The City Branding Resolution and now the resolution that has come after it calling for the brand study funds to be reallocated have travelled some winding paths. A reader had suggested I recap what happened with them, which I thought was a good idea. A vast majority of items are very routine and pass through committees with minimal discussion. Some items do end up undergoing greater discussion and scrutiny and are sometimes passed out of committee only to be referred back for further discussion and a second vote. A very small number end up taking years going through the committee process and travel a very circuitous route to either approval or denial. This is a good example of how un-routine some paths end up being.
04/22/2020 – Resolution 8-R-20 “Branding Resolution” was introduced by outgoing alderperson Chris Croatt (District 14). It was originally supposed to be referred to the Finance Committee but this was in the early days of Covid when a lot of things were up in the air.
05/06/2020 – The Common Council took the resolution up. Per the minutes from that meeting, “Alderperson Lobner moved, seconded by Alderperson Coenen, that the Resolution be referred to staff and then be brought back on Budget Saturday.”
02/22/21 – It does not seem to have been brought back on Budget Saturday but rather ended up in front of the Finance Committee which voted to hold the item until 06/21/2021 with the hope that by then they would have a better idea of how the city’s audit came out and if there was any funding available for it. Additionally, that would give more time to gain a better understanding of what implementation might look like and what the costs of that might be.
06/21/21 – The Finance Committee held it until the 07/12/2021 meeting because there was the possibility of getting funding for the project.
07/12/2021 – It was recommended for approval by the Finance Committee. During that meeting Alderperson Katie Van Zeeland (District 5) asked questions about enhanced crosswalks.
08/04/2021 – It was approved by the Common Council in conjunction with the allocation of the excess general fund balance. Alderperson Van Zeeland voted “nay” due to the decreased funding for enhanced crosswalks that had resulted a different resolution calling for a transportation utility study.
01/10/2022 – The Finance Committee reviewed recommendations to award a branding study contract to Unlisted LLC. After concerns were raised regarding the quality of Unlisted’s proposal the committee voted to hold the item to give Unlisted an opportunity to respond to concerns.
01/17/2022 – Rather than continue to pursue the contract, Unlisted, LLC withdrew from consideration.
01/19/2022 – During the Common Council meeting Resolution 2-R-22 was introduced. It called for taking the funds currently intended for a brand study and reallocating them for a city website redesign, the enhanced crosswalk program, and city technology upgrades.
01/24/2022 – The Finance Committee voted to indefinitely hold the brand study at committee, preventing it from moving forward.
01/24/2022 – The Finance Committee voted to hold Resolution 2-R-22 to give time to receive staff feedback.
02/07/2022 – The Municipal Services committee received an update on and overview of the Enhanced Crosswalk program to which Resolution 2-R-22 would allocate $225,000.
02/07/2022 – City staff requested that Resolution 2-R-22 be held until June at which point, they would have a better idea of funding needs. The committee members felt that was too long a timeframe so voted to hold it until 03/07/2022 at which point they could at least receive an update if not actually move forward on the resolution.
03/03/2022 – In preparation for the Finance Committee meeting, city staff provided a number of recommendations related to the allocations proposed in Resolution 2-R-22.
One thought on “A Recap Of The Long And Winding Paths Taken By The City Branding Resolution And The Resolution Reallocating The City Rebranding Funds”