►
From YouTube: City Council Meeting - 01-04-2021
Description
City Council Meeting - 01-04-2021
B
Heavenly
father,
we
come
to
you
today
asking
for
your
guidance,
wisdom
and
support.
As
we
begin,
this
meeting
help
us
to
engage
in
meaningful
discussion,
allowing
us
to
grow
closer
as
a
group
and
nurture
the
bonds
of
community
fill
us
with
your
grace,
o
lord,
as
we
make
decisions
that
affect
our
that
affect
our
community
and
continue
to
remind
us
that
all
that
we
do
here
today.
All
that
we
accomplish
is
for
the
pursuit
of
the
truth,
for
the
greater
glory
of
you
and
for
the
service
of
humanity.
A
C
E
D
E
C
A
All
right,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
aye.
All
those
opposed
signify
by
saying
nay
motion,
carries
item.
Six
is
next:
that's
the
public
comment
period
and
that's
the
time
set
aside
for
anyone
who
would
like
to
make
a
public
comment
to
step
forward
and
do
so,
whether
in
person
or
online,
please
state
your
name
into
the
microphone
or
into
the
phone
for
the
record,
and
if
your
comment
is
related
to
an
agenda
item,
please
wait
for
that
agenda
item.
A
Seeing
none
we
will
move
on,
and
I
note
that
we
do
have
someone
in
the
audience
for
one
of
our
council
items.
So
I
think
I
will
move
that
item,
which
is
f
up
to
the
top
of
the
agenda
and
with
that
change,
is
there
a
motion
for
approval
motion
by
lalump
and
a
second
by
vilhauer
or
redempsky,
lollam
and
rademski?
F
A
A
1-19A-11.11
and
based
upon
the
city
council's
written
determination
that
considering
all
relevant
factors,
there
is
no
feasible
and
prudent
alternative
to
the
proposed
project,
and
the
proposed
project
includes
all
possible
planning
to
minimize
harm
to
the
historic
district
property.
As
identified
in
the
case
report.
H
Okay,
I
will
try
to
share
my
screen
here,
there's
quite
a
bit
of
information.
We
could
talk
through
on
this
subject
and
I
want
to
try
to
make
this
as
packaged
as
I
can
regarding
the
the
details
of
the
circumstances
on
why
the
council
would
be
entertaining
a
building.
Permit
really,
essentially,
where
this
starts
off
is
that
we
have
an
established
historic
district
here
in
watertown
and
that's
the
screen.
I'm
sharing
right
now
that
shows
a
map
of
the
downtown
historic
district
that
was
established
back
in
the
1980s.
H
We
have
the
the
nomination
to
this
the
national
park
service
that
this
district
gets
registered
on
to
enter
files
and
I've
reviewed
that
and
and
have
been
in
contact
with
chippewa
as
well
regarding
this
particular
project.
But
I
just
wanted
to
provide
some
context
here
that
you
know
part
of
this
program.
H
It
is
the
city's
responsibility
to
then
forward
that
application
to
chippewa
the
state
historic
preservation
office,
and
they
then
review
it
to
look
through
it
for
a
whole
litany
of
things
and
see
how
the
project
fits
into
the
historic
district
once
they're
done.
With
that
review,
they
can
do
a
couple
things:
they
can
request
more
information
from
the
city
and
the
applicant
and
that's
exactly
what
they
did
in
this
case.
H
The
state
statute
actually
outlines
this
process
for
us
as
referenced
on
this
form
here
and
once
the
permit's
been
submitted
to
shippo,
they
can
request
a
case
report
and
that's
the
product
step
in
the
process.
I
was
at
my
summary
that
case
report
information,
then
that
the
city
and
the
applicant
together,
put
a
symbol
and
and
submit
back
to
schiphol,
then
again
gets
reviewed
and
shipped
then
makes
a
final
makes.
Any
final
comments
to
the
city
and
those
comments
can
vary.
H
Now,
in
this
case,
this
is
the
finding
that
they
made.
It
is
their
determination
that
the
project
will
damage
destroyer,
encroach
upon
historic
property.
So
that's
then,
what
puts
the
next
decision
into
the
council's
hands
and
why
this
action
is
before
the
council
tonight
and
I'll
just
read
this
here.
This
section
of
this
flow
chart.
If
chippewa
determines
the
project,
will
damage
destroyer,
encroach
upon
historic
property?
H
The
city
cannot
issue
the
permit
until
it
has
made
written
determination
based
upon
the
consideration
of
all
relevant
factors
that
there
are
no
feasible
and
prudent
alternatives,
and
that
the
program
includes
all
possible
planning
to
minimize
harm
to
the
historic
property
resulting
from
such
a
case
or
project
or
use,
and
so
essentially
the
the
council
is
tasked
with
just
that
tonight.
Chippo's
letter,
let
me
pull
that
up,
because
it
provides
some
good
detailed
information,
I
think,
is
relevant
for
the
council's
consideration.
H
H
Now
the
council
has
that
latitude
to
make
the
decision
to
issue
this
permit
and
make
findings
as
to
why
we
are
issuing
it,
and
I
believe
we've
got
a
couple
talking
points
and
I
know
I
believe
the
applicants
in
the
room
tonight.
Maybe
they
could
speak
to
that
as
well,
but
shippo's
stance
was
that
they
didn't
feel
that
alternatives
to
this
project
have
not
been
adequately
considered
and
should
be
explored
further.
H
H
So
those
are
three
financial
benefits
that
the
properties
within
this
district
can
can
leverage
and
take
advantage
of
and
have
use
for
them
and
have
had
the
ability
to
utilize
since
those
those
funding
options
have
been
put
in
place.
So
with
all
that
being
said,
I've
got,
of
course,
city
attorneys
online
with
us
today.
G
H
Yes,
that
is
correct,
councilman
bill,
howard
and
matt.
Maybe
you
want
to
expand
on
that
a
little
bit.
I
would
say
that
your
action
according
to
the
statute
and
how
it's
laid
out
we
are
supposed
to.
If
you
were
to
vote
for
this
and
were
to
pass,
we
were
supposed
to
then
identify
how
the
the
feasible
and
prudent
alternatives
were
exhausted.
I
Thanks
keith,
I
was
going
to
emphasize
the
same
thing
you
just
did.
Yes,
it
is
the
accountant's
authority
to
issue
the
permit
after
the
statutory
requirements
have
been
met
and,
according
to
the
recent
report
from
shippo,
they
do
not
believe
that
feasible
and
prudent
alternatives
have
been
explored.
J
If
you
do
make
improvements
to
your
building,
which
have
you
know
if
anything's
over
30,
000
or
more
assessed
value,
there
already
is
a
five-year,
no
tax
waived
on
your
improvements
so
like
in
this
case,
this
project
would
qualify
for
that
since
there's
more
than
thirty
thousand
of
assessed
improvements
planned.
So
I
don't
see
that
being
being
that
big
of
issue,
I
think
grants
sound
good
on
paper
and
I'm
not
saying
that
they
wouldn't
be
beneficial,
but
you
know
with
our
facade
improvement
program,
zero
interest
loan.
J
You
know
we
have
up
to
20
000
available
per
project,
so
I
think
that
would
potentially
replace
a
six
thousand
dollar
grant.
That,
of
course
takes
time
and
a
lot
of
those
are
competitive.
So
you
go
through
this
process,
you
don't
know
if
you'll
get
it
and
then
the
third
one.
I
don't
know
what
the
other
third
issue
was.
The
20.
J
Yeah,
potentially,
but
still
I'd
like
to,
if
you
haven't,
had
a
chance
to
watch
the
board
of
adjustment
meeting,
I'd
like
to
just
bring
everybody
up
to
speed
on
how
we're
here,
why
mindy's,
here
what
we
have
going
on?
So
you
know
somebody
asked
what's
the
dog
in
the
fight
for
the
development
company.
J
Obviously,
as
you
know,
as
a
city
of
charette's
and
other
planning
has
taken
place,
there
was
an
emphasis
on
downtown
redevelopment,
getting
things
downtown
and
we've
been
doing
a
really
good
job
at
that.
I
think
if
you
go
back
two
years
ago,
when
the
development
company
started
purchasing
buildings
on
kemp
avenue,
taking
the
risk,
remodeling
leasing
them
up,
that's
that's
reason
number
one
why
people
are
afraid
to
get
in
downtown
buildings.
Is
they
don't
know
the
cost?
J
So
we
started
chipping
away
at
some
of
this
stuff
and
of
course
now
you,
you
roll
into
new
construction
with
the
lofts
and
other
things
that
are
multi-million
dollar
projects
that
are
helping
keep
businesses
like
mindy's
downtown
that
employ
people,
and
now
the
locals
are
reinvesting
back
into
their
businesses
they
have
in
the
past.
So
this
is
kind
of
just
another
go
around
of
people
investing
in
their
businesses
downtown,
which
is
what
we
want
the
thing
about
the
shippo
process.
J
That
really
makes
it
tough
is
all
of
these
things,
cost
time
and
money
projects,
time
projects
money
trying
to
get
the
buildings
to
look
like
they
have
been
historically
just
not
feasible,
as
it
maybe
was
20
30
years
ago,
with
trying
to
bring
everything
up
to
speed.
So
I'm
afraid
that
if,
if
we're
going
to
go
down
this
route,
that
essentially
any
project
going
forward
meeting,
all
the
shippo
guidelines
will
be
very
difficult
and
I
think
we'll
see
buildings
stay
in
their
current
state.
As
I
know,
I've
seen
mindy's
proposals.
J
I've
seen
other
projects
that
when
they
try
to
keep
historic
preservation,
it
just
doesn't
work
so
then
they
walk
away,
and
then
you
get
with
what
we've
had
for
a
long
time.
So
just
want
everybody
to
keep
that
in
mind
and
right
or
wrong.
I
think
that
local
control
is
number
one.
I
think
we
know
what's
best
for
our
city.
I
think
we
have
a
good
ordinance
in
place.
Of
course,
there
was
a
slight
variance
requested
on
this
project,
so
I
just
want
to
keep
that
in
mind
that
we're
working
really
hard
on
downtown.
J
G
Just
one
I
get,
I
guess
probably
more
of
a
comment
that
a
question
at
this
point
mayor
is
that
I
really
took
exception
in
chippo's
letter.
I'm
just
going
to
read
part
of
it.
The
watertown
commercial,
historic
disc,
already
contains
incompatible
infill
in
the
form
of
the
lofts
apartments.
I
mean
that
that
really
got
under
my
burr.
Under
my
saddle
I
see
you're
nodding
that
chris
I
mean
what
they
expect
us
to
do.
Keep
a
burned
out
hole
in
the
ground.
For
that
probably
you
know.
Instead,
we
rebuilt
that
part.
G
J
Yeah,
so
I
would
I
agree
with
you
glenn.
I
lost
a
lot
of
respect
for
the
shipper
process
with
some
of
those
comments
and
some
of
the
comments
I've
heard
in
the
past
about
that,
where
they
they
show
up
after
the
building's
complete
and
and
threaten
to
make
them
take
it
down
we're
working
with
our
state
legislators
on
that
they'll
have
a
copy
of
the
letter.
J
J
F
F
I
personally
feel
that
we
as
community
know,
what's
best
what
is
going
to
be
the
best
return
on
it.
We
have
a
local
business
owner
that
is
looking
to
invest
into
our
downtown
purchase
couple
buildings
next
to
it,
looking
to
expand
her
business
and
hopefully
to
employ
more.
You
know
to
our
downtown
it
yeah
as
a
former
downtown
building
owner.
I
understand
the
process
how
long
it
takes.
I
looked
in
the
deadwood
grant
as
well.
F
The
requirements
that
they
had
frankly
are,
if
you're,
a
small
business
owner,
it's
unfeasible
to
try
to
come
up
with
the
money
to
put
full
wood
windows
and
full
wood
doors.
It
is,
it
is
extremely
expensive
and
for
the
price
of
the
buildings
of
what
their
value
is,
it
didn't
make
sense
to
put
more
into
the
renovation
than
what
some
of
the
buildings
cost.
So
it
does
not
make
a
lot
of
sense.
F
To
me
that
we're
going
to
going
to
sit
there
and
say
that,
well,
you
have
to
go
with
this
item
because
that's
the
historic
accuracy
now
they
talked
about
buildings
that
are
historical
or
frankly,
they're,
built
during
a
historic
time
frame.
Now,
whether
or
not
they're
an
actual
historic
building,
you
know
you
could
argue
that
either
way,
but
those
buildings
were
not
the
gas,
they
were
not
the
the
granite
building
the
longworth
building
on
the
corner.
Those
are
those
are
historical
buildings.
I
mean:
if
we're
really
going
to
talk
about,
they
never
should
tore
down.
F
You
know
the
hotel
where
wells
fargo
is.
I
mean
those
are
the
things
that
those
are
historic
buildings
now
these
are
buildings
that
happen
to
be
built
during
a
historic
time
frame,
but
that
does
not
mean
that
they're
historic
buildings
right.
So
I
guess
for
me
personally,
I
would
rather
have
our
control
over
it
have
a
chance
to
look
over
the
design
plans
and
what
their
plan
is
to
go
forward
now
is
drive
it.
You
know
going
to
match
the
historic.
F
J
Thanks
adam
and
a
couple
things
to
hit
on
that
you
that
you're
kind
of
going
down
is
you
know
one
of
the.
The
things
that
we
want
to
have
happen
with
downtown
was
that
other
people
would
start
now
contributing
and
investing
and
again
I'm
not
saying
that
people
haven't
I'm
just
saying.
Hopefully
it
spurred
on
another
round
of
investment
for
people.
So
when
you
bring
in
the
big
projects,
people
are
like,
oh
well,
this
is
really
cool
and
I
think
one
of
mindy's
first
emails
to
me
was
I
really
like.
J
What's
happening
downtown,
you
know,
and
I
know
one
time
potentially
looking
to
leave
downtown.
Then
you
get
people
like
myself
and
other
downtown
folks
that
want
her
to
stay
downtown
so
again
we're
here
kind
of
helping
that,
because
we
wanted
that
to
happen.
So
I
think
the
plan
that
we
all
wanted
is
now
taking
shape
you're,
seeing
more
reinvestment,
you've
seen
buildings
that
have
been
vacant
become
full
and
get
fixed
up.
So.
H
Yeah
mayor,
thank
you.
I
just
I
could
add
some
context
to
that
loss
reference.
I
I
really
don't
I
I
want
to
take
the
ownership
for
why
that's
mentioned
in
that
letter.
Shippo
is
really
really
alls.
They're
doing
there
is
identifying
that
particular
project
because
it
was
referenced
in
the
case
report
as
an
example
of
another
project
in
town
similar
to
this
one,
where
buildings
are
being
renovated
or
remodeled
and
their
their
front
facade
is
going
to
look
a
lot
different
than
it
than
it
was
now.
H
The
loss
is
different
because
it
was
a
full
reconstruct,
but
that
that
project
was
not
reviewed
by
shipple
and
again
I'll.
Take
ownership
of
that.
Because
on
my
watch
there
was
transition
and
staff
between
building
officials
and
our
newly
revamped
community
development
manager
position
and
that
particular
project
did
not
get
sent
off
to
chippewa,
and
so
that's
why
it
was,
after
the
matter
that
they
came
to
us
and
said
hey
what
happened
here
with
the
lofts,
and
it
was
a
big
oops
on
our
part.
H
We
signed
up
to
be
in
or
be
part
of
this,
the
national
park
service,
historic
property
register
and
we
helped
define
the
boundary
what
that
included,
and
we,
as
a
community
at
one
point
said
we
want
to
make
sure
that
we
preserve
the
historic
integrity
of
this
area
of
our
town
and
so
it
I
don't
want
to
necessarily
look
at
it.
As
this
is
big
brother
telling
us
what
we
need
to
do,
they
are
simply
helping
us
facilitate
what
we
signed
up
to
have
done
in
our
community.
H
H
We
have
that
authority
to
within
reason,
approve
things
like
this
and
move
in
a
direction
that
maybe
would
look
different
than
what
chippewa
would
expect
of
us,
but
because
we're
part
of
this
program
and
I'd
again
defer
to
math
that
does
open
us
up
for
certain
liabilities
to
other
contributing
members
within
this
historic
district
other,
and
we
asked
the
question
who
could
be
opposed
to
this?
I
don't
know
you
know
today.
Maybe
not
many
folks
are,
but
I
would
just
keep
caution
the
council
at
some
point
down
the
road.
H
One
of
these
historic
property
owners
could
raise
their
hand
and
voice
question
as
to
the
decisions
we
made,
that
compromise
their
funding
abilities
and
their
involvement,
membership
in
the
historic
preservation
program,
and
so
really
that's
that's.
What
we're
trying
to
do
with
staff
is
just
make
sure
that
we're
making
well-informed
decisions
and
dotting
all
the
I's
crossing
all
the
t's
as
we
go
here.
C
K
B
That's
correct:
they
would
have
been
fit
into
one
of
two
categories.
They
would
have
been
called
contributing
structures
or
non-contributing
structures,
and
we
still
do
have
those
two
categories
today
and
the
property
located
at
number.
Nine
south
broadway
is
considered
contributing,
whereas
11
and
13
are
considered
non-contributing
resources
within
the
district.
B
K
Okay,
I
guess
the
way
I
see
it
is
it's
kind
of
it's
kind
of
a
little
bit
backwards
to
where
you're
gonna
punish
an
investor.
Now
it's
willing
to
invest
in
this,
you
know
community
and
expand
their
business
to
make
them
have
to
pony
up
more
money
just
to
make
it
look
like
it's.
You
know
older
when
the
two
buildings
in
question
here
you
know
are
the
three
buildings.
K
I
guess
to
me
I
I
would
be
in
favor
of
moving
forward
with
you
know
the
developer
and
making
it
look
like
you
know
the
proposal,
the
way
it
should
be-
and
I
I've
looked
at
the
figures
of
what
the
cost
to
reduce
some
of
the
score
that
were
provided
by
the
developer
here,
and
I
just
don't
see
how
any
there's
any
way
they
could
afford
to
do
that,
and
I
don't
know
what
schiphol
wants
for
due
diligence.
You
know
how
much
she
has
to
spend
on
an
architect
to
try
and
comply
with
this.
K
F
F
I
don't
want
to
to
minimize
that
at
all,
as
far
as
what
they've
done-
and
I
I
think
that
this
is
one
of
those
that
you
know
once
we're
getting
through
the
steps
and
we've
we've
identified
the
areas
of
concern
from
us
as
a
community
that
I
think
we
can
move
forward
with
this
and
not
you
know
not
hold
up
this
process
anymore.
So.
E
It
kind
of
feels
that
the
day
that
we
created
the
overlay
district
was
the
day
that
we
kind
of
were
okay
with
taking
some
of
this
into
our
own
hands
and
governing
ourselves
with
this.
Looking
at
some
of
the
discrepancy
within
that
there's
just
some
minor
language
stuff,
but
realistically
the
ultimate
goal
of
that
overlay
district
was
just
to
have
quality
improvements
when
they
happened,
selectivity
and
what
materials
were
used
to
update
these
buildings.
When
those
times
came,
I
feel
that
mindy's
done
a
good
job
of
choosing
those
materials
to
still
be
respectful.
E
Of
that
I
mean
it's
along
the
same
lines
that
the
lofts
use
for
their
materials
as
well.
I
agree
a
lot
with
what
councilman
lallan
is
saying
with
you
know
this:
isn't
the
medical
arts
building
this?
Isn't
the
old
post
office?
This
isn't
you
know
the
first
national
bank,
it's
not
those
big
iconic
buildings
being
changed
and
those
are
the
major
historic
ones
they
feel
like
in
our
downtown
district.
E
I
do
feel
that
this
is
going
the
correct
process
coming
to
a
discussion
with
the
council.
I
think
that's
important
so
that
we
can
weigh
in
and
determine
if
we're
staying,
historically
comfortable
or,
if
we're
preserving,
that
aesthetic
that
we
want
for
our
downtown.
I
think,
in
this
scenario,
we're
not
taken
away
from
anything
right
now.
By
approving
this,
I
think
we're
facilitating
some
really
healthy
growth
for
our
downtown.
By
approving
this.
L
L
And-
and
I
guess
I'm
and
I'm
not
from
watertown,
I
frequent
watertown
a
lot
and
I've
always
loved
the
old
downtown,
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
shame
to
change
the
fast
shade
where
it
is
incompatible
with
the
with
the
whole
downtown
district
on
the
old
buildings
are
a
non-renewable
resource
and
they
need
to
be
preserved.
For
I
don't
know
the
next
generation
I
would.
L
I
would
love
to
see
my
kids
be
able
to
appreciate
that
and
with
the
current
proposal
I
think
that
would
damage
the
feel
of
the
whole
downtown.
You're
gonna
put
a
big
red
banner
and
you
just
gotta.
I
mean
if
you
I
understand
the
with.
I
understand
the
investment
they've
made
in
the
building,
but
that's
just
what
you
do.
If
you
want
to
live
in
an
old
farmhouse,
you
go
buy
one
and
you
you
do
what
you
need
to
do,
not
change
the
look
of
it.
L
F
B
B
B
If
you
look
around
downtown
yes,
there
have
been
some
buildings
have
been
rehabilitated
or
remodeled,
but
in
essence,
like
chris
shilkin
said
earlier,
a
lot
of
them
because
the
cost
is
so
is
so
intrusive.
It
just
goes
without
the
repairs
being
done
and
they
slowly
deteriorate
to
nothing
and
that's
what
you
see
in
some
of
these
downtowns.
B
B
Mindy,
maybe
if,
if
you
wouldn't
mind
speaking,
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions
for
you,
so
you've
obviously
invested
in
downtown
watertown
with
the
purchase
of
these
three
buildings.
Currently
I
believe
you
occupy
one
of
them
in
an
email
you
did
send
us.
There
was
a
rendition
of
of
what
the
facade
would
look
like.
B
Our
building
right
now
that
we're
in
is
about
110
years
old.
I
think,
and
we
purchased,
that
building
16
years
ago,
right
after
we
purchased
that
building,
we
probably
put
40
000
into
the
facade
and
that
building
used
to
be
white
and
it
had
black
shutters
on
the
front
of
it,
and
we
actually
obtained
a
grant
from
the
south
dakota
historical
society
to
paint
that,
and
so
it's
kind
of
interesting
now
that
their
proposal
back
is.
B
We
should
take
the
paint
off
the
bricks,
but
we
did
do
that
about
16
years
ago
and
we
have
replaced
all
the
windows
in
the
whole
building
since
we've
done
then,
and
when
we've
we've
been
for
the
last
two
years
at
the
point
of
outgrowing,
our
building
that
we're
in
we
have
20
employees
crammed
in
that
small
building
that
we're
in
and
I
went
to
my
staff
and
we
looked
at
three
different
options.
We
looked
at
purchasing
the
sears
building
by
montgomery
furniture.
We
looked
at
doing
that
and
we
looked
at
staying
downtown.
B
B
I
think
that
would
have
been
a
way
better
option
for
us
to
split
into
three
different
communities
for
the
cost
and
the
headache
that
we're
going
to
have
involved
in
this
process
the
the
three
buildings
that
you
have
mindy
right
now,
if
I'm
looking
at
these
pictures
correctly,
two
of
them
maybe
have
some
70s
style
fronts
on
them
right
now.
So
it's
not
like
you're
taking
these
buildings,
these
magnificent
historical
buildings
and
erasing
it.
It
looks
like
there
was.
Maybe
some
updating
in
the
70s
and
you'd
actually
be
updating
that.
D
E
Well-
and
I
think
that's
the
big
focal
point
here-
I
mean
the
buildings
that
are
being
talked
about
are
not
buildings
that
were
in
great
historical
shape.
To
start
with,
I
mean
they've
already,
two
of
them
are
non-compliant
anyway,
with
the
historical
part
of
this
they're
non-conforming.
You
know,
and
they've
already
got
a
really
great
set
of
paint
on
it
and,
like
josh,
is
kind
of
getting
that.
It's
that
70s
look,
it's
not
like
like
if,
for
instance,
looking
at
what
we
have
in
the
attachment
attachment
six,
just
the
street
view
of
it.
E
I
mean
we're
not
taking
away
from
the
town
players
building
where
it
does
have
that
extremely
ornate
brickwork
going
on
across
the
top.
It's
not
touching
that
it.
These
buildings
are
much
more
simple
than
that
them
already
having
the
paint
on
them
before
I
think,
already
kind
of
took
them
out
of
their
historic
value
in
a
lot
of
ways.
This
is
giving
a
facelift
to
three
sets
of
buildings
that
would
otherwise
have
you
know
just
stayed
as
they
were
and-
and
I
think
that's
just
a
simple
truth.
E
The
ledger's
building,
of
course,
is
the
best
looking
out
of
all
of
them
and
is
the
one
that
is
in
that
historic
designation,
but
I
just
I
I
still
feel
like
we
can
govern
ourselves
in
a
municipal
manner.
That
would
make
sense
with
this
as
long
as
we
still
feel
good
on
our
side
of
things
just
as
long
as
we
keep
our
integrity
with
it.
I
I
just
still
feel
like
this
is
a
fine
direction
to
go,
and
it
seems
to
feel
like
that
in
this
discussion
anyway,.
E
Yeah,
sorry,
I
was
at
the
rec
center
listening
to
this
on
facebook,
so
I
mike
lawrence,
I
own
harry's.
I
bought
a
building
five
years
ago
downtown
and
I
had
to
deal
with
this
as
well
and-
and
I
was
told
when
I
bought
my
building,
that
it
had
received
some
grants
and
they
did
some
things
that
to
keep
it
in
the
historic
and
and
now
you
look
at
those
things,
I
have
wood
doors
that
are
all
rotten.
E
I
have
wood
windows
up
at
the
front
that
are
all
rotten
that
need
to
be
replaced
if
they
would
have
put
in
an
aluminum
door.
I
wouldn't
have
to
go
back
and
do
this
again.
You
know
and
it's
something
that
I
don't
want
to
go
back
and
put
in
another
wood
door.
If
you
don't
lacquer
that
thing
every
three
or
four
years,
you
know
all
of
a
sudden,
your
your
expenses
go
up.
When
I
built
my
patio,
I
was
told
that
that
most
likely
would
not
pass
shippo.
So
what
do
I
do?
E
I
had
to
pay
extra
money
to
put
extra
footings
in
so
it
wasn't
attached
to
my
building.
So
then,
then,
it's
okay!
If
it's
not
attached
to
your
building,
so
then
I
could
build
my
structure,
but
I
just
think
if
we're
going
to
ask
people
to
oh
and
the
wood
windows,
they
wanted
me
to
do
wood
windows
and
they
actually
sent
me
a
similar
letter.
E
That
said,
you're
non-compliant
and
we
want
we'd
like
you
to
do
wood
windows,
but
it
just
again
I'm
not
going
to
put
wood
windows
in
because
I
have
wood
windows
and
some
of
them
now
still
and
I
have
to
replace
them.
So
I
think,
if
we're
going
to
ask
people
to
come
in
and
spend
money
downtown
and
and
the
option
of
doing
it
a
lot
cheaper
and
more
efficiently
somewhere
else
I
mean
there's
some
people
that
are
are
willing
to
do
that.
E
But
it's
I
didn't
do
it
and
I
don't
think
I
could
have
afforded
to
do
the
projects
that
I
did.
If
I
had
to
go
through
all
that
and
one
of
them
wouldn't
get
passed
and
that
patio
I
mean,
I
I
think
it's
a
pretty
cool
cool
patio,
so
I
mean
there's
a
lot
of
different
things.
I
think
there's.
Hopefully,
you
know
they
get
some
way
to
to
find
a
happy
meeting
with
shippo
or
or
take
the
community
in
a
different
direction,
but
it's
just
costing
us
time,
money
and
and
really
maybe
opportunity.
E
I
mean
you,
you
look
at
that.
I'd
love
to
see
some
bigger
companies
like
mindy
she's,
gonna,
she's
gonna
bring
more
employees.
They
come
into
my
restaurant
once
or
twice
a
week.
At
least
you
know
somebody
from
her
office
and
it's
just
that's
what
we
need
down
there
and
if
we
don't,
if
we
hinder
development
to
the
point
where
people
go
elsewhere,
it's
it's
not
good
for
downtown
in
general
as
well.
So
I
guess
there's
probably
have
to
be
a
happy
medium.
I
like
what
michael
said
about
the
the
urban
urban
district.
A
All
right
I'll
look
for
action,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
aye.
Those
opposed
signify
by
saying
nay
motion
carries
thank
you
for
coming
folks.
Okay.
The
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
a
approval
of
permanent
parking,
easement
agreement
with
the
lofts
llc,
a
motion
by
vilhauer
and
a
second
by
bueller
I'll,
ask
matt
roby
the
city
attorney
to
explain
this
one
to
us.
I
Pursuant
to
that
development
agreement,
it
gives
the
city
perpetual
right
to
allow
for
public
parking
on
that
a
surface
level
parking
lot
to
the
east
of
the
lofts.
It
also,
of
course,
requires
the
city
to
perform
maintenance,
snow
removal
and
eventual
repair
replacement.
When
and
if
that
that
becomes
necessary
down
the
road
and.
I
E
A
Those
opposed
signify
by
saying,
nay,
motion
carries
all
right:
item
b
is
authorization
to
set
the
date
for
the
2021
municipal
watertown
school
district
election
as
june
15
2021
a
motion
by
lollum
and
a
second
by
why
and
if,
if
we
do
nothing,
I
think
the
election
date
comes
up
as
april
13th,
so
we
have
to
take
action
to
set
this,
and
this
will
be
with
the
school
district.
As
usual,
we
usually
put
it
on
the
third
tuesday.
D
K
A
D
Yes,
thank
you
mayor.
We
do
we
pass
a
resolution
at
the
beginning
of
each
year
and
the
first
resolution
we're
going
to
cover
is
2101,
and
this
establishes
the
salaries
for
the
exempt
staff.
The
elected
officials,
as
well
as
the
part-time
there's,
really
nothing.
The
wages
are
listed
for
each
position
and
the
grade
based
off
of
the
new
wage
matrix.
D
The
only
thing
I
would
like
to
point
out
is
on
the
very
last
page,
a
couple
changes
with
the
mayor
position
and
the
reduction
of
the
council
members
we
did
put
into
here
what
the
mayor's
salary
will
be
as
well
as
each
older
person
salary
after
the
june
2021
election,
so
that's
broke
out
and
then
the
minimum
wage
did
increase
in
2021.
So
that
was
also
changed
to
incorporate
that.
If
there's
any
specific
questions,
I
can
try
to
answer
them.
F
D
D
G
D
Yep,
that's
no
problem!
So
with
these
positions,
what
it
was
was
with
the
new
wage,
matrix
the
wage
study
and
then
what
we
incorporated
in
is
that
the
matrix
will
adjust
based
off
of
what's
agreed
upon
and
for
2021
the
matrix
increased
by
one
percent.
So
all
the
starting
wages
went
up
by
one
percent
and
then
each
employee
received
a
one
step
which
is
about
a
two
percent
increase
on
their
pay.
So
on
average
it's
you
know
it
kind
of
varies
between
like
a
2.9
and
a
three
percent
increase.
Okay,
thank
you.
Yep.
K
C
D
Yes,
thank
you
mayor.
The
difference
with
this
one
is.
This
actually
covers
the
positions
that
are
overseen
by
a
union
and
that's
the
afscme,
the
firefighters
union
and
then
the
watertown
police
officers
union
as
well
same
thing.
What
this
does
is
it
establishes
the
position
and
the
grade.
The
one
thing
I
will
note
you'll
see:
there's
a
difference
between
some
of
the
grades
are
a
single
digit,
and
then
we
have
the
three
digit
that
is
because
asks
we
did
not
go
on
to
the
new
matrix.
D
So
for
this
time
being
we're
kind
of
between
two
matrix
right
now
there
is
one
change
that
was
caught
before
this
was,
or
I
should
say
after
it
was
sent
out.
I
want
to
make
note
that
with
this
motion,
I
would
appreciate
if
we
could
notate
that
the
traffic
maintenance
worker
under
the
street
department,
the
title,
has
actually
changed
to
sign
and
signal
technician,
and
that
was
not
a
grade
four.
That
is
actually
a
grade
five
position
now,
but
that's
the
only
change.
A
K
A
I
Act
has
allowed
some
additional
flexibility
and
some
some
funding
and
the
resolution
provides
that
full-time
employees
would
receive
a
1200
payroll
supplement
and
part-time
retirement
eligible
employees
will
receive
an
800
payroll
supplement,
and
I
can
let
you
let
kristen
clarify
that
last
phrasing,
essentially
there's
folks
that
work
for
the
city
that
work
over
20
hours
a
week.
I
believe
in
our
retirement
are
eligible
for
the
south
dakota
retirement
system,
and
so
they
would
be
included
in
this
aerial
supplement
and
would
receive
an
800
payroll
supplement.
I
A
A
G
Just
want
to
clear
just
want
to
comment
on
a
couple
things
I
had
someone
reach
out
to
me
concerned
that
are
we
giving
this
to
all
of
our
city,
employees,
even
those
that
are
already
making,
in
their
opinion
a
fairly
high
salary?
I
answered?
Yes,
we
are,
but
then
I
also
circled
back
to
a
school
board
member
and
also
a
county
commissioner,
and
we're
following
pretty
well
the
same
same
procedure
that
they
have
followed
for
the
school
employees.
In
other
words,
superintendent
principles
have
been
included
in
the
county
side.
G
F
Lalum
I
just
wanted
to
point
out.
You
know
that
this
is
hopefully
just
a
token
of
appreciation
from
from
us,
as
the
council
for
the
employees
that
that
have
worked
through
this
obviously
trying
year.
You
know
it
is
not
a
and
it'll
be
all
you
know
greatest
greatest
thing
ever,
but
at
the
at
least
it
shows
that
we
appreciate
their.
A
Right,
thank
you.
I'm
sure
they
will
appreciate
it
greatly,
and
I
have
appreciated
all
the
the
that
everyone
put
up
with
throughout
the
year
like
people
doing
jobs,
they're
not
used
to
doing
and
having
to
take
on
different
roles
and
when
people
were
isolated
having
to
do
more
than
one
job
just
to
keep
things
going
and
we've
kept
the
city
going.
A
B
A
A
motion
by
bill
hauer,
the
second
by
rademski,
and
then
you
can
see
in
your
packet.
The
full
scope
fee
is
183
212,
there's
a
ffe
for
furniture
and
whatnot,
which
is
an
additional
nineteen
thousand
eight
hundred
dollars
and
we've
already
paid
the
conceptual
design
fee
or
authorized
payment
for
that.
So
the
amendment
is
an
additional
188
thousand
twelve
dollars,
and
I
know
that
tad
holt
from
tsp
is
online
in
case
anybody
has
any
questions
for
him.
A
G
A
A
M
M
I
think
it
varies
with
the
specialty
like
getting
into
the
when
we
looked
at
the
jail
and
that
kind
of
stuff
with
the
county
that
was
substantially
higher
because
of
all
the
the
intricacies
that
go
into
designing
and
building
that
security
into
those
systems,
but
to
me
that
doesn't
seem
totally
out
of
line.
Of
course,
it's
always
a
little
higher
than
I
think
it
should
be,
but
I
do
have
a
question
on
the
ff
mayor.
Can
you
can
you
explain
that?
A
B
N
N
And
some
of
the
things
we'll
be
looking
at
if
to
do,
the
f
and
e
would
be
looking
at
the
existing
inventory.
That's
over
there
seeing
how
that
could
be
appropriately
used
and
then
also
you
know,
looking
into
the
flow
of
like
systems,
furniture
and
stuff
like
that
for
that
main
area
and
making
sure
that
it's
functional
and
it's
designed
well
with
the
rest
of
the
project,
and
it
also
allows
us
to
competitively
bid
the
ff
materials
rather
than
having
a
vendor
a
single
single
source.
Provided.
O
O
N
N
One
item
that
steered
us
to
that
timeline
was
one
to
try
to
get
work
complete
as
quickly
as
possible
for
the
government
transition.
But
then
also
another
item
is
is
generally
march,
is
a
good
bidding
environment
to
try
to
get
competitive
bids,
but
by
pushing
it
it
would
probably
push
our
schedule
accordingly.
N
That
is
not
a
percentage
of
fee,
that
is
a
percentage
or
a
fee
that
was
based
on
similar
type
projects
that
we've
done
recently
the
actual
ff,
and
the
estimate
is
tough,
to
pin
down
right
now,
especially
on
this
project,
since
a
number
of
items
were
left
in
the
building
by
wells.
Fargo
and
honestly,
I
don't
know
if
we
have
a
clear
inventory
of
exactly
what
they're,
leaving
or
not.
A
N
Correct
we
would
base
the
fee
off
of
the
percentage
of
construction
costs
that
we've
estimated
now
and
that's
what
we
would
amend
our
agreement
to
like
what
I
believe
it
was
councilman
elite
said
I
mean
if
there
was
a
a
major
shift
in
what
is
being
constructed
and
it
has
a
big
impact
on
the
construction
costs.
Then
we
would.
We
would
look
at
amending
it
again.
You
know
to
make
that
fee
fall
in
line.
C
Thank
you
mayor.
This
is
a
question
for
kristen.
Would
you
remind
me
again
kristin,
you
know
the
scope
of
this.
In
my
mind,
was
you
know
before
last
monday,
that
1.3
million
and
we
were
going
to
move
city
hall
across
into
the
new
bank
and
we
were
going
to
have
work.
You
know
now,
all
of
a
sudden,
I'm
hearing
you
know
there
are
all
sorts
of
numbers.
C
D
D
There
also
is
the
potential,
as
we
see
the
airport
terminal
project,
get
bid
for
the
second
part
of
it.
There's
the
potential
that
212
fund
212
can
also
cover
some
of
those
costs.
So
I
think,
as
we
start
to
see
the
numbers
play
out,
that's
the
conversation
that
the
council
is
going
to
have
to
to
have
and
then
to
make
some
of
those
decisions
as
well.
E
D
So
the
fund
504,
is
what
we
call
the
capital
project
fund.
That
was
the
fund
that
actually
had
some
of
the
bond
revenue.
It's
also
where
we
had
some
of
our
sponsorship
money
go
in
for
the
wellness
center
and
then
fund
212.
Yes,
that
is
our
capital
improvement
fund.
That's
a
second
penny
sales
tax,
and
that
is
the
fund
that
covers
whenever
we
do
street
projects
any
of
our
park
and
rec
improvements.
A
A
We
don't
go
down
there
unless
we
have
to
because
we
know
we
have
some
issues.
We
can't
move
down
there
and
have
create
more
offices
in
the
basement,
and
we
have
a
new
city
manager
coming.
We've
got
no
place
for
that
person
to
go,
and
we
would
be
expending
money
to
remodel
this
building
to
fit
that
in
so
we
had
five
million
dollars
floating
in
there
and
getting
pushed
around
to
build
a
a
different
city
hall,
and
we
looked
at
some
options.
A
We
we
had
one
option
where
the
estimate
for
building
a
new
city
hall
was
around
8
million
and
the
5
million
was
not
money.
That
was
reserved
for
city
hall,
but
it
was
in
the
long
term
budget,
and
you
can
see
that
just
like
most
of
our
projects,
we
estimate
the
cost
of
them.
We
estimate
the
year
we're
going
to
build
them.
We
kind
of
put
them
in
there
and
then
plan
accordingly,
so
this
is
falling
within
that
range.
A
C
C
I
also
thought
we
had
five
million
dollars
in
an
account
from
left
from
our
bond
issue
from
the
wellness
center
and
the
softball
fields,
and
is
that
the
same
5
million
and
if
that's
the
case,
isn't
isn't
that
money
designed?
For
I
mean
we
did
the
bond
issue,
we
asked
the
people
for
a
bond
issue
for
hockey.
Rink
and
now
is
this
my
I
mean
I'm
I'm
for
this
project,
but
I'm
not
for
it.
I
don't
think
if
we're
going
to
say
we're
going
to
take
that
5
million.
C
If
that's
the
5
million
the
mayor
is
talking
about
floating
around,
that
money
isn't
floating
around.
That
was
designed
in
our
bond
issue
for
those
three
projects.
We've
already
asked
the
community
once
for
money
for
hockey
rinks
and
I
I
don't
think
we
should
use
that
money
now
to
go
over
and
say
well,
we'll
do
a
bond
issue
later.
Let's
do
a
bond
issue
for
the
building,
then,
so
we
can
make
sure
that
that
money
for
the
hockey
rink
is
still
the
money
that
was
there
from
the
first
bond
issue.
Thank
you.
D
I
mean-
I
guess
you
could
look
at
it-
could
take
from
the
capital
improvement
fund
or
it
could
take
from
the
capital
projects
fund
is
the
airport
terminal,
and
that
was
totally
due
to
that.
We
had
the
opportunity
to
get
a
significant
grant,
so
the
timing
moved
us
a
little
bit
up
and
the
council
decided-
and
I
think
it
was
a
great
choice-
that
we
would
hit
that
project
first,
that
is
budgeted
to
take
about
five
million
dollars
of
our
cash
reserves,
out
of
capital
improvement
fund
to
support
the
construction
of
the
airport
terminal.
D
The
other
project
that
also
got
kind
of
moved
up
was
the
downtown
park.
So
those
two
things
have
kind
of
been
earmarked
to
take
up
that
capital
outlay
reserve
that
we
do.
That
was
actually
set
aside
a
little
bit
to
cover
the
street
facility,
that's
in
2022
and
then
also
the
city
hall
that
was
set
for
2022
as
well.
So
those
two
projects
kind
of
wipe
these
out.
D
D
D
A
Thank
you
kristen
it.
It
is
kind
of
confusing
we.
We
don't
restrict
our
funds
for
a
specific
project.
We
have
a
number
of
projects
that
are
in
our
long-term
budget,
including
all
the
ones
that
kristin
mentioned
and
that
have
been
brought
up
here
and
ultimately,
it's
up
to
the
council
on
how
to
do
that.
So
if
we
have
three
million
dollars
left
over
in
the
capital
projects
fund-
and
we
want
to
build
a
17
million
dollar
project,
we
can
bond
for
that
or
we
can.
A
I
mean
it's
up
to
you,
how
we
do
that
if
there's
money
left
over
and
a
project
ready
to
spend
it
right
now
we
can
use
that
cash
or
we
can.
We
could
sit
on
the
cash
and
keep
it
there
waiting
and
bond
for
something
else.
Bond
for
several
small
projects
bond
one
big
bond
for
several
projects.
It's
it's
all
up
to
you
and
the
the
ice
arena
project
has
been
a
heartbreaker
because
we
just
simply
don't
have
enough
cash
to
build
an
ice
arena
with
what
we
have
in
our
capital
project
fund.
A
We
want
to
move
forward
with
it,
but
if
you
move
forward
too
soon
and
bond
for
it
and
the
public
isn't
with
you
on
that,
that
could
kill
that
project
and
nobody
wants
to
do
that.
So
it's
it's
all
a
matter.
I
mean
we
can
bond
now
with
money
in
the
bank
bond
for
one
point,
whatever
million
that
we
need
to
build
the
extra
amount
for
the
new
city
hall
or
you
know
it's
up
to
you,
so
the
the
project
right
now
that
we're
looking
at
is
city
hall.
That's
not
a
new
project.
A
It's
been
in
the
works
for
a
long
time,
we've
been
making
do
with
the
city
hall
that
we
have
knowing
it
wasn't
going
to
last
forever
and
sooner
or
later
we're
going
to
have
to
move
forward
with
the
city
hall.
So
number
of
things
happening.
This
seemed
like
the
right
time
and
we
we
bought
the
the
land
with
the
bank
on
it
figuring.
We
could
remodel
for
significant
savings
over
building
a
brand
new
building
and
I
believe,
that's
true
so
questions
councilman,
roby.
I
I
So
if
we
we
know,
we
can't
build
a
heist
facility
without
some
big
benefactor,
big
some
big
naming
rights
deal
happening,
but
if
and
when
that
comes
in,
I
think
the
feeling
is.
If
we
spent
the
capital
projects
fund,
then
ice
is
off
because
we
spent
the
money
that
was
earmarked
for
ice.
I
think
that's
the
public
perception.
A
O
O
I,
while
I
still
hope
that
is
the
case,
I
personally
have
echoed
the
st
the
sentiments
of
what
I'm
hearing
on
in
public.
I
am
at
the
point
where
I
do
believe
this
is
an
either
or
proposition.
Either
we
get
a
the
city
hall
at
this
price
tag
or
ice,
and
I'm
not
saying
that
we
can't
do
both,
but
it
is
going
to
have
to
take
some
some
flexibility
like
bonding
now,
when
you
mention
bonding.
If
anything
should
be
bonded,
I
don't
think
it
should
be
ice.
O
I
think
we
should
keep
that
money
that
the
public
thinks
was
set
aside
for
ice
and
in
part
it
was.
We
should
set
that
aside
and
have
the
fiscal
discipline
to
say
we
are.
We
are
going
to
devote
that
to
building
ice
if
anything
needs
to
be
bonded.
It
is
these
newer
issues
now
I
know
that
you've
said
city
hall
has
been
in
discussion
for
a
long
time
now,
maybe
inside
city
hall,
that
has
been
under
discussion
but
out
in
public.
That
has
not
been
the
case
if
anything
out
in
public.
O
The
conversation
for
seven
years
has
been.
When
are
we
going
to
get
a
new
ice
rink?
Now
you
could
argue,
that's
actually
been
going
on
for
30
years.
So
as
far
as
like
length
goes,
I
think
ice
has
that
trumped
by
city
hall,
and
I
really
do
am
at
the
point
where
I
think
it
is
an
either
or
proposition
now.
One
other
thing
that
you
happen
to
mention
mayor
is
that
you
said
we
don't
have
the
money
for
it.
That
is
simply
not
true
for
ice.
I'm
saying
that
is
simply
not
true.
O
O
We
are
very
close
on
the
ice
rink
committee
of
either
bringing
some
proposal
that
we
actually
have
the
possibility
of
building
something
big
or
something
small
and
one
way
or
another.
I
want
to
say
I
want
to
get
something
done,
there's
no
guarantee
any
one
of
us
is
going
to
be
here
after
this
june
15th
election
deadline
that
we
just
set,
and
I
know
that
the
sentiment
is
to
get
this
resolved
for
the
city
of
watertown
moving
forward.
O
I
really
do
believe
that
it
is
an
either
or
proposition,
because
if
we
take
this
step
tonight
and
vote
for
this,
I
have
nothing
against
tsp
architects.
I
think
they're
great
tad
for
the
record
you're
fantastic
buddy.
But
if
we
take
this,
we
are
taking
a
huge
step
committing
the
city
not
to
the
architectural
fees
but
to
the
construction
cost
of
2.4
million.
O
O
I
have
some
questions
regarding
the
design
and
some
things
like
that,
but
I
don't
want
to
get
lost
in
the
minutia,
because
the
bigger
argument
for
me
is
how
are
we
going
to
pay
for
it,
and
I
think
that,
for
the
sake
of
ice
we
need
to
just
hit
the
pause
button.
Ice
in
this
town
has
waited
seven
years
since
the
bonding
issue
passed
and
30
years
since
we've
identified
a
need
city
hall.
This
is
relatively
new.
O
It
was
a
month
ago
that
we
basically
made
this
public
now
granted
we've
been
talking
about
it
longer,
but
it's
been
a
month.
Ice
has
waited
seven
years.
I
think
city
hall
can
wait
another
two
weeks
and
that's
what
I'm
going
to
propose
is
to
postpone
the
vote
until
we
can
get
a
couple
more
answers
regarding
the
design
cost,
because
I'll
just
tell
you
2.4
million
roughly
to
renovate
that
building.
O
I
have
a
really
hard
time
justifying
how
much
that
is.
That
seems
very
high,
because
when
I
was
going
through
that
building
a
lot
of
the
furniture
looked
fantastic
matches
the
building
beautifully-
and
I
know
tad
said
with
ffe.
It's
anything
that
you
shake
out,
and
you
said
I
don't
know
what
they're
leaving
behind
well,
I
talked
with
a
person
from
wells
fargo
during
the
tour,
and
they
said
you
can
have
everything
in
this
building
everything.
O
So
I
want
some
of
those
questions
answered
and
I
really
think
for
the
sake
of
how
we're
going
to
pay
for
it,
that
we
need
to
just
take
our
time
and
work
through
it.
I
and
kristen
you've
done
a
great
job
too
saying
we
need
to
have
this
discussion.
Well,
I
think
we
need
to
have
this
discussion
before
we
okay,
this
agenda
item
tonight.
Thank
you.
A
A
We
knew
we
were
going
to
have
to
gut
it
in
the
basement
to
put
city
council
chambers
down
there,
and
I
think
we
thoroughly
discussed
that
okay,
I
disagree
that
it's
either
or
I
mean
that
this
is
the
ice
arena
that
we
want
is
not
a
three
million
dollar
project
and
that's
what's
held
us
up.
We'd
have
done
it.
If
the
we
thought
that
the
public
would
be
happy
with
a
three
million
dollar
add-on
to
our
existing
ice
arena,
we'd
be
done
with
it
right
now.
G
O
Thank
you
and
I
don't
want
to
take
up
michael's
time,
but
I
do
want
to
address
those
issues
while
you
mention
them,
I
will
I
want
to
specify
something
kind
of
like
when
I
said
you
know
when
you
said
we
don't
have
the
money
to
build
ice.
Well,
we
do
just
not
the
ice
arena
that
we
want.
I
will
guarantee
you
that
the
people
who
use
ice
in
this
town
would
be
absolutely
thrilled
with
a
3
million
dollar
sheet
of
ice.
O
That
has
what
has
been
delayed,
because
once
we
had
the
money
to
build
a
second
sheet,
which
was
all
that
was
ever
on
the
issue,
then
it
started
being
well.
If
we're
going
to
build
a
second
sheet,
let's
make
it
really
nice
well
and
then
the
cost
went
from
7
million
to
9
million
to
12
million.
Now
some
estimates
are
up
to
15
16
million.
We
could
still
do
a
two
to
three
million
dollar
second
sheet
of
ice
and
I
and
satisfy
what
the
voters
of
watertown
said
that
they
wanted
seven
years
ago.
O
We
could
do
that
and
I
think
we
need
to
have
that
conversation
before
we
devote
that
three
million
dollars
to
city
hall.
That's
what
I'm
saying
so.
I
think
we
need
to
at
least
have
the
conversation
of
how
we're
going
to
pay
for
this
because
and
part
of
that
does
involve
ice.
So
if
we
have
to
bond
for
city
hall,
let's
bond
it,
let's
have
the
guts
to
say:
look,
we
don't
have
the
money
for
all
of
our
projects.
So
let's
start
the
conversation
that
kristen
has
said,
and
we
all
agree
with
that.
O
A
M
That
was
a
part
of
that
triad.
It
was
to
have
that
ice
ring.
We
did
the
softball
fields,
obviously
the
wellness
center,
but
at
that
time
we
need
to
remember
too,
that
we
were
looking
at,
maybe
maybe
nine
or
ten
million
dollars
and
from
the
onset.
The
idea
was
when
it
first
came
to
fruition.
It
was
let's
look
at
an
additional
sheet
of
ice
added
to
the
old
structure
and
we
studied
that.
M
We
looked
at
that
and
it
was
decided
that
the
the
exterior
wall
would
not
support
correctly
for
an
additional
sheet
right
onto
that
building,
and
we
also
I
mean
I
can't
remember
back
when
it
wasn't
going
to
be
two
sheets
but
to
renovate
all
the
ac
systems,
the
ice,
the
cooling
systems.
All
of
that
we
felt
that
would
be,
and
we've
had
more
than
one
architecture
firm,
tell
us
that
we'd
be
better
off
replacing
or
building.
I
should
say
a
new
facility
versus
trying
to
renovate
the
current
one
and
add
to
that.
M
But
there's
been
I
mean
it's.
The
inflation
rates
just
been
phenomenal.
I
think
to
get
this
thing
to
where
we
wanted
it
back
say
eight
ten
years
ago,
we're
probably
double
that
I
would
guess
for
the
same
thing
that
we
wanted
to
have
back
then
this
what's
happened
here
is
and
I'm
on
the
steering
committee
for
this
and-
and
I
will
agree
with
you
reid-
I
think
we
need
a
little
more
time.
M
I
need
a
little
more
time
to
digest
some
of
these
numbers
and
get
some
more
facts,
and
I'm
just
going
to
just
branch
off
for
a
quick
second
here.
If
I
could,
you
know,
we
look
at
there's
some
major
issues
that
I
don't
think
anybody
anticipated
when
we
looked
at
this
building
to
purchase
and
and
and
one
of
those
is
the
is
the
hvac
system-
that's
going
to
be
a
big
chunk
of
money,
the
sprinkler
system,
whether
or
not
we
still
don't
know.
M
If
for
sure,
we
have
to
do
that,
it's
easy
to
say
yes
to
all
of
these
things
that
we
want
to
have
for
that
facility,
but
it's
been
sort
of
a
gift
horse.
I
mean
this
thing.
The
timing
is
probably
not
great,
but
we've
been
looking
for
city
hall,
we've
been
looking
at
designs
and
costs
for
quite
some
time
to
build
a
city
we
need
it.
M
I
truly
believe
we
need
that
and-
and
it
just
so
happens,
that
this
opportunity
dropped
in
our
lap
and
it's
going
to
be
a
way
less
expensive
option
how
we
pay
for
it.
If
we
have
to
bond
again,
we
can
do
that
anytime.
We
want
if
we
need,
if
it's
just
we're
going
to
take
it
out
of
these
coffers
versus
these
fine.
I
think
that's
okay,
but
I
would
agree
that
I
think
we
need
a
little
bit
more
time
to
digest.
M
Some
of
these
numbers
ask
some
more
questions
and
I
certainly
will
be
interested
in
in
some
of
that
myself
and
I
I
believe
glenn
would
would
also
so
just
I
g.
I
guess
I
would
be.
I
would
question
the
idea
of
having
a
single
sheet
of
ice.
I
I
just,
I
think
the
the
public
would
like
to
see
a
two
or
even
a
mini
sheet.
That's
attached
to
a
new
facility.
M
E
A
A
A
M
You
mayor,
you
know,
for
all
the
years
I've
been
involved
with
city
government.
One
of
the
things
that
I've
heard
over
and
over
and
over
is
are
people
telling
me
that
it's
beyond
its
its
life,
you
need
to
replace
this
every
time
we
do
anything.
We
hear
that
and
in
a
lot
of
cases,
that's
probably
true,
but
if
I
got
an
ac
system,
that's
in
that
facility.
That's
working,
it's
been
been
maintained.
Well,
I
can
still
get
parts
for
it.
M
I
would
say:
let's
use
that
system,
that
part
of
the
system,
the
air
conditioning
I'm
talking
about,
not
the
not
the
heating.
I
do
believe
from
what
I've,
what
I've
the
questions
that
I
work
with
their
engineer
that
the
the
heating
portion
of
that,
because
we
can't
get
parts,
it's
antiquated
and
it
would
be
probably
less
expensive
over
in
the
long
run,
for
somebody
to
use
a
natural
gas
heating
type
of
a
unit
to
take
care
of
that
facility.
But
there's
things
that
that
sprinkler
system
you
know
right
away.
We
just
say
yes
to
everything.
M
It
seems
like
you
know.
Let's
look
at
that
sprinkler
system
if
the
density
levels
have
to
come
down
10
at
a
given
time
in
the
lower
level
of
that
facility,
then
maybe
we
should
look
at
not
necessarily
allowing
accommodation
of
that
extra
10
percent,
so
we
don't
have
to
sprinkle
the
building.
I
mean
all
those
things
we
just.
I
think
we
have
to
be
really
cost
conscious
on
how
we
move
forward
and
not
just
agree
to
everything
that
the
architects
are
telling
us
that
we
have
to
do.
M
M
The
f
and
e
stuff,
we
still
haven't,
identified
exactly
what
we
want
to
keep
over
there
and
we
need
to
do
that
and
we
need
to
find
out
what
it
is
we
are
going
to
have
to
put
in
there
now,
when
we
say
ff
e.
Does
that
what
I
I
know
about
ff
and
he
have
been
involved
these
projects
before,
but
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
it
and
see
exactly
what
that
is
get
a
better
idea
of
what
it
is
we
have
to
put
in
there.
What
we
have
to
replace.
M
I
mean
some
of
those
bigger
ticket
items
that
we're
looking
at
honestly
when
I,
when
I
first
looked
at
this
project
in
my
mind,
of
course,
I'm
not
an
engineer
or
architect,
but
in
my
mind
I
thought
well,
you
know
maybe
we'll
have
maybe
we'll
have
a
three
quarters
of
a
million
dollars
into
this
thing
for
renovation.
But
when
you
dig
deeper
into
some
of
these
other
issues,
you
find
that
they
have
to
be
taken
care
of
now,
maybe
on
the
outside
part.
M
I'm
just
going
to
say
this,
perhaps
there's
a
second
phase
to
this
project,
which
works
with
the
exterior
part
of
the
building.
Now
we're
talking
about
demo
in
that
drive
up
area
resurfacing.
All
that
parking
lot,
perhaps
that's
something
we
do
a
little
further
down
the
road
in
a
phase
two,
some
of
the
outside
the
exterior
operations.
Just
those
are
just
my
thoughts
and
I
hope,
did
I
answer
your
question.
A
A
A
M
I
don't
again,
I
agree
with
the
heating
system
that
makes
sense
to
me,
but
even
if
we
had
I'm
assuming
and
and
tad,
perhaps
if
he's
still
here
can
can
address
this.
If
they
said
we
don't
have
enough
air,
we
can't
accommodate
enough
air
conditioning
in
the
lower
level
at
specific
times
with
the
densities
that
we
will
have
in
the
basement
area.
M
N
Yeah,
I'm
still
on
part
a
lot
of
the
issues
that
are
coming
when
you
talk
about
adding
the
city
hall
chambers
in
the
basement
is,
is
changing
occupancy
to
an
assembly
space
and
that
just
requires
more
outside
air
to
be
brought
into
the
building.
To
accommodate
that.
When
you
have,
you
know
you
got
to
accommodate
it
for
when
it's
full
down
there,
so
that
that's
the
one
of
the
bigger
changes.
N
That's
would
cause
a
lot
of
modifications
to
the
existing
system
to
accommodate
that
and
then
you're
also
correct
about
you
know.
It's
currently
kind
of
a
piece
meal
and
they've
got
electrical
heat
in
there
and
they're
looking
at
changing
that
to
natural
gas.
So
a
lot
of
those
issues
need
to
be
addressed
either
way.
N
Then
the
question
would
be:
is
it's
a
little
bit
cheaper
right
now
to
make
modifications
to
the
existing
system,
but
the
existing
system,
the
majority
of
it,
is
original
to
the
building
and,
like
the
mayor
said,
the
question
that
has
been
proposed
in
all
of
our
meetings
was
is:
do
we
want
to
make
the
investment
now
or
do
you
want
to?
You
know
go
with
the
more
efficient
or
less
expensive
costs
now
and
then,
with
the
potential
of
down
the
road
having
to
make
a
big
investment.
G
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
to
how
to
put
this.
I
I
don't
disagree
with
what
I'm
hearing
a
lot
of
discussion
about,
and
I'm
concerned
too
about
numbers
for
the
city
hall
project
for
the
ice
arena,
etc.
But
I
also
don't
want
to
switch
horses
and
men's
stream
relative
to
architects.
On
this
I
mean
we've,
we've
got
a
good
firm
engaged
and
I
think
we
need
to
give
them
some
guidance
as
to
whether
or
not
we
want
to
continue
to
work
with
them
and
work
with
them
on
an
ongoing
basis.
G
I
don't
want
to
put
this
on
hold
and
potentially
lose
our
arrangement
with
them
and
then
we're
back
to
square
one
relative
to
our
design.
So
I
I
guess,
I'm
going
to
direct
this
to
tad.
Do
you
have
any
suggestions
from
your
perspective
or
your
firm's
perspective?
After
hearing
our
conversation
as
far
as
how
we
can
you
know
what?
What
might
be
being
a
happy
medium
that
we
can
arrive
at
tonight,.
N
G
Let
me
ask
this
ted:
let's
say
that
we
approve
your
your
contract
or
your
whatever,
whatever
the
mayor's
got
from
your
office,
not
necessarily
the
letter
that
we've
got
in
front
of
us,
let's
say
that
we
approve
that.
Does
that
mean
then
that
you're
going
to
because
I
know
you've
got
you're
trying
to
line
up
meetings
on
what
wednesday
or
thursday
this
week
with
various
departments
to
start
to
fine-tune
or
start
to
lay
out
some
of
the
office
space?
G
N
Yeah,
that's
correct,
we
can
move,
you
know
if
approved
tonight.
We
can,
you
know,
continue
on
our
schedule,
starting
with
our
user
group
meetings,
starting
wednesdays,
we're
trying
to
get
lined
up
or
we
can
slow
it
down
a
little
bit
and
let
you
guys
you
know,
make
your
determination
as
you
feel
fit.
G
How
I
mean,
how
long
would
you
say
slow
it
down?
How
long
are
we
talking
from
your
perspective?
I
mean
two
weeks
I
mean.
Let's
say
we
have
we
get
together
in
two
weeks
again
and
we
still
haven't
resolved
a
lot
of
our
concerns
or
questions,
and
so
we
asked
for
another
two
weeks
and
at
some
point
you
folks
are
going
to
say
the
heck
with
you
and
you're
going
to
move
on
and
not
want
to
work
with
us.
N
I
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
get
to
that,
but
yeah
I
mean
we'd
like
to
keep
the
keep
the
process
moving
forward.
We,
you
know
we
have
done
some
due
diligence
and
created
schedules
to
make
sure
with
we
have
our
manpower
available
to
work
on
this
over
the
next
two
months,
but
you
know
we're
certainly
can
make
adjustments
as
needed.
A
So
we
have
a
situation
here.
We've
got
a
city
hall
that
isn't
meeting
our
needs
any
way
you
come
in.
You
have
to
come
upstairs
or
come
through
back
ways:
there's
not
a
good
secure
system
in
place
for
the
employees
or
for
meetings.
It's
confusing
layout,
it's
a
it's
a
remodeled
warehouse
and
it
we
have
issues
and
we
know
about
them,
we've
known
about
them
for
a
long
time.
A
G
I'm
not
arguing
that
mayor
I
mean,
I
think
we
all
realize
that
that
we've
got
a
building
that
that
we
need
to
get
out
of,
and
we've
got
a
great
opportunity
next
door.
Just
a
matter
of
we've
got
questions
that
we're
now
hearing
from
the
public
as
well
as
far
as
how
we,
what
our
comfort
level
is
as
far
as
dollars
involved,
and
what,
how
we're
going
to
pay
for
them.
Well,.
A
A
I
may
be
mistaken,
but
I
think
what
I
was
hearing
was
that
councilman
helene
was
saying
this
is
either
or
and
if
it's
going
to
be
one
or
the
other,
we
might
want
to
go
with
the
ice
arena
instead
of
a
new
city
hall
and
then
we'll
just
keep
the
city
hall
until
we
decide
to
bond
for
it
or
whatever
figure
out
the
means
of
finance
which
we
can
do
with
any
of
our
projects.
I'd,
I'm
not
sure.
A
If
I
mean
in
my
mind,
we
need
a
different
city
hall
and
the
most
cost
effective
thing
for
the
community
is
what
we
should
be
seeking.
What's
what
best
for
the
least
amount
of
money-
and
I
think
a
renovation
project
is
a
much
more
cost
effective
alternative
for
the
public,
and
I
didn't
have
any
feelings
that
we
could
build
a
new
city
hall
for
nothing
over
there
or
next
to
nothing.
I
thought
this
was.
A
A
It's
really
not
an
either
or,
I
think
that's
a
dangerous
path
to
go
down.
We
we
know
we
need
a
new
city
hall
building
and
we've
got
an
architect
online
ready
to
help
us
move
with
this
and
what's
really
the
benefit
in
waiting
two
weeks,
we're
not
gonna,
know
anything
more.
I
I
if
there
is,
then
I'm
I'm
willing
to
wait,
but
I
want
to
know
clearly
what
more
information
we
can
provide
to
you.
So
you
can
feel
better
about
that
decision
in
two
weeks,
other
than
just
the
passage
of
time.
O
Thank
you
mayor
first,
I
don't
want
to
take
up.
This
will
be
my
third
time
speaking,
so
I
don't
want
to
speak
again
if
someone
hasn't
spoken
yet,
but
I
just
wanted
to
make
clear.
I
don't
I
personally
don't
think
it's
an
either
or
situation,
but
I'm
afraid
it's
coming
to
that
situation.
I
I
fear
it's
perilously
close
to
being
at
that
situation.
O
I
believe
if
we
then
spend
that
money,
that
cash
on
a
city
hall
that
it
would
become
an
either
or
situation,
that's
what
I
fear-
and
I
guarantee
you
that
is
the
perception
among
all
the
ice
users
in
town.
So
I
don't
think
it
is.
I
think
that
there
is
a
way
forward,
but
that's
where
I
think
we
need
to
have
the
conversation
of
do
we
need
to
bond
or-
and
if
so,
for
what
we've
been
delaying
that
conversation.
O
I
just
want
to
have
that
conversation
before
we
take
this
huge
step,
because
I
I'll
even
grant
your
point
that
the
city
hall
has
been
in
conversation
for
a
long
time.
But
let's
say
if
we
don't
move
forward
with
the
city
hall
at
this
time.
What's
the
worst
case
scenario,
we
lose
a
couple
months
of
construction
instead
of
moving
in
in
late
summer
or
early
fall.
We
move
in
next
spring.
O
Is
that
much
harder
and
that
much
more
of
a
quality
of
life
issue,
because
once
you
lose
ice,
it's
going
to
take
that
much
longer
to
get
it
back,
then
you
have
to
get
all
the
user
groups
back.
You
have
to
get
all
the
kids
getting
back
into
that
sport
or
ice
facility,
so
the
downside
of
waiting
on
city
hall
is
really
just
that
we
have
to
wait.
O
I
really,
but
also
I
do
want
to
say
I
totally
agree
with
bruce.
I
don't
I
don't
even
want
to
get
it
off
on
ice.
I
think
that
there's
enough
reason
to
wait
on
this
without
even
worrying
about
ice.
Like
I
apologize,
I
wasn't
here
last
monday,
but
there
was
talk
about
having
a
enormous
city
council
chamber
for
overflow,
seating.
O
We
could
move
it
into
the
theater,
so
I'm
saying
a
question
like
that,
rather
than
spend
a
lot
of
money
on
building
a
huge
city
council
chamber,
let's
have
the
conversation,
let's
have
a
very
small
city
council
chamber
and
use
another
city
building
that
we've
already
paid
for
when
we
need
it.
So
questions
like
that
which
I
I
I
also
see
your
point.
I
don't
know
if
they'll
be
answered
in
two
weeks,
but
I
will
at
least
make
the
motion
to
wait
two
weeks
and
have
the
conversation
again.
G
O
E
I
think
the
big
thing
mayor
is
just
that
you
know
we
went
into
it
at
one
point
too.
We
all
kind
of
saw
that
number
and
we
were
good
with
that.
I
think
seeing
the
2.3
is
just
a
little
bit
of
sticker
shock
coming
into
this.
You
know
it's
not
itemized.
It's
not
going
to
be
at
this
point,
so
that's
kind
of
hard
too.
It's
conceptual.
E
I
still
feel
like
three
and
a
half
is
going
to
be
cheaper
than
any
building.
We
could
have
ever
created
realistically
with
land
acquisition
and
then
building
from
scratch.
That's
still
going
to
be
cheaper
than
that.
It
is
difficult,
though,
like
I
said
when
we
don't
have
you
know
an
itemized
situation.
I
I
like
councilman
hollen's
bit,
though
about
we,
don't
need
a
huge
council
chamber
because
realistically
95
percent
of
the
time
half
this
could
fit
it.
I
I
love
the
idea.
E
If
we
could
just
go
to
a
bigger
space,
if
we
ever
had
a
contentious
issue,
we
thought
that
was
going
to
be
needed
on
that's
hard
to
guess
I
guess
as
well,
but
I
would
sit
here
and
say
I
don't
think
it's
an
either
or
issue
as
well.
Do
I
feel
that
five
million,
even
just
trying
to
add
a
sheet
on,
is
gonna,
get
it
there?
No,
I
think
we're
gonna
get
stuck
bonding,
no
matter
what
for
it,
I'm
in
the
ship
of
if
we're
gonna
do
it.
E
Let's
do
it
right
the
first
time,
even
if
it
is
adding
a
sheet
of
ice
on.
I
know
that
I
was
behind
that
all
for
that
idea
from
the
start
not
getting
a
giant
new
facility
but
adding
on,
but
I
got
told
from
the
get-go
there
that
wasn't
cost-effective
and
it
made
more
sense
to
build
something
new
which
blew
my
mind,
but
I
got
told
that
repeatedly
we.
E
E
That
again,
it's
just
I'm
sure
for
the
public,
that's
pretty
mind-blowing
too,
but
ultimately
I
mean
we
put
off
city
hall,
because
we
feel
like
it's
selfish,
to
improve
it,
to
build
a
better
location
for
something
that
not
everyone's
using,
I
mean
realistically,
when
I
look
at
it,
it's
a
quality
of
life
improvement
for
the
employees
of
the
city.
If
we
take
care
of
them
that
improves
all
facility
usage,
I
mean
you
come
in
for
a
permit.
It's
going
to
be
simpler.
E
If
we
have
better
work
spaces
with
better
workflow,
it
makes
everything
work
more
efficiently
and
in
the
long
run,
that's
saving
stuff
for
our
community,
I'm
in
favor
of
moving
ahead.
I
do
think
that
there
need
to
be.
There
needs
to
be
more
discussion
still
along
the
way
with
what
do
we
really
need?
E
If
we
think
we
can
get
some
longevity
out
of
it,
then
let's
find
that
savings,
but
if
it
doesn't
make
any
sense,
then
let's
not
do
it
either,
but
I
think
we
always
should
be
like
this
about
any
project
we
build.
I
do
think
a
lot
of
the
times.
We
just
go
for
it
and
we
go
okay.
That's
the
price
tag
cool.
E
We
should
always
be
this
cautious
with
when
we're
going
into
projects.
I
wish
we
saw
more
of
it,
but
in
this
scenario
again
I
think
we
just
need
to
hold
people
accountable
as
we
go
forward
and
I
think
we're
okay
to
still
go
ahead,
get
the
city
building
going,
but
I,
if
we
want
to
start
talking
about
ice
again,
let's
start
talking
about
it.
I
mean
ultimately
in
the
long
run,
we're
going
to
end
up
bonding
for
it.
A
Right
and
I
I
agree
with
everything
you're
saying-
and
I
I
would
like
to
point
out
too,
that
by
re
renovating
an
existing
building
for
a
lesser
cost
than
building
new
that
actually
reserves
more
money
for
us
to
put
toward
an
ice
arena.
It
doesn't
take
away
from
that
because
these
are
both
projects
that
were
in
the
books,
and
I
see
councilman
albertson's
had
his
hand
up
for
a
long
time,
so
councilman
albertson,
you
want
to
go
ahead.
C
Thank
you
mayor
mike.
I
want
to
go
back
to
kristen
again
kristin.
Just
a
question:
do
you
have
money
that
you
continue
to
say
would
be
for
a
rainy
day
that
we
could
say
the
wells.
Fargo
bank
is
a
rainy
day,
and
so
we
could
vote
for
this
process
to
get
it
going.
We
all
know
that
we
need
a
new
wells
fargo
building,
but
I
would
argue
that
wells,
fargo
building
came
up
a
lot
quicker
than
the
ice
sheets
have
come
up
and
you
know,
and
so
in
in
your
account.
C
Just
just
tell
me
the
truth:
do
you
have
3.4
million
dollars?
That
is
sitting
in
an
account
someplace
that
you
say
man?
We
don't
want
to
spend
this
because
this
is
rainy
day
money
and
if
you
do,
is
this
a
rainy
day
because
then
we
wouldn't
take
from
the
money
that
we
have
set
aside
and
for
me
ice
and
of
course
you
know,
I've
been
on
ice.
C
The
mayor
just
said
it,
but
I've
been
on
ice
for
a
long
time
and
like
the
park
downtown
has
not
been
on
the
agenda
nearly
as
long
as
ice
downtown
has
been
on
the
agenda,
and
so
my
question
is,
do
you
have?
Do
you
have
that
money
that
you
could
say?
Oh
my
gosh
as
a
bookkeeper,
I,
oh
I
just
would
hate
to
ever
come
up
with
3.4
million
dollars,
but
it's
there
and
we
can
do
it.
If
the
council
says
to
do
it.
D
To
that,
no
our
capital
outlay
accumulation
that
we
did
have
we
at
the
end
of
2019.
We
had
about
nine
million
dollars
set
aside,
and
that
was
to
capture
a
slug
of
different
projects
with
the
budget
that
was
just
approved
in
2021
capital
outlay
accumulation
actually
changed
on
that
was
reduced
down
to
about
two
million
dollars.
D
Seven
million
dollars
right
now
is
currently
earmarked
between
the
airport
terminal
project,
which
we're
estimating
around
the
5
million.
Like
I
said,
we're
still
waiting
for
the
bids
to
come
in
for
the
second
phase
of
that,
and
then
the
other
thing
is
kind
of
the
direction
we've
been
giving
is
the
downtown
park
and
the
downtown
park
was
estimated
at
around
2
million.
So
that's
seven
million
dollars
worth
of
projects
that
the
capital
improvement
fund
had
reserved
cash
set
aside
for
different
projects
and
they've
kind
of
made
their
way
in
just
in
the
timing.
D
So
is
there
any
additional
cash
for
more
projects?
No,
that
is
your
only
other
pot
of
money
is
the
capital
project
fund.
So
with
that,
if
the
council's
direction
and
thought
is
to
not
touch
the
available
cash
that
we
have
that's
sitting
in
the
capital
project
fund,
then
really
the
option
is
to
to
bond
for
the
city
hall
project.
C
And,
what's
the
what
is
the
time
frame
on
a
bond?
If
we
wanted
to
bond
the
city
and
said
you
know
what
this
is
something
that
we
would
like
to
do?
We
don't
know
that
it
would
get
referred
even
but
let's
say
it
might
get
referred
so
time
frame.
Give
me
a
time
frame
on
it
sounds
to
me
like
we
gotta.
We
have
ourselves
in
such
a
place
that
if
we're
gonna
do
the
stuff
that
we
want
to
do,
we
don't
have
the
money
anyway.
D
Right
so
usually
about
the
time
frame.
To
do
a
bond
is
probably
between
about
the
45
to
probably
about
60
to
80
days,
and
that's
just
with
your
public
hearings
that
you
have
to
give
notice
to
for
the
resolutions
and
giving
it
the
referral
time.
So
that's
about
the
window
that
it
takes
to
get
everything
kind
of
kind
of
going
for
a
bond.
M
A
F
We
currently
have
an
agreement
in
place
to
buy
the
wells
fargo
building
I
mean
we
are
arguing
with
ourselves
about
a
timing
issue
on
this.
You
know
and
realistically
we're
the
ones
that
set
the
time
frame.
So
to
that
point
I
mean
we
have
a
1.3
million
dollar
purchase
on
the
wells.
Fargo
building
we
can
take
it
as
it
is.
We
can
renovate
it.
I
mean
those
are
the
options
that
we
have
to
councilman
holden's.
F
You
know
this
thought
process.
Two
weeks
isn't
going
to
kill.
This
I'd
make
the
motion
to
table
until
two
weeks
from
today
for
the
next
council
meeting.
Then
we
have
time
to
sit
there
and
discuss
it,
and
we
give
I
believe,
it's
councilman
buehler
helene
and
bill
hauer
time
to
hammer
out
some
more
details.
At
least,
then
we
don't
have
to
sit
and
have
a
two-hour
discussion
about
this
and
that
or
whatever
so,
let's
get
a
little
bit
more
information
and
go
forward
with
it.
Okay,.
F
A
O
O
O
M
Do
I
just
want
to
reiterate
the
the
fact
that
this
is
really
the
the
the
wells
fargo
building
is
a
gift,
it
truly
is,
and
even
if
we,
if
we
bond
for
this,
I
think
the
finance
costs
would
would
never
exceed
the
amount
of
money
that
we
probably
will
save
and
the
other
big
part
of
this
is
location.
I
mean
where
in
the
heck
else,
would
we
put
this
place
if
we
were
going
to
do
it?
We
fought.
We
looked
at
other
properties
for
years,
and
this
is
hell.
I
can
throw
a
stapler
over
there.
M
E
B
J
G
A
M
Mayor
what
I
would
propose
that
the
in
lieu
of
this
decision
that
the
steering
committee
meet
soon
and
and
that
way
we
can
address-
or
at
least
put
the
questions
down,
that
we're
interested
in
answering
and
look
at
any
other
any
any
of
the
financial
stuff
as
well.
And
I
would
invite
mr
holine
to
certainly
join
in
with
that
steering
committee
with
our
meetings.
If
you'd.
If
you
felt
like
you,
wanted
to
do
that.
M
G
N
A
Make
that
just
in
there
or
maybe
just
reschedule
them
for
two
weeks
from
now,
and
then
we
can
always
cancel
them
later.
It
was
hard
to
squeeze
them
in
okay.
Anyone
else
all
right.
The
last.
Our
next
item
here
item
h
is
authorization
for
alderman
lollum
to
create
a
steering
committee
to
identify
the
mayor's
position.
F
You
mayor,
I
had
a,
I
had
a
few
people
from
the
community
and
we
had
a
few
questions
from
members
of
the
council
as
well.
So
basically,
I
I'll
just
read
a
statement
I
made
here.
I
moved
to
develop
a
steering
committee
for
the
purpose
of
identifying
and
explaining
the
mayor's
position
and
expectations
at
for
after
the
june
election
I've
had
like
I
said
I
had
members
of
the
community
and
the
council
reach
out
as
to
what
the
expectations
are
and
have
them
on
record.
F
F
So
I
moved
to
have
councilman
vilhauer,
mueller
and
albertson,
as
well
as
council,
vice
president
helene
on
there
and
byron
khalis,
who
is
the
co-chair
for
the
home
rule
charter
and
he
can
come
from
the
home
rule
charters
group
as
well
as
to
what
their
thought
process
was
and
then
have
them
meet
and
update
the
council.
As
to
on
the
first
meeting
in
february
and
then
maybe
make
some
recommendations
or
what
they
feel
is
the
what
they're
envisioning
is
going
forward
so.
F
F
A
A
B
That
was
the
case,
but
yeah
somebody
from
the
community
wants
to
come
forward
and
do
that.
That
would
be
great.
I
really
I
really
encourage
it
that
more
women
get
involved
with
this.
That
was
one
of
the
reasons
I
ran
for
council
in
the
first
place
was
because
we
have
50
men
and
50
women
in
the
city
and
we've
never
had
that
level
of
representation,
so
yeah
anything
you
can
do
to
encourage
women
or
if
I
can
help
in
any
way,
I'd
be
glad
to
do
that.
F
B
F
O
F
F
And
honestly
I'll
I'll
put
it
out
to
you
guys,
I
mean
if
you're
on
the
committee,
I'm
I'm
just
putting
it
out
there
so
that
there's
the
discussion
and
they
they
can
come
forward
with
it
and
if
you
feel
there's
other,
I
just
didn't
want
that
group
to
get
to
be,
I
mean
we
had
21
people
from
the
homeworld
charter.
I
don't
need
right.
A
A
A
Know
one
thing
I
would
like
your
committee
to
talk
about
is
economic
development,
because
the
that's
a
huge
part
of
what
I
do
as
the
mayor
right
now
I
mean
I,
I
expend
a
gigantic
amount
of
time
on
it
and
a
lot
of
it
is
well.
Some
of
it
is
financial,
but
most
of
it
is
glad-handing,
and
right
now
I
mean
I
that
could
go
either
way
and
it
isn't
stated
in
the
charter
as
to
should
that
be
the
mayor,
or
should
that
be
the
city,
the
city
manager
well,.
A
F
G
F
F
F
M
M
I
don't
know
that
I,
and-
and
maybe
you
gave
it
to
us-
I
didn't
see
it,
but
I
I
never
did
see
what
how
that
process
ended
up
what
we
ended
up
for
numbers.
That
would
be
interesting
to
have
that
information
that
that
the
council
filled
out
at
that
time,
but
I
think
the
the
big
thing,
the
big
one
of
the
big
reasons
we're
looking
at
this,
is
so
everyone's
clear
on
the
expectations
and
the
duties
of
this
position
and
and
how
that's
all
going
to
shake
out
in
the
future.
M
A
Sure
and
I'd
be
happy
to
consult
with
you.
I've
been
doing
the
job
for
three
and
a
half
years
and
I
have
kind
of
a
sense
of
what's
administrative
and
what
isn't-
and
it
has
been
a
challenge
for
I
mean
the
council
members
often
get
into
the
administration,
and
I
pull
the
reins
back
on
you
guys
and
it
is
never
a
fun
thing
to
do.
I
don't
think
you
like
it
and
I
there
is
a
pretty
distinct
line
between
administration
and
not
administration,
and
that's
really.
A
The
main
thing
is
that
whoever's,
the
mayor,
you
don't
want
them
to
have
the
false
expectation
that
they're
coming
in
here
and
they're,
going
to
continue
to
work
with
the
staff
every
day.
That's
a
big
no-no
and
any
more
than
then
the
council
can
walk
into
a
staff
member's
office,
and
you
know
talk
to
them.
Direct
them
ask
them
to
do
research.
F
Like
I
said
it's
more
just
to
set
the
expectations
and
and
what
the
public
is
is
envisioning,
as
well
as
what
the
council
is
expecting,
and
you
know
I
I
no
problem.
I
actually
that's
why
I
just
wanted
to
put
together
some
of
the
people,
and
I
leave
it
to
those
folks
that
have
said
that
they
are
willing
to
to
do
it
to
reach
out
to
other
members
of
the
public.
O
Mayor,
I
would
just
say,
for
the
sake
of
getting
a
motion
tonight
I
would
say
just
amend
the
motion
to
create
the
committee
with
the
council
people.
This
council
people
listed
byron
police
is
president
and
then
say:
byron
police
shall
appoint
a
woman
to
the
committee
with
the
unders
in
basically
just
leave
the
language
at
that,
but
with
the
understanding
that,
hopefully,
one
of
the
women
that
served
on
the
home
rule
charter
will
be
willing
to
serve
on
this
committee
as
well.
A
B
I
I
G
O
O
G
O
A
All
right,
all
those
in
favor
signify
by
saying
aye
all
right,
all
right
all
those
opposed
signify
by
saying,
nay,
motion
carried
okay
item.
I
is
the
emergency
resolution
that
we
put
on
our
agenda
and
talk
about
every
meeting
is.
Is
we
don't
need
to
take
any
action
unless
someone
wants
to
change
the
resolution,
so
anyone
that
would
like
to
entertain
a
change
not
seeing
anyone
so
we'll
move
on
to
old
business?
Is
there
any
old
business,
councilman
albertson.
C
C
So
we'll
come
back
to
the
council,
I'm
sure
and
ask
for
approval
of
some
money
one
of
these
days,
but
he
does
have
a
plan
and
hopefully
he
can
present
that
to
the
council.
One
of
these
nights
just
to
let
us
know
exactly
how
that's
going
he's
going
to
present
to
the
committee
this
wednesday
now
or
no
the
third
wednesday,
but
they're
excited
about
it
and
we've
got
some
money
raised
and,
and
the
city
terry
says,
has
some
money
that
we
can
use.
C
I
F
I
F
Well,
we
we
had
to
go
through
the
process,
as
I
currently
sat
to
get
to
this
point
I
mean,
if
we're
truly
honest,
so
I
think
we
have
to
do
that
going
forward
until
that
law
changes,
otherwise
we're
directly
violating
the
law.
At
this
point
we've
done
what
shippo
has
asked
us
to
do
is
you
know
basically.
A
Matt,
are
you
saying
that
we
have
not
complied
right
now
because
we
haven't
done
the
like?
We
haven't
done
the
due
diligence
to
make
sure
that
there
were
options
considered
and
because
that's
what
shippo
said
they
didn't
have
any
other
options.
They
just
said
no,
and
I
don't
know,
is
that
what
you're
saying.
I
A
And
we
said
we
don't
care
we're
not
going
to
make
you
follow
the
law
we're
just
going
to
go
ahead,
even
though
we
know
you
didn't
follow.
The
process
went
in
good
faith.
You
just
said
we're
just
gonna
walk
through
it,
ignore
it
give
it
the
10
days.
Council
can
support
you,
I'm
paraphrasing
what
happened,
but
the
state
law
says
that
the
council
has
to
agree
that
all
the
options
were
examined
and
there's
no
feasible
alternative
to
what's
being
proposed,
and
that's
not
really
what
that's
not
really
true.
M
M
M
M
I
E
Well,
when
I
read
through
what
was
written
there,
it
presented
those
three
options
and
then
said
why
none
of
them
were
feasible.
I
thought
that
was
exploring
options
because
there
was
the
full
brick.
There
was
the
half
brick
facade
and
then
there
was
one
other,
but
a
lot
of
them
had
to
deal
with
going
a
foot
into
the
sidewalk
doing
new
footings,
as
was
said,
and
then
even
just
the
joints
of
the
building
would
create
cracking,
and
so
it
wasn't
feasible.
So
I
thought
it
was
a
cost
prohibitive
thing.
M
M
B
A
I
Well,
I
just
you
know
in
chippo's
latest
response.
They
clearly
indicated
to
us
that
they
didn't
feel
that
the
case
report
actually
explored
the
feasible
and
prudent
alternatives,
but
the
council
kind
of
ignored
that
and
approved
it
anyway,
and
that's
fine
and
all
I'm
asking
the
question
for
is
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
waste
more
time
as
staff
than
we
need
to
that's
all.
H
Yeah,
thank
you
thank
you
matt
for
for
bringing
that
up,
because
you
know.
Obviously
I
have
some
of
the
same
sentiments
and
matt
expressed
wanting
to
you
know,
make
sure
we're
functioning
efficiently
effectively,
but
not
as
staff
not
doing
our
due
diligence
to
carry
out
and
facilitate
a
process
that
we've
signed
up
to
be
part
of.
So
I
can
respect
and
appreciate
matt's
comments
in
that
regard.
I'll
just
touch
on
briefly.
H
You
are
correct
that
the
applicant
did
touch
on
a
few
things
they
could
have
done
and
they
put
some
cost
estimates
together
for
those
items,
but
shippo
went
a
little
bit
further
and
and
did
provide
some
examples
of
you
know
whether
it
had
to
do
with
the
brick
facade
whether
it
had
to
do
with
altering
the
heights
of
the
building
they
were
concerned.
They
didn't
have
enough
information,
whether
the
massing
the
size
of
the
buildings
was
being
changed
at
all.
H
There's
a
lot
of
criteria
that
they
look
at
and
the
case
report
that
they
received
from
the
applicant
and
through
city
staff.
Just
didn't
have
enough
detail
for
them
to
feel
comfortable,
saying,
okay,
proceed
because
it's
cost
prohibitive,
because
that
is
a
that
is
a
response
that
they
will
provide
at
times
if
they
find
we've
exhausted
all
options
and
is
cost
prohibitive,
they're
not
in
the
business
of
making
people,
spend
more
money
to
and
and
will
make
other
recommendations
if
to
avoid
that
from
happening.
H
H
They
couldn't
quite
make
it
a
determination
on
some
of
those
other
options
because
they
didn't
have
enough
detail
in
the
case
report
and
to
matt's
point
yes,
you
know
I
couldn't
agree
more.
We
as
staff
just
want
to
be
sure,
we're
carrying
out
the
wishes
of
the
council
and
the
programs
that
were
administered
how
they're
administered
based
on
our
involvement
in
them
and
our
enrollment
in
them.
So
I
appreciate
that
question.
Matt.
G
Guess
I'm
confused
now
I
mean
the
action
we
took
tonight
was
the
approval
of
a
building
permit
for
this
project?
Okay,
what
what
more
than
I
mean
matt,
you're
concerned
about
what
staff
needs
to
go
through
or
spending
more
time
on?
I
guess
I'm
confused
at
this
point
now,
if
we're
ready
to
issue
a
building
permit
and
we
gave
the
approval
tonight-
I
I
guess
I'm
I'm
not
hearing
your
concern,
matt
or
or
you
heath.
I
I
We're
going
to
have
to
continue
to
administer
this
if
we're
going
to
abide
by
the
law,
and
so
I
don't
you
know
what
we've
done
tonight
is
is
done.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
the
council's
desire
that
we
continue
to
administer
it
going
forward
because,
as
we've
seen
in
the
past,
we
haven't-
and
you
know
you
can
just
roll
the
dice
and
and
hope
that
there
is
no
liability
that
results
or
we
can
go
through
the
process
that
the
law
requires.
I
I
guess
you
know
I
you
know,
I
don't
want
to
I'll
set
the
apple
cart
too
much,
but
but
the
you
know
the
language
in
the
statute.
If
we're
going
to
follow
the
law,
we
should
follow
it
and
and
the
applicant
should
have
shown
that
they've
gone
through
the
reasonable,
feasible,
prudent
alternatives,
and
it
just
didn't
appear
that
we,
you
know,
followed
that
standard
tonight.
I
We
just
approved
the
building
permit,
which
is
fine,
which
is
our
prerogative,
there's
a
risk
of
course
that
that
there
could
be
some
liability
on
the
city
down
the
road
as
a
result
of
that.
So
my
my
question
is
whether
or
not
we
we
go
through
the
process
at
all
and
we
can
skip
the
process
like
we've
done
in
the
past
or
go
through
the
process
faithfully
to
the
law.
F
F
If
that
is
not
the
case,
then
frankly,
we
were
not
informed
of
enough
of
it
to
make
that
moving
forward.
So
I
don't
know
if
that's
on
the
applicant
or
us
or
anyone
else,
but
I
mean
I
prefer
to
follow
the
law
if
at
all
possible
and
if
that's
the
case
I'd
rather
they
come
back
to
us
and
then
we
have
to
make
that
decision
as
a
council
at
least
then
we're
back
into
that
you
know.
F
What's
best
for
watertown
is
made
by
the
local
decision
makers
to
councilman
hoyer's
point
I
mean
I
don't
think
we're
gonna,
you
know
approve
something
that
doesn't
make
sense,
so
I
don't
know
that,
helps
you
or
hurts
you
or
not
sure.
If
that
puts
more
work
onto
the
staff
or
not
so
I
mean
the
only
thing
we
can
do
is
pass
out
the
information
they
got
to
make
the
decision
on
to
what
they
want
to
do.
A
H
H
H
Point
if,
if
the
findings
aren't
definitive,
that
we've
exhausted
all
options
like
shippo
was
hoping
we
would
it'll
get
filed
away,
but
with
the
note
on
it
that
that
was
the
case
and
that
and
so
in
moving
forward
on
subsequent
actions.
I
think
that
was
where
we
were
just
trying
to
figure
out.
You
know
to
make
sure
we
want
to
continue
to
follow
the
statute
and
work
through
it.
I
think,
is
the
angle:
matt
was
working
from
there
on
future
cases.
A
Okay,
and-
and
I
will
second
that
I
mean
I
understand
where
matt
was
coming
from-
the
staff
really
was
eviscerated
by
trying
to
do
their
job,
and
I
guess
he's
kind
of
getting
at
that.
Do
you
want
them
to
continue,
and
you
know
people
don't
like
it,
they
don't
like
it
and
it's.
We
just
passed
our
overlay
district,
which
is
our
own
historic
preservation,
and
we
gave
a
variance
to
it.
So
she
didn't
follow
that
with
her
design
either.
So
I
guess
for
to
protect
the
staff.
A
G
A
If,
if
we
could
like,
if
you
just
told
the
staff,
hey
just
ignore
the
laws,
we'll
we'll
just
take
we'll
blank
out
our
our
downtown
overlay
district
rigs
and
we'll
talk
to
the
state
about
maybe
getting
us
out
of
the
historic
district
or
just
keep
moving
forward
with
the
good
faith
that
we
are
going
to
ask
people
to
try
to
comply
and
see
what
they
come
up
with.
Okay,.
E
I
think
the
biggest
thing
with
that
process
is
just
making
sure
that
when
people
come
into
buildings
and
they're
looking
at
doing
renovations
and
the
first
time
they
come
in
for
a
permit
one,
we
need
to
make
them
a
little
more
aware
of
the
overlay
district
so
that
they
know
it
exists.
It's
a
new
thing.
I
mean
we
had
multiple
situations
here
where
folks
allegedly
didn't
know
about
it.
E
The
people
that
are
doing
the
design
work
can
make
sure
they're
trying
to
do
the
right
thing
from
the
start
too,
because
this
one
was
kind
of
a
miscommunication
mess
right,
and
maybe
it
was
just
that
from
the
start
with
this
one
and
it's
our
first
time
really
applying
the
overlay
district.
So
I
mean
it
it's
kind
of
inevitable.
We
were
gonna,
probably
hit
some
bumps
with
it
yeah
I
don't
know
this
is
kind
of
a
special
circumstance.
I
hate.
E
Should
still
continue
to
try
to
adhere
to
it
as
best
we
can,
if
it
is
a
conversation
that
we
do
want
to
have
where
we
look
at
exiting.
If
that's
a
thing,
I
don't
think
it's
a
thing
at
this
point
I
don't
know,
then
maybe
we
look
at
it,
but
otherwise
we
should
always
be
trying
to
follow
the
law
to
the
best
of
our
ability
and.
A
M
Thank
you
mayor.
I
I
don't.
I
don't
fault
the
staff
for
this
situation
at
all.
I
think
from
everything
I've
seen
and
heard
I
think
they've
done
what
they
should.
I
think
on
occasion
a
detail
might
get
by,
but
for
the
future
it
might
be
beneficial
for
us
to
provide
a
form
that
would
tell
whoever's
in
in
in
that
development
process
or
looking
to
develop
or
at
least
show
them
how
they
can
locate
information.
So
they
have
it
all
that
way.
We
can
always
say
hey.
We
gave
you
the
former.
B
M
O
This
is
not
on
shippo,
so
I
don't
want
to
shift
subjects
number
one.
I
wish
I
was
like
our
esteemed
public
works
director
and
had
the
background
of
a
string
of
lights
above
his
head
with
guitars
hanging
over
his
left.
Shoulder
that's
pretty
cool,
but
second,
I
wanted
to
address
two
things.
One
from
about
15
minutes
ago
I
got
a
text
from
byron
police.
O
He
would
be
honored
to
head
that
committee,
so
I
think
we're
good
to
go
there
until
we
get
the
last
member
and
finally
to
just
circle
back
with
ice
since
councilman
albertson
didn't
bring
it
up.
I
do
not
want
to
do
the
town
of
watertown
a
disservice.
I
don't
want
to
be
up
here
and
argue
against
a
city
hall
based
on
cost
and
use
the
ice
rink
as
a
tool
to
use
that.
O
Whether
that
means
no
ice,
which
I
have
always
said,
is
a
very
real
possibility-
a
very
cheap
sheet
of
ice
to
go
along.
There
will
always
be
two
sheets
of
ice,
so
one
cheap
sheet
added
to
the
ice
that
we
already
have,
or
I
will
just
say
that
the
count
the
committee
was
extremely
close
to
getting
ice
done
in
town
before
covet
hit,
and
it
just
threw
everything
into
a
maelstrom
that
we
are
just
now
trying
to
figure
out.
O
I
finally
realized
we
will
never
find
that,
but
I
don't
want
to
do
a
disservice
to
city
hall,
to
these
other
capital
improvement
projects
or
to
ice
or
to
the
people
who
have
been
waiting
on
all
of
those
projects.
By
constantly
arguing.
I
think
that
we
need
to
have
a
proposal,
and
that
is
going
to
start
with
a
proposal
for
ice
so
that
we
know
what
we're
going
to
be
spending.
O
So
I
think
that
it
is
up
to
the
ice
committee
and
I
be
more
than
happy
to
always
lead
that
to
bring
forward
a
proposal,
or
at
least
one
of
two
proposals,
whether
like
a
high
end,
a
low
end,
a
high
end,
no
ice
or
no
ice
and
cheap
ice,
and
that
the
council
can
then
vote
on
what
we're
going
to
do
moving
forward.
I
think
we
owe
it
to
the
city
of
watertown
and
I
think
that
this
council
is
the
one
to
finally
take
the
stand
and
resolve
this
issue
once
and
for
all.
O
A
M
To
make
one
comment
I
would
be
interested
in
if
it
would
be
okay
with
the
committee
to
be
a
part
of
that
committee,
and
one
of
the
reasons
is
because
I
am
the
liaison
of
the
park
and
wreck,
and
I
know
that
terry
as
terry
had
mentioned,
that
he
thought
it
would
be
a
good
idea
as
well
that
I
I
would
be
a
part
of
that
plus.
I
do
have
a
lot
of
history
from
some
time
back.
A
H
Yes,
sorry
mayor,
I
felt
his
appropriate
time
to
chime
in
on
the
the
facility
discussions.
I
know
we've
exhausted
that
here
tonight,
but
the
one
I
wanted
to
mention
that
hasn't
been
brought
up
in
too
much
detail.
That,
I
think,
is
part
of
this
entire
bonding
discussion
that
we
may
get
into,
and
I
just
want
to
put
a
shameless
plug
in,
for
it
is
the
street
facility.