 That is five o'clock so I will call to order this meeting of the Finance and Personnel Committee. We'll begin with the roll. Oh, they're Ackley. Oh, they're Faldi. Oh, they're Flicky Paneski. Oh, they're Pirella. Mitchell is here. We have a full committee and a quorum. Will you all please join me in the pledge? All right, because we have enough visitors today, let's move on to item four, the introduction of committee members and staff. All they're Ackley if you'd like to kick off. I'm Barb Faldi, I'm Council President and District 1 Representative. And I am Roberta Felicky Paneski, District 2 Council Vice President and Vice Chair of Finance. I'm Trey Mitchell, District 9 and Chairman of the Committee. And Dr. Pirella, the person for District 7. Alderman Heidemann, 10th District, Southside. Somebody turned my microphone off. Usually do the whole room. Director Bebel, if you'd... Thank you. All right, with that, we'll move on to item number five, which is the approval of the minutes from our March 13th meeting. Is there any discussion on the minutes? If not, we would be looking for a motion to approve. We have motion and second then seeing no discussion. All in favor? All opposed? Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. We'll move to item number six, which is arrow number 126 of 2223. Submitting a communication from the Harbor Center Business Improvement District requesting that the city of Sheboygan release all funds collected on their behalf and those funds allocated to them for fiscal year 2023. Good evening. This is an annual request from the Harbor Center bid, so we have already given them the funds that we have collected. This is just to file tonight. Thank you. Questions, comments on this item? If not, we'd be looking for a motion to file. We have motion and second then seeing no further discussion. All in favor? All opposed? Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. Item number seven is a direct referral of resolution number 161 of 2223. Approving the financial year 2023 one-year annual action plan for the community development block grant program submission. Is there anybody that would like to speak to this item? I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. Sure. Questions from the committee? Otherwise, I would anticipate there's some discussion coming up if you'd like to stick around. I just wanted to comment that I would be abstaining on this because my company is, the company I work for is included. Thank you. I'll therefore keep an ask you. Thank you. I noticed that the original dollar requests were prorated down. Can you talk about how you did that, the methodology? Sure. So we had a new agency this year as well as two agencies that have applied previously but did not get funded last year because they did not submit. So if we were to fund all of the applicants, that would include the Salvation Army, East Wayne County Interfaith, and the Abode, we would need to reduce the amount allocated per agency. We had 217,000 of our requests and we can give out above 130. So I basically, in talking with Chad, reduced it by the percentage of increase for 2021 to 22 and then we decreased it by that same percentage. Say that last part again. So we looked at whatever their percentage of increase was from 21 to 22. Correct. So for Lakeshore Cap, that was a 40% increase year over here. We reduced their allocation by that same percentage in our recommendation. They got no increase. No. And you followed that methodology all the way through? Correct. Okay. Thank you. Any other discussion on this item generally from the committee? This is going to be a multi-parter. We'll need to amend in the final figures that the committee is recommending but before we jump into the individual parts, if not, Alder Heidman. Thank you, Chairman. We're the community of partners community development in that category. I just like to get someone that says comprehensive plan update $30,000 program administration $173,000 and I don't know what section 8108 payment is. Could you just give me a explanation on that please? Sure. So section 108 is our payment for uptown social for the money that we borrowed. So we have an annual payment coming out of CDBG for 160,000 I think for the next 10 years. Administrative costs would be salaries for staff. So my salary is largely CDBG funded. I know part of the planning director, part of other pieces of our department. And the $30,000 plan amount is it's time for us to update our comprehensive plan and that's proposing or looking to fund I guess and a consultant to do that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The comprehensive plan and I'm gonna do a little background here. It's 10 years old or 12 and we have to do every 10 and we got to buy your leave for two years. I'm understanding it's not an option. We must do a comprehensive plan in. I was part of the community group 10 years ago or 12 years ago that was part of it because of redevelopment authority and at that point we hired Vandal wall and I actually brought I tend to keep my plans. There they are and and it includes a great deal of mapping and housing strategies, et cetera. And this this the city has done a housing study. We have done a strategic plan which we talked about and we did not adopt but the process was done and I'm understanding again from redevelopment I'm understanding that Vandal wall was was asked to provide our maps and our mapping from previously and that that's really the meat and potatoes of the plan and they provided that to us electronically. I don't know how far the staff is into updating but I know that that piece is done. I know that the housing piece is done because we've done that already. The community input by and large was part of it so I question why we're spending $30,000 to do it. So I know that Chad did think that we could handle that in-house because it's really just updating the narrative. So I'm incredibly chattised in here but so I guess the comprehensive plan there's a lot of different components to it and holder Flicky Panesky is correct. We did go out for some RFPs on this as well so we are currently out of compliance with the state. This is a document that we have to update every 10 years. I think we're 12 years into it right now and if you look at where the last comprehensive plan is there's many different levels to it and it kind of is the I would say it's kind of the physical strategic plan of the city where we're going to be aspirational for economic development as well as housing. I would disagree that the housing part is done it's not done we have to make sure that parts and the study are implemented in in the comprehensive plan as well and I know that there's a lot of discussion about additional dwelling units and other forms of housing or forms that we want to implement. We would have to do that in the comprehensive plan and then down the road work to update and modernize our zoning code as well too. Our current comprehensive plan if you flip through there holder Flicky Panesky there's talk about the casino on South Pier as well as the strip mall on the Willow Creek Preserve so parking structures on South Pier. So there are some major components and you talk about economic development and land use strategy that need to be updated and that is another big comprehensive part of that as well. Does that answer kind of more of the questions? Some of it. We are getting a cheaper deal. Okay City Attorney will take it. I'll add that you're really going beyond the scope of the what you're actually voting on today that's merely a whereas clause that tells you you've already approved all that. You already budgeted for those things. What you're approving is the last page. You've got to come up with the numbers for the public service organizations. The other numbers that are in the whereas clause is that's done already. You all voted for that. Thank you Attorney Adams. Mayor? Abbey? Taken Steve? Part of the 2012 Comprehensive Plan. So Steve so close from manager planning zoning planning department. Comprehensive plan. Someone indicated that it has to be done. It's there's nothing that necessarily says that it has to be done. It's common practice to keep up to date with the plans. Obviously it's 2012 when that was adopted. And as the mayor said, there are several things that are out of date. But as far as the Comprehensive Plan, we did send out some RFPs. The numbers did come in pretty expensive for what was going to be required. Typically when we're spending these types of dollars, we put an RFP out to get multiple organizations to apply for those dollars. So I'd have to talk to the city attorney in terms of that. But I obviously talked about the 30,000 being in there. But the Comprehensive Plan is a document that is used as a tool for future development in the city. And the zoning ordinance is the tool that implements that those policies. So if I can answer any more questions, I'm willing to do that. I don't know if I hit anything that you're after. But I'm here to answer questions as well. So you're really going beyond the scope of motion. So what you should be talking about is the recommendations for how is it the other bit for the public sector organizations. The rest of it, that's all just background. Okay. No, that makes sense. I guess I was somewhat wondering why we had two separate lists in two different sections. And one of them was not included in the actual action of the resolution. I will thank everybody nonetheless for educating us a bit on Comprehensive Plans. And I guess as Chair, I will use my privileged rule that just barely within bounds is germane to the conversation for now. In that case, this won't be as a multi-part. Looking through the resolution on the final page, we have the Finance and Personnel Committee recommendations. I believe the committee has all seen the recommendations from staff or the figures. And if memory serves in prior years, we usually begin with those numbers. And if there's any desire for further changes, we make them to that foundation. I believe we'll have to amend these on this time. So we would be looking for an amendment to add the staff recommended. So before you can amend it, you need to bring it on. Yeah, that's a good point. On the resolution itself, would anybody have a motion to approve? So move. And I am understanding just so I get this before you move on. Do we have a second to put the resolution on the floor for further discussion? The chair will second. Other flake can ask. So I'm understanding we kind of use the where as is this background and the only thing we're looking at are the are the not for profits that were reduced to the previous year's budget. Right. So you need to come up with numbers. I don't know if there was something not on the agenda that gave recommendations as to those numbers. But what you need to do is come up with you need to amend the resolution so as to provide actual numbers that you're going to be giving to those four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10 organizations. And the only the only two that are have already been sort of determined are the two housing ones partners for community development at 40,000 and habitat for humanity at 22 five. The other the other organizations you just got to come up with how you're going to spend the remainder of the dollars, which is in the where as clause 129,794. Thank you. All right. Now that we actually have the motion in front of us, if we would like to begin the process using the staff recommended figures, I would ask for a motion to amend the finance and personnel recommendations section of the resolution so that it reflects funding in the amount of $12,500 for Lake Shore Cap, $42,493 for Shoreline Metro, $15,000 for Family Services Association, $3,350 for Family Connections, $11,500 for Big Brother, Big Sisters, $4,900 for Wallace Hoops, $27,000 for the Salvation Army, $7,000 for SCIO, $6,050 for the abode and that would be the end of the amendment. Do we have such a motion? Do we have any motion for? So moved. Yes. Do we have a second? Chair will second the motion. We don't have these figures in our packet. Yeah, yes please. Yeah, I'm thoroughly confused. Are we able to get the? Do we have to push it? Send line. First I want to know why. What was the sheet just given to us now? I would have liked a little bit of time to peruse it and maybe ask some questions. It was previously sent out, I believe it was last week by Director Peleshek via email. Okay, thank you. Obviously I missed that. Do we have any other discussion from the committee? So the very long amendment that I suggest in that other Flicky Panesky move to make would be adding the row of figures that are highlighted in yellow up at the top here as the committee's recommendation for funding in the public service area with CBDG funds. These are also the staff recommendation. Because it's not an official document because it wasn't provided with the agenda. The motion that will come out of here has to give the exact numbers even though we have reading. That's the one. I did. I'll just take this from the top and go back down again. The numbers that were read were also the numbers that staff recommended for all of these not for profits. Is that accurate? Yes. Thank you. That was at least my intention. Yes. I will remind everybody we're voting on the we're currently discussing the amendment right now that is adding these figures. Is there any other discussion questions or comments? If not all in favor of the adopting the staff recommendations for funding as the finance and personnel committee's recommendations as was stated in the amendment. Please indicate by saying I. I. I. All opposed. Abstain. Abstentions. All right. Chair votes aye. The amendment passes. So we would be back on the resolution that was attached with the previously discussed figures now being amended onto it. Is there any other discussion on the resolution as amended? If not all in favor all opposed. Abstentions. All right. Chair votes aye. The ayes have it and the motion passes as amended. I think that went smoother than I anticipated it. All right. That brings us to item number eight which was a direct referral of resolution number 162 of 2223 which authorizes entering into a collateral assignment of TIF agreement with the Sheboygan Press LLC and Cardinal Capital Development LLC regarding the redevelopment of the former Sheboygan Press building at 632 Center Avenue in favor of First Business Bank. So I've reviewed it. I have no objections to it. It's it's appropriate but it did have to come back to council for approval. So recommending your approval. Thank you. Questions comments from the committee? If not we would be looking for motion to approve on this one. So moved. All right. We have a motion and a second then seeing no further discussion. All in favor. Aye. All opposed. Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. Next up we have item number nine which was a direct referral of resolution number 163 of 2223 updating the job description for the position of city administrator for the city of Sheboygan and authorizing the director of human resources and labor relations to initiate the hiring process for the position. Thank you chair. So as you see the job description is attached generally job descriptions would not come to council to be approved as long as the job is staying in the same grade in the same duties. However, given that this position is directly responsive to you, you are their supervisor. We're bringing it here for you to approve before we move forward in the hiring process. The majority of the job description did not change from what it used to be. Language was just clarified and added to make sure that there was a clear distinction in what the job duties are for the city administrator as well as putting them in an order of importance if you want to call them that but classifying the job descriptions and essential duties together. So with that I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. Any discussion from the committee? Elder Pirella? Yes there are two comments and questions. So in the in the education and experience section we say master's degree or greater from a credit college university or bachelor's degree with a minimum of seven years of city administrative experience blah blah blah and then we say that position requires at least seven years of progressively responsible work experience. So seven years are required anyway right? So what's the difference then between the someone who comes with a bachelor's degree with a minimum we say we require a minimum of seven years with a bachelor's degree but we require seven years anyway. Yes so with a bachelor's degree as it's written currently if you only have a bachelor's degree the job description requires that you have been a city administrator for seven years if you don't have a master's degree. However if you have a master's degree we're saying that you need seven years of progressive experience so but it doesn't have to be as a administrator with that master's degree. Perfect thank you and then I would like to add a statement. Go ahead. Among the yes I would say among the the essential duties one statement and it doesn't matter to me where to add it. So I don't know if I have to shall I start the motion on that right away to change. I don't I would don't want to amend I want to better I want to amend by adding one statement among the essential duties. So what you're approving is the resolution not the attachment. Okay. So are you looking to add something to the resolution or to the so obviously I'm trying to add something to the attachment will that be an option for us to do that in a different context or not. So I can defer it if there's anybody online since I always complain about that myself. If you want to make a change to the document what you probably should do is reject this and send it back for for further discussion to the group that's that created it because what you're approving is the resolution itself or as an alternative I would suggest approving the job description and authorizing the director of human resources to amend the job description as needed with approval of insert here so that the whole thing doesn't have to come back again. Again normally job descriptions wouldn't need to come to you so you could say what the suggestion is that you want added approve the resolution as is with an amendment allowing the HR director to make any necessary changes to the job description before it's posted. Is that a fair statement? Which that implies that I would come to the director of the HR to with my recommendation. Yeah or you could just say it now. Okay. Hold that parallel. What would be the item you'd like to add to the essential duty section? Yes so just briefly a background. I want to make sure that the individual we hire is going to be equitable and ethical with all department has direct reports and common counsel and I know we have addressed that in other pieces of the description but I think it is worthwhile to reiterate that. So I would like to add that the city administrator will deploy an engaging equitable and ethical demeanor with all department heads direct reports and common counsel. Director Weisbrück I'm going to defer to your expertise on this one. Yeah so again I don't I think what you're saying is in line with the job description and would be something that I would normally be able to do on my own for any other job description because it's not adding significant responsibilities it's not changing the scope of the job. So again assuming that counsel passes this and then gives the HR director the ability to change this job description before it's posted to include any additional recommendations that don't change the scope. I have no problems at all adding a language like that because again it doesn't contradict anything that is not already in there. Thank you. Okay so to do anything along those lines then we would need to amend the actual resolution. I imagine you would want to add a be it further resolved clause. Well what Adam said is what you probably want to do. You said it better than I would. So go ahead. Tell me what the motion should be. Well so first a motion to approve the resolution would need to be on the table. And you would think I'd remember that after forgetting already once tonight. Let's at least get ourselves to that point. Do we have a motion to approve? So moved. Second. We have motion a second. All right please continue. So if based on what Alderman Perel has said I think an emotion to amend to allow the director of human resources and labor relations to adjust the job description before posting would be an appropriate amendment to this. You said something about changing the scope before. No I'm saying what she's suggesting doesn't change the scope so it falls in line with what a normal job description change would be which is why I don't see any issue with adding that language to this. Okay but the amendment itself would just be to allow, authorize the director of human resources to amend the job description before it's posted. So Alderman Perel at? I make a motion to approve with the allowing the with the amendment of allowing the director of HR to make changes which do not impact the scope of the description. All right so we have amendment proposed to authorize the director of human resources to make further changes to the job description that do not change the actual scope. That is correct. Thank you. Therefore the job is posted. Thank you. Do we have a second? We have a motion and a second. The discussion is now on the amendment. Questions, comments from the committee? If there's no discussion then on the amendment I will ask all in favor to please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed? Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. We are back to the actual resolution now as amended. Do we have any further discussion? Seeing none all in favor of approving the amended resolution please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed? Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. Thank you director Westbrook. Next up we are on item number 10 which is a direct referral of resolution number 164 of 2223 authorizing the director of human resources and labor relations to enter into a service contract with GOV HR to assist in facilitating and co-conducting the city administrator recruitment process for the city of Sheboygan. Thank you chair. So again under our current ordinance generally service contracts under $50,000 are something that department heads can recommend and approved by the city administrator in a little with the absence of a city administrator. We're coming to all of you for that. As stated in the resolution and you can see in the attachment from GOV HR I have made the decision and recommendation to move forward with GOV HR assuming you approve it to help in this recruitment. Obviously this is a very big position we plan on doing a nationwide search for this position with a focus in the Midwest only because most likely the majority of candidates will come from the Midwestern region however it will be a national search for that. Just to give you an idea my recruitment process which you all engage Baker-Tilly for was right under $27,000 that you paid for the HR director's recruitment and I'm sure I was worth every penny of it but this amount is in line with the other industry standards. As it says in the resolution I didn't go out for RFP on this we have enough experience with the other places listed and through contacts and communications with other communities that have utilized all three services listed here it is my recommendation to move forward with GOV HR. I'm happy to answer any questions. Questions or comments? Do we have a motion to approve? So we have a motion a second. Any discussion on the item itself? Seeing none. All in favor please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed. Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. Thank you. Thank you. Next up we have item 11 this is discussion only a letter from Erin Ginther regarding legal counsel for two claims filed this was a communication that I received based on the date of the letter just after I could forward that on to the agenda last time it asks that it be shared with the committee so including it on the agenda here was sharing it as requested do we have any discussion on item 11 going once do we have any discussion on item 11 last call we'll move on to item 12 which is a note that our next meeting date is April 10th and with that we have exhausted our agenda and our chair and we are looking for a motion to adjourn so moved second we have motion and second for adjournment all in favor please indicate by saying aye. Aye. All opposed. Chair votes aye. The ayes have it. The motion passes. We are adjourned.