Advisory — Green Bay, WI
Date: 2009-08-31
Time: 17:00

MINUTES
 ADVISORY COMMITTEE
 Monday, August 31, 2009
 City Hall, Room 604
 6:30 p.m.
Members Present: Council President Chris Wery, Ald. John VanderLeest, Ald.
Celestine Jeffreys, Ald. Jerry Wiezbiskie, Ald. Andy Nicholson

Members excused: Council Vice President Tom DeWane, Ald. Tom Weber

Others Present: Ald. Guy Zima, Ald. Dan Piton, Ald. Amy Kocha, Scott Matejov,
Chad Weininger, Atty. Kail Decker, Jason Wied, of the Green Bay Packers, Pat
Webb and Greg Kuehl of the Stadium District Board, members of the media.

1. Call to order.
The meeting was called to order at 6:40 p.m. by Ald. John VanderLeest. He
indicated that Ald. Tom Weber and Ald. Tom DeWane were excused and Council
Chairman Chris Wery would be arriving a little late.

2. Approval of the agenda.
Motion made by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Jeffreys to approve the agenda.
Motion carried.

3. Approval of the minutes of the June 1, 2009 Advisory Committee
 meeting.
Motion made by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Wiezbiskie to approve the
minutes of the June 1, 2009 meeting. Motion carried.

 5. Update on RTA.
Transit Director Chris Phelps thanked the Committee for inviting him back,
stating that this is his third time here to talk about RTA’s. A copy of a power point
presentation was distributed. He indicated that he was here during the budget
process to bring them up to speed on seeking approval of a resolution in support
of a Regional Transit Authority. He stated that he would be giving a presentation
that he has given to a meeting of elected officials throughout our service area
about three weeks ago to update everyone on where they are with this process.
He said since the budget was passed and approved, there were a number of
RTA’s created in the state, mainly in Eau Claire and in Dane County. When the
legislature goes back into session in September RTA’s will be back on their
agenda notably for areas in the Fox Cities and Milwaukee County. Mr. Phelps
said in spring some of the elected officials in Madison that they weren’t hearing
from the community that this was an important issue and thus they hosted a
meeting with elected officials to share where they are. He indicated that they are
basically asking for the committee’s support for a resolution that could be found
in the back of the packet. The presentation has been presented to and approved
by the Village of Ashwaubenon, Bellevue and City of DePere and will be
presented to Allouez and Wrightstown and possibly the County. He stated that
the resolution was developed from feedback from the meeting with elected
officials and the Chamber of Commerce.

The power point was presented with main points as follows:
 Definition of an RTA, Green Bay Metro Service Area includes
Ashwaubenon, Allouez, Bellevue, Green Bay and De Pere. Metro is funded partly
through Federal Operating Assistance last year about $2.4 million, $2.6 million
this year, with formula funding based on population, population density and
revenue miles of service. He stated that with the census next year our urbanized
area is expected to exceed 200,000 and when that happens we will lose our
Federal Operating Assistance. Mr. Phelps explained the various tiers that
comprise the Federal Transit funding for Wisconsin and said we are in Tier B with
population between 50,000 and 200,000 and are eligible for operating assistance
until we exceed the 200,000 population. Based on conversations with Wis. DOT,
he estimates that once we lose the operating assistance, the state will equalize
the funding throughout Tier B and we expect that the net result will be a net
reduction of $550,000 in funding from state and federal. He said the best case
scenario is that we lose $550,000; worst case is we lose entire operating
assistance.

Mr. Phelps reviewed the makeup of Metro’s budget which is comprised of
Federal and State Operating Assistance, local dollars from participating
municipalities, fare box revenue, advertising and interest revenue, 30% of their
budget is federal combined with state operating assistance at 27%, which make
up 57% combined. He stated that the City has contracts with participating
municipalities and their rate is based on a proportionate level based on how
many route miles they go into each city. Mr. Phelps stated that if we lose federal
dollars local municipalities would need to make up 59% of that budget, which,
given our current funding agreements would not be possible. He reviewed the
Transit /System Flexibility Protection Act of 2007 at the Federal level, which is
the 100 bus issue where funding is not based on population estimate but on a
level of service estimate, which is 100 buses or less. He stated that at our peak
service we have 32 pieces of equipment. The debate in Congress at this time is
what level of operating assistance we would receive and said it could be a sliding
scale from nothing up to 50% of your operating assistance. He stated that we
are asking for authorizing legislation that would allow for the creation, operation
and dissolution of RTA’s. He said we raised fares and cut service January 5 th of
this year. Mr. Phelps discussed the need for regionalization stating that our
system is based on travel patterns that used to bring people from the suburbs
into the downtown area and said the destination areas have changed a lot and
our system is based on an old way of doing things. He said Transit can’t get to
some outlying schools and employment centers based on their funding
agreements right now and need to find a way to regionalize our service to benefit
all citizens in our service area.

Mr. Phelps reviewed the resolution stating that it is not a commitment or an
obligation but is asking legislature for permission to decide what we want to do
locally. It calls for a referendum process so there will be a public referendum no
matter what we decide to do locally and asks for creation of an RTA. Ald.
VanderLeest stated that there is no discussion about sales tax which Mr. Phelps
said the resolution does not address how to fund an RTA, simply asks for the
creation of one and said sales tax is one tool in the toolbox that municipalities
could use for funding and said this would be voted on in a referendum. Ald.
VanderLeest referred to the Protection Act of 2007 and asked if another
resolution could be brought forward to support this Act? He stated that he is not
supportive of a sales tax and inquired if Mr. Phelps could research a County
system or other opportunities. Mr. Phelps said circulating a second resolution for
the federal issue was discussed at the meeting with elected officials and said
they will be bringing that forward but said the timing was to get the local
municipalities because the Assembly will be coming back into session.

Motion made by Ald. Vander Leest, second by Ald. Jeffreys to support a
Resolution to endorse the Transit Protection Act of 2007. Motion carried with
Ald. Nicholson voting No.

Discussion: Ald. Zima confirmed that if this Act is passed, we could continue
operating the way we are? C. Phelps said this is up for debate right now in
Congress but said it’s moving in the right direction.

Motion made by Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald. Wiezbiskie to forward the Draft
Resolution Supporting the Formation of the Greater Green Bay Regional Transit
Authority to the full Council.

Ald. VanderLeest stated he feels we are headed in the direction of a local sales
tax and is not supporting this resolution. Ald. Piton asked where the County is at
researching a County run plan? Ald. VanderLeest responded that it has been
discussed in the past but no research has been done on it to his knowledge. Ald.
Zima expressed concern about a Regional Transit Authority being an
autonomous entity, which he said means another taxing entity. He questioned
the potential of losing $500,000 or more assuming that is a cost without any
reductions in our costs or increases in revenues. He suggested looking at our
most used routes to increase revenues and looking for alternatives ways to get
people where they need to go without forming a Regional Authority. He
expressed concern about another separate taxing authority who won’t be
answerable to the public citing NWTC, water bills, sewer bills etc. and said the
public has very remote input over those budgets. Ald. Zima said when they don’t
have to answer to anybody, his thought is that they don’t have the same worry
about what the costs are. He would like us to research any method possible to
stay within our budget and feels it’s just tax shifting, adding that it might take the
Transit budget out of the city budget but said in the long term somebody has to
pay for it. He feels it’s not saving and not really addressing the problem, adding
that he would rather absorb the cost and keep control. He said Mr. Phelps’
presentation does not address money and stated that he is offended by that.

C. Phelps said the Transit System Flexibility Protection Act of 2007 is an issue he
has been working on since 1996 and this is the type of movement we are seeing.
He stated that the presentation was designed to show that we are at a
crossroads and based on our current funding agreements we are not able to
provide meaningful services throughout the community. The presentation was
also given to highlight the need for a new way of doing something and not flush
out the details on who serves and what serves and how we’re going to fund it.
He indicated that the resolution was drafted for municipalities to highlight the
need to do something differently; it doesn’t create anything; it doesn’t approve
anything and it doesn’t make anything. He said our growth has shifted to other
areas and we can’t get there. Last year we had a spike in ridership but also saw
$4 a gallon for gasoline. He said today we announced a realigning of the routes
for the first time in 14 years. Mr. Phelps said currently a student at St. Norbert
College has an hour and a half bus ride to get to Prevea Clinic on Ramada Way.

Ald. Wery inquired if there is anything to prevent RTA Board members to be
made up of elected officials? Mr. Phelps responded that this is a bylaws issue
and each municipality who participates has to agree on this. He stated that the
resolution outlines a two-step process: 1) do you want to create the Greater
Green Bay Regional Transit Authority? 2) how do you want to fund that
authority? He summed up by stating that we are asking for the ability to decide
what to do locally. Ald. Zima said we have to examine the consequences of what
an RTA will have on us to decide if we want to create one and said the more
regional something gets, the less control we have over them and again stated
that he is really worried about another new tax in the community. He inquired if
it’s possible to set up our Transit Authority in a different manner and make the
Authority strictly the City of Green Bay and people would contract with us to
provide services to their community so that the home base is just the city of
Green Bay so we can manage to keep under 200,000. Mr. Phelps responded
that how the urbanized area is determined happens at the federal level and is
determined by Congress and said we service 80% of the urbanized area. He
said after the census is completed next year it will take 18-24 months for the
process to be finalized and that’s when the fallout hits us.

Ald. Wiezbiskie stated that we are getting away from the agenda discussing the
cost of an RTA and are here to try to take advantage of what is available to us
through the resolution. Motion made by Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald. Vander
Leest to open the floor to allow interested parties to speak. Motion carried.

Brad Sauer from Green Bay Metro who lives in DePere addressed the committee
stating that the issue here is to open up a doorway in case we lose the federal
funding. He stated that he would not want Green Bay to be in a position in 2012
or 2013 where we lose our federal funding and this possible way to fund it has
been closed because Green Bay did not wish to be part of a regional RTA. He
said Transit did a massive shift in routes which hasn’t been done for 15 years
and he’s heard positive things from the changes and are pleased they can now
get to Sybil Hopp and Walmart in DePere. He urges support of the Committee in
passing this resolution on to the Council and said surrounding states have
passed legislation to allow cities to create regional transit authorities, which gives
them the option to do so.

Karen Mason, 1603 Windsor Drive, stated that she and her mother take the bus
and are at poverty level. She indicated that they were so happy to be able to get
to Target and places in Bellevue and now that’s been taken away from them.
She said their only alternative is to take a cab, which they can’t afford and said
the citizens were willing to pay additional taxes for Lambeau Field and asked why
we can’t put taxes in for a transit system that people depend on everyday and
said we don’t have a subway system here.
Jamie Straubel, 2362 Manitowoc Road stated that he began using the bus last
year when he lost his job and vehicle. He indicated that he has not been hired
for jobs because he is limited on weekends and cannot work Saturdays or
Sundays and would like to see longer service on Saturday and service on
Sunday. He said if creating an RTA would help to get longer service on
weekends, he would support that.

Motion made by Ald. Wiezbiskie, second by Ald. Nicholson to return to regular
order of business. Motion carried. Ald. Wery stated that he has been the
Council rep on the Transit Commission the past 5½ years and said an RTA has
been discussed for three years and feels this is something we need to look at.
He said we are looking at a $1.8 million hole in the city budget and said he can’t
imagine putting this negative number in the budget. He feels we need to pass
this on and then look at how we’re going to fund it. Ald. Zima said many years
ago there was an attempt to get rid of transit and it was voted down 3 to 1 in a
referendum to keep it because there are people who need it and feels the
community supports it. He again said talking about creating an RTA without
talking about the implications is wrong and said it will come in some form of taxes
and wishes to hear what safeguards we are going to put in place to prevent that
from happening. Ald. Wery said it may be helpful to have a county leader who is
a supervisor to put that forward.

A vote was taken on the motion to support sending the Resolution Supporting the
Formation of the Greater Green Bay Regional Transit Authority on to the Council.
Motion carried with Ald. Vander Leest and Ald. Nicholson voting No.

Ald. VanderLeest motioned, second by Ald. Nicholson to direct Transit staff to
investigate and report on how a county run system would be run and funded. Mr.
Phelps stated that he can look into it but said the funding is still going to come
through the Feds. Motion carried with Ald. Wiezbiskie voting No and Ald.
Jeffreys not voting.

 4. Request by Ald. Wery for a report by the Stadium District Board and
 Green Bay Packers regarding the use of Lambeau Field for large-
 scale events as promised to the citizens of Green Bay.
Motion made by Ald. Wiezbiskie, second by Ald. Jeffreys to hold this item until
Ald. Wery arrives. Motion carried.

Ald. Wery stated that he brought this forward because he thought the public
expected more events to be held at Lambeau. Pat Webb, Executive Director of
the Stadium District Board distributed two handouts, one summarizing the Green
Bay Press-Gazette articles outlining the history of when this was being passed
and said the expectation was that more events would be held at Lambeau Field.
He stated that they agree that there should be larger scale events to be held
there and said it’s not without some effort that they’ve tried to do it. He reviewed
some key lease provisions regarding having special events at the stadium. He
said the reality is that all parties, the City, the Packers and Stadium Dist. Board
need to be on board for an event to be held there. He said the only time the field
is available is the month of June, to schedule something. The District Board and
the City have the right to schedule one event per month during the off season
and have scheduling priority from February 1 through May 15. The team has
scheduling priority from May 16 through June 30. (A detailed list of provisions is
attached to these minutes). Mr. Webb reviewed events that have been held at
Lambeau and said finding an event that fits within the confines of the city’s
contract with the Packers is difficult and said the months that the stadium is
available for outside events, February through June are not condusive to outdoor
events. He stated that protecting the playing surface is the No. 1 priority. He
reviewed events they have done like Snocross and Leap of Faith, Frozen Tundra
Hockey Classic and upcoming LZ Lambeau. He indicated they have made a bid
for college football and checked into college ice hockey, International Hockey,
College Lacrosse and Drum Corps International, but those didn’t work out partly
because the field is too small for some events and stated that some major
concerts require a six or seven figure up front guarantee, which the District
doesn’t have at its disposal.

Mr. Webb said they are currently looking at a floor covering to cover the playing
field to be able to hold concerts and said they will try this covering on the practice
field first. He reviewed the event impediments which included: concerns with the
playing field, dates not favorable, concessions revenue flows to Packers,
sponsorship conflicts, no risk capital in the District, club seats and skyboxes
excluded from use for events, expensive for smaller events to be held, among
others. Jason Wied, VP of Administration for the Green Bay Packers stated that
the concert business had dropped in stadium settings and said many of the big
ones demand $2 or $3 million guarantees no matter how many tickets are sold.
He reviewed the number of events that have been held at Lambeau in the Atrium
and other amenities which totals between 500 and 800 a year and said 70
percent of those visitors come from outside Green Bay. He said the Packers try
to support any effort to bring people to the city and said the team sees itself as
an economic catalyst for the area. He indicated they have been studying things
like removing the glass from skyboxes and getting a new sound system. Mr.
Webb said most concert promoters want a piece of the 10% ticket tax that they
have on concert tickets. He said the most important thing the Packers can do is
win, citing the two playoff games in 2008 that were held and the economic
benefit.

Mr.Webb said they are looking at retiring the debt in 2011 and repealing the
sales tax by 2015, adding that it is necessary to continue the sales tax for a few
years to build up a maintenance fund. Ald. Vander Leest said he is supportive of
the Packers and Lambeau being an economic tool and would like to see college
football here, possible partnership with the Badgers. He suggested a 3-4 day
event and the possibility of holding a country music event. Ald. Wery thanked
Mr. Webb and Mr. Wied for their update and offered help from the city or the
Economic Development Department. Mr. Webb and Mr. Wied said they would
be happy to come back periodically and give updates.

Motion made by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. Vander Leest to receive and
place on file. Motion carried.

  6. Request by Ald. Wery to restore the position of Council Assistant by
 shifting the Mayor’s Assistant/Grant Writer back under the City
 Council.
Motion made by Ald. VanderLeest, second by Ald. Nicholson to approve.
Discussion: Ald. Wery stated that he brought this forward because it was his
understanding that Andre Jacque was moving over to Transit. Scott Matejov said
there was some discussion about Andre moving to Transit to assist with the RTA
but said there is no current plan for him to move over there. Ald. Wery stated
that in the past there was a half time assistant to the City Council, Dave Nennig
and Grant Staszak, who would be the Council’s eyes and ears at City Hall. Scott
reviewed the duties of Andre’s position which included media advisories, press
releases, assisting with grant writing which has brought millions of dollars into the
city, helps coordinate and assist with special events and more importantly the
position is tailored more toward constituent services and said Council members
reach out to that position for constituent inquiries. Ald. Wery stated the position
could be grant writer/Council assistant from the sound of it. Ald. VanderLeest
said the Mayor has 2.5 full time positions and said previous councils did have an
assistant and feels this position should be formally put under the City Council. He
stated that helping constituents is mostly what Council does. S. Matejov said he
agrees and said it could be written into the job description and said they enjoy
the relationship they have with Council and if there were any sort of questions or
concerns with people not receiving a response, we would want to address that.
He said from a budget standpoint and functionality, it helps the Mayor’s Office
and said we want to be there for Council and said if it’s the separation they’re
looking for, he couldn’t speak to that but said on a day-to-day basis the position
is there to assist the Mayor and Council and with the limited resources we have,
we feel it’s working pretty well.

Ald. Wiezbiskie stated that he thought the position was there to help Council and
said he has been using him as an assistant and Andre covered his phone calls
when he was on vacation and has gone out to assist with constituent issues. He
said he relies on both Andre and Scott when the Mayor is not available. Ald.
Jeffreys inquired how they envision a person in this position helping Council in a
way that they are not helping now? Ald. Wery responded that it’s not so much
that the tasks would be different, but the reporting would be different and said
right now that position reports to the Mayor, not to the Council and they could
report to the Advisory Committee. He said if you need some work done or some
information from City Hall, Council would have someone here, and said
department heads are here but they report to someone else. Scott said they all
feel that they report to the Council as well and hopes that they all recognize that
and would receive response to a phone call or email. Ald. Wery said why not
have this position under Council since it sounds like they are working on
constituent issues much of the time? Scott responded that it’s broader than that
with a communication aspect in assisting with media and event coordination and
said it’s a city of 100,000 people and 12 council members and said the Mayor
cannot be at all places at one time and Andre and he frequently attend functions
that the Mayor cannot and Andre helps out with the Sustainable Task Force. He
suggested that before they make a decision, they take a broader look and study
the functionality of the office, the duties of both positions and how they can better
assist Council, without having to take this out of the budget.

Ald. VanderLeest said it’s not a budget item but to have the position report to the
Council President or Advisory Committee, as the County does. The Mayor
believes that Council now can contact anyone for a project Council wants done,
there are not complaints with it and would like to know if there is a specific
reason why Council wants to go in a different direction. Ald. VanderLeest stated
that they want some independence from the Mayor’s Office, adding that he was
elected to represent his constituents, not the Mayor and said the Mayor’s Office
may not agree on every issue or concept with constituents and they want
someone who will represent the Council. He feels the job description should be
changed and define who the position would report to. Ald. Zima commended
Ald. Wery for taking this initiative and said this is an attempt to give the Council
members a tool that can be useful to them and said historically Council had a
position to assist with research or problems they had. He said at some point,
they may want to put a job description to that position and said when a Council is
basically toothless, no secretary, no funds and no employees, it’s hard for them
to be a proper check and balance. He agrees that they should support this idea
and put a job description to it. He indicated that he felt comfortable using Dave
Nennig in the past and suggested locating this position in the Clerks Office or
somewhere other than the Mayor’s Office and said they will need someone who
has the skills to help Council and said he has not utilized Andre as Ald.
Wiezbiskie has.

Ald. Piton stated he is curious about how this will be presented to Council, hash
out job description now? Ald. Wery stated that Human Resources would need to
draw up a job description. Ald. Piton asked if the budget would shift? Chad
Weininger responded that if a half position would be a line item shift under the
Council, it would increase the Council budget and decrease the Mayor’s. He
recommended talking with HR to talk through the issues of budget and job
description and iron those things out before presenting to Council, possibly
bringing it back to Advisory. Ald. Piton stated that he has not made up his mind
on this issue. Ald. Kocha expressed concern with putting HR through the work
before they agree that the concept is valid. She is not totally clear on the budget
impact and inquired if the Mayor’s Office would be willing to give up a half time
position, and work with less? She inquired about the position at Transit, asking if
this is a position that has been budgeted for but remained vacant and expressed
concern that despite this Council’s vote that we’re not hiring new people these
things keep creeping u. Ald. Wery said he believes there is a vacant position. C.
Weininger stated that there is a position that will work with marketing, legislative,
paratransit and the RTA issue.

Ald. Zima said the Council position has been usurped from the Council and the
discussion should be what is the job description going to be, what is that position
going to serve? He said we’re not adding or deleting and the idea is to make
sure the Council position is reinstated and said it got absorbed by the Mayor’s
Office and he doesn’t remember voting on this. Ald. Kocha said if we don’t have
the Mayor’s Office agree to let this half position go, that’s problematic and said
she has not had someone there for her formally since she was elected, but said if
the Mayor’s Office is saying that this position is there for them, she cautioned
about opening that door that’s going to mean spending more money. Ald. Wery
commented that the issues Council has been handling need them to be more
intrinsically involved and they can’t be here all of the time and need someone
here who answers to them. He said they can talk about teamwork but it is two
separate things; the Mayor and Council and more often than not, entirely different
opinions on how things should go. He said if you have someone who reports to
the Mayor and you have different requests coming from Council, the Council
priority will be pretty low. He feels it’s important to have someone on their team
(and we’re all one big team) but when it comes to policies, many times we’re not
and said we need someone here to poke into things and say they’re looking into
things for the Council or Advisory and he feels that carries more weight than the
Mayor’s Assistant helping Council. He believes we should say this is something
we want first and then ask HR to define the position.

Ald. VanderLeest said if the Council or the Mayor’s Office were to add any
positions, it would need to be approved by Personnel Committee and then
Council. He agrees there should be a separation and locate the position in a
room other than in the Mayor’s Office where they would be accessible to the
Council. He said if this is approved, details would need to be worked out and
said he would not be opposed to this position continuing to assist with some
things in the Mayor’s office. He indicated that he has gotten much busier with
constituent issues than in past years and said he will support restoring the
Council assistant position. Ald. Jeffreys stated that she is not quite hearing what
is missed by not having this position and she would like to know more specifically
from the Council members that have been here for a while what they have
missed when this is reported out at the next Council member. Ald. Wiezbiskie
stated that he hasn’t missed this and said there is always someone there for him
and have been enjoying assistance from the assistants and the department
heads and said they are doing a heck of a good job. He said they have opened
up Pandora’s box and he is not prepared to vote on this issue and questioned the
timing on this. Ald. Zima pointed out that what Ald. Wiezbiskie is enjoying, is what
the rest of them had before. He said there is just a shifting of a line item here
and no change in the budget. He said if this doesn’t pass, he’s going to ask Ald.
Wiezbiskie not to use that position anymore because that’s not part of that job
description and he will see that Council needs that position. Ald. Wiezbiskie
responded that he has not abused the position and has been taught to ask if you
need help and sometimes it’s a simple clarification. He stated that Andre
answered his constituent phone calls when he was on vacation.

Ald. Piton said during his recent vacation, his phones were covered by Andre and
it worked well. He expressed concern that Council could pretty quickly
overwhelm a half-time assistant. Ald. Kocha said she takes issue with the timing,
if this is being brought forward because Andre may be moving to a new job, that
means there is an additional position on the table of organization and said she is
looking at the whole picture. Ald. Wery said it’s up to the Mayor’s Office whether
or not the Mayor is moving someone to Transit and said it was his understanding
that Andre was moving over to a new position. Ald. Kocha inquired if the Transit
position is already budgeted? Scott responded that he is not aware if it or not.
Ald. Wery said that discussion has nothing to do with this item.

A vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried.

 7. Update on possible ordinance revisions to 27.620, the Sex Offender
 Residency Ordinance.
Asst. City Attorney Kail Decker distributed a copy of proposed changes to the
Sex Offender Residency Ordinance. He indicated that he had made a
presentation at the last meeting and was asked to recommend ways of improving
the ordinance. He said issues that were brought up were: access to information,
equity among those who were affected by the ordinance (sex offenders) issues
with general housing, open records, open meeting laws, issues within the Board,
and DOC issues. He stated that he made a significant number of changes and
said the changes basically clean up the ordinance and do not change the
information very much. He reviewed the major changes as follows: updated the
definition of a sex offender, formally was sex offense against a child, he said
there is no child victim there is a victim in the case. Designated Offender means
anyone who has been convicted under Chapter 948 which is crimes against
children. They must register under Wis. Stat. §301.45. Another slight change are
the exemptions which now do not have siblings and grandparents included in that
exemption. Two additional things: the residence is a facility that houses
individuals who have a medical, alcohol or drug treatment need. If that’s the only
thing that facility does, legally we could not bring that person before the board
without disclosing that information voluntarily. An example is the Jackie Nitschke
Center which is a four week inpatient facility. Another exemption is a resident
who resides in a monitored facility operated by an entity designated a non-profit
which only temporarily houses individuals for not more than 120 consecutive
days as a transitional living program under the authority of the Dept. of
Corrections. He cited the TLP at 1761 Shawano Ave. as being exempt. He said
the remainder of the things that are eliminated are redundant language, unclear
language or other language that doesn’t apply to the ordinance. In the Appeals
section, the changes add some factors the Board can consider such as the risk
for re-offense, whether the person shows remorse and whether the person has
rehabilitated and gives the Board more guidance and gives the actual procedure
from start to finish for the Board to follow.

Atty. Decker stated that he also researched information and said if an Act of God
knocks the house down, and the person wants to move back into the house after
it’s fixed, they will have to find somewhere outside the city to live not within the
red zone and will need to appear before the Board. It was recommended that he
go to surrounding communities to get a system where everyone is on the same
page and he said it would be difficult unless the action that this Board is taking is
to repeal this ordinance. Otherwise he said it’s difficult to get six communities to
all have a consistent ordinance and the only real effect would be to have the
same language. He received statistics for compliance rates from Tom Smith in
the DOC in 2007 14 referrals were made to the DA, in 2008, 31 referrals were
made for non-compliance and today there are 27 pending referrals and 30 open
non-compliant investigations. According to Mr. Smith the number of people non-
complying has increased.

Ald. VanderLeest expressed concern with the exemption that the DOC could
place people on Shawano in the TLP, adding that too many are being placed on
the west side and can live at this facility for 120 days. He inquired where this
exemption came from, and said he is opposed to that exemption. Atty. Decker
said this is something the DOC would favor and believes it came up in
discussions with the DOC. Ald. VanderLeest said the Board makes the decision
where offenders are allowed to stay and said this change in the ordinance would
overturn that. He said his intent is not to allow anyone to live for 120 days in that
facility and he does not support this change to the ordinance.
Motion made by Ald. Jeffreys, second by Ald.Wiezbiskie to open the floor to allow
interested parties to speak. Motion carried.

Jed Neuman with the 200 N. Jefferson Street, Green Bay, Corrections Field
Supervisor with the Dept. of Corrections said the 120 day language came from
State Statute in Oregon which they have been utilizing. He also stated that his
Dept. does not run the facility on Shawano Ave, they contract that out. He said
the intent of that facility is to provide a living place while a location is found and
cited the case of two gentlemen in the Brown County Jail who need to be
transported each morning and taken back, are chaperoned the entire time, and
said this is a tremendous taxing of resources on the agency. He said the
transitional living program is a facility which gives the individual the opportunity to
find employment to begin their treatment and whose family ties are broken and
every stable area of their lives that individuals have to work on. Ald. Wery
inquired if the facility on Shawano is monitored where the residents are confined?
Mr. Neuman said the individuals there are on electronic monitoring and some
offenders are on mandatory GPS monitoring. He said there are monitors that
check them intermittently throughout the day and night. He stated that each
resident there is given a schedule and said if someone is in violation there are
enhanced procedures which would come into play immediately. Mr. Neuman
said the Green Bay City Police Dept. has not had any problems with the TLP.
Ald. Nicholson inquired why individuals are in jail? Mr. Neuman responded that
they are in the jail now because they can’t go to the TLP either they’ve been
denied in the appeals process, didn’t get their appeal in time they were released
from an institution and said his department made a commitment to the
community that there would be no homeless sex offenders so they place them in
jail. Atty. Decker stated that another reason that this was brought forward is
because during meetings, a frequent justification for denial is that the individual
has not shown they can transition back into society. He noted several points
where they were leaving jail going to the TLP and had no history. He said this is
one way they can have the opportunity to prove they can transition back into
citizen life. Ald. Piton inquired about the denial rate at the TLP, to which Ald.
Decker said around 50% or approximately 30 or so. He asked about penalties to
which Atty. Decker said everyday is a violation. Ald. Wery said the perception
and concern is, do the residents at the TLP pose a threat to the neighbors? Ald.
VanderLeest said they just received this information today and he would like to
have time to review this and bring it back at the next Advisory Committee
meeting.

Motion made by Ald. VanderLeest, second by Ald. Nicholson to hold this item to
have time to review the information and bring it back at the next Advisory
Committee meeting and to share the proposed changes with the remainder of the
Council and to members of the Sex Offender Residency Board.

Brief discussion whether this item should be brought before Protection & Welfare
rather than Advisory? It was agreed to have it come back to Advisory
Committee. Ald. Wiezbiskie would like these changes shared with the Sex
Offender Board and said they were the people who were expressing concerns. A
vote was taken on the motion. Motion carried.
Motion made by Ald. Nicholson, second by Ald. VanderLeest to adjourn. The
meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.