[0:02] We are recording.
[clears throat]
[0:05] » Terrific. Everybody ready to go?
>> Yes, sir.
[0:08] » All right, let's get this show
board meeting for Monday, August 3rd, 26
[0:15] time
[0:27] this evening. for a motion to approve
the evening's agenda. Is there anyone
[0:30] who wishes to offer a motion to approve
the evening's agenda?
[0:33] » Motion to approve the agenda.
>> Andrew has offered a motion to second.
[0:42] » Any other further discussion, questions?
Anything [snorts] else on this? We have
[0:46] a motion to approve that motion.
>> Hearing none, all those in favor, please
[0:51] signify by saying I
>> and those opposed. [clears throat] That
[0:55] motion carries. All
[1:01] right, let's stand al
[1:07] to the flag of the United States of
America and to the republic for it
[1:12] stands one nation under God indivisible
with liberty and justice for all.
[1:25] Item number
[clears throat] five service award for
[1:34] Mr. Kaker if you would.
>> Thank you. So Michelle actually started
[1:37] working for the village back in 2015 as
a pole worker before becoming the
[1:41] full-time village clerk in 2021. And
since then, she's not only been
[1:46] responsible for guiding us through
elections, liquor licensing, human
[1:50] resources functions, insurance coverages
and claims, open records requests, and
[1:55] much more. But she was instrumental in
the implementation of a muchneeded third
[2:00] polling location. She became a Wisconsin
certified municipal clerk in 2024 and
[2:06] has been one to take on the less
glamorous tasks like cleaning up our
[2:10] electronic filing system. She is someone
I know that I can trust to act
[2:15] professionally at all times and provides
A+ customer service. The village has
[2:20] been lucky to have you, Michelle, and uh
I thank you for your service to the
[2:23] village.
>> Thank you so much, Administrator Kaker.
[2:27] Appreciate that.
[applause]
[2:37] I also want to acknowledge the board for
their acknowledgement of our employees.
[2:42] Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[2:48] [laughter]
[2:54] » [laughter]
>> Never mind.
[2:57] » Maybe later.
>> We don't need to create [laughter]
[3:02] [clears throat] item wetland mitigation
update evergreens consult.
[3:07] » Thank you. So I'll invite up Chad Fet
from Evergreen Consultants to lead the
[3:12] discussion on our wetland mitigation
bank.
[3:19] » Hello everybody.
>> Hello.
[3:21] » Hi there.
>> Sh. It's been five years already been
[3:23] putting up with this. My
[cough]
[3:26] time [clears throat] is flying.
[3:38] We have a PowerPoint tonight to help
out. It's
[3:42] quite a lot to go through, but we'll get
through it quick.
[3:51] When was the last time we met? You
recall? Does anybody recall the last
[3:55] time we had an up?
>> It would have been last fall at some
[3:57] point.
>> Last fall. All right. Yeah, it's been a
[4:01] little while.
>> Yep. Well, we've been in kind of a
[4:04] holding pattern just kind of stuck and
with our the way the credit releases
[4:09] were set up initially under the old
rules were just kind of in limbo. But
[4:14] luckily, there's been changes. So, we
went through all of those documents and
[4:21] figured out way to change the credit
release schedule and habitat metrics and
[4:28] hydraology metrics to accelerate credit
releases. So, that's what I want to talk
[4:33] about tonight. So, we can go to the next
screen.
[4:38] So, what am I asking for tonight? I want
you to authorize me to submit a complete
[4:41] overhaul of your mitigation bank
instrument and your compensation site
[4:47] plan. That's that 1,200page
document. So we've gone completely
[4:51] through that and changed everything to
your advantage that we can use under the
[4:55] new rules. And then we used a lot of
site data to prove that as well. We do
[4:59] have wetland reference sites on within
the bank and those were utilized to help
[5:05] us with some of that and approving like
to approve the simplified release
[5:10] schedule and then like to have an
approval to head towards October
[5:14] construction for the last segment of
construction
[5:18] and we'll go through what those entail
but essentially your October
[5:21] construction is the old stream corridor
that we haven't take advantage of and
[5:27] putting in a couple of the alternate
that barriers in place that we need in
[5:31] order to get your your large credit
releases.
[5:36] Next screen,
>> Chad, could you talk a little bit about
[5:38] the new rules that you're referring to
because I don't think
[5:41] » Yeah, we'll go through those. Yeah,
we'll go through I'll go through the new
[5:44] rules and what they mean [clears throat]
uh in the another part of the
[5:47] presentation. It's pretty complicated,
so we'll go through those one by one.
[5:50] » Uh but for those of you who weren't here
in the beginning, this is the bank at a
[5:54] glance. So, it was 90 roughly 92.8 acres
consisting of three properties. Village
[6:00] properties, the Jones, and the Coxman's
property.
[6:04] We were approved for 58.35
credits on the bank and we have 6.04
[6:09] acres of area that are at no credit
currently, but we are going to be
[6:13] requesting credit for those in our
submission and we have a 10-year
[6:17] monitoring period. Your bank serves in
northwestern Lake Michigan, which is lot
[6:22] most of good chunk of northeast
Wisconsin and down the lake shore.
[6:27] Next, next slide.
So, there's four main changes that we're
[6:33] looking for in this plan modification.
It's a minor plan modification, although
[6:38] it seems major, it's pretty minor.
[6:43] We are going to be inserting the
stream channel. We'll change that, which
[6:49] originally was conceived to be flood
plane forest and a stream mitigation.
[6:54] And then we we're going to change that
to wet sedge meadow. That is now one
[6:58] credit as wet meadow. And that'll allow
you to gain credit on that six acres you
[7:04] currently are not getting credit for.
And then the rules allow us to
[7:07] consolidate credit types. So we did
originally have coniferous hardwoods,
[7:12] coniferous swamp and hardwood swamp as
separate types, but coniferous swamp
[7:16] isn't mitigated very often. So this is
advantageous to change this all to
[7:21] wooded swamp.
And then we have performance standards
[7:25] that we're changing, hydrarology and
vegetation standards, and we're changing
[7:28] those based on site data. And then
changes in the 2025 mitigation guidance
[7:35] allow us to make changes that are
beneficial to you. And it's lowering
[7:38] some standards to be able to get credits
a lot quicker and get these banks
[7:43] wrapped up. So what was going on is a
lot of people were getting cold feet
[7:47] about getting into banking and you
experience exactly wise. It takes
[7:50] several years and many years to get
approved and the standards are high and
[7:55] and so we're going to propose to lower
those. And then we have on-site data on
[8:00] our reference wetlands allows us to
further reduce criteria on the habitat
[8:06] side that helps you get credits faster.
And then we overhauled the way that
[8:10] credits are released and that leads to
significant amount of credits quicker in
[8:16] this system and I'll go through that in
a little bit.
[8:22] Uh specifically the old stream corridor
we were proposing stream mitigation but
[8:27] after site visit with IRT and Army Corps
they determined that the stream wasn't
[8:32] quite good enough for restoration
purposes. So we change we're changing
[8:36] over to wet meadow. That's the old plan
on the left. The plant the picture on
[8:40] the right is what it looks like today.
You've got um a channel in the center
[8:45] with cattail on either side. You've got
upland grasses and we're going to change
[8:50] that all to wet meadow.
Next screens has been helping us design
[8:57] this plan. So this is the the new plan
for the stream corridor. We'll still
[9:01] have some overflow channels to make sure
that water can get through in high water
[9:06] events, but we're going to do a lot of
uh what's called humbucko topography
[9:10] allows uh amphibian use and some
diversication of the plant vegetation
[9:15] which will help ward off invasive
species. [clears throat]
[9:19] And then it was modeled, there was an
H&H study done on this to make sure that
[9:23] we're not going to flood out any of the
neighbors. But essentially, we're going
[9:25] to fill the stream and then excavate a
lot of fill that's in that area to
[9:31] create some credits.
[9:36] And this is what the corridor look like
today. It's all as you saw, it's a
[9:40] cattail in center with surrounded by
upland grasses. So these pictures are
[9:44] from site. We have zone one, which
you'll see later is more in the north.
[9:49] That's a shallow marsh wet meadow that's
dominated by soft stem bull rush almost
[9:55] 90% that's a very interesting wetlands
very nice and then wet sedge meadow in
[10:00] the south very beautiful sedge meadow
has uh grown in that area very
[10:06] diversified species and then there's an
area of surface water that sticks around
[10:10] for quite a while and there were
thousands of leopard frogs that's a
[10:14] picture on the right but that'll be
similar to what that corridor looked
[10:16] like give us a little more
diversification
[10:19] of plants out there, more wildlife usage
and getting us credits to be a little
[10:23] easier. Chose wet metal for that area
because it is the easiest to sell credit
[10:28] type. So when we get those credits,
you'll sell them fairly quickly.
[10:34] And then one thing to note is that we
did we did a study of the soils before
[10:40] we before we did construction and see
what kind of plants would come out of
[10:44] the soil. And so we did these
germination tests and we would we didn't
[10:49] find a lot of the species that are
appearing there now. So we did have a
[10:52] seed mix. My kids and I collected seeds
from around some of our properties, some
[10:57] of our wet meadows that that don't have
any invasive species and we still didn't
[11:02] have some of the species that are here.
So there is a strong seed bankank which
[11:06] does help uh with vegetation standards.
So that's a good thing that we found
[11:11] over the last three years. You mean the
property has a good seed bankank?
[11:15] » Yep. Property has a good seed bankank
and I was surprised by that because it
[11:19] didn't come out in our seed bankank
test.
[11:21] » So having that water there for longer
just allowed those plants to germinate.
[11:25] So it's a very good species mix and that
zone five which is kind of the
[11:30] souththeast part of the site would
already meet vegetation standards if we
[11:34] were in wet meadow situation. So very
hopeful that we'll get the rest of the
[11:38] property uh to look like that as well.
[11:43] Uh just a sideby-side comparison just
kind of go through this quick, but this
[11:46] is just for the stream corridor. Uh we
were doing mandaring pools with a
[11:51] stream. Now we're just doing Sedge wet
meadow micro topography. We had turtle
[11:56] nesting areas, but without the stream,
we don't really need to have that. So we
[11:59] changed that to the Humuck Hollow just
to get some diversification.
[12:03] Uh the community was going to be
floodplane forest and now it's going to
[12:06] be herbaceous, no trees, just trees on
the edges. uh soil treatment in the area
[12:11] weren't going to do anything before. Now
we're just going to put compost in the
[12:14] area on top of uh the subs soils that
are there.
[12:19] Hydrarology standards going to be wet
metal easier standard to meet
[12:24] and herbaceous standard. So it's pretty
much just wet meadow versus forest. So
[12:29] currently there's no credit approved in
the old plan and now we're going to ask
[12:32] for 4.11 credits for that area
>> for what was the stream. This is for the
[12:39] stream corridor. So that center section,
it's uh six acres where there's nothing
[12:44] right now. No credits at all. It's just
left as it was. And now we're going to
[12:48] go in and change that, manipulate that
to get your credits.
[12:51] » But that's something that will need to
be reviewed by the Army Corps DNR and
[12:56] » yes, discussed.
>> That's part of our submission. Our
[12:58] submission for this week, should you
approve, we'd like to submit on
[13:02] Wednesday, is twofold. One is to add in
this habitat change. Second is to
[13:08] overhaul the whole plan and the
we have to make changes to the plan if
[13:14] we insert something and the IRT is
requiring us to do something with that
[13:17] center area some sort of vegetative
change and since we have to do something
[13:22] anyway you may as well get credit for
it. So that's why we're doing that
[13:25] submission. And then while we're there,
we since we have to make changes to your
[13:29] plan to insert this section by adding in
a wet meadow category, which you don't
[13:34] have now, we may as well just overhaul
the whole thing to the new rules, which
[13:37] the core and offered us for us to do
knowing that that we have uh less
[13:43] stringent thresholds to meet for
hydrarology and habitat. So, we want to
[13:48] take advantage of that and overhaul the
whole entire proposal, but we're about
[13:52] ready to go on that. If you approve
tonight, we'd submit it Wednesday.
[13:55] » Do Okay. Well, we can have questions.
>> We'll be going back through. We'll go
[13:59] through more of those in detail, Skype,
but I'll I'll take question now if you
[14:02] if you want.
>> No, go ahead and finish. I'll just I'll
[14:05] just make note and hold them till the
end.
[14:07] » Very good.
>> Uh, this is just again about the stream
[14:10] order. Why is this better, lower-term
risk? Um, so we won't have as many
[14:16] issues with flashy farm drainage. So, u
this will take some of those flood
[14:22] waters. So, that the site does flood in
the spring. And I'm sure uh Mrs. Jalen
[14:27] can attest to the fact that it floods
quite often in the spring. So, as we put
[14:32] in this wet metal, we're going to grade
it down and widen it out. So, we'll have
[14:35] some flood storage in there, which will
help alleviate some of those issues in
[14:39] the spring. And this does work with our
existing barriers. So, no issue no issue
[14:45] with that. We don't have to do anything.
It's actually to work between two
[14:48] barriers. Uh easier to credit because
it's wet metal. We can get that growing
[14:52] quicker. So we don't have the long time
that it takes uh forest to flood plane
[14:57] forest to grow.
And then we do have uh wet meadow
[15:01] standards already in place so we don't
have to come up with any. And this
[15:05] actually work out good for the wood
turtles even though we don't have any of
[15:08] the spawning or them sorry the uh
nesting areas up there.
[15:13] They'll still want they'll still
colonize. they'll still use the site and
[15:16] with the wet meadow there between the
trees, they'll be attracted to it and
[15:19] it'll work out well for them with the
humollow topography
[15:23] and it's a little more diverse. So, one
thing we lamented about the whole plan
[15:28] when the DNR initially approved it was
that we were pretty much forested to
[15:32] know forested situation, but
>> nature is doing what it does out there
[15:36] and we're getting some diversification
which we'll deal with in the future. And
[15:40] then we're also introducing some
diversification here which will lead to
[15:43] better overall habitat.
[15:48] So here's uh this is the big one for you
guys. This is hydraology is your biggest
[15:53] credit category.
It's 30% of your credits. And to show
[15:59] you that things are working out on site,
this is a picture of where one of the
[16:04] barriers go through the site. And you
can see on the right there's Queen Ans
[16:07] Lace. That's the white flower. You can
see that on the right and you don't see
[16:11] it on the left. And there's a very
distinct line where those two
[16:15] differentiate. So on the left it's all
wetland grasses and and forbes which be
[16:20] flowers and then right it's all upland
grasses and queen ans lace dominating in
[16:24] the flower area and that's right where
the barrier is at. So there's a very
[16:28] distinct line where those berries are at
on site and you can see them. So on the
[16:32] left you're getting hydrarology and the
right it's dry. Uh so things are working
[16:36] on site and although
we do have hydraology in in three zones
[16:42] on site now and four zone 4 really isn't
meeting it yet. This is a picture from
[16:47] zone 4. So we are meeting some low-level
hydrarology in zone 4 right now even
[16:53] though it's not meeting in our
groundwater monitoring wells. If you
[16:57] walked out in the site the whole site
looks at like a giant wetland with the
[17:01] where the barriers are at. You can see
there's up plants. So, it is all working
[17:05] and we're going to use that to our
advantage here in our next submission.
[17:14] So, we want to accelerate your credit
release. This is all about credits and
[17:17] being able to sell them and earn
dollars. This wasn't an entirely about
[17:21] wetland restoration. This is about
making some money for the village. And
[17:26] so, we really want to capitalize on the
changes that were made in the guidance
[17:31] documents. So the biggest change that we
have is that we can do this in zones.
[17:36] Now it used to be an all or nothing. So
we would have you have to meet
[17:41] hydrarology through the entire site in a
category no matter what. That was the
[17:45] old rule and that was really hard.
That's kind of why we're stuck in limbo.
[17:48] We have to wait till the hydraologies
met for two seasons and we have to plant
[17:52] our trees and we can't get this credit
release until the trees are planted and
[17:55] we're meeting hydrarology. Well, now we
can break this up into zones. Um, and
[18:00] they actually called them polygons, but
we're jumping on say, "Hey, well, we've
[18:03] got a polygon here, and we're tying it
to where all the barriers are at." So,
[18:09] everywhere on site is is chopped up
hydraologically by the barriers. So, the
[18:14] the barriers, if you don't recall, are
dug trenches down to a clay layer and
[18:19] then we pack clay in and compact it in
the sand layers and the sandom. It sits
[18:24] just below the surface where you can't
see it. So in that that last picture
[18:28] that we showed, you couldn't see the
barrier. It's not a hump, it's not a
[18:31] burm, it's subsurface. So we're going to
capitalize on those as zones. So we
[18:36] divided the site into seven zones. So
each of the site zones can be reviewed
[18:41] for hydrarology. So we're currently
meeting three of the zones for
[18:45] hydrarology now. So we should be able to
apply for that instead of being stuck in
[18:49] limbo. But we're going to make changes
where we can apply for those. And we're
[18:53] going to make the site more uniform. So,
it's divided up in 18 categories. Now,
[18:57] well, we still have subcategories, but
we're going to divide into two different
[19:00] uniform categories. Either you need to
meet hydrarology or you don't need to
[19:04] meet hydrarology. So, what I mean by
that is you have areas on site when we
[19:08] delineated initially that were already
wetland. So, we don't have to add water
[19:14] to those areas. So, those go in the
non-lift category. So, no lift. And then
[19:18] we have upland areas that we're getting
credit for. We're putting those in the
[19:21] no lift category. Then we have
everything else where we need to get
[19:24] some water back. That's in the lift
category. So we're making these into a
[19:27] lift and no lift categories, which
allows us to further chop this up into
[19:34] smaller segments that we can meet more
quickly instead of the all or nothing
[19:38] categories we've had before.
And then the hydraology, we'd like to
[19:42] split that into two segments. So be so
before it was 30% all or nothing. That's
[19:47] what you get when you meet hydrarology.
You get 30%. And that's based off our
[19:51] two-year cycle. So, you have to meet
hydrarology for two years in normal or
[19:55] wet years. And if you get a dry year in
the middle, you're stuck for another
[19:58] year. Luckily, we had a couple normal
wet years in a row and we're meeting
[20:02] that in some areas. So, we chopped us up
in zones. We want to say, hey, we're
[20:07] meeting it for a year. We want 15%. And
so, what we're saying is, hey, we've
[20:11] earned that year, so give us the 15%
credit and and we'll we'll wait till we
[20:17] meet the next one to get our next 15%.
And so that's a change we're uh
[20:21] implementing is this hydrarology split.
And then back to your stream quarter.
[20:26] Now we're going to ask for credit six
acres without credit. Now we're going to
[20:30] get ask for 4.1 credits
uh with 10% release released on
[20:35] approval.
And then we're look the next thing is
[20:39] setting the standards to what the site
can reach. So when you see this 20 2530
[20:43] and 30 3545 those are species variance
that we have to meet. So, if we go out
[20:49] to an area and we're reviewing it for
our first plant, our first vegetative uh
[20:56] barrier or benchmark, it has to have 20
different species out there to get our
[21:00] first our first uh draw. Well, the
current plan is 30. So, we're reducing
[21:05] it down from 30 species down to 20
[snorts] and the second one currently is
[21:09] 35 and then it's 45 for the third
release of credits. Well, we're going to
[21:13] reduce those out down to 20, 25, and 30.
Next, we're going to do an average over
[21:17] the site of 30 because that's this is
based off data we have in our wetland
[21:21] reference references that are on site.
We have four of them. And using the data
[21:26] we collected from those wetland
reference areas, we're changing what
[21:31] your standards can be. And that's
allowed in the new guidance where it was
[21:34] not before. So even though when we
initially drafted this document, we had
[21:40] to follow the standard guidance which
was 45 different species at the end of
[21:44] the project within an area. But our site
can't reach that. So if you go look at
[21:49] the beautiful reference wetlands that we
have and they are really nice. They're
[21:53] treed forested all over the place,
animals using them and there's the
[21:58] maximum we have is 38 species in one of
them. Well, we can't get that to 45. So
[22:03] that's why we're proposing that.
And then we want to start planting trees
[22:08] in the spring and we would plant those
in the areas that are meeting
[22:10] hydrarology. So we've been waiting and
waiting to plant trees. And Alex has
[22:14] really been saying, "Hey, let's get the
community together. Let's plant some
[22:17] trees." And I was all for it a year ago,
but we didn't meet quite enough
[22:21] hydrarology, so we had to wait. So if we
plant the trees now, we could drown them
[22:25] out and kill more than we expect to have
for mortality after planting. So we're
[22:31] but we're ready now to plant some of
those in some zones and in some zones we
[22:34] may have to wait a little bit longer for
them to meet hydrarology and then finish
[22:38] out planting. But before it was an all
or nothing thing. All the trees had to
[22:42] be planted on site before we could ask
for that credit. But now with dividing
[22:46] this into zones and our two uniform
different types of lift and no lift. Now
[22:52] we can segment this and ask for credits
earlier which we're going to do.
[22:57] So zoned approach. So here's your seven
zones. Uh the two in the north are the
[23:02] largest zone one and two and then there
three four you have five six seven in
[23:06] the south and those are where our
barrier locations are. They segment the
[23:10] site hydraologically and so it just
makes sense to break them up into those
[23:14] areas. Zones one, two, and five are
meeting hydraology on site vegetatively
[23:21] as well as in the wells. Zone three is
kind of on the edge in the middle. So,
[23:26] we are placing a barrier there at the
south end of zone three. And in four,
[23:32] even four is a little on the border,
too. It's almost meeting it, but we
[23:36] going to check out the south barrier.
There might be a spot where it's not
[23:39] quite compacted enough. So, we're going
to check that out during this fall's
[23:43] construction.
And then we're going to look at uh six
[23:48] and seven. Six is your stream corridor,
and that one is going to take a couple
[23:52] years. And then seven, we just need a
little bit more help with a barrier
[23:55] along the the ditch as well as some
grading and filling that'll be done in
[23:59] the stream quarter. We'll help with
those. So those are your seven zones
[24:02] where before the whole site was one
zone, now it's seven. And that will help
[24:06] us capitalize on some credits. Uh but
the credits in each zone, zone one is
[24:11] 33.4, zone 1, two, and five, and zone 3
is 11.2, and 4, six, and seven are
[24:16] almost 18. Uh, so we're looking really
good in zones one, two, and five, and
[24:20] that's 54% of your credit. So, we're
going to hit that pretty hard here with
[24:25] our submission with the evidence that we
have that things are going well in
[24:28] sight. And should they agree, we'll
we'll get a credit release. So, we'll
[24:33] talk start talking about credits
in the next. You got it up. Okay. So,
[24:39] today this is stream corridor is 6.04
acres with no credit and we're going to
[24:43] move that to wet metal and the credit
breakdown is below. So we really don't
[24:47] really need to go through that. This
just establishment rehabilitation and uh
[24:51] establishment. So just briefly
establishments where there it was never
[24:55] wetland and we're making it wetland and
that's areas where we had upland soil
[24:58] type that we found on site and we're
going to grade that down and make that
[25:02] wetland. Rehabilitation
is where we're [clears throat]
[25:07] we have some hydrarology and we're just
going to make a little bit better and
[25:10] doesn't have vegetation. So rehabilitate
that wetland that's needs a little help.
[25:14] and reestablishments where it's drained
and we're bringing everything back
[25:17] vegetation hydrarology.
[25:22] So simpler current release schedule this
is this hydraologic lift and no lift and
[25:27] the breakdown through the site. Uh what
what allows us to do is shift
[25:33] more credit lease to construction you've
already done. So you spend a whole bunch
[25:37] of money out on site and you're not
getting a release for it. And that's why
[25:40] we're just kind of stuck in limbo. but
we're going to change that with the
[25:44] zoning and with the hydraologic lift.
So, you've already done a whole bunch of
[25:48] lift out there. You've done
construction, so we're going to ask for
[25:51] that. And we weren't allowed to ask for
that before.
[25:55] And then we're asking for the two
installments and hydrarology. Don't mind
[25:59] my spelling error, but uh so we're going
to ask for that at 15 and 15. And some
[26:03] of the zones will ask for all 30 now
because they're meeting it. And should
[26:08] our data on our third third round here
will look as well, we'll try to ask for
[26:12] more areas if they qualify. So, we do
have our third season spring hydrarology
[26:18] is in. We just have to crunch through
it. And then everything works out to be
[26:22] the same as 2022. Nothing's changing.
You're not getting any more credits
[26:25] except for the stream core door edition.
We're just asking for some of those
[26:30] sooner because you've done a whole bunch
of work out there. Why not get some
[26:33] money to pay that back?
[26:38] And then this fall, we'd like to push
this hard. We're getting a little late,
[26:42] but it just 1,200 pages takes a little
while to get through, but we're there.
[26:46] So, our presubmitt meeting is done, so
we don't have to do that. So, we'd like
[26:50] to file this on Wednesday, and then the
core will do their notification. They
[26:54] get their review period. We should get
our decision in end of September along
[26:58] with a credit release.
And then the
[27:03] we have our construction deadline. We
really like to get that done in October,
[27:06] November. It's a great time to work on
the site. It's always dry and things are
[27:11] going dormant so we're not destroying
existing vegetation. So, it's a good
[27:15] time to be out there and even into
December can work as long as the weather
[27:19] holds out. But, we do need to bid ahead
of the approval. So, I'm fairly
[27:26] confident we'll get this. I talked to
heirs about this this morning that we
[27:29] can at least get an initial read from
the core on these changes. They wanted a
[27:33] memo briefing in addition to all the
changes so they could see what we're
[27:37] proposing and give us initial nod or hey
you're crazy hold up but we are pushing
[27:44] it pretty hard but I'm confident we'll
get the approval in this. So I would
[27:47] like approval to when we feel get a good
feeling about it then to have them work
[27:51] on that so that we don't delay the
construction and that second credit
[27:56] release based on construction. And then
we don't want to run into winter. So if
[28:00] we can get that that move in that would
be helpful. And if it does end up
[28:04] pushing the spring it's not the end of
the world but it's a lot easier to work
[28:07] in that site in the the dormant time.
[28:12] Okay. So you've you've earned a lot of
credits. We're just stuck in this limbo
[28:15] and you can't get them. So now if we
reconfigure all of this, we should be
[28:21] able to do that. Now you constructed
outside the stream quarter in 2023.
[28:26] We've monitored the hydraology in 24,
25, and 26. Uh we are still looking at
[28:32] the 26 data after there's all these
submissions in. We'll get back to that.
[28:37] But a lot of the areas meeting
hydrarology and you've constructed it.
[28:40] So, let's try to get those credits since
you've already earned them. Let's do
[28:44] that by changing. We call these rows.
So, they're all the different habitat
[28:50] types, the creation we call it, and the
restoration and the rehabilitation.
[28:55] They're all different rows. And we have
each of these rows in our different
[28:59] areas. And we've met a lot of that. So,
let's we'd like to ask for that.
[29:05] And right now, you have about 30 acres
that are just all or nothing. And with
[29:09] these changes, we'll be able to ask for
quite a bit of that that those credits.
[29:17] Let's see.
I'll wait for questions and let's go to
[29:21] the next schedule. So, there's a
schedule in here if you want to take a
[29:24] look at this and you can ask me
follow-up questions. Uh Alex can send
[29:28] them to me or you can send them. But
here's our construction windows broken
[29:32] apart by the different zones. Uh one,
two, and five. and three is kind of up
[29:37] in in that first that first schedule. So
you see it's a little accelerated on
[29:42] those areas. Four, six, and seven have
to wait a little longer because they're
[29:46] not meeting hydrarology. So when you're
doing wetland restoration, it's all
[29:50] about the water when when you get the
water back and when you don't. So we've
[29:53] got it back in portions of the site, but
not all. So we'll have to do two tree
[29:58] planting sessions out there. We'll do
the first one hopefully in spring and
[30:02] then the other one I'll have to wait a
couple years. um unless they unless they
[30:07] just all of a sudden meet hydrarology.
But I don't I don't believe four, six,
[30:11] and seven met it even once yet. So,
we'll still have to wait for two seasons
[30:15] before we plant uh plant trees. But, we
are going to finish seeding in the
[30:19] areas. So, when this is constructed out,
we'll reed the areas that are disturbed
[30:24] and then we'll do an overseeding of
additional species on the rest of the
[30:28] site. And that's because we've upped our
we've increased our number of species in
[30:33] some of the areas and we've reduced it
in others. So we'll have to gain back a
[30:37] few more species. So where there's a
lack of species in some areas, we'll
[30:42] oversee. But we're going to count that
as complete construction in those areas
[30:46] less the trees and we will be able to
ask for those credits now where we
[30:50] couldn't before. And so if you have any
follow-up questions on the schedule,
[30:54] just feel free to shoot them over to me.
a lot to take in tonight.
[31:01] Okay. So, credits. So, where do they
land? So, if we make these changes to
[31:05] your plan and they approve it
in zones one, two, and five, we're
[31:10] requesting 2.8 credits. In zone 3, we're
requesting 1.1 and 4, six, and seven,
[31:16] we're requesting 1.75. So, that's
roughly 5.6 to 5.7 5.65, I think, of
[31:24] credits. That's what we're asking for
with this init submission on Wednesday.
[31:28] So, we're going to do them concurrent.
We can't ask for it in the document
[31:31] change, but the new rules allow us to
run them concurrent together. So, we
[31:35] will ask for them concurrent.
And so, hopefully by end of September,
[31:40] you'll get a release of 5.65 acres of
credit. And then we're also going to ask
[31:44] for 1.95 acres of asbuilt in the three
different zones. So, you've already done
[31:50] that work. Why not ask for it? So, we'll
end up with
[31:54] almost eight credits we're being asking
for by the end of September.
[31:58] And of course, today you don't have any.
So, if we get eight by September, they'd
[32:01] be great. I have projects that need the
credits. And then we also have the
[32:06] hydraology that we can ask for for zones
one, two, and five and possibly three.
[32:11] So, we'll see how those work out, but we
can ask for those this winter. So, we
[32:15] could potentially ask for another 7
point probably seven and a half credits
[32:20] this winter. So you should receive those
if all goes well sometime in the uh
[32:25] middle winter, maybe February, towards
the end of winter. Uh so you could end
[32:29] up with almost 15 credits by end of
February is what we're looking to get
[32:35] here.
And then there the rest of the schedule
[32:39] goes down based on when we'll see
things. So if we get the planting done
[32:44] on the asbelts, we can ask for some more
credit next year. And then we'll have
[32:47] the subsequent plantings in 2029 when we
reach hydraology in other areas. And
[32:53] then we'll start looking at our interim
vegetation area. I can tell you area
[32:58] despite having cattail area five is
already ready on vegetation. That one's
[33:02] probably going to hit. It's definitely
passed its interimm one. So that's
[33:05] really good. We can't ask for it quite
yet, but that'll be open to us after
[33:09] hydraologies met. So we may be able to
start asking for those pretty soon ahead
[33:15] even ahead of this schedule.
[33:18] So very excited about that. And there's
other areas of the site that are looking
[33:21] pretty good, but there is a little bit
of work to do.
[33:27] Oh, and then just one last note on
barriers. We're still not putting them
[33:30] all in because we don't need them all.
So we in original submission, we had a
[33:34] staggered construction approach. We put
in the initial barriers that we thought
[33:38] were appropriate based on modeling
and then we'd see what happens. And
[33:42] that's where we're at. We we saw what
happened. We have many areas that meet
[33:46] hydrarology and we have some areas that
don't. So that's where we're going back
[33:48] and putting in three three and a half of
the barriers that are in the plan as
[33:54] alternates. And then we're leaving out
several that we don't need because we're
[33:57] meeting hydrarology. And we saw what
happened in the southeast corner when we
[34:02] over put too many barriers in. So that
area was already kind of wet when we put
[34:08] the barrier in. It it inundated the
whole area. I think I've been calling it
[34:11] Lake Jellen or Lake Asamon, but it
looked like a lake for a while. It sits
[34:15] with surface water almost the entire
year and now it's actually become a very
[34:19] good varied feature in the landscape and
we did talk about filling that with the
[34:25] core but they said don't they'll just do
a habitat change later in the process as
[34:30] things develop out. So you'll still get
credit for that area just maybe a
[34:34] different type credit type was actually
okay because some of the other credit
[34:37] types sell quicker. So, I'm okay with
that. And so, we took the off-ramp and
[34:41] and went with them on that.
Um, so then here's the
[34:47] on the next slide, we'll go through how
they get released. It's this is just
[34:51] it's a little confusing how this all
works, but we're modifying your plan to
[34:56] allow us to more quickly release these
credits. So, your your bank was
[35:01] frontloaded in the beginning. And what I
mean by that is your 10% that was
[35:06] released when you initially signed the
agreement wasn't spread across these
[35:10] habitat type. It was geared just to like
the upland areas. And so that kind of
[35:14] leaves us in limbo when we're meeting.
We have construction completed. Oh, we
[35:18] can't get that 5% on the interim
construction. Then we get second
[35:22] construction done. We can't get that.
Well, now we can if they approve this
[35:26] new plan. So it'll respspread that 10%
out across the whole project instead of
[35:31] just piling everything up on upland
areas and upland buffers and
[35:35] enhancement. We'll spread it out across
the site and that unlocks a lot of the
[35:39] credits and that's how we're we're able
to request these credits and that's done
[35:43] by zone. So now we're zoning out our
different credit releases rather than
[35:47] just an all or nothing approach as it
was before.
[35:52] So, this just breaks down how what we're
eligible for now and that we're going to
[35:55] try and get these near 15 credits. So,
we're we're going to submit right away
[36:02] for a good chunk of them and then we'll
approve apply for the rest and in the
[36:07] fall winter here.
[36:12] Okay, housekeeping stuff. So, again,
we're just changing this to a wooded
[36:16] swamp credit type instead of coniferous
swamp and hardwood swamp. So we'll have
[36:20] wooded swamp and we'll have wet meadow
and both of those sell. I think your
[36:24] limeville project that you mitigated
required hardwood swamp and you had it.
[36:29] So that was really good. Performance
standards are being updated. They're
[36:33] following all the new guidances. U the
most the biggest change were in the the
[36:37] 2025 Wisconsin mitigation guidelines or
which were very favorable changes to
[36:42] you.
[36:45] And I guess I could say we don't have to
do these changes. You're not required.
[36:49] your grandfathered in, but I really
would recommend doing these. Obviously,
[36:53] we can apply for credits. And then a
reference data is really supportive. And
[36:57] this is this is a big change on these
this species diversification. It seems
[37:01] like a little thing, but down the road
in five years when we're looking at
[37:06] trying to get all of your vegetation
credits out, this will have a big impact
[37:10] that we're going to bring this down to
30 species instead of 45. So, that's a
[37:14] big change, but it's supported by the
reference wetlands. And in the three
[37:18] different reference wetlands, it's 36,
28, and 31 species. We have an average
[37:22] of 30 roughly species. So that's why
we're proposing that. And our seed
[37:27] mixes, we're changing to one seed mix
instead of
[37:32] the different mixes we had before. We're
changing to one, but we're upping the
[37:35] native species component by another 18
species just to get you that
[37:39] diversification and the need to make it
over the threshold down the road. But
[37:43] we'll do some overseating and some spot
seating.
[37:48] And just at what things look like again.
So the left is a stream corridor.
[37:53] Uh on the right we have volunteer
cottonwood and willow coming in. So we
[37:56] have quite a bit of trees out there.
They're sp more sporadic and they're not
[38:00] widespread ubiquitous. They're in little
patches, but at least that's helpful.
[38:03] They are coming out. They'll save us. I
think those will be the trees that are
[38:07] your long live. So we can plant bare
roottock, but the seeded ones generally
[38:12] tend to to take over after time.
And we have three growing seasons of
[38:17] evidence to support that things are are
looking pretty well out there. Next
[38:21] slide. We do have invasive species out
there. We have reconer grass in a few
[38:26] large patches, but nothing too crazy out
there. And then we have some a little
[38:31] bit of infiltration reconarrass in
smaller
[38:35] smaller little
patches around the site, but not too
[38:39] concerned about that. Now, we do have a
little bit of fragmitees out there on
[38:42] the edges and a few in the center, but
that should be able to be taken care of
[38:46] easily by uh spot herbicide treatment.
And then we have purple loose thri
[38:50] showing up mostly on the south end. And
then there also is also an encroachment,
[38:54] but I'll talk to village staff about how
we want to deal with the encroachment by
[38:58] the neighbor and the mowing they're
doing. We'll talk to them about but
[39:01] they'll be seeing construction hopefully
soon and that'll probably uh end that
[39:05] one because there's going to be some
fill on their property line. And then
[39:10] village staff is very helpful on the
site. They've done a lot of serving out
[39:13] surveying out there and just general
discussions about issues we're having.
[39:18] And then they also made designed and and
made these raptor perches which uh my
[39:23] staff says uh raptors use and and and
Mrs. Jalen just said that uh they have
[39:28] hawks that utilize those. So that'll
become very helpful after we plant the
[39:32] trees. That'll help with rodents out
there. as well as a deer fence will help
[39:38] too, but deer tend to break through it
sometimes. You still get the rabbits and
[39:41] other rodents and that'll help with uh
help with the raptor perches. And then
[39:45] evergreen staff, we've volunteered over
100 hours out out there pulling invasive
[39:50] species and doing monitoring well
repair. And what we found, I haven't
[39:54] found this at other sites, but a
swamagon, the deer really like to chew
[39:57] on the the cords on the monitoring
wells. And they're all they're all
[40:03] sending to two units on site that are
all connected to the internet. So when
[40:07] they chew on at least when they chew on
it, we know that when something goes
[40:10] down, but they've been eating a lot of
the cords. So we've got a fix for that
[40:15] finally though. So we'll And then the
deer fence will help too. But we've done
[40:19] a bunch of work out there just to to
help the village along in this project.
[40:25] And a lot of these things, the
vegetation doesn't matter about the
[40:29] credit releases now. that's a more of a
down the road issue when we're trying to
[40:33] meet vegetative standards and those
don't come in for a while. So this all
[40:36] this does mean something but doesn't
mean anything right now to these credit
[40:40] releases or the hydraology because all
that's all independent of this but we do
[40:44] have to keep tabs on the invasive
species and make sure we're we're taking
[40:48] care of those.
So what I'm asking for you tonight is
[40:52] authorization to go ahead with this
refiling because it's a complete revamp
[40:55] of your entire plan. that's entirely
different from what we submitted before
[40:59] and was approved. And then to allow us
to the engineers to go forth with
[41:04] bidding after we get some sort of
positive response from the
[41:09] way we can keep our construction
schedule on course
[41:15] and we're meeting everything else.
You'll be under your letter of credit
[41:18] and we already have presubmitt and
semixing pricing will should be within
[41:23] budget. We haven't seen these
significant increases in that and then
[41:26] we'll we'll deal with the rivet stuff.
That's the core the core uh system once
[41:31] uh we're approved. So that's the end of
my presentation. I'll have you take any
[41:35] questions.
It's a lot to take in. It's it's kind of
[41:39] overwhelming to me. I feel really old,
but I'm happy this is about done
[41:43] [laughter] but for this submission
anyway.
[41:45] » So one one question I had so holding
pattern stuck that came up a number of
[41:50] times. So that was the result of of
the criteria being that we had to
[41:55] achieve 100% hydrarology across the
entire property. Who who who has now
[42:00] changed that rule?
>> So those are the old rules in Wisconsin
[42:04] DNR changed those rules and with with uh
work with the
[42:08] » and they've all accepted those rules. So
we don't have any
[42:11] » this were these change they they said we
should change to the new rules. it would
[42:15] be beneficial to us. And so we went
through the rules to see where we could
[42:21] apply them everywhere we could apply
them. And we've applied them everywhere
[42:24] we can apply them to help you.
>> Okay. So um another question. So
[42:29] approval was mentioned. We're looking at
approval um September 24th. Is that a
[42:34] hard date or is that could that push or
pull or move?
[42:38] » Oh, it depends on if they have any big
changes, but generally that would be a
[42:41] hard date. If they're if they're good
with the changes, they have a comment
[42:44] period and then they have an approval
window and then that would be their
[42:48] approval. So, if they're happy with the
changes, which I'm hoping they are, then
[42:52] that would be your deadline. If they're
not,
[42:54] » when would we hear if they were happy
with the changes?
[42:57] » They have a 15-day comment period.
>> So, once you turn it in on Wednesday of
[43:01] this week,
>> 15 days from then,
[43:04] » 15 days, they would say either do X, Y,
or Z or we're happy with it.
[43:07] » Yeah. I'm hoping to with the memo
they'll get us an answer a little
[43:10] quicker. Yeah. Yeah.
>> So, they wanted a summary memo. We have
[43:12] that prepared, too.
>> Okay. Um, time to get out your crystal
[43:17] ball.
>> I wish I could hard date them on that,
[43:20] but if we did a good job here, they
should disapprove it.
[43:23] » I'm I'm I'm with you on that one. But
chances have changed again
[43:26] » just just because I mean, you know, when
we look at this, we've been at this for
[43:30] such a such a long period of time. And
you know, with this approval
[43:36] with with this approval being with 100%
hydrarology being expected or being
[43:41] expected, I I kind of understand why it
got hung up. But now that it's not hung
[43:45] up again, my fear with this, my biggest
fear with this has always been the fact
[43:49] that are we going to move forward and
all of a sudden wetland mitigation banks
[43:52] aren't going to be a thing anymore?
There was a time, wasn't there a time
[43:55] with the with the assembly when they
were going to get rid of wetland
[43:58] mitigation banks?
>> There was a time, but that's long past.
[44:01] Even the Republicans are are good with
these now. So there's no the last
[44:06] changes they were made were positive.
>> Yeah.
[44:08] » For mitigation banks. They
>> they capped what the inloo fee could
[44:14] [clears throat]
go to in fees, which was a good thing
[44:17] for mitigation banks overall because it
gave you a way to increase your increase
[44:22] your credit costs and recoup your
construction costs.
[44:26] And when our when we revamped all the
wetland exemption regulations, we
[44:32] included mitigation in those. And so
that's actually been a big driver of
[44:36] mitigation lately are the exemption
bills. And I was one of the drafters of
[44:40] that. And we we want to make sure that
people had an easier path to filling
[44:46] wetlands that were inconsequential and a
mitigation factor behind a lot of those
[44:50] fills. So the non-federal exemptions is
one of the big categories of mitigation
[44:54] though. So I don't see this going away
anytime soon.
[44:58] » Okay, that's that's Thanks for the
crystal ball. Last question then. So
[45:03] species richness. So current species
richness in um in zones 76 and 4. You
[45:09] you did you say that was 38 at 38?
>> No, they're all down at the 20 30 35
[45:17] » but that's isn't that the requirement?
So is it the requirement? 25, 30, and
[45:21] 35.
>> 20, 20, 25, and 30 is what we're
[45:23] proposing. The current what you're under
now is based on published guidance, and
[45:27] that's 30, 35, and 45. And that's the
current one. But we can propose
[45:33] with on-site data that we can't meet
that. And so, we have direct evidence
[45:38] that our natural wetlands that are fully
functional and what we're striving for
[45:42] don't meet that.
>> They maximize out at 20 or 25. Yeah,
[45:45] there's one at 38, there's one at 28,
one at 31, I think, and that was done by
[45:51] time meander study and fistic quality
analysis that I conducted back in quite
[45:56] a while ago, but okay, it hasn't changed
much since. So, since we have direct
[46:00] evidence on site, I expect that one will
get approved.
[46:03] » Okay. Um, just one last maybe one last
question for Minister Kaker. Do you
[46:07] recall or maybe this is for director dem
so far that we've gotten on this was it
[46:12] four
>> the more that we sold at $70,000 each
[46:17] » 5.83 3.
>> Sorry, was it 53?
[46:19] » It was closer to six.
>> Closer to six
[46:22] » and I think they came in at about 70,000
a piece.
[46:25] » It was more than that. I think the
70,000 was for the Lionville project,
[46:28] but
>> um
[46:32] » current rates for
uh a credit would be closer to 160,000.
[46:38] » Yeah, we we gave a discount to Brown
County being
[46:41] » Yeah, we did.
>> I remember that. But it was 70,000 and
[46:44] it was four credits [clears throat]
>> somewhere around there. Around there.
[46:49] » You have that ability to discount your
credit prices.
[46:51] » Uh you you do have one competitor that
discounts their prices at Shbboen
[46:55] County, but they only discount their
prices for businesses in Shbboen County.
[47:00] » Not only do they not they only discount
it, they only sell it to projects within
[47:04] Shboen County.
>> Yeah. Yeah. So you do have some
[47:07] competition in Shboen County, but they
don't sell outside of that area. Okay.
[47:12] That's all the questions. I'll turn it
over to somebody else smarter than me.
[47:16] » Has Shabboan County followed any of
these changes too.
[47:21] » I don't know if they have made any
changes. I don't know.
[47:25] » They're further established.
>> Good question. I don't know the answer
[47:27] to that one if they have.
Yeah, they're a little further along.
[47:33] » I'd also add I don't believe the village
board needs to take any action. Your
[47:37] role in this project is approving the
budget which you have approved the
[47:41] budget. you've approved for construction
in 2026. This is more of a
[47:45] administrative engineering
modification to the plan and then
[47:50] ultimately the board will have a final
say once and if bids come back for
[47:54] construction. Uh and then the the
concept about accepting the bidding
[47:59] risk. Again, that's more of an
administrative process. Worst case
[48:03] scenario, we let it out for bid. DNR
comes back and says, "Oh, you actually
[48:08] can't do X, Y, or Z." we would issue an
addendum to that bid package andor void
[48:15] that contract and then rebid it. So
there's really not any financial risk uh
[48:20] if you were to to bid it before the
final approval came.
[48:24] » Hey, one less thing for you to do.
Perfect. Let's come back to you for the
[48:29] money request.
>> Well, that answered my question. Thank
[48:32] you. Welcome. Um this I have two
questions for you. They're both quick
[48:37] and easy. Um, can the this presentation
be added to the minutes or to the packet
[48:43] for the minutes?
>> Okay. And we'll add it to the website.
[48:45] So, we have a a web page dedicated to
the wetland bank. We can include it and
[48:50] I can send you a copy.
>> And um, in general, looking across the
[48:54] entire mass of the space, how wet will
it be like in the spring? Is it
[48:59] something you can like walk through and
not get wet most of it? or is it kind of
[49:05] like no, it's a pretty much a marsh and
you're going to sink in if you try to
[49:09] walk through?
>> That's a good question. So, you're going
[49:11] to have all of the above. You're going
to have areas that you'll need waiters
[49:16] on to cross and you're going to need
areas you're going to be areas you can
[49:18] walk in tennis shoes. So, it just depend
but spring is the wetter period. So, I'd
[49:23] expect in spring much of the sites can
be pretty squishy, but become Juneish
[49:29] and most of it dries up and you'll have
those one really wet areas, those few
[49:33] wet areas.
>> That's it. That's all I got.
[49:38] » Others.
[49:48] » I think it was a great update.
>> Yeah.
[49:51] » Yeah. Yeah, I'm real I'm happy with this
one. This is better than a lot of the
[49:54] other updates. I'm real happy we can
make something happen here. You know,
[49:58] we've kind of been languishing that
limbo and this uh the new changes gave
[50:02] us a way out and we're taking it.
>> I'm just nervous. I'm very very nervous.
[50:07] I mean, because we've been at this for
so long and having been in limbo now for
[50:11] so long and
dealing with who we're dealing with and
[50:17] the amount of legal hoops um and how
things have changed.
[50:23] » I just let's just get this through.
>> Yes.
[50:25] » Just get this through.
>> If we get this change approved, it's
[50:28] going to make this a lot easier.
>> Yeah. And I mean, if we, you know,
[50:33] because at some point, you know, I mean,
if we have to look at additional
[50:36] support, you know, to get this through,
we we got to get this through
[50:41] » um to to the point where we're not
having to deal with other outside
[50:45] agencies and the element of change is
gone, right? And then we can just manage
[50:51] the piece of property.
>> I'm hopeful and I'm I'm positive right
[50:56] now.
>> Okay. good staff, really good people
[50:59] we're working with and they suggested
that we take a lot of these changes.
[51:02] » I mean, I still
>> even offered to help do it and but I've
[51:05] combed through it. I think I'm happy.
I'll I'll take her help, but I want it
[51:08] as an approval.
>> I mean, I think there were three of us
[51:10] on this board who were here when this
all started when this all started some
[51:14] time ago. Three of us remaining and and
I understand that there was trepidation
[51:19] from the very beginning and rightfully
so. Um, but you know, in my estimation
[51:25] as we're sitting here today, Besides
being a long haul and and how we've been
[51:30] stagnant for so long on this, you know,
the dollars when you add up the dollars
[51:35] on this, the dollars still make sense.
>> Um, you know, when you're looking at
[51:39] five credits at 70, thou more than
$70,000 a year and the potential for it.
[51:44] And then you look at what that land was
yielding before that and how that land
[51:48] is going to be preserved for a very long
time, representative of what Swamo
[51:52] really truly was. um you know back in
the old the very very old days
[51:58] » you know back when we started working
mitigation banks it was 16,000 a credit.
[52:03] » Yeah.
>> Now your wetland your wet meadow credits
[52:05] are minimum 100,000 and then forested
credits can be 130 160.
[52:12] » But you got to preface that because it's
like selling something on eBay, right?
[52:15] They're only worth that much if you can
find somebody who wants to pay that much
[52:17] for the baseball card.
>> But luckily you've got a base that has
[52:21] to buy. [clears throat] Some of them
have to buy from you. So at least you
[52:23] have some of that. But it is it's not
for the faint of heart. For sure.
[52:27] » Well, that's for sure.
>> Mhm. And it takes a long time. But
[52:30] » I would never recommend it to anybody.
>> But we'll see.
[52:34] » No, I wouldn't necessarily recommend it
unless you have a stomach for a long
[52:39] » It's long range.
>> Long approvals and a lot of money sunk
[52:41] into it.
>> And it's long range. It's long very long
[52:44] range. I mean, there's there's long
range visioning and then there's really
[52:47] long range visioning. And this is
>> but they made these changes to make it
[52:52] easier for people to get you good easier
to operate. And thank goodness they did
[52:57] because we can have a way out of limbo
now.
[52:59] » Thank goodness.
>> All right.
[53:02] » Thank you.
>> Any followup questions? Just shoot them
[53:04] to Alex or you can email me directly.
Happy to help.
[53:08] » Thank you much.
>> Thank you.
[53:10] » Good day.
[53:13] » This wetland mitigation bank reminds me
of my own mortality. Watching the
[53:18] timeline of this the called legacy
projects. Pretty strong likelihood that
[53:21] I won't be here to see this one finish
out. But anyway, thank you.
[53:28] » All right, everybody ready to go on?
>> Let's do it. All right. Um, we're going
[53:32] on. We are That was a wetland mitigation
bank. That was item 5B. We are on to
[53:38] item six, public appearances. This is
for anyone in the audience who wishes to
[53:41] come forward and speak to an item not on
the agenda. Provide your name and
[53:44] address and let us know what's on your
mind. Anyone in the audience who wishes
[53:47] to come forward to speak to an item not
on the agenda? Here's your opportunity.
[53:51] Going once.
Anyone? Two. Last time.
[53:58] All right. [clears throat]
No one here to speak um publicly on an
[54:02] item not on the agenda. That gets us to
the consent agenda this evening. Consent
[54:05] agenda consists of previous minutes of
the village board dated July 20th, 2026.
[54:11] And uh item B, June 2026 fire department
report. Item C, May 2026 animal control
[54:18] report. Item D, uh committee
appointments 2026 through 2027.
[54:25] Has everyone had a chance to look at the
consent agenda. Are there any questions
[54:28] or discussion on items within the
consent agenda?
[54:31] » Motion to approve.
>> Second.
[54:33] » Thank you. Trusty Eert has offered a
motion to approve and that has been
[54:36] seconded by Trusty Romis.
Anyone else?
[54:40] Hearing no other discussion, all those
in favor, please signify by saying I.
[54:44] » I.
>> And those opposed.
[54:47] » That motion carries six to zero.
Very good. Item eight this evening,
[54:53] planning and zoning items 8A is a public
hearing. The vill's intent to vacate the
[54:58] unused portion of the rightway of
Cardinal Lane being part of the
[55:02] northwest quarter of the northeast
quarter of section 33T25NR20E.
[55:09] Zoning Administrator Ducks.
>> Thank you. This Cardinal Lane had
[55:13] intersected with both White Pine and
Velp um 32205.
[55:19] Um the road was redirected to White Pine
west of the Eskanava Lake Superior
[55:26] tracks to alleviate some of the
congestion in that develop. Um that
[55:30] portion was discontinued. It has never
been formally I guess discontinued
[55:34] rather than vacated.
This this is only for the village
[55:39] rightaway portion. We have no utilities
in that to discontinue. Any easements
[55:45] for any other utilities will be up to
the property owners and release of those
[55:53] should they need that. We do expect that
each adjacent property would receive
[55:58] half of the discontinued rightaway.
[56:05] Steve, I know you had talked about the
little notch on the corner.
[56:10] Do they have an updated exhibit?
>> Yeah, there's an updated exhibit.
[56:14] I put the wrong one in the packet,
>> I believe. So, that's okay. As long as
[56:19] it's included in the final version.
[56:25] So the easements for the utilities will
remain unless the future owners request
[56:31] through each utility vacation of those
easements.
[56:36] » Correct.
>> Um
[56:38] either way you look at it
that the white pinep corner should be
[56:45] water and sewer, right? They can't just
decide not to be.
[56:49] » We're talking about WPS easements. We're
talking about cable easements. the
[56:55] actual utilities outside of our
jurisdiction,
[56:58] » but it wouldn't be so simple for that
future owner to just say, "Nope, don't
[57:02] want water and sewer."
So,
[57:05] » there's nothing to do with
>> okay,
[57:08] » future water and sewer connections.
>> But that that is the plan on that
[57:11] corner. If everything else,
>> the plan is for that at some point to
[57:18] develop and be on sewer and water. Yes.
>> Okay.
[57:22] This is
>> nothing to do with that.
[57:24] » Nothing to do with Okay.
>> It's not an easement so that they can't
[57:27] put in sewer and water.
>> There you go.
[57:30] » Yeah.
>> No, the sewer and water go around go
[57:33] down existing roadways.
>> Yeah.
[57:35] » Within our rightway.
>> It wouldn't And if you think about, you
[57:38] remember the map we looked at was that
last last meeting or whatever, our
[57:43] probably our number one area that we
have to, you know, increase sewer and
[57:47] water usage and users is there.
All of our sewer and water
[57:54] » construction typically [clears throat]
takes place within the rightway, not
[57:57] within utility.
>> WPS has a main gas man going through
[58:04] there right now.
>> It just the way that's worded could it
[58:07] was vague.
Just making sure.
[58:10] » Yep. Other questions?
[58:18] Questions for the good zoning
administrator?
[58:22] Hearing none.
>> I have one.
[58:26] » Take a compliment when you get it. They
don't come that often, even if they're
[58:30] vague. Okay. Um I don't hear any other
discussion on this. Is there a motion
[58:34] then on this particular item?
>> President Van Ross, you'd have to open
[58:37] the public hearing, ask three times for
comment, and then close the public
[58:41] hearing.
>> Thank you for the reminder. We've never
[58:45] enforced [clears throat] the three times
>> per Robert's rules of order.
[58:49] » Better make sure we do times.
>> All right. So, opening this up. Uh, we
[58:53] are in a public hearing, so I don't have
to open it up. It's a public hearing.
[58:56] » You would open the floor.
>> Motion to open the floor.
[59:01] » Okay. We've got a motion to open the
floor for public comment. Is there a
[59:04] second?
>> Second. A second from Trusty Andrews.
[59:07] All in favor of opening the floor for
public comment signify by saying I.
[59:10] » I. I.
>> And those opposed? That motion carries
[59:14] six to zero. The floor is open for
public comment. Anyone wishing to make
[59:17] public comment?
Is there anyone wishing to make public
[59:21] comment?
Hello. Hello. Is there anyone wishing to
[59:26] make public comment?
That was three times. There is no one
[59:29] wishing to make public comment. Is there
a motion to
[59:32] » motion to close?
>> Thank you. Motion to close
[59:35] » the public hearing. And who seconded
that?
[59:37] » I did. Trusty Rome seconded that motion
to close the public hearing. All those
[59:43] in favor of closing public hearing,
please signify by saying I. I.
[59:47] » I. Those opposed. That motion carries
six to zero. What would you like us to
[59:52] do now?
>> You would move on to item 8B, which is
[59:55] to act on the resolution.
>> Excellent. I just wanted to make sure.
[1:00:00] All right. 8B act on resolution 26011 to
vacate the unused portion of rightway of
[1:00:07] Cardinal Lane. This will be a roll call
vote. Is there any further discussion on
[1:00:11] this particular item? If there is none,
I would entertain a motion.
[1:00:14] » Motion to approve resolution 26011
discontinuing a portion of Cardinal Lane
[1:00:21] as detailed in exhibit A. Trusty McKe
has offered a motion to uh approve
[1:00:26] resolution 26011
disontinuing a portion of Cardinal Lane
[1:00:31] as detailed in exhibit 8. And I have a
second from Trustee Romis on that
[1:00:36] particular item. Last chance for any
further discussion, comments
[1:00:41] hearing. None. May we have a roll call,
please?
[1:00:44] » Absolutely. Trusty Andrews.
>> I.
[1:00:46] » Trusty Eert.
>> I.
[1:00:48] » Trusty McKe.
>> Hi.
[1:00:49] » Trusty Rome.
>> Hi.
[1:00:51] » Trusty Stevens.
>> Hi. President Venrazam
[1:00:53] » I.
>> Motion carries six to zero. Thank you.
[1:00:59] » Okay.
[1:01:07] Item 8 C this evening is um public
hearing municipal code amendment to
[1:01:12] chapter 18 the zoning code to amend
18.04 uh 04 parent 5 parent A. Minimum
[1:01:19] floor area to include the minimum size
of a residential dwelling shall be the
[1:01:24] finished space above grade as required
by each separate residential or
[1:01:28] agricultural zoning classification.
Zoning administrator Dunks.
[1:01:33] » Thank you. Right now the dwelling
standards require a minimum floor area
[1:01:38] in that section of a minimum of 1,200
square feet above grade. Our changes
[1:01:43] last year to the residential code when
we created the three the sewer district
[1:01:48] code when we created the three separate
classifications actually reduce that um
[1:01:54] down to 800 square ft in the RS3
um and we're looking to remove that
[1:01:59] language within 18.04
um to adjust to reflect that change. So,
[1:02:06] we're asking that the minimum floor
area,
[1:02:09] minimum size of the residential dwelling
shall be the finished space above grade
[1:02:14] as required by each separate residential
or agricultural zoning classification.
[1:02:22] It's just more to clean anything up.
It's not changing anything. We just
[1:02:25] missed when we did the code changes last
year.
[1:02:29] Okay.
Questions for zoning administrator
[1:02:33] Dunks? Anyone?
Isn't that kind of creating a low rent
[1:02:37] district?
>> We're not
[1:02:41] changing anything that wasn't changed
already last year at what in July, June,
[1:02:48] whenever we made that.
>> I didn't agree with it then either. So,
[1:02:52] » we're not
creating a low rent district.
[1:02:59] might be creating with our R3 an area
that's more affordable for some to stay
[1:03:06] within the village of Swamo, but that's
a totally different discussion and we're
[1:03:10] just trying to clean up the language
because we have a conflict in our code
[1:03:14] and it should have been changed along
with those changes that went into effect
[1:03:17] last year.
All
[1:03:23] right. Additional uh questions or
comments for zoning administrator Dunks
[1:03:27] on this?
>> Otherwise, being a quick learner, I'll
[1:03:31] look for a motion to open this up for
public hearing.
[1:03:34] » So, on the motion, you don't need uh a
motion to open the public hearing. You
[1:03:42] » you call for it and then you
>> But we had so much fun the last time we
[1:03:45] did it this time. [laughter]
>> All right. Never mind. necessary.
[1:03:49] » Trusty Eard doesn't get the opportunity
to offer a motion, then I'm sorry.
[1:03:53] » All right, let's open this up for public
Let's open this up for public hearing.
[1:03:57] Is there anyone um in the audience who
wishes to come forward on this
[1:04:00] particular item, municipal code
amendment to chapter 18 of the zoning
[1:04:03] code to amend 18.04, etc., etc. Is there
anyone in the audience who wishes to
[1:04:08] come forward and speak on this item?
[1:04:12] [snorts]
Welcome.
[1:04:16] » Hello. Uh Tom L 2091 Maggie Lane. So So
where do we have the residential zoning
[1:04:25] three area in the village?
Last year about this time, we took the
[1:04:32] residential sewer district
and we went from residential sewer to
[1:04:40] residential sewer one which encompassed
the entire
[1:04:45] old RS zoning. We created the ability to
go to an RS2 zoning and an RS3 zoning.
[1:04:53] » So where is RS3? Do you have a map?
>> No place right now. Well, you don't have
[1:04:58] a map of it. Okay.
>> Well, we haven't created any
[1:05:01] reclassifications. Our expected would be
around the Chambers Hill Bar Area would
[1:05:08] be our number one location where we
would expect
[1:05:12] more of a a denser population. Um likely
multifamily
[1:05:19] as part of that because no
>> Well, okay. So,
[1:05:22] » creating traffic.
>> I don't. So here's my feeling. So 800
[1:05:28] square ft, we already have apartments in
Swamo, right? So the building is more
[1:05:35] than 800 square f feet. Where would we
be putting a house that's only 800
[1:05:40] square f feet? I don't think we're going
to be putting tiny house houses in
[1:05:46] residential areas in Swamo.
>> Our RS3 zoning allows for single family
[1:05:53] homes. Yeah,
>> on smaller lots. Those lots wouldn't be
[1:05:57] large enough probably for a 1,200 foot
home. They can in RS3, they can have
[1:06:03] single family home, they can have
duplex, they can have multifamily. It's
[1:06:07] all by code now instead of all being
through PDDs and whatnot. And we've
[1:06:13] already changed that, created that. We
have an RS3 classification that allows a
[1:06:20] dwelling unit to be 800 square feet. If
it's an apartment building, each
[1:06:26] apartment unit would need to be that 800
square ft, not the entire apartment
[1:06:31] building.
It's already created. This is a conflict
[1:06:35] in our code that was overlooked when we
did this last year. And it's a cleanup
[1:06:42] of the code. We are not changing
how anything else is being implemented.
[1:06:48] This is just a cleanup of code language
that [clears throat] was missed when we
[1:06:54] did the thorough code change last year.
>> That's when we created RS3.
[1:07:00] » That's when we created the the three
separate classifications. Yes.
[1:07:03] » To get rid of the PDDs.
[1:07:09] » Still have
>> not to get rid of them, but to make
[1:07:12] » Yeah.
the streamline the process. Yes.
[1:07:15] » What's the width of an RS3 again?
>> I believe 65
[1:07:23] » about 60
>> 60 to 65.
[1:07:28] » Does
>> I mean RS1 is now down to 70. So
[1:07:31] » does this 800 foot require a one stall
garage attached to it?
[1:07:38] We still require if it's a onebedroom,
they must have a one- stall garage. If
[1:07:44] it's a two-bedroom or greater, they must
have a two stall garage.
[1:07:48] That's for all of your RS zonings.
And that's not part of this discussion
[1:07:53] tonight. That's something that was
already implemented in our
[1:07:57] » I just wanted to know if the 800 square
feet included the garage.
[1:08:00] » That's not finished.
>> That's notable space.
[1:08:02] » It didn't say
>> it says finished space above grade.
[1:08:06] Right.
>> It's not a garage.
[1:08:09] » It's creating a ton of apartments
basically.
[1:08:11] » Well, I see some nice
>> apartment's an apartment,
[1:08:14] » but this is like
>> I think that's a like a tiny house type
[1:08:18] situation.
>> Not an apartment.
[1:08:21] » Those are gross over generalizations.
You don't know that. You don't know that
[1:08:25] it's creating apartments or tiny houses.
What it does is it gives us it gives us
[1:08:31] the ability because these are still
approved by planning and zoning and
[1:08:35] still approved by there a recommendation
made by planning and zoning and approved
[1:08:39] by the board. Any plan that comes
forward. What this does is this gives us
[1:08:44] options and gives the community options
um if we decide to pursue those options.
[1:08:50] That's the responsibility of every
trustee who sits on this board. um and
[1:08:55] citizens get to speak out on it and etc
etc depending on where it's at. The idea
[1:09:00] was Chambers Hill, the issue with
Chambers Hill is
[1:09:03] [clears throat and cough]
a single family dwelling who's going to
[1:09:05] have little kids probably isn't going to
spend the amount of money it's going to
[1:09:09] cost for a home to live in back of a
bar.
[1:09:13] Now on the other hand, apartments may
>> and this was a mechanism
[1:09:16] » possibly
>> to when we go through our comprehensive
[1:09:20] plan, we will show those areas
more effectively within our new
[1:09:26] comprehensive plan on what areas and
what the density we anticipate that
[1:09:33] zoning to be.
>> And I think another way to look at this
[1:09:38] 800 square feet is it's a good
opportunity for a starter home if a is
[1:09:42] being built at $300 a square foot. The
person now wants to spend $240,000 on a
[1:09:48] home. Give a person or give a individual
or maybe a couple. Sure, it's small, but
[1:09:54] then what they're doing is they're
investing in something instead of paying
[1:09:58] money for rent for an 800 foot
apartment. Now, they've got a it's a
[1:10:02] smaller home. Sure. Sure. It's true. Or
or maybe they do the 800 square foot and
[1:10:07] they make it a twotory. Think Archie
Bunker, right? those those houses used
[1:10:12] to exist. They just didn't have garages.
>> And again, this is to clean up something
[1:10:18] that was missed. It's not to change how
our code is implemented. We already have
[1:10:23] those three zones.
>> I think it builds freedom in for
[1:10:26] individuals to build what they want to
build.
[1:10:29] » It builds less freedom for us to be able
to
[1:10:34] keep a lot of lowcost housing.
>> What what's problem with lowcost
[1:10:38] housing? Because what don't I mean the
What my complaint is is we we don't want
[1:10:44] to conflate conflate
lowcost housing with some of the other
[1:10:49] problems that we may see in society.
>> Okay. Welfare housing.
[1:10:53] » Well, okay. So, if you're but if a
person is building an 800 square foot
[1:10:58] house, they're still I mean, we're not
we're not talking about um subsidized
[1:11:04] housing.
>> I think we are.
[1:11:06] » Well, that's a whole different
conversation. Okay. So, we have to
[1:11:10] remember
>> house. It's a house that someone can
[1:11:12] afford to build who makes $60,000 a
year.
[1:11:16] » You have to remember it's 800 minimum
>> and correct. And they could go up to
[1:11:21] » they go whatever they want. Whatever
fits on the wall,
[1:11:23] » whatever.
>> Let's say it's 1,000 square feet, 1200
[1:11:28] » 1,200.
>> Yeah.
[1:11:29] » You know,
>> um I mean, you still have to go storm
[1:11:32] water management. you have if you have
smaller lots, you have uh more roof per
[1:11:39] the lot. I mean, there's a lot of things
that because you got to you got to put
[1:11:44] storm water management in any type of
subdivision you put there. So, if you
[1:11:48] put a bunch of small houses, you might
have a big pond or a couple ponds
[1:11:53] » on Yeah. retention ponds. You're going
to have to have those regardless of if
[1:11:58] you have a small house or big house, but
a big lot will have less uh hard surface
[1:12:05] on it than than a than a bunch of small
lots.
[1:12:09] » But you also
>> So you got to think about that. But I
[1:12:12] mean I have a question for um Alex on
this. So was this because of some
[1:12:18] federal requirements that you went to
smaller?
[1:12:22] » No. So the this code
>> compliance or something.
[1:12:26] » No, Tom. This code change
>> is like if in some area of the code we
[1:12:32] had said you can only have red and blue
houses and then in another part of the
[1:12:35] code it says you can only have red
houses. Well, they're in conflict. So
[1:12:39] that's what's happening here is we have
language in two spots that are
[1:12:42] conflicting. We're fixing those
conflicting
[1:12:46] issues. That's all we're doing here.
We're not adding or changing anything to
[1:12:50] the code. Okay.
Well, I guess my questions are answered.
[1:12:55] I
>> you know,
[1:12:57] » it'll be a lot of traffic on your county
highway.
[1:13:00] » Well, I mean, I worry about the
>> I worry about the land right here. We
[1:13:05] could go to tiny houses right behind the
village hall.
[1:13:09] » I mean, that's right next to my
subdivision, bigger houses.
[1:13:12] » We're we're we're in multiple
conversations.
[1:13:16] There has been
um many meetings like this, many
[1:13:22] presentations of how we got to the
zoning. And so, but we're not talking
[1:13:27] about changing the zoning. And so, I I
think I can appreciate, you know, these
[1:13:32] perspectives, but that's not what's
being asked tonight. This is really
[1:13:36] about cleaning up the vocabulary that
lines up with the zoning, not to debate
[1:13:42] whether the different types of zone and
how many square feet we have. That's a
[1:13:45] different conversation.
[1:13:49] » Well, you're doing your comp plan right
now, right?
[1:13:51] » We are. Yeah.
>> Okay.
[1:13:53] » And I think, you know, let's think about
it in a different way. This doesn't have
[1:14:01] to be low income housing.
>> This this could be housing for me to
[1:14:09] sell my house and live in Swamo. I only
use half my house.
[1:14:15] and be able to
the reason a lot of us are our age
[1:14:22] are not selling our house because
it's a wash. We go to a smaller house
[1:14:28] and we haven't even gained anything
where [snorts] I could finally build a
[1:14:34] smaller house on a smaller lot. I could
sell my house and I could pocket some
[1:14:39] money and live in a small place. So
think about it for the seniors. I I know
[1:14:45] many people out here in Swamo that are
looking for something to downsize. So I
[1:14:52] you got to stop thinking that this is
just for lowincome people. It's not. It
[1:14:59] could potentially be a great thing that
we don't have in Swamo for older people.
[1:15:05] So I would reference I would reference
the comp and for you supervisor Lond I
[1:15:09] mean come to the comprehensive plan
meetings that we're having. These are
[1:15:13] the discussions that we're having at the
comprehensive plan meetings. The
[1:15:16] discussion that we're having tonight
about the zoning RS 1, two, and three
[1:15:19] that was there were discussions all of
last year that led up to finally a vote
[1:15:23] last year on that that I think was a six
to one vote to change those that to RS
[1:15:30] one, two, and three um at that time. So,
and this is just the language as it's
[1:15:36] been stated to clear that up. Now, going
forward, you know, what we're going to,
[1:15:40] you know, where we're going to be
putting these buildings or how we're
[1:15:44] going to treat, you know, these
residential structures, where they're
[1:15:47] going to be. That's the planning and
that's the the comprehensive plan
[1:15:51] committee, which has seven citizen
representatives and is open to the
[1:15:54] public and meets after every planning
and zoning meeting. That's the next step
[1:15:58] that we're starting to move into right
now is where are these areas going to
[1:16:02] be? Where is if we have an RS3, where is
an RS3? What is an appropriate RS3 area?
[1:16:08] Um, you know, what those are those are
the discussions I think coming. And I
[1:16:13] don't think, you know, you talk about
tiny houses, Brown County has an
[1:16:16] excellent tiny house development for
veterans that they've been working on.
[1:16:20] Terrific. And there has been discussion
at the comprehensive plan level um about
[1:16:25] you know do we have any opportunity
where we could do something for senior
[1:16:28] housing like that a tiny house
development in the village of Swamo I
[1:16:32] think the consensus thus far although
there are options is no we don't because
[1:16:36] we just don't have the land for it um
but that comprehensive planning
[1:16:42] committee made up of citizens is having
those discussions and has a vote in this
[1:16:46] that they make recommendations to the
planning and zoning committee which will
[1:16:49] make re recommendations to of this board
and then the board will have to make
[1:16:53] those decisions with citizens commenting
all along the way. So I think there's I
[1:16:58] think there's a lot of what you're
trying to get at and what you're
[1:17:00] interested in. I think there's a lot of
that that's undecided and at that level
[1:17:04] right now and you know would benefit
from uh public comment
[1:17:10] and that meets every second Tuesday
>> or Monday
[1:17:16] second Monday. You're more than welcome
to participate. We'd love to hear your
[1:17:19] perspectives.
I show up every time.
[1:17:22] » But there is not one next week Monday.
>> What?
[1:17:27] » There is not a
>> Brown County.
[1:17:31] » Brown County does not have their stuff
>> ready
[1:17:33] » ready to present.
[1:17:37] » Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you.
[1:17:40] » Okay.
All right. Um I'm guessing there's no
[1:17:44] one else, but I'll ask three times just
in case. Is there any other public
[1:17:48] comment?
>> [clears throat and cough]
[1:17:51] » This is a public hearing. Is there any
other public comments?
[1:17:55] Last time public hearing. Is there any
other public comment?
[1:18:00] All right. Hearing none, we'll move on
to item 8, which is act on ordinance
[1:18:05] 2026-05
to amend chapter 18.04,
[1:18:09] parentth five, parent a minimum floor
area. This will be a roll call vote.
[1:18:14] Anything else to uh share? Administrator
Dunks. Sorry. Um, yes, Mr. Dunks.
[1:18:22] Anything else to add?
>> More than enough has been discussed.
[1:18:27] » Okay. Anyone else with comments on this
particular item?
[1:18:34] » Okay. Is there a motion?
>> Like to make a motion to approve
[1:18:37] ordinance number 2026-05
modifying 18.04 [clears throat]
[1:18:41] PR five PR a minimum floor area minimum
size of a residential dwelling shall be
[1:18:47] the finished above grade as required by
each separate residential or
[1:18:52] agricultural zoning classification.
Because what this does is this removes
[1:18:56] an inherent conflict inside of our code
and references the subsections to
[1:19:01] determine the area.
[1:19:06] » Thank you. That motion was made um in
its entirety by uh Trustee Romas. Is
[1:19:11] there a second?
>> Second.
[1:19:12] » I have a second from Trustee Andrews on
that motion. Last chance for any
[1:19:16] questions or discussion.
Roll call, please.
[1:19:21] » Trusty Eckert.
>> Nay.
[1:19:23] » Trusty McKifrey.
>> I. Trusty Rome.
[1:19:26] » Hi.
>> Trusty Stevens.
[1:19:28] » Hi.
>> Trusty Andrews.
[1:19:29] » I.
>> President Venrazza.
[1:19:31] » I.
>> Motion carries 5 to one. Thank you.
[1:19:35] » Okay. Item 8E this evening is also a
public hearing. Um it this is a public
[1:19:40] hearing on the municipal code amendment
to chapter 17 the subdivision code to
[1:19:45] include the requirement of building
elevations on the face of the plat.
[1:19:48] Zoning administrator Dunks if you would.
>> Thank you. Um due to um recent issues
[1:19:54] mainly this spring created by the
unusually heavy spring rains continued
[1:19:59] [clears throat] staff concern [cough]
with additional new homes being
[1:20:02] constructed with at risk situations. Um
staff looked at possible adoption of
[1:20:08] language within the subdivision
ordinance which would alleviate some of
[1:20:13] these concerns. Um we had some new
construction homes with
[1:20:19] um at grade exposed basement windows
that took on water during those heavy
[1:20:23] rains. We also had additional homes
built after that with the same risks and
[1:20:29] we really don't have anything in our
language that we can have that that
[1:20:35] assist us in making sure this does not
continue to be an issue. Um so we're
[1:20:41] suggesting that we add 17.05 parents 8
storm water management and drainage
[1:20:48] protections.
A would require the minimum minimum
[1:20:53] lowest opening elevations be required
for all lots adjacent to a storm water
[1:20:59] management basin drainage easement flood
plane natural overland flow or natural
[1:21:05] depression area. Um the storm storm
water designer engineer professional
[1:21:11] shall determine or approve a minimum
lowest opening elevation.
[1:21:18] B would require that would be the plat
requirement. The final plat or certified
[1:21:22] survey map shall explicitly display the
required
[1:21:27] minimum lowest opening elevation for
each applicable lot.
[1:21:32] Lots subject to this restriction shall
be clearly identified on the face of the
[1:21:37] plat with a visual graphic indicator
such as a circle lot number and
[1:21:43] accompanied by a mandatory restrictive
covenant note and then C for compliance.
[1:21:49] No building permits shall be issued for
a structure on a identified lot unless
[1:21:55] the building plans demonstrate that all
structural openings including first
[1:21:59] floor sills, basement lookout windows,
and egress openings are designed at or
[1:22:05] above the designed minimum lowest
opening elevation.
[1:22:11] If the asbuilt elevation is in question,
the building inspector may request
[1:22:15] certification from a registered land
surveyor and or professional engineer
[1:22:20] prior to issuance of the occupancy
permit. Thank you.
[1:22:28] » All right. Are there questions for
zoning administrator Dunks
[1:22:33] » on this particular item?
>> Could you cl I'm just not sure I
[1:22:37] understood one thing. It says if Could
you clarify what the asbuilt elevation
[1:22:42] is derived from? Is that you go there
and you is it after it's been built or
[1:22:46] something? You go there.
>> The asbuilt is after it's been built.
[1:22:48] » So you go there and you measure it and
say, "Hey, you guys were below." All
[1:22:52] right. [snorts]
>> If you know
[1:22:54] » I got you. I [clears throat] understand
now. That's
[1:23:03] » okay. This is a this is also a public
hearing. So, is there anyone in the
[1:23:07] audience who wishes to come forward and
speak to this item?
[1:23:12] Anyone in the audience who wishes to
come forward and speak to this item?
[1:23:17] Is there anyone who wishes to come
forward and speak to this item?
[1:23:22] All right. Hearing none.
Uh, are there any further questions on
[1:23:27] this or is there a motion?
>> I'll make a motion to approve ordinance
[1:23:30] number 2026
creating chapter 17.05 58 storm water
[1:23:36] management and drainage protections
requiring minimum lowest opening
[1:23:39] elevations on flats or certified survey
maps to inform property owners and
[1:23:45] builders of a risk that they can.
>> Thank you. We have a motion on the floor
[1:23:50] from Trusty Romis that has been seconded
by Trustee McKrey for the approval of
[1:23:55] this item um as stated and act on
ordinance 2026-06
[1:24:01] to amend chapter 17 of the subdivision
code. That motion has been made and
[1:24:06] seconded for approval. Could we have a
roll call vote please?
[1:24:09] » Absolutely.
>> Trusty McKrey
[1:24:11] » I.
>> Trusty Rome.
[1:24:12] » Hi.
>> Trustee Stevens.
[1:24:14] » Hi.
>> Trustee Andrews.
[1:24:16] » Hi.
>> Trusty Eckert.
[1:24:17] » Hi.
>> President Benzam. I
[1:24:19] » motion carries six to zero. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay. Item number nine this
[1:24:25] evening is um uh convene into close
session per Wisconsin statute 19.85
[1:24:32] parent one parent E deliberating or
negotiating the purchasing of public
[1:24:35] properties the investing of public funds
or conducting other un other specified
[1:24:40] public business whenever competitive or
bargaining reasons require a closed
[1:24:44] session in this case union bargaining.
We will also be addressing item B which
[1:24:49] is per Wisconsin state statute 19.85
parent one parent C considering
[1:24:53] employment promotion compensation or
performance evaluation data of a public
[1:24:58] employee over which the governmental
body has jurisdiction or exercises
[1:25:02] responsibility. This in this case is the
annual village administrator performance
[1:25:06] review. Is there a motion to move into
con to convene into close session?
[1:25:12] » Some moved.
>> Trusty Romis has offered a motion to
[1:25:14] move into close session. I will offer a
second on that.
[1:25:20] Um, all those in favor of moving into
Well, we need to roll call. Sorry.
[1:25:25] » Trustee Stevens,
>> I.
[1:25:27] » Trusty Andrews,
>> I.
[1:25:29] » Trusty Eert.
>> Hi.
[1:25:30] » Trusty McKree.
>> I.
[1:25:32] » Trusty Rome.
>> Hi.
[1:25:33] » President Venzo.
>> Hi.
[1:25:35] » Motion carries six to zero.
>> Thank you.