MONROE - On July 5, Senior Citizens Board member Charles Koch presented an agenda item to six of his fellow aldermen requesting that Senior Center Coordinator Tammy Derrickson be given permission to find a company to possibly conduct a feasibility study for either an expansion or new build of the Behring Senior Center.
Koch moved for the resolution to be entertained for consideration by the Monroe Common Council. What followed was not the usual second to begin discussion - instead there was silence.
Of the aldermen present, Michael Boyce, Chris Beer, Tom Miller, Ron Marsh, Rob Schilt and Richard Thoman, no one spoke up to second the motion and to speak either for or against the resolution.
"It really stumped me," Koch said.
Specifically, the alderman said he did not understand how an item from the Senior Citizens Board, which was not asking to spend money or construct anything, had garnered such an unusual response. The routine measure was simply asking permission to look into possible avenues for a feasibility study, Koch said.
Derrickson declined to comment, instead deferring all questions to City Administrator Phil Rath, who pointed out that a lack of second does not necessarily mean a lack of support, but rather an uninformed council.
"I didn't read into it that it was not supported or supported by council," Rath said. "It could just be a lack of information among the council members."
Rath also said the need for a resolution may be unnecessary, and instead of a request to move forward, the board can simply inform the council on its steps in locating a firm to put together a feasibility study. The board would only request permission if allocating funds to the project.
Planning for an expansion or new senior center building is in its earliest stages. Members of the board dictated that Derrickson hire a professional or company to understand the limitations of a possible building expansion or even a future facility. The site's future plans of accreditation and additional programs may not be possible without a bigger facility. That proves to be a problem, board members said in May, because the current center is landlocked by streets and the parking lot is at its maximum size. Building upward on the aging structure also poses unique challenges.
Rath said the board could bring the board's resolution back to the next council agenda. It could also be discussed in future meetings, and could be presented as information to keep the city updated rather than a request for permission to progress in any plans.
Koch moved for the resolution to be entertained for consideration by the Monroe Common Council. What followed was not the usual second to begin discussion - instead there was silence.
Of the aldermen present, Michael Boyce, Chris Beer, Tom Miller, Ron Marsh, Rob Schilt and Richard Thoman, no one spoke up to second the motion and to speak either for or against the resolution.
"It really stumped me," Koch said.
Specifically, the alderman said he did not understand how an item from the Senior Citizens Board, which was not asking to spend money or construct anything, had garnered such an unusual response. The routine measure was simply asking permission to look into possible avenues for a feasibility study, Koch said.
Derrickson declined to comment, instead deferring all questions to City Administrator Phil Rath, who pointed out that a lack of second does not necessarily mean a lack of support, but rather an uninformed council.
"I didn't read into it that it was not supported or supported by council," Rath said. "It could just be a lack of information among the council members."
Rath also said the need for a resolution may be unnecessary, and instead of a request to move forward, the board can simply inform the council on its steps in locating a firm to put together a feasibility study. The board would only request permission if allocating funds to the project.
Planning for an expansion or new senior center building is in its earliest stages. Members of the board dictated that Derrickson hire a professional or company to understand the limitations of a possible building expansion or even a future facility. The site's future plans of accreditation and additional programs may not be possible without a bigger facility. That proves to be a problem, board members said in May, because the current center is landlocked by streets and the parking lot is at its maximum size. Building upward on the aging structure also poses unique challenges.
Rath said the board could bring the board's resolution back to the next council agenda. It could also be discussed in future meetings, and could be presented as information to keep the city updated rather than a request for permission to progress in any plans.