City Council - Special Meeting

call the special July 10th meeting of the West Des Moines City Council to order. And Ryan, would you please take the role?

Elliot? Present. Hudson? Present. Lotz? Present. Trevelyan?

Here.

All right, we have four members present.

Okay, moving on to item two, approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda, Ryan?

No changes, Your Honor.

Okay, with no changes, I take a motion to approve the agenda as distributed. So moved. Second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Okay, opposed, nay. Any abstentions? The agenda is approved. We're going to move on to Item 3, Public Hearings. Item 3A, this is a time and place for a public hearing to consider the Consolidated Grand Experience Urban Renewal Area initiated by the City of West Des Moines. Ryan, would you please read the date the notice is published?

June 26, 2026 in the Des Moines Register.

And have you received any written comments to this hearing?

None, Your Honor.

Okay, anybody in the audience would like to address the council on item 3A, please come to the podium, give us your name and address for the record. Anybody online hit star 6 to unmute yourself and do the same. Is there anybody either in the council chambers or online that would like to address the council on item 3A? All right, come on up and come to the podium here, give us your name and address for the record, and we'd ask that you keep it civil and respectful and five minutes or under.

Thank you. Good morning, Mayor and Council members. My name is Eva Morales. I live at 7490 Raccoon River Drive. My comments today relate to both Public Hearing 3A and then as well as Public Hearing 3B. And I do have written copies of my comments and I would ask that they be received and filed as part of the public record for both hearings. My family and I live near the proposed grand experience development area, and when I say near, I mean literally across the road. If you look at the packet, page 103, exhibit B3, we're the sole residents located to the south, closest to the planned developments. My husband, Sergeant First Class Zachary Mancuso, is currently deployed in the Middle East with the Army's 249th Engineer Battalion. He's the deeded homeowner, and I'm here to make sure that our household concerns are noted in the record while he's deployed overseas. I do want to make clear at the outset that I'm not here to oppose economic development. I do understand that growth is good for the city. What I'm asking is that the council slow down and not approve this agreement or commit public incentives to a project of this size without stronger safeguards for the residents who will live with the daily impacts. The packet describes a very significant project and this is not a minor update or a routine consolidation of the plans. With the expiration of the prior agreements from December of 24 and October of 25, the plan now includes the revised project scope and updated financial terms. It is essentially a new package that deserves meaningful public review. A regional entertainment district is being proposed in an area that is still largely agricultural and privately owned. As I understand it, that land has not yet been rezoned for this use. My home appears to be one of the few existing residences in close proximity to the proposed development. That does not make the residential impact irrelevant. It makes it concentrated. Our home has historically been remote and quiet. The 6,000-seat outdoor amphitheater whose stage appears to face south in the direction of our home hotels, a conference center, water park, restaurants, housing and event traffic would fundamentally change the character and conditions of our home. So my primary concern is the outdoor amphitheater. The agreement requires at least 26 live events a year, That's not occasional use. That is a recurring high-impact use near a residential area. While I appreciate that the agreement does require that the developer, WDM Entertainment, complete a noise impact study before construction begins, it is not enough by itself. The study should be independent, completed by a qualified third-party consultant, made public and subject to meaningful public comment before any amphitheater-related approval, permit, zoning, amendment, construction, authorization, or TIF reimbursement moves forward. I am concerned about traffic, parking, and lighting. The packet references road improvements, infrastructure planning, parking improvements, but I do not see in the packet a completed traffic impact study, parking demand study, photometric plan, light spill and glare analysis, event traffic management plan, or amphitheater parking analysis that accounts for the full scope of the project operating at peak demand. A 6,000-seat concert venue cannot be analyzed in isolation. The city needs to study what happens when a concert overlaps with the recplex activity, with hotel occupancy, the conference center events, water park traffic, and just normal neighborhood traffic. I am also concerned about public safety and emergency access. A venue of this size certainly brings crowd control issues to take into consideration. EMS needs, police staffing, traffic control, and late night dispersal. Has the city yet identified who's responsible for those services and who will pay for them? I am especially concerned about the use of public tax increment financing the TIF incentives before these impacts have been fully studied. Before the city commits public financial incentives to an outdoor amphitheater, nearby residents deserve to know what enforceable protections will be in place. In my professional life, I understand the importance of process and a clear record. So I must also question the proposed findings in the resolution that are included in the packet. The proposed resolution asked the council to find in Section 2 Sub A that a feasible method exists for relocating any displaced families. While I understand that the language tracks the statutory requirements of Chapter 403, the packet itself does not appear to include a relocation plan, relocation analysis, or even a factual explanation to support that finding. What is the basis for that finding? And if relocation is truly not expected, I would ask that the record clearly explain how that finding is being made and what facts support it. Again, I'm not here to ask the city to reject economic development. I'm asking that the city not let the momentum of this agreement and TIF funding make the project feel inevitable before the public has seen the studies and before enforceable protections are in place. We are not an abstract point on the map. The absence of a large neighborhood does not mean the absence of harm. It means that the harm is concentrated to the few existing residents who are already there. So please slow this down. Please protect the surrounding homes. Please do not move this forward until residents have had meaningful information, meaningful process, and enforceable safeguards. My last paragraph. Lastly, I would ask, as I mentioned, that my written comments be received and filed as part of the public hearing record. I understand that today is only the first reading, but the packet does indicate that the second reading and waiver of the third and final readings will be on July 20th. Given the size of the project and the unanswered questions about noise, traffic, parking, lighting, public incentives, I would just ask that the council not waive any readings and not compress the public review process. Thank you.

Okay, thank you so much. And if you want to enter everything into the record, please give it to Ryan Jacobson here, our city clerk. Okay, anybody else for public forum? Okay, I don't see anybody else in the council chambers. Is there anybody online that would like to address the council on item 3A? Please hit star six to unmute yourself if you'd like to address the council on item 3A and you're online. Okay, hearing no one, I'm gonna declare the public hearing closed. We've got a resolution for approval of the Consolidated Urban Renewal Plan, and we've got an ordinance for approval of the first reading. We need to take these separately, so we will first deal with the resolution. Can I get a motion to approve the resolution to consolidate the Urban Renewal Plan? Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Okay, hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Okay, all those opposed, nay. All right, the resolution is approved four to zero. Now the ordinance, can I get a motion for consideration of the first reading?

Motion to consider the first reading.

Is there a second? It's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion?

Sure. I just wanted to say I appreciate the resident sharing thoughts and concerns. As you correctly said, there is another hearing coming up on July 20th. And I know that you mentioned several things about this particular development agreement. And I appreciate that you want some more answers. So I just wanted to encourage staff to please review the letter. Please review all the documentation that was shared today. And I think we would all appreciate it. uh, some answers to those questions because, and as you correctly said, this is only the first reading and there are more to come. So I, over the next, uh, week or two, I would love to hear some answers so we can address, so we can better address, uh, those concerns. So that's what I wanted to share.

Okay. Thank you, councilman. Uh, any other discussion?

Yeah, I'll just add to what, uh, councilman Hudson said. I, um, I'm glad the constituent came in and spoke to us. She had some very good points. So what I would like to ask as well is, I guess I'll just strengthen his point and just say I expect staff to come back to council to answer the constituents' questions before the next reading. Thank you.

Okay. Well, and I would just say that, you know, this is not our first rodeo. We've dealt with sound issues before. That's why we're having a study required in here to make sure that we're doing everything we can in regards to the sound. I would say in regards to the momentum that was brought up, with all due respect, we've been working on this for over five years. So this is not something new that's just come out now. It's not like we're trying to rush this thing through. It's, like I said, been worked on for the last five years. I know that the amphitheater is a new addition, an exciting addition to this project, but we will certainly be making sure that everything is done the right way, that we'll be dotting all the I's and crossing all the T's, and looking into all the concerns that were brought up here tonight. So I appreciate you being here and appreciate all the comments that you had, but congratulations. we certainly will look into everything and and we have been working on this for a very very long time so i'm pretty excited that this has come into fruition this is going to be an unbelievable project that is going to be absolutely transformational for our city our city will change forever as a result of this project we've already got a million visitors to that rec plex and with this we're going to become even more of a destination than we are today And the economic development that is going to result up and down this corridor as a result of this project alone is going to be absolutely tremendous. So I really am excited about this today, excited that the developer will be closing on this land over the next couple weeks. And that this thing is moving forward and coming to fruition. I want to thank Jim Bergman Riley Hogan and others that my staff Ryan Moffitt Tom Haddon legal everybody that's been a part of this. This has been a long time coming We have had a lot of ups and downs as we've been moving forward through this process You know, there have been times where I thought I wasn't sure this was going to happen. Then I thought, man, this is moving forward 100%. It's been lots of ups and downs. I appreciate Jim's allegiance to the city, to the project, and sticking in there. throughout this entire thing. This is not a small project. This is not a small investment. In regards to the tax increment financing, this is what's called as a pay-as-you-go TIF. So there are massive protections in place for the taxpayer. If they don't build it, it won't happen. They've got to be able to create the increment, and it's going to be them that does that by putting these buildings on this land. And when they create that increment, then they're going to be able to receive the incentives. If they don't do that, they won't receive the incentives. So there are protections in place to make sure that we're not providing incentives for nothing. With that, all in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Okay, all those opposed nay. all right the ordinance is approved four to nothing uh item 3b this is the time and place for a public hearing to consider agreement for private development initiated by wdm entertainment llc and wdm south llc ryan would you please read the date the notice was published july 3rd 2026 in the des moines register and have received any written comments of this hearing none your honor Okay, anybody in the audience who would like to address the council on item 3B, please come to the podium. Give us your name and address for the record. Anybody online, please hit star six to unmute yourself and do the same. Is there anybody in the council chambers or online that would like to address the council on item 3B? Okay, come up to the podium. Give us your name and address for the record. You know the routine.

Again, Eva Morales, 7490 Raccoon River Drive. Obviously, I spoke during the prior hearing. I would just respectfully ask that those same comments and my written submission be incorporated into the record for public hearing 3B as well. I do continue to object to the approval of the development agreement without the safeguards that I previously identified, especially as they relate to the new proposed amphitheater. the TIF reimbursement, traffic, parking, lighting, public safety, and future zoning review. With that, thank you.

Okay, thank you so much. Those will be entered into the record as well. Okay, anybody online that would like to address the council on item 3B, please hit star six to unmute yourself and give us your name and address for the record. Somebody had spoken up. I don't know if we have somebody that would like to address the council on this item. Going once, going twice. Okay, with that, I'm going to declare the public hearing closed and we've got a resolution for approval of the agreement. Can I get a motion to approve the resolution?

Motion to consider.

Motion to approve, I mean. Okay, is there a second? Second. Okay, it's been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Okay, hearing none, all those in favor, signify by saying aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye. Okay. Four yes. All right. Item 4A, new business, Valley Junction lease agreement, 217 Fifth Street, Suite 102, Talia Zepeda doing business as TZ Artistry. We have got a motion for approval of termination of the lease agreement, and there are no outstanding issues. Can I get a motion to approve termination of the lease agreement? So moved. Okay, it's moved. Is there a second? It's moved and seconded. Is there anybody in the audience or online that would like to address the council on this item? Okay, is there any discussion on the dais or online, I should say? Okay, hearing none, all those in favor, say aye. Aye. All those opposed, nay. Any abstentions? Item 4A is approved. Item 5, receive, file, and or refer. Item 5A, we will receive and file the special meeting notice with no further business to come before the City Council. We are adjourned. Thank you, everybody.

Thanks. Have a great weekend.