City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Test. Test 123. Test. Test one. Two. Three. Last year, I think it was, like, colder than heck. Yeah. It was.

I'm here. Bertrand. Rayford here. Scott here. Can we stand for a moment of silent prayer followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, please? Amen. 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. Morgan. Haskell. Here's. Morgan. We missed you last Monday. We had a dog issue at my house. So we live in. So you know, we don't have animal dog issues. Always over. And I couldn't tell the police department. Sorry, I have to go. All right. Whereas the mental health is essential to everyone's overall, overall physical health and emotional well-being and surroundings can impact if, how and when a person's needs are met, which in turn affects mental health. Mental illness will strike 1 in 5 adults, and about 2 in 10 children live with a serious mental or emotional disorder, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion or economic status. Whereas people who have mental illness can recover and lead full, productive lives. With the help of the Mental Health Roundtable, which consists of various agencies working together to destigmatize mental health in the Siouxland area. Whereas stigma continues to be the single most significant barrier to people getting the help they need. And whereas access to early diagnosis, crisis intervention, appropriate treatment and support, including integrated treatment is critical to the well-being of our families, community, schools and businesses, and greater public awareness about mental illness can change negative attitudes and behaviors towards people with mental illness. Now, therefore, I, Robert Scott, mayor of the City of Sioux City,

Iowa City Council, do hereby proclaim May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in Sioux City and urge the citizens of Sioux City to recommit our community to increasing awareness and understanding of mental illness and the need for appropriate and accessible service for all people with mental illness. I present this to you and say a few words. Yes, thank you so much. Thank you again for doing it this year. I think this is the third year that I've accepted this proclamation. So thank you very much. The more we talk about mental health, the more people know that it's okay to get help. So thank you for all that you're doing. And I just encourage council members, everybody here today to wear green on Thursday, May 14th. We want to paint Siouxland Green to show our support, to let the community know that we stand by them and we want them to get help. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks, Morgan. The consent agenda today is two through 11 B, and you can consider these items to pass unanimously unless a separate roll call votes requested by a council member. Anyone wishing to speak on the agenda may come up to the podium at the time the item is being discussed. Anybody wanting to speak on an item, not on the agenda should come up under citizen concerns. All speakers shall state their name for the record and then provide their statement. I'll move the consent agenda. Second. Two is a reading of the City Council minutes of May 4th, 2026. Just one comment. I don't have any modifications or amendments, but I did want to note on the item related to the food trucks in the minutes. I just want to make sure that we continue. Mike, that dialog about identifying a permanent location. Enough people have mentioned that. I don't think that the downtown businesses or restaurants are opposed. I think they like the ancillary nature of it. So let's just make sure we continue that dialog. Thank you. Three is a resolution temporarily closing various streets in Morningside area for the Morningside Day

Carnival, Parade and staging. Four is a resolution accepting a donation from the Sioux City Parks and Recreation Foundation for the Big Sioux Pedestrian Bridge Crossing. Phase two project. Is that foundation separate from the city? The foundation's completely separate and their board members are completely separate. Yeah, Matt can speak to it, but they are. Yes, I remember when it was set up. Yeah. That Salvatore Parks and recreation director. Yeah. Completely different. 50501 C three board. There's five members and they meet quarterly. Is that a board? And so the council does not have representation on that board. Doesn't need you don't think it needs to have a representative separate organization. So okay. Yeah thank you. Three is a resolution approving and accepting a purchase agreement with g p Real Estate SC for three permanent easements and three temporary easements located at 35, 16 and 38 Singing Hills Boulevard and an unaddressed parcel north of Donner Avenue. Six is an. Actions relating to agreements and contracts. A is a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with Black and Veatch Corporation for the PFAS mitigation Project. B is a resolution granting a permit a permit to Metro Fibernet to own, operate and maintain underground fiber adjacent to 1816 Nebraska Street. I thought they got bought out by T-Mobile because I ordered. I ordered that and I get a bill from T-Mobile. They did? Yeah. The entities are related or part of the main. Okay. I looked it up the other day on Metro Fibernet is a portion of the new entity name. Okay. C is a resolution approving an amendment number one to the Consulting Services agreement with DDR engineering for the Parkview Boulevard water main replacement project.

Glendale Boulevard to Martha Street. Is Tom Tom here? Tom. Just the only question I've got. I have no opposition to amending the contract. But when you look at the original contract and then you increase it by almost an equivalent amount, is does it not trigger Mike or Tom a thought that maybe we should be rebidding that second contract that the amendment. I get that there's some history in terms of the work that's been done, but this is a pretty significant amendment. Gordon Fair, city Engineer Yes, it is significant, but it is in line with the amount that we would normally get for a lot of consultants, for design and for construction, admin and inspection. 26% though, is the second half is the construction admin and inspection, which we didn't have at the beginning of the project like we normally do 26% though, right? Maybe more than it's 26% for a water main only project is excessive on a good day. But anyway. Thanks. Go ahead Craig. Yes, I know, I agree mayor, I, I read through the materials and again, I am not I have no opposition to DDR. They do very good work. They've been with my first terms. They're, you know, back 25 years later. But I just look at the amount of the original contract. You move the amendment to 45. That's just a pretty significant adjustment. And so I wonder how you, when you bid the original contract, what you take into account certain services, Gordon, that you just described, or if you anticipate that there's likely going going to be an amendment number 1 or 7, and how we take that into account with other bidders? Well, they're not we don't take bids for. I understand that, but it sounds to me like you anticipated either that there could be a larger scope or additional work

that would be addressed in an amendment. Right. Originally, we didn't plan on having them do any of the construction management, but after the review of the workload and everything, we decided that it would be best if we did have them doing it. Who did you think was going to do it? It would be done in-house. Well, but with the influx of other projects, we just didn't have the manpower. Well, that happens on almost every project, so I don't know why we would have I don't know why you wouldn't. Back to what he's saying. At least ask what it will be if you do it. And then you can decide if you've got the workload, but you can't name you can't name ten projects in the last year that that the outside consultant that did it didn't end up doing the construction work. I mean, come on, that's how it works around here. But we don't bid it that way. And I know we don't bid it, but. Anything else? No thanks guys. D as a resolution awarding approving a contract to City Engineering for the Park View Boulevard water main replacement project. Glendale to Martha Street E is a resolution awarding and approving a contract to Sioux City Engineering for the Gordon Drive water main and sanitary sewer. Early relocation package. Project F is a resolution awarding an. Approving a contract to Ina construction for the sidewalk ramp project seven or actions relating to payments. A is a resolution accepting the work and authorizing the payment to Katie K to real estate development for the Big Sioux River Pedestrian crossing. Phase two project B as a resolution accepting the work and authorizing the payment to Steve Harris construction for the undersized water main

replacement project. Eight is purchasing a as a resolution awarding a purchase order to Hawkins for sulfuric acid for the water treatment plant B as a resolution authorizing and directing the city manager to purchase wastewater treatment. Plant property insurance from Mill Shellhammer Pits and Associates. Tom, just a quick question. Sorry. So this is property insurance. This isn't this has nothing to do with the wastewater treatment, rehab or owners liability insurance or otherwise. Just continuation of property insurance that we've had in the past. Tom. Public Works Director That's correct. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Nine or applicant applications for cigarette tobacco nicotine vapor product permits. Ten are applications for alcohol licenses and 11 are boards, commission and committee minutes. Anyone to be heard on any of those items? Can I ask a question on is there anybody here on the civil service items? The only question I've got, and Mike, maybe you could help me follow up. If you look on the Civil Service Commission minutes, this would be page one. 44 of our materials in there, item six, five and six, which are the EMS lead medic position that we recently approved. They're minutes don't reflect the dialog that we had with Chief Collins, and I just wonder if they are fully apprized of the scope of the issues that that came earlier. This was just for the testing, but they're not. This is the April 7th minutes, and they're not reflecting any of the dialog about how we were making those adjustments. Right. And I just wonder if they need to be part of that dialog. I can follow up. If you'd follow, that'd be great. Thank you. And were you in those were you were on civil service at that time? Well, I mean, I'm the liaison. Okay. So, Mr. Mayor, I want to

go back to your engineering question. So about two months ago, we started talking about this on what's should be in house, not in house. This isn't a shot at Dr. either. But I guess my question is, is. I don't know anybody on my end that uses. Dr. Outside of the public sector because they're so overpriced. So I'm just kind of curious is do we or how are we awarding between them and other firms? Like, how are we doing that? Tom. Well, you used to be able to actually ask for prices, but that's where I was two months ago. That's why I said that that should be a hard fixed. I, we talked about this two months ago and it's like, well, they've always done it. So that's was that was the response I got. Then what was your question? The question is, is that at. What are we shopping this at all? Are we just going with who's always done the work because they understand the work? Know we do shop. How do you shop it? We do an RFQ for water main project in this situation. And we had actually three three applicants and we had three projects. So we gave one to each. And now all of the prices were in line. So how do we have a project that's in line, but we don't have fixed costs going into it? I mean, I'm kind of with Mayor and Craig on this one. I mean, again, I feel like I'm talking at the mayor, but it's how do we not have a number at the beginning? And all these projects seem like at the end they won't let you. What do you mean they won't let you on the engineering side of it at the end? No, because the engineers are so professional that you can't ask their fee until you decide who it is. They change the state law. A while back we used to be able to do it, so you can't get it on, even on the on the the scope work on the once you once you tell them who it is, then you have to negotiate the price. Yes, because we negotiate the price with the consultant. And if we we find that their price is too much, we then can go to the

second one. But we cannot go back to the first of the second ones is higher. And so what you're saying, Gordon, is when you were looking at three different projects and you awarded them to three different firms, you were comfortable that the pricing was consistent amongst the three? Yes. And that's why you divided it mainly. Did they not have the person power to support more projects, or you felt the fairest thing to do was divide divided amongst the three in this situation? Yes. So what's what's the in-house cost of you're going to do this in-house? What did you budget for in-house? We couldn't do it in-house. Oh, I'm sorry for the design. Yes. We couldn't do it in-house. But for the inspection, I didn't have that. I don't have that cost in front of me. But who's inspecting eighth Street? That's in-house? I think I asked that those questions because we have several of these larger projects like that going on. We didn't have the manpower for this, this project. So then we decided to go out. So if you're us, what would you what question should we be asking you? To get this to get more consistent, get less, less cost? I was going to say, and then coming back with the amendment is probably the bigger issue. I would ask I would ask the amendment. What were you asking about? Well, just going back to then, why does it change so much? You know, after we assume that the numbers are what what they should be from the start? To answer Mr. Bertrand's question, we should have bid out the construction design and the construction. Well, you should at least get a price up front. You should at least get a price up front. So you know what it is, because that we could do. There's no negotiating. Once you've already given them the contract, they all know that they're going to get the inspection you're not going to have PGR inspect McClure's engineering plans. It's never going to

happen, shouldn't either, by the way. And we typically don't do that. We have someone else inspect here. That's where I was going with this. You're right. It should all be up front. I'm just thinking just like you see like I get the frustration. We seen it when I was sitting out there looking. It's like these engineering fees that come in late and hard and it's kind of like you're, you're stuck at this point. You're there and what's I'm just saying, you guys, what's the process? Educate us. How do we get in front of this? So in this situation, I looked at our workload for the year, was planning on having that done in-house. Things change. We had some other projects come up, didn't have the time for it. Manpower. I had another inspector. I could do that, but I don't. So in this situation, I had to make the change. And when you add it up, even if I bid it out all at once, it it'd still be right around the same number. Is there a time is there a moving forward? Is there a way forward for this? I mean, is there something we can we kick the nest? What's the solution? I think to the mayor's point would be to get that number, take that number back home, see if if that would if we could do that for a lower cost in house. If not, we should move forward with them. But then does it does it speak to the manpower that I mean, if you can do it for the lower cost, but then if you don't have the people to do it right, and also account for manpower and what projects we have going on during the estimated time of construction. No solution is to have the state legislatures allow us to bid those again. But. But I know Gordon, and you engineers don't want to hear that. But anyway, thank you for the record. I'm not an engineer. Yeah. You're right. The attorneys out in the audience, even they got to give you a

price up front normally about what they're going to charge you that there. You don't give them a scope of work and say, well, now let me know what the fee is going to be. Not. I think they go to school as much or longer than we used to say that in the field. That was that was that was a kiss before the. Yeah. Thanks, guys. Good discussion. Come on, Bob, find a solution or to zero recommendations of planning and zoning or 12 a resolution accepting and approving the final plat of a minor subdivision plat of Hanson Dunn Acres addition petitioners. Alphagan. On behalf of Madonna Hanson. The PNC recommends approval. I'll move that second anyone to be heard. So the only question you all really had on this one was whether there was going to be a second driveway. Is that is the plat limitation? Is that limitation in the plat, or how do they manage that to make sure that planning. They are not planning to add another driveway. They're not planning to. But what if in three and a half years they decide they need one? The DOT wouldn't allow it, so the DOT could control that. Yeah. Okay. Good to see you here today. It's good to be seen. I'll be here next week. The night that the 900 acres you're taking part in down south could have at least been talked about with the city of Sergeant Bluff and Sioux City. But we appreciate your investment in here. I appreciate you bringing that up,

mayor. I couldn't I could not let that go. Wouldn't expect you to. Do we move that? It's been moved. Yes. If I don't fight for my city, who will tell Catherine Kunhardt when you see her? Okay. Passes 4013 resolution accepting, approving the final plat of the residents of Elk Creek. Petitioner Scott Man. On behalf of egghead properties, PNC recommends denial. I'll move that second denial mean we vote no if we want to stay with the PNC, correct? Yes, yes and yes, we pass it through. Is that what works? We can override PNC, but as I understand it, there was there was a denial on a 2 to 3 or 2 to 3 vote, correct? That's correct. And but there was some additional information that came because the substantive issue was the size of the lot and in particular, the average size with regard to the three units. Yeah. It was the it was the lot line average over the right, over the, the entirety of the of the lot. That was an issue. So all that's in front of us is either approving or denying based upon that element. Correct? That's correct. But they sent a revised plan last week that was inserted in a report that makes the requirement now. So the site plan would now be approved by planning and zoning. Yeah. Well no but but I think there was an indication after the meeting that they indicated that they would otherwise approve it. That's why I'm going to move that we defer this, deflect it back to planning and zoning and let them review it and approve it or deny it. Again, the let's there's other information too. That's there though, is I, what I would like to see us do as a new council is this really is going to get hung up on the covenant issue. It's really.

All we're doing today is say they can go because if we approve it today on the 2 to 3, they'll get the permit, but doesn't mean that they've cleared the covenant hurdle out there. That's the bigger issue that's out there on the garages right on that. So that's the hurdle. So I just can tell that that I don't know if it's my development. I would be asking questions. So I did. And it does not meet covenants. But they're working with the developer within that. So what I what I would like to see the council do is approve the construction side of it. So when they work it out with the developer, which they're going to that it's just ready to go as long as we get. Does that make sense? Sam. It does. And some of those issues were brought to our attention during the during the PNC hearing, but it really was outside of the scope of what we were considering at the PNC meeting, which was just limited to the performance of the of the lot lines. And so I understand that they fixed that. And because if we defer that, we defer it. We see that back. We'll take a look at it. But we're not looking at it from a from a covenant. Yeah. That's their issue. That's the private sector. What I'm saying is those if we kick it down the road on a deferral, they can't get in the dirt. They can't cut the deal with the developer or they can't get going is what the last thing that I want to see is we run into a three week. You know, we're sniffing June. You know, we run into a three or 3 or 4 week delay based upon you know what I mean? I'd like to see it. Let's they worked it out. Let the developer work it out with the with the builder on the garage situation. It's a one, two, one, I think, or something like that, a one, two, two or something like that. Let them figure it out and let's pass it. Let them go. In my opinion, I think that's your prerogative as a council. Yeah. Thoughts? Anyone else be heard? May I please have your name for the record? Oh, my name Sam Wagner. I'm on the planning commission. I'm Gabriel planner. Gabriel. What's your last name? Jojo. Hello. My name is Scott Mann. I'm with Egghead Properties, and I'm the contractor on the job. We do have a building permit ready to

go, and we have an excavator there ready to start digging. We did go through the full process. We asked the developer. We gave them plans a couple months ago to approve them. He said, go ahead. So I don't believe that there's any covenant and conditions that are not being met. And I was unaware that at the previous Planning Commission meeting, about the size of the lot, that we were non-conforming on one of the one of the units after that meeting, I, I read the code, talked to Dr. And we came up with a simple solution. And now we meet our requirements. So. And we're ready to start going. Anyone else? Got a tie? Joel Voss, 5530 Lorain Avenue. For the next door neighbors, Henry and Linda Metz. I think there's still an issue with compliance. That is when you look at subdividing lots like this. What they're doing is called lot averaging. Lot averaging has two requirements. One is that the minimum width of the lot can't be less than 90% of the of what the code requires. But there's also an area requirement that the area of the lot can also not be less than 90% of the required area. I think that they hit the lot width. What they. What they did is an unusual sized lot. I guess it's it's wider up front than the rest of the way. It's kind of skinny and that allows

them to hit the 36ft width that's required at the point where you measure it, but they are still not at 90% of the required lot area. And so I think it needs to be sent back to planning and zoning to take a look at that, because I don't think it's in compliance. When you look at all of the code requirements. It hit it. Yeah, I haven't seen the plat, so I haven't actually seen what it is that they're that they're describing. So it's we'll just go with the guidance from the council and whether you kick it back to PNC, we'll take a we'll take a look at it in due course or whatever you guys want to do. Yeah. But if you look at the code section 25.0, 3.0, three, 0.4, that's a lot averaging. It allows you to reduce it by 10% and that's a 36ft that you're supposed to meet. And with the revised plan they meet that requirement. Now it's not supposed to be 90%. It reduces it by 10%. And if you do the calculation per the new revised plan, they meet that requirement. So what they're doing right now meets the code. It meets the code. Yep. Okay. Yeah. There's some wiggle room built into the built into the code. And one of the reasons that we denied it at the PNC meeting is that the way the lot lines were laid out in that original plat, they were way below. They've come back and, and kind of got it within the threshold of that wiggle room that. It was a close vote. Yeah, it was a 2 to 3 vote. Yeah. I mean. Is this by design more setbacks? Was it about design or setbacks? I think the PNC issue was the setbacks and the size of the lot. But there are questions about the design and the scope of the triplex.

Correct. Not so much with P and Z, no, but there are issues concerning the size and scope of the property and the improvement. Yeah. It was the averaging, right? The averaging. It's just how far off they were averaging that caused that caused some consternation on the PNC. Where's the developer on this. Is he okay with this Paul. Okay with this. I can't speak for him. I can just say that. Yeah. I mean, is he good with the design? I mean, it's his I mean, I gave him the design two months ago. He said go ahead, go through city. It looks good, but that's not a written approval of anything. So that's and from from everything that I've seen, we are in compliance with lot width and total lot size, everything. So you're okay? I didn't see him. Paul. Elk Creek, we have not completed our review from Elk Creek standpoint as there's bigger issues here that are at stake. Once theot l line issues are resolved, if they are resolved, we'll complete our full review at that point and determine if the triplex falls within our guidelines or not. This plan was provided to me. I don't know. I looked at it, I think, a month and a half ago, just glancing over it, it looked okay. After further review. I don't think it quite meets our covenants out there in Elk Creek, but like I said, I've not dived into it completely until this issue is resolved, if it is resolved. So there's no, as I told Scott last week, there's no dirt to be moved until this is resolved. And if this is resolved, then it would have tor go through ou covenants in Elk Creek first, and ifed that's satisfi, then he could dig. Thanks. Thanks, Paul. If think in light o the

multitude of issues I, I'd like to'd like to move thatac we send it bk to PNC to deal with both the PNCve issues. Also gi the developer, the builder and the propertyad owners in the jacent properties an opportunity to visit as t well, in the eventhat it affects the covenants. All that can be s done on the privateector though too. Just FYI, it could all h be done with permit inandm I mean, it's here, I going with that's sort of I mean, that already worked outwe between him and him beten the covenants. w I'm just saying is thathy do we want what's it going to what's going to what's the time frame going to cost. II don't know him from Adam.'m just saying, what's what's the timeth frame going to cost him n is? Three weeks, four weeks. Howck long does it take to get ba to PNC? Maybe it can get. on the on the 20 seat of May We havege a hearing on 26th so e can t it back to them.k So you're looking at first weeof June, second week of June.Ye The 26th you're talking about. ah, that's the next PNC on the 26th. He's saying theyhe would come back here then. And tn afterek that would come another two wes for it to get back to you. Yeah. Say that again, Mike.Ye It'd be the eighth. The eighth. p. I would like to just point out that the. Lot size, lot width, everything meets requirements, the covenants and conditions. I've read them. I don't believe we're in any violation of that. But that's a private matter. The issue before you here today is the approval of the d plat. And do I meet the requirements and Io meet the requirements. So I haven't heard any reason why I would be denied. So so if your developer comes at you and says, hey, weiz want to tweak this, your garage, your garage se or something like that, are you, are you rigid at this point?Aree whatever modifications. That's e big thing. I mean, that's, that's

the concern of the neighbors, I'm sure, which isthd everything else. They want it to match up th the development out there. And, and I've offered that we will make whatever modifications needed to make everybody happy. We just want to build the triplex and build some more in the same development. So I don't care. It's up to you guys. I know I'm a. So yes, if you want to pass. It knows a. So's we have a coupe different things on the floor. It been moved and seconded. And then Councilman Bernstein indicated he would move to send it back for reconsideration. So I've always said that when somebody makes a motion, we should vote, even if we're for or against it, we should at least allow that to happen. So I'll second the motion, the motion to send it back. Kinsey. So does the other motion have to be withdrawn first? Nicole. Yes. It was made by the mayor and seconded by Councilman Raiford. That was to just flat. What is that one for? That was the original withdrawal. And then after voting on this, it may come back. I will withdraw my motion. Second, will you withdraw your second? So the vote on the floor would be to send it back to planning and zoning for reconsideration. Motion made by Bernstein, seconded by Scott. Any further discussion then, I guess. Any

other comments? Call the roll. You can do it electronically. Oh. So it will go back to PNC. Next is a hearing, an ordinance vacating a portion of Sacajawea Park on the property known as 1904 South Ruston Street. The petitioners, Roger and Jacqueline Edwards, P and Z, recommends approval. I'll move that second. Anyone to be heard? Mr. Sam Wagner, do you have anything just to note that it was a unanimous vote? That's good. We like those. Anyone else? You're famous. Sam. See, you don't even feel like we need to. But in all fairness, man, I've sat in a few of your PA's. You guys got a functional P and Z right now. I've seen the last couple years and where they aren't real functional, you guys got a really good P and Z, right? Just remember who your new guy is. I know who it is. Well, and to Rick's point, the breadth of knowledge of P and Z is outstanding. It really is functional. And we have questions about scope of what they're reviewing. And oftentimes the legal elements are very. I appreciate that and I'll share it with the commission. Public hearing is now closed. Passes for zero.

Anybody opposed waving the statutory rule? No, I'll move that second. Bertrand. A Raiford I Scott I a second. Raiford I Scott I Bernstein I Bertrand a 15 hearing resolution approving plans and specs for the undersized water main replacement project. I'll move that second public hearings now open anyone to be heard seeing none. The hearing is closed. Passes 406 needs a hearing and resolution amending the budget for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 2026. I'll move that second public hearings now open. Anyone to be heard. Seeing none. The hearing is closed. Either Sarah or Teresa. Could we just get a three minute summary of why it's necessary? We understand. But for the public's awareness, could you just give a quick summary of why we're being asked to amend the budget for the fiscal year? Sarah Swearingen, budget manager you'll see that the compilation of all of the changes here, a lot of these changes include technical changes. We're transferring from one project to another. We need to add a budget to that project. The state requires all budget adds be compiled and submitted to

them before May 31st of each year, so this will come annually. Thank you sir. Passes for zero. Ordinance is 17 ordinance amending chapter 13.08 sanitary sewer rates of the Municipal Code to increase the rates of outside municipalities and outside improvement districts by 27.4%, effective November 1st, 2026. First consideration was approved on April 27th. Second, consideration was approved May 4th. I'll move third reading second. I'll second. Third. Passes four zero. You know, Mr. Mayor, on that on that that rate increase, that's a win. Just want to kind of put in the public record. That is a win for Sioux City taxpayers. I also think it's a great reflection on this council that we are the Sioux City City Council, not a not a tri state Council that we're looking out for our taxpayers first. And Tom wins the next time we're eligible to raise those rates again. The contract would state that. Tom. Public Works Director, that we could do that again in six months. Thank you. Just because of the six month notice. That's correct. That's right. There's nothing else

that I can annual and can't be once a year or bi annual or every five years. That's the way it's written. So so we basically put a little over a million in our coffers above that helps with construction, everything else, not one squeak, which means that it's not hitting anybody's pocketbooks or anybody's squealing. And I think we should continue to look at things like this and other things that we receive payments from other communities for our services. So great job on all of this. And, and the speed of it I thought was excellent. So thanks. Thank you. Thanks, Tom. 18 is an ordinance repealing ordinance 2026 and 4-64. Amending chapter 12.30 Stormwater Program and Municipal Code to modify the stormwater collection fees. A move first, reading second. Passes four zero. I would wait personally and give people a chance to comment on second reading. So sue Gateway Airport master plan update I have invited to present on the master plan. This is about a two year project that the FAA airport is required to do to update on at least a 20 year cycle. For funding purposes. I want to thank the guard unit and the FAA, our board, our public input process. We go through at least two public meetings and just goes over a 20 year planning horizon for our needs in the immediate, mid-term and long term, and

kind of separates the military and civilian uses for us as an airport out there. So does the master plan, and we've all reviewed it. But does it how does it take into account either the anticipated or what we understand to be the 1/85 growth cycle? They're going to talk about that right now. Thank you. I knew you were going to. I just wanted to. I think we have a PDF here. Right here. Just my thanks. Great. So thank you very much. My name is Mike Becker. I'm a senior aviation planner for Arsenal, and we're going to talk a little bit about the the master plan. I didn't do it right. So I'm not goingo tsee it up there. I will okay. r Allight. I gotgu it fired out. We're all set now. So first thing I wantto do is make sure we all level set on what an airport master plan is. And it's a comprehensive plan. It looks at thentire airport facility and it really describes short, medium and long term development needs for an airport. The FAA requires it tomake sure that the projecs that are listed on the airport layout plan are eligible and justified, and itps really hel the airport, the city, they, communit understand where they are today and where they need to go. in the future From a facility standpoint., So really the, theem general elent that needed to get really analyzed and planned heregr was the Nexus proam. What's going to happen with the Airnd National Guard a how the airport facility is goingmp to kind of irove and work through those. The graphic s you see on thecreen is really the facilitye improvements that ar going to happen over the short term duringar the project,

stting with some runway extensions, working on somes taxiway alignmentand some hold positions for differentn, aircraft. And the of course, an apron expansion. That graphic really represents thebig progrs that's going t occur. This master plan started off to w really understand whatas going to be needed and what needed to be t justified, to be ableo use a APo, money and DoD funding t to make this project occur. So the other I thing I actually, before go on, the other thing that was really importantrt to note is te last airpo master plan was about 20 yearst old. So it was needed and iwas time. And then theredo was this large project. So es the FAA only require it everyha 20 years? The FAA requires tt anhe airport have a master plan. T federal planning horizon is only 20yearw much improvement and change happens in a community, a master plan could be done every seven years, every 15 years. It'se really an independent perspectiv on the community to determine what was needed in this case,he with the growth and changes in t community and the master plan being 20 years old, it was reallyan time to lok at the facility, understd where the future was going to go and what improvements were needed.ol So during that proces, we really invve the community.he We had one virtual engagement room wre anybody couldwe come at any time join. There was a bsite, s there was a portal that you could go in andee some of the informationnn and participate. We had that up and ruing for the two yearspu of the planning assignment. We had two blic involvement meetings, threest advisory committees alog the way to underand the differented components that we were looking at. We publish five different documents to allow people to review and understand what was p going on. As we moved through the planningrocess. And we we had a lot more than ten differentre people. We tried to boil that into ten diffent partners within the community, in the broader community to, to reallyt engage and collaborate with, to make sure thathe airport facility was meeting the needs

of the users and stakeholders. So the general planning processd is kind of linear. You kind of start off by uerstanding whatn you have, what the future might look like, and the lookhe at all the facility requirements and understand wn a facilityp might need to have improvements made to it to keep uwithay growing demand. Then you really look at different ws toir solve that problem. So you don't just decide on the fstev one. You look at multiple different reasons and then aluate which ones make the most sense from an assortment of different reasons. Environmental funding, operational. And then once you've kind of figured out the preferredom solution, you, you figure out where is the money going to ce from and how do we implement it and what stages and what t phases should we move through that implementation process? Andhen the FAA requires us to put it in a in a drawing set, we call it the blueprint. So you really understand whatre facilities are going to be added to the airport, what changes a going to be made over the 20 years. And that's the document that the FAA reviews and approves, finalizes and say, yeah, this is a great plan. Go forth, move ahead. I'm probably interrupting. This is a question so you can answer it later if you want, Mike. But I'm curious on one of the struggles that we've had is identifying additional carriers. Right. And I know that's a very competitive world. Both the carriers, their financial security, finding pilots, etc. Does the master plan that you're putting together help our airport board and the City Council to move forward with working with other air carriers to promote our community and identify what the physical structure for general aviation can look like. It's a soft yes. The master plan is primarily looked at the facilities and understanding how the facilities can accommodate whatever type of aircraft, passengers and vehicles. The master planning process itself doesn't do the negotiating and

collaboration with with the airlines, but it does look at okay, is the airfield in a in a sufficient condition that the airlines or corporate jet activity would operate and be comfortable in? It? Is the passenger terminal accommodating the needs of the passengers in the airlines and is the parking facilities accommodate that. So that's where the soft jets comes in, but not directly negotiating with airlines. And I didn't anticipate that latter part. I was just curious whether, as we move forward with the airport board, understanding that we're in an essential air service community, what kind of leverage this gives us to broaden our services, approach the airline, the carriers, and try and improve air service in Sioux City? Yeah, I think, well, I'll try to touch on it with the graphic we have right here. This one you all see on the screen is kind of the forecasted Enplanements. So you can kind of start off in 2018. You can see what happened in Covid. And the gray line is kind of how you see passenger enplanements occurred during the the pandemic. The dashed line is what the FAA thought it would look like in well, sorry, the FAA didn't have the FAA saw the past just like we all did. So the historic numbers are exactly historic. And then as the FAA line moves out into the future, that's what the federal government was thinking your forecasted improvements would look like. As part of our planning analysis, we looked at what would be the base case of growth and what would happen if additional air service came on a different routes to different locations, and what could that generally do to the airport facility? Can the runways handle it? Taxiways, terminal buildings, parking lots. So we looked at both of those scenarios to make sure that the airport has a plan in place to be able to accommodate when that growth and that air service continues to, to continue to improve. The great news is, is you get three

little dots kind of pointed out on the screen where we started 26000 employments. So that's one set. If you add arrival and departure, that's the full passenger. So you're you're, you know, that's a 26 plus. That's 52, 52,000 passengers that were occurring at the beginning of the planning. And now you're at 28,000 employments. So roughly 60,000 passengers in the last couple of years. So that Denver and, and Chicago service has really helped bring some of that life back on the commercial side, I think the airport improvements that we're going to talk about in a second with the runways and taxiways and support facilities, are going to make the facility in a position to be able to accommodate that and and then continue working with the airlines themselves. We'll see what happens. But trend is going in the right direction. And a flight was added in January. So those aren't reflective of 25 numbers as well. So when we look at the other aspect not just the passengers but aircraft operations, you know, that was another concern in the planning studies, making sure we have enough aircraft operations to continue to use the airport. You make the tower continue to operate and be a strong, strong facility for this community. And you see with the adding of the flight school and the growth in the general aviation community, your your operational forecast is also increasing. So we looked at the base and the high to make sure that we had plenty of facilities in plan that could be put in place if necessary, as growth would occur. That somewhat answer your question, sir. Yes. Thank you. So that that kind of looks at the what you have and then what the future might look like. And then we generate these type of graphics and they're really kind of heat maps really meant to show kind of the facility that might need some improvements during the planning period. And we really break 20 years up into three planning periods, one, two and three. And we identified

trigger points of operation or a certain particular event that might occur that says, now's the time to begin planning, then to design and then implement it. So your facility is up and running and at a high level of service before it's needed. So you kind of see on the civilian side of this graphic, you see early on the aircraft rescue fire fighting facility and the maintenance SRE are red. So those we indicated needed some improvements right away to help with, with growth and facility improvements. The Arff was a of a line of sight issue with the air traffic control tower to get the air, the Air National Guard facilities improved and the maintenance SRE needed more space. As you look on the military side, no surprise to anybody here that the runway length and design standards were needed. That's what the primary objective of Nexus is. So we've identified that as the project that needs to happen right away. And again, on the RF, that was a siting study tower siting study that needed to be relocated, the facility to improve line of sight for the air traffic control tower. So those that's really a summary of nine months of work, trying to figure out what facilities needed to be improved and where. And then we really get into understanding the funding of that. And I'm going to hand it over to Darren. And Darren's going to kind of walk you through a couple of slides on funding. What the next five, ten and 15 years of capital projects look like here. All right. Thank you, mayor and Council. My name is Darren Christopher with R s NH. I'm a civil engineer and I just want to touch base on funding just for a few minutes here. Maybe skim the top some of the waves. It's about over the next 20 years, it's about almost $700,000,672 million program. But if you really break it down on the left hand side, it's the military. We look at our funding partners in the military is a large component of that. And of that 360 million, it really breaks down into two projects. There's the Nexus program, which is about $220 million program. That's for reconstructing the runway, extending the runways,

reconstructing the ramp at the at the 1/85 at the Air National Guard base. And then it's also another component of that is if they decide to to remission with a larger airplane, it would also. One of the big components is building a double or two hangars or a double hangar. And that's about $140 million estimated today to build those two hangars. So it's about that's where the over half of the program is about 360 million of that, the FAA being a large partner as well with their with entitlements and and their funding, the state being the the Iowa Dot, the Department of Aviation, local money could be private investment. It could be the matching funds from the city. And then there's in private investment through hangar development as well. The next one just breaks it down in the percentages of what the program. So it kind of just two different ways to tell the same story. And the next slide, moving on is this one's a little bit of an eye chart, but the 0 to 5 years, the projects we're looking at is one, the Nexus program. You can see a lot of blue or a lot of improvements on the runway environment itself, a runway. 1331 it's also rehabilitating and reconstructing two of the general aviation ramps on the left hand side. It's just showing that there's room for hangar improvements if they're needed, anywhere from additional t-hangars to corporate development. If that development is needed, there's a place showing that it could be constructed. It's also one of the projects. Here is a new entry. This is the Air National Guard's best Fit location right now is a new entry control point. Currently today, one of their projects after the Nexus would be the new entrance or gate to the to the facility and make sure they meet all their security requirements today. There they they need a new one, let's just put it that way. The next one is 6 to 10 years in the largest program here. We do show on the left hand side more improvements for general aviation if needed. If those tenants were needed some space, they came to Sioux City or were

able to track them. And the biggest program here is like we show area locations for the Air National Guard. We show a double hangar option so they could do a maintenance hangar and a fuelel cl hangar adjacent to each other. We think there's some efficienciesha sring a wall, and those are the biggest components in the next 6 to 10 years. And the last one, the 11 to 20 years, it's reconfiguring a few taxiways, more general aviation space. It does show additional development space adjacent to the paint facility. If that's a military only space or some commercial development. And the one that's a little bit hard to see is it does show about 20 years relocating the Arff station, right? The current location of the fire station or the Arff station at the airport, there's a little bit of a line of sight issue from air traffic control. Everybody operates safely there. There's a little bit extra communication. But when that building reaches the end of its useful life, we'll just move it to a different location. When that planning activity, that pal or planning activity level comes to an end or is triggered, and i we tried to keept under ten minutes. There's a couple of QR codes a up here. This is documentation or QR linkt' to te airpors master plan website. There's also a QR code that'lltake you to thes as well thashowss all the document from the master plan. They're all available for.ve The FAA did appro this master plan. We were asked to come and givery an executive summary. T to keep it short. High points. The FAA approved this master plan back in probably e March or February,arly March. And sot. they signed off on i And so this is a summary of t all the collaborationhat occurred over the last 24 or 30 months or so. So. Questions. All right. Thankwi you. Quick question. So th thefo the planning that you see r the next for the first five years, ten years and 20 years, and o the expansion and the growthf the 1/85he and what

we're doing with t taxiways, runways,ap etc. does that give s the cacity to be able to work with large care? Not I don't mean general aviation care carriers, but warehousing type of relationships. The large planes that that warehousing and distribution centers. Sure. There's not a lot ofhe airplanes that are in the fleet. On t commercial side, they couldn't land at the airport today. And with the Nexus program, some of the the there's going to be marked for military use only for those to the 1000 foot extension on the runway, there'll be signed. If there's a civilian need, we can come back and revisit it with the FAA. The FAA has asked that that is listed and marked as civil, as military use only. But there's not a lot of there's not a lot of commercial airplanes throughout the entire fleet that couldn't land in Sioux City and take off in Sioux City. They periodically have 760. There's. Last yearan they had 767 charter come in so they could hdle almost all. Almost all the. Depending if you're going to go international cargo, it's a different story. But you could fly domestically almost anywhere you want to out of Sioux City domestically with thenk current with the current runway sits today. So thas, Darren. Thanks, Mike. Thank you. Thank you. Citizen concerns. Any citizen want to be heard. Please come to the mic. State your name and or not your address. Just your name please. If you're coming, you got to get up here because I'm going to go to the council concerns. Yeah. I'm concerned about the airport runway name, please. My name is Melvin Carter. The concern I have is, what do you need all this for? Why do we have to be so big now? And what the reason really is for this bigger runway, you know why in a little bitty town, why would they want to put a bigun runway

in? Because we're going to lose the Air National Guard it if we don't, and we can't afford to lose that. It's 800 and some jobs in this community, right? The current $220 million project is the 1/85 and to the mayor's point, the 8 to 900 jobs that we would lose if the 1/85 left right. I understand that, but the 1/85 been using this airport for how long now they have to fly out with 70% capacity. They can't fly out with a full load, so they have to fly to like Wichita or Lincoln, refuel and take off again, which in a national emergency doesn't bode very well. You need to get out off the ground and in the air. And they're not able to do that today. The 1/85, the units that they fly are tanker units, right? Right there to fly and fill up the fighter jets. Right? Right. Now, to the mayor's point, they're they're only able to fill to capacity of about 50 to 60, maybe 70%. And they have to either land in Lincoln or elsewhere to get full capacity in their loads. It's a win for Sioux City. I ain't saying it ain't a win. I was just wondering why you need such a big runway and make all these different plans to the to the airport and all of this here. I'm just kind of pig out. Good question. Very fair question. You know, what is all this call for? What is it really good for? I understand it's good for a National Guard, but how about the other? What? What else is good for? It's good for all of Sioux City. So not really. And keep in mind that this is because the thing is, we ain't going to get no more states coming in here. We're going to Chicago, Denver, maybe Minnesota. Okay. All right. You know, I can see, you know, they going to open it so we can get more business

flights in here and stuff like that. But you know, just to say it's for we feel the jet, you know, I can understand that too, but I really don't get it. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Council concerns Rick briefly. Briefly this evening. First, I wanted to say thanks to the guys on the 18th Street Field services, Mike and I and Brad. And then we toured that for our wrap up tour after they cleaned it up. I highly encourage you if you haven't driven by to drive by, they did a great job. A 20 year cleanup opened up the space. They now took a full inventory of everything in there, kind of reevaluated what we need for needs versus wants moving forward. I look at it not just as a housekeeping drill, but more as they know what they got to help serve the citizens more with, what they do with snow and grass and everything else. So again, good job there. I was going to send them a case of a pallet of Busch Light, but I was told by legal I couldn't send that over. But the. So good job to those guys over there also. Then we're going to talk. We're in the process, Gordon and I, and we're in the process of reviewing the grading permit process. They sent over the first initial rough draft. And just so just so the public is aware why we're doing that is because right now the City of Sioux City is probably in my I don't know, any other city that doesn't allow grading before a full set of plans has to be submitted. It's starting to become it has been an issue. It's becoming is becoming a bigger issue. And I think that this is a great process that we're going to go through to rework the grading permit process, which kind of keeps a little bit of control on our dirt. Guys. We know from the board from a borrow pit standpoint, but also gives the

flexibility from our developers to get them in the ground faster and more efficient and to let the plans kind of catch up. So I saw a lot of a lot of additions that Gordon put on there that said, at the engineer's opinion or disposal, and we're going to redline his red line, but that'll be a great discussion for us on Thursday when we get together on the grading permit process. Also on the. The variance I still would like to see I know there's there's some state guidelines around variance, but I would still like to see a presentation on what what is a variance in the city of Sioux City and how to apply for it? And I think it would be a great public discussion. I still would like to bring that up. That's what I wanted to hear. Perfect. June 1st. That's that's a that's a very valuable discussion. I want to see. We want to see there also on the. Is Matt still here? Salazar still here? No, I think I saw the I just want to ask, Matt, do we carry trimmers on the on our equipment for. I assume we do, because I think this 2026 is the year of. No more grass over the edge of the curbs. Let's get our trimmers out and let's put some string in them. And so we're doing a really good job of, of clean up with identifying the spaces. But they have, they have. Yeah. That was being facetious there, Mister Mayor. That was that was a that was that was a little facetious there on, on getting the trimmers out and making sure that we, we refocus on trimming and especially over the curb and all that hangover. So again, just especially going into the season, it's a great reminder as we go there. And then also last, last but not least, I want to thank Daryl. We had a couple incidents this pop up in the field and where these are, these are things from a development standpoint that would have probably taken a couple a week or so. And Daryl continues to show the flexibility in getting out there and getting, getting, keeping guys moving. So thank you, Daryl, and keeping everybody moving. And let's have a great week. Great. Just

a couple of things, Mike. How are we managing the increased cost for fuel? Do we forward purchase our fuel for our various departments? We do. We do not finance average is that when we go through the budget process and we try and we try and forward look 12 months, but it's a guess. And obviously this year we would have been wrong. Just based on where we're at pricing, do you think that we're going to have to readdress any issues? We will have a budget ad more than likely in this upcoming year. You know, the good thing is the pricing was down the first part of the year, right? So we might average out fine. I can tell you in transit, we're still ahead budget wise, even with the increase in. Okay. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Then a couple of other things. I think it's terrific news. What security Bank did with the naming rights to the ball field. I was able to drive by there over the weekend. And their new sign is up and it looks absolutely great. So congratulations to the entire team to get that renamed. I'm really pleased that we were able to transition from the Mercy Field to Security National Bank. And the sign looks great. That was Matt. That's great. Yeah, he did a great job this morning. The mayor and I had a chance after we met with the group to go to the National Police Week ceremony. I thought they did just an absolutely marvelous job in recognizing the not only those that had died in service, but really just commending them for recognition of the importance of that service. And I thought they did a really nice job. And the county attorney, James Loomis, did a really nice job speaking. So they need to be certainly Rex and his team and all need to be recognized for what they did. Then just very quickly, I know that through the over the last week and I see Joe Tidwell sitting in the back. Sheila's not here tonight, but I know over the last week all of us have had a significant amount of dialog regarding the homelessness issue, the transient population, trying to get our arms around this. And I think we're all recognizing

both sides of the equation on how we manage this. I think we all recognize that change is necessary, that we need to work with our partners. It's going to take time, and it's going to take a lot of courage. But I'm encouraged by the discussions that we've had that we can get that accomplished. That's it. Thank you. Mike. Absolutely. I see Reagan is here. I just had a real quick question. Reagan, did your new ambassador for downtown start or. Just tee it up? I was just about out the door. Well, Cody, downtown partners, we're gonna never let you off that easy. No you won't. That's okay. I expect it and appreciate it. Last week I know Rick mentioned the ambassador program and an update on that. We are working on the memo. We got Bill's first couple weeks under him. He started April 15th. So we do have some numbers that I've put in the memo and should have it in the morning actually. So we just got those today. Oh, nice. Yeah. Perfect timing. Yeah. Thank you. Will you state your name for the Reagan? Cody. Thank you. Reagan. Are you are you tracking cost when this is all said and done. Can you I mean are you he does have a contract when it comes down to cost. I'll be working with Patrick and some other departments on that. So we're sitting here a year from now. We can either make a decision as a community if we want to. Yep. If we want to do this, if we want to make it bigger, we'll know what it cost us. It'll be tooat le. So thank you. Absolutely. Thank you, thank you. Thanks, Reagan. Just, you know, last week I'd asked Mike about the property cleanup over behind the beacons building. Thanks, Mike, for getting that taken care of. I love to see the improvements in the clean areas that are coming through that. I think sometimes our citizens don't see the work that's being done, but yet it is being done. And so we want them to know that, you know, it wasme great to et the how do you say Gilgenil Gilgen Ggen Gilden delegate this morning. Andhe and then ty get to see

some, some some prettiness in our community. I also want to congrats to the BCU and Morningside and Saint Luke's graduates. You know, they are getting ready to start their careers. And so got to see a lot of that this weekend. And that's it. Move. We adjourn second. a Scott Berensteinfo Bertrand a Rayrd ab. we did it, Bo