Indianola council approves police tentative agreement, advances sewer rate increase and rezoning; directs staff on traffic study

The Indianola City Council on March 24 approved a tentative agreement with the city’s police bargaining unit, approved a sewer-rate increase option for first consideration, and granted first consideration to a rezoning for Pickard Estates, while also holding a public hearing on the city’s proposed maximum property-tax levies and directing staff to return with formal language on a developer-requested traffic study.

The agreement with the police bargaining unit was adopted by voice roll call after council debate about an annual mental-health check provision included in the tentative agreement. Courtney Sullivan, the city’s human resources director, told the council the contract language requires annual mental-health checks to be paid by the employer and scheduled during work hours, but that the agreement does not specifically require the checks to be in-person. Sullivan said, “If council doesn’t vote yes to the TA this evening, we will end in arbitration over a one-year agreement.”

The council approved the agreement and instructed staff and legal to work with police leadership and the union on a memorandum of understanding (MOU) to clarify how the annual mental-health checks will be implemented after the contract takes effect on July 1, 2025. The council’s recorded action was “motion carries” after roll call (ayes recorded on the record). The tentative agreement will take effect July 1 unless further action changes it.

On sewer rates, the council voted to advance “option 2” for first consideration, which staff presented as a dollar increase to both the base sewer rate and usage charges—about a 6 percent increase on an average residential bill. Jared (utilities staff) explained the higher option “puts us a little bit better suited, going forward” given the new wastewater-treatment facility’s operating costs and the potential for state rate caps. Jared noted the difference in household cost is modest in dollar terms, saying the 6 percent option would add about $48 per year to a typical house’s bill compared with roughly $22 per year under the 3 percent option. The roll call on that ordinance showed the motion passed 4 to 1.

Planning staff presented a rezoning and comprehensive-plan amendment application from I T O M Investment Group LLC for a roughly 18.5-acre site south of Highway 92 and east of South 15th Street called Pickard Estates. Planner Bill (staff) said the concept plan identifies about 30–35 single-family lots and 22 townhome-style lots and would connect to the existing Pickard Commerce Park street network. The council gave first consideration to the ordinance rezoning the property from agricultural/open space to attached residential; the first reading passed on voice roll call.

During the required public hearing on the city’s proposed maximum property-tax levies for fiscal 2025–26, resident Mike May of 1216 E. Franklin spoke in favor of property taxes as local “dues” to maintain services. May said, “My wife and I pay $4,338 a year for property taxes on East Franklin. We regard it as money well spent.” The hearing remained open for the required period and the council noted the levy will be set at its April 21 meeting, when the council adopts final levy and budget figures.

Councilmembers also discussed a developer request connected to the Kentucky Ridge/adjacent development about paying for a traffic study and potential signal at the Kentucky/Highway 65 intersection. A developer representative described a roughly $19,000 study request and said a major prospective grocer had asked for the intersection to be signalized. Staff and counsel described the mechanics that would be required if the council chooses to reimburse a developer (TIF area changes or a development-agreement amendment), and the council directed staff and legal to prepare formal amendment language and background for a future council meeting. No final vote on reimbursement or signal installation was taken; councilmembers asked for a formal agenda item and documentation at the next meeting so the full council can vote.

A consent agenda resolution declaring the city’s support for preserving the federal tax exemption on municipal bonds—intended to protect local bonding capacity—was approved earlier in the meeting by roll call.

What the council decided and next steps: the police tentative agreement was approved and staff were directed to negotiate an MOU clarifying the annual mental-health-check implementation; the sewer-rate ordinance advanced with a 6 percent-style option for further consideration; Pickard Estates rezoning passed first consideration and will return for subsequent readings; and staff were asked to return with formal language on the Kentucky Ridge traffic study and any TIF or development-agreement implications before any reimbursement or signal installation decision.

Council members thanked department heads and staff for detailed budget work; the city’s final levy and budget will be set at the April 21 meeting. The council also noted the city manager recruitment process is underway with candidate interviews scheduled in late March and early April.

Votes at a glance - Police tentative agreement (TA): approved (roll call; motion carries). Council directed staff and legal to negotiate a memorandum of understanding to clarify the employer‑paid annual mental-health checks. (Proposed effective date July 1, 2025.) - Sewer service charges ordinance (first consideration, option 2): advanced; motion passed 4–1 (first consideration to amend Chapter 99 sewer charges to implement the dollar increases described by staff). - Pickard Estates rezoning and comprehensive-plan amendment (first consideration): passed first consideration on roll call to rezone the subject property to R-2/attached residential; will return for subsequent readings. - Resolution supporting preservation of federal tax exemption on municipal bonds (consent agenda): approved by roll call.

(Details on vote tallies and roll-call names are recorded in the official minutes and in the meeting transcript.)