We have 11 members in the room and 11 members in the clerk.

Great.

Thank you, Clerk.

Microphone.

Thanks, Clerk.

Now we will rise for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for our invocation offered by Alder Eck.

Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic by which it stands.

One nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you, Mayor.

So I have in I've um invited my good friend Tanya Evangelist Tanya Matoxin, um, who is from the Oneida tribe to come and lead us in invocation today.

Good evening.

Um first of all, I thank give God all the glory and honor praise for this opportunity.

And I thank you, God, uh, for Mayor Genrik, and for each and every city council member that is here today.

I am I'm totally blessed and honored to be here.

I just want to read a scripture and say a nice blessing and prayer over each and every one of you.

I want to do Psalms 91.

He that dwellth in a secret place of the most high shall abide under the shadow of the Almighty.

I will say to the Lord, he is my refuge and my fortress.

My God in him will I trust.

Surely he shall deliver thee from the snare of the follower from the noise and pestilence.

He shall cover thee with his feathers, and under his wings shall thou trust his truth shall be thy shield and buckler.

Thou shall not be afraid for the tear by night, nor for the arrow that flieth by day, nor for the pestilent that walketh in darkness, nor for the destruction that wasteth at noonday.

A thousand shall fall at thy side and ten thousand at the right hand, but it shall not come nigh thee.

Only with thine eyes shall thou behold and see the reward of the wicked.

Because thou hast made the Lord, which is my refuge, even the most high thy habitation.

There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plaque come nigh thy dwelling.

For he shall give his angels charge over thee to keep thee in all thy ways.

They shall bear thee up in their hands, they shall dash thy foot against the stone.

Thou shalt tread upon the lion and adder, the young lion and the dragon shall thou trample under feet.

Because he set his love upon me, therefore I deliver him.

I'll set him on high because he had known my name.

He shall call upon me and I'll answer him.

I'll be with him in trouble.

I will deliver him and honor him.

With long life will I satisfy him and show him my salvation.

I thank you, Heavenly Father, for each and every individual that is here today.

I pray blessings of Deuteronomy 28, 1 through 13 upon each and every one, and that no weapon formed against the city council shall prosper, and every ton of rise against him with judgment shall be condemned.

I pray that they um that walls and barriers come down.

I pray that they come together on one accord in love, unity, and faith.

And I pray that they make sound decisions, and I pray, Heavenly Father, that they have the wisdom of God as they make these decisions for Green Bay.

And I thank you for the families and for the children, and I bless each and everyone with Deuteronomy 28, 1 through 13.

Let the joy lord be their strength, and greater is he that's in them than he that's in the world is Jesus Christ.

They can do all things through Christ Jesus, which strengthens them, and whom the sun set free is free indeed.

Mount them up with wings of an eagle, and that they soar like an eagle, and they do not get wearied and well doing.

Let the joy lord be their strength.

In Jesus Christ's name we pray, Amen.

Amen.

Thank you.

Amen.

I told her she only had two minutes, so she had to speak fast.

Very efficient.

Now will we move along to approval the minutes?

Approval has been moved by Alder Prophet and seconded by Alder Ritterbush.

Any changes?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye's nay.

The ayes have it.

And the minutes are approved from our September 16th meeting.

Approval of the agenda.

Motion to approve by Alder Stevens.

Seconded by Alder De Lee.

Any uh amendments there.

Seeing none, all in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it.

And the agenda has been approved.

Report by the mayor.

Um, just real quickly, um, wanted to thank our planning staff for for being here again and had a little bit of a workshop on our comp plan before the council meeting tonight.

Um as as was stated during that discussion.

Um, we can continue to make changes if we advance the comp plan to a second reading.

So that's just my request of council is that we continue that work, continue moving it forward and um and remain open, of course, to to changes that are brought forward by council.

I think we had at least uh a couple of suggestions tonight, um, which seem to have some consensus um support.

So looking forward to more discussion as we as we continue with that, but um hoping we can advance it to uh a second and final reading um after tonight's uh meeting here.

Um so with that, I'll move along to announcements.

Alder Eckers, thank you, Mayor.

Um, and I want to thank uh Alder Stevens for all of the um the pink attire, I guess you could say, um, in honor of breastpanscer awareness month.

So just want to make that thank you.

Yes, thank you, Alder Stevens.

He's always always on top of it in October.

So we appreciate that.

Also happy for you.

Oh, thanks, Alder.

Appreciate it.

Yeah, tomorrow.

Not quite 46.

Any other announcements?

Two more terms for that.

Any other announcements?

All right, appointments.

Motion approved motion to approve, made by Alder Prophet.

That's for our new appointments, seconded by Alder Ritterbush.

Any discussion on those seeing none?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The new appointments are made on reappointments.

Motion to approve, made by Alder Prophet.

Second by Alder Delee, was it?

Uh any discussion there.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, and the reappointments are made.

Next is a public hearing.

It's a public hearing on a request for a partial alley closure located near 409 West Walnut Street.

Is there anyone here who would like to speak to that item?

Does that be no?

Anyone here who'd like to speak to that item?

Anyone here who'd like to speak to that item?

All right.

Seeing no one, um, just wanted the record to reflect that, Clerk.

No one's here to speak to that item that we have a public hearing for.

Uh so we'll move along to ordinance, second reading for adoption.

Alder Profit makes a motion to suspend the rules, take up these items with one roll call vote, seconded by Alder Stevens.

Any discussion on that?

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The rules are suspended.

Motion to adopt made by Alder Presley.

Second by Alder Prophet.

Any discussion?

Seeing none, we will use the board.

You may vote.

Alder Hutchison, how would you like to be reported?

Uh aye.

Thank you.

All right, those are adopted unanimously.

Report of the improvement and services committee.

Motion to approve made by Alder Delee.

Seconded by Alder Presley.

Items here to be handled separately.

Two.

Any others?

Hearing none others, all in favor of approving the remainder of that report.

We'll signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The report has been approved with the exception of item two.

Your wishes on that.

Um so earlier today, uh Alder Prophet and I and several staff members had met with DOT to talk about uh some of the proposed improvements for Shawnee Avenue.

Um couple things that came up, and one I kind of there's really two separate projects that they're doing here.

One is uh the resurfacing from Monroe to uh Taylor, which is what this agreement is.

Uh Chief Faults, I don't I know we talked that the actual agreement was not in here, it was a different document.

Were you able to email that out?

Yeah, okay.

Um one of the things that so that's one project, and then the other part of it was the reconstruct, which would be 300 300 feet uh west of Oakland to uh Hudson, I believe, which is contained entirely within that section, uh, but that has more of the underground work and would be more of a reconstruct.

And mayor and I spoke yesterday too, and we both agreed that uh the schedule timeline for this 2031 is not desirable.

And so we did talk a little bit about options of either moving that up or uh if there is a sort of temporary resurfacing that could occur that could hold us over really for the next six years.

Um prefer that that occur at state's expense, but we're gonna continue that conversation with DOT uh outside of the meeting and see what they can do with with internal resources.

Uh, but there was one piece that I did tell them that I was gonna uh ask staff or direct staff to continue the conversation with them as well, which was um evaluating or studying that intersection of Oakland and Shawnee.

Um to see improvements to the design of that intersection.

Uh partly uh director Jews and why it was confusing is because the recon this is not the reconstruct contract, um, but it is the resurfacing and it does apply there as well.

So I think either way, however that occurs, whether it's part of this one or the other one.

Um I do think it's really important that that intersection be reconsidered because of the number of accidents that we've seen there.

And um just for those not familiar, it does a really tight bend uh that is sometimes landed cars in yards.

Uh there's benefitality there.

So I I think now's the time for us to reconsider how that how we can make design improvements to that to that whole stretch.

So uh I don't need you know what what I said to them, and I think they agreed with is we don't need to amend the agreement in any capacity, so it'd be more or less I'll just make the motion now motion to approve the agreement, but direct staff to continue conversations with DOT representatives on ways to improve the Oakland Shawnee intersection.

Second, all right.

Alder Johnson makes that motion and it was seconded by Alder Galvin.

Any further discussion on that.

All right.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, and that item has been approved.

Um, just quickly on that item.

I took the uh secretary of transportation down Shawnee Avenue when she was in town um to to talk about the port and some of the work that the city and the county are doing.

Um you know, I think the Alder Johnson and I had a recollection that there was some commitment on elements of our state government that this project was gonna be moved forward before the decade was out, um, more so in like the 2028-2029 time frame.

So um so appreciate the advocacy by Alder Johnson, Alder Profit, and Chief Vault's um with our Department of Transportation.

It's a state highway.

Um, it's probably objectively um the worst road with the most traffic on it.

Um, and so it's something that we hear a lot of complaints about, and and obviously would love the the state to move that up in the pipeline if at all possible.

So again, thanks to our elders and staff for advocating.

Um next is uh protection policy committee.

Motion to approve made by Elder Stevens, seconded by Elder Profit items here to be handled separately.

Hearing none, all in favor will say aye.

Aye aye oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That report has been approved.

Next up is Green Bay Police Department granting operator licenses.

Motion to approve made by Elder Profit.

Second by Elder Presley.

Abstentions or names to be handled separately.

Hearing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, and that report has been approved.

Plan commission.

Motion approved.

Motion to approve made by Elder Profit.

Second by Elder Eck.

Items here to be handled separately.

One.

Any others?

Six.

One and six.

Any others?

All right.

Items one and six will be handled separately.

Um hearing none others, approve the remainder of that report by signifying or by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The report has been approved, the exception of items one and six.

Uh, your wishes on item one, Alder Prophet.

I would like to amend the motion in front of us to reflect what was brought forward to plan commission.

So I'd like to strike holding the 700 block of Vanderbrack and proceed with what was attached um in plan commission with with closing that small portion of Vanderbrack.

Um, my my concern being safety, of course, but I know there's layers of agreements with the rail as well that basically if we don't move forward, they will.

Um, and I don't think that fosters a good environment for anyone.

But there is um on my behalf, severe concern for safety at that intersection.

So I'm comfortable moving forward with what was proposed by staff at Plan Commission.

I don't know if director would like to add anything to it, but that's my motion.

Yeah, there's uh motion made for an amendment seconded by Alder Eck um on that, Director Juiceon.

Yeah, so we were proposing closure of Vanderbrack.

Um we are under a various orders from the office of the commission of the railroad.

And um one of them was for the closure of uh Eastman at Quincy.

The other was uh lane reductions at Quincy to go back to what was originally approved.

Um these are both for safety issues, and then the third was for Vanderbrack Street.

And there's just safety issues with the um the way the tracks are laid out.

Uh there's other tracks crossing Quincy very close to there.

Um it's very difficult to see approaching trains and other motorists.

And then there's also the difficulty if we don't close, there was the difficulty of adding warding um devices um because of the proximity of all the tracks.

So staff reviewed uh traffic counts and accident history.

Um they reviewed what's alternate routes there are that the traffic could take, and we are recommending closure of that street.

Okay, thank you for that, director.

Any um comments on the amendment.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it, the item item has been amended.

Motion to approve is amended, made by Alder Presley.

Second by Elder Ritterbush.

Further discussion.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

And that item has been approved as amended.

Now on to item six.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I don't think the applicants here.

Um so wanting to fully appreciate an understanding why this request is in front of us to allow the business owner to essentially expand their liquor license uh into the vacant lot next door.

Like the concept, that's all good.

However, I've had a couple of business owners and property owners in that area object to the closure of the alley.

Um I noticed you know, I kind of referenced the petition that was included in there in it.

Uh unless I misinterpreting state law, uh, I think the petition would also be incomplete and not meet the requirements that are necessary per state statute.

So of course I wouldn't want us to proceed with something if that's not where it needs to be.

And one of the individuals who actually signed that petition had communicated to me that um they didn't uh they signed the petition, maybe under the premise that they were signing for something else, and uh so I think that needs to get cleared up too.

So uh I did talk to Director Berner Wig as well as uh planner uh Hummel, uh Stephanie Hummel, and from their perspective, they didn't think there was an urgency to this, meaning that we would have some time.

Um, and I just simply requested that the temporary use permit that is in place that allows them to operate the way they are now, that there would not be um any changes to that operation, meaning that we would not rush to uh uh demand or require removal of the container or anything while uh the hold is essentially allowing us to flesh some of this out.

I I think there's a path here to get kind of uh unanimous consent amongst folks and make sure we're in compliance.

So that's I would just simply request uh a hold uh until the next meeting to allow a little bit more time for us to do that.

So I would make a motion to hold until the next meeting.

Alder Johnson makes a motion to hold this item until the October 21st meeting of council seconded by Alder Stevens on that Alder Prophet.

Yeah, in that I'm in favor of the hold, but could we get clarification?

Because I am reading one third of owners of parcels within 2,650 feet.

Was can we just get clarification from staff?

Are we good in terms of the state statute that was included on that petition?

Was that vetted before it came to plan commission?

Mr.

Buck.

Hello.

Yes.

Um, so this was vetted through the attorney's office.

Um there is a little bit difference if you were reading vacation versus closure.

Um there's a difference in the notification, and there's also a difference in notification if the uh request only serves the property owner and doesn't serve the community at large.

Uh staff did believe that the access going right onto walnut, really close to the Broadway intersection was less desirable than an access going out to chestnut.

So in that respect, it is almost it's almost it was applied for by a private individual, but it's almost a city action and it's to the city's benefit to do that.

And they have different sign-off requirements.

You have that half mile when it's a private development doing it only for the vacation.

So gladly hold it.

I don't think there's any urgency, and we can double check.

Um, but yeah, so we have we have attorneys at all of our plan commission coordination meetings.

So thanks, Mr.

Bark.

Alder Johnson.

Yeah, and just if I could get uh not necessarily clarification on the spot, but something I would obviously want to have to look at because when I read uh state statute, it just simply refers to it as a discontinuance of a public way.

So I uh admittedly didn't go into the case law to determine if um closure uh constitutes a discontinuance or if it's exclusively uh the a vacation.

Uh but either way, um it does indicate in here that uh that every property owner who is a butting the alleyway from front to back has to sign on that, and that did not happen within the petition, which is why I brought that up, and certainly the a third within 2650 feet didn't happen.

Um and the state statute does say that it says and not or so I I just think there's probably some advantages to us just making sure we're clear and maybe identifying if it's an applicant that's requesting it.

That's the statute.

But if it's us requesting it, then maybe there doesn't need to be an applicant, uh, if that makes sense and could maybe kind of ease that burden or that requirement.

Sure.

And we'd also probably like to talk to that owner that who thought maybe he didn't know what he was signing.

Yeah, for sure.

And like I said, I'm trying to relay information and uh um, but certainly would want staff to kind of take that baton and go from there.

Wonderful.

Good.

Again, that's to hold that item until our next council meeting.

All in favor will say aye.

I pose nay.

The ayes have it, and that item has been held over report of the finance committee.

Motion to approvement by Elder Stevens.

Second by older profit.

Items here to be handled separately.

Hearing none, all in favor will say aye.

Pose nay.

The ayes have it, and the report has been approved.

Committee.

Motion to improvement by elder Delee, seconded by Elder Ritterbush.

Items here to be handled separately.

Seeing none, all in favor will say aye.

The ayes have it, and that report has been approved.

Personnel.

Motion to approve.

Made by older profit, seconded by elder Galvin.

Any discussion?

Yeah.

Elder Grant.

Thank you.

Uh Director Oldson, can you answer how much did we pay the consulting company to run this study?

That's a very good question that I don't have the answer to right now, but I can follow up with you.

I know it's not a significant amount because we do these studies with various positions within the city.

Okay.

Um, I'm going to offer an amendment to revert the dollar amount back to the staff's recommendation of 128,000.

All right.

Um Alder Grant makes a motion to amend from the amount stated here to 128,000.

Um, seconded by Elder Eck discussion on that.

Um, can I make some comments on that just to kind of explain my amendment?

Um, I just did some research on this since our last meeting and just a few generic things that I just looked up.

I looked at average salary for other cities, and again, I like I said a personnel, there is no easy apple to apples to apple comparison.

Every municipality is set up differently between staff structure, having a man a city manager and mayoral uh position.

It's just it's really hard to look at it.

So a few things that I looked at.

I even compared the US average according to salary.com, the average salary for 107,000 residents is 90,987 uh per year, can range from 82,500 to 99,200 for the 25th to the 75th percentiles.

We are the 75th percentile compared to other municipality sizes.

So the highest was 99,200.

Um, another uh salary solver quoted 103,000 per year.

Um another thing that I looked at was our average salary here in Green Bay.

I was actually shocked to find out that an individual, the median income is about 56,000 for males, 47,000 for females.

Um the average house, or I'm sorry, the yeah, the average household for Green Bay, so that's a two-income household typically is 78,000.

Um, I did also compare to Appleton as well.

Their median household is 77,000.

And the only reason I bring that up is when we look at the median for Green Bay being 62,546.

Appleton's median is about 15,000 more than Green Bay, which I was actually a little shocked to find out.

And I think it is a little important to compare what the residents make compared to the elected officials, not just the population size.

Um other thing that I wanted to bring up too is I did inquire with staff.

Um, since 2019, the salary in 2019 was 92,221 and 12 cents.

So within the last six years, we've raised the salary vote to 10,000.

And the study, just a reminder, came back recommended at one for 114,000.

Staff's recommendation was 128,000.

So the difference in that, I know the way it's scheduled to set up that the over the course of the four years, the salary would adjust for the next four years forward, and it was brought up in discussion that we're always behind then in a sense.

But that's not necessarily true because if the recommendation was 114,000, and let's say we were aggressive with the 3% raise over the four years, 12% on that is $13,680.

So we are actually 14,000 over, so we are looking forward.

We're actually not looking backwards.

If we start at 128,000.

Um, I apologize.

I know that's not a lot of numbers.

I am a number person.

Um, but I do think compared to a lot of what the averages are, not a single average that I found was even close to 120,000.

So I do think it is a very important role.

I think we absolutely want qualified people applying for or running for this position.

I just want to ensure that people are running for the right reasons, and it's not just for the money.

Um, and that it is a gonna a big perk because it is, I understand a very big sacrifice.

Some people are leaving their careers and their professions for this position.

And as we all know, campaigning is can sometimes be very uh brutal and a lot of harassment.

So I can also understand people not even wanting to put their foot forward for this.

So I do appreciate the increase.

I support the 128,000 fully.

And again, when we look at coming from 92,000 in 2019 to 128,000 in 2027, I'm very comfortable with that increase, and I think it's a good step forward.

Thank you.

Thanks, Alder.

Any other comments on the amendment?

Alder Gell.

This uh just a quick question for Alder Grant.

You did throw a lot of numbers at us, and I'm not a number guy.

Um, did you include with that average that you looked at?

Uh communities that have a mayor and a city manager or city administrator.

That was kind of surprising with some of the information that we were giving at our meeting.

And when I did search it, it did say 100.

Um there's a lot of variation depending on region, cost of living, how strong the mayoral role is, whether it's full-time or part-time budget, et cetera.

So that's where it gave me three different websites: the 90,000, 103,000, 63,000.

But that's where I kind of trust the consultants' position, because I'm guessing they looked at a lot of these things.

They probably did a lot of what I just looked at, and their recommendation was 114,000.

So that's where, yes, there is no easy way to find a municipality that's just like ours.

And that's why I went with not only population, but what our own residents make, median and average, because that is that does vary.

Um, the difference in that was about 16,000 between the mean and the median.

Um, so and again, the 62,000 being the median and the 68,000 being the mean, that is household income.

So potentially that's two people.

When I looked at individual salary, it was closer to 56 to 47,000 for an individual in the city of Green Bay.

All right, I'll accept that.

But I also look at the fact that if you look at the salaries of our rank and file police officers, firemen, they're making more than the median income of most of the homes here.

Um, and and I don't think we use that though in factoring how much we're gonna pay our firemen or policemen or or you know, uh DPW workers or anything else like that.

So I mean, it that's good information to have.

And I've had one constituent call me with concerns about that based on you know what he makes.

Uh, but I also had had a lot of other things that I was able to explain to him.

So we saw where I was coming from after a while, but uh he still had concerns.

Thank you.

Thanks, Alder.

Alder Prophet the neck.

So I have a few questions.

Um, I first want to thank the director for including my um attachment.

I certainly would have emailed it because I will say in full transparency, I did have some folks reach out via email and I provided the same document via email to anyone who reached out, and I'd be happy to do that.

Um, my numbers that I factored in were based on what was attached in our packet from the consultant in June.

Um, could you clarify maybe, director?

Was there any other municipalities in that?

I grabbed every single one.

So when the consultant did their work, did they look at more, or were these all the municipalities they looked at?

There were two scopes that the consultant looked at for the salary analysis, and one was a full comparable scope to all of the information that they have, and there's a handful of cities here that I could go through.

There was also a limited scope, which was slightly higher of a recommendation than the 114 that included the organizations or the municipalities, I'm sorry, that were polled in our 2023 poll.

Okay, thank you.

Um, so yeah, I'm I'm not in favor of dropping it back down.

I do like the recommendation that came out of finance.

There's a few other things.

I think as a city, we could certainly look at when we compare the cities that have a mayor and then the cities that have a city admin, I think that's a conversation worth having, but that's not where we're at today.

Um, I also want to call attention to the fact that we have Lambo Field.

We have an NFL team in our community that that is um up kind of to the mayor in his office um to actively negotiate.

That is that is not apples to apples with any of these communities in my mind that were included, or um, really the only other one we could look at is the city of Buffalo, and that mayor makes 178,000.

I did look at that before I brought forward my recommendation of 165.

So I think there are a lot of numbers being thrown around.

I did have constituents reach out to me, shocked that they personally make more than the mayor.

Um, I think when we look at the average salary of our city, yeah, that should that should be higher as well.

And that's a conversation worth having.

But um, when we talk about the scope, um, appreciate the mayor drive in the Secretary of Transportation Don Shano Avenue.

When we just think about the scope of that work, I think it's worth 140.

Alderek.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, okay, so I in looking at the chart that um was attached uh from Alder Profit, um, in kind of just using Appleton as an example, they don't have a city administrator.

So I just wanted because I think Elder Galvin kind of alluded to the comparisons.

Um we did we hired it, and this is not about anyone in particular as far as looking at the salary.

You know, this is a future mayor, we don't even know who it'll be, so it's not anything about that.

It's just looking at the position itself.

I have had people reach out to me and they were telling me please do not raise it that much.

Um, you know, looking at it from a taxpayer standpoint, uh, they're concerned about um the impact on the budget and and their taxes.

So um that's you know a big part of why I am in agreement.

And I and I we hired a consultant to give us a recommendation, and they came up with a lower number.

Um, we're going up higher than what the consultant is recommending.

And you know, we we look at them as an expert, so that's why we ask them to do it.

So I just think we should all consider that when we're voting.

Thank you.

Thanks, Alder.

Any other comments from council Hinkfis?

One question first.

Um Alder Grant, you had talked about the 114.

I'm looking at the consulting um document from Cottingham and Butler, and it lists at the 75th percentile 1252 and 1269.

I just want to clarify that because I think I don't know where the 114.

I don't know, Director Olifson, if you want to know the 114 is the average rate for all that were pulled.

Oh, the average the pay scale of 2550, 75th based on those results.

Okay, so looking at it from the 75th percentile, it's more like 126 or 127.

So just we had started at a lower number, and ultimately when we look at what do we want our mayor to be, what do we expect from them?

They work 24 hours a day.

They're responsible for all the contracts.

They are responsible for bringing development to the area.

We have very high expectations as um community members, as council members, and the skill set that's required for that job is not something that everybody possesses.

And I feel like raising it to 140,000 will support more people running for the position and more options for our community.

And um it's much more of a fair wage to pay somebody with the expectations we all as a community have for our mayor.

So thanks.

Thanks, Holder.

Any other comments from council?

Just one mayor.

And what we were talking here, I was trying to do um, I think it's this recognition that if we're appropriately compensating someone for the work that they do.

And what our mayor is.

It is certainly an elected position, which is slightly different than a city manager where that role is hired, but the work that they do is still no different.

And in fact, it's probably even more demanding because it is a larger city.

Um it is uh I was trying to do quick research on some of the stuff.

Village of Suamako, 143,500, City of De Pier, 198,000.

Um I believe it was village of Ashwabanon was 143, uh around 140,000, I believe.

So uh my point is the you know, when you do an apples to apples compared to the work that's being done, uh, we are definitely still below market.

I do believe in a responsible setting of the rate at uh 140, recognizing that that had been held for so long.

Now we did make an adjustment in 2019, but it was an adjustment that still didn't bring it into market conditions.

So I like where the recommendation of the committee came in.

Uh I don't necessarily subscribe to the you know 128,000 I support, but 140,000 is a burden on the taxpayers because that's point zero zero zero zero eight five percent of the overall budget.

So uh I do think it is a reasonable number uh for the work that is being performed by the individual in this office, and I do support what the committee recommended.

Thanks, Alder.

Anything else on the amendment?

Seeing none, all in favor will say aye.

Yeah, absolutely.

Board vote has been requested.

You may vote Stevens.

Thank you.

Alder Hutchinson, how would you like to be reported?

No.

Thank you.

That fails three to nine.

Motion to approve made by Elder Profit, seconded by Elder Ritterbush.

Discussion on that motion.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Sure.

Board vote has been requested.

Okay.

You may vote.

Alder Hutchison, how would you like to be reported?

I thank you.

That passes nine to three.

Uh next up is public arts commission.

Motion approved.

Motion to approved by Alder Prophet, seconded by Alder Johnson.

I think Alder Hutchison had a had a change there.

Alder Hutchison.

I do.

I have a uh request that change in the Port Laureate RFQ.

I think it is intended to be a two-year project.

And I think uh under the scope of project.

The very last line says Port Laureate may only serve one full term.

January first, 2026 to December 31st, 2028.

That's actually a three-year term.

So I think December 31st should be changed to January first, 2028.

Then it'd be a two-year term.

Okay.

Is that an amendment that's being offered?

I think Alder makes that amendment.

Sorry, second second for the offered by Alder Johnson.

Uh any discussion.

See none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

That amendment has been made.

Alder Johnson makes a motion to approve is amended.

Second by Alder Galvin.

Discussion there.

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it, and that has been approved as amended.

T BNP.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve, made by Alder Stevens.

Seconded by Elder Presley.

Items here to be handled separately.

Three.

Any others?

Hearing none others.

All in favor of approving the remainder of that report will signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Oppose nay.

The ayes have it.

The report has been approved with the exception of item three.

Your wishes on that.

Alder Johnson.

Yeah.

Uh Director, um I submitted this communication, uh, joint communication with Elder Prophet and I uh because Dowsman splits our districts and um presuming that uh traffic uh commission was the right place to initiate this, but then when I listened to INS, there was a similar request on that agenda.

And appreciating that the difference might be that committee has more authority over maybe funding source.

Um wanting to get your recommendation on this, the thought was that we would sort of get the pre-authorization, if you will, for placement there, but that we would work with staff on funding.

Uh so wanting to maybe understand should this be going to INS for that decision, or is this something that you think we could continue to work with your office on?

Um does the city attorney have any comments on that.

I mean, my initial, I guess, opinion is that it could be something that we continue to work on.

You know, we would just have to work towards funding it.

Sure.

Is there initial um an initial decision needed to be made on whether it's appropriate to repaint the sidewalk at that intersection?

Because that would be appropriate for recommendation TPP.

uh city attorney have any comments on that i'm my initial i guess opinion is that it could be something that we continue to work on you know we would just have to work towards funding it's sure is there initial um an initial decision needed to be made on whether it's appropriate to repaint the sidewalk at that intersection because that would be appropriate for recommendation TPP but as you stated the funding source would likely be from INS so I think either would be appropriate if you'd like to refer it back to INS yeah I believe the the painted crosswalk is not um the issue it's uh installation of uh RRF B which is you know more costly yeah and it's my understanding you don't have an exact location correct that there was just a decision that there would be one installed in the future yeah I believe uh traffic engineer Sherman said um pointed out that because of its proximity to the railroad uh that there might be some consideration to have there in terms of setback or easement requirements um I do think that crossing is important to make safer uh recognizing that there are there's the potential for other plans in the future but those are totally undecided and obviously safety is uh a concern right now so I think our desire was to certainly have something installed now contingent on the railroad's approval so if having a decision by I mean the reality is I mean INS is uh you know really just making a recommendation anyway we have the whole body here now so that's where I'm just kind of wondering if if it falls below the you know the approval threshold of I believe it's 50,000 now is that right that can be approved at the director level right and I just don't I mean I think this would be less than 50 I think it was around 10 maybe I heard so I I don't want to presume though that you have a source for this and so that's where I was looking for your recommendation and I mean if if you had multiple requests like this would you prioritize this or not because that might make the difference on whether or not you're motivated to find the funding source.

Well I I don't know what the funding source would be so I think that we would have to look into it so I don't know if you'd want us to refer back to staff to look at possible funding for it.

Would you do you feel comfortable at least exploring that if we just approve it as is here recognizing that if this body does approve this that there's especially with the conversation that there's support for it so okay then I'd be comfortable with just a motion to approve all right Johnson makes a motion to approve seconded by elder profit further discussion on that seeing none all in favor say aye aye oppose nay the ayes have it that item has been approved sustainability commission motion to approve made by Alder Presley seconded by Alder Delee items here to be handled separately none all in favor say aye aye aye oppose nay the ayes have it and that report has been approved equal rights refer back to equal presley makes a motion to refer this report back to equal rights commission second by Alder Stevens um did you want to note why that would be oh yeah Alder Presley so yeah we're we're uh wanting to refer it back just because there was an out of quorum at the meeting um where we pass these items so it would need to go back through a larger percentage of the equal rights commission sounds good uh so motion has been made and seconded to refer back any discussion seeing none all in favor say aye aye oppose nay the ayes have it and that report has been referred back to the equal rights commission next informational items building report and municipal court report for September 2025 in your packet resolutions motion to suspend the rules made by all the profit seconded by Alder Hinkfist and that's to take up these items with one roll call vote all in favor will say aye aye aye oppose nay the ayes have it the rules are suspended motion to adopt made by all the profit seconded by elder delay discussion we'll use the board you may vote oops sorry you may vote Aldo Hutchison aye thank you those are adopted unanimously ordinances first reading suspend the rules and take up items two through seven uh alder Johnson makes a motion to suspend the rules and take up items two through seven the seven the seven mayoral salary well just I don't know if people want to have a vote two through six two through six um suspend rules for items two through six offered by Alder Johnson seconded by Alderhin's all in favor will say aye the ayes have it rules are suspended motion to advance made by elder profit seconded by elder delay again those are items two through six all in favor will say aye aye aye oppose nay the ayes have it uh those are advanced to a second and final reading now on to item one motion to hold to October 21st Alder Johnson makes a motion to hold this item until October 21st seconded by Alder Delee all in favor will say aye aye aye the ayes

Aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it.

Rules are suspended.

Motion advanced.

Motion to advance made by Alder Prophet.

Seconded by Elder Delee.

Again, those are items two through six.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it.

Uh those are advanced to a second and final reading.

Now on to item one.

Motion to hold to October 21st.

Alder Johnson makes a motion to hold this item until October 21st.

Seconded by Elder Delee.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

The ayes have it.

That item has been held over.

Item seven.

Motion to advance.

Made by Elder Delee.

Second by Elder Prophet.

Discussion.

Seeing none.

All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Nay.

The ayes have it.

And that item has been advanced to a second and final reading.

Petitions and communications.

Adjournment.

Motion to adjourn made by Alder Delee.

Second by Elder Eck.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed nay.

The ayes have it.

We're adjourned.

Thanks, everyone.