COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE - MINUTES - 6/9/2005
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE – CITY OF MUSKEGO Approved
MINUTES OF MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 2005 Audio Available
Alderman Melcher chaired the meeting and called it to order at 7:00 P.M. Those present recited
the Pledge of Allegiance.
Roll call: Aldermen Salentine, Patterson, Buckmaster, Borgman, Melcher, Schroeder, and Mayor
Damaske were present. Alderman Madden arrived during agenda item #3, discussion of the
recommendation to the Parks and Recreation Board. Clerk-Treasurer Moyer and Director of
Building and Engineering Sean McMullen were also present.
Clerk-Treasurer Moyer stated that the meeting was noticed in accordance with the open meeting
law. She also read the “Notice of Closed Session.”
Alderman Salentine moved for approval of the meeting minutes from May 12, 2005.
Alderman Borgman seconded the motion. Motion carried.
Approval of the Agenda – Motion by Alderman Schroeder, second by Alderman Salentine to
rearrange the agenda in the order listed below. Motion carried.
NEW BUSINESS – Discussion, update and possible action may be taken on any or all of the
following:
1. Review Existing 208 Sewer Area and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewer District 2010
Boundary Changes (PU 3/05) - Director of Building and Engineering, Sean McMullen,
gave a presentation regarding several areas of possible development that are out of the
existing 208 and 2010 Sewer Service Areas. The properties are located near the golf
course and an area near Woods Road. The first step is the developers contacting
SEWRPC to see whether MMSD and the DNR are willing to discuss the addition of the
area they want to develop. Director McMullen asked if the City wants to do amendments
for large areas or if they want to continue to do individual amendments. He
recommended the City continue to do individual amendments because of the MMSD
capital costs charged for any area included in the District. Motion by Alderman
Schroeder, second by Alderman Salentine to continue to approve amendments as
in the past and recommend this to the Public Utilities Committee. Motion carried.
2. Discuss Sewer Taxing District and Feedback from Public Informational Meetings (Ald.
Schroeder 5/2005) – Two information meetings had been held within the last two weeks.
The meetings were not well attended. Public Utilities Committee has also discussed the
creation of the districts. Director of Building and Engineering, Sean McMullen, presented
a report that included projections for reducing the amount of MMSD capital charges
included in the sewer utility quarterly user charges and instead creating two taxing
districts to collect the same capital charges through the tax roll. The 2006 proposed
capital charges are $2,498,924 for the MMSD service area, and $73,295 for the Norway
service area. Two alternatives were presented in the report. The first included
eliminating the total capital charges from the sewer user charges and collecting them
through a mil rate on the tax roll. The second included eliminating approximately 61% of
the capital charges from the sewer user charges and then collecting that amount through
a mil rate. The second alternative would require the use of Reserve Capacity
Assessment (RCA) funds and cash on hand to make up the difference. The RCA funds
and cash on hand will dwindle over time if used to subsidize the capital charges. The
report included the impact on properties in the City for the Norway and MMSD service
areas. Alderman Schroeder noted that some of the numbers in the report would change
such as depreciation and rate of return, which will lower the yearly user rate stated in the
report. An updated report will be presented at the June 20 Public Utilities Committee
Meeting. There would be two districts, the Norway service area and the MMSD service
area. Public hearings for both districts must be held and a copy of the hearing notice
mailed to every property owner in the proposed districts. After the public hearing, a vote
of at least six Common Council Members before October 1 would be required to create
the districts for the 2006 tax year.
3. Recommendation to Parks & Recreation Board to Allocate Additional Park Dedication
Funds to Complete Old Towne Hall Improvements (Parks Director 5/2005) – Director of
Building and Engineering, Sean McMullen, stated that the bids for the Old Towne Hall
project had been opened. The low bid amount, including the alternate bids for exterior
painting and entryway carpeting, is $137,900 from Rupel Construction, Inc. Additional
costs for inspections, engineering/architect, and Public Works Department roof and minor
interior work add an additional $63,630. Total project cost is $201,530. The total
revenue amount available for the project is $145,420. $56,110 is needed to complete the
project. At this time the City is asking the Department of Commerce to review the
building under the old commercial building code that is more lenient. If the funding for the
project is not approved within 30 days, then the building will fall under the 2002 IDC Code
that is more stringent and will make this project cost more than the bid amount from
Rupel Construction, Inc. Sean McMullen stated that the cost for construction to bring the
other buildings located on the property into structural compliance is $100,000 to
$150,000, not including painting, staining, or tuck pointing. The following comments were
noted during discussion:
Mayor Damaske will be sending letters to groups and businesses asking for
contributions for the Old Towne Hall project.
Alderman Buckmaster stated that he is in favor of the project based on that the
Chamber of Commerce uses Old Towne Hall for events and the Parks and
Recreation Department plan on using it for events. If the other buildings on the
site do not qualify for historic building status, the buildings should be removed
and the land should be turned over to the CDA. Otherwise the maintenance will
be too costly in the future. He stated that if the Parks and Recreation Board
votes not to approve the additional funds, then he would not support approving
the Old Towne Hall project at the Common Council Meeting.
Alderman Patterson stated that he did not want the town hall building to be held
up because of the other buildings on the property.
Alderman Melcher stated that he had discussed this project with residents in his
district. Of the residents he talked to, he estimated that 35% to 40% of them
have questions concerning the funds already spent on Old Towne Hall. He
would like to see the complete cost, including construction/repairs to all of the
buildings instead of just the Old Towne Hall building.
Parks and Recreation Director, Craig Anderson, stated that any programs held in
the Old Towne Hall building after the project is completed, could provide program
fees that would be refunded to the park dedication fund. The additional amount
of $56,110 to complete the Old Towne Hall project will be requested from the
park dedication fund.
Motion by Alderman Salentine, second by Alderman Madden to encourage the
Parks and Recreation Board to move forward with the extra $56,110, to complete
the project. Motion carried, with Alderman Schroeder voting no.
Director of Building and Engineering, Sean McMullen, and Parks and Recreation
Director, Craig Anderson, left the meeting.
4. Ongoing discussion on structure of Finance Department (Ald. Buckmaster) – Several
Finance Department staff members were present and made the following comments:
Interim Finance Director, Sharon Mueller, asked the Committee as to why the
structure of the department is being discussed. The aldermen have stated at
past meetings that it would be the decision of the city administrator to restructure
the department. This would be a set back for the department. Many things have
been accomplished, such as procedures, streamlined work, cross training, the
department has been responsive to requests, and they have met all due dates.
Water Utility Clerk, Lyn Gulbins, understood the restructuring of the Finance
Department would be done once an administrator is hired. The administrator
would be allowed to look at all positions in City Hall. That person would decide
how the existing employees fit in each department. She supports this idea. She
is not opposed to a finance director, but she does support the way the
department is organized now. What they have now is working very well. She
works in three departments, water/sewer, public works, and city. She looks
forward to having the administrator come on board, and make the decisions the
way it had been discussed back in January and February.
Assistant Bookkeeper, Janis Zudonyi, was under the assumption that the city
was going to go forward with the administrator. Let the administrator get a feel
as to how the city runs, who is doing what, and why, and then if any
reorganization is needed it would be done at that point. Bringing in too many
people at one time would be destructive and confusing to city departments. The
Finance Department has completed the audits and the work has been kept up to
date. No one has notified the department that things are not getting done.
5. Discuss Free Video Offer from CGI Communications (Ald. Melcher 6/05) – Alderman
Melcher stated that he asked to discuss this because the offer was mentioned but was
never brought before the Common Council for approval. The contract states that the
company is free to seek advertisement from businesses in the city, it is free to promote
banners along the historic district that will have a business name on it. The Chamber of
Commerce “Chamber” has plans to do a banner project. They were waiting for the
lampposts to be installed before the banners would go up. The Chamber uses
advertisement dollars to exist. The following comments were noted:
Mayor Damaske stated that the Chamber and the City had been contacted back
in November, and it had been turned down. Joe Sommers had informed the
Mayor regarding the offer. Information was presented to the alderman to view
the website that has been done. The banners do not have to go in the historic
district. The City does not have anything to do with it. They will provide a six
minute video that will be attached to the City’s website promoting the City of
Muskego and businesses. The Chamber of Commerce was supplied this
information and could have done this project. Ninety-two communities in Illinois
are using this offer. The Mayor felt that the quality of the banners would be
better using CGI Communications versus a local company.
Chamber of Commerce Director, Kathy Chiaverotti, stated that they had
considered this offer last fall. After consideration, the Chamber decided to do a
banner project using local businesses versus a company from out of state. Also,
the Chamber did not have it in their strategic plan for 2005 to do a video. The
Chamber was waiting for the lampposts to be approved and installed before the
banner project was started. The Chamber asked that information be shared and
to get feedback from the City. They were not provided that when the contact was
signed. A letter was sent from the Chamber to its members informing them of
the banner project with CGI Communications. She was concerned that the
proper approvals are obtained and what the approval process includes, before
banners are put up. The Chamber may still do a banner project in the future.
Alderman Schroeder stated the history on the banner project. This was
considered last year. The lamppost project was still being finalized. He would
like to see the advertising dollars for the banners stay in the City instead of with
an outside company. He asked what the cost would be to cancel the contract
with CGI Communications. Also, he asked what the cost would be to put the
video on the City’s website. He would like to get a copy of what this will cost.
Alderman Patterson felt that local companies should be given the opportunity to
do a banner project before going to an outside company.
Alderman Buckmaster would like to see the Chamber and Mayor work together.
He feels the City should continue with CGI Communications.
Alderman Madden reviewed the contract and stated that the only responsibility
the City has regarding the banners is to tell CGI Communications which poles
they are to use. The City must put the video on the City website.
Motion by Alderman Schroeder, second by Alderman Patterson to advise CGI
Communications that the City is not interested, and allow the Chamber, once the
poles are up, to do the banner project. If they default on that, then consider CGI
Communications as an alternative. Motion failed 3-4, with Alderman Salentine,
Alderman Buckmaster, Alderman Borgman, and Alderman Madden voting no.
Motion by Alderman Madden, second by Alderman Melcher to move forward with
the video with the contract that the Mayor signed and not do the banner project,
and let the Chamber present a banner project, if it is not acceptable then look at
alternatives. Motion failed 3-4, with Alderman Salentine, Alderman Patterson,
Alderman Buckmaster, and Alderman Borgman voting no.
A recess was taken from 9:35 p.m. to 9:45 p.m.
Motion by Alderman Patterson to reconsider the motion to move forward with the
video with the contract that the Mayor signed and not do the banner project, and
let the Chamber present a banner project, if it is not acceptable then look at
alternatives. Motion to reconsider was seconded by Alderman Schroeder. Motion
approved 4-3, with Alderman Salentine, Alderman Buckmaster, and Alderman
Borgman voting no.
Reconsideration of the motion to move forward with the video with the contract
that the Mayor signed and not do the banner project, and let the Chamber present
a banner project, if it is not acceptable then look at alternatives. Motion approved
4-3, with Alderman Salentine, Alderman Buckmaster, and Alderman Borgman
voting no.
6. Discuss Possible Salary Plan Adjustments (Finance Committee 4/05) – Motion by
Alderman Salentine, second by Alderman Schroeder to defer. Motion carried.
7. Discuss Possible Amendment to Leave Donation Policy (Ald. Schroeder 5/05) – Motion
by Alderman Schroeder, second by Alderman Buckmaster to defer. Motion
carried.
8. Committee Appointments (Common Council 4/2005) – Motion by Alderman Schroeder,
second by Alderman Borgman to defer. Motion carried.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS - Discussion, update and possible action may be taken on any or all of
the following:
1. Discuss a Proposed Ordinance to Waive Park Dedication and Conservation Fees in
Certain Situations (Ald. Schroeder 2/05) – Motion by Alderman Schroeder, second by
Alderman Salentine to defer. Motion carried.
2. Improve General Communications with Citizens (Ald. Melcher 2/05) – Motion by
Alderman Schroeder, second by Alderman Buckmaster to defer. Motion carried.
CLOSED SESSION
Alderman Melcher read the “Notice of Closed Session”.
Motion by Alderman Salentine, second by Alderman Borgman to convene into closed
session pursuant to Wis. Stats. 19.85(1)(c), considering employment, promotion,
compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the
governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility, more specifically
discussing specific employees and potential changes in employment and compensation
including but not limited to potentially filling positions of finance director, city
administrator and city administrator secretary. The Committee of the Whole will then
reconvene into open session to adjourn. Motion carried 6-1, with Alderman Schroeder
voting no. The Clerk-Treasurer was dismissed.
Motion by Alderman Salentine, second by Alderman Melcher to return to open session.
Motion carried, 7-0. Returned to open session at 10:40 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT - Motion by Alderman Borgman, second by Alderman Madden to adjourn.
Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Janice Moyer, CMC, CMTW
Clerk-Treasurer