Good one.

Harding.

Hug.

Here.

Melton is absent.

Roe.

Here.

Fasterson.

Mr.

President.

Please stand for the Pledge Allegiance.

Remain standing for opening remarks by Councilmember Don Rowe.

Pledge allegiance to the flag from the United States of America.

To the Republic for which it stands.

One nation.

Under God.

Liberty and Justice for all.

You may have a seat.

I'd like to share a poem written in 1719 by Isaac Watts.

Well, it's not originally written as a Christmas carol.

It certainly has morphed into that over the years.

It goes like this.

Joy to the world, the Lord is come.

Let Earth receive her king.

Let every heart prepare him room and heaven and nature sing.

Joy to the earth, the Savior reigns, let men their songs employ.

While fields and floods, rocks, hills, and plains repeat the sounding joy.

He rules the world with truth and grace and makes the nations prove the glories of his righteousness and wonders of his love.

Just wanted to say Merry Christmas.

And one other thing.

While driving this Christmas season, slow down the speed.

Stop at red lights and watch for pedestrians.

My hope is that everyone has a joyous holiday this year.

An affidavit of publication is on file, and a current copy of the Open Meeting Act is posted in a white binder on the East Wall of Legislative Chambers.

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

A reminder that you will have three minutes to speak on an agenda item.

Please stay on topic.

If you would like your comments entered into the public record, you can email the city clerk's office at Cityclerk at City of Omaha.org.

Council members receive these emails and we read them.

Finally, council members may ask members of the audience back up for a clarifying questions, but not for extra time to speak.

Item six to consider a class I liquor license for Golden Turtle located at 3910 Harney Street.

Public hearing is now open on item number six.

Good afternoon.

North forty eighth Street Suite 103B, Omaha, Nebraska, 68152.

I'm appearing on behalf of the applicant and the manager applicant.

I'll be happy to answer any question you may have.

Are there any proponents of item number six?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

I got question for you, please.

Yes, sir.

Um just what are the hours going to be?

Uh the hour will be from eleven to ten on a regular day, and Friday and Saturday will be uh closed at 2 a.m.

on the next day.

And what kind of what kind of business are you gonna have?

This is uh restaurant with a bar is uh serving the Vietnamese food in the Omaha area, and we want to uh sell them some alcohol with the food.

Okay, well, it's uh I can't make a motion of support to this but I'll be glad to be supportive today, and I wish you well in Blackstone.

Welcome to Blackstone.

Thank you, sir.

Second, got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding, yes, hug.

Roe.

Fasterson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item seven to consider a class D liquor license for Benson Grocery located at 5420 Northwest Radio Highway.

AIDS communication and opposition.

Public hearing is now open on item number seven.

Do we have the applicant on Zoom?

No.

Okay.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Mr.

Houghton.

Good afternoon.

Members of the council, my name is David Houghton here on behalf of the applicant.

My address is 284 South 87th Avenue.

The applicant is Benson Grocery LLC doing business as Benson Grocery.

Be located at 5420 Northwest Radial Highway.

The applicant's name is Rahil Amsidou, and her husband's name is Work who McCon McCowen.

He's a physician in town there looking to expand and start a business for their family when this opportunity became available.

The hours of operation will be 8 a.m.

to 10 p.m.

Uh they will operate as a grocer.

Uh they'll have a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables, canned foods and vegetables, uh dairy, um, all of your grocer and convenience items.

The council has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here on item number seven?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Uh Brandon Royal, uh 5243 Northwest Radial Highway.

Uh I live right across the street from this.

Um I oppose this because there are too many uh shops on this block selling alcohol and smoke products already.

Uh the community doesn't want any more.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other opponents here?

My name is Noran Bankin.

I live at 5239 Northwest Radial Highway, and I've lived there for 20 years.

Um I oppose the liquor license because we have plenty of liquor opportunities in um the Benson area.

Also because it is close to uh both Benson High School and the junior high that next door, and I think it just uh creates another opportunity for school children to find a little trouble.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other opponents here today?

Item number seven.

Seeing none, public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh this application is at about 54th Northwest Radial, which is in my district.

Uh so I appreciate those that are here to express their concern about a few things.

And I did speak with um another constituent that has a property there that also had a concern.

Uh Mr.

Houghton, if you want to come back up just for a minute.

Of course.

I appreciated our conversation about this this morning as well.

Um and I think you did a good job of explaining what he intends to do there, the applicant.

Um it will will in fact be additional grocery items and things of that nature, not just a liquor store, right?

That's correct.

Yep.

What types of things again?

Um I if you'll I have an exhaustive list if you want to hear it, but I doubt you do.

I can short circuit it for you.

Let's see.

My apologies for the delay.

Mr.

Bradman.

Uh I'll have fetch fresh vegetables, including asparagus, beets, broccoli, cauliflower, carrots, celery, corn, cucumbers, greens, lettuce, mushrooms, onions, peppers, potatoes, spinach, sprouts, squash, tomatoes, and zucchini, uh, canned foods, applesauce, baked beans, carrots, corn, beans, mixed fruits, mixed veggies, olives, pasta sauce, pickles, refried beans, tuna soups, tomatoes, uh, various grocery uh items such as gravy, honey, jelly preserves, ketchup, mayonnaise, pancake.

If you I can go on.

Okay.

Uh give me a story, but with fresh offerings as well.

That that's right.

Um it is not a gas station, it's just a it it's purely a grocer.

Yeah, and I I did have occasion to speak today.

Uh I just wanted to be up front with the council.

Um, the gentleman that submitted the written opposition.

Um, we understand their concerns.

Uh I think they're concerned about liquor in general in the community.

Um if they had specific concerns, my client would be happy to address any of those if it was litter uh or any problematic behavior in the currently a vacant building.

Um and this would be one bay in that renovated building, right?

That's correct.

Yeah.

And the other two bays, what were the thoughts there?

They'd be rented or leased.

Yeah, I think the idea is to define tenants for those bays.

Okay.

And I'm sure your client, if they haven't already, would take um liquor training licenses, like liquor training courses to make sure they aren't having any problems with kids or minors.

Yes, willing to do um whatever the law requires and then some.

Okay.

And then the other person I talked to was mostly concerned about litter.

But it's it's literally that it's already happening there, so it's coming from a different location, which I will deal with.

Um so it's not your your clients um issue at the moment, but realizing that's a thing of sensitivity, um, a commitment from you and your client to not have litter uh issues on this property once they're a tenant.

Yes.

I spoke with them before I came here.

They apologized they couldn't be here, they were working today, but um that's correct.

He they'll make every effort to make sure that um there's not litter on around or adjacent to their property.

Okay they certainly don't want to be a burden to their neighbors.

Okay.

With those commitments, I would uh motion to approve.

So got a motion and a second.

Got other lights.

Councilmember Hug, you're recognized, sir.

Yes.

Um do you have an approximate percentage of the floor space that would be occupied for um I can find that uh have to look through the application if you give me a moment excuse me?

The dimensions are gonna be uh 20 by 15.

Um they do not have any blueprints.

I think the building length is approximately 60 feet by 50 feet.

Okay, so the area to disp to sell alcohol will be how big?

Um I don't have a floor space percentage on what will be dedicated to alcohol sales.

All right, so we we don't know if I'm not sure.

The percentage of the floor space that will be used for selling alcohol.

Yeah, I don't have that in the application.

All right, thank you.

Welcome.

No further lights.

We had a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding, yes, hug, row, festerson.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed, six to zero.

Thank you.

Item eight to consider a change of location application for Don and Millie's to be located at 1811 Wright Plaza.

Public hearing is now open on item number eight.

Applicant here.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Name's uh Kevin Ames.

Uh, address is one four-three four-four uh Y Street.

Uh it's Omaha 68137.

I'm a representative of the company, and yes, we're looking to uh we submit an application to change our liquor license uh from 4430 Farnham Street to 1811 Reich Plaza.

So thank you.

Are there any proponents here today?

Item number eight.

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding, hug, row, faster.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item nine to consider a liquor license addition application for a little polonia located at 3804 Q Street to add an outdoor area.

I will now open the public hearing on item number nine.

The applicant by Zoom, I believe.

Miss Ghania, can you hear us?

Don't get doing 4819 last out.

And then you have Nebraska.

Five 402, five two, one.

Thank you.

If we have any questions, we'll come back to you.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here today?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Hug, you're recognized.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

Uh Karen, can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay.

Um you understand that your bar will still be subject to abiding by the uh noise ordinances that the city has in place.

Yes.

Okay.

All right, motion to approve.

Second.

I'm sorry.

I'll do it.

Good one.

Yes.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Rowe.

Festerson.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 10 to consider a liquor license addition application for Flix Lounge located at 1019 South 10th Street to add the building basement.

The public hearing is now open on item number 10.

Is the applicant here?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, sir.

Uh Joey Cumston, 2915 Bancroft Street.

It's for Flix Lounge, an additional seating and stuff, just seating in the back.

And yeah.

You're doing great.

If we have any questions, we'll come back to you.

Yes, sir.

Thanks.

Are there any proponents here on item number 10?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Good afternoon, Omaha City Council.

Donnie Rad Johnson, the Johnson Equestion Foundation.

And North O'Harrow Concerned Citizen Foundation, 4928 North 52nd Street.

I have nothing against this gentleman.

But we we were asking that.

They asked me to ask Mr.

Harding.

Did you I told him I was going to be voting for Mr.

Hardy.

Would he debate Mr.

Kavanaugh about Medical Mary 1?

Donnie, you're off topic.

Thank you.

But I'll come out for you, Mr.

Harding.

Are there any other opponents here on item number 10?

Public hearing is closed.

This is in my district.

I will be supporting it if we can get a motion.

Got a motion and a second.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Festerson.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Items 11 through 15 can be considered together for Peace Ridge, Replet 1, located northeast of 204th and Harney Streets.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Items 11 and 12 are ordinances to rezone this property from R4 district and R7 district to our four district and R 7 district.

Item 13, an ordinance to approve a major amendment to a PUD overlay district.

And 14, a resolution to approve a major amendment to the special use permit to allow general office and the R7 district.

Item 15, a resolution to approve the final platform the public hearing is now open for items 11 through 15.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Ben Drews 10836 Old Mill Road with TD2 Engineering here on behalf of the applicant to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here on items 11 through 15?

Seeing none are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

We got a motion and a second.

Roll call.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Thank you.

Item 16, an ordinance to rezone property located at 1947, South 13th Street from GI District to NBD District.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 16.

Is the applicant here today?

Are there any proponents on item number 16?

Are there one?

You can talk to the clerk.

Are there any proponents here?

Item 16.

Are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 17, an ordinance to rezone property located at 2602 North 24th Street from R5 District to MBD District.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is open on item number 17.

Applicant, good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Joe Dutlovs 10836 Old Mill Road.

T.

Michael Williams, 2602 North 24th Street.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here?

Item 17.

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Um so I just have a few questions about this project.

Can you tell us a little bit about it?

We are really excited to be able to have a uh community center in North Omaha on 24th Street.

We call it the Mariah Intergenerational Center, and the idea is to provide both meeting space for uh activities, concerts, uh small uh banquets, those kinds of things, as well as uh a space for uh incubators for uh entrepreneurs.

So we we're really excited about what this can bring to uh North Omaha.

Thank you, and we see that this is really one of the first phases in planning uh to rezone the area.

Um what what phase are you in with the project overall?

We're we're we're in the uh planning phase.

We are wanting to start the uh the uh project with this parking uh here in uh the spring.

And uh we uh are m looking forward to uh starting the um main building uh the Mariah Center once we uh complete the parking lot.

Okay, great, and so that is adjacent to the current parking lot at Mount Mariah.

That's correct.

Okay, and how many stalls will it have?

About 109.

Yeah.

As that area is beginning to fill in, we get a lot of I think complaints about parking, so I think it will be a well-welcomed addition to the area.

What's the timeline for the overall completion?

We because of the uh funds that we received from the state.

The uh goal is to be completed by December of 2027.

2027, okay.

Total cost of the project?

About 6.5 million.

Wow, so that's investment back to the heart of North Omaha, which is always exciting.

That's right.

Thank you so much for your work.

Uh I motion to approve.

Second.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes, hug.

Row, Festerson.

Yes, Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Thank you all.

Thank you.

Item 18, an ordinance to rezone property located at 3026 South 18th Street from R 4 district to R5 district, planning board and planning department recommend approval.

I'll open the public hearing on item number 18.

Are there any is the applicant here?

Please come up.

Hello.

Uh, my name is Nancy Sanchez.

I live in a 1035 West 10th Street, Fremont, Nebraska.

I am the owner in that property.

Applicant to request uh to R5 now.

And um I read uh uh good afternoon.

It's a privilege for me to be with you at this meeting today.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to plan to explain why we are here.

My only wish is that the resolution be approved because all we want, all we really want is to rebuild a house that is already there.

But which verify damage, so our only desire is to be able to rebuild it and live in it.

As told you last time, it's so I can give it to my daughter and improve the neighborhood with a house that is currently vacant and could otherwise be occupied by people who instead of helping and improving things only cause harm make things worse and vandalize unoccupied houses.

I would decide it is just to rebuild the house existing now.

We bought the pro the property, include two houses, one is good now, and the other one suffered five damage when we bought it and include two lot lands now, but we just want to rebuild the house is is our desire.

But when I came to the city and request that what I want, uh the city says is R4 need to be R5, and I contact the architect, his name is Tolib Son Mara Pope.

It's difficult to me pronounce it his name.

And he came with uh planning department and explain everything what we need to do, but we follow every step now what the city needed, and um available to do that.

That's my explain today.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here on item 18?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Council member hug, you're recommending.

Uh thank you, Mr.

President.

This is a question for uh Mr.

Fanslaw.

Dave, would there have been uh notifications sent out to neighbors on this resilience?

Uh yeah.

Dave Fanslow City planning there should have been, yes.

Okay.

And the city would have done that?

Yes.

Okay.

All right.

Thank you.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Yes.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 19, an ordinance to rezone property located at 6990 Dodge Street from GC District to TOD2 MX District, Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 19.

Applicants.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

McKinley Wilson, 10250, Regency Circle, Omaha, Nebraska.

Um attorney here today on behalf of the developer.

And also I have Colin here with me today who is a representative of the development team.

And we're happy to answer any questions that you guys may have about this project.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents?

Item 19.

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Uh, if you would just for a moment, a few questions for you.

Um, this is a property that's um currently a long-term stay hotel property, right?

Correct, yes.

It's being converted into about 80 units of um multifamily apartments.

That's correct, yes.

And I believe it's a mixture between studios and and loft departments.

Correct.

Yes, that's correct.

But no changes to access or e-gress ingress, nothing like that.

No, this basically the rezoning is just to accommodate for the new use of the property essentially and the new parking requirements as well.

Okay.

And I thought I read that the rental range is between maybe 850 and 1250 or so.

Thank you.

Yes.

Uh so nice, nice uh range of offerings there, I think, for folks uh that want to live in that area.

And it's a I think it's an interesting example of what um we might start seeing more of uh conversion essentially of a hotel into housing units that are sorely needed, right?

Yeah.

Right behind uh Omaha Community Playhouse.

Um, but uh no changes to their access either, right?

That's correct as well.

And we did reach out to the surrounding uh property owners and to the um Fair Acres Neighborhood Association a few months ago, and uh one of the developer representatives did host a meeting, so inviting people to come and answer and ask any questions that there might be.

And so um there seemed to be no big concern at those meetings that were brought to our attention.

Yeah, I think you're right, and I appreciate you doing that.

Uh I'll be supportive and on motion to approve.

Got a motion and a second.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I had a question for our planning director, Mr.

Fanslaw.

Um this is a transit oriented development project.

Uh in the agenda earlier, we saw planned unit development overlay.

What are the differences?

And I think I asked you this every time, but I'm gonna ask you.

Dave Fanslow City Planning.

Your question is what's the difference between TOD and PUD?

Yep.

Um quite a bit.

Well, we can talk online, but there are obviously two different zoning tools.

One, um, the plan you uh a PUD uh allows us to require and and require site divine design regulations, building elevations, um it really locks down the plan to to what you see is what you get.

With TOD, it's a base zoning district in our zoning code, and it's um it it it surrounds it, it it wants to surround itself by around transit.

So um the orbit bus line is why we put that TOD zoning in place in the zoning code in the master plan.

We made a change to the future land use plan, and this area qualifies for TOD as well.

Thank you.

You bet no further lights, roll call.

Good one.

Yes, Harding?

Yes, hug?

Row Festerson?

Yes, Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 20, an ordinance to amend the boundaries of the MCC district to incorporate into that district the property located at 8516 of Blondow Street, planning board and planning department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 20.

Applicant here today.

Good afternoon.

Hi, I um Anna Johnson.

I own 8530 Blondo Street, which is a garden center and landscaping company, and I have purchased 8516 Blondeau Street, which is just a couple couple lots over.

Um I don't know how much or how little I'm seeking approval for today.

Um, but I don't really understand the MCC overlay stuff.

But if I'm here to answer all of the plans if you guys have questions about what we're trying to do.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here on item number 20?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Excuse me, ma'am.

Good afternoon, I'm haul city council.

Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson Equestion Foundation, North Omaha Concerned Citizen Foundation.

I just have to do that.

Donnie, we need your address as well.

4928 Note 52nd Street.

As I was saying, me and Mr.

Harding going to Washington, D.C., I'm gonna change that.

In the meantime, back to this question here.

The boundaries.

And the county lines the same.

County lines the same.

Because I asked a Washington County Commissioner to sell me some land, but they say it couldn't change the boundary or the county lines.

Donnie, you're you're off topic.

Thank you.

Are there any other opponents here on item number 20?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

This one's also my district.

Uh Ann, if you don't mind, just a question or two for you.

So what's the current use of this property?

It is a vacant lot, which the seller still has some um trailer, tractor trailer storage on that he's supposed to be getting moved pretty soon.

Okay.

That'd be good.

And then uh your property just to the west there.

What how long has that been a landscaping operation?

We this is our 26th year as a garden center.

And then right in there has been a recycling facility at some point, right?

Uh right behind us, there was a can pack, and then actually the lot, I think it was part of this one that has been sent split, and there's a I think it's a car storage or something now that was all um the metal recycling, and those ladies have moved over to Maple.

Okay.

Yeah, it seems like that lot has been substantially cleaned up, right?

Uh it's the the city made the seller tear some stuff down and and clean.

There's still we're still working on getting the rest of it.

We've done a lot of cleaning, but we're we're actually trying to get water there now and things so that we can make it pretty.

Good.

Well, as a landscaping company, I think that that's probably in your interest, right?

That is, yes.

Mr.

Fanslaw, you want to take just one second to make sure she understands what the major commercial corridor overlay does for the property?

Sure, yeah, Dave Fanslaw.

So the MCC overlay, it's a zoning overlay, uh, major commercial corridors and one of our urban design overlays.

And what it it does, it it re then once that overlays put on a piece of property rezoned with that overlay.

Uh, any future development will have to comply with that part of our zoning code, which deals with signage, landscaping, building elevations, stuff like that.

So any changes you make will have to meet that code.

And that's all we're asking for today is just getting that's it.

Okay.

And that'll I think ensure that you can continue to operate your business as you intend to and make the site look nice as well.

So uh appreciate that.

I'll motion to approve.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes, hug.

Row.

Festerson?

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 21, an ordinance to amend the boundaries of the ACI 3 PL overlay district to incorporate into that district the property located at 120 Regency Parkway Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item number 21.

Applicant, good afternoon.

Hi, Blake Weatherly with Olsen 211 South 67th Street here on behalf of the applicant, here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here?

Item number 21.

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion to approve.

Got a motion and a second row call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hi.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Items 22 and 23 can be considered together for property located at 521 at South 38th Avenue.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Item 22, an ordinance to rezone this property from R 435 district to TOD2 M U R district.

Item 23, an ordinance to rescind the ACI overlay district for this property.

I will open the public hearing for items number 22 and 23.

Is the applicant here today?

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

I'm Mark Sanford Architect, uh 12509 Reed Street.

I'm the architect for the project and here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Mr.

I'll second it.

Now Mr.

Samford, a couple questions for you.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Good chat with you in person now.

Thanks, Dan.

Um so I don't have my cheat sheet with me, but when we talked, if I recollect correctly, it's 10 offices right now, correct?

That is correct.

It was for the uh university's medical offices.

Okay.

And you're gonna make four apartments out of this?

Yes, we're going to uh design and change some of those units into uh apartments.

Okay, and how about the parking issues?

Is there any parking issues here?

There are no issues.

There's an existing garage on that site that we're going to keep, and uh that will hold two cars and the driveway is large enough to uh accommodate two more cars, which uh satisfies the parking requirements.

With ten offices there before four apartments now, it'll probably be less traffic.

Definitely less traffic and uh not so transient as well.

Okay, and I know when you and I chatted, you spoke with people in the neighborhood of the neighborhood association as well.

Yes, we talked with uh Mark Mazer, did uh give me a call.

He's the president of the uh HOA in that area, and uh he was concerned if the building was going to be torn down like many projects seem to be, and then uh designing a new modern look which would not fit into the neighborhood fabric.

Uh the house is going to remain uh just the way it looks today, uh, with a little embellishment, uh some new paint.

We'll definitely uh upgrade it somewhat and add a dormer on the upper level uh to accommodate one more apartment unit, which makes for the four apartments.

Great.

Thanks.

Thanks for being here today.

Uh Councilmember Hug, you're recognized.

I apologize.

I should have looked closer to this address, but uh just for discussion purposes.

That is really close from the house Dorothy McGuire grew up in, the the actress.

And uh I believe at the time the uh med center acquired that property, they had made it promise to build some kind of monument memorializing that site in her in her memory.

But um that's not this address.

That is not this address.

Okay, it's close though.

It might be close.

We can investigate that a little bit more.

It might be on that block.

But okay, thank you.

No further lights.

We had a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Yes, Harding.

Yeah, hug?

Yes.

Row?

Fasterson?

Yes, Mr.

President.

I'm not sure.

Motion passed six to zero.

Items 24 and 25 can be considered together for property located at 10909 M Street, planning board and planning department recommend approval.

Item 24, an ordinance to rezone this property from GI district to CC district.

Item 25, an ordinance to amend the boundaries of the MCC overlay district to incorporate this property into that district.

Public hearing is now open for items 24 and 25.

Is the applicant here today?

Are there any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Motion is second row call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 26.

The resolution to approve a major amendment to the special use permit to allow scrap and salvage services in the HI District located at 3701 Dalman Avenue.

Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing on item number 26 is now open.

Mr.

Deathless, good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Joe Deltloffs, 10836 Old Mill Road.

Here representing the applicant available to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here?

Item number 26.

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion as second roll call.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Yes.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

I thank you.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 27, a resolution to approve the Elitoro Plaza tax increment financing redevelopment project plan located at 2405 Z Street in an amount up to 867,358 dollars.

Public hearing is now open on item number 27.

Mr.

Seaton, good afternoon.

Uh yes, good afternoon, Don Seaton, Omaha City Planning Department.

This is a mixed-use industrial office development located at South 25th and Z Streets.

It's on a vacant lot of about five acres.

It's been a long vacant lot that uh had been uh neglected for quite a while.

Uh current owners have cleaned it up, and they're proposing to construct a new one-story office warehouse.

Warehousing light industrial building of about 32,008 square feet.

Uh this will be uh really a good support facility for small and emerging businesses that uh are construction related in particular.

Uh we'll make use of this type of project or this type of uh facility.

The developer is El Toro Plaza LLC.

Uh they're investing about 10.3 million dollars into the neighborhood in South Omaha here.

The TIFF support for the project is 867,358 dollars.

Uh project meets the required criteria of our TIFF program, it's an appropriate land use for the area, really puts an underutilized uh bacon lot to a much better use, and we ask for your approval.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here on item 27?

Thank you, Don.

My name is Jack Suter with McGrath North Law Firm.

Address is 1601 Dodge Street here on behalf of the developer.

We'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

Any other proponents here?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Uh good afternoon, Omaha City Council.

Uh Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson E.

Question Foundation, and North Oha North Omaha Concerned Citizen Foundation, 4928 North 52nd Street.

I think a lot of folks would like to say something, but you keep cutting us off.

Is there any other opponents here today?

Public hearing is closed.

Council member hugged, you're recognized, Mr.

President.

Those of you who are not familiar with my district and this specific location will not be able to appreciate how much of an overall improvement this is not only to that site, but that whole area in South Omaha.

I mean, you know, that vacant packing plant sat there vacant for at least 20 years, if not 30, and had attracted those negative elements that we see and any other vacant property.

Um illegal activities, allegedly homeless, um illegal dumping, and uh since the developer has acquired that that building's been demolished, it's been the sites been cleaned up, and this will absolutely be a crown in the jewel in South Omaha.

And I I'm I'm quite pleased and proud to have the developer put that kind of financial commitment in my district.

Motion to approve.

Got a motion and a second, no further lights, roll call.

Good one.

Yes, Harding, yes, hug, yes, row, faster son.

Yes, Mr.

President.

I motion pass six to zero.

Item 28, a resolution to approve the Rose at Field Club tax increment financing redevelopment project plan located at 3863 Marcy Street and 3863 Mason Street in an amount up to 1,661,799 dollars.

Public hearing is now open on item number 28, Mr.

Seaton.

Yeah, Don Seaton, Omaha City Planning Department.

This project is the Rose at Field Club tax increment financing project.

This is a town home project located right along the field field club trail, just south of Marcy Street.

There'll be a total of 31 new market rate rental units constructed.

They'll be configured in eight Roho Row House style structures.

Uh these will be built on two vacant lots that are owned by the Board of Regents.

The developer is Sullivan Development Company managed by Charlie Sullivan.

Um the investment, the project is investing about 11.1 million dollars in the neighborhood.

The TIFF support for the project is 1,661,799.

Again, this project meets the required criteria of our TIFF program.

Uh it complies with the city's master plan, it's appropriate land use for the area, and we ask for your approval.

Thank you.

Are there any other uh any proponents here today?

Item 28.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Council members, Bob Griffith, 11440, West Center Road here on behalf of the applicant uh here today as well as Charlie Sullivan, um, the applicant himself.

So here'd have answer any questions you might have.

Um tight little infill spot that I think this project fits uh fits nicely there.

Um kind of the same type of deal that uh that TIFF really makes possible.

Um so with that having answered questions.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents here?

Seeing none, any opponents.

Uh good afternoon, Omaha City Council.

Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson E.

Question Foundation and North Omaha Concertain Citizen Foundation.

I asked myself Donnie, we need your address as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

Sorry, thank you.

You're welcome.

4928 North 52nd for now, tomorrow with Mr.

Harding, Washington, D.C.

In the meantime, uh we're looking at all these 14500 country companies leaving Nebraska in Omaha.

Do we need all these apartments?

Thank you.

Is there any other opponents here?

Item 28.

Larry Store, 5015 Lafayette Avenue.

Omaha 68132.

Well, I went by that area today, unless I'm confused again.

I don't see that the place uh the area is even lighted.

But what I do object to is uh using this project to help pay the cost of the streetcar project, and it's referred to as part of uh field club.

Field club to me is more this way.

And why uh streetcar isn't anywhere near that?

So why in hell are we paying to help pay the streetcar at that address?

Thank you.

Is there any other opponents?

Item 28.

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Mr.

Seaton.

So this is a TIFF project.

Uh can you explain to us in general uh how TIFF works?

How TIFF works?

Yes.

Is there is there um okay?

Go ahead.

Okay.

Uh the TIFF dollars that go into this project are new tax dollars, they're generated by the project itself.

Um there are new tax dollars that are paid by the developer on the increased property valuation that the project creates, and then those taxes are rebated to the developer.

So there's no city money, no bonds, no money coming from the neighbors.

It's basically tax dollar, new tax dollars paid by the developer.

So it's rebated to them.

So essentially the project generates the tax the project actually generates the tax incremental financing.

The TIFF money that goes into the project, generated by the project.

Thank you so much.

I had a secondary question for the developer, please.

Thank you, Mr.

Seaton.

Good afternoon, Charlie Sullivan, 2304 South 89th Court.

Omo Nebraska, I'm the developer Sullivan Development Company.

Good afternoon.

Um it's always good to see housing being developed in our city.

This happens to be uh market rate.

Um we need all types of housing in the city.

What will be the rental range?

Of the 31 units, there the rents range from about $1,500 a month to $2,800 a month, depending on the size.

There's one bedrooms, two bedrooms, and three bedrooms.

Okay, thank you.

And what will be the timeline where we'll see this this project come to fruition?

Uh we should uh we should open the first building summer of next year.

Oh wow, that's great.

I mean, when we're talking about a 30,000 um unit deficit and housing in our city, we need every single unit, so it's always good to see these projects uh move forward.

Thank you.

No further questions.

Thank you.

Mr.

Stallman, don't go too far.

I just good to see you again.

And I I know uh you did a lot of outreach with people in the neighborhood when this project first started, and hopefully OPPD got you up to speed where you needed to be when you contacted me.

Thank you for your help.

Yeah, no, I appreciate your your efforts as council member goodwin talked about the housing, why this isn't affordable, but uh do you know who you're gonna market this to?

Um generally to the UNMC campus community with with the new bridge man across Leavenworth that like drops off right at the front door of the project.

So you could live in my project and literally walk to UNMC.

So it'll be largely UNMC community.

Take your bike as well.

You could take your bike as well.

Right.

I don't Professor Son would, but I wouldn't.

But no.

Appreciate you being here.

Thanks, Charlie.

Uh we had a motion in a second, I believe, right?

Okay.

Second.

Thank you.

No further lights.

Roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

I motion passed 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 agenda items 29 through 45 were held on November 25th, 2025.

Any council discussion?

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Row.

Pasterson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

The public hearing is an agenda items 46 through 76 or today.

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

Indicate the agenda item number you wish to address.

Identify yourself by your name, your address, who you represent, and if you're a proponent or opponent.

Any proponents?

I'm on City Council.

Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson Equeston Foundation, and Northern Hawaiian Citizen Foundation.

4928 No 52nd Street, temporarily to Washington, DC from there.

In the meantime, my dad was with Doug Dell Construction.

And what number are you addressing?

Our number 46, Hawk and Construction.

Okay.

Thanks.

So Mr.

Lipple, who helped develop Benson, he was teaching us about the three little peaks.

Two people made a house and they blew down right away.

The third one took his time and built the house you can't blow down.

So we're concerned about these crackabout houses that's not going to last for five minutes.

Thank you.

Are there any other proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug?

Rowe.

Fusterson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 77, an ordinance leving a special tax assessment for a litter removal group 2026 statute 01.

Is amendment of the whole requested by the parks department.

Council discussion.

Got a motion.

We have a second.

Second.

No lights.

Roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Fasterson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Item 78, an ordinance loving a special tax assessment for cutting and clearing weeds.

Group 2026 dash 02 is amendment of the whole requested by the parks department.

Council discussion.

Got a motion and a second.

Roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Fasterson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion passed six to zero.

Skip those with any gone.

Do you want to do it?

Do I need to make a motion to do that?

Um council member Melton is in court, but my understanding is she is intended on coming.

If the council's okay with skipping past 79, and we can come back to it at the end.

Does that work?

Thank you.

Item 80, an ordinance to approve the redevelopment project revenue bonds in the amount of 40 million dollars for affordable housing urban core, A's communications and support, B is communications and opposition.

C is an amendment of the whole requested by the law department.

Council discussion.

Amendment of the whole second.

Got a motion and a second row call.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 81, an ordinance to transfer $4,000 in the 2026 budget from community service programs to parks communicate community recreation.

Council discussion.

Motion to through.

Got a motion and a second.

Roll call.

Goodwin.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Aye.

Motion pass six to zero.

Item 82, an ordinance to amend various sections of chapter six of the Omaha Municipal Code regarding wildlife chickens and other fowl.

A is communications in opposition.

B is communication from the Douglas County Health Department.

C is an amendment of the whole requested by the law department.

Council discussion.

We got lights on council member Goodwin.

You're recognized.

Come believe.

Good afternoon.

Just wanted to clarify.

So we laid this over with the goal of outreach to some concerned groups that are you know focused on urban agriculture.

Can you explain that process and how it went?

Yeah, we um started out with the local food um collaborative.

I can't remember their full name.

Um, but the Monday before Thanksgiving, we actually had a virtual phone call with them that they hosted.

Um, Russ Hayden and I, who's the sanitation supervisor of this program, um spent about an hour, hour and a half answering their questions, um, did address a couple of things they had.

Um they wanted a little more to clarify more in the ordinance, so we reached out to the city attorney um who kind of reworded some stuff and changed some things mostly regarding um language for community chickens.

Um we also reached out to the planning department to include some of the things they wanted that are in the urban ag code um to not add new stuff, but just to reference it in in this code um so it's a little easier to connect with.

Um then there was um a few, I believe, from you, Ms.

Goodwin and um from Mr.

Begley and I think for Mr.

Festerson who forwarded some emails from um concerned citizens.

We reached out to them and kind of did some back and forth discussion with them also.

Yeah.

So would you say that there's really as you make these changes, continual dialogue and education so that everyone's on the same page about these changes?

Correct.

Yeah.

Okay, thank you.

Yep.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Got a motion and a second.

Council member Fesserson, you recognize.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Eric, if you don't mind, uh couple more questions, I think.

There's a motion and a second to approve this, and I'll um also approve this amendment of the whole.

Uh I also want to thank you for taking some extra time to reach out to um the community on this.

And also um city planning.

I think that was important too to make sure we had their input.

And I think this does include that.

And I think we're not trying to discourage urban agriculture at all.

Uh, we're just trying to put some reasonable structure around it and help you uh uh the Douglas County uh Department of Public Health, who is in charge of responding to complaints uh when people do have complaints about operations and residential properties.

And so I think this puts some reasonable um guidelines for you to follow too in that respect.

Um but you can't plan for every uh type of scenario.

I can think of one in my district, for example, that um has never had a complaint, um, is essentially an urban agricultural operation, still wouldn't really fit into the parameters we're describing here in terms of the number of of um chickens they have and acreage they have.

But in an instance like that, we're still building into this amendment of the whole a potential uh waiver, uh so someone in a situation like that could approach you and explain their situation and have that be considered, right?

Correct.

There was a procedure in there now for a variance request.

Um there's also if we were to deny or revoke a permit, there is a process to go through the appeals board um file come to file an appeal on that.

There's a couple of different options.

Thanks, appreciate that.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

You bet can we clarify that that motion was for the amendment of the whole?

Yes.

Motion from amendment.

Thank you.

And second, I'll second that.

Councilmember Rowe, you recognize.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I did want to ask Eric just a question.

And I think uh Mr.

Festerson might have touched on it.

Um about the enforcement.

What's what's the plan for enforcement?

Is that gonna work through your department?

Or how does what's your intention on we do the origin initial inspections um and do the kind of the reach out to the owners of the property?

Um, but when it comes to enforcement, we go through the Humane Society, um, which I know we've been um struggling with some of the stuff that we're putting in this code now.

So hopefully that'll um allow the humane society to actually do some more enforcement.

Um that's kind of where we are with that.

They're the ones that have the site the issue the ability to issue citations and things.

We do not okay.

I think that's the one of the things that came up in my district was just how is how's the accountability gonna work to make sure that things don't get out of hand on on some of these?

We will continue to follow up, but we'll then also have to include the humane society and reach out to them to see where where they are in the process.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Thank you.

No further lights.

We had a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding, yes, hug, Melton, Roe, Festerson.

Yes, Mr.

President.

I motion passed seven to zero.

Item 79, an ordinance to amend section 44-151 of the Omaha Municipal Code regarding the 2023 National Electrical Code.

A is amendment of the whole requested by Councilmember Rowe, B is communication.

Council discussion, we have lights.

Councilmember Harding.

Noted by A.

Second.

We have a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Okay, hang on.

Lights, there it reset.

So re-enter if you want to speak, sorry.

Okay.

I just wanted to say thank you for your professionalism in laying this over, and I apologize for my being late today.

I appreciate it, Mr.

President.

Glad you're here.

You're welcome.

Councilmember Rowe, you recognize.

This really is just it's a rehash of the uh discussion we had last November concerning the 2023 uh National Electrical Code.

Um the state passed the code with five amendments carved out, and and it's incumbent on the city to to at least be in alignment with the state code.

And we've been out of alignment uh since the mayor, Mayor Stothard vetoed that um action last fall.

Uh so now it's coming back to us um again.

And I put the amendment in there so that we would align with the state state code.

When you we talked to other jurisdictions in the area, um, even as far as Lincoln, I believe, and and south of Lincoln, but throughout the state, they determined that there were these five items that could be amended out of the 2023 code and still um allow for safe housing.

I mean, that's our goal is to have safe housing, right?

We don't want to have housing that's not safe for people to live in.

And they determined at the state legislature that these five items were really a kind of you know want to have, but not necessarily have to have.

It was items about you know, GF CFCI outlets in the basement, it's about outlets for your range and dryer, it was about surge protection for your whole house, it was about uh an emergency disconnect for your uh panel.

And they determined that these five things really um were not were were things that a buyer, a new home buyer, if they wanted to put them in their house, they can certainly contract with their contractor to to to use them in their house.

But to have them mandated seemed to go against our hope for affordable housing.

We we've talked about affordable housing a lot up here, and we're um we're actually scrapping and clawing, looking for every $500 that we can find to try to make uh the housing cost more affordable because they continue to rise with inflation and and now with regulations.

And so I put in this amendment of the whole to sync us up with the state code, and that's my hope.

I hope that we can pass that um this afternoon.

Thank you, Councilmember Harding, you're recognized.

I'll try not to repeat a lot of what was said um at the last meeting about this, but to pick up um uh off of what Councilmember Rowe was talking about too on the affordability component of it.

Um last November, the statistics were that for every thousand dollars of additional cost uh to the house, which these items would add additional cost to new construction.

It would take out at the time it was I think 435 potential buyers.

Um now, a year later, uh the updated numbers are that that's now over 500 potential buyers would be taken out uh of the market with an additional thousand dollars added to the cost of the house.

I know we we kind of bantered about last week about what the amount was or wasn't.

I think that's really irrelevant because I think we all agreed that it would add additional cost to the house, and therefore taking out potential buyers for those homes that we are trying to do everything we can to make affordable over somewhere between 23 and 32 percent of the cost of new construction today in Omaha is in uh attributed to regulations, and I'm not saying that we need to abolish all regulations because we need to make sure that it is safe housing, but there are certain onerous regulations that do need to be reviewed.

I view this as one of those that is a want to have, not a need to have.

Uh and therefore I appreciate um this conversation that we had last week that we had last November.

We should be consistent with the state and other local uh jurisdictions.

So I will be supporting uh council members' uh Rowe's amendment of the whole.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

And Mr.

Rowe is absolutely right.

The reason why this is back is because we have to adopt something uh that is a requirement under state law.

It's just a matter of are we including five exceptions or not in how we do that.

And there's different opinions or has been different opinions on the council as as to how we go about doing that and different opinions in our uh testimony uh in the recent weeks as well.

Um, you know, estimates of additional cost between 400 400, maybe $2,000.

I I think the planning department is somewhere in between there.

So differences on potential impacts to safety uh from testimony we heard.

And nobody up here is an expert in this field, not even Mr.

L or Mr.

Bagley.

Um it's my opinion, um, and it hasn't changed since our original vote on this that I'm not supportive of amendments of the whole A, but I may be supportive of an amendment that we're calling C today, which has been a floor amendment introduced by Mr.

Bagley that I think he can explain should this first vote not uh be approved that can hopefully provide a little more common ground than maybe we had in the last few weeks.

And as it applies to affordable housing, um I think there's lots of common ground amongst everyone on this council and with the testifiers we heard from.

There was reference to a welcome home study about um the cost of regulation and housing.

I'm interested in that.

I've asked for that study for over a year now, but haven't seen it.

But if in fact there's 25 percent to 30 percent of costs that are should be able to pull to regulation, let's take a look at that.

I bet you we'll have a lot of agreement on how to go about reducing those costs.

Same thing with the affordable action housing plan.

Um there's dozens of recommendations in that document that we have yet to implement.

There were some council members that didn't vote for that document.

It was not unanimous, but I'm confident we're going to find a lot of common ground in that document too.

And I am c I understand from Mr.

Rowe that the first meeting of that task force went well.

He's optimistic about it.

So let's get about that work.

And I think we'll find a lot of things we can do together.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Fesserson.

I'll make a couple of comments in respect to Councilmember Rowe's amendment of the whole.

Um I appreciate the conversation I've had with Councilmember Rowe, my colleagues, the planning department, they provided good information that I appreciated.

I spoke to firefighters local 385 President Trevor Towie, uh, subject matter expert from IBW Local 22.

Um to me was always about safe and affordable housing.

And I think Councilmember Fesserson did a good job of the range of the price of what this is.

Maybe it's four or five hundred bucks, maybe it's two thousand.

And I I really did try the best I could to try to come to some common ground on things that we we can agree on.

And sometimes that doesn't happen.

Uh just looking through what was in the adoption, um, the 30-amp GF5 breaker at a dryer of 40 amp GFI ground fault interruptor at a range, the exterior 30 amp on the air conditioner, exterior disconnect for the meter main.

One of the things listed was a 50 amp for a carport at the price of $600.

That is not included.

There was never included.

Outlets for the basement to require GFI.

And in the conversation I had and listening to my colleagues, um, I came up with a floor amendment of the whole C that would remove the whole house surge protector from this to try to provide a little bit of common ground that maybe we can pass that in the event.

Councilman Rowe, who's put a lot of time and heart and effort into his amendment of the whole.

I I think it's important that I'd like to read, I won't read the whole letter, but it was submitted by local 385 firefighters president Trevor Towie.

And I'll read a couple paragraphs because we talk about regulations.

What does that mean?

In the second paragraph was letter, and you can see this at the city clerk's online site of our agenda, it's attached in support.

And it reads amongst the updates in the National Electric Code, we are especially supportive of the requirement for an exterior electrical disconnect on residential structures.

This single addition provides a meaningful and practical layer of protection for firefighters operating inside a burning home.

As firefighters, we continually look for ways to make it inherently an inherently dangerous profession just a little bit safer.

The ability to neutralize electricity before entering a fire provides a level of certainty and peace of mind that we currently do not have.

Allowing firefighters to safely and immediately disconnect power at the exterior of the home eliminates this risk and ensures no firefighter has to worry about coming into contact with energized wiring while performing search, rescue, or fire suppression duties.

This is a simple, cost-effective change that directly improves firefighter safety while protecting the residents we serve.

I think in regulations, is there some cost to them?

There is.

But again, we try to minimize the costs on this, but not sacrificing safe affordable housing when we work on this through this process today.

It looks like we get another light on for Councilmember Rowe, you recognize that.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Yeah, I'm I'm glad that we had this discussion.

I do I do appreciate the spirit of the discussion.

And we've had robust discussion from you know amongst us, and as Mr.

Fester noted, we had a task force meeting last week to talk about affordable housing and how can we enact some of the things coming out of the HAP plan.

And and you mentioned the 50 amp outlet in the garage, and that was a mistake that was brought by a home builder last week.

But we're gonna have to have courage going forward because that 50 amp outlet is going to be proposed in the 2026 energy code.

And I think that's where the the confusion came was the builders that you know have an interest in the cost of housing and they want to make it affordable, are looking at the 2026 of energy code that I'm not sure when it's going to come for adoption, but it will come.

And and our the council is going to have to have courage to say, you know what, OPPD doesn't have the power necessary to put a 50-amp outlet in every garage.

You know, it would blow up their system today.

They may have it in the future.

But those are the kind of things that we're going to have to take a look at and and really um take a hard look at and then make courageous decisions on it.

So again, I appreciate the spirit of the of the discussion.

It's been good, it's been robust.

And um, and again, I ask for your vote for amendment of the whole letter A going forward.

Thank you.

No further lights.

So we got a motion and second for amendment of the whole A, correct?

Yeah.

Roll call.

Good one.

No.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Melton.

Yeah.

Row.

Festerson.

No.

Mr.

President.

No.

Motion failed, three to four.

Motion to move for amendment C.

Second.

Row call.

Good one.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Councilmember Harding, you're recognized.

Um now that this is on the floor, and um thank you for letting me read that the letter from whoever.

Can you explain to me what then just explain for the public and me what the amendment of your amendment of the poll eliminates and or puts back in?

My amendment to the whole, it removes the section if I got my code right.

I will tell you exactly what number it was.

230.67A.

I'm 99% sure, but let me check.

230.67A, you're correct.

And what is 230 for the for all of us 230.67A?

That deals with the whole house surge protector that I am removing that from what's proposed today.

So that would not be required in what we adopt.

That is being removed from when we adopt today, correct?

Okay.

So help me out here.

I'm a little confused.

The letter that you just read from the firefighters said that that was important to them to keep in.

Is that right?

You're talking about moving it?

You're talking about the exterior disconnect for the meter main.

Yeah.

That's correct.

What I'm removing is the whole thing.

Not the whole house.

Okay.

All right.

Oh, the whole house surge.

Okay.

Thank you for that.

That's what I needed.

I needed that clarification.

No problem.

Good.

Thank you.

Okay.

So we had a motion and a second to move floor amendment of the whole 79 C, correct?

Correct.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

And thank you for bringing about this additional amendment.

I had a question about, so the whole house protection would now be removed from the adoption of the city code.

How does that factor in with affordability?

That would remove according to the MOBA estimate the surge, the whole house surge protector is 250 dollars.

The other price provided was 110.

So again, the ranges are 110 to 250 dollars.

So that would eliminate that part of the ordinance or the code.

And so essentially back to the ranges, we had various ranges as we discussed as to the original amendment, and now we're here.

But the goal is really to try to meet somewhere in the middle, and I can appreciate this attempt.

So I I do plan to support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No further light.

I'm sorry.

I do have life.

Councilmember Harding Red.

Yeah, I just I I'd like to understand the I guess the thinking.

And since I look, this is a floor amendment, so normally we would have maybe another opportunity to speak to it.

I don't mind the floor amendment, but I just want to make sure I understand that the thinking at Council Woman Um Goodwin just brought up the point of that you know this is somewhat of a it's a minor adjustment or minor reduction of the overall cost.

Even using the ranges I think we've all been using, it still is at least 750 to two that to a thousand dollars that is adding to the cost of the house with those that remain in.

So it I mean it's the resulting number reduction is negligible in consideration of what it does to the affordability or what it takes out of the marketplace for somewhere between 450 and 500 families.

So what why was this one taken out as opposed to any of the others?

I guess I I'd like to understand the thinking behind that.

Great question.

And my answer is I wherever you got those numbers of the 400 or whatever the range of houses.

I don't that is what you say it is.

The reason this one was taken out because at the end of the day, and Councilmember Melton, I think mentioned it in our public hearing that is this is this life safety, is surge protection life safety.

And is she always does make good points?

It I guess you could say that isn't.

That's more of an issue of protecting.

If you have a surge, you got motherboards in your range, your your all your appliances that are as we go shopping or with tariffs and all the things that are going on, they're higher price than ever.

So that surge would have protected your property with an investment of if it's 250 bucks or 100.

It would have been an insurance policy to protect you on that.

It's not life-saving.

The other items that are staying in there are life-saving items.

Okay, well, and I guess we'll respectfully disagree on on whether or not they are life-saving items.

I mean, we we've had the discussion with the builders with electricians, um, who have said that they aren't necessarily life-saving, they're they're like to have, but not need to have for I mean, look, my house doesn't have those.

And I I feel perfectly safe in my house.

I would assume that maybe all of us are in the same situation.

So I I guess I'm a little lost as to understand how this one was picked, this item was picked out to um amend out of your amendment uh the the floor amendment um as opposed to any of the other items.

So I don't see why we're doing one and not all of them when the state has adopted uh the code with the five amendments, and again, I feel perfectly um safe in listening to uh professionals to say that those are not safety necessarily safety issues and that they are want to have, not need to have.

So I again I'm just trying to get past the understanding of why this is eliminated and the others aren't.

And but I think yeah, you answered your okay, and one other point I'll make fair fair conversation.

Is I read in the firefighters letter, they testified in Lincoln that the fire uh marshall testified in support of what was not carved out that we have here today.

I think again, the life safety issues.

There was documentation, I mean with the GFI breakers, the meter disconnect outside the firefighters, it's in the letter.

It's a safety thing, and and I I'll read it again just a part where it says the risk to ensure no firefighter has to worry about coming into contact with energized wiring while performing search rescue or fire suppression.

This is a simple cost-effective change that directly improves firefighter safety while also protecting the residents we serve.

And is they also said in here?

It's a single addition that provides a meaningful and practical layer of protection for firefighters going into a burning home.

We deal with the firefighters and police, and I'd like to say I speak for this entire council that we support well protected, well paid professionals to protect and serve our community.

And I think that's certainly what the electric disconnect main does for firefighters.

So I think my light's still on, but I appreciate it.

Oh, I'm sorry.

No, no, no, no, no.

I asked you the question.

So let me ask you this then, since it's a four amendment.

Would you consider the four amendments and keep only in the whole house?

I mean the the um the the three the what's the number on it?

The 236 types.

No, I'm sorry.

Sorry.

Keeping yeah, keeping yeah, what what about um eliminate or we we keep in the four amended or we keep out if either way you want to look at it, the four amended items that the state adopted and only were to keep the exterior elect um electrical disconnect.

Would you consider that in your floor amendment?

I'm council moving forward with the amendment of the whole 79C as it's written.

So the answer is now politely, yes, that's correct.

Good try.

I I caught on to that quickly.

Okay.

Thanks.

I appreciate the conversation.

Thank you.

Me too.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

I just wanted to be clear that um as I talked with the very various affordable housing organizations and even some small developers, when you look at the range of 400 to even 1700, that that's really not going to impact the aspect of affordability.

So my question was not that I thought 250 dollars was really going to make a difference.

I simply appreciate it that there's some level of willingness to try to come in the middle and and find common ground with the the uh with this amendment.

And so um again, we have to pass an ordinance, and so I'm comfortable with supporting this one here.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No further lights.

We have a motion of second for 79 C floor amendment of the whole roll call.

Good one.

Yes, Harding.

No hug, Melton, Rowe, Festerson, yes, Mr.

President.

Yes.

Motion pass, four to three.

Item 83, an ordinance to approve the contract with Alexander Lawn and Landscape Inc.

for ground maintenance at six City of Omaha maintenance facilities.

Public hearing is open on item number 83.

Are there any proponents?

Item 83.

Any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 84, an ordinance to approve a major amendment to the Elk Creek Pines Mixed Use District Development Agreement, Planning Board and Planning Department recommend approval.

Public hearing is now open on item 84.

Any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

One public hearing can be held for items 85 and 86 ordinances to approve amendments to agreements for actuarial services with Millman Inc.

Public hearing is now open on items 85 and 86.

Are there proponents?

Are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 87, an ordinance to approve additional fuel storage at an existing Class B flammable combustible liquid storage district number B-157.

Public hearing is open on item number 87.

Are there any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Item 88, an ordinance to approve a purchase agreement with Union Pacific Railroad Company for the transfer and sale of city-owned property located at 1441 Capitol Avenue, and in the amount of 7 million 310,000 dollars.

Public hearing is now open on item number 88.

Ms.

Taylor, good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Uh bakely, members of city council, Jennifer Taylor, City Law Department.

Uh I'm just here to absolutely answer any questions you might have today about this purchase agreement.

Um as we've discussed, it is the purchase and sale and conveyance of the old Union Pacific headquarters site to Union Pacific.

So they're going to reacquire their old site, and um I think we're looking forward to what may come in the future is what they may plan to develop there.

But the present moment in time, the purchase price is fair market of price value.

Um, and it's otherwise a pretty straightforward agreement.

Thank you.

Are there any proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

Just want to indicate my support for this item.

Thanks for that summary, uh, Ms.

Taylor.

I'll support this next week.

I've had a long time involvement with this property, even back to when I worked for the mayor.

Um 20 years ago, 25 years ago.

And uh to have this property still not be developed, of course, is discouraging.

We had several stops and starts there, but I think the wise the city wisely kept that property uh under its ownership and had a clawback provision there.

Um this property, as you know, will be purchased for appraised value, which I think is good, uh, and also to the benefit of a longtime um steward of our community, Union Pacific, in fact, here prior to the city even being here.

Uh so in my mind, this is a good move for the city and good move for Union Pacific.

And if it helps in their discussions around their um merger and potential to bring additional investment and additional jobs to Omaha, that's a win for everybody.

So thank you.

I look forward to supporting this next week.

Thank you.

Councilmember Harding, your recognize.

I'll just uh pick up a little bit on what Ms.

Taylor and Mr.

Fesserson said as well, too.

So um, because my question was for the record to have it stated how the price was arrived at, and it was it is a fair market appraisal that was done, and looking at the the downtown comps on uh for other sales, I would say this is very much in line with that with that number.

So I'm very comfortable with the number that that was arrived at for the the value of the of the dirt.

Do you have any comments?

Um I will just reinforce that the appraisal was done actually in February or March of this year, so which is when we started discussing the purchase.

So it's an appropriate appraised value.

It is also um a higher appraised value than what this property appraised for in 2022 when when the city took ownership of it from Lanhal.

So it has increased in value, and the taxpayers are seeing the benefit of that increase in value.

Thank you.

One public hearing can be held for items 89 and 90.

Item 89 is an ordinance to approve a purchase and sale agreement with Union Pacific Railroad Company for the transfer and sale of property located at 1101 Izzard Street in the amount of 18,698,130 dollars.

Item 90, an ordinance authorizing and providing for the issuance of stadium revenue bonds in the amount of 25 million dollars is communication and support.

Together, right?

Together, 89 and 90.

Okay.

I'll open the public hearing on items 89 and 90.

Are there any proponents?

Uh good afternoon, Marco Faloriani, Mayor's office, uh Council want to thank you for the consideration of these items.

Um here sharing support from the mayor's office for the acquisition of 1101 Izzard.

Uh this public acquisition makes it possible to assemble this property, uh, coordinate infrastructure, remediate environmental issues, and really set the stage for a successful public-private partnership.

Uh this is a necessary first step towards transforming a dormant site in our urban core uh for a district that will serve the residents of Omaha better our future and our economy.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are there any other proponents?

Seeing none, are there Donnie?

Are you a proponent or opponent?

Uh proponent, Mr.

Okay.

I beg you, sir.

Uh Donnie R.

Johnson, the Johnson New Question Foundation.

I'm glad you asked that question because this is the things that Johnny, can we get your address?

Which one?

One in Washington, D.C.

or one here no more.

Your current address here?

4928 and over 52nd Street.

Thank you.

Uh yes, sir.

So we're supporting this for several different reasons.

And there's a good chance that Union Pacific may be doing that work in India.

I've been out of the country several times.

And they also sent a delegation to Egypt.

And we have to tell the young folks if you go and get these jobs, be willing to live on the streets because undeveloped countries, you have to do that from time to time.

Thank you.

Are there any other proponents here today?

Mr.

Levy, good afternoon.

Mr.

President, members of the council, good afternoon.

David Levy, Baron Home Law Firm, 1700 Farnham Street.

I've got with me Alexis Bulos, who is general manager of Union Omaha.

I'm going to give them your address.

Sure, 2402 South 102nd Street, Omaha.

Want to thank Mr.

Floriani and the mayor's office for their comments and their support.

Thank you all for your time a couple of weeks ago and today.

I know we had a great discussion, I think, on this exciting opportunity a couple weeks ago.

I don't want to belabor that, but I will just put up a couple of slides briefly.

We've got some other folks proponents who would like to address you as well.

Again, I know you've already had a long meeting and we will be brief, but if this will come up.

There we go.

I will zoom out.

This just gives uh a sense of the potential future use of this property.

Uh soccer stadium on about 10 acres there to the north, mixed use development on about six and a half acres.

The kind of pink area there is uh about three acres that the city would use for part of its combined sewer overflow uh project.

Those acreages might be a little bit smaller than than what you've heard previously.

That's because that's the actual developable area, takes out streets and and things like that.

You can also see the blue area there, which is an area that Union Pacific has reserved to keep their uh railroad track there, and part of that it'll pull back to the to the north and the east, um, and then there's a setback from that.

But I thought that might be helpful.

Um I know you've also seen this, but I think it's an exciting and wonderful image, so I will put that up again.

That's looking from the north.

But what I also just really briefly wanted to emphasize is you know, the stadium part of this project kind of gets the headlines.

But this is a district.

This is a 20-acre mixed-use district potentially.

Um council and and many others willing.

We have a lot of work to do uh going forward.

But you can see looking from the south, looking from downtown.

The yellow buildings there in the foreground are uh mixed-use buildings.

Those are residential buildings with ground floor retail and entertainment.

There's potentially office, there's parking underneath those buildings that would be accessed from the back, and then you can see the stadium there in the north.

So I just I wanted to emphasize for you all that this really is a is a district.

This is a new neighborhood in our in our community there north of coming, including this great public-private partnership that allows uh that would allow for the construction of the stadium.

Um the mixed-use development is private.

Uh my client would purchase that land from the city or ground lease that land from the city.

Uh uh that's part of the land that that is you know that we're having the hearing about today for the city to potentially purchase from UP.

Just a couple of other pictures to give you some idea of that district and and really the excitement here.

So the big yellow line is is what we're calling right now the promenade.

That would be a new street that would go diagonally from 11th Street as it crosses over from 10th Street across coming diagonally, so you'd be coming right to the end of the stadium where you saw the big owl.

You can see this is a representative image, of course, from another project.

But that's the idea is to have a district like that, a promenade where uh before games and and other events, right?

We talked about men's professional soccer, women's professional soccer, other events, youth events, and and again, a new neighborhood.

You're gonna have uh thousand hundreds of new housing units and and thousands of new people or people living here who will use this uh year-round.

Um here's another example of that.

You can see, oh boy.

There we go.

Uh, you can see the stadium uh and the owl there, you know, at the end of the promenade, and then just one more kind of showing uh some of the connections uh through the district and and really through the neighborhood even more broadly.

So I just wanted to emphasize that as you're considering um the city purchasing this property, it's not just the stadium, um, but it really is a new neighborhood there in this area that that is truly a mixed-use neighborhood, anchored by the stadium, but hundreds of new residential units, um, thousands of square feet of retail, entertainment, restaurant, um, all of those kind of things that really make all of this work financially and and help create a new a new neighborhood for Omaha there downtown in the urban core and and north of coming.

So, with that, uh, we are I've got again a couple more people who I think would like to address the council briefly, and we're certainly here and and happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Uh Aaron Fox, 5511 Harney Street.

Um, I just want to briefly uh thank you all for your support of this project previously and hopefully going forward.

I think the public-private partnership between the city of Omaha and Union Omaha is a great one.

I'm a soccer fan, I mean union Omaha fan.

I'm an Omaha resident, a small business owner, and I could not be more excited for the stadium to be built, mostly because it will enable us to have a women's team.

And so for me personally, um, I think Omaha is also a women's sports town.

Um we've got volleyball, we've got set the bar.

So I think I really want to thank all of you for supporting Omaha in moving forward with this gray partnership, and hopefully we can continue to grow Omaha's sporting community and bring in revenue and more entertainment.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Hunter Fengmeyer, 2719 North 65th Street, Omaha, Nebraska, 68104.

Good to see everyone here.

Um, I'm the president of Omaha Parliament.

We are registered 5013 with the state and um the largest independent supporters group for Union Omaha.

I'm here for you to speak about what the project would mean, not just to the city as a whole, but to our membership and the people that are gonna inhabit this missed mixed use district.

Founded in 2019, Parliament's membership role consists of 550 members in a 40 representing 48 different area codes.

Not only does this include people like myself that were born, raised, and educated here in Omaha, Nebraska, but also represents people that are transplants from both the east and west coasts, the south, um, veterans who have settled here after serving their country and many more.

We have families like travel in from Fremont, Lincoln, Council Bluffs, Blair, and other communities near the Omaha Metro to come to the games to an attend our events and to support our current men's team and hope in the future the women's team as well.

What this project does is place that community right in the heart of Omaha.

We've worked tirelessly to build a culture around Unamaha that represents Nebraskan values and personifies the good life.

Our finger fans care about the neighbors and donate their time and money to the community.

That spirit would be translated directly to downtown Omaha and the urban core, and I truly believe it'll blossom there as it has in other parts of the city.

The core of the city would expand with new housing, jobs, and businesses flocking downtown and with opportunities for community events and youth engagement, so the area can become a lively destination that connects truly everyone in our larger community.

As you consider this, I ask you not to think of the place but the people that come together to give that district its soul.

Think of the father from Fremont taking his kid to attend their first matches, just as his father took them to his very first soccer matches.

Think of the people that um have just transplanted here from South coming to get a new job here in the Omaha Metro and find their first community in Omaha with the soccer community that we've built here.

Um the fan who can get away from hardship for a little bit, and fans that find a community that will support them through difficult times.

Every person who visits or inhabits this district will have a story just like those.

Um that's what being what's being created.

You may see the place, but please see the people as well.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Jennifer Taylor, City Law Department.

Uh, we'll just go back really quick to again if you have any questions about the specific agreement.

Um there we go.

Uh, this is just a reminder quickly uh about things we have kind of discovered in some council briefings.

Uh, this is the actual parcel of property that's being acquired.

Um this is an easement area that will continue to be used by Union Pacific until the city is ready to move forward with the connector project and the CSO project.

This is generally the easement they'll be reserved by UP for their rail line.

Their uh current event space will be shifted back.

There will be access to that, and the rest of this will be acquired for the city for future development.

We will have time over the next 90 days to do due diligence, not only with um sub preparation on the mixed use site and the soccer site, but also we will have this entire site surveyed and specifically identify exactly where those easement areas will be so that uh upon closing that is all recorded and precise.

The purchase price for the property is 17 dollars a square foot.

Um that does take into consideration that the city will be um looking to possibly having to do some environmental remediation in here.

Um, and then that square footage and uh final purchase price will be determined by the survey that we'll have done in the next 90 days.

Happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you.

Are there any other proponents?

Seeing none, are there any opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Uh I'm sorry.

Louis Human is 2709 Dewey Avenue.

Um I'm an opponent because the city does not have the capacity to assess uh a fee for this development to not have uh affordable housing.

So if uh we're talking about mixed use residential uh a resident component might be something to consider.

So because the city does not assess uh commercial areas uh for not for lacking uh affordable housing.

That's why uh I oppose it.

Then you guys need to get to it.

Chop chop.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there any other opponents?

Public hearing is closed.

Councilmember Goodwin, you're recognized.

Thank you, Mr.

President.

Well, I am very excited that this is a district two project and it's really an expansion of an existing neighborhood.

Um we have those hello apartments and the Milwaukee Commons area really in a shared uh vicinity.

Um that this is building upon soccer and the various projects we have throughout the city, including Levi Park Carter Park, which is probably not two miles north of here, um, expanding then to Tranquility, which I know is in um council member uh Mountain's district.

And so this is a great a great opportunity for developing an underutilized site for spurring economic development through tourism and housing.

Um I believe 900 units, but I don't want to go after after off the top of my head, so I am gonna call Jen uh Taylor, please, up to clarify, and I believe it does have aspects of uh really mixed income here within the proposed project overall.

Uh Jennifer Taylor, City Law Department, uh the precise number of housing units is both contingent upon how this develops out and how some neighboring uh areas develop out.

I know that there is to the west uh additional opportunities for housing.

How the owners of those properties develop that I can't necessarily speak to today, but the opportunity for that number of housing units does exist here, and I believe not only uh I believe there is some intent to try to incorporate affordable housing into some of the neighboring developments, those plans hopefully can be announced in the next few months.

Uh to write to to this point in time right now, I'm not thinking don't think I can say definitively how many units we are going to have.

Thank you for that clarification.

And so we've got two proposed uh ordinances here.

One is the purchase of uh the property, but the other is that stadium revenue bond.

Um so that's really a decision that then has to be proposed or approved at the state uh with the goal of generating additional tax revenue, correct?

Correct.

So um two weeks ago the city council approved the city and downtown Soccer Stadium Inc.'s application to the State Turnback Tax Committee for uh up to 25 million dollars of sales tax turn back revenue that will be generated in this district.

Uh it's my understanding that application will be forwarded to the state shortly.

Uh and then as the mixed use area develops and the stadium is constructed and uh uh goes into operation, obviously the sales tax that's generated from those areas would be turned back to help the city pay for the current bond issuance that's in front of you today.

What is the proposed amount of tax revenue that we believe the site will generate?

Uh it's 25 million dollars over 20 over 20 years.

So it would be approximately 1.25 million dollars a year.

Yes.

Thank you.

Math is not my strong point.

Um but it'd be uh and that's actually set statutorily.

So that would be what we'd be eligible for.

It's very possible that the area could generate more than that, but that is that is how it we are capped at that amount of money.

But this bond uh this revenue bond would then be uh paid back with those revenues.

In addition to the tax revenue, there's also lease revenue that would be generated as well, correct?

Correct.

Part of the funding uh mechanism that we're looking at that will continue to kind of finalize over the next couple of months and then bring to this council as part of an agreement with the downtown Soccer Stadium Inc.

is that they would lease the stadium from the city uh for a certain amount of money every year, and that would be part of the revenue that we would generate to pay uh larger bond issuance to construct the stadium.

So we see a redeveloped site.

We see um tax revenue generation, lease revenue, uh potential housing, uh mixed use development of shopping and retail.

So this is growing our city.

It's also uh a regional attraction.

Can you talk a little bit about the difference in this project from I know we went over this what's been sounds like feels like longer than a week or two ago.

That this size stadium is a different size stadium than let's say Creighton or even some of the other fields that we're looking to develop.

Correct.

It is a different size stadium than the Creighton Stadium.

It will serve a unique and specific purpose in downtown that is not, I believe, overlapping with other areas.

And to your point, Councilman Goodwin, the area that we're looking to acquire here is currently generally unused property.

So it's owned by Union Pacific.

It's rather industrial in nature.

There is a significant amount of vegetation.

So it's a great opportunity to develop 25 acres of downtown property into 400 million, 500 million, 600 million uh dollars worth of new development downtown that will generate new property taxes and new sales taxes.

Yeah.

I always like to emphasize that this is in District 2 because I think people often think of district two in a specific space.

And when this is uh goes before council for vote, I'll be supporting it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Fesserson, you're recognized.

Thanks, Mr.

President.

I'll support these items next week as well.

I'm excited about this vision.

Um it's a great time for soccer in this country.

We have the World Cup coming this summer.

Uh closest games will be in Kansas City in June and July.

But also we have a great grouping uh that we're excited about for Team USA and how that might uh proceed this summer.

And then of course here in Omaha, the excitement is around the Tranquility Project and this project we're talking about and what that could mean for our community, not just soccer fans, but the entire community.

Um as Ms.

Goodwin notes, what we're talking about here today is a land purchase as we see it on the map here, and then uh an initial approval for $25 million worth of bonds for site work and uh initial construction.

So just a couple of questions for you along those lines.

Um you mentioned the land purchase is for less than appraised value.

Um that's good.

You also mentioned we have some due diligence to do, including environmental.

Um, when do you think we'll have that back?

Uh we will start the survey process and some initial environmental review as soon as the purchase agreement is is approved by this council, assuming it is.

So we'll get that work started immediately.

Okay.

And we should have um some good results at least from survey perspective and some initial understanding of what the site looks like uh within the next four to six weeks, I would imagine.

Okay.

And at that point, we might know if there's additional obligations because that would be the obligation of the city at that point, right?

To to the extent that we can determine what that site looks like, yes, to uh what information we have we will take.

We do have some experience with remediating um old Union Pacific sites.

If you look at um the Arena Convention Center site and what we have learned from Lot B, I think we can uh have a good feeling of what this will likely look like.

We also will get some additional information from Union Pacific and have those conversations along the way to try and get as good of a handle as possible on what our exposure will be as far as uh remediation and environmental cleanup.

Uh and I do believe uh downtown Soccer Stadium, Inc.

and their development partners will be partners with us in those efforts.

Thanks.

Look forward to reviewing that as well.

And I think this will engage and enliven a property that's been very difficult to engage for a long period of time.

As it applies to the bonds, um we will also see a lot more detail on the project itself in coming months.

I think we're talking January, February for a redevelopment agreement that'll spell out financing in much more greater much greater detail than we have here today.

Uh but suffice it to say, even though some of the revenue streams we're anticipating and hoping will come to fruition with our state partners and others, uh, you feel the 25 million you're confident that the twenty the 25 million can be covered.

It's not uh undue risk on behalf of the city for this approval today.

Um I I think if your question is if we are not entirely sure whether or not we'll get the 25 million dollars of state sales tax term back, do we move forward with this purchase agreement?

And I think we'll have to, you know, I'm not sure that this project can necessarily move forward without that 25 million dollars.

So we will need to have some input from the state.

Um so we're gonna have to see how that that materializes over the next few months.

Again, that's why we have a 90-day due diligence period.

But this approval next week, um, we're anticipating those revenues and we need those revenues, but you're still advocating for this approval at this juncture, right?

Uh we are advocating for this approval at this juncture so we can move forward with that application and we can make application to the state for those revenues.

Um obviously there's another there's a number of things that still have to be done in assessing the site from the survey perspective and from some um other due diligence perspective to understand what our obligations will be and how that financing will materialize and be put together.

Uh, but that's why we haven't any due diligence period, and we have a good partner with Union Pacific that I know will work with us on that.

Okay.

And then the redevelopment agreement itself, I mean, we'll talk a lot more about not only the city's revenue sources, but the developer's commitment and the team's commitment uh to a long-term lease and all those things will be determined and committed to other things we've talked about so far are affordable housing in adjacent properties and transit too.

Uh, transit will be very important to the ultimate success of this happening.

So I know we'll have additional conversations about that as well.

And then lastly, I'll just say um I appreciate the parliament fans being here.

That's a big part of this too.

Uh, you have a really enthusiastic group there when you go to a game and see them.

Um, it'll be a big deal uh for them as it is for the whole community, and we appreciate having you in Benson.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Councilmember Melton, you're recognized.

Uh thank you.

Uh Councilman Festerson, I think, asked a lot of my questions, but I just want to be really clear because we talk a lot and we we sometimes all of us understand this because we have had hours of briefings, right?

Um, and I've had the opportunity to ask you and Mr.

Levy all kinds of questions.

But I it it narrows down to what kind of the people see and the people here.

And I think what people hear is my tax dollars are paying for 20 are giving 25 million dollars to union soccer for land for the stadium.

Okay, that's that's a people here.

Can you please clarify that these are revenue bonds?

They're not being issued tomorrow.

We're just voting, authorizing the issuance.

A lot it will be done, including agreements before we actually do it, but this is a step that's required kind of in the process is that the council has to at least approve that we're we support it.

We will support the 25 million in bonds to be issued based upon other things.

But this 25 million is not coming out of the general fund that could otherwise be used for public works, for parks, for libraries, correct?

Correct.

Uh this is a $25 million revenue bond, it's non-recourse to the city.

It is secured and would have ultimately, when issued, would be repaid strictly with the sales tax turn back revenues that are generated by the new development on the site.

So currently today there is no sales tax revenue that comes from this area.

Uh what would hopefully be approved by the state would be the authorization to take that sales tax term back and reinvest it into the project, repay these bonds, those the proceeds of which we would use to build the stadium and uh the associated infrastructure.

So again, we were creating new sales tax revenue, which then the state would allow us to use to repay these bonds that will go towards the construction.

And I know people all say, okay, what if there is no tax, which we know is that gonna be true?

Um but no property taxes, people's property taxes that go to the general fund for our general fund budget.

Um are not obligated under these.

They are not obligated under these.

And that's what I just I want to make that very very clear.

I mean, we'll still hear it.

People still say fix my potholes with that money.

Um I'm hoping that public works can we still fix our potholes.

We have we had a great presentation this morning, but they this money isn't being taken away from you know our general fund or any of the other necessities that people expect out of the city.

Correct.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you.

No further lights.

Item 91, an ordinance to amend sections 23-177, 23-494, and 23-502 of the Omaha municipal code to reflect changes for employees in the administrative and executive classifications for the years 2026 through 2029.

Public hearing is now open on item number 91.

Proponents good afternoon.

Um, Annie Matthews, labor relations director for the city.

Um, I'm just here to answer any questions on this item.

Um historically, or what you'll see here in this ordinance, uh, it sets out the wages in terms of employment for our administrative and executive employees here at the city.

Um, if you remember is not a bargaining unit.

Um, you'll see this runs 2026 through 2029 that mirrors the four-year term of the um contract negotiated with our SIMTEC employees that was before you today for final reading.

Um with that, you'll see the same benefit terms of employment revisions from the SIMTEC ordinance and this ordinance.

Um so I won't go through them all.

Just a brief summary on the wages that were um determined for this group.

Um in 2026, there'll be a four percent overall increase.

Um, and then there were certain positions within this group that were reviewed just to make sure that they're still in line with our comparable cities, and um those ranges that were determined to have to be adjusted.

Um, employees in those positions will be placed at the step that ensures at least a four percent increase for them in 2026.

So for the remaining years 27, 28, and 29, there'll be a three percent increase each year.

So um, along with the other changes that are set out in this ordinance, happy happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Is there any other proponents on item number 91?

Uh good afternoon, Omaha City Council, Donna Yard Johnson and Johnson Question Foundation and North Omaha Concerned Citizen Foundation.

And I'm glad the subject came out.

Donnie, we need your address.

I'm sorry to interrupt you for that.

One in Washington, D.C.

or one here.

Omaha.

Okay.

4928 North 52nd Street.

So I'm glad they brought this up because in the 70s I employed, I had 15 employees.

And these changes that we're going through now under President Carter and Andrew Young.

We're preparing to send a lot of young gentlemen into that African continent.

And I told them you may have to live up in your car, live on the street for a while while you could always in this program, the Peace Court.

So I'm showing you how to do it.

But in the meantime, these things, these jobs that they'll come back with, may not be reflected on this program, but they will generate a new type of job.

Thank you.

Is there any opponents?

Item number 91.

Seeing none, public hearing is closed.

Non-action items, items 92 through 129 do not require public hearing or city council consideration at this meeting, but will be placed on a future agenda for public hearing under vote.

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.

Got a motion and a second roll call.

Good one.

Harding.

Yes.

Hug.

Melton.

Row.

Festerson.

Yes.

Mr.

President.

Motion passed, seven to zero.

Meeting is adjourned at 356.

Thank you.