Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutesPROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF OSHKOSH, WISCONSIN OlHKO f ON THE WATER REGULAR MEETING held Tuesday, August 11, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, City Hall. Mayor Esslinger presided. PRESENT: Council Members Bob Poeschl, Burk Tower, Dennis McHugh, Harold Buchholz, Tony Palmeri, Jessica King and Mayor Esslinger ALSO PRESENT: Mark Rohloff, City Manager, Pamela Ubrig, City Clerk, Lynn Lorenson, City Attorney, and Dave Patek, Director of Public Works Council Member Poeschl read the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC HEARINGS Resolution 09 -300 Approval of Final Resolution for Special Assessments for Water Main (Koeller Street, Oshkosh Avenue) There were no appearances and the Public Hearing was CLOSED. MOTION: ADOPT (Palmeri; second, Tower) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Resolution 09 -301 Approval of Final Resolution for Special Assessments for Sanitary Sewer and Water Main (Marine Drive, Fernau Avenue, Snell Road, Fountain Avenue, Green Valley Road) There were no appearances and the Public Hearing was CLOSED. MOTION: ADOPT (Buchholz; second, Poeschl) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Council Member Buchholz questioned what happens to the Department of Transportation assessment. Mr. Patek explained that the state law states because the DOT purchased the land for highway purposes the City would be responsible for charges once the land was sold. He stated that he would document that future connection charges were applied when the land was sold. 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Resolution 09 -302 Approval of Final Resolution for Special Assessments for Concrete Driveway Approaches and Sidewalk (Fernau Court) There were no appearances and the Public Hearing was CLOSED. MOTION: ADOPT (Buchholz; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Resolution 09 -303 Approval of Final Resolution for Special Assessments for Paving, Sidewalk, Driveway and Utilities (County Trunk Y, Jackson Street) There were no appearances and the Public Hearing was CLOSED. MOTION: ADOPT (Palmeri; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Resolution 09 -304 Resolution to Approve Amendment to $6,500,000 Town of Algoma, Winnebago County, Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (Oshkosh Community YMCA Project) YMCA 2002 Bonds by the Town of Algoma, Wisconsin There were no appearances and the Public Hearing was CLOSED. MOTION: ADOPT (Tower; second, Buchholz) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if the policy had changed regarding industrial revenue bonds. Mr. Rohloff stated that the policy had not changed, that it was cooperation between the township and City. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that he was under the impression the City was not participating in industrial development bonds program. Mr. Rohloff stated that to his knowledge that was incorrect. Ms. Lorenson explained that this was an amendment due to the interest rate change from when the YMCA was in the Town of Algoma and now it is in the City. 2 Council Member King questioned if industrial development bonds were issued for the UWO Sports Complex. Ms. Lorenson stated that was correct. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 CONSENT AGENDA Approval of Minutes from July 14, 2009 Council Meeting. Approval of Bills presented by the Finance Director. Receipt and Filing of Library Board Minutes from July 30, 2009. Receipt of Petition Regarding Alley North of Linwood Avenue between Ashland and Harrison Street. Approval to the University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh Utilize City Streets for their Rec Fest September 7, 2009. Approval to the Oshkosh Recreation Department and Oshkosh Seniors Center Utilize Menominee Park and facilities September 19, 2009. Approval to the Exclusive Company Utilize the City's parking lot directly adjacent to 318 North Main Street for their Decibel Drag Race Show August 15 and 16 2009. Approval to the Winnebago County Wisconsin Labor Council Utilize South Park and facilities for their Labor Day Celebration and Car Show September 6 th and 7 th 2009. Approval to the University of Wisconsin- Oshkosh Change traffic patterns on various city streets for their Student Move -In Day September 6 th and 7 th 2009. Approval to Unified Catholic Schools of Oshkosh Utilize Rainbow Park and facilities for their Cross Country Meet September 15, 2009. Approval to Midwest Sports Events Utilize City Streets for their Race the Lake Event /August 16, 2009. Receipt of Claim filed with the City's Insurance Company Carolyn Koenen for alleged property damage to carpet by Police Officers not removing their shoes when entering premises. Receipt of Claim filed with the City's Insurance Company John Coulter, for alleged damage to his vehicle as a result of hitting pot holes on Washburn Street. Resolution 09 -305 Approval of Initial Resolution for Special Assessments Sanitary Sewer Laterals Alley Located Between Main Street and Jefferson Street from Merritt Ave to Washington Avenue Resolution 09 -306 Disallow Claim by John Coulter (for alleged damage to his vehicle as a result of hitting pot holes on Washburn Street PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Resolution 09 -307 Disallow Claim by Thomas and Kay Mettlach (for property damages alleged from a sewer back -up) Thomas Mettlach, 1641 Sanders Street, stated that on April 23 the City flushed the sewer and it backed up into his home because of a blockage. He explained that he had spoken with two men from the first shift crew from the Sanitation Department and was told the blockage was on his end; therefore he called Roto Rooter and was told he had no blockage. He stated that the second shift crew stated that there was a blockage on the City's end. He stated that there was an 8" pipe with an inch, inch and half of space. He stated that the City crew said that it was not normal and that he would check the computer to verify which way the water flowed. He stated that he was told they would change the manhole covers to ones without holes in them; however they have not been replaced. He questioned the procedure for flushing pipes and why there were no employees watching for blockages during the flushing. He questioned why Council Members were not aware of the claims as they were the ones voting on the disallowances. Brian Kienert, 1647 Sanders Street, stated that he had experienced the same problem with the backup. He stated that he was upset with the lack of due process as he or his neighbors had not been informed that the disallowance was going before Council. He explained that the City was liable because they did not monitor the flow. He urged Council to create a policy for future residents to have the tanker process monitored to avoid backups. He stated that because it was preventable the City should share the responsibility. Resolution 09 -308 Disallow Claim by Travelers Indemnity Company on behalf of Paul Marxen (for injuries while assisting a Police officer) Resolution 09 -309 Approval of Appointments (Landmarks Commission; Police and Fire Commission) Resolution 09 -310 Approve Special Class B Licenses, Combination "Class A" License, Transfer of Combination Class "B" License, Agent Change, Operator's Licenses and Taxicab License MOTION: ADOPT CONSENT AGENDA EXCLUDING RESOLUTIONS 09 -307 AND 09 -309 (Esslinger; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Resolution 09 -307 Disallow Claim by Thomas and Kay Mettlach (for property damages alleged from a sewer back -up) MOTION: ADOPT (Buchholz; second, Poeschl) M CARRIED: Ayes (4) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, King; Noes (3) Buchholz, Palmeri, Mayor Esslinger Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned the amount of the claim. Mr. Mettlach stated that his entire claim was approximately $8,400 and his insurance had paid $5,000. He explained that his insurance company had filed their own claim against the City. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that the claim request was for $3,400; the amount that was not covered by his insurance. He questioned if the claimant had been contacted by the insurance company. Mr. Mettlach explained that after the article was printed in the newspaper he was contacted by the insurance company. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that from April 23 until July 13 Mr. Mettlach had not received any contact from the insurance company adjuster. Council Member Buchholz stated that after Mr. Kienert's last presentation it had been agreed upon to notify claimants of the denial of their claim. Mr. Rohloff stated that staff had been instructed to send notices. Council Member Buchholz suggested improving the process and taking liability or partial liability in such matters. He questioned how often routine maintenance took place. Mr. Patek explained that it was a continual process all year throughout the City. Mr. Rohloff explained that in that neighborhood it was a regular process as it was a dead end line and flushing started at the end of the line and washed through. He stated that this flushing took place around the corner from Sanders Street. Council Member Buchholz questioned the replacement of manhole covers. Mr. Patek stated that he was unaware of replacing the covers and would investigate that with the supervisor. Council Member Buchholz stated that there was no evidence of the City at fault. He stated that he understood the feelings from the claimants and suggested the City cover a part of the cost. Council Member King recognized the claimant's frustration. She explained that although the situation was unique to the claimants the insurance company dealt with these claims on a regular basis with different municipalities. She stated that claimants had the opportunity to take their claim through the court system and this was the process to follow if they were not satisfied. She explained that although the Council sympathizes with the claimants; itwould be difficult to establish guidelines as to claims the City should or should not compensate. She questioned where in the budget the funds would be allocated from to compensate claimants. Council Member Tower stated that he was empathetic to the claimants. He stated that he was opposed to reviewing claims as it was not realistic. He stated that he would support denying the claim as it was not in the best interest of the tax payers to support it. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Deputy Mayor Palmeri explained that he was disturbed at the outcome of the closed meeting regarding claims and that the meeting should have been open. He stated that the investigation had not included contact with the claimants. He stated that he would support to allow the claim and compensate the $3,400 not covered by private insurance. Mayor Esslinger questioned the amount of the claim. Ms. Lorenson explained that the resolution before Council was to disallow the claim, and to allow the claim staff would have to draft a resolution and bring it before Council. Mayor Esslinger questioned if the resolution could be amended. Mr. Rohloff stated that the item on the agenda was to disallow the claim therefore it needed to be brought back to Council with a specific amount to notice the public. He explained that the blockage was not caused by the City and staff recommends disallowing the claim as it would not be covered by the insurance company. Council Member McHugh questioned if the insurance company had a sewer expert that made the determination of claims or what questions they asked to make their determination. Ms. Lorenson explained that the insurance company called the City employees and asked questions. She stated that someone had put the net into the sewer and the City was not aware of that therefore they were not negligent. She stated that this was a liability policy which was different from homeowners. Council Member McHugh stated that he felt the City was negligent because the crew went home and stated that everything was alright. Mr. Rohloff stated that the back up had occurred prior to Mr. Mettlach's conversation with the City employees. He explained that the City caused no damage after they were aware of the blockage. Council Member Tower stated that it was dangerous for Council to allow claims that had been investigated by the insurance company with the recommendation for denial. He stated that the City was not prepared to handle reviewing each claim. Council Member King explained that each year there were sewer claims litigated in the State of Wisconsin and there were fact patterns to follow regarding the claims. She stated that she was R concerned that as Council they had not briefed or reviewed the legal standards for the cases. She stated that that was an area for juries, judges and fact finders to make determinations and if the City was found negligent during this process the claimants would then be made whole. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that by allowing the claim it would force the insurance carrier to complete investigations of claims. He stated that he was not confident in the investigation that the insurance carrier completed and he felt the investigation should include talking to the property owner. He stated that he would not support the resolution. Council Member Poeschl questioned the number of sewer claims appealed. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Ms. Lorenson stated that she did not have those statistics. Council Member Poeschl questioned the success of those cases. Mr. Rohloff explained that this was a routine issue and there was no negligence on behalf of the City; therefore if it went to Court he was confident that the City would prevail. He stated that when the City was found negligent they settled those cases. Council Member Poeschl questioned what the process would be for the Council to grant the claim. He questioned if the funds would come from the City's operating budget. Ms. Lorenson explained that the amount needed to be determined if the Council was going to allow the claim. She stated that the City was in the League of Municipalities and they would not pay for a claim they recommended denial. She stated that the funds would need to be taken from the operating budget. Council Member King explained that when the City was at negligence they made compensation to property owners involved as they did with the terrace incident. Mr. Rohloff explained that in that instance there was no claim filed against the City, the City recognized their errors and made it right with the party involved. Council Member Poeschl stated that the fault of the City was that they went with the insurance carrier of the league. Mr. Rohloff stated that any insurance company used would have come to the same conclusion. Council Member Poeschl questioned the insurance carrier's process of investigating claims as the claimants should have been contacted for due process. Mr. Rohloff stated that there were issues with the process; however it did not change the claim and the legitimacy of the claim itself. He explained that the insurance carrier had hired another company to assist with future claims of this nature. Resolution 09 -309 Approval of Appointments (Landmarks Commission; Police and Fire Commission) 7 MOTION: ADOPT (Buchholz; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King Mayor Esslinger Council Member Buchholz suggested the Mayor discuss appointments of individuals selected to the chairs of the commissions and boards for their input. Mayor Esslinger questioned if certain requirements or a college degree were needed to be a member on a committee or board. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Ms. Lorenson stated that the Landmarks Commission, Library and possibly the Redevelopment Authority may have had suggested certain requirements. Mayor Esslinger stated that the City Manager's secretary verified that requirements were met before selecting candidates. Mr. Rohloff stated that his secretary verified residency and then provided the applications to the Mayor. Ms. Lorenson clarified that the City Manager's secretary did not verified expertise. Mayor Esslinger stated that if there were expertise requirements they should be reviewed by the legal department. He stated that he did not recall any requirements listed. Ms. Lorenson explained that there were no requirements; there were suggestions regarding what to look for in candidates for a board or committee. Mayor Esslinger explained that if the chair of the boards and commissions had declined an applicant and Council appointed the applicant it could upset the chair; and then it could go as far as consulting members for their opinions. He stated that chairs of the boards and commission had the opportunity to suggest applicants. Council Member Buchholz suggested allowing the chair to know ahead of time who the appointment was. ACTION TAKEN ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ordinance 09 -311 Approve Zone Change from M -2 Central Industrial to R -2 Two Family 410 West 5th Avenue and Vacant Lot East of 421 West 5th Avenue (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT (Palmeri; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Ordinance 09 -312 Approve Repealing and Recreating Section 30 -27 Downtown Overlay District of the Zoning Ordinance (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT (Poeschl; second, Buchholz) MOTION: ADD TO SECTION (D)(3)(F) WILL BE ALLOWED ONLY WITH APPROVAL OF THE PLAN COMMISSION AND THE COMMON COUNCIL (Palmeri; second, Poeschl) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz; Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 MOTION: AMEND SECTION (D)(5)(B) CHANGE 12 SQUARE FEET TO 16 SQUARE FEET AND 6 SQUARE FEET TO 8 SQUARE FEET(4 X 4 SIGN) (Esslinger; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger MOTION: ADD TO SECTION (7)(M)(IV) PERMIT FEE ESTABLISHED BY COUNCIL (Esslinger; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger VOTE ON ORDINANCE AS AMENDED CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Council Member King questioned if the ordinance would impact the awning easements. Mr. Rohloff explained that there was a meeting held with the representatives from the 400 block and the Community Foundation. He stated that it was suggested that encroachments not take place until after the facade project was final. He explained that business owners within and outside the 400 block would be included to participate on the improvements and the City would continue to work with them. He stated that the City was working with an architect on the facade project for the downtown and different issues with the buildings. Council Member McHugh questioned if the ordinance addressed colors. Darryn Burich, Director of Planning, stated that the ordinance did not address colors only but the materials used. Council Member McHugh questioned if bricks were allowed to be covered. Mr. Burich explained that the ordinance prohibited the covering of prominent architectural features on a building. Council Member McHugh stated that the ordinance would require the property owners to 9 restore the building to the original type of brick or material. Mr. Burich explained if the restoration or maintenance was 50% or more of the facade the ordinance would require the entire facade to be restored. He stated that the intent of the ordinance was to preserve what was there and keep deterioration from occurring. Council Member McHugh questioned when the enforcement of the ordinance would begin. Mr. Burich stated that it would be enforced when the ordinance was passed and published. Deputy Mayor Palmeri urged staff to allow hand painted signs that were approved due to the community had a growing movement of urban art in which hand painting was appropriate. He stated that he believed Oshkosh was the artistic capital of the valley. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Council Member King questioned if the current facade program met the ordinance with projects that had been approved prior. Mr. Burich stated that he believed it did. Council Member Buchholz requested clarification if the vote pertained to the historic properties or the entire map overlay. Mr. Burich explained that it was the buildings within the overlay district which went down to the river over to Division Street and past State Street. He stated that there was a feeling that the area was too expansive and needed to be retracted. Council Member Buchholz questioned if the vote would have an effect on the boundaries for this project. Mr. Burich stated that it would have no effect. Council Member Buchholz questioned the penalties for noncompliance. Mr. Burich stated that the project would not be allowed to move forward and if owners continued with the project it would be a zoning violation. Ms. Lorenson stated that the base fine amount was $75 plus court costs, which was approximately $217. Council Member Buchholz questioned when the violation would be imposed. Mr. Burich stated that if work was completed without a permit and they were not complying with the ordinance a citation would be issued. Council Member Buchholz questioned the department that would issue that. Mr. Burich stated that it would be Community Development along with the Building Inspectors 10 Council Member Buchholz questioned if there was an appeal process. Mr. Burich explained that there were two appeal processes for the ordinance; one was the Board of Appeals. He explained in the ordinance there were two exemptions property owners would go back to the Planning Commission and the Common Council. Council Member Buchholz questioned why not wait until after the facade project to vote on the ordinance. Mr. Rohloff explained that the overlay ordinance went beyond the extension of awnings and items of that nature. Council Member Buchholz questioned if there were items other than awnings to be reviewed. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mr. Rohloff stated that some items may not involve encroachments and the ordinance related to other issues that were not directly related to the Main Street project. He explained that construction of facade literal or two dimensional would not be affected by the Main Street project. Mr. Burich explained that restrictions were in place that did not allow doors or windows to be boarded, have signs in places that were not allowed or metal or wood siding on a building. Mayor Esslinger explained that the change of the sign size was due to the "Public Enemies" movie. Council Member King questioned the basis for the dimensions. Mr. Burich explained that projecting signs would be pedestrian oriented and larger signs tend to overwhelm a building. He explained that the City reviewed ordinances regarding signs throughout the area and there was a range from 8 square feet to 25 square feet. He stated that he had no issue with 12 square feet for a sign and the City would require a height restriction when hanging to the signs. Council Member Buchholz questioned the size of the sign pictured. Mr. Burich stated that the sign was 3'4" by 1.5'. Council Member Buchholz stated that it would be approximately six square feet. Mr. Burich stated that it was approximately six square feet per side. Mayor Esslinger stated that a 4 x 4 sign projected from 10 feet high was not large and he felt the City was beautiful when it was decorated with signs in that era. He questioned the cost of the permit for sandwich boards and suggested the permit not cost more than $5 per year. He explained that permit fees were encumbering and thought the sandwich board idea was a good 11 with the downtown being revitalized. Mr. Rohloff stated that permits were a policy schedule and questioned where the fee would be placed. Mr. Burich explained that some fees were in the ordinances and some were administrative and that this fee would be an administrative fee. Mr. Rohloff suggested having a permit fee approved by the Council after December 31 st due to the expense of redoing an ordinance. Mr. Burich stated that a resolution would be best to administer the fee. Council Member McHugh questioned the need for a permit. Mr. Burch explained the fee was to enforce consistency with the requirements of the ordinance. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Council Member McHugh questioned why permission could not be granted without a permit. Mr. Burch stated that currently all signs required a permit. Mayor Esslinger suggested no permit required. Council Member King stated that she would not support the amendment due to the potential animosity among neighboring businesses regarding the size and type of the sign. Mayor Esslinger stated that size and type was listed among the conditions. Council Member Tower stated that permits were required to maintain that conditions were followed and a permit was appropriate. Council Member Buchholz stated that the permit was appropriate without a fee. Council Member Poeschl stated that to relinquish a permit for sandwich boards would require relinquishing permits for all signs. He stated that he would support a permit with no fee. Ordinance 09 -313 Approval of Parking Regulation Changes on Ceape Avenue, Commerce Street, Mount Vernon Street, New York Avenue, 8 Avenue and 11 t Avenue MOTION: ADOPT (McHugh; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Ordinance 09 -314 Approve Tuchscherer Annexation from the Town of Oshkosh (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT Poeschl; second, Buchholz) 12 CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger Ordinance 09 -315 Amend Ordinance to Allow Dogs at Rusch Sawyer Creek Park (Parks Board Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT (Poeschl; second, Buchholz) MOTION: REMOVE THE WORD PARK FROM THE ORDINANCE (McHugh; no second) LOST: LACK OF SECOND VOTE ON ORIGINAL ORDINANCE CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Len Tews, 1109 East Irving Avenue, urged Council to allow dogs in parks. He stated that the surrounding communities allowed dogs on trails. Paul Sobralski, 3195 Sawyer Creek Drive, explained that in the municipal code, chapter 19, section 19:2 this area fell into city park systems. He stated that a residential trail was different than a park. He urged Council to support the ordinance. Randy Van Ness, 1950 Mereworth Court, supported the ordinance change. He explained that it was an opportunity to enjoy nature with your leashed dog. Valerie Klika, 1245 Greenfield Trail, stated that she had concerns with children walking dogs due to their lack of experience. She stated that dogs should be accompanied by adults if allowed in parks. Faye Helstrom, 1320 Timothy Trail, stated that she supported the ordinance as this was a trail not a park. Council Member McHugh explained that the ordinance would create chaos; residents in other neighborhoods would want dogs allowed in their neighborhood park. He was concerned with pet waste. He stated that the trail was not a park it was a trail and the word park should be removed. Mr. Rohloff explained that the ordinance was to change a regulation in a park and it was legally designated as a park. He stated Council could take a separate action at a future meeting to rename the park. Ms. Lorenson stated that the regulation was under the jurisdiction of the Parks Department and the ordinance created an exception to the prohibition of animals. 13 Council Member McHugh questioned the authority that granted the area as a park and not a trail. Mr. Rohloff stated that it was local authority and it could be changed; however the change could not be changed with this ordinance there was other action that needed to be taken. Council Member King explained that she received e -mails from citizens stating their support for allowing dogs in parks. She stated that the ordinance pertained to the location listed and would not allow dogs in all parks. She suggested circulating a petition of neighborhoods near a park to allow dogs in their parks. Council Member Tower stated that he would support the ordinance change. He stated that this area was a unique area that was different than parks and there was reason for exception. Deputy Mayor Palmeri suggested placing a referendum on the ballot regarding dogs in parks. Mr. Rohloff stated that the next election would be April. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if that could be amended into this ordinance. Ms. Lorenson stated that it was outside of what had been noticed; however it could be brought forward as a separate resolution. Council Member McHugh stated that he would support the ordinance change. Mayor Esslinger stated that he was in favor to allow dogs in the area. Council Member Buchholz stated that he would support the ordinance for the area being discussed; however, he was opposed to allowing dogs in parks. Ordinance 09 -316 Approval of Galica Delayed Attachment from the Town of Algoma FIRST READING; LAIDOVER UNDER THE RULES Ordinance 09 -317 Approval of Parking Regulation Changes on Algoma Boulevard, Brown Street, Elmwood Avenue, Irving Avenue, Jefferson Street, Mount Vernon Street and in Various Municipal Parking Areas FIRST READING; LAIDOVER UNDER THE RULES Ordinance 09 -318 Approve Repealing Current Provisions Related to Permit Parking Fees and Providing for Establishment of Parking Permit Rate Schedule FIRST READING; LAIDOVER UNDER THE RULES 14 Resolution 09 -319 Disallow Claim by Liberty Mutual on behalf of Thomas and Kay Mettlach (for property damages alleged from a sewer back -up) MOTION: ADOPT (Poeschl; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (4) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, King; Noes (3) Buchholz, Palmeri, Mayor Esslinger Resolution 09 -320 Disallow Claim by Doris Matulle (for property damages alleged from a sewer back -up) MOTION: ADOPT (Tower; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (4) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, King; Noes (3) Buchholz, Palmeri, Mayor Esslinger PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Resolution 09 -321 Disallow Claim by Brian and Anne Kienert (for property damages alleged from a sewer back -up) MOTION: ADOPT (Tower; second, McHugh) CARRIED: Ayes (4) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, King; Noes (3) Buchholz, Palmeri, Mayor Esslinger Brian Kienert, 1647 Sanders Street, stated that he agreed with Council Member King that the City should not have to pay for the claim; however the City paid money for insurance. He explained due to the employees' unawareness of the back up they were negligent as they should pay attention when flushing the pipes and watch for blockage and obstructions. Mr. Rohloff stated that staff had checked and water was flowing through the manholes and the proper procedures for sewer flushing were followed. CITIZEN STATEMENTS Brian Kienert, 1647 Sanders Street, stated that UWO had a bike ride event planned to promote community awareness on October 17th called Tour de Titan Community Awareness Ride for a Bike Friendly Oshkosh. He explained the goal was to create participation and awareness needed for a safer City to ride bikes. He hoped the event would help the bicycle and pedestrian plan to become a reality. He stated that last week two children were hit by motorists while on their bikes and had sustained serious head trauma. He explained that bike lanes made a substantial difference regarding accidents with ER head trauma. Council Member Tower stated that the bike event was taking the place of the University parade and would start and end on campus. 15 COUNCIL MEMBER ANNOUNCEMENTS, STATEMENTS AND DISCUSSION Council Member Poeschl announced that on August 20th from 5:30 pm to 7 pm in Council Chambers there would be a public discussion regarding the bicycle and pedestrian plan. Council Member McHugh questioned the status regarding the Farmer's Supply building. Mr. Rohloff explained that the Redevelopment Authority closed on the property and assumed ownership on August 4th and the previous owners had 60 days to remove their belongings from the site. He stated that staff expected to have the area cleaned in 90 days. Council Member McHugh questioned what happened after the 60 days. Jackson Kinney, Director of Community Development, explained that after 90 days the building would be demolished. Council Member McHugh questioned who would pay for the cost of demolition and if there were TIF funds involved. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mr. Kinney stated that funds for the project were in the RDA budget and TIF funds would be used. Council Member McHugh questioned if the previous owner had tried to upgrade the building and was told he could not. Mr. Kinney stated that he did not recall requests for upgrades to the building during the process. He stated that there was a raise order written on the property and after that notice the owner approached the RDA and questioned if there was interest in purchasing the property. Council Member McHugh questioned if the RDA intended to acquire all the property in that area. Mr. Kinney stated that it was not every property. Council Member McHugh questioned if improvements were not allowed in that area. Mr. Kinney explained that improvements were not allowed without approval from the redevelopment authority and industrial use would not be recommended for approval as it was not in relation to what the plan was for that area. Council Member Poeschl questioned the demolition plan. Mr. Kinney stated that there were several properties scheduled for demolition in fall. 16 Council Member Poeschl questioned what properties were included in the demolition. Mayor Esslinger stated that the discussion was out of realm of what was noticed. He questioned if all items that went through the RDA were to go through Council. Ms. Lorenson stated that was not correct. Mayor Esslinger questioned what items did not and if that was state statutes. Ms. Lorenson stated that it was state statues. Mr. Kinney explained that after the redevelopment authority was created in 2003 all acquisitions went through and were acted upon by the RDA. He stated that those acquisitions in the designated redevelopment area did not go before to Council for action. Mayor Esslinger stated that there were individuals serving on the RDA that were not elected to decide on ways to spend tax dollars. Ms. Lorenson explained that once the redevelopment authority was created that was how the procedure worked under state a statue. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mr. Kinney explained that the redevelopment plan was approved by Council for that area and the plan. Council Member Buchholz questioned if all the contents of the monthly report were needed. He suggested that a broader view of the operation for City management and departments be reviewed to assure the City was heading in the right direction and economic development decisions were effective. Council Member Tower stated that a compromise would be to send a letter regarding highlights and look to the future in strategic planning on how Council would request reports on metrics and measures. He questioned if the report could be completed electronically and save paper which would improve recycling. He stated that Council could receive a summery of the key items. Mr. Rohloff agreed that was a reasonable suggestion. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that each Council Member had their method o granting a liquor license. He suggested a method of "first come, first serve" basis to grant the license. He explained the applicants would have to be current with their taxes, meet the criteria of health and the police department along with the state statutes. Council Member McHugh suggested implementing a policy that if license holders closed their business within a two year time frame that the license could not be transferred, that it would return to the Council. He explained that the "first come, first serve" basis would potentially turn opportunities away due to the wait for a license. 17 Deputy Mayor Palmeri requested a workshop regarding various methods of granting "Class B" liquor licenses. Mr. Rohloff stated that there were pro's and con's and suggested research regarding the matter. Mayor Esslinger stated that he would not support the "first come, first serve" as there were several applicants on the list and it could potentially prohibit a larger establishment from developing in the City. He expressed his concerns regarding the August 4th editorial on himself and that it was insulting for the editorial staff to comment the way they did. He stated that the comments in the Northwestern were misleading as to what was stated. He urged that editorial staff at the Northwestern to discontinue creating the news and report it. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if the comments printed were decisive. Mayor Esslinger stated that he did not recall the exact words; however it was along that line. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that the Northwestern needed to be careful in setting a double standard. He explained that he would want to hear beliefs from Council Members rather than a political spin. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mayor Esslinger stated that the Mayor's Breakfast was a success and there were more than 1,000 attendees. He stated that the funds left over would be given to an approved organization. He stated there were other suggestions for next year's event. He thanked the volunteers, Kodiak Jacks, Horicon Banks, Oshkosh Ranch, Festival Foods, Hometown Broadcasting, 41mprint, Cumulus Broadcasting, Discovery Alliance Properties, the Oshkosh Northwestern, Eastbay, Pepsi and the Roxy. Council Member Buchholz questioned the number of people that attended from EAA. Mayor Esslinger stated that it was hard to determine; however he thought approximately 30% to 40 Council Member Buchholz questioned if it was marketed properly to the EAA. Mayor Esslinger explained that due to the lack of time the event was not properly marketed CITY MANAGER ANNOUNCEMENTS, STATEMENTS AND DISCUSSION Mr. Rohloff stated that items 39, 40 and 41 were for the storm water detention basin in the southwest industrial park, additional engineering services associated with the Sawyer Creek drainage basin, which would be an upcoming workshop on September 1 st and the third item, was for the engineering services for Libbey Avenue and Nicolet Avenue drainage basin, AECOM. He stated that a memo was provided summarizing the bids on the Grand Opera House. He explained that the bids were competitive and the soffit area would be removed from W-1 the contract due to the State Historical Society had concerns. He stated that it appeared that Boldt Construction was the low bidder. He stated that the project total included a $232,000 (15 contingency due to the nature of the building. He explained that the project total was nearly $1.8 million and subtracting the funds that were matched from the State Building Commission grant as well as the Historic Preservation grant the City's project total was approximately $1.3 million. He stated that the amount did not include the work that had been previously completed by the Opera House Foundation $300,000. He stated that the Foundation continued to raise funds and needed another $100,000. He explained that the $1.3 million averaged out to be $95,000 per year for a 20 year period which was slightly under three cents on the tax rate per year for that 20 year period. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if the contactors were aware that the soffit work was eliminated from the bid. Mr. Rohloff stated that the contractor was aware as it was separated as an alternate bid item. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned the difference on the dollar amounts between bids. He stated that it seemed unfair as to how the bid was awarded. Mr. Rohloff explained that it may have been misunderstood as to the complete scope of work. He stated that Boldt had history with construction of historical buildings; therefore they may have had a better understanding of the work scope. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned why the project would not be eligible for federal stimulus funds. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mr. Rohloff explained that the Grand was not listed on the National Register of Historical Buildings, it was listed on the National Register of Historical Places therefore they did not meet the federal qualifications. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if the $500,000 from the State was taxpayer funds. Mr. Rohloff stated that was correct. Deputy Mayor Palmeri stated that in reality the project was almost 100% funded by taxpayer funds. He urged for private /public partnerships to contribute. He explained that restoration of the Grand was not in the top five priorities based on the survey provided through UWO. Joe Ferlo, Executive Director of the Grand Opera House, stated that the private /public partnership with the Grand was the finest in the City. He stated that was where the partnership was. He explained that the building was maintained by the City and the Foundation had raised funds to operate the building. He stated that the Foundation maintained the continual service to the citizens. He stated that this was a once in a generation issue to finish the oldest theater in the State. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned a sir charge on tickets. 19 Mr. Ferlo stated that there had been suggestions to various methods for fund raising. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if hotel /motel room tax could be used for the project. Mr. Rohloff stated that he would provide a summary on where the hotel /motel funds were committed. He stated that they were primarily used for the Convention and Visitor's Bureau; debt service for the Convention Center and a portion to the Grand to offset operational costs. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if the State Building Commission was meeting in September to award the $500,000. Mr. Rohloff stated that they had to approve the project after the award of bids. Deputy Mayor Palmeri questioned if Council did not approve the proposal would the City loose the funds. Mr. Rohloff stated that his understanding was yes. Council Member Buchholz questioned if the two week time span was sufficient as he would request detail in the numbers with options explored. He questioned if negotiation was possible once there was an accepted bid. Mr. Rohloff stated that change orders would be negotiated. He stated that an accepted bid could not be negotiated. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Council Member Buchholz stated that the cost thus far had been $260,200 and did not include the $1.2 million. He questioned the difference in cost for the soffit. He questioned if the Grand would register as a National Historic Building. Mr. Rohloff stated that it had not been explored. Mr. Ferlo explained that the Foundation had explored the option for federal stimulus funds and was told the Grand would not qualify. Council Member Buchholz stated that the cost of $1.5 million needed to be accounted for and all options for funding needed to be explored. Council Member Poeschl requested information to be brought forth regarding the Grand as early as possible. Mr. Rohloff explained that there were renovation methods that the State Historical Societywas not fond of. He stated that they would continue to explore other methods. Mayor Esslinger questioned what would be proposed at the next Council Meeting. 20 Mr. Rohloff explained that there would be two issues; one was the awarding of the bid and the other would be a budget adjustment to fund the project. Mayor Esslinger stated that if Council approved the bid the City was responsible for cost. Mr. Rohloff suggested that Council would approve a budget adjustment and then the bid. Mayor Esslinger stated that the budget adjustment needed to cover the complete cost of the bid. Mr. Rohloff stated that was correct and a funding source needed to be identified. He explained the first $500,000 was from the state grant however, the remainder needed to be identified. Mayor Esslinger questioned the incentive of having sources provide funding if the City was going to fund the entire amount. He stated that the service groups requested the City fund the renovations. He stated that the service groups had not raised funds for renovations. He questioned the partnership regarding that matter. He stated that he would not support the City pay the entire cost of renovations. Council Member King questioned the $500,000 matching grant. She stated that she understood that it was up to $500,000 based on contributions for the rest of the project. Mr. Rohloff explained that City needed to spend $2 for every $1 the State provided. Council Member Buchholz stated that he had received a -mails urging the City to support the renovations financially. He suggested to summit community groups to find funding or sources of funding for the renovations. PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL AUGUST 11, 2009 Mayor Esslinger questioned the time table to get this together. Mr. Rohloff questioned how long the bids would be good for. Jon Urben, Director of General Services, stated that he would check on the bids and the deadline for the State. He explained that he was concerned with the State Building Commission as they met monthly and that would push back the grants. Mayor Esslinger questioned the time restraints regarding Mr. Buchholz's suggestion. Mr. Rohloff stated that it could be done by delaying the grant. Council Member Tower stated that the match was 1/3 the match. Mr. Rohloff stated that it was one to two. Council Member Tower stated that it was 1/3 and not a matching dollar, therefore at some point 21 the State contribution would decrease also. Mr. Urben stated that the bids were good for 35 days. MOTION: THE COMMON COUNCIL CONVENE INTO CLOSED SESSION TO DISCUSS THE STATUS PRESENT AND PERSPECTIVE FOR THE PURPOSE OF NEGOTIATING THE PURCHASE OF PUBLIC PROPERTY AND /OR DELIBERATING OFFERS UPON PUBLIC PROPERTY WHERE COMPETITITVE AND BARGAINING REASEONS REQUIRE A CLOSED SESSION: A. FOR PURPOSES OF A DRY DETENTION POIND, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 325 SOUTH EAGLE STREET (THE FIELD BEHIND PERRY TIPLER MIDDLE SCHOOL) B. FOR A WET DETENTION POND, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1100 WEST SMITH AVENUE (A PORTION OF THE WOODS BEHIND NORTH HIGH SCHOOL); AND C. FOR CENTRAL GARAGE PURPOSES, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 137 CAMPBELL ROAD AND OTHER POTENTIALLY AVAILABLE PROERTIES FOR THIS PURSUANT TO SECTION 19.85(1)(E) OF THE WISCONSIN STATE STATUTES. (Palmeri; second, Esslinger) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Poeschl, Tower, McHugh, Buchholz, Palmeri, King, Mayor Esslinger MOTION: ADJOURN (King; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: VOICE VOTE The meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m. PAMELA R. UBRIG CITY CLERK 22