Rayford.

Here.

That can we stand for a moment of silent prayer followed by the Pledge of Allegiance, please.

I pledge to the flag of the United States.

Morgan Haskell.

There's Morgan.

We missed you last Monday.

We had a dog issue at my house, so we live in some clubs.

So you know we don't have animal care.

Dog issues always over.

And I couldn't tell the police department.

Sorry, I have to go except for confirmation in City.

All right.

Whereas the mental health is essential to everyone's overhaul, overall physical health and emotional well-being, and surroundings can impact if, how, and when a person's needs are met, which in turn affects mental health.

Mental illness will strike one in five adults and about two in ten children live with a serious mental or emotional disorder, regardless of race, ethnicity, religion, or economic status.

Whereas people who have mental illness can recover and lead full productive lives with the help of the Mental Health Roundtable, which consists of various agencies working together to destigmatize mental health in the Siouxland area.

Whereas stigma continues to be the single most significant barrier to people getting the help they need.

And whereas access to early diagnosis, crisis intervention, appropriate treatment and support, including integrated treatment, is critical to the well-being of our families, communities, schools, and businesses, and greater public awareness about mental illness can change negative attitudes and behaviors towards people with mental illness.

Now, therefore, I Robert E.

Scott, mayor of the city of Sioux City Island Bio City Council to hereby proclaim May 2026 as Mental Health Awareness Month in Sioux City and urge the citizens of Sioux City to recommit our community to increasing awareness, understanding of mental illness and the need for appropriate and accessible service for all people with mental ill.

I'd like to present this to you and then say a few words if you would.

Thank you so much.

Um thank you again for doing it this year.

I think this is the third year that I've accepted this proclamation, so thank you very much.

Um the more we talk about mental health, the more people will know that it's okay to get help.

Um so thank you for all that you're doing.

And I just encourage council members, everybody here today to wear green on Thursday, May 14th.

We want to paint Soulean green to show our support to let the community know that we stand by them and we want them to get help.

So thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thanks, Morgan.

The consent agenda today is two through eleven B, and you can consider these items to pass unanimously unless a separate roll call vote is requested by a council member.

Anyone wishing to speak on the agenda may come up at to the podium at the time the item is being discussed.

Anyone wanting to speak on an item not on the agenda should come up under citizen concerns?

All speakers shall state their name for the record and then provide their statement.

I'll move the consent agenda.

Second.

Two is a reading of the city council minutes of May 4th, 2026.

Just one comment.

I don't have any modifications or amendments, but I did want to note on the item related to the food trucks in the minutes.

I just want to make sure that we continue Mike that dialogue about identifying a permanent location.

Enough people have mentioned that.

Um I don't think that the downtown businesses or the restaurants are opposed.

I think they like the the ancillary nature of it.

Um so let's just make sure we continue that dialogue.

Thank you.

Three is a resolution temporary closing various streets in Morningside area for the morningside day carnival parade and staging.

Four is a resolution accepting a donation from the Sioux City Parks and Recreation Foundation for the Big Sioux pedestrian bridge crossing phase two project.

Is is that foundation separate from the city?

The foundation's completely separate.

It is and their board members are completely separate.

Yeah, Matt can speak to it, but they are, yes.

I remember when it was set up.

Yeah.

Matt Salvatore Parks and Recreation Director, yeah, completely different 50 501c3 board.

Um there's five members and they meet quarterly.

Is that a board?

And so the council does not have a representation on that board, doesn't need you don't think it needs to have a representative, not a separate organization.

So three is a resolution approving and accepting a purchase agreement with GP Real Estate SC for three permanent easements and three temporary is located at 3516 and 38 Singing Hills Boulevard and an unaddressed parcel north of Donner Avenue.

Six is an actions relating to agreements and contracts.

A is a resolution approving a consulting services agreement with Black and Beach Corporation for the PFAS mitigation project.

B as a resolution granting a permit a permit to Metro Fibernet to own, operate, and maintain underground fiber adjacent to 1816 Nebraska Street.

I thought they got bought out by T Mobile, because I ordered Metro I ordered that and I I get a bill from T Mobile.

They did.

Yeah.

The entities are related or part of the main.

Okay.

I looked it up the other day on Metro Fibernet is a portion of the new entity name.

Okay.

C is a resolution approving an amendment number one to the consulting services agreement with DGR Engineering for the Parkview Boulevard Water Main Replacement Project.

Glendale Boulevard to Martha Street.

Is Tom Tom here?

Tom.

Just the only question I've got, I have no opposition to amending the contract, but when you look at the original contract and then you increase it by almost an equivalent amount.

Is does it not trigger Mike or Tom a thought that maybe we should be rebidding that second contract that the amendment?

I get that there's some history in terms of the work that's been done, but this is a pretty significant amendment.

Gordon Fair, uh, City Engineer.

Yes, it is significant, but it is in line with the amount that we would normally get for a lot of consultants for design and for construction admin and inspection.

26%, though, isn't it?

The second half is the construction admin and inspection, which we didn't have at the beginning of the project like we normally do.

Twenty-six percent, though, right?

Maybe more than it's 26 percent for a water main only project is excessive on a good day, but anyway.

Thanks.

Go ahead, Craig.

Yeah, yeah, it's I know I agree, Mayor.

I I I read through the materials and and again, I am not I have no opposition to DGR.

They do very good work.

They've been with my first terms, they're you know back 25 years later.

But I just look at the amount of the original contract.

You moved the amendment to 485.

That's just a pretty significant adjustment.

And so I wonder how you when you bid the original contract, what you take into account certain services, Gordon that you just described, or if you anticipate that there's likely going going to be an amendment number one or seven, and how we take that into account with other bidders.

Um, they're not we don't take bids for the I understand that, but it sounds to me like you anticipated either that there could be a larger scope or additional work that would be addressed in an amendment.

Right.

Originally we didn't plan on having them do any of the construction management, but after the review of the workload and everything, we decided that it would be best if we did have them doing it.

Who did you think was going to do it?

It would be done in-house.

Well, with the influx of other projects, we just didn't have the the manpower.

Well, that happens on almost every project, so I don't know why we would have been I don't know why you wouldn't back to what he's saying.

At least ask what it will be if you do it, and then you can decide if you've got the workload.

But the you can't name you can't name ten projects in the last year that that the outside consultant that did it didn't end up doing the construction work.

I mean, come on, that's how it works around here.

But we don't bid it that way.

And well, I know we don't bid it, but anything else?

No.

Thanks, guys.

D is a resolution awarding and approving a contract, Sioux City Engineering for the Parkview Boulevard Water Main Replacement Project, Glendale to Martha Street.

E is a resolution awarding and approving a contract to Sioux City Engineering for the Gordon Drive Water Main and Sanitary Sewer Early Relocation Package Project.

F is a resolution awarding and approving a contract to INA construction for the sidewalk ramp project.

Seven are actions relating to payments.

A is a resolution accepting the work and authorizing the payment to KT K2 real estate development for the Big Sioux River Pedestrian Crossing Phase 2 project.

B is a resolution accepting the work and authorizing the payment to Steve Harris construction for the undersized water main replacement project.

8 is purchasing A as a resolution awarding a purchase order to Hawkins for sulfuric acid for the water treatment plan.

B is a resolution authorizing and directing the city manager to purchase wastewater treatment plant property insurance from Mills Shellheimer Pitts and Associates.

Tom, just a quick question.

Sorry.

So this is property insurance.

This isn't this has nothing to do with the wastewater treatment rehab or owner's liability insurance or otherwise, just continuation of the property insurance that we had in the past.

Tom Pingle, public works director.

That's correct.

Yep.

Okay.

Thank you.

Nine are applicable applications for cigarette tobacco, nicotine, vapor product permits.

Ten are applications for alcohol licenses and 11 are boards, commission, and committee minutes.

Anyone to be heard on any of those items?

Can I ask a question on is there anybody here on the civil service items?

The only question I've got, and Mike, maybe you could help me follow up.

If you look on the Silver Service Commission minutes.

This would be page 144 of our materials.

And their item six, five and six, which are the EMS lead medic position that we recently approved.

Their minutes don't reflect the dialogue that we had with Chief Collins, and I just wonder if they are fully apprised of the scope of the issues.

This was just for the testing.

But they're not this is the April 7th minutes, and they're not reflecting any of the dialogue about how we were making those adjustments, right?

And I just wonder if they need to be part of that dialogue.

I can follow if you'd follow that'd be great.

Thank you.

And were you in those you were on civil service at that time?

Well, I mean, I'm the liaison.

Okay.

So, Mr.

Mayor, I want to go back to your engineering question.

So about two months ago, we started talking about this on what's should be in-house, not in-house.

This isn't a shot at DGR any either, but I guess my question is is um I don't know anybody on my end of the used BGR outside of the public sector is because they're so overpriced.

Um I'm just kind of curious is do we are how are we awarding between them and other firms like the I mean how are we doing that, Tom?

Well, you used to be able to actually ask for prices, but not the same.

That's what I'm that's where I was two months ago.

That's why I said that that should be a hard fixed.

We talked about this two months ago, and it's like, well, just they've always done it.

So that's what was that was the response I got then.

What was your question?

The question is is that how what are we shopping this at all?

Are we just going with who's always done the work because they understand the work?

No, we do shop.

How do you shop it?

We do an RFQ for uh water main project for the in this situation, and we uh had actually three um applicants, and we had three projects, so we gave one to each.

And um, all the prices were in line.

So, how do we have a project that's that's in line, but we don't have fixed costs going into it?

I mean, if I'm I'm kind of with Mayor and Craig on this one.

I mean, again, I feel like I'm talking at the mirror, but it's how how do we not have a number at the beginning?

And at the all these projects seem like at the end of their flow.

What do you mean?

On the engineering side of it at the end?

No.

Because the engineers are so professional that you can't ask their fee until you decide who it is.

They changed the state law a while back.

We used to be able to do it.

So you can't get it on even on this on the the scope work on the once you once you tell them who it is, then you have to negotiate the price.

Yes.

Because we negotiate the price with the consultant, and if we we find that their price is too much, we then can go to the second one, but we cannot go back to the first if the second ones is higher.

And and so what you're saying, Gordon, is when you were looking at three different projects and you awarded them to three different firms, you were comfortable that the pricing was consistent amongst the three.

Yes.

And that's why you divided it mainly.

Did they not have the person power to support more projects, or you felt the fairest thing to do was divide divide it amongst the three?

In this situation, yes.

So what's what's the in-house cost?

I mean, you were going to do this in-house.

What did you budget for in-house?

We couldn't do it in-house.

Oh, oh, I'm sorry, for the design, yes, we couldn't do it in-house.

But for the um uh inspection, uh, I didn't have that, I don't have that cost in front of me.

Who is inspecting eighth street?

That's in-house.

I think I asked that those questions.

Because we have several of these larger projects like that going on.

We didn't have the manpower for this this project.

So then we decided to go out.

So if you're us, what would you what question should we be asking you?

To get this get more consistent, get less less cost.

I was gonna say, and then coming back with the amendment is is is probably the bigger issue.

Well, I would ask I would ask uh the amendment.

What were you asking about that?

Well, just going back to then why does it change so much?

You know, after we assume that the the numbers are what they should be in from the start.

To answer Mr.

Burtrand's question, we should have bid out the construction design and the construction.

Well, you should at least get a price up front.

You should at least get a price up front so you know what it is because there's no negotiating once you've already given them the contract.

They all know that they're gonna get the inspection.

You're not gonna have DGR inspect McClure's engineering plans.

Never gonna happen.

Shouldn't either, by the way.

And we typically don't do that.

We have someone else inspection.

Tom, you're that's where I was going with this.

You're right.

It should all have been up front.

I'm just thinking it's just like you see that I I get the frustration.

We seen it when I was sitting out there looking at it's like these engineering fees that come in late and hard, and it's kind of like you're you're stuck at this point, you're there.

And what's I'm just saying, you guys, what's the process?

Educate us.

How do we get in front of this?

So in this situation, I looked at our our workload for the year, was planning on having that done in-house.

Things changed.

We had some other projects come up, didn't have the time for it.

Manpower, had another inspector.

I could do that, but I don't.

So in this situation, I had to make the change, and when you add it up, even if I bid it out all at once, it it'd still be right around the same number.

Is there a Tom?

Is there a moving forward?

Is there a way forward for this?

I mean, is there something we can we kick the nest?

What's the solution?

I think to the mayor's point would be to get that number, take that number back home, see if if that would if we could do that for a lower cost in the house.

If not, we should move forward with them.

But then does it does it speak to the manpower that I mean if you can do it for the lower cost, but then if you don't have the people to do it?

Right.

And also a account for manpower and what projects we have going on during the estimated time of construction.

The solution is to have the state legislators allow us to bid those again, but I know Gordon and you engineers don't want to hear that, but uh anyway.

Thank you.

Well, the record I'm I'm not an engineer.

Yeah, you're right.

The attorneys out in the audience, even they got to give you a price up front normally about what they're gonna charge you.

The there you don't give them a scope of work and say, well, now let me know what the fee is gonna be.

Not think they go to school as much or longer than we used to say that in the field.

That was that was that was a kiss before the yeah.

Okay, thanks, guys.

Good discussion.

Come on, Bob, find a solution.

Recommendations and planning and zoning, a or 12 is a resolution accepting and approving the final plat of a minor subdivision plat of Hanson Dunn Acres addition.

Petitioners Alf Bagan on behalf of Madonna Hanson, the P and Z recommends approval.

I'll move that.

Second.

Anyone to be heard?

So the only question you all really had on this one was whether there was gonna be a second driveway.

Is that if is the plat limitation is that limitation in the plat, or how do they manage that to make sure that it's waiting planning?

Uh they are not planning to add another driveway.

They're not planning to, but what if in three and a half years they decide they need one?

The DOT wouldn't allow it.

So the DOT could control that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Good to see you here today.

It's good to be seeing.

I'll be here next week, too.

The nights at the 900 acres you're taking part in down south could have at least been talking about with the city of Sergeant Bluff from Sioux City, but we appreciate your investment in the air.

I appreciate you bringing that up, Mayor.

I couldn't I could not let that go.

Wouldn't expect you to.

It's been moved.

Okay.

Yes.

If I don't fight for my city, who will tell Catherine Coonert when you see her, okay?

I'll move that.

Second.

So denial means we vote no if we want to stay with the P and Z.

Correct.

Yes, yes and yes when we pass it through.

Is that what it works?

We can override P and Z.

But as I understand it, there was there was a denial on a two to three or two to three vote, correct?

That's correct.

And but there was some additional information that came because the substantive issue was the size of the lot and in particular the average of size with regard to the three units.

Yeah, it was the it was the lot line average over the over the entirety of the of the lot that was an issue.

So all that's in front of us is either approving or denying based upon that element, correct?

That's correct.

But they sent a revice plan last week, that was in secondary point.

That makes their requirement now.

So the site plan would now be approved by planning and zoning.

Well, no, but but I think there was an indication after the meeting that they indicated that they would otherwise approve it.

That's why I'm gonna move that we defer this, deflect it back to planning its only and let them review it and approve it.

Or deny it again.

The uh let's there's other information too that's there, though, is I what I would like to see us do as the new council is this really is gonna get hung up on the covenant issue.

It's really all we're doing today is say they can go.

Because if if we approve it today on the two to three, they'll get the permit, but doesn't mean that they're they've cleared the covenant hurdle out there.

That's the bigger issue that's out there on the garages, right?

Am I on that?

So that's the hurdle.

So I just could tell that that I don't know if it was my development, I would be asking questions, so I did, and it does not meet covenants, but that they're working with the developer within that.

So what I what I would like to see the council do is approve the construction side of it so when they work it out with the developer, which they're going to, that it's just ready to go as long as we get that makes sense, Sam.

It does.

And some of those government issues were brought to our attention during the during the P and Z hearing, but it really was outside of the scope of what we were considering at the P and Z meeting, which was just limited to the conformance of the uh of the lot lines.

And so I understand that they fixed that.

Yep.

Yeah, and we see that if we defer to the look at it, but we're not looking at it from uh uh from a couple of covenant.

Yeah, that's their issue.

That's the private sector.

But I'm saying is those if we kick it down the road on a deferral, they can't get in the dirt.

They can't cut the deal with the developer or they can't get going, is what the last thing that I want to see is we run into a three-week, you know, we're sniffing June.

You know, we ran into a three or three or four week delay based upon uh, you know what I mean.

I I like to see it.

Let's they worked it out, let the developer work it out with the with the builder on the garage situation.

It's a one-two-one, I think or something like that, a one-two-two or something like that.

Let them figure it out and let's pass it, let them go, in my opinion.

I think that's your prerogative as a counsel.

Yeah.

Thoughts.

Anyone else be heard?

May I please have your names for the record.

Oh, my name, Sam Wagner.

I'm on the planning.

I'm Gibriel Plana.

Abrail, what's your last name?

Oh, Joe.

Hello, my name is Scott Mann.

I'm with Egghead Properties, and I'm the uh contractor on the job.

Um we do have a building permit ready to go, and we have uh an excavator there ready to start digging.

Um we did go through the full process.

We asked the developer, we said gave him plans a couple months ago to approve them.

He said go ahead.

So I I don't believe that there's any covenant and conditions that are not being currently met.

And I was unaware at the uh at the previous planning commission meeting um about the size of the lot that we were non-conforming on on one of the one of the units.

Um after that meeting, I I read the code, talked to DGR, and we came up with a simple solution, and now we meet our requirements.

So we're ready to start going.

Anyone else?

Joel Voss, uh 5530 Lorraine Avenue for uh the next door neighbors, Henry and Linda Metz.

Um, I think there's still an issue with compliance.

That is when you look at subdividing lots like this, what they're doing is called lot averaging.

Um lot averaging has two requirements.

One is that the minimum width of the lot uh can't be less than 90 percent um of the of what the code requires.

Um but there's also an area requirement that the area of the lot can also not be less than 90 percent of the required area.

Um I think that they hit the lot width.

Uh what they what they did is an unusual size lot, I guess.

It's it's wider up front and then the rest of the way it's kind of skinny.

Um that allows them to hit the 36 feet width that's required um at the point where you measure it, but they are still not at 90 percent of the required um lot area.

And so I think it needs to be sent back uh to planning and zoning to to take a look at that because I I don't think it's in compliance uh when you look at all of the code requirements.

Did it hit it?

Yeah, I haven't seen the plat, so I haven't actually seen what it is that they're that they're describing.

So it's we'll just go with the guidance from the council and whether you kick it back to PNZ, we'll take a you know we'll take a look at it in in due course or whatever you guys want to do.

Yeah, but if you look at the the code section 25.03.4, that's a lot averaging, it allows you to reduce it by 10%, and does it 36 feet that they are supposed to meet, and with a vice plan they meet that requirement now?

It's not supposed to be 90%.

It reduces it by 10%.

And if you do the calculation per the new revice plan, they meet that requirement.

So what they're doing right now meets the code.

It meets the code, yep.

Okay, yeah, there's some wiggle room built in, yeah, built into the code.

And one of the reasons that we denied it at the P and Z meeting is that the way the lot lines were laid out in that original plat, they were way below.

Um they've come back and and kind of got it within the threshold of that wiggle room, then it was a close vote.

Yeah, it was a two to three vote.

Yeah.

I mean, was this about design more or setbacks?

Was it about design or setbacks?

I think the P and Z issue was the setbacks and the size of the lot, but there are questions about the design and the scope of the triplex, correct?

Not so much with P and Z.

No, but there are issues concerning the size and scope of the property and the improvement.

Yeah, it was the averaging.

Right, the averaging and just how far off they were on averaging uh that caused uh the cost of consternation on the P and Z.

Where's the developer on this?

Is he okay with this?

Paul okay with this?

I can't speak for him.

I can just say that I mean is you good at the design.

I mean, it's his I mean I gave him the design two months ago.

He said, go ahead, go through city, it looks good.

But that's not a written approval of anything.

So that's and from from everything that I've seen, we are in compliance with lot width and total lot size, everything.

So here, okay.

I didn't see him.

Paul Koskevich Elk Creek.

Uh we have not completed our review from Elk Creek standpoint, as uh there's bigger issues here that are at stake once the uh uh lot line issues are resolved.

If they are resolved, we'll complete our full review at that point and uh determine if the triplex falls within our guidelines or not.

This plan was provided to me.

I don't know.

I looked at it, I think a month and a half ago.

Uh just glancing over it, it looked okay.

After further review, I don't think it quite meets our covenants out there in Elk Creek.

But like I said, I've not dived into it completely until this issue uh is resolved if it is resolved.

So there's no, as I told Scott last week, there's no dirt to be moved until this is resolved, and if this is resolved, then it would have to go through our covenants in Elk Creek first.

And if that's satisfied, then he could dig.

Thanks.

Thanks, Paul.

I think in light of the multitude of issues, um I'd like to I'd like to move that we send it back to PNZ to deal with both the P and Z issues.

Also give the developer the builder and the property owners in the adjacent properties an opportunity to visit as well in in the event that it affects the covenants.

But all that can be done on the private sector though, too.

Just FYI.

That could all be done with permit in hand.

I mean here I'm going with that.

I mean that that's all gonna be worked out between him and him between the covenants.

I'm just saying, is it why do we want what's it gonna what's gonna be what's the time frame gonna cost?

I don't know him from Adam.

I'm just saying what's what's the time frame gonna cost him on this?

Three weeks, four weeks.

Um take to get back to P and Z.

Maybe can get on the 20th seat of May.

We have it here on 26, so we can get it back to them.

So you're looking at first week of June, second week of June.

Uh the 26th you're talking about the May P and Z as the next BND on a twenty sixth.

He's saying it would come back here then.

And then after that would recover.

But I'll take on that two weeks for it to get back to you.

Yeah.

Say that again, Mike.

Yep.

I would like to just point out that the um lot size, lot width, everything meets requirements.

The covenants and conditions, I've read them.

I don't believe we are in any violation of that, but that's a private matter.

The the issue before you here today is the um approval of the plat, and do I meet the requirements?

And I do meet the requirements.

So I haven't heard any reason why it would be not denied.

So if your developer comes at you and says, hey, we want to tweak this, your garage is your garage size or something like that.

Are you are you rigid at this point?

Are you absolutely we'll make whatever modifications are?

That's a big thing.

I mean that's what that's the concern of the neighbors, I'm sure, which is they want to aesthetically and everything else they want it to match up with the break development out there.

And I've offered that we will make whatever modifications needed to make everybody happy.

We just want to build the triplex and build some more in the same development.

So you guys I know where I'm off.

So yes, is you want to pass it and also send it back?

We have a couple different things on the floor.

It's been moved in the second end, and then uh councilman uh Baron Sinnan indicated he would move to send it back for reconsideration.

So I'm always said when somebody makes a motion we should vote even if we're for or against it, we should at least allow that to happen.

So I'll second the motion.

The motion to send it back to the second.

So does the other motion have to be withdrawn first, Nicole?

Yes.

Um it was made by the mayor and seconded by councilman rafer.

That was just flash send it.

What is that one for?

That was the denied withdrawal and then after voting on this, it may come back.

Yep.

I'll move the withdrawal my motion.

Second.

Will you withdraw your second?

So the vote on the floor would be to send it back to planning and zoning for reconsideration.

Uh motion made by Baronstein seconded by Scott.

Any further discussion then I guess?

Any other comments?

You can do it electronically.

So it will go back to P and Z.

Next is a hearing and ordinance vacating a portion of Saccawea Park on the property known as 1904 South Rustin Street.

The petitioners Roger and Jacqueline Edwards P and Z recommends approval.

I'll move that.

Second.

Anyone to be heard?

Mr.

Sam Wagner, do you have anything to the order?

Just to note that it was a unanimous vote.

That's good.

We like those.

Anyone's famous, Sam.

See?

You don't even feel like we need to.

But in all fairness, man, I've sat in a few of your P and Z.

You guys got a functional P and Z right now.

I've seen the last couple of years and the where they aren't real functional.

You guys got a really good P and Z right.

Well, just remember who your new guy is.

I know who it is.

Well, and and to Rick's point, the breadth of knowledge of P and Z is outstanding.

It really is.

They're functional.

When we have questions about scope of what they're reviewing, and oftentimes the legal elements very careful.

Appreciate that, and I'll share it with the commission.

Public hearings now closed.

Passes for zero.

Anybody opposed to waiving the statutory rule?

No.

I'll move that.

Second.

Aye.

Rayford.

Aye.

Scott.

Second.

Rayford.

Aye.

That's Barnstein.

Hi.

15 hearing resolution approving plans and specs for the undersized water main replacement project.

I'll move that.

Second.

Public hearings now open.

Anyone to be heard?

Seeing none, the hearing is closed.

Passes 406 needs a hearing and resolution amending the budget for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 2026.

I'll move that.

Second.

Public hearings now open.

Anyone to be heard?

Seeing none, the hearing is closed.

Either Sarah or Teresa, could we just get a three-minute summary of why it's necessary?

We understand.

But for the public's awareness, could you just give a quick summary of why we're being asked to amend the budget for the fiscal year?

A lot of these changes include technical changes when we're transferring from one project to another.

We need to add a budget to that project.

Thanks, sir.

Zero ordinance and seventeen is an ordinance amending chapter 13.08 sanitary sewer rates of the municipal code to increase the rates of outside municipalities and outside improvement districts by 27.4 percent effective November 1st, 2026.

First consideration was approved on April 27th.

Second consideration was approved May 4th.

I'll move third reading.

Second.

I'll second third.

Passes 4-0.

You know, Mr.

Mayor, on that on that uh that rate increase.

That's a win.

Just want to kind of put in the public record.

That is a a win for Sioux City taxpayers.

Um I also think it's a great reflection on this council that uh we are the uh Sioux City City Council, not a not a tri-state council that we're looking out for our taxpayers first.

And Tom When's the next time we're eligible to raise those rates again.

Uh the contract would state that Tom Pingle public works director, that we could do that again in six months.

Thank you.

Just because of the six month notice.

That's correct.

That's right.

That there's nothing else that could get like a like an annual can't be once a year, a biannual or every five years.

That's the way it's written.

So we basically put a little over a million in our coffers above that helps with construction and everything else.

Not one squeak, which means that this it's not hitting anybody's pocketbooks or anybody squealing.

And I think we should continue to look at things like this and other things that we receive payments from other communities for our services.

Um so great job on all of this, and and the speed of it I thought was excellent.

So thanks.

Thank you.

Thanks, son.

18 is an ordinance repealing ordinance 2026 and 4-64.

Amending chapter 12.30 storm water program and the municipal code to modify the storm water collection fees.

Uh move first reading.

Second.

I have invited R SNH to uh present on the master plan.

This is uh a two-year project that the uh FAA airport is required to do to um update on at least a 20-year cycle for funding purposes.

Want to thank uh the guard unit and the FAA, our board, our public input process.

We go through at least two public meetings, and um just goes over a 20-year planning horizon for our needs in the immediate, midterm, and long term, and kind of separates the military and civilian uses for us as an airport out there.

So, does the master plan and we've all reviewed it, but does it how does it take into account either the anticipated or what we understand to be the 185th growth?

They're gonna talk about that right now.

Thank you.

I knew you were going to, I just wanted to I think we have a click PDF just to take them out as you click here.

And then right here is just my things.

Great.

You'll just put so thank you very much.

My name is uh Mike Becker.

I'm a senior aviation planner for RNH, and uh we're gonna talk a little bit about the the master plan.

I didn't do it right.

So I'm not gonna see it up there.

Uh I will okay.

All right, I got it figured out.

We're all set now.

So, first thing I want to do is uh make sure we all have level set on what an airport master plan is, and it's a comprehensive plan.

It looks at the entire airport facility, and it really describes short, medium, and long-term development needs for an airport.

The FAA requires it to make sure that uh the projects that are listed on the airport layout plan are eligible and justified, and it really helps the airport, the city, the community understand where they are today and where they need to go in the future from a facility standpoint.

So, really the general element that needed to get uh really analyzed and planned here was the Nexus program, what's gonna happen with the Air National Guard and how the airport facility is going to kind of improve and work through those.

The graphic you see on the screen is really the the facility improvements that are going to happen over the short term during the project, starting with some runway extensions, working on some taxiway alignments, and some hold positions for different aircraft, and then of course an apron expansion.

That graphic really represents the big program for the nexus that's going to occur.

This master plan started off to really understand what was going to be needed and what needed to be justified to be able to use uh AIP money and and DOD funding to to make this project occur.

So the other thing I actually, before I go on, the other thing that was really important to note is the last airport master plan was about 20 years old.

So it was needed and it was time, and then there was this large project that does the FAA only require it every 20 years.

Uh the FAA requires that an airport have a master plan.

The the federal planning horizon is only 20 years, but depending on how much improvement and change happens in a community, a master plan could be done every seven years, every 15 years.

It's really an independent perspective on the community to determine what it was needed.

In this case, uh, with the growth and head changes in the community and the master plan being 20 years old, it was really time to look at the facility, understand where the future was gonna go and what improvements were needed.

So during that process, we really involved the community.

We had one uh virtual engagement room where anybody could come at any time, join uh there's a website that it was a portal that you could go in and see some of the information and participate.

We had that up and running for the two years of the planning assignment.

We had two public involvement meetings, three advisory committees along the way to understand the different components that we were looking at.

We published five different documents to allow people to review and understand what was going on as we moved through the planning process.

And we we had a lot more than 10 different people.

We try to boil that into 10 different partners within the community in the broader community to really engage and collaborate with to make sure that the airport facility was meeting the needs of the users and stakeholders.

So the general planning process is kind of linear.

You kind of start off by understanding what you have, what the futures might look like, and then look at all the facility requirements and understand when a facility might need to have improvements made to it to keep up with growing demand.

Then you really look at different ways to solve that problem.

So you don't just decide on the first one, you look at multiple different reasons and then evaluate one which ones make the most sense from an assortment of different uh reasons, environmental funding, uh operational, and then once you've kind of figured out the preferred solution, you've you figure out where is the money gonna come from and how do we implement it and what stages and what phases should we move through that implementation process?

And then the FAA requires us to put it in a in a drawing set.

We call it the blueprints, so you really understand what facilities are going to be added to the airport, what changes are gonna be made over the 20 years, and that's the document that the FAA reviews and approves, finalizes, and say, yeah, this is great plan.

Go forth, move ahead.

I'm probably interrupting.

This is a question, so you can answer it later if you want, Mike, but I'm curious on one of the struggles that we've had is identifying additional carriers, right?

And I know that's a very competitive world, both the carriers, their financial security, finding pilots, et cetera.

Does the master plan that you're putting together help our airport board and the city council to move forward with working with other air carriers to promote our community and identify what the physical structure for general aviation can look like?

It's a soft, yes.

Um the master plan is primarily looked at the facilities and understanding how the facilities can uh accommodate whatever type of aircraft, passengers, and vehicles.

The the master planning process itself doesn't do the negotiating and collaboration with with the airlines, but it does look at okay, is the airfield in a in a sufficient condition that the airlines or corporate jet activity would operate and be comfortable in it?

Is the passenger terminal accommodating the needs of the passengers in the airlines and is the parking facilities accommodate that?

So that's where the soft jest comes in, um, but not directly negotiating with airlines.

And and I didn't anticipate that latter part.

I was just curious whether as we move forward with the airport board, um, understanding that we're in an essential air service community, what kind of leverage this gives us to broaden our services, approach uh the airline, the carriers, and and try and improve uh air service in Sue City.

Yeah, I think well, I'll try to touch on it with the graphic we have right here.

This one you all see on the screen is kind of the forecasted employments.

So you can kind of start off in 2018, you can see what happened in COVID, and the gray line is kind of how you see passenger employments occurred during the pandemic.

The dashed line is what the FAA thought it would look like in well, sorry, the FAA didn't have the FAA saw the past just like we all did.

So the historic numbers are exactly historic.

And then as the FAA line moves out in the future, that's what the federal government was thinking your forecasted employments would look like.

As part of our planning analysis, we looked at what would be the base case of growth and what would happen if additional air service came on, different routes to different locations, and what could that generally do to the airport facility?

Can the runways handle it, taxiways, terminal buildings, parking lots.

So we looked at both of those scenarios to make sure that the airport has a plan in place to be able to accommodate when when that growth and that air service continues to continue to improve.

The great news is you get three little dots kind of pointed out on the screen where we started 26,000 employments.

So that's one set.

If you add arrival and departure, that's the full passenger, so you're you're in, oh that's a 26 plus that's 52 uh 52,000 passengers that are were occurring at the beginning of the planning, and now you're at 28,000 employments, so roughly 60,000 passengers in the last couple years.

So that Denver and Chicago service has really helped bring some of that life back on the commercial side.

I think the airport improvements that we're gonna talk about in a second with the runways and the taxiways and support facilities are gonna make the facilities uh in a position to be able to accommodate that and and then continue this working with the airlines themselves.

We'll see what happens.

But trend is going in the right direction.

And uh a flight was added in January, so those aren't reflective of 25's numbers as well.

So when we look at the other aspect, uh not just the passengers, but aircraft operations, uh, you know, that was another uh concern in the planning study.

It's like making sure we have enough aircraft operations to continue to use the airport, you make the tower um continue to operate and be a strong, strong facility for this community.

And you see with the adding of the flight school and the growth in the general aviation community, your your operational forecast is also increasing.

So we looked at the base and the high to make sure that we had plenty of facilities in plan that could be put in place if necessary as growth would occur.

Did I somewhat answer your question, sir?

Yes, thank you.

So that that kind of looks at the what you have and then what the future might look like, and then we generate these type of graphics, and they're really kind of heat maps really meant to show kind of the the facility that might need some improvements during a planning period.

And we really break 20 years up into three planning periods PAL one, two, and three, and we identify trigger points of operation or a certain particular event that might occur that says now's the time to begin planning, then the design and then implement it so your facility is up and running and at a like high level of service before it's needed.

So you kind of see on the civilian side of this graphic, you see early on the uh aircraft rescue firing fighting facility and the maintenance SRE are red.

So those we indicated uh needed some improvements right away to help with uh with growth and uh facility improvements.

The ARF was a of a line of sight issue with the air traffic control tower to get the air the Air National Guard facilities improved, and the maintenance SRE needed more space.

Um, as you look on the military side, no surprise to anybody here that the runway length and design standards were needed.

That's what the primary objective of Nexus is.

So we've identified that as the project that needs to happen right away.

And again, on the R that was a uh sighting study, um tower sighting study that needed to be relocated the RF facility to improve line of sight for the air traffic control tower.

So those that's a really a summary of nine months of work trying to figure out what facilities needed to be improved and where, and then we really get into understanding the funding of that.

I'm gonna hand it over to Darren, and Darr's gonna kind of walk you through a couple of slides on funding, what the next uh five, ten, fifteen years of capital projects look like.

All right, uh thank you, Mayor and Council.

My name is Darren Christopher with R SNH.

I'm a civil engineer, and just want to touch base on uh funding just for a few minutes here, maybe skim the top some of the waves.

It's about over the next 20 years, it's about almost 700 million, 672 million dollar uh program.

But if we really break it down on the left-hand side, is the millet we look at our funding partners and the military is a large component of that, and of that 360 million, it really breaks down in the two projects.

There's the Nexus program, which is about 220 million dollar program.

That's uh reconstructing the runway, extending the runways, reconstructing the ramp at the uh at the 185th at the International Guard base, and then it's also another component of that is uh if they decide to uh to remission with a larger airplane, it would also one of the big components is building a double or two hangars or a double hangar, and that's about 140 million dollars or estimated today uh to build those two hangars.

So it's about that's where the over half of the program is about 360 million of that.

Uh the FAA being a large partner as well, uh, with their with entitlements and uh and their their funding, the state being the uh the Iowa DOT, the Department of Aviation, uh local money could be private investment, it could be this matching funds from the city, and then as in private investment through hangar development as well.

The next one just breaks it down and into percentages of what the pretend of the program, so kind of just two different ways to tell the same story.

And uh the next slide moving on, is uh this one's a little bit of an eye chart, but then the zero to five years.

The projects we're looking at is one the Nexus program.

You can see a lot of blue or a lot of improvements on the runway environment itself, runway 1331.

It's also uh rehabilitating and reconstructing uh two of the general aviation ramps.

On the left hand side, it's uh just showing that there's room for hangar improvements if they're needed, anywhere from additional T hangers to corporate development.

Uh, if that development's needed, there's a place showing that it could be constructed.

It's also up by the one of the projects here is a new entry.

This is the Air National Guard's best fit to location right now.

It's a new entry control point currently today, one of their projects after the Nexus would be the new entrance or gate uh to the to the facility, and make sure they meet all their security requirements today.

They're they need a new one.

Let's just put it that way.

The next one's six to ten years in the largest program here.

We do show on the left-hand side more improvements for general aviation if needed.

If those tenants were uh needed some space, they came to Sioux City or we're able to track them.

And the biggest program here is like we show area locations for their uh Air National Guard, uh we show a double hangar option, so they could do a maintenance hangar and a fuel cell hangar adjacent to each other.

We think there's some efficiencies sharing a wall, and and those are the biggest components in the next six to ten years.

In the last one, 11 to 20 years, it's reconfiguring a few taxiways, more general aviation space.

It does show additional development space, so adjacent to the paint facility, if that's a military-only space or some commercial development.

And the one that's a little bit hard to see is it does show about 20 years relocating the ARF station, right?

The current location of the fire station or the ARF station at the airport.

There's a little bit of a line of sight issue from their traffic control, everybody operates safely there.

There's a little bit of extra communication, but when that building reaches the end of its useful life, we'll just move it to a different location when that planning activity the PAL or planning activity level uh comes to an end or is triggered.

And we tried to keep it under 10 minutes.

There's a couple QR codes out up here.

This is a documentation or a QR link to the airport's uh master plan website.

There's also QR code that'll take you to the uh virtual room as uh as well uh that shows all the documents from the master plan are all available for uh the FAA did approve this master plan.

I uh we were asked to come and give an executive summary, try to keep it short, high points.

The FA approved this master plan back in uh probably May uh March or in February, early March, and so they signed off on it.

And so this is a summary collab of all the collaboration that occurred over the last uh 24 30 months or so.

So questions.

All right, thank you.

Quick question.

So, with the planning that you see for the next for the first five years, 10 years and 20 years, and the expansion and the growth of the 185th, and what we're doing with the taxiways, the runways, etc.

Does that give us the capacity to be able to work with large care, not I don't mean general aviation character carrier carriers, but warehousing type of relationships, um the large planes that that warehousing and distribution centers?

Sure.

There's not a lot of airplanes that are in the fleet on the commercial side that couldn't land at the airport today.

Again, that the with the Nexus program with some of the uh the that's gonna be marked for military use only for those uh to the thousand foot extension on the runway.

They'll be signed if there's a civilian need, we can come back and revisit it with the FAA.

The FA has asked that that is listed and marked as civil as military use only, but there's not a lot of uh there's not a lot of uh commercial airplanes throughout the entire fleet that couldn't land in Sioux City and take off in Sioux City.

They periodically have 760.

There's last year they had a 767 charter come in, so you could handle almost all almost all the depending if you're gonna go international cargo, it's a different story, but you can fly domestically almost anywhere you want to out of Sioux City uh domestically with the current way the current runway sits today.

So thanks, Darren.

Thanks, Mike.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If you're coming, you gotta get up here because I'm gonna go to the council concerns.

Yeah, I'm concerned about the airport move runway.

Name please.

My name is Melvin Carter.

Uh the concern I have is what you need all this for.

Why do the run really have to be so big now?

And what the reason really is for this big old runway.

You know, why in a little bitty town?

Why would they want to put a big old runway in?

Because we're gonna lose the Air National Guard unit if we don't, and we can't afford to lose that.

It's 800 and some jobs in this community.

Right.

The current 220 million dollar project is the 185th, and to the mayor's point, the eight to 900 jobs that we would lose if the 185th left.

Right.

I'm understanding that, but the 185th has been using this airport for how long now?

They have to fly out with 70 percent capacity, they can't fly out with a full load.

So they have to fly to like Wichita or Lincoln, refuel and take off again, which in a national emergency doesn't bode very well.

You need to get out off the ground and in the air, and they're not able to do that today.

The 1850, the the the units that they fly are tanker units, right?

Right.

They're to fly and fill up the fighter jets.

Right.

Right now, to the mayor's point, they're they're only able to fill to the capacity of about 50 to 60, maybe 70 percent, and they have to either land in Lincoln or elsewhere to get full capacity in their loads.

It's a win for Sioux City.

I ain't saying it ain't a win.

I was just wondering why you need such a big runway.

And make uh all these different plans to the to the airport and all of this here.

I'm just kind of pig out.

Good question.

Very good question.

You know, what is all this called for what is it really good for?

I understand the good for uh uh national guard, but how about the other what what else is good for?

It's good for all of Sioux City, so not really and keep in mind that this is the day news.

We ain't gonna get no more stakes coming in here.

Well, we're gonna only Chicago, Denver, maybe uh Minnesota.

Okay.

All right.

You know, I can see up, you know, they're gonna open it so we can get more business flights in here and stuff like that.

But you know, just they say it's what refilled the jet.

You know, I can understand that too, but I really don't get it.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Council concerns, Rick briefly.

Uh briefly this evening.

Um, first uh I wanted to say uh thanks to the guys on the 18th street um field services, Mike and I and Brad, and then we word that for our wrap-up tour after they cleaned it up.

I highly encourage you if you haven't driven by to drive by, they did a great job.

Um, a 20-year cleanup, opened up the space.

They now took a full inventory of everything in there, kind of reevaluated what we need for needs versus wants moving forward.

Um, and I look at it not just as a housekeeping um drill, but more as um they know what they got to help serve uh the citizens more with what they do with snow and grass and everything else.

So again, good job there.

I was gonna send them a case of uh a pallet of bushlight, but I was told by legal I couldn't send that over.

Uh but uh the uh so good job to those guys over there.

Also, then we were gonna talk, we're in the process, Gordon and I, and we're in the process of reviewing the grading permit process.

Um they sent over the first initial um rough draft, and just so this so the public is aware why we're doing that is because right now the city of Sioux City is probably in my I don't know any other city that doesn't allow grading before a full set of plans has to be submitted.

Um it's starting to become it has been an issue, it's becoming has is becoming a bigger issue, and I think that this is a great process that we're gonna go through to rework the grading uh permit process, which kind of keeps a little bit of control on our dirt guys.

We know from the board from uh uh borrow pit standpoint, but also gives the flexibility from our developers to get them in the ground faster and more efficient and the uh let the plans kind of catch up.

So um I saw a lot of a lot of additions that Gordon put on there that said uh um at the engineer's opinion or disposal, and we're gonna I'm gonna red line his red line.

Um but that'll be a great discussion for us on Thursday when we get together on the grading permit process.

Um the variance I still would like to see.

I know that the there's there's some state guidance around the variance, but I would still like to see a presentation on what what is a variance in the city of Sioux City and how to apply for it.

And I think it would be a great public discussion.

I still would like to see that up.

That's what I wanted to hear.

Perfect.

June one.

That's that's a that's a very valuable discussion.

I want to see we want to see there.

Um also on the uh um is Matt still here, is Alazar, sir?

No.

I think I saw the uh I just want to be somebody needs to ask Matt.

Do we carry trimmers on the on our equipment?

For I assume we do.

Okay, this I think this 2026 is the year of no more grass over the edge of the curbs.

Let's get our trimmers out and let's put some string in them.

And so we're doing a really good job of of cleanup with identifying the spaces, but they have treat, they have tremendous.

Yeah, I mean I thought that was being facetious there, Mr.

Mayors.

But I that was that was uh that was that was a little facetious there on on getting the trimmers out and making sure that we we refocus on trimming and especially over the curb and all that hangover.

So again, just especially going into the season, it's a great reminder as we go there.

And then also last last but not least, uh I want to thank Daryl.

We had a couple incidents just pop up in the field, and where these are in these are things from uh a development standpoint that would have probably taken a couple weeks or so.

And Daryl continues to show the flexibility in getting out there and getting getting keeping guys moving.

So thank you, Daryl, and keeping everybody moving and let's have a great week.

Craig?

Uh, just a couple things.

Mike, how are we managing the increased cost for fuel?

Do we forward purchase our fuel for our various departments?

We do we do not finance averages that when we go through the budget process and we try and we try and forward look 12 months, but it's a guess, and obviously this year we would have been wrong just based on where we're at pricing.

Do you think that we're gonna have to readdress any issues?

We will have a uh budget ad more than likely in this upcoming year.

You know, the good thing is the pricing was down the first part of the year, right?

So we might average out fine.

I can tell you in transit, we're still ahead budget-wise, even with the increase in okay, very good.

Thank you.

Uh then a couple of other things.

Uh I think it's terrific news what security bank did with the naming rights to the ball field.

I was able to drive by there over the weekend, and their new sign is up, and it looks absolutely great.

So, congratulations to the entire team to get that renamed.

Um really pleased that we were able to transition from the Mercy Fields to Security National Bank and look the sign looks great.

That was Matt.

That's great.

Yeah, he did a great job.

Um, this morning, the mayor and I had a chance after we met with the children group um to go to the National Police Week ceremony.

I thought they did just an absolutely marvelous job in recognizing the not only those that had had died in service, but really just the commending them for recognition of the importance of uh that service, and I thought they did a really nice job.

And the county attorney, James Loomis did a really nice job speaking.

Um, so they need to be certainly Rex and his team and and all need to be recognized for what they did.

Um then just very quickly, I know that through the over the last week, and I see Joe Twidwell sitting in the back, Shayla's not here tonight, but I know over the last week all of us have had a significant amount of dialogue regarding the homelessness issue, the transient population trying to get our arms around this, and and I think we're all recognizing both sides of the equation on how we manage this.

I think we all recognize that change is necessary, that we need to work with our partners.

It's gonna take time and it's gonna take a lot of courage, but I'm encouraged by the discussions that we've had that we can get that accomplished.

That's it, thank you.

Mike absolutely uh I I see Reagan is here.

Uh I just had a real quick question, Reagan.

Did your new ambassador for downtown start or just pee though?

I was just about out the door.

Well, bringing Cody downtown partners.

We're gonna never let you off that easy.

No, you won't.

That's okay.

I expect it and appreciate it.

Um last week I know Rick mentioned the um ambassador program and an update on that.

We are working on the memo.

We got um Bill's first couple weeks under him.

He started April 15th.

So we do have some numbers um that I've put in the memo, and she should have it in the morning, actually.

So we just got those today.

Oh, nice.

Yeah, perfect timing.

Yeah, yeah.

So I can we'll you state your name for that.

Reagan Cody.

Thank you.

Are you tracking cost when this is all said and done?

Can you get I mean, are you he does have a contract when it comes down to cost?

I'll be working with Patrick and some other departments on how capture that, so if we're staying here a year from now, we can either make a decision as a community if we want to.

Yep, if we want to do this, if we want to make it bigger, we'll know what it costs us.

It'll be too late, so thank you.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thanks, Reggie.

Um, just uh, you know, last week I'd asked Mike about the property cleanup over behind the Beacons building.

Thanks, Mike.

Yep for getting that taken care of.

Um I I love to see the improvements in the clean uh areas that that are coming through that.

Um I think sometimes our citizens don't see uh the work that's being done, but yet uh it is being done.

Uh and so we want them to know that uh you know it was uh great to meet the how do you say Gilgian?

Jill just Gildan Gildan delegate this morning, and uh and then they get to see some some some prettiness in our community.

Also wanna congrats uh to the BCU and Morningside and St.

Luke's graduates.

Uh you know, uh they are getting ready to start their careers, and so uh got to see a lot of that this weekend, and that's it.

Move we adjourn.

Second Aaron Stein.

Hi, Bertrand.

Hi Raford.

Hi, we did it, Bob.

All right, we've got