Farmland Preservation Plan Steering Committee - Regular Meeting

Tuesday, January 14, 2025
Transcript
Video
Agenda

About this meeting

Government Body
Farmland Preservation Plan Steering Committee
Meeting Type
Farmland Preservation Plan Steering Committee
Location
Dane County, WI
Meeting Date
January 14, 2025

Transcript

831 sections (from 870 segments)

0:00 – 0:240

So I will call to order the Dane County Heritage Preservation Commission of January 14. I'll call it to order. Our first consideration is the minutes. And so if you have read them and want to approve them, I'll look for someone to move such.

0:241

I move approval of the minutes.

0:262

This is Tim. I second.

0:290

Okay. Any corrections or additions, revisions? Hearing none. All in favor, please say aye.

0:382

Aye. Any

0:40 – 1:060

any nos? Minutes pass. Thank you. So now we are going to start to dig in on the nominations. I take it presentations is next, even though it's D. It should be C, I take it. And we'll just take the review of the nominations, the marker project. This is where, I guess, you might want to say a few things, Brian.

1:06 – 1:383

Sure. So hopefully people had an opportunity to review some of the things on the website about what with some of the detail about each of these nominations. It came from a variety of different folks. We had, I think, 42 nominations entirely, and actually 43, I think, in total. And then what staff have done at the request of this commission at the last meeting was to try and put together a scoring rubric or sheet.

1:38 – 2:403

And then based on the recommendations that we discussed at our last meeting, so we're talking the spreadsheet that we have up on the screen now talks about the proposal, who it was submitted by, if it was submitted on behalf of an organization, what organization that was, the community that was identified by the nominee about who it represented, a staff assessment of whether or not it served underrepresented communities. We also did some research to see if there was an existing marker at some of those locations using the historic marker database, and those are linked where we could find those markers. In some cases, we had multiple nominations. Sometimes you'll see these actually submitted, you know, two different items there in some cases, because there's some slightly different aspects of it. They could be, it could potentially be two markers, but it's the same site or same event.

2:40 – 2:543

But in some cases, we also had more than one nomination for particular site. So that's noted in that column. The next column is blank because we felt that this

2:544

was something that the Commission would be in

2:553

the best position to evaluate, which is the historic or cultural significance. So ranking the each of those sites by those criteria.

3:05 – 3:263

also had a criteria as to whether it was on public land. There are three categories here. One is three is fully public. Two is that it's private, but there's public right of way nearby, sidewalk, pathway, something like that. And one is completely private without readily accessible public right of way.

3:28 – 4:083

Willing landowner, most of these are going be not known because we haven't contacted many of them. In some cases, in the few cases that we have, that's indicated here. I don't think there's anyone who's identified as one. Most of these are not known. Part of what staff was anticipating as part of this process is that when after the Commission narrows the field down a bit, the things that it feels are responsive to the charge of the historic marker program and that they serve underrepresented communities and they're historically significant, Staff would be prepared to contact all those landowners.

4:09 – 4:413

We have mailing addresses for them. We'll be sending them postcards with information about, you know, what the nomination is and solicit their opinion and time for the public hearing that hopefully the Commission will set the timeframe for that. And then, finally, the last piece is whether or not they're visible or accessible to the public. So three being very accessible, two being moderately accessible, one poorly accessible, and zero inaccessible. Those were the criteria that we used to sort of evaluate these.

4:41 – 5:193

And then I had sent the spreadsheet out, I think, the commissioners earlier last month, and our Chair, Rick Bernstein, took a stab at identifying the ones that he felt were appropriate for the historical markers programs, and those are highlighted in yellow. So that's the work that's been done so far. I think it's up to the chair and the Commission's prerogative how they want to proceed with this. If people want me to bring up any of the more detailed information about any of these items from the website, we can do that as well. Yeah,

5:22 – 6:140

so I'll just add that the highlighting I did was just my interpretation of whether or not they met the primary criteria as an underrepresented immunity appropriate for a marker. So I just kind of weeded out or did kind of a quick cut off the top of those that I felt didn't really meet that criteria as representing an underrepresented community. But it's always open for discussion. But I thought it would be easier, as we go through this list, if we could cut off from the top things that just don't meet their criteria. So Brian, are there any comments or questions at this point?

6:141

I'm now finding it hard to bring up that document. Yours. Okay. I think it's attached to the revised agenda.

6:213

Should be.

6:221

Yeah. But like the link

6:240

You had it a minute ago, didn't you?

6:251

I thought I did.

6:284

Anyway. That's the proposal scoring worksheet.

6:311

Yeah. It's that it's with the yellow on it. So it's

6:350

Oh, revised? It's the yeah. It should be that first,

6:382

the management.

6:381

Never mind.

6:39 – 6:540

Okay. We're back. Yep. Does everyone have that in front of them? Because I I think, Brian, what we wanna do is figure out how we rank these in terms of that criteria, cultural significance

6:550

Historic cultural significance. So that's where the commission will add its viewpoint in that column to see Yes. How these rank.

7:043

And I'm gonna have over here, I'm gonna have the Excel version of that up, so I can enter those in, we can take notes with that.

7:120

So is that our job right now, you think, Brian? To kind of go through what we have?

7:17 – 7:283

I think so, yes. And then if there's any of those that you want to see more detail on, let me know, and we can go to the to the map, the online map, and and bring that up.

7:281

And we can also do that ourselves, right, with

7:313

Yes. You that those links should be in the agenda. Links to what? Links to the online map.

7:41 – 7:590

Oh, okay. The map. Gotcha. So are people comfortable voting on these? I guess each person would rank it one through five, and then we'll do kind of a averaging of the score. Sure.

7:59 – 8:303

I just wanted to speak up real quickly and just mention that we do have some participants here with us. I've if they want to answer a question or be available for questions, to raise their hand, and we'll and I'll bring them up. We have Heather Bailey, Ibrahim Syed, Janet Murphy, Jason Tisch, and Jennifer Dorril on as participants today.

8:310

So we're allowing them to ask questions?

8:333

I'm sorry. Those those are the people who registered. We had Heather Bailey, Janet Murphy, and Jennifer Dorril are actually in attendance right now.

8:410

So are we to allow them to ask questions? Or It's

8:443

the commission's discretion.

8:460

Okay. Mhmm. Should we give them an opportunity for comment at this point?

8:50 – 9:013

There is an item on the agenda for comments on items not on the agenda. Right. And they'd be certainly welcome to speak at that, but I I leave it to the commission's discretion whether they wanna entertain.

9:020

Well, I recognize a couple names as people who submitted some of these nominations. Correct? Yes. Do people want to hear from them now?

9:121

I don't mind, but I thought that that's sort of what we were doing later, was having public

9:16 – 9:353

There'll be a public hearing, yes, later. So, I mean, everyone who submitted one will have an opportunity to speak on their proposal or on other proposals when you set the public hearing. So there's no obligation, I think, on the Commission's part to hear from people except from the items on the not on the agenda.

9:351

But they took the time to show up.

9:363

They took the time to show up.

9:371

And I appreciate that. So I don't mind.

9:410

I would wouldn't mind giving them each two to three minutes to just give us their viewpoints.

9:49 – 10:083

Is there well, let me just ask this. Is there any of the attendees here who wish to speak at this time? That's good. And if so, just raise your hand. Okay. I'm not seeing anything at this point.

10:08 – 10:220

Oh, okay. Alright. So we'll save that towards the end. Thank you for being here. Are people comfortable with working on this list using my edits with those highlighted in yellow?

10:231

I am, but I would like some backup. And I'm not able to sign into the map, you know, just to be able to

10:293

You're not able to sign into the map.

10:324

It's asked for an account.

10:331

History one?

10:343

Oh. Make sure

10:354

that I'm just doing Okay.

10:363

I thought that was I thought I had made that public. Let me see if I can fix that now.

10:434

I forgot that.

10:441

As much as I'd like to have yet another account and password in the world, see if we can solve that.

10:503

I'm sorry about that.

10:513

alright. No. It that's an error on my part.

11:155

Should be

11:193

let's see here.

11:394

Actually got that, Brian, and I went back in and tried again.

11:461

I'll try again too.

11:521

Yep. This time I'm in.

11:535

I don't

11:541

know if you did something or not.

11:583

Alright. Well,

11:591

appreciate that.

12:014

Oh, nice. Yep. You're in too. Yeah. I was going through the whole creating an account thing and all.

12:082

There it is.

12:094

Skip that. So

12:103

okay. Everyone in?

12:13 – 12:390

Alright. Well, I think the first one we wanna look at is the Ada Deer home. And we're to rank it one through five, five being most significant, one least. And I will start it off, and I will rank that a five. And then I'll

12:394

I'm sorry. What's the scale? One through five is the scale, but what's the

12:433

Five is the most significant. One would be the least.

12:481

I would agree.

12:500

Can we give it a five? Erica gives it a five.

12:524

I I was gonna do, like, a three.

12:570

Patrick, was that a three? Three. Tim and Can you see my hand, though? I can't.

13:063

Oh, sorry.

13:072

That's alright. I see myself on the video, but not you guys can't see it. I held up five fingers.

13:113

Five. Okay. Five.

13:131

So, Brian, you're scoring while we're doing this.

13:160

Right? Yep. And then

13:183

So that's I'm sorry. That was three five and 13. Is that correct?

13:283

3. And

13:290

313. Alfonso?

13:336

Yes, 5.

13:35 – 13:490

5. Okay. Next one is Bernard Bernard. Bernard residence hall. I will give that a 3.

13:546

Shall we just go alphabetical? So would that be Kurt, did you I'll I'll give it a three. I guess we don't need to. For me, that's also a three.

14:091

I'm gonna give it a five for now, and I'm gonna

14:140

Hedge your bets.

14:151

Hedge my bets. Just because I

14:170

honestly did not do a all women stuff column. So I've

14:23 – 14:496

got a quick question. I know that we can score based on what we've got here, and this was a question that I had whenever we found out, you know, that I was gonna ask, but then we digressed to our guests in the audience. So at least one of these has information. The the the the daycare facility, jab designed by the Japanese architect. So Japanese Americans have an interest in that, but so do architects.

14:50 – 15:246

And so whenever we think about cultural history or cultural significance, I I I think you know? I mean, I'm comfortable with our current approach, but I wonder sometimes if we didn't have other information. Like, for instance, does this appeal to a different professional community or a different segment of the population? If that wouldn't also get us to think differently. Again, I'm comfortable with what we're doing.

15:26 – 15:470

I think we can add to it. I think we're working off what we know. But, yeah, I think architecture could be a level of significance. But I think our primary objective is underrepresented communities, so I think that should be our our primary interest. Does that make sense?

15:476

Total sense and agreed completely on that basis. It would I we'll we'll see if, quote, unquote, tiebreakers

15:560

Okay. Might be needed.

15:591

And my question for a member of the audience?

16:020

You have a question for a member

16:043

of the

16:041

partner. Jason Tisch? Are you there?

16:093

Jason is not in attendance.

16:121

Oh. Oh,

16:120

I thought I heard that.

16:133

He's registered to attend, but he doesn't

16:150

know you.

16:15 – 16:271

Got it. Okay. Because, again, I just, not having done enough research here, just wanted some backup on whether Barnard is Madison Landmark or National Register. I

16:270

It's probably on the National Register.

16:291

Well, probably, but is it?

16:310

Because there was a campus. Well, the lower campus is all part of a historic district,

16:371

Bassman I like I needed to have done more

16:413

work I safety think the on the interactive map, we should have the AHI link for it. Let me see.

16:514

Oh, yes you do.

16:523

Some information.

17:011

Not listed.

17:033

Barnard.

17:031

Not listed. Not listed. Nope. Okay. Okay. That's what I need to know.

17:090

Okay. Has I don't think everyone's voted in terms of Nope. Bernard. Go back to

17:163

our spreadsheet. Okay. I've got two threes and a five so far.

17:280

Tim would vote.

17:303

Sorry. Tim what?

17:312

Tim votes three. Okay.

17:354

Three here as well. I'm we're flying by to see my pants trying to read the stuff on the interactive map now that I've gotten into it.

17:411

So Yeah. And then finding the thing on the map that

17:455

we're talking about. Yeah.

17:463

The if it helps, the column on the side is in alphabetical order.

17:511

It does help. Oh.

17:564

In the interactive map? Oh, yeah. It is. Okay.

18:01 – 18:123

And you can click on if you click on the picture, it will take you to the detail as well. Okay. I think that's all the votes for Barnard Residence Hall. Okay. Cardinal Barr. Cardinal Barr.

18:150

I'll I'll rank that a four, and that is on the National Register.

18:231

Yeah. Thank you.

18:244

Five for me. Five? Five.

18:286

Four for me or

18:342

Five. Tim says five.

18:383

One second.

18:410

Knocking them down. Carson and Beatrice Gully Home.

18:473

This was one we got two nominations for.

18:500

Oh, we did? Yes. Oh, that's cool. Oh, one's anonymous, and one's me.

18:550

Should I recuse myself?

18:583

I your decision.

19:020

Okay. Well, if unless there's an objection, I will vote. I will give it a five.

19:096

Yeah. I actually agree. It should be a five, and I don't see any reason for one of us to recuse ourselves from nomination.

19:180

Thank you.

19:201

I would also give it a five.

19:244

This is called

19:262

Tim says five. Yeah.

19:321

Yours yours is odd.

19:364

I'm throwing up my luster. No.

19:411

Try zooming your map out, maybe.

19:473

Yeah. It will react to your map.

19:494

Oh, so

19:503

I have to all the way out, you'll find it again. Mhmm.

19:521

Yeah. If you get too close, it's only showing what

19:554

it's Didn't realize that. I just thought it had everything. Okay.

19:581

Also, a spelling error on African American on that Mhmm. In the map. Okay. Just FYI.

20:023

I will correct that. It's probably how it was submitted to us.

20:114

Yeah. I have to follow a link now.

20:270

Patrick, I think Yeah.

20:280

Give it a five. Five. Okay. Catholic Multicultural Center.

20:353

And this also received two nominations.

20:370

I see. I will give it a three.

20:446

I will give it a four.

21:152

This is Tim. I'll give it a three. K. Four.

21:230

Thank you. Dividing ridge, excavated.

21:271

I wanna just get back to the CCC buildings.

21:300

Oh, I'm sorry.

21:311

No. It's okay. I just thought it was curious if the community identified was conservationists.

21:401

And maybe somebody could speak to that, only because it seems to me that though Are we

21:483

That was what was identified by the nominator.

21:51 – 22:093

So person, the individual who submitted that, that's what they filled out on the survey form. It's not to say that that's the only group that might, it might represent. I mean, I think to make independent judgments of that. Yeah,

22:111

because the CCC built things for everybody.

22:143

Right.

22:15 – 22:341

And so we're not necessarily wouldn't be calling attention to it because it's important to the conservationists, but it's important to everybody because the conservationists built it. So that's why I found that was I don't have a better recommendation except everybody, you know, which is not underrepresented then.

22:350

Right.

22:361

So maybe I just talk myself out of it.

22:380

Okay. No. It's worth just making sure.

22:411

Anybody else?

22:420

That that's similar to my thinking is that it didn't really fit the model that we've devised for this project.

22:481

Yeah. I think I think having said that all out loud, I would agree. And I think yep. Withdrawn.

22:57 – 23:140

Okay. Anybody else about the four there, Civilian Conservation Corps and the Forest Depot? Anybody feel that we should give that more of a chance, or are we comfortable moving on to Dividing Ridge?

23:181

Don't pull that.

23:19 – 23:320

Okay. Dividing Ridge, we have two of one excavated, one hilltop. Dividing Ridge excavated, I will give that a two.

23:331

I would recommend that they be merged.

23:360

Okay. Anybody else feel

23:38 – 23:551

With I mean, because the hilltop is a physical thing that's there that you can see and understand. And then if the information about it includes the excavated, then we don't have to deal with where do we put the sign on a thing that doesn't exist.

23:56 – 24:273

Well, to be clear, maybe I can show you this on the map, but there is there's a possible spot where you could have a marker that would show the cliff face. So Okay. There's there's a park I'm sorry. The cliff face from the excavated area. If you, so there's it's actually in part of the the operational grounds of the Henry Vilas Zoo.

24:28 – 24:443

But there is actually at that location, you it would be at the base of the area that was, excavated. So if you look at here, let me put this share this screen.

24:48 – 25:283

you'll see this is the Henry and Viola Zoo out to the south and then you can almost see it on the topo map, but this area here is the ridge that what's left, what was excavated. So everything south of that was excavated and you can still see the relief, the stone there that's formed a cliff. And then up here is the city park on the hilltop, where there is an existing marker up on the top of the hill. It's fairly vague and doesn't have a lot of information about sort of the rest of it talks about the mound, it doesn't talk about the whole bridge.

25:280

And there is a bound a bare effigy mound?

25:313

Yes. That's correct. So that's one of the ones that's still extant on that site.

25:354

So one of the 11 Yes. Yes.

25:401

It's The bear is separate, right? The bear is the bear mound? Or is there also a bear on the hilltop? There's two bears?

25:473

Just one bear that I know of.

25:481

Cause the bear itself, I believe, is individually designated?

25:52 – 26:123

This shows it a little better, right? So, you can see that here are some of the mounds up here, including a bird mound, and I'm not sure which one of these is the Bear Mound, but there's a plaque there. And then here's the cliff, and then these are Vilas Park Zoo buildings down at the bottom of the cliff.

26:12 – 26:321

So just to be clear, you're saying that there is a bear in this mound group in which when there's also a bear a couple blocks over, the actual Bear Mound Park. So I just wanna make sure that the bear mound that's separate is not I I mean, it might be included in this whole mound group.

26:33 – 26:463

Well, it's a good question. Let me see here. So I thought we had here, let me go back to this.

26:53 – 27:251

It might be neither here neither here nor there, and I wanna talk about this just sort of in general about the mounds because all the mounds are National Register, local Madison landmarks on their own already. And it's not that I don't want them to have attention, but if they already do have that in another way, I wonder if we don't need to recognize them again as a county, because otherwise we need to go through and recognize all of the mounds. Right?

27:263

Okay. I think you are correct. I think that that's

27:291

Yeah, that's the

27:303

bear about The bear marker and the mound that we're talking about is in Bear Mound Park, not in Vilas Park.

27:391

But it might be considered part of the larger group because I know that there's also some mounds in people's backyards that are part of that group too.

27:484

Is that park part of the ridge? No. I think

27:513

it's well, it's on top of the ridge, I believe.

27:540

The Bear In The Round Park is part of The Ridge?

27:581

I believe so because it's a very high location, so it must have well, I guess we don't know.

28:040

Okay. So we are talking with these two nominations for The Ridge. They are in very distinct locations, it appears.

28:161

Yeah. Well, one sort of tells the story of what's left, and one tells the story of what's not left. Right?

28:230

Right.

28:24 – 28:451

And I feel like they're related. But, again and and, again, not to not recognize mounds, but do we feel that they are indeed recognized enough in their own in a different way? If they're not, then let's do something. But I don't know why this mound group necessarily should be Dane County, and the rest aren't.

28:45 – 29:213

So just to be clear, so here's Bear Mound I'm sharing this, okay. Here's Bear Mound Park, which is where the bear marker is. I'll correct that in the sheet. Here's the top of the dividing ridge, which is this image here, and then this is the excavated portion at the bottom of what was excavated in the Viospark Zoo. So there is no marker associated with these particular these particular mounds.

29:240

There are mounds, you're saying, at the outside of the round park?

29:281

Yeah. Right here.

29:300

They still exist?

29:323

Yeah. This is this is 2022 digital elevation model Okay. Photography.

29:371

Yeah. The ones you can see

29:383

are just the conical ones. And then there's a number of conical mounds here.

29:44 – 29:591

Well, again, I just feel like to either either we do all the mounds or we don't. Right? And are you just saying it's because these particular mounds do not have their own marker where the other ones do? Or it's

30:003

I I I think what if I can talk about sort of the what I envisioned as the intention from the person who submitted it is

30:061

Thank you.

30:06 – 30:193

What they wanted to talk about was I mean, the idea was there were mounds there. There was a whole lot of mounds. Most of them were destroyed. Right. As part of the creation of the Madison Street Network.

30:19 – 31:063

Right. So, I think, you know, the the intention was to show both the fact that this was, you know, in a place that was important to indigenous Americans for a thousand of years but also to document the story about how they were destroyed. And so, I think it the the intention from both of the submittals that we got made it pretty clear that that what they wanted to talk about was the Dividing ridge, and the fact that it used to be one of the most prominent geological features on the Madison Isthmus, and that much of it is now gone. And that story, I don't think, is told in any of the other mound markers in that area. So yes, you're right, there's markers for Bear Mound, which is off isolated by itself.

31:07 – 31:223

That marker really just talks about this is a mound and it was built and it was important to the Native American. Doesn't tell any of the rest of that story. So I think that was the that was certainly the intention that, you know, we got from the survey materials that were submitted to us.

31:23 – 31:444

And given that historical context, it's one of the reasons I would I was planning on ranking that high, like, five. So Mhmm. And to me, I I don't know why we would distinguish between the hilltop and the excavated area. It's all part and parcel, I think. Was it was it two different people that Two different

31:443

people submitted something for Dividing Ridge. So Okay. We had That's

31:484

the two the two lines in the spreadsheet. Right?

31:51 – 32:023

Yeah. So we got Nick Smith and Cindy Schleekde. Cindy was nominating this on behalf of the Greenbush Neighborhood Association, and Nick was nominating it on his own behalf as an individual.

32:02 – 32:381

I would agree that the dividing ridge itself is important. And if the two nominations could be linked so that the story you know, so that you see one and you understand that there's another marker elsewhere to understand the other part of it. But, again, I would say that all the mounds in Madison basically were destroyed in some way by the Madison Street's grid. Right? So I'm not trying to lessen these mounds. I'm just saying it's I think all of them are important to Dane County. Maybe So we address that another time. I

32:390

don't think that not having the ability to do all the mounds in one full sweep should prevent us from doing this Sounds good.

32:47 – 33:090

Because it is a very unique story in terms of how those mounds survived or didn't survive, and because it's a distinct geological feature that we're going to talk about as well. So there is an underlying story to it all. But I think one marker for both of arising from those two nominations might be a good objective.

33:091

Or if two markers, they relate to each other. There's note on one to see the other, you know, that they

33:160

Right. Yeah, the trick will be how to tell the story from one location or two.

33:233

I mean, some of this

33:240

That'll be complicated to do it from two.

33:26 – 33:543

Rick, some of this may be for the topic later on our agenda, when we're talking about marker design and style of marker. Yeah. It's also possible that different sites may lend themselves to different styles of markers. If you had a marker that was more of a park informational sign type of thing, you could put more information about it that might convey that story in a way that would be different from a brass plaque.

33:55 – 34:110

Yes. Excellent point. Okay. Because this is telling a much bigger, more complicated, far ranging topic. And so having visual graphics would really be very important to really communicate that story.

34:12 – 34:231

Because not everybody can have access to that topographical map when they're looking at it too. I mean, when you see that map, it's incredible to see the mound shapes, which are really not that visible when you're there, because the grass grows on, you know?

34:23 – 34:400

Yeah. Okay, well, think our job now is just to read it one through five, and then we can talk about how to turn that into a marker or an interpretive plaque. So I will give it a five.

34:401

Which one? Both?

34:420

I would like to combine the two and try to tell that story

34:471

I would agree.

34:483

With one fell swoop. And I'll I'll note that in the notes that we're Okay. The recommendation is combine them.

34:554

Same here. Five? Two fives? Combined. Yes.

34:593

Yeah. Okay.

35:006

I'll give that a five also.

35:022

Tim, five. K.

35:070

Did you vote? I did. You did? Did you give it a five?

35:111

I said five combined.

35:123

Oh, okay. One two three

35:140

four one more. Great. So now we have two Eston, Hemmings, Jefferson.

35:223

Does anyone want to talk about the Ebenezer Brigham home before Oh, moving

35:260

sorry. Before we pass over Ebenezer, do people feel that does or doesn't represent the mission of this project?

35:354

Not familiar enough.

35:370

He was an original settler dating back to the mid-nineteenth.

35:433

European permanent settler in Dane County.

35:473

It was a lead miner, I believe.

35:491

So it's significant, but not necessarily In our context. Right.

35:554

Bookmark it? Bookmark it. There's also

35:583

a marker for Brigham Park in the vicinity that tells some of that story.

36:060

So we'll we'll get back to that one, but we'll skip it for now. People okay with that?

36:131

Yeah. We don't have a picture anyway, do we? Or oh, I'm sorry. The map out. It's out there.

36:210

It is in

36:211

Oh, so the reason this would have been brought up is because this is one of those places that isn't covered by another municipality that can grab it as a landmark.

36:310

Say again?

36:33 – 36:461

The reason I would understand that this is on this sheet here is because it's it's out it's outside of any other municipality that can grab it as a landmark. So it's not a Madison landmark. It's not a

36:463

To be clear, the reason it's on the sheet is because it was nominated by someone. K. We didn't we didn't make any judgments about that, and we didn't kick anyone off of that on that basis. So

36:560

I do think we are trying to represent the rural parts of the county because

37:021

That's what I mean.

37:03 – 37:240

Yeah. I think when we get to the point of deciding which of these markers we're actually going to proceed with, I think that could be a deciding point to raise. Okay. But at this point, I think we're just trying to decide on its historical merit or if it fee fits the mission of the project at hand.

37:241

It's more of the mission than the merit.

37:260

Yeah. Right. It's obviously an important historical individual, but does it meet that definition of underrepresented community?

37:36 – 37:500

Early white settler. Right. So that's why I was comfortable skipping it. But if other people feel differently, we say so. Okay.

37:50 – 38:470

Going back to Eston Hemings Jefferson, the youngest son of president Jefferson and Sally Hemings, lived in Madison for four years in the mid-1850s. And so there are two sites to consider, his grave along with his family in Forest Hills Cemetery, or what I believe, the research I've done, we'd have to confirm it, but I believe he lived in a house that's now a Madison City garage. So if we can get permission from the city to put a marker somewhere within that public property right away, it could tell the story of Eston and his family who grew up here in Madison.

38:48 – 38:593

By the way, we do have this was also submitted to us twice. Right. One of the people who submitted it, Janet Murphy, is in attendance if anyone Okay. Wanted to ask a question of her.

39:000

Okay. Any questions for Janet as the submitter of one of these?

39:053

Janet has her hand up.

39:070

Alright. Let's give Janet a minute to speak. Janet, you should be able to talk now.

39:127

Sure. Thanks.

39:14 – 39:408

I you know, we still have the mounds up on the screen. I wanted to tell you there is an old marker at the dividing ridge. It's one of the old kind of brass plates on a stone embedded in a stone. It may even be from the forties. It's pretty old. So just so you have that for your information. Back to I call him Easton. That means Jefferson. I'm not sure if he's Easton. Okay.

39:40 – 40:058

I don't know why I call him that. And, yes, the family's there. It's an important story about after the slave Fugitive Slave Act was passed in 1850. Did I get that right and the words right? That the Hemings family got paranoid living so close to the border.

40:05 – 40:338

And I think they were at that point after Jefferson died, they had moved to Ohio, Southern Ohio, but they were still quite close to the slave states, and they everyone was worried they were gonna get picked up. So that's why Easton moved up to Madison. And then his family and and the kids rather flourished here somewhere in the civil war. They were good entrepreneurs. Easton himself was an excellent violin player, no doubt taught by his father.

40:34 – 40:598

And and it's also the story of of, you know, the old one drop rule. The many members of the family some not all, but many members of the family chose to pass as Caucasian when they moved up north for a better opportunity. So I did not know his there was a place that people knew where his house was, so I thought that was quite wonderful.

41:010

Yes. That's from what little research I was able to do, that's my understanding. But like I said, it would need to be confirmed.

41:108

Yeah. I didn't actually review my research before I came on this, but does anyone else have any questions for me?

41:221

Thanks.

41:230

Thank you. Thanks, Janet.

41:264

Yep. You're welcome.

41:28 – 41:460

Appreciate your coming to our meeting. Mhmm. Well, should we take these one at a time? Or is it the significance we're really looking at, and then we can figure out which of the two sites might be best?

41:48 – 42:001

I guess with the question of his home site, and you're saying it needs to be verified, can we vote on it yet then if we if it isn't verified? Or how how close are you?

42:05 – 42:210

I think what I'd recommend is that we vote on the subject matter of trying to represent his significance to the county and to the Madison. And then we work with these two sites and see which one might actually be best.

42:28 – 43:201

Think this is one that takes national significance. I was fortunate to be with historian Annette Gordon Reed, who wrote about Hemings and Jefferson and actually was the person that got the DNA test that put that forward, of proved the connection between the offspring and Jefferson. And for that reason, I think, you know, having this Dane County designation helps bring that story to a more national light. And in that case, I'm of two minds because a gravesite is something we can see, and it exists. But it's harder to find.

43:201

You know, you're going into a cemetery looking for something, whereas you might be walking by the other site on the street and just learning something without planning it.

43:290

Right.

43:301

Which I'm always in favor of. So that was not an answer.

43:36 – 44:000

Okay. Well, yeah, I do think we have some work to do to figure out which of these two sites would work. But I I think if we could rank it, then we'd know whether or not to pursue that at all. But I agree with you. I do think it's of national significance, and it's not well known in the community. And so having a marker makes a lot of sense.

44:001

Correct.

44:03 – 44:160

But I I will give the Easton Hemings Jefferson the his story. I will give that a five, and I would combine these two and see which site actually works better.

44:161

I agree with that. And I'm going with Eston just because that is what Annette Gordon Reed used. That's the pronunciation she used as well. But then none of us were around then. So

44:280

Alright. Anybody want else to vote?

44:316

I'll echo the five vote for for that.

44:362

This is Tim. I vote five.

44:48 – 45:040

Five? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Next, the Gay Center of Wisconsin, nominated by Vicki Kenyon, important to the LGBT plus community.

45:120

I think it's an important property. I will give it a four.

45:236

Likewise, I give it a four.

45:441

Does anybody have any information on how long it was at this location? It's the first in 1972, and then it says it moved around.

45:53 – 46:043

Yeah. I don't know. This was submitted by Jason Tisch. Let's see. There's some Let's see. Do we have some other links here?

46:04 – 46:161

Yeah. I'm just looking at the AHI, but that's based on the historic name. It's part of the Langdon Street Historic District.

46:18 – 47:003

So this is from Isthmus 72. Hancock Building froze out the center in 7475, literally cutting off the heat. Center then moved to the basement at Saint Francis House, which is another nomination we have, remained there from 1975 until 1982. Then the center moved down the street to the basement of the University of the United Methodist Church, where it remained until its merger with the United in 1987. Prior to the merger, the Gay Center changed its name to the Madison Gay Resource Center in 1984, and finally to the Madison Gay and Lesbian Resource Center. Moved around a lot. Yep.

47:020

So how long do we know how long it was at this one location?

47:051

That's what I asked.

47:07 – 47:233

It looks like so from 1972 until let's see. Where did we see this? Opened on '72 and then through '75. Oh, three years.

47:250

Not very long. But it had several other locations.

47:293

After that.

47:300

Yeah. Yeah. But that's where it started. Is that right?

47:343

That's what we understand. Yes. Okay.

47:411

I would give it a five.

47:454

I'm sorry. Was the were they the original occupants of the building, or was it Sorry? Were they the occupants of the building?

47:523

Don't think so. I think that building was built

47:561

It's a residence.

47:573

It's a residence. I'm not sure when it was built.

47:591

Historical society under the name of the Yeah.

48:013

Got it.

48:021

Owner the first people.

48:043

It clearly looks older than 1972 construction. So

48:071

Yeah. And it's a Cloud And Stark building.

48:112

This is Tim. I give it five.

48:146

Yeah. You know, I wanna change my vote to five as well.

48:19 – 48:476

So I was looking at those two together in the sort of the same way we're looking at Easton, the the two the the '21 and '22, the Gay Center and the Gay Pride statue. But but because I think that anyhow. So and I also have a little bit of a problem. I've got I I'm traveling tomorrow, and I have to head out. I gotta leave you off, go pack and stuff.

48:48 – 49:146

So I'm kind of frustrated that I can't be part of this entire conversation. But I apologize. I I I in terms of the rest of these, the next one, actually well, I'm not gonna say anything. I'm confident y'all in the choices that y'all make. Anyways, thank you very much, and sorry, though. I gotta go.

49:140

Sorry. You gotta go, but you gotta go.

49:173

Yeah. Thank you, Alfonso.

49:194

Yeah. You're

49:203

welcome. We we still have quorum, so we have four in attendance, and there's seven members.

49:252

Yay. Great.

49:286

That's great.

49:283

So I have I I just want to clarify. I have three votes for five here so far.

49:334

I'm a four. Okay.

49:353

There's a four. And Tim, did you vote? Tim?

49:452

Please cut me back. I did try to give it a five.

49:470

Okay. Yep.

49:503

I'm missing someone then. Rick?

49:522

Five. Okay.

49:581

Can we jump to Saint Francis House just because we're talking about

50:02 – 50:231

Similar and I'm just interested in the different organizations. So the Gay Center, and then the Saint Francis is is Madison Alliance for Homosexual Equality, Madison Gay Sisters. So different organizations.

50:253

Though apparently there was some overlap after 1975.

50:301

Post Jonelle?

50:37 – 51:053

And what I understand from this was submitted by Jason Tisch those meetings took place in the basement of St. Francis House, a space that's no longer extant. But they picked up the building and moved it. So they didn't take the basement with it. So the basement actually no longer is in. It's not in the same location, but it is the building, the exterior of the building, it representative of of what it looked like when those meetings were taking place.

51:061

I remember that move.

51:070

You do. Wow.

51:08 – 51:201

The landmarks when it happened. Okay. I just wanted to clarify that they are, in theory, the same community but different organizations.

51:223

Yes. Do people want to take that one up now since we're on it in terms of

51:301

I'm gonna give that one a four just for the integrity the loss of integrity. Mhmm.

51:350

Good point. I will give it three for that same reason.

51:422

This is Tim. I'd give it a three.

51:473

Patrick?

51:573

So next up would be the gay pride statue.

52:031

Can you talk about the marker that is there?

52:083

Yes. That

52:091

was put up by.

52:103

Hang on. Let me find it. I think we've got a picture of it here.

52:171

It's very small.

52:18 – 52:413

It is small. Hopefully, that's a little bigger there. But it says, presented by the city of Madison and partially overgrown, I think it's the New Harvest Foundation, presented to the City of Madison by the New Harvest Foundation. I don't know if it has a date on it. Oh, yeah, I don't know if it has a date on the plaque.

52:430

I think the artist was George Siegel.

52:453

It that's correct.

52:460

Yeah. Copy of a statue in another location.

52:513

Well, it was originally commissioned for, Greenwich Village.

52:550

Right.

52:55 – 53:203

And then the New York City Council, so there were two that were originally struck by George Siegel. One was intended for Greenwich Village, right near the Stonewall Inn. The other was intended for Los Angeles. Both of the New York City and the Los Angeles City Councils got cold feet and wouldn't accept the statues. The one that was intended to go to Los Angeles is now in Stanford University.

53:21 – 53:583

The one that was intended to go in Greenwich Village was transported to Orton Park in Madison and it stayed there until I think it was 1981 when the city council in New York City finally relented and agreed to install it which is where the statue is now, is in Greenwich Village. So, for a period of time, it lived here in Madison. That statue, the original, lived in Orton Park. Some of the stories we we heard about this is that apparently, Madison residents would put coats on it when it got cold. To try and keep people from getting from from the statues from getting cold.

53:593

I think

53:591

it's an interesting story, but I'm curious about the existing plaque and if we would be replacing it, or what's what are we doing?

54:100

I don't think we could we don't have authority to replace it.

54:141

Right.

54:150

I think that was someone else who put that marker up.

54:191

And is it

54:190

And it would be on city property, so it'd be up to the city, I guess, whoever proposed the marker.

54:291

I just don't know if two markers on one spot helps anybody unless the story is not clear on the existing

54:39 – 55:233

Marker. You want I can read it, what the marker says. Please. It says, in 1994, the George Siegel sculpture Gay Liberation was on the site through the efforts of the gay and lesbian community and the New Harvest Foundation. In 1991, the sculpture was moved to its original intended home in New York City's Christopher Park. It is missed. This installation commemorates the sculpture and honors the ongoing liberation of lesbians and gay men. Presented by the city of Matt to the city of Madison by the New Harvest Foundation. The other thing I'd point out is that it appears that there's some damage to the lower right hand corner. I don't know if there was a picture there or what was there on that portion of the plaque.

55:233

And then also it's partially overgrown by what appear to be willies of the valley.

55:290

Is the New Harvest Foundation, is that a Madison organization?

55:333

I don't know.

55:361

Is indeed.

55:37 – 56:091

The only foundation dang high in the channel's contributions exclusively to organizations working to promote LGBTQIA plus rights services founded in 1984, volunteer board of directors. I feel like the existing plaque tells the story. Does. I'm not sure that we can do any better. Can we give them money? Do we have money to give away to help them fix it.

56:09 – 56:473

So just to so for a point of clarification, it seems to me there's two considerations that this commission is making. One is what's the relative historic and cultural significance of these submittals? And then separately from that, are we going to invest funds to put a new marker at that location? Yeah. It seems to me that those those are not necessarily related discussions so that you could, for example, in this case, perhaps rank this highly as an incident of historic significance, but then decide, since there's already a marker there, we're not going to invest additional money to put a second one.

56:480

I agree.

56:501

But all of them remain on the map, regardless of what we do.

56:54 – 57:203

That's correct. Yes. So, the recommendation of this commission, we have essentially split this project into two parts. So, we've got a web portal up now that is called the Dane County Community History that includes both the timeline and the interactive map of all the submittals that we've received and then, in addition to that, would be a a program where there would be physical markers at some of those locations.

57:230

There'll be other considerations in terms of how we want to spend our money.

57:263

Yes, indeed.

57:270

Because we only have so much to go around, and there are, you know, three dozen to consider. Right.

57:331

Yeah. I appreciate that clarification, because this commissioner is having a hard time separating ranking from education, right? And just ranking

57:440

where we get most bang for our buck and most of our things. Sure.

57:501

So But we should rank this, right, and move on.

57:53 – 58:040

Yeah. Let's rank it. Five. We'll give it a five. I will give it a three. I give it a two. This is 10.

58:10 – 58:430

K. Moving on. H two visa farm workers. And I'll just say I I propose this one, and we just haven't been able to narrow down a location for this. We know it was somewhere in a farm near Mazomene, but we don't have a location. So I do think it's important. But I have to in my own nomination, I have to say that we just don't know where it would go. So I would rank it as a three.

58:511

I will follow you with that three then for further consideration at another time.

58:590

No. We're not tossing anything out. Right. We'll keep them all on our shortlist for later.

59:041

Well, and they're all on the map. So

59:060

They're all on the map. We're not gonna get rid of them. Any other votes? This is Tim. I vote three.

59:224

I think it's an important story to tell. I just thought a location and something Yeah,

59:283

the location that's referenced on this map is just the geographic center of the town of Mesomani. There's no particular significance to it.

59:35 – 59:590

It is an important story. I would agree with you, Patrick. I don't think it's an undertold story in terms of agricultural history. But it's not ripe yet for us to give it a marker. So we could give it a five. I wouldn't object to that, but it's just not ready to to actually commit to as a part of the project.

1:00:011

So now we're Yeah.

1:00:021

know. Acting into the worker again.

1:00:050

I'll I'll change my vote. I'll I'll change my vote to a five, and we'll we'll hash out that issue of where to spend the money later.

1:00:133

I'm here. What do you what's your five?

1:00:180

Anybody else wanna change their vote? I I did. Okay. Harry Whitehorse Studio.

1:00:263

And I'm sorry. Erica, you voted three or five? Three. Three. Okay.

1:00:36 – 1:01:150

So I think we're all familiar with Harry Whitehorse, Ochunk native sculptor, lived and worked in his home in, I believe, his chief auto parts store on Broadway, where I believe he might have done a lot of his work, especially with metal sculpture. It's up for sale. I don't know what will happen to the property, whether or not we'll get permission to put a marker there. It's hard to say. But I will give it a five.

1:01:271

I'll give it a five.

1:01:382

This is Tim. I give it a 5.

1:01:444

Okay. It was 5.

1:01:50 – 1:02:040

Next is Ho Chunk Village and then McFarlane proposed by the McFarlane Historical Society, particularly important to indigenous community.

1:02:041

I have a quick question going back to Harry White Horse. Is it Monona Landmark?

1:02:094

No. Okay. Thanks.

1:02:131

Back to Ho Chunk Village.

1:02:184

I'd like it a five.

1:02:240

I'll give it a five.

1:02:292

Tim gives it a five.

1:02:351

I'll give it a five.

1:02:443

Hope Tavern. People

1:02:460

Hope Tavern.

1:02:51 – 1:03:253

This is not necessarily identified with any particularly underrepresented community, But this was how it was submitted to us. The interesting thing is this is actually public property now. It's I believe it's called the Training and Education Center, but it's part of the Dane County Solid Waste department associated with the methane plant at the landfill. Really? Yes. Wow. Interesting. I don't know what the future plans are for it, because it's it's in rough shape, the building itself, but Really?

1:03:279

I thought the building was removed.

1:03:303

Not as of last

1:03:320

summer. Who was that?

1:03:363

Was that Tim?

1:03:379

No. It's Kurt. Sorry. Kurt.

1:03:393

Oh, okay. Alright, Kurt. Yeah. Right. It it was still there as of last summer. So if it's been taken down since then, I I was not aware of that.

1:03:480

So there are probably pig plants for that area. No? I don't know. Nothing's known at this point.

1:03:553

Yeah. I'm not sure.

1:03:564

What's But

1:03:560

it was recently purchased?

1:03:583

2020. It was acquired by Dan County. Alright. Got it. Interesting.

1:04:060

The question for me is whether or not it meets, you know, the mission of the project, if it represents an underrepresented community.

1:04:161

I think it's similar to Ebenezer.

1:04:190

Yeah. It's early And white

1:04:221

it's it's a location that isn't getting landmarked.

1:04:270

It's yeah. It probably is significant. But is it significant in terms of what we're doing

1:04:374

right now?

1:04:400

So I would give it a two.

1:04:433

I mean, just to be clear, what we did with the Ebenezer Brigham was we, as you made a decision

1:04:480

Oh, we skipped it altogether.

1:04:493

The criteria. So you didn't evaluate the historic preservation. Yeah.

1:04:531

According to historic medicine

1:04:540

It's gone?

1:04:551

07/08/2024, it's gone.

1:04:570

Oh. Oh. There we go. Alright. So the question is whether to skip over it, I guess.

1:05:071

I would say yes. It's an integrity thing, again, where

1:05:180

Okay. And unless there are objections, we'll move on to the Islamic Center of Madison. Do we know how old the building is? Or I

1:05:283

believe it was built in the nineteen eighties. Let me find it, and I think I can confirm that.

1:05:33 – 1:05:440

And it's still being used for that now? It is. Yes. I would give it a five. Five from Tim?

1:05:57 – 1:06:190

Okay. Moving on. Kanazawa Circle is one that I nominated, But I believe I also nominated the South Madison Daycare Center

1:06:20 – 1:06:420

Which relates to the same individual, Henry Kanazawa, who was an architect. Kanazawa's circle was he had worked for Neighborhood House. No, he had worked for Habitat Habitat for for Humanity, and designed probably almost all those houses on Kanazawa Circle.

1:06:44 – 1:07:060

it's very representative of the work that he did in his later life in retirement. But the neighborhood house was also something he designed in 1968, when that building was first used as a daycare center. I think it's now a neighborhood center.

1:07:063

I think it's still daycare. It's still operated as a daycare center.

1:07:090

Was it like One City Schools in there for a while?

1:07:125

Could be. I mean, yeah, I think, but I think they

1:07:140

operated Okay, so but it's still being used for daycare?

1:07:17 – 1:07:490

Okay. So I guess we have two opportunities to celebrate Henry Kanazawa. I think his work is important, especially when he was working as a volunteer later in life. We have I just mentioned that we just received a lot of his drawings at the Dane County Historical Society, including the drawings for the South Madison Daycare Center.

1:07:503

Do you want to take those two up separately, or do you want to take them, combine them like we've done with some of the others?

1:07:57 – 1:08:470

I think it is a matter of which one of those sites we would best want to use to represent his significance. But with the South Madison Daycare, I think that building in and of itself is important for how it was used, the community, and the issues of that period in time. So it really tells two stories. And is important to more than just Japanese Americans in relationship to Hinikanazawa, but also African American community in South Madison. So I would think they're both important, but I I like the one the South Madison one in particular because you get a twofer there.

1:08:471

I would agree with that, and I would recommend that perhaps in the future, Kanazawa Circle pursue itself being a national registered district.

1:08:571

mean, how many homes are there?

1:08:590

Oh, at least a dozen.

1:09:011

Okay. Yeah. I mean, they're from the sixties, so they're 50 plus.

1:09:06 – 1:09:220

I don't know how old they are, to be honest. How does that work then? So we're voting on Kanazawa Circle first, and I would give it a five.

1:09:244

Same here.

1:09:252

Okay. Five from Tim.

1:09:310

And then the South Madison Daycare Center, I would give that a five.

1:09:402

Tim, also a five. Okay. Thanks, Todd.

1:09:45 – 1:09:570

Bye, Todd. I think, you know, when we get down to choosing which of those rank the highest, which ones actually get a marker, we'll kind of look at both of those together side by side. Yeah.

1:09:573

So is that four or five votes for South Madison Day Center?

1:10:000

I believe so. Okay. All right. Okay, moving on. La Mexicana Grocery, submitted by Antonio.

1:10:09 – 1:10:403

We don't have a tremendous amount of information about this one. This was one that was nominated while we were interviewing some people at the Catholic Multicultural Center. And Antonio suggested this, but pointed out that the building was the first Latino grocery in Madison. It's now a Thai restaurant, which is kind of interesting. It's also like three block like a block and a half from my house, so

1:10:410

Where is it?

1:10:423

It's on Fair Oaks Avenue, at the corner of Fair Oaks and Thorpe Street.

1:10:450

Fair Oaks? Oh, I know that.

1:10:471

This is doll. Picture of it on the EHI link, if you look at it, just from what it was. The link

1:10:523

So it it grocery was store for many years.

1:10:543

I can bring that up here.

1:10:574

Do you know when it became a a Mexican grocery? Yeah.

1:11:013

I believe it was in the early 1990s. Mhmm. It became a Latino grocery. This was when it was first.

1:11:104

And it was only the first?

1:11:14 – 1:11:463

First Latino grocery is what we say. Now, as I I don't have a lot of information on this, and I haven't been able to fact check a lot of it. We did find I did find the obituary for Banuelos. Maria de I talked a little bit about when the store opened up. But that's La Mexicana grocery store is what it was called. I remember it when it was a Really? They had great tamales. Wow. It's great.

1:11:46 – 1:12:033

there every Sunday. But that's that's like I said, we don't have a tremendous amount of information about it other than what, you know, what I was able to to find out. Some of those people are still around, so it's possible we could interview Yeah. Some of them and find out more.

1:12:04 – 1:12:170

I I do think we might need to do a little more research to nail some of this down, especially if we're gonna do a marker or interpretive plaque. But if indeed it is the first, I would give it a five.

1:12:221

I would give it a four and then a little asterisk of find out more. K.

1:12:304

I I concur with that.

1:12:333

Four. Tim? Four. K.

1:12:390

Okay. Lake Mendota dugout canoes. So we're talking about where they've been discovered, which is more

1:12:48 – 1:13:183

Yeah. We I did get an email from Amy Roseborough, who, if folks don't know, is the state archaeologist. Yeah. And she had suggested for all of the underwater resources, there's three proposals that are actually underwater, Partly to protect them from, you know, vandalism or looting, she suggested that we find somewhere on the shore, which would be more practical to put a marker anyway, rather than the I kind

1:13:180

of assumed it, but Like

1:13:193

a buoy somewhere. Yeah. Right?

1:13:21 – 1:13:373

I was So what I you know, with that commentary, what this is actually reflecting is this is a there's a Shortwood Hills Park here, which is near the location where the but not exactly on where the those canoes have been discovered.

1:13:380

There have been multiple canoes found.

1:13:403

Yeah. It's too bad Bill's not here, but I I think at our last meeting, said there's over 11 canoes that were found in that area.

1:13:460

That's an amazing Mhmm. Story.

1:13:48 – 1:14:012

And this this is Tim. I recently read that although the first one was dated at about 15 1,400 years old, the more recent discoveries go back many more thousands of years than that.

1:14:013

Yeah. 4,500, I think, is the the current record, but they keep breaking them. Every time they go down there, they find something older. Right. Sonar. The last one they did was sonar.

1:14:112

So Yeah. I I believe this has more than just local significance. This is a a national archaeological site. I I would give it a five.

1:14:200

I would too.

1:14:231

I'm gonna be a problem again because I feel like this story is gonna be very well told by the Wisconsin Historical Society when you can see the actual canoe in the museum. Mhmm.

1:14:340

I doubt you'll see them put up a marker there, but

1:14:371

No. That's true.

1:14:380

Yeah. They could. It would be totally eligible for a state marker, but

1:14:441

See, now we're getting hung up on the is it worth it, or does it need a marker? You know?

1:14:480

So let yeah. Let's try to stick on significance for now.

1:14:511

Okay. Five.

1:14:542

Five. K.

1:14:560

Okay. What's next? Lost my place here. Oh, Lathropaul. Jason Tisch, women.

1:15:090

This one I know is on the National Register.

1:15:15 – 1:15:260

And I think it was the first dance program in the nation. Could be. Women's dance program was there.

1:15:263

I think the School of Dance is still there.

1:15:33 – 1:15:451

And college women in built as a gymnasium, so college women in sports. Yes. First dance performance group, Orcesis? Kesis?

1:15:564

Five for me.

1:15:580

I'll give it a five.

1:16:002

I'll give it a five, Tim.

1:16:121

I will give it a five.

1:16:14 – 1:16:260

K. Great. Lucia Nunez. Andrea Teresa. Wisconsin Latinx history. Oh, it's on the East Side.

1:16:293

There it is.

1:16:320

Do you have any more background on this?

1:16:36 – 1:17:213

I mean, Lucia Nunez was an activist. She was the director of Centro Hispano. She was in the affirmative action office of the city of Madison. She insisted in the relocation of Cuban immigrants at Fort McCoy. And this was submitted to us by Andrea Teresa Arenas of the Wisconsin Latinx History Collective. There's a couple other submittals that they including the Cardinal bar, I think, and some others that they suggested to us. She was Chia Nunez was certainly was very active in city politics for a number of years until her death. I think just the last couple of years.

1:17:210

Really? Yeah. I will give it a five.

1:17:241

I will too.

1:17:260

I really like these under told stories.

1:17:302

Tim says five.

1:17:35 – 1:17:540

Anyone want to any words on Monona Bay barge shipwreck, whether or not it meets the criteria for our project? Or can we move on? Questions? Neighborhood House, African Americans, Italians.

1:17:57 – 1:18:293

So this was submitted by Neighborhood House itself, by the director of Neighborhood House. This was Madison's first community center. It's original, it's moved a couple times. This is the site of where it's been since 1965. It was previously on Mound Street. It started in 1916. Wow. So this was an area, a time when there's a lot of immigration and very high African American population in this neighborhood, and this was established as a community center to serve that population.

1:18:320

I would give it a five.

1:18:351

Would two.

1:18:392

Five from Tim?

1:18:41 – 1:18:524

Yes. Well, Mount Street is at that's off of Regent in that area. Yeah. I wonder if it ties into some of the history of people being relocated.

1:18:541

English? Mhmm. It does.

1:18:574

So, I mean, it has So longer history. I mean I mean

1:19:013

I mean, that would have been around the right time frame. Around the mid sixties was when a lot of that renewal took place, I think, in this

1:19:074

It was established. Sounds like the center was established at the Well before that, and

1:19:133

then Established. So it may have been moved as part of that urban renewal project.

1:19:164

So that seems to me when when if we do some sort of mark for that, somehow that part of the story is tied in.

1:19:230

Mhmm. Yeah. The whole Greenbush story.

1:19:26 – 1:19:401

Good point. Yeah. It would be interesting to know. I'm sure somebody's done this. Actually, the Madison Trust did a good Greenbush tour that might talk about whether or not this building or this site was a trade off in any of

1:19:400

the Mhmm.

1:19:411

Relocations and teardowns. Mhmm. We need a little bit more info on that.

1:19:454

But And would the market be more appropriate there or the original location?

1:19:500

Oh. Yeah.

1:19:523

So that's

1:19:529

I'm not sure

1:19:545

plays into it, but Mountain Street is

1:19:569

a couple blocks south of this site, so it's kind of a little bit more out of the Greenbush neighborhood or the Regent part of it anyway.

1:20:05 – 1:20:313

But by the way, let me introduce Kurt. Kurt is, one of my, colleagues, in the department, and he's picking up, some of the work that I'm gonna be leaving when I retire. We were hoping to have, my replacement on board, but and be able to introduce them at this meeting, but they're still going through they I think they've selected a candidate, but they're still waiting for an acceptance at this point. But, in the meantime, Kurt is picking up, some of that work in the interim.

1:20:310

Very good. He's your understudy.

1:20:355

Hopefully, it will be

1:20:369

a quick transition, and we'll seamlessly move on to the next person.

1:20:403

Okay. So I have four fives for neighborhood house.

1:20:430

Is that correct?

1:20:44 – 1:21:000

Yep. K. And school. Again, Wisconsin Latinx history. I know it moved recently. So is it being nominated in its current location?

1:21:003

Or I think it's in the same location as so has been, as far as I know. I don't let me find it here.

1:21:050

It used to be in Monona, and then Is recently that right?

1:21:081

School, and now

1:21:091

the Frank Ellis School. Right?

1:21:100

Frank Ellis.

1:21:115

Yeah. Oh, okay.

1:21:173

Yeah. This is the information we have about it.

1:21:201

But it was probably somewhere before that. Right? So Probably.

1:21:280

So. It was nominated for the site in Monona.

1:21:333

That's correct.

1:21:34 – 1:21:540

Okay. Which is still owned by the school district and has been leased out to the Monona Parks Department. They use it for after school day care and other recreational programs. But it used to be the Maywood School. It was elementary school for the city of Monona.

1:21:541

It was something before that too. So Oh, yeah. I mean, it had to have been somewhere before it was Maywood. It wasn't just created when they took over Maywood. Right? It came from

1:22:040

I'm saying it was a school for the city of Building?

1:22:091

Well, I'm saying Neustromundo was somewhere before they took over Maywood.

1:22:130

So Probably. I don't know that, but probably.

1:22:151

If we this is gonna be another one of our where does the marker go.

1:22:191

Right? And how many locations can we and, you know, and we can tell the location Yeah.

1:22:240

To tell the story. Right. But I I'll give it a four.

1:22:402

This is Tim. I give it a three.

1:23:041

Let me give it a five.

1:23:144

I mean, what year was the school what year was the school established?

1:23:183

You know? Let me see.

1:23:221

Oh, there's Lucia Nunez again.

1:23:24 – 1:23:403

Yeah. I think I need to recorrect some of that. Yes. No. That's right. Yeah. She was involved in that. I I it it's it's happened since the time I lived in Madison. So I believe it was in the nineties, late nineties, perhaps.

1:23:410

That sounds right.

1:23:433

We were right around 2,000 even when it opened.

1:23:531

Three for me. Okay.

1:23:56 – 1:24:160

K. Any comments on Holland Park barge shipwreck? Anyone wanna any questions about that before we move on? Okay. Richard Davis home. This was something I nominated.

1:24:173

You got two nominations for this one as well. You got two?

1:24:200

Yes. Okay.

1:24:213

It's on the West Side. Right?

1:24:230

It's on West Shore Drive, I think, or South Shore Drive?

1:24:263

Here we let's see.

1:24:280

And Oh, yeah.

1:24:293

It's here we go.

1:24:34 – 1:24:530

You got that? Yep. Okay. So Richard Davis was a world famous bass player. Played on a lot of the famous themes of rock music in the '70s, like Van Morrison and dozens others.

1:24:54 – 1:25:280

He came and taught at the university. And while he lived in that house, he had an institute where he worked with people who took classes with him about racism. And I was lucky enough to do that with him before he passed away. So that is actually where he conducted those institute sessions. So I think he's a well loved and well remembered individual, very involved with the university and Madison.

1:25:30 – 1:25:490

He always said he had two careers, one as a musician and one as a black man, and felt that his life was dedicated to fighting racism as much as it was making music. So that's why I nominated the house. Do have a score?

1:25:493

Do you have a score? Five.

1:25:554

Given that context, five.

1:25:582

Yeah. I remember playing seeing him play. This is Tim. Five. K.

1:26:060

Robert Valentine Farm.

1:26:08 – 1:26:453

This is one that I submitted. I was going through some research and reading the I'm trying to remember the name of the book, but it was a book about African Americans in the Union Army in the Civil War. And two people identified were John Jay and Julius Valentine, who were Robert Valentine's sons. Though Robert Valentine was one of the first African American settlers in Dane County. And I went found the location by going back through the register of deeds because the book identified it as a spot in the town of Rutland.

1:26:46 – 1:27:263

And so looking I did a search, found the original deed from 1852. And identified the The site is so the the farm itself is in private hands, but it is adjacent to the Rutland Center Cemetery. And so here's, this is a picture here of, from the cemetery, so that's one of the cemetery buildings, and then the cornfield you see in the background is the, was the original farm. We went through the cemetery to see if any of the Valentines were buried there, and they were not. So we couldn't find any of their grave sites there.

1:27:27 – 1:27:413

So Make Way for Liberty was the name of the book. And this is probably one of the earliest African American families, particularly outside of the city of Madison in the Dane County area.

1:27:430

It's just an amazing story. You don't think of the original settlers, any of them being black. Mhmm.

1:27:503

Well, this was around the same time that Eston Hemings, Jefferson, came. Eighteen fifties? Yeah. Right around the same time period. So they have been a I similar

1:27:591

mean, I'm assuming that you're saying that this family owned land.

1:28:02 – 1:28:323

They did. Yeah. So the land that the the deed that created the Rutland Cemetery and the deed that created the Ballantyne property were executed on the same at the same time. They're so the previous landowner sold both of them. Previous landowner was probably, in that time period, was probably someone who was one of the original patents from the federal government at that point. Wow. Valentine may have been the second non indigenous owner of that parcel.

1:28:320

Yeah. Well, I was very excited about this, and I would definitely give it a five.

1:28:371

Yeah. Same. Five for Tim.

1:28:414

Same here.

1:28:441

Thank you for your research.

1:28:460

Yay. Mhmm. So there's a book about this.

1:28:483

Make Way for Liberty by Knell. It's Wisconsin State Historical Society Press. There's some information in the in the

1:28:560

And he was a Civil War veteran?

1:28:583

His sons were. Sons. Both of his sons. Okay.

1:29:03 – 1:29:330

Sabin's viewpoint. I didn't feel like this really met our criteria. One, because it's fairly new, but it was built in honor of individual, but not in and of itself historic. So that's why I didn't include it in the highlighting. Any any comment on that? I agree, Tim. No. And here we are back at Saint Francis House. Did we just did we vote on that? Yeah.

1:29:333

You we we put scores on that one already.

1:29:360

Smart Studios. Again, I think it's important, it's historic, but I don't know if it would meet our criteria.

1:29:451

Yeah, I'd say that should be just a Madison landmark.

1:29:470

It should be.

1:29:491

If anybody wrote those nominations anymore. Hello, Is

1:29:550

Heather still on the line?

1:29:575

Let me see.

1:30:023

Heather's still here? Yep. Hang on. Let me

1:30:054

Not her fault. Oh, really? Hi, Heather. You should be able to talk now.

1:30:09 – 1:30:237

Hi. I I agree. I think that absolutely should be a landmark. I have talked with the property owners, and told them that I would very enthusiastically support that if they would like to pursue it. So far, they have not taken me up on that offer.

1:30:241

Yeah. She just needs more writers.

1:30:270

Yeah. That's where the Madison Trust is supposed to come in. Right?

1:30:30 – 1:30:567

Well, the Madison Trust oh, well, let me put in a good word for the Madison They are moving forward on nominations. They were doing the survey work and getting the information out there, and they are moving forward with nominations. So we just wrapped up one this past year for the Catherine Klarenbach house, and we've got one in the queue that hopefully we will be able to see coming up in the next, I don't know, couple of months. So be on the lookout. They're

1:30:561

doing good stuff.

1:30:58 – 1:31:170

Cool. Thank you. Yeah. Great. But so I feel comfortable in skipping this one. If others have any comment, let me know. Mhmm. UW Women's Studies program. Is what can you brief us a little bit on that?

1:31:17 – 1:31:413

Sure. Hang on a second. Let me find it here. So this was submitted to us by Jason Tisch, and this was the original location in the 1970s when it was clear that women's movement was making significant progress in shifting American culture. The region's made a system wide policy in 1974 that all UW institutions instituted women's studies program.

1:31:41 – 1:32:053

This was a house at 209 Brook Street, and it was the home of the UW Women's Studies program from 1975 until 1992. There was some construction here, but it's apparently it's now the Journal of Chemical Education. Mhmm. Interesting location. So at least that's what the sign on the door says.

1:32:050

Mhmm. I will give it a 4.

1:32:172

This is Tim. I'll say 3.

1:32:310

Okay. Moving on. Vandenberg Heights, Capehart Housing, city of Sun Prairie.

1:32:383

So this one comes to us from an employee of the city of Sun Prairie. I believe they're in the planning department.

1:32:450

Becky Bins.

1:32:46 – 1:33:213

Yeah. And this is an interesting story, I think. It's This was housing that was created by the US government under the K Part Act, specifically to house African American airmen who were stationed at Truax Field. Those airmen, like other African American families at the time, were having difficulty finding housing because of restrictive covenants in the area. So this was a federal act that allowed the US government to purchase land and actually build housing for these people.

1:33:21 – 1:33:343

It's properties that are they're owned. And I'll show you you can see these are like sort of long, duplex homes, but the land underneath it is still owned by the city of Sun Prairie.

1:33:341

Yeah, actually if you pull up the last of the pictures, there's a

1:33:393

This one?

1:33:401

That one, yeah.

1:33:41 – 1:34:053

This is the plat of the Yeah. This is a replat that was done in the 1990s, but that's the the original division. But so the land underneath it is still publicly owned, which reduces the housing costs. But also because they're homed, it's been able to be passed on from generation to generation, and this area is still a very predominantly African American neighborhood to this day.

1:34:070

That's an interesting story.

1:34:100

I will give it a five.

1:34:111

Me too. Five.

1:34:132

Five from two.

1:34:16 – 1:34:320

And the Veterans Memorial Coliseum, Again, I felt it didn't quite meet our criteria. But if others disagree What's that?

1:34:324

I agree.

1:34:330

I agree.

1:34:341

I do too.

1:34:35 – 1:34:460

Alright. Washington hotel LGBTQ plus community. That's gone, but the memories continue.

1:34:49 – 1:35:093

Let me find that here. Hang on a second. Here it is. Yeah, there's a plaque of sorts there. Doesn't really say much, just has a picture of the original building on the side of it, and then that's about it. But yeah, this was another one that I think we got two nominations for.

1:35:134

Think of this one a five.

1:35:150

I'll give it a five, too.

1:35:191

I will too. Do you see what the historic name is?

1:35:231

The historic name of it? Hotel Trump.

1:35:260

Oh. T r u m p f. Oh, be careful.

1:35:304

Careful. I know. Tim?

1:35:32 – 1:35:432

This is Tim. I remember going there. If you went on one floor, it was a heterosexual dance band, and you could take a date there. And then if you went on another floor, that was where the gay bar was.

1:35:441

Different date. You could still take a date there.

1:35:462

Sure. Yep. Yep. You could. Alright. I'd give it a five.

1:35:540

Everyone vote on that? Okay. So the last one, Champion Red Oak. Quite old, I might say.

1:36:02 – 1:36:203

Yeah. Three fifty years old. Wow. It is the largest red oak in the state of Wisconsin. So, but for a frame of reference, it started growing around the same time that Champlain sailed past on the Wisconsin River.

1:36:200

Yeah. It's worth a marker, but I don't think it meets the criteria of our program today.

1:36:27 – 1:36:450

Okay. Wow. Well, we'll let Brian compute all that, give us some numbers at some point. Should we move on to deciding about the design of these markers?

1:36:474

Maybe I'm going to need to cut out in a couple minutes while that costs you quorum quorum.

1:36:520

It probably will.

1:36:55 – 1:37:101

having some more time to think about it anyway based on what we've found, because the design, I think, has a lot to do with how much we need to say. And we've come up with a variety of different things to say.

1:37:120

So our next meeting is in May? February. February. Next And month, you will not be here, but someone will.

1:37:213

Yeah. I I may be here, but not in an official capacity. Okay. Might be one of those disembodied voices lurking on Zoom.

1:37:280

Okay. Well, you can help us with some continuity issues. But the two things we have left is the design issue and setting a public meeting issue.

1:37:363

Public hearing date, yes.

1:37:380

Public hearing. So should we just continue that February?

1:37:44 – 1:38:063

Sure. Unless you want to have the I mean, unless you want to have the hearing date on the February 11 meeting Ah. Which certainly would be your option. You've you've selected out of the 42, we've got a number that we've kicked out that we've that you said are not applicable to the project. Right.

1:38:06 – 1:39:153

So, you know, I think we're at let me see here. 1234, 567891011121314151617181920212223, 24, 25, 26, 27, some of which Rick, you you submitted, you know, one that I submitted that have we've already sort of talked about. So, you know, they probably maybe 15 or so that would people might want to present and and talk about. We also had Janet Murphy speak here today about some of those. But I think the idea would be to give, you know, people who nominated a site an opportunity to speak to it and talk about why they think it's important for others, you know, who may have an interest also to speak on, you know, any of those those sites.

1:39:15 – 1:39:303

So, certainly could, you know, do that and make that the public hearing date with those ones that meet the criteria or if you wanted to try and narrow it down a little further, you know, take that up at the February 11 meeting and schedule the public hearing further out.

1:39:31 – 1:39:420

What's the feeling of the committee? Do you want to combine it with February 11, or should we continue to work on this before we go to a public hearing?

1:39:42 – 1:40:281

At first, I was gonna say I didn't feel like we're quite ready for prime time yet, but I think also hearing from people before we decide what the markers look like might be helpful. Because then, like I said, it informs how much information we want to have on each one. And maybe you know, I mean, in this exercise tonight, which wasn't quite what I was expecting, we sort of had to scrap together some information. And maybe before we move even farther, it would be helpful to have the input from the other folks, from the nominee tours.

1:40:290

So you wanna have the public hearing on the eleventh?

1:40:321

Yes. But I want to make sure we know exactly what we're doing with that information.

1:40:390

With we get from the public hearing.

1:40:421

And I want them to know why they're coming and what

1:40:450

I guess for me, I'm just wondering, are we ready to invite the public? Do we have what we want?

1:40:501

That goes back to my original thought.

1:40:520

Yeah. I feel like I wanna work on this a little bit more before we schedule a meeting.

1:41:00 – 1:41:111

But what more inform what information are we asking for from them then? Would they be tiebreakers? Are they, you know, are they just filling out more information for us to then take to the next step?

1:41:11 – 1:41:410

Well, I think we're going to sift through what we've decided. We're going to have a ranking for all these markers, and then we can kind of say, Here's our shortlist that we're working from right now. I don't know if we're ready to present that, but here are the ones that ranked twenty, twenty five, had a score of four or five. And these are the ones the committee is looking at proposing for additional work.

1:41:41 – 1:41:563

One question I guess I would have is are there is there testimony that could be presented that might change your ranking in terms of some Good. Sure. On any of these?

1:41:570

And Can we have that list, though, of the rankings? Okay. Yeah. Absolutely. Well, that's what we'll put out there for people to comment on.

1:42:054

I think the list should be maybe this is goes without saying narrowed to the what meet our criteria the minimum criteria of, you know

1:42:160

Right. Yep.

1:42:17 – 1:42:483

Serving what I just that's what I just ran down. So there you know, there's roughly 20 or so that Okay. This commission has identified as meeting their criteria. Right. Some of those, you know, Rick nominated. One of them I or two of them I nominated. So you're probably looking at you know, if you held a public hearing and everything else, you're probably looking at, you know, 15 people or 15 items that people would comment on. I mean, they could comment on anything. Right? And it wouldn't just have to be nominators. It could be the general public or other people

1:42:481

who who didn't make the list can comment on things done on the agenda.

1:42:523

Right. That's true. Okay.

1:42:540

So we'll have a short list

1:42:570

Of 15 or so.

1:42:592

Yeah. Mhmm.

1:43:00 – 1:43:120

And that's what we'll put out there as part of the for comment primarily. People can comment on whatever they want, but this is what we're asking for comment on. Is that good?

1:43:133

That's commission's pleasure.

1:43:170

Does that work for people?

1:43:18 – 1:43:494

I guess what we're looking for out of a public hearing is is to be informed. You know? I mean, we we need to prioritize K. What, five or six sites. And so part of it is, you know, we did a ranking tonight by some of what input we get from the public. We may wanna change some of those rankings, but also just help us identify what are those top tier ones. Right?

1:43:491

Because they're top tier, you

1:43:514

mean The the high priority ones that, you know, we can afford to that were budgeted to the five or six that we can actually

1:44:01 – 1:44:173

So the the other thing that that is going to inform some of that discussion, I think, is one of the items that you wanted to postpone, if ever, which is The design and The design and the cost, because that's a huge there's a huge variance in that. Yep. You know, basically on an order of magnitude.

1:44:181

One affects the other.

1:44:19 – 1:44:453

In terms of, you know, if you're going with the brass plaques, they're very expensive. You know, approximately $3,000 or or so a piece. If you're going with, you know, a more informational sign, some of those could be in the $300 range. So depending on the costs, you could do more or fewer, depending on what those designs are.

1:44:464

The 5 or 6 was based on an idea of it being about 6,000. That's correct, yes.

1:44:510

I will mention though, with the interpretive plaques, there's a lot of design work involved.

1:44:570

they are available to do design work, but I think there'd be a cost there. Yep. So, yeah.

1:45:05 – 1:45:161

So in essence, the public hearing just allows us to gather more information to make our final decision on the top, however many we can afford.

1:45:170

Help us in the ranking.

1:45:183

Mean, from a planning perspective, that's what public hearings are for, is to collect information that you otherwise wouldn't have to help you render a decision.

1:45:270

Help us with the ranking and prioritization of which markers to go forward with.

1:45:321

Yeah. So as long as it's clear to those who are invited

1:45:361

Are they invited, or do they just have

1:45:384

to run across this? Yes.

1:45:403

We'll invite them. Okay.

1:45:41 – 1:45:540

So all the nominators will be invited. Yes. And when we talk more about this on ward radio, we'll let them know this is something that they can become part of too.

1:45:543

Rick and I are gonna be interviewed on Thursday on a public affair by Alan Ruff

1:45:591

Oh, cool.

1:46:003

Who wrote the 2,000 edition of the history of Dane County.

1:46:070

He was one of our coauthors, and I have never met him. We sell his book.

1:46:12 – 1:46:331

I just wanna say for the record, on underrepresented communities, the LGBTQIA community came out ahead with about five. Women, three. Indigenous, three. African American, three. Latino, four. I was just keeping track because

1:46:340

That's interesting.

1:46:354

Yeah. And then Japanese American.

1:46:37 – 1:46:561

And Japanese American one. Yeah. And then Islamic one. Yeah. So there's there's a couple outliers too, but I was just you know? And and this is loose. I I miss some, but because there's some overlap on some of them too. But just wanted to make sure we were getting as many communities as we could.

1:46:560

Right. Great. K. So are we ready to So are

1:47:033

we holding public, are we holding a public hearing on February 11?

1:47:060

I believe so.

1:47:083

Okay. I think that's all you need to do. I wanna ask for a public comment. Let me see if I don't know if Heather's still here.

1:47:230

Tim isn't there, and Oh, Tim's here. Tim is here. Yep.

1:47:283

Heather, was there anything that you wanted to add at this point?

1:47:350

She's still there?

1:47:364

Yep. So it'd be under public comment for things not on the agenda?

1:47:410

Yes. Ah, sorry.

1:47:473

Lot A of talk. Heather, you should be able to speak now.

1:47:53 – 1:48:157

I actually have to click on mute. There we go. I wanna say thank you so much for everything that this group is doing. Brian and I have met several times talking through your program. I do wanna bring up that the city of Madison also has a historic markers program that is we're going to be pulling from the underrepresented communities historic resources survey.

1:48:17 – 1:48:447

And I think a lot of the signage some of the projects that you're talking about are overlapping with the first set of five signs that we're talking about doing. I think this is a great opportunity for collaboration, and there's a lot of places that you are looking that we're not looking. And I think for the wider area, not just within the city itself, but for the wider area, I think that's really wonderful.

1:48:450

Thank you.

1:48:45 – 1:49:121

I would like that information to I would like to know that, you know, because like I said, it necessarily help a place to have more than one plaque as long as the plaque says everything we want it to say. So I appreciate you bringing that up, Heather, and I think that would help inform our decision on what we're you know, we might still rank a thing high, but we might not deem it plaque worthy if it's already under consideration from another entity.

1:49:157

And I think that makes a lot of sense. Yep. Absolutely. I fully agree.

1:49:191

So might we add a column to our sheet

1:49:230

Duplicate effort.

1:49:25 – 1:49:441

In Brian's last days, or or if there's another way to do it, just Sure. You know, which was sort of like my question about the National Register and the Madison Landmarks and the, you know, and let's make sure something gets noticed. It doesn't necessarily matter. It's all about the education.

1:49:443

Yep. We can certainly do that.

1:49:460

Good idea. Thanks. Thank you, Heather. I appreciate your sitting through this long meeting.

1:49:537

No. No. Absolutely. Thank you again for what you're doing.

1:49:560

Alright. I'm more than willing to collaborate. I like that idea. So we'll try and stay in touch.

1:50:037

Sounds good. Thank you.

1:50:05 – 1:50:160

Thank you. Such other business is allowed by law. I think we're ready to adjourn. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye.

1:50:184

Aye. Need to record somebody else making a motion. Okay. Jim

1:50:222

moves. Moves.

1:50:233

So moves.

This transcript was automatically generated from the official public meeting video and is presented unedited. It reflects remarks made on the public record by elected officials, staff, and public commenters. Transcript accuracy may vary; view the original recording for reference.