City Council - Regular Meeting

It is 6:36 p.m. You are in Wasau City Hall Council Chambers and I call the meeting to order. Please join me for the pledge of allegiance. Algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Ask the clerk to call a roll, please. There are 11 voting members present.

All right. First up, our proclamations. We have several here. Some will be read in, some are just going to be entered into the record. I would like to highlight Arbor Day. We planted uh on Thursday 12 trees over at uh Brockmeer Park with the help of Marathon Way Group and Wisconsin Public Service and the Marathon County uh Marathon County Forester. And I'm happy to report uh the trees alian that you planted two years ago at at Brockyer Park. There was a little fruit orchard there and they're looking good this spring. So they're still there uh surviving and thank you for your efforts in that. Uh and in addition Saturday we we planted trees at Scoffield Park for Earth Day. So there two different groups out there planting trees. So the total trees in the last I think it's about close to 10 years is pushing 400 trees that those two groups combined have put out there in parks around the city. Thank you. Week of the young child is in there. I've read that a couple of times, but at the event and that's being entered to the clerk. Okay. Up next, at the request of the Friends of Wasa Historic Landmarks, we have Christine and Carl Martins here to accept this one. This is a proclamation uh new to us. It's I'll read it uh the proclamation. It's National Preservation Month. Whereas historic preservation is an effective tool for managing growth, revitalization, uh revitalizing neighborhoods, fostering local pride, and maintaining community

character while enhancing livability. And whereas historic preservation is relevant for communities across the nation, both urban and rural, and for Americans of all ages, all walks of life, and all ethnic backgrounds. And whereas National Preservation Month 2026, themed All Created Equal, highlights the importance of telling inclusive and representative stories refle that reflect the full history of our community. And whereas the city of Wasa is home to rich and diverse history reflected in its neighborhoods, architecture, cultural landscapes, and the stories of the people who have shaped our community. And whereas commissions and organizations such as the city of Wasa's Historic Preservation Commission, Friends of Wasau Historic Landmarks and the Marathon County Historic Society, play a vital role in preserving, interpreting, and sharing our community's architecture and history for current and future generations. Now therefore, be it resolved that I, Doug Denny, mayor, city of Wasa, do hereby proclaim May 2026 as National Preservation Month in the city of Wasau, and encourage residents to recognize this important observance, participate in local events, and support efforts to preserve our community's architectural and historic resources, not just in May, but yearround. Signed, Doug Denny, Mayor, City Wasaw, April 28th. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Also joined with by Patrick Bcker. mic is yours.

Okay. Hi, I am Christine Martins and I am part of Friends of Wasa Historic Landmarks and I just wanted to say on behalf of our board, uh, thank you Mayor Denny for that and invite the full board and WASA to join all of these different groups and celebrating lots of different events going on all year round. And if any of the new uh council members have any questions about historic preservation, architecture, etc., please feel free to contact us. Uh and uh the old board members as well. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right, one more. Proclamation heavy tonight. We uh just a little less than an hour ago, I read this at the workers memorial down at the WPs Park along the river uh established by the Marathon County Central Labor Council. And we do have a member here to accept this one tonight. So, I'll give this one a go. Whereas each year thousands of workers are killed and millions more are injured or fall ill in the workplace, often from incidents that are preventable. And whereas 54 years ago, Congress passed Occupational Safety and Health Act known as OSHA, establishing the right of every worker to a safe job and creating federal workplace safety and health standards that have undoubtedly saved lives. And whereas concerned citizens, labor organizations, and communities are determined to prevent these tragedies by observing Workers Memorial Day on April 28th, a day to remember the victims of workplace injuries and illnesses, renew efforts to strengthen safety and health protections, enhance standards and enforcement, ensure fair compensation, and rededicate ourselves to improving conditions in every American workplace. Therefore, be it resolved that I, Doug Denny, mayor, city of Wasau, do hereby proclaim April 28th, 2026 as workers memorial day in the city of Wasau, state of Wisconsin, and commend citizens to observe this day by remembering those who have been killed or injured due to unsafe working conditions. Sign Doug Denny, mayor, city of Wasau, April 28th. And just a note, um, they read the list of those killed on the job since, uh, and and several of them were were safety

officers working in the line of duty as as recently as as actually this year there was one. So, we had uh uh a great little ceremony down there. Check out that park uh if you get a chance. Mr. Killian, Mr. Tom Kllin is a member of the council will be accepting tonight.

Thank you for coming. Thank you. YEAH.

All right. Okay, we have two meeting minute packets to approve. Uh, so item three is consideration of the minutes for March 24th, 2026 common coun regular common council meeting and April 14th, 2026 regular common council meeting. So, several of you were not there for this meeting, but I would still entertain a motion to approve those if you deem so necessary. Looking motion to approve as recorded.

And Neil, any changes? Seeing no none, you may vote. There's nail. Otherwise, I can try resetting it.

Hey, Bruce. Did you question.

Yeah. All right, that motion passes 11 to zero. Thank you. Up next is a public public comment. Are you okay? Did you What was your intention? Okay.

All right. sign language tonight. Right. Up next are comments and suggestions from pre-registered citizens. Do we have any? Anyone here to speak? Didn't get a chance to sign up? Seeing none, uh, next item up is the consent agenda. Item six. Would entertain a motion on consent. Watson motion. True blood. Second. No. Well, sure. But I uh actually would like to pull one of the items out. Okay. Which item? The joint resolution from the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee.

Okay. Yes. Should I speak up? Yes. Okay. Yes. So, I would like to pull out the first item in the consent agenda. Okay. So we will pull item 26- file number 26-0412 one one item remains.

All right you may vote. That motion passes 11 to zero. Okay. Up next is that file number 260412. It's a joint resolution from the bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee and the infrastructure facilities committee approving the bike rack request form. would entertain a motion from Watson and from second from Neil. Mr. Troulet, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I would like to actually see this sent back. The reason I'm It seems ironic that we would uh pass an assessment to charge people who had their road fixed $55 a foot for concrete. Whereas we're going to give people who asked for a bicycle rack free concrete. So if our if if we're using city resources, city materials, city time to install these bike racks, which I don't have a concern with, and they are paying for the bike rack itself. It just seems odd that we're charging one group for the concrete and not charging this group. So I feel there should be a cost to the to the complete installation not just the bike rack.

So that is my concern and it just seems ironic that we would uh be charging have this in with a resolution to charge so so if I ask for my street to be fixed would I get the concrete under the bike rack free? I wouldn't have to pay the $55 per foot. So that is my concern. Okay. Thank you. It looks like we have some folks from bike ped and possibly infrastructure in the queue. Alder Neil. Oh, Randy. Randy, did you want to get Yeah, I would yield to Randy. Okay. For now.

Thank you. And I'll do my best job pitch hitting for this tonight. Um, talked with Carrie on this before. And the concrete already has to be in place in order for this to move forward. They wouldn't be installing new concrete as part of these bike racks. This would only apply to situations where concrete is already in place. They talk about in areas where there's not concrete in place that that's something they would take a look at in the future, but this is specifically for locations where the concrete is already in place. I hope that helps it. Thank you,

Mr. Martins. Uh yeah and um that's that's um my uh uh that that was my impression you know when we when this went through infrastructure is that these bike racks could only be installed in places where there was already concrete. Um the ad I think the advantage of providing these bike racks to people that request them and uh the people then requesters are paying a minimal cost, you know, for the the the racks themselves are being fabricated uh by NTC students and um and painted uh by a local a local vendor at a at a great price. And this is a this is a a fabulous deal to encourage uh cycling and alternate means of of transportation and giving cyclists a place in which to properly uh lock up secure their bike while they are are are visiting these businesses. So it's win-win. Um we encourage more cycling and alternative forms of transportation. uh businesses provide adequate places for people to park their bikes and it will also you know by having good bike racks reduce uh the chance of theft of of these bikes. So I am in favor of this.

Thank you. Mr. True Blood, you're down twice. You still looking to speak? Okay. Okay. Anything else? Seeing none,

you may vote. Okay. So, this would be a vote to approve the uh the bike rack form. Motion passes 10 to one. Thank you. Nothing under items seven. Under item eight, suspension of the rules. I'd like to uh first without objection, the appointments were listed under under suspension of the rules because of a late addition. Uh and I would I would be I will be striking that item. That's the last item is the ethics board. So without objection, we could take that up under the regular business under ordinances and resolutions. All right. So I that we'll take that item 26-042 confirming appointments of the mayor of the city of Wasau to the historic preservation commission, sustainability, energy and environment committee, business improvement district board, community development authority board and strike ethics board. Would entertain a motion from Heni. Motion second from Lukans. You may vote. chair to confirm in the packet like on our voting it doesn't say the FX board is struck but it is struck correct

yes okay so if we vote for that then okay it's just eliminating that part just making sure

right so yeah we're motion passes 11 to zero. Okay, so the next item is the suspension of rules. And just to just for some procedural history, a little background so we can understand how we got here. Uh the clerk will chime in and and I'll ask the assistant city attorney to speak to this as well so that we're clear. I I did hand out prior to the meeting for reference, historical reference, minutes of the 2020 uh minutes of the 2022 uh organizational meeting and then the agenda for 2024. So you'll see highlighted under the minutes on 2020, motion by Larsson, second by Ryan to suspend the rules, and then a motion and second by Martins to adopt the rules. Uh there was an amendment uh by Killian that failed. There was an amendment uh let's see, another amendment, that one passed. That was to add the rights. That was a motion to uh add two council members to uh actually that was to to speak to the committee of the whole. Uh and then there was a motion by Larson, second by Pekum to adopt the rules as amended and that passed 10 to zero. 2022 a little different. Uh actually that so the suspension of the rules as it was listed on the agenda was simply

suspension of the rules. A motion by Watson, second by Larsson to suspend the rules and that was a yes votes 11 to zero. Um and there were there were a few comments in there. There was an amendment made by uh Killian that failed, but the motion, the ultimate motion to pass. Uh well, let me add the one amendment. I forgot that I did this one. Motion by Watson, second by Denny to amend the council rules to allow two persons uh may call for a committee of the whole and have it placed on the next regular meeting. uh that actually p passed uh seven to three. Seven to three is a simple majority. So that that passed by simple majority to the uh approval and adoption of the rules for the 2022 through 2024 season. And then the last item there is again the template that we were using for this year, but this is the 24 organizational meeting. Again, if you'll note, suspension of the rules and then the ordinance adopting rules for the 2024 to the 2026 uh term. And that passed without any I think that passed unanimously. There weren't any amendments that came up on that, so I didn't pull the minutes for that one. So, that leads us to where we are today. And and one of the things that after that last meeting, I I asked Cody to put together an SOP, which he did this last week, so that we have we're we're going to have a new clerk coming in. We also have a new city attorney or acting city attorney. So we we we want to make sure we get this right and we have it in place for the new clerk to come in so that we have an

SOP that we we don't have what we had last week with uh a deviation from what we had and what we have now and what you see is slightly different on the recommendation of the city attorney that we are more specific on rules that we are suspending. So in the past three you see you suspended all the rules the recommendation was that we only suspend the rules that we need for that case. So in this so tonight we had 6B listed there for the filing. We didn't need to suspend that because we we pulled that item. So now we're at 11 11 and 21. So Cody, do you want to just touch on that quick on on the SOP and how we came to do that? particular.

Sure. So, I can talk a little bit about um last week, as you know, um I think the mayor um touched on that last week that um resolution was in as um as a res resolution and not as an ordinance. So, that explains that and the SOP um makes that clear into the future. Thank you. And there is no Wisconsin case law addressing that matter. So or excusing it for that that fact. If it's mislabeled uh as an ordinance or as as a resolution or resolution, there's no case law that tells us how we fix that. Uh it was my opinion we could have fixed it with a suspension of the rules, but we on the side of uh pushing it to this week. Vinnie, can you speak to that? Yes. Alder Watson,

could I ask what SOP means? Standard operating procedures. Thank you for all those out there, too.

You bet. So, it's a it's a document that allows when a when so in this case, clerk transition. We're going to have two transitions. Uh it's a document they can pick up and and it it's a checklist in a way. And I've got it actually I think I have it here. So, it's a checklist. It has some embedded documents uh as to what what do you what do you do for example uh describes the procedures after the election. He's got to he's he's got to hold the municipal board of canvasers to verify the election and certify the election and then what do you do from there? Then the organization meeting comes next and then the steps what do you put on that or meeting. So, as to how what we had on to tonight for the suspension of the rules, uh Vinnie's recommendation was that we uh be very specific on what we're suspending because suspending all the rules, even though we did it in the past, uh doesn't necessarily give a clear indication of what we're doing.

Go ahead. You want to add anything? Assistant city attorney.

I I guess just briefly. Essentially just what's happening is that it seems that in the past the rules would be suspended. You would change your standing rules however you like or don't like I guess. And then um at the last organizational meeting there was just in a problem with the agenda and so now it was put on this one suspending 11A which requires items to go to committee prior to coming to council. Um and then 21 which requires twothirds votes uh to amend the rules. So essentially we're just skipping the committee requirement. You're voting to suspend the rule requiring the committee requirement and the two third vote to approve uh standing rules amendments. Yeah.

Alder Watson, do we have to suspend all of them? Because I think it would be really cool to have like a twothirds to amend it. That's my question. Or is it like we have to take them all? Do you want me to answer that? Yes. Oh, the attorney will answer that because because there's a little rule with suspension of the rules that it isn't debatable, but we Go ahead, Vinnie. You could make a motion just to suspend one of the rules.

All right. So, any further explanation on that? just procedural. So I want to be clear that uh more transparencies is in order and I think uh we're we're moving in the right direction. So that having said that uh we're up to item eight suspension of the rules 11A for referral of ordinances and 21 amending the rules. So would entertain a motion. Alder Watson, I would move to suspend the rule 11A referral ordinances and 6B of filing but not the other one. Okay, so we have a motion.

Can I amend it to just approve those two? 6B is not in play at this point because we then I'll just 11A referral of ordinances. That's how I would amend that. Okay. So, we have a motion to to suspend rule 11A. Second from Martins. You may vote.

Not point of order. We were just voting on the amendment. Correct. You're voting on the no suspension of the rules. the whole suspension. I can Okay.

Yeah, because that you're not like you don't need to amend it because it's you're making a motion to do something as opposed to amend. Okay. Did you hear me before, Cody? Okay. See?

And then I'm just going to ask one more time, would anybody else like to change their vote before I call it or equally unable to change your vote? Okay, that motion passes 8 to three. Okay. Any can I entertain a motion? Alder Heni, can I entertain a motion to suspend 21 amending of the rules? So, we have a motion from Heni to suspend rule 21. Do we have a second? Second from Killian.

So, and to be clear, so the vote before was to take up the ordinance at all? No, the vote was to suspend rule 11A. I suspend the rule to take up the ordinance cuz without that vote you wouldn't have been able to take up the ordinance. So under the motion by um Alder Heni um this would be to suspend rule 21 um sus amending of the rules. Correct. not on suspension of the rules.

So, just just to clarify, we're only suspending the rules. When we get to the next item, we'll have to have another motion to take it up and talk about it. So, we we're not there yet. It's a it's a little bit of a you know two-tiered system here and there's reasons behind it but we'll we can talk about that at a later date but here's where we are. Motion to suspend rule 21 Heni second with Killian. You may vote. You may vote. Motion fails 5 to6. Okay. Up next is file 020432. It's an ordinance from the common council to amend Wasa Municipal Code Chapter 2.16 staining rules of the common council. Would entertain a motion and a key motion second from Tyrannate. What's it Oh, okay. We've got Okay, gotcha. Sorry, my king keeps waking up. Okay, before before we call on some on speakers here, this is a little different because we have uh normally we adopt the rules and

then alders like I mentioned would offer amendments which we've we've had numerous examples of amendments that have been made. So in this case uh because I had made the suggestion uh the assistant city attorney crafted a draft that is just a draft. Anyone can do whatever they they want. There's there's the six day rule there that's going to be talked about and there's uh any other motions that somebody would like to make, they could. But before we start, I would like to to participate in the debate on this matter. So, I'm going to ask Council President Killian to come up and take the chair. So, I'm going to also ask the council, you know, this is some baptism by fire, and I thank Alder Kian for jumping in the hot seat, but my only goal here is that we have civil dialogue. I hopefully we dispense with some of the the misnomers that that there's some some potential uh trickery going on here. There's not. We're just going to debate the uh the item and take a vote, move on. The

Can I object? Success here is the success here is if we have a civil discussion, we take the vote, we move on and have a good night. Win or lose. Thank you, sir.

Oh, now I asked you. Madame Chair, Madame Chair, um I would like to object to this. Are you

I I would like to object to this. I believe we should just uh get on with the vote to suspend the rules as we normally do and and act and operate in in the proper procedure which we normally do. Thank you. So I would like the attorney Bonino to let us know if we are not proceeding properly. We're proceeding uh okayish. Yeah. I mean the the chair can step down and uh participate in the debate. Then he just can't uh retake the chair until after the vote has happened.

Well, I guess the reason why I'm objecting is because is is normally we suspend the rules. We vote to suspend the rules and then there's discussion. We don't discuss first. You just did suspend rules. That's my question. Thank you. I believe we did suspend the rules.

Chair chairperson, can you just talk closer? You have a very small voice anyway. Just right up there. Thank you. All right. I believe we did follow that process and attorney Benino has indicated that we are moving ahead properly. So if that was a point of order, I'm not recognizing that as appropriate. That wasn't a just an objection because I I didn't know if we could we could

I'm not recognizing that objection. I think there's a right to appeal if if someone wants to. I don't see an appeal. So, we will move ahead. Um, as Mayor Denny indicated, um, I did not anticipate sitting in this chair so quickly and this does feel like baptism by fire. And I know Cody will assist me and um, attorney Bonino is here to make sure that we move ahead properly as you can tell. So um, the next item on the agenda will be taking up, excuse me,

we already that we have a motion by. Okay, we have a motion by Tyranny and a second by Heni to take up the ordinance from the common council to amend the Wasau Municipal Code 2.16 Standing Rules of the Common Council. Alder Denny, is there a queue? Mayor Denny. Yes, there is. Is there a Q? I think there's a Q to speak. There is and I'll speak first and then you come. Are you in the queue? Is there a queue?

I am in the queue. I I indicated to Cody before I got down here. Thank you. Okay. So, thank you. Thank you for having civil discussion last week and again hopefully this week. Um my job is to look for efficiencies, work with the staff to work for efficiencies. This is one item that has surfaced time and again. How can we streamline things? How can we uh reduce staff time, reduce efficiencies, I mean increase efficiencies and and this probably has the most efficiency application to alders and secondly to the residents. So there there's elimination of duplication of uh staff having to repeat from health and safety to HR and then to finance before it can get to council. So I that is uh roughly a one-third reduction in meetings uh that we'll have to have to do uh under the rules under the state statute 62.11 uh of the common council. It's it's the foundational statute governing WASA's common council operations and a key for provision 62.112 uh following a regular city election. The new council shall first meet on the third Tuesday of April. And that's exactly what WASA's organizational meeting date was and has been for decades. Under under state statute 62.113e, the council shall in all other respects determine the rules of its procedure and this expressly authorize the annual or by annual adoption or readoption of

standing rules uh municipal code chapter 2.16 and Robert's rules. So I I I I can uh cover more items, but I'm going to keep it real simple. Uh there are 10 10 Wisconsin municipal municipalities with populations between 35,000 and 45,000 including Wasa they are Oak Creek they have three standing committees Sun Prairie four standing committees bloit four Greenfield 1 Franklin three Monaman Falls 2 Newland 4 fondelac 2 Brookfield five average of three standing committees for those cities. Now, Final X is a little different. They they create committees for certain tasks and they have uh boards and commissions that do the rest of the work and staff does the rest of the work. So, they don't and and they they utilize the full common council either in the form of a committee of the whole or the full common council takes up the items and debates them. So, they have they have virtually no committees. uh not suggesting that, but that that that's the variation uh that they have. Uh we talked about Cody's SOP. I think that will clean things up in the future for us. And I'll yield my time for this point.

I would like to recognize Alder Watson.

Thank you. Um so I I guess um the change so I guess I have three questions and then I have some comments. So first question um is the calendar of our meeting schedules is that codified in ordinance or is that just sort of practice? That's what we set up at the first committee meetings. I couldn't find it in our standing committee rules and I couldn't find it in our ordinances. So, I wasn't sure um if that's something we can change up because I think that would help with efficiencies and flow of information, too. Um, and I also wonder if there's a way that we can like play with it a little bit so we so it's not such a stress on like the clerk and the clerk's office putting together packets, making sure they have the correct number of days and like is everything published in Civic Plus. Like, I think there's a really good way of getting that flow. Um, and I guess I was wondering about calendar. Is that set at the committee level?

You want me to answer that? Yes. Go ahead. Well, it it is established the third Thursday in April following the election.

By state statute 62.11, that we have the organizational meeting, right? And by definition, organizational meeting has legal def legal implications with whether it's a business or whether it's a city. And it it lays out the election of the council president, uh various things. Now, it doesn't specifically cite adoption of the rules, but of those communities that I I listed for you, uh the vast majority of them have adoption. I've got Fondelac right here. resolution adopting supplemental meeting rules for the city of council of Fondelac. So that's on their organizational meeting.

It's tradition basically and I appreciate I I guess I'm not meaning by the organizational meeting. I I believe that's in the code. I I agree. I I'm totally like the third third Tuesday April organizational meeting. I just meant for like the other committees we have for like HR finance. Is that codified in ordinance or is that just something we discussed at our first meeting? It's in 2.16 on uh our standing rules list the committees which don't list meeting times, right? No, those are those are established by the committee.

Okay, that's that's what was my question cuz that I think then we could pivot and have a bigger discussion once we do seat whatever committees we have to have more of a a flow. Um, and I don't know, also one of the things that I've gotten from residents is sometimes it's hard and I know I don't want to be out later either, but like sometimes it's hard to get people at a 5:00. Um, and I don't know if our committees would start to like maybe consider going a little later, especially for those folks that get off of work. So that that would be something I'd love to talk about, but I was just curious if that's something we have to change here or if that's something we change at a committee level. So thank you. So that was question one. Um, question two, medium requ. Okay, so that's the calendar. Okay. Um, so I guess a couple of my comments. Um, the reason why I sort of like the structure as is and I I I think we could tweak the frequency of the meetings through scheduling. Like maybe HR is just a once a quarter kind of appointment or maybe it's something that happens only around negotiations time, right? Um, finance can still be one to two times a month. Um, but then parks can maybe be more at discretion of like when Jamie has business that we need to talk about. So maybe more infrequent. So then we would really only have finance, HR, park and wreck or you know we would have infrastructure, finance, public health and safety and ED as like core committees. So that would come down to four, right? And then we just have different committee um like frequencies, meeting frequencies. So that's one of my suggestions mainly because I think the lens that you look at the the items is different depending on what committee you're on. Case in point, right? I'm on finance. I look at the financial, right? Look at the dollars and cents, looking at how things, you know, balance up. But if it's about a contract, I'm not necessarily thinking, does this contract make Wasau a place we want to be employed? Does it is it fair for represented and non-represented employees? That's not something I'm thinking about at finance. That's

something I hoped my my HR folks were thinking about, right? Because it's a different lens that you're putting on. Same thing with like infrastructure. Like even though I was on finance and infrastructure, like when I was at infrastructure, I didn't have the finance. I mean, of course, I wasn't like, let's spend a billion dollars, right? But I didn't have the finance hat on. I had okay, what streets can we do and how can we do it, right? So, there's a value to that management. It's because you can put on those glasses and really get a feel for that issue. Um, so and I guess my other thing about this is I I appreciate we we have done this in the past. I guess I forgot the all that fun fun stuff we had at the beginning with rules. Um, but I I I think it was just how it came out. Um, it wasn't so much a discussion. It was sort of like this is what we would like to change. Um, and I think that was probably where it rubbed a little. Um because I was hoping to start this term like on a different foot. Like a whole bunch of crap that we had done in the, you know, the last two years was done, right? We were all sort of like ready to start fresh. Um and I think communication is the first part. And I just really think all the voices need to be at that table. Um and all the council people weren't at that table. Um the clerk's office wasn't at that table. Um I mean, maybe the department I I think people went to the department chairs. they were at the table, but I want to hear from them too. Like I didn't get a chance to talk to them. So that's why eventually after we have some discourse and I'll shut up eventually, but like eventually I I do want this to come to rules review because I think we can have a really robust discussion with all the actors and get it really changed and really efficient. Um but I also think all the voices need to be there and represented. So thank you very much.

Thank you Sarah. Um, next would be Alder Neil. Thank you, Madam President. Madam Chair, first time. Thank you for reminding me it's the first time, Tom. Yeah, I I feel it.

Yeah, it's okay. It'll be fine. Don't worry. Um, I've got a few thoughts I put down here because I I didn't want to meander as I often am prone to do. So, uh, streamlining and and efficiency efficiency efforts are good topics to consider. Uh, but there are some concerns to address for what we're talking about tonight. Uh, the proposed efficiency of going to four committees comes with a trade-off resulting in significantly reduced alder involvement. The new assignments we received last week featured eight alders in three committees each and uh, three alders in two committees each. In the four committee structure, a pool of 11 alders, all of us would be filling a total of 20 committee seats. Assignments would weigh seven veteran alders and four new alders. And uh unavoidably, it seems two alders would have to be limited to just one committee each. What criteria would determine who those two are? Not a crucial issue maybe, but it's not without implications regarding experience versus learning curve and workload. We could see oversized agendas with combined committees. Maybe particularly when the finance and HR committees come together. I mean, those committees often conduct long meetings on their own dealing with very weighty issues. Bloated combined agendas could make for exhausting late night meetings. also requiring staff to be on hand for that extended period of time. And instead of finishing by maybe seven o'clock or eight o'clock, meetings could easily go to 10 o'clock or even later. And there have been times in the past uh I have seen it, many of you have seen it, when that zombie effect kind of starts creeping in when we're here very late.

People even get a little edgy. So combining INF and parks could present a hefty agenda. playful at times, too, but maybe not as heavy as that finance and HR idea. Six committees may not be the magic number, but if we want to downsize, we could look at five as a more workable and equitable option. Instead of a 33% reduction in committees, we could be reduced by 17%. With 11 alders distributed among 25 seats instead of 20 seats, we'd have a good mix of newcomers and experienced alders without relegating any alders to one seat for whatever reason. And the reasons for their exclusion would likely come into question. Now, I'm certainly at this point I'm not making a motion to go to five committees, but it is possible thing we might discuss in the future. Right now, there's no urgent need to act on this. we do well to give it time for good evaluation as has been suggested uh notably by Alder Larson and uh let's let this go and uh stick with our existing structure until we've had time to really look at this and contemplate a change in the future. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Neil. Uh the next person to speak would be Alder Heni.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So, uh, similar to Mayor Denny, um, I had done research over the last week, uh, to look at comparable cities just to get some examples. Um, in truth, namely due to the fact that those who detracted from the, um, move to four committees from six. Um, I I genuinely wanted to hear arguments to keep the structure as is. And I heard resoundingly uh, two things. One, we've always done this is this way. It works. Don't change it. And two, one that I repudiate emphatically, uh, if Mayor Denny is in support of it, I'm against it. I'm going to be honest. It's that same repudiation, I believe, put me in this chair, uh, in this position, uh, as alderperson for district 7. I don't believe partisan politics have any place in city hall. Um and the idea that we would reject something simply because of the person who is recommending it is ridiculous. Um so in uh in light of what Mayor Denny had brought up, I won't reiterate only to say that um similarly, not only do these cities have our population size, they actually none of them uh even exceed seven alders uh per per municipality. Uh most of at most they have seven. So you know they are governing with lesson doing a fine job all the same. One of the things that really frustrated me about the way in which we approached this last week was the idea that we felt it was too short notice to consider such a change to council rules and to the structure of our committee. You know our committees as a whole for the standing committees. Um, why on earth at the beginning of every election cycle do we go through the process of approving the rules if not to review and see what

could be changed and what should be changed, what might need to be changed on that 2-year cycle basis. Um, one of the things that has uh has frustrated constituents of mine and and conversations that I had and I had people who spoke in favor of and people who spoke uh in disagreement with the um restructuring of our committees, but one of the things that all of them resoundingly uh agreed upon is that something and it's different it's a different tangible thing for each person, but something about this city council structure needs to change because the direction we've been heading um and the processes as they are in place um have not actually been in uh our residents best interests. Um obviously there's many things that go into that. Um I have my own uh my own bone to pick with uh some of the financial decisions this council has made historically. Um, but I do want to say that in conversations with um with department heads that there was more department heads that I heard from than less. In fact, I had a couple that said that they really would take it either way. Um, but I did have uh quite a few department heads who mentioned that the need to go and present to multiple committees is is a bit of a burden. Having to go to meeting after meeting after meeting in order to get something as simple as a new employee approved um or brought on to staff. Um I personally feel that in his administrative duties, the mayor is in the best position to speak for the state of city hall. um and the ways in which it's structured and the efficiencies that um could benefit city business. Um and having heard from, you know, having heard from the staff um downline from

Mayor Denny who um are recommending this, I truly have not heard a good enough reason other than we shouldn't make this change because we we we weren't expecting it and it's not the way that we've done things. Those aren't those aren't arguments in my opinion and they're they're not grounds for me to change my decision. Um, having heard from um having heard from department heads, having heard from our mayor, um I believe that I've talked to the individuals who are most informed on this issue, um and the majority are in favor that I've talked to are in favor of uh this change. So, I would ask all of you to to strongly consider that. Um I'm very eager to hear everyone's thoughts. Um, and thank you for giving me the time to share mine.

Thank you for your comments and your opinions. Uh, next to speak would be Alder Alder Drew. It's easier than saying your last name. Swiskowski. Swissowski. Thank you.

Yep. So, I maybe I'm more of a positive person uh speaking right now. Uh I had the pleasure of going around to the staff this week um over the last 5 days and talking to I think I spoke to about 17 members of staff and about four or five directors or managers and I asked all of them about this and the general perception that I got was quite similar to Alder Hanky Hani um what he uh said and I personally uh concur and object a bit with what everyone else has said so far But one thing that if we if we change the structure, great. If we don't, great. Whatever happens happens. It sounds like this would introduce some more efficiency. Um, a lot of people were concerned about agenda construction for these meetings and how long the agendas could become. Um I think something some a cautionary note that we should go if we go forward with four a structure of four is to assemble the agendas in such a way that certain people could leave meetings early or possibly attend later or um not have to have members of their staff sitting behind them as you know backup or a resource when they're going to be presenting or discussing things. um just being mindful of people's time. That was one thing that a lot of staff reflected to me is that they don't want to be sitting in meetings forever if they're not actually necessary for the meetings. Um and likewise, if there's a seven, six committees, seven committees, whatever we're going to call it, yeah, with with or without this executive one. Um similarly to be careful with agenda planning so that if somebody has to as just uh described go from one committee to another to another to another to present something that that's not very

efficient and it actually is wasting a lot of staff time. Um so that's all I wanted to say is that uh the staff gave me those points and I just want to reflect those back into the record. Thanks. Thank you for your comments. Next, uh, I would like to recognize Alder Martins.

Uh, thank you. And, um, we've had, so far we've had a lot of, um, really interesting discussion. And I just want to kind of start out with, uh, something that a former alder always said is that work is done in the committees. And that's where the bread and butter of our common council lies is in our is in our committee work. And when we get to the common council meetings, it should be, you know, all of all of the all of the heavy lifting should be done and it's just um it it you get you should be to the point of of yay or nay uh in in essence. Uh and that's that's the way our council has been been structured and um that's the way we've operated for I don't know how many years. I think re, you know, um I I think our current six committee structure goes back to the 1980s um at least when the you know that but that was about the time when the economic development committee was was added to the the list of standing committees. Um, I do have concerns, you know, um, when when we talk about reducing the number of committees, I really do have concerns about the size of the agenda and the amount of time it's going to take to get through these agenda items. Uh, in particular, the finance emerging of the finance and the human resources committee. Uh, those are two very important committees. I got a I got a feeling that a lot of people um either either discredit or don't really think about the full implications of what human resources does and why it is such a important committee for for the city. I know other uh I know Marathon County they their HR and finance is combined into one one committee and their and their meetings are large. They're they're ownorous in in in the

length of time it takes to get work done. And I I got a feeling and and I just don't want to see, you know, these these two-hour marathon sessions every two weeks in order to get through um finance issues and or HR issues on top of it. um HR may not, you know, sometimes with human resources things, you know, can can be a little bit lighter and, you know, maybe if if if that was scaled back to six meetings a year with extra meetings peppered in when it when it needs to be, that would probably work, you know, really well for the committee if if you're if you're looking about increasing efficiency. And I think um I I think that would be you know uh a very workable solution. You know probably with um with infrastructure and parks you know maybe there's not maybe we don't have enough business to have parks 12 times a year and um six meetings a year would be sufficient in order to handle all of that that parks um that parks duty. Um, but you would still have the ability to work through the issues in a committee and as Alder Watson said, have that lens that focus on the core items of of those of those issues. Uh, for example, for HR, um, you know, when we're talking about adding a adding a staff person, that's an important that's an important decision. uh when it comes to HR, you know, we're talking about job description. We're talking about the scope. Uh we're talking about, you know, the the the pay grades and the other classifications. When that item goes to HR, now we're talking about, well, how are we going to pay for this person? And it it it totally puts you in a different mindset. And I I think it's good in order to have those two separate groups looking at this issue, you know, thinking about the thinking about the

personnel portion of the issue and then switching to the financial portion of the issue without having to mix the two all in one meeting where I I I feel like it's it's it's just going to get a little scrambled up. um add because you know we're you know we may know we may know the importance of why we're adding a staff person but then you know getting to finance and we got to talk about well how important really is it you know in on a financial standpoint or or how can how can we afford it? How how can we how can we fit this into our budget? Um, and which brings me, you know, multiple, you know, we were talking about multiple meetings, and I think a great example of this famously is what, um, what our fire chief did in order to champion adding our 12 uh, firefighters to the to the um, to the department. I don't know how many meetings he went to uh between public health and safety, human resources and finance, but it was it was a it was a good number and all of those meetings were very valuable. And at each and every one of those meetings, the chief focused on a different aspect of why we needed these firefighters. And I I think it it it really added a certain breadth of to the conversation and it made us it made it made it feel more whole uh and more more holistic. And each of our each of our our committees had that buy in for the entire process. So when it came time getting these getting this decision to the common council, everybody I think I think just about everybody on the council because they they they it it touched them in in a different way. Be it you know be it their their work on their individual committees made a difference in that decision in order to move that forward um the that that

staffing adjustment forward. So, um I'm I'm I'm kind of I I I you know um if if we need to reduce things, I'm I'm kind of um uh receptive to Alder Neil's um you know of um suggestion of maybe dropping to five committees merging parks and infrastructure, but I really think that you know we we got we got to think really hard about HR and finance. I've been on both those committees for a very long time and I I I see the intricacies that we deal with on those committees and um I think we got to think about that, you know, if do we really want to merge those two committees together. So, thank you.

Thank you, Alder Martins. Uh I'd like to recognize Alder Chern now.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a few ideas that um weren't really presented. Uh I did too talk to a number of directors um six of them actually and kind of got in a mixed bag. Uh some said, "Yep, let's let's do some combination. Let's make this more efficient." Some were okay either way. I did not get a no. Uh, one of my thoughts here is we're sitting here and we're saying, well, we can do HR once a quarter or every other month. I think that the directors need to be involved in this decision-making process on how often they feel committees should meet because they are the ones that are bringing the agendas to the committees. So I don't think it's our place to say HR meets once per quarter or infrastructure meets once every two months. I think that those decisions should be made with the director of that department. Um and that should be made I guess together because again I don't feel that we should be telling them what's important enough to be brought up. we do have a lot of duplication um because so many things go from ED or infrastructure then to finance and then to um the council comman council as a whole. Um so you know I don't know how we alleviate that or um lighten that. I I do like Alder Neil's suggestion. Um I think too we have to look at the pairings a little closer. I I am in

favor of combining some but not necessarily the way uh Mayor Denny had suggested and after talking to some of the directors I I understand their dispositions on this and that's why I really think that we need to involve the directors of these departments when making these decisions because ultimately they're putting in a lot of work. Uh, another thing is we're going to see a whole lot of suspension of the rules because if we're doing a meeting, say every other month for one department, they're going to be bringing things forward to suspend the rules because they haven't been on a monthly basis for per se. So, I do see that increasing, which um to me who probably votes no on suspension of the rules 95% of the time would be um this rule was put in place and is almost never followed. So, that would be problematic for me. But, um regardless of what happens here, I do like Alder Neil's idea. I do think that the directors should be involved in this decision on how often they feel that they should meet and who they feel would be a proper pairing if their department is not done individually because I'm kind of at a loss with parks and infrastructure and uh so was um Mr. Blovski when we talked. Um, parks. My concern with parks is it's only part of the city. Parker Parks is city and county. So, I don't know how that can be rolled in with infrastructure. Um, infrastructure and parks have very little that um combines. You know, infrastructure is

looking at things that parks isn't looking at. So, um, and uh, Mr. Wasowski and I did talk about that, but um again, I don't think this decision can be made about without the director's input. Rather than are you in favor of this or not, I think looking at who they're paired with and how often they feel they need to be meeting needs to be taken under consideration before any decision is made. Thank you. Thank you, Alder Chney. Uh Alder Larrison.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair. Um gosh, so many good stuff has been said about this already. Uh one of the things that I I felt that, you know, as for what Alder Watson said, you know, this to me I thought was kind of an ambush on us last week. You know, it was totally brought to us by surprise. And uh I I have yet to see anything in any kind of packet on this, you know. Well, I mean, here we're talking about stuff that we haven't even seen any ands, ifs, what'ss, or buts. I mean, I haven't seen anything that that says that this these committees are burdensome, redundant, and ineffective. And and I haven't seen ways how this new system that's proposed is going to uh cancel those issues. Um I'm I'm very much concerned about uh uh when we're changing um city governance governance we should not be acting swiftly. We have uh a procedure we follow and proper process we should follow and and that is as as Alder Martin said do the work at the committees bring it to the committees. Um, I'm I'm I'm uh not real uh receptive to sponding to res to suspending rule 11A on this because if we suspend rule 11A, then we're suspending our our legal advice and uh that's the way I interpret it anyway. Um because uh 11A is about is is about the legal stuff and maybe I'm wrong but but that's how I interpret it. I I think uh we should have a a committee at the whole meeting on this. And I also said that I I don't

think that this is um uh fair to our our new colleagues here who have yet to even sit in through a standing committee meeting to they don't even know how how it works. And so I I'm not for or against us. I just haven't seen enough to to do this. And and I would like to see proper uh procedure followed. Thank you. Thank you, Alder Larson. Uh, Alder Lukans, we'd like to hear from you next.

Oh, okay.

Thank you. Um, so I agree that a lot good has been said. Um, I had something prepared. Um, so if anything's repetitive, please forgive me, but I'm just going to read this. Um I I also did my research. I did talk with some um staff and I will say um I feel it's a bit presumptuous to um say that you know that um one believes that if the the that person's colleagues uh have the feeling that if Mayor Dine is for this we're against this because it's presumptuous because especially um when you haven't worked with the rest of the council members, you really don't know what um what their reasons are. And it is our positions and our responsibility as council members to t to look at things and snarky remarks about the person that you won over just doesn't make a lot of friends. So, I'm I'm really hoping we can all work together on this council. Not a good way to start out. So, um I want to share some thoughts on the proposal before us tonight to reduce our standing committees from 6 to 4. First, I want to acknowledge that Mayor Deny's goals of reducing redundancy and making s more efficient are goals we all share. That common ground matters and I want to name it clearly at the outset, but I believe we already have the tools to address those concerns without changing our committee structure. If the same issue needs to go to multiple

committees, we can hold a joint session. Staff presents once problem solved. And I I just want to reiterate, I wrote this before the discussion, so you know, maybe some of this will change, but I still want to um finish reading this. If a committee has nothing on its agenda for a month, we cancel the meeting. No meeting required. And no elder is required to attend meetings of committees they do not serve on. Every meeting is recorded and livereamed. Minutes are published. any alder or any resident can follow along without being physically present. These tools are available right now tonight without restructuring anything. I also want to note that when council members were asked to list the committees they wanted to serve on at the start of both the 2022 24 term and this one, some members even requested more assignments and they they received not fewer. So you know some may wish to serve on more and you know others may not. So um but what would consolidation mean for residents? So for residents fewer committees means more topics bundled into each agenda as some have noted here. That makes it harder for residents to find and track issues that affect their neighborhoods. It also means fewer alders seated at the table for every any given policy area. Fewer districts with a direct voice before items reach this full body for a vote. I also want to provide some context about the larger conversation this proposal fits into. Mayor Denny has proposed hiring a city administrator since 2022 and publicly expressed support for a full city manager form of government in 2025. Those are two very different things and the difference matters enormously for

every resident in this room and across the city. Under the administrator model, WASA keeps its elected mayor. The council retains oversight authority over the administrator. Residents continue to vote for their mayor. Accountability remains with elected officials. Under the full city manager form allowed under chapter 64 of Wisconsin statutes, the elected mayor position is eliminated entirely. Wasa residents would no longer vote for a mayor. That is not a criticism of either option. Both exist in Wisconsin cities. both have genuine supporters and legitimate argu arguments in their favor. But a decision of that magnitude, one that would permanently change who residents vote for and how this city is governed, is exactly the kind of decision that deserves a full open resident driven conversation before anything moves forward. I raise it tonight not to oppose any particular direction but to ask a straightforward question on behalf of residents. If that conversation is coming, shouldn't residents be part of it from the beginning before structural changes are made that may make it harder to course correct later. This council has also established a clear standard when it comes to suspending our rules. On July 9th, 2024, this body voted or the the former body voted 6 to5 to block a rule suspension for a proposal that had not been vetted by committee. Members stated explicitly, and I quote, "Our rules require resolutions put before us be vetted by our standing committees for a reason. There is research that is required. You need facts. You need figures. You need data. That standard was reaffirmed at our

February 11th, March 10th, and March 24th, 2026 meetings. And just as Holder Tyranny noted tonight, too, it should apply here as well. I also want to recognize something genuinely positive. This council and this mayor have both championed meaningful public engagement on the redevelopment of 1300 Cleveland Avenue, a standing room only public input session, a survey of 98 residents, and a second listening session still planned that reflects a shared commitment to resident input that I believe every member of this council holds genuinely. I simply ask that we apply that same standard here. A change to how this council deliberates affects all 40,000 WA was residents across all 11 districts. It deserves the same deliberate resident inclusive process. But I want to close with what I believe matters most tonight. The most pressing responsibility before this council is not the structure of our committees in my opinion. It is affordability. Homeowners are carrying a growing property tax burden. Renters feel it, too. When property taxes rise, rents follow. Young families trying to build a life in Wasa need a city government focused on making that possible. And our elderly residents on fixed incomes can least afford any increase in their cost of living. This council should be meeting urgently and regularly to find new revenue sources so that property taxes are not the only tool we have. That work is overdue. The question of committee consolidation is one we can take up thoughtfully with full public input and a committee of the whole discussion during this term, but I don't believe there is urgency that requires deciding it tonight.

Excuse me, Alder Lucans. I think it's important that we stick to the uh topic where you seem to be discussing many issues. If you could Can I finish? I have like three sentences. All right. Because I I have been talking about the but again what is urgent is affordability. What is urgent is fiscal sustainability. What is urgent is honoring the trust that every WA was resident placed in us when they voted. That is where energy belongs and that is where I'm committed to focusing mine. Thank you. Thank you Alder Lucans. Um Alder True Blood.

Thank you Madam Chair. Uh, I also went through pages and pages of minutes and watched hours and hours of committee meetings. Um, and I appreciate I have not sat on a committee. However, in this council, I have sat on many committees in other locations. So, I feel as though I have uh a grasp on the situation as it were. It it sounds very redundant everything that's being said. It's it's all very interesting. Uh and I'm sure if ghosts from council's past could come forward, they would all many of them would hear their own words echoed because they're in the minutes. If we go back to when the executive committee was founded in 2022 in April of 2022 during the or during the um uh orientation meeting during the setup meeting some of these very same arguments were made the executive committee was established to ensure efficiency. It did not. We have done many things to ensure efficiency arguments about um so in um let's see when was this April of 2022 at the April 19th meeting a former a former former it's a new tongue I can't do a thing with it. former members said uh commented on how nearly everything that goes before the HR committee goes before the budget uh the finance committee because it has budget implications. So when we're doing things like that, if we were a business, we'd be talking about concerns of siloing. We are we are isolating ideas. We we are we are specializing so much we get nothing done. So it is time to review and the

beginning of a of an adventure, the beginning of a new council is the time to make these changes. And if we cannot make a minor change and I I say minor because who do the committees affect? The committees refer to the council whether they agree or not with the motion it still comes before the council if it's referred to the council. So the committee is only advising. The committee can make no motion. It still has to come before the council. We still have to review that. And since 2024, 90% of the time, 90% of the agendas have a motion to suspend the rules. So it seems a mantra of this city council to suspend the rules on a regular basis anyway. And uh and I will point out there are at least four meetings since April of 2024 where minutes do not appear on the website which needs to be addressed. However, the committees serve the council. So if we can honestly say that six committees are serving the council and through the council serving the citizens, then we should keep six. If they're not, we need to collapse these silos, become more efficient in what we're doing as a council, and serve our citizens better. The citizens are looking for change. This is really a minor change. The bigger change is when we're going to have to face budgets where we have to explain to the citizens, we're charging you two times the national average in taxes, and are you really getting two times the service back from the council? They elected us to make change. This is a good starting point.

Thank you, Alder Troub. Uh, I'd like to recognize Alder Slotski next.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, as was pointed out by Alder Larson, there's a number of us here who are new to the council and have not yet sat on a standing committee. So, I've been listening and and taking notes here as if I were sitting in a committee. Um, the various points that are being raised and it it seems to me that there are two main competing points. The first being, as was raised by Alder Watson, that different committees look at various issues through different lenses and it's important to come to those issues with those lenses. And the second being that we don't want to overburden the staff who have to come and and uh talk and explain to the committees. my concern and and I take uh older True Blood's point about siloing and the concern about siloing, but I would raise a counter concern about what will happen if we combine committees and the different concerns that need to be addressed with say finance and human resources. um what happens? Are those going are those concerns going to be addressed? And if they're not, uh is it because one lens is taking over? Um, my main concern being that the financial lens is going to overshadow other concerns that are important to our constituents. And my main concern being that if those are not even addressed in committee because nobody wants a big

monstrous marathon session. And so we just talk about what we think is most important and or what staff think are most important and certain questions are not asked or certain concerns are not addressed. That's where um I come to my concern and I would like to do a little more talking with the staff and the department heads about how they think that those competing concerns of staff efficiency um in not having to go to multiple committee meetings versus staff efficiency and not having to sit through and um conduct a monster long marathon session to a joint committee. Um, I'd really like to talk to them a little bit more and kind of sus out what we think that balancing act where we think we should come down on that. I haven't heard anything tonight that makes me believe that this is an urgent matter that needs to be addressed without bubbling up through committee the way it normally would without those discussions and those um uh considerations of competing uh values and interests. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Slowski. Um, Alder Heni, did you wish to speak again? I wasn't sure if we could speak again. Is that allowed? Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so first thing I wanted to clarify just to ensure that we get off on the uh right foot um to the older person from district 1. Uh the comment that I had made about if Denny's for it, we're against it. Um that was a direct quote from one of my constituents. I didn't mean for anyone at the council to take that as a personal attack. Sorry. Sorry, Madam Chair.

Sorry, Madam Chair. I want to clarify that I had heard from a constituent following our meeting last week who mentioned to me if Mayor Denny is for something, I want you to know that I'm against it. That was one of my residents who stated that. I did not hear that from a member of this council and and therefore was not intending it to be that way. I was actually very grateful to hear from my fellow members of the council that they echo a repudiation of those beliefs. Um, one of the things that I do want to say, uh, in in reference to, uh, some of the arguments that were brought up, um, one one argument that I heard, uh, just a while ago, um, was that much of the meat and the work of what needs to be done, uh, in terms of what the committee uh, brings to the council and thereby the the council then approves or denies happens within those committee meetings. I would I would very much like to know in in inquiry um whether or not there's a a formal statute that's set above uh this this council's ability to change rules around how many people sit on each um each committee. I I think a reduction of of committees and then I guess my assumption would be you know my question would be what what changes could we make to have more representation of each council member on those uh reduced committees so you have more council members on each committee. I don't know if that's something where we have a hierarchy of state statutes that say that that's not allowed or if that's a city ordinance that we could change to ensure that more eyes, not less, are seeing the business that the city is is looking through and discussing. Um, I would ask after my time, uh, Vinnie, if you don't mind clarifying that for me, if you if you happen to know or or see where that sits, if we would be able to change the rule on how many council members can sit on the committees, um, if we were to go from six to four, my assumption would be we get more

representation, not less, from the council as a whole. Maybe I'm incorrect on that, as you know, as as the rules are laid out. Um, getting back though to the argument that was made, there was there was uh there was talk about well the meat the meat of of the discussion of of what we do happens in these committee meetings. And so by the time we get to the council, it's just a formal do we approve it or or do we not? Um, I actually think that's quite worrisome, especially when we talk about two, three, maybe four individuals of an 11 person council being seated on a committee that then brings it to the whole. Um, there were a few uh different times where on the grounds of well, the committee uh unanimously supports this, the council should do in turn the same. Um, that that really concerns me. I think I think the the need to be able to have more oversight, not less, by more eyes on the council, not less, is actually one of the things that interests me about the committees. Um, in truth, if we had a reduction of the number of committees, I would I would advocate for and I hope you would join me in wanting to make sure we could have more council members um, not less, represented on those uh, those committees. I think it's behoo of all of us for not three of us to make decisions for the 11 on what does or doesn't uh make it through committee in an HR meeting or a finance meeting. Uh but more of us to have an opinion or or say on that. Um you know three of us don't represent 40,000 people 11 of us do. Um and I think it's really important for us to see the merits of having more eyes on the issues at hand than less. Um, so again, Vinnie, I don't know if you could speak to that um by chance in regards to whether or not there's a state statute that says that we have a limitation on the number of committee members we can have or is that something

where we are allowed to set that as a city? And I I yield. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Uh Vinnie, do you have any information to provide to him? So, I mean, I'll just start by saying so committees are creatures of the city itself. There's no statutes governing them. You know, you can make them, you can format them and name them whatever you want, whatever your little heart desires. Um, the only issue with uh increasing the number of council members on the uh committees is that then you kind of run into quorum issues. Um, I mean, I guess you could add a disclaimer. you know, there might be a um meeting a quorum of the city council, but um it just kind of becomes a little finicky because obviously these committees are discussing uh city business that will eventually come before the city council and then it's like you kind of see what the

Yeah. Yeah. Um Alder Tierney, did you wish to speak again? Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I'm just wondering because we do have a number of directors here if it would be possible to ask them if any of them have any comments towards this at this time. Um, and invite them up to the podium if they do have a comment since this directly affects each and every department. Thank you. If any of them want to be brave, I'm certainly open to that. If there's no objection from the council,

somebody's madam chair, our police chief is always ready to speak to us. Thank you, Matt.

First off, I I would just say that there's been a lot of conversation about city staff and we had a conversation about this specific issue at the mayor's last staff meeting. And one of the things that's really important to recognize is we are paid to serve the community. We're paid to serve this council. And if you need us here at six committee meetings, we're going to come to six committee meetings. I think it's also fair to say we don't want to go to six committee meetings cuz that's six committee meetings and some of them meet multiple times a month. um we can all identify numerous times in which we give the exact same presentation to two three um counting the final council meeting sometimes four times um and it feels a little bit like groundhog day. Um what I think we're all very pleased with is there was a very respectful robust discussion that numerous ideas have come up. I don't think all of the potential ideas. I have read comments in the paper and letters to the editor and discussions about committee of the whole um potentially these Matt's opinion. I didn't have the vote of all my fellow members, but if I know I'm going to have to go to three committees in the council, if you want to hold a committee of the whole occasionally so we can just take it all at once, that that saves giving the same presentation three times. Um, so I think there are things we should be striving to do. Um, I think I can speak for the department heads like we don't always agree on exactly how this should work, but we all agree we can be better at this and we should always be striving to improve how we serve. Um, your time is important, our time's important. Um, and I think we agree we can do better. When we took kind of a a vote at the table, which was does anyone disagree with changing committee structures? Um, speak now or

forever, hold your peace. um nobody spoke and so that was us saying we encourage um at a minimum a hard look at this and and we think it's worthwhile and I think we're appreciative of the council's discussion on this because it impacts you and impacts us and most importantly it impacts the business for the city and the community. Thank you. Thank you Chief Barnes. Are there any other department heads who would like to address the council this evening? Madam Chair, could I call a point of order? What is your

I guess my point of order is is, you know, um and and why why why why don't we have our our department heads and stuff put stuff down in writing so we can see it in front of us so we can make an educated decision on this in the future perhaps by putting it in a packet, you know, for upcoming meeting. And I would also like to uh uh table this and refer this to the make a motion to table this and refer this to the rules committee.

Um I don't believe I the point of order is well taken. Is it Madame Chair, then I would rather Larson, the point of order is not well taken. Well, then I'll then I'll make the objection to consideration of the question.

Calling the question. No, I'm objection to the consideration of the question. I got it directly from the mayor's the lawyer attorney's office.

I think I need more clarification. What do you feel is inappropriate, Alder Larson? Well, I I believe we've we're going to we're going to we can beat this up beat this up beat this up all night long and we're and that's why I I'm calling the objection to the consideration of the question. Um no second is is needed. Um um I I I've asked this from um from the city attorney's office and I would like to t make a motion to table this and refer it to the rules committee for when we have proper data and stuff in front of us to examine.

Um I'd like um attorney Bonini Bonino to speak on this please. So um objection to consideration is when uh essentially I guess one of you think that the uh topic is irrelevant or inappropriate and is meant to uh end the discussion on the or sort of end the conversation on the topic. Um I I guess just what I I guess just identifying what conversation you want to essentially end. Well, then then let me just let me just um take all that back and I'll I'll just uh make a motion to table and refer the rules to the committee table and refer it to the rules committee. People are going to speak here.

There there is already a motion on the floor, Alder Larson. It was the motion I believe that Alder Denny made. Who? He said there was a motion on the floor already.

Point of point of order. If I'm remembering correctly, the motion currently on the floor was made by Alder Tierney and that was seconded by myself. I believe that's still what is being discussed. Find that motion again, please. I if I the the motion that I have is actually um uh made by you, Alder Heni, and seconded by Alder Tierney just to approve that the ordinance as it sits on the table. And then I guess I would ask Alder Larson, is that a motion to table this or a motion to post or a motion to refer this ordinance to the rules review committee?

It's a it's a motion to refer to refer this to the rules review committee. Excuse me. Does that mean that the people who are speaking have no right to speak anymore? Hasn't been a second yet. All right. There is

All right. Uh, Alder Heni, your point is well taken. There is a motion on the floor. Um, I believe that Alder Larson has the ability to amend that motion. Yes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Then I would like to amend the motion to refer this to the rules committee after everybody's. Come on. Is there a second to that motion? Don't. Alder Watson. Jesus Christ.

All right. Any discussion? I was on the floor and um I had asked that we entertain uh discussion from any of the directors that were willing to talk. Are we not going to finish that or am I my my time on the floor is cut? Point point of order, Madam Chair. Yes, Alder. Yes, Mayor.

So, so the the the motion from Larson was a continuation of of his original point of order and his and he morphed that into a motion to table. He was not recognized for that motion to table. So, Alder Alder Tyranny was still uh had the floor and that's not an interruptible uh motion. You can't motion. You can't move to table something when somebody else has the floor. When you get to speak, you can make that motion.

When they allow you to speak, when they're calling you to speak, then you can make that motion. Yeah. Referring the main motion to the Yeah. But you have to say that you have to refer the main motion to the Yeah. I mean, it's just Well, that's what you wanted to do, right? Yeah. We're just be just beating us up. beating us up and we're not going to be able to vote on anything anyway. So, well, and yeah, okay, citizens the right to

Okay, I think we have this straight and I apologize for all the confusion, but I'm learning and this has become quite complex. Um, Mayor Denny's point of order is well taken. Alder Tierney has the floor and we will go back to asking if any other directors would like to speak. And again, I apologize. I do as well.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, a agree with Chief Barnes on that and I agree there's always room for efficiencies when we're working through things. There's a number of great things that were brought up. I did want to bring up one thing in terms of efficiency in terms of process and that was something I brought to Mayor Danny. It's included in the proposed ordinance in rule six item B filing in regards to the so-called 7-day rule. So to provide an example, when we're running our ED meetings, those are held on the first Monday of each month. At 4:00 on that day, I'm expected to have my resolutions in for whatever that meeting is going to produce for the council on the second Tuesday. That meeting takes place at 5:30. So, we're trying to predict as best we can what the outcome from the committee is going to be so that we can efficiently move that business of the city forward to the following week. My request and what's in the ordinance is moving that to 6 days. Now, the public and council receives the agenda on the Wednesday as well. So, this would be consistent with that and that the resolution agenda would be provided 6 days before your council meeting and just provides better efficiency so we don't have to go back do administrative work to correct anything that happens at that meeting. So, thank you.

Thank you. And I'll have Cody address this.

Uh, yes. Um, so in this amendment, um, I would or what's presented, um, as it currently stands, it is not workable because the that would require items to be due to the clerk's office at the exact same time I am required to put the packet out. So what in effect what would happen would be at 4:30 at the end of close I would get all those resolutions and then at 4:30 at the end of close I would also have to get all the resolutions put it into the packet and then send it out. I think um a more appropriate thing would be to still have it at the 6 days cuz I understand that that's an issue um and have it at uh 10:00 a.m. if that works. So then um how that would work is um the deadline would be 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday and then I would have till the end of the day to get that packet distributed out if that would work.

10:00 a.m. on the sixth day. Correct. Right. You got me down to speak. You got me down to speak. Yeah. Are there any other directors that wish to speak? Yeah, I did. Director Lynman.

Hi. Good evening. Um I think a lot of what Matt had talked about um I I concur with. We're always looking for different ways to make improvements whether we are doing joint meetings um bringing everybody together. I I do think that there there are some considerations where the committee of the whole uh should be considered more often. um you know when we talk about going from one committee to another to a third committee a lot of those committees the same people are on them right so we're not touching all of the council members and so um in our mind that is inefficient we're talking to the same people so if we're doing three committees in the council we're talking to those same people four times um I am in agreement with reducing the number of standing committees I support it uh from my perspective um with within the department. So um I'm happy to talk with any one of you uh talk through that um answer any questions that you have. But uh I appreciate the opportunity. Thanks.

Thank you. Uh any anyone else?

Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to talk and I appreciate the gravity that's given to human resources. um that's much appreciated um for me. I do also appreciate the elders who did reach out to me to gather some information and from my perspective the heavy lifting for me is done before the HR committee meeting. So, I have an entire city of employees that I am doing just as you have done with me where I'm having meetings and I'm building relationships and I'm gathering data and information that I need to bring to my committee and then therefore bring to everybody as a whole. So for me, I love the idea that Alder Watson had brought up where maybe it is quarterly. Maybe we look at it differently um the lens difference from the work that I do um and the work that um director Fifick might be doing. So I'm not I'm not married either way to a change or to keep it the same. It it matters not to me. Um, so whatever you decide is totally fine with me. Thank you.

All right. If there are no other directors, oh, Randy, go ahead. Yeah, I just wanted to respond to the clerk's comment about time of day and everything, and I think that's great for standard operating procedures, but I don't think that we typically include uh times in our ordinance in terms of when we would be publishing something. I think most of everything we have is ti tied to the number of days. Um, obviously, we want to have things done and having standard operating procedures in there in terms of when things are due from a staff perspective is great. It allows everybody's life a lot easier. Nobody wants to be here past 4:30. Um especially as we're trying to um get everything out in a timely manner, but I I don't think it's necessary to have that time commitment in there creating that deadline in place when um we don't do that I'm aware of for anything else. I don't know if Vinnie if you have any other examples where we're tying something to a specific time of day. Sorry to put you on the spot.

Go ahead, Vinnie. I mean, not that I'm aware of, but I'll just add that. Um, I mean, you know, these are just the uh standing rules, so you can sort of format them however you want. Cody, did you wish to address any of that? Did you have any comments? All right. Thank you. Anyone else? Going, going, gone. Okay. Uh, next to speak we have Alder Watson.

Thank you. Um, so I I was if Well, I guess I want to call the question. Um, but I know that everybody in the queue is going to be able to speak for our rules, right? So, um, and I don't know if I can talk before I call the question. Backing up. Um, so I want to talk just a second. Um if if like calling the question going through so this is just one potential amendment afterwards can I then also go into amendments or is that something we would like review at a rules review because I have about I don't know a half dozen yeah why not it's fun so can I make those after can I make the the other amendments that I want to make with all these other changes after we vote on it? Do I make them after then? Or do I make it within the amendment? Like should I nestle a whole bunch of amendments in this?

No, you call a question to a separate motion. I could. So if I call the question here, this will get voted on and then I can amend or add amendments later. Um, so you want to make amendments to the standing rules. So then you'd just uh move to amend the motion to add whatever. Okay. Yeah.

Cool. So I I would move to amend um let's start. Okay. So I would move to amend rule one of a regular meetings number one. I'd like to remove the second and third fourth Tuesday of every month as standard meeting days. I think we should be able to like create new standard meeting days. Second amendment I would like on rule six. I don't know. Personally, I sort of think it would be nice to add a time frame along the lines of what the clerk was saying. Rule six, I think it should be noon on the sixth day.

This is going to be kind of It is going to be nice. I like it. She has to make her motion. I'm finishing making my amendment. Oh, about the noon thing. Mhm.

I mean, we want to talk about the rules. Rule 7A. Are you finished with your amendment? No. Actually, I would like to also add to rule eight for council president a C um discussing scheduling of a retreat requirement for a retreat. I'm sorry. Rule eight add C that the council president schedules a retreat within the first month.

Okay. And then um I would also like to add on rule one E that talks about holding a cow twice a year. So that's another special meeting. It's E A Denny and I are both keeping track. Can you repeat that? One E. One E would be um require a cow scheduled twice a year with with the agenda. Is that under rule one?

Yeah. So add an E. So it would be cow required twice a year with agenda items sent from elders and citizens to fill the agenda. The agenda would be created by council president and clerk to be set to take place for about an like to set the agenda so it fits into the meeting time. Okay. Have you concluded, Alder Watson? Uh oh. Yes. Um rule 1B. Can you um when it's a special meeting number one, the mayor calls a special meeting. I personally would like to strike or left at their usual abode. I don't know, it just sounds really creepy. Um, so if we could just put it in as you telephone voicemail and email to their their address. It's important. I think that's a good thing. Um, during business hours and I guess like I do want to do an amendment, but maybe you guys can think about it. Um, to like piggyback on Alder Tyranny, she always I mean like we do suspend the rules every freaking meeting. So is there a way I mean these are our rules. So why do we suspend the rules for our rules that we make? So um one of the ideas I sort of had about rule 20 and 21 was to require explanation of why the rules are suspended. Um so like is it because I mean the the the mayor would have to like say so maybe add in in rule 20 expressing why the rule is to be suspended because maybe then we can start collecting information on why we're suspending them all the time and change the rules. So that's my final one.

Alder Watson, would you like to make these amendments subject to attorney review so that he can I would absolutely love to do that. Thank you, Madam Chair. Would we address uh would if if someone seconded the proposed amendments, would they be taken as a package and voted all at once? I believe so. Yes. Okay. Thank you. I'll second. Okay.

Cody will state the motion to amend. to briefly, very briefly clarify, I have um amend ordinance 020432 as stated by Alder Watson. I know that's not exactly very helpful, but I think um between uh Vinnie and I, we've jotted down those um and I think that would be the best way to instead of putting that all down on here. right now. So, we're going to pause right here. We're going to start a new speaker. Why is it going backwards? What the heck? Does anyone wish to speak on the massive amendment?

Alder Tyranny, just one uh comment. Can you amend a an amendment? Oh my god, I can't talk. What? Stuck on you may speak to that if you'd like. Oh, now we're on consent. Okay, you can make one amendment to a motion to amend. Okay, I'd like to do that, please. Okay,

I must tell you that jumping into this meeting has been a real challenge. Um, okay. I've I've not ever encountered so many issues, but um we'll work through them. My amendment to the amendment uh would be to keep standard meeting days. I don't feel that fluctuation of meeting days is is a good organizational situation. At least not for me. Thank you.

Yeah, that would be rule 1A that Alder Butson proposed. I would like to basically keep it as is. discussion of the motion. What's that? That's a discussion of the motion.

Is there a second on the amend that Alder Hen a second by Alder Heni? Uh, any more discussion? Anyone wants to speak on the amendment? Does does Alder Larson

Uh yes, Madam Chair. I I I really think that this is um too much to too much to devour um with just being out in the sky here and that's why I am not going to support any of this until I see it in front of me and perhaps gone and gone to the rules committee and examined. Um, so we're not doing anything hastily here. Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Alder Lukans.

Um, thank you. Um, Madame Chair, I also, it's a lot for one night. I would like the opportunity to discuss with this with residents before we vote on this on all of this tonight. I would really appreciate us reconvening for a committee of the whole. Um I'm I'm not ready to to vote to approve this tonight because I really really do want to discuss it with residents. So I don't know what that means because I know there are people in the queue. So I you know if I call the question then that cuts them out and I really don't want to do that. So, so if they're in the queue,

but if I call the question, that doesn't postpone it either. No, but right, if I call the question, we'd have to vote on this, right? If I call the question, we have to vote on what's before us, and I don't want to do that. I believe the people who are in the queue have the opportunity to speak even when you call the question. Okay. And well, and I know it's not my turn to speak yet, so I don't know if I And to be clear, the motion right now is the on the floor is the amendment to the amendment. So a call the question right now would be calling the question on that. Yeah.

Mayor D,

just speak briefly on the amendment to keep the standard days. And again, this this is why it it's important that it's subject to uh assistant city attorney review. There is specific uh chapter state statute 62.11 language on when meetings should meet. They are required to be at least once per month and they designate a certain Tuesday of the month unless the council changes it. So that's going to need review before we we monkey with that part of it. Thank you. All right. Is there any further discussion? If not, Cody will read the amendment to the amendment that we will be voting on.

So, yeah, just to reiterate and make sure everyone's uh knows what we're what we're right now. What's on the floor is um Tyranny's amendment to an amendment um to Alder Watson's amendment um which um keeps the second and fourth Tuesday of every month at at 6:30 p.m. Correct. Yep. So, a vote in favor would keep that in um a vote against would uh accept it as it originally was proposed by Alder Watson to remove it. All right, you may vote.

All right, you may vote. Oh, you have to vote. All right, that motion passes 10 to one to remove that item. And now what's before the body is the amendment as presented by Alder Watson without um the change to rule 1 A1. And Cody, just for clarification, that is with attorney review, correct? Correct. So, um, the motion that is now on the floor, let me just get back to it and I can pop that up on the screen. Um, is to amend the ordinance as stated by Alder Watson. I'll add with attorney review. Review. Does that sound Um, a point of question. Um, I swear I listened, Alder Watson, and I took took the notes. Um, so I know what Alder Watson uh amend or wants to amend it to be, but for clarity, would a yes vote also incorporate the proposed changes to decreasing the standing committees from six to four?

I believe that there needs to be clarification for everyone. So, could the full amendment that Alder Watson made be repeated because it was quite extensive?

Go ahead, Vinnie. I just so from my understand the initial motion proposed was the um to amend the rules as provided in the packet. So uh Alder Watson's amendment would be amending the rules with those additional changes to the uh standing committees. Is that clear for everyone? Alder Neil. So in effect, we would also be voting on the proposal to reduce to four committees. Just the amendment. Correct. Just the Yes.

So although I might support Alder Watson's amendments, uh if I voted in favor of them, I'd also be voting in favor of the reduction of committees. I can if you may because that's presented to us in our packet in proposal. So right now it's a motion to amend. There would be a second vote on the whole on on everything depending on what happens with this motion to amend. So there would be there's two more votes yet.

Okay. Thank you. Okay. Is there any further discussion on Alder's?

All right. Alder Drew. Yeah. So just a clarification on one point. You said to introduce a time frame on 6B. I think should we state the time frame like no later than as Cody said 10:30 on the sixth day before the meeting. Is that I think I I had initially proposed noon if that's okay or noon. Yeah. Is that just as long as it stated a time? Is that correct? Should we we should state a time, shouldn't we? if we're going to say it. I believe so. Right, Cody? Doesn't that

And I guess for the clarification, I noon would be 12:00 p.m. That would be the subject of the attorney review. As you said, noon, the attorney would probably turn that into 12 p.m. Any further discussion? So, so as I read number six, even if they don't get it done on on time, those requirements can be waved. So, if they don't get it on on time, what's the result? They just go to the chair, they go to the presiding officer and get it waved. And we do

Yeah. So, um that's a very question. So, what um the standard right now is that if an item is late, the a good example is on tonight's agenda um um prior to the mayor removing that one appointment um the appointment resolution was before the council under suspension of the rules um 6B filing. So, if um a resolution, ordinance, or any other communication gets to the clerk's office after the date, um uh it then automatically goes on suspension of the rules because the council has to decide to suspend the rules to take that item up. Um and then how that also works is um you have that that you know that will happen on anything that's um handed in after Tuesday as the current rules um stand. And then um in theory, anyone could add items to the packet and to the agenda up until the Friday. And then there's a rule that says after that Friday, nothing can be added to the packet. And that would include the agenda as well. So nothing can be added to the agenda or packet after the close of the week. Could I have a followup? Quick quick follow-up question. Um, am I able to ask request a friendly amendment to the motion? Is that would that be allowed

request the friendly amendment if if the motion are in the second degree? Yeah. Okay. So to uh since we're already changing rule six, so if it is not uh submitted by the time, could it then be postponed to the subsequent meeting rather than continually changing the rule or suspending the rules? Could an item not be submitted? If an item is not submitted by the deadline, could it be suspended until the next meeting? Because we do meet every two weeks anyway. So that would be a change to the rules except for in a summer we don't meet.

So I I would request that as a friendly amendment and that would be to uh rule 6B alder.

Thank you. Um I was on the rules committee last year and that was precisely what we had said and what the council had agreed to is that um an item that was not time emergent would go to the next council meeting. However, if something we needed, if we would miss out if it wasn't under suspension of the rules, such as a grant needed, we we need an answer now or um a purchase where we have a contractor coming to us and saying, I will give you this rate, but you have to sign by such and such a date. Those to me are what a suspension of the rule was meant for. if it wasn't um meeting those requirements in the council rules, we had stated that it would wait and unfortunately that's not the way it has gone and um that's what our rules committee had had. That is actually what is in our council rules. Thank you.

Is there any additional discussion? Point of point of order. the uh motioner and the seconder have to accept the friendly amendment before we can continue to accept or not accept the friendly amendment. Do Alder Watson and Alder Tierney accept the friendly amendment? Alder Watson, I don't know. Uh so it would be for removing that last sentence of B. I'm guessing

if for good cause this uh pre-filing is impossible or practical, the council or chairperson of the committee may wave this requirement. You're wanting to remove that.

I would have to say no because then if it is an emergency they would not be able to wave. So, I agree with what uh Alder Tier Tier Tierney said. Thank you. Um the older from the ninth said in that if it was already in the standing rules, I don't see it, but it would be great if somebody could point that out because as was stated, it seems like this was already discussed and voted on. So I will withdraw at this time the friendly amendment and bring it up when we have more information.

All right, the friendly amendment has been withdrawn. Is there any more discussion at all on the amendment of Alder Watson? And if there isn't, I would like Vinnie to summarize that amendment so we can vote on it. So again, this is a motion to amend the original motion to change or to add one E um which will essentially state that a committee of the whole will be held twice a year with the agenda set by uh council members and citizens. Um, oh yeah, in rule uh 1B to strike usual abode. Um, rule six uh B to set it at noon on the sixth day. Um, and then rule 8 to add C uh for the council president to schedule a retreat. And then rule 20 um requiring the explanation for why um we are suspending the rules.

Okay, seeing no further discussion, I believe we're ready to vote on the amendment.

You may vote. That motion passes 9 to2. Now we will be looking back to the ordinance, the original ordinance as amended. And I will have Cody read that

Q ordinance.

All right. We will now uh allow the people in the queue to speak. Alder Lucans, did you wish to speak again?

Yes. Thank you, Madame Chair. Um, and I can make it quick. I just, um, if we're voting on this motion tonight, I will be voting no only because I would like more time. Again, I would like time to discuss this with residents. I would really appreciate um, us putting this on hold for now, giving us some time to think about this, talk with residents. um and then maybe come back together in a committee of the whole so that we can really weigh the pros and cons. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Lupans. Mayor Denny, did you wish to speak again? Thank you, Madam Chair. Sure. And I I apologize. I I expected this to be fairly straightforward. Uh and it's ironic that uh Mayor

Denny, I hope your apology is to me. Indeed, I owe you one a drink maybe. Uh, so it is a little ironic that, you know, this meeting on efficiency has turned into the the longest so far for the term and we're going on 9:00. So, let me see if I can be quick here as well. uh the notion that there was an ambush, you know, I think that's that's disingenuous. But the uh um what's in the what was presented what was presented by me was in the packet and what was presented publicly was far more than any amendment in the past has ever been. Most of as as Alder Watson just demonstrated, we had a motion to amend from the floor. uh we've had Alder Watson and I had a motion to amend from the floor on a previous uh council meeting. So those those are those happen and and as to the delays I really think you know to we should defer and and the I respect new and old alders and I think everyone who was duly elected is able to make decisions on these. We all did when we were first put in on council. So I I think I think we we should respect them. We should respect their their opinion. New or old, I think their opinions matter the same. Uh we as to the why we suspend the rules. We did we did with the advice of the assistant city attorney, we listed specifically which rules we were suspending. We could we I think I indicated why, but we did list them and in the past we didn't list them. They were just listed as suspension of the rules on the previous org meetings. uh as as to Alder Watson and Henkei's points, this is a practical spot to be to be discussing the the org because we are at the organizational

meeting. This is where we moving forward for the term. So, let's set that tone and let's set that. Now, as to combining the committees, the way the the structure of the agendas would be, we have this the new civic plus software. each director, each staff member who has input into that agenda will put that in independent of each other and and then the clerk or the chair can sort that in a way that makes sense to deliver it to the meeting. So if whether it's uh we we have one item on on HR for the joint meeting or for for that HR human resources meeting uh they could schedule that so that it could be could be done. HR currently meets once a month and frequently doesn't meet. Finance meets every two weeks. HR could then has a lot more flexibility of when they put things on the agenda packet or into the agenda packet which by the way so so that would be a me a meeting of five alders. you would have the director of finance uh Maryanne Gro and director of HR uh Noak there and they would be the ones championing the items. So there wouldn't be this um I forgot what the term was used that we would be um diluted or you'd be concentrated on one item. It'd be their job to make sure that it was front and center for you. Maryann Gro by the way I did talk to her tonight for everyone not who doesn't know is uh is probably watching from the hospital and I hope she's enjoying this uh but she told me that once a long time ago when when she was first worked here or I I don't know the exact time frame but HR and finance did meet together there was a time when finance and ED met

together so this isn't unusual and again the full council always has the final say as to the department heads. There's a lot been said about who supports uh and I think I I even in my in my press release I think I indicated it had had overwhelming support and I I may have misworded that a little bit. Uh as Chief Arnes mentioned, you know, it wasn't it wasn't uh they're here to support the council. They're here to support the mayor. They're here to support the residents. So, if we tell them it's six or seven or four or three, that's what they're going to adjust to. And they're professionals and they will do that. So, first and foremost, they support the system and and the council. Uh, and we heard some mixed, some are all in, some are not, but they will they will do what you ask them to do. We talked about ex uh we talked about the executive committee. We forgot to mention that that's in there as a we're striking the executive committee. It was put in I think it was in 22 and it met two times in in that term. It didn't meet at all last term. Uh it's ineffective and and to Alder Haneki's point on uh expanding committees, one of the issues you run into is the uh the quorum. So that executive committee had just that issue is that it would meet with sustaining committee chairs and the council president. So you now have seven of the 11 members there. You're excluding four. So that is problematic and I think that's part of the reason why it was opposed when it was when it was there were three votes against it. I think it was Alder Killian, it was Alder Denny and it was Alder Larson if I recall that who voted against that. but

it passed 7 to3 simple majority and we've had it now it doesn't work let's get rid of it so we can do the same here it's pretty easy to to reverse this uh so I'm going to end this with uh you know I think we I think we will suspend the rules less and we'll have more opportunity for committees of the whole and I think anything that doesn't fit neatly into one committee should and requires multiple committees rather than a joint meeting we should have that because a joint meeting could have overlap of one. You'd have six people there. You could have 10 members. If you had two completely different committees that that didn't have overlap. Now you would have a joint meeting of 10. You're excluding one member. Doesn't make sense. So why not have the committee of the whole in that case? Uh and the and the logic Green Bay uses finance and HR. Uh the logic between parks and infrastructure re really was looking at all the special events coming up and the coordination that they have to do. Now it isn't routine throughout the year, but coming into the summer months, we have a potential for 5,000 persons showing up at a concert. We've got to secure the streets. There's there's special event requests come through parks. some uh others come uh to to secure the 400 block and then the Cody handles the special events for all the other coordinating on streets uh licensing uh police fire the whole the whole nine yards. So they do coordinate a lot and that was that was the impetus of that thought. So I'm going to leave it with one final thought. There's a quote from GK Chesterton. I've I've searched all the parks in all the cities and found no statues of

committees. So I guess what he's saying there is committees are tools uh not ends in of of themselves. They should serve the public not consume time and energy. Thank you. We still have a couple people in the queue. Mr. Alder Larson, did you wish to speak again?

Uh, yes, I do. Madam Chair, um, I would like to make a motion to re to refer this back to the rules committee. Um, I feel that there's not enough data been produced. I don't think there's been anything in the packet. I believe uh for for something this uh this important in in in our in our governance, I I I believe it needs to be examined thoroughly and therefore I would like to make the motion to refer this to the rules committee and go through the proper process. Thank you.

A motion has been made to refer this back to the rules committee. Is there a second? Alder Neil have seconded it. Is there any discussion? Just to just to clarify. So we had had the votes on the amendments to the amendments for the amendments. And now we are going to the current item. Are we able to make a motion when this is on the floor? Yes, I believe he can.

Is there any discussion?

Alder Martins. Yeah, you know, I I think we've done a very good job this evening um hashing out this issue and um I don't know if um more time with the rules committee and with another committee of the whole potentially committee of the whole and back to council again if that's going to change anybody's hearts and minds in the long run. And um I think I I got a feeling we we may have a pretty good handle on this one way or the other and I would not be supporting that the referral. Is there any other discussion? Alder Drew.

Yeah. I just want to say I knew this was on the agenda for tonight because we dealt with it last week and I took the week to talk to people and to gather evidence and information. So I I just I feel prepared to to move on this now. Thank you. Any other discussion?

If not, a motion was made and seconded uh to refer this back to the rules committee. You may vote. motion fails. Uh two to nine. I

now we will take a look at the original motion as amended. And Cody, would you read that for clarification, please? Oh, wait. Sorry. Alder Martins is still in the queue. I'm still in the queue. I wanted to speak uh one more time to the main motion. So, thank you. This is getting to be a um a long night and um um

I just my concerns uh with with this um with with the with the consolidation of committees is that um are we trading efficiency for transparency? I know something that we have worked really hard you know the um the last at least the last five years is how do we increase transparency? What do we need to do to make our process transparent so that the that you know just the average citizen understands the process and why we're doing the things we're doing. We've made great gains in the last years by limiting the amount of closed sessions we've done and that that's been that's been great. Um, and I don't, you know, I don't want to see, you know, and we've we've increased the numbers of meetings, you know, that that we air on online and we stream and, you know, that also is great. And I don't want to see us, you know, make this tradeoff of, you know, because we feel like, you know, we're being redundant, we're being we're being inefficient. Um, let's let's streamline the process so we can move we can move through on things. I don't want to see that that hinder, you know, our the openness that that that um we you we're we're trying we're we're striving for as elected officials. There's a big difference between, you know, how business operates and how government operates. And you you've you've you've got to you've got to take that you've got to take that mindset that governance mindset and in that you know what's good for business like the lack of silos and open communication between organizational structures and

what is good for governance um open openness op uh open in in how we make our decisions open in in in how we in in how we go go forth in things. So, you know, I would it it it feels like the process has slowed down and and a lot of times that's a good thing. I think we've made as as a committee, you know, as a as a body, we make our best decisions when we we do take our time and we deliberate and we're transparent and we're open and provide the best possible decisions that we can. So, um, you know, I I like I like um that we've added more committees of the whole and I like that, you know, that we're thinking about, you know, that for um uh you know, versus versus joint meetings. Joint meetings, you know, we're are are a good tool, you know, especially on the finance side of things, you know, when we when we need to um move move through a finance item and and it requires the the uh the approval of a second committee. Uh but when you start pulling in um with these bigger topics, you know, then the committee of the whole really really works well and it's it's it it does a tremendous job of delivering information in a in a open and transparent manner. Um I'd still but I still I I still like the committee structure that we have. The committee structure we have works, you know, it's it's transparent. um it it gives people the opportunity to do the work and um if there's not an agenda item, you know, we don't have to necessarily hold a meeting. And um so um I I think just caution everybody to think about

how we can stay as open and transparent as we as we are. um and with it especially in with our goals of increasing efficiency and and also be cognizant that the two may not be you know may not mesh completely. So if there's a if there's a um a choice between efficiency or transparency I think I'm going to be taking transparency.

Thank you. Alder Martins Alder Neil are you still in the queue? Yeah, I'm not giving up yet. Um, well, I'm on record from about two hours ago or so. Uh, and I stand by the comments I made at that time. I would make a motion right now, uh, to amend what's before us to strike the proposal to, uh, go to four committees. I am okay with striking out the uh executive committee and ending up with six standing committees knowing full well that going forward it could be that we look at our committee structure and decide that we need five or we need four maybe or whatever or we change the way we do things. Uh but right now tonight again uh without any urgency that I've heard tonight that says we have to right now go to four committees. I'm I would uh uh make a motion to strike that proposal and stay with the six standing committees and we'll see what happens, you know, in the months coming ahead.

I'll second that motion. A motion has been made by Alder Neil and seconded by Alder Larson. Um would you read the motion, Cody, so that we know exactly what we're voting on?

Yeah. So, um I'm going to have this up on the screen. Um just kind of like we had with Alder Watson's um ordinance amend ordinance um 020432 as stated by Alder Neil subject to attorney review if that if that works. Um and then I believe it would strike out um the proposed amendments in rule 13 committees um to leave as is um except for removing the executive committee. So the executive committee would still be removed from the rules. That's correct. Is there any discussion?

You may vote. Motion fails. Five to six.

Point of point of question, Madam Chair. Do we have a limitation on how many times people can add themselves to the queue only just so we don't get to the point where we just continue to throw our names in the queue? I believe we have uh a limit of two and we are done with the queue. Um probably I was too liberal. Madam chair, point of order. Thank you very much for your gracious handling of tonight's tonight's ordeal.

Thank you. All right. Now we will take a look at the original ordinance as amended. Um, you may I believe Cody, do you want to read it or Okay, Vinnie's going Vinnie's going to read it because there's amendments. Yeah, it's quite elaborate. So, with the amendments, we need to

So, okay. So, yeah, what you're voting on is amendment to um Oh, sorry. Yeah, amendment to Sorry, I wrote it down somewhere. an ordinance amending uh chapter 216 as follows. So the addition of one E uh requiring a semiannual committee of the whole um where council members and citizens may submit um uh agenda items uh rule 6B um is amended to change that uh matters submitted to the clerk's office uh by 12:00 p.m. on the 6th day prior to the scheduled council meeting. Uh rule 8 C is added to um have the council president schedule and organize a council retreat. Rule 13 is amended to combine the infrastructure, facilities, and parks committees. Um to combine finance and uh and human resource committee and to eliminate the executive committee. And rule 20 is amended to um require a statement providing the reasoning as to why uh the rules will be suspended for a specific agenda item. Everybody got that? Okay. Um, I haven't said anything um at all because I'm supposed to be an impartial person sitting up here, but I do want to make a comment before we vote on this. I have never in the two years that I've

been on council seen as much input from our council and as much concern uh and such strong opinions about which way they wanted to go. So, um I recognize what an important ordinance that we are voting on and I want to thank all of you for giving this so much thought and um it's it's an important consideration. So, uh thank you everyone. All right. Now that we know the original ordinance and as amended, you may vote. That motion fails to get the two/3s majority required. We're done.

Thank you everyone for your patience with me. It's been

quite even All right. So, that was a six to five in favor, but failed to meet the 2/3 uh 2/3 required under rule 20, which we chose not to suspend. So, there there's a lot of lessons learned out here tonight on rules. I'm glad we we uh stumbled through them. So, as a point then uh as you move forward, I'd encourage you to to read and learn the rules so that when we do discuss these that we're we're sharper and faster on the draw. Uh it's not always easy. Uh so when you call a point of order, you know which rule you want to refer to and and then it makes it so much easier on the chair to conduct the meetings. So, we're at the announcement from the mayor and alder persons. I had something I don't remember it. So, I'm going to turn it to alders. Anyone?

I aler Larson. Uh yeah. Um the uh Thomas Street, West Thomas Street neighborhood meeting was uh cancelled last uh Monday because of the school wasn't open where we meet. So, uh, we will be meeting this Monday at GD Jones School at 5:30 p.m. Thank you. Thank you. Alder Troubt.

As it's wrapping up, I would like to recognize again Mung Heritage Month. This is the Mung's 50th year in Wasau. And in celebration of that on Friday at the Horus man middle school there's an open to the public celebration by the middle school Mung community from John Mir and Horus man. It starts at 4:30 in the uh audi uh cafeteria caftorium whatever we're calling it today. So that is at 4:30 on Friday. It is a great event. I would encourage everyone to celebrate M heritage month. Thank you, Alder Watson. Oh, anyone beside announcements? Anyone from the public wishing to speak? We would take comments and suggestions from citizens.

Oh, sp your name.

Uh, good evening. Tom Kian, 133 East Thomas Street. I did want to mention because it's come up now I think a couple times in public and I'm sure it was done with uh good intentions uh but 1300 Cleveland Avenue the public participation plan has been brought up in public and compared to other more conventional proceedings. I do want to mention that that's not really comparing apples to oranges. It's probably comparing apples to ribeye steaks. And the issue with that and whether you're a current older or one of the new ones, you know, let's start with some reality. So, one or two floors above us in one of the department rooms, you will find an envelope labeled confidential from the 1980s. It's actually not enforcably legally confidential, but it is about Cleveland Avenue. And I would encourage everyone on this body to request it and to read it. And I would also encourage everyone at home to make the requests of the city to and read it because what you will find is some very unfortunate uh rather disgusting content in that envelope about the former property, Connor property, that through acts of omission or commission was hidden from our public. And over the years it was a sequence of events like that. And we saw the same thing with Crestline, Esene, Wikoa, whatever they'd like to call themselves at any given time. Well, it probably wasn't published in the Daily Herald when they were doing their politically not political negotiation with the DNR to not get superfunded. One of their concerns in addition to the costs it would take to actually do it

right under EPA requirements is that most of the work to date had not met valid federal public participation and notice standards. So this is not particular to my neighborhood. When you look at Wasau's history, which has been anything uh but open and transparent, which you will see in that envelope upstairs labeled confidential, you will see and much like the good people at the DNR, the hacks before them in that department were much like the hacks that preceded uh this body at times over the years. We are talking about policy makers that did not put their people above politics. They did not put their people above uh big money and these were Democrats, Republicans and everybody in between. So this is not a party thing. Right now you have some issues on the east side of the river with the super front site of which the city is a responsible party. How are the talks on public participation from the city going there? You have significant vapor intrusion issues. If my recollection serves me, they will be entering private citizens properties to conduct vapor assessments. Yes, the feds and the DNR have oversight. How are those public participation talks going for the city? As long as we're talking about municipal code and rules under municipal code, the sustainability or environmental committee is charged as the primary advisory body for all things existing between the relationship between the environment and the city. How's that coming? Uh, in terms of my neighborhood, the super fun site or any legitimate

pressing environmental contamination issue, they have done precisely nothing. And this has come up for six years when I was on it. And I wasn't the only one who felt uh that sentiment. And it's not because there aren't good and caring people. It's because city government to date has not done its job. And I'm sure the the olders who made the comparison were with 1300 Cleveland Avenue was meant to be positive and in good faith, but it is misguided and it diminishes the great injustice and the corrupted processes which fueled this city for decades. So citizens should not have to spoon feed their government relevant critical data about the environment and their people. Instead of making unfounded comparisons, it's time to say, "Why did that happen on Cleveland Avenue? Why did that happen with Crest Line? How is this happening with the Super Fund site?" And the council and that environmental committee needs to start spending some time doing its jobs. not apparently making uh comparisons to things of which the requisite knowledge does not exist. So in conclusion, I'll just say uh there's a lot of things in life that I know very little about. This bucket is not one of them. And I worked extensively, not only as a citizen and policy maker, to guide public participation guidelines here, but our neighborhood worked with the DNR in a pilot program because that is an exception. It's an exception we've seen unfortunately in other areas of the city where people have been treated like because government will work with polluters and profiters before their own

people. So I would just uh respectfully request that that cease and the time and energy is spent on finally uh doing this government's job. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else? Hey folks. Um, so just as a sitting member of two of the committees for the city of Wasa on the environmental sustainability committee and on the ethics board, I wanted to say I really appreciate and genuinely understand that this is something that I think gives each of us as a as a citizen member an opportunity to communicate with the council and to communicate with various committees. Um, and I appreciate the fact that you uh are taking seriously the thought that having a number of those committees, while may be inefficient at times, I think offers the citizens a great opportunity to communicate with the council and to advise that council. and as an advisory committee that speaks directly to the council. I think that the environmental s sustainability committee is one that in my heart of hearts I've been on that committee for uh this would be my third and final um aotment and it's really an opportunity for us to work with you and for you as a committee. So if there's any any opportunity for us to help you understand things in reference to some of the things that Tom has brought up, I'm happy to uh be the person that speaks to the committee on those things. So thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, I would entertain a motion to adjourn from Killian of Majin that second by Slinsky. All in favor say I. Meetings adjourned. Good night.