COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Packet - 11/12/2019CITY OF MUSKEGO
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA
11/12/2019
5:15 PM
Muskego City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
NEW BUSINESS
Presentation by Attorney Daniel R. Griffin of Phipps Deacon Purnell PLLC Regarding
Current Litigation Status Both Locally and Nationally on the Opioid Crisis
Proposed Ordinance Language Regarding Goats, Barn Event Venues and Scoreboards
Park Concessions
COMMUNICATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW
ADJOURNMENT
The Committee of the Whole may possibly reconvene immediately following the Common
Council meeting of the same date to continue work on agenda items.
NOTICE
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT MEMBERS OF AND POSSIBLY A QUORUM OF MEMBERS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTAL BODIES OF
THE MUNICIPALITY MAY BE IN ATTENDANCE AT THE ABOVE-STATED MEETING TO GATHER INFORMATION; NO ACTION
WILL BE TAKEN BY ANY GOVERNMENTAL BODY AT THE ABOVE-STATED MEETING OTHER THAN THE GOVERNMENTAL
BODY SPECIFICALLY REFERRED TO ABOVE IN THIS NOTICE.
ALSO, UPON REASONABLE NOTICE, EFFORTS WILL BE MADE TO ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS OF DISABLED
INDIVIDUALS THROUGH APPROPRIATE AIDS AND SERVICES. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR TO REQUEST THIS
SERVICE, CONTACT MUSKEGO CITY HALL, (262) 679-4100.
Packet Page 1
Unapproved
CITY OF MUSKEGO
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES
September 24, 2019
5:00 PM
City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Chiaverotti called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Alderpersons Wolfe, Hammel, Borgman, Kapusta, Engelhardt, Kubacki and Madden.
Also present: City Attorney Warchol, Police Chief Rens, Finance and Administration Director
Mueller, Finance and Administration Assistant Director Mustapich, Library Director Larson and
Deputy Clerk Blenski.
STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
The Deputy Clerk stated the meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting law.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES – September 10, 2019
Alderperson Kubacki made a motion to approve. Alderperson Kapusta seconded;
motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS
Resolution #080-2019 - Resolution to Determine the City of Muskego and Little Muskego
Lake District Roles and Responsibilities with Regard to Lake Management, Drawdowns,
Dredging Projects, and Equitable Lake District Fee Payments (Discussion)
Mayor Chiaverotti gave a brief update. The City is proposing to pay the Little Muskego Lake
District (LMLD) for the 28 parcels it owns and an additional $10,000.00 for 2020.
Alderperson Borgman moved to amend Resolution #080-2019 to reflect that the City will
pay 15% of the total annual LMLD budget not to exceed a cap determined by taking the
average of the last five year total annual Lake District budgets. Alderperson Wolfe
seconded.
Discussion took place with Alderperson Kubacki expressing his objection to the proposed
amendment. The City has three lakes. He cannot justify paying $40,000 to one Lake District
and nothing to the other two at the expense of all City taxpayers. All the lakes provide certain
economic benefits.
Alderperson Borgman:
You cannot compare the lakes because they are so different.
Alderperson Engelhardt:
The Lake District contributes to the City’s tax base, which provides a financial benefit. The City
should continue to support the LMLD as it has in the past.
Page 1 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 2
2
September 24, 2019
Alderperson Wolfe:
He supports Alderperson Borgman’s proposed amendment. He suggests having more
meetings with the LMLD for further discussion regarding the City’s future contributions. Leave
the 2020 City payment as it has been.
In response to a suggestion that landfill funds be utilized, Director Mueller stated research would
have to be done to determine if that was possible.
Alderperson Kubacki:
The property owners on Lake Denoon formed a Lake District to improve the quality of the lake.
It has improved; however, the residents on the lake shouldered the cost. How can the City
contribute to one lake and ignore the other two? There is no parody. Yes, the lakes are
different, but they all represent an economic boost to the City through taxation.
Alderperson Kapusta:
He would like to see better communication among all parties involved regarding future budgets.
He supports the proposed amendment to the Resolution.
Motion carried 5 in favor and Alderpersons Kubacki and Madden voting no.
Continued Discussion Regarding Muskego Senior Taxi
The Mayor stated that $5,000.00 is currently in the proposed operating budget. Alderperson
Wolfe moved to include a total of $15,000.00 in the 2020 operating budget for the
Muskego Senior Taxi Service. Alderperson Kapusta seconded.
Alderperson Kubacki:
The City contributed $10,000.00 in 2008 to provide assistance to the taxi service, which was
supposed to be self-sufficient by 2010. It is still not self-sufficient. The Mayor established an Ad
Hoc Committee to review the service and funding sources. Mukwonago runs a profitable
program. The Director of that program provided input to the Ad Hoc Committee. This was an
effort to assist the Muskego Taxi Service to become self-sufficient. The City requested specific
information from the organization that was never provided. He believes the service is necessary
and will support the $5,000 for another year, but cannot go beyond that.
Alderperson Borgman:
Distributed salary information. Staff have increased since 2014 because the rides increased.
He objects to the report that was presented from the Ad Hoc Committee. He was on the
Committee and did not have any input regarding the report. He also believes Muskego’s
program should not be compared to Mukwonago’s.
Alderperson Madden:
The organization came to the City for financial support, but has refused to be transparent.
Mayor Chiaverotti:
Believes there are discrepancies regarding the salary information distributed by Alderperson
Borgman. While some information was provided by the Muskego Senior Taxi, the full detail was
not.
Alderperson Engelhardt:
Believes the information disclosed meets the requirements of the IRS. The current director was
hired to put the program in order. It has prospered and meets the needs of the community. He
would like the City to continue its financial sponsorship of the taxi service.
Page 2 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 3
3
September 24, 2019
Alderperson Hammel:
Does not like the lack of transparency. If funding is requested from the City, information should
be provided. He would like to continue discussion in the future.
Motion carried 5 in favor and Alderpersons Kubacki and Madden voting no.
Elected Official Salary Discussion
Alderperson Kubacki:
Acknowledged the comparison salary information provided by the Finance & Administration
Department. He supports the Judge’s salary being increased to $18,000.00. The salary for the
Mayor is low and should be increased to a range of $72,000.00 - $75,000.00
Alderperson Wolfe:
Stated it is unfair to only raise the salaries of certain elected officials. The salary for
Alderperson has not increased since 2002.
Alderperson Madden:
Agrees that the Mayor’s salary should be increased.
Alderperson Engelhardt:
Stated he is comfortable with the salary for Alderpersons.
Alderperson Kubacki moved to raise the Mayor’s annual salary to $72,000.00 and the
Judge’s annual salary to $17,500.00. Alderperson Hammel seconded. Motion carried
with 4 in favor and Alderpersons Wolfe, Borgman and Kapusta voting no.
Continued Discussion of Mayor’s Proposed 2020 Operating Budget
In response to the proposed changes recommended tonight, Director Mueller stated that the
estimated State Transportation Aids should be received shortly. She will provide funding
options at the October 8, 2019 COW meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
Alderperson Madden made a motion to adjourn at 6:21 p.m. Alderperson Engelhardt
seconded; motion carried.
Minutes taken and transcribed by Jill Blenski, Deputy Clerk.
Page 3 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 4
Unapproved
CITY OF MUSKEGO
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MINUTES
October 8, 2019
5:15 PM
City Hall, W182 S8200 Racine Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Chiaverotti called the meeting to order at 5:21 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Present: Alderpersons Wolfe, Hammel, Borgman, Kapusta, Engelhardt, Kubacki and Madden.
Also present: Finance and Administration Director Mueller, Finance and Administration
Assistant Director Mustapich, Library Director Larson and Assistant Deputy Clerk Chavie.
STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
The Assistant Deputy Clerk stated the meeting was noticed in accordance with the open
meeting law.
NEW BUSINESS
Finalize 2020 Capital and Operating Budgets
Director Mueller reviewed the following Budget Updates and Proposed Appropriations for the
2020 General Operating Budget:
Description Account #
Impact to Current
Budget
Increase/(Decrease)
Revenues:
Transportation Aids 100.04.51.01.4132 $ 50,428.00
State Shared Revenue 100.09.80.00.4121 1,725.000
State video service Aid (Reclassification)100.09.80.00.4124 30,200.00
Cable Franchise Fees (Reclassification)100.01.06.00.4544 (30,200.00)
Net Budget Revenue Increase/(Decrease)$ 52,153.00
Expenditures:
Mayor Salary & Benefits 100.01.01.005105/201/202 $ 5,737.00
Judge Salary & Benefits 100.01.08.005105/201/202 2,691.00
Senior Taxi 100.01.06.00.6055 10,000.00
Hydrant Rental (3% Simplified Water Rate Case)100.02.21.00.5422 9,835.00
Little Lake District 100.05.06.00.6052 23,890.00
Lake Denoon District (request = 4,580)100.05.06.00.6053
Net Budget Expenditure Decrease $ 52,153.00
Balanced Budget Adjustments $ (0)
Review Request from Lake Denoon Lake District for City Funding
Alderperson Kubacki introduced Tim and Julie Laseke. Mr. Laseke is the Chairperson of the
Lake District, which consists of 95% Muskego residents and 5% Town of Norway residents.
A letter of intent and 2020 Budget of the Lake Denoon Lake District were distributed to
Committee members. The Lake District is requesting a City contribution of $5,290.50 to be
applied to its operating budget.
Page 4 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 5
2
October 8, 2019
Director Mueller explained that she used the same formula as the one used to determine the
City contribution to the Little Muskego Lake District. The City contribution to the Lake Denoon
Lake District would be $4,580.00.
Alderperson Wolfe noted this request was placed on the agenda very quickly; he disagrees with
how it was presented.
Alderperson Engelhardt suggested tracking results and the increase in revenue to justify the
factors.
Alderperson Kapusta made a motion to approve that $4,580.00 be placed in the 2020
Operating Budget. Alderperson Madden seconded. Motion carried with Alderpersons
Madden, Kubacki, Kapusta, Borgman, Hammel voting yes and Alderpersons Wolfe and
Engelhardt voting no.
Finalize 2020 Capital and Operating Budgets (Continued)
Park Arthur Baseball Field #4
Alderperson Borgman feels that the budgeted amount of $300,000 to regrade field #4 for proper
draining is a lot of money to spend. He suggested to look into alternative resources rather than
remove the dugout, fencing and light pole to regrade the field for proper drainage.
Alderperson Hammel did confirm that the fields were not in good condition. He is not sure if
removing and rebuilding is the way to go.
Alderperson Wolfe does recall that games were played at other facilities due to the field
conditions.
Ms. Mueller suggested leaving the item in the budget contingent upon reviewing the study at a
later date.
After further discussion, it was decided that Public Works & Development Director Scott Kroeger
and DPW Superintendent Ryan Beilfuss will review alternatives. This item will be discussed at
a later date.
Salaries of Elected Officials
Alderperson Wolfe asked if there should be continued discussion regarding salaries.
Alderperson Kubacki stated he reviewed the salary comparison study for elected officials. He
supports the recommendation made at the previous meeting.
Alderperson Borgman is in favor of raising the salary for the Alderpersons. The salary has been
the same since 2002. Alderperson Kubacki stated the study indicates that the Council members
are adequately compensated.
After further discussion. Alderperson Borgman made a motion that the Alderperson’s
salary be increased 1.5% effective upon the 2020 and 2021 elections and then increased
an additional 1.5% six months later. Alderperson Wolfe seconded. Director Mueller noted
that an Ordinance would be required to change the salaries for elected officials. Motion failed
with Alderpersons Madden, Kubacki, Engelhardt, Kapusta and Borgman voting no;
Alderpersons Borgman and Wolfe voting yes.
Review 2020 Water and Sewer Utility Budgets
Ms. Mueller reported that both utilities are in good financial condition. She noted the water main
projects will be discussed at a later date. Alderperson Kapusta moved to approve the 2020
Water and Sewer Utility Budgets. Alderperson Kubacki seconded; motion carried.
ADJOURNMENT Page 5 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 6
3
October 8, 2019
Alderperson Kubacki made a motion to adjourn at 6:15 p.m. Alderperson Kapusta
seconded; motion carried.
Minutes taken and transcribed by Kim Chavie, Assistant Deputy Clerk.
Page 6 of 6
September 24, 2019 and October 8, 2019
Packet Page 7
CITY OF MUSKEGO
Staff Report to Common Council
November 12, 2019 Meeting
To: Committee of the Whole (COW)
From: Adam Trzebiatowski, AICP
Subject: Zoning Code Discussions – Goats, Barn Event Venues and Scoreboards
Date: November 7, 2019
Background Information:
There were three different Zoning Code related topics that came up over the past year or two in which staff
was directed to do research on and propose some possible code amendments. The three topics related to
allowing goats on lots not only zoned A-1 (with a CUG) allowing event venues in barns and how to address
future scoreboards and advertising/sponsorships on said scoreboards. Below are details of planning staff
suggestions on how we could possibly proceed with these code updates.
Goats
The current Zoning Code only allows goats on A-1 (Agricultural) zoned lots with the approval of a
Conditional Use Grant (CUG). The direction of the COW was to explore allowing goats in more districts ,
modifying some of the current regulations and establishing minimum requirements. Based on that info here
are the items that staff is suggesting:
In the A-1 district, remove the requirement of a CUG for goats and any references that goats are not
allowed by right. By default then, any property that is in the A-1 district and has agriculture as the
primary use, goats will treated the same as cattle and horses, which are allowed without limitation.
For properties in the A-1 district used for single-family purposes that want goats, then they will
follow the permitted accessory uses section of the A-1 district, which allows all permitted accessory
in the RCE district. Details on the allowed RCE accessory uses are listed in more detail below.
In the RCE district, remove any references to goats not being allowed. In this district goats would
be treated similar to livestock (cattle) and horses, which are allowed as an accessory use on lots of at
least 120,000 SF (~2.75 acres) in area. If the lot is under that size then goats would not be allowed.
We are suggesting starting at allowing 1 goat per 40,000 SF of land. The Council could increase this
number now or down the road if they feel necessary. The thought was to start there as it is always
easier to add more than take away something that was previously granted.
Along with these code updates we clarified that horses are treated the same as livestock (cattle).
This was how the City always treated horses but there were a few sections of the code that had
conflicting information. We look at this as a clean-up item.
We added sheep as also being allowed with goats. Our research found that many communities
regulate goats and sheep in the same manor and with the same allowed quantities.
We added a section that clarifies how many total animals can be on a lot and discuss how contiguous
lots are looked at as far as animal counts.
As part of these updates staff also is proposing the removal of the hobby farm section(s) and
references in the Zoning Code. The hobby farm regulations conflicted with other portions of the
code and no one in 15+ years has requested approval of a hobby farm. Staff thought it made more
sense to simplify things by removing that section and just allowed the typical animal regulation, as
noted above, to apply. We are proposing adding three regulations relating to the storage of bedding
material, feed and manure, from the hobby farm section, to the RCE accessory use section that
regulates the type and quantity of farm animals allowed on a lot.
Barn Event Venues
A new trend with weddings and other events is holding them in old converted barns. The practice of
repurposing and reusing an older building for a new purpose is commonly referred to as adaptive reuse. Our
current codes do not have any specific allowance for the adaptive reuse of old barns into event space. The Page 1 of 3
Proposed Ordinance Language Regarding Goats, Barn...
Packet Page 8
only current option to convert a barn to a wedding/event venue is seek full commercial zoning, which then
limits other uses on a property. We have had three possible landowners in the City that have expressed
interest in converting their existing barn in to event spaces.
We suggest allowing the adaptive reuse of existing barns for event/wedding venues in any
residential district and in the A-1 district, subject to approval of a conditional use grant (CUG) from
the Plan Commission. We would not include commercial districts in this allowance as some
commercial district already all banquet/event spaces. This code section would not apply to barns
built after the date of this adoption of this ordinance.
The suggestion is that the code would state that the CUG shall not be granted unless certain
conditions are met. Here are the suggested conditions:
(a) The minimum parcel size shall be five (5) acres.
(b) A two hundred (200) foot separation between any event related building or amenity/feature and
any structures on adjacent lots shall be provided on all sides of the property not abutting a
public roadway. Special event/commercial business related structures, activities and/or features
are not permitted within a fifty (50) foot buffer area, nor is parking allowed in this buffer area.
The Plan Commission can consider reducing the required buffer, as it relates to parking only,
from any right-of-way if dense landscape screening is provided. If an existing barn is located
closer than the fifty (50) foot buffer, then the Plan Commission can consider reducing the
required buffer to not less than the existing barn offset. Where possible, agricultural crops shall
remain or be grown in the buffer area, or suitable landscaping, to maintain the
rural/agricultural character of the site.
(c) Buffer plantings shall be provided along a property line where there is an abutting residence,
including across roadways, to screen views, lights and noise from the operation.
(d) Parcels shall have direct unobstructed frontage along a paved public road for direct access.
(e) The surface of the parking areas and driveways are preferred to be asphalt, but the Plan
Commission can consider gravel parking areas on a case-by-case basis if the parking is far
enough from adjacent lots and homes and if the parking lot can be maintained in a dustless
condition. The number of parking stalls required should be one (1) stall for every two (2)
people of building capacity with the final quantity being approved by the Plan Commission.
(f) Any amplified music should occur only in the main barn structure and all door and windows
must remain closed when the amplified music is playing. Special conditions can be considered
for unique situations, subject to Plan Commission review.
(g) Applicants for a conditional use grant under this Subsection shall provide the following
information at the time of application:
[1] Ownership of the property
[2] Months/duration of operation
[3] The anticipated number of events per year
[4] Proposed hours/days of operation
[5] Primary types of events to be hosted, and a description of their ancillary activities (e.g.
hayrides, petting farms, bonfires, etc.)
[6] Size of the barn facility and guest capacity, including a floor plan of the barn and
auxiliary structures (including any tents or other temporary structures)
[7] A site plan/survey for the entire parcel, including ingress/egress, parking areas, all
facility structures/tents, restroom locations, and any other site based features
[8] Provision of restroom facilities, including screening method (must be provided)
[9] Location of refuse receptacles, screening and method of disposal
[10] Proposed signage and lighting plan
[11] Proposed use and location of amplified music
[12] Any additional information required by the Plan Commission to ensure the safe
operations of the event / wedding venue. Page 2 of 3
Proposed Ordinance Language Regarding Goats, Barn...
Packet Page 9
Scoreboards
The current Zoning Code does not specifically identify the allowance of scoreboards and/or regulations
relating to scoreboards. In 2018 the Muskego School District worked with staff and the Plan Commission to
install a new scoreboard at the high school football stadium complex. At that time a hybrid approach was
used to approve the sign, even though the codes were not specific to scoreboards. Also as part of that
request the District wanted to have a place advertisement/sponsorships on the backside of the sign. The
signage regulations do not allow signage related to businesses that do not operate on that property on which
the signage is located. Due to this, advertising/sponsorships were not allowed on the back of that sign at that
time. Based on that overall request, the City did some research on how other communities handle
scoreboards and are now suggesting the follow regulations to be added to the sign portion of the Zoning
Code.
Scoreboards. Upon approval by the Plan Commission, a scoreboard is allowed in the I-1
Government and Institutional District, PI-1 Parks and Recreation District, or an approved outdoor
recreational facility as designated in Article XX subject to the requirements of §400-21. Scoreboards
are exempt from the reader board sign size limits of §400-180 F(2). The size, height and location of
a scoreboard is subject to Plan Commission approval. The Plan Commission will give special
consideration to screening from right-of-way and neighboring residential uses; motion, videos and
flashing; and audio/noise emanating from the scoreboard or system mounted to the scoreboard. The
Plan Commission can also consider sponsorship advertising on the face, rear or scoreboard
structure if there is a defined plans outlining the sizes, quantity and design.
Page 3 of 3
Proposed Ordinance Language Regarding Goats, Barn...
Packet Page 10