City Council - Regular Meeting

either you either froze to death or you were and then the other end of the building you'd have to stop and get your code on the way across. Oops. All right. Good evening everyone. Welcome to North Plat City Council meeting here on Tuesday, April 7th, 2026 at 5:30 p.m. Calling the meeting to order. We have an invocation by Chaplain Don Anderson. Please, Chaplain Anderson. Father God, creator and sustainer, we thank you for creating a society in which we can meet and uh express our opinions and our voices. Father, we uh know that you have uh or created order and asked us to abide by that. Thank you for these folks that have stepped up into leadership that uh ask that you would give them wisdom and guidance this evening as they uh carry out the city's business. And uh for those that are going to participate also, Father, that we would all uh be sensitive to each other, that we would show honor and respect to each other, and that the meeting would be peaceful and civil. I ask these things in your holy name. Amen.

Amen. I pledge algiance 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.

Thank you everyone. Angie, the roll call please. here. Dive here. Here. Lucas here. Ger here. Lander. Reer here. Mcnick here.

Thank you. A current copy of the open meetings act of the state of Nebraska is posted on the wall at the back of the city council chambers. Meeting procedure. The public may address specific agenda items to the pleasure of the mayor. If recognized by the mayor, please identify yourself by stating your name and your address. Please address the council through the mayor and limit your remarks. We respect our city employees and request that any complaints or criticisms of employees not be aired in a public meeting. Concerns about employees should be brought to the attention of the city administrator or the mayor. Individuals in violation will be declared out of order. I don't have any awards or accol. Okay. Consent agenda. All matters under the consent agenda are considered by the city council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. Any city council member may however remove an item from consent by request. 1. A. A approve the minutes of the March 17, 2026 meeting. 1B, place on file the treasurer's report February 2026. C. Approve the mayor's appointments of Jim, excuse me, Jim Connley and Ron Meyer and reappointment of Mary Shim and John Guchin Writer to the North Flat Tree Board. D. Send the application of Shannon Bordeaux as liquor license manager at Ruben Shop House located at 1017 South Dwey Street, Sweet 3, to the Liquor Control Commission with no recommendation. E. Approve the applications by Midwest Leaf LLC for special designated liquor licenses on April 30, 2026 from 3 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at Riverside Community located at 11:07 11:09 Gwen Avenue for the ribbon cutting. F. Adopt the resolution consenting to the sale and consumption of alcoholic liquor on May 15 and 16, 2026 from the 12 pm to 1:00 am at East 5th Street and North Dwey Street during music on the bricks and approved the application by Brothers Tavern for the special designated licenses. G approved the application by First Responders Foundation for the special designated license on May 2nd, 2026 from 12:00 pm

to 10 p.m. at Pal's Brewing, 4520 South Buffalo Avenue for a fundraiser silent auction. H. Consider action on an application by Charles Roberts and Richard Houseman for Robert subdivision located 2401 Rodeo Road in an R3 dwelling district. I approve using newborn, excuse me, newborn funds in the amount of $38,338 to finance the concrete work of a 40 by60 foot polygon park shelter to install in Cody Park. J authorize the mayor to approve, negotiate, and sign all necessary documents for the proposal submitted by Midwest Petroleum Equipment in the amount of 362,63516 to replace the fueling system located at the public service department.

Mr. Mayor, excuse me. I move that we approve the consent agenda less less items H and I. Second. Okay. Motion in a second for the consent agenda for all items except H and I. Calling the question on consent agenda less H and I. Consent agenda is passed. Less H and I start with letter H. Mr. Eer, Mr. Mr. Mayor, if I may.

Okay, go ahead. Thank you. Um, do we I guess I just have a couple questions. Is there going to be anything done with the road that is supposedly there? Judy, is there anything that we can do or going to do or the developer going to do with the road? Mayor, council, and you're talking about Cody Avenue. Is that what you're talking about? Um, so the applicant actually is looking at coming back at a later date and asking to vacate that alley. Um, but due to the sale of the property, they wanted to get this subdivision completed first and um, they're looking at the possibility of vacating that if council

So, it's an alley or a road? It is a road. It is a road. Yeah. Cody Avenue, I believe. Yeah. Um, never been opened. It is dedicated as a road. Okay. Right. But if you do look out there, you can see that um I think the hotel that's to the east of it has kind of encroached a little bit on that road. Yeah. Is there going to be any other So there's an entrance off of Rodeo Road, correct? Is there going to be any other entrance or exit for that subdivision uh residential?

They can also come off of the north also. So that was 13th Street, 14th Street. I was just thinking because going to get to that property off the highway, you can only enter going west and you can only leave going west with that island there. So, I was just curious about that. Um, the other thing is, is there anything that we can start doing about sidewalks along development along highway? I would really like to see sidewalks start to be putting in on properties that are being developed. And that's funny that you should ask. The mayor asked me the same question either yesterday or earlier today. So, I did talk to the applicant. They're planning on putting a sidewalk there anyway. So, when I asked him to do so, he had no problem whatsoever.

Awesome. That is great. Thank you. That's all I had. Thank you, Mr. Eker. You had a number or letter I. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Um, Lane, were you going to check and see if this was bid out or is this be I'll kind of let Lyall answer that, but yes, the engineering did go and contact a number of cement contractors and got bids on that. Okay.

Good evening, Mayor Council. Yes, we had two other bids. One was $7,000 higher and the other was $11,000 higher. So, uh, we went with the lowest bid on this. Excuse me. Excuse me. L Why is this so expensive? I, when I looked at the number of yards that they're putting in there, we're putting eight pads in. They're both They're all eight 10 by 10, 3 foot deep, and that's 11 yards of cement per. So, we have a lot of concrete going to hold this building up. So, the footings are pretty substantial. Yes, they are. Including the rebar, too. Okay. Um, are we going to have to dewater that also then?

Uh, if we went down three foot, we might be able to get by with with without dewatering, but and we'll wait and see to when we get down and get to it. But okay, well that makes a little more sense, I guess, when I saw that figure and the cost of concrete and even figuring six inch concrete for the pad. Yeah. Yeah. Quite right. Yeah. And it'll be a lot of pad because it's a 40x60 building, too. So, it's okay. Pretty good size. You're very welcome. N sorry. Sorry. Other questions or comments? So, 38,000. That's the the concrete work. Do you have an estimate for the whole building what that's going to cost? We've already bought the building. You've already bought the building.

The building was approved by council about a year and a half ago. November is 24. Okay. All right. Fair enough. That was my question. for you. Well, having said that, excuse me, while are you guys going to erect it then? That is the plan. So, uh, I was hoping to maybe have a supervisor hired to help us out, you know, to do that, but we haven't found anybody available right now, so we might have to wing it a little bit on it. All right. Thank you. Mr. Ricker, would you like to make a motion? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I move that we approve uh item H and item I on the consent agenda.

Second.

Motion by Ricker for H&I. Second by Nisley for H&I. Further discussion calling the question on HNI. H and I are approved. Thank you everyone. Item number two. Authorize the mayor to negotiate and sign contract for guaranteed maximum price number three GMP number three and interim industrial wastewater treatment plant with Rice Lake West. Mayor I move to authorize mayor to negotiate and sign a contract for guaranteed maximum price number three GMP number three an interim industrial wastewater treatment plant with Rice Lake West. Second

motion by Reaper, second by BS. Brent, you want to describe briefly what we're doing here, please? Um, good evening, Mayor, Council. Um what is before you is the summary of some of the um discussions as far as the information on the industrial wastewater plant, the 90 to 100% um difference in cost and also the interim plant which is currently being used to treat sustainable beefs um wastewater. Those are what those two items are on there. And I I think what was provided was the front pages of the summary of the costs on those two items and we had some additional supporting data with that as as needed. So is there anything else?

Anyone have any questions or comments? Mr. Mayor, go ahead. Okay. As as this as we amend this agreement with the um for the construction, does our agreement with sustainable beef just naturally alter or does that have to come back and be amended as well? It just naturally alters the way it's phrased. So, thank you, Rod. So, when this plant gets built, is it going to only be able to handle the pack and plant or can we have other industries? Is there enough expansion other industries could use it or is it just for the packet plant?

Um, as it sits right now, it depends a little bit on where they end up at on actual production. The initial discussions was one and a half or 1500 head a day. They might it's designed up to about 1,875 head a day. So, it depends a little bit on where they actually land. With the things that have changed over the last five months, I'm wouldn't be surprised if they try to max out the use of the plant. If that happens, then it would be just for them. Okay.

It's set up to be expanded. It's designed intent is so that it can be expanded, but what's physically there wouldn't handle any more than what they're currently looking at doing maximum. Okay. Ed, Mr. Mayor, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the payment of that is built into the the fees that we're charging sustainable beef.

Yes, that's correct. Sustainable beef pays for the plant. Other questions or comments? Seeing none, calling the question on item number two, please. Item number, excuse me, item number two has passed. Item number three, second reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4216 to amend ordinance number 4208 relating to paving district number 842. Laying the ordinance, please. Ordinance number 4216, an ordinance of the city of North Plat, Leaky County, Nebraska, to amend ordinance number 4208 relating to the creation of paving district number 842 on Frances Street from the east side of the intersection of Brian Avenue and Francis Street. Then east to Devco Avenue, approximately 3100 ft in the city of North Plat, Lincoln County, Nebraska. repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict here with and providing for the effective date and publication thereof.

Mayor, I move that we approve, excuse me, adopt ordinance number 4216 to amend ordinance number 4208 relating to paving dis paving district number 842 on second reading. Second motion by RER, second by Lucas. Any discussion on item number three, Brad?

So, I apologize. I wasn't here for most of the discussion last meeting, so I might need a little catching up to do on this one. Um, so we're going down, we're going from 261 acres down to 28.74 acres, which is an 89% decrease in what the assessment, the assessed acres is going to be. um help me understand why we would increase our risk so significantly.

Doesn't really increase the risk, it decreases the risk. Um so the first reason that we're making this changes at the request of the developers to simplify the structure for the agreement for payment for Francis Street. The um and since you weren't here last time, you would have missed might have missed this part. Grab my map here. When the council sits as the board of equalization on this section of the road, all things being equal, what we're going to request is that the the funds are attributed on the north side of the road in that 8020 side as I've have there. So where the west side of of McCabe would be 80 of 80% of the cost and 20% would be attributed to the other side. The reason is that the largest asset there is on the 80% side which is the apartment buildings that are going up right now and and a paving district has first lean on properties. So it's ahead of the bank and everything.

Who is the developer that's doing that apartment building? It's this testman group, but I I I collaboration or remember the name. The legal name is I believe it's like NPC1 LLC. And we've talked to them and they're okay with this 80%. Yeah. Assessment. Yep. In fact, just before the last meeting, we had discussion with them to say this is likely what they said, this is what we're going to recommend. Now, the council gets to decide, but this is what we're going to recommend. And are they so they're building those apartment buildings is that tiff do they get their portion of the tiff of that? How is that agreement work? Yes, they're in the tiff zone.

They're they're they're getting that part of the tiff. So I would assume they're going to use that tiff for the this portion of it. Okay, that answers that question. Um the 20% acreage, what is the plans there? What's what's going on? I don't know there's any firm plan. Does anybody have any Austin? Do you have any information on that? I think that may be NPC2, which is an affiliated entity, but I I I don't know exactly what the plan is for that area. Okay.

Other than maybe more multifamily, I I believe I I'm not speaking with 100% certainty. I see Judy's nodding her head, but um I believe that the plan then is for additional multifamily within that area. Well, I was told that that's where the the new creative collaboration that people have been posting about. Some 40 city leaders have decided that that's where the the uh library and some other entities are going to move. Is that a true statement? Is that is that this land or do we know? Well, based on what the collaboration the group that you're talking about has and I'm probably getting

that's no that's that's close to the name. They have said that they would like to locate there. Um, however, no property has been transferred. No agreements have been made. The city has not agreed to do anything other than listen to their plan. Okay. So,

well, it's being promoted in the the, you know, out in the media and other places like this is a done deal. It's happening. And I haven't talked to anybody that has any like details on what what that looks like. And my concern is is we if if we move the library out there and then we've attributed this assessment to it, how does that play? You know, we're we're assessing our own building essentially and that that gets complicated if we're trying to recoup these losses. So I I was just curious if anybody knew anything on on how that was going to Yeah. We could easily assess all 100% to the other side too to the apartment building. Yep. And they're okay with that. I think so because I mean ultimately they all own all the same land. So

Okay. All right. So, I'm I'm I'm I'm going to walk through something and I I see this as actually increasing risk because the the Fritz Farm subdivision lot 2, block one, and block two are in the original ordinance. So, they're already included in in what we've agreed upon. Think of it like this is collateral for a mortgage. Like if I was to buy a house, um let's say there's a house that's worth $89,000 and a shed that's worth $11,000 on a property. So I go get a a loan for $100,000, right? Bank gives me the loan, no problems. We agree to everything. This is an 89% decrease in the in what the collateral is going to be. That would be like me going to the bank and saying, "Hey, I know you gave me that loan on the whole property, but really I only want the collateral to be the shed, the 11% of it." So, that is a massive increase in risk if the bank were to accept that that uh agreement because they're reducing 89% of what they can recoup their losses from. Well, empty property is worth a lot less than the multi-million dollar multifamily structure,

right? But we that's already included. So, we already got the shed. We already have that 11% in the original ordinance. We're not gaining that. That's already in there. We're losing 89%. We're not gaining the 11%. If if you read the original ordinance, I wish it was here because it's it makes it way easier. you can compare and contrast, but I went back and looked it up and these this this apartment building is already in the original ordinance. We're just losing 89% of our collateral.

Mr. Mayor, go ahead. Brad, I spent a lot of time looking at this um because I had some of the same concerns. The the different thing about assessments that's a little bit different than a loan is that we were going to be forced to equalize this at some point among all the subdivided lots in that. So you can't you can't assess you can't cross over an assessment of lot A and lot B if they both exist. You have to basically pick an amount for each lot correct when you equalize it. So the benefit of of one lot can't help another. And so the the I think on the surface it looks like okay we had this huge acreage and now all of a sudden we have a much smaller acreage but the ability to assess 20% of it on the apartment complex. I drove over there today and that it's it's pretty far along. It's based on my experience it's far enough along that it would be a real a very small percentage probability it won't get done at this point. There's enough invested in it somebody's going to finish it. And so by having an assessment that on that property, as the mayor pointed out, you have that first lean tied back with that property. If we spread it out over all the properties, we'd have a whole bunch of properties that have nothing built on them. And so I think the benefit to the city is is that they're we were targeting that 8020. And in the last meeting, the owner was here and agreed that that would work for him, thinking that that would leave some assessment on that additional acreage, hopefully well below its value and and maybe that gets fine-tuned if something's going on with that property. But I think by having, you know, 80% of that assessment, the complex is going to probably were be worth quadruple or four, five, six, seven times that. And so you do you do narrow the collateral, if we want to call it that, to a smaller parcel, but we're getting more assessment on that

parcel, if that makes sense. But theoretically, to your to your point, we could leave it as is, still assess 80% on the the apartment complex and take that other 20 and spread it over the 200, you know, 20 whatever acres are left over and it reduces the risk significantly.

Yeah. Well, yeah, it does. But I think I think what you're bal what we're bal what we've been asked to balance is the hassles they're going to have by trying to work with multiple properties, multiple property owners and how that gets equalized versus what you point out. So where I got comfortable with it in the last meeting was that we would have enough assessed on that property that I thought we were well protected and then if I look at the remaining assessment on that remaining acreage to me it seems like we'd be well protected. And so I felt like, well, if we're well protected, if it makes it easier for the developer to transact business and sell, then what's the what's the damage in that? But I I agree there is some risk differential there.

And I I'll I'll throw another curveball in here. The the developer has agreed to pay for this road through TIFF several times, and it's supposed to be coming in a redevelopment pro, you know, contract that we haven't seen yet. How does that all tie into here? because I if I'm understanding this correctly, this is worst case scenario. Like everything else has failed, things are going bad, city's just trying to recoup its losses to pay for the road essentially is what's happening. Um well, and just to clarify too, the redeveloper has already agreed to pay for the road as part of the redevelopment agreement,

right? So, the only thing from from what I understand, the only thing that any uh new amendment to that contract would provide for is the uh the application of the paving district and just reaffirming their responsibility to pay even though there's a paving district. So, it's just going to clarify things. It's not going to change their from my perspective, it's not going to change their legal obligation to still pay for the road. And I agree with you. I'm hopeful that that's what the redevelopment contract is going to state. But if everything is hitting the fan, everything is going sideways, why would we as a city want to reduce or increase our risk by reducing this acreage? I I I don't see the upside whatsoever for the city. It feels like we're giving away a lot but gaining nothing. That's my concern. Well, I think having a lean on the largest asset probably isn't giving away very much.

Well, we could have a lean on the largest assets and everything else out there also. Yeah, that's a possibility. I or Go ahead, Brad. I I see this as bad governance. I don't see a bank ever reducing their collateral once the papers are signed. It wouldn't make sense to do that. So, I I I feel like this is this is not in the taxpayers's interest, my opinion. Nick,

I thought um last meeting when we voted on this, we some of the council members did ask for that amended redevelopment contract. Do we have any status on where that contract is at? Um, I've been corresponding with both the de the developer attorney and I know the mayor's reached out to the CRA's attorney and so we're still waiting to see it at this stage, but we're continuing to push to get a copy of that so that we can have it reviewed and my plan is I'd like to have it in front of council before the third reading would be approved here. So, I'm Yeah,

I'm seeking some clarification from the redevelopers attorney on that. Well, we're yeah, we're kind of in a in a not really a bad position, right? But I mean, we're we're on a time crunch and I know that some council members want to see the to make sure that it's in writing, that amended redevelopment contract. So, I mean, is we're we're trying to push this forward and get it done because of the grant money and everything like that. But I think the I think that's an important thing that we should probably see soon if we can. Yeah. Okay. I think we made it clear that we or I should say I made it clear that I won't let this come back on the agenda without that item being first or in front of it. Yeah. So, I appreciate that. Yeah.

Other questions or comments? Seeing none, calling the question on item number three. Item number three is passed. Item number four, second reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4245 vacating a portion of an alley located between 621 and 701 East 12th Street. Lane. Ordinance number 4245. An ordinance of the city of North Plat, Lincoln County, Nebraska, vacating an alley described as a portion of the alley located between lot 32, Hastings edition to Northplat and lot one, Jurgensson subdivision, North Plat Lean County, providing for the reservation of title of said vacated alley by the city of North Platt, repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict here with, providing for the effective date and publication thereof. Mr. Mayor, I move to adopt ordinance 4 4245 vacating a portion of an alley located at between 621 and 701 East 12th Street on second reading.

Second motion by RER, second by Vols. And let's see any questions or comments on this one? kind of hashed through it last time. So, seeing none, calling the question on item number four. Item number four is passed. Item number five starts with a public hearing to consider action on application by the Wild West Arena Foundation Nebraska Days for a conditional use permit to allow construction of a new beverage service facility located at 2801 Charlie Evans Drive in an A1 transitional agricultural district. So we'll open the public hearing. Judy, you want to briefly describe what we're doing here, please? Mayor, council. Um, this is a conditional use application because the Nebraska lands um area sits in an A1 agricultural district. So, buildings that are put in an A1 agricultural district like this require a conditional use permit. Um, what they're doing with this is they are replacing some of the temporary beverage service areas with one that's going to be a permanent fixture. Thank you. Any questions repeat? Okay, we have a public hearing open. Anyone wish to comment on this? Please approach the microphone and let us know your thoughts.

I move to close public hearing. Second motion by Vol, second by Dy to close public hearing. Calling the question on closing the public hearing, please. Public hearing is now closed. Council will consider item number five cons which is consider action on an application by Wild West Arena Foundation Nebraskans Drive in an A1 transitional agricultural district.

Mr. I move that we find the request for the amendment to a conditional use permit to allow construction of a new beverage service facility located at 2801 Charlie Evans Drive meets the minimum standards stated in the North Plat code of ordinance section 156.322 and approve and grant the conditional use permit requested with the condition that all elements of the application are complied with based on the following factual findings. The you shall conform to all applicable ordinances, laws, and regulations of any governmental jurisdiction. The you shall have adequate water, sewer, and drainage facilities. Ingress and egress shall be so designated as to minimize traffic congestion in the public streets. The you shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district in which it is located. and the use shall be in harmony with the character of the area and the most appropriate use of the land. Second

motion by BS, second by Lucas. Any discussion on this item? Yeah, Mr. Mayor, go ahead. Do we know if this facility has water and sewer? It don't. I I called earlier and talked to somebody and it's not going to have water or sewer ran to it. Um, Mr. Mayor, I would motion that from the motion on the table, we strike that you shall have adequate water and sewer. Okay,

we have a second. Second motion by Lucas, second by Volos to strike shall have water adequate water and sewer. Any discussion on that? Ed. Mr. Mayor, how much trouble would it be to have that made into a public restroom? Is there a public restroom underneath? I guess there's one underneath the bleacher. It'd be a lot of trouble. There should be restroom facilities close by. So, porta bodies.

You had a comment, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead. Yeah. My intent wasn't to tell them they couldn't have sewer and water. My intent was that I didn't think it was included in the plan that it wouldn't be required for the conditional use permit. Yeah, makes sense. So, are they just going to be handing out bottled beverages? Are they going to have um beer on tap or I guess my my question is how do you do hand sanitation without Bill? Alcohol and things like

the water's cold enough they help you drink. I I believe they have portable hand sanitiz hand sanitizing areas. They're they're portable. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Go ahead, Mr. I drove out there today to see exactly looking at the map and everything and they've already started on a facility out there. Is that this one that we're talking about? I didn't I didn't drive out there, so I don't know. I just drove by and there's a structure started up in the air.

Jud, do you have any insight here? I don't know if I really have the insight because I can't tell you 100% for sure. Um, but Nebraska land days, um, sometimes they don't know when they have to get a permit because they are in an egg district. It depends on what they're doing. So, I mean, there's a possibility. I'm not going to tell you no, it's not. There is a possibility that they started without first getting the permit, but Okay. I just from the map that we had here, it looks like that's the building that they've already started. Yeah. And it is a possibility, but they are doing the right thing.

Well, if we don't approve it, we'll go make them tear it down. Just asking other questions or comments. Seeing none, calling the question on number five, please. Is this just the amendment? Nope. I'm sorry to amendment. Sorry.

Okay. Amendment is passed. Back to the original question as amended. Any further discussion? Seeing none, calling the question on item number five as amended. Item number five as amended is passed. Okay. Thanks to Judy. We have a whole bunch of public hearings tonight. So, we're going to combine public hearing on item number six and number seven since they are essentially the same subject. Oops. Yep, there we are. There we Okay. Sorry. Little bipocal failure going on over here. Okay. Um, public hearing. We're going to consider both items six and seven at the same time. Amend the city of North Flat comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from agricultural vacant to residential lowdensity single family on property located at 492 West North River Road. And then item number seven is first reading an action to adopt ordinance number 4246 to reszone certain land from an A1 transitional agricultural district to an R L suburban residential district located at 492 West North River Road. Lane, you want to read that ordinance, please? Ordinance number 4246, an ordinance of the city of North Plat, Lincoln County, Nebraska, reszoning certain lands described as lot one, Gishenhagen first subdivision, Lo Lake County, Nebraska from an A1 transitional agricultural district to an RL rural dwelling district, repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict here with providing for the effective date of publication thereof.

Thank you, Mayor. I move Hold on. Did we got to do the public hearing? Thank you. But appreciate your vigor. But hold on. Okay. Opening the public hearing for both items number six and number seven. If you'd like to make a comment on either of these items, please approach the microphone. Tell us who you are and where you live and we'll happy to hear your comment. Just for the record books, we usually wait about 10 seconds and if no one's moving, usually someone makes a motion. I move we close public hearing. Second. Motion by Vos, second by Dy to close the public hearing. Calling the question and closing the public hearing.

Public hearing is now closed. Council will now consider amending the city of North Plat comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from agricultural vacant to residential lowdensity single family on property located at 492 West North River Road. Mr. Mayor, I move to amend the city of Northplac comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from agricultural/vacant to residential lowdensity single family on property located at 492 West North River Road.

Motion by BS, second by RER. Judy, you want to give us a little little bit of information on items number six and seven here?

Okay. So, item number six that you have in front of you is the amendment to the comprehensive plan. In order to reszone a property, the first thing you have to do is make sure that the zoning is in conformance with the comprehensive plan. Um in this instance um the comprehensive plan showed it as agricultural and what they are looking at doing is changing that to a residential. The reason they have to change it to residential is by splitting it in half which is what they're looking at doing that now makes it no longer able to be agricultural property because it's less than 10 acres. So it has to be reszoned to something. The logical thing being in a suburban area of North Plat, which is in the one mile, so it's outside city limits. It's within the two-mile jurisdiction of the city of Northplat. Um, a suburban residential is makes sense. So, um, as you can see from the map on item number seven, um, that does show you that there are some areas zoned residential that are in pretty near proximity to the area being requested. So, um, their intent is to there is an existing home on that site right now. Their intent is to split that and have the ability to build another home on the neighboring site. So, if you have any questions, I'm happy to help. I don't see the applicant in the audience.

Go ahead, D. Judy, do you know, do they intend to try to do anything with the flood way or flood plane there? Are we going to be seeing anything on that or are they able to work around that with their project? So, um they know that the um structures would have to be built essentially on the north side of the project um pretty close to the road because of the flood plane that's in there. But yes, it can be done. Thank you. Other Nick, go ahead. Thank you. So, there's a house there already to but to build another house, they have to split it or what's the that's the reason why they're wanting to split it? Yes.

Okay. Um, we only allow one residential structure per um, property or per parcel. Um, sometimes you can go through a conditional use to get something, but I believe their intent is to sell this one and build another one. Okay. Other questions or comments?

Okay, seeing none, calling the question item number six, please. Item number six has passed. Item number seven. Continuing along the same line, first reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4246 to reszone certain land from an A1 transitional agricultural district to an RL suburban residential district located at 492 West North River Road.

Mr. Mayor, I move to adopt ordinance number 4246 to reszone certain land from the A1 transitional agriculture district to RL suburban residential district located at 492 West River West River Road. Second motion by RER, second by Dy. Any discussion on item number seven? Yeah, Mr. Mayor, go ahead. Okay. I'd uh motion to wave the additional two readings on this particular item. Second

motion by Lucas, second by McNe to wave the three readings. Excuse me. Wave the second two readings. Motion in a second. Any discussion on waving the readings? Calling the question on waving the readings. Motion passed. We uh readings are waved. So if passed, this will be passed in one motion. Any other comments or questions? Seeing none, calling them question on number seven as amended. Number seven is passed as amended. Thank you everyone. Moving on to another public hearing. We have a public hearing for item number eight. And again, we will combine number nine with it. The public hearing part. What?

No, we're going to hold on. Okay. Um so public hearing to amend the city of North comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from residential medium density and multifamily to commercial on property located 2200 East 2nd Street. And we'll also talk about first reading an action to adopt ordinance number 4247 to reszone certain land from an R3 dwelling district to a B2 highway commercial district located at 2200 Eastn Street. Lane the ordinance please. Ordinance number 4247, an ordinance of the city of North Plat, Linky County, Nebraska, reszoning certain lands described as a tract of land in lot 64, Plat View, North Plat Ley County, Nebraska from an R3 dwelling district to a B2 highway commercial district, repealing all ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict here with providing for the effective date and publication thereof.

Mr. Prepare a move to amend the city of North Tom public hearing at at public hearing. Sorry. Are you ready? We will do our best to hurry through the meeting for you. Okay. All right. Public hearing is open. If you would like to make a comment on either item number eight or number nine, please approach the uh microphone, tell us who you are and where you live, and we'll be happy to hear your comment. Please try to keep it under five minutes. Hello,

my name is Mark. Hi, my name is Mark Grubs. I live in on uh 2213 Burlington Boulevard, directly to the south of this lot that is requesting a zoning change. And I object to this zoning change. Um increased traffic, increased dust. I don't I see no other lands around there on that side of the street that accommodate commercial business um other than the uh children's home. But more importantly, I guess we have zoning laws so that people who don't want to live in a commercial district don't have to. And I don't want to live in a commercial district or be on the outskirts of a commercial district. So, I urge the city council to not change the current zoning at 2200 East 2nd Street. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Grubs. Would anyone else like to make a comment on this item? Either item number eight or item number nine. Good morning, Tracy Martinez, West Ninth Street. I agree with Mr. Grubs. That's not a place to make commercial businesses. I'm sure all that land up there, somebody would want to develop it for housing, which we all want housings, and to bring bring all that traffic in on Second Street. You're going to have to do the ditches and everything sometime. It's just not an idea. I'm sure the people who own that land would love to put houses there, but it's not a good place for a commercial district. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else like to make a comment? Item number eight or number nine. Going once, going twice. I move we close public hearing. Second.

Motion by VS, second by RER to close public hearing. Calling the question on closing the public hearing, please. Public hearing is now closed. Council will now consider item number eight, which is amending the city of Northplat comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map, amending certain land from residential, medium density, and multifamily to commercial, excuse me, to commercial on property located at 2200 East 2nd Street.

Mr. Matter. I move to amend the city of Northlight comprehensive plan 2011 future land use map amending certain land from residential medium density and multifamily to commercial and property located at 2200 East 2nd Street. Second motion by RER, second by Lucas. Thank you, Judy. Do we have a picture of this? want my old school picture. Oh, let's do let's do both.

Okay. Oh, is that what it is? Okay, so now it's saying it's empty.

Boy, the technology is great when it works. The folder is empty. They told me just to click on that, but huh, the refresh button. guarantee I can't sign in. Okay, let's just go with the old

We'll just go with the old. Okay, so here I got it. I'll show the audience here after. But anyways, here is the map of the area and all these colorful little lines are different. district in this area. So over here is industrially zoned. This is bicentennial that comes down here. This is all your R3 district currently. This is an R1 and then this is B2. Now um just so that you know there has been another request put in that hasn't been in front of you yet. It will be next month for this also become commercial. So this area and this area and you've got the boys and girls home here and again in this is a mobile home park. So um this area has a lot of different zoning right next to each other. Um this is a very large lot. Um little over an acre and a half. Um, but they're looking

ask you a question. Judy, is the at that home is that still still where the diversion program is housed? So, is there a decent I mean, is there there's a fair amount of traffic to that facility. Is that right? Correct. Okay. And remember down here on the south side there

and then the other direction on the south. Um and then Johnson Road looks like an alley but it's actually a road. Is that right? Or Johnson Road will probably eventually not be a road. a very half road kind of semi semi- maintained. Okay. Why don't you give your spiel to the audience real quick here and

so here is the area. All of the different colors are the different zoning districts in this area. This is by Centennial running up here. All of this area is zoned light industrial. Um, this area in here is all commercial. This, of course, is the mobile home park. This is all currently zoned as part. Um, this is the proposed area to be reszoned to a process of reflecting. Boy, girl is here. Thank you.

We have questions. Rod, go ahead. Uh, so I got on the internet and I'm more confused than I was when I looking. But on the B2, if something happens that he decides to sell that down the road, is is everything that I saw listed under B2, like uh garden centers, car washes, is that what's all allowed in that B2? Yes. So, when you reszone a property to whatever zoning district you zone it to. Okay. Yes. Technically, everything that's in there could be allowed. Now, a hotel in there, a restaurant, a printing business. It's a possibility. Garden centers. Okay.

And the person that's wanting it reszoned is going to use it for a construction site. Is that

building? Yes. what he wants to do is use it for an office and contractor storage. Um, from and the applicant is in the audience if you would like to have him explain more, but from what I understand, he is going to fence the entire perimeter essentially on three sides, east, west, and south. Um, so that way it's going to enclose the actual um business office space and storage. um he is going to either pave or use some sort of hard surface to make sure that there's no dust with vehicles that may or may not come in and out, but it would be a contractor's office. Um I'm trying to think of one that would be similar that's but off the top of my head I can't. But we have several where they have their contractor's office

like an electrical shop like Yeah. electrical plumber electric and those down on flood street. Yeah. Okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead, Jimmy. Maybe I'd like you to walk us through the They probably could have achieved this in an industrial zoning, but I assume and I know it was a split planning commission vote or a tight planning commission vote. So is the idea here to use B2 so we can put the rest kind of the restrict restrictions for lack of a better term the the requirements I guess in with the fence and that it specifies it as a contractor's office in the conditional use permit. Is that right? Yes.

Um had we looked at doing it as an I1 which light industrial is in very close proximity as you can tell from this map kind of it's skewed a little bit but it's in close proximity to it. So you could have went with an I1. If you go with an I1, they can come in, get their permit, go through the permitting process, plan review, you're done. Um, with the uh B2, then that would flip them into a conditional use permit. So, the only way that a contractor's office is allowed in a B2 is through that conditional use permit, which then does allow you to put some controls on there. Um and planning commission did um ask for there to be controls as the privacy fence, the um hard surfacing and you are always able to add more.

Okay. So if they sold the property to somebody who wanted to have a different use, they could forgo the conditional use permit and go back to legal B2 uses or they could comply with the conditional use permit. Is that kind of generally how that work? Okay. Thanks, Jim. I mean, my only concern is that it's a street that he's second there is a thing to run into down with uh on Eugene. It's a single asphalt two lane, no no sidewalks, a narrow street and you know, are we going to have a bunch of businesses down there and then we're have to deal with that road? It's not going to be adequate. I don't

I was trying to look and see how wide that was and I can't see the measurement. I think it's an average city road which is typically um that's a 40 foot wide um rideway on there. So that's kind of I mean it's not a lot of our roads run 66 but 40 foot is adequate for your two drive lanes. Um we have several 40 foot wide streets in town so it's not overly small. Yeah, I know. But They're

bringing trucks down there and stuff. That's a pretty narrow had a family member that phoned me one day and it was icy and ran the vehicle off the road on that road. I mean it is it is it is pretty uh and that's really my concern. I I if this law if this site was close to at the end of the street, you know, where they'd be right on Centennial or Bsentennial by Centennial is what is it east or west of the children's? It's just on the west side. The children's is right. That's where that's at

adjacent. Yeah. I I just I you know I I support development on this, but I that the thing of it is I think that street is really inadequate. If we allow one there and they have more, we're going to run into an issue that street's just not adequate. That's just my thought the concerns about

and I I I share your concerns because when you're when you're looking at zoning, you can't look at the business that's going in there. Uh, one of our first council meetings that I ever was on, uh, there was a a lot where an electrician wanted to do a light industrial thing. It's six blocks from my house. Oh, he's a nice guy. He's going to do this beautiful thing. It passed. Well, now there's a It's still an empty lot. It's changed hands several times. And now a chemical plant could be placed six blocks from my house because it's light industrial and that's the way it is. A friend of mine's half a block away. So he's really not happy with the situation. So So you honestly can't look at what who the current person is. You have to look at all of the the the spectrum of what can go in there. So you start, you know, looking at B2 and traffic and things of that nature like you're talking about, you could have some real problems, especially if you get two or three more like you're talking about bringing down the road trying to get that traffic in and out of there. It's going to be it's going to be a nightmare, I think. Pete, did you have a comment?

Yeah, Judy. Um, I watched planning commission meeting. Good dialogue on that. Would you please explain the conversation that you guys were having if we kept it as an R3 and what the potential for that lot is?

A potential and an R3. There's um several different things that you could do with it. R3 does allow for multifamily residential. So you could ultimately end up with an apartment complex and that lot is large enough being over an acre that you could get quite a few apartment dwellings on that lot with adequate parking. So when you're talking about traffic, I do understand the truck traffic is a little bit different than single car traffic, but the amount of traffic with an apartment complex could be quite a bit more as far as cars in and out of there. Um, the other thing that could be done is you could go in there maybe I don't know if it's quite large enough for a culde-sac, but you could probably divide it up into several um different lots and they could do duplexes or triplexes. Um, a multitude of different types of residential structures could go on there. Um, these properties, these in particular have sat um undeveloped for quite a few years. I mean like decades. So

you guys also talked about a barnaminium at one something something to that effect and and to to alleviate the conditional use. Would you mind explaining that?

So barnominiums become pretty tricky. Barndeuminiums are allowed in residential districts. What we have found with individuals that do barnaminiums, and I don't want to upset anybody, but what they tend to do is they keep a small portion of that structure as a residential structure and they use the rest of it for storage. Now, whether it's personal storage or whether it's not personal storage, I don't go ask people to open their garage and look into their barnaminium to see what they're storing in there. So, um I just felt that this was a much better way of going with the commercial with the conditional use. So they can do their contractor's office instead of having not that they would do this at all, but instead of having somebody do a barnaminium and end up with the same thing illegally.

Thank you. But if it was illegal, we could do something about it. I mean, the term illegal leads you to that included, correct? Yep. Then you have a zoning violation which takes a long time to correct. Correct. Other questions are coming. Nick,

so these properties over there, it looks there's two of them that are empty and then one on the corner, I believe, that surround that uh youth facility. Is it in our comp plan to start developing that as business property or what are the other uh pieces of land going to be? Are they going to remain R3? But what what direction are we looking to move towards in that area over there?

Our current comprehensive plan shows them as multifamily residential. That's what our current comprehensive plan shows. Um we are in the process of doing a new comprehensive plan, new zoning regulations. Um we've looked at that area multiple times. If you look on the um the highest and best use of those properties, um the one that abuts bysentennial, I could definitely see as commercial or industrial very very easily um because right across the street is industrial. You're abuing a mobile home park. Not that there's anything wrong with mobile home parks, but you have more um more traffic. you have more people in and out which is more of a high density type residential um which is more conducive to abudding a commercial property than it is a single family residential

home. So I it's kind of a roundabout answer. I'm not really answering your question because I can't tell you yesterday I would tell you it's commercial because we're still going through that process with comprehensive plan.

Yeah, it it's just I I don't know. I'm just trying to make sense of everything cuz on the east side of Bsentennial on that corner of uh Philip and Bsentennial, I mean, we changed that to RM for mobile home park and then um I I can see I can see it going both ways. If this was on the north side of the street, I could see it a lot easier being B2, but where it's on the south side of the street, it's kind of challenging for me. And then on that earlier agenda item that is prime commercial real estate is R3, right? So it's it's I'm just trying to make sense of everything. But I I'm not really worried about the current owners on this property. It's it's always the future and down road to where it is B2. I mean, I know that the the pe the applicants are going to keep it clean and they're going to be pretty respectful of the neighbors, but if something happens to that land, it's it's B2 forever. And that's what I'm concerned about as well. So,

well, and it may not be B2 forever. You're proposing to change it now. So, you you know that um zoning and comprehensive plans are living breathing documents and they change as your world changes around you. So, I mean, in 5 years, it it's hard to say what that area may be.

Well, and I I feel like if it's B2 and and it gets sold years down the road, I don't know if anybody's going to really want to change it back to residential. I mean, I I always see it more apt to change from residential to commercial than back to residential. But, um, so on how how do we I guess you say that if it stays residential, it'd be hard to control it if they put a barnaminium and everything like that. How do we control it if it's B2 other than the conditional uses, you know, 20 years down the road if it starts, you know, collecting stuff on the property that may be an isore to residents? How do you how do you put a handle on that and control that kind of stuff?

I might let Bill jump in a little bit, but a conditional use permits a little bit easier to control because you as a council honestly can have them come back in front of you once a year if you want to. You can put that condition on there. um if they miss any of those conditions that are on there, if they don't put up a fence, for example, or whatever it is that you put on there, you can call them in front of planning commission and you can take that conditional use away. So, you have a little bit more teeth than what you do with like a zoning violation. Zoning violations, I think, end up in district court. that up.

Yeah. Generally, um zoning violations are handled a lot uh in the same manner as the um nuisance violations where uh typically it starts out as a fine uh trying to give the property owner an opportunity to remedy the situation. So, uh, before we would go in and and get some kind of an order to, um, to fix the zoning violation, that would require a court order that would authorize us to go in and and do something, say, like tear down a building. Um, that is a possibility, but, um, just the way that we've handled it is, it typically starts out fine, uh, progresses from there, but as with all court proceedings, they all take time. Um, and to Judy's point with the conditional uses, uh, the idea behind a conditional use, um, granted that's not what we're looking at right now. Right now it's just the zoning change, but we can't get to the conditional use unless the zoning is changed. Um, but the idea behind the conditional use is that it allows the council to make determinations as to any additional conditions that that council would see fit to attach to that particular property in order to say protect the surrounding uh the surrounding properties or to uh protect public health and safety uh those types of things. So you have a lot of latitude when it comes to attaching conditions on a conditional use. And the reason behind that is uh you can tailor that to fit the needs of the community. Mr.

Mayor,

I spent a long time looking at this one. Just so you guys know, and and I can appreciate where Mr. Grubs's testimonies at. Here's my assessment of this is that you've got two or three homes on Burlington that are right to the south of this. There is a road between there that's really more like an alley than a road that are really nice. If you take out if you take other than those two or three homes, you have a lot of dilapidation of this of surrounding properties going on. You you can tell there's some very nice owner occupied homes and then there's some homes that are not near as good a condition on this block. You go to the west of this property and you have kind of a combination of agricultural salvage kind of commercial semicommercial activity going on there. I don't know exactly everything they're doing on the property, but there's residential, there's some um animals, there's a lot of equipment, there's look what appears to be some salvage equipment. And then if you go to the east of this property, you've got a fairly high traffic. It's just not a girl and boys home where people live. There's actually quite a bit of inflow and outflow, I think, every day. I the road issue is a concern, but I don't think a high a really hightraic business would desire to locate here. here. And so then I came back to, well, why didn't they seek industrial zoning? And I think what the planning commission was trying to do without me trying to read their minds was to protect what happened over on Front Street, which is still one that sits in Micro. I know it does pets as well, is that on that one, you know, we went for the industrial zoning because we had a lot of those, and they we we flipped it with the assumption they were going to follow through. Well, in retrospect, I wish we would have done this and then turned around and zoned it industrial after the project was done at a later point in time. as a strategy that I don't know that we considered it until you have something like that happen. And so I know I've looked at this from all angles and I don't think the impact will be that poor on the neighborhood because the alternative would be that you wait it out over time and you ultimately probably are doing a

redevelopment project for duplexes or multifamily that would have significant traffic impacts on the ground. If if you go to some of our other areas like if you go north of here or if you go towards Front Street if you go to the other areas we are starting to see a little bit of commercial leak a block over from those main thoroughares and this is a little bit of a similar situation but it's a tough one. I can understand why the plan commission was was split on this one. Pete Judy you said the applicant is here. Mr. Gonzalez, would you mind approaching the uh approaching the stand? Thank you. And uh state your name and address if you don't mind for the record.

Alex Gonzalez, uh 101 prayer room. Thank you. Real quick, there is a picture here and it just it's a rudimentary picture if you don't mind. And I read through the planning commission's conditions. I'm kind of jumping ahead to that a little bit. We have to go through a couple other steps first, but can you paint a picture of what this lot will look like once you're com once you're done with it? I see you have a building here.

Yeah, we're basically planning on putting a building to store our equipment that we have. And then we'll have fencing up and down the alley side uh up against Rosenoff's and the Boys and Girls home which will be fenced all the way around with a privacy fence so people can't get into the property. Um basically all we're trying to do is just have a place to run our business out of. Right now we're on 1821 Rodeo Road and we are out of room. Okay.

Where we park our trailers. We have a lot of nice trailers. We don't have enough room to park them in between these two buildings. So, we're just looking to expand a little bit. The most you're going to see outside is trailers, which that's about the gist of it. Um, as far as like dust and stuff that we're going to have there after the construction is done, we wouldn't we don't usually run our equipment around just to play with outside. They're usually at a job site or they're not making us money. So, okay, I got a better picture. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Nick, did you Ed, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Gonzalez, what kind of construction are you doing? Uh, we do anything from paving to We build post frame buildings. We do fencing. We do all sorts of general construction. You might have like a backhoe and a skid steer. We have a back Well, we don't have a backhoe. We have a mini excavator and two skid steers and that's it. Dump trucks or anything like that. Dump trailers.

Thank you. Other questions or comments? Brad, what would it cost? Going back to Judy, probably Brent maybe. What would it cost to bring that road, that section of road up to handle what any of the B2 spectrum could come in there? Because it sounds like you got at least one more, possibly more looking to come in here. What would that look like as as far as dollars?

Well, as far as dollars, I mean, that could get into you probably $800 a linear foot type of cost. Um, but to give you an idea as far as some comparison, eight east street, if you go from popppler east on 8th street, there's shaven. There's there's houses on the north side. And I'm not saying this is a good idea, but just as far as a reference, there's a lot of industrial. That's the old industrial park. Southside is eight, you know, south side of eight 8th Street. You go from Shaven Charlie's North Plat Plumbing. Follow along there. And then there's residential on the north. We had similar on Sixth Street. And now whether or not we'd set it up and designed it that way from the beginning to function that way is one question. The other question is is how's it functioned for 40 or 50 years. Um, so I mean from a standpoint I think we could maintain it um, you know, for traffic depending on the type of traffic, but I mean we have a quite a few asphalt roads that handle similar types and volume of traffic.

So you're saying the current width could handle it even with big trucks and Yeah. And I'm saying eight street right now. If you go look with we have plumbing contractor shaven goes in and out on 8th Street. It's the same width as what we're talking about. Correct. Okay. I mean, just from a functional side. Now, has has sidewalks, doesn't it? No. Not there. No. No. Like, not where Charlie's is at, not where Shabbans is at. Um it's got a big irrigation ditch. I think there's ditches on both sides. And also, we have um um the uh barricade, the interstate barricade, CSI.

Yeah. CSI is right down there on 8th Street. And they have quite a bit of traffic. So again, whether it's ideal or not, I'm just saying from a functional side, we have functional examples as far as the street goes. We might have some things as far as maintenance goes, but as far as if we wanted to do a rebuild, it would be comparable to what we did on 8th Street, West 8th Street. You know what we or Ninth Street, excuse me, what we did on Ninth Street from Sheridan over to Buffalo and also um Lake View. That was a rebuild that we did out there. as far as what we've done to get it up to like a city section. But do you think it can handle a B2 section?

With what's being Yeah, I with what we have out there for the amount of traffic, I think the track the street could handle it, it would probably be looking at an overlay maintenance overlay at some point. But as far as the load on just on again to I thought it was a good point that we're not looking at who's going there. We're looking at B2

and so with the size of law and things, I still think it would be adequate. Other questions or comments? Seeing none, calling the question on item number eight, please. Oops, we got to go back. Hold on. There we go. Following question item number eight, please

attorney says 43, right? Mhm. It does. Yeah. Just double checking the um feel your pain.

Yeah. Well, um an amendment to the comp plan is in a resolution or an ordinance. And so, um with a board of three vote, it is a majority of the of the council. Let me give me one minute. I'm just We'll pause briefly while we consult the statutes. Did you hear that the uh the gentleman that invented the smoothie died? The tragedy. Yes. The question is whether he be strawberry or blueberry or poison buried. I know it's a terrible joke. I know.

Something had to break the silence. We'd rather sing. No. No, you wouldn't. Trying to distract me from reading statute. I apologize. Um, so, uh, Nebraska Revised Statute 1641 states that an affirmative vote of not less than one half of the elected members shall be required for the transaction of any business. So, four votes is not less than one half of the elected members. And since it's since the amendment of the comp plan is not a resolution or an ordinance or an order for the payment of money, it doesn't require that higher

uh the higher number of votes. So for does allow for the passage of the amendment to the complaint. All right. Item number eight is passed. Moving on to item number nine. First reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4247 to reszone certain land from an arts reed dwelling district to a B2 highway commercial district located at 2200 East 2nd Street and Lane. You read the ordinance already, correct? Correct. We've already done the public hearing.

Mr. Mr. Mayor, I'd move to adopt ordinance number 4247 to reszone certain lands from an R3 dwelling district to a B2 highway commercial district located at 2200 East 2nd Street on first reading. Second motion by Lucas, second by Vols. Same subject. This is the actual ordinance to reszone this piece of property. Anyone have any further questions or comments? Seeing none, calling the question on item number nine, please. Same scenario.

So being being an ordinance, it does require uh a higher number of votes in order for passage. So under Nebraska Revised Statute 16404, the mayor is authorized to vote on this in order to uh achieve the um necessary number of votes. The necessary number of votes uh depending on how the mayor would vote, but you are authorized to vote on this matter. I always get stuck with a hard. All right, I vote in favor. Item number nine passes on first.

On first reading. Item number 10 is removed because we'll have to wait until item number nine has been read at least a couple more times. Item number 11 opens with a public hearing. First reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4248 to amend the city of Northplat code of ordinances section 156.144 special design criteria for RM mobile home parks to add G4. Laying the ordinance please. Ordinance number 4248, an ordinance of the mayor and council of the city of North Plat, Lincoln County, Nebraska, amending chapter 156, zoning section 156.144, special design criteria for RM mobile home park, repealing all ordinances in conflict here with providing for the effective date and publication thereof.

Thank you. So, we're opening the public hearing on item number 11. If you'd like to make a comment on M number 11, please approach the microphone. Give us your thoughts.

I move we close public hearing. Second. Motion by V. Second by RER to close public hearing. Calling the question on closing the public hearing. Public hearing is now closed. Council will now consider item number 10, excuse me, 11, first reading and action to adopt ordinance number 4248 to amend the city of North Plat code of ordinances section 156.144 special design criteria for RM mobile home parks to add G4.

Mr. Mr. Mayor, I move to adopt ordinance number 4248 to amend city mark plat code of ordinances section 156.144 special design criteria for RM mobile home parks to add G4 or first readings. Second motion by RER second by Vols Judy. Uh just second Judy you want to describe what we've got going on here please and then I promise Nick I'll give you the first comment. She might answer the question anyway. Okay.

So, this what you see before you is just an amendment to our current regulations for design criteria for mobile home parks. Um, this is not striking anything. It's not taking anything out. It is just providing for an additional option. So, if someone were to um create a mobile home park, they would have different options of um providing safety for a mobile home park. So, one of ours is a storm shelter built to FEMA standards. And then this would be in lie of that would be an option to um essentially permanent foundations for or permanent setdowns for mobile homes as long as those mobile homes are designed to a certain criteria which is um regulated under HUD which requires them to be built to certain HUD standards and then um placed on a more permanent foundation. I do have some experts in the audience that can talk about those types of foundations better than I can because I am not an engineer or a contractor. But

let's hear from the experts. Where are your experts? There we go. I think we have pictures too should we need them. Right. Yeah, we have a picture of the um actual possibility of the manufactured home, what it would look like. And then I do have some information on the what they call helical theaters. Okay. Hello. Hello. Tell us who you are, please. Mike Marorrow. I'm with Chief Industries Bonavilla in Aurora.

Thank you. Why don't you tell us about what your plan is here? Well, the permanent foundation that Judy described is essentially uh specified through the HUD program as meeting professional engineering design standards for um lateral and vertical uh anchor tie down in order to essentially create a permanent foundation that would be um equivalent to having a home that's permanently attach you know any home that's permanently attached all the same. Okay. So, could you describe in some detail how that works for us? Without getting too technical, we're not engineers, so

I'm not either, so I won't. Uh, typically, it's two different types. Um, one is a elliptical pier system where you have uh metal metal anchorage that is augured down deep into the ground and then attached to the house in the steel frame in various locations. The other system alternatively uh which both either way you do it is essentially the same uh engineering design standard but it would have concrete peers and then anchorage systems that run um laterally and across the foundation attaching it in different places. One has basically concrete peers, you know, that set footings that that are that are set in the ground, and the other just has um as I said, metal anchors that are augured down into the ground.

Roughly, how far do they auger the anchors in the ground? Um, off the top of my head, I'm not sure, but they typically go beneath the frost step, so they go pretty deep. Okay, Nick, you had the first question. Thank you. Oh, unless it was already answered. I'm sorry. No. Okay. No, I mean kind. Yeah. Um, so what what is the the cost offsetting, I guess, versus uh so how much more cost is it to anchor these the alternative way versus the traditional way? Let's just go with that. Is there a cost analysis on is it

I I guess I'm not What do you mean by the traditional way? Well, I'm the trai. So, I guess what I'm asking is if you just set the the manufactured home down and not why would you not anchor it that way anyway? If you're in an if you're in a completely unregulated environment, that's the only reason why you wouldn't do that. Okay. But in most environments, that's that's typically going to be required. So, like on a um a single lot with a manufactured house, that's typically how they would do it is the the better way, I guess, to say it.

Uh I would say that the in most states that have a regulatory environment that requires it to be done to the HUD standard, which not all do. Um but that like in Nebraska, it's specified that you follow that. you're going to have to tie it down in a in a method that essentially would be one of the professional engineering design standards like this. So, is there any houses or any, you know, manufactured mobile homes that are set in today's world that don't comply with that HUD standard? I'm sure there are.

Okay. just like you would find in an unregulated environment uh in an area of no building jurisdiction in some states or you know uh even in our own state I'm sure in a completely unregulated environment you you might not meet the you know the state law or what the typical requirements would be I'm sure that does happen okay I have some other questions but I'll wait and go ahead Rad so our our current way is to anchor these down in what you're talking about with our north spread Judy

or Brent. Maybe I should have made Brent get Yeah, I'm thinking you maybe should have made Brent, but um yeah, we do have mobile home setown permits and you put the mobile homes down, you anchor them to the ground and then they have skirting that goes around the bottom of them. These are going to be a little bit different because they're introducing what they call that helical pier. And I don't know exactly how that works, but it's supposed to be a more permanent type foundation. Whereas when you're just anchoring them down, you can just pick them up and leave. These take a little more effort to do that, right?

Yeah, that that's true. Again the the design standards that the helipical peers or a I would say an equivalent tie down system would be uh so that the later the lateral and vertical fastening of the anchorage and the and the way that the material itself is designed is to the you know the wind load standards that you would typically see in conventional construction. HUD zone one, which would be equivalent to the conventional building codes.

Hey Judy, I think Oh, I'm sorry, Brad. Just a second. I Let's bring up the pictures if you would please. So, go ahead, Brad. Will these have basements? Will they have interior rooms that are uh have no exterior windows?

An interior room with no exterior windows. Um, off the top of my head, the utility room. Yeah. Yes. The answer to that current design is not I I think the typical design would have that. Yes. Because my my concern is is if you know the mobile homes anchor down, but it sucks everything out of it. That's not really helpful to people living inside of it as opposed to a storm shelter which would be better. You know what I mean?

Don't disagree. You know, like I said, the anchorage and the fastening of a helipical pile or the the pier and the tie down system would essentially give the same lateral and vertical engineered hold down strength to that house as it would be to a house that is built in a subdivision right now uh on a on a typical conventional foundation that where you would not have a storm shelter or equivalent, you know, storm thing. So that same risk would exist um on the houses that are being built across town,

right? But t typical houses have interior, places you can go, things of that nature, basement, crawl spaces, stuff like that. So is the utility room that you describe, is it does it have any kind of special support that's going to help in an emergency, a tornado emergency? Not as currently designed. No. So you're basically if a tornado hits it, everything's getting sucked out. Probably the mobile home may be anchored down, but if the roof and everything's gone, that's that's that's going to be a problem. And you remove the storm shelter that they could have went to for safety.

Yeah. Again, I I don't disagree with you except to say that the the engineering and design standards that would exist in that house if you had a if you had a similar house that was built conventionally across town, you would have the exact same risk unless you had the coincidental, you know, forethought to design a room in like the way you're describing, but which is not required.

No, but it is common in conventional housing. Yeah, my house has a basement. We have internal places we can go to. You know, we have forethought house I lived in in town. We had a crawl space we can go into. Those kinds of thoughts are put into that that type of because I mean we do occasionally have bad weather around here

since the technology is thwarting you. Sorry, I can't get the computer to work. So, I'm going to um show you this picture. This is a picture of what the osed um manufactured homes would look like. They look quite a bit different than what you would see your typical um mobile home because they don't have like I mean they have a foundation around it. It doesn't look like skirting of a typical mobile home. Um it's very similar to what you would see as a slab on grade type. And when you do slab on grade, they take those houses and anchor them down also. And we've got a number of slab on grade homes in North.

Go ahead. If if I may. So yeah, only slab on we're building conventional houses there. So

Judy did consult with some of our other our peer cities and um like Cardi does not require storm shelters and and mobile home parks. So I I believe if if I remember right, two of our existing parks have some kind of a shelter. Not sure if I mean it's got they most they have groundwater and I'm not sure if you'd really want to go into it and some of our other parks do not. So it's you know there's a range of whether they do or don't. And so we're looking at other pier cities and this this adoption or that this added section is common as far as giving an either or an optional situation for that. So, you know, we could argue all day as far as safety because we know what happens when the wrong storm comes in, you know, with any with any home. So, but this this was something that was common that we did not have in our regulations that we we wanted to add. I thought it made sense to add as an option.

I think you can probably sit down for a second. Oh, hold on. Hold on. I lied to you. I'm sorry.

Sorry, Mr. Ro. Um, so do these properties become real property with this type of attachment or are they still considered a mobile home and personal property? In other words, does does this type of attachment make them mortgage eligible and then they get taxed as real property and the titles go away? Is it that type of process or like you would put them on a permanent foundation or do they remain a mobile home and like a personal property type asset? They could under certain niche financing that exists for uh HUD construction, but that's not the intent of of the homes as they're to be built in here. But they could I mean the foundation system doesn't really affect that, I guess I would say.

Uh just second. Okay, Judy, did you answer Miss Gentleman's question there? Okay, you got your question answered, sir. I would just point out the fact that all these home access port somewhere to get under the house for maintenance. So that could be used for emergency shelter. Just thinking about his word.

Yeah. Thank you, Nick. Um, I I just want to say that, you know, I feel like we want to keep the storm shelters a requirement for the people and the safety of the citizens in these mobile home parks. Um, as somebody who wasn't for this, I was told that we had very good trailer park ordinances or mobile home park ordinances for this exact reason of preventing issues in the future. And so any ordinance change to the mobile home park I am I'm not for

Okay. Go ahead Judy. You have a point. Um yeah this isn't striking the sorry this isn't striking anything out of the existing ordinance. This is just adding to in case somebody wants to go in lie of the shelter. So we're not taking that storm shelter out of there at all. It just gives them an option to choose one or the other. Okay, thank you. Do we have other questions or com? Pete,

just an observation on this. Um, I am equating it to Mulligan Meadows because they're stickuilt homes on a slab on grade. So, that's basically what you're doing here with this Heliloc system or or someone could do with a heliloc system. I don't know if you guys are doing it or not, but if you do put that stronger structural integrity down and anchor it down more, it's not even an anchor. You're you're you're attaching it to that slab on grade. Yeah. Obviously, there's a lot of different engineering designs that go into a manufactured house, but I think in 2026, they've come a long way. I don't know. And maybe you can explain a little bit on how these houses are designed. I know that manufactured housing, where is the load, and you're not an engineer, but is the load on the walls? Uh, it's it's a all-encompassing diaphragm. Okay.

So, it's it's all of it together. Okay. And the the when you say come a long way also the technical definition of a mobile home the word or the phrase mobile home technically defines a house that's built prior to the the HUD code that was enacted in the 70s which

which did not have the same design it really had unregulated design criteria prior to that. So the manufactured home regulations that are in place now um really are for the design criteria are quite a bit different and especially in the uh as it pertains to the regulation of the uh tieowns and the the way that the tie downs are actually fastened and attached to the ground and the way that they're regulated at the national level. Okay.

Thank you, Nick. Do this Judy do um apartment complexes or anything like that do they have safe rooms or anything in their complexes? There is no requirement for that to occur. Do most of them generally have common areas that are quote unquote safe safe zones or anything like that? That would be tough. I I mean interior rooms is about the only thing that there's no requirement that they have to provide a safe shelter or a storm shelter.

I guess I guess where I'm getting at with this point is like the comparison to Mulligan Meadows I feel is different because that's individual homeowners. They own the the house and the property versus uh a mobile park. They are a tenant and it's a business structure because there's lot and everything like that. So, I think it's a good business practice to protect the citizens in those parks that don't own the land to be have the option of a storm shelter to feel safe. So, that's kind of where I'm at with that.

Brad, I got to agree with you, Nick. this this feels less safe to me. You know, no matter how that structure is tied down, having an actual storm shelter that you can go to on someone that you're providing a service to, you're renting to is is is a better deal in my opinion. So, I I think I'm leaning towards being against this. Also,

if if I may, those apartments that are being built right now on basically McCabe and off of Philip there between Philip and Francis, those are all wood frame. And Brandon, do you know I don't think there's any type of storm or shelter built into those structures there. Is there I mean that's a that's a similar thing. It's an apartment complex and that's a wood structure. So just just to compare apples to apples if you will. Yeah, that's correct. I on the building plans I think they're just rooms and like apartments and then a hallway. So there are interior rooms but that's about it. But they don't have any special no wall structures or anything like that.

It's very similar to a hotel construction. The hotels are similar in that respect as well. But apartments and hotels are going to have in case of emergency go this direction to this hall. You know, it's going to be an interior, you know, section. Like they have those things in place, at least the ones I've ever lived in. But here again, they don't have any special criteria for those hallways. It's not like it's built for storm. It's just no windows, but it's not when Nick had mentioned some of these homes are being built with like an actual storm room. They those hotels or these apartments don't have an actual criteria for that. It's just just the walls, right?

I see what you're saying, Brad, but it's not not a special structure made to withstand a higher wind load than the rest of the building. I understand, but it's also not a a mobile home. Just because the foundation and the the structure if everything gets sucked out of there, doesn't matter how much the foundation's screwed to the ground. Same as a slab built home. Go ahead, Ed. Mr. Mayor, thank you, Judy. our current regulations. Um, do we have some kind of requirement that we have to have a safe uh shelter uh within so many feet? What what's the farthest distance the shelter can be from the farthest away home

in a mobile home park?

In a mobile home park. Sure. I'm sorry. Um, I'm going to have to look at the regulations um because I don't know that exact distance, but um there is a distance in the regulations that say that. And I'm sorry, I apologize. I don't know that exact distance. The um city attorney might be looking it up for me. Um but that's another thing to think of too is where placement of a shelter. If you require that in a mobile home park and you have an extremely large parcel of ground, you're going to have to run quite a distance to get there. So, our our city code, in answer to your question, Councilman Rar, our city code doesn't specify it. It um it kind of uh passes it off to what FEMA requires. And so, I don't know what the FEMA regulations are because I haven't looked those up, but it it basically says that the shelter has to be located uh in an area as directed by FEMA. So, FEMA sets the um parameters as to how far away that storm shelter would need to be. Well, if that's a FEMA requirement, can we get around?

We don't have to adopt the FEMA requirement. There are other jurisdictions that don't require shelters. So, we could have a mobile home park and not require a shelter. We're not mandated to require that shelter. Single song there. So, Judy, just ballpark. We have 11 mobile home parks in our city. Probably pretty close. Okay. How many of them have a shelter? I can think of two. I would say two that I'm aware of. Okay. And one of those I don't I would not get in the shelter. You're you're a little sensitive about spiders. So that's

But I'm not crawling under my crawl space either. So I'm going to be in the ditch just so you know. But

Okay. Yeah. Sorry Ed I interrupted you. Well, I I guess you know from a practical standpoint, I don't know how big of a mobile home park you folks are talking about, but you know, you get a pretty good size park. You're going to have to be a track star to get to the shelter before before the storm gets there. I'm not a track star, so I guess I'm going to go away. But but nonetheless, I I uh I I don't I don't know that it's it's necessary to add the extra cost to these folks. I you can only you can only legislate about so much safety.

So enough it Mr. Mayor, could I go ahead?

Yeah, I just wanted to add to that. I mean, it's hard when you're talking about safety because any putting anybody in danger is something none of us want to do. But I can guarantee you there's way more housing in this community that's going to be way less safe than what this is. I think what this council and city officials have to keep looking at is overall our overall emergency management strategy. I mean, the facts are we haven't had a new mobile home park. We really need this price point of housing. I think it's going to be safer than a decent percentage of the stuff that's in the community today. It's interesting when we were going through this, this was an idea that somebody added to our ordinances at this time. I I don't when the ordinances were crafted, I I don't remember if I was on the planning commission or if I was on the council, but this was a item that was kind of added. This was kind of the cherry on the banana split thinking that they could have it. As I've thought about this, I imagine if you're doing a big mobile home park, I mean, where are you going to build 10,000 square feet or 5,000 square feet underground? I mean, I just don't know how you really accomplish that. And so, I I think we should lean towards the federal regulations recognizing that this is going to be better, safer housing than a lot of the stuff that we have. They still have to sell what and have people want want the park. So, it has to be attractive. And then we're going to the town has to keep looking at your emergency management systems. We can't ignore that that's a component in all this. Um, you know, if all of a sudden we end up with a bunch of new mobile homes in certain areas, well then I would think that would affect the way we look at emergency management in those areas.

Nick, I'm not 100% certain on this because I didn't have time to research and look it up. Was there is there any grant money available for storm shelters or anything like that? Is that a thing? Anybody know that?

I don't know of anything off the top of my head to get that. Um, could always happen, but nothing that I'm aware of right now. We get well we have not so much this year but in previous years we probably get emails regarding different types of grants for different things probably two or three a month that are on different subjects and they're not always the same. So just because there isn't something now doesn't mean there might not be something in the future. Yeah. But I don't recall one in the time I've been mayor that would have probably addressed that issue specifically. Okay. Other questions are Oh, go ahead, Pete.

Just real quick. I was waiting for Brent to go clear in the back and sit down. Brent, would you mind coming back up just I want to get your expertise. I don't know if you've done any studies on tornatic activity or anything with mobile homes, but and while you're there, just to paraphrase a little bit about what we did with the mobile home ordinance uh five, six, seven, eight years ago or so. Um, you know, the main thing we were doing was was to making making it so that we have newer mobile homes. We had a lot of 1967,6869 you know the typical mobile homes that you see and like the gentleman spoke uh 1974 the HUD rules came out things changed a lot and now after looking at those pictures this has really changed a ton from your atypical mobile home that you we're all picturing you know um the gal in Kansas that got taken up by a tornado. Thank you. Yeah, that's her name. You know, but Brent, have you seen any of of the studies on on the new type mobile homes, 2026, 2027 mobile homes with this Helox type technology anchored in? Do you know? And what's your indicator on safety value and what happens to a mobile home, excuse me, manufactured house or a stick belt home in a tornado? Well, I've had some experience looking at some of Texas. Texas Texas&M has a tornado lab that they do some different experiments with. They're kind of interesting videos if you like things getting destroyed. It's an interesting video to watch. So, um I have experience with the FEMA HUD um requirements. It's a 1996 guide. It's about it's several hundred pages long and they went through wind loads, things like that for

manufactured housing. And what this basically is is a single wide manufactured house is what this is. We have quite a few double wide manufactured houses that are just two halves put together and it's a similar type of foundation is what they're proposing. from a foundation load side, it's the same um type of tie down system and strength. So in that regard, these are single wide versus double and we have a lot of double wide in the community. Um so from that respect, this would be similar to a 2x4 2x6 constructed house. I don't know your walls 2 by six or 2x4s. And I a lot of times the houses are built for shipping and they've got to handle making it from point A to point B is some of the roughest things they experience. So once they get in getting set and once they're set. So a 2x6 we have houses that don't have 2x4 walls. So if they're 2 by six they're already a heavier wall than what is required or necessary on a stick framed construction. So that's the uh I guess I don't know does that address some of your question?

It does. It does. Yeah. I'm just I'm picturing this as as safer than a good majority of the houses that are in our community right now, you know, with the exception that that things have changed so much with technology and with load bearings and and wind loads and that that I feel a 2026 manufactured house would be much more apt to survive straight line or heavy winds than some of the existing structures that we have in this in this community.

The the HUD guidelines do have wind requirements as far as the structure being able to handle it. And so I I know it's over 100 miles an hour. I don't remember maybe you guys might probably more of the 115 range. So gust your traditional cycle Okay, thank you. That answers a lot. Thanks, Ed. Hold on, Brent. No, I have another question. Oh, okay. Just get set back now, then we'll call you back. Okay. Go ahead, Ed. Sorry.

Uh, just just from a practical standpoint, if you're going to have a some kind of a community room or safe room or something, um, it's going to be maintenance point. Another maintenance issue for the for the park owners because typically those aren't going to be frequented very often. So, somebody's going to have to make sure they're clean. Uh if you leave the doors unlocked so people can get in there, it's hard telling what you're going to get in there. U just from a practical standpoint, I I I I can see very good reasons not to have it. Other questions or comments? Okay. Calling the question on item number 11, please. Item number 11 is passed. Moving on to item number 12, which begins with a public hearing. Consider action on an application by Lutheran Family Services of Nebraska for a conditional use permit to allow construction of an outpatient health clinic on property located 1160 Linda Court in an R3 dwelling district. We're going to open the public hearing on item number 12. Anyone would like to make a comment, uh, please approach microphone and tell us who you are.

Good evening. Uh, my name is Matt Peterson. I'm here on behalf of Lutheran Family Services tonight. My address is 614 Sequoia Court. I know you all have had quite some discussions tonight, so I'll keep this uh short. Um I think there's a lot of information in your packet, but essentially what Luther and Family Services is looking at doing is building a new outpatient clinic at this location. Um they currently have a uh a clinic on 12th Street um that's outdated and needs some renovations. And so the plan there is to um convert that into more of a crisis center. Um, this new location will now serve as the outpatient clinic. Um, as I think it's mentioned in your packet, it's strictly outpatient services. There's no residential treatment. There's no overnight stays. Um, there'll be scheduled appointments, so it's going to be just like any traditional doctor's office or thing like that where there will be some um traffic in and out throughout the day, but the times will be staggered and so there shouldn't be uh much traffic added to the area. Um, if there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer those. We'll do that during the next section. So, this is public hearing. So, thank you. Perfect. Would anyone else like to make a comment on this item?

I move we close public hearing. Second.

Motion by Vol, second by RER to close public hearing. Calling the question on closing the public hearing, please. Public hearing is now closed. Council will now consider action on an application by Lutheran Family Services of Nebraska for a conditional use permit to allow construction of an outpatient health clinic on property located 1160 Linda Court in an R3 dwelling district. Mr. Mayor, I move that we find the request for a conditional This is right. Right. Yep. Mr. Mayor, I move that we find the request for a conditional use permit to allow construction of an outpatient health clinic located at 1160 Linda Court meets the minimum standard stated in the North Plat code of ordinance section 156.322 at a proven grant. The conditional use permit requested with the condition that all elements of the application are complied with based on the following factual findings. One, the you shall conform to the applicable ordinance laws and regulations of any governmental jurisdiction. Two, the you shall have adequate water, sewer, and drainage facilities. Three, ingress and egress shall be so designated as to minimize traffic congestion in the public street. Four, the use shall in all other respects conform to the applicable regulations of the district and with located. And five, that you shall be in harmony with the character of the area and and the most appropriate use of the land.

Second motion by BS, second by Lucas. Okay, questions. Yeah, Mr. Matt,

I couldn't be more for this project. I mean, this is fabulous. we continue to see in our community needs assessments with health, the need for this and Lutheran family services certainly is a great partner to have in the community. Um if if there's some things that I've regretted over the years with residents, it's when we've worked with churches that we didn't um disallow flashing electronic signs when there's a lot of residences around churches. So, do you know if they intend to have any kind of flashing electronic sign with this project? Uh, I do not know the answer to that, but I would guess no.

Okay. I've I've felt at times that anytime we have some of these things, we should consider baking that into the permit, but I don't know that I want to restrict this. We'll we see this more than once. This is a one-shot deal. Yeah, go ahead and do it if you think it's important. Yes. Then I would motion that we include as a condition that there will be no flashing electronic sign. I would second that motion by Lucas, second by Vols for no electronic flashing sign on this piece of property. Is that what you're saying? Okay. Any discussion on the motion, Ed?

What what what's flashing, Ty? I mean, when I think about St. Elizabeth and We've got a marquee that that the the format changes periodically. It's not a pulsing flash, but obviously there's different light intensities based on the color that's being projected. So, how do you how do we define this? What are we what what are you thinking about? Well, that's a great question. I'm thinking about Ian Bryan and upset residents at that area. And there's a couple others in the community. Yeah, I think we have regulation on them. Judy might want to speak on this real quick.

There is the the building code. We've we've had this come up. The building code does have some uh parameters as to the intensity of the light and there's some other restrictions in the building code where our building inspectors have addressed this with some of the churches and one in particular that I can think of that's been addressed recently um with the signs. So, one way with this one also, since it is in a residential district, you could just simply say no electronic signage, scratch flashing. Yeah. Yeah. Well, I certainly don't have a goal of inhibiting our project here. We'll be getting a phone call from condoms.

And I don't think I don't think it'll bother them. I don't think they want to have a sign saying mental health here. I don't t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t typically facilities such as these are are not seeking to attract a great deal of attention. So I don't imagine that there's going to be an issue with a, you know, a great big neon sign. Yeah. Yeah. So maybe I I'll just withdraw my motion but ask Mr. Peterson to pass that information on or concern on. Yeah. Thank you. I'll withdraw my second.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch. Okay. Do we have any other comments on this item? I just do want to share that I appreciate Lutheran Family Services continuing to execute their plan for um alcohol and drug rehab facilities in the town. I know this is kind of stage one um stage two working with a couple of grants and things like that. Um if I understand it, Mr. Peterson, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but they're looking at remodeling the 12th Street side for a detox unit that would be a medical detox in part. Is that correct? That that's my understanding as well. I think um if they can get this facility built um and then we'll remodel the the term they used with me was crisis center, but I think that's exactly more immediate needs than the ongoing counseling services.

Something that several of us have worked on now for several years. So it would be nice to see that come to fruition. Yeah. Any other comments or questions on this item? Calling the question on item number 12, please. Item number 12 is passed. Item number 13. Mr. Mayor, may I interrupt you? Go ahead. Like to move to enter into close session for the sole purpose of discussing real estate transactions in order to protect the public's interest. Second.

Motion to close session by Lucas, second by I think RER won that one. Find the question on close session. Mr. Nissley and Mr. Garrick, would you please vote? Jim. Jim, would you vote, please? Can vote whichever way you want, but please vote. Council is now in close session. Thank you, everyone.

807. What? Oh, yeah.

You're burning the whole stuff. You're burning the whole working. Once we hold on a second

once we come out or once everybody gets back everyone back. All right. Okay, we're back everyone. Uh just let everybody know we entered close session at 7:31. We exited close session at 8:07. The only matter discussed was uh potential real estate transactions and we entered close session to protect the public's interest. Okay, we have item number 13 before us and that is to discuss and outline possible terms for sale of two industrial lots in the industrial area by Prospect Drive and Prospect Lane and direct the city attorney to draft a proposed ordinance. Mr.

Oh, sorry. Could I move to table item number 13 subject to getting more detailed plans on the proposal? Okay, we have a motion to table by Lucas and a second by Garrick. There's no discussion. A motion to table. All those in favor of the table, please raise your right hand. This item is tabled until there is a what was your exact words? Until we would have a more detailed uh site planite plan to review.

Okay. All right. Moving on to item number 14. Approve the claims. Mr. Mayor, I move you to pay the bills. Second. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to abstain. Okay. A motion by RER, second by Volos to pay the claims. Mr. Dye has abstained. Calling a question on the claims. Raise your right hand. Question. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay, go ahead.

Um, on the general, we we show hope as for $3,000. I think that's right. Um, I don't know if anybody's looked into these people, but they've got some associates that work with them that are promoting DEI, promoting promot promoting changes in our immigration laws. Uh they brag about being lucid uh making sure that we're an exclusive community and that we're welcoming all of the immigrants. I don't think this is something that I want to support. Um I know that I think Lane you said we're using them for translation.

That that's if I remember right um they hadn't invoiced us for a few months. So that's three months worth of translation services. when we have people that need translation services. What that actually was for the the chamber or the council, I think this was before the council about a year and a half ago when we first entered into that agreement with them. So, it's usually not 30,000, but that's what it's for, Ed.

You know, they they say right on their on their website this uh welcoming America, diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging. Now, I don't know if you guys have followed diversity, equity, inclusion, but that's a racist idea. It's definitely Marxist, and I don't think we be should be supporting us. I really don't. Um, and then they want us to sign the one of the other things is sign the pledge, draw the line against ICE violence. This is about as political as you can ever hope to get. Um what what is certified welcoming? The designation demonstrates efforts that the local government and community partners have undertaken to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, particularly for immigrants and refugees. Now, granted, they they failed to include illegal immigrants, of course, but that's what they mean. I I know if you've ever followed the Nebraska Apple Seed Foundation, another left-leaning bunch. Uh since 1996, Nebraska Apple Seed has fought for justice and opportunity for all Nebraskans. We take a systematic approach to complex issues such as child welfare, immigration policy, affordable health care, and poverty. Now, I don't think these are things that government should be supporting. I really don't. Thoughts? Um I did have a question though under under J under general um zel is that our

that's our HR consultants and then u under the fire uh we had a bill that barbecue for $1,500. Is that meals for the fighting suppliers or I I'd have to look into that. I'm not sure on that one. And then under public service, and I'm not questioning these, I'm just kind of curious what they afford. TK's welding and fabrication got $52,000. That's a pretty big deal for TK's. I'm not sure what we do.

That's um part of that was for our recycling bins for our dumping into the trucks to take to the Togala was like 12,000 of that. I'd have to look at the other I think we had something done. Um the we put in the steel floor at the uh transfer station. Every so often that wears out and we have to put new plates in. So I more than likely TK's does a ton of stuff for us. We we go to bib but they usually the best price. So So I just those are questions that I would I will find out about the fireworks. I don't know that answer. Anyway, that's the only thing that I have. Mr. Mayor,

thank you. Other comments or questions on the claims. Seeing none, calling the question of claim, please raise your right hand if you're in favor. Rod, you abstain. You're not voting. Put your hand down. All right. Six to zero. Public agenda request. We respect our city employees. Request that any complaints or criticism. Employees not be aired to public meeting. Concerns about employees should be brought to the attention of the city administrator or the mayor. Individual in violation will be declared out of order. If anyone has a public agenda request item, you're welcome to approach the microphone and uh let us know your thoughts.

Go ahead and come up to the microphone, please, sir. Tell us who you are and where you live, and we'll be happy to listen to your thoughts. The city I think that one propert

Are you talking about things that might be considered Trash or you talking about vegetation? Trash. Trash. Okay. Mattresses people leave behind and like that. You can't put out the truck. I I can tell you because of the cost of that stuff. That's why we only have it for a limited amount of time because it's a pretty significant cost. I think we had 50 some tons last year in that nine day period if we did it year round. It'd be a considerable cost. We'd have to look at our garbage rates. But that's that's why we only have it for a limited time.

Up until six years ago, we didn't do it at all. So, but I get your point. Yeah. Well, I'll tell you what, we we will look at doing at least more frequently in the short term. So, Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wilson. Anyone else? Mr. Rer, Mr. Mayor, I move to second

motion by RER, second by Lucas or excuse me, Bolds to adjourn. All those in favor is unanimous. Meeting adjourned. See you all in two weeks except for Pete who will be somewhere