|
TOWN OF ROCHESTER Link to Town Board Meetings
|
|
Link to Town Board Meetings |
NOVEMBER 18, 2004 PUBLIC BUDGET HEARING 7:00 p.m.
The hearing was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Gary Beck, chairman. Town Supervisors 1 and 2, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf, were also present.
In addition to Board members, there were fifty-three electors present.
Also present: Deputy Matthew Prochaska, Sergeant Bob Kacmarcik, Captain William Greer, and Sheriff Bob Carlson (of the Racine County Sheriffs Department); John Lutz (chairman, Honey Lake Protection and Rehabilitation District); Mary Stapleton, Donald Sinclar, Ann Schubert, Jeremy Hamilton, and Cheryl Fladwood (Rochester Public Library) and Robin Vos, State Assembly representative.
At the prompting of Gary Beck, Robin Vos introduced himself to those present as the Town’s new State Assembly representative.
Electors then reviewed the budget and questions were taken from the floor.
Dave Thompson, 34411 Washington Avenue, questioned 2004 expenditures for legal council noting an increase of approximately $6,000.00 over what was budgeted. He questioned why additional monies were not provided in the 2005 budget. The Clerk responded this was due to unforeseen litigation; expenditures are not expected to occur in 2005 at the same level.
Benjamin Miller, owner of 29200 Evergreen Drive, requested monies be included in the 2005 budget for ditching and rip rap along Evergreen Drive to fix drainage problems in the area. Gary Beck responded he believes monies will be available in the budget. After costs for (scheduled) 2005 projects are known, any excess monies will be applied towards fixing the problem.
Deborah Schwinn, 2529 Langmaid Street, thanked Board members for resurfacing of her street in 2004.
Ben Maze, 135 N. River Road, questioned when N. River Road will be resurfaced. It was explained the project will most likely be scheduled for 2006. Reconstruction is being held off until plans to expand the sewer lines down the road are finalized.
Alex McIlheran, 32137 Academy Road, questioned why the Town contracts for law enforcement with Racine County. Gary Beck responded that previous to the contract, the Town did not have the ability to enforce Town ordinances. Contracting for law enforcement allows the Town to specifically address such issues as junk vehicles and speed limits on Town roads.
Patricia Lancour, 34742 Oak Knoll Road, stated she does not want law enforcement cut back. She reported understanding the Village of Rochester was approached on sharing the contract, but was not able to because they had already signed a contract. She suggested trying to work out a cost sharing agreement for 2006. She stated concern about being on the western edge of the County and that there are only seven to eight officers per shift covering the west end. She feels cutting back on the contract will cause a decrease in response time. Honey Lake is having problems. The prevalent problem time was identified as 2nd shift. Contract officer, Deputy Prochaska, schedules his time to cover that.
Nancy Klemko, 2500 Beck Drive, questioned Clerk-Treasurer salary amounts. Mike Weinkauf explained the positions have been combined and the Town will save money due to the combination. The 2005 budget amount covers both Clerk-Treasurer and Deputy Clerk-Treasurer salaries.
Jackie Busch, 33753 Academy Road, questioned payment of engineering fees on N. Honey Lake Road. It was explained the project went at least $130,000.00 over budget. Jackie indicated there were errors made by the Town’s engineers and the Town should not pay for them. She complained of contractors on the job being under a “gag order” where they could not talk to her. It was explained contractors were there to work and were not supposed to talk to residents. Their job is to do the work. Resident inquiries are to be handled by the Town engineer or Town Board. Jackie indicated Crispell-Snyder (town engineering firm) should have been aware of increased costs ahead of the project. It was explained base soils were found to be poor and caused need for additional excavation in many areas and corresponding replacement with appropriate base materials. The only way this could have been discovered ahead of the project was for more soil borings to have been done- thereby increasing up front costs. It would not have changed the end result, base materials would need to be replaced regardless. Jackie stated her opinion that the engineering firm should have been more diligent.
Ray Moyer, 1620 Heritage Road, commented he was happy the road was finally done. He continued with a question of whether the Town had considered annexing into the Village of Rochester. He stated the City of Burlington could annex his property and he has feelings about that. He understands consolidation of the Town and Village failed due to density requirements. Gary Beck explained a new law was passed that will allow consolidation if boundary agreements can be reached with abutting municipalities. The Town just lost 40 acres along State Highway 36 to the Village of Waterford. He feels the only way to prevent annexations in the future is to change from a Town to a Village. Ray indicated the Town should appoint a committee to explore annexation in case boundary agreements cannot be achieved; this would allow a two-edge plan. Gary indicated positive feedback has already been received from the City of Burlington and Village of Waterford in regards to boundary agreements and it is the intention of the Town to explore this avenue first. Ray indicated the feasibility of annexation should still be considered.
James Fait, 33335 Washington Avenue, commented: “it doesn’t matter what the Town does, it isn’t going to work. The City of Burlington will annex land and the Town will have no say on it.”
Deborah Schwinn, 2529 Langmaid Street, directed a comment to Assembly representative Robin Vos: that consolidation of Village and Town of Rochester should be his first job and he will have a devoted electorate if he can help achieve this.
Ray Moyer, 1620 Heritage Road, commented on streets in the Honey Lake subdivision. He feels those streets should be maintained by the Town and should be treated no different that any other subdivision road. It was explained the (currently) private roads are substandard. Ray indicated the people of that area have the same rights as others in the Town.
Robin Vos, Assembly representative, stated annexation is a big issue in the State legislature and a lot of effort had gone into the law created to help Rochester (T. & V.) combine. Unfortunately, lobbying groups from the Cities and Villages got involved and more language was put in that complicated the process. Robin indicated he is willing to work with Rochester and abutting municipalities to help achieve the merger.
Wayne Schrader, 32417 Washington Avenue, stated he believes the Town should pursue the Boundary agreements, but he is doubtful it will work.
The Sheriff’s department was then invited to make a presentation regarding law enforcement services in the Town.
Deputy Prochaska stated he has been serving as a dedicated officer to the Town of Rochester since 2001 when a contract for one full-time officer was entered into between the Town and the Racine County Sheriff’s Department. His normal shift schedule rotates as follows: five days on; two days off; five days on; three days off. Being a community based officer allows him the flexibility to switch schedules based on need. Several ordinances have been passed based on input from the Sheriff’s Department since the beginning of the contract regulating or instigating: a curfew for minors; peddler permit requirements; possession of drugs and drug paraphernalia; reduction of speed limits on select town roads; and reckless driving. Deputy Prochaska utilizes bike patrol when practical. This offers him increased opportunity to interact with residents and neighborhood children.
Sheriff Department call statistics (specific to the Town of Rochester) were presented as follows:
Deputy Prochaska feels positive impacts have been made by the increased presence of the Sheriff’s Department including a decrease in junk vehicles and junk complaints in the town; and a decreased number of dump truck complaints.
He stated goals for next year to include a crackdown on dog licensing to help offset increased costs of the animal control contract (and ensure dogs are properly vaccinated) and to work with Racine County and the Town to reduce the speed limit on Academy Road from Village of Rochester limits to Maple Road to help reduce accidents in that area.
Vince Klemko, 2500 Beck Drive, questioned service levels of the Sheriff’s Department in the absence of a dedicated officer.
Sheriff Bob Carlson responded to the question. He explained calls are assigned to an area car and prioritized by the Department. He commented Public Safety is usually a significant part of any community’s budget because of its importance. A dedicated officer through the contract creates a professional response to concerns of the community. Dedicated service allows attention to quality of life issues. The number of calls going down is a good thing. There is a cost to the service, but he feels the community is getting great value. He also commented that jurisdictions who maintain their own police department spend a great deal more money than contracted services cost.
Nancy Klemko, 2500 Beck Drive, stated she is in favor of maintaining a full-time officer contract. She feels safer and feels comfortable calling Deputy Prochasa because he is part of the community. She feels the contract is an asset.
Pat Lancour, 34742 Oak Knoll Road, presented figures on costs borne by other communities for law enforcement. She stated the Village of Waterford spends $590,000 for three shifts of coverage; Town of Waterford spends $347,000 annually on its department, plus an additional $21,000 (annually) on a car; and Town of Dover spends $80,000 annually. In researching these numbers, other communities commented just having an officer on duty is a deterrent to more problems. She agrees with the statement.
Gary Beck stated the option was originally presented hoping the Village of Rochester would pick up 25% of the full-time contract. However, there may be some concerns about how to split out time of one officer between the two communities and some confusion in ordinances may result.
Deputy Prochaska indicated his job requires that he be familiar with State law, County ordinances and Town of Rochester ordinances. Combining the contract would add one more layer to these requirements.
Deputy Brian Zimmermann, 11 Nevada Avenue, performs service under the Village of Rochester’s law enforcement contract. Gary Beck requested his comment on combination of the contract. Deputy Zimmermann stated his feeling that there may be some conflict in terms of splitting the time between the two communities in a way that corresponds to cost sharing. In addition, ordinance interpretations may cause some difficulty.
Ray Moyer, 1620 Heritage Drive, made a motion to adopt Option B as presented on the proposed budget (includes funds for one full-time law enforcement officers under the contract; and funding for a house numbering system).
Mike Weinkauf, Supervisor #2, reported on his occupation as a farmer. He stated agribusiness has seen prices drop. He feels Deputy Prochaska has done good things for the community, but noted he has to drive through the Village of Rochester in order to perform his duties. He does not see the difficulty in splitting the contract between the two communities. He indicated the reason for including Option A (a 25% reduction in the law enforcement contract) was to be fiscally responsibility and more efficient. He would like to see the contract shared with the Village.
Mary Grube, 309 Ridge Line Road, stated she lives in Scotsdale Subdivision and Deputy Prochaska performed a bike safety clinic there for the kids. She feels activities like this are preventative and likes the fact that this gives the kids a chance to get to know Deputy Prochaska. She feels activities like this- bike safety, attendance at scout meetings, etc., are good for kids. She would like to see a full-time contract maintained.
Gary Beck, chairman, pointed out income for court forfeitures have increased and he feels this helps offset costs of the contract.
Ray Moyer, 1620 Heritage Road, stated he feels the Town and Village Board should get together on cost sharing. He feels they could work it out.
Ed Stone, 2826 Maple Road, questioned whether the crime rate goes up when Deputy Prochaska is not on duty. He does not believe there is an increase of calls. Deputy Prochaska indicated his time is scheduled based on when the volume of calls is expected to be greatest. Ed indicated the law enforcement contract makes up 1/6 of the total budget. He estimated the cost of reducing the contract to be approximately $29.00 on a $200,000 house.
John Lutz, chairman of the Honey Lake Protection and Rehabilitation District, commented $29.00 is minimal in terms of fiscal responsibility. He stated it is the duty of the people to vote for what they want. As chairman of the Lake District, he has seen the level of complaint calls decrease since the services of Deputy Prochaska have been contracted.
A question was stated as to the impact of reducing the contract by 25%.
Captain Greer responded the (already adopted) County budget includes this contract to cover costs of one full-time officer. Ultimately, there would have to be discussion on the issue and how to resolve the resulting deficit in their budget.
Deborah Schwinn, 2529 Langmaid, indicated the cost amounts to approximately 20 cents a day. She considers that minimal for a face and name that is connected with this community.
Nancy Klemko, 2500 Beck Drive, stated the Town is growing and as a result having more problems. She questioned why the Town would cut this amount when budgets are already set.
Wayne Schrader, 32417 Washington Avenue, stated he attended many Honey Lake District meetings when he was a Town Board member. They were having many troubles and there were always many complaints about (gravel) truck drivers on CTH D. Deputy Prochaska has had a positive impact on these issues and he does not want to cut hours.
Lorraine Maze, 135 N. River Road, commented she would rather have Deputy Prochaska on duty in lieu of house signs that are proposed in the budget. She stated River Road is in deplorable condition. She walks that road every morning and feels a dedicated officer helps slow traffic down and make things safer.
Alex McIlheran, 32137 Academy Road, commented an officer is more important than a 20% increase in the library budget.
Pat Hurley, 411 N. Browns Lake Drive, suggested the Town get together with the Village earlier next year and work out a compromise on sharing the law enforcement contract.
Ben Maze, 135 N. River Road, presented a large brick to Board members. He indicated vandals had thrown these bricks out car windows last month and caused $500.00 damage to his fence and mailbox. That is why he feels the Town needs to keep the full-time law enforcement contract.
Gary suggested discussion turn to house numbering signs at this point, as they are an additional option to the budget.
Examples of the proposed signs were shown. They are reflective two-sided signs that would be installed at uniform locations at every house and business in the Town. Installation is being encouraged by the Sheriff’s and Fire Department and costs are approximately $25,000.00 to have it done.
Deborah Schwinn, 2529 Langmaid Street, feels signs should be the property owner’s personal responsibility.
Pastor Sinclair (First Congregational Church), library board member, commented he has had to make house visits several times and has a difficult time finding places, particularly at night. He has seen the impact of these signs in other communities and feels they are very helpful.
Deputy Brian Zimmermann, 11 Nevada Avenue, stated while individual property owners may install signs, they all “do their own thing”. Quite often, it is difficult for emergency services to locate houses.
Steve Fladwood, 29625 Timberlane Drive, commented there are many places in the Town that do not have street lights. Standardization would help this with reflective signs.
Judy Correll, Secretary- Honey Lake Rehabilitation District, commented she was confused by the options on the budget. An attempt was made to clarify that the basic 2005 budget included full costs of the law enforcement contract; Option A included a 25% reduction in the law enforcement contract; and Option B included full costs of the law enforcement contract and installation costs of a uniform house numbering system.
Ray Moyer moved, 2nd by Steve Fladwood to adopt Option B for the 2005 Budget.
Bob Willard, 31219 Washington Avenue, called for more discussion on the subject.
Vince Klemko, 2500 Beck Drive, clarified the house number option is a one time expense. Gary Beck stated that is correct.
Mary Jo Mathers, 35305 Ravine Drive, questioned whether the Town obtains any revenue from recycling. It was stated revenues are not gained by sale of recyclables, but collection percentages do weigh into recycling grant proceeds from the State of Wisconsin.
Wayne Schrader questioned whether property owners would have to put their own signs up. Gary Beck indicated costs include installation.
Deborah Schwinn questioned what will happen when a snowplow takes a sign out- it was stated they should be far enough off the road to prevent that from happening.
David Thompson, 34411 Washington Avenue, feels house signs should be a matter of personal responsibility.
Gary Beck restated the motion (made by Ray Moyer and seconded by Steve Fladwood) to adopt Option B for the 2005 Budget.
Votes were: twenty-four in favor (Aye); and twenty-two opposed (Naye). Motion passed.
The public hearing portion of the meeting was closed and the special meeting of the electors called to order.
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ELECTORS
Ray Moyer moved, 2nd by Jane Babik to approve combination of Clerk and Treasurer offices pursuant to sec. 60.10(2) of the Wisconsin Statutes. Votes were: thirty-nine in favor (Aye); and one opposed (Naye). Motion passed.
Ray Moyer moved, 2nd by Vince Klemko to approve $237,550 for total 2005 highway expenditures pursuant to sec. 81.01(3) of the Wisconsin Statutes. Votes were: twenty-eight in favor (Aye); and zero opposed (Naye). Motion carried.
Vince Klemko moved, 2nd by Nancy Klemko to adopt $486,776.21 as the 2004 tax levy to be paid in 2005 pursuant to sec. 60.10(1)(a) of the Wisconsin Statutes. Votes were: twenty-eight in favor (Aye); and zero opposed (Naye). Motion carried.
NOVEMBER 18, 2004 SPECIAL TOWN BOARD MEETING 9:05 P.M.
The meeting was called to order at 9:05 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf present.
Betty Novy, Clerk, and Sandra Swan, Deputy Clerk, were also present.
Adoption of Year 2005 Budget for the Town of Rochester
Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to adopt the 2005 budget as presented in Option B with a total tax levy of $486,776.21. Motion carried.
Appointment of Clerk-Treasurer and Deputy Clerk-Treasurer
Gary moved, 2nd by Paul to appoint Betty Novy, Clerk-Treasurer and Sandra Swan, Deputy Clerk-Treasurer. Motion carried.
Resolution #8-2004 “Designating Public Depository
and Authorizing Withdrawal of Town Monies”
Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to approve Resolution #8-2004 requiring two signatures, with Gary Beck and Betty Novy primary and Sandra Swan as an alternate signer. Motion carried.
Appointment of Land Use Plan Committee Chairperson: Brian Wanasek
Gary Beck appointed Brian to the position.
Public Works Supervisor selection process
Consensus of the Board was to invite Chris Birkett, Jeremy Arnouts, Richard Santo and Rancy Baumgart in for interviews spaced ½ hour apart starting at 4:00 p.m. on December 9th or 10th.
Estimate to replace ceiling tiles in meeting room and municipal hall
Betty reported the estimate had been received but the Village Board rejected it because they thought costs were too high. Maintenance personnel will be questioned on whether they are able to perform the work.
Gary moved, 2nd by Mike to adjourn at 9:22 p.m. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted:
Betty J. Novy, Clerk-Treasurer
|