►
From YouTube: 5-18-20 City Council
Description
Des Moines City Council meeting via teleconference on Monday, May 18. 2020.
Help us caption & translate this video!
https://amara.org/v/C1IUJ/
A
The
automations
okay,
you
don't
need
to
call
the
meeting
to
order
for
this,
but
for
all
of
our
citizens,
app
that
are
listening
in
we've
got
National
Public
Works
week
and
I'm
gonna
quickly.
Kick
it
over
to
Jonathan
gano
to
give
us
kind
of
an
update,
and
then
I've
got
a
quick
Proclamation
rate
Jonathan.
B
Happy
to
have
the
floor,
mr.
mayor,
thank
you
for
the
opportunity.
This
is
an
annual
celebration
where
each
take
a
week
and
take
our
our
chance
to
remind
everybody
of
the
vital
infrastructure
and
services
provided
by
public
works
professionals
here
in
Des
Moines.
That's
in
the
both
Public
Works
and
engineering
departments
working
day
and
night,
sometimes
around
the
clock
in
different
Duty
positions
at
the
wastewater
treatment
plant
and
and
all
day
long
in
offices
and
now
in
homes
and
trucks
and
vehicles
spread
throughout
the
community.
A
A
We
want
to
thank
you
and
your
whole
department
and
staff
for
the
that
weekend
week
out
24
hours
a
day,
whether
it's
snow,
whether
it's
rain,
whether
it's
floods
or
it's
just
taken
care
of
picking
up
the
the
reset
on
the
garbage
and
whatever
every
single
week
but
Easter
day.
You
guys
are
on
the
front
line
and
I
just
want
to
thank
all
of
you
for
all
the
work
that
you
do
to
help
all
of
us
as
citizens,
City
of
Des
Moines.
A
A
Now
I
the
mayor,
the
City
of
Des
Moines
on
behalf
of
our
City
Council
in
the
citizens
of
Des
Moines,
do
hereby
proclaim
the
week
of
May
18th,
the
22nd
of
2020
as
the
National
Public
Works
week
and
in
the
city
of
Des,
Moines
I
call
on
all
of
our
citizens
and
civic
organizations
to
acquaint
themselves
with
the
issues
involved
in
providing
the
city's
Public
Works
and
to
recognize
the
contributions
which
Public,
Works
and
engineering
officials
make
every
single
day
to
our
health,
safety,
comfort
and
quality
of
life.
And
with
that.
A
D
Hello,
yeah
hi.
Thank
you
so
much
for.
First
of
all
expediting
this
proclamation,
it
means
so
much
to
our
community
I'm,
actually
on
a
national
call.
At
the
same
time,
recognizing
this
event
and
it's
wonderful-
that
more
in
Iowa
is
having
from
a
local
fan
point
and
being
a
part
of
this
at
a
national
level
as
well,
and
this
is
even
more
important
for
us
not
just
for
our
Asian
American
Pacific
Islander
community,
but
also
having
ancillary
communities
as
well.
A
Now,
therefore,
I,
the
mayor,
the
City
of
Des
Moines
on
behalf
of
our
City
Council,
and
this
is
is
Des.
Moines,
do
hereby
proclaim
May
18th
today,
2020
as
AAPI
day
against
bullying
in
hate,
and
we
urge
all
the
citizens
of
Des
Moines
to
reach
out
in
fight
bullying
and
discrimination
in
hate
crimes
which
have
been
on
the
rise
and
to
stand
up
against
racism
and
take
action
to
help
end
bullying
and
hate
in
our
community.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you
all
for
being
here
and
all
of
our
citizens
who
are
online
here
with
us
before
we
get
into
their
regular
agenda.
I
just
want
to
quickly
make
a
statement.
You
know
I
want
to
address
the
disruption
that
forced
our
cancellation
of
our
last
Thursday's
joint
meeting
with
the
council
and
the
des
moines
civil
and
human
rights
commission.
Such
racist
and
sexist
sexist
actions
can
never
be
tolerated.
That's
why
an
investigation
is
underway
by
the
Des
Moines
police
department
in
our
city's
IT
department.
A
So
any
rate
with
that
I
want
to
thank
you
for
giving
me
a
moment
just
to
say
that
to
you
as
the
council
and
thank
you
all
for
your
participation,
the
other
night
and
secondly,
to
our
citizenry.
We're
going
to
move
forward
and
nothing's
gonna
stop
us
now
and
with
that
I'd
like
to
have
a
motion
to
approve
the
agenda
as
presented
and/or
as
amended
move,
it's
been
moved
all
in
favor,
say:
aye
aye
aye.
A
Is
there
any
opposition
hearing?
None
it
passes.
Item
3
is
approving
the
consent
agenda
tonight.
Those
are
items
3
through
41
generally.
These
are
routine
items
and
will
be
enacted
by
one
roll
call
vote
without
separate
discussion.
Unless
someone
either
a
council
member
or
someone
from
the
public
decides
they
want
to
have
one
called
for
clarification
or
further
discussion
this
evening.
A
Item
4b
be
councilmember,
Gatto
wishes
to
speak
item.
5
I
will
be
voting.
No
item.
6B
council
members
raised
to
speak
item.
7
councilmember
gray
wishes
to
speak
and
item
7,
councilmember,
Voss
votes,
no
item,
26
councilmember
Westergaard
wishes
to
speak
and
item
40
and
40
a
council
member
Gatto
votes.
No,
are
there
any
other
items
that
anyone
would
like
to?
Could
you
put
those
back
up
again?
First
check
and
K?
Yes,.
C
A
A
C
A
E
E
A
Think
that
what
we
ought
to
do
Jo
is
maybe
we
could
continue
that
particular
item
I
believe
they
still
can
function
as
a
business.
While
we
do
that
research
and
get
that
back
to
us
by
the
next
meeting,
and
then
we
can
have
a
discussion
around
that,
because
I
would
doubt
that
unless
we
got
a
term
a
little
earlier
that
they
can
pull
up
all
the
information
that
we
would
need
to
take
a
look
at
that,
but
that.
E
That
sounds
great
yeah
and
it's
actually
in
Josh's
Warren
I
apologize,
Josh
I
meant
to
get
a
hold
of
you
today,
but
my
day
had
slipped
away
from
me,
so
yeah
I
would
continue.
I
would
continue
for
BB
and
take
a
look
at
some
of
those.
Some
of
those
questions
that
I
asked
and
maybe
see
if
we
can
get
a
good
neighbor
agreement
in
place.
If,
if
not,
this
is
a
this
is
a
problem.
So
I'll
move
to
continue.
It.
A
F
F
H
A
All
right
thanks
man,
you
bet
that
takes
us
to
66-
is
public.
Improvements
in
B
is
the
sixth
Avenue
streetscape
College
Avenue
to
University
it's
receiving
the
bids,
which
will
happen
and
616
of
20
we're
gonna
set
a
data
hearing
of
July
13th.
The
engineer's
estimate
on
this
is
three
million
eight
hundred
and
sixty
seven
thousand
four
hundred
and
eighty
six
dollars
and
seventy
cents
bill
gray.
It's
yours
for.
I
Seventy
cents,
I
think
I
can
probably
push
this
one,
a
lot
that
this
is
nothing
more
than
highlighting
phase
two
of
the
total
sixth
Avenue
streetscape,
the
mainland
groups,
with
the
help
of
brand
by
have
raised
close
to
one
point
four
million
dollars
of
this.
So
what
what
they
have
done
is
nothing
short
of
a
phenomenal.
This
is
really
going
to
dress
the
area
up,
and
this
is
one
of
the
main
corridors
that
does
come
through.
I
A
J
F
K
A
A
You
item
7
is
another
public
improvement.
These
are
items
regarding
the
proposed
second
Avenue
reconstruction
from
the
University
Avenue
to
the
Des
Moines
River
accounts,
communication,
number,
twenty
220,
it's
approving
the
concept
plan
and
be
approving
professional
services
agreement
with
Bolton
and
make
not
to
four
hundred
and
eighty
five
thousand
nine
hundred
and
twenty
nine
dollars.
Councilmember
gray,
Thank.
I
Right
this
is
one
of
the
projects
that
I
have
been
working
on
diligently
for
about
the
last
three
years.
We
have
had
constant
meetings
with
the
neighborhood
group.
We've
had
meetings
with
central
place,
business
owners,
the
second
Avenue
business
owners
and
I
can't
and
we've
had
plenty
of
opportunities
for
give-and-take
I.
Think
we
come
with
a
great
compromise
here.
I
went
through
the
blue
letter
and
engineering
has
done
a
fantastic
job,
I'm
getting
all
the
phases
put
in
place,
what
we
need
to
get
done
and
what
everybody
should
know.
I
This
is
an
all-encompassing
project,
because
not
only
are
we
going
to
read,
but
second
Avenue
careful
condition
is
what
early
joint
sewer
work
and
we're
going
to
be
doing
the
bridge
work,
so
we're
gonna
really
create
a
whole
new
environment
or
people
coming
in
to
Des
Moines
visit
our
downtown
area
to
go
to
Wells
Fargo
Arena
have
a
chance
to
get
to
the
hospitals
Mercy's
ahead.
Methodist
is
down
the
road
and
Lutheran
Hospital
is
just
down
the
street
from
extremely
happiness,
I'm,
extremely
happy
all
the
compromises
that
we've
put
together
on
this.
I
I
F
F
Polk
County
Supervisors
have
been
very
instrumental
in
helping
getting
the
Riverview
to
see
its
completion
they've
donated
quite
a
bit
of
money.
They've
worked.
They
helped
us
with
getting
dirt
for
this
site,
I
mean
all
in
and
I
just
really
truly.
Thank
the
Polk
County
Board
of
Supervisors
Pam
and
Bill.
Thompson
have
been
keen
on
this
for
probably
the
last
nine
years
so
before
I
before
I
came
around,
but
everybody
knew
that
they
were
involved
with
it
from
the
very
beginning
and
they've
been
instrumental.
F
They
have
worked
tirelessly
and
they've
worked
long
hours,
I've
they're
there
on
the
Friday
nights,
when
we've
cooked,
when
they
cook
hamburgers
and
hot
dogs
to
raise
money.
They
have
have
just
been
great
for
the
entire
neighborhood.
So
it's
a
real
honor
that
were
that
we're
being
able
to
do
this
naming
tonight
and
I
hope.
Everybody
will
support
that
motion
so
that
I
make
the
motion
to
name
the
access
road
at
Riverview,
Park
bill
and
Pam
Thompson
Parkway
and
my
apologies
that
I
didn't
pull
25,
but
it's
already
passed
so
know.
A
A
C
A
All
right,
thank
you
that
completes
the
consent
agenda
and
moves
us
to
the
ordinances
item.
42.
First
consideration:
42
is
amending
sections
50
26
50,
yes,
30,
2.0,
550,
34,
50-35,
relating
to
floodplain
development
regulations.
This
item
was
continued
from
the
may
4th
2020
Council
meeting
and
I'll
open
it
up
and
see.
If
there's
anybody
that
would
like
to
say
anything,
I
see
one
hand
up.
L
And
Thank
You
mr.
mayor
and
members
of
the
City
Council,
my
name
is
Tim
Coonan
I'm
with
the
Davis
brown
law
firm,
representing
the
central
Iowa
Water
trails,
a
project
I
know
you
all
are
very
familiar
with,
as
you
have
been
essential
and
loyal
partners
to
for
for
a
while.
Now
we
would
like
the
opportunity
to
work
further
on
the
language
in
this
proposed
ordinance
might
have
some
as
drafted.
A
A
E
Right
Joe
mr.
mayor,
thank
you.
I
will
I
think
it's
important
that
we
have
all
the
stakeholders
sitting
at
the
table,
making
sure
that
making
sure
that
they
understand
the
ramifications
of
what
we're
doing
here
and
making
sure
that
that's
going
to
be
in
their
budget
as
we
move
forward
to
get
this
done.
So
I
will
move
to
continue
item
42.
A
H
A
C
A
A
I
None
mr.
mayor
I'm,
going
to
move
45
and
I
just
had
a
little
sideline
here
mark
and
Leanne
25
years
ago.
Their
son
Mac
John
dagi
wrestled
with
my
son
Kelly.
So
we
go
back
a
long
long
time
so
glad
to
see
them
night
out,
praying
off
of
six
down
and
grab
out
where
phase
two
is
going
to
start
of
the
sixth
Avenue
corridor,
so
I'm
glad
to
see
they're
staying
right
in
the
neighborhood
and
continuing
to
grow
their
business.
C
A
Right,
let's
move
guide
in
46
item
46
on
the
request
from
Savannah
Homes
Inc
Ted
is
the
officer
to
rezone
33-23-33
35
in
33
41
East,
24th
Street
from
P
to
public
Civic
in
institutional
2n3,
a
neighborhood
to
allow
for
the
development
of
one
house
type,
B
single
household
residential
dwelling.
A
is
the
first
consideration.
The
ordinance
above
B
is
the
final
consideration
of
the
orange
above,
and
the
waiver
is
requested
by
Ted
growth,
the
president
at
Savannah,
Homes
Inc.
It
requires
votes
again.
This
is
a
hearing
item.
C
F
C
A
Right
takes
us
to
item
47,
which
is
unrequested
island
trucking
inc.
Ronald
fatness
is
the
officer
to
rezone
property
at
3220
Dixon
street
from
I
1
I,
believe
industrial
to
I,
to
industrial,
to
allow
for
future
consideration
by
the
Planning
and
Zoning
of
adjustment,
of
a
conditional
use
for
a
fabrication
and
production
intensive
use,
specifically
for
a
12,000
gallon
above-ground
petroleum
tank
for
truck
fueling
to
replace
the
use
of
mobile
tanks.
A
J
A
A
H
A
Right
moved
item
48
on
request
from
Scottish
Rite
Park
Inc
Daniel
J
boar
as
the
officer
to
amend
that
plan.
Dsm
Creek
our
tomorrow
comprehensive
plan,
future
land
use
designation
in
rezone,
2909,
Woodland
Avenue
from
nx3
neighborhood.
Next,
the
rx1
excuse
to
allow
the
applicant
to
request
a
conditional
use
permit
for
a
business
selling,
liquor
wine
and
or
beer
as
a
restaurant
Bistro
within
the
existing
assisted
living
residence
facility.
A
is
the
first
consideration.
The
ordan,
sebab
and
B
is
the
final
consideration.
A
A
A
O
A
Item
49
is
a
request
from
pinnacle
on
floor
LLC
Randy
Walters
as
the
official
regarding
approval
of
the
first
amendment
to
the
village
at
Gray's
light
beauty
conceptual
plan
for
twenty
seven.
Ten
and
twenty
five
hundred
fluor
drive
to
define
a
lot
five
of
the
plan
to
be
developed
with
a
twenty
unit,
multi
household
row
home.
C
E
A
C
E
A
Right
item
51
is
continuing
a
hearing
on
a
request
from
acre
investment
group
LLC
Michael
Donnellan
is
the
officer
to
rezone
901,
southeast
7th,
Street
and
709
714
Vale
Street,
plus
n
3
C
neighborhood,
2
n
x2
neighborhood
mixed
to
allow
for
the
development
to
from
know
how
structures
each
containing
six
household
units
to
June
8th
of
2020
again
here
everyone.
This
is
a
motion
to
continue
the
hearing.
Unless
anybody
wants
anything
about
it
this
evening
and
that
would
be
till
June
8th
anybody.
E
Mr.
mayor's
there
anybody
on
that
wants
to
speak
of
this,
I
I've
had
some
neighbors
call
me
about
this.
I
know
that
I
guess
I
was
a
I,
was
under
a
different
I
didn't
know
they
were
gonna.
Have
six
households
in
two
row
house,
like
three
different
three
different
households
are
gonna,
be
in
one
row
house?
Is
that
how
I'm
reading
this
is
that
the
density
that
we're
looking
for
Scott.
E
C
E
Yeah,
that's
what
it
says:
that's
the
problem
that
the
neighbors
are
having
some
issues
with
they're
all
single-family
homes
down
there
and
the
people
directly
adjacent
to
it
are
very
concerned
that
we're
putting
that
type
of
density
in
there,
so
I
think
that
they
need
to
be
part
of
the
conversation
and
I
need
to
be
brought
up
to
speed
on
on
this
particular
project.
I
know:
Karl
and
I
have
had
some
discussion
and
some
e-mails
back
and
forth,
but
I
guess
I
never
realized.
E
A
N
C
A
C
G
E
A
Let's
move
to
item
53,
it's
on
a
proposed
amendments
to
the
approved
zoning
ordinance
in
Chapter
134
of
the
city
code
relating
to
lodging
short-term
commercial
rental
uses.
This
adam
was
continued
from
February
24
2020
council
meeting
a
is
a
first
consideration.
The
ordinance
above
and
B
is
the
final
consideration.
The
ordinance
above
the
waiver
is
requested
by
Chris
Johansen
Community
Development
Director,
but
it
requires
six
votes
and,
let's
see
any
comments
from
our
council
members
as
we
open
the
hearing,
Josh.
N
If
we
want
to
go
down
to
the
amnesty
path
and
so
I'd
like
to
see
us,
add
language,
well,
one
removed
the
language
about
August,
30th
2020
after
August
30th
2020
in
paragraph
10
and
11,
and
instead
look
at
language
that
would
allow
the
Board
of
Adjustment
and
say
they
may
provide
a
variance
from
the
requirement
of
separation
by
at
least
700
feet.
If
an
applicant
meets
the
following
requirements:
one
files,
an
application
prior
to
August
30th
2020,
which
is
similar
to
what.
N
What
is
there
before
to
demonstrates
the
property
had
previously
been
used
as
a
short-term
rental,
by
providing
proof
of
payment
of
taxes
consistent
with
the
requirements
in
paragraph
7
of
this
section
and
3
has
the
approval
of
50
percent
of
the
property
owners
within
the
700
linear
feet,
and
if,
if
that
language
doesn't
work,
then
I
I'm,
not
in
a
position
to
support
the
the
provision
and
I
just
want
to
see
the
see
after
August
30th
2020
removed.
So
so
that's
that's.
The
first
issue
that
I've
identified
based
on
the
drafting.
N
The
second
piece
is,
we
have
a
couple
places
where
owner-occupant
is
is
referenced,
but
I
think
we've
released
in
the
current
version,
taking
that
definition
out
of
the
out
of
the
red
line
version.
So
the
definition
of
owner-occupied,
struck
and
I
think
we
need
that
definition
I
to
actually
just
go
back
to
the
the
definition
that
that's
already
in
there,
but
I'd
also
be
willing
to
change
owner-occupant
from
245
days
to
185
days,
because
I
think
I.
N
As
long
as
someone
is,
is
meeting
the
residency
requirements
and
is
there
for
at
least
six
months
in
a
day
that
to
me
is
deficient
for
an
owner-occupant
and
then
the
third
issue
that
I've
identified
was
something
that
I
think
the
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission
recommended
and
that
we've
heard
from
neighbors
and
that's
to
change
the
time
period
of
Zoning
Board
of
Adjustment
review
from
ten
years
to
five
years
and
I.
Think
all
those
things
are
things
that
we
discussed
and
and
that
I
would
ultimately
like
to
to
see
in
in
a
version.
O
O
That
the
cast
member
is
proposing,
you
know
we
use
the
term
owner-occupied,
but
don't
have
the
definition
in
there.
Maybe
more
I,
don't
think
that's
I,
don't
think
that's
a
change
that
would
require
starting
over
and
I'm,
not
sure
that
the
changes
that
are
proposed
regarding
the
700
that
the
amnesty
distance
for
those
that
are
the
operating
would
require
it
either.
But
I
definitely
would
want
to
look
at
that.
A
C
P
P
If
there's
concern
that
we're
gonna
continue
to,
you
know
buy
up
properties
over
the
course
the
next
year.
That's
definitely
not
going
to
happen
if
mr.
Mandelbaum
is
looking
to
find
ways
to
limit
the
growth
of
air
B&B.
Now
is
absolutely
the
best
time
to
do
it.
The
property
on
Harwood,
but
in
the
source
of
a
lot
of
consternation,
is
up
for
sale.
They
are
trying
to
get
rid
of
it,
so
bear
in
mind
that
when
mr.
P
Mandelbaum
says
and
hears
from
neighbors
he's
really
speaking
about
a
literal
pocket
of
the
neighborhood
I,
don't
think
any
of
the
other
council
members
in
the
same
way.
So
I
would
really
encourage
us
to
you
know
the
longer
we
kind
of
hold
out
about
this,
the
longer
that
you
know
us
investors
and
motors
kind
of
struggle
with
recovering
from
coronavirus.
So
a
lot
of
people
have
already
dropped
out
a
couple.
P
People
are
still
hanging
on
myself
and
a
few
dozen
others,
but
there's
gonna
come
a
real
bad
time
where,
if
we
don't
get,
you
know
good
answers
from
City
Council.
We
are
gonna
lose
faith.
You
know
me
personally
I'm
already
looking
at
other
cities
and
kind
of
backing
out
which
might
make
some
people
happy,
but
I
will
be
taking
my
money
outside
of
the
city,
which
is
not
good,
considering
how
badly
you
know.
Everyone
needs
investment
now.
So
thank
you
for
listening
to
me,
I.
Think.
P
E
A
F
Do
I
do
have
a
comment
mayor
and
what
I
would
like
to
say
is
you
know:
we've
been
working
on
this
for
literally
more
than
a
year
and
we've
had
workshops,
we've
made
changes,
you
know
we
we
get
to
the
council
table
and
we
think
we've
got
it
right
and
then
we
want
to
do
more
changes
I'm
not
going
to
support
any
additional
changes
to
this
wouldn't
vote
for
tonight,
as
is
but
I'm
not
going
to
vote
to
make
changes.
I
remember
very
specifically,
city
manager.
F
Sanders
said
this
is
the
works
and
project
in
in
process.
If
we
want
to
make
changes,
we
can
always
bring
something
back,
but
these
that
are
trying
to
do
short-term
rentals
that
are
trying
to
be
good
neighbors
in
our
neighborhood
and
I'm,
not
aware
of
any
short-term
rental
person.
That's
not
a
good
neighbor
in
in
my
neighborhoods
anyway,
and
I
don't
hear
from
residents
with
complaints.
I've
heard
absolutely
nothing
so
I
I'm,
not
gonna
I'm,
not
going
to
support
any
motion
to
make
any
changes.
F
Let's
get
this
past
tonight
as
is,
and
if
we
want
to
make
changes,
then
we
can
bring
them
back
and
discuss
it,
but
it's
not
fair
to
the
public
to
keep
keep
bringing
this
on.
You'll,
look
at
it
online
and
then
and
then
we
get
to
vote
and
then
we
want
to
make
changes
again.
That's
simply
not
fair
to
our
citizens.
Q
Hi
good
afternoon,
mr.
mayor
members
of
the
council,
hopefully
you
can
hear
me:
okay,
yep,
yeah
I
just
want
to
raise
one
point
and
I've
sent
a
message
to
Josh
and
I
know.
Carl
Voss
was
part
of
the
conversation
as
well,
and
I
brought
this
up
with
the
recent
Planning
and
Zoning,
and
it
really
has
to
do
with
the
fact
that
we
in
Sherman
Hill
at
least
I've,
always
said
that
if
you're
an
owner-occupied,
short-term
commercial
rental,
we
don't
care
how
many
there
are
in
our
neighborhood.
Q
We
support
that
and,
as
the
the
ordinance
is
currently
drafted,
we're
sort
of
lumping
owner-occupied
short-term
rentals
along
with
everything
you
know
we're
putting
a
700-foot
encryption
on
those
as
well.
So
one
potential
modification
that
I
would
request
of
this.
To
remove
that
700
foot
restriction
from
owner-occupied
Airbnb,
we
don't
care
how
many
of
them
we
have
in
our
neighborhood
I
haven't
heard
any
complaints
from
anyone
about
ona
B's.
Most
of
our
issues
have
been
around
the
ones
that
are
non
order
occupied
and
we
do
support
the
stuff
under
foot
restriction
there.
Q
G
K
Is
so
man
cut
mayor
and
council
if
I
could
quickly
interject,
shoo
and
jump
right
in
very
definition
in
the
code?
Is
it
was
passed
on
1216
of
19
that
says
that
the
occupancy
is
120
days
of
years?
The
owner
is
not
present,
so
we
do
have
a
definition
for
owner-occupied
based
on
number
of
days
already
in
the
ordinance,
but
maybe
that
would
help
Jeff
think
about
the
question.
From
the
legal
perspective.
N
O
O
He
wanted
to
suggest
I,
don't
think
conceptually,
but
I'm
I'm
terribly
worried
about
anything
getting
to
that
point
of
being
a
significant,
significant
exchange,
yet,
but,
depending
on
what
the
language
is,
because
I
understood
John's
to
say
that
he
wanted
to
remove
language
in
paragraph
ten
and
eleven,
so
I've
got
to
be
able
to
see
that
language
to
be
able
to
say
that,
yes,
it's
okay
or
no.
It's
not
well.
G
O
O
O
O
Yeah,
that's
I
mean
if
it
was
you
get
it
for
10
years,
but
and
instead
counsel
wants
to
do
5
years
right
off
the
bat
and
then
and
then,
during
with
the
understanding
that
assuming
everything
goes
okay,
they
can
get
another
five-year
term
yeah.
That's
you
know,
then
then
you're
really
just
I
would
argue
on
counsels
behalf
that
it
becomes
a
question
of
gradient
and
and
so
that
that
makes
makes
me
have
less
concern.
If,
on
the
other
hand,
it
was
you
only
get
5
years,
then
that's
more
of
a
problem.
N
F
Know
it's
a
conditional
use
permit.
This
is
Westergaard
speaking,
give
them
the
ten
years,
because
for
somebody
who's
who
has
to
worry
about
financing
and
insurance,
you
know
to
just
say
five
years:
I'm,
not
sure
that
that
many
banks
are
or
lenders
are
going
to
be
happy
with
that
for
somebody
who's
getting
a
loan
for
an
investment
property,
so
I'm
I'm
going
to
advocate
that
we
leave
it
10
years.
F
If
it's
a
problem
after
one
year,
we
can
hold
the
permit
if
it's
a
problem
after
two
years,
so
I,
don't
I,
don't
see
what
what
the
difference
between
I
don't
know
why
the
urgency
to
change
it
to
five
years,
keep
it
in
ten.
So
it
makes
it
easier
to
do
business
in
our
city
and,
if
there's
a
problem,
it
comes
back
anyway.
E
R
I
also
could
definitely
support
column
number
meadow
bombs,
three
pronged
proposal
tonight
with
the
700
position
and
limiting
it
to
the
existing
rentals,
but
require
the
50
percent
approval,
the
property
owners.
That
would
be
fine,
too
I,
do
want
to
stress
that
a
city
staffer
recently
told
the
plan
of
Zoning
Commission.
That
neighbors,
like
me,
seem
to
think.
Without
the
700
foot
rule
short-term
rental
owners
are
going
to
get
a
free
pass,
not
at
all.
What
I
do
think
is
that
we
were
counting
on
you
to
add
density
protections
for
our
single-family
neighborhoods.
R
Just
as
a
majority
of
you
pledged,
you
would
do
back
at
February's
public
hearing
and,
with
the
exception
of
the
very
welcome
improvement
in
parking
rules
that
we
suggested
at
the
work
session
by
councilman
gray.
This
separation
requirement
is
the
only
new
protection
from
my
neighborhood
that
came
out
of
the
work
session
now.
R
I
want
to
say
that
an
overused
comeback
to
objections
like
ours
has
been
that
this
is
a
living
document
that
can
always
be
amended,
but
you
know
those
amendments
aren't
going
to
apply
to
any
existing
short-term
rentals
they'd
all
be
grandfathered
in
another.
Overused
comeback
is,
if
there's
a
problem
with
a
short-term
rental,
the
Board
of
Adjustment
can
just
pull
the
permit,
but
how
big
a
problem
when
it
has
to
be
before
that
really
happens.
R
In
the
meantime,
neighbors
get
to
become
the
snitches
reporting
every
violation
over
and
over
and
hopes
of
building
a
case
that
might
result
in
pulling
the
permit.
So
I
just
want
to
end
with
a
quote
that
councilmen
Mandelbaum
used
in
February.
That
was,
if
you
want
neighborhoods,
to
be
more
welcoming
the
Airbnb
ease.
You
need
to
give
us
something
to
protect
the
neighborhoods.
We
love
yes,
help
us
protect
the
neighborhoods.
We
love
this
ordinance
states
in
its
first
paragraph
that
it's
supposed
to
address
the
needs
of
the
neighborhoods.
So
let's
put
some
must
behind
that.
R
K
Far,
as
was
the
variance,
but
she
refers
to,
variances
are
difficult
for
the
board
to
give
it
has
to
prove
that
there's
no
other
economic
value
for
that.
For
that
structure,
that
would
be
impossible
to
prove
just
to
give
them
a
variance.
So
it's
inaccurate
to
say
the
board
could
just
give
them
a
variance
of
some
people
like
it.
E
Okay,
mr.
man,
now
I
think
everyone's
spoke
that
I
was
gonna.
Listen
to
speak,
so
I
appreciate
everyone's
comments.
We've
we've
been
down
this
road
for
over
a
year
and
a
half
now
and
we
had
a
February
20th.
We
had
a
workshop.
We
talked
about
what
we
wanted
to
do.
There's
one
legitimate
change
in
there.
That's
probably
not
going
to
muddy
the
waters
too
much
is
the
five-year
with
the
additional
five-year
I
would
agree
to
that.
I
think
that's
a
I!
E
I
I
One
thing
I
would
hate
to
see
happen
is
if
we
let
the
short-term
rentals
come
in,
and
then
we
incentivize
them
either
through
the
neighborhood
finance
corporation
or
invest
DSM,
where
we're
using
taxpayer
dollars
to
help
a
person
build
a
home,
so
they
can
run
a
business
I
just
wanted
to
get
somewhere
in
there.
They
were.
Somebody
can
take
a
look
at
it
and
say
what
if
this
doesn't
make
sense?
Let's
not
do
this.
I
I
F
E
I
F
J
Carly
Hamilton
6,
7,
8
45th
Street
I,
want
to
thank
you,
council
members
in
mayor
mayor
for
taking
the
time
to
thoughtfully
look
at
the
balance
of
regulations,
those
that
favor
short-term
rentals
and
those
that
protect
the
impact
of
these
many
hotels
on
residential
neighborhoods.
Three
items
will
do
the
most
to
help.
J
Those
of
us
who
live
next
to
and
near
Airbnb
ease
for
365
days
a
year,
and
just
because
a
house
is
for
sale
does
not
mean
it
will
not
become
a
short-term
rental,
because
that
is
exactly
how
44:20
hardwood
Drive
became
a
short-term
rental.
It
was
for
sale
first,
one
let
every
neighborhood
it
not
just
Sherman
Hill
be
able
to
decide
if
it
wants
only
owner
occupied
short-term
rentals
in
their
midsts.
Many
people
from
Ingersoll
Park
spoke
at
zoning
enforcement,
sponsored
meetings
at
Planning
and
Zoning
Commission
meetings
and
City
Council
meetings.
J
Ingersoll
Park
has
also
emailed
the
mayor
and
select
council
members,
and
we
did
not
and
still
don't
have
a
working
neighborhood
association,
but
many
of
us
voiced
our
objections
to
the
non-owner
occupied
short-term
rentals.
It
wasn't
just
Sherman
Hills
and
we
would
like
in
consideration
five
years
and
no
more
on
the
lake
of
a
conditional
use.
Permit
is
very
important.
Ten
years
is
not
needed
by
financial
institutions.
If
you
want
to
have
a
short-term
rental
that
in
breakfast
owners
don't
get
that
from
the
city.
I
spoke
to
many
many
financial
institutions.
J
Please
no
amnesty
for
the
700
foot
density.
This
is
one
of
the
few
things
the
City
Council
has
given
neighbors
and
by
negating
the
700
foot
density
for
three
months
to
anyone
who
wants
to
reply
to
being
a
short-term
rental
is
really
a
slap
in
the
face.
I
support
with
with
what
Josh
mandelbaum
has
proposed
this
evening.
So
I'm
asking
you
to
consider
those
three
items
and
I.
Thank
you
very
much.
N
One
of
the
things
that
we
had
not
seen
prior
to
this
meeting
was
the
the
amnesty
language
that
we
talked
about
in
a
work
session
and
the
way
that
language
was
drafted
in
my
opinion,
was
overly
broad
and
not
something
that
I
could
support,
and
we
were
waiting
to
see
that
language
I
tried
to
come
up
with
a
solution
that
I
think
is
consistent
with
the
concept.
So
not
not
a
change,
but
I'm
also
willing
to
wait
to
the
the
second
or
third
reading
of
this.
N
N
That
the
what
maybe
that
was
a
little
interval
but
to
say
to
just
get
this
done
tonight,
because
we've
spent
so
much
time
on
this.
The
whole
point
is
to
get
the
language
right
and
when
you,
when
you
try
and
stifle
the
discussion
on
that,
it
makes
it
harder
to
get
it
right
and
build
consensus
and
I'm
not
comfortable
voting
with
this.
H
M
M
Been
trying
to
speak
for
quite
a
while,
but
I'm
a
disadvantage
because
my
internet
is
down
so
I'm
on
the
phone.
I
am
I,
also
AM
NOT
good
with
this
motion
because
of
the
amnesty
part
to
protect
the
neighbors
I
think
that
was
the
one
thing
we
I
was
looking
for.
So
I,
don't
like
the
dates
in
having
the
date
and
giving
the
amnesty
so
for
that
part
of
it.
If
we
can't
change
that
minimum
part
of
it,
then
I
can't
support
it.
M
I
think
some
of
the
things
I
appreciate
that
we've
been
working
on
this,
but
once
you
pass
something
it's
much
more
difficult
to
modify
it
and
we
have
a
chance
to
get
it
right
and,
quite
honestly,
everybody's
still
operating
without
you
know
these
regulations
really
on
them
too
much.
So
as
far
as
those
are
the
one
criteria
that
I'm
pretty
strong
on
that
I
can't
support
it.
If
it's
not
going
to
change.
M
Right
I
believe
everybody's
had
plenty
of
time
to
operate
and
had
opportunity
that
everybody
needs
to
go
to
the
correct.
The
process
is
laid
out.
They
go
through
the
board
of
adjustments
and
just
because
you've
been
one
doesn't
mean
you
have
like
that,
one
somebody
else
or
whatever
that
makes
sense.
Okay,.
K
K
Council
I
understand
that
concerns
about
the
amnesty,
but
I
also
understand
the
concerns
from
staff,
and
probably
the
short-term
rental
is.
How
do
we
manage?
Who
gets
the
700-foot
benefit
and
who
doesn't,
if
they're
across
the
street
from
each
other?
Is
it
just
gonna,
be
a
race
to
whoever
gets
into
the
door
fastest,
but
they
get
the
they
get
first
and
then
the
second
one
doesn't
because
they're
not
gonna
meet
the
variance
test.
N
K
And
there
are
some
that
have
taken
advantage
of
that
and
are
sitting
and
waiting,
so
they
they
will
get
the
benefit.
If
you
don't
do
the
be
allowance
that
others
who
came
in
holding
back
to
wait
for
the
ordinance
to
be
totally
done,
they've
held
back
and
now
you're
putting
them
in
a
disadvantage.
Yeah.
G
G
N
E
E
I've
got
the
motion
out
there,
let's
just
vote,
and
then
you
guys
can
make
your
motion
and
it
we're.
Never.
The
seven
of
us
is
never
going
to
agree
with
with
this
ever
and
we've
we've
wasted
ninety
months
and
staffs.
It's
never
going
to
happen.
So
sometimes
it's
going
to
be
a
4-3
vote
or
a
3/4
vote.
It's
okay,
I
mean
it's
nothing
personal,
but
just
to
say
that
I'm
trying
to
stifle
discussion
in
an
artful
is,
is
rudely
mistaken
and
I.
Do
you
take
offense
to
it.
G
P
I
would
like
to
say
hi.
Thank
you
very
much
mayor
real,
quick,
I'm,
totally
I.
Think
me,
and
this
are
the
short-term
rental
owners-
are
totally
fine,
bringing
it
down
to
five
years
totally
reasonable.
I
think
we
want
to
get
this
done
as
you
know,
and
get
ourselves
set
up
as
quickly
as
possible.
I
think
the
amnesty
is
important.
I
think
that
you
know.
Obviously,
you
know
I
do
believe
that
you
know
that
the
stifling
discussion
happens
whenever
we
come
to
the
table.
P
Every
meeting
every
workshop
I've
heard
this
decision,
though
everywhere
and
I,
represent
far
more
people
than
the
people
who
are
detracting
from
this
and
I
do
have
their
signatures
and
I.
Think
they'd
also
be
very
disappointed.
Let's
just
recall
that
meeting
that
I
brought
I
brought
45
people
in
there.
They
couldn't
even
all
speak.
At
least
people
from
all
around
the
city
and
their
lives
are
gonna,
be
affected
by
this
shut
things
down.
I.
P
Think
a
good
compromise
is
making
the
amnesty
much
shorter,
making
the
amnesty
much
much
shorter,
your
if
we
vote
on
it
tonight
we
make
the
amnesty
June
June
15,
because
that
means
that
the
people
who
are
on
the
ball
get
in,
and
that
means
that
the
people
are
off
the
ball.
Yeah
they're
gonna
get
screwed,
but
that
is
what
some
of
these
people
want:
some
people
in
City
Council
and
some
people
who
are
citizens.
They
want
to
see
this
platform
ruined.
So
that's
gonna
ruin
some
of
them.
P
So
my
proposal-
I,
don't
know
if
you
like
it,
but
we
do
five
years
totally
fine,
and
then
you
simply
reduce
the
amnesty
to
a
much
shorter
period
so
that
people
can't
sneak
through
said
the
people
who
are
the
good
neighbors,
the
ones
in
communication
with
me
and
the
other
leaders.
They
know.
What's
up
people
who
are
operating
off
the
radar,
they
will
get
screwed.
Okay,
that's
all
I
have
to
say
have
a
great
day.
F
I,
just
I
appreciate
what
sue
and
Donovan
said
and
I
really
urge
us
to
follow
what
Sue
Ann
is
sad.
Sue
Ann
has
worked
very
hard
on
this.
We've
got
an
amnesty
date
in
there.
Let's
leave
it
alone.
I
just
encouraged
I
encourage
my
council
members
to
support
this.
Well.
Do
the
one
change
that
that
has
been
made
in
the
motion,
but
let's
just
leave
the
amnesty
alone.
It's
it's.
We
have
to
make
it
fair
for
all
of
our
residents,
and
this
is
the
best
way
to
make
that
happen.
A
N
N
What
I'm
trying
to
say
and
what
the
proposal
was
designed
to
do
was
to
address
the
concerns
that
Sue
Ann
raised
about
the
zoning
or
about
the
amnesty
without
completely
eliminating
it,
and-
and
that
is
if
you
get
your
application
in,
you
demonstrate
that
you
had
actually
been
a
short-term
rental
by
by
showing
that
you
had
paid
taxes
using
the
language
that
is
in
paragraph
seven.
I
just
wanted
to
reference,
because
we
require
that
demonstration
under
under
our
our
code.
Already
we're
going
to
require
that
demonstration.
N
I
was
just
going
to
require
that
as
a
condition
of
being
granted
the
amnesty
and
then
there
is
approval
of
the
property
owners
nearby.
So
that's
how
you
choose!
You
don't
avoid
if,
if
folks
are
supportive
of
having
multiple
short-term
rentals,
it
avoids
this
problem
altogether
of
having
to
choose
who
goes
first
and
it
provides
the
neighborhood
that
protection
in
the
amnesty
process.
So
I
was
trying
to
craft
something
that
that
that
was
something
that
everyone
could
live
with.
M
Doesn't
show
if
I
did
because
I
have
it
I
tried
to
do
that.
Start9
needs
to
be
some
way
to
protect
that
I
don't
want
to
short
buy
it.
Some
people
want
to
have
two
words
written
in
their
neighborhood.
That's
great
I,
just
think
having
that
date
or
the
amnesty
part
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
few
more
conditions,
I
think
there's
also,
if
they're
in
good
standing.
If
it's
not
about
first-come
first-serve,
they
thought
that
have
50%.
M
We
know
that
we
just
want
to
make
sure,
and
my
concern
is
when
we
pass
something
that
we
passed,
something
that
is
as
good
as
we
can
get
for
as
many
of
the
people
we're
not
going
to
play
all
ends.
I
get
that.
But
I
do
know
that,
once
you
pass
something
it's
much
more
difficult
to
go
back
and
probably
amend
it
than
it
is
just
to
get
try
to
get
it
as
right
and
take
the
time
now.
E
Mayor
as
far
as
the
embassy
goes,
why
don't
we
just
want
to
change
the
date
until
the
final
reading
would
be
completed,
which
is
two
more
council
meetings,
so
if
we
made
it
July
first
I
would
think
that
that's
a
compromise
instead
of
August,
whatever
Sue
Anne,
had
it
down
August
20th
August
30th.
What
why
don't?
We
just
make
it
July
1st,
that's
when
if
we
would
vote
the
first
grading
and
the
second
the
third
reading
over
the
next
two
council
meetings,
I
mean
it
would,
it
would
go
into
effect.
E
Within
the
two
five-year
you
get
it
for
five
years,
then
you
have
to
go
back
and
ask
for
another
five
years
everything
else
the
staff
is
done.
We've
given
direction
to
do
that
I
mean
not.
A
lot
of
us
are
having
complaints
from
our
neighbors.
I
know
that
I
haven't
had
any
complaints
from
any
of
my
neighbors
and
I
have
the
biggest
square
mile
Ward
that
there
is
so
I
mean
I,
understand,
there's
folks
that
have
feel
like
they
have
problems
with
them.
Maybe
they
do.
Maybe
they
don't.
A
E
Everything
that's
in
there
for
staff
the
700
feet.
That's
all
it's
all
in
there.
The
only
thing
we're
changing
is
the
date
to
July
1st
and
instead
of
10
years
it
is
five
years.
So
it's
everything
that
we
directed
staff
to
do
the
last
time
we
had
a
discussion
about
it.
After
our
February
20th,
we
add
the
long
workshop.
We
decided
what
we
wanted
to
do
and
now
we're
gonna
come
back
and
we're
gonna
tweak
it
a
little
bit
and
we're
gonna
do
the
first
reading
and.
G
N
C
I
K
E
Correct
that
needs
to
be
in
there
that's
what
we
talked
about.
We
agreed
to
that.
That
definitely
needs
to
be
part
of
part
of
it.
If
I
need
to
make
that
part
of
the
motion,
I
will
make
that
part
of
them,
because
we
all
agree
that
in
Sherman
Hills
it
had
to
be
owner-occupied
and
we
were
going
to
meet
that
criteria.
K
E
E
N
N
E
O
Yes,
your
honor
just
to
make
sure
that
I've
got
this
correct.
My
understanding
of
councilmember
Gavin's
motion
would
be
to
approve
53
and
53
a
with
the
amendments
of
ten
years
to
five
years,
but
and
opportunity
to
go
back
to
the
board
for
an
additional
five
years.
At
the
conclusion
of
the
five
year
period,
180
days
of
owner
occupation
of
the
of
the
home,
we
switch
that
is
six
months
to
six
months,
okay,
six
months
and
then
changing
it.
Sherbet
heels
correct
right.
A
C
A
All
right,
let's
move
on
to
item
54
item
54,
is
on
East
29th,
Street
rehabilitation
from
Easton
Boulevard
to
Euclid
Avenue,
a
resolution
approving
the
plan,
specifications,
form
of
contract
documents,
engineer's
estimate,
receive
and
file
the
bids
and
designating
the
lowest
responsible
bidder
is
Grimes
asphalt
and
paving
corporation
Timothy
Mellon
code
President,
four
hundred
and
ninety
six
thousand
seven
hundred
and
twenty
one
dollars
and
63
cents.
Council
communication
number
20,
218
a
is
approving
the
contract
in
the
bond
and
permission
to
sublet.
H
A
Right
item
fits
five
in
the
2020
Municipal
Building,
rear
off
a
resolution
approving
the
plan,
specifications,
form
of
untracked
documents,
engineer's
estimate
and
then
receiving
the
file.
The
bids
and
designate
the
lowest
responsible
bidder
as
central
states,
roofing
company
mark
in
chanson
president,
two
hundred
and
twenty
two
thousand
two
hundred
dollars
council
communication,
number
20
219
a
is
approving
the
contract
and
bond
and
permission
to
sublet
go
ahead
and
open
the
hearing
on
this
item.
Anybody
have
any
comments
on
this.
The
2020
Municipal
Building
reroofing
I.
E
A
Item
56
is
on
River
Bend
and
King
Irving
sewer
separation,
phase,
3a
resolution
grooving
the
plans,
specifications,
form
of
contract
documents,
engineer's
estimate,
receive
and
file
the
bids
and
designating
the
lowest
responsible
bidder
is
Ronis
Corp
Warren
K
Rogan
is
president
1
million
one
hundred
and
fifty
four
thousand
five
hundred
and
fifty
nine
dollars.
Council
communication
number
20,
224
a
is
approving
the
contract
and
the
bond
and
permission
to
sublet.
Let's
open
the
hearing
on
this
item
counsel
any
comments
on
this
Riverbend
King
herbing
sore
separation.
I
A
C
E
A
Right
item
43
has
been
moved
any
discussion
by
anyone.
I
would
just
make
one
comment
that
you
know
there
are
continuing
odor
problems
on
occasion
around
the
city
and
I.
Think
citizens
need
to
know
to
whom
they
need
to
turn
to
make
those
complaints
and
enquiries
and
try
to
figure
out
how
it
is
that
we
get
resolution.