Fire Department leaders repeatedly raised concerns about leaks, drainage, roofing and unfinished work from October 2025 through August 2026. By August, a council member had personally inspected the building and confirmed extensive problems, while City Administrator Turri Colglazier acknowledged the completion documentation had been approved to meet grant requirements.
Completion Approved While Problems Remained
The Missouri Valley City Council formally approved the Statement of Completion and Owner’s Acceptance of Work for the Fire Station Addition at its July 7, 2026 meeting, even as concerns about whether the project was actually complete were raised during discussion of the motion.
According to the July 7 City Council meeting minutes, Council Member Struble made the motion to approve the Statement of Completion and Owner’s Acceptance of Work, and Council Member Tuttle seconded it.
Before the vote, council members requested a walk-through of the completed project and raised concerns about the completion of the work. The minutes state that those concerns would be addressed at the next Council meeting after additional research.
The Council was also advised that the addition carried a one-year warranty beginning on the date of substantial completion, January 9, 2026.
The motion passed 4-1:
- Aaron Tuttle — Yes
- Keizer — Yes
- Struble — Yes
- Meadows — Yes
- Gilpin — No
The July 7 minutes are significant because they show that questions about the condition and completion of the fire station addition were part of the Council’s discussion before it voted to formally accept the work.
Those concerns did not disappear after the vote. By the August 4 City Council meeting, discussion included unresolved issues involving drainage, standing water, leaks, roofing, weather stripping, water intrusion, debris, loose screws and metal, electrical work, insulation, hardware, flashing and caulking.
City Administrator Turri Colglazier also discussed completion documentation in relation to grant requirements. The combination of the July 7 minutes and the issues discussed in August raises a central question: what standard was used to determine that the project was complete and ready for formal acceptance while concerns about the work remained unresolved?
Problems with Missouri Valley’s new fire station have been appearing before the City Council for nearly a year.
From problems with the slope leading into the fire bays in October 2025 to leaks, standing water, roof concerns, weather stripping and unfinished work continuing into August 2026, Fire Department leadership repeatedly brought concerns about the new addition to city officials.
During that same period, the project moved forward.
The City Council authorized the City Administrator to sign a Certificate of Substantial Completion. The building received occupancy approval. The Fire Department began moving equipment and vehicles into the new facility.
But the construction concerns did not stop.
Missouri Valley Fire Department Lieutenant Brandon Fender says he raised ongoing problems with the City Council, Mayor and City Administrator on three separate occasions and provided photographs documenting what he was seeing.
Fire Chief Angel Smiley also brought problems before the council, including a leak between the old fire station and the new addition.
When the issues continued without resolution, Fender compiled photographs and a written list of needed repairs and emailed them to the City Council, Mayor and City Administrator.
According to Fender, he received no response to that email.
By August 4, Council Member Christopher Gilpin had also personally inspected the station with Fender and publicly confirmed that numerous problems remained.
A Project With a Controversial History
The construction problems are only the latest chapter in a fire station project that was controversial before construction began.
Missouri Valley voters twice rejected bond proposals to fund a new fire station. The city later moved forward with approximately $1.9 million in financing without a third public vote after declaring an emergency related to fire department facilities.
The emergency followed the purchase of an emergency vehicle that could not fit inside the existing fire station. That circumstance ultimately allowed the city to pursue the financing needed for the addition through a process that did not require another bond referendum.
The project also moved forward despite previous recommendations concerning how the fire station should be expanded and constructed, issues Missouri Valley Voices has covered separately.
That history matters now because residents who twice voted against financing the project ultimately became responsible for an approximately $1.9 million public investment. Nearly a year of recurring construction concerns raises an additional question: Did the city receive the building taxpayers ultimately paid for?
Read the full history of the fire station project →
Problems Were Being Discussed in October 2025
Construction concerns were appearing before the City Council by at least October 7, 2025.
At that meeting, the council discussed problems with the entrances to the new fire station bays. The slope was described as too steep, making it difficult for fire trucks to back into the building without getting stuck.
During the discussion, officials said an outdated survey had been used on the project and discussed whether that, combined with changes associated with the Highway 30 overlay, contributed to the problem.
Possible solutions included installing a trench and grates to address drainage, with additional discussion planned during an onsite OAC meeting.
A separate concrete issue had already required correction, although the council was told that work had been completed at no cost to the city.
The October discussion established that construction and site concerns existed months before the project would move through substantial completion and occupancy.
Council Initially Tabled Substantial Completion
On February 3, 2026, Council Member Christopher Gilpin moved to table authorization for the City Administrator to sign the Certificate of Substantial Completion for the Fire Station Addition.
Council Member Aaron Tuttle seconded the motion.
Tuttle, Keizer, Struble, Meadows and Gilpin all voted in favor of tabling the certificate.
Two weeks later, the matter returned.
On February 17, the council unanimously approved Pay Application #18 for $7,324.01 to Rogge General Contractors.
Substantial completion does not necessarily mean every punch list item or repair has been finished. But it marked an important step in the project, particularly because problems continued to appear before the council afterward.
Occupancy Approved, but Water Problems Continued
By May 19, Fire Chief Angel Smiley reported that the department had received occupancy approval for the new station and was moving equipment and vehicles into the building.
An open house was expected in the coming months.
At that same meeting, however, the council was still discussing standing water near the new fire station.
Several possible solutions were considered, including drainage improvements and grading modifications.
Smiley also reported a leak between the old fire station and the new addition, apparently occurring where the two structures connect. Staff planned to seek contractor proposals to determine the cause and what repairs would be necessary.
The department had reached the point of moving into the building, but the city was still evaluating how to correct water and leakage problems.
Roof and Weather Stripping Still Being Discussed in July
The problems remained active into the summer.
During the July 21 City Council meeting, Lieutenant Brandon Fender provided a Fire Department update.
Among other department business, the council again addressed construction concerns involving the roof and weather stripping of the new firehouse and discussed reaching out to the construction company regarding those issues.
By then, the problems had been raised repeatedly.
Fender eventually put his concerns in writing.
Nine Repairs and Corrections Put in Writing
Fender prepared a document titled “Fire Hall New Addition – Repairs and Corrections Required.”
The list identified nine items requiring corrective action:
- Missing latch hardware on the walk in door
- Accumulated trash and construction debris
- A compromised insulation barrier on the west wall
- Missing electrical receptacles required for the air dryer
- Trash, loose fasteners and debris on the roof and in the gutters
- Caulking needed on exterior metal panels to prevent water from flowing behind the metal cladding
- Flashing and caulking needed behind the front red light fixtures to create a watertight seal
- Exterior caulking needed around the garage door support pillars
- Concrete residue remaining on the garage door windows following the concrete repour at the front of the building
Several of the documented concerns specifically involved preventing water from entering or damaging the building.
Fender emailed the list and photographs documenting the problems to the City Council, Mayor and City Administrator.
He says he received no response.
A Council Member Went to See the Problems Himself
The concerns were no longer based solely on reports from Fire Department personnel or photographs provided to city officials.
At the August 4 City Council meeting, Council Member Christopher Gilpin described going to the fire station with Lieutenant Brandon Fender following the July 7 council meeting to see the conditions for himself.
Gilpin said he and Fender went onto the roof, where they found standing water, debris in the gutters, screws and pieces of metal left behind from the construction work. Gilpin collected a cup containing screws and metal pieces from the roof and gutter area and later brought it to City Hall to show city officials what they had found.
The roof was only part of what they found.
Gilpin said they spent approximately an hour and a half going through the station before he stopped because there was still so much left to inspect.
“There was so much that still needs to be done,” Gilpin told the council, describing things as falling apart and areas of the building as incomplete.
Gilpin also helped Fender clean up some of the construction debris while they were there.
His firsthand inspection added significant weight to concerns Fender had already been raising for months. A sitting council member had now personally inspected the building, seen the standing water and construction debris, collected screws and metal pieces from the roof and gutters, and spent roughly an hour and a half reviewing problems before stopping because of how much remained.
Fender Returns to the Council Again
On August 4, Fender once again brought the fire station before the council.
He told officials that the previous week he had emailed them regarding “repairs and corrections required at the fire hall” and provided a checklist and numerous photographs.
Fender asked whether the city could establish a 30 day turnaround for the remaining repairs.
He said the project was approaching two and a half years and argued that if the responsible parties failed to correct the work within that period, the city should consider withholding the remaining amount owed and bringing in someone else to complete the repairs.
Fender also emphasized the cost of the facility.
“It’s a $2 million building,” he told the council while criticizing the quality of some of the workmanship.
A city official responded that the issues were being addressed and that the city was working with the engineer to get them corrected.
Fender asked for stronger involvement from city officials and expressed concern that without action, he could be back on the roof a year later dealing with leaks, plugged gutters and other continuing problems. He also raised concerns about construction debris, including nails and screws potentially washing into the alley.
The unresolved construction work was also affecting plans to finish organizing the station and hold a public open house.
“I’d rather it not take three years to get completed,” Fender said.
Completion Approved While Problems Remained
The August 4 discussion raised a larger question about how the fire station project had been considered complete while so many construction concerns were still unresolved.
After Fender described the outstanding repairs and Gilpin confirmed what he had personally found during his inspection, the council acknowledged that completion documentation for the project had already been approved. City Administrator Turri Colglazier confirmed that the documentation was approved in order to meet grant requirements, even though work remained.
Some unfinished work is normal at the end of a major construction project, and a certificate of substantial completion does not necessarily mean every punch list item has been finished. But by August, the concerns being raised went beyond a few cosmetic corrections.
Fire Department leadership had repeatedly reported problems involving drainage, standing water, leaks, roofing, weather stripping and possible water intrusion. Fender’s written list also documented loose screws and metal debris on the roof and in the gutters, missing electrical work, compromised insulation, missing hardware and areas requiring additional flashing and caulking to create watertight seals.
Council Member Christopher Gilpin had also personally inspected the station and said there were so many unfinished and deteriorating areas that he stopped going through them after roughly an hour and a half.
Those circumstances make the timing of the completion approval important.
The question is not simply whether the building still had a punch list. It is what remained outstanding when the city approved the completion documentation, what standards were used to determine the project had reached that point, and what the city represented about the status of the project in order to satisfy the grant requirements.
Leave a Reply