Common Council - Regular Meeting

This meeting of the common council will come to order. Will the city clerk please call the roll? Alderman Pratt. Present.

Chambers. Here. Brower. Here. Baumann. Here. Westmoreland. Here. Cogs. Excused. Jackson. Here. Zamoriba. Here. Taylor. Here. Moore. Present. Bergelis. I don't

know where my mask is.

Alderman Bergelis. Present. Spiker. Here. Dmitryevich. Here. Stamper.

I'm here. Mister president. Present. 14 members are present. One is excused.

Please rise for the pledge of allegiance to be followed by a moment of silent meditation.

Oh, yeah.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of The United States Of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice strong.

Are there any corrections to the Comet Council Journal proceedings for the meeting of 02/10/2026?

There are no corrections to the journal.

There being no corrections, the minutes of this meeting stand approved. Are there any items of unfinished business?

There's one item of unfinished business. Item identified as one, resolution authorizing a $75,000 service contract between the State of Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and City of Milwaukee Environmental Collaboration Office through its FEED MKE program to provide non regulatory technical assistance to Wisconsin food waste generators and entities on projects to prevent and divert food waste from landfills. This item was held in council at the last regular meeting.

Alderman Stamper moves that this matter be placed on file. Hearing no objection so ordered, this concludes the unfinished business. Will the city clerk please inform the common council of any commendations or condolences to be acknowledged at this time.

Item two, communication from the city clerk relating to various commendatory and condolatory resolutions to be acknowledged and affirmed by the common council. One, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends, miss Akua, chancellor. Two, resolution congratulating Messmer High School on the occasion of its one hundredth anniversary. Three, resolution congratulating SASS's Hospitality Group on the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary. Four, resolution recognizing Reverend John McVicar Sr.

On receiving an honorary street name designation. Five, resolution recognizing Eva May Hayes on the occasion of her one hundredth anniversary. Six, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of Philip DeMarinis. Seven, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of Charlotte Thompson. Eight, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of plural Thomas.

Nine, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of Glenna Lee Macklin. 10, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of John Cunningham senior. 11, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of Dexter Adnott. 12, resolution expressing condolences to the family and friends of Veronica Sanchez. 13, resolution congratulating David Sikora on his retirement from the Milwaukee Public Library.

14, resolution congratulating Karen McElley on her retirement from the employees retirement system. 15, resolution congratulating Thomas Schirmer on his retirement from the Milwaukee Milwaukee Police Department. 16, resolutions congratulating the following on their retirements from the Department of Public Works. Brian Stankovitz, Robert Kessen, Gregory Pertet, RC Talley, Kevin Dudley. 17, resolutions congratulating the following on their retirements from the Milwaukee Public Schools.

Jane Weorick, Nancy DeSoutle, Nanette Whitmarsh, Sherry West, Corey Satterfield, Bridget Todd, Robert Howell, Jacqueline Brazil.

Are there any objections to the foregoing commendations or condolences? If anyone wishes to be added as a sponsor to any of the commendations or condolences, please fill out the form on your desk and submit it to the city clerk before the close of the workday. We will now take up reports of standing committees. Alderperson Jo Casa Amaribo will now present the report of the License Committee.

The License Committee recommends approval of one of three, forgive me, 251,756, motion relating to the recommendations of the License Committee relating to licenses. Included in the file are the following recommendations. Non renewal of the class a fermented malt license and the renewal with a ninety day suspension of the food dealer license for a parameter cower based on the preponderance of the evidence of the police report, resident applicant testimony that demonstrates that the operation results in a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of the public for the failure to comply with the approved plan of operation and gambling for the premise located at 418 East Center Street doing business as Titu Ramat Food in the 6th Aldermanic District. Written objections have been filed. Non renewal of a class a fermented malt license of Nadir e Assad based upon the preponderance of the evidence in the police report, neighborhood, and applicant testimony that demonstrates that the operation results in a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of the public for the gun violence assaults, battery, and failure to comply with the approved plan of operation for the premise located at 2438 West Greenfield Avenue doing business as Richard's Grocery in the 8th Aldermanic District.

Written objections have been filed.

Have the members of the common council read the report on recommendations of the license committee as well as the objection filed in these matters? Roll call, please.

Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers.

Alderman Chambers.

Excused.

Brower. Aye. Baumann? Aye. Westmoreland? Aye. Jackson? Aye. Zamoripa? Aye. Taylor? Aye. Moore? Alderwoman Moore. Aye. Bergelis. Aye. Spiker. Aye. Dmitryevich. Aye. Stamper. Aye. Mister president.

Ayes to excused. 13 ayes to excused. Are any of the following are the councils present? And if so, do they wish to address the common council? Parminder Kaur.

Aye, counsel.

Alder persons on Maripa moves that the common counsel resolve itself into the committee of the whole for the purpose of taking testimony in these matters. Hearing no objection so ordered, both sides are limited to five minutes and must confine the remarks to the report and recommendations of the committee. Counselor, the floor is yours.

Thank you, mister president. Members of the common council, Mike Maistelman on behalf of the licensee. You have in front of you already the details of what my client is willing to do. There's a ninety day suspension on the food and a

non renewal on the beer. I'm not going

to go into details about it. It's fairly detailed. I always do these plans and I do them very detailed to try to accommodate all the concerns of you and the police and the neighbors. Alderwoman Cogs, I've

been working with her for over

a week now on this matter and she can't be here unfortunately because she's still planning Akua's celebration of life and she wasn't able to be at the licensing committee for the because Akua passed away the day before. I can assure you that all Roman Cogs wants a sent back. I think she talked to some of the you, your colleagues already about that. And one of the interesting issues is that this person had she was on at a nine license renewal for her bear with her for her Class D operator's license. And when she came before the committee, it was approved without even a probably a warning letter.

She had six neighbors that were there to testify on her behalf, but because it went so smoothly at 09:00, she sent everybody home. She was in India at the time and couldn't be here because she was having some health problems and she needed surgery. So all I'm asking is that it be sent back to committee. I'm not asking that you take any other action on this, I respectfully request that you do so. Again, I'm not just standing up here as a lawyer. I'm giving you my word that she said that as me. Thank you. So any questions?

Assistant city attorney Gresham.

Travis Gresham, assistant city attorney Travis Gresham appearing on behalf of the city attorney's office. You have before you the findings of fact and conclusions of law related to this matter along with the recommendations of the license committee. Happy to answer any questions you have.

Okay. Hearing no questions. Thank you. Nadir Assad, is that you again? Yes. Okay. The floor is yours.

Good afternoon. Good morning, everybody, again. I represent this grocery store also. And you have in front of you the details of a very extensive six page plan that we revised. I've been working with the local alderwoman for well, since since the licensing committee acted upon this.

I've been working with the neighborhood organization via we met with them on Friday. We heard all of their concerns and we incorporated everything that they requested into our plan of operation. We also added everything that older woman Jocasta Zamoriba requested, Including we will not sell any more single beers, which is think a big deal, but older woman Zamorepa insisted on that and so we agreed to do that. There's a variety of other things that we're doing. We're gonna do fuses.

We're gonna attend monthly crime meetings and whatnot. Put up more cameras, face the the streets so we also the police could see what's going on there. But I would request respectfully that you renew the beer license. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Questions? Alderman Stamper?

Yeah. Thank you, mister president. Attorney Mike, can you expound on no single beer

ability to sell? I and I should correct myself because there's no alcohol beverages. Because I guess there's some alcohol content that might be considered not a beer. So Alderman Zammaripa insisted that we put that language in there. So in our plan, it doesn't say we won't sell single beer. It says we won't sell single alcoholic beverages. She was kind enough because we have like $20,000 of of products still there to give us some time to get rid of it.

I I

know that that's been done before before this. Interesting.

And is there an ounce percentage associated with that? Any ounce. Got you. Thank you. Thank you.

Any other questions? Thank you.

Again, my condolences about Accuah.

Assistant city attorney Gresham.

Assistant city attorney Travis Gresham,

appearing on behalf

of the city attorney's office. You have before you the finding of fact conclusions flaw related to this matter along with the recommendations of the licensing committee. Happy to answer any questions.

Any questions? Okay. Thank you. Alderperson, hearing no questions. Alderperson Samaripo moves that the common council resolve itself on the committee hold for the purpose of taking or no, excuse me. That all the person moved that their committee hold rise hearing the objection so ordered. Are there any motions? Chair recognizes all other person Samaripa.

Thank you, mister chair. I do have two motions to make. The first, notwithstanding the recommendation of the licenses committee, I move to return the class A fermented malt and food dealer licenses for Tito Ramat Food located at 418 East Center Street to committee.

Okay, the motion by all the person Samaripa is to return to committee. Any objections? Hearing none so ordered. Chair recognizes Alderman Brower. I do object to that. Thank you. Okay. Please note Alderman Brower's objection.

Chair recognizes Alderman Bergelis. Thank you, Mr. President. Can we hear why this should go back to committee? It was a pretty lengthy discussion in committee with the recommendation that was before us. So before I object to the motion to return, I'd like to hear why. Alder Persson Samaripo, would you like to answer that?

Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Alder Bergalis, for your inquiry. Was I was meaning to give you some context. The elder for the district, Alderman Cox, who couldn't be here today did reach out to me this morning. As you know, this business is in her in in the 6th Aldermanic District. She did ask for it to be returned to committee as you know. We recently all suffered a loss Akua Dansler having passed away very recently. Aldo Woman Cogs aid.

As such, Aldo Woman Cogs wasn't able to be in committee with us that day and as such is asking the committee to please return this file back to this application back to committee and I don't think that's too much to ask given the circumstances.

Thank you for that. I will not object reference to the local Alder.

Alderman Stamper, do you have your light on? Do you have your light on? Did you okay. Never mind.

No. I, I took it off.

Okay. That being said, chair recognizes Alderman Chambers.

He has a IRE in the report.

Okay. Let the record reflect. I vote for Alderman Chambers on the report. Any other comments or objections to the motion other than Alderman Brower's? Okay. Hearing that's ordered. Alderman Alderman, somebody, do you have another motion?

Yes, I do, Mr. President. I move for the renewal of the Class A Fermented Malt License renewal application for Richard's Grocery. And I'm happy to give some context on that as well if the body would like.

If you like to go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. President. Do want to point out and Attorney Maiselman has already indicated I greatly appreciate the applicant after learning he was his class A beer license was nonrenewed. Went to great lengths to put together a comprehensive mitigation plan that all alders have on their desks right now to review with Attorney Mason pointing out in his testimony that in fact probably the biggest piece of the applicant's mitigation plan is the fact that he voluntarily has decided to stop selling single serving alcoholic beverages after selling the existing stock that he currently has. So he has the next six months to move that stock and then he will completely stop selling single serving alcoholic beverages.

I want to thank the applicant for his willingness to do so. That's really a win for our community and for our city when we see a business being willing to do something like that. So with that, again, I move now for the renewal of the Class A fermented malt license renewal application for Richards.

As amended?

Yes, as amended with the mitigation plan that is now part of the plan of operation.

Okay. The motion by Alderperson Samaripa is to approve the license as amended. Are there any objections? Hearing none, so order. Hearing no further discussion, I would ask for a vote of the common members to adopt recommendations of the license committee as contained in file number 251756. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Brower. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye.

Aye.

Zamripa. Taylor. Aye. Boor. Aye. Bergelis. Aye. Spiker. Aye. Dimitrevich. Aye. Stamper. Aye. Mr. President?

Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

14 ayes, one excused. Will the clerk please continue with the reading of the License Committee agenda?

That concludes the reading of the License Committee agenda.

Okay. Thank you. Alderman Lamont Westmoreland will now present the report of Public Works Committee.

The Public Works Committee recommends approval of four, motion relating to the recommendations of the Public Works Committee relative to licenses. The Public Works Committee recommends adoption of five, resolution authorizing the Department of Public Works to a gift from the Daniel Holm Foundation to fund a route reports roadway condition monitoring pilot. Six, resolution directing the Commissioner of Public Works to execute a document entitled first provision state Municipal Agreement for a state led highway project with Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming, design, real estate acquisition and construction of West Fond Du Lac Avenue from North 19th Street to North 12th Street to set up funds for design engineering with an estimated total cost of $524,100 with estimated city share of $131,024 and a grantor share of $393,076 and to set up funds for real estate acquisition at an estimated cost of $100,000 with an estimated city share of $0 and a grantor share of $100,000.07, resolution directing the Commissioner of Public Works to execute a document entitled State Municipal Financial Agreement for a State Led Highway Project with Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design and construction of North 76th Street from Lorain Place to Feebrance Avenue and to set up funds for design engineering at an estimated total cost of $240,000 with an estimated city share of $60,000 and a grantor share of $180,000.08, resolution directing the Commissioner of Public Works to execute a document entitled State Municipal Financial Agreement project with Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design, real estate acquisition and construction of South Kinnickinnick Avenue from East Morgan Avenue to Fulton Street to set up funds for design engineering at an estimated total cost of $2,100,000 with an estimated city share of $525,000 and a set up a grantor share of $1,575,000 and a set of funds for real estate acquisition at an estimated total cost of $110,000 with an estimated city share of $0 and a grantor share of $110,000.09, resolution authorizing the city controller to transfer additional funds to the previously established project for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and the City of Milwaukee for cost participation for the design of Morgan Avenue and intersections with 20th, 16th, 13th And 6th Street with a total estimated cost increase for the project of $25,000 with an estimated grantor share of $0 and an estimated city share of $25,000.10, substitute resolution determining necessary to make various non assessable public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes.

With the city engineering cost estimated to be $115,000 for a total estimated cost of these projects being 2 and $50,000.11, substitute resolution approving construction of non assessable public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city construction cost estimated to be $12,434,000 for a total estimated cost of these projects being $14,962,000.12, resolution authorizing the Commissioner of Public Works execute a project agreement entitled cost sharing memo of understanding between the City of Milwaukee's Department of Public Works and the Milwaukee County Transit System for the cost sharing of construction for asphalt surface overlay on North Holly Road and West Wisconsin Avenue in the 10th Aldermanic District. 13, substitute resolution authorizing the Department of Public Works to accept a gift for the Milwaukee Brewers Baseball Club for an asphalt hot box.

Is there any further discussion of the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman Westmoreland moves for approval of the remainder of the Public Works Committee. Will the clerk please call the roll.

Alderman Pratt.

Aye.

Chambers. Aye.

Brower. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Aye. Zamoripa. Aye. Taylor. Aye. Moore. Aye. Bergalis? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dmitryevich? Aye. Stamper?

Aye. Mr. President? Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

14 ayes, one excused. The committee report is adopted. Alderman Marina Dmitryevich will now present the report of the Finance and personnel committee.

The finance and personnel committee recommends passage of 14, a substitute ordinance to further amend the twenty twenty six offices and positions in the city service. The finance and personnel committee recommends adoption of 15, substitute resolution authorizing attendance at conventions, seminars and other travel. 16, resolution authorizing the Department of Employee Relations to issue a request for proposal proposals for administration of the city's flexible spending and health reimbursement arrangement benefits. 17, resolution authorizing the Department of Employee Relations to issue a request for proposals for administration of the city's prescription drug benefits. Finance and Personnel Committee recommends placing on file the following: an ordinance relating to the confirmation of the head of the environmental collaboration office and the chief equity officer communication from the Department of Employer Relations relating to classification studies or other studies scheduled for Fire and Police Commission action.

20, resolution relating to the scheduling of cybersecurity training by the Department of Administration, Information Technology Management Division. 21, communication relating to submission for report relating to the purchase of commodities made under Milwaukee Code of Ordinances Chapter three ten eighteen point nine, purchase of Milwaukee made, Milwaukee County made, and American made goods. 22, communication from the Office of the Controller relating to the audit of the Milwaukee Fire Department, information technology general controls. 23, communication from the office of the controller relating to a minimum fund balance policy. 24, communication from the Department of Public Works, Water Works, amending the positions ordinance to add one position of water laboratory technician.

And the finance and personnel committee has referred to that recommendation item 25, a substitute ordinance to further amend the twenty twenty six rates of pay of offices and positions in the city service.

Is there any further discussion of the committee report? Any further discussion? Alderwoman Moore? Is your light on?

Yes. Okay. Thank you. I wanted to make a motion in regards to item number 25. I move passage of common council file number 251,761 a substitute ordinance to further amend the twenty twenty six rates of pay of offices and positions in the city service.

Okay. On that motion, Alderman Bergelis.

Thank you, Mr. President. What this motion does is expand the footnote that gives the Fire and Police Commission the authority to negotiate and approve a salary and contract for the police chief to also do that for the fire chief. Those are the two positions in the city service that the Fire and Police Commission has the authority to hire and fire. The fire chief's contract is up shortly in the next month or two.

This gives the Fire and Police Commission the flexibility to negotiate that contract renewal or not and find a new fire chief. So this has gone back and forth. It's been scheduled a number of times in finance and there are certainly concerns about the executive pay plan that was adopted twenty six months ago. If there are concerns with that, I think it's appropriate to address those and update and correct the executive pay plan as we would do any other file in committee. But the clock is ticking.

The fire chief's contract is just about up and the city needs to have leadership in its public safety departments. We cannot afford to wait to revamp the entire executive pay plan. This gives authority to the two positions that are subject to the Fire and Police Commission instead of just the police chief. Thank you, mister president.

Thank you. Chair recognizes all of miss Spiker. Thank

you, mister president. We're passing along an item going down memory lane just for members who weren't here in 01/10/2024. I want to provide some context for how this arose. So there was this thing called the executive pay plan that moved people's pay ranges in leadership positions to a much higher level than they had been before. We could get into the reasons as to why, but there was a perceived need for that to happen.

That came with a ginormous price tag which Alder Cogs, one of the sponsors of the pay plan, moved to diminish. She did so by making a motion here on the floor when I was here to strip the recruitment rate footnotes out of the pay plan. So there's a document being passed around now that says executive pay plan at the top and it shows these new recommended ranges for positions. It also includes in there minimum recruitment rates. Those are the items that Alder Cogs' motion stripped away.

So given that action, people would come in at the floor of their now heightened pay range. Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the opera. We missed the biggest one, which was the Chief of Police. That one had topped out at 161 and changed before. After the executive pay plan, the range was given as 174 to $2.43.

But there was a footnote deep in the salary ordinance that said, by the way, it can be recruited at anywhere in the range. By whom? Didn't specify. And so the motion that Alder Moore has before us would seek to add clarity there and gift it to the Fire and Police Commission to set where in that range. But the point that committee revealed is Alder Cogs' intent, and she said so at committee so other committee members can back me up on this, to strip all the footnotes.

Because if you're looking to lower a price tag, you don't leave the highest paid position in the city with a 70 some thousand dollar range. So that was the intent. It was never effectuated. And the Fire and Police Commission chose to reappoint the chief early, six months early I believe, and at basically very near the top of the range. That was, I think, parties will acknowledge now, that the intent of both the sponsor, Alder Cogs, and folks who voted for it.

The idea was to lower the price tag. Alder Moore's amendment here to the salary ordinance would take the mistake that was made by DER not reflecting Alder Cogs' intent and double the fund. So it would extend the wayward footnote that now applies only to the police chief position and say, hey, let's extend that to the fire chief position as well. If it was a problematic action to give the Fire and Police Commission or anyone the authority to pick somewhere in a range $70,000 wide, it might be thought equally problematic to extend that to another position. And if you don't think so, well look through the list.

One thing we might consider is everybody else on this list who was recruited at the floor of their new pay range. They would have, I would think, a legitimate gripe to say, what about me? Why is the police chief special? Why is the fire chief special? Shouldn't I be recruited higher than the floor?

Why are you picking out these two positions? So one thing I want to be clear about is I have no problem with the Fire and Police Commission having a range to choose from, But I think what happened with the executive pay plan is although there were some increases in the pay ranges that were very sensible, very in keeping with other raises we saw elsewhere, there were also ones that were astronomical. And the reason we might have not thought it mattered is because of Alder Cogs' motion that basically reduced everybody to the floor of their new range. So the situation we sit in now is this. We can either ignore DER's mistake and double it or we can go back to the author and the other voters in favor of the executive pay plan's original intent, which is everybody in this new higher range is at the floor.

Now, I'm amenable and I would support a look back at the executive pay plan or even just focusing on the Chief's first start if there's some sort of timeliness concern as was expressed and look at whether those pay ranges should be different than what they are now. FPC should have some latitude. They should not have that much latitude where we basically seed our authority to determine our budgetary matters. So I would urge members to reject this doubling of the footnote fund, go back to Alder Cogs' original intent, and then make adjustments to the pay ranges in the executive pay plan in a systematic fair way that we can justify outside the Fire and Police Department to the other dozens of positions listed here. Thank you, Mr.

President.

Thank you.

And so I have a motion at the appropriate time. I guess for the parliamentarian, must the current motion be dealt with before we consider the next?

Yes, we do have to and there's some comments I believe people want to talk on the motion. Very good. Thank you. Alderman Chambers?

Thank you, Mr. President. As one of the three people who did support the motion on 01/10/2024 and was cosponsor of the removal of file. You are correct. The intent was to remove all footnotes and somehow this slip between the cracks.

However, it doesn't negate the the need to make what's right for our fire chief. I think that he is more than deserving of getting the same opportunity, as his, counterpart on the police side, and the current rules that are in place as was right now. So I will support, Aldwyn Moore and Sources motion to support adding the footnote to the fire chief. But I do agree with my colleagues saying that we do need to clean up for it. I just think now is not the right time.

Thank you.

Okay. Chair recognizes Alderman Demetraevich.

Thank you. I think we do need to look at dollars here, Mr. President. If it did kind of slip or whatnot, and I was part of that too, the salary increase for the police chief went from $183,000 to $243,000 So if we're trying to create parity, we should also have some additional transparency. So I just wanted to make sure I place that on the file, Mr. President.

Thank you. Any further discussion on the motion? On Alderman Spiker's motion. I'll just ask committee members that even Alderman Spiker, is it safe to say that city attorney's office was asked about the legality of the initial ER move to keep the footnote in or their interpretation that was never really answered by them?

Mr. President? Yes. My understanding from reading the opinion is their main point was the horse is out the barn with respect to the police chief's contract. I did not see great clarity on the question of whether FPC had the authority to begin with to do what they did. But given that the contract is signed, there's no going back as it were for the police chief. We have a signed contract.

But the question was asked and never answered. Correct?

I did ask the question. I did not see clarity in an answer and people can look at the opinion and see if they see something I don't.

Because Elder Woman Cox also asked that in committee.

Yeah.

Okay. Thank you. On the motion? Mr. President? Elderperson Samaripa.

The motion is Alderwoman Moore is correct?

It's Alderman Spiker's amendment is what we're voting on right now. And if that fails, then it goes back to Alderman Moore's initial motion.

So what's before us right now is this motion by Alderman Spiker? I don't think I heard him read it. I heard his speech but did he start by reading it off? I thought he said he had an amendment, but he wasn't sure for the parliamentarian. Remember he said that?

Well, Ms. Baker, you want to read your motion into the record?

Sure. If I could have a copy of it. I can recite it from memory if you like. Thanks. So the official motion is I move to amend common council file 251,761 by amending part one of substitute one to remove the recruitment rate flexibility footnote from the Chief of Police position.

So that's getting rid of footnote one under the Chief of Police in that range in the salary. Also moved to amend Part three of Substitute one to change the effective pay period from pay period '25, which has already passed, to pay period seventwenty twenty six, which is in the future, March 17. And further move for passage of the file as amended. But the motion is basically just, as I said, strip the footnote that was originally intended by Alder Cogs and those voting in favor of it to be stripped. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alder Woman Demitravich.

Yes. On the motion, I think we must take the people out of this. We vote on positions. We even executive pay plan was hundreds of positions, even included this body, but it wasn't us because we didn't know if we were going to be here. And so when you're looking at finances, which I brought up at least four or five times that this item was up, it's my understanding that if we had questions about that increase from $183,000 to $243,000 That lies within the Fire and Police Commission, of course.

But where then if the council allowed that progression in the range, that ability, that's we're talking about here is giving the ability to move to the highest part of the range. We really couldn't do anything once the contract was negotiated. And if you're okay with that, perhaps we say that is the Fire and Police Commission's work but it does have major financial implications on the city budget. So I definitely agree that the Fire and Police Commission should negotiate. They should have those meetings.

They should look at the output we're receiving for the input. Okay? That I understand. And in fact I wish they even had more authority. We know that the state legislature stripped them of that. But the financial part is what I am concerned about. That's a significant amount of money multiplied by the term of that individual and then you add in pension and whatnot. In the same way that we laser look at every dollar we spend, I just think it's significant and quite frankly when I look at the police chief situation, that was an enormous increase. And I'm not saying whether I would have supported or not, I'm saying that I think I would have liked a little bit more discussion and transparency with the council that does hold the purse strings. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. Chair recognizes Alderman Bergilis.

Thank you, Mr. President. We are already entertained another motion completely separate from what is before us right now in committee that did not pass that would have given authority to the finance chair to be a safety valve. And we rejected that motion in committee because of our importance that the Fire and Police Commission maintain its independence. Motion before us right now continues to strip authority from the Fire and Police Commission just like Act 12.

And this body should not be taking away the responsibility of the Fire and Police Commission. We should be expanding the authority and responsibility of that citizen body that is charged with these two positions in the city service that are the most important public safety positions. So I urge my colleagues to reject the amendment and get back to business and allow the Fire and Police Commission to negotiate and fill these two positions as they deem appropriate.

Thank you, Mr. President. Chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. So we have had extensive conversation and I want to thank my colleague Alderman Spiker for bringing this amendment to the floor because it does provide us some context around what we need to discuss. But what I want to remind my colleagues is that this is this is sort of a timing issue. There are some decisions that were made unbeknownst to the council's will.

And as my colleague has shared, the the horse has already left the stable. We're just in a really critical timeline to get this done so that the Fire and Police Commission has an opportunity to, negotiate with with our chief, with our fire chief that frankly wants to also be here in the city of Milwaukee. I have connected and again it's necessarily about him, It's about a process that I want to be fair, give him the opportunity to and and give the fire and police commission the opportunity to negotiate. There's some there's still some work. This this doesn't preclude the work that still needs to be done.

There is some work that still needs to be done. I just would like my colleagues to consider my motion so that we can borrow work forward. Thank you.

Chair recognizes all in chambers.

Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with actually both sides of the sentiment. Where I'm at right now is we're at where we're at right now because of what lapsed happened within DER from the executive pay plan. The Fire and Police Commission moved on the advice from DER and other people. They made the contract offer to Chief Norman. He accepted. That's that. And I think that the fire chief, regardless of whoever is in there, deserve that same opportunity. If we don't do that, we're this is a great example of pay compression.

That's not to say that we can't come back and figure something out with this motion after the fact. It's just saying right now, this is the cars that we dealt with, that that we have, and I think that we should vote this now and add, you know, and add the fire chief to the footnote. And then once the Fire and Police Commission do their thing for future chiefs, just know that they won't have the same opportunity as these two individuals have right now that things may be different. So I will urge my colleagues to do that. And at that point, I will call the question, Mr. President.

Okay.

Thank you. Chair recognizes all of Mr. Spiker. Thank

you, Mr. President. Just briefly in closing, I've been an assiduous defender of the Fire and Police Commission in the sense of having the rulemaking authority. It's loss of that authority to no one any favors. But by the argument advanced earlier, we restrict their power if we give them anything less than what they need to recruit the candidate of their dreams.

So if the current ceiling would be too low, are we restricting the Fire and Police Commission's authority unless we give them to 500,000? I mean that argument is sadly too permissive because any attempt to hold financial exigencies is paramount is then seen as curtailing the Fire and Police Commission's power. That seems a stretch at best. I would urge us again to think beyond the position. If we do give the Fire and Police Commission the authority to go to the moon as they did with the Chief of Police, they may go there and then good luck recruiting somebody in the future who's going to take less pay.

But I would close with this. Whether or not you were here in the chambers

motion and we as a body made our decision,

chambers it is problematic at best to say, oh, that was an oopsie situation and a department can transgress the intents of the body and nothing happens. If Alder Cogs made that motion with clear intent, which I think was very obvious given the price tag concern, then we should at a minimum restore the intent of the council and then make moves from there. To do otherwise is to basically say, yeah, if you make a mistake, we're not going to hold you accountable for it. That's the concern. So with that, again, I'd urge us to restore what we tried to do two years ago and then make adjustments to the pay ranges in a systematic, intentional way that prioritizes the budgetary concerns which are our purview.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Sure. Okay. The question has been called by Alderman Chambers, so we do need to take a roll call vote on on calling the question. So

I I would draw it. I think he's done. Okay.

Chair recognizes all mister Stamper.

Thank you, mister president. Just what the compensation. What's the difference in the compensation comparison in the two proposals?

Mr. President?

Yes.

On that question?

Alderman Spiker?

So if you look at the document I handed out saying executive pay plan, you see on this pay range for ZX, so the second grayed out line three rows down, that the ceiling under, I guess it would be Alder Moore's proposal, would be the 243,776 or thereabouts. So that would be what FPC would be allowed up to. Without the footnote, then we're at the floor unless of course the council changes the pay range, which was discussed at committee. We have that authority. We have the authority to set the pay range for any of these positions.

So if, you know, reflection, deep thought, and prayer reveals that, hey, the chief of police and fire chief going forward should

The have question's been answered.

Should have a range that's different than what's proposed, well, that's a decision we can make as a body. So there's nothing locking us in, I guess, Alderman Stamper, from choosing a pay range that's higher than that would give whoever is recruited, be it the current Fire Chief or someone else, a higher pay than they are receiving now. It would just not authorize the ability to go to the $0.02 $5,000,000 figure. So I don't know if that's sufficiently clear, Alderman Stamper.

Alderman Stamper, you're good.

I'll accept it.

Okay. Chair recognizes Alderperson Samaripa.

Mr. President, I wanted to also hear from the author of the initial motion, Alderman Moore. Alderman Spiker answered the question. Felt like we should have heard from both. We have two motions, right, that we were trying to consider.

No, we have Alderman Spiker's to consider.

Right. Only because he put it, Alderman, only because he basically put it on top of Alderman Moore's motion. Right? Ultimately, if his fails, we're gonna go to Alderman Moore's motion.

Sure. We can hear from her after we vote on Alderman Spikers.

Thank you.

Okay. Hearing no other discussion on the motion, could you please do the roll call on Alderman Spiker's motion please?

On Alderman Spiker's motion to amend. Alderman Pratt.

Aye. Chambers. No. Brower. No. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Aye. Zamripa. No. Taylor? Aye. Moore? No. Bergelis? No. Spiker? Aye. Dmitryevich? Stamper. Aye. Mr. President.

No.

Seven ayes, seven noes, one excused. The motion fails.

Motion in front of us is alderwoman Morris. The roll call vote on that, please?

On Alderman Moore's

Mister president, I I recall that you said that when we took took up Alderman Moore's motion, we would then, I mean, we don't even have a printed version of it again. Can we read it into the record again?

Sure. It is in the agenda but. Yeah. She didn't move it to approve? Yes. It's not an amendment. It's the initial agenda item to adopt. Could you just read it again? I'll do one more.

What are you, sir?

Mr. President, so the motion on the table is I move passage of common counsel file number two five one seven six one, a substitute ordinance to further amend the 2026 rates of pay of offices and positions in the city service.

Okay. Roll call please. On the adoption of 02/1761 as

amended. Alderman Pratt.

Aye. I'm sorry.

Aye.

Chambers? Aye. Brower? Aye. Baumann? Aye. Westmoreland? Aye. Jackson? Zamoripa? Aye. Taylor? Aye. Boor? Aye. Bergalis? Aye. Spiker? No. Dimitrijevich? Aye. Stamper? Aye. Mister president? Aye. 13 ayes? One no, one excused.

Does that conclude the finance? Nope. It does. Alderman Moore, did you have your light on?

No, not anymore.

Thank you. Okay.

Can we take a final roll call on the entire report? Can we do that now? So if there's any further discussion in the committee report hearing now, Alderman Demetriovich moves for the adoption of recommendations of the finance personnel committee. Will the clerk please call the roll.

Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Frauer. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Aye. Samuripa. Aye. Taylor.

Aye. Bohr. Aye.

Bergalis? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dmitryevich? Aye. Stamper? Aye. Mr. President?

Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

Alderman Bianjo Jackson will now present the report of the Judiciary and Legislation Committee. The Judiciary and Legislation

Committee recommends 26, forgive me, adoption of 26, substitute resolution declaring opposition to how federal immigration enforcement activities are occurring in The United States and amending the city of Milwaukee's legislative packet. Forgive me. That item was not, recommended by the committee. The first recommended item of the committee is 27, substitute resolution relating to legislative bills. 28, resolution authorizing payment to the claim of Mario Jackson.

29, resolution authorizing settlement in the lawsuit entitled Shaquia Higgins and others versus the city of Milwaukee and others. 30, resolution canceling real estate taxes levied against certain parcels bearing tax key numbers on the 2020 tax roll plus interest applicable to date of repayment if appropriate. 31, resolution authorizing payment of judgment in Balamu, Walker and others versus the city of Milwaukee and others. 32, resolution authorizing settlement of the lawsuit entitled Alan DeKeyser and Markeda DeKeyser versus Leon Burns and others. And the judiciary and legislation committee recommends disallowance and a definite postponement of items 33 through 39 claims against the city.

Is there any further discussion of the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman Jackson moves for adoption.

Chair

recognizes Alderman Yes.

Thank you so much. I would like to I wanted to speak to item 26 and make a motion please.

It was not written into the record though, correct? Was not written. Alderman Brower, your motion please.

Yes. I move to take common council file number 251793 from committee.

Okay. The motion by Alderman Brower is to take out of committee item 26, which is item or file number two five one seven nine three. Can we take a roll call on that?

Mister president? Mister president, may I speak to my motion?

Sure. Alderman Brower.

Yeah. Thank you so much. Just to speak to on the the question at hand right now is whether we should consider for adoption this resolution in the moment right now on the floor. So I just wanna speak to that, which is that, you know, the urgency of what's going on right now with the actions of this demented fascist president. We need to take action today here at the council.

There's a few items we can take action on. We don't need to take action on all of them, but this resolution clearly states our a new position for our city. So I urge colleagues to vote to let us debate the merits of this resolution and cast a conscience based vote on whether you think that this resolution should be adopted by the city. So this vote is whether to consider it before us. So voting yes will allow us to debate it, allow us to take action right now on it, and a vote of no, we'll send it back to committee. Thank you.

Thank you. On the motion, Alderman Bergowas.

Thank you, mister president. Was this item already heard in committee and seven ninety six is relating to the potential uses of emergency communication system? I don't have a copy of it. I'm unclear what we're voting on.

It was heard at Judd Legg. It it's I thought it was referred to committee at Judd Lake.

Heards above it. It's referred

to Okay. It's still in committee. I'm sorry. Did you get an answer to that then, Alderman?

My question was, was this already heard by committee? No. It wasn't. This was not heard by committee. Why was it not heard by committee?

Yes. I can speak that. Please. Mister president? Yeah. Please. Yeah. So that that is correct. Yes. Seven nine three was not heard by the judiciary and legislation committee.

Another file was that I will also attempt to take action on this morning, a separate resolution. This resolution, I mean, I, you know, I attempted to prepare it, to be heard by the committee. You know, it it didn't quite make the committee there, but what needs to happen right now today, in my opinion, is for us to consider this given that ICE could potentially be right on our doorstep and that we need to declare and given what's going on in this world and the murders that have occurred in Minneapolis, the abductions that are occurring, we I urge that we take action on this today and not wait for the regular committee cycle. I have been approached by colleagues to discuss questions of process, right? Questions of is this following the process?

Well, is a process within our common council rules to bring things to the floor and I am following that process. That is the current and if we don't want that to happen, then we should we should amend our rules to not allow things to be brought to the floor. So I am using the process, giving the urgency of what's going on. I think we should make a statement today, and not and not wait through the regular cycle because I believe there support for this language and for what's said in this resolution. So I believe we should take action today to, call the city to oppose what's going on with immigration and customs enforcement and also to oppose, the very existence and call for the abolition of ICE.

Okay. Thank you. The motion That

was an answer to my question. Thank you for the answer. Mr. President, I would like to ask for unanimous cosponsorship of this item, add my name to it. This is important.

I merits think consideration by this body in committee. In committee we hear from not just members of the council, we hear from the city attorney's office. We hear from interested stakeholders. We have a number of them here in the audience today. That legislative process is important, that we have checked all of the boxes to make sure that we're doing that we're making our laws and our resolutions and adopting them properly. Has the city attorney made an opinion on this item?

It doesn't have to on resolutions.

Has the city attorney provided guidance on this item? No. President? Just got an email.

Yes, he did.

Okay. On the motion to take out a community here on the floor, any other comments or questions

on that? Mr. President.

Chair recognizes Alderman West more.

I like working. Not working? Now it is. Thank you. I heard from the author that we should take action today. So my question to the author is what action are we taking today and how does this stop ICE?

Mister president. Yes. Yeah. Thank you so much. I can respond directly to that. First of all, the action that we would be taking today as the body is adopting this resolution. So that's the specific action if we choose to bring this to the floor and adopt this. The the reason for that I mean, how does how does it stop ICE? Well, I believe that cities all across the country, and they already have been and should be, standing up making declarations of where we stand. So I like that we're considering this this first because I think this starts a legislative process and kicks off a legislative process where we can adopt all sorts of ordinances.

We have an ice out package. We should consider further ordinance changes and and further pieces of legislation if we are are given those. But what this will do is make our voices heard and and declare that the city of Milwaukee stands up to the way immigration actions are being conducted. The on the question of whether, like, you know, will this stop ICE? No.

But a movement around the no. No. Taking this and voting on this will not halt what our president is doing. But taking this action today will be a part of all of the voices across this country that are being raised up in the streets, in legislation, letting congress know how they should be acting, putting pressure on every elected official, and will help to bring the tide that will that will sweep change into this country. And I don't think we should be immune to that or step away from that.

We should make a declaration today given what the president is doing, given what's happened in Minneapolis, given that there's the front page of the journal sentinel just the other day described, ICE actions in Western Wisconsin. And, yeah, like under normal circumstances, yes, we should we should send things through a committee and potentially have them get held and then held again or whatever, like but in in this case, given the urgency of the situation with ICE, given that the community has spoken out, I held a town hall with over almost 350 people in attendance. There are other alders who held town halls. And, to my knowledge, from what I've seen, there was a resounding answer when the question was posed, what action should we take? The answer was every single thing that you can and you need to do it now.

That was what I heard from constituents. That's what people have been saying all over this city of every identity have been saying that they want action right now immediately. And so I think that is a signal to me from the city and from organizations that that we should skip a committee process at this point and make a declaration today on where we stand regarding immigration and customs enforcement. And I can speak, you know, a little bit. I mean, the the city attorney has said to me that this could potentially put adopting this resolution that calls for the abolition of ICE could potentially put us on a list of in Donald Trump's White House of cities that are sanctuary cities. I am in support of us being declared a sanctuary city. I wanna end up on that list. Thank you.

Thank you. Alderman Westmoreland?

No. I'm not done. By sending this to committee, are we putting any of our population at risk by not proving this today and sending it to committee. That's for the author. Mr. President. Here, please.

Yeah, thank you. No. No. This does not like you know, delaying this does not put anyone else in more immediate danger. But what it does but what it does though, if by delaying this, is not continue the momentum that's been building against what's going on with ICE. And I think that that imperative that we that we organize our communities, that imperative that we as a body take a stand and that people today can find out that the council at its very first opportunity took action on some of the pieces of legislation. Now granted, there's multiple pieces of legislation in the ice out package and there's a separate communication file. I've signed on to every single thing and I think we should, you know, move forward with all those. So this is a one piece of what's going on. So, no, it doesn't put anybody else in more the delay doesn't put anybody else in more immediate danger.

But when you're building a movement, you need to act with a sense of urgency, and we need to tell the president and our federal electeds and anybody who will listen, frankly that ICE is not welcome here in Milwaukee, that what's going on federally is completely unacceptable and that it needs

to

stop immediately. And the community has said that they want this taken up immediately. As much of this legislation as possible, I've heard from people that they want this taken up. And I know that some people haven't heard that. But if you haven't heard something from your constituents, if your constituents have remained silent and there may perhaps our communities where constituents have remained silent, what that means is as the elected leader for that community, we expect you then to, you know, make a judgment call based on on your judgment and what you're seeing as an elected here in Milwaukee.

And so, I mean, I really appreciate these questions honestly because I think it clarifies what we're trying to do. We wanna make a public stand and we should make that public stand today in this moment. And so that's what voting yes on this accomplishes. Voting yes on the procedural motion. Those two motions are gonna happen. One is gonna be this first procedural motion which will allow for us to debate this and then the other one will be a motion on adoption that I will make, and that will be just to affirmatively adopt this. So if you wanna debate this further, vote yes on this motion.

Cool. Thank you. I just wanna urge colleagues if they have not received the email from city attorney in relation to file 251793 at 10:16. I urge you to take a look at that. Thank you.

Chair recognizes, and this is on the motion to bring this out of committee and debate this on the floor. Alderman Spiker.

Thank you, Mr. President. Just to clarify, if the motion fails, it is in Jud Legg?

Yes, it is.

Okay. I guess following up on my colleague, Alder Westmoreland's comments, there is an attorney client privileged, I assume, email to members stating a concern the city attorney has that has fairly major repercussions. So I would urge at least a discussion with our city attorney about those repercussions and then if members decide, hey, I'm willing to take that risk or no, I don't want to take that risk, that's a fair discussion. But we can't have it here on the floor without the city attorney present. So I would support it staying in committee so we can have that full discussion and then people can decide if that risk is worth it or it's not.

But then it's an informed discussion as opposed to not having the advantage of our city attorney's opinion on the ramifications of our judgment here.

Thank you.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Aldwoman Demitravich.

Thank you. These files are not subject to a legal and enforceable review as they are not ordinances. So you can't have it both ways. Appreciate the information, but this does not require that type of review. Thank you.

Chair recognizes Alderman Baumann. Yes.

Thank you, Mr. President. I do support taking this from committee and acting on this today mainly because I've seen few issues in my terms on the common council which have generated as much public interest and frankly public engagement as this issue has. You have to go back to some of the police shootings that we've had in this community and perhaps the murder of George Floyd to have to see similar levels of public engagement and public interest. Our citizens are looking to us to take some action in response to their very legitimate concerns and frankly the passion that they have demonstrated around this issue.

And I think this is a way of doing that, of exercising leadership. Yes, it's unlikely adding this to our legislative package will result in defunding or abolition of ICE. I think everyone in this room recognizes that, that that is a tall order and that's action only the Congress of the United States can pursue if if even they can pursue it.

The results of litigation.

But nevertheless, I think delaying this for a committee hearing that's where the inevitable is obvious. I mean, Alderman Regalis calls for unanimous sponsorship. Well, if they're unanimous sponsorship, what's the point of having a committee meeting other than adding three weeks to the process? And in the meantime, our citizens are are are wondering what the hell you guys doing down there? You all agree with this. Why not just on it? Why not just pass it for what it's worth? And I agree with that sentiment, so I do support taking this from committee and then moving adoption.

Okay. Chair recognize all of Mr. Spiker.

I would urge members to look at this email, look under file 251,953, and read the last clause in the last sentence. So there is a consequence here that goes way beyond what we might just comfortably say that's a small price to pay. If that's real, that is a real consequence of an urging that I think we all acknowledge might not actually move the Feds off the dime. So I have no problem with endorsing the sentiments unless it has consequences that have real world application to our ability to function as a city government. So I'm not going to get into the attorney client privilege stuff, but there's a real consequence laid out there that I think it would not be as responsible as we might like if we don't at least hear the city attorney's case for saying that consequences linked to our action today.

Thank you.

And I'll ask the sponsor, is this the first time you're hearing from the city attorney with that clause?

Mister president, I am seeing an email from the city attorney, regarding, 793 yeah. Okay. Yeah. And well yeah. No. And that's that's what I addressed. Actually, this concern is what I addressed. And the city attorney's email right here addresses the concern that I previously forward, relaying what the city attorney had shared, which is that they you know, this could list us as a sanctuary city. That that is that is a risk, and that is a you know, Donald Trump has said he will attack sanctuary cities. I think the benefits of declaring to our neighbors that we are sanctuary for them outweighs the risks here.

I I really do. I think we need to declare sanctuary in the city of Milwaukee. And so that and and if if that's what it is truly does, it is this resolution does not affirmatively say that we are a sanctuary city or have any ordinance implications other than we want ICE abolished. So that yeah. So that's Okay.

You know,

I'm I'm seeing the same email, and I it it reflects My

my question was if you heard it if you got any feedback before today on exactly that clause.

Yes. Yes. I did. Yep. Yesterday. That's correct. Yeah. Yesterday and that is what I shared this morning.

Okay. Thank you. Chair recognizes alderman Baumann?

First I saw was at 10:16 when this came.

I didn't even know there was an

email until it was pointed out to me that it just arrived in our inboxes, and they're not objecting to this file. They're raising a hypothetical possibility that if we call ourselves a sanctuary city, somebody in the White House might get angry about that. Might, maybe, could, would. Fine. Take the risk full speed ahead. You have to respond to the very legitimate demands of thousands of constituents who are looking for action and leadership by the council.

Okay. Chair, recognize all of Ms. Piker.

I'm making sure people are reading the same email I am. So the sanctuary jurisdiction, the concern the city attorney has is a consequence of that. So again, I appreciate that members have been circumspect in not saying what the consequence is but that has to be discussed because that would have wide ranging ramifications. And I'm not saying we have to give in to the fear that those might happen but at least needs to be a point of discussion with the city attorney. That has not been discussed. It is something we will have to discuss in closed session but we can't do that here on the floor.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderwoman Moore.

Thank you, Mr. President. I have to reiterate what Alderwoman Dimitrijevic stated in the city attorney's, email, these files are not subject to a legal and enforceable enforceability review as they are not ordinances. This is an opportunity for our city. This is an opportunity for our city to put people first.

We make a lot of decisions based on, you know, what could happen, what could not happen. There has to be there has to come a moment where we put a stake in the sand and say we're gonna put people first. As the only immigrant sitting here on this council, the only immigrant sitting here on this council, if we don't take a stand for people right here in the city of Milwaukee, I don't know who else is going to. This is this is something for me personally that I live in a city and I wanna know that people are standing up for me. Period.

So I'm thankful to Alderman Brower for his leadership on this and for pushing us to do things that sometime it's not it's not comfortable. Right? There's a lot of things that could or couldn't happen. Our our constituents are looking for us to be leaders. And I think Alderman Baumann, you know, said some really, really great points. This is a moment. This is a moment for us, and I say we take that moment to put our constituents and our residents first. We

we have to take a roll call vote on taking it out of committee. I see no lights on. Let's take a roll call vote to do exactly that. Let's let's take one at a time here.

On the motion to take file two five one seven nine three from committee, Alderman Pratt?

Aye. Chambers? Aye. Brower? Aye. Baumann? Aye. Westmoreland? Aye. Jackson? Aye. Zamoripa? Aye. Taylor?

Oh my god.

Yeah.

Aye.

Moore. Aye. Bergalis. Aye. Spiker. Aye. Dimitrivich. Aye. Stamper. Aye. Mister president.

Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

We have in front of us Alderman Brower, we have in front of us, the item now that it's out of committee for us to vote on. I will say that this is an amendment to the legislative package. And as many of you know, several of members are going to DC for the NLC. And I think it's very important that we have this package amended as we go out and meet with our congressional reps. So I want to thank you for your leadership on that. We have the motion before us on that. Alderman Broward, do you wanna start?

I did wanna speak to it, please.

Okay.

Thank you so much. And thank you, mister president. Thank you, colleagues, for allowing us to debate this. I do appreciate it. Truly, I want you guys to recall Yesenia Ruano, a Milwaukee resident, an MPS employee, and and union sister of mine who last year was ordered by ICE to leave the country and go to El Salvador even though she had a pending application for Visa to stay in this country. We were all appalled by what happened to Yesenia, but her story is not far from unique. It is also far from the worst case of ICE abuse. Across this country, ICE agents are routinely detaining people as they show up to their immigration heal hearings. They're deporting refugees who have come here because they are unsafe in their former home countries. They're targeting people who follow the legal process and have no criminal record.

We're still they're breaking into people's homes without a warrant to haul them away. They're arresting people and shipping them halfway across the country to be kept in hastily converted warehouses. They are detaining children as young as five years old. ICE is keeping people in unhealthy, unheated cells, excuse me, with no beds, forcing them to sleep on concrete floors. And they have murdered American citizens who are trying to hold agents to account for their illegal actions, just like I'd like to see our PD do.

When I see things like this happen, I'm reminded of a story that happened just a few blocks from here in Cathedral Square. There on 03/11/1854, a crowd of hundreds gathered around Joshua Clover, an escaped slave who sought refuge in Wisconsin. Clover had been arrested and detained under an a law called the Fugitive Slave Act, a federal law passed in 1850, which required officials and citizens of free states to cooperate with slave catchers in bringing escaped slaves back to plantations. They fled. They led this righteous anger.

This law led to righteous anger among abolitionists and citizens in free states, and Milwaukee was no exception. The crowd demanded the Glovers immediate release, and when they were ignored, they broke him out of prison here in the city and escorted him by the underground railroad to Canada where he would be free from capture. This did not go unnoticed by our state government at the time who stood by Glover and the abolitionists who freed him. Later that year, the Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that the state had no duty to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. And in 1857, the state legislature passed a law forbidding state officials from enforcing the federal law.

And I bet there was a lot of legal opinions on that matter as well. Right? But in his decision, the Wisconsin Supreme Court justice Abram Smith said, this law, the fugitive slave law, is a wicked and cruel enactment. Let the federal government return to the exercise of the just powers conferred by the constitution, and few, very few will be found to disturb the tranquility of the nation. But until this is done, I solemnly believe that there will be no peace for the state or nation, but that agitation, acrimony, and hostility will mark our progress.

I am honored to be a lifelong Wisconsinite, a state that has a record of standing against the capture and detention of people whose only crime was insisting on their own rights and freedom. And I intend to carry on that legacy. I have heard so often that we need to follow the process, follow press and follow procedures, and all the while ICE repeatedly ignores due process, ignores precedent, and institutes their own procedures which violate the constitution. Every day that goes by without us taking action is yet another day where people of this city are at needless risk. It is yet another day where someone like Asenya who is following the proper legal procedure can be taken away.

It is yet another day where immigrants where immigrant residents of the city are forced to feel unsafe. We can't wait any longer. There's already gonna be pieces of this package that will go through the committee process. Let us adopt this today and take action and take a stand for this city. Thank you, mister president. Thank you.

Chair recognizes chair recognizes alderman Brugellis.

Thank you, Mr. President. I almost forgot what I wanted to say. Just for clarification, I did not ask for unanimous cosponsorship. I asked for unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor. I think this is important. This is clearly going to pass committee. This is clearly important to our community. I don't know if I've had anything with more email inbox comments in my legislative career. This is important to our residents. This is important to our council. Important to our city, and I'm proud to stand up and vote yes today.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderman Demetrijevich.

Thank you. I'll be brief here. I just want to make sure I say thank you to all of our colleagues here and for those watching and many are watching. Many are watching. They're here today and I appreciate that. They're watching from their homes. I had a town hall meeting on Monday, a community meeting. Over 300 people came out, probably would have been more but we capped it. Not only did they speak out and talk about wanting us to act, they took action themselves and actually over 300 people were trained that day on how to stand up for their neighbors. That's what this moment is about.

And I thank our colleagues for honestly, I want everyone to understand making an exception to the process. Sometimes it's okay. It's okay to say thank you for that legal information. It's okay to take a break from process because we're in unprecedented times. None of us who were elected locally ever thought we see the federal government doing what it's doing to local cities and municipalities and our families.

So the only response is one that rises to the occasion. And for our colleagues to unanimously allow an exception to this process, I truly thank you. And you've been there every step of the way and we still have more of a process to go. There's still more of this package. And I have to mention that yesterday, we also had a victory.

The Milwaukee Police Department decided to actually modify their own standard operating procedures to not allow facial coverings within the Police Department. So little by little, thank you, your actions matter. That is what this moment is about, is that one person, many people, many calls, many committees, we can rise up to a moment that feels really overwhelming. And what I heard on Sunday, Mr. President, at my meeting was that people wanted to be in community, they wanted to be along side one another and they wanted to be heard. And they want to feel like even in overwhelming dark times, there is light. And that I believe is what is shining today. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you.

Okay. I see no further lights on, so we can take a roll call on item, 26 file 251793.

On adoption, Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Brower. Proudly aye. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Aye. Zamripa. Aye. Taylor. Aye. Moore. Aye. Bergalis. Aye. Spiker. Aye. Dimitrijevic. Aye. Stamper. Aye. Mister president.

Aye. 14 ayes, one excused. 14 ayes, one excused.

Is there any further discussion of the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman Jackson moves for adoption of the recommendations of the judiciary and legislation committee. Will the clerk please call the roll.

Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Bauer. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Westmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Zamripa. Aye. Taylor. Aye. Moore. Aye. Bergalis. Aye. Spiker. Aye. Dmitryevich. Aye. Stamper. Aye. Mister president.

Aye. 14 ayes when excused.

14 ayes when excused. The committee report is adopted. Alderman Scott Spiker will now present the report of the public safety and health committee.

The public safety and health committee recommends passage f 42. An ordinance relating to parking controls, 43, and ordinance related traffic controls, 44. A substitute ordinance relating to the creation of a Department of Community Wellness and Safety. The committee recommends adoption of 45 resolution authorizing the Milwaukee Fire Department to amend the private ambulance service provider agreements for emergency medical services in certain areas of the city of Milwaukee. 46, resolution approving an agreement between the Milwaukee Police Department and Milwaukee World Festival regarding extra duty police services.

The committee recommends confirmation of 47. Appointment of Carrie Scott Haney to the Milwaukee Commission on Domestic Violence and sexual assault by the mayor. 48, appointment of Sherilyn Lopez Horn to the Milwaukee Commission on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault by the Mayor. 49, appointment of Matthew Thorbinson to the Milwaukee Commission on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault by the Mayor. 50, appointment of Eliza Mueller to the Milwaukee Commission on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault. The committee recommends placing on file item 51, communication from the Department of Administration relating to its vision, Vision Zero Annual Report. 52, communication from the Fire and Police Commission relating to standard operating procedures.

Is there any further discussion of the committee report? Any further discussion? Hearing none. Vice President. Alderman Brower.

Yeah, thank you so much. Sorry. My light there we go. Now it's working. Thank you so much. I would like to make a motion regarding item 41. Okay. Yes. I move let me just make sure

I have the

right file Yes. I move to take common counsel file number 251801 from committee.

Okay. The motion by Alderman Brower is to move that out of committee. On the motion, chair recognizes all. Ms. Spiker.

Thank you, Mr. President. Just wanted to read the resolved clause of that one. So if I'm reading the right file, this is the one that resolves by the council of the city that members of the MPD are called upon to protect the rights of community members when they engage in constitutionally protected speech and assembly and intervene to protect community members if anyone, including other law enforcement agency personnel, attempts to abridge the public's constitutional rights. So this is a resolution.

It would not go to the SOPs affecting how MPD conducts their business? I was trying to figure out the relationship between the two. That is correct. Okay. So we resolved that they shall do this but without touching the SOPs. Okay.

They are urged to do it. Chair recognizes Alderman Brower. Yeah. Thank you

so much. And and that was a great observation Alderman, Spiker that, yes, this is this is a resolution. So once again, we are with this with with moving, with, you know, voting yes on this motion to bring it before us allows us to adopt this here. And, yes, I I can confirm this is a resolution. I do intend in other pieces of legislation to modify standard operating procedures of the Milwaukee Police Department to compel them to do things like this.

I'm going to fight as hard as I can to compel our police to not stand by when ICE terrorizes this city. But this this is merely, at this point, a resolution where we make a stand and make a statement about where we want the Milwaukee Police Department to be as far as as far as an actor in this city. And I think one of the questions a colleague of mine here on this body made, I thought was one of the most astute comments about policing that I've heard in a while, which is that the question really is who do the police have their back to? Not

who

are they backing up, but who do they have their back to when they're when when the police are are protecting someone, they turn their back to them and they face the aggressor. Right? You know, they they they face the aggressor. So when ICE comes here and ICE is already operating in the city by the way, but when they begin, if and when they begin a major operation, will the police when they arrive on the scene, will our will the, you know, the commanding officer instruct the police or will the police of their own volition have the back have their backs towards the protesters or their backs to ICE? Who are they gonna be protecting?

Let's start the directives and the SOP modifications that that compel them to protect our people and not ICE agents, when they come here by adopting, this resolution. I just wanna make sure that that's that's a clarification. I do intend to make other SOP modifications. There there is one in our package and a second one that I am cosponsoring. And actually, there's a third one in there as well in our package.

Those are not being considered today. I think what this body has the will to do today, what this body has the will to do today is adopt these two resolutions and and really start on a great footing the legislative process for everything else. And so this declares our intent, to have, to have the police protect our citizens and that our excuse me. Not even just our citizens, our residents, excuse me, and, and protect their rights when they are exercising them if and when there is a major ICE operation.

I'll Thank remind everyone this is on the motion to take out a committee in here today. Mr. Spiker?

I guess the question of the intervention that's being urged here is salient. I might have thought that would be worthy of a committee discussion. But again, if this isn't affecting the SOPs, that nebulousness, I guess, can be tolerated. Thank you.

Okay. The motion before us, I see no lights on, is to take this out of committee and hear it on the floor. Roll call, please.

Take item 41.

Yes. Thank you.

Aldo Woman Pratt? Aye. Chambers? Aye. Brower? Aye. Baumann? Aye. Wes Morlin? Aye. Jackson? Zamorepa? Aye. Taylor?

This this one, I I had a little bit of an issue with. So I this one, I'm gonna vote. No. Okay.

Moore? Aye. Bergilis? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dimitrijevic? Stamper?

Excused.

Mr. President? Aye. 12 ayes, one no, and two excused.

12 ayes, one no, two excused. Motion is before us, item 41. Any discussion on item 41, resolution? Alderman Brower.

Yeah. Thank you so much. Again, I'll just reiterate some of the comments I made earlier, which is that this would allow us to this this stakes our position that we want our police department to be doing every single thing they can to protect the residents of Milwaukee.

I have, you know, I have

had some productive conversations so far with Milwaukee police, to just discover ways. And and some of them some of those conversations haven't resulted in agreement, we may come to a point where we need to push them. This starts those conversations. This declares where this body stands. Thank you. Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderman Brugellis.

Thank you, mister president. The South Side had a a neighborhood meeting last week as well. And hundreds of people came out and expressed their support for the city to do whatever it can, however it can. And I do want to point out that the Department of Public Works has put a sign outside of City Hall that says caution, falling ice. And I think that's a prelude to what's happening in the chamber today.

What we've seen nationally is that the federal law enforcement has broken conventions of policing and conventions of keeping the public safe. When I ran for office, my constituents have always told me that public safety is number one. Public safety in keeping our residents safe. This resolution does just that. It encourages that law enforcement here locally protects residents. So I am honored to ask unanimous consent to be added as a cosponsor to this item. Thank you, mister president.

Let the record reflect the cosponsorship of,

Alderman Bourgellis. Chair recognizes Alderman Taylor. For this one, yes,

we did

get, a legal opinion and, yes, I do commend my, colleagues for what they are doing, but I think when we're talking about changing the SOP, we wanna create realistic expectations for the public. And so I think we need to be a little more cautious.

Hold on. I'm tell them this this isn't an SOC.

For oh, this isn't the one for this.

This is a resolution.

Okay.

Okay?

My apologies. No. No problem.

Chair recognizes, all the person Samariba.

Thank you, mister president. And, actually, to Alderman Taylor's point, I did wanna clarify for our colleagues and the public. This is another symbolic measure. I wanna thank Alderman Brower for putting this forward. I understand the consternation that has been, that some of my colleagues have today.

I also bemoan an immediate adoption. I prefer to let the sunlight shine on our pieces of legislation to allow our constituents to weigh in, to allow our colleagues to ask questions and dialogue, to hear from city departments. But I can understand, as you can imagine, the urgency that Alderman Brower shows by wanting to push these two, again, symbolic measures forward. I served, as you know, Mr. President, for a decade in the Wisconsin State Assembly before coming to City Hall.

And I can recall being in the room with my caucus and being the only member of my caucus that was pushing for pro immigration policy. And so to be here today and hear from so many allies and to be surrounded by so many allies, I remember again being the only one in the room wanting to push this issue. So I I appreciate the dialogue today. I thank the author for pushing this forward. I thank my colleagues for being willing to hear it and I look forward to voting yes on this measure. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. Chair recognizes all of Ms. Piker. Spiker.

Thank you, Mr. President. I guess touching on Alder Taylor's point, this is a resolution saying we call upon MPD to do this, but the SOP changes where they would actually be required. So for me this all hinges on the word intervene and there may be species that are totally reasonable in keeping with the guardianship role that we expect of our officers. But I want to be careful and not set up an expectation that we have our officers pull a weapon on somebody else with a weapon who thinks they're entitled to act.

So I don't want to suggest that by supporting this, one would support an SOP change of that specificity and potential danger both with respect to the officers, but with respect to the community that's around that sort of action. So because the word intervene is, as I said, nebulous, I would wait till the SOP change that's being proffered in the future is before us to decide what my final action on that item would be. So thank you.

Chair recognizes all over Taylor.

Okay. So I just want to make sure that so when we're talking about the SOP, we're looking at number 4251799.

It's not before us.

But the one that we that is before us is the 251801. Yes, ma'am. Right. Number 41. Okay. So for that one, then I voted no when I actually was looking at the other one. So for that one, I'll change my vote to an aye.

Okay. Let the record reflect. So Alderman Taylor's no to aye vote. Chair recognizes Alderman Brower.

Yeah. Thank you so much, mister president. Yeah. No. There's, you know, the the question of and I'm really glad we're asking this question. The question of to what extent what are we expecting our police department to do is a great one to be asking, and then we will be asking that future legislation. I'm also glad that it was brought up. I wanna I wanna stake a claim right now that that our police need to be expected to do more than nothing like in other departments across this country. We we expect that from our officers who have put who have took a taken an oath to protect our residents. And so that's that's in my mind what is what is being said here.

Intervening has like like Alderman Spiker said, intervening has a lot of different meanings. Intervening has so many different meanings, but at the very minimum, they need to do more than nothing. And just in in certain cases in other cities, they're standing by and throwing their hands up in the air and saying, oh, well, it's a federal agency. They can do whatever they want. That is not correct. If a USPS driver, a postal service driver is driving drunk down the street, we don't just say, oh, they're a federal agent. They can do whatever they want. They can deliver the mail drunk. We don't do we arrest them. We're crying out loud.

So when so I would so I just wanna, you know, stake an opinion here that, like, we we need to have a minimum level of expectation for the conduct. And and I do believe that if an ICE agent is violating our statutes, especially our criminal ones, they should be arrested by our police department. That's not what this resolution says, but I do wanna state that for the record. That is my personal opinion. What this resolution does is offer a nebulous word of intervene. I just want it at the very minimum, I think legally, it should be more than just nothing. They should at least say something. At the very minimum, they should at least say something. You know? And if we pass these other ordinances that are in our package, they should inform ICE agents that they can't be masked.

They should inform ICE agents that they can't be blocking traffic, that they need to have, like, another city's ICE is putting one license plate on the front of the vehicle and one license plate on the back. If they are even putting license plates on there, and I know that's a huge issue in our city, they need to be informing them that they're violating our laws. At the very minimum, they need to inform them. So that's you know, the the spirit of this resolution is to state the claim that we want them to do something, especially when it comes to protecting our residents that are exercising their civil rights. And then I I am aware that, like, you know, there is no, you know, there is no federal law or peace law established that affirms the duty to protect civil rights by our police, but, like, I would like them to protect people and their lives.

And so I think that's what this accomplishes. I think we'll explore more about, you know, what we can accomplish in further legislation

we can direct, but

I did wanna state my opinion from the jump of what I think. Thank you.

Chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. I had the honor as well as Alderman Spiker and Bergalis to attend the last graduating MPD class. They always give out the little pamphlet and on the back of it, it always has the oath of honor. And I'm gonna read that to you all today.

This is our MPD oath of honor. On my honor, I will never betray my badge, my integrity, my character, or the public trust. I will always have the courage to hold myself and others accountable for our actions. I will always uphold the constitution, protect my community, and accomplish the mission of the Milwaukee Police Department. I will demonstrate competence, have courage, be a person of integrity, exhibit leadership, show respect, and act with restraint.

Restraint. This is my solemn vow. And as the conversation of my colleagues have shared, this is a symbolic gesture. This is an opportunity and a moment for us to symbolically say, who's going to protect us? Who's going to protect the residents of this great city?

Outsiders, insiders, do wrong. We're expect we have a high level of expectation for the people that are supposed to serve and protect. And that's where this council comes in. To have that I love the word symbolic. To have to show that symbolic gesture that this doesn't necessarily put teeth in it, right, until we Alderman Spiker shared that there's some other things that that needs to be done with the with changes.

But this at least communicates back to our constituents that have showed up. There have been many forums that peep hundreds of people have showed up and expressed their concerns. This is a moment for us colleagues. Let's do let's be on the right side of history. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair recognizes all them in Stamper. All of them Stamper, your light was on or was it off?

No, sir. Okay.

Sheriff recognizes all the women in Taylor.

I just wanted to to speak to, what was being said. I I think it's it's not I don't wanna say that the police don't do anything, so I don't wanna paint that picture that they stand by and do absolutely nothing because they do have a code of conduct that they have to adhere to. So when we talk about intervening, I just it's under my opinion that we don't wanna just leave it as a blanket statement as it's vague without explaining what that intervention can actually look like. Because, again, as I was about to say earlier, we don't want to set unrealistic expectations of something that they can't do based on the code of conduct that they have to adhere to.

Thank you. The vote before us is item 41, file two hundred fifty one thousand eight zero one. Did you want to say something out of No,

thought Mr. President. Yes. Yeah, thank you so much. Appreciate it, colleagues. Couple of things as we, you know, I just want

to clarify that I what

I was speaking to Alderman Taylor was speaking to about them doing nothing. I was speaking in other jurisdictions when ICE when ICE has been present. And I just wanna make a comment about our our process. Think I I just wanna challenge colleagues a little bit about, you know, the processes we have here at city hall. We have meetings that start at 9AM on workdays.

Parking is terrible around here. I I just wanna challenge us a little bit that like what we do here in this building is is is accessible but what our what we do do, what we as elders do that other elected officials do less of but we that's very accessible, that is extremely connected more than any other type of elected official out there is our community meetings and town halls that we hold. We hold more community meetings, I think, than any about bars and restaurants and and about ice than than any other elected officials that I've seen in my career in politics. And so that that is a way that we can can hear their voices or made their make their voices heard. Excuse me.

And when we have held town halls and meetings like the South Side Alders did, like alderwoman Dmitryovich, like we did in the 3rd District, people have resoundingly said that they want this passed and they want this stuff passed as soon as possible. I am hearing from a lot of colleagues here too that the other piece of the legislation that they're keen to get those heard and I really do appreciate that. Let's move with urgency with the other piece of legislation. This is the only these are these two resolutions are the only items that I'll be bringing from the ICE package to the floor today, but I felt there was such a sense of urgency to at the very minimum, and we have and we have met that and we're exceeding that with our win the with the SOP yesterday. You know, we have done the minimum of starting to say something.

So I just want to be clear with that, that our process has shown that people want this. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay. Before us is item 41. Can we do a roll call vote, please?

On item number 41, Alderwoman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Brower. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Wes Morlin. Aye. Jackson. Aye. Zamorepa? Aye. Taylor? Aye. Moore? Aye. Bergilis? Aye. Spiker?

Owing to the ambiguity and the word intervene, I abstain.

Dmitryevich? Aye. Stamper? Aye. Mr. President? Aye. 13 ayes, one excused, and one abstained.

13 ayes, one excused, one to say committee report or the file is adopted. Is there any further discussion on the rest of the report?

Mr. President?

Recognizes Alderman Spiker.

On item 44, I would move to amend file number 250,953 by eliminating the phrase community health instead inserting the phrase community wellness in section three forty five-one of substitute one and further move for passage of the file as amended. This takes care of concern from the city attorney's office that the Office of Community Wellness and Safety soon to become with this the Department of Community Wellness and Safety not transgress certain restrictions in state statute that give the health department control over healthy stuff. So by changing the word health to wellness, we avoid that concern. So this is basically a technical correction upon the advice of our city attorney's office. Okay.

Any questions or comments about the simple amendment by Alderman Spiker related to file two five zero nine five three. Any objections to that? Hearing none, so ordered. Chair recognizes Alderman Baumann.

Yeah. Thank you, mister president. Regarding item 46, this appears to be a resolution approving the agreement between Police Department and Milwaukee World Festivals Inc, I. E. Summerfest. And and to the chair, was there any discussion about the adequacy of compensation? This has become a perennial issue over the years. Summerfest consumes an immense amount of police resources. Uh-huh. Oftentimes during the To take it from the committee.

Summer activities when crime, fear, and safety issues in the neighborhoods are at their highest levels. The summer, Summerfest, June, July time frames. I was just wondering if there's any any discussion about the adequacy of compensation because the hourly rates that are plugged into this agreement for police officer, it's $75.14 per hour. For motorcycle officer, same. Supervisors, $80 an hour.

Lieutenants are 89. Was there any discussion about the adequacy of that of Mr.

Chair, so Alder Berglis chaired that item. He also raised the excellent that new employees in the police department now fall under WRS, so there is a pensionable component to overtime. I thought that was a very excellent point to raise and touches on some of Alder Baumann's concerns. But he was Chair of that committee, so I defer.

Maybe we should send this back to committee perhaps.

I thought we did. Pardon? I thought we sent it to finance. Okay. So, mister president.

Chair recognizes Alderman Bergelis.

Thank you, mister president. To, so my recollection and it certainly may be wrong, I thought we referred this to finance and personnel, so that we could get an answer on the pensionable overtime concern that we uncovered during committee. Lots of good things happen in committee. Sometimes the questions are answered, sometimes new questions come up that still need some time to be resolved and that latter is what is before us with this item. So I'll move that we refer item 46 to finance and personnel.

Okay. The motion by Alderman Bergellis is to send to committee. Item 46 for discussion. Send send it to committee. That's your motion.

We'll refer it

to committee.

Refer to to finance and personnel. Okay. Any objections to that motion? Hearing none so ordered. Any further discussion of the rest of the committee report? Care recognizes all the person Samaripa.

Yes. I would like to object to item number 44, file number 250953.

Okay. Let the record reflect all the person somebody who has objection to 44. Any further discussion on the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman moves for adoption of recommendations of the public safety and health committee. Will the clerk please call the

roll? President.

Chair recognizes alderman Stanford.

Yeah. I missed a vote. Please add me an affirmative.

Oh, for item 41?

Yes.

Okay. Let the record reflect, an I vote for Alderman Stamper on item 41 filed two five one eight zero one. Can we please do the roll call on the committee report?

On the committee report, for public safety and health, alderwoman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Rauer. Excused. Bowman? Aye. Wes Morlin? Aye. Jackson? Aye. Zamorepo? Aye. Taylor?

Excused.

Moore? Aye. Regulus? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dimitrijevic? Aye. Stamper? Aye.

We're gonna call Brower again.

Brower? Aye. Taylor? Aye. Mister president? Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

14 ayes, one excused. Committee report is adopted. Alderman Robert Baumann will now present the report of the zoning neighborhoods and development committee.

The zoning and neighborhoods and development committee, item number 53, this item is not before us. The city attorney's office has requested more time to determine whether the ordinance is legal and enforceable. The zoning and neighborhoods committee recommends passage of item 54, a substitute ordinance relating to the fees charged for city permits for sprinkler insulation in certain apartment buildings. 55, a substitute ordinance relating to the inspection of parking infrastructure. The committee recommends adoption of 56 substitute resolution directing this.

Welcome. Directing the Department of City Development to study the feasibility of creating an employee down payment assistance program. 57, resolution authorizing the sale of the city owned tax deed property at 912 West Berlite Street in the 6th Automatic District. 58, resolution authorizing the sale of the city owned tax deed property at 4232 North Daytona Avenue in the 1st Automatic District. 59, resolution approving a land disposition report and authorizing the sale of the city owned taxi property at 4417 North 27th Street in the first automatic district.

60, resolution authorizing the sale of the city owned taxi property at 1633 To 35 West Center Street in the 15th automatic district. 61, resolution authorizing the sale of a seven sit the sale of seven seven City of Milwaukee owned vacant lots in Milwaukee to to Milwaukee Community Crossroads for construction of new single family homes through their youth build program in the 7th, 8th, and 15th automatic districts. 62, substitute resolution approving the amendment number one to the project plan tax incremental district number 127 known as 100 East Wisconsin and authorizing additional expenditures in the fourth automatic district. The committee recommends placing on file item 63, communication from the Office of Equity and Inclusion relating to human resource requirements quarterly reports for the Five Points project.

Chair rec Chair recognizes Alderperson Samaripa.

Thank you, mister president. Can you permission to be added as a cosponsor to file number 251725, item number 61?

Let the record reflect cosponsorship of somebody before 61 filed two five one seven two five. Chair recognizes alderwoman Dimitriavich.

Thank you, mister president. Okay. First, may I be added as a cosponsor to item 56, please, on down payment assistance?

Let the record reflect cosponsorship of all the women in Mitravich, item 56.

And then, mister president, if I have the floor, I'd like to speak to item 62. If you allow or when the time is right.

The floor is yours.

Thank you, mister president. Colleagues, look at item 62. I've been in discussion with many of the parties involved here And I thought about a couple of procedures here, but I really don't want to stop this project from going forward because it is a significant investment downtown. I just want to raise a flag and that's why if you'll allow me, this is in lieu of separating out or making a motion. I've had great conversations with my colleague Alderman Bob Baumann who every time I call and I do call and I ask a lot of questions, answers my questions and I continue to learn a lot from him and I do appreciate that.

It's maximum collegiality and I appreciate it. And I know I have a lot of questions. Part of our job is to ask questions. And I just want to place on the record, Mr. President, for Item 62.

You may wonder, on 100 East Wisconsin, it's one of the new projects that we're investing in that's moving forward with a new TIF plan for workforce housing, I support workforce housing. I support affordable housing all over our city, to be honest, because we have a housing problem. We know there's thousands where thousands of units, some have estimated approximately over 15,000 for what we need, especially for continuing to grow our population. So when we're providing this major investment, which is worthwhile to private entities, we've got to be sure we're getting something in return. And I just want to continue to raise the bar and making sure we're getting investment.

And there's one item in here that I want to bring some light to and I feel that I can do it because I've spoken to my colleague whose district this is in. As this amendment to the tax incremental district is being considered, it is allowing for more funding because of the fact that prices have gone up. I have some real thoughts on that. I think part of that is in response to decisions made by our federal government. But let that be the case, we have to amend the TIF.

This project though, however, also has additional expenditures. And for the life of the TIF, from what I understand, there will be an investment Now, no problem with the Business Improvement District. They're obviously great and they do great things for the community, but I'd like us to consider going forward what it might look like to find ways to continue to invest in affordable housing. I'm worried and I've said it in many meetings, I've said it to colleagues that we don't have long term sustainable funding sources for the housing trust fund as well we know what down payment assistance and this council has been amazing at stepping up and finding the funds for that. And so this you might think I'm picking on a certain project, but I have to pick on what's in front of me.

And I just think it's almost $1,000,000 that over the life will go to the bid and the bid is great. Again, I'm not taking away from the bid. It's just that while we go forward, I think we would it would behoove us to look at the policy and how to find long term funding strategy like other cities have done for our housing trust fund. And I can speak to this in first person, Mr. President, and I'll conclude.

We just opened the core list that had nearly 600, 100% affordable units in my district and part of the missing piece was they did get an allocation from the housing trust fund. So if you want to chip away at the thousands of units that are needed, we've got to think about what works and what package works. And so I just wanted to put the council on notice to consider. I'll continue talking to Department of City Development. I talked to the sponsor as well. I've talked to even the developer. But I just thought this was an opportune time and I didn't want to pull the project up yet. But I am going to be working on some policy to get a little bit of a better return on our investment. Thank you, Mr. President.

Chair recognizes Aldwoman Pratt. Thank you. Really just

to echo Alderman Dmitry's sentiments about this project, voted no initially and I would like to be recorded as a no as well. I do not agree with subsidizing already rich people downtown. And I'd like to be added as a cosponsor to number fifty four and fifty six.

Let the record reflect, no to item 62 for Alderman Pratt. And you want a cosponsorship of fifty six and fifty seven? Fifty four. Fifty four and fifty six? Yes. Okay. Let the record reflect cosponsorship Alderman than Pratt. Chair recognizes all the person Samariba.

Thank you, mister president. I I would also like to be added as a cosponsor of item number 56, file number 251449.

With the record co sponsorship of Samaripa on '50 six. Chair recognizes Alder Woman Moore.

Thank you, mister president. Same here for item number 56 as well. Thank you.

Okay. Let the record reflect cosponsorship of alder movement more on '56. Chair recognizes alderman Taylor.

Same, mister president. I could be added as a cosponsor to, '54 and '56.

Cosponsorship of alderman Taylor on '54 and '56.

Chair recognizes alderman chambers. Same for '54

and '56. Let the record reflect co sponsorship Alderman Chambers '54 and '56. Any further discussion? Chair recognizes Alderman Jackson.

'56.

Co sponsorship by Jackson on '56. All the woman Dimitrivich.

Yes. Also on '54 for me. Thank you.

Co sponsorship on '54 for all the woman Dimitrivich. Chair recognizes, is that it? Okay. All chair recognizes Alderman Westmoreland.

In my Mark Chambers voice, can we get unanimous sponsorship for item 56? Oh my god.

Alderman Westmoreland is unanimous cosponsorship of 56. Any objection to that? Hearing none, so ordered. Any further discussion on the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman Bowman moves for adoption of the recommendation zoning neighborhood development committee. Would the clerk please call the roll?

On the entire file, Alderman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Brower. Aye. Baumann. Aye. Wissmoreland. Aye. Jackson. Zamarepa. Aye. Taylor. Aye. Moore. Aye. Bergilis. Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dmitryevich? Aye. Stamper? Aye. Mister president? Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

14 ayes, one excused. Alderman Russell Stamper the second will now present the report of the community and economic development committee.

The community and economic development committee recommends passage of 64, an ordinance relating to friendship city relationships. The committee recommends confirmation of 65 nomination of Osmarie Gilmore as the fifteenth district representative to the Milwaukee Youth Council. 66, reappointment of Annette Adams to the Business Improvement District Number 21 by the mayor. 67, reappointment of Patricia Keating Khan to the Business Improvement District Number 21 by the mayor. 68, reappointment of Michelle Bellett to Michael Bellett to the business improvement district number fifty three by the mayor of 69.

Reappointment of Jill Ingalls to the Business Improvement District Number 53 by the mayor of 70. Reappointment of Rich Lund to the Business Improvement District Number 53 by the mayor of 71. Nomination of Arias Denis to the fourteenth district representative as a representative to the Milwaukee Youth Council. And the committee recommends placing on file item 72, resolution terminating Business Improvement District Number 26, and creating the new Menomonee Valley Business Improvement District.

Is there any further discussion in the committee report? Hearing none, Alderman Stamper moves for the adoption of the committee and economic development committee. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Pratt? Aye. Chambers? Aye. Brower? Aye. Baumann? Aye. Wissmoreland? Aye. Jackson? Zamorripa? Aye. Taylor? Aye. Moore? Aye. Bergelis? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dmitry Evich? Aye. Stamper?

Aye.

Mister president?

Aye. 14 ayes when excused. 14 ayes when excused. The committee part

is adopted. Alderwoman Marina Dimitrevich will now present the report of the steering rules committee.

The steering and rules committee recommends adoption of 73. Substitute resolution relating to collaboration between Port of Milwaukee, the Department of City Development, Innovation Office, and city clerk's office. The committee recommends approval of 74. Substitute motion approving renewal of a charter school contract with Escuela Verde for an additional five year term. 75.

Substitute motion approving renewal of a charter school contract with Milwaukee Math and Science Academy for an additional five year term. The committee recommends confirmation of 76, appointment of Tracy Sparrow to the Charter School Review Committee by the mayor, 77, appointment of Ted Tiani and Davis to the Charter School Review Committee by the Common Council President. The committee recommends placing on file item 78, communication from the housing authority of the city of Milwaukee, Office of City Attorney, the Department of Neighborhood Services, and the Milwaukee Police Department on housing authorities, Milwaukee recovery plan. 79, communication from the Charter School Review Committee transmitting its findings for the annual report for 2024, '25, and '80. Communication from the office of the city attorney relating to a status of update on the Collins set settlement.

Any discussion on the committee report? Chair recognizes alderman Brower.

Yeah. Thank you so much, mister president. I would like to be recorded in opposition to item items seventy four and seventy five. I'd like to speak to them as well.

The floor is yours, Alderman. Thank you.

Yes. So, these items are the renewal for two charter school contracts with the city of Milwaukee. Broadly, I believe that the city of Milwaukee should not be in the business of chartering our of chartering schools here in the city. You have a school board that is separately and democratically elected by the residents of this city, and I believe it should be up to them to decide who should receive a charter or not. State statutes do allow us to charter schools, but I don't believe that that means we should take that right.

Public education is the cornerstone of our democracy. And while these are public charters, they are not publicly operated. I think that, you know, both these schools presented some merits to their academics. I'm not speaking, you know, to their academic caliber here on the floor. What I am speaking to is, the question of who decides. Because in organizing, we ask the question, who makes decisions? Right? And I asked both of these schools and others at the Charter School Review Committee or excuse me, at the steering rules committee this cycle about their structures and who makes decisions in these schools. Right? And, you know, of all I mean, spoiled it early.

I an okay answer about there's there's some level of democracy of their parents and students being able to elect the board. But really, when it comes down to the other ones the other

ones did not. The other ones

had their appointed boards or could not even identify, and you got you all can view the footage, could not even identify how their boards were determined. So which might be that racial price red flag right away there. But but broadly, the most democratic process elections we, besides direct democracy, is the elections that we conduct. And so we elect our school board. And then I would say that at the very minimum, these charter schools should be democratic.

And just to say that a charter school, even if let's say that they did have elections from parents to their board and that sort of thing, but even in that case, the people who don't have kids should still have a say in how our students are educated. And that's why we elect through the government our school board. Right? Because what happens to our students in the schools does have a ripple throughout the entire community. Just like we say we can license a business, we give we we lay claim to being able to license a business because we say that that business can have an effect on its neighbors.

I think everybody here would agree on that. Well, that's why we should have democracy in our schools as well. And when you have a a potentially well meaning nonprofit whose board is appointed by donors or by the philanthropy barons of this city, that is not democracy. And so just on that principle alone, I I oppose us chartering schools, and I wanna register my objection to this. But more specifically, you know, I don't think that just because a statute gives us the right to exercise our right of chartering, meaning that means that we should.

Right? And that should be solely in my political opinion, the purview of our democratic school board. So I'll be opposing these today, and I would welcome any colleagues or community organizations that would wanna join me in exploring the possibility of legislation to phase out the city Of Milwaukee's chartering of schools when all of their contracts are done. Thank you so much, mister president.

Okay. Let the record reflect the alderman Brower's opposition. No vote to seventy four and seventy five. Chair recognizes alderman chambers.

Thank you, mister president. I'm gonna speak on my colleague's comments, and and and I respect my colleague's sentiment. I I know that he has done fantastic work leading unions and becoming a teacher prior to coming here. So I give him much respect to that. I'm very different as far as whether we should be chartering schools or anything of that nature.

Personally, don't it doesn't bother me one way or another. But I'm gonna speak on the fact that he brought up the school board. I have a school, Carmen Northwest, in in my district that is leaving my district because of decisions made by the school board. That was ill fated in my opinion. You know, they did a review.

The review said they qualify for a three year renewal based on their standards and then they twisted to become a non renewal and then worked out a deal to go with one year and now they're leaving. Meanwhile, I have 600 families, 600 teachers and and school students that is going to be leaving a hole in the second district. I have this going to be a vacant building in my district starting the June. And prior to Carmen coming into that school, it was vacant for seven years prior to that because the teachers union or the the school board or hopefully, you know, this they don't have a plan. I still have not heard a plan about what's going on with the building far moving along when they made these decisions.

So I respect my my colleague's sentiments. Me he and I conversations, and then I continue to welcome him because I have that relationship with him. But if we're gonna get serious about whether improving our public schools or choice or anything like we have to have a serious look at some of the things that our elected board which is the school board is is doing and we can't continue to push the blame on the the the legislator when they have a $46,000,000 shortage because they overspit $46,000,000. So, you know, I I I didn't plan on speaking on that, but, honestly, you know, the the the movement of the the school board kinda struck a nerve with, their decision on vacating a school in the district without factoring in those kids. So thank you.

Chair recognizes all woman Taylor.

Thank you very much, mister president. While I respect my colleague's opinion regarding the charter schools, but and, yes, I was employed with MPS for quite a bit a long time. But I still think that we ought to give parents choices, and we know that MPS has faced a lot of challenges regarding educating our children. So I think that we should not take away a choice of a city charter school. And as we know that, the particular charter school at number 75 has been extremely successful and their report card reflects that.

So I would not agree with taking away city charter. I think that that is a choice. We know that we have private schools and sometimes our children can't get to those private schools, but they can definitely get to the city charter school. And so I think that we would not be doing any justice to to our children if we take away that option.

Okay. Thank you. Any further comment on? Chair recognizes all member Bergelis.

Thank you, mister president. No on 75.

Let the record reflect your opposition to 75? Okay. Chair recognizes Alderman Demetrevich.

Thank you. So, I'm sorry. The motion on, is there a motion before us on '75 or

just? No.

No. People just stating their objection to it.

Okay. Will there be a roll call on 75?

Tier three. Not yet.

Okay. I'll be in abstention on 75.

Okay. Let the record reflect an abstention on item 75. Chair recognizes alderwoman Moore.

Thank you so much, mister president. I I wanna definitely value and appreciate my colleague sentiments. Like, we we have a huge issue when it comes to education, and this city should be pro education. It should be about what do we need to do to make sure that every young person in this city get a quality education. That should be the conversation.

And still a lot of work that we need to that needs to be done especially when we talk about structural issues. You know, I I get really, you know, passionate when it comes to talking about particularly black and brown kids and how we educate them right here in this community. We rank the top. We rank the bottom of the barrel in a lot of cases. There are some, you know, other communities with very similar demographics that are doing much better than we are, and it just tells me that we still have some more work to be done.

So I I say all that to say there still needs to be some, you know, in some forthcoming conversations as we talk about how we look at educating our children, the children right here in the city of Milwaukee. But and I encourage you, you know, some of the issues that you have with some of our some of the schools that the city charters to go and visit, to go and have some conversations with the leadership. That's typically what I do when I don't agree with something or may have different views about something. I wanna make sure that I'm educated and I'm getting the right, you know, information despite how I may feel. So I would encourage you, alderman, to please go and find some time, to to visit, some of these schools.

And, you know, I I want us to just focus on what we need to do to educate all the kids in this city. So I I just wanted to, you know, say my, 2¢. I am in support, of, $70.75.

Okay. I just wanna remind everyone to be germane about the contracts that are in front of us. Chair recognizes all the person Samaripa.

Thank you, mister president. I do want to note, I believe Alderman Brower speaking to both 7475. Both are around the renewal of charter schools Escuela Verde and Milwaukee Math and Science Academy. If you recall on student roles, I made the motion for Escuela Verde, which makes its home in the 8th Aldermanic District on the near South side in my district. I want to join Alderwoman Moore and extend an invitation to my colleagues to join me at Escuela Verde.

They do have a student run coffee shop that I would love to have a cup of coffee with you there. And I do want to make sure to clarify. We only operate. The city has about half a dozen. I think technically seven.

Right.

Schools that we charter here at the city of Milwaukee. I would be opposed to to moving those. I I certainly can understand and I don't think we've added any schools for quite a while and I and I would be in support of not adding more schools but I would ask that we continue. I've talked to leadership at Escuela Verde and they've explained the challenges that there would be were they to be moved and so I would ask us to please, can we at minimum operate this just about half a dozen allow these charter schools to operate under the the city of Milwaukee's ability to charter schools. That would be my ask and what I would push for if this dialogue continues. Thank you.

Thank you. There being no further discussion,

alderwoman Demetria Mooch for chair recognizes Aldwin Taylor. And I'm just speaking because I don't know if my colleague went into opposition on '75 because I pointed out '75. That's only because I've had a chance to visit and sit with, the leadership at, Milwaukee Math and Science Academy and to learn about what they actually do and to take a look at their report card. I have not had that opportunity with, Escuela Verde and, but I do welcome that opportunity to do that. So I'm not making any difference between the two.

They're both city charter schools, and I do, piggyback off of my two colleagues that spoke in favor. Aldwoman Moore and Aldwoman, Zammaripa that, there is a place for city charter schools and so, I will be voting in favor of both of those.

Okay. Chair recognizes all the one more.

I'm sorry, mister president. I just wanted to correct myself. I just wanted to be in support of both 74 and '75. Thank you. Okay.

There being no further discussion, elder woman Demetriever moves for adoption of the recommendations of the steering rules committee with the clerk. Please call the roll. You don't.

Elderwoman Pratt. Aye. Chambers. Aye. Brower. Aye. Bowman. Aye. Miss Morland.

Aye.

Jackson. Aye. Zamorepah. Aye. Taylor? Aye. Moore? Aye. Bergelis? Aye. Spiker? Aye. Dimitrijevich? Aye. Stamper? Aye. Mister president. Aye. 14 ayes, one excused.

14 ayes, one excused. The commuter report is adopted. We will now take up communications from city officers.

File number 251804. Communication from the city clerk relating to service of papers.

Order file.

File number 251805. Communication from the city clerk relating to various commendatory, condolatory resolutions that be acknowledged and affirmed by the common council. Order file. File number 251807. Rather 806. Communication from the city clerk relating to official notices and reports.

Four on file.

File number 251888. Communication relating to the various appointments to the Milwaukee Community Impact Committee.

Four on file. Are there any items for immediate adoption?

There are three matters for immediate adoption. Item number 81, file number 251864. Resolution approving final certified survey maps. Item number 82, file number 251889, resolution expressing opposition to the Wisconsin Electric Power Company proposal before the Public Service Commission and item number 84, file number two five one nine zero eight, resolution amending common council file number two five zero four eight nine relating to Milwaukee Community Impact Committee.

Chair recognizes all the women to be treated.

Thank you so much, mister president and thank you to our colleagues once again who every step of the way and I know I've said this and I thought it would get, you know, funnier along the way but but it's definitely not that funny that I have to keep talking about this because it keeps happening. So really the way to stop me from talking about it is that We Energies could stop increasing rates on our residents in the city of Milwaukee. And I say that with all seriousness here, Mr. President, if you allow me to speak on this matter of immediate adoption. It's been out for a few days.

Absolutely wonderful memo by Dave Gettling. Shout out to our legislative and reference bureau that really helps pull together the data that we need to make decisions. And on that matter of decisions, Mr. President, there's quite a decision in front of the Public Service Commission. I ended up having to submit my own testimony a few weeks ago due to timing.

And every time I've asked this body unanimously you all have stood up of course for our Milwaukee residents and ratepayers they're they're spoken about in the terms of the Public Service Commission because each year, We Energies has gone and made their case. Well, there's been some changes. I just want to let you know in the last five years, in 2023, rates increased nine. Two percent. 2024, two. 3%. Pending before the Public Safety Commission in '25 and '26 is six. Nine and then four. Three. That ends up as a whopping 23% increase on ratepayers in the city of Milwaukee.

And once again, they're at it again. This time, it's for consideration of a special tariff for data centers. I'm sure we've all heard about it. It's become a national discussion. And many cities like us, in fact, I'll have one up soon.