Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes ~ OJHKOJH PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL ON THE WATER CITY OF OSHKOSH, WISCONSIN SPECIAL MEETING held Tuesday, September 19, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall. Mayor Castle presided. PRESENT: Council Members Shirley Mattox, Meredith Scheuermann, Dennis McHugh, Bryan Bain, Paul Esslinger, Burk Tower, William Castle ALSO PRESENT: Richard Wollangk, City Manager, Pamela Ubrig, City Clerk, Warren Kraft, City Attorney, Edward Nokes, Finance Director Public Agenda Discussion Resolution 06-278 Set Referendum to Exceed State-Imposed Levy Limit Ken Bender, 806 Oak Street, stated the City needs to get their spending in line and he supported the referendum. Robert Cornell, 548 W Smith Avenue, explained he supported the referendum and that the public should have the opportunity to voice their opinion. Action Taken on Resolution Resolution 06-278 Set Referendum to Exceed State-Imposed Levy Limit MOTION: ADOPT (Bain; second, Scheuermann) MOTION: AMEND TO DELETE SECTION 1 I THE COUNCIL HEREBY SUPPORTS AN INCREASE IN THE CITY TAX LEVY FOR 2006 (TO BE COLLECTED IN 2007) TO EXCEED THE STATE LEVY LIMIT (Bain; second, Scheuermann) LOST: Ayes (3) Mattox, Scheuermann, Bain; Noes (4) McHugh, Esslinger, Tower, Castle VOTE ON MOTION TO ADOPT: CARRIED: Ayes (4) Mattox, Scheuermann, Tower, Castle Noes (3) McHugh, Bain, Esslinger Council Member Tower explained he supported the referendum because it was necessary for the public to have the opportunity to vote on it. He stated that budget flexibility was necessary for the Council and there were various issues with the garbage fee. He asked for clarification on the wording of the referendum. He stated the wording that the State required and the legal verbiage of the referendum were frustrating. Proceedings of the Common Council- September 19, 2006 Mr. Kraft responded. Mayor Castle stated his support for the referendum and that the only way the City could exceed the 2% tax levy was by a referendum. He explained there needed to be discussion on the issue for the public to realize the impact of eliminating a garbage fee. He stated that support of the resolution was not stating support for a tax increase. He explained that people need to realize that the Council was governed and limited by State law and he was prepared to make hard decisions primarily against quality of life issues, not Public Works, Police and Fire. Council Member Esslinger explained that citizens who had a tax increase, due to the recent re-evaluation of their properties, and who owned homes valued around $100,000.00 faced a higher burden than those who had higher assessed homes if the tax levy were raised. He stated that citizens did not want a garbage fee and did not want their taxes raised. He stated the resolution was premature due to the budget was still pending. He stated concerns with the language of the referendum in which it stated that Council supported an increase of the City tax levy and also the language referring to the percentage and that the language would be confusing for the voter. He stated he found it interesting that Council Members wanted public input on this item but they did not want public input regarding Mayor-Veto Power. He stated the garbage fee should be put back on the taxes and necessary cuts made to the City budget. He requested a clarification on information he had received from Mr. Kraft regarding referendum language. Council Member McHugh stated the majority of people who had contacted him did not support a garbage fee or an increase to the City tax levy. He stated that if the Council did not believe the tax increase was necessary they should vote against the resolution. Council Member Scheuermann questioned if budget cuts were still necessary if the referendum passed. She asked for clarification on the dollar amount regarding the tax levy. She stated her support for the referendum. Mr. Wollangk responded. Council Member Bain questioned the language in the referendum and asked what text would be on the ballot. He stated that the comparisons made to the Mayor-Veto Power issue were irrelevant. He explained there was no government that had a mayor with veto power as part of the legislative branch of government. He also explained the City was required by state law to do property re-evaluation. He asked for restraint to be exercised if the garbage fee referendum failed and the referendum to exceed the levy limit passed. Mr. Kraft responded. Council Member Mattox stated she supported the amendment because the Council would be directed by the vote of the people. She questioned what the ramifications were for 2 various situations if the City increased to the allowable state increases. Proceedings of the Common Council- September 19, 2006 Mr. Wollangk responded. MOTION: CARRIED: ADJOURN (Esslinger; second, Scheuermann) VOICE VOTE The meeting adjourned at 6:43 p.m. PAMELA R. UBRIG City Clerk 3