|
TOWN OF ROCHESTER Link to Town Board Meetings
|
|
Link to Town Board Meetings |
February 10, 2005 JT. TOWN/ VILLAGE OF ROCHESTER 7:00 P.M. BOARD MEETING
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. with the following Board members present:
Town of Rochester: Gary Beck, Paul Beere and Mike Weinkauf. Village of Rochester: Chris Denman, Dennis Saunders, Bill Weidert, Jim Henning, Mark Tamblyn, Dean Stapleton, and Judy Karweik.
Betty Novy, Clerk-Treasurer, and Atty. John Hotvedt were also present.
Options to the question of an advisory referendum on whether to continue the process of consolidating Town and Village into a Village: Attorney John Hotvedt
Atty. Hotvedt presented three options to the question as follows:
1. Shall the Town Board continue to work with the Village of Rochester and attempt to consolidate the Town of Rochester with the Village of Rochester?
2. Shall the Town Board pursue Cooperative Boundary Agreements with neighboring municipalities as part of an effort to consolidate the Town of Rochester with the Village of Rochester?
3. Shall the Town Board pursue Cooperative Boundary Agreements which determine how certain Town lands will be annexed into the City of Burlington and/or the Village of Waterford as part of an effort to consolidate the Town of Rochester with the Village of Rochester?
John explained the amount of information provided in the question is increased with each option. How much information to provide in the question should be used as a basis to decide which version to use.
Beck solicited each Board member’s opinion on pursuing consolidation before taking the issue any further. Board member comments are summarized as follows:
Dennis Saunders stated he feels the referendum and consolidation issue is worthwhile as he would like to see Rochester, as a whole, continue into the future.
Bill Weidert commented development and progress is happening. He fears if the Town and Village do not consolidate, the Town of Rochester will lose considerable amounts of land through annexation to Waterford and Burlington. In addition, he feels the Village of Rochester will stagnate. He feels consolidation is a good move.
Mike Weinkauf stated concern over taking the option to annex to villages and cities from large land owners. He indicated State Statutes look at Towns as holding areas for cities and villages to grow. Consolidation will say that only the Village of Rochester can grow in the Town of Rochester. He stated any information provided to residents should present only facts. It must be made clear that the intent of consolidation is not only to put in TIF districts, water and sewer in the Village of Rochester. It must be made clear how this will affect the whole Town, including those on the west end.
Paul Beere stated he is in favor of consolidation. As a landowner on the east side of the Town, he feels his area will be separated off if the lands abutting STH 36 continue to be annexed to abutting municipalities.
Gary Beck stated a desire to still see Rochester here 100 years from now in somewhat the same shape it is now. He would hate to lose the ability to control development to other municipalities.
Chris Denman noted a tremendous amount of effort continues to go into the Joint Land Use Plan. He fears this effort will be for nothing when properties are annexed to abutting municipalities. The present community will loose control.
Jim Henning stated his opinion that consolidation is a good idea. The Village has worked cooperatively with the Town for a long time and this has allowed them to share services and costs. He does not see any reason not to do it. He feels there will be financial benefits to consolidation.
Mark Tamblyn noted there will naturally be some conflicts as the area develops, but notes this will happen regardless of whether consolidation occurs. He does not anticipate any problems that cannot be worked out. He is in favor of consolidation.
Dean Stapleton stated he feels the effort to consolidate is the result of Village and Town Boards looking towards the future. It is necessary that consolidation be fair to all landowners and this information must be communicated. It must be made clear residents will not be taxed for services they do not receive.
Judy Karweik stated she is in favor of consolidation and that all the reasons stated were valid, including financial preservation and more efficient government. She questioned how many large land owners might be affected in their ability to annex to abutting municipalities. An exact number was not known.
Paul Beere concurred a lot of debate is going into the issue of whether the Town should allow three or five acre average densities (per housing unit) for new land divisions. If these lands are annexed to a City or Village that allows 1/4 acre lots, that is how the land will be developed.
Bill Weidert stated his feeling that Rochester needs commercial development in order to offset property taxes on the homeowners. He feels a natural place for this development is along the STH 36 corridor, but the Town may have difficulty installing the infrastructure (i.e. sewer and water districts) without some of the economic development tools, like TIF districts, that are afforded to Villages and not Towns. Commercial development will need a water district because of sprinkler system needs. He felt it unfortunate that the Town of Rochester could not retain Runzheimer because it could not offer a TIF district. He feels Rochester needs to get these things done; that Rochester should try to control its own destiny and not let someone else do it for them.
Consensus of the Joint Boards was to choose a version of question number one, as applicable to each municipality, as it was felt this was the simplest, most direct language.
Process and content of information to educate residents on the referendum question
Through group discussion, the following points were identified for inclusion in educational materials:
Financial:
Ordinances/ Rights of Land Owners
Development
General
If consolidation is achieved, Board members agreed they would like to petition the U.S. Postal Service for rural delivery out of the Rochester Post Office again.
The Clerk is to prepare an informational flyer for the referendum question which addresses these points, and questions compiled by the Town Plan Commission, for review by Joint Boards on February 23rd. A follow up meeting will be scheduled for March 10th as necessary and a public information meeting scheduled March 24th at 7:00 p.m. to field questions. April 5th is the election.
Village Board Action: Dean moved, 2nd by Judy to place an appropriate version of question number one, slated towards Village voters, on an advisory referendum ballot for the April 5, 2005 election. Motion carried.
Town Board action: Mike moved, 2nd by Paul to place question number on an advisory referendum ballot for the April 5, 2005 election. Motion carried.
Proposal to share law enforcement contract costs in 2006
Mike Weinkauf identified law enforcement as an area where he feels Town and Village should try to share services regardless of consolidation. He expressed his appreciation that Town and Village are able to contract services with Racine County to supplement 24 hour coverage already provided by the Sheriff’s Department. The additional presence helps. However, he noted the Town of Rochester currently finances one full-time contract officer which spends a lot of time in the Village due to the location of the Municipal Building and his need to drive through the Village to get to other parts of the Town. In previous communications, the Village Board indicated they would consider sharing costs and services of one full time officer for the 2006 contract. Mike reported that contract terms require notice by June 1 if changes are to be made for 2006.
Chris Denman reported talking to Deputy Prochaska about some of the details that would need to be worked out if sharing one full-time law enforcement contract/ officer. He noted any officer assigned to the contract would need to deal with dual ordinances. Procedurally, things may be different for Town and Village. Chris indicated he does not object to sharing the contract, but feels it would be best to assign a committee to go through both sets of ordinances to create uniformity so that confusion is less likely on key issues any Deputy would have to enforce. Atty. Hotvedt indicated the Town could adopt a bond schedule similar to Village’s to help alleviate confusion. One contract issue that would need to be worked out for Village is parking enforcement; third-shift patrol currently serves some of the Village’s contract hours in order to enforce overnight parking restrictions. It was unclear how this would be handled under a shared full-time contract position.
One issue identified as a plus to a shared contract was the ability of one officer to patrol the bike trail which runs through both municipalities.
Consensus of the Boards was that if the arrangement is to be pursued, cost sharing should be kept simple in a 75%/ 25% formula (Town/ Village). The officer would also not be required to keep separate logs of time spent in Village and Town as it was felt that he/she would be here to serve Rochester wherever the need presented itself while on duty.
Denman indicated the Village would discuss the concept further at its February meeting.
Gary Beck moved, 2nd by Dennis Saunders to adjourn at 8:25 p.m. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Novy, CMC Clerk-Treasurer Town and Village of Rochester
February 14, 2005 Town Board Meeting 7:30 p.m.
Meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. with Gary Beck, Paul Beere, and Mike Weinkauf present. Chris Birkett , Public Works Supervisor, Sandi Swan Deputy Clerk-Treasurer and Betty Novy Clerk-Treasurer were also present.
Moved by Weinkauf, 2nd by Beere to Approve the January 10, 2005 Minutes. Motion carried.
Moved by Beck, 2nd by Beere to approve the February disbursements as follows. Motion carried.
Town General Fund Disbursements
February 14, 2005 Town Board Meeting 7:30 p.m.
Sewer Utility District #1 Disbursements
Treasurers Report was read as follows:
Public Works Report Chris Birkett gave his report to the board.
Honey Lake Rd. He reported that a caution 35MPH is ready to be installed approximately 500 feet from the first turn on Honey Lake Rd.
February 14, 2005 Town Board Meeting 7:30 p.m.
Birkett said he had Arbor Images cut the brush on the corner of Academy Rd. and Honey Lake Rd. He received a verbal quote of $100. Birkett asked the board if he could call Arbor Images for small jobs ($100 or less) and get quotes on jobs over $100. The Board agreed that any thing over $500 he should get approval from the board.
Birkett reported having a mudslide on the west bank of N. Honey Lake Rd. approximately 15’ x 15’ came down on to the road on February 14, 2005. He had the County equipment clean it up and then they placed four straw bales with steel posts above the curb.
Potholes are being filled as time allows.
Birkett stated he has concerns about N. River Rd. by the Lift Station. He would like the board to take a look at it. The Board stated that N. River Rd. is scheduled for improvements in 2006.
Birkett reported that he and Novy met with the engineer of Crispell-Snyder at the N. River Rd. Lift Station. He feels that he now has a fair working knowledge of how to handle problems that may arise. He is working on writing a protocol of scheduled maintenance and for exercising the generator.
Birkett reported on 3 complaints as follows: 1.) Water in yard on the corner of Oak and Mather St.; owner has the lowest lot, resident is also upset about stones from seal coating that have been pushed into his yard from the snow plows. 2.) Culvert in driveway on the Hazelow farm has a hole in it and the gravel is scoured away. Water is cutting way the bank by the road. Birkett asked if the culvert is the Town’s responsibility or is it the property owner’s. The Board said it is the property owner’s responsibility to take care of. 3.) Poor snow plowing on Oak St. Birkett looked it over and decided homeowner had pushed driveway snow into the road. He had Gunderson clean it up.
Sheriffs Department
Deputy Prochaska reported the following statistics for January: Six accidents; eight speeding citations, eight traffic citations and thirty two warnings were issued. Complaint statistics were as follows: Nineteen complaints originated through calls directly to the Sheriff’s Department; Deputy Prochaska assisted with twenty-four additional complaints, performed follow up on three and originated twenty-one on his own. He reported 20 work days, 159 hours and 2044 miles driven.
Deputy Prochaska said the over all call volume is the same as last year. He is starting to graph and pinpoint reportable and non-reportable accidents so he can identify problem areas. He is categorizing them as PD = Property Damage and PI = Personal Injury. Beck asked if most of the property damaged is caused by the snow. Deputy Prochaska said that most of them occur from the snow. He said that deer vs. car accidents cause a lot of property damage as well. Beck and Beere both stated that they like the report and thought it was a good idea.
Deputy Prochaska said he heard a startling statistic about Rochester that he has to have confirmed. He heard that the Flight for Life helicopter was called to the Rochester area 28 times last year which was reported as being the highest in the state.
Jurisdictional Transfers regarding rerouting CTH “W”; Glenn Lampark and Cecil Mehring, Racine County Public Works
Lampark spoke to the board about the rerouting of CTH “W” to Ela Ave. down Buena Park Rd. to Hwy. 20. He stated that the Village of Waterford would take jurisdiction over Jefferson St. which is currently also know as CTH “W”. The Village of Waterford can then ban truck traffic on Jefferson which is becoming more residential. Racine County is requesting that the Town of Rochester concur with the rerouting.
Racine County would take full jurisdiction over the newly routed streets. They would then be responsible for speed limits, improvements, etc. Weinkauf stated that he was concerned that Buena Park Rd. is too narrow. Lampark said the County recognizes that the road needs work but nothing that is too expensive and can be improved over time.
Lampark said in exchange for the rerouting, the County would like the Town to consider taking over Maple Rd. which is considered a Rustic Road. He said it is not a requirement but would like the town to consider it.
Beck asked if the Town would have to pass a resolution. Lampark said they would just need to copy the resolution the County provided. Beck said the Town would send a copy of the resolution to the Town attorney to look over and draft up a proper resolution to be put on next month’s agenda.
Cost sharing proposal for electrical service to Case Eagle Park Diamonds; Glen Lampark, Racine County Public Works
Lampark addressed the Board with drawings of a restroom constructed for Case Eagle Park. Lampark said the the building was approved by the Racine County Board as well as the budget for the building.
Cecil Mehring went over the design of the rest room for the Board. The building will have a small storage area with a large overhang incase of inclement weather. The building also has an area that can possibly be used for concessions. The building is centrally located in the park. The County is hoping to put the building out to bid within 2 months. Beere asked if it would be a 4 season building. Lampark noted that it would be available for use in the spring, summer and fall.
The building needs electric. The County hired an electrical engineer consultant to determine what types of power requirements are needed for both the building and the Town’s future plans to light the baseball diamonds. The County would like the Town to consider contributing $15,000 toward the electrical facilities. Lampark said electrical costs could be as high as $19,000, however, the Town share would not exceed $15,000. Motion made by Beere, 2nd by Weinkauf to contribute $15,000 towards the electric needed in the park. Motion carried.
Engineering proposals for 2005 road projects
John Tierney stated he wanted to note a correction from the January 10, 2005 minutes. The minutes read that his rate is $98.00 an hour, however, his actual rate is $100.00.
Weinkauf stated he is very disappointed with the current town engineer. He feels that they do not represent best interests of the town. Beere agreed with Weinkauf. Beck asked Tierney if he would attend Town meetings. Tierney said he would.
Motion made by Weinkauf, 2nd by Beere to aquire Baxter Woodman Services for the 2005 Street Projects as well as plan review services. Motion carried.
Beck noted he would like Tierney to take a look at N. River Rd. for a short term fix.
Racine County Hazard Mitigation Plan
Beck recommended the Town adopt the Racine County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Motion made by Beck, 2nd by Weinkauf to adopt the Racine County Hazard Mitigation Plan. Motion carried.
Agreement to provide services and materials for house numbering system: Lange Enterprises
Weinkauf said he wanted to discuss the possibilities of the Town doing the installation of the numbering signs. Weinkauf asked Birkett, Town Public Works Supervisor, if he has the capabilities and the materials to do the installation.
Birkett said he could do the job. Plus, he said he has a good knowledge of working with digger’s hotline. He stated that digger’s hotline takes full liability if a gas or electrical line were to be hit based on their markings. Birkett said it would probably take him approximately 6-8 weeks to complete the job. He thought he could probably save the Town approximately $2,000.
Beck said the Town needs to find out if material prices from Lange Enterprises would change if they did not perform the installation. Clerk is to check on this and report back in March.
Deputy Prochaska asked if the Town would be passing a new ordinance in regards to the signs. He said there should probably be a penalty for sign removal. Beck said John Hodtvedt, Town attorney should take a look at the Town of Raymond’s ordinance and draw up an ordinance for the Town.
A resident from the audience asked if an attorney is needed, if the Town were to just copy the Town of Raymond ordinance. Beck said the attorney would still have to review it.
Sanitary sewer concerns regarding Fox River Prairie Subdivision: James Deluca Building Inspector
Novy said that Deluca was unable to attend the meeting. However, he did convey his concerns about the sewer lines in the Fox River Prairie Subdivision.
He has concerns that there is gravel in the lines and he suggests the Town have someone televise or jet the lines. Beck suggested that the lines be televised first. Tierney stated that if the Developer still has money in the letter of credit, the Town may be able use that.
Beck instructed Clerk to get a cost estimate from Visu-Sewer to televise the lines.
Property Insurance Update
Novy said she sat down with Jim Steffens from Steffens Insurance. Steffens said the Town should get new appraisals on the buildings. Novy wanted a suggestion from the board as to what direction to take in regards to Steffens suggestion.
Novy said the Town insurance covers the Town Hall and the Fire Department and the Village insurance covers the Library. A suggestion was made to have the Town assessor do the appraisals. Beck suggests that the Town get a package bid for all of the buildings and discuss at the Joint meeting with the Village on February 23, 2005.
Consideration to change Board meeting time
Motion made by Beck, 2nd by Beere to change the meeting time to 7:00 p.m. Motion carried
Period for Public Comment. There were none.
Motion made by Beere, 2nd by Weinkauf to adjourn at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted by,
Sandi Swan Deputy-Clerk
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||