Anything from it, it's the Hilbert transform. So it plays a special role. So this kind of derivation that goes with the Hilbert transform, which we ran into several times before. This is our guy. So remember we had this difference quotient derivation, delta j, which, well, if you like, it's defined by saying that when you differentiate the variable xi, you get 1, 10s, or 1. But another way of saying it was the, so this was ij from 1 to d, if you have d variables. But in the case that d is 1, you can think of it as a map from polynomials in one variable to polynomials, commutative ordinary polynomials in two variables. So this dj normally is a map from polynomials in d variables to the tensor power of that algebra. And in this case, it's just a difference quotient. It's taking a polynomial p to this function of two variables, which of course is also a polynomial. Now, what we've frequently encountered are equations of this kind. That when you evaluate tau on something, xj multiplied by q, then we get tau tensor tau of dj of q. Another way of saying it is that this xj is simply the adjoint of this derivation del j applied to 1, 10s, or 1. Because of course our dot product xy is just tau of xy. That's in the case that x and y are self-adjoint. And so if you look at tau of xj, q, this is just the dot product of xj and q. And to say that this is, on the other hand, tau tensor tau of 1, 10s, or 1, sorry, of dj, q, you can think of it as 1, 10s, or 1 dj, q. And so now if you equate it like this, then you see why I'm saying that this is like applying the adjoint. Is there a question of somebody simply dying a slow death? That's Ian. All right. So we had several examples of this, as I mentioned. One example was the semicircular law. That was the case where xj was just equal to xj. And in fact, in that case, this equation was simply the characterization of the semicircular law. Another example that we briefly touched upon is limits of random matrix models like that. So you choose matrices at random with respect to some measure that looks like that. In that case, we also had an equation like this with cj being what was called the cyclic derivative of v. And so that was under some assumptions on v. Now this object in free probability theory is an analog of a classical object. And this classical object is called a score function. Namely, if you have a classical probability measure with density rho, it's just the derivative of the log of rho. I mean, it should kind of remind you of this. If rho is e to the minus v, log rho is more or less v. So when you take the gradient of it, you get this derivative of v back. It's also, of course, just being the logarithmic derivative, just that. And it plays an important role in classical information theory. I mean, the L2 norm of this guy, which, of course, is the integral of this thing against rho of x, although usually when you look in the book, they, of course, cancel one of these rho of x. So it will be the absolute value of rho prime squared over rho, is up to a constant, the derivative. This is called efficient information. And up to a constant, it's the derivative of entropy under a Gaussian perturbation. So if you take your rho and you convolve it with a Gaussian of variance t, and then you compute the entropy, which is that, the derivative of entropy under this perturbation, and maybe I messed up the factor of 2, ends up being this efficient information. All right. Now, in cases that we looked at, this dj of p, this derivation was, in fact, given as a commutator. So this was the way we proved that it exists in the semicircular case. And this rj, in our cases, was bounded. Sometimes it can be unbounded. And notice that this equation actually defines rj almost uniquely.  So it's defined up to something that's in the commutator. And there's some choices. I mean, in the semicircular case, we often make the choice that rj adjoint kills 1. And then rj1 will be our cj in that case. Or you can sometimes make the choice instead that rj is self adjoint, in which case rj is, gives you, I think it's wrong. I think twice cj or something. Then the shift 2 is on the right side. And in the classical, sorry, one-dimensional case, when d equals 1, I mentioned that the derivation is just that. But this you can write, if you think about it, as a commutator between p and something that has the integral kernel 1 over s minus t. And that's, of course, the Hilbert transform. So you can write it this way. And then from that, you recover that this c is just the Hilbert transform of the density. This is just that equation there. So this variable cj, it has a name. It's called the conjugate variable. And more generally, we say that x1, xd are, I just coined this for this lecture, by the way, the word freely differentiable. So there's some smoothness in the underlying law of these variables. If these partial derivatives, these non-commuted difference quotients, are actually closable. So they're defined a priori on polynomials. But if, as unbounded operators, they're closable, then we will say that the d tuple is differentiable. And it's not a very difficult exercise to check that, in fact, in the one variable case, this differentiability amounts to saying that your law is non-atomic. If the law is non-atomic, then this difference quotient actually defines a closable map from some domain to L2 tends to L2. All right. Now, in the case that we have this equation, we call these cj's conjugate variables. And there's a little lemma which says that this is a sufficient condition for differentiability. So if these cj's actually exist, then we're in the differentiable setting. And the reason for it is very simple. I mean, you know that if you have an unbounded operator t from some domain to a Hilbert space h, then t is closable if and only if its adjoint is densely defined, right, where the domain of the adjoint is simply all vectors c with a property that the map, say, zeta into txzeta is bounded. So it's a classical story, right, that the closability is equivalent to dense definition of the adjoint.  And then there is a formula like that. And well, because of that, you see that a tensor b for any polynomial a and b is in the domain of d star. And these things are dense. And L2, so actually it's densely defined. So actually DI is closable. Now as it happens, semicircular perturbation is a good operation for these sorts of things. And the semicircular perturbation of any d tuple is always differentiable. These conjugate variables immediately start existing. All right, so I wanted to show just a quick example of how you apply these things in functional analysis or in operator algebra. So I apologize in advance for those of you who don't care about this problem, but people that do phenomenon algebras kind of do. So I just wanted to show you as a sample. This is a very simple proof just to give you an example of what kinds of things we're interested in. So the setting is that I have this x1, xd. And remember, they generate something which is called the phenomenon algebra of x1, xd. So this is, if you like, what would be the noncommutative analog of all essentially bounded measurable functions of x1, xd. And the question that you may want to ask is, what is the center of this guy? So what things are there that commute with everything? Well, of course, there are multiples of identity, right? Multiple of identity commute with everything. But is there anything else? And so the statement is that if we have a differentiable d tuple and d is at least 2, I forgot to write it, because otherwise it's wrong. Of course, if you take only 1, the algebra is a billion. But if it's a d tuple with d at least 2, then it's freely differentiable. Then actually, the whole thing is a factor. So here's the proof. Suppose that we have something in z, and it's in the center. Well, if it's in the center, it's got to commute with everything in the algebra. In particular, it has to commute with x1 and x2. In fact, that's all we'll use.  But the problem is that although x1 and x2 are in the domains of my derivative, it's not clear that z is, right? The operator is only closeable, so its domain is not everything, a priori. But in this nice case, because of special properties of these operators, you can use the theory of Dirichlet forms to regularize things. So you write down a kind of Laplacian, which is d1 star d1. And then this Laplacian is a nice positive operator, and so it has a canonical closure and all that. And so using that, you can define a kind of a smoothing operator. So this delta is this Laplacian, and you look at alpha over alpha plus delta, the power 1 half. So because delta is positive, this is always bounded. But when alpha goes to infinity, this converges to identity, right? And but the nice thing is that somehow the derivation composed with the smoothing operator is now always globally defined. That's not a very, very hard fact to check. So you call this new thing called d1 alpha. It's a smooth version of d1. Now d1 alpha is no longer a derivation, but because d1 kills x2, it's one of the things that we know about these different quotients, anything that's in the kernel of this delta is untouched by this regularization. So this thing again will have the derivation property over x2. So it will still have this property with respect to x2, the Liebditz rule. Of course, keep in mind that d1 of x2 is 0. So now we apply this to the fact that x2 commutes with z. We have the right to do this because now it's a bounded operator. So what do we get? We get x2 commutator with d1 alpha of z. But where is this d1 alpha of z? d1 alpha of z is something in L2, tensor L2. Because we know that free differentiability happens, we know that x2 has diffused spectrum. So suddenly, we have something in L2, tensor L2, which you can think of as a Hilbert-Schmidt operators. So you have a compact operator, namely this guy, commuting with an operator that has diffused spectrum. Boom, the operator is dead. So this d alpha of z has to be 0. But since d alpha of z has to be 0, we can remove the regularization and conclude by closeability that actually the z is in the domain, and moreover, is killed by d1. Excellent. So now we can apply d1 to the first commutator. What do we get? Well, z is killed by d1. And x1 is differentiated into 1, 10s, or 1. So by Liebditz, we get this. And now you apply tau, 10s, or 1. One of these z's gets replaced by tau of z. The other z's stays the same. And you get the tau of z is z. So it's a scalar. So a very, very cute proof. OK. So if somebody asks you to prove that the phenomenon algebra of two semicirculars is a factor, there you go. Of course, that's not the earliest proof of it. OK. Let me prove also with knowing a little bit about this differentiability. Let me prove for you the subordination fact. So remember, the subordination fact told you that when you do free convolution, is there a free eraser? Oh, this board may kill somebody by falling on them. But hopefully it won't be me. So remember, we had the following things. If I have x and y free, we looked at the Cauchy transform of, so this had low mu 1 and this had low mu 2. And we said that if you look at the Cauchy transform of the free convolution of the two things, this is just the Cauchy transform of one of them evaluated in a different place. Now, just to decipher what this means, of course, g mu 1 of z, this is just the trace of the resolvent of x. And similarly for mu 2, so what this is saying is that the trace of the resolvent is actually the same thing as the trace of the resolvent of x, but evaluated in a different place. Hope I got the brackets correctly. No, I didn't. OK. All right, so this lemmo voiculescu philosophically explains why on earth all these resolvents occur in free probability. What is so special about resolvents? And the statement is this. Suppose I have a variable which is freely differentiable, then of course when I apply my difference quotient to a resolvent, I get a tensor product of two resolvents. We actually used this once already. But conversely, suppose I have some function in L2 of my variable and that function satisfies the same equation. That is, difference quotient is just the function tensor itself. Then the function must be resolvent. So it's a beautiful fact that characterizes resolvents. If you like, this is similar to saying that if I give you the differential equation d over dx of f is equal to lambda f, this characterizes f equals to e to the lambda x. So these functions are the important functions for differentiation. Well, this is saying that resolvents are important functions for this kind of free difference quotient. Well, the proof of this is fairly easy. Suppose I have that my function is satisfied. One way is easy. I mean, it's just a very, very simple algebraic manipulation. Let's go the other way. Suppose I have some function f that satisfies this. So plugging in what the difference quotient is, it tells you that this difference quotient is equal to f tensor f. So in other words, it's equal to f of s times f of t. So now I can multiply by s minus t to conclude, I know, differentiability, right? So my measure is non-atomics, it's not a problem.  OK, now you do a little bit of work to prove that actually this implies that f is continuous. And moreover, it tells you, therefore, that f at any s is just f at some fixed point t0 times that. And this is just solving the equation. And now if you, I think there's a missing equality here. But if you insert the missing equality, you see that actually it is of this form, w minus s inverse.  So from that, you see that this function has to be of this form. And of course, w cannot be in the spectrum because otherwise this should be w. It cannot be in the spectrum because, of course, we know by some work that f is continuous. So therefore, w cannot be equal to s. So the short point is that this equation characterizes results. So now let's do the subordination. In fact, we'll prove something stronger. You know, any time you have a phenomenon algebra with one of these traces, if I have a phenomenon algebra generated by, say, x and y, I have a phenomenon subalgebra generated by x. And I have always a map from one to the other. I have a kind of a projection map, which in classical case corresponds to conditioning. It's a conditional expectation. So the statement actually is this. If I take the resolvent of x plus y and don't take the trace of it, but simply project it onto the phenomenon algebra generated by x, then I get a scalar. A priori, this is an operator, but I get a scalar. And the scalar is just that. It's the resolvent of x evaluated at some other point. And so, of course, this tells you that it's scalar. So therefore, I can apply tau on both sides. So it tells you that this is that, which is exactly the subordination statement that I have written here. My lease is puzzled. I may have written something wrong. I mean, I'm barely reading what I've written. And I'm kind of trusting my late night writing. Anyway, so the idea is that you, first of all, you check a little identity. This is trivial, actually. If you start with some function and you condition it onto x, so you project it onto the algebra of x, and then you differentiate it, that's the same as differentiating first. And then conditioning the result. Not too bad, if you think about it. All right, the other thing that you notice is that when you restrict differentiation in x to the algebra generated by x plus y, this is the same thing as differentiating with respect to x plus y. This confused me for about half a year once, but I think I survived. The point is that what is the definition of dx plus y? Well, it's the unique derivation having the property that d of x plus y applied to x plus y is 1 tends or 1 plus Leibniz. Well, what happens to dx? When I apply it to x plus y, when I differentiate y, I get 0. When I differentiate x, I get 1 tends or 1 plus Leibniz. So of course, they're the same on the generator, so they're the same everywhere. And now using this, you see that if you look at the algebra of x plus y, if you differentiate with respect to x on that algebra, I mean, you have that equation. But since we're working on the algebra of x plus y, I have the right to replace dx by dx plus y, because they're the same differentiation. So therefore, I have this variable here, this thing here. And now you just apply it to this function, fz. So if I look at fz, which is what's written there, I know that dx plus y of fz is fz tends to fz, right? Because, well, it's a resolvent, and we're differentiating with respect to x plus y. So plug that in here. And you see that from that you see immediately that this dx of fz, sorry, of w star of x of fz is equal to e w star of x, no, just fz, right? The dx, actually, that's what I'm saying. Sorry, I'm saying it wrong. What I know is that dx plus y of z minus x plus y inverse is equal to z minus x plus y inverse tensor itself. So now, because of that, when I apply it to fz, I get that this is equal to fz, tensor fz. So from that, I know that fz must be some omega of z minus x inverse, right? And so what? Yes, you're right. Yeah, yeah, yeah, you're right. Yeah, yeah, OK, yeah, you're right. Yeah, so you have equality without the traces. And then when you apply traces, you get the equality of these two things, sorry, you're right. So you get this. And then, of course, because the whole thing, of course, obviously analytically depends on z, you get that this omega has to be analytic. So this proves it for the case where x and y are differentiable. But by this little regularization trick, you can actually extend it to an arbitrary pair of x and y which are differentiable. So that's subordination. So again, the key thing is this fancy characterization of resolvance here. Because the image of this projection lives in the algebra of x. Oh, did I write it wrong? I know it's correct in the notes. I may have copied something wrong. What did I do wrong here? So I'm too tired to think about what I'm doing. So no, no, no, it's not that. Actually, what I think I need here is just x. Yeah, I think I need x here. Yeah, then it's correct, right? Yeah, so this is just a typo. This should just be x. And that actually is what I want to compute ultimately, because I want to compute dx of fz, which is that. Sorry about this. So this y is just there. Yeah, OK. All right, now, so these were just two applications of our superpower, this derivation. So I wanted to, you know, I had not so much time left in the whole course. Of course, I cannot talk about everything. So I thought I would just concentrate on one story, which is the story of free entropy, which also connects very well with random matrices and goes into a lot of current work and very interesting questions, and also connects to a number of lectures that happened here. So I'll just do that. So I told you before that there is a classical formula that the Fisher information, the classical Fisher information, can be written as the L2 norm of this classical score function. So in one approach to free entropy, Kolesko copied that, and he just defined the free Fisher information as that. So you define it to be this, if these conjugate variables exist, in other words, it's plus infinity. Now, there's a very nice formula related to semicircular perturbations that tell you that if you actually start with a semicircular, if you're interested in the conjugate variable to a semicircular perturbation of x1, xd, then not only does this variable exist, but in principle, you have a formula for it. Namely, you have to simply take the conditional expectation onto the algebra generated by this perturbation of just the perturbation itself. It's related to the fact that sj, being semicircular, is its own conjugate variable. Now, there's a price to pay, which is you have to divide by 1 over squared of t.  And well, whether it does or does not is the question of your specific law. Anyway, so that's just a little remark for later. So one consequence of this is that you have an estimate on the Fisher information of such a semicircular perturbation. It's always finite. In fact, the entropy is at worst 1 over t, or d over t, if you have d variables. And so then, Vojkulesk could define free entropy by simply forcing the derivative of a semicircular perturbation of free entropy to be given by Fisher information. And if you think a little bit about it and notice that semicircular perturbations are form a semi-group, if you perturb something by semicircular of variance squared of t times a semicircular and then perturb further by squared of s times some other semicircular, that's the same as perturbing by one semicircular with squared of t plus s in front of it. It's just like Gaussians, right? So because of that, you can compute that actually the derivative of this free entropy is given by Fisher information. And you have a number of nice properties. So for example, if you look at this kind of relative entropy, if you look at chi star minus the quadratic variation, this is maximized precisely by the free semicircular d-tuple, or n-tuple, d-tuple I guess in this case. You have a characterization of freeness. If all the entropies here are finite, then the entropy of a d-tuple is the same as the sum of the entropies precisely when the variables are free. And in the case that d is 1, so you have only one variable, there is actually an explicit formula for what happens. You use the fact that you have an expression for this conjugate variable in terms of the Hilbert transform. And then what you get is this logarithmic energy plus the universal constant. So that's very nice because of course logarithmic energy, as you saw, is intimately involved with random matrix models in one dimension if you have one random matrix, one self-adjoint random matrix. So all of these properties are not so hard to get from properties of the Fisher information, more or less this formula plus a little bit of stuff. Now, there is a competitor definition of free entropy. And this is the so-called microstates free entropy. It's also due to Vojkulesku. I should have written his name as well. And it proceeds in a different way. It's kind of rigged to look like a large deviation principle. It's not written as a large deviation principle. It's not exactly equivalent to one. But it's sort of the flavor of what a large deviation principle is supposed to say. So let's try to parse it. At the onset, you're given some d-touple of operators, x1 through xd. And then what you want to do is you want to try to find n-bion matrices that look in law like your d-touple. Now, what does it mean to look in law like that? You pick a certain weak neighborhood of your law. So you specify a degree of approximation, m and epsilon. And what you want to say is that if you take any monomial of degree at most, m, then the normalized trace of your monomial evaluated in your matrices is approximately the trace of your monomial evaluated in your operators up to an error of at most epsilon. So you're trying to model the noncommutative law of your operators, x1, xd, by matrices of finite size, of size n by n. And then, well, what you do is you measure a kind of logarithmic rate at an appropriate, so logarithmic, at the rate of 1 over n squared, a logarithmic understanding of how likely this happens. So what you do is you take the Lebesgue volume of this set of matrices, and then you take the logarithm of this volume. You rescale it by 1 over n squared. n squared, dn squared, by the way, is the dimension of all matrices, because we're looking at d-touples of self-adjoint, I've got to say self-adjoint, d by d matrices, n by matrices. And this factor, n over 2 log n, is added on just for the fact that if you have a ball of finite size of finite radius in this thing, then the ball will have a certain volume, which is not exactly like 1 to the dimension. There'll be some constants that actually have some asymptotics. And to kill those constants, you have to add this n over, should be d, by the way, d over 2 log n, sorry. OK, so that's the definition of free entropy. Now in the case of a single matrix, you actually have a quality with the previous definition. In particular, you see that this thing here is just the logarithmic energy. So why is that? Well, this is kind of the usual story that if you have a single matrix x, which you can write as u times lambda 1, lambda n.


Fruit is popular around the world but do you have any idea which is the most popular fruit in terms of how much it is grown and consumed in a single year. I bet majority of the people will get this answer wrong. The correct answer my dear friends is the tomato and a lot of people end up forgetting that the tomato is indeed a fruit. Not only there are over 10,000 varieties to choose from but there are more than 187 million tons of this fruit grown in a single year around the world. Yes my dear friends that's tomato. Oh do you know which is the second most popular fruit in the world? The answer is banana which is grown at the rate of 124 million tons per year but it just cannot come close to the tomato in terms of popularity.


We'll call the 19th regular meeting of the Common Council to order. Pat, would you call the roll, please? Bowman, Berg, Boone, Doyle, Groth, Manny, Montemayor, Moody, Perez, Rinflaich, Steffen, Van Akron, Van Der Wiel, Wongerman, Warner, Weininger, 15 present. Corms present. Alderman Van Akron's wife, Anita, had operation for a heart and I believe she had to have something done with her valve again. She's resting very comfortably doing well, didn't care of today she was in surgery I believe about six hours they said so but she's doing very well. We all send a card from the council and some flowers down to her everybody knows. Alderman Groth. Thank you Your Honor. I've been moved to dispense with the reading of the minutes of the previous Common Council meeting in the same stand as approved as entered on the record. It's been moved and seconded that we approved the minutes of the previous Council meeting under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor? Opposed? Motion carried. Pledge allegiance. Alderman Doyle. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all. I forgot. We have one hearing before us this evening and as amended text of the zoning ordinance to delete the prohibitation of signs mounted on a roof. Any interested parties or should we heard? Steve? Mayor, council first I'd like to wish everyone a happy new year. Planning department want to take this opportunity to at least update the council with regards to the status of the proposed RIF sign amendment. As you may be aware a draft proposal is submitted to the plan commission a couple of weeks ago. The ordinance was relatively short. Basically it took out something that said no sign shall be mounted on a roof. Just eliminated that section. The plan commission as well as staff had several concerns with that proposal. Basically a couple of those concerns dealt with location. Where do we want to locate these signs? Do we want to locate them downtown? Do I locate them in the Harbor Center? Where do we want these signs located? Second, does a number, does not address the number of RIF signs? Do we want to allow one, two, three, how many? Doesn't address size. Do we want, you know, how do we regulate size? And lastly it didn't address the approval process. So before we drafted any type of formal language from the plan commission directed staff to contact several other communities and staff was in contact with Appleton, Fondalac, LaCrosse, Oshkosh, and Manitowoc. Out of those five communities only Manitowoc permitted RIF signs. And those were with special regulations and things like that before other communities specifically prohibited RIF signs. So again it appears that Sheboygan was rather progressive and forward thinking when they put, when we put the prohibition of RIF signs in our ordinance. So basically at this time staff just wanted to update you what the status is. This is the same information we're going to provide as a plan commission. And we just wanted to let the council be aware that our ordinance is consistent with what other communities have with regards to prohibiting RIF signs. Thank you. Thank you, Steve. Okay. Anyone else wishing to be heard? Yeah, I move that the hearing be closed. Moving to second to hearing be closed. Under discussion. Hearing none, all in favor? Opposed? Motion carried. Are we farmed? Yes. Rosemary, you used the microphone there and you'll have five minutes. Yes, ma'am. Can you hold the microphone down a little bit so you can speak right into it. That's good. Thank you. Our sewer backup problem goes back to August 1st. As you can see, I think you have the paperwork, Mayor. Yes. As you see from our damage injury city forum, we've experienced three, three sewer backups in 14 years. This is definitely the city of Sheboygan's fault. We're not going to accept act of God three times. God can't be that mad at me. We are indeed very IRA taxpayers. Sewer backup number two, you promise it would be taken care of. North Avenue was dug up for three months, then dug up again. Presumably, we were getting our monies worth. Wrong. Either your sewer department and the construction company they hired didn't do it enough where they did it wrong. Either way, the buck will stop at your desk. I suggest you start by getting rid of incompetent people who are wasting our tax dollars. Sewer backup number three. As you can see, this time our damages cost $23,934.50. This is the city's fault. No lies, no excuses. We had to replace a fine coal or furnace. A water heater, and voices are included. We had to throw away expensive sofas, sofa bed, family trips, pictures. We had to install a new sewer shutoff valve that cost $2,546.40. Because the city sewer wasn't handling the rainfall from an average storm. These items may seem trivial to you at City Hall, but I assure you we're furious. Dr. I'm sorry. Attorney Humpey and his wife, Dr. Ross Worthington and his wife, those are our neighbors. Reverend Forbush, Joan Forbush, are equally upset as we are. That was my first letter, my husband and I dated right after our sewer backup. October 28th was our second letter. And you've given us platitudes to the act of God theory, but you've already denied our claim for the loss of $23,934 and moved to a closed-door meeting. You've moved our case further under the rug and told us you're at the next level. Unfortunately, the same all our men and attorney are deciding our case again. Do we expect them to suddenly see our sigh? I don't think so. It's three months since August 1st, sewer backup, and you've again given us no explanation and what caused this mess and where the blame lies. Well, we've had to make phone calls for many concerned citizens, and we've made many phone calls to get to the bottom of this. I called Dick Schroeder and Jacob Bastian, construction company, who put in the new sewer pipes. I also talked to Ken DeBest, Best Systems, the subcontractor who installed the alarm system in pagers. I talked to Phyllis at security insurance. I've talked to engineering and security people. The result of two weeks of phone calls the day before August 1st, sewer backup, the city sent inspectors to test the entire system. However, after the inspection, the city testers did not hit the reset button to reactivate backup generators and alarm pagers. After I called the city to notify the public works department that our basements were flooding on August 1st, workmen came to the pump station at North 3rd Street. They pushed the reset button, and all the systems and alarms came on in full force. Most of the people I talked to knew the problem in the solution by 7 a.m. on August 1st. Their conclusion, the city testers did not push the reset button to reactivate the alarm and pagers after the test. Now we've got no satisfaction as to our city's response, not from the call to suggest we sue the city. Great. We have that kind of money. Or any alderman I talked to who is supposed to be representing us. This certainly smacks of a major cover up considering there are an estimated 14 homes affected by this sewer backup. Our question is simple. Who were the city testers and why weren't the reset button on? The city is supposed to help its citizens with basic civic services. And sewers is as basic as you can get. As a senior citizen on limited income, $23,934 is a lot of money for us over a mistake. We are only asking for what's fair for the city to acknowledge the responsibility. No more lies, no more cover ups, no more babble, just truthful answers. That's what we taxpayers deserve from our elected representatives. No phony stalls, no more weasel words, no more hiding behind closed doors. Just honesty and decency. It's not too much to ask of honest people. Rosemary. That's my second letter. I'm finished. Okay. You're done. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Rosemary. Steven Cooper. That's it. Okay. Consent agenda. William McGrath. Thank you, Your Honor. That's items 19-1 through 19-8. I would move that all ROs be accepted and filed. All RCs be accepted and adopted. And that we pass the resolution. Moving to a second, all ROs be accepted and filed. Resolutions be put upon their passage and RCs be accepted and adopted. Under discussion. That's 9-1 through 9-8. Hearing none, would you call the roll please? Burg, Monet, Doyle, Groth, Manny, Montemayor, Moody, Perez, Rinflaich, Steffen, Vanderwill, Wangeman, Warner, Weninger, Baumann. 15 ayes. Motion carried. 9-9 will hold for 1926. 9-10 lies over. 9-11 through 25 to be referred. 1926 along with 19-9 by Alderman Warner. Designating the police department as the agency in the city to receive fund, to receive found money or goods by city employees. Alderman Warner. Thank you, Your Honor. On 19-9, I would make a motion to accept and file the report of officer. And on 1926, I would make a motion to the resolution be put upon its passage. We have a motion before us to pass the resolution on 1926 and file 19-9 under discussion. Under discussion, Your Honor. The resolution on document 1926 is a resolution designating the police department as the agency in the city to receive fund, money or goods for purposes of section 170.105 of Wisconsin's statutes. Essentially, this will bring us into compliance with state law and allow a process to deal with items found by city employees during the working hours. And the police department will be the people who oversee it as they do without the lost and fallen items. Okay. Just another discussion. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carried. 1927, resolution by Alderman Perez, Montemire and Ryan Flash, directing the Special Audit Committee to hold open meetings in the Common Council Chambers at a time earlier than 6 p.m. on televised live cable eight. Alderman Perez. Thank you, Your Honor. I take it that the resolution can be put upon this passage tonight. Yes. And I would make a motion to put the resolution 1927 upon this passage. Your Honor, this is a resolution that was drafted in response to a lot of people that have called me and some that have stopped me at the mall and Piggly Wiggly and Walmart and so forth asking that the council consider televised in the meetings of the Special Audit Committee that was put together. They wanted to have the opportunity and would ask that other people have the opportunity to either be present during the meetings in City Council Chamber or to be able to view it via Channel 8. The reason that the City Council Chambers is being designated as a place to hold the meetings is because the television cameras are already set up here. There wouldn't be any additional movement cost or anything like that. The time that they are requesting that the meetings be held at 6 p.m. or thereafter and there again some were concerned that maybe the meetings were going to be held at 3 o'clock p.m., 1 o'clock, 10 o'clock in the morning and a lot of these people worked and they were hoping that the council would be considered enough to hold this to have the Special Audit Committee hold the meetings after 6 o'clock which in their mind and in my mind is a reasonable time for citizens who work up until 5 o'clock and then they also ask that these meetings be televised at least twice, the recording to be televised at least twice afterwards so that other people would have the opportunity to see them, at least the people who didn't show up during the meetings here or the people who weren't able to see them during that particular time. So this is pretty much where this resolution originated from is from direct requests from several residents in my district and other districts. Alderman Manny. Thank you, Your Honor. Would the members of the ethics committee, Special Committee, in doing the study of the open to that timeframe have you contacted them? No, I have not contacted them. I quite frankly didn't think of it. I thought this would be, since it's a committee that was put together by this council, the council could authorize and direct the Special Committee to hold the meetings here in city council chambers. This is a great way to just give public access to what we do. Alderman Wong. Thank you, Your Honor. Just a few thoughts. Assuming that the cable company pays their employees and this is extra work, who's going to pay for this? Where's that money coming from? Secondly, I think I don't care what time of the day you pick, you're going to find somebody that's working because at 6 o'clock all the people that are working nights are working so I don't, you know, you could have it at 4 in the morning or 3 in the afternoon or whatever and somebody is going to be working and won't be able to come to it and I know of no other committee that operates within the city government where the chairman of that committee does not pick the place and time and the main reason that we picked a committee of citizens was so that there would be no hint of any kind of council interference. I think it would be a disservice to the chairman of the committee not to allow him to pick the date, the place and the time of the meeting and no matter when you do this, somebody is going to squawk and say, hey, I'm working. Thank you. Alderman Montmere. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I understand it probably would cost some money but Mayor, when you decided to call for this committee, did you have, you must have had some money in mind other than just the, for this extension, this audit extension other than just the review of the Quarles and Brady? We had money, we didn't allot money for any televised programs. Was any money considered for the special audit committee that you wanted? That's all volunteer. Oh right, I understand that. They're not getting anything forward. So there wasn't any. Right. Has Attorney T. Winkle mentioned when he would be starting? That you're going to have to talk to Alderman Warner. Alderman Warner? I know we're trying to get a meeting together for this week. With the holidays and everything, you have five people. And Christmas and New Year's between our last meeting, it's pretty difficult to get five people together at that time. One of them is the minister. It's a little difficult to get those people together at that time. So they're going to plan a meeting for this week. I don't know if they've contacted Pat's office but I did call this morning to see where they were, was setting one up and he said they're trying to get people together for a meeting this week and it'll be publicly noticed and all their meetings will be open to the public. I received a phone call from Attorney T. Winkle this afternoon. He's scheduling a meeting for Thursday. He had three people that said they could make it. He was waiting for answers for the other two. He wanted to use the planning conference room for the meeting. I told him he'd have to contact that department to get the approval. And then we talked about when he has to get the agenda to me so I could get it to all the other persons. I'm sorry, what conference room did he ask for? City planning. City planning. I still think it would be a very good idea to approach Attorney T. Winkle with these concerns with this plan. I think he would be very much in favor of the community being able to see what was going on without having to actually be here. It would open the information to more of the community. Thank you. All in the press. Thank you, Your Honor. Just in response to Ullerman Wagon's comments, I think that by televising the pre-recorded version twice afterwards would meet the needs of the people who do work after six o'clock and so forth. As far as cost, this is a special committee. This is unlike any committee that has been created. Some people didn't ask for this committee to be created. It was created nonetheless. I don't think that the cost is going to be huge, but whatever the cost is it's very little compared to giving the public access to what we do. And in this particular instance, the importance of this committee, we could sit here and say it's going to cost a lot of money. Well, if this committee comes back and orders a special audit I guarantee you it's going to cost a lot of money too. And I take it everybody would be in agreement with that. I don't know and I don't think that holding these meetings here, given that the scenario setup is already here plenty of seats are here that is going to cost this council or this city an enormous amount of money. I would question that very seriously. Ullerman Wagon. Thank you, Your Honor. I agree with Ullerman Wagon that I think money would be an issue. And I would like to ask Mike Hots about that if you could explain the TVA side of that. If you could. Thank you. Thank you. One thing that hasn't been brought up first of all, TVA employees are city of Sheboygan employees. We fund that through a portion of the franchise fees from charter communications. We have programming scheduled every night on a regular basis just to go through Thursday night was the night I heard for the proposed meeting. That is Hispanic and Humane Society programming that entire evening. These are people who get together on a weekly basis and do their programming. We would have to preempt their programming which doesn't set too well with the people we work with. We have special programming scheduled Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday each evening. Monday nights are either legislative updates on the off council meetings and then on the alternate Mondays are council meetings. So what we would have to do is preempt some programming which doesn't set too well with the people who volunteer their time to come in and do that type of programming. Another problem it is I've got two full-time employees at TVA. They're nonrepresented employees who do not get overtime. You'll see them at South High games, North and South games on Friday, Saturday evenings, UW Sheboygan games, Sheboygan Lutheran games. They do not work I guess an ordinary nine to five shift. What happens when they're working these late hours? I'm unable to staff the UW or the TVA studio out at UW. The more time they work evenings equates to less time out there doing our regular programming. So it does create some problems we haven't run into. I had asked Alderman Werner in the past when he was at the committee of the whole meetings if he could perhaps have those on the same evening as council to help me out with our scheduling our TVA people. So we've done that on Mondays and if we go off that schedule for additional nights it does create a problem. So I hope that does answer your question. Thank you. Alderman Brainfush. Thank you, Your Honor. I'm happy that this has created some debate and looking at the best way of getting information out to the public. I did understand that there would be some conflicts of schedule and there may be some costs involved before putting my name on here. However, I think we have a crisis of confidence in city government right now. The committee has been called by requests from people within the community. We're doing this investigation by request people through community we're not doing the ethics board, we're doing a subcommittee of the ethics board that we voted on here. I think it's important that people see the transparency of this investigation. As it goes through the questions asked, the response is given. People can be confident then that the investigation was done properly and whatever solution comes out of that is the proper solution that way. So I do know that it's going to be problems here but I think the best way for the community to see what we're doing is legitimate, is proper and they can have confidence in any result by having it here and broadcast on TV. Thank you. Alderman Warner, you pushed your button. Yeah, it's on. I didn't know if you wanted to speak or not. Yes, please. Okay. I guess I won't support this document and part of the reason for that is that the special audit committee was approved by this council to do a specific job and report back to us, this council, with its findings. This is not an unusual process by any means when it comes to a special committee. It was made clear when the special audit committee was approved that its meetings would be open to the public and to the media. As well as being properly noticed according to state law. We do not force time constraints on or televised our standing committees or any of our special committees or commissions. The finance committee, public works, public protection and safety, salary and grievance, special marina, building use, plan commission, redevelopment authority, housing rehab loan committee, none of these are put into such a box. And a special audit committee should not be put into a box either. The special audit committee will meet on the call of the chair. The chairman will poll its members to determine when they can be available and then set the meeting date and time. That's not uncommon. We operate that way all the time. It will be properly noticed and open to everyone. This is a normal and standard practice. I would like to remind everyone that the special audit committee is made up of volunteers. Unpaid and willing to give of their own time to bring forth facts and conclusions regarding the issues at hand. It is not fair nor is it proper to try and put constraints and roadblocks in the path of the special audit committee to limit their progress and independence from this political body. And I believe that is what this resolution would do. The special audit committee will comply with Wisconsin's open meeting and records laws. And when the work is done they will report back to the council. Their report on the ethics issues in question will go to the ethics board and will be televised. We talked about that when we approved this committee. And with all the older persons present and open to the public. The report on the Blue Harbor contract will go to the common council and possibly to the committee of the whole. Be televised and open to the public with all of the older persons present. The right thing to do is to let the special audit committee do its work as directed by this common council in accordance with Wisconsin state law and report back to us. Their reports and the common council's deliberations on them will be properly noticed, televised on TV 8 and open to the public. I will not support this roadblock to the progress of the special audit committee and urge the council to deny this resolution so the committee can move forward with its findings of fact. Thank you Mr. Mayor. Thank you Alderman Warner for your thoughts. I don't agree with many of them but that's alright because we still speak very nicely to each other at the end of the meeting. I don't think this is a roadblock. I think this makes it smoother, easier and this is a special committee. It isn't the routine ones and wouldn't it be wonderful if all of our committee meetings could be broadcast which we can't. Difficult to air because it interferes with present programming? Not so difficult we can't overcome it. The money for the employees yes, but a special committee special audit committee that you called for needs a little bit of money. I think we should do this to make it easier, smoother, not with roadblocks. Thank you. Alderman Warner. Just one comment yet. It almost appears to me that people are insinuating that the only distribution of news we have in this city is cable TV. I mean we have some other gentlemen here at the table who are reasonably capable at broadcasting the news and I'm sure Mr. Petrie is going to be writing some articles and I'm sure that the radios will have anything in it that people want to know so I think if people really want to find out what's going on in that committee I'll just pick up the paper and listen to the radio. Alderman Press. Go on to that one. No I didn't. I spoke once and I answered questions.  I'll give you the floor. Finish up. Thank you. I just wanted to make a clarification here that although the radio does an excellent job of reporting what happens in the council there's an enormous amount of information that's left out because they're limited to time, airtime. The same goes for the newspaper. Mr. Petrie is limited to a certain amount of words per article. There's an enormous amount of information that does not get reported simply because he's limited to information. So to stand here and say that we have two competent entities that can report everything that happens in every meeting is not true. Alderman Gough. Thank you, Your Honor. I don't know if there's a hang up on the word special or not but we have the special committee on capital improvements. We have the special marina committee. We have several other special committees that we call and have them meet on the call of the chair and that's what the special audit committee should do. We, on those other commissions and committees that I mentioned, we meet usually at five o'clock in the afternoon, 5.31 I think meets and as late as we can so that we get enough public participation. I can't remember the last time that we had public participation in any of these meetings other than the department heads coming in and requesting something. Because of that and because you get a report of committee, you get minutes from that, all the Alderman will see those minutes. They're open to the public if they so wish because I believe they'll be posted on our website and although not everybody has a computer they do have access to it. The paper has access to those as well. I can't see anybody supporting this and tying the hands of anybody on this special committee. Thank you. Alderman Steffen. Yes. I think the important thing is what Alderman Werner said is that this is going to be televised. It's going to be public.  They're from out of town.  Who are we kidding? They're going to put this on the council floor every one of us knows it. That's going to be televised. I guess as a side and maybe a suggestion to Alderman Werner it occurred to me when I was put on the county board I don't know if they do this all the time or it's just because ten of us got elected that same year but former corporation council Alex Hopp gave us a presentation before we ever took our oath on ethics and I think as we go forward in this, before we meet as an ethics committee to look at this other ethics committee I think we should have clearly Attorney McLean probably wouldn't want to do it but maybe somebody else who can go through and tell us what ethics is because I think there's a lot of grey area in ethics. Even if you understand it 100% there's grey area for example I've heard of an alder person who told me well this other alder person threatened me and said he'd go find somebody who run against me if I didn't vote a certain way. I would find it unethical. Clearly some people don't similarly another alderman related to me that he thought an alderman set a physical threat to him on the floor of the council. Again clearly I would find it unethical. Some people don't and I guess my point is I think there's always going to be grey areas when it involves ethics but I'd like to see us have an instruction from a lawyer corporation council Hopp, somebody who's dealt with these types of issues so we all know exactly what ethics is. I have people too stop and see me in the community and they say there was a mistake made but is that ethics? And I said well we'll see what happens I guess with the investigation you know it's not being handled the way I wanted to handle the mayor wanted he said yep we'll double bag it we'll go an extra mile to make sure we have this committee and then the other committee to make sure I'm 100% clean. I understand that you know I mean I applaud you for that it's not the way I would have done it but I think what we've got to remember here is the document we're dealing with had two signatures on it. Now is everybody who wants to have this televised are you telling me that if I get two signatures that accuse any of you of bad ethics we're going to have a televised meeting on it we're going to accuse you of bad ethics maybe they're right maybe they're wrong I'm not prejudging anybody I'm not accusing anybody of anything but I think we're setting an awful dangerous precedent. If we decide two people can write a letter to the community and all of a sudden we're going to have televised meetings we're going to have change our hours change our committees it's a win of two people and all we have is accusations. I think you're setting a very very dangerous precedent and that's you know I certainly wouldn't support this because like I said I believe in open government I always have it's going to come back it's going to be open we're going to deal with it we're going to deal with the committee they find something we don't like if they we don't think they did it right we're going to certainly look at it I'm sure that'll happen but I think you're setting a very dangerous precedent to improve something like this thank you. Thank you. All the right flash back to you. Thank you. I think we need to focus on why we're making this recommendation it's not for the Alderman's information we have access to that we have the minutes we're going to meet back with the as the ethics board with this committee to get their findings. My concern isn't us getting information the concern is the public seeing with their own eyes I can't believe that my phone's only one ringing off the hook talking about how people feel about local government nowadays and I can't argue with them because of their perception I can tell you the facts of my reality but their perception is they have a crisis of confidence local city government I just want to be able to make it easier for people to wash the proceedings on their own so that whatever result comes out they can be confident in and we can move forward and they can be confident in the government again as well and that's all I'm making the recommendation for is that people be able to see it on their own believe with their own two eyes and be confident again in the city government thank you. Alderman Groff. Just one more statement after Alderman Reinfelders made that plea you know if there are that many citizens that are that concerned they can come to the meeting once they know when it is and it will be moved if they don't have enough room in the place where they want it. There will be enough space that will be available for them to meet anytime they want to meet and they can ask any questions they want at the meeting as the chairman has said so I think we're doing as much as we can to give as much information as we need to thank you Pat wait a minute Alderman Warner. Briefly Your Honor I guess in my district I have not heard from a great deal of people who are gravely concerned with what this special audit committee is doing at this time in fact not one single phone call however I have talked to many people around the city when I go to the grocery store and other places and they have told me quite a different story about what their concerns are and I won't bring those up right now but one thing for sure this is a special audit committee to bring something back to the common council and the ethics board of this council which will be open to the public televised with their presentation to the ethics board and with the presentation to the common council and or community the whole for the blue harvard contract issues and this is just senseless to have a resolution like this come through and I think there's a lot more to it than meets the eye however I think we should vote this resolution down and leave it at that. Okay Pat would you call the roll please. And I would be for passage Bonet Doyle Manny Montemayor Rinflesch Wongerman Wenninger Bauman Bauman Bühlig Re implycommit by public protection safety recommending the denying beverage operators license 6235 based on a noncooperative cooperation with a noncooperation with the committee in misrepresenting her record on her application. Alderman Doyle Thank you, your honor is miss her nickel here to represent herself No, your honor we can proceed. Okay. We have a motion before us under discussion Hearing none would you call the roll please bear Doyle graph Manny Monta mayor Moody Perez I'm sorry Too much coughing going on windflash Stefan Vander wheel wrong woman Warner Weninger Bowman Berg bone 15 I's motion carried 1936 through 38 lies over 1939 to be referred 1833 a resolution by Alderman graph Stefan Doyle transferring funds to establish estimated revenue and appropriations for the police training aids Alderman graph Your honor on that resolution as well as Resolution 1832 which is a resolution to establish the appropriation to advance funds from the general fund to titik 10 debt service fund to be repaid with interest and Establishing estimated revenue and appropriations for use department of housing and urban development led based paint abatement program and Then resolution 1834 which Increases appropriations by 98,000 833 for the fire department regular salaries and 85,646 dollars for the police regular salaries and 1835 with a result which is also a resolution amending appropriations in the Department of Public Works budget as Outline I would move that all For those resolutions be put upon the passage Move to secondary resolutions be put upon their passage 1833 3234 35 under discussion Alderman Montemire Thank You. Mr. Mayor May I ask Alderman Alderman graph a question sure? 1834 We're authorizing a transfer of appropriations in the 2004 budget for fire and police departments increasing Appropriations for fire services regular salaries and for police regular salaries. It's just regular salaries. There's no wage increases in there Correct. Okay. So the word increasing means increasing appropriations 98,833 dollars the first word in that right and you're increasing that From those various accounts that show like under the column that says from under the general fund fire service unemployment compensation Fire protection our prevention bureau unemployment compensation You're moving those funds that are left over to the general fund fire services regular salaries. Thank you Okay, there's no discussion. Would you call the role please graph? Manny Montemayer Moody Perez Rindflash Stefan Vanderwill Wongamun Warner Winnigar Bowman Burr Bonnet Doyle 15 eyes motion carried 1839 general orders by Alderman Warner resending ordinance granting an encroachment to Marcel and Shannon Brillo For the purpose of seasonal outdoor seating Alderman Warner I thank your honor. I'd make a motion the general ordinance be put upon its passage Move to second ordinance be put upon its passage under discussion under discussion your honor This is an ordinance resending general ordinance number 950102 which granted an encroachment to Marcel and Shannon Kring viral for the purpose of seasonal outdoor seating Your honor the viral was granted an encroachment for seasonal outdoor seating in April of 2002 And for whatever reason did they did not pay the fee for that? And at this time the they have not used that right to encroachment and under city code The rights of encroachment are automatically removed within 10 days of notice to them And if the viral would desire to do this in the future all they need to do is reapply for an encroachment There's another discussion would you call the role please Manny Montemayer Moody Perez Rindflash Stefan Vanderwill Wongam and Warner Winniger Valman Brunei Doyle Groth 15 eyes motion carried 1842 general ordinance by alderman van Ackerman Wonderman Manny changing the class grade of lavatory technician and wastewater treatment plan operator 1 and the wwtp to Alderman Wonderman Thank you, your honor reference document 58 dash 0304 I make a motion that the ordinance be put upon this passage Move the second agenda or is be put upon this passage under discussion alderman graph. Thank you, your honor I'm wondering if Alderman Wegman or someone can tell us if there's any cost associated with this and then also if this is part of the Reorganization that many of the departments are looking at all the one one you want Tom to answer that Tom home Actually, there's a savings that right now the lab deck work seven days a week So he's getting two and three quarter hours overtime on Sundays will not have to come in on Sundays to do those tests And is it part of I know you're looking at a reorganization of something is this the start of it or is this the no It's not oh, it's a system different. All right. Thank you Okay Another discussion would you call the role please Montemayer Moody Perez Winfrey's Stefan Vanderwill Wongamon Warner Winninger Bowman Berg Bonnet Doyle Groth Manny 15 I motion carried 1840 general ordinance by Alderman Warner Doyle Vanderwheel To add a stop sign on Pennsylvania Avenue westbound at Broughton Drive All in order. I think your honor make a motion the general ordinance be put upon its passage Move to second ordinance be put up on this passage under discussion under discussion your honor This is an ordinance relating to stop signs So as to add a stop sign on Pennsylvania Avenue westbound at Broughton at its intersection with Broughton Drive This is the intersection at the short stretch of street That runs past the Coast Guard station in the odd club and it dead ends right by the waterfront there There's currently a yield sign and with increased traffic along our beautiful lakeshore. This will help to improve safety at that intersection Public protection safety committee recommends pass There's another discussion Pat, what do you call her old Moody Perez Rinflaich Stefan Vanderwill Wongamon Warner Winninger Bowman Berg Bonnet Doyle Groth Manny Montemayer 15 I motion carried 1940 in our old by Shibuya Transit Commission recommending filing various documents that could be accepted placed on file Moved in second to accept the place on file under discussion Hearing none all in favor Most motion carried 41 will go to public protection and safety and 42 will go to public protection and safety Alderman Groth Thank you, your honor. I would move that we convene in closed section closed session under the exemption provided in 19.851 G of the Wisconsin statutes for the purpose of conferring with legal counsel for the city Who is rendering oral or written advice concerning strategy to be adopted with respect to litigation in which it is or is likely to become involved They have a motion before us to go into closed session under discussion Okay Pat Calderon Perez Rinflaich Stefan Vanderwill Wongamon Warner Winninger Bowman Berg Bonnet Doyle Groth Manny Montemayer Moody 15 I motion carried will recess for five minutes be back in the five minutes. You will be closed session