MINUTES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Thursday, July 13, 2006
City Hall,
Room 604
6:00 P.M.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chad Fradette, Tom Weber, Celestine
Jeffreys, Jerry Wiezbiskie
MEMBERS EXCUSED: Chris Wery, John VanderLeest
OTHERS PRESENT: Ald. Tony Theisen, Ald. Gary Kriescher,
Atty. Jerry Hanson, Rob Strong, Paul Neumeyer, Chad Weininger, Julie Yelle,
Jennifer Sundstrom
1. Roll Call.
The meeting was called to
order by Chairman, Chad Fradette at 6:00 p.m.
Roll call was taken as noted above.
2. Approval of the Agenda.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to approve the agenda with one amendment, to move
item 11. to the top of the agenda.
Motion carried.
3. Approval of the Minutes of the June 7, 2006, meeting.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to approve the minutes of the June 7, 2006 meeting as
submitted. Motion carried.
4.
Announcements.
There were no announcements.
11. Request
by Ald. Theisen that staff testimony of a significant nature at Committee or City Council meetings, be
accompanied by supporting documentation.
Ald. Theisen said he
believes that in order to be more professional, the Mayor and Council should
enforce a policy that was adopted by Council in 2003, that Council should get
testimony or recommendations by department heads and staff on items of a
significant nature, in writing. He said
determining what is significant is a gray area but could be determined by a
committee member or chair of a committee.
Ald. Theisen said if staff doesn’t anticipate speaking on an item, he is
fine with asking them to put something in writing after the meeting, but said
staff should be prepared with supporting documentation on issues that are
important enough to address at meetings. He cited examples in the past where
handouts were distributed to substantiate testimony and said when something is
in writing, it forces them to be more logical and thorough, adding that this
would be beneficial to new council members.
He said receiving written testimony ahead of time would be helpful for
Council members to review and be prepared. He indicated that the written
material need not be lengthy as long as it includes the major points.
Ald. Wiezbiskie stated that
many times staff testimony is unplanned, with Ald. Theisen responding that he
was referring to when staff knows they will be speaking or presenting.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Wiezbiskie to recommend that any staff testimony of a
significant nature, as determined by a committee member or the committee chair,
at committee or City Council meetings be accompanied by or followed up with
supporting documentation.
Discussion: Ald. Kriescher said we have been doing this
all along, and this motion would just formalize it. He indicated that if the information goes only to committee
members, the non-committee members wouldn’t receive it. He believes that department heads should not
wait for a request from the chair, but should anticipate the information to
cover their recommendation. He
expressed concern with Ald. Theisen’s statement about a paragraph or two being
sufficient, adding that he believes things could be missed with this condensed
version. He indicated that it would be
difficult for staff to prepare when they don’t know which items they will be
questioned on at Council meetings. Rob
Strong said staff does try to anticipate what items will be discussed and come
prepared with necessary materials for those items, adding that he believes the problem
is with non-committee members not receiving the information. Chad Weininger asked if Ald. Theisen is
looking for a position statement from department heads, with Ald. Theisen
responding “yes”.
Ald. Jeffreys questioned
whether this is a problem overall or only when Council has to decide on a snap
decision such as with the 911 issue.
She indicated that when items come through committees she feels prepared
to discuss and vote on them. Ald.
Theisen responded that over the years there were times that he wished to have
recommendations in writing such as at P&W meetings when staff recommends
denying something such as closing a bar, he feels staff recommendation should
be in writing with the reasons for their recommendation. He said he needs to be able to read the pros
and cons. He summarized by saying that
in the professional world, he would expect any worthwhile recommendation to be
in writing. Ald. Weber said he agrees
with Ald. Theisen that pertinent information should be in writing and should be
included with the meeting packet.
A vote was taken on Ald.
Weber’s motion. Motion carried.
5.
Review changes
to Chapter 13 Zoning Ordinance.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to open the floor to allow interested parties to
speak. Motion carried.
Rob Strong addressed the
committee stating that the Mayor’s Task Force has been meeting the past 6-7
months to review the sections of the new zoning code, primarily the section
that addresses residential properties.
He indicated that the Task Force consisted of a member of the
Homebuilders Association and the Board of Realtors, Chad Weininger, Tom
Lesperance, Paul Neumeyer and other staff, and said Ald. Tom Weber moderated
and facilitated the group. He
distributed a copy of a draft which listed recommendations on revisions to the
Zoning Code from the Task Force on items that should be changed and not be
changed. He indicated that there were
two or three major areas they addressed and resolved fairly quickly. The first area is side yards where they
changed the requirement back to six feet side yard requirement for a one-story
home and eight feet for a two story.
Driveways was the next issue which they formalized the requirement to be
an 8-foot width for each stall in the garage plus two feet on the sides. He said depending on the size of the garage,
the driveway would vary with that and said there is also a limitation on what
the frontage could be. Mr. Strong said
this ordinance allows the City through it’s Inspection office to evaluate whether
or not a new construction in an existing neighborhood architecturally fits into
that neighborhood, adding that there are about six items they can look at
including roof pitch, number of stories, etc.
Mr. Strong said they defined
infill and said within a block they look at the character of the neighborhood
and had added in the ordinance that a front door facing the street was
required. He said they revised this to
give the Planning Director the option of reviewing the plans and deciding in
rare instances if a home fits into the neighborhood. Jennifer Sundstrom, Realtors Association, said they defined
requirements for multifamily versus single family and commercial since these
looked like they were grouped together.
Julie Yelle, Brown County Homebuilders Association stated that the
consensus was they had good, lengthy discussions. She indicated that she is looking forward to continuing to work
on this Task Force and said this opened the lines of communication. Ald. Weber said it was a lengthy process and
a good learning process. He thanked
Jennifer and Julie for their time and input on the Task Force. He said it was tough to balance his beliefs
of government’s role and his views on what should be the driving force of the
private sector to balance those personal property right issues with
government’s obligations to protect the rights of the neighbors of those
people. He would like to see the Task
Force continue and said they developed good relationships with these other
organizations.
Mr. Strong said Ald. Wery
asked about the lighting section of the code and said a change was made to the
previous code that states a lighting plan is no longer required in residential
districts. He said the City needed to
have the right to ask people to change their lighting plan if it is offensive
to their neighbor and an amendment was
made to the code to state that an exterior lighting plan may be required if the
Zoning Administrator believes the lighting from the structure may encroach on
the neighbor’s property. Mr. Strong
commented about conversation with the folks who are putting up large monuments
along Lombardi Avenue and said they found that in that particular zoning
ordinance they had a 10 foot setback which they do not have in any other
district. He asked that we amend the
ordinance by adding a statement that no setback is required in signing in the
GI District.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Wiezbiskie to approve the Chapter 13 Zoning Code revisions
from the Task Force and with the following amendment: to add a statement to the
ordinance to say that no setback is required in signing in the GI
District. Motion carried.
6.
Review of progress on He-Nis-Ra
Park redevelopment.
Chad Weininger distributed
a map of the proposal for the He-Nis-Ra Park redevelopment and said he and
County Board Supervisor Kathy Johnson wanted the park to be nature
oriented. He indicated that the shelter
would be 26x30 and will be constructed by staff and will be open with a roof.
The trail will be crushed gravel. Ald.
Weber said he had met with Park & Rec 2˝ years ago and has been expecting
something to happen before this time.
He indicated this has been budgeted and he is disappointed that no
progress has been made in 2 years. Chad
W. said the shelter, parking lot and trail will be done by the end of
September, adding that the Mayor directed Bill Landvatter to follow this time
line.
Ald. Kriescher said the
wetlands surrounding this park make redevelopment difficult, with getting the
necessary permits from the DNR and limited resources to put in fill. He added that we have limited staff to do
the work and contractors do not want to haul fill any further than they have
to. He indicated that the Park
Committee has given updates in their minutes about this project and said
whenever we have fill available, Public Works uses their equipment and gets the
fill there. Ald. Fradette said as an
environmental consultant, there would be no issue with permits for the
wetlands. He stated that Farlin Park is
going great and contractors are bringing in fill, which is free. Ald. Weber thanked Chairman Fradette for his
efforts.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to direct the Mayor’s Office and Parks &
Recreation Dept. to move forward with the plans to complete He-Nis-Ra Park as
presented tonight, in the timeline as presented tonight. Motion carried.
7.
Update on sediment testing for PCB's
near the Bay Beach expansion area.
Chad Weininger said he
talked to Dean Haen, Director of Port & Solid Waste and Dean said in the
past they were not interested in sediment testing regarding PCB’s. However, now they would be interested if the
city could come up with a plan. Mr.
Weininger indicated that he is working with aldermen on a plan to be presented
to the Park Committee and asked the committee to refer this item to the Park
Committee.
Motion made by Ald. Weber,
seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to refer item 7. to the Park Committee. Motion carried.
8. Discussion regarding median improvements for city entry
corridors.
Ald. Weber said he had
spoken to Carl Weber and Bill Landvatter the past couple of years about our
gateways to the city on West Mason and Packerland in particular. He said the medians are not being taken care
of and thought Park & Rec staff might be able to mow and weed whack a few
times a year. Discussion ensued
regarding Packerland being a county road and Forestry being responsible for
upkeep of the median. Ald. Kriescher
said the county has to maintain Packerland, but we assist in mowing and get
reimbursed by the county or it’s shared.
Ald. Wiezbiskie asked for clarification on Nicolet Drive regarding
City/County. Chad W. said they had to
get the County Executive to sign off on putting double lines for safety
reasons. Ald. Kriescher confirmed that Nicolet Drive is a county road and said
we get paid by the state for plowing state roads. Ald. Weber said we have state highways and county roads running
through our city and we have reciprocal maintenance agreements on several
areas. Ald. Jeffreys asked if Ald. Weber is looking for something to be done or
for a policy? Mr. Weber responded that
he is looking for a policy to be implemented and said our gateway roads should
be inviting and welcoming as part of the whole package with good parks, schools
and services.
Motion made by Ald. Weber to
refer this item to the Mayor’s Office and to have a report back, including
responsibility for mowing and weeding, within 60 days. Motion carried.
Ald. Jeffreys inquired about
the Beautification Committee adopting this issue. Chad W. said to let the Mayor’s Office handle it.
9. Request
by Alderman VanderLeest for an ordinance prohibiting parking near mailboxes
(referred from the Protection and Welfare Committee).
Ald. Fradette
said this item was referred from the Protection & Welfare Committee because
they didn’t know what to do with it.
Chad Weininger said Ald. VanderLeest asked that this item be tabled
because he is working with the U.S. Post Office on the issue.
Motion made by Ald. Weber, seconded
by Ald. Jeffreys to table this issue.
Motion carried.
10. Review of City Council meeting
procedures.
Ald. Wiezbiskie said he had
met with the Mayor and proposed a schedule of advancing the City Council
meetings so the reports from the standing committees would be delayed another
week or two. He indicated that he
brought this forward as a result of Council meetings running into the early
a.m. hours and Council members being put under pressure to make a decision on
important issues without having time to study both sides of the issue and
prepare to vote on them. Ald. Weber
said this is too long of a time to address items from the committees and some
items cannot wait two weeks and reviewed the calendar stating that Committee
items would be hanging for three weeks.
Ald. Kriescher agreed that this would be cumbersome and the general
public would forget about the issue with a long delay.
Discussion ensued regarding
the cutoff time of Friday morning for Committee agendas and some aldermen not
receiving their packet until Monday, which does not leave ample time to prepare
for the Council meetings. Discussion
involved moving Council meetings to Thursday nights and making Council members
full-time positions. Ald. Jeffreys said
the key is to follow the minutes of the key committees so there is not as much
prep time needed before Council meetings, adding that Friday packets could be
picked up on Friday afternoon. Ald.
Kriescher said the issue of receiving packets on time has been an issue for 8
years and the City cannot do anything further; it’s the U.S. Mail, adding that
if a committee meeting is cancelled it would be too long to meet if an item is
referred back.
Discussion surrounded
reasons for lengthy Council meetings with people being allowed to talk too much
and Council members not being prepared for the meeting. Ald. Wiezbiskie said
Council meetings should be for making decisions not re-discussing everything
that came through the committees. Ald.
Kriescher said part of the job of an aldermen is to handle pressure and make
decisions at Council and agreed that it’s almost a full-time job. He stated that if they want Council to
rubberstamp everything and have 30 minute meetings, they can do this. Ald. Weber said there has to be a solution
between rubberstamping and all night meetings, adding that the key would be to
limit the amount of time for on floor speeches and it comes back to the
aldermen, adding that they should have more orderly meetings. He feels that as a body they don’t give
respect to committee decisions and Council floor time is spent informing
ourselves and starting the debate process.
Atty. Hansen stated that
there are two rules on the books: 1) that no person can speak more than twice
on an issue and 2) a person cannot speak any longer than 10 minutes on an
issue, adding that this is rarely abused as they keep track of the time. He
said when an amendment is made, it becomes a new issue and gives each person
two more opportunities to speak on the issue.
Ald. Kriescher stated that Municipal Magazine said you can never legally
limit the debate at Council meetings and said when Council members know they
have support, they should not make further comments, just vote. He added that Council members do bring up
good points when they are allowed to speak more than once. He said it’s a freedom of speech issue and believes “we have all
violated” the speaking twice rule. He
feels we cannot limit debate at meetings, adding that if we follow Robert’s
Rules of Order we would have very boring meetings. Ald. Weber disagrees that every time a motion is made, that it
changes the issue and said people would continue to make amendments just to
have two more opportunities to speak.
Ald. Jeffreys believes it
comes down to a couple of things: 1) people reading the material before
arriving at the Council meetings and 2) a little bit of self-control. She said there are two concepts here, one
being freedom of speech and second, that the Council meetings are a public forum
and a place to discuss issues. She said
it should be as simple as if you don’t exert self-control, you get gaveled
down. She stated that we do not need more rules. Ald. Wiezbiskie said some people manipulate the rules to change
the wording to get more opportunities to speak and believes we should “call an
issue an issue”.
Atty. Hanson read a sentence
from the ordinance relative to alderman’s right to address Council: “an
alderman shall not speak more than twice on any subject under discussion unless
permission is voted by two-thirds of the members present”. He indicated that his interpretation has
been if there’s an amendment, he starts the count over again, adding that this
body can define “subject”. Ald. Weber
believes it would be in the best interest to define and said he doesn’t believe
this is a constitutional argument about freedom of speech, adding that as a
body we have the power and right to invoke time limits for speaking such as is
done at House and Senate meetings. Ald.
Wiezbiskie said Robert’s Rules of Order supports an orderly, timely
constructive meeting. He said we are
not there to entertain people and supports gaveling down and feels that we need
to get control back and get orderly meetings going.
After further discussion, a
motion was made by Ald. Weber, seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to refer this item to
the City Attorney’s Office to draft a definition on the interpretation of
“subject” and to report back at the next Advisory Committee meeting. Motion carried.
12. Discussion on adding a citizen member to the Protection and Welfare Committee.
Motion made by Ald.
Wiezbiskie, seconded by Ald. Weber to approve adding a citizen member to the
Protection and Welfare Committee.
Ald. Fradette made a statement relative to why he
brought this issue forward stating that he has been approached by a couple of
citizens regarding where they can serve on a committee. He indicated that one person is a retired
police officer, the other a retired County Sheriff’s Department worker. Mr. Fradette said there are often times when
the vote at Protection & Welfare Committee is tied 2-2 and this furthers
the amount of discussion on Council floor.
Ald. Kriescher said Committees are set up to be run
by elected officials and if there are too many tie votes, he should ask the
Mayor to appoint another alderperson like he did on the Park Committee and
Improvement and Service. After a brief
discussion with Ald. Fradette, Ald. Kriescher left the meeting. Ald. Fradette stated that Ald. Wery approved
adding a citizen member.
Chad Weininger addressed the Committee stating that
Ald. Wery had left him a brief voice mail before he left for vacation, and said
he was not opposed to it, but has some concerns. Mr. Weininger gave a brief background of the committee appointments,
indicating that the Mayor’s original intent was to place five members on all
standing committees. However, with
additional appointments to various boards and committees, some alderpersons
would be serving on five or six committees.
He indicated that if they couldn’t appoint a fifth alderperson, they
were looking at bringing on a citizen member as the fifth person, with the
thought being that if the item was brought back, that fifth person wouldn’t
have a voice on the floor. The thought
was that only people elected by the public should be on standing committees.
Ald. Wiezbiskie said he would support having a
private citizen on this Committee. Ald.
Fradette said the most important committees in the City are dealt with by
citizens who have expertise in the areas such as RDA, EDA and Plan
Commission. He indicated that he does
not see the standing committees as being any more important. Ald. Weber suggested the possibility of
considering liaison members, who would give their input but would not have a
voting right. He added that he does not
have an objection to having a citizen member on a voting, standing
committee. Ald. Jeffreys stated that
Ald. DeWane had contacted her with a concern about this item. She indicated that she’s interested in precedent
but she would want this person to be a regular citizen, not a retired police or
fireman. Ald. Weber agreed that there
is enough political influence in some of our groups and if a liaison member is
appointed, he would prefer that it be a regular citizen.
After brief further discussion, a motion was made by
Ald. Jeffreys, seconded by Ald. Weber to table this issue until the next
Advisory Committee meeting, when the full committee is present. Motion carried.
There being no further business, a motion was made by
Ald. Wiezbiskie, seconded by Ald. Jeffreys to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried.
The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Mary Haupt
Recording Secretary