 The reason that the committee voted This is the fellow fellow with the conviction 19 years ago, right? Well, I was about to say is mr. Troy Murray here There is It is the opinion of the city attorney that state law if you've had a felony conviction Prevents this man from getting beverage operators license and It is the opinion of of the the man's brother was a paralegal and I Although not an attorney. I did go to law school in Madison is my opinion. I agree with the applicant that What the law says is that? We as a municipality or the law and license as a committee Cannot be sued if we do deny the license it it exempts just like the The concealed carry law says if a business doesn't put a sign up They're exempt from being sued if there's gun violence on their property But they put up the sign that immunity goes away This is this this the statute that's being cited by the city attorney to deny The license it states that we cannot be sued as a city if we grant his license it does not say we Can't grant a license Thank you with that. I asked a city attorney to please comment just like to correct Alderman Jose's Statement of what my opinion is it's not simply about felony convictions Felony convictions in and of themselves do not make a person Ineligible if it were simply a felony conviction the committee's role would be to weigh whether that felony conviction Substantially relates to the licensed activity However, there is a series of five particular convictions That a person is completely ineligible for a license if they have one of those convictions Mr. Murray has one of those convictions basically for Providing drugs selling drugs to to a person In essence, there are three categories of people who would apply for a liquor license one are people who have no No criminal record of any kind those people are eligible for a license People who have a criminal conviction of these five types are not eligible for a license People who have criminal convictions of any other type whether felonies misdemeanors Then there has to be a weighing of whether they relate to the licensed activity Alderman Jose's legal analysis and the paralegals legal analysis just simply misses that there is an additional statute involved section 125 panel for I can give you the The direct subsection It's 125 point oh for Subsection 5 subsection and that particular section does provide that a person is not eligible for a license if they have a criminal conviction but subject then to the Fair Labor Act the Fair Labor Act then Simply provides that there are certain other situations in which that comes around Because of 120 504 sub 5 That whole issue of you just can't get sued because of it doesn't apply in this situation because we do have a specific Statute on site so in this case it is my legal opinion that Mr. Murray happens to be ineligible for this license Unless he becomes Pardoned he is not currently part of that offense And currently the governor is not partying in anyone Or he gets the case reopened which he has indicated that he will be trying to do Thank you for those comments next is all their personless whole shoe I was just going to reiterate that he was denied by our committee due to his conviction of Manufacturing and delivering of THC felony bail jumping and possession of drug paraphernalia and as advised by our legal counsel He's ineligible to receive a beverage operators license Thank you for those comments with a clerk, please call the roll for passage 14 eyes one no motion passes Item 6.4 is an RC by the Committee of the whole to whom was referred charter ordinance number two of 1617 by Alderperson whole shoe Heidemann Jose Schneider Thiel and Trester being the subject of home rule provisions of 66 0101 of the Wisconsin Statutes to maintain the number of alderpersons in the city of Sheboygan at 16 it recommends that the charter ordinance be passed Alderperson Donahue Although I shall vote against it I would move to accept and adopt and put the charter ordinance upon its passage second Thank you for your motion and support The item is before you for discussion All the person holds you. Thank you. I Have a little I've taken personal notes because sometimes I go off the street here As this has been discussed at length. I would just like to add my personal point of you regarding this issue It's been stated that this issue came to be Passed in previously with much discussion and we shouldn't change a charter How it would appear to prosper business dealings in The future it would be in questions because we're going back in changing a charter I would like to state that there was not a lengthy discussion about this When it came for us to pass it was brought forward and we passed it So that being said what does an alder do in a case where a vote has been made and after time has passed in Realizing that that choice was made was a wrong one What do we do as elders to correct that change? More often than not we do not always have the time needed to perhaps research and contemplate I say as alders on this council. What is more appropriate leaving the status quo or taking the steps necessary to correct an error Does one look at a committee or a council in a different light for correcting an issue and bringing it up for discussion? Once again, I personally would like to correct any errors. I've made on my years on council Bringing this forward is doing just that. I Would not judge anyone that is taking the effort and believes that making mistakes is human Correcting them is care of it. I voted yes to the ten alderman on that boat And I'm standing before you today to state for the record that I made a mistake In casting that vote and I believe that 16 alder persons are what are required the people deserve Representation the committees deserve attendance The council deserves a think tank that is diverse with the ability to tap into different specialties Clearly it is not a monetary issue and honestly. I don't think this issue with many of our Constituents is forms a leading form of dispute between them The issue for me is representation attendance and dutiful service to the aldermatic position Which is accomplished in 16 seated alder persons in this discussion? We have had many references to history and presidents and I can't feel like I can let this opportunity go Without adding my own reference and this is coming from the highest source. I know it clastes 4.9 Two are better than one because they have good return for their labor and John Hayward then went on to say two heads Are better than one. I'm hoping that you'll support this issue We had it rewritten so many times and with the help of our city attorney I think we have it in a legal format that will work Those of us who did vote yes and and had time to reconsider Do you believe 16 alderman is what is needed for the representation of our constituents? I struggle with quorums I struggle with participation. I struggle with think tanks. We're reducing to 10 We're gonna have two people on committees So again, I know this is gonna be a long discussion yet again But I hope that you'll vote in favor of this as I am. Thank you. Thank you for those comments all their person Jose I want to agree with and support everything and all their person whole shoes said and add a few more viewpoints I think that going down to only one all the person per district gives less representation if we look at the way our Federal government has set up every state has two senators So you can look at a state like a district. We should keep it at two. I brought up this idea a couple of meetings ago if you if you if you so badly want the district and the representation to mirror what's happening at the the mirror the The lines that the county board supervisors have for their districts if that's so important Increase keep keep your tent keep the 10 districts but then elect to alderman per district and go with 20 alder persons because for more alder people is only gonna be about $25,000 it's a drop in the bucket of the budget Conversely going down six alder people saving the salary of 4400 or whatever it is is not is Isn't gonna wouldn't pave the road from here to the next desk On any street. So it's not it's alderman hosier said it's not a money issue but it is a representation issue and I Sure, I think that it's gonna It's gonna it's gonna create more work for the existing all our people It's very ironic that for the people that voted for this then Then within six months after voting for it either resigned their positions or didn't run for re-election After they created more work for the other ten all that for the ten alderman that will be left over It's the mayor has only has five standing committees and it's tough to get enough people to staff those committees now And what's it gonna be like when you got six less alderman to try and to run all those standing committees? Thank you for those comments alder person Herman Thank you concur with All the person whole shoot who heads are better than one if you don't have 16 you're not going to have the representation If a certain older person is not available You have a backup. I believe there's strength in numbers Things are working very well in Sheboygan. It's a it's a thriving growing community with 16. I believe most of the cities in Southeastern scots and are still in the surrounding areas of Sheboygan are still going to the 16 number format If you don't have You're not going to in terms of committees You're gonna have like two people on a committee and one or two people could control the meeting and control the vote and that's not fair I prefer to keep it at 16 and that's not gonna change Thank you very much for those comments Alder person feel Thank You mayor I too Did vote yes to this originally without very little time to Really think about How it was going to be set up? What really got me to change my mind is when I saw the setup How we're going to set our committees up how many members we're going to be that's what I really got the the wheels turning on on what we actually did here I Go back to the last meeting I had of public protection and safety. We have five members on that on that committee Two of them are unable to make it so right there it gave me an example of having a three person committee And it was pretty obvious how control it was going to be I mean Like Alder person Herman said two people are pretty much control can't control that committee with no problems And I don't think that's fair to anybody applying for a license or For any type of thing that needed to get voted on I Just really saw that vision happening if we go to 10 and I think we really need to think about that Also We went to had a meeting if two people went to showed up that meeting would have been cancelled So if we want to know ahead of time we get to the meeting two people don't show up everybody was there It's cancelled. We're done. We don't have a quorum That's not fair to those people I really think we just need to think this through and I don't think we did the first time and I think now We've had some time to think about it I did take some time to look at a few other Communities see how many people they have as far as older persons and stuff It goes from us being at 16 the cross at 17 which I was surprised with West Alice 10 Well, whatosa has 16 final act had seven they're all within close vicinity of Our population and stuff some a little less some a little higher a Couple of them got back to me as far as how much each one of them gets, you know paid for their annual services La Crosse is actually going up to in 2017 They're gonna get 6,000 West Alice has given 7,300 dollars We get around forty seven hundred dollars. I do believe I think we're 16 people What we do forty seven hundred dollars is pretty good. I don't think we need to go to 10 Just sit in a committee that has three members and I think you'll understand what's going on So I support keeping it at 16 and I think we got it written right. Thanks to our attorney. So thank you Thank you for your comments Alderman Herman. Did you have something else? Please go ahead. I Want my tenure decided by the people that elected me by the taxpayer I wish this had gone to a referendum because I think that would be the fairest way to do it But that idea was shot down not to be disrespectful, but I don't want my tenure decided by You need two previous older people who no longer sit on this council Came up with the idea to reduce it from 16 to 10. It's rather strange that they're not here, but Anyway, I want my tenure decided by the people that elected me and Your ten years should be decided by that same standard. Thank you. Thank you very much Alder person truster I just wanted to make one brief statement and that is I have told my Constituents that I am always available for them and I have been and my phone rings off the hook or They knock on my door. I don't see how I could be a better Alderman or As good as I am for them if I had to have a greater population to serve And by going down to ten I would have more Okay. Thank you very much See the attorney. Would you please review the votes needed for passage on a charter ordinance, right? So In order to pass you will need 11 votes in favor because it does Require a two-thirds vote and in essence what it does is Increases the number of districts from eight to ten. So you'll actually have a smaller A smaller district, but there will only be one older person in each district then Thank you Alder person Lee Wendalski. I Just want to add a few things That haven't been brought up, but if we go down to ten Alderman Each one of us is going to have a lot more work because the constituents can't Try to get hold of one of two alderman they got to try to get hold of only one alderman and that one alderman will have to See what they want and try to solve it also if somebody is on vacation or gets sick that means that It was districts will not have any representation at common council meetings Thank you very much older person whole shoe. Thank you For me, it's not a matter of more work. That doesn't frighten me What matters to me is the number of people are attending committee meetings But I am all in favor of a think tank the more people we have out here The more specialties we can grasp at our constituents deserve that We as alderman deserve to have other people to bounce things off of I Just don't think it's a matter of us having to do more work because I just I'm not buying into that I just think I am so strongly so strongly changed my mind that the representative of our constituents should be paramount and I really don't believe that there is concerned about this issue as we are a Referendum, I don't I just I think if we're going to do referendums. We should do those in regards to city halls and and Other things that are more relevant than how many people are here because they voted 16 in I don't know if this has ever come before the council before my time and I've been here five years I'm just Really adamant that them we cut it down you are going to put more work and find less candidates For these positions. Thanks. Thank you very much Alderperson Donahue We are we are getting pretty good at talking about things sort of over and over again and so I'll keep my remarks short I Really don't think that it is a particularly good argument To keep the council at the size that it is because we can't make Quarms at committee meetings and because people don't respond to phone calls and that sort of thing if you're elected you do the job And as Alderperson feel pointed out there are a number of communities that have bigger Councils there are a number that have smaller Green Bay, which is a city at least twice the size of Sheboygan Has 11 Alders and somehow business goes on and business gets done We have in fact spent a fair amount of time developing a plan to make this a very workable Proposition in a workload that is reasonable and that looks at a different way of doing business a more efficient way Ways that businesses just normally do it. So whether we whether we stay at 16 or 10 It's really not the end of the world. I just want to warn you if it changes in 2015 and it changes in 2016 it can change in 2017 it can change in 2018 This is a charter ordinance. This is not, you know, whether we're granting somebody a license or whether we're granting a zoning request This is really pretty serious stuff is reflected by the vote that's needed. I'm saying this because I just think that we need to keep in mind that Precedent I would agree is not everything But if you're telling our citizens that they can't rely on something as basic as the number of people who are going to be running For office, then I think that is of greater concern. So as I say Whatever happens will happen and we should just move on and and and attend to attend to other business but I I I think I think a think tank of 10 motivated Concerned and highly involved citizens is as good as a think tank of 16 Some of whom as Alderman Holschu has pointed out don't come to meetings. Don't pay attention Thanks Thank you very much. Alderperson Herman If you cut it in 16 to 10 You may as well increase the pay because if it's down to 10 You're asking this many people to do this much work for the same amount of money I I just think things are working well with 16 if it's not broke don't fix it. Let's keep it where it is Thank you. Alderperson Jose Uh, I gotta say if you had 16 people rowing a boat And you propose that 10 of them should row the boat by themselves I think maybe the person the the person or the people making the proposal will probably be thrown out of the boat By the people that are doing the rowing That's just a clever analogy, but it's also on the same analogy It's very interesting if it it must have took 11 votes, correct I think it was 12 to 4 But I think it took 11 votes to pass it the other way, right? Well, it's interesting that that for the people that voted yes They're no longer here and without those four they would have they would have had uh seven not enough votes To the lower at the 10 in the first place So you might say they jump ship after the after the after they got rid of some of the orbit horsemen Thank you all the person born Thank you here. I call the question second Is there any objection to cutting off discussion? Seeing none. We'll ask the clerk to call the roll Everybody know what you're voting on and I vote means It's to pass the charter ordinance a yes would be to pass the charter that's presented right here And that's keeping it at 16 pardon. That's keeping it at 16 To maintain 16, okay Okay nine Yes, six no motion fails Item 6.5 is an RC by the committee of the whole to almost referred resolution number 107 of 16 17 Direct referral by all the person donahue wolf drawn Regarding the advisory referendum question related to the size of the common council in the city of shabuagan recommends that the resolution be passed All the person donahue Uh, thank you mayor in light of the vote. I moved to file Thank you after that motion in support Emotion on the floor then is a motion to file 5.6. Is there any discussion? 6.5 or 6.5 All the person holds you. Yes. Thank you in light of the vote What if we we want to have it go to referendum at this point That's your question. I have to ask what do we have a first and a second I'm going to encourage us that we pass this And let the people speak finally have the our constituents have the last word at this point So I'm not in favor of filing this at all. Okay. Thank you for those comments any other discussion all the person born Thank you, mayor. Uh, I'm not going to support this going to a referendum If it goes if it's if it's a referendum and it's an advisory referendum and it comes back here My understanding would still take 11 votes then right? Correct. So, uh You know if you're going to make it a record a referendum then make make it a binding referendum But I think we're just wasting our time if it's advisory. Thank you. Thank you for those comments all the person jose I think a referendum and the people being heard is is never a waste of time um I think that uh the value can be this If the people vote that they want to keep it at 16 alderman and we bring it to another vote and The people that Vote against it. We're freezing it back to 16. Then the citizens know who to vote out of office at the next election Thank you for those comments So, you know, uh Other lights all the person whole shooter you want. Yes, I have a question. How do um, do I make a friendly motion to make this a binding referendum? Well, first of all, that's not germane to the motion at hand, which is to file um The reason that uh, the it came as an advisory referendum Is that the statutes really don't provide for a binding referendum you could call it a binding referendum The council could still disobey it So that we shouldn't do a binding referendum if in fact we get to that point It's it's not really a binding referendum. You could call it that. Um, but it's not really one. So then people saying that it would be a Referral referendum and not a binding one. There really is no difference Right. There is there is no binding referendum for these kinds of things the state statutes actually list a number of items for which Binding referendum are either required or permissible. This is not one of them. So this would just be the voice of our constituents. Yes. Thank you Okay, so the the motion on the floor is a motion to file The clerk, please call the roll Eight eyes seven nose Motion passes Next we'll move on to item six point six Which is an rc by salary and grievances to whom is referred resolution number 114 of 16 17 By all the person donahue adopting the 2017 city of shabuagan compensation program For non-represented employees and recommends that the resolution be passed along with the amended 2017 City of shabuagan compensation program for non-represented employees all the person donahue Thank you, mayor. I move to accept and adopt and put the resolution upon its passage second Thanks for that motion and support. Is there any discussion on the motion all the person born? Thank you, mayor, uh, I had intentions on attending the salary and grievance meeting and something came up that I couldn't but a question that I had for Chairperson donahue or if there's somebody here from hr Is that in consideration of this pay increase? I know I know from reading some of the documents that they went out and looked at I guess private sector positions like positions as far as salary Was the benefit package? For the city employees also also taken into consideration in comparison to the private sector Before recommending this two percent wage increase Thank you Sandy rick. Would you like to come forward and answer that question? Thank you. The answer is yes. We look at total compensation Any other discussion? Would the clerk please call the roll I'm sorry Oh, I popped up. I said I lost connection. So I didn't know if it was working. Yes. No I think it might have went through. I don't know it did go through 13 eyes Excuse me two nose motion passes Next item is 6.7 an rc by salary and grievances to whom is referred resolution number 115 of 16 17 by Older person donahue authorizing the city to establish and maintain a voluntary term life policy beginning january 1st of 2017 And recommends that that resolution be passed Older person donahue. Thank you, mayor. I move to accept and adopt and put the resolution upon its passage second Thank you for that motion and support Under discussion older person hosé I just have a question is this uh Is this something that the city would have to contribute to like we contribute to a portion of the Health health care insurance where we have to contribute to a portion of the life insurance premiums Or would that all be paid by the by the employee choosing whether they have the the term life or not We would not be contributing. It would be to the employee's option and they would pay for it Older person hosé I'm assuming then because I am not I I don't have any understanding of this. Do we offer that now? No, we do not This would be something that you add to it Thank you. You're welcome. Any other discussion I would like to please call the roll for passage 14 eyes 1 no Motion passes item 6.8 is an rc by finance to whom is referred resolution number 110 of 16 17 by Older person borne authorizing a transfer of appropriations in the 2016 budget to establish an appropriation for the settlement of an nrfc memorial holdings llc For a refund of excessive 2014 real estate taxes and recommends that the resolution be passed older person donahue Thank you, mayor. I would move to accept and adopt and put the resolution upon its passage second Thank you for that motion and support under discussion Older person borne. I don't have anything. Okay See no discussion all those in Let's see we have to call the roll 15 eyes Motion passes Item 6.9 is an rc by finance to whom was referred resolution number 102 of 16 17 By older person wolf authorizing a transfer of appropriation in the 2016 budget Establishing an estimated revenue and appropriation for forfeiture funds received by the police department That the resolution be passed older person wolf Thank you, mayor. I would like to make a motion to accept and adopt and pass resolution Second thank you for that motion and support under discussion Seeing none will the clerk. Please call the roll for passage 14 eyes 1 no motion passes Under other matters Both 7.1 and 7.2 we refer to the law and licensing committee and I'll turn it over to the city attorney for other items Yeah, 7.1 is a general ordinance By older person bellinger repealing and recreating Article 4 of chapter 30 of the municipal code relating to the sales of drug paraphernalia and repealing and recreating Section 70-8 of the municipal code entitled adoption of state law regarding controlled substances And 7.2 is an RO by the city clerk submitting various license applications for the period ending December 31 2016 june 30 2017 and june 30 2018 Thank you. And again those will go to the law and licensing committee Next we have a contemplated closed session older person donahue Thank you, mayor. I would move to convene and closed session under the exemption provided in section 1985 sub 1 sub e of uh, wisconsin statutes For competitive and bargaining reasons require a closed session related to redevelopment opportunities for the founders club llc And a development opportunity in the 600 block of north 9th street second Thank you for that motion and support asked the clerk to call the roll on closed session 14 eyes 1 no Motion passes. I just like to advise our viewers at home that we will be adjourning in closed sessions So this will end the broadcast of the city council meeting for this evening. We'll take a three minute recess and reconvene