 Also seven o'clock, so I'll call this committee the whole meeting to order Here Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance Looking for approval of the previous minutes Motion made and seconded to approve the previous minutes any discussion all in favor of that motion say aye. Aye chair. What's aye opposed? Motion carries Interracial purposes I invited the mayor up to utilize the empty seat in the empty mic that we would otherwise have So it would save some time for him if there's any questions for the mayor to walk up to the microphone and back It was my decision if there's any objection, please let me know It was simply for convenience purposes First on the agenda is discussion of possible action on proposals from Ed Wachowski regarding transit commission four documents are attached 25-42 25-43 2577 from community of the whole and 332 from Swine County taxpayers Alliance Motion to be made to file is there a second Motion made and second is there any discussion I'll invoke. Thank you. Mr. Chair. I just invite If we if the committee thought it was appropriate invite Mr. Wachowski to come up and remind us about what His paperwork was about and what actions he'd like to see us take tonight on behalf of the organization That's a motion. I'll second it Motion made in seconds over the floor to Ed Wachowski it. Oh, sorry. All in favor say aye. I Got a vote on first chair votes. I opposed motion carries Thank you There are two items that I submitted to common counsel or to the last common counsel one Was a vote yes and one was a vote no The vote yes document that I submitted talked about the reorganization of the transit Commission, I'm asking you to file that Document and the reason being you have a lot more important business to discuss tonight Than this item here. This can be taken up at a later date So and I don't want to take the time your important time to discuss that document now but I would like to discuss the second document and Start off by saying thank you very much We're taking your valuable time this evening to hear my concerns and to hopefully take the appropriate action to remedy these concerns I was under the for those of you who are not who were not in office when I first appeared before the common counsel in February of this year. I will give you a brief overview of the material I supplied at that time I thought you had received a copy of that material Have you received the new order persons received a copy of that material? To clarify the material was originally sent out. I believe in February to the existing members Of the committee, so I guess like all the Radke some of the new you probably had not received that unless Previous Alderman left that information all the versus same thing It may be a little difficult for you to for you to follow then what I'm going to tell you and hopefully I can be Answer any questions you might have to further educate you on the document that I submit it And this is a document that I submit it. Let me tell you what is in that document if I may The first page of the document deals with ordinance number five five dash o nine dash ten Asking you to approve a change in the physical fiscal control of the expenditures of the transient and parking utility The second part of the document is Article five Which talks about boards commissions and committees section two? Defines among other things the responsibility and fiscal controls that apply to the transit commission fiscal controls of section two states all transit commission expenses Shall be audited by the commission and If approved by the commission shall be paid By the city in a manner provided by ordinance The next section of the booklet regard Parking assessment districts and the responsibility of the commission to operate these districts on a break-even basis With special asses assessment procedures and authority the next section deals with the revenue and expenses of the parking assessment districts The next section is an analyst an Analyzation with highlights of some of the information from the city trial bounds of the commission for the year ending December 31 2008 and I hope you're familiar with what a trial bounds is trial bounds in the city is a complete documentation of all the expenses by category of a specific department Accompanied by several pages of that trial bounds to support the analysis in the book There are three entities in the city with the requirement their board Audit and approve expenditures before they are paid by the city finance department They are the water utility the Mead library and the transit commission The transfer commission is the only entity that will not will not comply with this requirement Also in the booklet is the oath of office the oath of office that you signed and that each elected a person elected official and a point pointer official signed as their oath to uphold The laws and regulations of the city and the state I've also included an excerpt from the code of ethics that allows you to understand what Actions you may take if you find a violation of the oath of office. I Have a letter in here that is from the finance director talking about the approval of The bills from the from the transit authority that's it you may or not. I'm sorry just have one quick question and Now you're saying that the water utility commission and the library board audit all the bills that means they take a sample They take a sample of the bills out and they check with all those vendors. That's an audit No, that's an audit. No It says Approval is different from not audit is sampling bills received checking with the vendors to make sure nobody's fudges the numbers What the library does regarding the audit? they Have the bills That have been submitted to the city finance director, right? Actually at the meeting they have a printout from the finance director the finance department That states what bills have been submitted to them? for payment The finance chair of the library then reviews the bills the actual copy of the bill To indicate that it is a legitimate expense with a legitimate Notation of the reason for that expense and that it agrees with the printout of Bills that are asked to be paid I would argue for my accounting background. That's a review and approval process That's not an audit. I'm sorry. That's a review and approval process. That is not an audit. Well We can we can talk to Maddox. Okay, but in my opinion that that is Unless you're testing data Oh I respect your opinion as I've respected your opinion many times in the past not having the Webster dictionary here I cannot state what the Webster dictionary definition of an audit is I can only rate my favorite feeling as well as you stating your feelings I'll have a suit. You're saying that is then There are there are proven a compilation Perfectly legitimate by a board so they're not auditing the compilation within the current audit system It would put us within compliance with you got it the statutes okay To Ron McDonald director of transit copied a mayor Ryan from Terry Hansen finance director Changes in the procedure of expenditures the finance department will be changing the way it proceeds It processes the expenditure of the sensibility can transit Vertical five section two dash five six three All transit commission expenditures shall be audited by the commission and if approved by the commission Shall be paid by the city in a manner provided by ordinance This means that all expenditures must be approved by the commission Prior to the finance department Reducing funds for such expenditures. It will be vital that a list of expenditures It will be vital that a list of expenditures be available to the commission for approval at their scheduled meetings For approval to ensure the timely payment of invoices This letter Was sent and after it was sent to the commission They then came forth to change The ordinance so that it would not be necessary for the commission to see the bills The oath of office that he's person elected official takes or signs and the code of ethics. I did say that a letter for the finance director. I Feel at this point since you don't have a copy of this booklet. I would like to read The final statement in the booklet H33 just to make the following statement to the common council would speak Please we have a comment quick question so According to former director Hanson, and I think you're probably right He was using the word audit based on your description the follow-on census sound like he meant approval so It was the opinion of the previous finance director that They needed to follow a process. They were not they are not following is that correct? Yes We should take away from that document whether we use the word audit Or we let the the subordinate clause later on that uses the word approval whichever one of those we We go with it sounds like our former finance director who I think has great respect from the men and women on this floor Said that we weren't following a system as prescribed and we either need to change the system or start complying with it Is that basically how yes? Okay should also be noted that even after the letter was sent That the procedure for paying the bills was not altered. Okay approval was not made by the Commission on the bills and The finance department still paid those unapproved bills and to my knowledge are still a pain those bills today unapproved Based on the reading of the attachment the conclusion would seem obvious that the transit that the transit authority Transmission and maybe the finance department along with the city's avoiding government Not only a knowledge is the fact of not following city and state statutes is required by law But further are doing this act of defiance of law seeking to change the law to make their actions a presently performed legally This is contrary to the original ten of the law and finds no exceptions Successfully challenged to date in the state further defeats the purpose the Perven concept by which we operate in democracy by eliminating the various system of checks and balances Conceived to protect the public interest from misuse and waste of public monies You should also be noted that the lack of constraint or at least yearly update records is lacking Which leaves the door open for further errors not consistent with good business practices Additionally the lack of accounting in the area of transit parking Accountability is almost non-existent This particular department of the city of subordinates were a complete investigation Investigative audience to determine the accuracy of all monies acquired and their sub subsequent dispersal according to law and good government accounting practices Finally the complete structure of this department It's administrative management and controlling membership is in higher question of competence capable to actually run this department and may need state intervention to bring this entire situation To even the most basic responsible requirement by law and the public interest each year You are asked the comic council to approve the assessments for the parking district because they are to run on a Free of any losses You don't know How much money is being built to any business in the district or why there is even a need for an assessment? I would think that your conclusion might be that this has been reviewed by the transit commission and there is justification and That the parking authority is being run in a very professional efficient and cost saving manner Which I can state from the records that I've reviewed that is not so The transit commission is willfully violating the city ordinance The finance department is violating the city ordinance by paying unapproved bills, and I ask you is the oath of office and the city ordinances mere words on a piece of paper What do they really mean something and do you hold people accountable to abide? There At a recent comic council meeting stated that he has no problem with the commission violating their oath of oath or the city ordinance Two items. He is sworn to a pole Mr. Wachowski May I ask you when what did it? What can you call me? What did I say? I'm sorry. What did I say? These are this is paraphrase is not your exact words. What okay? No, may I can you repeat that please you had said? You had no problem with the commission not Not reviewing the bills because there is an audit at the end of the year Is that what you said? What did you say the first time? but in essence what that is saying is that you have no problem with The commission violating their oath of office. I said I have no no no problem with the commission violating their oath of office That those words came out of my mouth. That's my interpretation I think it's a very loose interpretation. Mr. Wachowski if I if I can ask were you the former Chairman of the transit commission Were you the former chairman of the transit commission? Yes, several when you were the former chairman of the transit commission Where bills paid in a different manner than they're paid right now that question was asked for me of me before And I repeat that answer, but I will add to that answer because that question was asked of me by Alderman Hanna The answer was no because I did not know that so you were the chairman of the transit commission and you didn't know me Do you want me to answer the question? If you don't want to answer the question and I'll stop there The answer is no because I did not know that they had to be approved however, and that's what I said at the last meeting and what I'm going to add to that is that the Director of the transit Sat to my right and never informed me that those bills had to be approved by the commission Had I known? Yes, they would have been approved and they would have been submitted. I did not know Just two questions To the best of your knowledge Have discrepancies come up in the transit audit by shank or the federal transportation commission Okay, to the best of your knowledge Have discrepancies or concerns been voiced by shank or the federal transportation commission on our transit department. I Really don't know I Asked you not to approve any change in the fiscal controls of the transit commission To enforce the ordinance that is presently in place and to hold the transit commission Commissioners and the transfer of management accountable accountable for their willful violation The ball is in your court and we the citizens of the city are waiting your action and I do apologize if I appear to be Argumentative with the mayor or argumentative with autumn in Hanna I've tried not to enter any type of emotion To this type of presentation, but it is highly emotional to me and highly emotional to me because The people who work the buses the drivers are outstanding people They do a job. They are probably the best employees of this city Okay, and I don't want to hurt them But I think something has to be done and it's up to you to do it You can you can file this if you so desire But then you're saying that the oath of office means nothing the ordinance of the cities can be Followed or not filed by any citizen or You're saying from the quote from the animal farm book that all people are created equal But some people are created more equal than others. Thank you very much for listening to me Hello more mr. Wachowski. I got a question for you Before we act on your second document you said the first document You didn't want to really discuss tonight Would a better motion on your first document to be hold to hold that rather than file it and then maybe schedule it again well, I would ask that that Either you file it or you hold it if you hold it that would be my first preference But I didn't want didn't want to enter into discussion on it this evening to take valuable time away from other items That you because you have a very busy schedule, right? I would appreciate it if you did hold it while we have a motion on the floor to file this I'd make a motion to hold I would second that on document number 2542 2542 motion made and second to hold document 2542 Any discussion on that item any discussion on that item all in favor of that motion to hold say I'm all involved So I just want to because I don't have them in front of me. Okay 2542 is the document to Reorganize the structure of the committee Okay, no separate issue is still on the transit commission, but not that way All in favor of holding document 2542 all say aye chair Blitz I opposed I'm sorry Want to pose. Thank you Motion's made and second to file the rest of the documents. Is there any response from city attorney McLean or McDonald if you'd like to respond Thank you now to take a Statement from Paul Harvey now for the rest of the story the way the Bills are paid in the transit commission is the way it's been paid. I Believe since the inception or very shortly thereafter of Sheboygan transit Current chairman of the transit commission did some research went back to the inception of transit and found the documentation as to when that was set up There was a discussion or a memo from finance director Hansen because of a request from mr. Wackowski I Talked to Terry He had a discussion with attorney McLean We talked about how the bills were paid and it was Based on that discussion that attorney McLean drafted a new ordinance and said this makes sense to the transit commission is doing The general ordinance was sent to the council who was approved by the transit commission Sent to the council and then it was held in the previous council on to this committee the whole meeting Regarding discrepancies or alleged improprieties I'll guarantee you we get audited more than any other department in the city as a matter of fact our audited numbers get audited by the State Department of Transportation And the American attest to that because he just had one come through a couple of days ago into his office To answer Alderman Hannah's yeah comment or a question We have never had any findings in any audit that we've ever had done Whether it be from shank or the state DOT or the federal transit administration As a matter of fact the last audit of the federal transit administration We received an award because we had zero findings out of the 23 areas of compliance that we reviewed in It's such an extraordinary feat. They sent us a certificate because we were It was so well done So I would like to dismiss the the claims and accusations that have been thrown around in spewed around this this community for the last several months Let me tell you how the process actually works We typically need an item. I'll use a bus part as an example We'll talk to the purchasing agent Bernie Romer He will put out bids or in some cases our deputy director will put out bids for bus parts if it's a specific vendor We then submit a requisition for those parts into the city purchasing department The parts are ordered through the purchasing department If they exceed $15,000 they come to the council for approval and go through the finance committee like the rest of the city does When the parts come in the staff signs off that we've in fact received the parts that we've ordered They then get submitted into the munis system for an invoice payment The or the invoices get submitted for payment. They come to me I sign off on them they go then to the finance director the finance director reviews them They then get paid The transit commission chairman then gets a check register of every check written on behalf of the transit commission For any parts or any items? Regardless Sheboygan transit doesn't issue a check it all comes out of the finance department Those record journal check journals are given to the transit commission chairman for review in questioning the commission has talked about it whether or not they the as a Commission want to review all of the Entries and they've in fact agreed on numerous occasions. They wanted to keep the process the same as it was I Looked back to notes dating back to 2008 when mr. Wachowski raised this issue and It was actually I'm gonna find the Minutes here bear with me a second in 2008 Then Mayor Juan Perez made a statement that he'd like to make it very clear that there's been no improprieties By the commission or the transit staff and that any implications of such are inappropriate Mary mayor Perez went on to thank me for the job that I'm doing Alderman James Gisha motion to authorize to continue the procedures as they've always been performed in Mayor Perez Seconded that motion that wasn't in 2008 Mr. Wachowski wasn't happy with it and Talk Terry Hansen into Reviewing it Terry did and after He sent out that initial memo that was cited to you without telling you the rest of the information That when I received the memo Terry and I had a discussion along with a discussion from attorney McLean And ultimately was decided that the ordinance should be changed to actually Mirror the practice that's been going on since the inception of the Sheboygan Transit Commission There hasn't been any type of effort to conceal things anybody who wants to look at him. It's an open record. I mean my gosh Ron I know that there was a document in council at one time for changing that ordinance on how those bills were paid I don't recall myself to that pass. No, it was actually held and it's it's here tonight It was held and it was held in and it's here tonight you know in my opinion and and I will Agree with my predecessor mayor Juan Perez that director Ron McDonald's is an outstanding director of his department This is not something that he came up with since he walked into transit This is something that has been done since its inception in the 1960s 70s 70s So it's not like the rules have been changed midway through the game The purpose of changing the ordinance is to comply with practices that have been going on for decades in the city this department has audited in more than any other department as Ron said When the federal government audited him they gave him an award Which I believe he has hanging on his wall So to change the rules to not Pass the ordinance to meet the practice that has been going on for the last 30 years Is ridiculous in my opinion it would be different if we had discrepancies in our audits his department gets audited two three times every year Frequently Frequently and there's never been a discrepancy in the audit So in my opinion, this is a non-issue and this ordinance should be should be passed in the The ordinance should read should comply with with the practices that we are that we are presently to clarify the Ordinance actually is not On today's agenda It was not in the committee of the whole inbox. I guess so I that ordinance will have to be resubmitted But it was it was held. It was held right. It is actually included in as one of the attachments on the agenda 2577 one of them had multiple documents My believe it was RO 508 0910 I Believe if you look at that it has multiple documents on it. It's in here is in it's in the original document that we got from mr. Wachowski, yeah, okay, it was council document number 2150. That was the ordinance The train McLean it would appropriate for the council to make a recommendation on the ordinance itself Considering the agenda does not specifically clarify that ordinance is part of it. I guess I would say if it's part of the RO that's Referenced in the agenda. Okay. I don't say a problem with this committee making a recommendation to council with respect to that document I know Generated the document after talking to Terry Hansen and Iran McDonald This was months ago and it was referred to committee the whole and sat there No action was taken. I Think the sooner you're on my view You know if if the ordinance doesn't follow what we're doing and The finance director is satisfied that what we're doing is fine The the ordinance reflects What we're doing it makes sense to me to to enact that but that's certainly up to the council and you guys can Decide how you want to check some balances, but it's my understanding that this is more of a historical issue that has crept up over time and When was brought to my attention my suggestion was to As long as there's no auditing issues or finance department issues to Update the ordinance to reflect what we're actually doing that seems to make sense to me. Thank you I'm sorry McLean. I'll go on to me already made the original motion File I would we'll withdraw that file Well, we can probably make the motion to file the communication But recommend to the council to pass The attached ordinance if that's yes. Yes. Yes. Yes, absolutely. Okay with the second agree to that Okay, so modifying the original motion from filing to file the communication and Recommend to the full council to pass the ordinance general ordinance. Thank you All the much we are you are next The button you're nothing else dad. Thank you. I've been born Thank You, mr. Chairman. I'm mr. Chairman before we would vote on this For the all for the new older persons of the older persons that don't have them with have this with them Would it be appropriate for you to read before we vote on it? And then another question would be I guess for attorney McLean is that if we if we do end up giving a favorable Recommendation on this general ordinance and it goes to the council on the 16th or whenever our next meeting is then usually ordinances Have to lie over for the final So we actually if we we wouldn't approve this actually then till the first part of September So ordinances generally lie over right, okay, would you like do you have a copy of this? Would you like to read it to the other persons that don't have it before we vote on it? It's not that lengthy a few paragraphs It's document number 2150 In ordinance repealing and recreating section 2-563 of the municipal code relating to fiscal control of transit commission expenditures So as to conform with current practice Common counsel the city of Sheboygan do ordain as follows section 1 section 2-563 of Sheboygan missal code entitled fiscal control is she by repealed and recreated to read as follows section 2-563 fiscal control Unless otherwise authorized by the transit commission all books of accounts Shall be kept in the office of the city finance director slash treasurer All transit commission expenditures shall be approved by the transit director and shall be paid by the city in the manner provided by ordinance a Payment register shall be reviewed by the transit commission or its designee Section to all ordinances or parts thereof and come conflict with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby repealed To the extent of such conflicts and this ordinance shall be in effect from and after its passage and publication That's the floor. Thank you. I have two lights on almond bauke and bowers. I'm not sure actually who's first so Bowers go ahead Okay, I guess the question I have are we talking just procedural changes here Are we talking a big change in the county procedures there? We just change in an ordinance or Is this going to entail? Redoing our books. I guess I'm a little confused at this point This ordinance will change nothing from the way it's being done right now. It's absolutely the same as way it's being done So the only thing that I get out of this it comes through the finance director instead of you No, actually the well They come to me for approval, but from there they go to the finance director for review before they get paid This is merely Changing the ordinance so it mirrors what the practice has actually been for the last 30 plus years I guess to clarify also anything that comes out trans equation is not paid directly by them It goes through the fine with finance department and that would be the current system as is which would be Put in line with the general ordinance that's as presented right now Alvin bulk Thank You mr. Chair just out of my respect for citizen Wachowski and for citizen watchdogs in general I'd like to give him a chance to come up and and just answer My original concern was that we weren't following a procedure now if we change that ordinance will be following it And I'd like to just ask citizen Wachowski. Where's the downside to that? What are we missing? If we begin following that ordinance How is that putting the city at risk? Right if we if we change the ordinance so we begin following the laws we put up Where's the downside to that? We do need to be using the mic because we are being televised The downsides to that is spelled out in the book because Mr. McDonald has said this is the way we've done it all along and that it works Okay The mayor has said this is the way they've been doing it for 30 years Well, I can tell you there were traffic signals on 8th Street for 20 years And now they've been removed because it didn't make any sense times change things changed Why does it make sense to have a system of checks and balances? It's very simple when you look at the budget and In this case the transit budget that was approved by the transit commission It's not an absolute authority to spend. It's a road map to spend every other department if they overspent or underspent a Category within the budget as for a budget transfer. So their budget is actually balanced and brought in to Focus with what their authority whomever oversees them has agreed upon however, if you look at the budget For the year and it would budget for 2009 was not available when I put this together Okay, so that's why I use 2008 Saras were 95,089 dollars and 25 cents less than budgeted health insurance was 43,571 dollars less than budget the Professional organizations and that that's positive that's positive But then you say well if it's less than budget, where did the money go? I mean does that mean that that the transit authority then has all this money to spend the answers? No, because there's no oversight Okay Oversight because the power transit Mr. Wachowski, so you're just claiming that You're claiming then that in the 2008 budget there would be some kind of financial shenanigans There's missing money. Is that what you're saying? These are from their financial reports died from mine, right? We're saying those that that budget's been audited and the federal government's while they probably can play shenanigans with their own money I'm sure don't allow other communities to play shenanigans with their money So you're not claiming that they're shenanigans. You're saying the system does work or are you saying systems not working? And there's missing money because I find that very tough to believe that we will win a war Of having it, you know, no problems no mistakes and no lost money and you're claiming that there is lost money in the real world budgets are reviewed by boards of directors of Corporations on a monthly basis if there are board of directors meetings are on a monthly basis or on a quarterly basis If their meetings are on a quarterly basis, I know that for a fact is I put those figures together for the company that I work for But if you look at power transit on here, there are two hundred and sixteen thousand dollars overspent How do you spend two hundred and sixteen thousand dollars over without any oversight? And I appreciate mr. McDonald coming here and saying all the good things he said, but one thing he hasn't said is That he has been violating the city ordinance It's like your car outside and it says a new parking sign you park your car there for years It doesn't make it right and then all of a sudden a officer comes along gives you a ticket Is the officer wrong or have you gotten away with something? For all those years. I'm sorry but the ordinance is very specific and the ordinance has been violated and That system of checks and balances is at the window Okay, and when budgets are figured They're figured on actual excuse me on budget to budget not actual to budget or actual actual And without any types of controls you're saying here's two point five million dollars do with whatever you want to do with it regardless of the service you're providing and mr. McDonald will tell you himself that the service that's being provided by transit today is Bad not satisfactory and I've heard him say that many times Okay, and it's because the money is not being in my opinion Properly used the library got billed thirty nine hundred hours for the assessment district When you look at how lot 13 and 14 are managed There's no incentive to put any type of controls on the expenses Or to increase the income because nobody's looking at the budget all you do is you bill Everybody in center in the center city district additional money, and then you say why don't people want to be located down here? You know is there any controls if you don't want any type of fiscal controls, and it was also stated up here That if there's no problem with the finance department with the way things are Then there shouldn't be an objection. Well. Here's a letter that says there is a problem With the way things are being handled. Here's a letter not mine I didn't generate the letter the finance director general generate the letter and say you're violating the system of controls and balances and I expect you to adhere to that and Even you put an ordinance in To change something whatever it is that doesn't negate how you do business today It may negate how you do business or change how you do business tomorrow if it's approved But I think it's extremely arrogant, and that's my word arrogant To continue a practice when you know that you're not doing what you're supposed to do and saying that this council Will approve what you want them to do So you're going to do it in advance of that approval, and I'm sorry But I think that is totally totally totally inappropriate And I hope I've answered your question. I'm sorry to go on so long with it But without the system of checks and balances Why do you have all these committees? Why do you have the government set up the way it is today? I mean this violates the basic principles of Government checks and balances of money coming in Approval of the money going out you say to me gee do you think there's any hanky-panky going on? I don't know I don't review their bills, but I'll tell you this right now if I were sitting where you're sitting Okay, I would be asking for an audit of The transit by an outside auditor and you want to know something you can't do that because you have no control over what transit does However, and there is always in a however you can tie the funding of transit for 2011 Asking that they submit a budget run a request for funding in 2011 which includes an audit of the books for 2009 and then you decide whether or not checks and balances work You decide whether or not the system today works and you decide whether or not Tax dollars and whether they come from this city from this county from this State or from the federal government are my tax dollars and my tax dollars and your tax dollars Should be accountable and there should be some system of checks and balances and if you don't want to do that God bless you. Okay, because that is in my opinion a Wrong stance to take but the decision is yours and I don't want to sound like a preacher up here But my god, that's exactly what I feel like that. I need to find intervention To have a system of checks and balances put in place So that I wouldn't have to be here So we wouldn't have to be talking about this evening this issue So we wouldn't have any tide of cloud over anyone. Okay? Thank you very much Want to speak first mr. Chairman in Response to mr. Wachowski's checks and balances and the lack thereof if you do read this Read the ordinance fist under section 2-563 called fiscal control Unless otherwise authorized by the transit commission all books of accounts shall be kept in the office of the city finance director Treasurer all transit commission expenditures Shall be approved by the transit director and shall be paid by the city in the manner provided by ordinance Which is paid by finance a payment register shall be reviewed by the transit commission or its design a which is the transit commissioner Regarding audits as we've said again and again We have shank Audit the transit commission Shank is not a division of the city It's an outside auditing company We have the state and the federal government also not divisions of the city that do audits of the transit of The transit of Sheboygan transit What more can we ask for? We have outside auditors We have fiscal control all we're trying to do is put the ordinance in line with Practices over the last X amount of years that there have never been any discrepancies found And to blow this up into A conspiracy I don't think is appropriate at all So I would ask that the that the committee of the whole Sunday recommendation to the council to approve this ordinance Dr. Adele if I could just make one comment and yes Our 2009 books were audited already by shank. I believe all of you received the audit I know went to the finance committee my guess is it came back to the council already and there were no findings There are Checks and balances Typically defined by the auditors how we proceed There's been a lot of different Mud slinging thrown out there to try and confuse the issue like we're not Capturing enough money and lots 13 and 14 well quite frankly There's a contract with the Boston store that says we can only charge X number of dollars That's a contract that the city entered into that you entered into not me That dictates what we can do. I'm just following them what the contract says I Would like to also add that Reiterate I've had a conversation with then finance director Terry Hansen about the procedures We had a discussion with attorney McClain After that discussion it was decided that the best route to go would be to change the ordinance Finance director Hansen Was on board with that And quite frankly if he wasn't on board with it It would be no different than my kid asking me for money to go to the movie and I said no He wouldn't pay the bills if he didn't think it was appropriate He's a director of all the money that comes into this city. That's where they get paid. I don't pay them Well, all of our stuff goes to the finance department and a finance director was signing off on all of the invoices for payment so to to sling mud in and Say there's a cloud over this is absolutely ridiculous and You know, whatever I could go on for a long time, but Just a quick question. Have we received a copy of the 2009 Shank on it yet. Was those distributed yet? I'm not aware of that myself. I don't think so Yeah But the best of your knowledge mayor when you've met with the representative shank. Did they raise any concern? No, there were no discrepancies found in 2009. Thank you Almond born as of the set as of this afternoon in a discussion I had with Nancy bus acting finance director The shank audit is not done because I was hoping it would be done So we would have some information on one of the later agenda items, but she said it's not done And she's trying to get it, but there's been some vacations over there, etc. So we don't have it I'm sorry. I misspoke 2008 was done 2008 must have been the one it just came through finance a couple months ago, then I thought it was 2009 All right, there are no other lights. There's a motion at this time. I'll forever that motion say aye. Aye chair What's I opposed motion carries? Next on the agenda discussion possible action on communication. We're all been born communication six dash thirty-nine from Alden born Floors yours Gotta find it here my I would I would make a motion to file I would make a motion to file this and I guess all I want to say is that the The guest editorial that I read that I wrote for the shabuagan press a while back Created a lot of discussion in the community about the W Wisconsin retirement fund and I think the Discussion was healthy, and I think the discussion is going to continue and hopefully it'll continue right through to the next Negotiations we have with our with our union partners that here in the city. So That's really all I really all I want to say about it is the reason I wrote it is just to start some discussion and make the citizens aware of What the situation is with the Wisconsin retirement fund is how is it affects our city employees and public employees throughout the state? Thank you Thank you all the more most of them made to file the document is there a second Motion made in second to file a document hold on Hannah Just a quick question, and I do want to compliment Alderman born. I think thought-provoking Letters to the community are important. I think those ongoing discussions are good to have I think that just makes for good government and You don't have to Agree with anything that I might write you don't have to agree with everything that Cory Balk may write or what what Jim writes But the important thing is we're putting issues out there from a perspective, and I think that's a positive Very good discussion All fear of the motion say aye. Hi, sir. What's I opposed motion carries right? Next on the agenda discussion a possible action on communications receiving received regarding Alderman Kielsen 9-21 from Dulce Johnson and 9-25 for March matter You'd like to start Motion made to file is a second of that motion second motion made in second to file and discussion Alderman Hannah Yeah, I just I just wanted to comment that I've been on the council for Five years I've been on the council for Almost as long as all the person Kittleson and to the best of my re-election Anything would benefit the fact that her husband is retired Fire Department employee To the best of my knowledge she recuse herself and abstained in every single issue I Voted to have this moved here because I believe firmly that Our Alderman Kittleson all the person Kittleson should be given the opportunity in a public forum to explain that I've played by the rules and I believe she has played by the rules Thank you Alderman Balk Thank You. Mr. Chairman. I too would weigh in on that. I'd say that Alderman Kittleson has been re-elected by her constituents. There's no doubt in their mind that she is Comes with her perspective. She doesn't benefit by the continuing of a firefighter ambulance system She abstains from the votes from which she could potentially benefit, but that's her perspective Whatever her vote is on the the ambulance service is her perspective and her constituents have re-elected her with that perspective So I would say that that's between her and her constituents But I also want to applaud the citizenry for writing in with their concerns We also want to make sure that people who have concerns and if there's a perception of fairness what we did with Alderman Versi and and if there are some outstanding questions about President Kittleson those need to be aired and and I agree with Alderman Hanna that this is the right venue for that. So again, I applaud the the citizens for writing in with concerns I think we're doing the right thing here tonight by talking about that and again I think President Kittleson's constituents have weighed in on her opinions and they like her opinions and they keep Center here, so Thank You mr. Chairman Any other discussion the citizens who wrote the communications are available. They are here today Make a motion to open the floor to any one of the citizens that want to speak on this second Okay It's a motion made to allow Dulce Johnson Marge matter who wrote the communications to speak motion made in second All in favor that motion say aye aye chair votes aye opposed Motion carries. Thank you chairman. I should There has long been Concern in the community About Alderman Kittleson voting on fire department and ambulance related issues We know that Alderman Kittleson's husband is a retired Shabuig and fire department employee retiring in December 2005 after many years on the force on September 6th 2005 Alderman Kittleson voted for the bids and contract for station number five While her husband was a full-time employee of the Shabuig and fire department In fact, I believe Alderman Kittleson's husband was a deputy chief in the department at that time For her to vote no would undoubtedly have created an unpleasant working environment for her husband There was no financial gain to her husband, but given his employment with the department Abstention would have been appropriate to avoid the appearance of bias May 29th 2007 she voted to give the ambulance to the Shabuig and fire department again no financial gain But again Extension would have been appropriate to avoid the appearance I could cite other examples related to the ambulance, but you all know what they are Again, no financial gain, but it would have been better to abstain On April 7th 2010 she voted against the smoke detector ordinance that was proposed by Chief Herman At that time her husband was president of the Lakeshore Apartment Association And one must presume that the Kittleson's are thus in the apartment rental business So she should have abstained There were personal financial concerns about this ordinance because of the cost to apartment owners Owners to purchase and install the new smoke detectors Actually Alderman Kittleson moved to amend the ordinance on the council floor after it came from the committee You will recall that one of the complaints against Alderman Versi was that he made a motion on the council floor regarding the ambulance Was Alderman Kittleson representing her personal interests and the interests of the organization that her husband led or What was in the best public interest Her husband of course had every right to represent his organization But as a person who would benefit from the defeat of this organization Ordinance Alderman Kittleson should have abstained Is it personal bias or a matter of ethics? Ethics is a principle of right or wrong. I Gave an example of Alderman Kittleson's obvious bias with the greater Sheboygan white paper and her Comment about chief Herman's response She has said that she has to do what is in the best interests of the Sheboygan fire department Which may not necessarily be in the best interests of her constituents Public interest must be the primary concern of all elected officials Alderman Kittleson's relationship with the fire department employees via her husband's employment history Makes it extremely difficult at best for her to make impartial decisions on behalf of her constituents vis-a-vis the fire department That alone is reason enough for her as a matter of good conduct and ethical practice to abstain There need not be direct financial gain for it to be prudent for an elected official To abstain from voting on matters in which they clearly have an established bias Thank you. Thank you Miss Madden would like to speak What's been open to you? It's bendable Marge How's this can you all hear me? Yep. Good. I can't say but we can hear it This is really different I'm used to sitting back there and looking at the backs of your heads Checking out who needs haircuts and who doesn't pretty scary this way, huh? So this is really different. I want to commend anybody who has the the courage to stand up here and speak before 16 Prove it to me people It's a challenge, but I will accept it. I'm not here to quote the mayor drag anybody through the mud or To seek the character assassination That isn't what I want to do. I want to talk about the power of your vote Now we have many people here who come to the council and you don't know how they're going to vote Constituents don't know how they're going to vote But when that motion comes to the floor That's when the power comes into play Whether you're going to vote I or no That's going to determine what's going to happen to our city Now it's already been mentioned that Alderman Kittleson voted for this majority That did not accept the fire chief's suggestion for an upgrade on smoke alarms and This is where the abuse of power comes in and at this point I would respectfully ask No faces and no eye rolling From anybody up here or the consulate or the stem or the assembly I deeply resent that But I will go on to say There's some time a little while ago Another citizen stood here a little taller and she asked if Alderman versi Would have stained from voting on anything concerning the ambulance service Not one alderman nor the mayor Defended him a two alderman did admit that they do abstain from issues that might put a cloud on their vote former Alderman Jim Geisha Explained that in order to avoid any doubt Any shadow any cloud it is better to abstain from any vote and this is why I'm asking Alderman Kittleson to abstain from any future votes Concerning the fire department or the ambulance it is true that she abstains from anything concerning the funding for Retirement or health care But there are many other issues as it's already been pointed out that she has voted I now if my worthy opponent the mayor Decides to rebut me I Respectfully asked the president of the council or the committee the whole To have the mayor come down here face you all just as I am And I respectfully asked that he does not lose his cool as he did the other night at the council Because the judges and the voters do not like anybody losing their cool Thank you very much Thank you Mars Mr. Chairman if I may Mr.. Mr.. Chairman with all due respect and I respect the mayor, but this is this is the council's This is the council's a committee of the whole and I guess I've got a comment I've got a concern with the mayor making comments I think this should be the alderman first and then at your discretion whether you feel the mayor should be making comments on this But I have a problem with it Thank you. Thank you alderman boron. I was just trying to fulfill the citizens request If I may I will be seated and just if I may Is that an objection to my ruling you can well? I don't know if you may I don't know if you made a ruling yet by allowing it That's moving of the chair is to allow the mayor to speak Then I guess I don't like it alderman Rindflash, but you're the chairman so I'll respect that But you can object and then we can go to vote because it is as you say it is I'll make a formal objection there's objection is there a second that objection motion made in second The objection of the ruling of the chair to allow the mayor to speak is there all in favor of the objection overruling My vote say aye aye opposed We'll do a roll call And I vote would be to overall to overall. Okay. Aye. We're voting on whether to allow the mayor to speak Yes, vote doesn't I vote is to overrule my decision to allow the mayor to speak So I would not allow the mayor to speak at this time Warren aye Bulk aye Bowers aye Decker no Hammond is excused Hannah. No Heidemann. All right Kass aye Kittle I'm gonna abstain Montemire no Radke no Rindflash no Vander wheel no Versi aye And wagamon. All right I'll take your seat there Seven yes six no and one abstention Have a nice evening. I hope you make the right decision tonight moving on then what the lights is for Alderman, Wagamon All about Thank You mr. Chair. Oh I was just going to thank the two citizens again That's why this country is great and this process is great is because they've made very thought-provoking comments and have made me Reconsider and although she doesn't owe us that perhaps president Kittleson would like to weigh in on how she will Make her decision whether to vote in the future She that's between her and her constituents in the interest of transparency if she would choose to talk to us about How her mind works and how she chooses when to vote and what she's committing to in the future That would be a welcome thing because I think they brought up great points with regard to Interests and and going beyond a shadow of a doubt of there being no issues Thank You mr. Chair My recommendation is as Alderman Versi did is to not respond this time. I feel free to do so. It was your decision only because Well, he did respond at the very end I guess May I ask attorney McLean to come up and speak on this topic please? Could the floor be opened for him? Yes, I would make a motion to open the floor Motion man second of the four to turn McLean all fair say aye. I share what's I posed motion carries three McLean Thank You mr. Chairman first off. I noticed I read this Johnson's letter and this matter and Email quite closely and I don't see any ethics violation being alleged In fact, this matter says this in no way suggests any breach in ethics Dulce Johnson speaks to a concern about bias and Concern about what other people in the community have said I think Alderman Kettleson's record speaks for itself She's been elected several times I Think everybody comes to political office with certain biases One way or the other. This is a nonpartisan body, but you look at the state legislatures and Federal legislatures Public and a Democrat independent They those individuals Follow a the party line so to speak Are they biased sure is that impermissible? No where you get into impermissible biases is in a Judicatory or quasi judicial type of proceedings where Bias is a form of pre-judgment that you Have a certain preconceived Opinion before you hear the facts on a particular adjudicative type of matter, but typically that that's not the case on a legislative matter It's clear Alderman Kettleson's record speaks for itself. She supports the fire department She's been reelected number of times her constituents apparently know that and Feel that that's fine. That's certainly an appropriate issue when it comes to the ballot box next time she runs for election for any opposing candidate if they feel that That's not good for the city then let them Make that a campaign issue, but I don't view this as an ethics issue the ethics code Both are local ordinance the state statute on Ethics for local government officials deals with Personal interests and financial interests You can start going pretty far afield when you start talking in general about bias, but personal interests Deals with interests by blood or marriage on particular issues Financial interests deals with monetary gain the concept is are you Taking an action for yourself or Your your family's interest or you looking out for the welfare of the city and I must say in my experience Alderman Kettleson has come to me perhaps more than any other Alderman with questions about And concerns about whether she should vote on a particular matter or not I've I've disclosed to her a couple of times that I didn't see any problem with her voting on a particular matter, but yet She's still abstained so You know are there issues go back five ten years ago that? You know, maybe she could have abstained on maybe she couldn't have maybe I think that's true with everybody, but I You know as has an ethics issue, I just don't see it in this this case And again Neither of the the letters really talks about Alderman Kettleson having a personal or financial interest in In the action she's taken or accuse her of Unethical conduct I think it's very clean I lost me or Thank you, I guess I was going to say a couple of words about our bias and pretty much with Attorney McLean said we all come here with certain biases in fact That's usually our platform and they think we all know what our platform our biases are here On the mercy, thank you. This is a super maternity McLean Miss Johnson brought up a fact that was outside the fire department of April 2007 this year And the RC number was the boat the 49709 10 about the boat about the smoke alarm ordinance when she she voted no Against the ordinance that's not fire detectors smoke detector ordinance Which to my knowledge between her husband being a president and also owning some rental units that they would be there would be some Financial loss if there would have been it would have passed That seems awfully conjectural to me And I guess if somebody had a concern at that time should have been raised I guess at that time but In Doing some research several weeks ago Preparation for the last time the committee the whole myth. I looked at and it's pretty good source. It's on the website government accountability board Publishes Legal opinions that they issue they issue opinions one requested by local governments and They they published those opinions and there's there's a couple that I think are relevant to To the council that are worth keeping in mind One one comment that this was made in a 2002 Ethics opinion in the absence of anything other than conjecture about an Effect as far as personal effect on an individual public policy favors the public officials exercise of official duties So really you're elected to act in the governmental interest That's a strong public policy for you to take action and not to just Say I'm gonna abstain Sometimes it's easy to abstain when it's a difficult issue, but unless you know so Don't abstain at the drop of a hat it's a really your duty to To act on legislative issues This this went on to say this had to do with the a this was a county board official apparently owning some property adjacent to Property that the county owned and the county was going to decide whether to Build a public facility on this land adjacent to the property that the county board member owned and the issue was whether or not That created an ethics violation for this county board member to vote Because he had the adjoining property and and again the Government accounting accountability board punted on the ultimate decision Saying in the absence of anything other than conjecture about that Effect public policy favors the public officials Exercise of official duties and that the factual assessment is important, but it's not one we can make But the official at his or her discretion may abstain for participation if the official believes Participation is likely to undermine citizen confidence in the the governmental decision So they give three scenarios If the building building the public facility on adjacent property will or is reasonably likely to have a financial effect on the officials land The official should abstain from participation In the absence of any financial effect the officials should participate And if the effect is conjectural or attenuated the official should participate unless in the official judgment To do so would undermine public confidence in the decision or in government so if If it's an attenuated situation, or you're not sure but you think Could vote but you're concerned that Taken action could undermine public confidence in the decision or in government the ethics board is saying May want to abstain in a case like that so I think these are Pretty good concepts that as a general rule, it's your duty as as an alderman To take action on these issues, but there are situations under our ethics code and you need to look at the ethics code Where abstention is appropriate if there's a director indirect personal or financial interest or if such Interest would tend to impair your particular judgment It's a McLean. We have a question. I'll invoke. Thank you. Mr. Chair Steve Is there anything about materiality in that I mean these these smoke detectors in a two-income household the price of a few Smoke detectors may not even be material to their annual budget, or is that not in it not a consideration. Well, sure I think it is so I think you look at the Personal or financial interest is a really a personal interest You know how how much of an interest is it is it conjectural is it? Is it real is it substantive? I think those all weigh in the mix So there could have been ten other fine reasons that she would choose to vote against that even though it was in her material interest, but if that material interest were small it could be outweighed by these other fine reasons to be against the The smoke detectors necessarily if if if it's a Personal interest if you've got any old person has a personal interest or a financial interest They should seriously consider whether to abstain or not. Okay, and just one more comment, Mr. So I think we've all all the person Kittleson has heard these concerns from the citizenry She's reached out to the attorney more so than any other alderman on making sure when she votes I think she's been put on notice by the citizenry that hey We're watching your votes, but she's an important vote. We're very divided on this issue So every vote counts and so she's going to make a deal with her constituency She's going to vote or not vote based on what she thinks her Deal with her constituency is and and then they'll be able to hold her accountable in the next election I and so I think now she's been put on notice that people are paying very close attention And she'll take that into her consideration in future votes I think that that's probably right and I think there's clearly no ethical violation here other than the fact that people are watching Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Mr. Chairman if I could indulge There was one other opinion that I thought was kind of interesting that it deals with the matters that May apply to an individual but also apply to the entire community and this was an ethics opinion It goes back to 1998 Was then called the Wisconsin ethics board But says the ethics board advises that a member of municipalities governing body who lives in an unsewered subdivision May consistent with the statute, which is the local governmental ethics Statute Participate in a decision whether to require the extension of water and sewer service in all to all existing and future development in the municipality so there even though this person lived in an unsewered subdivision and The decision was to require the extension of water and sewer service to all existing which would impact this individual But since it applied totally across the board The ethics board at least took the opinion in 1998 that that was not a violation of the ethics One one thing I would suggest if individual alderman have questions We've got the the ethics board and perhaps this is something we should look at the redrafting as well It's somewhat of a cumbersome process under the code for an alder person to request an advisory opinion from the ethics board But that's called for in the ordinance and any alderman can request an advisory opinion from the ethics board it's a confidential opinion and But I guess what I would suggest Short of that is if you've got an issue give our office a call would be happy to discuss it with you and Try to work through any particular issues that may have Before the matter comes up, I think it's generally helpful to do that Not saying we're always gonna have the right answer or not I My and this has been reiterated a couple times in the past meeting my general philosophy is err on the side of caution I Would prefer in ethics matters not to walk the fine line but I guess when push comes to shove there somewhere there is a fine line and The ethics board which is all of you will have to make that decision Perhaps someday as to which side of the line somebody is on but I guess I think the better approach The approach I advise is try not to stay You know Right at that line try to err on the side of caution But but bear in mind the principles. I've talked about the your public Your duty as a public official The fact that you're all coming to the council and your jobs with a certain amount of bias there's nothing wrong with that and Talk to us and or Ask for an advisory opinion from the ethics board If if in doubt Thank you, attorney McLean One comment was made that The alderman did not come to the defense of all the University I believe the vote was unanimous not to proceed that sounds pretty Much like we came not necessarily to your offense, but we found absolutely no reason to pursue it I want to go on record saying that that The questions that were brought up in that case of personal financial gain This council found that there was no reason to continue beyond that and the opposite side of what Attorney McLean had just said is that therefore its responsibility to continue to vote When appropriate and not to vote when in that question So I want to clarify that that we did come to the defense because we felt it wasn't the strong case We needed to move on from there. Sorry to drag you back through there again rehash We did two weeks ago, but again, it was unanimous. There was no question about that Second thing we heard about is bias a lot and my own personal take on that is kind of rehashed We've already heard that we all come with biases If someone was elected because they're a business owner I find ridiculous to say that they shouldn't vote on business issues. They're a lot They're elected with that expertise We hope to have that expertise to use in the council on the argument is the next police officer I think it would be ridiculous for you say, you know what all that experience you have we don't want you know, you you fought crime in the city and I don't think that it would be appropriate not to vote on the police issues as well, I mean we all have biases and Be aware of them if there's any again personal financial gain that comes off of that story, but The other thing is that as attorney McLean pointed out there wasn't actually no ethics claim in the two communications as Chairman of the committee the whole and again that can be overruled. I will not be scheduling Further Complaints as such unless there is a actual claim of this in propriety Again, so I'm not saying that we don't want to sit here and do that again But now we've got two all the persons I've gone through issues that I don't know how this will it's going to go tonight But the first one was unanimous not to pursue so if there's an actual claim will go on from there And we'll certainly all the public to do so, but we have work to do And I don't want to sit here 14 more times for the other 14 of us all the person's here in this well 13 right now I guess Going through this process again unless there's an actual claim that we can move on to ethics board Swear people in takes a penis gather information and move on from there Having said that we have some lights, so I must have touched a hot bun album in just a just a very short comment Attorney McLean has made it quite clear that there really is no ethics violation here and I've seen alderman older person Kittleson work many times and I Think I for one can trust her judgment in these matters because I think what we're looking at is not violations But judgment and there's no way to Legislate judgment and in the past she's showing pretty good judgment, so I think in the future I'll trust her judgment on these matters. Thank you. You all along with Alderman board Thank you, Mr. Chairman I would like all her person Kittleson to just comment on the proceedings so far tonight if she would and also I would also like her to comment On how she reaches her decision on voting on fire department ambulance issues. Thank you On fire department things always I I've always gone to attorney McLean The first year that I was was an alderman when my husband was on the fire department I abstain I was very skittish about everything pertaining to the fire department. I'd always asked for Clarification on things I never voted on insurance matters. I never voted on retirement issues Anything pertaining to salaries. I abstain from entirely he retired then December 31st 2005 I Would also at that time since that time I would always go to the attorney asking for clarification on things when fire department issues came up if I thought there was a problem or He would the attorney would always help me talk me through it or help me and he there were a number of times Or he would say jean you don't have to abstain from that plea you need to vote on that and I abstained anyway That being said Like I would always ask for Steve's Steve's opinion on things Going back here. Let me just see I did vote on the fire station number five. That was December 6th 2005 but I know that I asked Steve's opinion on that there was no Monetary you always have to be careful. What's the monetary gain for you? What's the personal? What's the personal gain? Then I voted on the ambulance may 29th 2007 John was gone from the department at that time there was no personal gain From he was never involved in it in any of the ambulance talks or any of the any of those issues So I felt it was my duty to to to vote on that As as attorney said Rather than abstaining you need to vote on these issues. So you need to you need to make that decision The smoke detector ordinance that there were a lot of constituents who called on that that was Contentious issue. I never I voted on what I Made the best decision based on what the citizens who had called me had talked to me about and and that's what I based it on So that that being said I will continue to talk to the attorney whenever there's an issue That's my stand Thank you. I want to listen There are no more lights on at this time I'm about sorry. Sorry, Mr. Chairman. I thought I had knocked it out. I was just gonna dance. I'm sorry Are we taking these two together? I mean it might be more I don't see that there are different documents I just don't know if the motion is to take them as one. Yes. Yes, the motion was to take them as one and the second So it's together. Thank you. All right motions been made and seconded to file the documents All in favor of that motion say aye. Aye chair. What's I opposed? Motion carries All right discussion of possible action on resolution calling for referendum regarding abandoning the city's current ambulance service 8-37 for Alderman's Bauer, Longman and Heidemann Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to approach the Chair and I like to pass out some information some of the alderman have received it but not all of them So you haven't received it also at this time I would ask permission that other people be allowed to speak on this naming Pat a home Gary Maples and CPA Fay arena Would they be allowed to speak on this too because they were part of the process that I Asked them to help me with the information that Alderman Gisha Requested that we come in with some financial information and I didn't feel I was qualified to do that So I I would make a motion to open to the floor to the to the citizens that Alderman Bauer would like Speak motion made in second to open the floor very discussion on that motion On the longman This is on the motion to open the floor. Yes I'd just like to make the suggestion possibly that we put a time limit on each speaker so that Everyone has a fair chance at this. I would request that the chair rule on that Thank you Alderman longman The motion that made up the floor I would make a motion that we use the rule that we do at public forum Five minutes each five minutes with a request for six if they need it that'll be at the option of it Second I would check in that Okay, so the original original original motioners more in the second diversity Had amended their motion All right, I'll favor that motion say aye. Aye. All right careful. It's I opposed motion carries continue at this time I would like Pat a home to address the council in the meantime I will Pass out information Miss a helmet you'll wait just one moment. Well, I get my stopwatch so That's a part of the phone up first so we can continue. So just be a moment yet It's taking a while Mr. Chairman for the record while you're getting that ready could we have the woman's name and also her address for the record? Absolutely, it's Patricia a home 260 to a Camelot Boulevard. All right. Yeah, five minutes Okay, this is an email that I sent this noon to every Alderman Some of the people may not have gotten it because I sent it to the new email address and I'm not sure if you were all using that yet or not But tonight is your last opportunity to correct the injustice done by the Sheboygan Common Council back in 2007 when those members took it upon themselves to eliminate a financially responsible and cost-saving Contract with a private ambulance service that was providing excellent service to the citizens of the city Only to create more jobs and hire more personnel at a huge cost increase for the Sheboygan fire department the tax-paying residents of Sheboygan had no say in the matter at that time and If they would have I'm certain the Sheboygan fire department would not now Be the major focus of enormous deficit spending in the city's budget The only way to correct this financially unsuccessful error of the past is to vote tonight to Resolution calling for a referendum on the November ballot to allow the majority of our tax-paying citizens To decide who should handle ambulance service in this city Why are you so afraid to let the voters make the decision? If you feel so certain that the Sheboygan fire department is the proper entity to continue with the ambulance service Then let the voters confirm your choice By not passing this resolution for referendum to abandon the city's current ambulance service You only prove that you're afraid the outcome will show a very poor decision was made by the council members in 2007 I Don't know who is all on that council when it was determined the firefighters should get into the ambulance business But now is the time to trust your constituents and give them the opportunity to make the ultimate choice That will save much needed money down the road and in the long run Yes getting out of the ambulance business will mean the four firefighters just hired by Mayor Ryan's Split-casting vote will lose their jobs But if you wouldn't always be putting the cart before the horse in order to shove your ideas down the taxpayers' throats There would have been no need to lay anyone off The Sheboygan fire department ambulance matter is not a money-making venture for the city as the chief keeps trying to show With his ever-changing fuzzy numbers It is an expensive burden that we cannot afford and it's time you allow the people you are supposed to represent To show you the financially feasible way to go on this issue Thank you, and may I just make one more comment? Thank you my brother lives on 10th and endcourt and I called him before I came to this meeting and asked him to contact his older person. I assumed it was Maryland, Montemayor, and it's not it is Scott versey and He said that they therefore don't even have a chance to voice their opinion on this because they have called Scott versey and Told him what their opinion was and he doesn't get to vote on it He doesn't get to represent the people from his district that want This referendum to be put on the ballot. So there is an opposite effect of What we had with all the person Kittleson? Thank you Thank you. I'll be ours is next Thank you I've got one time. Thank you Oh, you got the Those three pages are Gary Meeples mine starts with number three I went before the Finance Committee approximately two weeks ago and at that time Mr. Gisha Indicated that the finance committee would like some financial information I'm also going to call upon two other people that are professionals that have more information and We're able to dissect some of the information Given to the alderman and the people regarding the ambulance and that will be failure rater who's Company is innovative solution. She's a local CPA And she will give give me new information And also Gary Meeples who I believe this by buddy knows he has a local business man and President of the Greater Sheboyka Committee So they will Be adding to these remarks There are three pages here that I've taken And some of you said well, you don't have page to what I've done is I followed copy The first page is a letter that was read to the finance committee Approximately two weeks ago kind of self-explanatory and I believe failure rater will elaborate on this the second page It's 2009 it shows the revenues and expenses In 2009 we had revenues or to take 2008 revenue of 620 thousand five hundred and five dollars and fifty one cents Expenses four hundred and twenty one dollars Three dollars four hundred twenty one thousand three dollars and thirty cents in two thousand nine eight hundred and six thousand three hundred and thirteen dollars and nine cents in revenue and expenses of five fifty one six hundred and eighty dollars and thirty seven cents yet At this time you can see that in two thousand eight made approximately two hundred thousand dollars Based on the accounting used by the city 2009 the the net was two hundred and fifty four thousand which In in response to questions that we had Four hundred thousand dollar profit So you can see about that in itself. We felt far short of the projections that were given to the council back in 2007 The last page shows projected revenues for two thousand ten of 892,000 This would Develop revenue per employee of a hundred and fifty eight dollars And roughly twelve cents. This is based on four employees That we were told that they had to hire to run the ambulance service Industry average per employee is sixty five thousand dollars Which you can see sheboygan is way ahead of the game because we are really a money-making organization and Apparently the rest of the country Hasn't caught on to how to do this. So with that I am going to Leave it up to you. I think the next person I would like to have come up would be mr. Maples and You want okay, I'm sorry Faye Rainer the local CPA and I would ask her to come up and she can elaborate on some of these figures Sure, though. Mr. Rainer. I will need your name address, please. Sure Faye your Rainer 727 north 37th Street Sheboygan You will have five minutes. Okay. I passed out two sheets of paper one green and one white Has everyone received those? I'm sorry. I don't have and every enough for everyone if anyone would like some look me up I will give you a copy definitely no problem So I'm not going to quite address those yet, but what I would like to say is I've been working with businesses for over 25 years I kind of know I guess having that CPA is I kind of know what I'm doing with finance stuff So what what I want to focus on today? I got from Nancy bus our deputy finance director today I got a number from her. I said what is our cash balance? What's our what's the balance in our checking account and she gave me that number? It's a hundred thirty six thousand five hundred twenty nine dollars It's a on the green sheet Okay, what did that means is? That's how much money we have in our checking account And on a cash basis What we've been hearing is we've got we've been making money with the ambulance service And my understanding is we started out where the there was some money given to the ambulance service to pay some Expenses that money was paid back and to date now. There's a hundred thirty six thousand sitting in the checking account Usually when we're evaluating businesses the checking account is kind of the key where you can't really fudge that too much As far as where things are going where expenses are being allocated So it's kind of nice. We do have a checking account for that separately for the ambulance service So I'd like to point out my first point is the ambulance service has not made four hundred thousand revenue over expenses Technique need technically using the word profit is inaccurate government entities don't don't have a profit. Okay. Thank you so what we do have though is is an accounting system which as a Government agency we can kind of do what we want to with our accounting and it can be okay There we have audited financial statements, but we don't have to Break out everything and as you could see on the green sheet and And this is what really bothered me about the whole situation is we have zero ambulance expenses Okay, the vehicles that were being used in the first year was zero Okay Yes, I think the reason for that is the least payment hitting year two It was paid in year two, but if we're looking at one year, we've got zero expense And that's communicated to people to say we've got four hundred profit the first year. I Actually, we communicated that information where I said, you know, it's just not plausible and that's why I got involved I'm not a member of you know, I'm not at all affiliated with the Orange Cross or with the fire department or anybody I'm an independent and I'm here today as a citizen saying I am tired of hearing all the Information and misstatement and as an auditor as an accountant as a CPA I find I have found it offensive that we would say the government is making a four hundred out thousand dollar profit every year But we have a hundred and thirty six thousand dollars in our bank account So help me see where where where that profit is going then because it's not going back to the general fund Do you under I hope everyone understands that we don't have money going back to the general fund We have a paper profit the three hundred some thousand dollars a paper profit It's not hard money that's going back into the general fund Okay, I Really don't want to talk too much about what I want to talk about but I really want to know if you have any questions for me So please feel free to ask that. Yes, Mark. Yeah, thank you Complete cost basis versus marginal cost basis I think when the council started to account for this I'm led to believe we're eugenie Marginal cost basis is that inappropriate? Well, I believe it's very inappropriate when trying to make a decision on whether something is profitable or not It's typically used in business to say, okay, you know, we've got a real small unit over here We're gonna apply just just the basic cost and if I were to give an example I'd say yet your son or daughter at once a lemonade stand you're gonna foot the bill for the lemonade You're gonna buy the cups and they're just gonna go out there and make profit I'm gonna give my brilliant management advice for free And you're gonna give them your management advisor parental advice of what not to do So yes, and that's that's just my very simple example of From an accounting standpoint, neither one's Necessarily wrong they're accepted accounting practices, right and as you can see here today, you know the word audit Causes all kinds of Misinformation the war, you know the the how things are represented Can be very different and I talked with Nancy bus specifically about that. I said why you know why was that? No ambulance cost. I mean that the lease was was Incepted in 07. Why was there nothing in 08? She said we talked with the auditors about that We could have done it either way and we've also looked at a variety of other ambulance services throughout the country And they do they're accounting all different ways There's really no consistency and I said I realized that and that's why we've kind of looked at this more in comparison to what the industry business has in relationship to what the numbers should be and Really in summary, I don't know how many minutes I have here But I was thinking I was thinking this through the government could take over a local homeless homeless shelter You're actually over five minutes, but I'm allowing it because I would vote to give her another minute All favors say aye. Hi chair. What's I posed carry on? Getting very warm up here, and I don't want to faint so That would be a little dramatic very dramatic. Okay, so That would be good All right But my point is we could as a government as the city government take over the local homeless shelter and show a profit doing that Now whether that's really true, you know It's just not true and we and I feel we've done this with the ambulance service and Really distorted from an accounting standpoint What what's really happening with that situation I'll learn about Lauren first This year in or I want to ask you a question on an issue that I've always had difficulty with and I did some research on this myself and that is the the final act fire department in in Delegating their cost for example They delegate seventy five percent of their paramedics time to the ambulance side of the business and 25 percent of their time to the fire department our fire department Delegates and and they're making well over 2,000 calls a year. Whatever the number is our fire department is delegating 25% of the paramedics time to the ambulance side of the equation and 75% to the fire department now if you were if you were looking if you were looking at the books of the ambulance service Would you question how that could possibly be possible how they're delegating? delegating The time of the paramedics when they're making over 2,000 calls a year, but yet Supposedly they're only delegating 25% of the cost of the paramedics to the ambulance side and 75% to the fire department where and again I guess just because fondle act does it it doesn't make it wrong But it seems to me a fondle act is making Probably the same number of calls we are and they're their finance director over there decided that you know If you're really going to take a true look at the cost We ought to be delegating the amount of time that they're actually spending on ambulance calls, and they consider that to be 75% On the ambulance and 25% to the fire, and we're doing just the opposite if you'd like to comment on that, please Well, this has been an area of contention when we've discussed this But I am convinced that we are greatly under valuing the salaries and benefits on the Modified accrual accounting process. I reviewed this and I'd be happy to go into it in detail But I think I will bore you all to death And that's why on this green sheet I've added where we could be adding a normalized cost and we would at least be doubling our wages For what we have there and I understand the chief's position on that, but I still believe this would be even conservative I think I can answer to some degree as well If for example, the ambulance service would discontinued tomorrow And we laid off 25% of our firefighters who are left with 75% Then it's appropriate costing because again using marginal. That's the cost of the city has The increased cost would be the 25% which is why they're I believe they're doing the 25% of that if it was the other way around if we Got rid of the ambulance service and we could lay off 75% of the firefighters Then I think it'd be appropriate, you know to to go in a different direction But I think that's that's one way of looking at it is is the the marginal cost is that we have a fire department Yes, they're doing more of their work on the ambulance service beginning. We're the ambulance service What amount I mean we have the budget 100% then and what is that number? It's about 75% of the they're told budget right now if I could just follow up, please what fondle what fondle act with the final act fire department in their finance department has decided to do is Hypothetically if the cost of running the ambulance service for the final act fire department is 1.2 million dollars, and that's a hypothetical Hypothetical figure at the end of the year The city of fondle act is telling the citizens of fondle act it costs us 1.2 million dollars to be in the ambulance business however Because of that expenditure, and this is a hypothetical figure again We are putting as a result of being in the ambulance business $400,000 into the general fund and I and that has always been a contention with me and a lot of citizens Why can't we just give the citizens a shaboy again what it is actually costing us to run the ambulance business and say oh by The way at the end of the year. We're putting in $400,000 I think a lot of people would be satisfied if that's the way it's being reported a lot of people don't understand This marginal cost and it's been a born-of-contention with a lot of people since day one The marginal cost is the way to do that unfortunately, and it is confusing and that's the problem You know again your example 1.2 million And we're adding the 400,000 to the general fund The cost is only the difference between having a fire department and having a fire department and an ambulance service Increased cost and those numbers haven't given I believe we've had those for a while Alderman Hannah here next I just have a quick question Let's assume we we switched to a complete cost basis Humor me for a moment and and let's keep the numbers round. Let's say that With the ambulance revenues involved with the fire department it has the potential of generating 300,000 to the general fund and we shift costs from regular fire department over to ambulance So ambulance now shows a break-even or deficit Would the fire department have excess cash flow then to contribute to the general fund Making the assumption of 300,000 Certainly not the ambulance serve or the fire department is not a profit-making entity I didn't use profit or I mean the ability to contribute back to general fund No, certainly not and actually that 300 all that's really doing is coming out of that the fire department budget That's it's just saying okay. We're taking that paper money and we're taking it out of the fire department Budget in total or the money that it's showing up on the statements. So again paper money Not not real. I do have an issue with that marginal cost Because I really don't believe we really are including all the marginal costs And I've got some communication out to our deputy finance director You know, I know there's insurance costs that we've had to get in addition Those are not here and apparently that my understanding is that marginal cost method was decided by a group of non-accountants who decided let's figure out how to Then I don't mean to insult anybody. That's okay But a group of non-accounts that decided this is what we're gonna do without input from someone that may have a little bit more knowledge in that area and You can and that's basically what I also got from the deputy finance director It was decided this is how we will do our accounting. So they're not doing anything wrong They were doing how it was Decided by a group of people how to do that accounting All right, there are no more lights Thank you, mr. Chairman. So then what and we have a hundred and thirty six thousand five hundred and twenty nine dollars in the Checkbook and so we do that's money that we have that's money that we have I'm not positive if there was money originally given out to the to the finance to the ambulance service To start up. I my understanding was that was given back and some of that might have been used But that's you have this right now. However, if I may add I don't mean to interrupt you What that means though is we've allocated for people to this This report for people now if we really related that to real life the numbers well, I happen to know look kind of perusing some information that was public of that The the nonprofit ambulance service let go nine people so we replace nine people with four And I don't see that logic Because they are running. I have looked at that some public financial information. They are running a lean organization And it's a nonprofit and they have been a nonprofit. I believe for 14 years Okay, and I know I hear the citizens I hear people talking about this all the time and I felt for me This is just an issue. I need to step on and get involved with and I realize you have auditors You could ask them some questions. You have your finance director. You have your your fire chief however, I also realize that finance issues are difficult and Perhaps when when the council has those maybe maybe talking to some advisors Well, whether again it be your audit team or it may be even the greater Sheboygan group or our group of business leaders understand finances and have Access to people like myself that understands numbers very in very great detail your six minutes are up for Opinion, but we're using right now as an expert. So please stick to answering The questions all the welcome. Thank you, mr. Chairman I'm gonna I got to be careful here because I'm now on the opposite side of this issue So I have to be careful because I don't want to you indicating a bias I don't want to diminish her input because she's making my new case for me But I gotta I have to caution our guest that she is a late-comer to this conversation And she is missing a great deal of information about the history behind this so to catch her up The whole efficiency lean thing mr. President has everything to do with the city had a million dollar overhead advantage There was no will of the people at the time to get rid of the Help me out. Dulce. There were either 15 firemen or 15% of the fire force I forget what but there was a move afoot to say hey, they're not that busy Let's get rid of the members several members of the fire department There was no political will of the people to make that happen So what the or the group that passed and then this this council that passed the fire department issue? Decided that it made financial sense and one of the reasons was because there was a million dollar overhead benefit We already had buildings to put ambulances in we already had very qualified paramedics and so Because of that million dollar overhead advantage stuff that wouldn't go away because we couldn't get rid of the firemen at the time And so we didn't have those additional expenses and an orange cross did that gave us a million dollar overhead advantage over orange cross and that's why we were able to implement it by hiring four additional people and Leasing three ambulances so again I realize that you're late coming to this conversation But I have a great suggestion and that is we would love to have someone with your Investigative techniques and your knowledge of numbers apply for our director of finance job in the city because Lord knows we need one That has the bandwidth to pursue questions like this. The honorable thing you do is to not take the benefits package Thank you at all gracious leave me to decline that That question the million dollar overhead I realize you have infrastructure and such to deal with again We could we could probably how was some of the homeless people there now? Is that something you want to do you know is that is that part of the argument? I guess that doesn't generate income Well, and again, we probably are too cavalier with the word profit and there are people who use it inappropriately I don't think any of the three people who weren't aware of numbers that were involved in the creation of this program I don't think any of us have used that the word profit inappropriately I think we've been very cautious to use words like it provides an income stream It offsets its own expenses on a marginal cost basis. It returns more than it sucks up and again just For complete disclosure. I'm on the other side of that issue now because As a first-term freshman alderman, I was naive to the very Expensive long-term proposition that hiring new firemen meant at the time. So again, I'm not trying to disprove miss uramer uraners Argument here. I'm just because she's doing a good job of doing what I hope will happen But I'd caution you to be a little bit more tentative in the words that you choose because you're missing some valuable pieces of information And I appreciate that I There were not there making money. I thought this was I'm a little confused I admit that when it comes to numbers I'm probably not the brightest candle on the cake in the room here But I'm wondering are we straying off the question here I thought the question was whether we're going to have a referendum or not to put it very bluntly You are correct. However, two committees that this was referred to Did not have information within those committee structures and asked Alderman Bowers to provide the information at this session So I'm simply providing that resource that the other committees did not have which of course the members are here today You are right I'd like to keep you know a little more focused on the issue at hand. There are questions about the referendum that we Think we need to discuss. I think we have yet to discuss the referendum Actually, yeah, exactly and I kind of wish we would get on to that All this financial information to me can be presented Supposing this does get on the ballot that's the time I would think to present all this information so that people can make an informed choice and I certainly would be all for that we'd have like two and a half months or so to Put out our positions to our various constituents and from what I've been able to observe out there this very simply can be called a very hot button issue and People out there have very very strong opinions on this and I think it behooves this committee to Get back to the question if you would and let's Decide whether or not we're going to allow the people of Sheboygan to speak their piece or not I think that's what this is all about Alvin born Thank You mr. Chairman. I was going to make a motion on the resolution But I didn't want to preclude mr. Maples from speaking if he wanted to I would I wouldn't Yield to mr. Maples if he wants to make any comments Otherwise, I prepared to make a motion with an amendment to the resolution. We have two more lights If you want to make the moment you make it do so. I'm gonna I'm gonna make a motion to Make a favorable recommendation to the council to go ahead with the referendum But I do want to amend it and the thing I want to amend is the last sentence of the of the resolution where it says January 1st 2011 I want to change that to January 1st 2012 and under discussion. I'd like to give reasons for making that motion go ahead the reasons for making that motion is that if this does go on the ballot if we choose to make a recommendation for this to go on to the ballot and The election is November 2nd. There's a very very short time frame between November 2nd and and January 1st of 2011 if the decision of the citizens was for us to get out of the ambulance business and give this back to the Private sector however, I would feel more comfortable if the date was changed to 2012 because it would be my intention as a member of the finance committee To recommend that if the citizens wanted to get out of the ambulance business and get it back into the private sector that This be put out for bid It's going to be impossible to get this out for bid to private contractors with the due diligence that Bernie Romer does He's very thorough But when he puts stuff out for bid and it's going to be darn near impossible for him to get this out to bid get the Bids in award the contract and expect expect the private sector company to be up and running by January 1st 2011 however if we change the date It gives our purchasing director ample time to do due diligence on the bids get them out there get the bids in Have whoever's going to look over the bids Make a recommendation to which provider private provider would have the ambulance business This also gives our fire chief Based on the wishes of the public if it passes that we get out of the ambulance business for him to make recommendations on restructuring his fire department and then gives the new provider ample time to Become the ambulance provider on January 1st 2012 I just don't think if it would pass in November for us to get on the ambulance business that there would be ample time to Pull this off you might say and this is not only a financial concern on January 1st 2011 it would be impossible For me to be comfortable with a private provider taking this over and being able to provide the private Safety to our to our to our citizens. I just think it's too much of a rush job But I want to make that motion to change that date to 2012 for those reasons. Thank you Is there a second of that motion? Motion been made and seconded to amend the resolution as before us to change the date To January 1st 2012 Under discussion I can definitely see your point I think it's an excellent point if I own an ambulance service and I knew a city had two months or less It wouldn't get my best bid You know a little bit high am I big knowing that they have no choice to do so so that'd be a good idea We have a few people Alderman Bowers your first. Yes, I would be Settled for that, but I think there's too much time. Why don't we just say July 1st 2011, I think that's plenty of time. That's eight months to put it out for bids and Get the proper procedure in place. I don't think we need 14 months So I would like to amend that one to 2000 July 1st 2011 There's a motion made on the amendments We'll see if it passes or fails and then we can add to that accordingly if you desire Alderman Well, I just wanted to say to I we need I before I feel comfortable voting on this I I would like to know, you know the financial ramifications and We have it here and I I guess I'd like I'd like even more information from Faye Talk to us some more on this. I Hear my thought was I forgot what my thought was when you were up here. I was talking Highlighted areas Hold off we have a motion regarding and we're going to focus on that question at hand So we're just discussed right now the motion Alderman Hannah your next is on the motion This is this is just some comments in the motion and some suggestions within the context of the motion When I served on the school board, we did a referendum for one building and gymnasiums at North and South High And Initially that was met with a lot of resistance So there was a real commitment on the part of the school board and some active citizens to hold Educational forums to get all the information out And we've got between now and November So can I add a friendly amendment that we make a commitment to at least hold five Public forums between now and the time it's voted on so that we can educate the public Given the best information that we know That's that's really how we we did it with the school district. It was full disclosure plenty room We had we had school members for it and school members against it And I just think that adding that commitment to public forums is helpful I would accept that friendly amendment if they if that means a second I would second that I think that it the point that Alderman Hanna makes is very important I'll be long when you had seconded the original motion The person making the motion it amended to include that they hold five those in session So that would actually have you written in the resolution because right now you're amending your resolution How would you want that word at Alderman Hanna? Where would you want to be on behalf of the Common Council? Or be it further resolved we would be it further resolved that the Common Council hold five Public forums in the neighborhoods of the five fire stations So the amendment would be to twofold first portion of the amendment would be to change the date to January 1st 2012 And the second portion would be to add a be it further resolved that the Common Council add five listening sessions Prior to the election. Okay, Alderman bulk you're next. Thank you, Mr. Chairman one Comment and one question the comment would be And again, no one wants to see this ambulance thing over sooner than I do But when we when we stood up the ambulance service, I remember with chief Lestoskey, I think eight months was pretty much pushing How far out in advance we could get equipment and get people trained And things of that nature. So again, I'm gonna support Alderman Boren's 12 month timeline or 12 or 14 whatever it is because again, nobody wants to see this thing gone more than I do but again And at an appropriate pace that allows Orange Cross or some other entity to hire the people they'll need get the equipment They'll need and get them trained And it's just my recollection and Alderman Hanna You may or may not recall that but I remember that eight months seemed to be pushing it last time So that's my comment. It was pushing it big time And then my question for this body is do we need to Define whether this is a binding or non-binding referendum does that or doesn't it matter? I just that need that word doesn't appear anywhere in the resolution. I just wanted if it's important Mr. Chairman hello, I would I it is it is binding if you look at the bottom you have the original document there, sir There's words. I don't have the document That the council shall comply with the The decision of the people and I I checked that out with attorney McLean and he said that makes it binding perfect. Thank you, sir Alderman Bowers you have this on the motion to amend Okay, very good any other discussion on the motion the amendments to the resolution Seeing none all in favor of the amendment say aye. Aye chair. What's aye opposed? Motion carries. We have an amended document Alderman Bowers you had a motion to amend again if you'd like to make that motion as the appropriate time Changing to July 6th It's already been amended to change it to January 1st 2012 But you also wanted to make a motion to now change the what the body just had done and change it to July is that correct? So your motion is to amend what we've done to July 1st 2012 has already been passed. Yeah, so if that's your motion, then is there a second to your motion? Yeah, there is no second so that motion fails. They get on the bars Okay, now on continuing discussion Alderman Boren you had mentioned that you'd like to hear from Gary Maples at this time If Gary Maples has anything to say, I would like to open the floor to him. Okay, Mr. Raples, please go forward Alderman Wongaman has reminded us that the topic at hand is whether or not to hold the referendum So if Paul Paul mr. Raples, can we focus on that question at hand whether to have the referendum or not? Mr. Maples name and address please Gary Maples sheboygan falls, Wisconsin. I'm also president of the Greater Sheboygan Committee and Mr. Chairman, I would graciously ask if you would allow me to state my professional qualifications and not include that in the time You have five minutes you may throw that in there if you'd like I so without including it in the five minutes We'll stipulate that he's a well qualified. He's well qualified. Thank you. Well known Admired by the business community and private citizens alike. Thank you You can begin As far as I can't perhaps address the referendum issue is exactly as you wanted I had been approached by Alderman Bowers and by Missy Rainer to Offer my contribution as far as my I will mention my professional qualifications. I am retired I've been a president of two different banks. I have Economic interests within the city of Sheboygan I've spent my entire life 35 years looking at financial statements That was my role in the bank was to analyze and look at the quality of financial statements to this day I still teach I teach in several different locations in the United States Including the University of Wisconsin Graduate School of Banking. So that's my background my credentials What I passed out to you is is is mr. Born asked for a simple answer and that's what I've tried to do you will notice I don't have any there's nearly as many numbers on the page as Missy Rainer does but dead, but I'm not a CPA Take out the words profit take out the words Contribution take out the words all those words that are constantly tossed around Because the only thing that counts at the end of the month at the end of the year is cash And what you see on the paper is the net cash position of the ambulance service Cash inflows in other words collections and fees minus cash expenses For the year two zero zero eight that number is a hundred and ninety nine thousand dollars However, as Fay pointed out, there's no debt service or lease service in there So that number is probably double what it would be if the lease payments had been made in the first year the second year 255,000 net for two zero zero nine does that include the lease payment that includes the lease payment That is correct the 210 budget is for 376 All right, let me elaborate a little bit on that Let's take two zero zero nine cash collected was 806 cash expenses was five fifty one now those numbers of cash expenses four twenty one in two oh eight and That five fifty one in two zero zero nine are based on the accounting system being used as Miss Rainer indicated there are some potential holes And there are some perhaps some marginal costs that are not being captured in the accounting system So that five fifty one and that four twenty one for cash expenses are probably and I agree with Miss Rainer considerably higher of course what that does is if it was properly accounted for in that way It would reduce those net cash lines considerably and perhaps drive them negative. Yes with that cash Data move to the fire department. I'll have a general I would ask that we withhold questions to the end so we don't run in the same problem of Miss Rainer about when five minutes is actually up Write it down, please Cash is the focus cash is the only thing you can count Billings don't count receivables don't count cash counts. This is cash information in flows and outflows now What I have some of the same Problems same frustrations that fade as is so many numbers have been tossed out 300,000 400,000 500,000 800,000 in the future None of those numbers mean anything unless you can relate them back to the cash flow. This is the cash Right here. It's on the page now the last comment I hope I'm not pushing my time too closely here and that is Let's take a look at two zero zero nine If the ambulance service was removed from the fire department the 806 and cash collected would go away now Theoretically the five fifty one should go away also because no the landman service no revenues no expenses however, that five fifty one contains approximately two hundred and fifty thousand of fire fighting staff and If you make the assumption that those people would stay in the fire department once a Divestiture of the ambulance service occurred then that hole that financial hole so to speak would be 250 Plus 255 or almost 500,000 so that's a reasonable number However, I'm concerned about that number because again, I've heard if you drop the ambulance service The hole is five hundred six hundred seven eight hundred thousand dollars coming from different sources Sitting in these meetings listening to them There is a five hundred thousand dollar hole in two zero zero nine based on two zero zero nine numbers if you drop the ambulance service But that's with the assumption. You will keep all the fire department staff, which is not necessarily a No, that's another counsel issue to determine, but mr. Maple's a good pause for a second you had a motion to grant the extra minute Motion made a second all favor say aye. I share what's I carry on please. Thank you That does mean that there would If the four firefighters would be dropped you would still have a hole of 255,000 based on two zero zero nine numbers that is less than three percent of the fire department's entire budget it is not a Do you want to give up 255,000 dollars in income not necessarily but on the other hand it is not an insurmountable number Asking expenses how many of in your private lives have been asked you to take a 15% pay cut and and you did it because you had to So that's I wouldn't focus on that number as being an insurmountable obstacle It it needs to be dealt with the last thing is as Terry Hansen pointed out in his paper that he wrote and and submitted about the Next five to ten years of the fire department Your six minutes are up if you hold please though. I'm sure there's some questions. Okay someone like to ask him about What are you just about to say? That might be appropriate Alvin Hanna, thank you two questions you answered the first okay for What's a fair value to sell the ambulance business out that we have and secondly if we were to sell it to a private vendor? What is the fair fee and lieu of taxes to charge that vendor for access to our city I Can't answer you because I have not researched those areas. I could tell you that that information is available great I do not have it today Thank you Are there any questions this time Alvin born I would ask the question for you to continue with what you were going to say As mr. Hansen's report indicated The fire department operates at a deficit now all city departments operate a deficit That's nothing new. That's no great revolution Revelation excuse me what his report says however is that deficit is going to grow Dramatically in the fire department Regardless of the ambulance service or not so again in the short run it helps But do not look upon the ambulance service as a long-run panacea that is going to eliminate these Growing deficits and the what the reason that drives the deficits is basically personnel costs Thank you mr. Maples other any other questions this time Alvin bulk thank you mr. President Thank you. This is great analysis. You're totally right about cash But to say that 3% is not an insurmountable obstacle is someone who has not sat across from them at the negotiating table That 3% is a significant obstacle and they will fight What we are trying to accomplish here Even though they are in the papers trying to be agreeable They are working have no doubt that they are working to keep as many firemen on duty as they can So when someone who is good with numbers says it's not an insurmountable obstacle Practically he's I mean feel Theoretically he's right practically there are obstacles to be surmounted if we end up having to lay off a significant amount of the fire Department and getting the political will to do that. That's one and then two if you take $400,000 which is and again, I'm with you to give you a little more history and Gary you are around I'm not sure if they was in as involved at the time There are expenses missing from that but that was not because of any short of Malfeasants what that was was we put the best business plan together several aldermen signed off on it Really people who are really good with numbers Signed off on it and then we left it up to the good offices of the Department of Finance to make sure that all the costs were allocated And then there were long conversations driven by citizens and us to make sure those numbers were included And so three years later if all those numbers haven't been included shame on us But that's not because of any malfeasance upon anybody here So if you take $400,000 divided by 14,000 homes in Sheboygan That's about 28 bucks per household to get out of the fire Fire ambulance business so again as you communicate with your constituents ask them if it's worth a couple of pizza hut pizzas to get this mess behind us and and get Get orange cross back in the ambulance business here and for Alderman Hanna I'm really interested in if that's possible. Can we put this bit out, mr. President in a way that forces a contribution in lieu of of tax because they are a nonprofit entity and all of us We can have conversations about what that means, but definitely they're in it for profit It's just not tax profit. So mark. Is that possible mark for us to put that for Bernie to put that in the thing? Okay, because that would help make this decision a whole lot easier to if we can turn some of orange cross or some other entity in the future turn Them taking this business over into a revenue stream for the city that makes it even easier And this is preaching from Alderman born's gospel And that is your how do we create we have a lot of nonprofits and how do you? appropriately Get fees for access to the city to help offset cost of services. Whoever does the ambulance we're plowing the streets Excellent, you know that's helpful. Thank you. So McLean. I do a few questions if you're available. I'm still awake Because it's hot and we're all tired Questions that I have for you are really two-fold one ties into Alderman box conversation here. The resolution is calling for referendum And we've already amended it as such to also include listening sessions would be appropriate to if the recommendation is to go to open bidding and Put requirements within the open bidding is it appropriate to add this to this now Because we would need to take such actions as necessary to carry out the decision of the electorate Or do we do that at a later date? Do we set up then the bidding guidelines at a later date? Well, that's not my decision. That's your decision. I'm not gonna tell you what you should do or shouldn't do and I'm not a financial person, but That's that's the problem you have with a binding referendum. It's basically got to be a simple enough Question so that people can make an informed decision. Yes or no, and it's a yes or no decision and You know the more things you throw in there That It's probably a good idea because there's a lot of variables But that's that's your decision. I was asked to review a draft document. I Not my purview to change the the merits or the content of the document. I was looking at it from the standpoint of Format basically If the council chooses to have a mandatory referendum I Personally and it's again not my purview of it. I think it's a good idea to provide some time frame in there because As Alderman Warren pointed out From November 2nd or 3rd the date of the election to January 1 2011 it's pretty short time frame There's there's a lot of issues if the decision is to do away with the ambulance service Then what do you do? That's That's binding on you. I guess The question would be then if that's how the resolution reads and the referendum reads then I guess you've got to decide You know, what do you do? Says we're out of the ambulance business. Does that mean we contract with the private ambulance service? Do we just not do anything and let the private sector? They'll avoid I think there's probably gonna have to be some negotiation with the county to as we did before to get a joint contract a lot of issues and It's all That's why I think it's very important that you not rush this sort of question And you take some time to develop an appropriate if you want to do a referendum make an appropriate question that from your standpoint is intelligible to the public gives you the information you you want and Again, I've had the question asked the number of times a couple of times Whether or not the council can do this as a binding referendum Because the issue has come up in the past where citizens have initiated a direct request for direct legislation through petition and I've given the opinion that Council already acted on it. So it's not an appropriate subject for direct legislation. Therefore. You can't take it to referendum This is a different scenario this isn't being initiated by the public or private private citizens This is a council initiated Document In my view my legal opinion you can make it mandatory you can make it advisory You're not bound by the same Proscriptions that there are for the public in in trying to override Legislative decisions by the council but I think all those are questions that are that need to be Analyzed carefully before you make your ultimate decision on on having a referendum What you want to include there and How are you going to word it because I think it's very important and as I say Ultimately it comes down to in a referendum question. You can only answer yes or no and And You know you can't say well, maybe if this or that and the other thing so you make it mandatory it's It's all or nothing, so I don't know if I So if answered your question or not But in summary if it is the council's goal to put it out for open bid That should actually be part of the referendum question So perhaps something to say shall the city should plug in a man's fire department based ambulance service in favor of a private ambulance should really say She won't get a man's fire department ambulance service and go for open bid For the service that'd be more appropriate. I'm not sure what well If that's what you want to do or if you want to talk to the county about Working with the county cooperatively like we did previously and have a joint contract. In fact, the county took the lead on that contract If you say go out for bid, you know that the council will go out for bid then you're bound by that If it's a mandatory referendum You've got to go out for bid then so that's the sort of thing that Gets a little difficult Questions Alderman Bowers your first No, I'm sorry Alderman longman you are first your second your next Alderman Bowers. Thank you I think I agree wholeheartedly with turning McLean that We should keep this document as simple as possible. This is a yes or no question We I don't see how we can put something into a document where we say If if this resolution or if this Referendum passes then we'll go out for a bids is that what we're saying. I mean, how can we do that? Why don't we just keep it a simple yes or no question? Do you want the ambulance service? Do you know in the fire department? Don't you I think this is what we have to stay with and the more complicated we make this We're gonna over engineer this thing till we come up with a complicated document that half of us won't understand So ours keep it keep it simple to kiss principle I agree Let's just keep it simple once we start asking ambulance companies if you're gonna kick in and if they don't do that do that We're getting the cart before the horse. Let's keep this simple Let the people decide and then after that we can do negotiating and if negotiations are fruitful Okay, but otherwise we can't be putting all these caveats on on the ballot because People wouldn't even know what they're voting on Alderman Hannah you're next. Yeah, no, and I agree with Tom In no way do they want revenue sharing on the ballot you keep the question clean You do your education up front We've got from now until November what 14th? 15th second right we've got a period of time now To get as much information and ramifications out to people There's an opportunity in the community for individual people to form Interest groups on either side of the issue and that creates a healthy debate in the community and More flow just because we're holding five listening sessions doesn't mean other folks Can't do all the educating they want, but I just think it's important as a as a group We at least make an effort to communicate as the facts as we know them To as many people as possible so they can make an informed decision It's what we try to do with the school district You know you you try to to give the facts as best you know them at that time Nobody has a crystal ball about the future, and I think that you keep it simple, but you educate up front very public board Thank You mr. Chairman I'm glad Alderman Hannah brought that up about the nonprofits making a contribution for city services Unfortunately that the way the law is written is that those are voluntary Contributions the only way you're going to get those contributions is when you've got something that they want and that can be negotiated to give An example the new hospital at Aurora is building down in Grafton Aurora agreed to give Grafton, and I don't want to say the figure, but it was a very very substantial a lot big buckaroos and What what Grafton is doing now? I believe he's building a public works building or something is very substantial amount so Definitely when if we're going to put this out to bid and we're going to be negotiating I Definitely think we should be getting some future considerations and in addition to that money that Grafton got Aurora is paying on a yearly basis for for a fee in lieu of services a substantial amount for fire Protection police protection and public work services, so it's I think it's very appropriate when the time comes that we Have that as part of the negotiations, but that's a separate issue from the from the referendum I don't I agree we shouldn't cloud this up any more than it is right now But whatever committee is going to be in charge of that whether it be finance or strategic fiscal planning Those are all very important parts of the discussion if this goes out to bid. Thank you I'm in bulk. Thank you, Mr. Chairman Mr. Chairman, I'm politically conflicted Because I ideologically I'm against referenda in this matter because it's a complicated issue And I think it's us abdicating our responsibility to have the courage to make decisions I think we should be making this decision But in light of the fact that we tried to make this decision before and it didn't go the way that Frankly, I want to see it have another shot at going. I'm willing to give the citizenry their chance And so I'm going to support this but there are a couple of things that we should make sure we get out there One is every time we vote there are these unintended consequences every time government does anything there are these unintended consequences and One of these unintended consequences might be based on the financial reporting that orange cross did before we did all this They were scraping by their people were underpaid their people were overworked They were just a stepping stone to a real paramedic job. These are the things we heard If we impose or would negotiate some sort of large contribution to our community That may go the other direction. They may not invest in as many ambulances as we want They may not invest in the training. We want them to invest in so know that if we vote on this tonight And we do away and we potentially set us up to get out of the ambulance business Citizenry out there beware there may be consequences. You're not thinking about and to What was to oh? I think we may underestimate the power because we've got a great group here tonight That is being vocal with numbers and facts on a very complicated issue They may underestimate the power of organized labor to get out the vote on this issue And you may not like the way this referendum turns out So I want you to be considering who has the ability to get the vote out And if we vote to approve this and if the good people sitting over there get behind this referendum You better be ready to match an an ideological opponent that is ready to defeat this referendum and so I think again I I'm gonna vote for it tonight. It's against my ideological Predispositions, but I'm considering it a penance for my short-sightedness when you know three or four years ago Thank You mr. President Ellen Bowers They call a question There's a motion to call the question And it has been seconded So we will call the question this point in time. My goal was to have the fire department speak on behalf now Beware of that they have been sitting all two and a half hours for the chance to speak as well But the motion has been made so we need to vote at that point in time now all in favor calling the question right now say aye Opposed calling the question calling the question simply calling the question Actually And that's the motion right now to call the question technically though There is no question called because we've amended we need to make a motion first to pass the amended Resolution had written and second that so right now. We're been in discussion with no question So when somebody make a motion first and then another question can be called However, again, I would consider we've had people wait two and a half hours to speak as well So you need mr. Chairman you need a motion for For to make a recommendation on the amended resolution, correct Motion was made first. We've amended it. So we need we need a motion to pass the amended before going forward So technically there's no question to be called So motion been made in second to pass as amended or to recommend passage as amended more in about Any discussion on that's All right, thank you Say this to me again The question was called to vote on whether or not we have a referendum or the question is called Whether or not we accept Alderman Boren's amendment. Okay, technically the question was called. However because we have never Had a motion to pass as amended There was no question to be called so now born and back have now made in second in the motion To recommend to counsel the passage of as amended And if someone like to call a question may do so at this point in time, but there has been no question called right now If someone calls the question again, we need someone to call a question if that's the answer otherwise Is there we're still in a call a question? Motion's been made to call the question is there a second to call the question At this time when we vote to call the question which what we're right voting on right now is to end input and debate On this question so everyone's clear. We're not voting on to pass the resolution with the recommendation yet We're just voting to end discussion all fear that motion say aye. Hi opposed All right, we'll do a roll call Call the question. This is the call the question to end the debate Moran. Hi Oh, hi hours. Hi, Decker. No No No No Kittleson says no my to me or no radkey. Hi Rindflash, no van der wheel. Hi Versey up staying Anwangeman, I Seven knows six yeses one extension Motion to call the question has failed. Okay this point in time The chair would ask that the fire department's has had heard of the commentary this evening And the question is whether or not we're going to put this on the ballots if the fire department has some input They'd like to add this time Thank You mr. Chairman. I too do not want to sit here another two and a half hours as the rest of you do There's been a lot of good points made I've been given Numbers at the same time that you were tonight Obviously did not have time to research them I do have a couple of questions on the green sheet From miss you Rainer it's got a number of $29,700 for donated equipment lease value I'm not familiar with what that is there was a $50,000 estimate of Supervision cost and I think Alderman Hanna did bring this up I Guess I'm wondering is that you're understanding that that is transferred then out of the fire department budget and into the ambulance I guess I'd like to know if that that is a question or the answer to that Also nor in it. I think it was touched upon but The amount in the fire department budget that comes out of my budget and is transferred into the general fund And I think that was related to as just paper But it is a deficit to the fire department budget and I do Agree with mr. Maples on the the actual hole in the 2009 budget. I think that his figures are are Fairly accurate The marginal cost issues I think we can debate this and we have debated this for months and years on How the costs are allocated for the ambulance? Unless somebody can show me that there's costs that are not in the fire department budget and not in the ambulance budget that are An expense to the ambulance system I guess I don't understand the argument because if it's in the fire department department budget It will come out of there and go into the ambulance and it's it's the net result of the city is the same You know I ran some figures on If we cost Expensed out all 18 paramedics And the expenses to the ambulance system. It's roughly I think about 1.4 1.5 million dollars If you subtract the eight or nine hundred thousand dollars I'm projecting it a little bit higher next year of revenue. It is a deficit of about eight hundred thousand dollars But again that comes out of the fire department budget my question is If you decide that we're not in the ambulance business anymore, and we take those 18 paramedics away from the fire department What do you have left? And I think that is the decision that this body needs to make Because that it's in your power to decide policy and fire department level police department level Department of Public Works level So I think that the public needs to know that I think you need to understand that that with When you take bodies away from the fire department stations will close Services will drop. There's there's no other way around it. I think we saw the public Outcry when we closed station five Just for a couple of months. I Spent the better part of the last two months traveling around the state Researching on the internet calling fire chiefs calling city managers looking at other systems To compare us to just the on Monday Alderman Bowers mentioned that the city of Oshkosh is looking at getting out of the ambulance business That's exactly what you said no well Okay You know I would recommend that we go up there and talk to them or take a trip with With a couple officials and talk to them to see what their reasons are for looking at getting out of the business Once again, this is a decision that the council needs to make as to what level of fire protection that you want The ambulance in my opinion is funding part of your fire protection right now if you take away just those four firefighters That are funded in the ambulance budget a station closes so there is a reduction in fire and public safety Protection just by reducing those those four people I believe miss a home made a comment in her statement that The only reason we took this one was to add employees and I guess I would ask how many employees Did we have in the fire department prior to taking on the ambulance service 78? How many do we have today? Is it 78? What do we have then we have 73 when we took it on right now? We have 69 soon to be 73 in a week although I would Wouldn't be surprised if I get a call from four gentlemen who decide not to quit their jobs in the next week and come here So once again, it's decisions that this council needs to make you need to educate the public whether it's through listening sessions, but make no doubt that Changes that are made from the system that we have now will have an effect on The delivery of public safety To the community and I think the one thing that was not mentioned tonight. That's very important is Aurora Memorial Hospital and St. Nick's have both stated that the system the medical delivery system is better with the Sheboygan fire department in it This the head of the state EMS has said the same thing And I think that's something that's something very important that those three entities have said that The delivery of emergency medical services in the city of Sheboygan is better with a Sheboygan fire department has a part of it There aren't any questions Lovin Bowers you're up. Yeah, I think it's five minutes or up And I'd also category denied that I said I talked with people in Oshkosh They had no recommendations one more the other and I talked to the president of the council Now you say that I talked to them and they were looking at privatization No, they're not right that Alderman Bowers. I didn't say that on Monday I asked you if there were any other cities looking at getting out of the ambulance business and you inform me that You had knowledge at Oshkosh was I talked to them, but they're not I didn't say that Okay, all right. Good. I said you straight or not. I said, thank you because that saves me another trip As for five minutes sees a department head So I'm not a member of the public that motion was not made to limit to five minutes So I did let them speak all in a long time. You're up Chief just one question, please Are you against a referendum? Are you against letting asking the people what they think of this because this is the question at hand We're getting way off the question again the question at hand They shall we have a referendum and my question to you sir is are you against a referendum? I would say as somebody who has stood up here since 2002 talking about this very issue Thinking about that that I'm not opposed to a referendum, but I Would caution you that I hope this is not an easier way out for this body right here Because I believe that this is what you were elected to do if you are choosing this avenue as an easy way out for you When With regardless of which way it goes if the if the vote comes out to say no we want the ambulance in the fire department and the people that know me well know that I'm a Pretty fiscally conservative You don't have to worry about that with me as chief, but I would hope that It's not viewed as okay the public voted this the ambulance is in the fire department. It's a blank check But that's one of the Possible Outcomes of that and the other is if the public is up in arms that as a result of that of not being in the ambulance business We close one fire station. We close two fire stations. We close three whatever it turns out to be I Would hope that this body then does not say well we washed our hands of it the public voted That's what they got so I guess I have a fear that it's an easy way out for this body But am I afraid of a referendum? Absolutely not I've always said let's listen to the people speak All the head. Yeah, I just wanted to reiterate that As many people possible as part of the education process is critical the information's got to get out You know, I encourage groups on both sides of the equation to get out And I know you'll be Appreciate that Alvin board. Thank you, mr. Chairman Chief in defense of what the citizen said I have a copy here of the letter that you wrote in the summer of 2007 in that magazine and I want to quote a paragraph there We are currently two firefighters short and have lost four in the last two years and Had the real possibility of losing four to nine more in the next two years due to budget for Shortfalls that would have caused us to likely close the station under this proposal Meaning getting into the ambulance business We will add four firefighters next year and have a staffing guarantee for the next five years This is key. There is still a real possibility that orange cross will fold And we will take over the entire area. We would then look to add an additional 12 firefighters Now if that doesn't say that this wasn't driven by increasing your staff when you said it yourself in this article in the union magazine I don't know what is if you want to comment on that's fine, but that's what you said And first of all it was written for a union magazine. It was edited after it left my hands We have not added any more staff other than the four In fact the council guarantee of staffing for five years was not held up. So Yeah, I wrote that letter And it said it I don't have I don't have to go over it again It said you're hoping that orange cross falls and that that's going to mean an additional 12 firefighters I don't know if I wrote in there that I was hoping they were full They would fold but in the event that we had to take over a larger service area That's a possibility that we would have had to add staff. That's correct Would I have that same viewpoint after being in the system for two and a half years? Probably not I'll never see sorry can't hold my tongue on this one Got a correct a statement you made that you just spoke with the stadiums director Which is dr. Martins and she stated that it's been better since the fire department has taken over I know that it's not made that mr. Brian. Let's go. No, Dr. Martins is a stadiums director And she's also I may have most miss spoke on the title. I'm sorry I'll about thank you, mr. President. I Echo Alderman Hannah's concerns about this is a very complicated issue and putting it out to the people it may devolve into this popularity contest worthy of a high school prom, you know election and Because it's very complicated people who are very good with numbers can disagree with people who are very good with numbers And so again, I have concerns about putting this out to the populace Not because I don't want them to have their say but because it's a very complex issue And I'm afraid it's going to turn into who spends the most money and who turn who makes who the worst guy And are the worst people and then that other side will win in a popularity contest So again could be unintended consequences all the first month we are Thank You chairman Previously when we have the ambulance and with the police department there was a referendum in November of 88 and two-to-one margin in favor of city ambulance service And even though they knew at the time it was going to cost them huge amounts of money to train the police Because they were definitely not paramedics or just barely EMT's The citizens then still said yes, so I think there is a Sometimes the public just wants it the way it was And I don't want to make it that simple but to get the public Educated to the real Possibilities that might happen is going to be very difficult. It is not a simple issue. It is very complicated and remember when We did have orange cross and we worked at the county We paid for that. It wasn't free. We paid for that Finally toward the end we did not have to pay but when it first started we paid for that and Before orange cross was hired There were a couple of other ambulances that we paid to come to the city One of them just left another one intended to be here But on the last day that they needed a certification from a local doctor the doctor Renigden said I will not do that and that's how we came to have orange cross and We did have to pay a lot now. I would guess we probably will again because Orange cross will know we need them. We have no out if this is binding I'd have another question for a The way the question is written It says in favor of a private ambulance service doing to add non-profit So it's that we're not precluding companies like orange cross that we are including them in the victim process Or does private mean non-government? Yeah, that question for you The term private would that preclude non-profit Ambulance services we need to add that so that the nonprofits can bid as well I'm sorry. I'm clean. We're televised. I need to use the mics again. People could interpret it different ways. I suppose Private if you want to say non-governmental I suppose you could do that But every time you put a word in there, it's gonna have some sort of effect that you may not totally want the I Don't know if I can take a second to address Something Alderman and a Montemire said my recollection on orange cross was I Think when I first got here in 85 and 86 the county subsidized orange cross But when the city Drop the police ambulance and we contracted out we went for bids Curtis ambulance was the winning bidder at the time and I believe they They may have been paying us something But they didn't they didn't fly either they they couldn't cut it and I believe the latest two orange cross contracts The most recent one was a joint contract with us and the county with orange cross and I don't believe there was any subsidization And You know we didn't subsidize them and they didn't they didn't make any payments to the city again getting back to the Text of your referendum question if it's going to be mandatory You're gonna have to be very careful on each particular word if you want to make an advisory I'm not saying yes or no. That's up to you, but you'd have a little more leeway and If you made an advisory and you didn't abide by the voters wishes They vote you out at the next election, but then at least you'd know the will of the people perhaps and Could take that into consideration in some of your financial factoring but again, I'm not here to Argue one way or the other but just to make you aware of Thank you all of ours Yes, it changed the wording and make it nonprofit. You're eliminating a Lot of ambience. I'm not saying it'll change it all the way I'm saying are we precluding nonprofits from bidding right now? Well, add them as well because we're private We have what nonprofit. No, what do we have private private private that would include everybody wasn't it? Well, that's my question. Does private not mean nonprofit as well I want to make sure that the nonprofits have a chance as well as long as we get everybody because I have you want broad based Yeah, because I have talked not with the people in charge, but people with different evidence services And they said it's an interesting situation now these people had nothing to Say about the bids themselves, but they said it's interesting and they're out of town Ambulance services now the next question is that we go to buy three. Why don't we just Instead of postponing it Let's let's say it's a bitey referendum and get on with it and let the people decide Thank you, Alden Hennett Yeah, at this point in terms of there's some we'll have another kick at the cat the full council We've got some words that we all need to do some homework on So I would call the question at this second most of the maid to call the question this point in time the question Upon calling would be as amended because I question is All favor calling the question say aye. Aye chair votes. I opposed Motion court carries questions been called So the motion to be made and second to pass the resolution as amended With a favorable recommendation to the full council all favor that motion say aye. Aye chair votes. I opposed Stain Foreign aye Bowers aye Decker aye Hanna aye Heidemann aye Cough aye Kittleson says no Montemay or says no Radke. Aye Grinfleisch Vander wheel aye verse versey abstain Wangerman aye Love and eyes to nose and one Motion carries for a motion to adjourn Thank you. Second All here say aye