Anderson Pool – Located at 8730 – 22nd Avenue.                                                                               http://www.kenosha.org/departments/parks/pools.html

At Monday night’s Finance Committee, one of the agenda items was the resolution to amend the city of Kenosha’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2012 by increasing the funds for Anderson Pool by $160,500 and decreasing the funds for park renovations by $30,000, for the Comprehensive Outdoor Recreational Plan (CORP) implementation for Forest Park by $66,500, and by creating outside funding of $64,000 from Anderson cell tower collections and Anderson Park impact fees, for a net change of $0.  This would bring the total alloted for the Anderson Pool work to $560,500.

Kenosha’s director of engineering Shelly Billingsley stated that the quote received was not even in the vicinity of the budget.  Bids came in higher than expected.  Therefore, the work had to be re-bid.  They then lowered the cost of the project by $70,000 and re-bid the project.  The bid came from a company in Madison, which was still higher than the budgeted amount.  Therefore, there was the need for the movement of the existing CIP funds.

Alderperson David Bogdala wanted to know if these were 2012 line items.  Carol Stancato, director of finance, said that they were.  The amount being moved from the park renovation takes that line item down to $0 for 2012.  There was $1.9 million in the outdoor recreational plan.  Forest Park was one project in that plan.  The Department of Public Works recommended that the work not be done in 2012 in order to fund the Anderson Pool work.

The question was raised whether or not the work would be done in Forest Park in 2013.  Billingsley said that a storm water study is being now.  Because two different analyses are being done, the department decided to postpone Forest Park until the storm water analysis is complete.

Bogdala wanted to know if this would impact any other plans in the CORP Plan, and he was told that it would not.  Billingsley will prepare the change request.  Forest Park will be lined out, and a new line item added.

This item was also on the agendas of the Board of Park Commissioners meeting and the Public Works Committee meeting.  It was unanimously approved at the park meeting, but the Public Works meeting did not take place due to a quorum issue.  Therefore, once it got to the Common Council meeting, it was deferred for two weeks to allow it to be voted on at the next Public Works meeting.

The Board of Park commissioners also voted unanimously to approve the award of the contract for the Anderson Pool splashpad construction to Scherrer Construction Co. (Burlington, Wisconsin) in the amount of $300,000, but again, since the Public Works Committee did not meet, once it got to the Common Council meeting, it was deferred for two weeks to allow it to be voted on at the next Public Works meeting.

Anderson currently has two pools with:

• A tot pool with small children’s slide;
• Two water slides – 200′ slide and a 6′ high/10′ long drop slide;
• An Olympic-size pool with diving board;
• Lockers; and
• Deck chairs and umbrella tables.

____________

In other business conducted at the meeting:

• Proposed resolutions to impose special charges upon various parcels of property located in the city were approved unanimously.  These had to do with property maintenance re-inspection fees ($3,982), boarding and securing ($2,547.01), grass and weed cutting ($17,634.33), trash and debris removal ($300), and graffiti removal ($160).
• The request from Bridget Bielecki, Kmart Express, LLC, for a resolution to rescind an administrative fee for a special assessment for a boarding and securing at 4122 – 52nd Street was denied unanimously.  The requester was not present at the meeting.
• The request from Brad Kellor, Pop’s Place, to rescind penalty fees in the amount of $90 for an illegal sign installation at 3214 – 60th Street, was also unanimously approved.  Kellor, the owner, was present, as well as the alderperson of the district, Scott Gordon.  Gordon said that it was a mistake made by the owner.  Jeff LaBahn, director of community development and inspections, said that the work had been done prior to obtaining a permit.  Chairman Daniel Prozanski wanted to know the chain of events.  LaBahn explained that the owner changed the name of the business, and the sign went with it.  “The owner never gave it a second thought.  He replaced the old sign with a new sign, and it was hung in the same spot.”  Prozanski asked if there was a five-day leeway, and LaBahn said no.  Prozanski said that a double fine didn’t seem right.  He asked if there was anything that the business owner gets, and LaBahn said no.  “If the applicant is unsure, he/she needs to ask questions.  If he had asked, he would have found out that he needed a permit.  In 2010, he got a license for a new sign.  Prozanski made a motion to reduce the fine by half.  Bogdala wanted to know if this was going to become the new standard practice.  “It seems that countless of these come forward, and they are not rescinded unless there has been an error by the city.  Less than one month ago, we denied one.”  Prozanski said that each one is dealt with on its own merit.  LaBahn said that the actual permit was $90; doubling it made it $180.  His request was that the $180 be cut to $90.  “Basically, what you’ve done is cut the extra fine in half.”
• Another agenda item was the agreement by and between the city and Veolia ES Solid Waste Midwest, LLC, for recycling processing and marketing services for recyclable materials.  Bogdala wanted to know if this was a pressing contract issue that needed to be resolved today.  Mike Lemens, director/city engineer, said that the city has been without a contract for one and one-half to two years, and that there is no cost to the city.  There have been consumer price increases.  Bogdala, therefore, made a motion to defer for two weeks, since the Public Works Committee did not meet on the issue.  Alderperson Rocco LaMacchia voted against the deferral, but it was approved by a vote of 5 to 1.
• The remaining two agenda items were discussions on the status of litigation and proposed settlements.  The committee went into closed session on these two items.  The first had to do with the settlement between Kenosha County and the city, and it was approved by a vote of 5 to 1.  Bogdala was the sole dissenting voter because he said that this was merely a discussion item.  No vote needed to be taken.  The second agenda item regarding the status of litigation regarding Henley, et. al., vs. the Kenosha Housing Authority, had been pulled from the agenda, stated Ed Antaramian, the city attorney.