Frost Footings Take Forefront of Council Discussion
Oskaloosa City Hall
BY HAILEY BROWN
Oskaloosa, Iowa – The Oskaloosa City Council meeting was full of discussion on Tuesday night as members considered an ordinance for the second time that would amend the Oskaloosa Municipal Code regarding frost footings.
According to the full video of the meeting provided by the Communication Research Institute of William Penn University, the conversation brought into question whether or not the council was tailoring rules to one specific individual in the community. Council member Steve Burnett said he was bothered by the ethics of the situation and so he called up the Iowa League of Cities to weigh in, to which he said they did not agree with the discussion as it was presented to them.
“To say, ‘lets make this to where it fits one individual’ is absurd,” he said.
Council member Tom Walling said the issue was not about accommodating a specific individual but was geared towards cutting down on over-regulation. Council member Doug Yates also weighed in, asserting that he was comfortable with having a code that does give some flexibility where it is needed.
Oskaloosa resident Jason Van Zetten addressed the council during the public commentary portion of the meeting, stating that the proposed motion did not reflect the true intention of the rule and due to this, he drafted up his own “Option B” to send to council members via e-mail for consideration.
The original reading of the ordinance passed by a vote of 6-1 at the January 3 meeting, and includes the following language:
Frost footing requirements for accessory structures may be waived by the Building Official, if plans and specifications prepared and designed by an engineer or architect licensed by the state to practice as such are submitted. Such plans and specifications shall sufficiently demonstrate the ability of the proposed structure to address frost heaving for the intended use of the structure and shall conform to the provisions of this chapter and of all applicable laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and orders.
The main point of difference between proposed “Option B” and the original wording was that the word “may” turned to “shall,” removing discretion of building officials. City Attorney David Dixon cautioned that these seemingly minor word changes had bigger implications, recommending that if the council did wish to entertain Van Zetten’s option that the process start from the beginning. During the meeting, Van Zetten and Burnett shared a brief exchange as Van Zetten felt he was entitled to answer some of Burnett’s assertions. Van Zetten rejected the notion that he was an individual being catered to.
“I have the same access as anybody else out there so to say I’m special, Mr. Burnett, is just absolutely wrong,” Van Zetten stated.
Burnett was quick to reply, “I would agree that you’re not special and I’m not disagreeing that everybody has the same access… My personal opinion is that people considered this because they know who you are.”
‘Option B’ was not on the agenda and so it was not up for consideration. Burnett and council member Aaron Versteeg both voted down the ordinance altogether, but it ultimately passed with a vote of 5-2. The item will likely appear on the agenda again at a future council meeting.
