The Meeting of the Common Council was called to order at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, December 12, 2006. It was noted that the meeting had been announced and a notice posted at City Hall.

Roll call was taken, with the following members present: Mayor Jim Bialecki, Ald. Mike Giese, Ald. Diane Oldani Wulf, Ald. Gary Gonczy, Ald. Jim Olson, Ald. Kim Smith and Ald. Clarence Stellner.

Also Present: City Engineer Jarrod Holter, Land Use & Development Director Jason Gilman, Finance Director Fred Buehler, and City Clerk Cari Burmaster.

Item 2 - Pledge of Allegiance

The Pledge of Allegiance was declared.

Item 3 - Approval of minutes from previous meeting.

Motion by Ald. Olson, second by Ald. Smith, to approve the minutes from the November 14 and November 28 meetings as printed and on file in the City Clerk’s Office. On voice vote, motion carried.

Item 4 - PUBLIC INPUT: (limited to 3 minutes/individual)

Mayor Bialecki turned the agenda item over to anyone wishing to provide input.

Item 5 - REPORT FROM THE MAYOR.

1. 32^nd Engineers – Alpha Co

Mayor Bialecki stated his appreciation for the 32^nd Engineers of Alpha Company. There was an awards ceremony held at the Onalaska High School Auditorium a week ago for the over 100 people who had served for 12 or 14 months in Operation Iraqi Freedom. We appreciate everything that you have done. These people have served when their names were called and they have served well. Our appreciation to them.

2. Household Hazardous Waste Agreement.

Mayor Bialecki noted he had attended a meeting of the committee of LaCrosse County, representative of all the local governments in the county. In January, there will be a proposal to come forward to extend the agreement out by ten years. As a cost to Onalaska, there will be no increase as it was successful that they were able to meet all their extensions and future ones with the fees that were involved.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL AND/OR POSSIBLE ACTION FROM THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEES/COMMISSIONS/BOARDS:

Item 6 – FINANCE COMMITTEE:

FINANCE

A. Resolution 35-2006 - Resolution Authorizing the City of Onalaska, Wisconsin to Borrow the Sum of $3,190,000 by Issuing General Obligation Refunding Bonds Pursuant to Section 67.04 of the Wisconsin Statutes and Authorizing the Sale of the Bonds.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve Resolution 35-2006 – Resolution Authorizing the City of Onalaska, Wisconsin to borrow the sum of $3,190,000 by Issuing General Obligation Refunding Bonds pursuant to section 67.04 of the Wisconsin Statutes and authorizing the sale of the bonds.

Mayor Bialecki noted the discrepancy in figures between $3,190,000 and $3,195,000 and questioned the appropriate figure.

Brad with Moody’s indicated the correct figure being $3,195,000. Brad further presented this figure should be the figure reflected in the final resolution, being a modest change from what was presented in the agenda. Fred had consulted with Quarles & Brady and this is not considered a material change so it should not conflict with any open meeting publications or any regulations. Brad briefly discussed the summary entitled, “City of Onalaska Final Pricing Summary”, which was presented to members. As a point of reference, when Brad was before this committee a month before, the existing debt of three obligations that are outstanding – one from 1999, one from 2001, and one from 2002 – the refunded callable maturities of those three outstanding issues and the $3,195,000 is the issue size which is needed to fund that refunding. The targeted savings or the projected savings when Brad was present at the prior meeting was $76,884 – the savings came in higher than anticipated. The present savings value was $81,477, for approximately $4,600 greater savings than anticipated.

Contributing factors to this: The market cooperated and issuance costs came in less than anticipated which is accountable to the increase in savings. There is a complete Moody’s report attached to the summary. There has been no change from the last recent report. Some of the highlights: The historically strong financial operations and the expectation that the financial operations will continue, the City’s rapid rate of tax growth and tax base and average debt burden with the rapid payoff of that debt. These are all contributing factors to the Double A3 rating.

As the City will be in a non-bank qualified borrowing status for 2007, Brad reviewed the expected payment from Bethany Lutheran. On the summary page there is a savings of $39,543 – the savings of the city issuing these bonds non bank-qualified and not getting any type of reimbursement from Bethany Lutheran. In consideration of comparisons, there is a separate page within the documents of similar type issues that are in the market, so there is a basis to calculate the payments that’s expected from Bethany. On this page, the left hand side shows the City of Onalaska issuance and the bond deals are showing, which generates the savings discussed earlier of $49,543. The column in the center gives the best comparison, it’s a community park district from Illinois, it’s a general obligations, similar to the City’s pledge. This has a Standard and Poors rating of Double A. This is insured and consistent with the bonds the city is selling, which is also insured. It has an earlier call provision but should not materially change the yields. The sale date is also today. This is a very similar issue in the market at the same time as the City’s with the distinction being this is a bank qualified issue compared to the City’s issue of non bank qualified. Brad indicated he placed those yields into the analysis of the refunding, which would have generated a savings of $81,477. The savings of $49,543 was then subtracted from the figure of $81,477 to calculate the payment that is expected of Bethany Lutheran of $31,934. Combining these two figures then comes up with a total savings available of $81,477.

In response to a question, Brad indicated this amount should be paid to the City by Bethany Lutheran near closing, but this will be worked out logistically between the parties and it will be in the closing documents.

On roll call vote: Ald. Smith – aye, Ald. Gonczy – aye, Ald. Stellner - aye, Ald. Olson - aye, Ald. Giese - aye, Ald. Oldani Wulf – aye. Resolution passes.

B. Resolution 36-2006 – Approving Bethany Lutheran Home, Inc. Housing Project to be financed by the Community Development Authority of the City of Onalaska.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve Resolution 36-2006 – approving Bethany Lutheran Home, Inc. Housing Project to be financed by the Community Development Authority of the City of Onalaska.

On roll call vote: Ald. Stellner – aye, Ald. Oldani Wulf – aye, Ald. Gonczy – aye, Ald. Giese – aye, Ald. Smith – aye, Ald. Olson – aye. Resolution passes.

C. Vouchers.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve Vouchers No. 2557 through No. 2780, expended since the last Common Council meeting of November 14, 2006 in the amount of $1,931,258.22.

On voice vote, motion carried.

D. Amend and restate Cafeteria Plan to include Community Development Authority/ City of Onalaska.

1. Resolution 33-2006 – Amend and restate Cafeteria Plan under Section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve Resolution 33-2006 to amend and restate the Cafeteria Plan under Section 125, Internal Revenue Code of 1986.

On roll call vote: Ald. Oldani Wulf – aye, Ald. Stellner - aye, Ald. Olson - aye, Ald. Smith - aye, Ald. Gonczy - aye, Ald. Giese – aye. Resolution passes.

2. Adoption Agreement between City of Onalaska and Community Development Authority (C.D.A.).

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Giese, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to accept the Adoption Agreement between the City of Onalaska and Community Development Authority (C.D.A.).

On voice vote, motion carried.

3. Supplement Participation Agreement between City of Onalaska and Community Development Authority.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve the Supplement Participation Agreement between the City of Onalaska and Community Development Authority.

On voice vote, motion carried.

E. Onalaska Tourism Website Agreement between City of Onalaska and Vision Design Group, Inc.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve the Onalaska Tourism Website Agreement between the City of Onalaska and Vision Design Group, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $6,855.

On voice vote, motion carried.

F. Authorization for City to hire an appraiser to evaluate the L. Brueske Property next to the City’s reservoirs and approve funding from Park Fund Account.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve authorization for the City to hire an appraiser to evaluate the L. Brueske Property next to the City’s reservoirs and approve funding from Park Fund Account.

Under discussion, Ald. Smith noted the estimated cost of this would be $2,500.

On voice vote, motion carried.

G. Authorization to participate in the TRACS/INCODE and FORS/INCODE interface grant(s).

Fred reported there was a motion at the Finance Committee level to approve the TRACS/INCODE, but since the FORS/INCODE was not on the agenda, no action could be taken at the meeting. It is the recommendation that the FORS/INCODE be created in conjunction with the TRACS/INCODE with the understanding that it will be at no cost to the city.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve the authorization to participate in the TRACS/INCODE interface grant.

Chief Williams reported the TRACS/INCODE is the Municipal Court portion of these two grants. The FORS/INCODE grant did not come up until several days later, but they both work in conjunction with one another. They are utilized to download reports without the necessity of clerical staff entering them. There is no cost other than to download the software which Sergeant Troy Miller has access to perform. This would mutually benefit both the Court and the Police Department.

Amendment to the motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to include authorization to participate both in the TRANS/INCODE and the FORS INCODE Interface grants.

On voice vote, motion to the amendment carried.

On voice vote, motion carried.

H. Modification to building Inspector Marv Horman’s contract to add a CPI to his rate/ inspection.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Stellner, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to approve the modification to building Inspector Marv Horman’s contract to add a CPI to his rate/inspection at a cost not to exceed CPI rate of 4%.

Under discussion, Ald. Giese indicated the rate of increase being determined by the published federal rate for whatever district the City of Onalaska is in usually defaults to the same standard. The contract reads that the contract can be modified by any party with 90 days notice. Ald. Giese questioned if this will take affect after that period of time.

Ald. Smith indicated this was not discussed at the committee level.

Mayor Bialecki indicated the City would abide by whatever terms are stated in the contract.

the contracts states.

Ald. Giese noted his position would be that whatever the stipulation of contract that applies would be used, and if there is any question, the City will refer back to precedent.

On voice vote, motion carried.

I. Authorization for City to pay for deer population survey (approximate cost will be $2,000).

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Finance Committee to deny the authorization for City to pay for deer population survey at an approximate cost of $2,000. On voice vote, motion carried.

Item 7 – PERSONNEL COMMITTEE:

1. Compensation Study Update.

Ald. Smith indicated this is for information only. The Personnel Committee had received an update on the progress and hope to receive the results of that study soon.

2. Personnel Policies:

1. Information Technology Systems Usage (6.03).

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Personnel Committee to approve the Information Technology Systems Usage (6.03). On voice vote, motion carried.

3. Safety Programs.

1. Fleet Safety Policy.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Personnel Committee to approve the Fleet Safety Policy. On voice vote, motion carried.

4. Assistant Crew Leader – Street Department.

1. Job Description.
2. Post and Advertise.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Personnel Committee to approve the Job Description and proceed with the Post and Advertise for Assistant Crew Leader – Street Department. On voice vote, motion carried.

5. Assistant Crew Leader – Utility Department.

1. Job Description.
2. Post and Advertise.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Personnel Committee to approve the Job Description and proceed with the Post and Advertise for Assistant Crew Leader – Utility Department.

On voice vote, motion carried.

6. Onalaska Police Department Restructuring Plan.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Personnel Committee to approve the Onalaska Police Department Restructuring Plan. On voice vote, motion carried.

Item 8 - ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE:

A. Approval of Operator’s Licenses.

Motion by Ald. Gonczy, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Administrative Committee to approve the Operator’s Licenses presented at the meeting. On voice vote, motion carried.

B. Request for Harold Topel’s cremains to be buried in Block 88, Lot 6, Grave 3.

Motion by Ald. Gonczy, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Administrative Committee to approve the request for Harold Topel’s cremains to be buried in Block 88, Lot 6, Grave 3. On voice vote, motion carried.

Item 9 - BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS:

1. Selection of consultant to perform design/ engineering services for SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) System Project.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to hire Strand and Associates in an amount not to exceed $5,000 for Phase I of the SCADA Design and then return to the Board of Public Works with an alternative and design cost for Phase II of the design and implementation for construction of the SCADA System.

On voice vote, motion carried.

2. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System General Permit (Phase II Storm Water Permit).

Jarrod indicated this is an information item which is the new Phase II Storm Water Permit which was received November 15 with the implementation date.

3. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System General Permit (Phase II Storm Water Permit) engineering consultant request for qualifications.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works, to approve the distribution of the Request For Qualifications of consultants to assist the City regarding the Storm Water Management Plan and to return to the Board of Public Works for review.

On voice vote, motion carried.

4. Review Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources annual water supply inspection.

Jarrod reported Charlie Cameron, the DNR Environment Engineer conducted an inspection of the City of Onalaska’s water supply giving very high remarks on the City’s water system. There were some points of discussion which are being reviewed. Over all the report indicates the DNR is very satisfied with the water inspection. Jarrod extended his thanks to employees for a job well done.

Motion by Ald. Gonczy, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to accept the report from the Department of Natural Resources for review of the City of Onalaska’s annual water supply inspection.

On voice vote, motion carried.

5. Engineering/water chemistry consultant review of polyphosphate usage/corrosion in water system.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to authorize the hiring of Process Research Solutions, in an amount not to exceed $4,000 to complete the study.

Under discussion, per request of the Board of Public Works, Jarrod has researched the proper qualifications and references and recommends hiring this consultant.

On voice vote, motion carried.

6. Extend contract for 2005 water study with S E H to include uni-directional flushing plan for the area around Well #9, corrosion control and iron/manganese within the water system.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to authorize the hiring of S E H Inc. in an amount not to exceed $7,500. On voice vote, motion carried.

7. Schedule public hearing for 2007 Capital Improvement Projects on Tuesday, January 2, 2007, at 6:45 PM.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to forward the amount of $3,303,295 with an estimated issuance cost of $40,000 for a total of $3,430,295 and that a public hearing be scheduled for Tuesday, January 2, 2007, at 6:45 p.m.

For clarification, Fred indicated the amount should read $3,043,295.

Mayor Bialecki reminded council members that the capital improvements list does identify the Library for the ‘07 projects, which he does support. As a point of information, at the time of the Board of Public Works meeting, there were no more exact figures for what the total of the renovations and addition would be. There will be confirmed numbers in advance of the next meeting.

In response to a question from Ald. Gonczy, Mayor Bialecki indicated the amount was for $500,000 this year, but this should be reviewed to include the addition, plus the renovations.

On voice vote, motion carried.

8. Bids received for Well #10 well drilling and authorize award of bid or modifications to bid.

Ald. Giese indicated the Board of Public Works recommended tentatively accepting the bid of Lane Northwest in the amount of $382,432.00 with discussion of deleting the test well from the bid as there is an existing well at this location. Ald. Giese turned the item over to Jarrod for further information.

Jarrod indicated that after further review with City Attorney Sean O’Flaherty regarding deletion of the test well, the bid cannot be altered by more than 15%, which would be approximately $57,000. Jarrod recommended rebidding the project with the following schedule: Advertise Friday, December 22 and Friday December 29; open bids on Monday, January 8 to bring to the next council meeting for award.

For clarification, Sean indicated this is for information and there would be no action necessary at this meeting and that the project can be rebid per Jarrod’s recommendation.

9. Authorize bidding of Well #10 well house.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to authorize bidding of Well #10 well house to S E H Inc. to bid out the well house at Well #10. On voice vote, motion carried.

10. No Parking on Main Street north side 150 feet west of 11^th Avenue North and set up public hearing on February 6^th, 2007, board of Public Works meeting.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, to set up a public hearing on February 6, 2007, at the Board of Public Works meeting for the subject of No Parking on Main Street – north side 150 feet west of 11^th Avenue North. On voice vote, motion carried.

Ald. Giese noted this was moved to February because of a busy January agenda.

11. Drainage issues on Meadow Wood Road, draining onto 2818 Trillium Place.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to deny contribution to drainage issues on Meadow Wood road, draining onto 2818 Trillium Place based on the City of Onalaska exceeding the original amount with the in-kind contribution. On voice vote, motion carried.

12. Use of right-of-way for turn around at 205 2^nd Avenue North and enter into an agreement regarding future driveway costs.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Gonczy, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works, to approve the use of the right of way for a turn around at 205 2^nd Avenue North and to indicate that any costs incurred in the future will need to be borne by the property owner.

On voice vote, motion carried.

13. City Limit sign design.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Oldani Wulf, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to accept the information sign at entrances to the city with the change of wording to read, Welcome, City of Onalaska Population listed.

On voice vote, motion carried.

14. Oak Avenue South transportation enhancement project agreement.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to agree to the Oak Avenue South transportation enhancement project agreement.

On voice vote, motion carried.

15. Payment of change order for 2006 paving contract (Mathy Construction).

Ald. Giese noted this is a new item which was not discussed at the Board of Public Works meeting and turned this item over to Jarrod.

Jarrod explained this item would be $12,399 for the cemetery paving and the storm lift paving.

Motion by Ald. Smith, second by Ald. Giese, to approve the payment of change order for 2006 paving contract (Mathy Construction).

In response to a question from Ald. Gonczy, Fred indicated this amount is listed in the budget.

On voice vote, motion carried.

16. LB White grading and fill permit.

Ald. Giese turned this item over to Jarrod.

Jarrod explained that LB White has recently contacted the City Engineering Department requesting to move some fill from the Bethany Lutheran Construction site next door to their site. As they are requesting to move between 10,000 and 15,000 cubic yards, common council approval is required for anything over 10,000 cubic yards. Jarrod has reviewed the plans from Davey Engineering and does not see any problems with this.

Motion by Ald. Gonczy, second by Ald. Olson, to approve the LB White grading and fill permit.

Ald. Gonczy questioned if there are any wetland or DNR concerns with this amount being moved.

Jarrod explained all the city is requiring is a city permit and they are under the DNR requirement for their erosion control permit.

On voice vote, motion carried.

17. Extend contract for 2005 water study with S E H to include sizing of French Road reservoir.

Jarrod reported with the impending development of this area of the city, he recommends this be completed, if not for this development, it will need to be completed at some future point in time.

In response to a question from Ald. Smith, Jarrod indicated the estimated cost is not to exceed $6,500.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Smith, to approve the extension of the contract for 2005 water study with S E H to include sizing of French Road reservoir.

Ald. Gonczy questioned if this is somewhat premature as this area that is being considered is not annexed in yet.

Jason explained, “Portions of the area are covered – the Nikolai property, Manski property, and then the Northern Engraving property that was recently purchased by Bronston. There are areas that may be considered for annexation or future growth, and we’re currently working on that so I think the study will be flexible in that it can address the needs that we have today and can also look at what needs to happen if the city should grow farther east.”

Ald. Gonczy raised concerns with the city going to the expense of putting the reservoir in, the area not being developed as originally planned, and the city having the expense of the water reservoir that is unused for five years. Ald. Gonczy agreed the study should be completed, but perhaps this is not the best time to do it.

Jarrod explained this study would assist the Engineering Department in the future, not only as a planning tool, but also to set specific guidelines for reservoir construction even without a development coming into the area.

Ald. Smith questioned, “Jarrod, also don’t you think that once you know the correct size, it will help you determine if you are going to pass the cost onto the developer, what percent of the cost each developer should be responsible for”?

Jarrod answered that this is correct and part of this study will help define the area which this will benefit and he will have an area calculation that is correct based on the size and the conditions present.

Ald. Gonczy questioned if this development was not being built, would his request have been made, and if so, why wasn’t the request made in August.

Jason explained, “There are some changing conditions. One is the recent speculation on the Manski property which has kind of happened in the last year. And the other thing is we have been getting more interest in the Nikolai property, too. I had a meeting with Mr. Nikolai just in the last few months, and I think that is somewhat related to the speculation of the utilities. So as the city continues to grow east, whether the study is done this year or next year, or the year after, it will have to be done at some point. If the timing does give us the advantage to better plan for it and just advise the speculative developer what to expect in terms of cost. But I can see your point. We do have a couple of annexations yet to come that will be influenced by this.”

Ald. Gonczy said, “The only reason I’m bringing this up is I want all this on the record because it’s going to be hard for me to support building another reservoir speculating that a development is going to happen when the development isn’t even annexed in - which is the next agenda item - and so I want to get this on the record. I’m not opposed to doing the study, I think it needs to be done. I just don’t know and I’ll just be right up front- that I can support that we add another cost on the capital expense now if the developer wants to build it and then when we’re ready to take it over, maybe we’ll buy it back, maybe we’ll consider that. But until I know that that property is going to be developed and annexed in and how many lots are going to sell, I just don’t want to put the tax payers’ dollars on the line right now, personally.”

Ald. Giese said, “The reason I was not able to report a recommendation from the Board of Public Works relative to this agenda item is because we didn’t make a motion specific to that agenda item. So, we did make a motion which I’ll read now, which is kind of in between and that motion reads, “That the proposed project identified and packeted as Item 4, that is the development by the developer that $375,000 for the reservoir be tentatively added to the 2007 capital improvements projects that is with the understanding that the development agreement is in place and it meets all the projections for both the developer as well as the city.” Getting that onto the record, we did discuss at length the study to know where we lie out there. In my opinion in the Board of Public Works is that yes, we should go ahead and do that. There’s enough interest to justify that. So I’ll speak to that motion, but I’ll quickly add that it doesn’t mean that the new item, R, that’s been added, it means I’m going to be voting in favor of that because of reasons Gonczy sited and other reasons.”

On voice vote, motion carried.

Item R - Consideration of requests by Leo Bronston, French Valley partners, LLC, for the City of Onalaska to add an estimated 100,000 gallon municipal reservoir project to the 2007 capital improvement budget to serve impending development near French Road and State Highway 16 at an estimated cost of $375,000 with cost share from the development.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Board of Public Works to approve consideration of requests by Leo Bronston, French Valley Partners, LLC for the City of Onalaska to add an estimated 100,000 gallon municipal reservoir project to the 2007 capital improvement budget to serve impending development near French Road and State Highway 16 at an estimated cost of $375,000 with cost share from the developer.

Under discussion, Mayor Bialecki stated, “While that might have been the recommendation of the Board of Public Works, I might ask that we refer that back and my primary reason is from some of the discussion of the previous motion. But to do this now is contrary to our subdivision code, and correct me if I’m wrong, but any and all paperwork in regard to annexation should have been in by October.”

Jason said, “Yes, we have monthly deadlines and the subdivision code does indicate that any requests for capital improvement be submitted to the city by October.”

Mayor Bialecki suggested, “The other thing, too, as Mike alluded to earlier, it’s a dangerous precedent that we’re putting water in an area that’s not being annexed and I’m not sure I’d like to do that – that’s been contrary to our history. What I’d like to do is ask, I did talk to two of the partners involved with this project and explained that to them I would rather we not go for the motion, or you can. But after that ,if we could refer this back and maybe between myself, and Jason and Jarrod, and these developers, we could have a sit down and a few others in the area just to re-evaluate everybody’s plans and then come back at a time where we could tell as council we need a reservoir out there, why, and how we’re going to pay for it. Does that work for everybody? You can go ahead and take the vote if you want.”

Ald. Gonczy questioned if there would be any other new information before the public hearing in February.

Mayor Bialecki said, “It would only be a guess and thank you for asking that. Rarely we get to ask that here. To me if it’s not documented, it’s not done.”

Fred said, “I guess to elaborate what I talked to the attorney before, I was not comfortable without this being on the agenda for us at the public hearing to add an item that was not officially published, and that’s why this item is on the agenda.”

Ald. Gonczy asked, “So what you’re basically saying is we can add it but you don’t have to approve it until the public hearing in January.”

Fred replied, “Well if you were to add it, I’d have to add it as a public notice. If you were not to add it, then we would not add it.”

Ald. Giese asked, “So the question is to procedure. If we vote no and take no other action, it’s not going to appear in the 2007 budget.”

Mayor Bialecki answered, “It can’t because there’s other codes and requirements that have to be met as well as publications.”

Ald. Giese said, “If we refer it for 30 days, it’s still not to appear in the 2007 budget, right? There’s really no difference and we just don’t need to take that extra step.”

Mayor Bialecki answered no.

Ald. Gonczy suggested, “We could approve that it be added and then at the public hearing on January 2, we could scratch it. Right, I mean we have that right. We haven’t approved the final.”

Fred added, “Well you do but I think the mayor has already mentioned to me you’re not going to find anything different in 30 days.”

Mayor Bialecki said, “The other thing too, if this reflects back to the study – right now we suggest 100,000 gallon reservoir, but when the study is done, that could tell us something different, too. Okay, at this time the motion is to move forward and place this on capital improvements. Is there any further discussion on that motion? Again, keep in mind if this fails, then we’ll make it a point to get back to the developers on this project and others in the area just to get a more formalized plan to bring back.”

Ald. Oldani Wulf questioned if Mr. Bronston has issued any applications to the city or have any costs involved with this.

Jason indicated that Mr. Bronston has been working with a consulting firm preparing the plans, but the city has not received any applications to date.

On voice vote, motion fails, 6 to 0.

Item 10 - PLAN COMMISSION:

1. Conditional Use Permit application filed by Diana Burt, 1116 East Avenue north, for the purpose of conducting home occupation –gift shop at 1116 East Avenue North (Parcel # 18-4373-0).

1. CUP Fee of $150.00.

2. All signs require separate permits – maximum size = 4 square feet.

3. Exterior storage is prohibited.

4. Owner shall disclose hours of operation.

5. Large events/shows shall be prohibited.

6. Owner/developer must pay all fees and have all plans reviewed and approved by the City prior to obtaining a building permit. Owner/developer must have all conditions satisfied and improvements installed per approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permit.

7. Owner/developer must notify the City prior to any utility connection to public utilities.

8. All conditions run with the land and are binding upon the original developer and all heirs, successors, and assigns. The sale or transfer of all or any portion of the property does not relieve the original developer from payment of any fees imposed or from meeting any other conditions.

9. Any omissions of any conditions not listed in Plan Commission Minutes shall not release the developer/property owner from abiding by the City’s Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Code requirements.

10. Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed in 12 months to insure neighborhood compatibility.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Smith, upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, to approve with 10 conditions of which the last condition being to review after 12 months, the Conditional Use Permit application filed by Diana Burt, 1116 East Avenue north, for the purpose of conducting home occupation –gift shop at 1116 East Avenue North.

For clarification, Ald. Oldani Wulf questioned if Ms. Burt is allowed to put a sign in her yard per the conditional use permit.

Jason indicated this is correct and there are two sections pertaining to signage in the code. One says that a small sign approximately 2’ by 2’ can be placed in a residential district and this has been permitted in the past in home occupations.

Ald. Oldani Wulf said, “Because in the minutes, it says starting at Line 208, ‘Ms. Burt indicated that she would like to be permitted to open the gift shop, however, as a compromise, she would be willing to give up the sign in her yard if this is a problem to the neighbors’. But that was not a condition.”

Mayor Bialecki answered, “Some of the people that spoke against it, their chief issues were traffic, devaluation of the home, and signage out on the lawns. And so even if she can put a sign out in her yard meeting our code, she has offered as she said in the minutes there to compromise and just have a sign in her window.”

Ald. Oldani Wulf raised concerns that the owner of the gift shop is not required to adhere to that and her concern is, “My concern is that people went home that night hearing what they heard, but from what I read in the minutes, that is not a condition which was placed upon her. So if she chooses, right now, per the minutes, I read that she is allowed to put a sign.”

Mayor Bialecki said, “Everybody heard that loud and clear and if there are issues on signage, I believe there is another condition put on there, we would take a second look at that a year from now and if there are any problems, address them then.”

Ald. Smith suggested adding it as a condition now.

Ald. Oldani Wulf said, “I would like to add a friendly amendment that as an 11^th Condition, that – because it does say here that, Jason noted that there is a provisional code that would allow a maximum three square foot sign in the window. And the reason that I brought that up is that there was a big concern with people in the minutes that they didn’t want one more sign. They talk about people who had golf balls for sale and all this and that, and I would ask that that also be one of the conditions.”

Mayor Bialecki indicated as there was a concern regarding this, a letter will be sent to the owner of the golf ball sign requiring him to obtain a conditional use permit for the sign as the gift shop was required to obtain a conditional use permit for a sign.

Amendment to the motion by Ald. Oldani Wulf, second by Ald. Giese to add Condition 11 which does not permit signage in her yard, but which she is allowed to have in her window.

Ald. Stellner said, “Your Honor, I’m totally against having a business in a residential neighborhood. I’ve been opposed to it for many, many years. We buy a home for a residence. If these people want a business, they should go into a business area. I personally, would not want to have a shop of any kind next door to my house and so I am totally against it.”

Mayor Bialecki replied, “I think that’s the reason it has come to Planning Commission is to be weighed out carefully, i.e. if you had someone there with substantial foot traffic or automobiles that would be a concern to a lot of people including the city. But in her case here, her hours are limited to late afternoons and occasional weekends and there’s going to be a few customers involved. Also, parking we talked about that too, If you were to take a look at her driveway that she has there too, she’s got sufficient parking to park four cars off street and it’s unlikely that’s she’s going to have that many customers at one time. Then generally speaking there too, probably in the last ten years or so, there’s going to be a lot of people that have home occupations, computer business and some even practice accounting out of the home, so it’s not uncommon. Just they would come here to be weighed out on a case by case basis.”

Ald. Stellner questioned if they would be under a residential or a business tax base.

Jason answered, “Residential, but they may pay personal property tax.” One of the other clarifications in the code is that it does not permit somebody to completely convert a residence into a business. They can only use 25% of the floor area. So in terms of improvements for business purposes, it’s somewhat limited.”

Ald. Oldani Wulf indicated that some home based businesses are so quiet that you would never know they were there. With the changing of society and more people working from home, some people would be in support of those types of businesses because of less cars on the road and being more environmentally friendly.

Ald. Oldani Wulf said, “But something like this where there were four individuals coming and they were very much against it. I guess the bottom line, my concern when they left they heard her make that offer, but I guess I wanted to put some teeth behind it. I want to make sure we have it in writing to protect the residents because when they walk out the door, I want to make sure that they’re getting what they thought they were getting.”

On voice vote, amendment to the motion passed 5 – yes, 1 – no.

On voice vote, motion passed 5 – yes, 1 – no.

2. Conditional Use Permit application filed by Dick Rogers for Sprint/Alamosa, 100 West Henry Clay Street, Whitefish Bay, WI for the purpose of locating antennas and a 15 foot extension to the existing tower located at 580 Lester Avenue (PARCEL# 18-4013-0).

1. CUP Fee of $150.00

2. Tower shall not exceed 3 times the distance to the nearest property line.

3. Owner shall provide proof of structural capacity by a registered engineer.

4. Owner shall provide photos/drawings of changes to existing facility.

5. Owner shall provide landscape screening for any ground facilities/structures.

6. Owner shall disclose any lighting additions to facility.

7. FAA approval required.

8. Owner/developer must pay all fees and have all plans reviewed and approved by the City prior to obtaining a building permit. Owner/developer must have all conditions satisfied and improvements installed per approved plans prior to the issuance of occupancy permit.

9. Owner/developer must notify the City prior to any utility connection to public utilities.

10. All conditions run with the land and are binding upon the original developer and all heirs, successors, and assigns. The sale or transfer of all or any portion of the property does not relieve the original developer from payment of any fees imposed or from meeting any other conditions.

11. Any omissions of any conditions not listed in Plan Commission Minutes shall not release the developer/property owner from abiding by the City’s Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Code requirements.

Motion by Ald. Giese, second by Ald. Olson, upon recommendation of the Planning Commission to approve with 11 conditions, (noting that the 7^th condition is approval from the FAA and report filed with the city), to approve the Conditional Use Permit application filed by Dick Rogers for Sprint/Alamosa, 100 West Henry Clay Street, Whitefish Bay, WI, for the purpose of locating antennas and a 15-foot extension to the existing tower located at 580 Lester Avenue.