 Kittleson, Laucs, Manny, Montemayor, Perez, Rinflaich, Sagalli, Steffen, Van Akron, Vanderwiel and Warner, 14 present. Corms present. Before we go, let's go with the approval of the minutes. Alderman Warner. I thank you. I want to move the minutes of the last Common Council meeting to be approved and that the same stand has entered on the record. We have a motion and a second before us for approval of the past meeting of the Common Council under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Hold? Motion carried. Before we do the pledge of deceit evening, Alderman Burke, we have a very special guest with us this evening. Would you like to introduce him please? Thank you, Your Honor. Well, tonight it's a, yesterday was my birthday so it was very, very special birthday because Saturday my son-in-law, First Sergeant Timothy Knack came home from Iraq. He's got 20 days and he's here this evening with his wife, Cheryl, and my grandson, Sean. So Tim, if you would like to say a few words to the group? How y'all doing? Good. I'd like to say thanks for, first off, back in December got care package from everybody here and we really appreciate it. For about our third month in our tent and rations were real low at our base in the job. Pretty far away from Baghdad so things were kind of tight. Came at a good time, passed out to my soldiers, they really appreciated it a lot. We spent about the last six, seven months in Iraq right now. I'm home on leave for 15 days. I'll be heading back to Iraq on the 21st and hopefully be back before the 4th of July if everything works out right. So I just want to say thanks for all your support. Thank you. Tim, as a city we like to say thank you to you for without you and have the freedoms we enjoy today. So thank you very much. With that Alderman Berg would you and Tim please lead us on a pledge of allegiance? A pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Steve Resignations. I have a letter dated February 17th from Jeff Herman advising that since no longer president of the Firefighters Local 483 he's resigning his appointment to the Labor Management Committee and the Community Health Insurance Advisory Task Force. That can be accepted and placed on file. And for Mayor's appointments, hereby submit the following appointment for your consideration. Wallace Ensley to be considered for appointment to the Labor Management Committee and the Community Health Insurance Advisory Task Force to fill the unexpired term of Jeff Herman whose term expires 430.05 signed by the Mayor. And Ken Conger, County Board Supervisor to be considered for appointment to the Ergo Commission term expiring April 30, 2005. Anthony Bonnet and Paulette Enders is non-voting ex-officio members of the Ergo Commission signed by the Mayor. Okay, that will hold for now. We need a suspension on that. But if you want to read the rest of them Steve because I could go on to Ergo Commission. This was brought in February 21st to the Ergo Commission. Alderman William Steffen, Lana Steyer Maloney, Dennis Ladwig, William T. Winkle, Dean Bogan shoots, Joe Sheehan, and Rich Gebhardt, Finance Director, ex-officio members. Alderman Steffen's term expiring 4805 and all the others 43005. That can be confirmed. Alderman Warner. On that your Honor, I would ask for suspension of the rules. Is there any objection to suspension of the rules? Hearing none, proceed. On that your Honor, I would move the meters of appointment speed approved. We have motion and second before us. All in favor of the motion? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. All in person, Sugali. Thank you, your Honor. First of all, I'd like to say welcome home to First Sergeant Timnack. Godspeed on your journey back there. We also need to thank his family because without you, he would not have the support that he receives when he is back at home and when he's there overseas. For anybody who was not able to attend the homecoming of the 330th, I think it was probably one of the most powerful events that I have ever witnessed. When they came into the armory and the flags flying and yelling USA, USA, USA, the mayor's speech was terrific. As you looked over and you spanned the crown because Alderman Sutter and I were up above there so we could see the people. And there were a couple of people, of course, that weren't flying flags and then you think you're wandering to yourself. Why are those people here in the first place? But it's just kind of like a passing moment. And you go back to this whole emotional thing. And for the wives and families of the sergeants that were killed over there, I think we ought to tell them that they are always in our hearts, our prayers and our thoughts. And thank them for giving up something so very special that was their husband's lives. I still think that they have that on TV. I don't know on channel 20. But if you get a chance, please watch it because it's something that you need to see. And this is the true meaning of what they say we're proud to be in Americans. Thank you. Thank you. Very well said. Thank you. Tonight I was asked to also remind everyone when they speak, make sure you got your microphones clipped to your lapels or whatever on your collar. And when you speak, speak directly into the microphone so that people can hear you out there. They're the problem with the sound otherwise getting out. Public forum, Sue. First on the list, we have Mark Summer. Mark, could you give me your home address, please? Yes, my name is Mark Summer. I live at 523 South 14th Street, Cheboygan, Wisconsin. And Mark, you will have five minutes. Yes, I have been a resident of that address for over 29 years. Dear Mayor and Common Council members, thank you for the opportunity to address you. One of my many concerns is the order that will be produced, and it's dispersal to the surrounding areas of the proposed ethanol plant that's going to be located at the former Shryer malting place. I was at Utica's plant on three different occasions, and I did notice an order there on all three separate occasions. We had a neighborhood meeting, and the Utica representative there did indicate that the plant will produce an order. I talked with two neighbors by the Utica plant, one less than a mile away and one more than a mile away. They both indicated with the proper wind direction they smell an order from the Utica plant. Nobody to me has ever indicated that there would not be an order that would be produced by this plant. And my other big thing I want to speak tonight is I feel that there's a legal aspect and a possible major conflict between the proposed zoning change and the existing zoning code that I feel protects us now. Basically under the Sheboygan zoning code 15.206 parent 7 parent B. Heavy industrial land use description. Heavy industrial land uses are industrial facilities which do not comply with one or more of the following. Are conducted entirely within a closed building are not potentially associated with nuisances such as odor noise, heat vibration and radiation, and are detectable at the proper length. Do not pose a significant safety hazard. Basically if you don't meet those three criteria, which they don't because of the fact it's not entirely in closed building, it's potentially associated with nuisance of noise and odor. So it definitely is classified as a heavy industrial land use. Then it says more specifically heavy industrial land uses are industrial land uses which may be wholly or partially located outside of an enclosed building, may have the potential to create certain nuisances which are detectable at the property line and may involve materials which pose a significant safety hazard. Now here's the thing I wanted to really highlight. However, in no instance shall a heavy industrial land use exceed the performance standards listed in 15-7. So now you go to 15-7 of the same Sheboygan zoning code book and they talk about odor standards under section 15-711 odor standards. Here in one the purpose which is basically would cover, I'm presuming would be like in a complete industrial plant location where everything would be basically UI or HI zone. It says the purpose of this section is to regulate the creation of odor which adversely affects the joining properties in order to prevent the creation of nuisances and to promote the general welfare of the public. Then number two is applicability which also allows certain exceptions. The requirements of this section apply to all land uses and activities except these standards shall not apply to orders creating during the construction of the principal use on subject property or by incidental traffic parking loading or maintenance operation. Public landfills and public sanitary sewer treatment plants shall be exempted from the requirements of this section as essential public services. And then if you go to number three, that one is basically more restrictive to protect neighborhoods that I believe are but heavy industrial and we have commercial office and stuff like that. I'll read it exactly as it says here and this is basically out of that chapter 15-7 that heavy industrial refers directly to. It says standard except for food preparation, comma, and by that I'm presuming all the restaurants and fast food restaurants and stuff like that that produce odor. They're basically cooking and fireplace orders emanating from residential land uses, comma, and orders associated with property development and maintenance. Parentheses such as construction, lawn care, and the painting and roofing of structures. So basically those orders are exempted. Now here's the big part that I believe should protect us as neighbors in that area. It says no odor doesn't classify what type ranking. It specifically says no odor shall be created for periods exceeding a total of 15 minutes per any day which are detectable, now it says parentheses, by a healthy observer such as a zoning administrator or a designee who is unaffected by background orders such as tobacco or food at the boundary of the subject property where said lot abuts property within any residential, comma, office, comma, commercial zoning district, comma, or suburban industrial district. So basically if you're out in an industrial plant, this would not be applicable if you had all heavy industry zoning like in an industrial park, they could make odor and then unless it was adversely affecting somebody, it wouldn't. But here if you're bounding by residential office which on the map that they submitted, you can very clearly see... Excuse me, Mark. I'm sorry your five minutes are up. Thank you. Thank you. Next is John Burner. Yes, 1990. John, I need your address again. I'm trying to be helpful. I know. Can you give me your address again, John? Okay. I want to say something on an ethanol plant too and then according to the paper today, I broke down and bought one. John. $20 million. Excuse me, John. Can you give me your address please? Pardon? Could you give me your home address please? Oh, 1919 Broadway. I thought I did that. That was our routine every week, you know. All right. And you have five minutes, sir. Okay. They say 20 million gallons are going to be transported from that plant yearly. That's all flammable. Inside the center of the city of Sheboygan, next to a river, a boat down from a school running seven days a week. I'm not against it. I think it's an all plant. Fine. I don't think in the center of the city. I really don't. People were against the police station being across from the school. And here you got a 20 million gallons a year of flammable right across from the school again. All right. I say no to that. That's your decision though. And one other thing. I was watching the common council meeting last week and you had a little problem here. I didn't know what was going on in my body. Talked up here last week. He didn't know what was going on until somebody said what was going on. I think there would have been a better way of handling it is asking the common council to meet after the meeting in close session. I didn't think this had to be viewed to the public. Personally, I really don't care who backs the mayor and I really don't care who backs you. My decision when I vote is what I find out personally about you and personally about you. And that's how my vote is backed in. Not by some businessman or anybody else. I thank you. You could have had that minute. Next on the list is John Kittleson please. John, could you give me a home address please? 1716 Illinois Avenue, Sheboygan. And you will have five minutes. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to address this council in the public tonight. I'm a member of the concerned mall company neighbors group known as CMCN who lives near cargo mall plant located in Sheboygan. The mission of CMCN is to research factual information to ensure that the building of an ethanol plant in the city of Sheboygan does not diminish the quality of the neighborhood environment, does not endanger the health and welfare of the citizens of Sheboygan, and does not have a negative impact, economic impact on the value of the neighborhood properties and other business investments the taxpayers have helped to develop. Our focus is centered around three main issues. The order that is generated from the ethanol plant, the health effects caused by the release of volatile organic compounds pollutants in ground ozone especially on elderly neighbors and children at the two elementary schools in the near neighborhood and the devaluation of the surrounding residential properties. CMCN is not at this point anti-ethanol or anti-ethanol plants. We are opposed to the building of an ethanol plant in the heart of Sheboygan in the heavy residential area. The only other plant built in the residential area has in spite of the newer technological equipment installed to meet environmental requirements caused neighborhood problems regarding orders and emissions and that ethanol plant filed for bankruptcy and closed its doors at the end of 2004. The neighborhood meeting held last Tuesday evening at BFW Post 9156 and South Evans Avenue had 55 people in attendance including Alderman's, Alderperson's and the mayor. Also in attendance were Paul Wilson and John Corner from the Utica plant and Scott Bush from Cargo. A question-answer period followed presentations and it was definitely evident that those in attendance did not want an ethanol plant built in this Sheboygan. Mr. Olsen did speak to the neighbors. He made many statements. Most significant in my mind is when I asked him directly, quote, will the ethanol plant emit an odor? Unquote. His response after initially skirting this question was, quote, yes. The second significant question reflects the manner in which Utica Energy LLC has operated its business. When asked if Utica Energy LLC was ever charged with violations or had litigation against their operation, he answered with the question with a reference to minor things that they were asked to change and went into detail describing how an outside agency monitors their operation and that they pay for the required monitoring. I present to you tonight a current lawsuit against Utica Energy LLC being prosecuted by the State of Wisconsin Attorney General's Office on April 15th, 2004. An air pollution suit against Utica Energy of Oshkosh was announced. The suit has nine claims against Utica Energy, listing multiple violations regarding constructing without a required air pollution control permits, constructing in excess of the limits of permits, not installing required emission controls before putting equipment into operation, improper transfer of products into tanker trucks, constructing gasoline tanks, storage tanks without permits and without emission control devices, constructing a new grain elevator corn storage bin, additional cooling tower cells without permits, constructing additional fermentation tanks before receiving a permit, constructing a 2 million gallon ethanol storage tank next to the railroad before issuance of a permit and not building an air pollution scrubber as part of a permit agreement. These types of violations contribute to emissions of excessive pollutants into the environment. Is this a disregard for conducting business in a forthright manner? Will Utica Energy conduct their business any differently in Sheboygan? CN believes it is wrong to allow cargo mall property located in this residential neighborhood to be rezoned to heavy industrial. I urge the public to attend the meeting tomorrow night at cargo mall and vote to voice their concerns. CN and CN urges the city to thoroughly study these issues considered to the citizens affected by the rezoning application and vote no on the rezoning request. Thank you, John Kittleson. Thank you, John. Next we have John. John, is it Rady? John, could I have your home address, please? It's 1423 Virginia Avenue. 1423 Virginia? Virginia Avenue, and you will have five minutes, sir. My concern on the ethanol plant is the rail and the truck traffic that it's going to bring. I always say it's important to look for these plants two to three years down the road. Utica's current plant started at 20 million gallons. They're already up to 52 million gallons. Three years later, right now what they're saying for this plant at 20 million gallons is four to 5,000 rail cars per year. If you take that 150% increase as their other plant, you're talking 10 to 12,000 rail cars. That's a small 11 acre site down there where they have it now as 25 acres out in Utica. That's a lot of rail cars to be navigating through just a small residential area. Right now it's an uncontrolled rail intersection. My concern is that it's going to become controlled with the gates that come down and you have the bells, and then I think by law the train has to sound the whistle to get across the road. There's going to be a lot of train crossing right there that's only a two-lane road, so the rail traffic concerns me. They also said most of it will come by rail, but they didn't say all. A lot's going to come by trucks. What do they mean when they say most is coming by rail? 10 trucks a day is almost 4,000 a year. 30 trucks a day is 12,000 trucks a year. You get up into the high range and say it's 50 a day. That's 20,000 trucks coming down New Jersey. And again, every two to three years they're very good at expansion. You have to give them credit for that. If it's 50 trucks a day at 20,000 a year, and you double that, that's 40,000 coming down New Jersey Avenue, that's crazy. I think what we're trying to do here is put a square peg into a round hole. This plant's just not going to fit into a residential neighborhood. There's schools, churches, a lot of houses. I just don't think it's going to fit, and I hope you give that some concern. Thank you. Thank you. And lastly, we have Renee Susha. Renee, could you give me your home address, please? 303 St. Clair Avenue, and that's in Sheboygan. And you will have five minutes. Thank you. I'm going to talk about something a little bit different. I'm not talking about Utica tonight. I'm going to cross some interesting information relating to the revenue and debt. Many people in this room receive a monthly journal called The Municipality that's put out by the League of Municipalities. And they had a section in the most recent issue on municipal revenue and debt. And if you contacted them, they would fax you the information you were interested in, such as city information, villages, towns, et cetera. So after I received the information relating to the cities, I found some information that was really interesting. Out of all the major cities in the state, when I say major cities, I'm talking about cities with populations of over 36,000 people, only three cities get more shared revenue per capita than Sheboygan. And I know that there's a lot of controversy whether we're getting our fair share of shared revenue or not, but I'll tell you, I'd rather be on the receiving end of the fourth highest recipient than on the bottom. When you look at the total revenue per capita, again, out of all of these large cities, Sheboygan is the fourth highest. And when you think about it, if our revenue that we're generating in the city of Sheboygan is the fourth highest city in the state of Wisconsin, we should be rolling in money. But we're not. And many of you will remember that when you were going through the budget process last year, there was a threat of cutting 13 policemen. And when you start thinking about if we have all this revenue, why would we be threatening to cut jobs? Well, in the end, what you decided to do was take money out of the building fund that was supposed to be used for building a new police station, and that's covering the salaries for these folks for one year. But I think that the real reason we need so much revenue is that this budget is full of wasteful spending, and we've had so many years of mismanagement of our budget. And let me just show you, when you start looking at the debt of the city, that's where it becomes rather obvious. According to the information from the league, when you look at sizes of similar size, we have the second highest amount of debt. And when you look at the debt for the past 27 years for the city of Chevoigan, you'll see that from 1997 to about 82, we were under the $10 million mark. I don't know what they borrowed money for in 82, but we went up to about $15 million. But the three years after that, each year we paid off $1 million in debt. So by the time 1986 arrived, we were about $11 million in debt. And that was the last time, 1986, where you saw a significant reduction in our debt. Since 1986, we have just completely skyrocketed. And if you can't see where that is, it starts here and it goes to the end of the chart. And the interesting thing is that right now, we're sitting with $66 million in debt and a borrowing capacity of $70 million. Now I can do the simple math. That shows me that we have $4 million that we could borrow. The question I have is if we need to build a new police station in the next couple years that is probably going to run us about $15 million, how are we going to do this? So when I called the finance director today, he gave me some good news. He said that this year we are going to pay off $5.8 million of our debt service and we are only going to borrow $720,000 for a new fire station. And I guess one of the questions I have for the alderman is how many of you knew that when you approved the budget we were going to pay off $5.8 million in debt. That might have been something to consider before we dipped into the fund that was supposed to be set aside for the police station. But what this means is that by paying off the debt this year this is really good news because maybe in a year or two we will finally be able to have enough borrowing power to build the new police station which in my opinion should have been built 15 years ago. Thank you. Anyone else? That's it. We have one notice this evening. And that's for assessments for repaving Michigan Avenue from North A Street to North 14 Street. One notice this evening. Okay. We move on for hearings. We have two hearings before us this evening. I will read them both. Anyone wishing to be heard on a hearing, please step up to the microphone and let us know which one you want to speak on. Number one, to propose Levy a special assessment for the calendar year 2004 against all benefit of properties in parking districts one, two, and four. Hearing number two, a request zoning change for property located at 802 Blue Harbor Drive. Any interest parties wishing to be heard? Any interest parties wishing to be heard? Hold on, McGraw. I'll move that the hearings be closed. Motion has been made and seconded at the hearings be closed under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Consent to Jen Alderman Warner. I thank you, and I'll remove that all ROs be accepted and placed on file. All RCs be accepted and adopted and all resolutions, substitute resolutions and ordinances be passed. We have motion before us that all ROs be accepted and adopted. All RCs be accepted and put on file. Resolutions, substitute resolutions and ordinances be put upon their passage. That is 23-1 through 23-21. Alderman Montmere. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll bet that Tom Holton can answer this one for me. 23-13, Sandy Wimler about the water problems. Has that been handled, solved? We met with the house in the 30th a few weeks ago and the seats gonna go out there when the frost out of the ground that dries up May or June shoots some elevations in the backyards to come up with a quantity of topsoil to be placed back there in order to make that water drain towards the concrete swale that's there. So it will be, we'll have to be patient yet. Hopefully June or July. Thanks. Thank you, Tom. Good to hear. Thank you. Is there any other discussion on a consent agenda? If not, would you call the roll, please? Bowman. Serda. Graf. Manny. Montemayor. Perez. Rinfleisch. Segali. Van Akron. Vanderweel. Warner. Thirteen Ayes. Motion carried. 23-22 to 23-23 to be referred. 23-24 by Sheboygan Transit Commission recommending creating division six of article two of chapter 106 of the Municipal Code relating to the establishment, operation and financing of parking, and parking assessment, assessment district number five. Follow me, Bowman. Your Honor, thank you. I move that the report of officers that are being accepted and that the general ordinance be passed. We have a motion before us that the ordinance be put upon as passage under discussion. Hearing none, would you call the roll, please? Serda. Graf. Kittleson. Lauchs. Manny. Montemayor. Perez. Finnefleisch. Segali. Van Akron. Vanderweel. Warner. And Bowman. Thirteen Ayes. Motion carried. 23-25 to 23-43 to be referred. 23-42 will go to the Ergo Commission, not strategic fiscal plan. 23-44 by Alderman Bowman, changing the name of the Mayor's Special International Committee to the Mayor's International Committee. Alderman Bowman. Thank you, Your Honor. I move that the resolution be put upon as passage. Second. Moving to the second resolution be put upon as passage. Would you like to tell us the reasoning, Alderman Bowman? Well, the reasoning being that the word special really isn't there. I mean, yes, all 16 members are special, but we don't feel that we need the word special in the designation. There's another discussion. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carried. 23-45 through 47 will lie over. 23-48 through 23-51 to be referred. 23-52 by Law and Licensing, recommending that Beverage Operator's License 1453 be denied based upon the applicant's ability to pursue to section 111335 ineligibility pursue to section 1113351 C.S. of Wisconsin State. Alderman Manny. Thank you, Your Honor. You can ask if Operator License 1453 is here. David Anaheiman. David Anaheiman. Just now to hear your honor, I best move that the recommendation be put upon as passage. We have motion before us in a second. Under discussion. Here you know what you call the roll, please. Graf. Kittleson. Laux. Manny. Montemayor. Perez. Rindfleisch. Sagalli. Van Akron. Vanderweel. Warner. Baumann. And Serda. Thirteen Ayes. Motion carried. 23-53 and 54 to be referred. Alderman Serda. Thank you, Your Honor. I understand that document 23-53 is just being referred at this point, but I would like to call the question, the wordage in this document, which states as follows. By strategic fiscal planning, recommending referring documents, authorizing the mayor and appropriate staff to meet and negotiate with the county of Sheboygan to establish a plan and timetable for elimination of the city's policy emergency dispatch and transition to the county's emergency dispatch center. I don't believe the statement is completely correct. It's just implying that the Urgos commission, this is their sole intent, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought they would be looking at all options, one being that maybe it's a possibility that the county could share services with us in our police department. And by stating this, I think we're giving a false impression and we don't want to start off on the wrong foot with the citizens of Sheboygan and the county. Thank you. Alderman Graf, that way to your document. Or Alderman Warner. Well, this has been referred to the Ergo commission. There has been two rewrites that were sent over to the city attorney's office that are also going with this because we were in the process of redoing these and coming back with something to the council. And then instead we thought, as long as the Ergo commission was created and they could look at this all, we were sending it all over to them, including the rewrites that the city attorney was going to do. So before they come back to us to approve or anything, they'd have the substitutes presented to them. Okay. Alderman Sugali. Thank you, Your Honor. I go along with Alderman Sutter. I just think the wording is very improper on this resolution also. I feel that it should be made a little bit better. Like she says, when you read it, it's almost as though we're turning everything over now to the county. You know, and we're looking for the city to turn it over to the county. And that's not the case. And I want to make sure that the people of Sheboygan understand that when this comes to the transition of these emergency dispatch centers that one dispatch center or another is not going to go, we're going to have to keep both of them because we need a backup unit. If we have one dispatch center and something, what happens? Say, for instance, like the lightning that hit the city hall and our dispatch center went down. We needed a backup. And that backup was the county. We're just not going to only have one dispatch center. And I think the voters need to understand that we're going to have to have another one for a backup. And I think that should be more clear in these resolutions or these whatever being presented to the Oracle Commission that should be better explained. Thank you. Alderman Rangford. Thank you, Your Honor. I do agree with perhaps the question the wording needs to be figured out but also we're not voting on this today. We're not deciding if it's going to be a county or a city or both or anything. It's a document to be referred for a commission that we've established to discuss and come back with us recommendation. I know things have been heated recently in here. I think we just need to look at what the question really is and the question simply is it's being referred over to the committee for them to make a recommendation. So I just let it happen and then trust that the committee does its work, comes back with a good solution and then we'll vote on it from there. Thank you. Alderman Horner. I think I guess part of it probably stem part of the misunderstanding is that the entire part of the header that referred to the original document that was brought in is included and on your council agenda the part that says along with a draft of a substitute resolution doesn't exist and that substitute resolution is really something that strategic put together and asked the city attorney to look at for the simple reason that we did not feel the original resolution had anything in it that we felt real comfortable with and I think as we go along with this and in that substitute resolution one of the things that does state is that the city of Sheboygan is in the design stage of a new police station and that design includes space for a joint communications center. The reason that was added to that is that's something we want that Ergo commission to consider when it looks at these documents. I'm glad we're having a good discussion on this because any switch to a joint dispatch center first always means you have to back up somewhere and second it's a major move it's not something you just do by flicking a switch. Emergency dispatch is the link between every citizen in our city and every citizen in the county to their emergency services and we can't make changes on that and we have to follow a thorough investigation and we have to be very positive that we're doing the right thing if we have a go to that loop and I'm sure that Ergo commission will investigate that and this council will get a kick at the can to see if there's anything they can do with it so. Thank you. Okay, 2355 by finance recommending authorizing a transfer appropriations in the 2005 budget. Alder McGraw. Thank you, Your Honor. I would move that the RCB accepted and adopted and the resolution will be put upon its passage. We have motion to second before us that the resolution be put upon its passage under discussion. Hearing none, would you call the roll? Kittleson. Laux. Manny. Montemayor. Perez. Rinflesch. Segali. Van Akron. Vanderweal. Warner. Bowman. Serda. And Graf. Thirteen Ayes. Motion carried. 2356 by seller and grievance recommending amending section 2975 Sheboygan Municipal Code so as to create the municipal court as a new department. Alderman Van Akron. Excuse me. Your Honor, I move the ordinance be put upon its passage. We have motion to second before us that the ordinance be put upon its passage it's under discussion. Alderman Montemayor. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll be voting no against creating a new bureaucracy. I can't imagine that a new bureaucracy or a new department will shrink. It will only grow and cost us more and more. Thank you. Just another discussion. Would you call the roll please? Laux. Manny. Montemayor. Perez. Rinflesch. Segali. Van Akron. Vanderweal. Warner. Bowman. Serda. Graf. And Kittleson. Ten Ayes. Three Noes. Motion carried. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Motion carried. 2357 by Alderman Warner, repealing resolution 1910405 and creating Division 11 of Article 5 of Chapter 2 of the Municipal Code relating to establishment of the Efficient Regional Government Opportunity Ergo Commission. Alderman Warner. I thank you, Your Honor. First I would need to ask for suspension of the rules. We have a motion to second before us for suspension. Is there any objections? Any objections? Hearing none, would you proceed? On that, Your Honor, I move the general ordinance to be put upon its passage. We have ordinance to be put upon its passage in a second under discussion. Alderman Wrenflesch. Thank you, Your Honor. This is mainly because of my work schedule. I have not been allowed to be here recently by doing some catch-up work, if you would help me out here. First of all, why are we repealing a resolution that we passed just a few weeks ago and substituting with this one? Second of all, the current, which has not met, but the special committee on shared services, are we repealing that committee? If not, how are we going to coordinate two existing committees, even though one's not meeting? It could meet with similar functions that way. I guess those two questions I have. Alderman Warner. I thank you, Your Honor. I'll let Steve explain the reason why we had a change. As part of that is we had to get some time frame in there and resolve some of those issues. And besides that, this really is separate from the shared services committee. The shared services committee is a city county joint committee, and they haven't met since February of last year. I believe we attempted to call a couple of meetings together, but for one reason or another was not able to be done. So if Steve would explain. As far as changing from a resolution to an ordinance, which basically this does, that was at my suggestion because I guess I was not quite up to speed as to what this body was going to be and how long it was going to be in existence. I guess I was looking at it more of a temporary sort of thing like a sort of a special committee. But there was discussion about saving, goal of saving $5 million over the next five years. There was a request to add additional members I thought it's a commission. We should put it in the code along with the other commissions that we've established rather than just have it out there as a resolution without any real structure to it as to how the members are pointed, how long they're going to be on there, and so forth. So this gives it a little more formality, a little more structure since it's going to be around for a while and also added two additional non-voting members. Did that answer your question? A follow-up? Sure. Thank you. A follow-up then to the commissions. Just one example that we're looking at right now would be the shared services for the joint dispatch. This committee says it comes through. Again, we have no idea what they're going to say, but say that the county should run the primary joint dispatch and the city has the backup. We have a commission on the books, excuse me, a committee, not a commission on the books, for the joint dispatch. Say it does meet some point down the road and they have a recommendation as the opposite, that the city should run and the county should have the backup, for example. On the current structure and the code, what takes precedence? What recommendation do we take? Do we not? Is it necessary to actually go ahead and amend this to also strike the committee that's in existence even though it hasn't met so we don't come into that problem down the road? It seems that we have two things by name. Yes, one hasn't met. It hasn't met for a while. We've tried to, but what if it does? It's in the code book, so I just want to make sure that we're clean and that we don't face any problems down the road with conflicting information or conflicting recommendations. Which ones we act on? I guess my response to that would be to the council. It's up to the council as to what sort of committees you want to have, what sort of commissions, where you want to send different things. They're both advisory things. They don't have power in and of themselves. So whether it goes to one or the other, it's up to you. When it comes back, it's up to you what you do with it. So this does not repeal the shared services committee, which is already set up for a certain purpose. I understand what you're saying. Alderman Rindfleisch and their, this Ergo commission may be dealing with some of the same things, but I don't know, it's a different group. It's got a different dynamic. And the council chose to create the body. All I wanted to do was kind of clean it up and get it in appropriate form for the ordinance book. It's up to the council as to whether you want to, again, keep a shared services committee in this or not. Okay. Okay. Do we have another discussion? Would you call it all, please? Manny? Aye. Montemay or? Aye. Perez? Aye. Rindfleisch? Aye. Sagali? Aye. Van Akron? Aye. Vanderweel? Aye. Warner? Aye. Bauman? Aye. Serda? Aye. Graf? Aye. Kittleson? Aye. And Lauchs? 2255. Communication by Alderman and county boards with rather Dan Berg stating his concerns with Adam Payne, county administrative coordinator regarding his endorsement of Alderman Juan Perez for mayor as being out of line. Alderman Berg isn't here this evening. He had to leave because he was ill, but we need a motion on that. We have a motion to second before us. Is there any discussion? Alderman Perez? Thank you, mayor. I wanted to make a point here. I think it's more for the public's sake than most of us here. This issue obviously got a little passionate and overheated. It's had the attention of both radio and the newspaper for a few days. But I was concerned with having a member of the council who also serves with the county board supervisor bringing an issue that involves a county employee. It would be appropriate to bring that concern should anybody have any concern to the county forum, not the city council forum. That's not our jurisdiction. We don't deal with issues that involve employees of any other jurisdiction. Had it been one of our employees, this might have been the appropriate forum to even bring this letter forward. In my opinion, this letter had no business in council chamber. Thank you. If you have another discussion, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. Okay. 2229 ROA by city plan commission amending the zoning for property located at 802 Blue Harbor Drive. Alderman Warner. I thank you, Your Honor. I would move to accept and file the report of officer and pass the attached ordinance. We have a motion and a second before us. Under discussion. Under discussion, Your Honor, this will make the property at 802 Blue Harbor Drive change from pre-planned unit development to planned unit development clarification. And I think this is very important that this just means another parcel in the south pier district is moving forward in the development process. And it's very important to see how that district is forming up and it's another positive for the city and our investment there. Correct. Alderman Cigali. Thank you, Your Honor. Could you explain that a little bit further since I'm not understanding some of this? Call out. We have pre-planned unit development, planned unit development, and I'm going to let the experts explain it to you because... Thank you. You'll get a lot clearer. Mr. Mayor, Council, good evening. Basically what we have here tonight is a developer considered as triple play is here and in our zoning ordinance for the south pier we have what's called the planned unit development process. It's a four-step process. What we're doing tonight is as a planned unit development, nothing at all can happen there. So the first step in the process is to rezone the property to give them the opportunity to actually take the next step, which is the conditional use process before the planned commission to actually propose the development. So it's another step for us to make sure we are getting the type of development that we want in the south pier district. This is the zoning aspect of it. It will now allow the applicant to submit a conditional use permit for the actual development. My understanding of the development, which would be going to the planned commission is supposed to be a two-story, 37,800 square foot entertainment facility, have things like outdoor mini golf, indoor mini golf, rock climbing, golf range, concessions, some baseball and softball lessons, things like that. So tonight we're strictly looking at the zoning, getting it to the proper zone set so that they can make the application for the actual use. Okay. Thank you, Steve. Okay, would you call the roll please? Montemayor? Aye. Perez? Aye. Rinfleisch? Aye. Sagali? Aye. Vanakren? Aye. Vanderweel? Aye. Warner? Aye. Bauman? Aye. Serda? Aye. Graf? Aye. Kittleson? Aye. Lauchs? Aye. And Manny? Aye. Thirteen Ayes. Motion carried. relating to the establishment, operation and financing of parking assessment district number five. Fields not here this evening. Alderman Warner. Alderman Warner. I thank you, Your Honor. I would move that we accept and file the report of officer and that the ordinance be passed. The motion is second before it's under discussion, Steve. Council, this document is on the agenda three different times because it went to three different committees and you already passed it as document 23-24. It's establishing parking assessment district number five so really don't need to act on 22-30 or 21-23. It's the same document. Okay. Okay. So we can just delete that? Yeah, I think you can probably withdraw those two documents. It's the same ordinance just coming from three different committees. Okay. On that I would move to withdraw. That's 22-30 and 21-23. Yes. It's motions before us in the second to withdraw those two documents under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. 23-36 by Alderman Borner. By Alderman Bowman Warner to withdraw authorizing the purchase of five transit buses. Alderman Bowman. Thank you. I move to pass the resolution. Motion before us in a second to pass the resolution under discussion. Alderman Manny. Thank you, Your Honor. I call upon Mr. McDonald to explain to the city why such an action is physically responsible especially as opposed to buying smaller vehicles. Well, that's a good question. Actually these buses will be smaller than the ones we purchased last time. We'll start out with that. The buses we purchased last time were 35-foot buses. These will be 29-foot buses. And why is it necessary? This procurement was started back in the late 90s and we've been putting off buying new buses for a number of years. Prior to my time being here, my understanding is most of the capital improvements was put into the stormwater sewer, taking care of everything from the flood. So we've put off the purchase of new buses. In 2003, we bought six of them. We want to buy five now that are a little bit smaller to give us a mixed fleet. And the buses that we're going to be taking off the streets are about 18-years-old and they're just worn out and they're becoming very costly to maintain. Does that answer your question? Could you offer a comment or two also about the durability of the larger bus versus the small, small bus? That's another good point. And the funding mechanism also. Okay. Well, I'll start off the difference between the smaller buses and the ones we're looking at buying. The smaller buses that you see on the street right now, those were defined by the federal government as a seven-year bus. So in the government size, those buses are worn out already. I'm not proposing that we take those off the street yet. We'll still utilize those for a number of years yet. The new buses that we'll be buying are designed to be 12-year buses. We normally run them for a minimum of 15 years. Like I said, the buses were replacing now are 18-years-old. So it's a more structurally sound vehicle. It's a heavy-duty bus. It's designed for the application that we're doing. Quite frankly, those of you that were around back in the late in 96 and 97 when we bought the small buses, you'll remember there's quite an uprising. In fact, the rest of the order was even canceled because the passengers were having a hard time and they were very difficult vehicles for our passengers. So these buses will be more user-friendly. They're low-floor. Passengers can just simply step onto the bus and walk in. There's no steps at the front door. They'll be very accessible. They have a ramp on them for passengers with accessibility problems, wheelchairs, that kind of thing. In that respect, our customers will have great accessibility. As far as the funding mechanism, these buses are funded 80% by the Federal Transit Administration and the city is responsible for 20%. And I'm not necessarily proposing that we go out and spend money just because we can get it for 20 cents on a dollar. But we do need the vehicles and we do have the funding available right now. This grant is getting rather old. And if we don't act on it, we will lose the 80% funding from the federal government in the very near future. And quite frankly, we just absolutely need the buses. Like I say, the buses that we're taking off the streets will be, they're 18 years old now. These buses won't get here until the very end of this year. And so they're almost another year older by the time we get the new ones. So we just can't go out into a bus lot and buy a new bus and drive it home. It has to be manufactured. And it's a good part of a year to get that done. So that's why we're working on it now. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. All in order? No, thank you. No, thank you in honor of the director answering my question. Okay. Okay. There's another discussion. What do you call the roll? Prez. Rin Flesch. Cigali. Van Akron. Vanderweel. Warner. Bowman. Serta. Graf. Kittleson. Laux. Manny. And Montemayor. Thirteen Eyes. Motion carried. Twenty-two, thirty-seven. By Alderman Graf, Stephan, Serta, and Montemayor, authorizing the transfer appropriations in the two thousand years. And so far, we've been talking to the president of Montemayor, authorizing the transfer appropriations in the two thousand five budget. Alderman Graf. Thank you, your honor. Twenty-two, thirty-eight also. A resolution was sending the two thousand four personal property taxes for assessment number five, nine, two, eight, one, eight, three, oh, six, two, seven, six, two, three, excuse me. I would move that both those resolutions would be put upon their passage. We have motion to second before us where the resolutions would be put upon his passage. Under discussion. Alderman? Right. Thank you. What assessment number are we looking at on twenty-two, thirty-eight? What property is that? Rich. I'll ask for division then on these issues. I don't see how they're related. Okay. I think I didn't quite hear Rich's answer. We have the communication. You want to division on a question? Did you say yes? Yes. Okay. We'll vote on twenty-two, thirty-seven first and then twenty-two, thirty-eight second. Would you call the roll on twenty-two, thirty-seven first? Um, Rinfleisch? Segali? Aye. Van Adren? Aye. Vanderweel? Aye. Warner? Aye. Bauman? Bird? I'm sorry, Serta? Aye. Graf? Aye. Kittleson? Aye. Lauchs? Aye. Two, thirty-eight. Oh, Segali? I'm trying to, it's notifu. Oh, I'm sorry, Eric. Go ahead, go ahead. No one else's right This particular company had a commercial division and a manufacturing division that they merged together and I guess you know give you a little bit back on or it may be aware that the city assessor assesses commercial property and the department rep department of revenue under their manufacturing division assesses manufacturing The accountants for this company notified the department of revenue of this merger Was putting the commercial into the manufacturing, but they did not notify the city assessor And so the city assessor kept it on the commercial role and issued a bill for the personal property as a commercial property but it had been merged and After they received the bill of course, then they called the city assessor So a relation have been under that role Okay answer question Okay, if you'd call the roll, please so golly Stefan. I'm sorry. We're just getting tired tonight Van Akron van der wheel Warner Bauman Serta graph Hiddleston lokes Manny Montemay or Perez Rindflash 13 eyes portion carry Okay 2243 by public works amending the name of the special marina committee to marina committee and harbour committee and amending the committee's responsibilities 2123 was Was dropped Okay 2243 by public works amending the name of the special marina committee to marina committee and harbour committee and amending the committee's responsibilities Alderman ball We have motion a second before us under discussion Hearing none. Would you call the roll van Akron van der wheel Warner? Bauman Serta graph Hiddleston lokes Manny Montemay or Perez Rindflash Sigali 13 eyes motion carried 2252 General Lawrence by Alderman Warner amending the code so as to adopt an Amendment to the police department records retention schedule Alderman Warner. I thank your honor. I move the general ordinance be put upon as passage We have motion a second before us that general orange people upon this path you join a discussion under discussion your honor This will bring the police department up to date in the records retention law changes that were recently enacted in Madison and Pretty much as what this does There's no other discussion Vander wheel Warner hi almond Serta graph Hiddleston lokes Manny Montemay or Perez Rindflash Sigali Van Akron 13 eyes motion carried 2258 general ordinance by Alderman Warner creating section in the code exempting members of the efficient regional government opportunities Commission Ergo from the Residency requirement Alderman Warner. I thank your honor. I move the general ordinance be put upon as passage We have motion a second before us under discussion under discussion your honor This will add the Ergo Commission to our ordinance that allows non-city residents to serve on city commissions or committees I believe the cross-section of the Ergo Commission speaks for itself and The inclusion of non-city residents on this commission is is actually absolutely crucial to the success of the Commission Alderman right. Thank you. I know names as we've recommended for this commission. I know of them And I think they're gonna do a fantastic job Question probably not just for myself, but for the public at home who does other documents in front of them How are we describing who is allowed to sit on this commission? Which positions? Basically, which ones are allowed for city residents business owners within the city business without the city county residents Which we need to have for efficient conversation regarding shared services. How are we titling it? How many people get what positions for the public it for my own use? Once the commission set up they will do that The ordinance that you passed earlier tonight sets forth the appointments and the Doesn't get specific as to who is city resident who's not it talks about the voting members being representatives of business labor and government It doesn't doesn't say there'll be three county residents Three city residents or anything like that that that's left to the appointing authority and the council Okay, no follow-up on that I will hope for this at this point in time But I hope that we continue in the future as people come off in two years and we establish themselves Look at making sure that we create a balance between the county and city residents Theoretically in the council with the council's approval We could appoint a committee. It's completely county residents You they may own businesses within the city, but they may not live themselves within the city may not pay the city residential taxes here So I would hope that in the future we look at being specific of Someone who owns a business from the city of Chicago Someone who lives within the city of Chicago and pays property taxes on their personal property as well as say three residents of the county who Don't pay city taxes as well as a balance. I think that's probably important on the road to make sure that we have a Good cross-section of all times Okay with that. Would you call the roll, please? Warner? Bowman Serta graph Kittleson laux mani Montemayor Perez Rindflash Segali Van Akron and Vanderwill 13 eyes motion carried other matters 2361 is communication from Loyola and Bryce Huebner regarding their concerns with the outdoor furnace being operated on North 37th Street that will go to public protection safety 2362 is a Report of officer submitting the Harbor Center marina balance sheet from operation stated January 31 2005 As submitted by Skipper Marine that will go as the marina committee 2363 is an ordinance reestablishing the south pier sheboygan river dock line description in the city of Sheboygan That will go to public parks 2364 is an ordinance vacating the unpaved alley near the southwest corner of the intersection of north 15th Street from Hewley and That will go to city plan By motion a second before us for adjournment under discussion Bring it on all in favor