Village Board - Regular Meeting

All right. Good evening. I will call to order the village board meeting of Monday, July 20th. Erin, could you call the roll, please?

Yes. Trustee Saunders.

Here.

Trustee Detman.

Here.

Trustee Casper. Here. Trustee Van Evenhoven.

Here.

Trustee Haller.

Here.

Trustee Sarabin. Yep. And President Buckley.

Here.

Thank you.

Never done this before. All right, next on the agenda is the consent agenda. We have four quick items. The minutes of the regular meeting held June 15th, the investment report and check register for June of 2026, and some turf management plan updates that went through the Public Works Committee and passed. It was mainly a housekeeping adventure. Any questions or concerns? Otherwise, a motion to approve?

I move the village board approve the consent agenda as presented. Thank you. Do I have a second?

Second. Thank you, Sam. Any further discussion? Bearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to the report of the village officers. Our village attorney is not here today. Excused. So we'll move on to the village manager report.

Sure. So I wanted to acknowledge the passing of former village president Jim Gormley. Mr. Gormley served as the village president from 1990 to 2002 and played an instrumental role in the creation of the North Shore Fire Department. He was actually cited in a few of the reports. cases around just kind of explaining how you can form these consolidated groups. So obviously our thoughts are with his family as they're mourning his loss. And thank you to him and his family for their service. And then the last one is in-person absentee voting begins on Tuesday, July 28th. Coming up.

Right. Moving on to the Village President's Report. All I want to say is I think this is our first meeting in July and we had a magnificent July 4th. I want to thank the Waves Bay Civic Foundation for putting that on, the Whitefish Bay Auxiliary, police, the police department, the DPW, and all the staff that helped with the 4th of July and came out on a great weather day and everything went very smoothly. And then just yesterday, we had another event hosted by the Civic Foundation and Three Lions who put on the World Cup final show at Clody Park. And that was another huge hit. And I spoke to some of the Three Lions folks and they were really excited about coming and doing more events at Clody Park. whether it's, you know, a beer garden pop-up or another screen event, et cetera. So really excited with their reaction to what happened yesterday.

That's all I have. Any miscellaneous trustee reports?

Just a shout out to the DPW. I know the sidewalk replacement program is in full swing. It seems to be going very, very well, or at least on my block it is. Things seem pretty smooth. So thank you.

And I just want to double up on President Buckley's thanks to the police and the DPW for July 4th. I mean, every year, top notch. And I know that they do. I know it's a very long day, especially for the DPW folks. So Matt, hats off to your team.

Anyone else? All right, we will move on to our next section, which is petitions and communications. This is an opportunity for anyone in the audience to address the village board on any issue that is not on the current agenda. I think we have at least one person who would like to address us. And just as a quick comment, while the board encourages input from residents of the village, it may not discuss or act on any issue that is not fully noted. If you could state your name and address.

Okay.

And if we could, we have kind of a long meeting tonight, so keep it to about five minutes.

Well, my name is Autumn Fay, and I'm here to ask you to reconsider the notice of claim that you heard last month's closed session. On April 16th, our basement flooded 10 weeks after the Village and Badger Underground removed 5 feet of our sewer lateral on February 5th, while repairing the water main break that occurred in front of our home. naively when we submitted the notice of claim we didn't include all of the details as we didn't realize this was our one and only shot that's on us we should have informed ourselves on what a notice of claim was truly before we submitted it like the form asked we briefly described the situation had we known that this was the one and only shot we would have been way more substantial in our submission When it was denied, I submitted a records request. After receiving the response, we are concerned about the inaccuracies and admissions that are in Mr. McCarthy's summary timeline. Dated April 28th. If Mr. McCarthy's summary timeline is what was presented to the board, we believe it to be necessary to correct the record. I really believe that once the board hears and sees the full record, you'll agree that our claim warrants another look. Listen, I don't want to be here. I don't want to do this. I don't want to be in an adversarial relationship with the village that we love. I can hear my voice shaking, and obviously I'm crying, but I'm a neighbor and a villager. I'm a taxpayer who just wants a fair outcome to what happened to us, and I would much rather solve this cooperatively rather than through any other means. So in that spirit... Let's start with the records response that I received. I'll hand out a copy of it after my presentation if you want to look at the details. To summarize, it appears as though the village allowed Badger Underground to fix the water main break with no estimate, No quote, no permits, there's no inspection report, no invoices after five and a half months that they finished their work. There was no record on site from Badger or who was there from DPW, and not a single picture was taken on February 5th of their work by either Badger or the village DPW. and no contract. There wasn't a contract in effect between the village and Badger DPW when they allowed them to do this work. The only existing contemporary, sorry, contemporary documentation on file with the village is the Diggers Hotline report. It's really concerning that there was no contract in effect on February 5th. How were they allowed to operate in our village on behalf of the villagers without a contract? That can't be right, right? And why wasn't Badger required to obtain the Whitefish Bay right-of-way permit to excavate and repair the water main? The village's response was no record of permits pulled for the February 5th water main break and repair of private ladder on February 5th exists as the location of the break was in a public right-of-way. Well, we have a right-of-way permit. The village typically requires this permit for all excavations in the right-of-way. In the right-of-way permit general conditions, in the scope section, I quote, a permit is issued by the village engineer is therefore typically required for all activities within, below, and above right-of-ways, etc., etc., such activities as, etc., All excavations. Later on in the scope, it says a permit is not typically required for village personnel acting in the discharge of their official duties. Okay, I get that. Or to any work. Permit is not typically required for any work being performed by any person or persons, firms, or corporation under contract with the village. According to my records request, there isn't a contract. So if I'm understanding this correctly, Badger is under contract with the village. They don't need permits. But if I, as a resident, contract Badger, they need to get permits. That doesn't seem right. Anyway, there was no contract, thus the village should have required the right-of-way permit, whose sole purpose is to protect the village and the homeowners and the businesses and the taxpayers from situations exactly like what we suffered. I've printed a copy of the right-of-way permit general conditions and I highlighted some important information and protections that would have applied to our situation had Badger been required to fill out a right-of-way permit. Moving on to Mr. McCarthy's summary timeline. In it, there are several inaccuracies. Number one, he characterized it as a sewer backup. This was not a backup. This was water that was able to access our sewer lateral, which is 13 feet at the bottom of the excavated gravel pit because five feet of our pipe was removed in February. The gravel pit filled with rainwater when we had that huge storm April 15th. And with the immense amount of rainwater in the gravel pit, since gravel doesn't absorb water, water did what it always does. It found its way from our open, broken lateral, 13 feet at the bottom of that pit, and the water poured into our basement. Next, Mr. McCarthy stated, quote, on April 20th, DPW excavated the area of repair to investigate. Parentheses, we thought the clay pipe may have failed, end quote. At this point of our timeline, our basement flooded on Thursday. This is Monday morning that this is happening. When DPW came back to excavate half of the pit, At this point, we are still unaware that Badger in the village had broken that storm water lateral in February. After DPW excavated down to the repair lateral, the DPW guys told us this was our sewer lateral. This didn't seem right to me because it was only five or six feet below the surface. I asked, well, where's the water main? And they replied that it was about four to five feet further down in the pit. I was confused because on Thursday, the day we flooded, when DPW came out to our house, they told us they never saw our sewer lateral. because by law, the sewer lateral must be under the water main. So Thursday, they didn't see our sewer lateral. Monday, this is your sewer lateral. I then asked, why is our sewer lateral above the water main? And someone said, one of the DPW guys said, your house is 97 years old. Maybe they couldn't pitch it properly to connect to the main. My husband then asked the three DPW guys that were there for the excavation, well, who would have done that repair? The various DPW responses to who made that repair? A contractor probably. gas company or the contractor that board for the main gas line replacement. Who knows how old this repair is? That's probably open trench. The gas main with all the sand around it, they probably came across it, whoever the contractor was. I mean, this probably happened 1960s, 70s, you know? And then the other one said, it's too hard to speculate who broke that. I asked if somebody could pull the permit for that repaired lateral and they said they didn't think that there was one. They then suggested that based on based on his 22 years of service in water and sewer, it was probably broken when the gas company replaced the gas lines in the 1960s and 70s. The DPW staff made up all of these possibilities of what happened when they knew all along they broke it in February. We have a 30-minute audio recording of this conversation. After this conversation, DPW left. Justice, our plumber, came back and took off the PVC repair. He discovered that this repaired lateral was not our sewer line, so he called the village again. When DPW arrived, we asked if they could return to excavate the rest of the gravel pit, and they refused to excavate any further, citing liability. I asked, well, why wasn't liability a concern this morning when you came out and dug out half of it, but now it's a liability? They said they did it as a courtesy, and doing any more work would subject them to more risk. I asked them to call someone higher up at the village, not understanding me. why they wouldn't finish that excavation. Whoever they called said, no, they won't excavate anymore. And they left. The next day, Justice, our plumber, brought an excavator to continue excavating the gravel pit at a cost of $4,000. Thankfully, kindly, DPW did agree to bring their robot camera to send down the water main so that they could locate the exact location where our sewer lateral connects to the sewer main.

It really helped Justice figure out where our sewer lateral is.

It was during the robot camera DPW visit that Justice, our plumber, asked a question about the repaired lateral. Someone who wasn't there the day before for the conversation about the repaired lateral said, oh, that was fixed in February. Surprise! It's now April 21st, five days after we flooded, a day after three DPW employees made up a whole bunch of suggestions as to who did that repair, and we are learning this for the first time. That poor guy, I don't think he realized what big of a statement that was. We didn't say anything at the time. When he did tell us that... whole bunch of conversations suddenly made sense, especially why they agreed to excavate half of the pit they dug and wouldn't excavate the rest. Next, Mr. McCarthy says, quote, they discovered a broken pipe that was deeper than the February 5th excavation. And further, he says, DPW Badger never knew the sanitary pipe was only about a foot deeper than the original excavation. This is not true. it was not a foot deeper than the original excavation. If you take a look at picture B in the packet that my sister-in-law handed out, you can see that the sewer lateral is only six inches under the water main. In order to fix the break, it was necessary to dig deep enough under the water main to put the repair collar on and secure it. And remember, at this point in time, the water's still flowing. So they didn't have a clear view of the bottom of the pit as they were doing this. You can also see in this picture that the lateral juts out from underneath the water main for a few inches. The last inaccuracy was, quote, the broken pipe was directly under the clay repair that DPW Badger Underground made. Also not true. You can see if you look at picture E, it's the last page, that the stormwater lateral, the one that's on the left side, and the sewer lateral, the one on the right, are about four feet apart from each other. The sewer lateral runs diagonally through the workspace where the crew worked in February. To give you a little bit of perspective on distance there, that repaired stormwater PVC that the village did, that's about four feet. That's about four feet. Moving on to the admissions and Mr. McCarthy's summary. He admitted that the laterals were unmarked. According to Wisconsin Statute 182.0175, subsection 2M, paragraph B, facilities marking. If the person is a local governmental unit, and if the excavation notice relates to sewer or water facilities owned by the local government unit, the local government unit shall also mark the locations within the public right of way of all laterals connected to the sewer or water facilities at the area described in the notice. It says right there by law that if the village is working on their utilities, it is their responsibility to mark all laterals that are contained in the right of way. Paragraph BM details how governments can satisfy this requirement. Basically, give the excavator a map or a diagram or something that shows the laterals. And if you don't have that, then you have to give them written notice advising them that you do not know where those laterals are. According to our records request, the village did not provide Badger any of the documentation required to fulfill this ministerial duty. And a ministerial duty means it is that you do not get discretionary immunity. It doesn't apply to duties that are explicitly laid out in the law. As a result of the negligence of not marking our laterals, both of our laterals were damaged.

One was repaired.

Mr. McCarthy admitted that they broke our stormwater lateral. According to Wisconsin Statute 182.0175, subsection 2, paragraph AM, lines 6M and 7, by law, which again, ministerial duty, thus no discretionary immunity, they should have told us in February that the stormwater lateral had been broken. The statute states, quote, refrain from backfilling and excavation until the inspection is conducted and any necessary repairs have been made by the owner of the transmission facility. We weren't given any option. We didn't know. The next sentence says, immediately notify the owner of a transmission facility if the inspection reveals that the transmission facility has been or may have been struck, damaged, dislocated, or disrupted, and if flammable, etc., etc., end quote. Neither the Village nor Badger Underground told us about this in February, as is required by law. And then DPW tried to deceive us on April 20th. In the Wisconsin Legislative Council Information Memorandum, IM-2024-10, while discussing governmental immunity exceptions, it states, I quote, the court further recognized the injustice of imposing the entire burden of damage resulting from the wrongful governmental acts upon the single individual who suffered this injury, rather than distributing it amongst the entire community without hardship. There's reasons why there are exceptions to governmental immunity. And this case is the exact reason why there are exceptions. Now, if all the information that I just gave you is different from what you understood during the closed session meeting last month, you now know why I'm here tonight. We want to resolve this amicably without any additional expenditures for us or for you guys or for our taxpayers. Our home is 97 years old. For 97 years, our basement was dry. We live at the top of Cumberland Hill, for goodness sakes. Ten weeks after major excavation in the exact location where our private laterals are, our basement floods for the first time. This wasn't a coincidence. The February worked was the cause. Nobody disputes that. And we have over $84,000 of damages. So for all of these reasons, my husband and I are formally requesting an opportunity to meet with the board or a designee within the next month because we've only got six months if this needs to go the legal route, and I don't want to do that.

Because I don't want to cost us money, and I don't want to cost the taxpayers money.

And the idea of using my taxpayer dollars to deny what is rightfully, should you guys, should have taken accountability. We'd like to discuss Pat McCarthy's summary timeline and revisit our claim. This is only half of the information. There's a lot more. I believe with due diligence and open communication, trust, and integrity, we can get this resolved in the most just manner for the village, for the taxpayers, and for our family. Like I said, I have some handouts so that you guys can see the response request that I received and how there's no documents according to the response request, the right-of-way permit, general conditions that protects all of us, as well as I've summarized some of the laws that I quoted in my speech so that you have that. Thank you so much. I appreciate the time.

Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other petitions of communications from members of the public? Sure. You can use either one.

This one, I like this one.

And if you could state your name and address.

I'm Mary Garvingy-Mo. We came to you last fall in August about the short-term rental ordinance that we hoped would pass, and it passed in November, which we're thrilled about. My neighbors and I are all here to discuss what's happened since. In general, a good amount of us, not everybody could be here tonight because a lot of people have kids and softball and soccer and all the stuff. But several things. And I'm just going to read them because I kind of wrote them down out of order. The homeowner on our block, 4785 North Larkin, has a permit right now. We've been in contact with Anna Christofferson, Kelsey's co-worker about enforcement. They had selected a six month period of renting, which was required by the ordinance, which was really written into it and was important to us. They only have six months to rent. They've already gone past their six month purview. They picked January to June or July, and now we're almost to August. I think that's true, but I guess Kelsey would have to update that with Anna. The village sent us a letter saying, did you get a letter from the homeowner, which is a requirement that anyone that lives within 200 feet of the home be notified of the fact that they're renting in. We all got kind of an unsigned letter, but it was signed with no last name, no address, no phone, no nothing, just kind of like an anonymous letter you see in the old days in the newspaper. But the village contacted all of us saying, did you get the letter? And that was the homeowner's responsibility was to provide proof to Village Hall that they sent us all the letter. Well, that's easy. Send a certified and I'll send it back. The U.S. Postal Service still exists. The health department signed off on a health department license the same week we reported a live raccoon trapped on their attic. So that week they had the exterminator there. How do we know this? Everybody sees what goes on on this block. It's not like we're nosy, but we all kind of live close to each other. And there was a raccoon hanging off like one of the eaves. And that was the week that the guy in Shorewood, gosh, I can't remember his name, but somebody else probably will, told us, oh yeah, we're signing off on their health permit. I'm like, there's a live raccoon on the roof, but okay. And that was during the daytime. Um, we believe that they are using an unknown site to rent because we've received correspondence from Anna saying we're checking, having the intern check like VRBO and Airbnb to see the frequency of the rental. But what we've observed in the last few, probably like six weeks is they rent Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and then it's vacant all week. Then somebody comes again, like Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday. How do we know this? Because we're snoops. We see the cars. Like one day it's a white van, the next day it's a blue truck, then there's a black truck. Then, you know, I go to Costco yesterday to some guy with the big white pickup trucks loading up all the suitcases and then somebody else is there tonight. Those are one day rentals. This is what we came here to prevent. We begged you, please make them rent for seven days or longer. Sure, you can rent for a week if you could afford $3,600 for the week. because that's approximately what it is right now, $3,600 for a one-week rental in August on their property. If you only want to stay one day, maybe that's worth it. Maybe you want to pay $3,600 for one night. That's your prerogative. But when we constantly see these different cars coming in and out, it's the same problem we had last year, which means the ordinance doesn't have any teeth. What I suggest is... We just had a couple of college kid cars stay at our house over the weekend. And I said to the kids, like, do not forget to call them in. Call in so you don't get the $30 ticket. They did that. But could the nightly parking attendant note the license plate in that driveway? There are only about 20 of these known Airbnbs in our community, supposedly, because last year the police officer, the chief, looked that up. Didn't you find 21 places and only three had a permit from the health department? Something like that. Sure. Well, anyway, what I believe was true was that there were about 20 in Whitefish Bay, 20 known Airbnbs. So we're asking for more enforcement. That's what we're asking for. And that the ordinance really be enforced. Like everybody that's staying right now should literally get kicked out because their rental period was June to July. or I mean, January to July, June 30th. And now we're hitting August in a couple of weeks, but I don't want to take all the time.

Okay. Thank you.

I'm Jill Schrader. I'm a 4790 North Larkin directly across 4785. And Mary stated it extremely well. I don't think there's any malintent among this board not to enforce this. I think it's a lack of process and oversight that puts us in the situation that we find ourselves, which is the same situation not only from the amount of cars that are coming in and out, the number of visitors that we're having across the street, It also spills over into the refuse, right? The lack of oversight with the garbage, increased rodents, recycling, not taking it back up. I had visitors in town. I took their garbage back up. Someone had put it out. It is the lack of the... We actually had someone come out and look at the yard because the yard was so overgrown. Someone had come that day and mowed it with a weed whacker. And it's so burnt out now that it just doesn't require mowing. And... beyond the safety, beyond the fact that this has created a hole within the fabric of our neighborhood. That's really what this gets to. And so I would just ask you that there is a process of accountability in place for oversight to the best of your accountability. We know that there are limitations to this. I'm not sure in my communication with Anna Christopherson, she said that there was an administration intern that was put in charge of this. I don't know what her accountability is to the board in terms of reporting, in terms of understanding what that oversight is. And so that would be my request. We want to be in a positive place about this, and we're just asking for simple accountability. And from your standpoint, I go back to the mission of what you've said. graciously donated your time to sign up and do. And that's your mission is to enhance the lives of the people who live here, you know, through, you know, governance. And so my question is, are you going to be the board that puts, you know, not only these ordinances in place, but also enforces these ordinance to really safeguard our community as it should be? And are you going to have the oversight in terms of the overall pulse on the, number of short-term rentals that we have to make sure that we are that those are also enforced. I actually called the village today. I talked to the deputy clerk about, because it's under Wisconsin open laws, it's public record to say how many short-term rentals do we have? And the woman was very kind and she said, just submit this to us on the website. I'm just curious as to what that looks like right now. Is that increasing? Is it not increasing? And how many of them have permits? How many of those permits are active from what timeframes? And so I'm not sure if there is a next step in terms of an internal discussion, but it would be so excellent and appreciate if there was. And if we could come back and understand what the outcome is.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm Megan Morosky. I'm at 4779 North Larkin. I'm next door to an Airbnb in the village. And despite the village's recent short-term rental ordinance, this property continues to bring a steady stream of transient weekend guests to our neighborhood. The yard, as noted, has been poorly kept. There's a mountain of yard waste that's just stored in the garage. And this is exactly what the ordinance was meant to address. The guests have repeatedly driven over and damaged, saw it on my property. When I raised the lawn damage with the property manager, he goes, this is unfortunately common anywhere that there are urban driveways. Acknowledgement, but no real resolution. I'm asking the village to enforce compliance and take action for these delinquent properties. I think everybody else has summarized it pretty well before. So thank you.

Thank you. Any other members of the public or public comments? Going once, twice. All right, thank you. We will then move on to our general business. We've got seven items on the agenda tonight. This is gonna be exciting, you're leaving. The first item is a discussion action on design concepts for the Clody Warming House. Elsie?

Yep, I can tee it up.

Sure, who is going to tee it up?

Yeah, so I'll start, but it will be a combination of many of us. So the village board appropriated $1.5 million in the 2026 debt issuance to fund the replacement of the Clody Warming House. And then earlier this year, the Village approved a contract with Groth Design Group to design and manage the construction of the new building. Since this time, Groth has held two open houses to gain initial feedback from the community, which anyone from the public was invited to attend, and then also did a specific meeting with the Civic Foundation and the Business Improvement District to discuss the project. So all of this feedback, as well as feedback from the village board, and they've listened to previous meetings were all utilized to develop 3 initial design concepts. So the next step will be to take the design concepts or some formation of those design concepts to the community to do a survey. We did include some potential survey questions in the packet for consideration by the board. I do think it's important to understand that the final design will not look exactly like any of these three steps. So we're very, very early in the process. The point at this stage is really just start to figure out what people like and what they don't like. which will help kind of merge or adjust the final design concept to fit what the community desires. There are also, because I mentioned that we're early in the process, there will be a lot of other points where the public and certainly the village board will have opportunity to weigh in and make adjustments. And so I just don't want anyone to feel like, This is your only shot at it. Of course, not for the Village Board, but even for the public, there's going to be a survey. There will be other public meetings. So lots of opportunity to gain input. At this point, we're really just looking to move to that next step, which would be surveying the public. So with that, I'll hand it off to Peter with Groth to walk through the design concepts. Thank you.

Thank you. Can you guys hear all right? Yeah, I can see. Thank you. Appreciate being here tonight. Excited for this opportunity to present the initial concepts. I want to reinforce two items that were said. One, this is not the end all be all, right? This is a narrowing the funnel moment. The design spectrum can be infinite and we got to kind of take steps to get closer and closer. And this is the first time, not the last time that you'll probably be hearing from me and getting a kick at this. The other piece I wanted to add before we jump in. I'm going to run through all three of them. I'm going to try to articulate all three before we kind of open it up for discussion. And the reason I would like to do that is there's a lot of information in one of these projects that we have to kind of distill down. And the purpose of these options isn't necessarily to say this is a final one, but to sort of organize some of those decision points a little better and put it on paper so that we can kind of have an informed discussion on what's next. With that, I guess up here are sort of five criteria that we sort of use to evaluate or things that we want you to think about as I'm talking through these. The first is overall site layout, right? Is the building in the right place in relation to what's existing in relation to roads, how we lay out the overall site. Second, building components and size. So you'll see each floor plan has a slightly different configuration. different sizes, different importance. Third would be architectural style and massing. So we have shown three different versions on three different scales, but there's nothing to say that we can't take one architectural style from one option or one massing from one option. to get there. Fourth is function, right? That's a really important one. Does it meet the needs of the project? And then project goals. There's some sort of overarching project goals that I think have been discussed. We're not going to outline those in detail today. I think kind of that's the purpose of the information we've gathered. But in your opinions, are we moving towards the goals, the overall project goals? Yeah. With that, I would be excited to flip to the first. So we're going to call these options A, B, and C for today. And please tell me if I turn my head a little.

Do you want to get through all three of them and then go back?

Yes, please. And I'll try to go through them relatively quickly to have a good robust conversation. So this first one is An attached multi-use pavilion on the east you'll see. There is an increased area on the paving on the north between the parking where it says food truck or loading zone. That's an important thing I want to talk through. During our information gathering, parking, loading, ADA, were all things that were kind of discussed or brought up at various levels. I think this is a really nice way to create a piece of the site to make it more functional. So this is an area, and you can see that rectangle represents a food truck approximate size. So it gives you a little scale. So this could be a great area for loading, great area for people that have increased needs to get in and out. It can be an area that could get tented if there is the need for that for an event. An area that a beer truck or additional port-a-potties could be parked. And additionally, it's close to utilities, right? So whether it's water, like a hose bib, or a power pedestal, all those would be in that general area. Can I stand and point? Sorry. Do you want to laser point? Yeah, maybe.

There's one on the corner of the podium right over there.

I've got one here too.

We need you on the microphone, so you'd have to hold that. It's being recorded. Sorry.

So this is the area I was discussing. This would be the main entry, community room, bathrooms, and mechanical. In this option, we've shown a version where the mechanical is separated with a door so the public couldn't get to it, but could be locked and easily accessible. to the people that need it. Here you can see that covered piece we'll talk about in a minute. And then here is a small viewing room that overlooks kind of the larger part of the park, if you don't mind going to the next slide. So this is a floor plan for that building. So up here is the playground. Here's the main entry. Down here would be the grass and where you know the ice skating rink to be. You would enter here. There's a hallway and a vestibule. You can see the men's and the women's restrooms, a water fountain. And then in this option, we have a bench that might have cubbies or some hooks if people need to play. PB, Jorge Boone. : rest put their change shoes hand coats up whatever that may be, and then you can see this viewing area here, where we could put a bar type counter with large windows overlooking the park. PB, Jorge Boone. : We talked about this as being a warming house in historically, this will be a fully conditioned building so be heated and cooled so I don't want to undermine the need for a cool space in the summer. I think people with young kids, grandparents appreciate the ability to go inside for a few minutes, particularly if we have a week like we've had in the last few. Then we have an entry into this community room. Here is, we call it a hospitality bar, some cabinets. It would have a full-size refrigerator, a sink, and plenty of outlets for crockpots, blenders, whatever kind of tabletop appliances people might want. We have a large storage room here that would allow this room to be flexible. So if there is furniture in there, it could be stored. Or if you need other supplies to make that room functional, it could be stored in there as well. There's a janitor's closet, which has a janitor's sink and some shelving as well. Here we have the opportunity to do a double-sided fireplace, right? So it could be viewed from both inside and outside. And then here is where you see that covered pavilion space. All of these have an occupant load of about 135. To put that into context, we use 15 square feet per person when we're setting a room up like a wedding, so tables and chairs. We use five square feet per person when we're thinking about sort of concerts or standing room. Here to get to that 135, we used about 10 square feet per person. So kind of split in the middle. Could you get a few more people in there? Maybe I think it would start to feel really uncomfortable really fast. And then certainly if you're setting it for seats, it would probably be a little under that number.

Can I ask a question that's not about the design? Go ahead. I just want to know, what is our capacity for Cahill? I'm just trying to get a sense of...

Yes. So this room is about the same square footage as Kay Hill's space.

That's what I wanted to know. Thank you.

We're off by 100 square feet or so, but it's about the same.

And I just have another square footage question. Like for all these designs, they're roughly like four times the size of what is currently there.

So this one's about 3,300 square feet. The next one's about 2,500 and then back to 35. Yeah.

What we have now has got to be 300-ish. Yeah.

I don't know that answer to be honest. I could I could do some math if we need to. That's okay.

It's significantly bigger.

Four-ish times the footprint, I think, is the... Yep. Okay. If you don't mind going to the next slide, please. The next few are just some quick renderings here. So at the end, you can see the covered pavilion. You can see this double-sided fireplace, the large community room, and the viewing area. You can see the... Excuse me. You can see the playground in the background. we would be standing on the southeast-ish corner of that green space, or a few steps in from there, if you don't mind going to the next one. So this is from the opposite corner. You can see the tennis pickleball courts over here, the playground. This, you can see the bathroom block. We are okay with some nice, simple massings to do that. And then this is the addition for that mechanical room. Next slide, please. And then this would be approaching from the parking lot. You can see the main entrance has a nice covering. You can see the community room and then that pavilion space. And then we would work here for that nice connection for the food trucks and that paving area.

Can I ask a quick question? So this area has a lot of... movement a lot of kinetic energy and i see a lot of glass um is this glass tempered is it designed to resist small children i mean you name it i mean it just seems like things are going to hit the building and there's a you know yeah uh yes it would be tempered it's safety glass

Could somebody break it? Yes, they always can break it. But it would be more aligned with a windshield versus a simple pane of glass that you would see in an old window. There's some other levers we can pull, like some foundation landscaping that helps protect those rolling items. But a good comment. If you don't mind going to the next slide, please. So this is option B. This is where we do a smaller building here. We've created this plaza or patio area, and then we've detached the multi-use pavilion. Same concept here for that patio area. could be tented, could host different vehicles on it, food trucks, maybe a farmer's market type event, but could be used for different staging. Also creates a really nice space between the multi-use pavilion and the community room that provides some extra energy and touch. This you'll see is a square. We're intending it to be kind of an omnidirectional design It's 25 by 25 covered, about three risers up. And the reason is, is with this omnidirectional approach, right, you can, you could face a speaker or a musician this way and utilize this part of the park for that. You could orient that same thing to the south. There's great kind of connectivity for people that want a little extra shade that when this is not being used for other things to observe the playground. And then we have two entrances, two distinct and separate entrances to the building in this design. Here, we really separate the entrance from the bathrooms. So that would be off to the north from the entrance to the community room, which you'll see here on the south. Next slide, please. So this is the floor plan. It's oriented the same way you saw it on the site plan. So we have the playground up in this area. We have that patio plaza area here. and the tennis pickleball courts here. So you'll see a covered entry into the men's and women's restrooms. You'll see a similar setup, right? A large community room. It's a little blurrier in this picture for some reason, but about the same square footage as the previous community room. Storage room, janitors, and some hospitality bar. Two additional things I want to point out. One that's universal to all of these designs is in lieu of doing an assisted bathroom, there can be discussions about security concerns about when you have a bathroom that you could lock. with the proximity of kids and others. But there's a need for that assisted piece to it. What we've done here is we are calling out for an adult-sized changing table in this oversized ADA stall. So if somebody does need that additional support or needs some help cleaning themselves or whatever it may be, there's ample opportunity for them to find the privacy within this bathroom itself. The other thing I want to point out here that's a little different from the first concept, and this is that optionality I was talking about, here you'll notice a hatch. So we are proposing that the mechanical system would go up in the attic. There would be a crawl space and a hatch to get you up there. You know, there's pros and cons to that like everything else. but this is one of those optionality moments to discuss. You don't mind the next slide, please? Thank you. So here you can see that pavilion, right? And we've used this sort of four gables to reinforce that omnidirectional piece, that plaza. And, you know, we can talk about how much landscaping and is that add value or detract through here. And again, put a little food truck looking guy in there for reference. And then the front of the building with the community room, large windows overlooking the park, some smaller punched openings but still ample glass overlooking that plaza area, and then the stone in the back. I guess I neglected to talk through the architectural style on the first one. Do you mind going back to one of those renderings? Thank you. Here you'll notice this is our most traditional kind of version. It's got a more natural and historic material color palette. We're talking about heavy kind of timber framing here, shingles, asphalt shingles, some brick. And then we would look at siding, whether it would be a fiber cement type siding or a natural cedar or wood siding. And then you can see kind of using the most traditional emollient patterns. We can add and subtract details to this right in this concept. As we go through that design development phase is where we kind of get into the nitty gritty of what are the rafter tails look like and those kinds of items. If you don't mind then going back to our other rendering. Thank you. This is taking still more traditional look this would be a more of a board and batten with a lighter material palette. We're looking at maybe a standing scene metal roof here with a stone accompaniment. We would use a stone that wouldn't be native to the area. And then you can see more of a transitional mullion detailing through this architectural style. Next slide, please. This is the view from the other side. We did elect to add a door here. Want to kind of engage both sides of this building. In a lot of these, you know, I think there's some great opportunities for small gatherings in this part of the park, given how we're locating these buildings. Next slide, please. And then this is a view where you see as you enter, you see a majority is open. You get a little gable end of the building. You can see here is the entrance to the bathrooms, and you'll catch the pavilion over here out of the corner of your eye. And you can see how it's raised a couple of steps above the plaza. Next slide, please. Our final option here, this sort of deconstructs the massing. So we kind of have separated the community room from the bathrooms and used more of a viewing bar to do this. This architecturally has the most sort of modern nod when we get to that part. Here we've chosen to do a smaller, our smallest kind of intervention for that parking loading zone. And then we have two locations for a detached multi-use pavilion, an option here and an option here. You'll see in the renderings, this pavilion is a little more directional. So it's got a pitched roof. So there's a little bit more of a front and a back, even though all four sides are architecturally pleasing.

Next slide, please.

Here again, oriented the same way you were just looking. So playground up here, big grass field down here, lake on to the right. You would enter this kind of vestibule hallway, lots of glass, but you can see we're not really programming it with seats, but you could add some furniture. It's a multifunctional space.

Is it covered?

It's fully enclosed and covered. Yep. And then you would enter the community room here. And similar, we would have that detached mechanical or separate mechanical entrance, double doors. We can talk about a small patio here if that's an option that's desired. If you don't mind going to the next slide.

But you lose the changing table in the bathroom in that one?

You do because we do enter from both directions. We still absolutely can provide the changing table. It just wouldn't be as private as it is in the others. Yes, very good. Here you can see that same view. Here's a patio, a small awning to provide some protection to the windows. can see larger glass expanses here we're proposing more of an architectural metal panel that has a wood look or a different look to it here you can see that glass enclosure for that vestibule area if you mind the next slide please moving around the building. So that's that waiting area and then the bathroom connection here and then keeping the bathroom very simple and it's massing. You can see the pavilion here and Kelsey and I were going back and forth. It is not in line with this building. We can edit that to make it a little more, to pull it back a little bit, but we wanted to get it in the same frame here for you guys. And then if you don't mind the last slide, Here's that entry. You can see the community room, kind of a white glassy connection, and then a approach to the bathrooms and doors into the bathrooms. So with that, I will turn it over to the group.

Okay. Thank you. I think what we'll probably do is give you feedback on all three options. I think what we'll do, we'll get everybody a chance and maybe we'll reverse the order for each item. And then maybe at the end, we'll give some summaries of what we think. I'm just going to go right to left. Sam, if you don't mind. You just want to run down the list? Yeah, let's do A.

And then if I don't mind adding one more thing. Things that you like are really important, but sometimes things that you don't like are also as important. So I got a thick skin. I want the real feedback, please.

Okay, so for option A, I'll just say that's my favorite of the three in terms of building layout. I love the windows. The covered patio area I think is great. One con of that is it'd be nice if we could stretch it around so it also partly faces the playground. It just feels like it's facing out to the lake. If we could add more covered patio, I think that would be a win there. Um, I thought the accessibility from the back where you had that, um, patio area was, was good. It's a nice ad. It's a good use of that space. Um, the fireplace I thought was a nice touch, maybe not necessary, but really liked how it was fit into that piece of it. Um, I liked the color, the brick, kind of that style. It would be nice there, I think, if we could mix up the materials. It looks a little kind of monochromatic. I think there's ways you could blend it into the surrounding areas that would fit in this footprint, but might just look a little bit more dynamic. Some of the cons... And I'll jump to B. One of the things I really like about B, I really don't like the design of the building in B, but I really like the patio between option B. So that's not here. Something maybe think about getting in. And then the only other con would just be, you mentioned kind of the use of the maintenance or the mechanicals, whether it's in the attic or the ground. Can you speak a little to the pros and cons of that?

Sure. I mean, it really comes down to maintenance and interchangeability. You know, if it's on the ground, you know, the maintenance folks love to be able to pop a door open and, you know, they don't need a ladder. You know, when it comes to getting a new unit in or out, when we put a hatch, these aren't going to be big, huge units, but they might have to kind of deconstruct them a little bit to get them in and out. So, you know, if all things were equal, I would always kind of put it on the ground in a closet, but there's space and cost, right? It's additional square footage. There's a door. So there's some cost efficiencies to putting it up there. So I guess in summary, it's probably weighing cost and efficiencies against maintenance and ease of future maintenance and replaceability. We're really just going to have a furnace for the most part up there. There'll be a condenser somewhere outside. for the ac um and then we'll have a electrical panel somewhere that we got to figure out hot water heater hot water heater and just one other question where is the entrance to this building is it facing the playground is a great way to think about it uh so yes if you where do you see the entrance as a design yeah i i've always viewed the entrance from the parking lot in the playground because i sort of assume a majority of people that's the center of activity We've tried to set up all of these designs, though, that at least have a door that's facing all aspects because we acknowledge that people walk. It's a community. I might come from the north and you might come from the south, but we want it to feel as kind of accessible. But we've always oriented the front door has been off of that off of that side.

I'm not sure I would think of that as the entrance as I look at the building, but I guess I'd be curious what others think as well. That's not typically how I'd access the park, but I'm just speaking for myself.

Are we coming just on option A? Just A, yeah, and then we'll come back. I mean, I would mostly agree with this, just to keep it short. The one thing I do like is the size of the restrooms. Option A and option, the third option, have the same number. I think it's important that we maximize that. So I do like that in this option for sure. The look of the building doesn't feel like it fits in with the neighborhood, in my opinion. I think there's different things that we could do that we could add to the exterior of the building potentially to make it blend in with the neighborhood a little bit more, just in my opinion. I guess that's about it for right now.

Sure. I would agree with everything. And in fact, we got an email early tonight that had some suggestions about some brickwork that I thought was quite attractive and would be a really good starting point. Questions? You've got a viewing area that goes only towards the ice rink, which is great, except that I think the majority of the time it's the playground that's being used. And so I wonder... And I think that if I can envision a time in which we'd have the building open, the bathrooms are open and that center area is open, but the community room is locked because you don't just want it. And so if somebody is coming in there to use that space to get cool for a minute, they're not able to see the playground. unless that community room is open. So that was one thing. This is my favorite though. I do really like that. I like that the bathrooms are accessible. So if you are someone who has rented the community room, the bathrooms are right there and they're in the building. There's one of the other ones where you had to leave the building and go around and say, I'm a Girl Scout leader and I've got my Girl Scouts. I don't wanna just be sending them outside to go around. So I like that it's attached here. By the same token, I don't like that the mechanical slash storage is way around the back. Because if we are, you said, like, you know, storing furniture or something in there, that means if you're going to be dragging chairs over to use in the community room, you're going outside all the way around the building.

That would be the sink storage room.

Well, but that's the mechanicals back here. Is there storage in there too? Oh, there's storage there. Sorry, I missed the storage. Okay. And then the other question is, did you give thoughts at all to mini splits as opposed to furnace just to, you know, not have so much in a mechanical room?

Yeah, we can consider all those. I think a furnace might be your best bet.

Okay.

I just was thinking of the base. That's our next onion level.

Okay. That is my only thing. Thank you. I'm sorry. I missed the storage.

I guess I'll go because I'm in the middle. I would start off with the concept that I think for all three of these, the front of the building is... viewed from the Lake Bell intersection and not so much from the playground. And again, that's, that's probably a personal aspect in that, like, that's how I view those buildings is like, that's the front. If you were a mom or dad bringing your kid to the playground all the time, you probably look at it the other way, but again, the community is going to see that building at the events. And generally speaking, those big events are all going to be looking, you know, from the ice rink, let's call it. Not to say that the other side should look awful or like a back door or anything. I mean, I love the way that front door does look. It's just that This building is a statement building for Whitefish Bay, and when you're driving on Lake Drive, you should be able to look over and go, oh, I see what they're doing here, versus what you have today looking from the Lake Bell Quadrant is a mechanical room, right? That's the main piece that people on the lake are seeing. So that's my number one thing for pretty much that's going to be a constant along all three options, but particularly this one, because I do like this one the most. I love the double-sided fireplace, the fact that you can get in and out of the bathrooms. I think Tara has a great comment about the viewing area in that. And maybe that can be just tweaked in the community room concept where, yeah, parents are going to be looking out the window, maybe, right? I don't know. We're all going to have to figure out how we're using the building. Do you let your kids play while you're inside? I don't know the answer to that. Oh, and just one other quick comment about the mechanical room. You have doors to the exterior, and they're to the north. Just a comment because I've done ice rink building and you need access from the south. You need to be able to hook up hoses and whatnot in the chemical room and then lead them out to the ice rink. So that's not a big deal. Just you need to have like either two doors or a more accessible door. And then I guess finally, what was the other thing? The... One of the things, I think this is where this came from, and that is that during festivals, during the beer gardens, during any kind of events, vehicles need access to that rink area, right? And so right now, it's just a little bit to the west of the building. They can drive from the parking lot through there. And so I think for each one of your options, you have this area that's like a parking lot area for storage of food trucks or deliveries or whatnot. And there may be some deliveries, but generally speaking, there still needs to be a way for trucks to get into the grassy area. And I don't know how that's done exactly, but I have a feeling that that was the message that you heard was that you know, we need a place for trucks. And that is probably not it because technically that's the back of the building where people will be using trucked in items, whether that's, you know, fourth of July stuff or ice drink stuff, that'll be in the grassy area, not so much in the front. That's at least my opinion on A. Let's see. I like the covered patio a lot. The one issue I have is I'm not sure how music events occur in that, because they'll be mainly to the south. And so you kind of have this opening that's great, but it's to the east, towards the lake. And that's probably not where you would intend to have people in that area. I mean, there's trees there and whatnot. You need something that broadcasts out to the grassy area. So I mean, if you could somehow rotate it or open it up more to the south, that could be a pretty decent solution. I rest.

I like it. This is my favorite color scheme and kind of style. When I think of Milwaukee County parks or state parks, I think of brown painted signs with yellow letters that we're all very familiar with. This kind of evokes that the most in my mind, and I appreciate that. It just feels parkish. As far as the large windows, I think... I like the idea of being in there and being able to see what's going on outside. But at the same time, given that we plan on renting this space out, I kind of think it feels a little exposed. I'm sure for a lot of things, if it's a kid's birthday party, it's probably great. But if this is grandma's funeral service or a Bible study and you're like, Looking outside and you're seeing three-year-olds jumping off the frog and landing on their face, it just isn't going to feel like it's a private space that you are renting because there will be people all around. And we have that. I mean, it's a park, it's a public space, but there are going to be a lot of events that occur there that are not open to the public. Yeah. which kind of leads me to the patio area. And I'm of two minds of this, so I apologize because the next one I'm going to say the opposite. But given that it's attached, I think it's going to be difficult to separate like, you know, let's say it's a graduation party, right? People are going to be going in and out onto the patio area, but that patio area is not going to be reserved. And so you're going to have, I don't know, I just feel like it's going to intermingle like, the private and public. And when people do want to reserve it for something, it's, it's going to get a little iffy as to like who can go inside, who can eat the cake, all that stuff. I generally, I like it. I think music events would be fine here. I think you just set the band up to face the South. Even though the opening is larger facing East, I don't think that really changes much as far as audio is concerned. So I don't have a problem with that, but yeah, that's it. That's it for me.

I want to say thanks for your hard work. And these are really great. And I always think warming houses are really kind of creepy. Like I don't want to go in them. And I think your windows and all of these drawings get rid of that for me. I agree with you. The patio awning, I think maybe that could be switched over to the south. And the windows maybe could be on the east so you see the lake. And then the windows wrap around to the playground. And then the fireplace awning area is facing south. Okay. Or maybe we have two situations like that where there's like a mini version of what you have on the salt with the fireplace and then a separate band area. That's like the other pictures. Um, but yeah, I think that one's really well done. And I think that's one of my favorites. Um, I do see a combination of materials with the siding and the brick, the glass, the wood. The more I look at these, I didn't think this before, but I am starting to like the stone of B, maybe not so farmhouse looking, or some of the brick that was sent to us earlier in that email. But yeah, I like this one. Jake?

I never knew how much I wanted to see a detached music type venue until I saw these three renderings. That said, the attached patio is the only thing that I don't like about Option A. Everything that everyone has said, I echo completely. I just... I really love... When I look at BNC, I really love the idea of detached, whatever we want to call it, because I think that it really, especially for Fourth of July or something like we had yesterday with the World Cup, I think that that would really provide, it would really stick out and it would be in a good way. And it would be a fantastic way to separate the warming house from whatever big activity is going to be underneath the pavilion. But other than that, I love option A. I, again, echo what everyone else said.

Let me toss it back to you for a second because I think you've heard some contradictory comments. Is there anything that's particularly contradictory that you'd be like, look, we need to kind of figure this out? Like the front of the building, Jay suggests the patio covering is not to his liking. What are the things in there did you hear where you're like, oh, crap, I've got two on this side and three on that?

I mean, I think maybe I appreciate the chance to answer that. Maybe I'll answer that after we're done. Because what I'm what I'm what we are trying to do with these three options is it's kind of like showing your work at school. Right. Like you got to kind of show it so that we can say we looked at it and then we narrow that funnel. So I'd be curious to see. I'll answer that at the end.

Right. It's just as a meeting facilitator, that's always what I'm doing. It's like, all right, what did we come down with? We got seven people and seven, you know, we're designing a camel here.

Jay, a clarifying?

Yeah, you should. Absolutely.

So are you saying that you don't like the covered part period or you don't like that as the only pavilion? So like if there was a standalone pavilion, would you still be opposed to the covered part?

i'm i'm fine with both i just i just i just want there to be a separate a separate standalone pavilion that you could put a band you could put a the the big screen for the world cup that and that's covered there so there's no glare issue there's no any so i yes i would be fine if that wasn't if it's an and if it's an and yes that's a great if it's an or not no

Okay. And then can I ask Jacob a clarifying question? So when you asked about the permitting, it just made a bunch of things go off in my head. Would you be opposed to having that patio be a part of, if I have rented the pavilion, I have also rented...

No, or, you know, or it could be like, uh, you rent a B or a NB. Um, certainly. Yeah. I mean, that's, uh, I just, the more I think about what we're going to use it for, uh, I was just kind of trying to go through my head and what, what is Cahill used for? It's for like, you know, uh, sometimes like, you know, churches will rent it out. Like sporting groups will rent it out. Birthday parties, you name it. Yeah. So graduation parties, different services, like how are those going to play in that space?

And the reason I ask that is because I obviously see how that's rented out and how often, but that covered piece is always kind of a part of the rental. And I think most of the people who rent it end up, unless it's dead of winter, spilling out into that area. And that's right on top of the tennis courts. And I haven't seen a lot of conflict between that.

other people and but and i think it's great to have the the ability to spill out into the outside too and like um you know i just were i was just worried if there wasn't clear defined lines that you know people would be going in and out and kids will be running in and out well and i think people will be going in and out to the bathrooms i mean and that's why it's kind of nice that that area you can come in and either go here or there sure yeah

I'm just going to give an editorial comment, too, that you had mentioned glass and how it's not very private. And I don't think we're going to manufacture something that's perfect for all groups. I think the glass is amazing. I think you'd be in that room and you'd say, wow, this is a really great view. you know, perhaps it's not the best place for Aunt Edna's funeral service. You know, it's just where we got a design to, you know, the majority of birthday parties that are probably in there.

And I would argue that most people aren't going to rent something 20 feet from the playground for Aunt Edna's funeral.

So that may answer your question. Challenge accepted.

Like, oh, crap. Big windows, little windows, portholes.

Let's move on to B. You better be warmed up, Jay, because now we're going to go left and right.

I am warmed up. I think that... What do you like? I think I like A so much that the others were just... I mean, yeah, I think that that is one of the things that, you know, Brian mentioned was optimizing the size of the bathrooms. I just, the flow, I think the flow on option A is huge. is just to me what makes, what separates it from everything else. So I don't think you have that same kind of, you don't have that same kind of flow in B, which would be my biggest con. It's just, it seems a little awkward. flow wise. What I do like, I mean, it's, I like the community room size, you know, the hospitality bar and the, you know, just like the others that the storage is attached to the community room, you know, that it's that way at Cahill. And I think that that's a, that's a must as someone who is Drawed a bunch of chairs and tables out of that storage room. But yeah. Yes. Okay. That's my short answer.

Anna? After seeing all the windows of A, this one doesn't compete. I like the windows. Sorry, Jacob. Yeah. And I like the separation of the band area. And the stone. I like the stone right now. But I think that's all I have to say about this.

Oh, really quick. I'm sorry. I love the design of the pavilion. That's funky, and I like it. Sorry.

So I... The styling of this one is my least favorite. It just feels a bit cold to me. But everyone can have their own opinions regarding that. This one... I have this nagging fear that the reason we all like the first one is because it's the most expensive by a mile. This one, not to be a downer, feels like the most achievable. And I want the worst warming house that can be built, or that will be built, not the best. We don't need it. we're not going to finance a Taj Mahal. And I'm not saying that's what the first one is, but I just have concerns that, that these are not all going to cost the same. And this one feels like it could happen. And the first one feels like it maybe is just a bit of a pipe dream and maybe I'm wrong. And maybe that's just has to do with how much we, we put forward for it. I really do like the pavilion. I think it's great. It's versatile. I would like to see it moved up a little to the South if it, where it's in on the map and, It's back just a little bit. It looks like if you did have a band playing there, you wouldn't be able to... Just walk onto that. Yeah, they wouldn't be visible from the entire open grassy area. Sure. I think this one looks... I'm using words like achievable, and I don't mean that as a knock towards it. It just feels like this is a very tight, compact, practical building that would last a really long time. And I think... there's something to be said for that. And to your earlier question, I do kind of view the entrance as by the pickleball courts in the park, just because that's where the parking is. I feel like, and me personally, that's where my family is a lot. And so I see that as the entrance, but I also agree with Kevin, like when you're driving down Lake, it should look, it should be a stunner, yeah. It should look good from both sides.

Yeah, no doubt about that. Can I just make one quick comment on? So I think you keyed into to the dollars a little bit. What we did here, right, was we have that larger paving area and the detached pavilion. So we wanted to try to compress the warming house structure a little bit to balance those costs. So, yes, you're right that that building is intentionally meant to be kind of the pared down version to allow for those additional amenities to help. That's how we're thinking about the options right now.

But all of these are within budget.

To date, they are in budget and on target. You know, it's one of those, we all know it, right? I mean, that first one, if we add a bunch of details, you know, depends on what those details are, right? That could push us over the edge or we find that happy middle ground, right, where we all need to be. So we can make anything expensive and more affordable. But there's a give and take everywhere.

I agree with a lot of what Jacob said in terms of it looks achievable. It almost looks like the building that we would have built 20 years ago, maybe, and with a smaller budget. So that's why it's probably my least favorite of all of them. So that's the first step. The second is I really don't understand the courtyard decorating paving area. I mean, you have like a... food truck park there. But again, I don't see the use case for that. And again, it's true that we're going to have different use cases going forward. And I think I would reject it particularly in that this is a park and suddenly you're putting pavers down and making less green space. And I, and like, we definitely heard that response back of like, we, we don't want to have, we don't want to get rid of a whole bunch of green space. And I just, that didn't make a lot of sense to me. Um, the funky pavilion that looks reasonably. All right. I mean, we'd need to design it a little bit differently, but okay. Uh, the bathrooms being only accessible from the outside, um, i i don't like that at all i mean if you're going to rent a community room you're going to want access to the bathrooms and so i that's a that's an odd design choice that would not uh i i don't like that um the i like the hospitality bar um i like the entrances on the you know i guess that would be north and south i'm not sure which way i'm looking east and west there you go um The materials definitely look the most basic and cheapest. I don't know if it was meant, it almost looks like it's a metal roof and metal siding. And I like the stone, but generally this looks kind of like a municipal building you would have built 50 years ago kind of thing. And let's see. Oh, mechanicals. So, yeah, quick comment about mechanicals. Again, with the hose. But here you have it upstairs. And, again, we're going to struggle with use cases in that in each one of these you've built in a storage area, which, again, we'll need to learn how we're going to use it. That's a lot of space that could be used for mechanicals, and we don't know what storage is going to be in there. I mean, chairs, I guess, is probably what it's going to be, but...

Yeah, I drew the line on that one that we needed to have room for tables and chairs because it becomes really difficult when you're renting out if you don't provide them and we have to haul them.

Okay.

But maybe we can make it smaller, but he didn't have that in some and I said that it had to be in all of them.

And I didn't quite get like what was going on with the storage next to the room that says Jan. What is Jan?

Janitorial. Janitorial. Okay, okay.

I mean, maybe you can, yeah, make it a little bigger, make it a little smaller. Yeah. And I think that is it, other than the front of the building needing to be facing Lake. Tara?

Go ahead. Do you want to say something?

Sorry.

Really?

We should have Kelsey talk about it. No, no. Just a clarification. So Lake... there's been a lot of fronts of buildings. So it's really all four sides. We're saying at this point, I would say, I mean, I think you tried.

I think the real question I have is we'll make all four sides presentable. Obviously we can put doors on all four sides, but like when we say, where's the front, like we need to define a front door to this building, right. You know, for, for the purposes of this, My suggestion is on the north side because it's the closest to parking. Not to say that we can't add like a gable to the south to mimic that or to. But I guess what's that, if we put a door not on the north, how would you connect it? Or would you just let it kind of feather out into the grass?

If you have a front door, you expect there to be a sidewalk.

Yeah, you'd have a sidewalk.

Well, but are you going to have a sidewalk that runs right through the grass area? Or how do you, I mean, I think that's the point with, you've got a sidewalk, you've got a parking lot that goes right to the front door if it's on the north. If you put it on the south-

I mean, there's going to be doors everywhere, right? Right. I mean, depending. It doesn't have to be on all four sides. But I think it's just the main presentation of the building, I still think it's from Lake. I think, yes, there are people who go to the playground and pickleball people, but that's a small segment of the population. Most people are going to be seeing it as we do now.

But seeing it as opposed to accessing it. There aren't a lot of people, but there aren't a lot of people, I don't think, who are walking from Lake Drive. to the building because they'd have to walk across grass. That's all we've got is grass there. We don't have a walkway. We don't have a... So they may be walking over, but realistically, the place where most people are going to park, most people are going to come in would be on the north because that is where the parking lot is.

Yeah, it depends on how you use Clody. I mean, like I've come from the picnic or the rink area you know, a hundred times more than I've ever parked in the.

And you just walk straight across the grass from, yeah.

It's kind of where you live and what you're using it for, but. And also think about accessibility, though, for somebody who's in a wheelchair. But there's going to be, you know, there's going to be sidewalks and there's going to be accessibility. And it's just it's got to look good from north, from.

Oh, yeah.

From all four sides, but particularly drive. That's kind of my whether you call that the front or not, I don't know. But it's got to be presentable. And oh, yes, this is a beautiful building that we're looking at from Lake and Bell. Whether that's, you know, the.

You don't see the door per se.

Yeah. We have lots of doors. I'm not sure what's the difference between a door and a front door.

I would tell you, I think you can see that in one of these renderings. That's a front door with a canopy and posts and defining a space.

Maybe there's just canopies on H1 and then we're done.

That's what we did on this one. If you looked at the other side, we gave it that similar. But you can see here, that's the point that I guess was... We can put the patio, but then it just kind of feathers in.

I take what Kevin is saying is similar to Cahill, where the most presentable or aesthetic part or side of the building faces Fairmount. And the most people, to Kevin's point, the most people who see this are going to see it from Lake Drive. So it's the aesthetic. Sure. That's what I agree with Kevin. I think I understand. Do you know the magic? I think I understand.

The magic we're looking for?

Aesthetic versus accessibility are two different things. Moving on.

So I think it's still you there, Terry.

I actively dislike this one. Sorry, but I pretty much stopped after I saw after I envisioned sending my someday grandchildren out and around, you know, to get to a bathroom. I mean, you pretty much lost me there. So that's all.

I agree. It's the size of the bathrooms again, the size of the building. It looked like on one of the doors going out to kind of what Kevin's getting at, it looked like one of these doors opened up to grass and it could just be the way the rendering was drawn. I think that what you could activate without doing a full sidewalk up to the south side of the building, if we aesthetically make it look nice, even just a small patio or a walkway, there's other ways to do that versus running a concrete walkway all the way up to the south end of the park, in my opinion. And I also don't like how it's disconnected. I agree. If we rent it to somebody, you want the bathrooms to be a part of the building. I completely agree with that.

I'll give you the design expertise of an accountant and then tell you to figure out how to pay for it. I agree. I don't like this building. As it lays out, I don't like the farmhouse look. I don't really like how it's oriented. What I do like about this, though, is the flow from the building to the pavilion. I don't know that I like a patio that large, but some kind of a patio that moves to... A different structure, I think, has some benefit here. I like that. It feels kind of like it flows with the playground. I don't know that in design A, putting any kind of entertainment under that patio and facing it the other direction, I don't know if that'll work as well. And so I'm wondering, is there ways to integrate some of this into more of a building that looks like A, but do it in the same price point? Yeah. You can do that. That's really the only thing I like about this is the flow between the structures, if we're going to have a detached structure.

I like the idea of the patio connecting.

This is a little bit large.

I'm curious if anybody else had a comment about the patio. I was the only one who... Did you care for it? Did you think it was?

It's kind of like, you know, if you're going to have two separate structures, I would like something that connects them together.

Yeah. And you could put some seating. You could shade it possibly. I mean, this one looks big and kind of exposed, but we're a little bit smaller. No, I just like the idea of a flow from the building.

I hate to say it, but, you know, that looks like it looks like a splash pad, a spot for a splash pad, which people go crazy for. Just saying.

Possibly. But also a place for picnic tape.

Just do it in budget. Splash pads aren't expensive, right?

They're nothing.

I think so.

Okay. Let's go to... Unless you want to... Keep going. Yeah, so...

C, I kind of struggle to understand. I didn't like the two structures attached together. It just kind of feels odd. It's a little modern, like you said. I actually really like the connecting walkway, but I don't know how you fit it into the other ones. And then the... The pavilion here feels like an afterthought, just kind of out in the distance. It doesn't flow very well, in my opinion. I like the color scheme, but it feels a lot like if you split A into two buildings and put a detached structure to it. And then the outdoor bathrooms, I agree. I just don't like that as much, kind of this layout. Yeah. Well, it's the outdoor entry to the bathroom. Do you see it would be on... Yeah, but you can get to it from the other side.

Can you get to it from the other side? Okay, so I guess... Option A, you only can get in from inside. Okay. Option B, you have to go from outside. Option C, you get... You get both.

But then you lose the accessible...

I guess I would just assume have it accessible from the inside would be my preference.

Although I will say that Cahill's bathrooms, they're accessible from the outside and people use them a lot.

Heavily used, yeah.

I mean, they're integrated into the building, though, so it's a little different.

Yeah. Yeah.

The one upside to that outside entrance is if for some reason, and this is an operational thing, it's very easy to close the building, keep the bathrooms open, whatever. The rest of the building is completely inaccessible if you want to get.

Can I ask how we do Cahill?

So Cahill is locked on the inside? Yeah.

The bathrooms are open?

I mean, the police usually come and open them and then they come back at night.

So there's times where the bathrooms are open and everything else is closed.

Exactly. Most of the time.

And the bathrooms have an outdoor and indoor accessibility, but the indoor accessibility is locked.

Locked from the inside. Yes.

And that is a definite problem. For me, it was one of the things I was going to comment on. It's positive.

It is a positive. It's a huge operational positive because you don't have to clean a hallway and it's less vandalism risk. Yep. All right.

I'm reversing. I didn't realize Cahill had the interior accessibility, I guess. I've never accessed it from the inside, but that makes more sense. It's both. Yeah. No, that's good.

It does unless you've rented it. You don't.

Yeah, that's true. No, that makes sense. Okay. Sam, you're wrong. No, I'm not. You know how often I get told that in a day.

What you should probably get out of this is I think we're probably all going to say it would be really nice to be able to access the bathrooms from both sides and have an ability to lock. or a code or something. We'll figure those.

That's design development.

Yeah, I hadn't thought about the hallway. And it would be nice to.

But yeah, otherwise, from a design perspective, I guess A just feels like a nicer version of this in a single building from a look and feel.

Brian? I did like the bathroom. So I have two points from accessing both directions. I like the fact that you almost have three different ways to use this space. because we talked about using it for like a warming shelter for the ice rink. You potentially could keep that vestibule open and keep the bathrooms open and then still lock the kind of rented area, so to speak. Kind of liked how you have the option to do that. I didn't love the location of the shelters. I also didn't love the ceiling of them. I feel like it's creating a megaphone for the neighbors to the north of there, depending on what direction that's facing. It might be facing east.

We could face that pavilion east or west was kind of the thought, depending on which.

That would make more sense to face it east or west.

They're currently facing east.

I would say probably. I mean, if we're looking for people's input, but I think we'd want to face it east toward the lake where there really is no neighbors, then... Not north, south, or west, in my opinion. That's about it. It almost looks like you kind of created an outdoor area on the east side of the building. I liked how that was, you almost had that in addition to the shelter. I like that part of it as well. And I like the exterior look of this one the best, personally, of the three of them. But it looked like it fit in the most with the neighborhood, but not too since.

I also liked the fact that it is like three separate places and how you could lock off the community room. You could keep that warming area open or you could close that. I mean, it seemed like it was slightly more versatile. It would be interesting to me if some of those Florida ceiling windows were patio doors, potentially.

And they could be. We set them up for a three-foot module so we can easily fill them in and out.

Yep. I liked the covered area, you know, again, because I do think that when you rent a building, you often will spill outside, and that covered area I like as well. So there were multiple things I liked about this one as well. But, yeah, mainly the kind of modularity of it. That's a word.

Which covered? Are you talking about this?

I'm talking about this on the east side, how this is covered here. Cool. So you've just got like a little overhang there? Yep. Got it. Okay.

Does that say?

Oh, and also I want to agree with Brian in that I think if we are going to be adding more in terms of music, that we are going to want to point the music sound out towards the lake as opposed to towards people's houses.

Okay.

And we talked about that a lot during the last... You keep saying things over and over.

Yeah, it's funny. Sea has grown on me a lot. I love the concept of the bathroom's entrance from the outside and the inside. The... let's call it a three-season porch. That's a clever area. The room looks good. The more I think about it, the one thing, it did look interesting in that there's two roofing systems, which seem to be, that's a lot of roof to fix, but what do I know? I mean, just the fact that it's basically two buildings joined by a... Oh, sure, sure. I love the little overhang that Tara was just mentioning. The pavilion that you've chosen, I like the wood. I like the wood. I mean, the option B's pavilion had the funky metal. It looked like a metal roof, maybe. I like the wood of this, although it is very boring.

It's still a metal roof, though.

Well, this is metal, but at least the columns are wood. And so a combination of those two pavilions look good. And you know what? Yeah, I think I've warmed up to the placement of the pavilion to be... near Lake Drive, we would certainly, let's see, I'm sorry.

So that would be to the west?

Yeah, the west, the western position. Obviously, when it is created, you need to be cognizant that Lake Drive will be looking at the back of that forever, and we need to make it look nice from the back. But yeah, there's a lot of, it's grown on me. I I think you could probably change the, I don't know what that is, like wood siding or something? I'm sure what you'd call the brick on one side and wood on the other, is that?

Yep. That would be some sort of phenolic panel or metal panel with wood look. But we can, if we need to, you know, make it fiber cement.

Yeah. I mean, but there's a lot to like about all of that. So that's a close second for me. Jacob?

um yeah i think i like the l shape of this one how it kind of hugs the park it kind of just feels like a natural enclosure i don't know practically if that does anything but it just feels right um i do worry about the space the hallway that is also like the viewing space i think we'd practically speaking, struggle to figure out what to do with that. I think we would want to put furniture in there and then almost immediately there would be barbecue sauce and cake on the furniture. And then we'd be like, oh, we got to get different furniture. It just seems like i don't know it seems like a cool space but i don't know how often it would actually get used what if you put benches maybe i mean i like the i like the they kind of had that bar system yeah in the first one something like that yeah yeah um but as it is now it could still sit on them yeah it feels like we would get it and it would just be barren and then we would be like man we got to spend ten thousand dollars on furniture and then it would just be a constant like you know Now we have to repair the furniture. Maybe I'm overthinking it. But I'm going to echo Sam's point. This kind of feels just like a slightly less desirable version of option A. So I think if we're going to go this one, I'd probably just lean into option A. Yeah.

Did anybody have C as their favorite?

No. And if we could do the bathrooms with an inside and an outside in option A. Yeah.

Yeah.

But then you'd also have to switch around. I mean, because right now, the ugliest side is facing dry.

That's a good point. You could make that brick better.

I like the idea of flipping the patio. If you move the mechanical room, an option A.

You should put the mechanical out. You should split the doors and we'd have to put a little canopy.

And I think you guys would dress it up and give you access.

Can I ask a quick question to the group? If option C's mass and layout was rendered with the materials and the vibe of option A, what's the feedback there?

Yes. Kevin's question was, does anyone have C as their favorite? My answer was going to be yes, but if we could... weave in some of the things from option a into option c like the the detached pavilion um uh some of the materials that you were referencing um i loves i love c for the reasons that jacob just said and we talked about the bathrooms um uh yes to both of the questions that you two just asked. My turn. I was just answering the questions.

My answer is no. I like it, but the more I look at this, this area is getting really awkward to me. it's just the two structures it's not doing it for me but I like the front and I like the little awning and that's kind of what I was saying with option A if you make that little awning or you make the big awning a little awning sure okay you've heard from me I really love the fireplace the two-state fireplace and that's the whole point of you being here it's like you're

Maybe this was a test. You were just like, let's throw these three things together that aren't perfect. And now you've been hearing all this input that you will now, are you going to create three more?

Well, I think that's what I, I guess I'm curious on what that expectation is. I mean, I don't think we threw them together. I think they're all very intentional. It's a really hard thing to narrow this infinite spectrum down. And this is a simple building in the grand scheme of things down to something. So we have to give you those to say yes and no. Am I surprised by the general feedback? I think we can. I think there are a few things that really were new, but I think overall, I'm not overly surprised. I think that is my question of where do we want to go, right? And maybe I'll let you kind of start.

Sure. So if I could walk through what I saw as the takeaways to make sure we're all in agreement. Okay, so we like the bathrooms accessible from both indoor and outdoor. The building needs to look good from all sides. There can be a front and back. Doors with canopies on bell, lake, and parking lot sides. Point the music to the east or lake with a standalone pavilion, which should be located on the west side of the site.

To the east or lake? What do you mean? Sorry.

Point it to the east. To the lake. Yeah, to the lake. Okay. Yep. Here, I'll clarify that. Big difference between you. Send the music to the lake. The standalone pavilion should be on the west side of the site, but it also needs to look good from Lake Drive. Like the overhang or connected pavilion area for the community room to flow into. also potentially like a patio flowing to a separated band area, want a standalone pavilion or band area, which I guess I already said, and then need to consider access to the grass area and mechanicals opening to the south. Fireplace. Oh, and I really like the fireplace. Anyone didn't like the fireplace, right?

Perfect.

And it's one of the things that people love at Cahill.

It is. And they were so sad when it wasn't working. Yes.

So I have to take a moment and hopefully he'll watch this. But that fireplace, it was created, you know, probably in the beginning of the building. But Mark Sumsky from the Civic Foundation about 14, 15 years ago said, I want this fireplace to work again. And he worked with the fire department, with several contractors, and he made that project happen. So thank you, Mark. He doesn't live in Whitefish Bay anymore, but I just have to give him a shout out.

All right.

In fact, let's call the clothing one the Mark Somsky Firebase.

Is there anything that I didn't summarize that there seemed to be a clear consensus on? No, but I'm curious about one thing.

Just to fit in with the neighborhood, you didn't say.

Oh, yes. I'm curious about what I'm hearing. I thought I heard that we liked the building attached or connected in some way to the pavilion, but then I hear the pavilion on the west side, those two things don't jive. Or both.

Or do we do two pavilions? Like a mini one attached. Like an overhang. Yeah, a little overhang.

I just want to make sure that that was clear because when I hear... That's true.

So it's more to you because you were contemplating the option B.

That option B. I see them as different. So like an overhang to me is part of the building. If we're going to do a pavilion, it was nice to have it connected by that patio that's not overhung.

Right.

But... I think your comment is really only for option B. It was what I liked about option B. And if we decided we want to detach one and it's going to be on the west. I would still like an overhang on the building though. Yes. Regardless. I think that's a really nice feature separate from the pavilion.

I think what you were trying to say was just some kind of connection between the two structures.

And does there need to be or not?

I think it depends on which option you go with here. So if you fully detach this pavilion and put it somewhere else, I don't think you're paving between the two. The thing that was nice about option B was it felt like it flowed as an area of the park. If you stick a pavilion somewhere else, it's just a different flow. And I guess I kind of liked... containing it all in one place. It seemed like a nice flow. But I guess I'd be curious to see what does it look like? Or how can we orient that separate pavilion building as well?

So when you look at this one, for example, how do you feel about that? See, how do you feel about the pavilion being completely detached?

I guess I'm less concerned about it being detached if that's the route we go. But when I saw the picture of C, I didn't like where it was located, where it was just kind of like perpendicular to it. It just seemed kind of maybe it was functional, but it looked strange as well.

OK.

And I'm not speaking about like the pavilion in B with the roof and everything wasn't what I was talking about. It was more just the flow of it was kind of a nice flow from covered area to it. I think if we go the route of detaching, it's a different conversation entirely. I just want to make sure we have a covered patio.

That sounds good. That's helpful. Is that good enough? They did conflict. And so I appreciate you clarifying that. OK, in terms of next steps, we had a great debate about this today on a call. So there's two options. There's value in showing people different options because that's how you kind of figure out what you don't like, but also what you do like. Right. So what we could do is. slight modifications to the three options, things like the mechanicals on the lake, you know, making those look a little more aesthetically pleasing, but it's not going to check all these boxes and they're not going to be, you know, perfectly responsive to everybody's feedback. We'd really be looking at the headline concerns, basically. Another option would be to zero in on one option that really takes into account what I just summarized being everybody's feedback and then doing a broader survey to say, here is a design concept. It's not the design concept, right? But here is a design concept. What do you like? What do you not like? And then work for modifications from there.

I can. So I don't really like going back with three more. I think you just continue to raise questions. I would cut it off at two or one, but two coming back with two designs could work. I wouldn't go to three.

I agree.

Otherwise, you're going to have the same conversation two or three more times. As we see different options, it'll trigger different things. And I think

And it's not necessarily coming back to us.

No, and I actually, that's where I'm thinking even one or two options that incorporate these things and then ask for feedback about that design is probably a more functional way to go than giving three. Because if I think of how this would have gone if we surveyed on this, I think A would have probably won because it's kind of the most aesthetically pleasing building. But I don't know that you would have gotten feedback on what about B and C is a concept we liked. Or if you go with a single design or two, you might get more specific details or themes. But I'm...

I think if we're going to go two, then it should just be a vote. I mean, we can elicit feedback, but I think if we're going to have more than one option, a lot of people are going to treat it like a vote. Yeah, like it's a... If we go that route, then I think we just put it up for a vote. I kind of like the idea of just one and elicit feedback. Yeah.

I think what's tricky in this community about the three options is traditionally or how we have done it that I am aware of is you have three playground designs and these are given to you by the manufacturers and you can switch out a slide, right? But you're not wholesale changing it. Whereas in this case, obviously you can do whatever you want. And so we don't want people thinking of it as it is truly a vote of my favorite because you're going to have modifications and changes based on the feedback. Yeah.

I like the option of two because I feel like if we only put out one, people are going to feel like they had no choice. They had no voice. Whereas if we put out two and we essentially vote and we still request feedback.

And then you come back with something.

And then eventually we incorporate that feedback with the, you know, because truthfully, I mean, A and C are conceptually pretty different, but we all kind of had decent feedback on both of them. And it'd be interesting to see if the public is like, we like the two separate or we like one, you know, that difference.

Let me also throw out one other option. When I saw the three options, I figured that this would have been one of them, and it would have been the very classic building with a band shell facing to the south. And that has been my vision for a decade because it was a simple building. They're both attached. You have entrances to get into the building. But I was surprised that that wasn't one of the options. Basically replicating what we have now and replicating the stage area that the Fourth of July uses. And so my suggestion is, if you were to have two options, I think what's going to happen is we have designed A in a pretty good way. And if you could tweak a bunch of things and work some magic, that'll probably be the answer. But if you wanted to say, here's the detached option and here's the attached option, I was kind of expecting an attached option at some point. So does that ring any bells for anybody? Like, oh, the public would like to weigh in on whether it's attached or detached.

The only question I have about that, I mean, having the band shells facing the south, I think, is problematic for neighbors. And I could imagine neighbors just going, nope, and we lose the whole.

And we've had this chat before. I know. And I always believe what could go right. Those neighbors might love this and love the fact that the park is being activated just like they do around Schoolhouse Park. So I put a tack in that one. And maybe that's why people choose the detached one that's facing west.

Well, did anyone here, I'm trying to remember, did we give feedback at all that we wanted it attached or did all of our modifications have it detached?

It sounded like everything.

Everybody likes A, which is attached. I mean, I think A, it's the least functional to the south. I think you're discounting what that space to the east really is. And I'd encourage you to go up to Cedarburg for summer sounds. And people love being in and amongst the trees for that. So I think it's still a very open space. I think we can make modifications to A to get it to open to the south, no problem. I mean, that's not... Or both. Right. It's not a non-starter. I mean, it might be a gable, right, like we did with the pavilion just to open it up. So, I mean, I think, yes, there is an attach and detach. I think if we're going to get down to two... got to, we got to settle on where we want that pavilion and which way we want it to face. Because if I know that, then I can work like things like the, is a plaza realistic or not. Right. I mean, if it's in option C, right, where we're down in here, it's going to be in the field, you know, we can landscape around it. We can do other things, but it's going to work. I don't see us, you know, making a pad, but right. But if it's over in here, you know, like B, and we still have A, then maybe that plaza does become... So I think where we land a detached diversion would be helpful. I think there's really two general answers. It's somewhere in this axis and somewhere up in here or potentially over in here if you wanted it.

In my opinion, it would be detached like B and it would be broadcast over the lake, so east. Um, yeah, but I don't, I don't think a big monstrosity, like would be, be as big as Cedarburg or is this smaller? Okay.

Uh, I couldn't tell you the demand. I mean, it, Cedarbridge is like four times the size. I mean, we're talking about, uh, a better one would be like, if you go to Theensville to the park, um, by the river there, they have that little arch top. It's more of that scale of it.

I like to be where it was and be. So I think that's the access. That's the area I would like to see it, if we're doing detached.

Yeah, I agree. The flow, like having it in one consistent space, to me, feels functional. It feels like it belongs if you're going to detach it.

But to answer the question of how many to give the community, one or two, and I can tell you, not everyone understands design. You're going to get crazy feedback. And people don't do well with a lot of options, I think. They're going to be all over the place. It's going to be arguing, changes. Yeah, but then multiplied by how many community members. So that's my opinion.

So I think I just heard people flipping or something. There's two possible places for a detached stage. One is to the east of the building. We'll call that number one. And it's B. You know, it's option B and one is option C. So where does it, it sounded like you started, two of you said, no.

I liked B from the beginning, the layout of where that's placed. I agree.

I've heard B. I like option C. I like it C too. I like it on the west side of the building because I think it opens up like this weekend. yes like that that's where you lose you really cut off the park if in my opinion if you put it up there yeah i like the attack that's why i said when i was talking about both that's why i said both because i like the attached version for like this like you're renting the pavilion yeah and it's kind of open but then you're also having a separate pavilion that's gonna it also feels more welcoming that's where you're gonna put your picnic benches that are there you know most of the days and you can use that space whether or not you're renting the area so you're actually on a without any detachment

I think is what you just said.

Come on. I'm on A with the separate attached one. A and F. A and F. Are you having fun making actions?

I'm team Brian. That's exactly what. Yep. I am too. Yes.

Who else is? Who wants B?

We have two options, right? And we're not showing an attached anymore.

So can I just clarify, what I heard throughout the discussion is to shorten up the overhang in A, so it's not as costly and because it doesn't seem to need to be that big, and then have a standalone pavilion bandshell on the west side of the site by lake drive.

Yes, I think that's what A plus is to me.

How much do we save by shortening that up?

I mean, it's about the size of your community room right now. So even if we shorten it in half. Because we were thinking about it as that pavilion space, not as an auxiliary space.

You could use like option C's option.

Yeah, I would like that. I would like that. The overhang that's on C. I'd like to see that bigger, personally. So I'd like a big overhang.

Is the question really where you place the pavilion at this point, then? It's either near the house or to the west? Is that what the options you're talking about are, is where you place that?

I hear there's two options we're working with, right? One's going to be based off of option A. Maybe we'll add a pavilion to the east of the building, like option B. That's detached.

On the east side of the building?

Yes, like option B. We're shortening the pavilion.

I think that's what Sam was saying. I think that's two people who want that.

Oh, OK. Yeah, that was one of the options I'd like to see.

That's why options aren't fun to think through, because there's one of these 3,000. Option two, we're building off of C. with a more A look to it, with the architecture of A, and we're talking about a pavilion that's off like we're showing in this spot or this spot.

It sounds like the majority are liking the western spot where you're pointing to right now.

Yep.

Who likes the eastern?

I like the Eastern layout, but I think those are two good options. I mean, it's a good question to get an answer to.

Anything we do will be better than what we have. Exactly.

Again, these aren't the finals, right? You got to get close enough that we're happy with where we are, that we can stand by it if it's chosen. But there are literally a million decisions that we're going to make between now and then. kind of get it done.

So it sounds like what you're saying, and I just want to make sure I understand. It sounds like what you're saying is we're essentially the two options for the building would be essentially A, essentially C. Everyone seems to be in agreement that the official auditory pavilion would be separated from either of the buildings, correct? And then the question is, are we putting that on the east side or on the west side? Does that kind of boil it down to how you're thinking about this?

I was with you right up to the last thing.

The east side, on the east side, or closer to Lake Drive.

It's the distance, too.

I think this one was... I didn't hear anybody advocating for... No, no, no.

I was saying to the east of the building, kind of a la B, the way it is in B. Okay. So I think it's, I believe we have an agreement that we're separating the music pavilion piece from the building. Correct, everyone? Yeah. Okay. That the two options for the building would be A and C with changes. Yep. Okay. And then the question just is, which of the places for the separate pavilion do we prefer? To the east of the building or to the west, closer to Lake Drive? Does that sum it up pretty well?

I think so. I think it's, Jacob and Sam prefer the one to the east. Yep. And I'm hearing everybody else preferring the one. No, I haven't voted yet. Oh, you didn't?

Okay. No. Jay, where were you on that? To the east or the west?

West.

Okay. Anna?

East. So we've got three easts. Three easts and four wests.

Well, I haven't voted yet.

I am very... Well, you know what? I mean, like, that is actually a decision we don't need.

We don't have to vote, right?

Design a detached pavilion for us. Thank you.

We'll figure... We'll throw a dark... We'll put an alternate location if we need to.

Well, and maybe that's part of the survey.

Yeah.

You know, the part of the survey is... Design two buildings, design one...

pavilion, and then we'll figure out where to put it.

Maybe that's a survey question. Just to be clear, in that picture he's holding up there with the two, I'm on Team West.

Same here. If that's what we land on, I'm with you on that.

Think of it as like a pavilion placement between C and B.

That's the distance from the building, more so than

Okay.

I gotcha.

Once further.

So next question then, based on that feedback, we'll get the designs. Obviously, you could come back at the next meeting or another option is I could email the designs if there's not major concerns, we could move to survey.

I would do that. Yeah, I don't think he wants another one of these. We're talking to you.

Don't lie. You're not paid to lie.

All right. Thanks. Thank you, everybody. I appreciate it.

Thank you. Well, but we should, yeah, one other quick comment. We did get an email. Did you share that email? I hope I did. You did. Just about the more any of this architecture or some glances to... buildings that are surrounding and inside whitefish bay the more things you can look at and go hey this looks like a whitefish bay building because you know we are we have looked at abnc focused on them a lot and i'm not sure abc has relationships to whitefish bay architecture i'm not really sure what that is other than if you said i'm going to make this into a tutor english tutor people would be like yeah that looks like whitefish bay so keep that in your mind for styling Because you're going to get more emails from people who have used ChatGPT, and they're going to say this is better, and then you're screwed.

And we know how to respond to those now. Sort of.

We know. That's great. Let us know how to respond to those. Okay.

Thank you.

Any members of the public? I'm hearing none. We can move on to the rest of our show tonight. There's more? Yeah. All right, we're going to number two, discussion action on the contract award for the 2026 Rogue Way Rehab Project. Oh, I'm sorry, number two. I skipped down to the second. I'm sorry, discussion on carryover bond. Carryover bond proceeds. My bad. Wow, Jacob. Wow.

I know, Jacob's ready. Anybody need to stretch or anything just to...

Oh, all right, go for it.

So just to start this off, no decisions need to be made right now in this specific agenda item. It's kind of teeing us up for some things that are coming and just possibilities of what we can do. So as we're working on closing out our 2024 borrow, which was primarily for the storm sewer collapse, there were some other projects that came in under budget. And then there was also some, I guess I want to call it like extra money that came from the 2024 and the 2026 borrow because the cost of issuance came in less than Ellers was anticipating. So we did have some extra money for that, which got us to about 900,000 that we have unallocated. As I was preparing for today's meeting, I did determine that 140,000 of that has actually already been allocated as carryover. So when we were doing the planning process for 2026 borrow, we had a chunk of money that we knew we hadn't spent. So we were planning on having that as carryover. And we actually had a higher amount of carryover already. I don't remember. It might have been like $400,000 higher. And then we decreased it to $140,000 because we knew that the salt shed was a growing possibility. So I would say that this money that we have here, so it's like $762,000 is what we're working with. It's less than $900,000 because $140,000 has already been taken care of.

So these numbers aren't correct on the memo. You're changing them as you are talking to us. Got it. Okay.

Yeah. I mean, I didn't do that math in my head. I changed it before I got here.

I just want to know what we're staring at is not accurate.

Correct.

We would have never known and you could have been really impressive.

Sam would have probably. I would have caught you someday.

Maybe not today.

So I guess kind of then to summarize the rest of the memo is the options that we have as recommendations are the salt shed with Glendale and Shorewood and then the 2026 roadway rehabilitation came in over budget. Now, I'm not going to go into detail on either of those because, like I said, they are future agenda items, but just kind of showing the money we had, uses we could have for it. So then for both of those numbers on the back, you would have to subtract $140,000 to get to what we actually have left to allocate for any purpose outside of the salt shed or the road rehab.

It would be helpful. We can email out maybe updated tables if somebody wants to see that. But can you just say how much money in each of the columns?

Yeah. So for the delay, the road rehab until 2027, it would be $139,352. And then if we took the lowest bid for this year, it'd be $64,352. Gotcha. So does anyone have any questions on that before we move through? the kind of specifics on the items.

Oh, so you're going to do that?

No, I'm going to sit down.

Oh.

I think we'll move on to the next agenda items, but are there any specific things on this? I can also speak to them as we get to those agenda items if there are questions, but...

It was the last three paragraphs about PPII that were a little confusing to me. Like the sentence specifically, the cost of replacing a private portion of the service line cannot be paid by the water utility. It must be funded entirely outside of the utility. So I think that means that the general fund, like, is that where that's coming from then?

Essentially, yeah. We're going to create a separate fund that will just house all that activity.

No,

you can go yeah so it will still be collected through it's actually special charges now we've learned not special assessments so it'll be collected still from special charges that the residents will pay but the cash has to flow through the levy or through the general fund and what that means functionally is that the risk is on the general fund side so if for some reason which the risk is pretty low bank is on that side yeah so the risk or the loss potential is on the general fund side and not the utility side yeah Also, accounting is a huge nightmare because each of these projects have to be very, very specifically separated out. We're getting questions about $2,000 here or there.

Each individual replacement?

Well, just about accounts and wanting, if there's anything that could potentially be private, they are just digging, digging, digging.

Who is?

PSC.

Why?

Because it cannot be in the water rates. So when we do all of our bidding, everything is going to have to be separated. And then I've already started a spreadsheet for PPII that's showing byline item, how everything's going to be separated out. And there's still going to be a ton of questions.

And it cannot be in the water rates. Why?

Because of state law.

Yeah, no, I'm just curious. Yeah, I get it.

Yeah, they're saying that the water utility doesn't own the private lateral, whether they're correct. But it turns out that the business wouldn't be functional if the water can't get there.

Yeah, I think that's a really good chicken and egg question.

Yeah, exactly. It is the way it is. This is why we didn't realize it at the time. We thought PPII was like a test for our public works department and for us to figure out how do we do this.

Sure.

But what we didn't realize is it's also a great test for the PSC and doing the water rate case. I am so thankful we're doing it right now because to learn this stuff two years from now would be a nightmare. And so it is painful and we're figuring it out, but it could be a lot worse.

And so your reason to allocate this $100,000, $140,000 would be just to cover the risk in theory that there's underpayment or something? Or why would we move this there, I guess? What does it shield us from?

The reason the PPII overruns is because we were planning to split. So we got the cost for the public and private sides, and we were just going to split it 50-50 because logically that makes sense. That is acceptable. We've learned from like a design perspective, as long as you're replacing both public and private. But they want us to go into the bid tabulation line item by line item. And what we found is because you have to tap the main and how those the bid documents structured, it's actually a lot more costly. by the bid, not in reality, but on the bid it looks like it's much more costly to replace the public side than the private side. So basically what's happened is the costs have flowed from the private special charge to what is now the utility has to pay. And so the water utility is still paying that, but it's more costly.

But that's only in the bid or that's in the actual charge? Because you're saying from a design perspective, you split it. In reality, the village is bearing a higher percentage of that split. Is that how to think about this?

Yeah. So there's different parts of the project. So the first part of the project is you design it. That can be split 50-50 in cost between public and private, between special charge and utility.

The cost of the design or? Yep. Okay.

But then when you get into construction, you have to go into the bid tabulation and look at what is the cost to tap the water main? What is the cost to enter the house? All those line items. And when we bid out the project in the way those costs came back, it shows that to replace the public portion of each lateral is much more costly than replacing the private side. So it means that the water utility will have to We'll have to pay more.

So the allocation might be more like 70-30. Our design just understates the public copy of this, right? And that's what you would do.

I don't know if that's the right percentage.

Yeah, but that's what I'm asking.

For shifting the percentage. It's now like 75%, 25% versus before we were thinking of it as 50%.

You've budgeted for a project that's 50-50 in theory over time, but you probably are going to be 60-40 or something. I mean, don't quote me on that, but you are going to bear more of the cost than 50% on the public side.

i i think when we do the water main project because we've learned i think it's going to be different um but like right right now with the ppi program because we had to how we had to bid it out with mmsd just how it all yeah is that the cost ended up being a different split is this sorry go ahead no so it's good for the homeowners very good for the homeowner okay

But it will come back in the form of, whether it's a levy or a higher borrow, it'd be a borrow, right? Ultimately is what we would fund it by, but it would be a general fund borrow?

No, I'm sorry. And that, yeah, it's kind of do different things. In this, in the PPII case, that is all the water utility.

Okay.

So it really is just the water utility. We would move more of the borrow to the water utility, which we can do because they're all bio bonds.

Yeah, right.

Yeah. So what it means functionally is, do you want to just do one year of PPII, knowing that the cost is higher? Or do you want to reserve some of the money to still be able to do two years of PPII? Is functionally what that piece is about? Yeah.

And this is all PFC reporting issues or it's also the valuation that we're going to charge the homeowners?

It's both.

Okay. That's an acceptable answer. And then the next piece is, Is anyone helping you with this? Is this Ehlers helping us with this? Or is it an engineering firm that's figuring out the splits? Or are we doing it? Yeah.

So it's both. So Ehlers is doing our PSC rate case. So they're helping us figure it out. When we're doing calls with the PSC, what they keep telling us, because I ask, do you have examples of how you've done the bid documents or how you've done the splits? And the answer is, you're the second one through.

So Shorewood was the first one.

Yeah. I probably don't need an answer to that question. I just want to make sure you have the help and consulting that you have, that you need. That's all I care about.

We have all of it that is available. The answer is we are a test case. So they're saying what we learn from your case, other people will build on and then we'll keep going.

As Eller said, this will be really good for our other clients.

I love that. Well, no, I mean, Jamie, you can hire yourself out as a consultant to Fox Point and Charlotte.

I don't think I want to do that. They have that.

Okay. Okay, but we don't have to decide tonight, right?

Yep. So we're good with that.

It's all just informational at this point.

Thank you.

Then we're moving on to discussion action on the contract award for the 2026 Roadway Rehab Project. Maxine, welcome.

Thank you. So back in March, I presented the proposed locations for the 2026 Road Resurfacing Project. That was all of Devon, and then it was Bay Ridge from Montclair to Monrovia. And, um, also in March, the DPW was doing a storm sewer repair and they had to open up the road and they noted that the road surface is sitting directly on dirt. So it doesn't have any of them like modern layers of asphalt or support for the road there. Um, I don't know if you could bring up the photo that I if it's not too much we have it back it's yeah so that is actually a historic photo that we found of Devon looking east and you can see that it's all torn up but that's a historic way that they constructed roads and obviously it doesn't have the longevity that modern roads have and then. I included two photos that I took that day of looking into the hole. And you can see that it's the driving surface directly on one. Then if you go down, down one more, here's an example photo of a modern road, which has a proper expected useful life. And it has all the layers of subgrade base course So yes, if we continue with the proposed plan of a standard mill and overlay, it wouldn't be addressing this issue of the lack of support and the road wouldn't have the longevity that it needs.

Can I ask, we have other projects going on on Bay Ridge too. We're doing laterals, aren't we? No? Or is that... You got another mic.

You can just... Are you referring to the PPII program?

Yeah, I think, yeah.

That's more on the southern side of the village, so that would not be a comprehensive of the PPII program.

Okay, because I just didn't want... Barrett's connects with Devon. I didn't want them to be people living on that stretch to basically be facing multiple construction sites on both ends for a long duration.

And that was something that we covered in a previous Public Works Committee meeting, but we had this massive matrix, as we call it, that really evaluates completely different than historically about our resurfacing program to ensure that our water main projects and any other type of program do not compete against each other. So we're trying to do more of a holistic approach with PPII, LSL, water main. So once we touch these roads like Devon or Bay Ridge, based on that matrix that we put together, we're able to analyze all of our different utilities to make sure that we get the expected useful life of 20 years before we have to go back for a water utility project, for instance.

What is your workload this year versus next year?

That is a great question. That's where I was going to actually take over from Maxine, looking at the pros and cons of two options available. So as Maxine was alluding to, this did come to a little bit of a surprise, but not so much when we started opening up this road, because this is not a typical resurfacing program whatsoever with Devon. But I'm impressed that our DPW staff took that due diligence once this was discovered to not just do things like in 2012, where it's just another mill and overlay that we never got our expected useful life of that. So that's why it took so long to get through this process of doing the soil samples and seeing what that under drain may need in order for us to really build up that road based on that exhibit that Maxine had shown. But because of that, now we're kind of behind the eight ball to go into the question about workload is that typically we would be resurfacing right now, right? And it would just be part of that program that we would typically bid this. very early in the year. And then the contract would pick X number of weeks in order to fulfill the mill and overlay program. And you go on, it's typically like a one or two week program and people are happy with the resurfacing. This is a bigger project. There's no doubt about it, especially with Devon that we're going to need to have more impact. The benefit of Devon specifically is it's an east-west road, that there are garages, but it's not a lot of residential impact when you close down that road incrementally throughout a construction season. But the JCC though, they have other entrances as well. So it'd be, yes, it's all interconnected from either you're on Santa Monica, you could access as well as off of Port Washington.

It's a big, it's a big loop.

So going back to your direct question, as far as workload, do we have, time and energy right now to do this project. Absolutely. Between our annual sidewalk program, Sendix, other miscellaneous DPW tasks, the project, if it was awarded today, I feel confident that we would have the staff workload in order to have Maxine be the project manager and make sure it's a quality project and get it done type of attitude. The con is next year, we're going into one mile of water main. We have safe school zones. We have our typical mill and overlay program on top of this one, that it would be a larger workload. On top of that, we all know the economy has been very much a thing over the last year or two, or even since the pandemic that our Probable costs are just that, right? We're making assumptions based on are we really saving whatever that net is of $75,000 as our engineer said versus what our bids are. So there's a risk to that as well. That should be evaluated by the board that just because we have put it on here, it just takes one global crisis or oil prices to throw things off. And I would hate for this to be alluded to that this is going to be a finite number when we have to rebid that. I do think it would be more competitive, but there's also risk to that. So backing into it with not only the staff time, there's risk of our staff workload going into next year because we're doing our first ever one mile of water main and LSLs.

You've probably made your point.

It sounds like you actually, I mean, in the memo, you are recommending either option, but it sounds like you're recommending option one.

Let's get it done. I honestly, I'm very sensitive to tax dollars, right? And seeing the budgets come back the way they did do not make me feel warm and fuzzy, right? We don't want that. But I think it was necessary for us to be able to bid this the right way versus being quick and on the fly and getting a cheaper alternative and then having this conversation in 10 years. So I am sensitive to the budget and when we bid it was not optimum. And I think we're going to pay a premium for that. And I want the board to recognize it. From a staff workload and a risk, it does make sense to get it done now if we have the funding available and the board feels comfortable securing those funds for where those overages existed to get us back on track again. So I'm sensitive to budgets. I understand that. I recognize it. Would we be able to figure it out going into next year? Absolutely, we'll figure that out. But from a staff workload, I think it's just best to get it done and move on.

I hear a recommendation there.

Yeah, I'm in favor of one. The only question I have is this road connects with Glendale Roads. Is this a problem that stops at our border or is this a, like, will there be any difficulty with us redoing Devon and then like Glendale not doing it? Is it going to feel like... seamless roadway? Cause it's pretty well traveled.

No, that's a great question. So we would go up to our municipal boundary. There's an alley, I believe on the west where you can kind of do a cut through where the ACE hardware is. And that's give or take right to our municipal boundary. We did reach out, actually Clark Dietz is their village engineer, city engineer for Glendale. So we did have that conversation. Hey, do you want us to continue to do that? And we could basically push off whatever unit costs of additional, you know, either resurfacing or what have you. So those conversations have started with Glendale that if it makes sense for the additional maybe 300 feet or so of Devon to the west, we would partner with them.

So you don't have to like re-bid or anything?

No, it's all based on unit costs. So it's all captured within what we already received.

Is this the first time we've run into this in the village? Has there been any other streets that are of this design?

From what I hear, it's not common to have this, but it doesn't mean that they don't exist. So most of our streets actually have a concrete base and then we have asphalt over that, which is a better structural integrity to our road surface, especially with the mill and overlay because the concrete is a little bit more structural for us. This has happened in the past. I couldn't tell you which roads they are. But part of our future process, as far as lessons learned, is we're being more holistic. We're doing soil samples. We're doing stormwater management based on the studies and the feedback we're already hearing from our consultants. We replaced two of the water valves where you see probably the patches on Devon. That's because our water utility staff knew those valves did not work. So let's get it done ahead of our road program. I think we're trying to have a paradigm shift that this is not just a typical resurfacing program because we want to check all those other boxes of utilities, storm, base material for us to make a more informed decision to the board. If there's anything else that's an add-on, let's do it now so then you're not seeing these cutouts and these squares two or three years after the fact.

The last thing I would say for a pro is that Little League just ended. We had that road tore off during Little League season. Those neighbors are already impacted with the parking load. And we are kind of in an off time right now. What would this mean for timing wise for the construction if we approve tonight?

I believe it has to be done by early to mid-November. So we give them a window of time.

So you're still going to have a fall ball, but it won't be the extent of what it would be for...

But you are correct. My little league ended tonight. We lost. So I'm out. He's not better.

Oh, sorry.

Did the Millen overlay in 2012 have picked up on this?

Yeah. I don't think.

And who are they? And should we be using them? Good question.

So if we bid it out as a simple mill and overlay, they probably didn't go to the depth for discovery. They wouldn't have picked up. They would not have picked up on any of this information. We would have done core samples or to the pictures that Maxine had shared, really cut into there and for staff to bring this up and say, hey, this is not right. You do not have good base material.

Okay. What's our average mill and overlay? I mean, this is 14 years. That sounds pretty. 20. 20. Okay. That's. less good but hey so one other quick thing should we as long as we're digging this whole thing up should we be looking at um bump outs at lydell because of little league and also perhaps shoreland because of jcc so are you doing anything the curbs we are not doing anything it's all within inside the curves with this program so we're not doing curb and gutter work with this one

We did what we do, again, looking very holistically, is we reviewed and evaluated the pedestrian bike safety study that was done. And we already put in the RRFBs on LIDL because that was a recommendation with a safe school zone. So there was no recommendations for bump outs for Bay Ridge, for instance, by the JCC entrance. So we're trying to stick with what the board and the studies have proposed in the past, really to... Optimize those funds whenever it's recommended to stay on focus for those studies and recommendations.

Yeah, that's an acceptable answer. I know Liddell is heavily trafficked by Little League traffic. I have no idea about Shoreland and JCC. I don't know who walks there and uses that versus Santa Monica or whatever. Right. We should ask the question anyways. But it sounds like we're not touching the curbs anyhow, so that changes my answer. Have a nice day. Are we at a point where we would like to make a motion, either option one or two, one being immediately?

Make the motion unless other people have comments. What did you say? I'll make a motion unless other people have more comments. I don't want to cut anybody off. I move that the Village Board award the 2026 roadway rehabilitation bid to Lalonde contractors in the amount of $630,095 with the Village Board approving $310,000 from the 2024-A carryover proceeds and the 2026-A unallocated proceeds.

Second.

Second.

Thank you, Tara. Any further discussion? Maybe a friendly amendment that we always call Devin pronounces Devin.

Oh, no, I call it Devin.

Okay. That'll fail. I always thought it was Devin, but Devin like Kevin, man. All right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

Thank you.

All righty. We're going to move on to... Discussion action on intergovernmental agreement with the City of Glendale and Village of Shorewood to construct and operate a joint SALT facility. Kelsey.

Sure. So this is a continued item. You may remember a month or two ago, I presented to the board about a memorandum of understanding with the City of Glendale and the Village of Shorewood to have a shared SALT facility that'd be located on the current Glendale Public Works site. So the direction in that MOU was for staff to work together to come up with an intergovernmental agreement that would be used for both the administration of the facility as well as outlining basically the fee structure or how the costs would be divided amongst the partners. So that IGA is included in the packet. We just by timing of the meetings happen to be the last one. So it has been approved by the city of Glendale and the village of Shorewood specifically. Neither body had any changes. The village would own 700 tons of the 2000 ton facility, which is 35%. And so then in saying that we would be responsible for 35% of the initial capital expenses, which Jamie summarized earlier, which is approximately $389,000. And then there will be an annual fee for the ongoing maintenance as well as the operation of the salt shed. We've tried to do some like preliminary costing and it's just it's really difficult. The nice thing is they're open to us operating their equipment, obviously would be under like our. But that allows us to load on our own, which should reduce the overall cost, but also would give us access in storm events. If their crews are all out on the road, we would still be able to load. One other difference since MOU that I'm really happy about is originally there was a clause that Glendale could essentially buy us out. At any time that has been through negotiations removed. And so we do have like vested rights in the facility and we would have to opt to sell it or in some way violate the NBA in order for that to happen. So I think long term thinking of this as a salt short salt facility, it makes me feel a lot more comfortable. I still recommend that the LIDL site, the folks I've talked to that use shared facilities, say you still want a small facility where you can unload because there's not a lot of efficiencies with hauling back and then having to measure that salt on the way back. And so we'll want to be able to unload locally, use it for parking lots and kind of smaller loads. And so we'll still use part of our site for that purpose. Would our branding equipment stay there?

where it is now or would it move?

Yep. So it's going to remain in the current location. We'll use it until it dies. I mean, there's no value really in selling it at this point. They do make pristine brine, I am to understand, with specialized salt. It's hard for me to say that with a straight face, but they really enjoy the process and have done a lot of research. So I think we'll dabble in trying that and we'll have a price and see if we find that to be more effective. Because if we do, there's a lot of benefits to just using their brine, loading up salt and getting on the road versus... having two different stops. And that also would allow us to not have to replace that solid equipment, which is really what we all, I think, want long-term. So I don't have a crystal ball, but I would suspect that we'll not replace that brine equipment and long-term we'll be operating out of their site.

Is the operating cost incremental to what we do today? So that would be like a true levied run rate cost, right?

Yeah.

I know you don't have a number, but...

The challenge is that the savings are indirect, right? So the cost of us pushing up those. So yes, it would be added to the levy.

Yeah, that was my next question is, do you see indirect savings though from this? So you may over time, there's efficiencies you're going to get here that you may not see it in the levy, but you're going to see it in man hours or better use of this will unlock some of that over time.

Yeah, I've thought about like, is there a way to get that to direct? And maybe with time we can figure it out. If it was in the summer, it would be easy to scale back on seasonals, right? But we don't have seasonal plow drivers. So I'm not sure yet how to get that to direct, but there will be additional capacity.

That's what I'm wondering is there's some benefit to the staff from taking on that operational cost that isn't just moving it around. And I think that makes sense. Okay.

Yeah, absolutely.

Any other questions? I'll just say I'm thrilled this day is approaching and coming in that I want to say it's been three years where we toured the DPW auxiliary buildings and talked about SALT. And one of the first things that come up is, hey, if we're going to build a new one, let's talk to our neighbors and let's see if we can coordinate. And today's the day we're coordinating. So love to see it. Would anyone like to make a motion number four?

I move that the Village Board approve the IGA with the City of Glendale and the Village of Shorewood for construction and operation of a joint salt storage facility and approval of the change order to construct the facility.

I'll second. Thank you, Brian. Any further discussion? Or actually, public comment.

Would you like to comment on this old shit? Nope. I like how efficient this is. I think it's a really good step in the right direction. I think we should remind Mayor Kennedy, who says that we don't cooperate with him, that here we did cooperate with him. It's great working with our neighbors. Congrats to the team for getting it done. I think this is a great move. Saves us money. Everything but hassle.

All right. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Then we will move on to discussion action on investment advisory services through Ehlers Public Finance Advisors.

All right. So I am going to keep this short and sweet, hopefully. There are two handouts that we gave you guys that show kind of the difference between our two options. So I would say our two options for investing our bond proceeds are either with the LGIP, so the local government investment pool, or Schwab. Sorry, not Schwab. Schwab can't do it. Or Ehlers. So LGIP is nice because it's liquid and they do have some decent interest rates, but investing with Ellers would give us a chance to earn more income. That is obviously a benefit. But then the other added benefit that they have is they do arbitrage tracking. So pretty much if we are like earning interest at a higher rate than what we borrowed the debt, there's a possibility that we could have to owe money back to the IRS. And Honestly, Kelsey and I are learning about it. We're learning a lot about that right now, too. But I think that having them do that as experts is really helpful, especially as we're starting to borrow more money more consistently. So we would like to invest our bond proceeds from 2026 with them. And they do a little more kind of specialized investing where it's not all just liquid. They can look at our spend down and say, oh, you're not going to spend some of this till late 2027. We'll put that in something that's probably going to earn a little more interest. So Ehlers does have fees, but their projections are that we'd be, I think, around like $27,000 better off just in interest income with those fees and then with that arbitrage tracking also. So any questions?

That's net of the fees, $27,000?

Yeah, so those handouts I gave you in the upper left corner is kind of the summary of what the income would be under both of them.

According to your research, are we leaving legally allowable arbitrage dollars on the table right now that Ehlers thinks we can generate more of? Because we should try to create as much as is legally allowable, which is what I think you're trying to do here, right?

Yeah, and I think right now more the risk would be that We're just holding on to some of these proceeds for so long that we're getting too much interest on it.

Is it cumulative, though, or is it annual? Is it like a cumulative amount of?

Yeah, like so because we have ideally you're supposed to spend on all your proceeds in two years. And we haven't been doing that necessarily. So I think so. But now we'll have an expert helping us with it.

Okay. And then in there, I saw the fees were anywhere from 0.22 to, is that 0.25%? It's not 25%, right? I just was reading how it was written. I didn't think so, but that would be scary. Okay.

Sam, to maximize this, can you suggest investing in Bitcoin?

No, no, I'm not a fan. Oh, the only other question I had was liquidity. So you said the current is much more liquid.

Yeah.

Are you going to just make sure we manage the liquidity? That's a leading question. Yeah. We want to have some available. Yes.

Absolutely. And I think that we kind of work with them to determine what our spend down schedule is and leave a buffer for things that might pop up.

Okay. Got it. Thanks. Last question is your recommendation, staff recommends, blah, blah, blah, for the investment of the 2026A debt proceeds. is there any opportunity to make this more of a blanket policy that anytime we have debt proceeds, this is the path that you take?

Yeah, I think so. I think, so right now we have quite a bit of money with Schwab and Ellers is trying to get all of our money. So we were kind of taking this as like a test trial to see how it went working with them. So not to say that we can't, and I think we will continue to for the debt proceeds. I think the question in the future is if we move all of our investing to them or not. Okay.

Well, figure that out. And if we ever need to change that and have another motion that allows you to have flexibility, flexibility between either brokerage, go for it.

We actually have an investment policy that eventually will. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That would be a great time to, you know, I think that's enough all.

Okay. Any further questions, public comments, or option motion number five?

I move that the village board utilize Eller's investments for investment of the 2026A debt proceeds.

Thank you. Do we have a second? A second. Thank you, Jay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Okay, moving on. We're moving along here to the discussion action on Armory Park Shared Use Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement Extension. We'll see.

So the village entered into a 20-year shared use agreement with the school district in 2006, which established the terms and the conditions around the school district using the Armory Park land. That agreement has expired. So in consultation with the village attorney, staff is recommending that the village board extend the existing agreement through December 31st of 2027. The reason being is to sit down and renegotiate right now would not be a good use of staff time or really anybody's time. And so it's just to allow this community process and the long range facility planning process to play out and to see what the school board's ultimate recommendation or ask is of the village. And then at that point, we'll obviously renegotiate a new agreement based on that. So it's just an extension. with no changes with no changes yeah i wouldn't recommend any it's kind of an all or nothing thing with an agreement that's old understood any questions

I move that the Village Board... Hold on. Any public comment? Just because I'm going to do that. Then please make your motion.

I move that the Village Board approve an extension of the June 6, 2006 Intergovernmental Cooperation Agreement providing for the terms and conditions of use of former armory property through December 31, 2027. Thank you.

A second. A second. Thank you, Jay. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. All right, now we are at the almost end and we need to move into closed session. Kelsey has reminded us that sometimes we do closed sessions with roll call votes. And so we will.

We'll do a motion in a second.

Motion in a second on a roll call. So could somebody please make motion number seven?

I move that the village board convene in a closed session pursuant to Wisconsin State Statute 19-85-1G to confer with legal counsel for governmental body who is rendering an oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted by the body with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved specifically regarding a sewer backup claim.

Thank you. Do I have a second? Second. I'll give that to Sam. Any further discussion? Hearing none, Erin, could you please call a roll call vote?

Yes. Trustee Detman?

Aye.

Trustee Haller?

Aye.

Trustee Casper? Aye. Trustee Saunders?

Aye.

Trustee Sarabin? Aye. Trustee Van Evenhoven?

Aye.

And President Buckley?

Aye. Thank you. We are now going into closed session. If you could pause the recording. move people out and everyone will need to depart okay it is 9 16 and we have gone back into open session uh we do reserve the right to take action on any topic discussed in closed session and so we we should probably wait i'm sorry There is a member of the public who is interested in the subject and has waited. And so I'll repeat that. We have moved back into open session and as agenda, the board reserves the right to take action on any topic discussed in closed session. We had one item and I think we have a motion to be made.

I would move that we deny the claim from State Farm related to the sewer backup claim as discussed in closed session. Thank you. Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Tara. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. All right. That is the end of our very long agenda. We just need a... I move to adjourn, Mr. President. Second. Thank you, Anna. Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. We are adjourned.

Everybody, thank you for sticking around. Jamie, Matt...