City of Delafield Special Common Council Minutes October 25, 2001 7:00 p.m

CALL MEETING TO ORDER

Acting Chairman Phil Schuman called the meeting to order at 6:07 p.m.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited.

ROLL CALL

Present       Absent
Phil Schuman, Ald.     Mayor Ed McAleer
Paul Craig, Ald.      Maurice Mathey, Ald.
Rick Lieblang, Ald      Al Zietlow
Linda Quartaro, Ald.
Ron Miskelley, Ald.
Matt Carlson, Administrator
Marilyn Czubkowski, Clerk

P. Schuman distributed information to the commissioners that he obtained at a conference.

1. CITIZENS COMMENTS ON ITEMS PERTAINING TO THIS AGENDA

Jim Zahorik, 1948 W. Shore Drive – Mr. Zahorik asked whether this was a workshop for citizens or the council.  M. Carlson stated that the citizens would be able to speak at the committee level.  Tonight’s meeting is a “show and tell” for department heads to discuss what is included in their budgets.  The real dialog will occur at the committee levels.  The Budget Hearing will be on November 19, 2001.  If citizens have comments that they would like to express, they can call or e-mail M. Carlson.  The final budget and tax levy is anticipated on being approved on December 3, 2001.

Audrey Kelner, 1116 Devonshire – Ms. Kelner spoke about the letter of transmittal, particularly the proposed Public Works Director position and asked what responsibilities would be left for M. Carlson and M. Scaff.  She had concerns regarding possible over-staffing on the administrative level rather than on the physical level.  Discussion took place.

Jim Zahorik, 1948 W. Shore Drive – Mr. Zahorik spoke regarding the Main Street Sidewalks.  M. Carlson clarified that there are two different projects.

Betsy Bush, 830 Wells Street – Ms. Bush spoke regarding the transmittal letter, specifically the hiring of an accounting person for City Hall.  She discussed combining other responsibilities with this position.  Ms. Bush asked for clarification on why the mill rate dropped $0.12 but taxes went up.

There were no more citizens who wished to comment.

2. NEW BUSINESS

a. Capital Improvements Program Workshop

M. Carlson stated that he will keep track of questions raised.  He introduced the agenda to be followed for this meeting.  This workshop is intended to illicit thoughts from the council.

M. Carlson reviewed the 5-year capital improvements program included in the packets and also displayed on the screen.  The listing showed the project, year to be done (or started), what the cost was, and where the funding would come from.  The line items were individually reviewed.  The year on the Genesee St. Culvert Replacement with Decorative Rail is incorrect and it was stated that this project would be done at the same time the Genesee St. is redone.  The Main Street Reconstruction and Streetscape will be designed at the same time Genesee Street Reconstruction is done (2002).  If the Tax Increment Projects are revised with possibilities of some being deleted, this 5-year document will also be revised.

L. Quartaro asked about the City-Wide Stormwater Study – M. Carlson stated that this is a one-time expenditure.  Discussion took place as to whether this item should be removed from the budget.  Funding was discussed.  P. Schuman spoke regarding “Smart Growth Planning” and discussion followed.  Discussion took place regarding changing the study from a city-wide study to a specific area and whether a public works director would be able to perform this function.

Clarification took place as to what is included in the Genesee Street Reconstruction and the bridge reconstruction.

Discussion took place on the Gateway signage – the commissioners felt that this should be taken out.

Discussion took place as to whether the sidewalk reconstruction included lighting (Main Street Sidewalk).  M. Carlson will get a cost with the lighting to be included.

The commissioners discussed the Main Street Reconstruction and Genesee Street Reconstruction, particularly if the construction should take place at different times or at the same time.

The necessity of remodeling the old library was discussed.  The term “Need Assessment” should be changed to “Architectural Assessment”.

The sheet entitled “Revenue Comparisons” was discussed by M. Carlson and displayed.  M. Carlson briefly stated statistics as to the changes.  The drop in the rate compared to the increase in tax was explained.  M. Carlson briefly stated statistics as to the changes.  The drop in the city tax rate compared to the increase in the annual budget was explained.  L. Quartaro spoke in regards to the contribution to the fund balance and that the proposed number is very aggressive.  R. Miskelly stated that perhaps the target should be changed and investigation should take place to see if the City could get a favorable bond rating.  He thought that $250,000 is too aggressive.  M. Carlson gave different scenarios and outcomes in regards to the fund balance.  Revenues generated from the property tax, state, hotel tax, ambulance service were discussed.  L. Quartaro stated that some of this must be cut and that the $250,000 would be a good place to start.

It was stated that there would be sufficient funds available to make the sewer fund payment in total.

The City of Delafield Tax Rate Comparison was displayed and M. Carlson explained.  The net tax rate of Delafield compared to all cities in the state of Wisconsin showed that the City of Delafield ranked 187 out of 190.  P. Schuman stated that the City of Delafield also includes garbage services and some other communities do not.

Milwaukee suburbs (Milwaukee Magazine, 1998) ranked the City of Delafield as 4th.  In a 2001 study, Delafield’s ranking dropped from 4th to 16th.  What the City of Delafield actually controls in the categories used for ranking were discussed.  This means that when you compare the Milwaukee Magazine with results of Community Opinion Survey, and Goals Workshop areas identified should be concentrated on.  The resources in Police, Library, and Park & Recreation were elevated.

Expenditure Comparisons were discussed.

a. Departmental Presentations of 2002 Proposed Budget

Library – Jocelyn Bubolz gave a brief overview of the Library’s budget and distributed handouts.  She reviewed the 2001 Salary Comparison chart.  The affect of the salaries in regards to attracting new employees and retaining current employees was discussed.  Delafield is known for having a very good, knowledgeable, and friendly staff and keeping these employees is a priority.  Changes in staffing requirements when the new library is built were discussed, but she doesn’t expect to see a personnel increase in the near future.  The figures in the computer section of the budget were explained.  The Program Support Materials and Collection were items that could be up for discussion in terms of cost savings.  Everything else in the budget is based on actual, salary adjustments, or contractual costs.  Normally when a new building is built, an increase in circulation and use is seen.  Discussion took place regarding the amount of $88,000 that the library is asking from the City.  J. Bubolz stated that the budget is not padded; it is the bare minimum.  P. Craig stated that making cuts in the budget for the library are the function of the library board.  M. Carlson stated that 4.8% is the average increase in the library budget in the past; this year’s increase is 26%.  M. Carlson will provide historical statistics.  J. Bubolz stated that the detail is provided to the council to show the amount of thought that was put into this budget.  The revised budget amount with the program support and collection section reduced would be $15,963.

Skip Abbott, delegate to the library board, spoke to the commissioners in support of the submitted budget.  He has been on the board for four years.
 
Park and Recreation – Marily Gardner decreased the Park & Recreation budget by $11,000.  The Park & Recreation Department would like to add a Park & Rec Director/Coordinator as a part-time position at a salary of $15,000 per year.   After discussion, it was stated that benefits would become active after 600 hours.  The issue of benefits and number of hours per year will be analyzed in the near future.

Administration – M. Czubkowski stated that everything in the budget is a response to the community survey, the technology committee, and audit requirements.  The need for an additional employee was reviewed.  This person would have a definite skill set.  Specific line items were discussed.  The staggering of employee start times to extend the office hours was discussed, but M. Czubkowski stated that this did not appear to be needed.  If there appears to be a demand, this would be considered.

Police -- Scott Taubel, Police Chief made a presentation of the Police Department’s budget.  Packets were distributed to the commissioners.  Clearance rates were discussed; the City of Delafield was rated number one at 51.1% in 1998, in 2000 the clearance rate was 66%.  M. Carlson stated that it is the structure of the police department to take a case from the inception to conclusion that translates to these high rates for the department.  Calls for Service per year showed that each officer averaged a total of 834 calls per officer.  Calls for assisting other municipalities are not accounted for in this area.  Right now, other municipalities are assisting the City of Delafield more than the City of Delafield assists others.  L. Quartaro stated that she is in favor of hiring two additional police officers but asked why overtime would be increased.  Chief Taubel responded.

Fire -- Allyn Swayze, Fire Chief, discussed his budget.  The Fire Department’s budget increased 3.7% primarily due to the full-time person being hired.  R. Lieblang asked for clarification on the radio reprogramming.  The computer with monitor was a result of the City’s Technology Committee.  M. Czubkowski will get a copy of the Technology Committee’s report to all commissioners.  The replacement of the ladder truck was discussed.  The commissioners felt that this should be put off.  The budget will have to be amended.  Other capital expenditures were discussed – specifically defibrillators.  It was clarified that the ambulance fees used to be an expense item and now is a reduction of revenue – the higher number of calls, the higher number of unpaid bills are possible –this also takes into consideration Medicare bills.

Public Works – Mike Scaff, discussed major increases.  The increase in the tipping fee, function of the subcontractors, replacement mower, and street sweeping were addressed.  The clean up of the Bark River will be revisited by M. Carlson.  The five-year new equipment plan was discussed; specifically weed harvesting equipment and a new backhoe.

c. Confirm recommendation from Public Works Interview Committee ` regarding Genesee Street and Main Street Engineering and Design.

M. Carlson distributed and reviewed a memo describing the process.

L. QUARTARO MOTIONED TO RECOMMEND THE CONFIRMATION OF THIS LIST.  R. LIEBLANG SECONDED THE MOTION.  THERE WAS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.  ALL WERE IN FAVOR.  MOTION CARRIED.

d. Approve contract for engineering survey of Genesee Street and Main Street

M. Carlson stated that the time frame for completion of this project is very tight.  In order to meet the schedule it needs to start now with the survey work.

R. MISKELLEY MOTIONED TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZE THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO ENTER INTO A SURVEY AGREEMENT WITH RUEKERT MIELKE WITH THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:  THAT THE CITY ENGINEER REVIEWS THE SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE PROJECT AND THE AGREEMENT STANDARD TERMS OF CONDITIONS AND THAT THE AGREEMENT WILL BE A “NOT TO EXCEED” CONTRACT WHERE THE COMPANY BILLS AGAINST THE BUDGET.  P. CRAIG SECONDED THE MOTION.  THERE WAS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.  ALL WERE IN FAVOR.  MOTION CARRIED.

3. ADJOURN INTO CLOSED SESSION PER :

§ 19.85(e) deliberating or negotiating the purchase of public properties, the investing of public funds, or conducting other specified public business whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a closed session (joint services).

L. QUARTARO MOTIONED TO MOVE INTO CLOSED SESSION PER § 19.85(E) DELIBERATING OR NEGOTIATING THE PURCHASE OF PUBLIC PROPERTIES, THE INVESTING OF PUBLIC FUNDS, OR CONDUCTING OTHER SPECIFIED PUBLIC BUSINESS WHENEVER COMPETITIVE OR BARGAINING REASONS REQUIRE A CLOSED SESSION (JOINT SERVICES).  R. MISKELLY SECONDED THE MOTION.  THERE WAS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION.  A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN:  P. SCHUMAN, AYE; P. CRAIG, AYE; R. LIEBLANG, AYE; L. QUARTARO, AYE; R. MISKELLY, AYE.  ALL WERE IN FAVOR.  THE MOTION CARRIED.  THE MEETING ENTERED CLOSED SESSION AT 9:24 P.M.

4. RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION

L. QARTARTO MOTIONED TO RECONVENE INTO OPEN SESSION AT 9:45 P.M. P. CRAIG SECONDED THE MOTION. A ROLL CALL VOTE WAS TAKEN:  P. SCHUMAN, AYE; P. CRAIG, AYE; R. LIEBLANG, AYE; L. QUARTARO, AYE; R. MISKELLY, AYE.  ALL WERE IN FAVOR.  THE MOTION CARRIED.

5. ACTION OF ANY ITEMS DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION

6. ADJOURNMENT

MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 9:46 P.M. (CRAIG/LIEBLANG) MOTION CARRIED.

Respectfully submitted:   Minutes prepared by:

Marilyn Czubkowski, CMC  Sue Hildebrand
City Clerk/Treasurer   Accurate Business Communications