MEETING RECAP

Workshop Meeting of City Council of Walnut Grove
November 18, 2021
10:00 AM

 

Due to the fact that the city never posted an agenda we did not know it was taking place so we signed in at about 10:20 and missed the first portion.

When we entered the meeting, discussion was in regards to development of the City. They appeared to be in discussion about the Corn Dawgs property. We are trying to get the audio of the first part so we can update this portion, but we did hear concerns from Councilwoman Moncrief about traffic, safety, why the need to move so quickly, etc. The Mayor indicated that he though there had been plenty of time for them to make some decisions.

There was discussion about residential properties, changing, once again, setbacks, bringing in some ranch style homes, etc. Councilwoman Moncrief was concerned with the large footprint so many homes, so close together would put on our city and the look of overcrowding. The Mayor and other council do not seem concerned with this. The Mayor insisted that he thought a light would go in at that intersection and yet previous conversations indicated that DOT had rejected that possibility. He also made the statement that the park may or may not go into place. There was NO discussion involving the things going in around us and how that will play a roll in mix.

There was discussion about additional development possibilities along the Walnut Grove Parkway including the possibility of the Church selling off some of its’ property for this.

There was discussion as to whether or not there would be the need for another Public Hearing and was told there would not be. So IF you oppose the PUD that will come up at the December’s meeting, you may want to email your council and hope they listen or show up at the Dec meeting in person and be heard during Public Comments (that they can leave out of the meeting if they choose).

Next topic was the possibility of having in the near future a Marshall and Code Enforcement on board. Salary discussed was $20-$25 per hour for each and a 32 hour week. The Mayor indicated that it could possibly be only one person if they qualified for both, but that it would likely involve two people and the purchase and equipping of a new vehicle for the Marshall. There was some discussion of the differences but little to indicate why a Marshall is actually needed for the city. The main thing the Mayor pointed out was that the Marshall could write tickets inside the city limit for almost anything except a moving violation and could make arrests accordingly. It appears too that current Code Enforcement will be leaving the city as soon as a replacement is found or the first of the year. Update note: Upon speaking with Code Enforcement, he indicated that his is not leaving but transitioning to a Zoning Administrator and there will be at least one added employee, possibly two in the way of a Code Enforcement and/or Marshall.

There was a discussion in regards to current and future personnel policies and benefits. The Mayor wishes to raise the employees to a minimum of $15.00 per hour. This means the $12.00 per hour employee would now be at $15.00 if voted into place.

There was discussion about the possibility of providing more benefits for employees. The possibilities included $350.00 per month/per employee insurance reimbursement. It also included a change in Personal leave, Sick/Bereavement, Vacation days. The Mayor wants to eliminate any personal days and have sick roll over and be available when an employee leaves under good terms. He referred to it as a “retirement” plan. Our concern is that those are two different things, plus people need to have at least a day or two of personal leave as not everything falls under vacation or sick. What if you need to spend time with an accountant or just so many personal errands that taking a single day off would be so much easier. He also wants to give a number of days to employees at the start up of 2022. He suggested the Deputy Clerk start with 60 sick/bereavement days. We need more information on all of this to have a true opinion. The mayor asked Councilwoman Pilgrim to work with him on developing personnel policies and benefits. Councilwoman Moncrief asked if it created a conflict of interest and Pilgrim stated that it did not. She said “Brian doesn’t work for me.” While it may be that legally it does not create a “conflict of interest”, we do see where the public will have concerns as to Councilwoman Pilgrims prejudice to her son who is the Public Works Manager. Her history on council does show her interest in the Public Works Department so therefore this is an indication that she may pay special attention to that department.

Our concern is that all of the above involves a lot of dollars and we wonder where the Mayor plans to fund all of this. It certainly leads you to believe that you will NEVER see the promised reduction of taxes. We are also concerned that he is moving way too fast to be making sound decisions regarding the growth in Walnut Grove.