If alders and guests could please take their seats, we'll begin momentarily.

Well, good evening, everyone.

The hour of six o'clock having arrived on the 16th of June 2026, it is my honor to call to order the City of Racine Common Council.

The first order of business is the Pledge of Allegiance.

If you could please rise as you are able and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Move to approve.

Any discussion on those minutes?

Seeing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, that motion carries.

We have three proclamations that we'll be uh reading into the record this evening, and I will begin with the first one.

Uh we will start with Pride Month.

Proclamation reads, whereas on June 28th, 1969, New York City Police raided Stonewall Inn, a gay club located in Greenwich Village, and sparked a riot, leading to six days of protest and clashes with law enforcement known as the Stonewall Riots, which later served as the catalyst for the LGBTQIA plus rights movement.

And whereas since the Stonewall rising, the LGBT community has achieved significant progress, including the right to marry, equality across the country, state and federal workplace detections, and the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr.

Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

Whereas Americans are 26 times more likely to die by gun homicide than people in other high-income countries, and firearms are the leading cause of death for U.S.

children and teens, with one in 10 victims aged 19 or younger.

Whereas National Gun Violence Awareness Day is observed on the first Friday in June, this year on June 5th, launching Wear Orange Weekend in honor of Hedeah Pendleton, who at age 15 was shot and killed in 2013.

Whereas the color orange, chosen by Hadia's friends, has become a national symbol honoring all victims and survivors of gun violence.

And then on this day on June the 5th, and throughout Wear Orange Weekend during gun violence awareness month, we join as one Racine community to support efforts that prevent gun violence, promote responsible gun ownership, and protect our children, families, and neighborhoods.

Now, therefore, I Corrie Mason Mayor of the City of Racine do hereby proclaim June 5th to be National Gun Violence Awareness Day here in the city of Racine, witness whereof I is hearing to set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Racine to be affixed.

This next proclamation is in memory of Officer John Hetland, who died in the line of duty protecting our community.

Um I want to acknowledge uh Alder Kelly for suggesting that we do this proclamation, and it reads, whereas Officer John Hetland joined the Racine Police Department in February 20 on February 28th, 1995, bringing with him a deep sense of duty, compassion, professionalism, and was highly respected for his commitment to serving and protecting the community.

Whereas John attended Racine Public Schools and graduated from Park High School in 1988, he continued his education at the University of Wisconsin Milwaukee, where he earned a degree in criminal justice.

Whereas John loved spending time in the Northwoods hunting and fishing with his children, family, and friends.

He enjoyed watching his children participate in sports and often help coach their teams.

John himself was an accomplished athlete, a devoted sports enthusiast, and an event and an avid Packers and Brewers fan.

Whereas John was a leader among his brothers and sisters in law enforcement, serving as vice president of the Racine Police Association and as a proud member of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association.

Whereas on June 17, 2019, while off-duty, Officer John Hetlin was shot and killed while courageously intervening to protect others during an armed robbery.

And whereas, although Officer John Hetlan's physical presence is no longer with us, his legacy continues to inspire current and future generations, reminding our community of the extraordinary sacrifices made by those who serve and the unbreakable bond between officers and the people they protect.

Now, therefore, I query Mason Mayor of the City of Racine to hereby formally honor and commemorate the life, service, and extraordinary legacy of Officer John Hetland and offer our deepest sympathies to Officer Hetland's family and all who mourn his passing.

A witness where of I have here in two set my hand and cause the seal of the city of Racine to be affixed the 16th day of June.

Again, thank you to Alder Kelly for making that suggestion.

We'll now move on to the public comment section of the evening.

I will ask the clerk to please read the procedures before we begin.

The public comments section.

The public comments segment is opportunity for citizen to speak directly to the common council.

Speakers will limit their remarks to three minutes.

There shall be no dialogue or interaction between the speaker and the officials or staff.

This time is not attended to be a debate or discussion.

The common council shall not hear personal complaints or attack against city employees or elective officials or any matter related to an individual claim, citation, appeal, or lawsuit.

Profane destructive threatening or conduct that otherwise impates the CFD, orderly or effectiveness.

Conduct of the common council meeting is equally unacceptable during the public comment period and it is during all other portions of the city meetings.

Candidates for public office may not use this opportunity, campaign for office.

Speakers during the public comment period shall follow all the rules of the Common Council and rulings of the chair, including a decision to terminate the remarks.

If the speaker does not adhere to these rules, public comments shall be limited to ideas or concerns regarding the city of Racine.

We encourage you to submit any detailed concerns in writing to the city clerk's office or your aldermen where they can properly document and direct for a response.

There will be six speakers this evening.

And just before the clerk calls up the first speaker, I just want to remind everybody there is a clock that will appear on the screens for three minutes and it counts down.

When your three minutes are up, your microphone is turned off.

That is not a reflection on your commentary.

It is just an effort to treat everybody fairly and the same as they come and offer their comments.

If the clerk could please call the first speaker, the first speaker today will be Diane.

Hello.

Tonight I'd like to talk about two points, but the both are related to a single point.

I am a former third generation landlord.

They're running for about 12 years now, learning in Racine.

And some of the practices that others have told me about or share with me, and even a friend who's here with me today who will go in detail about his building.

Are some things that my parents never told me to do as a landlord.

I'll refer to my notes to do to make sure that it's said in detail.

One thing I was told never to do as a landlord, uh being heavy handed at solving problems by power or fear of homelessness, being one-sided as an apartment manager, arguing the point rather than use rationality to resolve an issue without escalation.

Never cause an issue that tenant is fearful, needs to call the city, needs to call the health department, or needs to call the older person, or even the doctor and psychiatrist.

And in my case, three years ago, we had one bad apartment manager that worked for apartment management company that works in Milwaukee.

And she terrorized many of us, including those of us who are disabled regarding her version of cleanliness, and also her philosophy of uh multi strictness of cleanliness.

Fortunately, the management company caught on and they have a new manager who's wonderful, who's mending fences, but there are other places in Racine that people share with me that they have concerns about lazy fare, uh, lack of responsiveness, and even the managers just basically clocking in and clocking out, not really listening to the tenants, or basically letting the tenants fight among each other, which is unprofessional management, especially when you're talking about complexes of a hundred, hundred units, or even twenty units.

So, therefore, because it's not everybody, but there's a significant amount, I think, that that has been brought to the attention.

I think the state we've seen needs to adopt some sort of a licensing procedure similar to a liquor license or bartender's license with the mayor points with owner occupied landlords exempted unless they have three violations.

Thank you.

Second speaker will be Ron Person.

Just leave it on Yeah, thank you for uh allowing me to speak to you about another situation, landlord situation that I'm encountering over at Oakview Manor.

We have been without an elevator for more than 10 days, and no corrective action has been done by the subcontractor because can't they cannot find the parts.

This is not a typical situation.

I understand that, but what I need to have is some cooperation from the city of Racine to see that it is done, and that we don't have a problem in the future.

Uh, you know, in regards to this ongoing event.

Um the building I live in has a lot of disability people who can't make three flights of stairs.

Uh, even myself, I have a problem with that because I'm not in the best shape at my age.

Um what I feel is that you know there should be follow-up on the management of elevators that are old.

This building was built in 1976, and uh unfortunately there's no inspection periodically on the elevators as it is in the state of Illinois.

It's required by the city and suburbs to do that.

Here in Racine, you're at the mercy who actually owns the building or manages it, and that's another problem.

I never really got a good response as to actually who owns the building.

Um that's a problem too, because uh I think we we should have full disclosure here to correct this ongoing event.

I can't tell you the turmoil that we've gone through in the last 10 days, especially people who uh could barely make the steps and stairs, and I would say about 80 percent of the building is handicapped in some way or way or form, you know.

So we need some backup from the city of Racine to see things get done properly, and that this doesn't reoccur.

Because if there was a fire, you know, that would have been a real problem in the future, too.

Umgoing and you know the inspectors have been over there as well as my alderman, so they know of the case, and uh we need to have their uh fulfillment of their duties to see that things get done.

Also, this was also mentioned on Facebook about how deplorable the situation has become in the building, and I kind of think that we should be losing our HUD accreditation that's so pathetic unclean and everything else, and I invite you to look at Facebook to get further details of you know, people and their comments on it.

Thanks for your consideration in the matter.

Our third speaker will be James Gamble of 514 9th Street.

Good evening.

Good evening.

Um 50 years ago, 1975.

I was hired as a program director at Project Breakthrough Community Center, and I was also hired as assistant to the director and community representative.

My position was funded by Racing United Way.

That um the purpose was to build a center to get a center built, which the people had been trying to get done for the past 10 years, so around 1965.

I took over.

So once I was hired, the belief that anything could be done since it had been trying for 10 years, that anything would be accomplished, but I assured them that it would be, and a lot of community organizing went on, and a year later, before the community development block grant committee, a amount of 550,000 was allocated for the center to be built in 1976, just one year later.

I have been aware of plans to raise that center, and I don't see the need for that.

I would I know that uh some plans have been made to uh have the sent have the city turn it over to uh count uh city development or something like that, and they will retake control of it.

But what I would ask is some type of alternative so the building can survive.

It's only 50 years old, so it seems to me that there should be some alternative to not erase it.

You got the Martin Luther King Center uh statute right down the street, the family came down in order to initiate that to uh for the opening and everything.

So I would like that to be considered.

I have enough contact number and everything, uh asking for follow-through, follow-up in regards to this request.

Thank you.

Got the idea to put the uh closed captioning on there.

When you're hearing impaired, that makes a big difference.

Most time when I was ever in here, you all sounded like I couldn't understand a thing.

Thumbs up.

Now you got a lot of the things on your agenda tonight involving traffic, and what I'm gonna ask you all to do is put a moratorium on any changes to traffic.

Because what happens is the network isn't organic alive.

If I touch one intersection, it's gonna impact somebody else in another intersection.

So, for example, the yields to stops.

If they're not paying attention to a part-time stop, which is what a yield is, why would anybody think they're gonna pay attention to an all-time stop?

They're not.

Um it seems every time you touch things you make it worse.

A great example is West and Taylor.

That intersection that intersection was terrible.

It's worse now than before the city rebuilt it.

Roundabout.

That's the only solution you got for that.

Terrible sight distance, roundabout, no signals, roundabout.

What I suggest, I saw something uh about traffic calming on Washington.

Now it's a state highway, so you're very limited what you can do if you take the state highway number off.

There's more limits.

What I would suggest you all do.

Say I'm an Uber driver, and I drop North Milwaukee is my area.

So I drive North Milwaukee every single night.

And that seems to be where the city of Milwaukee has thrown all of their traffic homing.

Uh trials.

Drive North Milwaukee at night.

Um drive it between 9 and 12, and that's when all the the uh peacocks come out.

These are the young dudes who are trying to show off to the young women, and they drive like idiots.

And then go after midnight when traffic is tied down.

But observe as a nighttime driver, there's pros and cons to all of these traffic homing devices.

And some of them at night, especially, you're not going to see.

They're obstructed.

Uh, unless you maintain speed humps, you're not gonna see them.

And then you go flying like Duke's a hazard, and frankly, I like my car too much, so I try and keep it under control, but a lot of people don't, they just don't see it.

My suggestion is before you go any further with any suggestions from any pseudo-engineer traffic expert who doesn't know what they're doing, drive other cities, especially North Milwaukee.

One of the things they do in Milwaukee that I could kiss them for is they flash the signals at night, and that solves most of the problems just by putting them out flashboat because you're not wasting time, and that's where people get angry, and they drive recklessly.

Our next speaker will be Jim LaForte from 1105 Carlton Drive.

Thank you.

Um, I'm here speaking on behalf of the parking lots.

This is the fourth year that we will be hosting the PVA, the Paralyzed Veterans Association.

Coming down, um, we will be having 60 to 80 paralyzed veterans visiting Racine.

They will be renting two wings of local motels here, spending money shopping, going out to eat, and all the different things that they will be doing while visiting the area.

The problem we run into is the majority of them are amputees, a large percentage of them are double amputees.

We struggle every year with the parking lot down next to Festival Park.

There's never a path for us to reserve that parking lot a weekday early in the morning to mid-afternoon.

Every year it's something different.

Last year it was reach out to an elder, go to the parks, go to the uh Department of Public Works, go to the city administrator, go back to the elder, go back to the city public works, back to the administrator.

The administrator then works with the mayor, and we get it waived.

That took four months.

This year I was told it was a totally different process.

I had to contact ABM.

I contacted ABM and Milwaukee.

I was informed that they were advised to under no circumstance give any discounts or wave any fees.

I explained it was for the veterans.

I was then informed that veterans have no preference in the city of Racine over any other constituents.

Now I'm back to square one.

There's no path, I don't know where to go.

I luckily was given a little bit of information ahead of time.

I found out at an elder can um help with this process.

If there's an elder that can help me get this going, we are now down to three weeks.

But again, I've been working on this for over three months.

There's nothing online to fill out, there's no application to speed this up, there's no way to expedite this in any fashion.

It is a typical three-month process of being bounced from one area to another area to another area.

And to me, we are all excited about the 250th.

Let's recognize those that got us here, and find a way to welcome them to the city and not worry about getting a couple bucks out of parking.

Thank you.

And our last speaker for tonight will be Christine Dawntree.

I know you're probably all tired of saying me.

I'm tired of being here, believe me.

And I almost wasn't here, but thank God for good doctors.

Um I just have a couple things to say.

Your spokesman told Channel 4 News in an interview that if the water is impeding the street, water ice is impeding the street, it is the city's problem.

When the ice is into the middle of the street, I don't know what your consideration of impeding the street is, but that's exactly what it was doing.

All I'm asking you to do, don't vote like the person on your right or left wants you to vote, or the person behind you or in front of you.

Use your own minds, own judgment, own common sense on this, and vote the way you need to vote on my issue.

Thank you.

That's all the speakers for teaching.

Okay.

That includes the public comments for this evening.

We'll then move on to communications.

Um for referral.

Umder Jorgensen, would you uh like to make a motion regarding um item 0567?

Yeah, uh item number 056726.

Uh communication sponsored by Alder Wagner to rename the Cesar Chavez Community Center to its original name, Douglas Park Community Center to the Public Works and Services Committee.

Do you have a motion?

Second.

The item.

Uh all those in favor of referring this item, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

That motion carries.

Moving on then to referral to executive committee.

Alder Jorgensen, would you like to make a motion regarding that item?

Yeah, item number 0558-26.

Uh subject direct referral of communication sponsor by Mayor Mason requesting the executive committee to meet regarding a bargaining opportunity that for competitive and bargaining reasons requires a closed session.

Is there a second?

Uh multiple seconds.

All those in favor of referring this item, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

That motion carries.

Uh items to refer to public safety and licensing.

Alder Pete.

Um, would you like to make a motion regarding these items?

Move to refer to the follow up items of public safety and licensing committee.

Uh, have an unusual situation.

I've been asked to uh for separate consideration for item number 052526.

Communication sponsored by Alder Kelly to have the director of finance and or the chair president of neighborhood watch to present to council and accounting of the 75,000 dollars that was given to neighborhood watch as part of the 2026 approved budget amount.

Um these are items for referral.

Yes, okay.

But uh it was requested that uh some different action be to some action be taken on it tonight.

Say this to none.

I've never had this request before either.

So it's um we don't have it scheduled tonight for debate or consideration.

All we have it scheduled for is referral, so we can't simply take it up tonight.

Okay well I are you asking to receive and file the item?

Yes, um that would be the ultimate goal.

Okay.

There's a motion to receive and file this item that's been made by Alder Pete, seconded by Alder Wider.

Yes.

Um discussion?

See none.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

This item will be received and filed.

Um Pete, would you like to make a motion regarding the remainder of the items referred to?

Could you repeat the would you like to make a motion regarding the remainder of the items to be referred to public safety and licensing?

Yes, move that the following item be referred to the public safety and licensing committee.

Item 053526, communication sponsored by Alder Davis proposing ordinance 000 326, unleashed animal and dog parks.

Recommendation to the public safety and licensing committee that the ordinance 326 will unleash animals and dog parks be approved.

Item 0539, number 26, communication sponsored by myself, submitting a change of agent application for a cigarette tobacco and electronic vaping device license for Dean A Z L L C D B A Dean's Mini Mart, which is located at 1407 Superior Street.

Abdallah agent, item number 540 26, communications sponsored by myself for change of agent application for a class B license for the Coban Foundation DBA, the Coban Center, located at 600 Karan Butler Drive.

Gop reward agent.

Item 54126 communications sponsored by myself, submitting a new application for a Class B retail permitted malt beverage and intoxicating liquor license for Ellick Oak, LLC DBA Ellick Oak, which is located 3006 Street, Devon Kane agent.

Item 0542 26 communication sponsored by myself for the license premises report.

Item 54326 communication sponsored by myself requesting any consideration and formal expression of concern or other action pursuant to the police report.

Item 54826 communications sponsored by myself, submitting a renewal application for a massage establishment license.

Licus DBA LEACAS, which is located at 2000 Wisconsin Avenue.

Ligas has owner.

Aye.

Opposed.

That motion carries.

We'll now move on to committee reports where we will start with finance and personnel.

Alder Land, did you have items for separate consideration?

Yes, I have four items.

Okay, please read the first one.

Item 0199-26 communications sponsored by Mayor Mason submitting the results of official notice 3-2026 design services for construction of fire station one headquarters.

Recommendation of finance and personnel that the mayor and the city clerk be authorized to negotiate and enter into a design services for construction contract with Wendell Architecture PC for the Fire Station One headquarters.

Move to approve.

There's a motion and a second to approve this item.

Is there any discussion on this item?

Alder Widener.

Thank you.

I was at the Finance and Personnel Committee when this was discussed, and for over 20 years, uh this council has discussed at budget time creating a new safety building, which for most of those years was a combination of police and fire.

I know it was mentioned at the finance committee that's not necessary that the police department be attached to the fire department.

But um, with this presentation, and what we are proposing is something that I don't I need some clarification on how it's going to work because we're asking somebody to create a design.

So this will be for a fire station, and attached to that fire station will be four apartments, either on top of the fire station or alongside the fire station.

And I guess I'd like to have a better understanding before I give direction to design services on how the city how that would work.

I don't know, does the city become a landlord for those apartments that are attached or beside the fire station?

I I need some clarity on that before I can uh approve moving forward with uh this kind of a design.

So is there someone specifically to whom you'd like to direct your question?

Well, whoever could answer the question as to how the city can build apartments on top of or next to the fire station and own own those apartments.

I I just don't know how we can do that.

So I don't know who would be able whose idea it was and who planned it to uh I can direct your question to the to the fire chief.

I think I I would just say this in terms of at this point we're very early in the design phase of this before we moved on to any ownership structure or developer structure or what have you that would come after the design phase.

But I'll refer your question to Chief Hanson and see if he can't try to answer it.

Um I do know in the presentation you may recall there are other cities, uh Madison, Green Bay, and and others that are doing mixed use developments along this line, but I will refer your question to the chief and see if we can't um get some clarity there, but again, this is this is the beginning of the process, not the end of the process, so it may be difficult to answer your question to that level of specificity at this point.

Chief Hansen.

Mayor Mason, members of the common council, thank you for the opportunity.

Uh I'm aware of uh a couple of communities that have built uh fire stations with residential housing close by.

The one that's been referred to is in Madison, it's their fire station one.

The structure itself or the fire engines are housed is on a first floor level.

There is a building next to that that rises up several stories with uh the fire department administration offices being on the first and second floor of that building.

What I can tell you is I I know that uh our needs are going to be a little bit more challenging because we have to incorporate maintenance into the facility.

We do all our own heavy fire maintenance today.

We replace some uh brakes on one of our fire trucks.

So it's gonna be challenging, but I I know Madison has a station built, they have a plan for a second station, there's station six, I believe, and Green Bay is in the process of developing that.

In this particular case with Madison, the residential piece is next to the fire station and rises above the Madison station.

I'm not real sure on what they are designing or how that's incorporating into their design as far as the residential housing.

I haven't seen any photos or any drawings of that, so it'd be difficult to address that question.

So I guess my question would be does then the fire department collect rent from those apartments that are attached to or nearby.

Only if we get to keep it.

I don't know how that would work.

Uh that's that's not my realm.

Before we entered into any agreement, there would be a development agreement that would have to come before council that would play out how that that financing structure would occur.

But what we're authorizing now is the firm that would design such a building, and then uh that allows us to bring back to the council a proposal of that would be able to answer your questions.

But right now we're just at the very beginning of the design phase of it.

Uh it is too early to say what the development model would be, and just to say that we've seen at least three other um models that have existed in other cities and are in uh are pursuing that as an option here, but how it would be owned and structured and or who the developer would be or who the builder would be.

It's very early on in the process.

We couldn't tell you what the ownership structure would be any more than we could tell you who the contractor who would build it would be at this phase.

I I understand that, but by approving this, we're also approving the proposal that apartments be attached either above or around this facility, and I think we need more under a clear understanding of how the city will become landlords for those buildings before we give direction to someone to design that.

And that's what I'm looking for.

Is just the city does not rent out apartments.

Uh and I is this something new that we're gonna adventure into or that's my question.

Alder Hermann Thank you, Mayor.

I appreciate it.

Thank you, Chief Hansen, for being able to come up and just answer some questions.

Um, I did hear you say that there is something similar to this in Madison, fire station one or something like that that has something similar to possibly this.

Do you know how the rent is collected for this structure?

No, I do not.

All right, thank you.

Alder Pavone.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I would have along the same lines of that question if since you had uh alluded to this being in Madison.

Do you know how those municipalities or governments are managing something like this?

Yeah, for station one that uh Chief Hansen just referenced, it's actually the developer there is uh is Hubdi, which is the same company that did uh the breakwater on Lake Avenue.

There, the city is condoed out.

So a developer owns the space, and the city essentially pays an annual fee to the developer.

There are other models, however, where it is a side-by-side thing where where the city, when it's side by side, the city owns one half, and the developer owns the other half.

There's there's a couple of different models that we could approach.

Again, it's uh it's it's an exciting opportunity to explore, but it's too early in the process to say exactly how it might work uh in this particular instance.

Okay, thank you.

Alder Jorgensen.

Yeah, I mean, I think this is pretty clear to kind of go back to the beginning of this.

Fire station one, uh, the one that we have here right now across the street, it's in rough shape.

I mean, I've toured it.

I I think you gave the offer of if anyone here questions whether or not we need a new one, uh, the chief would take you over and show you plenty of of areas that are in need are of concern of need of repair to the point where it's it's time to replace it.

Um it comes to this, there are cities that are doing it today, so it's not like it's we're paving the way or blazing a trail and we have to figure out how to do it.

There's already other communities doing it.

It sounds like there's some different options in committee.

We talked about that.

There's the one that's next door, there's one that's above, but without a design put in place, we really it's it's hard to pontificate with a five-dollar word there.

It's hard to think about how we would run it when we don't even know what it would look like.

Is it gonna be next to it?

Is it gonna be above it?

That's really what this is for.

And so the idea that we would want to slow this down of trying to delay building a new fire station when we desperately need it, is just I think it's irresponsible.

Now, there's a lot of questions that'll have to be answered once the design comes forward and there's proposals of how this is gonna work.

Right now, we really don't even know what it would look like.

One of the biggest decisions is is it above it?

Is it next to it?

Without a design in place and having an architect look at it and come back with plans.

I think it's really hard to answer those questions.

What we need to know today is we need a new fire station.

This was planned to move forward to start the design work on it, as well as uh other cities have done something similar to this.

And frankly, I applaud the city of Racine for looking at new ways to try to build apartment dwellings, build residences in the city.

Uh, unfortunately, some folks back in 2000, early 2000, 2001 made a terrible, terrible water deal that landlocked the city, so we can't grow anymore.

We have no ability to expand our borders.

And you'll hear it time and time again at the league of municipalities and elsewhere.

When a city gets landlocked like this and it can't build out, it has to build up.

So we have to look at every opportunity we have to put more housing in the city, or we're going to continue to decline in population.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Individuals who had a chance to tour the safety building are aware that the safety building is in need of a new building, not just some remodeling in there or a new building.

Um but my concern is where did it go from a safety building to just a fire station?

And then my other concern is where there will they be other designs presented besides the one that's discussed here about this fire station and apartments, or have we just landed on this as an ideal to move forward and look at this, or have we examined other cities with other fire one station, station ones that are not with apartments next to them?

And it's it's not to you, Chief.

Uh I'm just speaking out here.

Um that's my concern.

How do we just get to this point here?

And yes, we looked at um, there's this fire stations in Madison, Green Bay, and you named some other places.

Do we have ideals of designs of areas that are comparable to racing?

Because racine is not like Madison.

Racine is not like Green Bay.

So, yes, we need a fire station, but what is the fire station that is needed for this city?

City or racine.

I'm complete.

Alder Weiner for a second time.

Uh, just a question.

I'm wondering if the pre-design services or phase one that cost 32,500 would be coming back to this council and give us an idea what the fire station would look like with and then without the apartments before we invest the additional two and a half million that would really lock us into a design that we don't fully understand.

I don't know who can answer that question.

What department is responsible for the pre-design services and for phase one and then phase two and four.

Is that the fire chief or is that I'm not sure what phase one incorporates?

Uh perhaps uh finance director might be able to touch base on that.

Or yeah, if you would, please.

Introduce yourself.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Laura Eisenagel.

I'm an architect for Wendell and the Five Bugles Design Team.

Um, so in answer to your question, yes, absolutely.

So basically, this pre-design of the first phase is doing exactly what you are all asking questions on.

We have no idea what you can have to your point, because we haven't studied it yet.

So that's what phase one is.

Phase one is a study to figure out is it feasible financially for your community to do it?

How big would it be?

Does it make sense to have the apartments on top on the side?

Does it make sense to have the apartments at all?

That's exactly what phase one is.

The next question you asked was would we come back and get it approved to move forward?

We will continue to keep you updated.

So typically in the design phase, there's a concept, and then we go through a five-phase design process, and we would be here at the end of every one of those to keep you all informed of what's going on, ask questions, make sure we're still moving to the right direction, and then get your permission to move forward from there.

That's excellent.

Thank you so much for being here.

You really clarified a lot for me.

I appreciate it.

Yeah, thanks for having me.

Alder Allen.

I just have a question for the chief, and this is just a curiosity about the shifts that our fire persons work.

Do they work uh 2440 hours?

Are they on duty 2448 hours?

Or do they just work traditional eight to twelve hours?

How does that work for your staff?

So the the Receni Fire Department for well over 80 years works on a Chicago schedule.

It's a nine-day schedule.

At the start of that schedule, let's use a common we work week.

Uh they work Monday, Wednesday, Friday, 24 hours each day, and then they would have four days off, and then the following week they'd work Wednesday, Friday, Sunday.

So they do work a 24-hour schedule with 24 hours off in between for the first three days, and then they'll have a four days off.

All three shifts over the course of nine weeks work each day of the week.

If you that makes sense.

Okay.

The reason why I asked that is because we're always looking for ways to uh make racing home to people who would be working in racing.

Off the top of my head, I when I imagine apartments or or housing that may be connected to the fire house.

I immediately lean in the direction that perhaps this would be an optimum consideration for fire uh workers in the future, and they would be able to reduce their commute time or their response time when they have to you know come in on a you know short shift or something like that.

And I am familiar with the Chicago schedule at the Bully Chicago actually did their training for female firefighters in California, so they adopted that schedule.

Uh so that's why I asked that question how that works.

Any other discussion on this item?

I have no one else in the queue when the clerk calls your name.

Please vote as you wish.

Alder Holerton.

Alder Hodges, Alder Allen, Alder Pete?

Alder Lynn.

Alder Kelly?

Aye.

Alder Harman.

Aye.

Alder Pavone.

Aye.

Alder Fraser.

Alder Weiss?

Alder Davis.

Alder Jorgensen.

Aye.

Alder Weiner.

Why didn't they record it?

Here we go.

13 yes, zero no's.

Motion carries unanimously.

Alder Land.

You said you had other items for separate consideration.

Could you read the next item for separate consideration?

Item 0432-26.

Communications sponsored by Mayor Mason requesting to approve a contract with G strategies for the Lincoln King community and Lincoln King Community Center project.

Recommendation of finance and personnel was that the mayor and the city clerk be authorized to enter into a contract with G strategies LLC in the amount of 150,000 through March 31st, 2027 for the fundraising fundraising services for the Lincoln King Community Center and Clinic Project.

Move to approve.

Discussion, Alder Widener.

Thank you.

I would ask the parliament if a motion to table this item would be in order.

Well, tabling isn't a term that exactly exists in Roberts.

Um laying on the table, I guess it does exist.

Let me just go back.

Laying on the table generally means that we're going to put this away and maybe never talk about it again.

Um, as opposed to deferring, which is we're gonna talk about it at some point in the future.

Um if somebody wants to make that motion, they can certainly make that motion.

I would make a motion to lay this item on the table.

I'd like to speak then to the motion to approve this item.

Um I'm gonna speak against approving this contract.

At our last council meeting, this was deferred.

It did not go back to the finance committee for further discussion.

At the last common council meeting when we took this item up, there were several items or several questions that could not be answered by the finance director slash purchasing agent.

She had indicated that the mayor would have to answer those questions.

I sent an email to all the aldermen today outlining the five questions that are critical to be answered before we can approve this contract.

Dear members of the Racine Common Council, I'm writing to ask you to table resolution 0432-26, the 150,000 G strategies LLC fundraising contract until five specific questions are answered in writing.

I'm not asking you to vote no, but now I am.

I'm asking you to slow down.

What I found in the documents presented to the Finance Committee raises serious concerns that should be resolved before any vote is cast.

The most urgent problem is $180,000 already paid for fundraising.

On page 10 of the Concord Group contract signed by the Finance Director Fisher on March 3rd, 2025 and authorized by resolution 0039 25 itemizes the following fee structure.

Owners representation services, 1,023,704.

Building commissioning services, 240,000, subconsultant project fundraising 180,000 for a total of 1,443,704.

The city has already paid or committed to pay $180,000 just a year ago for fundraising subcontant services through the Concord contract.

Mayor Mason's ABM for resolution 0432 does not mention this.

The finance committee was not told about it before authorizing an additional 150,000 to G strategies for fundraising.

The council must ask, is G strategies the Concorde subconsultant?

If so, have they already been compensated for the exact work described in Mayor Mason's briefing memo?

The combined fundraising expenditure could be $330,000 paid twice to the same firm for the same work.

The five questions that must be answered before any vote is G Strategies the Concord Fundraising subconsult consultant.

The Concorde contract already contains 180,000 sub consultant project fundraising line.

The council must know whether G Strategies was that subconsultant before approving additional payment.

If they were already paid, this vote authorizes a double payment.

If they were not, the council must ask who the original subconsultant was and what results they produced.

What competitive procurement process was followed?

City ordinance 46-39 requires competitive selective for professional service contracts above $50,000 that are not subject to documented sole source exception.

This is a hundred and fifty thousand dollar contract.

No request for proposal, no competitive big bid documentation, and no sole source justification form appears in any document presented to the finance committee.

The ordinance requires that when a sole source exception is claimed, the department head or purchasing agent must fill out the city's approved form and file it with the finance director and city administrator.

That form does not exist in the record.

Did the purchasing agent review and approve the contract?

The city's purchasing division, not the mayor's office, is responsible for overseeing contract procurement and ensuring compliance with city and federal procurement requirements.

The ABM for resolution 0432-26 was authorized directly by Mayor Mason bypassing the normal procurement review process.

There is no indication that the purchasing manager had reviewed or approved this selection.

The council should require written confirmation that proper procurement procedures were followed before voting.

Does account zero or four five zero one zero to five two one zero zero two two nine one two contain federal funds?

The Lincoln King Center has received ARPA, CDBG, HUD, and other state grants.

If the account identified as a funding source for this contract contains any federal dollars, the contract must comply with two CFR 200.31H, which requires full and open competition.

A sole source 150,000 contract from a federally funded account would without competitive procurement documentation is a potential federal grant compliance violation, the same type of violation that has already exposed the city to significant federal scrutiny in other areas.

Who authorized G strategies to begin work before council approvals?

Mayor Mason's ABM credits G strategies with securing 3.15 million in funding commitments.

Work that was performed before this contract was authorized by the council.

The council must know when did G strategies begin working for the city, under what authority, and who directed them to proceed without a council approved contract.

The political concern.

G strategies LLC describes itself on its own website as specializing in large scale scale political operations.

Every staff biography lists democratic political campaigns.

Not one mentions a municipal building project, a community health center, or a publicly owned facility.

Their own fellowship program requires progressive values as a hiring criterion.

This is not a uh municipal services firm.

The mayor wrote the memo recommending his own political networks firm.

That is not how city contracts are supposed to work.

The mayor is asking the council to pay 150,000 without a competitive bid to his political network, awarding 150,000 sole source city contract to a political consulting firm with direct ties to the to the mayor's political network through an ABM authored by the mayor himself without competitive selection, without purchasing agent review, is precisely the kind of action that erodes public confidence in city government.

Members of the council who vote yes on this resolution without the five questions above being answered are placing their own credibility at risk.

Did the purchasing agent review and approve the contract?

The city's purchasing agent division, not the mayor's office, is responsible for reviewing every professional service contract before it reaches the council.

That review is not a formality.

It is the step that confirms the process was clean, the paperwork is complete, and the council is protected if questions arise later.

Every mayor should know this.

It is not a technicality buried in the ordinance.

It is the basic separation between political leadership and professional administration that every elected executive should know on day one.

The mayor proposes, the administration reviews, the council approves.

The sequence exists because public money is not campaign money.

It belongs to every resident, regardless of party, and the rules that govern how it is spent exist to protect residents from exactly the kind of arrangement being presented here.

The purchasing division review is not in the record in it.

As a matter of record, the finance director slash purchasing agent directed me to the mayor for answers to my questions.

What this means is that if this contract is challenged by an auditor, by a competing firm, or in court, the administration has no documentation that the process was done correctly.

As a council member who votes yes, is voting to approve a contract, the administration cannot demonstrate was properly procured.

That is not a position any member of this council should want to be on the record.

The broader pattern.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I, if I recall correctly, my memory could be a little fuzzy here.

That at the last council meeting, I was the one that wanted to defer this item because you at the time were not here.

So I think that we all had a lot of questions, very valid questions, and this is nothing to do with the actual Lincoln King uh development.

We all agree that that's very important for the city.

But I would like the opportunity for the mayor to answer these questions if you would do so to answer the questions outlined as well as potentially any other questions.

I only think it's it's fair to have that opportunity.

Do you have a question you'd like to pose?

Um I I don't know if you have, I don't know exactly.

I mean it's not often that you come down to the floor to speak on something, but yeah.

So I mean, addressing sort of uh an item that's not in front of us or purchasing agent procedures or a previous contract or subcontract, that's not what is before you right now.

What is before you is an item to essentially sole source through G strategies to in the amount of 150,000 dollars, not with federal funding, but there is a financing gap that still exists um of the 68 and million and change of the project.

We've raised about 53 million of it.

There's about 15 million of that that remains, um, which we have bonded for.

So the the project is gonna go forward, it's gonna get built.

Um the question is in the six to nine months that remain to complete the project, do we want to work with a firm to help us raise um money to help close that gap?

Um if you don't, like if you want to table this or refer it, um, the remaining balance will simply go on to local property taxpayers to pay the difference.

If you think we should have a firm, a firm with experience doing projects like this, or the veterans tiny homes in Milwaukee and other experience raising money who have in uh have already helped us identify funding sources for this project, then you should vote yes.

But I think um wrapping it up in into some sort of procedural questions that are there, not to minimize this question, but that's not really what's before us.

What's really before us is should we sole source this item to have a professional fundraising firm that knows how to raise funding in the space to raise funds in this time that we have to finish the project or not?

Uh if you don't want to, or if you want to table it, that means that taxpayers will be solely responsible for helping us pick that up.

If if you think we should hire a firm that has experience fundraising for projects like this to reduce the liability of uh taxpayers on this project, then I would encourage you to vote yes.

Okay, and it was um also a point brought up that this didn't follow whatever typical procedures are for let's say placing it out for a bid for this kind of service.

Could you elaborate on that?

Sure.

So it's not unusual for a sole source item to come forward without having gone through a form of bid.

I I will say that the universe of people who have experience to talk to foundations and rich donors and philanthropists and state and federal funds that are available is a very, very small group.

Um so I think being able to work with a firm that has that experience is no different than you know when when the chief might say we need to sole source for particular project uh for something that that the fire department does that's very unique.

It's a very unique skill set that's available in this space, and so uh we want to rely on that that expertise that exists here and move forward with it again if we want to reduce the um the liability of the taxpayers.

If we don't, um then you know if you want to vote it down, then taxpayers will be responsible for the remaining $15 million balance that we bonded for to complete the project.

Okay, and I know not everything has to go, even if it has a fiscal note before finance and personnel.

This is not something that's required to go before them before it comes to us.

It did go to finance and personnel and passed out of finance and personnel, I believe, unanimously.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Um Alder Davis Thank you.

My question is for maybe the city attorney.

Maybe you can clear this up.

I have concerns that G strategies currently um is what is my word is delinquent in being registered with the Department of Financial Institutions.

Are we the city able to go into contract with someone who is not um up to power with the state?

I'm just looking.

I thought I don't believe you, but um if that's the case, then we could make as a condition of entering into the contract that they be current with the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions.

I do see, at least based upon what the Wisconsin DFI website says they were delinquent as of January 1st of this year, which usually means they haven't filed the uh necessary reports that are required every year.

Correct.

All right, thank you.

Thank you for that.

Um with knowing that, although I know you said that we could possibly approve it with the condition.

There are questions out from a few different auditors.

I don't know if any others I don't feel this is up to being approved at this time.

I'm going back in it.

I will make a motion to let's see.

I'm not sure if it's defer until we've waited on this.

Um I think I may be pausing a moment.

Tell me the words again.

So what would be the options available?

Refer, defer, table.

Like what what is a possible option for a motion here?

Sure, other than to approve or disapprove the action, you could there could be an action to defer this to a later common council meeting.

There could be a motion to refer the matter back to the committee.

Those are the principally the things that happens.

Approve, disapprove, refer, or defer.

Okay.

That motion fails for lack of a second.

No, I hadn't paused.

They were waiting for me to be complete with what I was saying.

Okay, please state your motion.

I'll like a motion to make a motion to defer this item.

There's a second on the motion.

The motion on the table now is to defer the item.

I'll repeat.

I need some clarification on the ABM because to me the and some of the answers to the questions that have been asked or brought forth this evening are already on the ABM.

It looks like they have already secured in excess of a million dollars toward the project.

So we're already working with them in spite of these other conditions.

So I would that would get back into some of the questions why it wasn't sourced out or what have you.

But the important thing is they they raise more money more than uh 150,000 to start with, so it shows that they are a proven commodity.

So I think that answers some of the other questions, not to mention some the other two million that they help secure, so that they are being productive already, helping us toward a goal.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So there is a consideration, I believe, on how a deferment could possibly affect timing of the project.

Uh and especially since we are looking at the possibility of saddling our taxpayers with the deficit.

And then I have comments just on, you know, when we present uh things to be considered when we are uh looking to vote on an agenda item.

I think it's helpful, especially to people who may not be uh really savvy when it comes to some of these issues, like for instance, we we have to avoid, I believe, and I'm not just saying I'm just saying in general, it would be helpful not to make statements that could be taken as vague because if we're trying to decide on something that is in front of us, uh HR issues that can't be validated and should not be discussed by the council, uh objections to uh being exposed, having the city being previously exposed to censorship, and there is no uh way that we are proving right now that campaign funds are going to be used on this project.

So that's a little um could be a little confusing to people that have to make a decision on how to vote going forward.

But if there is anyone that can speak to what a deferment would do to the timing of this project or putting it in possibly making our city responsible for the $15 million deficit.

So I can tell you that there are grant applications coming due soon.

There are visits from philanthropy groups and others that are scheduled for the weeks ahead.

But some of these things have taken a good deal of time to try to arrange and secure.

Oh having to pass this on, at least some part of it to our taxpayers, which we've already uh heard that they are well, we all know we don't need to spell that out.

So uh and then when it comes to construction, because you know you say it's gonna be done in nine months, but an act of God could already impact that.

So if we get involved with the time frame right now, we could push this into 2027.

Right.

I mean, I think the the goal is to have this open in early 2027.

We we want to stay on that fundraising standpoint.

We have some funding sources that have to be spent this year, so the project needs to get done this year.

There's no sort of couldn't we just delay finishing the project and see if we can raise the rest of the money because some of the funding sources we have require completion in 2026.

So we have some um lack of flexibility that that is there.

I also just want to give people context of sort of like I mean, so first of all, to raise $53 million of a $68 million project is no small feat.

Anybody who's been involved in large capital projects, that is not an easy thing to do.

But in terms of the the gap that remains in the previous administration, we had applied for an environmental justice grant under the Biden administration uh that we were given very positive indication that we would like to receive.

Uh, there was a change in administration, and it was one of the first grants that was uh eliminated under the new uh and the new um administration.

Additionally, there was uh an earmark that had been secured uh from uh a federal legislator, uh, and that was also removed uh when the new administration came in.

So we were poised at that moment before the switching administration to have this fully funded.

So it was disappointing to have those funding sources removed and find ourselves with a gap.

Again, we could simply say, well, let's just let local taxpayers pick up the difference.

I think this is a very exciting and positive project that has a great story to tell, and if we tell it, I think we can fill some of that remaining gap.

150,000 of a 15 million dollar gap is one percent of that funding.

Now there's no guarantee that we're gonna fill all of it, but I can guarantee you if you don't have somebody engaged to raise the money, uh, we probably won't raise any of it.

Alder Horton.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank I think Alder Allen uh kind of uh asked you all the questions, and I'll repeat kind of followed up on it.

And I don't think that the uh city residents can take on any more property tax.

And I I don't live in Mount Pleasant, I live here and I can't take it on either.

So I think this is something that we uh and and it sounds as if uh the city is already working with this with this uh organization and have already started raising money, but I think it sounds it sounds as if this was kind of like uh a process question, like you know, did we skip over something uh to uh acquire uh G strategies to do this?

And and now I'm hearing from you is that they've already been working on this and raising money, you know, 15 million dollars and we almost dare uh is important, but it's also important that uh you know that we don't put on any more hardship uh as far as taxpayer dollars to to this project.

This is a this is a wonderful project.

Uh go buy it every other day, uh it's an amazing project.

But at the same time, if this organization, from what I'm hearing, has raised three million dollars, two million dollars, a million dollars, or whatever it might be.

Um I think that and um I did I did hear you some say that time is of the essence uh you know of it being tabled or being deferred.

Uh this is something that I would support going forward, but I'm glad uh because we do need the clarity.

Uh uh it was said this this was an item that would be clarified by you.

So uh I'm glad that you're you know here to clarify some of the issues of about you know about this particular item.

Thank you.

So some of the council members are new, and I know we're talking about the 17 million, uh, which is actually uh 15 million dollar debt that we're going to have.

About a year ago, we bonded for 17 million to cover the costs of completing the project, which is supposed to be done by next year.

Um the reason we bonded for that is because there were two grants that were we were slated to get from the federal government for 17 million, which at the time the council voted on bonding, we had a pretty good idea that we were not going to get those grants.

So we knew that we were going to be at least six 17 million in long-term debt to continue funding.

We have a health department that writes grants all the time.

And because this is the health department clinic, the health department can be writing grants and they can be out uh sponsoring, you know, looking for sponsors that might want to, you know, have their name on a solar panel or on some kind of well.

I mean, the our health department can do this kind of grant writing.

I don't see why, and and I don't know how G Strategies was able to raise the money that it did if they did not have a contract that we see.

Unless the mayor would like to answer the question, was G Strategies the subcontractor from Concord that was charged with fundraising.

I don't have that information in front of me, and what I have before me is the contract that's before us now.

I don't I don't have the answer to your question.

So if we're saying that there was a contract, we would have there had to be a contract for him to have for a G strategist to have raised the 3.1 million that we are claiming that he has raised.

There has to be some documentation that a contract existed.

And evidently we don't have that information.

So we are creating a new contract that did not go through the proper channels.

Um I don't think we should defer it.

I think that this council should vote this down.

And the Merritt didn't claim that it's on the taxpayers' backs, but that's because we bonded for the 17 million, which is now 15 million, that's gonna be on the taxpayers.

I don't I cannot see anybody gonna be willing to pay five five million to seven and a half million to the city of Racine for naming rights of that facility.

I mean, we don't do that.

So I'm against deferring this, it does need a resolution, and I think the relevant resolution should be that we not go forward with this contract and we follow the proper channel and put this item out for RFPs or bids as should have been done in the first place.

For a second time.

But um we've been working with Z strategies already for they've been helping with fundraising.

And yeah, this is sort of going back.

How do we get it in the mix with them to start um how did they even start the fundraising?

I believe that was a question I wasn't able to be answered earlier, but I just want to know like how do how did they get involved?

Um and if they have been helping, where there are any payments made to them during that time, up until now where we're looking to possibly of doubt this resolution.

So they have previously been assisting with fundraising up until this point.

That is true.

What exactly the um again what's before us is the the contract to move forward.

I I don't have what the previous relationship is or how the funding mechanism worked or how that all came about in front of me.

So I I can answer what's before us on the floor.

I can tell you we've worked with them previously, and it would be helpful to continue to work with them to move forward to close the gap.

Yeah, I um I'm always skeptical of consultants.

Um I always like to wonder is is that something we could do in-house?

Is that something that we could do here?

Uh and so I asked the question in in committee uh to Director Fisher of if we don't approve this, is this something that we have the expertise to do in-house?

And she very honestly said no, that this is something unique.

We really don't do a lot of very large expensive facilities that we do naming rights for.

That's not something that we uh we do commonly.

And so the idea that we would just have the public health department do it, it's a great thought, but we're we we're being told by staff that that's just not feasible.

Uh and so when I look at it, we really have two choices here.

And the I'm against deferring it.

I think we need to, as a council decide, do we want to say no?

Uh and have this go on to the the property taxes, which I don't agree with.

I think they're high enough.

And the idea that when we bonded for it, we always knew that we were going to pay for it.

I that was not how it was presented.

I think that was a little bit before my time when the council, but that wasn't how it was presented.

It was presented that we'd bond for it while we go for these grants, or in this case, the administration pulled those grants back, and so we're once again trying to fundraise for it.

And so if the council wants to shift gears as a body and say we no longer want to put forward full effort into fundraising for this, we're okay getting what we get uh fundraised and everything else we'll put onto property taxes.

I'm not comfortable doing that.

If others are, so be it.

Um I feel like we we owe it to our constituents to make sure that we're going in with uh all efforts at trying to fundraise this so that it doesn't go uh and be put on on property taxes.

So I would uh I would vote against the motion uh that's before us to defer it.

I think that we have enough information before us to make a decision tonight, and I would also encourage everyone to be in favor of moving this forward so that we can get this fundraise and we're not putting it on the backs of everyone, all of our residents to do uh to pay for.

I know some may snicker at that.

I think it's no laughing matter of having residents have to pay for 15 million dollars.

Uh I think some may laugh at that.

I I don't.

Elder Pabone.

Thank you, Chair.

So are there there are I think there are good conversations happening, and I think there are valid points on each end.

Um I don't think that the big hiccup here is 150,000.

I think it was the um unanswered questions we had from who what when where how uh and I think that in this instance the mayor has explained um, albeit to only things that he has in front of him.

But what I would say with this is this would allow us to have an actual contract with them where we could then um check in on that, we could ask for progress on it, we could we have it now, we have the contract, it's there.

Can't change what's already happened.

And if we're talking about how do we make up the difference, I think if if our health department, this is not a dig on the health department, I know how hard it is to raise funds, anybody who's worked with nonprofit agencies or anything like that, even school events, how hard it is uh to raise funds for things.

I think if this was a capability that we had internally, we would have already done it, and we probably would not have done it as effectively.

So I think with this particular situation, there's a lot of baggage being thrown in there that shouldn't be.

But again, can't change the past, but what we have before us is this contract that allows us again, we can check in on the progress.

We authorize these, we're the council.

And if this is the case to help us in the next seven or so months to get through to help bridge that gap for fundraising that we know again, they have already demonstrated they have an ability to do, then I, in my opinion, um think that this is right now the option that we can move forward with in order uh to kind of get to where we need to be with money without increasing the burden on the taxpayers that we already have through other you know, through budgetary, whatever it is through bonding, so on and so forth.

So I'm not in favor of the motion to defer.

Thank you.

Alder Weiss.

Um, so I a lot of things that I was gonna say have been spoken to, so I won't belabor it, but as stated, working in a nonprofit, you your staff does not have the expertise or capacity to do this kind of work, to do this fundraising or capital campaign work.

So why would we just say, oh, well, it's been bonded for when we have the opportunity to close that gap and minimize the burden?

Um just feels like a no-brainer to me.

Um, and there is a very limited amount of people that have the expertise to do this work, and so if they've actually proven to raise money already, it feels like it would just be irresponsible not to approve it.

Thank you, Mayor.

I believe that um as an Alder and in my decisions should be done effectively and efficiently as possible.

I think that when we come up with or decide who should get various funding for different things, we should be making decisions that are going to expedite things instead of hold things up.

The reason why I had voted for this to be deferred was so that questions could be answered.

Um the reason that was given to defer it to begin with was so that questions could be answered, and then to come here tonight and say don't no need to answer any of the questions.

Um the director of finance hasn't been asked any questions.

Um then I just don't think that that's how the process should work.

The questions have been answered, the agency has started it, and even if we had gone through a different process, no one has convinced me that this agency wouldn't have gotten it to begin with.

So I'm not understanding why we would hold up moving forward on something, hold up potentially paying someone when our return on investment 150,000 to get 15 million.

I mean, I'm uh that's the no-brainer, but to go through all of this back and forth when no one has said that there was any other agency that would have been able to do this as effectively other than our own health department that's already working as effectively and as efficiently as they can, but to put more work on them to come up with 15 million dollars when we have someone that is skilled in doing it and has done it before.

Um, yes, I wouldn't I would also not be voting yes on deferring it, and I really think that we should move forward on this.

Thank you.

Alder Allen for a second time.

Thank you.

And I agree, I I'm not going to vote to defer it, but I do want to clarify that when you raise, and I'm sure everybody is aware of this.

When you raise grant funds, those grant funds have to go for that entity.

If the health department were to write grants and receive grants, that would go to the health department, not to construction.

So uh it wouldn't be transferable.

Uh Alder Horton for a second time.

So uh thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Uh, I just want to say this just a clarification because I serve on the health department.

Uh we are struggling in that area with grants.

We are we have been waiting on grants for an entire year that has not arrived uh at the at the health department in my last meeting.

We lost a grant that was 19,000, and we're gonna be losing service in different areas.

So uh at this point, I don't know if grants are coming.

I don't know if they have stopped coming.

Um from what I look at, what I'm looking at here, it looked like some of the money have come from foundations and private foundations, and so uh for the next couple of years that might be the way to give money, but the grants have not arrived, and I don't think uh at that capacity that the health department uh has the capacity to write for millions of dollars to help out uh the uh Lincoln King Center Alder Davis, you've spoken on this issue twice.

Do you have a motion you'd like to make no okay?

Is there anyone else who'd like to speak to the item?

Okay, the motion before us is to defer this item when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

No, okay, Alder Harlton?

No, Alder Hodges?

Elder Allen?

No, Alder Pete?

No, Alder Land?

No, Alder Kelly, Elder Harmon.

Elder Pabone?

No.

Alder Frazier.

No.

Elder Jorgensen?

No.

Okay.

Before us, then is the main motion as provided.

Is there any further discussion on the motion?

The main motion.

Uh again, if you've spoken to the previous motion before, just know that um that that time to speak does count as well.

Alder Pabone for a second time.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

I do um want to go back to a point with Alder Davis had made regarding the registration with the state.

I do think that's important.

So can I ask the city attorney if they are I'm not up to date with the registration with the state to do business possible to continue doing this if they are not going to try to be an apologist for them?

It's not my job to do that.

It's not frankly uncommon for businesses to fail to file the annual reports with the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions.

And they file the report and they're restored to good standing.

And I see that it actually happened with G strategies on one prior occasion.

They filed a fourth report online and we're restored to good standing immediately.

Okay, so this that is something that you can keep us up to date on.

Sure.

Of course.

Okay, so I'll trust your word.

Keep us up to date, they're in good standing.

That's I work in banking, so I get to a lot of companies that come to us want to open things and do things.

We're like, wait a minute, we need this proper documentation, so I do understand that hesitation.

Thank you.

Yes, if you could keep them abreast, you said sure, but if we just get an affirmative yes, yes, of course.

I will tell you, I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Um Alder Davis for a second time.

Alder Probone brought up what I was going to bring up regarding that.

Alder Weiner for a second time.

Thank you.

I just want to clarify for the council what we're voting on when we vote to approve this.

This is funding from G strategies.

Resolved that the mayor and the city clerk are authorized and directed to X to executed a contract with G strategies and the amount of 150,000 through March 31st for the fundraising services for the Lincoln King Community Center and Clinic Project.

This is not for grant writing.

This is for naming rights according to the document that was provided in the AB along with the ABM that was in both the council report and the finance director or in the finance committee.

And also, if you looked at the documents that was created and provided by the city, the contact is not G strategies.

The contract, the contact is the mayor's office and uh and Nick in his office.

So it says right here, contact information.

Corey Mason at City of Racine, Nicholas Wilgan at City of Racine.

So this is for fund not fundraising, this is for naming rights.

Um I just don't I just think that this is a waste uh and we're not gonna offset 15 million dollars by naming rights.

Um more importantly, is if we're legitimately gonna do naming rights, this should have gone out for bid and not a no-bid contract without any of the proper protocols.

So therefore I am voting against the motion to approve this, and I hope my colleagues will join me for the reasons that I outlined in the email that I sent you today, and I read aloud at the council meeting tonight.

Thank you.

The queue is empty when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton?

Alder Hodges, Alder Allen?

Alder Pete.

Alder Land.

Alder Kelly.

Alder Harman.

Aye, Alder Pavone, Holder Frazier, right?

Alder Davis.

No.

We got 10 yes and three notes.

Motion carries.

Alder Land.

Did you have other items for separate consideration in your report?

Yes.

Item 0489-26 communications sponsored by Mayor Mason and Common Council President Jorgensen submitting the 2027 budget calendar for consideration.

Recommendation of the finance and personnel committee that the budget calendar be approved as amended to add Thursday, October 15, 2026, as an additional discussion day.

Move to approve.

So motion and a second to approve the calendar as presented and amended in committee.

Um did you want to speak to your motion?

Um yeah, we discussed it thoroughly and it passed unanimously at finance and personnel.

I know Alderman Weidner wanted it called out for separate consideration.

Okay.

Thank you.

Having participated in 22 budgets, I have never seen a budget calendar or schedule as compacted and compressed as this one is.

And just as an example, the budget will be presented to us from the mayor on October 5th.

Uh, the next day we're gonna get an overview from uh the um finance director.

Then the following week on Monday the 12th, we're gonna get to start to get our uh departments will give us a presentation, and then on Wednesday, October 14th.

So we're gonna meet on the 12th and the 13th and have the committee of the departments present.

Then on the 14th, we're gonna have a committee the whole meeting and a uh public hearing.

That's on the 14th.

On the 15th, the next day, we have to have any amendments that we wish to make into the finance director by by the end of business the day after the public hearing, giving us 24 hours to present our amendments, which require each of us to have a line item on you know which item we're gonna take money from or add money to.

So we have one day to do that.

Uh, and then we will be voting on the budget on the 19th and passing it on on the 20th.

So that is a mere two weeks.

And just so you know, we're not required to pass a budget until mid-November.

So we're gonna be all done with our budget by October 20th, um, and not giving the due diligence to the most important function that this council has, and that is deliberating on the proposed budget that is submitted by the mayor to this body.

So I'm gonna be voting against it.

Not only that, but the whereas in this are what concerns me.

And last year's budget was a perfect example.

I submitted several amendments that I was not even allowed to read.

Instead, the council president sat in that chair and he called on the finance director.

The finance director determined that my amendment was not appropriate.

That is a decision for this body to make, not the finance director or anybody else.

It's for this body.

So the way our process is we're tying our own hands, not only with the timeline that we're allowing ourselves to give uh the due diligence we should to the most important function that we have, but also in how we can discuss the items in the budget.

So I will be voting against uh this calendar.

I think it's uh it's a it's pathetic.

Thank you.

Alder Davis thank you.

My question for the city attorney, the resolution the whereas is I noticed last year.

I don't recall the year before we have those.

Can you speak to why we have the whereas resolutions to connect it with the budget calendar?

Well, the um ordinance, the charter ordinance requiring there to be a budget calendar presented to finance and personnel committee then to the council is only two years old.

So this process is new because the ordinance was not in place before that time.

Oh thank you.

I had a question for the city attorney.

So my concern is um the being able to amend the amendments and the process that uh took place last year, where uh I believe there were some examples given at the finance committee where certain people's hands were tied and they were not able to make an amendment.

So is there a some sort of a common ground not talking about adding money?

So is there a some sort of a common ground not talking about adding money maybe if we wanted to reduce something, is there a way that we could maybe do that?

Well, as the proposed resolution is drafted, all amendments would have to be submitted again by the close of business on Thursday, October 15th.

And as drafted, the resolution says amendments submitted after this date will not be considered by the common council.

Um I suppose if somebody had a proposal to modify that language and the council approved it, that could happen.

Um I think I heard you say to amend the amendments, not necessarily to present new amendments.

And we're not talking about adding or deleting departments or any of that, just being able to uh I think the example was given of the potholes uh versus stationary uh type of scenario is you know, taking the 15,000 and moving it to another area, the funding source had already been established.

So not creating something new, but just being able to amend something after a discussion with the body.

Sure.

Obviously, the the um the details are for the common council to decide.

I will just say procedurally, it would be easier if those kinds of things happened at a committee of the home meeting.

For example, potentially the Monday, October 19th committee of the whole meeting, as opposed to being introduced at the common council, because there's a whole lot that gets put together for the final budget approval.

So is there a motion on the floor?

The motion on the floor is to approve the budget calendar as amended in the finance and personnel committee.

That's what I'm saying.

Am I able to make an amendment to that to add this language?

An amendment would be in order at this time.

Okay.

So I would like to make an amendment to add the language as stated.

Uh so the council body is able to amend an amendment, but not to add money.

Um, if we wanted to transfer something over, delete something altogether, whatever it is.

But however you need to word that, that's I just don't want our hands to be tied.

Okay, if I understand what you said, ma'am, that the your suggested amendment to the proposed resolution is that the uh amendments to the amendments that are offered by October 15th would be permitted, and if I may ask, presumably at the committee of the home meeting.

Yes.

Um, and that those amendments be limited to not adding any additional spending.

Correct.

Um any other limitations adding additional spending, um, but again, only amendments to the amendments that had already been proposed in writing.

I can get that written up.

An amendment that's been proposed by Alder Kelly, it's been seconded by Alder Widener.

Um so we have several people in the queue.

I would just say if you want to speak to that amendment, I'm actually gonna clear the queue.

Um and just say if you would like to speak to the amendment, uh please press your button and we can discuss it uh from there.

Alder Pabone.

Thank you.

I just want to refresh my memory, maybe.

Don't do we not have a whole uh day set aside to debate any amendments that would come before before it gets to the point where we have to approve what's before us?

We do.

Okay.

So given that part, I I mean I was a part of the budget process last year.

It is intense, absolutely.

But we have a whole day uh, as far as I understand, set aside to debate any amendments we propose.

And at which point, if the city attorney can correct me if I'm not correct here, um at which point we could propose changes to those amendments, correct?

Well, again, as the uh resolution is drafted.

Okay, um all amendments would have to be presented in writing no later than close of business Thursday, October 15th.

The day the council has at least uh again on this proposed calendar to consider and debate the amendments is Monday, October 19th.

After the that's the date.

Okay, thank you.

Yeah, I'm not against the amendment as a concept.

Um, I think my concern is the quality of some of the amendments we got last year to call it out were very poor.

They didn't follow the guidelines, and so when they weren't allowed to be read, you know, the rules were you have to identify a funding source.

Some of them didn't identify funding sources, so they weren't able to be discussed because they didn't meet the most basic rule of if you're going to spend money, you have to cut it somewhere else.

I know it's really fun to propose amendments to spend more money, not so much fun to propose cutting it from somewhere else.

And so I feel like the way that this current amendment is proposed leaves it a little bit too wide open, where if somebody submits a poor amendment that doesn't identify a funding source, I I feel like it's it's dangerous to have the council have everyone pull out their red pen and start searching through the budget book to to cut some line items to fund whatever had been proposed.

And the reason that that's dangerous is for for those new alders on here.

When we submit the amendments by the deadline, the finance director and staff spend many many hours putting together what that would do.

Here's the amendment, here's what it's proposing to do, here's where it's proposing to cut and transfer the money.

Here's how that would work because sometimes there are an unintended consequences.

If you're going to cut something by 15%, uh turns out that department, if you do that, that goes below an already existing contract.

That would mean that they wouldn't be able to do it anymore.

So all of those things are done and have to be researched.

And so the way that it's written now being wide open, uh, I I just feel like it it opens the door for um redlining some things that would have some unintended consequences, as well as I think it's really important to notice what we're going to be discussing.

So when the amendments come in, they're posted.

Uh I think it's important so that if somebody were to propose an amendment to an amendment that ended up doing something super crazy, like I don't know, gutting the library, it was noticed, and everyone knew that that's what was going to happen instead of trying to slip it in in the dark of night.

And that's just a hypothetical situation.

But it's one that I feel like uh is is something that we need to consider.

So if we want to try to do amendments to amendments, you know, I I feel like there's a way to do that, but it has to be very clear on what it is that you can't do any new funding sources for it.

It can only be an amendment to the proposed funding source for what was uh uh proposed.

It would be things like you can't uh eliminate an entire department.

I know that it it was said by Alder Kelly that that wasn't her intent, but then when it was being formulated, it what didn't make it into the final motion.

That would be another one I think we'd have to add in that you can't go and add a uh a line as a part of an amendment to eliminate an entire department for those reasons I stated earlier that there's just a lot of research that goes into that.

There's a lot of um notice that goes in, just so that it's it's well thought out uh and it's truly supposed to be doing what it's intended to do.

Alder Allen.

Thank you.

I think I'm just gonna piggyback off of that statement about why it's why it's done the way last budget season, uh it was proposed that we eliminate the health department.

And I feel like this this proposed uh ordinance is kind of a roundabout way of answering the reason why some of the amendments did not get read last budget season because it didn't have a funding source.

So if we are amending on the floor in that real time, quote and quote, then you're that could come out again.

Oh, well, we want to fund here, and we're gonna take the money from the health department, right?

And then the city doesn't have a health department, and we're here five hours debating that.

Uh and then in part about again with timing.

In the committee meeting, we discussed why we were have why we have the time frame that we do.

It is because, yes, we have until the middle's I believe I'm speaking too.

State your point of order all the way.

Uh the speaker should be speaking to the motion.

And the motion was to amend the amendment on that we're discussing.

Alder Weiner, her her comments are germane.

She can continue.

Alder Allen, you have the floor.

Thank you.

So uh is because while we do have that time, and we could go over these amendments on the floor, and we could it would expand how long we would in the process.

We run the danger of going into the elections, which are in November.

And our team that supports us while we're going through the budget would then be dividing their time and trying to juggle as Alder Jurges has said the process that it would take for them to do the research to um find the answers and the consequences to any amendments that we would make, and then if we needed to tap into the clerk's office during this process, we would then be bumping into the elections.

And so while this budget process is the major thing that we do as a council, also being cognizant of the ability for our community to be able to have fair and free elections on an uninterrupted is also a responsibility.

Otherwise, I just was I wanted to ask Alder Kelly to just clarify for me.

Um your amendment versus the October 19th committee of the whole um that says budget amendments debated and voted, like the difference.

To whom are you directing your question?

Alder Kelly.

Alder Kelly, will you yield to the question?

So I don't have the calendar in front of me, so I was looking for some guidance from uh city attorney.

So um my intentions were so we could have that sort of uh debate on whatever night it is that I'm sorry I was not here in person um because of my situation last year, so I had to do all this remotely.

Um it was very hard to follow along.

Uh there were people that were trying to make amendments on the floor to try to make a change, and we were unable to do that.

So this would open it up.

I'm not saying that we're adding funding, we're not adding dates.

Um I would like to stay in the parameters that were given to us that if there are not uh correct funding sources um established, then that is not a proper uh uh budget amendment.

So I want to keep all that framework, but I just want this council to be able to make amendments if necessary on the floor on whatever night that is.

I don't sorry I don't have the calendar in front of me.

No, and my question was just because um on the calendar it says October 19th, committee of the whole budget amendments debated and voted.

So I didn't know if that was the same opportunity to amend amendments or if that's something different.

I'm just asking for clarity.

Yeah, I'll ask the city attorney to try to clarify what I believe the amendment says.

I uh I'll just try to give you an example.

So imagine somebody submits an amendment on time that says I want the city to be able to purchase a hundred widgets for a department, and then come committee the whole day.

The debate seems like maybe that wouldn't be approved, but somebody else thinks purchasing 50 widgets might be okay.

So the amendment is to buy a hundred widgets.

The amendment to the amendment is to change it from a hundred to fifty widgets.

And I believe that's what Alder Kelly is suggesting would be that's exactly.

And I was just wondering if it needed to be amendment or if that's already baked into October 19th as work the council could do.

That was just my curious the way it was interpreted last year, was very strictly, and I think correctly that the amendments weren't in on a particular date.

That was the end.

Thank you.

Yeah, I guess I just have a for a second time, sorry.

Point of information then to the the motion maker if she'd yield to a question.

Um you yield to a question?

Sure.

In the motion, I I didn't hear the the I know that you talked about it, but then when you'd given it to attorney letney, I didn't hear the portion about how it it still has to be a um it still has to meet the other requirements first before it can get it because I do think that changes it.

Um, you know, if if we have the ones that are I just want to make sure your intention that the way that the attorney has it recorded is that it's not to fix anything or identify different funding sources, it's truly just uh an amendment, basically uh an amendment or an amendment to amend it with a reduction, and that's it.

Alder Kelly, is that your intention?

That would be one of my intentions, yes.

But for the example last year, for example, if we're just reduced, you know, yours was not to reduce down, it was to switch over to a different area, and if we're gonna restrict ourselves to that, then we wouldn't have been able to do that last year, even if we would have been able to amend an amendment.

I still want to stay within the parameters though of making proper budget amendments with proper funding sources and staying within those guidelines first and foremost.

They shouldn't even come here if they don't have that.

Secondly, we should be able to discuss, and if we decide that a hundred widgets isn't it and 50 is, then we should be able to make that decision on the floor.

Other Jorgensen.

Thank you for clarifying that.

Yeah, I mean, I it's good to hear that the intention, I just want to ask the attorney a question uh specifically on the um the way that you have it written right now, were this still would prohibit inappropriate amendments from even being able to be discussed, such as I want to take money out of the utility fund and give it somewhere else, despite that not being a germane amendment.

Um if you mean an amendment to an amendment, um that is the way I understood what Alder uh Kelly had requested, and I will say that this is my notes is the uh amendment Alder Kelly um proposed is uh that members of the common council would be permitted to provide amendments to the properly submitted amendments at the committee of the whole meeting on October 19th, um, only again for the amendments that have been offered in writing, um amendments would amendments to amendments would not be authorized to increase spending.

Um that's that's what I have.

So to use our widgets example, someone couldn't say I think it should be 200 widgets.

I would be open to adding improper, adding improper uh funding sources if that's something that you're agreeable with.

Yeah, I I would, and and uh the other one that I'd like to see if there's some way to do it of I get the idea that you know maybe the amendment that was proposed to eliminate something and put it somewhere else wasn't approved and we want to move it somewhere else.

I'd like to see that um limited to things that are already noticed in the budget, uh, so that it can't be I wanna, you know, we let's to use the stationary fund from last year.

We're eliminating the stationary fund to use it towards paint.

The council didn't approve using it for paint.

If you want to put that fifteen thousand dollars towards somewhere else in the budget that's already been noticed, I think that that would be a a little bit safer than an alder being able to create brand new items on the floor to send it.

I agree.

Yes, absolutely.

So I don't know if we need a if it's a friendly amendment on that one or yes.

Are you um how do we work that out?

Or Kelly agrees to that as a friendly amendment.

Alder Winer, do you agree to that as a friendly amendment as the second or the motion?

Aldo I before I can agree to that, I have to understand it.

So can you repeat what that friendly amendment is?

I'll ask the city attorney to a uh to try to stipulate what the amend what the friendly amendment is.

If I think I understood is what you were saying that amendments to the amendments would also have to identify proper funding sources, yeah, that was one part, so they would they would still have to identify proper funding sources as well as they have to um if you're if the uh if the amendment to an amendment changes where that funding source would go to or where you would move the money, you can't create anything that wouldn't have already been created by the budget.

You'd have to move it somewhere to the budget.

So the stationary fund for last year to use that example again.

The original amendment was to use it towards paint that that didn't have uh through many things, wasn't able to go forward.

I couldn't then say I want to go and and s create a new foundation with that for the city because it's not in the budget, but if I said I want to move it to the road repair fund, that would be an acceptable amendment to an amendment.

So let me let me see if I can put it in terms that I think staff will understand and hopefully the council will understand.

So the proposed resolution already makes clear um, for example, proposed amendments may not include fund balance or wage provision as a funding source, and funding for amendments for capital projects can only come from capital funded sources, and funding for amendments for operations can only come from operation funding funded sources.

So there are every department has a series of accounts, professional services account, there's a um you know, a travel account, there's a office supplies account.

If I understand what you're saying, is the amendments to the amendments could not identify an account for which money to come from that is not already included in the original amendment.

I think we were thinking the other way of a can't go to, so you can if it was if the amendment to an amendment was noticing that you're taking it from this account, that's fine, but then you have to send it somewhere that's already been created with an already created purpose.

So it can't you can't create new things with an amendment to an amendment.

Okay.

You can add to other areas with it, but you can't you can't pull a new initiative out.

Given the complexity of it, we might need an amendment to the amendment to discuss how we're going to amend the amendments for the budget.

And so this is a preview of what October 19th uh may look like.

Okay.

I will just note that I saw the finance director nodding her head adamantly that she absolutely understands exactly what you're talking about.

And we will make sure it is written the correct way.

Okay.

So it seems like there's a um a meeting of the minds between Alder Kelly and Alder Jorgensen, which would make this not a formal amendment but a friendly amendment.

But again, Alder Widener is the seconder of that amendment would have to agree to that being uh incorporated into the amendment.

If not, it would need to be um proposed as an amendment to the amendment.

I'm not going to support the friendly amendment, and I'd like to speak to why.

Um that's not in order at this time to um it's just a residual thing at that point.

So the seconder of the motion um did not concur with the the friendly amendment, Alder Kelly.

Would you like to make it a formal amendment to the amendment?

Yes.

Okay.

Second.

There's a motion uh to formalize that amendment to the amendment.

Umgensen has seconded it.

Um now we're talking about the amendment to the amendment process.

Uh is there anybody who would like to speak further to the item?

Um I have several people were in an amendment to the amendment, so I'm gonna clear the queue again.

If you would like to speak to the amendment to the motion, um, please put your name in the queue.

Alder Widener, you have the floor.

Thank you.

The reason I'm speaking against the amendment to the amendment to the amendment is because I don't I I don't want to see this council limit their ability to discuss things, and I can tell you we probably have the brightest finance director in the state of Wisconsin right here.

Matter of fact, this morning I emailed her at uh 745 and I asked her what was our debt ratio in comparison to our our uh equalized value, and in 30 seconds she told me.

So I I have no doubt that if when the council is discussing an amendment to an amendment on the council floor, we can take advice from the finance director if the fund that we're discussing taking that from is an appropriate fund to take that from.

So I we we already have our hands so tied in discussion.

I don't think we have to tie them more when we have the staff that we have that can consult and advise us as we pay them to do.

So that's why I'm speaking against the amendment to amendment.

We don't have to have all the answers to discuss it.

We have staff to guide us and help us with that, but we should be we should have the freedom to speak on on any of these amendments and without limiting ourselves to have to have to know what line item we're gonna be taking something from.

So that's why I'm speaking against the amendment to the amendment to amend.

Alder Jorgensen.

Yeah, I'm talking in favor of it.

Um amendment section uh gets a little difficult.

Um however, I think what gets more difficult is the budget book.

I mean, when you for the new Alders, I mean it's inches thick.

Uh, and so uh while I do think our our finance director is is top-notch, I think even she would be the first to tell you that any time you start to try to change the budget, you there has to be some level of research.

And so I think the guidelines that Alder Kelly has laid out allow flexible changes to be able to get things through without opening it up so wide that we start uh changing it to the point where we don't know what those intended consequences are, and staff wouldn't have that that night if it wasn't submitted as an original submission.

Once you start to change it and change it, and you start identifying new funding sources that aren't even in the budget book or new target sources that aren't in the budget book, that all becomes very difficult to try to lay out um in one night.

So I would be um in favor of of adding these restrictions that give limited flexibility in the way that still allows business to be conducted uh in an orderly fashion.

I know it seems some people seem to revel in the chaos.

I'm one of I think government works best when everyone understands what's going on, uh, and that is between Alders and City staff.

Once you lose that, um that's when unfortunate bad things can happen.

Alder Pabone.

Thank you.

I'll speak in favor of this speak and simply because I'll albeit as great as Director Fisher is at her job, she's one person.

So if we already have the funding sources identified that are appropriate, and we would then want to make changes to maybe language that's in there, it's better than having her puddle through who knows how many pages or on her laptop frantically trying to find if that is a correct funding source and potentially putting us in a position we don't need to be in.

I it does it doesn't make any sense to me.

I am totally in favor of being able to modify it, but it coming from the correct source.

Otherwise, we're gonna be here till three or four in the morning because somebody could say, well, I want it to come from this, that's not right, okay.

Then come from this, that's not right, then come from this, that's not right.

And they could have 40 amendments that they wanted to do, and on top of that, we have the ability, and the budget the budget is intense, it's very intense, but we also have the ability beforehand, we have we we have the address on the fifth.

When would uh if the mayor would um enlighten me on when we would do they plan on giving us the actual budget book after the address or uh that night the address of the fifth so yes well, I mean I work a full-time job too, and then I do this, so I understand the the the burden that comes with it, but that's part of what we're doing here, and that's the time I mean I can't tell you how many countless hours I spent on the phone with Director Fisher last year, but the ability that we're talking about right now in what um Alderman Kelly and Alder Jorgensen have come together to propose allows us a little more flexibility that some members want or most members want, but it also allows our staff not to have to be running around uh and frantically flipping through things to see if it's even capable of doing it.

We can't just willie there are laws and regulations in place that dictate how certain funds can be spent in a budget.

We can't just allow that to be free form chaos, it wouldn't make any sense.

So I'm in favor of this amendment.

Thank you.

I see no other people in the queue, so we will go to a vote.

I just want to clarify where we are.

So the primary motion that is on uh on the floor for discussion is the calendar.

The primary amendment was to allow for amending amendments on the um at the last committee of the whole meeting.

What we have before us right now is an amendment to that amendment, which defines the terms and conditions under which those amendments can be amended.

Is everybody clear on what we're doing?

Okay.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Horton?

Elder Hodges, Alder Allen, Alder Pete, Alder Lynn, Alder Kelly, Elder Harman, Alder Pabone, Alder Frazier, Alder Frasier, Alder Weiss, Elder Davis, Alder Jorgerson, Alder Weiner.

Aye, okay.

The amendment to the amendment passes now what we have before unanimously, now what we have before us is the primary motion as amended by the secondary motion, which would allow for amendments to the amendments on the final day of the committee of the whole under the terms and conditions adopted in the secondary motion or amendment to the amendment.

Is that is that clear?

Great.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Holden?

Elder Hodges, Alder Lynn?

Elder Pete.

Elder Lynn.

Elder DeMore.

Oh no, Alder Kelly?

Alder Harmon?

Alder Pabone.

Alder Frazier.

Elder Weiss?

Alder Davis?

Alder Jorgensen?

And Alder Weiner.

Okay, then we're back to the main motion, uh, which is the proposed budget calendar with the amendment that was amended and adopted.

Is there any other discussion on the primary motion?

Seeing none when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Horton?

Elder Hodges.

Elder Allen?

Elder Pete?

Elder Land?

Elder Kelly?

Elder Harmon.

Elder Pabone?

Elder Frazier.

Elderwise?

Elder Jorgensen?

Aye.

Elder Weiner.

Yeah.

Motion carries 12 to 1.

Elder Land, did you have another item for separate consideration?

Yes, I have one.

Please read the item.

Item 0494-26.

Communications sponsored by Mayor Mason requesting authorization to allocate 1 million seventy-seven thousand in funds for a home renovation program titled Racine, Rehabbed and Ready.

The recommendation of the committee on 6-8 was that the city of Racing Common Council authorize the use of funds not to exceed 1,077 in total for the racing rehabbed and ready program.

Further authorizes the City of Racing Community Development Authority to implement the allocation of these funds and develop rules and guidelines to implement the program.

Move to approve.

There's a motion and a second to approve the rehabbed and ready item on the agenda here.

Alder Land, would you like to speak to your motion?

Again, we discussed this thoroughly in committee, and it was voted on unanimously.

Yes.

Some questions.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Um Alder Davis.

Thank you.

Oh, looking at this, it sounds like a good program, but watching the finance committee meeting, there were some questions I had that I have now.

Like, so I understand the funds are available because of closing of that TID.

Alder Davis, if I could just clarify that last statement, it's not that we closed a TID, it's that it did expired.

Well, the TID expired.

Right.

And and under state law, you can add expenditures from a TID for one year to go towards housing projects.

So that's it's it's maybe a fine point, but I just want to make sure people understand how the funding source came available.

So please proceed.

Thank you.

So my question is, why what why did the decision come about to create this program for abandoned and vacant homes when I have many received many many calls from my constituents wondering how they can receive some type of grants or funding to take care of their home that they're currently living in, and they're having a hard time rehabbing it, remodeling it, and they're not located in any TID districts.

So I I would like to know why we decide to go about this way to support vacant and abandoned homes versus assisting the homeowners that are requesting funds now and they're being told like there's no loans or grants available.

So we do have income qualified grants under HUD that are available from different funding sources.

You do have to income qualify for them.

You have to be below 80% of area median income, but we do have other funding sources that allow for people to apply for grants and or forgivable loans that live anywhere in the city as long as they income qualify.

Uh to address those homes that we sometimes get from the county or other nonprofits obtained to give them a chance to do it.

Um I can also, if if there's more clarification needed, or you'd like to address um uh assistant director hints on uh the formulation of it, he helped research the project and and wrote out the framing of it.

Um, just as a full disclosure, we did borrow a lot of these ideas from Detroit uh that have a very similar program, but if you'd like to direct any additional questions to uh Mr.

But if he'd like to direct any additional questions to uh Mr.

Hints, I'm sure he'd be happy to answer.

He um may have to go into another meeting for a moment.

I don't see them back there.

Where's that?

Where oh, there he is.

So could you tell me a little yeah, tell me a little bit more about this?

Yes, as the mayor noted, and thanks for the question.

Um, as the mayor noted, there really isn't a good funding source.

There's we know there's a gap between a house is vacant, it's a blight on the neighborhood.

There's nearly not a good a lot of those properties need so much work that there's going to be a gap in what the market would support somebody coming in to renovate.

Um it's not to say that people that live in their house don't have that same problem, but there are their funding sources to address some of those issues.

There's not enough money to go around is the honest answer, but there really isn't a good funding source for vacant properties in particular.

We know they're bloody neighborhoods, we know they're running things down.

You probably all have lists of properties for your district.

It's like, God, I wish someone would come in and do something to that property.

So this is that opportunity.

The funding would you know help us out with you know, around 40 to be able to get them back into productive use if people are gonna renovate them?

We'd have some rules about you know, one person wouldn't be able to take like five or ten or something at a time, they're gonna need to finish one before they could do another one.

Um, it would generally run on a first come, first served basis, but that would help get some of these properties that still could be saved.

Um, certainly with some of the money, they could just be demolished.

But we know from a lot of the bids and things that you see in the council sees that you know, tearing down houses, you could do it for 20 or 30,000, you know, at a time generally per a lot, but then to put a house back on that lot, you know, we found costs around 400,000 all in, which isn't really sustainable.

So if we can figure out a way to bridge the gap between somebody wanting to come in and renovate a house, whether it's a private individual, an organization or whoever, and bridge that gap with $25,000 on a lot of these properties, that will get the property back into productive use again and back on the tax roll, whereas if it just sits, um it will be demolished or need to be demolished through neglect as the only outcome.

So we want to try to change that outcome with this program.

Thank you.

Follow-up question.

I attempted to look more into the Detroit's rehab program.

There wasn't much information online.

Could you would you provide by email some information that you have with regarding that?

Also, my question, my um question is there was there any research or a stuff research or a study done on how and why these homes became abandoned or vacant?

Could it possibly be to um the point where we have some to some of my constituents at our call where they're elderly, low income, or some of them even have a moderate income and they don't have the income though to rehab their home, renovate their home, remodel their home.

Do you think if there was funding more of a funding source that could help them, we would have less abandoned and vacant homes?

Is there some type of correlation?

Possibly.

I think in terms of the properties we're targeting here, is they're generally tax foreclosure ones where people have just walked away and said forget about it for whatever reason.

Um before that happens, certainly there is a period of disrepair.

Like the whole goal of you know what city development tries to do holistically is invest in neighborhoods with both new construction and then also with products that would help people maintain what they have.

So this is kind of that last tier of things where there's properties that no one seems to care about and they're forgotten about, and not all of them are too far gone.

There certainly will be some that we'll look at and say, well, you know, this maybe wouldn't be a good candidate for that program if somebody applied for it.

It needs, you know, 200,000 dollars worth of work, and you know, our 25,000 dollars may help that, and if they have private equity that would bridge that gap, you know, we we wouldn't say no, but um we are gonna be you know somewhat selective.

Some of the properties, you know, maybe aren't gonna be salvageable.

Um, certainly as part of this program, we would you know need demonstration from the applicants that they've actually got the financial resources to renovate it and get it done.

Um, we'd hate for someone to get started and then you know figure out that as they're progressing through it that you know the property just isn't gonna be renovated and that you're gonna need more than 25,000.

So we'd want to you know evaluate the properties, like certainly one that you know had fire damage or something along those lines wouldn't be a maybe a good candidate for this, but there are properties, dozens of them, which is why we have a vacant property registry in the city to figure out where these things are and hopefully get them back into use again.

But to your point, I think there's programs that we do offer that can help catch them before they get to that point.

But to the mayor's original you know, point about why this program would be so important, there really isn't a good funding source at all for the ones that are just vacant and forgotten about.

It's like, well, hopefully the market will take care of it.

And we know there's a gap.

People ask us and have been clamoring for this type of program, so we figured this money has been sitting here.

We should you know put it on the street.

There's a need for it, I think, citywide in all the districts for vacant and derelict properties that need someone to care for them.

Final question.

I don't recall this if it was dating.

Are these will these have to be owner occupied homes?

Yep, they would be after at the conclusion of it.

You would either need to be someone who's gonna buy it and do the renovation work and move into it or sell it to an owner-occupant, and it would be deed restricted that it stay that way.

Is there a timeline on how long an individual have to stay in that home?

Not necessarily as long as it as long as it stays owner-occupied.

If someone wanted to renovate it and only live there for a year and you know, maybe move to a different one, we wouldn't be opposed to it.

The goal is to have structures that are you know run down in neighborhoods be occupied by owner occupants again and be in good repair, so we wouldn't necessarily want to limit that duration of time.

Um we would want to ensure that in perpetuity that it is owner-occupied is the goal of the program.

All right, thank you.

Complete Alder White, thank you.

Uh, a couple questions for you, Jeff.

And I think this is a great use of this money, it's been sitting there long enough.

Um, I do have a question though, that what we're doing here is we're authorizing the CDA to implement the allocation of these funds and to develop rules and guidelines to implement the program.

Will approval of those guidelines come back to the council for final approval, or will that be strictly within the CDA?

The intent is that it would be the CDA, is how it's worded.

Certainly, the council can do what it's like.

Um, the CDA is you know a public meeting, certainly, for folks to come to and attend if desired, but the intent is that if approved the CDA would develop this, and I'm happy to share, but that is the way that the items worded now.

Okay, and then um do you already have in mind what guidelines you're gonna propose to the CDA for them to approve?

Because I know they don't sit in committee and come up with the guidelines and rules themselves, it's something that you present.

So, do you already have something in mind?

Uh on a higher level, yes.

I mean, some general ones that we do in our other programs would generally be repeated, like I said earlier, we're not gonna let somebody just apply for five and then sit on them like you're gonna need to finish the one that you did.

You know, it's gonna be a one-at-a-time thing and a first come first serve basis.

There's not going to be necessarily uh you know, pride or prejudice towards any type of developer individual law of standard things like if you're back on taxes or you're you know owing money on another property or something like that.

You know, you're not gonna be a good candidate for this program, you need to be in good standing with the city.

But um, you know, that's essentially the the crux of where I've arrived at now.

But in the coming weeks here, um, I would intend to bring something to the CDA in July to be able to get this you know operational so people can make function of it this year yet and hopefully renovate some properties.

By July, you said, yeah.

So would it be the CDA or would it be the Department of City Development that would determine which developers would have access to the grants that would enable them to get a property sale ready for a homeowner?

Ultimately the CDA with a recommendation from the Department of City Development.

Okay, and does the uh city development or the CDA have requirements as far as if a developer has an LLC before they can access any kind of these funds?

I wouldn't necessarily want to impose that if it was a private individual or an LLC.

I mean, we'll we'll check out if the LLC is controlled by you know, for example, me, and then I have Jeff LLC, like we'd make sure we'd see that's the same person or the same controlling entity and say you already have one out, like finish that one, come back.

Um, to you know, the limit that is best we can.

Certainly, there's things people can do to you know, hide who you know is the LLC, but um we would intend it to function in that fashion, so there's not just a group, you know, hoarding all this money effectively and then not letting others who want a shot at it to renovate a property um you know, not have a chance.

Okay, okay, thank you, Jeff.

Thank you.

I see no other discussion on this item when the clerk calls your name.

Please vote as you wish.

Well, I'm sorry, Elder Drugenson.

Do you want to speak to the item?

Yeah, I was just gonna throw it out there that I think this is a great program, and I think this is one of the ones I know that I've said it before for neighborhood kids, and I'll say it for this one as well, too.

I think this is something that should go into the uh realty community because there's a lot of folks who are on the edge of they're not quite able to afford a home.

This is one of those programs where you know maybe you're able to get a home now that you can use some uh of this this money to get it back into a livable condition and become a homeowner and start building generational wealth.

So I I really do view these things as you know, it it's great if developers want to do this, but I'm really excited that private individuals can do this as well.

I view it as kind of an equity thing of if if you're on the edge and you're not able to afford it, this is potentially another road to be a homeowner uh right here in the city of Racine.

The queue is empty when the clerk calls your name.

Please vote as you wish.

Alder Hodges, Elder Allen?

Elder Pete.

Elder Kelly?

Aye, Alder Harmon.

Aye.

Alder Pavone?

Aye.

Elder Frazier.

Elder Weiss?

Alder Davis?

Alder Jorgensen?

Aye.

Alder Weiner.

Aye.

Motion passes unanimously.

We'll now move on.

Oh, are there any other items for separate consideration in the finance and personnel uh reports?

Alder Alder Widener, did you have a request for an additional item?

I do.

I missed one.

Uh 0402-26.

What page is that item?

That would be on page four.

Oh item 0402-26.

Correct.

Would you like to make a motion?

On the item?

Uh does someone want to read them?

Alder Land, would you like to read the item?

Item 0402-26 communications sponsored by myself submitting the claim of Christine Dowerty for consideration or disallowance.

Recommendation of the finance and personnel committee that the claim be disallowed.

Move to disallow.

There's a motion to disallow this item.

Is there a second?

Second by Alder Horton.

Any further discussion on the item?

Alder Wedner?

I'm going to speak against disallowing this claim.

I thoroughly understand the arguments on both sides of this issue.

Um I attended the closed session where things were discussed.

Um a lot of things were said, but I go by the visuals.

I looked at the pictures of the frozen vehicle to the street, and I saw that the building had a sump pump that had a curb cut in it with a hole in the curb where the water was expelling itself and it expelled itself all the way out to the middle of the street.

And I do think that because the city does allow for these kind of curb cuts and with uh some pumps for commercial properties or investment type properties, that there is some culpability on the part of the city.

Um so I would uh I'm gonna be voting against uh denial of this particular claim.

Thank you.

Any further discussion on this item?

Alder Allen?

Attorney, if I may, please take your question.

Uh when we voted to go into closed session, it was going to be that Alder Allen, hang on just a second, your microphone turned off.

Please proceed.

Oh, are you hang on just a second?

I don't know why, but your microphone appears to be malfunctioning.

Please try again.

Try one more time.

Why don't you trade places with Alder Pete real quickly and uh you can make your comments there?

And I guess we will ask IT to look at your microphone when the meeting adjourns.

Thank you.

Okay.

When we were in committee, or when the committee happened, I'm not part of the committee actually uh for voting, but the claimant asked for us to go to not go into closed session.

Uh and there were there was uh information that was shared to the committee that allowed uh the committee to reach the voting decision that they did.

Uh because not all of the council members were present at that committee meeting.

Are we able to share the information that was disc that was disclosed to the committee at this time?

Well, if the common counsel wants to hear all that information, I can tell you what it was.

Well, just if I could clarify that be a motion from the floor to how would that procedurally happen?

Hang on just a second.

I didn't, I didn't hear I thought the author was asking me to explain the reasons for the city attorney's office recommendation for denial.

Correct.

And there's no motion or formality that needs to be.

No, no, no.

Okay.

Then uh Alder Allen, if you're okay with it, I'll have I'll ask the city attorney to explain that, and then we'll come back to you for your follow-up question.

Okay.

Well, excuse me, the recommendation of the of the city attorney's office is that the claim be disallowed because the city is not liable for the circumstances giving rise to the claim uh filed by Ms.

Dotry.

Um Ms.

Rottery filed her claim on February 12, 2026, asking for seven twenty-seven thousand seven hundred forty-five dollars and fifty cents in damage due to related allegations that her car, a 2013 Fiat 500, became non-operational after its tires became frozen in ice due to her parking on the street in the vicinity of a sump pump discharge pipe running from her apartment building at 2700 Anthony Lane on her about January 23rd through February 2nd.

Upon inspection by the city's chief building inspector, the neighborhood enhancement division manager, the water utility, and the superintendent of public works, it was determined that the source of water was a sump pump that was discharging from the property at this location, which froze because of the uh cold temperatures that week.

As such, the owner of the building, FAH Maples LLC, may be liable for the damage, but the city is not legally liable for the damages as alleged, and that's the reason that the uh city attorney's office recommended that this claim be disallowed.

Um I have some information I can provide about the claim for damages if you like.

I don't know if that's necessary, but the claim for damages is a total of $27,000.

That claim does it includes the vehicle, but as was disclosed in the committee meeting, the vehicle, if we if we went to court, the claimant would be made whole for the for the blue book value of the vehicle.

However, the entire claim amount is for $27,000.

So I think it would be helpful for the counsel who were they were not in attendance to hear what those line items are for.

Okay.

And let me just say that none of this changes the city attorney's office recommendation that the claim be disallowed.

Um the question is whether or not the claim dollar amount even represents actual loss.

So the claimant uh requested a total of 27,745 dollars in damages, um, all of which allegedly stem from the loss of her use of her vehicle.

Um this is broken down into various component parts, $15,000 for the replacement of her vehicle, $2,000 for first and last month's rent for a new apartment, an unspecified amount for the loss of her emotional support animals, an unspecified amount for her mental health, eight thousand four hundred and ninety-five dollars and fifty cents in lost wages, seven hundred and fifty dollars for claimant to give the landscape company, which volunteered to help her get her car out of the ice for free, but did not actually do it.

$1,500 for claimant to give $750 each to two friends who have helped her.

I note that at the time of these events, uh the claimant's driver license had been suspended and had been suspended for several years.

Therefore, it was illegal for the claimant to be operating her vehicle at the time of this claim, and it would have been illegal for her to operate her vehicle as of today's date.

If claimant had not been illegally operating her vehicle on January 23rd, 2026, when she drove and parked her vehicle on the street in front of 2700 Anthony Lane, this claim would not exist because none of this would have happened.

Furthermore, the claimant premises many of her alleged damages on the assertion that she personally drove this vehicle on a regular basis in her day-to-day life, which of course would have been illegal because she has a suspended driver license.

The claimant again requested a total of $27,745 in damages.

However, she has not presented documentation, such as receipts, estimates, or other concrete evidence to substantiate the validity of any of these damages.

When the city attorney's office investigated these legged damages, it found as follows.

Claimant requested $15,000 for the replacement of her vehicle, which again I note was a $2013 fiat $500.

Based on the Kelly Blue Book value, the claimant's car had the claimant's car been in excellent condition, which it was not, it could be sold to a private party for a price range of $3,470 to $4,545, which with an average price of $39.95, again compared to the $15,000 claim.

The price range for a trade-in or sale to a car dealer, of course, is significantly lower.

There is at least an $11,000 discrepancy between the claim damages and the actual value of the vehicle at the time.

In June of 2024, claimant's vehicle had been involved in a rear-end collision with another motor vehicle and incurred a damage to the front of the claimant's car.

The car had been impounded by Racine Police Department in August of 2025, and it was reported to have dents and scratches all over the front bumper.

Again, these would all tend to reduce the actual value of the vehicle.

The claimant says she first discovered her car was stuck on January 24th, 2026, and that her vehicle was still running as of January 26, 2026, when she turned the car's engine over for a lengthy period of time in an attempt to melt the ice below it.

Claimant eventually had her vehicle towed on Friday, February 6th.

And if she had actually called the tow truck to take care of this when it was originally discovered, it's quite possible her vehicle would not have become inoperable for sitting in the ice for nearly two weeks.

Claimant requested $2,000 for first and last month's rent for a new apartment.

She has alleged that she lost her apartment because she was unable to drive her vehicle to get to work beginning on about uh January 23rd, 2026.

However, the real reason the claimant lost her apartment was because her landlord had filed an eviction action against her on November 26th, 2025, nearly two months prior to the date of the events giving rise to her claim.

Claimant requested an unspecified amount of damages for the loss of her emotional support vehicle or excuse me, animal.

When claimant moved out of her apartment due to her eviction, she left behind her two cats, which were discovered abandoned in her vacant apartment on February 25th, 2026.

After attempting to call the claimant about the matter to pick about this matter to pick up the cats to no avail, a city verseine community service officer had to pick up the cats and transport them to the Humane Society.

Claimant demanded $8,495 and 50 cents in lost wages because of the loss of her vehicle allegedly that she claims led to the loss of her employment.

However, she did not provide any actual evidence of income, including pay stubs or other documentation of proof.

Some minor things she asked for $750 to give the landscape company, which volunteered to get her car out of the ice.

Of course, it didn't get her car out of the ice.

So there is no reason to pay for unsubstantiated damages like that.

The claimant asked for $1,500 to give $7,500, $750 each to friends who have helped her.

This is not the kind of unsubstantiated claim that would be recoverable under these circumstances.

All those issues just uh relate to the actual loss, if any that the claimant had, but none of that changes the fact that the city is not liable for this action.

Liability lies in part in the claimant's failure to move the vehicle from side to side as she was required to do on opposite side parking, and the fact that the sum pump um discharged onto the street, which caused the ice that froze this.

Just because something happens on a city street to a vehicle does not mean the city is liable for what happened to that.

So again, the city attorney's office recommends disallowing the claim.

No, thank you.

Any other discussion on this item?

Again, the motion is to disallow the claim.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

State your point of information.

Just want to clarify for everyone.

A yes vote is disallowing a no vote.

It's an important if you vote yes on the motion, you would disallow the claim.

It's an important distinction.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton?

Alder Hodges.

Alder Allen?

Elder Pete.

Elder Lynn?

Alder Kelly?

Aye.

Alder Harman.

Elder Pavone?

Alder Frazier.

Aye.

Alder Weiss.

Alder Davis?

Alder Jorgensen?

Alder Weiner.

The claim is disallowed on a vote of 12 to 1.

We'll now move on to well.

I'm sorry, are there any other items for separate consideration on the finance and personnel report?

Okay, then seeing none, we'll place the remainder of those items on the consent agenda and move on to Alder Harmon to talk about the public works and services committee report.

Alder Harman, did you have items for separate consideration?

Yes, I do, Mayor.

Please read the first item.

Um item 040826 is not for separate consideration.

Um the Alder Alder Davis is asking that it be read so that it is on record.

So subject communication sponsored by Alder Davis requesting consideration for installation of a pedestrian crossing beacon at the corner of DeCoven Street and Taylor Avenue to approve to improve pedestrian safety and crossing accessibility.

Recommendation of public works and services committee on 6926 to install the pedestrian beacons.

Fiscal note, the cost is already budgeted in the 2026 budget through DPW.

Item for separate consideration.

Yes.

Um I move for it to be approved that the installation of the pedestrian beacons um be made.

Yes.

Um the DPW department has considered um the request by Alder Davis.

She came before the committee and made a very good point as to the reason for this.

Our administration the administration, especially Ron and others, gave additional information on why it would be feasible after researching this, and I think that it really is a good idea for this to go forward.

All right.

Any other discussion on item 0408-26.

See none when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton?

Elder Hodges, Alder Allen, Alder Pete, Elder Lynn, Elder Kelly, Alder Harman, Elder Pavone, Alder Fraser.

Alder Jorgensen.

Elder Weiner.

Motion passes unanimously.

Alder Harmony, do you have any other items for separate consideration?

Yes, Mayor, just one more.

Item 0488-26.

Communications sponsored by Alder Widener submitting bid results for contract 2026, West Street and Wilson Street intersection realignment.

The rep recommendation is that the contract West Street and Wilson Street intersection realignment be awarded to AW Oaks and Sun Inc.

in the amount of 207,298 dollars and 25 cents.

They be in the lowest responsible responsibility bidder.

The funding is available in following org objects 400325750 TID 32 paving.

I motion that the contract be awarded to AW Oaks and Sun Inc.

There's a motion and a second to approve the contract.

Would you like to speak to your motion?

Alder Harman.

Yes.

Considering that this is the lowest responsive responsible bidder.

I think that it should be approved.

There may have been additional bids at a higher amount, but a higher amount does not negate that the quality of the job would not be reasonable and I believe or successful, substantial, or satisfactory.

So therefore I think that we should approve this.

Okay.

Any other discussion?

Alder Weiner.

Thank you.

AW Oaks was the lowest responsible bidder.

Um this item can be uh included on the consent agenda.

I just had a question to ask that could not be answered in committee by the uh commissioner of public works, and that is in regards to the funding memo.

Um this is being funded from TID 32, being that we had just created the uh TID 32.

I wanted to ask someone if they could tell me where the funding is coming from in the new TID.

Given her approach, I will refer your question to the finance director.

Sure, thank you for the question.

I actually was watching public works and services that night.

Um so TID 32, and this was included in the project plan in TID 32.

Also in the project plan was a line item saying advance from the IG fund.

So it is common practice for the city of Racine to use the IG fund to help fund TIDS in the first one or two years before the increment does come in.

Then the TID district will pay the IG fund back with interest over that period of time, generally for this one for 200,000.

It's a relatively small amount in the world of TID.

Um, so I would anticipate that being paid back probably 2028.

Alder Wayner.

So are there any other projects that you can think of or are aware of that would be funded out of TID 32 before it actually achieves some increment?

So again, there's other infrastructure projects that may be done again as it was associated in the project plan.

So um this Wilson Street realignment was imagined the entire time.

There will be other sidewalk projects that will have to be done in that area because many of the sidewalks have been dug up.

Um there's a bit of street lighting that may be done a little bit farther down the road.

There's some road widening in certain areas and some tree planting and things that'll have to happen to do some improvements for the homes.

Okay, thank you.

Seeing no further discussion on this item when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton?

Elder Hodges, Alder Allen, Alder Pete, Elder Land, Alder Kelly, Alder Harmon.

Alder Probowan?

Alder Frazier Alder Weiss Alder Davis?

Alder Jorgensen?

Alder Weiner?

Motion carries unanimously.

We'll then move on.

Uh were there any other items, Alder Harman for separate consideration?

Thank you, Mayor.

Apparently, there is one other item 0487-26 communication sponsored by Alder Widener submitting bid results for contract 2026 099 College Avenue Curb Replacement Recommendations of Public Work Services Committee on 6926, the contract 2026 099 College Av Curb replacement be awarded to AW Oaks and Sun in the amount of 87,545 dollars.

They be in the lowest responsive responsible responsive bidder funding is available in the following org objects 6048457570 storm sewers motion to approve.

Is there any further discussion on it?

Seeing none when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Allen?

Elder Pete?

Elder Land.

Alder Kelly?

Alder Harman?

Elder Pabone?

Alder Frazier.

Alder Weiss?

Elder Davis?

Elder Jorgensen?

Elder Weiner?

12 ayes, one no.

The motion carries Alder Harman.

Did you have any other items for separate consideration?

No, I don't.

Seeing no objection, we'll replace the remainder of these items onto the consent agenda and we will move on to public safety and licensing.

Alder Pete, did you have any items for separate consideration?

Yes, I do.

So please read item number 0482 26.

Communication sponsored by myself submitting a new application for a class A retail permitted malt beverage and intoxicating liquor license for Max West Town DVA West Town Foods, which is located at 3326 16th Street, that the vendor car agent 13th district recommendation of the public safety and license committee on 610 26 that the communication sponsored by Alder Pete submitting a new application for a class A retail permitted malt beverage and intoxicating liquor license for Max West and DBA West Town Foods located at 3326 16th Street.

Devander Carr agent be approved.

Alder Pete I'll move to approve.

Okay.

Approving the item is there a second.

Oh, Alderwise seconded it.

Um Alder Pete, would you like to speak to your motion?

Can you turn it back on it?

When it went through the committee, we didn't see anything wrong with that, didn't have any concern from the uh public or uh there's nothing from the attorney's office nor the police department, and it was simply a transfer of an agent license because the previous owner had sold the business to a new owner who had to get the agent license.

Also, the uh any license is class B license would have been grandfathered, but there was nothing to be grandfathered for, so there was no concerns.

Thank you.

I asked this ask for this to have separate consideration as after the committee meeting.

I looked into it a bit more, and I noticed that their hours of operation is to 12 a.m.

And looking at other stores similar to them, I feel um that 9 p.m.

would be better suited as it's it's listed as a grocery store, but majority of their sales are in alcoholic beverages.

So if we're looking at being proactive about you know alcohol and the locations and all that, I would like to make an amendment making a motion to amend the hours of operations, the hours of operation.

Yes, I'd like to make a motion to amend the motion to for the hours of operation.

Alder Davis has a motion to amend the hours of operation to have move the closing time from 12 a.m.

to 9 p.m.

Do I have that correct, Alder Davis?

And who seconded?

Alder Kelly seconded it.

Umder Davis, do you want to speak any further to your amendment?

Just in this time and age, if we want to have consistency with liquor stores, I believe 9 p.m.

is the best um best way to go about it and having them close at nine.

Alder Kelly.

Thank you.

Uh this is in my district, and after the committee meeting, I actually had uh a couple constituents reach out to me from that area and another business owner, and the the hours of operation was the main concern of that location.

Um it is a new owner.

I know that they have other locations.

Um I'm okay with approving the license, but I I definitely think that in this area we definitely need to modify the hours as Alder Davis has stated.

Thank you, Alder Weiner.

Thank you.

I have three questions for the city attorney.

The first is what are the hours in which uh liquor liquor or package beer can be sold?

Sorry, Alder Weiner, could you restate that question?

I wanted to I don't know what's happened in my voice.

Um I want to know what the hours that uh liquor and package beer can be sold.

Um you know this is not my area of expertise and our attorney Poplin would have it on the top of his head, but I believe that liquor and wine can be sold till nine o'clock and beer till midnight.

Okay.

I believe that's correct.

So this store is selling both beer and liquor.

Okay.

So my next question would be would we be able to amend the hours of operations on the council floor?

Would it have to go back to committee so that the applicant would be made aware that we are changing his hours of operations?

Um it's probably useful because you pull one lever, maybe something else changes, frankly, if the committee were to look at it again, it may affect something else in the business plan.

Um which would be useful voting on it here or sending it back to sending it back to committee, I'm sorry, it would be useful.

Okay, and then my last question maybe um somebody is familiar with this store.

What were the hours of operations from the previous owner to whom are I don't know if even know if it matters?

I would make a motion to refer this back to committee.

There's a motion to refer this item back to committee, seconded by Alder Pavone.

Alder Weiner, would you like to speak further to your motion to refer the item back to committee?

No, I I understand uh absolutely the alderman of the districts wish to uh amend those hours, but I think that's something that should be done in committee with the applicant's knowledge uh rather than on the council floor.

Okay, uh Alder Pavone on the motion to refer thank you.

Um City Attorney, I I know that attorney Pompin is in in this more than you are, but is it possible for the uh committee or and or the council to put a conditional on the license that they're only able to sell to a certain time without affecting his hours of operation?

Well, the state liquor alcohol sales licenses generally preempt a whole lot of things that can be done with um in municipalities.

Um I believe that's possible, and I'm sorry to hedge um right now.

This is not something that I a question that I anticipated having to answer tonight.

So I know there's a lot of regulation that comes along with alcohol.

So I was just curious.

I mean, uh as we as it regards to the motion to send it back.

I think that the uh owner deserves a chance to state their case again on why they shouldn't have to be limited, and if the option is there for the committee to impose a conditional approval to a certain time, that might be an option as well without limiting the hours of operation, so where they're no longer allowed to sell alcohol and um or beer and and uh liquor, but that they can still be open for other items that people might need.

That might be an option as well, but that's for the committee to to look at when it comes back.

But I do think it's it would be wise of us to allow the the new owner to understand what we're trying to do without just imposing it on them without them even being here.

Thank you.

I'm sorry, Mr.

Mayor.

I've confirmed I was correct about the hours.

Intoxicating liquor and wine till nine o'clock and beer till midnight.

Alder Beat I yes, I thank the attorney just answered the made a statement that I was gonna make.

We will be in contact with uh attorney Pomplin.

However, what as Scott, I'm sorry, attorney Litney just pointed out, they have what we call class B license.

They're not only selling beer, because you could say, well, the gas station is opened after nine o'clock and they sell beer and wine, things of that nature, but the difference is that they're selling uh intoxicating beverages, which wouldn't fault make them fall under the uh nine o'clock rule.

But again, this seems like a good discussion to have back at committee.

Yes.

Well, just won't point that out.

Okay.

Alder Allen.

No, I'll ask a committee.

Thank you.

All right, the motion before us is to refer this item back to the committee.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton?

Elder Hodges, Alder Allen, Alder Pete, Alder Lance, Alder Kelly, Alder Harman.

Alder Pavone?

Aye.

Alder Frazier.

Alderweise, Alder Davis?

Aye.

Alder Jorgensen?

Aye.

Alder Weiner?

Motion passes unanimously.

That item has been referred back.

Alder Pete, do you have any other items for separate consideration?

No, I do not.

Alder Davis, did you have an item for separate consideration?

No.

I have ordered the same on a four, but we won't go back till committee till after June 30th, correct?

I I don't know.

Could somebody get a cabinet for our next one?

But if it's regarding the motion we passed, the discussion is the item has been referred.

So what do we do?

Alder Pete, did you have any other items for separate consideration?

Then without objection, the remainder of these items will be placed on the consent agenda.

We will then move on to planning heritage and design.

Alder Pete, did you get a request for separate consideration on this item?

No, I did not.

Um then Alder Weiner, did you want separate consideration on this item?

Well, I had a question for the city attorney on the previous agenda.

Um the previous agenda item is uh has been voted on and referred.

If there's procedural questions, um I would suggest we ask them after the meeting.

It is a procedural question on the item that we voted for on sending an item back.

Is there a way that the committee can rescind that uh defer back based on new information uh regarding when the next PSL meeting meets if the concern is not approving this before the end of the liquor licensing year?

This is not a renewal, this is a new license, and new licenses can get approved kind of any time during the year.

Okay, thank you.

If there's been no requests for separate consideration on planning heritage design, we will place this item on the consent agenda and then move on to the community development block grant advisory board.

Uh Alder Horton.

Um would I don't I think that might be an error?

Yeah, I think it should read Alder Jorgensen.

Alder Jorgensen, have you had any requests for separate consideration?

All right.

Um thought I was gonna get out of that one.

Uh uh, and uh Alder Weiner just whispered that she would like both items to be uh pulled out for a separate consideration.

Uh so that would be item number 0522-26.

Communication sponsored by Mayor Mason authorizing contract acceptance and execution for Terra Venture Advisors LLC relocation services for the 1644 Packard Avenue project, the recommendation of the CDBG advisory board to approve an additional fifteen thousand dollars to TERRA Venture Advisors LLC for relocation case management activities for the 1644 Packard Avenue Redevelopment Project.

Uh move to approve.

Second.

There's a motion and a second to approve this item.

Discussion on the motion, Alder Horton.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Sorry.

Thank you.

I just have a question for the assistant director of city development regarding this.

Please take your question.

Uh the question is I believe last year we had allocated money to Terra Venture for relocation for 1644 Packard, so I'm wondering why we have to uh add another 15,000.

Yeah, thanks for the question.

Um the short answer is the property isn't what we thought it was when it was acquired, and due to the fact there were multiple tenants in it and it was believed to be empty.

The complexity of what Terra Venture needed to do to have the folks relocated necessitated the uh additional funds for their services to have the folks relocated.

I am uh excited to announce that it is now vacant and is uh being prepared for demolition.

Okay, can you tell me what the total cost that we paid to Terra Venture for relocation expenses for that building that we believe to be empty?

Yeah, the this amendment would move Terra Ventures service contract from uh 20,000 to 35,000.

Okay, thank you.

And okay, thank you.

Any further discussion on this item?

See none.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Alder Horton, Elder Hodges, Elder Allen, Alder Pete.

Elder Lynn?

Aye, Alder Kelly, Alder Harmon?

Aye, Elder Povone?

Aye, Elder Frazier, Alder Weiss, Alder Davis, Alder Jorgensen, Alder Weiner, aye.

Motion carries 12 to 0.

Alder Pete.

Um, we're voting on item 0522-26.

How do you vote?

Aye.

Right.

Thank you.

Motion passes unanimously 13 to 0.

The record reflect.

There was a request for several consideration on the next item as well.

Elder Jorgensen, could you please read the item?

Yeah.

Item number 0524-26.

Communication sponsored by Mayor Mason to allocate home funds for new construction at 1561 Homes Avenue and a forgivable forgivable homeowner rehabilitation loan at 1308 Franklin Street.

The recommendation of the CDBG advisory board was to approve an uh approve of an allocation of up to 359,263 in home funds for new construction at 1561 Homes Avenue and up to 290,000 in home funds for homeowner rehabilitation activities at 1308 Franklin Street and authorized staff to prepare bid specifications and solicit bids as necessary to complete the projects, move to approve.

There's a motion and a second to approve this item, Elder Widener.

Thank you.

Have a couple questions.

So the bid specification and solicit bids, is that for the rehab of 1308 Franklin?

Or is that just for the new build?

It would be for both, actually, depending upon how it goes.

If the new build was done by a Chooto, there wouldn't be a bid, but the uh renovation would definitely be a bid.

So the 1308, the 290,000 for renovation, is that building empty?

Is that house empty?

No, it's just it was identified during uh one of the clean sweep areas that we did as one of the walkthroughs.

It does have an occupant in it, and upon um investigating you know the issues that the resident you know came out and indicated they'd like to talk with us about maybe having fixed up during the clean sweep.

Um, you know, just several things led to another, and the the house essentially just needs a a complete renovation, is where the the money comes from is in terms of that dollar amount.

So 290,000 dollars, we are giving a forgivable loan to rehab one property.

That is the proposal that was presented, yes.

Okay, do you know how much we have in home funds that would be available for rehab for uh properties within the city recent?

Off the top of my head, no, but I can give you the number.

But it's important to remember with the home funds, they're a little bit they are a function of HUD, but they work differently than like C BG funds that you know many of you have seen quite a few times on agendas.

Home funds require if they're used that the entire property be brought up to compliance.

There's not the ability to to pick and choose, like on CDBG, you could say we're only gonna do the roof and you know, forget about other things on the property.

So that's the best funding source for the the type of need that was identified as uh a part of that uh clean sweep for this property.

Um and and should this be adopted, we would move to you know have that work uh you know, bid and and completed so I'm looking at 1308 Franklin Street.

This picture is taken in May 2023, and I I'm just stunned that we would give someone a forgivable loan of 290,000 dollars to rehab a property.

Um what assurances do we have that they're gonna stay there, or can they turn around and sell it, or they are able to sell um the funding source does require it, go to an income qualified individual, so there is some restriction there, but they're not required to necessarily stay.

So it's not five-year forgivable, none of that not necessarily.

Um it is required to be like I said, income restricted for who goes there, but um, they would need to you know pay that back if they sell within I think it's 10 years, they would need to pay a portion of that back.

Do we know what the assessed value of this property is?

Um off the top of my head, I believe it's about 71,000 somewhere in there.

Okay.

Okay, do you have a list of the specs of what they intend to do with for the 290,000?

I I can provide that to you, yeah.

Okay.

Last question.

I I don't think I've ever seen anything like this come before me before, where we are giving a 290,000 dollar forgivable loan to rehab a property.

Um have we done that and I missed it?

Off the top of my head, I think this would be probably the highest one we've done.

And as I mentioned, this was identified during the the clean sweep program last year.

Okay, thank you.

Elder Weiss.

Um I don't know who would answer the question, but um it might be helpful to share a little bit of background information about the resident, how long she's been there, the accessibility to the home as far as a handicamp ramp.

I don't know if anybody else, I don't know who would share that, but I think that could be helpful.

So yeah, the the woman who lives there is a grandmother who's lived whose family's been in the house according to her for 60 plus years.

Um she does have medical needs.

She is uh she's in a wheelchair.

The ramp in front of her house is about to collapse and fall apart.

Her her grandchildren uh literally sort of have to um lift the the wheelchair around the corner when she's there.

Um usually with clean sweep projects, it's fixing up a porch, fixing a roof, maybe doing some siding, picking one of these things.

Um this was uh a house uh upon further review, um needed a lot of work to get it into code compliance.

And as Jeff mentioned, there's a difference between C D VG home repair loans that we might do and these home funds that are also also federally funded.

Those funds require, if you're going to do um a house with those funds, you have to get it entirely up to code.

And so, given uh the exposed pipes that are on the inside, uh the challenge with um the the back addition, which I believe is the bathroom, which is literally falling away from the remainder of the house, uh, the work that needs to be done uh was substantial.

Uh and so this is uh an opportunity as we talk about generational wealth and giving owner occupants the opportunity to hand down from one generation to the next the value of homeownership.

Uh this would be um an opportunity for us to do that.

Um this is a a woman who's lived here for a long time.

I believe she works as a poll worker for the city of City, uh the city of Racine during campaigns and elections, um, and would give us a chance to achieve one of our goals, which is to improve homeownership, maintain homeownership as a means of passing on generational wealth from one generation to the next.

But she is a woman with substantial needs, and um you know, I I just I wish we had more federal funds to do 10 of these a year, 20 of these a year, but the reality is the money we get from the federal government allows us to do about one rehab and one new build a year.

And so um it um, and while that amount may sound like a lot of money, we are spending um well north of 300,000, 400,000 for for new builds when we do new home um builds in the city of Racine.

That is believe it or not, what a new home costs these days.

Uh I don't know if that answers your question otherwise, but yeah, thank you.

I thought it was important to clarify because some of the question was around somebody potentially taking advantage of this and selling their house.

So I thought it was important to note that she's lived there for over six years.

Yeah.

Elder Papone.

Thank you.

Just to clarify with this as well that this is coming from a federal grant that we've received, so it has to be spent in this way, not specifically on this property, but in a way that it's a full fix-up.

It's that's right.

So we can't just allocate a different.

So we sort of have two pots of money federally that we can use one of this the C D BG small home repair grants that we have.

Again, if you needed like your porch stairs replaced or something, or maybe a window replace, we have we have small grants for that, and we do those.

We do many of those.

If you're gonna use these home funds though, and do home repairs, HUD requires that the entire building be brought up to code.

And so in this case, we are doing uh an entire rehab on the house, and I I can tell you that it that it is warranted and needed based on what we've heard from the building inspector and uh and city staff who've walked through it and made the recommendation.

Thank you.

Elder Jorgensen.

And I think the other thing to note here as well is you know, 290,000 sounds like a lot, but it's already been said that these are our federal funds that have to be used in in a manner like this.

However, just above it for 359,000 is a new build, and as was discussed, that's not including getting the lot, tearing down what's there.

Um there's you know, potential environmental cleanup with tearing it down, what you're going to find as you dig into it.

So this is one way to as the the mayor had said, there's enough funds to do a new build and a rehab just because even though 200,000 290,000 sounds like a lot, the cost to do a new build is astronomically higher.

Uh and then the other thing that I'll throw out there as well, though, is uh neighborhood character is something that's very very important to city residents.

I know I've gotten calls on it before.

Um it's been something that you know people list as a reason that they moved here or they wanted to move here, and so tearing down any and all of the houses that maybe need some work, if that's our initial reaction, we really do lose some of what makes Racine Racine, some of our beautiful old historic homes.

We really do lose some of what makes Racine Racine, some of our beautiful old historic homes.

Um may laugh at that, I guess.

Um I I don't I I love living in Racine.

I think our heritage is something to be proud of, it's no laughing matter.

Um, however, it's in this case 290,000 is far less than what it would cost to do a new build there.

So I think it makes sense to protect the character of our neighborhoods uh and do some good with the funding that does come with a lot of strings attached.

This isn't funding that's coming out of our general fund.

This isn't funding that we could go use to do for any number of other things.

This this has a lot of strings to it, and so this is something that's been identified, and and I'm in favor of going forward with this.

Okay, just had a funding question about the the home uh funds from HUD.

Um, they have strict time limits.

I'll refer your question to uh Mr.

Hints with the home funds.

We generally have um, you know, this might be off by year, but it's I think seven years off the top of my head is when we have from the year we get it allocated to us to have the money spent on a project fully.

Right.

So I just kind of looked it up.

I deal uh in my own uh workspace with you know restricted funds and things that have to be allocated within a certain time period.

Um so just based upon some of the information that I looked up, it says that the local governments must uh commit or reserve those funds to a specific project within 24 months and spent disperse all the funds within five years.

Some of the rules are missed.

The federal government takes the money back.

Does that sound pretty accurate?

Yeah, yeah, it was off a couple of years.

BF, but yeah, generally speaking, the the new build would be our allocation for 2026 that this council just voted to allocate in the 290,000, I believe is um coming, it's reserved from I believe our 2024 funds that were in an action plan to do housing renovation effectively.

So they're in cut they're counted for within the 24 months in the plan that way, but then you know the address you know was it's been identified now, essentially.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Just another question, Jeff.

How many applications do we get from people that are requesting home funds for renovation like this?

It's not typically one we go out to uh accept applications for just for like you know, it's a it's a funding source we typically use to build new homes with.

Um, this came up during the clean sweep, and the property is you know, it was talked about was so you know you'd so much work astronomically.

We typically don't go to bid for like home funds for renovations to to do it that way, um, just based on our investigations and you know the recommendations of the building inspectors and city staff.

This is really the only funding source we'd have to do something to this property that that it would need, but it's the short answer to your question is we typically don't go out to bid for home funds, we use it to build new homes.

But this one was such an anomaly in terms of what we'd seen for the clean sweep areas, it needed so much work to it.

This was really the best funding source for it.

Um the alternative would be we would just you know build another you know a new house with it typically, but um sorry.

So is that typical you must partake in the clean sweeps, correct?

Yeah, I've participated in a few of those.

So there's one coming up over on Prospect Street, Harriet Street in that neighborhood.

Uh and there would be funds available in the home funds for renovation for properties over there during that clean sweep.

Potentially, I mean we're gonna take a look at what's there and who's willing to you know have us take a look at excuse me, their property, and depending upon, you know, as noted if it's like bits and pieces of things that we can do with C BG funds where we can kind of pick and choose, we'll use those first.

But if we do discover properties that you know need such astronomical work, we're gonna certainly look at home funds for those as well.

Okay, thank you.

Seeing no discussion uh remaining on this item when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Hold on, hold on, hold on.

Right.

Holder Horton, Helder Hodges, Elder Allen, Elder Pete, Elder Land, Elder Kelly, Elder Harmon, Elder Powell, Alder Frazier, Elder Weiss, Elder Davis, Elder Jorgensen.

Hulder Weiner.

Motion carries unanimously.

Moving on to the committee of the whole report.

Elder Jorgensen, did you have items for separate consideration?

Yes, I have one that was requested to be called out.

Uh that was item number.

Let me make sure I've got this right.

1265-25 communications sponsored by Alderman Widener presenting ordinance 0029-25 communications.

Uh staff recommendation that the proposed ordinance 029-25 be referred to the executive committee as it relates to the ordinance 0003-25, which is currently in the executive committee queue for discussion.

The recommendation of the committee of the whole was to approve as amended.

Alder Jorgensen, you want to speak to your motion?

Yeah, I would speak against this.

I do think it opens up some cans of worms about sending council business to non-council committees.

But the idea that we would take council business and send it to committees that are not driven by the council.

We're elected to get stuff done.

I I don't feel I wouldn't feel good about going back to a constituent who sent something in to me.

I put it on agenda, it got sent to a committee that's not driven by the council, where it was taken up, um received and filed immediately, and that was its day in court.

I don't I will never be in favor of the idea of having the folks who live out in the villages decide city business.

I think there's something to be said for living in the city of Racine and serving in the city of Racine.

Um that's what I was elected to do, and that's what I uh uh that's why I would speak against my motion.

Alder Pabone thank you, Chair.

I would like to um and the city attorney can help me with language here.

Um I would like to amend motion to amend the approval of the amended ordinance.

And what I would like to do is just be basically only allow the um I would still like to keep everything else in there except only allow alders and administrative managers to refer items to standing committees.

So allow standing administrator managers that aren't allowed right now, they can refer if they can't find an alder, what have you, that'll take care of that, and then the other you know, 90-day clause, all that stuff is fine, but um just to make sure because I've been thinking about this since we we had that discussion, and I do think there is a very real concern to be had about putting potential city business items on committees or commissions that don't have any business uh deciding that for the city, but I do think there are a lot of good things in this proposed ordinance that will help us, so I'm not sure exactly how to word that if you could advise.

Sure, ma'am, yeah.

So, and based on our conversation before the meeting in this, I understand what your intent is to remove all the provisions in the proposed ordinance that would permit communications to be referred by the common council to other authorities, boards, or commissions.

Correct.

So I understand that motion, there's a number of places that exists, but if that's the motion, uh presumably if it was approved, then all those references would be removed.

Okay, and again, this still keeps the 98 clause.

I think that's that's great.

Uh notification by the clerk if something has fell fallen through the cracks.

Um, but I do think that there is a potential danger to allowing that to happen, where again you could have something that is nothing to do with uh uh a commission or a committee um that goes through and then they're trying to to decide city business.

So I think keeping it on the standing committee and allowing the council to regulate its power that way is the best way to move forward with this.

So that would be my motion.

Uh second to Alder Pabone's amendment.

Second taken by Elder Kelly.

Um would you like to speak further to your motion?

I think that was okay.

I don't have anybody in the queue to speak on the oh, Alder Wynder.

Thank you.

I'm gonna speak against the amendment for a simple reason.

No individual alderman can refer anything to any committee.

It's the council that refers.

It's the council that makes the referral.

Is we had a referral to uh the public safety and licensing committee.

The council voted to receive and file it.

We could do the same thing.

So what the amendment is doing is removing any ability for an alderman to submit a communication to a committee, even a committee that they serve on.

And I used the example when we discussed this in the committee of the whole.

So you're removing by supporting this amendment to remove that, you're removing your ability to have any kind of ability to uh send items to a committee other than a standing committee, and I don't know why you would want to do that to yourself.

Thank you.

Oh, I one other thing.

And I don't know if it's on the amendment, but the staff recommendation that is on this item.

Um Mr.

City Attorney, we had discussed this.

This staff recommendation was inappropriate that there is no uh relationship between ordinance 0003-25 and 0029-25.

So that staff recommendation should have been omitted from this item.

So I don't know how we do that.

Well, at this point, it's the recommendation of the committee of the whole that the council would be acting on.

Thank you.

Alder Allen.

Uh for clarity, I if I'm understanding correctly, I think we're looking for the procedure to be the same as it is now, which is uh for the Alder to present a communication to the council.

The only thing I believe, if I'm understanding correctly, is that eliminating the idea that anyone would refer a communication to outside of a standing committee.

It is the portion of other authorities, boards, or commissions that is being requested to be eliminated from that.

And then if I may speak to what I think a chair's uh role is, is they're elected into that position in order to make decisions.

Of course, no one is saying that a committee member cannot make a recommendation, but the chairperson is the person that would make you know the ultimate decision.

And besides that, um if it's what is it, October is it December when we vote on the times of when committee meetings would happen.

Is that something that the council does as a whole, or do the committees do it individually?

Uh the various authorities, boards, and commissions determine for themselves when meetings should be.

There's nothing in the ordinances that requires any particular meeting schedule for the those authorities, boards, and commissions.

Um by ordinance, the standing committees, the three principal standing committees must set their meeting schedule for the ensuing year in December.

So at that so at that time, if the committee were to come together, that is when they would discuss and vote, you know, what time that meeting was going to be.

And then I'm presuming the majority in that community in that committee would decide the time.

For standing committees, the procedure is the committee decides, or the committee chair proposes and it comes to common council for approval for that.

Okay.

So I'm getting to is there is an opportunity for the entire community.

I'm can why did I say that?

For the entire committee to put their and to provide their input of what they would like to see happen, and then it's voted on, then it's brought to the council for for final approval.

For the five or for the three standing committees, yes.

Okay, so then there is no reason to have that be a concern right now.

Um again, all the authorities, boards, and commissions operate on a different procedure, they decide for themselves when the meetings will be right.

But as far as the standing committees are concerned, we don't need to worry about that because it there are uh allowances made for all of the committee members to make their preferences known.

Correct.

Alder Minor.

Thank you.

You may all recall at the last council meeting, I had submitted a communication to the public works committee asking to have uh the band shell looked at.

This council made a recommendation, and it was called a staff recommendation to send my communication to the public works committee and to the parks board according to the ordinance as it stands until we pass this new one.

Would be we did not have the authority to send that communication to the parts board because it's a board, it's not a standing committee.

So we already are submitting communications to the commission's boards or committees if it's a staff recommendation.

So I don't know why anybody would object to an alderman submitting a communication to a committee other than a standing committee because again the staff recommended it go to the park board and we did it.

We sent it to the park board.

So I I just don't understand why you know the importance of this amendment.

Alder Harman.

Thank you, Mayor.

I am so confused, and I can't be the only one.

I am hearing from the maker of the motion.

The I am hearing from the sponsor of this item that we are already doing something that is being requested that we change and do.

I'm not understanding why we need to change, make change, chabish something that we are already doing as a committee based off of our needs and our understanding to do something.

Every time we change an ordinance or do something different, it's not always to the effect of where you think that it's going to be, because I remember when we someone made a motion that we had a vice president because of some understanding of how the presidents was supposed to be doing something, and then they regret it that they made that recommendation and that it was approved.

Now we're having something that we're already doing, and they don't understand.

I just it's so confusing.

Why redo the wheel when the wheel is working, the way that it's working, and there hasn't been any issues on how we move business forward at all.

We're able to do things without having to change different ordinances and make different rules because rules is not what make things go smooth.

People make things go smooth.

We don't need rules to make you do something that is right.

We're able to do that without having to have a thousand different rules changing on how we should be able to do something.

I'm not voting for this.

If I'm thank you, if I'm following Alder Harmon correctly, I I agree and speak with what uh Alder Weiner said as to why we're doing this.

I think if I'm clear, uh I'm just trying to track it.

When we refer something, it has it comes in front of the council.

We're not sending it off in the according to the way this ordinance is proposed, the staff would make the decision as to where it would go.

We would never we would not see it.

It would be just automatically referred, and I think that was that was the catch point.

And what our point is more in line with what Alder Harman is saying, it just come here, and if we decide that we want to refer it or do we will refer it, that is a decision that the council would make on the floor.

So either way it goes, we do have an ordinance that has been working for us.

And that referral isn't just to standing committees, it is to anywhere.

And anyone could do that to the authorities, commissions, and boards included.

We do it differently slightly, and that way that we do it is the way that we should continue doing it.

Alder Jorgensen.

I guess I would have a question for the alder from the 14th.

Um what she had said, it sounds like she was maybe going towards moving to table.

I just wanted to see if she'd yield to a question.

Is that where she was going with this?

Alder Harman, are you wanting to make a motion to table this item?

Yes, thank you.

I was gonna do it in afterwards, but yes, I would like to make a motion to table this item.

Or to place it on the table is a technically the term lay on the table.

Sorry.

I would like to make a motion to lay this item on the table.

Is there a second?

Second.

There's a motion and a second to lay this item on the table.

Alder Harman, would you like to speak further to your motion?

Thank you, Mayor.

Exactly like what I said before.

I think that we have a board of individuals that are intelligent, and that we really do want to work together and get things done.

We already have a process and in place where if we want to refer to committees, refer to one committee that the city council makes that recommendation, and we do it and defectively get things done, to change things and to go backwards and make new ordinances when we're already doing something and we have the ability as a group to do it smoothly.

I think that that's enough that we need right now.

Thank you.

Alder Wagner.

Well, I would argue against laying it on the table.

We do not have a system that is working smoothly.

I submitted an ordinance back in May of 2025.

I wanted it to, I made a recommendation that it go to the committee of the whole, this body instead sent it to the executive committee.

The executive committee did not meet from May until September.

In September, that item was deferred by the executive committee.

That was in September of 2025.

The mayor, the chair of that executive committee assured the committee that that item would be taken up before we took up the budget, was which was in October.

That item still is deferred, and here we are in June of 2026.

So our after the budget, our next most important function is we are the legislative body for the city of Racine, and we can't even get an ordinance discussed.

I wasn't even asking people to pass the ordinance.

I was asking people to be able to discuss it, and it's tied up in the executive committee.

So then what happens?

I submit another ordinance, ordinance 0003-25 in December of 2025.

I asked that it go to the committee of the whole.

You don't have to like me personally, but I am an alderman.

And I am due at least the consideration for you to either vote up or vote down.

An ordinance I've spent a year and a half working on for crying out loud.

So please do not table it.

If you don't like the ordinance, if you don't like to have any authority, if you want to just let the mayor decide everything, and you just come in here and rubber stamp whatever it is he wants, then that's that's your the choice that you can make.

But for heaven's sakes, don't table this thing.

It's bad enough that by original two ordinances are still sitting in the executive committee, one is deferred and one is referred and never being taken up.

So please don't table it.

Alder Jordenson.

I just think it's interesting.

The we just heard uh an Alder speak against tabling, but I believe it was the same Alder that brought up tabling something else earlier tonight.

Um so just a little interesting nugget there.

Um I also uh want to just point out as well that I did participate in the discussion.

In fact, it was stated that I came down and participated in it.

So the idea that the two alders that motioned and second to us didn't participate.

That's a lie.

I did participate.

So I guess the other one where I think this is really coming from is I'm not opposed to everything in here, but it seems like it's it's all over the place.

It's doing, you know, originally it talked about with the petitions, and then it all talked about the the 90 days, and then it talks about referring to other committees, and time and time again, it seems like there's been questions of is this what we want to do, or what were we trying to do here?

That just makes me nervous.

I think if this came back as separate proposals, uh with individual ones that could be discussed about it.

I think that's an option.

Uh, I guess where I get concerned and share the same concern with Alder Harman is it seems like this body keeps changing rules uh and having unintended consequences.

It's you know the wish gets made of wish we could do this, and the monkey paw curls, and then we run into some roadblock in the future.

I mean, we've gotten emails saying, hey, we missed having it referred and read at this committee meeting.

We wanted to get it on for the public works agenda.

Can it be taken up?

No, the way the rules were changed two years ago, we can't do that.

I'm very sorry.

The only option now is a direct referral.

Has to be here is being said it's not true.

We've run into it.

In fact, it's been emailed numerous times that's the way it has to work.

I get that it may not have been someone's intention that that's how it works, but that's how it was written, and that's goes back to the monkey paw theory of you you can't just say I want to do this and have no unintended consequences without very deliberate actions on it.

And so the fact that there's folks in this room who are questioning how we're doing it, we're trying to amend it again to try to bring it to a point that we feel is something that we can approve.

And it's not a rubber stamp of the mayor.

This is something that's going on in this body of we have to work within these rules that we keep changing.

How many times are we gonna keep trying to tinker with this before it completely breaks down?

I mean, I was nervous when we got that email a few weeks ago saying something needed to get on public works, but they missed the initial reading.

What do we do?

I sent back an email saying I would have loved to help you, but unfortunately, our hands are tied on this, and judging by somebody saying that that's not the way it was supposed to work, that's the way it was written.

So I I can't be in favor of doing this whole entire thing, trying to do, in my opinion, too much at once.

I think if we want to make small targeted changes to rules, uh I would be uh in favor of of hearing those out and and working on those.

Um, but to to do some large uh rule change all at once, it's just it's irresponsible and it's going to potentially have another negative consequence by changing these rules altogether.

I mean, I had another one.

Resident called me and said they missed my street for snow plowing.

They didn't they didn't plow my street.

This has happened multiple times.

Please get it on the agenda.

Due to this rule, I had put it in uh and it had to be read at a council meeting, and that was uh a week uh or more to get that read.

Then it had to go for the next committee meeting, but there was a holiday, so that committee meeting didn't meet, so it had to go the further the the week after that.

Uh all to say we didn't talk about snowplows uh until we were far along in the the plowing season, and so I I guess and I I get it that that may not have been what the intention was behind that, but there's absolutely some negative consequences with how that happened.

So I would caution the council before adopting a mass rule change to slow down and really think about it and change things intentionally, not just on a whim in a large package like this.

Alder Allen.

Can we call a question?

And I'm it's a motion and a second to call the question on this item.

Um is that a debatable item?

Um all right.

The motion is to end debate.

Um when the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

The vote is to end debate or to technically it's when you say call the question, it's technically a motion to to close or end debate.

That's what's before us.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Horton, Elder Hodges, Elder Allen, Elder Pete, Elder Lynn, Elder Kelly, Elder Harmon.

Elder Pullen.

Aye, Elder Frazier, Elderwise, Elder Davis, Elder Jorgensen.

Aye.

Elder Weiner.

So now the motion before us.

Um the motion to end debate has passed unanimously.

Now the motion before us is to table this item.

When the clerk calls your name, please vote as you wish.

Elder Hodges, Elder Allen, Elder Pete.

Aye, Elder Lynn, Elder Kelly.

Elder Frazier.

No.

Elderwise.

Elder Davis?

No.

Elder Jorgensen.

Aye.

Elder Weiner.

There's seven ayes and six no's.

The motion carries.

Were there any other items for separate consideration?

Alder Jorgensen from the committee of the whole report.

There were not.

Then without objection, these items will be placed on the consent agenda.

Now we will move on to the office of the mayor report.

Uh and before Alder Jorgensen begins reading the item, I just want to let people know everything that is on here is a time-driven request.

Um, none of these things are trying to sneak things through or circumvent going through committee, but they are all timely items that require action uh faster than the committee uh process that was recently mentioned that was changed.

Um, and so these are all things that were direct referred to uh at staff request to address the timeliness of the issues.

Alder Jorgensen, do you have items for separate consideration under the mayor's report?

I did not receive any separate consideration items for the mayor's report.

Alder Weidner, do you have a request for separate consideration?

I have a question on these items.

When is the next public works and services meeting?

Because most of these items should be going to public works and services.

And I'd like some explanation as to why these cannot go to committee, what what the timeliness of the all each one of these items is that they have to be taken up as a direct referral and not go through the appropriate channels and go to committee first.

Yep.

So I can say the the for example the lighthouse run is gonna come up before it could go before the public works committee.

Um the um the festival park 5k contract uh was based on the the statement made by the operator that if we didn't have a contract by the end of June, he was gonna walk away from the item.

I'll let uh Ron address some of the timeliness of some of the other issues that we have before us.

Uh thanks for your question, Alder Weiner.

Uh we have two items.

One is a direct referral, that's uh the Wilson Street project plat.

Uh that plat needs to be done because we're gonna start construction pretty quick on this on this project.

Probably gonna start around August 1st.

So uh that's why this this is uh this is moving forward.

We have to take a look at uh the the plot is done.

We need to if there's I think there's a couple of slivers of property we need to acquire that takes time.

So uh that's the reason why this one is on there.

The second is the waste management contract.

Waste management took uh their sweet time to get me their numbers for uh collecting all of our sweeper material and our contract is up, so uh we need to get that renewed.

That's where that's why it's here before you today.

Thank you.

And without any separate uh specific requests for separate consideration, I will place these items on the consent agenda.

And with that, Alder Jorgensen, I would entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda.

Move to approve the consent agenda.

It's a motion and a second to approve the consent agenda.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

The motion carries.

Uh now we are on to common council announcements.

Just as a reminder, announcements are limited to recognition of city residents and employees, memorials, and non-political community events.

Discussion of matters related to government business is prohibited.

Alder Harman, you are first for announcements.

Awesome.

Thank you, Mayor.

I would like to give a shout out to management of Central Park Apartments.

Um there in my district.

Um get items removed timely that are in the parking lots and on the properties and stuff.

I really appreciate him taking out the time to do that.

So shout out to Central Park Apartments Management.

And then second, um, Father's Day is this upcoming Sunday, and I want to say to my dad, Robert Harmon, that you are an amazing dad.

You've been in my life all my life.

You have um been a great example of how a father is to raise a family and um a great husband, and I just want to say happy father's day, Daddy.

Just as a reminder, we do need 10 people to stay before the meeting's done, so we can maintain quorum.

We're we're almost done.

So if people, I know it's late, but if we could wait just a couple more minutes to get through announcements, if people could be brief with their announcements, that would be great.

Alder Pabone.

Thank you.

Just uh had the opportunity to go out to the Juneteenth celebration.

It was a great time.

Um there, a lot of community out there, good things to see happening.

And also uh this coming up for Father's Day.

So happy Father's Day to all the uh real fathers out there and to my father Oscar.

Thank you.

Alder Horton.

All right, this will be brief.

Happy uh birthday to my son Galen, uh, who had a birthday on uh June 14th, and happy birthday to my wife who has a birthday uh on the 25th.

Thank you.

Alder Allen.

I wanted to thank everyone who came out over the weekend to help celebrate the Juneteenth uh celebration with the city.

We had a great time walking and participating in a parade.

Um, and it was a great great time for our city.

And I want to wish my hubby uh who has a birthday coming up.

That's an old man coming.

And also uh Alder Pate left.

His birthday is actually the day after, so we'll be celebrating his birthday as well.

Alder Jorgensen.

Very quickly want to say uh happy Father's Day to my father for teaching me how to be a good dad to uh to my daughter.

So thank you.

Alder Hodges.

I just want to say happy Father's Day to all of the men in my life, um, including my dad, and um happy early birthday to my mom on June 25th, and um happy early Juneteenth.

Alder Weiss.

All right, Mr.

Bial.

Um, so first I just want to give a huge shout out to all the city departments that have helped me over the last however many weeks now I've been in this role calling me, emailing me back, giving me information, it's just been really helpful so that they're making me look really good in my district.

So I appreciate it.

And then just happy Father's Day to my dad, who is amazing, um, to my husband, and then he is also we also have our first grandson, so happy Father's Day to my stepsons on his first Father's Day.

That's great.

Um I too would like to wish my father a happy father's day.

Um, a couple things I just wanted to announce.

Um, you may have noticed that there is closed captioning uh on the hearing today.

I just want to give a shout out to the IT staff.

It was not yeah, not as easy to do as it looks.

Um, and so thanks to them.

It took some time to figure out how to get the technology right to do that.

So kudos to them, and then I just want to just mention um Juneteenth is a city and a federal holiday this Friday.

We will be closed.

Um, strangely, we got quite a bit of guff for that online.

I do want to just um acknowledge a couple things.

First of all, we can't delete comments that people post on our Facebook page as hateful and as terrible as they may be.

Um, and so we are left with that, but we are left with responding um that Juneteenth is an important part of America's history and our freedom, an important part of uh the work that we do to acknowledge the work that we've been doing on an ongoing basis to make this a more perfect union.

Still work to do, but I think it's important to end with a statement uh that we are proud to celebrate Juneteenth as a federal and city holiday this Friday, and so we will be closed in celebration of releasing people from bondage and our history of freedom.

So, with that, I would entertain a motion to adjourn.

Multiple motions and seconds to adjourn.

All those in favor of adjournment, please say aye.

Opposed the motion carries, and we are adjourned.