City Council - Regular Meeting

You're kidding. How are you? Okay.

just like to scare people. I'll call the May 18th meeting of the West Point City Council to order. Invite you all to stand to join us for the pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, welcome everybody. Please sign in.

Five members present. Ryan, have there been any changes to the agenda? No changes, your honor. Can I get a motion to approve the agenda as distributed? So move. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Please vote. Five. Yes. Okay, we're going to go on to uh items 1 A and B. Uh item 1 A is the Emergency Medical Services Week uh proclamation May 17th through the 23rd. And uh item 1B is a National Public Works Week May 17th through 23rd as well. So I am going to uh read both of these proclamations. Then we're going to get the groups up front. Uh assuming we have some groups here to take a picture and then we'll move on to citizens forum after that.

Maybe we don't have groups for these.

No groups. Okay. Well, in that case, what I'm going to do is I'm going to read the proclamations. There's going to be no picture and we're going to move on to citizens forum. Okay. Whereas emergency medical services is a vital public safety function, providing life-saving care to our community 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. And whereas access to quality emergency care dramatically improves survival and recovery outcomes for those experiencing sudden illness or injury. And whereas access to quality emergency care dramatically improves the survival and recovery rate of those who experience sudden illness or injury. And whereas the EMS systems encompasses first responders, EMTs, paramedics, emergency dispatchers, firefighters, nurses, physicians, and other out of hospital care providers who dedicate thousands of hours to specialized training and continuing education. And whereas it is appropriate to recognize the value and the accomplishments of emergency medical services providers by designated emergency medical services week. Now therefore, I, Russ Trimble, mayor of the city of West De Mo, Iowa, in recognition of this event, do hereby proclaim the week of May 17 through the 23rd, 2026 as Emergency Medical Services Week. Okay. Our next proclamation item 1B uh is National Public Works Week. Whereas public works provided in our community are an integral part of citizens everyday lives. And whereas the support of and understanding and informed citizenry is vital to the efficient operation of public works systems and programs such as sewers, streets and highways, public buildings and solid waste collections. And whereas the health, safety, and comfort of this community greatly depends on these facilities and services. And whereas the quality of effectiveness of these facilities as well as their planning, design, construction is vitally dependent upon the efforts of skilled public works officials. And whereas the efficiency of the qualified and

dedicated personnel who staff public works departments is materially influenced by the people's uh attitude and understanding of the importance of the work they perform. Now therefore, I, Russ Trimble, mayor of the city of West De Mo, do hereby proclaim the week of May 17, 2026 as National Public Works Week in the city of West De Moines. And I call upon all citizens and civic organizations to acquaint themselves with the issues involved in providing our public works and to recognize the contributions which public works officials make every day to our health, safety, comfort, and quality of life. Thank you to our public works uh employees as well as our emergency medical service uh providers and workers. We appreciate everything that you guys do. Uh and we'll be celebrating the week with you. Moving on to item two, citizens forum. Uh anybody that like to address the council on any item that is not either part of uh public hearings or new business, item six or seven, uh this is your time to come to the podium here. Give us your name and address of the record. We ask that you keep it civil and respectful into five minutes or other or under. Robert, come on up. You can get us started.

Thank you. Name and address of the record, my friend. Yes. Robert Greenway, uh, 211 Northwest Hay Street in Greenfield. Or I get all static about that, by the way. Um, you've got the floor.

Thank you. The last time I was here, I apologize for my lack of knowledge of how we were funding our the countywide EMS building. It will be a revenue bond. So, that really does not go to vote across the county. That was my misconception. Um, the EMS funding on that was approved. Site was approved. Uh, it's I think they're going for an 8.5 million, but they proposed 6.9. Um, the reason I'm trying to update you all is because local option sales tax is 55 to 60% generated from the West De Mo area. Okay. Uh, that was done by state years ago on valuation.

We know that very well.

Thank you. I just making sure you all know. I know. Okay. That's one reason why I'm a candidate for this area. Okay. There will be no fault. Like I said, it was approved. Um the MS the county EMS in Adel is extremely outdated and it didn't take hardly any time to walk in it to see that. Um I wasn't really aware of the the u lack of outdated. I did have a conversation with a physician's assistant in the rural Dallas County area. I asked him to rate just we were talking about different things and I asked for his time about that uh the EMS county service on a 1 to 10 basis on response caliber professionalism etc. He says I'll give him a nine. And then I asked him, "Had he been ever in their facilities?" He said, "No, most people haven't." I haven't until last 60 days. So, it is overdue. Anyway, I understood from Tim just a little a little while ago that 9.2% of your budget goes to your EMS. Uh, I have I have no idea what the EMS deal is. This is just an update. I don't think I need to answer any questions, but I will take one if you want one.

Okay. Thank you, Robert, for being here. Any questions for Robert?

All right. Well, thank you for being here and thanks for your report. Appreciate it. Okay. Anybody else for Citizens Forum in the audience before I go online? Okay. Anybody online for citizens forum? Please hit star six, not pound six. Star six, do unmute yourself. Give us your name and address for the record. Is there anybody online for citizens forum? Going once, going twice. Okay, citizens forum is closed. We're now going to move on to item three, mayor council manager report, other entities update. And we're going to start with the other entities update. item 3A with uh Tiffany Taek and the Greater De Mo Partnership. So, if you want to come up, Tiffany.

Good evening, mayor and members of council and city staff. Thanks so much for having us. I'm Tiffany Talshek. I'm the president CEO of the Greater De Moine Partnership and very pleased tonight to be joined by three of our partnership board members that are uh seated here. We have Greg Ble who is the president and CEO of IMT insurance, Chris Costa, president and CEO of NAV properties and partnership board chair and Kyle Gamble, president and CEO of Hubble Realy. So, thank you all for being here. Uh, our message tonight essentially is one of gratitude and also to give you a quick update on some things happening throughout the region. You of course are very familiar with great things happening in the city of West De Moines and I want you to know that we very much appreciate all that you're doing for the city of West De Moines because we know and understand what goes well in West De Moines echoes through the entire region. So really really appreciate all that you're doing. As a reminder, the Greater De Moine Partnership is the regional economic development organization. We focus on econom is anybody there?

Hold on one second, Tiffany. Uh, yep, Amy, we're here. Um, I just asked if there was anybody for Citizens Forum uh online and uh didn't didn't hear anybody, so we closed Citizens Forum. I'm sorry. Sticky fingers today. Okay. On the phone. Well, I'll tell you. All right. Talk to you the next time. All right. All right. Thank you for understanding, Amy. Okay. Bye. Bye. Take care. Bye bye.

Okay. Go ahead, Tiffany. I'm sorry. No worries. Thank you, mayor. So, we uh focus on regional economic development and talent development with public policy as a supporting strategy to drive that work forward. We very much appreciate the city of West De Mo and your continued engagement and partnership with the Greater Dwayne Partnership. There are about 400 investors in our nonprofit organization. We represent 7,200 regional chamber members uh in part because of the great relationships and affiliations that we have with a number of chambers including of course your West De Mo Chamber of Commerce. So about our region, we represent 940,000 residents. Our combined statistical area or CSA, it's a number we're keeping very close track of in part because we once we hit a million population, we will instantly be eligible for additional economic development projects. uh which is a good thing for all of us in the cities and counties that we represent. Uh with those affiliate chambers of commerce, here is the list of those 25 affiliates. Again, noting that we work very closely with uh West De Moines Chamber of Commerce who's doing great things. Collectively, we are the second largest regional chamber of commerce in the entire country. That's helpful as we're looking to get things done, especially on a federal level. uh you know uh and are familiar that every five years we go out and fundra for our next five years of um of funding for our organization and we are in the midst of preparing for that next round for 2028 through 2032. We uh build all of our strategies and strategic plans outside and bottom up. So we talk to you our investors hear what's important to you and build that into the plan as we continue to drive forward as a region. These are our one-year priorities. The 2026 priorities, no surprise, continuing to focus on economic development, talent development, quality of life. We've added in AI and innovation, as well as positioning our region for the future and storytelling.

This is a fund fun stat that we've shared uh nationally recently because it's something that we can all be really proud of. And again, West De Moines's been a really great leader in the space of making things happen and getting deals done. We have 5.7 billion in capital investment and economic development activity underway right now in our region and another two billion in the queue. For a region our size, this is very very strong and a number that we can all be very proud of. Going to turn it over to Stacy Leavon now who is our SVP of economic development for a quick ecdev update.

Good evening everyone. Um and just as we um to kick off, just want to do a reminder from the economic development team. We really have two main goals. One is help the local businesses that are here already when they need to grow and expand and staying in contact with them and creating an environment where they s can succeed. And number two, identifying and attracting businesses who are not within our region today or within the state of Iowa to the region um to support our economy and help grow the economy. Since we were formed in 99, we have assisted 787 very different projects for a $16.5 billion investment and over 39,000 jobs. Um on this next slide, the Lego logos that you see are companies that we assisted in 2025. Um and we have several that are already working on in 26 um that we will be releasing um soon and sharing that information. the um it is important that we talk about the existing businesses who are here today because we know that 80% of business growth comes from our local businesses. Our economy is impacted by how our local businesses are doing. We are consistently um in conjunction with your economic development team, Ryan and Brad, um out talking to local companies and um learning what's what they're seeing in their industry and how we can assist them. From a business recruitment side, we do a lot of our recruitment efforts in conjunction with the state of Iowa through the Iowa Economic Development Authority, but we have many um activities that we do and outreaches that we do to promote um the region for economic development. We know this is important because there are over 10,000 economic development organizations going after the same 100 to 200 major projects each year. Um as we are doing our recruitment efforts, we really focus on six key industries. Um advanced manufacturing, insurance and financial services, agricultural innovation,

logistics, data centers and technology. Um we work with companies that are outside of these industries as well. But when we are doing our targeting and really using data to help drive our work, these are the industries we focus on. In 25 we did 27 national marketing trips um through trade shows and conferences but also um we completed six uh metro area recruitment trips and that's where we go into a metropolitan area have 12 to 15 meetings with companies or key site selectors who are doing business and talking with them one-on-one across the table for about 45 minutes. um our leads in 2025, um 83% of our leads were locally generated with 17% of our leads coming from the state of Iowa. Um if you look over the 10-year period, it's about the same with um 19% of our leads coming from the state, um 68% direct from the partnership and 13% from our local partners, whether that be uh communities or real estate um entities here. um our lead generations in 2025 came from 20 states and 11 countries. Um and then finally, just a um reminder of how regional um our work is and how regional our our our region is in the metropolitan area. Um when you look at the commuting statistics, 30% of your residents who are employed currently work within the city of West De Moines. of your people who are employed in West De Moines, 15.6% of them actually live in the city of West De Moines. So it's that those commuting patterns that happen across the entire region. Tiffany,

thank you. Thanks, Stacey. So I wanted to touch on talent development really quickly, but please feel free to jump in if you have questions. Uh as mentioned, talent development is another core area of focus at the partnership. We have a number of programs that we have to help with K12 uh interns, current workforce, retaining and recruiting workforce. So, a number of those initiatives are noted on the screen. We also have a DSM USA welcome guide and I was looking through this today and I just want to share with you West De Moines is very well represented in the welcome guide. Uh so, some examples of West De Moine companies, organizations and places noted in the welcome guide. Microsoft, Jordan House, Historic Valley Junction, West Glenn Town Center, West De Moines Community Schools, Pulse Dance Fitness Studio, West De Mo Leadership Academy, St. Kilda, and Walnut Wood State Park. So, just to name a few. Uh, so thank you for again having great representation in this. We utilize this guide as we're looking to attract talent as well as those talent that have just moved here. We share this with them as a way to inform them about all of the great things or a few of the great things that are happening throughout our region, including of course in West De Moines. We have a number of DSM MVPs. So, think of these folks as super ambassadors. As we are looking to attract talent, we are connecting them with these MVPs. or if someone's just moved here and they want to get more connected in the community, we can connect them with some of our MVPs based off of what they're interested in, including where they'd like to live. So, happy to share with you that we have five West De Moines residents who are DSM MVPs. So, again, you are very well represented uh in our MVP program. We of course want to continue to do what we can to drive the region forward. And one thing that we heard uh starting about three years ago was this eagerness to connect rural, urban and suburban leaders. And uh Mayor Trimble's been

very helpful and helping us shape a number of our initiatives including our regional summit related to and connecting those those and those uh leaders from across the region. So really appreciate your candid input which helped guide us in getting to that point. And also want to call out that at the regional summit uh last year. And thank you for those of you who attended, we were able to uh share the really great news that we had two different West De Moines companies who received economic development awards. So economic impact awards. So again, another example of great ways to share and tell the stories of good things happening in in West De Mo and throughout the region. We also continue to focus on small business support as one of our economic and talent drivers and have a number of initiatives focused on the small business support work. A number of uh small businesses in West De Moines are involved in those programs which I'll touch on more here in just a moment. Another piece of our work is state policy and federal policy. So from a state policy perspective and federal just want to give a shout out and thanks to Councilman Hudson as well as Jamie who've been very involved in serving in our government policy council, our GPC work in helping us put together our leg legislative agendas for 2026. Uh as you know we had some featured priorities and worked uh very closely with a number of you as well as a number of your businesses and uh leaders throughout the region to continue to advocate for a progrowth agenda. Uh we know that there was a bit of a mixed bag uh in the outcomes and that said very very proud of the collaborative effort that you we all took to do what we can to protect progrowth and that includes for businesses, cities, counties and and all of our organizations throughout the region. From a federal policy agenda, we'll be headed to DMDC uh here shortly. For those of you who haven't signed up yet, we'd love to have you. uh will be

advocating for the policies noted here on the screen. DMDC is a great opportunity for us to I hadn't seen this slide yet. Uh is a great opportunity to connect with our congressional delegation and their staff and drive forward the the federal legislative priorities that we have as a region with one voice. One of those has been future 435. And thank you for all of your work and support on getting that through the state 20 years. Uh it took us 20 years, but we got it done and and now we're headed to DC with that. And then also want to touch on just overall regional momentum. We have a number of rankings of course. I know that you all celebrate the rankings as well as we do. We believe that that's one of the roles that we play is to celebrate the good news and the good things that are happening in our region. Just want to call out that uh our metro was named number two top metro for economic development projects and that was just a recent ranking. So again, that's uh a true partnership and again, thank you to Ryan, Brad, and and your team for the great work that they continue to do. Our employment and population growth also continues to be strong. In fact, we're outpacing our peers across the Midwest, which is great. We want to see those numbers continue to go up. So, doing well there. a number of events and activations that our team is working on and we're very pleased that we're able to highlight some of your businesses and some of your locations throughout this work. We have uh one of your local businesses uh is featured here in the picture for the downtown farmers market. Our regional activations we've had hide-and-seek ornaments you keep as well as the the balloon the great balloon hunt um and then world food and music festival. So, want to call out that we have had in 2025 16 of your local businesses that were involved in some of these activations and really pleased to say that next for this year 2026 39 of the businesses are from West De Moines. So, kudos and again just shows the the really great

environment and business environment that you have here. And then calling out communications and marketing. You all know that storytelling is something that's really important to us and again we're looking to sell to say and share some good news. We all need some more good news. Uh so our team is dedicated to helping you lift up the the good work that's happening. We have a new Greater De Moines storytelling hub that's dedicated to doing that. So if there are stories you'd like us to help share, let us know. And just want to call out that this is a snapshot of some of the benefits that you receive as an investor of the Greater De Moine Partnership, as a city investing in the organization. Uh just in closing before opening it up for questions, want to say again, thank you for all you do. Not only for the city of De Moine, for the overall region. We very much appreciate you and mayor, thank you for the regional hat that you wear consistently in addition to the city of West De Moines hat. It is very much valued and appreciated. So, thank you for that. Um some quick calls to action and um which no surprise there. We just want you to get as engaged as you'd like to be. And with that, I'm happy to answer questions. Thank you.

All right. Any questions for Tiffany or Stacy uh or for that matter for Kyle or Chris or Greg? Um yeah, just briefly, Mayor, um Tiffany, thank you. Stacy, thank you both for being here. Um and gentlemen, thank you also for taking time out of obviously very busy schedules to to be here to show your support for the partnership. I just want to say thank you to the partnership for the work that you've identified here, but most recently the work that you uh did on the property tax bill. I know there was a lot of uh a lot of good and u productive conversations that came of that. I think uh we still have some work we would like to accomplish uh relative to the economic development side, but nonetheless, I know you all spent a lot of time up there and and the same uh here. I know uh many of you spent a lot of good time up there. We appreciate the collaboration because it's in our interest to um create a pathway for folks to grow um develop create jobs in this community and um that was uh the kind of northstar if you will the pole star of of the work that we undertook. So I just wanted to call that out. I know a lot of time and effort went into that. The governor signed it today so it seemed pretty uh relevant. But thank you for all you do for the region.

Thank you. Thank you. And as noted, uh, Council M McKenna was up there just as much as our team was. So, thank you for for your continued work. It was a team effort. No doubt about that. You know, our uh our folks uh from the legislative committee that we have and all of you guys as well as the League of Cities and a whole number of folks that were engaged in conversation up there, productive dialogue that, you know, really uh steered the outcome of the legislation. So, Mr. Again, he had uh I think 12 miles of steps just all circular around the rotunda. Go back and forth. Back or back for his AirPods in. Absolutely. He does that, too. Uh any other questions for Tiffany or Stacy?

Yeah, Tiffany. I just want to say thank you, Stacy. Thank you. And I I feel I feel different than I did seven years ago when I think I first heard a Greater De Moine Partnership presentation. And and I think it's a good different because I feel like the entire region is ready to kind of come together a little bit more. Uh, the state gave us some struggles this year and I appreciate your advocacy as Councilman McKenna said because I think we have the opportunity to capture some magic as a as a as a region and I say this as not just the chair of Catch De Mo because I see all the amazing things that Trina and her team are doing out there to bring events not just to West De Mo but the entire region and if we can capture not just business, if we can capture job growth, if we can capture uh housing, if we can capture uh Uh, transportation 435. That's great news. Do we have a day when we will be relabeled? Is there a date that it's in mind?

Well, it needs to go through Congress first. Sure. Congress works like that. I know it's going to be soon. We cleared one hurdle at the state. Now we got to clear a hurdle at the federal government. Are they even open yet? 435 people plus 100 people in the Senate. They can figure this out. Absolutely. It's why we named it 435, right? Absolutely. There you go.

In any case, all of these things coming together can make a giant difference. And the reason I say it feels different is because working with other metropolitan communities, as I know you do every day, as I know all of us do every day, if if we can make this happen, I think central Iowa can catch some magic. We'll break that 1 million mark. And I think sweet, sweet things can happen. So to that end, I just want to say thank you. Thank you. Thank you all. Thanks to the entire board and all of our partners as we're all in this together. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilman. Okay, any other questions? Councilwoman Elliott. Hello. Hello. Good to see you.

First of all, the timing of this is just fantastic for me being the newest council member. I am hitting the ground running. What I really do appreciate about your presentation is the importance of the work that you do. And then our our business partners that are here today. You know, for me being new, all of my experience and knowledge has been education on the school board. So, for me, it is very imperative and important that I know and learn and appreciate the connection of your organization and our business community. I will continue to grow and um I am very fortunate to have the opportunity to have so many people even my fellow council members, my mayor that are so willing to help me become acclimated as soon as possible. So, um I appreciate you. I appreciate you guys and I am looking forward um to my time on the council and doing whatever I can to continue the great progress of the city of West De Mo.

Excellent. Congrats and welcome. Thank you. Thank you, councilwoman. Okay, anybody else questions? Council, I just want to say thank you for everything that you've done. Um I know a few years ago I didn't feel like it was like the partnership was really working. um in concert with West De Mo and I think that has changed. So I appreciate that. Thank you and credit goes to those of you who brought that up to us and your fantastic staff.

Well, you guys listened. You went on the listening tour. you listened to everything that was said and you proactively made a change and it's definitely been felt and and been noticed and so we appreciate everything that the partnership's been doing uh working with us working with everybody else in the region on economic development it is economic development is not an easy job at all um you know um and to to that end I've got a question we talk about 83% of the the leads are local leads what what do we mean by that is that is that that a company has contacted one of our economic development professionals or is it that we've got a business within the city of West De Moines that has contacted you about growing and expanding or what is that exactly?

It's a combination of both. It's both existing business and those looking to come in. We would say um I would say the new businesses looking to come in probably make up a third or more okay of those um each year. Last year we had 140 leads and we ran the numbers and you can get the data. I will get that to you because now I'm going to misquote a number but it was a good number. It was over that third. It was

I mean this is such a hard game, right? To try to bring uh companies in from outside and have them locate here and then of course we all compete for those companies. Um, but it's it's it's just not easy. And you guys do a great job staying connected, you know, staying connected with the site selectors and working with the state of Iowa to bring prospects here. And I love the change that you've made on sending out the emails. I know we've had to tell elected officials, you don't have to act on this. It's not fallen on your shoulders. We've copied in your economic development people. Um, but it's nice to be able to see the leads that are generated through the partnership and that that come to us. We weren't seeing that before. So, we weren't sure like how how many leads were being uh generated there. Um, but it's just it's not easy. I mean, this is like uh like cold calling people for business, right? I mean, you you call on 100 different businesses and and maybe one of them uh shakes loose and and comes here. But really appreciate all your your efforts on that. Um everything that you guys are doing. So,

thank you. Appreciate that. But we'll get you those staff. Okay. Sounds good. Uh, any other questions for Tiffany or Stacy? No. Okay. Thank you guys all for being here. Thank you to our CEOs for being here. Appreciate all that you guys do for us as well. So, don't feel like you have to stay. I know you guys have all got busy lives and other things to uh get on to, families to get back to. So, storms to avoid, storms to avoid, hail damage to avoid. Take care. Thanks for being here. Okay, moving on to mayor council manager report. I will start down to my right with city manager Tom Haden. Any report tonight? Your report, your honor. All right, short and sweet. Moving on to Councilman Greg Hudson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All right, let me get my list. So, just a couple of things that have been happening. Uh, we had our students here last couple weeks ago. It was really super cool to have the students here. Really appreciated their dedication to come to a city council meeting on Monday night. And I was glad that they chose to uh make this their choice because they have a bunch of different choices on things they can do as the sixth graders. And the 10 of them were like, I'm interested in the city. I was like, oh, that sounds great. Not a lot of folks are interested in the city, so it was great to have them. Uh but I kind of withheld a little bit of report in the interest of time and getting them home before uh before bedtime. So, a couple of finance administration subcommittees we have had and a couple of those are going to be coming up tonight because a few FNA meetings ago, Christine shared a little bit about the community uh block fund grants that we'll be chatting about and are on the agenda a little bit a little bit later today. Uh a good portion will be to devoted to improving our human services building which is really exciting because there's a lot of amazing things that happen in our human services building. I know a couple couple of folks up here who have been on the human services board before they even joined city council. So, you all know and everybody in the room knows that our human services building uh continues to well serve kind of right there in the name. We have some budget amendments on the docket tonight that we looked at at FNA2, but I believe we'll chat about them later, so I won't belabor the point at this point. Uh looked at a couple of smaller annexations out off of Mill Civic. just a couple of lots uh couple lots who are excited to join in with the with the city water, West De Mo water. It's good water. A couple of big reasons why we have a AAA bond rating. I know that uh Tim has talked about this at uh at length, but so has uh Suzanne from PFM, but when we looked at why we have a

AAA bond rating, uh it kind of came down to a couple of key factors that helped us out a lot. First thing, a very strong reserve balance. Number two, strong management and policies at the city level and a strong local economy. So all of those things together really help buttress our AAA bond rating from both S&P and Moody's. And as we know, as we'll always speak to, I'll tell anybody that it gets us lower interest rates when we when we buy stuff in the city. So that was uh so that's FNA stuff. Uh library. So I'm the leazison liaison for the library board. Uh it's good news that we're approaching the end of the fiscal year and the library budget is on track. I know that's not our per purview directly, but they are in a good place budget-wise. If you didn't get a chance to see the central Iowa libraries map, all the libraries on a really really creative and artistic map. It's really really cool. And of course, the library is going to be hopping this summer because they get a lot of usage while kids are out uh of school. Uh I also serve as the board liaison for the parks and recreation board. Couple of announcements that have been exciting over these past few weeks. Uh I was playing some tennis with uh my kid over at Valley View Park. Uh there was a tennis court open. Glad I didn't try to play pickle ball because it would not have been open. There was probably a line there and there was not a line at the bathroom because the Valley Roo Park pickle ball courts uh the new restrooms are open which is exciting. new playground at Holiday Park. Softball is officially open. We had a huge season at the Reclex once again. Hundreds of thousands of people coming in and summer park season will be upon us. So, as the as everybody goes outdoors, uh Ryan, am I right to say that the art is still around here on the campus right now? If you get a chance to take a stroll around the pond, the art on the campus exhibit is live. Uh this is the 14th year we've done this. Uh it brings incredible regional talent right to the heart of

West De Moines. I see right outside this window there's a cool looking guitar sculpture. It is not typically there. Take a quick stroll out to the city council meeting assuming it's not hailing. That's why I should probably end this report more quicker. Uh but I do want to compliment parks and wreck for pool seasoning which is opening up pretty soon. And we are staffed up. It is enormous to get lifeguards while other cities are scrambling. We do our work early and we have a great working environment at both Holiday Park and at Valley View Park, our two aquatic centers. So, the fact that we are staffed up and ready to go is exciting. Um, other thing for parks and wreck, we're going to be working on the first street trail connection. It is commenced and later on this summer we'll be able to connect 1/63rd Street all the way to Raken River Park. Is that correct, Ryan? Will or is it just the first phase of the trail?

That will happen in 2027. 2027. Okay. But we are getting started with the work and so the full connection will be done next year. Excuse me. Um while we were talking and celebrating public works week tomorrow, uh festivities from 4:00 to 7:00, right, Mr. Rank? Yes.

Uh I'm told there will be inflatables and big trucks and balloons and more big trucks and ice cream trucks, which is the best one of all. do want to thank our public service and public works uh folks because you had put a great quote at the bottom of the advertisement for public works week uh celebration which is tomorrow from 4:00 to 7:00 down at the public works building at 8850 Grand Avenue. You put a great quote at the bottom and it said uh the roots of service run deep in public works and I think that's a great quote and it's incredibly true in West De Mo. So come and celebrate and see some cool toys that we have in West De Moines. And finally, uh, as I end my report, I do want to issue some congratulations. Uh, half of Walke High School is filled with West De Mo residents, and they just graduated, uh, uh, either yesterday or Saturday, I can't remember. So, congratulations to all the West De Mo residents. And of course, all the Walke residents, too, because it is graduating graduation season. I know we have graduates coming out of Dalling Catholic High School. They're graduating in a couple days. And of course, the Illustrious Valley High School will be celebrating its graduation right over here on Sunday night. So congratulations to all those in fact in the entire metro state, country and world who are graduating from high school. That concludes my report, Mr.

That was a phenomenal report. Thank you, Councilman Hudson. All right, Council Member McKenna, you have that to follow. Can't believe I have to follow that. All right.

Yeah, I won't go there. Um, all right. Two quick items here. We've had several conversations uh on the dis or at least uh constituents that have showed up uh with concerns about electric bikes. And so I just wanted to brief uh the council here and those that might be listening that uh the metropolitan planning organization, the MO uh had a meeting last week where this topic uh was brought up and it sounds like the city of Ankenany has adopted an ordinance. The ordinance is consistent with the I'll call it the police chiefs association that has developed a model policy. Ankeny adopted it. It sounds like they've made a few tweaks to it. Walke attempted to adopt it roughly two weeks ago and there was a some significant amount of push back. So Walke has um as a result of that taken the push back, the feedback back to the police chief's association. uh at which point that'll be shared with the NO and then shared broadly and hopefully that is something that we can then I mean we can do it on our own but I mean we might as well also take some feedback from what others are doing and and hopefully we could have more of a cohesive approach across the metro as opposed to a patchwork of well if I cross the border and enter into Walke what what what's the difference so anyway that's a quick update on the electric bikes and as soon as we have some more from the no I'm happy to bring it here and I know Tom is also involved

yeah and and that's that's consist assistant. We were talking about a model bicycle ordinance as well. We were hoping to the state would pass a law because exactly what you're talking about not having a patchwork where you go to ride a bike in Ankeny and here are the laws and then you you know you ride it in West De Mo and the laws are different and and uh and we didn't want to also do something that got us preempted by the legislature who didn't like what we passed either. So that that kind of approach makes sense. I appreciate you reporting on that um tonight. I'm looking forward to seeing what the MO brings forward after looking what Ankeny's put in place and what Walke is looking at putting in place. I know that Ankeny looked at putting in place like a speed limit. Uh that was the you know the the gist of the entire article that uh Councilman Loz had sent a couple of us uh in regards to what New York City had done and why it that failed because it's just the enforcement of I mean a police officer sitting uh and clocking 13-year-old kids on bikes. It's just not very practical. So hopefully they can kind of you know work on that and and figure out something a good model ordinance that we can look at adopting like you said so patchwork but anyway.

Yep. Thanks.

No absolutely no I think uh it sounds like it'll be relatively soon. This is not like a year or two in the process. It sounds like it's a week or or so in the process. Um and then the last item I just uh you know uh most of you know that I have had a lot of interest in figuring out our zoning ordinance uh relative to um you know we adopt a comprehensive plan. What is the ordinance going to look like that we marry up to it? So today we had a development and planning subcommittee meeting where it was the primary topic. We talked about it for well over an hour. Um and there will be a workshop. I think it's the first uh meeting in June. And so this will help us you know we adopted the comp plan. This is how we are going to implement the zoning uh within each one of those uh I'll call it uh classifications and this one we're focusing on first is the residential area. So I just I want to say thank you first to Tom. This is you know something that I've been very interested in. We talked about it at the February uh budget presentation and this is on track to it feels like get implemented yet uh this year hopefully this fall. And I want to thank Lynn and her team also because we talked through some very significant impacts and it is going to be I think a I think there's a reason there's a piece of paper on your uh on the DAS here that says do you want to have dinner at our future council meetings

because I think the workshop might take a while because of just all of the intricate issues that we're going to have to work through and it will definitely change the direction of our community in terms of uh what folks are going to be able to do on their property. So anyway, that's my report. Well, I appreciate that. Appreciate uh Lyn and her team uh bringing that forward and all the work that's gone into that. Appreciate Tom working to move that forward as well. I as I think I told you guys before when Councilman Trailion and I got elected back in 2009. We came in here in 2010 and that was one of the first things we started tackling was the comprehensive plan. It's something you should be doing every five to 10 years. uh and it hadn't been looked at uh for a while and we had meetings that went 10 11:00 at night and then had executive sessions afterwards. So, bring it on. We're we're ready to discuss the uh the zoning to to put in place with a comprehensive plan. But I think you're right, it's probably going to be a pretty robust discussion and lots of decisions that will have to be made, but I look forward to that. So, okay, Councilwoman Elliott, any report?

Yeah, go ahead. I'm laughing because I have all these papers that I'm I'm Councilman Trailion any report. No, I'm going to try to highlight.

Well, um, thank you for appointing me as the DART commissioner. um because I have attended my very first um commissioner's meeting and I wanted to let everyone know that DART is prepared to launch their re re-imagine campaign. Um it it will launch on June the 14th, but there will be various open houses um in our community community at large for West De Mo specifically on June the 4th from 5 to 7 at the West De Mo library. Um the open house will be geared towards announcing the overall strategy all of the new routes and specifically the routes that are going to impact the residents in West De Moines. Basically I'm going to say they took 20 odd routes that are around the city and they have um condensed them down to 10. But they are strategizing that these new routes will go to businesses that maybe had not been there on the route before. The whole intent is to get the buses to the people that are most in need and are using um public transportation the most. So, more to come, but if you attend the open house on June the 4th at the West De Mo Library, you will be enlightened to what those changes are. Um, also from June the 14th till June the 30th, free rides. So, anyone who wants to to ride um the bus, it'll be free from the 14th through the 30th. I'm going to try to go through this real quick. Um, let's see. as part of the community engagement institute along with two of the uh um two of the

attendees that are part of the program. Um we um toured and to get an update and enlightened with our police department with Westcom, our fire department and EMS and myself I was over the top to be able to get into a fire truck with a helmet. But it it really speaks to the admiration that I have for our firefighters for the work done by our police department West Westcom facility was very very enlightening and impactful. Uh let's see. Um Kevin and I attended the first farmers market which included the Cinco deio um celebration and there was a crowning of the king and the queen. Um I just want to make note that um our partners in the in the business community um this was sponsored by the Greater Iowa Credit Union as far as Cinco deio. So my hats off to them and to thank them. Um also um the historical valley Junction Foundation um I attended a meeting. Thank you Steve. And I was enlightened to some of the things that um go on um at the historical valley junction um in terms of the different programs, the different events. Um so I appreciate that and I just want to publicly um thank Google F Google Fiber. They're one of our sponsors and also of course West Bank. They are the sponsors of Music in the Junction. I think it's important to acknowledge our diff businesses that do support not only the historical valley junction, our farmers market, but then their support of West De Mo.

Uh let's see. I attended the human rights commission meeting. Um, I also uh the community engagement institute. We also had the opportunity to have Brian come and speak to us as far as our engineering department. Thank you, Brian. Great job. And of course, Ryan with Parks and Wreck. We were at the Rex Plex for me. By attending these weekly meetings, it gives me an opportunity to hit the ground running in terms of learning and appreciating our various directors of our de various departments. So, I'm calling out Brian and Ryan because they're sitting here and I see them. I will try to make sure that I do that. We have uh one more meeting um next week and it'll be here at city hall and um you're going to be here. Yep.

Yeah. handing out the cupcakes. Absolutely. Hand out treats. They're eating cupcakes. It'll it'll end the way that it started.

But um I think Oh, I cannot um go without mentioning um I was asked to give the introduction to the West Demo six sixth grade festival choir. Um I did um introduce they gave me five minutes. I try to do it in four minutes. I please um um plug up your ears officer because I left Valley State Center. I was able to get to the police station in probably four minutes, but I was very honored to participate in being there and honoring our police officers and the memorial service. It was very very impactful. Um it ended um with the um picnic which I had an opportunity to go around and meet with some of our um citizens. Also bouncy houses. The kids love that. keep, you know, keep having the bouncy house every every year. But, um, bottom line, it was an opportunity though to show appreciation for our police officers and the great works that they do. So, I thank you guys and thank you for not giving me a ticket. And that's it.

All right. Thank you, Councilwoman. I can see that you absolutely have hit the ground running and are uh absorbing all of the materials and delving into it all. You gave a great report on Dart. you're doing a great job representing us there and appreciate you doing that. So, all right, Councilman Travillian, any report?

Uh, I got a couple of things. I just want to update everybody. The, uh, we had the community compliance meeting uh, prior to the council meeting and city detect, which is the software we're going to be using for code or yeah, community compliance. I was going to say code enforcement, community compliance um violations that hopefully is going to be signed and the contract will be signed in a couple of weeks and we're keeping our fingers crossed that about the middle of July that is going to be operational and we should know within a few months of it I would think being implemented if it's going to work the way we think it will. So that's cool.

Hopefully that's going to happen. Another thing that that I learned and I am going to be asking for uh a change to our ordinance. I learned that it's uh against code to have well I don't know what six or eight conduit pipes stacked in your front yard, but it is not against city ordinance to have a ditch open in your yard because there's a property down on Seventh Street that has both. he's allowed to keep the ditch open because we don't have anything that says it's illegal. So, I've asked uh Barabi to look into revising that because to me it doesn't make any sense to have an open trench that somebody has to look at and it can stay there I guess forever. So, the last thing um is Gary come forward please. I think everybody up here knows, but uh Gary Rank, who has been with the city of West De Moine in what was public works, now we call it public services for 25 years and has been the uh public works director for about the last three years, is retiring at the end of this month. Gary, it's been my pleasure to work with you for 25 years because when I was at Waterworks, you know, we we worked together um and then obviously with the council and now as you being director, you've done a phenomenal job these three years. Uh congratulations on your retirement. You will be missed by I'm I won't say everybody because I'm sure there's some people in your department that but those

by us. Exactly. Everybody's got those. But you will be missed by me and I think this entire council, you've done a phenomenal job. You jumped into those those shoes and whoever takes over um you've set the bar. So they they've got to climb a ladder to to exceed what you've done. So, thank you very much for everything you've done these last 25 years for the city of West De Mo

and I thank you all for the time that I've been here. Um, you know, it's it's bittersweet. I will say that it's been a good career. It's been a good place to work and know I'll miss you all as well. It's my time. Yep. I hear you.

Thank you. Well, you know, we had um we had uh was art on the campus and you know, it was Sally Ory's last one. So, I I did the same thing you just did here, but Sally hadn't announced that she was retiring. So, I'm glad you actually just brought this up and not me. Uh so, I didn't out Gary on retiring here uh like I did Sally apparently. But Gary, I I just would echo I think all of us feel exactly the same way and Council Millian said it well, but you know, when Brett left here, Brett had been here forever and I know you had worked with him, but I thought, "Oh my goodness, we're losing a lot of institutional knowledge. Uh and and uh wow, how is how is this going to go?" And Gary, you did you stepped up. You didn't even miss a beat. You kept everything going. Uh, and as I say about you guys over in public works/public services, you guys really burn the candle on both ends. I mean, you do everything and you do it well. Uh, you have been a phenomenal director and you will definitely be be missed, but I'm also excited for you to have your time and and have your retirement and uh enjoy life and not have to worry when it snows. No.

So Gary, honestly, from the bottom of my heart and everybody up here, man, we're really going to miss you and really appreciate the job you did. You did a phenomenal job. Phenomenal job. So, all right. I have to add something about that. So, when Gary gave me his uh letter, I put up my desk and said, "You may want to think about this." And so, I'm glad you brought up Kevin because it's happened really quickly. And I'm thinking we had another chance to honor him and boom, it's here. So, he doesn't like a lot of attention and obviously, but he he he done a great job. He's got a great team and we'll keep it going. So, thank you. Phenomenal job, Gary. Okay, Councilman Lot.

Uh, I'll go and I'll be very brief from our report. One of the things, your honor, that's keeps coming up is uh from constituents is our addition of the flock cameras a few years back. Um, and there's uh I don't know where it comes from, but I'll call it some misinformation that gets passed around in the various social media areas and whatnot. So, I just wanted to speak to that real quickly for everybody who's in the room or might be listening. Uh, you know, when the city council adopted those cameras, I don't know, I think it was three or four years ago, uh, I I have a software background, so I participated in the due diligence and the contract review and whatnot. And so, I wanted to just talk about some of the u protections that are in place for citizens real quick. Um, contractually with Flock, that data is deleted every 30 days. So, when you drive by front of Jordan Creek Mall and it takes a picture of your license plate, know that that picture will be gone. Uh, I drive by multiple times a day, so mine's always in there, right? Um, also though to take that the next step, there are access controls, so only specific officers get to have access. Um, there's activity logging. So, anytime somebody goes into that system and pulls down a log, they that gets timestamped, uh, who did it, what happened, why they pulled that data down, all that stuff is logged. There's negative sharing provision provisions in there. So, there's no fishing expeditions. So police can only go look for specific crimes or criminal activity or if they've been contacted by the police department of another municipality, uh they can go look for information, but they're not out looking for and they cannot go out and look for Doug's truck and find out what my pattern of life is. Um and then the last piece and maybe the most important is that the usage of this system is available for audit at any time. So if anybody wants to audit it, you can do that. Um, ultimately I'll I'll speak for myself and not the rest of the council, but uh with these protections in place, I felt like um uh the biggest thing is is I trust our police officers. I trust our department. I trusted Chief Scott back then. I trust Chief Bellamy now and all of the folks

that work for the PD. And it occurs to me if you don't trust the police department, then you probably shouldn't put these in place. But I think we have that and I trust them to do the right thing with that technology. Um, it has prevented some horrible crimes. We all know of a teenage uh girl who got kidnapped and we found her in Tennessee safe and that was because of the flock system. So, uh, as the as a public, uh, safety subcommittee chair, I I just wanted to speak to that. Greg and I are always keeping an eye on these things. And so, uh, that's my report, your honor.

And if I can just add one more thing, uh, I think it's on June 5th. Councilman Lot, I think we're having a discussion at our subcommittee meeting at 7 am on that Friday morning. And one more one more thing to just bring to mind because there are a couple of um owl cameras out at Raccoon River Park. Those are not run by the flock system. Those are city cameras run and maintained by the parks and recreation department. Those are not cameras that are sending data to the flock company. That is not that is a separate thing. So, I know it can be easy to conflate these two things, but they're different. The owl cameras in Raccoon River uh are different than the flat cameras that that Councilman Los was mentioning in our commercialized areas.

Well, I appreciate the report. Very thorough report. Uh and you know, we've discussed this a number of times. It's it's an important issue. We need to make sure that we maintain the privacy of our residents, which I believe the system does. But it is also a very very valuable tool. Um, you know, we we had talked a number of times even when I first got elected, we talked about having the the speed cameras and all that stuff. None of us were in favor of that. Uh, there was a due process uh issue involved with that that uh we didn't like and uh I'm just not in favor of those those speed cameras personally. But these cameras, uh, to Councilman Lotz's point, um, my gosh, I mean, I think we had a list of different, uh, crimes that were solved, uh, as, u, you know, result of these cameras being in place and for us being able to solve those crimes that otherwise we wouldn't be able to be solved and lives that have been saved, uh, in the case of Amber Alerts and whatnot because of these cameras as well. So,

that chain of bank robbers coming up from down south, right,

got them here. And and that's something that people that are concerned with the privacy don't even look at uh don't even give any uh thought to. Uh and you know, you go go sit down and talk to a family member who uh got a loved one returned uh that they thought otherwise may have been killed uh as a result of of these cameras uh and the technology and being able to to patch in with other cameras and other uh police departments across the country. It is a very very powerful tool and if you don't do anything wrong there's nothing to be worried about you know and again the other thing I talk about is the deterrent that this has to crime huge deterrent you know we have these cameras if you're going to do something you're going to break the law you're going to do something you know commit a felony or something like that you're we got the cameras we've got it on camera you're going to get caught going to jail so do that in some other community not here so

can I just yeah go ahead Councilwoman Elliot and then we'll move on yes

this Wednesday um I unfortunately have another commitment so I will not be able to join but there is this group they will be meeting Wednesday on the 27th well I guess it's next week and the Valley Junction Activity Center um basically community input regarding um the cameras the flock cameras um I'm hoping though that I can make arrangements to attend because to Doug's point. There is so much misinformation out there um in terms of what the cameras are doing, how it's being used. I think it would be important for a few of us if we could attend to attend this meeting. basically as misinformation is being brought to light for one or two of us to be there if if nothing else as a source to kind of combat the negativity and the mis miscommunication that are that are out there. So I thought I wanted to at least share that. It is actually Wednesday, May 27th. I'm at the Valley Junction Activity Center.

I believe Chief Bellamy will be there. Okay. Okay, perfect. All right, moving on to item four, consent agenda. Um, do we need to have anything pulled? Okay. Um, we any council person like to pull any items from here? Otherwise, I would take a motion to approve as distributed. Yes. Uh, mayor, I'd like to pull 4 C 78 and 9. They are liquor licenses for Maverick. Yep, I had that marked. Okay, so we're going to pull 4 C789. Are there any other items that any council person would like to have pulled and voted on separately? Otherwise, I take a motion to approve their moved. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Please vote.

Five. Yes. Okay. Item 789. We're going to take end block. It's basically uh liquor license uh approvals for the Maverick Group uh LLC. Uh does somebody want to I'll make a motion for 4, 7, 8, and nine. Okay, it's been moved. Okay, it's a move and seconded. Uh, please vote. Four. Yes. One abstension due to potential conflict of interest.

All right. Item five, old business. Item 5A, Reeds Crossing Planned Unit development, 925 Jordan Creek Parkway and 6990 Ashworth Road. would amend the Reeds Crossing planned unit development PUD ordinance to incorporate ground to the east of the existing Lutheran Church of Hope property for storm water detention uh initiated by Lutheran Church of Hope. We've got an ordinance amendment for approval the second reading waver the third and adoption of final form. There are no outstanding issues and no changes from the previous reading which was adopted unanimously by the council to last. Say second reading second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?

Okay, hearing none. Please vote. Five. Yes. Or amend the city code of the city west 2024 and the reads crossing PUD ordinance pertaining to plan unit development district regulations and guidelines. Motion to approve the second reading. Second. Okay. Please vote. Five. Yes. Motion to wave the third reading adopted final form. Second.

Please vote. Five. Yes. Okay. Okay, item 5B, approval of traffic code amendment, special speed zones, various streets. We've uh once again got an ordinance amendment for approval of the second reading, waver the third, and adoption of final form. There are no outstanding issues, no changes from the previous reading, which was adopted unanimously by the council at the last meeting. Motion to consider second reading. Okay, it's been moved and second. Is there any discussion? Okay, please vote. Five. Yes. amending the city code of the city west by 2024 by amending provisions pertaining to the traffic code relating to official traffic controls. Motion to approve the secondary second. Okay, please vote.

Five yes. Motion to wave the third reading and adopt in final form. Second. Please vote. Five yes. Okay. Item six, public hearings. Item 6 A. This is a time and place for a public hearing to consider community development block grant 202627 annual action plan initiated by the city of West De Mo. Ryan, would you please read the date the notice is published? May 14th, 2026 in the de mo register. And have we received any written comments of this hearing? None, your honor.

Okay. Anybody in the audience would like to address the council on item 6A. Please come to the podium here. Give us your name and address for the record. Anybody online, hit star six to unmute yourself and do the same. Is there anybody either in the chambers or online that would like to address the council on item 6A? Okay. Hearing and seeing no one, I'll declare the public hearing closed. And we've got a resolution for approval of the 2627 CDBG annual action plan. And there are no outstanding issues. Motion to approve. Second. Okay. It's been moved and second. Is there any discussion? Okay. Hearing none, please vote.

Five. Yes. Okay. Item 6B. This is a time and place for a public hearing to consider 202526 FY operating capital budgets and amendment number three initiated by the city of West De Mo. Ryan, would you please read the date the notice was published? May 1st, 2026 in the De Mo register. And have received any written comments at this hearing? No, your honor.

Okay. Anybody in the audience would like to address the council item 6B, please come to the podium, give your name and address for the record. Anybody online, hit star six to unmute yourself and do the same. Is there anybody either in the chambers or online that would like to address the council on this item? Okay, once again hearing and seeing no one, I'll declare the public hearing closed. And we've got a resolution for approval of budget amendment number three to uh to the FY 2526 operating capital budget. There are no outstanding issues. Motion to approve. Second. Okay, it's been moved and second. Is there any discussion?

Just want to thank Chris and Tim and the finance team for combing through. I believe this is our last budget amendment for this fiscal year and I look forward to more budget amendments in future fiscal years. Or maybe I don't look forward to those, but thank you. All right. Thank you, Councilman. Please vote. Five. Yes. Okay. Item 6C. This is a time and a place for a public hearing to consider Grand Avenue widening South Jordan Creek Parkway to South 60th Street initiated by the city of West Deo and Ryan. Would you please read the date the notice is published? May 1st, 2026 in the De Mo Register. and have received any written comments at this hearing? None, your honor.

Okay. Anybody in the audience would like to address the council on this item, please come to the podium, give us your name and address for the record. If you're online, hit star six to unmute yourself, and do the same. Is there anybody either online or in the council chambers who'd like to address the council on this item? Okay. Hearing and seeing no one, I'll declare the public hearing closed. And we've got two resolutions and a and a motion we can take at the same time. And there are no outstanding issues. Motion to approve. Second. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Okay, please vote. Five. Yes.

Okay. Item 6D. This is a time and a place for public hearing to consider South 35th Street Trail reconnection a reconstruction initiated by the city of West Deo and Ryan, would you please read the date the notice was published? May 1st, 2026 in the De Mo register. And have we received any written comments at this hearing? None, your honor. Okay. Anybody in the audience that'd like to address the council item 60, please come to the podium. Give us your name and address of the record. If you're online, hit star six to unmute yourself and do the same. Is there anybody either in the council chambers or online that would like to address council on this item? Okay. Hearing and seeing no one, I'll declare the public hearing closed. And we've once again got two resolutions and a motion so we can take at the same time and there are no outstanding issues. Motion to approve. Second.

Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? All right, please vote. Five. Yes.

Okay. Item seven, new business. Item 7 A, plat survey, parcel 2026-4 east of 811 Buro Oaks Drive. Approved Platis survey creating a parcel for the transfer of ownership the village at Glenn Oaks. Uh we have got a resolution for approval and release of the platus survey and there are no outstanding issues but there are three conditions of approval including that this is being done solely for the transfer of ownership that the owner needs to contact the city upon transfer the property so that we can record a lot tie agreement and that no improvements are to be done to the property until the property is replatted through the city subdivision process. Pretty standard. Uh somebody want to make a motion to approve? Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Uh, is there anybody in the audience or online that would like to address the council on this item? Is there any discussion on the dis? All right, please vote.

Five. Yes. Okay. Item 7B uh amendments city code title one administrative chapter 9 municipal elections repeal and replace section one to become a chapter 45 city for elections. My understanding is that uh we've got some council people would like to defer on this item uh and have it referred to uh finance administration uh at their next meeting for some discussion. Uh does somebody want to make a motion to that effect? So moved. Okay. It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?

Okay. So we're going to defer on this and we're going to bring it back after there's been discussion uh through finance and administration. And my understanding is that there's three different kinds of city elections that can be had. We've got right now a runoff election. It's a costly election process if there's more than two people running because if somebody doesn't get 50% plus one, then it goes to an election after November in December, you're campaigning in the cold and everything else. You've got another form of election which I believe Ankeny used to have for a while which is a primary election. in that form of election. Uh if there's more than two people, you are also going to have uh two elections. It's just you'll have one before the November election and then have the November election. And then there is the form of election that we're looking at going to here uh which is the winner takes all. But there is different requirements for each one of these different numbers of signatures that need to be had. So we're going to bring this to uh finance administration, have them vet that there, and then bring it back. Yeah, I think my position on this is I'd just like Finette and Greg to take a closer look before it comes to council for a final vote. So,

Sure.

Thank you, Councilman. Having said that, I was talking to our uh wonderful city manager, Tom Haden, and he does want all of us to explore this. And look, we will absolutely take a a deeper look at it and we will report out and when we do get the uh report for the FNA meeting, I would love a real like pretty simple chart. And I'm sure there's one out there that just really talks about here's the differences, here's the similarities, a really nice concise way to describe those differences. And of course, there are nuances maybe built in within this. And I would love to explore them more. And I know council member Elliot and I will be willing to explore those, but I do want to make sure all six of us are really, really educated when this comes to because we're at the root of what our city's local Democratic vote looks like. So definitely important.

It is important. It's also important to look at the financial aspect of elections and if we don't have to have more than one election and have the citizens pay for that, that would be great, right? I mean, I think we just had Councilwoman Elliot was in a runoff election. She had to campaign twice and that wasn't an easy process for either uh Councilwoman Elliott or her opponent. And then of course there is the cost that's borne by the citizens. Uh and I want to say that that cost was maybe $50,000 somewhere in that uh neighborhood. Ryan,

yeah, I think it's 3540,000. 40,000. So, you know, if we can if we can have a a fair and and uh reasonable process uh that people can can vote for their candidate and we can avoid a costly second election, I think that makes a lot of sense. But let's take that to finance administration. Let's vet it and let's bring it back here. And there is some discussion and Tom and I have had this. Not everything that we do up here is going to go through the subcommittee process. a lot of what we do will, but there's sometimes where it's appropriate for all of us to have the debate, the discussion back and forth and make a decision uh all at the same time. So, Councilwoman Elliot, and what I would like to add is that West De Mo is the only one in the metro that currently has the process that we were following. So it kind of behooves us to look at different scenarios, analyze it,

and maybe be more in sync with the rest of the metro area cuz the rest of metro area, you know, they're they have already made the change. So I think it's it's important for what going to

Totally totally agree. I think we're the only ones left doing the runoff elections. Um, you know, and you know what's interesting is I I I looked at your election and there are a lot of people, believe it or not, that some of them may not have come to the polls the second time because they thought you won because you were the top vote getter the first time. So, that's another one of the flaws there is uh people seeing that and say, "What do you mean I got to go out and vote? I already voted for you." Right? People get confused. So, okay. So, there's been a motion in a second there to defer it and bring it back. Uh, we need a vote. Please vote. Five. Yes.

All right. So, that is deferred. Uh, moving on to item 7C, approval of traffic code amendment, official traffic control, South Grand Prairie Parkway and Wendover Road, EPR Parkway. Uh, we've got an ordinance amendment for approval of the first reading and there are no outstanding issues. Move consideration of the first reading. Second, second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Uh, is there anybody in the audience that would like to address the council on this item? Anybody online that would like to address council on this item? Any discussion on the dis? All right, please vote.

Five. Yes. Norman the city code of the city of West Iowa 2024 by many provisions pertaining to the traffic code relating to official traffic controls. Move approval of the first reading. Second.

Okay. Please vote. Five. Yes. Okay, hold on a second. All right. Eight. Item eight, receive, file, and or refer. Uh, item 8A, we will receive and file internal financial reports. Item nine, other matters. Are there any other matters that any council person would like to bring up at this point in time for the good of the order? Okay, hearing none, we are going to, I guess, adjourn to our workshop and then after that we've got an executive I think we're planning on doing the executive session. Okay, we're going to go meet up in the boardroom first.

Okay, so we're going to meet up in the boardroom. Uh time is money. We're going to move up in the boardroom for a close session and then we're going to come back after that and reconvene for our workshop. We are

With that, we're going to convene our workshop. Sergeant Wade is going to lead us by singing uh whisperless whisper. Is that you? It's our musician. Get me singing. That's your playing song. Let's walk up something. All right, Ryan. Okay. Roll that beautiful bean footage. We uh waiting on council member Lot to get back or let's just start. He's coming. All right. Where'd he go? He had a little truck. Oh,

Sergeant Wade went and marked the chalk. He's at the 30 minute spot. I'm in the 30 minute spot and I bet he doesn't tow it.

Well, we will be as brief as possible tonight. I don't think we're going to beat the storms brief, but we'll try to I know you've had some weighty workshop topics lately. This will probably not be one of them. So, Ryan Moffett, community economic development director. Um, what we've got before you tonight is a brief council workshop presentation on some of the proposed changes to the property improvement fund and regulatory compliance fund that we've deployed for for quite some time now. So, we're going to refer to it as PIF and RCF from here on out. Um, in a minute, I'm going to turn it over to Brad. He's going to talk about a little bit about the history of the program, some of the successes of it. But, next year in 2027 marks the 10-year anniversary since this program came to be and it was first rolled out. So, we're doing this on the heels of making some program tweaks uh before we roll out uh round number nine for new applications later this summer. So, we just want to fine-tune some things, make sure the program is working as good as it can be. We've learned some things from the applicants, from our due diligence committee, uh, from previous recipients, and we want to make sure that the program has the biggest impact to the community that possibly can. So, uh, in tonight's presentation, here's a little bit about what we'll go through. Again, a little bit of background on, uh, PIF and RCF. Uh, refresher, maybe for some of you, it's it's new information for our newer council members. We'll talk a little bit about some of the successes the program has had and give some real life examples of impacts that we've seen so far. Uh we'll go through some of the suggested changes that we're proposing to make and the reasons behind why we're looking to change that. And then we'll uh follow that up with any questions you might have and just get feedback basically that will direct us so we can implement these new rules and roll the program out. So with that, I'm going to turn over majority of this tonight to Brad Munford. He's coordinated this program for several years now and really is kind of our subject matter expert on it.

All right. Good evening. I will uh again kind of quickly go through these things again. Um as Ryan pointed out, you guys have had a lot of workshops. So, uh this is just to kind of recap a few things and to get you guys some feedback. Uh if you guys are kind of into cinema, this is going to be a little bit different. Kind of like a Quinton Tarantino movie where I give you the end and then I fill in the blanks uh later on. So right here, this very first slide, these are the five questions that ultimately we're going to be asking you tonight. Uh I'm doing this so that you know what you're listening for, what's important to you, and I'll go over these kind of real quickly. So the first uh kind of point is uh uh one is potential expansion of the eligibility areas. I'll talk about that. I'll also talk about the evaluation of job creation versus uh uh job retention requirements. uh reviewing our uh funding participation limits uh as far as what we do as a city uh supporting small businesses uh through uh flexible project timelines and then also uh the idea of prioritizing catalytic and synergistic investments uh throughout the area. Um so first our PIF RCF program it's uh uh the property improvement fund is a PIF. the five-year 0% interest forgivable loan and it support property upgrades and reinvestment uh in these areas. The regulatory compliance fund is a reimburseable grant. So they do the work. We pay a portion of that money back to them in a reimburseable grant. Again, that is focused more on code compliance and safety improvements. So code of compliance, we're looking at fire sprinkling systems. Uh we're looking at grease interceptors, things of that nature, ADA bathrooms, things of that nature. for both of those programs. Uh we have each app they can each program is maximized or the maximum is 75,000

per applicant that they could be eligible for unless you have a historic property per our um study that was done uh most recently in 2022. In those cases, those properties can be eligible for up to $100,000 from each one of those programs. the target areas that we've had uh initially was Valley Junction. That was our um that was the majority of the target areas for all of these rounds. And then our last round u which was in 2024, we added the eighth street corridor uh just north of again uh as Ryan pointed out we're hitting our 10-year anniversary. This is a good time to kind of look and reassess some things uh types of projects that um that we fund and impact. We already talked about uh uh facade and infrastructure improvements, tenant remodeling, ADA accessibility, fire and uh sprinkler systems. Uh our impacts of our programs, you can see some of the examples on the lefth hand side of the screen. I'll go over some of those a little bit more in detail in a second, but uh it helps us strengthen our aging commercial corridors. We can make an argument that this is probably one of our most adaptable and uh programs to help out Valley Junction in a way where other things uh we may not be able to help. Um it supports small businesses. We preserve and enhance uh historic structures. Examples of that would be uh the Winchester, the old Silvers building that's historic and then also the work that was done on the KCL building as well. Uh the nice thing is that we were able to leverage significant private investment after we put in our city dollars. And what I mean by that is uh we fueled this in a number of different ways. So over the eight rounds we had 73 projects that were completed that touched over 37 businesses. Uh 343 jobs either uh retained or kept through this program and uh for about $2.6 million of investment, we were able to leverage a

little over $7.6 million of private investment in these programs. So when we look at that, that means for every dollar that we've put in these programs over the last eight rounds, uh we ended up sparking about $2.87 of private investment. Uh we see that as a um a benefit and we hope you do as well. Uh some success stories. I'll run through these pretty quick just to kind of get you guys familiar with it. You've seen these you've seen these buildings. You probably been proud of them or reference referenced them before, but just kind of go through them real quickly. uh give you an idea of some of the uh valuation and increases we've seen. So with the KCL building before they work done in 2016, you see they're a little over $424,000. Right now they're at 1.6 or 1.4 million, a little over uh which is again I see at the bottom a little over a million dollar increase in valuation. Uh we see similar things with uh old Muffin Factory at 721 Railroad. This is a project that was just done in our last round. So, we don't have those years of increased uh valuation, but you can still see here we're looking at $120,000 of increased valuation in just in little little under a year uh of that work that's being done. Uh Bixon Company, Bixon Company, this was a situation where a building was raised and we put something and something else was put in its place. Um we looking at, you know, $1.1 million of increased valuation for that property there. Um, lastly, we have uh Winchester, the old Silvers building. Uh, 364,000 in 2017. Again, we're up to, you know, a little over a million uh million dollars in valuations today. Uh, 700,000 increase there. Uh, so with that being said, let's talk about a little bit of the uh, uh, valuation after the eight rounds. So, this is where we're going to kind of talk about those questions a little bit. Um, I'll come back to them at the end and just ask you directly what do you think of each one, but here's the background of each thing. Um,

we already talked about why we're reviewing it. Now, I'll talk about uh how we're the lens that we're looking at this uh these programs through. It has to do with stakeholder input and perspective. So the feedback that we got over these last uh eight programs uh myself personally the last two rounds of this um we gathered history from uh you know uh program applicants uh businesses that thought about it and wanted to participate but chose not to. We have our due diligence committee members and then our personal observations from administering the programs. I will point out since we do have new council members and for those that may not be familiar with the due diligence committee, the due diligence committee is a committee that was appointed by uh past mayor and actually uh current mayor in some cases to review and score applications that come in for these programs. It is a competitive process. those uh due diligence committee members uh represent a wide array of professions and bring uh different expertise to that review process. So we have individuals that are bankers, we have individuals that are design professionals, we have citizens and then we also have individuals that represent the chamber of commerce and the Valley Junction Foundation. Um we we have a scoring that goes through. They give their scoring and then we um we uh present a represent uh present their findings to you to then give a final um funding to distribute final funding. the uh stakeholder perspective. It's a our strength is that it's a pro a proven trusted program, strong private, public and leverage um flexible funding tool and it gives us again an ability to help smaller businesses in situations where they do not create enough increment through tiff where we can help them through that tool. Uh some of the challenges that we had is that it's been

limited to Valley Junction and our a street corridor. Uh the job creation and retention requirements have sometimes um kept people from applying. Uh the city's 35% funding cap has been more difficult for some for some businesses. I'll touch on that a little later. Um limited development experience for small businesses uh created some challenges. Um again because of education and sophistication of some of the business smaller business owners uh more uh more time to get projects done and then we want to also talk about creating more catalytic reinvestment. So potential improvement number one getting into the questions the PIFF RCF eligibilities we're currently in Valley Junction and A Street. Valid junctions in orange at the bottom a streets in uh green at top. Um businesses have expressed outside of these areas have expressed interest in this. Um we wanted to get an idea of where the council feels about opening up. Uh we took a look at our community and we thought that where we the place that we saw small businesses that have uh aging buildings, aging infrastructure is uh would next be our grand corridor approximately from first street to around 14th and that's what you see there in blue. Uh potential improvement number two is a reduction of job creation and retention requirements. So to just kind of briefly summarize this slide here, um right now we currently require two full-time equivalent jobs to be eligible for this program. A lot of these smaller businesses or a few of these smaller businesses are owner operated. So they have they're working by the sweat of their brow as their one sole employee and they're working keeping their business open. They then hire part-time employees to help them

during peak times of the year. Uh at times the sum of those full-time hours add up to another full-time equivalent where they can say it's two. The issue that comes into play is that those businesses that are hesitant of for applying, they cannot guarantee that they can have enough part-time over a 5-year period of time that they can guarantee that they're going to have two every year for 5 years. So, what they do is they kind of pull bait and they don't apply for the programs. Uh, we believe it's something that we should kind of think about and it'll be up to your discretion on how we move forward with that. Uh potential improvement number three, the rising cost of construction and the program limit and the limits to our program. Since the initiation of this program, the city we have said that we are not going to place any more investment into these projects than 35% of the total project costs. Um, again to make this to summarize this up a little bit more, what's happening is is that uh the cost of construction for smaller businesses are starting to rise more and more. And unfortunately, their opportunity to get access to capital is not keeping up with those construction costs. So, yes, those construction costs are going up, but they still go to the bank and they're still limited on how much they can get for a loan. So, we end up in situations where they can't scrape enough pennies together to try to get this project to move forward. However, it's something that could help on a historic building. It's something that would allow for a fire sprinkler system be put in to make a space more usable. Uh, one of the questions that we will be asking you tonight is if uh if it's possible or to go from a 35% to a 50% to align a little bit better with kind of what we're seeing in uh construction

needs there. Uh number four is addressing the uh learning curves for small businesses. Uh currently in our development agreements uh all projects have to be done within 12 months. Again with small businesses they are small business owners. They know their business. If they make trinkets, if they serve food, that's what they know. They then have to jump into the realm of trying to understand how to go about getting uh a site plan review through development services. They have to figure out how to get a engineer to design their sprinkler system. Uh how to find an architect. That takes a little time and some rev up for them to go. And we've been finding that it's been more and more difficult for those business owners to get it done within a 12 month period of time. Uh what we've done at a staff level is that if they have shown an effort to get things moving and the project is moving forward, we've worked with them to allow them a little extra time to get those projects done. In essence, we want to go ahead and codify that and make it part of the act uh to make it part of the actual standard so that we give them possibly 24 months so that they can get the project rolling so that they can learn a little bit, have a little bit of that learning curve and move forward and still get a good project for uh uh up and moving. Uh number five, oh sorry um five. I'm I'm going quick so I had two slides and put into one. All right. Uh number five, prioritizing synergistic investment. Uh I have two slides for this. I'm going to kind of break it down a little bit shorter for you. Um first is that we've always have used uh the financial backing or the financial um optics of a project as being almost the one thing that we look at when we're ranking and distributing money for these projects. However, what we have noticed

is that uh there's been some uh some nice benefits that have come through. So, for example, when we give a project money, um we've seen through projects such as St. Kildas and Winchester, Bixon Company, KCL, that it sparks other people to kind of step up their game. So, in essence, it's almost a situation where you see your neighbor cutting grass, you're like, "All right, I better get out there and start cutting the grass." Um what we want to do is kind of work at uh changing our scoring criteria where we keep the financial standards that we have but in addition to that we want to give some extra scoring and a nod to things that we are calling to be uh that's going to be synergistic that's going to spark more development in the area so that other people kind of get out to with keep the analogy get out cut your grass paint your building fix your roof because you're not keeping up with the Joneses next door. So, um that in a kind of brief show with us. So, again, um what we're proposing, alignment with our city plans, positive impact to surrounding businesses, uh renovation and preservation of existing historic buildings, uh visibility and prominence of the project. And I'll kind of point an example of that. We kind of see it a little bit going on with Bixon Company where as you enter Fifth Street, it kind of becomes this entry point where you see this this uh this building that's new. You feel that energy that's there. Also, it has that patio that faces the stage which allows for more people to interact not only with the business but with what's going on in our festivals and things that we have down in that area. That is uh an example of how you get that energy. Most people can't explain it, but you definitely can feel it. And we want to try to set up a scoring criteria where we encourage that uh moving forward. Um and then again, ability to inspire additional reinvestment. And then we

want to this last kind of check mark here, long-term commitment to the district community. We want to make sure that we add points to businesses that have been in our community for a long period of time that they get extra scores, extra points for that. uh that will help us as a tool so that we um don't necessarily have um I don't want to say franchises or outsiders but basically individuals that are we want to encourage individuals that have been in our community doing the work in these older areas to stay give them a few extra points so that they have uh a little bit better shot at getting some of these funds. Uh, with that, I will go back to our original slide. I went through that pretty quick. Back to our original slide and kind of um ask these questions, but before we go through that, I will stand for any questions that you have. I I went through a mile a minute to try to keep you from getting wet.

No, it's perfect. Brad, any questions for Brad or Ryan?

I do have a question. Um, I know this is all geared towards businesses and whatnot, but the Masonic Lodge that I belong to down on on Fifth Street that's been there, the building's been there for 100 years. It was last year we had the proclamation for that. Um, they've got, I think it's three rental properties down below. Um, one of them is Penrod's Barber Shop, which has been there the entire time. Not the same owner, but same thing. and the other businesses. Um, Judy Kay's I think has been there for like 30 years. They were the lodge was told that they could not qualify for these because they the lodge doesn't have any employees. But when you've got rental properties, if you're not keeping your building up, obviously you're not going to have places for your tenants. So, is there a way to

work through that? work through that rather than no you don't you the Masoning Lodge doesn't have employees so you can't qualify. Yeah. Yeah. And that's something that to be frank with you um I've sat down Ryan and I've sat down and kind of wrestle with thought about um quite a bit. Uh we don't have to be frank with you we don't have a direct straight answer at this point in time. Um it was something that to be honest with you I had it as a slide to kind of discuss. We don't have enough answers to give you to give you a direct one. Now, there's it's more complicated than I thought.

Um there are some legal implications with some things with nonprofits, uh with jobs, uh things of that nature. Um but I will say that there are two avenues that can be done. So, for example, uh you know, a tenant can apply for funding as opposed to the building owner uh could be one way. I'll let Ryan see him here out of my peripheral. But you're not going to get a tenant that's going to apply for to get a new roof put on the building because then they're on the hook. Understand that that's why I said there's more there's more that we have to look into there a little bit. But I'll go ahead and let Well, that's all I ask is it gets looked into and if it can't happen, it can't happen. I just

I think by nature I mean the rules of the program today tax exempt properties would not qualify for the program. I think historically when this was created it was meant for tax producing small businesses properties on the tax rule. I think that's the issue that we that's tripped us up before at that location. We'll double check the taxable uh status of that property to see if it's on the tax rules or exempt. But I think, you know, we didn't bring that up tonight just because it's there's a lot of landmines I think with talking about that. And we've got another funding source that's available for nonprofit businesses to to apply, which is the hotel motel sales tax program. So, um I I think going forward, I mean, it still would be our recommendation we don't put that in here for tax exempt properties, but certainly if council directs us, we'd be happy to look at that further, too.

What we have to be careful of is, you know, when when we created this pro these programs, you know, it it was it was kind of a scary thing. We we wanted to try to revitalize the business district in Valley Junction and have, you know, more manp small businesses, but at the same time, you wanted to make sure we protect the taxpayer investment. And so everything that we did to set this up, including the due diligence committee, was was doing that. And really, if I think about the uh over the last 10 years of the program, I mean, Kelly Sharp, who was honest and honest and honest to get this program up and running, ended up having Veno 209 go under like uh pretty quickly. Now, it's still being used and, you know, rented out and whatnot, but I I don't know that a lot of the the businesses due diligence committee's done a good job and the program rules, I think, have done a pretty good job. I don't know other than that that there have been a lot of these businesses that have received funding and have gone under or are no longer there. I know Heavenly has had some

there's been a few over the over the course of the eight rounds. There are some certainly and we were willing to take that risk but you you got to also make sure that you're protecting the taxpayers money and the investment for us too. The Do you know 209 did repay everything. Oh, they did. Yep. Yep. That's right. Loan was okay. Y too. I mean, we have had other nonprofits that have asked us about this funding program, but it's a slippery slope when we talk about places of worship, uh, you know, other community centers down there that might not be on the tax rules. Where do we draw the line? Okay. So, how do you um I've got feedback on all five of these items and I'm I'm happy to like do it right away or we want to go one by one or one by one and then up and down the line

on on each like Okay. Yeah, let's Yeah, that let's do that. Start down with Doug. Number one, potential expansion of eligible areas. Do you want to go to Grand Avenue or just leave it 8th Street and uh and Fifth? You're asking me? Yeah. Yeah. I would expand it. Yep. Kevin, I would expand it. That I would expand. I'm with them. Expand. I actually have a question related to it. Yeah. Okay. So would we have sufficient funding to continue doing the project size and amounts that we are doing in the existing areas or would we reduce the amount that would be eligible in the Valley Junction area.

Well, actually that's a funding question so I'm going to defer that to Okay.

Yeah. I I think uh what what we're saying and this is kind of goes hand in hand with the scoring, right? I mean we've had basically to this last round, first one I've really the only one I've been a part of coming to West De Mo. everybody that applied that met the criteria was funded regardless of how significant their project was or in some cases wasn't. And I think what we're saying going forward is if we be more selective and let the cream rise to the top and focus on these projects that are more catalytic in nature um that is going to shape where the funding goes so we have a situation where maybe not every applicant does receive funding. But this would really be about the same amount of funding that we're spreading over a larger area. And how we derive this area basically in blue that you see there is if it's commercially zoned along Grand Avenue within a reasonable range. We didn't go over to where Hi's at at Grand and Railroad. Um but within that area basically if it were commercially zoned we decided to put it in. Now there's some new buildings in there and quite a bit of new development. Instead of having a checkerboard of Charlie's filling station not being in but the fairway being uh excluded, we decided just to put everybody in. Obviously, you know, it's going to be unlikely that Wendy's with a brand new building is going to come forward and pursue this program, but that's just cleaner. So, we don't have that checkerboard pattern.

Okay. Um, yeah. I mean, I I I don't know that everybody needs to win, so to speak. I think the right projects need to win. And you all know better than I do as I sit here now whether or not there are projects that would have been more appropriately funded had there been opportunities outside the district. So uh I I I would uh agree with my colleagues that expanding it would be great but I don't want to expand it at the expense of reducing um viable and you know if um but you are going to do that to some extent.

I I I I get I I get that. Um and that's why I'm trying to figure out what that balance is because I I believe that some of those buildings down there and and we've all talked about it are just years from crumbling. Uh I hope I'm wrong. I hope it's decades. But in the event I'm not wrong and we decided to help, I don't know, the vacuum cleaner on, you know, 10th and and Grand Avenue in lie of a historic building down there that's ready to crumble. That would be my concern.

Yeah. And I think this is going to be addressed by the scoring criteria. It's always going to weigh historic preservation as the first and foremost goal of the program. I would say the vacuum cleaner store honestly might be a historic example too in that twotory commercial. That's why you shouldn't name. But to your but to your point to his point, we want to the we want the best bang for the buck. Bingo. We we want we don't want this to be, you know, everybody plays, everybody wins, right?

That's that's missing the mark. That's missing the mark. We we want, you know, people in Valley J and I'm This is rare for me because, as you know, with the housing program, I don't want to go outside of Valley Junction. I want to make the biggest bang for the buck for the part of the city that needs it the most. And that's why I have not agreed on the housing program to go outside. But I have heard from other businesses up and down Grand Avenue. I know a street we finally went to, you know, and maybe we're not getting as many takers anymore. Of course, we haven't had a program for the last year, right? But and Valley Junction, I certainly don't want to water down Valley Junction, but at the same time, I want the best bang for the buck. So, if there's a if there's a, you know, a restaurant bar or or whatever, a business that's on between 1 and 14th on Grand Avenue and it's really a great project and to Brad's point, my god, this is going to spur other development. Maybe not from incentives from us, but they're going to see these people are taking care of their business and now they're going to invest. Um, we want that. And so, I don't just want like, all right, 10 people applied, we've got $300,000, everyone's getting 30 grand.

That's the wrong thing for this. I will kind of if and before and I know we're waiting for Greg to answer as well. I will also say this is that one thing that I did want to point out in uh that I had in the slide is that we are seeing le we're leveraging our dollars pretty well and so there we're seeing arguably that this is a successful program and in the future if we ever do get to a point where we want to do some more of those kind of slush fund type things that Newark pointed out a few weeks ago we kind of have a tool that's already in place that could help us do that if we decided that we wanted to throw some more funds at small businesses.

Yeah. And I think I've heard from at least three of you about taking our toolkit and going to areas outside of Valley Junction that might be in need of this as well. So, this is in response to that. Well, we're trapped now. So, right at us. Sorry. Well, we'll be here for a little bit. So, my next question is a seven-part question. Oh, boy. No kidding.

What time does Uber Eats arrive? Michaelelsson ordering a pizza. Um, so I like the idea of expanding it, but I guess my question is why not uh upper 8 street corridor? Why not university corridor? Why aren't there like if if what Matt said is correct that really the goal has been our goal has been historic preservation. Yeah, 8th Street stuff not going to apply. University corridor stuff not going to apply. stuff where all of the uh New Mark was talking about or no what were they talking about between Westtown University up in Ward 2 where Home Depot is all of that area. Why would that not be open to any of this? Is it because it's not historic? Is it because it's not needed? Tell me more.

Can I answer that? Because when we started this program, we wanted to get a good bang for the buck and there was such little amount of money available. So, we wanted to concentrate it all in Valley Junction. And we looked at all those areas. We literally drove around, me, Clyde, Sand Dagger in a car and looked at all the areas you're talking about and determine whether or not we want to, you know, put some of these programs towards that. We decided to do the uh 5-year 100% tiff rebate towards all of that other area uh and then focus this on Valley Junction. I mean, how much money are we going to have for this program? 300,000 400,000 we've been between 600 to 800,000 in terms of an allocation for every program basically about that's the answer. But I I mean,

so that that kind of goes back to like we could expand it to I like the idea of expanding it. Yeah, I do. But if as the mayor said like 300600,000 even still if it's like 60,000 for 10 projects, uh I'd be more interested in doing it in $150,000 in a real differencem sort of way. And if which case I imagine wouldn't Valley Junction probably have four properties that could really use $150,000. So that's why I'm skeptical to expand it. Yeah. And I just think too, I mean, for larger properties, larger scale properties, this probably is not the right tool for for the funding amount that we've got. I agree. It's just But if we're going to expand it, well, it may not be the right we're not going to do it. But I'm sorry.

Oh, you go ahead. I was going to say, well, it may not be the right tool for that. Do we have a tool for that?

We we do not right now. I've gotten questions before in the Valley West area specifically if we've got a facade program created there, too. And the answer today is obviously no. But someday if we have good increment to show in that area, I mean that's one possible use of increment that we could take a look at someday is a creation of a program there. The other thing too is if it's a substantial enough renovation, I mean the door is open if we wanted to discuss uh you know your values here today and increases there. Let's do a development agreement and talk about a tiff rebate if it's a more thorough restoration of a building. The part of the issue that we were talking about way back when when we created these programs was, you know, we heard from people, God, West De Mo is the chain capital of the world, right? Where are all the MP power? Where are all the family businesses and family restaurants that are down in the city of De Moine? And we don't we don't have those here. And so this was kind of our effort towards trying to get some of those small MPA type businesses, more unique businesses, uh, like Winchesterers, like Bixs, um,

St. Kilda, St Kilda here. and it's it's worked and so I'd love to do it all across the city but we just we don't have the funding to do

and it wasn't and that's not a it wasn't a serious proposal I was just using as a hypothetical that if we're going to expand it expand it like where do we stop this expansion because as Matt correctly said I mean we do have buildings along Grand among other places that could use some of this money for that but why not hone it in on the place with the historic buildings and places that are most likely to collapse is stopping a building from collapsing, like shoring up a foundation in a way. Now, if it's beyond repair, like uh the longest yard was, yeah, it goes down. But I'm assuming there's some buildings down there who could use some PIFF or some RCF funds for that purpose of shoring up foundation, right? In Valley Junction. In Valley Junction. Well, we know there are buildings with structural issues down there for certain.

And this would be used specifically for those structural building uh structural issues, right? The problem is you can't make these people apply. We cannot. That's the problem, right? And they have to put money in too. Now, whether it's 30, you know, our match being 35% or 50%, that's up for consideration tonight, too. And that's why I would say if we were going to up it to 50%. Which I think I like the idea up to 50%, keep it to the orange areas. This is not a hill that I'm willing to die on or anything, but that's just my thought. But I thought I thought with when we originally created this, I thought that the uh the RCF was a grant program, but it's dollar for-dollar match, right? Okay. So, we're not looking at changing that, are we? No. No.

Okay. because I think it's important that they have skin in the game, too. And the last thing we want to do is have somebody that, hey, I don't want to provide any jobs and I can't come up with any money and I have no sophistication, so I need help and and we're just going to hand out $150,000 and they're going to go under. Yeah. What we're proposing would be a 50/50 match instead of a, you know, 3565 match like we had before. And in addition to the reason that Brad brought up it, one thing that we saw last time around too is we had a lot of applicants, right, and a limited source of funding. And in that approach where everyone got fed a little bit of something, not everyone got full awards and people had hard decisions to make as to whether or not they can even go forward with the project if they didn't receive the full grant amount. So,

if I could just maybe sum up where where I then stand based upon that that feedback, I I agree that um if we I have no problem expanding to the blue. Um I think however if we can prioritize some of the things we've been talking about and let's say hypothetically we don't have people that are willing to take on these funds to reinvest to to preserve some historic structure. We're just going to give money to some person that shows up because they want to do something that technically may qualify, but there's a bigger bang for the buck on grand. Go for the bigger bang for the buck on grant. I agree, sir. Yeah.

Yeah. This isn't meant to be a charity case. I mean, like I said, everybody plays, everybody wins. It's it's let's let's do the bang for the buck. Let's let's spur economic development. I mean, this essentially did that in Valley Junction, right? to to the extent where all of a sudden now people are wanting to come into Valley Junction that weren't there before because it's now starting to be the place to be. Well, I mean, which is also why I'm kind of supportive of expanding because it's done what we intended it to do in Valley Junction and we can bring our bring our bag of goodies to

and I don't know if we put this in the presentation, but Brad calculated out of the award recipients over the eight and a half rounds we've done this in, we've more than doubled the taxable valuation from before to after. Yeah, that's amazing. Yeah. So, uh Okay, so night number two. Question number two. Yeah. So, uh same kind of touch. So, question number two as far as the the jobs itself as far as reducing the jobs standards from one or from two full-time equivalency to one full-time equivalency to be eligible for the program. Can we move to the next slide?

Oh, yeah. This time maybe we start down with Hudson and we'll work the other way. So instead of two full-time down to two down to one or one full-time and two part-time like I would love to have some part-times incorporated too if we're going to move from two full-time down to one. Let's make sure there's some part-time incorporated but what the right balance is. Yeah, it's full-time equivalent. So we've always have to be half. It could be somebody that just shows up

but yeah consistently meeting the full-time equivalent threshold. So, if we have to lower it to include the two 10-hour a week people who only add up to a halftime equivalent, whatever, I could be okay with that. But, um I I I kind of break it down in terms of infrastructure uh preservation related versus business operational related. And what I mean by that is let's say you've got a building that has some tenants in it. it's it's operating and they it's they're going to struggle to hire folks, right? The the two or whatever it may be. Um but the building is in dire need of some tender loving care. Um I I think that uh I'm I'm comfortable reducing it if we're going to help preserve something that is otherwise going to just fall apart. Uh, but I I do think we need to have some sort of employment involvement. I I think of vacant buildings, right? I don't want to just help reinvest in a building and it's just going to sit there vacant. I'd like to think that this building that is maybe not occupied because there's mold or water problems or other things and here we're going to help put on this roof and it's going to then be capable of being uh, you know, occupied. then we ought to have some sort of job component. So I I think again it's more of a prioritization. I'm I'm comfortable reducing it if we're going to do some really important things around preservation.

I appreciate that. And as a side note, under Iowa economic development law, if we're giving incentives, they have to have at least one job component. Okay, that's a bare minimum. Mhm.

So, at the beginning of this program, it was talked about whether or not we're going to allow sole proprietors to be able to apply for this or if we want to have more of a jobs component to it. We wanted to have more of a jobs component to it. We talked about five jobs, 10 jobs, five jobs. We ended up settling at some point in time for two. I'm not really in favor of going down to one. I I suppose I could get there if kind of like how the states programs were where okay you you you're not meeting the job requirement but your capital investment is pretty massive you know so if you're not going to meet the job requirement then you need to have some sort of level of capital investment that you yourself are putting into this program then fine other than that

I I I'll add that addendum to my every every day of the week. Well, if I can, but however, if I if I could gently push back on that a little bit. Oh, no. We are Hold on. Hold on. I'll get him. Let them let him go. Let him go gently. Um, again, we are dealing with small businesses. Totally get it. Their opportunity to give a large capital investment and if we are really trying to preserve that small business aspect of it, um, we could inadvertently open a door for somebody larger to come in and kind of game. We don't want that, Brad. But at the same time, I mean, the problem is if if if this small I get it. Yeah. Like running a small business is extremely difficult, right? I understand that and

uh we want to try to be as helpful as possible and this program has been aimed at that. I don't want to go against it. But at the same time, if we have somebody that's a small business owner that doesn't have a pot to piss in, that can't get a loan from a bank and we're going to give it to them, we're setting up for just disaster in my opinion because they're not financially. This is why we wanted the due diligence committee in place because we wanted to try to protect the taxpayers against some business that doesn't have the pot to piss in, pardon the language, but and then comes and applies for $150,000 from the city, gets it, puts the money into the building, and goes under two weeks later. You know what I mean? We want viable. They can they can be struggling, but we we want

I thought they had to prove that they've got the ability to repay it. Right? We're not just giving them $150,000. They've got to show they've got the financial ability to repay it, right? So, yeah, that's all got to make sense. That's all got to make sense. I mean, if we're like, "Oh, this poor guy, you know, it's just him by himself and, you know, we're going to give him 150,000 and not require something because he can't afford it." I I think we're making a big mistake there.

But, we're not changing that. It really is the what you just brought up about the sole proprietor. I mean, there are business owners that could otherwise qualify for the program, but that one thing is what stopped them before, right? And they might need some time to scale up and eventually when they grow, they can hire more people, but initially it's an impediment. And so what we're doing with this is just passing on what we've heard from applicants before to see if there's interest in program changes. So you've got Greg is fine going from two to one, you're fine going from two to one, FET. You know, in all honesty, I am just really trying to absorb. I'm not trying to automatically say, "Oh, no. Oh, yes." Yeah. You know, I'm trying not to let my emotions

I get it. I get it. And I tr and I trust you guys. You're more You have the experience. You have the knowledge. You know where we were. You know where we're going. So, I would just like to add just to kind of fit the other two. Okay. I I get it. Nope. That that makes a lot of sense. Kevin, where are you at? I think it makes sense to reduce it down to one. I mean, we're talking small business and if they're again, a lot of them do operate as you said earlier with

sole proprietor and then they've got a few part-time people here and there. So, I think it makes sense for one because even if you if you part-time people over the course of a year equals another full-time employee, who's doing the math on that? How do you prove that, you know, I hired, you know, Bob and John and Tom and Sally and Susie to to work these hour? I just to me it makes sense to drop it down to one. All right, Doug, where you at?

I think it's a terrible idea. Um, and I'll tell you why. Um, and I'll just try to be really brief. Um, I think if you've got a business and you don't have anyone else working in it other than yourself, you don't have a business, you have a hobby. So, anything beyond structural improvements in these buildings, which I think are good, but like to me, I'm not interested in investing in something that isn't going to hire another person because that limits the impact of the funds and I don't think that's a good use of taxpayer money. So to be clear on what I was saying is one position but also multiple part-time positions doesn't necessarily have have to add up to a full-time position. But I agree with Doug. If it's just a one person band, it's not a band. I want to see some other people in there who are actually working. And I don't know how hard that would be to monitor, but at the end of the year, I assume, hey, who did you hire this year? How much do they work? It seems like that is something. But

well, let me add one thing to it too. Yeah. And I don't want to split hairs on like is three people one job or whatever, but like I think there could be other things that are beneficial to the community. So if it's a two-story building and it's a one person business downstairs, but there's an apartment that could be an affordable housing unit for somebody, I think we should consider that maybe. Okay. So, we had three people that wanted to go from two to one. Now, we kind of got like two and a half people. Why don't we just call it one and a half FTEES? Go from two down to one and a half. Terrible idea.

Well, I know, but that's where we're at. I mean, that would kind of get at what Greg's talking about with the the other way you could think about this is if you raise the FTE requirement, let's call it five again. Yeah. Yes. the smaller person won't get the money, but you can make a bigger impact with the same dollars. What's the impact when you measure impact? See, in my mind, I'm thinking like this to me, like that's why I was saying is it is it business operational or is it infrastructure preservation? To me, it's capital improvement.

And so, you know, let's let's say you've got a building. My my my uh concern about what you're saying is a hypothetical of you've got a building that's in great need of repair, but that owner operator business person can only really have one and a half, one FT, two FTs, but they got this building that's just falling apart. In my mind, I'd rather help preserve that building so it doesn't fall apart. Um, and try to encourage reinvestment through that. Um, and in that scenario, they wouldn't qualify, but somebody else whose building may be okay that needs a grease trap, but they could add five FTEEs would be able to qualify. And that's why, you know, I'm not saying both are wrong, but in my mind, I almost prefer the preservation as opposed to maybe the job creation at this point.

Maybe we need to maybe we need to split it between PIFF and RCF. RCF is is is more regulatory compliance type stuff and uh PIFF is literally what you're talking about. That's what it is, right? The building is that's what those two programs are. Well, you got regulatory compliance where you got building falling in and need a repair. That's probably less job. Not that's not regulatory. No, no, no. Property improvement fund. That's what I'm saying. So maybe you ought to But they already are, Russ. There's two different programs. One does the mean

I I get that. But isn't the job requirement for across both programs? So I'm saying so I'm saying why don't you leave the one regulatory compliance at at two and put the PIFF down to one. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. I see what you're saying. So if it's more infrastructure related that'd be PIFF and so less concerns about jobs. If it's more property the compliance fundian regulatory compliance that's a higher job I actually and just to just to be clear this is kind of how I they could apply for both and that's the only problem that would cause they could apply for both and that that adds some complexities to it but just generally speaking piff rcf I kind of tell people when I explain it to them piff starts with p that's the pretties regulatory you know that's the

but also the foundational stuff is under piff too it can be in some place like for structural structural structural. Yes, it does fall within that under regulatory compliance is literally grease traps, range hoods, but it's not because you guys allowed one of them to have that needed a roof fell under the regulatory compliance fund which I which I didn't understand time it based on past president prior to us both being here decking was seen as part of the structure and fell within the regulatory compliance because you had to have a roof that needed repair as opposed to

but that's not regulations. And that was my point when that thing came up. Regulation says you have to have a sprinkler system. Regulation says you have to have a grease trap. That's what the regulatory compliance fun I'm just going to say you're not wrong, Kevin. I mean I I mean and the other was property improvement which is a roof because initially roofs didn't even qualify for it. No. Yeah. When the question came up last time, there was a program change in 2022 that I wasn't aware of when I initially came up to the podium. Tim actually sent that to me. I think I forwarded that on to you at that point. Whatever happened in 2022 allowed rupet but was structural in nature basically to qualify for that program too.

But see, that's where I think that needs to get fixed. I agree. I agree. That is not regulatory. No, I agree. And this is a good time to do that, right? So that's I think it needs to be. That's it could be it could be regulatory, but that's pretty extreme. That's building structure. That's property improvement. Yeah. I mean, it was meant for more ADA compliant bathrooms, you know, grease interceptors, range hoods, fire sprinklers. Yes. All these things that the government put obstacles in the business's way that we could help remove that, right? A roof is more property improvement fund. No doubt.

So, where are we at then? Do you guys want to go? I mean, do you want to go? I think it makes sense that the RCP of of two employees and the property improvement is one. I'd be fine with two in one. Doug wants three in one or five in one or I I don't care. I'll follow whatever you guys want to do. I just I think for going to two to one, you might as well not just lift the requirement all together. But you can't. We can't. I know. I know what you're saying. Yeah. Yeah. And and I'm with you, Doug. I'm just trying to figure out how we can come to some kind of an agreement move forward that makes sense. And I this will complicate the program a little bit, right? What's the dollars we're talking about here? How much money in these two funds every year? Uh was it we're talking about 800,000?

6 to800,000. And is there any funds remaining at the end of the year? Uh right now, yeah, we've got around 300 some thousand unspent from projects that didn't move forward previously. I mean, to me, it's not enough to protest over. I'm going to go with what the rest of you think. Um, I would try to do it a little bit differently, but there's probably restrictions I'm not aware of. So, all right. So, we're at two two for uh regulatory compliance and we're at one for Did uh the 300,000 that's sitting in there was I mean, was it could have been allocated if there was an employee difference or if there was some of these other changes?

I'm sorry, that again. the 300,000 that that didn't get allocated. Did it not go through and be used because of hey, you couldn't maintain the FTEEs or some other thing here. The the projects for a variety of reasons just haven't gone forward. 175,000 of that is 122 Fifth Street that we've been holding in reserve for that project. Basically, the business that goes within it. Okay. There are a few others that just didn't advance forward. There are sometimes where people come in under what they originally estimated. So, that has causes a little bit of a reserve balance, too. Okay. One thing to think I'm thinking about the new mark report. What happens to 300 grand that we don't use?

Uh technically it goes back to the general fund. I've been working with Tim to kind of hold it in reserve for when we so we don't have to have as much general fund dollars come back into the next round. Put this in our incentive. The PIF the PIFF was meant to be a revolving loan fund, but just for simplicity of budgeting and other expenditures and whatnot, it's been being paid back and put back into the general fund. So we don't have a Okay. We don't have a revolving laws really. Okay. All right. So, what I'm hearing is uh two jobs for regulatory compliance, one for PIFF. Yeah.

I would like to make sure that each of those one I for the one for the PIFF, I would still like to No, for the PIFF, I would still like to make sure there are at least two employees even if one of them's part-time. So, I really like the idea of 1.5. That's what I like prefer because I don't like the idea of a oneperson show. We could go ahead and just keep it the same. Yeah, it's I want to stay up too. If you want to keep it at two for simplicity sake.

No, if I can explain just a little bit more clearly. All right, I'm going to go buy a property down in Fifth Street and I want to do this and I'm going to employ myself and only myself and that's it. I don't have any other jobs. I don't have anything. I don't have anything anything else going on and then I can apply for this fund. What Matt said earlier was right. What Doug said earlier was right. Getting more employees in the area to prevent just a one-man show from doing this by himself or by herself. That's all I was suggesting. So how that looks, I don't know, one FTE, but I do I would really prefer that there were more employees even if they're part-time. one uh one employee 10 hours a week for the entire year or seasonally for one that's all

we want to be monitoring this that's the thing it's not going to get monitored yeah the real reality of it is the best we can with compliance work too but we don't go out and verify that so and so still works at this business the business gives a W2 every year it ain't hard here's the W2 oh this person works 72 hours monitor it why are we sitting here going back and forth trying exactly two or one. If we're not going to monitor, let's keep it real. If we're not going to monitor it, are you suggesting we don't monitor this? No. I What I'm saying is they submit a report every year, but we don't go out and actually verify if that person still works there. We basically are taking them for their word that they've got

employees. If they submit a W2 to you that lies to the federal government and we get subing a W2. All right. They're say they're they're writing down that I hired Johnny for 10 hours a week for 6 months. I just I think it just muddies the water. I I would humbly suggest though I I don't know why we couldn't reality of it is I don't know that there's anybody that's truly working by themselves. I think I think they're all going to have some part-time element throughout the year. And we're probably splitting juice, so I can move on. It's all

Is it going to equal half of them? This is why we said two employees. This is why we said two employees just leave it at two employees for simplicity sake. I mean, yes, we hear about that that that's an impediment to a few small business owners. But I think that is more simplistic than maybe like even that though, all they're saying is I had two full-time employees. Right. Right. They're not proving it. Um I IDA has them submit a report like when they do their programs and I would assume we could do the same thing. But you're right there probably not I Debbie Durham's not going down there to count heads. There's no way. Every fall, every October we do get a report for this and the economic tiff projects basically that they've paid their taxes, they've met their employee count.

Sometimes they'll send a list of employees, but we're not going back out there and saying, "Okay, this person still works here." Technically, we have clawback I think we have clawback provisions put in this these program at least one of them if not both if they don't meet these requirements. So, right, we need to be monitoring for sure. Okay. Yeah. I'm sorry. I don't I'm I have immediately have more concerns about about lack of verification. I absolutely do now. Now that I really think about this, if what Kevin says is true, they just lie and say, "No, we got three people working here." Okay. and there's not actually a federal verification via their Iowa tax returns or their federal tax returns. If it truly is what Kevin said, I have enormous concerns now. That's all I'm saying.

I I'm not sure a business is going to give us all the tax information of their employees. I think we need to I think we've got a program that's been working. We've been getting reports. I think we've got to stick to that and I think we're making this more difficult than it is. either either we do two or one and then let's let's move on or we do two for the one and one for the other. Let's just make a call and then we're going to live with it. We're going to move on. If we need to change it, you guys will bring it back to us to amend the program. Do we have more verification or less verification than say Debbie Durham does? I'm not familiar with what Debbie Debbie Durham does. I mean, we do have a I'm just using her as an example with the I think I think she requires just the business to report on how many FTEEs they have.

Can we have that be part of a prioritization? the more jobs you have, maybe you get a bump. Absolutely. That's already that's already baked.

Well, see, and that was where I was coming from where the the the state programs would have something like when we had what was it? What program was that? High quality jobs, high quality jobs where it was like you had to had to have a certain amount of jobs that paid a certain wage. Uh, and or but you could also get in on the program if you had zero jobs, but your capital investment had to be a significant amount. And just to touch on on on your point there, the scoring is set up. It's not a all or nothing. So if you come in for example with only without this discussion tonight with only two jobs, you would get right now one point. However, if you would have another business, so for example, I believe Mark Grimler down on Railroad Place, he was hiring like 10. He ended up with the maximum amount of points, which I believe are five. So it that's so that scaling and that scoring is already kind of in place for it. What we were bringing up is there were businesses that said I can't even meet that lowest threshold to be scored at all. That's what this was kind of about. And frankly all we're doing is just again reporting what we've heard. I don't even know if we This is not a hill we would like to stand on either, right?

We're just bringing up what we've heard. I'm just looking at what you're saying, Brad, and I'm like, if that guy's coming to you, I'm not sure we should be financing that guy. To me, that guy's in the right about to go under unless he's going to put in a million bucks to help preserve the building and and he needs to help this help to get it done. And then that's also the other thing is that how much there's categories for how much. So, if you're $100,000, $10,000, 20, it jumps up and you get more points for that as well too in scoring criteria. This is the portion of the program where Loach usually calls it the question. So, what what are we about? Yeah, I know. Where where are we at? Well, we're we're on three here. Okay, let's move on to three. We got the answer already for two.

All right. So, uh what was the answer sitting it out? She's the only smart one of us. So, is it is it two for regulatory and one for property improvement? Is that the way we ended? Two for regulatory, one for Is that where we ended? I can go along like like Councilman Lo. What? Two two for two for a regular. You guys have exhausted me. I I I think either it doesn't it probably doesn't matter because the scoring criteria is already prioritized. True story. And if Kevin is right, it really doesn't matter. I'm fine with two and one.

There's other criteria that go into the final quote scoring anyhow. Yep. Right. Yes. Yes. Two in one. Great. All right. Let's move on. Two in one. Next question. Two in one. All right. Okay. Uh, next question is the participation increased from 35% to 50% of the total project cost. Can we afford that? Um, I think the impact is going to be less projects awarded, but it'll be a bigger bang projects that do get the award. I like this. I like the 50%. I'm fine with it. I'm fine with it. I know it's less. I know it's less, but that's fine. Okay.

Wait, wait, wait. Is this for both programs? Yeah. Yeah. Well, this is 50. This is this is to the for PIFF and RCF can be more than 50% of the value of the project, right? Because we were we were worried at one point when we started this program that maybe the city, you know, the building's worth 300 or 200,000 and the city's putting in 150. And it's like that's that's more than 50% of the value of the property. That that's what we're talking about here. Well, we're talking about No, what we're talking about% of the project

basically the equity that the developer in this case or the business puts in as a match to the program. The assessed value thing, I would recommend that we take that out altogether because I've seen buildings before Valley West Smalls assessed for $100 right now. Um, right. that shouldn't penalize somebody from taking advantage of this program that needs it. So, but that was the discussion at the time was that it was it was worried that we're going to put too much money in. We're putting in so much the building's worth 200 and we're putting in 150. I guess my recommendation is that we don't worry about that. We could have buildings that are assessed really low that need the help, which then would increase their value, which would then increase the value if it's stabilized and occupied.

I I I like the greater leverage actually. I like to see $1 in or whatever you had $1 in and two three dollars back and what you're gonna get to now is $1 in$1 back. Yeah, it's more of a one to one. I I prefer the bigger leverage. Tell me was there was this is coming from feedback. Did people just not take the money because of this pro? I mean I get it. I want more, you know, more uh less project. I want to put in Yeah. Bingo. I mean, anybody would ask for this, but is it meaningfully having an impact on our ability to get projects done?

Well, there are a few that have backed out that basic and from this last round, too, that just couldn't go forward with the project, citing some of the costs that were out there. So, again, this is just something that we're But are these the oneperson shops that can't have another job added to? No, one of them was 1225th, but I I So, I'm with I don't know that you need to Yeah, it's twofold. I mean it's the issue that we're hearing uh with financing challenges with construction costs that have elevated,

but cost is going up for everybody. It it's not unique for that one individual or that building. And then you know I used to be a banker many years ago and there was an old saying, lend me $10,000 and I owe you. Lend me $10 million and you owe me. And so like we go deeper and deeper into this, we're going to end up owning these things. Well, and and that's the thing we got to keep in mind. We're investing on behalf of our taxpayers, right? We got to get the best bang for the buck possible while at the same time helping these small businesses. And if we're starting to, you know, move the needle in the in the area that like we're going to start putting money into business, we shouldn't be investing in. Yes, I agree. That's that's just to be clear, the cap isn't ch we're not proposing the cap changes. What is the cap? What is the cap right now?

75,000 per program per applicant, unless it's a historic building, then it goes up to 100. But but are we talking about the the percentage of public dollars versus the the the total value of the project. Yes. Right. Yeah. What the owner of the business or the building is putting into the project versus what the city puts in. Lowering that amount essentially.

But even still, that's not what they're going to spend. I have $100,000 to repair to make and so I apply for 50 thou. Well, no. I have a $300,000 repair to make. So, I apply for the $100,000 for a historic building, right? I get the $100,000, but I'm still putting in an extra $200,000. Yeah, it's a onetoone match, but it maxes out at $100,000. So, there's your 2:1 match. Is that correct? Is that the 2 to1? That's correct. And what we're hearing is that for people to get funding for that from like lending institutions, it's becoming more of a challenge. So, if you can't still get our two to1 leverage, why should we give you money? Yeah. Yeah. And that's that's fair. Bank of West question. No. Yeah. I' I'd say keep it at I' I'd leave it alone. Yep. Moving on. Agreed.

This was all the stuff we were trying to balance the first time. All right. And then uh as far as the timeline itself, again, to recap that, businesses are having some challenges kind of understanding our processes. It's taking them a little bit longer than 12 months. Uh I'll go first on this one. I'm happy with moving it to 18 or 24. Agreed. Got it. Agree. Agree. 18 months. Yeah, I think 18 makes sense. I don't know that 24 18. When's the clock start on that anyway? Uh once they get their uh um building permit. All right. So, they have already appi. They've already gone through a lot of the city process and then we're going to give them I misspoke.

Okay. I misspoke. It's from the It's the development agreement. I'm sorry. It's when they sign the development agreement. All right. Okay. All right. I like 18 months. Yeah, that's the easiest one yet. For for number five, I actually like this one a lot because, you know, you want to be a good neighbor for everybody and if somebody's going to do this and it has it will have impact. I mean, if you go down to Valley Junction, all that stuff that's been done has impacted everybody down there. And so I think having criteria for this because all you're talking about is adding some scoring criteria or some extra points in the in the due diligence process, I think it's a great idea.

Um, at the risk of uh being diametrically opposed to my council colleague, tell me where I'm a little off here, but in fact, it's a second bullet point. I didn't I was going to say this exact same thing. St. Kildas not a long-term uh property owner. Bixen Co. not a long-term and Winchester is not long-term. We hold them up as successes and what we're saying is they would be lower ranked in future projects because they weren't there for a long time. Maybe I'm misunderstanding. No, that actually they don't own those. That was not how I understood it. Those are all rentals, right? Yeah. That's not tenants within a building.

Yeah. Okay. So that's not the question that's not the question at hand with this that it's the more the question is is that do you prioritize buildings that are going to spark and inspire people as opposed to just a so to kind of make it a little bit simpler. So would we prefer to have something more like uh the Winchester and put investment in that or somebody that comes in and say we want to do landscaping and maintenance on our parking lot? Okay. Was there a program in here where you said we want to have you be having maybe owned longer than you the duration of ownership?

I did say that uh one of the scoring criteria is is that you can get an extra two points if you are a business that have operated there for more than 5 years or something. Okay. Whatever one that is was that five uh that's not a change that's not there today. Yeah. And I think that was put in there as a result of new investors coming in and utilizing this fun these funds basically and longtime businesses couldn't have access to it. So that's not we're not proposing to change that. My apologies. I was going a mile a minute there. All right. Fair enough then. Yes, I agree. If we can get more of these projects, we ought to. Yep. So I come back around Doug. I'm all the way back.

Okay. And I and I disagree because I think all you're going to do is you're going to end up getting a lot more of the new buildings down there. Call the question.

Um it was not a motion. You're out of order. Um I just I and and your your example of you know inspiring with you know and then a landscape company that's that is so one extreme to the other. So, that didn't even make sense. Um, again, if we're looking at some of these historic buildings, are they going to in what's the definition of inspire? There's some people that think it's it's cool as hell that you've that we're retaining the old buildings. And then there's others that say, "Bulldo some and build brand new. New looks better." And so, that's going to inspire people. So, so I I would say this is the most subjective piece of the scoring criteria and that's by design, but you have to trust the due diligence committee that's been put together. And then you you've got the ability to review the recommendations of that committee before you vote on it, too.

And you got design criteria and you also have incentives for historic buildings that they cannot just get 75 and 75 out of each, but 100 and 100 out of these things, right? like I mean not if that doesn't inspire well and create momentum and I think that to

one of the kind of core points of this program is to preserve and so that's that's kind of baked in there a little bit I will admit right now we don't have something and say you know what is a definition of inspire but the program has already given priorities to um you know to to to preserve properties. We have the Winchester that that kind of occurred. We had KCL. Those processes through our scoring criteria have rised to the top. What we're proposing in this situation is to hone in on that special sauce and to just make it just make it clearer when somebody apply that that's what we're looking for and please don't come in with your maintenance on a parking lot

which we have had. I mean, so I I really I get that. Oh, no. We had it.

So, is Kevin you uh I I like what Kevin's saying about uh making sure we keep the historic. So, this will be the last thing I say. Uh we have two really really different things. Bixon company 100% so happy that happened. I think that was fantastic and it's a synergistic investment. Winchester, same thing, but the Winchester kept the historic but just improved it. I think the Winchester is the model for what we do in Valley Junction. So if we can really encourage that synergistic investment in Winchester type products, uh now Bix was different because that the first building there it looks so much better than it ever did right now. So that was synergistic. But if we give that boost and I think uh Brad you were kind of mentioning that if you get that special sauce of improving a existing property like the Winchester, give it that extra boost, I'm here. But it is subjective and so we're just doing what we can. So,

but again, you got to be you got to keep in mind that we're talking about expanding this. I think we've already decided we're expanding it up to Grand Avenue, right? Okay. So, you gota you got to kind of forget the Valley Junction of it

and look at these other areas. And I'm going to go back to one thing you said, Ryan. Um when when Matt brought up about the uh vacuum cleaner place at 9 and Grand, you said, "Well, I might consider that a historic building." I would like to point out that that is a concrete block building. No different than the building that predated Bixing Company. And everybody said, "Well, there's nothing historic about that. Just goddamn concrete block building." So, either you've got historic concrete block building or you don't. Just wanted to point that out. They're both concrete block buildings.

Vacuum cleaner still. I can't believe I brought up the But just to clarify, watch what you say on this D. There there always will be a scoring bonus for properties that are deemed historic and on the national as long as you're not made of propret and that's I think we're all the way through it unless there's more discussion. So and actually just we've we've ridden out the storm so we're good to go. All right. Anything else for the good of the order before we adjourn? No, that's all. Thank you guys. Thank you guys for walking us through that and for putting up with us. Thank you everybody for the great discussion.