Common Council - Regular Meeting

Everybody currently on the council, you all light up right here for me. I appreciate you right here. It's my way. Nice.

recording in progress.

Okay, I'd like to invite Pastor Ray to come on up and give an invocation. Paul wrote these words. First of all, then I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgiving be made for all people, for kings, for mayors, for department heads, for aldermen, for alder women, for all those who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way. This is good and it is pleasing in the sight of God our savior who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Father God, we do thank you for those who have felt the call to serve this community in many different ways and in many different with all their talents and gifts that they have. And tonight, Lord, as there are some who are leaving the council and others who are coming on, we thank you for the service of those who are leaving. And we thank you for those who have felt the call to be elected and to come on and serve our community. Father, we are thankful for our community and all that we have to offer to one another. And Father, I just pray that your spirit would come and give wisdom and understanding, patience to all who have gathered here tonight. Bless this meeting and all that participate. And Father, we would always give you the praise and the glory in Christ's name. Amen.

Amen. Thank you, Pastor Ray. I'd like to invite the new alders that come up. Uh, District 2 first. Jonathan Lampy, if you want to come up, you can bring any family that you'd like with you as well. Jesus. I will support. Constitution. Thanks be to God. Jana Techi from District 4. district

that I will support of the United States partially. discharge. Thank you. Thank you,

Fred Smith from District 6. in your area. Oh, and repeat after your name. I state your name. I, Fred Smith, who've been elected. Who have been elected? older person for the sixth district. Older person for the sixth district of the city of Watertown. of the city of Watertown. swear that I will support swear that I will support

the Constitution of the United States the Constitution of the United States the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and will faithfully and will faithfully and impartially and impartially discharge the duties of this office discharge the duties of this office the best of my ability to the best of my ability. So help me God. So help me God. One more you guys. One more you guys. All right. Three, two, one. Oh, that's a good one.

Rita Hazy, District 8. I state your name.

I have been elected elected person for the eth district. Alder person for the eth district of the city of water town. City of water town. Swear that I will support that I will support the state of Wisconsin and the constitution of the state of Wisconsin. I will faithfully faithfully and impartially and impartially discharge the duties of this office discharge the duties of this office to the best of my ability to the best of my ability. Thank you very much. Yes. Three, two, one. One more. Thank you. You hear that? Okay. I'd like to call tonight's common council meeting to order on Tuesday, April 21st. is 7:09 p.m. You take the role, please.

Davis here. Lampy here. Berg here. Ni here. Blanky here. Smith here. Arnett here. Hi here. Moldenhower here. Hey, can you please stand for the pledge of allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Okay, first on the agenda is election of common council president. I'll uh look for uh nominations. Mayor. Yes, sir.

I'd like to make a motion for uh Fred Smith to be our our our city council president for the next year. Okay. A motion for Fred Smith for council president. Mr. Mayor, I would like to second that. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Wenau. Okay. Any other nominations?

Mr. Mayor, Mr. No other nominations, I'd move that the ballots be closed. The unanimous ballot be returned in favor of the sole nominee. Okay. A motion to close. Any opposition? Okay. Uh let's we'll keep going with the roll call. I believe uh it was a motion by Mr. Berg. So you're first I believe. Yeah. Berg. I. NKI. I. Blanky. I Smith. Hi. Arnett. I I moldenhower I Davis

I motion carried okay thank you

next election of planning commission member I'll look for any nominations on this position Mr. Smith Mr. Mr. Mayor, I would like to nominate um Alder Person Berg for the Plen Commission membership. Okay, we have a nomination for Alder Berg. Mr. Mayor, I'd like to second that. Okay, thank you, Mr. Molenower. Okay, that was I was going to make a nomination, but you can make Well, do we vote on No. Okay. I'd like to nominate Jonathan Lampy.

Okay. Okay. Any other nominations? Okay. The common council presence on paper. This one's an open. So, should we go with somebody or just everybody states which person they're voting for? Mr. Mayor. Oh, for sorry. Any second for Lampy yet? Okay. Second.

Okay. Ni, we have a second. Okay. I'll just double check. Any other nominations? Let's go that way. Okay. So, we just have two on. Yeah. Voice voice vote. I guess who we start with? Uh Fred Smith did the first. Go with Smith first, I believe. Okay. So, you either vote for Berg or Lampy. Berg. Bergie

Berg Moldenhower Berg Davis Lampy Lampy I'll abstain from this one. Thank you. Berg, I guess myself Berg Nucky Berg wins. Oh, I'm sorry. Berg,

Alder Berg. Okay. All right. Mr. Berg will represent planning commission this year then. kind of choice. Choice is good. Okay. On my list. Actually, it's the first time I I ever had a vote on that topic be in this room myself. Okay. Oh, that spot is closed. We'll move on to minutes of council meeting held on April 6th. Mr. Smith. Move for the approval of the council minutes for the meeting of April 6. Motion by Smith.

Second. Okay. Second by questions, comments. Okay. All those in favor say I. I. I.

Opposed. Thank you. Next we have comments and suggestions from citizens present. Uh if you could please state your name and address. You have up to three minutes. Um please step up there front. Have anybody. Okay. Seeing none, we'll move on reports. We have the plan commission minutes of February 23rd, site plan minutes from March 9th, plan commission minutes from March 9th, licensing board minutes from March 11th, Parks, Recreation Portion from March 16th, plan commission minutes from March 23rd, finance committee minutes from March 23rd, tourism minutes from April 9th, ethics board minutes from April 10th, public works minutes from April 14th. Glad there was another sheet of it, but okay. Okay.

Mr. Blankie, go ahead. I just have one question on the licensing board minutes because we will be voting on that item later on in the meeting. Okay. Uh it's for the right now I location. Um you try I'll just cover it when we get to the

Okay. The licensing board or the licenses rather. We can wait till later. Sure. Okay. We'll move on to the next topic then. Communication recommendations. We have employee recognitions. Go to the top here. So, I'd like to thank Vince RLE from the Street and Solid Waste Division for 25 years of service. And also from the Street and Solid Waste Division, Keith Ryan that's been working here for 10 years. Next, we have presentation on Watertown Family Connections by Stephanie Curtis. Good evening. Can you hear me? Okay. Um, good evening, city council, Mr. Mayor, and community members. Thank you for giving me the opportunity tonight to speak to you as we recognize family strengthening month and the essential role strong families play in the health, safety, and future of our city. For those of you I haven't met, my name is Stephanie Curtis and I've had the privilege of serving as executive director of Watertown Family Connections for almost 21 years. This community is my home. This is where I raised my family. My roots are here. And the families of Watertown have shaped my life just as much as the work the the work we have to do to support theirs. And tonight I want to share three things with you. where we began, why family strengthening matters, and how we can build on the next 30 years together. Before we talk about our programs or data, I want you to imagine something. Imagine a young mother walking through

our doors for the first time. She's tired. She's unsure. She's carrying more than a diaper bag. She's carrying fear, hope, and the weight of wanting to do everything right. Now imagine her child 30 years later, a nurse, a teacher, a trades person, a parent themselves. This is the story of Watertown Family Connections. Not a story of buildings or budgets, but the of the hands held, burdened shared, and future shape quietly, consistently, lovingly for 31 years, almost 32. We began in 1993 in the basement of a church, a couple of staff members, a handful of programs, and fewer than 50 families a year. But even then, we had something powerful, a belief that every family deserves support, connection, and a place to belong. As needs grew, we moved into the Hawk that became the YMCA, and eventually into our current home, the Watertown Public Library. Every move reflected the same truth. Families needed us and we showed up. And I want to pause here to say something important. For more than 30 years, the city of Watertown has stood beside us. Your support, your investment has helped ensure that families in this community have had a safe place to land, a place to grow, and a place to belong. Because of the city's commitment, thousands of families have found connection, confidence, and community. Your investment has shaped childhoods, strengthened parents, and built the foundation for the next generation of Watertown's workforce, caregivers, leaders, and business owners. On behalf of Watertown Family Connections and the families that we serve, I want to thank you. Your support has mattered and it continues to matter. Today, we serve

hundreds of families each year, offering early childhood programs, parent education, support, resource navigation, outreach, and community building opportunities and something we are deeply proud of. Watertown Family Connection is connections is an accredited family resource center of quality, a recognition of excellence, best practices, and our commitment to equity and family well-being. And we are also the only family resource center in the United States located in a public library. This partnership is so unique and so effective that in June of this year, a family resource center from New York will be traveling to Watertown to tour our space and learn firsthand how we collaborate with our community partners and the library, the families we serve. So, we're very excited about that and why family strengthening matters. Here's the simple truth from our work. Connection is not a luxury. It's a lifeline. 85% of families who come to say come to us say they feel less isolated. 90% say they feel more confident as parents. 100% would recommend us to others. And research shows something startling. Chronic social isolation has the same health impact as smoking 15 cigarettes a day. When families feel alone, unsupported or overwhelmed, it affects their health, their stress levels, their parenting, their children, their future. But when families feel connected, supported, and seen, everything changes. We follow the nationally recognized protective factors framework which strengthens families through parental resilience, social connections, parenting knowledge, concrete supports, social emotional competence of children. These aren't just concepts. They are prevention. They are stability and they

are hope. They are the difference between a family breaking or bending. Now, I want to share something personal. In the last few months, I've been walking alongside my parents as they age. I've held my mother's hand as she shared stories she's carried for 70 years. Stories of shame, fear, and resilience. In the moment when she shared those things with me, I realized something profound. We never outgrow our need for connection, safety, and someone to hold space for us. And that is exactly what Watertown Family Connections does. We hold space. We listen. We walk with families through tender, complicated, beautiful parts of their lives. This work is not just professional for me. It's personal. It's generational, and it's sacred. We know that when families feel supported, children learn better, parents feel confident, workplaces benefit, schools thrive, and our communities grow stronger. This is not theory. This is the ripple effect we see every day through our work. The toddlers who once toddled through our doors are now nurses, teachers, welders, engineers, business owners, and parents themselves. They are the heartbeat of this community. That is the generational change we see. And we know we can't do it alone, and we can't ignore it. We are strong, but we are not meant to be solitary. Families are complex, needs are complex, and no single organization can meet those needs in isolation. That is why partnerships matter. Our collaborations with schools, nonprofits, county agencies, healthcare providers, faith communities and local businesses, government. These relationships are the backbone of our impact. Because when we work together, when we share our resources, when we communicate, when we show up for families as a united community, everything changes. I often

say this, um, if you're at meetings, you've heard me say it. If we all put our ores in the water and row in the same direction, we can move the entire community forward. Watertown Connections is committed to rowing consistently, compassionately, with purpose. But we need others in the boat with us. We need partners. We need advocates. We need champions for early childhood and family well-being. Imagine a water town where every family feels supported and every parent feels confident, every child feels seen, safe, surrounded by the people who believe in them. Imagine a community where early childhood is a prior priority and not an afterthought. We're asking for help is met with compassion and not judgment. This is the future we are building. a future rooted in connection, grounded in equity, and strengthened by partnership. And this is where I where you, our city council, come in. You can partner with us. You can advocate for families. You can support early childhood initiatives. You can champion sustainable funding. You can help ensure that no family in Watertown has to navigate life alone. Every action strengthens family and every fam family strengthens our community. When I think about nearly the last 32 years of Watertown Family Connections, I don't think about the numbers. I think about the moments. A parent exhaling for the first time in weeks. A child laughing in the room where they feel safe. A family finding connection when they thought there were they were alone. These are the moments, the quiet threads that have woven the fabric of Watertown Family Connections. And we carry not only the stories of the of the past 31 years, but the responsibility and honor of continuing this work with excellence, integrity, and heart. The families walking through our doors,

like I said, are the future nurses, teachers, homeowners, welders, engineers, caregivers, business owners, and the leaders of Watertown. They are our future and they deserve everything we can give. And as we look ahead, I want to return to that image of rowing because the truth is when we do put our ores in the water and row together, we move this entire community forward. Watertown Connections again is committed to rowing every day with purpose and compassion and with the families of this community at the center of our work. Again, we cannot do it alone. We were never meant to. So tonight, as we honor family strengthening month, I want to say this clearly. We hope the city of Watertown will stay in the boat with us because you're already there. Continue rowing alongside us. Continue moving forward with us towards stronger families, stronger connections, and a stronger community for everyone who calls Watertown home. Because when we row together, we don't just move forward. We build a future worthy of the families we serve here. And I want to thank you for believing in our work at Watertown Family Connections. Thank you for believing in the families of Watertown and thank you for helping us build on the next 30 plus years together. Thank you.

Great. And if you have any questions, I'm here if I have time. No questions. Anybody have a question for Miss Curtis? Mr. Lampy, go ahead.

I I just wanted to say thank you for um highlighting one of the essential services that the city provides. Um there's there's a lot of things that I I know go into providing that service at that location. There's um there's access to that facility. There's uh the ability to have uh the right personnel there at the right time. And we appreciate uh being all over the community and and providing those services. U also appreciate the report. Um if if there's something else that um I I I think might be useful to the councils a little bit in terms of some of the bridging services that uh the family center provides for um some of the families who are basically in in transition um let's let's say from some of the criminal um aspects of our police department and whatnot. So for bridging people so for instance we'll we technically serve families zero to five but we will help um individuals who come into the library who are in need of s resources will connect them to the resources. Also we over the last year we are working with the community action coalition and they are colllocating with us once a week so that um they can have office space right downtown um and seeing individuals. So that's been a tremendous help um not only for us but for the Watertown Public Library that there's a location for people to go who are in need. We also work with Crossroads Rental Assistance. So we're a location where people can pick up those applications. We and if people have need assistance getting their applications scanned and making that connection, we'll do that. Um and also we don't just give a phone number to somebody, we try to make sure it's a warm handoff, making sure that they are connected to who they need to see. And we have worked really hard on working on our relationships with other organizations so we have that connection a person that they can connect to so we can bridge that. Great

and make it seamless and less traumatic for people too. That's the other part of it. Any other questions? Okay. Thank you again. I appreciate it. Thank you. Next, we have an update on the April 2026 rain event and flood response efforts. There's a good memo in there. Mr. Buyer's here with any questions. I think we're it's been a week since we were standing to rain together. I think Andrew.

Right. So, a bit of context. Um the city and much of the surrounding area experienced sign significant rainfall events uh last Tuesday, April 14th. The memo in the packet this evening uh details the event uh the response and the impacts. And I've got Marie Mcroom, our storm water project manager and myself who can answer questions uh this evening for you all.

Yes. What was the total rainfall over the three days combined? You have the one for the 14th, but the other two that week and they are about five and a half. I've seen some different numbers. It depends on where in the city you're taking from. Thank you. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Buyer. All right. Thank you. Okay. Next, under new business, we have council committee assignments. But I'm sorry. Um, and this this is almost more of an order question. Where would you like to um take requests essentially for things we would potentially want to see on the agenda in the future? We haven't done this in a long time. items on the agenda or updates on certain matters like what what is what is our avenue for that?

Well, if you tell me I can put it on there unless you think for some reason that the council needs to vote on it. But do you want me to do it now or email or without knowing what it is? Yeah. If you What would you like to see on there? the okay it should it should be on email because it's not properly noticed on this agenda. So you see on um

it's a common practice you see new business or for the good of the order league uh league officials have said for open meetings requirements and the notice requirements they don't suggest that practice I don't suggest that practice for the same reasons. So if you have something you want added to the agenda just reach out to the mayor um via email. All right thank you very much. Okay. Okay. I'll go back to council committee assignments.

Mr. Smith, Mr. Mayor, I would move for the approval of your committee appointments. um specifically the revised one that um came out most recently. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Smith. I'll second. Okay. Second, Barnett. Okay. Questions, comments? Mayor, M. Davis,

I have a few comments. Um first of all, I wanted to just express that I appreciate the time and thought that goes into appointing um all of the council members to this uh long list of committees. It's not easy. Um, it's very difficult to do that. Specifically in regards to the finance committee, I recognize the mayor's authority and responsibility in shaping a team that can effectively guide important financial decisions. And so definitely that is an important thing that is uh being considered when shaping the finance committee. And then as we see tonight, these committee appointments come to us as council members to then approve through a vote. So, we then bear some responsibility as council members as well. Um, but tonight I'd like to offer a perspective that may be worth considering as these appointments move forward either tonight or perhaps for future consideration in in a future year. Uh, three out of the four members on the finance committee were replaced in a single year this year. Three out of the four members were replaced in just one year. And doing that naturally brings significant change to the committee's dynamic. While fresh perspectives can definitely be valuable, they're very helpful, continuity and a range of viewpoints can be just as important in maintaining balanced and well-informed decisionmaking. In that spirit, diversity of experience, and by experience, I mean experience professionally, personally, and even the experience that comes from a variety of demographics. Having that diversity experience tends to strengthen any group tasked with the complex responsibilities that the finance committee has to uh uh has to solve. Uh I'll give you example. Last year on the finance committee, the budgeting process was very challenging. But to be honest, it's challenging every year. It's just really hard. It's difficult work. And there were times last year where we had some contentious conversations. And I actually see that

as a good thing because that's evidence of healthy uh diversity of thought and backgrounds and experience. And in that uh those difficult conversations, that's where you arrive on good solutions and really valuable solutions for the whole community. Uh the council currently includes capable female members and having their perspective represented on the finance committee this upcoming year could have added to the breath of discussion and insight. Now listen, this is definitely not about meeting a specific quota, checking a box, or meeting a certain requirement. It's all about having a variety of perspectives and incorporating those varieties of perspectives to come to good solutions. It's a lot harder to have a variety of perspectives. it's easier to have homogeneous kind of approach where uh there's less of a variety of of differences, but when we have committees that have a variety of backgrounds, we're going to come to really good and solid decisions. And so, I just ask that we would consider that either tonight or as we head into the future and have uh committee appointments made in the future. Thank you,

Mr. Bur. Go ahead. Yep. Um I appreciate um Alder person Davis on on the comments she made and I to some degree obviously agree with uh the overall point she's making. Uh I felt as a finance committee we had accomplished a lot and I thought we were uh working well as a as a group. On the other hand, I know the mayor has complete discretion and and authority to make changes that he feels uh are needed. I would prefer to have stayed on finance. I'm obviously not on but I I know the that he had his reasons for it. So I'm I do appreciate though again the point made and I do feel that committees when they are together for a period of time they do actually gel and they do actually perform and and they get better uh over a period of time as long as there's a core of people that can help move it forward. Um, it will be challenging for the new committee with having three new members, but I I know each of them and I know their abilities. So, I'm I'm obviously optimistic they can uh take on that that new challenge.

Mr. Mayor, go ahead, Mr. Just briefly, I have every confidence that the mayor took the perspective of balance and diversity into account when presenting the overall slate of assignments. As noted, it's not an easy thing, particularly when some roles maybe everybody wants. Um, I've been in that position on schoolboard president. I know what you've gone through. So, I appreciate that. I would just add that in my experience, it has been very useful to have turnover within committees and to have members of a body move between committees so that they get a well-rounded perspective on the operation of the organization rather than necessarily staying in one spot for a long period of time. And so I think again turnover to some extent can be a very useful thing and getting people into a variety of roles over their tenure on council will result in a stronger council. I taught third grade for five years and moved on to middle school. was a good change for me and at times I changed the subject levels. I believe in this council I taught of the nine of euphoria touch kids and I went back to elementary gave me a good fresh perspective on teaching. When I was on council I was I'll say it I was on the library board and a new mayor came in and moved me somewhere else. I I guess no matter what

boards I was on before, I figured that I would serve the city in whatever way I was asked to do, I was excited be on the council and I always looked I would serve no matter what boards I had. Change can be good. I think having someone served six years on the same boards all the time, it's not the same. You know, go on different boards, you see different aspects of the city. when I have many people that want certain boards, there's only four spots for it. Can't give it all to everybody. So, it's weighed in between all the smaller ones and the three main staying committees. So, I lost sleep over at times cuz I I was able to last year give everybody either their first or second choice and stay in committee and I was able to do that this year again. It's not easy. We had when Mr. Barts and Mr. Wetzel are on council. I did the numbers and I believe 95 years of council experience and count my year as being mayor and Mr. Smith's nine that gave us 105 years of experience in this room. That's not counting school board and I enjoyed perspectives talking to Mr. Berg live with Esau and school board going through a referendum for that high school. Like you guys all have strong qualities and every board's really important. Transit became very important this last budget. They're all important. So I hope you take that role as the citizens chose you to represent them and I'm helping find the path what's best for the city. can't uh put everybody on every board they wanted to wish must have had more spots I guess. So I I enjoyed the nine people on this past council. I'm looking forward to

having two new people brand new different perspectives. Um it's not easy. Miss Davis and you your thoughts and different like different backgrounds what their experiences are. So, it's uh it's tough, but it's good to have different perspectives. So, changing every once in a while, it can be a good thing, too. I did a few times teaching. Thanks for the comments. Does anybody else have a comment on the assignments? Sorry, Mr. Smith. Go ahead. First of all, I uh tremendously respect each member of this council and I have had the opportunity to be on many councils in my opinion. Um the currently seated city council is probably the best council I have had an opportunity to be involved with. I also believe that um we have an extraordinary opportunity uh to move forward with the decision that the mayor's made in terms of making appointments to specific committees. We have not only the three standing committees, each of which is tremendously important, but 13 additional boards or commissions. And the mayor's perspective is one where each and every one of these committees being important being part of the broader contributing part of our city government also need to be balanced and in a

position to work together uh effectively. And I thank you, Mr. Mayor, for the extraordinary uh effort you put in to these committee appointments. I I did it for nine years and I can tell you it is never easy. There are invariably many individuals who would like to be on a particular board or commission, one of the standing committees in this particular instance. But we have determined that the way that our committees will be staffed is through the executive appointment and the approval process by the council of the individual appointments by the mayor. I think that our mayor has done an extremely good job. Every one of us, if we'd been making these appointments, probably would have done things differently. But the reason why the mayor is tasked with this responsibility is he has the comprehensive view of every single aspect of our city government. He needs every single portion to function effectively, cooperatively. and by making the appointments that he has he is um expressing the view that

this is the best way forward for our city. I thank you for the extraordinary effort you have put in, the difference that you have given, the requests by individual members of the council for service on the different committees and I am convinced that we will have an excellent uh year as we move forward. I had the honor of being on the finance committee last year and those individuals who served last year and aren't on the finance committee this year are tremendously talented council members and they are going to provide excellent service in the areas where they are appointed and serving. Um, I would have loved to have served with all of them. I would I look forward to serving with each of the current members, but not just that one committee. I'm looking forward to serving in every capacity that the mayor has appointed me. My commitment is to do the best I can in each committee. And I'm sure every single council member here is going to provide outstanding service in each of these appointed areas. And we have an extremely bright future. And the next year is going to be a key part of that. And as we move forward, I think our commitment in working together and recognizing that diversity is expressed

in each one of these different committees and the diversity of the perspectives of those on our council, you know, is is one of the underlying aspects of what I consider to be a very very excellent um body of representatives. So, I am thankful for the voters that have placed each person on this council, I'm extremely thankful for the contribution each makes. And I would say if ever there is a committee action that is not representative of the consensus by the broader council that's why virtually every important uh committee act is brought to the full council so it can be modified and improved even at that level. So we have a very bright future ahead and one of the aspects of its brightness is the uh leadership that we have um from our mayor and I believe that is represented well here in his appointments.

Thank you Mr. Smith. Okay, nothing else. Do a roll call in. Smith. I. Arnett. Hi. Hi. Hi. Moldenhower. Hi. Davis. No. Lampy. I Berg. I Blanky. I. Motion carried. Okay. Thank you. Next. Uh, B review and take action committee committee appointments. Believe there's three of them there. I'll move further adoption, Mr. Mayor.

Okay. Motion by Berg. Second second by Blanky. Okay. Awesome. Mr. R. Go ahead. Yeah. I I did see um in the minutes that were provided that at the last ethics meeting, there was two members there. Uh and I I see tonight there's a third person that maybe wasn't at that particular meeting. So, this individual that we're asked to appoint tonight, uh, Ryan Lesner, an alternate. So, how does that person get used as a as a board member? What's the the role that they play

as an alternate? They aren't there each meeting? No, they come to every meeting um particular particularly when we have an an anticipated absence. They'll only vote though when um either there's a conflict or somebody's not there. Okay. So three is uh is the normal membership of that committee. Yep. Three plus the alternate. Okay. I had Steve Saganska and put it on there and the alternate was going to be on there but the person I asked happened to be um elected official on the county board and actually one of the things with ethics is that they can't be an elected official. So I had to wait a month later to get that person on.

Oh yeah. So that would have been that last month, but we didn't I didn't realize that they couldn't be elected official. I see. Okay.

Okay. If nothing else, we do a roll in. Berg, I Blanky. I Smith I Arnett I Hassie I Moldenhower I Davis Hi Lampy Hi motion carried

okay next under Council vote for plan commission and council president the mayor goofped up and put that on there if there's uh no objection we'll move on to uh 13 okay seeing none okay miscellaneous business we have a payroll summary from March 18th through March 31st paid invoices report March 2020 26 cash investments March 31st 2026 any question? Yeah. And Mr. B um just saying we have two new people on here. So generally if there's

a question comment just kind of raise your hand or so I'll call on you. But Mr. B go ahead. Uh just going to make the comment that in looking at the at the the police and fire. It it appears at least for now after three months of uh of uh of expenditure that they are at least if you extend that into the the balance of the year they will uh at least in this case at least going right now they're their expenditures for overtime in comparison to what I I guess looked at I I think they're doing comparatively well uh this year and hopefully they can stay within budget to a higher likelihood than last year. Okay. Any other comments? Okay. We'll move on the licenses. There's a license a memo to council from the clerk. Mr. Mayor,

Mr. Blanket. Yeah. You remembered now? No, it's just easier to find here. Um, okay. So, the only question I had was, uh, there was a condition for the Applebees that they passed inspection. That's normal. Um, I noticed there was not one for the current occupant, which has moved to surrender the license. Did that license transfer to the new location for that for Fiesta Margaritas? Thank you, Mr. Lamp. Go ahead.

I have another one and again I'm I'm not too familiar with the licensing sides. So So let me know if this this one applies there. Is there is there a part in our licensing that requires accurate signage in front of the establishment in terms of what the place is. That's not usually tied to the service point. Okay. Is this this is where I'm unclear. You know, sometimes we attach some conditions regarding um the type of facility or the other piece to the application and I don't know where that that line is.

That be the sign would be a zoning. Okay. And the size of it too, I believe. Yeah. So, I can I can reach out to Brian and and get you an answer. Could you? Thank you.

Okay. All right. I'll go to B. Review and take action applications for temporary class B licenses from Watertown Cardinals baseball organization incorporated for home game versus Helenville Rebels on May 3rd, 2026 10 a.m. till 5:00 p.m. Home game versus Milan Crescent on May 9th, 2026 from 10 till 5. Home game versus Neossha Rockets on May 17th, 2026 from 10:00 to 5:00. Home game versus Rubicon Red Sox May 31st, 2026 10 to 5. And home game versus Climbing Canners June 12th, 2026 from 4 to 11:00 p.m. Locate at Washington Park at 6:35 South 12th Street. Move

approval. Okay. Motion by Blanky. Second. Okay. Second by Berg. Okay. Questions, comments on that one. I have a question. um or just uh confirming my understanding uh it's my understanding the Watertown Cardinals baseball organization is not a youth sports organization. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. Thank you.

Okay. All in favor say I. I opposed. Thank you. Okay. Next. C. Review and take action application for a class B mol liquor license from AppHop Watertown Incorporated DBA, Applebee's Neighborhood Grill and Bar and IHOP Walter Salivia agent located at 1512 South Church Street for licensing year July 1st, 2025 through June 30th, 2026. And any motions, please uh list the uh conditions. Mr. Blankie M. May I'll move approval with the condition that the applicant pass all city inspections.

Okay. All the inspections pass. Okay. Second. Second by. Okay. Questions, comments on that one. Okay. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Thank you. Next under ordinances, ordinance 2612, ordinance to repeal 24-25, 24-26, 24-27 of the city of Watertown general ordinances, sponsored by Alderman Lampy and a park and recre and forestry commission on its second reading. Mr. Lampy, I would move to approve ordinance 2612. Okay. Motion by Lampy. I second.

Okay. Second by the techi. Okay. Anything on that, Mr. Lampy, go ahead. For those who were here two weeks ago, um I'm just going to repeat a couple of the comments from from that. This is basically to clean up a section in the ordinance. Uh a lot of the decisions around the commission and uh what would happen thereafter uh were made in previous meetings. So this is basically just paperwork to follow uh previous decisions. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Lampy. Okay. Take a roll call. Ampy. Hi Burke. Hi NKI. Hi Blanky. Hi

Smith. I Arnett I Moldenhower. Hi Davis. Hi. Motion carried. Okay. Thank you. Next. Ordinance 26-13 ordinance to repeal and create section 658 and 659 of the city of Watertown general ordinances. Sponsored by myself from the ethics board on its first reading. Mr. Mayor move for first reading on 2613. Okay. Motion by Arnette, second by Lampy. Okay. Questions, comments on it. Mr. Bur, go ahead.

Um, hey, Mr. Mayor, I did look at the amendments again that were provided tonight and it shows that this um meeting occurred and it lasted 13 minutes. And during that time, is this the topic that they actually did discuss for that 13 minutes? and then recommend it to the the council or is it did they have a previous meeting that would have absorbed and allowed them to understand uh this topic?

They had a prior they had a prior meeting in March that that they considered the this particular topic I believe at last or this month's meeting. Um there's a weird provision in the existing ethics board rules. um it'll be coming before this body at the next meeting, but they have to if they are making or proposing amendments to the ethics board um committee rules, they have to meet twice. So that's was that's what the topic was at last month or this month's meeting. It was just a repeat um looking again previously discussed. Correct. But this particular ordinance was not considered at the April meeting. That was at the March meeting.

Okay. And this is new information that we now as elected officials we have to fill out. Correct. So that's the city's existing form um that has been utilized since I believe 2022 when it was created. Um it was created by us. It can be changed by us. Um I had a request from another council person to provide that to to this body tonight. Okay. Yeah. I filled it out for the first time when I when I ran to get on. Thank you. Mr. Lamp, you go ahead.

I was that other council person. Um, I do appreciate uh some of the back and forth that we had on this thing. There there were some concerns, I think, with previous iterations of this from some of the other um professionals who serve on some of the committees and basically just just donate their time here or or there. Um, I was happy to see that the ordinance here did uh exclude some of the concerns of of some of the folks that I talked to over the over the past couple of years. I I think that this is very good as is. I think it balances uh essentially the the ethics board right to know what interests we have uh with the degree of discretion. Um, and with that degree of discretion, one of the things I guess I'd like just just to restate here is is in terms of the amount of redaction that that occurs um if a request for one of these forms is made under a um freedom of information act.

Sure. So if we got Yes, these would be subject to a public records request. if we got that information. Um, we would obviously it gets a little normally we redact uh personal personal information. So, this is things like addresses, phones, email addresses for council members. That's a little unique just as most of most of your constituents already know where you live. Um, I I believe that's all public knowledge as well. But obviously information um regarding minor children that all gets redacted as well.

Thank you. Sorry, Mr. Smith. Go ahead. I was Oh, I'm sorry. You might have been looking at someone else. No, no, I was going to say something, but you go ahead first.

Oh, okay. Um just looking at this and anticipating uh future appointments to commit uh to standing committees specifically finance and public works. Uh there's a requirement that is uh to preede the appointment or the submission of the names to serve on two of our three standing committees, public works and finance 10 days before their names are submitted to the council. How is that going to work following a council election? Uh that's going to put an substantial time constraint upon the mayor's appointed timeline. uh because he's only going to know who was elected 2 weeks before this uh the submission of those names to uh the council. So that would give him 4 days to complete the determination of who's going to serve on those two committees such that they can in a timely manner submit the statement necessary uh because then the clock starts ticking before those names can be submitted to the council. And I'm just wondering if that's a realistic timeline. So that provision only applies to any citizen members. Council members would have already submitted this uh information. So it's due for candidates for elected

office when you're returning your nomination papers or if you're an existing council member, will we do those annually? And I believe there's a requirement in the proposed ordinance that says we do it annually. So we typically do that December, January. When do we usually do those? right now when they're elected elected then in it would be in April. So that particular provision only applies to the citizen members.

If that is the case, how does it even apply? There are no finance committee members that are appointed from the general populace. They are all members of the city council. So the provision if in fact it doesn't apply to city council members seems to me to be unnecessary here. Sure. But there is a citizen member that sits upon public works public works.

On public works exactly but you have included in this ordinance the finance committee which has no citizen members. So my presumption was it applies that the word persons applies to council members being appointed to the finance committee.

Sure. So it applies the requirements apply to both elected officials and appointed individuals but only those limited to finance and public works. Um when this was originally brought before the ethics board, we had it applying to all boards and commissions, but they shared the same concerns that Alder person Lampy had that this would discourage potentially um individuals for volunteering their time. So that was a recommendation from the ethics board to only have uh the statement of economic interest apply to those committee members or those committees that are more likely than others to see the kinds of conflict of interest that the form is looking at eliminating or disclosing.

I think I can clarify. So I think the point that's being made is that for all existing members of council, the form is already on file. What's that? For all existing council members, the form is already on file. There's no new form required. The form is already on file. And for any newly elected members, the form would also be on file because they would have filed it when they filed their candidacy.

So effectively, it does apply to everyone, but the the but the fact of the matter is for council members, it's already on file for everyone. So it it not only will it be on file at least 10 days before, it'll be 30, 60 or more days before that happened. It was already been done. I think that was the point that was being made. It applies to all members, council and otherwise. But the fact of the matter is for council members, it's already on file. That's what I understood. Mi, you had something first?

Yeah. Um, I'm looking at the sheet for the first time right now. So, that's something I have to fill out this for. And this is being new for next year's uh coming up. So, yeah. Okay. Miss Davis. So, following up on that, to be clear, it's does not apply to current council members. I meant the newly if we have new alders next year that they would have filled that out. They turned papers in in December. So, it would be for this this group as well. Yes,

as a followup, um, a specific question about the form. Is this the appropriate time to ask that question? So, letter C on page two says, "List the names of all employers or clients who have paid in excess of $5,000 in the last year to you and your spouse." My question there is, some professions have a client confidentiality requirement, which would make disclosing that illegal. So, this comes from subsection D of our ethics code. It says $3,000 there. So, I'm not entirely sure where the $5,000 comes from, but it states that no public official or employee and no business in which a city official or public employee holds a 10% or greater investment may enter into a contract with the city of Watertown involving a payment or payments of more than $3,000 within a 12-month period unless you first make a written disclosure of the nature and extent to the board.

I think that's letter B on the form. I'm referring to letter C. So B is getting at the the interest. Uh I believe the intent of the form is to separate that out for the payment dollar amount um into C.

So you're saying that letter C is relating only to um funds received from the city of Watertown because it says list the names of all employers or clients who have paid in excess of $5,000 in the last year to you and your spouse. Okay, I understand your point. Uh I I guess for your concern, if you noted that this is a conflict on the form, that's something should we receive a public records request, we take that into consideration and would notify you and most likely do a redaction for. Is this letter C coming from some state requirement?

We don't I do not know where letter C came from. This was a form that was in place before I started with water. So my recommendation would be for us to investigate whether letter C is a required aspect of this statement of economic interest form or whether we could not require that is there a motion in there? Um yeah, we don't need a formal action on that. We can just make revisions to the form by general consensus. If I had to guess, we probably copied it from somewhere else.

Mr. Lampby, go ahead. I guess I guess I will uh pile on a little bit and and note that the mention of clients in particular was one of the concerns of again some of the professionals who again do work in the community where they charge more than a certain amount to other folks in the community. We just had a massage ordinance that had the same thing on it, but listen, the clients But not the dollar amount. Yeah. And it could be initials actually, not just the client's names. So you're thinking like if it was HIPP, if it's a medical someone in the medical field, right? So it could just be initials. Okay. Go ahead, Mrs. Davis.

So I do also want to point out, which is probably obvious to everybody, this would be available for by the public records. It's a public record then this information. Um so that's also why letter C is concerning. And I also want to say that um this is not required by the state for common council elected officials to complete the statement of economic interests. Um the state does have requirements. Um but the state does not require common council members to uh complete this is my understanding. Judges are required, mayors are required, and there is a designated people who must do this according to the state. Um, but common council's members are not required. However, municipalities can choose and that seems to be what's happening tonight. Ideas are protect citizens too in case there's a something that you should abstain on as well. It's for everyone's protection as well. We did have when I was on council, we did have someone had to leave the council because of their work changed and they see the amount of work to be done by the city.

And I guess within our ethics code, we'll cover this at a committee of the whole in the near future. Um there are a number of the form is an easy way of notifying and disclosing to the board the requirements um that are set forth in our chapter 65 under conflict of interest. So um I we'll go over that at the committee of the whole. I just encourage council to take a look at those if those types of situations come up. So, it's disclosure of gifts, services that exceed $50. If you have other employment that is going to conflict with your service as a council member, if you have the the 10% interest of payment or three payments of $3,000, you are required under our ethics code to disclose any potential conflicts to the board.

Mavis, and I would just say that's in place whether or not a form is signed. Correct. That is correct. Do we So, we're planning on crossing out C or looking at it. Is that what we're going to do? I think it's B's. Uh, let's see. We Yes. Or provide We could do some revisions to it.

Okay. The subsection that it's trying to get at is our conflict of interest sub C that talks about you can't accept private employment or render services for private interests that could conflict with your service on the city. That's and I think the $5,000 is probably just an arbitrary number that somebody somewhere picked. Okay. So, I'll make some changes to it then. Second reading, right? Yeah, I get. Yeah. Okay, it's my change. Mr. Blankie, go ahead.

So, I guess I have a different concern than most with this form, and that's basically this becomes a public record that's available to anyone upon request. Now, normally I'm 100% in favor of the public being informed on everything we do. However, in light of recent events and being doxed and having my personal address put out because of a vote that this council took, I have a much stronger feeling on this. So, people I do business with, property I may own, now that can be doxed as well. and people who are in my orbit, property that's in my orbit now also can be affected because of a vote that I took on this council floor. That's extremely concerning to me, especially on something that's not required by the state. What parts are redacted again? So we would redact personal address, personal phone number, personal email, not city email, minor children information,

but people I do business with, real estate parcels I own, correct? Such as a that would be public record. Correct. So, if I were to own a rental property, that would become public record even if I owned it under an LLC and it could be targeted. So, I I have that it's a concern. I never thought I'd have to deal with that concern in Watertown, but I do now. Oh, it would already. For what it's worth, the county records are fully public. Everybody can know where everybody's owned parcels are.

Look at our GIS, too. Yeah, it's not just City of Watertown. It's a whole lot easier to just look it up on the counties, but this makes it a one-stop shop. I I'd at least prefer that they have to do a little work for it. But people I do business with isn't necessarily on there. I have a follow-up question if I may. Um, Mr. Stevens or Megan, um, we've had a conversation, Megan and I have, and you refer to an audit. Can you tell me what the why an audit plays into this or what the expectation of the auditors is or who who is requiring this of you all?

Yes, it is part of our financial controls on an annual basis. our Baker Tilly auditors um are asked uh are asked of us to provide numbers of um check off boxes, if you will, to make sure that we have financial controls in place. And so these are forms that may or may not be requested of the auditors on an annual basis to look at. It is on a sheet of instruction that I have to uh provide on an annual basis to the auditors to check off that yes, we are doing it. And then sorry I have another followup. When they are asking yes we are doing that they're asking if we are doing more than the state requires or are they asking are you are you fulfilling the state requirements for this statement of economic interest form?

No, it's not a state requirement that they're asking us. It's that our own um ethics rules state that we're doing it and they're confirming that we are doing it. They don't currently say that. That's what we're doing tonight is putting them into the ethics rules. Yeah. Some somewhere there I mean back in 22 there must have been something that prompted um us to have to do it. I mean that that's in my first audit here. That's when they first started asking those questions.

Okay. Anything else? Okay. Megan Arnette. Hi. Hi. Hi. Molden Howard. Hi. Davis. No Lampy. I Berg. Hi NKI. Hi Blanky. No Smith. No motion carried. Thank you. Apologize.

Mr. Mayor for for clarification. Um, we just passed this as a first reading and are we looking for revisions to the ordinance or to the form or both ahead of the next council? Well, right now I hear for the form specifically C, I believe, so we can make changes to it and see a copy and I think it would be helpful and maybe I'm overlooking. You said there would be things redacted. Where is that specified? either on the form or in the code. It's that's in the public records state code um which is chapter 19 of state code.

It might be helpful to refer to that somewhere either on the form or so that the person filling out the form has the assurances. Thank you. Uh see I believe right ordinance 2614 ordinance to amend sections 1143 and 114-7 of the city of watertown general ordinances sponsored by myself on its first reading. Mr. Mayor sorry Mr. Lampy go ahead.

All right. Um, I would move uh for ordinance 2614. Okay. Motion by Lampy, second by Blanky. Okay. Questions, comments on item C. This is the Mr. Berg. Go ahead, sir.

Um, Mr. Mayor, I I'm um appreciative of u of the ordinance as far as some of the intent behind it being in front of us. I have a couple items that I that I did did see that stood out a bit for me personally. I'm I'm um able to say I've been on the council on and off for over 20 years. And 20 years um plus I was as a council member involved in helping to change the agenda to uh to allow a second uh chance for public comment and that went into effect again over 20 years ago. So it's there and it does have you know a benefit of being used uh periodically not as often as the first uh chance for public comment but it does show up in different occasions. So my my comment is that uh on that second page of your ordinance, you're you're making reference to the fact that u uh an individual can only speak once. And I know of examples where an individual will make a point, they'll stay at the meeting for their own reasons and and attend the full meeting. And then because of the action taken they may uh in those occasions uh either compliment or or restate a point that they feel is still has merit. And again it's it's infrequently uh used but it does have benefit. Anything that allows and encourages uh the public to come forward and to have a chance to have input to help us in our decision should always be on the side of uh allowing that. And I I I think I understand maybe the point where in the first portion of the council meeting, if an individual uh makes a point and other people end up commenting and you're still under the first portion of that agenda on public comment and they come back for a second uh intent to comment, that would

probably be an abuse or a misuse of of our of our intentions here. But um you're saying u it looks like one time per meeting and it would take away that example I gave earlier of people that have in the past including myself. I I went to meetings uh you know over the last uh several years uh when I was off the council for six years and I I did attend and I did then come back later and and I restated a point that was still valid I felt and I wanted the council to know it had to do with our fund balance and the concerns that I had with that topic and it was allowed in that example. So I I think we should be on the side of you know curtailing abuse maybe on the example that I gave where they could maybe try to speak twice in that first portion but still allow uh individual that want to comment for different reasons um that they feel are are of importance. So um the other thing I just want to point out is is in that three minutes u I know that that is u a topic that has been discussed uh for more than a few years and and I know that uh under a previous council there was u fairly good discussion on whether we should have three or make it more or less or do something with. I was at the time in favor of not even having um I think people can abuse but we I know when I came here a few times as a private citizen and I commented on the on the budget it's next to impossible to actually state your case and make points on a topic like the budget within the three minutes and initially uh Mark was uh pretty good about with the timer and reminding me on my three minutes being up. I don't know if they're as u sharp on enforcing the free anymore. So maybe it's less of an issue than it was a few

years back, but I'm I'm just always on the side of encouraging people. If we have to stick around for an extra 5 minutes because of of that. Uh I just think it's time well spent and I'm uh I'm concerned about those two items while let other discussion occur. Um I would just assume take out or modify somehow the wording of that language there going to address these in order starting with letter G where it discusses the mayor is authorized without approval of the common council to execute applications to state and federal agencies. If you look at the policy manual, um, currently, uh, grants that do not have a matching requirement or restrictive covenants, um, can be submitted after being reviewed by the finance director and treasurer prior to the application being submitted. However, grants requiring city matching funds are to be requested from the finance committee prior to the submission of the grant application. And then the finance committee shall approve all grant awards prior to the final acceptance of the grant. So I'm a little confused about the letter G here because first of all, currently according to the policy manual, grants do not go to the common council. Number one. Number two, the mayor is already authorized to submit grants that do not tie or require a matching fund. And then number three, grants that do require matching funds are approved by the finance committee, not the council. So I wonder what the impetus was for this or are we changing things entirely or is there ordinance has more teeth to it, I guess, and give us a chance to

put a 30 days in there if something's wrong. We had that we had an airport grant that timing wise we're able to put in front of finance committee but in case time wise doesn't allow for to be approved and don't lose a chance in having money uh come our way.

I definitely understand there's a goal for efficiency um and I understand that. However, um government is by design not always efficient and that's a good thing. And in this case it doesn't have more teeth in it. It actually gives the mayor more authority to do um grant approvals than is now the case. Um if you think about it, a grant application is a decision to designate potentially designate staff resources, money, time. It's a prioritization uh of direction for departments. And that's why I think it's important for the to continue as it's already in the policy manual for grant applications requiring matching funds to come to the finance committee for approval because it's a decision to say yeah let's go for this um this is the direction we want to go. I think we want to be really careful about that um because it's putting a policy or a direction in place goals departmental goals in place without any approval or or approvement from finance committee. So, I'm not in favor of letter G. I'm in favor with the policy as it's currently in place in our policy manual.

Mr. Lampy, go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. U I share the concerns of Alder Davis, but I had a slightly different take. I did see this as uh explicitly a move toward some efficiency in our ability to go after opportunities uh with more authority and essentially being able to say yes uh to a lot of these opportunities earlier on. My one concern with how it's written in G is that there's an opportunity here for the council to come back and act on it within 30 days, but not necessarily an explicit mechanism that triggers this again for review by finance or the council or the appropriate body to actually automatically get this on somebody's agenda to approve at the appropriate level. So, I would, and I don't know exactly what the best way to do here is, but I would suggest that we add appropriate language to automatically add anything that falls under provision GE to the appropriate approval process within the city.

Like the mayor will put it on the next council meeting once the grant signs, something like that. Yes. Okay. or are you looking for committee approval?

Again, this this is where I was not diving in as deep as as Alder Davis. I know she's she she has a lot more of this language, but I was looking for all right, we're empowering the mayor to go out and be more proactive in negotiating or chasing after grant opportunities. Fantastic. How do we come back and make sure that that approval locks it in at the appropriate body rather than as the ordinance states essentially we have to speak on this within 30 days which I there's a lot of opportunities to miss that but if we put it up on the agenda it's more likely yes we'll have an explicit approval of that as we move through Mr. Mayor yeah go ahead Mr. that.

So the three steps are mayor can execute a agreement that does not bind the city expenditure of funds but then they have to report to council on that within 30 days and then council within 30 days of receiving that report can reverse the action. But it's a three-step as outlined in here. If I'm reading it correctly, it's three steps. Mayor takes action. Mayor reports to council on action taken. And then that starts the timer for council to be able to withdraw that action within 30 days. That's what I understood this to say. It it's requiring for the mayor to report. Now, he could make it explicit and say report

at a council meeting just to make it, but I'm I suppose they could otherwise report it via email, I guess, but like they but they I'm not sure they could because so it seems to me like that point is already there because it already requiring a reporting step to common counsel. Just

and I do want to just make sure we're understanding the letter G is talking about making grant applications the mayor's authorized to do that without any committee approval for um all grants as long as they don't bind the city. That's different than what's in our policy right now. Our policy right now is that if the grant requires matching funds, it must have approval. And I think that's a big thing to consider. Here's why. Imagine that the mayor um and not you mayor stocks some mayor way down the road. Imagine that mayor make finds a grant thinks it's a great idea goes for it. We get it brings it back and says we're going to get all this money. So now we've got the opportunity of having money. How will that be turned down? I think it's better to on the front end weigh the pros and cons. Should we get the money? What will we do? Is this our priority in the city of Watertown? Is this an initiative that is important to our community or not? That needs to be done on the front end. Besides, if we're talking about efficiency, it's not efficient to apply for a grant, be told you got it, and then turned down by when it comes back to council or it's not efficient to go through this three-step process as laid out here.

Go ahead, Mr. Ernette. Can I just get clarification? So, what you're saying is under current rules, I'll actually say I believe I if I heard it correctly, the finance director, no, the mayor has authorization to sign these types of documents, but it's reviewed by the finance director and the treasurer for grants that do not require matching funds. Right. So, as currently written in policy, the mayor can file a grant application if it doesn't require matching funds. Matching funds. True. So, go ask for a million dollars. No strings attached. We get the million dollars and then council says we don't like that. Yep. That can happen right now.

And it can happen as you're pointing out under this policy. True. Because this is essentially saying the same thing. For the first portion, it is. But it is not saying the same thing because it does not delineate matching funds. It does not bind the city to it. I'd actually I would agree it says more than that because it says shall not bind the city to an expenditure of funds. That's a wider definition than matching funds. I would say the binding means required whereas uh a grant that will require matching funds is not binding. You could turn it down. So I the language is is not accurate there. If it's saying what you think it's saying. I think it says what I think it says.

I think it should be rewritten because it doesn't say that.

Mr. Lampy, go ahead.

I I'm I'm sorry if I'm repeating myself, but uh I I think the conversation does show that there's room to be more explicit as to what it does or does does not. And again, I'm I I am in favor generally of providing more latitude. If that requires more explicit language to make sure that we understand what that latitude is, fantastic. I just don't know how to ask for it. Okay. I think the idea is not to uh take a chance on losing any grant money. I wasn't expecting much conversation. I'll go back to Mr. Bird's um thought. We had changed the council me into being only speaking once quite a while ago and even recently we had someone that spoke at the beginning and then kind of asked to speak at the end and I allowed that person to do that. So that's kind of discretion of the chair. So to answer your your concerns, Mr. Berg that if somebody has legitimate concerns and I've let them go beyond their time limit as well. I can think of a school board president that's in this room that let me speak longer in 3 minutes too when I was talking about my classroom a little bit. So I think if it's worthy and we want to hear it, they have concerns, we flip the timer. I don't make anybody stop. So, I think it just sits there if someone just they know about how many minutes they have. And I've only had that asked once since we changed a little bit and I I think it was one of our last couple meetings. I let that person speak. So, I give you one minute. Timer went off and let her go a little bit longer. So, I I think everybody in this room would want to hear uh citizen if they got some legitimate concerns.

Miss Davis. Um this is for the attorney. Previously, uh the mayor had the discretion to make a time limit, not to make a time limit as was written in our code. Um is it required that we have down to the detail that's in our code here where it's three minutes and the form and all that kind of stuff or um is it was it okay and perfectly fine to have a broader approach to it that gave mayors some flexibility?

Sure. So, our code currently says under rule 12, it's subsection 3, the presiding officer shall decide if comments are relevant, shall have authority to set a time limit on the comments, and shall have other such authority as may be necessary to efficiently conduct this area of common council agenda and order of business relating to the public comment section. I believe the intent here was just to provide some clarity to members of the public um regarding if they are prepared to if they are preparing to come and speak to to to you all and to to this body what to expect as opposed to the vague statement but that could be done on the meeting agenda as well.

Correct. And it would probably be more accessible to the public than the code. Sure. and and what this this uh um proposal is codifying what is already existing on our on our agenda under public comment. So then it's not necessary to make the specific delineations in the code. The mayor has the authority right now to to make the changes.

Mr. As it relates to the portions relating to speaking, uh it seems to me that this um does encourage an openness and an orderliness which is always a balance. uh it writes into the ordinance the opportunity for the presiding officer to limit areas where it appears that abuse is taking place. But the general uh subjective portion of this is to allow greater flexibility, more time if appropriate, speaking a second time if the presiding officer feels that is appropriate. It simply gives the presiding officer the tools to maintain an orderliness and allow for the um the uh the circumstance where we have uh a number of individuals that are here to speak. Um I've not seen this uh type of discretion abused. I think this does give us some good guidelines and it provides the presiding officer with meaningful flexibility generally in the direction of allowing greater opportunities. But it does put in place the opportunity to address issues which may be undermining um the orderly process for uh the

meeting and uh to proceed and for individuals to um address issues of importance. As far as the uh issue of filing uh applications and so forth, I think this provides good flexibility for the mayor. Uh there's nothing in this provision that would limit the mayor from bringing grant applications to the committee uh when there's time. This just provides him the opportunity to proceed in a manner that allows the timely submission of applications which could be financially beneficial to the city and provides the council with a variety of options to address anything of concern. But I cannot imagine that ever arising. I think this gives us the kinds of opportunities that will allow us to maximize opportunities for future grants and I think anything we can do along that line uh is to the city's benefit. So I think this ordinance is good across the board. Mr. I uh I agree with the fact that and I am I'm encouraging of of our mayor to continue to give discretion and allowance on on people speaking uh to allow them to make their point. Uh that was not previously the case when I would come to meetings and they had a timer and they were reminding me that that my time was done. Uh that was more accurately and consistently enforced. uh I want discretion from the person in charge uh to allow uh them to make a

point if they feel that they are uh on something that that allows a bit more time. So I'm okay for now with that 3 minutes as long as we have a mayor who is allowing himself to be open to to the comments being made by people. The the only thing I will restate though briefly is that the uh the mayor when he does uh introduce the the opportunity for public comment, he does remind them as part of his comments that he consistently makes that you're you will only be allowed to speak once per meeting. That that again is inconsistent with the example that I gave earlier. and and even though he's got that discretion, uh if he's stating uh consistently the the fact that there's only one chance for a public comment uh by that individual, then they're going to a meeting, watching the comment u and then making a comment at the end of the meeting would be not allowed if they had if they had made a previous uh point under the first section of public comment. I think that sentence right there, members wishing to speak during the public comment section may only speak once per meeting. I don't see the value of it. I think we can see where there's abuse and and the mayor has every discretion or the presiding offers has every discretion to enforce uh and and I'm confident that he will. So, there's no benefit of that sentence in there and I would make a motion to take it out for that reason.

Okay. Hey, Miss Frigot. Motion to take out members wishing to speak during the public see I'm sorry. Public comment section may only speak once per meeting. That one sentence. Okay. We have a motion to remove that sentence. Yes. Okay, Miss Davis. Oh, is that I'm sorry. I was on to my next stop, but I think we need a second.

Right. I'm looking for a second yet. Okay. Second by Mullen hour. Okay. Discussion on that taking that sentence out. Okay. All right. Take a roll on that. Berg. I blankie. No. Smith. No. Arnett. No. Hy.

No. Moldenhower. Hi. Davis. No. Lampy. No. Motion failed.

Was it five? Simple. Majority on that. It's six. Okay. All right. All right. The Senate stays in. Okay. Any more questions, comments? M. Davis. I'd like to make a motion for letter G if I may. Okay.

So, for the sentence that says, "This shall be done on the conditions that such application shall not bind the city to an expenditure of funds." Um, I think it would be helpful to match the wording that is in the policy. And so if we could say um this shall be done on the condition that such applications do not require matching city funds that then matches up with the policy and the policy manual um with the difference that the policy manual requires matching fund requests to go to the finance committee. Apparently, um, this ordinance would change that and it would come in counsel.

Well, actually, it wouldn't change that. Would it would revert back to the policy manual about what about this? So, then if we put the matching funds in there, I think I could support that. Okay. So, you want to add it? So, instead of it's just changing the wording a little bit. Um, I'm sorry. Let me get back. With grants that do not require city funding. Is that what you matching city funding matching city funding or city funding of any type uh for grants that do not require city matching funds to city matching funds is what the policy manual says. So add that somehow we have a motion to add that. Anybody want to second that? Second.

Okay. We'll do a second by the techie. Okay. So we're going to add that sentence somehow in there. Okay. Mr. Chanki, go ahead.

So now I think that that actually loosens it slightly because expenditure of funds I took that to mean something similar to what Alder Arnett did and that is so an expenditure of funds. If there's a $25 filing fee that's an expenditure of funds that means the mayor can't do it on his own. matching funds would be 5% 10% whatever it may be. So I think that changing it to matching funds makes this less restrictive rather than more.

Do grants usually require a filing fee? Andrew, a filing fee. It requires city the time of city staff. That would be an expenditure of funds, wouldn't it? I used filing fee of $25 because it was a simple example. This be if there's any charge whatsoever, then we wouldn't be able to have any of them. I took this to mean that the mayor is the one doing it, not city staff. Oh,

that's how I take this. the mayor is the one applying for the grant. City staff isn't filling it out because that would be an expenditure of funds. Execute applications which would be the signing of I could be wrong.

Okay. Anything else? I apologize. We had a motion. We had a second, right? You didn't take. Okay. All right. We'll take a uh Can you read the motion? The motion was that the mayor would only be authorized to apply for any grants that do not require any type of city funds. No, Mr. Mayor, there's a point of order. I don't believe that's what it is. I believe to change that sentence to this shall be done in conditions that such applications not bind the city to matching funds. matching funds. That's likely to change it too. Instead of being an expenditure of funds to not bind the city to matching funds.

Okay, I go with that. That I believe that is what Aler Davis was stating. Okay, if all Davis is fine with that change and then the techie is good on that second. Okay, we'll state matching funds. I'm assuming half and half then. Okay. Davis. Hi, Lampy.

I'm going to vote no. Sorry. Berg, yes. Nucky. Hi. Blanky. I Smith. Hi. Arnett I Molden Howard I'm sorry Hi Hi

I Moldenhower I motion carried okay so we'll add a sentence about matching funds okay anything else on ordinance 2614 Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Mr. Knack, go ahead.

So, approximately 3 years ago when I was president of the school board, the board brought forward essentially the same key points regarding public comments that you see here. And at that time I was um had quite a bit of heartburn about it because I'm generally not in favor of restricting public involvement where we allow it in the board at that time really felt that the language provided sufficient flexibility in the powers of the presiding officer to make exceptions as they felt were appropriate and necessary. And on that basis, move forward with it. And I'll just say that looking at this, it looks to me pretty much the same way that the presiding officer has a fair amount of flexibility to provide for more time um up to and including allowing somebody to speak twice. So, I'm going to going to go with it.

Okay. Um Davis, a follow-up question. Is it treading in dangerous ground to allow some people to talk longer than other people as far as is that a dangerous position to be in for us legally? No, I haven't. So, it's not a first first amendment kind of thing. No, I haven't stopped anybody yet. Yeah. Usually people are they hear the bell and they stop in their 20 30 seconds or thought. So, I haven't said, you guys know that for a year, I've never stopped anybody. So, it's not a restriction of speech or anything.

I've asked people not to call out alderman's names, but other than that, I haven't restricted one person. Okay. Anything else? We'll take a vote. I think start with Lampy, I believe. Lampy I first reading. I blankie I Smith I Arnett I Moldenhower I Davis I motion carried

okay thank you be one change to it on the second reading all right next resolutions exhibit 9851 resolution for water system wastewater agricultural land lease extension sponsored by Alderette and the public works commission move for 9851 motion Blanky second by Moldenhower. Okay. Questions, comments on that, Mr. Berg.

Yeah, I want to have you if you can either uh alder person or net or the mayor. Uh it's referencing 140 acres u that is being leased out and at a rate of $225 uh per acre. So that looks like around $31,000 a year of income. Uh the the land that um that is being used. I I know that there was a portion of land that uh was acquired by the wastewater treatment plant, but that the city uh in the last three years I I think in the last three years they acquired that from from the water from the wastewater treatment plant and and we are as a city we're actively marketing, promoting and and working on th that portion of land. Um is any portion of this that um but I also in addition I want to just ask where these funds go. Do they go back to wastewater treatment as far as the the funds or do they go in to some other category of uh of deposit? So it goes to wastewater. Good. And no, it does not involve the other land that you're speaking of.

All right. Okay. Anything else? Okay. Blanky. Hi. Smith. Hi. Arnett. Hi. Hi. Hi. Moldenhower. Hi Davis. Hi Lampy. Hi Berg. Hi NKI. Hi. Motion carried. Okay. Next, exhibit 9852, resolution for IT network and security upgrade project sponsored by Alder Net in the public works commission. So move.

Okay, we got a motion by Mullenau and a second by Lampy. Okay, questions, comments on 9852? This is in the budget and it's funded. It's not a new That is correct. Okay. Megan Moldenhower. Hi Davis. Hi Lampy. Hi Berg. Hi NKI. I Blanky. I Smith I Arnett I motion carried.

Okay. Next. C. Exhibit 9853. Permit fee agreement between TDS Metriccom LLC and City of Watertown. Sponsored by Alderette and Public Works Commission. I'll move for resolution 9853. I'll show you blankie. I like for parts and wets will do all of them this time again. I'll second. Okay. Second or not. Okay. Questions, comments on on 9853? Mr. Berg,

this is a a very important type of uh infrastructure improvement that's being uh proposed for um for implementation. I uh I'm glad that TDS is um involved. I I I saw them in a building in Watertown and they moved out of that building. Uh not sure what their status was as far as being part of our our city, but I'm I'm glad to see that they're involved and that they're part of this proposal. I in looking at the just the language here that is um for us to review and approve it. It it shows that there's an $8,000 amount per per uh permit being paid out. U and then it makes reference within this document of 51 permits that are that are proposed for uh for being being issued. So that comes out to a bigger number a big number like $48,000. So again, th this uh and it is offset by language that you you've shown in your um in your resolution where the city has retained short Elliot Henderson to assist with permit review and that their services are fully reimbursed. So that's that's good language that was put in uh for for the city to get reimbursed back. Uh but it still is a this amount of uh payout is that is that all uh the kind of numbers that we were expecting? So just to clarify the permits we're speaking here TDS is laying fiber optic service throughout the city. As a result of that work they have to secure a wide number of permits not from us for this necessarily. This is other permit work that they need to do primarily at a state and also federal level. We as a municipality have a right to

inspect the work and we have to do certain work related to those permit applications that TDS is making. TDS is fully reimbursing us for our expenditures on behalf of this work. That's what's occurring here. How many per permits for the city are you aware of? Uh uh Mr. Arnette,

I'm not sure how many of these actually have to deal with the city. It's again predominantly state and federal. And so this isn't a matter this is a matter of them paying us permit fees. What they're paying in permit fees is not about this at all. This is about what expenses they're prepared to cover on our behalf for each of those permits. And there's an additional provision that basically says if the initial amount that was been allocated here gets drawn down to a certain point, then they have to come back and replenish it. So if in fact the work overruns this amount of time and effort on our on our end, they're still on the hook for it. Okay.

Right. Thank you. Yeah. Anything else on the 9853? Okay. Blanky. I Smith. Hi. Arnett, I Moldenhower. Hi, Davis. Hi, Lampy. Hi, Berg. I NKI I. Motion carried. Okay. Next. Okay. Exhibit 9854, award West Side Creek System Assessment to McMahon Associates Incorporated for $122,142. Sponsored by Alder Net and the Public Works Commission. Move that. Okay. Motion by Arnette. I'll second.

Second by Bur. Thank you. Okay. Questions, comments on 9854. Okay. Barnett. Hi Hassie. Hi Moldenhower. Hi Davis. Hi Lampy. Hi Burke. Hi NKI. I Blanky. I Smith. Hi. Motion carried. Okay. Thank you. Next. Exhibit 9855. Resolution to update 2026 payroll resolution to add facilities maintenance technician to municipal building grade 130. Sponsored by myself and the finance committee.

I'll move for adoption. Okay. Motion by bird. Second by Smith. Okay. Anything on that. Okay. Burke. Hi. NKI. Hi. Blankie. Hi. Smith. Hi. Arnett. Hi. Hi. Hi. Moldenhower. Hi. Davis. Hi. Lampy. Hi. Motion carried. Okay. Next. Exhibit 9856, resolution to authorize execution of a contract for city hall boiler plant replacement. It's sponsored by myself and the finance committee. Move for adoption. Motion by Smith.

Second. Second by the techi. You think it's fine. Usually the first and second people sometimes just say it's okay. Thank you. Okay. Anything on that one? Okay. Smith. Hi, Arnett. Hi, Passie. Hi, Moldenhower. Was that an I Davis? Hi, Lampy. Hi, Berg. I NKI. Hi, Blanky. Hi. Motion carried.

Okay. Next. Exhibit 9857, resolution to approve virtual meeting policy. Council of boards and committees sponsored by myself. Mr. Lampy, I would move uh for exhibit 9857. Okay. Motion by Lampy. Second by Mullenhower. Questions, comments? Mr. Lampy, go ahead.

I wanted to take a look at the uh packet on 143. Just one tweak. I was uh interested in knowing if other members of the council were making. There is a section in here about exceptions may be made for family emergencies, illness, or other special circumstances. Uh for those of us with challenging jobs, I was hoping to add the phrase work emergencies as well in that area. Uh, so I would move that we add the word work emergencies to which it's on it's on page 143 in the packet or there's a section called attendance and participation.

It does say special circumstances. Would that fall under that? I I'm asking for something more explicit. Point point of order. Can we have a second on the motion before we have discussion? Uh we did uh Molenhowers gave me a second on it. Okay. But he's looking to make an amend. He's he's making a motion to looking for a second on that motion before we discuss it. And you want to add the word add the word work emergencies to that phrase where it says exceptions may be made and ends in circumstances in the section where it says attendance and participation. We have a motion for that. Do we get

second? Mr. Blank, you has a second. And just you know this policy is not just for us in here. for all the citizen members too just to make sure there's quorums is a few times it's happened and obviously there's emergencies that people can't make a meeting so that obviously be exception just as a reminder for everybody anything else on that we'll look for well a roll call we can do a vote Mr. Mayor so I didn't want to run over Mrs. Davis comment. Oh, I'm sorry.

And I I also think that other special circumstances already encompass it, but I don't necessarily see harm in adding one more specific thing. Okay. I think we can just do a voice vote on that one. on the motion to add the word work emergencies into that attendance of participation paragraph. All those in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Okay. With that added, is there any other? We'll go back to original exhibit 9857. Any comments, questions on that? Okay. Okay. U favor say I.

I.

I. opposed. Okay, thank you. Uh, last thing on the agenda, comments and suggestions from citizens present. Each individual request to address the council on agenda items will only be peritted up to speak up to three minutes for their comments and must fill out the sign and sheet provided. Members wishing to speak during the public comment section may only speak once per meeting. Anything? No. Okay. Yes, Mr. Burger. There's somebody had spoken. It's really important I let them right now, too. Okay. And I would hold a timer if need be. Okay. All right. Seeing none, I'll look entertain a motion to adjurnn. Motion by Molen hour. And we could stay here longer if take a second by blankie. Okay. All in favor say I. I. I. Opposed. Thank you, Mr.