Public Works Committee - Regular Meeting

Chairwoman Melele a Cox. I'm joined to my right by alderman, by a ballman. I'm joined, to my left by alderman Alex Brower, and to his left, alderman, We are also joined by staff assistant Chris Lee and Carmen. What's your last name, Carmen?

Carmen Roman.

Roman. Here today. Item number I believe we will soon be joined by alderman Westmore as the wing of vice chair. Item number one, file number 251489, resolution determining it necessary to make various accessible public improvements at various locations, appropriating files for these purposes with the city engineering cost estimated to be 70,000 for a total estimated cost of these projects being 1,260,000.

Good morning. Holly Rutenberg with DPW. This is setting up engineering for future assessable paving projects.

Are there any questions from committee? Hearing none, Alderman Baumann will move adoption. Hearing no objection is so ordered. Item number two, file number two 51490. Resolution determining it necessary to make various nonaccessible public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city engineering cost estimated to be $4,269,600 for a total estimated cost of these projects being $26,154,600.

Good morning. This is for setting up engineering and admin costs for the 2026 program.

Any questions from committee? Hearing none. So order I mean, yes. Or oh, wait. I'm sorry. Motion for adoption by alderman at Westmoreland. Hearing objection. So ordered. File number three I mean, item number three. File number 251491, resolution approving construction of nonaccessible public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city construction cost estimated to be $8,315,000 for a total estimated cost of these projects being $8,596,000.

This is for setting up construction funding for projects to occur in 2026.

Any questions from committee? Hearing none, Alderman Brower would move adoption. Hearing no objection, so ordered. Item number four, file number two five one four five nine, resolution authorizing the commissioner of public works to execute a first revision to a state municipal agreements for a state led highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the construction of North 76th Street, Florist Avenue to CTHQ, and to set up funds for construction at an estimated cost increase of $815,000 with an estimated city share of $767,000 and a grantor share of $48,000.

Good morning. Robert Slane, environmental engineering section. This is to update the SMA based on the bid results for the contract that was that just bid. It covers the city share is gonna cover sanitary manual adjustments and CUC manual adjustments.

Any questions from committee? Hearing none, honorable man Taylor would move adoption. Hearing objection, so ordered. Thank you. Item number five, file number two five one four six zero, resolution authorizing the commissioner of public works to execute an amendment to the intergovernmental cooperation agreement between the city of Milwaukee and Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewage District regarding the Kinnickinnick River flood management project project for an area abutting the Kinnickinnick River between South 6 And South 16th Street in the 12th And 14th Automatic Districts.

Yeah. Good morning. This revises it not to exceed amount for combined sewer relocation. The combined sewer was relocated last year, so this is just encapsulating all the city costs and construction costs and reimbursed by MMSD.

Thank you. Any questions from committee?

No, but.

No. Alderman Vaughman will move adoption. Hearing no objection,

so ordered. Madam chair. For Alderman? I apologize,

but I do have

a question about number four.

I

don't File number 251459.

Alderman Taylor move reconsideration of item number four. Okay. Hearing objection, so order, go ahead.

Okay. So my question is just, because it just says North 76th Street, and I just was trying to figure out exactly. Is it just between the floors and the County Highway Q?

Yep. Yes.

So it's

in Floors Avenue and County Line Road.

In County Line Road.

Which is Highway Q. And do we know what kind of construction is going?

It's asphalt mill and overlay.

So Okay. So we're not doing anything else on that?

Correct. That'd minor curve improvements here and there, but it's keeping the curves in line

and Okay.

That that's all I need.

Yeah. Honorable Ms. Haley, we move adoption hearing. No objection. So order.

Item number six, file number 251461. Resolution authorizing the commission of public works to execute a 39817083¢ change order to the private property inflow and infiltration funding agreement M10005M109 with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewage District for a project at various locations throughout the city of Milwaukee.

Yeah. Good morning. Robert Slane, environmental engineering section. Similar to last item, this is just closed out from our 2024 city bilateral replacement contract. This is just capturing all costs that the city incurred that MMSD is gonna reimburse us for.

It says change order. So do we do we initially bill MMSD for what we project it will cost?

So we set up a a funding agreement with the estimated costs. And then as the contract goes out and the actual cost change, we have to request a change order with MMSD to our funding agreement.

Thirty nine. What? Oh, that's not thirty nine minutes. Thirty nine south.

Thirty yeah.

Okay. Well, I said that's a huge change. Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions from committee?

Alder Memberment would move adoption. Hearing objection, so order. Item number seven. File number 251469. Resolution authorizing the city controller to transfer additional funds to the previously established project for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and the city of Milwaukee for cost participation for the design of North Titania Avenue from West Mill Road to West Good Hope Road with a total estimated cost increase for the project of 650,000 with an estimated grantor share of $0 and an estimated city share of 650,000.

Good morning. David Tapia, major projects manager. This file is to set up additional design funding to complete the design of the project.

Any questions on committee? Hearing none, alderman Westmoreland would move adoption. Hearing objection, so order item number eight to file number 251473, resolution directing the commissioner of public works to execute a document titled first revision state municipal agreement for a state led highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design, real estate acquisition, and construction of South 84th Street from West Greenfield Avenue to West Adler Avenue and to set up additional funds for design engineering at an estimated total cost of $530,000 with an estimated city share of $26,500, a grantor share of $397,500, and a remaining $106,000 of cost to be funded by the city of West Allis.

Again, another project that setting up additional design funds to complete the design of that project.

Are there any questions from committee? Hearing none, alderman Brower will move adoption. Hearing objection, so order.

Actually, I have a quick question, madam chair. I move to reconsider.

Alderman Brower will move reconsideration of item number eight. It is the hearing objection is so forth. Go ahead.

Just so that I'm I'm fully clear, just not not no confused at all. Do you mean additional design funds? Can you define what you mean by that?

Sure. So at the beginning of the project, the department entered put together an agreement with us in West Allis to basically get through what they call the final scoping certification, which is they're sort of starting off the project, trying to figure out what exactly the project will entail. As that gets close to the end and now they're going to actually move into the design the final design through the rest of preliminary into final design, kind of having an idea of what they want to accomplish, then they estimate what that design will take, whether they're going do it in house or with a consultant, and then they set up the additional design funds as necessary.

Okay. I guess I just wanna make sure I'm I'm clear on this because, like, what are these funds actually pay for? Because, I mean, we have staff that's doing the is it staff time? Is this just like a paper reallocation of staff time? Or are we what are we actually spending here with the with this with the design funds?

So yeah. So in this case, we do have some oversight even though we have a very small portion portion of this project at the very north end. Okay. Mostly West Allis. And then, of course, it's a state trunk highway. It's connecting highway. So, DOT. Yeah. Has the biggest portion of it. So, DOT's time, our time and in this case, I think they're outsourcing to a consultant to do the all the actual roadway design to get the plans at the end of the design phase. And we pay, in this case, the split is 75 state and federal funds, 20% will be West Allison, 5% is the city Milwaukee.

And that's the city share. 26,000. Yeah. Okay. That's okay. Thank you. I that's what I was thinking. I just wanted to make sure

we were

we were clear and fully understand. Thanks.

I move approval.

The motion by Alderman Brower is for approval. Are there any objections to that motion? Hearing none, so ordered. Item number nine Item number nine. File number 251474.

Resolution directing the commissioner of public works to execute a document titled state municipal agreement for state highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design and construction of Forest Home Avenue Intersection with South 16th Street and a set of funds for design engineering at an estimated total cost of $250,000 with an estimated city share of $25,000 and a grantor share of $225,000.

So this is for a new highway safety improvement program or HISSA project at that intersection.

Any questions from committee?

What are what are the

safety measures? So, under the hyssop, it's primarily going to be putting in monotubes. We'll look at I'm not sure of the there's three of these. You'll see the next two. Some might have yellow flashing left turn signals, but mostly mounted tubes we'll be putting in the audible pedestrian signals. While we're out there, we will review and most likely upgrade all the curb ramps to be up to current pro ag standards. And then if we can, we try to also look at other traffic calming bump outs where

think, get

ir

that then have to the arms out over traffic so that the signal heads are then lined up over the lane of traffic better helps vehicles understand where they're supposed to be going as they go through the intersection.

Okay.

Next.

Alderman Taylor will move adoption. Are there any hearing objection is so ordered. Item number 10. File number two one four seven five. Resolution directing the commission of public works to execute a document titled state municipal agreement for a state led highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming, design, and construction of West Greenfield Avenue and South Cesar Chavez Drive and South Muskego Avenue and to set up funds for design engineering at an estimated total cost of 250,000 with an estimated city share of $25,000 and a grantor share of $225,000.

Similar projects, similar scope, and plans.

Any questions on committee? Hearing an alderman bomb and would move adoption. Hearing no objection, so order. Item number 11. File number 251476. Resolution directing the commissioner of public works to execute a document titled state municipal agreement for a state led highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design and construction of South Cesar Chavez and South 16th Street intersections with Burnham, Mitchell, and Lapham, and to set up funds for design engineering, an estimated total cost of half $1,000,000 with an estimated city share of $50,000 and a grantor share of $450,000.

And that's the third intersection.

Any question on committee? Project. Hearing none, armament less more than we'll move adoption. Hearing objection, so order. Item number 12. File number. Thank you. 251483. Resolution relating to the 2026 capital improvements program to provide funds for multimodal transportation improvements at various locations.

Good morning. Chad Creusbaum from the Department of Public Works. This resolution funds section capital program for the year.

Any questions from committee? Yes, Madam Chair. Alderman Baum.

Is there a list of what these improvements are and where?

Yes, we can get you that list. But understand that this budget is broken down into many different things, most of which are administrative. There is obviously the line item that are the infrastructure projects as well. But in this particular budget, you're talking about rapid implementation and striping type projects, so small scope, right? I think the total amount for the infrastructure projects within that budget, dollars 1,400,000.0

is.

So this does not include any street redesigns or protected bike lanes or removing surface street parking or things of that sort?

I mean it's the multimodal groups administration side of all that, right? So any project that we might have that does that, then this funds We their engineering and

are getting a lot of pushback from citizens and businesses about some of these street redesigns. Michigan Street for example is a complete disaster. An unmitigated disaster. The amount of street parking that was removed is just horrible. And we are getting complaints from residential buildings. There is a couple of apartment buildings on the West End Of Michigan. And one of those buildings has no off street parking. And those tenants are stuck with street parking and we reduced there is like four spaces left. And one or two of those are reserved for handicapped, which is another issue that I have seen pop up. And we have had a discussion about that offline.

So where do we nip this in the bud going forward with some of these street projects?

Well, I mean, it's not as if they are being designed in a vacuum there. We are doing parking studies and I am not sure we have to try to reconcile what you are Well, seeing

are wrong because

Okay.

Street is a huge

Well, obviously that wasn't the intent. We do look at the parking usage ahead of time, but maybe something maybe that needs to be revisited a little bit, take a look at what we might be able to do. Our Michigan Street project is in a full reconstruct. So there are modifications that could be made if

that Well, don't want be

going in and tearing out curbs

and islands that we

just put in.

Correct.

Although I wouldn't that may be necessary at some point. We're getting a lot of complaints from citizens about this.

It could be revisited. You have forwarded those complaints to the multimodal group or to the city engineer?

It was raised just last week or two weeks. Yes, last week.

When did

we move change? Like two weeks ago?

Yes. Okay. Yes. No, I mean, again And

I consistently mentioned this to the city engineer personally. Personally.

Yes. Like I said, are following best practices with analyzing those situations ahead of time.

That's not a good explanation

for Clearly something is not

Best practices nationwide and not necessarily applicable to a particular fact situation at a particular location. Sure.

Yes. So we can get you a list of those projects that are included in this budget for sure and maybe revisit some of those that have been recently installed that are

happening And in of course, Wall Street, you managed to completely destroy Wall Street between Broadway and Ben Buren. I mean it is so much concrete, so much hard surface, very little landscaping and the idea was people would use these expanded sidewalks. Well, they haven't. Not being used.

Yes. I think the data is still being gathered on Wells Street.

They moved 50% of the parking easy, not more. And there is one business that claims they were put out of business because of that project, a very well known business.

So the primary concern from your standpoint has been the parking

Yes.

For the most part. Yes. Certainly something we can revisit.

At first we thought this all was a good idea until we saw it in practice. And in practice, it is turning out to be not quite so good an idea.

Well, and there are ways to modify these approaches. I think, like you say, not everything

I imagine like there is some projects coming up in other districts, National Avenue being one in particular, where you have the real potential of killing a whole lot of small businesses that are pretty much on the margins as it is. And they aren't going to survive the construction, much less the permanent loss of street parking that's proposed over there in the Silver City area, in the Walkers Point area. Some of those businesses are scared to death of what's coming down the pike. I'm not sure the engineers realize that because they don't hear from the people on the ground. Yes, you hold meetings. That's true. But a lot of those folks are working their stores and restaurants during those meetings.

Sure. Yes, I think there has been quite a bit of back and forth on the National Avenue project. I think that's ongoing.

Well, isn't that baked in at this point?

Well, for the design, I mean, for the most part, there could be some minor modifications made. Again, locations, like you said, everything is not black and white, there are shades of gray. Some of those areas.

Put that out there. I I know the local elder person in that case has been on it already.

But I

do patronize businesses over in that area and they are scared out of their minds when they hear who I am or what I do. They are on me like fly

good question.

Question.

Stalls. And I just wanted think to I mean, maybe I

this is outside of the scope of this particular item. But

we don't do we

have do we have those around the city? Installed Have street?

Okay.

Yes. I think for the most part, they're in areas that where we have metered parking. So for the most part, it's a CBD, right? Okay. James is in charge of the group.

And Madam Chair, to the Alderman's point, they are not used by anybody. I mean, I have had some of these pop up to the great consternation of local businesses and they are not used. I have never seen a vehicle use any of these dedicated parking spaces. Got the tags and tags allow you to park at any meter spot for free and to basically ignore the time limits, correct? But these are designated spots which if there is not enough handicapped vehicles driving around, these spots just sit empty while everybody else is circling the blocks looking for our street spot.

Yes. James Washington, Public Works Coordination Manager. So with these parking spots, these accessible parking spots, I mean, we are, as you brought this to our attention, we are looking at these as far as their utilization. We are following proag, the public right of way accessibility guidelines which states that if you have metered or marked spots, in the city we don't really mark spots, they're mainly metered spots, That one out of 25 spots need to be dedicated to accessible parking. And we have been pretty much behind the ball when it comes to installing these spots and this is due to complaints coming from the accessibility community back from 2009.

So we have been putting those in, you know, deliberately now. But now we are seeing that there is that balance between are they being utilized or not. We know that they are being utilized around City Hall, but it seems like in some of these other locations, they are not being utilized as much. So now it's just a matter of evaluating as we start putting these spots in. Maybe we are not as aggressive in areas where these spots aren't being used. But this is something that by national guidelines we are kind of required to do.

Madam sir. And when you say one for every 25 meter space, I mean, are locations where there are two back to back. How does that happen? Yes. On Kilbourne in particular, Kilbourne and and King Drive. I mean, there are literally two one after the other.

Yes. So that one out of 25 is on the entire block face. So it's going around the entire block. If there's only two, it doesn't explicitly state in the guidelines what they're supposed to be, but we try to put these in using some sort of common sense, not just going by the rule book. But if there is, for example, on Kilbourne, there's blocks where there may be only four on the Kilbourne side, but there'd be 30 if you add up the total spots going around that entire block.

Well, see, that's where common sense would come in because those are massive blocks. They are not typical city blocks. They're massive blocks and so if you count, I mean, the the the spots that would count parking spaces on State Street then presumably. If you say you go around the block. Yes.

That's that could be 600 feet away. I mean, that doesn't seem to be the way I the way I would count because those blocks are not you you don't park on State Street to go to a business on Kilborn because the blocks are massive. And there's a lot of no parking due to the Wisconsin Center District facilities. So I would revisit that because I'm getting a lot of complaints. For one particular business.

Yes. We can definitely take a look at your concerns there.

Alright. Yeah. Thank you so much.

This is a this is a really a really good thing to bring up because this this brings up the question of, you know, meeting as many needs as we can and potentially conflicting needs that we have. Like, I mean, that's just what we have to manage here as decision makers is is potentially conflicting needs. Accessibility is extremely important. And I'm you know, I was I'll just say, like, I I I appreciate spots that that go in. And I know that

I mean, I

you know, I hear the concerns that that that alderman is bringing up. So maybe there is room to revisit some of those spaces. But overall, we do I mean, my opinion would be that we do need more handicapped accessible spaces around the city just and and the on the question of utilization, I mean, for people that are handicapped and I don't I mean, I'm I'm not handicapped myself. I don't want speak for the for the entire community, but I imagine that I imagine that for people in those situations, they're because our culture hasn't supported them in the past, they're not going out as much. And so there's gonna have to be a period of potential.

I mean, I

would imagine there would be a ramp up period where people would where we create the infrastructure. You know, you build and they will come. Right? We create the infrastructure and then people who have disabilities will realize that then now these other areas are now accessible and they're just gonna be a transition period. I would imagine for there to be utilized full utilization of those kinds of spaces. So I just, you know, I wanna throw that out there too that like so I I can totally understand though that a business is right there. They felt like they've lost business because of parking. And then now there's a handicap spot right in front of their building. And they're like, okay. Wow.

Nobody's even using this. So and now here I am losing business. I I can totally see that being, you know, something that a small business would consider. Another thing that's going on forever for businesses that are losing money out there, and we do have some on the East Side. There's been some really unfortunate business closures on the East Side.

And I do have constituents that reach out that blame parking on those business closures as well or blame those business closures on lack of parking. I think it's also worth noting here at the table that we, you know, that our president is doing everything he can to drive this economy into the ground and so people don't have as much money right now. And so there's businesses that are the margins are getting tighter because there's tariffs and inflation. And when, you know, Trump and company are trying to drive this economy to the ground so they can buy everything on the cheap once the economy crashes. So that's those are those are factors that are beyond our control and beyond what's just like available as far as parking. But I you know, it's a

bunch it's a bunch

of factors. I mean, obviously, like, you know, and we have to reconstruct the roads. Like, there's just no way. I did have some complaints from businesses on North Avenue that they lost business when North Avenue was was before my tenure but they lost business when North Avenue was reconstructed but I don't know like I mean, that's a compete. Once again, competing needs. We have to reconstruct the roads because people don't want potholes. And so our order, I mean, we don't want to go back to the days of a gravel road like at the time of settlement in this town, right? So we need to pour concrete and

it has to happen in

a certain place. So it's just I just want to note those things. But I'll just say generally that we need we actually probably could use more handicapped, more more handicapped parking, more accessibility and more retrofits to all of our infrastructure to allow to accommodate every single person's mobility needs. Thank you.

I do have a question for is there is there a reason when we began this file, alderman bombing requested the list of the actual projects, the locations that are going to be it. Is there a reason that that was not part of the file already?

Not necessarily. I think the projects are set, set, the ones that are part of this budget. Again, like I said, these projects are small in scope that are part of this particular budget. They're

and posts, in

some cases, the splitter islands that go up and designate different lane configurations, so on and so forth. The larger projects that are multimodal or complete streets, right, those are funded under different groups. This is just like I said, this particular capital budget here is primarily administrative and then there are a list of smaller projects that will get done. So we can certainly forward that over.

And when you forward it, forward it to the whole committee, please. Sure.

And a point of clarity on the accessible spots as well. There's a fairly significant number of criteria we have to meet to make a spot handicap accessible. And so two of them side by side, you might say, well, why didn't you spread them out? Well, it's hard to locations where you can actually meet all the criteria, right? So that you're if you don't want to say it's you don't want to market handicap, thereby implying that it's safe for a handicap person to use and then, in fact, it's not, right?

So it's pretty arduous bit of engineering to make sure that the criteria are all met. In that particular case, the back to back ones probably just it was they presented themselves as areas where we could that we could use when we didn't have other areas.

Mentor. I don't remember.

Yes. And what I mean, just for maybe somebody listening along or for everybody's edification here, what would be, I mean, some of those things to consider, spacing for a like a platform to come out of a of a vehicle and and then go down to the ground. Mean, what is generally like, is that like just the larger spaces or what?

Sure. There's, I mean, there there's several criteria that we use. We typically like to have a a bike lane. So a person who is using mobility devices and exiting directly to traffic, there is a bike lane as a buffer. Obviously bicycles can slow a lot quicker and a little bit more maneuverable. We are looking at the speed of the roadway. What is the speed limit there? We are looking at is there a running slope on the parking spot. So I am sorry, if there is a roadway, for example, if there is a hill like on Juneau, it is probably not the best place for an accessible

You parking wouldn't want someone to park and then have a, there is a slope that they might

Correct. Okay. But we also have to evaluate that because accessible parking spots don't necessarily mean someone who is using a wheelchair. It could be someone who's using a walker and they're not having as many issues when you're dealing with the hill. But those are just just a handful of some of the criteria that we look at.

In close proximity to ped ramps. Yes. Corners tend to be, right? You tend to see them on near.

What what can we do and maybe this is probably getting

way outside the scope of this file but that but I

I think it's worth asking. What can we do or madam chair, excuse me. What can we do to like make sure there's there's synergy?

I mean, I think

the question that Alderman Bowman is bringing up is how can we, you know, accommodate or at least the question that comes to my mind based on on your comments, Alderman, is that how can we, you know, accommodate both like the needs of of every single individual and have the city be welcoming to every to every single ability level. Right? And then while also making sure that these businesses are getting, you know, the the foot traffic, the the the foot traffic and the and the traffic that they need to stay open so we don't have a bunch of empty empty storefronts. I know that like I what I something I appreciate that DPW does regarding that is when there's construction, I have seen signage where they'll actually put the logos of the business in a directional arrow of where to, you know, when the streets being redone of how to get to those businesses But I just, you know, I just wanna pose the question. Maybe that's some food for thought of how we can make sure that that these, you know, these locally owned businesses aren't going out of business when when parking stalls are lost because we wanna make improvements to the street.

I mean, I would I haven't specifically evaluated Wells, you know, myself, but I'll just speak to broadly to it that, like, you know, yeah, we wider sidewalks are a good thing. Right? And and more handicapped spots are are a good thing. I didn't I the older one was speaking to, you know, other issues that the the the issues that people are facing but I just like, you know, it's worth exploring, I think, and maybe that's something we can have in a future file in this committee is just how we can make sure that the that the accommodations that we're making that are necessary also still can have us have economic success too.

Who's now in that position that deals with the businesses when construction is in the area?

Sarah McClanahan. Okay. When you

is it still outreach when it is parking related?

Anything that, you know, would be an impact to the construction we would or or from construction would be. Yeah. So yeah, parking is affected. Yes.

Alright. Absolutely. Any other questions from committee? Hearing none, Alderman Broward would move adoption. Are there any objections to that motion? Hearing none, so order. Item number 13, file number two five one four eight four, resolution relating to the 2026 capital improvements program to provide funds for traffic signs and signal work at various locations.

Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the committee. Scott Rheinbacher with the Department of Public Works. This is essentially a routine file we have every year to essentially activate the funds that were appropriated through the 2026 budget process relating to miscellaneous signal and sign capital improvements throughout the city. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Any questions from committee?

Hearing none, order woman Taylor would move adoption. Hearing objection, so ordered. Thank you. Item number 14, file number two five one four eight five resolution relating to the 2026 capital improvements program to provide funds for street lighting work in various locations.

Good morning. I'm Kelly with DVW Street Lighting and CUC units. This is my coworker say, I mean, is just a routine. We try to activate the funds that's appropriate for the street lighting works for 2026.

Any questions from committee? Hearing none. Alderman Road?

Yeah. No. Just I'm glad we're, you know, making this happen. We when we say street lighting, we are talking about the street lights. Am I

That's correct.

Yes. And it is a it's something that we hear about in my office a lot and I know there's other parts of the city that are even more affected with the lack of and improvements to circuitry. I mean, I'll just underline. See here in the file that we're allocating 2026 funds $11,900,000 Great. I mean, guess, like broadly, I would wonder, you don't have an answer to this, that's fine.

But I would just wonder, what is it going to take for us to have a completely, you know, and what would be the dollar amount that we should consider this, in my opinion, is, you know, what would be the dollar amount for us to have a fully functioning top notch streetlight system all across the city. And I know we've we've touched on that briefly and we had a file with Alderman Alderman Pratt earlier, but I just, you know, I'm I'm glad to see this allocation and I, you know, I I appreciate everybody out there, all all of our electrical workers working diligently. I just, you know, I wanna say here that I want to see us have a top notch system. I don't think we're quite there yet in this city.

No, we are not there yet. And a long, long time ago, we did provide an estimate when I say depends how you define top notch. And obviously, we have a lot of old circuits that we need to replace and the dollar amount is just humongous. So it's not something like we can do it like right at the moment. So if you want that dollar amount, can double check. I don't want to tell you the wrong thing.

Madam Chair, on that point, we did discuss this

when we had the American Rescue Plan first available.

That's correct.

And I think the number in round numbers was $100,000,000

Something like that. Yes. Can't be 100% sure how much it is. I don't want to tell the wrong thing,

but it is a huge amount. Even with the

upper funds that we have, it's only helped like just a small portion

of that.

One obstacles of that we ran into was the ability to get materials to do a job of that scale in the timeframe required for the rescue plan money to be spent, correct?

That's correct. And then right now, we stopped with the construction some of the construction that we are doing right now, we got a cable theft issue too. So some of the project kind of got delay and delay and contract are trying to work on it. But as soon as they put the wire in, they put the cable in, it was stolen. It was vandalized.

So we Madam Chair? Go ahead. Yes. No, no, it's a there's a whole bunch of issues to this. I mean, is the big picture questions that I think we should be considering on the council is what do we want to have our constituents bear as far as cost.

We have a street lighting fee. I would imagine we could if it's a $100,000,000, we could, you know, finance it and then have our constituents pay through the street lighting fee and but of course, that's another levy on people and that, you know, I'm just I I haven't found yet a way around some of those some of those things. I mean, obviously, the bigger picture issue with millionaires and billionaires paying their fair share so that we can actually have that $100,000,000 in the city's coffers to be able to spend right now to improve all this stuff but I just my opinion is is we should have some sort of plan to bite the bullet and make it the best system we can. It is really an issue. But I really appreciate this allocation. I intend to support this.

Another challenge is, I mean, you don't really put $100,000,000 project out there and expect someone will just buy on it like instantly like the entire portion. I mean, there's just not enough manpower to do something like that, I mean, from the contractor perspective. And then obviously, like, our Chairman Bao will say, I mean, we have problem with the material too. And then right now, it's really hard to give a fair estimate with the material cost going up through the roof, like you mentioned just now. So with this tariff thing and we see the copper price, aluminum price go up, it's totally it's very hard to do an estimate nowadays.

And then sometimes when we try to put out a contract to buy the material, some people even say that when are you going to take the delivery? Can you confirm the quantity? Because they just can't project what is going on or what kind of price they will be looking at six months down the road because it just changed. So there's a lot of challenges. Narendra?

Yes. Alderman.

Thank you. How does the department determine which projects get prioritized? Is there a is it driven by the number of complaints or if the mayor has a pet project that jumps to the front of the line? How do projects get allocated and budgeted year to

It's primarily based on the number of outages, number of trouble we have on the circuit. We take out those first. Whatever the circuit has the most trouble, that's the one that we put on the priority list. That list has been established. So that's why we go down the list, and we don't intend to jump. It's somewhat unless there is some circuit sometime with the weather like that, like we have, I mean, the snow melt and things like that, we will see a lot more trouble. But then during summertime, it dies down. Sometimes it's really hard to do the analysis on those circuit. But primarily, we already have a lease like how many outages we are looking at on these circuits and which one on the top list.

Could you provide a list of the number of trouble calls for each of these projects that have been prioritized for 2026?

Sure. I can give you the top 10. How about that?

Well, whatever is included

in those items, I

think, would be helpful for the entire council.

Sure. So that we can see which older medic districts have the

most trouble calls and which ones are getting the most, revamping, improvements.

Sure. Thank you.

Any other questions from Premier? Hearing none.

Yes, ma'am. Sure.

Well, just a comment, Yes. And thank you so much, Alderman Burgles, for bringing that up. Mean, it should be the evaluation, my opinion, should be as scientific as possible based on what the actual problems are and you know, we do an analysis like that. We do need to take into account that some areas are more likely to call than others too to call, you know, the city hotline and then, then, have a confirmation number and we can track it, right? I'm assuming that's what you're you're talking about when we say, you know, what we can, you know, the number of complaints.

So what I would just, you know, my thoughts, my 2¢ would be that we should have some sort of scientific analysis, but also, you know, with it with it being challenging, I mean, that's, you know, it it it really sucks. Mean, but like, you know, we're here. I I mean, I'll just say that, you know, I am here to take on challenges. I think everybody here on the council is and we can sell it. I mean, I would love us to to really get into the meat of what this, you know, of what we can do to have a premium living, you know, in the city of Milwaukee, where, like, every single neighborhood has not just good street lights but quality roads and, you know, it it may not be completely feasible given the resource allocation that that this capitalist economy has, but like, I think we should do everything we can and and, you know, if we just need to just lay out the challenges and what are possible for us to not have whole neighborhoods that are in the dark sometimes.

And I know nobody wants that. I don't think anybody here at City Hall wants that kind of stuff to happen. Just does. So that's 2¢ on that. Thank you, madam chair.

Yes. Our our city worker has been working diligently. I mean, any troubles or any outages we have, we try to address it as soon as we can. As soon I mean, as soon as possible. So like actually about half an hour ago, I just addressed one from Niu District. Liam told me that there is the intersection there, that we have a problem there. It's too dark. And good that we have a contractor working in the area, so we're going to ask them to do the upgrade right away. So that's Bradford and far away, I believe.

Any questions? Any other questions from committee? None, Alderman Bauer would move adoption. Hearing objection is so ordered. File item number 15, file number 251486, resolution relating to the 2026 capital improvements program to provide funds for underground communications and electrical conduit improvements at various locations.

And clearly, we've also DPW Street Lighting and CUC. That's communication underground conduit. This is the same the files, like the routine files that we have. We try to activate the funds for the CUC.

Any questions from committee? Hearing none, honorable and Taylor will move adoption. Hearing no objection, so ordered. Item number 16, file number 251487, resolution relating to the 2026 capital improvements program to provide funds for the maintenance and repair of the underground communications and electrical manholes at various locations.

In Keely, DBW Street, IDN, CUC. And again, this is the funds that we try to activate the funds for the manholes, repair and maintenance.

Any questions from committee? Hearing nonautoment bombing will move adoption. Hearing objection, ordered.

Thank you.

You're you're welcome. Thank you. Item number 17, file number 251496, resolution approving an operating agreement with Ventures Endurance Events LLC for the staging of the twenty twenty six Milwaukee Marathon and Half Marathon in the city of Milwaukee on 04/11/2026 and a five k run-in the city of Milwaukee on 04/12/2026.

Good morning, madam chair and alders. James Washington, Public Works Coordination Manager. So this is an operating agreement that we're presenting for council approval for the Milwaukee Marathon. I'd actually, I'm looking at this. There was a mistake.

It says late front marathon, but we will correct that. So as you're aware, when there are these large scale special events that utilizes a large number of DPW and NPD resources, we enter into an operating agreement which outlines the responsibilities of the permit fee. For the most part, this agreement is similar to the ones that we've done in the past. There's only a minor change. NPD simply requested to invoice after the event rather than having a deposit prior. Other than that, it's pretty much the same, the same route and substantially the same agreement with the same terms.

Any questions for committee?

Madam Chair.

Alderman Brown.

Yeah. So first of all, like, great. This this is a great event that a lot of people support and I'm glad to be supporting this here today. Well, just generally because I haven't got a chance to fully read the operating agreement here before the committee meeting. There, we have police there. We have DPW ready to go. We have all this stuff there covering some of those costs. I mean, I imagine there also an argument to be made, there is an economic activity boom here and potentially sales tax revenue generation with this withdrawing people into the city. But are some of the can you just outline or give me the gist of some of the cost sharing or cost that they're taking on? Sure.

By nature of this agreement, they take on all costs.

Okay.

Great.

So with this, DBW doesn't have the traffic control to provide for an event at this scale. So they are required to provide their own traffic control. What we do provide are the no parking signs where they are necessary and we also hood the parking meters where necessary. Those items are invoiced to the app, to the permittee. But they bear all the other costs.

You. Madam Chair?

Under your mind.

What is the range of that cost that they bear? I mean, for example, since we have done this before, what was the last year's bill to the event sponsor and is it paid?

I do not recall what that was. It is based on the our permit d our DPW services schedule. So it would be $20 per no parking sign. The meter hoods are I believe those are 12 each now.

And and and the police cost? Who how who calculates that?

Police department? The police department.

Those are separately.

Yes. So one of the changes to this agreement is in years past

Well, the agreement's not in the file, I might add. So there's really nothing to read.

Oh, sorry. That was uploaded I see it on the late yesterday. So it was it was uploaded pretty late.

Okay. My version doesn't have it on here. But Okay.

Oh, it's not in Granicus.

Okay. It's not in Granicus.

Yeah. So we'll have that uploaded to make sure that that's in the file.

Well, after the fact. Yeah. Yes.

So yeah. Again, the agreement is, for the most part the same as as it has been in years past but I'm sorry. What was your question again?

How much have we build them historically just to give a sense to especially all of in Brower and other newer members. What's the order of magnitude of this cost to the city and how much do we pass on? And I think the lion's share of the cost is MPD, correct? Yes.

MPDs because they are they are the ones that are actively the event, so they are charging for police hours and a lot of that is overtime. And the like I said, the one of the changes from this agreement that we've had in the past is As I understand. There have, like, frequently bid additional officers needed and they had a lot of trouble, like, adjusting the payroll. So now they present those costs after the fact. So they will be billed for the actual payroll that was necessary to fulfill this event. Okay. DPW, if you're talking about orders of magnitude, is definitely $10. $10? I mean, what? It's it's in the tens of thousands. Okay. And if I recall, it was it was around 10,000.

You have something to add

to that? Yeah. So I'm Craig Harrison. I'm the operations manager for the Milwaukee Marathon. I don't have those what we paid in the past but I can tell you we do cover all 100% of the cost with police and sheriffs. I appreciate that. But the

question is are we accurately computing the cost? I mean are we accurately preparing the bill?

I can say that

Which the event guy can't answer. I mean he doesn't know if the police are accurately

I can say that DPW is accurately billing our cost because it goes by our special event schedule. So we are charging the same $20 or 6 I believe it's $16 per sign. And we're charging the $12 per hooding each meter. So those are the only services that we provide. So that's pretty easy for us to calculate because we know what we're installing.

And MPD, again, they're charging their payroll hours. So that's part of the reason why At 100%. At 100%. So that's part of the reason why they want to make this modification to the agreement so that they're just billing after the fact versus estimating before the fact and then making adjustments and trying to figure that out.

And is the bill paid? Just curious.

We never had a problem with

payment. Okay.

Alright. Very good. Madam Chair.

Alderman Brown.

Well, I just we just really appreciate you guys holding this event here. I was somebody forced me to sign up for the half marathon. So I'll be I'll be participating on the

day of the event as well. Awesome. They forced you.

Any other questions? We I do we do need to amend the resolution to reflect the correction that you were speaking of. Can you repeat what you you said it's at lake or something?

I'm sorry. There there are two major marathons that we do. There's the Milwaukee Marathon, which is this event held by Ventures Endurance. In the fall, we have the Milwaukee Lakefront Marathon.

So

this so is this worded correctly? It's it is worded correctly.

Venture? I'm I'm looking at Ledistar in the resolution that before as it says Ventures Endurance Events Ventures Endurance Events LLC throughout the resolution.

No. He was saying it's at Lake.

This takes to twenty twenty six Milwaukee Lake Farm Marathon.

What are

you Oh, I see the the the contract agreement. Yeah. Yeah.

Yes. Just in the title.

In the in the contract, not the resolution.

No. The resolution is correct.

So I

wouldn't Yeah. I'm madam chair. Yeah. I'm looking at the file here that's posted on legislator here and it says operating agreement between the city of Milwaukee and Ventures Endurance and

Ventas. Hold Hold on. Because the resolution is properly worded. We don't need to edit anything.

Is this the contract ending? I'm sorry.

The resolution is correct. The operating agreement is incorrect.

So you need to upload the correct The correct operating agreement?

Correct.

So we don't need to go up to change anything. So

Just amend the agreement to reflect the correct date, and then you can't submit it after the

the motion by Alderman Brower is.

One more question. Just for Alderman Brower's edification. Thank you. This sponsor is a for profit entity, correct? Correct. Whereas the Lakefront Marathon is a non profit sponsor, correct? Correct. Milwaukee Striders or whatever they are called? Just a capitalist activity. That is correct.

Yeah. Looks like it. Yeah.

Looks like

The motion by Alderman Brower is to amend the contract agreement in the file to

say Milwaukee Marathon.

Milwaukee Marathon instead of? Milwaukee Lakefront Marathon. Alright. Are there any objections to that motion? Hearing none. So order. Alderman Brown will move adoption of the file as amended. Are there any objections to that motion? Hearing none, so ordered. Item number 18, file number two five one four two six, substitute resolution relating to the addition of a tree planting request option to the MKE mobile action app. This file is sponsored by Arteman Bergelis. Arteman Bergelis, would you like to speak first too?

Thank you very much, madam chair, committee members. This is a trailing resolution following a budget amendment to make sure that tree planting is added on the mobile app. It is there. It is prominent. And hopefully we will get we'll have our we'll let our community help the department decide where the best places are to put new trees in 2026 and beyond. We're joined by Forestry and ITMD. Would

DPW or ITMD like to speak? Identify yourself. Yes.

Good morning, Erica Roberts, ITMD. This was easy for us. We want our resources for the community to be organized in a way that reflects their interests and desires. And so once we saw the ask come through, we were happy to make the change.

Erin Stochel, forestry services manager. Just glad it's there. It's not a terribly frequently used request option, but I think it's an important one nonetheless.

So I'm glad it's there and available. Thank you. Any questions from committee?

Yes, madam chair.

Audubon Wasserman.

Unrelated, since we have ITMD here, How come why is it so difficult to find reporting leaf piles on this app?

That's a question I'm unfortunately unable to answer.

You're not? Okay. Yeah.

Alright. Sorry. Just

thought That's okay. You would know.

Thank you.

Any other question from committee? Audorman Westmoreland with move adoption.

Everything else is.

Hearing objection is so ordered. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, speaker. Item number 19, file number two 51339, resolution approving a fifth amendment to lease agreement with New Singular Wireless PCS LLC for the placement of personal communication services, antennas, and ancillary equipment at 5600 West Oklahoma Avenue.

Oh, my. You shouldn't have to. Yeah.

Go ahead. Morning. Jordan Shettle from the city attorney's office. Before you is a fifth amendment, with new Singular Wireless also known as AT and T. This amendment does two major things. The first is extends the term of the original lease agreement out five years with four optional extensions. So essentially out until 2050. It also increases rent at the site from $19,500 to $52,215 with a 5% rent escalator.

Any questions from committee? Madam chair. Alderman Brown.

Thank you. Thank you.

This is great that they're paying more. This is the when we are having public assets like this being used for profit, they should be paying. So I really appreciate that they are paying this. I wouldn't be able to speak myself if this is in line with a market rate. I would hope that at some point that's determined. I'm not sure how exactly you would determine something like that, but just to note that, but I'm glad that there is an increase in the amount being paid going forward.

Yes. This puts it in the range that we have seen that we have for all of

our other leases. This was

a very unique one where it's been stagnant at $19,500 since 2007. We are happy to have gotten an increase.

Thank you. So now are all of them at a similar level?

Yes. At least the ones that I personally deal with. Will have ITMD provide information if there are any that are outside of what we are normally looking

for. Okay.

Thank you.

Are there any other questions from committee? Hearing none, Alderman, bravo, move approval via adoption. Hearing no objection. So order item number 20, file number 210786. Motion relating to the recommendations of the public arts committee relating to licenses. Okay. Here we go. Do we have Mohamed Salim?

Good morning.

Good morning. Please raise your right hand so you can sworn in.

Do you solemnly swear do you solemnly affirm under the penalties and sanctions of the perjury of the state of Wisconsin that the testimony you're about to give is the true and the holy truth, the only the truth?

Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Do you acknowledge receipt of notice of today's meeting with the possibility that your application may be denied?

Yes. I do.

Alright. Mister This

is I'm sorry. Mohammad Salim. Mohammad Thank you, chair. Jim Cooney, license division. This is a driver renewal that is here on a neighborhood complaint. I don't know if there are any neighbors present to testify to that.

Are there any neighbors present here to testify on this application for I'm hummus. They are not present. Okay.

That's it. There the complaints in the file of the committee would like to ask him questions, madam.

Committee for this applicant?

Well, madam chair, I mean, traditionally, we have requested the applicant to respond to these allegations to admit or deny. If he denies, then fine. There's no other testimony to to refute that. But if he admits to

it I get you. Are you seeing a complaint

that was Yeah. I've seen the complaint.

Do you?

Yeah. I've seen there's two complaint. You know, one of them is regarding the ride from Milwaukee Airport to Kansville. Actually, it was for Cederberg. It's, like, almost more than two year and a half ago. Okay? The guy, he came to me. I remember exactly the instance what happened exactly. He came to me. He was looking for Uber. And Uber, they were charging him $150 or more than $150 for that ride. And he say, can you beat Uber price? I say, at this time, yes. We beat Uber price. Where you are going? He he told me where he is going. I told him, okay. This is we can do flat rate for you. How much Uber did they charge you? He told me exactly how much Uber charged him.

Yeah. Okay. And he asked me, can you do it $100,110? I say,

yes. Okay.

And after, you know, there's outside of Milwaukee County, we have the right to do flat rate Yeah. Not to do the meter. Okay? And after we just pass, you know, the the airport, he asked me why you don't run your meter. I said, okay. I run my meter. And when watch it. Which one is cheaper come to you? I charge you. And in the end, okay, I charge him $85. You know? This is exactly what happened. I charge him this what's supposed to be cost, you know, because I don't start my meter exactly from inside the airport. I start my meter when we run out to the outside the airport.

So was the 85 the flat rate or was the 85 the

median? We agree about 110 for the first time.

Mhmm.

You know? But I give him 85 for one reason. You know? He told me that he I can come pick him up tomorrow, take him back to the airport if I give him discount. This is exactly what happened.

Well, what is the law on this? Because according to this complaint, you initially were discussing a flat fee of 50 to $60 to match what would be an Uber rate.

Even if

you And then when you got to the destination, you demanded a $110.

No. He he told me it overcharged him 110 a 150 and he offered for me 100 to 110. I say for him, agree. Okay. Even if you owe I've been overpriced over right now, I just check over. Over XL, they are charging 100 XL 26.

So the disagreement here is which level of service, rideshare service was being agreed upon as the comparison point? Because Uber and Lyft offer varying levels of service

But in that time varying rates. Exactly. But in that time, Uber was searching price. If you look for the date, Uber was searching price and that price was way more than taxi price.

And this was a trip to Thiensville? Yeah. So maybe 18 miles, 19 miles.

It's 23 miles.

How

many? 23 miles. 23 miles. Yeah. Okay. And Thanesville is about from Oizoke County. It's not Milwaukee County.

Alright. Well, seems like the facts are pretty much in agreement, actually.

Any other questions from committee?

Well, what is the law in this business about, negotiating rates

and Attorney Gresham?

Attor assistant city attorney Travis Gresham, appearing on behalf of the city attorney's office. As far as the law with regard to a negotiated fee for a flat fee rate for an outside county trip, I don't know, most especially considering that, I guess, part of or potentially the majority of the trip is actually within the city limits. So I think your point is well taken, right? If someone's at the boundary of Milwaukee, can you negotiate a rate if they're just heading right outside the city limits? Or are we kind of binding them for that whole period of time that they're in? As far as that's concerned, I don't know. I would assume that you can negotiate a rate if you're within the outside county, but I don't know. Jim can maybe speak to it here.

Thank you. So code and I do see maybe a bit of an asymmetry, particularly as it compares to ride shares that are regulated by the state where the price is already given to you before you get into it. Yes, exactly. But our code says that the meter needs to be run to determine the fee and that there is a $15 minimum charge for rides that go to the airport.

Does our code dictate what triggers it? Like, you pick them up here?

They get into the car.

Okay. Yeah.

So then this was improper to negotiate a flat fee.

And I wanna add one thing. I've been driving taxi cab since 2008 Mhmm. In Milwaukee City. I never have any problem like this. This is the first time.

Manager. Do you

so, mister Cooney, would Alderman Baumann's analysis be correct, though, then? In this case, even though he was taken on Thamesville because the ride began in Milwaukee, we would expect him to adhere to the ordinance, which says the meter should have been running.

We would. Yeah.

That's how you would interpret the ordinance. Do you understand?

Yes. I understand. But we did agreement, you know, before he got in my car. Mhmm.

When I asked, did you understand? I mean, did you understand the interpretation of the city of Milwaukee's ordinance Mhmm. Which says because that ride started here, you have to adhere to our ordinances Okay. Which means a meter should have been running.

No. No. Let me explain for you something as a driver, you know, and you can ask anybody. As a driver, if anybody come to us, like, he wanna go for example, he wanna go to Chicago. He asked how much is the price. We do flat rate. You know? Anything outside the Milwaukee County, we have the right to do flat rate, not to run the meter.

If the trip originates outside of Milwaukee County. Yes. I think that's what you're so this trip originated within the city of Milwaukee.

No. No. No. If the trip is going outside of Milwaukee County. How Not just starting from

okay. Mister Cooney, how was your interpret the order?

Okay. Like, what exam?

I don't think that's accurate.

Yeah. Go ahead. For clarity.

For the city, it's for trips that originate within the city of Milwaukee. If someone is picked up from a cab in Chicago and dropped off in Milwaukee, we would assume that whatever regulation in Illinois or Chicago would apply to in that situation. And there is no there is a, I guess, a reciprocity, if you will, for taxi cabs that are licensed by other municipalities to come into the city of Milwaukee and drop off passengers. Historically, the city of West Allis was the only other municipality that licensed their own taxi cabs within the area here. And so if a West Allis taxi cab picks someone up in West Allis and drop them off at a location in Milwaukee, we would allow for that, but they would be regulated by those by that municipality's ordinance.

Madam Chair? Yes.

May be a bit of a county city issue because of the airport, so the airport being a county resource. I don't know if we would consider that within the contiguous, you know, confines of the city. That may be where there is some, I guess, question or remaining question as far as this originating trip.

I could see how that could be confusion, but it wouldn't be a question to me because the county owns parks. So those parks aren't in the city anymore. No. It's still in the city. They may own the airport, but it's still in the city.

But to to get service from Milwaukee Airport, you have to have the city the license from the Milwaukee Airport. That's belong to the county.

There's a there's a secondary Yeah. Permit that I've got. To go to the to pick up. We have have pick passengers.

To allow to pick up from airport, we have to have a permit from Milwaukee Airport.

Okay. But that had nothing to do with the the meter rate issue. Yeah. And the meter use issue.

So even be honest case here today, attorney Grant told me if you could opine on something and

Yes. So I'll something. Right? I'll direct, at least some advice to the committee members for fear of, advising, the public and this individual. So I will direct that commentary towards this group as opposed to broadly. Yeah.

Alright. That was the first complaint. What what about the second?

The second complaint is the drivers about the line inside the airport. You know? And I was the second out in that time, and the first out person I was talking to the lady in the GT, and there's a guy who's coming. He don't speak English. He speaks Spanish. So I talked to him, and he wanna go to Chicago. So I just direct him to the first cab. And the first cab, he was inside his car, you know, closing his window. It was cold time, you know, wintertime. So I don't do anything, and I just direct him.

And he asked me about the price. I don't give him any price. I told him go to talk to the first cab because this is the rules inside the airport. And he get out of the car, and he he start doing complain because we have personal issue, you know, before, me and him. And this is exactly what happened.

Any questions from committee?

Madam Chair.

Alderman Brower.

More just a comment. I mean, you know, regarding the legal structure and who whose jurisdiction this is. I mean, we are discussing, frankly, you, we're discussing a license that the city of Milwaukee issues. So therefore, we are discussing the city Of Milwaukee's code of ordinances as it relates to granting you a license. So I mean, I just wanna make it clear that, like, you know so, yes, the the city of Milwaukee's ordinances do apply in this situation.

If you're interested in having a license from the city of Milwaukee. I'll just you know, my personal opinion is, like, you know, it sounds like, well, this might be a common practice amongst cab drivers at the airport to offer flat rates or to not have the meter run that, you know, just advise that, like, that practice has obviously gotten you some complaints and brought you here and wasted your time. And so just I mean, I would just say that, like, it's probably not a good idea to to do things like that. And it sounds to me like from this complaint that from one of the complaints here that, you know, using Uber XL as the standard is not what generally people think of when they think of Uber. Right.

So I mean, so, like, you know, so you're so what you did in that situation that yielded a complaint that brought you here today is that you you you you parsed hairs and, like that's not a good practice when it comes to operating a business. So, just, I mean, I just, well, just say that the like, you know, the ones that the cab drivers that don't end up here.

I agree. You know, don't

get into disputes where they're saying, oh, but Uber XL says this.

I agree with you. 100%.

So that's, you know, just wanna throw

it out there.

There is one also one point, please let me add it. Okay. Maybe it's not only me. I told you I've been driving since 2008 until now. Driving a cab, I drive a different company before you guys give us the permit. Mhmm. Okay? So most of the driver, okay, and all the driver, I know them, they know us exactly that we have the right to have a flat rate of negotiation, a flat rate from riders, from airport to anywhere outside the Milwaukee County. You know? And she just this nice lady, she just add for my information, okay.

Now that you have to start if you start from Milwaukee City or Milwaukee County, you have to start your meter. Yeah. You know? This is information. To be honest with you, I swear to God, you know, I don't have it in my mind. Yeah.

Let me ask you this.

Go ahead.

Is is your, you know, the way you've operated, is that based on because you were at the airport or is that based on just your belief that you were ending up out outside of the city?

No. Because we ending out outside of the county, not outside of the city. For example, like, if we go to West Allis, okay, West Allis is still barfed for Milwaukee County.

Mhmm.

If we go to Racine, Racine is outside of Milwaukee County. Mhmm. You know? That's the best, you know? We where we end, not where we start.

Interesting.

Except that's not the law.

Right. Okay.

Maybe I'm wrong about that because I told you. I'm honest with you. This is the information we have.

Yeah. Yeah. That's that's interesting. Because I'll I'll be honest with you. I will probably read the ordinance similar to what mister Cooney did, but I could also understand there'd be confusion because I I didn't know about the second permit and all of that stuff with the the county with the with the airport.

So I was trying to see where your confusion may have been or where other drivers' confusion may be. Maybe because you gotta get a separate permit, maybe because it's a county permit, maybe because it's a county property, maybe there's some confusion there. But that's why I asked you that specific question, and I thank you for being honest with me about the fact that that's not even your issue. Your issue was where you end up, not where you started.

Exactly. Which

I think from what I'm hearing from mister Coney, it's pretty clear Yeah. That for us, it's about where you started.

It. Yeah. I I I do both way. You know? Like, for example, if people, they call me, like, my client, they go to Chicago or come pick us from O'Hare Airport. Once I go to pick them up from O'Hare Airport for the same amount, I take them from here to O'Hare Airport.

Mhmm. See this?

You know? But you but you understand now at least from

Now I understand.

Okay.

Yeah. I mean, the whole point of this rule Yeah. Is to avoid these situations Yeah. Where you get in the car under the expectation of paying one price and then when you're delivered and you're a captive in a vehicle.

Yeah. You gotta pay more.

A different price is demanded. And so the the customer is midnight. It's snowing out. It's rainy. Maybe you're dropping them off in the middle of a I mean, it's a dicey situation. Actually, yeah. Which is why we have meters.

Yeah.

And we have separates. So, there's no argument about what's owed which is which is why Uber and Lyft are effective because you know ahead of time what the price is gonna be and it's not a process of negotiating with a driver. It's software. You're you're negotiating. The price is set by the company. The driver is just that, a driver. Providing a service, money is not part of that. I'm sure.

And you're saying ultimately, you charge them the meter price?

I finished charging less than the meter price. Less than the also remove for him the airboat fees, you know, if which is $3 plus $1 for extra bags, whatever. And even he changed his clothes inside inside my car because he was going to a wedding and he arrived late. You know? Alright.

I do I do think between license it is a a bigger conversation beyond him because I believe him that

Thank you.

Most of the drivers are probably operating in that same kind of way. And if that's incorrect, we probably need to

And as I that out. Yeah. And as I said, I as I told you, this is first time it's happened with me. I I never have any complaint like this.

Any other questions from committee?

Madam chair.

Alderman Brown.

Well, I guess I was I was gonna make a a motion to approve of the warning letter if that's Fine.

That's fine. I I moved

to approve of the warning letter.

The motion by Alderman Brower is approval with a warning letter. Are there any objection to that motion? Hearing none. So will order.

Thank you. Good luck. Thank you.

With that, with no further

I think there's

just one

more check.

Oh, I'm sorry. Mohammed Yes. Zafraz.

Different mom.

The next mom. Different a different

It's a different mom.

There. Yeah. Walking.

Hello. Please raise your right hand so you can be sworn in.

Do you solemnly affirm under the penalties and sanctions of the perjury of the state of Wisconsin that the testimony that you are about to give is the truth and the only the truth?

Yes. Thanks. Thank you.

Do you acknowledge receipt of notice of today's meeting with a possibility that your application may be denied? Yes. Alright.

Mister Coney? Oh, this one's here

on a police report. Yeah. Go ahead.

Just one item. The applicant is a convicted sex offender.

Did we get a, a letter or something?

Sure. If I may. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman. Our ordinance looks back ten years for, criminal convictions. This conviction presumably happened, in sorry. In 2010. In 2010. So the conviction itself didn't show up on the police report. However, the registration on the sex offender registry is Yeah.

We wouldn't get a letter from he's

not No. The letter that you're referring to is typically from the Department of Corrections if they're on probation. Probation. Okay. Yeah. Let the committee know if the licensure will be in violation of the terms of their probation.

Forget my lack of familiarity. I'm familiar with all the license stuff, but not necessarily with this. So for attorney Gresham, what are the the ordinances we can factors that we can consider when deciding to

Like an

approve or not. This is a new is this new?

This is new. Yes.

When deciding whether to grant or not.

Yes. So when looking at licensure for occupational licensure with regard to conviction record or, I guess, this case, yes, conviction record, you can look to whether or not the charge or the conviction is substantially related to the license that's sought. And so creating that substantial relation is a determination by this body, the licensing agency, as it's written in the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act. As far as what's written in ordinance, obviously, there's some latitude given. You've, again, prescribed some latitude to decide whether or not things are you have a certain amount of thing kind of explicit, but then you also have the kind of open ended substantial relation question as to whether or not, again, any conviction kind of creates that substantial relationship between the license sought and that provides you the opportunity to deny if you so choose.

This is actually a complicated case. This was up to the Court of Appeals, Supreme Court.

It looks

like, yes.

Once conviction was reversed and then it was retried and convicted again. Is that correct?

Yes. And so these cases are never easy. So there there's often complexity when it comes to issues like this.

You know, I allowed the sergeant to read off what you had been convicted for, but I didn't allow you to speak to it. So my apologies for that. So, mister Sarfres, did you wanna speak to the police record?

Oh, yeah. I I don't wanna

You don't want to? Okay.

I don't wanna talk to my

Okay.

Fast. Sorry.

Okay. The were there any other questions from committee?

Yeah. There I I do so you were were you incarcerated?

Sorry. I I don't wanna

Well, mean, potentially, this does relate to the carrying of passengers in the public. I mean, how long has he been out? Is he still on extended supervision? Are you on extended supervision currently?

No. No. I'm I'm done on everything. Order of what happened

in the case

Oh, this is a new license application. Right?

Yes. He was

What time do you use with this license for? Excuse me? You have a job?

Yes. Yeah. I used to be driving taxi.

When did you last drive a taxi?

02/2010. Yeah. I start 02/1956, I think so.

So you intend to get back into the taxi cab business?

Well, I want them. That's why.

Well Sergeant Velasquez, you were saying?

Just to answer, he was in prison for a amount of time, and then he's not in extended supervision any longer. Otherwise, we would have been to send an email to DOC. Yeah.

Can read through all of But what was the sentence ultimately?

Yeah. Ten, five 10 in five or He

was found guilty of a second degree sexual assault, use of force, and use of a dangerous weapon. Felony level.

Sentenced to fifteen years, ten?

I'd have to briefly Definements

and five extended supervision.

That's why they say

that. Which means his supervision ended like last year.

Is that right?

Yes.

Okay.

Any other questions, subcommittee?

And who and and what was the age of the victim?

I don't so

What was her?

It was a known

known person.

That's a

known person. 23. Yeah. 23 years old? Yeah. That time.

This is somebody you knew?

Oh, yes. She is my family member. Alright. Yeah.

With some trepidation, I'll move approval.

Any other before we take up the motion, any other questions from committee? Alright. The motion by Alderman Baumann is approval. Are there any objections other than my own?

I'm I'm going to abstain.

Okay. The motion passes with one objection and one abstention.

Good luck. Oh, thank you. Thank you.

Order. With that, if there are no further business, we are adjourned.

Her. Hold the doors.