I'll hear by a call to order the regular meeting of the bearably common council for Tuesday, February,
February 14, 2023, we will begin with a roll call and collective allegiance lit by council President Pettie.
We'd again call here. Hazard here. Kent here. Pettie here.
Ellington here. Sloan. Sloan here.
Here's a.
All right, minutes were included on the website and email two, I will entertain a motion to approve the minutes from January 24th.
Second.
All right, is there any comment or correction to anything in the minutes?
All right, all in favour of approving the minutes please say aye.
Aye.
Any opposed minutes are approved.
Approved tonight's agenda that has not been modified, I will entertain a motion to approve tonight's agenda.
So, we'll approve Pettie.
Second.
All right, we have a motion and second all in favour of approving tonight's agenda please say aye.
Aye.
We have an agenda for this evening.
Madam Clerk, are we in compliance with the open meetings law?
Yes.
Thank you.
Item six, we have a couple of presentations tonight.
So, we will start things off with our utility superintendent, Wade Peterson.
So, Wade, you have the floor.
All right, thank you.
Good evening.
I'm here tonight's conference on federal mandate for monitoring or surveying everybody's home service.
There's a lot of service.
So, forever we've always monitored what our side of the water services,
but now under the EPA guidelines we now have to identify all the private side-led services,
which is quite a task.
We've got like 4,000 services to identify.
So, I wanted to come tonight to show you a little bit of what we're working on
and to hopefully get our community that are watching this to help us complete this task.
We have tell October of 2024 to try to identify as many of these services as we have.
So, kind of.
So, we track here as you can see we track in the process of tracking services and if they're
copper, lead, galvanized, unknown.
So, all these different colors, red and yellow are not good.
That's either lead or galvanized.
Blue is good, white or vacant.
So, we have a lot of work ahead of us.
We just kind of started putting this together.
It's been a lot of time on it so far.
But as we get every individual home to do their survey,
it'll turn to a hopefully a blue blue where it's non-led, a non-led service.
So, over here, we'll kind of verify what the utility side is.
And then we'll go down and verify what the property owner side of the services.
And you can do this one of two ways.
One, we have a on our website.
You can go to.
Right here we take a survey so you can do this right from home.
We'll just kind of go through one real quick.
So, you just click on here.
You can just kind of fill it.
You'll fill in your name.
Your address.
If you have your account number.
And we kind of show you where the account number is on there.
You kind of identify what type of service you have.
If you're single family, residential commercial.
Then down here, you'll get into a couple parts where we help you try to identify your service.
Here is a magnet where a magnet will stick to galvanize,
but it won't stick to lead.
So, there is kind of one pointer.
Here is kind of a picture of a meter.
And how the service comes into the house.
And goes through the meter.
Here is different types.
If it's lead, you can scratch it.
It will turn shiny like that.
Copper would be like that.
It could be tarnished.
But if you scratch it, it will turn to a copper.
Galvanize.
You can scratch anything.
Nothing going to happen.
But a magnet will stick to that.
So, we kind of give a little bit of help to our customers.
Help us try to identify.
And then all you do is you click what you believe your service is.
Size wise.
And if you want, you can take a photo which kind of comes in handy.
If you have a tough time identifying the service yourself,
you can click a photo and add it to here.
And then I'll see that photo.
And be able to assist with that.
For example, here's one of our surveys.
With the light, it makes it kind a little bit different.
It difficult to see.
But older house, not much there.
Here's where your service comes up out of the ground.
And ties into the meter.
As you can tell, there's not a lot of space in there.
But I can tell you that that's half inch galvanized pipe.
The individual tried scratching it.
And it didn't turn shiny.
And she did put a magnet to it.
So she was able to identify what that is.
So it's not too difficult.
But for those that don't want to go through that route,
you can simply just call us at the office at 355-274-0.
Mr. Thurrow.
She was, we sent this to all you folks.
She decided to just make the phone call and have us come visit.
Were we there five minutes?
I don't think so.
Nope.
It doesn't take long.
It just doesn't really take long for us to come in.
Identify what kind of service.
So we're just asking for the public's help to try to get as much as this identified as possible.
So here's my lovely tractor.
So we have roughly 4,430 services in the city.
Of that, we have still 2,980 that we need to identify the homeowner side of the service.
So we've, we're over a thousand done.
We're making good progress, but we have a way to ways to go.
I can tell you since we started the lead service replacement program.
In 2017, we've replaced the 136 lead services, homeowner side of lead services.
So we kind of track that and do the percentage.
And then down here in this lower part, this is the city's our side.
I can tell you, roughly, we're going to be at about 830 lead services on our side.
And then over on the homeowner side, but we have identified so far.
We're looking at roughly about 230 galvanized services that we'd like to get replaced.
But the lead ones right here is 319.
Not all of them have been completely verified yet, but for what we know of the most that those are the ones we want to try to go after.
And get out of the system.
So you're just kind of a pie chart.
One of the things with the EPA's mandate is in October of 24.
We have to make this available to the public.
So where you see this like right here, you'll be able to click on the city's website.
And you'll actually be able to get in and look at something very similar to this.
You won't be able to tell by who service it is or click on one.
But you'll be able to use this identifier off to the side.
And if you wanted to check your resident and see what kind of service you have.
Or if you just wanted a general idea of what we look like, this is kind of what you'll see.
But this is one of the things that we have to make public.
So it'll be attached to our website.
Again, I'm just asking hopefully we can get some of our customers residents to help us out with this.
And if you see folks, please let them know that either go to the website and do the little survey there,
or just give us a jingle and we'll come and visit you real quick.
Any questions?
Any questions for Wade?
Thank you very much for your work on the lead.
Thank you.
All right, next up we've got MSA doing a presentation on the conceptual study and design for the Oak Street Overlick and ADA Path project.
Let's return that mouse on.
All right, I need this Marcus Rue with MSA.
I'll take a look at the Oak Street Overlick and assess situations with the existing structure and then also look at alternatives to turn it into a park.
Start with kind of an overview on the park.
One of the things we noticed with the existing structures, the east wall of shifting.
There's a fair amount of cracking through the blocks.
There's been multiple repairs over time and then there's some site drainage invoids that are occurring behind the structure itself.
These are kind of evident in the pictures.
You can kind of see that tip and the upper corner there and you can see the iterative repairs that have happened over the years there with pieces getting.
Parts of the gather, I guess, is the best word.
And then there's some drainage issues that are occurring on site.
With the existing sidewalk is getting washed out.
It's behind the wall, the cracks in the actual structure.
And it's a general safety concern.
Some of the other things we notice with the site is there's a large large elevation change between the sites.
It's about 30 feet from the top of the site at first street, down to water street.
So that's going to present some ADA compliance issues.
There's general aesthetic issues with the existing walls that are on there.
The railings, everything's kind of settling and shifting around.
So we performed some preliminary borings on the site and boring one in three indicated.
One was native fill or native material, boring three indicated about 10 feet of fill in that area.
There's a former raceway that used to run through there from a middle or something ran under the road and then back.
Boring two, we hit obstructions.
And when we dug into that a little more, there's an old bridge that used to actually cross over that raceway.
That's probably the abutment for that.
So we shifted over to boring four, which also indicated more fill about about 10, 15 feet total on that.
So once again, as I said, there's almost 30 feet of elevation change between that.
And that first of ADA ramp and then the one down on water street that applies or supplies access to parks.
So with the dug into it a bit, we got some of the concept together here.
And we're looking at a lot of 8% five to 8% slopes for ADA compliance.
So there'd be a lot of railing that railing we're proposing to all be like a lighted railing to kind of provide an accent along the route.
And we'll also put that around the actual overlook itself.
Due to the structural concerns on the overlook we're suggesting to actually take it down and shift it over slightly and rebuild it with like a post and pile wall, which which can be modified to have a facade that looks more like a natural stone.
Whether it be like the bearable, the bearable court site in the area here or we could even make it look like the existing structure itself and staying that concrete.
And then supply some additional parking down there and provide that access from downtown to that.
To want to park there and the future future developments that are happening across the river.
So give you some ideas of what we're looking at for railing here. The lighted railing is kind of those top two photos there.
The like a steel railing with an accent light underneath the handrail.
Those stones that you see there are actually stained concrete that can be put on the front of the post and panel wall and help it blend in with the area.
We're proposing since the wall we're proposing since we're taking to recommend taking down the structure itself that we could even save those stones.
And restack them as planters or retaining walls on site provide historical signage something along those lines to indicate the history that actually was there.
Structure has been here for 150 years. And then with the slopes that are on the sides, they're closing like a native planting, with stone, like boulders, restacks, stone from the existing abutment and some native plantings to help with erosion and help with the water control through the area.
This is kind of a sketch-up of what we're proposing. We'll have the plantings in the front there, and nice little parkway down or a walkway down, that upper portion by first street there, we're proposing like a, in our park that you could kind of walk through as you go down, and that would be provided, all the art would be provided by the local artists.
Then the big thing is the budget. Due to the retaining walls, the post-empile, the eddy ramp that has to come down, there's a large cost in the retaining walls for those.
The lighted railing will have a bit of a cost that's kind of one of the things driving fact, one of the driving factors here.
And then there's some contingencies in there, because the market variability, so in total it's looking, looking like it's about 3, 3.5, 3.6 million.
That seems like a big number. And there's funding available for all of this. That's, we can access, there's the tap program, which is like an 80, 20 split with DOT, federal funds.
I know that there's been some earmark funds already set aside about a half million I believe, and then we got stewardship funding grants that are available all over.
So that's one of the things we can help you through, so I guess with that or questions.
Any questions that we started to go after those grants?
Yes, we've already received 500,000 in a congressional earmark, so that's allocated.
And then across the street as a part of kind of this project, we also are looking at that park installation down there.
We have 153,000 that we're received for stewardship funding, so ultimately this would be a multi-phase plan of going after grants and then doing the work that the grants would fund.
So is that 3.5 million, does that include the removal of the existing?
Because there's 80,000 dollar on classified excavation that is kind of vague.
Yeah, it is a little vague.
There is some removal in there. There's a fair amount of fill that would have to come in on site for the ADA ramp to come down because that's a retaining wall structure.
So along those residents is along the backside with the shifting of the structure and all the fill that goes in behind that, that's what encompasses that.
That's what the 80,000.
Yeah, so the 3.5 does it does not include the removal because I'm assuming this will be done in phases as we discussed in finance tonight.
Removal portion of it based off of public safety with the existing structure.
So is that part of the 3.5 million, there's a 3.5 million, just the new ramp?
Okay, we had included in this estimate.
It's an overall removal.
Yeah, okay, thank you.
Any other questions?
Will you be staying until we get to those items on the agenda in case any questions come up?
Yes, that's got to happen.
We'll just wait some more.
Okay, some points, so.
All right, great, thank you. Thank you very much.
All right, bring this to us.
Okay.
We'll lose him.
Okay.
I'm going to wait till you're got him.
We're trying to get Alderman Sloan back with us via phone.
That brings us to item eight, public invited to speak.
Any citizen has a right to speak on any item on business that is on the agenda for council action tonight.
We do have quite a few people that are registered to speak tonight.
And before we get into this, I did just want to tell folks that I imagine there's some things on the agenda that may evoke some strong feelings.
And I do ask that all speakers and viewpoints be treated with respect tonight.
I have no doubt that everyone at the day is and everyone in the audience tonight is.
Working towards the best interest of bearable.
We sometimes have a difference of opinion on what that looks like or how to get there.
And the job of the democracy is to work through those differences. So again, please treat each other with respect and treat all those viewpoints with respect.
I will also mention that this is not a Q and A. Sometimes people think it's a question and answer.
It's not an opportunity for council to answer your questions.
It's an opportunity for you to present us with your opinion on the topic.
And there is a three minute limit on each speaker tonight.
And in the interest of moving things along, don't feel like you have to use those whole three minutes.
If you can get to your point across more succinctly, we encourage you to do that.
And please don't make me get the going out and hook you off the stage.
And with that, we will get started with, I believe, Jerome Mercer is the first person who wishes to speak tonight.
My name is Jerome Mercer, I live at 8.33 year course circle in city of Berber.
I'm here tonight to speak in favor of Mayor Nelson's veto and against the spirit lake development.
I want to compliment Mayor Nelson on his veto memorandum.
It is with clarity and detail.
I do not disagree with any aspect of that memo, including his thanking you for your service on the city council for the city of Berber.
We all appreciate it.
The concern that I have with the development is that it basically opens up urban sprawl for the city of Berber.
The day may come when that development is appropriate for the city of Berber.
In my opinion, that day has not come.
I hope that I do not live long enough for that day to come.
Thank you.
Next we have Michael Platt.
My name is Michael Platt.
615, Effinger Road.
I was on city council for 12 years and I think I can just use the full three minutes.
It's been 20 years and we've had a little or no development.
For me, now is the time to take advantage of the building expansion to expand our tax space and pay for increased costs for police and fire.
It's time to welcome people to Berber, not drive them away.
If I was a mayor, I wouldn't have vetoed this building project.
The idea that it's a nice place to build.
I drove it five minutes from downtown.
Takes five minutes to get out to Devil's Lake.
Thousands of people come to downtown Berber from Devil's Lake.
I'm sure the people out there in the new building area will come down and support the people downtown the businesses.
Just like that new.
Again, furniture will help with people being right there to.
These building projects are going to bring people to Berber and when I was on council many.
Business owners said they're on razor thin margins.
People don't shop down there.
Mainly because there was a grocery store.
Without them again furniture project there'd be a grocery store.
So I think this is a good thing for Berber to maintain the downtown businesses and be prosperous.
There's idea that this will endanger.
Peel its nest to stay protected area.
I don't believe that at all because then the proposed development your Devil's Lake would endanger Devil's Lake.
I think that's just an excuse to stop increased tax revenue for the city of Berber, which we badly need.
I wasn't made aware of this when a city council but we are short.
We are short in 20,000 this year because money was improperly taken out of a tiff district to pay for operating expense.
It's like robbing theater to pay Paul.
But the costs are increasing for police fires and over removal street repairs.
And these building projects are going to bring in needed tax revenue in order to take care of the increased cost.
If you don't want the wheel tax to jump from 20 to 40 per vehicle.
Because we were looking for ways to fund all our increased costs and this is the way to do it through new building projects.
But if you don't want the wheel tax to jump up to 40, well then let's go ahead and approve these developments.
For me the compulsive plan for 2005 covers that area wouldn't change much would an updated plan.
I think merely it's an attempt to stop or delay new building projects for our city from people who want to keep bearable small.
If we say small and we don't have the revenue for income coming in to pay for increased costs we'll end up dying out.
We'll have you start wrapping things up mate.
I will do that sir.
I guess last thing I'll just say the Bible says there is wisdom in the council of many.
I trust you guys on city council. I worked for two for 12 years.
I know you do your research, you do your homework and I would urge you to override the marriage veto and then pass this for that spirit lake development.
Thank you.
Thanks man.
Next up we have Bill Dagna.
Thank you very much.
I just really want to state that I back the mayor's veto for the reasons he stated I read that article on the paper twice and I think it's very well thought out.
I'm very concerned that the new highway 12 will turn out like the old one where you build up and build up and build up until you don't even know there is a country around here.
And it's going to take a lot of thought and planning to see what should be west of the highway 12.
I know there was a special ruling just to get the sub station there for the electrical and a lot of thought went into that.
So I appreciate your work on that.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Next up is Mary Ann Codder.
Hello, I'm Mary Ann Codder. I live at 97 second street.
I'm here to encourage you as council members to sustain mayor Nelson's veto of the approval of the development agreement with spirit lake LLC.
And it's really for two reasons.
I think it would seriously erode the rural character of Baribu and would also promote urban sprawl.
In his memorandum, Mayor Nelson said preserving the rural character and viewscapes west of the highway enhances the allure of our community and provides a valuable balance to the commercial corridors on the east side of the highway.
And I completely agree with him building 254 apartments west of highway 12 plus additional commercial development would significantly alter the perception of Baribu to people traveling on highway 12 and I don't think that would be in a positive way.
My husband and I chose to buy a home and retire in Baribu partly because we appreciate that rural feeling of the small town which has so much natural beauty surrounding it.
The conservation vibe of Baribu was a big draw for me as it is for many others who choose to make this their home.
This proposed development would seriously erode I think that special quality of Baribu is a community that values its natural resources.
Secondly, urban sprawl residents of this proposed apartments of these proposed apartments could neither walk nor bike safely into town.
They'd have to get in their cars to do just about anything.
Why is that important? Because many, because along with many others in Baribu, I believe that it's finally important.
We do everything to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avoid the worst effects of climate change.
Reducing emissions from gas powered cars is part of this picture.
If this development goes through, there would I believe be pressure to build even more amenities to support the people living out that would now be living out there making further urban sprawl.
Even more likely, and that would mean people driving even more.
As much as possible, let's make Baribu a place where people can walk and bike as to get groceries, go to school, work, enjoy cultural activities and eat out.
Clearly, there is a need for more housing in Baribu, but let's approve new housing and other development in a climate smart way.
You have a chance to make this more likely tonight by taking a step back and thinking about the bigger picture.
So I urge you to sustain Mayor Nelson's veto of this proposed spirit-like development.
Finally, it's crucial that there be open and meaningful community engagement and what kind of development happens in Baribu going forward.
Thank you for all you are doing to make this city make sure this city staff puts creating a new comprehensive plan on the top of there to do list. Thank you.
Thank you.
Bruce Stewart is next.
Thank you. My name is Bruce Stewart. I live at 1618. I'm gone when drive and bearable. I've lived here since 1998.
And my wife and I oppose development at this time on lands to the West of Highway 12 and at the entrance to Devil's Lake State Park for four reasons.
On number one, the process has not employed meaningful public discussion.
The city of bearable comprehensive plan points to a separate detailed planning process for these, quote, urban reserve areas on quote.
That employs public participation and creates a preliminary concept plan.
The city should then require compliance with this detailed plan as a condition of annexation.
These steps are detailed on page 88 of the comprehensive plan.
Our second concern is the loss of prime agricultural land. The soils on the land west of Highway 12 are classified as prime farmland.
The comprehensive plan states on page 40, quote,
The poorer soils are preferred development areas for the city where the land is able to adequately be served by public infrastructure, unquote.
Our prime agricultural farmland is best used to grow food.
Our third concern is the proximity of the area west of Highway 12 to skillet creek, puits nest state natural area, and ultimately the bearable river.
The comprehensive plan states as a goal on page 48, quote,
Prevent future problems associated with developing land to close to natural areas, drainage ways, and flood plains, unquote.
Development here will produce volumes of run-off from roofs and impervious surfaces that could have potential impacts on sensitive ecological areas.
Our fourth concern is the risk of urban sprawl.
Our characteristic of urban sprawl is automobile dependency.
Transportation from residential areas west of Highway 12 will be difficult via any means other than car.
We should be encouraging walking and biking like the extremely popular river walk.
A second characteristic of urban sprawl is strip development.
Do we want to see a ribbon of residential and commercial properties on the west side of Highway 12 as we're beginning to see along the east side?
Driving along Highway 12, you would be in a tunnel of development like the entrances to so many communities across our country.
Bearable is unique being surrounded by rolling agricultural land in the bearable range.
Let's maintain and enhance the quality of life that a landscape that that landscape inspires and contributes to by planning wisely, carefully,
and with caution following the steps set out in the comprehensive plan created by the leaders that came before us.
To do otherwise, there's too much at stake to do otherwise. Thank you.
Thank you.
Samuel Pokenett, just next.
I'm Sam Paul, since you're delivered to 18 second straight here in bearable.
I speak in support of the mayor's position.
When I talk about people I know, bring your make up a little bit.
Thank you.
When I talk to people I know who don't live here when I tell them what bearable is what makes bearable special is it has a vibrant downtown.
You put that apartment complex west of the highway.
To me, that takes away from it.
You want to keep the downtown vibrant. You've got to have development closer to downtown, so people go there mostly.
That development west of the highway, people are going to go to the businesses that are close to that development.
We know what those businesses are. That's not the downtown business.
The other aspect of it is bearable looks beautiful when you drive into it.
You drive out of it going west. It's the most beautiful place when that development there will kill it.
And once you lose the charm of bearable, that's it.
It's difficult to get that back.
We do need development. The world's going to change. We can't change that.
But there's developments downtown and I think that's the way to go if you have to do it.
It'll support the downtown. There's plenty of towns here in this state that do not have a vibrant downtown.
We don't want to lose that. Thank you.
Next up, we have Ryan divine.
Ryan divine, 701 wallnut street.
I grew up my whole life in bearable. I watched a lot of things change.
I personally spend a lot of time on the bearer,
I enjoy enjoying it, enjoying the beauty of this town.
I have a couple questions for the city council that I would ask you to think about when it comes to the
Oak Street development.
The $3.5 million dollars. I know a lot of it comes from grants,
but how much of it exactly does.
What is the exact purpose of the project assigned from the safety I understand that?
How much created parking would we get out of it?
As people move to this community and become more and more popular,
I think we all understand that parking is a situation in bearable.
And how does this project benefit the citizens of bearable?
Is it something that we need or is it something that we think we want?
I just feel like if we can get grants for things in this city that maybe we could get grants for things that might
matter benefit not only the citizens of bearable,
but the tourists that come into this town. Thank you.
Thank you.
Next up we have Todd Persie.
My name is Todd Persie. I live at South 6674 Freedom Road in the town of Freedom.
I am the director for the bearable range preservation association.
We are a local land trust working throughout the Bluffs as well as in this city.
Our office is in the Civic Center and we have close to 350 members.
The great majority of them live pretty close to here.
Our mission is and has always been to preserve and protect the qualities and culture of the bearable range,
which you've heard expressed here at the night.
I had a lot of things I was going to say.
For interest of not repeating them, I will not mention them.
I will mention that our group formed 30 years ago exactly because of this urban sprawl issue.
We don't want to look like everybody else.
We have biological treasure in those hills.
We've done an awesome job.
I would say on the township level at the county level in the city level,
we've done a nice job of interfacing development with the wild places.
I think up into this point I've been pretty happy with it.
I'm here tonight to support Mayor Robbs' recent veto-the-plant subdivision,
but I really have a bigger issue that I would like to address with you folks.
I don't recognize your process often for bringing these development proposals up anymore.
I don't recognize some of the stuff that happens in close session.
In our 30 years, if working with planning and zoning,
you've pretty much had open processes.
You've involved the public.
You've gone out of the way to involve the public.
I would really love it if you could return to that.
Also, many members in our group that have talked about making variable,
livable, walkable, greener community.
It's in your resolutions.
You have that sitting somewhere in your charters.
I would love to see you return and think more about those situations.
Another thing some people have brought up is the urban spa we see.
Now, it is a reminder of the 1980s and 1990s.
But with this caveat, we now know that climate change is a major problem.
I mean, what is today?
Valentine's Day, my neighbor's sap is running in their maple trees.
The yard is green and my yard.
That never used to happen.
Building things that bring more cars and more trips to the area,
it just makes absolutely no sense to me.
And we haven't done it yet.
We still haven't opportunity to back off on that.
The other thing that bothers me is technically a lot of the process that goes on.
It is legal, but I have some.
It just feels like ethical irresponsibility to not try more and more to reach out to the public.
It's great to see the newspaper here.
But if Rob, if you had not vetoed this process,
I would have had no idea that this was even going on.
I will have you start right at the paper.
It starts to wrap it up here.
I'm just letting you know that that's my main thing.
So the last meeting we were at, we were talking about annexing something.
Brian Hazard had a great idea to just pause, put all these things kind of on the table
and come up with your comprehensive plan to just take it easy.
I'll ask you to do that, sir.
All right.
Thanks, brother.
James O'Neill is next.
Thank you.
I'm James O'Neill, a live at 923 Manchester Street in Barable.
I agree with the mayor's veto.
I want you to uphold the veto.
And I won't repeat the very many eloquent arguments that have been given to you,
but I just want you to know that I would like you to uphold that veto.
Thank you.
Next up is Wayne Muffet.
Good evening, my name is Wayne Muffet.
I live at 219 Street.
I'm a partner in a law firm that's been in Barable for 130 years.
I've only been with the firm a small number of those years.
Now my partner Jerome's been there longer,
but it's been my privilege over the years to represent a number of municipalities
and governmental entities, including towns.
I'm here to also support Mayor Nelson's veto of the bill,
and for the reasons that were stated.
However, my main reason to be here tonight is to voice my objection to the process
that was followed here because I disagree with my friend Todd Pershe.
I don't think the city abided by the law when it passed this resolution last month.
And specifically, the open meeting law.
In 1976, Wisconsin passed what were called Wisconsin Sunshine Laws,
which included the open meeting law.
When it passed that law, it said, the legislature,
quote, it is declared to be the policy of this state
that the public is entitled to the fullest and most complete information regarding the affairs of government
as is compatible with the conduct of governmental business.
Now, with regard to meetings, the law says today,
at any meeting of a governmental body, all discussion shall be held
in all action of any kind, formal or informal, shall be initiated,
deliberated upon and acted upon only an open session,
except as provided in section 19.85.
Now, I looked at the agenda last month when this was passed
and item 16 says, closed session under 19.85 per and one per and e
to review the terms and conditions of a proposed development agreement
with respect to spirit late.
Now, 19.85 per and one per and e is an exemption to the rule
that you have to discuss and deliberate everything in open session.
What that's exemption says is that you may go into closed session
for deliberating or negotiating the purchasing of public properties,
the investing of public funds or conducting other specified public business
whenever competitive or bargaining reasons required a closed session.
Well, have you start wrapping up your way?
Okay. The point is there was already a deal.
There was no negotiating to be done.
That was not an applicable exemption last month.
You can't have a deal done and then go in the closed session and discuss it.
All right. Thank you.
Okay. Thank you.
Let's up his time.
Craig O.
Thank you.
I'm here to support the veto of Mayor Nelson of the spirit late proposal.
And I have to say that I agree with all the great points that the previous speakers
supporting that veto have stated tonight.
I'd also like to acknowledge that Mayor Nelson made several excellent points.
Any single which one would be enough to reverse the vote of the city council.
But I'd like to make a couple of other points that other speakers haven't made.
There was an argument made that this is needed for the tax base.
And I'm going to read some comments here to try to keep on time.
But it was shown a long time ago that a town city or village cannot grow itself out of property tax.
If that was possible, there should be no property tax in large cities such as Madison, Milwaukee, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York.
I have friends that own property in a couple of...
All of those cities, Madison and Milwaukee. And they think their property taxes are too high. And that's because, every time you add growth, you add expenses that offset any income that is added. The other problem that you have is that a tax incremental finance district is a mechanism by which local governments can also engage in corporate welfare.
Every tax incremental finance district causes a wealth and income distribution from outside of that tiff district to inside that tiff district.
So if you build a house in a township, not only do you expect a pay for the cost of your well, your septic system, your driveway, and you will pay your property taxes to pay for the expenses of your township, of your school district, of the county, the vocational technical school, and you will have already paid for all of this infrastructure outside of your property taxes.
So you are paying for the infrastructure that's already there. In too many tax incremental finance districts, most of your property taxes that you pay for 25 years, just goes to pay for the infrastructure that sort of like the septic system, etc.
We'll have you start wrapping up your town or almost at a time. Okay, so there's no good economic advantage for doing this development and especially doing it with a tax incremental finance district. So again, I urge you to uphold the mayor's veto and and take another look at this in a more open way. Thank you.
Next up is Jennifer Stewart.
Hello, I'm Jennifer Stewart. I live at 1618 Elgonquin Drive in Baribu. My husband Bruce spoke previously and as he remarked, we both share the points that he shared with you.
And so I registered to speak to also just provide our personal endorsement of keeping development in Baribu condensed and focused on areas that are already slated for development.
We came to this town because I fell in love with it in 1993 and I convinced a packer fan to move from green bay.
We've left twice and keep coming back because we love it so much and we'll likely stay for a long time.
We have raised a child here, we're involved with community activities and so we do want to continue to stay here and that what's important to us is that rural character surrounding the town and a vibrant town and so appreciate your support of
Mayor Nelson's veto and not developing especially west of Highway 12.
Thank you for your service. I used to work for university extension especially supporting local municipalities and Stevens Point and I know how much time you invest in our community and I appreciate it. Thank you.
And that brings up Patrick listed.
Good evening. My name is Pat List and I live at 1013 Manchester Street in city of Baribu and I'm not going to echo all of really good arguments I heard tonight about sustaining the mayor's veto but I certainly hope you do that.
There's a number of concerns I have. One you haven't had a updated comprehensive plans since 2005.
I mean and so you're building any available piece of land you've just pungent down something and you have no basis for doing it.
You don't look at the impact on schools. I mean there's all kinds of issues that you have not looked at.
The other thing I'm concerned about is a lack of transparency. Since the last year and a half you folks have done a lot of stuff in secret.
And I think that's wrong. I don't know if it's legal or not.
I'll let the attorneys deal with that. But if it's legal or not it's definitely wrong. You need to invite the public to further input.
I mean you represent 13,000 other people. And they have the right to have their say so. Thank you.
Thank you.
And I believe that's everyone who wanted to speak. Is that correct? Anybody else who wanted to address council?
All right. Thank you all.
Moving on. Mayors business. Just a couple of election related things tonight. The spring primary is scheduled for Tuesday February 21st.
All city of Arab we residents vote at the Civic Center and the polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m.
If you want to vote early in person absentee voting is available at the clerk's office here in the Civic Center during business hours up until Friday February 17.
Okay. Thank you. And that takes us to consent.
Item one is approved the accounts payable to be paid in the amount of $6,795,977 in 64 cents.
And item two is approved the temporary alcohol license application for downtown Baribu, Bruhaha March 10, 2023.
Oh, sure. Pro. But again.
Second.
We have motion in a second to approve consent agenda, which you please call the roll.
Sloan.
Here's it.
There we go.
All right.
Cool.
Hazard.
Kent.
Petty.
Ellington.
Consent passes unanimously. Thank you.
Item 11 ordinances on second reading 11.1.
Consider approving the annexation of certain lands in the town of Baribu to the city of Baribu.
This was passed in the first reading at our last meeting. Does anyone need a refresher on this item?
Motion to approve.
Petty.
Second.
All right. We have a motion in the second to approve the annexation of certain lands into the city of Baribu.
Any further discussion on the motion?
I'd like to make a statement.
I express some concerns about the annexation in the first meeting.
And some of those I won't.
I won't bother repeating some of that, but it was a preference for infant projects.
It was concerned about what impact this would have on double slate state park.
And some of the early ideas that were floated were somewhat unappealing.
I also mentioned the irregular boundaries between the city and the township.
And I remember in the past that mayor, Mayor Listen at that time.
He was trying to straighten out those boundaries so that we could do more infant projects and stuff.
I think that the other other side of that is that the positive points of annexation
is that the city would be in control of those properties and could provide extensive review of any potential development out there.
I like the idea of southeast residential development, but the rest seems kind of undefined.
Our outdated comprehensive plan, which we still rely on,
says that the city ultimately would like to see this area and that's the area around Devils Lake State Park.
Incorporated into the city property.
I've had the opportunity to meet with two of the owners out there who have stated that their intent is to have a high quality development that would appeal to bearable residents.
I believe that there's some sereness, however.
Our outdated comprehensive plan does say that premature development should not be promoted in a quote.
It is a direction of this plan that a separate detailed planning process be followed that employees meaningful public participation.
And with that in mind if the owners and by extension any potential developer that they hire would commit to engage the public in a transparent matter through open forums involving city residents, business entities, civic groups on.
On the record, I would be willing to change my no vote that I originally cast.
So I guess I would ask Greg McArthur.
I mean, you've been the spokesman of the group.
Greg McArthur, I did have a chance to talk to some of you.
And I'm very productive conversations I learned a lot.
I mean, I learned what we needed to do a better job with communication to the public communication to you.
And I also learned today speaking to Jason that there's committees.
Committees can have a play of big role here too.
So what I did tonight is I invited Bill Ryan from ADCI to give a just a brief overview.
Five years ago we started working with Bill Bill came up with a plan that got us excited something that we thought we could be very proud of as a bearable residents to do the right thing with that property.
If you look at the property now, it's kind of a mess and it needs to get cleaned up.
So Bill, I'd like you to just come up and before you do that, right.
Yeah, could I ask a question.
Our you was a group committed both you and any developers you hired, you know, to conduct a transparent review, you know, involving city residents business partners.
Absolutely.
And I think what's most important with that is you, you have to be transparent.
Otherwise you waste time.
If we bring something if we spend a lot of money or a developer spends a lot of money to bring a plan to the table and it gets shot down because you haven't seen and we surprise you with it.
Which by the way, I apologize for that that book that I gave you because I think there was some assumptions that that's just what we're going to do.
No, that's just a vision plan. So you absolutely.
I mean, I think that's most important.
You know, in business, you work with your people, you work with your team.
I think this whole community's a team needs to be.
So thank you.
I keep this very brief because I know it's getting long tonight.
I'm Bill Ryan with Architectural Design Consultant's ADCI and we're the architect working with Greg in this partnership.
And I'm not sure I can express more enthusiasm for the idea of annexation and be in part of the city of bear within the great camp, but I'll do my best.
Tonight we've heard some comments about keep bearable special.
That's exactly what Greg and his partnership team really want to do.
Devil's Lake is precious to the city of bearable.
Precious to Saw County.
And when we designed for Randy Scott, the tumble rock restaurant brewery out there.
Randy Scott wanted that to be a very enhanced addition to the gateway of Devil's Lake.
And we want to do no less as we continue to clean up some of the property that Greg has out there.
As you know, it could certainly use some improvement.
And that's what this whole development idea is about.
We're looking to not put as much density as we possibly can.
The whole development, we work with developers that would put significant property on that land.
This is not what they're out to do.
They're not out to see how much they can fit on there.
They're out there to see what they can provide.
That's really nice for the entrance of Devil's Lake.
I look at it from my perspective when I listen to what they want to do.
When my children and my grandchildren go to Devil's Lake, they can't.
They go get a tent, they sleep on the ground.
That's not me.
I'm not doing that anymore.
We might be able to create a housing development.
A rental community or a small boutique hotel or whatever we do out there.
To create somebody like myself coming out to that area.
And staying in that building and then going out and joining my grandkids and my son and daughter.
So on out there as part of the Devil's Lake experience.
So I think by doing the right thing out there, whatever that comprehensive plan submission will be later on,
we'll show you that what we're trying to do out there is the right thing.
And I'm here to answer any questions if you have any.
I'm happy to answer.
But keep in mind, this isn't such early stages.
We're really here about annexation.
We're really not here to circumvent any open meetings.
Any questions from Mr. Ryan?
Thank you.
All right.
I think we do.
Do we have a motion in the second on the floor?
Is that correct?
We do.
Is there any other discussion on the motion to approve the annexation?
All right.
Hearing none, please call the roll.
Here's it.
There we go.
We do good.
All right.
Cole.
How's it?
All right.
Kent.
Petty.
All right.
Helington.
Sloan.
All right.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
On to new business.
12.1.
Development agreement with spirit late consideration of the mayor's veto of the council.
January 24th approval of the spirit late development agreement.
I believe everybody got a copy of the memo.
I should have a couple weeks ago.
Mayor did we skip 10.2.
There was not consent. Oh, okay. We just did 11.1 and now thank you. Now we're on 12.1.
So as always saying, I believe everybody got a memo of the reasons that I issued the veto and I don't feel like I need to go over those again unless somebody wants me to, but I don't. I don't think I do.
I think everyone also should have gotten a letter from the developers, which I believe was yesterday's that right.
With with some of their additional information in that.
So I guess I will open it up for discussion if you can't.
Travis come up and discuss his letter.
Would you like to say anything to Council?
Sure. Thank you.
All right.
I appreciate the time there and my name is Travis Zick.
I am apparently I'm the only one of Spirit Lake who doesn't have good Valentine's plan.
So I get to, I get to be here tonight. No, I'm just kidding.
I appreciate the time and the opportunity to come in.
I listened and I respect everyone's opinions and every comment that's been made.
I think it's part of what makes bearable so great is that we do have a diverse, you know, diverse outlook, a diverse group of people here.
I've been a bearable resident my entire life with the exception of college.
Up until a year and a half ago when I became an empty nest,
and moved to Marmach to downsize.
But I was raised in this community. I love this community.
It's been our intention.
We bought this property in 2005 from Sheriff Mike Spencer.
It's been our intention all along to some day put together a high quality,
gateway type development that the community will be proud of and that people will be attracted to when they come into town as the entryway to bearable.
We've been working on this project for a year and a half.
We've been working very closely for the past year to try to put together and answer some legitimate concerns and legitimate questions that have come up along the way.
And I feel like we've put together a project that is a tremendous and will be a tremendous asset to bearable.
I think it hits on some areas that are desperately in need in the community.
Obviously, the big one being housing.
You all had a housing study done, saw county did a housing study a few years ago.
We paid for our own study to be done before we even started down this path and they all say the same thing.
There's a drastic shortage in bearable, especially in rental units.
You've heard commentary about the tax base and the need to grow.
Obviously, commercial is also an area where bearable needs some additional sites.
Just to be honest, there's very little to nothing that's affordable for a commercial business look into come here.
And that's why we haven't seen much for a long long time.
This site will offer some of those opportunities as well.
But I want to make clear, as Bill said, you know, this is work early on in this process as well.
So as interest comes along for businesses or for commercial development out there, we want to work with the city to make sure that it's the right businesses that it's the right type of buildings that are going up out there.
The type of thing that again is going to be attractive to people.
And the last thing I want to say is, again, I've lived here my whole life.
I love so much of what bearable brings.
And we have a tremendous amount of assets here.
The river is a tremendous asset.
Downtown bearable is a tremendous asset.
Devils Lake is a tremendous asset.
And the bypass is a tremendous asset.
And they don't have to compete.
They all bring their own appeal.
They all bring their own positives and they all attract people to the area.
The area in front of our property has the highest traffic count anywhere in the city of bearable.
That is appealing.
That brings the type of businesses, the type of people, you know, the type of facilities that we want out there.
And again, I understand some of the concerns that have been raised.
And I appreciate everybody coming out tonight to share their thoughts.
Man, I just hope that you all see.
And I hope you had a chance to read through the information I sent.
The positives that come along with this project.
And that you'll again vote as you did last month to pass it on.
Thank you.
Jake, did you have something you wanted to say as well?
Not much.
I just kind of want to reiterate what Travis said.
And one of the things that Council in the city for crafting.
What I think is a great development agreement.
I'm sorry.
I'm Jake Buswell.
One of the developers of the multi-family.
I'll just I'll just I'll just I'll just say we will build a nice property a aesthetically
pleasing property.
It's kind of designed after one of our other properties off of highway 53 in on Alaska.
It'll look very similar.
It'll be an attractive building and buildings and.
Yeah, just want to thank you for the opportunity to come up and speak today.
today and I think the city has that demand and supply report on their website and that really
outlines the stark shortage of supply in this area and we sought firsthand with our rapid
river development. That property, we had all the deposits down five months before we had full
occupancy on the building and I've heard that the Greenfield State has similar demand. I've seen
some similar demand over the last few years. It's really all I have to add. It will be a nice
walkable property as well. I drove by on the way here. There's a sidewalk that connects from this
property already to the town. You can literally walk to Walmart within a couple minutes.
Yeah, I guess that's really all I had. Thank you. All right. Thank you, Jake.
We appear to have lost all of them flown again and trying to pick them back up.
Back with us, okay. All right. I like to comment there. I'll go ahead and go ahead and
hold first hand down the road to get things started if other council members chooses to participate.
First of all, thank you all for being here. This is like the largest crowd I've seen in the gallery
since we were looking about urban chickens. It was a packed house. There's a hot topic. So yeah,
we got a big fan. So we got urban chickens. I am an extreme pragmatist, but I'm also a person that
does a lot of research and a lot of homework. And I did read the mayor's memo several times.
I also, hey Joel, could you just maybe speak up a little bit so we'll make sure that's gotten
every time. I'll put this up closer to me that probably. I did read the mayor's
memo several times. I also am kind of dove tailed off, power up there who and they sent a little
thing out encouraging people to come and speak and support the mayor's veto. I also read
information from spirit lake and I'd rather do all the design and all that stuff. But they said it's
an information too. I also read the 178 page smart growth comprehensive plan from 2005.
I also reviewed the 2018 housing study by Saw County Economic Development Corporation.
And a couple of things in regards to the smart growth from 2005, reading that is a, it is a
document of mere many paradoxes. It is an antiquated document. It is an old document from 2005.
July, like people had said, also the forecasts and trends were used off the 2000 census and data,
which means that data is 23 years old. The smart growth is 18 years old. The projections are not
accurate and I know people working from a crystal ball at that time. The hopes and dreams of
variable in 2005 were redeveloped the water street riverfront area, promote historic downtown square,
enhanced community entryways, tourism, and also to encourage greater public involvement in community
planning. But it doesn't say what encourages, there's no definition in there about it. So as that
encourage me, you put something in the paper, whatever. So I'm saying that document is full of
paradoxes. Another part of that is expanding recreational areas development of the ICH trail,
nurture small businesses, preserve and enhance the surrounding natural environment. It doesn't define
what that is. So when people are talking about these outlying areas and protecting this in that,
the comprehensive plan doesn't say what that is. That's really, every one of us in this room.
That's our lens that we look through and we decide what that is based on our own personal preferences
and how we see the work. Housing. It also said that the city should explore new ways of ensuring
a mix of housing types and affordable levels, especially to meet the demands of first-time home owners,
seniors, it mentions nothing about transitional housing and mobility housing, short-term housing.
There's no mention in the comprehensive plan about that. So where are those folks love?
I've got a story I'm going to tell you a little bit later because I'm going to,
back at three minutes are longer. All right. I'm going to be quite, I'm going to say longer.
I'm going to be, I'm going to be concise. What I also said in 2005 is the city of bearable
has a very good supply of housing available. So it's the city of bearable who have the very good housing
supply available now. Again, we've got a bunch of paradoxes working here. Consider the school board
members being involved in plant commission. Do we have any school board members on plant commission?
I don't know if we do. It was brought up earlier that when we talk about developments,
do we have the school involved? Well, we do. School members are involved. School board members are
involved in looking at developments and projecting out populations of potential school children.
Economic development. The city should not subsidize development. There's not a development
that I've been involved with that the city is not subsidized. Okay. Moreover, the business community
would like to see greater consensus at the council level regarding decision making. It is believed
that there is rarely a clear voice of the elected officials. The previous vote for this was eight to zero.
Video preference survey in 2004, they used the slide projected to show different cities and
stuff. How many of you are currently using a slide projector? You know, we just you don't see those
sorts of things. Growth all turned into two page 34. Features growth opportunity that continues in recent
development trends and provides more land for employment, shopping, and anticipating development
stimulated by the proposed bypass project. Plan neighborhood areas. It should be noted that traditional
neighborhood plans different from types of land use such as single multi-family residences are not
random but located in a logical reasonable manner. And that is not the fine folks as to what that actually
is. Come on, what's that? The 2018 South County economic development corporation housing study.
The number one challenge for hiring the workforce in the city of bearable for major employers is the
inability for them to find housing and bearable. Plan amendments, appropriate plan amendments to the
smart growth comprehensive plan is becoming if it becomes irrelevant or contradictory to
emergency policy or trends in the city should be evaluated every three years or sooner. And we have not
done that. Shame on us. And some of our predecessors. So 39 years ago, I took a job with the
South County Social Services, which is now human services. I took a job as a child protective
services so to work for doing abuse neglect, investigations of children, and I'm going case management.
I came to bearable, got off for the job, and came up for two weeks to look for a place that I could stay
in bearable. I could not find a place suitable 39 years ago for me to live in bearable. I got an apartment
in low-income housing at Howard Woods in Portage and lived there for six months until a coworker of
mindset, hey, we're kicking out some pot heads out of our dueplex. You and your wife on a move in there?
I said absolutely, I can't find another place to live. And we live there for two years until we bought our
starter house at 329 second avenue where we still live this day in our starter house. So again, when we
look at these things, through our different lenses, in short, I'm not supportive of the veto.
As far as urban sprogos, I took a couple of drives today, just like my plots. I drove up T,
drove from Sullivan's to up to my enrol, where that housing development is. What's in front of it is
the enormous cornfield, what's behind it is wooded area, and then my enrol. Please tell me what's
different about that. It's the same distance I drove it today. I actually got out of my car. I drove
down on the bypass twice. Once down, once back, to look at this land, then I drove to where that
substation has parked my car and got out and looked around. I bite by at least once a week during
biking season. I think that it's a good fit. I think it's going to provide housing that's desperately
needed. And I think the city has the infrastructure to maintain it. I do not feel like the touch
from the city is a matter of fact. I feel it's a segue. In future development is going to occur.
I do understand people's concerns. I appreciate those concerns. But I'm also here to provide my
perspective and my point of view from the research and the homework that I've done. And also,
you know, having a 35-year career at Human Services, no, that. In the winter times, we have some families,
they'll stay three days in Devils Lake, they gotta get out, and then they go over to Mirror Lake to
stay three days in.
Go back and forth because they can't find a place to live. So think about those things when you're thinking about the big picture, the city of bearable. It's a lot of people, it's a lot of things to consider, but I am going to oppose the mayor's veto based on that information that I've obtained. So thank you for your time.
Thank you, Joe. Anybody else want to go ahead?
Yeah, great. Okay. A couple things that I liked. One is that Travis also doesn't have any Valentine's Day.
And the other thing is I appreciate the effort that Casey has put in on this on this development.
The problem is that I had nine calls all in the last three or four days all opposing this development. That's probably six more calls that I've had in the entire 14 years I've been on city council.
To me, when I think of a neighborhood, I think of a place where people can walk or bike easily to grocery stores, schools, libraries, churches and gauges and civic amenities.
And I think this development will certainly have the green space and the walking paths and it easy access to the highway, but little else of what I consider a vital neighborhood project.
We were talking about the comprehensive plan 175 pages. I got to about 90 pages of my eyes went blank.
I didn't three settings to be quite honest. I did not do it in one.
It's a bit of a dry, really, to be quite honest.
But it speaks to the vision of the participants and the quality of life issues.
Saying that the city quote should develop plans that encourage neighborhoods with parks, tree sidewalks and safe and adequate connections of these neighborhoods to the city amenities.
I don't see that in this project. I don't see it connected to other neighborhoods quite frankly.
This project I feel encourages more of a commuter neighborhood where residents have little social or cultural connection to the city.
I'm not going to go through what Rob has already mentioned page 38.
Of course talks about the accelerated peripheral areas such as this one.
And suggested at some point we go west of highway 12 bypass at the city engage in meaningful participation, which I think thanks to Mayor's veto.
We finally have had that civic engagement.
The problem that I also have with this is that designated school for the youngsters would be North Freedom School, which is quite a hike from from Baribu.
The other part that bothers me somewhat is two of the projects that are two of the commercial entities that we've talked about.
I have to do with what I would call heavy commercial rather than you know grocery stores and dry bins and truck truck truck traffic.
And there's a single in this project there's a single egress to county W and so when you have 240 apartments.
Plus commercial.
A development which includes some heavy truck traffic sharing an egress with other vehicles to a small county road.
It creates what seems to me a public safety issue.
So those are my thoughts.
Thank you Tom.
Brian.
Good.
I agree with a lot of what Tom said.
I was one of the ones who voted yes to the last meeting and since then I got educated.
Not only with the Mayor's men, Mel and other things I looked into and heard about.
Like Tom I got many contacts from my constituents who were all against this development.
I believe we should wait until that comprehensive plan gets redone.
Once that thing is is it's on our agenda.
I know to do it the next year correct.
Yeah once we have a new comprehensive plan then maybe we could revisit this.
And decide if this is a good idea or not.
But as of tonight I'm not in favor of it.
I agree with your veto.
Thank you.
Please.
We don't.
Thank you.
Okay.
Go ahead.
Jason.
So yeah this this I I appreciate all the all the community involvement tonight.
This is a very hard decision because there's there's there's a bunch of different views on this.
Joel made some very good comments and so to dress.
Housing is needed.
I was on the fence when I voted the last time we voted on this and I'm still on the fence to be quite honest.
I've gotten calls as well.
I agree with what you're saying.
Brian and and and Tom.
It's not just about the comprehensive plan.
I think what Joel read from the comprehensive plan.
I'm glad he read it and I didn't have to redo it.
Is community involvement engagement.
Mr. Muffa made a very good a very good comment.
I have said this a number of times that I think that things get fast tracked on in the sake of money or they need to get done right away.
And that what that does is that the scourges community involvement.
It it lacks transparency and it lacks community engagement.
And by by not having that we have this we have a lot of people who.
One either don't have all the information or don't understand why we're doing something.
The Joel's point you know the question the comments were made about our schools involved.
So yes I think they are I think the case he does a good job involved involving the school district and community community back and forth.
But it's pretty obvious that the rest of the people in this room don't know what that process is.
That's wrong. That's wrong and I sit here on a regular basis in this in this seat and question what I'm actually approving or voting for.
And the reason for that is is because we load up the agenda.
And we sit here and we have to go through the agenda and then all of a sudden it's a vote.
It's a vote for what and afterwards I kind of found myself going what one of my voting for.
I got a lot of information coming at me every week and I think everybody here does too.
So with with the information that we have I think we're more informed tonight.
I think you possibly could see people switched their vote but.
But I do think we need to have a comprehensive.
A comprehensive plan is developed with community involvement and that's my take on this whole situation.
So that's all I have to say.
Thank you Jason.
Anyone else who would like to.
Wait a minute or questions.
Scott are you still with us.
Okay. Did you have anything just want to make sure you're getting an opportunity if there's anything you wanted to say as well.
Sorry. Could you say.
Okay. Doesn't have anything to add. Okay. Thank you.
Yeah, I have we came to bear who in 1968.
And I as a vocal music teacher and my wife is school nurse.
We had one child in another child on the way.
And we had to live in.
Out in.
And the. The cabins out on.
I don't know.
I don't know what's bear was there no longer there.
Because there is absolutely no.
Zero housing.
We stumbled on Bob Miller who got a house.
And he was he was a remodeling it.
And he said he'd rent it to us.
So we put all our stuff in his garage and went out to.
And then came to get our stuff out of the garage and move in the house and.
He had used our bed slats for the for some of his laborers in the house.
So anyway.
There was and that.
You know, I back Joel with it.
It's been a year after year there.
There's the no housing.
And people come.
Where am I going to live?
So they're not going to come here to work.
It's just seems to me.
I understand my wife is concerned about few is nests.
Because that's one of her favorite places to walk.
And she goes there least once a month during the summer.
I'm not twice.
And he was concerned about.
People is nests in as I understand trevists.
Comments.
That should not be.
I think we do have a pond there to help with that.
So.
You know, I look at tea out of tea.
That's that's not connected to bearable.
It's you can't walk from tea to downtown bearable.
So we already have it.
And I, I just don't understand.
The, I understand.
I appreciate everybody's comments very much.
But I don't understand that we, we have what they're saying that we don't need.
We already have it.
And it, it's, it keeps going away from bearable.
This won't go away from bearable.
Because it's, it's pretty well stopped in that area.
So.
I appreciate everybody's comments.
But I haven't, I'm, I'm for.
Overterning the mayor's veto.
Thank you, John.
Any, I think Phil wants to be in.
Yeah.
Thank you.
I'm kind of a late and duck here, not so.
But I was here when we did that last copy and it's a plan.
I was part of it.
But I get, I look on Facebook and everyday.
There's people in there that are trying to find a place to live in bearable.
Every day, there's somebody that wants to move to bearable.
They can't find a place to live.
We have employers in bearable that hire people.
And they can't find a place to live here.
So they can't hire them.
I went back in 2005.
We didn't have to worry about this.
That advancement.
But it's for all.
Because it was nothing out there.
Nobody wanted to build anything.
And I watched that.
I watched it for 20 years.
Nothing.
Nobody built anything in there.
We just, we were just dead.
And we're going to point right now.
We need housing in bearable.
And as far as I'm concerned, I don't.
I don't fear or overruling the mayor's feet.
Thank you.
Okay.
Do you want to do it?
Yep.
I'm not way in.
There's a couple of points of clarification.
This property.
There's been a lot of comments that it's not in the comprehensive plan.
It's in a urban reserve area.
I believe it's what it's classified as.
This property when the 2005 plan went through.
It was actually zoned a one in 2015.
I believe 2014, 2015.
The landowners actually came into the city and asked you guys to
rezone this.
You rezoned it to I4.
So it went through the full rezoning process.
There was multiple public hearings.
It was a result of that.
And that's how they've operated and they've designed this particular property.
Is looking at they have the ability to do this.
That's kind of what brought this plan forward.
What we're talking about here is just simply a development agreement.
So it's a partnership between the city and the developer in the development agreement.
Every single aspect of all of our vetting processes is still in place.
So the next step for the landowner obviously is creating a plaque getting that recorded,
which is multiple public hearings.
The next step after that, they're going to break out the parcel that jake will be developing as part of
view its nest or view its landing LLC.
He's given us preliminary renderings of what he plans on doing.
But he's going to have to rezone that to a residential like an R3.
So he gets more density down there.
So that'll go through that public process.
And then as a part of that, he'll have to go for the building permit,
which will go through the plan commission.
I'll have to review that.
There'll be public hearings there.
Public hearings when it comes back.
I, you know, the the concerns about protecting.
Pue its nest and skill at creek.
That is a huge issue for everyone involved.
We all are stakeholders in that.
Obviously stormwater plan has to go through.
Specifically through plan commission and through public hearings.
And then ultimately comes up to council.
And same thing with the site.
What rendering plan or landscape plan.
As a.
Part of that, too. So every element of every project that's going to occur out there is going to have 2, 3, 4, 5 public hearings that everybody will have the opportunity to weigh in on.
What is being done and what the veto is pertaining to is specifically the development agreement. So that's the start of the project.
And then going forward, each and every project that occurs out there is going to have numerous public processes.
And if they fail to go through that process, if you need the development agreement, then their violation of the development agreement.
So we require every project to go through as part of the development agreement, the exact same process that every other project does.
So the terms and conditions that were negotiated between the city and the developer does not remove any of the other aspects of the public transparency process.
So just so it breaks kind of out the same page. This is the start of the project.
The development agreement is the start of that. And then you've got the public process that takes place throughout.
So just want to clarify that for everyone.
All right. Thank you.
Anyone else with any comments or discussion?
We can move some again.
Oh, sorry. We lost all of them and flown again.
We're only the phone service in the talk period is not up to snuff tonight.
Hey Scott.
All right. Is there any any any further discussion or comment from anyone?
There's no comment. I'll entertain a motion if someone would like to make that or I'll make a motion to veto the the mayors.
Over right over right the mayors veto. I'll make that motion.
All right. So we have a motion in a second to override the mayors veto and approve the spirit lake LLC development agreement.
Is there any other further discussion on motion?
All right. Hearing none, we will call the roll and just to clarify.
A yes vote is to override the veto and approve the development agreement and overriding the veto will require a two thirds vote or six votes.
I'll go ahead and please call the roll.
There we go.
All right.
Call. No.
Hazard.
No.
Kent.
No.
Petty.
All right.
Ellington.
All right.
Here's it.
All right.
So we've had was six votes in favor correct.
All right.
So the veto is overturned and we will proceed with the development agreement.
Thank you all for your consideration on that topic tonight.
It takes us to 12 dot lots more exciting stuff. Don't run away everyone.
That's yeah, we don't get a large gallery very often.
It's a ghost.
We're just getting warmed up tonight.
12 dot two removal of the oak street overlook.
Consider approving the removal of the old bridge among the abutment at oak street and water street.
Mr. Hurr.
Thank you.
I don't know if I should be offended if everyone's leaving now.
But I don't have Valentine's night plants either.
So I'm so you're stuck with me.
So anyway, you heard from Marcus and I'm going to say tonight with the presentation.
So I don't have to repeat that.
But if you have any questions, I'm sure Marcus can answer.
I can try to answer as best as I can.
There's some questions as to why now.
So this obviously this abutment has been around for over 100 years.
And why now are we looking at doing something with it?
Why haven't we before?
Well, I guess in the interest of some of the other discussions we've heard.
We do a comprehensive outdoor recreation plan every five years.
I've done four of them since I've been here in the 14 years have been here.
When we get to year four, I tell Parks Commission that we need to start the process again.
We need to assemble a committee, a public committee, so we can get a new comprehensive outdoor recreation plan pass.
Because every five years we have to have one done to become eligible for grants.
And the last court plan that we did, we do a community survey in every court plan.
The last survey that we did, which covers 2022 to exceeding 22 to 22 to 27.
We're currently in right now.
2021, we did a community survey.
We had a 11% response rate from 11% of city households, which is good any time we can get over 10%.
We're very happy.
Of those households, year city households, the number one thing they wanted,
which has been the number one thing every five years has been a continued expansion and improvement of the riverwalk,
which is why we put that as a priority, the Parks Commission puts that as a priority,
see that in a budget every year.
The number two thing in 2021.
Can you open that door back?
The number two thing that the community wanted us to concentrate on in 2021 was this project,
was the Oak Street Overlock, a connection between the businesses and the downtown businesses in the riverwalk.
So that's why we put this under budget.
We went, we got on the way funding to get a study done.
We went out and did bidding and got MSA came in to do this project.
And again, that was on the way funds that wasn't tax dollars.
The number three thing, of course, was bringing the Great Sox State Trail to Baribu.
And of course, I've been on that Great Sox State Trail Commission since 2018,
so that's something that we're working on as well.
But the community has asked for this.
This was their number two thing that they asked of us to do.
So that's why, number one, that's why we're doing it.
So when we went at this, we went looking at the original plan that was done back in.
I think it was 97 or 2002 something like this.
We used in the existing abutment and doing an ADA ramp to get up there and that sort of thing.
So that's the original route that that we took.
Unfortunately, as you heard tonight, there are some concerns structurally with that.
We're not able to do that anymore.
So the three things that you require me to do by department to do is we look at safety.
We look at accessibility.
We look at being within budget.
Those are the three things that we need to do.
Regardless of what the community wants.
Regardless of what grants we have available.
We need to make sure it's safe.
Obviously, we want to take that liability away from the city.
So that's what our opportunities for injury or anything like that.
We have to make it accessible so that the majority of our residents are able to access it.
Regardless of their physical ability.
And we need to be within budget.
And that's why we've been pursuing these grants.
This is going to be a multi-phase project that we are going to be continuing to pursue grants for
Casey Wiss instrumental in helping us get this start with this half million dollar
appropriation with Senator Baldwin and Representative Polkan.
I hope not with that and there'll be future grants coming.
This is probably one of the best projects that's going to qualify for several different grant funding opportunities
as we go through it.
So it's going to combine a lot of opportunities.
So number one once we heard that this this abutment was unsafe.
We did snow fence it off to the public.
It does need to have considerably more barriers put up to make it less accessible to people.
We had our staff meeting.
We determined that the best course of action due to the report from the structural engineers.
Was to immediately take that down or as soon as possible take that down to eliminate any risk,
especially knowing that it wasn't feasible to keep.
So the first thing that we're looking at is permission for us to remove that hazard.
And this did go to, you should mention this did go to Parks Commission last night.
It was actually the second last month they had actually first looked at it and had a presentation from Marcus.
And then last night they had considered this.
It was unanimous recommendation.
However it was discussed especially by three of those members.
Quite a bit of discussion that went on.
A lot of people that I really hated to do it but they knew that in the position that we were in.
We did have to do it so it was unanimous decision.
They'd go to finance tonight as well.
And they also recommended it for a for your consideration tonight.
So if you have any questions Marcus right would be happy to answer.
Marcus suggested that you could keep some of the original stone to put as planters or.
You know, maybe even a memorial, you know, you know,
you know, a bronze memorial that showed would depict the old high bridge or something like that.
And I think as long as some of those original stones are saved, you know, I agree that, you know,
in this look to just society.
I think that proposes a hazard the way it is.
Yeah, and like like your report said about five to ten percent of those stones could not be used to what they were found out to be.
The the parks commission was told this as well.
That is our intent to do that on project to save what we can and and to work with the parks commission and with yourselves.
To develop additional signage and additional memorial is there.
You will have the opportunity in parks commission will have the opportunity if this does continue to go forward.
The future designs as we go on to the next phases.
So you'll be able to see what it's actually going to look like.
So we will have some options as far as what finishes type of finishes.
We can make and what kind of a historical signage that we can add as well.
I make a motion that we approve this resolution to remove the ice cream.
Second.
All right.
Hazard made a motion.
How long have you been waiting to.
All right.
We have a motion and a second if I could just ask one quick question Mike.
So when you say.
Staff would immediately start removing that.
What kind of timeline are we looking at like.
Yeah, as soon as.
We want to get to as soon as we can and.
So if anyone wants to picture they better get out there tomorrow.
I would say get as soon as he can because we it's going to depend on the snow storm, but we're going to have people working out and immediately.
It is a safety hazard.
The sooner we get it out the sooner we eliminate the risk.
Okay.
All right.
Sorry for interjecting.
So we do have a motion in a second on the floor to.
Approve the removal of the old bridge above that oak street and water street.
Is there any further discussion?
I guess I'm going to ask the question again.
I'm still a little unclear what the cost of that is.
So just because of strictly just the removal of the.
Abutment do we have any kind of a figure for that.
We don't know.
No, yeah, it's it'll be an in house.
Removal using using staff equipment from in house.
So we're not looking at contracting that part out.
So that's just by city staff.
I mean in.
Street's department in person department primarily yes.
You're welcome to come down and bring her head if you want.
We'll take volunteer.
Just have to sign of volunteer for them.
Sign of volunteer.
We've got volunteer waivers for that.
So yeah.
So if I'm understanding question, there wouldn't really be a cost per say other than.
We're potentially pulling people off from other.
Other jobs.
Yes.
What's no storm coming in obviously parks.
Road street street guys are going to be tied up.
So, you know, once we can get crews freed up, we're going to be dedicating them to get in this taking care of as soon as possible.
Okay.
What are you going to do to mitigate erosion once you tear that.
That.
Well, don't.
The apartment down.
We've well.
So until something gets built there.
Yeah, so it'll be obviously so thin everything that that that we do that.
You know, that we do with any street when it's any park development.
Any landscaping type projects still fancy landscaping and then getting seated of course.
As soon as possible.
So yeah, we'll be following those those same protocols that we use in any other development.
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
Any further discussion.
All right.
Hearing none.
Please call the rule.
We'd again.
All right.
Call.
Hasard.
Kent.
Eddie.
Hi.
We've lost.
Here's it.
There.
All right.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
And on the 1213 request for proposals.
Consider approving the city engineer to solicit request for proposals for the design and construction administration of the Oak Street Overlooking ADAPF project.
Oh, sorry.
Oh, numbers are appearing before my eyes.
Sorry.
12.3 requests for proposals.
Might.
Please make me stop talking.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
So this is.
This process again.
This was recommended to you by Park's commission after last night's meeting.
This allows us to go on with the next phase of planning.
So many are soliciting RFPs to get a final plan on the future ADA ramp and the overlook that will allow us to continue to go to pursue additional grant funding.
We're also looking as part of that RFP to provide an option to continue.
Design for the across the river into the new riverfront park.
What our goal is to ideally work with the same.
Designer the same firm so that we have a consistent design in that area.
This kind of goes to meet our the bearable riverfront corridor improvement.
Projects that we've been working on.
So we're looking at continuing this.
The planning for the the corridor in the parks.
There's as I mentioned before, this area is right for a lot of grants and right now.
There's a lot of for instance cap funding out there some stewardship funding and there's been more appropriations made for these types of projects and for trails and those types of projects.
So getting.
On this right away, getting some RFPs out there right away, that will help us also to pursue additional grants and additional donations, and to continue this project going, because one of the concerns that we did here is that we don't want a plan to happen, we don't want you to tear down the abutment in it to set for another 20 years before anything happens. So we want to continue this process going, especially while the funding is out there and is available. This was also discussed by Finance and Recommended to you tonight.
Any questions for Mike on this one?
So we'll...
Second.
Okay, we have a motion and a second to allow the city engineer to request RFPs for the design and construction of the old street.
Overlook at an ADA path and a further discussion on the motion.
Hearing none, please call the rule.
Cool.
Aye.
Hazard.
Aye.
Slow and slow.
Slow.
Okay.
Here's it.
Aye.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
12.4.
Consider approving a classic combination liquor license for SSS Wisconsin BRW LLC, doing business as squirrels,
service station number 707.
Located at 516-H.
Street.
I was dragging in out as long as I could.
Are you taking?
I'll go ahead and start on that one.
All right.
Go ahead.
I'm a standard classic combination license, which means that it is for fermented milk beverages along with the liquor.
This will be a united cooperative formally held the liquor license at that location.
They have surrendered it.
And now with SSS Wisconsin BRW LLC has come in and place of them.
So this would be at the corner of.
Yeah.
Thank you.
It's been reviewed by city staff.
Sorry.
This would be the Senate station.
It's a big corner of four.
Thank you.
It's been reviewed by city staff including the police department and it went before the administrative committee.
With unanimous approval.
If approved tonight, the liquor license would be effective starting tomorrow February 15th until the end of June when all like the license.
This is expired.
Motion to approve.
Petty second.
All right.
There's a motion in a second to approve the classic.
Motion in a second to approve the classic combination liquor license for SSS Wisconsin BRW.
Any further discussion on the motion?
Hearing none, please call the rule.
Hazard.
I can't.
Petty.
Aye.
Ellington.
Aye.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
12.5.
Consider authorizing Chiefsenden to purchase body cameras to be reimbursed from the tribal and local law enforcement agency initiative grant funds.
Chief, you have the floor.
Good evening, everyone.
Everyone.
One thing I've learned is a new chief of police is when the city clerk puts your name on an agenda item you show up at the podium.
Fourth whip.
Reference the body cameras.
All of you are undoubtedly aware of the grant that I'm proposing to spend tonight.
The city council did vote at an earlier meeting to accept grant funds in the amount of $32,178 in some sense.
What the purpose of my presence here tonight is to request to spend those funds.
I'm proposing to spend those funds on replacement body-worn cameras for each of our police officers.
The amount of $32,160 will be spent and trust me.
I promise the finance committee I would find to place to spend $18 and I will do that.
But this equips this allows for 29 body-worn cameras.
But that also allows our community service officers to wear those, which is very important.
So my request is to expend the $32,160 for body cameras out of the grant funds.
If you recall, the city spends the money and then is reimbursed by the Department of Administration for those funds.
I would question on the body cameras.
They've been in the news lately, if you've probably seen that.
Are they supposed to, what's the rule with your officers about how the cameras are on or when they're off, etc?
We have specific policies required by law that dictate when those cameras go on, when they go off.
And those policies are quite extensive, actually.
So as far as the individual specific circumstances when they're turned on and when they're turned off,
I will tell you that, in my opinion, over the last 32 years of service,
the risk of not having body-worn cameras, the liability to the city, is much greater without those cameras than it is with the cameras.
But there are rules and regulations on and off.
Yes, mandated by state law.
Okay, thank you.
Motion to approve.
All right, we have a motion in a second to give to authorize the purchase of body cameras through the grant funds,
and he further discussion on the motion.
Hearing none, please call the rule.
Kent, Betty.
Hi.
Ellenton.
Here's it.
I thorough.
Good.
Hi.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
12.6, consider authorizing the mayor to execute and enter into a joint powers agreement with
Scott County for the 911 emergency system.
This is also you, correct.
Correct.
Yes.
I get to be a stand-in for Tom.
Right.
You also have to come to the podium when it's, but that's right.
This is a rather simple agreement.
It is a joint powers agreement required by state statute.
Whenever a city or an entity is involved in a countywide emergency 911 system, they have to sign an agreement
pursuant to state statute that says, when we are called outside of our boundaries, if we are
not utilizing specific pieces of equipment, that we will utilize those outside our boundaries
if we're asked to do so.
And this agreement, which, again, is mandatory to be part of the 911 system, details that.
Motion approved.
Correct.
Second.
All right.
We have a motion and a second to authorize the execution of a joint powers agreement for 911 emergency
system.
Any further discussion on the motion?
Hearing none.
Please comment the roll.
Petty.
All right.
Hearing none, please comment the roll.
Petty.
All right.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
12.7.
Consider preliminary resolution.
During intent to levies special assessments in accordance with the sidewalk policy for
new sidewalks at 11th Street between Elizabeth and Jefferson, that will be installed as part
of the 2023 Street improvements.
Mr. Pin, take it away.
Thank you, Mayor.
Good evening.
This is a resolution that should sound familiar.
We go through this pretty much every year.
It's part of a statutory process to assess brand new sidewalks where none currently exist.
That's consistent with the city's sidewalk policy.
It's part of the budget preparation and review.
Public safety committee reviewed several areas within the city.
We have a map that shows the entire network of sidewalks throughout the city.
And when we're doing street projects that our will have sidewalk, the committee tends to target those
areas to provide better connectivity in some of those areas that don't have sidewalks currently.
So this year there's roughly $75,000 available.
And we looked at 10th Street, 11th Street and 12th Street between Elizabeth and Jefferson.
So it's at two block stretch.
11th Street has the least amount of obstacles in the way.
So we'll simplify that and keep the cost reasonable.
And that will essentially exhaust the available funds for new sidewalks.
So public safety committee at their meeting.
Last month decided that this would be a good place to provide new sidewalks.
And this is the first step in that statutory process.
So it's the preliminary resolution that declares our intent to let special assessments for new sidewalks.
So that triggers the city engineer to have to prepare an assessment report.
Send out notices to the affected property owners.
Part of that process.
We try to hold a neighborhood meeting with the affected property owners.
And then there's a mandatory public hearing that she'll see in the upcoming months.
I think I'm forecasting toward the end of April as part of this particular agenda.
Under item eight.
I'm estimating going to be April 25th for that public hearing if we can get everything done in the meantime.
So with that, happy to answer any questions.
Any questions for Tom?
Second.
All right.
We have a motion in a second to approve the declaration of intent to level to levees special assessments.
We have a motion in a second to approve the declaration of intent to levees special assessments for our sidewalks on 11th street between Elizabeth and Jefferson any additional discussion on the motion.
Hearing none, please call the roll.
Here's it.
I thorough.
We begin.
Hi.
All right.
Motion passes unanimously.
Thank you.
To new business 13.1 an amendment of ordinance 7.09 sub 20 to related to overnight parking being prohibited on certain.
Streets or parking lots.
Still you, Tom.
It is.
Thank you again.
This ordinance revision comes by way of the staff.
Primarily the public works department and parks department.
Those that are charged with clearing the streets and municipal parking lots of snow.
Right now downtown.
Bear who has a prohibition overnight parking between the hours of 2 a.m.
And 6 a.m.
Every single date.
That does not extend into the municipal parking lots.
We have many parking lots that are 24 hour parking.
It doesn't give them in definite time 24 hours passes.
They have to move at least 90 feet to completely ordinance.
So what staff is suggesting is there's a couple of locks that are used rather sparingly for overnight parking.
Northside of 5th Avenue just east of Broadway and the lower civics center parking lot.
So since they're used sparingly we'd like to concentrate the location owes vehicles so we can maximize the efficiency of removing snow from those.
So on the 5th Avenue parking lot we'd like to create alternate side parking if you will.
And it would be restricted from 2 a.m.
To 6 a.m.
On the east side on.
On the west half would be allowed during odd days east half on even days.
So we'd be able to clear at least 50% of the parking lot completely and not put our operators or equipment and perils way.
Trying to sneak through scattered parking via park vehicles.
Similarly lower civics center lot.
A lot of stalls there in fact there's six different aisles of parking running east and west.
So the proposal from staff is that the central area.
Be restricted from 2 a.m. to 6 a.m. so we can complete four out of six of those are 66% of the lot cleared.
So the far north row of stalls which is against the upper civics center parking lot.
And the southernmost row of stalls adjacent to first street would be 24 hour parking.
The balance no parking 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.
I know there's a question what about special events typically that's posted for special events so that basically voids that 2 a.m. to 6 a.m.
So this was looked at the January 30th meeting in public safety.
I know it's the police department has chained in and I know that the folks from the parks department.
Feel that this is a reasonable approach to improve the city's operational capabilities.
So that we have to address any questions or concerns that you might have.
This is going to be a huge learning curve for the people that that park in those overnight lots.
How are you going to put this information out so that it's an understandable format for these folks.
I think we have 10 different signs to identify exactly it'll be very well signed.
It comes as close to being itself explanatory as long as someone's looking at the signs and not at their phones.
So it will be well we've already sent notified our normal sign company.
They've sent us drafts back so if this gets approved at the next meeting we would have them ordered.
We don't really expect to sign it or enforce it anymore this season but certainly for the fall portion of winter.
Just get people used to it.
Yeah, that's it. Thanks.
But it would be a year round change though correct.
Not just in the winter. Yes, it would get upon the direction of the science so ordinance will be there and signs and they're taking six to eight weeks to get them delivered these days.
So by then hopefully this season of winter is over.
Any other questions for Tom.
So we have a motion in the second to amend ordinance 7.09 sub 20 related overnight parking.
Yeah, I just want to say that one of the biggest things I hear from people who live downtown is how restrictive the parking already is and is there any other way to accommodate parking downtown to also accommodate snow and move.
I don't know if there is, but I can I can assure you that more restrictive parking downtown even as apparently as you say it's it's being used.
It's going to cause more consternation for people downtown.
I don't know if there's any other way to do snow removal that makes sense to do maintenance up there.
I don't know.
I'm just saying that potentially if there's any other creative way to do to do that and allow people to park without all these restrictions.
I think that would be a very open.
That's all I have to say about that, because parking right now down there is something that I've heard about parking passes, about a lot of snow emergencies, instead of a vote and it's said parking and being allowed to park on the street. And now not only are we not doing that or not even talking about that, we are going to restrict parking and lots that we're not restricted before. So I just want to bring that up as maybe there's other ways to do things.
I'd be happy to hear. It was a concern as well on public safety, but we had several aerial photos of that area. And there really were just a smattering of cars parking overnight. And there's adequate parking for the cars that are identified. There's adequate parking on the alternative parking spaces.
And in addition to that, the snowplow drivers were engaged in this in Tony, so Tony, the street superintendent confirmed that, you know, there really isn't a lot.
The parking spaces that are going to be a lot more than compensate for.
For that one, when they're flowing. Okay.
Any further discussion on the motion.
All right. Hearing none, please call the rule.
Curezic. I. Served. I. Whittigan.
Cool. Aye. Hazard. Aye. Kent. Aye. Petty. All right.
All right. Motion passes unanimously. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you Tom.
Administrator and council comments.
Casey, do you have anything? Okay. Any other person's have any comments to share?
I'd like to point out fees in our building, uh, uh, building inspectors report is 10% of the total fees collected.
10% in January of the total fees collected in 2022.
So there's something going on.
Thank you. Anyone else that have any announcements to share?
All right. Thank you. That takes us to 15 reports, petitions and correspondence.
We're linked to the packet online, uh, which takes us to item 16.
I'll entertain a motion to go into closed session, pursuant to statute.
19.85 sub one sub C to consider employment promotion, compensation or performance evaluation of a public employee.
And this would be, uh, continuing the annual performance evaluation for the city administrator.
All right.
We have a motion in the second to go into closed session.
Would you please call the roll?
Cursic, uh, thorough.
Hi. We'd a good.
Cool.
All right.
We are going into closed session. Does anyone need a break?
Looks like they are already queuing up.
Looks like they are queuing up at the year.
Yeah.
May I rush with a manager?
Thank you.