All right, folks.

We are going to call this meeting to order.

So I know we were working on some IT stuff over there, but we are going to call the Tuesday, April twenty first, twenty twenty six meeting to order.

We are going to start with a presentation from the police and fire honor guards.

So if you want to come on in, please.

To the flag of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Ready?

Stop.

Two.

Ready?

Two.

Ready.

Two.

All right.

Thank you to our police and fire honor guard for that presentation.

Now that we have already done the Pledge of Allegiance, we are going to move on to the administration of the oath of office.

We are going to start with the Office of Mayor.

That's me.

Thank you.

Hi, Alicia Helvin Sleyman.

I, Alicia Holbinsleighman.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties of the Office of Mayor.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties of the Office of Mayor.

For the City of Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.

For the City of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up, we have the oath of office for Aldermanic District 2.

Hi, James.

I'll have you raise your right hand and repeat it.

Repeat after me.

I, James Everett.

I James Everett.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

Then I will support the Constitution of the United States.

Then I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of Office of Aldermanic District 2.

Of Aldermanic District 2.

For the city of Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.

For the City of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you, Darius.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up we have Aldermanic District 3.

Have you raise your right hand and repeat after me?

I Doreen Wigderson.

I Doreen Wigderson.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of all their person for District 3.

Of all their person for District 3.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the City of Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

And next up we have Aldermanic District 6.

I Jack Wells.

I Jack Wells.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

Of the Alder Person for District 6.

Of the Alder Person for District 6.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the City of Waukeshaw Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my abilities.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Alright, next up we have Aldermanic District 7.

I'll have you raise your right hand.

I Daniel Manion.

I Daniel Manion.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of Alder Person for District 7.

Of Alder Person for District 7.

For the City of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the City of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up we have Aldermanic District 10.

Thank you.

Aye.

I'll have you raise your right hand if you need a moment.

I Mike Anderson.

I Mike Anderson.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And will faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of all their person for district 10.

Of all their person for district 10.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right.

And next up we have uh Aldermanic District 13.

All right, Eileen, I'm just gonna be raise your right hand.

I Eileen McClitz.

Hi, Eileen Miklitz.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of the Alder Person for District 13.

Of the Alder Person for District 13.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

Thank you.

All right.

Next up we have the city attorney.

I Brian Running.

I Brian Running.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

And we'll faithfully discharge the duties.

Of the Office of City Attorney.

Of the Office of City Attorney.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

For the city of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations.

And last up, but certainly not least, uh, our court commissioner Dan Reek will uh administer the oath of office for our new municipal judge.

Okay.

Please repeat after me.

I Laurie Fabian.

I Lori Fabian.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Of Waukesha, Wisconsin.

Do solemnly swear.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin.

And we'll faithfully discharge.

And we'll faithfully discharge.

The duties of the Office of Municipal Judge of Waukeshaw.

The duties of the Office of Municipal Judge of Waukesha.

To the best of my ability.

To the best of my ability.

So help me God.

So help me God.

Congratulations, Your Honor.

Thank you, Joe.

Congratulations to everyone who was sworn in today.

So that that's the extra fun part.

Now for the the other fun part, our council group photo.

So if all of the council members could meet me up in front so we can take a group photo.

Okay, so I'm in the back, right?

Okay.

I was going to say that.

Like me.

Yeah, you have to go right here.

Yep, I just go over back and call something.

Yeah.

Okay.

Oh, yeah.

All right.

All right.

One, two, three.

Um, Dale, can I have you take a half step that way?

There you go.

I can see you.

One, two, three.

All right, one of those should work.

Oh, good.

Oh, we're in.

Stay there.

Stay there.

We've not.

Everybody's got to get sworn in there.

All right.

So feels like we've been here for a while, but it is now time for roll call.

Wikerson.

Here.

Piper.

Ban Trieste.

Wells.

Here.

Manion.

Molton.

Here.

Witeska.

Anderson.

Here.

Matthews.

Here.

Rick Lemke.

Here.

Camacho.

Here.

Nichols?

Everett?

Christine.

Here.

All right.

Everyone is here.

Just as a note, uh, the district 11 spot is vacant because that used to be my spot.

All right.

So moving right along, we have public comment.

I have two people, but if there's anyone else, please let me know.

But we'll start with the two people who signed up.

Uh first I have Tyler Stetson.

And just as a reminder, you have three minutes.

Please state your name and your residence.

Good evening.

Uh Tyler Stelson 417 Dunbar Av.

I just wanted to speak to the agenda item for me tonight, which is to acquire a piece of city surplus property directly behind my property.

So I guess I'll speak just to why I'm requesting to do it for no purchase price, because I think in my brief I laid out pretty thoroughly why I think the city could benefit from me acquiring the property.

So why I requested to have no purchase price.

Some background on the area.

So this strip of property that sits behind my house that's city owned surplus used to run the entire south side of the 400 block of Dunbarav.

Around 2018, the city approached the owners of each property on that side of the block and offered to give them that piece of property directly behind their property.

And most of them took it.

So it's still city surplus just behind my piece of property.

Since then I've taken to kind of caring for that piece of city-owned property, removing weeds down trees.

There was a three-foot pile of trash on the property.

There was three tons of concrete that I moved off.

And in total, uh I've spent around $2,000 just trying to make that property a little bit more pleasant to the eye.

One, the costs I've incurred to this point on the property.

Two future costs, there's a couple trees on the property or overhanging the property that are dead.

And so if I did acquire the property immediately, I would have expenses incurred with dealing with that.

And three is just the precedence in you know, allowing the rest of the homeowners to buy the property.

Unfortunately, I wasn't there at that time.

Um, but I guess I'm just looking for the same deal as them.

Um I'm happy to pay the taxes on the property and any fees associated with transferring it to my ownership.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Great.

Thank you.

Um, and that item will be on the agenda later.

Uh next up I have Lisa Saul.

Good evening, Lisa Sub 434 Madison Street.

Um, I I have some red flags about a few things.

Um is the document the cleared for construction, which was on the agenda, the 45 um page document.

Um I have some concerns in regards to that and um putting that in uh together with the the new zoning code.

Um my red flag is that that uh there may be a lack of transparency if things are uh pushed through or put through by staff that the public might not have the opportunity to otherwise comment on it because they might not see it because it would be done within the office.

So that was a concern that I have.

So I just want to make sure that the public isn't losing their transparency on that.

Uh another thing that I have a concern uh specifically is the um the new zone of the RN4, and I would just like to bring up the wording on that, if I may, um, where it says that it's supposed to be a buffer.

Uh and I'll just read that RN4 residential neighborhood for district.

The RN4 district is intended to accommodate new and existing larger multi-unit developments and their immediate surroundings, providing buffers and transition between commercial major streets and lower density neighborhoods.

This district promotes development that includes a range of higher density types, uh building configurations and development styles that are compatible with existing residential context, allowing for gradual transitions in density between commercial areas and lower density housing.

Um, in in my district, which is district two, which is the area between North Avenue and uh St.

Paul, the area where the laundromat is, there's 40 homes in there.

And with this new code, this new RN4, it would allow buildings up to 60 feet in their neighborhood.

So unless there's some plan to not have those houses anymore, I don't see how that's a buffer going from a single family to a 60-foot building.

So there's something there that that needs to be addressed, please, if you could take a look at that when that comes in.

30 seconds remaining.

Also, we used to say if it was a first reading, second reading, third reading, I'm not seeing that anymore.

So I don't even know where where we're at, even in the public notice, it doesn't say which reading it is, so if we could include that as well.

And also with this new zoning code, I just have a question.

The mayor said at the plan commission that it provides, quote, less potential for liability for the city, unquote.

I would like to know what that means.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Are uh is there anyone else for public comment at this time?

All right.

Seeing none, uh, we will move right along.

Um, it looks like we have a presentation uh on the cleared for construction report.

Oh, just got really bright in here.

Um, so Jennifer, yes.

I wanted to bring this forward tonight very briefly.

Um, this last year we were contacted by the um Wisconsin policy forum to participate in this study, and they published their report earlier this year, and and it's um been um in some press releases, and there's been some discussion about it.

So I wanted to just bring the council up to speed.

So when they asked us if we would participate, we agreed to, and we provided them um a bunch of data.

And really, what they're studying is how long it takes projects to get building permits, and these were their study communities.

So the city of Milwaukee and then um five surrounding um municipalities of various sizes.

So we were one of those municipalities that provided our data to them to look at.

This just shows you a map of um where the projects were.

They asked us for data regarding projects that were valued at five million dollars or more.

Um, so that's really what this uh map is showing is where those projects were located and how much their worth was.

Um, just to give you a brief overview of our existing process for permitting, is as many of you know, it'll go through a planning review.

Um, some projects go to plan commission, and then um they would go through a final plan development, and then they would go to building permits, so they would submit for their building permits, and then that would be reviewed again by the staff, and then a permit is issued.

And so that's how we operate now.

Um, not every project goes to plan commission now, and um it depends on what the project is.

So, in this data, there were some projects that uh had permits because and they didn't go to plan commission because they were internal renovations or things like that.

And so there's a wide variety of projects that kind of get swept up into the data we provided them.

And uh, these were their outcomes.

So you can see in terms of how long it takes to get a building permit with this in this cohort.

Waukish came in second in this evaluation at 222 days.

And so this is from the moment that they uh submit an application to the planning department for review to when they're actually issued the building permit.

The next uh chart shows that it what they did here is they re removed some of that time because after the staff is done reviewing and the plan commission, if needed, is done reviewing.

Um, the the developer often has to make some revisions, and we have no control over how long it takes them to make those plan revisions, and so the policy forum removed kind of that window that's really the developer's responsibility and kind of netted that out.

And so we're still second here at 87 days for from start to finish on a project.

So we fared pretty well in the study.

Um, some of the conclusions were that when there's uh need for rezonings or land use plan amendments, that does add time to the process as we would expect because there's public hearing requirements.

Um projects just take longer than others, and across all the municipalities, residential projects just took longer for approval than say a manufacturing project.

And part of that is they tend to be much more complicated than manufacturing facility, which is usually a large facility, but doesn't have a lot of um intricacies because it's a large box and there's lots going on inside, but there you know it's not a lot of um intricacies to the project itself.

And lastly, um pre-application meetings reduce friction and in this whole process, and that's something we do informally already within our process.

Um this is the document.

I attach it to the agenda so you can read the whole thing if you're interested.

We're happy to answer questions.

Um we were excited to participate because although we think we have an efficient process, it was nice to see how that measured to some of our peer communities.

And um, so I wanted to share that with the council and also recognize that you may have heard about it, maybe depending on um where you work, you may have heard somebody talk about it.

And I just wanted to make sure that you were up to speed and you saw the report yourself.

So thank you.

I got to turn that back on.

Thank you, Jennifer.

Uh, did anyone have any questions for Jennifer at this point?

All right, then we will move right along.

Uh next up is approval of minutes.

Is there a motion to approve the minutes from our April 9th meeting?

Uh Alder Person Wagerson.

I move to approve the minutes.

All right, is there a second?

Alder Person Molson.

I second.

All right, then please vote when it's before you Matthews.

Aye.

Come on, show aye.

Alderman Mannion.

I'm a yes, I click yes.

All right, that motion does pass unanimously.

So our minutes have been approved.

Uh, next up is consent agenda.

Are there any items to be removed from consent agenda?

All right, then that uh our everything on consent has passed.

Next up we have the election of the council president.

Uh are there any nominations?

Alderperson Piper.

Thank you.

I'd like to nominate Dan Mannion for council president.

I'll second.

Excellent.

Are there any other nominations?

Geez, and I had Jenny cut all these little pieces of paper up.

Uh all right.

Um, I will just do a quick voice vote of acclamation if that's okay.

All those in favor of uh Alder Person Manion, as long as that's acceptable from our city attorney.

All right.

Uh all those in favor of Alder Person Manion is the council president.

Aye.

Thank you.

Everybody said aye.

All right.

Uh so the eyes have it.

Um if you'd like to move up here right now, you can, otherwise, next meeting.

Sounds good.

All right, congratulations, Alder Person Manion.

Thank you.

And that is official.

So excellent.

All right.

So next up, we have to determine the process for replacing um an alder for District 11, which was my former seat.

Uh so I am going to uh send that over to Brian because I know you sent out a memo.

If you want to just um maybe give us a quick overview of our options and then we will have discussion.

Thank you.

The statutes provide a uh several methods for filling a vacancy on the council.

Uh you can simply appoint a successor by a simple majority vote to fill the remainder of the term.

Or there can be a special election held to fill the seat.

And in the interim, until the special election, you can appoint uh an interim person to hold the seat.

Uh there is also an option to just leave the seat vacant until the next regular election, which I think everybody would agree is in a vi inadvisable in this case since there's about two years remaining on the term.

So your choices are really whether to appoint a successor to fill the entire remainder of the term or appoint an interim successor to fill the position until a special election.

If you decided to go that route, you would then have to declare a special election.

And if you do that, it would be my suggestion that you declare it to be held concurrently with the general election on November 3rd, with a primary if there if that's required to be held in connection with the regular partisan primary on August 11th.

Thank you.

Uh Alder Person Matthews.

I'll make a motion to fill the vacancy for automatic district number 11 to for the council to appoint a successor.

Um and I motioned that it would be the person that has run in the previous election out of the air inspector.

Okay, so that's to fill for the full fill the spot for the remainder of the term.

Excellent.

So we have a motion.

Is there a second?

Alderperson Lemke.

Okay.

So I'm going to take that as a second.

All right.

Are there any comments or discussion?

Alderperson Molson.

Does the motion just has a vacancy and we're going to interview for candidates later?

Is that what you're doing?

My motion would include the appointment of the candidate that ran in the election, Aaron Spector, to fill that spot for the remainder of the term.

So thank you.

It would be an appointment by the council, which is not unprecedented.

Brian, is that if the council wants to receive applications and resumes and consider candidates, I think you would probably want to just decide on the method tonight and then solicit those resumes and applications so they can be reviewed and uh people have an opportunity to do that in a little bit more organized way.

That would be my suggestion is to vote tonight on the method.

Uh in your case, just to say that it would be an appointment for the remainder of the term, and then to solicit applications and consider candidates.

That's my suggestion.

Okay.

Did you want to make an amendment or is your motion as stands?

Okay, and I just want to make sure is that what you understood the motion to be?

All right.

Um is there any discussion on the motion?

Yes.

Alderperson Lemke.

Uh in the last two elections for your term, Alicia, congratulations for winning them.

Thank you.

But there were no other candidates that even had an interest.

So my thought was uh to reward Aaron, he got the most votes, not more than you, but he's already shown an interest for the past two elections.

And so I think that says a lot from constituents in the district.

Uh, and I thought we could just end it now, but I'm willing to listen to discussion.

That's what we're discussing.

Uh Alderperson Camacho and then Piper.

I think that um now because the seat is vacant, I think that there should be other people that would be open to the idea as well.

So I don't want to just close it off to one person right away because it also feels a little bit like hijacked.

I think that there could be other people within the district that would be interested as well, and I think we should give them the opportunity to consider as well.

Because also she was the incumbent when she did win, and so that may have put some people off to not even deciding to run.

So I think that the method is a great idea.

Let's figure out the method tonight, and then we can look at candidates if that's the way we go.

But um, to name a candidate tonight, I think it feels a little rushed.

Okay.

Alderperson Hyper, then Molson and Wells.

I'll I'll echo Alderman Camacho's point.

That's exactly what I was gonna say.

I think the the standing the standing process has been is we've picked a method, and then we've had an opportunity to hear from a variety of folks that might be interested in the role.

And um, if if Aaron's it, Aaron's it.

But if there's others that have an interest in it, it gives them an opportunity to come forward.

And you know, perhaps someone's moved into the district that might want to become an alderman.

So I support um the appointment for the remainder of the term, but I'd also like to you know pause and hear from any candidates that might be interested in the position at a future meeting.

Thank you.

All right, Alderperson Molson.

I agree with Alders uh Camacho and Piper.

All right, Alderperson Wells.

I agree with the last three speakers.

Excellent.

All right.

Are there any other speakers?

Yes, uh Alderperson Micklitz.

I agree as well because I don't know this person.

Yep, yeah, use your mic, please.

I I agree with the other as as well because I I don't know this person, and maybe the everybody else does, but I'd like to see who else would be interested in the position.

Any other comments?

All right, so the active motion uh is to uh appoint Aaron Spencer because he was the other person who ran uh in the previous election.

Um so that is the standing motion.

So this would be specifically for that person, not necessarily for the overall process.

So just to be very clear.

Uh so please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does fail uh four to ten.

Uh so I will open it back up.

Are there any other motions?

Alderperson Molson.

I'd like to move to uh appoint uh successor for district eleven for the substance substance of the remaining term, and we'll interview candidates when convenient.

Well, it would be fair to potential candidates to say that you must get your uh applications in by a certain date and have a selection date anticipated, which I would suggest would be the May 5th regular meeting of the council.

We don't have to do all of the mechanics tonight, I don't think.

I think you know we can put in a notice, a public notice, uh soliciting candidates, uh the deadline by which applications must be filed and so on.

But my suggestion would be to uh do the selection on May 5th.

Okay, excellent.

Uh was there a second um Alderperson Micklitz?

All right, and we have a second from Alderperson Micklitz.

Is there any additional discussion?

Uh Alderperson Piper.

Brian, is May 5th?

Is that gonna be enough time for background checks and everything that we need to do in your humble opinion?

Because that's it's like two weeks away.

I'm just asking.

Yeah, well, fair point.

Uh it doesn't have to be May 5th.

I was anticipating that uh people were anxious to get this done quickly, but if you'd rather put it off for another two weeks after that, then certainly the second meeting in May uh is not too soon.

All right.

Um I'm I think we'll just leave it at May 5th.

Never mind.

Okay.

Unless anybody has um yeah, Alderperson Molson.

It does give the people a chance to respond to.

I mean, when a spot is open, you have to decide whether or not this is you, and you know, you need to waffle for a while and get your paperwork in and talk to the clerk about the process and what is you know what's entailed in being in a no I I can see why people would have questions that want to talk to the clerk first.

And I don't 30 days is a pretty normal amount of time for business transactions to take place.

So I'm not sure this is equipped, it's not exactly equivalent to a business transaction, but to give people a chance to respond and get all the things the city needs to do.

I I think the meeting after the May 5th meeting, May 5th plus one meeting.

So but the motion itself doesn't actually have a date in it.

It doesn't, so we can always figure out the date.

Um, but yeah, it may 5th or May 19th, it sounds like our what we're going to do.

We'll select one in May.

Something in May.

All right.

Sounds like we can work out the exact logistics with uh the city attorney's office and I'll work with you, Tony as well.

So all right.

Uh is there any additional discussion?

Yes, Alderperson Lumpke.

I just think we should put a date in.

So the fifth to and then a decision to be made at the following one.

That way that anybody can get theirs in by the fifth.

We can do the background checks, uh, some due diligence uh uh by the council and then make a decision on the meeting after the fifth, I think.

But I think we should put a date in there.

Uh whatever that date may be, so that the public knows listening today what the date is, you know, and then okay.

I'm happy to put that we'll make the selection on the second council meeting in May.

Yes, but we should put a deadline date in also so that the public knows, you know.

So if we give them two weeks of a deadline, uh and then which would be May 5th, that's our next meeting, and then make the decision on the following after a police background check, and we have an opportunity to maybe look at the resumes in between that time uh and do our own deal due diligence.

That's I'm not trying to rush it, but I think two weeks is plenty of a time to put a deadline in then and then two weeks of due diligence, police background check, and such like that.

Yeah, uh Tony, did you want to speak?

Yeah, if I could, I would just like to make a suggestion that uh one way in which we could do this is the same process we went through when Cassie Rodriguez's seat was up.

Um so roughly what that would be if we followed that same script is we would have candidates apply through Thursday, May 11th, and then at the uh council, excuse me.

The 18th.

Well, hold on, let me look at the right month here.

19th uh so it would be Thursday, May 14th.

We would accept applications through, and then at the May 19th meeting is when the council would do interviews and select a candidate.

Yeah, I'm fine with that.

Yeah, I'm fine with that.

I I just wanted to, you know, don't want to leave representation for too long, but give enough time to do it.

Absolutely.

Yeah, Alderperson Matthews.

Is that consistent with what we've done in the past with the previous appointments in that time frame?

Yes, that's what we've done in the past.

I'm fine with that time frame.

I do agree we need to set up a goal in the timeline for that, and then a subsequent vote afterwards.

So all right, sounds good.

Well, the motion it sounds like is for the 19th uh decision.

So and the logistics on the back end seem to work out.

Uh Alder Person Ventriester.

So if we do a uh May 14th uh deadline, and then we're gonna uh at the next common council's second meeting in May.

Does that give the police department enough time for vetting?

Yeah, yes.

Yep.

Any other comments?

All right, then again, the motion is to select a new uh alder person for district eleven on May 19th at that um meeting, and that will be to fulfill the remainder of the term, the two years on that term.

Uh please vote when that is before you see Alderman Van Trieste Excellent.

Uh that motion does pass unanimously.

Uh so we'll get the press release sent out announcing that, and I encourage uh anyone living in District 11 that is interested to make sure that you apply.

All right, so next up on our agenda is a review and possible action on a proposed amendment to the tax incremental finance district number 27.

Jennifer, I will let you take it away.

Thank you.

Uh District 27 is Fox Run, so the corner of St.

Paul and Sunset.

And this was a district that was created um some years ago to redevelop that site.

And uh at the time there was the proposal for the hospital and a bank and the multifamily project that you see there, and there was a development agreement at that time, which was approved by the council.

But there was one lot that they was left vacant because the developer wanted to pursue a commercial project on that lot.

And over the last several years, they have pursued um that commercial project and have not had success.

And so the owner of the apartment building um said that their project's been very successful and they could use uh more units and more amenity space.

And so they'd like to amend the agreement um to allow for additional assistance to support uh a new multifamily building there, 63 units, which would bring a value of a little over 12 million dollars to that site, and the TIF assistance would be $2 million, and that would be paid as the new value generates tax revenue.

So this is uh what we call as a pay of Zoe TIFF, meaning that the developer doesn't realize any of that um that assistance unless they perform by building this building and meeting their um value requirements.

So what we've attached to the agenda is uh a redlined version of our existing agreement um that would accommodate this additional building, this additional development, and so it increases their pay-go amount by that $2 million forty dollars and um extends the expected payout date of that incentive um by nine years, so it would be out instead of 2031.

The first part of the project was expected to be um finished paying its incentive by 2031.

This one is expected at the latest to be 2040.

Um, and then increase the overall uh guaranteed assessed value by like I said, a little bit over 12 million dollars by adding that apartment building to that site, and as I mentioned, their existing project has been very successful, leased up extremely quickly, and um they did receive plan commission approval uh for this project, and the council did approve the PUD as amendment as well that went along with this when we discussed changing the use from commercial to residential.

So I'm happy to answer any questions you have on this.

Uh Alder Person Ventriessa.

Jennifer, can you tell us uh how many prior um proposals have been for that particular uh uh parcel over there?

Uh when the developer was seeking uh someone to to buy the property for commercial use, we got calls regarding car washes and a dollar store.

Those were the requests we got for that site.

Um car washes weren't permitted in that particular area, so those that was a no-go.

And the developer and the staff talked about the dollar store and thought that we could probably get something of a higher value on that property, and so that's in they agreed, and that's when we went back to the drawing board, and they decided to keep pursuing other options, and that's where they are.

Uh yeah, you can go with your follow-up and all.

So Jennifer, uh, this this particular uh parcel cannot with the with the apartments that are currently in place there, that's not even visible from uh St.

Paul, is it?

Well, it's set back, it is set back away.

It's kind of behind that landmark credit union that fronts on St.

Paul.

So it's not right up against the street.

There's the landmark credit unit, there's an internal drive, and then the apartments are behind there.

Yeah.

So you can see it, it's just not right on the street.

Yeah.

Excellent.

Alder Person Lemke.

One of the goals of our council usually has been to maximize taxable property due to the fact that we're landlocked.

And I certainly think a 12 million dollar apartment complex would be of much more long-term growth to the city than a million dollar car wash or a million dollar jet general dollar store.

Um when it does come before TIF, it does have to go uh in front of Baird uh for the pay, you know, uh if not four, um, you know, then this project wouldn't go through.

And I think if you give up a little bit of two million dollars worth of tax increment uh on a 12 million dollar project, it's a good deal for the city.

So uh I would be in favor of it.

Um I think it fits there with the other apartment complexes and in the commercial area.

In fact, it'll probably uh help the other commercial uh projects around there, you know, maybe do some shopping within walking distance.

So uh if Baird uh does perform the performa uh and it uh is eligible for TIFF, uh I think it's a wise use uh of our uh tax process.

Thank you.

Okay.

Yes, that would be a motion to approve as stated.

All right, so we have a motion.

Do we have a second?

Alder Person Camacho, and then I did have a comment from Chrisine, and then I will come back to you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um extending on what Rick said, uh Northeast Corner District one.

I don't have a lot of opportunity for growth uh other than hopefully we come up with a solution for the foundry, but uh Southwest Waukeshaw is growing and growing and growing, both businesses and manufacturing people need places to live.

And I I'm all I support uh places to live in that along that corridor, all the money that we spent on that corridor, moving people, traffic, and commerce through there.

I think this is a good extension of uh commerce and uh places for people to live.

So I do support this.

Excellent.

Alder Person Camacho?

Yeah, I agree with both the elders that just spoke as well, and also I was just curious.

Do we have a rough estimate on that 12 million?

How much in tax revenue that could potentially bring in?

Just a rough estimate.

I think that the tax rate is ten dollars per thousand.

Um I think it's about there right now.

I don't know if Tony can help me on that, but you can keep stalling to see if it's I will I well Tony's calculated.

I'll uh just comment on Alderman Lemke is correct.

We did send this to our our third-party consultant Ellers who reviews all of these performance, and they did say that even with the assistance, the return on investment for this developer is much below the market rate.

Excellent.

Uh Alder Person Manion.

Jennifer, I I I was just curious why um why they're not guaranteeing the whole 12 and a half million assessed value.

Um because it looks like um the guarantee is for 42.3 and the previous was about 33.3, so that's only about a nine million dollar bonus or bump in guarantee on a 12 and a half million dollar project.

Is there a fudge factor in there that I'm missing or not accounting for?

No, I think what you're seeing there, I'm and I know Brian might be able to correct me, but from memory is I think there was a value assigned to that commercial lot, a lower value.

Um, and then in our iteration that you're seeing here that's redlined, we had increased that to the 12 million, but then in discussing with the developer decided to consolidate all those values into one lump sum, and so then we crossed out all those individual values.

That's my recollection on it.

Um, how that went down.

So is there an offset from the previous what we were previously calculating that value to be?

Is that what you're saying?

Exactly.

Okay.

I've been supportive of this TIFF and uh redevelopment project, so I'm gonna continue to support it, but I did want to clarify that point.

Excellent.

Are there any other comments?

All right, so there is a motion um to approve the proposed amendment to the to number 27 development agreement.

What's I've got one other person?

Uh Jennifer, if I could.

Um do we happen to know percentage-wise single family homes versus apartments in the city of Waxha?

It seems to me like that's all we build anymore is apartments and and jammed up homes on summit.

So I just I'm just curious if you've got a number.

I don't have the number off the top of my head.

We built about 70 single family homes last year around that number, um, just roughly.

I would say that the latest American community survey data shows that our home ownership um percentage has risen over the last couple of years because of course ownership is fluid.

Um so sometimes things are condos, they go to rental, sometimes um single family homes go to rental, and they and these things move back and forth.

And so it's not always dictated by building type.

Um so but I so I don't have a definite answer as to how many single family homes versus apartment units in the build in the city right now, but that's the data I can tell you off the top of my head.

I can touch on that for a second.

Um, so if you look in the budget document, which I know that everyone looks likes looking at, because I really like it too.

Um, but if you look at new, there's a section in here that talks about new buildings and it breaks it down by different types from 2020 to 2024.

And in 2024, there was 31 single family properties, 21 two family, 16, three or more, and 14 commercial.

So I would say that there is a diversity in the types of developments that we are seeing, and I would assume and probably guess that uh Jennifer and the rest of the community development staff would agree on that point.

All right, are there any other comments or questions?

All right, there is a motion on the floor again to approve the proposed amendment to TID number 27 development agreement.

Please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass 13 to 1.

Uh we will move on to surplus city land, the request from Tyler Stetson.

Uh is that you, Jennifer, or okay.

You guys wanna go ahead?

Sure, I'll take that one.

Okay, Charlie.

Um, so this is the request for surplus land.

Uh, you heard Mr.

Stetson before.

Um really know if I have much to present to you after his uh summary is pretty accurate.

Um, but I'll just quick go over and give you show you some pictures of where exactly this land is located.

Um so this is uh highlighted here in yellow.

Um you can see Dunbar Avenue is just to the north.

There's a railroad that runs just to the south.

Um the properties on the south side of Dunbar are those ones that have um recently you can see some of these lots go back much further to towards the railroad tracks.

Those are lots where they took advantage of the city's offer back in the uh 20 teens um to uh take some of this what we considered surplus land.

Um you can see here there's a between 435 and 439, there's a lot that wasn't taken, so now it's essentially a landlocked parcel.

And then the same thing happens behind four uh 17419 Dunbar, which is highlighted here in yellow, and that's the one before you this evening.

Um this is about 4,700 square feet in size.

This part this little parcel.

So um back in 2010, let's say the city had uh this uh parcel along the railroad tracks.

Uh so you can see highlighted in blue, and then it was determined that yeah, this land is surplus.

Um there was issues with trying to maintain it.

Also um neighbors have been encroaching on it, things like that.

Um so it it made sense that if the neighbors were interested in expanding their property, why not give them the opportunity?

Um so the city went ahead and did that.

Um and like Mr.

Setson mentioned before, the majority of the neighbors took advantage of it, but several didn't.

Um and he mentioned he became the owner of uh 417 in um 2000 and or 2021.

Um and the previous owner had not taken advantage of it.

And speaking with his neighbor at 425, he um heard that the city had offered that, and so he wrote us a letter inquiring about that process.

So here's just a close-up of that, and you can see a little better the the other two uh lots that would have city surplus land remaining still behind them.

Um and as he mentioned in his letter, um in the interest of the neighborhood uniformity and equitable treatment of adjacent owners, he's requesting that the city follow the same resolution for the parcel behind um his property as as the previous uh property owners had the opportunity for so at this time the owner at 417 Dunbar has requested to acquire the city owned surplus land behind his property, and again that's approximately 4,700 square feet in area.

Um past property in this block has been transferred by warranty deed from the city with no purchase price, and the owner is requesting the same at this time.

Um note um should the council direct city staff to proceed with this land transfer.

I'm in discussion with the public works department.

Um there is a storm sewer that runs under this lot um that runs across that whole former city parcel, and they would just request that an easement be included with the uh transfer of land to make sure that there's access to that storm wire.

All right, great.

Uh are there any questions or comments?

Uh Alderperson Anderson.

Thank you.

I have a question about the person or who owns 419 and how does the conjoined house and property all come together there?

We can see side by side.

Actually, the if Zimden Farley would have seen 417 and Ford 19, it's a duplex, and he is the owner of the duplex of the entire lot.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, anyone else?

Alder Person Wells.

I will make a motion to approve as presented.

Okay.

Uh Alder Person Matthews.

I'll second it.

All right.

Uh so there is a motion on the floor to proceed with the land transfer along with the easement as presented.

Uh are there any other questions or comments?

Alder Person Molson.

Uh, this seems to be a very reasonable request, and I support the motion.

Excellent.

Any other comments or questions?

All right, so there is a motion.

Please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass 14 to zero.

So congratulations.

Um City Staff will work with you on that one.

Um moving along to the next item.

We have approved the abandonment of wells number 11, 12, and 13.

Um, Brian, I will let you get started on those.

Thank you.

Uh, a couple of contracts, three contracts actually here for the water utility.

The first two uh items E and F on your agenda have to do with the abandonment of wells.

We no longer need the wells.

We're getting our water elsewhere these days.

Uh, and abandonment of wells is not as simple as just walking away from them and not using them anymore.

Because wells are a means of extraction of water from an aquifer, they are also a means of the introduction of contaminants into aquifers, which would spoil it for everyone else that still has their wells in those aquifers.

So the DNR has very strict regulations about the abandonment and the closure of wells, which is what accounts for the expense of uh abandoning these wells.

So they put this out to bid, and uh they've got some winning bidders here.

You'll see in the attachments to your agenda that Midwest Well Services uh was the low bidder on the closure of all five of those wells.

Um 1112 and 13 for 62,320, and uh five and six for 175,071 dollars and fifty cents.

The water utility commission last week approved the granting of there are the award of the contracts to this company for those two projects.

So tonight we are asking for your approval of those uh contracts and to authorize us to finalize the contracts and execute them so that they can begin the work of uh closing up those wells.

Just a comment.

I sit on the committee.

I was in these uh meetings.

The one question that did come up to clarify there's two proposals that are out here.

One is for 62,000 for three wells, and then another 175,000 for two.

Um, just to clarify for any questions, the 11, 12, and 13 wells are shallow wells, so there's a lot less cost, a lot less uh construction going into that.

Um five and six are what we consider deep wells 450 feet or below.

Um, so that's why the cost is more significant just to clarify.

It was a topic of um discussion in committee.

Okay, Alderperson Piper, or excuse me, Anderson, then Piper, then Lemke.

Uh just out of curiosity, is there a current cost for us to just keep the wells open?

Well, there's it doesn't make sense to well, okay.

If the wells are no longer being used, then the DNR regulations require that we close it so that we don't allow contaminants to be introduced into the aquifer.

So I think at this point, if we are no longer using those wells, we don't have any choice.

We can't just, like I said, we can't just walk away and leave them there.

Is there any opportunity for us to use that as a backup or emergency water supply that we would ever need in the future?

We have them already.

The backup wells have already been designated.

There are wells in the network that are designated for backups.

I don't remember the quantity of them, but we have already supported backup wells for that.

So these would be closures that, like Brian said, we have to vote.

Okay, thank you.

Alder Person Piper.

Thank you.

Um, Brian, I'm very supportive of all of these items.

I just have just a question.

Is it before the council tonight?

Just given the fact that we're the council needs to approve to abandon a well, and this isn't something that can just be done by the water utility.

I guess my question is I'm just curious why it's before the council.

Well, because these would be contracts with the city.

The water utility has a separate budget, but they are not a separate entity from the city.

These would be contracts with the city, so the authority to execute them has to come from the common council.

Okay, thank you.

Excellent.

Alderperson Lemke.

Oh, never mind.

All right, Alderperson Wells.

I'm generally opposed to abandoning wells, but I'll make a motion to approve.

I was gonna make the joke, so I'm glad that you did it.

All right, anyone else?

All right.

Um you probably want to approve these separately in separate motions, please.

Yes, yes.

So is there a motion?

Uh Alder Person Matthews.

I'm I motion that we approve the $62,320 for wells 11, 12, and 13.

Excellent.

Uh Alder Person Wells.

I'll second.

Excellent.

All right.

So there is a motion uh to approve the contract totaling $63,320 to abandon wells number 11, 12, and 13.

Uh, please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass 14 to 0.

Um moving on, we have the contract for wells number 5 and 6.

I'm guessing that the information is the same.

The total is just different.

Yes.

All right.

Are there any questions about this one that would be somehow different than the last one?

No.

All right.

Then I will ask uh Alder Person Matthews for the motion.

I motion that we approve the abandonment of wells five and six as stated for 175,000 point five.

Alder Person Wells.

And to be clear, it's wells six, not wells from District Six.

All right.

Uh so we are we have the motion to approve uh 175,000 175,071 dollars and fifty cents uh to abandon wells number five and six.

Please vote when it is before you.

Oh, everybody voted already.

All right, that does pass 14 to 0.

Um moving along, we have uh approve of the Prairie Avenue water main replacement.

Brian, I will let you do that one, or at least I've got you listed.

This one is a little more straightforward.

This really doesn't involve a lot of complicated um hydrogeology or anything like that.

This is a straight-up water main replacement in Prairie Avenue.

So there are two parts of this 199,820 to Ferguson Waterworks, which was the winning bid that the Water Utility Commission approved and awarded the contract to last week, as well as to Ferguson Waterworks for the purchase of the 20-inch pipe and fittings that will be uh a not to exceed basis contract for 125,000 dollars.

And if you're wondering why I'm presenting this tonight for the water utility commission, it's because Kelly's Elstra from the water utility asked if I would pinch it for her tonight.

So that's why you're hearing this from me.

All right.

Are there any questions or comments on this one?

Any motions?

Alder Person Matthews.

I motion that we approve the water main replacements as written, 199,820 from Ferguson and 125,000 for the purchase of the pipe.

So Alderperson Chrisine.

I'll say it.

Um use the wrong company for the 199.

He said Ferguson, and this there's two different companies here.

So just to be clear, it's for UPI construction for the 199,000 and Ferguson for the 125,000.

That is correct as written.

Okay, excellent.

All right, and we have a second.

Are there any additional comments or questions?

All right.

So we do have a motion on the floor to approve the Prairie Avenue water main replacement to UPI construction in the amount of 199,820.

And a Ferguson Waterworks for the purchase of 20-inch pipe and fittings not to exceed 125,000 dollars.

Please vote when it is before you.

All right, that motion does pass uh 14 to zero.

Thank you.

Next up, we have a public hearing on uh the rezoning petition for smart trust.

We will start with that.

Doug, if you could take it away.

Sure.

So this is for excuse me.

This is for um property that the smart family owns north of Summit Avenue and west of Meadowbrook Road.

Sorry, my presentation reset here.

There we go.

Um so here's uh kind of a highlight of the the property for the most part in question.

Um here's Meadowbrook Road, just running on the side here, and Summit Avenue at the south end of the property.

Um the Smart Family owns more than just that little portion that was being discussed here tonight for the most part for this rezoning area.

Um they also own all the property up along the uh going farther to the north.

You can see the rehab hospital here on the corner of the um Coldwater Creek and Meadowbrook Road, and Pro Healthcare owns that uh rehab hospital, and they're interested in acquiring uh some additional land to create a medical campus in this area.

So they would like to acquire some land to the south.

They've approached the SMART and they're uh coming up with a way to do that.

Um but to do that, they'll want to rezone it to institutional to match the same zoning as is up here on this um property.

So uh the Pro Health would then acquire this bottom portion, they'd want to make this all institutional along the Meadowbrook Road side.

Currently there's a church here just to the south.

That's also institutional zoning.

Um, so it makes a lot of sense just to have this whole section institutional.

Um in the future, uh, the SMARTs would like to do some residential development off here to the west in this open land, but that isn't part of what's being proposed here.

Um, with the Pro Health acquiring this property, they also would like access down to Summit Avenue.

Um, so there would be a street connection that would come up through this location and up into the property.

And that was proposed in a CSM that was on the consent agenda, if you recall seeing that earlier.

So here's that that certified survey map.

Um so you can see the the larger lot one up here in the top is what uh pro healthcare would be acquiring.

Uh then there'd be a new public road, Country Crest Lane, which would come up into the site.

Also would connect over to the west to the um Woodland Hills condominium development where Red Maple Way is a street that's coming from the that development towards the east, and they would connect then into this location, providing access then to the south out eight uh 18 or Summit Avenue.

So with the rezoning proposal lot one would be rezoned to institutional, as I mentioned, and then there's two outlots that'll be um created with the street extension.

Um is in green here, and outlaw two uh to the left of the road is in red.

Uh both of those lots that are kind of long and narrow and odd shaped, not really big enough for development.

So what they're proposing is to use those for stormwater facilities to do that uh to do the work and get permits to do the work.

The property needs to be zoned first.

Currently, all of this old farmland is under temporary zoning.

Um, so they're gonna assign an RS3 single family zoning on those two outlots.

Um, no noting that they are outlots, there will be no development on them, but there will be used for stormwater facilities.

So here's the uh exhibit for the rezone for I-1 institutional district on lot one.

Um there's a little finger that kind of comes up to the north, and uh in the next month or so you'll be seeing another certified server map, which is going to combine these two lots and turn it into one big lot for pro health.

Um then that little finger will go away and it'll make a lot more sense when that comes in the future.

Um, and then the two lots to the south, they want to rezone to RS3 single family to accommodate those stormwater facilities on either side of the uh extension of country crest lane.

And here's just uh kind of an overview of how the kind of the stormwater would fit in the in the sites here down at the south end, and again the the large pro health site.

And then this is just an overall concept of um what they're anticipating developing in the future.

Um so you can see here's where the the stormwater would be at the south end, then there'd be some more type of residential going up on the west in that vacant area, while this whole site along um in the blue would be the institutional zone for a future campus for pro health.

Um then there'd be possibly some commercial activity right here on the corner with cold water on the north side.

Uh, if you recall plans were recently approved for a senior living facility, uh construction work has begun up there on that site if you've been over there recently, and then uh other future development uh for residential way off in the future up on the far northwest corner as well.

Um just to give you an idea of what could be coming in the future on this site.

But at this time they are requesting just the rezoning from the T1 temporary district to a mix of I1 for that 7.76 acres of um institutional, and then the RS one for the two acres at the south end where they'd be using stormwater facilities.

Um this is a public hearing, so we're gonna start with uh if there are any questions or comments from the audience members or from the public.

No, all right.

So then we are gonna move on uh to um the next item, which is also a uh zoning code update.

And if we could have Charlie up next, uh and then for anyone who isn't aware, we will take any possible action on these after the public hearings are over.

All right, all right.

So uh we are very happy to be able to present the uh entire uh draft of the zoning code to all of you for uh what would is a second reading.

Uh the first reading would have been at the plan commission on uh April 1st and for your review.

Um this is a uh about two years of work uh by many uh departments of city staff as well as uh consultants at uh House of Levine and Birch Line Planning and also the Plan Commission and Council.

Um so just to run through the timeline uh of the process.

Uh it started uh January of 2024.

Uh we had uh pretty significant uh community engagement uh effort in the spring and summer of 2024.

Uh the consultants uh uh did an analysis of uh of the current code uh as well as the city's need and uh needs and other uh other plans uh and uh came up with a list of preliminary recommendations, which they presented in January of 2025.

And then over the course of 2025, we had all of the uh the sections of the code uh presented uh over the course of the year in different portions to uh the plan commission and council, and now we have the uh the draft of the final zoning code for you.

Uh subdivision standards are not uh in this draft yet.

Uh those are currently uh separate chapter 2323 of the city code.

Uh so those can stand on their own, but we do plan to have those as a later update uh uh hopefully summer of this year uh to incorporate into uh into chapter 2022, right?

Into chapter 22.

Uh so this is part of a longer effort uh which started in in 2021, uh which included the update of the city's comprehensive plan.

Uh the comprehensive plan is a it's a policy uh document which uh which describes the city's vision for how development should happen.

Um and the zoning code is uh one of the primary tools that we have to make that vision into uh into a reality.

Um so the the uh most uh one of the most important parts of the uh of the comprehensive plan is the land use policy map.

Um all of the uh properties in the city uh zoning needs to be consistent with the uh with the policy recommendations of the land use policy map.

Uh so that's one of the one of the efforts of the zoning code is to bring it into uh consistency with that.

Uh one of the most significant changes in the land use policy map was to uh to go away from uh previous uh comprehensive plans which uh had recommendations for uh density visions and to replace that with uh with sort of a recommendation for uh how what sorts of properties and what sorts of uh buildings we were looking for for each property.

Uh both the comprehensive plan and the the zoning code included a pretty significant uh community engagement.

Uh so to start with the comprehensive plan uh in 2022 uh questions were added to the national community survey, which was uh uh distributed to the city in English and Spanish.

Uh we had uh an online uh citywide focus group meeting as well as five uh in-person focus groups for for specific areas uh throughout the city.

Um then uh uh plan commission focused group, which is uh pictured on the right, as well as uh additional surveys and then uh presentations and discussion uh by the common council and the uh plan commission.

Uh for the zoning code, uh we had a community open house uh at the kickoff uh to the process, as well as uh interviews with uh local business owners, uh developers, uh nonprofit uh leaders and other stakeholders, uh as well as a uh survey, which was also published in English and Spanish, and then six joint uh plan commission and council meetings uh to discuss the code uh uh over the course of the process, uh as well as another community open house at the conclusion in February.

Um just to go back to the uh the recommendations report uh which was produced by the the consultants.

Uh the report included a list of uh key themes uh which uh they were recommending uh to incorporate into the new code.

Uh each of those themes referenced both comprehensive plan and the uh the uh feedback that we had received from the community engagement process.

Uh it also included a land use plan alignment analysis and a uh uh an analysis of uh lot standards and uh what uh what did and did not work in the current code, um proposal for an outline of the structure of the new code, which uh isn't exactly what we ended up with, but it's pretty close, and then uh research into uh other cities uh throughout Wisconsin to see uh what had and what they have in their codes that did and did not work.

So there's a list of the uh the cities that were included in the comparative research.

They were selected for uh similar uh population and also similar character to Waukesha, and uh research included uh uh their development standards, their design standards, and and other portions of the code uh just to find uh ideas for again what uh what does and does not work.

Um the lot standards analysis uh found a number of uh nonconformities uh in the in the current code.

Uh so these are the five districts which currently make up the vast majority of the uh the residential areas of the city, uh and they analyze them to find out which ones uh were not conforming with the current uh lot area and lot width requirements.

They found 3,441 uh properties which don't uh meet the lot area requirements, and uh 5,673 in those districts uh which uh don't meet the lot width requirements.

Uh together those are about a third of the city and a third of the residential uh areas of the city.

And um in the uh RM1 and RM3 districts, which are uh tend to be the uh the central city uh core area uh the it's much higher.

Uh in the RM3 district, uh 72% of properties uh don't meet the uh the lot width requirements, and in the RM1 district, it's uh 82% of properties which uh which don't meet those requirements.

So 1,734.

Uh so this sort of leads into uh the question of you know why are we doing this uh um uh what what are the reasons that we need to replace the code uh and I just want to kind of run through that before we get into the uh into what is in the new code.

Um so to start out the last uh last major update was in 2001.

As you can imagine, uh quite a lot has happened in the quarter century since then.

Um most importantly for the city, uh the Great Lakes Water Agreement and the incorporation of uh the village of Waukeshaw and surrounding municipalities have uh have really locked the city's boundaries and uh and really transformed the uh the outlook for development and uh city's development needs.

Uh basically, if if Waukesha wants to keep growing and uh meeting the needs of its residents, uh we've we need to be uh looking at uh primarily uh redevelopment uh and and uh additional density.

Um as I had uh mentioned uh in the previous slide, uh much of the city, uh including uh almost all the central cities non-conforming, and beyond just the uh lot width and lot area uh nonconformities.

There are properties that don't meet setback requirements, there are non-conforming uses and any number of other uh nonconformities, which uh leads to uh a lot of complications for the owners of those properties.

Um as far as the uh commercial use lists, the uh the standard at the time that the preus code was adopted uh was to try to uh list any possible use that could be allowed in a district in detail.

So we have these long laundry lists of of uses which uh include uh some relatively ridiculous uh um uh specificity uh including uh list of specific types of pasta that can be uh produced in some of the manufacturing districts.

Um it's never possible to uh to list everything and and it really doesn't uh account for changes to uh the business environment and changes to the the economy that have happened since then.

Uh so that uh we were looking to update that.

Um as far as development standards go, there really aren't any uh specific standards in the code.

That's left up to uh negotiation between developers and the plan commission.

Um the plan commission to its credit has done a very good job of uh being consistent with its uh standards, but uh the standards that uh that we have are uh lead to some unpredictability both for developers and for the for neighbors.

Um and then lastly, the uh organization of the code is uh is confusing and dense uh even for uh people that those of us that work in it uh on a daily basis, and let alone for members of the public.

Uh so just to illustrate that, these are the uh 75 sections of the of the current zoning ordinance.

Uh some of those sections uh on their own are large and convoluted, and others are um uh are really rarely useful.

Uh so the uh proposal is to uh reorganize and consolidate the code into 12 sections, and I'll just run through all of them quickly.

Um the uh to start out general provisions is uh includes a purpose statement and the uh list of um statements that are uh required for all zoning codes, uh district standards uh describes each of the districts in the city, and then um includes uh dimensional requirements uh uh such as setbacks and and lot area requirements.

Uh the use standards uh replaces those uh those lists of uses with a uh table of permitted uses for uh all districts in the city.

And um uh the the uses are a lot more uh they're a lot broader and and hopefully more flexible for uh to account for changes in uh business environment.

Uh it also has uh supplemental standards uh to account for uh issues that might uh come up uh related to specific uses and uh as well as accessory uses and uh temporary uses.

Um development, design, uh parking and landscape standards are really the meat of what the plan commission uh normally reviews.

Um those are the uh the um the uh set uh design standards uh the that uh will uh add some predictability and that will make things easier for uh for people to understand and will uh uh make uh review processes a little bit uh a little bit more predictable.

Um subdivision standards again that's coming later in 2026, so we sort of have that as a placeholder for now.

Uh sign standards will be replacing the uh the existing chapter 27, which will be uh incorporated into the the zoning code, um and then the review and decision making standards uh chat section is uh includes a lot more detail than the current code does for all of the uh the review processes that that uh uh touch on the zoning code.

And has for the most part is fairly similar to what we currently have, but the one significant change is to the site plan and architectural review, which I'll have some detail on coming up.

The code also in order to make it easier to understand and to use includes a lot of diagrams such as these examples from the design section and the sign section to help people visualize what the what the code is describing.

And also tables including this one for permitted uses, which is on the right here, which also will hopefully make it easier for both staff developers and members of the public to understand.

Again, decision making procedures includes quite a bit more detail and includes flow charts of each of the decision processes that the code goes into, including this one for a zoning code text amendments on the right.

So the intention is that with the uh with the more with the with the specific design standards, the objective standards that the the code has added, some of those approvals, especially for smaller projects, will be able to be approved by staff without having to go to the plan commission, uh, which will save uh save time for applicants.

Um but uh the plan commission uh wanted to make sure that uh uh that they that they kept some uh some review authority for uh projects that uh that will have a significant impact on their surrounding area.

Um and we had quite a bit of uh work and back and forth and discussion with the plan commission to uh to get that right, and uh what we had come up with is uh a requirement for uh projects that have adjacent property impacts to go to the plan commission for review.

Uh so that's anything that is adjacent to uh residential district where uh the type of use that's in question will not need to be would not be allowed in that adjacent residential district uh that will automatically have to go to the plan commission for review.

Uh and then uh each of those uh sections that I had mentioned before, the design uh development uh landscape and uh parking sections uh include a clause uh that that states that uh exceptions to the standards in the section uh will have to go to the plan commission for review as well.

Um so uh just to give a few examples of this.

Um this was from the uh the plan commission agenda for March.

Uh these two items were on the consent agenda uh for the plan commission.

This was uh uh John's root beer on Arcadian Avenue.

I wanted to add a small uh small shed for storage, and then an airplane hangar uh at the uh at the airport.

Um both of these items are are very uh utilitarian structures.

Uh the plan commission didn't have any any design comments, and both of them were approved again on the consent agenda uh with the some minor staff comments.

Um so the intention is that uh these will be able to be reviewed uh by staff and and won't have to come to the plan commission and projects like them, uh and that'll save some time.

Uh in the case of John's Ripbeer, the uh applicant uh almost lost out on a on a deal for the shed.

So hopefully uh that we'll be able to prevent that in the future.

Um for uh this is an example of a project that will have to come to the plan commission for review.

Uh this is uh a proposal for a store it right, sort of a high-end uh um uh mini storage or uh self-storage uh business.

Um the design standards include requirements for for glazing for how many windows uh are on a building facing a public street, uh as well as for entrances and and for some uh material standards, and uh a storage building uh it really doesn't make sense to to require windows on the building or some of those other standards.

So those will come to the plan commission to determine whether or not that's appropriate in each case that we get that kind of an application.

This is the Prairie Song Courtyards on the west side of the city near Madison Street, which was approved this earlier this year by the Plan Commission.

This is in a planned unit development district.

So it would require Plan Commission review automatically.

But we would envision in some cases the code does allow for some residential developments in the commercial commercial districts as a permitted use.

So we would envision there are some instances where there might be a redevelopment in some of the city's older shopping centers where there isn't any kind of residential area nearby where a project like this where there's a high quality design could potentially be approved by staff without having to come to the plan commission.

And then another example of a larger scale project that could be approved without without plan commission review is the GE Experience Center, which was approved last year for GE's campus to the north of Interstate 94.

This is obviously a high quality design.

This is a building that GE wanted to have for showcasing products to customers.

So they they have a lot of a lot of glazing and high quality materials, landscaping, all would meet the standards that are proposed in the code.

And this is nowhere near any residential, also not visible from the public right-of-way.

So this could be approved without coming to the plan commission for approval.

Obviously, in this case, we know that both the plan commission and the council like to hear about these kinds of projects.

This is sort of a feel-good development.

So we would plan to have sort of a report on these sorts of developments if they are able to be approved.

These are the this is the wording for the design standards exceptions.

This is the one from the uh from the building design standards uh section of the code, but again, that's uh each of those four, uh actually five, including the uh uh the um sign section uh would have a version of this of this uh statement uh which authorizes the uh the plan commission uh to make a modification waiver or reduction of the requirements of the section, uh should it find that the nature of the proposed use, development, or redevelopment, or the shape or size of a property uh makes strict compliance impractical, unjust, unfair, or unreasonable.

Uh such exceptions shall be to the least extent necessary to address the cause and approval as consistent with the review criteria in the uh plan commission approval section.

Uh so again, this is the plan commission that's making these uh these uh that's authorizing these exceptions.

Um the intention of this section is to uh provide the plan commission with guidelines for uh how they should be uh reviewing these these kind of requests, uh, but to still allow uh quite a bit of um flexibility and and subjective um uh review by the plan commission.

Uh one uh pretty significant change that we've had since the last um since the last uh joint uh plan commission and council meeting uh was uh addition of some standards for planned unit developments.

Uh so planned unit developments are uh uh larger scale projects that uh come to the plan commission and council uh for review when there are exceptions to uh the zoning code that are required uh to make them happen.

The hope is that we won't have as many of these with the new code, that it's a little bit more flexible and a little bit there's some of the uh standards are relaxed, so these these shouldn't be necessary in as many cases.

Uh but when we do have them, we want to make sure there are some uh specific objectives to sort of uh uh lay out what the city uh wants to get out of those kind of uh developments.

So uh the standards on the left, um each PUD will need to uh meet uh all of those standards on on the left, and then uh the standards on the right, they'll have to meet at least one of them.

And uh the the way they're worded each of them includes some detail on what uh what those uh standards mean, uh which will are flexible enough to allow uh applicants to uh to propose uh what they you know how they feel that they're um they're meeting each of those objectives, and uh and they they allow the uh plan commission and council to have some uh flexibility to review those uh proposals and and decide whether they feel that the uh that the proposal meets uh the standards.

Um so the last big thing I want to go through is uh one of the most significant changes to the code uh which is uh the changes to the way uh residential districts are um regulated.

Uh so as I mentioned earlier, the the comprehensive plan uh had envisioned uh uh going away from uh sort of the the detailed um uh density requirements and replacing them with uh with an idea for what uh each neighborhood should look like.

Um so the current code has nine residential districts, which which again are broken out uh kind of granularly uh by density, um, and the proposal is to consolidate those into four districts.

Uh so the RS1 and RS2 single family districts uh would largely become the RN1 uh residential neighborhood district.

Um the RS3 single family residential, as well as the uh R2 uh two family uh zoning districts uh would become the RN2 residential neighborhood.

Um largely the RM1 multifamily residential district would become the RN3 residential neighborhood.

Uh that district will include portions of what are now RS3, RD2, and RM3.

Uh and then uh the RM2 and RM3 districts as well as the one property that is currently in the RS4 mobile home park uh district would become part of the RN for residential neighborhood district.

And then also I have uh some detail in the mixed-use commercial district as well.

Uh so this is a map of the uh of the current code proposal for the the code.

Um the residential districts in this map are uh shown in yellow, uh orange and tan.

Um and I have uh kind of an older uh version of a draft of the map which which uh divides them out a little more and makes it a little easier to see which which ones are which.

So uh just going through uh based on that older uh map.

So the the green areas here are uh what would be proposed for the residential neighborhood one.

Uh these are the large lot single family subdivisions, uh mostly on the west side of the city.

Uh and those uh so the examples here are the uh maple ways subdivision and then also uh tall grass subdivision.

Um the proposals, those will stay uh single family only, but they will allow uh accessory uh dwelling units, as will any uh all the residential districts within the city, so that would allow uh homeowners to uh to uh divide up portions of their home uh you know, what if they want to add uh an area for to either rent out uh within their home or uh on their property or uh or to uh um have uh a relative or or another uh person living there.

Um the next uh district is the residential neighborhood two district, uh which would include uh some of the newer subdivisions uh which have uh generally smaller lots, um such as the uh Rivers Crossing subdivision here on the south side of the city, as well as some of the older parts of the city, um such as this uh this area around uh Roberta and Tenny Avenue, uh kind of to the uh the southeast of uh of the central city and of Carroll, uh as well as the area uh to the west of Delfield Street, uh Moreland uh boulevard and Summit Avenue here.

Um just jumped ahead a little bit.

Uh so the examples of that district are uh so this is uh from Rivers Crossing uh as well as uh some of the older neighborhoods where there's uh predominantly uh ranch uh ranch style homes, uh but with uh some different uh different types of uh um construction uh mixed in as well.

And then uh these areas uh in in many cases have uh have duplex areas that are uh that are kind of mixed throughout.

Uh so those will be included in that district, and this district will be will allow for residential uses of of uh up to four units, so including uh triplexes and quadplexes uh where appropriate as well.

Uh the residential neighborhood three district is uh uh largely the older neighborhoods in the uh in the central city.

Uh so that's uh shown here in orange.

Um that uh includes both some of our uh these are designated historic areas, such as uh this uh the McCall Street Historic District here, uh as well as some parts of the city that are not uh designated historic, but our older uh older uh smaller uh homes on smaller lots.

And these areas also have uh um some duplex, triplex uh uh uses that are sprinkled throughout, as well as some larger uh this is a four-family uh residential area, residential uh as well.

Uh so this district will include uh residential uses of up to eight units on properties.

Um and then lastly, the residential neighborhood, lastly of the residential only districts, uh is residential neighborhood four, uh, which is includes the areas immediately surrounding uh downtown, uh which uh include uh uh mix of uh one and two family as well as some larger uh scale um uh uh multi-family or multi-unit uh uh dwelling uh uh dwellings and uh also some uh areas uh further out from the uh from the central city uh where we have uh larger uh multifamily complexes uh such as this one on uh Cambridge Avenue uh and uh mix of uses uh these these areas uh further out from the the central city uh core tend to be all to have existing uh PUD zoning on them.

So this uh uh this area um at the intersection of Madison Street and Comanche Lane.

Uh this is uh an aerial photo uh of highlighting that area.

Uh you can see all the the green dots on this uh on this uh aerial photo are each one is a separate address, so you can see there's a pretty good mix of different uh housing types in that area.

Um the uh examples here are the uh this is from Arlington Avenue, uh just off of Grand Avenue in the central city, where there's a mix of uh one and two family as well as larger scale apartment uh uh buildings, and then um this is at the intersection of Buckley and Baxter Streets, where there's a larger uh uh condominium uh development that's right across the street from from some single family uh residential.

Um then the last district that I wanted to highlight is the uh mixed use commercial district, which is shown here in purple.

Uh these are some of the older uh commercial corridors in the city uh where there is a mix of commercial uses, but uh also with some uh residential uses which have in in many cases been uh non-conforming for many many years, but have uh remained residential.

Um so this is uh Main Street and Broadway as they uh go east from downtown, uh and then St.

Paul Avenue as it extends to the uh southwest from downtown, as well as uh sections of uh Wisconsin Avenue and then Grand Avenue and extending down towards William Street.

Uh so this is the example from uh from Main Street uh heading east from downtown.

So the the uh commercial uses will continue to be allowed, uh, but then those uh those residential uses will be permitted as well.

And uh this is this example is from uh Grand Avenue and Harrison Street, uh further to the south where the uh Castle Noble R Noble restaurant as well as uh some other uh commercial neighborhood commercial uses are uh um mixed in with uh with some of the residential some of the the homes there.

Um so the next steps for the uh this process uh depending on uh discussion tonight, uh we would hope to have a uh a vote uh for final approval.

That would be the third reading uh at the meeting on May 5th.

Uh if uh if there are no significant changes that come up tonight uh as well as uh then an implementation date of September 1st uh that would allow for um for staff uh to work through some of the uh changes to the approval processes uh and to some of the regulations that would uh uh come with this new code to uh allow for for that to be uh new applications and uh brochures and things like that to be published uh and to prepare for the the changes.

Um and then hopefully we'll have the subdivision standards in uh within the next couple months.

And just uh we want to stress that we we see this as sort of a living uh living document that uh we would expect further updates.

Uh there are some changes that are uh sort of experiments that may or may not uh work how we uh how we hope they will.

Uh so we would expect to bring some of those back in the short term as well as uh continue to update the code in the long term.

So staff recommends approval of the new zoning ordinance to replace chapter 22 uh zoning and chapter 27 signs and outdoor advertising in their entirety.

Uh with the note that uh the city's attorney's office is uh review reviewing it and updating the formatting uh prior to publication, they've been working on that over the course of this month.

And uh just a note that the uh plan commission unanimously voted on April 1st to recommend approval of the of the revisions excellent.

All right, that was quite the presentation.

Thank you, Charlie.

Uh so this is a public hearing, so I want to make sure that we are opening this up.

Are there any comments or questions from the public at this time?

All right.

Um, Brian, I actually do have a question for you because there is no item on the agenda for this for discussion by the council.

So are we still able to discuss as the council?

It just says the rezoning petition next.

So I don't know if that was just an oversight or I know this is only the second reading, but I didn't notice until we got here, so sorry.

Yeah, I think you're right.

Um all we have is the public hearing.

It's not listed under the action on public hearing.

Somehow was omitted um, I guess depending upon how broadly you want to define action uh discussion and debate could certainly constitute action.

Uh absolutely you should not uh make any motions or take any uh formal action on anything here tonight.

Sure.

I'm gonna make the recommendation then um because this is so substantial that it might be a good opportunity for everyone on the council to really review um and come up with any questions.

I'm sure that uh Charlie can answer anything that you have between now and the May 5th, but I do want to make sure that we are compliant here and not opening the city up for any issues.

So if we can hold off on questions and comments on this until our next meeting, but in the meantime, please make sure that you are reviewing all of the materials and coming up with any questions.

Um if you have any potential amendments, um please make sure that you're working with the city attorney's office and Charlie uh to get that handled.

Um so we will close the public hearing then uh and move on to possible action on the rezoning petition for the smart trust west of Meadowbrook Road.

Are there any comments or questions?

I believe I know it's been a little bit.

Alder Person Lemke, did you have something on this one?

Yes.

Um, I thought we were talking about the smart.

Yes, this is just the rezoning petition.

Yes, yeah.

So that's in my district, and I've uh dealt with the SMARTs and also uh city staff.

Uh and uh I like to rezone it because I think it's a good program.

And if we can get it rezoned, we can get the industrial part part built before Balinski comes in and puts the single family homes.

I'm always in favor of doing the industrial portion first so that the new single family homeowners know what they're buying, and they don't get surprised later with something that moves in uh after the fact.

So uh I would be in favor of the rezoning petition as stated.

Is that a motion?

Yes.

All right, excellent.

Uh Alderperson Chrisine.

Mine's a comment, and I can wait till there's a second to comment on that.

Okay, is there a second?

Alderperson Wells.

I'll second.

All right.

I just want to make a note also that it's institutional, not industrial.

Okay.

Yes.

Institutional.

Yes, and cuisine.

Um, when I was on the RDA and city staff has presented a lot of uh charts and graphs on how much of the city is actually non-taxable, and I do believe my question would be uh the expansion of and with the uh with the rezoning, the ultimate re uh expansion of the pro health to the south.

Would that be a non-taxable piece of property?

I'm fine with the homes around it.

I'd like to see more homes around it, but would that be a non-taxable piece of 7.25 acres or 7.76?

Go ahead.

Um, it would depend on the use as to whether to be taxable or not.

If um one of their ideas floating around is possibly uh a large clinic building, that would be like any other commercial clinic around the city and would be taxable.

Alderperson Lemke.

In speaking with the SMARTs, it is pro health to have medical offices in there, which would be taxable.

Thank you.

Any other questions or comments?

All right, so there is a uh motion on the floor to rezone approximately 9.78 acres of vacant land from T1 to a mix of I1 and RS3.

Uh please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass 14 to zero.

So thank you for all of your presentations, both Doug and Charlie.

Very much appreciated.

Uh all right, so on to reports, transit commission report.

Alex?

No meeting, no report.

Excellent.

Uh water utility.

Uh Alderperson Matthews.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh, we discussed the wells closing.

Um, the committee still wants to uh thank on the collaboration and continued collaboration with DPW on our projects, you know, for street openings, and hopefully we can both continue to collaborate and make sure our projects are done inappropriate time to save money both for the city and the water community.

So thank you.

And a report.

Okay.

IT board, alderperson Manion.

Uh no meeting, no report.

Okay.

Uh Landmarks Commission, Alderperson Chrisine.

Thank you.

As stated uh earlier this month, we uh landmarks got their fine uh funding, so we can start providing uh needed funding for getting some of our older homes in our landmark districts fixed, and also we had a selection of homes uh and applications, and we picked three winners, and the winners will be announced uh and hopefully awarded at the May meeting.

Thank you.

All right, uh redevelopment authority report.

Alderperson Lemke.

At our meeting last night, uh reviewed and took action to approve three affordable housing development fund loans to habitat humanity uh for new construction at 128 and 134 Caldwell Street and a duplex at 909 Madison Street.

Domina Park is finishing up, and they will repay the three loans they have outstanding for Domina before these three are um uh processed.

Uh we also um discussed uh uh uh Kansas City State University Technical Assistance for Brownfields grants.

Uh and uh spoke about the authority loan programs, but if anybody wants that, I can speak with them later to get the loan balances.

Uh otherwise that's it.

All right, thank you.

Uh on to Parks Rec and Forestry Board report.

Alder Person Wells.

We met last night and recommend approval of a new playground equipment at Greenway Terrace Park, which is currently our oldest playground in the city inventory.

We also got an update on the various programs, pools, projects, maintenance that comes with the warmer weather.

That's all I have for report.

Excellent.

Uh library board report.

That's me, and I just realized that I needed to make that report.

Um, we did get some updates uh with regards to the expansion of the children's area, which was very exciting.

Uh so stay tuned for that.

Uh and we have a proclamation later that I will get to when we get there.

Uh end of report.

Uh up next, cemetery commission report.

Alderperson Chris.

Thank you.

Our meeting this month was canceled, but just uh hopefully there'll be some more sites, host sites for Waukesha unlocked, and uh cemetery is proud to be part of that.

So looking forward to that.

Excellent.

Uh housing authority report, Alder Person Piper.

Thank you.

Uh we had a meeting of the Housing Authority last week, Wednesday, and um discussed a couple of items.

Public housing occupancy continues to be very good with the units across the county.

Um section eight voucher program um has seen some uh nice increases.

We had 16 new families that were issued vouchers in March, 19 planned for April, and 16 vouchers uh planned for May.

Um the challenge as we know and we've discussed is is finding units that fit within the uh the voucher program as it relates to just availability and the pricing of those units.

Um we do have one new landlord um that is uh coming on board in Peewalkie.

And one area that we've been focusing on is the new development of Bishop's Woods in Brookfield.

We now have five families that are residing in that new development in Brookfield.

Um next meeting will be uh in May, and I'll have a date for that at our next council meeting.

End of report.

Excellent.

Uh community development block grant.

Uh Jennifer, anything?

Yeah, we'll be convening the committee in the next month to do the 2027 allocations.

Excellent.

Thank you.

Uh public art committee, Alder Person Molson, no report.

All right.

Uh Plan Commission.

Uh Jennifer.

No other items.

All right.

I was hoping not.

Uh all right, uh finance committee, Alder Person Piper.

There is no report.

No report this evening.

Excellent.

Um Building and Grounds Committee report.

Uh Alder Person Lemke.

We did not have a meeting.

All right.

Uh ordinance and license.

Um I've got first of all the revisions to uh chapter 11.

Brian, I have you down to present that unless Alderperson with Tesco, you wouldn't like pointing the fingers.

Sorry.

Given that I wasn't at the last meeting because I was out of the country, I'll defer to Brian.

Sounds like a plan.

Sounds fair.

Okay.

Uh this ordinance proposes a number of amendments and new sections to our municipal code.

We have a uh Schmorgus board of items for you tonight, or we'll call it a grab bag.

Uh first section of the ordinance adopts into our municipal code a number of already existing state violations.

We have battery prostitution, patronizing prostitutes, soliciting prostitutes, pandering, keeping a place of prostitution, and unlawful assemblies and their suppression.

Already existing state violations.

The police department has requested that we adopt these into our municipal code so that they can issue municipal citations for these violations.

The second section of this ordinance corresponds with the first section, and it sets the range of the forfeitures, which align with the forfeitures that already exist in our chapter 11.

Um section three amends an already existing section of our code to increase the maximum penalty within the table of penalties for the possession of controlled substances.

And as you see, that will uh increase that from between $50 and $1,500 for our municipal forfeiture.

Next is the creation of a dumping ordinance.

We do not currently have an ordinance that specifically deals with dumping, but we are experiencing problems around the city with people pulling into cul-de-sacks and uh other um less traveled areas and just unloading piles of garbage.

If we can uh track these people down, the police department wants to have a municipal ordinance to issue citations to them for that.

The uh distinction here between dumping and our existing littering ordinance is the littering refers to small quantities, whereas this dumping ordinance is specifically aimed at larger quantities.

Uh the definition is is uh refuse material of greater than five pounds or a volume of greater than one cubic foot, which is a size that you ordinarily wouldn't associate with littering, as that term is popularly understood.

Um the penalty is set between 500 and 1500.

So that's uh right in line with what our current uh schedule is.

And then you should note too that there is a restitution section, which means that if somebody dumps garbage onto uh, let's say your property, uh, if that person is cited and uh the municipal court takes the case, then you would be able to ask for your costs of removing cleaning up the junk off of your property as part of the uh penalty against the dumper.

Uh section five is it accompanies the creation of the dumping ordinance and it amends the nuisance section of our code to add a provision at the end that says it is not a defense to enforcement of this nuisance section, that the nuisance exists as a result of the actions of one other than the owner or occupant of the property.

And that was added because what we run into is people who have been the victims of dumping, meaning a nuisance now exists on their property as a result of the dumping, but when enforcement of the nuisance ordinance is attempted against them, they try to defend themselves by saying, Well, I didn't put it there.

And unfortunately, uh the fact is that that nuisance is there and needs to be remedied.

Uh as I mentioned, there is the availability of seeking restitution from the dumper.

Um, but it it's unfortunate that people do this, and unfortunately, people uh landowners will be affected by this, but uh nuisances have to be abated.

Uh there's an amendment to section 1109 sub-1 of the code, which adds the use of electronic vaping devices to the definition of smoking, so that our smoking prohibitions can be enforced against vaping similarly to smoking.

Section 7 creates a new subsection of the code to prohibit smoking on the grounds of Waukeshaw school district property.

We did not have a specific ordinance concerning that previously.

And uh along the same lines, section 11.096 is created to prohibit the purchase and possession of electronic vaping devices not otherwise regulated by state statute.

Um to read as follows.

Uh you can read that yourselves in the attachment, but basically it just says that if you're under 21, you can't have a vaping device.

And uh section nine of the ordinance is another new creation here, 11.45 of the code to address the unlawful use of the 911 emergency telephone number system.

We do have problems with people doing that.

And in cases where they should know better, um, this allows a citation to be issued to them.

Um it's the way it's written, it says that no person shall utilize 911 for any purpose other than to report an emergency or to report a claimed emergency while knowing the fact situation being reported does not exist.

In other words, it's totally fraudulent.

Uh we did not want to make this read that uh people to report in a claim a claimed emergency uh knowing or they should have known the fact situation did not exist because of course we don't want to discourage people from making calls when they have to.

And you don't always know for sure in an emergency situation just exactly what the facts are.

So this would not penalize people for that kind of circumstance.

Uh that's it.

This is the second reading.

This is not up for final passage this evening.

If you have any questions about it, you can run them past me now, or you can uh contact me in the interim before the third reading at the next meeting.

All right.

Alder Person Piper.

Brian, just as it relates to the 911, since the city has a 911 in the city with our police department and the county's 911 systems also in the city.

Would this reply, would this apply to someone who made a erroneous or a bad call to the county dispatch as well?

Could they it's yes, it's the use of the 911 emergency telephone number system, which is a statewide mandated program.

Uh this would apply to that, but uh I want to stress again it's not just for erroneous, it's for deliberate misuse of the bad word choice on my part.

So deliberate misuse.

So that would so if someone would call the county dispatch center, the county could we couldn't we could, in a sense, give them a municipal citation if they if someone from even outside the city made a deliberate bad call to the county dispatch center as well.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Alder Person Wells.

Does the restitution section of the dumping ordinance apply to a city if the dumping happens on city property?

Yes.

So we can recover costs of say something is dumped on park property or city property.

Yes.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions?

All right, as Brian mentioned, this is a second reading, so we will see this again on our next uh council agenda.

If there are any questions in the interim, please reach out to Brian.

Uh next up we have review and possible action on update to 13.055 residential solid waste and recyclables collection.

Alex andor Emma.

I'll let you guys duke it out.

I'll just give a brief overview.

Um so first of all, this will be I guess this will be the third reading here.

Um this did go through uh Board of Public Works and was approved unanimously and then went to ONL uh committee um later in uh March and then uh at the common council meeting.

Uh the mayor uh read it and uh offered any questions to be brought up.

Um so I'll just give a very brief overview.

There is uh the supporting documents and the attachments that includes uh obviously the red line and then a summary of uh the changes on that uh uh is an attachment.

Um so basically there's three general overview changes throughout the the document there.

Um first of all, it's to align um basically the uh ordinance with our special charge that was approved.

Uh that's one item.

Um another one would be the align it with our John's contract.

Um basically the city owning the carts and the changes we made for that, and then ultimately there's an the last bit of the changes here were to clean up uh the document and make some administrative changes.

So if there's any specific questions on anything that's redlined in that document, umma or myself or Brian Running would be happy to answer that.

All right, Emma, did you have anything to add?

No, that was a perfect overview.

Awesome.

Very efficient.

I like it.

Thanks, Emma.

Uh, are there any questions, comments from uh from the rest of the Alders here?

Uh do we have any motions?

Alder Person with Tesca.

Uh I'll make a motion to approve as presented.

All right.

Uh Alder Person Manion.

I'll second the motion.

All right.

So the motion is to uh approve the update to 13.055 residential solid waste and recyclables collection as presented.

Please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass uh 14 to 0.

Alder Person Piper, did you have a question?

I was just I would be remiss not to thank Emma for the work that you've put in on this um in your role with Dustin being gone, stepping in and pulling this all together.

The council certainly appreciates your work on this.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Emma and Alex and everybody else.

So great work.

Uh moving right along, we have human resources committee report.

Alder Person Wigerson.

No meeting, no report.

Excellent.

Uh back to you, Alex, uh, Board of Public Works.

All right.

Uh the first item, this is a uh resolution uh that would direct the the Board of Public or the Public Works Department to prepare plans and specs for the demolition of the 137-139 East Park Avenue uh house.

Um also a project on Luke Avenue, Walton Avenue, and Bourne Place, and then also uh the parade memorial irrigation project.

Um so normally we we run this resolution through kind of at the beginning of the season.

Uh these projects weren't included in that main resolution as they came up later on in the path here.

So uh that's why it's a separate resolution.

But if there's any questions, feel free to let me know.

Alder Person Piper.

So moved.

All right, Alder Person Witesca.

Second.

All right.

Are there any questions or comments?

All right, so there is a motion to approve um demolition of 137-139 East Park, utility improvements on Luke Avenue, Walton Avenue, and Bourne Place, and parade memorial irrigation.

Please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass.

14 to 0.

Alex?

All right, thank you.

Uh, the next uh two items are both bids that we received on March 20th.

Uh the first one is for the 2026 Alley Reconstruction Project.

Um, and this is to reconstruct alley number 34 and 41.

Uh these alleys are west of Grand, uh between West and Grand and then uh between Wilson and Harrison, and then 41 is between Frame and Wabash.

So that general area over there.

Uh the bid came in at uh 391,150 and 50 cents uh from Milwaukee General Construction, and that is what the board recommended moving forward with.

All right, Alder Person Piper.

So moved.

Alder Person with Tusca.

Second.

All right, any comments or questions?

All right, the uh motion is to approve the low bid from Milwaukee General Construction in the amount of 391,150 and 50 cents.

Please vote when it is before you and Everett.

All right, uh that does pass uh 14 to zero.

Uh back to you, Alex.

Um, the last item is the uh 2026 Asphalt Street Utility Repair Project.

Uh the board recommended moving forward with a low bid from always contractors, the amount of 192,690 dollars.

Okay, alder person piper.

So moved.

Alder Person with Tuscan?

Second.

All right, any discussion?

All right, there is a motion on the floor to approve the low bid from always contractors in the amount of 192,690 dollars.

Please vote when it is before you.

All right, that motion does pass.

14 to 0.

Thank you very much, Alex.

Very much appreciated.

Uh director of public works report.

Anything?

No other report tonight, thank you.

All right, thank you.

City attorney's report.

Nothing.

All right, city administrators report.

No report.

No report.

All right.

Um, so the next up is mayor's report and referrals.

Um, we did have the common council committee assignments attached to the agenda, and I believe we still have to have those approved appropriately, right, Brian?

Yes.

So is there a motion to approve the committee appointments?

Alderperson Molson.

I move to approve.

All right, Alder Person Piper.

Second.

All right.

Uh any questions or comments?

All right, then please vote when that is before you.

All right, that motion does pass 11 to 3.

Um, council seating chart was also attached.

Do we have to vote on that, Brian?

For the seating chart.

I think customarily we do approve that, don't we?

I don't remember.

Maybe not.

I take that back.

I think that's in the in the mayor's discretion.

Okay.

Yeah, I'm sorry.

Everyone clearly got the memo, so good job on that.

Uh all right, proclamations.

Uh, we do have one proclamation tonight.

Very exciting.

I love libraries, so I'm glad this is my first one.

Uh so we are uh doing a proclamation for National Library Week, uh, whereas libraries have long served as trusted and treasured institutions where people of all backgrounds can be together and connect, and whereas libraries build strong communities through transformative services programs and expertise, and whereas library librarians and library workers empower their communities to make informed decisions by providing free access to information, and whereas libraries are looking beyond their traditional roles and providing more opportunities for community engagement and delivering new services that connect closely with patrons' needs.

And whereas we are proud of our Waukesha Public Library and the vital services it provides to our community, and whereas the 2025 Waukesha Public Library was visited by 311,246 people and issued 3,844 new library cards, saving patrons that checked out one million thirteen thousand nine hundred and seventeen, saving them uh a total of fifteen million two hundred and fifty-four thousand three hundred and ninety dollars.

It's a lot of numbers.

And whereas libraries, librarians, library workers, and supporters across the United States are celebrating National Library Week.

I therefore uh Alicia Holvin Slavin, mayor of the city of Waukesha do hereby proclaim April 19th through the 25th, 2026 as National Library Week.

So excellent.

Uh moving right along.

Are there any referrals?

All right, no referrals.

Uh so absent any objections, we are adjourned.

Thank you all.