Friends of Lakeside Park

1800logo copy

sidewalk

Double Standard?

by

Double Standard?

January 19, 2021

On Wednesday, January 13th, two citizens came and spoke at the City Council meeting for two minutes about putting a 4 way stop at three intersections.  City Engineer, Paul De Vries and the Advisory Traffic and Parking Board both recommended not changing the intersections.  There was an hour of discussion and at the end the council went against the recommendation of the Advisory Board and directed Mr De Vries and the Board to re-evaluate their decisions and study the issue more.  

Contrast this with what happened with Lakeside Park.  How many hours and how many people have stood in front of the council asking for a pause on the pavilion, a referendum, and to delay signing the Enhanced Agreement?  And why does Council member Degner speak how his decision is informed by the recommendations of the Advisory Parking and Traffic Board but when it comes to the Advisory Parks Board he ignores them as well as the people?  

Below is a detailed account of the meeting.

The presentation for the first ordinance (corner of Marquette and Follett St) began with information presented by city Engineer, (now the  new Public Works Director) Paul De Vries.  He explained that the Advisory Parking and Traffic Board recommended denying the request as the traffic data from the intersection did not meet the criteria for making it a 4 way stop.  Council member Dan Degner made a motion to deny the ordinance with a second by Council member Richards.  

Council member Hans commented that she relates to the concerns of the citizens as she had made a similar request for an intersection in another neighborhood.  She was told that what the citizens want may not be the best solution.  4 way stops do not necessarily slow people down.   She talked about being conflicted when what people want is not supported by engineering data.  She asked if  more law enforcement could be a solution.  

Next, Council member Degner agrees with Council member Hans and says the best option is for police to patrol the area more and he supports the Advisory Parking and Traffic Board’s decision to deny the motion.  Council member Allen comments next.  She said she “agrees with the motion to deny” but she is very aware of the speeding on Marquette Street as she lives 2 blocks away.  She suggests there are visibility issues and that it definitely needs to be looked into.

Finally, Council member Miller asks for alternatives from Paul De Vries.  He proposes driver education and says that vision issues can be investigated further.  He says lots of the responsibility falls on the driver and that there is not a ton more engineering that can be done, but they can try and work with the police department.  Council member Miller comments that it is frustrating that residents have concerns about what is happening on their streets and that nothing can be done for them.  She states that she will not support the denial.   

The board votes and the motion is denied with Hans, Degner, Richards and Kolstad voting in favor.  Giles, Allen and Miller vote no on the denial.  (Notice, Council member Allen said in the comment time that she was in favor of the denial, but she did not voted to deny.)  So the 4 way stop is denied.  

Then the second ordinance is presented (corner of Marquette and Cotton St) and again, the recommendation is to deny.  Council member Richards asks questions about signage options and there is more discussion about how the traffic counts are done.  Again, Council member Degner makes the motion to deny, Ms Hans seconds and the motion.  Degner again states that the Advisory Traffic and Parking Board’s  unanimous recommendation was to not pass the ordinance and that the solution is “better patrols.”  

On this vote, Council member Richards switches sides and the vote to deny fails.  Those voting in favor of the denial are Degner, Kolstad and  Hans.  

With this failed motion, Council member Degner immediately makes a motion to APPROVE the ordinance and it is seconded by Allen.  In the comment period, Degner says in light of the previous vote, he will change his vote to be in favor of the ordinance.  

Council member Miller makes an amendment to the motion to refer the ordinance back to the Advisory Parking and Traffic Board and it is seconded by Council member Hans.  (Council member Miller is the only one who seems to know what motions are appropriate)  There is more discussion with Paul De Vries about collecting more data and that it will take more time to do this.  That motion passes unanimously.

The final ordinance is about the corner of Roosevelt and East Bank Street.  Again, the recommendation is to deny.  Council member Miller asks about making a motion to refer the ordinance back to the Board and Paul De Vries talks about collecting much more information for the board and the council to address their concerns.  Council members Hans and Richards ask additional questions about traffic counts and intersections.  

Council member Degner makes a motion to deny the ordinance, and Hans seconds.  Degner citing what he has before as reasons to deny.  Council member Hans agrees with Degner, but asks that the Advisory Traffic and Parking Board look at how they are making decisions when people are coming to them and being denied.  She suggests the board look at the criteria they are using.  Council member Miller makes a motion to send the ordinance back to the board and it is seconded by Hans. 

Council member Hans says it is a good idea to “pause” with this and take time giving the board more opportunity to collect data and information.  The vote to refer the ordinance back to the board is 6-1 with all but Kolstad voting in favor.  

This discussion took almost an hour.  We are happy the Council is responding to citizens.  Can the many citizens who are concerned about Lakeside Park get the same consideration?

Can the many citizens who are concerned about the development plans for Lakeside Park get the same consideration?

We release information first to our email list.  If you want to be the first to know, click on the button below and sign up for our list.  We thank you for your interest in the facts of our cause.  Help us spread the information out in our community!

Click Here to Sign Up for our Mailing List
Donation and ornament information

#LetThePeopleDecide

Truth in Advertising

by

Truth - Your Taxes Will Go Up

January 6, 2021

Amy Schingen gave this presentation on Sept 23, 2020 at the Fond du Lac City Council meeting where the council tried to pass a binding agreement committing the city to spend millions of dollars.  Amy was responding to the full page advertisement that Lakeside Forward ran in the Action Advertiser on Sept 16th.  You can see the ad below.   

On September 16, 2020, Lakeside Forward paid to run this full page ad in the Action Advertiser.   They were also running radio ads to promote the Alternative Master Plan.

In an email sent September 14, 2020 to Lakeside Forward, Joe Moore stated that #3 is incorrect:  ” The city’s portion of the cost of improvements will have an effect on taxes.”    He also talks about other inaccuracies in radio ads that were running at the time.   In a return email, Lakeside Forward admits their ads are inaccurate and pulls them from the air.  This full page print ad is not canceled.

Concerning Item #1 in the Ad, The Enhanced Agreement commits the city to spend $5.2 million.   And Joe Moore quoted from the radio ad in his email, “As more area business step forward with financial backing, the remaining portion covered within the city budget will be reduced.” 

In fact, the enhanced agreement commits the city to a “relatively equal extent.” and if the city cannot fund, the donors do not fund.     The donors are NOT donating a “majority” of the cost (as stated in item #1)  or reducing the city’s obligation as more donors step forward. 

Concerning Item #2 in the Ad,  we are told that the building has been moved to the west.  There has been no amendment made to the AMP to show this has happened.  In any case, the building still appears to be on the peninsula.   The ad also states that the building has been downsized.  It is difficult to know what this means when we do not even know the size of the original building!  Where is it stated?  The only specific published information on the size of the building is the mention in the Enhanced Agreement that 2000 sq ft will be community space.  

Concerning Item #4 in the Ad, What exactly does “procedure would be in place with the city” mean?  Normally, selecting a vendor is done through a competitive bidding process set out in city code.  A Request for Proposal ( RFP) is issued.   In the Enhanced Agreement there is no provision for the city to be involved in the sublease to the restaurateur. 

Truth - Our taxes are going up and we don't know how much because there are no financial documents associated with the AMP.

Truth - Citizens need and deserve accurate information. We are shut out from the process. Decisions about a public park should be made in public.

We release information first to our email list.  If you want to be the first to know, click on the button below and sign up for our list.  We thank you for your interest in the facts of our cause.  Help us spread the information out in our community!

Click Here to Sign Up for our Mailing List
Donation and ornament information

#LetThePeopleDecide

A Look Back at 2020 – Lakeside Park

by

A Look Back at 2020 - Lakeside Park

January 4, 2021

2020 was extrardinary in so many ways.  We are deeply grateful for the people who came together over our beloved park.  Thousands of you have signed petitions, attended meetings, sent emails, made phone calls, donated to our legal fund and so much more.  There has been lots of work and lots of passion.  We are united in our common goal:  “Let the People Decide!”

Before we take a look a back at the events of 2020, let’s first take a look at a few milestone dates that have led us to where we are today:

2014 – City Council created the Lakeside Park Exploratory Committee (LPEC)

2015 – LPEC published its findings and 27 recommendations

2016 – City retained Excel Engineering to assist with the creation of the Lakeside Park Master Plan

June 2016 – City staff unveiled LPEC – inspired Master Plan

November 2016 – City Council modified the proposed Master Plan, deciding instead to build a brand new pavilion as well as commissioning a revised Master Plan that would locate the new pavilion on the site of the current one

April 2017 – City Council approved the revised Master Plan which included a new pavilion

2018 – City retained Angus Young to design the new pavilion

February 2019 – Angus Young unveiled design concepts for the new pavilion, which rejected Council

June 2019 – Angus Young produced a revised design for the new pavilion, which was endorsed by Council

 

October 2019 – Council Member Ben Giles says a group of business leaders were talking about ways to have a more elaborate plan for the park with possible donations to allow it to happen. Action was tabled until next meeting.

 

November 2019 – A Motion was made by Alicia Hans instructing city staff to delay further design work on the Lakeside Park Pavilion ($60,000 has already been spent) until February 15th, 2020 in order to allow the City Council to evaluate alternate proposals from potential community partners related to the Lakeside Park Master Plan and seconded by Ben Giles. The motion was Passed. Ayes: Degner, Giles, Hans, Merkel, Richards Nays: Kolstad, Miller.

 

November 25, 2019 – An Advisory Park Board member attempts to recommend development be limited to only the Pavilion footprint. The motion dies for lack of 2nd. A second motion was made by Brian Kolstad to recommend to City Council to not develop on the green space at the end of Main Street and seconded by Velesca Fleischman and the motion was Passed. Ayes: Dennis, Doll, Fleischman, Kiefer, Kolstad.  Nays: Teletzke There is no mention of developing Lighthouse Peninsula or Oven Island.

January 16, 2020 – Article appears in the FDL Reporter “Lakeside Park revised plan gets public reveal Monday in Fond du Lac: What to know.”  

January 20, 2020 – Lakeside Forward gives a presentation to the public at the Lakeside Park Pavilion. The presentation, which consists of 29 pictures, provides no firm designs or costs, only “white box” drawings with specific locations on Lighthouse Peninsula and Oven Island.  This was the first point at which the new plan was revealed to the public.

January 21, 2020– Lakeside Forward member emails to other members:

January 27, 2020 – Lakeside Forward gave presentation to the Park Board in the Council Chambers. Council member Donna Richards participates as a citizen speaking in favor of the plan. Park Board was not given the opportunity to weigh in with a recommendation for the Council.  This was the second and final opportunity for citizen input.

 

February 12, 2020 – Just 23 days after introduced to the public, the process for a brand new Pavilion with added features and owned by the city, for a cost of $3.2 millon was paused indefinitely by City Council. The desire for a feasibility study was passed. The overall concepts of a New Alternative Master Plan with no financials on what the project will cost were endorsed. Ayes: Degner, Giles, Hans, Merkel, Richards.   Nays: Kolstad, Miller.

 

Mid March, 2020 – Wisconsin is largely in lockdown, due to COVID 19.

 

March 25, 2020 – Council member Miller suggests a new citizen survey; Lakeside Forward threatens to pull out of deal if survey is done. The original survery of 3,000 citizens which was conducted by the LPEC took place in 2014. Those results were used to create the 27 recommendations for the original master plan. The new Alternative Master Plan is quite different from the original.  

April 21, 2020, Ben Giles, Kay Miller, Arletta Allen and Donna Richards are sworn in as council members. Each ran unopposed. Allen, a newcomer and Giles, are both members of the Envision Strategic Planning Advisory Committee – supporters of Lakeside Forward.

In an email from Lakeside Forward Supporters to Joe Moore and Jordan Skiff they ask for clarification on a survey:

May 13, 2020 – Lakeside Park Master Plan Survey is re-visited. Lakeside Forward again threatens to pull donations if a survey is conducted. Motion was made by Brian Kolstad to defer to Advisory Park Board, but fails. Ayes: Hans, Kolstad, Miller Nays: Allen, Degner, Giles, Richards.

 

June 24 2020 – The city reveals it intends to include in the feasibility study Request for Proposal, consideration of private ownership of the multipurpose building. 

See the response from Donna Richards to a citizen when she was asked, was council not made aware in February when you voted for this, that the building would not be owned by the city?

“Donna Richards response to the citizen: “On this privatization lease stuff none of this was was part of the latest plan when we approved it. That was sprung on us two days before the RFP went out for the feasibility study, and at that time I was the only council member who objected. Others may have objected if they had time to think about it. I understand that K Miller Is not happy about it maybe others. There was no vote on this. I asked for a copy of the RFP and found that the lease idea was embodied in the RFP I asked whose idea the lease was at the previous meeting discussed and was told directly by Joe Moore that it was his idea I was taken aback and then said in an outburst “this is irresponsible “. But as I said earlier I was the only one who said anything. We certainly thought it was a public building up until then so we never had to think about hours and uses or the nature of the restaurant because we thought that would be discussed by Council as part of the feasibility process; not that it will be privatized for those decisions.”

 

June 24, 2020 – Donated sign depicting proposed changes to Lighthouse Peninsula is proposed. It includes information about a website to provide opinions. Comments are overwhelmingly against the development.

June 29, 2020 – Large crowd at Advisory Parks Board meeting – most opposed to a building on Lighthouse Peninsula.   

 

July 6, 2020 – A Facebook Group, Stop Lakeside Park from being Privatized! is launched and quickly gains thousands of followers.

 

July 13, 2020 – The first 24 yard signs go up around the city, which soon number in the hundreds. 

 

 

July 15, 2020 – A group of citizens meet at Lakeside Park in the pouring rain to discuss what might happen to the park.

 

July 21, 2020 – A small group of concerned citizens meet with City Manager Joe Moore at the pavilion, one day prior to selection of feasibility consultant.

 

July 22, 2020 – Johnson Consulting, a consulting firm out of Chicago is chosen to conduct the feasibility study.  The city of Fond du Lac pays $36,000 for this study. 

 

July 23, 2020 – A small group of citizens gathers around a kitchen table (they would become the Friends of Lakeside Park) to hammer out an advisory petition requesting no development on Lighthouse Peninsula. 4100 signatures from Fond du Lac County residents are quickly gathered.  

 

July, 2020 – Hundreds of Save The Lighthouse Peninsula yard signs appear city-wide.  Every weekend from July into September, people who are now aware of the plans for Lakeside Park volunteer their time to be at the Farmers Market on Saturday and out in the park every week day.   They find many citizens are unaware of the plans.  As people are informed, the momentum for a referendum to include the people in this development decision builds. 

 

July 27, 2020 – Another large crowd at Parks Board meeting. Board recommends to halt pavilion remodel until feasibility study is complete.

 

August 12, 2020 –  A large number of citizens gather at Veterans Park before an overflow City Council meeting.  The City Council is presented with an advisory petition with over 4,000 signatures opposing “building any structure on or near Lighthouse Peninsula.”  The petitions are not acknowledged by the City Council. Council is asked by citizens to both take park boards’ recommendation to pause the pavilion project and to write and hold a referendum on development in the park. Council is warned by citizens, if you don’t do a referendum we will. Lakeside Forward supporters make it clear they will pull their donations if the pavilion project is paused or a referendum is sought. Recommendation to pause pavilion project dies for a lack of a 2nd. Referendum information was presented by city staff, but little discussion and no action was taken by council members.

 

August 13, 2020 – After being ignored by City Council, Friends of Lakeside Park meet and discuss using the WI 9.20 direct legislation petition process to force referendums for development on either Lighthouse Point Island or Oven Island. An attorney, Mary Beth Peranteau, of the law firm, Wheeler, Van Sickle and Anderson SC is hired to write the petition in proper form.

 

Lakeside Park is a legacy. It is the backyard for the citizens of Fond du Lac; created developed, and nurtured over decades of City and volunteer oversight.

We commit to continue that legacy for future generations, with responsible administrative and financial stewardship of the Park, through oversight and partnership with the City and the citizens who use it, love it, maintain it, and find solace within it.

August 18, 2020 – The Friends create their Mission Statement and Logo. 

 

August 20, 2020 – Friends of Lakeside Park meet with Johnson Consulting expressing concerns with the locations of the multi purpose building and amphitheater. The Johnson staff was receptive and interested.

 

August 28, 2020 – Two 9.20 direct legislation petitions begin circulating, asking for a referendum to let the people decide, prior to development of Lighthouse Point or Oven Islands. Close to 3000 signatures on each are required to make them binding. The signatures are easily gathered in less than 3 weeks.  The petitions do only one thing, they ask that the people of the city of Fond du Lac be allowed to decide on development for Lighthouse Point and Oven Islands.  If the people say yes, the plan can go ahead.  

September 4, 2020 -The Friends hosted a petition signing event on Oven Island, complete with a food truck which was one of the top recommendations from the Lakeside Park Exploratory Committee.

 

September 5, 2020 – A billboard is donated to our cause by a supporter.

September 14, 2020 – Emails between Joe Moore and a Lakeside Forward supporter points out inaccuracies in Lakeside Forward’s advertising:

September 16, 2020 – Lakeside Forward “Truth” ad appears in the Action Advertiser.

September 17, 2020 – In an email, City Manager Joe Moore warns council members against entering into a developers agreement written by Lakeside Forward without involving city staff. This is usually a lengthy, careful process.  Johnson Consulting also recommended working on an agreement after their feasibility report is completed.

September 18, 2020 – City Ethics Board meets concerning receipt of a verified ethics complaint regarding a specific person, which if discussed in public could have a substantial adverse effect on their reputation. (This person is now known to be Council Member Ben Giles)

 

September 18, 2020 – Word of the developers agreement written by Lakeside Forward’s attorney is posted in the city council agenda.  Having ample signatures, Friends of Lakeside Park prepare petitions for submission. 

September 19, 2020 – The city’s server that hosts council agendas mysteriously goes down.  No access to the upcoming agenda, comment forms or the developers agreement is available to the public until September 21.

 

September 23, 2020 – The Friends submit the Lighthouse Point Island petitions with over 3,000 signatures collected in less than a month.

 

September 23, 2020 – Newcomer Council member Arletta Allen presents a developers agreement and resolution to adopt the binding agreement immediately in an attempt to subvert and preempt the 9.20 petitions. The donor group, now named Lakeside Forward LLC, again threatens to pull their donation if the council doesn’t immediately approve the agreement.  Another overflow crowd is in attendance, many speaking against the agreement. 713 citizen non-attendance comment forms were submitted in opposition to the agreement. City staff attempts to make changes to the agreement on-the-fly prior to any vote and the city attorney did not sign off on the document.  Lakeside Forward’s attorney is allowed to speak and answer questions regarding the agreement. A vote on the resolution to adopt the agreement was defeated due to a Roberts Rules technicality, but a majority of City Council members favored scheduling a special session in the next week to pass the agreement. 

 

September 28, 2020 – City attorney is present at Park Board meeting. (This is unusual.)  Motions for recommendations by Park Board members regarding the AMP are declared against meeting rules because they are not noticed properly on the meeting agenda. All recommendations made by the Board are rejected due to this technicality as pointed out by the city attorney, despite recommendations having been made this way in the past. One of the recommendations was to wait for the feasibility study to be completed prior to signing any developers agreement.

 

September 30, 2020 – In special session, after a couple of modifications were voted on, a motion was made by Daniel Degner to approve the Lakeside Park Enhancement Agreement and seconded by Arletta Allen, and the motion Passed. Ayes: Allen, Degner, Hans, Kolstad, Richards Nay: Miller Abstained: Giles.  This agreement that was negotiated in one week commits the city to spend at least $5.2 million on the Alternative Master Plan.  Normally a multi-million dollar agreement like this would be carefully negotiated over months by city staff and then presented to the Council.  

 

October 14, 2020 – Another large crowd gathered at the city council meeting. The agenda included a resolution finding that, The Friends of Lakeside Park’s Petitions Are Not Proper Subjects For Direct Legislation, based on the city attorney’s opinion. However, the city attorney’s opinion does not make them illegal the decision to adopt the petitions rest solely with the City Council.  Many citizens spoke in opposition to that opinion. 271 non-attendance declarations were also returned in opposition to that opinion. The resolution passed 4-2 with Giles abstaining. Council member Degner declared the petitions “illegal” while voting in favor of the resolution. 

October 19, 2020 – Friends of Lakeside Park go to court to dispute the City Council’s rejection of their 9.20 ordinances by filing a writ of mandamus and also file a motion for a temporary injunction to stop any action by the city at Lakeside Park. The filings were prepared by attorney Mary Beth Peranteau. All of the judges in the Fond du Lac County Circuit Court recuse themselves and the case is assigned to Winnebago County Judge Teresa Basiliere.

 

November 11, 2020 – Johnson Consulting presents its feasibility study to city council. Their recommendations include: Moving the multi purpose building (MPB) off of the Lighthouse Peninsula, (the existing pavilion site was recommended for the MPB) moving the amphitheater off of Oven Island (the Sauputo cheese factory was recommended) No financial projections were made for the proposed restaurant, only stating that there is some statistical demand for another restaurant in the city. No lease profit projections were made and potential for success was largely dependent on who operates the restaurant. They recommended the city own the buildings and amphitheater. There were profit/ loss projections given for the amphitheater, which predicts losses for 10 years.

 

November 2020 – Friends of Lakeside Park receive a $22,000 bill for attorney’s fees. Fund-raising efforts have been on-going and the amazing people who favor a referendum to let the people decide have donated enough to cover the bill, mostly in $10 and $20 donations.  Christmas ornaments and calendars were offered in exchange for donations.  

 

November 2020 – A “management team” consisting of majority Lakeside Forward members and a minority of city staff, begins meeting to decide on how or if to implement the feasibility study recommendations. The meetings are closed to the public. Their proposals are due in early January, 2021.

November 18, 2020 – The city responds to our lawsuit, calling for it’s dismissal and demanding we pay their legal fees. 

November 24, 2020 – Judge Teresa Basiliere schedules a hearing for the temporary injunction on February 5, 2021

 

December 5, 2020 – Lakeside Park Friends have a float at the drive through Christmas parade at Lakeside Park.

December 11, 2020 – Ethics hearing for Council Member Giles is postponed until February 5, 2021.

 

In 2021, will the FDL City Council, Let The People Decide?

We release information first to our email list.  If you want to be the first to know, click on the button below and sign up for our list.  We thank you for your interest in the facts of our cause.  Help us spread the information out in our community!

Click Here to Sign Up for our Mailing List
Donation and ornament information

#LetThePeopleDecide