Hello, Neighbors! Welcome back to another alderman blog post. This week is Committee Meetings Week again and things are getting a bit busier after the last few weeks of quite a few meeting cancellations. Here is your regular rundown of what you can expect to hear about from City Hall:
Monday, 05/20/2024
Municipal Services Committee – 4:30pm We’ll start the week’s meetings with what looks like a relatively easy one. There is a request for a permanent overhang (over the sidewalk) for the entrance of the new Trout Museum building currently under construction on College Avenue, a requested affirmation of the Appleton Public Arts Committee’s vote to allow a mural painting in the city’s Red Parking Ramp, a request to allow outdoor bar seating in the amenity strip in front of the Commodore Club on College Avenue, the potential approval of an under-budget contract for street marking/paint maintenance, and a request to approve a parking change off of Lynndale Drive that’s been under evaluation during a recent trial. Easy peasy, right?
But then there is an informational item (with no supporting documentation) titled “Bird Rides” at the end of the agenda. One of the last times this committee met, a representative of Bird was present and tried to convince members of the committee (and other present) that things will be better with Bird scooters in Appleton in the future… if the council lets them have another chance. I suspect that this informational item will be more of the same. It is my feeling that we gave the scooters a nice try but that they just don’t work for Appleton. I would be satisfied if the city just made the company aware that the program just doesn’t work well enough to negate the issues that have arisen with their presence in the city. But what are your thoughts?
Finance Committee – 5:30pm This meeting will be a bit tougher, I think. Here is what this committee will be taking up this week:
- There will be discussion on the potential 50% increase in the city’s “Wheel Tax” on vehicle registrations. This one was mentioned in an earlier blog post where I stated my position on the issue: This “band aid” solution is not appropriate for the major issues the city has with funding for road reconstruction. There have got to be better ways and we have to dig deeper into the issue before just slapping an increased cost on only some of the road users in the city. Some of you have already shared similar thoughts with me. If you haven’t yet, please do!
- In what looks to me to be the creation of excess government red tape (for city staff and for contractors looking to perform work for the city) and a municipal code “solution” looking for a problem, there is also a new resolution up for review — a “responsible bidder” policy resolution. While I do not dispute that minimum standards should be (and are) required for contractors who perform work for the city, I fear that the municipal code changes required by this resolution go too far beyond what the city already practices in reviewing bidders and their bids for city jobs. There are pieces of this resolution as its written that include what I considered unnecessarily burdensome requirements for any contractors bidding on city contracts. Examples included in the proposed ordinance are 1) that all contractors bidding on city jobs must follow “equal opportunity provisions” (which, by the way, is already federal law) and 2) contractors bidding on any city projects over $1M must participate in “a Class A registered apprentice program.” The city already has issues with too few contractors bidding city jobs. This leads to higher prices for city contracts due to less competition for the jobs. This resolution would likely compound that problem… quite unnecessarily. Unless the city has a problem with continued contractors which do not perform city work to the satisfaction of the taxpayers — which I do not believe is the case — I do not believe that the city should enact this sort of excess government-for-the-sake-of-
government. What are your thoughts? - Also on the table for this committee is a request for the allocation of the non-profit grants of the city’s American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Here is the breakdown requested:
This is a total of $2M — two MILLION — dollars of ARPA funds. While I see the value in many of these programs and understand that non-infrastructure issues exist in our city…. I see no reason the city should be looking to increase the Wheel Tax on our citizens and then turning around in the same meeting and giving away these two million dollars to these organizations instead of investing them in the city’s pressing infrastructure needs. Again… I understand the needs of these organizations. But what is the core job of a city government? To ensure a proper infrastructure in which people can safely live. This proposal for these dollars does not do that, no matter how well intentioned. What do you think about more Wheel Tax for you in exchange for the city’s proposed donations to these organizations? While of course these organizations may be worthy and their work no doubt important, is this the way that you think a municipal government should prioritize its spending?
Parks and Recreation Committee – 6:15pm There is one item on this committee’s agenda — the potential approval of an updated fee schedule for rentals of the Scheig Center and Gardens at Memorial Park. While the proposed fee increases seem a bit steep, there are a limited number of users who may be affected by the increase and the increases are proposed to offset the costs of utilities and maintenance of the facilities/grounds and to better align the fees for the Scheig Center with the city’s fee schedules for other parks and facilities for rent throughout the city.
Board of Zoning Appeals – 7:30pm They haven’t met in a while but my favorite board is back in action this week! They will look at three applications for zoning variances:
- On Estherbrook Court (on the ravine on the south side of the river), an owner would like to build an accessory building (a garage to be reconstructed over the existing footprint of an older garage that will be torn down) in the front yard of the property. Municipal code does not allow front yard accessory structures. But since the ravine to the rear of the property (sloping nearly 30 feet!) gives it a “unique physical limitation,” a variance can appropriately be granted. And I expect it will be.
- On Leminwah Street, an apparent medical professional homeowner states in her variance application that, unless her property is granted a variance so that she can build an attached garage that would be too close to the lot line, some of her patients could die. There is an existing detached garage on her property but she would like to expand the garage and attach it to her home… which can only be done on this property within code if the expansion part is left out. This one should not be granted a variance as the property is perfectly usable as is (without a variance) and a variance stays with the property, regardless the owner or the owner’s occupation.
- The developers of the Fox Commons project (the old downtown mall revamp) are asking for a variance for wall signage that exceeds the maximum code limit. Wall signage in the city is limited to 35% of any wall. The developer’s request is for signage that would total over 200 square feet more than is allowed by code. The uniqueness of the property is that it is large and expansive and signage can only be placed on the south and north sides of the property. I’m not sure that just willy-nilly granting signage for “more than what the code allows” is a good idea for this board, though. I hope that, should they grant a variance for the signage size on this property, they will place some specific maximum limits on the signage size… something that, while it’s more than the code allows, will not allow for unlimited signage and be an eyesore for the community in the future.
Tuesday, 05/21/2024
Fox Cities Transit Commission – 2:50pm Commission members will be asked to approve the April 2024 payments for Valley Transit. They will then review the ridership and financial statements, talk about proposed evening and Saturday service modifications, and review “American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding” (which is decidedly vague). We shall see what comes out of these discussions… particularly on the last two items.
Utilities Committee – 4:30pm There is a request for design and training for a Department of Public Works stormwater monitoring software package (to the tune of $41,400) and a request to award a contract for some storm sewer cleaning and televising (for $250,000) on the table for these committee members. Neither item includes information on whether these two requests are within or over budget. I hope that that question is asked of city staff by committee members at this meeting.
Wednesday, 05/22/2024
City Plan Commission – 3:30pm There are three action items on this commission’s agenda this week. And that means that there will also be three public hearings as well — one for each item. Here’s what they will look to approve:
- A Special Use Permit for bar/cocktail service at 823 W College Avenue. A liquor license will also be needed should this permit be granted. But this is the first step for this proposed cocktail lounge. I expect this one to be approved.
- A Special Use Permit for warehousing at 1800 W College Avenue. Flatline Corp would like to use this property as a wholesale facility. This would be a relocation of their current facility on Haskel Street. I expect approval of this one as well.
- A rezoning of a property on W Lawrence Street from Commercial to Two-Family Residential. Staff is recommending the approval of this rezoning as it fits all of the criteria for a rezoning and rezoning will potentially add to the housing available in the city. The structure there was, at one time in its history, a residential structure before it was rezoned to Commercial and was used for offices/storage. Here, too, I expect no opposition from commissioners.
Community Development Committee – 4:30pm This meeting has been cancelled due to lack of agenda items.
Safety and Licensing Committee – 5:30pm The following liquor license holders are asked to appear before this committee this week for the following license violations:
- Walmart on Calumet Street – selling alcohol to a minor
- BP on Oneida Street – selling alcohol without a license holder present
- Quinto Sol Market on West College Avenue — selling alcohol without a license holder present and failure to display their liquor license
- Newberry Mobil on Newberry Street – selling alcohol without a license holder present
- Courtyard Marriot on Riverheath Way – selling alcohol to a minor
It is important that all liquor license holders in the city understand that it is a privilege for them to be licensed as the city has only so many liquor licenses (per state statute) and is fast running out of them. The council can be more judicious about approvals of licenses renewals should there be a shortage of licenses available and a record of repeat violations from some current license holders. These demerit violations should be taken seriously and the appearance of the license holders at these committee meeting hearings is important. The city needs to be assured that each license holder acts responsibly so that these sellers can retain their licenses.
After the demerit discussions, the committee will move on to a slew of license renewal approvals, five new license applications to potentially be approved, and some liquor license changes of agents. There will also be overtime updates from both the Fire Chief and the Police Chief.
Human Resources and Information Technology Committee – 6:30pm This meeting has been cancelled due to lack of agenda items.
So there you have it! Lots of things being discussed in lots of meetings this week. If you have any questions, thoughts, or concerns about any of the above items, please reach out to me. I’m always happy to hear from District 13 neighbors and any and all Appletonians.
Thanks for tuning in again this week. Have a great week!
