City Council - Regular Meeting

Okay. As far as the table goes west, I'm in the middle. So, I'm gonna stay there. Hey, how you doing? Good. I guess I need your roommate over here on the end. set up.

That's Yeah.

Yeah. Boundary waters, right? Yeah.

Okay. You guys ready to go over there? You ready to go over here? Yeah. City law. Ready, Kaylin? Let's go. We will go ahead and call city council regular business meeting to order. This is Thursday, January 8th. It is 6:00 p.m. Uh Kayn, would you please call the role? Council member Horron here. Council member Brown here. Council member K here. Council member Mi here. Council member Porter here. Mayor Phillips,

I'm here as well. Uh we do have quorum so we'll move on. Would like to welcome Andy Bourjon and Kelsey Porter as new council members. So welcome to the council table. Appreciate you guys running and being here. Thanks. Thanks. All right. Item number two is pledge of allegiance. Would you please rise and say the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the stands one indivisible and justice for all. All right. Next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda. Would anybody like to move any of the consent items to the regular agenda? Hearing none. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda? Motion. Second. Okay. Motion by Cool. Seconded by Brown. All those in favor say I.

I. Post. Same. Motion carries. Item number four. Welcome guest and public comment. Thank you for being here tonight and participating in your local government. Uh at this point in time, we'd open the deis up for any public uh comment that want you want to address to council that for items that are not on the agenda. We'll give you three minute time limit. Uh realize that we can't take action on those items tonight because they are not on the agenda and that would be a violation of open meetings meetings laws if we took action. Uh also, if you'd like to comment on any item in the consent agenda, now would be the time. Any takers? Seeing none, we will move on. Item number five is there our consent agenda. Can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda?

Motion. Second. Okay. I got multiple motions by cool and and you pick who. Uh second by Bourjon. Uh Caitlin, would you please call roll? Uh council member Bourjon. Yes. Brown. Yes. Yes. Key, yes. Porter, yes.

All right, that motion carries. Item six is old and new business for consideration, discussion of possible action. Item A is a public hearing regarding an amendment to the Brody's Landing plan unit development regarding well uh regulations for decks. So, we'll open up public hearing at 6:02 p.m. So, this changes to allow decks and parcels CD and E to extend within 10 ft of the back property line. Luke, I'll turn it over to you.

Sure. So, uh, particle CBD and E of the Brody's Landing area are the, uh, single family areas. We're talking about, uh, decks for houses. Um, the Brody's Landing development, when we put that together, um, we did some unique lot sizes where they're a little bit smaller than typical. And a kind of unintended consequence of that is, uh, the rear yards are a little bit less useful than we would have hoped. Um, so this amendment would um remove some of the restrictions for um decks and stairs and stuff that go into the rear yard and let them get closer to the uh rear property line so folks would use space rear.

Okay, that's simple. Thank you. Uh Kayn, have we received any oral or written comments on this? No. We have any public comment on this item? Okay, hearing none, we'll go ahead and close public hearing at 6:04 p.m. Item 6B is the first reading of an ordinance amending the official zoning map of the city of Norwalk, Iowa by amending the Brody's landing uh plan unit development regarding bulk regulations for decks and land use parcel CD and E. We just had a public hearing on this item. Luke, you got anything to add? Nothing else. Uh what do we have discussion from council? Any public? input.

Can I get a motion to approve the first reading as presented? Motion. Okay. So, motion by Porter, second by Cool. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Caitlyn, did you call RO? Council member Brown. Yes. Yes. Mi, yes. Yes. Or yes. All right. That motion carries. Item 6 C is public hearing on the proposed annexation of approximately 282 acres of property southwest of the city of Norwok. So we'll open up the public hearing at 6:05 p.m. So this public hearing is to get public input on the annexation south and west of the city limits. Uh Kayn, have we received any oral or written comments on this?

No. Uh Jim, I'm going to turn it over to you.

Okay. Well, basically uh you've got a act in front of you. It's titled study development board because we are this has to be reviewed by the city development board. It's 100% annexation 100% voluntary. No involuntaries included in there. Uh and it has to go to city development board is is within two miles of the city of coming. There's a couple corners of the land that we're looking at that are within that amount of time. So then the code directors said it's got to go to the city development board. Uh hopefully we will be on the agenda for that uh in for their February meeting. Uh that's they know this on the way. We've discussed it with them also. [clears throat] Basically what you're looking at is

let me get those maps up on

you want them on the screen. screen so people can see what they're what we're looking at on this is a 280 acre annexation uh involving two different land owners like I said uh land owners have all agreed to it and have asked the city to annex it so those are all voluntary uh it is you remember the city had previously done a larger annexation south and west uh this ground is actually contained within in that same annexation, but the previous annexation is still under appeal and therefore under Iowa code, it's not final. Uh, and because this is the area closest to the city and really with a definitely a developable area, uh, the area is looking for uh, or to like immediate development and there are uh, purchase agreements in place by u, to to start immediate development once we're looking once annexation is complete. And really, I believe the purchasers and the sellers don't believe that they can wait the potential year it's going to take to finish this uh the appeal process. So, u we're trying to get this through slicker so that they can continue on with their with their business and this business doesn't fall through. The city's made substantial investment already to attract business to this area and if you know it would just be uh not good for the city or anybody for that purchase to fall through. So, we're going through with 100% annexation within this area. The map's up there, as you can see, uh to kind of orientate yourselves. Uh if you know where like Michael's Food and Windsor windows are, that's up in the norththeast corner of this map. Uh so, that's kind of where you can get the idea where where we're at. The Dun Industrial Site is right to the south of that. Then you've got the red line, that's where it touches the city current where the Panex area currently touches it. And then the green hashtag areas is the proposed annexation boundary.

Anything else? No, I think that's it. All right. Do we have any public comment on this?

Can you come up to the podium? State your name and address. Uh Dane Henley and I'm at uh 5220 Delaware Street which is just uh west of west and north of the proposed Yeah.

Um I was just wondering if there's any I mean I'm just concerned about what's going to be in there. I've heard rumors that it's going to be a like a data center or something. It might be. Um, is there any I guess how do I go about knowing what that's going to be? And do I have any recourse of like, you know, lights and fences and everything that's going to be next to the property that I live on? Uh, you know, I I guess the best way to keep in track with it is is definitely follow the city's agendas. Okay.

I mean, because that that's where the information comes out. And, you know, the best way for you to find out what's going on by far is what you're doing right now. showing up here at council meetings, asking questions, educating yourself. And the council definitely prefers people doing that versus not doing that because yeah, you know, you certainly don't want to live on, you know, social media sites and try to get your information from there. This is where the good information is.

And u so I guess that'd be one one area where you would want to gain that information. Uh you can also look at the zoning laws, see what the sites can be zoned as. There are buffer requirements and everything like that. So, uh, you know, as far as lighting or fencing or things like that, uh, it's certainly a good thing to keep track of, but I think staying active is the best way because when you we're looking at site plans and, you know, as that progresses into the future, which could be five years from now, we, you know, we don't know when it's going to be. Uh, giving input on at at key times, at those times, uh, your needs and your wants usually get addressed.

Okay? you know, the council doesn't know what you want if you're not here telling them. So, it's great that you're talking about it because now all the council members have heard that it's a concern of yours and what I've seen, they strive to at least address your Okay. Yeah. I just don't want to have daylight 24/7. Yeah. I don't plan on moving. So, yeah. All right. Thank you. Yep. Thank you. So, talking about you talked about the station. Yeah. Come on up. State your name and address. Apologize for being late. Matthew Clark. Uh I think and your address. 520845th Avenue, Norwalk. Thank you.

Uh it's my understanding we're you're annexing what was in the last annexation. Or is this a new one? know that this area this is basically it's it's in wholly contained within the old annexation area to the east of your property. Yeah. So the the pro the idea is that the other annex is under appeal. Correct? Absolutely.

Okay. I just wanted to verify to the council, you know, that there the court did a affirm in October, but then it there was uh ask for reconsideration and then there's still a a motion for uh enlargement that the court hasn't answered yet and that it will be going to the Supreme Court. So, it's it's not over, you know. So, I just wanted to tell you I'm in favor of what you're doing here

and that, you know, if you you need to go ahead, you can get that because then, you know, the neighbor says as soon as he gets in next, they're going to buy his property and then they've told me they're going to buy uh I don't know who it is. You don't know who anybody is in this world, but the broker said that if I accept the NX, they're going to buy me out, too. And you know, it's a lot of money. A lot of money. Yeah. Not just a lot of money. It's a lot of money. Yeah. And I've told him, you know, buy me out and go get annexed. If I think that, you know, that question why they would tell me I have to be annexed first. So,

yeah. and uh you know if there's any question in your minds whether they're going to win the appeal with state of Iowa the what's called common law is the case law that states that uh the 8020 annexation can only be applied in two narrow circumstances. One is prevent islanding which the board affirmed it and or approved it for to prevent islanding and the court upheld that. But the Supreme Court case law states islanding exists when a person is completely surrounded by cities on all four sides and you can't be an island in a city. And the connectivity is in another part of their ordinance is that there has to be the 50 ft of connectivity. And so obviously, you know, you didn't they didn't get a a survey. So they made a decision without, you know, the whatever they call that the intelligence. So you know, that's kind of moot. But uh there's no islanding. And then the other 20 part of the 20% were the I believe that Jim brought up was to a more uniform boundary and that's never been applied in case law anywhere other that I could find than between two cities. What made a more uniform boundary who provided services? It's more than just making Norwok bigger which is all the ANX did with me was it just made it bigger. It didn't make anything more uniform. It actually made it less uniform

because now [clears throat] it goes a quarter of a mile up and out and around. Yeah. So it's less the good thing I mean there are some complicated issues on that. No doubt you know the attorney general's representing the the board and you know you're representing yourself on that but really the city's not even a name party. I know. But I just wanted you guys to know that if you deny this Yeah. you know that it's I'm going to win. All it's going to do is promote a lengthy time. And if they're actually going to buy that and buy me out, I'd like to see you prove this. And if they pay him and they come over and buy me out, then I'll be in the city. You know, that's okay because I'm not going to be there.

And that's basically I there was something I was going to say it interrupted there. I don't is probably not too important, but uh oh, that case law about uh making a more uniform boundary. Uh when I talked about, you know, could you guys be wrong? Could Jim Dhy have been wrong? Could the t state attorney general be saying things that aren't accurate? There are like five city arguments between each other. And as I read it, they just tried to do something that the state of Iowa and the code of Iowa says you can't do. So, you know, I'm saying that's what happened here. You went with 8020 and it can't be done. I cannot be a next under 8020.

Matthew Matthew, thanks for being up here. I I wish we were the court that could decide this. Well, it's going to be decided and you know, if you you could read the case laws, you know, they takes about three or four hours, but anyway, uh I hope that we're happy to hear your support for this stuff. I hope this gets approved and if they actually come and pay him, you know, my property's going to get annexed and I'll dismiss the appeal. I just told them that all they have to do is write me a check and All right. So, that's all I had to say and I thank you for hearing me and I'm sorry I was late. I got caught in the mud if you believe that. Nice to hear. Thank you. Anything else?

Hearing none, we'll go ahead and close public hearing at 6:16 p.m. Item 6D is a resolution approving landowner applications approving the voluntary annexation of property southwest of the city of Nor. We just had a public hearing on this annexation. Any discussion or questions from council? Oh, motion. Okay, got a motion by Bourjon. Do I get a second? Second by Porter. Uh, Kayn, would you please call a RO? Remember K? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Brown? Yes.

All right, that motion carries. All right. Item 6E is a resolution initiating resoning referring the resoning proposal to the Normont Planning and Zoning Commission and setting a public hearing regarding the proposed amendment to the Orchard Hills plan unit development related to R4 highdensity residential and C5 traditional neighborhood commercial uses in uh PD parcels 1A and 1B. So for our new council members, there are a couple of ways for a reasonzoning request to get to planning and zoning. One way would be for the requester to pass petition uh around the area close to the resoning and if they receive enough signatures uh that the reasoning request can then be considered by planning and zoning. Uh the other way which is what this item is about is for the requester to ask council to begin the resoning process which if you guys pass it uh passes it to planning and zoning for consideration. So the majority of our resonings begin with a request that the council initiate this process. Uh an initiation request is simply a method to start the process. Uh so all details and analysis have not been done yet. Uh and they haven't been completed by staff. So did I get that correct, Luke?

Yeah, that's that's the gist of it. Okay. Jimmy, anything? No, I don't think so. I think yeah the main point is either the council can do it or if the council prefers they could ask the land owner to do it.

Yeah. All right. So we've recently had a resoning request come to council uh for this area to build some ACE restricted apartments that was in the past and and Jason Ed and George have gone through that. Uh at that time the resoning preserved the commercial zoning along all of the commercial resoning along uh North Avenue. Uh, and that was passed by council. It looks to me like this request now comes in and will potentially change the area along North Avenue to allow apartments uh while preserving a corner along North Avenue for a future commercial opportunity. Luke, am I right on that? You got the gist of it again. Huh?

You got the gist of it again.

Okay, good deal. Uh, okay. Questions from council or do you have more? I guess uh to maybe give a little more background for our newer council members who weren't here during the initial one. Um first off, I guess Lindsay, if you could pop down, I added a second map into this today. Uh just so you can see what the geometry of what we approved in the the 2025 that the mayor just referenced. So there was we split it into 1 A and 1B. So there was a parcel on the south side that was going to be these uh anchoring markets and then we left a parcel on the new I'm going to back up in time even before that decision this whole area was called parcel one and initially at the very beginning of this this Fortell's development like 2005 uh this was a neighborhood commercial peak in 2010 we added the ability for there to be highdensity residential on that parcel as well. And at that time we added a clarification because we didn't specify which it could be. We said it could be commercial or highdensity residential. But we the the code then said whoever proposes something needs to come back to council and like lock in what they're doing. So if somebody comes in wants to do apartments, we need to have them come and we need to remove the commercial from this so that's just apartments. We don't have a building built that could be res an apartment building but also potentially use as a commercial building right so we wanted to be what was so that's what happened last year we had somebody come in the bottom half of it they just wanted to do apartments they didn't want to do commercial there so we reszoned it for them very deliberate in that it's like really one product style that can go on one and then with one A um council had

the idea thought they wanted to keep the commercial aspect of that. So that one still has the either or. So it can be either or one could be could still be apartments or commercial but they have to come back and ask you guys to set it whichever it was. I believe the council direct the property time we really want to be commercial right. So within the context of that, we had this proposal come forward. Um, initially just looking at, hey, we want to do some apartments here. Um, what would that look like? Knowing that 1B as it exists today on the screen is an apartment with a very specific style and then 1A could be apartments or commercial. So if you scroll back up to the proposal that we have with um what they are asking then is uh more apartment area in that space but they are willing to lock in partial 1A as only commercial. So that's kind of what fundamentally changes in this one is you're going to have a specifically residential parcel and a specifically commercial whereas right now we have a residential parcel and then a residential or commercial.

Is one B still going to be all age restricted then or is that right now they are not asking for it to be age restricted. They would change as well. Yes. Correct. Correct. Um does staff have any thoughts on this?

Um so we've seen some preliminary um concepts of of what they were asking to do. Um another jump back in time with things. This area is identified as one of our new urbanism areas of our land use plan. in that new river area. Uh talked about a little bit higher density residential avenue in those areas and um commercial as well and having those kind of build out like cohesively, right? And then talking about how the different uses interact with the the public realm, streets and all that stuff. And so in talking through that concept with the developers, they've been very willing to come up with a concept that would front things more to the street, put parking back behind stuff. So we didn't have parking lots right against our public streets and do more of a urban form that that district called for comprehensively. Um so what they've shown I think you know probably better than the previous one matches our expectation what tourism would be. Um it certainly is a big change for what the potential for commercial that frontage would be. Um at the same time I don't know that we've got a lot of tires kicked over years on commercial area. So potentially the idea of adding apartments in a lot of this maybe makes that a little more desirable um from a neighborhood commercial. So Luke, I have a question. So if it like it looks like it's zoned or it would be for like a commercial property, right? Gas station something, right? Yeah. In six months when they came back and say like now we want that to be apartments like is if they do is that like wonky then with their site plan or something, right? Because they could come back and say we want that to be uh

we do the same process again and you know if before we brought something to you guys we would say guys what are you doing? Yeah. Right. Like cuz the whole purpose of this would be to like let's be definitive right now. You know, this this is a beauty from 20 years ago and then we've had that concept of what could be on this property change over time. So, let's try to lock it in and at least keep to that concept for a while before we keep jumping around a bunch. Um, and they seem to meanable to that as far as the 1B, 1A, uh, you know, saying 1a, no, we're okay with that being a marketable commercial property. We're not gonna We don't want to have the right to do apartments.

So, sorry, one more question. So, would we say that we're good with the residential aspect of 1B, but 1A must be Yes, that's exactly what Yep. Yep. Luke, another question. What's [clears throat] the zoning for the property just to the west that Bearfield? Um to the Oh, the west is the school which I believe is Give me a second. It's either a or single family residential. Um, schools are typically zoned as single family residential, but I don't remember off the top of my head if they zoned the whole thing. The school park.

The school owns that. That's the school own that they may sell it. They may develop. Yeah. Yeah. It is still egg. Still egg. Really don't know where that's what that's going to be at some point. Okay. Other discussion from what's future land. I as soon as you guys give me one second.

Well, sometime I'm gonna get in the habit of just things ahead of time. You'd think I would have done that. Come on. I've got it right. Um We are we do have single family in that area. So, yep. Well, low density. So, that's a density size than this unit type

in this area that we're talking about on that long long range plan. Is that commercial? um the area that we're the shaded area we're in right now. It meets our um new urbanism which would be uh commercial or like a medium highdensity residential like think of new urbanism as like an intense area. It doesn't necessarily call out the specific use but there's supposed to be a lot of activity on this space. Right now this property that could be developed either way. Yeah. So if we wanted to absolutely have commercial there, this would be the way to do it for partial 1A. Yes.

Yep. Although they do have to come back to us for parcel 1A regarding how they want to use it future anyway with this proposal. We would with the old one with the old one. Yep. If you if we take this if we want to do all just res normal resident or whatever we could say yes y correct do we have any public input council

okay so let let me go through something here quick I I I'll take that motion uh just to be clear so if you pass this motion it's going to go to PNC for consideration if you don't pass a motion. The requester can still get it to P&Z using a petition. Okay. Either way, if PNZ approves the resoning, it's going to still come back to council for final approval. Is that right? Yeah. So, we got a lot of meetings and other public hearings to go before anything gets set on this. Yeah. All right. So, I got a motion by Micki. Anybody want to do a second? Second. All right. So, second by Bourjon. Any further discussion? Kaylin, would you please call roll? Me? Yes. Order? Yes. Yes. Brown.

Yes. Yes. All right. Motion carries. Just because I trust our colleagues in P&Z to do their job, right? So, this is what this is what I'm doing. Yeah. Okay. And then oh so and just to for more education so if P&Z would happen to decline the idea they can still bring it back to council and then if council wants to approve it it would require four votes. Yeah. Well VNZ actually does they don't approve they make a recommendation

but they make a recommendation. So if you do not have a recommendation from B&Z, you can still approve it with a formula. Yep. Cool. All right. Item 6F is a resolution approving an increase to the city's deferred compensation retirement benefit for non-union full-time employees. So council started discussing this last year during our budget discussions and actually approved it. Uh due to legislative changes, staff's decided to delay full implementation of a defined benefit plan for non-union employees. Uh this resolution creates policy around the defined benefit plan and staff would like to make it effective January 1, 2026. So Carrie, I'm going to turn it over to you.

Yes, thank you.

Yeah, you've summarized it well. Um this is already accommodated for in the budget. Um there is funding available. Um the keys are really to make us more um competitive but also more comparable with the deferred compensation contributions by other metro cities. Um really the only thing that I have to add that's not already the agenda statement is that council does approve this um bringing back um a change to the employer. I mean for those employees that may be listening that one year um if the the match proposed starts at one year 12% for years one to five and then 10 is% and then um 3%. So for those employees listening with the city we're going to loses they will still receive the $25. So they nobody anything is what I just want to call.

Okay. So a quick comment on this mayor. Yeah. Is uh I mean just because this needs to be said out loud. I feel like this was approved and our staff decided to take it out of the budget. Yes. Because of the legislative environment

which is extraordinary to me. So, I just want to say that out loud that uh this highlights again I think uh I'm not this is not tooting my horn. This is tooting the staff's horn. This is Luke's horn. This is your horn, mayor. And just saying this was put in, but because of the uncertainty with tax policy, the staff said, "Let's just take it out. And um that strikes me as a rather selfless and uh just they're almost thinking like owners and so uh anyway I'm glad that we're going to be able to get it back in.

Well, we haven't voted yet. Any other comments? Lil said Jerry and we talked about this the other day. We said the up to 1% or up to those like we kind of I didn't look at this that briefly but make that change. Right. You bet. Okay. Any any other council input or public input? Hearing none. Can I get a motion to approve the resolution as presented? Second. Okay. Uh I'm going to do motion by Cool, seconded by Brown. Any further discussion? Hearing none. Kaylin, would you please call a role? member for yes, yes. Brown, yes. Yes.

Yes. All right, that motion carries. Item seven, uh, is about future agenda items. So, the purpose of this item is for council to give direction staff by way of motion to have items placed on future agendas. It's not to discuss the merits of the subject matter, but it's to get it on the agenda so that we can discuss the merits of the subject matter. So, anybody have any future agenda items tonight? Like I was at a past Jason had one, right, for the the gates, right? But maybe we're still doing research there, right? Yeah, I think uh next meeting that'll be on the I think it's on the agenda for the next meeting. Yep. Anything else?

Yeah, I I think at some point we should talk about an uh the possibility of annexing coming. Okay, agree. Uh, second. I agree. Yeah. Okay. So, I got a motion to put that on the agenda and a second. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed, same. Sign. I. I. I. Okay. So, we're not going to put that on the agenda. So, [snorts] that that motion failed. Thank you for making it. You're welcome. Uh, anything else? It it's good to it, you know, failure is good.

You learn from failure. Everyone learns. I would like to revisit. I know it's been spoken on before, but um the golfart issue specifically in Echo Valley, think it's something to revisit. Okay. So, uh Okay. So, look at look at golf carts, golf cart usage again within Echo Valley. Anybody want to second?

I I don't know if it has to be just inside Echo Valley like but like we definitely have places in our community where there's maybe wants or needs for that, right? And so, but I agree with Kelsey. I'd second. Okay. Would that be better for a work session, Mayor than a council meeting? We we'll get it something like that. Yeah. Whether it's we might do a work session first. Uh okay. So all those in favor for that one say I. All those post say. I.

Okay. So that one failed as well. You know what? This is great because we've never had such tremendous disagreement before. But like just bring Andy and Kelsey on and a firework just starting to happen. [laughter] It's very exciting. I I agree. It's great. Uh although they they vote some people voted wrongly on both issues. Yeah, I got denied twice. You know what I'm saying? True. Yeah, I was on the wrong federal. Yeah, Andy was bad twice. I was 50 50 over here. Uh, okay. Anything else? This is fun. I want to hear another

I mean, I went big, so we might as well just an award system one time and so we I think maybe staff's working on it. Maybe not. System for voting. An award award. Oh, award voting. So, you might uh I think that is still coming up, right? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. off the fence. It's on the It's on my list, which means that's not yet forgotten about. Did you want us to revote, George? No. No, not the way it's voting. [laughter] No, I was just asking if you approved it before it anything else. Like I said, this is kind of fun this time.

Okay. Hearing none, we're going to move on. Item eight, council inquires and staff updates. like to remind everybody this uh that this portion of the meeting is much less formal. You can hear some back and forth banner and general joking around. We believe that this can build some camaraderie and cohesiveness between staff and council. George uh first uh job as lay on with the park and rec department was last night and I loved it. Awesome. loved P&Z, but I can feel my creative juices flowing that park and wreck me. So, yeah. Me. Yeah. So, crazy ideas.

George, we feel those creative juices, too. So, it's really great. I might have some. I don't know. We'll see how it goes. Yeah, you're kind of you're you're more reserved. More reserved. Yeah. Buckle up there. Feisty group. Yeah. That's all right, though. Andy? Uh, nothing for me. Lindsay, nothing tonight. Kaylin, nothing. All right, Jean, nothing. Thank you. Cararissa, nothing. Holly,

I'm gonna give you some numbers, but it'll be short. So, just for your first meeting in 2026, a tiny recap from 2025, just as a positive outgoing note, we had 24 new businesses open in Norwok in 2025. These are brick and mortar. So really good mix of health and fitness, retail, restaurants, service space, entertainment. So we had some really good businesses open. Um that brought about 350 new jobs. Part of that was an expansion, but a lot of new good jobs. And then our commercial industrial values grew significantly, which is super exciting. We added almost $und00 million in value in commercial and industrial in in one year. It's pretty wild. So 63% increase in commercial values, 64% increase in industrial values. And then Norwok was in the news 340 times just on the positive stories. We didn't include any of the negative ones. Um and that does not include our news stories in other countries. So some good nuggets for you.

All right. Thank you, Chief. Hi. Yes. I'm going to just give you three quick numbers. Um in 2025, police activity increased. Um, the number of calls for service went up 15% over 2024. The number of police reports that were written every time somebody calls, the police go, but not every time we go do the police write a report. But, uh, the reports increased by 18%. Um, the number of warrants that we obtained increased 81%. And the number that's disturbing is school bus violations went up 66%.

So, um, anyways, uh, the officers did more work, um, last year and, uh, we're busier and we're happy doing it. That's all I have. All right. Well, thank you, Chief. I have nothing tonight. Thank you. Let's go to Tony. Nothing else for me, Mayor. Thanks. All right, Joe. No, thanks, sir. All right, Carrie. No sir. Nothing. Wow. Ed nothing. Mayor Jason said it right. [laughter] Kelsey,

thanks for having me here. I'm excited. Um, and all the meetings I've had with city employees thus far have been really, really impressive. I'm very impressed with all of them. So, I'm just excited to be a part of all this. Even though my one thing I like brought up, [laughter] whatever. It happened. [laughter] Uh, happy new year everybody. Can't believe it's 2026. Yeah.

All right. Uh, only thing I have is comm we'll have community chat in here at on Saturday 9:00 to 10:30. Uh, come on in and join us. We'll have a chat. uh we get to talk about whatever you want to talk about. Uh all right, with that said, I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion. Second. Motion by Cool, seconded by Borjon. All those in favor say I. I. I. All post, same. We're adjourned. 6:41 p.m. That's recent.