Plan Commission - Regular Meeting

So that's the other thing. So either the golf course has some in the end. Well, they got to change it because you can't have to write some It could be the oldest

that one I think had a 33 dedication. So it's either they didn't Go all the way that line. So it's like I think they look at it more or less center. That's probably

So unless they can provide something6 We got

they show us something. probably Maybe just All right, good evening. We'll get the meeting going. Uh is

February 12th here at the Village Walker show for the joint plan commission and village board meeting. Um, if you could all stand for pledge of allegiance, please stand als for all. Thank you. Uh, open meeting law and compliance check verifying that the agenda was posted properly and distributed to the public news media on or before February 11th. Yes. Yep. I'll go backwards and do a roll call. Plan commission here. Buckold here. White here. Niles

here. Nelson here. Heckers here. Stable village board. Stigler here. White here. Niles here. Adams here. Buckles here. Okay, we've compliance checked already. Uh, citizens comments. Anyone want to come up to microphone and speak? If you do, just uh give us your name and address, please. and go one at a time. Thank you.

Um, hello. My name is uh Don Peekle. My husband Ted and I reside at S62 W24240 Townline Road in Wauaaw, Wisconsin. We have come here today to get on record that we are against the Big Ben sports complex that is being discussed which is approximately four blocks from our home and would be AC and across the street the phase two. We would we would hear and and have a clear view of this complex and the hotels and all the other things. We went to the sport complex meeting that was held in January at the village of West Ben or Big Ben, excuse me. We are very happy that this board was proactive and discussed ahead of that meeting and voted against this construction use of village of Wauaaw resources the fire EMT sheriff tax hour tax dollars roads infrastructure cost to the taxpayers and other resources not mentioned at the meeting. There were over 40 plus issues and questions in which the village of Big Ben had no answers or at least were not made available to the public that were potential serious issues to the areas of the community impacted. We are concerned on a personal level of a loss of property value to our home. Are our taxes in the gen general area going to be redone? It was mentioned that our home value could drop as much as 25%. Which does not surprise me. If we had a potential buyer, I am sure some of the questions would be, "Can you hear that complex when events are taking place? How was the traffic? Have there been issues when events have been going on? Is it safe? Have you had trouble?" I know these are questions I would ask. A retired police officer spoke on the questions I've mentioned who had served on the police force for Franklin and said an emphatic yes. It was a huge issue to the neighbors of Franklin all the way to Greenale. There were over 200

neighbor complaints and lawsuits. Over and over throughout the meeting, people brought up a number one reason they moved to this area was a quiet and rural life by leaving the Milwaukee and other urban neighborhoods. I know that things change, but there are other options for this land use that would be much more conduct conducive for the area of village of Wauaaw, village of Vernon, and the village of Big Ben. We as other village of Walkershaw residents would appreciate the continu continued transparency on this project and continued support against this project at it is not the best interest in our area andu and community. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else?

Good evening. Mike Borchard, W231, S5205 Hunter Hollow. Uh, two things. I see the board as charging $30 for a yard waist permit. I don't have a problem with that. Um, I think it would have been better served that a fee put on the tax bill for every resident. Uh, every resident has to pay for school taxes, whether we have children in school or not. um could have put 25 bucks on the tax bill and I think you would have gotten more revenue uh for the yard waste. The other subject is the DPW building which is been going on for well over a year. Uh I was told that one of the previous meetings in January that a statement was made um saying that someone in someone not present this evening said we have to have 4ft concrete walls on the DPW building. And that would have to point to me because I'm the one that designed the building that you're talking about for the last year. I never said you had to have 4 feet concrete walls. It was part of the original plan. No one questioned it. Matter of fact, in the early stages, one of the current board members told me it should be 5- foot concrete walls. I said, "No problem. Change it to five foot concrete walls." And it was never brought up again. The reason for the concrete walls in my design was if you're going to wash trucks in there, which are covered with salt from the winter on that, it's going to give the building a better integrity instead of having metal panels down to the wall. Metal panels are going to get

banged up with equipment. Um, you're going to be spraying salt water against it and everything else. So, that was the reasoning for it. Uh I I delivered complete plans and specifications with the help of contractors for 1.3 million. You had a architect that was talking about 5 million. Uh you can take it and do whatever you want with it, which I know you will. I know that the DPW building discussions have been going on with boards for 10 years or more and I I just don't see anything going on. What the board needs to keep in mind though is Workman Enterprises plowing half the village, actually about 60% of it isn't going to be plowing for the village every year. We don't even know if they're going to plow this next winter. Okay. the board, the village is way behind on getting a DPW building, getting enough trucks, and getting enough drivers. Uh, one of these days it's it's a ticking time bomb. It's going to blow up in your face. So, uh, I just put on my three minutes. Anyways, so uh if you have any other questions as far as what the information that I put together for you, you've got my phone number. Please feel free to call me. I'll be glad to discuss it with any one of you at any time. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak? I got a lot of papers. Sandy Ham was 230 South 3827 Milky Way Road. I'll just start by saying I hope you approve the ordinance changes that are in agenda item 12. Everyone knows I'm in support of that. Um, and I had some other things I would like to speak about, but something unexpectedly I guess for me was that, you know, the CH issues came up and today's agenda and I wanted to share with everybody. There's four of you up there that know pretty much everything and and the rest of you, you know, this goes back now 16 years for the residents. It it's not like just one year or two years. And um we've seen just for instance initially in 2012 and I went back and got the minutes and the agendas from way back all those years on this issue and been going through them. You know it's the started at 8 well there was certain months of the year it went till 9:30 for lights and operation and then other months it was shorter but that's all gone and I understand that. But over the years then it's crept from 9:30 now up to 10:30 and now the request is for 10:45. I don't know why they would ever stop asking until it's the next day or something. I mean this is this is what the last 16 years have been. When the project was proposed the town ordinance was 28 feet for light poles. Then it was 70 or 71 feet. Then they

came back again and needed even more lights, more higher poles. So that's what this is. Um, you know, the very first meeting that ever took place in this room on Five Diamonds, the first person to speak for them was their attorney. And there had been quite an uproar about some of the projected fears of this project. And the first thing out of his mouth was, "There will never be alcohol served at this facility. And now again today, we have another request that was denied last May coming at us again. I I just don't understand why we're going to spend a lot of time on it. I I don't know whether a good idea or a bad idea to have a strongman competition. I probably don't think it's a good idea to serve alcohol at this strong man camp competition, but you know, next year it'll be two or three or four. It's just creeping and it's been creeping for 16 years. I've been watching it. So, just want you to understand that as a neighbor with the whole view of it from beginning to end, um it's awfully frustrating to have to deal with it. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Hello, Sarah Karstens and I reside at S37W23155 Moyer Way and I wanted to speak about the Catholic memorial um request to have longer hours. I have young children. There's a lot of young children that are right in the same neighborhood as I am and the field is literally our backyard. I mean, we can walk across the nature skate park and we are we are in their vicinity. It just doesn't make sense to continue to have longer hours. There's lights, there's music, there's if we add alcohol, there will be what would be considered a party scene. And I think we are inviting trouble, especially when people come out of that parking lot onto a very busy highway. It just doesn't seem necessary to continue to add. What they have now is adequate. If they would like alcohol as a special use, they can always request it and then it can be reviewed for the situation and the purpose that they're intending. So, I just really would like you to consider keeping it a quieter neighborhood with especially as it gets later at night because we moved here because we have a family and I know there are many other families in the community as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Hi, my name is Dan Peterson. I live at S37W23110 Moyer Way. I probably have the closest house to the Catholic Memorial Complex. And I think if you look at things in context, um, overall they've been a good neighbor. I can see the lights. I can hear the noise. But it's it's not too bad right now. But I think the theme has been they continue to take another inch and another inch and another inch or request another inch. And that wasn't the original intent of this project. So overall, I think they've been a good neighbor. I'm not knocking them. I want kids to have a good time. I want the community to have a good time. And I think so far that has taken place. But if you keep asking for more and more and more, eventually it becomes a nuisance and then we're too far down the line. So, thanks for hearing me out. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, hearing none, we will move on. Approval of the uh previous meeting minutes from January 8th of 2026.

I'll make a motion we approve the minutes as printed. Okay. Is there a second? Make sure your microphones are on, please. Just as a reminder. Got it. Thank you. All right. It's been motioned and second. Is there any discussion? All right. Hear none for the plan commission. All those in favor say I. I. Anyone opposed? Carries. Uh, village board. I make pass. Okay. Second. I'll second that motion. Any other discussion? Okay. All those in favor from the village board of approving say I.

Any opposed? That carries as well. Thank you. Okay. Next item on the agenda. Uh notice is hereby given that a joint public hearing involving the village walka plan commission and village board will be held today on uh February 12th at 6 p.m. 6:30 p.m. excuse me u for accessory building waiver request for quantity and location of accessory buildings. The petitioner James Britain property owner is James and Cheryl Britain with the location being west 225 South 5201 and west 225 South 5261 Guthrie Road. Sean, you want to start?

Sure. Um, if you remember last year, um, in May, the petitioner was in front of the plan commission board. Wanted to build a fairly large accessory building. Um, 60240t barn essentially. Um, he owns both of these properties. So, there's one in south which, you know, he's he's got a new home there and then there's a property to the north that has an existing home, a rental home, and then a a large barn, a couple silos, a shed, and then a detached garage. So at the what he was trying to do is essentially build the barn the new barn on this on this property with the with the rental um because of the number of buildings at the time because of the location of the buildings um and then the square footage of the buildings he need essentially needed a waiver for them from the plan commission. The plan commission denied the request because essentially they thought it was a better idea to create a oneacre parcel for the rental house and the existing detached garage and then combine everything else into one big large parcel where it would make more sense to put a large barn. Again, the the purpose of the barn is for agricultural operations, storage of equipment and so on. So, um, the the petitioner went away, uh, and is now back looking to a cert to do a certified survey map. Again, that's a different item on the agenda, but essentially building the same barn in in a in near the same location, but it's a larger property now because of the combination. He'd still be requesting a waiver for the number of accessory buildings and then the location of the accessory buildings being closer to the road than the home, but would not need a waiver for the the total area because the the total combined parcel would be large enough for the the area of the building. So, um we can get into the CSM too if you want to, but I wasn't going to cover that unless there was questions about it until we get to that agenda item.

So this no action is taken as part of the public hearing. This is just for the you know to ask questions and for the obviously for the public to provide comments or questions if they have any. Thank you. Uh for the boards uh anything initial question wise or comments that you have for Sean or related to this? Yeah, I've got one. Didn't we have something similar to this though with a building in front of the residence down the road the u a dare property and that was denied? Uh what's the difference here I guess is my question.

Nothing I mean there's not necessarily any difference on this one. Um except that originally he was requesting it to be here and it would not have been closer to the road than this house. But the direction from the plan commission and board was the better solution was to break off this 1acre parcel so that the large barn and the other barn that's being kept would be part of a bigger farm holding. And so that was the trade-off that was discussed last time. Um the plan commission board as far as I remember basically said if you can do that pro prove all the setbacks work that essentially that you'd be willing to consider the waiverss for the location as well as the the number. So that was it was a trade-off basically on this one. Does anybody remember it differently?

I mean before it was part of that house, right? The farmhouse. It was part of which one was part of the farmhouse? No, it was going to be to the north of the farmhouse. It was going to be right here. And that's where it's still going. The building is going to be. As far as the CSM goes, it was I thought we were putting it with the house. We're putting we're putting with his we're putting with his house. I know that that's what's supposed. But like I said, that's exactly what happened down with the dares down there and they were denied. Now we're putting this house if you left it with the house, the front house, the farmhouse, put the building with that. I would think then it would be compliant.

It would be compliant with location. and it wouldn't be compliant with number or quantity. Plus, the concern from the plan commission board was that that's too small of a parcel for all those accessory buildings. And that the ideas was to split this one off and then have the larger egg holdings. And so, what the plan commission board said, as I recall, was that yes, we know there's a waiver for location. Yes, we know there's a waiver for number, but we're willing to do that to to to make it a large egg holding. Yeah. Part of that was too that we didn't have the certified survey map to check as far as the distances and setbacks to the new lot line that was going to be between the existing house and the new building that he wants to put in.

So we we forced him to go get the CSM based on how the last conversation was. That was the direction given is that we could have approved it at the time, but the thought was and said pending the pending you get the CSM approved because he always had he was always planning doing a CSM, but the but the idea was to bring back the CSM at the same time so we can make sure all the setbacks work and and everything else. Yeah, force is the wrong word, I guess, when I say so. So, yes, I mean that was all talked about, but it was it was in my recollection it was it was sort of a tradeoff. Yeah, I think no matter what you do the You're not going to be able to get that barn in front of that new house.

It's always going to be in front of the house because there's no room behind it or beside it to put it. I get that. But the original before the the new house was built that was that lot was separated off. We put we approved that as a we did a split split. We did

built his house back so he could build that new house back there. That's And now we're going to build Now he wants to build a shed in the front. I guess why why didn't you why didn't we combine the the farmhouse, the new building, and the old barns into one parcel? Wouldn't that kept the back house separate? I mean, I don't we keep talking about this and every time I look at the pictures and stuff and it all doesn't make sense because now we're doing Say that last part again if you don't mind to combine what to combine the the original the old barn back there that we were you know saving. Combine that with which the house the farmhouse this one.

Yeah. Okay. It already is on the new one on a new city. No, I mean that's but that's the existing condition. This I mean all the accessory buildings are on the parcel with the farmhouse and then put the new building on that parcel. Right. On this par on this parcel. No. On the old one. On the old one. Yeah. That's what he wanted to do originally. That's what he came in originally with and then and you guys said no. Because because the lot was too small. Because you felt because you felt this lot was too small. We got too many lots here. That would Okay.

So, you wanted a bigger property and that's why you you'd said create this one acre, make this a larger egg holding and then you you could you could get your waiverss. Are you able to put up what? Yeah, I could put that versus the

So, so this is proposed, right? So, this is a basically a oneacre lot for the farmhouse and the detached garage. Here's the his new house. Here's the old barn shed. And here's the proposed building. So again, it's a it's a 24 acre parcel, which is more than enough for the the size, the square footage of all those buildings. It just happens to be this one's clo it's closer to the road than the home. And then the number there's an existing barn, a shed, there's two silos that aren't quite attached to the barn, but the discussion last time was that you'd consider them, you know, for for waiver purposes, you know, they're close enough to the barn to really be in one structure. So there's, you know, technically five buildings with this one, but in reality or practically there's there's three. Um, again, the whole point was put it on a big parcel. That was the that was the discussion.

Any other questions? What are the minimum acres he needs to keep it agricultural? Uh, it's not agricultural. It's it's R1. which is one acre. You can still farm in R1 obviously, but it's so R1.

All right, Mr. Brandon, did you want to come up and say anything at all?

Good evening, Mike. I think I've seen most of you before. I don't know if I saw you. Give us your name, please.

Mike Schober, s 2835 South Bon Road, New Burland, Wisconsin. I appear here with Jim and Cheryl also. And just to straighten out a couple of things, um we went over a number of potential survey iterations with Sean and this is the one that evolved and we appreciate the uh trustee commissioner's comments, Stigler's comments, but uh after a fair amount of effort and um a lot of time and expense, uh this is the one that evolved between the planner and ourselves and we'll accept it uh in part because of time. This uh started back in April of last year and I should put it in the present context because it this is where it's at. The minutes at that time indicated in relevant part that there's a motion by Commissioner Buls to recommend to the board to deny the accessory building and waiver request with the caveat that the petitioner can return within six months with uh a CSM for approval. And then it went on to the discussion of the uh accessory building uh waiver. And again, it was a motion to deny with the caveat that the petitioner can return within six months with a CSM for approval. And those both carried with a 60 and a 50 vote. So what we're told to do was get a CSM that met the st the setback requirements. There was a fair amount of effort back and forth with Sean in order to come to that conclusion. And even like a month ago, one other requirement came up that required a further setback of the building from the farmhouse. I think because of its height, we now have and I'm seeing an affirmative nod here

from Sean. We now have met the standards that were given to us a year or 10 months ago. um wasn't within the six months and I apologize for that but the surveyors are busy and it just got tougher than woodpecker lips to get uh the survey that met all of the standards. We now have uh have done that and uh when I look at son's report uh he does um and it's a very comprehensive report I have to say doing a good job. uh the commission and and board uh earlier required completion of the CSM prior to approving the proposed building to ensure compliance with building setback requirements. Uh that was require denied last year. However, both bodies expressed the willingness to grant waiverss for the number of accessory buildings allowing existing silos to remain and the proposed building location contingent upon CSM approval. Part of what drives this is to preserve the silos. It would have been cheaper and a lot quicker to have torn them down, but that is not the old goal of this family. They moved to the community uh in order to become farmers. There is an adjoining 57 acre parcel that doesn't show on the CSM map which they have uh intended to farm and you could see some of the farm fields and the aerial photo. Thanks, Sean. But uh they intend to farm, they intend to enhance the wildlife. They have the wherewithal to do that and I think are probably a pretty good neighborh once they get this building done. Uh the the building is going to be an attractive building. Uh the ultimate architecture is going to have to be approved by the staff here at least. So you're going to have a kick at that. The the irony of this in in some respects is that uh the new house which

I understand to be this here uh they're measuring the barn setback standard from this principal residence per the code to this uh proposed site for the building. I'm going to guess about 700 ft away more or less. Ironically the appearance of this thing will be to everybody in the world they will think this modern new building goes with that and it is set back further. So it satisfies the aesthetic goal of your code uh in this ironic situation not ironic but this unique situation. So uh I don't know if there's any other questions. I could say a lot more, but I don't know that it really adds much to your decision making u information. So, if there any questions, I'll try be happy to try to answer them. If not, I'll just shut up.

Thank you.

Thank you. I think uh when uh this was brought back and we kind of changed things around quite a few times and gave suggestions the new bond that's proposed I guess the main reason was that we kept it on the now the larger parcel was that it's going to behind the main farmhouse residence which would meet our requirements of uh of an out building. I think that's our main reason why we we wanted to change it. All right. Any other public that wants to speak since this is the public hearing? Okay. Anybody else from the board? Sean, anything else?

Nope. I think I agree with Trusty Stigler. I to me it would make more sense to make that the new building and and the rest of that whole parcel, the front parcel one one lot. um because that's where you're going to have your excess buildings. It's and then it meets the code also for the setback.

You don't need to speak. You looked at me. Yeah, they uh the whole issue came up is because that parcel with the old house on isn't big enough to allow for the square footage of that building. He's already got over the limit with the buildings that exist there. So, there is no way he could put up any building if we left it the way it was. That's the whole reason for it. He doesn't that lot wasn't big enough. There was not enough acreage to allow that size footprint of a building to be built there. The only way he'd get a building that big is if he made the lot bigger, attached it to his own house. And he and it's a rental house. He may not own that. He may sell that house off.

Yeah, I think he's done to his partner's part there discussion there. I think he's done everything we asked for at this point from the last meeting. So there's anything else. Okay. Hear nothing else then uh we will close the public hearing and move on to the next item. Okay. Discussion of possible action for site plan of operation review and possible amendment for petitioner Donna Bambek uh representing Catholic Memorial High School and the Catholic Memorial Athletics LLC for the property at West 234 South 3555 West Paul Parkway uh for annual review and possible amendments of the current excuse me the current permit and site operations for the Sullivan campus. Sean,

sure. So as mentioned um the petitioner will be giving an update um of the annual review essentially uh which was required for the last site plan of operation approval was required uh in February 2026. So that's what they're doing. Um but in the they're also requesting some updates. So, if you remember from last April, they not last April, it was last May. Um, they asked for some amendments. They asked for some food trucks. At the time, we couldn't approve that because we didn't have a a food truck permitting process. Um, they wanted to remove the 15 tournament per year limit. Um, that was that was not approved. um they wanted to be able to have portable speakers for walk up music essentially for for the for the ball players and based in some back and forth we did approve that um limited decibb certain speaker size etc. So that was approved. Um they also asked for to have the option for beer sales for nonwa events. Um, right now their permit only allows them to request temporary beer and wine license for special events like fundraising, other things, but not not sporting events and things like that. So, um, that was also denied. So, the only thing that was approved last time essentially was the the music. So, they're back and they're asking for some updates. And so, for the sports field complex, they're they're asking for the for five food trucks again to be parked at the north end of the the lot during events. Um they know that they would they would be required to get the or the vendors would be required to get the permits from the village as well. Um they want to extend the operations from 10:30 to 10:45. Um right now the you know all operations have to be done and the field lighting has to be off by 10:30. So they're asking for all that to be extended by 15 minutes. Uh, and then

they are also once again asking for the ability to to have a temporary class beer and wine license for nonWIA events and tournaments to be sold at the concessions building. Uh, in addition, the the next level building, um, the way that their permit works is essentially it's written so that there's a sports field complex permit and then there's the indoor sports training facility all under the same permit but different sections. So, Next Level wants to hold one indoor special event per year. That's the one-day strongman competition. Um, it's indoors, limited to 40 participants and 200 spectators. They also want the ability to apply for a temporary class B beer wine license for the just for that one day of the event. So, that's what's being asked. Um, that's all I have. want to come on up?

I sure do. Hi everybody. Um Donna Benck, president of Catholic Memorial High School, 601 East College Avenue, and of course um our location at the um Sullivan campus in the village of Waua. So I I do want to start with the update that I was asked to present. Um so thank you very much for your support. Um, I I it occurred to me, I don't know how many of you have been out at this facility since you approved it and we renovated it last year. I would certainly encourage any of you to reach out to me. I'd love to show it to you um since you approved it and you could see firsthand um what's happening on the campus. Um uh we did in fact finish the construction of a baseball, soccer, and softball field. uh and in complete with turf and lighting and fencing um everything that um we stipulated in the um proposal last year. Um, I do want to um we worked really closely with all of you and the DNR um and happily when all of those floods happened uh last year, this facility remained dry um because of all the great uh storm water management that we worked on together. Um, so we've been um opened and running some tournaments. Um, because of cold weather delays which delayed the actual installation of the turf, we didn't get to start playing ball out there until July last summer. And then we had um certainly our boys soccer um team was able to play a last few games of their season. Don't know if you heard, but they won state for the first time in many years. That was great. brought a lot of people to the village um as we were celebrating um their great season. Uh so we're excited.

Uh there are a few things that are part of the original plan um as um already approved that we're going to continue to update. We did um finish that pavilion is up and operational that opened at the end of last summer. Um, and we'll we still have to do the paving that we had agreed to do, but the weather and the timing didn't allow that to happen last year. So, that'll get done. Um, I do want to say we work really hard at being good neighbors. Um, we are very um I have great strong relationships in the heart of the city of Waua. We're right in the center of a neighborhood um and have great relationships with our neighbors there. Um we were happy to hear that um neighbors commented that they think we're trying and that we're doing a good job. We after these meetings last year, we met with neighbors both at the school to hear from them as well as um right we came over to their homes to kind of take a look from their vantage point what they were seeing from their homes so that we could make sure we could um hear what their concerns were and accommodate um and make adjustments. Um, I do want to say the our goal with the um additional 15 minutes is um just we want to be good neighbors and we want to get people out safely on 164 and get so sometimes these games run a little late. Um, we are more than happy. It is not our intent to be playing music until 10:45. So, if we could get permission just to have everything done by 10:45, we can turn the music off earlier than that. I mean, we can certainly we're we're not planning on playing music loud until 10:45 at night. Um, it is really about getting the lights turned off and kids out um and teams out of there safely. Um, because sometimes games run over. They just go into overtime. Um, and that's not something we can predict, but

we felt like a 15minute buffer would help make sure that that happens, that the games are done and people are gone. Um, so that's um number one. and why the request. Um but um the other request for the beer sales, this is something that Tom Kullanick, previous owner um of uh the Five Diamonds um for the 10 years prior to our ownership um was able to sell beer at that campus. I called the local police um and asked if there had ever been any incidences at this property because of beer sales or quite frankly any reason. Um, and I was happy to hear no, there was not any incidences at this property. Uh, the reason we haven't applied for um, and we didn't apply in the past is we were under construction and quite frankly, we would have had to sell it from a folding table and we didn't want to do that. We want to make sure we're being responsible and getting licensed um, bartenders and um, people in that pavilion. Now we have a pavilion. We can secure it. it can be um managed very responsibly. Um we've already gotten permission from the arch dascese of Milwaukee. We are a member of the arch dascese. Um they look at this similar to the permits they give parishes for church festivals. It'll only be um for some of the tournaments where it's not a WIAA event because we can't sell beer during WIAA events. So any of the weekday kind of our baseball games that our high school kids are playing would not um involve any beer sales at all. Um uh so that's the second request. One is going a little later. Two is the opportunity to do what the previous owner was permitted to do um for the 10 years prior to our ownership selling beer without incident. And then

number three is to accommodate um NX who rents that building from us. Um they they're also a really good partner on this campus and they want to have an event um indoors where they would also make beer sales available for their event um a limited capacity a number of people. Um but um again because it's a kind of an an adult kind of atmosphere event, they want to be able to sell beer. So that would be a one-time request. I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. Um I we we feel really great that the property has run as committed to and we've worked really hard to be good neighbors and be responsible in terms of our execution on this on the buildout and the um functioning. It's a youth sports complex. Um, we have no desire to be a concert venue. That's not what we're trying to do. We're a youth sports complex for high school kids and little leagues. That's what we do.

Real quick, just because you you mentioned how you mentioned it as far as beer for the nonWIA events, is that the maximum number that you're allowed of 15? Is that what you're expecting? Correct. Those are those weekend tournaments. Yes, that's exactly what our previous owner of the property did on those weekend events. Okay.

We would want to retain if I do a fundraiser out there, those are usually with key big donors that come out there and that would be a very small group of people, but we would want to retain the right which is in our current permit to be able to do that. And those we don't that's those are like glasses of wine type of thing very for for donors.

Okay. Um we don't need to approve to continue with it as it is. Correct. No but you sorry. No, but um one the condition that stated for the for the annual review basically said that the plan commission board can require them to come back again if you want. So we can either strike that now from the site plan of operation, not make them come back or if you want to hear from them again in a year that then keep it in. Okay.

All right. Um there's a lot I guess to discuss of the different things that they're requesting. So, if we can, I guess organization wise, let's just go one by one through if you guys don't mind, rather than trying to make the conversation go in 12 different directions for all things that they're requesting. Uh, so starting off with the five food trucks. Um, I I drafted an ordinance last year specific to that because they were requesting it through the construction process to be able to have trucks there because the ordinances didn't allow it. Uh, so allowing that to be added to allow the five trucks to be there. Any discussion on that part? Is the concession building done now or not?

Yes, it is. So, I'm glad and thank you for asking that question. Last year, up to five food trucks was because we didn't have a concession building. Um, I did ask our team, there is uh still a desire to have their ability to have a food truck. Um, but the reason we asked for up to five is because we didn't have a concession stand. Um, but now we don't expect to have up five food trucks. there might be a need for um whatever reason to have um a type of food tacos or something that we don't sell in this food in the concession stand that somebody might or hot food that we might not offer in the concession stand. So a but we're not looking at lining up food trucks. It might just be supplemental to what we do in the concession stand.

But you want to keep it as up to five. Yes. But I I just want to make sure the intent is understood of what we're trying to do. Sure. I appreciate that. Any other comments on that topic?

I think um I looked up what our goal was, excuse me, in the village and it was to enhance the semi-ural nature. Um and I have been involved in this a couple times now, four I think. Um, and I think we all started out with the idea this could be the field of dreams type of baseball and five food trucks, music lights gotten away. Middle miss mission creep yet. I'm glad you're been a good neighbor. I mean, but I have also know that um brick and mortar buildings pay a lot of taxes. I would guess that um um Dairy Queen Pizza Ranch that Pizza Ranch building is probably a million paying about I don't know what it is but tax is probably at about a million and now what we're going to do with food trucks and the concession stand you know you had that plan but you going to start bringing food trucks in there what's how's that how is that helping the village and I think I brought that up the last time could the food trucks be from people in the village I mean how do we how do we offset this so there's something good you said before that this brings people to village Well, if they're eating and drinking at your place, what are they bringing to the village? They're driving on, you know, I mean,

we're So, I will say a couple things for the village. Um, first, we are taxpayer. Second of all, um we are um we we have been talking to a number of local businesses who want to put their banners up at this facility because they want to drive people to Culver's for lunch and to a hotel to stay for hotels because a lot of the people that come for these weekend tournaments are from out of town and so they're coming they're shopping at Quick Trip. They're buying things that's you know on their all the different businesses on Sunset. Um it drives people into the village. I myself with my family was out to eat and all these baseball players were in the restaurant and I asked them where are you playing and it was at our field. Um so that's I think a huge benefit to the village of Wauashar is that we bring people into the region so they solic they help support the local businesses. And I I do want to comment the lights. I know people are nervous because the and we talked about this last year when we got those approvals. The lights poles are taller. I fully acknowledge that. But that was because we wanted to do the dark sky certified lighting so that it comes down and doesn't bleed over into the neighbors and that's what we did. That's what we accomplished. And that's why the lights that's why the lights were proposed and recommended the way they were. Muscal Lighting came and um presented that and they have done exactly what we have hoped that they would do.

Well, and I apologize. I didn't know you were paying taxes. So, yeah, like that was brought up last year and we're talking about Culver's and other places. The only two village businesses that would be potentially impacted or benefited by this is Tallally's on Sunset and Neighbors Bar and Grill on 59. The rest of the stuff you've you both have referenced is City of Walker property. It's not Pizza Ranch Pizza Ranch. Yeah. I mean, so City of WA I'm I'm trying to It's all city. I might have mentioned things that are in the city, but yeah, I guess I'm I'm referencing more she's brought up that

that's it's good for local businesses, but if you're trying to benefit the village, there's only two that would be benefiting it from that perspective. So, just wanted to clarify, I guess, make that statement. So, anything else on specific the the food truck request? I mean, my question is a five. We can I don't think you really need five since you get pavilion going right now. So, I'm not in favor of five. Okay. All right. I agree. What would what you agree with him? Okay. What would you be once in a while approving to what's the what what would you consider three? I would say maximum of three. Okay. Three.

Number because if you have the wedding there or something which is going to be the next request and then they're going to have a wedding and then they're going to have five. You know you watch. You watch. I've seen this happen. Okay. So, five of you just said three. We can't. That's the thing is we can't play the what ifs. Well, you better because what I mean there's potential anything could happen at this. I mean, what we know we can deal with is what's in front of us right now. You know, they're a sports complex and they're asking for food trucks for now. And if we want to go to a wedding venue, we'll deal with that at that time. Okay. Would you be okay if it's three? because it sounds like between the two different three is fine. Thank you. Till next time.

That three would be acceptable. Yes. Potentially as a vote for a majority. I understand. Okay. All right. The next item then uh the time change from 10:30 p.m. to 10:45 p.m. Discussion on that.

I tend to agree with pretty much a lot of the residents as well. This is continuing to creep every year. I've only been in the village for a few years in my history with it. I've seen it a couple times now. It always seems, well, we could, you know, we really want to do it till 10:30 because we're struggling with the schedule. Now, we want to do it till 10:45. Do we go back again next year? Well, you know, we couldn't I I guess that starts to become a scheduling issue with you guys, not a village issue. I I'm not a neighbor over there, but I could completely respect the fact that, oh man, now they gave him 11. Are they going to give him midnight next year? So, I understand that. And I'm I'm opposed to it. My personally, and again, I'm not a neighbor and I've only been around a few years, but the twice I've seen you guys come before the board. You continue to to kind of stretch the rubber band a little farther to see what point it breaks.

Part of and thank you. I understand that comment. Um, part of it is this was under development last year. So, we were we're just trying to settle into a routine and it didn't open until July in terms of we were under construction most of last year. So, now we're feeling like we're getting into a better routine, right?

And um and so that we're just trying um to say what we've noticed is this. And again, I understand the concern about sound. So we stay within the sound decibb that we're specified. Um certainly if you say no more music after 10 um you know we wanted we don't that's not the goal to play 10 to music till 10:45. That's not our goal. Our goal is games run late sometimes overtime and then shut down the lights and get everybody out of the parking lot. Um, we just wanted to be transparent that um, our experience has been sometimes we're pushing it at 10:30 and we're trying. We don't want to do that.

Okay. I I don't understand. Sorry, Roger. Um, all right. Let's I guess at this point we've heard what you've got to say on everything. So, um, let's keep it just discussion wise amongst us at this point. If there's a directed question, we can ask her of that at that point. Okay. Sure. Uh, food trucks, will they be gone after every game and then they'll be brought back in? Correct. So, we ain't going to have because you were talking about getting semis out there at one point. They have to follow the ordinance, which does not allow overnight. Okay. Thank you. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Roger, you had some comments.

Uh, yeah, I did. I I'm just uh it becomes to to Mr. Smith's uh comment. What's the difference if it's 10:30 or 10:45? It's a difference to the the people that are in the area. And I just uh I think it's a scheduling issue. I mean, can you move every your tournaments back 15 minutes or can you do something to better accommodate instead of uh 10 10:45 seems to me to be pretty late time. Uh it's I think it's something that that you folks can continue to to to work with and that you could accommodate to to uh the people that are the neighbors around because I don't think that they're going to be very understanding of the fact that we are as they said as has already been said creeping the time out again and the potential then the question is going to come up well when's it going to come up again I agree it's probably going to come up again and I would like to cut it off at this point and have you folks manage through that now and be done with it

okay any other comments or discussion I should say. I tend to agree with Roger on that. One of the comments I've heard at another development is that the same thing to keep creeping up and they've referenced this facility as one that's over the years has always come in and asked for more every year. And I don't want to get that as a reputation for us to do that. I I agree with Roger. I think they can move the schedule up and be out of there by 10:30. And the neighbors I think deserve that. Okay. Any other discussion?

Sure. I think um moving up to 10:45 I mean they wanted to be together at 10:30 and I want 10:45 and I know they're not everybody's not going to be at a parking lot at 10:45. Someone be hanging around until 11. So I'm not in favor of 10:45. Any else? I have a question about the alcohol if you're going to hit that or Yeah, we're going through line by line. That's just before we Yep, that's up next. Um I guess just for clarity of the discussion. 10:30 is the time now and that's where everything is shut down. So, no lights after 10. Lights. Yeah, lights. No lights after 10:30.

Okay. Doesn't mean they they have to be out of the parking lot and gone. Well, it does say um field and parking lot lighting shall not be on before 7 or after 10:30. Security lighting after 10:30 should be shielded. No light source. Um hours of operation to 10:30. So employees are allowed 24 hours, but so yeah, people are supposed to be off the grounds at at 10:30. Okay.

All right. Next item on the uh the list for request then is the temporary beer and wine for the nonWIA events. That's up to 15 based on how we have the limitations. Discussion on that. I kind of have questions. Thanks Sandy for the history lesson. Again, I haven't been here that long. At any point in time were you ever promised or said eventually you will be allowed to have alcohol here? We haven't asked. Okay. So, the previous owner said, "No problem. You should get a license. No problem." Yes, he did. That's what the previous owners

Yes. They And when when we purchased the property, the previous owner said, "I I get a beer permit for every one of my tournaments." Okay. So, but your Is it true that your attorney stated we will never ask for alcohol? No, that is not true. Okay. I'm just clarifying for my own personal reference. That was at the beginning of the of the association. Okay. Just verifying you won't what I heard is different. Okay. I do believe last year you did ask for it. Yes. So you said before you had it before, but the second year you're asking for it, right? Well, but we Yes, I qualify. Yes, you're correct. Other discussion.

All right. Uh the next item is dealing before you go on. Okay.

It's I'm going to stick to my guns. I said this is supposed to be a youth complex. I don't think we need alcohol. The youth complex. The kids aren't drinking. It's not a great example for the adults to have to be drinking. They're youth a youth event and I don't think we should have alcohol there. The next level thing is a whole different story, but I'm a little mixed feelings on that. If you're doing a strong man event, I'm not sure you're out there drinking beer and wine doing your strong man event. So, what does alcohol really benefit? I'm I'm still mixed on that. I mean, that's kind of an adult event and it's it's a one-time event. We do allow it. We're allowing it for special events. Do we consider that a special event? I'm not so sure.

Well, I'm going to go to an next level next. Okay. specific to the beer liquor or beer beer wine, excuse me, was to the sports complex portion itself. Yeah. Okay. So, you're against that? Yep. Okay. All right. Um, regarding NX level or how do you pronounce it properly? Is it NX level? Okay. I wrote down text, but yeah. Uh, so there's two parts to this. Um, Sean, just clarify or tell me if I'm wrong saying this out loud, but from what we talked about staff, um, the first part to the request regarding this is that they're allowed to have the event because currently the way that the the uh the overall approval is is that they can't have that event there. They're not allowed to have special events at the

Nothing's written to their approval that says they're allowed to have special events. So, kind of two parts to the request here. one that we would allow them to have an event like this because it's already scheduled and advertised and on their website and stuff like that for this national group that's doing this which with how it's currently written they're not authorized to have an event like that. So that'd be part one of that. Part two would be the beer and wine for the event itself. So uh specific to the event discussion on that allowing the event to even occur because

this might be a question for the attorney. I'm not so sure. But what's the what's the difference between, you know, next level have to do their own thing and and the complex itself? It's all part of the same ownership and part of the same complex.

The answer to that question is found in the document itself. I don't know if Sean can bring it up. There's very there's three different categories. There's the complex and the rules for the complex and then there's two sections for rules of this other facility. one for the uh fitness group, I'll call it that for lack of and then one for the uh medical uh entity that also operates out of there. So the answer to the question is we have it's very limited as to what the fitness group and the uh hospital group can do and that's why the question that does that the complex has rights to do certain things and they could probably do this at the Sean will correct me if I'm wrong. They could hold this event at the complex but not in this building because this building has specific rules. That's the answer to your question and he I he's bring brought it up for you. This is all they can do at the next level and at the Freigher Medical College of Wisconsin. It's very specific and it doesn't include special events. That's the answer to your question. Okay. And Sean, they could hold this event.

I'm not I'm not sure about that. I think I think the events relate limited to the sports complex are are the the 15 tournaments and then special events related to the organization like fundraising. Thank you for that. And their kickball their kickball their kickball day whatever that's called. That's the question. That's the answer to the question. So they want to add a number you know B I four you know whatever you tell them they can do. Fair enough. It's a great question. We we struggled with finding the answer and we had to go to the document specifically and look at what you're seeing on the screen.

So rel related to that then um you are only asking the modification to be for this event. Correct. Yes. So you're not looking to increase and allow other events at the building. It's just specific to this one. Is it helpful to the village board? The president of NX is here to the owner I should say is here with me. Would it be helpful to talk with him to Well, it's ultimately this is all under your site plan. I just wanted to offer that. If he wants to come and speak if somebody has a question for him, I I don't mind I guess but um good evening.

My name is Matthew Mary with Next Level. So I answer any questions. And so I guess at this point it's just information gathering and just make sure we're all on the same page with what's operating within the four walls of the sports complex and working with our great landlord with CH make sure we're all on the same page on what's functioning, what's what's the goals of the facility, what's the goals of the operations of the whole complex.

So specific to this event, this is open to the public. So you're expecting all ages to be present. Um so the next level is itself with training facility. So the event itself is a strongman competition. So it's invitation only. So the people that will be coming is strictly for that event only. It's not open to the public where we're going to have hundreds of people coming through. Okay. So like like anybody here in the room can't buy a ticket to come and be a spectator at it. Correct. Okay. So, how many people you expecting to be there total then? 30 to 40 is what we were projecting.

Okay. What's the age group roughly? Um well hopefully hopefully me but uh in 20s to 40s to be honest I would I would have to get back to you on that as part of what the age groups are. Well, I didn't mean it specifically. I kind of get a general idea if we're having high school kids or we're having adults or what do we have adults? And what um what are the expected hours for the event start to finish? It's during the normal operation. Yeah, it's dur normal operations and it was for one day in my application.

Yeah, I was just asking because there's a lot of pages to go back to find it. So if you knew off hand I I asked because the way that going back to the packet of information it says it's limited to 40 participants and 200 spectators in the request. Uh so the spectators isn't general public coming in and buying tickets. It's people that connected to those 40 participants. Right. But you just said it was 40 people total. Oh, I thought you were talking about participants. No, I'm talking how many people are going to be in the building for that. So, at that point, it's you know, we can have rules of thumb of how many people. Is it your wife that comes with it? Is your family of three coming to it or is it just yourself? So,

it's projections. So, back to the other question then, ages of who's present. It's not who's participating, but who's present? Participating as as in they're at the event, but maybe not competing. Um, you're talking all ages then because it could be the bodybuilder and and their spouse and children and parents and grandparents and all the above. So, it's all ages.

So, it's it's a family event. It's not coming through and it's a bunch of college fraternity guys coming through and I I think we're concerned about the beer consumption. It's not that type of event. It's a competition for guys that work hard to compete in what they love to do. So that's for food and when we're talking about concessions is offering that service so it's there and they don't have to race to go get food if it's you know mid session or what hours that we have with different gaps of competitions we have that offering so it is there

again the arch dascese has approved this even though they know kids are going to be present they they look at it like they do a church festival we have whether we have that during the tournaments or there during this event. They look at it as a special event like our tournaments like this event. Um the parishes all over Wakauar County serve beer during their church festivals. It does help as a nonprofit organization. It does help us generate revenue. It's a fundraising opportunity for the school and for our this property. Um, and that's why church festivals do it. Um, and again, it was something that was allowed for 10 years prior to our ownership. Um, when um, Tom Kellanick owned the property.

I'll cut you out because we I know we we've talked about that. You already said that in your opening remarks to that effect. And past is past history. We're trying to have a good relationship and good communication. So with what we're talking about right now, so we don't want So for the commissioners and the trustees, we're talking two to 300 peopleish. We don't know for sure because you have it as 40 and 200 um of all ages, including spectators that are But it's private, so I can't buy a ticket, nor can you. We just have to look later. I don't like you can compete. I have I have a question.

Go ahead. My question is, you're talking about church festivals. Church festivals are specifically a social circumstance. They are different from what's going to be going on here because we're talking about a sports event here and you've got uh a bunch of people that are competing to see how good they are uh in in athletic competition. I just don't see what the need is for alcohol at an event like yours. I do see the need for for something uh like that at a church festival. Been to I've been to a hund of them, you know, but I don't see the need for alcohol because the premise of this whole complex with with Catholic memorial is that it's for for kids uh in in a to a great respect. And um I just don't uh see where alcohol plays a part in you having a better tournament as far as what's going on.

So, okay, that's my vote. Backing up again, it's two parts to to specific to this building and this event. Uh discussion on the event itself between two to 240 in that range give or take some uh for the event. Are you willing to have the event? I support having the event. Is it going to be once once a year? Is it going to be twice a year? Three times a year? What what's the plan? Once a year. You're expecting annually then or just this year?

If there's anything that comes up that we have an event that we want to do, we would be coming up to you guys and having the same type of meeting. We're not going to just automatically assume that we can keep on doing it. Okay. So, this would be an annual event. Got it. All right. Anything else on that specific topic? Well, I guess do we want to put a number on it instead of just one if if they want to have two a year or something rather than have them come back every time we have to modify this every time they come back. That doesn't make any sense either. I'm fine with that. If you want to make it too, we can do that. I guess that's why I'm looking to them. What what are you looking to accomplish or what are you looking to do?

Well, hopefully the events is a success and we can have two. I just want to make sure everybody's comfortable. That's what what we say in here and invite all you guys to come to facility, come to the different events and to see how the functioning how it functions. So, we want to be good stewards to the neighbors. We want to be good stewards for the community. Okay. But the question I have then you have to be very specific as to how you're going to describe the second event. We have all the details on the first event because John and I deal with this all the time and we have some communities that require a whole litany of information. He he said it's the same it' be the same. It'd be a strong man.

That was that was actually going to be my next question. Are these events the same thing or or are we looking for other types of events? It' be strongman competitions. So if we deviate from that, if it would be a indoor sporting event, it would be different than what we're asking for now, that might have different restrictions. So I would feel totally comfortable coming back. Are we doing this because you've already advertised it and you're asking us to help? I I get that. Or because what happens if the weakman contest comes up that I'm that I'm the chairman for, but you know, this is a mission creep again. Now we had, you know, and I understand you got you got in a pickle. you know, be happy to help.

But how many more? I mean, we got 15 already that you can do, right? And now you did this. Now you want this one twice. I I I don't know. They don't have any right now. No. Right. I don't know that this is mission creep. This is something new that they're trying to put on the other part of the campus. It's not this is a a separate thing because they while they're on the same property, they're operating like different organizations in a way. So um okay. So up to two strongman events a year would be the request there. Uh so same language but times two. Okay. And then uh to the specific to the beer and wine request for this specific event or the two year discussion on that.

I'm a no. I don't see a need. I'm not in favor of it. I think it's It's not required, not needed. Okay. I don't know. All right. Any discussion? Okay. Uh the last thing on the list then as far as uh things to consider for this would be do we want to make this an annual and have them come back again next year like they are tonight for the review. Discussion on that. You haven't had a full operating year yet, right? That's correct. I'm in favor of having them come back one more time so we have a full year of of operation. Okay.

You're good with that? Sure. Just come back next year to to clarify. Um sometime in the beginning of next year be okay. February suits me just fine. Okay. February then? Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, February. Is it appropriate to ask a question? Sure.

Um one thing I hear I'm hearing regularly is that you hear a need for beer sales. So, I'm wondering if there's something that I can bring back at a future time to demonstrate need because we are we do these things for fundraising. While the kids are playing baseball, their parents are there all day long or they'll come for a game and leave. But it's not unlike what the I So, we are doing this to help generate revenue. that's our need to cover our costs um to hosting these events.

So I'm hearing need and I was like I have obviously not demonstrated need which is on me not you. So I'm just wondering how I can come back and show you the need. This is a fund this is a revenue generating operation for us and it's done by a third party legalized bartenders will be licensed bartenders and I I'm wondering why for 10 years this was approved. So I I must not have demonstrated need and so I that's my question. How do if I come back can I demonstrate need? Well my question then is you said next level is separate from Catholic memorial correct. So why is the need on you now to sell beer at his event?

Well no it's two things. We're asking for beer at this event and we're asking for our our tournaments. Well I know the tournament I think is not a big deal as far as I'm concerned. Okay. We've done that in the past and that's seems to be a non-event or not. The strong man event you're saying the strongman event now is his deal. Correct. But why is it benefiting Catholic memorial? Um there um because they're lease their space from us. So I get that. But I mean does he still going to pay his rent whether he has beer sales or not? Hope so. Hopefully. Well that's my point I guess is how is that benefiting Catholic memorial by his

Let me ask a question. What's the difference? So, if it's still being responsibly monitored by legalized legal bartenders and sales to adults that we take it all very seriously, revenue is revenue. If it's a nonprofit, it's nonprofit. We're talking about businesses within the village of Walka. I'm just answering her question. Nothing to do with that. I'm not arguing that point. Okay. I'm just curious as to how that statement when Catholic memorial is going to benefit when it's they're really not involved in this other than you rent the building. So the question are you going to paraphrase what the question is where I don't go ahead. She asked a very specific question.

There's two ways to interpret there's no need. There's never a need or I didn't prove a need. I I I think most of them are saying there's never a need. It's not that you didn't prove it. They just don't think there's a need for alcohol. Right? So that's why I'm saying what can I do to prove? And if it's if it's the first, there's never going to be a need. You're it's not a proof issue. There's two ways to interpret their statements. That's the only point I make.

That's what I was just going to say. Not the same way you said it, but I was going to say it differently, I guess, paraphrasing the others on the board who have made comments specific to the beer sales during sporting events. It's about the kids and the family. And the the resounding theme is that there doesn't need to be beer at a kids's event. That's I guess I'm paraphrasing how they've been wording it. So to to John's point, I don't think I think you're hearing need in a different way than than what it seems like everybody is saying. Um short of changing out everybody, I don't think you're going to get the beer part approved in the future. The majority is not there for that.

You mean for the strong men or It sounds like we're either. You're the only one that said anything positive as far as approving. I think I want to honor what we've committed to in the past. That's the only thing I'm thinking. Well, we haven't at that location though. What location? At the next level. No, exactly. I'm talking about you still doing tournaments out there. Mhm. So, you did I just want to clarify prior to us owning it prior to Catholic Memorial High School. I know you said that like four times on I don't mean to be

I'm not I'm not discounting that that was what was in the past. I'm I'm saying the people on the board who have been speaking about this last year and and tonight then are saying they don't want to see beer at these youth events. families there, but paraphrasing and speaking for everybody that's been that made the comments, they don't feel it's appropriate to have beer at a kids event. So, it's not a matter of the need for the fundraising part of it as that it is you don't need to have it there as John's more or less rephrasing it. So, I reserve the right to come back and Well, you can always come back and ask for something. Yeah. Yeah.

That's that's always Yeah. Okay. Um, hearing everything that's been said, I I think because I've been writing notes on all this, just to simplify this to to move forward tonight, um, I I'll make a motion on the plan commission site initially here, um, that we modify the site plan and plan of operation for the, um, Catholic memorial Sullivan campus to allow allow up to three food trucks on the premises at one time at any one time. Um, and to allow uh up to two strong men events per year at the NX level or next level uh facility and that's the only things that would be changing based on everybody's been saying. The other things stay as is.

Second. I I think there's one item on there that we haven't discussed and that was allowing more than the 15 tournaments. I think was that that wasn't asked this time. It was last time they asked. Oh, I'm sorry. I got confused. Sorry. Do I have to put that again? No, just this time in there. Ah, okay. And I I will modify to add the uh come back next year in February to do another annual review. You still second that. Okay. Any other discussion?

I have one comment as far as the beer and alcohol. Um, I'm in favor of if they have a special event, a social event for donors or whatever, if they come and apply for a one-day permit for that day. I don't have a problem with adding that. That that's already in there. So, we're not modifying that. If that's still there, they can continue to do that. All right. Yep. Nothing's changed there. All right. Yep. I'm just I guess I'm basing my motion off of the conversation up to this point of the things that we'd be modifying from what already exists.

Um, any other discussion? All right. plan commission to uh the motion and again just to restate it is to allow up to three food truck vendors on the premises at any one time and also to modify uh to allow up to two strongman events as is in the packet language wise at the NX level facility and then to come back once more next year for an annual review. All those in favor of that from plan commission say I. I. Anyone opposed? That motion carries. I'll make the same motion for the uh village board then just to simplify it. I'll second it.

All right. Any discussion with the board? Hearing none. Stew. All those in favor uh from the village board say I. I. Anyone opposed? That motion carries also. So those two portions are approved. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Did we vote on the time? I did not modify it. So it stayed as 10:30 based on the discussion.

Okay. Uh up next uh number nine, discussion of possible action on a CSM request for James Britain uh for two properties listed West 225 South 5201 and 2255261 Guthrie Road to adjust the property line between the two existing properties. You need to go anything again? Yeah, I don't have much else to add except that this is just the CSM action item. Next item will be for the accessory building approval and then the accessory building waiver request. So unless there are questions, I know I think you had a couple technical comments.

Yeah. So the CSM in particular from a technical perspective, nothing too exciting here. Just a few things we need revised. We have listed in our review letter. Um some extra signatures needed, some detail needed on the set corners for the the new uh lot too. Um information on the petitioner needed on the CSM, square footage needed for the structures. Um a length of a line needs to be modified and a bearing needs to be modifi modified. So we we feel confident that those can be handled by the petitioner, their surveyor, but certainly if they have any questions, we'd recommend they they reach out to us.

All right, discussion. I have one question. It I think it said in there that the water for the old farmhouse comes from the milk house. Um that I I I wouldn't have said that in my staff report. I thought it said something in there about the source of the of the well was um maybe we can ask the petitioner because I'm not sure about that. James, you want to come up?

James Britain 16995 West Small Road, New Bland. Yes, the uh milk house does provide the uh water to the farmhouse. Okay. Do we have does he need some kind of an easement to maintain that? I mean, if he sold that property someday, then that house might not have water. Yeah, I didn't realize that. Um, that's the only concern I had is it's a good point. There might need to be some kind of an easement. Yeah. So, so that's something we could handle after the fact if this was approved, but yeah, we could certainly have an easement on there for

I don't think I recognized that, but you did. Um, so there would have to be some kind of an easement I think that would be created. Um, actually I think it could be a note on the CSM. Yeah, it could be a note on the CSM. There could be a box that's drawn around it with a with an easement that basically benefits the house essentially. They maintain access to the water from from that wellhouse. Um, the we could work out the specific language, but it it could be added just as a note. Sure. Thanks. Thanks for that comment, though. That's the only concern I had with it. I didn't I didn't realize. I guess the same question that septic and stuff is all within the new boundaries. So nothing else is bleeding over besides the well.

Okay. A good catch, Dan. I would add that the you know everything that's shown on the CSM, the lot sizes, the setbacks, it all meets zoning. So it's all it's all fine that way. I'd make a motion to approve the CSM with the comments from the planner and the engineer those corrections are made and and with the well easement included and with the well eastment included second and that's a recommendation to the bill correct

all right any other discussion excuse me hearing none those in favor All right. For the plan commission, all those in favor of approving the request with the conditions that were discussed in the or mentioned by Dan say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? All right. Village board. I will make a motion that we accept the planning commission's recommendation to accept the CSM with the corrections and additions as discussed. You want to go one more word?

Really wants to say his name. Just wait. Just wait. Okay. Did you want to? No. All right, I'll second it then. Just to beat Al to it, I guess. I forgot. If you could note that it said Chad, not Al on there for a second. Any other discussion? At least we're laughing at some point tonight. All right. I got one. It would be a good one. Closing discussion now. Sorry. There you go. What' you say? I got wood pepper lips. I do have to say that you gave everybody a chuckle. I've never heard that one before. I'm not I don't think anybody has. So, thank you for that cuz I wrote it down in my notes for later. Was it tough tough tough as woodpecker lips? Was that

tougher than woodpecker lips? Yes. I want to ask Mike, is it okay that we use that in future things or is that something that's exclusive to you? Okay. We should probably note that in the minutes that that was deep. Yes, I wrote it down. Toilet paper. Thank you. All right. You got more if we're going to close discussion now. Like um All right. All those on the village board in favor say I. I. I. Any opposed?

That motion carries as well. Thank you. All right. Up next, um discussion, possible action. I not going to read all the addresses, but for the same property regarding action on accessory building request and accessory building waiver request uh by the same petitioner uh for the new 6420t accessory building to be used for storage and maintenance of the farm equipment uh and then the waiver for the accessory building quantity with the location as well. Anything else you want to add?

No, that's the gist of it. I would just show you know we saw this the first time around. the, you know, the barn is a, it's an agricultural building. Um, it's a metal building. It's got some doors, some windows, got some koopas on top. Um, and then it's got the the overhang porch as well, which does count toward the the square footage. So, yeah, it's so it's the approval of the building and then the the waiverss for location and quantity. Okay. Greg, anything else you want to add? I guess I have a question. Are the garage doors still going to be the glass garage doors or that was talked about? There's no indication

last time. Yeah, there's no indication on these on the on the these are the same plans essentially from last time. I'm not sure.

Okay. Say building as last time. All right. Plan commission. All right. All right. Anybody discussion, I guess suppose unless there's a motion ready.

I'll make a motion to recommend to the plan commission approval of the accessory building and approve the two waiverss, one for location and one for number of buildings on the property. Second just as he said it, right? All right. Any any other discussion? All right. Plan commission then if there's none. All those in favor say I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Village board. I'll move to accept the recommendation of the planning commissions. Roger. Motion it.

Roger. Second it. Turn your mic. Microphone. Roger. I second it. All right. Any discussion from the board? Hearing none. All those in favor of approving the recommendation from the plan commission to allow for the building of the accessory building uh to include the two waiverss say I. I. Anyone opposed? That carries as well. Uh that's it for that I guess for you folks.

Thank you. Yeah, thank you. Up next, discussion of possible action on a certified survey map request for petitioner William Domino for the property located at West 269 South 3244 Mel Hills Road to adjust the property line between the two existing properties. Sean, sure. On the overhead, um here's the golf course right across the street from the subject properties. Um there's a vacant about three acre property here and then there's a can

house with um with a an accessory building in the back that's like 3.4 acres. Um essentially there's these are two unplatted parcels. You can see the southern parcel has some funky things going on. There's like a dotted line through there. There's some old cobbled together parcels that are part of this lot essentially. Um, and then the septic system for the house is is actually on the northern parcel. So, what they're trying to do is make these, you know, get get rid of the cobble together parcels through certified survey map. Um, which is here. So, the house and the accessory buildings are on this property. Here's a septic mound. Um, here's the vent. The dashed line was the old property boundary. It's the adjustment. So, it does jog out a little bit. It's not perfectly regular, but it does solve the problem of moving the vent pipe to the southern property. Um they're both three at least three acres in size. So that satisfies the requirements of the residential estate district. Um that's essentially all I have. I know you had a qu

Yeah, I got So in addition to some of our more standard comments, um and I don't feel the need to go through the list necessarily. I think they're pretty pretty simple. Um revisions were asking be made before this be recorded. Um there's a couple items on here that we we suggested in our letter their surveyor get in touch with us to kind of to walk through before um they get so far as to record this. I think they're they're more important things um that they they might need some guidance on, you know, from what we're seeing from our perspective. Um one of them is an error in the closure of the boundary for lot two. So we kind of mapped out all the lengths and bearings they gave us and something didn't seem to add up. Um, we we gave them provided a report we ran with all of the the the lengths and the the bearings of all the lines they gave us and something in there is wrong. Um, we just want to I guess compare our work to their work to try to figure it out. So, I think that one's pretty pretty solvable. Um, I guess we just suggest, you know, that get ironed out before this get signed and recorded. The other one is you'll notice along the rightway for me Maril Hills Road, they note an existing rightway width of 66 feet. But then they're they're also suggesting or including a dedication of a sliver of land that varies in width from the 2.72 ft at the north to 9.15 ft at the south. such that it would make the new property line for both lots one and two not parallel with the the quarter section line, which is the the line that they're suggesting the dedication be offset from, which is pretty substandard to say the least. Usually, when you have a quarter section, it suggests that that should be either the center of the rideway or the edge of a rideway line. Um, so I guess what we're kind of asking for is is if they want to do what they're requesting to do with the rightway dedication, we need some more information to I guess

suggest that what they're doing would achieve a 66 ft rightway. Um, otherwise what's probably more likely is that that dedication's not needed at all. Um, I don't think I mean we don't see too many of these where a rightaway dedication creates a lot that's not parallel to a quarter section line. should be kind of running with that or offset, you know, a standard distance 66 feet or 33 feet. Um, so that kind of, you know, triggered the question there that looks, it looks a little odd to us that it's kind of a weird sliver of land they're asking to be dedicated that they really might not need to. Um, so I guess we're just suggesting their surveyor kind of work with ours. We kind of figure out what's going on there. They may not need to dedicate anything. again it it might work out without that dedication. Um but I think we need we have to do some work there before this can be uh recorded essentially.

Do you think we need to table this so that you can work those things out before we make an approval just to simplify it? Potentially. Um, my, you know, my gut's telling me likely they they don't need this dedication, in which case it wouldn't negatively affect the lot sizes. It would make them bigger, but there's a, I guess there's a small percent chance that they would need a larger dedication. I don't have really enough information looking at this um, to know which way it's going to go. Um, and that but either way it goes does it make deal with does it still meet the lot sizes and all of the

that's that's I don't know because it I guess there's a potential where the lots could become smaller in which case they would be under you know one of them at least would be under three acres. Yeah. Lot two is just a fraction over the three mark. So if more of that was lost you might be at 2.99 or something like that. Right. Right. You you could I mean I think you could approve it with the caveat that says you know as a condition that if it if adjustment of the rightway dedication would make one of these lots less than three acres then it would be you know the approval would be no no longer be valid essentially. Okay. Somebody write that down. But here's here's the thing. My point is it is I wanted to know if it was merely technical.

Sure. There's no policy decision if the board says the lots have to be legal and they have to work with the engineer to satisfy the condition. That's sort of what we do all the time. It is. It is. They could they could also adjust this dividing line a little bit too to make sure that there's at least three acres here. The point is it's got to be three acres. Yeah. And I think I think there are ways to achieve that. To John's point that probably wouldn't warrant it, you know, coming back here. I think we can we can work with them to figure that out, but I don't know which way it's going to go necessarily without more information.

Yeah. I didn't suggest I didn't want to suggest like we have to postpone it and make it delayed, but if if there's something that required it. Um, sir, do you want to speak on the on your behalf at all? Discuss it at all? Sure. Good. Good. Good evening. I'll leave. I'll be helping. It's been one of those days. Exactly.

I'm Bill Dina. My wife and I own the property. We've been a renewed village resident for the last 15 years. 10 years, broken off previous with a stint in another county for a while while I took a job there. Um, and we were privileged to buy this house which has a real historic feel to it from the former owners, the Hardies who were family was the original settlers of this farm area which was ultimately divided um with Merryill Hills Country Clubs and which was built back in the 1920s. I did uh relay the information to the surveyor um and had a brief discussion with him. He did not feel any of the issues were insurmountable. The Mel Hills road thing is is interesting because what he said to me, at least what I heard him say, and I'm not an engineer, is that um the road itself is not centered um in the 66 foot rightway that exists. You could look at um the golf course and see where they've set up their fencing and majority of that area appears to be pitched on the golf course side. Um and so a lot of the road is pushed towards our property, but the right of way really pushes to the east uh much more so. And so I'm not sure about that sliver whether exactly what it is or whether it's needed. And I'm very interested to have the discussion about that and have people that understand math actually kind of work it out. But I do think it is something we can work out. This issue for us is one just to try to clarify because we bought two lots um in 2011. Um and there is a uh comment on the uh

tax record that the um u village planner placed that created an ambiguity regarding whether or not they were conforming um or at least the lot the vacant lot is conforming. And so I wanted to clear that up and simply u bear the expense of doing it by CSM, which I think is the cleanest way to address all issues and get it recorded so everybody's clear as to what the uh what the lot shapes are and what the rights are connected to it. So that's the purpose. Thank you for taking it up.

Thank you. All right. Other discussion. So I want to clarify if you make a motion to recommend approval that be commission's action subject to the town planner and town engineers condition. I I'd like to include also they can they can modify obviously the lots have to be legal and all that. They can modify the line. It's not only the rightway, the line, because that's not something that we as staff would do unless you gave us permission to allow that. The rightway is a technical thing that they have to that's an engineering comment. Modifying the line slightly to keep each of them to be legal size. I just would like that in the motion so that we're comfortable with it as a staff.

Certainly. for the plan commission side. I'll make a motion to approve the request with the um I already lost it. No, subject to the subject village planner and village engineer um to include the ability to adjust the lot lines if necessary to meet all the requirements and to to stay a legal property or properties. I'll second that somewhat motion. Yeah, I started getting lost again. All right. Any other discussion on the question of the motion?

Hear none from the village uh plan commission. All those in favor say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? That motion carries and I'm not going to try and restate it again. I will just make a motion to accept the recommendation of the plan commission. Much simpler. I'll second that. Any other discussion? All right. All those in the village board uh in favor of approving the recommendation from the plan commission say I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Thank you and thank you for your service to the community, sir. All right. Up to adjournment of the plan commission.

Oh, I sorry. I just I just drew a line through that because I thought that's the one we just did. All right. Nice try though. I tried. Discussion of possible action the conceptual proposed amendments to the village ordinance chapter 42 zoning to add new permitted use called land preservation and education to the A1 agricultural district. Okay. This is uh still conceptual. We talked about this last time. There was a number of concerns. Commission member. Don't they have to be involved in this? Vickiy's leaving. No, she's talking right now. But Vicki, we're still doing business here. Yeah, we didn't adjourn. You You got up and left before I even mentioned adjourning. Okay, carry on. Sorry.

Okay, so we talked about this last month. It's still conceptual. It's the the addition of this land preservation education use to the A1 zoning district. There was a number of concerns by the plan commission board last time. um a few things about, you know, off- streetet parking, making sure that there it wasn't completely paved, making sure that uh seasonal non-farm storage was under control, and then then locking down special events so it wouldn't get out of out of hand like event barns or so on and so forth. So, I did um you have the red line, the clean version of the packets. Essentially, I wrote it I rewrote it so that the land preservation and stewardship activities is the principal use and that everything else is accessory to the principal use. And I had a community gardens in there as well because that was mentioned. Um off streetet parking areas um is rewritten essentially to mention to accommodate vehicles for normal day-to-day use and approved events. Hard surfaced or gravel parking limited to those spaces regularly used by employees and visitors. Any parking needed for special events beyond these spaces are provided in grass only unless hard surfacing would be approved through the site plan review process by the plan commission and board. For seasonal non-farm storage, um it's defined as temporary indoor storage of personally owned non-commercial vehicles or equipment used during certain times of the year and which are not actively used or stored in the site on a year- round basis. intended for offseason protection of recreational or personal vehicles and shall not include regular access, repair activities, commercial storage, equipment associated with business, construction or industrial operations. And then there's some sub bullets under there as well. Um only permitted accessory use within existing farm buildings. No new buildings, building expansions or modifications shall be permitted for the purpose of storage. Um limited again to the same things we talked about. um explicitly prohibiting construction equipment, commercial vehicles, heavy

machinery, materials, uh etc. And then occupying no more than 25% of the total floor area of all existing buildings in the property again as approved to the site plan review process. And then for special events, um those will be organized, sponsored, and conducted solely by the entity operating the land preservation and education use directly related to and supportive of the state of mission of land preservation. egg, environmental stewardship and education. Events not principally connected to these purposes, including general, private, commercial, or entertainment. Events custom customarily held at event venues or event barns will be shall not be pre permitted. Um, and then special events may be approved through the plan of operation by the planning commission board and then may be subject to the limits on maximum events per year, type of events, attendees, hours of operation, etc. So, those are the those are the changes I made based on what I heard last time. Are there questions or comments?

He looked at me wrong. I saw you getting ready to say something. So, yeah. Um I I kind of think most of my things have been covered. I I had uh on the first go back to um 421 two, three, the uses.

Yeah. Uses, accessories, principal use. Number four, special events related. Um, I didn't know if we had to specify those events, but later on you do that. So, that kind of took that comment away from me. Um, uh, retail food sale. Do we need to address what that means? I mean, are they able to come in there and put in a commercial kitchen and stuff like that or, you know, do we need to tighten that up even more or not?

Um, so what does it say? It says retail and food sales limited to the education center and operations of the landowner organization. So, yeah, it's not specific in terms of what that means. So, um, we could we could tie it down. We could lock it down if you think it's important to I mean, could they do that? I mean, they have restaurant going at this point if they got approved from the county for for that. I mean, I think they could. Again, it's only limited to the to their employees and the people that visit the the But yeah, I think without locking it down further, they could potentially do that. And I'm not sure we need to do that. I just it's thought that cross my mind. So,

I don't think that's the the the intent, but this would this is pretty, you know, this is pretty wide open. I mean, could apply to anybody and it's not specifically to this property. I mean, somebody else came in and wanted to do the same thing. Maybe they have different intentions and that's what I thought. Maybe that should be tightened up a little. I don't know. Um, what do you suggest in terms of I mean because I don't think they envision a a restaurant. So, right. So it would be well the retail portion of it is souvenirs and things you know t-shirts and things like that for fundraising.

Maybe we don't need to tighten up. Maybe it's fine the way it is. I'm not sure. Petitioner want to the petition. We're the petition. Yeah, we're we're now the petitioner. Right. Right. Exactly. Well, this is an ordinance change, not just pursuant. I'm used to saying that. I apologize. You're right. But, um, I guess from your perspective, do you want to come up and speak on the intentions that way for your property? Yeah. Um, I think Sorry, could you just give us your name and address, please?

Yeah. Um, Becky Fedak, S54 W31 5000 State Road 59. I'm in Jennese. Um so I think that would because we're limiting it to the education center and um our operations it was retail would be you know if we have things that we want to sell for ourselves um and any food sales because we are a farm um if there's things for um are related to that or the education center if um there's concessions or something like that But if we need to tighten it up, it's again, it's definitely accessory to what our intent is. Um, but it was just something we wanted to keep open. Um, knowing that we are going to have an education center and those kinds of um, facilities might be nice to include.

Yeah, I guess that's where I was coming from. I mean, are they selling, well, we we have sweet corn available because we grew it this year and we have some available, we sell it, or is it, you know, we have a kitchen, we're making burgers and hot dogs and French fries? No, I think it was more because the education center and again as I had shared last time the um previous land owner had who had donated the land to us was um an educator and so we will have that education space and part of that is the concept of an incubator farm for new and beginning farmers and education around that. So, if if they're growing things and want to have a space to sell the things that they're growing or food products that they're generating off of um things that they're growing on the farm, that was the intent. It was more just to provide some flexibility for those kinds of operations without a true concept of what that could be because they're just um visions that we have at this point. So could could we say it's it's limited to basically you know whole foods like essentially produce from the farm andor um processed food basically based on right

yeah we're not it's not like we're like you said we're not going to have like a hamburger and hot dog stand. It's more just we wanted to provide space because a big part of agriculture is the food that's generated from that. We wanted if we could be a space where those farmers could sell their products, we wanted to have flexibility to do that was the intent. So change it from food sales to produce and concessions. Would that be okay? Yeah. Yeah. I struggle with concessions, but I'm not good thinking of words smithing on the spot. But um because I think that's that's some small snack kind of stuff, things like that, but it's not a full-blown kitchen. You're not going to get a meal served to you essentially,

right? Yeah, that would be fine. Okay. The next paragraph after that, you didn't have that red line, but under uh number four. Mhm.

Um site plan of operation shall be submitted for review for the requirements of section 42-30. Architectural and landscaping requirements shall apply to any new construction associated with administrative office education center. I added words in there. I said it should be construction or renovations associated with and I said any of the structures not just limited to those two things. So construction or renovation of any new structures

of any structure of any of the structures. Yeah. I mean, if they wanted to remodel the house into something else or whatever. Okay, I can I I'm fine with that.

And I only have one comment. Yep. And that was on the at the uh end of the next section. Um and maybe this is covered already under number one. It's a under I uh B5 five which one the top of the next page right four the IV for one that starts out with storage maybe permitted only oh gotcha that's the next one there we go got it

um and this may cover it says that um approval of principal land use and only within existing farm buildings. Um I had written before I went back and read it again, I had written something that outdoor seasonal storage is is prohibited. Um I don't know if we need to specifically say that or if that really covers it up there. I can I can add it to be clear. Yeah. Okay. What else you got? That's it. Otherwise, I thought you did a nice job. Thank you.

Do we need to do that for that? Because it says for the purpose of seasonal storage, but previously seasonal storage was defined and it says as temporary indoor storage. I mean, you could add it, but it's already defined as indoors, not outdoor. Yeah, I wouldn't it wouldn't hurt to clarify because I did repeat I did repeat a couple things just to make sure it was reinforced. So I I wish it's not going to be a Sure. Yeah, I said that too. Said it seems like it was So if there if there's no other comments, the next step is to bring it back for public hearing. So is everyone on board for bringing it back for Oh, yeah. on on 13 there. Um so hours of operation, I know farmers get up a little earlier than the rest of us.

Uh so is 9:00 a.m. a little late or can we throw in 8:00 a.m.? Is anybody opposed? Well, that's for special events. Yeah. Is anybody opposed to going to ADM? I mean, huh. Well, this this was originally originally started out as their petition and now it's ours. So, you know, they they originally said nine. That was what they'd said. Okay. Um but all right. Where do you sit with it? I guess since you're blazing the trail here. Well, but farming is separate, right? To your point. Well, no, but it's also egg education is I guess where I'm going at. And

it is a good point. I mean, because again, like the incubator piece is just a vision that we have currently. Um, if there wouldn't be opposition, more of that flexibility actually probably could be good for future events. Um, again, not something we're going to fall on, but um, if there wouldn't be option for that, I don't we wouldn't be opposed. All right. Anybody opposed to 8 a.m. start and then keeping the 10 p.m. close. Good. Okay. All right. Anything else? Okay. We'll bring it back for public hearing for next month. Thank you.

I just have a question as far as storage. He says seasonal non sto or storage. um equipment be non-farming. What do they do with their farm equipment that they're using on the on the site that they don't use? Do we say non-farming year round? Well, they would be storing equipment there too, but that's part of their main purpose though to store their own equipment. That's right. The seasonal this is auxiliary to that,

right? This is they rent out enough space to put a boat inside. I could it's a good it's a good point and maybe we I could just caveat that says it doesn't you know the seasonal storage is not related to the principal use and storage related to that to make sure it's clear is it yeah I think it's number 11 number 11 well actually is it 10 now yeah 11 now it would be 10 now Sean could I

just as you're revising That one thing making sure when it is for farm related that's not just our farm because if we are doing the incubator thing one thing is making sure we would have storage space for other farmers if they were doing farm related activities so that it wouldn't just be for the land owner it would be for any farm related activity that that storage wouldn't necessarily be limited. Does that make sense? Yeah. So exempting any exempting any farm related storage that's that's allowed regardless farm related storage is allowed. We'll just we'll just explicitly say that. Okay.

Okay. Nothing else. And uh we'll bring that back to the future board for uh the hearing and approval. Now adjourn. Question mark. So motion to adjourn plan commission. Second. Okay. All those in favor of adjourning the plan commission say I. I. Anyone opposed? You're adjourned. For the rest of you, do you need a minute or two or can we keep going? Two minutes. Huh? All right. Uh, we will take a two-minute recess.

Stretch a little. Oh my god. Need another I was cleaning off my whole bunch of That's why I was trying to

Yeah, I know. It's fine. Well, I had one where there was really long discussion. All I had was a sign for it. It was the very last thing on the agenda and it was like 11:00 and they kind of came up like and then like

Yeah, no worries. It's fine. I think

good.

Oh yeah. comes at least one or two years. Keep everybody up to

Yeah, they should have What they were What am I supposed to doing all this work? Oh, yeah.

Oh, no. I didn't get there in that area anyway. eventually get right now, but they're thinking they say they might.

All right, let's uh get restarted so we can go on with our night, guys.

Ste, if you can come back, please. All right. Discussion and possible action for village board items. Letter A, letter of credit reduction for Pebble Brook Hollow subdivision phase one.

Yeah, thanks Chad. Um, excuse me. Uh phase one for Pebble Brook Hollowo last fall they completed the final lift of paving as well as some repairs to curbon gutter and um adjustments to curb inlets that were out there. Originally Mr. Bman had requested a final reduction and acceptance of public improvements but upon our punch list inspection. We're not quite ready for that yet. There's still some restoration he'll have to return and do in the spring. Um, and so he modified his request essentially to reduce it in the amount equal to the value of the final lift of asphalt which was placed. Um, which would reduce the overall letter of credit to a value of $16,32529. Um, which I think is is more than enough to cover what he has left to do in the spring, which is essentially just some some landscaping work. um at which point he'll come back um submit another request for reduction and and uh final acceptance of public improvements by the village. Um so recommending um the letter of credit be reduced in the amount indicated in our letter for phase one of Pebble Brook Hollow.

Okay. Any discussion board? I'll make a a motion to make a letter of credit reduction to phase subdivision of phase one of $16,32529. I'll second it. And just to clarify, that's the remaining that would be what's left in the letter of credit. So the reduction itself is the 81,000 and change. Okay. Any other discussion? All those in favor of approving the letter of credit reduction as uh noted in the packet say I. I. I. Any opposed?

Motion carries. Letter B, letter of credit reduction for Pebble Brook phase two.

So phase two kind of subsequent to the improvements for phase one last fall. Um they did essentially everything out there except for paving the final lift. So, you know, building the roads, um, concrete, curb, gutter, some of the inlets. Um, I think there's still some landscaping and restoration and grading to be done out there, and the the letter of credit reduction that Mr. Belman's asking for reflects that. So, this will be the first reduction. He's um asking for it in the value of everything that's been completed. Total reduction request 1,195,18410 which would leave $192,91920 left on the letter of credit which is equal to the established value for final lift of paving various landscaping and grading that's still left to do as well as a 20% contingency of that remaining value. So that is our recommendation. Okay, I'll make a motion to approve a letter of credit reduction for phase two as discussed.

I'll second. Any discussion? Seconded. Any discussion? All right. All those in favor of approving the letter of credit reduction for phase two say I. I. I. Any opposed?

That carries. Moving on to site plan for the DPW building and operations. Um and Rob's in the back and Greg's still here. Uh there's a new map that's um site plan map refer to it I guess for um what's been laid out. There's a bunch of work that was done between Greg and Rob as far as um how to lay this out from the last discussion that we had uh trying to move things forward with the public works building project. You want to add or discuss what we're doing here?

Um yeah. So, I guess after last month's meeting, the direction was, you know, come come back with a site plan um showing the proposed building 10 ft off of the existing building to the to the south um which we had prepared and we we discussed at a staff level and took a look at kind of a conceptual version of that. What we also discussed was at, you know, after last meeting, one of the decisions that was made was to kind of move on from the baseball diamond that's that's back there. Um, and and Rob made the point, well, you know, if that's no longer going to be used, we have a whole lot of land back there that that is usable for this rather than kind of tie ourselves into an area with ongoing operations and a lot going on. Um, you know, putting the building in the site of some of the existing operations mean we means we have to find a new home for those operations in the interim while this building's being built. Moving the building to the north, um I guess to the west of the existing building gives us a lot more flexibility for what that elevation of that building is going to be. We have some more flexibility as far as storm water drainage around it. Make sure it it's built at an elevation that you know is going to avoid some some flooding in the area potentially. Um as well as just gives um Rob and public works a lot more flexibility with what they're going to do with that area to the south. um keep that operational while this building's being built rather than being forced to find an interim location for civilized operations. So, taking all that into consideration, worked with um Rob very closely to come up with the site plan you guys are looking at. Um I I think a lot of what we talked about in the past is represented on here as far as utility locations. Um proposed asphalt pavement, some of the other site operations that you know Rob could um get into in more depth, but I guess generally those areas are somewhat conceptual and

more laid out for for the future. Um what's important for moving the public works building forward is the building, the pavement, the utilities. Um, some of which, you know, we still have some some work to do as far as pavement design and and grading, but I think this is being brought uh before the board is, you know, this is where this this building is is going to go. Rob, do you have anything you want to come up and add?

Okay. Um, I just want to emphasize with what Greg just presented that um, moving it where it did, as we've talked um with Rob and Greg on this in prior staff meeting is not only is the yard waste able to stay where it is at least temporarily um as we figure out the future of of that and how that is done uh but it also gives us the opportunity to to allow the other two buildings to remain in place during the construction portion uh so that they can maintain storage of the equipment and not have to start parking stuff outside um with the existing buildings. Those would still in the future plan come down as we've already discussed and approved in prior uh meetings, but moving it the way that it does allows those to remain so operations can be affected the least amount possible with the bill being where it is and they wouldn't really overlap anymore at that point. So, um I don't know if you guys printed off a copy if you um looked online with the packet, but uh you've got orangeish kind of color or brown tan kind of color uh for where the building would be for the new building is the greatest section that be proposed asphalt as it says. Um the area of the existing buildings lists as future asphalt pavement for the yard and site operations. When we to this. I I wanted them to and I asked them to put it in the portion where future site for salt shed and and yard waste could be. So, it's already allocated and we already have an idea and a plan moving forward for the future for those things. It's not to say that that's going to be done immediately. That's just so it's kind of already in there. We're not having to come back to the drawing board in the future to do another version of site plan because it's already built into it from that perspective.

discussion from the board. Al, you're the one that made the motion that wanted to have this. So, I guess call on you first if you have anything you want to discuss with them.

Yeah, I do have a few things. One, if we do do something different like we see in front of us right now, I think we all voted on back in the day that we were to put it on the south side. Just hold that for but um overhaul um obviously I asked for the site plan of operation that uh so everything would work out and fit for the needs of the DPW building here at the village. My opinion is that I'd like it where where we voted on it. My opinion only. Um, in fact, if we do change it, I I would I would still like to have it added on to the other building. And I know that whoever said or architect or whoever we were talking to said that couldn't be done. I disagree on that. I think it can be done by redesigning the roof mainly. I think that could be reinvented and have that done. So, I just throw it out for everybody else. That's right. But I appreciate I mean we to get the site plan of operations down is that why I brought that up is because make this happen feasible for the village DPW to uh do their work and uh have room for the future um waste that we have yard waste the salt storage bills and u and their storage areas for their their yard waste that they have. I just wanted to PL so everything fits and works the way it's supposed to and then the grades and everything else that comes in forth in

place of this site plan. So that's why I asked for it. Okay. Uh just I guess in response to part of what you said there. Um I think I was the one that made the statements as far as working with um the designer of the building. It wasn't that it could not be attached to the other one, which we've already voted that they weren't going to be attached. Um, but it was there was complications with that as far as the design goes. And you reference the roof and stuff like that. So, we could still attach them if that's where you wanted to go, but then we have to go back and redo the drawings and the design of the building. Um, it's going to delay that part of the project that much further. So, we've I just I guess like I said, I wanted to clarify that that can happen. It wasn't that it can't from how you said that. ask a question on that.

Certainly. Is that roof design was the problem before? Did it have to meet tying it in the roof? The concern was um specific load of of the new roof would be snow coming down and and um runoff and whatnot from the new building. Uh the the old building wasn't designed to be able to take on that additional snow and stuff that would be falling on it from the new building. Okay. I wasn't would be wrong with just putting a walkway between it. Not big grandios just connected to access to both buildings without having to go inside 15t wide walkway between two buildings.

Okay. Well, again, we're going to be going back to redesigning

portions of the building and stuff. So, if we want to move this forward, we keep the two buildings separated and we just decide if this is an acceptable version of the site plan or if it goes back to uh the 10 foot to the south of the existing building, which again operations wise, I asked Rob and Greg as they worked through this that um they I relied on them to be the ones that came up with what would be the best options here. Uh Rob had a lot of input into this looking for the future of his department. and I'm relying on that that this is what will be the best for them and their operations. So, personally, I like what they've laid out here. Anybody else?

I don't How much fill is this going to take? It's going to take a lot of fill, right? Either one's going to take fill because to four feet probably.

I don't So right now we set the building at 817. So the finished floor elevation the the top of the slab at 817. The lower I guess the the northern end of that building the elevation is 814. So you're varying between 3 ft of fill on the north half to you know one foot of fill on the the south half. Um there's some grading that would need to be done around it. obviously to build up that building pad and then we need to create a path for for drainage. I mean kind of regardless of where we're putting this building, the water wants to go from the site from the south to the north west portion of the the site. So we need to need to place the building at an elevation at which it's it's not directly in the line of of drainage conveyance. Um we need to take the water around to the west. So, I think regardless of where you put it, you're bringing in some fill.

Another thing I have is you had the water main connection coming out of the existing building. There is no water man there at this point. And the only water feeding that building is a 3/4 inch pipe that comes from this building or from the well. And you're not going to get a 3/4 inch pipe because you're going to have to reduce it to go into the next building which is going to be a half inch pipe and you're not going to have any water. There is no water man out there. Why would that reduce from the existing building going over 3/4 to a half?

Well, it's basically, you know, that's what it's going to act like basically by the time you get the water pressure over there, you won't have any water at the at the end of it. Just something to look at. Yeah. We'll look into that. Okay. Other discussion or a motion? I'll just make one comment. I think it' be cheaper to add on the other building. I'll leave it at that.

Roger. Well, I'm kind of liking what I see here, but I don't have the expertise that you guys have as far as concern. Uh, we've had a number of things that we've had to deal with and I think it just it becomes to a point where Chad, I know you spent so much time on this along with Rob and This this works, Greg. This works

from well from an operations perspective. I I took Rob's opinion on the site overall, you know, put a lot of weight on that. What works best for him and his department. I think both locations of the building work, right? Um ultimately the the finished product of the building could work in either location. What made the most sense to me was if we put the building to the south of the existing building, you're immediately displacing all those operations. We'd have to find a new home for

um which would likely have to be to the north. And you know that obviously that's part of what would have to go into the site plan. Um this option from that perspective is a lot simpler because you can keep those where they are while the building's being built. Um, I think this requires from a cost perspective less asphalt pavement replacement. You know, immediately ultimate build it's pro it's going to end up being around the same because you know the red area we're showing eventually might end up being new pavement if um if that area is improved for future site operations. U but for the building itself, I think it's it's a little cleaner

to get to get it constructed this way. Well, Rob, you had a lot of Rob had a lot of input on this as well. I mean, he's looking at doing the jobs that are necessary to get things uh coordinated and uh I I think that that kind of input is is to me most important. This whole thing about cost falls just really is is at this point, how much more cost? I mean, I don't think it's going to be that much more either way. I don't think cost is relevant. I think if we have a workable uh design right here and can incorporate the things that we have talked about over here, I think we go with this design, I'm for it. We can't be kicking the ball down the road. We have spent so much time doing and redoing and redoing um that it's this is our best this is our last one so far and I don't want to be it so far. I want get to work on something here that works and been so many uh pieces of of of information that have gone into working and reor reworking this thing that I'm uh I'm confident very confident in in in what uh Chad and and Rob and you Greg have done here that I I can go with this I can go with this system right here.

I'll say the same thing. I I've always people that have to work with these things are people that should have most of the input because they're the ones that have to deal with this on a day-to-day basis. And if it doesn't work for them, I don't think it works for the village. So, this is what they want. I think this is what we should do. I think shoving it down further is going to just create more cramp space between the building and the property line. So, I think this is the best best way to do it. always said you build a building, you got to do it right the first time because you don't get a second chance at it. So,

I'm going to make a motion to approve the site plan as presented um with a I stipulation that the water and uh sewer connections can be modified as needed for the final design. Those are as they are on the map. They're proposed. That's not for sure that way. I'll second that. Any other discussion? All right. Hearing none. All those in favor of approving the site plan with stipulation about the two items as mentioned say I. I. Anyone opposed?

No. All right. It was yes, Rob or sorry, Bob, myself, and Roger. No was Al and Ste.

Are we talking about the whole site plan here right now? Yeah, I believe that was the motion. That's what I heard. Yeah, the whole site plan or the whole thing going on? What do you mean the whole What's in the map that presented for the public works building, not just the public works building? This wasn't about the fire department or the rest of that. It was solely to the public works building project because that's what was in the last meeting for um Al's motion that was approved that need to be done before we go to the next phase bidding the building. Okay. So to do anything about the fire department, we have to get that put on the agenda. That's a separate line item that's being worked on. So I would like to put that on the agenda for the next meeting. Okay.

Discussion on this. Let me tell you. Okay. Um, do we have to redo the motion that we made like a month and a half ago that we voted on supposed to go? I don't think so because we've approved a new version of the location to the building. I believe that last motion just did that. Okay. I just want to make sure that's why I listened to how you were wording it and I I thought that was the intent. Yes. Okay. Okay. Up next on the agenda then um related to the same discussion but consideration of geotechnical evaluation proposal for the DPW site project. Greg, you want to talk about that?

Sure. Um so one of the first things we did after last month's meeting and kind of the direction from the board to move forward with the site plan was um start talking about some geotechnical work that needs to be done. So essentially that means collecting soil samples to completing soil borings up to a certain depth not only for the building but for the parking area. Um critical for us to complete our design of the pavement but also critical for the you know whatever contractor is going to be putting the building up to know what kind of subsurface they're dealing with soil strength water table information. Um, it's actually a requirement in the state of Wisconsin to to provide that information to biders for a building construction project. Um, so we started talking to a firm that we deal with quite a bit, PSI Intertech, their local geotechnical firm. They do soil borings for us all the time on roadway projects. Um, you know, any kind of pavement design projects we're we're usually doing with them to to get soil boring information. um they put together a proposal to complete the work. You'll notice I guess on the on the front page the borings they have proposed or actually we proposed to them was based on the previous site plan. So obviously those would be relocated two within the new pavement section and two within the new building area. Um they're ready to get this going.

They said oh they'd be doing it next week. They already marked utilities. So, obviously, if if the site plan wasn't approved, we'd have some work to do to to tell them to to hold off, which wouldn't be that big of a deal, but um the information they're going to bring back to us is pretty critical for us to complete our design and then get this thing on the street for for bidder. So, wanted to bring it to the board for your consideration. I believe their total cost is $5,800 total for four borings. they'd be providing the boring logs within, you know, a week or two of completion and then ultimately a a geotechnical report that's going to have all sorts of recommendations for for our design parameters. So, anything else? Sorry.

No, that that's summarizes it. Uh just transparency wise, uh Greg approached me on this um I think roughly two weeks ago. Uh because he had been working with this company to get this done as he said, but uh if we went through Greg's firm to contract them for this, it's going to increase the cost of it because there's some issues uh with insurance carrying stuff like that. So he asked that I review it and based on what was here, I didn't I wasn't going to just approve this. So that's why it's in front of you guys tonight. Um, so that's the reason behind this. If if it those things hadn't been there, this would have been under Greg's um, billing to us. But again, it would have been at a higher cost. So we're saving a little bit of money on doing it this way. I believe we did some site survey and some geolog geological testing back in 2019. I'm thinking it's probably maybe between August and October. Does anybody know where the results of that is?

So, you definitely did a site survey because that's actually what we used for our survey. We we borrowed that from Fisher Fisher Ty. So, the site survey was done. I think that was 2017. the geotechnical I I don't know, but unless it's in the exact location of the new building, it's not going to be very useful for for the purposes of the public works, but I yeah, I don't know the answer to your exact question. Well, you wouldn't have recommended this place here unless you've had previous um experience with them.

Yeah. No, we deal with them annually. um loads of roadway design projects, parking lot design projects. Um they're excellent at what they do and they they'll turn it around quickly. They know this one, you know, time is of the essence to get this done. We can't really complete our pavement design without their data, nor can we bid this out without their report. So, um they're going to turn it around pretty quickly. Well, I just understand and and I'm just relying on your judgment. Thank you for that.

Study your question. I think it's possible geotechnical would have been done in the previous one that had gone up to bid and then was canceled by a previous board, but to Greg's point, it would have been south of the existing building where the other buildings are going because that's where that plan had been according to the designer. It was um it was going to be the site same site as where we had it previously. So, we just thought to do it here. I thought maybe we could save some money if we had the information.

If if there are boring logs out there from 2019, they still could be useful to us to provide. I mean, it might eventually they might be in the location of future improvements at the site. It might be good for the village to know, you know, where those are and what they entail if they were done.

Uh, all right. I'll make a motion to approve the the work to be done by the geotechnical firm for this evaluation under the proposal in front of you. I'll second it. Any other discussion? All right. Hearing none. All those in favor of uh approving this proposal say I. I. I. Anyone opposed?

Motion carries. Up next is uh approving a beer garden request for the NX level sports performance location for that special event we talked about earlier tonight. Uh I'll make a motion to deny the request based on us not allowing that in the change in the site plan of operation for the property. Second it. Any discussion? All those in favor of approving the denial say I. I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Up next, consideration of consolidation of village bank accounts. Thank you, Greg. Tonight,

it's a long night. Um, so up next is consideration of consolidation of village bank accounts in the village money market accounts. Um, I'm going to combine the next two with that. The Landmark Credit Union CD maturity dated se February 7th and the Citizens Bank maturity uh CD maturity date of February 8th. um working with Chris and Beth. Um here you guys want to take one each your way that way. You can have one if you want as well.

Uh so I put together this one I just handed out. I put this together um finished this up last night. Um, I guess just give you some backstory to what's going on or what what I'm proposing here. Um, Citizens Bank, one of the representatives there reached out to me uh about a week and a half or almost two weeks ago maybe uh asking to sit down and discuss uh banking options for the village um and wanted to propose um what their services could be to the village. Um Chris Beth and I met with Representative Logan uh last week and um she presented to us some information on what Citizens Bank would offer if we were to consider moving all our portions of um our banking um from Walkshire State Bank or other banks because we we also have stuff at Landmark and Walkshshire State Bank and Associate Bank as you can see in that sheet. Um we have all those different locations where you have money stored for different purposes. Um And so I got to looking at this with Chris and Beth after we met with her. Um and um I think we're doing a disservice to the village, to the residents, the taxpayers by leaving the funds in the locations that they're in currently. Um what Citizens Bank offered uh I'll go to CDs in a second, but just for normal banking purposes, I'll just discuss initially. um they have money market opportunities where if the minimum balance is $500,000 or more that uh they do a considerably higher interest rates on those accounts than what we have now. There is a I forget that I don't maybe I do have it written down here from the meeting. There's something we've not discussed as a board before at least that I've ever been aware of that's called the local government investment pool. Uh, and

that's where communities um are able to deposit funds into one of those pools with each other that then draws a higher interest rate on those funds. You can take the funds out as needed. It's not like a CD. It's just a different version of a savings account. That number fluctuates, but it's um last month or in the last several months it was around 3.9% or 3.92%. uh sorry 3.82% I misspoke there. Citizens Bank what they offer is to go uh 10 basis points or.1% higher than that local investment pool. So if that pool is at 3.82% our money market with Citizens Bank would be at 3.92%. They just give you a slight increase by giving them your funds to store versus going to one of those government pools. If you look at the top gray section of this, I've broken down with Chris and Beth's help the different balances. Those balances were as of 131 of this of this year. So, a few weeks ago, those numbers have fluctuated because there's bills to be paid and maybe some revenues that came in from building permits and whatever else. But, uh, those were the balances as of 131 on that section. I put a fund type to each of those because, as we discussed, there's the general fund and then we have capital improvements funds. It's a separate type of general fund and we keep those separated. So our Walker State Bank checking account which is general money uh you can see what the balance was as of 131 and the money in that account would acrew at 05%. Uh there's a property tax account that's also through Walker State Bank um because it's a higher dollar amount and then how they um provide an interest

rate to that they have that money at 2.15%. The then there is a WASHA state bank money market that is not general but it's capital improvement funds that's also at that 2.15%. We have a which talking to Chris, we don't know in the history of these funds why this was separated out, but there's a associated bank money market capital um fund type that is at uh 0.95%. So there's a savings account at 0.95%. We then have the CDs that we keep renewing, the two through citizens bank that are under the general fund and then we have the landmark one that's under the capital fund. Again, I'll mention those because they're in a later segment to the bottom of this u document that I gave you guys. So, what we would be doing is leaving this the everyday operations as far as checking and uh you know, automatic withdrawals, automatic deposits, all those types of things that are out there now so that the clerks don't have to go through a slew of uh of documents from the different places that money would come and go from to the village. uh and and then try and redo all those uh through a new account at Citizens Bank. We are going to leave the operations daily operations to remain as is with that checking account to stay as it is. It's not going to change from the interest perspective, but that allows them to keep doing the the checks the way that they are, not having to order new checks and all the things that go with the daily operation of a checking account. The property tax account, as you can see, is a is a pretty high or substantial number. That's because as uh property taxes are collected by the county at the end of the year and then into the start of the new year, that money is automatically deposited by the county into that specific account. So, it's high now because we're at the start of the year, but as the year goes on, um Chris and Beth get withdrawals that go

for the money that goes to the state, the money that goes to the school fund or school district and things down the line to where um that money just keeps reducing month by month until property taxes are collected at the end of this year and it goes back up again. Uh that's at again 2.15% currently through Wakasha State Bank. Um I have it on here as 3.92 as a proposed but that's that number the proposed number is going to fluctuate on again what that local investment pool number is within 0.1% higher through citizens pay. So when she presented this to us, that number appeared to be 3.92. Next month that might be 3.95. It could go down. That's going to fluctuate. But either way, um it's still, as you can see, almost double of what it's currently at. Okay. U for both of those two accounts, the property tax account and the Walker State Bank money market account, that's the line below that. Uh what I'm going to propose here is that the money in the associated money market is going to be closed out and then that money transfers over to one of these other accounts as I get down the sheet here to explain this to you because again that's even less of an interest rate on that money that's less than 1%. Um and that could be that money would transfer over and be at that higher 3 point whatever you know the current rates at. So that's even that's almost almost four times as much at that rate versus what it's at now. Um, and I'll discuss the the CDs last. So, uh, if you skip the blue section because that's related to CDs and the orange section. If you look in the pink section of the document I gave you, um, there's a couple sets of numbers there. What I did is I went online and and got a a a savings account calculator and then took those balances from up above for those three accounts that you can see in the current balance section up above. And I did one month's interest on

those accounts at the current of the 2.5 2.15 or the 0 n5 and that's the left of those two numbers. So like the 1142 the 212 that's what would have been the interest accured on those specific accounts in the month of January. If we were to have had it at the proposed higher rate through citizens bank it'd be the number to the right. So, if you go to the right side of that where it says combined for January, we would have gotten approximately the top number about $9,000 for the interest on all those accounts combined or those three accounts combined. If we had it in the higher citizens bank account, it would have been the number below which is a little less than double

16,889. We went from about 9,000 to almost 17,000 in interest. Holy smokes.

So, it's no small numbers. This isn't like changing $100 and you know something like that. This is a pretty significant difference. So, as I've talked with Chris and Beth, I I think I keep using the words we're losing we're not losing money, but we're losing an opportunity that we could be uh seeing higher interest um payments coming in from that money stored somewhere else. Uh those are money markets. So that money is accessible to Chris and Beth when bills come in or something else goes on. They just transfer the funds from one account to the next to be able to pay those bills and such. So it's not like a CD where it's locked in for a specific amount of time. But just for comparison purposes, this is why we're bringing this up is I I want us to be able to see that we're getting the most out of our money when it's sitting in an account somewhere. Um so 9,000 to 16,000 in one month is it's a pretty significant amount of money. Okay. Um so backing up then just the top segments in the gray again you see the two citizens bank cities. Um one is um at 4.25% currently. The other one's at 4.15 or sorry 4.17%. One of those two CDs is what's due that we pushed off to tonight's discussion. The other one uh comes due at the end of the month. The landmark CD is also one that's in our our packet tonight to discuss um and is at the 4.22% but that's also that's the one that expires or expired on February 7th, so last week. Um, with what I'm proposing with transferring these funds, uh, I'm my proposal is going to be in the orange section where we combine the two citizen bank CDs and make them a total of $500,000. Um, with the discussion, I guess, of where

we put the money and for what term, as you can see in there. Uh, and then the other one would be the general fund money that we would put 500,000 into that account. And that one I would recommend because it's general fund money and uh we don't know where things are one month the next uh we would put that in for the sevenmonth term so that it's available towards the end of the year if we um if we need the money towards end of year expenses. talking to Chris and Beth with how our annual budget works and when pays are, you know, bills are coming due and such throughout the the budget cycle, that 500,000 uh would not need to be touched within the time frame of these seven months. Technically, that's part of the general fund anyways. That's money that's not even part of our operating budget for the year, but in the event something were to happen, uh that money is still available to us by like September roughly. So, that would be my recommendation is that we're going to do two new CDs. Again, if you look up above, uh we have two general citizens bank CDs, general fund money that those would become um a $500,000 combined. And then the other one would be the capital fund uh that would be rolled over but increased by some of the capital money that's in the current money market. So to that point then the discussion that was in the packet and I think the sheet that was at at the table in front of you tonight is because some of those interest rates have changed uh since that was put in the packet with Chris doing follow-up work on this. uh the the one in orange as far as capital for 500,000 I have it as a seven or 18month term because if you look at the sheet that was um put in front of you tonight uh Citizens Bank is offering to match that se 4% that Landmark had given us but they didn't want to do a 12-mon CD as was originally presented at the last meeting they only wanted it for a

sevenmon CD the landmark one was at 12 months when We met last time about this. Um, but they've now made the 4% a 18-month CD. So, let me know when you're going to take place. Okay. Um. All right. I Yeah, you got a question. Go ahead. Well, you said that landmark was at uh what is that? Is it uh 4% for 18 months? Correct.

That's the current Yes. If we had done that CD at the last meeting, um it would have been a 12 month for 4%.

At 4%. Okay. And what we're looking at is a proposal where we're going to give all of our money to Citizens Bank um in certain denominations. combination of CD and general investment. Um so it's kind of an all or one none deal. I mean we can't we can't pick and choose and and so I I guess I understand um the term for the CD general for instance and for the capital CD is seven months. Um one is at seven or 18 months term but the 18 month is for landmark. Is that correct?

Yeah. So look at the sheet that Chris put at the table in front of you tonight because that was different than what was in the packet, right? So Landmark is offering the 4% APY for 18 months, right? Um so if you want 4% locked in, you have an option of either seven-month term or 18-month term for that CD. Yeah, but we got to give all of our funds to We don't have to give all the funds anywhere. My proposal is oh that we're putting our money into business bank because they're offering for the money market money or savings account money they're offering us the the largest rate there.

Okay. CDs we can put wherever. I'm that's why I'm saying like for the capital improvement for $500,000 if you want it for a shorter term at seven months then it would go to Sid's bank because they have the seven month for 4%. If you want it locked in for a lot longer than that then it would be for 18 months because Landmark is offering the 18month for 4%. If you want something in between seven and 18 months then you have to look at the sheet Chris Gabe and it's going to be a lesser percentage for something like 12 months. All the indications are and and Chris verified this for me is that interest rates are going to be going down. I think uh what you've done here is great. This is great homework and and this is easy to understand. Um I I certainly would want to consider for the CDs the 18month rate over at Landmark Credit Union because interest rates are going to drop anywhere from a half a percent to three quarters of a percent probably in the next 9 to 12 months. And uh It's It's just kind of It's just kind of what it is as is going to be happening.

Yeah. The part in the blue, I apologize. I didn't change that uh because Chris emailed this document over to me earlier today. So, I I changed the term in the orange portion to match 18 months, but the part in the blue was because yesterday the the rates are different. That's that's where there was a 12-month option for landmark, and that's no longer an option in the blue section. So, ignore the blue section. Go off the sheet that Chris gave you tonight.

Okay. Um, so I guess just continue the conversation on the CDs. What any other discussion on the CD portion of what I've presented to you? Thoughts from anybody else. Okay. um to the other topic then of transferring the funds um to accounts that have a higher yield or higher interest rate on them. Out of transparency for this um again we met with Citizens Bank. She slid over a paper in front of us and said here's what we're offering. um knowing that our money was split between different places which I don't think she even knew all that because she asked a bunch of questions of Chris and Beth with that but um with those numbers I did ask Chris to reach out to Walker State Bank and um they were given an opportunity to pre present um something different knowing that there's competition for these savings and and where to put this money and um I'll Chris you Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'll paraphrase by saying that what's already in front of you, they they weren't willing to increase anything. They were not going to change anything. So, it's going to stay the same. Um, so with that, Citizens Bank is willing to give us a lot more for our money. Uh, again, as Roger said, as I mentioned before, the interest rates go up and down on the savings accounts, but those are remaining as savings or money markets because we have access to them. when we need it. So, discussing on that portion as far as

moving the funds, uh any discussion or comments on that? I will point out uh as we've talked in the past when it comes to renewing these CDs, Citizens Bank is open and to the point that um they ensure us at the higher than 250,000 that FDIC does or that they have to these accounts because if you remember each time we talk about rolling over these CDs like Landmark and such, they don't they don't insure above that number. So when we have a CD that's higher than that, they're not ensuring that additional funds in that

the same. Okay. So, Walkers State Bank also does ensure for the higher rate. Landmark does not when that's been called above. Okay. Just for just for clarification here, um have any banks ever defaulted on on on FSLIC? If you go over 400,000, what's going to happen if you got less? You You've got the 250 and you got 150,000 that's not guaranteed. What's going to happen to that 150? Are they Are they just It's gone. Executive. If the bank goes belly up or whatever, you ain't getting it. Well, that's the reason for the insurance in the first place. It's

protecting the money. Yeah, I understand. It's not It's not our money. It's the client's money. So, I understand we need that kind of protection. All right. So, Roger's been the most vocal on the CDs as far as terms and such. What is everybody else's thoughts? Because as below, I as you can see in the yellow section, I kind of laid out what my my proposals and thoughts are here um with all of this. Your idea is I'm make those motions. Yeah. The citizens bank then put our CDs in the citizens bank. The C CDs are going to be based on what you guys want to do with those terms like in the orange section or the sheet that Chris gave us. Currently, we have two CDs.

And they're paying 4% on the renewal. Yeah. For seven months. And they're guaranteed what again? No. Citizens Bank is where all of this is covered. All that's covered. Thank you. For municipals, they they go much higher. Okay. CD. Sure. You want a motion on that first one? Well, I guess I I I would make the motion to put CDs with Citizens Bank for the term of seven months.

Okay. because of the because of the absolute guaranteeability of that amount that uh that that that's guaranteed as opposed to landmark landmark is for 12 months but they don't guarantee it. So actually 18 months here but they but they only guarantee 250. Yeah. Okay. So your motion is to create both CDs as I have in the paper here for 500,000 each for each of the two funds at seven at the seven months for both. Yes. Yep. Do we have that? Okay. Does that make sense, Chad? I mean, you did this. I guess I want to make sure that this is what that I'm understanding this correctly.

Hold on a second.

Okay. So, you've clarified you want seven months for both of those two CDs. Is there a second to that? I will second that. Okay, that's what we talked as as the safer bet lower month I mean no lower number of months of guarantee but a safer bet because it's completely okay yes one for the 500,000 for capital and one for 500,000 under the general funds Okay. So, Bob's uh motion for that. Roger seconded that. Is there any other discussion on that?

I'll make a separate motion to finish that. So, we will make this is to make create two new CDs for these amounts. Actually, just to simplify it, um will will you be willing to modify the motion and and also the second that the motion includes the two CDs from Citizens Bank are merged together to do this because that one comes due soon and one is already due. Is that the one that's in our packet here that says two days from now? Yeah, I do that. Okay. Yeah, I'll go with that.

Okay. Because they they're going to they're willing to do that without any penalties since the one's like a week away from or week and a half away from expiring. Okay. Any other discussion? Roger, you seconded. Yes, I did. All right. All those in favor of approving uh the creation of these two new CDs at Citizens Bank, 500,000 each from the two funds at the sevenmonth uh term for 4% in each. Say I. I. I. I. Anyone opposed? Okay. Second of that. I'm going to make a motion that we um hold on a second. Skip the

Heather. I'm going to make a motion that we authorize a village treasurer to create uh new money market accounts at Citizens Bank that transfers funds from Walker State Bank money market and the associated bank money market which closes the associated account with the available funds from each location. the two and I'll just to specify further with that the two accounts would be because one is capital improvement funds and the other is general um general funds.

I'll second that. All right. Any discussion or you need clarification on what's been presented and what I'm talking about? I need clarification only from the standpoint um you've uh are as far as what you're creating here. Okay. I understand that the uh the tax fund. So what amounts are we actually transferring?

I'm not putting the actual amounts in because the numbers are fluctuating and the numbers on the paper in front of you are not going to be exact to what they are say tomorrow or next week when Chris is able to do this. That's why I labeled it in the motion that's the available funds. There's going to be a minimum balance to an account. We're not going to close specific. The the only account that's going to close with this is the associated money market. The property tax account needs to stay open because that's how the funds transfer back and forth. Oh, yes. Um for the the things that Chris has to do there uh when the property taxes come in, they come into that account. So, we're not closing the account. We're just taking the savings of it over to the new money market. The checking account stays as it is.

Okay. the Walker State Bank money market that's listed on the paperwork, that money transfers over to the new account. The associated money market through associate bank transfers over to the new account. So in the end, there will be two new money markets as citizens bank. Um, one is general fund money from those accounts up above transferred over and the other one is from the capital funds from up above transferred over. I I said both I merged it all into one motion that we transfer all of the above. Okay. rather than

so the motion is to authorize the village treasurer to create two new money markets at citizens bank allowing the treasurer to transfer available funds from the state bank property tax account the state bank money market account and the associated bank money market account.

Yep. With in the motion I stated was that the associated bank account would be closed. The last piece I'll discuss on this is because uh Chris talked to Paul the auditor. There is the ability just to do one money market for all of the above. But then Chris has to do more um math on when a interest payment comes in at the end of the month or whenever it does. And then she'd have to figure out what the percentage of it is is general fund money versus capital fund money. And it just turns into more and more work each month from that perspective. So that's why I'm suggesting we make two separate accounts to keep the general fund money separate from the capital improvement fund. Yep.

Any other discussion? All right, hearing none. All those in favor of the motion as stated say I. I. I. Anyone opposed. Okay. I think that covers everything under that. That handles FG and H on the form or on the agenda. All that's left is accounts payable, which is in the amount of 300 and make sure I got it right. 397,4752 from all the different accounts.

I'll make a motion that we pay the bills in the amount of 397,4752. Is there a second? I can second that. Any other discussion? All those in favor of approving the bills. Any amount stated say I. I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Ajournment of Village Ford. I move to adjurnn. I'll second it. All those in favor say. I. Anyone opposed? I say I as well. And we are done. Thank you guys. A lot of stuff.