City Council - Regular Meeting

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. Thank you. Are you pleased to roll call? Mayor Clark?

Here.

Councilmember Anderson?

Here.

Councilmember Grove? Here. Councilmember Lyon? Here. Councilmembers Crone and Pierce are absent.

Agenda item D is open forum. Open forum is the time for anyone here tonight to address the council on any subject over which the council has the authority to act or on any item on the agenda other than a public hearing. Does anyone here tonight, either in the council chambers or on Zoom, we should address the council at this time. If so, please approach the podium or raise your hand. Or if participating via Zoom, please click on the raise hand icon located in the reactions. You can approach the podium. As a reminder, before you speak, please state your name and address for the record.

Hello, hello. My name is Jonathan Auberg. My address is 1270 Tunnel Street, Des Moines, Iowa. And the subject of discussion tonight, I would probably call procurement around municipal governments in Iowa if I was to categorize this. Good evening. I chose Waukee deliberately. Many Des Moines area cities use, consider, or discuss automated license plate reader technology. After moving to Des Moines, I built a tool to search nearby Iowa council records for ALPR and surveillance references. On its first run, the tool flagged a reference in Waukee's meeting records to a public discussion of ALPRs. For me, that was the signal.

There's something improbable about that.

I asked a non-deterministic language model to help write a Python program, and one of its first meaningful results was that someone in Waukee had already raised a similar question before this council. Maybe that is fate, maybe that's something else. However you explain this, It told me that this was the meeting I should attend. I did not come here because I had decided Waukee had done something wrong. I'm visiting because the public record showed this question was already alive here, and it deserves a public answer. What I am studying is not just flock camera technology. I am following the municipal process that brings a program like this into being. Before the 2023 approval, the police chief discussed a draft LPR policy and proposed a 60-day pilot. A week later, the council approved the Flock Agreement through its consent agenda, 11 cameras, a $34,650 first-year and installation cost, and $220,000 described as a donation earmarked for the initiative. Later records refer to permits for those installations and recurring FOC payments. The public portal refers to a Waukee police policy. I am tracing how those pieces fit together. Authorization, funding, installation, policy, renewals, and ongoing oversight. I am not claiming tonight that any one of those steps was improper. I am saying that a resident should be able to follow the whole chain without reconstructing it from scattered agendas, contracts, permits, check registers, and record requests. A public vote is only the beginning of public oversight. I asked the council to maintain a plain language public overview of the program's authorization, current policy, and retention rules. Aggregate costs and funding, oversight process, and non-sensitive rules for outside agency access. That would protect investigations and personal privacy while also giving residents the transparency that they deserve. Thank you for listening to me tonight.

Thank you. There are no hands raised in Zoom.

Our council meeting shouldn't be too long tonight. If you would like to stay and discuss after the meeting, let us know. All right. With that public open forum is closed. Can I get a motion for agenda approval?

Move to approve.

Any discussion?

Second.

Please vote. Councilmember Grove? Yes. Councilmember Lyon?

Yes.

Councilmember Anderson?

Yes. Agenda item F is, or F1, sorry. Addendment and company on upcoming fiscal year 2026 audit. Robert?

Yes, good evening. My name is Robert Endres. I'm a partner with Denman CPAs. Denman's been engaged to perform the audit for the City of Milwaukee here for FY2026. We'll be on site in about three weeks and has been our tradition in the past. We'd like to come to a council meeting beforehand so that you know who to look for when you're in City Hall in three weeks from now and give you a chance to engage with us as a part of a planning process as to what we should be looking for, what you should be considering as you go through an audit and help us a little bit with the procedures that we're about to perform. So as a quick reminder, our responsibility as your auditors is to perform an audit and to express an opinion, an opinion on the financial statements, the accuracy of the city's financial statements. Along with that, we are also going to be issuing reports on controls and compliance with financial reporting standards, the Code of Iowa, and uniform guidance of federal standards for federal funds. Management's responsibilities also exist over the course of financial statement audit. Management's responsible for making sure its financial statements are accurate, and management's responsible for having controls and systems in place to support accurate financial statements. As we look at preparing for an audit, we are looking at risk, the risk of the financial statements being misstated. As we consider that, there are several things in particular that we're thinking about as far as those risks. So we're looking at non-routine transactions, judgmental manners, estimates within the financial statements. All financial statements do have estimates within them. New standards. Our profession loves to add work to Rachel and her team. We're just talking about that briefly. We have another small new standard this year that she's going to implement. So those new standards present risk to the financial statements as well. For the City of Waukee, as we go into our engagement, we do have identified two what we call significant risks. They pertain to management override of controls and improper revenue recognition. Those two risks exist on every single engagement our profession performs. So they're not unique to the City of Waukee, but they are risks to all financial statement audits, all financial statement preparation, the possibility that management will override systems and processes, and revenue recognition is just a very inherently complex and impactful part of a financial statement reporting. We acknowledge this because our procedures are going to specifically address these risks during our work. So we're going to address the possibility that management might override controls. We're going to address the possibility that there might be revenue recognition mistakes. Just a quick reminder on internal control. Internal control is here to provide oversight of systems and processes to ensure those financial statements are reported accurately. We do look at controls as part of our audit procedures, but a reminder, we are not auditing controls. We are not looking at every single system and process the city uses, so control risks may exist that we're not going to identify during the course of a financial statement audit. We do look at materiality as part of our procedures here. So we're not looking at every single transaction during the course of a financial audit. We're using benchmarks to look at material and significant events. So bear that in mind. We aren't here looking at every single transaction. So if $10 is misposted, misrecorded, we're not going to identify that. But we are looking at those significant events that's going to impact the informed reader to your financial statements. Along with those financial considerations, some quantitative and qualitative other considerations would include the fact that the city is using public funds, right? So the level of oversight is more significant because of that factor. And the need for scrutiny is going to be higher. And we take that into consideration when we are performing our audit procedures as well. As I mentioned, we'll be on site here late August for two weeks. We'll have team members on site performing our audit work with the intention being that we'll be back in front of you sometime between Thanksgiving and Christmas to present the final results of fiscal year 2026 audit. Now, perhaps the most important part of this whole presentation is this part right here where I'm going to be quiet and ask you guys questions. One of the more important parts of our process here is to make sure that you as members of governance and council have some feedback and insight in the audit process. So if you have questions, concerns for us, we would be happy to hear them, whether or not that be today or, as I said, we're going to be on site for a couple weeks. We're not going to be very hard to get a hold of. So please do, if you have questions right now, ask them. Or if something comes up in the near future, don't be afraid to reach out to us. With that said, can I answer any questions regarding the upcoming audit?

Any questions? I'm just wondering if there were any significant issues found last year. There are two of us who are new to the council, and so I'm just wondering if there was anything that needed to be addressed that we should be watching for for this year.

The audits that we've done for Waukee have always been very, very clean. Inevitably, there is going to be one or two what we call small immaterial compliance findings that come up during the course of an audit. Typically, a budget amendment item is pretty common. And I do believe we had one recommendation related to inventory cost accounting. Pretty minor, all things considered. But those would be two items that come to mind immediately that were in last year's audit report. Thank you.

Any other questions? Well, as always, we appreciate your work. We also very much appreciate our finance team's work because we know it's a lot extra during the audit process, but it's very important. So thank you. Yes, thank you. Agenda item G1 is a public hearing on plan specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost for Grand Prairie Parkway Street Phase 1 project. And now to put this public hearing open. Becky, have we received any written correspondence?

No, none received in the city clerk's office. Thank you.

Brad.

Thank you, Mayor. This is a public hearing relative to a streetscape project along Grand Prairie Parkway associated with the Kettlestone Development Area. I would say that this project is 11 plus years in the making. It was contemplated as a part of the original master plan in design standards related to the Grand Prairie Parkway corridor as a part of the Kettlestone District that it would further be enhanced with signage landscaping and hardscaping as development occurred. So even as the street was designed, this was set up long term for that project. meaning that there is no additional right away needs associated with what's being proposed here tonight. In last year, I should say back up last year, the city council did identify this as a strategic planning item relative to the implementation of a streetscape plan for Grand Prairie Parkway. Confluence Landscaping was retained as a consultant on this project who did some of the original concept designs for Grand Prairie Parkway. And that plan was reviewed and approved by the city council in February of 2026. Relative to the project itself, this is intended to be phase one of two phases of the plan for the entire two and a half mile corridor stretching from Interstate 80 to University Avenue. The major elements included in phase one, which is before you tonight, do include the gateway signage at both University Avenue and Interstate 80, as well as major signage elements at the major intersections of Grand Prairie Parkway and Ashworth Road, as well as Grand Prairie Parkway and Westtown Parkway. Second phase, we'll kind of fill in the gaps. We'll utilize a lot of the internal median signage for landscaping and hardscaping as well as some additional minor intersection signage and wayfinding elements. The project before you tonight, as mentioned, does include the two major intersections that are circled there in the middle, as well as the two gateway signage components at either end of the overall project. The purpose of this project is multifold. First of all, community identity with the construction of the interchange at Interstate 80. It really did become the new front door to the city of Waukee. There's very little to no signage that actually would acknowledge that you're in Waukee coming off of Interstate 80. So as a part of this, it's intended to not only sort of set the stage, if you will, for the Kettlestone area, but also to identify the fact that you are currently entering the city of Waukee. It is intended to be a cohesive community and corridor branding. The initial plans for Kettlestone really called for sort of segregated Kettlestone signage along this corridor and not really referencing the fact that you're in the city of Waukee. through this planning process and working through with the city council, the intent is to create a project that is cohesive of co-branding, if you will, the city of Waukee, as well as defining within this area that you are within the Kettlestone district. We have certainly seen significant economic development within this corridor, particularly over the last two to three years. The intent is to support that kettlestone growth by incorporating this signage to further create additional value for those that are locating within this corridor, as well as future development within the area. It is intended to complement other city signage projects that the city has already completed, specifically signage that's along Alice's Road to the north, as well as some of our entrance monument signs that we have on University Avenue. However, it has been designed to be different than what we already have in place. And then finally, it does create opportunities for placemaking, specifically at some of the intersections, almost creating mini pocket parks on the backsides of these signage elements. The project itself consists of the Gateway Monuments. This would be the rendition of the University Avenue Gateway at University and Grand Prairie Parkway. It includes an approximately 33-foot tall sign, various lighting elements, hardscaping and landscaping, which would be located on the southwest corner of the intersection of University Avenue and Grand Prairie Parkway. The Interstate 80 gateway is slightly larger in terms of the overall scope. However, it does follow the same kind of implementation, if you will, as the University Avenue corridor, the main sign approximately being 33 feet in height. followed by the surrounding lighting and landscaping. In this case, we are also adding an element of an additional sign that would be sort of built into the landscape that identifies Kettlestone. So in this case, instead of Kettlestone being on the monument sign, it would actually be on this secondary sign that would be included within the overall landscape. And then the major intersection improvements associated with this project, it does include monumentation, hardscaping, and landscaping at all four corners of each intersection within these triangular areas that were identified when the roads were built. Two would represent City of Waukee exclusive signage with the other two representing Kettlestone while also incorporating the city logo within those. Two of these would be significantly larger in terms of planting beds for both annuals and perennials, as well as seating areas both along and behind. And then the other two would be more of your traditional monument signage, also including some trails and areas behind the signage for elements such as art, which is represented on that one slide as well. That is the public hearing before you tonight. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Does anyone here tonight enter in the council chambers or on Zoom? We should address the council and voice their comments or questions on this particular public hearing item. If so, please approach the podium or raise your hand. For participating via Zoom, please click on the raise hand icon located in the reactions controls. There are no hands raised in Zoom. Does council have any questions at this time?

No.

One of the things that I would comment that didn't get as much airtime while you were, this is not just signage. This is really trying to create an entire identity for this area. And it includes quite a bit of trail work and opportunity for engagement with the landscape and for people to take rest and things like that. So there's actually quite a bit of redevelopment of those intersections.

So when people see the price tag, I want to highlight that.

I now declare this public hearing closed. Agenda item H1, consideration of approval of a resolution approving plan specifications, form of contract, and estimate of cost. Can I get a motion?

Move to approve.

Second.

No further comments relative to the plan specs, form of contract, estimate of cost. Staff would recommend approval.

Sorry. Any questions? We've just approved that. We're going to move on. No. We need to vote.

Yes.

Any questions?

All right. Council Member Grove? Yes. Council Member Anderson?

Yes.

Council Member Lyon?

Yes.

Agenda item H1B, consideration of approval of a resolution awarding contract.

Can I get a motion?

Move to approve.

Second.

Bradford. Thank you, Mayor. I do appreciate your additional context relative to this project. It is a significant project that not only incorporates the pretty pictures that I had shown, but also does incorporate other trail elements and really reworking these various intersections. The city did take bids on this project on July 28, 2026. We had two bids. As you can see on the chart here above, the two bids were extremely close to each other and also extremely close to the engineer's estimate for this project. In fact, the one bid was 1% over and the other bid was minus 0.32% under. So I'm not sure I've seen bids that close to the engineer's estimate. THIS PROJECT WAS DESIGNED SO THAT THERE WOULD BE A BASE BID WHICH ESSENTIALLY INCLUDES EVERYTHING THAT WAS IN THE OVERALL PLANS. HOWEVER, ALSO CREATING ALTERNATIVES WHICH WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY REMOVALS FROM THE OVERALL PROJECT. ALTERNATE ONE WAS REMOVAL OF THAT ADDITIONAL FREESTANDING SIGN AT INTERSTATE 80 THAT WAS KETTLESTONE MONUMENTATION. ALTERNATE TWO WAS REMOVAL OF SOME OF THE LIGHT MOLLARDS IN TERMS OF REDUCTION OR IF YOU WILL A DIET of those light bollards throughout the entire corridor. Alternate three was removal of the cast stone benches at the major intersections. And alternate four was some modifications to the lighting control system throughout the corridor. Because the overall base bid did come in slightly below the engineer's estimate, staff is recommending moving forward with the bid from Concrete Connection of Johnston, Iowa, in the amount of $3,475,000 in rejecting the alternate bids on this project. I would note that funding for this project is coming out of cash reserves, utilizing tax increment financing within our unified urban renewal area. With that, I'd be happy to answer any questions, and staff would recommend approval.

Thank you. Are there any questions?

No.

All right. Please vote.

Council member Anderson.

Yes.

Council member Lyon.

Yes.

Council member Grove. Yes.

Agenda item I1 is consent agenda. Can I get a motion? Second.

Any discussion? Please vote. Council member Grove. Yes. Council member Lyon. Yes. Council member Anderson.

Yes.

Agenda item I2, consideration of approval of an ordinance for the division of revenues under section 403.19 code of Iowa for the North Waukee residential urban renewal area for 2026 ordinance parcels. This is an introduction and a first reading.

I introduce the ordinance and move to approve the first reading entitled only.

Second.

Thank you.

Jennifer. Good evening, Mayor and Council. What you have before you is the 2026 TIF ordinance additions for North Waukee Residential. And you can see on the screen, the green there would be the additions. And this is really just due to the new development and anticipated development activity in North Residential. And really it's just the ordinance just establishes the cities, excuse me, the city's ability to capture tax increment and then to attack all of the projects included in the urban renewal plan. Staff would recommend proceeding with the reading and the first reading of the ordinance.

Thank you. Are there any questions?

Please vote. Council Member Lyon. Yes. Council Member Grove.

Yes.

Council Member Anderson.

Yes.

Agenda item I3, consideration of approval of an ordinance to amend chapter 135 of the Waukee Municipal Code regarding playing in streets or alleys. This is an introduction and a first reading.

I introduce the ordinance and move to approve the first reading and title.

Can I get a second?

Second. Chief.

Chief. Good evening, Mayor and Council. This amendment to Chapter 135 adds a parental responsibility piece to the playing in streets. As you may recall from the work session, we currently don't have an enforcement mechanism for parents that continue to allow their kids to play in streets after they've been warned multiple times by law enforcement or other city officials that that's prohibited. Ultimately, the goal is the children's safety. Streets are not the place to be playing. They're for vehicular traffic. And the goal would not be to, of course, enforce this or take enforcement action without just blatant violations after multiple warnings. But we do not currently have that enforcement mechanism in place now. This would create a simple misdemeanor for violation of that at the parent responsibility or guardian responsibility level. The standard fine for a simple misdemeanor by state code is anywhere from $105 to $855. And that's just a blanket simple misdemeanor per state code. So I'm happy to take any questions you may have. Staff recommends approval.

Thank you. Are there any questions? No.

Please vote. Council Member Grove? Yes. Council Member Anderson?

Yes.

Council Member Lyon.

Yes. Agenda item I4, consideration of approval of an ordinance to amend chapter 26 dog park regulations. I'm having challenges tonight.

We're almost there.

It's okay. Prime regulations by amending section 26.12 dogs restricted to rename section 26.12 as dogs and to include dog park rules and regulations. This is a second, third, and final reading.

I move to approve the second reading of the ordinance, waive the third reading, and place it on final passage. Second. Thank you, Matt.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. As I said in the first reading, this is a cleanup item. It was found that in Chapter 26 of the ordinance, at one time when we opened the dog park, we had the dog park rules by resolution, but it was not put into the Chapter 26 park regulations. So it's not enforceable until we get it in the ordinance. So I have nothing further. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have.

Mayor Clark? Yeah. We can't waive the third reading. We need Council Member Lyon to amend the motion and Council Member Anderson to amend the second to only approve the second reading because we need four out of five to waive a reading.

Oh, okay.

Oh, no. She's not.

Okay. I amend the reading. And I introduced the ordinance move to approve the second reading in title only.

And I am in my statement to second, the second reading. Thank you. All right. Does this cause any issues for timing? Okay, perfect. All right. Any questions? Please vote. Council Member Lyon?

Yes. Council Member Anderson?

Yes.

Council Member Grove? Yes.

Item I-5, consideration of approval of an ordinance trim in Chapter 169, Zoning Ordinance, City of Waukee, Iowa, by rezoning certain property from KMFSM to KMFSM slash PD1, a property to be known as the Wren. This is a third and final reading.

Move to approve.

and place it on final passage? Second.

Andy.

Good evening, Mayor Clark, council members. Before you tonight is the third reading of the Wren rezoning request. The property is generally located north of Southeast Ashworth Road and east of Grand Prairie Parkway, and it's approximately 5.78 acres in area. It's the area outlined in blue on the screen. You'll recall from previous discussions on this, it is a single building with four towers that are four stories each. Those four towers would be located on top of a underground parking structure with a total of 80 units for an active adult living community. The proposed request is consistent with the Kettlestone Master Plan and staff is recommending approval of the third and final reading for the run. Happy to take any questions. Thank you. Are there any questions?

Please vote. Council member Grove.

Yes.

Council member Anderson. Yes. Council member Lyon. Yes. Council member Pierce. Yes. Council member Pierce.

Yes. Can you hear me? Sorry. Okay.

Yes, we can hear you now.

Okay. Yes. Sorry. Thank you.

All right. Agenda item J, reports.

Fred? Yeah, thank you, Mayor. Just a couple of reminders that tomorrow is Public Safety Day from the 5 to 7 p.m. at the new Public Safety Building. It's not as new anymore. It's already a year old. Prior to that, the city, we will have a ribbon cutting for our newest public art piece that sits in front of the Public Safety Building beginning at 4.30 p.m. And then just as a reminder to the public that our new program City Explained, we are currently accepting applications. There is a limit to the number of folks that we can include in this inaugural session, but it will begin in the middle of September for a seven-week period. So you can learn all about what we do on a daily basis. Thanks.

No reports?

No report.

Movies in the Park. is on Friday, right? And the movie will be Mario? Mario Brothers? I think is what I saw. Super Mario Galaxy. So bring the family and have some fun. Anna?

No report. Sorry. I joined for the last one minute of the meeting, but good to see you all. I hope you had a great day.

I unfortunately will be out of town tomorrow and we'll miss public safety day, but it's always a good time. So I encourage everybody to bring out their families.

And with that, I'll take a motion to adjourn. So moved.

Second. All those in favor.

Aye.

Thank you very much.