City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening, everybody. You are at a Common Council meeting for the City of Wausau. It is Tuesday, July 14th, 2026. It is 6.36 p.m. Wausau City Hall Council Chambers. I will call the meeting to order. Please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Ask the clerk to call roll, please. There are 11 voting members present. We have a few neat proclamations tonight.

First up is for the Daughters of the American Revolution, and we have in the audience with us Jane Johnson, Melinda Bartel, secretary, and Catherine Sparks, chapter regent for the Daughters of the American Revolution. And we have our own city attorney, Ann Jacobson, who helped draft the resolution as a member. Oh, and the treasurer. The proclamation reads, whereas the National Society of Daughters of the American Revolution was founded on January 30th, 1926, to promote historic preservation, education, and patriotism, and whereas the Wausau chapter, Daughters of the American Revolution, has faithfully served the Wausau community and the state of Wisconsin for 100 years, through civic engagement, educational programs, support for veterans, preservation of local and national history, and encouragement of patriotism. And whereas for a century the members of the Wausau chapter have contributed countless hours in support of schools, scholarships, historic commemorations, naturalization ceremonies, veteran recognition, and community service projects. And whereas the chapter continues to honor the legacy of America's founding patriots while inspiring future generations to value citizenship, service, and love of country. And whereas the celebration of this centennial anniversary marks an important milestone in the history of the Wausau community and recognizes the enduring contributions of the chapter's past and present members. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Doug Denney, Mayor of City of Wausau, do hereby proclaim July 19th, 2026 as the Wausau Chapter Daughters of the American Revolution 100th Anniversary Celebration Day in recognition of the chapter's century of dedicated service and commitment to historic preservation, education, patriotism, and community leadership. Signed, Doug Denney, Mayor of City of Wausau, And on Sunday, they're going to have a little reception to hoot it up a little bit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

On behalf of the Wausau Chapter, Daughters of the American Revolution, I wish to thank you, Mayor Denny, and the Wausau community for this great honor. The Wausau Chapter is ready to provide service to the Wausau community for the next 100 years and more, and by supporting historic preservation, education, and patriotism. And as Mayor Denny already mentioned, we'd like to invite everyone to our 100th anniversary celebration this Sunday from 1 to 3 p.m. at the Marathon County Historical Society's Woodson Center. And again, thank you very much for this great honor.

Thank you, Catherine. And Melinda. Okay, up next, big night for Wausau Downtown Airport. Is John here tonight? Oh, awesome, I see John back there. Another gem of our city is Wausau Downtown Airport. This weekend is the AirVenture Cup race, so we have a proclamation to commemorate that. And we have dentist seats here as well to accept this one. And the proclamation reads, whereas the AirVenture Cup cross-country air race is the world's premier amateur open circuit air race open to all experimental and factory-built aircraft, and whereas the race is held annually on the opening weekend of the EAA AirVenture Oshkosh fly-in and convention and is the first major event of the fly-in. And whereas the AirVenture Cup race was first held in 1998 and went from Kitty Hawk, North Carolina to Oshkosh, Wisconsin with 10 aircraft. And whereas in 2012 was the first time Wausau hosted the event and the finish line with 45 racers. Wausau has hosted the finish line multiple times since then, and whereas this will be the fourth year that the race has started and ended in Wausau at the Wausau Municipal Airport, and whereas there are several Wausau-based planes in the race again this year, and whereas in 2026, the race will be held July 19th, and there will be more than 100 racers. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Doug Denny, Mayor of the City of Wausau, do hereby proclaim July 17th through 19th, 2026, as AirVenture Cup Race Weekend in the City of Wausau, State of Wisconsin. I commend this observance to all citizens and call upon all our citizens to visit the open house on Saturday and the race on Sunday at the Wausau Downtown Airport. Signed, Doug Denny, Mayor of the City of Wausau. So this race, I had an opportunity to co-pilot last year. Dennis hooked me up. Awesome. It's great to see, and it's understandable how aviation enthusiasts like it and come here and find it. But we'd also like to highlight this, that this is a big event in Wausau. They fill the Jefferson Street in to capacity for four days. We bring a lot of people into town. But spectators are also welcome on those days. So spectators are welcome to come in. It's a mini little air show to see all these aviation enthusiasts out there in downtown Wausau. Thanks. We're in the ABC.

Well, from everybody that's involved with the, we call it AVC, AirVenture Cup Race, downtown airport, EAA Chapter 640, Learn, Build, Fly. I want to thank the city of Wausau for the hospitality. A couple of statistics that didn't get mentioned but are probably noteworthy is we have, We have participants from 29 different states, Canada, Mexico, and actually last year we had some from the UK and from Italy. So we truly do get an international presence here. There was roughly 120 airplanes that we're expecting this year for racing, plus all the support aircraft. And then it's a 430-mile, approximately a 430-mile race. It goes from Wausau and ends in Merrill. And what's unique about this is that there are several communities that have, over the number of years that Wausau has been the base for this race, have developed actual aviation training in high school level. viewing. For instance, Shawano gets over a thousand people that show up just to view us coming through to the race. There's several other locations along the way that are real fun. A number of people actually come in and witness it. I want to thank you guys, and I appreciate your support. And we're going to continue to do this for another two years, I guess, at a minimum. We've got a commitment to the 30th. So this is the 28th running. So thank you.

Thank you, Dennis. All right, up next is a certificate of achievement for Hazel Schaefer. Young Eagles, it's an EAA fly-in recognition. The EAA operates a program for young aviators called Young Eagle Flights. where they expose kids to have an opportunity to take a flight, take a ride in an airplane, take multiple rides in airplanes, learn about airplanes, work on airplanes. So we have our very own city of Wausau Chapter 640 EAA member who applied to be the 2.5 millionth Young Eagle flight. And that flight's going to take place in Oshkosh to commemorate, I think it's 30 or 40 years worth of Young Eagle flights. And it'll happen at Oshkosh on the day of the air show to kick off the event. So this person from our chapter here in town was selected. This person, it's Hazel. And I'm going to read a little bit before I present the certificate from her application. Hazel was just two years old when she went to her first EAA AirVenture. By the way, it was her mother who took her. Jessica is here along with the family. And she says, I could not wait to fly for my first Young Eagles flight. When I was six, I started building aircraft and helping at the hangars at our airport and learn, build, fly. One of the first things I did was help fabricate on our Whitman Legacy. I also learned to build ribs. And ribs are not what you eat, but they keep the wing intact. support structure but she really wanted to fly and she knew at six years old she needed to be eight to fly young eagles and that seemed like a really long time to wait time flies when you get older but at six and eight that's a big big time frame but she really wanted to fly so she made a goal to get eight hours of flight time before she turned eight and ended up getting 12 hours of flight time before her birthday, and now she's 10 and has 42 hours of flight time in 35 different aircraft types. She's also done aerobatics, which she absolutely loves. And last year, when she got out of the aerobatic plane, I had a chance to take a ride in it, and the pilot said, do you want the... the lazy mayor's ride or do you want the Hazel ride? And I said, if Hazel can do it, I can do it. And it was a thrill. So she joined the EAA chapter on her eighth birthday, EAA chapter 640. And she helps when we have the chapter gatherings by cooking, cleaning, and getting name tags out. She does EAA work parties, setting up for Oshkosh. She's taken nine Young Eagle flights. So now she always makes sure other kids get to go first. And she helps Scott, the coordinator, to run the show. I love helping at EAA and I love being part of EAA and helping other kids get excited about aviation. Someday I will fly Young Eagles as Young Eagle pilot. So Hazel, I'll read this and you can come on up with your family. We have Wausau, city of Wausau presents this certificate of achievement to Hazel Schaefer In recognition of your 2.5 millionth Young Eagle application, we commend you on your flight at Oshkosh during the EAA fly-in on July 22nd, 2026. Here in the city of Wausau, we present this, and we're pleased to provide this certificate on this 14th day of July. Signed, Doug Denny, Mayor, City of Wausau. And she's sporting a pretty cool flight suit tonight, too. Oh, you got one. Awesome.

You want to say hi to Laura? You got it? No, you got it. Good.

Thank you, Mayor Denny, for supporting kids like me and flying in Wausau. I love flying and seeing kids fly. Thank you.

Enjoy. Thanks, Angel. All right. Cool night for aviation. All right, up next is consideration of the minutes of the preceding meeting, and that would be the June 9th regular common council minutes. Would entertain a motion from Killian, second from Watson.

Voting is now open. Vote passed 11-0.

Up next is public comment. We have five signed up, so we'll read the public comment statement. City of Wausau recognizes the value of public comment on local issues and the importance of allowing members of the public to express themselves on city matters. Please identify yourself by name and state your address. Each statement made by a participant should be limited to three minutes. Direct all comments to the chair, not to members of staff. or council members or other participants. People addressing the council shall not disrupt the orderly course of business. And the chair values civil discourse and may interrupt, terminate, or prohibit comment that do not adhere to these rules. Oh, Susan, you're up first. So we have some preregistered and we'll take them in the order they came in.

Okay. Hello. My name is Susan Lang, and I am president of Emrick Properties, and we're a landlord, owner of rental properties in the greater Wausau area of over 750 units, and I wanted to speak tonight in a positive support for the Wongard project development on the riverfront. Even though that project would bring in competition for rentals, I think it is a wise, low-risk, economic development project for our city And as the council being stewards of that parcel of land I feel that and reading the proposal that one guard checks all the boxes and Is a proven developer and we need to keep attracting good strong development in our County in our city And I'm a huge supporter of that. So I hope the council considers positively. Thank you.

Thank you, Susan And up next on data center ordinance is Arden Thornhill. Arden? That's correct. Okay.

It's an unusual name. So, hi, I'm Arden Thornhill. I live on McIndoe Street. First, I'd like to thank the city staff and the Planning Commission for recognizing that data centers deserve their own regulations. Lots going on there across the nation. I appreciate that this ordinance requires applicants to disclose water use, energy demand, wastewater, noise, and sustainability impacts. Those are important requirements, and I support WASA putting regulations in place before a proposal ever comes forward. But my concern is that we're creating regulations, is it that we're creating regulations, but rather whether we've gotten them right. I appreciate that this ordinance requires a conditional use permit and a more robust application process, but my question here Today is whether the ordinance gives the city clear standards for evaluating those applications Say a proposal would consume an extraordinary amount of water electricity strainer water resources create unacceptable noise or require major infrastructure improvements what standards will guide the city's decision to approve modify or deny that project and I also hope that the council will explain what protections exist to ensure that Wausau taxpayers and utility customers are not left bearing the cost of roads, water, sewer, or electrical infrastructure needed to support these facilities. Furthermore, the medium industrial district is intended for industrial uses that are not typically a nuisance for adjoining properties. I hope that you'll explain how that standard will be applied when evaluating facilities with significant cooling equipment, backup generators, or substantial utility demands. Finally, I'm respectfully asking that this ordinance be removed from the consent agenda and discuss its own item before you vote on it. This creates an entirely new section of our zoning code for a land use that could shape Wausau's future for decades. It deserves a full public discussion with full public accountability. Again, I just want to reiterate that the decisions that we make today define our community for decades, and I hope that we're taking it very seriously. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Arden.

Okay.

All right. That item has already been marked for pulling. Okay. Up next is Linda Kalski. Is Linda here tonight? I submitted mine via e-mail. Would you prefer us to read it?

Yes.

Okay.

Or I can read it. Either way.

My comment is in regard to the river life self self development. I fail to understand why the council continually approves the building of apartments in the Wausau area. Apartments recently opened where the downtown mall was previously located and more recently on the first Avenue and in Stewart Avenue while there is another development curly under construction on Thomas street. Rental costs for these developments are on the high end while low income residents are continually left in the lurch. Statistics show that Marathon County is one of the worst counties in the state to provide adequate low income housing. Also apartment dwelling does not create stability for a community as tenants tend to move frequently. When is this council going to do something beneficial for the marginalized in our community? I am really disappointed in how certain aspects of my community are being developed as well as the overall lack of consideration for taxpayers. And Mayor Denny, I respectfully request that you do not rubber stamp all spending proposals. Thank you.

Thank you. Up next is Tom Killian on data center zoning.

Good evening, Tom Killian, 133 East Thomas Street. And yes, first I'd say that if local government had the opportunity, I think the correct policy path would be an outright ban on AI data center construction. My understanding is that is not legally or statutorily possible at the local level. And in addition to some of the risks that were already conveyed, I'd mention that, yes, in addition to decimating employment opportunities in various job sectors in the very near future, AI has the potential to destroy the human experience as we know it. AI is fundamentally an anti-human initiative that poses a clear existential threat. So without the ability to formulate an outright ban at the local level. I am in support of creating zoning requirements and regulations. I think city personnel should be commended for taking a proactive approach. But I would make one suggestion in some of the requirements that look like they have a good chance of passing. So due to the unique disturbance and risks that these types of centers pose and not all data centers are monolithic, but certainly AI data centers pose a unique disruption and threat. My understanding is that the zoning districts at hand only provide for setbacks of 30 to 50 feet, roughly. Just imagine that in your head, that proximity is extreme, very close. So some communities have looked at and some advocates have pushed for setbacks of at least 200 feet from any residential area. area so yes in addition to what's being proposed this evening I would ask as a resident that the body give consideration either this evening or at some point in the future to at least a setback of 200 feet and given the limitations that act 67 places on Wausau's discretion to deny conditional use permits I feel it's important to really lay those out as clearly as possible and as early on as possible to make sure those protections are there. And yes, while the state of Wisconsin has destroyed city and local discretion with Act 67, I would remind you that it does not do so on development deals. So your judgment is your own on that tonight. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Up next is Christine Martins on data centers. Data center ordinance proposal.

Good evening. My name is Christine Martins. I live at 1228 Arthur Street in Wausau. I'm here to also speak about Ordinance 260706, the addition of data centers to the municipal code. I find it ludicrous that an item as important as the regulation of data centers has been placed within the consent agenda. The regulation of data centers is of the utmost importance to the citizens of Wausau and all people and for future generations. This is not a topic that should be slid into the consent agenda like the addition of a stop sign. It needs full council discussion and transparency. I appreciate that some parameters have been created to be set into the codes. It is a good beginning, but they don't go far enough as the other speakers mentioned. These parameters may slow the process, but the possibility of data centers is all too real still. The list of issues created by data centers within Wisconsin and around the country continues to grow. WASA needs to pay attention to the communities already dealing with the fallout of new data centers. These developments are built at the expense of resident, excuse me, these developments are built at the expense of residents, not to benefit the community. Resources are abused and depleted. Expenses are passed along to the residents. Infrastructure is strained. Investment into the community by data center companies is minimal or non-existent, as are the jobs promised. Thank you.

Thank you, Christine. Anyone else think they signed up or haven't had a chance to speak? All right, seeing none, we'll move on to the consent agenda. So we have one item we are going to poll, and that is 26-0706, and that's the ordinance amendment from plan commission for regulations to create regulations on data centers. Is that the only one? Okay, so would entertain a motion on the rest of the consent agenda unless 260706. Motion from Slonsky, second from Watson.

Voting is now open. Passed 11 to 0.

All right, so that item will move down to 7, ordinances and resolutions. And we'll take it first. It's file number 260706. It's an ordinance from the plan commission amending municipal code title 23, zoning sections 23.2. 03.05 table of land uses, 23.03.14 industrial land uses, and 23.0606 off-street parking and traffic circulation to define and create regulations for data centers in the zoning ordinance. We'll entertain a motion. From Watson. We have a second. We'll go with Alder Slonsky. Yes, discussion, questions on that. We do have Carrie Edmondson here, assistant city planner, who helped draft this for plant commission and took input and has some, can answer any question you might have, I think. You gotta give me a yell because I don't like seeing anyone. Mr. Martins.

Excuse me. I guess I'll get things started off here because there's been a lot in the news concerning data centers, most of it negative and justifiably so. With the rapid expansion of AI or artificial intelligence, the data center provides the back end for those AI, that AI processing power. But data centers do come in all shapes and sizes. And in the ordinance, I'm glad to see that there is a provision for an ancillary use of AI A BUSINESS USING THEIR DATA CENTER OR SERVERS FOR PROCESSING. I THINK ONE EXAMPLE THAT WAS GIVEN IN THE MINUTES, LIKE THE HOSPITAL, WOULD HAVE A SERVER FARM. IN TODAY'S BUSINESS CLIMATE THAT IS A COMMON ROLE, ALTHOUGH MORE AND MORE BUSINESSES ARE MOVING A LOT OF THEIR SERVERS OFF CAMPUS INTO THE CLOUD. Even our city of Wausau is moving many of its servers off into the cloud, and those data farms are justifiably necessary for today's marketplace, but the rapid deployment of the AI data center, the crypto mining data center, have become a scourge on our... communities you just need to look at down in Pleasant Prairie or Oak Creek to see you know the the concerns that residents they are having with the water table and and noise just to name two things so I I like this ordinance it is a good starting point it's a good jumping-off point it makes us You know, if somebody's looking to bring a data center to the community, you know, it forces a conditional use permit so that we do have the opportunity to weigh all of the necessary pros and cons of the data center and see if that's something that we want to be able to invite in you know it's not going to be 100 protection because any other community outside of the city of wasa could decide that you know if if they want to they want to host it you know it's it would still impact you know the residents of the city of wasa so just be aware of that uh you know for deeper protections we need to be looking at the county and the state level but This is a good first start, and I like that positive momentum, so we're going to move forward with that. So I will be supporting this ordinance. Thank you.

Thank you. Alder Watson.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO I DID WANT TO HAVE CARRIE COME UP JUST FOR A SECOND, BUT I GUESS I HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS BASED ON SOME OF THE FEEDBACK FROM THE RESIDENTS. WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE TO ADD THE 200 OFFSET FROM THE RESIDENTIAL? BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT you know, some of the items, maybe we could add an F to it. What are your thoughts on that?

That's something we very easily could add. I mean, that could be an additional supplemental standard. Just one point of clarification, the 30 foot setbacks in the medium industrial and 50 foot in the heavy industrial are building setbacks. So those are from the edge of the building to the property line. So for certain uses in the zoning code, we also have requirements, distance requirements from residential properties in the area. They typically occur when we have use outside the structure, like heavy industrial, for example, if there's outdoor use, I think it's a 50 or 100 foot requirement from residential our outdoor recreation if there's outdoor use so they're two different things but yes when we do have that it's an additional supplemental standard with the conditional use permit okay so it wouldn't it would be redundant you think to add it in here no no i think i think we could so right now we we don't have any um required distance from residential we just have the building setbacks okay

So I also had another question, because a concern from a resident was, like, what are the metrics we're going to use if we get these applications?

Yes, that's very good. So when we're reviewing as staff conditional use permit applications, and Act 67 was referenced, That was passed in 2017. It is correct to say that limited our local oversight over conditional use permits. But we still have an administrative protocol we need to follow. So in any zoning code, you need to have findings of fact for conditional use permits. So in our zoning code, these I'll just go through them really fast, there's five. It needs to be in harmony with the comprehensive plan. It would result in a substantial or undue adverse impact on nearby property, the character of the neighborhood, environmental factors, traffic factors, parking, public improvements, public property or right of way, or other matters affecting the public health, safety, or general welfare. C is maintains the desired consistency of land uses, land use intensities and land use impacts as related to the environs of the subject property. D is the conditional use is located in an area that will be adequately served by and will not impose an undue burden on any of the improvements, facilities, utilities or services provided by public or private agencies serving the subject property. And then E is the last one, the potential public benefits outweigh any potential adverse impacts of the proposed conditional use after taking into consideration the applicant's proposal and any requirements recommended by the applicant to ameliorate such impacts. So once we would receive any plans, studies, sustainability plans, utility studies, water usage reports, sustainability plan, we're evaluating the proposal in this context. So this is what we're presenting to Planning Commission. We're determining if we think it meets these findings of fact. If we don't think it does, even with Act 67, as long as we have substantial evidence documented in our Planning Commission minutes, we're able to deny a conditional use permit. The difference is there used to be a lot more subjectivity. If we just didn't think a use was a good fit, we could deny it. Now we would want to say, you know, the utility reports aren't consistent with item B because da-da-da-da-da, the whatever isn't consistent with item D. So we do have, as part of our review, we're required to review it in this context. So this is the framework that we'd be using.

And it was mentioned at the plan commission, too, that part of it's about a conditional use permit. So that that approval wouldn't come to this council, it would just stop at plan, right? So, any pros and cons to that? Any, like, I guess, to assuade our fears.

Yeah, so, I mean, one, I would say one positive is the way our conditional use permits are structured is we have two meetings, two subsequent meetings, So we have a public hearing at Planning Commission where people can come and voice their concerns, and then a subsequent meeting where we make the determination. So there is some space between those, which I think this is an example of where that's very advantageous. I mean, a negative, of course, is, you know, if the Common Council wanted to see the applications, I mean, they just have to be aware of what Planning Commission agendas and packets are coming out. and certainly could attend a plan commission meeting, of course, and comment, but they wouldn't be the final determining body. Plan commission is the final determining body for conditional use.

And I think that's what's valuable about Alder Trueblood and myself serving on the plan commission. We can be those conduits for the rest of the council if those kind of discussions would come up. But I have to say, Carrie, I think this is an amazing job. And I know you collaborated with a consortium of municipalities that were working on this dialogue, right?

Yep. So we are very fortunate in the city of Wausau to have support to be part of the Wisconsin Local Government Climate Coalition. So that's a statewide entity. There's a lot of municipalities that are a part of that. Within that, we've had a data center work group that's been meeting for the last seven months, so we are pretty, I'm part of that, and we're in very close conversation about what's happening throughout the state, how different communities are handling things, what's working well, what isn't. In reality, I mean, none of us are, you know, experts on this. I mean, it's very rapidly changing technology. The applications vary quite a bit. And then I'm also on APA board, American Planning Association, Wisconsin board, and Some of my colleagues in that group are involved in some of the communities that were named earlier and are dealing with some of the impacts. So it definitely has not been developed in a vacuum. And the city attorney's office helped us quite a lot too with development of the language and what was included. But we really have tried to use a variety of resources. There's a lot of really good materials out there that are being developed, that are helpful. But like I said, because of the technology, it is probably something that we do want to revisit, particularly in the first couple years, just to make sure that we think it's meeting our needs and still... One quick thing I do want to say, one thing I think was really well done with the language and this was a lot of help from city attorney's office, we stayed away from like naming specific technologies, it's more on the impact. So as things change, we're still looking at impacts like energy impacts, water impacts. So we're not referencing anything hopefully that's going to become outdated quickly and hopefully we can get good data on usage.

AND I JUST HAVE TWO MORE THINGS, AND I WILL FINISH, I PROMISE. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH, CARRIE, FOR SORT OF EXPLAINING THAT. AND LIKE I SAID, AS PLAN, ONE OF THE PLAN COMMISSIONERS, I'VE BEEN SORT OF PRIVY TO SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS, SO IT'S AWESOME. ONE THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT ABOUT CARRIE'S COMMENTS IS THAT OUR GUIDANCE IS GUIDED BY THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH ANOTHER AWESOME THING THAT CARRIE IS DOING THIS NOW. AND SO IF WE DON'T WANT DATA CENTERS IN OUR COMMUNITY, WE NEED TO, LIKE, PUT THAT IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SO I WOULD ask the citizens to to participate in that survey, because that's what guides our plan. So sort of as a little caveat. And then I guess I would see if there's an appetite for an amendment. I would like to make an amendment and add an F underneath minimum required parking. And the F would be to require 200 feet or more away from residential areas. Is that OK? I was going to say 500 maybe, but I didn't want to be too crazy.

Did you say 200? I said 200 feet, but would you say 500 feet? I think five, well.

Because it sounds like 200 is sort of like the standard, but do we want to be a little extra?

Well, so I kind of looked through the zoning code on this earlier today. Most of what I could find was 50 or 100. So I think 200 would be fine. But I think whatever the council decides is fine.

So that's my amendment. I would amend to add F after the E, the minimum parking, and just say to require a minimum of 200 feet from residential areas.

And we could just copy, I mean we'd change it to 200, but we could just copy the language for other uses, however that's where it is, so we get the specific.

So we have a motion on the floor from Watson to amend the ordinance to add a setback of 100 feet, 200 feet. 200 feet from residential. Okay. Okay. Clear as it's written up there? And we had a second from Alder Slonsky. Further discussion on the amendment.

Mr. Mayor. Mr. Trueblood. So 200 feet sounds great. But what does it do? If it's open space, it's just an additional distance for the sound whatever to travel. So in that 200 feet, some communities are requiring berms, some are requiring other sound buffers, some are requiring retention pond and a berm. I mean, if the goal is to, what is the goal of the 200 feet? Is it just to separate it, or is it to actually dampen sound and dampen the possibility of? So this is my concern with addressing this currently. Our goal, as the legislature said in September, there's a stampede of these coming at our state and we're not really ready. So this is our sign, as it were, our notice that we are getting ready. But as has been mentioned, there are groups working on this in the background. And some of it we've addressed in other statutes, in environmental protection statutes. Maybe we could reference that material, bring some of that in. Do we need to... to wordsmith this now, or do we start with this and set a time to revisit it in four months, six months, eight months, and say, okay, now that we've had a chance to review, see what is working. I mean, we know for a fact, like in Port Washington, we have laws on the books, and the DNR did not follow the law. So the Sierra Club is suing them. What good was the ordinance? What good was the statute? So I would rather take the time to really establish what we're looking to do and do it well one time than to have to keep visiting this over and over and over and over. So I like the ordinance as it is currently written as a jumping off point. And then I would prefer to set a time in X number of months meetings so that we can study it further, so that we can get further education on it, and then come back and say, okay, here are the things that would be great if we could fix or adjust.

Anyone else on the amendment? Mr. Haneke. Thank you.

sorry thank you mr mayor um i just wanted to thank you carrie and the plan commission as well for for starting this process because i think it's well past time that we should should have done this um one thing i just wanted to clarify before i kind of share some comments is that i do think as a council it'd be important for us to take a close look at what we do or don't want to direct staff to including consent agendas I DO FEEL THAT THERE ARE QUITE A FEW TIMES THAT I'VE SEEN EVEN JUST IN THE THREE MONTHS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE WHERE ITEMS THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR GOOD REASON ARE OF IMPORTANCE TO OUR CITIZENS GET SLID INTO CONSENT AGENDAS WHEN I REALLY DON'T THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE TO DO SO. SO I'M GLAD WE WERE ABLE TO PULL THAT OUT THIS EVENING. AND I KNOW WE DO HAVE THE MEANS TO DO SO, I JUST THINK. IT WOULD LOOK BETTER IF WE WERE AHEAD OF THAT TO BEGIN WITH. SO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I DID WANT TO JUST COMMENT IN RELATION TO WHAT ALDER TRUBLOOD BROUGHT UP WAS THAT I THINK IT WOULD BE WISE FOR US AS A CITY, IF POSSIBLE, IF OUR CITY ATTORNEY OR CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT LIKE CASE PRECEDENTS FOR OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE FACED LAWSUITS FROM DATA CENTERS WHO, FOR WHATEVER REASON, WANT TO PUSH THE ISSUE OF GETTING A FOOTHOLD IN A COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP. BECAUSE I THINK, WHILE THIS IS A GOOD STARTING POINT, I AGREE WITH ALDER TRUBLOOD, I THINK WE NEED TO PREPARE FOR THAT AND SEE WHAT AVENUES AND PRECEDENTS ARE BEING SET IN TERMS OF HOW THE LEGAL SYSTEM IS USED TO GO FOR OR AGAINST SOMETHING THAT A COMMUNITY WOULD OR WOULDN'T WANT. SO I WOULD SAY THAT WHILE I AM ABSOLUTELY IN SUPPORT OF THE AMENDMENT, I THINK A BROADER DISCUSSION ON THIS NEEDS TO HAPPEN. AND I DO THINK AS A CITY IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR US AND THE PLANNED COMMISSION AS A WHOLE, I THINK, TO INCLUDE IN THEIR DELIBERATIONS LOOKING AT SOME OF THOSE USE CASES WHERE DATA CENTERS HAVE SUIT MUNICIPALITIES FOR THE RIGHT TO BE ABLE TO DEVELOP IN THEIR CITIES TO PREPARE FOR THAT. BECAUSE I DON'T WANT US TO BUILD ORDINANCES, RIGHT? IT'S GOING TO SEEM IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE A GOOD LOOK TO FEEL LIKE WE ARE TARGETING A SPECIFIC INDUSTRY. AND I REALIZE THAT WE ARE REALLY BEING CAUTIOUS IN WHAT YOU SHARED IN NOT DOING THAT. But I think it would be very important for us to just see what's already happening because, yeah, I don't think it's a matter of if but when.

So we are on the amendment. So let's stick to the amendment.

Those quarters knocking.

All right.

Alder Lukens.

Oh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to say I really appreciate the public comments on this tonight. And I appreciated what Alder Watson had said also in encouraging people to take the survey. But as well, the extension or coming back and revisiting this that the other two elders, Trueblood and Haneke, just said. So I do like the amendment with the additional setback, but I do think I would prefer to revisit it. So I'm really glad that we are getting the start on it because it's been a concern of mine for a long time. So again, to the public, please keep coming and making your public comments because they're really important. Thank you.

Thank you. All right, so we're still on the amendment to the main motion and I had Andrew Wyskowski in, but are you looking to speak to the amendment? We need to take the amendment first.

Yeah, I mean, my comment sort of goes along with the amendment. Okay, go ahead. There's a number of amendments that I would make to this. So I'm of the same stance as Alder Trueblood where it's like, I don't know if tonight is the right forum for us to be making lots of amendments. I think it's better if we get the ordinance up and running and then revisit it repair it, improve it, whatever we need to do. Because similarly, I have questions about depth. We talk about how far away from properties they go, but how deep do they go? Is there a groundwater situation underneath them? What kind of natural resources is it far away enough from as well? Everything in the ordinance right now just talks about residential, and I'm also concerned about, okay, how far is it from a wetlands? How far is it from a All these possible things. So I like that particular amendment. I just think that tonight's not the night to get into this. I think that's a bigger conversation.

Okay, thank you. Anyone else on the amendment? Seeing none.

Voting is now open. Passed eight to three.

Okay, so now we're back to the main motion as amended. We had a motion and a second. Is there anyone left in the queue to speak to the main motion? Alder Slonsky.

Thank you. FORGOT TO WITHDRAW MY REQUEST, BUT SINCE I'VE GOT THE MIC, JUST WANTED TO THANK CITY PLANNER FOR PUTTING SO MUCH WORK INTO THIS. I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET IT STARTED, AND I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SIT HERE TONIGHT AND TRY TO MAKE THE PERFECT THE ENEMY OF THE GOOD. I DO SUPPORT THIS, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS AND ENHANCEMENTS AT A LATER DATE.

THANK YOU. All right, seeing no further questions, comments.

Voting is open. Passed 11 to 0.

Thank you, Carrie.

Okay, up next is file number 26-0705. This is an ordinance from the Planning Commission rezoning 1010 South 16th Avenue from a single family residential to a five zoning district to a it's a five zoning district to a pud planned unit development zoning district to allow for expansion of a commercial business known as brass properties llc would entertain a motion from watson second from lukens Seeing no discussion.

voting is now open.

Oh, Alder Killian. So we're having trouble getting the speakers up on our screen here. So raise your hand if you don't get recognized. Alder Killian.

I will not be supporting this because as I read the packet material, I saw that all of the residents who came to speak at the planned commission public input meeting on June 16th plus a written submission spoke against this rezoning. So I would like to speak in support of the residents.

Point of order, Mr. Chair. So the vote that we just called when there was still discussion to have is now rescinded, correct? For the vote to be retaken?

We had a motion and a second. We were trying to get the voting set up, but we didn't actually call the vote. So are we going to revote? The vote was not announced by the clerk. There were some issues getting everybody's vote in. So anyone else like to speak on it? Mr. Martins.

I'm in support of the development here, but just one thing I wanted to call attention to was the lighting specs and the lighting plan, because I did see that the fixtures that they were using, it looked like are ones that work well with keeping the lighting downward, and I think that's important. You know, there's... way too much light that goes up into the sky and whatnot, and I'm a proponent of dark skies, and whenever we can use lighting that is smart, that keeps lighting levels at a at a color temperature and an intensity that benefits dark skies, but also the residents in the neighborhood. I do appreciate that. I see if they can keep the color temperature low, and if you can keep the overshadow always downward so that it doesn't interfere with the temperature. the dark skies and also the residents of the community, I'm totally in favor of that, so thank you.

Okay, thank you. And just to address Alder Henneke's point, I wasn't getting the hails to speak here, so if I do pass someone over, let me know. But right now I've got it up, and I'm showing Killian and Martins. Anyone else wish to speak on this? Alder Killian. Great. Those are the two I had in queue. Is there anyone else? Okay, seeing none, I will formalize this with a vote.

Voting is open. Passed 9-2.

Up next is file 26-0710 is a resolution from the Economic Development Committee approving a planning option for 1501, 1502, 1505, 1508, 1509, 1510, and 1514 North 2nd Street and 201 East Bridge Street. WITH EMINENT DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, AND THAT CAME TO US FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN A 3-1 VOTE. WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION FROM MR. NEAL.

A MOTION TO APPROVE THE PLANNING OPTION.

AND A SECOND FROM MR. HENEKE. SEEING NO SPEAKERS.

Yes, we have three.

Wow, I'm getting a little time delay here. All right, who is first?

Alder Larson. Thank you, Mr. Chair. When I read through this, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is still just in the planning stages, so there's been no ask or anything from the developer or anything. I just wanted to clarify that. Patrick Gaterman.

Yeah, ultimately a planning option is just that, is what it allows is both the developer and the city to go through the due diligence stages of a plan. This allows the developer to look into the site plan, refine the actual site layout better, work with their banks, look at their loans. So we have a lot of developments when they come to us, when we get to term sheets and development agreements, they're in their third or fourth, fifth extension of those planning options. So sometimes they take years. So this is the first agreement we'd have with Eminent Development Corporation. This is a, like I said, right now it says a three to four level, 30 to 40 to 50 apartments. We have to refine all those things. So this is just allowing him to go through due diligence and partner with the city on that process.

Thank you, Patrick.

Alder Killian.

Thank you. Based on Alder Larson's question, I believe at the ED committee, I did, I understand this is just a planning option. But at the ED committee, I did ask specifically When the developer answered the RFP, he said he wanted the land for a dollar. And under that planning option, I believe they said that it would be consistent with the response. If it moves forward, it will be consistent with the response from the RFP. So I do believe that this developer is going to and is continuing to want land. land that is valued at five hundred and forty thousand dollars for a dollar plus additional subsidies if that's not correct Patrick let me know

Yeah, ultimately, I don't feel we're near that stage yet. Ultimately, in the planning option, they do say this is what they want it for. But this isn't a term sheet. This is an development agreement. Those things are not negotiated at this point. So like many of those things, these take many revisions to look at. But no, it would not be for a dollar.

Why does it say that in the planning option? And in the information we got at the ED committee that

Anything moving forward would be consistent with the response from the RFP Ultimately the consistency is we try to stay consistent with like this is the plan of the developer You know through this process, but the dollars the you know the time frame those are still negotiable items Just to finish my time

Even though this is a planning option, I know that if it moves forward, I will not support it. So whatever the terms are, I do not feel that our city at this point in time needs additional market rate housing. So I will not support the planning option. Thank you.

Thank you. Alder Martins.

Thank you. I like the concept of the planning option, and I think it's good that we're entering into a planning option with the developer because that gives them a chance to work out in a greater depth and a detail if their concept is going to work in this scenario. in on the on these properties uh... this area this neighborhood has deep connection for me because this was we live our our our second apartment was block away at fourth and dekalb so it's uh... i know the area well and i do like the group i i i like how a lot of it was cleaned up in the last decade i have concerns about uh... adding fifty sixty units of apartments in this neighborhood though with the consideration of just a block away we have both trolley flats and the Savo Supply Building. And then I think just to my personal ideas is that maybe something like the townhouses or the duplexes that ring these blocks might be a better option. But maybe that's something that the planning option will discover. 5,800 square feet of mixed-use commercial is a good thing. This neighborhood, while it is across the river from a large grocery store, it would be good to see... retail more retail in this in this in this neighborhood uh... we we have an opportunity to make this a very nice walkable neighborhood and uh... those are you know that uh... not you know i'm i'm not to see anything good or bad about uh... about the concepts but my wish to know my wish list for development in this area is walkable neighborhood retail that benefits the residents and a lower density of housing on those parcels. So thank you.

Thank you. Alder Wyskowski.

Patrick, can you come back up? Certainly. Was the community engaged on this to suss out their feedback on it?

Ooh, the RFI was originally released in 2024. I'd have to, I mean, I've been here only nine months, so I believe there was community engagement back in 2024, which they collected what they're looking for, At this point in time, we're in several years. Randy, could you speak more to that?

Yeah, happy to step in. Andrew Lynch was in Patrick's position prior to him, and they did do a community meeting in this area. Information that was obtained from that community meeting was included in the RFI that went out, so there was information collected on that.

Yeah, because I can't see any of that information in the packet here.

Yeah, ultimately, yeah, because this, we really kind of started in 2025 when the RFI was revised to reflect Eminent's response. So that's the difference. You know, it was, you know, there is information. We do have that community response, but the revision from 2025 is what Eminent responded to.

Yeah, it's kind of a trick question because I knew it happened. My mom went to it. But I just think it would be really useful to include what the community said they wanted and also specifically what they didn't want. I think that would be beneficial for us to have available at the next point that this comes up. That's all.

Thank you. Alder Watson.

She did me a favor and withdrew and then resubmitted so that I could.

I would like to cede my time to Alder Hennig. I'm not refreshed as fast as you are. So let's go with Alder Hennig.

So Drew, thank you for bringing up those questions. I wanted to thank Patrick for all the work that you've done in getting this settled with eminent domain and just looking at or eminent investments and just looking at the options that we have. AS CHAIR OF THE ED COMMITTEE, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS THIS EVENING, AND I WANTED TO GIVE SOME CLARIFICATION AS TO WHY. SO, IN TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, BEING SURPRISED AT MY NOMINATION TO CHAIR THE COMMITTEE, BUT WANTING TO LEARN MORE ABOUT WHAT THE CITY IS DOING IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, I DID REQUEST AND STAFF WAS VERY KIND TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE PROPERTIES THAT THE CITY CURRENTLY HOLDS AND HOW LONG THEY'VE BEEN ON MARKET, WHAT OPTIONS WE'VE HAD AND WHAT DEVELOPERS HAVE COME COURTING. very disappointed, not in our staff, not in the city, but in just the reality of the fact that we have some properties that have, and many that have exceeded 2,500 days, that nothing has happened with them, nothing's been done with them. I AGREE WITH ALDER KILLIAN'S DISTASTE FOR SELLING VALUABLE PROPERTY AT A LOW COST FOR DEVELOPERS. I DO THINK WE AS A CITY SHOULD KEEP IN MIND THAT IF NOT FOR THE PUBLIC INVESTMENT, WOULD THIS INVESTMENT HAPPEN? THAT WAS MY CONSIDERATION WHEN MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PLAN. obviously an actual development agreement would need to move forward then after this planning option. I do think it's important for us to keep in mind the reality of what economic environment we're currently operating in, where wrong or right, the standard has kind of been set. I think for developers across the board and within the nation that THEY GET SOME TYPE OF SUBSIDIES FROM THE CITY, NOT NECESSARILY IN DIRECT FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS FROM THE CITY TO SUPPORT THE PROJECT, BUT TO PROVIDE PROPERTY FOR INEXPENSIVE DEVELOPMENT. TAKING THAT IN TANDEM WITH THE FACT THAT WE DO HAVE A VERY DIRE, AND SOMETHING THAT I WANT TO LOOK AT AS CHAIR OF THE ED, BUT A VERY DIRE SITUATION IN THAT WE ARE REALLY STRUGGLING TO FIND OPTIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTIES THAT ARE EXCEEDING EXTRAORDINARY AMOUNTS OF TIME THAT THEY'VE BEEN AVAILABLE FOR ACQUISITION. I REALLY DO THINK IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE CITY TO OPERATE IN GOOD FAITH TO LOOK AT HONEST AND OPEN AND TRANSPARENT DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR PROPERTIES THAT REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER INTEREST AT THIS TIME. THAT IS NOT TO SAY THAT WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY RUBBER STAMP THE FIRST PERSON WHO COMES AND SAYS THEY'LL TAKE A PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN SITTING FOR SIX YEARS BUT I THINK IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT DEVELOPERS KNOW THAT OUR CITY IS WILLING TO CONSIDER OPTIONS AND OPERATE IN GOOD FAITH TO SEE WHAT WAYS WE COULD OR MAY NOT MOVE FORWARD, I'M IN SUPPORT OF THAT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT OUR COMMUNITY WHICH IS ALREADY SUFFERING FROM A LACK OF DEVELOPER INTEREST IN THE PROPERTIES THAT WE DO HAVE AND WOULD LIKE TO GET RID OF, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE OFF THE IMPRESSION THAT WE ARE NOT WILLING TO AT LEAST HAVE THE CONVERSATION AND LOOK AT WHAT OPTIONS THERE ARE FOR DEVELOPMENT. SO ALL THAT TO SAY, AS I REEMPHASIZED FROM EARLIER, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS IN LIGHT OF THAT. THAT DOES NOT SAY ANYTHING TO THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T EVEN CROSSED THAT BRIDGE YET, BUT I WOULD ASK THE COUNCIL TO SUPPORT THIS.

Thank you. Alder Trueblood.

As I see this property, and I appreciate all the work that's been put into this, I see it as eight separate properties. At one time, there were eight single-family homes on that block. So we keep saying, well, we need more affordable single-family homes. We tore them down. So have we tried to sell these eight parcels as developable places we could build houses? When you think about it, we are being asked to consider a building not even two blocks from this site as an apartment complex because it's off the hill, this is at the top of the hill on bridge, down by WOW, by the Waterside Park, We're being asked to consider a property. We are constantly being told we need to develop the property on the other side of Bridge Street. We have a box company that we want somebody to develop. Maybe it's not that we don't have developers, maybe we're trying to develop the wrong thing. Maybe we've given them a cookie cutter and said as long as what you want to develop fits this cookie cutter, this shape, that's what we want. Are we, so I as a private individual, if an RFP came to me, I wouldn't even know what that was. But there are a lot of places I would like to live in town where if I could find an empty lot and if it were convenient for me to build there because the city promoted it and allowed it and helped me do it, I would love to do that. But even talking to general contractors, I find that, yeah, that's not easy to do in Wausau. So I don't hate this idea, I just don't think we need this cookie sitting there. Especially when we're putting another one just down the hill. And we're gonna shell out lots of money for that. I really hate to give up eight single family sites for one really large, potentially empty building.

Thank you, Alder Watson.

I'll make this brief. Thank you, Mayor. I like the proposal. I'm going to vote for the planning option because I think it's awesome. But I like the idea that we've converted to RFIs because RFIs are sort of opening up more than just, like, pigeon-holding. Like, we want this. It's more opening it up, right? Is that what the RFI, Patrick and Randy?

Yeah. So, really, the RFI is something new that we created because we saw that, you know, we get this process where we expect a proposal to come forward and it limits the ability to amend it, take in input as they're going through the process. So actually the Wongard project at River Life South was the first time we went through it in that we wanted to find a partner to work with on a project. We didn't want them to come with these are our plans, we put a bunch of time into it and this is what we're doing. We wanted to have some iterations throughout that process. So that was kind of our attempt to be a little bit more flexible. Also something I'll talk about through our process is when we do take public input on the front end, it's kind of a double-edged sword in that we're taking that input in and we're saying we're gonna come back with something that's gonna fit within that. And sometimes that's a bit challenging other than saying we have land available, give us your ideas. Now that's a whole balancing problem where We want to get the public input from the neighborhood to bring back something they want, but it's also limiting what we can bring back. It's the conundrum that challenges us each day.

Right, because you can't bring back a bowling alley, restaurant, pool. We have a lot of asks and those weird hybrids are hard to come back. Maybe that's what Alder Trueblood is mentioning, is maybe we need to go to more of that RFI so we're not pigeonholing ourselves into an idea that we're exploring it and becoming partners. Because I think that's a key with economic development is we need to be partners with our businesses and our developers. And being good partners is being able to communicate good and collaborate, right? So thank you.

Thank you. Alder Lukens.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with much of what has been said here. I think that, Randy, I'm going to ask you to correct me or clarify, but to Elder Trueblood's comment, yeah, I mean, we have a number of, I know we have a number of apartment complexes. Part of that is, though, my understanding, the demand that

not that our population has changed so much but the type of housing we need the family unit size correct correct um so and i mean like type of using we are limited in the city of wassau we don't have any more land that we can acquire outside our boundaries So in order to add additional housing units, we're looking at density opportunities. And that means growing up higher density on certain parcels to fulfill that need. We did a presentation for Economic Development Committee at our meeting last Tuesday, talking about the fact that even though our population has grown very slightly in the city and really the county as a whole, we have more households in general. People are having less kids. So although our population isn't generally increasing that much, we have a need for more housing units. So one way to do that is through more dense development like you see proposed here.

Thank you. And I think the other thing that I thought of as far as homes, I mean, I would love to see that too. You know, homes, actually homes put in. However, Do you know what the average costs now? I mean, I know in last term on ED, it's expensive to have a home built, or even a modular, correct?

Yeah, correct. I mean, housing costs have gone up. We had one of the pieces of data that I showed was since 2020, the cost of single-family home construction, I forget, was $45,000. 47%, very similar to multi-families on that same trajectory, that the costs have gone up that much since 2020 to build a new single-family home. So unfortunately, those are the realities we work in, and we need to work through those challenges and find solutions.

Yeah, because the ones, I just remember some of the ones that we looked at last term on ED, you know, for two-bedroom, whatever, it was like $200,000 to $300,000. So I think that's one of the difficulties. So anyway, I just kind of wanted to bring that up because those things really struck me. So thank you.

Thank you. Alder Slansky.

Thank you. I'd like to kind of jump off of what Alder Lukens was just talking about. So there are the trolley flats, atrium lofts both in that area, but we do still have a deficit of housing in Wausau and we're land constrained. It's going to be very hard to find more open spaces to create enough housing. AS SINGLE FAMILY UNITS. ONE OF MY CONCERNS THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE US AVOID IS A SITUATION WHERE WE'VE GOT ALL LOW-INCOME HOUSING KIND OF GROUPED TOGETHER AND KIND OF GHETTOIZED, AND THIS PROPOSAL OF A MIXED DEVELOPMENT MARKET RATE UNIT WOULD ALLEVIATE THAT CONCERN FOR ME, SO I WILL BE SUPPORTING IT.

THANK YOU. Mayor, if I could just point a clarification on all this. It will have, there will be majority of those market rate, but there will have to be some affordability in the mix. Just based on how we acquired that last single family home along Bridge Street, I believe that would happen in 23 or 24. We use CDBG money for that. So there will be affordability component to a portion of the building. So it won't all be market rate. There'll be a portion of it that would have some affordability to it.

Even better, thank you.

Thank you.

Seeing no further discussion.

Voting is now open.

All right, next item up is File 260702, Confirming Appointments of the Mayor of the City of Wausau to Historic Preservation Commission and the Capital Improvement Project Committee. I would entertain a motion from Slonsky and Watson. Watson seconded.

Voting is now open. And that passed 11 to 0.

Up next is item eight, suspension of rule 1D, transmission of committee business to the council, 6B for filing. And there's a correction here. If it is rule 11A, it should be rule 12A, referral of resolutions. 11A is referral of ordinances. I'm going to entertain a motion. from Neil, second from Slotsky. Point of order. Said your point of order.

Do we need to amend this to reference 12A rather than 11A before we vote on it?

Go ahead, Ann.

I don't think we need to amend the agenda. I think we can acknowledge it unless there's an objection as a clerical error.

Thank you.

And the suspension of the rule still requires two-thirds vote.

Voting is now open.

Okay, we have a request to speak on the suspension of the rules. Mr. Trueblood.

So in our April meeting when we were discussing committees and we pointed out that we were going to make suspension of the rules as rare as possible. And this is granted the first time we've had to do it this term. I would like to know that all of these items have had the option, opportunity to go through their standard process, or are we just hurrying this up because we're in a hurry?

So point of order, I didn't think suspension of the rules was debatable.

Is it not? Well, that was the debate we were having about debating the debate.

Oh, I got it right here.

Okay, so generally it is not. We did make some clarification.

So, okay, I resend my comment.

We'll move on. But I think it's important to preface that at the director's meeting, there were potentially six requests for suspension of the rules, and we whittled it down to the ones that we really felt needed to come forward. So that's why you see the ones that you do here. Thank you for the clarification. All right.

Is everybody good with their votes still?

Yes.

Okay. The vote passed eight to three.

Okay. The first item. All right, first item up is item file number 040306 is a joint resolution from the Human Resources Committee and Finance Committee approving bargaining agreement between the city of Wausau and local 1168 Amalgamated Transit Union, AFL-CIO for July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2028. Would entertain a motion from Slonsky. Second from Haneke. Seeing no. Hold on a second. OK, we have a we had a question on the. The items that came forward the the votes out of committee. human resources passed unanimously and finance was that tonight mike yeah finance passed unanimously unanimously also okay so two unanimous votes from uh hr and finance tonight and that was one of the reasons why this one is under suspension of the rules voting was opened and it has passed 11 to 0. Up next is file 26-0713, resolution from the Human Resources Committee approving the City of Wausau Firefighter Paramedic Apprenticeship Program. And this passed tonight, oh. Three to two at the Human Resource Committee. Finance, I was here. I thought it was five to zero.

It was three to two at finance. I think HR was four to one, if I remember correctly. All right. Three to two also? Okay.

Okay, so I'm hearing three to two at HR, four to one at finance.

Three to two at finance. They were both three to two.

Let's refer to the clerk. Hold on.

Yes, it did pass 3-2.

Human, sorry.

Yeah, this was at Finance.

I stand corrected then, it was 5-0.

Okay, so I... Which maintenance is that from? From tonight? Okay, and that's the item? Okay, who's that? Yeah, that was the initial. Okay, we have just a little bit of a recording issue. I think it was at Finance, and then I believe it did pass 5-0 is what we have recorded.

I can confirm that because everybody who was at Finance tonight just said they voted in favor.

Yeah, I stand corrected. I apologize. It was 5-0. I was thinking of another resolution.

All right.

Five to zero.

Okay, so if paramedics, it did pass tonight, if finance, five to zero. We'll try to get these recorded before the meeting starts. We don't rely on our memories.

All right.

So I would entertain a motion on approving the apprenticeship program. from Martins, second from Haneke.

Before we hear from the chief, would I be able to just share why this made sense to be under suspension of the rules to provide that clarification if we were doing that for the last item?

Sure, sure.

So just to clarify, and I appreciate you chatting and presenting to us today, this item definitely made sense to be under suspension of the rules. I do know that this item in particular is under a pretty tight timeline right now. I think the date in which we were asked to have this submitted has already passed at this point. I believe we're almost a month past that point already at this point. So time is of the essence with this item for sure.

Thank you. FOR THE COMMENT. ALDER WATSON.

OH, I APPRECIATED THE, THANK YOU, MAYOR. I APPRECIATED YOUR PRESENTATION TODAY, AND I GUESS I DIDN'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. I THOUGHT YOUR PRESENTATION WAS REALLY NICE, AND I HOPED, I THINK MOST OF US HAD GOTTEN IT AT ONE POINT. SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK YOU'VE BEEN DOING. AND THE PARTNERSHIPS, I THINK THAT'S KEY, AND I'M VERY HAPPY THAT YOU'RE BUILDING THOSE PARTNERSHIPS IN OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

Alder Trueblood.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I echo what Alder Watson said. I think this is a great opportunity. I think it's a great... Anytime we can develop the future workforce, I think that's a good thing for us to do. So I appreciate all your work on this. I appreciate all that's been done. I do... I would like to know why things are going under a suspension of the rules and why things get to the point where it's a must be decided now situation. Because this is a lot of work has obviously gone into this. So I don't know if just the calendar got away from us or I don't know. But it would be nice if we could get these things in a more timely manner. But I do really appreciate all your work and I love this plan. Thank you. Thank you.

Alder Tierney.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

I believe one... Vicki, I'm sorry. Vicki, I'm trying to read across the table here. Alder Wyskowski.

Sorry.

Okay. Let me ask a quick question. Does everybody see the order of people looking to speak here? You're not seeing that.

Neither am I.

Right now, I'm still getting, mine isn't working, but it's updating still.

Okay, so bear with us.

We'll take them in the order. Alder Wiskowski.

I can give you some context on why we're in this position. At last month's HR meeting, we did not approve this to move forward. We did not feel it was ready. We had a number of questions as we were talking to the chief and connection at NTC about hidden costs that might accrue, which all came down to a number of benefits packages issues, which if you look at the memorandum of understanding have now been included in that as of last night. I think, so that's one thing. Two, I think for the benefit of the public, if you could give a very quick, very simple summary of what the city is contributing in terms of finance towards this, that would be really great because we've spent a lot of time talking about this. I think that would be, I think that's really what the people want to hear is like what are we paying and what happens to stuff. So if you could do that real quick and real simple for us.

I can. I don't know if you want to go through your queue, Mayor, or should I try to do that now? Through the queue? Of anyone that needs to speak.

Oh, right now I'm showing Watson and Wiskowski.

Or if you want, I can ask you specific questions and you can just answer them that way.

I'll do whatever you guys want.

Okay, I'll do it that way. You're on the spot. Does the city pay a salary out of our coffers?

No, so with this apprenticeship program, you know, it's a partnership collaboration with NTC, working under the state apprenticeship program with their guidance and using the money that we were able to get from the... Holy smokes, without the... Congressional spending, yeah, thank you. For just over $3.2 million, everything towards this program will come out of that money. The only risk that the city holds at this point that we talked about in the last couple of meetings was the fact that they are considered full-time employees of the city of Wausau, but they're limited-time employees, meaning that they will understand and sign a contract that they will be employed for 18 months, and at that point, in order to continue their employment, they'll have to apply again. to become full-time firefighter paramedics. So if something would happen to them in that 18 months, then there would be some risk to the city as far as any injury or anything related to that. Dug into that deeper with the HR director and the HR department. And that risk is very, very small compared to the comparisons over the last few years of all the employees in the city of Wausau, as well as the fire department. And that would be the only risk that the city has. But the rewards, like I spoke to in a different meeting, the risk over rewards is huge. The rewards for the city is huge. is something that, you know, I can't speak to what exact numbers, but there's a lot of numbers there, right down to turnout gear, radios, training, the future of our firefighter paramedics, and the influx of people coming in. An example that I'll give you is that we're going to... That's great.

I think that's great. All right. I'll make it quick. Okay, next question. Any materials that are bought with this grant money, where do they go at the completion of the apprenticeship?

Right on. So with anything with the gear, the radios, the face masks, the testings of the face masks and all those sort of things, fire department-wise, comes back to the city, comes back to the fire department for future use. Those numbers are huge also.

And those are paid for by the grant?

Correct. Everything's paid for by the grant. Books and that sort of thing would go back to NTC.

Okay, great. Next question. Should the grant money expire during the course of the apprenticeship, what happens to the apprentices or to the program?

So that's something we added to the MOU, and that would mean that if the funds would become not available or anything like that, the termination of the program as well as the limited time employee would also be terminated.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you. Any further questions for the chief? Seeing none.

OK, voting is open. And that passed 11 to 0.

Thank you. Alright, up next is file 266-0708. It's a resolution from the Common Council approving term sheet for the redevelopment of 920 North 1st Street and 15 Fulton. It's a River Life South by Vanguard Partners. And the explanation on this one is that it did not have a formal vote from the economic, no, from finance the last time. If you recall, that meeting started, the council meeting started 40 minutes late. So when they rushed out of the closed session, they didn't take a vote and they didn't take a vote in open. So it is essentially coming from common council. That's rule 12A, referral of resolutions. So it didn't come out of a standing committee officially because there wasn't a vote for that. So I would entertain a motion on that from Watson, second from Neal. And first up, we do have Dave from Vanguard here tonight and Randy available. And I think maybe it's appropriate, he's been here for some time, is to introduce the project and Randy can walk through what the term sheet looks like. It's in the packet, but I think it's good for him to give us an explanation.

Yeah, thank you, everybody. I'm going to hand it over to Dave Rydell from Longard. There's a presentation in the packet if you don't mind pulling that up. He'll walk you through that. Then we're available for questions and your discussion after. Thank you.

Thanks, Randy. As he said, the information is largely in the packet, so I'm just going to kind of talk through this very quickly. First, thank you for the opportunity to be speaking here. We're here in response to the city's RFI. I had to correct that. And for everyone's purposes, that was a very collaborative process, and we've been appreciating working with staff and everyone with Wausau to this point. The reason for the response to the RFI initially was, one, we want to become part of Wausau's community, and two, we have extensive experience throughout Wisconsin and Brownfield redevelopment. Uh, the project directly advances the city's stated goals, whether in, um, in reviewing the comp plan, the river edge parkway plan, or the 2022 housing assessment, or even the update in 2025, all, um, outlining the need for additional housing. The project itself, uh, there's 143 units. I'm not going to go in through all the details. I'm glad to answer questions on the project itself. If there are any, Um, market rate housing along the river and the former hammer blow site. Uh, it'll provide that needed housing. And we talked about bringing residents near downtown employers, businesses, and foot traffic on the river rock. Um, critically, what it does is convert vacant tax exempt property into a productive community asset. Uh, the site is not easy to develop. Uh, we do have experience in Brownfield. As I had mentioned, more than 2 million must be invested in environmental work, soil stabilization, specialized foundations, and engineered site controls. One Guard will fund that work and has experience in doing it. We will complete it all to DNR standards and these extraordinary costs are the significant reason that assistance is necessary, not just for Wongard, but for any future developer that would seek to develop this site. The city has already invested years of planning, staff time, infrastructure, resources into this area to encourage and facilitate new development. That includes the establishment of TID 12. So TID 12 expires in 2024. That does cover the subject property. Every year the site remains vacant and is one less year of new tax revenue available to help overcome the conditions that have held it vacant. Starting over could mean another RFI or RFP, additional city resources, or another search for a developer willing to assume those same risks that we are. Delayed doesn't necessarily preserve the city's options for what happens with that land, but as the TID gets closer and closer to closure, it gradually reduces that option. The TIF is not intended to improve the return or needlessly enrich us on a project that already worked. The TIF, by design, fills a gap created by the extraordinary cost of the site. The incentive is entirely performance-based. If the value is not created, the reimbursement is not earned. The city is writing no upfront check, and the existing taxpayers are not funding this project. Today, the property generates no taxes. There are ongoing maintenance and reporting requirements, but the greater cost is really the opportunity cost of holding and the foregone income and the real estate revenue that would have been generated had something been developed. The project will generate or will create approximately $29 million in new taxable value, roughly $11 million during the remaining life of the TID and $800,000 in annual tax revenue following its closure. And in conclusion, the city created the vision, invested in the riverfront, invited the private market to respond. We're here today reflecting that response. We're prepared to invest. and solve some of the site constraints that do exist today and ameliorate them. Approval today, it turns years of planning really into action. It turns a vacant parcel into a neighborhood and a tax exempt property into a lasting source of community value. If there's any other questions, I'm glad to take them or have my seat. Thank you.

All right, thank you, David. Randy, did you have anything to add to that?

Nothing in particular. I think members of finance and ED, as was discussed earlier by the mayor, the reason that this is coming to you the way it did, we had a discussion running out of time. The decision was made to forward it on to the council as a whole without taking a vote. That's why... It's in front of you the way it is, so apologize for that, but we're here to answer any questions. We also have Keith from Ehlers, who's our financial analyst, available via WebEx if anybody has any questions on that. Hopefully there's enough information in your packet that gives you the rationale for how this was put together, but once again, we're here to answer questions.

Okay, showing first up is Alder Killian.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

FIRST OF ALL, I'M SURE THIS IS NOT GOING TO COME AS A SURPRISE TO ANYONE. I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS TERM SHEET OR THE DEVELOPMENT.

IS YOUR MIC ON?

IT IS. IT'S PROBABLY TOM. PUSH IT CLOSER. OKAY. THANK YOU, TOM. OKAY. I WILL NOT SUPPORT THE SALE OF IT. THIS IS NOT A CRITICISM OF THE DEVELOPER OR THE WORK THEY DO. I will not support the sale of a piece of land on the river assessed at $1.4 million for $100,000. The developers are also asking for an additional incentive of $4.84 million. Why would we give the developer 80% of the tax revenue for up to 17 years? And then at a 5.75% interest rate, it allows the unpaid balance on the incentive to accrue interest over time to a maximum of $8,351,739. But most importantly for me, it's clear from public sentiment and it has been so vast on this development I found it unbelievable that there is widespread disapproval of these types of deals, including this one. When there is that much rejection from the people who elect us and the council chooses to do something anyway, disregarding public sentiment, to me it almost feels a bit arrogant because as policymakers, we are dismissing the clear feelings of our people. Thank you.

Thank you. Alder Neal.

Thank you, mayor. Um, well, you know, I, uh, harken back to some, words from alder haneke earlier this evening about our unfortunate ownership of lots of land and holding on to it for long periods of time this particular piece which represents to me i mean prime real estate adjacent to river life and right there on the river It has been empty for years and years. It is providing zero dollars in revenue to the city year after year after year. We've had at least one, maybe two proposals I think just one proposal for that piece of land. Went through some various steps in the process, and then they just backed away. And it still sat there. Zero dollars of revenue year after year after year after year. And we're stewards of that gold mine down there that's bringing us nothing every year. Going forward, if this project doesn't happen, how many more years are we going to watch that prime spot produce zero dollars of revenue for the city year after year? How long are we willing to just let that happen? You know immediately if we approve now tonight. It's just a term sheet It's not the developers agreement, but ultimately if this project is approved even according to this term sheet Immediately we would the city would receive the purchase price Which we haven't had that's a hundred thousand dollars not zero dollars immediately The base, frozen, taxable, assessable value of that property, which is now about $1.4 million, is it? That would now start being paid to the various taxing entities, the city, the school district, NTC, the county. All of those entities are receiving zero dollars year after year after year, and anybody sitting here who's willing to let that go on indefinitely, I just, I can't wrap my head around it. This is an option to supply high density housing in a high value place. The value of that land is going to monumentally increase the property value Right now, an annual tax payment for that $1.4 million would be what, $28,000, something like that? Now multiply that by how many tens of times when this is a $29 million property? And who are we as stewards of the future of this city to say, well, I'm willing to let that go? We hear a lot of things out there in the public, people erroneously saying, why are they giving taxpayer dollars to wealthy developers? We hear it over and over again. People don't seem to accept the idea that what is being given, if you will, returned to the developer is the increased property value that they themselves have generated. They made that tax dollar increase happen. And as partners, we would then turn around and work with them to help them defray the expenses on a multi-multi-million dollar project. We're not talking about little infill housing projects. Those are great, and we'd love to have them. but you could do a dozen or do 20 or 30 infill projects and not get the tax revenue return you're going to get from this one project. It's our job to be stewards. It's not our job to be crusaders. It's our job to look at the numbers and the future So, I mean, let's get real. Anybody who has looked at the sort of executive summary that's in our packet that Patrick put together, it's in layman's terms. It's as clear as can be. It is very helpful. It's the kind of information that should be out there in front of the public so they could stop saying things that aren't accurate. stop misunderstanding what this is all about and understand what a reverse TIF is And if anybody should be able to understand that, it's people at this council. If anybody sitting here still doesn't understand that, please read again Patrick's summary. It lays it out in such a way that I can't imagine anybody looking at it and saying, no, I don't get it. It doesn't make sense. And it doesn't really meet our duties as stewards of the city's interests. So thank you. I fully support this and I hope everybody else does too.

Thank you, Alder Larson. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. You know, I'm just sitting here. This is kind of like these city council meetings are starting to sound like a broken record. Apartments, apartments, apartments. You know, that's all we do is apartments, apartments, apartments. But anyway, I have three things here I wanted to touch on. And I have a concern. about the vacancy data about the departments that we have subsidized. Is there any data out there that these, what's the vacant tenancy rate? And I also have concerns, are we over flooding the market? So before I could support this, I would have to see some vacancy data.

And. Director Feifrig, can you talk to occupancy?

Yeah, I can talk to specifically Foundry on 3rd. When I looked today, they had 62 units, other units that were still available, meaning they're at about 60% occupancy right now. Typically what we would expect to see with a lease up would be over a six to 12 month period to get to what 90 to 95% is what they expect to kind of level off at. So they're on their way. They opened in, it was November last year, so seven, eight months in. I would expect that 12-month timeframe, they should hit that 90% where they're going at. Westside Commons, I spoke with Ted Mackham from Gorman earlier today, and they're at 100% as of June 30th. And keep in mind, that's a LIHTC project. There's a lot of... There's a lot of different components to it in terms of them needing to get to 100% occupancy for their tax credits. There's a lot of things. Really what I see on those is it's a stabilization period where there's a lot of people coming in and out for the first couple years until they kind of get settled in to a little bit more regular, less people moving in and out of those facilities. But those are the two most recent.

Okay, there are some more questions. I have two more questions. Yes Last night at last night's meeting we talked about budget shortfalls and and I would like to know if there's Like for this project here It's it's pretty much like the foundry where there's 80% going back to the developer of the tax revenue for for 17 years so where does the does that go back into the general fund? Does that go into a TIF? I'm, just like the foundry on 3rd, I don't think that any of that goes back into the general fund for, go ahead Randy.

Yeah, correct. So it's in the tax increment district, this is in tax increment district number 12, meaning that the increment generated from this development will stay in TID 12 until it closes, I believe closing on this is 2044. So that's where the 17 years comes from in that their development, REVENUE THEY GENERATE FROM THEIR DEVELOPMENT, THEY GET 80% BACK OVER THAT TIME FRAME. THE REST STAYS IN THE TID, WHICH WE'RE ABLE TO USE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS, ROAD IMPROVEMENTS, A LOT OF DIFFERENT PROJECTS THAT CAN HAPPEN WITHIN THAT DISTRICT WITH THAT MONEY.

BUT IT SEEMS THAT NEVER HAPPENS, BECAUSE I WAS ON THE INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE, AND EVERY TIME WE GOT TO BUILD A ROAD, WE GOT TO BORROW FOR IT. BUT THAT'S A STORY FOR ANOTHER DAY. AND MY LAST QUESTION IS HERE IS, YOU KNOW, THESE DEVELOPERS, THEY COME FROM OUT OF TOWN, They want these incentives, you know. And yet we have a foundation that's building an apartment complex right downtown across the street from Hawaii, and they are asking for no money. The only thing that they had asked for is the utilities to be repaired to go to that building. So I just, I... I have to echo Alder Killian's thoughts. I mean, the people are not for this. I would love to move to the city and have 17 years tax-free or 80% tax-free on my house, just like anybody in this city. So I will not be supporting this. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, if I could, I just want to remind everybody that we do have Keith from Eller's on. And what we do as part of each of these projects is we run through a pro forma. Our goal isn't to unduly enrich a developer. We're trying to fill the financial gap as part of these projects. So we go through the project. Keith runs through all the numbers, looks at their construction costs, what their revenues are going to be. and we want to and we aim to create a financial package that fills that gap. It doesn't unduly enrich them, but it's enough so that they can make a moderate return, because nobody's doing housing for free. They're taking a big risk, they're putting in their own money. The only way they get paid is if they're successful with this project. So just keep that in mind that they're the ones, they're looking at the market, they're the biggest investor in this project. Obviously, as a city, we're a partner, and we benefit in the end. Adds more citizens to the city, adds more workforce to the city, and in the end, it's going to affect our general fund down the road.

Keith Dahl from Ehlers on the line. Did you hear that question, Keith?

Yes, I did. Good evening, everyone. Keith Dahl, I'm a municipal advisor at Ehlers, the city's financial consultant. When we, or I should say, when the city receives a request for public financial assistance, we want to review that. We want to evaluate the request because we don't want to give away a scarce resource, which is property tax, unless it is truly warranted and necessary to support the vision of the city council and ultimately the goals for redevelopment of the property. When we do a pro forma analysis, we're not just looking at the developer's sources and uses, their development budget. We're also looking at their operating pro forma, the rents that they're anticipating to collect, their operating expenses to understand once we get to the net operating income, what is their return on investment? If we are going to provide public assistance to a project, we wanna make sure that we're not unduly enriching the developer and that we only provide the minimum amount of public assistance needed to make the project financially feasible. We wanna make sure that we're maximizing, the developer is maximizing all private funding sources and other county funds that may be available to benefit this project since it is a redevelopment. And so through this process, there was a lot of time, a lot of back and forth with the staff and the developer. I just want to remind everyone that we have come a long ways in the negotiation. Originally, the developer wanted to receive 20 years of TIF assistance and collect about 99% of the increment generated from their project over that term. In addition, they also wanted upfront assistance. So, $9.4 million of PAYGO assistance over 20 years, that's a future value sum, and $1.5 million upfront and the land for a dollar. We've ultimately come to, I would say, a very reasonable amount of public assistance, truly the minimum to make this project financially feasible, providing 80% of the increment over 17 years and providing a reduced purchase price on the land, but the city is still getting $100,000. Keep in mind that while the land is, yes, assessed at $1.4 million, It is tax exempt currently, so the city is not collecting any property taxes from it. Any developer, in order to make this property developable, will have to spend $2 million. So I would argue that the $1.4 million assessed value that it currently has as a shadow value doesn't necessarily reflect what its true value is for redevelopment. um so with that i just wanted to give that high level overview to show where we've come and how we've shifted the risk from the city taking out potentially bonds to borrow for this upfront incentive to making sure that it's truly on the developer as a pay-as-you-go model and it's performance-based where the city has little minimal risk for this development thank you any other questions for

Okay, so right now on the queue we have, so we had Larson. Larson, are you finished with your questions? Okay, then we have Alder Lukens.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So thank you to Ehlers. Thank you, Randy. Thank you to Wongard. When I first became an alder in 2022, I was serving on the finance committee and ED, and everything was new, completely new to me about this. And I've learned a lot since that time I've done a ton of research throughout the country to try to figure out the whole, you know, housing issues, and I've tried to research, you know, other, what it's like in this state, other states, and I mean, everything that I've found is largely that we're not an island. This is taking place all over. But anyway, when I started, this property was kind of sitting, it was sitting and there was the possible, the development, but nothing was happening with it. So that was over five years ago. So in my time, nothing has happened. We've received nothing. that fell through, and from what I've seen, I'm certainly not the longest, there are a lot of people on this council who have served a lot longer than I have, but I think we've come a long way. When I hear, Ellers, what you just shared, right we are it's not for a dollar the sale i appreciate everything that wongard is doing to clean up the property um and i was i you know there are so many things built into this that i mean even i You know, I've thought at times, like, do we really need more apartments? You know, that same thing. But everything that I see, everything I listen to from other areas, everything, you know, I've learned from ED is we still do. You know, we can look at it and think, oh, we have so much of it. We don't, but we do. And one of the things is that family size that has really struck me. So I was on the river walk today, and I haven't been able to spend a lot of time on that in my life. But I went over to Barker Stewart Island to see the goats with my grandchildren. And even that, I think just being on the river walk there and I know this is further north, but I think, wow, how exciting would it be to have more vibrancy and the more people we get downtown, maybe, you know, we, I mean, I think we are benefiting because this is not sitting vacant. But the other thing is businesses. I also remember before the development, foundry development, business owners that were saying, please, please, please provide more housing because we need people downtown. And I just know from when I was like in my teens to now, like there used to be so much, there used to be so much more retail and you know, it's, we need that vibrancy. And the more that you know, the more people we have living downtown, they're going to hopefully be visiting the businesses. They're going to help our business owners out. And, you know, everything will build on each other. So anyway, I... I just really appreciate all the work that has been done in this, what Weingart is willing to do because right, everyone is in this, every business needs to make money. And I appreciate all the negotiations that have been done. And I just think that this is so much less risk for us that I'm going to be voting for you. in favor of this. So again, thank you all for all your work. I do just encourage everyone to think about it's not just what we get out of it. We all know we need revenue. We all know that. However, we have to be forward thinking. And we do have to think about the partnerships we have with business owners that they need this too. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Slensky.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to address something that comes up a lot in the neighborhood forums, the news, and I did hear Alder Killian say it today as well. We hear it a lot about this property is worth $1.4 million and we're selling it for $100,000. But that's not true. It's not worth $1.4 million if nobody is willing to pay that for it. and nobody is willing to pay that for it because it's going to take $2 million to remediate it. If we don't want to see another five years pass or more without anybody willing to put in some effort to develop this property and make it start returning on our taxes, it's not worth anything. It's just an illusion. I DO HAVE A QUESTION, THOUGH, FOR WANGARD THAT I HEAR A LOT FROM MY CONSTITUENTS, AND I THINK I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT IT WHEN YOU AND I MET, ABOUT MARKET RATE RENT, RIGHT? BECAUSE I HEAR A LOT FROM MY CONSTITUENTS AND MYSELF THE LAST TIME I MOVED TO A NEW PLACE WAS 15, 17 YEARS AGO, RIGHT? AND I THINK WHEN PEOPLE SEE THE RENTAL AMOUNTS THAT ARE GOING AS MARKET RATE, THEIR EYES POP A LITTLE BIT, RIGHT? SO COULD YOU KIND OF GIVE US A THUMBNAIL ON HOW YOU DETERMINE WHAT MARKET RATE RENT IS AND WHY YOU'RE ASKING WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO BE ASKING FOR FOR THE VARIOUS UNITS?

Yes, sure. So the rental rates are within the packet, but I can briefly kind of go over it. So for the overall community, it averages $1,776 per unit. That's across studios, one, twos, and threes. I'm sorry, studios, ones, twos, no threes here.

Excuse me, can you speak into the mic a little more so we can hear you better? Thank you.

Yes. So studios would be around 1,000. One bedrooms would be around 1,650. Two bedrooms would be just over 2,500. So to address your question on how we come up with these runs, I mean, we've looked at the foundry was a big source of data for us and how we wanted to kind of compare one with our amenities and our sizing and our unit finishes, which we find to be rather comparable. Another was Schofield Mill, also along the river property down at Schofield. So we conduct our market analysis and determine what our like-kind property is trading for that are not income-restricted or age-restricted and then align with market expectations. Does that address your question?

Yes, thank you. Thank you. Walter Wyskowski.

I had a few conversations with the E&D team about this development and where the future of a lot of our properties that we own and developments that might come. I mean, this project is moving along. It seems like this would be an economic benefit to us. you know a lot of constituents tell me they don't want apartment buildings no one wants apartment buildings it seems and i kind of get that but also when you live in cities apartment buildings are just I do think we should take an opportunity to keep in the back of our mind that maybe some of the future developments that we look at and direct E&D to do, maybe we do some more crafting and working with the communities to really engage them more and say, okay, what could we do and then narrow down together with the community more? instead of just launching a building on them. I too share a lot of concerns as Alder Neal about just this land sitting around and the poison soil is also a problem. It's gonna cost anyone a ton of money to remediate that. My concern is if this doesn't go forward, then I'd really like to see the council and the city immediately start thinking, okay, we have to do something with this land because it's just sitting around and it's been sitting around forever. And what will that cost us? Because at this point, we can't just continue to put out requests for people, requests, requests, requests. I would love to see, okay, if we're not building something on it, what is the city going to do with this land in the short term then? Are we going to build a park there? Are we going to put something on it? What expense will it be for us to remediate the soil? I just have these types of concerns, and I don't... I'm really puzzled by all the other vacant lots that we own across the city and I even went on a soil walk on the west side and looked at the Cleveland Street space along with Alder Trueblood and we're just sitting on more land that needs soil remediation and it's like these are conundrums that we have to deal with. I feel like we have to immediately action something if this doesn't go forward because it's just dead space otherwise.

Thanks.

Thank you. Alder Tierney.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I find it a little bit ironic that we're talking about two big apartment developments in one council setting here. And just because somebody might not agree with one of their coworkers doesn't mean that they're uneducated about the way a TID works. IT MEANS THAT WE DON'T AGREE WITH EACH OTHER. BECAUSE I, TOO, HAVE DONE A LOT OF READING ON TIFFS AND A LOT OF DIFFERENT RESOURCES ON TIFFS, AND EVERYBODY SAYS, YOU KNOW, OH, IT'S NOT, WE'RE NOT COLLECTING ANY PROPERTY TAXES ON IT. WELL, UNTIL THAT CLOSES, THAT PROPERTY TAX MONEY IS GOING NOT TO THE GENERAL LEVY. That doesn't happen for years. And we are giving out a large tax incentive. We talk about people revitalizing the downtown. Randy, at the foundry, that commercial development part of that, how many takers have we had on that?

Well, I mean, it's a private development. As far as I know, they have one tenant at this point, which is the fitness facility.

So we have one tenant in the fitness center. The other development we were talking about earlier was talking about having commercial space as well. And I believe so is the Scott Street development wants to look at some commercial. Well, we've got Foundry there that's showing us that might not be really successful since they have been Open now for nine months and nobody was jumping on the bandwagon even before they were open and last of all we have been We were elected by our constituents to act on their behalf, to do what they're trusting us to do and represent them in what they want from this city. And we have heard them scream to us about these developments. I can't, in good faith, move forward and support another development when this city clearly does not want another five, six department developments. Thank you.

Thank you, Alder Killian.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I have a tendency to speak quietly, and I'm sitting over here having a very hard time maintaining that. When I say that I am representing the desires of the people, I do not consider myself a crusader. I find that very insulting, and I wanted to address that. I have seen a tremendous outpouring from the residents of this city saying, no more. Put your money someplace else. Support us where we need help. I am not crusading for them. I was elected, like Alder Tierney said, to represent the people in my district and the people in this city. And I resent them. the enthusiasm that was shown. Anyway, I'm having a very hard time maintaining my quiet. Thank you.

Thank you. Alder Watson.

I would like to call the question.

So we have a motion to call the question. Okay. Motion to call the question. Looking for a second. Slonsky. So we have a motion and a second. Okay. So it is not debatable and it requires a two thirds vote. And right now I'm showing, let me see. Neil Lukens, Henneke, Trueblood in the queue. So once the vote is taken, if it's a yes, then those will continue to be able to purge the queue. Clear?

So point of order, the remainder of the queue is allowed to speak, correct? After the vote, yes. Okay, thank you.

Two thirds, two thirds majority. Right?

Voting is now open. On the call of question. Vote passed 10 to one.

double check that okay so do you want to restate that 10-0 one abstention 10-0 with one abstaining okay all right we have four left then we would have alder neil thank you again

First of all, I apologize for my fervor and choice of words and upsetting anybody. I'm quite passionate about this and similar things. I really firmly believe, just as everybody else here, I'm here to represent my constituents and the city at large. and to not just represent the loudest of them, but to represent their best interests, the best of my ability for what I learn and know here in my role in committees and on council. That's what representative government is about. It's not here just to say, I'm hearing a lot of loud pushback, so therefore I'm going to push back. My job is to come here. I'm hearing pushback, of course. My job is to come here and look at the merits and try to do my best on behalf of my constituents and the city at large. Unfortunately, one of our members left for a moment during the gentleman from Ehlers' initial comments about the process that went through from the initial negotiations to where we are today. and i'm sorry that he missed that and maybe the gentleman from ehlers can um summarize that maybe your first few uh paragraphs given a chance here in a sec i will you'll imagine i'm sorry i had to pull up all of larson come on now all or larson you're out of order continue on mr neal I merely want to make sure that there's an opportunity that something is not missed because of your not being here for a little bit. That's all. Yes, the soil at this site is challenged and the developer is offering to spend $2 million to do the site prep, the mitigation, the soil, just take care of everything to get it shovel ready, if you will, so they can start building. $2 million. A lot of developers might come in here and say, yeah, we'll do something there, but we want you to clean that up first. Not unusual. Regarding TIDs. The purpose of a TID is to create value within the TID, to create value through development. If a TID sits there for 10, 15, 20 years not creating value, then why did we even have it in the first place? That's the reason TIDs are a tool. They are used. There's like 1,400 at least TID districts in the state of Wisconsin.

They are used... Point of order. Is this germane to this motion since we've already voted not to end debate? Is this germane to this motion?

I was in queue and I'm responding to what was said prior to my...

However, the question is... Is the discussion of TID districts germane to this particular motion to approve this agreement with Wonga?

I would say yes. Senate TID.

But it's actually up to the mayor to decide. Give me a second.

I'm sorry, Tom. We have been pretty wide in our latitude tonight. There's been a lot of excursions, but we should... Okay, so Tom, if you can keep it as narrow as you can, bring it back to your decision. TIDs are relevant because we're talking about a TID, but we don't need a lesson on TIDs.

Okay, well, it seems like there was a statement made about TIDs that was allowed, but mine's not. Okay, I'll yield my time.

Alder Lukens.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, we have some passionate views on both sides, and mine, I, well, I just wanted to add a couple other things I had thought about before, you know, when I was mentioning about Barker Stewart Island and, you know, the river walk. We have a unique that we have the river in the middle of our city. And so I guess that's one other thing as I've been on ED for the past five years, developing that. I realize we have some vacant commercial space, but how, Randy, if I could just ask you to, how long is there an average with a new development? that has been, so it opened in less than a year. Is there any, you know what I mean, average for commercial space? Do you feel they're not really?

Anything I would say on that, I'm not well informed on that. It can take a variety of time. There was hope that with them having a project in already, that that would... flow into more developments along there. I think I would point out that this development is different and that there is no commercial component to it. This is strictly a residential only project.

Thank you. Good point. Stay on topic. But I still do believe that the more development that we have, the more people living downtown is also... it would be helpful for our transit. The more that we have, the more development in other ways that we're going to have. So I just really wanted to mention that transit, public transportation, and the river. And so I guess it depends how we look at it. I look at the possibilities, and I just think that there are enough possibilities factors built into this that I feel confident about the low risk, so thank you.

thank you alder henneke thank you mr chair um so i just i just wanted to to share some insight again um you know from the ed perspective that we are obviously in a position where we have a lack of interest in investment in properties that the city owns which is in truth the city's fault um in my opinion i've had many conversations and i would agree WITH ALDER SLONSKY THAT IF YOU DON'T HAVE A DEMAND FOR A PROPERTY, IS IT ACTUALLY WORTH WHAT YOU SAY THAT YOU ASSESS IT AS IF NOBODY'S GOING TO BE WILLING TO PAY THAT? THE PROBLEM THAT I DO HAVE IS THAT I, LIKE MANY ALDERS HERE, WOULD ECHO THE SENTIMENT THAT MANY CONSTITUENTS HAVE EXPRESSED TO ME THEY ARE TIRED OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS. THEY WANT MORE DIVERSIFIED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. WHAT I WILL SAY, THOUGH, IS IN HAVING BROADER DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM AND GETTING TO THE ROOT OF THE ISSUE, THE CONSTITUENTS I'VE SPOKEN WITH ARE JUST TIRED OF THE CITY PURCHASING PROPERTY FOR WELL OVER WHAT IT'S WORTH, TURNING AROUND TO SELL IT FOR WELL UNDER WHAT IT'S WORTH. THEY ARE TIRED OF THE CITY MANAGING PROPERTIES AND BEING LANDLORDS. Regardless of whether or not we would say that's the loudest voices or it's a small minority or what have you, I can absolutely say that that sentiment has been expressed to me as well. Now, whether or not they understand the actual nature of a TIF, if you will, or if they understand is it really the issue of what we're doing with the property or the fact that you do or don't want us to be managing all of these properties, that's a real broader discussion to have. I WOULD SAY THAT, AS WITH ANYTHING, SUPPLY AND DEMAND WOULD ABSOLUTELY PLAY INTO FACTOR HERE, THAT IF YOU CAN PROVIDE MORE SUPPLY THAN THERE IS DEMAND, ESSENTIALLY OUR HOPES WOULD BE THAT THAT DRIVES DOWN COSTS, RIGHT? I AM SLIGHTLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROPOSED COST OF THE UNITS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, BUT TRUTHFULLY, I DO VERY MUCH FEEL THAT WE ARE IN A POSITION WHERE AS ALDER LARSON BROUGHT UP, THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT HAPPENING DOWNTOWN WHERE THE ONLY ASK OF THE CITY WAS TO REASSESS AND REEVALUATE THE UTILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE THAT DEVELOPMENT. HOW OFTEN DOES THAT HAPPEN? IT DOESN'T HAPPEN THAT OFTEN. AND THE TRUTH IS, BECAUSE IN MY OPINION, AND I THINK IN THE OPINION OF THE CONSTITUENTS I'VE TALKED WITH, WE HAVE A SURPLUS OF SUPPLY ON OUR SIDE HERE. I THINK RESIDENTS KNOW OR EXPECT THAT THE CITY WILL OVERPAY FOR PROPERTY IN A LOT OF CASES WHEN WE ARE LOOKING TO PURCHASE PROPERTIES. AND RIGHT OR WRONG, WE'VE SET THE PRECEDENT OF THESE KIND OF INCENTIVE DEALS. AND IF WE WANT TO CHANGE THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S A MUCH BROADER DISCUSSION. BUT I DO FEEL TO SOME EXTENT, I SEE THE MERITS OF BOTH IN NOT WANTING TO GIVE AWAY A VERY VALUABLE PROPERTY, BUT ALSO WANTING TO DO RIGHT AND INTERACT IN GOOD FAITH WITH A DEVELOPER FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY CREATE TAX REVENUE LONG TERM IN A SPACE THAT FOR YEARS AND YEARS HAS NOT BEEN DOING THAT UP TO THIS POINT. So I would say I am very open to and would welcome any member of our council and the community for that matter to speak with the members of our Economic Development Committee because we are facing a lot of large problems and we are trying to navigate that and tackle those issues with the means that we've kind of set up for ourself. It's the bed we made, now we gotta lie in it, so to speak. SO I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS TODAY, AND I WOULD JUST MAKE A MENTION TO, JUST IN LIGHT OF THE PASSION THAT CAN HAPPEN AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, THAT I THINK WE'VE ALL BEEN WILLING TO SPEAK TO THE OBSERVATIONS THAT WE'VE HAD OF COUNCIL, OR THAT OUR CONSTITUENTS HAVE MADE OF COUNCIL. I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY HAVE TO MAKE THE, WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE THINGS PERSONALLY, WE ALSO DON'T NEED TO BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE INFER THINGS ONTO SPECIFIC MEMBERS.

Thank you. Okay, Mr. Trueblood, you're going to get the last word, but I'm going to circle back to Mr. Neal.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Hold on a second.

I'm sorry. I'm circling back to Mr. You. We'll get the last word. Just reviewing germaneness here, and we've given a kind of a wide latitude tonight to stray off. Mr. Neal, if you want to tie tids into the reason you want to make this decision, you can go ahead and finish that up.

Well, thank you for the opportunity. Merely, it's as simple as this. TID is a tool that is designed as one of the few tools that municipalities have where they can actually affect development. It's a tool where it's designed to create money, if you will, value within a district, within a defined area, and that is done through improvement, development. Otherwise, if that development doesn't happen, the TID is not fulfilling its role. as a boundaried thing. So therefore, when something large like this comes forward within a TID, that we can really help add value to the TID, which ultimately, when the TID dies, is on the tax rolls 100% for all the taxing entities, strategically, it makes sense to me.

Thanks again. Thank you. Last word to Mr. Trulutt. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

We have thrown out a lot of terms. I have a question for Mr. Eller, the representative from Eller's. I apologize, I can't see your name, because it looks like you're either Rachel or Marianne, and that doesn't seem to be right. Keith. Keith. Okay, thank you. If we invest which, as Alder Neal has stated, this is an investment. If we invest this money today, as I read your document, we will gain our investment, we will have a healthy return on investment within 17 years. Is that correct? When the TID- From the city standpoint? From the city standpoint.

Correct, yep. You would be retaining 20% of the increment generated from this project. Significant dollars over that 17-year term as well.

And at the end of the 17-year term when the TID expires, it looks like the taxes are in excess of a half million.

Correct. If you use the value, if the project was constructed and stabilized today, it would be about $535,000 in property taxes. Now, that is split between all the various local taxing jurisdictions, and so the city would receive a portion of that, but that would be the total tax paid.

Okay. And as I further understand it, One of the differences between this agreement and previous agreements is the money is contingent on metrics being met Rather than us just handing over cash as we have in some other arrangements this money is tied to two benchmarks being reached and

correct so the developer has to build the project and the project has to be assessed at a value in order to repay this obligation if the obligation is not repaid over that 17-year track time frame the city is under no financial obligation to make the developer whole that is a risk to the developer because you are only paying them essentially on a rebate basis, 80% of the annual increment generated. Okay.

So, while I agree TIDs have their place, I do think the city has a history. I don't have a crystal ball. I don't know what's going to happen in 17 years. Inflation could make all this money worthless in 17 years. I have no idea. But I do have a rearview mirror. And I know that in the past, the city has not handled TIDs properly. So that is what I'm hearing from my constituents that, oh, here we go again. But this seems to be a completely different deal. But we throw out terms like we're filling in a gap and it's what does that even mean? So we, the departments, we have these conversations, but then they don't go anywhere else. And so the citizens are going, okay, you use TID, what is that even? And then they have very bad taste in their mouth from it. I understand we want to redo a lot of our downtown. However, retail, I bought several items from a very, well, probably one of the world's largest malls today. It's Amazon. They don't, they are not going to build anything in our downtown. And they killed most of what was in our downtown. So we live in a different world than I grew up in. And we have to take that into account as we move forward as well. So I am, I'm very torn on this one. We say we have a river. There are 83,000 miles of river in Wisconsin. More than 100 towns and cities have rivers running through them. Ours happens to be non-navigable. you know, if we could get rid of that dam, you know, there were things we could do. But it is, and it's not really, I mean, you know, there is usually a premium associated with living next to water. I don't see that on our river. But I do like the idea of this property being there because it fits. I think that it's a... It is a tough question, and I do think if we could more clearly define our terms, it is an investment. It is one I think will pay off. It is one where we're in reality paying somebody to take our ugly daughter to the prom because nobody wants this property. If they did want it, so we say, okay, we're going to give you this money. In fact, we're saying... let us incentivize you to do this. Nobody else is willing to step up and say, hey, I'll invest in that. So I think we have to consider our options, and I agree with Alder Neal that When you've been down this road before and it fell through, you might want to take the next lifeboat that comes along. So I think that in the end, this is probably a good one for the city. So I will be supporting it, and I would encourage everyone else to.

Okay, thank you. That's the final word. It is the hardest-working river in Wisconsin, I am told, though. the hardest working river in Wisconsin. It used to be. It used to be. And we do have Lake Wausau because of it. All right. Are we ready to vote?

Voting is now open. Passed eight to three.

All right. Thank you. Just real quick, I know it's 9.15. You don't want to learn a lesson here tonight. We seem to learn lessons every meeting here. So I'll give you a homework assignment. And when you get a chance, check out under Rule 17G, termination of debate. We have a few nuances in our council rules that are different from Robert's rules. So we have added that those who speak to finish out the queue will get three minutes. And we'll enforce that next time. And then there's also a streamlined... opportunity to call the question if there's no objection we get right to it so we don't have to necessarily vote unless there's an objection so review that um if i got that right we'll if we do vote it's a roll call vote you're correct so Good information. All right, we're up to announcements from the mayor, and I'll just double down on our southeast side airport, Wausau Downtown Airport AirVenture Cup this weekend. Go check it out. Night market is on Thursday. We had a record turnout, close to 5,000 people last Thursday. So it's this, or last month. Any other alders with comments or announcements? Alder Watson.

I'LL BE REALLY QUICK. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST WANTED TO THANK THE CLERK'S OFFICE TONIGHT WAS A LITTLE FUN FOR OUR MEETING, AND I ALSO JUST WANTED TO THANK RACHEL. YOUR FIRST MONTH IS AMAZING. I DID WANT TO SAY ABOUT THE CONSENT AGENDA, OUR CLERKS DON'T SLIP THINGS IN. I THINK WE HAVE CONTROL OVER THE CONSENT AGENDA, SO IF THERE'S STUFF ON THERE, I THINK IF WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THEIR METHODOLOGY, IT'S NOT LIKE DEVIOUS They just do it to help us with our order of business. So I guess I just wanted to say they don't slip things in, they don't do that kind of thing, but thank you guys for your service.

Mr. Trueblood. In light of previous discussion, I would like to make a motion to revisit the ordinance on data centers at the second meeting in September.

So a motion to reconsider. A motion to revisit.

I'll second that motion.

Stand by, we'll refer to the rules. I voted in, yes. So you were on the... I was on the affirmative.

The prevailing side.

Yes.

Okay, we're on rule 10 if you're following along. So we would need a second. Well, without objection, the motion was to review the data center on what date? Second meeting in September Second council meeting I don't have the date here. It would be that fourth Tuesday in September without objection We'll schedule that Okay other announcements Happy birthday All right, I would entertain ocean to attack public comments. Oh, oh Okay, hold on, we've got one more item. Did you have an announcement? Okay, comments or suggestions from citizens present during public comment occurring before or after business meeting?

Mr. Killian.

Thank you. Tom Killian, 133 East Thomas Street. I did want to speak a little bit about TIF and some of what was said this evening. So as a matter of fact, Wausau has been using TIF since the 1980s and quantitatively, not as a matter of opinion, since then it has failed to deliver on any of the bold financial promises that were made over 40 years ago and we can see if it had succeeded in delivering those financial benefits we wouldn't have seen yesterday a slew of regressive fees and regressive taxation measures arise so TIF has put us into a very poor spot fiscally, and if there's going to be any fiscal sanity or responsible financial policy, it will not be continuing what has been done to date. And furthermore, elitism and condescension is not a valid term. intellectual approach. And when we look at the numbers on the term sheet, I think a lot was misconstrued in this chamber. So yes, the developer was going to or is going to provide $2 million for contaminated property. But let us not forget, there was $1.3 million taken off that value plus with interest, over $8 million in incentives, potentially over 17 years. So if anyone has a calculator, subtract the nine plus million in city subsidies and incentives, subtract two million from that. It's still a large amount of incentive. So I feel like, ultimately, if TIF is not reevaluated, we are not going to be able to get out of this financial mess that we've found ourselves in. Thank you. Thank you.

Christine Martins. I didn't want Tom to have the last word. Just quickly, with all of this discussion about the the property that the city owns and is just kind of sitting there. I just wanted to remind everybody, green space is nice. Green space is necessary. Parks, community gardens, places to have a picnic, play bocce ball, whatever. Remember, green spaces are needed. Please consider that when looking at all these parcels that are just hanging around. Thank you.

Thank you.

I will be super short. Last night, Alder Tierney, as chair, did a great job in the HR committee as we talked about overtime. But during that conversation, she shot me a look and it stuck with me. And then there was an article today in one of our publications that discussed many of the topics covered. And I think it requires clarification because you might get asked about it. And, um, finance director wrote, discussed the disparage, the difference between two different reports and overtime regarding the police department and mentioned that it's, it's the bank that officers put their training time in and save it until retirement, at which point in time they cash it in. And although there's a component of that, that's true. Our officers per contract. in order for us to save over time, when they attend training on off-duty, they earned training time owed at time and a half, which cannot be cashed in. It's used as time off. Upon separation with the city, it is time that they owed, that they earned, so it's money that we owe them. So upon separation, that bank, which is capped at 48 hours, the remaining hours in there are cashed out at their hourly rate. Our staff don't bank training time over the course of their entire career just to cash in at retirement. As cool as that would be, that is not a process that we have. And I just wanted, since it was outlined in the media today, and you might be asked about it, I wanted to provide the context and clarify that. Thank you.

Thank you, Chief.

Further public comment?

Seeing none, entertain a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. All in favor?

Aye.

Meeting is adjourned. Good evening.