EVANSTON — At the Tuesday, Sept. 3 meeting of the Evanston City Council, member Jen Hegeman asked that Resolution 23-26, which was passed in 2023 and concerns council rules of procedure and order, be repealed by passing Resolution 24-59.

“Resolution 23-26 violates constitutional due process when it states that only local residents can testify/speak at a council meeting; violates freedom of speech; provides no appeal process and takes authority away from the people,” Hegeman said. “It is often redundant, is problematic and I was advised by attorneys to ask for its removal.”

Mayor Kent Williams asked Hegeman who advised her and for their names.

Hegeman said she had called WAM (Wyoming Association of Municipalities) attorneys and Elizabeth was one and she couldn’t immediately remember the second attorney’s name.

Williams asked Evanston City Attorney Mark Harris if he was aware of any of Hegeman’s concerns in the resolution, and Harris said he did not concur, and he wasn’t serving as the city attorney at the time it was adopted.

“I thought it was a fair and good code of conduct, and I see no need to repeal it,” Williams said.

Councilmembers Evan Perkes and David Welling agreed with Williams and both said they had voted for it in 2023.

Councilmember Jesse Lind said, “I don’t see a need for it; we already use Roberts Rules of Order, and this is redundant.”

“My biggest concern,” Councilmember Mike Sellers said, “is that it gave the mayor absolute authority, and that is not constitutional.”

Williams called for a vote on Resolution 24-59 to repeal resolution 23-26. Four council members — Hegeman, Lind, Sellers and Tim Lynch — all voted in favor of the repeal, with David Welling and Evan Perkes voting in opposition. The resolution for repeal passed.

Harris opened a public hearing to receive public input regarding the renewal of liquor licenses in the city. There were no public comments and Harris closed the hearing.

Harris told the council that Joe Westerman with JoeCo LLC asked for an extension on the time limits for the renewal of his license until the Sept. 17 meeting, and Westerman also asked for an extension until Oct. 3, 2025, for his business on Front Street, Queen City Saloon, to become operational.

The council then voted to approve Westerman’s two requests with council member Hegeman recusing herself from the vote as she has had business ties to Westerman.

The council voted to approve the other applications for liquor license renewals in the city of Evanston.

A motion was approved by the council to set a public hearing for Oct. 1, at 5:30 p.m. to consider the lease and option to purchase of the property at 196 Bear River Dr. (the Sunset Cabins) to AGN LLC.

Harris said the lease and potential sale falls under the economic development statute and requires a public hearing.”

The date of Sept. 17 was approved by the council for a public hearing on amending the city’s 2024-25 fiscal budget by increasing general fund expenditures by $84,000 for relocation of the Union Pacific Railroad water tower from Wahsatch, Utah, to the Evanston Roundhouse and Railyards as requested by Roundhouse Restoration Incorporated (RRINC), a Wyoming nonprofit corporation.

Rick Eskelsen has been asking the city council for their financial support to move the water tower for several months and he and Shelly Horne, vice president of the Evanston Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) met with Harris earlier to get a motion on the agenda.

“This is something we have talked about for a long time,” Williams said. “I still need to see hard and fast numbers. I have concerns relative to the tower itself; we need costs associated with contractors, architects, crane operators, etc.”

He said he hasn’t seen anything from Union Pacific or RRINC on who will have ownership, and how it will be transferred.

Tom Farrens, president of RRINC, was in the audience and asked to speak. He said he couldn’t remember what the cost figures were from several years ago, but that Myers-Anderson had done a complete design workup. He said he did not know this subject was on the agenda so he hadn’t come prepared with paperwork.

Welling asked Farrens who owned the dining car and other cars parked near the Roundhouse, expressing concern with how it was beginning to look like a junk yard.

Eskelsen said the city owns them, and Farrens said when he was president of the Evanston Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), the renovation of the dining car and the caboose were on the to-do list for restoring and preservation, but engine 4420 and the water tower were higher priorities.

Sellers said he supports moving the tower but at the public hearing he would appreciate solid data on the cost.

The council approved the public hearing for Sept. 17.

A limited malt beverage permit was approved for a mixed martial arts competition to be held at the Machine Shop on Saturday, Sept. 21, from 6-10 pm.

The council approved on second reading Ordinance 24-07, amending the city code relating to pawns and pawnshops to match the Wyoming statutes regulating pawn finance charges and maturities.

Lastly, Hegeman asked for a discussion regarding an update on air conditioning in the Machine Shop including a roof assessment.

“We need to move on this subject,” Hegeman said. “We need to do something and start getting bids. We only have eight months until next summer to get something done. What are the next steps?”

Evanston Community Development Director Rocco O’Neill provided some possibilities. He said the subject of air conditioning in the machine shop has been on the capital construction budget requests for 10 years.

O’Neill said they would need to hire engineers to assess the building; the windows are single pane glass and might need to be replaced with double panes, and the walls are uninsulated brick. They would need an estimate from an electrical engineer as to the long-term maintenance and utility costs. O’Neill said the city currently spends between $900 to $1,200 a month on electricity in the Machine Shop.

“The cost of air conditioning based on inflation could range from $250,000 to $400,000 and would probably be closer to $300,000 — and that would be just for equipment and controls,” O’Neill said. “The roof assessment needs to be done and would cost 5% to 15% of the project cost.”

Other alternatives O’Neill suggested are portable industrial AC units, which he said would cost between $20,000 to $35,000 each for that size of building. With AC units, they would need electrical and exhaust upgrades and there would be an issue with efficiency and noise as the large units would be loud. Swamp coolers create humidity, which creates mold, and concrete floors can become slick with the moisture created, so they are not an option.

“We could have renters sign an agreement acknowledging there is no air conditioning in the facility, or we could just not rent it out during the hottest days in the summer. Or we can just go on as is,” O’Neill said.

Hegeman said the first thing they should do is get a structural engineer to look at the roof and see if air conditioning is even feasible. She said the brick walls are a great insulator and the windows could have film put on them.

Harris spoke up and said it would be good to get an estimate from an engineer for an assessment and they could also look into energy efficient grants, gather up as much information as they can and bring it to the meeting on Sept. 17.

During public participation, Gina Sundquist addressed the council once again. She suggested that the council could consider adding a small fee to the water bills that could go toward air conditioning. She also gave the council a handout with information on the IRS commercial buildings’ energy-efficiency tax deduction.

HPC vice pres. Shelly Horne addressed the council.

“First, I want to thank Mark Harris for taking the time to meet with Rick and me. There is a serious misunderstanding here — all we are asking for is just the funds to move the water tower. You don’t understand what you are looking at; $84,000 is as hard a number as we could get. That is just for moving the tower and for the foundation, it is not the entire amount for completing the renovation. UP only gives us 120 days to move it after a letter of transfer is signed. We are going to move it one way or another; we just thought the city would be happy to have it.”