City of Racine Committee of the Whole Meeting Summary – June 9, 2026

The City of Racine Committee of the Whole met on Tuesday, June 9, 2026, at 6:00 PM in City Hall Room 205, or after adjournment of the Public Works and Service Committee. Roll call showed 12 alders present and 3 excused. The committee approved the May 11, 2026 minutes, received and filed three communications, and approved an amended version of Proposed Ordinance 0029-25, Communications, as a recommendation to the Common Council. The meeting adjourned at 8:27 PM.

Call to Order, Roll Call, and Minutes

• Present: Weiss, Turquoise-Davis, Maack, Jorgensen, Weidner, Hodges, Allen, Peete, Land, DeMark, Harmon, and Pabon.
• Excused: Frazier, Horton, and Kelly.
• Minutes of the May 11, 2026 meeting were approved on a motion by Alder Pabon, seconded by Alder Peete.

Communication 0297-26 – Ballot Omission and A/B Ballot Reconciliation

• Alderman Maack sponsored the request for an overview of the ballot omission and processing/reconciliation of A-B ballots. The county clerk was invited by email and certified mail but did not attend or respond.
• The City Clerk said her office learned on the afternoon of March 25, 2026, that the municipal judge race was missing from the ballot. A press release was issued the same day, and the city contacted the county clerk and the Wisconsin Election Commission.
• She explained that the county clerk is responsible for designing and printing ballots; the city submits certifications and does not receive a proof or an opportunity to review ballots before they arrive.
• Because the clerk’s office must mail roughly 2,300 to 2,500 ballots within 24 hours and there are 57 ballot styles, the initial ballots were not reviewed for accuracy. After this incident, the clerk’s office plans to use checklists and review ballots when they arrive.
• The clerk said contingency ballot paper and envelopes allowed corrected B ballots to be sent about three days sooner. Alder Weidner noted the ballot B notice did not explain that an already-submitted ballot A would be opened and transferred to ballot B; the clerk said the wording was prescribed by the Wisconsin Election Commission.
• The committee received and filed the communication on a motion by Alder Pabon, seconded by Alder Allen. The vote was 11-0 with 3 absent/excused.

Communication 0061-26 – Licensed Establishment Constituent Outreach

• Alder Frazier requested discussion of how to handle videos, texts, emails, and other constituent communications about licensed establishments.
• Assistant City Attorney Ian Pomplin advised alders not to investigate on their own. He directed them to send information to the police department, call emergency or non-emergency lines for active issues, use Sergeant Enrique Cruz Ortiz as the public safety liaison, and preserve videos/photos through the Axon evidence platform.
• Police compile a licensed premises report every two weeks for the Public Safety and Licensing Committee, and recent constituent communications can be added to that report.
• The City Attorney added that alders have legislative and quasi-judicial roles. Because liquor licenses are constitutionally protected property, alders acting in a quasi-judicial capacity must not rely on facts gathered outside properly noticed meetings.
• The committee received and filed the communication on a motion by Alder Peete, seconded by Alder Land. The vote was 11-0 with 3 absent/excused.

Communication 0518-26 – Cell Phone Use During Council and Committee Meetings

• Alder Weidner said constituents had repeatedly raised concerns about council members’ cell phone use during meetings and that the public watches the council’s conduct. She did not request a formal ban and moved to receive and file the item.
• Alder Pabon said constituents should contact their alder directly. Alder Weiss said she welcomed a broader later conversation about meeting behavior. Alder Turquoise-Davis said she uses her phone for closed captioning because she is hard of hearing, and also for maps, statutes, and emergencies; she said constituents should ask rather than assume. Alder Peete said elected officials should act as responsible adults. Alder Harmon said some constituents make assumptions about what they see.
• The committee received and filed the communication on a motion by Alder Weidner, seconded by Alder Land, by voice vote.

Communication 1265-25 – Proposed Ordinance 0029-25, Communications

• Alder Weidner presented Proposed Ordinance 0029-25, which would change how communications are submitted and referred. The City Attorney distinguished it from Ordinance 0003-25, a separate deferred item about code amendment procedures.
• The proposed changes would: allow administrative managers to submit communications without an alder or mayor endorsement; allow the Common Council to refer communications to authorities, boards, and commissions as well as standing committees; impose a 90-day limit on deferrals; reduce from two-thirds to a majority of Common Council members the vote needed to move a deferred communication; delete the existing 250-elector petition process; and require the City Clerk to notify the council by January 15 of communications received by December 31 but not yet acted on.
• Alder Weidner argued the changes would increase transparency, reduce administrative barriers, and prevent deferrals from lingering. She cited items deferred for months and said 250 signatures was disproportionate when only 20 signatures are needed to get on the ballot.
• The City Attorney noted that referral to an independent board, such as the Board of Police and Fire Commissioners, would place the item on that body’s agenda but could not compel the board to take a particular action.
• Several alders, including Allen, Weiss, Pabon, Hodges, and Jorgensen, said the 250-signature petition should remain or expressed concern about deleting it; Maack spoke against preserving it. Alders also raised concerns about referring items to boards outside the council’s standing-committee structure, where the council would have less control.
• Staff had recommended referral to the Executive Committee, but the committee proceeded with its own discussion and vote.

Key Outcomes

• Minutes approved; the ballot, licensed-establishment outreach, and cell phone use items were received and filed.
• An initial motion by Alder Weidner to approve Ordinance 0029-25 as presented died for lack of a second.
• Alder Turquoise-Davis later moved to approve the ordinance as presented, seconded by Alder Maack. Her call-the-question motion failed 5-5 because it needed eight votes.
• Alder Pabon moved, seconded by Alder Weidner, to amend the ordinance by striking Part V, which preserved the existing 250-signature elector petition process. The amendment passed 7-3, with 4 absent/excused.
• A subsequent motion to call the question passed 8-2, and the final motion to adopt the ordinance as amended passed 9-1, with Alder Allen voting no and 4 absent/excused.
• Because this was a Committee of the Whole action, the amended Ordinance 0029-25 recommendation will go to the full Common Council for final action.
• Note: The printed minutes include a recommendation label reading ‘Approve as Amended. Failed,’ but the transcript and final roll call show the amended communication was adopted 9-1.