Common Council - Regular Meeting

unmute. Order of the common council, March 10th, 7 p.m. Can I have a roll call, please? Boy, here. Stubby neighbor here. Hill here. Chris Ball here. Sorenson here. Five. Thank you. Um, we'll have the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance 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.

Uh, number four, general public comments. Um, Andy, I'll have you first and Sue, you can talk on the actual number, unless you want to talk early and get going. It's up to you. Okay. Um, Andy, state your name and address, please. And Alexandra Rogers, 113 South Church Street, Berlin, Wisconsin, 5493.

All right. Um, good evening, council members, and thank you for the opportunity to speak. Um, I did put a letter with a little more than I'm going to read about my thoughts and what I want to present tonight. I'd like to propose that business owners who operate within the city of Berlin, even if they they do not reside in the city limits, be allowed to run for council and other committees, provided they own the building in which their business operates. Local businesses are a core part of our city's economic health. Their owners invest significant time, money, and energy here every day. They maintain properties. They attract visitors. They contribute to the overall vitality of Berlin. In many ways, they are as deeply connected to the city's success as the residents who live here. Allowing these business owners to run for these seats would bring two key benefits. First, it would broaden the pool of candidates who understand the economic realities of operating Berlin. Their perceptive their perception on business on issues like zoning, infrastructure, and business regulations can help council make informed and practical decisions and other committees, not just council. Second, it strengthens collaboration between the city and business communities. When decision makers include those who work here on a daily basis, we gain more balanced council and one that reflects most both residential and commercial needs. This proposal is not about giving special privilege. It's about recognizing the people who contribute to Berlin's growth and ensuring their voices can help shape this future. Thank you for considering this idea and your continued service to the city.

Thank you. And Andy, I will just tell you right off the bat, that was something that I was passionate about when I when I ran. Um it gets a little bit trickier with with um the voting issue. Um, but I have and state statutes and all that good stuff, but I have asked Jesse, we have talked about trying to open it up to at least boards and boards where especially um a business owner input would be valuable. So, it's not falling upon deaf ears. We have been looking into it. So, I just want to leave you hanging there. Is this open to discussion? No. I mean, if you have a comment, I wouldn't mind a comment, but um yeah, we can't take action on this.

I was just wondering as she was speaking, that's why I thought maybe we were opening to public opinion here. It's technically you you we can't take action. Yes. And it's not in the agenda, but if you have a comment to make, you can make a comment. my my only concern in opening up to business owners and I've heard other business owners say that that have businesses in the community and I thought it seemed like a good idea but then I thought what happens when Sam Walmart walks in and says I'm going to drive the city towards making sure that all the Walmart things happen. You know what I'm saying? Like then you run into like outside outside business owners that aren't even like local people but they have a business within the city limits having a vote. Sure.

That that would be my only concern is how do you govern that? Okay. All right. I'll make a motion to see. Thank you. F. Who second it? Missy. Okay. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed?

Thank you. Um, we'll go on to Okay. On to the consent agenda. The consent agenda contains a I'm learn um the consent agenda contains item items which staff considers to be routine and have already been discussed and recommended by a committee or commission at a previous meeting. I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion by Victoria, second by Terry. Uh, roll call, please. Sorenson.

Hi. Stubby. Hi. Boy. Hi. Frisbol. Hi. Neighbor. Hi. Hill. Hi. Thank you.

And the consent agenda. Number 12 is the um amend employee handbook. recommendation is approve and a approve amendments to the introduction general government and vacation holidays and leave section of the employee handbook to be implemented immediately. So within your packet or online version, we had the two sections that we had talked about before with the um track changes. So you could see what was um proposed as well as a hard or excuse me a full copy um within integrated into the entire um handbook because the hope is to adopt this handbook moving forward so that we can utilize the the new pieces of it and do that each time that you approve a new section and then at the very end do an overall okay this is the the final document approval. Um, just for your awareness, I have not actually sent these pieces to the city attorney. If you wish for me to do that, I certainly can and you could adopt pending his review. Um, if if you would like that for for these pieces, I certainly can. Or we can send a couple things to him later or final and make tweaks. I wasn't sure at what point you wanted to go through that review. I have a question not necessarily related to any of these.

Okay. And I don't have the full handbook in front of me. Did we ever have a probation period in the handbook? I do not recall. I read the whole thing. It's not my mind. I'd have to specifically look for that, but I don't recall there being information yet. Okay. I'm just wondering if that's something we should consider just for going forward. Um, but then also what happens when the sections we are approving then conflict with the other sections we haven't gotten to yet.

I know. So that's I guess that was a fear of mine I had knowing the implementation immediately. I mean what are your pros and cons? Is there is there a reasoning behind

the reason that I wanted to implement immediately was to address some of our um things that we talked about for recruitment specifically um basically the the leave section. Um it all needs to be updated and approved and and all of that. But I guess if you were comfortable just approving that that second section that we reviewed um or or even if because it's it's vacations, holidays and leaves is that section. We also did the introduction and the general government piece um was the first section that we looked at and then the second section was the vacations and leaves and stuff. So, I guess my hope was to just um imp implement that stuff right away so that when we have u future recruits, it's it's in place. But if you if you were okay with perhaps um implementing the the vacation schedule changes and the um holiday schedule changes just as a separate and then do the full adoption after we make sure everything ties together. I can understand that as well.

Are they actively looking for recruitment that this is an issue immediately? The department's currently looking for people right now. We actually finally were able to hire. Um so current I'm not aware of of one at the very at this very moment. Um but it can happen any any time. How does um implementation work for moving around some of this vacation um the the weeks? Do we have a lot that this would affect um like the year 13 or not? Sorry, what was the update?

Oh, okay. Moving to year six versus seven and moving to year um 13 versus 16. Yeah. Um so our thought was that we weren't going to rent them or anything that upon adoption um whomever was in that we would just change their accumulation um amount sorry at that time starting with that pay period. So if if you wish to to wait for that um it would just be happen later on. I mean, it's certainly a recruitment issue and I would really like to see it happen, but it is, excuse me, it's a retention issue. It's not necessarily a recruitment issue. I mean, people will ask, but most most aren't really right away worried about are we currently worried about that. It's a concern that a number of have have voiced. So, I'm also going to throw out there I did have only one um reach out and ask that we um look into the years um asking for a little bit condensing it a little bit more um that the reasoning behind um it's one of the easiest ways that since we can't pay more um that we offer more of an incentive. Um, so they were asking for year 10 to bump up to four weeks and year 15 to five weeks. Currently we don't have five weeks. We only go to four. Correct.

No, we do have five weeks, but it's at 20 years. So they were asking to condense that a little bit. Um, when I asked talked to Jesse, you know, is longevity a concern? You know, has that been brought? I think the hiring um the right off the bat has been the concern or the issue holding us back. as far as longevity for employees. This is the first time I've heard of that. Um, but I just wanted to throw that out for anybody else to have any input. County maxes out at four weeks. Um, and as far as not that it's picking up on there, but for everybody else,

um, the county maxes out at four weeks, not that we need to follow that, but also, correct me if I'm wrong, vacation here, you're allowed to carry over what you earn, correct? So, okay.

Okay. So then we need to figure out I mean is everybody okay with implementing this right away? Are there any concerns? Um do we want to wait till the end? Obviously Jesse is saying that there's some concern with at least the hiring portion or um obviously we're not hiring a lot. No, not at all. I I like I said I think vacation acral I can't not the chart but um for new hires as well as the holidays I think that's a question that you get I like the idea of checking with the attorney to see if we implement this immediately and there's contradicting things so there how do we problem solve that

and the first holiday that we're changing is Christmas Eve yeah we have some more of a recruitment thing then

I'd be I'd be interested in doing that 6 to 10 10 to 15 like condensing the vacation just to give them more incentive to stay. My only question is um as to impact like how many people that would give an extra week, how you have impact, how that would infect up impact staffing towards and then um if that would become a problem right away for you because it it look sounds like a good idea but now you're talking about an extra week maybe for three people and does that you know change staffing for the year? I think you also have to look at the longevity of some of the people here and realize that you have people that are currently probably on the cusp of 20 yearsish or the people that have already made 20 and they had to wait that long. Like that is a very long time for somebody to stay and to see somebody who hasn't reached that like that that could be an issue. I mean we are already adjusting the scale. So can

I don't see anything out of line with these types of the time frames for them from personal experience what's presented to us what's presented I don't think that I think that they're very reasonable okay so we don't nobody wants to explore or did you want to explore more do we want Jesse to come back with any more numbers or are we okay with what was presented to us I was generally in support of the idea but the rest of the board I don't know we've just heard from too that seem to disagree. So, I don't know. I'm okay with what's presented. Okay. Um, let's stick with what is presented then.

Um, Jesse, could you just have that run that by Eric then first to make sure that there's no nothing else we need to be aware of or like Christina had suggested. So when I I want to make sure I understand what the proposed motion would be would be to approve pending review by the city attorney or you just want to adopt a piece and have them review this section and imple to get ready for other sections which are reviewed first before we approve it. Um I I don't think I've heard anything to have them review it. I would prefer if you would review it so that we I think the entirety of it to make sure that we're in compliance with anything we might not be aware of,

but also okay

what we need to do when it's not jing with another part of the handbook since we've not gone through the whole thing. No, I think that's a very fair point and I think I can send him the pieces that um you guys in theory approved and ask him to look at that and then let him know that we're going to continue to move through the handbook and if he could continue to um review and let us know if he sees anything that is out of line. So with that plan would it be acceptable then to not not adopt each section as we go but then it is approved pending anything needing to be

I can't think of the word but you know what I mean yeah to all be correspond to each other um if that is the case would you be accepting of just approving the vacation I'm still opinion we don't have anybody We're like, we're not actively recruiting somebody right this minute, right? We're not actively recruiting somebody right now. So, there's not a hurry. There shouldn't be this big rush. Like, it is coming. I don't I really don't understand what they the immediate I think it's going to take a significant amount of time to get through this whole thing. I

I do. I mean, if you look at it's there's a lot of sections. You guys takes a long time to to get through it. I mean, you gave us five sections in one month. How many sections we have?

Some are more than others. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. I gave you three sections, but introduction and then general employment are fairly class. Oh, okay. No, I'm sorry. I was looking at all the headers on the first section.

No, you're right. There's all kinds of things under each one of the sections. So, we are sending to Eric to review the the changes that we have discussed that are presented um and then bring it back for approval. Is that what we're suggesting? I guess there's a couple of different ways to do that, but my concern would be like if I tell them, okay, please review the section and then make sure that it doesn't contradict with any other sections. Yeah.

Then we're going to pay for our full review every time we send them sections. Yes. I don't know that I necessarily need him to review anything else in it. I need him to be able to tell us when one contradicts the other, what do we go with? Or we do need to wait until the entire thing is done. And maybe just because we're on this first one, get his feedback on that case so that he Yeah, that's okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. You're just asking for if we adopt in sections and something doesn't jive, what do we do for that?

Or can we put a amendment in there saying the new section is, you know, the part we're going with until it's updated? Yeah. What we need to do to make sure we're Do you need a motion on this or just the guidance you're okay with? Well, I think amendments, but let me know um if somebody can put that in a motion and then um I will assume you want me to bring it back once I have that answer and then you can adopt that those sections. So, you need a motion to send it to the city attorney for review guidance. I think so. Just to make sure we're all on the same page.

Yeah. I'll make a motion that we send the these sections amended sections to the city for guidance. Second motion by Terry, second by Missy. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you. Number 13 is a class B picnic license and class sorry I'm class B class B okay so two class B the class B picnic license and the class B license for the ABC group in discussion of let freedom ring event the recommendation is to approve the temporary class B and class B license for ABC group um to allow the sale of fermented all beverages and wine at the left freedom ring event on July 3rd. I also have um Sue's um public comment card. Um so Sue, if you want to come up to the podium. I'm Sue and I'm with the ABC group and I would just like to talk about our event that's coming up and if you have any questions. Um, I would like to tell you that our plans are well underway for this year's Let Freedom Ring and our 250th anniversary celebrations on July 3rd. It is another pre community event. We will again have three live bands, games, raffles, food vendors, petting zoo, um balloon, artists, rock hunt, and of course our dollar dogs and lots of family fun. We thank the city for the help that we always receive and for having the city fireworks the same evening. Working together, we do achieve a better community. Any questions?

I did just want to mention that the group is um considering having them shoot off I'm going to call it strong houser um again this year. They did that last year. I don't know if anybody recalls but there was a um a group of military with the um equipment and I saw a lot of people over there checking it out and discussing. Yeah, they had a number of soldiers over there and there were there were adults and kids and they were fascinated with it and uh uh Sergeant Newower now that was in Berlin now is in Madison, but he called me and he said because he has roots here and connections that they want to do it again and so I said well um I want you to do it again too. So he is they are going to they are planning on coming. Great.

So just want to make sure there were any concerns that you heard about that. No. Okay. Sounded great. Anybody have any questions for Sue? Any comments? Just that it's the most question. Yeah. Yeah. Are you all coming? Yeah. All right. I think you I think I'm bartending again. So thank you Sue and the whole ABC group for putting this on. really is a fixture in Berlin and such a great thing for the community. It's very appreciated. Thank you. Thank you. Well, we we have a lot of support and we appreciate all everybody's help and uh hope to do it a lot longer.

Thank you. Just everybody else said we all we all talk about it's such a great great event and we're happy to to be part of it and have it in our community. So, thank you. With that, we are looking for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve temporary class B and class B license for the ABC group, Inc. to allow for the sale of fermented malt beverages and wine at the left freedom ring event at 455 river drive shelter house. I'll second them. Motion by Sam, second by Terry. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you guys for your help. On to number 14 is the race and repair inquiry for the garage at 255 South Sesco Street. Recommendation is accept the findings as prepared by the building inspector and authorize the race and repair order for the garage at 255 Southwest Street. Personal order as presented.

Okay. So um the picture is probably explained it as well as I could but uh this is a property that we've been trying to I say manage much more softly and this is the sort of next stage of escalation for this. We are asking council um for the permission to u proceed with the raise and repair hoping that they do the repair or raise of this and and salvage this being a habitable house in the city. It's just a garage correct Tim. Not the house. Oh yeah. I'm just Yeah. functioning as part of what I would hope would serve the house there.

Right. But the repair order itself or order is just for the garage. The home is not. Yeah. Just for the garage. I think they will encourage them to also make sure that the house is kept up because that's I believe part of the history of the back and forth we'd have with them. Um yeah. So, this is a property that's been um discussed before, I'm assuming, or not discussed with us, but a problem. Yes.

Yeah. Yeah. We like to actually say see one of those two paths go forward for this and that would improve definitely would be improved by either being removed or fixed. So just help me. Um what is the timeline for them then? 30 days. 30 days. Okay. But to get to the 30 days, there would have had to been steps taken before this. Correct. Yes.

Okay. Um in the future when this comes forward again, can you have a little bit more like we used to do for the old ones, a little bit more of a history? Yeah, and there will be some I mean, yeah, the we do have a lot of that information together. We just haven't it wasn't put in the packet, but uh yeah, I'd say especially once we have motions and dialogue and that from council that will absolutely be included in something of a ongoing report and uh when when will you update this then? Um we'll issue the raise and repair raise or repair order. Will you will you be following up with us after that? I say as needed.

Okay. Unless you will have a want to add anything to the motion. I believe that's what you've done before. Does anybody have any questions for Tim or any suggestions or things you'd like to see? when when you come back with that um followup, it would I would love to see the leadup to it, the communications history. Okay. Yeah.

Like I said, we used to have that especially when we talked about more popular ones and we had that background um that we were able to pull for the properties just to show the steps that you've taken. Um I would like to see that in the future. I think my memo probably includes much of what I know about uh we tried I don't know if we have the most specific documentation for the calls that have gone out that have been left unanswered there were word number in end of 2023 and throughout 24 and then it's just it's definitely past that point now. So this has been an issue since 23. Yes. Some things I didn't I'm not reading the right

there. There's a whole Oh, on the I'm reading the cliff notes then. I'm not reading I thought. Okay. I don't have the full pack. I just have the front is that's all it is. It says right there background in November 23. Oh yeah, right there. Okay. So, it's been an issue for Yeah. years unfortunately. And if they would have reached out to the city, I'm sure the city been more than happy to work with them throughout the repair of their their property.

There are some Yeah, I mean, we know of a few potential programs and I think around that date and time we were trying to promote on behalf of I mean some national funding that was around some state funding. I mean, if that's what they need that then certainly always go to try to help people with that. To your knowledge, is this a rental? Yes. Okay. Do you know what the ownership is local or not? It says Ashkosh is the mailing address of the LLC. I don't know who the owners of the LLC are though. I believe they are in Ashkosh. I think I've talked with I've talked with this person about other properties. I don't know. I don't believe I've talked with them about this property.

All right. We are look if there's no other discussion then we're looking for a motion for that raise or repair order. I'll move to wave the committee the whole discussion and move directly to discuss and vote on accept the findings as repaired by the building inspector and authorize the race and repair order for the garage at 255 southwest fesco 2061592000000 second a motion and a second all in favor say I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Number 15 is the borrowing engagement letter affair. The recommendation is to approve the engagement letter affair and authorize the city's administrator city administrator signature to allow preparation and future implementation of the $2 million 2026 2027 capital borrowing.

In order to borrow the borrowing in the time frame, may you need to get going with with her to get everything in place. Um costs as noted in the engagement letter are one and a half% less than $5,000. There will be other costs as well, not necessarily to bear such as if they need to um have counseling or rating down or anything like that. So I just wanted you to be aware that we're looking at at least 35,000 in cost. That's to do the actual crime. It's what it is. So, if they're if you're comfortable and you want to stick to that time frame, then we'll get um they're engaged. They're aware and they're starting to put things together for us. Any questions? We had that 35 built in, right? We knew we were borrowing into the budget.

I will look um I apologize. I will also talk with Barrett about whether or not we can fund the borrowing with the borrowing, if that makes sense. because within our plan that we have right now, we had about 90,000 of contingency. So that's my hope is that we can fund it with funding. That makes sense to a little legalities on that, but that's kind of was my thing. But okay. And then Scott's not allowed to order his stuff before them though. And the fire department they start up there.

That's a great question. I was talking to Barrett about technically um you can if you do a special resolution prior to the borrowing and when you do that that'll allow you to um spend money up to 60 days prior to the actual um borrowing itself. So, probably next month's time frame, we'll bring that resolution to you if we're looking at a May June borrowing just because if something were to happen with the price being that some of that equipment in other countries um or we have a much better deal, we could front it and then pay ourselves back with that just gives flexibility. We'd be requesting it most of the two million probably about 500,000 to be able to do that with because the biggest piece of equity that we're most concerned about right now is that snowblower and that was you know a couple hundred thousand.

Was that engagement letter included in our packet? Because I didn't get a copy of it. I apologize. Did I miss it? Um you had the D crew during the um packets this week. So I apologize because normally Britney say crew has crew. Great. So, it all would like this pack. I would love to just look at it and end it with my apologies, but I typically don't ask for all of it. So,

um included in that is also the costs from a $2.5 million borrowing from another community. Um because I just asked for some additional information on how the costs work. So there's the letter and then there's another piece that doesn't really look related, but that's what that is. So this one might have been part of the in the beginning the consent agenda one. Is that No, you were talking the actual letter. I I apologize. I think it was on the electronic version. Yeah. Josh said it's on it.

Yeah. I apologize. When I made the copies, like I said, B team, I apologize. I missed a hard copy. Is it I was going to say is this motion right?

Yes. On the recommendation that be sufficient. So I'm sorry because I was looking I didn't listen super great. What's the cost of this that we're talking about that's that we're going to ask if it can be rolled in? 35,000 35,000

it could be more depending if it has to be rated and if we have to go with our council as well but fair piece is 1 and a half% plus 5,000 which is about 35. I'll make a motion to approve the engagement letter with Baird and authorize the city administrator signature to allow the preparation of future implementation of the $2 million 2026 2027 capital borrowing. Second motion by Sam, second by Victoria. All in favor say I. I.

Any opposed? Motion carries. Number 16, old business. Does anybody have any old business to add to the agenda or for future agendas? new business. Any new business? If we want to add um Miss Rogers uh recommendation to discuss allowing We can add that to the next um future committee of the whole to discuss some options. Um can you have some stuff prepared from our attorney? I know we talked about that before. um what it would be allowed, what's possible, that kind of stuff. Yep.

Boards and boards that council is not but I can ask a question. Okay. Um any other new business? If not, on to number 18. Motion to second. Motion by Josh, second by Terry. All in favor say I. I. Any opposed? Motion carried. Uh 7:36.