Council recap: Chateau indecision, pay raises, and more
The Rochester City Council decided Monday to hold off on making a final decision regarding the future use of the Chateau Theatre.
While several members spoke in support of the staff-recommended proposal from Theshold Arts, there were suggestions from the council that Threshold work with the other two groups that responded to the RFP.
One of those groups, known as the Community Enrichment Team, is made of up of three city departments — parks, music, and the library. The other consists of Rochester businessmen Steve Barlow and Daniel Van Hook.
Council President Brooke Carlson said the goal is not to force a collaboration — but to give the groups time to determine whether there could be a framework involving all three proposals.
“I just hope there is an opportunity for those partners to come together, and be really thoughtful about the best way to pull their strengths together,” said Carlson, who joined four colleagues in voting to table the decision.
Ward 4’s Kelly Rae Kirkpatrick was the lone councilor to vote against the motion — arguing the council should instead be focusing on moving forward on a 2016 plan by Miller Dunwiddie Architecture.
“The long-term use is what we really need to get back to with the Chateau Theatre,” said Kirkpatrick, noting the possibility that historic tax credits could be renewed by the state legislature. “If they are renewed next year, we can hit the ground running with a long-term plan for the Chateau to bring it forward for a reopening in five years.”
Councilors also raised concerns about “outstanding issues” with the nearby Castle, where Threshold had operated out of prior to the pandemic.
The city has notified the Castle ownership that they are in breach of contract by allowing a church to operate on the second and third floors of the building. When the city sold the building to the ownership group in 2017, the contract stipulated the space must be used for the “advancement of arts and cultural offerings.” Council members said they hope to have more clarity around that issue in the coming weeks.
Pay raises divide council
Also on Monday, the council opted to raise their salaries in accordance to an ordinance approved back in 2019.
Those increases, which came with plenty of controversy, set the mayor’s salary at 120 percent area median income (AMI), the council president at 92 percent AMI, and council ward representatives at 80 percent AMI.
After delaying the full increases in 2020 and 2021 — the latter due to the pandemic — the council voted 4-2 to approve the revised salaries.
The update puts the mayor’s 2022 salary at $83,760, the city council president's salary at $64,216, and council members pay at $55,840.
Ward 6 Councilor Molly Dennis, who was elected in 2020 after the pay formula was passed, said the higher wages are essential for allowing more people — including those in marginalized communities — to seek office.
“I have a lot of respect for the previous council who voted for this long-overdo liveable wage increase,” said Dennis, adding it takes at least 40 hours a week to be an informed and engaged council member. “I never think liveable wages are wasteful spending.”
Ward 5 Councilor Shaun Palmer disagreed with Dennis’s assessment, saying he considers the position of ward representative to be a half-time job. He proposed reducing council pay by 50 percent, while keeping the two citywide positions — council president and mayor — at the previously agreed upon level. The motion, however, failed for lack of a second.
“It’s not a liveable wage issue,” said Palmer. “This is about serving the public. And if you don’t think it’s an honor to serve your public, well then don’t run for city council.”
Ward 5 Councilor Nick Campion joined Palmer in voting against the pay increases, noting the current economic climate. He also suggested the current formula of basing salaries on AMI had not worked as intended.
Despite agreeing to tie the 2022 wage increases to AMI, the council adopted an amendment to scrap the formula moving forward. That means instead of having the raises be brought up each year automatically, the council’s salaries would be capped at their current levels and any plan to increase them would require additional council initiation.
Downtown levy increase approved
In another divided vote, the council approved an 8 percent levy increase for businesses in the Rochester Downtown Alliance’s special service district.
The increase, which had already been approved by the RDA board, will raise the levy from $324,750 in 2021 to $350,660 in 2022. The RDA did not seek a levy increase for 2021 due to the economic impacts of Covid-19.
In letters to the council ahead of the vote, several downtown businesses owners spoke in favor of the levy — noting the work the RDA does to put on events and programming, such as SocialICE and Thursdays Downtown.
“The work RDA does for our downtown district is phenomenal in not just connecting downtown stakeholders together (which is incredibly valuable) but helping to create connections to our broader community through RDA’s events and programming,” wrote Shawn Fagan, co-owner of Fagan Studios.
Only one business — Titan Development — used the public comment period to argue against the levy. Speaking through an attorney, the development and investment company said now is not the time for an increase and warned it could cause businesses to leave downtown.
“The reality is when you put a levy like this in place, it’s going to flow to the tenants,” said attorney Andrew Davick, who spoke on behalf of Titan and its CEO, Andy Chafoulias. “It’s going to increase their burden.”
In response to Davick’s comments, RDA Executive Director Holly Masek noted the organization has expanded its services in recent years to include outdoor space management and its Clean and Safe Ambassador Program.
She said while some of those initiatives got started with city funding, the only sustainable path to keeping them going is through the levy.
“In order to continue to grow, and support these programs, the funding will need to start coming more from the special service district,” said Masek.
The levy passed 4-2, with Palmer and Kirkpatrick objecting to the motion. Kirkpatrick cited concerns about how the increase could impact businesses.
“An eight percent leap, when we don’t know what’s going to be happening in the next four, five and six months, is potentially problematic,” she said.
On the other side of the vote, Campion described the levy as an important investment for the downtown, particularly coming out of the pandemic.
“There are things you do in a downturn to make sure you are ready for an upturn, and this is one of them,” said Campion.
Sean Baker is a Rochester journalist and the founder of Med City Beat.
