Committee of the Whole Meeting Packets

COLUMBUS COMMON COUNCIL – COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 2019 – FOLLOWING REGULAR MEETING COLUMBUS CITY HALL 1. Roll Call 2. Notice of Open Meeting 3. Approve Agenda 4. Citizen Comments 5. Department Reports a. CASC – July, 2019 6. Committee Minutes a. HLPC – July 11, 2019, July 18, 2019, and July 29, 2019 b. CASC – July 11, 2019 7. Review and consider the creation of Tax Incremental District #5 8. Review and consider Resolution 12-19: A Resolution to authorize the creation of Tax Incremental District #5 9. Review & Consider a farm lease revision with Sennview Farms for lands near the Wastewater Treatment Plant 10. Discussion of Ordinance to address the designation of Local Historic Landmarks in the City of Columbus 11. Report and discussion about a leak at the Columbus Area Aquatic Center 12. Convene to closed session pursuant to §19.85(1)(c) considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data for any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility (City Administrator Evaluation process) 13. Reconvene to open session 14. Adjourn  Columbus Area Senior Center Director’s Report July 2019 Highlights We co-hosted a program about space and the 50th anniversary of the space landing on July 2 with the library. This was featured in the Columbus Journal the next week. The attendance was 58 for this fun program. July 6 over 60 people attended the musical programs sponsored by the Columbus 4th of July group. They felt it was successful enough to do this again next year and possibly add food and expanded beverage sales. Our annual picnic was well attended with 45 seniors, 19 4H volunteers and 10 adult helpers. The food was catered by Julie’s Java this year and we had a great deal of positive feedback. The cost is still unknown as we haven’t received a bill, but I am assuming based on other catering quotes for this event, the price will be about $6-6.50 per meal. In addition, we provided baked beans, chips and beverages. Catering is beginning to be very expensive and there aren’t as many catering options for us to choose from that will cater small functions within our price limitations. We will be looking for options to make sure we can continue the picnic and our Holiday party. We had 2 friends of the Center sponsor bingo in July. Thanks to Kelly Preston of Clean Caption and Janell Decker. The Volunteers for Columbus Community Hospital held their annual Euchre Party here on July 23. They had 11 tables and lots of fun. The library held their summer program Zoot Zort here again this year. They held 2 sessions with a total of over 275 kids and adults. I had the opportunity to speak with Sharon Wilcox, our representative on the State Aging Advisory Board. I gave her a tour of our center and copies of our Prime Time Connection and Columbus Commotion. We discussed what we have to offer those over 50 in this area. We spoke about what the future of Senior Centers looks like and what the main concerns of seniors are currently. I also talked about our using technology to keep connected with seniors, as one concern in rural areas is transportation. She was very impressed with our center and the support and participation that we have. Incident Report  There were no incidents in July. Budget Revenue PERIOD BUDGET % OF ACTUAL YTD ACTUAL AMOUNT VARIANCE BUDGET MISC REVENUES 35.07 521.19 1,500.00 ( 978.81) 34.75 PROGRAM REV 598.00 2,699.10 6,000.00 ( 3,300.90) 44.99 NUTRITION PRGM .00 510.00 1,020.00 510.00) 50.00 DONATIONS .00 3,050.00 .00 3,050.00 .00 July 31, 2019 Expenses CUSTODIAL SVCS 184.50 1,225.62 5,000.00 3,774.38 24.51 REPAIRS/MAINTENANC 337.79 3,362.17 6,000.00 2,637.83 56.04 SUPPLIES 611.30 3,054.10 4,000.00 945.90 76.35 MARKETING/ADVERT 122.64 8.79 1,000.00 121.21 87.88 EDUCATION & TRAVEL 27.00 42.00 1,200.00 1,158.00 3.50 PROGRAMS 343.66 1,858.68 11,000.00 9,141.32 16.90 DUES & SUBSCRIPTS .00 952.84 1,000.00 47.16 95.28 DONATED FD PURCHAS 56.93 506.88 .00 ( 506.88) .00 CAPITAL ITEMS .00 .00 7,500.00 7,500.00 .00 COMP LICENSE/REPAI .00 720.00 2,000.00 1,280.00 36.00 Monthly Duties and Assistance August Newsletter printed and distributed Columbus Commotion Fall issue will be ready to publish in mid-August. Prepared Advisory Board agenda and reports. Prepared calendars and made appointments for programming and events for 2019. Weekly news releases to the Columbus Journal, website and other sources Assisted with phone calls & drop-ins regarding programming and services Conducted facility tours Provided dining center program referrals Rental/building use: calls/questions/walk-through tours/code door Accounting: completed purchase orders and requisition for outstanding invoices, supply items purchased, completed deposits, payroll, and reviewed monthly budget. Completed Payroll Welcomed 3 new members for a total for 2019 YTD 52. We welcomed a total of 43 new members in 2018. Completed and submitted for review the 2020 budget Applied for 2019 CAE Grant Sponsors Columbus Family Restaurant – bingo Janell Decker – bingo Kelly Preston, Clear Caption - Bingo Fast Lanes - Bingo Mike Hanousek – individual computer instruction Columbia County ADRC-benefit specialist appointment, meal site and energy services Columbus Community Hospital –exercise instruction, Lunch & Learn Generations Hospice – Blood pressure. The Meadows Assisted Living – Bingo Rentals: CAE, Library, Weight Watchers, 4th of July Committee, CCH Volunteers, Hillside Cemetery, Meetings & Training Attended Department Head meetings – July 3, 10, 17, 24, 31 Senior Services Networking Meeting – July 18 Commotion meeting - July 29 Media Meeting – July 12. Civic Plus Training – July 25 State Advisory on Aging – July 24 Staff time – Candace is off until early September. Sue will be here until September 18; M-Th 8:15am-1:15pm and F 8:15am-2, unless she is covering for my time off. Kim will be off on August 16. July 31, 2019 Columbus Historic Landmarks and Preservation Commission Monthly Meeting, Community Center Building, 6:00 PM Date: July11, 2019 Attendees: Beth Altschwager Retta Kurth John Salzwedel Carolyn Fredericks Eric Lukasavitz Ruth Hermanson Jan Ulrich Andy Traxler –liaison: Excused Guests: Pete Kaland, Sue Salter 1. Call meeting to order 2. Properly posted meeting 3. Citizen comments on agenda items: See comments from Kaland & Salter under Old Business, Item B. 4. Approve Agenda: Motion: Salzwedel; Second: Lukasavitz; Moton carried. 5. Approve Minutes of May 9, 2019: Lien Waivers included with payments to Wright for reinforcing sinks, and Crary for carpentry. Motion: Lukasavitz; Second: Altschwager; Motion carried 6. Treasurer Report-Attached Motion: Kurth; Second: Lukasavitz; Motion carried. 7. Old Business: A. Summer Concert Series – July 25 concert: 1) Advertising, - banners, posters, cards, and social media and radio: Hermanson will follow up with TV and radio advertising. Fredericks will set out the sandwich board with balloons early on the day of the event. 2) Newspaper articles – Jan – Loco Vocals: Ulrich submitted an article to the Columbus Journal for publication in the July 13 & July 20 issues,featuring the Loco Vocals. She will be in contact with Lisa Wolf for city website exposure. B. 251 W. James St. and Water Tower designations: Kaland informed the Commission on the purchase of the James St. property made up of funds from an anonymous resident, the Library Board, and the City. The City is involved in a facilities study (Roadmap to 2050) to determine in part the future of the property. Salzwedel updated the Commission on the progress in the designation application. A Preliminary Review date has been set for Monday July 29 at the Community Building at 6 pm. Notice has been given to City officials as well as area residents.  C. Pavilion projects/planning meeting – July 18, 2019 – 5:00 pm at Pavilion and Andrew’s Auditorium meeting with CHLPC: Fredericks will contact Andrew. 8, New Business: A. Bills: CHLPC account: 1) Loco Vocals: $500 as agreed. 2) Minutemen Press: $492.35 for advertising. 3) Ulrich: $115.28 for mailing expense for calendar advertising. 4) Fredericks: $39.01 for adhesive paper from Staples. 5) City of Columbus: $103.00 (attn.: Matt Schreiber) for battery for water pump. Salzwedel made a motion to pay all bills; Hermanson seconded it. Motion carried. B. Deed of gift – Columbus Area Historical Society: Ulrich reported on the receipt of items donated. C. Certificate of Appropriateness – YumYum Thai Kitchen signage: Following discussion, Salzwedel made a motion to accept the certificate. Altschwager seconded it. Motion carried. D: Certificate of Appropriateness – Forward Pharmacy signage: Following discussion, Lukasavitz made a motion to deny acceptance requesting consult with building inspector, Dion Okeson. Salzwedel seconded it. Motion carried. E: CHLPC Budget funds – Water Tower line item: Salzwedel checked with Manley about cutting a check for the Water Tower Fund #253474. Fredericks will follow up. F: Rest Haven Frieze painting: Salzwedel made a motion to get bids. Lukasavitz seconded it. Motion carried. Fredericks will contact Steve Roberts & Jon Pahl. Luikasavitz will get another bid. 9. Council Liaison Report: Traxler, excused absence. 10. Adjourn: Salzwedel made a motion to adjourn, Hermanson seconded it. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 7:45 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Retta Kurth, Sec.  Columbus Historic Landmarks and Preservation Commission Pavilion Projects Meeting Agenda Thursday July 18, 2019 @ 5:00 pm Fireman’s Park Pavilion Attendees: John Salzwedel, Beth Altschwager, Carolyn Fredericks, Eric Lucasavitz, Retta Kurth, Jan Ulrich, Ruth Hermanson 1. Call meeting to order: 2. Properly posted meeting: 3. Approve agenda: Motion: Lukasavitz; Second: Altschwager; Motion carried. 4. Citizen comments on agenda items: 5. Approve minutes from the June 20, 2019 Pavilion Planning meeting: Motion: Salzwedel; Second, Altschwager; Motion carried. 6. Additional electrical project: Fredericks received the signed contract and insurance certificate from Michael Ormosen with Volt Wagon Electric LLC. 7. Windows: Salzwedel updated the Commission with positive referrals for Community Building & Restoration. Following discussion, Lukasavitz made a motion to accept their bid; Hermanson seconded it. Motion carried. Salzwedel will check on availability at the Pavilion and schedule commencement for this fall. Fredericks will contact the State and Sheskey, and get information together for council approval. 8. Exterior painting: Lukasavitz has sent out the information packets for bids with deadlines for responses. 9. First floor entryway design: Fredericks will meet with the building inspector and follow up with contacts to local architects. 10. Next meeting date: Set for August 21, 5 pm at the Pavilion. 12. Adjourn: Motion: Lukasavitz; Second: Hermanson; Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:15.  Columbus Historic Landmarks & Preservation Commission Local Landmarks Designation – Special Meeting Agenda Monday, July 29, 2019 Columbus City Hall 6:00 p.m. 1. Roll Call: Present: Carolyn Fredericks, John Salzwedel, Beth Altschwager, Jan Ulrich, Ruth Hermanson, Retta Kurth Absent: Eric Lukasavitz, excused 2. Notice of Open Meeting: Given 3. Approve agenda: Motion: Altschwager; Second: Hermanson; Motion carried. 4. Guest – Joe De Rose – Survey & Registration Historian – State of WI Historic Preservation Office 5. Citizen Comment: Pete Kaland: Concerning the designation of The Dering House 1) Kaland questioned a journalist’s claim in the Columbus Journal. 2) Kaland mentioned the Library Board’s opposition to the designation, and that donations were made to purchase of The Dering House and for future expansion. 3) Kaland felt there was missing information or errors in the application: a) Legal description b) Written statement c) Owner’s consent Following Mr. Kaland’s comments, HLCP provided him with a complete Local Landmark Application packet, which he had previously not seen. Patrick Vander Sanden: Vander Sanden stated that he had been in communication, and met with Salzwedel regarding the Application, as well as with Attorney Paul Johnson for clarification on legal description, map delineation, and owner consent. Also, VanderSanden stated according to his conferences with Attorney Johnson that any missing or incomplete information on the Application would be able to be added without deterring the progress of the designation. Dan Wagner: Mr. Wagner spoke advocating the designation of 251 W. James St. – The Dering House, for Local Landmark status, as a representative of the Columbus Area Historical Society. Carolyn Fredericks: Fredericks stated, referring to 251 W. James St. – The Dering House, that the intent of the CHLPC is to recognize the property as a Local Landmark., not to impede any possible future expansion to the Library. 6. Preliminary Review for Local Landmark Designation: Notification was given to all City Departments and the Library Board. Hermanson made a motion to accept the reviewed materials. Kurth seconded it. Motion carried. 1. A. Conduct Preliminary Review pursuant to section 114-177 of the City Code concerning 251 W. James St. - THE DERING HOUSE aka Public Library Annex B. Conduct Preliminary Review pursuant to section 114-177 of the City Code concerning 704 Chapel St. (approximate address) THE OLD BRICK WATERTOWER Hermanson made a motion to accept the Preliminary Review as stated . Ulrich seconded it. Motion carried. 2. A. Possible action concerning the nomination of 251 W. James St. – THE DERING HOUSE aka Public Library Annex for Local Landmark designation. Hermanson made a motion to accept possible action. Kurth seconded it. Motion carried. B. Possible action concerning the nomination of 704 Chapel Street (approximate address) THE OLD BRICK WATERTOWER for Local Landmark designation. Hermanson made a motion to accept possible action. Altschwager seconded it. Motion carried. 7. Schedule Public Hearing for any Nomination that merits further consideration: Hermanson made a motion to go forward with the public hearing for THE DERING HOUSE. Altschwager seconded it. Motion carried. Hermanson made a motion to go forward with the public hearing for THE OLD WATERTOWER. Altschwager seconded it. Motion carried. Hermanson made a motion to set the public hearing for the designated properties for Monday, September 9, 2019 at 6 p.m.. at City Hall. Altschwager seconded it. Motion carried. 8. Adjourn: Altschwager made a motion to adjourn. Hermanson seconded it. Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 6:40.  Columbus Area Senior Citizens Advisory Board MINUTES Columbus Area Senior Center July 11, 2019 at 8:15 a.m. I. Call to order at 8:20 am II. Roll call: Present- Gessler, Schultz, Parpart, Banetzke, Ballweg, Lang and Royem III. Notice of open and posted meeting - posted IV. Approvals: a. Agenda- Motion to approve Parpart; 2nd Banetzke b. Prior meeting minutes – Motion to approve Schultz; 2nd Parpart V. Comments/suggestions of citizens present- none VI. Comments/suggestion box - $5.00 donation VII. Old Business 1. Upcoming Events –July/August a. July 2 – Library program b. July 6 – 4th of July music programs c. July 12 – Summer Picnic d. July 16 and 30- Nutrition class e. July 30 – Library Program Zoot Zort f. Mondays and Wednesdays – Yoga with Mary Benisch g. Book Club – July 8 and August 12 h. Movie – July 24 and August 21 i. Anniversary Party – August 25 2. Committee Report and Comments i. Next meeting – July 11 after Advisory Board Meeting ii. 40th Anniversary Celebration VIII. New Business – Review and approve a. Other New Business - None IX. Director’s report June (see copy in packet) X. Comments & suggestions from advisory board members for director XI. Adjourn- Motion to adjourn Banetzke; 2nd Schultz, 3rd Parpart Next Meeting: Thursday, August 1, 2019 at 8:15 am at the Senior Center  2019 AGENDA ITEM Committee of the Whole Meeting date: August 6, 2019 Council Meeting date: August 20, 2019 ITEM: TID #5 Creation DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT MATTER: Due to the potential expansion of a local manufacturer and for strategic economic development purposes, staff is recommending that the City pursue the establishment of Tax Incremental District #5. Creating a TID #5 gives the City the potential to support this expansion and to anticipate further activity within the proposed district boundaries. Included in this information is a timeline of events that are required for the TID creation. The urgency to establish a TID #5 is to have it in place and functional in case development activity is commenced yet this calendar year, so that the January 1, 2019 values can be used as the base value for the TID and not January 1, 2020. One of the first steps of the process is for the City to approve an authorizing resolution, which is attached, and engage Ehlers Associates to assist with a TID Project Plan. The work to complete the plan comes with a cost, which is not currently budgeted for this year as the TID was not fully anticipated. While we can search for current budgeted funds, one way to approach this would be to have the General Fund loan the amount necessary for the project plan to the new TID #5 fund, and then have the future tax increment generated by TID #5 pay the General Fund back. This is similar to actions done with TID #3 in years past. The funding of the TID #5 project plan is something we can discuss on Tuesday. LIST ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED: Proposed TID map and spreadsheet, TID meeting timeline and draft Resolution 12-19 (following item) ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and consider  Proposed TIF 5 City of Columbus 105 N Dickason Blvd Columbus, WI 53925 DISCLAIMER: 920-623-5900 This map is not a survey of the actual boundary of any property this map depicts. The City of Columbus does not guarantee the accuracy of the material contained here 6,000.00 in and is not responsible for any misuse or misrepresentation of this information or its SCALE: 1 = 500' Print Date: 7/31/2019 derivatives.  Property in Mixed Used TIF 5 Parcel Numer Owner Address CITY State ZIP Acres Assessed Year Assessed Land Assessed Improvement Assessed Total 11211‐1088.3 Hustisford & Columbus LLC 225 E Michigan Street, Suite 300 Milwaukee WI 53202 6.43 2018 $185,700.00 $825,500.00 $1,011,200.00 11211‐1088.02 Gusto Properties LLC 100 Continental Drive Columbus WI 53925 4 2018 $173,200.00 $0.00 $173,200.00 11211‐1088.4 United Cooperative N7160 Raceway Road Beaver Dam WI 53916 9.42 2019 $163,900.00 $167,000.00 $330,900.00 11211‐1088.01 American Packaging Corp 100 APC Way Columbus WI 53925 5.49 2018 $132,800.00 $1,215,700.00 $1,348,500.00 11211‐1110.23 JJB Real Estate Development LLC PO Box 481 Stoughton WI 53589 6.274 2019 $248,200.00 $0.00 $248,200.00 11211‐1087.A Wilkey Components LLC W4923 County Road T Watertown WI 53094 3.01 2018 $72,500.00 $500,400.00 $572,900.00 11211‐1088.1 Gusto Properties LLC 100 Continental Drive Columbus WI 53925 4 2018 $173,000.00 $865,800.00 $1,038,800.00 11211‐1087.F2 Farmers & Merchants Union Bank Of Columbus PO Box 226 Columbus WI 53925 0.741 2019 $213,000.00 $10,400.00 $223,400.00 11211‐1087.04 Farmers & Merchants Union Bank Of Columbus PO Box 226 Columbus WI 53925 0.933 2019 $279,400.00 $551,600.00 $831,000.00 TOTAL 40.298 $1,641,700.00 $4,136,400.00 $5,778,100.00 2018 Equalized Value $422,220,900 12% Rule for TIF $50,666,508 TIF 3 EV $28,709,400 TIF 4 EV $10,819,300 TOTAL $39,528,700 Available for TIF $11,137,808 Proposed Mixed Used TIF 5 $5,778,100 TIF Left (Valuation) $5,359,708  CITY OF COLUMBUS, WI TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 5 MIXED-USE CREATION Proposed Timetable - 7/24/19 ACTION DATE STEP City will provide Ehlers with a list of the parcel tax key #’s within the District, pertinent parcel information, the July maps, list of projects and costs, etc. Ehlers will prepare & provide the City with a feasibility analysis report, options, and/or draft project plan document Planning Commission makes a motion to call for a public hearing (optional) Aug. 6 Ehlers’ will e-mail a Notice to Official City Newspaper of organizational JRB meeting & public hearing. (cc: City) Ehlers will mail notification letters, along with required enclosures, to overlapping taxing jurisdictions of JRB organizational meeting & public hearing, as well as the agenda - to be posted by the City. (cc: City & attorney) (Letters must be postmarked prior to first publication). Ehlers will provide City, overlapping taxing entities, and/or City Attorney with [revised] draft Project Plan Aug. document, if not yet provided and/or necessary, as well as agenda language (City to post) & resolution (City to distribute) for first meetings, and will also request legal opinion of the plan. First Publication of Public Hearing & JRB Meeting Notice (Week prior to second notice & at least 5 days prior to Aug. 10 JRB meeting) Aug. 17 Second Publication of Public Hearing & JRB Meeting Notice. (At least 7 days prior to public hearing) Joint Review Board meets to review plan, appoint chairperson and public member and set next meeting date. (Prior Aug. 29 to public hearing & within 14 days of the public hearing notice publication) Planning Commission Public Hearing on Project Plan and approval of TID boundary. (Within 14 days of second publication) Planning Commission reviews plan & approval of District Project Plan and boundaries. Ehlers will provide City & City Attorney with revised draft Project Plan, if necessary, as well as agenda language Aug. 30 (City to post) & resolution (City to distribute) for Common Council meeting. Also request legal opinion from City Attorney approving the Project Plan (to be inserted into the plan prior to the Common Council meeting). Common Council reviews Plan & adopts resolution approving District Project Plan and boundaries. (at least 14 Sept. 17 days after hearing) Sept. 24 Ehlers’ will e-mail a Class 1 Notice to Official City Newspaper of JRB meeting. (cc: City) Ehlers will mail notices & required attachments to JRB of the final meeting, along with the Agenda (City to post). (cc: City & Attorney) (Letters/documents are not required to be sent prior to the meeting). Sept. 28 Publication of JRB Meeting Notice (At least 5 days prior to meeting) Joint Review Board meets to consider approval (In person attendance is required for voting purpose’s). Oct. 3 - (Within 45 days of notification of meeting / receipt of Planning Commission & Common Council resolutions) Ehlers will notify the DOR within 60 days of approval that the TID creation took place. Ehlers will then gather prepare, and submit state forms & required documents to the state, once the 2019 assessed parcel values available Aug. – Oct. (following the BOR) & we receive all remaining maps, legal descriptions, parcel information, documents, etc. from the City. DOR filing deadline October 31. Plan Commission meets 3rd Thursday’s @ 6:30 p.m. Council meets 1st & 3rd Tuesday’s @ 6:30 p.m. Columbus Journal – publishes Saturday’s, deadline Tuesday’s. via phelms@capitalnewspapers.com  CITY OF COLUMBUS, WI TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICT NO. 5 MIXED-USE CREATION Proposed Timetable - 7/24/19 ACTION DATE STEP City will provide Ehlers with a list of the parcel tax key #’s within the District, pertinent parcel information, the July maps, list of projects and costs, etc. Ehlers will prepare & provide the City with a feasibility analysis report, options, and/or draft project plan document Planning Commission makes a motion to call for a public hearing (optional) Aug. 13 Ehlers’ will e-mail a Notice to Official City Newspaper of organizational JRB meeting & public hearing. (cc: City) Ehlers will mail notification letters, along with required enclosures, to overlapping taxing jurisdictions of JRB organizational meeting & public hearing, as well as the agenda - to be posted by the City. (cc: City & attorney) (Letters must be postmarked prior to first publication). Ehlers will provide City, overlapping taxing entities, and/or City Attorney with [revised] draft Project Plan Aug. document, if not yet provided and/or necessary, as well as agenda language (City to post) & resolution (City to distribute) for first meetings, and will also request legal opinion of the plan. First Publication of Public Hearing & JRB Meeting Notice (Week prior to second notice & at least 5 days prior to Aug. 17 JRB meeting) Aug. 24 Second Publication of Public Hearing & JRB Meeting Notice. (At least 7 days prior to public hearing) Joint Review Board meets to review plan, appoint chairperson and public member and set next meeting date. (Prior Sept. 3 to public hearing & within 14 days of the public hearing notice publication) Planning Commission Public Hearing on Project Plan and approval of TID boundary. (Within 14 days of second publication) Planning Commission reviews plan & approval of District Project Plan and boundaries. Ehlers will provide City & City Attorney with revised draft Project Plan, if necessary, as well as agenda language Aug. 30 (City to post) & resolution (City to distribute) for Common Council meeting. Also request legal opinion from City Attorney approving the Project Plan (to be inserted into the plan prior to the Common Council meeting). Common Council reviews Plan & adopts resolution approving District Project Plan and boundaries. (at least 14 Sept. 17 days after hearing) Sept. 24 Ehlers’ will e-mail a Class 1 Notice to Official City Newspaper of JRB meeting. (cc: City) Ehlers will mail notices & required attachments to JRB of the final meeting, along with the Agenda (City to post). (cc: City & Attorney) (Letters/documents are not required to be sent prior to the meeting). Sept. 28 Publication of JRB Meeting Notice (At least 5 days prior to meeting) Joint Review Board meets to consider approval (In person attendance is required for voting purpose’s). Oct. 3 - (Within 45 days of notification of meeting / receipt of Planning Commission & Common Council resolutions) Ehlers will notify the DOR within 60 days of approval that the TID creation took place. Ehlers will then gather prepare, and submit state forms & required documents to the state, once the 2019 assessed parcel values available Aug. – Oct. 31 (following the BOR) & we receive all remaining maps, legal descriptions, parcel information, documents, etc. from the City. DOR filing deadline October 31. Plan Commission meets 3rd Thursday’s @ 6:30 p.m. Council meets 1st & 3rd Tuesday’s @ 6:30 p.m. Columbus Journal – publishes Saturday’s, deadline Tuesday’s. via phelms@capitalnewspapers.com July 30, 2019 Patrick Vander Sanden, City Administrator City of Columbus, Wisconsin 105 N Dickason Blvd Columbus, WI 53925 Re: Written Municipal Advisor Client Disclosure with the City of Columbus (“Client”) for 2019 Tax Incremental Finance District #5 (“Project” Pursuant to MSRB Rule G-42) Dear Patrick: As a registered Municipal Advisor, we are required by Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) Rules to provide you with certain written information and disclosures prior to, upon or promptly, after the establishment of a municipal advisory relationship as defined in Securities and Exchange Act Rule 15Ba1-1. To establish our engagement as your Municipal Advisor, we must inform you that: 1. When providing advice, we are required to act in a fiduciary capacity, which includes a duty of loyalty and a duty of care. This means we are required to act solely in your best interest. 2. We have an obligation to fully and fairly disclose to you in writing all material actual or potential conflicts of interest that might impair our ability to render unbiased and competent advice to you. We are providing these and other required disclosures in Appendix A attached hereto. 3. As your Municipal Advisor, Ehlers shall provide this advice and service at such fees, as described within Appendix B attached hereto. This documentation and all appendices hereto shall be effective as of its date unless otherwise terminated by either party upon 30 days written notice to the other party. During the term of our municipal advisory relationship, this writing might be amended or supplemented to reflect any material change or additions. We look forward to working with you on this Project. Sincerely, Ehlers Greg Johnson, CIPMA Senior Municipal Advisor/Vice President _______________ 1 This document is intended to satisfy the requirements of MSRB Rule G-42(b) and Rule G-42(c). Appendix A Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest/Other Required Information Actual/Potential Material Conflicts of Interest Ehlers has no known actual or potential material conflicts of interest that might impair its ability either to render unbiased and competent advice or to fulfill its fiduciary duty to Client. Other Engagements or Relationships Impairing Ability to Provide Advice Ehlers is not aware of any other engagement or relationship Ehlers has that might impair Ehlers’ ability to either render unbiased and competent advice to or to fulfill its fiduciary duty to Client. Affiliated Entities Ehlers offers related services through two affiliates of Ehlers, Bond Trust Service Corporation (BTSC) and Ehlers Investment Partners (EIP). BTSC provides paying agent services while Ehlers Investment Partners (EIP) provides investment related services and bidding agent service. Ehlers and these affiliates do not share fees. If either service is needed in conjunction with an Ehlers municipal advisory engagement, Client will be asked whether or not they wish to retain either affiliate to provide service. If BTSC or EIP are retained to provide service, a separate agreement with that affiliate will be provided for Client’s consideration and approval. Solicitors/Payments Made to Obtain/Retain Client Business Ehlers does not use solicitors to secure municipal engagements; nor does it make direct or indirect payments to obtain or retain Client business. Payments from Third Parties Ehlers does not receive any direct or indirect payments from third parties to enlist Ehlers recommendation to the Client of its services, any municipal securities transaction or any financial product. Payments/Fee-splitting Arrangements Ehlers does not share fees with any other parties and any provider of investments or services to the Client. However, within a joint proposal with other professional service providers, Ehlers could be the contracting party or be a subcontractor to the contracting party resulting in a fee splitting arrangement. In such cases, the fee due Ehlers will be identified in a Municipal Advisor writing and no other fees will be paid to Ehlers from any of the other participating professionals in the joint proposal. Municipal Advisor Registration Ehlers is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB). Material Legal or Disciplinary Events Neither Ehlers nor any of its officers or municipal advisors have been involved in any legal or disciplinary events reported on Form MA or MA-I nor are there any other material legal or disciplinary events to be reported. Ehlers’ application for permanent registration as a Municipal Advisor with the (SEC) was granted on July 28, 2014 and contained the information prescribed under Section 15B(a)(2) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and rules thereunder. It did not list any information on legal or disciplinary disclosures. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix A Page 1 Ehlers July 30, 2019 Client may access Ehlers’ most recent Form MA and each most recent Form MA-I by searching the Securities and Exchange Commission’s EDGAR system (currently available at http://www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html) and searching under either our Company Name (Ehlers & Associates, Inc.) or by using the currently available “Fast Search” function and entering our CIK number (0001604197). Ehlers has not made any material changes to Form MA or Form MA-I since that date. Conflicts Arising from Compensation Contingent on the Size or Closing of Any Transaction The forms of compensation for municipal advisors vary according to the nature of the engagement and requirements of the client. Compensation contingent on the size of the transaction presents a conflict of interest because the advisor may have an incentive to advise the client to increase the size of the securities issue for the purpose of increasing the advisor’s compensation. Compensation contingent on the closing of the transaction presents a conflict because the advisor may have an incentive to recommend unnecessary financings or recommend financings that are disadvantageous to the client. If the transaction is to be delayed or fail to close, an advisor may have an incentive to discourage a full consideration of such facts and circumstances, or to discourage consideration of alternatives that may result in the cancellation of the financing or other transaction. Any form of compensation due a Municipal Advisor will likely present specific conflict of interests with the Client. If a Client is concerned about the conflict arising from Municipal Advisor compensation contingent on size and/or closing of their transaction, Ehlers is willing to discuss and provide another form of Municipal Advisor compensation. The Client must notify Ehlers in writing of this request within 10 days of receipt of this Municipal Advisor writing. MSRB Contact Information The website address of the MSRB is www.msrb.org. Posted on the MSRB website is a municipal advisory client brochure that describes the protections that may be provided by MSRB rules and how to file a complaint with the financial regulatory authorities. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix A Page 2 Ehlers July 30, 2019 Appendix B Tax Incremental Financing Services Scope of Service Client has requested that Ehlers assist Client with creation of Tax Incremental Finance District #5 (“Project”). Ehlers proposes and agrees to provide the following scope of services: Phase I – Feasibility Analysis The purpose of Phase I is to determine whether the Project is a statutorily and economically feasible option to achieve the Client’s objectives. This phase begins upon your authorization of this engagement, and ends on completion and delivery of a feasibility analysis report. As part of Phase I services, Ehlers will: · Consult with appropriate Client officials to identify the Client’s objectives for the Project. · Provide feedback as to the appropriateness of using Tax Incremental Financing in the context of the “but for” test. · If the Project includes creation of or addition of territory to a district, identify preliminary boundaries and gather parcel data from Client. Determine compliance with the following statutory requirements as applicable: o Equalized Value test. o Purpose test (industrial, mixed use, blighted area, in need of rehabilitation or conservation, or environmental remediation). o Newly-platted residential land use test. · Prepare feasibility analysis report. The report will include the following information, as applicable: o Identification of the type or types of districts that may be created. o A description of the type, maximum life, expenditure period and other features corresponding to the type of district proposed. o A summary of the development assumptions used with respect to timing of construction and projected values. o Projections of tax increment revenue collections to include annual and cumulative present value calculations. o Qualification of the district as a donor or recipient of shared increment, and projected impact of any allocations of shared increment. o If debt financing is anticipated, a summary of the sizing, structure and timing of proposed debt issues. o A cash flow pro forma reflecting annual and cumulative district fund balances and projected year of closure. o A draft time table for the Project. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 1 Ehlers July 30, 2019  o Identification of how the creation date may affect the district’s valuation date, the base value, compliance with the equalized value test, and the ability to capture current year construction values and changes in economic value. o When warranted, evaluate and compare options with respect to boundaries, type of district, project costs and development levels. o Ehlers will provide guidance on district design within statutory limits to creatively achieve as many of the Client’s objectives as possible, and will provide liaison with State Department of Revenue as needed in the technical evaluation of options. · Present the results of the feasibility analysis to the Client’s staff, Plan Commission or governing body. Phase II – Project Plan Development and Approval If the Client elects to proceed following completion of the feasibility analysis, the Project will move to Phase II. This phase includes preparation of the Project Plan, and consideration by the Plan Commission1, governing body, and the Joint Review Board. This phase begins after receiving notification from the Client to proceed, and ends after the Joint Review Board takes action on the Project. As part of Phase II services, Ehlers will: · Based on the goals and objectives identified in Phase I, prepare a draft Project Plan that includes all statutorily required components. · We will coordinate with your staff, engineer, planner or other designated party to obtain a map of the proposed boundaries of the district, a map showing existing uses and conditions of real property within the district, and a map showing proposed improvements and uses in the district. · Submit to the Client an electronic version of the draft Project Plan for initial review and comment. · Coordinate with Client staff to confirm dates and times for the meetings indicated within the following table. Ehlers will ensure that selected dates meet all statutory timing requirements, and will provide documentation and notices as indicated. 1If Client has created a Redevelopment Authority or a Community Development Authority, that body may fulfill the statutory requirements of the Plan Commission related to creation or amendment of the district. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 2 Ehlers July 30, 2019  Meeting Ehlers Responsibility Client Responsibility Post or publish agenda and provide Prepare Notice of Meeting and transmit to notification as required by the Client’s designated paper. Wisconsin Open Records Law. Mail meeting notice, informational materials, Prepare meeting minutes. Initial Joint and draft Project Plan to overlapping taxing Review Board Designate Client Joint Review jurisdictions. Board representative. Provide agenda language to Client. Identify and recommend Public Attend meeting to present draft Project Plan. Joint Review Board representative for appointment. Plan Post or publish agenda and provide Prepare Notice of Public Hearing and transmit Commission notification as required by the to Client’s designated paper. Public Hearing Wisconsin Open Records Law. Prepare and mail individual For blighted area districts and in need of property owner notices (only for Plan rehabilitation or conservation districts, provide a districts created as blighted area, or Commission format for the required individual property in need of rehabilitation or Public Hearing owner notification letters. conservation). Attend hearing to present draft Project Plan. Prepare meeting minutes. Post or publish agenda and provide notification as required by the Provide agenda language to Client. Wisconsin Open Records Law. Plan Attend meeting to present draft Project Plan. Distribute Project Plan & resolution Commission Provide approval resolution for Plan to Plan Commission members in Commission consideration. advance of meeting. Prepare meeting minutes. Governing Body Post or publish agenda and provide Action notification as required by the Provide agenda language to Client. Wisconsin Open Records Law. Attend meeting to present draft Project Plan. Provide Project Plan & resolution Provide approval resolution for governing body to governing body members in consideration. advance of meeting. Prepare meeting minutes. Mail meeting notice and copy of final Project Plan to overlapping taxing jurisdictions. Prepare Notice of Meeting and transmit to Post or publish agenda and provide Client’s designated paper. notification as required by the Joint Review Board Action Provide agenda language to Client. Wisconsin Open Records Law. Attend meeting to present final Project Plan. Prepare meeting minutes. Provide approval resolution for Joint Review Board consideration. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 3 Ehlers July 30, 2019  · Throughout the meeting process, provide drafts of the Project Plan and related documents in sufficient quantity for the Client’s staff, Plan Commission, governing body and Joint Review Board members. · Provide advice and updated analysis on the impact of any changes made to the Project Plan throughout the approval process. Phase III – State Submittal This phase includes final review of all file documents, preparation of filing forms, and submission of the base year or amendment packet to the Department of Revenue. This phase begins following approval of the district by the Joint Review Board and ends with the submission of the base year or amendment packet. As part of Phase III services, Ehlers will: · Assemble and submit to the Department of Revenue the required base year or amendment packet to include a final Project Plan document containing all required elements and information. · Provide the Client with an electronic copy of the final Project Plan (and up to 15 bound hard copies if desired). · Provide the municipal Clerk with a complete electronic and/or hard copy transcript of all materials as submitted to the Department of Revenue for certification. · Act as a liaison between the Client and the Department of Revenue during the certification process in the event any questions or discrepancies arise. Compensation In return for the services set forth in the “Scope of Service,” Client agrees to compensate Ehlers as follows: Phase I $ 5,900 Phase II $ 7,500 Phase III $ 1,600 Total $ 15,000 · Phase I base fee includes up to five financial scenarios. Additional scenarios will be run as needed at a cost of $750/scenario. · In the event Client determines not to proceed with the Project once a Phase has been authorized, but prior to that Phase’s completion, the compensation due for that Phase will be prorated to reflect the percentage of the work completed. For any service directed by Client and not covered by this, or another applicable Appendix, Ehlers will bill Client at an hourly rate that is dependent upon the task/staff required to meet Client request at no less than $125.00/hour and not to exceed $300.00/hour. Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 4 Ehlers July 30, 2019 Payment for Services For all compensation due to Ehlers, Ehlers will invoice Client for the amount due at the completion of each Phase. Our fees include our normal travel, printing, computer services, and mail/delivery charges. The invoice is due and payable upon receipt by the Client. Client Responsibility The following expenses are not included in our Scope of Services, and are the responsibility of Client to pay directly: · Services rendered by Client’s engineers, planners, surveyors, appraisers, assessors, attorneys, auditors and others that may be called on by Client to provide information related to completion of the Project. · Preparation of maps necessary for inclusion in the Project Plan. · Preparation of maps necessary for inclusion in the base year or amendment packet. · Publication charge for the Notice of Public Hearing and Notices of Joint Review Board meetings. · Legal opinion advising that Project Plan contains all required elements. (Normally provided by municipal attorney). · Preparation of District metes & bounds description. (Needed in Phase III for creation of new districts, or amendments that add or subtract territory). · Department of Revenue filing fee and annual administrative fees. The current Department of Revenue fee structure is: Current Wisconsin Department of Revenue Fee Schedules Base Year Packet $1,000 Amendment Packet with Territory Addition $1,000 Amendment Packet with Territory Subtraction $1,000 Base Value Redetermination $1,000 Amendment Packet No Charge Annual Administrative Fee $150 The above Proposal is hereby accepted by Columbus, Wisconsin, by its authorized officer: Signed Title Date Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 5 Ehlers July 30, 2019 Documentation of Municipal Advisor Relationship – Appendix B Page 6 Ehlers July 30, 2019  RESOLUTION NO. 12-19 A RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE CITY STAFF TO BEGIN WORK TO CREATE TAX INCREMENTAL FINANCING DISTRICT #5 WHEREAS, the City Council has found that creating a new Tax Incremental Financing District will be beneficial to the City, and WHEREAS, the City has identified a potential area of land that would otherwise not be developed but for the creation of a Tax Incremental Financing District, and the boundaries of the area of land are as set forth on the attached Exhibit A. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Columbus City Council does hereby authorize City staff to begin work on the creation of Tax Incremental District #5. Dated this ______ of ____________, 2019 CITY OF COLUMBUS _______________________________________ Michael Thom, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________________ Patricia Goebel, Clerk  2019 AGENDA ITEM Committee of the Whole Meeting date: August 6, 2019 Council Meeting date: TBD ITEM: WWTP Ag Land – Farm Lease DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT MATTER: The City owns 3.8 acres of tillable land adjacent to the Wastewater Treatment Plant, which has been leased to a local farmer (Sennview Dairy). The current lease is in effect and expires at the end of the 2020 planting season. Earlier this year, community members have come forward with proposals to work this parcel into a useful park/nature area. The Columbus Oddfellows have been most interested in turning a portion of the land into a butterfly garden. Over the past couple of years, there have been some other conceptual discussions about turning that area into a useful, natural area with potential for recreation adjacent to the Crawfish River. As a part of those recent discussions, I worked with Mayor Thom and the farmer on a way to adjust the lease with a hope to get started in this project sooner. In concept, Sennview Dairy was open to changing the lease to release it one year early with the stipulation that he maintain an access easement to farmlands that he owns across the Crawfish River and uses the access to process his harvest each year. Atty. Johnson has been working on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to reflect the intent of the conversations that have been taking place. The bottom line is that the land will be available for conversion into the butterfly garden/natural area following this harvest season, and in turn the farmer will till the land for us following his last cutting of alfalfa. He will also be allowed his access easement. LIST ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED: MOU for WWTP Farmland. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Review and consider.  2019 AGENDA ITEM Committee of the Whole Meeting date: August 6, 2019 Council Meeting date: TBD ITEM: Continued discussion of Local Landmark Designation of City Property DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT MATTER: The Columbus Historic Landmarks Preservation Commission (CHLPC) held a preliminary review meeting last Monday on the question of whether to place two city properties into Local Historic Landmark status. The two properties are the Library Annex (251 W. James St) and the Old Watertower (Chapel Street). The City Council has had a couple of discussions related to the process involved with making the designations and concerns have been raised about them. Following the preliminary review, it is important for the Council to discuss whether the City has a position on the proposed designations or other actions necessary to the process. CHLPC has set a public hearing date on this matter for Monday, September 9, 2019 at 6 pm at City Hall. LIST ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED: Atty. Johnson 7/10/19 Memo, Applications for the Landmark Designations ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Further discussion  Dering House (Berney/Moore) 251 West James 1912, Prairie School 10 5l t the turn of the century a group of Chicago archi­ tects created an American style of architecture called the Prairie style. The style flourished throughout the Midwest, promoted through pattern books, until about 1920. This residence exhibits the Prairie influence in its simple lines, widely overhanging eaves and use of stucco or concrete as an unadorned wall surface. The windows are grouped and, on the second floor, tied together with the horizontal banding typical of the style. The barrel-arched entry with "ears" was a favorite motif of architects like George Maher and Tallmade & Watson, and is strong feature of the style. The house was built by A. L. Bonnett and it has hollow tile walls clad in stucco, which a local newspaper noted was a first for Columbus. From 1908-1921 Guy Dering ran a successful commission store located at 153 N. Ludington. He was a champion trap shooter and held the world record in 1927. This house was built for Dering and his widowed mother, a milliner who continued her business in a room on the second floor. The small addition to the right of the front door was added when the house was used as an osteopathic office by Dr. Richard Sheard from 1941-1983.  ASHLEY Y. THOMPSON A TT OR N EY A TH OM P S O N @ B OA R D M A NC LA R K . C OM D I R EC T ( 6 08) 28 3 7 5 4 7 FAX ( 6 08) 28 3 1 7 0 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Paul Johnson FROM: Cat Wiese DATE: July 10, 2019 RE: Historic Preservation Ordinances The City of Columbus has a Historic Landmark and Preservation Commission (“HLPC”), which has the authority to designate historic landmarks within the City. Recently, the HLPC has expressed its intent to designate a building used for library purposes as an historic landmark. The City owns this building. Members of the common council are concerned that the HLPC could designate structures owned by the City as historic property without the approval of the common council. Further, because building is currently used as the library, the library director believes the library board has exclusive control over the building; therefore, the building cannot be subject to historic landmark designation. Questions Presented 1. Based on Wisconsin Statutes, what can the HLPC do under Wis. Stat. § 62.23? Are there any requirements missing from the City’s ordinances? 2. Does it make sense that a Commission, and not the common council, can dictate what properties can be designated as historic? 3. Is the library director correct that the library board has control over the building? If so, what does that mean for the HLPC? 4. Proposed next steps? Short Answer 1. The HLPC has authority to designate historic landmarks without common council approval. However, Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3 gives property owners the right to appeal HLPC decisions to the common council and the common council can overturn the decision with a majority vote. AUGUST 2, 2019 PAGE 2 2. Based on Wisconsin Statutes and case law, it does make sense that a historic preservation Commission can designate historic properties without common council approval if the commission follows the authority delegated to it by the City. 3. The library board has exclusive control over library building; however, this control does not allow the library building to escape historic designation. 4. The common council should amend its ordinances to include the appeal right codified by Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3 and exempted municipally-owned property from historic landmark designation. If the HLCP has already designated the library a historic landmark, the library board should appeal the HLPC’s decision to the common council. Analysis 1. Based on Wisconsin Statutes, what can the HLPC do under Wis. Stat. § 62.23? Are there any requirements missing from the City’s ordinances? Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)1 gives cities the authority to create landmark commissions, which can designate historic landmarks and establish historic districts within the city. This provision also establishes that cities can create ordinances that regulate historic properties in order to preserve the property. Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em) 2 provides that a city must hold a public hearing before it designates a historic landmark and must notify the owner by first class mail of the place, structure, or object of the determination and the time and place of the public hearing on the determination. Finally, Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3 provides that the owner of a property affected by a decision of the city landmark commission can appeal the decision to the common council and the common council may overturn a commission decision by a majority vote. The statute does not outline standards that the common council must follow to during the appeal to overturn the decision. Aside from these requirements, Wisconsin Statutes do not dictate what a landmark commission can do. Instead, Wisconsin Statutes allow the city to regulate its historic landmarks and landmark commission by ordinance. In its current form, Columbus’s Historic Preservation Ordinance does not codify the appeals right established by Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3. As the legislature created Wis. Stat. §62.23(7)(em)3 in 2015 with 2015 Wisconsin Act 176, it is likely that the ordinances were not updated since the statute was enacted. Although Columbus does not codify this appeal right in its ordinances, property owners can still appeal HLPC decisions because Wisconsin state law creates this right. As I will discuss in Part 4, this appeal right could create a potential conflict of interest in situations where a municipality owns property and appeals a AUGUST 2, 2019 PAGE 3 historic preservation designation to the common council, which is the governing body of the municipality. 2. Does it make sense that a Commission, and not the common council, can dictate what properties can be designated as historic? Based on Wisconsin Statutes and case law, it does make sense that a historic preservation Commission can designate historic properties without common council approval if the commission follows the authority delegated to it by the City. Wis. Stat. §62.23(7)(em)1 establishes that a city can create a landmark commission and give that commission the authority to designate historic landmarks. However, Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)1 does not require the common council to approve those decisions. Further Wis. Stat. §62.23(7)(em)3 provides property owners with the right to appeal commission decisions to the common council; this suggests Wisconsin Statutes do not require the common council to approve a landmark commission’s decisions as that would make Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3 superfluous and create a redundancy issue. Case law also supports the notion that boards and commissions can act when they are delegated authority by ordinance. Courts have held that the common council may delegate its authority as long as it delegates that power clearly and specifically. See Hocking v. City of Dodgeville, 2009 WI App 108, ¶ 16, 320 Wis. 2d 519, 770 N.W.2d 761, aff'd, 2010 WI 59, ¶ 16, 326 Wis. 2d 155, 785 N.W.2d 398; see also Holzbauer v. Safway Steel Prod., Inc., 2005 WI App 240, ¶ 24, 288 Wis. 2d 250, 708 N.W.2d 36. Additionally, courts have held that when an ordinance gives discretionary authority to administrative officials, the municipality must give standards to guide their action. AllEnergy Corp. v. Trempealeau Cty. Env't & Land Use Comm., 2017 WI 52, ¶¶ 59-73, 375 Wis. 2d 329, 895 N.W.2d 368. Further, courts have upheld actions taken by boards when their action was fully authorized by ordinances and was not an unlawful delegation of power. Thalhofer v. Patri, 240 Wis. 404, 409, 3 N.W.2d 761 (1942). The City clearly delegates the power to designate historic buildings to the HLPC in Sec. 114- 175(1) of its ordinances, outlines criteria that it must use in Sec. 114-176, and details the procedure it must follow in Sec. 114-177. Common council approval is not required anywhere within these ordinances. Because the City’s ordinances that grant the HLPC the authority to designate historic property do not require common council approval, it is likely that the HLPC can designate property without that approval. AUGUST 2, 2019 PAGE 4 3. Is the library director correct that the library board has control over the building? If so, what does that mean for the HLPC? While the library director is correct that the library board has exclusive control over the building, it is likely that this authority does not allow the library building to escape the historic preservation ordinance because it is a zoning ordinance to which the library is still subject. Wis. Stat. § 43.58(1) provides that a “library board . . . shall have exclusive charge, control, and custody of all lands, buildings, money or other property devised, bequeathed, given or granted to, or otherwise acquired or leased by, the municipality for library purposes.” I have not been able to find any authority that discusses this power in detail, but I interpret it to mean that the library board has the right to act as the owner of the property. Therefore, the library board is likely still subject to historic preservation designations because laws relating to historic preservation likely considered similar to zoning ordinances as they are contained in Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7), which is the zoning enabling statute. Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)1 explains that “a city may, as an exercise of its zoning and police power for the purposes of promoting the health, safety and general welfare of the community and of the state, may regulate, by ordinance . . . any place, structure or object with a . . . historic . . . value.” Because the statute cites a city’s zoning authority and police power and is contained within the zoning enabling statute, historic preservation ordinances are likely considered to be similar to zoning ordinances. Practically speaking, as a property owner, the library board, like any property owner, would still have to comply with the zoning and building codes of the municipality in which it is located. I was unable to find a source that discussed the extent to which a municipality is subject to its own zoning code, but I asked around the office and the general consensus is that a municipality generally must comply with its zoning code. There is a question of the extent to which counties are subject to municipal zoning ordinances as the court in Green County v. City of Monroe held that a county was immune from local zoning ordinances when constructing a jail because a county is “a governmental arm and agency of the state performing primarily the functions of the state locally.” Green Cty. v. City of Monroe, 3 Wis. 2d 196, 199, 87 N.W.2d 827, 829 (1958). However, this should not be an issue here as the library board is not a county and I cannot see an argument that it would be an “arm of the state.” If you would like me to research this issue further, I would be happy to do so. While the library board’s exclusive control over the library building does not allow it to escape historic designation, there is an argument that the library board could be the body that appeals an HLPC’s decision to the common council. Because Wis. Stat. § 43.58(1) grants library board has exclusive control over the property, this could mean that the library board gets to act as the property owner and make decisions about the property. I did not do extensive research on this issue; however, I do not see why the library board could not be the entity that appeals an HLPC historic designation to the common council. AUGUST 2, 2019 PAGE 5 4. Proposed Next Steps Generally Generally speaking, because the appeal right contained within Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(e,)3 is not currently codified within the City’s ordinances, the common council should amend Sec. 114-177(3)(g) and (h), which detail the effect of historic designation denials and approvals, to include the appeal right. Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)3 does not provide standards that common council needs to follow when reviewing a landmark commission decision but only states that the common council can overturn the decision with a majority vote. Therefore, while amending this ordinance, the common council should establish what standards the common council should consider when reviewing a HLPC decision. As a reference for these standards, the common council could require that the common council to review the designation criteria outlined in Sec. 114-176 and determine whether the designated property actually meets those criteria. Further, to avoid any potential conflict created in situations where a municipality is the property owner who appeals a HLPC decisions to the common council, the common council should consider passing an ordinance that exempts municipally- owned property from the HLPC’s authority. On another note, I noticed that Sec. 114-177(3)(b), which details the notice of public hearing, currently does not contain the requirement under Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(em)2 that the owner of the property be notified of the public hearing by first class mail. Because the historic preservation law is located in Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7), which is the zoning enabling statutes, the common council must follow the procedure outlined in Wis. Stat. § 62.23(7)(d) to amend its historic preservation ordinances. For the Library Based on our telephone conversation, I was not sure what stage the HLPC was in with respect to designating the library building. If the HLPC has not yet designated the library building as a historic landmark, the common council could amend its ordinances to exempt municipally-owned property from designation before the HLPC can take any further action on the library building. This would avoid the historic designation altogether. If the HLPC has already designated the library building a historic landmark, there are several avenues that the common council could take. First, the common council could appeal the HLPC’s decision to the common council and the common council could overturn the decision by a majority vote. However, because the City owns the property and the common council is the City’s governing body, this action could spark a potential conflict of interests. With this potential conflict, if the City appeals the AUGUST 2, 2019 PAGE 6 decision, the common council should to be sure to follow some criteria to support its decision to overturn the HLPC’s decision. To avoid this potential conflict altogether, the library board, having exclusive control over the building, should appeal the HLPC’s decision. Technically, if the HLPC notified the common council of a public hearing regarding the designation of the library building, the common council should ensure that it was notified via first class mail. Currently, the City’s ordinances do not contain this statutory requirement, so it is possible that the HLPC did not satisfy it. If the HLPC did not, this would make the notice defective and be procedural grounds under which to challenge the public hearing and designation. This may allow the common council more time amend its ordinances and exempt municipally-owned property from historic preservation designation. However, this option is not preferred as it might require the City to sue its sub-commission and might bring up other conflict issues. Therefore, the common council should use the appeal option as it is an option that is available by statute. F:\DOCS\WD\53481\3\A3491452.DOCX  2019 AGENDA ITEM Committee of the Whole Meeting date: August 6, 2019 Council Meeting date: TBD ITEM: Leak at the CAAC DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT MATTER: This item on the agenda is a placeholder for now, as staff is investigating a leak at the Columbus Area Aquatic Center. The issue emerged in this past week and work is being done to review the situation. If there are actionable items and more of an update on the issue on Tuesday, we wanted the agenda to afford us the ability to discuss it. LIST ALL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION ATTACHED: None. ACTION REQUESTED OF COUNCIL: Unknown.