MINUTES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Monday, August 31, 2009
City Hall, Room 604
6:30 p.m.
Members
Present: Council President Chris Wery,
Ald. John VanderLeest, Ald. Celestine Jeffreys, Ald.
Jerry Wiezbiskie, Ald. Andy Nicholson
Members
excused: Council Vice President Tom DeWane, Ald. Tom Weber
Others
Present: Ald. Guy Zima, Ald. Dan Piton,
Ald. Amy Kocha, Scott Matejov, Chad Weininger, Atty. Kail Decker, Jason Wied,
of the Green Bay Packers, Pat Webb and Greg Kuehl of
the Stadium District Board, members of the media.
1.
Call to
order.
The
meeting was called to order at 6:40 p.m. by Ald. John VanderLeest. He indicated that Ald. Tom Weber and Ald. Tom
DeWane were excused and Council Chairman Chris Wery
would be arriving a little late.
2.
Approval of the
agenda.
Motion
made by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Jeffreys to approve the agenda. Motion carried.
3.
Approval of
the minutes of the June 1, 2009 Advisory Committee meeting.
Motion made
by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Wiezbiskie to approve the minutes of the June
1, 2009 meeting. Motion carried.
5.
Update on
RTA.
Transit
Director Chris Phelps thanked the Committee for inviting him back, stating that
this is his third time here to talk about RTA’s. A copy of a power point presentation was
distributed. He indicated that he was here during the budget process to bring
them up to speed on seeking approval of a resolution in support of a Regional
Transit Authority. He stated that he
would be giving a presentation that he has given to a meeting of elected
officials throughout our service area about three weeks ago to update everyone
on where they are with this process. He
said since the budget was passed and approved, there were a number of RTA’s
created in the state, mainly in Eau Claire and in Dane County. When the legislature goes back into session
in September RTA’s will be back on their agenda notably for areas in the Fox
Cities and Milwaukee County. Mr. Phelps
said in spring some of the elected officials in Madison that they weren’t
hearing from the community that this was an important issue and thus they
hosted a meeting with elected officials to share where they are. He indicated that they are basically asking
for the committee’s support for a resolution that could be found in the back of
the packet. The presentation has been
presented to and approved by the Village of Ashwaubenon,
Bellevue and City of DePere and will be presented to Allouez and Wrightstown and possibly the County. He stated that the resolution was developed
from feedback from the meeting with elected officials and the Chamber of
Commerce.
The power
point was presented with main points as follows:
Definition of an RTA, Green Bay
Metro Service Area includes Ashwaubenon, Allouez, Bellevue, Green Bay and De Pere.
Metro is funded partly through Federal Operating Assistance last year about
$2.4 million, $2.6 million this year, with formula funding based on population,
population density and revenue miles of service. He stated that with the census next year our
urbanized area is expected to exceed 200,000 and when that happens we will lose
our Federal Operating Assistance. Mr.
Phelps explained the various tiers that comprise the Federal Transit funding
for Wisconsin and said we are in Tier B with population between 50,000 and
200,000 and are eligible for operating assistance until we exceed the 200,000
population. Based on conversations with
Wis. DOT, he estimates that once we lose the operating assistance, the state
will equalize the funding throughout Tier B and we expect that the net result
will be a net reduction of $550,000 in funding from state and federal. He said the best case scenario is that we
lose $550,000; worst case is we lose entire operating assistance.
Mr. Phelps
reviewed the makeup of Metro’s budget which is comprised of Federal and State
Operating Assistance, local dollars from participating municipalities, fare box
revenue, advertising and interest revenue, 30% of their budget is federal
combined with state operating assistance at 27%, which make up 57%
combined. He stated that the City has
contracts with participating municipalities and their rate is based on a
proportionate level based on how many route miles they go into each city. Mr. Phelps stated that if we lose federal
dollars local municipalities would need to make up 59% of that budget, which,
given our current funding agreements would not be possible. He reviewed the Transit /System Flexibility
Protection Act of 2007 at the Federal level, which is the 100 bus issue where
funding is not based on population estimate but on a level of service estimate,
which is 100 buses or less. He stated
that at our peak service we have 32 pieces of equipment. The debate in Congress at this time is what
level of operating assistance we would receive and said it could be a sliding
scale from nothing up to 50% of your operating assistance. He stated that we are asking for authorizing
legislation that would allow for the creation, operation and dissolution of
RTA’s. He said we raised fares and cut
service January 5th of this year. Mr. Phelps discussed the need for
regionalization stating that our system is based on travel patterns that used
to bring people from the suburbs into the downtown area and said the
destination areas have changed a lot and our system is based on an old way of
doing things. He said Transit can’t get
to some outlying schools and employment centers based on their funding
agreements right now and need to find a way to regionalize our service to
benefit all citizens in our service area.
Mr. Phelps
reviewed the resolution stating that it is not a commitment or an obligation
but is asking legislature for permission to decide what we want to do
locally. It calls for a referendum
process so there will be a public referendum no matter what we decide to do
locally and asks for creation of an RTA.
Ald. VanderLeest stated that there is no
discussion about sales tax which Mr. Phelps said the resolution does not
address how to fund an RTA, simply asks for the creation of one and said sales
tax is one tool in the toolbox that municipalities could use for funding and
said this would be voted on in a referendum.
Ald. VanderLeest referred to the Protection
Act of 2007 and asked if another resolution could be brought forward to support
this Act? He stated that he is not
supportive of a sales tax and inquired if Mr. Phelps could research a County
system or other opportunities. Mr.
Phelps said circulating a second resolution for the federal issue was discussed
at the meeting with elected officials and said they will be bringing that
forward but said the timing was to get the local municipalities because the
Assembly will be coming back into session.
Motion made
by Ald. Vander Leest, second by Ald. Jeffreys to support a Resolution to
endorse the Transit Protection Act of 2007.
Motion carried with Ald. Nicholson voting No.
Discussion: Ald. Zima confirmed that if this Act is
passed, we could continue operating the way we are? C. Phelps said this is up for debate right
now in Congress but said it’s moving in the right direction.
Motion made
by Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald. Wiezbiskie to forward the Draft Resolution
Supporting the Formation of the Greater Green Bay Regional Transit Authority to
the full Council.
Ald. VanderLeest stated he feels we are headed in the direction
of a local sales tax and is not supporting this resolution. Ald. Piton asked where the County is at
researching a County run plan? Ald. VanderLeest
responded that it has been discussed in the past but no research has been done
on it to his knowledge. Ald. Zima
expressed concern about a Regional Transit Authority being an autonomous
entity, which he said means another taxing entity. He questioned the potential of losing
$500,000 or more assuming that is a cost without any reductions in our costs or
increases in revenues. He suggested
looking at our most used routes to increase revenues and looking for
alternatives ways to get people where they need to go without forming a
Regional Authority. He expressed concern
about another separate taxing authority who won’t be
answerable to the public citing NWTC, water bills, sewer bills etc. and said
the public has very remote input over those budgets. Ald. Zima said when they
don’t have to answer to anybody, his thought is that
they don’t have the same worry about what the costs are. He would like us to research any method
possible to stay within our budget and feels it’s just tax shifting, adding
that it might take the Transit budget out of the city budget but said in the
long term somebody has to pay for it. He
feels it’s not saving and not really addressing the problem, adding that he
would rather absorb the cost and keep control.
He said Mr. Phelps’ presentation does not address money and stated that
he is offended by that.
C. Phelps
said the Transit System Flexibility Protection Act of 2007 is an issue he has
been working on since 1996 and this is the type of movement we are seeing. He stated that the presentation was designed
to show that we are at a crossroads and based on our current funding agreements
we are not able to provide meaningful services throughout the community. The presentation was also given to highlight
the need for a new way of doing something and not flush out the details on who
serves and what serves and how we’re going to fund it. He indicated that the resolution was drafted
for municipalities to highlight the need to do something differently; it
doesn’t create anything; it doesn’t approve anything and it doesn’t make
anything. He said our growth has shifted
to other areas and we can’t get there. Last year we had a spike in ridership
but also saw $4 a gallon for gasoline.
He said today we announced a realigning of the routes for the first time
in 14 years. Mr. Phelps said currently a student at St. Norbert College has an
hour and a half bus ride to get to Prevea Clinic on
Ramada Way.
Ald. Wery
inquired if there is anything to prevent RTA Board members to be made up of
elected officials? Mr. Phelps responded
that this is a bylaws issue and each municipality who participates has to agree
on this. He stated that the resolution
outlines a two-step process: 1) do you want to create the Greater Green Bay
Regional Transit Authority? 2) how do you want to fund
that authority? He summed up by stating
that we are asking for the ability to decide what to do locally. Ald. Zima said we have to examine the
consequences of what an RTA will have on us to decide if we want to create one
and said the more regional something gets, the less control we have over them
and again stated that he is really worried about another new tax in the
community. He inquired if it’s possible to set up our Transit Authority in a
different manner and make the Authority strictly the City of Green Bay and
people would contract with us to provide services to their community so that
the home base is just the city of Green Bay so we can manage to keep under
200,000. Mr. Phelps responded that how
the urbanized area is determined happens at the federal level and is determined
by Congress and said we service 80% of the urbanized area. He said after the census is completed next
year it will take 18-24 months for the process to be finalized and that’s when
the fallout hits us.
Ald.
Wiezbiskie stated that we are getting away from the agenda discussing the cost
of an RTA and are here to try to take advantage of what is available to us
through the resolution. Motion made by
Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald. Vander Leest to open the floor to allow
interested parties to speak. Motion
carried.
Brad Sauer
from Green Bay Metro who lives in DePere addressed
the committee stating that the issue here is to open up a doorway in case we
lose the federal funding. He stated that
he would not want Green Bay to be in a position in 2012 or 2013 where we lose
our federal funding and this possible way to fund it has been closed because
Green Bay did not wish to be part of a regional RTA. He said Transit did a massive shift in routes
which hasn’t been done for 15 years and he’s heard positive things from the
changes and are pleased they can now get to Sybil Hopp and Walmart
in DePere. He
urges support of the Committee in passing this resolution on to the Council and
said surrounding states have passed legislation to allow cities to create
regional transit authorities, which gives them the option to do so.
Karen Mason,
1603 Windsor Drive, stated that she and her mother take the bus and are at
poverty level. She indicated that they
were so happy to be able to get to Target and places in Bellevue and now that’s
been taken away from them. She said
their only alternative is to take a cab, which they can’t afford and said the
citizens were willing to pay additional taxes for Lambeau
Field and asked why we can’t put taxes in for a transit system that people
depend on everyday and said we don’t have a subway
system here.
Jamie Straubel, 2362 Manitowoc Road stated that he began using
the bus last year when he lost his job and vehicle. He indicated that he has not been hired for
jobs because he is limited on weekends and cannot work Saturdays or Sundays and
would like to see longer service on Saturday and service on Sunday. He said if creating an RTA would help to get
longer service on weekends, he would support that.
Motion made
by Ald. Wiezbiskie, second by Ald. Nicholson to return to regular order of
business. Motion carried. Ald. Wery stated that he has been the Council
rep on the Transit Commission the past 5½ years and said an RTA has been
discussed for three years and feels this is something we need to look at. He said we are looking at a $1.8 million hole
in the city budget and said he can’t imagine putting this negative number in
the budget. He feels we need to pass
this on and then look at how we’re going to fund it. Ald. Zima said many years ago there was an
attempt to get rid of transit and it was voted down 3 to 1 in a referendum to
keep it because there are people who need it and feels the community supports
it. He again said talking about creating
an RTA without talking about the implications is wrong and said it will come in
some form of taxes and wishes to hear what safeguards we are going to put in
place to prevent that from happening.
Ald. Wery said it may be helpful to have a county leader who is a
supervisor to put that forward.
A vote was
taken on the motion to support sending the Resolution Supporting the Formation
of the Greater Green Bay Regional Transit Authority on to the Council. Motion carried with Ald. Vander Leest and
Ald. Nicholson voting No.
Ald. VanderLeest motioned, second by Ald.Nicholson
to direct Transit staff to investigate and report on how a county run system
would be run and funded. Mr. Phelps
stated that he can look into it but said the funding is still going to come
through the Feds. Motion carried with
Ald. Wiezbiskie voting No and Ald. Jeffreys not voting.
4.
Request by
Ald. Wery for a report by the Stadium District Board and Green Bay Packers
regarding the use of Lambeau Field for large-scale
events as promised to the citizens of Green Bay.
Motion made
by Ald. Wiezbiskie, second by Ald. Jeffreys to hold this item until Ald. Wery
arrives. Motion carried.
Ald. Wery
stated that he brought this forward because he thought the public expected more
events to be held at Lambeau. Pat Webb, Executive Director of the Stadium
District Board distributed two handouts, one summarizing the Green Bay Press-Gazette articles
outlining the history of when this was being passed and said the expectation
was that more events would be held at Lambeau
Field. He stated that they agree that
there should be larger scale events to be held there and said it’s not without
some effort that they’ve tried to do it.
He reviewed some key lease provisions regarding having special events at
the stadium. He said the reality is that
all parties, the City, the Packers and Stadium Dist. Board need to be on board
for an event to be held there. He said
the only time the field is available is the month of June, to schedule
something. The District Board and the City have the right to schedule one event
per month during the off season and have scheduling priority from February 1
through May 15. The team has scheduling priority from May 16 through June
30. (A detailed list of provisions is
attached to these minutes). Mr. Webb reviewed events that have been held at Lambeau and said finding an event that fits within the
confines of the city’s contract with the Packers is difficult and said the
months that the stadium is available for outside events, February through June
are not condusive to outdoor events. He stated that protecting the playing surface
is the No. 1 priority. He reviewed
events they have done like Snocross and Leap of
Faith, Frozen Tundra Hockey Classic and upcoming LZ Lambeau. He indicated they have made a bid for college
football and checked into college ice hockey, International Hockey, College
Lacrosse and Drum Corps International, but those didn’t work out partly because
the field is too small for some events and stated that some major concerts
require a six or seven figure up front guarantee, which the District doesn’t
have at its disposal.
Mr. Webb
said they are currently looking at a floor covering to cover the playing field
to be able to hold concerts and said they will try this covering on the
practice field first. He reviewed the
event impediments which included: concerns with the playing field, dates not
favorable, concessions revenue flows to Packers, sponsorship conflicts, no risk
capital in the District, club seats and skyboxes excluded from use for events,
expensive for smaller events to be held, among others. Jason Wied, VP of
Administration for the Green Bay Packers stated that the concert business had
dropped in stadium settings and said many of the big ones demand $2 or $3
million guarantees no matter how many tickets are sold. He reviewed the number of events that have
been held at Lambeau in the Atrium and other
amenities which totals between 500 and 800 a year and said 70 percent of those
visitors come from outside Green Bay. He
said the Packers try to support any effort to bring people to the city and said
the team sees itself as an economic catalyst for the area. He indicated they have been studying things
like removing the glass from skyboxes and getting a new sound system. Mr. Webb said most concert promoters want a
piece of the 10% ticket tax that they have on concert tickets. He said the most
important thing the Packers can do is win, citing the two playoff games in 2008
that were held and the economic benefit.
Mr.Webb said they
are looking at retiring the debt in 2011 and repealing the sales tax by 2015,
adding that it is necessary to continue the sales tax for a few years to build
up a maintenance fund. Ald. Vander Leest
said he is supportive of the Packers and Lambeau
being an economic tool and would like to see college football here, possible
partnership with the Badgers. He
suggested a 3-4 day event and the possibility of holding a country music
event. Ald. Wery thanked Mr. Webb and
Mr. Wied for their update and offered help from the city or the Economic
Development Department. Mr. Webb and Mr.
Wied said they would be happy to come back periodically and give updates.
Motion made
by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Vander Leest to receive and place on
file. Motion carried.
6.
Request by
Ald. Wery to restore the position of Council Assistant by shifting the Mayor’s
Assistant/Grant Writer back under the City Council.
Motion
made by Ald. VanderLeest, second by Ald. Nicholson to
approve.
Discussion: Ald. Wery stated that he brought this forward
because it was his understanding that Andre Jacque was moving over to
Transit. Scott Matejov said there was
some discussion about Andre moving to Transit to assist with the RTA but said
there is no current plan for him to move over there. Ald. Wery stated that in the past there was a
half time assistant to the City Council, Dave Nennig
and Grant Staszak, who would be the Council’s eyes
and ears at City Hall. Scott reviewed
the duties of Andre’s position which included media advisories, press releases,
assisting with grant writing which has brought millions of dollars into the
city, helps coordinate and assist with special events and more importantly the
position is tailored more toward constituent services and said Council members
reach out to that position for constituent inquiries. Ald. Wery stated the
position could be grant writer/Council assistant from the sound of it. Ald. VanderLeest
said the Mayor has 2.5 full time positions and said previous councils did have
an assistant and feels this position should be formally put under the City
Council. He stated that helping constituents is mostly what Council does. S. Matejov said he agrees and said it could
be written into the job description and said they enjoy the relationship they
have with Council and if there were any sort of questions or concerns with
people not receiving a response, we would want to address that. He said from a budget standpoint and
functionality, it helps the Mayor’s Office and said we want to be there for
Council and said if it’s the separation they’re looking for, he couldn’t speak
to that but said on a day-to-day basis the position is there to assist the
Mayor and Council and with the limited resources we have, we feel it’s working
pretty well.
Ald.
Wiezbiskie stated that he thought the position was there to help Council and
said he has been using him as an assistant and Andre covered his phone calls
when he was on vacation and has gone out to assist with constituent
issues. He said he relies on both Andre
and Scott when the Mayor is not available.
Ald. Jeffreys inquired how they envision a person in this position
helping Council in a way that they are not helping now? Ald. Wery responded that it’s not so much
that the tasks would be different, but the reporting would be different and
said right now that position reports to the Mayor, not to the Council and they
could report to the Advisory Committee.
He said if you need some work done or some information from City Hall,
Council would have someone here, and said department heads are here but they
report to someone else. Scott said they
all feel that they report to the Council as well and hopes that they all
recognize that and would receive response to a phone call or email. Ald. Wery
said why not have this position under Council since it sounds like they are
working on constituent issues much of the time?
Scott responded that it’s broader than that with a communication aspect
in assisting with media and event coordination and said it’s a city of 100,000
people and 12 council members and said the Mayor cannot be at all places at one
time and Andre and he frequently attend functions that the Mayor cannot and
Andre helps out with the Sustainable Task Force. He suggested that before they make a
decision, they take a broader look and study the functionality of the office,
the duties of both positions and how they can better assist Council, without
having to take this out of the budget.
Ald.
VanderLeest said it’s not a budget item but to have
the position report to the Council President or Advisory Committee, as the
County does. The Mayor believes that Council now can contact anyone for a project
Council wants done, there are not complaints with it and would like to know if
there is a specific reason why Council wants to go in a different
direction. Ald. VanderLeest
stated that they want some independence from the Mayor’s Office, adding that he
was elected to represent his constituents, not the Mayor and said the Mayor’s
Office may not agree on every issue or concept with constituents and they want
someone who will represent the Council. He feels the job description should be
changed and define who the position would report
to. Ald. Zima commended Ald. Wery for
taking this initiative and said this is an attempt to give the Council members
a tool that can be useful to them and said historically Council had a position
to assist with research or problems they had.
He said at some point, they may want to put a job description to that
position and said when a Council is basically toothless, no secretary, no funds
and no employees, it’s hard for them to be a proper
check and balance. He agrees that they
should support this idea and put a job description to it. He indicated that he felt comfortable using Dave
Nennig in the past and suggested locating this
position in the Clerks Office or somewhere other than
the Mayor’s Office and said they will need someone who has the skills to help
Council and said he has not utilized Andre as Ald. Wiezbiskie has.
Ald.
Piton stated he is curious about how this will be presented to Council, hash
out job description now? Ald. Wery stated that Human Resources would need to
draw up a job description. Ald. Piton
asked if the budget would shift? Chad Weininger responded that if a half
position would be a line item shift under the Council, it would increase the
Council budget and decrease the Mayor’s.
He recommended talking with HR to talk through the issues of budget and
job description and iron those things out before presenting to Council, possibly
bringing it back to Advisory. Ald. Piton
stated that he has not made up his mind on this issue. Ald. Kocha expressed concern with putting HR
through the work before they agree that the concept is valid. She is not totally clear on the budget impact
and inquired if the Mayor’s Office would be willing to give up a half time
position, and work with less? She
inquired about the position at Transit, asking if this is a position that has
been budgeted for but remained vacant and expressed concern that despite this
Council’s vote that we’re not hiring new people these things keep creeping
u. Ald. Wery said he believes there is a
vacant position. C. Weininger stated
that there is a position that will work with marketing, legislative, paratransit and the RTA issue.
Ald.
Zima said the Council position has been usurped from the Council and the
discussion should be what is the job description going to be, what is that
position going to serve? He said we’re
not adding or deleting and the idea is to make sure the Council position is
reinstated and said it got absorbed by the Mayor’s Office and he doesn’t
remember voting on this. Ald. Kocha said if we don’t have the Mayor’s Office
agree to let this half position go, that’s problematic and said she has not had
someone there for her formally since she was elected, but said if the Mayor’s
Office is saying that this position is there for them, she cautioned about
opening that door that’s going to mean spending more money. Ald. Wery commented that the issues Council
has been handling need them to be more intrinsically involved and they can’t be
here all of the time and need someone here who answers to them. He said they can talk about teamwork but it
is two separate things; the Mayor and Council and more often than not, entirely
different opinions on how things should go.
He said if you have someone who reports to the Mayor and you have
different requests coming from Council, the Council priority will be pretty
low. He feels it’s important to have someone on their team (and we’re all one
big team) but when it comes to policies,
many times we’re not and said we need someone here to poke into things
and say they’re looking into things for the Council or Advisory and he feels that
carries more weight than the Mayor’s Assistant helping Council. He believes we should say this is something
we want first and then ask HR to define the position.
Ald.
VanderLeest said if the Council or the Mayor’s Office
were to add any positions, it would need to be approved by Personnel Committee
and then Council. He agrees there should
be a separation and locate the position in a room
other than in the Mayor’s Office where they would be accessible to the
Council. He said if this is approved,
details would need to be worked out and said he would not be opposed to this
position continuing to assist with some things in the Mayor’s office. He indicated that he has gotten much busier
with constituent issues than in past years and said he will support restoring
the Council assistant position. Ald. Jeffreys stated that she is not quite
hearing what is missed by not having this position and she would like to know
more specifically from the Council members that have been here for a while what
they have missed when this is reported out at the next Council member. Ald. Wiezbiskie stated that he hasn’t missed
this and said there is always someone there for him and have been enjoying
assistance from the assistants and the department heads and said they are doing
a heck of a good job. He said they have opened up Pandora’s
box and he is not prepared to vote on this issue and questioned the
timing on this. Ald. Zima pointed out that what Ald. Wiezbiskie is enjoying, is
what the rest of them had before. He
said there is just a shifting of a line item here and no change in the budget.
He said if this doesn’t pass, he’s going to ask Ald. Wiezbiskie not to use that
position anymore because that’s not part of that job description and he will
see that Council needs that position.
Ald. Wiezbiskie responded that he has not abused the position and has
been taught to ask if you need help and sometimes it’s a simple
clarification. He stated that Andre
answered his constituent phone calls when he was on vacation.
Ald.
Piton said during his recent vacation, his phones were covered by Andre and it
worked well. He expressed concern that Council could pretty quickly overwhelm a
half-time assistant. Ald. Kocha said she
takes issue with the timing, if this is being brought forward because Andre may
be moving to a new job, that means there is an additional position on the table
of organization and said she is looking at the whole picture. Ald. Wery said it’s up to the Mayor’s Office
whether or not the Mayor is moving someone to Transit and said it was his
understanding that Andre was moving over to a new position. Ald. Kocha inquired
if the Transit position is already budgeted?
Scott responded that he is not aware if it or not. Ald. Wery said that discussion has nothing to
do with this item.
A
vote was taken on the motion. Motion
carried.
Asst. City
Attorney Kail Decker distributed a copy of proposed changes to the Sex Offender
Residency Ordinance. He indicated that
he had made a presentation at the last meeting and was asked to recommend ways
of improving the ordinance. He said
issues that were brought up were: access to information, equity among those who
were affected by the ordinance (sex offenders) issues with general housing,
open records, open meeting laws, issues within the Board, and DOC issues. He stated that he made a significant number
of changes and said the changes basically clean up the ordinance and do not
change the information very much. He reviewed
the major changes as follows: updated the definition of a sex offender,
formally was sex offense against a child, he said there is no child victim
there is a victim in the case. Designated Offender means anyone who has been
convicted under Chapter 948 which is crimes against children. They must
register under Wis. Stat. §301.45.
Another slight change are the exemptions which now do not have siblings
and grandparents included in that exemption.
Two additional things: the residence is a facility that houses
individuals who have a medical, alcohol or drug treatment need. If that’s the only thing that facility does,
legally we could not bring that person before the board without disclosing that
information voluntarily. An example is
the Jackie Nitschke Center which is a four week
inpatient facility. Another exemption is
a resident who resides in a monitored facility operated by an entity designated
a non-profit which only temporarily houses individuals for not more than 120
consecutive days as a transitional living program under the authority of the
Dept. of Corrections. He cited the TLP
at 1761 Shawano Ave. as being exempt. He
said the remainder of the things that are eliminated are
redundant language, unclear language or other language that doesn’t apply to
the ordinance. In the Appeals section,
the changes add some factors the Board can consider such as the risk for
re-offense, whether the person shows remorse and whether the person has
rehabilitated and gives the Board more guidance and gives the actual procedure
from start to finish for the Board to follow.
Atty. Decker
stated that he also researched information and said if an Act of God knocks the
house down, and the person wants to move back into the house after it’s fixed, they will have to find somewhere outside the
city to live not within the red zone and will need to appear before the Board. It was recommended that he go to surrounding communities
to get a system where everyone is on the same page and he said it would be
difficult unless the action that this Board is taking is to repeal this
ordinance. Otherwise he said it’s
difficult to get six communities to all have a consistent ordinance and the
only real effect would be to have the same language. He received statistics for compliance rates from
Tom Smith in the DOC in 2007 14 referrals were made to the DA, in 2008, 31 referrals were made for non-compliance and
today there are 27 pending referrals and 30 open non-compliant investigations. According to Mr. Smith the number of people
non-complying has increased.
Ald. VanderLeest expressed concern with the exemption that the
DOC could place people on Shawano in the TLP, adding that too many are being
placed on the west side and can live at this facility for 120 days. He inquired
where this exemption came from, and said he is opposed to that exemption. Atty. Decker said this is something the DOC
would favor and believes it came up in discussions with the DOC. Ald. VanderLeest said the Board makes the decision where
offenders are allowed to stay and said this change in the ordinance would
overturn that. He said his intent is not to allow anyone to live for 120 days
in that facility and he does not support this change to the ordinance.
Motion made
by Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald.Wiezbiskie to open
the floor to allow interested parties to speak.
Motion carried.
Jed Neuman with the 200 N. Jefferson Street, Green Bay, Corrections
Field Supervisor with the Dept. of Corrections said the 120 day language came
from State Statute in Oregon which they have been utilizing. He also stated that his Dept. does not run
the facility on Shawano Ave, they contract that out. He said the intent of that
facility is to provide a living place while a location is found and cited the
case of two gentlemen in the Brown County Jail who need to be transported each
morning and taken back, are chaperoned the entire time, and said this is a
tremendous taxing of resources on the agency.
He said the transitional
living program is a facility which gives the individual the opportunity to find
employment to begin their treatment and
whose family ties are broken and every stable area of their lives that
individuals have to work on. Ald. Wery inquired
if the facility on Shawano is monitored where the residents are confined? Mr. Neuman said the individuals there are on electronic
monitoring and some offenders are on mandatory GPS monitoring. He said there are monitors that check them
intermittently throughout the day and night.
He stated that each resident there is given a schedule and said if
someone is in violation there are enhanced procedures which would come into
play immediately. Mr. Neuman said the Green Bay City Police Dept. has not had any
problems with the TLP. Ald. Nicholson
inquired why individuals are in jail? Mr. Neuman responded
that they are in the jail now because they can’t go to the TLP either they’ve
been denied in the appeals process, didn’t get their appeal in time they were
released from an institution and said his department made a commitment to the
community that there would be no homeless sex offenders so they place them in
jail. Atty. Decker stated that another
reason that this was brought forward is because during meetings, a frequent
justification for denial is that the individual has not shown they can
transition back into society. He noted
several points where they were leaving jail going to the TLP and had no
history. He said this is one way they
can have the opportunity to prove they can transition back into citizen
life. Ald. Piton inquired about the denial
rate at the TLP, to which Ald. Decker said around 50% or approximately 30 or
so. He asked about penalties to which Atty. Decker said everyday is a
violation. Ald. Wery said the perception
and concern is, do the residents at the TLP pose a
threat to the neighbors? Ald. VanderLeest said they just received this information today
and he would like to have time to review this and bring it back at the next
Advisory Committee meeting.
Motion made
by Ald. VanderLeest, second by Ald. Nicholson to hold
this item to have time to review the information and bring it back at the next
Advisory Committee meeting and to share the proposed changes with the remainder
of the Council and to members of the Sex Offender Residency Board.
Brief
discussion whether this item should be brought before Protection & Welfare
rather than Advisory? It was agreed to
have it come back to Advisory Committee.
Ald. Wiezbiskie would like these changes shared with the Sex Offender
Board and said they were the people who were expressing concerns. A vote was
taken on the motion. Motion carried.
Motion made
by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. VanderLeest to
adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.