City Council - Regular Meeting

December 1st, 2025. Inform the public about the location of the open meeting act posted in the council chambers and accessible to members of the public. At this moment, we're going to at this time we'll start with a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, please. Granquist here. Arns here. Webb here. McCarthy here. Beckman here.

Jensen here. Langy here. Hildebrand here. Mayor here. All right. We'll open this meeting with public comment. Um we need to remind of the rules how that works. We got Oh, there it is. Five minutes per individual wants to come up. Unless you're Santa then then it's a little bit different. So, we'll start there. I'm not signing in. No. Well, I think everybody knows who you are. Oh, we know your address.

Merry Christmas. Merry Christmas to you. Merry Christmas, Santa. Keep in a good spirit. [snorts]

Yeah, that's probably appropriate for you. [laughter] And remember, Thank you, sir. [snorts]

Merry Christmas. Merry Christmas. to stop talking to me. [snorts] Couple more stops and then I'll leave.

I'm not quite sure. Jim McKenzie. that we asked of these four cities was, "Does your council hold subcommittee meetings? If so, are those meetings recorded and our minutes taken?" And I'll read to you a snippet of each city's response. Columbus, yes, we have three subcommittees. Public property safety and works committee comprised of four city council members. Public finance, judiciary, and personnel committee comprised of the other four city council members. Committee of the whole comprised of all eight city council members. The property and finance committee meetings have audio recordings. The committee of the whole has video and audio recordings. Minutes are taken for all three.

Fremont, we do not have any formal subcommittee meetings for our council. Carney, no, our city council does not hold subcommittee meetings. North Platt, we used to hold subcommittee meetings years ago and minutes were taken, but we stopped doing them. I'm not sure why. So, in summary, staff contacted four cities. Three of the four do not even have subcommittee meetings. and the one that does, Columbus, has their subcommittee meetings advertised and open to the public. I took this one step further and looked into all first class cities in Nebraska with a population greater than 10,000. And I could not find any cities other than Columbus and Norfolk that have formal subcommittee meetings. I did not do an exhaustive search, but I looked at their websites and in some cases their municipal code to see if there were any reference to formal subcommittee meetings that are composed specifically of city council persons like Norfolk and Columbus. Many cities appear to have boards and commissions in which some council persons participate along with members of the community. I assume these meetings are open to the public since they contain members of the public. The conclusion I come to is Norfolk is an anomaly, but not because we were recording subcommittee meetings, but because we have formal subcommittee meetings, unlike most other cities, and they take place behind closed doors, not open to the public, and now not even recorded. A couple things came to mind as I was researching this. First of all, why is it so hard to just do the right thing? If you're going to have subcommittee meetings, hold them in

public like Columbus does and record them so they can be viewed at a later date in time by those who cannot attend. Secondly, if all these other communities are operating without formal subcommittee meetings, then why do we have so many? And why are they held behind closed doors with no recording of what took place? Norfolk seems like the only first class city I could find with a population greater than 10,000 that holds subcommittee meetings closed off to the public. It's simply not right and it shows Norfolk in a very poor light. We must move away from this insular inward focused culture in the city. We must be willing to embrace public input and public knowledge of our decisionmaking and for policy forming process. Either eliminate the subcommittee meetings altogether or make them open to the public. Thank you Jim. Jim I have a question for clarification. What are you what are you considering formal or what are you implying as formal?

If it's in your city code or pretty much if it's going to be in your city code or you have regular subcommittee meetings that are made of the city council persons. Okay. Okay. Thank you. All right. Anybody else?

[clears throat]

Bruce Mills. I live at 706 North Box Selder and um our property there is the end of the line for the storm water that that comes through before it drops into the outfall that goes down into uh the gate which goes into the the main flood control. Um so I started having contact with city officials in July um just trying to get some resolve to help clean that out because we get sediment that comes down um to our property. some of its our sediment too from there just helped getting it cleaned out because it's a mess. Um so that that started in July. Um I did talk to Mr. Ramos and a few others. Um I just want to get some time to get down to have a meeting to talk about what we can do to fix the problem because it seems to be an issue. There's quite a bit of sediment build up there. So that's all I wanted. I just want to know what else what other process I have to do to go through to get a meeting to talk about this.

If you had Well, go ahead, Steve. You want me to answer? So, Bruce, since our since we've had our conversations, we have we have been working on that. We are we are I've got one proposal right now to u put a 54 in CMP in there and we are gathering two other proposals to do the same. Uh once I've got those other two in my hands, then I'll reach out to you and we'll have some conversation around that. But my goal here is to move that forward come spring and completely eliminate the problem. Okay. All right. Well, I appreciate that. That's all I needed. Thank you.

Anyone else want to come forward? Okay. Well, seeing none, we will move on to the rest of our agenda. I need a motion to get approval for the consent agenda, removing items number 17 and 18 and placing them on the regular agenda. So moved, your honor. Second. A motion second. Please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Motion carries.

All right. Move on to approve the full agenda including 1718 into the regular agenda. I'll make a motion to approve the cons full agenda. Second. Motion to second. Please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Motion carries. Okay. On to public hearing and related action. Um, this time we'd ask for a motion to adjurnn as mayor and city council and convene as the board of equalizations for item number 22 through 26.

So moved. Second.

I motion second. Please vote. [clears throat] All council members voting in the affirmative. Motion carries. So I will start off with item number 22. Uh public hearing of the for the board of equalization to hear the equalization special assessments for paving district number 521. Start with Steve. Mayor Council, thank you. Um before you here is the um final assessment calculations as a function of the request for paving district 521 um Northwork 140 subdivision. Uh the assessments were requested by that developer. Uh the assessments are all all the assessments are to that developer. The total cost of the project for paving was uh $2,82,39941. Uh budding property nonaccessible. The intersection costs were 95,000. Oversized storm shore 95,000. Total accessible costs on the project 2,511,000 925.66. Um on the back on the back side of that you can see the calculations for oversized storm sewer. Um per city code anything over 24 in is defined as oversized. Um so we go through a calculation there and uh calculates what we are going to consume for that. Um the the assessments there's three

lots that are being assessed. It's lot one, lot two, and lot three of that uh subdivision. Outlot A is a storm sewer retention facility. And so we do not uh we do not assess that uh any assessment that would occur to that as a function of the linear footage adjacent to the project is consumed by the other three lots. Um the assessments have been shared with the developer and they did not have any any comment. Um the the assessments themselves and in terms of you what it does for that developer. Obviously it allowed them to move a an operation that they had here in town. The Nebraska machinery uh operation is part of theirs. And so they have relocated that over there. Um and uh they desire to and are currently actively working to get uh other development moving in that subdivision. Any questions on that one?

Yeah. Right. So instead of closing uh for each one of these items, we're just going to keep it open so uh we can talk. We're going to item number 24, public hearing for the board of equalization to the equaliz special assessments for water extension district number 128. Uh in front of you, mayor and council are the final assessment calculations for uh the Northfor 140 subdivision. Again, they also requested um district 4 uh water and sewer. I'll go through the water one here, which is item number 24. Total costs on that project are $333,515. There was a small amount of oversized on that in the amount of $20,8648 for a total assessed project cost of $313,428.52. Um the oversized calculation there is included uh that develops that $20,8648. Uh the same here it's lot one two and three and we are not assessing lot A. The total cost of the assessment is rolled into um lots one, two and three. The assessments were shared with the developer and the developer had no no comment. All right. Uh item number 26, public hearing for the board of legalization to hear the equalization special for sanitary sewer extension district number 255. Sewer extension district 255 is the sanitary sewer extension district as part of the Northfor 140 subdivision. Again, the developer requested sanitary sewer district. Um, total cost of the sanitary sewer district is $189,640.95.

The abuing abuing non-accessible oversized cost $1,13729 for a total assessable project of 180 $188,536. Oversized calculations are shown there on the back side. And again, the assessments are to lots one, two, and three of the subdivision. There's no assessment to outlot A. Steve on Steve on page 126 when it says uh engineering at $17,828.90 is that the engineering fees for the project or do we do we usually cover the engineering fees? I guess I'm asking that looks like a low number like there would be a engineering cost outside of that number. the the page you're referring to is that in the um

is that the sewer district in the agenda? Sewer district.

So the engine the engineering contract um I don't recall necessarily off the top of my head, but the large the largest portion of the engineering contract was was on the paving side. Um, typically with that comes in as a single contract and then we we divide that up proportionally based on the cost of the project into sewer, water and paving. Any further discussion as the board of equalization? I'd like to have a motion to close. What's that? Oh, any public comment as we're open as a board of equalization at this time? All right, seeing none, I'd like to have a motion to adjurnn as board of of equalization and reconvene as mayor and city council.

So move your honor. Second. I have a motion and a second. Please vote. [clears throat and cough] All council members voting in the affirmative. Motion carries. That brings us to item number 23. Consideration of approval of ordinance number 5958 leveling and special assessments in paving district number 521. I'll offer for consideration the approval of ordinance number 5958. Second. Any discussion? I think he really I mean

yeah I just point out mayor and council this is a 10-year um assessment um should the developer choose to pay off any one of those assessments uh among the three lots there is a 0.9% uh reimbur or deduct to the assessment uh which is a a cost that we would not have to incur for the underwriting fees and bonding cost. Um again the benefit to the property is their ability to develop the property um selloff portions for for development. It also brings sewer service, water service, um enhanced fire service into that area. Um any questions for me? Any questions from the public at this time? All right. scene. Short title, please.

An ordinance leving special assessments upon the lots, parts of lots, lands, and real estate abuing upon and adjacent to and specially benefited by the improvements in paving district number 521 of the city of Norfor, Nebraska to defay the cost of set improvements and to provide for the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form. All right, please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5958 carries on first reading. Your honor, I'd move that we suspend the rules and pass this ordinance on second and third reading. Second.

You have a motion to second. Any discussion? I see none. Please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5958 carries on second and third. All right, that brings us on to item number 25, consideration of approval of ordinance number 5958 levying special assessments in water extension district number 128. You move consideration of ordinance number 5959, first reading. Second.

A motion second. Any other discussions or questions for Mayor and Council? just point out uh the paving district was set up as a 10-year district. The water and sewer districts we typically set up as 20-year districts. And that is what is before you here is a 20-year uh district for the water extension. Any other discussion? Any discussion for the public? Right. Seeing none. Actually, I do have ahead. So, you said this is a 20 year versus 10 year on the paving. Is there a reason why it's different?

The only the only answer I have would be that just historically we we've done 10 year on paving and 20 year on water and sewer. I don't know if there's more history to that. Randy,

I [clears throat] don't know about more history, but um the water and sewer mains have a much longer expected life than the pave does. I know on our fixed asset system, we normally depreciate the paving over 30 years, assuming that within 30 years that street will have to be rebuilt. The water and sewer mains uh are 100year life and we've got some mains in place that are longer than that life. So, I'm guessing that when we did that, that was based on much longer life. the uh fixed assets being paid for with those special assessments have.

Okay, thank you. The only reason I asked was just the paving was so much more expensive. Seemed weird that it was on a shorter term than a less expensive item, but makes sense, Randy.

All right. Short title, please. An ordinance levying special assessments upon the lots, parts of lots, lands, and real estate abuing upon and adjacent to and specially benefited by the improvements in water extension district number 128 of the city of Norfor, Nebraska to defay the cost of set improvements and to provide for the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form. Okay, please vote.

All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5959 carries on first reading. I'll make a motion that we suspend the rules and pass on second and third. Second. I have a motion to second. Any discussion? Seeing none, please vote.

All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5959 carries on second and third. All right. And on an item number 27, consideration approval of ordinance number 5960, levings levying special assessments in sanitary sewer extension district number 255. Make a motion that we uh for consideration of approval number 5960. Second. All right, we have a motion to second. Any discussion? Steve, you have anything else? I just point out again, mayor and council, I just point out this is set up as a 20-year assessment district. Any questions for Steve? Any question on the anybody? Okay. Uh seeing none. Short title, please.

An ordinance ordinance levying special assessments upon the lots, parts of lots, lands, and real estate abuing upon and adjacent to and specially benefited by the improvements and sanitary sewer extension district number 255 of the city of Norfor, Nebraska, to defay the cost of set improvements and to provide for the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form.

All right, please vote. Okay. And it looks like my system just went down, so this will have to be a verbal roll call. Granquist, yes. Arns, yes. Web, yes. McCarthy, yes. Beckman, yes. Jensen, yes. Langy, yes. Hildebrand, yes. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5960 carries on first reading. I'll

make a motion we suspend the rules and pass ordinance 5960 on second and third. Second. Motion to second. Any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. Granquist, yes. Arnes, yes. Webb, yes. McCarthy, yes. Beckman, yes. Jensen, yes. Langy, yes. Hilderbrand. Yes. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5960 carries on second and third. All right. Now, it brings us to item 28. Um, need a motion. Well, what we'll do for item number 28 and 30 is we're going to open the public hearings at the same time and have those discussions. So, at this time, we need a motion to open the public hearing. So, move second. I don't get a motion.

Sorry. We just Sorry, I don't need a motion. Second. I just can I can open that. So, opening of the public hearing for item number 28. Did it's not popped up there either. My system went down. I have to fix it. Okay. All right. Um public hearing at the request of Raymond and Julie Stala to consider a zoning change from a agricultural district to I1 light industrial district on a proper generally located 1 half mile west of the intersection of 61st Street and Highway 275. Did you want to open number 30? Both?

We have Yeah, 28 and 30. Correct. Okay. So, you can discuss both items.

Perfect. So, this is a probably going to be easier in picture form. Um, so we're kind of out here on the edge of our ETJ. So, you can kind of see where this colored line is. That's where the start of the Madison County uh zoning begins. and they are the whole top piece and just some of this bottom piece. Um, and so that is where the picture comes in handy a little bit because there's also a plat. If these go through on all three readings, a plat will follow. And this is what the zoning is really being asked for is so this is that whole first top piece that was in the red. There's an existing house on this pink one that is being requested to rural residential. So, it would stay conforming as a a residential lot then with the remainder of it being these two lots north and south being requested into I1 along the highway. And then there's a second RR lot that is coming down here as a flag pole and opening up into a minimum threeacre lot for well and septic being we don't have uh water and sewer out there for future planning because the people who own this piece um have a feeling that one of their children would want to build a house out there and there's already other things going on there because it's a Rista Ranch. And so because we're going through a zone change and a plat, it just seemed logical to have it all done at the same time. Um, and you're you're that close to the ETJ anyway. So hopefully that helps. The applicants are here if you have any questions for them.

And what [clears throat] what is the request for the I1 for

the future businesses on there? You mean [clears throat] Good evening. My name is Ray Stala. Um, and we're requesting the zoning change. Basically, what we're doing is the highway frontage we're selling to one individual along with that existing house. the south part of that piece of property we're sell we would like to sell to um the Arista Ranch people. So the Arista Ranch people have kind of outgrown their facility as far as what the equipment that they use. And so what they'd like to do is put up a a shop there on that south part. And then the people along the highway are considering doing um like oversized uh storage units. Whether that comes about, I don't know for sure, but that's what the discussions have been.

So that's why there's an I1 request, right? Because it would it would be under a conditional use permit under C3. So that's how we got to I1. And with the Olsson's and their shop, it seemed fitting to go to I1. Also, any other questions, concerns. Thank you very much. Any further discussion? Anybody else have questions? Okay.

Planning Commission report, please.

The Nor Planning Commission held public hearings on November 18th, 2025 to consider zoning changes on property generally located 1 half mile west of the intersection of 61st Street and Highway 275. The request included changing the zoning from A agricultural district to I1 light industrial district and from A agricultural district to RR rural residential district. The planning commission recommends approval of both requests with the 7 to zero vote. All right, at this time we'll close the hearing and we'll move on to item number 29, consideration of ordinance number 5961, approving a zoning change from an A agricultural district to an I1 light industrial district on property generally located 1 half mile west of the intersection of 60 street and highway 275.

I'll offer for consideration the approval of ordinance number 5961. Second. All right, motion second. Val will lead us in discussion. We have any questions for her [clears throat] or any additional questions, I guess. All right. I see we're not going to have any qu any questions from anybody here. All right. Short title, please. An ordinance of the city of Norfor, Madison County, Nebraska, amending the zoning district map of the city of Norfor, Nebraska, providing when this ordinance shall be in full force in effect, and providing for the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form.

Right. Please vote. All [clears throat] council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5961 carries on first reading. Seeing no opposition, I'll make a motion that we suspend the rules and pass on second and third. Second. I have a motion to second. Any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5961 carries on second and third.

That removes us to item number 31, consideration of ordinance number 5962, approving a zoning change from a agricultural districts to RR, rural residential district on a property generally located 1 half mile west intersection of 61st Street and Highway 275. I'll make a motion for consideration of ordinance number 5962. Second. Right. We have a motion to second. Any other questions or discussion? Seeing none. Anybody from the audience have anything? Okay. With that being said, um, short title, please.

An ordinance of the city of Norfork, Madison County, Nebraska, amending the zoning district map of the city of Norfor, Nebraska, providing when this ordinance shall be in full force in effect and providing for the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form. All right. Please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5962 carries on first reading. Make a motion that we suspend the rules and pass ordinance 5962 on second and third. Second.

All right. Motion second. Any discussion? Seeing none, please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5962 carries on second and third. All right, that moves us to item number 32, consideration of resolution 2025-68, approving the final plat of Arista Ranch edition.

I'll for consideration of 202568. Second. All right, we have a motion to second. Any discussion? See none, please vote. [clears throat]

All council members voting in the affirmative. Resolution 2025-68 is adopted. I move this item number 33, a public hearing at the request of Jennifer Wet to consider a zoning change from agricultural district to RR rural residential district on property addressed at 3106 North 25th Street and the discussion on this will go to Val.

Okay. Thank you. I brought this property up. We are at Eisenhower down here at this southern cyan line and the property in discussion is the outlined in red. Um it's about 19 some acres currently in agg and they wanted to split that in half so that it could be more easily sold. And so they wanted to go kind of east and west with the properties because there is you can see an existing house on here and then this back um acreage back here. So the plat um will have a flag lot going along the north to to remain access to this back lot. Um because they wanted to split it. It's no longer large enough for egg being 40 acres minimum in egg. So, we're doing the zone change to RR and the plat at the same time so that they can easily sell this off because they do have someone uh wanting to purchase the the western portion of it.

And just for reference, where is uh our two-mile jurisdiction end on this property?

It's closer on this than uh the previous one. So Eisenhower is our uh city limits line. So it's about 3 half to 3/4 mile. [clears throat] Yeah, because it it's it's right here. Any other discussion? Anybody want to have any questions? All right. This time, um, planning commission report, please.

The North Park Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 18th, 2025 to consider a zoning change from a Agricultural District to RR, Rural Residential District on property addressed as 3106 North 25th Street. The planning commission recommends approval of the request with a 7 to zero vote. Right. With that, we'll close the hearing. Move on to item number 34. Consideration of ordinance number 5963 approving a zoning change from agriculture district to RR residential district on a property address as 3106 25th Street. I move consideration of ordinance number 5963 on first reading. Second.

Right. Motion second. Any other discussion for Val or any questions for Val? Anybody from the audience have anything about the general public have any questions? All right, seeing none. Short title, please. An ordinance of the city of Norfor, Madison County, Nebraska, amending the zoning district map of the city of Norfor, Nebraska, providing when this ordinance shall be in full force in effect and providing for the publication [laughter] of this ordinance in pamphlet form.

Please vote. Sorry. Please vote. [cough] All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5963 carries on first reading. I would make the motion that we suspend the rules and pass ordinance number 5963 on second and third. Second. We a motion seconding discussion. Seeing none, please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5963 carries on second and third.

Right on to item number 35, consideration resolution 2025-69, approving the final plat of the Wet subdivision. I'll offer for consideration the approval of resolution 2025-69. [cough] Second. Okay, we have well we have a motion second. So, any other discussion for Val? All right. Seeing none, please vote.

All council members voting in the affirmative. Resolution 2025-69 is adopted. All right, let move this on to our regular agenda tonight. Uh instead of starting at 36, we're going to move back to item number 17. Consideration of approval to advertise for bids for downtown Northwork lighting. I'm sorry, invest in lighting. I'm going to be abstaining from this vote. Um just with owning property downtown, I don't give the perception that I'm doing anything to benefit myself. So, Do we have a motion? Second. I'll make a motion.

We have a motion and second. All right. Candace will be leading us with discussion. Any questions for Candace?

Yeah. So, in front of you is a request to advertise for bids or quotes for the festune lighting. Um, this is a part of the civic and community center financing fund grant that we received and that grant specifically in this funding year was set aside for creative districts. This was one of the activities that was um really um in sync between the creative district strategic plan and our downtown northwork plan and survey results. So what it will entail is festune or lantern type lighting at several intersections along Northwork Avenue including 2nd, 3rd, fourth, and fifth. And then it takes feston lighting or those small bulb lighting and it'll drape it across um the street as you go down Third Street towards Brch Avenue. Then it'll take and go down Brash Avenue to Second Street. Then it'll turn again on Second Street and connect with the Giri Pedestrian Bridge that was just put in. So, we are ready to advertise for bids and we're excited to get those cost estimates to come back and um move forward with the rest of the project, which would be alleyway lighting. I would field any questions that you have.

When do you anticipate the start of the project and maybe the end of the project? I would hope that um the start of the project will be as soon as possible. There will have to be some new footings poured as a result of some more robust poles that will need to be put in to support the weight of the fine lighting and lanterns. All right.

Other questions? Anybody from the audience anything? Jim McKenzie, I just have a question. Do we have an operational and maintenance budget for this? And if so, where will that come from in our budget? Great. Candace, can you address that, please? [snorts]

Sure. So, we have engaged heavily with the vehicle parking district, the downtown Northwork association, and the creative district on this project just because the creative district helped us get that grant. We knew that the long-term maintenance of it was going to need to be pulled into the city somehow. And so staff is given updates at BPD meetings and the vehicle parking district understands that if there's a insurance claim or if there's something associated with the damaging of the feston lighting or even the downtown sign that that will be a part of the ongoing maintenance cost. Um, additionally, the downtown Northark, um, the new manager will help us just monitor those lights to to let us know when lights are out and need to be replaced. So,

any further questions? Any further discussion? I guess and the big thing about this too and it it's this is just a authorization to go out for advertising for bids on it you know so it's not even that it's you know so I I not real sure where the maintenance question came in at so okay

well I think Jim honestly just looking longterm if this goes through just to have all the pieces of the puzzle in place so I think it's a legitimate Just around that too, this will replace some existing street lights that are in that area as well. So from a power perspective, I I don't see this requiring more power than what is currently currently there. [snorts] All right, I believe we have a motion second here. So go ahead and vote. [clears throat]

Voting in the affirmative. McCarthy, Granquist, Arns, Jensen, Langi, Hildebrand, Beckman. Abstaining. Web. Motion carries. Right. Move on to item number 18. consideration of approval to advertise a request for proposals RFP for the finishing and construction of the downtown gateway sign to be placed on Northfor Avenue between 8th and 9th Street. Move consideration. Second. Motion second. Candace will lead in discussion, please. [snorts]

Yeah. So, this is another part of the civic and community center financing fund grant. Um, this will help with associated costs as it relates to constructing a gateway sign that'll span Northwork Avenue between 8th and 9th Street. So, we've seen a lot of attention on the east side of uh downtown. This is going to really be a a gateway or an opening, an introduction to our downtown from the west side. And so we've engaged with a company called Merge to help facilitate the design process as a part of this. They started out with three designs and did a community survey. We got a lot of great feedback from the citizens on what they liked and didn't like, pros and cons from the various designs that were presented. And then they came back with a fourth design which you'll find in your council packets which we're moving forward with with a request for proposals. Any any questions on that?

It'll be great. It'll be a great project. So we're we're looking forward to seeing it implemented. Ready? Any additional questions for Candace? Members of the public, any questions? Let me see. Okay. Seeing none, uh, please vote.

Voting in the affirmative, McCarthy, Granquist, Arns, Jensen, Langi, Hild Debrand, Beckman, abstaining. Web motion carries. Right, we're on to item number 36 of the regular agenda. Consideration of ordinance number 5964 creating paving district number 523 providing for paving of 23rd Street connecting Omaha Avenue to Michigan Avenue. I move for consideration ordinance number 5964. Second. All right. We have a motion second. Steve, please leave us some discussion on this.

Yeah, mayor and council, we received a request for a paving district here to construct 23rd Street. uh that is what is what is before you. Uh the particular owner requesting the district uh owns the adjacent 69% of the adjacent property. Um as we put this together and develop numbers around this district uh which are right around 9 and I think 965,000 at 963,752 is the estimate on this. Um we did go out there and meet with all the other property owners uh that would be uh have some some assessments to them. Um they all saw the benefit of the project um and [snorts] didn't have any any subsequent questions for us. Um and so the the in presenting the request for the paving district, the property owner or the developer of this um has already put the water and sewer uh in on their own own expense and um are just requesting the paving district. the the developer himself um has I'm going to just read off here what what's going on there in terms of the different property owners so there's an understanding of how many we have there is one two, three, four. There are four different property owners in there. Again, the the

requesting requesting party having 69% of the adjacent property and you said most donors were in agreement with the Yeah, I didn't get I didn't get any opposition to the to the district. Okay. Is there anybody here an owner of adjacent properties or anything else? Okay. Um, any other discussion for Steve? Anybody from the public have any questions on this project? All right. Short title, please.

An ordinance creating paving district number 523 in the city of Norfork, Nebraska, ordering the construction of street improvements therein and ordering the publication of this ordinance in pamphlet form. Please vote.

[clears throat] All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5964 carries on first reading. I'll make a motion to suspend the rules and wait and approve the second and third readings. Second. All right, we have a motion second. Any discussion? Seeing none, please vote.

[clears throat]

All council members voting in the affirmative. Ordinance number 5964 carries on second and third. With second and third passing in this evening, we'll move on to 37. Consideration of approval of engineering design service and construction services contract with Engineering, Inc. for for 23rd Street paving district project for an amount not to exceed 90,000. I'll make a motion for consideration of approval. Second. Motion second. And Steve again will be leading discussion here.

Yeah, mayor and council. Before he was a contract uh with Mclar engineering for design services and construction administration services. uh mlowry was the engineer that the uh requesting developer had used for the rest of the engineering on their site. Um because of that, we're seeing a very favorable um as uh cost for engineering services on this and uh about 6% of of uh construction. And so we would recommend moving that contract forward. Any additional questions for Steve? Any discussion public? Right. See, please vote. All council members voting in the affirmative. Motion carries.

All right. We're on to item number 38, consideration of resolution 2025-70 authorizing an agreement and waiver with the International Associate of Firefighters Local 105. Trevor will be leading us in discussion for this. I'll make Good evening, Mayor and Council. Need a motion. Sorry, I brought you up real quick. You're good. I'll make a motion. Second. We have a motion and second now. Trevor, go.

All right. Good evening, Mayor and Council. Trevor O'Brien, assistant fire chief. I'll try not to go too long. About a half an hour or so is all I got for you. So, um I don't want the meeting to go too late. Uh we would just like to request your consideration authorizing an agreement and waiver with the International Association of Firefighters Local 105. While this agreement is between the local um and the city, uh I would and I'm not part of the local. I don't want to speak on their behalf, but I would like to talk to you in regards [clears throat] to all the firefighters within our department um that have invested time and effort into this. Um this agreement and waiver with the international uh would approve a shift schedule change from the current 2448 uh schedule to a 48.96. This would start on January 1st, 2026, and it would wave the statutory rights um pursuant to Nebraska statute 35-302, uh which just classifies how long firefighters can work before they have to have time off. So, with that 4896 shift schedule, that would um go over that 24-hour period of time that we have. Uh as a result of increased call volume, our firefighters are finding ways to help with mental health and well-being. Uh studies have shown that this 4896 schedule has some benefits in comparison to what our 2448 uh shift schedule has allowed for us. Uh we've talked to some counterparts in the industry who have also made this transition and have uh given testimony to better work life balance um better mental well-being, time off, able to kind of recoup from the job before they dive back in. So at the beginning of 2025, we required that 100% of our staff vote on this topic. Uh and after doing so, we required 2/3 majority or 66%. we

had over 80% that were in favor of this. So, it doesn't come without some heartache. Obviously, there's family things that have to take place when these type of shift schedule changes happen. There's always some uncertainty with what that's going to look like on the backside. Um, but with that, we formed a committee in March uh started discussions how we're going to navigate this process, what this looked like when we transitioned. Um, we feel like we've done our due diligence to try to investigate what that's going to be. Uh still of course some unknowns. Um but we've come to realize that we're not the only ones doing this within the state. Grand Island's also making this change starting in uh January as well. And Scotsluff has been doing it for some time now. So they actually were on the 48.96, switched back for a brief period and went back to the 48.96. So they went 48.96 2448 back to 48.96 because of um the benefits that they saw. So with that, um it's not expected to have a negative financial impact. It's intended to be a positive investment in the health and safety of our staff. Uh obviously happy and healthy staff uh serve the community at high levels. So we want to invest in them to make sure that's preserved. This will be just a one-year trial period starting in January with um three-month evaluations just to see how everybody's handling it, uh what we might want to change or tweak. Um, and then we do have a fallback plan. If those tweaks don't uh help with that process. So, if we have to go back to 2448s, we will. It won't be a problem. So, with your support and approval of this agreement waving this statute, that would allow us to to enter into that um work schedule come January. So, I guess if with that, if you have any questions.

So, Trevor, you're going to evaluate every three months, you said? Yep. That's our plan. And so would you then if something doesn't work go back like the other company did? You said they went back to the 24 and then they went back if if you find that that that would work. Would are you able to to verify that that [clears throat] adjustment? Yep. We would so we would just this um agreement would become null and void and we would just go right back to our personnel manual and the way that that is structured. Um right now we're not making any personnel manual changes. It's this statute just waves the work requirements for the duty hours specifically. Thank you. Yep.

Was there any concerns from other off other firefighters? Yeah, we did have a few. Um and we still do to be honest and everybody that's made this transition has kind of had that. Uh what a lot of departments have found though is after they've made that switch, there would be a vast majority of those folks that were nervous about it in the beginning that came to really like this shift schedule and made it work for them. Um but again, we do have a vast majority that are in favor of it. And we've uh we met with every shift, actually everybody in the division um that works a schedule to discuss all of those things, their concerns, um things that they like about it. We've done a lot of research and things like that as well. So,

any other questions? Will this increase or decrease the amount of hours um that a firefighter would put in in an average week?

It actually doesn't change it um in the end. It just changes it up front a little bit depending on what week you're working which days. Uh, so the statute just states that we can't work more than 60 hours in a week on average over the course of a month and we're still within that. Right now we do have Kelly days that offset the hours that we're over which a Kelly day is just an extra day that we get off so we're not paying extra overtime and those types of things. Um, we would still have that Kelly cycle. There is uh some of these departments that have made this transition have gone away from Kelly cycles, but again there would be a financial impact with that and we did not want to do that right now. If it for some odd reason became a problem that might be something we would explore down the road, but we have no desire or anticipation to do that currently.

Thank you. Yep. I appreciate you guys getting all the input put into a vote. I mean that makes it easier for us to understand that there's buyin. So thanks for doing that. Yeah, absolutely. Thank you. Appreciate it. All right. Thank you. Yep. Any further discussion? All right. Seeing none, please vote.

All council members voting in the in the affirmative. Resolution 2025-70 is adopted. That we are ajourned.