Festerson Goodwin Hug, Melton, Harding, and Bigley is absent.

Please receive it.

Normally we have opening remarks, but it happens to be the end of the day, we admit to that.

Go ahead and see that.

And I think the first thing that we have that is a proclamation to be read by the question.

Okay, and just real quick, an affidavit, a publication is on file in a current copy of the open meeting act is posted in a white binder on the east wall of legislative chambers.

Welcome to the this meeting of the Omaha City Council.

As a courtesy to those in attendance, and to facilitate the conduct of our business, we ask that you please silence or turn off your electronic devices.

And as a reminder, you'll have three minutes to speak on an agenda item, and please stay on topic.

If you would like your comments entered into the public record, email the city clerk's office at City Cork at City of Omaha dot or G.

Council members receive emails and they read them.

And finally, council members may ask members of the audience back up for clarifying questions and uh but not for extra time to speak.

I'd also like to remind council members to speak clearly into their microphones.

So audience members in attendance and those at home can hear.

Mr.

Hugg, you have a proclamation?

Yeah, or is there anybody here for the proclamations?

Okay.

I think due to the power outage we had here earlier today.

I think we're rescheduling that.

So we'll wait till then.

Item six to consider a classly liquor license for the Clover Leaf House located at one four one two Howard Street.

This is the public hearing on item number six.

Is the applicant here?

Yes.

Okay.

State your name and address for the record, please.

Nikki Connor, one ninety thirty-two R Street, Omaha, Nebraska, six eight one three five.

Here on behalf of the Clover Leaf House for any questions.

Okay.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion second.

Roll call, please.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item seven to consider a class C liquor license for Jay Goretz, Delhi and Market, located at one two two zero at South 203rd Street.

This is the public hearing on item number seven.

And we have the applicant, I think, by Zoom.

Please state your name.

Yeah, please reset your name and address for the record, please.

Nikki Connor, one ninety thirty-two R Street, Omaha, Nebraska, six eight one three five.

Here on behalf of J.

Garotz Delian Market for any questions.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents?

Any opponents.

Public hearing is closed.

Motion second.

Roll call, please.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item eight to consider a classly liquor license for Tussy's casual grill located at nine two two nine at Mormon Bridge Road, suites nine through eleven.

This is the public hearing on item number eight.

And we have the applicant by Zoom.

Please state your name and address for the record.

And here to answer any questions, correct?

Yes.

All right.

Do we have any proponents?

Any opponents.

Public hearing is closed.

Motion to appear.

Motion of second.

Oh I'm sorry, Mr.

Festerson.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Uh Jennifer, just a quick question for you.

This is in the Florence area in my district, a very popular location at Tussey's.

I think the longtime owner recently sold.

Um and so you'd be the new owner, right?

Yes.

Yes, Honor.

All right, great.

And obviously, you intend to keep the same name and same general plan and menu and everything.

Everything will stay the same.

We're very proud of uh this restaurant and it's the neighborhood restaurant for 18 years.

We keep the same name, keep the same menu, everything the same.

Oh great.

Well, I think the neighborhood will appreciate that and uh wish you good luck, and I'll support this today too.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Motion to approve I think we had a motion of second already.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson, yes, good one.

Hug.

Yes.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item nine to consider a class CK liquor license for Beacon Hills, Xarbin, located at 6750, Mercy Road, suites 106 to 108.

This is the public hearing on item number nine.

We have the applicant by Zoom.

Please state your name and address for the record.

Yeah, John Benton, uh 7713 Wyoming Street, Omaha, Nebraska, 68122, here to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Do we have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Mr.

Festerson.

That's an old light.

That's an old light.

Okay.

Do we have a motion from the board?

Motion and second.

Roll call.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Hug.

Yes.

Melton.

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 10.

To consider a class C liquor license for World Liquor located at 2219 North 90th Street, suite 219.

This is the public hearing on item number 10.

We have the applicant.

Hi, I'm Steven Rand.

I'm from Crocker Hart Law Firm 2120 South 72nd Street, suite 1200.

Just here to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion to approve.

Motion of second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Hug?

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 11 to consider a class C liquor license for Vino Moss located at 2835 South 170th Plaza Suite 206.

This is the public hearing on item number 11, and I believe we have the applicant by Zoom.

Please state your name and address for the record.

Deanna Albertson, 15713 Berry Street, Omaha, Nebraska, 68135.

Thank you.

Do we have any proponents?

Any opponents.

Good afternoon.

Omaha City Council, Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson Equestion Foundation, and North Maha Concerned Citizen Foundation.

I have nothing against this lady.

And my address is 4928 North 52nd Street.

What we're concerned with is that can we have one someone from this city of Omaha apply to the liquor commission so we can get this in medical marijuana at the same time?

Okay, Don, you're off subject.

Sit down, please.

Ms.

Melton, you have the floor.

Thank you.

I just want to say that.

Deanna has a place in my district, Vino Moss.

It's one of my favorite places to go to.

So Don, I think you're going to be very happy to have the second location over in your district.

So if you want to make a motion, I'll second it.

It's a great place.

And I I wish I hope you do as well there as you're as you're doing.

Just make sure you don't leave the place off 144th in Eagle Run.

You promise you're going to stay there too.

I promise.

We will not leave here.

All right.

Thanks.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Motion of second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Hug.

Melton.

Yes.

Parting.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 12.

A resolution to approve the preliminary plat for Serenity Estates Townhomes located at 2240 Skyline Drive.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

This is the public hearing on item number 12.

We'll start with the applicant.

Hi, my name is Andrew Coster, 10836 Old Mill Road.

Uh, with Tom Striesson and Dorner, the civil engineers on the project.

Here to answer any any questions.

All right, thank you.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents.

The public hearing is closed.

Motion second roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug?

Melton?

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 13, a resolution to approve the preliminary plat for Ginger Creek located south of 165th and Pinkney Streets Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Hi.

Hold on one second, please.

This is the public hearing on item number 13.

We have the applicant.

Yes.

Andrew Coster, 10836 Old Mill Road.

Uh Thompson Dreeson and Dorner, civil engineers on the project.

This is a preliminary plow with a single lot for multifamily and 24 lots for single family.

Uh here for plenary platable for any questions.

Thank you.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Goodwin.

Yes.

Hug?

Yes.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Items 14 through 16 can be considered together for Westbury Creek 3, located at 4625 at South 216th Street, Planning Board and Planning Department.

Recommend approval.

Item 14, an ordinance to rezone this property from EG district to our four district.

Item 15, a resolution to approve the final plant.

Item 16, a resolution to approve the subdivision agreement.

This is the public hearing on items 14 through 16.

May we have the applicant first, please?

Good afternoon.

Randy Kushak with Lamper Nearson, 14710 West Dodge Road, Omaha, Nebraska.

Um here on behalf of the applicant, uh Richland Holmes, and joined today by Mr.

Pat Sullivan of Adamson Sullivan, who is the SID attorney.

I'm here to answer any questions you have today about this 33 lot subdivision with one out lot that is the final phase of Westbury Creek.

Thank you.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Second.

Motion second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug?

Melton?

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 17 and 18 can be considered together for property located at 6303 Q Street.

Planning Board and Planning Department.

Recommend approval.

Item 17, a resolution to approve a major amendment to the special use permit to allow indoor entertainment and outdoor entertainment in the GI district.

Item 18, a resolution to approve a major amendment to large project special use permit for an area over 10 acres in size in the GI district.

This is the public hearing on items number 17 and 18.

Is the applicant here today?

If not, do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

The public hearing is closed.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Consent agenda.

Any member of the city council may cause any item placed on the consent agenda to be removed.

Items removed from the consent agenda shall be taken up by the city council immediately following the consent agenda and the order in which they were removed unless otherwise provided by the city council rules of order.

The public hearing on it agenda items 19 through 25 were held on November 4th, 2025.

Is there any council discussion?

Right.

I believe there's yeah.

We're going to remove 25 from consent.

Okay.

So motion to approve items 19 through 24.

Okay.

Motion and second.

Roll call on 19 through 24.

Roes.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 24.

Oh.

Good.

I was just going to say item 25 is an ordinance to amend various sections of chapter 6 of the Omaha Municipal Code regarding wildlife, chickens, and other fowl.

Motion to lay over item number 25 until December 9th.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Motion, second, roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion pass six to zero.

You don't hear?

Did you introduce them yet?

Okay.

Yeah.

Uh the public hearings on agenda items number 25 26 through 45 are today.

If you wish to address the city council regarding these items, please come to the microphone.

Indicate the agenda item that you wish to address.

Identify yourself by name and address and who you represent, and if you are a proponent or an opponent.

So we will start with the proponents on items 26 through 45.

Seeing none, do I have any opponents?

Opponents for 26 through 45.

Seeing none, the public hearing is closed.

Second.

Motion or motion and second.

Roll call, please.

Row.

Yes.

Pesterson, yes, goodwin.

Hug.

Yes.

Melton.

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion passed, six to zero.

Item 46, a resolution to approve the purchase order and facilities waiver with OPPD for the installation of new three-phase permanent power feeds for the compost relocation project.

This is the public hearing on item number 46.

Do I have the applicant?

Or any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion approved.

Motion of second.

Roll call, please.

Roe.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug?

Yes.

Melton?

Harding.

Yes.

Motion passed.

6-0.

Item 47, an ordinance to approve the contract with Midwest Maritime Services, LLC for sewer maintenance, on call tree, and stump removal at various locations.

This is the public hearing on item number 47.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 48, an ordinance to approve a one-year option to an agreement with Mutual of Omaha to provide group long-term disability insurance.

This is the public hearing on item number 48.

Do I have any proponents?

Good afternoon, Deb Sander, City Human Resources here to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Any other proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 49, an ordinance to approve and execute an agreement with the standard to provide voluntary benefits for city employees.

This is the public hearing on item number 49.

Do I have any proponents?

Again, Deb Zander from City Human Resources to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Any other proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 50, an ordinance to approve a professional services agreement with Tony Jensen and to authorize funding from the City of Omaha's fiscal year 2023, improving criminal justice responses to sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence, and stocking grant program.

This is the public hearing on item number 50.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 51, an ordinance to amend a portion of Chapter 11, Article 2 of the Omaha Municipal Code entitled to Food Inspection and Protection to a Correct a Typographic Error in Section 11-265A to replace the term particles with the term practices.

This is the public hearing on item number 51.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 52, an ordinance to approve a purchase and sale agreement with the duo apartments LLC for the transfer and sale of real property in a public parking facility generally located at 201 South 16th Street.

This is the public hearing on item number 52.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents.

The public hearing is closed.

Item 53, an ordinance to approve an amendment to a redevelopment agreement with the duo apartments LLC, which will acknowledge and authorize the redevelopment project to be completed in three phases.

This is the public hearing on item number 53.

Do I have any proponents?

Any opponents.

Public hearing is closed.

Item 54, principal financial group appeals the rejection of their bid from October 29th, 2025 for custodian services for COEs and couplers.

This is item number 54.

It does not require a public hearing or city council considerate or it does not require a public hearing.

And then we will hear from the city.

Good afternoon.

Thank you.

My name is Robert Coulman.

I'm representing, I'm here representing Principal Bank, which has its headquarters at 7 Eleven High Street, Des Moines, Iowa, and it maintains a local office at 18205 Capitol Avenue, Elkhorn, Nebraska.

I'm here to respectfully appeal the rejection of Principal Bank's proposal to provide custody services for the City of Omaha civilians and City of Omaha police and fire retirement plans.

By way of background, Principal Bank submitted a complete and competitive bid, including all required references and attachments by the 10 October 29th deadline.

We currently serve as the incumbent custody service provider for these plans and have done so for 30 years.

I am a relationship manager principal, and I've been personally responsible for overseeing the services delivered to the city for the last 18 years.

According to the notice received from the city clerk's office, our bid was rejected due to a quote failure to submit bid security.

We can test this decision.

Our proposal included confirmation of a $50 cashier check issued from our partner bank, including both the check number and FedEx tracking numbers.

It should be noted that the city received the actual cashier's check and the amount of $50 on the same day that the bid was delivered.

We believe that we made a good faith effort to comply with the bid requirements.

Given our long-standing relationship with the City of Omaha, the quality of our competitive proposal and our thorough understanding of the service needs of both retirement plants, we request our bid be considered alongside alongside the others that were submitted for proposal.

Thank you.

Thank you or from the city.

That needs to be in by 11 a.m.

on the date that the bids are opened.

Here the electronic bid had a note indicating that the bid security would be mailed separately from the bid.

It wasn't scanned in as is required by city code.

It did not arrive here physically until I believe sometime at 11 59 or after that 11 p.m.

or 11 a.m.

bid opening.

So that's when it arrived to the mailroom.

There is some reference in the so there, it wasn't here by 11.

Um as has been our office's recommendation and all the other appeals.

It's not here by 11.

The bid should be rejected.

They confirmed that the company did log in at 1031 a.m.

Uh on the day that the bids were opened.

So they did log in.

Um they would they indicated to us that they would have had indication if they attempted to submit additional documentation at that time.

Uh there's nothing in their servers that indicated any additional information was attempted to that anyone attempted to upload additional information.

To me, that is an indication that they did not log in and they did, or they did log in, but they did not attempt to uh update and upload that bid security as they are required by code.

Okay.

Any questions from counsel?

Yeah, just yeah, come up, please, Mr.

Coleman.

I I have I'm not gonna I I just very simply want to state two things.

One, I could not find in the code that it specifically said that uh an electronic copy of the check is sufficient.

I want to reiterate that we provided the actual cashable check the same day that the bid was due, which is better than what is required by the code, which is to deliver that cashable item within seven days of the bid.

And then the second thing is to the point about the system.

Yes, we did log into the system at around 1031 before the bid was due because we had finally received an actual copy of the check from our bank, but the system declined our ability to actually update the bid.

It said it was locked out, which it should not have done until we had reached 11 o'clock.

So we contend that yes, correctly the we were in the system, but what you can't tell is that the system wasn't allowing us to update our bid with an actual copy of the check prior to the cutoff.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any questions from the council?

Ms.

Goodwin.

You're recognized.

To speak with our city council, please.

Um were there any other issues with um other bids um in uploading their payments?

Uh no.

I'll uh the city code requires just to be absolutely clear.

Some sort of scanned copy of the bid security be uploaded prior to 11.

All of the other bids had that scanned bid security uploaded.

So we could go into Ion wave, we could verify yes they did obtain this bid security.

For this particular bid everyone had that bid security in on this date and I believe that all of all the other bids as well everyone had that electronic verification that they got bid security uploaded.

So there was no indication of technical difficulties or issues.

There was no indication wave yeah there was no indication of technical difficulties and from what Ionwave told me um they if there were technical difficulties they would have had a record of that and they did not have a record of any technical difficulties.

And then how long is the time frame from when the bids are open to the closing date at what or time of 11 a.m.

What's that window look like is it 30 days is it two weeks the window so the bids are closed at 11 11 a.m and that's when we open them at 11 I see same day.

Yep.

Gotcha.

So they have all the way up until 1059 and and 59 seconds to finish their submissions and if they hit submit when we go to open the bids right at 11 it will be there.

Okay.

Thank you for that I have uh just one question.

I I just want to make sure we're we're clear on this so it's the the electronic copy or the actual check security has to be there at by 11.

Yes we need something by 11 in order to open the bid and since it wasn't there in either form but came in later that day that that doesn't suffice the the um the requirements correct it does not meet the requirements of our code we need one or the other by 11 a.m.

Okay.

But if it was just the electronic copy then it would have you would have a number of days before it was actually to be in hand.

We wanted to to control for the situation where someone electronically submits it at say 1059 a.m and then they have seven days to mail us that bid security and we will still be able to consider their bid yeah I just wanted to make sure that we had that clarification as Mr.

Coleman had stated that it was actually delivered later on that day within the seven days but again either the facsimile of or the actual check was not included or was not present at least when the bid was open at 11.

That is correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Mrs.

Melton you recognize well and I have a question and I don't I'm not sure if it's um for Mr Coleman or the city because it says we did not when they uploaded the bid at 735 p.m on October 28th we did not have a copy of the actual check but provided a reasonable substitute.

What was the reasonable substitute that was provided yes we provided I'm sorry.

So yeah the we provided the FedEx tracking number because the check was coming directly from the bank to the city and the check number for the check that was on its way to the city.

We did not act at at the night before we did not have the actual copy of the check we had we were trying to get that from our bank we got the copy of the check from our bank in the morning again attempted to open up the bid that we had submitted and the system told us that the bid was locked it wouldn't allow us to amend our bid is what it told us.

And so 11 o'clock hit we couldn't add anything more we couldn't add the actual copy of the check.

However we knew the check was on its way down there we had trusted that FedEx would have the check there on time but of course that never happens so that that was the issue.

Does that answer your question?

Yeah because I was just curious as to what they did upload.

It was a note that said the check is in the mail essentially attachments they had a note they said we've mailed the check okay they had a note but I want to be clear it wasn't just like some little piece of paper it said a note they actually sent you the FedEx tracking number and the check number I don't recall the specifics of what was in the note but there was text that said we deposited this in the mail it's scheduled to be there um by this date the bid opening date if the check number and the tracking number was in that note that's not a fact I recall right now.

Okay.

Okay Mr.

Coleman I'll let you respond but I we can't do that.

I'm I'm talking to the city do you so you don't have a copy of that because it would have been uploaded they would have uploaded this the FedEx and the check number and you would if they if they actually uploaded a FedEx here's the check delivery number and the check number that's still not good enough you have to have the check it has to be a copy like you have to do a PDF or some sort of JPEG copy of the actual bid security or the actual check so we can because there's also a bunch of requirements as far as what the check is concerned we have to be able to make sure it's a U.S.

We have to be able to make sure it's a U.S.

bank.

We have to be able to make sure it's a certified check and not a company check.

So we need to see the actual check and and evaluate that prior to allowing the bid to be opened.

That was not done in this case.

Okay.

That's what I wanted.

I that's what I wanted to confirm.

I mean, Mr.

Coleman, I'll allow you to respond, but respond to what he said.

It had to actually be the actual check.

That's the that's what the if that's what the code is.

Mr.

Coolman, if you're if you're responding, please come to the if that's what the code is requiring.

I was just gonna allude uh um add clarity that when we when you submit the bid electronically, you attach your response to their proposal, you retach documents that are the actual pricing proposal, you attach the all the um all the references that are requested and in and in place of the actual copy of the check, we attached a document that was labeled that it was the bid security, you know, proof of bid security, and it had text that explained that the check was being delivered, and here's the FedEx reference and so forth.

So to his point, it was not an actual copy of a check.

Okay.

So it sounds to me like it's unfortunate that FedEx didn't get it here by 11 because uh if if the check had been here by 11, you'd have had the physical copy, so this wouldn't be an issue, is that correct?

If we had the physical check by 11 in the bid opening in room, we would have accepted that.

Okay, because uh we've had a lot of these where it just seems so minuscule.

Um, but we also we've also this council for many many years.

Look at Mr.

Festerson, it's sometimes painful to have to deny these appeals because it's something that seems like common sense, but with specific bids, we can't set a precedence that we're just gonna take them and allow allow certain people because we like them or because we know them or because they've done good work for us before, if they don't follow the specific rules of these bids, it in my opinion, the council almost has no we we have to deny it if the rules weren't followed exactly the way they were supposed to.

Otherwise, all these other people that have had their bids denied actually could potentially even turn around and and sue us because we can't allow some people to maybe not follow it as little as it may be.

I think there was a bid that was rejected because it was two cents off.

Um President Harding, I think uh remember that complaint, it was about a year ago.

Yeah, and it was two cents off.

The person who punched the numbers in made a two cent mistake.

It was two cents short.

And it was denied.

And and it was really unfortunate because I think they would have been the best actually the best choice for the job.

Um you know, I I thought they were a great company, and it was it was denied.

And so these are the these are the times that I I hate, I hate doing it.

Um, but we have to follow our own rules.

And so it's really an unfortunate thing that you didn't have the check and it didn't get here by 11.

I think you did everything almost right and thought that that was a good compromise since you didn't have a copy of the check, but unfortunately, I think I'm going to have to vote unfortunately to uphold the denial for those reasons and for all the other people who we've denied before because we have to keep precedent.

Um, or else we throw throw our bid process kind of out the window.

So is that a motion?

So it motion to I'll I'm gonna have to do a motion to deny the appeal.

Second, a motion second roll call, please.

Row Festerson good one, yeah, hug, yes, Melton, yes, harding.

Yes, motion passed six to zero.

I think yeah, non-action items.

I think Mr.

Hugg, did you have something for the Mr.

President?

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to put it agenda item 94 on file.

Second.

I think it's 94.

Yeah, 94.

Motion second roll call, please.

Row.

Yes.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Yes.

Hug.

Yes.

Melton.

Yeah.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion passed six to zero.

Items 55 through 93 do not require a public hearing or city council consideration at this meeting, but will be placed on a future agenda for public hearing and our vote.

The reason for non-action is noted after the item on the agenda as well as the date the item is expected to appear on an agenda for consideration.

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

Motion of second.

Roll call, please.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Good one.

Hug.

Melton.

Harding.

Yes.

Motion passed.

Six to zero.

Meeting is adjourned at 2.34.