Minutes - Council - 01/27/2026 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

calculation, using the example of a property having a horse, chickens, and multiple beehives concurrently. City Planner Martin stated that under the current and proposed code structure, beehives are regulated separately from animal units. He explained that the code addresses dogs, cats, bees, and other animals in distinct sections, meaning bees may be kept in addition to the allowable animal units calculated under the animal unit table, consistent with how the code currently operates. Motion by Councilmember Riley, seconded by Councilmember Buscher, to introduce Ordinance #26-02, Repealing and Replacing Chapter 10 of the City Code, Animal Regulations, with the added clarification to the Animal Unit table specifying how animal units translate to the number of animals allowed per acre, as presented graphically. A roll call vote was performed: Councilmember Buscher aye Councilmember Riley aye Councilmember Stewart aye Councilmember Olson aye Councilmember Specht aye Councilmember Peters aye Mayor Heineman aye Motion carried. 7.02: Introduce Ordinance #26-01, Amending Section 30-5, Nuisances Police Chief Bluml presented a proposed amendment to the City’s nuisance code, specifically the noise ordinance, in response to resident complaints about excessive noise from engine retarding brakes, commonly known as “Jake brakes”, along St. Francis Boulevard / Highway 47. He explained that in 2025, both the Police Department and a City Councilmember received complaints about semi-truck engine brake noise in the area south of Sunwood Drive, where southbound traffic descends a grade, and the speed limit drops from 55 mph to 45 mph. Extra patrols were conducted, but no violations were observed at that time, in part because enforcement vehicles were highly visible to approaching traffic. Upon reviewing state statute and existing city ordinance, staff determined that while vehicle noise is already regulated, additional clarity would be helpful, particularly to support the installation of signage alerting drivers to the restriction. After consultation with the City Attorney, staff recommended adding one clarifying sentence to the ordinance to ensure enforceability before installing signage. Police Chief Bluml shared historical data indicating that from 2020 to 2025, the city received over 1,000 noise complaints, approximately 200 involving vehicles, 204 related to engine noise, and four specifically involving semi-truck engine braking. While not widespread citywide, the issue significantly affects residents in the identified corridor. The proposed ordinance language would state that the intentional use of engine retarding brakes that cause abnormal or excessive noise is prohibited on public roadways within the city, except in emergencies. The Chief noted that staff City Council /January 27, 2026 Page 7 of 10