City Council - Regular Meeting

Let's stand for silence in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Good afternoon, everyone. Before we get started with the consent agenda, I would like to recognize a very important group of folks who are here. Do you guys want to come up?

Hello.

Love the uniforms.

Uniforms are great.

The city would like to recognize the Miracle League team who will be traveling to Cincinnati to represent the city of Sioux City in a Miracle League competitive event. You'll be competing against Miracle League teams across the country who are all gathering in one place for a wonderful experience. We're so proud of these athletes. Just look at them in their new uniform. We're so excited for them to represent our city on this national stage, and we really want to wish them good luck, and let's give them a big round of applause.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem, City Council, and members of the community. On behalf of the Miracle League of Sioux City, thank you for taking the time to send us off as we prepare to represent Sioux City at the Miracle Series in Cincinnati. In just a few days, 17 of our athletes, along with their families, coaches, and volunteers, will travel to play alongside Miracle League teams from across the country. Throughout the weekend, they'll participate in skills, combines, opening ceremonies, baseball games, and unforgettable experiences that celebrate inclusion through America's pastime. As we prepared for this journey, we knew we wanted a team name that represented where we came from. That's why we proudly chose the Sioux City Packers. Long before we took the field, the original Sioux City Packers represented this community and the name pays tribute to our city's deep roots in the packing plants and stockyards that helped build Sioux City into what it is today. It's a reminder of the hardworking, resilient spirit that has always defined this community. And it's that spirit that each of our athletes embody every single day. This trip represents so much more than baseball. The Miracle League of Sioux City didn't become the number one miracle league in the nation on its own. It happened because this city believed in its inclusion from the very beginning. From the first conversations about building this park to the incredible facility and programs we have today. The city of Sioux City and its council, our parks and rec department, local businesses, volunteers, donors, and countless supporters have made this possible. When our athletes step onto that field wearing Sioux City across their jerseys, they'll be carrying much more than just a team name. They'll be carrying the pride of a community that believes everyone deserves the chance to belong, to compete, and to shine. So on behalf of every athlete, every family, and everyone at the Miracle League, thank you. Thank you for believing in our mission, for investing in inclusion, and for giving us a city where we're incredibly proud to represent. This weekend, we hope the Miracle League Packers remind this country exactly what Sioux City stands for, hard work, heart, and a place where everyone belongs. Before we head to Cincinnati, we'd love to recognize the reason we're all here. Please join me in, again, a huge round of applause to the incredible athletes here today who will be representing not only the Miracle League of Sioux City, but our entire community on the national stage. We couldn't be prouder of each and every one of them. Thank you.

Do you have a website for donations? Sorry, I should have asked you before you left. Is there a website or do you have some information on how we can make a donation?

Absolutely. You can go to MiracleLeagueSiouxCity.com. We're also on Venmo. You'll find all of that on our Facebook and socials as well.

Great. Thank you. It's not about best of luck, but about the experience. So it's wonderful to represent the community.

Thank you so much.

All right. Interview with Planning and Zoning. Hi, Michelle, you want to come on up?

Hello, Michelle Bostonellos, and I'm asking for a third term on the Planning and Zoning Commission. I know that's a special exception to the rule, so I've already served two five-year terms. I've also served as chair for a while, currently the vice chair. I have a background in planning. That's my education. part of American Planning Association for Iowa, professional developers of Iowa, so this is kind of my realm, and I don't get to do it every day, my everyday job, so it's kind of nice to come here and be able to kind of flex those planning muscles for the city to be able to use what I learned.

Right in your wheelhouse.

Right?

Yes.

Yeah. So I can answer any questions that you might have, but otherwise I would hope that you would consider putting me on for a third term. Wonderful. Absolutely.

I had a chance to visit with Michelle over the weekend and thanked her for her continuing interest and really the expertise that you provide to the commission. I know they respect and appreciate what you do, and certainly as a city council we do as well.

All right. Thank you.

Thanks, Michelle.

All right.

Good luck.

We'll move to the consent agenda item three through 14 K constitute a consent agenda. I was passed unanimously unless a separate roll call vote is requested by a council member. Anyone wishing to speak on an agenda item may come to the podium at the time the item is being discussed. Anybody wishing to speak on an item not on the agenda may do so at the end of the regular council meeting during citizen concerns. fill out a citizen concern card found outside the chambers, and give it to the city manager. All speakers shall state their name for the record, you no longer have to state your address, and then provide their statement. Motion and second to move the consent agenda, please.

Move it. Second.

All right, item three, reading of June 22nd and 23rd council minutes. Resolution, do I have to say four? Keep going.

Item four, yeah.

I want to make sure I'm in order. Item four, resolution amending the maximum limits of funds that can be held at city designated bank depositories.

Teresa, quick question on this. So when you give us the increases, are those based upon the asset value of each bank or is it based upon what you anticipate? Because clearly that's well beyond what our deposit capacity is. So are those based upon asset limits or asset values of the banks?

Teresa Fitch is the city manager. Actually, we're increasing for the possibility in the case that those banks have better interest rates. We have the ability to move funds there. So we have a situation right now where we have a couple of banks that have higher interest rates that we wouldn't be able to invest in because we don't have high enough limits there. The decreases that we are seeing here are because we had a banking change. So Wells Fargo, we're moving down because we have already moved up. U.S. Bank, we need to change that authority.

Or Heritage.

Right. And one went to a non-approved entity.

What's that? One changed to a non-approved entity. Correct. Yep. Credit union. Mm-hmm.

So those are really the updates. We look at them every single year and make adjustments that we see necessary. You'll probably continue to see us bring it year after year until we completely transition to U.S. Bank from Wells Fargo. So it's been a multi-year process.

Well, this gives you more capacity for deposit interest rates. Correct.

Benefit the city. Good.

Thank you.

Item five, resolution amending the general fund balance policy to update the maximum unreserved general fund balance. Number six, resolution authorizing an airport improvement grant application.

I just had a real quick question on that one just for Teresa. On number five? Yeah, number five. And that's based on the state law that changed, right?

Yep, Teresa Fitch, Assistant City Manager. We are just mirroring what the state or the new legislation is.

Is that like for every city?

Yes, every city and we're only updating right now the general fund policy. It was between 12 and 20 percent and we've increased it to 35 just to be consistent with the state legislation.

So can you give a practical explanation of what the increase to 35 percent means?

Well, it would allow us the ability to have a larger fund balance in the case, because right now we have limitations on property taxes. So it, in a sense, allows you to keep funding there for the ability to have a larger project or a larger expense item later. So that's kind of what the state indicated, is that you could set aside funds for the ability to have an additional or larger pot of funds for later.

Effectively returns. Correct. Which is ironic, because to increase the amount

from 20 to 35% seems... Well, we are currently at 20%, but there are currently school districts and cities and counties that are well above the 35%. So we ourselves were conservative. I've always said the city is very conservative, but that doesn't mean across the state they have been. And part of this comes... Because there are some municipalities that have very large, large reserves, they're trying to control them. This will actually bring their reserve balances down. It allows us to bring ours up, but we, I mean, it gives us some capacity to keep that in a reserve, but we have not in the past. Typically what we do is we reprogram any excess to fund for the next year to keep our property taxes down.

Thanks.

What is the state's maximum percent? 35. In the past, there was not. So this is going to force those that had 60, 70% reserves, force them to use like we do. We already reprogram ours. It will force them to do so.

Because what that means is they continue to tax their property owner when they already have tons of money in reserve. So you're paying taxes for money to sit there until they find a gigantic project that they're trying to save this money up for. The city has never done that. Sioux City hasn't.

So we use fund balances every year and we note that in our budget book.

Each year we use fund balances to keep the levy down. Some city could have $100 million sitting in their reserve because they're planning some big project someday. It hasn't been programmed or necessarily a project hasn't been chosen. So again, their residents are paying taxes, taxes, taxes when they have all this money in the kitty. like money in the checking account that they don't need yet. So the state government doesn't think that's right, nor do we, which is why we haven't done it. So what we tax for, we spend. And if we don't spend, we have a little leftover, we pull it into next year so we don't have to tax again for it. So I just want everybody to know that just in lay terms, that's what it means.

How does this impact funds that communities have been holding from COVID? It will force them to use those as well.

It will force them to use it down to that. So you should see them buying down the levy. So the levy in those communities should start to decrease. Like we buy down each year, they may have a significant buy down forcing them to get down to the 35%. Great.

Thanks, Teresa. Yep.

Item six, resolution authorizing an airport improvement grant application to the FAA to fund The purchase and installation of 20 vehicle movement area transponders at the airport. What in the world does that mean?

So this is a tracking mechanism. The FAA region actually contacted us so they have a safety focus that they're reaching out to airports. It allows the towers to electronically rather than just visually monitor the vehicles out of the airport. So you recently had at an airport a fire truck collide with an aircraft. So all those things happen and they respond to those and this is one of those reactions.

Sounds like a great safety measure. Number seven, resolution adopting plans and specs for the Pearl Street and railroad surface improvement project. Number eight, resolution suspending the requirements of the Iowa code for the hiring of employees for the wastewater treatment plant for a period of one year. Can I? Go ahead.

I just was just curious about why.

We got to find out if Vicki or Tom or someone's here. Vicki?

Janelle's here.

And Janelle? Somebody. It looks like Vicki's coming up. Go ahead.

I guess my first question was just why are we suspending those requirements?

Vicki Baker, Assistant Public Works Director. This would be our second extension, so this would be our third year that we did it. We do it because wastewater employees are very hard to find, and so it's hard to get qualified applicants, and it really allows us then to repost the job without having to wait the whole year, and it's really saved us some time on some previous postings.

So this is a civil service that we... that came last year. And they still need to be qualified under the civil service rules.

Right.

This advances the period of time.

Right. And staff that's involved in the hiring had to take extra training. And then we also have a member of HR on the interview panel when we interview.

Janelle Bertrand, Human Resources Director. Yes, this is part, that job is a civil service job. They're asking for a waiver from you guys. They've done it before. We have other departments that also have this waiver.

That was my question.

Yep, they still have to meet the minimum qualifications of the position, and they also have to take and pass all civil service-related examinations.

Off the top of your head, Janelle, what other departments are you waiving the rule?

Police will you ask us police has the waiver I believe utilities water treatment plan underground utilities had the waiver That might be it right okay, thank you traditionally We've done these in year increments as well just so we can bring it back to council and discuss it annually Economic development and community development have also had a waiver so Thanks

Number nine, resolution awarding a purchase order to Ed Stevers Ford for one 2027 Ford E350 cutaway van.

Is Spiro here or is somebody? Spiro, the question I've got is invariably when you're bringing the purchase orders forward to us, we're getting relatively few proposals. Is that because the specs on the proposal are so... delineated that we're not maybe thinking to broaden the scope of who might be able to support a bid?

Spiro, who is purchasing manager. I know we work a lot with CMG, and he typically writes the specs. He tries to write the specs that meet the state bid. Typically, the state will send bids out. We try to meet them to there. I mean, I know Obviously, I think Ed Stivers seems like they have the state bid on a lot of them. And it does give the vendors, it's all public information. So I know a lot of times we'll have a couple of local vendors that will bid. So we typically, most item vehicles, we will get three to four. This one was pretty unique in that it sounds like it's just a very difficult piece of equipment to obtain.

Well, and to your point, maybe you can address this. I do understand that there are relatively few vendors in the state that qualify for state bidding. And what I'd like to see, if there aren't unique elements that are required for the purchase orders, that we broaden that scope to allow, especially for more local vendors, to participate. Because many local vendors will share that when they get the specs, they simply either can't get the product or they're not qualified to get the product from the supplier, from the manufacturer. And I just wonder, can we broaden the scope of the specs so that they could be included?

Jeff Dedecker, fleet manager. So in this case, there's not a lot of local vendors. It takes a rather large vendor usually that will deal with these cutaway type vans. Then they have to work with the bodybuilder to get the box put on. We did reach out to one local one, and he couldn't find anybody local or any closer than Kansas City to put one on, outside of Des Moines, obviously. So I did not expect to receive more than maybe two or three I'm kind of surprised at the one on this one, but that's just kind of how it fell. And I don't know if their pricing, like in this case, if that really affects how the chassis itself, the availability, a lot of them I don't think really deal with the cutaways. They're just kind of a different.

The explanation seemed like it was quite specialized, so maybe this is a one. We did meet with a local vendor. It's probably been about six months to a year ago about another vehicle. And we were told is that when they go to order, they're ordering off their with the government listing. It's not like you're going there and buying your something off the lot. They each get a certain slot when they order. So the bigger cities, they get more. The Des Moines vendors get more now. And we do get some local ones that will come in there every so often and beat those state.

Spiro, I'm glad you mentioned that in the past you've met with some of the vendors, especially with regard to the car dealers, because as I was visiting with some of them, I had suggested that maybe we needed to have an evening where we could sit down and explain to them what our parameters are. So that might be something that you want to consider maybe in the next three, four months? Sure. That'd be great. Thank you. All right.

Item 10, 10A, resolution approving the second amendment to the agreement with Piper Sandler to extend the financial advisory services agreement for one year to include specific projects in the scope of services. B, resolution approving an agreement with Eagle View for aerial photography services.

I just have a question on that one, Julie. Okay. Gordon, I pretty much just understand everything. I'm just curious why the rescinding of it.

Gordon Ferris, City Engineer. We had the incorrect agreement set up before where we were going to have the county pay us.

City Assessor.

What's that? The city assessor. That's right, the city assessor. And they were going to pay us, but then they wanted their own agreement, so we had to rescind that, redo it. The costs stay the same for the city and everything.

Okay, thanks. And the document, I know that when we approved it prior, I asked Nicole, you've had a chance to review the legal agreement, same agreement, you're still comfortable with the document?

Same agreement, just that it's split out from the assessor's office now.

Thank you.

C, resolution approving contract with RP Constructors for South Bridge Drive Emergency Force Main Repair Project. D, resolution awarding service provider agreement with Blankenship Paint and Glass for the 26, 27, 28 Fire Hydrant Repainting Project. E, resolution approving a post-construction stormwater management plan maintenance agreement and easement with Morningside University and the Sioux City Community School District. for water quality practices and accepting a permanent easement located on Morningside University campus.

So on both E and F, is the reason that we're retaining an easement in the event that we need to maintain, they don't maintain the property and we need to go onto the property, is that why we have the easement?

Aramontang Environmental Services, it basically just says if they don't uphold their agreement to clean or maintain their detention, retention, or any kind of water quality, the city can access that site and make sure it doesn't affect our infrastructure.

Thanks. And we're not paying for that easement on either E or F?

Correct. Morningside's going to do all the maintenance on these.

Typically, if we obtain an easement, we'll pay for the value of a temporary or permanent easement. We're not paying for that easement on either of these. Thanks.

F, resolution approving a post-construction stormwater... Oops, just did that one. Oh, no, it's the same one. Resolution approving a post-water construction stormwater management plan, maintenance agreement and easement with Family Worship Center for a detention base and accepting the permanent easement property at 1315 Indian Hills Drive. Resolution G, resolution approving the submission of merchant services application with X4 pay. for payment processing services for a five-year term with the option of a one-year extension for parks and rec facilities.

If any of these parks and rec facilities come offline for any reason, can the agreement be amended?

Justin Atlas, Recreation Superintendent. The agreement, you're asking if the facilities are put down?

If for some reason we make changes to a facility, would this agreement be amended?

The agreement can be amended, yeah.

H, resolution approving a settlement agreement and release regarding a claim by Stephanie Sotelo. I, resolution approving service provider agreement, JCI Industries for pump removal, repair, and installation project.

On I and J, we've had issues before where we've had work done on pumps. They come and get the pump. They take the pump. And invariably, when it gets to their location, we get increases in the purchase order. Because of the location of this particular group out of Lee's Summit, could it be reasonable to expect that they could come, pull the pump, evaluate the pump, and tell us what we're really looking at now as opposed to having to go to Lee's Summit and then being held?

They do come and pull it, but they have to take it back to their shop to tear it apart.

So they can't do that here? Okay. THANKS.

I APOLOGIZE. COULD YOU GIVE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD ONE MORE TIME?

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

J, RESOLUTION APPROVING A SERVICE PROVIDER AGREEMENT TO JCI INDUSTRIES FOR A PUMP REMOVAL REPAIR AND INSTALLATION PROJECT. 11, ACTIONS AUTHORIZING PAYMENTS. A, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE OF RETAINAGE IN 30 DAYS TO C.W. SUITER AND SON FOR THE MARTIN LUTHER KING TRANSPORTATION CENTER RETAIL SPACE HVAC REPLACEMENT PROJECT. B, RESOLUTION APPROVING FUND TRANSFERS FOR APRIL. C, MOTION APPROVING THE LIST OF ALL CLAIMS, TOTAL EXPENSES AND RECEIPTS FOR APRIL. 12, APPLICATIONS FOR CIGARETTE, TOBACCO, NICOTINE AND VAPOR PRODUCTS, SEE THE LIST. 13, APPLICATIONS FOR ALCOHOL LICENSES, SEE THE LIST. 14 board commissions and committee minutes review the list and come forward if you have any questions Appointments to boards and commissions and committees you'll need to vote on the committee. Yep. Sorry Sorry, sorry The vote is for Mayor Scott absent. Appointments to boards, commissions, and committees. 15, motion appointing Bruce Miller to the Events, Facilities, and Tourism Advisory Board to complete a balance of a three-year term expiring June 30th, 2027, and reappointing Bruce to the Events, Facilities, and Tourism Advisory Board for his own three-year term.

I'll move item 15. Second.

The vote is four with the mayor being absent. 16, motion reappointing Jody Reitmeyer to the Events, Facilities, and Tourism Advisory Board.

I'll move item 16. Second.

The vote is for the mayor being absent. 17 motion reappointing Matthew Scott to the Historic Preservation Committee.

Almost sorry. Almost 17. Bob would have abstained on this one anyway, so.

Yeah. Results are four, mayor being absent, four ayes. 18, a motion reappointing Terry McGaffin to the Human Rights Commission.

I move. Second.

It's 4-1 with the mayor being absent. Gotcha. 19, motion reappointing Michael, sorry, to Karczyk to the Transit Advisory Board for a three-year term upon due consideration the circumstances of council. The City Council waives the policy that no person shall get more than two consecutive terms.

I'll move it.

19 second.

What is four? I, the mayor Scott absent. 20, motion appointing three of the following four applicants to the Airport Board of Trustees for a three-year term, re-applicant David Kaplan, new applicants Tyler Crews, Pat McElroy, and Barbara Sloniker.

So I'll move this item and as it seconded like to have some discussion. I talked to Nicole and rather than moving this as slates, can we? I would like I would prefer to move each individual based upon who we want to select, but that each in that we have each individual moved and voted on. And that's Nicole appropriate.

Yes, that's OK.

So we need a second ever 2021 and 22. It is for, we don't need it for 22. We have to do each one separate. But we need it for 20 and 21. Yeah, and 22 would be fine too.

So was that motion in second then for the first candidate on the list for Ms. Kalin?

The motion was for appointing three of the four. They've got to be nominated, don't they? We now need a motion to nominate each individual. Correct. So I will start by nominating David Kaplan.

Do we have a second?

We need a second. I'll second.

Starting, that was for David Kaplan.

Yes. So is your plan to run through all four? Yes. Yes. Yes. On all categories?

Okay.

Okay. So on Mr. Kaplan? Yep. Berenstein?

Aye.

Bertrand?

Yeah, aye.

Rayford?

Aye.

Shaner?

Aye. I'll move Tyler Cruz. Second.

By the second.

Still need a second.

You have to move in second each individual and then it can be voted up and then, but it will.

But technically, if there's not a second, the motion failed.

For lack of a second, yes.

OK, motion fails. OK.

I'll move Barbara Sloniker second.

Berenstein? Aye. Bertrand? Aye. Rayford?

Aye.

Shaner?

Aye. Okay, so that's one. Pat McElroy.

I'll nominate Pat McElroy.

Second.

Bertrand? Aye. Rayford?

Aye.

Shaner? Aye. Berenstein?

I will definitely support Pat. He's a wonderful candidate. The reason I had moved Tyler Cruz was because Tyler had applied last year and was not approved. This is Pat's first year. I think Pat will do a great job. Candidly, I would have preferred that we support Tyler in this round, but I will support Pat with a yes.

All right, 21. Motion approving to the following for applicants for the Library Board of Trustees for a three-year term.

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm going to move 21 so that we can then do what we did for 20. Second.

Are we caught up to where we need to be? Are we where we need to be?

Yep.

OK. So we're approved to read each one separately?

Yes. You technically don't need to move it. You could just move each candidate separately. So we'll just go ahead. And if you'd like to start with.

I'll move the nomination of Linda Santee. Second.

Bertrand?

Aye.

Rayford? Aye. Shaner? Aye. Berenstein? Aye.

I'll move Terrance Feenstrom.

Second.

Rayford?

Aye.

Shaner?

Aye.

Berenstein? No. Bertrand? Aye.

And we can still submit the nomination of the other candidates. And if they're equal votes, then we would have to revote, correct? That's the intent, is to be able to vote on each candidate.

Typically, at this time, you've already filled both spots. So there's not another position to fill. So we wouldn't normally do that. I would defer to the city attorney.

Could they vote and then reconsider?

I was just going to say you have the reconsideration.

Yeah, and my intent would be to allow all to be voted on. And if there's another candidate that gets three votes, then we would re-vote on those candidates. What I'd like to move is that we also nominate Jane Vereen.

I guess, would you like to have discussion prior to, I mean, you could have discussion to see if it's going to potentially

I thought we would be able to vote on each candidate because it would be possible that multiple candidates could get four votes or three votes or two and two, but that the vote would be different amongst possibly the four of us. So that if there was a candidate, if there were two candidates that had equal number of votes, that those candidates would be re-voted.

But I thought of this. I think you could have discussion to see where people are going to fall publicly on the floor. The problem is once you've voted, then technically the position is filled. You could move to reconsider both of the votes that you just had and then open up the discussion on the floor to see which direction you would like to go.

So I can't motion? No.

Yeah, I can't because I'm not on the prevailing side you can move to reconsider I was I was I was in the one but you know, but you would need four votes to reconsider it would take four Move on Wait, I mean you could still reconsider if you choose to do that But it would have to be moved by the other three of you would have to yes. I'm good with what we have I

Yeah, they're all saying that because we've already got two candidates that have been approved, we're not, by rule, we cannot nominate or vote on the other candidates.

So I'd have to like, for you to get what you want to do, I want to respect what you want to do. So you'd have to either reconsider on Linda or reconsider on Peter, right?

The procedural issue you would have is if you moved on to the next candidate and it was all that candidate was also approved. If you didn't have four votes to reconsider the previous candidate, you're stuck right in the water.

There's another vote on the vote.

Yes, yeah.

You know, I respect that there are three votes. Yeah, well, I yeah, go ahead.

Okay. These are always complicated for some reason.

My understanding was that each candidate would be able to receive a vote regardless of whether a vote had approved. That was simply a number. That didn't necessarily mean they won because we might find that if we nominate a third candidate or a fourth candidate, he or she gets four votes.

Well, and that's why, I guess in the future, perhaps a way to make sure that we're doing what everyone had envisioned, and I apologize for that if I played a part in misunderstanding related to that.

Well, Nicole and I had a chance to visit prior. Sure.

You could have discussion. If you moved and seconded and opened it up, you could have free discussion so council members knew where each other sat related to that.

Before the vote.

Before the vote, right. Okay.

Good to know.

The public needs to understand we don't get to talk about this.

That's correct.

That's the hard part is the public's looking up going, what's going on? But the hard part is we don't get to discuss these candidates together at all. So it's, you know, this is the first time really that nobody knows where everybody else is sitting.

All right.

Point taken.

Okay. 22, motion approving the following two applicants to Nyamanashi City Sister City Committee. to complete the balance of a three-year term and reappointing the applicant to Yamanashi City Sister City Committee for the three-year term, applicants Linda Rupp and Matthew Johnson. Does anybody want to nominate either one of them?

I move we nominate Liz Rupp.

Oh, Liz. I think I said Linda. I'm sorry. Second?

I'll second that.

Rayford?

Aye.

Can I? Oh, I'm so sorry. Go ahead. Is there additional discussion that you would like to have at this time prior? Because it's only one of the two.

Are they both in the room? I don't think so. No. Okay.

Okay.

Rayford? Aye. Shaner?

Aye.

Berenstein?

Aye.

Bertrand?

Aye. Passes unanimously. Recommendations of Planning and Zoning 23, motion acknowledging June 23rd Board of Adjustment Actions. Can I get a motion?

So moved.

Second.

We got. Andrew Leister, Planning and Zoning Chair, just if you guys have any questions. For we voted, the Board of Adjustments passed. We had one item and it passed 7-0.

Motion passes 4-0 with the Mayor being absent. 24, resolution accepting and approving the final plot of Crummins Habitat and Re-plot of Block 4, Crummins Second Addition to the City of Sioux City, Woodbury County, Iowa. Petitioner, Sioux Land Habitat for Humanity, P&Z recommends approval. Can I get a motion?

So moved. Second.

Anything exciting?

We just had some some residents that were one of the houses was going to get demolished some sentimental value there to that house. So there was some discussion that way, but it passed on our board 7-0.

Sentimental value by an owner or previous owner or a neighbor?

Previous owner. Previous owner and neighbors too were they were had some.

Or did they have a suggestion like? What would the alternative be?

They were just disappointed to see the house torn down, but the people with Habitat talked about they would spend way more money bringing it up to date than they would to tear it down and build a new one.

But that's not one of the lots that they'll rebuild on?

It is one of the lots that they will rebuild on.

I thought there were two lots turning into six. One of the properties is coming down and then four new properties. So there's five new properties?

Yes, I believe so.

Wait can help me remember Which old city planning? So there are two houses two Lots Originally when they did that it was all one block as a parcel essentially and so this is splitting it up into six parcels and though they will tear down the one house on Chambers and the one on Myrtle will remain And then will there be five new five new properties?

That's great

Ms. Shaner, can you hit that button one more time for me? Thank you.

Motion passes 4-0 with the mayor being absent. 25, hearing and ordinance rezoning 1213 Granby Boulevard, petitioner Bishop Helan, Catholic Schools, PNC recommends approval.

I'll move item 25. SECOND. SO DURING THE REVIEW PROCESS AND THE PRESENTATIONS, JOHN PLANNER AND I WERE TRYING TO BE ABLE TO VISIT EARLIER TODAY AND WE WERE BOTH BUSY. WHAT I'M CURIOUS ABOUT IS WHAT THE RECLASSIFICATION, WHAT THE SALE OF THE ALLEY DOES.

I NEED TO OPEN THE HEARING ON THIS IF YOU DON'T MIND.

IT WAS ALREADY MOVED, RIGHT?

Moved and seconded. Ms. Fainter, you'll just want to make sure and say the hearing is now open. The hearing is now open.

Let's start that again.

So my question is, and I see John in the back, with the rezoning and the sale of the alley and the prior discussions that we've had, did discussion come up in P&Z regarding Helan's short-term and long-term plans with regard to this property and other growth and development in the area?

No, this was really about their campus finally being, I think there's one more house in the area that kind of is still within their campus and was kind of making their campus whole. Okay.

Hearing is now closed.

Shaner?

Aye.

I'm sorry. Nope, that's totally my fault. Electronic first and then I call it.

It would be three readings, which you could waive the rules today.

That's what I was going to say. We can't waive it, can we?

Yes, if there are four votes to waive.

So the first vote's got to go, then we can make a motion to waive. Second, make a second. I knew I was going to move somewhere.

Then the second would be a motion to waive the rules. It would take four votes, and then someone could move second and third together.

So where are we at?

Initial vote.

Okay. Thank you.

That's okay.

Now I can make a motion to waive. Waive out. Second. The vote, okay.

You guys.

It's all right.

All right. We just all know how important Bob is to you guys.

Yes, yes. You've got to do this more than twice a year. He's never gone. The vote is 4-0 with the mayor being absent. All right. Now. Now, yeah. Do we have someone who wants to waive the rules? Motion to waive the rules. Correct.

I'll second that. Thank you.

Shainer?

Aye.

Berenstein?

Aye.

Bertrand?

Aye.

Rayford?

Aye. I'll move second and third. Second.

Berenstein? Aye. Bertrand?

Aye.

Rayford? Aye. Shainer?

Aye. Just for the record, they can go tear down, right? That's where we're at? That clears them?

Just the alley.

On the alley part of it? We've rezoned. Just the alley.

Correct. And the rezoning is not effective until publication on, which should be on Saturday.

Should be on Saturday, yes.

Yeah. All right. Item 26, hearing and ordinance vacating a portion of the east-west alley in the Sioux City East Edition. Petitioner Bishop Heelan, Catholic Schools, P&Z recommends approval. Hearing is now open. I need a motion and second first. Oh, sorry.

So moved.

Second. Second.

Public hearing is now open.

Hearing is now closed. The vote is 4-0 with the Mayor being absent. Is there a motion and a second to waive the statutory rule?

Motion to waive the statutory rule, please. Second.

Berenstein.

Aye.

Bertrand.

Aye.

Rayford. Aye. Shaner. Aye. Motion for second and third reading.

Move second, third. Second.

Bertrand.

Aye.

Rayford.

Aye.

Shaner. Aye. Berenstein. Aye.

Hearings.

Real quick, I would be remiss if I didn't recommend Michelle Boston Ellis for another term.

Oh, that's great. I think we agree with you. I serve on MPO.

That's probably the straw that probably turned the tide.

Very good. That was it. That tipped the scales.

It was two to two until then.

hearings 27 hearing and resolution approving plans and specs for the long lines family recreation recreation center cold room infield project Motion and second please so move I'll second this public hearing is now open So can we have some dialogue and the frustration that I have?

with committing significant financial dollars to the Longline Center is that we don't know what our plans are for the Longline Center. And I'm fine if we want to approve plans and specs and get some bids, but is there any better sense that you or Mike, do you have any better sense of what we're doing with the Longline Center? And candidly, part of it, evolves into the discussion that we'll have with the Walgreens site and as it moves to the west with regard to any activities on either that east lot or as we continue to go south and go to the northwest corner of these properties. And I know that's throwing a lot at you, but it's a difficult CONVERSATION TO SUPPORT COMMITTING TO SIGNIFICANT DOLLARS UNTIL WE KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING.

EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A PARKS AND REC ASSET, THE DISCUSSION IS REALLY ABOUT THE TYSON EVENT CENTER. THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE MUCH OPERATION IN THERE ANYMORE AS PARKS AND REC SINCE THE EXPO HAS BEEN BUILT, BUT IT'S MORE OF A LONG-TERM DISCUSSION ABOUT THE TYSON AND HOW INTEGRAL THIS BUILDING IS IN THE OPERATION OF THAT AND THE UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE ALL FLOWS THROUGH THE LONGLAND CENTER.

It's not something that can be put off if we want to keep the Tyson operation? It's not. But if you want to have a bigger discussion over the budget cycle, that's... Yep, I think that's a good idea.

I was going to ask that, you know, how... I mean, when I look at the available funds, we don't have, right? So how are we paying for this?

This is probably budgeted because it was in our budget discussion, right?

Oh, it's a negative. Yeah, I think this was an add-on, right? This element of it.

Teresa Fitch, Finance Director. I'd have to look at it, but when I saw this come through, when they sent the RCA through, it indicates that they'll have additional funding in FY27. Well, it just was a timing situation. Now we're in 27 and funding was brought forward in the 27 budget.

So we're looking at 26's budget balance.

They had not gotten their funding yet because they had to submit that prior to July 1 when the actual project was funded with their current budget. We're in the positive here. Yep. So this was when it was I just want to clarify when it was submitted It was accurate information But now you know you have a 10-day lapse in between that when they have ended and when a council occurs So there was additional funding that was submitted. They they received on July 1 so on paper Right. Yes.

So then this will go out to bid tomorrow or this week My understanding is that we already have a contractor ready to go. I

The bid letting will start tomorrow.

Yes. All right.

Any more discussion? Seeing none, the hearing is closed. 28, hearing and resolution, approving the proposal to sell part of the vacated.

Don't you need to get all the votes for 27?

Oh, sorry. Okay. Vote results. One no, three yes, one absent. 28, resolution approving the proposal to sell part of the east-west alley adjacent to the 1800 Sioux Trail, 3511, 3515, 3527 Orleans Avenue, petitioner Morningside University.

Move 28.

I have a second. Second. Public hearing is now open. Any discussion?

So is this for them to incorporate this section of property into their parking lot? adjacent to the vacated? Yes. I think I just saw him already walk out. It is.

Alex, do you want to say anything? Just to confirm.

Annette Frye, VP of Finance for Morningside. Um, this piece, this parcel is, is, um, part of our driveway on our greenhouse. So it's just rounding off our, our property. Oh, okay.

Right. Anyone else to be heard? And the hearing's now closed. Measure passes 4-0. Mayor Scott being absent. 29, hearing and resolution approving the proposal to spell vacated North South Alley adjacent 2310 South Clinton Street. Petitioner Clarence Gordon.

I move 29. Second.

Public hearing is now open. Is there anyone who wants to be heard? Seeing none, the hearing is closed.

Should make it final for Mr. Gordon, right? He hopes so.

The item passes 4-0. Mayor Scott absent. Item 30, hearing and resolution approving the proposal to sell part of the vacated East West Alley adjacent to 3503 Orleans Avenue. Petitioner George and Randy Joe Sully. Motion.

So moved.

Second. Public hearing is now open. Is there anyone who wishes to speak? Seeing none, hearing is closed. Measure passes, board zero. Ordinances. Ordinance amending Chapter 13.0, sanitary sewer rates, the municipal code to increase rates for outside municipalities and outside improvement districts by 27.4%, effective July 1 of 2027.

So was this an issue that we misunderstood the six-month window of when the municipalities were permitted to get notice? Yes. Do we need to move the item?

Yes.

I'll move the item. Second. Now we can have discussion. Sorry.

Vicki Baker, Assistant Public Works Director. Yeah, we have to give them the whole fiscal year. But this is just changing the ordinance to match what you voted on.

But to also, wasn't the intended date of notice?

Right. We were supposed to give them, an old draft said we gave them six months notice, but it actually is the whole fiscal year. So it has to start July 1st of next year. So.

So my question is, what's the notification we need to raise it next year? This is going to be. This is it. No, this is already in. We're adapting this to 27. So what's the notification we need to get ahead?

We have to notify them before January 1st.

Of 27? So put that in your calendar.

Yes.

So we're going to, in December, we're going to give them notice, correct? For 28. So we're not going to let that. slide by like this because we weren't here yet so that's it's a fair it's not a mistake it's just a fair you'd have to window bring an ordinance change and allow her time for three that's got to be this in december so it'd have to be in november then so if you're going to if you have a deferral on one of the readings then you could i would allow six october you're thinking is that what you're thinking i'm just i mean let's just get ahead of it so then we don't miss that same window because we want to go again and the earliest we can go then is october for 28. so this will catch up We lose $200,000, which is fine, but we still get the seven something, and then we'll catch them again in October for another rate increase. And we can't amend this at this point, the dollar amount, because the notification's already been given. It's already in the ordinance.

Right. Yeah. So this is you guys voted?

Yeah.

And this is just us changing the ordinance to match what you guys voted on, because the sewer rates go in the ordinance. Right.

So this amount is fixed. Just asking, you got to ask.

Teresa, will this impact, will the delay in the rate structure increase impact any projects or any financial bonding?

No, because we didn't have it in the budget. It wasn't even in the budget.

Teresa Fetch, Finance Director. No, we didn't. Sorry, Assistant City Manager. No, we did not budget this, I mean, as revenue. So, no.

Thomas Mack of South Sioux skated for $204,000. That's what I'm mad about. Kenyon? Should we still give them notice, though, because in case they don't come off the system in February?

They gave us their notice. They gave their notice, effectively indicating they will be done.

Yeah, but what happens if they don't?

They start fresh with a new contract. I don't think you have to reconsider.

That's a fair question. I mean, I'm just saying that, I mean, if we're going to do this, I mean, why not just leave them on there, and then it doesn't matter if they're not on it anyway. Right, the connection point will still be there.

Why would we just leave them on there? Yes, the connection point would still be there. The 2080 agreement would still be, so we would still give them notice, yeah.

Need that's adequate. Okay. Thanks.

Thank you anyone else The hearing is closed 32 oops, I got a nevermind Measure passes 4-0 absent and that is just the first week. I

I'LL MOVE TO WAVE THE RULES. SECOND.

RAYFORD.

AYE.

CHAINER.

AYE.

BERNSTEIN.

AYE. BURTRAND.

AYE.

DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO WAVE THE SECOND AND THIRD?

I'LL MOVE SECOND AND THIRD. SECOND.

CHAINER. AYE.

BERNSTEIN. AYE. BURTRAND. AYE.

RAYFORD. AYE. 32, ordinance amending Title 10, traffic of the municipal code regarding the operation of off-road utility vehicles on streets.

Good afternoon, Mayor Pro Tem and Council.

We need a motion and a second. Sorry.

Motion. So moved. Second. Caleb Christopherson, Assistant City Attorney, Mayor Pro Tem and Council. At the direction of council, city staff and legal collaborated on verbiage for an ordinance permitting and regulating operation of off-road utility vehicles on the streets in the city pursuant to its authority granted under Iowa Code Chapter 321I, permitting cities to do so. Among the considerations were safety to persons and property along with uniformity with traffic laws for conventional motor vehicular traffic. THIS DRAFT ORDINANCE REPRESENTS THOSE EFFORTS. THE ORDINANCE WAS GIVEN TO COUNCIL AND CITY STAFF FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ABOUT 10 OR 12 DAYS AGO. WE HEARD A FEW QUESTIONS BACK, BUT FOR THE MOST PART, NOT A WHOLE LOT OF FEEDBACK.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU FOR GETTING THIS DONE AND MOVED AND MAKING THOSE CORRECTIONS AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS. I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. Absolutely.

So my first question is, is Dolly in the room, in the journal? Yeah. The picture she put in the paper was a picture of an ATV, and that is not what we're talking about here. We're talking about UTVs. So it's a little misleading there on that end of it. We're trying to put out there that, oh, we're going to legalize ATVs. We're not legalizing ATVs, right?

Council Member Bertrand, I would like to make an adjustment on the terminology. You're correct. The ATVs, we're not talking about that here. But being consistent with Iowa code, I'd like to adjust it to off-road utility vehicles because that's a terminology used throughout that code.

So the ones that are four-wheelers? that are the ones that are illegal are called what now specifically?

Sure, all-terrain vehicles are the ones, think straddling the saddle.

That way those are called off.

Oh, I'm sorry, no. All-terrain. Straddling, yeah, all-terrain vehicles are you straddle the saddle, so to speak.

Four-wheel, they're not legal. Correct. That's the biggest thing we want to make sure we're clear. We're not talking about four-wheelers.

Correct, sir.

Okay.

Is there a size capacity for ATVs and UTVs, or are there different sizes of UTVs that we're permitting?

Again, for ATVs, currently they're not permitted because although state law allows cities to regulate and permit those, we currently don't have an ordinance that permits those. The direction was to address the off-road utility vehicles only.

Yeah, I think our thought from the very beginning was that ATVs possessed a safety issue that we felt was in that we didn't want to address. It was the UTV issue that I think was primarily focused. Is there a size difference in UTVs or are they basically all the same size?

Well the off road utility vehicles, there are different designations I believe that's in the definitions provided in Iowa Code Chapter 321I. Our ordinance will not make a distinction.

So the question I have is does this line us up with Similar communities are we doing anything irregular? Does it put us kind of in line with what they're doing in like Council Bluffs with other communities the public wants to hear that's we're Not on our limb on our own in an attempt to give you the short answer to that.

Okay? Yes, we are being consistent and

So when the public says, why are we doing this? We're going to say because there was a change in Iowa code, correct? In the past.

I wouldn't agree with that. I think we've had the power to permit them and regulate them. We have that power.

More of a change in practice in other communities, right? Indeed.

That would be based upon state code when they basically, that's what I'm saying is that there was a waving at one point that said now the local or local communities have their ability to do what they want. Correct.

I would agree with that.

Yeah. I'm just trying to make sure that what goes out to the public is that we're not roguing something. We're not trying to, you know, chase another state or community. This is happening across the state of Iowa. These vehicles are becoming illegal in communities with almost the same restrictions, the speed restrictions, those type of things.

I would generally agree. I wouldn't know as far as a number of how many different Iowa communities have permitted these and regulated these. I know there are several and most of the communities are smaller than Sioux City that have done this.

I think we've done our due diligence and working and having a great conversation, listening session. And so I think, you know, instead of making a quick decision, we've made the right decision and doing it the right way at least.

So let's go back to what was a big focus. When you talk to a lot of the drivers, they say that they won't abuse these and that they're all for when the abuse happens, that they support. strict fines, they support harsh fines, and I floated the idea that we would then be able to confiscate, or basically to impound, like we impound a vehicle. So if a kid gets on it, tears across, you're going to get a stiff penalty, and then we have the opportunity. That was totally, we couldn't do that. Now when I read the ordinance, it says that we can do it. Is that correct? So is it fair to say I was right? Okay, I heard that the so after that the so now so walk us through the penalty phase of this. So if a vehicle is ripping through a neighborhood, what options do the does the police department have? And are we going to be strict on this enforcement? Are we going to have a no tolerance programs? I think that's what the public wants to hear is if we're going to do this, it's kind of a split through the community. We're going to do this. Is it a no tolerance policy or what are we going to do when the vehicle goes ripping through the neighborhood?

Could I ask a favor? I agree, I'd like to understand what the enforcement or the penalty process will look like, but I think it might be helpful for me to process what's being presented to better understand the rules, the limitations, and primarily how it's going to be enforced to get to Rick's question of what the penalties will look like. Because I think there are parental aspects I'm curious about. We limit use to 18-year-olds. How is the police department going to decipher between seeing what they think is a 16-year-old and an 18-year-old in the utility vehicle?

Rex Mueller, Police Department. How are the officers going to determine Well, it's like any traffic stop. As far as enforcement goes, officers still have discretion. It's going to be based on the nature of the violation, what they're doing. Officers are still going to have the authority and should still have the authority to decide how they're going to go about that. I don't know that I would... In any case, necessarily mandate because every circumstance now they can and will use the ordinance and it does align with state law, so that should make it very clear as to what they need to do to be within compliance.

Is it pretty standard across the other communities and the state that used to be limited to 18 year old and above? Or do other communities allow 16 year olds that have a driver's license permanent drivers, right? So 16 year olds can or cannot anywhere else. You have to be 18, yeah. You get a driver's license at 16.

And I've seen 18 as well. I don't recall if I've seen 16. I don't think I've seen 16. It doesn't register. Sorry.

That's good. Isn't that a permit, though, at 16? No. It's a permit at 14, right? And a license at 16. Right, the intermediate license program.

But I was do clearly, I mean, I combed through this thing. And I do remember it saying 18 years of age somewhere in there, right? A part of the operating requirements, right? Yes, Mr. Rayford.

So you've addressed the exception of the carve outs to make sure that those that should otherwise be permitted to use the vehicles can.

Oh yes, certain areas we have identified. Yeah, and of course you know in the first draft identified where we did make exceptions for emergency services for using these things. Real quick personal story. The fire department had actually come to my house for a grass fire that was in a lot next door, and they brought up their off-road utility vehicle with a 50-gallon tank in the back. It was pretty handy. We wanted to make sure that fire, EMS, if they have them, they're allowed to use them. I didn't quite... account for other city staff such as Parks and Recreation to Fall into that exception so that that will come be available for a second and third reading as well I know in visiting with the chief early in the discussions in the winter one of his concerns was noise is Does the muffler requirement under the code?

321 12 address the noise issue or how do we, it's usually addressed by decimals, correct Chief?

Well, decimals is a tough one because it's subjective, somewhat subjective on the part of the individual. I think that noise may potentially be a source of complaints. Part of the problem is not necessarily the muffler but that the engine itself the covering. It's a relatively exposed engine in comparison to an automobile that has firewalls, that has a lot of things that hush the sound of that larger motor. And so these are smaller, higher revving. There's probably going to be a little noise associated with them, but as the group that advocated for this commented on, there's pretty loud motorcycles out there. We have just taken the approach that, and one of the things when I reached out to other chiefs in other communities, similar size, and there's not a lot of them, surprisingly, but they did come back and they said that in legalizing them for in-town use, they haven't had a lot of complaints, which would lead me to believe, or at least they conveyed the fact that the users who seem to be doing it seem to be responsible users and it's not really creating any issues for the community. To me, that was kind of the turning point I think the listening session that Mr. Rafer did was very enlightening. Obviously, you had one side of the issue, but I think it was good to at least start the discussion. I've been clear that I think, will we get concerns? Will there be operators who don't operate these properly? Absolutely, but there's people who operate cars the wrong way. There's people that operate motorcycles recklessly, and we'll address that with enforcement.

Is the ordinance doesn't have a dollar expectation on having financial viability? Is that covered under state code?

Yes, Mr. Berenstein. That would be then a regular motor vehicle car insurance. So it would be consistent with the statute?

Yes. I noticed there was a fine or punishment for double double writing, how would, if you look on page, I just didn't know how that would apply. If you look on, it's our page 332, but there's a section 10.54.030 says double writing is prohibited and there's a fine of $135.

Okay. So, Mr. Bernstein, what we did in this ordinance is I kind of tried to do, kind of kill two birds with one stone. That falls under Section 2 of the ordinance, which actually sort of backs off, backpedals on the section, I'm sorry, the chapter that addresses personal transport vehicles where we had a regulation about all-terrain vehicles and motorcycles, off-road motorcycles. And why it appears that way in this ordinance is when you change a part of a section, you have to list the whole thing. Okay. So it was procedural why it's in there. Correct. Right.

And a point of clarification, the DOT requires that the individual driving must be 18 years old with a valid driver's license. So it is under the state code.

That would be why I didn't see 16. Right. Sorry.

I had to look it up.

Any more discussion?

Yes. So now I'm going to go back to the enforcement side, which I think is going to be the number one concern by the public, because I think the public is, like you said, split on this. So let's go back to the enforcement. So you've got someone ripping through the neighborhood. What is the officer? Number one, are we going to pursue?

Depends on whether or not it meets our threshold for our policy. So if it's just traffic violations, no, we are not going to pursue.

So if we've got somebody ripping through the neighborhood, we are not going to pursue? No.

depends on the circumstances if there's other things that meet our threshold and officers are allowed to pursue but Generally traffic violations. We do not pursue for yeah, it's a hard one.

Mr Bertrand because these vehicles are capable of Departing the roadway and then between houses and you know, that's that's a tough That's a you know, that's a tough pill to swallow You know if you're gonna try to pursue when somebody's doing something you mean like an escalated

I mean, higher speed pursuit. High-speed chase. Right. And going into areas that police vehicles will not be able to follow. Or it's just any pursuit.

Speed isn't a factor. The justification for a pursuit has to be specific. And we set a high threshold for that because pursuits, unless there's a lot at stake, present a danger to the motoring public, the pedestrian. And so we will follow our pursuit policy when deciding whether or not to do that. I think that somebody behaving badly, clearly, I think the officers are going to take strict enforcement action on this. And there's probably more than just the violation of the local ordinance that they're...

Okay, so we didn't pursue, but we got them pulled over. So what happens to the guy driving it?

Depends. If it's just, it depends. A number of circumstances. Like I said, what did they do? Did they damage property? Did they? Yeah, there's lots of options. Did they damage property? Did they? Did they commit another act in concert with operating this UTV unlawfully? There probably is going to be citations. There could be arrests potentially. You could tow the vehicle. It just depends.

See, I think we're going to have a window of opportunity here when we launch this like anything else. So either we're going to come at this and we pass this, but we pass it with very clear expectations that if you jack around, you're going to get the maximum fines, and they need to be out there, and your vehicle's going to get impounded. Because we found a way. So I guess what I want to hear from our police department is to say, hey, guys, this is our opportunity. Number one, I do think you're going to, well, we'll come back to the ATVs. That's what I want to hear. I want to hear that we are going to have strict enforcement, you're going to lose your buggy, you're going to lose your sticker, the way it says in the ordinance, and it's going to cost you a whole bunch of money because there's a lot of good people that want to drive these. And I think if we identify the bad apples up front, that's all I want to hear. Does that make sense?

And I appreciate that. But at the same time, not every circumstance. You're asking me to generalize about what we'll do in every situation. And if it's one person that maybe doesn't have it registered and they're driving it on a city street, that is different from somebody who's tearing across a campus or driving through a city park and destroying property. To say that we'll take one stance.

So are you going to give direction to your officers? that from the top down and says if and early on in this process we're educating the public that we're going to have a strict no tolerance policy or I mean I get if somebody wanders out of then they're driving 30 mile an hour down a zone that they didn't understand they shouldn't have been in it was identified and we're trying to learn these zones that we've carved out but I mean is the direction from the police department going to be you jack around on these things you're going to get fined is that to me that's where I think the council wants to be I mean maybe I don't want to speak for anybody else but that's what the public wants to hear

And we can definitely pass the word along to the officers that we do expect strict enforcement as we get the general public. But you're asking me to comment on absolutely.

No, I'm just asking you as the chief if you're going to give direction that's going to say, hey, man. We're happy to do that. I'm not trying to battle with you.

No, no, I understand. As we acclimate the public to it, we're happy to do so. But at the same time, every situation is different. So to paint this with a broad brush, that means that we're not giving discretion for officers to do at the time what they feel is right.

So the next question I have then is on the ATVs. Do you expect an uptick in ATV activity of... of guys on the four-wheelers, the guys that are... That sounds funny, but I personally see you're in an uptick. And where are our enforcement codes and our dollar... What's the fines? We talked about revisiting those fines on the ATV side of it, because I think this would be an appropriate time to... Again, some of you are going to pull somebody over who's going to say, I thought we just legalized these or whatever. So, okay, that's your warning. But then, I mean, where are we at with the fine structure on the ATV? Is that addressed at all in here? Yes. Or can it be? Yeah. It is.

The specific violation for ATV prohibited operation is a $200 fine.

Is that the maximum we can charge? Scheduled violation. That's the maximum we can there on that part of it. Okay. and we won't pursue that either, probably.

Well, I think you bring up a good point, and I appreciate the fact that you did. I really think that unless we do have a good public information campaign to go along with this, and I think our department, along with Ann Westra, I think we do a good job of trying to inform the public. So I think... If this ordinance were to pass, I think we need to be invested in a public information campaign that tells our citizens where these are acceptable, what they need to do to be lawful in the operation of that, and reiterate the fact that so-called ATVs, the tandem riders, the things that we've been talking about, are absolutely Not allowed that we're just talking about you TVs and I think I think our our folks and and have done a good job in dealing with the scooters and things like that and trying to educate the public I think we can do the very same thing this way we really try to Gain voluntary compliance by educating the public and I think that will cut into the issues, but I believe you're right I think that once people hear there's an ordinance. I think people will be testing the waters and we'll need to address that I

I think one thing that I appreciated in the listening session was those that attended and wanted this agreed that, you know, we could be aggressive and we wanted to make sure that we caught the bad actors, if such. And so, you know, to Rick's point, I do think, you know, now that, you know, and I think one of the issues that I believe I heard coming from the department, PD, was identifying and being able to identify you know at one point you can identify certain things but now we know that we can identify the two the different types of those vehicles and so you know we know that this is this can go away so you know if people don't do what they're supposed to do and do it then you know we come back a year later and and we pull it, so I just appreciate that we've pushed this thing to where we need it to be, and so we'll keep our eyes out.

Great opportunity for the community. Absolutely. It's a great opportunity. I'm excited for the responsible drivers. I think it's going to be cool.

They're expensive vehicles. I have confidence that the majority of these drivers are going to be responsible drivers.

Yeah, I think the concern is less about passing this ordinance because I think it's the right thing to do with responsible UTV owners and it's those that we're trying to guard against, right? Whether it's ATVs or UTVs. But I think the significant issue continues to be scooters and e-bikes that are operated on sidewalks without helmets. I think we've probably all had situations where somebody on an e-bike and Nicole and I were visiting earlier about e-bikes and they're on a sidewalk and they're traveling and they don't stop at an area where they're supposed to stop. I'm comfortable with what we're trying to do here, but Chief and your successor, Mike, I say to you, we have got to get our arms around those that are on scooters and e-bikes and other vehicles that are not operating them properly because, God forbid, one of these days somebody is going to get hurt or killed, and that's something that we're going to need to address. We have to enforce those rules. About a month ago, I was telling Nicole as I'm traveling down 39th Street on Hamilton. Guy's on his e-bike and had no regard for the fact that I was stopped there and that I not stopped 10 feet short of the stop sign, he would have hit me and been badly damaged. Same time, I saw five kids on scooters, no helmets, traveling across Hamilton Boulevard and they, you know, they're traveling, if one of those children were to fall with or without a helmet, it could be catastrophic. And I just, we need to make sure that whatever we can, certain things we can't do, but whatever we can do, whether it's enforcement, ordinance, or otherwise, we need to make sure we're staying on top of that. Sir?

Scott Bishop, resident of Sioux City. I've actually got a couple of things. One of the questions I have, and I was one of the first ones on the 26th of January that We brought this up. What are the DOT tire situation in the ordinance? And the reason I bring that up is because from what I'm understanding is you're wanting us to put a DOT tire onto a UTV. The issue with that is the UTV weighs 14 to 1,600 pounds, not 4,000 to 6,000 pounds. So you got closer voids in those tires.

Did you say voids?

Voids in the tires, the grooves. So the next thing that's going to happen, because now you got 14 to 1600 pounds instead of four to 6,000 pounds to push that tire down, you're going to get a lot of rocks. So I recommend... And I know, I think this originated with golf carts in all seriousness. This, as far as DOT tires, most of your UTV tires are not going to hold rocks. They're not going to tear the roads up. So I'm questioning. I agree wholeheartedly. What's known as a crossbar or a tractor tread 100% does not need to be on any road. This part of the country, they don't run them even on UTVs. You get over Plattsmouth, Nebraska, where they're doing a lot of river riding, that is an issue, but that's not an issue here.

What do other communities do? Do they use the standard issue tires that are sold on it? What do other communities do? I don't know.

Yes, yes. Most of the, they come with a tire.

But I mean, other communities, what do the other communities do? Do they just accept those or do they do, where do we get the, can I ask, where do we get the DOT change out on the tires?

Sure, Mr. Bertrand, yeah, the DOT tires are, The DOT tire is designed to be on streets, the prepared surfaces, concrete and asphalt. They have far less dramatic treads and there's literally more rubber than meets the road. Also they have the DOT stamp on them that they've been Basically, it's a design that's certified by the federal DOT and meets highway traffic safety standards.

Do other communities do it? Did we steal this from another community or something? Or is this something that Sioux City thinks that we need to do it?

That I and I don't remember the beauty of this a hearings we can bring this up next time we get an answer for that question And this is a suggestion for those considerations, but you can any right?

Yeah, the public gets to read this and give you this is the first step So let it be the first one Let's figure out why we went with that in the the factory wheels that come on on these devices are stamped NHS which is non-highway service and They're not supposed to be on prepared surfaces. I'm sure they stop great in the grass, on the trails, mud even, probably because of the deep treads. On prepared surfaces, there's less rubber meeting the road. If you slam on the brakes, then you've still got your 1,600 pounds or whatever.

So let's find out what other communities are doing. Let's find out. Find me some communities that you're using. And that's cool. Everybody's using the More rubber hits the road. That's cool. But I got this feeling that they probably don't. But it's a good question. Let's find that. It's number one on the next tier. Go ahead.

My name is Penny Tobin. They do make a tire that it looks just like a, well, it's got better tread than my Jeep tires. My Jeep tires are chunky. But they look just like a truck tire. And it's all surface.

Is that the original tire that's on the vehicle? No, it is not. It's an upgrade?

It's an upgrade, yeah. Yes, it is. And if I could address the education part, if this passes, I think we need to, I don't know where to get a copy of the ordinance, but I would like to go to all the dealerships.

Let them read it.

No, have it for the customers. So they know. We've been pushing no ATVs at our dealership and another dealership. They will not be on the streets. And people are bummed about it, but it is what it is. But they do make a tire that is road-friendly, pavement, because I don't want to drive knobbies on the street anyways. They're going to tear up really fast. Yeah, they wear out fast. And it's going to be a rough ride.

Thank you. Thank you. First, with the DOT rating.

Can you tell us your name, sir? Oh, I'm sorry.

Dennis Taylor. I'm a resident of Sioux City. I also own a business here and several properties with a lot of interest in a lot of properties. Anyhow, DOT rating is basically for highway driving, not city driving. So it's kind of a moot subject. My UTV weighs 3,500 pounds. So it weighs just about as much as a Volkswagen or something along that line. But then in turn, my UTV cost me $52,000. Not a lot of people buy UTVs. You have a very slim amount of people in Sioux City or our community, surrounding communities, that have them. So I've been watching this for over two, maybe three years from the first time that I entered into the UTV with Sioux City. And nothing's really transpired. To this point right now, these guys have come up with the different things that we can't do, where the other communities have done. There's no big commotion. There's not thousands of people that are going to raid us here like Sturgis, South Dakota next month, okay? So I mean, I see a lot of talk, but I really don't see a lot of action. The biggest problem I've got is I have properties in Morningside. I got interest in the north side, west side, downtown, South Sioux, North Sioux. I have no way to get there with the proposed isolation areas that the city is proposing or have been recommended. And I see no reason if you have bicycles traveling on the streets in Sioux City, on narrow streets, Morningside Avenue, for instance, on 141, where I live, It's barely big enough for two cars, and you have that as a bicycle route. Somebody really thought that one out. But with that in mind, I look at the fact that we that own these UTVs have a lot invested. I have full coverage insurance, regular road coverage, without exception. We have three of them, by the way. And in turn, it's protected that way. Bicycles aren't. Downtown Sioux City, you got bicycles going every direction you can see, skateboards. I don't understand all the hell blue worrying about all these different things when you have smaller communities that have been doing it for years now. And we are sitting here sucking our thumbs wondering how to pass this thing and to get something that works, worrying about fines. The same fines would be the same thing as if I was speeding. You know, what would be the difference? Now, what I see is the ATVs, if you allow them to hit the streets, I see them going over the curbs, going down through somebody's yard. Police aren't going to chase them because of the hazard type of thing. And I see a problem there. But UTVs, the people that own them have a lot invested. They're not going to be out here, yeah, dang, speeding up and down the road. I heard the chief say the engines have a loud noise to them. They do have a rap if you're doing 45, 50, 60 mile an hour. At regular speeds, 20 mile an hour is very much like, I'm not going to say a Honda, but pretty close. But that's all I really got to say. I love Sioux City, but at the same time, we're dragging our feet on this, and I'm getting old.

Thank you.

All right, thank you.

Well, let's address the question then. So first, I think this council has taken action, just so you know. You're going to get a vote. And then on the zones, let's address that part of it as a hearing. So we identified these zones. And again, you guys are going to be able to review this more and more when you take it home, throw it to the dealerships. This isn't going to pass tonight. This is a process. So walk us through, educate the public on why we did the zones. Do other people do the zones? What was the criteria that you came into it? I mean, please.

Now, it was council direction. I believe it was Mr. Rayford that gave direction to say, you know, hey, carve out downtown exclusion zone. We'll see what that looks like because there were considerations of vehicular congestion and pedestrian traffic that is heightened in the downtown area. So I drew up the zone and, you know, for the council's consideration.

If it stays or doesn't stay, you know, from a policing or from a safety, you don't, it's just something that was suggested to draw what it looked like and we'll make a decision from there.

Pretty much.

Sure. Rayford's suggestion.

And for clarification, like four lane divided highways and so forth, those are prohibited under the state code.

Under state code.

Those are already.

I think one of the issues they have is Floyd Boulevard is, it goes from 35, what, to 40, right through that main stretch when you get past Chestnut. It's also four lanes. So it's a double whammy on that.

That'd be off.

That one's off period. So even if you lower the speed limit, that one's off just because of the four lanes. So what's the leads thorough? What's the, what's, what do you suggest is going to be the, the, the main route through leads to get to leads? Can't go down 75.

I don't think we've considered the routes. We haven't looked at reversing the city. For us to consider that, we have not considered the routes.

That's why I'm putting it out there. We can do all these restrictions. We can make this thing impossible to use, too. I guess my question is... Maybe in the next hearing, show us what are the feeders for each part of town, if you guys don't mind, what the police thinks the feeders are. So how do you get to Northside? How do you get to Northside? What are the feeder routes that you think that these vehicles can take to get to where they've got to go? Please.

Scott Bishop. And that's where we are currently is people have them in town. but we don't have any way to get from point A to point B. So that's where, that's what we want. We would love more than anything, to be able to go from the east side to the west side.

Let's let them come up with some feeders, and then let's evaluate it. Absolutely. Your point is absolutely made. He made it. Let's find some feeders. Let's see if the city's even got accessibility that they're even functionable in the town. Absolutely. And I like that Ike put together a beginning of a discussion with downtown and stuff. And, you know, this is the hearing process. Any other questions on, before you guys take it home and review it, take it to the dealers, everything else, anything else you guys want to talk about, get out?

As a kind reminder, I think that we would be constrained, obviously, by state law because of the layout of certain streets. Right. Truth be told, we're not the smaller communities that apparently have it wide open. So we'll do our best according to the council's direction.

That's a fair ask, don't you think? You know, just like, you know, what gives people direction? Maybe if we have to have ATV. You know, designated, you know, we have trails for everything else. Seems like we're putting bike trails along roads these days. Maybe there's a TV trail or UTV trails. Sorry.

I'd like to speak one more time.

I was like, no.

And you're not taking the ordinance to your shops yet, right? Because it's not really.

It's not complete. Just to discuss. When it's done.

Got you. I just want to let you know that this is still a discussion.

I think what's important is for us to have this discussion, generate dialogue with all of you that understand the nuances better than we do, better than Caleb does, take that into account, likely approve, well, I can't speak for the others, but likely approve first reading, not move second and third, or waive the rules to move second and third, and get additional input.

You know, I understand we deal with Iowa here. But we have our neighbors in Nebraska. We have our neighbors in South Dakota. South Dakota has had this for a number of years. They don't allow UTVs on federal highways, interstates, or four lanes. That's the only place. Sioux Falls, you can utilize UTVs. You can't use ATVs. Major city. I hate to say it, but they've grown quite a bit. We haven't. but a little more inventive as far as thought, I think. So I just wanted to mention that.

I'm done. Thank you.

What do we need to do?

The intent of the four-lane, from my understanding, was Iowa has a lot of four-lane highways, Highway 20, Highway 30, so forth and so on. That was the intent at highway speeds. There's a large difference between that in the state law versus four lane here in Sioux City. Huge difference because you've already busted the speed limit down to 35 mile an hour or some places 25 mile an hour.

But I don't know what we can do about the state law. It's still prohibited.

I was going to say, yeah, we can't override that anyway.

But my understanding was that was the intent at highway speeds. Right. Do you see what I'm saying? I mean, there's a huge difference at... if you're outside of town where the speed limit's 65, 70 mile an hour versus in town?

Well, it would have to say a four lane that's only 30 miles an hour. The state law would have to say that. We don't get to do that. So if there is, if that's in there somewhere and we don't know it, then we could do that, but I don't think it is. So we'll follow up.

Okay. What are we voting on?

It's the first reading.

The first reading. And just for clarification, Caleb had indicated we need to expand the city personnel definition. So we'll bring that back. We'll be adding a table of contents. Just some clarification issues with it. Nothing substantive as far as changes from us being proposed. We'll provide an alternate. then any additional direction that the council gives so educate nicole educate us so from an amendment standpoint let's say we went in there wanted to amend any portions of this along the way would that be done before the next hearing or done during the next hearing what i would suggest is if you want to go ahead and pass first reading tonight if there is direction for us to come back with any alternatives or modifications we can provide an alternate draft ordinance for consideration um and the second reading and that wouldn't restart the clock No, I generally do not. When you get to a third reading, we don't advise making drastic changes on the floor at a third reading. But at a second reading, there should be plenty of opportunity to discuss the alternate proposed language.

This should be next week or does it need two weeks?

We would request for staffing issues to be able to fully discuss this. We have a few conflicts with attorneys to be present. We would ask that it would come back in two weeks for counsel's consideration.

Does the public have access to this? Yes. Okay. So you guys have access. Get us feedback in writing. Pick it apart a little bit. Give us feedback in two weeks.

Yeah, and I think the feedback needs to go to Caleb. I mean, he needs to understand where the pockets are. in the draft ordinance, whether it's with regard to tires or speed limits or locations, share with Caleb. He admittedly said, look, I'm drafting this based upon input that I'm getting from other communities and the restrictions based upon state law. I think the practical impacts are going to be relevant. I would encourage you to visit with Caleb, give him some direction so that he can share that with us.

And if I could just request, if there are council concerns or people are reaching out to the council, if it could perhaps be channeled that direction so we have clear direction.

That's what I was saying. CCS to the council and everything.

Yes. That would be, I think, easier for us to manage if it's something directed by the council for us to look at.

Good. We're moving.

All right. That was a great discussion, everybody. Very good. All right. Where are we at here? We're on ordinance traffic municipal. Do we need to vote on anything for that? Yeah. Motion for first reading. Just one moment. Okay. We just have to vote. First reading only. And then we'll come back on the 20th with it. Motion passes 4-0 with the mayor being absent. All right. Presentations, blight removal funds.