Weekly Recap – Nov 25, 2024

This past week’s council items were relatively quiet, but two stood out as particularly interesting. Context for the work session is from this short post about the 2025 budget.

Town Halls Are Coming Back to Two Rivers

First, some absolutely fantastic news for residents… The City Council has listened to the residents who signed the Airbnb petition, and Town Halls are officially in the works! This is a huge step forward in mending the gap between the city and its residents, and it wouldn’t have happened without your support.

We made it clear that residents want a stronger voice in the decisions shaping our community. These Town Halls will provide a relaxed, welcoming environment where residents can share ideas, raise concerns, and ask questions… Without the pressure of formal council procedures or cameras.

Here’s what you need to know:

  • What are Town Halls? They’re informal conversations with a few members of the City Council. It’s your chance to talk openly about what’s important to you.
  • When will they happen? The plan is to hold these sessions four times a year, starting in early 2025. Each session will be held at places like the library or senior center to make them accessible to everyone.
  • What’s the goal? To foster real, back-and-forth conversations between residents and city leaders. By keeping things informal and approachable, these Town Halls will make it easier for more people to participate and connect with our city.

This change shows what we can accomplish when we come together as a group. Let’s keep the momentum going!

Two Simple Things You Can Do to Help
  1. Show up for the Town Halls: Council member Stechmesser made it clear that participation is key. If attendance is low, these sessions will be canceled after just one or two tries. Let’s show that we value this opportunity by showing up.
  2. Stay Involved: Stay informed by joining our newsletter. It’s a great way to stay informed on what’s happening with future of Two Rivers. You can also sign the Airbnb petition to help protect our neighborhoods and prioritize families over tourism.

Property Tax Example

The budget discussion was fairly uneventful. Mr. Wachowski was similarly skeptical of the building permits projection as I was, even more so that it’s now raised another $10k. But Mr. Buckley felt it was in line with earlier years. Other than that, there was very little discussion about the budget. Vote on the budget will take place tomorrow.

But what wasinteresting is that Mr. Buckley put together a property tax example for 2025. The example is for a home that was previously assessed at $100k and received the default 94.4% increase during the citywide revaluation this year.

Your taxes will depend on how much your property value increased – less than the average 94.4%, for example, would mean a smaller hike. Charts like this are honestly confusing, making it hard to know how it applies to your own property. But what I think is important is to look at how much the four different areas affect your property tax bill.

Concern about Closed Sessions

As an aside, for awhile I’ve been skeptical that we’re using Closed Sessions appropriately. Closed sessions allow council members to privately discuss sensitive topics, such as property negotiations or personnel matters. While these are permitted under state law, they are only allowed for specific reasons, and agendas must clearlystate why.

This weekend I emailed the city leaders about my concerns on how closed sessions are handled. I feel like the reasons we’ve seen on agendas are too broad and too vague, and in one case last month the reason was entirely missing.

Residents have a right to know what’s being discussed behind closed doors and to trust that private meetings are truly necessary. I absolutely do not think anyone is acting in bad faith, I just think we need to review how we’re doing things. Mr. Buckley has forwarded my email to city Legal, and we’ll see what they think.

My Email to the City:

Hi everyone,

Not that I am threatening legal action in any way, so please don’t take it that way… But just so you are aware, council members are personally liable for WOML violations just for knowingly attending illegal meetings.

I already think we play a bit fast and loose with closed sessions, but the agenda/minutes from November 18th (page 9) for 19.85(1)(f) seem worse than normal:

  • Discuss possible property acquisition
  • Discuss possible assistance to development project
  • Discuss matters pertaining to property sale agreement

It’s too vague. The onus is on you guys to prove it’s necessary to go into closed session, and even then, it’s only allowed for the specific parts that would harm the city’s negotiating position. 

The next reason for closed session for 19.85(1)(g) was just blatantly wrong because it doesn’t even list a reason… Just citing the statute isn’t sufficient notice for closed session.

The quickest way to read about it is probably the WOML Compliance Guide on page 29.

https://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/office-open-government/Resources/OML%20Guide_2024.pdf

And here’s one I didn’t know before… On the agenda for the room tax commission, closed session can’t be the first thing. The reason listed also probably isn’t sufficient reason to go into closed session.

https://mccmeetings.blob.core.usgovcloudapi.net/tworivrswi-pubu/MEET-Agenda-c7382115a58b45a1a9b458df64a3a751.pdf

Info about it is on the last page, lower-left part of the page:

https://www.doj.state.wi.us/sites/default/files/dls/ompr/OAG-66-93-boyd.pdf

Thanks,

Andre

Scroll to Top