My name is Tom Deimerly. My wife Libby Brown and I own Deim Holdings LLC. I want to share some context around our involvement with the city, our vacant corner lot, and what happened at the April 27 council meeting.

We are not in this to profit. We have brought our vision to the city for years — slice off a portion of this corner for permanent community greenspace, leave the rest to be privately developed along with the building. To no avail. What we will not do is see this lot utilized in a manner inconsistent with that vision during the time that we control it.

I have been undergoing cancer treatment, which stopped in December. As I have come out of that fog and started paying closer attention to what has been happening around our property, my frustration has grown with every new detail I uncover. It is infuriating. There are gaps in my awareness during that period that I am still working to fill in. I am much closer to full capacity. And I’m paying attention now.

The Waterline Stub

We have asked the city to remove an unwanted waterline stub from our lot — turning down a tax-funded “improvement.” The city claims this waterline stub serves buildings without sprinkler protection. Ask some of the other downtown property owners who received one whether they wanted it? We never wanted it then, we don’t want it now, and we are still waiting on its removal. They’ve called it a hydrant. They’ve called it a clean out. If you ask me, it’s a glorified canine rest area — the downtown dogs will be thrilled.

This stub is not just an eyesore in the middle of the lot. It is a foot in the door. Leave it in place and you make it easier for some future owner or elected official to pull this lot away from the public trust entirely. Removing it works against our own financial interest. But we’re doing it anyway — if the city will work with us to have it removed. Otherwise it becomes another issue for lawyers. We really don’t want to pay lawyers. And neither should the taxpayer. We hope that one will work itself out before construction gets too far along for a cost effective fix.

The Sidewalk

What began as a simple outreach to Carol Webb about sidewalk construction status and alley work became something far more complicated. We feel we made a very reasonable approach to the city.

What we requested grew over time, as additional area spending details and city responses to our concerns emerged — and it became increasingly apparent that there was not a discussion happening, but more of a “shut up and accept it” approach.

Here is what Deim Holdings proposed — and what was voted down by four council members with the mayor’s support:

Community greenspace and art space on a prime corner, in exchange for an estimated $8,000 sidewalk improvement and a $20,000 seed grant to the Arts and Cultural Alliance. $28,000 total. The sidewalk cost is $8,000 specifically because the Main Street project is already replacing half of it. The vision — hands-on art learning for kids — but that is just our vision. We will leave it to the community, not us.

Also part of that proposal — a key to the alley the city wants to close for an archway. But we will get to that. In exchange, we asked for one seat on the planning committee for a building representative of our choosing, and a commitment to help with future fundraising. We are not looking for a handout. To characterize it otherwise is frankly in bad taste.

That same council meeting, I watched $250,000 in road bond funds get reallocated toward a trail. Then I was questioned about a $28,000 community investment.

The city has indicated the sidewalk will be addressed in Phase 8 — along with the remainder of State Street and the connecting streets to Main. We asked for a timeline. None was provided. Phase 8 is not in the city’s five-year capital improvement plan. Taxpayers are spending tens of millions to rebuild downtown and doing it halfway. No timeline. No funding commitment. No plan.

That same night, the council reiterated support for the trail and the archway. This is part of a nearly $8 million street improvement project — and not a single dollar of that $500,000 goes toward an actual street or a needed sidewalk. Yet a $28,000 investment in permanent community greenspace was voted down.

That said, the sidewalk will work itself out if and when construction is required and we are assessed. Now for the important part — and the one that should concern every taxpayer in this community.

The Alley and the Archway

The city intends to spend $250,000 on a decorative archway that will close a downtown alley — the alley that provides delivery access to our property. Their offer of “reasonable accommodation” amounts to moving traffic barriers 2.5 feet. We are being forced to consider a lawsuit simply to retain a key to our own alley, so that this archway can sit directly adjacent to city-owned Parking Lot N — unimproved, heavily used, and touching the Main Street improvement project itself. That is the precedent. That is the current reality.

As I have filled in the gaps from a difficult period, the picture that has emerged has only added to my frustration.

Some council members have said they voted no because I am difficult to deal with. I won’t argue that. But the taxpayers of this community deserve better than decisions made based on whether or not they like the person asking the question. Don’t worry, it’s mutual. I’m not expecting a Christmas card and I’m sure they don’t expect one from me.

It Is Not Too Late (I Hope?)

If nothing else, call them and tell them to give us a key so we don’t waste our money and yours as the taxpayer, protecting something that has been in place for 120 years. Or tell them to stop the archway and leave the alley open. Even if some archway materials have already been ordered, stopping now could still save tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars — money that could go toward parking lots, amenities, and dare I say a needed sidewalk and public art. Leaving funds available for what will be a daunting project in the hospital revitalization.

What You Can Do

If you feel that the archway or associated lawsuits are not in the taxpayer’s interest, please contact your council member. The following contact information is pulled directly from the city’s website at marshalltown-ia.gov under Mayor & City Council:

Mayor Mike Ladehoff — mayor@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-750-9863

Ward 1 — Marco A. Yepez-Gomez — myepez-gomez@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-750-4640

Ward 2 — Mark Mitchell — mmitchell@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-485-5515

Ward 3 — Greg Nichols — gnichols@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-328-4463

Ward 4 — Melisa Fonseca — mfonseca@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-351-8428

At-Large — Jeff Schneider — jschneider@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-750-2702

At-Large — Sue Cahill — scahill@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-485-0608

At-Large — Gary Thompson — gthompson@marshalltown-ia.gov — 641-691-4088

To be fair to everyone, here is my cell number: 641-352-0047. Please feel free to contact me, although you may not receive an elected official response.

——-

Tom Deimerly of Marshalltown is the co-owner of Deim Holdings LLC.