[0:10] general in this case
[0:10] .
[0:11] >> all right.
[0:12] Good evening everyone.
[0:18] Will call the tuesday MAY 31st
[0:19] twenty twenty two meeting of
[0:20] the finance committee to order
[0:21] all members of the committee
[0:23] are present will stand please
[0:24] stand for the pledge of
[0:39] allegiance.
[0:44] One nation.
[0:45] Next item on the agenda is
[0:48] public comment and this is open
[0:52] to residents and folks that own
[0:53] property in the city of
[0:53] waukesha.
[0:54] So if there's folks that are
[0:55] here for public comment tonight
[0:56] ,please come to the center
[0:57] microphone and if you'd give us
[1:00] your name and address and then
[1:01] you have three minutes to
[1:03] address the committee so anyone
[1:14] here for public comment?
[1:15] >> hi everybody.
[1:16] I think I've talked to all of
[1:19] you privately on the phone.
[1:20] My name is christina taft.
[1:22] My address is three three five
[1:23] oh wait this will help him.
[1:26] >> I know my address but my
[1:27] address is three three months
[1:30] old replumbed my address is
[1:31] three three five s heartwell
[1:34] avenue emulsify resident and my
[1:35] husband and I own two
[1:37] businesses in the downtown
[1:38] waukesha.
[1:39] >> I'm here tonight to show my
[1:42] support for the behavioral
[1:43] health responder program for
[1:43] verber.
[1:46] I'm sure you're aware we
[1:47] witnessed issues in the
[1:49] downtown area that are caused
[1:50] by mental health or addiction
[1:53] often in addition to the mental
[1:54] health or addiction issue.
[1:55] The individuals are homeless.
[1:58] our police department does a
[1:58] great job responding in various
[2:01] ways but they can only do so
[2:01] much by themselves.
[2:05] After all, being mentally ill,
[2:06] addicted or homeless is not a
[2:08] crime.
[2:10] I love the idea of having a non
[2:12] law enforcement behavioral
[2:12] professional to respond to
[2:16] mental and behavioral health
[2:20] crisis as we in full support of
[2:21] this program to aid our police
[2:21] department and our community
[2:24] and we hope you are too.
[2:25] I'd also like to thank you for
[2:28] considering the central city
[2:28] storefront program.
[2:32] I believe the program can help
[2:33] many building owners get the
[2:33] older buildings up to code as
[2:36] our businesses and downtown
[2:39] activities grow we take pride
[2:40] in the historic charm of our
[2:40] downtown buildings.
[2:43] However, as you MAY guess,
[2:44] retrofitting the older
[2:44] buildings with modern amenities
[2:47] can be pretty pricey.
[2:48] I own one building downtown and
[2:51] leased the there for our
[2:51] business.
[2:54] We recently had quotes done to
[2:54] determine the cost of
[2:55] sprinkling for both buildings.
[2:58] One building was quoted at one
[2:59] hundred and forty thousand
[3:02] dollars and the other at
[3:02] 270000.
[3:05] Those quotes do not include
[3:06] repairing the street and
[3:10] sidewalk after lateral adequate
[3:11] for fire suppression is
[3:14] installed.
[3:14] There would be in addition
[3:17] additional cost to those things
[3:17] .
[3:18] I wanted to share some real
[3:19] world numbers with you as you
[3:21] determine the funding for this
[3:22] program and how the funds would
[3:25] be dispersed.
[3:26] I would ask you to please
[3:27] consider doing a hybrid grant
[3:29] loan program for that so we can
[3:30] get a lot of those things up to
[3:32] code and and make the downtown
[3:36] businesses and buildings
[3:37] interior a little bit more
[3:37] modern while still keeping that
[3:40] historic downtown chen, thank
[3:40] you.
[3:41] >> great.
[3:44] Thank any other members of the
[3:45] public wish to speak before the
[3:49] committee ceiling.
[3:50] And again sir, if you'd please
[3:54] give us your name and address.
[3:54] Good evening.
[3:58] My name is keith klasky one
[3:59] zero zero nine lynn drive
[4:02] waukesha five three one eight
[4:02] six.
[4:03] I'm one of the owners of house
[4:09] of dennis pub downtown waukesha
[4:13] and would like to speak in
[4:14] favor of the behavioral health
[4:17] responder program.
[4:21] Everyone in the downtown area
[4:22] has their own stories about
[4:26] some of the homeless and and
[4:28] mentally challenged people that
[4:32] have decided to be in the area.
[4:33] So I'm not going to go into
[4:36] that.
[4:37] I would just like to say that
[4:41] having a family member that had
[4:44] mental challenges who is at
[4:45] this point deceased, I think
[4:49] that it would have helped us a
[4:52] lot as the family to have a
[4:56] program like this in place.
[4:57] >> I'd also like to speak in
[4:59] favor of the central city
[5:00] storefront program as with
[5:04] everything else contract costs
[5:04] are are skyrocketing.
[5:08] >> we're currently in the
[5:09] process of beautifying our
[5:11] interior.
[5:12] our initial quote changed by
[5:16] about 68000 dollars by the time
[5:19] they decided to give us a final
[5:20] quote because of their
[5:23] subcontractors and what they
[5:24] decided the pricing should be.
[5:28] >> that's made us have the pull
[5:31] back by about a third of what
[5:32] we wanted to do inside the
[5:32] building.
[5:35] >> we continue to discuss
[5:39] working with putting in a
[5:40] kitchen weekly.
[5:43] We get people asking if we can
[5:46] do sit down dinners at the pub
[5:46] .
[5:47] The edge of the building
[5:51] doesn't help because we would
[5:52] have to actually raise the
[5:54] ceiling in the basement in
[5:55] order to put in the hood system
[5:58] necessary to vent.
[6:03] We are grateful for any support
[6:06] that we can get from the city
[6:07] to do these kinds of projects
[6:10] to update these older downtown
[6:11] buildings but we would really
[6:14] like to see it include grants
[6:17] and as well as low interest
[6:19] loans to help us move move the
[6:22] buildings long term to safety
[6:24] code and beautification.
[6:27] >> thank you.
[6:34] Thank you very much.
[6:35] Good evening.
[6:38] I know some of you I'm laura
[6:39] lau.
[6:40] I'm a circuit court judge for
[6:42] waukesha county.
[6:43] >> I'm here for the mental
[6:44] health responders program and
[6:47] the possibile of that being
[6:47] something that waukesha could
[6:48] use.
[6:50] >> I've been in the court
[6:51] system for just about 22 years,
[6:54] 18 years is circuit court
[6:55] commissioner and coming up on
[6:57] four as a circuit court judge,
[6:58] I'm assigned only to criminal
[6:59] courts.
[7:01] >> so that's all I do for eight
[7:02] years I did emergency mental
[7:06] commitments so had a lot of
[7:06] definitely a lot of hands on
[7:10] with people that are having
[7:10] mental health issues.
[7:11] >> tell you a little bit about
[7:13] me because gives you some frame
[7:13] of reference.
[7:14] >> I'm waukesha chadbourne.
[7:17] My parents were born in
[7:17] waukesha.
[7:20] I graduated from north.
[7:22] My dad was a csc operator at
[7:24] waukesha engin my mom was a
[7:25] typesetter at the waukesha
[7:25] freeman.
[7:26] >> I share that with you
[7:29] because we went through some
[7:29] periods where if you've lived
[7:33] here for a long time the uh the
[7:33] factories in the foundries
[7:36] closed and we had a housing
[7:40] challenge and our family and we
[7:40] survived on surplus cheese and
[7:43] thrift store bread for several
[7:44] several years.
[7:47] >> I tell you that because I
[7:48] think my daughter is also a
[7:49] lawyer and it's been said to
[7:51] her she goes must be nice being
[7:52] born with a silver spoon in
[7:53] your mouth.
[7:54] >> and I think if you don't
[7:55] know if somebody is a journey
[7:55] you kind of don't understand
[7:56] where their passions lie.
[7:59] >> in addition to that, we've
[7:59] had some mental health
[8:00] challenges.
[8:03] I lost my husband who is a vice
[8:04] PRESIDENT At wuxia state bank
[8:06] to suicide.
[8:07] So those are things that have
[8:10] touched my life.
[8:11] >> I've been on non-profits for
[8:14] over 30 years and waukesha just
[8:15] finished as the PRESIDENT Of
[8:17] the nami board.
[8:18] >> I'm here because I
[8:22] understand and I've seen how
[8:25] waukesha has changed over you
[8:26] know I'm fifty nine you know,
[8:27] fifty nine years and the
[8:29] challenges that we have and as
[8:30] we're growing as a community
[8:31] and we have a definitely
[8:32] different socio economic
[8:33] situation that's coming into
[8:37] our community, it's wonderful,
[8:40] you know that we have nami who
[8:41] has the two people we have
[8:42] sunny and matt who are the you
[8:44] know the boots on the street
[8:45] during working hours.
[8:49] >> however they don't work
[8:49] nights.
[8:50] >> they don't work weekends and
[8:53] I I'll give you an example.
[8:55] >> christina had someone GOD
[8:56] bless her friday we had coffee
[8:57] that night she had someone that
[9:01] was basically kind of wandering
[9:01] around one of their businesses.
[9:05] >> she stopped to talk to that
[9:06] person, ended up driving him to
[9:08] the hospital which is something
[9:09] that she's been doing which you
[9:12] know, you really just can't do.
[9:13] >> it's not safe.
[9:15] And so she and I spoke
[9:16] afterwards and then we see
[9:17] capped him.
[9:20] He has over three screens and
[9:21] seekamp and I've actually had
[9:23] him in court before and he's
[9:24] not a criminal.
[9:27] >> he's somebody that has a
[9:27] mental health challenge.
[9:31] >> and so I think I don't have
[9:31] the solution for this.
[9:32] >> I really just became aware
[9:34] of this issue.
[9:35] >> but we've got to do
[9:36] something where we're bringing
[9:39] in people that you know, have
[9:40] that training.
[9:42] >> the police are overwhelmed.
[9:43] >> they're absolutely
[9:44] overwhelmed about 20 seconds.
[9:46] Ok, so you know, I really think
[9:47] that it's important that we
[9:49] incorporate someone our
[9:51] legislature passed a law like
[9:54] the emergency medical commands.
[9:55] >> now you have to have a
[9:56] mental health professional like
[9:58] that goes that's by law.
[9:59] >> I don't think we can wait
[10:01] for something like that.
[10:02] So I'm interested if you're
[10:03] going to put a task force
[10:05] together or anything like that,
[10:06] I would be more than happy to
[10:09] lend any assistance that I can.
[10:10] >> thank you.
[10:10] Thank you.
[10:12] Any other public wish to speak
[10:15] this evening?
[10:16] All right.
[10:17] Seeing none of them.
[10:20] We're going to move down to the
[10:21] last item on our agenda this
[10:21] evening.
[10:23] We have a number of folks staff
[10:24] and directors that are here for
[10:27] item number e which is
[10:28] discussion and possible action
[10:31] on the proposed plan for the
[10:31] arpa funds.
[10:32] >> with that I'll pass it to
[10:38] MR. Laner.
[10:39] Thank you.
[10:50] I'm getting logged in here so I
[10:51] just have a brief update from
[10:54] our previous meeting going over
[10:55] some of the changes that I made
[10:58] based upon the feedback I have
[10:59] a couple of slides and then I
[11:02] have a spreadsheet that I can
[11:03] share with you that shows the
[11:06] updates and then obviously we
[11:07] can have any sort of discussion
[11:09] we have additionally we have
[11:10] folks here to present
[11:13] additional information about
[11:13] economic study related to
[11:17] nootka park and so that was
[11:18] just recently completed and it
[11:21] kind of gives you a bigger,
[11:22] broader view of that project as
[11:25] well.
[11:26] So I only have a few slides but
[11:27] I just wanted to let you know
[11:29] kind of the direction that we
[11:32] that I went with the outline
[11:33] and of course just remind
[11:34] everybody that this is this is
[11:37] an outline it's not a cement
[11:38] and stone plan.
[11:40] It just kind of gives us a
[11:41] green light to start working on
[11:42] things in more detail and
[11:44] obviously things change if
[11:45] there's different priorities
[11:46] that come up along the way we
[11:48] will make adjustments as we go.
[11:52] >> so just in terms of what
[11:53] changed from the previous
[11:55] meeting based upon the feedback
[11:59] I we added an additional five
[12:00] hundred thousand to the storm
[12:00] water projects.
[12:03] Those are projects that are
[12:04] within our ship currently and
[12:07] as we were talking about it,
[12:08] number one, it's it's one of
[12:09] the called out eligible
[12:11] expenses and number two, we
[12:15] have a long term study related
[12:16] to stormwater issues that we
[12:19] are working through the city
[12:23] and so this would just dedicate
[12:24] more funds to those issues and
[12:27] addressing areas that are prone
[12:27] to flooding and things like
[12:28] that throughout the city and
[12:31] just add a little bit more and
[12:34] get those things done a little
[12:35] more quickly than we otherwise
[12:38] would have plus obviously not
[12:39] showing debt for those
[12:39] projects.
[12:42] I added a line for capital
[12:43] projects and so this would just
[12:44] be something to that would be
[12:47] non debt revenue that we could
[12:50] apply to whatever capital
[12:51] project that we chose that's
[12:54] within the sipi currently it
[12:58] could be a road project, could
[12:59] be any sort of project that we
[13:00] would like to do.
[13:02] I'm related to that and again
[13:03] it would just offset any sort
[13:05] of debt that we'd have to issue
[13:06] for those projects, increase
[13:09] the the central city storefront
[13:10] program to eight hundred
[13:10] thousand.
[13:13] It was previously five hundred
[13:17] thousand and so those are the
[13:18] some of the things that I did
[13:19] in terms of updating the
[13:24] funding remove the electric
[13:25] vehicles project and I want to
[13:28] make sure that folks know that
[13:29] we didn't do it because we
[13:30] don't think that there's value
[13:35] in but in working with john
[13:39] from the city garage there is a
[13:40] lot of federal funds that are
[13:43] coming in to electric vehicles
[13:44] in other ways, specifically
[13:47] carbon reduction grant program
[13:51] is one that is out there and
[13:52] there's just and there's other
[13:56] grant funding programs that I
[13:56] think that if we're going to go
[13:59] down that road it would be a
[13:59] better vehicle for that.
[14:03] I do think that it's something
[14:04] that we do need to continue to
[14:06] explore because it is where a
[14:07] lot of the vehicles are going
[14:11] and that we should get a handle
[14:14] on stuff like cost of ownership
[14:15] and the utility for our
[14:15] purposes and stuff like that.
[14:19] But we have removed that from
[14:20] this arpa outline and are
[14:23] exploring other grant programs
[14:26] for that the broadband network
[14:29] again it's we think that
[14:30] there's a lot of value there
[14:34] but the the the cost of running
[14:35] the the system the operating
[14:38] cost really we put a burden on
[14:42] us from a tax levy standpoint,
[14:43] an operating budget standpoint.
[14:46] I'd like to find a ways to
[14:47] generate some additional
[14:48] revenue from it so I wouldn't
[14:50] call that a dead project.
[14:52] If we can find partners where
[14:54] we can offset our operating
[14:55] costs in some way and we'll
[14:58] continue to explore we have
[14:58] been talking to the school
[15:01] district pretty regularly but
[15:03] we haven't found a way to to to
[15:06] get there on operating costs so
[15:07] we wouldn't want to put that
[15:10] burden on our operating revenue
[15:13] and so that we took out for now
[15:14] and then we took out the
[15:16] streetscapes project on white
[15:20] rock avenue as well.
[15:24] So just really the summary if
[15:25] you look at it you could break
[15:27] it down into broad categories.
[15:31] We have two point two million
[15:32] going into public safety
[15:33] programs, some stuff that we
[15:34] already approved and then an
[15:36] additional things that we
[15:36] outlined previously.
[15:39] We have four point four million
[15:43] going into capital projects and
[15:44] one of those is the manocha
[15:45] project which is a revenue
[15:48] generating project in the long
[15:48] term we have one point five
[15:49] million going into economic
[15:52] development, one point seven
[15:53] million going into affordable
[15:55] housing and eight hundred
[15:56] ninety one thousand going into
[15:59] sustainability efficiency
[16:00] programs.
[16:01] And so I'm going to switch my
[16:04] screen here and just kind of
[16:05] show you what that looks like
[16:06] on our spreadsheet.
[16:11] So you know what and I I failed
[16:14] in terms of I did not introduce
[16:15] my sidekick tonight.
[16:16] >> this is britain, a future
[16:18] city administrator.
[16:19] he's just come in to fill
[16:20] figure out how it feels to sit
[16:25] up here so no pressure be so so
[16:28] we have on the spreadsheet
[16:29] those are the changes I've I've
[16:34] outlined them down here in
[16:36] terms of what we change and
[16:41] what we added increased but
[16:44] it's the same dollar amounts
[16:48] the allocation numbers in terms
[16:49] of when they were being
[16:50] allocated changed just a little
[16:53] bit based on some feedback.
[16:56] But other than that we did we
[16:56] have the error shade project
[16:57] that's still here.
[17:00] The mindiola project that the
[17:01] led conversions, the snow
[17:04] melter as I mentioned the store
[17:05] the central city store front
[17:08] activation project which we
[17:11] increased the project the
[17:12] economic development project
[17:15] the we already discussed public
[17:16] safety here the pds or changes
[17:19] babri else responder again and
[17:20] so on.
[17:24] And so based upon that feedback
[17:25] those are the changes that I
[17:27] made and I know that you
[17:28] requested some additional
[17:31] information regarding some of
[17:32] these things and I know the
[17:35] folks that did the economic
[17:36] development study around
[17:37] minicar here mindiola excuse me
[17:40] adeola are here to present
[17:45] their information as well and I
[17:46] don't know if you want to go to
[17:47] the presentation first I can
[17:49] ask answer questions.
[17:50] It's up to you guys.
[17:51] Yeah I guess I'd bring it back
[17:53] to the committee and I think
[17:54] just in the interest of folks
[17:55] that are here tonight maybe it
[17:57] would be ok to shift to the
[17:58] minneola presentation and then
[17:58] we can kind of take questions
[18:01] from there because I know that
[18:02] something that we asked for.
[18:04] >> so ron, if you wanted to
[18:05] come up and kind of take us
[18:06] through the mindiola project,
[18:08] the floor is yours.
[18:13] Thank you, kevin.
[18:13] >> thank you.
[18:14] Paul ryan piper in the
[18:16] committee.
[18:17] >> I'll I'll do a preamble to
[18:20] the presentation to kind of
[18:21] walk you through what we know
[18:23] to try to cover and do as
[18:24] concisely as possible.
[18:28] >> I had asked jennifer andrews
[18:31] community development director
[18:32] to speak tonight give us some
[18:35] background on when we really
[18:36] started talking more seriously
[18:39] about developmental a complex
[18:43] over minneola and back in 2000
[18:44] there was I should say in back
[18:47] in 2020 there was a study that
[18:47] was done by uw.
[18:51] >> I am planning urban planning
[18:55] department and I think that
[18:56] does a nice job.
[18:57] >> and jennifer is going to
[18:59] briefly nick on that how the
[19:02] discussion started with
[19:03] revitalizing sunset drive
[19:06] especially that center corridor
[19:10] section of sunset drive and we
[19:11] I think we all agree needs some
[19:14] of the attention and and most
[19:14] importantly what was identified
[19:18] with that is that this type of
[19:19] complex development would be
[19:19] excellent.
[19:22] Catullus for revitalizing that
[19:22] area.
[19:25] So I will start with with
[19:27] jennifer to touch on that study
[19:29] from ibm and then we have MR.
[19:33] Brian dowling from johnson
[19:44] consulting, the recently
[19:45] completed the economic impact
[19:46] study which takes that uw study
[19:46] a step further.
[19:47] And here the focus is on the
[19:48] actual complex and what impact
[19:49] that complex would have
[19:53] financially for the community
[19:54] and then certainly be here to
[19:56] entertain any questions.
[19:57] The wrap it up as far as the
[20:00] park timing, whatever.
[20:01] >> I do want to add that we did
[20:04] have a letter of support from
[20:07] the waukesha pewaukee
[20:08] convention visitors bureau as
[20:12] well that came out kind of
[20:13] eleventh hour.
[20:15] >> so if you didn't catch that
[20:16] ,I apologize for that.
[20:17] >> so certainly there's a lot
[20:19] of excitement from that area as
[20:20] well.
[20:23] >> so with that jennifer, if
[20:27] you could come on up jennifer
[20:28] if you could just introduce
[20:31] yourself for the folks at home
[20:32] that became jennifer andrews
[20:33] and the community development
[20:35] director for the city waukesha.
[20:36] And when there is discussion
[20:39] about moving minor league
[20:40] baseball into mindiola park
[20:43] that part of sunset really came
[20:46] to the attention in the
[20:47] forefront of the redevelopment
[20:48] authority.
[20:48] >> and so although baseball
[20:51] didn't move forward, there was
[20:51] a secondary plan of developing
[20:54] the park into a soccer complex
[20:55] and in the meantime the
[20:58] redevelopment authority became
[20:59] more engaged in how can we
[21:02] improve the area and bolster
[21:03] some redevelopment in the area
[21:06] recognizing that there had been
[21:07] some vacancy and some continued
[21:09] decline in long sunset drive
[21:10] between grand and prairie.
[21:13] >> so in anticipation of the
[21:14] parks project in the
[21:15] redevelopment of mindiola park
[21:18] which I thought was an economic
[21:21] driver we engaged with uw to
[21:22] look at the area and provide
[21:23] some suggestions back to the
[21:25] redevelopment authority and
[21:26] they provided a report and we
[21:27] had a nice discussion during
[21:29] covid over zoome about their
[21:30] report but basically they
[21:33] outlined zoning updates that
[21:34] could be made adaptive reuse of
[21:37] particular buildings and they
[21:38] also identified street scaping
[21:39] and wayfinding as an
[21:41] opportunity for city investment
[21:42] to start to enhance the area
[21:45] and by doing those things
[21:46] believing along with the
[21:49] improvements mindiola park they
[21:50] believe that that would attract
[21:50] investment.
[21:53] New businesses, new to
[21:54] redevelopment projects to the
[21:57] area.
[21:58] >> so after we went through
[21:59] that project we community
[22:01] development redevelopment
[22:02] authority jointly with the
[22:05] parks department engaged
[22:06] brandon dowling in johnson
[22:09] consulting to do an economic
[22:09] development an economic impact
[22:12] study for us.
[22:13] >> so we're just trying to put
[22:14] the pieces together to see how
[22:17] much impact this could have and
[22:20] also what kind of businesses or
[22:21] development we should be
[22:21] focused on to attract to the
[22:22] area.
[22:24] >> what makes the most sense if
[22:25] this is going to be a soccer
[22:28] complex and so we engage
[22:29] johnson consulting and
[22:29] brandon's here tonight and he's
[22:30] going to walk through his
[22:32] presentation.
[22:34] We did do this in front of the
[22:34] redevelopment authority as
[22:34] well.
[22:37] So I know a little bit familiar
[22:37] with that but that's a little
[22:38] bit of the background of how we
[22:41] got here to this part of the
[22:45] presentation with the economic
[22:45] development studies.
[22:52] >> so brandon, not sure if I
[22:55] have control here so I'm going
[22:56] to talk loud.
[22:58] That's ok with you all.
[22:59] >> maybe one and one second.
[23:02] And sir, could you please
[23:03] introduce yourself for sure
[23:04] that my name is brandon darling
[23:10] and with johnson consulting I'm
[23:11] not sure if I have.
[23:11] >> sure.
[23:13] Yeah, I just want to be able to
[23:14] brand and I think I think brad
[23:15] can come out and see if we can
[23:16] get that up on the screen here
[23:17] .
[23:18] >> it's on my screen.
[23:21] I don't not advance it guess
[23:22] what it from here instead of
[23:25] that I still want to sit in
[23:29] front of that please sit it's
[23:29] fine.
[23:30] Ok fine brenda and that
[23:30] microphone right there to your
[23:34] to your left there should be a
[23:35] look that's that's good.
[23:36] >> thank you.
[23:36] All right.
[23:39] Well good evening and thank you
[23:40] again for having me here today
[23:42] again brandon darling johnson
[23:43] consulting I am a principal
[23:46] with the firm just a little bit
[23:47] about us and who we are.
[23:50] We were started about
[23:51] twenty seven years ago.
[23:52] We specialize in market
[23:54] financial feasibility studies
[23:55] particularly for public
[23:58] assembly type fagon venue.
[23:58] So convention centers,
[24:01] conference centers,
[24:02] recreational facilities,
[24:06] stadiums, arenas as well as the
[24:06] mixed use developments that are
[24:09] usually sprouting around those
[24:09] .
[24:11] And so I led our effort on this
[24:13] economic impact study that
[24:14] we're here to kind of share a
[24:17] brief summary and help share a
[24:18] little bit of our findings from
[24:20] that analysis.
[24:21] Pretty familiar with the area
[24:22] we're based out of chicago just
[24:25] recently a few different venues
[24:26] here regionally the marquette
[24:29] university athletic performance
[24:32] facility as well as the new
[24:33] stadium in franklin.
[24:36] So we we helped with both those
[24:37] market and financial
[24:38] feasibility studies for those
[24:39] venues.
[24:40] So just jumping right in I
[24:42] thought I kind of give a brief
[24:44] overview of our scope.
[24:48] >> it was in essence really to
[24:49] assess what the concept and
[24:52] program was put forth for
[24:56] minneola park and part of our
[24:57] work was really jumping in and
[24:58] understanding what the market
[24:59] opportunity the demographic in
[25:03] the area is and leveraging that
[25:04] and understanding sort of what
[25:04] the regional and competitive
[25:08] marketplace MAY look like and
[25:10] then from there really
[25:11] articulating what the overall
[25:14] economic impact could be.
[25:15] So this is should be nothing
[25:16] new.
[25:19] The overall concern of what the
[25:20] redevelopment for mindiola park
[25:23] would be so this is sort of
[25:24] what we analyze from a number
[25:26] of fields and the overall scope
[25:26] .
[25:28] You know, one of the things I
[25:30] think we shared early on is
[25:31] sort of the limitation of the
[25:34] site and in terms of the number
[25:35] of fields and size of fields
[25:38] and so you'll see in a lot of
[25:39] our numbers I would say we're
[25:39] probably culturally
[25:42] conservative just by way of
[25:43] background some of these other
[25:43] facilities and you'll see in
[25:46] the case studies are much
[25:47] larger size and scope in terms
[25:47] of acreage.
[25:50] >> I think you all have about
[25:53] 20 acres of some sort you know
[25:54] ,traditionally we could see
[25:55] these in the range of eighty.
[25:57] We just finished one on 380
[25:57] acres.
[25:58] >> so sports tourism is in
[26:01] itself kind of bringing
[26:02] visitors towards the sporty
[26:05] sports events has really boomed
[26:06] kind of growing from the
[26:09] original recession in 2008 and
[26:10] continuing to grow year over
[26:13] year.
[26:14] Just a snapshot of some of the
[26:15] key characteristics and I'll
[26:17] highlight this graph a little
[26:18] bit real quick on the right and
[26:21] kind of qualify why we look at
[26:22] these three areas, if you will,
[26:25] the orange the baby blue and
[26:26] the navy blue the thirty minute
[26:28] hour and a half for our
[26:28] effectively your three segments
[26:33] that we analyze the thirty and
[26:33] it being sort of your primary
[26:34] target market.
[26:35] What we found at a national
[26:36] level is mom dad caretaker are
[26:37] not going to travel greater
[26:40] than that four weekday
[26:40] practices and games and events
[26:44] the hour and a half is more
[26:45] sort of your regional draw
[26:48] daytrippers and for our is
[26:49] likely your overnight larger
[26:52] tournament demand.
[26:53] So you're just looking at sort
[26:54] of the historical and the
[26:56] projected population growth
[26:59] fairly consistent on a national
[27:00] average.
[27:01] You know, one of the things i
[27:02] think is unique as you all MAY
[27:04] know is the density that you're
[27:05] able to pull from in particular
[27:08] just from an hour drive time.
[27:08] Right.
[27:09] That's a pretty significant
[27:10] number when we look at these on
[27:11] a national level mainly given
[27:12] the major metropolitan areas
[27:13] that you all are our
[27:18] neighboring and the other is as
[27:21] median household income these
[27:22] types of venues really lend
[27:26] themselves to disposable income
[27:27] given if you're, you know,
[27:30] catering towards sports tourism
[27:31] really from a travel
[27:33] standpoint, you know, this
[27:34] venue I think is going to be
[27:37] largely local recreational with
[27:38] the ability to host smaller I
[27:41] would say regional tournaments.
[27:42] >> and so you'll see this in
[27:44] some of our projections one of
[27:45] the areas and it kind of speaks
[27:48] to what jennifer talking about
[27:49] hotels when we analyze the
[27:52] market there is about eight
[27:53] hundred and twenty one there's
[27:55] about another 300 I
[27:56] understanding coming in the
[28:00] pipeline just overall that's a
[28:01] little light especially if
[28:01] you're going to be bringing the
[28:04] number of visitors that we
[28:05] think this facility would be
[28:05] bringing.
[28:08] So in terms of identifying the
[28:09] types of development that MAY
[28:10] make sense in terms of that
[28:11] redevelopment, some form of
[28:15] hotel component we think would
[28:19] be ideal and then obviously
[28:19] sort of the family
[28:20] entertainment.
[28:21] So these things have evolved to
[28:23] be replacements for vacations,
[28:27] if you will, until it's much
[28:28] more than just the venue
[28:28] itself.
[28:29] it's also sort of what there is
[28:31] to do in a town and the
[28:32] experience that they have and
[28:32] that's really what increases
[28:35] that trip from one trip to
[28:36] visiting a venue, you know,
[28:38] five years in a row if you will
[28:38] .
[28:39] Another avenue that we look
[28:42] into the statistics on the
[28:43] hotel side, you know, if you
[28:46] look at the overall occupancy
[28:47] 70 percent and above is doing
[28:47] excellent.
[28:50] So you guys have some growth
[28:51] opportunity in terms of the
[28:54] accuracy as well as the adr and
[28:57] that's the average daily rate.
[28:58] >> those are two strong
[28:59] indicators for us in terms of
[29:01] you the viability of something
[29:02] like this because in many
[29:05] markets I shouldn't say many
[29:06] but when you're closer to
[29:09] larger regional markets the adr
[29:10] is what could impact the
[29:13] success meaning you know, if
[29:14] the hotel room rate is too high
[29:16] it's going to limit your family
[29:17] in the visitors ability to kind
[29:18] of stay there for multiple days
[29:20] like four tournaments and
[29:21] things like that.
[29:22] >> so when we look at the
[29:24] average in the occupancy we
[29:25] think both are opportunities
[29:31] for waukesha.
[29:32] Another element was we dug a
[29:34] little bit in terms of regional
[29:35] audit, in terms of some of the
[29:36] facilities.
[29:38] A lot of these came through for
[29:39] research and our primary
[29:39] database at johnson consulting
[29:42] as well as our discussions with
[29:46] several regional and local user
[29:47] groups to understand sort of
[29:50] where everyone was playing and
[29:51] what are the elite venues.
[29:54] So effectively these would be
[29:55] the venues that you would be
[29:56] competing with for some of
[29:57] these events.
[29:58] >> these are the four really or
[30:01] three I should say including
[30:02] minneola and the future
[30:03] improvements or proposed future
[30:05] improvements.
[30:06] We did sort of benchmarking
[30:09] around those three segments to
[30:10] kind of give a sense of where
[30:11] you all would sit against some
[30:13] of your key competition in the
[30:14] marketplace.
[30:17] As I mentioned before, I think
[30:18] ,you know, one of the strength
[30:19] is just a pure density from the
[30:21] the site itself and we'll get
[30:22] into that a little bit later
[30:25] and what we did a sort of a
[30:26] market penetration summary for
[30:28] you all to kind of see what we
[30:29] think we can it'd be able to
[30:33] attract and again, I think, you
[30:33] know, highlighting sort of the
[30:34] footprint as you could see it's
[30:36] one of the smaller of the
[30:36] three.
[30:39] So the overall size is going to
[30:40] be a limitation.
[30:43] But I think through many of our
[30:44] discussions as you'll see here
[30:47] in some of these ballpoints we
[30:48] talked with wisconsin youth
[30:51] soccer association so it's the
[30:52] state association really
[30:55] understand sort of state wide
[30:56] where things are from a demand
[30:57] perspective and honed in in
[30:59] particular to the waukesha
[31:03] area, you know, sharing a
[31:04] little bit of what the proposed
[31:05] plan was with them to
[31:07] understand.
[31:08] You know, is this something
[31:09] that could be utilized for
[31:10] statewide kamps tournaments,
[31:11] clinics in particular for the
[31:14] younger age group so you know,
[31:15] you're some of your fields
[31:18] would be smaller than a fall
[31:19] 2011 if you will, but you're
[31:22] still fully capable of hosting
[31:23] fairly decent size younger
[31:26] youth and amateur's are seven
[31:29] via sevens on those fields.
[31:30] We talked to several in
[31:31] particular one in milwaukee
[31:34] wave group that you know really
[31:37] are looking for additional
[31:38] services in the marketplace.
[31:42] So I would say two or three at
[31:45] the least that we talk to were
[31:46] interested in some sort of I
[31:50] would say a partnership or
[31:50] understanding how they can be
[31:53] but we would call it anchor
[31:54] tenant meaning they would, you
[31:57] know, sort of allocate specific
[31:58] dates and schedules.
[31:59] You know, one team would have
[32:01] monday, wednesday, friday
[32:02] certain time period because of
[32:05] the limitation of supply of
[32:06] surfaces in the greater
[32:06] marketplace.
[32:07] That's been a challenge for a
[32:09] lot of these organizations and
[32:10] it's been a hindrance in their
[32:11] opinion to some of their growth
[32:13] as well because you know,
[32:15] there's only so much to to grow
[32:18] with the table on the right
[32:19] kind of dives in a little bit
[32:21] of what we characterize as
[32:22] market penetration opportunity
[32:23] and this is particularly for
[32:24] your market and those three
[32:28] segments again on a national
[32:28] average we typically see
[32:33] anywhere from 30 percent on a
[32:33] 30 minute time ours.
[32:36] Fifteen percent and seven.
[32:37] And so if you look at the beige
[32:40] no, we're taking effectively in
[32:41] that 30 minute we're taking 30
[32:41] percent of that number and
[32:44] that's that number is the
[32:44] taking population and applying
[32:48] that towards the percent of
[32:49] population that participates in
[32:52] soccer and the various funds
[32:53] that could be held there and
[32:55] giving us a total number and
[32:56] then from there we're assuming
[32:57] only 30 percent that number.
[33:00] So again across the board I
[33:01] think you'll find a lot of our
[33:01] assumptions and numbers are
[33:03] fairly conservative with
[33:04] intention.
[33:08] You know these these things are
[33:08] sort of early on when we're
[33:09] involved and so there's a
[33:12] there's a whole host of things
[33:12] that can can can be modified
[33:14] and change the direction of
[33:15] that.
[33:16] And so, you know, large part
[33:19] based on a lot of our
[33:19] discussion and research and
[33:20] really diving into some of the
[33:23] data that we have in-house, we
[33:24] think that there's certainly a
[33:27] fairly significant amount of
[33:28] demand for the proposed
[33:30] development.
[33:31] So what that man really means
[33:35] looking at this sorry you're a
[33:38] little happy there.
[33:39] This is the diagram on the left
[33:39] to give us a little
[33:41] illustration of sort of how and
[33:42] the methodology of how we
[33:45] arrive at these economic impact
[33:46] numbers.
[33:47] >> you had the venue itself.
[33:49] You have folks that are coming
[33:50] in here directly spending their
[33:51] money.
[33:51] You have the indirect and
[33:54] induced in one way.
[33:55] We like to categorize that and
[33:58] you'll see some of these rates
[33:59] for each of those areas
[34:01] indirect induced an increased
[34:02] those are from in-plant.
[34:03] It's a nationally recognized
[34:05] multiplier that produces and so
[34:06] we apply that base off the
[34:09] direct number that we produce
[34:13] and so the way we like to
[34:14] categorize it as a direct spend
[34:17] is if I'm a parent and I'm
[34:18] taking my children to the
[34:21] sports complex, we are paying
[34:22] five hundred dollars for the
[34:25] tournament that weekend that is
[34:26] a direct spend to the city.
[34:29] If we were to go to the local
[34:30] pizzeria and I buy pizzas for
[34:33] the whole team that's a sort of
[34:34] an indirect spend to the
[34:37] community so that those dollars
[34:37] at that pizza place wouldn't
[34:38] happen if it weren't for that
[34:40] tournament that I was in town
[34:40] for.
[34:41] And the induced is really the
[34:44] server that now had sold
[34:47] fifteen pies that day that
[34:48] because there was a major
[34:49] sports event in town and so
[34:52] their tips are greater than
[34:53] they would normally be if it
[34:53] were not.
[34:55] >> but for that event that
[34:56] happened and so that's just a
[35:00] sort of a discretionary way to
[35:01] kind of explain each of those
[35:03] definitions.
[35:08] The next is really kind of a
[35:09] high level and again really
[35:11] conservative estimation of what
[35:12] we think demand and events
[35:14] could happen at this repropose
[35:16] park including the addition of
[35:19] additional fields we talked
[35:20] about early on and really
[35:23] looking at what the overall
[35:24] year five number is that we
[35:26] hone in on you'll see that
[35:26] quite a bit.
[35:27] Year five is what traditionally
[35:30] we see on a national level to
[35:30] be stabilization.
[35:31] These things take a little bit
[35:34] of time to get on the you know,
[35:35] wisconsin youth soccer
[35:35] association.
[35:38] they've booked events two years
[35:39] out, if you will, for their
[35:40] camps and clinics and so it's
[35:42] going to take time post
[35:43] development for you all to land
[35:46] on that.
[35:47] But they do over time have a
[35:48] ramp up period and that's what
[35:49] you'll see across the board and
[35:52] a lot of our projections
[35:56] ultimately it is our projection
[35:57] in previous just from a total
[36:00] about roughly 17000 total
[36:04] spectators and participants
[36:05] when we look at that from a
[36:08] event day standpoint and that
[36:09] in itself accounts for, you
[36:12] know, several days on the camps
[36:13] and clinics that are in town
[36:14] for a greater than just one day
[36:16] and not just day tripping.
[36:17] So again in that year five
[36:19] we're looking approximately
[36:23] 25000 folks in that's really
[36:24] we're projecting would produce
[36:27] approximately 6200 room nights.
[36:31] >> so again, when we look that
[36:32] and we talk about additional
[36:32] and ancillary potential
[36:35] catalyst development, we could
[36:36] see where the hotel MAY be an
[36:42] opportunity for you all to seek
[36:43] in the last but not least is
[36:46] really sort of a summary of all
[36:46] this.
[36:47] So understanding kind of what
[36:48] those visitors and those date
[36:50] nights and room nights look
[36:54] like applying our average daily
[36:55] spend if you will, for lodging
[36:57] and meals and and it's
[36:57] incidentals we're projecting
[37:01] approximately in year five an
[37:02] economic impact of three point
[37:05] two million which would produce
[37:06] again utilizing those numbers
[37:09] from a multiplier standpoint
[37:09] approximately nineteen full
[37:13] time jobs and the equivalent of
[37:14] about 47000 in tax revenue from
[37:17] those sales.
[37:18] >> so again these are all
[37:21] annual numbers so so we sort of
[37:22] hone in on that year five.
[37:25] But again, as you it's hard to
[37:26] see why in year one it's
[37:27] lighter and it grows and it
[37:29] grows.
[37:30] >> that's all indicative to the
[37:31] overall demand that we're
[37:32] projecting for the facility and
[37:33] that I felt like it was a
[37:36] really quick summary.
[37:37] So please if any questions or
[37:40] anything you'd like me
[37:41] elaborate.
[37:42] I'm here to do the right thank
[37:42] you brandon.
[37:45] I guess we'll certainly bring
[37:45] it to the full committee to see
[37:46] what questions they MAY have of
[37:47] you.
[37:49] >> but I guess a couple that I
[37:51] have off to to start is when
[37:52] when a study like this is done
[37:55] in a facility is built, how are
[37:56] power numbers like this
[37:56] validated?
[37:59] >> how do you come back after
[38:00] five years and give a
[38:01] presentation to the council and
[38:05] say hey, we were right, we were
[38:05] wrong?
[38:06] >> I mean how we only when the
[38:07] right no.
[38:08] Well what it's a great question
[38:09] what does the validation
[38:11] process and something like this
[38:12] look like?
[38:13] >> yeah no that's a great
[38:13] question.
[38:14] We get that quite a bit and
[38:15] more in the private financing
[38:16] world sort of I guess where
[38:19] your question is is sort of
[38:20] what is our variance in some of
[38:20] our projections and so a lot of
[38:22] that is actually going back and
[38:23] looking at what we had
[38:24] projected and how it all
[38:26] effectively had performed post
[38:27] development and ultimately
[38:30] we've traditionally been within
[38:31] that ten to fifteen percent
[38:34] variance on numbers.
[38:35] And so I guess that's a long
[38:38] way of saying we have
[38:39] continually do go back and look
[38:40] at our numbers sort of post
[38:42] development if the development
[38:46] actually proceeds forward, I
[38:47] would say, you know, again
[38:57] we're doing feasibility studies
[38:58] .
[38:59] We're fairly early on.
[38:59] We like to call ourselves the
[39:00] the tip of the development
[39:00] spear.
[39:01] Right.
[39:02] And there's a lot of steps and
[39:02] zoning and design and capital
[39:03] cost have to come next.
[39:04] So you know, I would say
[39:05] roughly anywhere from 20 to 30
[39:05] percent of these venues are
[39:06] actually moving forward from a
[39:07] development standpoint because
[39:07] they're so early on.
[39:10] >> but we do go back and
[39:11] actually fact check our numbers
[39:12] and I another question,
[39:13] brandon.
[39:14] >> so the three point two
[39:15] million of economic impact
[39:17] that's based upon the project
[39:20] being fully built out that was
[39:21] highlighted on one of the
[39:22] earlier slides, is that
[39:22] correct?
[39:23] >> that is correct, yeah.
[39:25] That's kosuga.
[39:28] And then lastly the 47000
[39:29] dollars in tax revenue I mean
[39:32] the city doesn't the city
[39:33] doesn't get a cut of the of the
[39:36] of the sales tax.
[39:37] >> so was that forty seven
[39:37] thousand dollars is that
[39:38] strictly sales tax?
[39:40] That's purely yeah.
[39:41] >> it's a five percent of the
[39:41] state yeah.
[39:43] Ok all right.
[39:44] Other questions for for brandon
[39:45] from the committee on the
[39:54] presentation alderman lemcke,
[39:55] was there anything in your
[39:59] study to project property tax
[40:03] growth because that's where the
[40:06] city you know, revenue would
[40:07] come from the increase in
[40:09] property values around new
[40:10] hotels, new construction,
[40:13] something like that.
[40:15] So as MR. Piper said, we don't
[40:18] get any of sales tax revenue of
[40:18] the state of wisconsin would
[40:21] get that and whether complexes
[40:25] in madison or eau claire,
[40:25] oshkosh, they get the revenue.
[40:27] >> it isn't going to change for
[40:29] the state standpoint where the
[40:32] pie is and waukesha is
[40:33] concerned about, you know, how
[40:35] is it going to revitalize our
[40:36] district plus any of the
[40:37] tournament money that we could
[40:40] get from the parks department
[40:40] that would help.
[40:41] But I was just kind of looking
[40:44] at the redevelopment side what
[40:45] growth that's going to help the
[40:48] city of waukesha property
[40:48] taxes?
[40:48] >> sure.
[40:49] No, that's great question.
[40:52] Our our whole analysis was
[40:52] absent of sort of what would
[40:55] happen with property tax.
[41:02] Other questions for brandon
[41:03] brandon.
[41:04] >> thank you, joe.
[41:04] I thank you.
[41:07] I wanted to make sure I mean we
[41:08] mentioned in terms of taxes we
[41:10] do get a cut of the hotel motel
[41:10] tax.
[41:11] So I mean as part of the state
[41:14] law we get a cut of the hotel
[41:14] motel tax.
[41:17] so that was mentioned briefly
[41:18] the thing so if there is new
[41:21] hotels built then that would be
[41:22] additional revenue to the city
[41:23] as well as to the convention
[41:26] and visitors visitors bureau
[41:27] which also helps to bring more
[41:29] group folks in to.
[41:30] >> thank you, kevin.
[41:33] Before we at brandon go into
[41:34] any other questions from the
[41:37] committee, brandon, thank you.
[41:37] Thank you.
[41:38] I appreciate it.
[41:39] Certainly up to you but you MAY
[41:41] want to stick around.
[41:41] Who knows?
[41:42] We MAY have some other
[41:43] questions later on in the
[41:44] discussion but I appreciate we
[41:45] appreciate coming in and
[41:46] presenting your material so
[41:46] thank you.
[41:47] >> thank you.
[41:48] Appreciate it.
[41:49] Kevin, how would you like to
[41:52] proceed from this point?
[41:53] Well, I would just from my
[41:55] perspective I'd like to get
[41:56] some feedback from the
[41:57] committee if this outline looks
[42:00] acceptable with what we've done
[42:01] or if you'd like some
[42:04] additional adjustments before
[42:04] you consider it for approval,
[42:07] that's really where we're at.
[42:08] There are there was some
[42:11] questions about some cost
[42:12] benefit of the snow melter.
[42:15] So like that hasn't been
[42:15] completed yet.
[42:16] We haven't been able to do all
[42:19] the data on that.
[42:20] So in terms of doing the labor
[42:26] costs of moving snow and that
[42:27] analysis still needs to be
[42:28] done.
[42:31] But but we do want to try to
[42:32] answer the questions that you
[42:35] had and reflect some of the
[42:36] changes that the committee was
[42:36] discussing previously.
[42:39] >> so I guess one question I
[42:40] have is the you know and I know
[42:42] you we remove some items and
[42:43] things like that.
[42:46] I guess the the million five in
[42:47] capital projects at the very
[42:47] bottom.
[42:49] >> could you could you
[42:50] highlight that a little bit
[42:51] more in terms of what your
[42:54] ideas are for that one point
[42:55] five?
[42:56] And I guess my point is and
[42:57] I'll certainly leave it to the
[42:58] rest of the committee is I
[43:01] don't know how much in terms of
[43:02] firm recommendations this
[43:03] committee wants to give the
[43:05] council versus kind of leaving
[43:06] something rather open ended.
[43:06] Yeah.
[43:09] So I was hoping that maybe you
[43:10] could provide a little bit more
[43:13] color around that one point
[43:13] five million.
[43:14] >> yeah so that's exactly what
[43:16] the that was intended to do in
[43:17] some respects is that this is
[43:20] an outline so it's like a set
[43:24] in stone plan but with that one
[43:25] of the discussions that was had
[43:28] at the last meeting was you
[43:29] know we have a skype with a
[43:30] bunch of capital projects and
[43:32] it's why not not issue debt for
[43:33] that and use these funds to
[43:36] help offset the future tax
[43:37] increases that are going to be
[43:38] resulting of the debt that we
[43:40] have to issue.
[43:41] And so between this the one
[43:42] point five for capital project
[43:43] we could be used for any
[43:44] capital projects that we have
[43:47] on the books and plan for a
[43:51] road you know, a park facility
[43:52] ,whatever the case MAY be we
[43:55] could just use this instead and
[43:55] then the other one point five
[43:59] for stormwater.
[44:00] We have planned stormwater
[44:00] projects nearly every year
[44:03] every other year.
[44:04] So again that would be
[44:04] offsetting that debt that we'd
[44:07] have to issue to do those
[44:08] projects.
[44:10] So you'd essentially not
[44:14] borrowing for the three million
[44:15] those of those capital projects
[44:16] you wouldn't have to borrow for
[44:19] the major equipment in the in
[44:22] the snow melter and I still
[44:23] can't believe that's a thing
[44:26] but it's a cool thing and you
[44:30] wouldn't be borrowing for the
[44:31] m_nika project either.
[44:34] >> so all of those would be non
[44:38] debt, you know, funded projects
[44:41] that would not that would help
[44:42] us do the things that we want
[44:43] to do without impacting the
[44:45] taxpayer.
[44:46] All right.
[44:50] Well, what I'm going to do is
[44:51] I'll bring it back to the full
[44:53] committee and I have certainly
[44:54] open it up to the committee for
[44:56] questions on anything related
[44:57] to the to the updated
[45:00] spreadsheet and then I'm going
[45:01] to see kind of how the
[45:02] conversation goes and then we
[45:05] can we can do one of two things
[45:06] and again, I'm not ready to lay
[45:08] this out completely that we
[45:09] either can approve some of
[45:12] these items like we have with
[45:15] the modular vehicle barrier
[45:16] system that we did recommended
[45:19] that one the council and to the
[45:20] org changes.
[45:21] >> those are two items that we
[45:21] already have recommended to
[45:23] council.
[45:24] So that is certainly an avenue
[45:25] for us to consider this evening
[45:27] is if there's items on here
[45:28] that the committee feels like
[45:29] it's a good idea, we're ready
[45:32] to move forward and vote on
[45:32] those things.
[45:33] We could do that tonight and
[45:34] recommend those kind piecemeal
[45:35] to the council.
[45:38] I said or we could ask for some
[45:39] additional information and
[45:42] bring it back for a third time
[45:43] to the committee and vote on it
[45:44] as a package.
[45:46] So I just wanted to give that
[45:47] to the committee as some food
[45:48] for thought as to how we can
[45:49] proceed tonight.
[45:51] >> we do have agenda is that we
[45:51] could do it either way.
[45:54] >> we could do this piecemeal
[45:55] and take some take some action
[45:57] on some specific items so
[45:58] again, just from a committee
[45:59] standpoint, let's let's think
[46:01] about what we're comfortable
[46:02] with this evening and then I'm
[46:03] going to pull it back and see
[46:06] if anybody has any questions on
[46:06] what's been presented in
[46:07] alderman lemcke, you put your
[46:09] hand up.
[46:13] I think I mentioned the last
[46:14] time we had spoke that I would
[46:17] like she had a good portion of
[46:21] the funds that we're getting
[46:22] from arpa since they are tax
[46:25] dollars coming from the federal
[46:25] government that the city of
[46:26] waukesha proportionately has to
[46:29] pay back because it's all debt.
[46:32] >> we're getting a share back.
[46:34] >> I'd like to see some of the
[46:36] debt that we are going to be
[46:37] putting together.
[46:39] >> for example, mindiola park
[46:40] that looks like it's going
[46:44] through pieces at a time which
[46:47] I'm not against the capital
[46:48] projects on the roads and for
[46:51] example and this is just an
[46:52] example of where I'm coming
[46:52] from the dredging of the
[46:55] saratoga lake.
[46:56] Those are all things that we
[47:00] have in the cfp now where I'd
[47:00] like to see a good portion of
[47:03] these arpa funds used so that
[47:04] the federal government is
[47:08] paying some waukesha tax payers
[47:08] bills that the taxpayers are
[47:11] then going to have to pay the
[47:12] federal government so it's not
[47:14] increasing the tax burden is
[47:15] skinning the cat from one piece
[47:18] or the other.
[47:20] >> so I just don't want to see
[47:23] 10 million dollars of add on
[47:26] and in that we have to pay the
[47:27] federal government for and I'd
[47:30] like to see some of it come
[47:31] back now I'm in favor of the
[47:34] habitat for humanity just about
[47:35] everything's there and I just
[47:37] want to know if like the
[47:38] mindiola that we have allocated
[47:41] and the storm water projects,
[47:42] the capital projects if if that
[47:46] amount of money three million,
[47:47] four million dollars was in the
[47:49] cypriote that we could allocate
[47:50] to that and not have to spend
[47:50] it.
[47:53] >> so then we're making some
[47:54] new purchases but not all the
[47:57] those specifically stormwater
[47:58] the capital project line and
[48:01] mindiola are all in the ship
[48:02] currently those are all in the
[48:05] five year plan.
[48:10] The that's what I mean that's
[48:11] that's your that's the answer
[48:11] to your question.
[48:12] >> those are all in the five
[48:13] year plan.
[48:17] Thank you.
[48:17] Other questions from the
[48:21] committee what's been presented
[48:25] so far?
[48:26] >> all right, let's try this.
[48:28] What I'm going to do is let's
[48:29] start from the top of the list
[48:32] because this is the second time
[48:33] that we've seen a lot of these
[48:37] items and I would just want to
[48:37] go through one by one to make
[48:40] sure that we can show our
[48:40] bosses that we've thoroughly
[48:41] vetted this list and talked
[48:43] about it, which is important
[48:44] and then if there's no
[48:48] objection I'm going to kind of
[48:49] treat this as kind of the
[48:51] capital budget portion of our
[48:52] finance discussion where we
[48:53] start where I'll start asking
[48:55] for some motions on some
[48:56] certain items and if the
[48:56] committee is comfortable with
[48:59] that particular item, get a
[49:00] motion, get a second, we'll
[49:02] vote on it and then we'll take
[49:04] this to council in kind of
[49:07] perhaps some bits and pieces.
[49:08] >> but I think that that that
[49:08] gets this moving along.
[49:11] It gets the council viewing
[49:15] this and asking some additional
[49:18] questions and let's let's do
[49:18] that.
[49:19] So I'm going to start with the
[49:20] habitat for humanity project
[49:23] project.
[49:24] This item was presented at our
[49:26] last previous meeting that a
[49:27] total of a one million dollar
[49:27] allocation.
[49:28] >> were there any additional
[49:30] questions from the committee on
[49:34] this item?
[49:35] >> was there a motion alderman
[49:38] mcilvanney, the motion to
[49:41] approve or move forward habitat
[49:42] for humanity airshed project
[49:45] second by alderman bartel's ok,
[49:46] so just for everybody watching
[49:49] at home what we're going to do
[49:50] is we're going to vote on these
[49:51] one by one so far so the motion
[49:53] has been made to recommend to
[49:54] the common council an
[49:57] allocation of one million from
[49:58] the rpa for the habitat for
[49:58] humanity project.
[50:00] We have motion and a second is
[50:04] there any discussion on that?
[50:05] >> and denise, we're going to
[50:06] do voice votes on these so you
[50:07] don't have to keep track of in
[50:07] granicus.
[50:08] That's all right.
[50:12] Yeah, we'll just do we can do
[50:12] voice votes on this.
[50:13] >> that's fine.
[50:15] All right.
[50:16] >> so the motion we've got a
[50:17] motion and a second for the
[50:19] million dollar allocation
[50:20] habitant and all those in
[50:20] favor.
[50:21] >> please raise your hand and
[50:22] sign I I any opposed.
[50:23] >> all right.
[50:30] That item passes mindiola park
[50:30] revenue generating capital for
[50:31] one million dollars.
[50:33] Is there a motion on that
[50:37] particular item?
[50:41] >> alderman lemcke I would like
[50:42] to make a motion to accept the
[50:45] million dollars arpa funds that
[50:46] would go to the S.O.P in 2023
[50:49] towards a projected project.
[50:56] >> is there a second second
[50:57] alderman mimic elderly?
[50:57] >> I'll second that.
[51:01] Ok, so we have a motion and a
[51:02] second for the one million
[51:04] dollars for mindiola.
[51:05] Is there any further
[51:05] discussion?
[51:07] Alderman battelle's how many
[51:11] years out will we be looking
[51:12] for a completion of the park to
[51:16] the plan in the in the plan we
[51:19] have it spread out over I think
[51:23] two years twenty twenty four
[51:24] and twenty twenty five is that
[51:24] correct.
[51:26] Run yeah.
[51:27] >> yeah twenty twenty four
[51:30] twenty twenty five.
[51:31] >> so that would be the full
[51:35] build out of it and of course
[51:38] it's a big number so that's
[51:39] contingent upon you know
[51:42] competing priorities but um
[51:46] obviously the faster you do it
[51:47] the more gets to stabilization
[51:48] and you start to talk about the
[51:50] types of numbers that the the
[51:54] folks the consulting folks
[51:55] we're talking about that brian
[51:55] was talking about.
[51:58] So but right now we have we
[51:59] have a planned out over 24 and
[52:05] 25 and what was the total
[52:06] estimate for the whole thing?
[52:09] >> for the whole thing I think
[52:10] it's seven million in the city.
[52:13] Am I right in my I'm I'm
[52:14] guessing I should never guess I
[52:16] should go look it up.
[52:17] >> ron has the sheet right in
[52:20] front of them for the record,
[52:24] thanksgiving in the budget
[52:24] right now.
[52:28] >> and again we're evaluating
[52:29] the site as far as updating the
[52:35] master plan, do cost estimates
[52:36] because of the volatility of
[52:38] the climate that we have?
[52:40] >> as you all know, the total
[52:42] is eight million nine hundred
[52:43] and fifteen thousand.
[52:44] >> that's what we have
[52:49] projected through 2025 and
[52:53] we're doing it in phases a lot
[52:54] of inventory.
[52:56] Oh, I'm sorry.
[53:01] >> sorry so if during the
[53:01] process this whole eight
[53:05] million or so doesn't go
[53:08] through what happens to the one
[53:11] million dollars tonight.
[53:13] >> so I mean again this is just
[53:16] an outline so we would what we
[53:17] would do with this particular
[53:19] project is that we would update
[53:20] this ship to include the arpa
[53:23] funds as part of the project.
[53:23] The one million dollars gets
[53:26] you another full size field
[53:27] completely built out and with
[53:31] the success that we've had with
[53:32] the one that we've done, you
[53:34] know, we would generate revenue
[53:35] from the one otherwise.
[53:38] You know, you could do you the
[53:40] whole thing you do one more you
[53:40] could do half of it.
[53:43] >> ok, that's I was looking for
[53:43] yeah.
[53:47] >> thank you is a display ad a
[53:48] tad to that as I indicated in
[53:51] the communication today this is
[53:51] an opportunity to help defray
[53:55] part of the cost of the overall
[53:57] build out and get another field
[53:58] in operation earlier than we
[53:58] had anticipated.
[54:02] So we look at this as an
[54:03] excellent opportunity to not
[54:03] only get another field
[54:06] operational but also save save
[54:09] some money or get funding from
[54:10] a source outside of traditional
[54:13] bonding.
[54:14] And I would also add there's
[54:15] some value in doing it
[54:17] incrementally too because you
[54:18] get to learn you get to know
[54:18] what works.
[54:21] You get to figure out what the
[54:22] teams like and what they don't
[54:25] like and things like that.
[54:26] And so I mean getting it in and
[54:29] getting it operational at peak
[54:29] efficiency for lack of a better
[54:31] description is also not a bad
[54:31] thing.
[54:35] Yeah, I just wanted to add I
[54:38] don't think it's been mentioned
[54:39] yet tonight but the arpa funds
[54:43] currently need to be spent by
[54:44] the end of 2024 so that the
[54:47] first portion of the million if
[54:48] it is spent prior to that would
[54:51] be covered.
[54:52] >> the arpa funds just wanted
[54:55] to make that node and it
[54:56] included the first time we
[55:01] discussed us back on MAY 10th
[55:03] that we will be ready to go.
[55:05] >> this project is in the
[55:06] position that we can move on it
[55:07] and get moving on this project
[55:10] and 23 and certainly have it
[55:11] completed by twenty four to get
[55:14] this additional field built.
[55:15] So we're one step closer to a
[55:18] complex and I think the other
[55:21] thing a bit that onto brandon
[55:23] indicated is it MAY not be the
[55:26] biggest complex but we're
[55:27] looking at high quality in turf
[55:29] is what it so it's imperative
[55:33] that we push for the turf
[55:36] fields that will draw a crowd
[55:37] guaranteed when you know you
[55:41] can play they will come and we
[55:44] definitely are in a position we
[55:46] have a niche that we can fill
[55:49] so we have thirty fields now
[55:52] but we could have facility it
[55:54] has five or six fields that are
[55:56] high and quality that could be
[56:00] used for multiuse and again if
[56:01] we go to the route of building
[56:04] the full sized fields you can
[56:05] carve out a lot of smaller
[56:08] fields on that full size so you
[56:09] have a lot of flexibility.
[56:10] >> you can paint temporary
[56:12] lines for example if you want
[56:13] to use a tournament we can get
[56:16] eight fields of you eight kids
[56:17] on one turf field, one full
[56:20] size is to give you the scope
[56:21] so you can you can run some
[56:24] good sized tournaments
[56:24] especially with the younger
[56:25] kids, the tournaments that
[56:28] require full size field play or
[56:32] somewhat limited but not
[56:35] certainly be relegated not
[56:36] having tournaments for full
[56:39] size play when you have quality
[56:40] so you'll get high end quality
[56:43] type tournaments that would be
[56:44] attracted and that's the that's
[56:47] the word that we got, you know,
[56:48] from the wisconsin youth soccer
[56:51] association etc. That there's a
[56:52] niche there for their olympic
[56:52] development program camps.
[56:55] >> you in also tournaments.
[56:57] So again bigger is not
[57:02] necessarily always better in
[57:06] lemcke I'm glad I have run and
[57:09] kevin in and this is just more
[57:10] of educating myself.
[57:13] Um, when we talk about a major
[57:17] sports complex like this that
[57:17] benefits the entire city, would
[57:21] this be something that impact
[57:24] fees could be allocated towards
[57:28] ,you know, like in my
[57:32] particular district it's
[57:33] projected just from what I can
[57:35] see coming up in the next five
[57:36] years we're going to have about
[57:40] 500 new units.
[57:41] So if we have a and if we have
[57:43] an apartment complex coming on
[57:44] with a hundred units, does that
[57:47] mean that when they apply for
[57:48] permits for that particular
[57:51] apartment complex they pay 100
[57:52] impact fees, one for each unit?
[58:02] Where do they pay one impact
[58:03] fee for the whole complex?
[58:05] Well, the impact fees, jennifer
[58:06] to the two.
[58:07] >> yeah ok.
[58:08] But it's per unit boxton per
[58:08] unit.
[58:10] So if we have a subdivision I'm
[58:11] just going to ask the question
[58:14] whoever knows can answer we
[58:14] have a subdivision coming on
[58:17] very down in my valley we have
[58:18] fifty new condominiums going
[58:18] in.
[58:22] We have about 120 flats coming
[58:23] on just off of highway eighteen
[58:25] across from oakmont we have a
[58:29] new proposed that's in the
[58:30] works right now with maybe
[58:33] three hundred and
[58:33] twenty townhomes and fifty five
[58:37] single family homes just in
[58:38] those in my district alone in
[58:40] the next five years we
[58:44] anticipate about 500 individual
[58:45] units and if I remember when we
[58:49] did our impact fee raise four
[58:52] for AUGUST the parks is going
[58:53] to get about twenty two hundred
[58:55] dollars on each one of those
[58:56] units that's about a million
[58:59] two hundred and fifty thousand
[59:00] dollars of revenue that the
[59:00] city could use.
[59:03] >> I'm thinking towards
[59:04] mindiola park because in my
[59:07] district we have enough little
[59:08] neighborhood parks with
[59:11] meadowbrook howell oaks and you
[59:15] know the oliver sports and all
[59:16] of that.
[59:16] I don't think a need for
[59:18] another park needs to going in
[59:18] there.
[59:19] But I'm thinking, you know,
[59:22] that I understand MR. Bartlet's
[59:23] fee fear as is mine.
[59:26] I don't want to spend six
[59:27] million dollars of the
[59:27] taxpayer's money towards
[59:30] mindiola park over the next
[59:31] five years.
[59:32] But if it can come from the
[59:33] people who are moving in buying
[59:34] that lot or moving into that
[59:37] apartment complex from
[59:41] something like that, then if
[59:42] that fund can be used there
[59:45] again it's a way of not having
[59:46] the taxpayers foot the bill for
[59:49] mindiola and and making making
[59:52] the project can be a draw for
[59:53] redevelopment and such.
[59:56] So if we earmarked those impact
[59:57] fees just in my district I know
[1:00:00] there's a lot more and it would
[1:00:03] soften that blow of having to
[1:00:04] spend six million dollars on
[1:00:04] mindiola.
[1:00:07] We got a million from the arpa
[1:00:08] ,we got a million in two fifty
[1:00:11] and impact fees from my
[1:00:11] district.
[1:00:13] >> you know it has a funding
[1:00:16] source as long as we didn't
[1:00:16] have to invest in new park
[1:00:18] because I think my personal
[1:00:19] opinion is waukesha is very
[1:00:23] generous with their park system
[1:00:27] and and you know, if we can
[1:00:28] fund it without having to
[1:00:30] increase the taxes that the
[1:00:34] people pay, I'm in favor of the
[1:00:35] majority of it.
[1:00:39] So if if that would be a way of
[1:00:42] obtaining spending the money so
[1:00:43] you so you know where the money
[1:00:45] is going to have to come from
[1:00:46] or you're going to have to be
[1:00:47] spent rather than proposing a
[1:00:50] new park or a new pool or a or
[1:00:51] something like that then I'd be
[1:00:54] much more in favor of voting
[1:00:54] for this.
[1:00:57] That looks like it's coming
[1:00:58] anyway but there we go.
[1:01:00] That's my thoughts.
[1:01:02] I can comment on it if you like
[1:01:04] me to.
[1:01:05] Yes, definitely impact fees was
[1:01:09] one of the things that was
[1:01:10] factored in in the study for
[1:01:13] minneola because it is a
[1:01:13] community asset, a community
[1:01:17] park and so part of our funding
[1:01:20] strategy is obviously to look
[1:01:21] for alternative revenue sources
[1:01:24] which we qualify impact fees as
[1:01:28] as that you know, nontax based
[1:01:29] and and that's why we got
[1:01:32] excited about this opportunity.
[1:01:33] Arpa there's a that's one that
[1:01:36] we didn't count on, you know,
[1:01:37] three or four years ago
[1:01:37] certainly.
[1:01:40] And to try to find ways to stay
[1:01:44] out of using geo bonding or
[1:01:45] things of that that type of
[1:01:47] mechanism.
[1:01:48] >> so impact fees is part of
[1:01:49] the mix.
[1:01:51] We haven't quite determine how
[1:01:53] much impact fee the use for
[1:01:55] that but we'll certainly have
[1:01:59] more of that detail for you as
[1:02:02] we get through the process.
[1:02:04] >> you know we have JULY one is
[1:02:06] our self-imposed deadline that
[1:02:07] cfp submitted and sort of
[1:02:11] better defined it but that was
[1:02:12] factored in that there would be
[1:02:14] a piece of the puzzle would
[1:02:14] come from impact fees.
[1:02:18] >> how much that hasn't been
[1:02:18] determined yet.
[1:02:21] And as you indicated in lemcke
[1:02:22] that those numbers have changed
[1:02:23] all too.
[1:02:26] So that changes that landscape,
[1:02:26] MR. Laner.
[1:02:30] >> yeah, just to add on to that
[1:02:33] the way the impact fee
[1:02:34] ordinances work is that they
[1:02:35] have to be spent either in the
[1:02:36] neighborhood where they are
[1:02:38] generated from or on a
[1:02:41] community park facility and we
[1:02:42] might have to look at our
[1:02:43] ordinance to make sure that
[1:02:46] we're eligible to do that.
[1:02:47] I think we are already but
[1:02:48] that's an adjustment that we
[1:02:49] can make and so you can use
[1:02:53] them for either area and then
[1:02:54] there's also a time limit with
[1:02:55] impact fees you have to spend
[1:02:57] them within seven years on a
[1:03:00] new item.
[1:03:01] You can't spend them on
[1:03:01] maintenance you can't spend
[1:03:02] them on.
[1:03:03] You have to build something new
[1:03:04] with them.
[1:03:05] So that's how that's how it
[1:03:06] works so you can use them
[1:03:08] locally in the specified area
[1:03:09] or you spend them on a
[1:03:11] community facility.
[1:03:13] >> just one other thing to add
[1:03:16] on to kevin's comment is that
[1:03:19] the keep in mind minneola park
[1:03:20] is largely undeveloped.
[1:03:21] that's why it does that's one
[1:03:23] of the qualifiers for impact
[1:03:23] fees.
[1:03:27] >> so a one one field alone as
[1:03:28] you know as we've discussed is
[1:03:31] over a million dollars a full
[1:03:31] sized field.
[1:03:32] >> so we have undeveloped
[1:03:35] largely undeveloped community
[1:03:39] park and that typically shines
[1:03:39] really well for impact fee use
[1:03:43] for community wide use.
[1:03:44] So it was part of our strategy
[1:03:46] when we elton john cameron, et
[1:03:50] cetera on identifying all the
[1:03:51] different parks, that big lawn
[1:03:54] chart that is part of the study
[1:03:59] minneola is part of the mix all
[1:04:07] romanian run refresh my memory
[1:04:07] .
[1:04:08] We have an existing turf field
[1:04:11] at mindiola right now.
[1:04:11] >> correct.
[1:04:15] And that was put in when I was
[1:04:19] there the tail the
[1:04:20] twenty twenty we opened in 2021
[1:04:22] last year.
[1:04:23] >> ok, can you give me a
[1:04:26] ballpark if you know of roughly
[1:04:27] what kind of revenue that field
[1:04:31] has generated in on an annual
[1:04:31] basis?
[1:04:34] >> well we have we have one
[1:04:37] full season on our built but
[1:04:39] the field is to give you an
[1:04:42] idea prior to the turf field
[1:04:43] and our total revenue was nine
[1:04:45] hundred and twenty seven
[1:04:47] dollars for in the old park
[1:04:49] with the grass fields in
[1:04:53] twenty twenty one rentals the
[1:04:54] loan was over thirty eight
[1:04:56] thousand so we went from nine
[1:04:57] some dollars to thirty eight
[1:04:58] thousand plus we were able to
[1:05:04] move our program over an entire
[1:05:05] youth program utilizes the turf
[1:05:08] field now for games and that
[1:05:09] program was expanded to almost
[1:05:12] 3500 kids in that program being
[1:05:13] brought in in 2001.
[1:05:16] >> edita and so conservatively
[1:05:21] the turf field attributes one
[1:05:24] hundred and twenty six thousand
[1:05:25] its first year and the numbers
[1:05:28] are looking very good right now
[1:05:29] we're projecting to be about
[1:05:29] one hundred seventy five
[1:05:32] thousand four for this year.
[1:05:33] We haven't seen what's going to
[1:05:36] happen in the fall season yet
[1:05:37] but spring was very good.
[1:05:38] >> thanks, ron.
[1:05:41] Those are good numbers and ron
[1:05:44] just also to remind the
[1:05:47] committee that when the first
[1:05:48] part when the first field went
[1:05:49] in there was a special revenue
[1:05:50] fund that was created to
[1:05:51] capture the income that was
[1:05:52] derived off of that off of that
[1:05:53] field.
[1:05:55] >> correct.
[1:05:59] >> that's all the funds in the
[1:06:00] general fund.
[1:06:00] >> but I thought there was I
[1:06:03] thought there was something
[1:06:03] specific that the city created
[1:06:04] to capture the revenue from
[1:06:07] that field to recoup some of
[1:06:08] the operating costs and perhaps
[1:06:10] some of the replacement in the
[1:06:12] future for that project as we
[1:06:14] did to turn fields one time
[1:06:15] would frame baseball.
[1:06:16] We did create a turf
[1:06:18] replacement fund or it's a
[1:06:19] maintenance one can be used for
[1:06:22] more turf replacement but that
[1:06:26] cost shared with carroll
[1:06:30] university in the city and it's
[1:06:31] ten thousand dollars a year
[1:06:34] from carol and 10000 from
[1:06:35] proceeds that we derive from
[1:06:38] frame baseball goes into that
[1:06:39] fund.
[1:06:39] >> so there wasn't there wasn't
[1:06:40] something similar done with
[1:06:43] mindiola not at this time but I
[1:06:43] think that's something we would
[1:06:46] look at certainly for you know,
[1:06:47] the bigger picture the bigger
[1:06:51] project is to have I call it a
[1:06:54] turf replacement fund.
[1:06:55] >> we made a little broader
[1:06:55] than that.
[1:06:57] You know, maintenance.
[1:06:58] But the idea that primarily
[1:07:01] would help you know, the free
[1:07:02] again cost down the road for
[1:07:05] turf replacement because you
[1:07:06] know, one of the one of the
[1:07:09] things that we've talked about
[1:07:10] I mean you and I and you and I
[1:07:11] and kevin have talked about the
[1:07:13] concern that I have is just the
[1:07:14] ability for the city to
[1:07:14] maintain the park
[1:07:16] infrastructure.
[1:07:17] We have given levy limits and
[1:07:17] the limitations on the
[1:07:18] operating budget.
[1:07:21] I mean that it's a big topic
[1:07:21] but that's been my overarching
[1:07:24] concern with with the parks
[1:07:28] that we've had.
[1:07:31] >> I guess my question for this
[1:07:32] is is if if we have the first
[1:07:33] one and the second one gets
[1:07:37] approved, you know, from a
[1:07:37] standpoint of just maintaining
[1:07:38] it, I mean are you are you
[1:07:40] comfortable that we've got the
[1:07:41] room within the operating
[1:07:42] budget within your operating
[1:07:43] budget to maintain these assets
[1:07:44] and or does it make sense to
[1:07:47] start setting up specific funds
[1:07:48] for these larger assets to make
[1:07:52] sure that, you know, repairing
[1:07:55] bleachers and repairing
[1:07:56] bathrooms and repairing the
[1:07:56] field don't pull away from the
[1:07:59] other funds that you're going
[1:08:00] to need to maintain a you know,
[1:08:01] to maintain the park shelter at
[1:08:06] horeb for you know, part one.
[1:08:07] Yes, we're very confident that
[1:08:11] our experience turf field is
[1:08:14] it's enable us to reprogram a
[1:08:15] chunk of our maintenance
[1:08:18] activities to other facilities
[1:08:22] in parks because the turf no
[1:08:25] longer we have to mow no long
[1:08:26] trimming no longer we control
[1:08:29] fertilization, no longer
[1:08:30] irrigation.
[1:08:34] So that's a pretty hefty list
[1:08:37] that now no longer has to be
[1:08:38] done and we can redirect those
[1:08:39] hours and manpower to other
[1:08:41] areas in the city.
[1:08:42] So it's been a maintenance
[1:08:44] benefit for us and that's
[1:08:48] that's why we were very bullish
[1:08:49] I guess is the term on turf
[1:08:50] fields.
[1:08:52] We're just seen the impact of
[1:08:53] ability and on the revenue side
[1:08:56] and rentals but we also had a
[1:09:00] very favorable response on the
[1:09:01] maintenance side and so there
[1:09:04] is some grooming involved but
[1:09:08] other than that replenish some
[1:09:12] of the infill material, there's
[1:09:12] a relatively simple machine
[1:09:13] that does that and then once a
[1:09:16] year we bring in a service to
[1:09:20] do a or complete reconditioning
[1:09:21] of the field in the school
[1:09:22] district.
[1:09:24] Does does the same with their
[1:09:27] three stadium fields and there
[1:09:28] we look to piggyback with the
[1:09:31] school district working with
[1:09:32] that.
[1:09:32] >> but overall the cost man
[1:09:35] hours is way down and we
[1:09:36] anticipate that that's the way
[1:09:36] to go.
[1:09:39] Try to avoid, you know, the
[1:09:40] grass fields and in the upper
[1:09:44] midwest this spring as if there
[1:09:45] was ever an indicator this
[1:09:47] spring is a good one about a
[1:09:50] very, very difficult to get
[1:09:51] into games and the pressure of
[1:09:55] especially a varsity level or
[1:09:55] high school level type play
[1:09:58] very difficult but with her
[1:09:59] fields playing baseball for
[1:10:02] example, was a savior in many
[1:10:02] respects.
[1:10:06] >> we're getting games when no
[1:10:07] one else was and that makes all
[1:10:10] the difference and that's the
[1:10:11] best part from a revenue side
[1:10:13] is word of mouth.
[1:10:14] If people have excellent
[1:10:15] experiences they tell others
[1:10:21] and then they come back other
[1:10:22] other questions or discussion
[1:10:23] on the mindiola item from the
[1:10:28] committee I'm going to I'm
[1:10:31] going to be a vote on mindiola
[1:10:31] .
[1:10:33] I just I just cannot I just
[1:10:36] can't bring myself to support
[1:10:36] it.
[1:10:37] I just I'm worried about kind
[1:10:40] of the overall size of the
[1:10:42] project and I've not been of
[1:10:43] this isn't anything new.
[1:10:44] >> I've not been a big
[1:10:45] proponent of it in the in the
[1:10:46] five year plan.
[1:10:48] But if the item is passed
[1:10:51] tonight, I want the committee
[1:10:52] to know that this my intention
[1:10:53] is for this to go to the
[1:10:55] council is a package and I
[1:10:56] don't want to get into picking
[1:10:59] this apart council if the
[1:10:59] council wants to do that,
[1:11:00] great.
[1:11:03] >> but I do feel that this
[1:11:04] needs to go to the go to the
[1:11:06] full council as a package even
[1:11:07] if there are one or two
[1:11:08] dissenting votes on a
[1:11:10] particular item as we go
[1:11:10] through it.
[1:11:11] And if we get into other items
[1:11:12] and there's other dissenting
[1:11:14] votes we all have every right
[1:11:15] as a member of fifteen to pull
[1:11:18] that item out and talk about it
[1:11:18] additionally at council.
[1:11:19] >> but I wanted to be very
[1:11:21] clear as to why I was going to
[1:11:22] be a no vote on this particular
[1:11:23] item at finance but also
[1:11:25] stressed kind of how I envision
[1:11:26] this going to the council for
[1:11:29] further consideration.
[1:11:30] >> so all those in favor of the
[1:11:31] mindiola project please sign it
[1:11:37] by saying I I all no byone know
[1:11:38] so that item does pass four to
[1:11:40] one.
[1:11:41] Ron thank you.
[1:11:42] Brandon, thank you for coming
[1:11:43] in this evening.
[1:11:45] Appreciate the committee.
[1:11:45] >> appreciate your time and
[1:11:46] efforts.
[1:11:48] I want to jump down because I
[1:11:50] know MR. Lainer has a has a
[1:11:53] commitment that he has to go to
[1:11:54] so I wanted to kind of jump
[1:11:56] down to capital projects that
[1:11:57] one point five dollars million
[1:12:01] and offer a recommendation to
[1:12:02] the committee to see if there
[1:12:05] would be some openness to
[1:12:05] consider putting in some of
[1:12:06] that dredging into this
[1:12:10] particular item.
[1:12:14] So I would hold off on that
[1:12:15] because there's a lot there.
[1:12:18] So we have a study that says
[1:12:19] how much it's going to cost to
[1:12:21] dredge the saratoga lake.
[1:12:25] >> but we are exploring
[1:12:26] different alternatives with the
[1:12:30] dnr and other things and so I
[1:12:33] would not advise to the
[1:12:34] dedicate money that project
[1:12:37] right now until we fully
[1:12:38] explored all of those options.
[1:12:39] >> that's just my suggestion
[1:12:39] for you.
[1:12:41] That's gavin.
[1:12:42] >> we're here to take your
[1:12:42] input so that's fair.
[1:12:45] Ok, all right.
[1:12:46] >> so I'll move back up to the
[1:12:47] top of the list.
[1:12:49] The the we energy's led
[1:12:50] conversion for three hundred
[1:12:50] eighty thousand dollars.
[1:12:53] Was there any further comments
[1:12:53] or discussion on that item?
[1:12:56] >> I'll make a motion to
[1:12:57] approve that item as presented.
[1:13:00] >> is there a second boils a
[1:13:00] tie.
[1:13:03] Alderman mannion has the second
[1:13:05] so we have a motion and a
[1:13:07] second on the we energies led
[1:13:08] conversion all those in favor
[1:13:11] sign I I and you want to post
[1:13:12] all rights that that's been
[1:13:16] allocated the city portion of
[1:13:19] the led conversion for 511
[1:13:20] thousand dollars.
[1:13:21] >> any further discussion on
[1:13:22] that item?
[1:13:26] I'll entertain a motion
[1:13:27] alderman mcilvanney motion to
[1:13:31] approve and move forward.
[1:13:32] City led the conversion as part
[1:13:34] of funds there are second
[1:13:35] second by alderman mannion any
[1:13:39] further discussion?
[1:13:39] All right.
[1:13:43] All those in favor sinai high
[1:13:46] that item is approved.
[1:13:51] The snow melter is is there a
[1:13:54] alderman lemcke I would like to
[1:13:57] defer that one until we get the
[1:13:58] the economic impact and labor
[1:13:59] studies done.
[1:14:02] If we haven't already.
[1:14:02] >> thank you.
[1:14:05] Any objection to I I I have
[1:14:08] some general briefing
[1:14:09] information.
[1:14:10] >> it's not a full a full study
[1:14:13] but comparing the fuel costs to
[1:14:17] melting the snow which is at
[1:14:18] your question was the fuel
[1:14:18] costs of just running trucks
[1:14:21] back and forth.
[1:14:22] The fuel costs alone are
[1:14:25] approximately equal.
[1:14:26] >> there are a little bit
[1:14:29] cheaper to run the trucks but
[1:14:30] once you throw in the cost of
[1:14:32] maintenance and wear and tear
[1:14:34] on the trucks that puts it over
[1:14:34] the cost of the fuel for
[1:14:36] running the the the equipment
[1:14:37] that doesn't look at any of the
[1:14:40] costs for man hours driving
[1:14:44] trucks back and forth and the
[1:14:45] man hours to run the equipment.
[1:14:48] >> but you look at the man
[1:14:49] hours to melt the snow with the
[1:14:50] equipment it's less than
[1:14:52] running ten trucks back and
[1:14:53] forth all day.
[1:14:56] So that's generally speaking if
[1:14:56] you want more detailed
[1:14:57] information we can prepare that
[1:14:59] as well.
[1:15:00] >> I alex, my sense from the
[1:15:03] committee is that I think we
[1:15:04] were looking for a I mean we
[1:15:05] appreciate the information this
[1:15:07] evening but my sense from the
[1:15:08] committee on this was we were
[1:15:09] probably looking for a little
[1:15:11] bit more yeah.
[1:15:12] >> what averaged rawat's you
[1:15:14] know, back and forth and that
[1:15:15] sort of thing that's just taken
[1:15:16] into general numbers.
[1:15:18] I just wanted throw that out
[1:15:19] there if you know I appreciate
[1:15:19] it.
[1:15:20] >> so I think if there's no
[1:15:22] objection from committee, I
[1:15:23] think it my sense is that we're
[1:15:24] going to have a little bit of
[1:15:25] wiggle room as we finish out
[1:15:28] the ten point eight.
[1:15:29] >> one last thing if in
[1:15:30] particular alderman lemcke
[1:15:32] maybe some education as to why
[1:15:33] we can't just put this on a
[1:15:36] grass field and let that melt
[1:15:40] by itself that you know, they
[1:15:41] said you can't do that.
[1:15:42] And I said well wait a minute,
[1:15:44] if it's in the street, why
[1:15:45] can't it melt but it can't melt
[1:15:46] on grass in a pile.
[1:15:48] >> so I just ma education on
[1:15:49] why that's not allowed.
[1:15:49] >> thank you.
[1:15:52] Sure we can get that for you
[1:15:52] too.
[1:15:53] It has a lot to do with the nra
[1:15:56] and just think about the amount
[1:15:56] of trucks driving in over grass
[1:15:57] and things like that.
[1:15:59] You'd be a big a big mudhole to
[1:16:00] begin with right away but yeah.
[1:16:01] >> so the snow melters not a
[1:16:04] snow it's just a not right now
[1:16:07] but very good.
[1:16:08] That's my one.
[1:16:08] That's my one.
[1:16:11] It's my one joke of the year at
[1:16:11] the finance committee.
[1:16:12] >> they appreciate that.
[1:16:13] So we're going to we're going
[1:16:15] to we'll put the snow melter on
[1:16:16] hold and we'll have kevin work
[1:16:19] with staff bring that back at a
[1:16:19] future finance committee
[1:16:20] meeting as we as we kind of
[1:16:22] round out arpa, the central
[1:16:26] city storefront activists
[1:16:26] activate activation for the
[1:16:28] 800000 dollars there motion on
[1:16:32] that item.
[1:16:36] >> alderman lemcke, I'd like to
[1:16:40] make them a question, you know,
[1:16:41] a statement as to how I feel
[1:16:42] about it before I vote.
[1:16:44] Thank you.
[1:16:45] >> note we can we can take a
[1:16:46] half step back.
[1:16:47] Rick the floor is yours.
[1:16:48] So I think it's a good idea to
[1:16:51] offer storefronts help on
[1:16:55] upgrading for sprinklers.
[1:16:56] >> it makes the occupants of
[1:16:59] the building safer.
[1:17:00] So it's a public safety as well
[1:17:04] as it is a increase in value of
[1:17:07] the property.
[1:17:08] For example, if they if the
[1:17:11] property sells with sprinkler
[1:17:12] versus no sprinklers it's going
[1:17:12] to sell for more.
[1:17:15] So therefore the property tax
[1:17:16] is going to be greater.
[1:17:19] >> I don't like the idea of for
[1:17:20] example, if a sprinkler system
[1:17:23] costs eighty thousand dollars
[1:17:24] making a grant to the person
[1:17:27] who is going to receive the
[1:17:27] benefit.
[1:17:30] >> in other words the store
[1:17:31] owner but I wouldn't mind a low
[1:17:35] interest loan with a five to
[1:17:38] seven year payback and maybe
[1:17:42] some grant money maybe 10 15
[1:17:43] percent because I want the
[1:17:46] funds to keep coming back, you
[1:17:47] know, but I wouldn't be in
[1:17:51] favor of saying here's one
[1:17:51] hundred thousand dollars to do
[1:17:52] your sprinkler.
[1:17:55] >> I could say here's ten
[1:17:56] thousand dollars to do your
[1:17:59] sprinkler in an eighty thousand
[1:18:01] dollar loan over five years at
[1:18:02] very low maybe one percent
[1:18:03] interest just to get it paid
[1:18:05] back.
[1:18:06] So I would be in favor of
[1:18:09] something like that and I like
[1:18:10] the fact that they raised the
[1:18:13] amount of the central city
[1:18:14] store storefront to make more
[1:18:17] money available for the
[1:18:18] program.
[1:18:19] >> so that's just my thoughts.
[1:18:21] Thank you.
[1:18:22] I guess kevin, I'll turn it to
[1:18:23] you.
[1:18:26] Is there I mean is this is this
[1:18:29] particular item that the staff
[1:18:29] would like a little bit more
[1:18:30] time on to kind of.
[1:18:33] >> well, I can I can give you
[1:18:34] the detail that we have today
[1:18:37] and you you mean if you approve
[1:18:38] it as part of the outline we
[1:18:40] can flesh out the details of
[1:18:41] the program so as we as it's
[1:18:42] currently constructed and
[1:18:45] jennifer can help me if I mess
[1:18:46] up any of the details is that
[1:18:48] we have it as a very low
[1:18:48] interest.
[1:18:50] i think it's one percent loan
[1:18:52] program revolving loan program.
[1:18:55] >> and so the idea is is that
[1:18:56] you give people the opportunity
[1:18:59] to improve their their
[1:19:03] commercial space at a very low
[1:19:04] rate lower than I am able to
[1:19:05] get from any bank or anywhere
[1:19:06] else and then you're able to
[1:19:07] pay back to us over time and
[1:19:10] then that regenerates and so
[1:19:11] it's revolving so we're able to
[1:19:14] reinsert money back into, you
[1:19:15] know, the central city to keep
[1:19:18] that money going.
[1:19:22] No objection to doing a part
[1:19:23] grant, you know, helping folks
[1:19:24] out doing that.
[1:19:26] We were just how we construct
[1:19:27] the program.
[1:19:28] But the idea was is to keep
[1:19:29] that money coming back and
[1:19:31] having a little bit of earnings
[1:19:32] so we could keep reinvesting in
[1:19:32] it.
[1:19:35] >> so that's the way the way we
[1:19:39] have the program set up as it
[1:19:39] was proposed is a revolving
[1:19:42] grant program with like a one
[1:19:45] percent rate that would help
[1:19:46] keep regenerating.
[1:19:47] >> and there are there are
[1:19:51] nuances to how we structure
[1:19:54] that we can you know, we can do
[1:19:55] a bunch of different ways when
[1:19:56] we develop the actual program
[1:19:58] documents can remind you remind
[1:20:02] me that was that the who was
[1:20:03] what body was going to approve
[1:20:06] those was not going to be done
[1:20:07] by redevelopment redevelopment
[1:20:10] authority would approve the
[1:20:11] would approve the loan at the
[1:20:11] application.
[1:20:14] >> yeah and if there was a
[1:20:15] grant component as well that's
[1:20:16] what we would that's what we do
[1:20:21] on one it'd be I mean like if
[1:20:25] you we did the the covid stuff
[1:20:26] you know we had a little loan
[1:20:29] committee that did that that
[1:20:30] worked out pretty well but we
[1:20:30] had the existing redevelopment
[1:20:33] authority it seemed like a good
[1:20:33] match for that and they already
[1:20:34] do some of that stuff already
[1:20:36] with some of the facade grants
[1:20:37] and things that we have.
[1:20:40] Yeah, I'm I'm not you know, I'm
[1:20:41] not completely against the idea
[1:20:42] of having some of this be a
[1:20:42] grant.
[1:20:44] I think that that is something
[1:20:45] that we could be open to.
[1:20:47] But I also like the loan
[1:20:48] program idea because it does to
[1:20:49] your point kind of regenerate
[1:20:52] funds that can loaned out.
[1:20:53] I guess my question for the
[1:20:55] committee is are we comfortable
[1:20:56] approving this and kind of
[1:20:59] letting redevelopment authority
[1:21:00] work out the details?
[1:21:04] I'm comfortable with that
[1:21:04] because I've I have experience
[1:21:05] with redevelopment authority
[1:21:06] and and they have experience
[1:21:08] with these particular programs.
[1:21:09] But I just wanted that sense
[1:21:10] from the committee this
[1:21:10] evening.
[1:21:14] So alderman battelle's I'm
[1:21:14] comfortable with the grant and
[1:21:20] the the loan portion also have
[1:21:24] the if we could pass that on to
[1:21:26] them, I don't think that we
[1:21:28] needed to say that right now.
[1:21:31] So the one question I had those
[1:21:35] kevin went to 800000.
[1:21:35] What was the 800000?
[1:21:39] The rationale behind that?
[1:21:40] I mean is it a number of
[1:21:43] storefronts that have expressed
[1:21:46] interest in the past or no.
[1:21:48] >> I mean literally it was just
[1:21:50] trying to make the numbers work
[1:21:51] and reflect you guys had had
[1:21:55] talked about I'm trying to put
[1:21:56] more money into it and I think
[1:21:57] that that is a good idea
[1:21:58] especially with the most recent
[1:21:59] estimates that folks are
[1:21:59] getting.
[1:22:01] You know, so you heard them
[1:22:02] firsthand what's going on in
[1:22:06] the marketplace and so if
[1:22:07] you're you know, we have two
[1:22:10] potential applicants here.
[1:22:11] I heard up to three hundred
[1:22:13] thousand dollars worth of loans
[1:22:15] and grants going out the door
[1:22:15] for two stores.
[1:22:18] >> so that was just as great
[1:22:22] divvying up the numbers that's
[1:22:23] where I was able to get to was
[1:22:25] eight hundred thousand ok,
[1:22:26] because I was on the same
[1:22:29] thought as you when hearing the
[1:22:33] dollars that were we're seeing
[1:22:34] here for some of these quotes
[1:22:35] and I was going to take the
[1:22:37] deferred item of the snow
[1:22:41] melter and put that into 800000
[1:22:45] but because I would think the
[1:22:46] downtown needs need some help
[1:22:49] and if we have the money we
[1:22:53] should do it and that's why I
[1:22:54] really like the idea of the
[1:22:56] loan and and the grant and
[1:22:57] redevelopment authority I think
[1:22:59] can run with this.
[1:22:59] Thanks.
[1:23:03] Ok, so I guess before I
[1:23:04] entertain emotion I'll just
[1:23:07] going to ask the committee is
[1:23:08] there any objection from the
[1:23:09] committee that if this item is
[1:23:11] passed that we allocate the or
[1:23:12] we recommend the council the
[1:23:15] allocation of the 800 thousand
[1:23:16] dollars and we let the
[1:23:16] redevelopment authority sort
[1:23:19] out the difference between a
[1:23:19] grant and the loan program?
[1:23:20] Is that fair?
[1:23:23] Alderman lemke?
[1:23:24] >> one of the reasons I
[1:23:26] outlined my parameters, you
[1:23:27] know, like a one percent loan
[1:23:30] and either a ten or fifteen
[1:23:31] percent grant is so that we can
[1:23:34] make it available to the most
[1:23:35] amount of people and as the
[1:23:35] chair of the redevelopment at
[1:23:38] least this year, I wanted to
[1:23:39] let the committee here know
[1:23:41] what my thinking was so that
[1:23:45] the rda could that's where I'm
[1:23:46] coming from, you know, I mean I
[1:23:47] don't think I would do a zero
[1:23:50] percent interest and I don't
[1:23:50] think I'd be in favor of any
[1:23:53] more than a fifteen percent
[1:23:54] grant because it is improving
[1:23:57] the property value and the
[1:23:58] owner of the property
[1:24:01] theoretically when they sell
[1:24:02] the building would be able to
[1:24:05] get that back not fully but a
[1:24:06] good portion of it in increased
[1:24:06] value.
[1:24:09] So but I want to make it an
[1:24:13] encouragement to to get the
[1:24:14] upgrades done for the public
[1:24:14] safety.
[1:24:20] Thank ok.
[1:24:21] So we don't have a motion yet.
[1:24:24] Alderman mannion, if the
[1:24:25] devil's in the details as they
[1:24:29] say and I would feel more
[1:24:32] comfortable voting on this item
[1:24:35] if we actually knew what the
[1:24:40] redevelopment authority's
[1:24:41] decision would be or how this
[1:24:41] was actually going to be
[1:24:43] structured.
[1:24:44] >> I'm kind of on board with
[1:24:45] what rick just said and what
[1:24:47] alderman lemcke just said with,
[1:24:48] you know, a small amount
[1:24:51] possibly as a grant and a low
[1:24:52] interest loan for the rest.
[1:24:53] I think my preference would
[1:24:56] actually be to see it stay as a
[1:24:56] loan program completely.
[1:25:00] But I could live with, you
[1:25:01] know, a small grant program but
[1:25:03] there's no guarantee that just
[1:25:04] because the CHAIRMAN Of the
[1:25:07] redevelopment authority is in
[1:25:08] favor of that that that's
[1:25:09] actually what the redevelopment
[1:25:11] authority is going to go with
[1:25:15] and that's my that would be my
[1:25:16] concern and my reservation and
[1:25:19] voting voting for this and
[1:25:20] saying let's just turn it over
[1:25:29] to them to manage any other so
[1:25:30] I guess I want to I want to
[1:25:31] take again taken of a half step
[1:25:34] back, alderman bartel's floated
[1:25:38] the idea about the spot in the
[1:25:40] snow melter.
[1:25:41] I'm going to ask the committee
[1:25:44] from kind of a is that
[1:25:45] something that we would
[1:25:46] consider putting into that or
[1:25:49] are we still inclined to wait
[1:25:49] to get some additional
[1:25:52] information on the snow melter
[1:25:52] ?
[1:25:57] >> and I bear with me a little
[1:25:57] bit, folks.
[1:25:58] >> I mean this is kind of
[1:25:59] uncharted territory as we hand
[1:26:00] out these funds.
[1:26:03] >> so I'm just kind of breaking
[1:26:04] from my normal convention and
[1:26:05] how I do this type of thing.
[1:26:08] >> but I just want to try to
[1:26:08] get some consensus.
[1:26:11] >> alderman lemcke, at this
[1:26:11] point I'm not in favor of the
[1:26:14] storm shelter at all using arpa
[1:26:15] dollars I wouldn't be adverse
[1:26:18] to putting that dollar amount
[1:26:19] into the storefront activation
[1:26:22] because that's public safety.
[1:26:26] We're all the public who visit
[1:26:29] a place downtown for example, a
[1:26:30] restaurant or you know, I go
[1:26:41] into nice ash I'm not promoting
[1:26:42] them but I go into their
[1:26:43] basement, ok, and play cards
[1:26:44] down here every once in a while
[1:26:45] I make a tremendous cost to
[1:26:46] make that it's all sprinklered
[1:26:46] underneath there and I would
[1:26:49] not feel comfortable going into
[1:26:53] the basement of a downtown
[1:26:54] establishment or even some of
[1:26:57] the places without sprinklers.
[1:27:01] So I feel confident in public
[1:27:01] safety.
[1:27:02] They're having the sprinklers
[1:27:04] and I and I'm I'm in courage in
[1:27:09] the city to try to help in a
[1:27:09] way of encouraging it.
[1:27:10] You can't force them unless
[1:27:11] they're put in a new business
[1:27:12] in.
[1:27:13] So I wouldn't be adverse to to
[1:27:17] making it in and again with the
[1:27:19] rda I think that every member
[1:27:20] of the rda would would keep the
[1:27:24] grant portion you know in the
[1:27:27] ten to fifteen percent because
[1:27:28] the only ones that we really
[1:27:29] approve of anything different
[1:27:32] in grants is somebody who is
[1:27:34] below the poverty level to to
[1:27:35] increase their house.
[1:27:36] >> everything else is kind of a
[1:27:39] payback type of a situation.
[1:27:39] >> thank you.
[1:27:43] Ok, for any other discussion on
[1:27:47] this I guess one question I
[1:27:48] would have is and jennifer
[1:27:51] kevin maybe put you on the spot
[1:27:52] a little bit to alderman and
[1:27:53] point.
[1:27:55] I mean what you know is there
[1:27:58] kind of a is there some math
[1:27:59] that exists now in terms of
[1:28:00] what you know, what should be
[1:28:02] given out as a grant versus a
[1:28:03] loan or is that something that
[1:28:06] the that the rda potentially us
[1:28:06] would have to would have to
[1:28:10] figure out or do you have some
[1:28:11] type of a kind of a recommend
[1:28:12] kind of a high level
[1:28:14] recommendation keep the
[1:28:14] conversation moving along.
[1:28:15] >> I don't have a
[1:28:17] recommendation tonight but we
[1:28:18] can certainly hold a special
[1:28:19] redevelopment authority meeting
[1:28:22] this month to make sure that we
[1:28:23] get a program vetted and
[1:28:26] approved so that we can start
[1:28:26] taking applications fairly
[1:28:30] quickly and so we want to get
[1:28:31] back together and think about
[1:28:34] that a little bit before I make
[1:28:34] a recommendation.
[1:28:37] >> but um, we're open to doing
[1:28:38] that so it moves along quickly.
[1:28:42] >> ok, alderman bartles, if I
[1:28:45] could get the committee to
[1:28:48] agree to move the uh the
[1:28:49] deferred snow melter into this
[1:28:54] 800000 I am fine with whatever
[1:28:58] the committee decides as far as
[1:28:58] having the finance committee
[1:29:01] decides a redevelopment that's
[1:29:02] not a showstopper for me.
[1:29:04] I'd rather get more money into
[1:29:04] this.
[1:29:08] >> um, so whatever that emotion
[1:29:12] people that that is emotion.
[1:29:16] >> so your motion is to combine
[1:29:17] the snow melter and the in with
[1:29:19] the central city storefront
[1:29:19] activities activision for a
[1:29:22] million for a total of one
[1:29:23] million 250.
[1:29:24] >> it's my math right.
[1:29:30] Denise ok.
[1:29:31] >> yes, that's my motion.
[1:29:32] All right.
[1:29:33] Is there a second to that
[1:29:35] motion on my elderly second
[1:29:38] sentence second that snow is
[1:29:39] snow melter.
[1:29:40] >> so we have and we have a
[1:29:42] motion in a second to increase
[1:29:43] the central city storefront
[1:29:46] activation to one point
[1:29:47] twenty five million dollars and
[1:29:49] then in a sense removing the
[1:29:50] snow melter from consideration.
[1:29:53] I'm going to support that too.
[1:29:54] I've been I mean, alex, I know
[1:29:57] you're not probably married to
[1:29:58] the snow melter, but I was kind
[1:29:59] of on the on the fence a little
[1:30:01] bit with this item as well.
[1:30:02] >> and I agree with the
[1:30:02] consensus of the committee that
[1:30:04] i think that this would
[1:30:05] probably a little bit of a
[1:30:07] better use of funds.
[1:30:09] >> MISS Andrews, you had a
[1:30:12] comment just one clarification
[1:30:16] before you voted can just make
[1:30:17] it clear if the program is
[1:30:18] going to the final decision on
[1:30:20] the program details is with
[1:30:21] redevelopment authority or if
[1:30:22] that needs to come back to
[1:30:24] finance for council just so we
[1:30:28] know the process well, I'll
[1:30:29] take it back to the to the
[1:30:32] maker in the second or in terms
[1:30:32] of what what your what your
[1:30:38] gentleman's preference is.
[1:30:43] So let's let's do this because
[1:30:44] I think I think there's some
[1:30:46] there's some merit to having
[1:30:47] the finance committee being
[1:30:48] able to report to council kind
[1:30:49] of how these dollars are being
[1:30:50] allocated.
[1:30:51] >> so if it's if we're
[1:30:51] comfortable with the committee
[1:30:54] as we can, we can make a motion
[1:30:55] to approve or to allocate the
[1:30:56] one point twenty five dollars
[1:30:58] million ask the redevelopment
[1:31:02] authority to have a meeting to
[1:31:03] kind of shake out the details
[1:31:06] and I guess this is the part
[1:31:07] where I want to get some
[1:31:08] consensus and have perhaps
[1:31:10] jennifer or rick come back to
[1:31:11] the finance committee with more
[1:31:13] of a matter of report around
[1:31:14] that item or does the finance
[1:31:17] committee want to approve what
[1:31:20] the redevelopment authority did
[1:31:21] ?
[1:31:22] My sense is that we've given
[1:31:22] the redevelopment we've given
[1:31:24] jennifer and brick enough
[1:31:25] direction in terms of what the
[1:31:26] finance committee is thinking
[1:31:29] that I'd like to give them a
[1:31:30] little bit of latitude to make
[1:31:30] a portion of it a grant program
[1:31:33] and then report back to the
[1:31:33] finance committee.
[1:31:34] But I'm open to what what the
[1:31:37] committee's thoughts are on
[1:31:37] that.
[1:31:38] >> alderman lemcke I would
[1:31:40] think that give the authority
[1:31:41] to come up with something at
[1:31:44] the redevelopment and then
[1:31:45] we'll bring it back to finance
[1:31:46] for the approval of the final
[1:31:48] plan once the plan is out
[1:31:49] there.
[1:31:50] I don't want to see the finance
[1:31:52] company that's the finance
[1:31:53] department committee go through
[1:31:56] each individual application.
[1:31:57] We don't want that.
[1:32:00] But I'm fine with now we have
[1:32:03] eight hundred one million two
[1:32:04] hundred and fifty thousand
[1:32:07] dollars of a chunk and then
[1:32:08] we'll come up with a program
[1:32:11] subject to finance companies
[1:32:11] approval of that program and
[1:32:15] then once you give approval and
[1:32:16] an agreement done on how that
[1:32:18] money is going to be allocated
[1:32:21] then we can go with the program
[1:32:23] like we do for, you know, all
[1:32:26] our other programs that we have
[1:32:26] .
[1:32:27] So yeah.
[1:32:30] Kevin, I'm sorry.
[1:32:31] I don't I don't want to be a
[1:32:32] bureaucrat but I'm going to be
[1:32:36] a bureaucrat for a second.
[1:32:37] >> I would I what I would
[1:32:38] recommend just have the council
[1:32:40] approve the rda program because
[1:32:44] technically finance committee
[1:32:45] doesn't have any authority over
[1:32:45] what already does and if
[1:32:48] there's any sort of dispute
[1:32:49] that's how it's going to end up
[1:32:49] there anyway.
[1:32:51] >> a nominal idea.
[1:32:52] >> right.
[1:32:53] So why don't you just have the
[1:32:56] council approve the rta program
[1:32:57] not the not the day to day
[1:32:59] operations of it but what they
[1:33:02] come up with.
[1:33:03] >> all right.
[1:33:04] So the motion the motion before
[1:33:04] the finance committee that is
[1:33:06] to allocate one million two
[1:33:07] hundred and fifty thousand
[1:33:07] dollars of arpa dollars towards
[1:33:11] the storefront activation and
[1:33:11] asked the redevelopment
[1:33:12] authority to create a program
[1:33:14] that will be done approved by
[1:33:14] council.
[1:33:15] >> everybody on the everybody
[1:33:18] understand the motion.
[1:33:19] >> all right.
[1:33:22] Let's do a voice vote all those
[1:33:26] in favor sign I I opposed.
[1:33:26] >> all right.
[1:33:27] That passes unanimously.
[1:33:29] Kevin, thank you.
[1:33:30] >> joel can I just get who is
[1:33:33] the second year on that frank
[1:33:33] all right.
[1:33:34] Good discussion, folks.
[1:33:34] Thank you.
[1:33:37] Kevin, thank you for that
[1:33:37] thought.
[1:33:41] >> that'll bring us to project
[1:33:42] innovate in the amount of 750
[1:33:44] or 750000.
[1:33:45] >> I'll make a motion to
[1:33:48] approve a second on that one
[1:33:49] second by alderman lempke.
[1:33:50] Is there any discussion on that
[1:33:52] item?
[1:33:53] All right.
[1:33:56] All those in favor sign I I
[1:34:00] anyone opposed that item passes
[1:34:00] five to nothing.
[1:34:01] >> the police department
[1:34:02] organizational changes have
[1:34:05] been approved so we'll move on
[1:34:05] to the behavioral health
[1:34:08] responder partnership in the
[1:34:09] amount of four hundred five
[1:34:10] hundred and thirty five
[1:34:12] thousand dollars.
[1:34:13] Is there a motion on that item?
[1:34:18] alderman lemcke make the motion
[1:34:23] for five hundred thirty five
[1:34:26] second by alderman mac elderly
[1:34:33] we ok brad oh I make a motion
[1:34:34] to approve the behavioral
[1:34:37] health responder partnership of
[1:34:38] five hundred and thirty five
[1:34:41] thousand dollars using our
[1:34:42] monies for a year 2022 three
[1:34:46] and four I second of motion in
[1:34:49] a second on the behavioral
[1:34:50] health partnership any further
[1:34:53] discussion.
[1:34:54] All right all those in favor
[1:34:57] saini I anyone opposed that
[1:35:00] item passes.
[1:35:01] >> next up is the two hundred
[1:35:05] thousand dollars of support for
[1:35:06] the waukesha housing authority.
[1:35:07] >> I'll make a motion to
[1:35:08] approve is there a second
[1:35:12] second by alderman lemcke any
[1:35:16] further discussion on this item
[1:35:16] ?
[1:35:18] Right all those in favor sign I
[1:35:21] I and want to post all right.
[1:35:24] >> that item passes and I will
[1:35:24] pause for anybody watching at
[1:35:25] home the reason that we're
[1:35:27] moving rather quickly is these
[1:35:28] items have been before the
[1:35:29] finance committee one day not
[1:35:32] one the two time.
[1:35:32] So please don't think that
[1:35:33] we're moving quickly.
[1:35:35] These items have been pretty
[1:35:36] thoroughly vetted at a previous
[1:35:39] meeting next up is the
[1:35:40] community access ahead for
[1:35:42] 85000?
[1:35:46] >> is there a motion on miguel
[1:35:47] elderly motion to approve the
[1:35:50] 80s for community presence?
[1:35:51] Is there a second second by
[1:35:54] alderman battelle's so we have
[1:35:55] a motion and a second on the
[1:35:58] community access program.
[1:35:59] >> any further discussion or
[1:36:02] questions from the committee?
[1:36:03] All right.
[1:36:05] all those in favor sign I I
[1:36:09] anyone opposed that item passes
[1:36:10] moving on to the peer to peer
[1:36:13] drug overdose counseling for
[1:36:15] fifteen thousand dollars.
[1:36:20] >> is there a motion all in
[1:36:23] elderly motion to approve the
[1:36:24] peer-to-peer drug overdose
[1:36:24] counseling?
[1:36:26] Is there a second second by
[1:36:27] alderman lemcke?
[1:36:28] Any further discussion or
[1:36:33] questions on this item?
[1:36:34] All right.
[1:36:37] All those in favor sign I I and
[1:36:38] you want to post all right.
[1:36:41] >> that item passes moves along
[1:36:42] to the fire department special
[1:36:45] services vehicle for the amount
[1:36:45] of one hundred and sixteen
[1:36:46] thousand dollars.
[1:36:47] >> is there a motion on this
[1:36:48] item?
[1:36:53] Alderman lemcke that was the tv
[1:36:56] that can be used at various
[1:36:57] different special events.
[1:37:00] I make a motion to approve the
[1:37:01] fire department special
[1:37:04] services utd all right.
[1:37:05] Is there a second second by
[1:37:08] alderman battelle's any further
[1:37:08] discussion?
[1:37:09] We have a motion and a second
[1:37:10] any further discussion on this
[1:37:14] item and all the person albon
[1:37:15] slavitt if you have any
[1:37:15] comments or questions, just
[1:37:18] throw your hand up.
[1:37:18] I'll call on you.
[1:37:19] All right.
[1:37:20] We have a motion and a second
[1:37:22] all those in favor sign I I and
[1:37:25] you want to post all right.
[1:37:28] >> that item passes the modular
[1:37:29] vehicle barrier system has
[1:37:32] already been approved and used
[1:37:36] in our most recent memorial day
[1:37:37] parade that moves us along to
[1:37:40] the affordable housing fund for
[1:37:41] five hundred thousand dollars.
[1:37:43] is there a motion on this item
[1:37:43] ?
[1:37:44] >> alderman lemcke?
[1:37:47] I'd like to approve the
[1:37:51] affordable housing fund
[1:37:52] increase of 500000 dollars
[1:37:54] using R.P.M. Funds.
[1:37:59] >> is there a second second by
[1:38:01] alderman elderly any further
[1:38:05] discussion on this item?
[1:38:06] All right.
[1:38:10] All those in favor sign I I and
[1:38:11] you want to post all right.
[1:38:14] >> that item passes as well.
[1:38:15] >> and that brings us to our
[1:38:17] final two this evening.
[1:38:19] The last one is the storm water
[1:38:20] projects and the amount of one
[1:38:22] point five dollars million.
[1:38:23] >> I'll make a motion to
[1:38:23] approve.
[1:38:25] Is there a second second by
[1:38:25] alderman lemcke?
[1:38:26] >> any further discussion or
[1:38:31] questions on this item?
[1:38:32] >> all right.
[1:38:35] All those in favor sign I I and
[1:38:36] you want to post all right.
[1:38:40] >> that item pass and last but
[1:38:43] not least the capital projects
[1:38:44] item four items I should say
[1:38:46] for one point five million.
[1:38:48] >> is there a motion on this
[1:38:51] item?
[1:38:52] I'll make a motion to approve.
[1:38:55] Is there a second second by
[1:38:56] alderman mc elderly any further
[1:38:59] discussion on this item?
[1:39:03] >> alderman bartel's so is this
[1:39:03] because we kind of discussed
[1:39:07] this and it was a no go on
[1:39:07] dredging?
[1:39:10] Is this kind of we use it for
[1:39:11] anything that comes up in the
[1:39:11] yeah.
[1:39:14] >> serape?
[1:39:14] Yeah yeah.
[1:39:17] We'd find the right project at
[1:39:18] and put it towards that towards
[1:39:19] that project.
[1:39:22] so road project it'll be
[1:39:23] identified in mississippi you
[1:39:27] know arpa funds for capital ok
[1:39:27] so if there's something for
[1:39:30] police or fire or something
[1:39:31] like that we could probably put
[1:39:34] it toward yeah I as long as the
[1:39:35] capital it was qualified as a
[1:39:38] capital project so something
[1:39:39] that we would use this instead
[1:39:41] of borrowing for it would be to
[1:39:45] go right and kevin that would
[1:39:46] be I mean you developed a
[1:39:49] capital budget so the use of
[1:39:50] these dollars would be at your
[1:39:50] discretion subject to approval
[1:39:53] by the by the committee at
[1:39:53] fair.
[1:39:54] Yeah, exactly.
[1:39:55] And we'll have it you know,
[1:39:56] just like in when you have the
[1:39:57] summary sheet for any capital
[1:39:58] project and you see the sources
[1:40:00] of funding, you know this
[1:40:01] source for most big ones are
[1:40:04] going to be ten year debt.
[1:40:04] Right?
[1:40:05] So instead of having ten year
[1:40:08] debt it'll be arpa funds, you
[1:40:09] know, one point five and we
[1:40:10] might split it up between
[1:40:12] several projects but probably
[1:40:13] it's going to cover a portion
[1:40:16] of one of our bigger projects
[1:40:17] that we're going to do next
[1:40:17] year.
[1:40:19] >> ok, martell's when I was
[1:40:20] only asking because I just I
[1:40:23] don't want to go to tennis
[1:40:24] courts or pickleball or
[1:40:24] something like that.
[1:40:27] It should go toward something
[1:40:31] for yeah I think idir yeah I
[1:40:31] got you.
[1:40:32] I think the direction you're
[1:40:33] getting from the committee
[1:40:34] kevin is that we'd like to see
[1:40:35] it more around kind of a
[1:40:36] broader infrastructure project
[1:40:39] I gottschalk's yeah i
[1:40:39] understand.
[1:40:40] All right very good.
[1:40:42] We have a motion and a second
[1:40:43] on that item.
[1:40:44] >> is there any further
[1:40:44] discussion?
[1:40:45] All right.
[1:40:47] All those in favor sign I I
[1:40:50] anyone opposed that item passes
[1:40:54] all right gentlemen, I
[1:40:55] appreciate the very thorough
[1:40:58] discussion this evening on
[1:40:59] these arpa dollars.
[1:41:00] I know we owe it to all of our
[1:41:02] bosses to make sure that we've
[1:41:03] vetted these items and I know I
[1:41:06] can confidently telling my
[1:41:07] bosses that we certainly have.
[1:41:08] So I appreciate the time
[1:41:08] tonight.
[1:41:10] Kevin and staff and the
[1:41:11] directors that are here.
[1:41:12] >> I appreciate your time in
[1:41:13] this item as well.
[1:41:14] >> anything inclosing on arpey,
[1:41:17] MR. Laner?
[1:41:17] >> no.
[1:41:22] But as you can tell, I have a
[1:41:23] guest who's going to be up past
[1:41:25] your bedtime so and I have to
[1:41:26] go pick up some other kids and
[1:41:29] get my wife at the airport.
[1:41:30] I'll be leaving and leaving the
[1:41:31] carry over discussion to denise
[1:41:33] and have a good evening.
[1:41:34] >> thank you.
[1:41:34] Great.
[1:41:37] Thank you, kevin.
[1:41:38] We'll start go back to the
[1:41:39] start of the start of the
[1:41:40] agenda and that is item number
[1:41:41] four which is approval of
[1:41:44] minutes for the 10th of MAY or
[1:41:45] any changes to those minutes
[1:41:45] from the committee.
[1:41:46] All right.
[1:41:48] Those minutes are approved
[1:41:49] through unanimous consent.
[1:41:50] We'll move into the balance of
[1:41:52] our business items for this
[1:41:52] evening.
[1:41:53] Item number five a is a review
[1:41:55] and act on receiving grant
[1:41:56] funds from the united way in
[1:41:57] the amount of nineteen thousand
[1:41:59] three hundred eighty three
[1:42:00] dollars for the waukesha police
[1:42:00] department.
[1:42:03] Immediate emergency shelter
[1:42:10] program chief goehring in the
[1:42:11] department is looking to
[1:42:14] receive we already received
[1:42:15] funding grant funding for
[1:42:18] nineteen thousand three hundred
[1:42:19] eighty three dollars for the
[1:42:21] immediate emergency shelter
[1:42:22] program.
[1:42:23] Just briefly what the program
[1:42:26] is answering your questions if
[1:42:27] you have any is it's another
[1:42:28] tool in the toolbox where we
[1:42:29] can funding for those
[1:42:30] individuals that immediate
[1:42:33] needs shelter where they
[1:42:34] normally don't have the means
[1:42:34] to do so.
[1:42:37] So for example, domestic
[1:42:38] violence we only get into
[1:42:41] immediate shelter, get them
[1:42:42] into a hotel for that evening
[1:42:45] so we can get set them up with
[1:42:46] the woman center some other
[1:42:48] facilities that can help them
[1:42:49] and a longer care program in
[1:42:52] the future.
[1:42:53] >> other situations would be
[1:42:56] individuals that might be
[1:42:57] homeless and we put them in a
[1:43:00] shelter for that are the whole
[1:43:01] town for that evening.
[1:43:04] But with a long term plan of
[1:43:04] getting them either to a place
[1:43:07] for where they're going to get
[1:43:08] help, we work in locating
[1:43:11] family or things of that nature
[1:43:15] to get them out of that weather
[1:43:16] is very cold weather where
[1:43:18] they're not going to be harmed
[1:43:22] by by the weather.
[1:43:33] There's no one second here now
[1:43:37] there's very strict rules of
[1:43:38] engagement with this.
[1:43:41] For example, we can't have
[1:43:42] people that try to repeat
[1:43:44] offender with with the funding
[1:43:48] so people have warrants
[1:43:49] obviously they have to go right
[1:43:49] to jail.
[1:43:51] They would not be able to use
[1:43:52] it.
[1:43:53] Repeat offenders would be
[1:43:56] vetted.
[1:43:59] But again, having that funding
[1:44:00] ,being able to take them, we
[1:44:01] remove them from a place of
[1:44:04] harm, get them into a hotel for
[1:44:05] the evening and then work in
[1:44:07] with the facilities are closed
[1:44:11] during those hours where
[1:44:12] they're not operating in most
[1:44:15] of the shelters in treatment
[1:44:16] facilities for people that are
[1:44:19] either substance abuse, mental
[1:44:19] health or economic usually
[1:44:22] during business hours this is
[1:44:23] going to meet those that
[1:44:27] vacancy when business hours and
[1:44:30] that when they're not operating
[1:44:30] .
[1:44:31] >> so any questions regarding
[1:44:32] that?
[1:44:32] Yes, sir.
[1:44:34] Alderman lepke.
[1:44:35] Thank you, chief.
[1:44:38] This wouldn't be a situa and I
[1:44:43] I am compassionate for the
[1:44:43] homeless but this wouldn't be
[1:44:46] for an example a zero degree
[1:44:50] day round up all the homeless
[1:44:51] and put them in a hotel
[1:44:51] overnight.
[1:44:53] >> it would be a one on one and
[1:44:54] again, you know, for example,
[1:44:58] not taking someone who has been
[1:44:59] homeless three hundred and
[1:45:00] sixty three days a year and put
[1:45:02] them in a shelter for one night
[1:45:03] where it's not going to solve
[1:45:05] their situation.
[1:45:06] The immediate purpose are the
[1:45:10] the main purpose of this is
[1:45:13] with the intent.
[1:45:14] We already have a plan in place
[1:45:17] to get them into a facility for
[1:45:17] future.
[1:45:21] There's some frequent there's
[1:45:22] some individuals let me
[1:45:23] rephrase I say this are some
[1:45:25] individuals that do not want
[1:45:25] any type of treatment.
[1:45:26] >> right.
[1:45:29] That that are very happy living
[1:45:40] out there homeless.
[1:45:40] >> those are different.
[1:45:41] These are situations where like
[1:45:42] I said maybe domestic
[1:45:42] situation.
[1:45:43] Ah, or a person who might be
[1:45:44] homeless says I want shelter
[1:45:45] and want to get into a
[1:45:45] facility.
[1:45:47] I want to get help.
[1:45:52] That's when we purpose and use
[1:45:52] this funding for that.
[1:45:53] But again, there's very strict
[1:45:56] guidelines and you have to meet
[1:45:57] all the guidelines and they
[1:45:58] have to sign document
[1:45:59] accordingly and we track all
[1:46:03] that data for example maybe my
[1:46:04] house burned down at eleven
[1:46:07] o'clock at night and I don't
[1:46:07] have anywhere to go.
[1:46:08] >> that's a great example.
[1:46:11] Oh and I appreciate you said
[1:46:12] that because that's another
[1:46:14] great example of where a family
[1:46:17] would be in need like a fire is
[1:46:18] a great example where we know
[1:46:21] that family or where families
[1:46:26] 15 hours away to come out to
[1:46:27] support we'll put them in a
[1:46:29] hotel for the evening and get
[1:46:30] them with their family so they
[1:46:33] can move forward.
[1:46:36] >> thank you.
[1:46:37] >> but there their questions on
[1:46:41] the side I'm I'll make a
[1:46:41] motion.
[1:46:43] >> oh, I'm sorry, alicia.
[1:46:44] >> I just wanted to make sure
[1:46:46] that I spoke in favor of this
[1:46:48] house burning down.
[1:46:48] >> yes.
[1:46:51] There are other things that can
[1:46:52] happen in the middle of the
[1:46:53] night and I know that a lot of
[1:46:55] people that were in my building
[1:46:56] did take advantage of that
[1:46:59] hotel in one of the things that
[1:47:00] a lot of people don't consider
[1:47:01] is that when do when things do
[1:47:03] happen in the middle of the
[1:47:04] night, that's not all of it
[1:47:05] necessarily.
[1:47:07] >> it did take a couple of days
[1:47:08] for things to get set up where
[1:47:12] people could actually go
[1:47:12] somewhere and sometimes that is
[1:47:15] what's going on and so I think
[1:47:16] that this sort of allows for
[1:47:19] that little bit of leeway while
[1:47:20] the logistics get worked out
[1:47:22] whether that's family coming
[1:47:23] from a distance or a shelter
[1:47:27] situation getting set up those
[1:47:28] those longer term plans so that
[1:47:30] that kind of fixes that
[1:47:31] immediate needs.
[1:47:32] >> so I don't I definitely want
[1:47:34] to say that I'm in favor of
[1:47:37] this very good.
[1:47:38] I'll make a motion to accept
[1:47:39] the grant from the united way
[1:47:40] in the amount of nineteen
[1:47:42] thousand three hundred eighty
[1:47:43] three dollars and with a second
[1:47:45] I'll speak very briefly to it
[1:47:46] second by second.
[1:47:46] Great.
[1:47:49] I just for for the sake of the
[1:47:50] committee and the public that
[1:47:52] might be watching the issue of
[1:47:53] homelessness is one that I am
[1:47:54] very close to as well.
[1:47:56] >> I mean I'm serving a more
[1:47:57] than one board around waukesha
[1:48:00] county that is that is devoted
[1:48:00] to to ending homelessness in
[1:48:05] waukesha county and I really
[1:48:05] view this this particular grant
[1:48:06] program as something that's
[1:48:09] going to augment a lot of
[1:48:09] existing services.
[1:48:12] We have added shelter capacity
[1:48:13] in the city and I would like to
[1:48:16] see additional shelter capacity
[1:48:16] are added around the county.
[1:48:18] >> that's a conversation for a
[1:48:20] different day.
[1:48:21] >> but to the chief's point,
[1:48:24] there are times when the
[1:48:24] shelters that we have in town
[1:48:25] are full.
[1:48:28] There are times when to the
[1:48:29] chief's point that the
[1:48:29] individuals that man these
[1:48:32] shelters don't have the ability
[1:48:33] to take on additional folks at
[1:48:36] 2:00 in the morning because
[1:48:37] they're they're stretched their
[1:48:40] their staff is stretched to the
[1:48:40] point where they're managing
[1:48:41] the existing shelter staff and
[1:48:42] they just don't have the
[1:48:44] capacity to add somebody at in
[1:48:45] the middle of the night.
[1:48:47] I also like what the chief
[1:48:48] mentioned in that this is this
[1:48:51] is not a program that is an
[1:48:51] end.
[1:48:52] This is a gateway to getting
[1:48:54] these individuals that want
[1:48:55] case management and some
[1:48:58] direction to become homed
[1:48:59] instead of homeless as putting
[1:49:03] them on that particular path
[1:49:04] versus I think to some of our
[1:49:04] other questions tonight about
[1:49:06] just, you know, perpetually
[1:49:07] housing someone in the middle
[1:49:10] of winter so you know, there
[1:49:11] are a lot of different
[1:49:11] organizations in the city that
[1:49:14] are trying to take, you know,
[1:49:15] bites out of this very big
[1:49:15] problem.
[1:49:18] And I really do view this as
[1:49:19] another another bite out of
[1:49:22] this particular problem.
[1:49:23] and I know through my
[1:49:23] experience with not only the
[1:49:25] council but some of my other
[1:49:26] work in town that the that the
[1:49:27] police department is a very
[1:49:29] good relationship with the
[1:49:30] organizations that are also
[1:49:30] taking bites out of this
[1:49:31] problem.
[1:49:33] >> so it's a long winded way of
[1:49:34] saying that that I support this
[1:49:37] but it's also a way of me going
[1:49:38] on the record and saying that
[1:49:40] there are organizations in town
[1:49:41] that are doing very good work
[1:49:41] around this.
[1:49:42] There are shelters in town that
[1:49:44] are doing very good work around
[1:49:45] housing people and this is
[1:49:48] simply a way for us to add to
[1:49:49] that capacity.
[1:49:49] >> so thank you.
[1:49:52] Any further discussion on this
[1:49:52] item?
[1:49:53] >> all right, denise, I think
[1:49:55] we can go back to granicus now
[1:50:02] so speaking of which, joe, I
[1:50:03] think we can go back to
[1:50:05] granicus now when it appears on
[1:50:13] your screen please vote that
[1:50:13] item passes unanimously.
[1:50:14] >> gentlemen, thank you.
[1:50:17] Thank you very much.
[1:50:18] >> it looks like you're up
[1:50:20] again so we'll move item to
[1:50:22] item number five b which is
[1:50:22] review and act on a pilot
[1:50:25] testing for the flock license
[1:50:26] plate reader cameras in the
[1:50:29] city of waukesha chief.
[1:50:30] >> yes, thank you very much.
[1:50:33] So what we'd like to do is
[1:50:34] pilot a 60 day program with
[1:50:36] flac.
[1:50:37] >> it's not like an optical
[1:50:37] camera.
[1:50:40] It is a license plate reader
[1:50:44] camera and we'd like to do in
[1:50:45] the six day period has put the
[1:50:48] key locations in the city
[1:50:48] specifically thirty near
[1:50:51] businesses and locations where
[1:50:56] people come in to city out of
[1:50:56] the city.
[1:50:57] And what's the purpose of these
[1:50:58] cameras?
[1:51:00] Well is basically where the
[1:51:03] cameras are not so flack will
[1:51:07] store the data for thirty days
[1:51:08] and the 31st date automatically
[1:51:11] disappears.
[1:51:12] >> the only way that the person
[1:51:13] can access that data is if
[1:51:14] there's a nexus to crime.
[1:51:15] What we want to do those
[1:51:18] cameras is multiple things.
[1:51:19] The license plate reader
[1:51:22] cameras is retail thefts in the
[1:51:23] city.
[1:51:26] >> a lot of our stolen autos
[1:51:27] are coming from the east of our
[1:51:31] city into our city handles like
[1:51:32] license plate reader cameras
[1:51:34] actually alert our officers as
[1:51:35] to vehicles coming into our
[1:51:35] city.
[1:51:38] >> we have the major key points
[1:51:42] in our city have those cameras
[1:51:43] that in itself is a safety
[1:51:46] issue for the public and
[1:51:47] officers because if we can
[1:51:50] engage with a perpetrator in a
[1:51:51] stolen car at the outskirts of
[1:51:52] the city before they get
[1:51:55] downtown, that is a win for us
[1:51:59] other things that the cameras
[1:51:59] do is they have artificial
[1:52:03] intelligence where we can go to
[1:52:06] a business for example, car
[1:52:07] that's a business that sells
[1:52:10] cars and they have katic
[1:52:11] inverters are stolen.
[1:52:14] They can actually have sensors
[1:52:14] .
[1:52:15] I can tell when the car is the
[1:52:16] catholic voters being cut out
[1:52:18] of the vehicle.
[1:52:19] I'll turn the camera towards
[1:52:22] where the incident is occurring
[1:52:23] and automatically alert the
[1:52:24] police that that's occurring.
[1:52:29] Um, and would be for possible
[1:52:31] force multiplier for other
[1:52:32] things.
[1:52:33] We want to get our wal-mart's
[1:52:33] our targets, our home depot,
[1:52:36] the hearts in the cities to
[1:52:39] purchase these cameras to be a
[1:52:40] force multiplier in curbing
[1:52:44] these organized retail theft
[1:52:44] groups that come into the city
[1:52:48] and steal thousands of dollars
[1:52:51] that these businesses write off
[1:52:51] but impacts multiple businesses
[1:52:55] and our city in that
[1:52:58] information that intelligence
[1:52:59] that data coming from license
[1:53:02] plate readers cameras before
[1:53:03] multiplier in reducing and
[1:53:06] mitigating people coming to our
[1:53:07] city to commit retail thefts at
[1:53:13] those locations.
[1:53:17] >> alderman make elderly.
[1:53:18] >> good evening, chief.
[1:53:21] So you're explaining that the
[1:53:22] the the focus of these cameras
[1:53:23] on these cameras unlike the
[1:53:26] currawong, the optical cameras
[1:53:26] we have now are just video
[1:53:29] recording cameras.
[1:53:30] The search functions aren't
[1:53:31] there as would the flock
[1:53:34] cameras in alpers.
[1:53:35] It's more of a you can do a
[1:53:38] study or some research to find
[1:53:38] out you're looking for.
[1:53:39] >> right.
[1:53:41] So you can actually put in blue
[1:53:45] vehicle with sticker at the
[1:53:49] rear bumper in search and
[1:53:50] they'll narrow it down to
[1:53:51] vehicles that matched that
[1:53:51] description.
[1:53:53] >> that's correct.
[1:53:55] >> and then with the the active
[1:53:58] cameras they're taking pictures
[1:53:58] of every vehicle that travels
[1:54:02] through not just a criminal
[1:54:02] profile vehicle.
[1:54:05] >> they are taking pictures i
[1:54:06] just want to be preemptive with
[1:54:06] that.
[1:54:07] >> they are taking pictures of
[1:54:09] every vehicle but law
[1:54:10] enforcement can access that
[1:54:13] data unless there's reasonable
[1:54:13] suspicion associated with it.
[1:54:16] There has to be some
[1:54:17] investigative means for us to
[1:54:20] have access to it and it's very
[1:54:21] so when an officer tries to
[1:54:25] access that data they have to
[1:54:25] fill out certain things and
[1:54:26] that's audited.
[1:54:29] It's tracked and it gets
[1:54:29] associated with an
[1:54:32] investigation so someone just
[1:54:33] can't go in and type in and say
[1:54:35] I want to look at a license
[1:54:36] plate and I can tell you from
[1:54:37] my previous life and milwaukee
[1:54:41] police I can tell you one
[1:54:44] instance it was domestic type
[1:54:45] situation where an officer got
[1:54:49] himself or herself in trouble
[1:54:52] by had a relationship.
[1:54:53] Want to see where that person
[1:54:53] going to vehicle put the plate
[1:54:56] in that and we're able to see
[1:54:57] that and there's immediate
[1:55:00] discipline that was associated
[1:55:00] with that behavior.
[1:55:04] >> so there's very strict
[1:55:05] measures in how to use it has
[1:55:08] to be associated with a crime
[1:55:09] as we associate with some type
[1:55:12] of investigation and it is
[1:55:16] audited so any search goes in
[1:55:17] there we'll be able to see why
[1:55:18] was searched, what to search
[1:55:20] for and then we can match that
[1:55:20] with someone.
[1:55:22] >> officers go to work.
[1:55:23] >> they have what's called a
[1:55:25] hotlist and a handler shows
[1:55:31] nordenson vehicles that could
[1:55:31] be in their area of operation
[1:55:34] or where they're working.
[1:55:34] >> right.
[1:55:37] So what the license plate
[1:55:38] reader does for that officer
[1:55:39] stuto officer seen it.
[1:55:42] >> you'll be alerted he stole
[1:55:46] vehicles at ah just stroll
[1:55:47] through this location at this
[1:55:49] time.
[1:55:50] >> the other thing that this
[1:55:54] alpers cameras can also do for
[1:55:56] us is see we have a
[1:55:58] presidential visit and we want
[1:56:04] to we can actually see for
[1:56:05] location anything that looks at
[1:56:09] suspicious packages is what I'm
[1:56:10] talking about.
[1:56:13] If a big place and sister for
[1:56:14] a long period of time alert the
[1:56:17] officers, there's an object
[1:56:18] that was sitting there that was
[1:56:21] not there for a longer period
[1:56:22] of time and that is an extreme
[1:56:24] situation awareness for us
[1:56:24] especially in presidential
[1:56:28] dignitary type visits.
[1:56:29] So it's a multitude of things
[1:56:36] but I can tell you this it's a
[1:56:37] tool that has very strict
[1:56:40] policies and procedures of how
[1:56:44] we utilize this tool and it is
[1:56:45] not the facial recognition.
[1:56:48] There's no fake facial
[1:56:48] recognition at all in this
[1:56:51] alpers cameras and like I said,
[1:56:54] after 31 days that data's gone
[1:56:54] .
[1:56:59] I'm glad there's a lot of
[1:57:00] oversight on this because the
[1:57:01] phrase I'm with the government,
[1:57:03] I'm here to help is a good
[1:57:03] phrase.
[1:57:06] >> civil liberties are always
[1:57:07] the balancing act we have to
[1:57:08] have and as I understand it,
[1:57:11] you currently have alpers in
[1:57:11] mobile form on squad cars
[1:57:14] driving around but I think for
[1:57:15] me the oversight we had to make
[1:57:16] sure that any data that's
[1:57:18] gathered by anybody needs to
[1:57:19] have the proper oversight and
[1:57:22] audit done so we're playing by
[1:57:22] the rules.
[1:57:25] >> thank you all.
[1:57:29] >> I've been lucky.
[1:57:30] >> so for example, I'm just
[1:57:32] going to pick this out of the
[1:57:32] air.
[1:57:33] Let's say you have a red car
[1:57:36] with a white bumper sticker on
[1:57:37] the back involved in a hit and
[1:57:37] run on moreland boulevard.
[1:57:40] So you have a complaint from a
[1:57:41] citizen, the person who was hit
[1:57:44] it was a red car with a white
[1:57:45] bumper sticker.
[1:57:46] Would you be able to go into
[1:57:47] this system and say I want to
[1:57:51] look for all red cars with a
[1:57:52] white bumper sticker on that
[1:57:55] with that exact and then and
[1:57:56] then that would get you to a
[1:57:57] license plate and be able to
[1:57:59] then investigate?
[1:57:59] >> that's correct.
[1:58:01] Ok, then I'd be in my in my
[1:58:03] previous career we've been very
[1:58:06] successful with just the basics
[1:58:07] part of license plate readers.
[1:58:11] This one here has more up to
[1:58:12] date and more technology
[1:58:15] advanced technology where we
[1:58:19] could actually exactly or crack
[1:58:22] in the rear quarter panel
[1:58:26] window they'll be able to
[1:58:27] narrow down two vehicles that
[1:58:28] match that's precise
[1:58:33] information.
[1:58:34] Alderman older person kelvin
[1:58:36] slaven.
[1:58:36] >> yeah.
[1:58:38] So I just have a quick question
[1:58:40] sort of on the flip side this
[1:58:41] is really only targeting the
[1:58:43] vehicles themselves so not the
[1:58:44] driver.
[1:58:45] So let's say there's a driver
[1:58:48] who has a registered vehicle
[1:58:49] with a specific license plate
[1:58:51] and they have a history of x,
[1:58:52] y, z criminal behavior.
[1:58:55] You aren't necessarily tracking
[1:58:56] that license plate to kind of
[1:58:59] follow that person around,
[1:58:59] right?
[1:59:00] >> I mean that seems obvious
[1:59:01] but I just want to make sure
[1:59:03] that that's clarified that it
[1:59:04] clarifies what we're looking
[1:59:07] for is crime.
[1:59:10] So unregistered vehicles we're
[1:59:14] not tracking those type of
[1:59:14] things.
[1:59:15] We're tracking retail thefts.
[1:59:18] We're tracking stolen vehicles
[1:59:19] ,tracking robberies.
[1:59:19] You're tracking hit and runs.
[1:59:22] We're tracking those type of
[1:59:26] crimes and we're not tracking
[1:59:26] individuals.
[1:59:30] >> we are using the license
[1:59:31] plate reader information as
[1:59:34] intelligence to provide a lead
[1:59:35] to assistance of further
[1:59:41] investigation any other
[1:59:43] questions for chief all
[1:59:48] romanian for my technology hat
[1:59:51] on for a minute and ask a
[1:59:55] couple of questions unnecessary
[1:59:56] totally finance related but
[2:00:03] could be how do these things
[2:00:07] communicate back to home base
[2:00:08] and are they living on the city
[2:00:10] network of a self-contained
[2:00:11] where's that data being stored?
[2:00:15] >> flagstaff's the data cosper
[2:00:19] camera is about twenty eight
[2:00:20] hundred dollars per camera.
[2:00:22] That includes storing the data
[2:00:23] associated with that has no
[2:00:26] network ties into the city at
[2:00:26] all.
[2:00:30] >> ok, are they cellular level
[2:00:31] connecting back to flock.
[2:00:33] >> yes.
[2:00:37] Ok thank you for that.
[2:00:39] >> I am I only ask that just in
[2:00:42] case you think that questions
[2:00:45] out from left field we we in
[2:00:46] the I.T. Board spend a lot of
[2:00:49] time talking about cameras and
[2:00:50] data storage and the expenses.
[2:00:50] yes.
[2:00:53] With that particular item in
[2:00:54] the optical cameras one of
[2:00:57] those items that we've dealt
[2:00:57] with over the years.
[2:01:00] >> so I just wondered if this
[2:01:01] was similar or not.
[2:01:04] >> you bring up one good point
[2:01:05] like to so one of the things we
[2:01:06] do want to do with these
[2:01:07] cameras is we want to do the
[2:01:11] six pilot testing, get the data
[2:01:12] no cost to the city at all.
[2:01:16] But we want to do is leverage
[2:01:17] our data to be a force
[2:01:18] multiplier.
[2:01:18] >> we go to these businesses
[2:01:20] and say you retail thefts are
[2:01:20] here.
[2:01:23] >> our guard is capturing us.
[2:01:25] You would you be interested in
[2:01:29] obtaining this license plate?
[2:01:32] We MAY come to you as a console
[2:01:33] and see these five points in a
[2:01:36] city are definitely worth us
[2:01:39] putting these license rear
[2:01:40] cameras at these locations
[2:01:41] because we'll be a force
[2:01:43] multiplier and reducing
[2:01:44] implicating transit crime
[2:01:49] that's occurred in our city.
[2:01:52] >> alderman lepke, my business
[2:01:53] has a camera in it that is
[2:01:57] focused on the intersection of
[2:01:58] highway 100 and capital drive
[2:02:01] and it just sits there 24 hours
[2:02:02] a day and his focus is on that
[2:02:05] intersection and a company pays
[2:02:06] me thirty dollars a month just
[2:02:07] to have that camera there so
[2:02:09] that there's evidence accident
[2:02:10] on that corner.
[2:02:11] They can go back there with a
[2:02:13] complaint from citizen that
[2:02:14] there was an accident here and
[2:02:17] they can get a video of that.
[2:02:18] >> they sell the information to
[2:02:21] the to the authorities, you
[2:02:22] know, so they can get paid.
[2:02:25] But it's a good idea to have a
[2:02:26] camera there that does nothing
[2:02:29] but just sits there in case
[2:02:30] something happens not to spy on
[2:02:33] everybody but just to like
[2:02:36] somebody steals the catalytic
[2:02:39] converter off of a of of a lot
[2:02:40] you know, somebody says we saw
[2:02:44] a blue sedan with a broken out
[2:02:48] window search for that to maybe
[2:02:48] lead to a crime.
[2:02:52] Our business replaces two to
[2:02:53] three catalytic converters a
[2:02:55] month and that's just one
[2:02:56] little gas station.
[2:02:59] >> so that is a huge crime
[2:03:02] opportunity to put it in big
[2:03:03] parking lots to maybe catch
[2:03:06] these catalytic converter
[2:03:07] thieves because they are
[2:03:10] impacting a tremendous expense
[2:03:11] .
[2:03:12] >> the average catalytic
[2:03:15] converter is two thousand
[2:03:16] dollars for a customer if yours
[2:03:19] gets cut out of your car.
[2:03:19] >> so catch these people.
[2:03:20] They just use an electric
[2:03:23] sawzall and they're gone in
[2:03:24] about three minutes.
[2:03:27] So I'm I'm in favor of this
[2:03:27] program.
[2:03:28] >> thank you.
[2:03:30] Very good.
[2:03:31] >> any other any other
[2:03:32] discussion?
[2:03:32] I'll entertain a motion to
[2:03:35] approve the item is presented
[2:03:38] alan mcilvanney I'll second
[2:03:39] I'll make a motion to approve
[2:03:42] the item as presented alderman
[2:03:42] elderly is the second any
[2:03:44] further discussion on this item
[2:03:45] ?
[2:03:49] >> it's not my very good one
[2:03:50] appears on your screen please
[2:03:59] vote that item passes
[2:04:00] unanimously.
[2:04:00] Thank you.
[2:04:01] Thank you gentlemen.
[2:04:02] Thank you very much.
[2:04:03] do you have a good night?
[2:04:04] >> brings us to item number
[2:04:06] four which is review and act on
[2:04:07] the approval of a mowing
[2:04:08] contract for tall grass and
[2:04:11] weeds on private property.
[2:04:14] >> MISS Andrews, thank you for
[2:04:15] being thank you for being
[2:04:18] writing a thank you for being
[2:04:19] patient this evening.
[2:04:19] >> jennifer, this is just a
[2:04:22] renewal we have a contract with
[2:04:26] a landscape contractor to mow
[2:04:26] on private property when
[2:04:27] there's a violation in the
[2:04:30] private property owner has not
[2:04:31] taken care of that we assess
[2:04:33] that cost back to the private
[2:04:34] property owner as well.
[2:04:35] >> this is a renewal of the
[2:04:36] contract.
[2:04:45] They performed very well over
[2:04:46] the last three years is for
[2:04:47] three years and there's no
[2:04:47] price increase.
[2:04:48] >> so ok, very good.
[2:04:48] Thank you jennifer.
[2:04:49] >> alderman lemcke correct in
[2:04:52] assuming that gorath over help
[2:04:56] that I pushed it am I am I
[2:04:57] correct to assume that the
[2:04:59] ordinance is that grass cannot
[2:05:00] be longer than eight inches and
[2:05:06] if a person refuses to cut it
[2:05:07] they get a little notice on
[2:05:08] their lawn that says you must
[2:05:10] cut this within three days and
[2:05:11] if they don't do it then this
[2:05:14] contractor would come out and
[2:05:15] mow that grass to be billed to
[2:05:18] the property owner.
[2:05:19] >> yep, that's correct.
[2:05:22] Thank ok any any other
[2:05:25] questions for jennifer?
[2:05:26] I'll make a motion to approve.
[2:05:29] Is there a second second by
[2:05:30] alderman bartel's any further
[2:05:33] discussion on this item?
[2:05:34] >> all right.
[2:05:36] When it appears on your screen
[2:05:40] please vote that item passes
[2:05:40] unanimously.
[2:05:44] Thank you, jennifer.
[2:05:45] That'll bring us to item number
[2:05:46] four d which is a matter of
[2:05:48] report this evening and that's
[2:05:49] capital carryovers by fund
[2:05:52] funds for four ten four
[2:05:56] twenty four thirty six three
[2:05:57] six five which is clean water
[2:06:03] and return flow deniece ok yeah
[2:06:07] so these items again are being
[2:06:08] presented as a matter of report
[2:06:11] and attached to your agenda is
[2:06:12] a separate document for each of
[2:06:15] the funds with the carryovers
[2:06:16] because these capital funds are
[2:06:19] considered nonlawyer corpsing
[2:06:20] statutorily there's no action
[2:06:23] needed on your part this
[2:06:24] evening but we do like to
[2:06:27] present this once a year around
[2:06:31] this time what I was going to
[2:06:32] do is just make a few global
[2:06:35] comments about carryovers and
[2:06:36] then if you'd like me to go
[2:06:37] into the individual sheets I
[2:06:39] will but I start with just a
[2:06:40] few global comments and we can
[2:06:45] go from there.
[2:06:46] >> so the capital funds are
[2:06:49] considered non lapsing because
[2:06:50] these projects often are
[2:06:53] multi-year projects or there
[2:06:57] MAY be a large capital purchase
[2:06:58] for some kind of fleet
[2:06:59] equipment where we purchase in
[2:07:01] one year but we don't receive
[2:07:02] the the item until the
[2:07:05] following year and then then
[2:07:06] we're required to make payment
[2:07:10] on and I think this year in the
[2:07:14] last in the previous year this
[2:07:14] was especially true due to
[2:07:18] covid and some of the supply
[2:07:18] chain issues.
[2:07:20] So we're going to see some of
[2:07:21] these carryovers be maybe a
[2:07:24] little bit higher than maybe
[2:07:25] they had been in the last
[2:07:28] couple of years.
[2:07:29] The other thing is as we know
[2:07:32] we've been tackling a lot of
[2:07:33] large capital projects over the
[2:07:37] last few years, many of which
[2:07:40] are going to come to an end
[2:07:41] come to completion by the
[2:07:44] summer of 2022.
[2:07:49] >> so this ah this is just
[2:07:51] we're going to be carrying over
[2:07:52] those funds so that we can
[2:07:55] complete those projects and
[2:07:56] then we'd be looking if there
[2:07:57] are any savings in these
[2:07:59] projects we'd be looking to
[2:08:00] apply some of those excess
[2:08:04] funds balances perhaps to some
[2:08:07] projects in 2023 or reducing
[2:08:11] our spring borrowing in 2020 or
[2:08:12] three.
[2:08:13] >> so right now this is
[2:08:15] carrying over the amounts to
[2:08:19] complete a lot of projects.
[2:08:20] Right.
[2:08:20] Denise, thank you.
[2:08:22] So just in summation and we
[2:08:26] have the sheet on our um on our
[2:08:27] we have our sheet attached so
[2:08:30] you've got a summary sheet for
[2:08:31] each of the each of the funds
[2:08:32] and like you said, this is more
[2:08:34] of a matter of report because
[2:08:35] these are capital capital
[2:08:39] projects that have been
[2:08:39] approved by the finance
[2:08:40] committee in the council.
[2:08:41] Just to your point like due to
[2:08:42] timing and some other things
[2:08:43] aren't didn't quite get done or
[2:08:44] getting carried over into the
[2:08:45] next fiscal year.
[2:08:46] >> that's correct.
[2:08:47] Was there any questions from
[2:08:50] the committee on any of the
[2:08:50] specific funds?
[2:08:51] Again, we've got the summary
[2:08:53] sheets and I know we've all
[2:08:54] reviewed well.
[2:08:56] >> all right, denise, thank you
[2:08:57] .
[2:08:57] so there's no action needed on
[2:08:58] that because it's a matter of
[2:09:00] report that'll bring us to
[2:09:01] communications.
[2:09:04] >> denise, anything nothing on
[2:09:05] my end.
[2:09:06] >> ok and referrals any
[2:09:09] referrals?
[2:09:10] The committee.
[2:09:10] All right.
[2:09:13] All I mean mannion if this
[2:09:17] counts as a referral but if it
[2:09:17] might it's more of a request.
[2:09:21] But that's kind of what a
[2:09:21] referral is.
[2:09:24] >> I was wondering, denise,
[2:09:25] maybe if you could put your
[2:09:28] head together with kevin and
[2:09:29] provide for the finance
[2:09:32] committee a little bit of a
[2:09:35] report around the potential
[2:09:39] impact of rising fuel costs on
[2:09:41] the city and if there is a plan
[2:09:44] to mitigate that or deal with
[2:09:47] that or what that impact is
[2:09:48] going to be long term in our
[2:09:51] budget this year.
[2:09:55] >> yeah, I'll make a note to do
[2:09:55] that.
[2:09:56] >> I know we've been in
[2:09:59] discussions with some of the
[2:10:00] guys in fleet but but yeah that
[2:10:03] that is a concern for all of us
[2:10:07] so I'm sure it is you know, I
[2:10:08] just think it might make sense
[2:10:11] to bring that to light and
[2:10:11] provide some some data.
[2:10:12] >> maybe I'm the only one
[2:10:14] that's interested in that.
[2:10:15] But I think it would be an
[2:10:19] interesting item to bring
[2:10:20] forward to the finance
[2:10:22] committee.
[2:10:22] >> yeah, yeah.
[2:10:23] We can certainly do that.
[2:10:24] Thank you denise.
[2:10:26] Yeah I would I would agree with
[2:10:26] dan.
[2:10:27] I think that you know maybe in
[2:10:30] our next meeting or two if you
[2:10:31] can have just a little bit of
[2:10:31] an update on that because I
[2:10:34] I've also heard anecdotes that
[2:10:35] you know, diesel fuels at three
[2:10:37] four, five dollars a gallon,
[2:10:40] six dollars a gallon, some yeah
[2:10:41] .
[2:10:42] >> I have a funny feeling
[2:10:42] that's going to start to impact
[2:10:45] our budget at some point.
[2:10:46] >> so we appreciate you putting
[2:10:47] some put some effort into that
[2:10:49] any are there any other
[2:10:50] referrals from the committee
[2:10:52] this evening and our next
[2:10:54] meeting, denise, is JUNE 14th,
[2:10:57] JUNE forty six pm.
[2:10:57] All right.
[2:10:58] So our next meeting of the
[2:11:00] finance committee is JUNE 14th
[2:11:02] ,6:00 pm and if there's no