|
Meeting Details
|
Meeting date/time:
|
8/18/2026
5:00 PM
|
Minutes status:
|
Final
|
|
|
Meeting location:
|
Room 301-B, Third Floor, City Hall
|
|
| | | | This is also a virtual meeting via GoToMeeting. Should you wish to join this meeting from your phone, tablet, or computer you may go to https://meet.goto.com/989937629. You can also dial in using your phone United States: +1 (872) 240-3212 and Access Code: 989-937-629. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 1. | | Call to order.
Minutes note: Meeting called to order at 5:04 p.m. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 2. | | Roll call. | | | |
Roll call
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Also present:
Minutes note: Beka Bein, Legislative Reference Bureau
David Kuta, Public Information Division | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 3. | | Review and approval of the previous meeting minutes from July 14, 2026.
Minutes note: Meeting minutes from July 14, 2026 were approved without objection. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 4. | | Public comments and/or announcements.
Minutes note: There were no public comments or announcements. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 5. | | Review of a website for the committee and community budget program for allocation of MKE Community Impact Funds.
Minutes note: Mr. Lee said that members were forwarded a link and copy of a draft webpage for the committee, which was being shared on the screen. There was opportunity for members to review, provide input, and to make a motion to approve the webpage.
Mr. Kuta said he was present to answer any questions from the committee.
Member Bill Christianson asked what would be the best way for people to find the webpage and whether, if someone searched for Milwaukee participatory budgeting or Milwaukee community impact funds, this site would be among the top hits by default.
Mr. Kuta replied. The City builds webpages it uses via a content management system called Titan, which has the ability on the back end to input search optimization phrases and keywords and meta tags. The draft webpage being presented today was a base website. There was opportunity to enhance the webpage further with public meeting information, survey information, QR codes, short links, and other community engagement tools. The intent of this version was to establish a homepage that explains what the committee is, who they are, and what they do, and then to continue to build it out as the committee has more to share publicly. The webpage was live in order for members to access it, but it was not actively searchable at the moment.
Member Schettle questioned the sections relating to the listing of committee members and when the webpage would go live and be searchable.
Mr. Kuta replied that the membership information could be seen on the side panel toward the top and then further toward the bottom, and that it looked different in the printout versus the actual online viewing setup. The webpage was technically an active page now but was not searchable. It could be made live and searchable first thing tomorrow morning if the committee did not have substantial changes or feedback.
Mr. Lee added that the committee could make a motion to approve the webpage and direct it be made live and searchable as soon as possible.
Member Stanley noted that there was an accessibility issue when zooming in on the webpage as that displaces the side panel and places it at the bottom of the page making it not readily visible. She can help offer to troubleshoot this issue as she does accessibility work.
Mr. Kuta said that he could certainly take a look and see what tools they had on the backend to remedy the issue.
Member Harrell asked why the members listed was not in alphabetical order by last name.
Mr. Lee replied that he did not believe there was any specific reason to the order, that the order was the same order as the membership listing for the committee that appears on the agenda, that membership listing goes by the order of seniority and/or when members were appointed to serve on the committee, which is typical for meeting bodies.
Member Schettle commented. He felt comfortable with approving the webpage. The webpage contained content regarding the committee that was already publically available and helped to centralize that information. He suggested striking the phrase “Substitute resolution creating an MKE Community Impact Committee” under the section “Establishment” as being unnecessary and duplicative.
Member Schettle then moved approval of webpage, as presented, for the MKE Community Impact Committee website with the amendment to delete the phrase “Substitute resolution creating an MKE Community Impact Committee” under the section “Establishment”. Member Christianson seconded. There was no objection. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 6. | | Discussion, review, and/or updates from work groups and/or committee on devising a method to allocate MKE Community Impact Funds relating to program definition, outreach plans, additional capacity and resources, budgeting and funding, timeline, rulebook, and/or other aspects.
Minutes note: a. Eligible Projects & Proposals Work Group
Mr. Lee commented. The Eligible Projects and Proposals Work Group had not met. The members to the work group were members Christianson, Napoleon, and Mahan. The work group was tasked to develop definition and criteria for eligible proposals, provide limits on funding per proposal, establish applicant requirements, define proposal and funding timelines, and develop a process for sharing proposals and voting guidelines.
Member Christianson commented. He apologized and said that he would be sure to connect with the other two members to meet and have initial discussions. They would likely bring to the full committee a range of options and recommendations. They would want to be inclusive as possible and not do anything that would limit the proposals that come in.
Member Mahan concurred and added that they would aim to meet this week to at least set criterion and a timeline.
b. Community Building & Outreach Work Group
Mr. Lee commented. The Eligible Projects and Proposals Work Group had met once. The members to the work group were members Frederick-Stanley, Avalos, Stanley, and Harrell. The work group was tasked to define community vision and goals, organize outreach efforts, and engage with community-based organizations.
Member Harrell gave an update. The work group met on August 7th to discuss and define the difference between community building and outreach. They discussed the importance of having inclusivity, availability of dual language or multi-language information for community members, accessibility, and how individuals learn about what participatory budgeting is. There were community members in attendance at their meeting. One had concern pertained to the committee’s name being duplicative or closely resembling other steering committees, which confused that community member. The community member suggested that the City be more savvy with naming committees or provide clear context in the descriptions of them to decipher between those meeting bodies.
Member Harrell said that workgroup needed further clarification on whether the work group was to ideate and present ideas or actively be boots on the ground to ideate, get ideas, create a plan, go out into the community, and disseminate information; and how to ensure information disseminated to the community would be public facing, that descriptions would be detailed, not vague, and easily searchable. She added that there was inquiry on the public having access to the minutes or notes from meetings of the work group. She questioned the deadline for the committee to make a presentation to the Common Council.
Mr. Lee replied. The work group notes or minutes were not published anywhere online or distributed widely. Upon request, it can certainly be provided if it exists. Concerning community outreach efforts, members may or may not choose to partake in going out into the community, which would be at the discretion of the workgroup. They could conduct or engage any organizations or community members in any mechanism they see fit to accomplish their tasks. He could not speak to the enabling legislation that created this committee and its name, which originated from sponsor, Ald. Milele Coggs. Any request to change the name of the committee would require legislative amendment to the enabling legislation, which would be the committee's discretion. The deadline was November 1st.
Member Christianson commented. He suggested that a good way to proceed with the work groups was for the work groups to develop and bring proposals, findings, and recommendations back to the full committee for formal review. The full committee could determine that a work group was best suited to execute tasks.
Member Harrell concurred with the suggested approach. She noted that the work group would have to meet again to get boots on the ground. She suggested the work group move forward with suggestions and a plan of action versus taking a lead in a short amount of time to interact with the community because at that point it would not be intentional.
Vice-Chair Johnson asked for further clarification regarding the role of the work groups.
Mr. Lee said that the workgroups are an extension of the full committee to do the work of determining a method to allocate MKE Community Impact Funds pertaining to a rule book, parameters regarding criteria, conducting outreach, and other elements. It was typical that any proposals or ideas before final approval come back before the full committee to take formal action. The committee could choose to defer tasks to a work group. There are committees that create technical subcommittees to look at proposals, to score things, and bring top proposals to the full committee to consider.
c. Rulebook & Online Organization Work Group
Mr. Lee commented. The Rulebook and Online Organization Work Group has not met. The members to the work group were members Rivera, Napoleon, and Schettle. The work group was tasked to provide draft of rulebook for the committee to review, define process vision and goals, define timeline for full expenditure of all funds, and develop online presence and platform.
Member Schettle provided an update. The work group had a planned meeting but did not meet yet. They were attempting to meet. The purpose and goal for the work group was to create the outline for the rule book, what style it looks like, what sections to include, and incorporate suggestions from the other work groups into the rule book regarding community organizing and the plan for expenditure of funds. The hope was to still have a rough draft for the committee by the next meeting. Based on his review he liked the rulebooks from Boston and Eau Claire, and perhaps the committee’s rulebook could resemble those rulebooks. All members were welcomed to provide feedback. A finalized version should be created by October.
d. MKE Community Impact Committee
Vice-Chair Johnson inquired about any aspects that the full committee needed to still discuss or review.
Mr. Lee commented. This item was for the committee to openly discuss anything not covered by work groups. From a staff perspective, the full committee had been reviewing a program definition, something member Stanley had provided the latest version of. There was past discussion about acquiring additional staffing or consulting services, but no formal action was taken by the committee. The next agenda item pertained to a training or resource opportunity at a cost. The committee may want to look at whether it wants to allocate funding or to make a decision on pursuing additional resources.
There was no other discussion. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 7. | | Discussion on the Participatory Budgeting Project relating to participatory budgeting trainings and resource opportunities.
Minutes note: Vice-Chair Johnson said that some members were interested in the training offered by the Participatory Budgeting Project and wondered how costs associated with the training could be paid for.
Mr. Lee replied. There were no allocated funds from the City Clerk’s Office or the City to pay for members to receive training or pay for anything outside of approved proposal(s) under an approved plan. Anything ancillary that the committee wanted to pay for, including services or training, would have to come out of the MKE Community Impact Funds, which would require approval via legislation from the Common Council. An email offering participatory budgeting training and resources at a paid subscription from the Participatory Budgeting Project was forwarded to members, and some members had expressed interest. A representative from the organization was invited to attend the meeting today but was unable to attend.
Member Christianson commented. Program dollars spent on things other than participatory budgeting activities and projects proposed by community members should be very carefully evaluated. All other things being equal, his default position would be to maximize the amount of funding available to fund projects and try to really limit or avoid spending those funds on things outside the actual projects being proposed. Every request should be evaluated carefully. The committee should be very clear about the direct and tangible benefits from any program dollars they would look to spend on things other than the program itself.
Ms. Markasa Tucker-Harris, Executive Director with the African American Roundtable, offered comments. AART had connected with the Participatory Budgeting Project along their journey when they did participatory budgeting in-house and out in the community on the northwest side. The Participatory Budgeting Project were a reputable organization that helps different organizations across the country to utilize and learn about participatory budgeting. It would be a $5,000 investment to get the services offered by the Participatory Budgeting Project. She could be assistance to connect the committee to the Participatory Budgeting Project.
Member Harrell said that in order to support something of this magnitude important to the City, she believed it was only right to ensure that the members steering the project and presenting ideas to the Common Council in November were presenting ideas based on having proper understanding, skill sets, and research-based evidence from successful experts. Training would be beneficial for committee members.
Member Schettle said that the committee should first broadly discuss setting aside funds that they have to, if able, for future training. Then the committee should do a deeper analysis on the companies that provide trainings and go through the process to choose the correct one. He did not believe the committee was in a position today make a decision on which organization to go with. He suggested that the committee, at its next meeting, discuss whether it wanted to set aside funds, how much to set aside, and discuss what those costs might look like. The committee was not in a position today to debate among services or trainings offered by different groups without better information from those groups and their associated costs.
The discussion was held and the committee took no action. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 8. | | Next meeting date and time.
Minutes note: a. Tuesday, September 8, 2026 at 5 p.m.
Member Christianson said that the next meeting date may be problematic should members have extended unavailability due to the Labor Day holiday.
Mr. Lee asked members to inform him of any unavailability or schedule conflicts for the next meeting date. He would work with the chair to reschedule the meeting, if needed. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 9. | | Items for future agendas.
Minutes note: Member Schettle said that the November deadline was closely approaching and work groups needed to meet. He requested that the workgroups provide an update on their activities, proposals, and/or recommendations at the next meeting. | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | 10. | | Adjournment.
Minutes note: Meeting adjourned at 5:57 p.m.
Chris Lee, Staff Assistant
Council Records Section
City Clerk's Office | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
| | | | Meeting materials for this meeting and past meetings can be found within the following file: | | | |
|
Not available
|
|
251987
| 0 | | Communication | Communication relating to the activities of the MKE Community Impact Committee. | | | |
Action details
|
Not available
|
|
|