 Good evening, everyone, and welcome to tonight's meeting. Before we start the meeting, I'd like to read our city clerk, Susan Richard, puts a lot of thought to these little quotations that are up on the agenda. I always read them, but I think it'd be nice to read them. Then the quotation goes like this, slow down and enjoy life. It is not only the scenery you will miss by going too fast, you also miss the sense of where you are going and why. Wonderful. I'll call the 13th regular meeting of the Common Council to order. Madam City Clerk, I'm sorry. I want to go out first. I'm sorry, no, we are all right. Madam City Clerk, please call the roll. Bowman, excuse my voice, I'm not feeling very well tonight, so you'll have to forgive me. D-Berg, E-Berg, Serta, Davis, Graf, Kittleson, Manny, Meyer, Montabay or Ratke, Cigali, Stefan, Susha, Van Akron, and Vanderwill, 15 present. Oral was present. Alderman Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I would move that we dispense with the reading of the previous common council meeting in the same stand approved as entered on the record. There's a motion to second under discussion. Not all those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? Minutes stand to approve. Next, we have the Pledge of Allegiance. I'd ask Alderman Stafford to please lead us. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you, Alderman Stafford. And for the benefit of the gallery and the public, we call upon Alderman to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance, going by alphabetical order. I've been asked that question by the public. How do we decide who's going to lead us? We do it alphabetically. Mayor's appointments, Attorney McLean. Thank you, Your Honor. This is dated today's date. Hereby submit the following appointments to the Business Improvement District for your consideration. Reappoint Linda Jar, Cleo Messner, Janet Carter, Jan Davis-Wood, and Tricia Fippin for three-year terms to expire 9-1208. And appoint new member Douglas Pelnar for a three-year term to expire 9-1208, signed by the mayor. Those will lie over. And Thomas Holton to be reappointed as Director of Public Works and Engineering, commencing January 1, 2006, and expiring December 31, 2010, signed by the mayor. An appointment will lie over. And hereby submit the following appointments for your consideration to the Tourism Advisory Committee. The Mayor, the Director of Planning and Development, Alderperson William Steffen, the Harbor Center Marina Representative, Michael Froh, a lodging facility with 120 rooms or less, Representative Cara Leonard, the Non-Lodging Tourism-Related Business Representative, Linda Jar, Harbor Center Bid Representative, Richard Meyer, Bed and Breakfast Establishment Representative, Frank Ribich, lodging with more than 120 room Representative, Rick Peterson, Museum Representative, Ruth Kohler, Non-Lodging Tourism-Related Business, Rob Hury, and the Tourism Manager as Exefficio Non-Voting Member. Some of these are through the end of the 2005-2006 Council year, and the other half are through the end of the 2006-2007 Council year, signed by the mayor. Those appointments will lie over. Thank you, Attorney McLean. Madam City Clerk, Public Forum. Yes, tonight, Jim Bourne, please. Mr. Bourne. Jim, could I get your home address, please? 1526 Nolcrest Drive. And you will have five minutes. Could you let me know when I have one minute left, if possible? Mayor Perez and members of the council, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you tonight. I was supposed to be here two weeks ago, but unfortunately, at the last minute, I had a conflict with my church council, and so I had to be there for some quorum votes, and I called my two Alderman Graf and Berg and mentioned that I was gonna be able to make it. And Dan said, you should take care of God first. You can talk to us Alderman any time. So I'm here tonight. The reason I'm here tonight is to discuss 2005 Act 40, a provision of law enforcement services to cities and villages by the county sheriff. Act 40 was sponsored by Senator Lippam, amongst others, and was signed into law by Governor Doyle in the last budget. The companion bill on this was Assembly Bill 79. It had bipartisan support, both in the Senate and in the Senate and the Assembly, and as I said, was passed by Governor Doyle. Couple of weeks ago, the city clerk put into your packets how I got started on this. This Act 40 was not covered by the Sheboygan press, unfortunately, so it had been kind of under the radar screen here in Sheboygan, but I saw an article in the journal Sentinel back on August 26th, and I sent a copy of this to my Alderman Graf, and he got it on the agenda back in September, and it was referred to public protection and safety. I met with public protection and safety at their meeting on Tuesday, September 13th, and they decided to have this issue lie over because of the fact that the county really hadn't met on this issue yet. The last county board meeting last week, it was referred to the law committee and I talked to Supervisor Winkle before I left tonight, and he said they have met and they haven't taken any action on this bill, but actually, they really can't take any action on it because it's a statute and it would be up to the city of Sheboygan whether they wanna pursue this. The reason this bill came about was that current law was unclear regarding the authority of cities and villages to possibly abolish their police departments and contract with the county for law enforcement services. Act 40 authorizes cities and villages to abolish their police department if they enter into a contract with the county for the sheriff to provide law enforcement services for any city or village in Wisconsin. The reason this article was of interest to me is because in speaking with my own Alderman and several others and also running into Mayor Perez occasionally at lunch, I realized the predicament the council is in with trying to balance this budget. It's my understanding that for 2005, the city budget for police services is $10.4 million, which is almost a third of the city budget. Next year, according to the article in the Sheboygan press, it's going to be $10.7 million. I don't have to remind you of the fact that your shared revenue is frozen. There's a property tax limits. It's not really a freeze, in my opinion, but there are limits in what you can do with the budget the next two years. And also looming in the upcoming legislative session in Madison is the taxpayer bill of rights is going to be revived again. Now, regardless how you personally feel about the taxpayer bill of rights, it's going to be revived. And this is probably going to be a constitutional amendment that has to be passed by two sessions of the legislature and then has to go to referendum and there was a survey done by the Republican and Democratic caucus last session. And if this taxpayer bill of rights would have went to a vote last session, 70% of the taxpayers in Wisconsin would have voted for this. So when I was speaking with the Public Protection and Safety Committee, what I was recommending because of the fiscal restraints that the city is in, and I'm not endorsing Act 40 by any means, only if it would make financial sense to the city of Sheboygan. In other words, if you approach the sheriff and laid out what you wanted as law enforcement in the city of Sheboygan, and let's say hypothetically, and I don't like to deal in hypothetical situations, but let's just say the sheriff could provide the law enforcement that you want for $8.4 million. That's a $2 million savings over what you're doing right now. So what I recommended to Public Protection and Safety is to possibly form a committee, Mayor Perez, similar to the committee that you formed when you were on the school board, and I would recommend that the committee be made up of labor leaders, business people. Excuse me, Mr. Borne, your time is up. Alderman Susha. I make a motion to allow him to finish. Second. Motion to the second. All those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? One no. Case containing, Mr. Borne? What I was going to recommend to the Public Protection and Safety Committee is for, if the committee agreed, would be for the mayor to appoint a study committee made up of, as I said, labor leaders, business leaders, citizens, and whoever else you thought, Mayor Perez, would be appropriate for that committee and to study this issue. And after this study by your committee, if there were going to be true savings, now obviously at the end of this study, if the city was going to save $50,000 or $100,000, in the scheme of things, it wouldn't be practical to change over to the sheriff's department to provide law enforcement services. On the other hand, if it was going to be a couple million dollars, I think it's something that you seriously have to take a look at. So I'm going to be watching for a future Public Protection and Safety meeting and we'll go back and discuss this further. But I wanted to at least talk to the council about my feelings on this bill tonight. Thank you very much for your consideration. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Martin. And that's it. Thank you. Madam City Clerk, next we have a proclamation for Safe Harbor 15th Anniversary. And I'd ask Mary Fontanessa to please come forward. We'll record here. Thank you for being here today, tonight. As we know, Safe Harbor is celebrating its 15th anniversary and along those lines we have issued a proclamation. Whereas the effects of domestic abuse and sexual assault are far reaching and these crimes take a toll on individuals, families, our community and our society. And whereas Safe Harbor is dedicated to the prevention of all forms of domestic abuse and sexual abuse assault in the community. And whereas each year, Safe Harbor services hundreds of citizens by offering education and prevention programs, advocacy and by providing safety and support services for victims of domestic violence. And whereas in September 1990, Safe Harbor began working to ensure that those who live, whose lives are shattered by domestic violence can find help and hope in Sheboygan. Now, therefore, I, Juan Perez, by virtue of the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of Sheboygan, do hereby extend to Safe Harbor the heartfelt congratulations of all the citizens of Sheboygan on the occasion of their 15th anniversary and encourage all my fellow citizens to support this final organization which continues to provide shelter and support for the victims of domestic violence in our community. Ms. Fontanessa, congratulations on your anniversary. Thank you very much. And Ms. Fontanessa, I would like to say a few words. I wanna thank all of you very, very much and just let you know that I firmly believe that I would not be standing here on behalf of the board of Safe Harbor and the people that we serve if it were not for the wonderful people of Sheboygan. 12 years ago, you helped us to find a new facility to shelter the victims of domestic violence, the sexual assault that we serve each year. In 1991, when we had only a few months' operating expenses, it was the people of Sheboygan that kept us open and running. It was the people of Sheboygan that have been there since the very beginning and I'm so glad that you're still with us today. Thank you very much. Next on the agenda, we have a hearing to amend the text of the city of Sheboygan official zoning ordinance relating to quorum requirements for the zoning board of appeals. Is there any person that wishes to be heard? Is there any person that wishes to be heard? Is there any person that wishes to be heard? Alderman Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I'll move that the hearing be closed. There's a motion. Is there a second? Under discussion. Not, all those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Hearing is closed. Thank you, Alderman Graf. Consent agenda, Alderman Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I'd like to pull forward two documents. The first one is 1374. Pulling forward, 1334 on page. 1374. 1374 on page 10, I believe. This is the resolution of proving the terms and conditions for the contract for lease of land between the redevelopment authority and harbors side development and entertainment LLC. And with that, I'll turn it over to Alderman Stephan. Alderman Stephan. Thank you, Your Honor. I need to move that the rules be suspended. There's a motion, a second to the span. Under discussion. All those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Please continue. I would move that the resolution to be put upon its passage. There's a motion and a second to put 1374 upon its passage. Under discussion. Under discussion, I'm gonna turn it over to Paulette. She's got the developers here and they're gonna give you a quick overview. As far as the lease goes, Steve can answer any questions. I know some people just got it tonight, but typically these leases, the rates are all the same with everything we're doing in the south pier. It's just that they've gotta put in the boundaries and the numbers and the measurements and stuff. But all the language is similar to what we've been doing in the south pier. So with that, I'll turn it over to Paulette. Okay, excuse me, Paulette. Paul and Ms. Agali. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was just gonna ask the same thing. Something could please explain this. Thank you. Ms. Anders. Thank you, Mayor and Common Council. What I'll do is actually turn it over to the developer and their architect. They're present. Okay, we need a motion to open the floor to a non-. There's a motion, a second to open the floor to a non-department head under discussion. Paul is in favor of State Eye. Any oppose? Motion carries. Please proceed. Thank you. Good evening, I'm Scott Matula. I'm with LJM Architects. I'm representing Harbor Side Development. Could you speak a little closer? Okay, is that better? Is it Scott Matula? Yes, M-A-T-U-L-A. We have here some drawings of what we're proposing to do. I'm just gonna touch very briefly on it. I'll let John fill in a few more of the details. Basically what we're proposing right now are two buildings. The first one is, I don't know, maybe about a couple hundred feet north of where the Jomaji building is. The second one would be located across from the entrance of the Blue Harbor parking lot. You wanna show the slide? Sure, the first building, one of the Harbor Side terminals east. Hi, everybody. You know, I'm honored to be here. My name is John Schwartz, Harbor Side Development Entertainment. And, yes, Scott was saying, the first building will be right here, Harbor Terminal East, we're calling it. And another thing... Mr. Schwartz, could you try to talk into the mic? We got the public is watching and they'd like... Okay, sure. Thank you. And another building we are seeking to start digging will be right over here. And what that will have is retail on the bottom and some condos up top, which we have drawings. I'm gonna turn over to Jeff for one second before I start talking about these things, just to go over some things with the agreement. Okay. And we've got a packer game to get to, so we're gonna try and do this really fast. Would you please give us your full name first so we can keep on the record? Jeff Bartson. John and I are partners in Harbor Side Development and Entertainment. Real briefly, it's a privilege to be here. We thank you, Mayor and Council. We're excited about this process. We're excited about our projects. We've had a really good working relationship with the staff. Paulette and Mr. McLean have been very great to work with. We've got six billion things total. We are trying to go ahead with two of them now. We've come to terms with the city on the development agreement and the lease agreement. So we're ready to move forward. We wanna start digging as soon as possible. We have high hopes for this area. We think this and other buildings will start and be the catalyst for a lot of development on the south pier and the surrounding area. So we can go the specifics of the approval of the drawings. We can talk through the project if you have questions of us, our structure, our legal structure. I'm a Sheboygan original. So I live in Madison now. John's from the Chicago area. Together, we own a lot of condos in the Dells and here at Blue Harbor, a little over 20 units. And so we have a vested interest in this area. We're not going anywhere and we're looking forward to making it better. So John, if you wanna. Sure. Sure. That is correct. I own a bunch of units at Blue Harbor. I own 20 of them. And I'm so fond of the investment at Blue Harbor and some of the other investments we've done in Illinois and the Dells. I'm very excited to take the next step and to put more money into this area. I'm enamored by the whole area and we have some ideas that have worked in other developments, whether it's the Dells or an Illinois region that we think they'll work really well over here. The biggest chaos that we see over here is now is Blue Harbor, such a wonderful resort. But we have Lake Michigan right there and we have a beautiful South pier that when we start building some of these things I'm gonna talk about, there's gonna be a vibrancy and this place I am just very excited about. To start out, when we first started with working with the RDA in February, we were talking about building a couple buildings that had condos on the top and retail on the bottom. We've also seen this year, 2005, that Blue Harbor and South pier not much has been going on. We've received a lot of comments of it being a boring island. Every time I come up here weekly, I don't see many of the locals coming down on the South pier and it's well understood. But one thing that everybody says is it's a beautiful place and we cannot wait the development happens. People, we received our August checks and people are spending 600 bucks a night to come to our places and our checks have been phenomenal and Blue Harbor, once this happens, this is gonna be one of the greatest tourist spots in the Midwest and I feel very strongly about that and strongly enough to put my money over here versus other spots that we can in the Midwest. Our goal this year with our company has just been right on Sheboygan. Now, what has happened since we were gonna put these buildings in retail is we were able to take a look at this harbor terminal. We wanna react to the people who are staying in our units and some of the feedback I've been getting from Joseph Haas and what they need next year to see on that South pier is amenities for the children. What I've learned from the Dells and all our under investments unless your child comes pulling at ya, sorry Scott and Tuggin, let's go back to Blue Harbor. They have about 10, 12 different destinations to go to. So next year we wanna develop attractions for the children and the adults as well, but over to the right, this harbor terminal area, I'm sorry. Well, we wanna capture next year, not only one of the things we wanna bring to Sheboygan is a water taxi, which will pick up people at the harbor terminal. Maybe we'll go this way with a little bit more. And be able to transport people up and down the river for the west and the east banks to tie in. We wanna get people over to the west side. I think right now that's the biggest thing is people will come over to Blue Harbor and they find it difficult to get across. And this water taxi will be an attraction for the children, not just a taxi and parents to get people around and they kinda bring both sides together. We also out of here next year, we wanna use this space over here to try and provide entertainment all year long, whether it's the children of the schools coming and doing a little puppet show or it's bands over there. But we want something going on in all times and we're gonna develop that over there. We are also going to the right, put up an outfitter store, which will not only have bicycle rentals, segways, kayaks, maybe even jet skis we'll explore, but it'll also have opportunities for children to purchase summer needs. They're gonna Velcro, baseballs, all kinds of things. Plus we're gonna rent a fishing pole so kids are fishing all out there. It's gonna be a place where there can be charters coming through, bicycle tours up and down the coast, so we really find this place to be an area where we're gonna build up south pier and activities and stuff. And the people that are coming here, they need this. They're leaving with money in their pockets is what they're telling us and the kids are a little bored. So these are the things that'll work in other areas and make it grow. Also, we also wanna get something for next year. There's a big mile circuit around south pier so we wanna be able to provide an attraction whether it's a little trolley or a choo choo and have the kids going around. Some of these amenities we wanna bring over here, I'm also wanting to incorporate so we get all the locals to visit south pier and Lake Michigan. Right now we're fortunate that there's a lot of people outside of Sheboyganet, wanna spend a lot of money in this area and help out, but it'll never work unless we get the locals out here and provide stuff for the locals. So we're gonna keep both of these things in mind and with that great mix, this is gonna develop into a destination. It'll be a three-day destination and not just a half-day destination. A great thing that we see about this area is Dwork County is still a couple hours away. You put everything right over here, we're saving everybody four hours a weekend coming up to here and it's a very exciting place. I mean, I could go on for an hour but I'd rather just say if people ask whatever questions they have of this because you've heard a lot of things and I'd love to answer them the questions. And if anybody's, I read an editorial last week about Blue Harbor and sometimes I'm hearing about Blue Harbor, I feel very confident Blue Harbor. If I didn't, I wouldn't be double-downing on my investment. There's other places I can put my money but I know based upon the checks that I've gotten the last two months, Blue Harbor's gonna be a big winner for my partners and for the city and I've seen stuff like this where you go through a one-year cycle of it being boring and as it gets established and infrastructure's put in there, this thing's gonna go so fast, it'll be blinding speed and it's gonna be very exciting to be part of and I want everybody to be involved in this. We are, I am from Illinois, Jeff is here from Sheboygan but with all the people we've talked to in the last four months, we wanna get all the locals involved with this. So if anybody has any questions, I'd love to answer. Are there any questions? Oh, I'm a sushi. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I've received some unusual feedback over the past few months and I've never known what to do with it and actually your presentation here tonight gives me a place to put this suggestion and some feedback from some of the phone calls and I know I mentioned this to Scott before. I've gotten calls about the colors of the buildings that are going up on self-care and I've just asked that as you do the development, you keep in mind we've got a beautiful hotel there that's white with a red roof. Here I see a picture of a bright orange building, bright orange clashes with red roofs so if you could just keep that in mind as you're putting the paints together and the buildings together down there. It looks like this facility here is gonna be absolutely beautiful and I am thrilled to hear you're looking at a water taxi versus a bridge. Thank you. Well, you're welcome. And the lime green color down here in the corner, we're gonna keep that out there too. So but I agree with you, these colors are not set in stone. What we've done over the last months is whether it's the mayor, the alderman, or RDA, whatever changes, luckily we can change anything you want. We've had so many comments from the RDA and other people what to do as far as changes and we love them. This is... Alderman, Stefan? Just a couple points of information. He mentioned a six unit project and that's the long-term goal and all we're approving tonight is two because you can't take the whole ball of wax at one time just to clear that up in case anybody had an idea. And as far as the buildings and the colors, the redevelopment, just we approve the pictures and say it looks nice. The next step is it goes to architectural review where we actually have people who build homes for a living and sign homes for a living. So they're the ones who approve all the architecture and along with the developers. So it's kind of out of our hands, but hypothetically they should be the ones that are the experts. Thank you, Alderman Stefan. Alderman, Sigali? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just have a couple of questions. Are you gonna have any type of sports for the kids in the winter? We're talking summer only, the fishing, et cetera, the kayaks. Are you gonna have anything for them in the winter? Cause we do have some rotten winters here. And also are you gonna make it affordable for the children and their families for the people in this area to be able to go to that because that would be one of the prime things that would bring the people to your area would be the cost features. Sure. To answer both questions, as far as the winter, the winter is the most critical. In the summer, like in the Dells and other destinations, you will get things sell out and there's waiting lists for summer. So summers is not gonna be something that we're gonna have to market an extreme a lot. People come in the summer and when kids are out of school. But the winter is the most critical part to any investment whether it's owning the condos or to South Pier itself. So a lot of the things that we're gonna be doing over here based upon the weather is gonna be indoor dry land type stuff since we have an indoor wet area with the water park. What I think is the next thing that's gonna happen around the United States besides these outdoor, I mean indoor water parks is indoor amusements. So we are right now trying to build some things for next year because we don't wanna lose next year. And I was hoping that there's more things that were gonna be put on this pier this year for everybody. But instead of building more condos and retail, we wanna get into that area of like you say, summer outdoor activities with the fall in mind of all winter activities. And I don't know, for another day I can talk about that. We have some ideas for indoor stuff in winter. We definitely have it in mind, but right now these first two developments are not gonna have a lot of it at first. There's gonna be some things for the kids to do. It's gonna be a little play area. And in one of the structures, there's gonna be a little putt-putt golf area. But triple play is taking care of some of that need which we're happy about. They've got some of the older kids. We're gonna come back and some of our other buildings and address some of the smaller kids needs to do. But it's critical for us that we do that. And as far as affordability, just answer your next question. Yeah, we're gonna do everything in our power that during the week, when it's slower times over there, we're gonna make it very affordable to the children and adults of the area. Whether it's water, taxi, having residence rates and everything for everybody, because that's critical. That's how the work gets spread around here. Is everybody from the area knows people from outside the area, so we want that to happen. Caller Muneberg. Yes, thank you, Your Honor. Question on your condo development. Will those be rental condos or will those be basically long-term lease or will they be for sale and what will the price points be on them? Sure, good question. It's hard to answer that one because I don't know exactly right now. I can foresee them being rentals to purchase. I mean, condominiums to purchase. I can see them being weekly rentals, monthly ones. I know one thing that if a unit is getting six, 700 bucks a night, the value of that unit will be very great compared to the apartment rental rate, which in turn will drive up a higher tax base for everybody. So we will work with the city to establish what's best for all of us, but that can make a difference of probably about 500,000 each condo, possibly. That's just some of my things. And if you have eight to 16 condos in there, that's a lot of tax base for the city to grab on to. Okay, well, if there's no more questions, thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it very much. Thank you very much. I thank the mayor and the RDA for such an enjoyable time of going through this. Thank you. Okay. I'm sorry. Attorney McLean. Thank you, Your Honor. Just with respect to the documents in front of you, you've got really an incomplete set right now. When we last presented to the RDA, which was last Thursday, what we were discussing at the RDA originally was just approval of the Harbor Terminal, what we're calling the Harbor Terminal East Building. At that meeting, the RDA approved both the Harbor Terminal East Building and the one Shandy style building that's farther down the pier. So over the weekend, I amended the, or revised the contract for lease of, for private redevelopment that you do have as an exhibit to include both of the projects, but there's only one ground lease attached and that's the one for the Harbor Terminal East. There will be another ground lease for the Shandy style building. It'll basically be identical to the lease that you do have in front of you, except for the differences in the fact that it's a Shandy style building and where it's located and it's legal description and the square footage of the property and the uses. The uses for the Shandy style buildings are basically retail on the first floor and condominiums on the second floor. But other than that, you've got the full packet. I just wanted to clarify that. I apologize for not getting the documents to the clerk in time for you to get with your packets this weekend. I'm sure you would have all enjoyed reading this, these documents thoroughly over the weekend. It has been stated that they are similar to prior agreements that we've entered into on the South Pier. I will say they're not identical. Each one's got its little nuances. There are items in here that aren't in other ones. Some things are similar to other ones. And as far as the documents themselves, it's a little much for the council to bite off here tonight, as far as the specifics of the agreement. I will say that we've gone over these things pretty carefully with the redevelopment authority. And I think they're comfortable with the concepts here. Redevelopment authority basically owns the land out there and enters into the lease. The statute does require that the council approve the terms and conditions of redevelopment agreements and contracts for lease and ground leases in redevelopment areas. So you've got approval of their process. If you have any questions about the specifics in the document, I'd be happy to try to address them. There, one thing that is a little different on this project I talked to Attorney Bartzen this morning about is the ownership structure and perhaps Attorney Bartzen can address that. These documents speak in terms of Harborside Development and Entertainment, LLC. But I've been advised that they intend to, that'll be sort of the development arm. What they're looking at doing is having each of the particular individual projects, each of the individual buildings, really owned by a different LLC, limited liability company that would have different investors that are more passive investors as members of those LLCs and Harborside Development and Entertainment would be kind of the managing member of those LLCs. Let's, the other projects out there, we haven't done that at this point. They've been owned by the entity we were contracting with. That gets into the issue of assignability. There's some assignment provisions in here that generally relate to once the buildings are complete, you've got the right to assign to anybody they want without any consent on the city or the redevelopment authorities part. But I think it's important that you be aware that there will be different entities owning each building and perhaps Attorney Bartzen, if you could address that a little bit more for the council. Sure, when we began, when John and I began looking at this a year ago, we started looking at a building or two and we set up a company to start doing that. As it unfolded, we saw more and more possibilities and so what happened is our pool of investors needed to spread out a little bit more. And we began to, internally for legal reasons, just looked at more complexities in setting up all these entities, both from a security standpoint and from conflicts of interest standpoint. So what we thought was the best model was that the city from our standpoint wanted to make sure that they knew who they were dealing with, that they weren't gonna sign an agreement with Joe one day and be working with Susie the next day. So we think we can accomplish that and accommodate our investors at the same time by having Harvard side development entertainment owned by John and I always be an owner of each of these units and always be the managing member. So you're only gonna be talking to one group of people and that's John and I. That gives us flexibility in funding each one of these buildings with a slightly different pool of investors. Otherwise, we're looking for a large group of investors to do all six and that really becomes problematic. So that's why we did it that way. Thank you. Anything else? Thank you, Attorney McLean. Madam City Clerk, please call the roll. D-Berg. Aye. E-Berg. Aye. Serta. Aye. Davis. Aye. Graf. Aye. Kittleson. Aye. Meijer. Aye. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Segali. Aye. Steffen. Aye. Sousha. Aye. Vanakren. Motion carries. Consent agenda. Alder McGrath. My second one, pull forward. Like pull another one forward, sir. Under matters laid over. 1258. Page nine, I believe. And that's the ordinance which is amending section 2975 of 1975. Sheboygan Municipal Code, so has to add various positions to the city development table of organization. And with that being moved forward, I would make a motion that the general ordinance be put upon its passage. Second. There's a motion, the second to put 1258 upon its passage under discussion. They're being on. Madam City Clerk, please call the roll. E-Berg. Aye. Serta. No. Davis. Aye. Graf. Aye. Kittleson. Aye. Meijer. Aye. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Segali. No. Steffen. Vanderwheel. Aye. Bowman. No. And Dieberg. No. 11 ayes, four noes. Motion carries. Consent agenda, Hall McGrath. Thank you, Your Honor. With that, for items 13-1 through 13-25, I would move that all ROs be accepted and filed. All RCs be accepted and adopted. And we pass all, I believe there's three resolutions. Second. There's a motion, the second under discussion. Alden Bowman. I thank you, Your Honor. On 13-4, just for discussion purposes only, I don't wanna call it out separately. Okay, 13-4 for discussion. I'll read it out, by the way, too. It was from the plan commission, was a communication from Louise Hansen stating that she was outraged that the city did grant a conditional use permit to a local pet store. This was for the sale of a maximum of 40 puppies. I did attend that meeting and did listen to Mrs. Hansen's presentation along with representatives from Humane Society, ASPCA and some other areas. There was also a veterinarian there. And I found out basically that plan commission does not need to bring this particular thing to council because it is a conditional use permit. Honestly, I didn't know that and I had been waiting for it to come through so we could send it back, basically. Well, it didn't happen. And like I say, listening to the presentation, it resulted in a 600 signature petition that was presented to myself. And she had asked me to take this to the pet supply outlet store in the Washington Square Market area from the petitioners who will no longer shop at this particular store because of the fact of the puppies that they intend to sell. And of course, parts of their presentation was the fact that pets should only be purchased from reputable breeders by the public, not from unscrupulous mill type dealers who will never let their animals out for exercise other than for breeding purposes. I'm sorry we couldn't do much more to prevent this, but it's a permit that they'd go through. The only way now to stop it would be go through a court. Thank you Alderman Bowman. Alderman Deberg. Thank you, your honor. These puppies that were being sold out, they are from legitimate people in the business. A lot of them breed for a show. And a lot of these people that are objecting to this, they figure if your dog, if you're raising a dog and your dog has more than one litter, you're considered running a puppy mill. But that ain't right. But these dogs are good legitimate dogs. Thank you Alderman Berg. Any other comments? Not, Madam C. Clerk, please call the roll. 13-1, 13-25. Asurda. Davis. Graf. Kittleson. Meyer. Montemayor. Radke. Segali. Stefan. Sushia. Van Akron. Vanderweel. Bowman. Deberg. And Eberg. 15-i. Motion carries. Communications and petitions 13-26 to 13-30 to be referred except 13-29 Alderman Bowman. I thank you, your honor. On 13-29, I would move to file that particular communication. There's a motion to second to file under discussion. Under discussion, your honor, Mr. Abel did appear at the Parks and Forestry Commission meeting and he appeared in the public comment section of the meeting and actually did state everything that it says on the back of this particular communication that he was not happy with the location with the Leomong American Veterans Memorial within the DeLand Park area. And once this was basically explained that it also had been sent through council already that there was nothing really that could be done to move it. So I then, like I said before, moved to file. Thank you, Alderman Bowman. Any further discussion? If not, all those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Report of officers to 13-30A by city plan commission recommended filing document approving the capital improvements program recommended by the capital improvements commission. I'd ask for a motion to accept and file. There's a motion in the second under discussion. They're being on all those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 13-31, Alderman by, excuse me, 13-31 by the city plan commission recommended approval of the revised capital improvements program recommended by the capital improvements commission for the program period 206-210 and adopting the 206 program for implementation. Alderman Montemayor. Thank you, Your Honor. I move the resolution be put upon its passage. This is the one that goes to finance. This is the one that goes to finance. It's gonna have to go to finance. This is, this just came back from the city planning commission by ordinance. It has to be referred to city finance. So if you would just withdraw and then make a motion to refer to finance, please. Yes, please. I make a motion to refer to finance. I'll withdraw a second. Is there a second to refer to finance? Second. Second. Under discussion. Alderman Serta. Thank you, Your Honor. I just have a question for the city clerk. When will we be having this document so we can see and compare the revisions? When do you meet Alderman Graf? We meet next Monday. Next Monday, after that, they'll be here the following council meeting. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Serta, Alderman Graf. Alderman Deberg. If I'm not mistaken, we're gonna have a joint meeting with you, aren't we? Salaries and Grievance and you, October 10th, at six o'clock. That's how we're planning it, right? Good, go ahead, sir. Alderman Graf. Thank you. Yep, we're planning a joint meeting with Salary and Grievance and Finance also, but we'll also be discussing this at that same meeting. And just to let you know the difference, what happened is that there was, I believe it's $96,000 for police video cameras in the cars and that's the change that was made to the capital improvements and we sent that directly over to the plan department so they could approve that and they did. Right, the Capital Improvements Commission made its recommendations. Cambridge Council was referred to city planning. City planning held it pending the reconvening of the Capital Improvements Commission to add that $96,000 for the surveillance cameras. That has been done. Now it needs to go by ordinance, back to finance, then it'll come back to the council. After all that, are we clear? Sometimes it gets a little confusing. Alderman Staffin. I just wanted to make sure. I have under other matters was, at that point in time, it was document 1268 and that has the police video of $93,840 in. So that would be the final document then if it's got it in there in the capital improvements. 12 what, sir? It's not a document that's on the agenda for tonight but I just had it with me because I knew we were gonna talk about this. But that has a police video assistant for $93,840 on it. So that would be the final. Yes. One, right, okay. Thank you, Alderman Staffin. Are we done? Thank you. Alderman Sugali. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And that revised capital improvement plan does that still hold as a request for the hold off of the police station until 2008? Correct, that's still in that one. Okay. As it stands now, the recommendation of the commission by a majority vote makes that recommendation to postpone the building of the police station for two years. Okay, there's Alderman Graf. Just a, he's Alderman Sugali. Mind a little bit. We can vote on that. We vote on that when it comes out of finance. And then we make recommendations. Yes. Correct. Okay. Thank you, Alderman. There's a motion to second to refer back to finance. You need a roll call for that? All those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. To be referred 1332 to 1352, but please note that 1338 will go to public protection and safety. And 1345 will go to public protection and safety also. Two changes. Resolutions introduced three, 1353 by Alderman Stephan, approving the amendment to contract for sale of land for private development and the promissory notes by in between River Park Palace place of Sherboygan LLC and the redevelopment authority of the city of Sherboygan, Wisconsin. Alderman Stephan. Thank you, Your Honor. I believe once again, I need suspension of the rules. Is there any objection? Please proceed. I would then move the resolution we put upon its passage. There is motion and second, put the resolution 1353 upon its passage under discussion. Attorney McClain mentioned that typically the redevelopment authority when they are in charge of lands, they might, they had a lease. There were some issues that need to be discussed and they were approved and all of a sudden we found out that even though the redevelopment authority approved them, they had to come back to the council to get approved and that's the reason why it's here tonight and why we needed suspension. If you have any more questions, Paulette, I'm sure would be happy to fill you in. Thank you, Alderman Stephan. Are there any more questions about the council? If not, please call the roll. Davis. Aye. Graf. Aye. Kittleson. Aye. Meyer. Aye. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Segali. Aye. Stephan. Aye. Sushia. Aye. Van Akron. Aye. Vanderweel. Aye. Malman. Aye. D-Berg. Aye. E-Berg. Aye. And Serda. Aye. 15-nice. Well. Could I also have that document referred to salary and grievance too? Referred to salary and grievance also. Also correct. Is this, excuse me, is this 1354? 1354. Finance and salary. Cellar and grievance and finance. Any objection to that? Is there a second to that? Second. Second. Under discussion. Alderman Montemayor. Thank you, Your Honor. I simply wanted to refer it back to finance. Thank you, Your Honor. I simply wanted to refer it back to finance so we can look at the funding of this again. Thank you, Alderman Montemayor. Any other discussion? If not, all those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1355 to 1357 to be referred. Report of committee five, 1358 by salary and grievances recommended filing various documents. Alderman E. Berg. Yes, so thank you, Your Honor. I recommend that the documents be filed. Second. Under discussion. Under discussion. Under discussion, these are issues that were brought forward by former Alderman, Dr. Carl Tafel regarding firm limits. I think the committee has reviewed them, has discussed them and we are recommended filing. It is pulled from consent because Dr. Tafel requested that we would have a roll call vote and I would request same. Okay. Any other discussion? Not? Please call the roll. Graf. Aye. Kittleson. Aye. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Sagali. Aye. Steffen. Aye. Sousha. No. Van Akron. Aye. Vanderwheel. Aye. Bauman. Aye. D. Berg. Aye. E. Berg. Aye. Serda and Davis. Aye. 13 ayes to noes. Motion carries. Report of committee five, 1359 and 1360 to be referred. Report of committee seven, 1361 by finance recommended filing documents authorizing the establishment of a policy to review the hiring of city employees effective immediately and during 206 and eliminating the creation of new city positions. Hallermann Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I would move that the RCB accepted and placed on file. There's a motion and a second under discussion. Seconded. Thank you. Hallermann Montemayor second. Motion to accept and adopt committee report. Under discussion. Your Honor. This is one of the, this item is what finance and salary grievances will be discussing because there are certain things that we'd like to do and we'd like to see changed in our hiring policy and this would be something that we need to talk about. Okay. Thank you, Hallermann Graf. Any further discussion? Does anybody want a roll call on this? If not, all those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1362 by law and licensing recommended filing document authorized in the city of Sheboygan to apply for copyright and trademark of its logo and tagline. Hallermann Ratke. Thank you, Your Honor. I would move that the RCB accepted and placed on file. There's a motion and a second to accept and adopt the report of committee and under discussion. Under discussion, Your Honor. We were advised through our council in committee that being it that the city is already paid for the logo and things like that, as long as it's being used in the proper manner and it's not being used in derogatory way, we've been, we're pretty well protected now without having to go through the whole steps. If we have an issue in the future, we can have our legal council city attorney or whatever take care of it that time. So there's really no reason to pursue this any further. Thank you, Hallermann Ratke. Under discussion, Mr. City Attorney, I would request that the assistant city attorney, Chuck Adams submit a legal memoranda on that issue to me. City Attorney. Well, our office will submit something if you. Yes, please. Thank you, sir. Okay, any other discussion? All those in favor, state aye. Aye. Any opposed? I don't know who the no's were. Who was the no's? Do we want to do it all? Two no's. Montemayor and Meijer. Thank you. Motion carries. 1363 by the committee of the whole recommended filing documents to repeal division three of article four, chapter two of the municipal code relating to a municipal court. Hallermann, Montemayor. Thank you, Your Honor. Even though I'm going to make the motion to accept and file the RC and a motion to accept and file the general ordinance, I will be voting against it. I still think that having a municipal court is going to grow legs and cost us in the long run instead of save us. Sorry, what? We need a motion before we discuss. Right. Did you make a motion? Yes. There was a second? Okay. Please continue. Are you done? That's it. Thank you. Any more discussion? Hallermann Serta. Thank you, Your Honor. At the last committee of the whole, elder person Montemayor had challenged the elder persons who had supported the municipal court to show us the money per se. Fortunately, I did contact Rich Garp. We got part and I got to thank him for putting together a comprehensive report which you've all found on your desk. For those of you, the viewers at home, I'll explain here some of the tallies that he came up with, respectively, looking at these numbers conservatively. The startup costs for the municipal court, if we would start in November by training a clerk for the two months and start our municipal court come January, we're looking at the total startup costs being for the total $130,000, or $130,105. We would be generating a total revenue in that for ourselves, $470,652. Now, if we pay back the expenses, also the $50,000 which has been advanced to us from the general fund, we'll be contributing $290,547 to our general fund. But we also have to incorporate the funds that we would be receiving back from the county from the previous year. And with those combined totals, we're looking at generating $384,547 when the projected 2006 general fund revenue cost that we were projecting from the county with doing it for free, basically, we're looking at $450,000. So just the difference in the first year getting started, that's a difference of $65,000 approximately. To be exact, I think it's $65,453. That's all that's holding us back to improving the quality of life issues. Given District 6, and maybe Alderman Racky can also verify this, 75% of my calls has to do with housing-related issues. And by having a municipal court, we are gonna address these issues a lot more effectively. So that's what it comes down to in terms of money. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Serra. Alderman Montemayor. Thank you, Your Honor. Thank you, Alderman Serra, for that information. I think most of the Alderman, all the Alderman understand the startup costs. That's not, to me, the real problem. It's down the line. Salaries grow, more employees will be needed, more benefits will be needed, although in the very first year it's not accounted for, because there will be no benefits and it'll be part-time. But if this is successful as proposed, this will grow. We'll add some income because there'll be more tickets written, but I can't imagine that they will meet and exceed the cost of the salaries, the benefits, the equipment, and we already have the service. This is a duplication of service. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Montemayor. Alderman Draf. Thank you, Your Honor. I can agree with what Alderman Serra just explained here, but it still is a $65,000 loss in a year that we really can't afford any losses. $65,000 is quite a bit when you're looking at things. And then also, we have to be able to collect on all of these. And I know right now, you're looking at the county's collection. They don't collect all the monies that they have coming from their circuit courts either, and that's a loss. And I don't know if that was taken in consideration for any of these figures or not, but who will be doing the collection if it's the clerk that's in the office? Sooner or later, they're gonna run out of time. They're gonna have to add somebody new. So I can see costs escalating also. And I still think of this as a shared services that we could do with, and as you pointed out here, we get 400, or it's estimated our revenue, if we let the county do it, our revenue is $450,000, and that's bound to go up also. The other thing I see that was brought up a week ago was that there is legislation being looked at that the state will be starting to charge municipal courts what they charge the circuit court for handling their fees. And that's something that is out there too. Thank you, Elmengraub. Just as a point of clarification because it's been brought up, if you look at page three here where it talks about the estimated cost of circuit court and municipal court revenues, you're looking at that gap to the right-hand side of the third column, the vertical column work. That is making some huge assumptions. And I'm talking about, as Elmengraub has stated, the assumption being that we will be able to collect 100% of that money. It may turn out that the city's gonna end up being a collection agency that's not gonna have a very good return on that. And we're also looking at a time factor. Now there's two options for collecting. Serving as a collecting agency or hiring one ourselves and paying a percentage of that, which means we're not gonna get all that money. We're gonna get a percentage of that. The other option is they don't pay, they go to jail. Well, it costs us, I believe, 40 to $45 a day to keep somebody in jail. So that's gonna have to be chiseled off that amount too. The amounts are maybe attractive to some. They're not attractive to me. And I'll tell you why, because we have the capability, the ability to raise our levy limit by 3.339% this year. And we are already in the hole. Next year, we're gonna be able to raise it no more than 2%. That's a lot less than we're able to do now. And we're trying to take a $65,000 hit, $65,000 hit. I wouldn't recommend that. Paul Deberg. Thank you, Your Honor. Talk about $65,000 hit when you're trying to protect the taxpayers and their homes and their property. But everybody's willing to put out $107,000 for a room tax committee. I don't think that makes any sense. Thank you, Alderman Berg. Alderman Vanderweel. Thank you, Your Honor. Attorney McLean, if the council approves this today, when is the soonest that the municipal court will start? Because last I heard we're waiting for the software. Attorney McLean. That's correct, Alderman Vanderweel. The Paragon software is developing the software. I think the earliest that's probably gonna be available is at the end of October. So it'd be some time after that. We'd have to hire a clerk, start. I guess what I would suggest that probably the cleanest thing would be to set, because this is dragged on, set a January one date and start converting over writing tickets based on municipal court come January one. That gives us little time to hire a clerk or the necessary furniture and supplies. Somebody trained. I've also had a conversation Friday from the chief and Kohler. Kohler is interested in joining with the city of Sheboygan in having a joint municipal court. So that's something we'd have to consider as well. In order to do that, our two ordinances would have to be identical as far as municipal court. So that might take a couple of meetings to do to accomplish as well. So I would suggest start planning, start up January one if you keep the municipal court in place. Thank you, Alderman Stephan. Thank you, Your Honor. I guess Silas maybe got part of my question, assuming that it's a go after tonight, who's gonna be responsible for this? It seemed like we did it a year ago and nothing happened and then we got a resolution to rescind it and I just wanted to make sure we had a clear understanding of moving forward. Who was gonna put the ad in the paper, legal ads for the judge, who was gonna put the ads in? Who was gonna be responsible? Is that your department? Is it the mayor's department? Is it somebody else? I don't know, but I just wanted to make sure we were clear on that. As far as I'm aware, that would be through the HR department that we'd be talking about that CERC as far as putting out the announcements for those positions. And the mayor will be involved too. Alderman Sigali. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One thing that could save a lot of cost when you're talking about furniture, et cetera. This chamber could be used as the courtroom. We only use it how many days out of a month that they could set this up as one of your CERC courts, a municipal court here and you wouldn't have to worry about where else the people would need to go. Could be held right here. Thank you. Thank you. Alderman Meier. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I oppose this municipal court right now because of the money issue. A year ago when the council looked into it, I think they were under the impression that the money was gonna be flowing in left and right and it's not. The money is capped now. And I don't understand the urgency in pushing forward with this municipal court. It could wait a couple of years and I will not support it. Thank you, Alderman Meier. Alderman Sousha. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I wanna thank Rich Gephardt, the finance director for putting this document together and I do have a question for him. If he'd be all right, if he could step up to the podium. Mr. Gephardt, please step up to the podium. You're on. I know that a lot of times what the council does here is give you a project and tell you to tell us how to make this work and that looks like what you've done here. But I'm very interested in your opinion. In your opinion, should the city start a municipal court next year? Well, I guess my opinion would probably be of any new operation at this point has been discussed I think previously in tonight's meeting. We recognize we're gonna be facing financial difficulties in the upcoming years. There has been limits placed on the council by the state in the future and many different areas that won't be as many areas under the control of the council as there have been in the past. And I guess my suggestion, whenever you're looking at new operations that you can control to try to build in as much stability as you can, otherwise you're taking on more risk. And at this point with what we're facing, we really can't afford more risk. And some of these numbers may not sound huge at 65,000. And I'll be the first one to admit that's just a random estimate based on as much background as I can get on this process. But as you look through your budget book and you see the mayor's summary of the process here that we just went through at the end of the process, we got the news from the Department of Transportation that they're gonna pay the city 90,000 less next year for transportation aids in the general fund. And that, you know, you can relate in there what the outcome is of that. We don't know what's ahead, but I can say that the 90,000 look much bigger this year than in past years. You know, that right now we don't have as many alternatives to turn to. And we really, as I said, I would really suggest as we go through this difficult situation in the next couple of years that we try to keep as much stability as we can. Okay, so that was a no? That's a no on any change right now. As you go into any new process, wherever there's risk involved, which I do see this because we don't really know what the decreases in the revenues or the cash flow situation is gonna be and what that impact is gonna be. Okay, thank you. Just to continue on for a second. Do we need Mr. Gabbard here or not? No thanks. Thank you, Mr. Gabbard. Okay, please continue. Thank you. I guess the analogy I think of when I look at the situation is that if I went to a car dealer to buy a new car and they told me to come back tomorrow with $30,000 cash and I could have this great car and I go home and I look in the bank account and I don't have $30,000 and I call my finance director and I call the money man Rich Gabbard and I say I need $30,000 cash tomorrow and he would say take your credit card to the bank, get a cash advance and you'll have the cash and I'll go to the car dealership the next day with my $30,000 and I'll have a new car. The part I forgot to ask is Mr. Gabbard, is this a good financial choice? And the answer is no because by taking a cash advance on your credit card you're gonna be paying 24% interest and I think over the years what we've forgotten to do is ask the man with the money. He knows the budget better than any of us in this room and if he's not advising us to do this next year I think we need to roll that into our decision because not only do we hear that he doesn't think it's a good idea, at the last meeting we heard that the police said it was a low priority, we heard that the building inspector said that everything's working out fine, we heard the mayor say that he's worried about next year's budget. So I don't see how we should move ahead at this point. To me, it's just, it's not making any sense. I don't see the benefit versus the risk. So I also will not be supporting this tonight. Thank you. All room and rat day. Thank you, your honor. If I may direct another question to Mr. Gabbard. Mr. Gabbard, please sir. Rich, the question is a nice layout here but under the salaries that just include the judge in the clerks. Is that all you've considered in the salary here? There is a full-time clerk of the courts and a half-time clerk of the courts, as well as the judge. So I guess my question here, your honor, is first off, we don't have a home for this court. Assuming we use the common council chambers as was suggested just a few minutes ago, what type of costs are gonna have to go into security in this building to make it more secure and what type of police over time or whose budget is secure to come out of here in the court because I don't see any security listed here. Obviously not gonna put a clerk and a judge up here not have a police officer around. How many officers are we gonna have to take off the road to make this whole thing happen? How much time is that gonna cost us in addition to the officers we have to call in the testify? I mean, there's something I don't see here called security. What's that gonna cost us? You'd like me to address that, I really don't know. Thank you, Mr. Gabbard. Thank you, all men. Ratky Hallerman, Deberg. Thank you, your honor. I was gonna say something but I can just see you the way the gang is getting together but we know for a fact this municipal court is gonna make money. It's proven the committee had a full year study on it. Mr. Gabbard himself in this layout he had tonight, it's gonna make some money but I can see what's happening. So I'm gonna make sure that I support the municipal court. Thank you, all men. I think you may have misread the document just handed to us as it compared to the amount of revenue the municipal court has projected to bring the first year to the amount that we get now from the county for doing absolutely nothing. The difference is a $65,000 loss. That's not making money. That's all I wanted to clear. Alderman Vanderwill. Thank you, your honor. First, I don't think there's an urgency to have the municipal court. Seems to be an urgency to get rid of it but this reminds me of when we were looking at the ambulance service and bringing it in house and the council was told to bring an additional revenue and the council at that time was worried about many things, one of them the startup costs and ultimately they voted down to bring the ambulance service in house. Well now Mad Rock has proven that the ambulance service brings in lots of money. To me, the decision that council made at that time cost the city a lot of money. The municipal court is a result of thinking outside the box. When businesses lose revenue and can't raise prices they create new products. The municipal court is our new product. We need to stop raising prices and develop new products. The only mistake that the municipal court committee made in my eyes was giving us a report that was too conservative. In the first year, I think it will make a profit. The citizens of Sheboygan are constantly telling us that we need to stop raising taxes, start thinking outside the box and create more sources of revenue. The municipal court will do just that. Thank you. Alderman Vanderweel, thank you for that comment. I will stress so that there is no urgency to get rid of anything. I think you're incorrect in making that assumption. What there is in urgency is to manage our money more wisely, that's where the urgency is and if you will recall, sir, way back when I first made my appointments, you said, show me, mayor, that you will work with me and us and we will work with you. I have showed you that I will work with every one of you. I need you to show me that you're willing to work with me to trust me this one time and trust our finance director, trust everybody that's telling us, don't go off on this venture because you're going to lose money. I'd rather tell you a year or two from now, I'm sorry, I made a mistake, but I think what I'm going to tell you if this thing passes is I told you so. I don't want to do that. I'm asking this council for once that I don't believe that we have shown a strong unity as a council and moving forward with our finances. We have a money problem, ladies and gentlemen. I've been trying to stress that to you in all the listening sessions and all the meetings that we've had. I don't know why you don't trust me when I say that. We have a money problem. This is just one more thing that's going to compound that problem. Alderman Serra. Thank you, Your Honor. And I would also agree with you that we do have to look at our budget, respectively, and it's, but it's two sides to a coin. One of the things that I've heard over and over and over is this doom and gloom picture, but we owe the citizens, and I know I'd be looking as one of them. I want to know what suggestions are. It's one thing to hold down the line, but what are you going to do for us because we're hearing it over. Shared revenue is going to be frozen or it's going to decrease. My next question is, well, what are we going to do to help ourselves? This is a tool that would help ourselves. It is, yeah, it is a risk, but it could return some financial benefits to the city. Another issue, too, is the ambulance. I guess the difference is you're either looking at the glass half full or half empty, and I'm going to choose to look at your boy in half full, and I'm going to continue to look for revenue sources and other tools because if all we do is hold down our budget and that's it, it's just going to continue to get worse. We're going to have to come up with some creative ways and the municipal court is one of them. Let's not miss this opportunity. Thank you, Alderman Serda. Alderman Sousha, second time. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know that some of the proposed condominium projects have not reached the Council floor yet. We had heard some presentations on the pay as you go from two condominium projects at the last finance meeting, and I know that Alderman Serda is looking for other ways to increase revenue, and when you're talking about each of these condo units putting up 60 to 70 units, that's going to increase the tax base. Those types of expansion projects are going to be increasing the amount of revenue coming into the city. I just don't think that any of the Alderman here have accounting degrees. I don't know if anyone has a finance degree, but I put a lot of eggs in the basket that Rich Gephardt carries. He's the expert when it comes to our money, and if we don't start listening to him too soon, I don't know where this city is going to be heading. We're taking steps in the right direction by putting more property on the tax rolls, and that is a reasonable way that we can increase the money coming into the city, and I think that taking risk here is uncalled for. We could take $100,000 from the general fund and buy some lottery tickets if we're willing to take some risks here, and that I think would be voted down hands down. We would vote against that because it's just too risky. That's similar to what we're looking at here. There is no guarantee we're going to make the same amount of money. If there was a written guarantee, we'd get the same amount of money. If not more, I'd be on board 100%, but since we can't have that guarantee, this risk is not worth taking. Thank you. Okay, we'll take a roll call. An aye vote means that we will continue with the process of the municipal court. Yes, does everybody understand that? An aye vote would be to file these documents and continue with municipal court. And I know the opposite. I see confused faces. An aye vote means that we're filing these documents and the municipal court will go on. It'll continue. An aye vote, is that it? Everybody understand? Okay. Call the roll. Kielsen. Aye. Amayur. No. Montemayor. No. Radke. No. Sagali. Aye. Stephan. Aye. Sushia. No. Van Akron. Aye. Vanderweel. Aye. Bauman. Aye. Dieberg. Aye. Eberg. Aye. Serda. Aye. Davis. Aye. Graf. No. 10 ayes, 5 no. Motion passes. Committee 8 by 1364 by finance, authorizing the adoption of the proposed operating plan for Harbor Center Business Improvement District and passing the substitute resolution. Alderman Graf. You know, I would move that the RC be accepted and filed or adopted, excuse me, and that the substitute of the resolution be put upon its passage. There's a motion and a second under discussion. Any? Alderman Sushia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I will be voting no on this for the simple reason of that. We are creating a Department of Tourism next year and to divert $17,000 in room tax to the Business Improvement District no longer makes sense. Last year they had a line item for regional advertising for almost the same amount of money that they were requesting. This year they removed that line item for regional advertising. So they plan on diverting that someplace else into the Business Improvement District and I think that's totally inappropriate. The object of room tax is to market this community to the people in Milwaukee and Chicago and get them here. Once they're here then the bid district can use their own money to generate interest to pull them downtown. But if we keep diverting the room tax away from the Department of Tourism we will never have enough money to do the advertising that is necessary. I mean some of these magazines to just put one ad in is gonna be $10,000 per ad and we can't keep diverting money. So now that we have a Department of Tourism I feel that it's very inappropriate that we give this extra money, the $17,000 in room tax to the bid district therefore I will be voting no. Thank you Almond Sushia, Almond Serta. Thank you Your Honor. I'd like to ask Paulette Enders if she feels that this is a duplication of services. Ms. Enders please step up to the podium. Thank you Mayor and Common Council. Again as I mentioned at the finance meeting I don't feel that this is a duplication of services. We'll have, we can look at the year 2006 in the past Dick Meyer and I in the bid have worked, I'm a ex-officio on the bid board. We've worked closely on the small amount of advertising that the city's undertaken and made sure that there's no duplication of services. They also man the tourist information booth all summer long and I feel that that's very beneficial to the city and the tourists that visit the city. And I think Dick Meyer at the finance committee meeting had made a promise to not duplicate any services you know and I believe in what he's stating and I would support that. Please hold on, wait a minute. Almond Stafford do you have a question for? No, just a statement I guess I was gonna ask Paulette. All the person Sushia spoke so eloquently on the last issue about you know trusting our experts and I guess I would hope that she trusts our expert on this one also. Thank you Almond Stafford, thank you Mr. Enders. Okay, Almond Grot. Thank you, Your Honor. And just to add to what Paulette had said, the $17,000 that the bid is going to be using is made up from room tax money and it is being used to help during January, February, March, April before we really get our feet wet as far as our tourism department and to help the new manager or director or whatever the title happens to be, help him or her do what is needed to help us advertise the city. Thank you Almond Grot. Okay, we will call the roll. Madam City Clerk. Mayor. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Sakali. Aye. Stephan. Aye. Sushia. No. Van Afren. Aye. Van Der Wiel. Aye. Baldwin. Aye. Zerda. Aye. Davis. Aye. Graf. Aye. And Kittleson. Aye. 13 ayes, 2 noes. Motion carries. Ordinances introduced. 1365 lies over. 1366 to 1367 to be referred. Matters laid over. 1237 RO number 2870506 by the City Plan Commission recommended repealing and recreating section 15.934 3B of the City of Sheboygan Zoning Code relating to quorum requirements for the zoning board of appeals. Alderman Montemayor. Thank you Your Honor. I move to accept and file the RO and pass the ordinance. There's a motion in second to accept and file and pass the ordinance. Under discussion. They're being on. Please call the roll. Montemayor. Aye. Radke. Aye. Sakali. Aye. Stephan. Aye. Dandereal. Aye. Bowman. D. Berg. Aye. Ebert. Aye. Serna. Aye. Davis. Aye. Graf. Aye. Kittleson. Aye. And Meyer. Aye. 15 ayes. Motion carries. 126 to 3 in RO number 2890506 by the City Clerk submitting an application for private wealth permit for James Bergschultz. Who takes that? Alderman. Serious application for private wealth. Alderman Bowman. Well thank you, Your Honor. I move that the resolution tonight be put upon his passage. There's a motion in second. I roll. I accept and file. Under discussion. They're being on. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1249 resolution number 1320506 by Alderman Graf. Stefan Montemayor, Susha and Davis authorizing a transfer of appropriations in the 205 budget. Alderman Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I would move that the resolution be put upon its passage. Is there a second? Second. Motion to second. Under discussion. Under discussion, Your Honor. This represents the estimated revenue and appropriations for donations received from Henry Young for the sculpture purchase, the one in the rotary. And this will be a project that he will be working on along with Christopher Graf. Thank you, Alderman Graf. Any further discussion? They're being on. Please call the roll. Radke, Sigali, Stefan, Susha, Van Akron, Vanderweel, Bowman, D-Berg, E-Berg, Serta, Davis, Graf, Kittleson, Meyer and Montemayor. 15 ayes. Motion carries, 1259. General Ordinance number 370506 by Alderman Susha of Vanderweel, Montemayor, Radke and Meyer relating to no standing stopping or parking area so as to add the north side of Oakland Avenue from a point of 50 feet west of South 11th Street. The no parking restriction for the entire block north side of the 1,100 block of Oakland Avenue remains. Alderman Susha. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We move that the ordinance be put upon its passage. There's a motion and a second under discussion. They're being on, which please call the roll. Sigali, Stefan, Susha, Van Akron, Vanderweel, Bowman, D-Berg, E-Berg, Serta, Davis, Graf, Kittleson, Meyer, Montemayor and Radke. 15 ayes. Motion carries. Other matters authorized by law. 1368 will go to public protection and safety. 1369 will go to public protection and safety. 1370 an RO by the Board of Contractors, examiner, submitting applications for building contractor's license. I'd ask for a motion to accept and file. Alderman Radke. I make a motion that we accept the document. Oh yeah, there. Which one are we on here? Accept and file, 1370. Make a motion to accept and file the document. Is there a second? Second. Under discussion. They're being on, all those in favor say aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1371 will be referred to Marina and Harbor Committee. 1372 an RO by the Board of Parks and Forestry Commissioners recommending filing various documents. I'd ask for a motion to accept and file. Alderman Bauman. I thank you, Your Honor. I move that the report of officer be accepted and filed. There's a motion, a second to accept and file 1372 under discussion. Alderman Seva. Thank you, Your Honor. Under 1372, one of the communications that went to the committee was one, from one of my constituents, Mr. Bolgart, who had inquired if indeed the Parks and Forestry Commission would be willing to explore the idea of pursuing high avenue as a dog run. And I'm happy to report that they are going to be looking into that. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Seva. Alderman Deberg. I just want to get two cents worth in about high avenue. That is my district and those people are having a big problem right down there with just dogs without a dog run down there. So I will not support that area. Okay. Thank you, Alderman Berg. Any more? All those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1373, a resolution by Alderman, month in my order established and a help in water feature advisory committee for the city of Sheboygan, Alderman, month in my order. Thank you, Your Honor. I move the resolution to be put upon its passage. There's a motion in second. Resolution upon its passage, under discussion. Yes, thank you. We've talked a lot about the water feature. Should we start it? Should we fix it? Shall we fill it in? Shall we just leave it the way it is? So I think it's a good idea to have a committee formed to just look at this one thing. And that's all they have to think about. And worry about, and then give us some recommendations. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman, month in my order, Alderman Sagali. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I guess what I'm thinking here is here we have another advisory committee. I think the council can be best decide that's not have this go to a committee who's gonna have, as I understand, Alderman Berg said, seven different opinions. They're all gonna come back. Nobody knows what to do. We've got a council here that can decide what to do with this. And I think we're gonna be committed to death on here. I remember that we let go of the Ergo Commission because we didn't want to have so many committees. Well, all of a sudden now we're having committee for this and a committee for that. And I don't think it's necessary for a water feature. Thank you. Alderman Van der Wille. Thank you, Your Honor. I agree with Alderman Sagali that we're having a lot of committees, but I'm gonna go along with this one, except last time, I don't remember maybe a year or two ago, we had a committee with a bunch of citizen members, no Alderman. I felt like there was a lack of guidance. So I'm gonna make an amendment, a motion to amend the resolution. After the last, be it further resolved, it states that the membership of the community shall consist of seven members. Then I'll amend it to say one Alderman, who are residents of the city of Sheboygan and shall be appointed by the mayor and confirmed by the common council. There's a motion to amend. There's a second. Second. And a second. Any discussion on the amendment? I'll keep you on there, Alderman Berg, for the next one. Any discussion on the amendment? I think that the only reason, from my standpoint that an Alderman wasn't put on there was that it would give the community an opportunity to provide input on their own, as opposed to throwing in the element of an elected official. I don't have a problem with it if that's what the council wants, that's fine. Either way works. But I will tell the council that I've had a tremendous amount of response from people who wanna participate. They wanna help out. Okay, we'll take a roll call on the vote on the amendment. Right, Alderman Vanderweel is the one person as an Alderman included in the seven, so it would be six residents and one Alderman. Are you looking to increase it to eight people? Alderman Vanderweel. Thank you, Your Honor. Yeah, I meant six citizens and one Alderman. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. This is to amend six and one. Alderman Stephan. Hi. Lucia. Hi. Van Akron. Yo. Vanderweel. Hi. Bauman. Hi. Dieberg. No. Eberg. Hi. Serda. Hi. Davis. Hi. Graf. Hi. Kittleson. Hi. Meyer. Hi. Montemayor. No. Radke. Hi. And Segali. 11 ayes and four noes on the amendment. Motion carries and I will take a vote on the resolution as amended. Alderman Dieberg, you had a comment on that one, sir? Right. Thank you, Your Honor. That's the job of this council to make decisions. And like I said, every time there's an issue that comes up, we can't keep on appointing committees to study this, study that. We have a planning director. We have a department of public works director. They should get together. And if there is a interested party in the city that's willing to pick up the tab for the water feature, I think they should get together with them and then come to the council with whatever findings that they have. Thank you, Alderman Berg. Alderman Graf. Thank you, Your Honor. I was just gonna make a motion as amended that the resolution should be put upon its passage. I second this motion. I second that the resolution has amended to be put upon its passage. Next we have Alderman Monk and my wife. Thank you, Your Honor. And yes, we as a council will be making the decision. We need more information. We need input. We're just getting more info and that can't be wrong. Thank you. Alderman Eberg. Yes, thank you, Your Honor. I will be in support of this. I think it's a good start. And I think rather than being a finite committee, I think that we should look at capitalizing, if you would, on the enthusiasm of people in our community to support many things. We have individuals who probably don't know they can memorialize people by having a brick and a walkway. We have individuals who are more than willing, the friends of Sheridan Park to rehab and bring things forward for parks. Other municipal entities, for example, the Sheboygan School District has formed a foundation to be free standing from government, but yet to solicit decisions. We had a brief talk about a dog park, Connie Shocktell is very interested in developing a dog park and would be more than willing. So if somebody wanted to name a dog park after an individual and basically have some level of perpetual care that could take it off of the patrol, I could see that as being a very good start. So again, I see this as being in that line of looking at those opportunities where individuals can participate and we can deal with the amenities and the quality of life kinds of issues because you're right about the budget. The things that are going to go and be most affected are the quality of life kinds of issues. And the water feature, I think for me is basically a watershed if you would, identity of what quality of life is in the battles we do. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Bird, Alderman Serla. Thank you, Your Honor. You know, I look at this and I'm wondering if we're losing sight of what our positions are because the last time I checked, I thought that's what I was here for, for citizen input, where my constituency could call me. Now, if a committee wants to do all my homework and that's the way that we're going, that's what I was supposed to be doing. I'm picking up the phone, I'm asking the questions because I think we're now narrowing it down to a very select few of seven that you choose when people could still call me from my district and give me their input and I'm still doing the homework, but if this is the pattern that we wanna set, I don't know if it's such a good idea. So I'm giving you an explanation why I'm not gonna support it. Thank you, Alderman Serla, Alderman Ratke. Thank you, Your Honor. And I am going to support this for the simple reason being, I hear from many people, what are you people gonna do with the water feature? And it's, I was driving my moped downtown one day and I stopped to thank a few ladies earlier this summer for planting flowers out here and told them they were doing a nice job and I'd like to see the community spirit. And Alderman E. Berg was correct. I mean, people do have, wanna memorialize somebody someplace. We could look at those alternatives, but the big thing is, we're getting people involved in their government in a way that, you know, we can take a look at making something better in the city. We can't make all those decisions by ourselves because we don't have all the ideas. You gotta get ideas from outside of these chambers. And that's where the citizen input is needed. I mean, if we start saying we don't wanna listen to citizens, then we might as well just unlist our phone numbers and call it quits. Thank you, Alderman Serla, one more time. Yep, last time. Thank you, Your Honor. Just as a reminder for the citizens, where they wanna give their input is when it's referred to a committee and they're entitled to come and speak. Absolutely. Exactly. Thank you. Absolutely, thank you. Okay, we will take the roll call on the motion as amended. Resolution as amended. Resolution as amended. Yes. Alderman Sousha. Hi. Van Akron. No. Van Der Wiel. Bauman. Hi. D. Berg. No. E. Berg. Hi. Davis. No. Graf. Hi. Kittleson. Hi. Meyer. Hi. Montemayor. Hi. Ratke. Hi. Sagali. No. Stefan. 10 ayes, five noes. Motion carries. 1375 will go to city plan commission. 1376, a resolution by Alderman Bauman and Kittleson directing a public hearing to be held in connection with a change in the zoning for the corner vacant lot on North 37th Street and Erie Avenue. I'd ask for a motion to pass the resolution. Alderman Bauman. I thank you, Your Honor. I'd move that the resolution be put upon its passage, please. There's a motion. Is there a second? Second. Second. Resolution upon its passage under discussion. There be a none. All those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1337 will go to city plan commission. 1378, a resolution by Alderman Bauman and Kittleson directing a public hearing to be held in connection with the establishment of the zoning classification for property located at Indiana Avenue 500 feet east of Tigler Drive lot one. Alderman Bauman. Again, I thank you, Your Honor. I'd move that this resolution be put upon its passage, please. There's a motion. Is there a second? Under discussion. There be a none. All those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1379 will go to city plan commission. 1380 to city plan commission. 1381, a resolution by Alderman Bauman and Kittleson directing a public hearing to be held in connection with the establishment of a zoning classification for property located at Indiana Avenue 500 feet east of Tigler Drive lot two. And you get to do it one more time, Alderman Bauman. Again, I thank you. And I'd move that this resolution be put upon its passage. There's a motion. Is there a second? Under discussion. There be a none. All those in favor, state aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 1382, city plan commission. 1383 will go to finance. And before we make a motion to adjourn, every, make sure that the chairpersons of the standing committees meet with their committee on the budget as recommended and that you report back to the council. There's a motion to adjourn. Second, all those in favor, state aye. I'm sorry. I'm sorry, excuse me, before we take the vote. Alderman Serra. Thank you, Your Honor. Just quick question from earlier and this was stated at a past council and I know I'm gonna get calls on this. Could Alderman Meyer or Alderman Groff clarify what bill that is currently in the Wisconsin legislature that you're referring to for the municipal court? We can get that answer. You can get that answer to her. Do you need that tonight? Or do you want that Alderman Groff? It's just being introduced. It's being talked about in committee. There's no bill number assigned to it. Thank you, Mr. Groff. All those in favor, adjourn. We stand adjourned.