 the committee of the whole is called to order would you call the roll yes please I'm sorry Bowman excuse D-Burg here E-Burg here Serta Davis Braf is here Kettlesen nanny here Meyer here here Radke here Cigali here Stefan here Susha here then Akron here Mander we leave here 15 present a quorum is present thank you item number three I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of April 1105 May 1905 and May 2305 there's been a motion in a second any discussion all in favor state I opposed thank you very much item number four yes president I would make a motion that on item four five six seven and eight that the resolution on item number four and the communications on five and six in the RO 7 and eight that they be placed on file there's been a motion in the second to accept and place on file number four five six seven and eight any discussion all in favor I opposed motion motion pass madam chair person on items 9 10 11 and 12 the three communications and the one RO I would move that those items be placed on file also there's there's been a motion in the second on items 9 10 11 12 on the agenda to be placed on file is any discussion all in favor motion pass and then madam chair person also on items 13 14 15 and 16 that those three RO's and the resolution that those four items be placed on file there's been a motion in a second to have item 13 14 15 16 on our agenda placed on file any discussion all in favor opposed now we're down to what we're here for this evening item number 17 on the agenda review of city development and city engineering rating scores of proposed police station building sites I want to thank Tom Holton and Paul at Enders for working so hard and getting this information to us before tonight I think that was very considerate of you very professional I thank you and you have the floor okay thank you what I'd like to do is have for the benefit I think of the viewing audience is read a little bit of the the cover letter that we inserted in our analysis of the 18 sites the committee of the whole met on May 23rd and compile can you wait just a minute thank you madam chairman I see here where Paul at Enders and Tom Holton did this this proposed site evaluations what my question is and I would like answered before we go into any of this if the police the police were given an opportunity to look at these sites and to recommend what their sites would be because they are experts in this field so I would like to have that answered before we go into the sites please thank you Alderman Segali on this technical information phase and you can see the criteria and the things that they looked at that wasn't the needs assessment of the police these were that's this is the technical phase but the needs assessment of the police has been gathered by Zimmerman and I think that that will perhaps be addressed later on this evening does that answer your question Alderman Segali no madam chairman I'm sorry I feel that they're with the technical as well as anything else the police should have been involved in this they should I mean they should know the technical part of this and I I think that they should have been able to at least be a part of this this process thank you for your comments thank you mr. Mayor thank you madam chairman I may be able to clarify that a little bit when this committee referred those 18 potential sites to city development and city engineer they they were referred to them with with some specific instructions meaning that they should have the opportunity to look at every site and bring back information pertinent to that the 18 sites were not referred to the police department they were referred to city development and city engineer but aside from all that even now as we speak the police department is involved but they're they're involved in a different aspect they're involved with some of the numbers that that involve the cost of the police station they were working with mr. John Salmon national net this is just that's just not part of what's being presented to you now but their involvement is assured they should be involved and they will be involved they're just not going to be be involved in everything like a lot of things a lot of other departments aren't involved in everything either but I appreciate your comment that they should be involved and they are involved thank you mr. Mayor Alderman Danburg what you madam chair first of all I'd like to when these came out on Friday first of all I didn't know any other site the selections or anything I was notified by the shabuigan press they called me and asked me all questions on these sites I said I had no knowledge of any of the sites and then when we were going to leave our home we closed the front door this was thrown on my front porch and I was just wondering who who was delivering these and why they weren't I handed it to us personally because our door was wide open in the front and if anybody would have been there and knocked on the door or anything because my dog would have torn my new something but I don't think a document like this should have been just thrown on our steps thank you Alderman Berg mr. Mayor thank you madam chair and again I guess I'd have to answer that particular concern there what I attempted to do and if it was wrong and I apologize but what I attempted to do and instead of putting it in your mailbox I felt that it would be a better effort on my part and more respectful to you if that particular handout was was taken to your home address personally so I asked mr. Tom Holton to get somebody to come here at a certain time so we could deliver those personally now if your interpretation is that they were thrown on the porch that's your interpretation but those those handouts were supposed to be delivered personally to you with personal attention and that's what we attempted to do is that correct mr. Holton thank you Alderman graph thank you I know I received mine no one was at home it was between our doors which I get a lot of mail from there I was happy to see it but you should have all received a copy of the the minutes of the meeting from the day that it was that the the site selections were given or the 17 sites or 18 sites were given and that was distributed to everybody on email I know and that that came out but sometime Friday but it still was out before that too because there was a list done from somebody's office because I saw a list earlier and I know I I put one in the minutes as soon as I put it together so that's just thank you Alderman graph Alderman Cigali thank you madam chairman with all due respect to the mayor and to Paul f into Tom and to you madam chairman I want to be put on record as saying I strongly object to the police department not being involved in the selection of the sites I think it was mandatory that they should be there and I thank you for that these are the sites that we selected right and they're and now they're being analyzed but the final three sites they all should have been and also should have been involved and then they weren't that's what we will be deciding this evening thank you if I may yes Alderman graph but you know we're going to be developing a review process where these these 18 sites we're going to whittle them down tonight to to three or four or whatever we decide and at that particular time I'm sure the police department are going to be more involved into well can we live with it here or what and so that was kind of the process that we had said two weeks ago that we were going to do we have these 18 sites we wanted Tom and Paulette to to look at these and from there we whittle it down and go from there and hopefully that'll work for everybody thank you Alderman graph Alderman Serda thank you madam chairman I think in all respects I think we're we're communicating here but just to help out with the police department just courtesy to them I understand that they just received this report today and they are a critical component in this we are building their facility and maybe just as a teachable moment that in the in the you know if in the future that they would receive a copy of this I think we can just leave it at that prior to the public you know courtesy to their department thank you thank you Alderman Serda thank you and I think start off by saying that we did not choose a site what we did was we evaluated the 18 sites and then ranked them in descending order and really the selection is up to the common council we evaluated these to the best of our ability using our professional expertise and tried to give you as much information as possible and we're here to answer any kind of questions so I'll begin again set for the benefit of the viewing public the committee of the home that on May 23rd and compiled a list of 18 possible police station sites this list was then forwarded to the directors of public works engineering and planning and development for their evaluation it should be noted that Sheridan Park site was not scored based on common council action to remove the site from consideration City Hall North 23rd Street and the bus transfer station received the highest scores and then what we did was we listed the 18 sites in descending order it should be understood that no site received a perfect score the city of Sheboygan is a compact and densely developed community given the city's lack of vacant parcels flexibility and design should be exercised all sites will have a variety of issues to overcome assumptions were made on smaller sites at multi-floor facilities would be feasible a wide range of criteria were selected to evaluate the sites the selected criteria were categorized into three main groups economic location and geotechnical the criteria were not weighted and the cost of construction was not a consideration in this evaluation a zero to three rating system was used with zero of no value one low value to medium value and three high value and then what we did was in some situations when you get into site selection they'll just do a simple pass fail we did not do that we rated all really all but one of the 18 sites thank you thank you Paulette Tom Holton would you like to add anything all right thank you so much and I'll bet we have some questions now and we are working on a process for selecting the location for a new police station so agenda item agenda item number 17 Paulette and Tom Rich Gephardt did you want to say something to us now Rich Gephardt yes please yes yes I just bring to your attention what I placed on the Elderman's desks in reference to a summary of the estimates for the police facility and this was for what Mr. Savinash did as an estimates for an 80,000 square foot facility not knowing the site but giving a range of possible costs and what this ties in to is what we discussed earlier this evening in the finance committee in reference to financing the police facility and also with what is on the horizon with state regulations of the budget bill that we will be looking at coming in the finance committee has recommended to council an authorized resolution for debt issuance of up to 17 million dollars that gives the council the authority to issue that debt but it's not any commitment to the council but it's based on these estimates that were placed on your desk and in the discussion that we had this evening so just let you know that you'll be seeing that on your next council agenda thank you rich John Savinash would you like to tell us a little bit about option a option be optimistic conservative the costs that we generated were based on and I believe everyone's received the full spreadsheet information is that correct or is everybody looking at the distilled version the option a and option b are based on bid projects of comparable size and configuration so we have a multi-story building and a single-story slab on grade building in these cost estimates that takes into account the size of project that's roughly comparable to the size of project that we envisioned identifies specific criteria for fleet independent of the major body of the building as a smaller unit cost to derive an estimated cost of construction in two thousand six dollars the optimistic approach would say that on bid day there would likely be a bidder who would be very aggressive and position himself to acquire the project at that level the conservative approach would say that we can't guarantee that that aggressive better is going to be there on bid day so we would recommend considering a more conservative approach in terms of financing and funding the project ensuring that the project is viable on bid day in addition to the hard construction costs there were a number of different allowances that were inserted into the project not knowing the nature of the site so some issues related to utilities and other categories of construction that might be identifiable early on in the site selection process are given as allowances in this case so at the time that we have a more explicit site definition it could be that those allowances would be rescinded out of the capital budget and not be a project factor cost in addition to that we were very methodical and identifying the other project costs that would be attributable to the project relative to security systems temporary construction criteria and other categories that haven't been fully explored in depth to this point so we took the most thorough approach that we could at this level of design and the most thorough approach relative to the building design that we could given that we know nothing about the nature of the building because we have no site when we knew about the size of the building so we used that comparable data to gauge where we stood relative to prudent budgeting for a project at this level of completion thank you mr. Sabanach Alderman Sarada thank you madam chair according to this to this information that we given under site construction can that also be translated to site preparation thank you because we know so little about the site it would be costs attributable to specific site detailing so it would be as an example in the more conservative approach we're expecting that we might have a slightly larger site have more site preparation to do more more disturbed area that has to be covered by landscaping so as an example there the landscaping budget is larger given that we would expect to be dealing with more landscaping on a larger site but in general terms yes it's relative to earth and excavating of the site preparation of the site proofrolling and making the site ready for the building to be inserted upon it thank you Alderman Sarada Alderman Sarada thank you madam chair me forgive me i'll be asking a lot of questions tonight in reference to what Richard Gephardt had given us with this cost comparison has finance capped us at any certain amount currently and so that and the reason i bring that up is because on this information that we have there's no land acquisition costs and there's also no demolition costs factored into the sheet thank you Alderman Graf this evening finance did make a recommendation to cap the project at 17 million dollars which includes land acquisition if necessary but we also left a message that we expected it to come in less than 17 million dollars because the cap we put at is can't be raised above that but we don't have to spend the 17 million dollars if we don't need to so we are looking at something very conservative and we're we're hoping that the the police department and Zimmerman and associates and this council is going to work together on coming in at something under the budget and once the rest of the process is done as far as selecting a location and so forth we'll all need to work together to see if there's something that we can do to help come in at something less than 17 million dollars because the 17 million dollars will be putting us right below our borrowing cap that we have and therefore it's imperative if we want to continue our double a bond rating and so forth that we we do what we can to stay under our cap thank you Alderman Graf does that answer your question Alderman Serda yes thank you i think you received um from Alderman Graf the process for selecting location for the new police station step one we've done that that was um Paulette Enders and Tom Houlton step two pick three potential locations and refer them to Zimmerman and i think Mr. Sabanash would gladly do that for us for further evaluation with a time limit of 30 days or sooner Zimmerman will be charged with evaluating associated costs size of property size of structure functionality of structure and potential delays step three while Zimmerman is doing that hold a public input session in evaluating the three locations that we give him tonight and perhaps we could meet and add and ask the public to join us at the library rather than the council chambers i think um i'll ask the mayor if you might be able to arrange that with the library thank you step four that won't be tonight review Zimmerman's evaluation of the three sites and the public's input and vote on a site and then do this any further questions Alderman Serda thank you madam chair could you explain the reason why we'd want to hold that at the library versus the common council bigger space friendly to the community and it has microphone yes yes yes Alderman Graf if i may add one thing um i know that the library would also be more conducive to having people that um we could have it set up so that it could be like from maybe four until seven on one night because a lot of people have trouble making a four o'clock meeting let's say or even a seven o'clock meeting because there's other things that they may want to be but if we have a three-hour space let's say where public would be welcome to come in and and we take comments from them during that period of time it might give give us more information so that was one of the reasons looking at the library was easy get to it and parking wouldn't be a problem there and okay thank you Alderman Graf thank you Alderman Serda Alderman Radke thank you madam chairman um at the end of what Alderman Graf brought up why couldn't we look at a Saturday morning listening sessions as long as we're going to open this up and look at people who work in evenings and days and things so if we give everybody the public a chance to come out and and give their input because i think many times people are not available during the weekdays for a Saturday morning would work out much easier for them good information thank you Alderman Radke and maybe that could be done both i know a lot of our public hearings as far as the budget goes for the counting let's say we always have two two public input sessions that we um we listen to um to various people coming in and speak we normally try to do one on a Saturday and one a little longer during the weekdays and that helps there too so it's good thank you Alderman Graf Alderman van der wheel thank you madam chair um i don't know if it's possible at the library but i would ask if it is possible if we could have another channel eight have the meetings taped we'll check it out thank you yes Alderman Sagali thank you madam chair um when it comes to these three sites we are not limited now to the three sites that they have chosen am i correct you are correct if there is like the foresight uh southwest business and broadway if we do i have if we look at that one that could be one of the three we don't have to be limited to the three that they have so chosen right now am i correct they have told us which are the three top sites with their technical information but they they're not deciding we are deciding okay thank you Alderman Sagali Alderman Graf question um since that's what we're supposed to um i know one of the things that i've heard um several times is that the north 23rd strike the north 23rd strike site is is very much polluted and there's um a lot of additional costs that may be associated with that um tom can you answer that question because i know we did some soil boardings there and so forth and um i'd like it directly from you is that a problem or is that something that um we shouldn't be as concerned about i don't believe it's a problem we we went out the city back when we dug four test pits down to the virgin soil uh varied from maybe three to four feet to eight or nine feet of fill it was just to maybe a few bricks and some asphalt but we had to check for any petroleum we didn't find anything uh i think it's a buildable site i mean it's nothing that's not manageable and i have one other question um regarding are any of these sites too small or um and would not be practical to even consider well something to come to mind as paulette mentioned that we virtually looked at just throwing some of the sites out because of that but decided for criticism not to do it though we would rate all of them and let the cards follow they may but uh up on ninth and st clare that site was only a few thousand square feet eighth and i agra like that site was maybe six thousand square feet i believe and there's some other sites i think that are just too odd size long and narrow like the green warehouse or the rock line warehouse just their long narrow sites i don't think that would uh conducive to a functional facility in my opinion thank you alderman serda thank you madam chair um along the same lines how do you feel about city hall because the acreage there is coming in far below some of these other sites you mentioned what's your perspective there as as we said in the narrative here that you know some multi-floor facilities maybe have to be looked at and again we're not knowing the functionality of them but i think you could look at vacating the alley maybe even going in the parking lot to make the site bigger if need be thank you alderman serda alderman vander wheel thank you madam chair there's there's reports all that the city has gotten in the county has gotten that that land is polluted on north 23rd but basically if we decide to go north 23rd and we're not happy with the contract or we're not happy if they say well we're not going to pay cleanup costs well then we'll just drop it you know unfortunately we'll have to get to that point but that's where we're going to have to go thank you alderman vander wheel alderman serda oh sorry alderman danberg got to remember the 23rd street site also the appraisal price they were they wanted us to put 300 000 in escrow that they could use our money for their use of sharing services with us plus they want that parking lot on pentavono which is very very valuable piece of land if the city would have to give up that parking space and go purchase land someplace else and have demolition of homes relocation of people you're talking close to a million dollars alone right there and they would have to be liable for all environmental cleanup because it is their property and it's their problem so they would have to 100 cleanup of the property tom holton there would be no cleanup well no i think there is a petroleum back by the sultry i believe that's been spilled back there at some point and how much cleanup does that involve i couldn't tell you i don't know what the extent of the contamination is i know the drift i think is to the north northeast or when old swale used to go through there thank you and on the 23rd street if i'd add no there's other issues that materials that was placed in there probably was not compacted so you would have to do something with a building design for a floating slab or something like that which would be some additional cost thank you alderman graph regarding the the parking lot that was one of the things that they asked for but that doesn't mean that we can't substitute that with for instance the um the armory parking lot is just as close as the the one that you're talking about and that's already rented out that other yeah ours is 48 out of the 51 or at least but you talked to some of the supervisors there they say their people are too lazy to walk from the armory parking lot so what do you well i'm just saying that i know options available and i don't think that is a an issue that they need additional parking places at the at the county it's available one of them one of the ways to get there and like i said the um the armory parking lot is as close as the one on um seven streets yes yes thank you alderman bird change go ahead paulette um what i just wanted to mention was on the north 23rd street site what we did was we put in the appraisal that the the latest information that we had kind of excluded any other deal that was discussed and we just used the appraisal like the other sites we didn't have a a fair market value from the assessor's office because a piece of tax exempt but we use that current appraisal alderman radke thank you madam chairman um i was looking at the south business drive and broadway avenue i talked about this about two months ago with that particular piece of property how would that be affected by the existing rail line which is still active running through there or could we work something out with the railroad on that that's a good question i don't know if you could or not um the railroad line that runs between pennsylvania avenue and merton avenue it's not used um we tried to acquire it sometime ago for a interurban bike trail but the only way they'd be able to do it they'd sell it for a bucket square foot but it go to the rail to trails program so if they were wanted rail back in there they'd kick us out and we'd lose our investment and uh i don't think we tried to get that line abandoned twice when we were doing south business drive ended up costing us probably half a million dollars extra on retaining walls through there and we could not just run into dead ends we had the state try to help us out and we could not get that thing vacated so how would that affect the building being right next to the rail lines that built there if they ever open it back up oh there's there are other issues that set out no i can't say for sure what that rail line does other than it's probably no 60 more feet 66 feet of land that you could use and uh i think it's been probably three years since a train's gone through there and actually took the cross now that broadways the crosses i didn't in there right now thank you alderman redke alderman van der wheel thank you madam chair i just wanted to uh state that by working with the railroad the last three or four years it's nearly impossible you're dealing with basically people in washington and it just trickles down so it's almost impossible and i don't think we'd ever make a deal and by building next to the railroad we're landlocked because we're not going to be able to go past the railroad so i just wanted to state that thank you alderman van der wheel alderman serda thank you madam chair i would like to actually present this question to mr sabin ash because he is an architect and we were conservative as you can look at this map we are at least what 10 feet or so from that railroad and if he's ever worked around a railroad if that is feasible to be so close thank you i think i've worked on every site imaginable now uh i would agree with any sentiment that would identify that the railway is a very difficult organization to work through and acquisition would be measured in years not months if it's an active rail line there are certain um there's certain issues related to the security of the facility given that it's an active rail line if there's a hazardous spill somewhere approximate to that rail line as a function of its active use that's a problem with putting a major municipal facility proximate to it but there are certainly examples of facilities that are proximate to rail lines i would just add that if the the citing question has additional setbacks and other criteria with it that just impacts the building design you'd find out in a hurry whether it was a viable site when you took a look at it in depth the railway doesn't light people next to it it generally avoids that whenever it can thank you mr sabin ash alderman graff thank you madam chair at this particular time i'm going to make a motion that the three sites that we should be presenting for for our choice of of the new police facility would be the city hall site the north 23rd site and the the former drop off site and the reason i i did not select the bus transfer station right across the street is because we would end up paying back to the feds any undepreciable amount of money i believe it is that um that they gave us um and they paid about 80 i think they paid 80 percent for that transfer station so we'd have to pay them back for that particular thing unless we could have them um i forgot what it called um but it's uh they would give it up freely and i don't know if if they're willing to do that or not i know we worked a long time for the senior center to be given to the city so and then the southwest business slash broadway site for some of the reasons that were just brought up i eliminated that so i would move that those three city hall north 23rd street and the former drop off site be the three sites that we recommend we have a motion on the forward that we consider city hall north 23rd street and the former drop off site tom holchon i think you wanted to say something about the bus transfer station nope yes not all right all of a man thank you madam chair question about south business and broadway uh looking at the site with the configuration it's it's an uneven piece of property i presume if we went that direction we would actually need to buy the adjacent property which i believe is the channel tv site is that correct i would agree with that it's a whereas it stands by itself it's a very odd shape would that be in addition with the property adjacent to that another acre and a quarter how much i would say probably acre and a half just guessing maybe close i'd say an acre and a half to acre and three quarters acre that area thank you all the money thank you mr holton alderman danberg thank you madam chair we're looking at money money money money you know why are we keeping one in there that's going to cost us a lot of money such as the 23rd street site this i mean i think there's uh the county people had too much say in this this whole thing and this is like i said this is a shabuigan pd let's use the land that we've we've chosen here and do away with that 23rd street site because it's going to be nothing but a headache thank you man alderman alderman alderman alderman berg yes thank you madam chairman question on the Zimmerman design we have two thousand uh two million one thirty four to two million two ninety for fleet components and i assume that has to do with uh if you would uh the uh maintaining the the police department fleet were we to look at citing it at the former drop-off site i guess i would ask tom what would be the expandability of putting some of the service base in the municipal service building versus new construction and also uh regarding that site the degree of fill we'd need to get it above flood plain and your sense of the future of expanding the municipal service complex not now but 30 or 40 years down the line given that would allow us to have a a rather large campus if you would that provide all municipal services to answer the first question is there's an area in the mechanics shop where we store tires and parts that could be relocated elsewhere so you could probably get a couple of bays in there for smaller vehicles like a car uh on the on the uh 19th street site the drop-off site fill would be needed uh where that the warehouse that i believe alpine has been that parking lot is probably below a flood plain now it's suspect you probably have to bring it up about three feet uh plus to bring that out and as far as expansion as part of the comp plan it shows that we should be purchasing homes uh west of the service building as they come up for sale i believe there's about four left we had been doing that but nothing's come up for sale as a best one by today there's one for sale now i noticed a yellow one that's just right next to our driveway there's possibilities for expansion down there as we purchase uh more property thank you thank you all member alderman davis uh madam chair considering the uh conversation that we've had here why don't we break this question down into three parts and local vote on each portion of the question thank you all and davis we do have a motion on the floor in a second so i think we'll alderman go out i just wanted to in reply to alderman danburg regarding the 23rd street site you know the previous council did some negotiating with with the county on that site but this council has not done any negotiating with them and things could have changed and just like you you bring up the fact that that's going to cost a lot of money well the dollar amount that i heard that they were looking for was a approximately three hundred thousand dollars set in an escrow account that would be used for shared services that's the only dollar amount that i heard and several times i've heard several people say it's a million dollars for this and and this is going to cost us so much and this is going to cost us so much and i think if this one is one of the sites that that stays that um one of the first things that we have to do is we have to go to step two and then we have to begin negotiating with these entities to see what we have to do and what we can get thank you alderman ground alderman danburg i was in on those negotiations there was i wish i would have been so there was 300 000 in the escrow they wanted 150 000 for the salt shed and then they wanted that parking lot now the the value of that parking lot was i don't know what it was at the time but to replace it we have to have parking down here for our business people like i said there's 51 parking stalls there 48 are at least where are those people going to go if we give that up i'm not saying giving that up that's what i'm that's what the county wanted and that's what i'm talking about the negotiations i was in when we were talking with them that's the figures that i had and that's what i heard all along yet now they'll come and oh we'll do this and we'll do that i just don't i don't even like it thank you alderman bird alderman serda thank you madam chair for me the motion was just too quick i thought we would be generating more discussion tonight for instance um let's face it we're not professionals in the sense of being an architect having the background professional background as paulette and tom however i'm wondering if we should have submitted this to mr sabonache because here's we could take what we know now limited to three sites but there could have been a potential site for us if we didn't have the experience from the architect could you see where that that could be a missing link here so i have some reservations there for instance here's a simple question that i would like mr sabonache to answer is what do we first see and i know i've had the opportunity to meet with paulette and tom today and i'm glad that i did because i thought these questions would be answered today um but when they looked as far as the report and you had to make a determination on expansion um you know it's funny how some of these sites come out as being the top sites but yet we're limiting ourselves by for instance city hall we're boxing ourselves in there was all this in the beginning about you know future expansion you have to think outside the box but here that's one of our top sites we need to look reasonably what is our need as far as expansion and again i think we should ask the chief of police he knows his department well and again i would direct that question mr sabonache how does he foresee a department our size given the city's dynamics and the potential growth mr sabonache uh there was a certain amount of growth already programmed so i think that even if you uh inquired with the chief what percentage of the building i'm not sure we'd be able to tell you that but there was a certain amount of growth given that this was a 20-year projected building inherent in the program statement that we generated in terms of shared services or like facilities at this site um one would generally take the approach that i think we we discussed during the previous meetings that you would try to identify the spaces that were most likely to be shared in this case largely the training facilities briefing rooms report writing areas and you try to get them positioned strategically so that they were approximate to an outside wall that would allow interface between two agencies or expansion of an agency adjacent to it within the department itself a bureau let's say in terms of the site evaluation we would just take an estimate of what we would think to be a normal growth rate if we have program reductions as part of the budgeting process and we try to identify where we try to replace those program spaces in the future and you would just try to establish where you would logically expand the building in the future as part of that site criteria but we haven't looked at the site so we don't know whether one is more restrictive than another thank you mr sabanash um alderman serda i think that future expansion is part of the criteria that paulette and tom took into consideration it's listed with all of the sites and then what we also did was somewhat related to what mr sabanash was stating is we did also look at shared services not only from a let's say a county perspective but from a city perspective with our own you know with the internally as well as externally thank you paulette alderman manning thank you madam chair i'm having trouble realizing how the city hall site is possibly big enough um tell me more would this building be maintained as city hall and redone eventually and would the police station be adjacent to the north would this site come down totally and build up from the ground it just can't see how it would work in this space well we kind of look at it based on a previous study that the city hall would stay intact and the expansion be to the north and again that was that was assumed that a multi-floor uh facility would work you know we we looked at i think it was 23 criteria the 22 or 23 criteria and uh the city hall has scored high and a lot just because it's it's already owned by the city there's not any action costs there's not a lot of demolition costs but it's expansion it's scored low it's scored to one so it's possible it might be some expansion whether you design the building to add additional floor later or if you look at going into the parking lots to the north in the future but it would just make an assumptions that there would be room to go to the north and up how about parking for which for the squads or that's something that that would be sermon have to look at that you could do something underground parking yet or a first floor parking somewhere to what's out there now a larger thank you alderman manning alderman radke thank you madam chairman chairperson i guess my question right now really is how big of a new police police station do we really need senate bill 118 is lurking around the senate floor and one of these days it's going to come to a bullet when they put that to assembly bill 79 that clears the way for us to start working with the county and possibly contracting some services or all the services police department now handles over to the county so i guess really what it's coming down to right now is how much money do we really need to spend i mean if senate bill 118 and a b 79 become law which is possible in the very near future that could save us a heck of a lot of money in the long run thank you alderman manning alderman stefan uh yes i guess jeff hit something or alderman radke hit something that i wanted to address um shared services has talked about and it and it's it's the buzzword and i'm not saying you're making this assumption but i'll tell you that the people who've called me who've said we want you to work with the county and have one dispatch system or you know thinking long term we want you to have one we can have the sheriff's department run everything well be very clear anytime i've ever talked to anybody on the county board if they're going to take the dispatching they ain't just taking it charging us what they talk what they charge the people in a dell they're going to say okay we're going to take all your people we're gonna you know you're going to get charged an extra fee yeah you pay for it now but we're going to charge you more so it's not like they're just taking this whole department away from you and you're just going to let the other outlying towns villages and communities absorb the cost granted we're paying for dispatch for the county that does little or nothing for us now other than some shared services and they that's what they think they think well we're paying for it for the county so we'll get it for free and the same thing on police protection i guarantee you the county is never going to do that i mean they might do it but they're just going to say sure your budget 64 million will do it for 65 it's not like they're just going to say yeah you're paying your fair share already we'll spread that out i think that net net brings up my my thoughts on the 23rd street site the only reason it's in there is because of shared services and i don't want to turn my back on that but i think the county needs to make a commitment you know in my mind give them 30 days if they don't tell us that they're building something next to there they're moving the highway department out i'm not saying they got to do it 30 days but they can decide in 30 days they can make that commitment to us otherwise get that site out of there it wouldn't be there if it wasn't for the potential of shared services while we're telling them we're thinking about building it there let's let them tell us that they're thinking about moving the highway department out because i've talked to county board supervisors have told me there's no reason the highway department should be there and let's get it out and they've gone nowhere we've not only got to get the highway department out they want to get the police people in sheriff's department in if they're not willing to commit to those two things there's no sense in my mind even considering 23rd street thank you alderman steppin alderman susha thank you madam chairman um just a couple of things uh first of all in regards to senate bill 118 um there are a lot of unknowns uh relating to that but a lot of times people in municipalities will complain about unfunded mandates such as right now the mandate is is that any village over 5 000 people must have their own police force what senate bill 118 is doing is they're dissolving that mandate basically giving you a new option um authorizing a city or a village to abolish its police department and contract for law enforcement services with the county i mean i'm not saying that's the best thing that we uh should jump on the bandwagon and move ahead with it but there are a few unknown factors such as are they going to start doling out shared revenue based on shared services so should we you know build a police station tomorrow no i don't think tomorrow but you know within the next year or two possibly but we have to keep our eyes on madison to see what type of guidance and direction we're going to be getting from them because the last thing we want to do is stick 17 million dollars into a police station and then find out from madison that because we didn't incorporate shared services now our shared revenue is going to be scaled back i mean can you imagine what that's going to do to the local tax payers um secondly i do want to make it clear that i was not in support i was the only descending vote at finance tonight we upped the cap it was at 8.7 million we doubled it to 17 million dollars tonight and i am not comfortable with that i strongly believe we could use different types of building material not to bring that price down and i question if 80 000 square feet is really necessary um but aside from that there's been some discussion and questions about if a city hall is large enough and i guess one of the potential expansion ideas i see if we were to add on to city hall is that you could almost create a law enforcement campus in the downtown area perhaps the first phase would be to add on behind city hall the second phase would be you know to check into the transfer point nobody has all the answers we don't know if we have to repay any federal dollars maybe we don't have to repay any of that money and the land would be free to expand across the street you know we we could look into putting a parking structure across the street as well to help facilitate some of the parking issues that we have down here you know the grand hotel is on here now granted right now the acquisition price is too high and we can't afford it but perhaps the county would decide down the line that they would like to purchase that property to expand the law enforcement campus in the downtown area so we're in a situation where we have a lot of great options and i think that we should look into all of them thoroughly and keep an open mind that even whatever we decide and you know set our minds to tonight that after we get the community input and input from other sources that the ultimate decision might change from what we look at tonight so thank you thank you alderman sushi alderman van der wheel thank you madam chair i agree with alderman steffen that we need equipment of shared services that that's just necessary and um building behind city hall is too expensive i don't think this council ever do it because last i heard a parking structure would be about two and a half million to build a parking structure down here any parking you take from business is you're going to have to replace so you're going to have to spend money somewhere to replace parking and a multi-floor structure is going to be too expensive you're looking at like a six-story building behind here i don't think it's ever going to happen thank you alderman van der wheel alderman dan berg like alderman steffen said that 23rd street site started off they were going to be next door to us our good neighbors i'm on the county board we talked to the law committee we asked how come the sheriff hasn't come out and made any statements the sheriff made a statement once he said oh sure if it was built next door to us it would be fine they have no intention of building on the 23rd street site if that highway building is moved it's going west if they ever have a new sheriff's department that's going west because the sheriff's department right now is in the worst possible place it could be the farthest east in the county it could be but as far as shared revenue shared services and everything it's not going to happen because they even came in with having a metropolitan police department a couple of supervisors came in and that went nowhere the county county boys didn't want nothing to do with that but as far as shared services between the city and the county law enforcement agencies there are 24 of them right now i don't know how many more that you can have um alderman berg i did want to ask you that year and a half to two year negotiation with the county you were on that building use committee it was considered very viable for a year and a half to two years that was because the shared and park site was not available at the time because they were going through the history of it all and to find out if it was legal and whatever so the league of municipalities declared it was legal to use shared and park as the site for the police station that is why that came up sure that was second choice but our first choice was still shared and park and that was because and it wasn't until the league of municipalities said it we could use it that's why it didn't come out right away otherwise it would have been used shared park no no 23rd street no we don't know because of all the money involved i see thank you we're trying we're trying to save money here we we can't keep us shaking our fists that or knows that a million dollars here and there thank you alderman danberg alderman graff one thing was that well shared in park isn't available now either so 23rd street probably is your your first choice now but other than that john i have a question for you how many sites can if if we can't give you more than than the three sites that we had proposed here how many can you look at to tell us yeah this would be doable there or not more than three is that four or 40 well no i would guess it could be as many as five or six um it's something that our landscape architect or designer would be working on so um up to six is a doable proposition 30 days is a little tight but um we have the musculature of office that can handle that kind of workload so if you uh put that task on us we would uh we would make it happen thank you thank you mr. sevener thank you alderman graff alderman mani thank you madam chair um south business drive and broadway two more questions related to that 1.5 acre site that would be needed to make the site viable would you have an estimated market value of that property in addition would you have an idea as to the tax revenue that we would lose by so buying that property don't have a clue what that's worth then i mean i have to i don't know if we're ready to have that i have to go through the state to get that i'm sure it's over a million bucks the electronics are going to be in there probably well over that i'm guessing i think thank you well and then what we'd also have to add to that is relocation demolition and then also some kind of like we did with all the other sites take a look at moving expenses for that business thank you alderman mani alderman serda thank you madam chair i realize there is a motion currently on the floor but i think it was a very good idea um alderman steffen had bring to our attention and that is we are looking at building a facility and always taking into consideration expansion based on shared services and i think it's at this time that we do need to have a formal commitment from the county and then i would also add to that and say if the 23rd site is even considered after their commitment that they'd be willing to put in writing that if there is any contamination at that site it would be at their expense and not at the city's and i think it would give us some time to get this book if we narrow it down to six sites give it to mr sabinash for his office and their expertise to look and see if this is feasible based upon the relationship they have built together with the the police department in assessing our needs so we can have an accurate picture of what we're actually creating instead of us as older persons trying to figure this all out tonight thank you alderman serda alderman mayer thank you madam chair um i had spoken with the dnr a while back about brown sites and um they did tell me that they would like cities to clean up the brown sites and they do have grants available for that so i'm sure if we look into it i don't think it'll cost us any money thank you alderman mayer alderman grau thank you um i just want to say regarding the county site i know i've spoken several times with the administrative coordinator and he with the county board chairperson and they both are in agreement that they would be more than willing to come over here and sit down with us and not negotiate because we wouldn't be that far yet but tell us exactly what they think they could do for us and what we expect from them we could so transfer to them but that again has to be at a different step in time but i think now that we know that um they can handle up to six if somebody wants to amend my motion to add three more i think we that's what we need to do two alderman dan berg okay he he had the top three of city hall 23rd and the bus to drop off site or to drop off site i'm sorry okay that i had that too i would like i would like to add north 13th street and pennsylvania have no site between uh commerce street and north 13th street and that southwest business drive which one i'm sorry uh north 13th and pennsylvania have no that's it says number two on in the column yeah all right and then uh number 18 so that's that's five that would be five right there that's five all right then if anybody else would like to add another one i is there a graph would you say those again um number um city hall it would be if was there second to your amendment okay then it would be the five that have been suggested so far um city hall 23rd street southwest business slash broadway form a drop off site and then northeast 13th slash pennsylvania avenue thank you now that's amendment to the original motion so yes and there was a second on it thank you yes we need a vote on the amendment right yes all in favor of the amendment aye opposed no different ideas okay alderman serda thank you madam chairman is this where i would like to make an amendment just so the ball doesn't drop that we get a formal commitment from the county as far as okay well you can make that as a separate motion through okay rather than site selection rather than um mess it up with this sounds good i'll do that if that's okay madam chair if i may yes is there anybody that would like to add any of the other sites to make it six or is the five alderman um yeah if i may alderman susha yes alderman susha thank you um i would just like to add um the bus transfer station as an option and for a couple of reasons i think you could almost get two birds with one stone here because i've talked to some people who have been taking the bus and they've painted some interesting pictures in my mind in regards to imagine if the bus was your only mode of transportation and you were sick and you needed to go to the doctor in shaboy and you have to go all the way downtown transfer buses switch to get to the clinic and um and take them a good half hour to get to see a doctor when they're feeling very ill also with um grocery shopping the downtown area is not very good for people who take the bus when you go you do your grocery shopping and you have all these bags full of frozen goods it's going to take you a good 30 minutes to get home so what i'd like to do is at least look at that option um and check into moving or the feasibility of moving the transfer station um and that way if the city hall package deal could move forward that would give um the architect a little more room uh to look at this option they almost could be bundled together so i'd like to amend alderman groff's resolution to include that thank you alderman susie alderman van der wheel is there a second second yes second all in favor of the amendment aye we have to ask for discussion discussion thank you alderman groff thank you any discussion on the amendment to add the bus transfer station to the list if not all in favor of alderman serda you have a thank you madam chair i think um also i would um ask that when we're receiving this information i think it's it's a good idea but just to involve mr mcdonald and that seeing that he's ahead of transit thank you also under discussion if i may yes alderman groff thank you um ron as long as you're here do you have any idea of what we maybe would have to pay back to the feds or is there something that we could do to to work something out say if we did a new transfer station well good question they're going to want 80 percent of the fair market value of the property and can we work out a deal perhaps if we use that 80 towards the purchase of a new facility but my guess is going to cost you a lot more to replace what you have than what you're going to get out of it so you're you're probably adding i would expect a few million dollars on top of what you're going to get out of that that you're going to have to pay for a new transfer facility then we have to to get additional federal money to work through this process we have to get that into the tip next trip next table be coming through in 2006 we can probably get that into a grant about 2009 maybe 2010 where we get the grant money about 2011 begin construction about 2012 that's the reality of it thank you thank you thank you alderman van der wheel yes you're on thank you madam chair um i agree with alderman sushi's theory in concept i think it's a good theory but my concern is the time of looking at these six sites and the cost is it 50 000 for each site he looks at and what are we looking at for cost and how long will it take thank you alderman van der wheel mr. sabinash well i i would like some time to be able to go and consider what my task is it will not be an order of magnitude of 50 000 of site and the mantle as i understand it is we have to be done in 30 days so within that framework i would tend to say i need to have a draft document done in about three weeks and i can't spend that amount of money per site in the office equitably and slow approach you without looking you looking away from me every time i look you in the eye so we'll put together a proposal that fulfills your timeline and does so in our reasonable and responsible way thank you alderman serda thank you madam chair i just want to clarify for myself as far as the bus transfer station being presented as another optional site i think that's a good idea that we're just generating more information i don't necessarily think it could be possibly feasible given the commitment that we have to the federal government thank you thank you alderman serda thank you alderman sushi thank you i know that oftentimes we put department heads on a short notice to come up to the microphone and answer questions but i would encourage everybody that if you don't have the answer it's okay to say i don't know because i was not prepared to answer this question tonight and i i appreciate the fact that mr mcdonnell stepped up to the microphone and did the best he could but when i hear i believe and i think and those types of phrases i just think it's worthy it's better to say i don't know i'd have to check into it rather than take a stab in the dark because things could have changed since the last time it was addressed and and i'd rather have the truth even if it takes 24 hours to get it i'd rather like to have things written down rather than everybody guessing because you do hear that a lot and he's not alone a lot of us you know i think i predict you know i'd rather have the facts rather than guessing all the time thank you thank you alderman susan alderman dan burt why didn't you know all right alderman graff at this particular time i'd like to bring forth the motion then that the six sites that we should include would be um city hall north 23rd street the bus transfer station southwest business oh i thought that's right thank you oh i'm sorry yes we have to vote on that bus one that's right any more discussion on the amendment all in favor of the amendment to add the bus transfer station site to the list for mr sabinash and company to look at i i any opposed no two opposed roll call and i vote would be to include the bus transfer site deep deburg eberg serda davis i myself will be i kettleson mani meyer montamaro radki sagali stefan susha van akron vander wheelie nine eyes six nose carries amendment carries amendment you're both nine to six 15 all to embalement is excused this evening there's 15 then with that madam chairman i would ask that um we um put forth the motion that city hall 23rd street um bus transfer station southwest business slash broadway former drop-off site and the northeast 13th slash pennsylvania avenue b the six sites that we have picked any further discussion who's seconded okay let us vote let's do a roll call on that just to make it clean okay just a minute then okay this is on the six sites and i vote would be in favor of those six eberg serda davis myself is i kettleson mani meyer montamaro i radki sagali stefan susha van akron vander wheelie deburg 15 eyes motion passes mr sabinash you have your work cut out for you all to mincerda thank you madam chairman now i would like to make a motion that we get a formal commitment from the county what um a commitment from them if they are going to actually build with thank you build with the city of shabuigan and um co-locate in the future some type of commitment and also i would add that i understand alderman's meyer meyer's input but there are no guarantees and people still have fresh in their memory close to that proximity the the pond the retention palm that we had purchased and the mess that we had in the cleanup costs that we had there and i say you know put it in writing that way we're all at ease and that way the city is safeguarded and if it's their property and they can stand by that that's even that's even better thank you thank you the last portion of this was regarding contamination or not contamination and that they should put it in writing that if there is any contamination found at that site they would be liable for the cleanup costs alderman serda alderman susha are you the second thank you uh discussion yes alderman susha okay i think that's a great idea to get the county involved and i'm just looking at the four step process and i would almost think that that would have to fall into place next before the architect reviews the sites because we would almost have to know what that need is beforehand i don't think we can do that otherwise we lose track of the time frame that we're on so it's going to have to be something that's going to be ongoing once this is is drawn up it will be presented to the county board as a as a motion and at that time though if they have two weeks or whatever it's going to be to to put something to make this commitment um that's what they'll have to have that's my thoughts uh i don't know and my thoughts would be a lot of these sites if if we don't know how they're going to work out um the south business and broadway would we have to get a commitment that they would sell before we went ahead i think we need to get the information for mr sabinash's company for simerman company mr sabinash thank you alderman serda alderman eldenberg yes thank you madam chairman a couple of thoughts we talk about commitment uh when it comes to negotiating with our colleagues in the county and i would submit we don't need commitment we need a prenuptial uh to uh perhaps address the issue factors that i think play into this is uh one a decision by the county's legislative body this year does not bind a future legislative body to it so in other words while i think it's a good idea to get current intent as time goes on 10 years from now that intent may be changed if you would buy subsequent administrations uh and i don't know that at this stage of the game we can legitimately expect to have a contract so in terms of the concept of getting intent i think that is certainly a a reasonable idea if there is a mechanism that exists i think it comes as if 23rd street becomes the site and a viable site i think we can engage in certain contractual negotiations that would hopefully bind future county boards to make it attractive if you would to co-locate with us on 23rd street site but i think that's something we've done before in terms of some of other our other negotiations and hopefully one that will come out of some deliberation and contract language thank you thank you alderman berg alderman stephen i don't disagree with everything elton said i do think what we'll know in a hurry is how interested this board is and i i sense they're not very interested because i've never seen any action on their part you know in common sense would dictate that you know they don't want to be at 23rd street they want to be you know somewhere near falls plinth that area that's the center of the county so they won't guarantee us that they'll be there but i think it'll give us a very good impression that they won't be if they're not interested thank you alderman stephen alderman radtke thank you madame chairperson i would like to see the next committee the whole meeting of 23rd street does place up there that we invite the sheriff and his people and the county law committee people up here in the proper people so we can ask the questions get them right here instead of saying well i wonder if you know we'll just ask them right here from the podium so we can get some direct straight answers and see exactly which way they they intend to go that would be my my suggestion thank you alderman radtke alderman dan burke i will do you one better jeff or alderman person radtke i'll go tomorrow and i will talk to sheriff helmke and see what his thoughts are on this whole idea thank you alderman burke alderman serda i think all these extensions are really good but i still believe that we needed in writing folks and we need to go through the formal process so i think the motion should still stand but still go ahead and do what's recommended thank you thank you alderman serda alderman manning thank you madame chair i think the first part of the motion is um unadvisable to pursue that kind of commitment for them they can't truly provide it but i believe the second part is what we could pursue so i'm going to go to uh i know on this motion we could have a second motion asking about the cleanup costs that would be their responsibility thank you alderman any any further discussion yes alderman braf thank you when i have written down and i might need something more from you tomorrow morning but right now i've got we need a written commitment from the county that they are willing to work with us on on the 23rd street side and they're possibly build there in the future or co-locate you want it and not possibly just co-locate okay and um okay and then put in writing that contamination would be paid for by the county and to and to put in writing that contamination would be paid for by the county but cleanup alderman van der wheel thank you madam chair um i was just thinking maybe it would be proper for alderman serda to submit a document to council she can think about what she wants to put in there because this is for the moment and we are sending it to a other governing body so maybe that would be more proper and maybe that she could work with steve on it also yeah okay yes would you like to withdraw this motion then this is a committee nada and not the council alderman serda chairman i guess i need to you need to let me know and the public know how does this affect our time frame as far as because if i submit it to council and work on the resolution how long will that take and maybe we have steve here tonight if you would like to inject anything maybe we can just change it tonight and get it going and go to board i think or if i may i believe steve could have something or you too could work something out so that it could be presented to our next council meeting which is next week monday and at that time we could vote on that to refer it to the the um to the county board for their action and so i don't think it would delay anything okay as far as that goes okay good so i hate to commit all these people to all this but um i'm sure they would be more than willing to do that so alderman serda you're withdrawing yes yes and the second also alderman ratki thank you i think that's it alderman eldenberg given that there's no motion to have a question on the step in the process i think in the past most of the design firms have looked out only 20 years i think for me one of the considerations of looking for example at city hall i can see city hall perhaps being functional in 20 years this building has been here 100 years okay we do a police station once every hundred years and i guess i would ask if mr sabinash would feel it would be within his professional judgment to take it out 40 or 60 years in terms of the venturing i guess in terms of the potential that these various sites might have for future expansion beyond the 20 year if you would envelope that you feel comfortable operating within i know i can design a building that will last 100 years i can't attest to the program changes that will um evolve within the department i would use as one example if you probably pulled every police chief in the state of wisconsin in 1950 and said what do you what do you think women what role women play in the department they would have all missed and so um as a functional programmatic effort i know that i'll be very it would be very difficult for me to programmatically identify that in terms of construction i know i can build a building that will last within the time frame that you've identified within um reasonable construction costs sites may not present um maybe i'll what i'll do is i'll i'll say how most people deal with expansion in a project of this type is even we've begun to discuss in my two minutes to talk to the chief um independent of the finance committee is that if the program changes if for some reason the program has to be reduced the things that you take out of the future expansion it's the office that wasn't assigned it's the conference room that now becomes an office and we've all seen i think if you looked at the original plans for this building that storage spaces conference rooms things that were public meeting spaces now have now evolved into functional operational office spaces and things of that ilk so in in terms of how the program evolves relative to the budget i know that there's growth and we use 20 years as a as a measuring stick because that seems to be what's in vogue these days for architects to use the more program that's cut the less likely it is that the building is going to satisfy your needs now is that threshold of pain going to happen in 10 years 20 years 30 years or 40 years that's what's tough to identify because we don't know how the department's going to change one of the things that tends to happen now in criticism of buildings that if you look at libraries there's certainly a population base that thinks that all you need is an internet connection at your home and that's the new library police departments could evolve into something similar to that it's certainly not outside the realm that if the city should bring more to grow substantially for any number of different reasons that you might look at a different methodology of policing you might start to look at independent stations satellite stations and things of that nature so i can stand here and probably tell you something that i think could happen in 20 years i know that the program that we have in place will create a building that'll last that time frame i know the technology will change in it i know that we'll have enough space to satisfy the department needs in that time outside of that it becomes very difficult for i think anyone to extrapolate what the nature of the department's going to be i know that reducing the square footage will limit your opportunities in the future um but that may be a hurdle that we just have to cross when we get to the budget process thank you mr thank you mr saban ash paul i i guess i have a question for mr saban ash too if you when you design a building and can given the restrictions that we have in shabuagan based on site we don't have any greenfield sites and we're working on primarily urban sites do you think about going up as an alternative so that the building is constructed if and when you had to expand that you could potentially just add a story or two it would be my preference that if we need to deal with expansion on any site that we deal with it as an addition to the building rather than going on top of the building in general in general terms it's very difficult for a construction agency to keep the police department operational and we're building on top of it when there's no roof on the building it's very difficult to ensure that the weather tightness and the validity of the people that are working in that environment below where the weather actually exists are going to actually function adequately so and i know that that's also one of those things that's in vogue as architects say well we'll just add a floor you'll build up in police department planning that's very difficult to actually achieve and so that's still a real opportunity and i would never dismiss it a certain site may dictate it but if i had my option i would rather say let's leave a section of the site available for expansion that expansion would take place horizontally that would ensure that the people who are operating in the building in the future still can operate there at a certain point the two blend together and that transition takes place but again it's really difficult to shut down a 24-hour building to allow somebody to build on top of it thank you mr. sevenish alderman serda thank you madam chairman this question is for paulette and tom considering that we um are still going to be possibly looking at self-business drive is there any way alderman manning had suggested the acquisition costs and the actual charter cable if we could get that information back i don't know if we directed them to actually do that if you could provide us with that information concrete instead of the ifs and maybes thank you do that thank you thanks yes alderman graf thank you madam chair um all we passed out um the process for selecting a location for the new police station and um i just went through and i changed wherever it says three to six and um with that i'd i'd make a motion that we approve that process for selecting the location of the new police station second wait a second there's been a motion in a second to approve the process for like selecting location for the new police station any discussion seeing none all in favor i wait wait oh alderman van der wheel thank you i just had a question um you're mentioning this document the process i just changed where it says three to six i was wondering there's no number on the document i was just wondering how you would do that because there doesn't seem to be a formal document but just because this is a process we're going to adopt as as a committee of the whole okay and that's why it's not a document per se that's going to counsel anything it's a committee of the whole document and that's what's going to guide us through this process i believe i believe you're right thank you thank you alderman serda so you're saying step three is changing to step six no no no okay any place it says pick three potential sites i changed it to pick the six okay because that's what we did um one of the things like an older person i know said here on the floor is that there is a component with the county missing in here so are we restricting ourselves by passing this that any other any other information like tonight we are sending we're doing another component here we're sending the information to mr sabinosh that wasn't on here i'm just a little concerned that we might restrict ourselves in the future unless you want to put in a clause there if you know we can if we have to amend this document or how that process would work because like i said there's a couple steps that we initiated tonight that went to fall in under these categories uh step two is refer them to zimmerman for further evaluation okay but the county and how the county is going to separate from this process right this particular sheet of your document will do that and we've talked about it so it should be covered under here okay that's that's input from whoever we need input from okay that would be my interpretation as long as we don't restrict ourselves that's fine thank you all to insert it any further discussion on accepting this process step all in favor i right all right opposed thank you we'll find we'll find out mayor can find out from the library if they will let us meet there and when and that'll be within the time frame that zimmerman is gathering information and then step four we will review zimmerman's evaluation of the three sites of the six sites and the public's input and vote on a site in your next meeting alderman berth prior to making the motion to adjourn do you anticipate a future meeting of this body i would bet there would be yes do you have a date well i was thinking of waiting until mr sabin ash or zimmerman lets us know when they have the information thank you move to adjourn just can we tentatively set that up july um 11th they haven't voted on this yet oh july 11th okay all those in favor say aye who made this second