City Council - Regular Meeting

This 5.30, having this meeting to order, we will start with the invocation and the pledge. So those that would like to participate in the invocation, please stand.

Thank you, Mayor, Council. Let us pray. Dear Dark Father, let us stand now unbowed and unfettered by arcane doctrines born of fearful minds in darkened times. Let us embrace the Luciferian impulse to eat of the tree of knowledge and dissipate our blissful and comforting delusions of old. Let us demand that individuals be judged for their concrete actions, not their fealty to arbitrary social norms and illusory categorizations. Let us reason our solutions with agnosticism in all things, holding fast only to that which is demonstrably true. Let us stand firm against any and all arbitrary authority that threatens the personal sovereignty of one or all. That which will not bend must break, and that which can be destroyed by truth should never be spared its demise. It is done. Hail Satan.

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

Chris, if you would take the roll, please. Okay, I got to wait a minute. So Chris, if you would take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway. Here. Council Member Hoffman.

Here.

Council Member Dupre.

Here.

Council Member Kavanagh. Here. Council Member Reed. Here. Mayor Foote. Here.

So it looks like we have a citizen that would like to.

So that would be an E or at the end, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

So, yeah, Rick, if you could. Let's just reverse that curse that was just put on our city, that ending with Hail City and Hail Dark God. That's not welcome here.

Mayor, this should be done at E or at the end.

It needs to be done now. Okay. I appreciate what Ms. Galloway is saying, but that was a curse put on a city when he said, hail Satan and old dark God. And most of you know that, and we need to just stop and reverse it.

So what I'm going to do right now, I'm going to invite us into a 30 second time of silence. Time of silence.

No, we are at the consent agenda. I'm sorry, but it's time to move forward. The invocation happened.

As mayor of the city of Tumwan, the one rolling this, running the meeting, I'm going to ask right now that we do a moment of silence to reflect on whatever it is we need to reflect on at this time. And then we will move to the consent agenda. So with that, we'll go into a moment of silence. Okay, thank you. With that, we'll move to consent agenda part one. Do I have a motion for consent agenda part one? So moved.

Second.

Any questions? Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

With that, we move to consent agenda part two. Do I have a motion for consent agenda part two?

So moved. Second.

Any questions? Chris, take the roll.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh. Yes. Council Member Reid.

No. That I would entertain a motion to approve the agenda. So moved. I'll second that. Chris, take the roll.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh. Yes. Council Member Reid.

Yes. And with that, I'll turn it over to Administrator Rath for his report.

Okay, thank you. With us tonight, we have Tim Seberg. He is the Executive Director for Bridgeview Center. And I'm going to invite him up to a brief introduction of himself and tell us a little bit about himself and what he's vision for Bridgeview Center.

Good evening, thank you, Administrator Rath, and council members, good to be here, and I appreciate the time you give me to introduce myself. My name is Tim Seaberg, and I'm the executive director here at the Bridgeview Center, and I can say that I've only lived in the state of Iowa, in Ottumwa, and had this position for about two and a half months now, so no quizzes on what's going on around here, if you will, please, thank you. Yeah, it's a real pleasure to be here. I've spent the better part of my working career in hospitality in some capacity or another, most of which has been spent managing or working with smaller to midsize venues like Bridgeview Center across five or six states. I've worked in places like Grand Junction, Colorado, Fort Smith, Arkansas. Eastern Tennessee, another name for Johnson City, Tennessee. And the largest community I've worked in prior to those locations was in Rochester, Minnesota, which is probably 100-some thousand people. So I'm very used to working in smaller communities in a venue like this where it's difficult to bring great entertainment and great people. you know, public events to because of its location and accessibility. But that's not going to stop me from trying to make it better than it's been before in that capacity. Um, I started out many years ago in the hotel business, uh, in Chicago, and I decided that that wasn't for me. And I jumped into the venue management world, uh, probably 25 some years ago, um, and found that that was more exciting because that's where the fun is. The fun is an events in people having fun at their events and doing things to achieve their goals at these events. And, uh, and that's where I've been the last 25 years or so. And, uh, I bring a lot of experience in trying to manage a smaller market venue like this one, and it's a beautiful venue. And before I even stop, I want to make sure that I thank you all for your support of that venue. It's a very important piece of this community, and while it does cost the city money yearly to help maintain the operations of that building, it is important, and I appreciate that from my perspective for sure. And with that, I'm happy to entertain any questions or comments or anything you'd like to know about me that I haven't talked about so far.

I think it's important to point out, and perhaps you just overlooked it, the Bridgeview project does cost the city something, but it brings in a lot more from public funds. Travel and people coming to town, spending their money here. And actually, Venue Works tries to give us an incentive every year for having been here. So thank you.

That's right. Thank you. And you're right. That is an oversight. I do want to point out that these venues are so important because literally that building is putting in millions of dollars into this community. Whether you feel it or not in your pocket, it is true that we can demonstrate on any given year that anywhere between $5 and $15 or $20 million in some years comes into this community because of that building. simply because people are coming to this community, they're spending money during those events, and then they're leaving town. And that's really what we want. We want them to all go home after they've been in our building. But they are spending money here, and that does drive a lot of economic energy in this community. So that's a great point. Thank you for pointing that out.

Thank you. Would you give me your name again?

Again, my name is Tim Seberg.

Tim Seberg.

Seberg. It's a Swedish name.

Sorry. Thank you.

For the Swedes in the room, it means lake in the mountain. I don't know why I was given that name, but that's the name they gave me. But thank you very much for the opportunity.

And those watching at home, I think there's still a couple tickets left for the ballet tonight.

There is. In fact, after I'm done here, I will be heading back over to the building to make sure that that event goes well, and it will. It's a great ballet organization in the house tonight. The Swan Ballet is happening, and I encourage anyone in the room. to stop by and take a look. It'll be a great event. And there are others coming later this year, like the Cirque Musica Holiday Wonderland event is back with us in November. Tickets are on sale now for that, too. So thank you very much.

All right.

Thank you. Thank you, Tim. Thank you.

Okay, moving on to monthly reports. Just a couple of highlights. Employment staffing this month, the city welcomed Robert McKinnon to the Engineering Tech One position. Our average time to fill is outpacing local government average by about 32 days since 2022. Positions which opened in 2026 are filled on an average of under 37 and a half days. So I want to just give a little shout out to the Human Resource Department, Barb, and especially Katie King, who's done a lot with hiring and assisting staff members with the hiring process. And also then the support of the Civil Service Commission members over the past few years to really help bring those numbers to a manageable level. Currently, there are open positions, including police officer, 911 communication specialist or dispatch, operations supervisor for the water pollution control facility. Interested individuals can apply online. Last week I had the ability to go to the Iowa League of Cities conference. I just wanted to give council and public a couple updates from that. The opening session was entitled Leading People with Confidence and focused upon supervision and best practices for managing people. It included topics regarding servant leadership, succession planning, holding employees accountable. There are a variety of topics and sessions available to attend in addition to that keynote. Sessions which I chose to attend, and there's about five to seven going on at any one point. There was best practices for 28E agreements, boundary crossings by bridge building across sectors, managing conflict, property tax 201, tax reform in my budget, advanced, and then local voices, statewide impact, building relationships that matter. session on 2080 agreements i think self-explanatory but thought it was important with regard to the increased interest in combining services and or partnering with other entities for city services managing conflict provided discussion and some tips related to conflict management and de-escalation tactics big takeaway identified that our job isn't to eliminate conflict it's to remain calm spelled out c-a-l-m in the middle of it c is for curiosity over criticism a is for active listening L, lead with transparency, and M, moving towards shared goals. Most interesting session, in my opinion, was the Property Tax 201, as it previewed the financial impact of the new property tax levies, or property tax laws, specifically the exemptions. For properties with assessed values lower than $120,600, the city will see less dollars due to the exemptions. And we do have a number of properties that are valued under that. So I think we're going to have a bigger impact than communities that have a more modest assessed valuation. Also noted that the 2% cap is related to revenue, not tax rate. As a result, it was advised that municipalities levy at the highest legal rate to ensure that we don't be penalized in dollars for future years. And that's obviously a contradiction to efforts we've been trying to make to reduce the levy rate in the past. So I'm sure there'll be a lot more conversation about that. And we do have... preliminary budget meeting set for later this month, the last Tuesday. And so we'll probably have a little more conversation about that and what that would look like and what mean for the city. The final session, local voices discuss the benefits of building relationships with state officials and sharing stories with the communities to assist lawmakers with understanding local impact decisions that are made in Des Moines. So that was a conference in a nutshell, at least from my experience. But even more than those sessions, it's getting between sessions, during the meals, connecting with other people, elected officials, other staff members across communities, and sharing some of those stories that aren't in the sessions themselves and learning from each other. So it's, I think, a huge benefit in that regard. Some upcoming council policy decisions or potential decisions. We're still talking about ambulance service. Future direction of the service delivery remains one of the top priorities of city council staff, Waplow County and Ottumwa Regional Health Center or ORHC. City's currently working with ORHC and the EMS Advisory Council or the MSAC to identify ways to support and or supplement ambulance services. Staff between the city and ORHC are beginning to consider language for a 28E agreement for that purpose. And more to come on that as it gets framed up. Regulations related to e-bikes. Chief Farrington met with Public Safety Advisory Commission regarding the topic. Mayor called for a special meeting for next Tuesday to address that issue and a few other topics on that agenda, which will come out later this week. Information related to current laws and regulations for e-bikes will be reviewed along with options for any proposed revisions. As with any potential legislative changes, the ability and or cost and force regulations should definitely be part of that deliberative process. And finally, sewer fee rate structure or stormwater ordinance. City staff has met with the financial advisor to review modeling a revised rate structure of various fee structures, including the lower base fee or higher usage rate, while also maintaining zero stormwater fees. Staff reviewed the model and identified some items which needed verification or maybe modification. And Piper Sandler has been invited to the October 20th meeting in two weeks to present their findings, answer questions, and identify next steps. And I respectfully submit this report to the City Council in public. And that's all I had for tonight unless there's any questions. Any questions? Okay, thank you, Administrator.

With that, I would encourage anybody here that would like to speak on any of the agenda items to fill out a little slip of paper. Those are found in the basket up there on the front banister. And with that, we would move to the public hearing.

This is the time, place, and date set for a public hearing on the proposal to convey interest in real property to Swift Pork Company.

So with that, I would declare this public hearing open, and I would turn it over to our Community Development Director, Amal.

Good evening, everyone. We considered this request during a request to vacate right-of-way. This is for JBS to allow for a facility expansion, and they're thinking about 12,000 square foot. This step is needed to transfer that property to JBS. Total square footage is 12.5.

Okay, so this is the little triangle that we talked about in a previous meeting, right?

Correct.

Okay. Is there any questions from council? Hearing none, this is a public hearing. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to speak on this matter? Okay, and I know we received one document. So are you going to read that to us?

I will read it.

Okay, thank you.

It says, dear Ms. Reinhardt, please share this email with the mayor and city council and include it in the record for tonight's public hearing on the proposed transfer of city-owned property to Swift Pork Company. I oppose the transfer. My understanding is that the property is intended to support a cooler expansion associated with increasing JBS's line speed from 60 to 65. If that is the purpose, I ask the Council to consider the proposal as part of a production expansion, not as an isolated land transaction, and to publicly confirm what the land will be used for. The wastewater concerns deserve careful consideration. JBS's Belt Press reportedly remained out of service from about November 2025 until nearly January 2026. while clarifier and related treatment problems also affected the facility's ability to treat wastewater. On September 10, 2026, JBS reported another wastewater permit exceedance. The DNR record identifies a daily maximum total suspended solids mass limit exceedance and says that the cause was uncertain, possibly involving weather and or a return activated sludge pump problem. The record does not establish weather as the sole cause. These events raise reasonable questions about whether the treatment system is reliably handling the facility's current production. An expansion that supports increased production could add to the demands on that system. The downstream Des Moines River segment is already designated as impaired, so the consequences of wastewater problems extend beyond the plant. JBS is an important employer in Ottumwa. Still, public land should not be transferred to facilitate increased production, while recent treatment system problems remain a concern. Before approving the transfer, the city should require clear public information about the project's purpose and its expected wastewater impacts, and assurance that the treatment system can reliably handle the existing load. This land belongs to the residents of Ottumwa. Once it is transferred, the city gives up the property and some of its ability to seek accountability. I respectfully ask the council to reject or postpone the proposed transfer until these questions are answered. Please confirm receipt and let me know whether this email can be entered into the hearing record. Sincerely, Joe Mays.

One comment I'd like to make, this is not approving a building. There is a process for a building review, plan review, and approval of the construction. This is simply vacating right of way and transferring that to the company. There will be a time where staff will review the proposed and the details, including wastewater. And I believe engineering handles that pretreatment agreement, right? No?

They don't. JBS has their own treatment plant, so we won't look at anything under sewer discharge.

There are certain levels that I'm sure there are certain levels they have to meet before they discharge what they're treating, correct? Correct.

They would be under our general permit number two. DNR, when they give those facilities permission to discharge, they will set standards and they'll have to meet that standard.

Regardless of the addition or not?

Correct.

Okay. Yeah. Any other questions?

I would just also state that it does identify that this is to accommodate a planned expansion. So that information was identified and posted for the public to see too. And we've talked about it for the last three weeks. This is our fourth week talking about this, I think.

Correct. Sounds right. Yeah. Yeah.

But I wanted to make sure this is not a detailed review of the proposed building, there will be a time where staff will do that review. Perfect. Thank you.

Okay. If no other questions, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved. Second.

Chris, take the roll.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Resolution number 197-2026, approving the conveyance of interest in real property to Swift Fork Company. Recommendation pass and adopt resolution number 197-2026.

Is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

Second. Is there any other questions or comments from council? Okay, Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reed?

Yes.

This is the time, place, and date set for a public hearing on the proposal to convey certain real property located at 167 North Ransom to Henry Lopez.

With that, I would declare the public hearing open and turn it over to our planning and zoning coordinator, Mr. Rush.

Thank you, Mayor. Good evening, Council. The city accepted bids on this property until 2 o'clock September 10, 2026. We received eight bids. Henry Lopez submitted the best bid in the amount of $25,500, and staff recommends accepting that bid.

Any questions from council? Okay, this is a public hearing, so is there anyone out in the audience that would like to speak on this matter? Okay, seeing none, did we receive any phone calls or email letters, correspondence?

I didn't receive anything on this property, no.

Okay. With that, I'd entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Second.

Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Resolution number 198-2026, approving and authorizing the conveyance of certain real property located at 167 North Ransom to Henry Lopez for $25,550. Recommendation passed and adopt resolution number 198-2026. Is there a motion to approve? Move the recommendation. Second. Second.

Any other questions? Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reed?

Yes. Thank you.

This is the time, place, and date set for a public hearing on the review of the final plat for the proposed four-lot subdivision on the corner of 65th Street and South Milner Street.

So with that, I would declare this public hearing open and turn it over to our Community Development Director again.

Hello again. This is the county subdivision. It's in the unincorporated area just outside the city, as you can see here with this picture. The green vertical line is the city boundary. And the highlighted in red box, this is the proposed subdivision. The parcel is the square one. The red is the four subdivided lots. The subdivision is creating four lots and the tract just north of that. And we're reviewing this because code allows us to review any proposed subdivision within one mile of city boundary to make sure that subdivision, the way the land is subdivided does not create any issues for the city in the future. Basically, we'll look at the tract of land and the proposed improvements. In this case, there are no road improvement included here, along with the subdivision. So we consider this like a simple parcel split. And the review is allowing the city to object in case the city sees issues in the future. Approving this tonight does not mean the city is annexing the property and the city has no jurisdiction over the zoning of the area. This is not looking at zoning. This is still under county jurisdiction. The county still will have to approve that subdivision, still have to review the zoning, the proposed zoning and approve the development itself in the permitting and the buildings as they're built. As you can see here from the densities surrounding that, it's actually lower density than what we have existing here in the county and within the city. Lower density than we have in the city. Lots would be about one acre in size, creating four lots. I'll take any questions if council, any questions from council.

So this is just a formality for us to say that we have no objection.

Correct. We're saying we have no objection to how this land is divided based on subdivision standards we have in our code.

And we provide no services to this area because it's considered county, right?

Correct. We have no jurisdiction over the area other than review to see if we would like to object. Thank you.

So just for clarification, we're kind of looking when it's outside our boundaries, we're looking at where if we were to expand outside the boundaries, what our plan use would be, future plan use compared to what is there. So this is all residential around there and it's a residential project. I'm assuming our expansion would be for residential in that area. If they wanted to put a factory right in the middle of this lot, that would be in contrast to what the future use would be. That would be a reason to object.

Correct.

but residential and residential area would not be.

Or if they're proposing improvements, roads that are not going to be consistent with our standards in the future, we would have grounds to oppose. Right now, there are no proposed improvements and the density is the only thing we could worry about, but it's less density than what we have within the city boundary.

I have received two letters from local people living in the area, and their objection is to any jurisdiction that the city has over this property. And we have none at this point. It's county property.

Correct. We're not rezoning that district. We have no jurisdiction to rezone.

Thank you.

Okay. Any other questions from council? I do have two individuals that wanted to speak on this matter. So first I'll ask Inez Hill to come forward. Inez, if you could speak your name and address, that would be great.

My name is Inez Hale, and I live at 13934 65th Street in Ottumwa, and our house is just across the street from this lot in question. My husband had written a letter indicating that we don't have any objections to using that land for single family homes, possibly two on South Milner and two on the 65th street, which is ours. We've lived there for 46 years and we really liked the open field across the road. But if the council decides to go against it, that's okay with us too. That's all I have to say.

Okay.

Does anyone have questions?

Okay, thank you. Thank you. And then with that, I would call John. I'm hoping I'm saying your last name. Cordray, is that right? Cordy. Cordy? Okay. Yeah, if you could speak your name and address, that would be great.

John Courtney, and it's 5356 Point Isabel. So this is my grandparents' or my grandmother's now land. They have 10 acres there. She's separating it off, surveyed it already, and she's got three kids, so she wants to leave something to her kids. Just a simple survey, basically. maybe future single housing uh single family house on the lot that's that would be it no factory no nothing special it's just simple sure so i mean that's that's all i have to say okay thank you again this is a public hearing is there anyone else from the audience that would like to speak on this matter

If not, I would entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Second.

Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Resolution number 199-2026, approving the final plat of Clifford's Corner Subdivision for purposes of the City of Ottumwa's Extraterritorial Subdivision Review. Recommendation passed and adopt resolution number 199-2026.

Do I have a motion to approve?

Move the recommendation.

Second.

Any additional questions or comments?

One thing I say is that I think that all of us believe in private property and people being able to do what they want to with their property, as long as it's within reason, as was previously mentioned a few things. If the city did ever annex that area, it would need to be residential for houses and so on. And so I just think the idea of private property carries the day on this idea.

Sure. And I would remind us that this is county. And so all we're doing is not giving objection for them to move into the process of them subdividing it. They would be the ones that ultimately make that decision. There's nothing else. Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh.

Yes.

Council Member Reid.

Yes.

Ordinance number 3261-2026, amending the municipal code of the city of Ottumwa, Iowa by repealing section 31 and a half to 45 entitled privately owned or leased trash dumpsters or receptacles in city parking lots in its entirety and replacing with a new section in lieu thereof. Recommendation passed the first consideration of ordinance number 3261-2026. Do I have a motion to approve?

Move the recommendation.

With that, I will turn it over to our city clerk.

Yeah, this one's mine. All right. So originally this was ordinance 3184 and it was passed in 2021. The ordinance was adopted as a joint effort to improve the overall appearance of the downtown business areas and improve traffic flows by developing a process to allow privately owned or leased dumpsters to be placed on public owned parking lot property. Dumpsters or garbage receptacles were placed behind or adjacent to businesses and were unsightly. They also created numerous obstacles in both parking areas and travel lanes. This process was modeled from another municipality and adapted to fit the needs of our downtown area. So areas in the downtown area continue to be unsightly and it became apparent that the process needed to be reviewed and possibly changed. The following departments and or entities collaborated. So I met with the city administrator, the mayor, our city engineer, public works director, engineering supervisor, Chris Patrick with Main Street Ottumwa and Holly Berg represented Ripley Motors as well as the Schmidt Group, which is the downtown group. So there was kind of a work in process and we are still kind of working through everything, but we wanted to at least get this ordinance in front of everybody to kind of get everybody's initial thoughts on it. So we removed, well, I guess I don't want to say we, I removed the language it said within the municipal parking lot because this also entails businesses using city right-of-way like in alleys downtown. So this will encompass those areas as well as opposed just the parking lots. So it's a little bit more broad as to where the receptacles will be placed. So we added language to ensure that the dumpsters or receptacles and enclosures are properly closed and clear of any obstructions, which this was a new one that we added because the previous ordinance did not have any stipulations in there about businesses making sure their areas, the receptacles were closed. Obviously, when things are open, if it's windy out, stuff is going to blow out. It causes kind of like a mess in the area. So that hopefully will help detour some of those obstacles. Keeping waste contained helps to prevent it from blowing into connecting streets and alleys. Signage will be provided by the city and placed on enclosures with contact information for the permitting process. This was another thing that we added because it wasn't really... It wasn't really brought out to the businesses as to how the process works. So we're hoping to be a little bit more communicative so they understand the process and why it's there and what they can expect from it. So we hope that that will help as well. There's some future locations of current and possible enclosures within the city parking lots. I think that is, I know Schmidt has been working on that as well to maybe having some more of the enclosures added to the parking lot. So that will help our downtown businesses as well. The fees for the permits are a sticking point, which those are not in front of you this evening. This is just the ordinance that will add the process in place. The amounts for the permits will be brought to you at a later date. The current fee for this is $300 for an annual permit, which takes into consideration the utilization of multiple parking spots in a parking lot being used 24-7. If purchasing a parking permit on an annual basis for any of the city-owned lots, it would be $25 per month with a 5% discount, making the price point 285. So that's just for a citizen that wants a parking spot downtown. The major concern being individuals and our businesses owners are currently not paying anything for the utilization of the areas discussed, and if we set the permit fee too high, being the $300 price point, which is what it currently is, they would not pay for it anyway, which is kind of what we ran into. The Schmidt Group suggests lowering the annual fee to $30. which appears to be on the extreme low side. The resolution setting the price point will be presented later on with amount shown. The price points that we're wanting to present for you are 60 and 100. So that's kind of, it is still on the lower point, but it's something that we can actually, we can review this process, you know, in a year or two, see how it's working. But again, you guys aren't voting on any of the prices tonight. You're just voting on the language that's within the ordinance. um so this ordinance will be presented for three separate readings beginning tonight and as i said the price does not have to be decided now but this is opening up the conversation for what council would like to see those price points if you have any other options on that i would entertain any questions concerns so 100 would be paying monthly and 60 if they paid up front No, what the difference is, is if they have an enclosure or if they don't have an enclosure.

Thank you.

Do you have any idea how many of the parking lot spaces would be taken?

The enclosure takes up, is it two? It's more spots than two, isn't it?

Probably one parking spot per dumpster.

Because I did have a constituent reach out. little upset that parking was hard enough downtown without the parking lot being giving up more spaces and then because they aren't going to be paying full we're not going to be taking in as much revenue correct

So that's kind of why the price point's a sticking point. If we sell parking, we're gonna get that $25 a month. But if we put an enclosure there, if we're only gonna get $30 for the year, if that's what we start at.

So that's- The other comment was that they felt that we were giving the parking spaces away to businesses that weren't going to be using them for customers.

Yeah, these are always in the backside and in the alley. I don't think a lot of the customers will...

park in that area but maybe they do i don't know yeah there are some dumpsters in the green street parking lot um that take up spots and that's kind of okay you want the businesses to be able to have the ability to get rid of their trash in a nice way but at the same time we'd love to have the parking stalls so that more people could go and frequent the business so it's kind of a catch-22 in some ways um But I think that's where, of course, we're not talking fee tonight, but that's something to consider when we do talk about the fee and what compensation is.

The other thing, if you're going to be doing this, I know that we have talked in solid waste about how our commercial doesn't recycle. Are we going to maybe put something about recycling dispenser dumpsters in downtown area as well?

We didn't discuss that.

That's a great question.

That could be something that we could add to it later as well.

Well, it's just we're trying to keep it from going to the landfill.

Yeah, I agree.

And the commercial has a lot of boxes that probably could go to recycle versus the landfill. Just saying.

And I would comment that one of the things in the ordinance talks about someone who's putting a private dumpster on public property shall be subject to a civil penalty. That's something else we probably need to talk about is, okay, if someone's placing a private dumpster on city property and they're not getting a permit, what's the fine? What is that? Yeah, what does that look like as well? And again, I think that's something we can cover when we determine for sure what the fee needs to be.

So who enforces those?

Yeah, that's been another, yeah. That's been tossed back and forth, honestly.

Yes, it has.

Yeah, we were talking with the SMID group as to whether they should be enforcing it or if we should be enforcing it.

Well, why don't we just I mean, whomever before placing, could we have an agreement with the the trash receptacle people that they have to contact the city if it's going on public property before laying it because otherwise they'll get the fee. I think that would have them contact us rather quickly.

Yeah, I agree. And if we have the ability to put a padlock on it, if it's not there legally, that should get a phone call pretty quick too.

I mean, I think if we talk, if we say like, Hey, if you place it without confirmation from the city, then you, the company get the fee and the business owner or whomever gets the fee.

Yeah. Hey Colby, are you here on behalf of Schmidt tonight? Main Street. Oh, you're just from Main Street, but I didn't know if you had anything you wanted to add from this. I know Chris was involved with the conversation and I didn't know if she wanted you to add anything to the conversation. Okay. All right. Well, I apologize for calling you out then.

So yeah, my understanding, the reason for the ordinance now is to set a framework in place because we really haven't had one. I think there was an attempt at one and then it kind of got lost in the mix. And so we're revisiting it to make sure we have a framework that works and that we can build off of.

Well, I think picking up the trash and making it look more pleasing is a good idea. I just don't want to be...

taking spots that people want to park in and i know currently there's only do we just have two enclosures downtown right now correct and i know that there's going to be another one that the schmidt group is looking at putting in but as opposed to the other ones it's mostly addressing those that are in the right-of-way in the alleys and stuff as opposed to the enclosures

Well, I think it definitely needs to be something that they pay for and people that have an interest in it need to put some money towards it. I'm kind of disheartened by the idea that there was a permit or a fee that was mentioned, but people weren't paying it. It sounds like that's not good. But 300 seems kind of steep, but at the same time is taken. a parking spot that would be producing some revenue so there needs to be a proper fee and and when you think of it in that regard the 100 even seems a little on the low side to me sure and sometimes it's multiple businesses using the same enclosure so they could

obviously split you know the cost between them but again it's you know i think we had one business that followed through with the procedure in 2021 and it's now 2026 so yeah well we want it workable for them but we need to properly manage the space too so a balance

Any other questions or comments from council? I didn't have anybody from the public wanting to speak on this, so.

And remember, this will be in front of you two more readings as well. So if there's additional questions that come up, obviously let me know and we'll work through it.

Okay, Chris, if you'd take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Cavanagh.

Yes.

Council Member Reed.

Yes.

Street Department truck number 12, 2014 Dodge Ram. Recommendation approve the disposal of the 2014 Dodge Ram 1500 half-ton pickup from fleet through the online auction process.

So with that, I would entertain a motion to approve. Motion to approve. And I'll turn it over to Mr. Burgmeier.

Thank you, Mayor. So when the street department purchased a replacement for number 12, we intended to transfer number 12 to the central garage and the central garage would sell a 2004 Chevy halftime pickup, which is number 407. But upon receiving number 12, it was found the engine problems had worsened since his last evaluation and it would not be worth the funds needed for repairs. And that 407, the 2004 is actually in better condition. So we recommend keeping 407 and then selling number 12 instead. And because we think it might bring more than 5,000, it needs council approval to be sold.

And that's the fleet committee's recommendation. Well, yeah.

The resolution to purchase a replacement for 12 said that we would transfer 12 to the central garage from streets and we'd sell 407. But once they received the trucks, they found out, well, number 12 is not a very good truck, so we'll just sell that one instead. We can't just switch what we're selling now. We have to get council approval to switch the truck we wanted to sell. Okay.

Okay.

And I drove number 12, it's bad. Like misses, it barely goes up a hill. It sometimes doesn't start, so yeah.

Okay. Any other questions from council? Okay, Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh. Yes. Council Member Reid.

Yes.

Compensation handbook and connected policies recommendation is continued discussion on this item.

And with this item, no action is to be taken tonight. So this is just simply meant for discussion. So the only motion would be as if we were going to table this or hold off and do it at another time. So if that's the case, I'd entertain that motion. Otherwise I'll turn it over to Administrator Rath.

So moved.

So is your motion to not have the discussion?

Yeah, I think that I understand that we want to have a discussion and look at bringing a policy next week. But Administrator Rapp did send an email today that maybe not everyone got to review.

And I guess maybe not table postpone is more of my motion.

um got to review and i don't i guess i don't understand why we're rushing this forward when we want to make sure if we are bringing a policy we're doing it right and even if we were to bring a policy next week um in hopes of voting on it i think that then we would still need to review and write on or probably make some changes so i don't know i believe that we should uh postpone it to next week where we can get truly read this email and um i think there's some other questions that may come forward too um that and give us time to process and think um i think that this conversation tonight should just be postponed to next week i'd have to agree with councilwoman galloway i think there's too many questions on my you know i i went back and looked at the gal

Galloway study from 2023. And that just brought up even more questions and there's more things to watch after that. And I would rather... Table it or postpone it until, yeah.

And I would also say, I understand starting the conversation tonight too, but I don't think that that's giving our staff proper time to maybe prepare for some of those questions too, where we can just put it at all instead of, hey, I'll get back to you on that and that kind of stuff too, because I want to make sure we're using good use of our time and the people in the audience's time too.

Most of us on council weren't around when all this started, and unless you've done your research, it's really quite confusing.

Would it be beneficial to hear what Mr. Rath was going to speak to, and then we don't necessarily need to go to discussion, or do we want to wait for the whole thing until next week?

I'll leave that up to the administrator, right?

Yeah, I'm okay with holding off on that. The message I sent out was more so to just push the conversation forward, to throw some suggestions, some things that maybe hadn't been thought about, and to help frame what that policy would look like. I would agree. It doesn't have to be done tonight. That can definitely be done next week or at some future meeting. Um, uh, if you want time to digest that, uh, um, but pretty much what I was gonna say was similar to what I had mentioned last week is that I believe that, um, The acting pay policy that was in some of the contracts was meant to probably be a give and take during negotiation where perhaps the city couldn't afford as high of a cost of living adjustment one year. And so that was a negotiating strategy. And it said, well, okay. let's put this in there. And sometimes when that happens, there's not a robust evaluation of what that cost might be. If you add a holiday, let's say, is it calculated to what the actual cost would be? Not just to pay everybody who's off on that holiday, but if it's a 24-7 operation, what it means for someone to have to work or get double time or overtime or other things. So some of those things that aren't always looked at, looking at just last year alone for non-public safety employees, I think it was over $36,000 of dollars paid out in acting pay. And not all of that was for supervisory roles, which I understand the concern and the argument to say that if someone's taking over in a supervisory position, and they're taking on the responsibilities and the accountability, and they're making decisions on the fly in lieu of the normal supervisor, there may be a justification for compensation. And that was just what I put in the email, something to think about. I also think that if we're talking about budgetary dollars here, the department head who's in charge of maintaining the the budgetary control should probably have a say in uh if they're going to appoint somebody into that supervisory role for and therefore the acting pay uh or if they're going to try to maneuver other things within their department or take it on themselves those responsibilities and there's other things that could be considered that was just one of them that that i had in there um You know, what is the rate going to be? How many days will it be effective after? So I got the sense from the last meeting that there were maybe differences of opinion on that. And if we're going to look at having that as policy, we need to be closer and give you some time to maybe think about those things if you're not prepared for that tonight.

So with that, go ahead.

Well, you know, and again, respectfully, we have represented and nonrepresented associates or staff, and I don't believe anybody up here wants to do them an injustice, but it really did take a lot for them to come to us with this. And, you know, we made some, you know, we made promises and we want to listen. So I want to know, and I mean this respectfully, how far down the road are we going to push this? I mean, and the discussion, and I'm not saying that it doesn't merit discussion. It does. So if anybody down there is going to yell at me and say, well, we have to discuss it. We have to have policy. We have to have this. I understand that. I'm not stupid. What I want to know is, is after we discuss how far are we going to go? I mean, are we going to take action the next meeting? Are we going to take action the next meeting? I mean, how long till we can give them some kind of an answer or some kind of a policy.

So I'm asking to postpone it to the next meeting. And then we have a council meeting until the end of November every Tuesday. So, I mean, I think we could get it on the agenda pretty quickly after we talk, review the policy and ensure it's appropriate for all our staff that, and that we're happy with it. So I think.

i mean we have a council meeting i agree i want to make sure it's appropriate for our staff too that's why i don't want to keep kicking it down the road i don't want to postpone it forever i just i want to completely understand it so that we are serving not only our constituents, but our employees with what they deserve and what they've been promised and what their interpretation is. And when I read it, I'm confused.

And we need to understand the financial aspect of it too. We have in here, as Mr. Rath pointed out, a 36.5.

And if you look at what Mr. Lee gave us last week, It's not looking good for next year either. So we have to make some really wise decisions. We're already in a shortfall. I 100% agree with that.

The original intent. for tonight was to have discussion so that we would be able to write a policy to bring to council the following meeting. So right now we have a motion and I believe a second to postpone the discussion until next week. And then the intent would be that we would have an actionable item the following week as council member Galloway mentioned to take action on. So we'd be postponing it one week. In that week, I would encourage you to, if that's the direction council decides to go, to get a hold of Administrator Rath, myself with questions, with HR Director Kojo as well. I know she can answer questions. So when we do come to discussion, then we can, yeah, we can all kind of be all, make sure we're all on the same page, I guess is what I'm trying to say. So.

And I would also recommend too, like I know I have some questions and council person to pray to, if we can, if we send it to our department heads, could you respond to all of us so we have all that information too? That would be great also.

Yeah. And if we had one question from any one of you, we definitely try to respond to everybody. So you all have the same information to be able to make a fair decision. Sure. Perfect. Thank you.

With that, there is a motion to postpone. And so we do have to take action on that, right?

Yes.

Okay. So Chris, take the roll, please.

Council member Galloway. Yes. Council member Hoffman.

Nope.

Council Member Duprey? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Motion carries, 4-1. Resolution number 201-2026, authorizing fiscal year 26 fourth quarter transfers as submitted by finance. Recommendation, pass and adopt resolution number 201-2026. Is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve. Second.

Second.

I'll turn it over to our finance officer, Mr. Lee. Good evening.

These are the standard quarterly transfers between funds. We are required to gain council approval on these transfers in between funds. So we're a little late in getting them here normally. Part of that is end of year as well, making sure what revenues are coming in, that we're transferring the right amounts and covering all of that. With that, I know there's a lot here, a lot going in between funds, but this sets us up and gets us ready for our audit later this month.

Any questions from council?

I know it's a standard thing that has to be done and you've got your numbers here and you can even, so I appreciate that. It's just something that obviously needs to be taken care of.

If no other questions, Chris, if you'd take the roll.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman.

Yes.

Council Member Duprey. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh. Yes. Council Member Reid.

Yes.

Resolution number 202, 2026, designating depositories for city monies and city funds not to exceed the sums indicated per financial institution. Recommendation pass and adopt resolution number 202, 2026.

Is there a motion to approve? Move to approve. Second. Mr. Lee.

So you saw this last in June. What that didn't do was increase Community First to 26 million. When I came in, I saw we had taken advantage of some CDs over the last year, some good rates for CDs with Community First, and we were a little off in what that number should be. So this provides that correction and lets us move forward and continue to take advantage of. good percentage rates on CDs.

So we'll make more money.

So we'll make more money.

I like that.

I just want to add one thing on the last section in this one. I just want to appreciate how you paint a picture. It's very understandable. It's not, so thank you for the way you organize and put this.

Any other questions or comments? Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes.

Council Member Kavanagh.

Yes. Council Member Reid. Yes. Resolution number 203, 2026, approving the city of Ottumwa fleet policy. Recommendation passed and adopt resolution number 203, 2026. Is there a motion to approve?

Motion to approve. Second.

Mr. Lee again. All right. All right. It only took me a month to get up here multiple times. So here we go. All right. So the fleet policy in front of you formalizes those practices and procedures that have been in place since pretty much 1991. The policy document you see, the mayor took the lead in doing some research, creating an outline, and I'll say I'm getting it across the finish line with putting the actual policy together, but he put a lot of effort into getting it to this point, so we appreciate that. The mission is just to ensure we're being efficient and effective with the fleet we have, that we're replacing it timely, and that we also identify a clear path on how we expand the fleet or make improvements to the fleet. My example on the improvement to a fleet is somebody who's driving a sedan and they say they need a truck. So we would, it's not just go to the fleet committee. Hey, my car's ready to be replaced, but I need a truck. So we do that. There's a, we look at that as an expansion, uh, along the same lines as an expansion. So, um, We have that in there. Members of the committee, we will have seven members of the committee that are identified by the department directors. Those departments and it can also be the department director. But those departments are the airport, building and code, engineering, the fire department, police department, parks, and public works. Those are the voting members. Then we'll also have non-voting members, the central garage supervisor, a city administrator, finance director, and information technology manager, as a lot of our vehicles now have IT equipment involved. So we want to make sure they understand what's happening and the decisions that are being made. That committee will have a chairman and a secretary to do meeting notes. They'll meet quarterly or more frequently during the budget cycle. to look through those things.

Mr. Lee, can I stop you for a second on membership? Is there a length of term, so like length that a person would serve and a length that the person would be appointed chair and secretary? I don't see it in here. I don't know if that's needed.

We don't have it in there because membership could be a department director. My example on that's the airport. They're a small bench, so it's going to be JD. So we wouldn't want to limit and say, hey, you have to assign somebody else. So we kind of kept it a little bit open like that. The chair and the secretary, we left that open. But I think to me, it's an annual thing, just kind of if somebody gets reappointed or a new person is appointed, we can make that decision at that time.

Great, thank you.

As mentioned, it also lays out for the expansion and the upgrade and how that's reviewed, how that comes to council. Everything in here is clear that council is making those final decisions and seeing those things. The fleet committee is seeing any addition to the fleet so that they can help set those specs to make sure that our staff can maintain that equipment and that we're looking at it correctly, so.

I have another question. So I talked with you and Administrator Rath about this earlier. So on that fleet expansion and equipment upgrades, right here it said any equipment or vehicle additions shall require the authorization from the committee. But then when you look at the process, it's kind of later in after it goes to city council. So can you kind of walk us through that?

Yeah, again, I think that goes back to the intent and then maybe there's some drafting. that we may need to clean up later, but the intent of that is for the specs on that equipment. The fleet committee has to see it. We don't wanna go out and again, buy something that we're not gonna be able to maintain, or we need special equipment or tools to be able to maintain and just understand that. So we want the fleet committee to see that before we get to final presentation to council.

My understanding that's current practice as well. Yes.

So this was fleet committee was started in 91. So there really was never a policy.

No, there's just a PowerPoint.

It's 35 years. Yeah.

And obviously practices have changed over time to some degree. So this is helping. And it led to some of that questions a couple of meetings back. This will help to, validate and and yeah memorialize the the processes and at some point in the future if they need to change due to practices policies laws technology whatever city council would be able to make those changes at that time thank you i think it's good any other questions from council okay chris take the role please

Council Member Galloway. Yes. Council Member Hoffman. Yes. Council Member Dupre. Yes. Council Member Kavanagh.

Yes.

Council Member Reid.

Yes.

Resolution number 204, 2026, approving the state of Iowa section 130 crossing safety improvements agreement between the Iowa Department of Transportation, Dakota, Minnesota, and Eastern Railroad Corporation and the city of Ottumwa and authorizing the mayor to sign. Recommendation pass and adopt resolution number 204, 2026.

Is there a motion to approve? I'll move. Second. I'm going to turn it over to our city engineer, Mr. Bergmeier.

All right, thank you, mayor. So the... The Dakota, Minnesota, and Eastern Road is Kansas City, Southern, and Canyon Pacific. It's the track that runs across 2nd Street. So what this does, it's a DOT program that performs safety upgrades to railroad crossings. On this particular crossing on 2nd Street, the railroad is going to install new signal arms and lights, bollards. All their equipment is going to get changed. And then the city is going to narrow up our road. It's over 40 feet wide now. We're going to narrow it down to 30 feet wide, make it less left that people will go around the arms. Then we're also going to raise the center line of the road because over time, the railroad has raised their tracks and raised their tracks and raised their tracks. There's a big bump there. We're going to realign the road, make it a little bit straighter, smooth out the curve a little bit. Right now on the westbound lane, when you go over the tracks, you kind of drop down and have to turn right really fast. It's not really a very... Very good design. So we're going to smooth all that out, increase the radius of the curve, make it a little bit easier to get across. And it's 100% reimbursable through the DOT. So it'll be nothing. None of the construction costs will be out of pocket. Just our cost for overseeing the work.

What was that last part? Just our cost for what?

Overseeing the work.

Overseeing.

Yeah. Any questions from council? What's the timeline on this?

It's an 18 month deadline from the time it's approved. So we're going to try to get it designed up this winter and have it let this fall or sorry, next spring to be done by next fall. If it, for some reason it doesn't work out, we can ask for an extension too. So we're going to, we're going to try to get that next fall.

And that's going to be a tough intersection to be closed for a long time. And so how long does the work expected to take any ideas on that?

Um, it's, it was like two or 300 feet each side. So it'd be quite a while. I don't think, I don't think doing one night at a time is going to work either just because of the, you know, going across the tracks like that. So, um, Yeah, it'll be a while.

Just don't do it while the Viaduct is closed. That would not be good.

That should be open way before then.

Will that affect the Bridge City Sanitation Company?

Yeah, we're going to have to work on some maybe detour upgrades too. I don't know. I know there's not really a very good detour route around it. I know when there's floods and we have to close off Harold's Branch, there's just not a very good way around it. So we'll look at that before the project's let.

Summit Street is really a rough street up and over there.

Because they have both their commercial and their residential trucks both on that other side, don't they?

Yeah. And I think the, one of the landfills out that way too. So even.

So that's going to affect. Yeah. Yeah. We want to look at that. I don't want garbage for 18 months.

Well, and if it costs too much, I mean, there's, there'd have to be road upgrades to create a detour around there. Cause those roads are pretty steep and not very heavily used. And well, even if we did, you have the overpass that Harold's branch too. So. you know, maybe doing one lane at a time is the way to go and just have a stoplight there. Might be better for everybody in the long run. That's something we'll look at, I guess, when we're designing it.

Yeah, that's better. Okay. Any other questions? Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh? Yes. Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Resolution number 205-2026, approving a right-of-way agreement between the City of Ottumwa and Main Street Ottumwa to install bollard lights on city property adjacent to Market and Third Streets and authorizing the mayor to sign. Recommendation pass and adopt resolution number 205-2026.

Is there a motion to approve?

So moved. Second.

Mr. Bergmeier.

Thank you, Mayor. So this agreement between the city of Ottumwa and Main Street Ottumwa, Main Street would like to install solar powered ballard lights in the city right away and on city property adjacent to Market and Third Street. I believe Chris talked about this in her last update. She kind of showed what was going to be on the Third Street parking lot there. I included pictures of what the lights would look like in the packet. And Colby is here to answer any questions for Main Street. You guys have questions?

Timeline for installation?

Timeline would be as soon as we can get them ordered. We're hoping to get them in before the weather gets too cold, so this year.

Okay, great. Thank you.

I'm not a council member, but I'm super excited about this one because that area is very dark. It's really dark, yes. For those of us that have to walk back there, this is nice.

Any other questions from council? Okay, Chris, take the roll, please.

Council Member Galloway? Yes. Council Member Hoffman? Yes. Council Member Dupre? Yes. Council Member Kavanagh?

Yes.

Council Member Reid?

Yes.

Resolution number 206, 2026, award the 2026 RFP number three, Ottumwa Library parking lot replacement to TK Concrete of Pella, Iowa and the amount of $40,875 and authorize the mayor to sign the contract. Recommendation pass and adopt resolution number 206, 2026.

Is there a motion to approve? Motion to approve. Second. Okay, I'll turn it over to our library director, Ms. Furrow.

This project will remove and replace the pavement for the Ottoma Public Library parking lot and will include site restoration. There has been breakage in the asphalt and concrete for over a decade, but has been more prevalent since the 2020 and the COVID pandemic when the drive-up services at the library were so prevalent. In the last year, a person has fallen from tripping on the broken parking lot material. It is currently a hazard to patrons and staff. The request for proposal was emailed to three contractors. The bid opening was held on September 30, 2026. The two bids were received. The lowest bid was received from TK Concrete of Pella, Iowa, in the sum of $40,875. The budgeted amount was for $61,180. Staff recommends the City Council award the contract to TK Concrete.

Okay, does council have any questions or comments?

I'm confused about where this parking lot is going to be. The one that's back there now, I think, is mostly gravel. Is that not true?

It's not gravel at all. It's the two parking lots is split. It's the staff parking at the fourth street and the alley. And then at third street and the alley, it's eight parking spots. And there's also a dumpster there.

I was thinking about the place to park directly behind the library. There's a place back there where some people park. Okay.

Yeah, it is behind the library. It's not counting the alley. It's just the parking spots that are split around the sheds and the library building.

And it's so broken up. It does look like broken asphalt or gravel-ish.

It's bad. It could be described that way probably. Pretty much.

So where is the money coming from? Is this coming from streets or where's the money come?

It's coming out of the library budget, but we did include that last year when we presented the budget. Yeah. Okay.

I thought so.

And it's significantly less than what we presented in the budget. And that's no thanks to me.

When is the anticipated timeline for this project?

They would be finished before December 1st.

Oh, good. Okay, thank you. Any other questions from Council?

TK Concrete has a lot of projects in our town, and they'll be done by December 1st.

So they run separate concrete and earthwork crews. So they're doing other projects in town, but the concrete crew is not always busy on those projects. So they intended to get it done sooner rather than later. We'll see how the weather holds up, but they do.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Okay. Chris, if you would take the roll.

Council member Galloway. Yes. Council member Hoffman. Yes. Council member Dupre. Yes. Council member Kavanagh. Yes. Council member Reed.

Yes. At this time, we are at the section of public forum, so if there is anyone from the audience that would like to come forward and speak on any non-agenda items, you may do so. Okay, seeing none, I am going to call for a five-minute recess.

Are we doing our mayoral comments?

Oh yeah, I skipped right over that, guys, sorry. Okay, before we go to five-minute recess, Yeah, is there anything that council would like to communicate to the public?

I would like to ask Phil Burgmeier a question about this purchase of a 2025 Chevrolet Silverado four-wheel drive. We got a quote from the Tumwa Vaughn Motors, a Tumwa. And then we got a quote from Yeah, it was the one that they purchased to replace it. Is this old business?

Yeah, it's very old.

It was the vehicle they purchased to replace the one that they wanted to sell.

Okay, so you can disregard that comment. My next question is, did you get us a quote on what it would cost to light those four stop signs on the south side?

I did send a quote out and it's three and a half thousand dollars for the one we found. So it costs $14,000 to light four stop signs. And our entire sign budget for a year is not even that much. So.

That's amazing. I don't know what they do with all that money.

It's the batteries. So we looked up cheaper ones, but the batteries don't last very long. So if you get cloudy days in a row, they'd stop flashing.

Okay. So further notice, I'll let that go.

Any other thing from council?

Yes. Just a little report on the parks. Oktoberfest went well despite the weather. The first two days were pretty rainy, but I hear that it was a success. The parks is beginning to winterize all the parks, so water is going to be shut off. at all the parks. And there's an open house out at the cemetery on Friday from two to four with a ribbon cutting. They're gonna grand opening. So everyone's welcome. There's maybe cookies, but not much food. I have something I'd like to say.

So I just want to comment on what happened tonight. So opening with an invocation means allowing viewpoints that may not reflect our own. And responding to someone's invocation is a slippery slope to putting a financial liability on the taxpayers and allowing for others to object or respond. And this is exactly why I had concerns about having an invocation when we first talked about it. And I think I even specifically referenced that having someone from the Church of Satan or a prayer about Satan, when we talked about that, that this could happen and we would need to allow it. So I just want to remind us that, again, sometimes things are said that we may not agree with. But we as up here, and while you're allowed to do the moment of silence and that kind of thing too, I think we've opened ourselves up for others to object or respond to others' invocations. And we need to remember that we are up here to be neutral and allow viewpoints because we've opened up invocations. That's all I have to say.

Anything else? Okay, with that, I will call for a five minute recess in which we will convene downstairs in conference room 128. So we're in recess.