You may have missed it, because it was little more than a sentence in Tuesday’s paper, but on Monday, the City Council will reconsider its decision not to build a new street near a proposed Hy-Vee grocery store at 50th and O streets.

At the very end of the more than five-hour meeting Monday night, the council quietly voted 6-0 (Patte Newman was absent) to reconsider its Jan. 22 decision.

The Hy-Vee is part of the city-guided revitalization of the area around 48th and O, but its future is in limbo because the city has been unable to hold up its end of the deal.

As part of the “redevelopment agreement,” the city promised to extend 50th Street from O to R streets. After nearby property owners declined to sign onto a deal where they largely would pay for the street, the council decided not to pay for it either.

Initially, the city planned to only kick in about $433,000 of the projected $1.66 million cost of the new street, ornamental lighting, sidewalks and trees. The rest they planned to charge to nearby property owners through a special assessment district. But those property owners refused to sign on, saying the road largely would benefit Hy-Vee.

Hy-Vee would have had to help pay for the road, too, but possibly could tap into tax-increment financing money, if enough is generated.

So the city went back to the drawing board, narrowing the street and reducing its cost to just more than $1 million and proposing that the city use leftover state money for the adjacent O Street widening project.

The council didn’t go for it. During a debate a few weeks ago, an attorney representing two property owners complained that the cost of the street was 10 times typical paving costs, alleging the city lumped in other costs.

When Councilman Ken Svoboda seized on that, asking whether the property owners would change their minds if the costs were more typical, attorney Bill Blake indicated that was possible.

That’s why Svoboda made the motion Monday to reconsider the earlier decision. He said talks with landowners are under way, and a resolution is possible.

Hy-Vee had been scheduled to buy the land Monday from owner Abram LLC after a previous Dec. 14 closing date was pushed back because of the 50th Street issue.

Hy-Vee spokeswoman Chris Friesleben said the company did not close on the property Monday but has again extended its option to buy it.

“We are still interested in purchasing the property, and we’re hoping that we can resolve this street issue with the city so that we can proceed with our project,” she said.

Meanwhile, the nearby Skate Zone is for sale, and a sign on the Blockbuster says it’s moving.

Here’s to global warming

It looked like a belated Christmas present, but it actually was more related to New Year’s.

At the end of a recent informal council meeting with department heads, Councilwoman Robin Eschliman presented Public Works Director Karl Fredrickson — who had been under fire for the city’s lackadaisical snow removal efforts — with a brightly wrapped gift and said: “There is a light at the end of the snow removal tunnel.”

Inside was a DVD about global warming.

Ready to retire?

Republicans on the City Council have a lot of questions about an early retirement incentive program the city is considering offering veteran workers.

While Democrats often get accused of only wanting to add government, this time, the Dems on the council are the ones prodding the Republicans to try out the pilot program in the hope that longtime employees will retire, cutting the city’s burgeoning personnel costs.

But the Republicans want some questions answered first. So the council delayed action Monday for a week.

Here’s how it would work. Employees would be offered:

* A $15,000 contribution to their post-employment health plan (a tax-free investment account they can use for health care costs after they retire).

* An additional 15 percent sick leave payout over and above the employee’s normal payout.

To be eligible, employees would have to be older than 62 or age 55 with at least 20 years of city service. They would have to apply between Feb. 1 and April 30 and retire between Sept. 1 and Nov. 30.

The incentive money would have to be found within department personnel budgets.

The idea is to entice longtime, more expensive employees to retire, and then leave their position unfilled, delay filling the position or restructure the department. All of those options bring budget savings.

Currently, 244 employees would be eligible to retire early (police and fire employees don’t qualify because they have their own retirement program).

City-county Personnel Director Don Taute estimates that about 134 of those city employees have enough accrued sick leave to consider retiring early. Their average pay is $29.10 an hour, and they have banked an average of 1,850 hours of sick leave.

If a quarter of them retired, it would cost the city about $737,000, Taute said.

In 2002, the city offered early retirement incentives to a group of mostly blue-collar employees, as part of their labor agreement. Thirteen employees signed up, and it cost the city about $180,000 over five years, but saved the city an estimated half a million dollars.

Former Personnel Director Georgia Glass told the council Monday that every one of those 13 employees thanked her for offering the incentives because they had been thinking about retiring but didn’t know how they would pay for their health insurance.

It’s a lot easier than laying off city employees, she added.

But Councilman Jon Camp wanted more information about the 244 employees who would be eligible — such as how many are funded by the general fund and how many aren’t, because the city wouldn’t save as much money if the positions are financed by fees.

The council is expected to take up the issue again Monday.

Quote of the week

“Was that a motion made by Joan?” — Councilman Dan Marvin, after City Clerk Joan Ross politely suggested Councilman Jonathan Cook amend his motion. Cook took her advice.

Reach Deena Winter at 473-2642 or dwinter@journalstar.com.