Common Council - Regular Meeting

All right. I call to order the meeting of our Common Council for Tuesday, June 16th, 2026. Clerk? Yes, thank you, Your Honor.

We have 11 members in the room. Mr. Orlowski is excused.

All right. Thank you, Clerk. Now please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance and remain standing for an invocation offered by Alderman Hinkley.

Pledge of Allegiance.

Everybody can take a seat, and I'd like to just take a moment of silence and think about what we can do to make our city better. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Alder. Approval of the minutes.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve. Made by Alder Proffitt. Seconded by Alder Presley. Any changes? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. The ayes have it. The minutes are approved. Approval of the agenda. Motion to approve, made by Alder Eck, seconded by Alder DeLee. Any amendments here? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it, and the agenda has been approved. Report by the mayor. Just a couple quick things. City night at Joanne's, hopefully, weather permitting, tomorrow night. I think it's also Blue Ribbon's alumni night, so it should be a great opportunity to hang out at the ball field, interact with some of the city staff, and offer our appreciation to them. If there is a rain issue or rain out, we'll try to reschedule that, but hoping that we're able to get there tomorrow night. um next july 4th celebration america 250 of course coming up um so as usual we've got our fire over the fox that is coordinated by on broadway but in addition to that we have um a bigger celebration stretching earlier into the the morning so mid-morning um things will get going we've got the widener philharmonic um playing some patriotic songs a little bit of a speaking program uh Preble Drumline will be there. So a number of different things to check out. So inviting council members and, of course, members of the community to celebrate America's 250th in downtown Green Bay. And with that, we'll go to announcements. All the press is late.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Another announcement, a reminder that Green Bay Pride is this Saturday from 1.30 to, or wait, 1 o'clock p.m. to 8.30 p.m., and it's a block party right outside of this building. So it'll be in the street on Cherry and Jefferson. And I also want to recognize we lost two members of the queer community recently, Paul Grahl and Joseph Torres, who were, I mean, pillars of that community and the community as a whole. So we'll be recognizing them at Pride, but I also wanted to take a minute here to recognize their contributions.

Thank you, Alder. I'll be there as well. Anyone else? Alder Hutchison.

I'd like to recognize the fact that Tom Shermans, Traffic Engineer for the City of Green Bay, of 37 years experience. Today's his last day. And if you ever went before the Traffic, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Commission, he was the one guiding light at that commission, and he did a terrific job. So just want to get that out there.

Absolutely. Well said. We're going to miss him.

Alder Prophet?

I just have a quick announcement. Some may know that I help coordinate a community fridge program. So I just wanted to share over the past six weeks, we've doubled. So we've gone from two to four fridges with most recent on Sunday at West Moravian Church, which is near Lombardi in Lombardi Neighborhood Association. So I just want to share for any in the community who may have a little extra. There's two fridges on the east side, two on the west side. And for anyone in our community that might need a little help. We now have four community fridges. And for any neighbors who feel like those two aren't close enough to their home, please reach out. We're always looking to add more so that they're accessible for everyone in the community.

That's great stuff. Thank you. Any other announcements? Seeing none, we'll move along to appointments. Motion to approve our new appointment made by Alder Profit and seconded by Alder Act. Any discussion on that? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The ayes have it. Yes, motion to approve the reappointments made by Alder Presley.

Second.

Seconded by Alder Hinkfess. Discussion on those? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and those reappointments are made. Report of the redevelopment authority. Motion to approve. Motion to approve by Alder Prophet. Is there a second?

Second.

Seconded by Alder Hinkfess. On that, Alder DeBaker. All right, Alder DeBaker abstains from item one. Any items to be handled separately? Two. Any others? Hearing none others, all in favor of approving the remainder of the report, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The ayes have it. The report is to be approved with the exception of item two. On item two, Alder DeLee.

I was just wondering if the developer was here, if they could talk a little bit about it, or if staff had any more information about this project.

I don't believe he is present, but I would go to our Deputy Director Buchanan.

All right, this is a development agreement for the corner of Elk and Locust. The developer is looking to do multifamily on this site. It's already zoned multifamily, so the development agreement would allow for PAYGO TIF assistance to help support the cost. I think it's getting a new TID.

90 units, three buildings?

Yes, three buildings, three 30-unit buildings, all multifamily.

Okay. There were some concerns from the residents about some wetlands back in there. I don't know if you have any information on that.

No, this is a redevelopment of previously developed sites. This is a former nursery. I'm not aware of wetland issues that would be handled through the proper development process with building permit. That's not something we typically consider at the development agreement stage too much.

Okay. Anything else? That's all I had.

All right.

I entertain a motion to approve. So moved. Second. Moved by Alder Profitt and seconded by Alder Britterbush. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay. The ayes have it. That item has been approved. Improvement and Services Committee. Motion to approve, made by Alder Eck. Aye. Seconded by Alder Prophet. Items here to be handled separately. Abstention on number five. All right. If you don't have any separate items, all in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. The ayes have it. And that report has been approved. Protection and Policy Committee. Motion to approve. Motion to approve, made by Alder Prophet and seconded by Alder Presley. Items here to be handled separately.

One.

One and nine. Any others? Hearing none others, all in favor of approving the remainder of the report, signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. If the ayes have it, the report has been approved with the exception of items one and nine. On item one, Alder Prophet.

So I'd like to make a motion to hold this item and perhaps request that we handle or host a special meeting to address these. Just for some clarification, in our packet, the licenses that are before us were locked. We can see them as the council, but the general public cannot see them publicly posted on our city's webpage. So because, you know, interested parties may not have seen that they themselves or just a community member that was looking at what these renewals were just couldn't see them. So I would just make a motion to hold and request, given that our next council meeting is kind of far out, that hopefully we can kind of work together as a body to schedule something relatively soon to just address these renewals and potential non-renewals.

So Alder Prophet moves to hold these items until a special meeting to be scheduled here in the near future. Is there a second for that? Seconded by Alder Hinkvis. And then just asking either the clerk or attorney, city attorney, to weigh in on that. If any.

I can certainly, as Alder Prophet mentioned, it's just a notice issue. Again, we thought this attachment was part of the packet, and it wasn't, and there are renewals and one non-renewal. So we'll have to repost them, and we will do so. Special meeting. The point about Alder Prophet's request for a special meeting is these licenses expire June 30th. Okay.

Thank you.

Any additional comments or questions? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed, nay. The ayes have it, and that item will be held over until that special meeting. Item nine, pulled by Alderac.

Thank you, Mayor. Yes, I would like to make a motion to deny. I just feel that we have mechanisms in place already. that would take care of these situations without putting more restrictions on our homeowners and our business owners. And I don't think we need to add more fees, which basically are taxes, adding more taxes. So that is my motion.

Okay, Alder, I can make some motion to deny. Is there a second for that? Second. Second by Alder Grant. Further discussion on denial, Alder Grant?

Can I just ask some questions either for staff or Alder Presley about, I guess, is there a specific property in mind that sparked this or what brought this idea forward?

Alder Presley.

Yeah, there was some complaints in my district, both on a property on the west side of my district and some on East Shore Drive.

Can I ask what the issues were?

There was one individual, well, a couple people with one property who had concerns that it was windows boarded up. People were potentially breaking into it. Just not well-maintained, this property, and had been unused for close to a decade.

Okay. And then just a follow-up question for staff. With those issues, do we not have nuisance ordinances placed? I mean, we don't allow those, do we? Director Renier-Wick.

If we receive a complaint, we'll follow up on it and issue orders for repair or whatever might be needed.

Do you feel the current city ordinances can handle this situation?

the situation of a property that's in disrepair? Yes.

Okay. So yeah, I just, I asked those questions because I think we have mechanisms in place, or maybe if there's things that we should be amending of our existing ordinances to address these issues that might help this problem better. Because what I worry about is an ordinance like this may have some unintended consequences for everyone in the city. And we, it's not a black and white situation. Some I don't think any business owner wants a vacant property. It's costing them money. They're still paying taxes on it. Some people are going through medical issues or financial issues. I just don't want to knock people down when they're already in a bad place. So I think maybe we take a step back and look at what is the issue and is there a better way to address it than fees. Thank you.

Any other comments? Alder Presley. And just a reminder, this is, and you all know this, but this is just on referral. We're not adopting anything tonight. Alder Presley.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, to that point, as a referral to staff, I'd like to see what our options are potentially. Maybe it's not something that we decide we want to pass, but right now, I personally, even though I've looked into it, I don't have enough information to decide if this is something we necessarily need or is worth looking into. I will say, I mean, it's the philosophy behind it is that There are costs incurred on the city, on the neighborhoods, on the other businesses that spill over from properties that are neglected, that are vacant. So the philosophy of a vacant property fee comes from the fact that those are, if I have my business and I take care of it every day and I go in there, the lights are on, I'm open for business, I'm contributing to the neighborhood, I'm contributing to the commercial corridor. If I have a business right next to mine that has been shut down for years and years, just held as a commercial investment or whatever it might be, that property is potentially getting nuisances building up. It is potentially getting people breaking into it. It could be a hotbed for loitering. It could just, I mean, on the basic level, level be unattractive to people who might be coming to my business next door, but are not going to because they see, especially if there's a group of them, just this sort of chronic vacancy in an area. So it is to discourage that sort of use of owned properties. So I don't think it's a punishment for anybody. I think it's just leveling what people who are taking care of their properties are contributing to the neighborhood and If you have a vacant property, there are damages that spill over outside of that property. And asking them to pay for some of the harm outside of their property, I think, is perfectly warranted, at least looking into it. So I'm not in favor of the denial.

Thanks, Alder. Anything else? Council Alder Hinkvist, then Hutchison.

So when I read this, and I did talk to Joey Hinkvist, or Alder Presley about this. I feel, and I've been thinking about this, I feel like we have a solution to a problem that we don't know what the problem is. Because we're going immediately to saying we want to establish a fee for those homes that are not, don't have people in them after so many, such a period. Maybe we need to turn it around and say, look at the properties where we do have issues and if they're not being resolved, look at a fee from that perspective. But written as it is, I can't support it. It's too broad and it brings a lot of questions for me, I would have for my constituents. So I do think that there are fees that we should charge when there are nuisance properties. and people not, but I can't support just an all out. And part of that comes from my own personal experience. My father-in-law's house on Monroe was vacant for three years. He had a stroke. This would say that we would have been charged for that as this is written. And I don't think that that's Alder Presley's intent. So if we, you know, pared it down, But as it stands, I would be a no. Thank you.

Alder Hutchinson?

Yeah, I think there is a need to, like Alder Hinkbus said, understand the issue. I don't think walking away from this issue and just putting this to rest is not the way to go. Um, so I'd be against denial, but I would be in favor of changing and amending this, um, petition, uh, to for staff to develop a, a memo regarding the establishing, uh, a, uh, ordinance. So it would be a little different. It wouldn't be establishing the ordinance. it would be giving us the alternatives that we're looking for. I think the just drop it isn't correct.

Okay. Alder Dillian then profit.

With this being a referral to staff, I think it's a great way to open the floor to just start some communication on it. I can understand what Alder Grant said and I can understand what Alder Presley said and Alder Hinkfess. But there are situations where we do run into properties where I think people are very lax on them. I know of a house in my district that has been vacated for like 15 years, and the neighbors have complained to me repeatedly about it, that no one even goes to the house anymore, and they only cut the grass when they get home. Reports from the city that they need to so it's stuff like that. I can think of commercial properties on belt Avenue that. Roofs were caved in for multiple, multiple years, and maybe looking into something like this and establishing an ordinance where we can actually establish some guidelines with it and maybe. Not as much, you know, do a negative aspect to people, but encourage them to move along in the process to get things changed on that property to brighten the side of that area.

Thanks, Alder Prophet.

So before I get into my feelings about what the communication is, I just want to address, it's really disheartening to hear that we would deny an alder the ability to just ask staff to look at something. I don't think that's something we routinely have done historically on this body, so I would just encourage everyone to at least allow the opportunity for staff to look at it. So that and then I'll go briefly just because, again, it's just a referral to staff. So I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty, even though I've done my fair share of research on the topic. To me, we don't even have a fee structure in front of us. So the hesitation that, oh, we're adding fees. We don't know what those fees are. Really, to me, what I see this as is incentivizing a property owner to come in and just communicate with staff. other delieges touched on. You might have some of those properties. I know I have plenty in my district where there's not even readily accessible contact information for the property owner because it's an LLC that's out of state and it's really hard to get in touch with some of them. If they see a $5 fee added somewhere along the line, they might come in and they might answer those phone calls. So I'm just really disappointed that we would just go straight to denial when we don't even know a dollar amount. We don't know nothing in front of us right now. We're just asking staff to do a little digging for us, which other municipalities do this. We wouldn't be the first of this kind. And I really feel like I owe it to my constituents that, you know, we look into this because I've had my fair share of complaints, as I know we all have. And, again, it could be $5. We don't even know yet.

Thanks, Alder.

Lots of people. Alder Shelton hasn't spoken yet.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay.

I just want to really echo what Alder Prophet said, which is that this is really just an exploration of something that I think, if we're being honest, we all know this is an issue in our city. My next door neighbor has basically abandoned the house next to me for seven years. And had it not been for one of my neighbors smelling a gas leak, I don't know what could have happened to the street from that house. So this is an issue. And I would just remind everybody what we're here to do. We're not here to play games. We're here to do things for our constituents to try and improve life in the city. And so exploring this, as Alder Presley has communicated it, is something that we should all vote for, honestly. It doesn't mean that we're changing anything today. It means that we're exploring the problem and figuring out what may be some things that we can do about it.

Thanks, Alder. Alder Grant.

Thank you, Mayor. I think the issue, the reason I'm supporting the denial of this communication, because this communication specifically says that to establish a vacant property registration and fee program for commercial and residential properties. What I'm saying is if staff is going to focus time and spend their time on something, I would rather the communication be around what is the problem and where can we either fix existing ordinances. I don't think fees, a fee program isn't going to stop a gas leak call. That can be called in right now. Boarded up windows can be called in now. Things, that's what we're getting at. So If these properties are taking a long time to have the issues addressed, then that's the problem we need to be addressing. Fees aren't going to fix those things. So I understand that we're not voting on a fee schedule, but we're asking staff to spend time on something that I don't think fixes the problem. So if they're going to spend their time on something, The problem, I think it needs to be amended. So I can appreciate Alder Hutchinson's recommendation that maybe we aren't asking them to create a fee schedule, but look at abandoned properties in the city. What is the problem and how are we addressing them and why is it taking so long? Thank you.

Thanks, Alder. Alder Hinkwist in the back.

I think Alder... You just, you just, that's the issue is are we looking at properties that have been long-term or are we looking at property short-term? I look at this as my father-in-law moved out and I would have to file something with the city. That's what this says to me. So if we want to look at nuisance properties, want to make sure that we have the right things in, charge a fee, I don't have an issue with that. It's just, this is too broad for me. So another communication or amendment I'm okay with, but this is just really broad. And I don't think it sends the right message to the community. Thanks, Alderac.

Thank you, Mayor. Yes, I believe that we already have, as I said before, mechanisms in place. And I also reiterated at the protection of policy that this puts undue burden on our residents, on businesses, and on our staff for the monitoring. You're asking people to come in and register that when they're either their home or their business is vacant and then be monitored. To me, we already have those mechanisms. Our inspection department takes care of these things. just today I had calls into inspections about different things and they're always very good about checking into these problems and getting it solved. And I appreciate that. And I just feel like that that's already there. This is just adding one more thing. So I just think it's doubling up something that's already there. So that is why I'm making the motion to deny. And again, I don't want staff to spend more time on something that I just don't agree with. So thank you.

Thanks, Alder. Alder Presley for a second time.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. All of these responses, I think, have really justified the need for a fee when I'm thinking about it because we're talking about the processes that we have in place, which our inspection comes in. That's staff time. That's administrative time. We send the fire department in to check on a gas leak. That's fire department time. That's administrative time. If we have to put resources into cutting somebody's grass because they haven't cut their grass, shoveling the sidewalk. That's time and money that we are spending with no recoup for that. Sometimes we get, if we have to cut grass, we can build them, but why not create a standardized structure where we account for these additional burdens that go on the city and go on the neighbors for these sort of properties? Why don't we account for that with a fee And then we can also have a registry, because right now we don't have just a list of all the vacant properties. That's something that we don't have registered. So I recognize the concerns with this. I mean, to Alder Hinkfess's concern about the individual case with your father-in-law, I think any policy is going to have options for appeals and options for exemptions. I think the transfer of an estate is absolutely an option for exemption. I think that ongoing maintenance or refurbishing a property where they can't have somebody move in immediately, that's an option for exemption. But I don't want to shoot this down wholesale. I also, to Alder Prophet's point about us not denying referrals to staff, we have actually made a habit of it, but it's only my communication so far. So I can count four. So if we want to continue that trend, I'm happy to fill that role. But I would prefer that we just refer this to staff. Thank you.

Alder Ritterbush. I guess I have to agree with Alder Presley. There's a property on Dousman Street that's been sitting empty for 15 years. It's 15 years that somebody could have did something with it. that it's just crumbling down. And, you know, that could be housing. That could be housing that we could put some of our residents in the community. And I think that's very important. But I think we should keep our eyes open and not worry about the fees. And let's get some dialogue with the whole, you know, the staff to figure out what would be the best for all of them. Thank you.

Anything else on the denial motion? Alder to Baker.

One other aspect we got to consider is how does this look if we don't look at what the city holds as vacant properties as well, both buildings and land. Having those vacant lots, as others said, kind of gives the feeling that people, why aren't people here? So if we're going to be looking at these, we also have to look at ourselves when we consider that. That's all.

Anything else? All right. This is on the motion to deny. Sure. Board vote has been requested. Again, this is to deny the referral. And that fails four to seven.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve, made by Alder Prophet, seconded by Alder Presley. Any further discussion? Alder Hutchinson.

Having listened to what people have said and what their concerns are with this motion, for presenting it to staff to investigate, I would make the motion we change these words in the first line. We refer to staff a request to draft, delete an ordinance establishing that gets deleted. And then in its place, a memo regarding Okay, so it's a memo regarding vacant property registration fee program and then deleting the last line where a fee structure would be. Created, we will wait till after we get the memo. If we do this before we do any of that. Okay, is there a 2nd for that amendment? Sure, so it would read this way to approve the petition and communication submitted by all their joy Presley to refer to staff and request to draft a memo regarding vacant property registration and fee program for commercial and resident residential properties that remain unused for an extended period of time, with the goal of discouraging long term vacancy. encouraging productive use, and addressing the public costs created by vacant buildings, including code enforcement, safety, maintenance, neighborhood stability, and development impacts, redevelopment impacts, period.

Is there a second for that? Seconded by Alder Hinkley's discussion on the amendment. Excuse me, Alder Crawford.

I understand the intent of the memo, but I guess I'll just say I'm opposed to that because I think if we're going to have staff look at it, they might as well draft the ordinance because if we're going to spend staff time doing the memo, come back here, decide, yep, let's proceed. I think it just eliminates and then we have a full picture right away and then we can just look at the ordinance, pick it apart from there and the fee schedule as is if that's the will of the body. So I think it's just adding another step. to what we may end up already requesting. So I'm against a memo. I'd like to just cut right to the chase.

Thanks, Alder. Any other comments on the amendment? Seeing none, all in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay.

Nay.

The nays appear to have it.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve. Do we have that already on the floor? Yes. So any further discussion on the communication as it's written? Seeing none, all in favour will say aye. Aye. Board vote has been requested by Alder Grant.

You may vote.

And that passes six to five. So we're now on to report of the Green Bay Police Department granting operator licenses. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Made by Alder Profit. Seconded by Alder Presley. Any abstentions? All right. All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay. The ayes have it. That report has been approved. Report of the Planning Commission.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve. Made by Alder Profit. Seconded by Alder Eck. Items here to be handled separately. Hearing none. All in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. You guys have it. That report has been approved. Finance Committee? Motion to approve. Motion to approve, made by Alder Presley.

Second.

Seconded by Alder Ritterbush. Alder DeBaker is abstaining on number one. Any items to be handled separately? Hearing none, all in favor will say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. You guys have it. And that report has been approved. Park Committee? Motion to approve, second. Motion to approve, made by, was it DeLee? Alder DeLee, seconded by Alder Eck. Any discussion here? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed nay? The ayes have it. That report has been approved. Personnel Committee? Motion to approve. Motion to approve, made by Alder Prophet, seconded by Alder DeLee. Discussion on this item? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Opposed, nay. You guys have it. That report has been approved. Informational, a few items here. The court report and the building report, as well as the release and availability of a Class B liquor license. Resolutions.

Motion to suspend the rules.

Motion to suspend the rules and take up these items with one roll call vote. Made by Alder Prophet.

Seconded.

Seconded by Alder Presley. All in favor, we'll say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. You guys have it. The rules are suspended.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt, made by Alder Prophet. Seconded by Alder DeLee. Discussion here. We'll use the board. And those resolutions are approved 11-0. Ordinance is first reading. Motion to suspend the rules. Take up these items with one roll call vote, made by Alder Prophet. Seconded by Alder Presley. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. You guys have it. The rules are suspended.

Motion to advance.

Motion to advance, made by Alder Prophet. Seconded by Alder DeLee. Discussion here. Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed, nay. You guys have it. And those ordinances are advanced to a second final reading. Committee of the Whole. Just on those real quick, Attorney Kochart, can you just explain what we have in front of us? Sure, absolutely.

So both Committee of the Whole items are actually a renewal for these alcohol licenses. You may recall from the previous meeting, these were recommended for non-renewal. A notice went out through additional discussions with both the Law Department, Police Department, and others. The staff recommendation has changed to a recommendation FOR RENEWAL WITH BOTH HAVE A REQUIREMENT THAT A CORRECTION MEETING BE HELD. CORRECTION MEETINGS ARE PROVIDED FOR IN CHAPTER 4 AND THEY'RE HELD WITH CHIEF DAVIS AND MYSELF AND APPROPRIATE STAFF. SO THESE ARE BOTH NOW RECOMMENDATIONS FOR RENEWAL TO GIVE THESE ESTABLISHMENTS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEMONSTRATE AN ABILITY TO COMPLY WITH OUR ORDINANCES SO LONG AS WE GET THIS MEETING COMPLETED AND THEIR LICENSE SHOULD BE ISSUED FOLLOWING THAT MEETING.

OKAY. MOTION TO APPROVAL BY OLDER AK. SECONDED BY OLDER HINKFESS. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. And that report has been approved. Motion to adjourn. Moved by Alder Eck.

Second.

Seconded by Alder Ritterbush. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed nay. The ayes have it. We're adjourned. Thanks, everybody.