[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:00] All right, we're going to move on to public comment. And first of all, I'd like to thank everyone from the public that is here tonight.
[0:08] We do really appreciate your interest. We appreciate your participation in this process.
[0:14] And we value your feedback. So thank you. And thank you to all of those who have sent us messages and emails and phone calls.
[0:22] So we do appreciate your feedback.
[0:24] back. We will be limiting, we have quite a few people that want to speak, so we will
[0:29] be limiting you to two minutes. I'm also limiting to make sure that you are a resident, a current
[0:36] resident of St. Croix County. And please remember to speak your name and your address
[0:44] and be as specific and concise as you possibly can. I will also let the next
[0:54] person know who's up next so we can keep the process moving along. Okay we're
[1:00] going to start out with Scott Miller and then Scott he will be followed by
[1:06] is Celeste Corboral.
[1:24] Thanks everybody for your time. Stand before you to bring the, in
[1:32] regards to the solar farm that's being pushed upon the people from our bad policies both
[1:38] in our state and our federal government. It is your guys' jobs as a county board. If
[1:45] anybody's in this room that's from municipalities, we need to stand in front of this. We need
[1:50] to send a message to our state and federal government that we have to stop all these
[1:55] poor policies where we are basically paying these companies to go around and there was
[2:04] a policy that was going to go in this area that was under 100 meg that they obviously
[2:08] couldn't get through the local government so then they brought it through XL who's
[2:15] now going to ram it through because they're going to use the state.
[2:18] So, I gave you guys a document and there's a bunch of areas in there that we need to
[2:22] research, you know, who's funding this and the stuff.
[2:26] Ask questions of Excel today.
[2:28] All the kickbacks are getting from state, local government, tax benefits.
[2:31] That's what we, the people, want to know.
[2:33] They bragged on their crap meeting about being the cheapest energy, but I bet if
[2:39] we put all of our costs together as a taxpayer, it wouldn't be that cheapest.
[2:45] Okay.
[2:46] Celeste, the next will be Christy Rora.
[2:48] Good evening. My name is Celeste Cobrell. I live on like Malalu in the town of Hudson,
[2:54] Wisconsin. We've been there for 31 years. I did send in written public comments regarding the
[3:00] manure storage facilities ordinance and also dropped off some highlights of our photos
[3:05] regarding water quality in St. Croix County. I am speaking to you tonight because you're
[3:12] to be making decisions about the proposed minority storage facilities ordinance and
[3:18] I hope that you will carefully listen and consider with both your heads and your hearts.
[3:22] The public comments that people are making about the need to better protect our water
[3:27] quality in St. Croix County.
[3:30] As we have presented facts, we have shown you that already 13% of the private water
[3:36] wells in St. Croix County or about 2,000 water wells are drawing from groundwater
[3:40] water that already exceeds the safe drinking water standard for nitrate
[3:44] contamination.
[3:47] And unfortunately both the number of contaminated wells and the
[3:51] contamination level with nitrates is increasing annually in St. Craig County.
[3:55] It is not decreasing. Please remember that drinking water with excessive
[4:00] nitrates is a serious health hazard. It affects our blood pressure, our heart
[4:04] rates, our digestive systems and it causes blue baby syndrome which can
[4:08] sick and and kill infants. It also reduces the values of homes by about 15% and it is
[4:15] very expensive to remedy through the installation of private reverse osmosis systems or replacing
[4:22] your private drinking well. One of the causes of high nitrate contamination is when manure
[4:30] and or biosolids are spread into farm fields at a rate higher than what the crops grown
[4:36] on those fields need. In addition, already our St. Croix County surface waters are impaired.
[4:43] Reduced water quality in algae blooms hurts St. Croix County's visitors economy, which is already
[4:49] about $219 million of total economic impact in 2023. It reduces the values of homes along
[4:56] water bodies by about 11%. Again, a source of the impairments in our surface waters is runoff
[5:03] from fields where manure is improperly applied or too much is applied because that carries
[5:08] sediments, phosphorus, and nitrogen into our lakes, our rivers, it clouds the water,
[5:13] it feeds the algae blooms.
[5:15] The manure storage facilities ordinance is a very reasonable ask.
[5:19] It doesn't ban anything.
[5:20] It doesn't say you can't have a manure storage facility.
[5:23] It doesn't say you can't have a CAFO.
[5:24] It doesn't say you can't have a manure digester.
[5:26] It just says, if you put in a new one or expand an existing one, please don't make our water
[5:33] quality worse.
[5:35] Please support it.
[5:36] Thank you.
[5:40] A Christy in following her will be Elizabeth Wood.
[5:47] Christy Raritt of 1657 150th Avenue in Hammond, and I'm here to address the proposed solar
[5:53] farm in that area.
[5:55] Well, there are numerous concerns about Excel's proposed massive industrial solar farms such
[6:01] as environmental health, water quality, noise pollution as well and the well-being of surrounding
[6:06] residents.
[6:07] I would like to speak to Excel's misrepresentation of the impact that the industrial solar farms
[6:12] have on property values.
[6:14] Excel continues to claim that there is no impact on property values near solar farms.
[6:19] This is simply not true.
[6:22] numerous scientific studies that I have found have shown that property values
[6:26] do decrease by an average of three to nine percent when utility-scaled farms
[6:31] are near homes or neighborhoods. For example, a study out of New York found
[6:38] property values declined by 8.7 percent within one mile of a solar array. Now
[6:44] while there are studies that show no impact, it's important to consider who
[6:48] funds these who funds these studies. Many of them are sponsored by solar
[6:53] industries who which stand to benefit from skewed results. The board and the
[6:58] public need to be aware that Excel is not being fully transparent as they claim
[7:03] to be with the information they provide on their website in medium
[7:07] statements and their informational meetings like the one they had like the
[7:12] one they're gonna have tonight and the one they've had in previous
[7:17] on previous occasions.
[7:19] For many homeowners, property values represent the future that they are building for their
[7:23] families while a large corporation like Excel, 9 to 7 percent might not seem significant,
[7:33] but to my family and many of you who are in this room, that's a substantial amount.
[7:38] Living this project decreases values, it results in financial loss, mental health
[7:44] strain and concerns about long-term invested. It's critical as a county we
[7:50] consider these impacts when planning solar installations to work with local
[7:54] communities so they are not unfairly burned in. Thank you.
[8:02] Okay Elizabeth Wood
[8:03] and who will be followed by Thomas Brunchettle.
[8:11] Good evening. My name is Beth
[8:14] Wood. My husband Warren and I live on Cedar Lake in St. Croix County. The lake
[8:19] Lake is located in both Polk and St. Croix counties.
[8:22] The water flows into Cedar Lake from Horse Creek in Polk County.
[8:27] It flows through the lake and the water does not care about the county line.
[8:33] The water flows out into Cedar Creek, into the Apple River and onto the St. Croix River.
[8:40] My point is, it matters what protections we take in St. Croix County to the people
[8:47] living downriver, and to the people that share our watershed.
[8:52] We have a responsibility and an opportunity to do what we can to minimize harm.
[8:59] I think that we can all agree that the most valuable natural resource we have in St. Croix
[9:04] County is our water.
[9:07] Regardless of our proximity to a CAFO, the entire watershed, once it has been compromised,
[9:13] can, will, and has contaminated our groundwater. We have taxpayers in this
[9:21] county that cannot use their well water safely to great personal expense. We have
[9:28] town hall buildings in this county that cannot safely use the water that comes
[9:34] out of their faucets. Taxpayers going to vote cannot safely have a drink of
[9:40] water. We are barely staying ahead of what could be a serious devastating
[9:46] problem. Not only to the safety of our families and communities, but to our
[9:52] property values. This St. Croix County Board has an opportunity to take
[9:57] preventative action now by adopting the manure storage facilities
[10:02] ordinance. We want this ordinance to protect our groundwater and our surface
[10:08] waters. This is the water source that we all use. Ultimately we are all
[10:15] drinking the same water and let's make sure we do everything we can to keep it
[10:19] clean and safe. Thank you very much.
[10:25] After Thomas will be Jason Haas. Hello I'm
[10:29] Tom Brunch out of 1738 30th Avenue Cam in Wisconsin. I'd like to address the
[10:33] solar farm. Good evening to the board and thank you for this
[10:36] opportunity to provide comment on the Ten Mile Creek solar project that is
[10:40] being proposed in St. Craig County.
[10:43] We need to look back at some recent history
[10:45] for us to understand what the people that live
[10:47] and work in these towns would like to see
[10:50] as the towns continue to grow.
[10:53] The state of Wisconsin has in place
[10:54] comprehensive planning legislation.
[10:57] This legislation only project.
[10:59] The county used a grant from the state of Wisconsin
[11:02] for the planning process to meet the extensive
[11:04] requirements of this legislation.
[11:07] Five towns worked with county consultants
[11:10] on writing the 2006 Heartlink Cooperative Plan.
[11:18] I personally was involved in this planning process.
[11:21] We had two years of planning committee meetings,
[11:23] multiple public surveys, and three public meetings
[11:26] where residents could share their opinions,
[11:28] not only on the day-to-day business
[11:30] of running local government,
[11:31] but also the long-range view
[11:33] of what they wanted, the place where they live,
[11:35] and their children go to school to look like.
[11:38] specific sections of the plan called out land use, residential development and
[11:43] acceptable commercial uses. All residents came to consensus that they wanted to
[11:49] live and raise their children in a rural environment that allowed for controlled
[11:52] growth of both residential developments and commercial businesses. This
[11:57] philosophy we believe would best serve the people of the towns. In all the
[12:02] towns a statement was made that there needs to be a balance between
[12:05] residents and the need for incremental development of businesses and the need to preserve farmland
[12:15] and farming that should not be impeded by local ordinances.
[12:20] We believe that existing and new residential developments and farming operations can coexist.
[12:26] One of the main goals of this long-range plan is to keep farming as a lifestyle and
[12:31] as an important economic contributor to these towns.
[12:36] Ten Mile Creek Solar Project, as you will hear in a few minutes,
[12:39] will cover approximately eight sections of farmland,
[12:42] with solar panels and industrial infrastructure.
[12:46] The cost of the project is between two and two-and-a-half billion dollars.
[12:51] It will be given $250 million of taxpayer money
[12:58] in the form of subsidies and future tax incentives. These monies will be siphoned through the
[13:04] Inflation Reduction Act and other federal and state programs. This is money taken from
[13:09] the taxpayers and then a small amount of it is being used as shared revenue to the towns
[13:14] and county. It will be very enticing for you as the board to just say, this is
[13:21] a matter for the Public Service Commission to decide. The county can take the annual
[13:26] shared revenue payment and duck any responsibility for this project. Please do not do that. Please
[13:33] do not allow the state to write conflicting legislation that both asks for public input
[13:39] on the future development and then disregards that input by moving the decisions to a bureaucratic
[13:45] state commission. Thank you.
[13:51] Jason. It will be followed by Steve Schaller.
[13:54] Hello,
[13:58] I'm Jason Haas. I'm from Somerset, Wisconsin. I am a fifth-generation farmer in Somerset.
[14:03] I'm here to talk on the Miner Storage Ordinance. You did some great work ahead of time with the
[14:09] Community Development Committee there. Had a lot of productive meetings there. The thing that I
[14:15] had to talk about tonight was in the ordinance on Section D2, Operating Permit A3, and there
[14:24] the Nutrient Management Plan shall be prepared for a landowner in SNAP Plus by a Nutrient
[14:30] Management Planner and the plan files submitted electronically and includes the SNAP Plus database.
[14:35] So the problem that I or the question I would have or ask you to do is the SNAP Plus database
[14:41] is basically my six-year business plan. It doesn't include financials, but it does
[14:45] include my farming operations for the next six years. It goes to the county in a
[14:52] form that's not protected. The county employees that see this plan have the
[14:58] ability to change it.
[15:00] Now, I have the original copy, but they can do what they want with it. My concern is we
[15:07] know who's in that position now. In the future, we don't know who's going to be there.
[15:13] My information
[15:15] there is prepared by somebody that I paid that the county requires them to be certified
[15:21] to do this, so they're qualified.
[15:26] But to have somebody in the county be able to change
[15:30] my information is a concern. I don't know any other business that submits six years of plans
[15:35] and then can have it changed and then not protected. So I would like to see it amended
[15:40] and just have it some form. We can file it electronically yet so they can use it,
[15:45] but I would prefer my data be protected. Thank you.
[15:52] Okay, Steve, and we'll be followed by Kathy Streets. Hope I'm pronouncing that correctly.
[16:03] Hello. My name is Steven Shala. I live in Derry Farm in Pleasant Valley Township. You
[16:09] may remember me as the guy who comes in June Derry Month and brings cheese and invites
[16:12] you to the county fair and Farm City Day. Tonight I'm here to comment on the Chapter
[16:17] 11 Ordinance. Our understanding is that the ordinance was selected for review and
[16:22] response to a proposed chicken litter digester project. However, it directly impacts resident
[16:27] farmers and future farmers in our county. In November, a group of about 50 farmers gathered
[16:33] to review the proposal at our farm. We had an excellent representation of active farmers,
[16:38] dairy farms, CAFOs, non-CAFOs, beef farmers big and small and grain farmers. We agreed on a list
[16:45] of changes we felt were fair, productive, and maintain the spirit of continual improvement.
[16:50] We brought these items to the December 12 public hearing and we appreciate that the
[16:54] committee incorporated most of these suggestions.
[16:57] Tonight I continue to represent the group that met before,
[17:00] and we are asking for two more small amendments
[17:02] to proposed ordinance and then your support
[17:05] of the ordinance for approval.
[17:08] The amendment I would highlight is in regards
[17:10] to a farm field that appears
[17:12] in two nutrient management plans.
[17:14] We are asking that the language disallowing this
[17:17] to be stricken from the ordinance.
[17:19] Fields may appear in two plans for multiple reasons.
[17:22] three examples, but not limited to would include farmland preservation,
[17:27] economical logistics, and crop rotations.
[17:31] In addition, at the public hearing,
[17:34] Tom's Wald presented in his handout about nutrient management plans,
[17:38] identifying specific sources of the miner,
[17:42] and clearly identifies the quantities produced and the quantities applied
[17:45] to demonstrate that a farm has adequate acres for all their miner.
[17:50] If following the SNAP-plus program or equivalent, you can't double-dip on these acres without
[17:55] raising flags that the regulators will easily see.
[17:59] So your farmers have been working on continual improvement and sustainability practices for
[18:04] generations.
[18:05] In closing, I ask that you would help us in that cause by supporting the two more
[18:09] updates for the Chapter 11's language, the other being the database file, and support
[18:14] its approval.
[18:15] Thank you for your time and effort on this.
[18:17] As always, if you have any questions or concerns, please contact a farmer and visit a farm.
[18:24] Your agriculture community is happy to talk to you.
[18:27] Thank you.
[18:31] Okay.
[18:32] Kathy, and after Kathy will be Dan Wetherly.
[18:37] Hi.
[18:38] Thanks for the chance to share opinions and feelings.
[18:43] I'm Kathy Streit.
[18:45] I live in the town of Hudson for five years.
[18:47] I don't have a big statement prepared, but I do have strong feelings about water.
[18:54] We have a well that we take our water from.
[18:57] And I feel like we have the right to have clean water in our well.
[19:00] I think it's 33% to 37% of people in the state have well water that we live on.
[19:08] I believe that this chapter 11 proposal is a small way that you all have the
[19:18] duty to keep our water clean. I'm aghast that we have giant manure dumping
[19:27] facilities already in our county and I would hope that this board would take
[19:34] very seriously your duty to keep our water clean from here on out so my
[19:41] understanding is that if we support the manure storage facilities ordinance as a
[19:48] board and as a community that will do a little bit more to keep our water clean
[19:55] thank you
[19:59] Dan and after Dan will be Steve Mueller all right good evening I'm
[20:05] Dan Weatherly, resident Hammond Township, St. Croix County.
[20:09] Earlier today, I emailed to Jason Kay,
[20:11] I can't pronounce his last name,
[20:12] forgive me your community development director,
[20:14] a copy of our petition which contains,
[20:16] I think as of this morning, 4,445 signatures
[20:21] primarily St. Croix County residents,
[20:23] all of which are opposed to this XL Energy solar farm
[20:27] for multiple reasons.
[20:29] You also have a paper copy of this,
[20:30] the electronic copy will get you links
[20:32] to the studies and articles that we cite in here.
[20:34] So I encourage you to get that from Jason if he hasn't already provided it
[20:38] But you know this petition has all the details. I can't cover much in the time allotted, but I can cover the high-level issues
[20:44] I think you know one of the issues is in the petition. You'll see a a map of
[20:51] Hammond Township and
[20:53] There's four residential large residential subdivisions and Hammond Township that Excel energy for reasons
[20:59] I can't understand and no one can understand is seeking to surround on all four sides
[21:04] with this industrial solar farm complex,
[21:06] complete with millions of solar arrays,
[21:10] service roads, inverter buildings,
[21:13] sub-barbed wire, as we understand it.
[21:16] There's other places,
[21:17] we don't like the solar farm, we want it stopped.
[21:20] But if it is allowed to proceed,
[21:21] there's other places that put this industrial complex,
[21:24] there's no reason why they need to be abutting
[21:25] these residential subdivisions, zero.
[21:29] There's thousands of acres of farmland
[21:31] where no one is living,
[21:32] that they can lease from farmers and place the solar arrays and accomplish their goals
[21:37] if they're allowed to proceed. We hope they aren't, but if they are, there's other options.
[21:42] And so this presents a number of health and safety and economic risks to the residents of this subdivision
[21:50] and other places where they're seeking to do this.
[21:53] In terms of health and safety, in the petition, we've included studies and articles
[21:57] that outline the enhanced and elevated fire risk that solar farms present.
[22:04] And the studies, if you go in and read it, they show that it's an elevated risk.
[22:08] The solar farms have a propensity to start fires.
[22:11] Okay.
[22:12] This is the 5,000 acre tract of land where it starts here.
[22:16] This is pretty much where it starts around the subdivision, the four subdivisions.
[22:20] If there's a fire, there's no municipal fire department around anywhere in the proposed
[22:24] solar farm area much less near these rural subdivisions in Hammond Township.
[22:28] There's no municipal water source to put out a fire control of fire. They're
[22:33] gonna have to you know bring water in to control it which is which is not gonna
[22:37] be a good way to contain a fire of this size. There's also an article from CBS
[22:42] News that covers an event in New York where the governor of New York had to
[22:46] order a shelter-in-place order for all residential units within a mile
[22:53] of the solar farm that caught on fire and burned for days, sent toxic smoke billowing
[22:57] into these residential subdivisions for days.
[23:00] And so the families in those subdivisions essentially were prisoners in their own home
[23:05] because of this fire risk that came to fruition and required the governor to make formal
[23:09] orders to protect the people.
[23:11] So that's an example of the fire risk.
[23:13] The other issue that you'll see in the petition, there are multiple seven studies
[23:19] in this petition that we hope you'll read that clearly show there's up to a 9% reduction
[23:24] in property values for homes within one mile of these solar farms. So that's what we don't
[23:30] want that, okay? Excel will tell you there is no property value reduction. That's nonsense.
[23:35] There's seven studies in here that clearly show that. And so we're asking St. Croix County
[23:40] to attempt to regulate this pursuant to 66.0401. We understand there's some limitations,
[23:46] but the law doesn't say you can't regulate it.
[23:48] It says you have to satisfy three criteria in there,
[23:50] and you can't preclude the solar farm,
[23:52] and you can't inhibit it.
[23:53] But there's some room to regulate it.
[23:54] We want a one-mile buffer between the solar farm
[23:57] and the residential subdivisions.
[23:59] We want you to formally intervene
[24:00] at the PSC application review process,
[24:03] and we want you to appeal any detrimental rulings
[24:07] that are handed down by the PSC itself.
[24:09] Thank you for your time.
[24:12] Okay, Steve will be followed by Linda Carlson.
[24:19] Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the board.
[24:22] My name is Steve Mueller, resident of Warren Township and president of the St. Card County Farm Bureau.
[24:27] I'd like to personally thank the Community Development Committee for their willingness to listen to the community these last few months
[24:32] and modify the amendments to the Chapter 11 Minor Storage Ordinance.
[24:35] The committee in the agriculture business is affected by this ordinance,
[24:38] have come to some sensible common ground in several areas.
[24:41] For example, 11.2.8.2 in regards to rainwater and normal products that enter the storage
[24:52] area.
[24:54] There's inherently going to be products like Teat Dip and Foot Bath Solutions that end
[24:58] up in storage systems with no other practical ending spot.
[25:01] These are costly value pieces by producers that protect animal health and product quality.
[25:07] They're not manure but they end up there and we're glad that that was incorporated
[25:11] Under other revision, it was important to maintain is the daily versus annual recording
[25:16] of manure components added to pits.
[25:19] Daily records are not necessary.
[25:21] They can be highly inaccurate when you consider rainwater and stuff like that.
[25:25] And the important numbers at the end of the day are the manure analyzation at time
[25:31] of application in terms of nitrate quality and the volume.
[25:34] And that's where your most accurate numbers come from.
[25:38] Furthermore, section 11.3.d.2.a.5, in regards to sign agreements between landowners and dairy
[25:50] farmers, that was just simply, those are proprietary information and that was just unacceptable.
[25:58] We appreciate that.
[26:00] And finally, incorporating, and this also goes along with one of the gentlemen talking
[26:05] about acknowledging that land may now come available to producers and that these previous
[26:09] records from frills may not be available to be provided in an accurate recording in regards
[26:14] to previous history. We're glad that that was upheld. The St. Craig County Farm Bureau,
[26:21] our board of directors, sent an email to supervisors yesterday in support of a couple
[26:25] of their visions. You've heard about SNAP Plus and utilizing farmland in several plans.
[26:31] We'd like to consider those potential future amendments that are needed for producers to
[26:36] efficiently manage farms.
[26:38] And a couple months ago, I came and asked you guys to listen to the farmers, and I sincerely
[26:43] appreciate the committee to listen to the agriculture community so that the producers,
[26:49] the community in our environment would thrive.
[26:52] Thank you.
[26:56] Good.
[26:56] Linda will be followed by Erin Tomsick.
[27:03] Thank you for listening to our comments.
[27:05] Linda Carlson in Pleasant Valley and I'm here to speak against the solar, the
[27:15] solar farm.
[27:18] It took me about 10 minutes on different websites which I don't have
[27:25] them all written down but I do have them if anybody's interested I can share
[27:29] them with you. One of them talked about burnt insects and birds wings. This may
[27:37] need, this may seem insignificant in rural areas when you're driving and an
[27:43] insect goes on your windshield, but for the large-scale they're talking about
[27:49] building, it could have a regional and global effect. Secondly, the World
[27:58] Health Organization, many of you know it as the who, talked about electromagnetic radiation
[28:08] known as EMF, which I'll refer to. The EMF fields cause headaches, fatigue, skin
[28:16] rash, and sleep disorders to people who live near them. There has been studies
[28:22] that it could cause cancer, more research to be determined. A study in Australia
[28:30] says the same thing. They have had people get the same symptoms and there is
[28:37] more studies needed to determine if it causes cancer. At the Zoom meeting it was
[28:44] talked about they were going to do proper disposal so that when they were
[28:50] disposed of the chemicals would not leak.
[28:54] I don't believe it was brought up
[28:56] about batteries possibly leaking to to our harsh weather and the long-term
[29:03] wear and tear. So what if the batteries leak into the soil with those chemicals?
[29:09] And there was one more thing the gentleman before me talked about fire
[29:13] hazards. There aren't that many older homes out in the rural area but
[29:19] there are some with no AC if you shelter in place with no AC your windows are
[29:25] going to be open that's it thank you
[29:31] Aaron and we'll be followed by Nate
[29:35] Zemtars I got that right Aaron yeah
[29:45] we are limiting comments to residents of
[29:48] St. Croix County but thank you for letting us know Nate then I get Nate
[29:55] Wait, shall I get you?
[29:57] The same is true for me.
[29:59] I'm sorry?
[30:00] Okay. All right. Thank you very much. I appreciate that. Tom's wall, Tom.
[30:14] Thank you guys for being
[30:15] with us. Tom's wall, Pleasant Valley Township, 609 County Road, Z. I'd like to talk about
[30:21] Chapter 11, the Miner storage ordinance. You guys have heard a couple of amendments. I
[30:26] won't go through the literature again in the section numbers. Keep it brief. But I asked
[30:31] that you support removing the database file, not only because it should not be edited.
[30:38] It's our plan that we work off with our agronomist to make a finalized plan and submit it for
[30:44] approval for compliance checks, not to be, well, it could be better if you do this, that
[30:50] or the other thing.
[30:51] But also, the language is going to be outdated in the next year.
[30:55] I was very disappointed community development department never saw that.
[31:00] When the new version rolls out, that lingo will be impossible for us to follow because there's going to be no such thing.
[31:08] They're moving to cloud hosting, and so therefore it won't even be possible because they're changing the language.
[31:14] So I'd ask you guys to change that as well as two plans.
[31:19] Our farm, we've had a couple of fields in two plans for the last 13 years.
[31:25] we own the field or we rent the fields, we harvest the crops, we do the tillage,
[31:31] we are responsible for the soil loss, but we don't have enough manure at our farm
[31:36] to apply our own manure on those fields. So we rely on a neighbor who has
[31:41] enough manure and is willing to sell it to us as our source of commercial
[31:45] fertilizer. So we're doing this as a benefit to the soil for the health
[31:50] of the soil for the soil helps fix more carbon and such.
[31:56] The other thing I would point out on that is that St. Croix County, I was on the Water
[32:01] Quality Study Committee years ago, I think back in 2018, and we asked for an isotope
[32:07] study.
[32:08] I know that Tim Steiber completed that isotope study and did not find animal manure as
[32:16] the cause of the nitrates.
[32:17] Thank you.
[32:20] Okay, I'm also Joshua Weinbein. Joshua,
[32:31] might be Joshua. Okay, you're up.
[32:36] Alright, fantastic. Good evening. I'm Joshua Weinbein. I am a resident of the
[32:41] Hammond of Township. I've been there for 11 years. I've been a resident of St.
[32:45] Craig County for over 40 years. I'm here to speak my opposition to the
[32:50] Excel Ten Mile Creek Solar Project, particularly due to its men's size and
[32:57] also the proximity to individual homes.
[33:01] In November, Excel presented a map
[33:03] indicating the location of the project with my home and my neighbor's home
[33:07] surrounded by the project. There were some studies mentioned earlier and you
[33:10] can find lots of studies online talking about what the impact this could
[33:14] have a property value.
[33:17] However, there's no doubt surrounding a home with a solar power
[33:22] plant will have a significant impact on property values, my family's financial well-being,
[33:27] and impacting my children's future. Further, the size of the project. Sorry, I was scrambling
[33:34] with my notes as I'm staying in the hallway. So, you know, based on my research, so the
[33:40] the scale of this project. This will be the largest, based on my research, this will be
[33:44] the largest industrial solar project in the United States. This is not a solar array.
[33:50] It's called a solar farm. In my opinion, this is a solar power plant, and I really think
[33:55] it has no business being built around people's homes and in residential areas. Thank you
[34:02] for those comments.
[34:06] That concludes the cards that I got. Is there anyone else that would like to address
[34:10] the board in public comment. Yes, sir, Mr. Wisconsin.
[34:26] Yes, my name is Everett
[34:27] Fuchs. Most people call me Bud. I live at 1724 Loyal Avenue in Hudson. I'm here to
[34:37] speak about, you know, the manure storage facility ordinance. I think that
[34:45] There's a lot of good things in that, but I also have some concerns.
[34:51] I worked for a long time as a fisheries and water quality biologist, been to court a number
[34:58] of times over water quality issues.
[35:02] We won every court case, I'll say.
[35:06] When it comes to protecting water quality, especially if you're going to go to court,
[35:11] nothing is so important as having complete clear and defendable regulations
[35:18] and ordinances that are not only easily understood but cannot be misunderstood.
[35:27] Now, while I think some good changes have been made to this ordinance from the
[35:32] original draft, I'm concerned that some of the changes have also introduced
[35:37] some clarity problems and some confusion and maybe have gone just a bit too far.
[35:47] So basically, as I have suggested in an email to all of you with some attachments for areas
[35:55] where I think maybe they need to be looked at again, maybe especially with the advice
[36:03] from your staff. You're very competent county staff. So I would ask you to do
[36:11] that.
[36:15] Let's remember what this ordinance is all about. This ordinance
[36:19] basically gives the county the ability to manage in the future any large-scale
[36:26] manure storage facilities. I think that's really important and it also is
[36:33] going to be efficient for your county staff and make a couple of other
[36:38] statements here as I see I'm clicking down on time it's kind of like a shot
[36:43] clock on a basketball game. Pollution of our water by industrial agriculture
[36:50] amounts to a de facto tax and those citizens who must buy bottled water
[36:55] install reverse osmosis water treatment systems in their homes dig far deeper
[37:02] wells and see their real estate values declined because of increased
[37:08] pollution caused expenses and health hazards. Thus I pray I pray that you will
[37:17] adopt the four simple modifications to the manure storage facilities ordinance
[37:24] in the best interest of our county residents as an important step in the
[37:30] direction in protecting our water, and as a clear statement that the Board of
[37:36] Stuprovisers stands tall in support of clean water. I think we all know that our
[37:44] water quality based on the present practices has been going downhill for a
[37:49] long, long time. We know that the state of Wisconsin is not going to ride in on
[37:55] a white horse to save us. This is one instance where the county does have jurisdiction and
[38:03] you can do something to make a difference. So please consider that carefully. Thank you.
[38:11] Anyone else care to make public comment? Former Supervisor Berkey.
[38:24] Thank you, Chair Long, and thank you, County Board members. My name is Jill Berkey.
[38:32] I
[38:33] the town of Troy. I wanted to thank you for addressing this important issue of
[38:37] clean water, groundwater, and drinking water. I also want to thank the Community
[38:43] Development Committee for listening to a lot of public comment at your last
[38:48] meeting and also to dedicated staff in the Community Development Department for
[38:53] talking to citizens and farm groups. It is imperative that we protect clean
[38:59] drinking water for human and wildlife populations.
[39:03] Manure and or biosolids spread onto farm fields are a source of nitrates that may leach down
[39:09] to contaminate our groundwater when greater quantities of nutrients than crops can use
[39:16] are applied to the fields.
[39:18] We concern ourselves with those sources of sediments and biosolids that reduce the
[39:26] clarity in our rivers and lakes and the source of excess phosphorus and nitrogen that feed
[39:31] the algae blooms in our rivers and lakes. As many of you know, I chair the park board
[39:37] in the town of Troy for many years. I've been concerned about the algae blooms not
[39:45] only in the St. Croix River, but also includes Troy Beach, our county operated park, Pembles
[39:53] access which is operated by my township, Kenneconic State Park, and a lot of other bodies of water
[40:01] in St. Croix County and into our neighboring county of Pierce.
[40:05] The manure storage facilities ordinance would require the operation of new expanded manure
[40:11] storage facilities to not make the water quality in our rivers and lakes worse.
[40:16] This ordinance is necessary and reasonable measure to protect the water
[40:21] quality of our groundwater, lakes, rivers, impacting sound health for
[40:27] residents, visitors, livestock, and wildlife. It does not prohibit newer
[40:32] expanded manure storage facilities, CAFOs, or manure digesters. It would
[40:38] apply to a very small subset of St. Croix County farming operations and
[40:43] would only to apply to new or expanded manure storage facilities.
[40:49] Again, thank you for looking at all aspects and listening to those comments by citizens
[40:57] this evening and for adopting a reasonable manure storage facility ordinance.
[41:07] public comment back in the corner there sorry I don't have a name so I'll just
[41:17] try to point you out my name is Sherry Walker I live at one on 2051 130th
[41:25] Avenue and Aaron Prairie I'm here to speak against the 10-mile solar
[41:30] the project. For decades, Aaron Prairie has chosen to have our township be an ag township.
[41:39] We have cherished that and this 10-mile project is going to turn 5,000-plus acres into an
[41:50] industrial parking lot. 5,000-plus acres is a distance that would be from, if they
[41:57] covered it would be from County Road G down to Baldwin. It would be from Highway
[42:05] 63 all the way to Highway 65. That would be their 5,000 acres and I believe
[42:14] there's chances for acreage beyond that. I would ask that this County Board
[42:22] consider those aspects of turning us into just an industrial wasteland. We've
[42:29] had a lot of comments about water quality. Where I have a cabin, the DNR
[42:36] regulates whether you even put up a shed because the roof surface and the runoff
[42:43] off of a roof changes what the flow that goes into the water system. And
[42:49] And we're going to have 5,000 acres of solid surfaces and say that that's not going to affect
[42:55] the water quality.
[42:56] We have the Kinney-Connick water flowage that needs to be considered.
[43:00] I think that the impact of this solar farm is just horrendous on our community.
[43:06] And I'd ask you to take that into consideration.
[43:11] Other comments?
[43:12] I think I saw a hand over here.
[43:15] Yes, sir?
[43:21] Matt Bocklin, 573 Oma Road, town of Troy.
[43:25] I just couldn't stay quiet any longer. This isn't a new issue to St. Croix County.
[43:30] Matter of fact this came to us in town of Ceylon. We heard the exact same
[43:34] conversations in town of Ceylon in regard to the solar panel. I went to the
[43:38] presentation, basically phoned four or five farmers basically who wanted to sell
[43:43] and that's what they were going to do. So this isn't new. We've heard a lot of
[43:47] the same things. The difference that we're seeing today is the IRA. That's
[43:51] That's why we're here.
[43:53] It is basically the Northern Prairie Solar Project before.
[43:58] Today we're talking about the Inflation Reduction Act that was signed in by Joe Biden back in
[44:04] 2022.
[44:05] That is what this is.
[44:07] This is a land grab by corporations and they want to change our farmland and they
[44:13] want to supply the power to Minnesota.
[44:15] Before they want to send the power to Apple Valley, Minnesota.
[44:19] That was where all the power was going to go.
[44:20] The one thing that nobody's talking about today is solar panels, solar farms use a transfer system to move the power from one place to the other.
[44:29] A lot of those have problems as well and aren't conducive to our area.
[44:33] But again, my biggest concern is that solar farms typically last for 25 years. That's about it.
[44:39] It takes about 10 years to recoup your costs. It's about it.
[44:42] But when the IRA runs out, who is stuck paying for all this waste?
[44:52] And we also know that Donald Trump, President Trump coming in, said he's going to try to
[44:56] claw back as much of the IRA money as he possibly can.
[45:00] Again, this is the federal government basically subsidizing something for short-term gains for
[45:06] the energy industry to make out with our money and leave us holding the bag. They got it right
[45:12] in town of Cylon with when they fought there. Let's stop this whole solar farm fiasco because
[45:18] eventually this is going to become an unfunded mandate. And for those who might be Democrats
[45:23] on this board the Republicans are really pushing for this as well in certain
[45:29] areas because they have chosen to pick low-hanging fruit which is Republican
[45:34] red states the reason being is they have less regulation that is a letter that's
[45:40] gone to honorable Mike Johnson as well saying please don't kill the IRA so
[45:46] that's what I have to say about it thank you for listening any other public
[45:51] comment. Yes, sir.
[45:58] My name is William Drinken. I live in the town of Hammond. I've been there
[46:02] for about 30 years. I've got a lot of things that have crossed my mind. A lot of them have been
[46:08] covered by the people here, you know, EMF. The one thing I haven't heard much about is energy
[46:14] efficiency. These solar panels decrease in efficiency as time goes on. As we're going
[46:21] through the process here you know certain parts of the year are not very efficient for solar farms
[46:27] and that for the solar you know southern california does great i got an ant out there
[46:33] they've got one on their house and they're doing great i've got relation down in florida
[46:37] you would think florida does well guess what they aren't even producing enough to cover the
[46:42] costs of the the equipment that they put on the house and that these are not the greatest
[46:48] than most sufficient things to be using here in that.
[46:52] And so we're going to take a large chunk of land.
[46:56] We're going to remove all the wildlife from it because they can't have wildlife in there
[47:01] because it's going to damage their equipment.
[47:03] They've tried that with domesticated animals and had to do things.
[47:07] And that you're going to take and push all that wildlife out of there in that.
[47:12] I think that's a major mistake to put this in in that.
[47:16] It's going to affect all of the homes that are in the vicinity there, and that's a lot
[47:23] of them there.
[47:23] I was surprised at how many developments in Hammond Township are close to this facility.
[47:29] I really think we need to get some hard answers from the XL people to address our concerns
[47:38] in that.
[47:39] We can't have them just say, oh yeah, well, that's an important thing to think about
[47:44] and not answer the questions you know they're not giving us answers they're
[47:48] just trying to push it through and I would like this board to help the
[47:53] community out there that supports this board thank you.
[48:00] I would ask if there's
[48:02] any other comments if you have anything new to offer or if you can keep your
[48:07] comments short and specific sir.
[48:17] Good evening everybody my name is Steve
[48:19] Brock Pollard. I live in the middle of this solar project if you will in the
[48:27] center of the county. These people ahead of me have done a great job talking
[48:33] about all of the other aspects of and the down side of all of this. I as a
[48:39] farmer have land that can be eligible for this but refuse to put anything on
[48:45] it, such as this. I was the town chairman of Erinn Prairie from 87 to 97. We were strong
[48:52] on agland preservation. We were strong on keeping farm preserved and whatnot. And this
[49:01] is going to be a huge, huge scab in the center of St. Craig County. Just the array itself
[49:10] and the size of the project, but the implementation of this, there's one going on right now north
[49:17] of us just south of Highway 8. And if any of you people have ever seen any of the videos
[49:23] on it, the construction on it, it looks worse than I was in the Army. It looks worse
[49:29] than a war zone. It is a nasty procedure. It is an unnecessary procedure. I have nothing
[49:37] against solar energy. I have nothing against new energy. It's got to stand alone. It can't
[49:46] be the subsidized money thrown out that we're all going to go zero carbon tomorrow and damn
[49:53] the torpedoes, whatever happens happens.
[49:57] Erin Prairie is too valuable. St. Craig County is too valuable to do an experiment like this
[50:04] and leave a huge scab and a lot of hardship
[50:07] for the residents of Erinn and the county.
[50:11] Thank you.
[50:14] Any other comments?
[50:17] Make them, and I'm just gonna allow
[50:19] about an extra few minutes here
[50:20] because we're running a little long.
[50:24] We have a lot to cover tonight,
[50:25] so if you do have a couple of comments you wanna make,
[50:27] please step up to the podium,
[50:29] but we do wanna try to keep this short and concise, please.
[50:36] Hello, my name is Diane Barfels and I live in the township of Richmond.
[50:41] The reason my husband and I moved out of the Twin Cities four years ago
[50:46] is because we wanted to get back to the country.
[50:49] Now you're proposing to surround us with solar panels, solar panels that are going to affect
[50:55] the wildlife. Just a week ago we had thousands of Canadian geese land in the farm field
[51:02] behind our house so that they could feed for the night.
[51:08] This affects the water. The panels
[51:13] are made from plastic. Well, what's in plastic? Pifos. I think we all know well about Pifos
[51:20] and what they do to the soil, to the water, and to the air. I just hope you understand
[51:28] And all the people's lives that you're affecting with this possible decision.
[51:33] People live out in the country for a reason.
[51:37] They want to see the farm fields.
[51:40] They want to see the sunsets.
[51:42] They don't want to be surrounded by solar panels that are not proven that they're really
[51:47] that effective, especially up here in Minnesota and Wisconsin, who have cloudy weather most
[51:53] of the time.
[51:53] It seemed like at least lately it does.
[51:55] So, I just want you to take into consideration what all the true impact you're going to be.
[52:03] Really look at the studies at what these things do to the soil, the water, and to the people
[52:10] that live in those areas.
[52:12] Thank you.
[52:14] A final comment.
[52:18] Go right ahead.
[52:19] Yes.
[52:25] Linda, by VOTA, today I'm at 583 Windgate Drive, River Falls.
[52:31] I'm in favor of the board adopting the manure storage facility ordinance because all of us,
[52:37] no matter who we are, how much money we make or where we live, we all want and deserve clean
[52:43] and healthy water. I do have a few concerns. I emailed the board about some of the language
[52:50] and that that could be restored. And then I just also want to say at our house, we're
[52:55] fortunate to have clean and healthy water and I really hope it stays that way. But I'm
[53:00] concerned when I read things like this, the 2024 report of
[53:04] the St. Croix County citizen groundwater program found that
[53:08] nitrate nitrogen was a prevalent and increasing
[53:11] health related contaminant in our groundwater. Approximately
[53:15] 2000 private wells in St. Croix County or 12% of private
[53:19] wells now exceed the safe drinking water standard for
[53:23] nitrate nitrogen and the percentage of wells exceeding
[53:26] that standard is climbing. Another thing is my husband and children liked to fish
[53:32] and most recently they were ice fishing and so luckily they caught fish and we
[53:37] had a great dinner but I do wonder sometimes when I hear about the lakes
[53:43] and rivers being impaired if the fish is safe to eat. I also wonder sometimes
[53:49] with family members that have some immunocompromised health concerns is it
[53:55] safe to feed them the fish. And so I think of those things and I'm really appreciative
[54:02] that you're putting this ordinance in place. I also appreciate the landowner's agreement
[54:09] for spreading manure. I think of it like a rental agreement and just like any rental
[54:14] agreement, the renter is responsible and can be held liable if there are any damages.
[54:19] That makes sense to me and I appreciate that accountability piece. These are my main
[54:24] concerns overall. I think this is a large improvement and I urge the Board to
[54:29] adopt the manure storage facility ordinance. Thank you for listening.
[54:34] Thank
[54:35] you and again I just want to express our thanks to everyone that's here tonight.
[54:40] We really do appreciate your interest. We appreciate all your comments and your
[54:44] feedback. It really is important in the process so thank you. We're going to
[54:49] on to our consent agenda. Do we have a motion on the consent agenda? That motion to approve
[54:57] the consent agenda by Supervisor Berning and second by Supervisor Rice. And I believe we
[55:06] can vote on that shortly.
[56:25] Okay, that motion passes unanimously. We're still a little
[56:30] new at this. So hang with us.
[56:34] Okay, so we're going to move on to two presentations. So the
[56:38] first will be Cell Energy Presentation on the Solar Power Project by Brian Ellwood, I
[56:45] believe. And I just want to remind everybody this is an informational presentation. Okay,
[56:52] there's nothing on our agenda that will really give us any opportunity to discuss this project.
[56:58] So this is just for us to listen and learn.
[57:01] I'm hoping we'll have an opportunity for a little Q&A afterwards.
[57:07] Absolutely.
[57:08] Okay, that's great.
[57:09] So I'll turn it over to Brian.
[57:11] Thank you for joining us.
[57:12] Great.
[57:12] Thank you, Chair Long, and thank you, Board, for inviting us this evening.
[57:16] It's a great opportunity.
[57:17] We appreciate the opportunity to talk about this project as well.
[57:20] And clearly, there's a lot of interest, and we certainly understand that.
[57:24] We understand that you're being in lots of questions from the community as well.
[57:27] appreciate the opportunity, appreciate the invitation and looking forward to answering
[57:30] questions as we get through the presentation. Tonight I want to cover
[57:33] three things. First I want to talk a little bit about our company and the
[57:37] project and why it's being proposed. Next we want to talk a little bit about
[57:41] the utility shared revenue program in the state of Wisconsin and the benefits
[57:44] that brings to communities as well. I know there's a lot of questions
[57:47] regarding that. And the third thing we'll talk about is the Public Service
[57:50] Commission of Wisconsin process. So we are a regulated public utility and the
[57:55] Public Service Commission of Wisconsin regulates everything we do, our rates, our programs,
[58:00] services we provide, the projects that we build and things like that.
[58:04] So projects such as this go forward to the Public Service Commission to evaluate them,
[58:07] to make sure that they're in the public interest and the public need.
[58:10] And that we'll talk a little bit about that process and how that works.
[58:13] And certainly key components of that is having public comment and public input.
[58:17] So I encourage everyone here tonight and everyone watching online and to participate
[58:22] in that public process, it's critically important.
[58:24] And State of Wisconsin has one of the most robust commissions in the United States.
[58:30] They value public input.
[58:32] Certainly throughout this project and throughout the process, there will be public input sessions
[58:36] right here in St. Croix County, and we encourage everyone to participate in that as we move
[58:40] forward.
[58:42] That first slide, I'll go back real quick, Ken.
[58:45] We're getting, you got the clicker, right?
[58:47] Okay.
[58:48] Next slide.
[58:49] There you go.
[58:50] So, since we held our public open house in November, we started getting lots of questions
[58:55] from our community members, customers regarding the project.
[58:59] And we understood that we needed to have more information out there about the project.
[59:03] We had a great open house, a lot of interest at the open house, but we needed to provide
[59:06] more information.
[59:07] So, what I'm showing tonight is something we announced a few weeks ago, and that includes
[59:11] a project, a dedicated project website with frequently asked questions.
[59:14] I heard other folks mention that tonight.
[59:16] We're continually updating those frequently asked questions.
[59:20] Encourage people to go right off our website,
[59:22] excelenergy.com, forward slash 10 mile.
[59:25] We've also established for this project
[59:27] a dedicated phone number.
[59:28] So I'd encourage anyone to write this phone number down.
[59:31] If you have a question about the project,
[59:33] something that comes to mind late at night,
[59:34] early in the morning,
[59:36] if you have a question about the project
[59:37] or impacts it might have,
[59:39] call that project phone number.
[59:40] We have a great project team
[59:42] that represents lots of different aspects
[59:44] of this project at our company, we'll direct that voicemail to the right person and get you
[59:49] an answer real quickly. And also we have a dedicated project email, so 10milecreeksolar.com.
[59:55] Write that down. That also goes to our project management team. We'll route that.
[1:00:00] Make sure it gets to the right person. We're answering lots of questions this way.
[1:00:03] We found that these tools have been very helpful in answering questions that are out in the
[1:00:06] community right now. So let's talk a little bit about Excel. I know there might be some
[1:00:12] folks in the room who might be new to St. Croix County. Certainly, we're not. Our
[1:00:16] company can actually trace its roots back to the Willow River Power Company back
[1:00:20] of the turn of the 20th century. The Willow River Power Company was actually one of
[1:00:24] the very first companies in the nation to provide electric power via hydroelectric
[1:00:29] power on the Willow River. That company eventually became Northern States power, which eventually
[1:00:33] became XL Energy. So we've been serving St. Croix County for over 125 years. I'm very proud
[1:00:40] of the service that we have in St. Croix County. XL Energy serves eight states. We'll talk
[1:00:45] a little bit about that. But here in Wisconsin, on this slide, you can see in the blue
[1:00:49] service area, that's our service territory. So we serve about 271,000 customers in
[1:00:54] in Northwestern Wisconsin that represents 26 counties.
[1:00:57] So as a utility, we're a large geographic utility,
[1:01:00] but we have about 270,000 customers in that area.
[1:01:03] We serve over 500 communities in that area.
[1:01:05] So all the way from Abbotsford to the East
[1:01:07] to Hudson to the West,
[1:01:09] Ashland to the North, down to Baroque to the South.
[1:01:12] So that's our service area in Northwestern Wisconsin.
[1:01:14] We've got a thousand employees
[1:01:16] that live in the state of Wisconsin.
[1:01:18] So notably in St. Croix County,
[1:01:20] it's the third largest county we serve in Wisconsin.
[1:01:23] and so behind old Claire and La Crosse, St. Croix County, we have the most customers
[1:01:26] in 25,000 customers. Customers for us, of course, are homes and businesses, not people,
[1:01:32] but we're talking homes and businesses, so that's the 25,000 customers. 35 communities
[1:01:36] we serve in St. Croix County, so we're the biggest utility provider in St. Croix
[1:01:39] County. And we have 200 employees who are property tax payers and live in these communities
[1:01:44] that we call home in St. Croix County as well. But unique to St. Croix County
[1:01:47] is, you know, most of the energy that is served to our customers here in St. Croix
[1:01:52] County is imported. At XL Energy, we have less than three megawatts of generation actually
[1:01:56] located in St. Croix County. We have two hydroelectric plants on the Apple River that I'm sure folks
[1:02:01] are familiar with. But other than that, we don't have any local generation in St. Croix County.
[1:02:06] We'll go to the next slide. The reason why that's important is because when you look at
[1:02:10] our upper Midwest service area, we really think of this area. We own and operate,
[1:02:15] transmit and generate electricity for our upper Midwest system as one system regardless
[1:02:19] list of state boundaries. So, we serve 1.8 million customers in five upper Midwest states,
[1:02:26] Wisconsin and Michigan, Minnesota, and North and South Dakota. 85% of electricity used
[1:02:31] by our customers here in Wisconsin comes from Minnesota and the Dakotas. Only about
[1:02:35] 15% of it's actually produced in the state of Wisconsin. Why that's important is because
[1:02:39] it is a great way to keep our costs low. So, our rates are 16% below the national
[1:02:44] average. They're considerably lower than many of our peer utilities in the state
[1:02:48] Wisconsin as well. So we're very proud of that fact and we're able to do that because we have a
[1:02:52] large generation fleet. So we own and operate over 150 different generators, right? Everything
[1:02:58] from nuclear power plants, coal plants, natural gas plants, hydroelectric wind, solar, biomass,
[1:03:05] kind of an all the above type of thing is that of energy that we have on our system today.
[1:03:09] And our customers across those five states benefit from all that energy on our system
[1:03:13] as well. Here in northwestern Wisconsin, we've got 19 hydroelectric plants. We've got the two
[1:03:19] in St. Croix County. We have 17 other hydroelectric plants. We have biomass plants up in Ashland,
[1:03:24] Wisconsin, and biomass plant down in La Crosse, Wisconsin as well. And we have a natural gas
[1:03:29] plant over in the town of Wheaton just outside of Eau Claire. So that's kind of our generation
[1:03:32] fleet in Wisconsin as we see it today. So, important to note here again, about 85% of
[1:03:38] the electricity used by our customers in Wisconsin actually comes from Minnesota and the
[1:03:43] Dakotas is not generated here in Wisconsin.
[1:03:46] Okay, gotcha.
[1:03:47] Thanks, Ken.
[1:03:50] So let's talk a little bit about this project.
[1:03:52] So when we plan our system, we really look forward 30 years.
[1:03:57] Literally, we look at how are we able
[1:03:59] to provide electric service to all of our customers
[1:04:02] safely, affordably, reliably, every minute of the day.
[1:04:06] We look at every hour of every day for 30 years
[1:04:09] and how are we gonna be able to supply electricity?
[1:04:11] because the last thing our customers want is to not have the lights come on when they
[1:04:15] turn on the switch. And we certainly understand that. And we want to do it safely and affordably
[1:04:19] for our customers. In 2019, we announced plans to retire the King Power Plant. So we're
[1:04:24] all very familiar with the King Power Plant on the St. Croix River in the town of Oak
[1:04:28] Park Heights. It's a wonderful plant. It's been operating since the mid-1960s. It'll
[1:04:33] be about 60 years old when we retire it in 2028. It's a great plant for us,
[1:04:39] about 80 employees work there, and we're transitioning that plant and doing it responsibly.
[1:04:45] So all those employees that work at that plant will have opportunities at the company
[1:04:48] going forward.
[1:04:49] But as we retire that plant, it's got very important regional energy grid connections
[1:04:54] at that plant.
[1:04:55] So what that means is it's a large substation at that plant.
[1:04:59] That area is used to having about 600 megawatts coming into it.
[1:05:02] That's a large plant, it's a 600 megawatt plant.
[1:05:04] Those regional grid connections are critically important to our region and critically important
[1:05:09] to the upper Midwest. So we have reviewed numerous options of how to best utilize those interconnection
[1:05:14] rights. How can we best use that location to reliably and affordably serve our customers?
[1:05:21] And we looked at lots of different things. We looked at natural gas, and it's not feasible
[1:05:25] there for anything more than 100 megawatts. That solar and wind on that site is not
[1:05:30] feasible, and obviously it's now part of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. So it's
[1:05:34] very unlikely that you would build another location on that site.
[1:05:38] So we looked in the vicinity what would make sense to
[1:05:41] reutilize those interconnection rights that we have in that area.
[1:05:46] Installing solar in a close proximity to the King Power plant
[1:05:49] was identified as the least cost option to reuse those grid connections.
[1:05:54] That's really important.
[1:05:55] So we want to make sure that we can safely,
[1:05:57] affordably serve our customers at the lowest cost.
[1:06:00] and we identified that doing King or solar within close proximity to that King plant
[1:06:05] site was the best option.
[1:06:07] There is an existing transmission line in place that crosses the same square river that
[1:06:11] comes through in the same square county along Highway or County E. So there's already existing
[1:06:17] transmission in place which makes it even a more suitable connection for us.
[1:06:22] We'll go to the next slide.
[1:06:25] So the 10 mile creek solar project, here's an overview of what we're proposing.
[1:06:29] So phase one of the project will be up to 350 megawatts, representing about 2,500 acres.
[1:06:37] All phases, if proposed, would be up to 650 megawatts, representing about 5,000 acres.
[1:06:44] Important to note that the discussions we're having right now are all with private landowners in a very large geographic area.
[1:06:52] There was discussions from folks that attended our open house in November at the FIPS.
[1:06:56] maps. The map was shown and it kind of showed this general project area. That shows the
[1:07:01] general project area that we're talking to private landowners about leasing their private
[1:07:05] property for this project. And that's about a 30,000 to 40,000 acre area. The area that
[1:07:10] represents the solar farm will be about 5,000 acres of that. As with this project, we've
[1:07:16] discussed before, those private landowners are being offered lease payments. And approximately
[1:07:20] two-thirds of the land is already under lease with those private landowners.
[1:07:25] In talking to those landowners, we know that they're looking at this for different options.
[1:07:30] Certainly these are summer farmers that have been farming on this land for many years
[1:07:34] and want to find a way to diversify their income.
[1:07:38] Some farmers might be leasing it to others as well
[1:07:41] and see this as an opportunity, again, to lease it for a different purpose.
[1:07:45] In addition to the solar plant, and I mentioned the transmission line,
[1:07:49] line. We will also provide two different route options, and that's part of the commission
[1:07:53] process to provide two route options for the transmission line that currently exists to
[1:07:59] raise that to add a 230 kilovolt line to connect the solar array back to the King power plant
[1:08:06] location.
[1:08:09] So this slide right here kind of shows the proposed general area on the west of
[1:08:15] the slide. You can see the King power plant and the solar location in the central
[1:08:21] to the eastern part of St. Croix County.
[1:08:23] Important to note with a lot of solar projects,
[1:08:26] and certainly with this one, land use will be very important,
[1:08:30] and it will include things such as pollinator habitat,
[1:08:33] plant or prairie plantings,
[1:08:35] and different opportunities to evaluate things
[1:08:38] like agrivoltaics and things in the future
[1:08:40] will certainly be a part of this project as we move forward.
[1:08:44] Go to the next slide.
[1:08:47] So I know there's a lot of questions
[1:08:49] about the Wisconsin Utility Shared Revenue Program.
[1:08:51] It's probably, I'm not sure if it's something that's been addressed by this board in the past.
[1:08:55] The Wisconsin shared utility revenue program provides municipalities and counties with
[1:09:01] payments from the program.
[1:09:04] How that's allocated is the county receives two-thirds of the payment and then municipalities
[1:09:09] where these projects are located receive a third of that payment.
[1:09:13] Because we don't have the exact locations of this project until we file that with
[1:09:16] of the Public Service Commission,
[1:09:17] we can't really identify what those municipalities would be.
[1:09:21] Excel Energy and other utilities
[1:09:23] that have these types of projects
[1:09:24] contribute funds to that program.
[1:09:26] And those funds are sent back to each counties
[1:09:29] or each community's annual operating income to be used.
[1:09:32] However, local officials choose to use that.
[1:09:35] For this project, we've calculated
[1:09:37] for the first phase of the project,
[1:09:39] this would represent about a million dollars annually
[1:09:41] to the county and the municipalities
[1:09:44] where the project would be located in.
[1:09:46] So that's about $60 million over the life of the project, and then if all phases are
[1:09:51] approved and complete, represents about $3 million annually or about $100 million over
[1:09:56] the life of the project.
[1:09:58] Next slide.
[1:10:01] Next we'll talk on the Public Service Commission's process.
[1:10:04] So the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin, a three-member agency, Deliberative Body
[1:10:10] in Madison, is the state regulatory agency that has oversight for utility projects.
[1:10:15] Large projects like this require a certificate of public convenience and necessity, also known
[1:10:21] as a CPCN.
[1:10:24] The PSE has a very deliberative process when they're evaluating projects like this.
[1:10:29] They identify, look at things like the public need, what are the economics of it?
[1:10:33] Will it be safe for the environment?
[1:10:35] What's the reliability look like?
[1:10:37] Will it impact the reliability of the grid and is it safe?
[1:10:41] We'll go to the next slide.
[1:10:44] This kind of outlines what that review process looks like.
[1:10:47] So what we're planning to do, Excel Energy, is mid-2025.
[1:10:51] We will file a very detailed application, hundreds and hundreds of pages along with
[1:10:56] maps and locations that will show the design, location, address environmental and economic
[1:11:01] issues that have been put forward to us.
[1:11:04] And then, as I mentioned earlier, the PSC will host public hearings to gather input.
[1:11:09] And they do that in lots of different ways.
[1:11:10] I suspect they will hold public hearings here in St. Croix County. They obviously will
[1:11:14] have technical hearings in Madison. They provide opportunities for the public to comment
[1:11:18] online and in person as well. So there's really a lot of opportunities and important
[1:11:22] opportunities for the public to get involved in this process.
[1:11:26] And then it goes to the PSC staff. And the PSC has a very deliberative, thoughtful
[1:11:31] staff that looks at these very in-depth process. They will conduct their own investigations.
[1:11:36] They will engage other state departments such as the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
[1:11:42] for any environmental or wildlife concerns.
[1:11:44] They'll talk to DATCAP and other agencies in Madison to provide input into the process
[1:11:51] as well.
[1:11:52] And then finally at the end of the day, the final decision will go or the final
[1:11:57] decision will go to the three commissioners in Madison to make a decision.
[1:12:01] If they issue a decision, they can issue that with conditions as well.
[1:12:06] So, there might be conditions regarding the environment or setbacks or screening or other
[1:12:11] types of things that can be incorporated into the design of these projects.
[1:12:15] And again, the Public Service Commission is a very deliberative body, much as yourself.
[1:12:19] And they will look at all those characteristics and ensure that the project is in the public
[1:12:24] interest.
[1:12:26] So, as we're looking forward, as I indicated, we'll file mid-2025.
[1:12:32] That PSE process takes about 12 to 18 months, so it's not quick, but it's deliberative,
[1:12:39] and it's important, and it's thorough, and it involves input from the community, and
[1:12:43] it involves input from all the state agencies as well.
[1:12:48] Their environmental analysis to also cover the things such as construction will include
[1:12:53] operation that will include post-operation, so when the solar arrays and solar garden
[1:12:58] is no longer in use of what the post operation looks like as well.
[1:13:03] We'll go to the next slide.
[1:13:06] We showed this slide a couple weeks ago during the online meeting with the town of Aaron
[1:13:11] Prairie.
[1:13:12] This was from a different solar array, lots of different pictures out there.
[1:13:17] Important to note this was taken in the spring, trees were just planted, but these
[1:13:22] are types of screening, types of things that happen that we work with landowners
[1:13:26] are to ensure that they're set back, there can be screening that's put in place.
[1:13:31] A typical solar panel, just to give you an idea is about the size of a sheet of plywood,
[1:13:36] about four by eight.
[1:13:38] When they've got solar panels on the front and back, so they're called bifacial, they
[1:13:42] track with the sun, so they tip with the sun as the sun moves through the sky.
[1:13:46] And when they're on their total slanted access, they're about 10 feet high off the ground.
[1:13:50] So that gives you some sort of visual sense of what they look like from the roadside.
[1:13:59] So again, this is the contact information from us, our website, our phone number.
[1:14:03] Again, I strongly encourage you to write that phone number down, please share that phone
[1:14:07] number with your constituents if you're getting questions from folks in your community
[1:14:11] as well or use that email address.
[1:14:14] We will get back to folks real quickly with the right person who can answer their questions.
[1:14:20] So I think with that, Ken, we did it.
[1:14:25] Could you share that presentation with everyone on the board?
[1:14:29] Absolutely.
[1:14:29] That would be acceptable, so we'd all get a copy.
[1:14:32] We have those numbers.
[1:14:34] So you're okay with a couple of questions?
[1:14:36] Absolutely.
[1:14:37] I'm going to go ahead and start out.
[1:14:39] Can you talk two things?
[1:14:41] Talk a little bit about the ability or lack thereof to recycle solar panels.
[1:14:46] And then also, what's your plan B or C or D or whatever, should you have some sort
[1:14:54] of an incident where maybe there's a tornado or a hail
[1:14:59] Thank you for watching.
[1:15:00] Or something that wipes out substantial numbers of these panels.
[1:15:06] What happens at that point?
[1:15:08] Thanks, Chairman.
[1:15:10] So to your first question, about 90% of the solar panel could be recycled.
[1:15:16] We want to take all the steps we can.
[1:15:18] I think like any business, we try to recycle as many materials as we can.
[1:15:22] I think as we think towards the future too,
[1:15:25] We're not sure what types of materials can be recycled well into the future when the solar
[1:15:30] array is no longer operational.
[1:15:31] So we'll take all the steps we can to recycle as much of those materials that we can, and
[1:15:35] then safely and responsibly dispose of what's not able to do.
[1:15:39] I think all of us in business, we do that every day in our jobs, and we certainly
[1:15:43] do that at Excel when we take our impact on the environment very seriously.
[1:15:48] Your question about storms, I think, is very pertinent as well, and it's a question
[1:15:51] that we get a lot.
[1:15:54] I would tell you we're in the utility business. We're used to storms. We're used to the power
[1:15:59] going out. We're used to responding late at night, early in the morning. When it's cold
[1:16:05] it's out. When it's most treacherous out, our crews are out there making sure that
[1:16:09] the power gets back on for people. So we have lots of contingency plans in place.
[1:16:13] Not only if the solar is not operating, but if we have another plant that goes down.
[1:16:17] If one of our nuclear plants goes down for some unexpected reason. As I indicated,
[1:16:21] we have 150 generating units on our system serving those 1.8 million customers across five states.
[1:16:28] I can guarantee you there's things that happen probably every day. A lot of things I probably
[1:16:32] don't know about. But our job is to make sure that we can have safe, reliable, affordable power
[1:16:36] for our customers. And I'm proud of the work that our teams do. And I think we do that very
[1:16:40] well. So if a storm came through, I'm confident we'd have power to replace it,
[1:16:45] because it's part of what we do each and every day at our company.
[1:16:49] Thank you.
[1:16:51] Other questions?
[1:16:53] Supervisor Heads.
[1:16:55] How are you?
[1:16:56] Good, Dan.
[1:16:57] It's nice to see you.
[1:16:58] Good to see you.
[1:16:58] It has been a while.
[1:17:00] I'm a strong proponent in county zoning, and I believe that a property owner is right to enjoy their property the way they understood that they could when they purchased the property is something that we need to protect.
[1:17:11] Having said that, and I respect that you're paying a very fair price to the people whose property you're renting.
[1:17:19] Is there any compensation for the people who simply don't want to be near this?
[1:17:23] Is there anything that you're doing for people who'd like to get away from the solar array?
[1:17:30] So I appreciate that question.
[1:17:32] You know, two ways I'd respond to that.
[1:17:36] The Utility Shared Revenue Program that I touched on is a way to, you know,
[1:17:39] provide compensation back to municipalities as well, right?
[1:17:43] So municipalities can choose to use those dollars however they see fit in their communities.
[1:17:48] the county can as well. As it relates to landowners who are adjacent, we try to be good
[1:17:54] neighbors and we've always been good neighbors in the communities that we serve. We want
[1:17:58] to work with those landowners to provide screening opportunities and other types of things,
[1:18:02] but to a specific question, there isn't financial payments to those living near it
[1:18:07] other than the lease payments to those that are leasing their private property for this
[1:18:11] project.
[1:18:15] Supervisor Shirley? Yeah, a couple questions. The first one would be battery storage. What kind of
[1:18:24] battery storage do we expect on a site of this size? And I'm assuming they would be on this site
[1:18:32] rather than on a different site off of where the solar panels are, but if you get interested.
[1:18:41] So the first phase of the project does not involve any battery storage.
[1:18:46] So the first 350 megawatts we talked about does not involve any battery storage.
[1:18:51] Future phases may involve battery storage.
[1:18:54] Don't have any information about what that might look like at this time.
[1:18:57] Okay.
[1:18:58] Second question is additional needs for St. Craig County.
[1:19:03] as we see the the initial application would be 350 megawatts the king power
[1:19:12] plant is 650 so we're we're netting negative on the first go around I know
[1:19:18] that the the event eventually we will get up to the 650 again but as we're
[1:19:25] trending down in a constant on a king power plant versus maybe not a constant
[1:19:34] with solar and how are we going to or how is Excel proposing to the increased
[1:19:45] power needs of St. Craig County as we see the need for more industry or
[1:19:55] commercial, we've even talked about data centers in the area that we're not able to say yes
[1:20:05] to these projects because we don't have enough power in the county.
[1:20:08] So how are we going to, or how does Excel think that they're going to power our county
[1:20:14] long term when we can't get the projects done that we necessarily need to now?
[1:20:21] Yeah. We check our responsibility to provide safe, reliable electricity very seriously and we do a very good job with that.
[1:20:30] As I indicated before, we're looking out, we're making investments today for things that will be used 30 years from now.
[1:20:37] So we're looking at what those power demands will be 30 years from now,
[1:20:41] ensuring that we have all the resources on our system to safely and reliably serve our customers.
[1:20:47] That's something we do each and every day.
[1:20:49] We have a fantastic team in Excel that's looking at all those resources.
[1:20:53] How do we do that?
[1:20:54] Last week, we just received approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend
[1:20:57] the life of our nuclear power plant in Monticello for another 20 years.
[1:21:01] That's going to be another important, so I'll get us to 2050 for the Monticello nuclear
[1:21:04] plant.
[1:21:05] We're doing that with all the generation in our system, so when we can't think
[1:21:08] of a one or kind of a one-to-one type of thing, we look at our entire system.
[1:21:13] We look at how we're serving all of our customers throughout the upper Midwest
[1:21:16] with all those sources of generation.
[1:21:19] And I'm confident we'll be able to do that.
[1:21:21] St. Croix County is one of, I don't have to tell you guys,
[1:21:24] it's obviously one of the fastest growing counties
[1:21:26] in the state of Wisconsin,
[1:21:27] if not the fastest growing in the state of Wisconsin.
[1:21:30] What some folks might not know
[1:21:31] is that Xcel Energy was the company
[1:21:35] that helped start the St. Croix Business Park
[1:21:37] back in the 1990s, so we provided a loan
[1:21:39] to City of Hudson, which created
[1:21:41] the St. Croix Business Park,
[1:21:43] which is a very important economic resource
[1:21:46] So we're very keen on the economic vitality of this region and ensuring that we have enough
[1:21:51] power to serve the needs into the future.
[1:21:53] So I'm confident we'll be able to get there.
[1:21:56] We're definitely going through transitions.
[1:21:58] We make lots of decisions when it comes to energy infrastructure and how we serve
[1:22:02] our customers.
[1:22:03] We work through the state process.
[1:22:04] We work with stakeholders such as yourself, community members as well.
[1:22:09] So it's a very important process that we work through and I'm confident that
[1:22:12] we'll be able to do that well into the future.
[1:22:14] Sure.
[1:22:19] Supervisor Van Summeren.
[1:22:22] Again, I have a couple of questions.
[1:22:24] The first one, why you're in Prairie?
[1:22:27] Why on the finest farmland we probably have
[1:22:30] in St. Croix County instead of some land
[1:22:33] that is not as fine, not as productive, not as level.
[1:22:36] However, solar arrays don't need level lands.
[1:22:39] So why, first of all, why you're in Prairie?
[1:22:43] So I remind you that we're working
[1:22:45] with private landowners in St. Croix County.
[1:22:46] I mean, we're trying to be within a certain distance
[1:22:48] from that King Power Plant interconnection.
[1:22:50] 15 to 20 miles is really a good distance
[1:22:53] to make it cost effective to reuse those grid interconnections
[1:22:56] for us.
[1:22:57] We've got an existing transmission line in place
[1:22:59] across county E. Again, we'll propose two different routes
[1:23:03] for an upgraded transmission line, a 230 kilovolt line.
[1:23:08] When we file the application, we
[1:23:10] will see the scope of what those 350 megawatts will
[1:23:14] look like the 2,500 acres for that first phase of the project.
[1:23:17] So it's proximity, it's location, it's working with those private landowners who are making
[1:23:24] that decision on how they want to use their private property.
[1:23:27] Okay, let me follow up on that.
[1:23:29] You talked about 10 to 15 miles is the finest, but earlier in your presentation
[1:23:33] you said that part of our energy in Wisconsin comes from South Dakota, which is farther
[1:23:39] than 15 miles away.
[1:23:40] Yep.
[1:23:40] Wouldn't the same thing apply?
[1:23:41] I mean, again, the power line that goes along E goes along double D all the way to Highway 128
[1:23:47] and beyond. I think it ends up in going through Eau Claire. So, you know, there's plenty,
[1:23:54] plenty of other space where we don't have housing developments. If you've been in the audience,
[1:23:58] you've heard we don't have to uproot some very productive farmland. It would just make
[1:24:04] sense to me to move that to an area farther east, farther west, where it's rocky and wet
[1:24:10] crummy, because you don't need much good soil to plant i-beams in the ground.
[1:24:16] So a key point of this project is having those regional grid interconnections that are located
[1:24:22] at the King Power Plant site.
[1:24:23] There's a very large substation right there that is used to having a 600 megawatt plant
[1:24:29] right there.
[1:24:30] So being in proximity to that and having generation that could feed into that grid connection
[1:24:35] is critically important to make this project affordable and cost effective.
[1:24:38] It does also have a rather large connection on WD just east of Highway 63 also.
[1:24:47] So I mean, there are other places.
[1:24:48] Question number two, where are the panels made?
[1:24:52] So with our project, we seek the source from domestic providers for this project.
[1:24:58] As we file the application with the commission and go through the supply chain process,
[1:25:02] our goals work with domestic providers.
[1:25:04] Okay, I'm happy to hear that because I'm just thinking that we're facing perhaps
[1:25:08] That's a 25% tariff and suddenly that 350
[1:25:10] would be 100 with the same dollar.
[1:25:13] So thank you.
[1:25:14] Okay, thank you.
[1:25:17] Supervisor Ramberg.
[1:25:18] Thank you, sir.
[1:25:19] Thank you, chair.
[1:25:20] I have two questions.
[1:25:22] One, during the public input process,
[1:25:25] is there opportunity for your plan
[1:25:29] before you submit the application
[1:25:32] to be modified to accommodate?
[1:25:34] Some of these are as many of these concerns as possible.
[1:25:39] You know, with modifications or conditions, i.e., like reflections on cars for traffic
[1:25:46] accidents?
[1:25:47] Yeah, so I'm sorry, Mr. Question.
[1:25:49] Reflections for how, like the safety of reflections onto neighbors and to the cars for traffic
[1:25:56] accidents and dumping more animals on highways and different things like that for safety.
[1:26:03] Yeah, so the Public Service Commission has a very thorough and comprehensive process
[1:26:08] process that involves not only public input but input from the state agencies that oversee
[1:26:13] things like consumer protection, the environment, and other types of things.
[1:26:17] So having been through that process many times, I can tell you it's very thoughtful.
[1:26:22] It's a sound process.
[1:26:24] In fact, the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin was the very first public utilities
[1:26:28] commission in the United States.
[1:26:30] It's got a very long history, very proud history of serving the state of Wisconsin.
[1:26:33] And so, as we file this application, there will be plenty of opportunities for that public
[1:26:38] input.
[1:26:39] And that will be up to the public service commission staff to take all that input through
[1:26:42] their investigations, through their common periods, through their discussions with other
[1:26:46] state agencies, and develop a record that the commissioners can review and vote on.
[1:26:51] Thank you.
[1:26:52] And number two is not knowing the future, of course, and with efficiencies of electricity
[1:26:59] manufacturing in the future that we don't even know about today like hydrogen and
[1:27:04] nuclear and all that if that were to come to us faster or come to you faster
[1:27:10] than your 60-year plan or whatever you have in there could that tip over when
[1:27:15] you're removing the I-beams you know how do you do that and could that tip it
[1:27:20] over and reduce the acreage being consumed while you consume these
[1:27:24] smaller area, energy efficient issues?
[1:27:28] Yeah, no, I think it's a good question.
[1:27:31] There's unquestionably a lot of people
[1:27:33] looking at energy issues right now in our country.
[1:27:36] I mean, energy is a big issue in our country,
[1:27:38] not just electricity, but just energy in general.
[1:27:41] And there's all sorts of advancements always be made.
[1:27:44] Our wheat and power plant is outside of Eau Claire.
[1:27:47] We're actually pre-fitting that for hydrogen.
[1:27:50] We don't know if hydrogen is gonna be a thing,
[1:27:51] but we're pre-fitting it for hydrogen.
[1:27:53] And some day, maybe it's going to be a thing.
[1:27:55] Maybe it'll be cost effective.
[1:27:56] Maybe we can use hydrogen at that plant.
[1:27:58] We don't know.
[1:27:59] But as we're upgrading that plant,
[1:28:00] we're actually doing that work right now, just outside
[1:28:03] the city of Eau Claire, is to be ready for the future
[1:28:05] when it happens.
[1:28:11] Other questions?
[1:28:12] Suburbanist of Barclow.
[1:28:14] Thank you for coming and presenting to us.
[1:28:17] A couple of questions I'm looking at is just
[1:28:20] peak efficiency for a solar farm.
[1:28:23] looking at average days of sunny weather in Wisconsin,
[1:28:27] just a Google search this afternoon is 89 days of clear skies
[1:28:32] and 176 days of cloudy skies.
[1:28:34] So that's a pretty low average of good generation, I would imagine.
[1:28:42] I see solar farms showing up at 24, 25% efficiency.
[1:28:49] Is that accurate?
[1:28:51] I don't know the percentage efficiency.
[1:28:54] What I can tell you is that as we look at providing service to our customers,
[1:28:59] we're looking at all types of energy sources, right?
[1:29:03] So it's not just the solar and the wind that we offer, the hydroelectricity,
[1:29:08] our natural gas plants and our nuclear plants, right?
[1:29:10] They all operate as a system. They all have benefits in different ways, right?
[1:29:15] They're different energy sources.
[1:29:16] We utilize a variety of energy sources in order to be reliable, safe and affordable for our customers.
[1:29:22] So this is a key component of that. The other key component of this is obviously its proximity to that King interconnection site, too,
[1:29:30] and being able to reliably and affordably use that site in the future.
[1:29:33] So my follow-up question is, using 5,000 acres seems like a massive waste on our scenery
[1:29:42] and the use of those public lands for ag and potential homes in a county that is
[1:29:50] continuing to grow. Why not just keep the King Power Plant active? So we made the
[1:29:56] decision in 2019 to retire the King Power Plant in 20
[1:30:00] It's literally at the end of its useful life. It's a 60-year-old plant that it's not cost-effective
[1:30:06] to operate into the future. But we wanted to make that decision a very responsible manner.
[1:30:11] We didn't just shut down the power plant in 2019, decided to shut it down in 2020. We're
[1:30:16] doing that over a period of time to make the most responsible decision we can for our
[1:30:20] customers.
[1:30:23] The 5,000 acres is, again, a note that we're working only with private land
[1:30:28] owners on this. Those private landowners are being provided lease payments to
[1:30:33] provide their land for this project.
[1:30:41] Supervisor Rice. Yes my question Brian has
[1:30:45] to do with plans for the 25 to 30 year lifespan of any solar farm. How you go
[1:30:58] about the retiring process financially to afford making sure
[1:31:05] that it's safely taken down?
[1:31:06] Yeah, that's a really good question.
[1:31:08] So part of starting a project is,
[1:31:11] how are you going to end a project responsibly as well?
[1:31:13] And that certainly will be part of our application process
[1:31:16] that we file with the Public Service Commission.
[1:31:18] How do we decommission that?
[1:31:19] How do we work with landowners in the future?
[1:31:22] I don't have those details right now,
[1:31:23] but that's certainly part of the plan
[1:31:24] that we'll file with the Public Service Commission
[1:31:26] in mid-2025.
[1:31:30] Supervisor Adams, again, we appreciate you coming.
[1:31:34] In St. Paul, they had a coal-fired plant
[1:31:37] along the Mississippi River.
[1:31:38] Typeridge.
[1:31:39] And I worked at St. Paul Public Schools,
[1:31:41] and I watched them decommission it, slice it apart,
[1:31:45] bring it down to ground level,
[1:31:46] and put up a natural gas facility there.
[1:31:51] Why can't we do that at the King location
[1:31:54] and use natural gas, which gives us
[1:31:56] baseload energy and we don't have to worry about trying to wicker solar power
[1:32:03] into the grid that then requires transformers and you know magic dust to
[1:32:09] make it come out of our wall. So you know I'll answer that in a couple
[1:32:14] different ways it's a great question it's a question we've we've gotten a
[1:32:17] lot right if you're not familiar with the energy infrastructure you might not
[1:32:20] be familiar what we can and can't do at other sites so not only in St. Paul
[1:32:24] that we convert that coal plant to natural gas. We also did that in Minneapolis as well.
[1:32:28] We converted a coal plant from at the Riverside plant in Minneapolis to natural gas. We looked
[1:32:33] at all the different options for the King plant. We could only get enough gas to that
[1:32:38] site to power about 100 megawatts. And remember, too, it's part of the Wild and
[1:32:42] Scenic Rivers Act as well. It would be very unlikely that you would be able to
[1:32:45] site a new power plant along the Sinclair River. But we did look at it. So we looked
[1:32:50] at that. We could only get about 100 megawatts of natural gas generation if we were to propose
[1:32:56] a site there. So we looked at other options, right? We looked at wind. We looked at all
[1:33:00] the different options on the table because reusing those interconnection grid location
[1:33:05] is really critically important to us. And doing that within a geographic area that
[1:33:10] makes sense is what makes this project feasible and affordable going forward.
[1:33:18] So, I'm looking at the Apple River plant Hydro, outstanding, everybody loves Hydro.
[1:33:25] Only two megawatts, and the plant was built according to this interactive map here in
[1:33:30] 1901.
[1:33:31] So, here we are using that place for a century, but the King plant is too old, it's 60.
[1:33:37] Here, I guess, I don't know, within the last 10 years, we've only been using it
[1:33:40] for six months out of the year.
[1:33:41] So, is it really 60 years old or something less?
[1:33:44] So, you know, I agree that, you know, we're just seemingly ramming this project down our throat.
[1:33:52] I'm looking at the public utilities omission site.
[1:33:56] Please don't, please.
[1:33:59] And they have not, they have not cancelled or turned down any applications.
[1:34:04] I mean, our chances of getting this thing turned down are like a snowball's chance and you know where.
[1:34:09] So anyway, I'm not, I'm not ragging on you, but, you know, this stinks, so.
[1:34:17] Okay, that's pleased.
[1:34:19] Please hold your colleagues.
[1:34:21] Supervisor Berning.
[1:34:23] Hey, Brian.
[1:34:23] Thanks for, thanks for coming tonight, man.
[1:34:26] It's always great to see you.
[1:34:28] So you said something about the King power plant being decommissioned and then putting
[1:34:32] one in its place there that it would be almost impossible to do so, but there's
[1:34:36] one there right now.
[1:34:39] So the King plant was built before the Wild and Seedy
[1:34:42] Careers Act was put in place?
[1:34:43] Yeah, no, no, I realized that because that was late 70s,
[1:34:45] early 80s, somewhere in there.
[1:34:48] But isn't there something like grandfathering that site in?
[1:34:52] I mean, isn't there anything in there
[1:34:53] that you could preserve so that you could rebuild it
[1:34:57] or rebuild something like Supervisor Adams was
[1:34:59] saying regarding natural gas?
[1:35:01] I mean, we're going through all the rigmarole of getting
[1:35:05] something brand new over a very large space approved when you have space already and you
[1:35:11] guys have done a great job of cleaning it up and making it so that we have Paul Deagles
[1:35:14] on the river again.
[1:35:15] That was wonderful, but I mean, could you guys do that?
[1:35:20] Could you guys push to do something there again?
[1:35:23] So Paul, answer the question the same way I did before and sorry if this is redundant.
[1:35:26] We looked at all the options for the key plant site.
[1:35:29] We looked at natural gas.
[1:35:31] We looked at other options for the key plant site.
[1:35:33] The best option to re-utilize those interconnection grid is to build a solar array and central
[1:35:39] in the eastern St. Croix County.
[1:35:41] So if this fails, like if you don't pass the PSE, which there is a chance that it may
[1:35:46] not, although, you know, Supervisor Adams made an indication that there hasn't been
[1:35:51] one that's failed, what is your plan B?
[1:35:55] Because there always is a chance that someone looks at a petition of 4,000, some citizens
[1:36:00] of residents of St. Croix County and goes,
[1:36:03] man, I don't think that this is what this area wants
[1:36:06] to have inside of it.
[1:36:09] What is your guys' plan B?
[1:36:11] Do you guys have a plan B if this doesn't go through?
[1:36:13] So I would say our plan B is always
[1:36:15] to make sure we're providing reliable service
[1:36:18] to our customers.
[1:36:20] And we'll do that.
[1:36:22] Not sure what that might look like,
[1:36:24] but our plan is to make sure that every time our customers
[1:36:27] customers want to turn on the lights, cool their homes, that they have electricity to
[1:36:31] do that.
[1:36:32] So we take planning our system very important.
[1:36:36] As I indicated, we are looking out 30 years into the future on how to safely and responsibly
[1:36:40] serve our customers.
[1:36:43] If the plant or the project doesn't go through, we will have plans in place to make sure
[1:36:47] our customers have uninterrupted service just like they do today.
[1:36:50] And then as regarding nuclear power and expanding that with some of the advances
[1:36:56] that have happened in France and how clean that they, I mean, it's amazing what they've
[1:37:01] done over there.
[1:37:02] Nuclear is pretty much, for the most part, carbon-free.
[1:37:07] It utilizes nuclear energy.
[1:37:10] My friend works there at the one in Monticello and it's very efficient.
[1:37:16] Why have we not looked at doing that adjacent over here instead of 5,000 acres of, you
[1:37:24] know, spread out over 40,000?
[1:37:25] I mean I mean let me ask this so why is nuclear not been pursued so and it has
[1:37:31] been pursued I mentioned that earlier so that we operate three nuclear units on
[1:37:35] the Excel energy system in the upper Midwest we have two units in Red Wing
[1:37:38] Minnesota and we have the one unit up in Monticello those plants have been
[1:37:42] operating since the 1970s I believe and we have plans in place to keep them
[1:37:47] operating like I said Monticello just received approval to operate to 2050
[1:37:52] So reinvesting in those existing nuclear units has been incredibly important to us.
[1:37:58] It's an important base load fuel source for us.
[1:38:01] It keeps our rates really low for our customers, and it's very reliable.
[1:38:05] So we support nuclear.
[1:38:07] We're investing in our nuclear plants where they're an important part of our fleet.
[1:38:10] And those plants, while they're located in Minnesota, provide electricity to our customers here in Wisconsin.
[1:38:17] So that didn't really answer what I was asking.
[1:38:22] I guess what I'm asking is if this board and local municipalities, past resolutions
[1:38:27] and passed it on to our state representatives, asking them to work hand in hand with you
[1:38:32] to provide the funding needed to build a nuclear facility rather than a large,
[1:38:37] sprawled out solar facility, would you guys be willing to consider that again
[1:38:43] and work with the legislature and our local municipalities to make that happen, because
[1:38:48] I think we could lead the effort on that here with our residents and our neighbors from
[1:38:56] this board.
[1:38:57] I think so.
[1:38:57] I know I speak from everyone.
[1:38:58] There's 19 of us total, but I'm saying from my perspective, I think we could lead the
[1:39:03] charge on that and get buy-in for that rather than this particular project being
[1:39:07] sprawled out and only having a lifespan of 20 to 30 years.
[1:39:10] What do you say to that?
[1:39:11] Well, I would say I think nuclear is a really important part of the future of energy in our
[1:39:16] country.
[1:39:17] At Excel Energy, we've made nuclear a very important part of our portfolio in the upper
[1:39:20] Midwest, too.
[1:39:22] So expanding that in the future, not sure what that would look like, but we'd certainly
[1:39:25] be able to any discussions that the board might want to have with state legislators
[1:39:28] and others in the future.
[1:39:30] Okay.
[1:39:30] And then I think you've answered a couple of these other ones.
[1:39:33] Let me just make sure I got Supervisor Rice.
[1:39:37] nice job on the retirement.
[1:39:41] Oh, on the retirement, I did have a follow-up question on that. Retirement
[1:39:44] of the solar facility once it's done. So are there contingencies in place? Do you guys put
[1:39:50] those anything in place like a bond or some sort of insurance? Like if Excel energy happens
[1:39:55] to file bankruptcy or the landowners are default and now of the sudden who's responsible
[1:40:01] for that? Is there a bond? Is there insurance policy or something that's in place? I believe
[1:40:06] One of the supervisors in the admin committee brought that up a couple weeks ago, but can
[1:40:11] you talk about that?
[1:40:12] What the insurance process or what the insurance is for us to have that cleaned up once those
[1:40:18] are retired?
[1:40:19] Yeah.
[1:40:20] I don't know the insurance process, but I can certainly follow up with you and see
[1:40:24] what that looks like.
[1:40:25] As indicated earlier, as part of our applications, the Public Service Commission includes what
[1:40:29] happens with decommissioning and when it's not operating and how we work with
[1:40:32] those landowners going forward.
[1:40:33] So that's that's a critically important part of the process as well. I got one last question
[1:40:37] I appreciate you indulging me mr. Chair on this and thank you Brian for indulging me as well
[1:40:41] My last question is I have not heard of a single solar project
[1:40:47] Anywhere in this country and maybe there are some where it is all completely private funded without any type of federal subsidy
[1:40:55] For the at least the initial construction of it including private residents
[1:41:00] businesses
[1:41:01] What have you guys applied for or what will you apply for any federal subsidies once this
[1:41:07] project is approved if it gets approved?
[1:41:09] So we will take advantage of any tax advantages and subsidies that there are for the project.
[1:41:14] Those cost reductions are then go back to our customers in the cost of a lower cost
[1:41:19] project.
[1:41:21] But as of right now, there's no grant application in or what does that look like?
[1:41:27] No grant application in.
[1:41:28] But once it is approved by the PSC, I'm under the assumption you will look for those subsidies.
[1:41:34] Yeah, I'm not sure what tax benefits there might be out there at the time.
[1:41:38] You know, we're talking well into the future.
[1:41:40] But any of the tax advantages that are for projects like this flow back to lower cost for our customers
[1:41:45] and then a lower cost project for our customers.
[1:41:47] Okay, thanks, Brian.
[1:41:50] Supervisor Leif, I believe you have a question.
[1:41:54] I do, and I'm sorry for my voice.
[1:41:56] I'm wondering if Heather could court counsel could give us some information about what what
[1:42:03] realistically if anything the county can really do in this case I know there probably was an email
[1:42:10] but I haven't gotten to it all but I wonder if she could just give us the what is what
[1:42:15] really if anything the county can do regarding this project. Thank you.
[1:42:25] I and with all due
[1:42:27] respect Supervisor Leaf I think that's another discussion for another meeting.
[1:42:32] It's not really on our agenda to discuss those types of ins and outs of what we
[1:42:37] can or can't. Well I think okay I guess that's fair but I don't it's my
[1:42:42] understanding there's not much.
[1:42:46] Okay Supervisor Carlson.
[1:42:54] Thank you. The biggest
[1:42:56] complaint and worry about people I get from our constituents is the closeness
[1:43:01] to residential areas and covering farmland. Have there been studies done
[1:43:06] to see, because I know you want to stay close to Oak Park, but have there been
[1:43:11] studies to see how much it would cost to put transmission lines and put it in
[1:43:15] the area that's much more rural, because it certainly doesn't fit the
[1:43:19] setting right next to houses. I was horrified when I saw one of
[1:43:24] the pictures where they put yellow where all the solar panels were, and there was a road
[1:43:29] going in, 10 houses, and it completely surrounded it, like forever.
[1:43:36] So has there been a study done to see how much it would cost, and can we see that study
[1:43:40] if it has been done so we know?
[1:43:42] Yeah, I don't know if a particular study has been done.
[1:43:46] I know studies have been done to determine what's the best use of that interconnection
[1:43:49] site and how far you can be away from it to make it, obviously every mile you
[1:43:53] move further away it's another mile of transmission line and obviously there's a cost that goes
[1:43:58] up with that.
[1:44:00] What I will share about the map and I think it's important to note, 60 days before we file
[1:44:04] the application we do file the general area that the project be located and it will show
[1:44:10] the map of that location as well.
[1:44:13] And then when we file the application I have more detailed information.
[1:44:15] So we are looking in a very large 30,000 to 40,000 acre area.
[1:44:19] area. So I think some of the images that have been out there haven't been very detailed
[1:44:23] enough. And I encourage the public and supervisors and elected officials to look at that map when
[1:44:31] it comes out to see where we're proposing for those final arrays. Again, we're talking
[1:44:35] to landowners in a very large area. Just for a little geography, I did my own little
[1:44:40] AI search beforehand, St. Croix County, but just under 500,000 acres in size.
[1:44:44] we're talking 5,000 acres so St. Croix County is a big area as well and so we're
[1:44:50] and we're talking to landowners in about a 40,000 acre of that 500,000 acre area in St. Croix County.
[1:45:00] Uh, Supervisor Coehr.
[1:45:06] And I also would like to thank you for coming and walking through this
[1:45:11] with us. Um, I have two questions for you. One that has been brought up by some is, uh,
[1:45:19] the concern for bleeding of, uh, is there a potential for bleeding for PFAS or other contaminants
[1:45:26] from the amount of array that's out there? Yeah, I appreciate the question. Environmental
[1:45:32] environmental concerns are one of the key things that the Department of Natural Resources
[1:45:36] will look at for any of the solar arrays.
[1:45:38] So that's part of their process to look at what types of environmental impacts there are
[1:45:43] from not only the land use, but the type of project that you're proposing, the type
[1:45:48] of materials that you're proposing, where you're getting them from as well.
[1:45:51] So those will all be a part of that study process.
[1:45:54] And I'm confident that the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and other state agencies
[1:45:59] will look at that to ensure that anything that's approved is safe for the community.
[1:46:03] Thank you for that. Then my second question is,
[1:46:11] does Excel Energy then, do they have any provisions in the contract to be able to
[1:46:18] sell the solar farm to investors? This solar array will be owned by
[1:46:28] We're based out of Eau Claire, my office is in Eau Claire, so that's the operating company that will own this.
[1:46:36] We've been operating there since 1924, which is celebrated 100th anniversary in Eau Claire.
[1:46:42] I don't anticipate that changing in the future.
[1:46:46] So, Excel Energy is the owner, will be the owner and the operator of this plant.
[1:46:50] Okay, so that would be for the entire life of the contract.
[1:46:54] Correct.
[1:46:54] They would have ownership and the contracts themselves are provided that way that Excel
[1:47:01] will continue ownership.
[1:47:03] So I think the question is going to add.
[1:47:04] So some solar arrays are built by third parties, right?
[1:47:06] They might not be a public utility that's building it, and then the ownership of that
[1:47:11] solar array can transfer from owner to owner.
[1:47:14] This is actually being owned by the public utility and it's being used to provide electric
[1:47:19] service to our customers.
[1:47:21] Okay.
[1:47:22] Thank you.
[1:47:24] Supervisor Shirley, a couple other questions for you.
[1:47:28] Do you have an estimated total project, proposed project cost?
[1:47:33] We don't.
[1:47:33] We will when we file.
[1:47:34] So we'll have all that information, the detailed application.
[1:47:38] As we indicated earlier, we're really at the front end of this process, right?
[1:47:42] I keep telling you, we're kind of like at 1B now.
[1:47:45] I think before we were at 1A, we transferred into 2025, we're kind of at 1B now.
[1:47:49] We have a lot of work to do before we file that application including all the financial analyses that will go into that
[1:47:55] So we will have a total project cost when we file it with the public service commission
[1:47:59] Obviously cost is one thing that the public service commission will look at
[1:48:04] Along with all the other considerations that they get for projects like this
[1:48:09] And I know what you said earlier in
[1:48:12] presentation that your your initial application is for the 350 correct and then you'll do a later
[1:48:18] submission. Does that first submission include a future proposed up to 650 so
[1:48:26] the public service knows that you're going to grow this or is it just 350 and
[1:48:32] then when you go for more they could say yes or no. There'll be two different
[1:48:38] there'll be multiple applications perhaps right. The work that we're
[1:48:43] doing with landowners right now is to secure those lease agreements for the
[1:48:47] entire full project, that 5,000 acres. So what that looks like in the future, you know,
[1:48:52] I guess I don't have information on, but it could be multiple applications for different
[1:48:57] sizes of the project. You asked a question about batteries, too. Certainly that's something
[1:49:00] that can be incorporated for future phases of the project. We don't have that for the
[1:49:04] first phase of the project, but that's certainly something that can be evaluated going forward.
[1:49:08] And one quick last thing. In a previous meeting that the two of us were at, you said that
[1:49:13] that there were no new energy plants other than solar that were in the – any proposed
[1:49:21] in this area. Do you think that that is a sustainable thing to do in the future?
[1:49:30] So when we look at providing service to our customers, we look at all those energy sources
[1:49:35] we talked about before. We're investing in our nuclear plants. They might not be
[1:49:39] located here, but they're serving our customers here. Our customers here, everyone
[1:49:42] in this room if you're an Excel customer is paying for those nuclear plants, our hydroelectric
[1:49:47] plants, the 19 hydroelectric plants, we're investing in those to make sure that not only
[1:49:51] they've been operating since 1901, but that they can operate for well into the future. So
[1:49:55] when we look at all of our energy sources, it's important to look at them as a system and not
[1:50:00] as individual pieces. St. Croix County, as I indicated, we've got two hydroelectric plants
[1:50:05] here. They've been operating for a long time. We're proposing solar, there's other solar
[1:50:10] projects being proposed in the area as well. This area doesn't lend itself for us, for
[1:50:16] wind resources, so for Excel Energy, because we serve Western Minnesota and the Dakotas.
[1:50:21] That's a much better wind resource for us, and that's why when we site wind generation,
[1:50:26] we look to site it in areas that we serve in Western Minnesota and the Dakotas. When
[1:50:30] we upgrade our hydroelectric plants, that's right here in Wisconsin. We've got 19 hydroelectric
[1:50:34] plants, and we do that right here. When we invest in our biomass plant up in
[1:50:37] Ashland, that's because there's a huge logging resource up in Ashland with the wood products
[1:50:41] industry.
[1:50:42] It's a great plant for rut and provides about a $5 million economic impact in Ashland in
[1:50:47] that region.
[1:50:48] So when we look at energy sources, it's important to look at it as a system for us.
[1:50:53] And that's why we're proposing this one here.
[1:50:56] But it's difficult to kind of compare and contrast when you look at just one area.
[1:51:02] Okay.
[1:51:03] Thank you, Brian.
[1:51:04] I have one final question for you.
[1:51:06] One more here.
[1:51:07] One more?
[1:51:08] Okay, let me throw this out for you, and then I'll turn it over to Supervisor Rotino.
[1:51:14] I'm aware of this possible agreement called Joint Development Agreements, and that would
[1:51:22] be agreements between Excel and counties or municipalities.
[1:51:28] Addressing a lot of the concerns that a lot have been voiced here tonight, is Excel
[1:51:34] going to be interested or agreeable to possibly get into those types of agreements?
[1:51:41] I think we're always open to having those discussions with our elected officials and
[1:51:45] the community.
[1:51:47] I would say as we move forward, being engaged and involved in that public service commission
[1:51:51] process is really critical.
[1:51:55] Supervisor Rotino.
[1:51:58] Thank you, Mr. Chair.
[1:51:59] here. Something struck me about this, since it's such a large piece of property, there
[1:52:06] has to be an environmental impact. But it sounds like this has all been, it's a done
[1:52:13] deal and you guys are just going to push this through. I have a real problem with the new
[1:52:17] green deal that's going on in the administration and we don't have any say of it. We have
[1:52:24] three guys in Madison, determining the future of that piece of property in this very heart
[1:52:32] of our county. And they're 275 miles away. I just, this is, we have no say. I would like
[1:52:42] to see that the county has a voice in that decision because it, right now we're being
[1:52:51] railroaded.
[1:52:54] I would appreciate if you could see if we could get some local representation in some
[1:53:02] of the decision-making.
[1:53:05] So to answer your question about environmental impact statements, so as we noted earlier,
[1:53:11] the Public Service Commission process is very thorough, includes a review from the Wisconsin
[1:53:16] Department of National Resources, so there is a very detailed environmental analysis
[1:53:20] that's done on projects like this.
[1:53:22] Thank you.
[1:53:24] Any other final questions?
[1:53:28] Okay, Brian, thank you very much.
[1:53:30] Thank you, Chairman.
[1:53:30] Our intent is not to be confrontational.
[1:53:33] Not at all.
[1:53:33] Appreciate your time.
[1:53:35] But we appreciate your presentation.
[1:53:37] We appreciate the information.
[1:53:39] At this point, we're going to take a real quick eight-minute break.
[1:53:44] We'll come back at 7.10, please.
[1:54:00] Of course.
[1:54:00] Okay.
[1:54:01] We're going to have a slight change in the agenda.
[1:54:05] Our cast of presentation from Sean Kinsella is going to wait, hold off until the annual
[1:54:13] department reports.
[1:54:14] Thank you very much, Sean, for your consideration so that we can move on to our county administrators
[1:54:20] report and our business items so we can move ahead with those.
[1:54:28] So county administrator, you are on.
[1:54:31] all right thank you the financial report is in your packet the financials
[1:54:36] are through the month of November I have looked at preliminary year and
[1:54:41] there's a lot of entries that we book back through the first quarter back into
[1:54:44] the prior year really from a financial standpoint it looks very much like all
[1:54:48] the other years which is a good thing because St. Croix County does very well
[1:54:54] sales sales tax were above what we had budgeted for the year so that's
[1:54:58] where our cushion is and I think that'll be fine.
[1:55:01] And then the other update that I had
[1:55:03] was the Department of Corrections.
[1:55:05] We did get the final approval on that.
[1:55:07] So that lease is a done deal
[1:55:09] and the probation and parole offices
[1:55:11] will be moving into our building in July.
[1:55:15] So
[1:55:18] any other questions about anything
[1:55:20] in the financial report?
[1:55:22] Any questions for our County Administrator?
[1:55:26] All right, seeing none,
[1:55:28] we're gonna move on to our first business item,
[1:55:30] which is an ordinance to repeal and recreate Chapter 11
[1:55:33] and the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances.
[1:55:36] Can we start out with a motion, please?
[1:55:40] Supervisor Anderson.
[1:55:41] I move to, what's the language?
[1:55:46] Repeal and recreate Chapter 11,
[1:55:48] we store its facilities in the St. Croix County
[1:55:50] Court of Ordinances.
[1:55:52] Yeah, the motion is to approve the resolution.
[1:55:55] Do we have a second?
[1:55:58] Supervisor Rice.
[1:55:59] Yes.
[1:56:01] Okay, who would like to give us a nice explanation of this resolution and
[1:56:08] Supervisor Anderson? Yeah, so this is to kind of modernize and update our
[1:56:13] chapter 11 we storage facilities ordinance came about with some projects
[1:56:18] that were proposed in some industrial large-scale projects that were
[1:56:23] proposed in the county. I would rather get ahead of it than try to play
[1:56:27] catch-up. We had multiple discussions on this at one in a regular committee
[1:56:35] meeting. We had a special open house with stakeholders of all kinds, farmers and
[1:56:39] residents of the county to go through it and then passed it at our most recent
[1:56:48] committee meeting. It's went over repeatedly with a lot of comment and I
[1:56:55] I think we have a pretty good ordinance.
[1:57:03] Supervisor Shirley.
[1:57:06] Yeah, I will concur that we had a lot of public comment.
[1:57:11] We did a lot of work to recreate this ordinance
[1:57:17] and put a lot of time into this.
[1:57:20] So there are two items.
[1:57:23] And I think I had planned to bring an amendment to this
[1:57:27] motion.
[1:57:28] I think you heard about them earlier, but if we look at my amendment would be for 11.2
[1:57:37] number three, we will strike the remaining paragraph after fields in an NMP plan.
[1:57:48] So three A in
[1:57:56] the A section at the what you have highlighted there.
[1:57:58] So after that strike-through of every four years, that fields from there on strike the rest of that.
[1:58:12] So that will – the public comment you heard earlier with fields in multiple NMP plans that would take care of that issue.
[1:58:23] I think that there – you heard public comment earlier about that.
[1:58:27] But I can't explain it any better than they did earlier, so good job with that.
[1:58:32] Our second item for the amendment would be 11.3 in Permits and Applications, letter D 2.3.
[1:58:43] So we would omit the rest of the sentence that says and include the SNAP plus database.
[1:58:52] So
[1:58:59] it's 11.3d
[1:59:09] to two point, it's an operation permit, so I think it's down further.
[1:59:21] There we go.
[1:59:23] And then number three.
[1:59:26] And that last part of the sentence there, the and includes snap data plus database.
[1:59:32] Let's strike that.
[1:59:38] Keep in the files submitted electronically and then omit the and include the snap data plus database.
[1:59:47] Yes, just like that.
[1:59:52] So there's two amendments being proposed.
[1:59:55] We do need a second.
[1:59:57] Second.
[2:00:00] Sorry, who is that? Oh, Surveysel Lynn, second.
[2:00:05] And could we clarify just quickly to make sure
[2:00:09] that we everybody knows what we're doing? Or what the proposed amendments are?
[2:00:19] Yeah, so it's the words that you see highlighted on the screen striking those words from this
[2:00:25] section.
[2:00:30] Do you have a question specific to this one before I go back to the other one?
[2:00:33] I do. I do. And my question maybe can be directed to Supervisor Shirley. So can you explain to me,
[2:00:42] since I've been deep in this, the SNAP plus database, tell me the why, what changes in this by
[2:00:51] eliminating those words that are highlighted? Supervisor Shirley. So by eliminating the
[2:00:58] database, you heard someone say earlier in public comment, the database is their proprietary
[2:01:07] information that's their company plan for the next, however long the NMP plan is.
[2:01:14] So if we, six years, six-year plan.
[2:01:17] So having all that database that is provided in a format that could be manipulated when
[2:01:25] And they pay for somebody to create that plan and submit it.
[2:01:30] We've heard from, for the people that are not in Community Development Committee, we
[2:01:34] heard from some of our farmers that have said that if this is required, that that database
[2:01:41] is required, then the people that they pay to create their nutrient management plan
[2:01:47] would charge them a significant amount, more money to submit the database as well.
[2:01:57] Go ahead, Supervisor Rice.
[2:01:59] So what I'm trying to understand here, because we have several people here who have commented
[2:02:04] on seeing the connection to this manure storage ordinance and their desire to have clean water.
[2:02:12] And my understanding with the SNAP Plus database is that while county staff could look at
[2:02:18] it, I mean think about all the departments we have here that have access to confidential
[2:02:22] information and it does not come out.
[2:02:25] It does not leak out.
[2:02:26] So, this concern is being expressed by those in the dairy business that somehow their proprietary
[2:02:33] information will somehow be manipulated and shared and used and that that's going to cause
[2:02:37] some hesitation on landowners.
[2:02:40] I frankly just don't buy it.
[2:02:43] It is, I think, an over-response to a small ask to ask for that elimination.
[2:02:50] So my concern is we've worked really hard on this overall chapter.
[2:02:57] I don't know that we'll ever come to 100% agreement between those that are arguing
[2:03:03] to continue to support our dairy business in their desires and those who want clean water.
[2:03:10] We've worked pretty hard on this.
[2:03:12] And we have a good chapter right now.
[2:03:17] Primarily, what all of this does is it stops manure from being transported into the county.
[2:03:24] That's from my vantage point.
[2:03:26] A lot of this is detail, but that's what we're stopping to do, but with this chapter.
[2:03:31] So if we open up this fox and we vote for these amendments, I would say we should go
[2:03:38] back to committee and tweak a few other things that could be clean water protections.
[2:03:43] So that's my view.
[2:03:46] I see Supervisor Leif has her hand up.
[2:03:49] I would like to invite our Community Development Director to address both of these amendments
[2:03:56] to get a little better background if I could.
[2:04:01] Thank you, Mr. Chair and members of the board.
[2:04:03] So to fill in the board members in that that haven't been through the Community Development Committee meetings
[2:04:09] in regards to the database and what that is.
[2:04:13] So currently our staff are getting a large array of different nutrient management plan
[2:04:19] formats.
[2:04:20] Basically everybody does them a little bit different.
[2:04:22] The SNAP Plus program is the state approved program by DATCAP and that for the nutrient
[2:04:31] management planning process.
[2:04:33] And so what the database does is instead of having a checklist on each field it's
[2:04:39] more of an Excel spreadsheet where you can see all the fields
[2:04:42] in that nutrient management plan at a glance.
[2:04:46] It also allows us to get accurate sediment
[2:04:49] and phosphorus losses over those fields
[2:04:53] and that over many years.
[2:04:54] Whereas the checklist just takes an average loss
[2:04:59] of the sediment and phosphorus based on their crop
[2:05:04] and what they've been growing year after year.
[2:05:07] So that crop adjustment in that can make it off and with our county land and water
[2:05:15] dollars that we've done in 2024 we did roughly $400,000 and that can help us
[2:05:22] identify areas or fields that maybe have high phosphorus loss, high you know
[2:05:29] erosion and that to take and do more best management practices on the
[2:05:34] landscape and that will be in that database as it will kind of highlight
[2:05:37] those outliers that are not necessarily the best fields that we want and also in
[2:05:45] that but it what it does show is it does show the calculations that the
[2:05:49] agronomist or whoever is putting together the plan is using for the
[2:05:53] manure application so usually you're able to take and select it's the first
[2:05:58] year that they've applied manure the second year the third year that
[2:06:02] they've applied on those fields.
[2:06:04] And from what staff have seen is all of the time
[2:06:07] the agronomist picked the first year
[2:06:09] because then everything works out and it's approved.
[2:06:12] And that in the checklist and in the SNAP program
[2:06:15] whereas reality it maybe has seen
[2:06:18] minor applications many times.
[2:06:20] And so that helps us to take and get accurate information
[2:06:24] because otherwise in this program
[2:06:26] you can tweak the information and that to make it fit
[2:06:30] and have it checked.
[2:06:31] And I will say that this isn't a green it's go red it stops and that because a lot of these fields may be
[2:06:39] excessively high in one area already
[2:06:42] And so it's really a tool to try to allow our staff to be able to work with the property owners and the producers to bring
[2:06:48] Them closer and that to a check
[2:06:51] point so
[2:06:52] That's that change
[2:06:55] The other change is in regards to
[2:07:00] the field in two different nutrient management plans at the same time.
[2:07:05] With farmland preservation, the property owner maybe is submitting the nutrient management
[2:07:10] plan to get a tax credit, and the producer was submitting the same plan.
[2:07:16] The proposed text said that each one of those plans would then match because really
[2:07:22] our application should be exactly the same because the property owner is renting out
[2:07:26] that property to the producer. The public comment that we heard brought up the farmland preservation
[2:07:34] it also brought up economical concerns and that for transporting the waste and that's generally one
[2:07:41] of the main issues why we see fields getting excessively high in phosphorus is because it
[2:07:46] costs a lot to take and move the manure or there's implications with doing a drag line
[2:07:53] and then the crop change and that which and that they're constantly amending
[2:07:59] the NMPs every year for what the crop actually gets. So let's say we get a
[2:08:04] really wet year and we were going to take and plant corn on those acres and
[2:08:10] that but we couldn't get in there in time to plant corn so that the farmer
[2:08:13] had to switch it to beans they can amend that plant at the end of the
[2:08:17] year and that so that it reflects actual T-WAS over the years. That's the summary
[2:08:24] of the changes. They're really policy changes. Our staff can move forward either
[2:08:29] way but that's the reason why the proposed draft was written the way it was.
[2:08:36] Other discussion. Supervisor Lin.
[2:08:39] I think one of the... Sorry. No, I'm sorry. I
[2:08:42] needed to let Supervisor Lee go first. I'm sorry. I apologize. It's okay. Sorry,
[2:08:47] Lisa. I had a question because there was somebody in public comment that said that even if this
[2:08:55] is passed that it would be outdated and I don't understand what that meant and is what that means
[2:09:01] and if it's related to the cloud or what can you shed light on that Jason? Yeah so the state is
[2:09:10] working through switching SNAP plus this approved software to a cloud-based platform in the next
[2:09:19] year or two. And then we did amend on that the ordinance to say the state approved system or an
[2:09:26] approved system by county staff, I believe. So that would be covered in that if that change
[2:09:33] caused any heartache or hardship.
[2:09:42] I think another one of the concerns that's even bigger with the SNAP Plus is the fact
[2:09:50] that the program is editable and that there's no secure way for them to send in their six
[2:09:57] year business plan.
[2:09:58] It becomes part of a file that people can request and there's ways to manipulate it
[2:10:06] and I think that the farmers want their property
[2:10:11] that they submit protected from the ability to edit it.
[2:10:21] Is there a way to lock it?
[2:10:24] Not that I'm aware of.
[2:10:26] So, and I believe that our staff actually wants
[2:10:29] to be able to get that information
[2:10:30] and be able to use it for calculating our phosphorus
[2:10:34] loss for the St. Croix TMDL.
[2:10:38] And so we want to be able to use that information and help the producers.
[2:10:43] So we're actually considering doing some training for nutrient management planning and how that can be done.
[2:10:51] But that will be something that will be coming after this ordinance.
[2:10:54] Or a subline thrown in that then becomes part of an editable place,
[2:11:01] but that the program itself is not violated the plan.
[2:11:08] Correct. And so that's where we're kind of on that line.
[2:11:11] We're not saying that it's got to be approved by SNAP Plus either.
[2:11:14] We just don't want to check all the boxes.
[2:11:16] We're really trying to consider the water quality impacts of that
[2:11:21] that may be from a field that's high.
[2:11:22] Like I said, it's not a green or a red
[2:11:25] and that we're going to have fields that are excessively high
[2:11:28] that have had bad BMP practices over the last, you know, 10, 20, 30 years, and so can we
[2:11:35] help them in that when funding becomes available to help them cost share some projects and
[2:11:40] that and a checklist doesn't give us that information that we need and that in order
[2:11:46] to be able to help them with T-WAS or the soil loss on the field.
[2:11:55] So there's a fundamental that's that I'm seeing here that I don't think we're covering it's not it
[2:12:02] I think we're getting into the weeds and the fundamental is that it's it's kind of a matter of
[2:12:08] respect that the people who are the business people that have this proprietary property this
[2:12:15] intellectual property have asked that they don't want to turn it over.
[2:12:20] And I think the next and appropriate question is, would be, is there a way that we can
[2:12:27] cooperate to get the information we would like to get to calculate TMDLs in a manner
[2:12:32] that you find more palatable and not do it hamhandedly?
[2:12:40] That would be my preference that we make the – we pass this amendment that we honor and
[2:12:49] respect the people who run the largest industry in the county.
[2:12:54] And then we ask them, would you please help us collect the data?
[2:12:58] They're going to submit their report electronically, presumably a PDF.
[2:13:04] We're going to get data on how they're spreading the manure in the fields.
[2:13:10] Presumably, it's going to be an improvement from what we've been doing for the last period
[2:13:14] of time.
[2:13:16] And then we can say, Steve and Steve and everybody else, what can we do to improve?
[2:13:23] Because we would like to find a better way of doing it than what we just passed.
[2:13:27] And would you help us?
[2:13:28] And I have a feeling that they probably would, because I respect these guys and I know
[2:13:34] that they have their best interest to the community of mine.
[2:13:38] So I say, please, let's pass this and move on.
[2:13:50] Carlson.
[2:13:53] Thank you much.
[2:13:55] I heard you say a couple of times that you wanted to snap
[2:13:57] to plus data.
[2:13:59] Then you said you can help or teach the farmers
[2:14:05] and help them in the future with it.
[2:14:08] Are they asking for that help?
[2:14:11] can they get it otherwise? Also, in a letter that they sent to all of us, they say requiring
[2:14:19] submission of this data not only mandates the use of specific software but transforms
[2:14:24] otherwise confidential information in the public records, this would inadvertently expose
[2:14:29] sensitive information to reputational consequences, competition for resources, and misinterpretation
[2:14:36] by third parties.
[2:14:37] So in other words, they're worried about their business plans and their profits because people
[2:14:43] might be able to compete against them better if they knew what their business plans.
[2:14:48] So is that, do you consider that a valid worry for them or can you guarantee that it doesn't
[2:14:54] become, because it seems to me they should be able to protect that kind of information.
[2:14:58] All there are
[2:15:00] Actually doing the nutrient management plan, the SNAP was done by University of Wisconsin,
[2:15:07] and even they in the confidentiality agreement that they have online express that this is confidential
[2:15:14] information. But it sounds like we're not keeping it confidential. So I would, you can answer
[2:15:20] those questions or rhetorical, but I also suggest that we pass the amendment.
[2:15:24] Okay.
[2:15:31] Supervisor Shirley.
[2:15:34] I forget sometimes that, you know, not everybody, we've gone through this so many times that
[2:15:40] not everybody was there to see it, but, you know, our largest producers, our CAFOs in the county
[2:15:50] have this requirement for the database, and all of this is more rigorous than what they need to go through.
[2:16:00] the best thing that our county could do would be to put more farmers, more farmers would
[2:16:06] choose to turn in nutrient management plans. And by doing this we're making it more expensive
[2:16:14] for them to do it and we're making them making it harder for them to do it. So it's counterproductive
[2:16:20] for us to do this without these amendments in there because our goal is to have more farmers
[2:16:28] or is that want to give us the data that we really need?
[2:16:34] Supervisor Adams.
[2:16:35] Thank you, Chair.
[2:16:36] I'm looking on page 157 of the packet,
[2:16:39] and there's a letter in here from the Dairy Bureau,
[2:16:44] and they talk about section 11.2, point alpha, two delta.
[2:16:50] The owner operator shall maintain daily records
[2:16:53] of manure and non-manure components added
[2:16:57] to the manure storage and processing system.
[2:16:59] Is that still in the program?
[2:17:01] No, it took and was changed in that throughout the meetings that we've had and that to take
[2:17:07] and be an annual maintenance walk, basically a starting point and an ending point for the year
[2:17:12] because if we got bad weather for fall spreading and that we might be going into the winter
[2:17:16] months with much more mineral on hand and that than what we did and so that would just
[2:17:21] impact how many acres we need for nutrient management planning purposes.
[2:17:26] Any other comments or discussion regarding the two amendments to the ordinance?
[2:17:33] Okay, seeing none, I think we're ready to vote on amending the ordinance as proposed with the two changes.
[2:17:42] Yeah, why don't you real quickly?
[2:17:44] Yes, so the motions will be to strike language in section 11.2.A3A to remove the language that says
[2:17:52] as fields in the NMP shall be unique to owner-operator plan
[2:17:55] and not be part of any other NMP
[2:17:57] unless the property owner is applying
[2:17:58] for the Farmland Preservation Tax Credit,
[2:18:00] what Mr. Witt has on the screen.
[2:18:03] Also, in this case,
[2:18:03] the operator and property owner
[2:18:05] shall submit matching plans to avoid confusion.
[2:18:07] And also strike language in section 11.3.D2A3
[2:18:12] to remove and include the SNAP plus database.
[2:18:18] Does anybody have any questions on the amendment?
[2:18:22] Okay we're ready to vote and
[2:18:52] the amendment passes 16 to 2. Okay now we're
[2:18:57] back to the original ordinance as amended.
[2:19:05] Yes sir.
[2:19:19] Okay so now we're back to
[2:19:21] the original resolution for the ordinance to repeal and recreate chapter 11
[2:19:28] as amended.
[2:19:31] Sure.
[2:19:31] Discussion?
[2:19:32] Questions?
[2:19:33] Surprise or Rice?
[2:19:34] I'd like to submit an amendment.
[2:19:38] If we can go to section 11.3, D2A6.
[2:19:45] So, yes, there's a lot of text in this.
[2:19:50] There is.
[2:19:51] Let's see.
[2:19:51] Do we have it here?
[2:19:54] It's the phrase, if possible.
[2:19:58] One of the things we were striving to do is to use consistent clear language that could
[2:20:03] be understood by everyone and not misinterpreted.
[2:20:07] And I see that if possible is subjective.
[2:20:13] So this has to do with an initial permit application.
[2:20:16] And the circumstance that came up was somebody trying to, they bought some land and maybe
[2:20:23] didn't have the past history.
[2:20:24] So I'd like to see it strike the word if possible, and instead, I have to pull it up here.
[2:20:35] Instead, say something along the lines of to be calculated in partnership with county
[2:20:43] staff or other reliable expert.
[2:20:49] It's always possible to come up with a calculation for what the soil quality is.
[2:20:53] So the idea of it being not possible
[2:20:57] doesn't strike me as prudent.
[2:21:01] We're looking for a second on that amendment.
[2:21:05] Second.
[2:21:06] Second by Supervisor Leith.
[2:21:11] Jason, would you like to comment on that?
[2:21:13] Yeah, so if possible,
[2:21:15] that was something that came out of the stakeholder meeting
[2:21:17] that we had with the ag producers, basically,
[2:21:21] in that this would be a new field
[2:21:22] that was in the nutrient management plan
[2:21:24] that we didn't know you know we maybe knew that it was corn last year because
[2:21:29] there's still corn stocks there but what it was two years ago or three years ago
[2:21:33] maybe up in the air we can probably get that information know from the USDA
[2:21:37] however any fertilization practices that would go into this snap plus software
[2:21:43] we would be guessing at and any tillage practices that were used for the past three years
[2:21:49] and that would also be a guess and with, you know, over 100,000 acres in the county our
[2:21:54] staff and that don't know what that is exactly.
[2:21:58] And so that's the reason for the vagueness and that that it was in there, but, you know,
[2:22:04] and that we can try to help and assist in that we're just not going to be able to
[2:22:08] fill it in accurately and that you're probably going to have to go back to an
[2:22:11] old producer.
[2:22:12] Now, if that acreage was in a previous nutrient management plan, it's easy because
[2:22:17] that acreage can just roll over into the new plan it's for the acreage and that
[2:22:20] for the smaller producers and that that may not have been included or maybe came
[2:22:25] out of a soil bank or CRP so and then one is in production so questions
[2:22:34] discussion I'd like to submit additional amendment to no we're gonna just one
[2:22:40] at a time one one at a time one well
[2:22:46] we did two last time okay see no
[2:22:49] No additional discussion will vote on this amendment to the ordinance to strike if possible
[2:22:58] and it went away.
[2:22:59] Oh, there it is.
[2:23:01] Go ahead.
[2:23:03] I'm sorry.
[2:23:04] Okay.
[2:23:04] Supervisor Anderson?
[2:23:05] I think what would be, I understand not wanting the vagueness, but I think, and I
[2:23:12] know this original one would have to get stricken and then we'd have to take it
[2:23:15] up again.
[2:23:15] but something that reads data to represent baseline conditions unless no
[2:23:22] data is available would be more appropriate here.
[2:23:30] First the county board
[2:23:32] should vote on. Yeah I'm just that's just a polite suggestion so. Okay let's let's
[2:23:39] vote on the amendment to strike if possible first and understand what we're
[2:23:48] on. The amendment to strike that phrase.
[2:23:54] Can I just ask for clarification for Supervisor Rice? I think she said to remove the words
[2:23:59] if possible and add the language instead to be calculated in coordination with county
[2:24:04] staff and or necessary professionals.
[2:24:07] Okay, thank you for that clarification.
[2:24:08] Yes, that's correct and I'm endorsing the change here.
[2:24:11] Let's vote on this amendment first.
[2:24:13] I'm going to vote no.
[2:24:30] Okay, that motion fails 2 to 16.
[2:24:37] Supervisor Anderson, would you?
[2:24:39] Yeah.
[2:24:40] I'll make the amendment.
[2:24:41] Can we pull up the text again?
[2:24:42] So we'll read, we'll change 0.6.
[2:24:44] That's highlighted there.
[2:24:46] App to read application data to represent baseline conditions unless no data is available
[2:24:56] period instead of if possible.
[2:24:59] I need a second.
[2:25:02] All second.
[2:25:02] Supervisor Rice.
[2:25:05] Any discussion?
[2:25:08] It's getting easier as we get tired, isn't it?
[2:25:11] Okay.
[2:25:12] We're ready to vote on the amendment.
[2:25:50] All right.
[2:25:51] That amendment passes unanimously.
[2:25:54] Thank you.
[2:25:55] So now we're back to the original resolution to improve the ordinance replacement as amended.
[2:26:04] Supervisor Rice.
[2:26:05] have another amendment. And for those of you who don't know, we rely on some of the county
[2:26:09] staff that were unable to be at our last committee meeting. We were able to ask some of these technical
[2:26:14] questions. This one has to do with 11.3 D2A5. It starts out the owner operator. And what
[2:26:25] I'd like to do at the very end is add the sentence, all land application agreements
[2:26:30] shall be made with the land owner.
[2:26:33] And while this is very much in the weeds, what we were hearing was that producers didn't
[2:26:40] want to have to share those contracts.
[2:26:41] We're not asking for contracts for a manure application on land.
[2:26:46] We want them to just have them because there's often confusion between who owns land, who's
[2:26:51] applying the manure.
[2:26:53] So that's the proposal.
[2:27:00] Okay. We'll need a second on that for discussion. Supervisor Leaf,
[2:27:07] I think we could use a little
[2:27:09] more explanation on this change, please. Jason, would you like to enlighten us?
[2:27:15] I can kind of try to get at what Supervisor Rice is looking for. So the idea behind this
[2:27:22] change or this whole provision is that the manure facility, manure processing
[2:27:29] facility and that a farm if it is and that they would actually have an
[2:27:35] agreement in writing certifying the amount of acres in their nutrient
[2:27:39] management plan and so she is changing it from the owner-operator I believe
[2:27:44] and that the property owner would have that agreement. As these dairies get
[2:27:49] bigger there are some new business models out there and that for how to
[2:27:54] handle their farming operation and so sometimes they don't even crop
[2:27:59] the acreage themselves. They just contract with a grower or another farmer to produce their crops
[2:28:05] and then they use that same acreage base in that to spread the manure on. And so with doing that
[2:28:13] type of business plan, they can get big quick in that. They can have a lot of acres in their
[2:28:18] nutrient management plan. However, is it actually accurate that they've got that acreage approved
[2:28:24] for spreading by the property owner and even by that grower that's farming that particular field.
[2:28:31] And so that was the reason in that for considering having some agreements and of course if it's
[2:28:36] you know not something that our staff is questioning they're probably not going to
[2:28:41] run known every single nutrient management plan field and make sure that we've got that agreement
[2:28:46] but if things just aren't adding up and all of a sudden we're seeing other fields in their
[2:28:50] plan starting to increase in phosphorus and then we'd be asking
[2:28:56] questions why is that phosphorus increasing is it because those fields are
[2:29:00] the closest to the farm will cost areas to spread or is it because we really
[2:29:05] don't have as much acreage as what we think in the plan or as what is being
[2:29:09] claimed in the plan.
[2:29:13] Supervisor Shirley.
[2:29:16] I know that we've talked about this a
[2:29:19] few times in committee my issue is is that as a governmental body we are
[2:29:26] telling a business owner what best practice is and that's not really our
[2:29:33] purview you know it should they have the agreement with the landowner yeah but I
[2:29:42] don't think that we're in a situation that that we need to tell them that what
[2:29:48] about how to do the business that they're doing.
[2:29:51] In number five, it says that we're going to have a table of all the landowners
[2:29:54] and their contact information already.
[2:29:56] So we know who they are and we know what their contact is.
[2:30:00] Public information is, if Jason's staff has an issue, we could always call one of them too.
[2:30:06] So I just have a problem with government dictating something that isn't really in our place to
[2:30:15] do.
[2:30:21] Supervisor Mansome.
[2:30:22] Thank you, Chair. I guess I don't see that as dictating that, you know, if we're interested
[2:30:31] is in clean water, which we are.
[2:30:34] And I think the producers are interested in that too.
[2:30:38] I think we have to, there has to be some accountability.
[2:30:41] The accountability would be that indeed there
[2:30:44] is enough land to spread on, there's enough land
[2:30:47] to put this amount of manure on that amount of manure.
[2:30:50] I think that's why there has to be some way of getting that.
[2:30:56] And maybe you're right.
[2:30:58] Maybe, you know, the supervisor's right when he talks about the government shouldn't tell
[2:31:03] people that except the government at the state level, the town level, municipal area, tells
[2:31:10] us the very same thing all the time.
[2:31:12] That is part of government because the government is concerned about the outcome.
[2:31:16] So I think we should leave that as it is.
[2:31:19] Thank you.
[2:31:21] Supervisor Hansen?
[2:31:24] Perhaps it's important to see these agreements to know not only that the grower has the agreements,
[2:31:33] but that the other landowner has acknowledged them and has agreed to them.
[2:31:42] because you want to see two parties, that somebody isn't just saying, I would like to spread over there,
[2:31:58] but that they've gone out and said, hi, neighbor, do you need nutrients and made an agreement?
[2:32:05] agreement, not what the agreement is, don't need to know what their private business is
[2:32:11] just that there is an agreement.
[2:32:18] Those things are dynamic, but that they have permission
[2:32:22] to spread,
[2:32:26] that there's not going to be a backlog of manure,
[2:32:31] that there's three different
[2:32:33] operators planning on spreading on one small area.
[2:32:39] That's something that when I'm putting
[2:32:42] together the puzzle in my head of how you prevent from having an area of being overspread,
[2:32:51] again, I don't want to be telling people how to do their business. But I want to understand
[2:32:58] on how you keep from overspreading.
[2:33:02] I don't want to know who's, you know, go ahead.
[2:33:05] I don't know.
[2:33:09] Supervisor Carlson.
[2:33:10] Thank you, Chair.
[2:33:12] It occurs to me that you would have to tell them
[2:33:16] how to do it too.
[2:33:17] Do they have to prove it?
[2:33:18] Does it have to be written?
[2:33:20] Or do they just say, yeah, we have a verbal agreement?
[2:33:26] I guess that's my only question about it.
[2:33:33] I think all of that we're looking for,
[2:33:35] and that is to make sure that X number of acres are allowed to be spread on.
[2:33:40] And then in the SNAP program, as part of the nutrient management planning, that would tell
[2:33:45] you you're putting on X number of gallons of manure or X number of pounds of phosphorus
[2:33:50] and that through chemical fertilizer, and then the application type for that.
[2:33:55] So that's all done through the nutrient management planning side of it, and that all this
[2:33:59] would be is just saying yes, and that you've got 20 acres of mine that you can
[2:34:02] spread manure on.
[2:34:04] But how would the county know that actually happened?
[2:34:07] Are they going to have to have a written agreement or?
[2:34:12] Well, I mean, there's a lot of partnerships in that with the producer and that actually know that that is being spread on that field.
[2:34:20] And over time, the soil tests, so that the soil tests are required for the nutrient management plan.
[2:34:26] If it's not happening, we should be seeing change.
[2:34:33] Other discussion on Supervisor Sherup?
[2:34:37] The reality of all of this is that the only time that staff is going to look at this is if it's red flagged.
[2:34:46] We don't have the staff to go out and look at every nutrient management plan and track down every field and look at every single one of these.
[2:34:53] It's only going to come through with a flag from either the nutrient management plan or the soil test.
[2:35:00] If the soil test is failing, then we're going to go back to these things, or staff is going
[2:35:05] to go back to these things and say, hey, we need to look at this more, and then they could
[2:35:10] go with this table of landowners, and they could follow that right now, the way that
[2:35:15] it's written.
[2:35:16] I don't see the need to tell them to have an agreement that, yes, they should have,
[2:35:24] but it's only going to come into contact when there's already a red flag there saying
[2:35:30] that something is not meeting optimal levels.
[2:35:35] Other discussion comments?
[2:35:38] I think we can move ahead and vote on the amendment.
[2:35:42] Suggested amendment.
[2:35:43] Could you read that back, please, Heather?
[2:35:47] Yes.
[2:35:49] I can't forget what section it is.
[2:35:52] But to add the language to, I believe it's 11.3D2A5, that all land application
[2:36:01] agreement shall be made with the landowner.
[2:36:06] Okay, so we're voting on the amendment to that section.
[2:36:57] And that motion fails 15 to 13. All right, we're back to the original resolution to approve the
[2:37:05] ordinance replacement as amended, as we've already agreed on. Is there any other discussion
[2:37:12] of the year of the comments.
[2:37:16] Good. Seeing none, we're ready to vote on the ordinance to repeal
[2:37:21] and recreate Chapter 11 as amended.
[2:37:35] Okay. Thank you.
[2:37:37] That passes unanimously.
[2:37:39] Thank you very much.
[2:37:43] Yes, I will also commend the community development,
[2:37:48] committee and the department and staff.
[2:37:52] They spent a lot of time on this.
[2:37:53] There's been a lot of work, a lot of discussions, and they've done a fabulous job.
[2:37:59] So congratulations, I think you guys did a great job.
[2:38:04] Okay, we're moving on.
[2:38:07] Number two, business item ordinance to repeal and recreate Chapter 30, Parks and St. Croix
[2:38:12] County Code of Ordinances.
[2:38:14] We have a motion.
[2:38:17] We have a motion, Supervisor Counter.
[2:38:20] And second by Supervisor Shirley, I'm assuming that's a motion to approve this ordinance to repeal and replace.
[2:38:29] Okay, that's okay. Who would like to discuss and explain? Supervisor Anderson.
[2:38:37] This is an update to the park's ordinance.
[2:38:40] It allows some seasonal long-term camping, both restrictions for like the quality of
[2:38:48] the campers in there, you know, no one's camping in their van there.
[2:38:53] But just to allow some of our, I guess, emptier areas of camping to be used, it also,
[2:39:02] am I missing something significant here, Jason?
[2:39:04] and please remind that, huh?
[2:39:14] Yeah, Mr. Chair, I can just add,
[2:39:16] there was also some text added in here for e-bikes
[2:39:19] in that because that's kind of a new emerging trend
[2:39:22] on county properties and the county trails.
[2:39:25] And then also there was a lot of just duplicated text
[2:39:28] in that throughout the ordinance.
[2:39:30] And so that was kind of cleaned up and streamlined
[2:39:33] and that into the staff's current practices.
[2:39:35] And that's really the summary of the amendments.
[2:39:39] So, there was some commercial event permits and that that we just standardized and created
[2:39:46] a process for and more of an application like a normal permit would be, whereas it wasn't
[2:39:51] really detailed to that level in the past.
[2:39:56] Any questions?
[2:39:57] Comments?
[2:40:00] Okay.
[2:40:01] Seeing none, we're ready to vote on, I'm sorry, oh, I'm sorry, Supervisor Conner.
[2:40:08] My apologies.
[2:40:09] One of the future things that we're still working on then is the event camping.
[2:40:17] Yeah.
[2:40:18] So that being Chapter 15 would be the special event camping.
[2:40:21] Yep.
[2:40:22] Thank you.
[2:40:25] Okay.
[2:40:26] Any other comments?
[2:40:28] All right.
[2:40:29] Seeing none, we're ready to vote on the resolution to repeal and recreate Chapter 30 of the
[2:40:37] St. Croix County Code of Ordinances.
[2:40:48] Thank you.
[2:40:49] That passes 18 or unanimously. Thank you. All right move on to our third business
[2:40:55] item establishing St. Croix County legislative priorities. Do we have a
[2:41:00] motion?
[2:41:04] Motion to approve. Do we have a second by Supervisor Fiedler? Who would
[2:41:10] like to describe this? Supervisor Burding? Yeah, thank you Mr. Chair. So this is an
[2:41:15] exercise that we did last last meeting to establish the priorities and
[2:41:21] and then we just took them at the admin committee
[2:41:23] and rallied around them and here they are today.
[2:41:28] So we're taking the, was it about an hour above work
[2:41:32] that we did taking the WCA priorities
[2:41:34] and establishing those that we're making a priority
[2:41:36] as a board here at St. Croix County.
[2:41:42] Subraza counter.
[2:41:45] One of the things too, during the admin meeting
[2:41:47] that we also discussed some of the things
[2:41:50] that were pertinent also directly more
[2:41:53] towards St. Croix County versus the state program and Supervisor Bernanke, you may remember
[2:42:02] what the things that we discussed on that, too.
[2:42:09] I mean, I don't.
[2:42:10] So there's that.
[2:42:12] But I don't know if we're just, that's not, yeah, why don't you, if you can fill that
[2:42:16] in because I don't remember what we talked about because I don't think that's on this.
[2:42:20] It is.
[2:42:21] So number six on there.
[2:42:22] So, number six is not one of the WCA legislative items.
[2:42:27] That's how come it's labeled a little bit differently.
[2:42:29] SCC is for St. Croix County.
[2:42:31] Resolution 44 that we passed last year.
[2:42:34] This one was more particular to St. Croix County,
[2:42:37] an issue that we have without a home child placement cost
[2:42:40] that WCA really hasn't picked up on yet.
[2:42:43] So, yeah, so admin had made, yeah, so admin had made the,
[2:42:50] to add this one on. And they had pulled one off, and that was related to circuit courts being able to have certain types of cases via video conference.
[2:43:03] When we talk to the judges, it might be an issue more in other counties. It really probably is not in our county.
[2:43:09] So the judges didn't see it as a priority for us.
[2:43:13] So admin based upon additional information that after the last meeting made those two changes.
[2:43:23] Okay, and just a reminder, these are going to be discussed with some of our legislators at a breakfast meeting next Monday
[2:43:31] and also at the WCA legislative conference at the end of February.
[2:43:38] Any other comments, questions?
[2:43:45] Okay, we're ready to vote on the resolution establishing the legislative
[2:43:53] priorities.
[2:44:01] Thank you.
[2:44:02] That passes unanimously.
[2:44:04] All right.
[2:44:05] We'll get our last and fourth business item, resolution amending personnel policies.
[2:44:11] Surprised or burning?
[2:44:13] Make a motion to approve the resolution amending personnel policies.
[2:44:17] And the second, Surveyser counter.
[2:44:21] Surveyser burning?
[2:44:23] Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair.
[2:44:24] So this is just part of the standard operating procedure that Audrey's been working on cleaning up our policy handbook and some of the other items inside of HR.
[2:44:36] So it includes IT's acceptable use policy, some proposed changes there, jury and witness leave, and then the benefits policy.
[2:44:44] And if anyone has any questions, I hope Audrey's still here after a long meeting.
[2:44:50] She hasn't gotten Chipotle yet.
[2:44:52] So yeah, if there's any questions, we can address them to her.
[2:44:56] But otherwise, this is just standard cleanup that we've been doing throughout the last
[2:44:59] couple of years.
[2:45:00] Any questions, comments? Alright, we'll vote on the resolution to accept the resolution of
[2:45:12] Mending Personnel Policies.
[2:45:20] Thank you, that passes unanimously. We're getting good at this now.
[2:45:25] Alright, that takes care of our business items. We're going to back up now. We kind of delayed
[2:45:32] the report of CASA and Saycroy County Annual Report. Thank you, Sean, for waiting
[2:45:41] until we were needed to get a few of a couple items. So thank you very much.
[2:45:47] Good evening and happy New Year. If you haven't heard it before, you guys are
[2:45:51] all angels for what you do. So I'm the Executive Director for the
[2:45:57] the Quarter Pointed Special Advocate Program, and I'm just here to give you our annual report.
[2:46:04] I also sent out our published one, which is a little bit different.
[2:46:08] So I did a deeper dive, but I also pulled out various items that I thought would give
[2:46:15] a greater insight.
[2:46:16] So if we can go to the next slide.
[2:46:19] So every year, of course, we have strategic plan, and we look at key performance indicators.
[2:46:24] and one of ours is about advocate retention. How long are we able to retain
[2:46:31] our advocates? We asked the advocates to commit to about two hours a week for an
[2:46:35] entire year working with children and we have about an 80% retention rate.
[2:46:42] Really what we're finding is the biggest cause are family issues with
[2:46:46] the advocates. A lot of our advocates are retirees and they're struggling
[2:46:53] with parents who have cognitive issues and that's really pulling them out. So that's quite
[2:46:58] honestly or we have a lot of knee replacements as well. So those are really the issues that
[2:47:05] where we lose people on, they are staying on past their year and they're often taking
[2:47:12] on multiple cases too. So we're just doing a great job with that recruitment and retention.
[2:47:20] Our total special advocates were 31, and we served 50 children last year.
[2:47:26] And out of that, 10 children were also placed in what we'd call a safe, stable home.
[2:47:31] That could be with a family member, it could be returning to the parents.
[2:47:36] And then our board had a goal to recruit two new board members, and they accomplished
[2:47:41] that as well.
[2:47:43] Next slide.
[2:47:45] So, if you haven't heard, we did get approved for the Victims of Crime Act funding, and
[2:47:54] we have already started that.
[2:47:56] We have about 10 individuals right now that are identified, and our data is actually due
[2:48:01] to the state next week.
[2:48:04] We will be providing those services that are outlined there, and we're really targeting
[2:48:11] the families and the children that are within juvenile court, we're not trying to duplicate
[2:48:17] what exists with the county. So if there's any question that I'm just going to keep going
[2:48:22] because I know it's been a long day for you. So I do want to show you what our budget
[2:48:28] look like for actual and performance. I'm going to just draw your attention right
[2:48:32] down to that bottom line. Our goal this year was $236,000 and we came in at $266,000. Our
[2:48:43] revenue is pretty solid. I don't think there was anything in there that hasn't been accounted
[2:48:49] for yet. It is our expenses that are really more fluid yet. We have not closed the
[2:48:53] year out. So if we can move forward, then I wanted to, we'll go one more slide. Thank
[2:49:00] Thank you.
[2:49:00] I want to draw your attention down to total expenditures.
[2:49:04] So our targeted total expenditures were $222, and we actually came in at $169.
[2:49:10] Part of that was some staffing changes, and then part of that is I'm just really frugal.
[2:49:15] So I don't like to give up money very easily.
[2:49:19] I had a joke about it, but I'm going to keep going.
[2:49:24] These are bullet points.
[2:49:25] This is not an actual tabulation here.
[2:49:28] So, when I presented it earlier, they called me out on that.
[2:49:31] So, what I wanted to really direct you to are the first two.
[2:49:35] Direct contributions and then organ is organizational contributions.
[2:49:40] What we saw was this year we were budgeted for more direct contributions.
[2:49:46] We actually received less direct contributions, but we received more organizational contributions.
[2:49:52] So, at our gala, stand up for kids, which is scheduled for May, it happens in May.
[2:49:58] What we saw is more organizations came in and bought tables, but then there was less contributions
[2:50:03] individually.
[2:50:04] So, we ended kind of netting out where we thought we would be.
[2:50:09] Grants, this is probably one of our, what would you say, crystal ball things that's
[2:50:15] really hard to look into.
[2:50:16] to. One of the things that I would say, though, is we did get two grantors through the bit.
[2:50:23] There's about four big grantors that really serve St. Croix County area. So two of them
[2:50:28] have stepped forward and said that we're on their continuation list. So we'll just
[2:50:35] have to submit and we'll come up with a growth plan. They said, give us two years
[2:50:39] and we'll establish your growth plan. So that's exactly what we wanted to happen.
[2:50:43] And if you're not aware, the next, the other organization is Burma Bank is currently merging
[2:50:51] with Old National Bank.
[2:50:53] So what will happen with this is at the end, when it's all said and done, some of the money
[2:50:58] from that merger will go into the Otto Burma Trust.
[2:51:02] Otto Burma is really one of those great trusts that give money out to Wisconsin,
[2:51:08] Wisconsin, Minnesota, North South Dakota. And we're all extremely nervous about what that
[2:51:14] will mean. They're not taking grants right now. So we would have applied in October. We're
[2:51:19] still in a holding pattern waiting to hear what those trustees decide to do with that.
[2:51:26] And we just don't know. We know at this point that one of the big issues will be,
[2:51:32] and they've stated that on the web page, is that they're not going to fund young
[2:51:35] organizations moving forward. So we are moving into our fourth year here, but they're going
[2:51:42] to start with year five. However, we've been funded, so maybe we'll be grandfathered in,
[2:51:47] but that's the big thing that I don't know yet. And so that's also partly why our grants
[2:51:53] are lower, is that we were not able to apply and we're still waiting to see what will
[2:51:59] of that. So as you can see, we came in 30,000 above target and my margin was around 97,000.
[2:52:10] And again, that was some staffing. We were going to hire full-time staff at the beginning
[2:52:13] of the year and we didn't do that until October. So we keep things fluid and we watch
[2:52:20] what's happening and we make sure that we're responsible. So that's that big margin.
[2:52:24] As I said, the two foundations have accepted us. We are going to continue to focus on the
[2:52:30] victim compensation. This will be a big program for us, and that will create stability. So
[2:52:36] this grant that we got from Wisconsin is a three-year grant. So every year we have
[2:52:42] to reapply, but in that sense, once you get it, the next three years are funded at that
[2:52:47] first grant amount. So we receive 38,541, I believe. So that will carry us forward for
[2:52:56] the next three years. We're going to continue to work on serving children. A lot is changing
[2:53:01] in child protection. So we didn't want to put a growth factor on at this point. Also, as
[2:53:08] we are aging and we've been around now going into our fourth year. So I assume we're
[2:53:14] start losing some of our advocates. We lost a very good one with Carrie, but she's also
[2:53:20] doing a great job here. So, and then our volunteer recruitment to continue to target the CHIPS
[2:53:29] program. We did have a change there in that we're getting involved a little bit earlier
[2:53:35] and it's giving me more control over those numbers so that I'm able to flex. Before
[2:53:40] I didn't really know who was coming in and I just was very kind of nebulous how that
[2:53:45] came through. So that is the change that occurred. That's it in a nutshell. I went through that
[2:53:52] super-flat-fast because I'm sure everyone's hungry and ready to go. But I will field
[2:53:58] questions if you have any.
[2:54:00] Any questions for Sean?
[2:54:04] Yes. Supervisor Feudler.
[2:54:06] Just a 20-second observation. We hear from Sean quarterly at the Public Protection
[2:54:10] Judiciary Committee meeting, and he gives us updates very, say, quarterly, and they're
[2:54:14] always very helpful.
[2:54:16] In our last meeting, since it was the end of year, meeting of the year, Judge Waterman
[2:54:21] came down from the circuit court, and I think the members of the committee all agreed he
[2:54:25] gave Sean an A-plus for what he and his volunteers have done with COSIS.
[2:54:30] It's invaluable to the judges in understanding what's happening to these young people
[2:54:33] in very trouble situations.
[2:54:35] So you get an A-plus from the judges.
[2:54:37] Thanks, Sean.
[2:54:38] Thank you.
[2:54:38] So everyone have a great night.
[2:54:40] Thank you, Sean.
[2:54:44] Yes, I want to say thank you for the update on that.
[2:54:48] And I would appreciate it if the committee, when
[2:54:51] they get that presentation, would do a quick synopsis
[2:54:54] to the board members, because that was another one
[2:54:57] that we hadn't heard about in quite some time.
[2:55:00] Thank you.
[2:55:04] All right, we're going to move on to annual reports.
[2:55:08] Justice Support Services.
[2:55:11] Dr. Galli, you're on.
[2:55:15] Thank you.
[2:55:16] Good evening.
[2:55:16] I'll keep my remarks fairly brief here.
[2:55:20] Just quick overview of justice support.
[2:55:22] So again, justice support services oversees the pre-trial division in the county, the
[2:55:26] Adult Treatment Court, and then the CJCC, which is the Community Justice Collaborating
[2:55:31] Council.
[2:55:32] Another really successful year.
[2:55:34] I want to start by talking about the Adult Treatment Court.
[2:55:37] report. You all get emails from me probably every couple of months about a graduation.
[2:55:42] We had seven of those in 2024. You'll continue to receive those emails from me. Please make
[2:55:49] your way up, not necessarily just for a graduation, but a Wednesday morning at 8.30 in Judge
[2:55:55] Nordstrom's Court in Branch 1. We would love to have you.
[2:55:59] I would point your attention to the end of the report.
[2:56:05] There are four different sets of pie charts.
[2:56:09] And I just want to outline these.
[2:56:11] These are all specific to our pre-trial program.
[2:56:14] Again, just a little bit of brief history.
[2:56:16] Pre-trial in St. Croix County, as it's currently run
[2:56:19] in what we call a civilian model by case managers,
[2:56:22] is fairly new.
[2:56:24] We're not quite three years into it,
[2:56:26] about two and a half years.
[2:56:27] years. Before that, it was run by our Sheriff's Department for about four years. It was more
[2:56:32] of a law enforcement model. But what I would like to, again, kind of just make a comment
[2:56:37] about each of these and then take maybe some general questions. But the first pie chart
[2:56:41] there is broken down into branches. So, again, we have four branches, four judges
[2:56:45] here in St. Croix County. What that first kind of pie chart looks at is what I would
[2:56:52] say it's a pretty even split for the most part.
[2:56:55] Our judges are all using pretrial services.
[2:56:59] There's some variation there, certainly Branch 3,
[2:57:01] which is Judge Needham, has more cases with us
[2:57:04] than maybe the other three, but for the most part,
[2:57:06] all judges are assigning cases to us.
[2:57:10] If we go to that next one there,
[2:57:12] what we're looking at there are levels of monitoring.
[2:57:16] So we have levels one, two, three, and four
[2:57:19] as far as when people are assigned to us pre-trial,
[2:57:22] how we monitor them, how closely
[2:57:24] and how actively we monitor them.
[2:57:26] Level one really isn't a level at snow monitoring
[2:57:29] so we can kind of just remove that.
[2:57:31] Level four is gonna then be individuals
[2:57:33] who are at the highest risk to public safety
[2:57:35] as well as to not return to court.
[2:57:38] So 40% of the individuals that we monitor on pre-trial
[2:57:42] fall into that higher risk category,
[2:57:44] which is again determined by our public safety
[2:57:47] assessment, it's a risk assessment tool
[2:57:48] validated nationally that we use. That's really good. That means we're monitoring
[2:57:54] the correct people per the tool and then the judges then take that into
[2:57:59] consideration. Ultimately the discretion is left up to each judge to make that
[2:58:03] decision. Stop me if you do have questions. That next group of pie chart
[2:58:09] pie charts there is broken up into those four different branches again. This
[2:58:13] This looks at the individuals that are assigned to each branch.
[2:58:18] Are they active?
[2:58:19] Are we monitoring them?
[2:58:20] Do they have an active warrant, meaning they're not in compliance?
[2:58:23] Or are they incarcerated oftentimes in the jail?
[2:58:27] The majority of clients, we call them clients defendants in each branch assigned to us
[2:58:33] are actively being monitored by our staff, which is a really good thing.
[2:58:37] That means they are presumably returning to court, presumably being compliant
[2:58:41] in the community.
[2:58:42] And so we're meeting those two standards of public safety and return to court, which are
[2:58:46] again kind of the gold standards in pretrial.
[2:58:50] And then the last group of pie charts there, there's actually four of them, those are broken
[2:58:56] down into those three different levels of monitoring, two, three, and four.
[2:58:59] If you look at level four,
[2:59:04] again, those are a higher risk individuals.
[2:59:06] we see that 65% again so a majority of those individuals at that level are
[2:59:13] actually out of custody meaning even at a higher assessed risk level to public
[2:59:17] safety there's still maintaining compliance in the community coming back
[2:59:22] to court which is really important I mean that really is the biggest part of
[2:59:26] pre-trial is maintaining that return to court and they don't have active
[2:59:31] warrants and that's really important too because that creates obviously other
[2:59:35] issues. So I'm happy to answer any questions on those charts or other questions in the
[2:59:41] reports.
[2:59:42] Supervisor Berninger.
[2:59:45] Yeah, thanks, Phil. So we made that switch from the Sheriff's Department to private,
[2:59:52] you know, more of a private approach and not so law enforcement-y, I think. How's
[2:59:57] that, how's that impact?
[3:00:00] I did the people that were helping, I guess, in their compliance. Like, have you seen a drastic
[3:00:06] shift from them feeling like there's no more room? Like, it's not a pressure thing, so there's
[3:00:10] less stress, so there's less. I don't know. Tell me how that transition has gone, because
[3:00:15] that was a while ago that we did that. Sure. Yeah, it's a really, really great question.
[3:00:19] I would say, and again, I can't speak to prior to my time here in the last couple
[3:00:24] years. However, I would say case management, what we do now really helps to build some
[3:00:28] rapport with clients and help them return to court, you know, our staff do a great job
[3:00:34] of reaching out, asking them if they want services, if they're struggling with anything.
[3:00:39] So I think that rapport building is something we can spend a lot of time on now, that maybe
[3:00:44] the prior model, they just didn't have time to, it wasn't set up for that.
[3:00:47] That was no offense to the Sheriff's Department whatsoever, it was just how the model
[3:00:51] was set up.
[3:00:52] So I think rapport building has been huge.
[3:00:58] Any other questions?
[3:01:01] I'll just make a quick comment.
[3:01:02] You didn't mention the CJCC, and I've been lucky enough to participate in that group
[3:01:09] for the last couple of years, and I just have to say I'm amazed at the amount of programs
[3:01:15] that we have that are helping people in this county.
[3:01:20] I was also shocked to find out the number of people that need help.
[3:01:25] So, I think there are so many programs that are going on that I think we should be very
[3:01:32] proud of because there's a lot of people that need help and we're doing the best we can.
[3:01:38] Thank you, Phil.
[3:01:39] Thank you.
[3:01:40] Thank you.
[3:01:41] And really, right along the same lines, we're going to hear from our district attorney
[3:01:48] regarding victim witness.
[3:01:51] Good evening.
[3:01:55] So, I'll be pretty brief. It's been a long meeting.
[3:02:01] One good thing that happened was
[3:02:02] TAD increased their funding. So we used to have a part-time data entry specialist split
[3:02:08] between our office and Justice Support Services. Now we each have a part-time position funded
[3:02:14] by TAD, which is great because there's a ton of reporting requirements for that grant.
[3:02:21] Nothing unexpected really in the budget.
[3:02:24] We did lose a federal crimes victim grant which allowed or it was a grant for our victim
[3:02:32] witness to assist non-victims like just met general members of the public get restraining
[3:02:38] orders.
[3:02:39] We lost that grant so we no longer do that for non-victims.
[3:02:41] We still help victims of crime get restraining orders.
[3:02:47] The last year, we had a little over 1,400 adult criminal cases about an even split between
[3:02:55] misdemeanors and felonies.
[3:02:59] For our diversion program, we had 72 people complete it successfully, which means they
[3:03:04] had either a felony or misdemeanor dismissed or reduced.
[3:03:10] We had 20 people revoked, meaning they went to sentencing because they violated the
[3:03:15] conditions.
[3:03:15] so about 7 out of 9 success rate. We had more people enter, but a lot of our
[3:03:20] agreements are over a year. So diversion, it's going to continue to be an ask our
[3:03:29] office for an additional diversion position. Like right now we have one of
[3:03:33] our two and a half people going on maternity leave, so then we have one
[3:03:38] and a half people in diversion to supervise a couple hundred defendants
[3:03:42] which is a huge task.
[3:03:49] The one thing that we're big, we're doing right now that I'm excited about for 2025
[3:03:57] is looking into digital evidence receipt as well as forwarding that to defense digitally.
[3:04:05] Right now we get body camera footage, reports in every way you can imagine.
[3:04:10] We get personal deliveries of flash drives, DVDs.
[3:04:13] we get them in the mail, we get things emailed to us.
[3:04:17] So we're kinda trying to come up with a third party provider
[3:04:20] for software essentially in cloud-based services
[3:04:23] that all the agencies in the county
[3:04:25] can send us everything in one mode
[3:04:27] and we can share that with defense in one mode digitally.
[3:04:32] That would be a huge time saving for us.
[3:04:34] We've had a couple presentations
[3:04:36] from the most promising is evidence.com
[3:04:38] which some of our neighboring counties use.
[3:04:41] They just have to figure out how to link it
[3:04:43] to the body cam system that everyone uses
[3:04:45] and all our agencies use, but that's extremely promising.
[3:04:53] I think that's about it as the big overall summary
[3:04:56] unless anyone has any questions.
[3:04:58] Yeah.
[3:04:59] Any questions?
[3:05:01] Supervisor Bernie.
[3:05:02] Yeah, thanks Carl.
[3:05:04] So since COVID we saw a big dip in people jailed,
[3:05:09] we saw a big dip in people actually committing crimes
[3:05:12] because people weren't wanting to go out.
[3:05:15] how is our like everything like what's what's happened with that is there an
[3:05:20] increase in crime are you seeing more I mean I know we have like the Apple
[3:05:24] River ordeal there was a bunch of other incidents like tell us what the state of
[3:05:30] the county is in that and what's your like outlook on the trend for like 25
[3:05:35] and 26 the the weird trend we had from during COVID was our overall numbers of
[3:05:41] crimes stayed the same, but we used to have a lot more misdemeanors than felonies and then we
[3:05:47] suddenly had more of an even split. So we're having more felonies. And that's pretty much
[3:05:54] stayed the same. We haven't seen like a drastic increase in crime. It's pretty much stayed consistent
[3:06:00] since COVID. Fortunately, we haven't had a homicide in a while. We currently have no
[3:06:09] pending intentional or, you know, gun knife homicides, all of them have either gone to trial or resulted in a plea.
[3:06:17] So that's good.
[3:06:19] Yeah, it's been pretty steady, the crime since that weird change we had during COVID, which I still have no idea what caused it.
[3:06:29] Yeah, nothing significant as far as fluctuation.
[3:06:36] Surveyor Hansen. Mr. District Attorney, you say there's an increase in felonies, but that's
[3:06:44] a pretty broad category. Are we seeing what we got, moonshineers, or is there people? What are we
[3:06:51] seeing? Violent crimes or are there white collar crimes? What kind of things are we seeing in the
[3:06:57] category? I think a lot of it was just a lot more felony level drug offenses. And honestly,
[3:07:03] my best theory at the time during COVID was a lot of people were out of work or you know giving
[3:07:10] getting the COVID relief money and suddenly had a bunch of cash to buy drugs but it's kind of stayed
[3:07:15] the same so I don't I don't really know what the yeah when people hear that though they
[3:07:21] truthfully and instead of trying to be funny people worry about violent crime and are we
[3:07:26] seeing an increase in violent crime or is it mostly static? No we haven't had a big increase
[3:07:31] in violent crime. We did have several homicides in a relatively short time frame.
[3:07:40] There's
[3:07:40] no real pattern to them. They're just random. They're all situational.
[3:07:47] I'm not seeing any
[3:07:49] sort of pattern on increase of violent crime. We're not seeing some of the things you
[3:07:55] in bigger cities suddenly start to happen here a lot. So, no, there hasn't been any sort
[3:08:01] of dramatic increase.
[3:08:04] And hard, and I hate to ask this, but with the drug problems, are we seeing more domestic?
[3:08:16] I haven't ran the numbers, but I can tell you anecdotally, domestic seems pretty, I
[3:08:22] I mean, kind of our bread and butter, the cases
[3:08:25] we see on an everyday basis are drunk driving,
[3:08:27] domestics, and meth.
[3:08:29] And that hasn't changed.
[3:08:31] That's probably 80% of our caseload
[3:08:33] or 90% of our caseload.
[3:08:37] And usually, domestics are alcohol related, actually,
[3:08:40] versus drugs.
[3:08:43] Probably, there might be a lot of reasons for that.
[3:08:46] One probably is meth users aren't probably
[3:08:48] going to call the cops if they have a bunch of meth
[3:08:50] there.
[3:08:51] You know, so they probably just don't report it, but yeah, thanks
[3:08:56] Any other questions?
[3:08:58] Any other questions?
[3:09:00] Thank you Carl, thanks for hanging in there.
[3:09:04] Any request for future agenda items?
[3:09:10] Supervisor Burning.
[3:09:11] I think we need to have a discussion on what the presentation that we just had today from Excel Energy.
[3:09:17] I think we should have a discussion item on the agenda.
[3:09:20] If not for this board, for the Committee of the Whole.
[3:09:28] I think we need a lot more information, quite frankly, too, on what we may or may not, what
[3:09:34] we can or can't do, what are our options.
[3:09:38] So I think that would be a good discussion item, even from an educational standpoint.
[3:09:45] Any other requests?
[3:09:49] County clerk correspondence announcements.
[3:09:57] I sent out an email earlier today reminding you about the St. Croix County Economic Development
[3:10:03] Corporation Banquet that's coming up September 27, or September, February 27.
[3:10:11] Just coordinate with me if you want one of the tickets, I'll make sure to register
[3:10:14] you then.
[3:10:15] So we have a certain number of tickets that are available to us for free.
[3:10:18] So please email me if that's something of interest for you.
[3:10:23] I also want to mention just to remind everybody that last month, we were very fortunate, our
[3:10:29] very own sheriff was the 2024 Wisconsin Badger State Sheriff of the Year.
[3:10:35] It was quite an accomplishment.
[3:10:39] And I'm sure he will attribute that to his staff, but we're very lucky to have him and
[3:10:47] all of the deputies and all the staff in that department.
[3:10:51] Okay.
[3:10:52] With that, thanks for hanging in there.
[3:10:54] everybody's still awake it's 8.33 we are adjourned