[0:04] Okay, we're going to call the meeting to order for the regular regular meeting of

[0:08] the common council Tuesday, August 25th, 6:30 p.m. And we'll begin with roll call

[0:14] and pledge of allegiance. Seth >> here.

[0:18] » AJ >> here.

[0:19] » Todd Kirkin >> here.

[0:20] » Kyle >> here.

[0:22] » Todd Spaith >> here.

[0:23] » Cindy >> here.

[0:24] » John >> here.

[0:25] » Tanya >> here.

[0:26] » Steve >> here. and Christa

[0:29] » here.

[0:37] » America to the republic which stands one nation under God indivisible with

[0:44] liberty and justice for all.

[0:51] Item two, approval of the August 18th, 2026 regular council minutes.

[0:59] » This is Tanya of approval. Oh, but I do have a question.

[1:02] » Sure. >> AJ, I'll second.

[1:06] » So, we have a motion and a second. Tanya, question.

[1:11] Just uh for a point of clarification on number nine, it says we were approved

[1:15] for the vibrant spaces grant and there was some confusion on this last time

[1:21] and I just were were we approved and if so great and if not if it was a pre

[1:26] approval or a like I just want it worded correctly so if you're comfortable with

[1:30] what's in here. We were they we sent in a preapp they responded that it had been

[1:36] we are welcome to send in the application which pretty much usually

[1:40] means you've you've got it but and then if then they would have held the 50,000

[1:45] for us like I said now the the audit when it's done they'll hold that 50 for

[1:49] us so no we're not approved officially yet

[1:52] » because you should that have to have council approval to

[1:55] » yeah we have to have a resolution that's plan should

[1:57] » that say preapproved >> I think be clearer That's all.

[2:02] » Okay. Thanks. That's it. >> So, we'll update that to say

[2:07] pre-approved. And we've got a motion and a second. All in favor?

[2:11] » I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Item three,

[2:15] council announcements. Does anybody have anything to share?

[2:20] » This is Steve. Happy first day of school.

[2:24] » Let's go.

[2:28] » That was what I was going to share. Wait.

[2:31] » Good. >> Anyone else have anything?

[2:38] All right, then we will move forward. So, we have um we're going to go into

[2:43] the first period for public comment. If you have just come in, there is a a

[2:49] clipboard going around with a pen and there are three public comment periods

[2:54] tonight. This first period for public comment is going to be for items 5

[2:59] through 13 on the agenda. So, if you want to make any comments on any of

[3:03] those items, this first period is the time to come up and make your statement.

[3:08] Um, if you are here to speak on item 14, which is the public school tax bill

[3:16] transparency or on the presentation on the resolution opposing the Marbel 765

[3:22] kilovolt project, um, there are two different boxes on there with those

[3:27] agenda items on there. So, feel free to sign up ahead of time. If you don't sign

[3:32] up, that doesn't mean that you can't speak. It's just um we'll go in order of

[3:36] who's on the list and then add people in. So the first period for public

[3:41] comment um if you want to make a public comment either online or in person, you

[3:46] will come up to the podium and state your name, your address, and you'll have

[3:51] three minutes for comment. And Sarah, if anybody is online and wants to make a

[3:57] public comment, raise your hand and she will help you unmute.

[4:14] Aaron Parker, uh, Lincoln Avenue. Uh, I have, uh, two comments. One is um uh at

[4:23] the um uh public safety meeting earlier, it was

[4:28] stated that the uh that the uh old city hall property is too small for a

[4:35] building. Um I'd just like to point out that uh of

[4:40] the historic buildings in downtown that wouldn't fit on that site,

[4:46] uh there are only three. The opera house, the Fortney, and the Temple

[4:50] Theater. all the rest of the buildings in downtown would fit on that property.

[4:55] Um, if you want what won't fit on the

[5:00] property, a Walmart won't fit, a McDonald's with a drive-thru won't fit,

[5:06] and I think that's for the better. Uh, my other comment is, uh, as part of the

[5:11] comprehensive plan, the city of Veroa undertook a separate historic

[5:15] preservation plan. Now that the plan has been approved, we can begin the long

[5:21] work of shaping and building uh a future that allows

[5:27] that also recognizes uh our history.

[5:32] uh Jason Tish, the senior officer uh at the state historic preservation off uh

[5:38] office who incidentally nominated nominated the city of Veroa for the

[5:42] excellence as best historic preservation commission in the nation for which we

[5:47] were selected uh has written to Cindy Hubard and me saying quote if the city

[5:53] would like to apply for a grant to do a full survey of the city I would

[5:58] encourage it. There was a reconnaissance survey done in 2001, but it looks uh but

[6:04] it looks like it was just a windshield survey with minimum research, and we

[6:09] like to see surveys updated every 25 years. I endorse his recommendation.

[6:14] Historic preservation in the US is a very recent thing. It was begun in

[6:19] response to the demolition of New York City's Pennsylvania Station in the late

[6:23] 1960s. I've been involved with historic

[6:27] preservation for nearly 50 years. All the work that I've been involved with

[6:31] has had the effect of saving or preserving or restoring or sensitively

[6:36] renovating notable historic structures and/or places. Preserving these places

[6:42] allows people to experience these places with their own senses. That experience

[6:48] places them in space and time and offers insight into whom we are and the society

[6:54] of which we are apart. In order to actually know what places and structures

[6:59] are of value, the city must undertake a thoughtful, well-measured and informed

[7:03] historical survey of the city. In that way, we will be able to protect our

[7:08] heritage and be better able to access our own local history. If we don't do

[7:13] so, we will be at the um we'll be making

[7:19] decisions based on the economic and political pressures of the moment. Thank

[7:23] you. >> Thank you, Aaron.

[7:37] Chapter call 609 South Rock Avenue. Um

[7:43] the comment just made refers to the possibility that we have

[7:50] as a council and as a community to consider

[7:56] the next 20 years in terms of the comprehensive plan that's been approved.

[8:01] Uh, and I think as we consider the next 20

[8:07] years, we have to think strategically in the moment that we're in right now. And

[8:13] that means having a long-term perspective on what

[8:20] the corner lot represents in terms of the aesthetic value uh of green space

[8:28] versus the possibility of using that land for income and tax revenue going

[8:37] forward. Having said that, there are some safety issues I think that haven't

[8:42] been brought up. One being the amount of diesel exhaust that happens on that

[8:49] corner every day. And we say young people shouldn't be in that park, but we

[8:57] have uh a very mobile young young generation now with the scooters and uh

[9:04] electric bikes. And I see them all the time down there in that corner and

[9:09] they're exposed to diesel exhaust. They're carcinogenic

[9:16] and dangerous. And I think uh we need to take consideration of the air quality in

[9:23] that location. Beyond that, I'd like you to consider

[9:29] if we're going to commit to the park that we have a hard and fast number of

[9:35] the cost, which I haven't seen yet.

[9:40] So, uh, I don't like going into open-ended

[9:45] projects where we don't know what the final cost is going to be. And I would

[9:50] encourage you to get a final number before you make your final decision.

[9:59] » Thank you. >> Thank you, Chuck.

[10:10] » Is there anybody online that would like to make a public comment? If you do, you

[10:15] can unmute or raise your hand.

[10:21] Okay, so that is the end of first period for public comment. We'll move to item

[10:26] five, review and approval of alcohol agent change for Aldi and that's coming

[10:32] from public safety. Okay, public safety just met tonight and

[10:37] there was a change with the agent for the alcohol for Aldi. The name of the

[10:41] new agent is Andrew Van Olstein. The reason that they're making this change

[10:46] is that the previous agent that they did have had moved to another location. Um,

[10:51] all background checks and stuff have come through. So, um, public safety sent

[10:55] it forward with their approval. Just looking for your guys' approval to, um,

[11:00] change this on their license. I'll make a motion to approve the

[11:04] alcohol agent change for Aldi. >> Kyle, I'll second it.

[11:08] » Motion by Tanya, second by Kyle. Any further discussion? All in favor?

[11:14] » I. >> Any opposed?

[11:16] Motion carries. Item six, discussion with possible action on class A beer

[11:21] license for Kikapoo Hospitality LLC doing business as American from public

[11:27] safety. >> Again, this was at public safety this

[11:30] evening. This is um a license that they've had in the past at the American

[11:36] when when it was Vernon in. They want to be able to have serve beer basically on

[11:41] a to- go basis. It's kind of like if you went to a quick trip and whatever and

[11:44] wanted to pick up a beer if you're at a hotel. Some hotels have this. Um the

[11:50] alcohol would be stored in a locked laundry and storage room and it would be

[11:53] purchased at the front desk if you're at the at the hotel. So everything is in

[11:58] order in regards to their agent has already has a license. Um public safety

[12:03] approved forwarding this to you with their approval. So, I'm just looking for

[12:07] your approval to move forward with this license application.

[12:13] » Make approval to approve the class A beer license for Kikapoo Hospitality

[12:17] LLC.

[12:21] » Steve, I'll second. >> Motion by Tanya, second by Steve. Any

[12:24] further discussion? All in favor say I.

[12:30] » Any opposed? Motion carries. Item seven, operator license approvals from public

[12:37] safety. >> Okay, I have several of them for

[12:40] Walgreens and I'm just gonna state their names. So, Zachariah Bordon, Deborah

[12:44] Shepard, Maya Campbell, Rebecca Nelson, Debbie Keance, and Steven Wedwick. Um,

[12:51] and then Gassers has Kendra Balden. Pizza Hut has Michael Baker, Andrew Van

[12:56] Olstein for Aldi. Um, all of these have gone through their background checks. I

[13:00] have one that came in today for Quick Trip South for Carol Fletcher. So, if

[13:04] you approve these, it would be all pending the background checks. All of

[13:07] them other than the last one has been approved, but you can just make it as um

[13:12] making sure that all of them have been done if you so choose to approve.

[13:18] This is Tanya. I'll recommend app or make a motion to approve CH license

[13:23] approve operator license approvals pending completed background checks.

[13:27] » No second. Motion and a second. Any further

[13:31] discussion? All in favor? >> I.

[13:35] » Any opposed? Motion carries. Item eight, review and approval of changes to the

[13:40] fire ordinance, public safety, and this is the first reading.

[13:52] » All right. So last month I brought it to public safety uh to make a change in our

[13:57] ordinance to go from eight fire officers to nine fire officers.

[14:02] And the reason for that is as we grow and continue the the workload um

[14:08] continues to grow that we want to be able to spread out that that uh amongst

[14:12] more people. Uh Josh now was on full-time obviously as a fire captain

[14:17] and so we're looking to replace replace him as far as um his previous position,

[14:23] but we would like to also add another. So that was the main reason for bringing

[14:28] the ordinance in front of them in the first place. Uh, as George and Steph

[14:31] went through it, they determined that if we're going to make one change, we might

[14:34] as well make any other obvious changes to the ordinance that either does not

[14:39] that needs some adjustments either be it punctuation, um, capitalization,

[14:45] um, better way to word it. U, they went through all that. Um, but the main

[14:51] change is again that going from eight fire officers to nine fire officers. As

[14:55] far as budget, I could talk about that a little bit. Uh, as far as budget, um, it

[14:59] won't affect it a lot. Um, because we're still only covering a certain amount of

[15:03] weekends, you know, those types of things. Um, and then obviously Josh is

[15:08] not getting that that stipened or whatever. So, you know, we can we can

[15:12] move that to a different location. So, the benefits definitely outweigh the the

[15:16] minimal cost that we may see. Um the other changes I guess that that uh I

[15:21] want to bring up is um uh is it three uh number three on there? Um it was uh it

[15:30] talked about where the firefighters had to live and

[15:35] state ordinance or state uh law was put into place quite a few years ago now of

[15:41] where it limited the ability for the city in this case to um how much

[15:48] they could limit that that piece of it where they had to live. So, um, George

[15:53] adjusted that to make it make more sense and it puts it more on the fire chief to

[15:59] determine what works for the city when we're hiring and working working through

[16:03] that or whatever, what our response needs are, what their position might be

[16:06] with the department, um, and so on and so forth. So, the other pieces it did

[16:10] talk about the fire chief and the assistant chief. So, that's section C

[16:14] there. And that used to require being within 2 miles both day and night uh

[16:20] majority of their time so on and so forth. So again completely opposite of

[16:24] what the state law um said you could do. So he changed it to fit what that state

[16:30] law allows. So again changes mainly due to um updates and then obviously that 8

[16:39] to9. So questions, thoughts, concerns.

[16:53] » I'd second that. >> Push your button, too. John,

[16:59] » they add that to the motion. >> Okay, I'll wave the second reading.

[17:06] » I'd second that. >> All right, so we have a motion and a

[17:08] second. Any further discussion? >> I just appreciate that you're getting

[17:12] this updated. It's important to update ordinances

[17:17] » when you can because

[17:21] » All right. All in favor? >> I

[17:24] » I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries.

[17:27] » That's going to be ordinance 26 002.

[17:34] » Thank you, Lori. We'll move on to item nine, review and

[17:38] approval of pay request number 10 for Hansen Farm Project Public Works.

[17:47] Okay.

[17:51] So, we're looking at a current payment for this pay request of 51,818.88.

[18:02] Um there's a lot of stuff all over the place. They're just finishing up a lot

[18:07] of what's making it look like a new area to be. Uh so a lot of road work, um

[18:14] curbon gutter and finishing up some of the the loose ends, so to speak, of

[18:19] things that weren't done before, like some um sanitary sewer televising, some

[18:24] storm water pipe. Um yeah, I'm trying to be concise. So, if

[18:30] anybody has anything that they want to ask about, please do. But everything's

[18:34] making sense. Um, we did have a few things where like we have a certain

[18:38] category that repeats itself throughout the pay request. And so, some of those,

[18:43] like for example, is this number 74 is a good one where it actually should have

[18:47] been distributed better throughout those other ones. Um, but we've done the math

[18:52] and recorded it and they are on par for what they should be using.

[18:57] So, that's about it. Unless anybody has specific questions, this did get

[19:01] approved at public works and brought forward.

[19:05] » I'll make a motion we approve the uh Hansen Farm project pay request number

[19:11] 10 >> for $51,810.

[19:15] And is that 88? >> Correct. Yeah. Sorry.

[19:20] How did >> I second the motion?

[19:22] » Motion and a second. Can we please have a roll call?

[19:26] Todd Spaith. >> Hi

[19:28] » Cindy. >> Hi

[19:30] » John. >> Hi

[19:32] » Tanya. >> Hi

[19:33] » Steve. >> Hi

[19:34] » Seth. >> Hi

[19:36] » AJ. >> Hi

[19:37] » Ty Kerin. >> Hi

[19:38] » and Kyle. >> Hi.

[19:40] » Moving on to item 10. Review and approval of pay request number nine for

[19:45] center avenue project from public works.

[19:53] I will say that

[19:58] the best news I've heard in months very

[20:05] like I'm so here like

[20:10] but they everybody's sympathetic and things should be really quickly now. Um,

[20:16] nonetheless, uh, current payment due is 39,2641.

[20:23] And this pay request is got items all over the place because as you can see,

[20:27] things are happening all over the place. We're having some road stuff being

[20:31] built. We got a lot of curbing gutter going on, but we're still

[20:40] also our store material. So, you always see this this odd number in the corner

[20:46] here where we have one which is actually material and then

[20:51] a deduction.

[21:12] » This is Todd. I move approval for pay request number nine for the Center

[21:16] Avenue project for $39,264.71

[21:24] » motion and a second. Any further discussion? Sarah, thank you for

[21:28] managing all those moving parts. >> Oh, and I apologize. I just got to note

[21:33] that I did not press my button.

[21:37] » All right. Motion and a second. Roll call, please.

[21:40] » Cindy, >> I.

[21:42] » John. Hi >> Tanya.

[21:44] » Hi >> Steve.

[21:45] » Hi >> Seth.

[21:47] » Hi >> AJ.

[21:48] » Hi >> Todd Kirky.

[21:49] » Hi >> Kyle.

[21:51] » Hi >> and Todd Spaith.

[21:52] » Hi.

[21:55] » Item 11, review and approval of change order number nine, the Veroa Welcome

[22:00] Center. I can take that one. >> Thank you Cindy.

[22:03] » Yep. >> If you wondering.

[22:07] » Yes. It's specific to an extension of time

[22:11] for the sake of final decisions on a series of details for sake of

[22:15] completion. Amongst these are details of a list of owner provided contractor to

[22:19] install items. In other words, we hadn't ordered the bathroom fixtures yet.

[22:23] That's what that's about. So, we were waiting to make sure that we had the

[22:28] funds and everything was, you know, in line that way. So, now we will order

[22:32] them promptly. So, that that's big the substantial completion date. We need to

[22:37] have the bathrooms ADA compliant. the building ADA compliant. So that was the

[22:42] big hold up.

[22:49] » Yeah. >> It's very exciting.

[22:52] » I'll make a motion that we approve the change order number nine for the Veroko

[22:55] Welcome Center. >> I'll second

[22:58] a motion and a second. All in favor? Do we need a roll call and a change order

[23:02] for that? If it's not >> There's no money involved in this. This

[23:05] is just changing so you don't hear. >> Yeah. All in favor say I. I

[23:09] » any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to item 12, discussion with possible

[23:15] action on the revised agreement with town and country for survey work from

[23:20] public works. Okay, so you have all seen this before

[23:25] um previously. What was different is this line here

[23:30] where it said the sanitary sewer survey that I would be doing the survey work

[23:35] which would save us $6,000 which is absolutely wonderful when I have the

[23:39] available time. Um but there's been a few things coming forward that I'm

[23:44] really wanting to get this interceptor study done sooner than later and I don't

[23:49] want to be the reason it's not getting done because I have lots of other things

[23:52] to do. Um so I'll be doing surveying but maybe for the park and not for the

[23:57] sewer. So um this is actually was approved at public works and at that

[24:01] time the work was just being done that day. So it's this is uh in retrospect

[24:05] here but the the contract amount is going to go up by that 6,000. So that

[24:11] was this 23500.

[24:15] So looking for approval to approve that

[24:20] even though it's >> already

[24:22] » already done. >> Okay. I make a motion we approve the

[24:27] town and country revised agreement for survey work for was it?

[24:32] » It would be like an additional 6,000. >> Additional 6,000

[24:35] » on that. Yeah. >> I'll second that.

[24:37] » Motion by Cindy, second by Kyle. All in favor? Actually, we need a roll call for

[24:43] that. Thank you, Lori. >> John.

[24:47] » Hi, >> Tanya.

[24:49] » Hi, >> Steve.

[24:50] » Hi, >> Seth.

[24:52] » Hi, >> AJ.

[24:53] » Hi, >> Ty Kirky.

[24:54] » Hi, >> Kyle.

[24:55] » Hi, >> Todd Spade.

[24:57] » Hi, >> and Cindy.

[24:58] » Hi. >> Item 13, discussion with possible action

[25:03] on old city hall site plan from public safety.

[25:08] » Okay. Uh, I realized last week that I did not do a good job, I think, of

[25:13] explaining how we got where we are, where we are now. Um, so I don't think

[25:17] we need to go over the history of the site, unless anybody wants us to. Um, I

[25:23] think we all are well aware of the old city hall getting why it had to be torn

[25:28] down. We tried to RFB to get the building fixed, but we got one person

[25:32] and we weren't comfortable or satisfied that that would f solve the situation.

[25:38] So, as Todd Spaith uh mentioned last week, we did took RFB out for the site

[25:43] and got no one. Um, when HPC designated it as a local or request nominated to be

[25:50] designated as a local site, they suggested it be a park because of the

[25:54] historic significance of it and because it could be a gateway, an entrance to

[25:59] our historic downtown. So, that was what happened there. um WEDC, Wisconsin

[26:05] Economic Development Corporation. They uh gave us a landscape designer or

[26:11] architect to work with. I think he was officially a landscape designer. I'm not

[26:16] sure. Um and we formed a design team which you've seen all those names

[26:21] before. We had a wide variety. Library, chamber, tourism, uh historical society.

[26:27] » It wasn't trick. You want me to >> Yeah, that's Yeah, that's okay. Um so

[26:31] you saw that. I don't want to go over every thing I didn't I covered. Um, and

[26:36] that gave us a good idea of things that would work, wouldn't work, and kind of

[26:40] an idea of the budget. Then we got busy with the U comp plan 2025 and pretty

[26:46] much took it to the end of the year. Then we heard that Vibrant Spaces had

[26:51] money left over. And so in February of 2026, we put a preapp in for that

[26:58] vibrant spaces grant based on that old concept plan. Uh Mark Tolman, the

[27:03] Lacrosse Regional Director of Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation, uh got

[27:09] back to Nate and I and said that it's a great location for it. Uh this is what

[27:14] the the kind of thing we're looking for, but there are some things we need to see

[27:17] in order for it to qualify to get the Vibrant spaces grant. And being that

[27:22] they're of the Wisconsin economic development, they want to see something

[27:25] put there that's going to lead to more economic development or lead help our

[27:31] economy, right? And the idea was that this is a spot that can be the entrance,

[27:38] like I said, to our downtown. I wanted to point out that safety is always a

[27:45] concern in our mind and the cost was always a concern in our mind. As we met

[27:49] with our landscape architect, um we did um

[27:55] interview three different architects for the plan. They were people that had done

[27:59] park and wreck planning. So that's how we happened to pick those three people

[28:02] that had been recommended by Kale. I believe Kale had heard of them and knew

[28:06] of them. And Kale's going to chime in when he feels need to. Um

[28:13] and then also Wisconsin Economic Development Corporation does know

[28:17] Veroqua. I wanted to point that out and they are very familiar with that corner

[28:23] and are interested in what goes on there. So um we worked with Blake Thson

[28:30] I think that's how you pronounce it or the now I can't remember which it was.

[28:34] Um if you want to go to Yeah. the site the concept planned please. Well, I

[28:41] could I don't know if I need to go over this again. Historic preservation. We

[28:44] wanted to point out historic site with uh interpretive signs that can be

[28:49] changed so that it's not going to be the same history forever. It's going to be

[28:53] other people can put artwork in or they can put the historical society can put

[28:58] stuff in there. You know, it's a library. It's we'll you know, it's

[29:02] open-ended. Um tourism because there'll be wayfinding

[29:07] uh signage. uh Chad Burus recommend or not recommend but mentioned to me that

[29:11] when they go to a town they often stop at places like this kind of get a

[29:15] feeling for you know what's where should I go from here kind of thing and this

[29:19] would point them to the welcome center would point them to the library and and

[29:24] point them to our historic downtown of course uh it would serve as a gateway to

[29:29] the historic downtown by some of the things I'm going to uh mention and

[29:33] definitely is going to make the site more beautiful than it is now

[29:36] beautifification which definitely helps when they come

[29:40] into town and their first impression, you know, would be something really

[29:43] attractive rather than this place that kind of looks neglected.

[29:48] Um, and then the promotion again is going to be promoting downtown

[29:52] businesses as I'm going to explain soon. Uh, casual community gathering space,

[29:57] art, as I mentioned, lighting is the Ballard lights, uh, picnic tables,

[30:02] walkways, shade. So, those are the kind of things that they wanted to see. Also,

[30:07] um, as far as how is it going to help the economy develop, they want to see,

[30:12] uh, programming, and I made the mistake last week of talking about events, and

[30:16] you're conjuring up, you know, hundreds of people, and that's not what this is

[30:20] about. This is about programs where a business can come down there and we'd

[30:25] have to pick, you know, decide when is a good day to do it, when it is a good

[30:29] time to do it, you know, when is the that all things that can be decided. But

[30:33] they would be able to bring something that they have that they sell or that

[30:37] they make. U Mark Tolman of WEDC recommended Utopia. He said they could

[30:42] spin show us how they spin yarn or you know because they do a lot of stuff and

[30:47] they could say and if you like this there's a whole bunch more yarn up at

[30:50] our store. That's the idea is to get people to go into the stores uptown. So

[30:55] that's how it would help the economy and tourists of course we want to encourage

[30:59] tourists to stay the night. So that's heads and beds kind of a thing. Um so

[31:05] that is I think that is the big thing. So year round programming is what they

[31:09] want to see. There's no definite number that I've seen that says you have to do

[31:13] so many. It's just that we have to make the effort to do something to bring

[31:18] people to our downtown. It's part of it. Um

[31:24] see gateway. See how things I mentioned the plan itself. You could go to that

[31:30] now. Oh, you could also show the Well, let's talk about this first. Um,

[31:35] yeah, I think that we talked the only thing I think he changed the holiday

[31:39] tree. I don't I think it was AJ suggested it be moved up farther so it

[31:45] would be more visible from all directions. Um, Chad Burus recommended

[31:50] that the two shade trees on the east end, uh, first we got to make sure

[31:55] they're in far enough so they're not any kind of a visual problem. But also um

[32:00] our arborist Wyatt Oldm recommended river birch, but river birch you can

[32:05] definitely see through and Chad thought it might be better to have a tree that

[32:09] you can't see through so much like a pine tree I mentioned at our last

[32:12] meeting or at the public safety where you could have branches all the way to

[32:16] the ground. But these are things that can be talked about, can be decided. Um,

[32:21] we're going to do the flower pots there as another barrier. The burm three to

[32:27] three and a half feet high in the middle and then it goes down with as aspen and

[32:31] that also would proide a barrier. Uh, historic marker. I pictured the upper

[32:37] right one there to be Moses Decker. Yeah. But it' be facing in so that

[32:42] people aren't trying to read it as you drive by. You know, we're trying to

[32:46] think of all the safety measures we can. Did you have anything you wanted to add,

[32:52] Kale? >> No, I think you're spot on right now.

[32:56] » And we're taking people in. That's another thing. These sidewalks take

[32:59] people in. They get them away from the corner in the street and the business

[33:03] with the picnic tables in there and the benches and things like that. Food

[33:08] truck, you know, they would have to make a reservation and they could charge be

[33:12] charged to use it. It wouldn't be just free for all.

[33:16] Um, does anybody have any questions about things like that? Uh, like I said,

[33:22] safety and cost were what we were definitely had in mind as we were doing

[33:26] this. What could we afford and what would be safe at that spot?

[33:31] » Yeah, like Cindy had mentioned, I think everybody's kind of thinking special

[33:36] events. This park is not special events. This is more of a passive park with a

[33:43] few small um tables and probably um a few um

[33:51] small events to get people to the main street. So again, don't think of the

[33:55] great lawn as we're going to have a concert there and pack everybody in on

[33:58] the great y lawn and listen to a concert. That's not what we're going

[34:03] for. It's more passive with um small tables that people can come up to.

[34:11] » But we do have to do the year- round programming.

[34:13] » Yeah. >> You know, that's important. That's

[34:14] something they want to see. But like I said, there's small these are small

[34:18] events. We're not talking about big event. I don't want to use the word

[34:21] event. Small. >> One thing I just wanted to add to I was

[34:25] talking to Cindy. Um I just took a trip around uh Michigan and all these small

[34:30] towns. um have a gathering space, lots of them, right on their main drag. Um

[34:38] you know, just down south of Portage, Wisconsin. Um I I actually had my wife

[34:44] take a picture. I'm like, "Take a picture of that because that's what

[34:47] we're kind of going for." So, as you go around, you see a lot more green space

[34:54] in their their communities to get people there, stop, see what's going on, and

[35:00] get them into town. So, again, that's what we're trying to do here.

[35:04] » Could you show them an Namin Fall pictures? This was mentioned last week

[35:08] as a spot that's very similar to ours, a very busy intersection. This is how it

[35:12] used to look. Well, it looks like they're starting to work on it when this

[35:15] picture was taken. And then this is this is different angle. I'm sorry I couldn't

[35:19] find one with the same angle, but it gives you an idea of how nice a spot

[35:25] like that can look. And it's very successful even though it

[35:29] is at a busy intersection. But like Kale said, it's not the only example

[35:34] something like that. Did anybody have any comments before we

[35:39] move on to the budget? Do you have anything else?

[35:42] Okay. I'm sorry. Last week you got some incorrect information that I didn't even

[35:46] realize you had. So, um, we we're going to give you the correct stuff. This

[35:51] time, the updated that was old stuff that we'd been working on.

[35:57] » Yes, please put the first one up. >> This one here is the one, the correct

[36:02] one. Yes. >> Yep.

[36:04] Here. What it shows is the owner soft cost. We were lucky. The uh Verbecker

[36:09] did a top topographical topographical topographical survey for only $850 and

[36:14] we thought it would be much more than that. Architecture the uh our part

[36:20] architect is charging us 20,400 and he has been very good to work with.

[36:26] I think we all were very pleased with how fast it all came together once we

[36:30] had you know met with him. Yeah. Can you break down that 20,000 because I think

[36:36] um >> now I don't remember how it's broken.

[36:38] » Well, I know that earlier in the process, wasn't there like we paid for

[36:43] step by step? We haven't paid all of that for what we see. Is that correct?

[36:47] Or is the 20 >> I'd have to look back

[36:50] » correct. We've only paid 8,000 for the first if we went through the whole

[36:56] project with Blake, it would be 20,000, but we would have to come back to

[37:00] council to get that approval. That was at the first council meeting. So, we've

[37:07] only paid them 8,000 right now. >> Okay. So, that I think I remember that

[37:11] number being to get to the final drawings

[37:16] » through project management and bidding. >> Thank you.

[37:21] Um construction costs, those are the 78,362.

[37:27] And then in order for us, you can see down below TID 6, we um decided in our

[37:32] CIP, we approved 53,500 for the uh old city hall site and the

[37:40] vibrant spaces is worth 50,000. So that brings us to 135.

[37:47] And you can see that there's a lot of inind costs and what I and before you

[37:51] have a heart attack about the uh Oh, that should not be there either. That I

[37:55] thought that I eliminated that. Yeah. Um the 48,000

[38:00] a lot of that has to do give you Well, we can go to the next page.

[38:04] » Yeah. Next page. >> Yeah. Go to the inind donations.

[38:09] » Show you how that is because these are numbers based on what it would

[38:14] cost a contractor to do these things. Um and the city will be doing some of the

[38:19] in infrastructure and then some of the site amenities

[38:24] and then the inind we're hoping to get the public uh memorial benches, trees,

[38:30] uh the mural uh and the shade structure. So again, I

[38:35] would say that the 145 is high for putting that gray plastic thing around

[38:42] there and the de demolition of the parking lot

[38:47] and uh some top soil and then the lawn, the burm trees. Again, the trees are

[38:55] just listed at 400 because those are things that will be added. So we have

[38:59] not do not had a definite figure on that one. outcropping stones as we find as

[39:04] the city finds those big stones they can put those on the burm uh picnic tables

[39:10] kale thought that they could come out of park and wreck budget uh signage is

[39:15] split with the uh some of the money is coming from the in the 78,000 figure and

[39:22] some is coming from the city planner pods we already have you want to add

[39:27] anything to that uh about the city stuff or Maybe Sarah,

[39:32] I don't know. >> No, like I told Cindy, like we're we're

[39:36] currently trying to update some benches and picnic tables throughout the other

[39:41] parks. So, as we do that, um there's maybe opportunities that we get a picnic

[39:48] table for that park as we would for all the other parks as well. So,

[39:54] » as far as the trees, I have at least four people that have already come

[39:57] forward wanting to donate trees. So, uh I remember our mayor J Justin wanted to

[40:03] donate trees and uh several other people have come forward. So, I don't think

[40:08] this def and we like we said we do it as we go but it'll be we have an arborist

[40:13] so we'll do it right. Um the mural that's another thing that we can do then

[40:19] we want to be part of the mural walk but again that doesn't have to be done right

[40:22] away. So

[40:25] this is if you go back to the other ones and really Yeah question.

[40:31] » So are those numbers labor costs or >> the 145 and the 153 were numbers from

[40:39] the um our architect for it be what the contractor what he

[40:44] estimated would cost charge >> but the but it's in kind city cost. So

[40:48] is it inind city like so that's coming out of somebody's budget.

[40:53] Um, so I'm curious or and is it including labor or is it just for um

[41:00] what's the word I'm trying to come up with the things?

[41:02] » Well, I think it's going to be less number one. But

[41:06] » so like demo of the parking lot is just us

[41:10] using our equipment and our our crew that already exists, right? So it's not

[41:14] necessarily the gas or something like that that we

[41:18] would spend on a typical day. the erosion control. We would need to buy

[41:23] some of those materials, but it's not 14,500. So, she's she's taken that

[41:28] number out of the original architect's like line items budget, right? So, for

[41:34] for the contractor to do it, it's 14,500, but for us, it's usually a

[41:40] fraction of that, right? Because we're paying for

[41:43] » So, it's things that we already have. So, we're not buying something and then

[41:46] it's labor. We would buy We don't have to buy top soil, but we do have to buy

[41:50] that erosion control fencing, but I mean, it's a fraction of that.

[41:55] » 14,000. >> I understand that.

[41:56] » It's not going to cost us $8,000 to demolish that the old parking lot and

[42:00] the >> and the if we paid someone to do it, but

[42:04] yeah, in house, it's just work we're doing.

[42:06] » Yeah, that's the kind of stuff. >> And the site amenities. I heard Kale,

[42:10] you say you're you're buying new picnic tables for other spots and you'd also

[42:14] buy them for this site or you're going to move.

[42:17] » We could look to do that. Yes. As we rotate

[42:21] » or maybe somebody would want to donate, you know, money for picnic tables, too.

[42:26] » Yep. So, if we don't have donations, where's the money coming from?

[42:30] » Well, that's what we don't have to do it all at once. I don't think that

[42:33] » that doesn't answer my question. Is this a park and racks budget item? Is this a

[42:37] public work item? >> What What exactly are you talking about?

[42:43] » Because if we >> Let me start over.

[42:48] » I don't care what the number is. It's going to be something. We're going to

[42:52] spend some money. You're telling me those numbers are a little high, but

[42:56] there's going to be a number there. >> Where is that money coming from? Whose

[43:02] budget is it coming from? Why is this a hard help me am I asking a

[43:08] question that doesn't make sense to other people?

[43:10] » No, you're >> Thank you.

[43:13] » Can I have it set

[43:17] where it's coming and the 153 are what are listed as estimates for contracted

[43:23] work that are being suggested could actually happen inhouse from the city.

[43:29] So that's the top one. I think we all got that you're saying. So what how do

[43:34] we get to the added up cost of what those will cost?

[43:39] » Nope. Let me start over. >> Okay.

[43:41] » Whose budget does any cost come out of? Whose budget is paying for any cost that

[43:48] ends up being incurred? >> It it looks to me like on that top

[43:51] infrastructure sess section would come out of hers. What what materials they

[43:56] use and gas things like that. Picnic tables would come it would come out of

[44:01] multiple departments. It looks like >> picnic tables would come out of park and

[44:05] wreck. >> So our wages and the gas and everything

[44:07] like that would come out of street and we haven't had the conversation of who

[44:11] is actually buying the erosion control fence. I don't know that yet that didn't

[44:16] have that conversation. I mean, we have a budget meeting tomorrow

[44:20] and the next day and we will have to allocate even if even if the total cost

[44:25] ends up being $5,000 or $10,000, it's got to come from somewhere, right?

[44:31] » Yeah. >> So,

[44:33] » it sounds like multiple. >> If somebody wants money to pay for these

[44:37] things next year, I would encourage you to tell me or Todd

[44:42] or any of the people on the budget committee where you think that money is

[44:45] coming from. So, you're only talking about the top two, right? Because the

[44:49] bottom ones is plain. We're talking about

[44:51] » I'm talking about any any money that's coming from the city. And we are just

[44:54] happen to be on this page right now. I haven't gotten a solid answer for the

[44:59] » kind public would be coming from the public.

[45:03] » And if we don't get those donations, >> well, we

[45:07] » then we just won't do them. We will wait till we get I don't think you'll have a

[45:11] problem getting the trees and the memorial benches but and the mural can

[45:15] be put off the shade structure you know right Tanya I agree with what you're

[45:23] saying because I'm on the budget team as well that in order to make decisions for

[45:29] how we're allocating money for next year we need more detail. Is that what you're

[45:35] asking? Uh uh I have a hard time approving

[45:39] something that I don't understand how we're paying for it. I'll be honest with

[45:42] you. So we could start with that question.

[45:46] » Um can we hold that question for for a

[45:50] moment? So to zoom out a little bit, the design

[45:56] that we're seeing is a schematic design. It's still only in the first phase of

[46:00] design and the estimated numbers are based on what we're seeing there. So,

[46:07] um, when we approved to have this design done, we said we were only going to go

[46:12] forward with the schematic design to get to a place where we knew it would

[46:17] either maybe happen or not happen. And that's where we're at today. Some of

[46:24] that was we had to have a design to get approved or to actually apply to the

[46:29] grant, which now we know we have a pre-approval waiting on an audit. that's

[46:35] almost done. Um that came from public safety

[46:39] last one hour ago. Um

[46:47] so the appro any action taken tonight is

[46:52] not to finalize a design or finalize the acceptance of the whole project. I think

[46:58] it is to continue to the next step. But I want Cindy to clarify that of what is

[47:07] the next step and what do we actually need to walk away from so we have

[47:13] numbers for budget or next steps to get those numbers.

[47:17] » Does that >> Sure.

[47:19] » Yeah. It sounds like I need to meet with Sarah and Kale and we can talk about

[47:23] these numbers. Um because in two weeks we hope to have the resolution. the

[47:29] resolution has to be attached for the application. So, does it have to exactly

[47:35] be the way it's on there once we turn hand in the application? No. My

[47:39] understanding is does not, but it can't be any major major changes either. It be

[47:44] my understanding. So, so I think I see us closer than maybe you see us.

[47:51] » I think we're closer. I think we also will probably end up needing to come

[47:55] back with a resolution >> that you're suggesting and also the um

[48:02] next phase of design. >> Excuse me, ma'am. No, please.

[48:05] » On the agenda because it was a furthering of our public safety and all

[48:10] this was supposed to do was cover that we went through the chief of police,

[48:15] went through the chief of fire. They don't see any issues with this plan

[48:19] moving forward. And that's all this agenda item was. It wasn't to talk

[48:24] budgets. It wasn't to do any of that. It was to say that we approved it from

[48:28] public safety that everything looks to move forward.

[48:32] » That's not my understanding. Thank you, Seth. But my understanding is that

[48:36] whatever was the agenda item last week, we were going to public safety get

[48:41] public safety concerns answered and then it was coming back to us for that same

[48:45] line agenda item that was on the agenda last week.

[48:49] » If that did not include talking about the budget, then I don't know why we

[48:53] were talking about it today. >> No, no, it it should have last week.

[48:57] I think it's all of those things that the budget was on the um council packet

[49:03] last week, but we didn't >> it had incorrect things in it

[49:06] » and we didn't get into that part of it at the discussion last time because we

[49:11] also sent it to public safety. That's what

[49:15] came out. >> And yes, it did. Um Seth's comment of it

[49:21] coming back here tonight. I just looked at the agenda item

[49:27] context to that too. >> Well, I mean it was what we were

[49:31] » discussing as the concerns arose of traffic and vehicles having an issue

[49:37] with >> extra eyes on a spot and what the

[49:42] concern is with safety measures to maintain separation. And through what we

[49:48] discussed in public safety, through what both chiefs presented, we have to

[49:54] obviously take concerns about what trees and what plants go in there. But there

[49:58] wasn't anything that come out of public safety that said we need to stop this

[50:02] process. It's all I had hoped we were covering, but I

[50:08] wasn't here last week either. So, >> does anyone else from public safety want

[50:12] to add anything from their comments or the meeting outcome?

[50:22] » Yeah, I'll just say so I, you know, I was a loud voice last council meeting

[50:27] about concerns around safety in particular for pedestrians and

[50:30] representing someone who has a family of pedestrians. Um,

[50:36] I was impressed with how thoughtful both chiefs were and listening to the

[50:41] concerns and how Cindy has laid back out how safety has been a concern

[50:45] throughout. So, I will say that I voted in favor of moving it back out of the

[50:50] public safety committee and back to this body um, in great part because everyone

[50:55] was demonstrating thoughtfulness and listening and concern and I would expect

[50:59] we would do the same as the project unfolds. That's my summary. Yeah, there

[51:04] was also uh comments made as the project unfolds.

[51:10] It's like we're not going to keep the chiefs out of those decisions made.

[51:14] We're going to include them in whatever changes. I think I understand also we

[51:20] didn't talk about budgets and public safety, right? That we are now. And

[51:24] there you do have a line on here that says expenses, revenue, and then you you

[51:27] say there's savings just below like move that up a little bit.

[51:34] » It's on there. So, right. But I guess what I'm saying is

[51:38] like if you're already accounting for savings and you don't have money in hand

[51:42] from donations, it does raise questions of where does the money come from?

[51:48] That's I I that's why I sit with Tanya in this discussion because

[51:54] um budgets are real and you can't just say

[51:58] oh it's going to be donated everything's going to be donated because then like

[52:02] you said if it has to be a certain uh design or we can't change it so much

[52:08] then we can't just delay the whole park >> while getting the grant money right like

[52:14] we have to build the park Right. So like it has to come

[52:20] from somewhere. >> I don't think there's a timetable. I

[52:24] mean this is what we're planning on doing. And I mean they know what the

[52:31] project is. They know the inind you know

[52:36] » they being WEDC, >> right? I just uh

[52:42] I don't know. I so I sit on the uh playground committee and we have a

[52:47] mural, but it was not free, right? Like we did account for that in our budgeting

[52:54] here. It's like you have it accounted for as it's going to be a donation

[52:59] and I don't know that's you know what I mean? Like it's hard to

[53:04] say. >> You don't think that's a make or break

[53:06] thing for the >> No, I'm not saying that either. I think

[53:09] we're just concerned that if you're accounting for $40,000 being inind,

[53:16] it's hard to say yes, we're all for this project knowing that we might be on the

[53:21] hook for an additional $40,000 and not knowing where we're going to maybe get

[53:26] that money from is like I guess does that make sense?

[53:28] » I don't think it'll be 40,000, but >> sure. No, because of

[53:33] » I understand any additional monies still need to be

[53:38] accounted for and that's I think all that Tanya was trying to

[53:43] » if I don't want to start a park project that we get halfway through we're not

[53:47] able to come up with the the um you know the inind stuff and then but we still

[53:53] want to move forward or perhaps the grant is requiring us to move forward

[53:57] and then we have to pay for it somewhere. I think we'd also be remiss

[54:02] if by assuming that any of the stuff in the inind city doesn't cost anything

[54:07] just because the city workers are doing it. It's their time and labor that

[54:12] they're then not doing something else for the city. So, it is costly. It's

[54:16] just not money. I've got to write a check for today, right? But it's time

[54:23] and money and work that they that they aren't doing something else. Um,

[54:29] » is there a way that we can give clear direction on what we need next to make a

[54:35] an approval or a decision on

[54:40] » what was the next agenda item? >> The so the end goal of this is to move

[54:45] towards the preapp or the application now with WEDC when the audit is done. Is

[54:52] that correct? >> But we still need the resolution.

[54:55] » Correct. So the resolution is coming on the next agenda the second week of

[55:01] September. Is there something else we also need to

[55:08] have in a packet to get to an approval for that

[55:16] or to inform or answer some of the questions?

[55:23] Um, >> do you want to see a full budget?

[55:27] » Yeah, I think that would help. >> Do you want to see those costs allocated

[55:33] by department or estimated by department or

[55:36] » wasn't that a part of the $8,000 we approved was to get architecture to

[55:43] create a bid plan to so that we could get to the point of bidding so that we

[55:47] had an end goal. Well, if we're still in that early point, then I think

[55:51] » No, we have >> Okay. Well, then then we have to

[55:55] probably be able to review that to make choices moving forward off that, I would

[56:00] say. >> Is that something that we can get to for

[56:06] the next meeting to see the costs breakdown of that plan?

[56:12] Do we want to see it phased or do we want to see it as a whole?

[56:18] or both. >> I Yeah, I would answer that with a

[56:21] question which is we we brought up here is how does WEDC define the park being

[56:26] done so that we can then receive that grant money. So whatever

[56:31] » it's a good point >> pieces of the budget get us to that

[56:34] » definition of done if you will. >> I will say these WEDC grants are

[56:38] reimburseable. So you have to pay for that stuff upfront and then get

[56:43] reimbursed. So you have to be able to go far enough into your project with those

[56:48] inind parts on those statement of expenditures

[56:52] in order to get reimbursed. So there are upfront costs. I'm just letting you know

[56:56] that you need to know in this budget going into it.

[57:00] » Um well I I know you know vibrant spaces grants but I know when I hand in the

[57:05] application they don't want the inind stuff listed. They just want the budget,

[57:09] the construction costs, and >> you still have to come up with the

[57:12] $50,000, which is all construction costs, right?

[57:17] Yeah. >> Yeah. You have to show expenditures and

[57:20] and some of that stuff when you're doing >> in order to get the money,

[57:25] » you have to show that. And that's all part of that has to be done first. And

[57:29] if that's not if you're going to do it in phases, you're not going to get the

[57:32] money all up front and then be able to finish it in phases. I'm just telling

[57:36] you that that's how these grants work. You have to have it paid for and then

[57:40] get reimbursed. So, just keep that all in mind when you're looking at this as

[57:45] well. >> Sarah and Kale and Cindy, is this

[57:49] something that over the next weeks ahead of the next council, this could be

[57:53] worked on to bring on the next agenda? So, with regards to the stuff the public

[58:00] works is doing, um, I can try to figure out like how much the silt fence costs.

[58:06] I do hesitate a little bit about like our time and equipment, which I can

[58:11] certainly put in, but you brought up the park project. I think you'd be surprised

[58:15] how much public works is split. And we do that all the time. Public works works

[58:20] for everybody at some capacity at some point. And so just to be fair to all

[58:26] departments, we don't necessarily like parse out the oil change amount that

[58:30] like we did work on the police cruiser or the you know, so I just I don't want

[58:35] to get too much in the weeds with that. >> I'm not asking for that,

[58:39] » but I'm happy to look at like, okay, what would have to come out of our

[58:42] budget that we wouldn't normally have like silk fence for example?

[58:46] » Anything you're Yeah, the erosion I can do that.

[58:52] This is also coming at a time when we're scrutinizing our budget, so it's top of

[58:56] mind. Um, but I think if we can get to having a

[59:01] full budget to review and approve or review and discuss

[59:07] um with the resolution and then we'll have an update on the

[59:14] audit. Is that kind of where it

[59:18] » I'm like maybe two days away from getting that part approved. So that part

[59:21] is not >> Okay.

[59:22] » What happened with that is that they won't even allow us to apply for this

[59:26] grant because the the audit was holding it up. Then they got the audit and they

[59:31] didn't like the wording within the audit. So I'm trying to work with our

[59:34] auditors to get some side notes in there. And I think I'm this close to

[59:40] getting it being okay. So that part won't be an issue. I think that we need

[59:45] to leave out the inkind uh donations and and work um unless

[59:53] they've already been committed unless somebody's already committed to the

[59:57] trees. Um but the the shade structure and and

[1:00:02] uh the mural and things like that, there's not 100% certainty that, you

[1:00:08] know, we're going to get that donation. >> So, I think they have to be left out

[1:00:12] too, don't they? I think it goes again to what do we need to accomplish with

[1:00:16] this park space to fulfill the $50,000 grant money and

[1:00:23] » can we as a city accomplish that and do we like what we accomplish before

[1:00:29] » that gets received.

[1:00:36] » I hear Seth saying he wants to move this along.

[1:00:40] » Seth, do you have a motion? Well, I don't think that grant hinges

[1:00:44] upon a shade structure or a mural,

[1:00:49] » right? >> Well, and again,

[1:00:52] » Huh. >> That's a good point,

[1:00:54] » right? But I mean, >> I maybe didn't understand and and

[1:00:58] » the agenda item was because from what it looks like on our agenda, y

[1:01:04] » I would like to make a motion to move forward with our

[1:01:10] part plan. Is it green spaces? What are we

[1:01:14] calling it again? >> Broke green.

[1:01:15] » Broke green. Not official on account of approval from public

[1:01:21] safety.

[1:01:25] That muddied. I'm just That's what we're covering tonight for this space. And

[1:01:35] » it's got a motion. >> I'll second it

[1:01:38] » and a second by Todd. any further discussion.

[1:01:44] » If we need to talk about when we're being presented the actual budget of

[1:01:49] this, then that would just need to be another agenda item, but to get us

[1:01:55] through what the agenda was for tonight. So,

[1:01:59] that discussion has to happen. >> Where's that admin when you need him?

[1:02:07] » I will say I wasn't at the last one either. However, public safety really

[1:02:11] shouldn't have been put on this agenda the way it was listed. It was just that

[1:02:16] it went to city council last week. It was forwarded to public safety for those

[1:02:20] concerns and come back. So, it technically is the exact same as what it

[1:02:24] was the last council. Public safety should not have been listed on here. So,

[1:02:28] that is an error. I just wanted to make sure that you're

[1:02:31] » Lauri was out last week. >> I was at my clerk's conference. So, I

[1:02:34] wasn't if if I would have been asked, I would have said don't put that on there.

[1:02:37] But I'm just letting you know that if you wanted to change your motion, say

[1:02:40] and it's because of what came out of public safety, that may not be actually

[1:02:44] what your intention should be in that motion. I'm not trying to change your

[1:02:48] mind. >> Should it be contingent upon a final

[1:02:52] budget approval? >> That's what, however you guys want to

[1:02:55] put it. It just doesn't need to be attached to public safety.

[1:02:58] » I'm probably not the one to be doing the motion because I wasn't here last week

[1:03:02] that started this conversation that got us to this point. So, I don't know what

[1:03:05] we were trying to accomplish in the end here.

[1:03:08] » Do we need any further approvals to move to the next phase on

[1:03:14] this that would need to come to council next week to be presented to get this

[1:03:18] project continuing forward? Is there anything like I'm hearing we need a full

[1:03:24] budget breakdown that shows all in all all things together?

[1:03:30] We could have a side breakdown that shows what's possible to be in kind, but

[1:03:34] we still need to see where everything falls within department budgets to plan

[1:03:40] for and that if that comes next week or sorry to the next council agenda that

[1:03:48] in addition to the resolution,

[1:03:52] what is the next step for this project? because we're only at the first phase of

[1:03:59] design, right? The first 8,000. So, once it's approved, then what do we need to

[1:04:05] do next? >> Well, we we need the resolution and then

[1:04:10] we hand in the application. Okay. And we wait to hear back. And I know that they

[1:04:14] don't want any inkind information on that application. So, I'm puzzled by

[1:04:18] what you're saying. >> My my my point of all of that wasn't

[1:04:22] what goes into the application. My point is is when you get the money and we were

[1:04:27] talking about budgets and how are we going to pay for this, the fact that you

[1:04:32] have to pay for it and get reimbursed, those items need to be thought through

[1:04:37] as to where those funds will be coming from. That was the point of what I was

[1:04:41] trying to make on that. I thought that this that we approved

[1:04:46] $50ome thousand dollar from the city back when we decided to turn that into a

[1:04:52] green space from the table. >> So is it there? Okay. So was it 50?

[1:04:57] » That's on their um line number 16. >> Wait. Okay, there it is. Yep. I'm sorry.

[1:05:02] I think some of the confusion comes in is that the grant is because I've been

[1:05:06] helping Cindy try to get the application in is that they don't want to see in

[1:05:09] kind donations because it doesn't need to be that match like our match only has

[1:05:15] to be it can cover up to 75%. And so our match of TID money of 53,500

[1:05:22] meets that match. And then Loriy's talking about something we're we're kind

[1:05:26] of having three different conversations. Um you're absolutely right. We right, we

[1:05:31] get into that all the time. We need to make sure that we have our match or

[1:05:35] their match covered until they reimburse us. So that's like another element that

[1:05:39] we have to make sure our cash flow is working. And then in order to do the

[1:05:43] whole project of that 151,000, we have those inkind donations that make up that

[1:05:49] remaining amount. So this is a very challenging conversation, but I think

[1:05:53] everybody's right in some way. And it for budget purposes, we want to see if

[1:05:59] those donations don't actually get made, are we paying for them and out of what

[1:06:04] department? >> Or we just don't

[1:06:06] » or they get eliminated, right? Yeah. >> So that's where I was using the word

[1:06:10] phased, right? Like maybe those get phased over time or it's an inkind

[1:06:15] donation or it's another grant in the future for

[1:06:19] picnic tables or for that. It comes together as the plan over time, but

[1:06:25] maybe not right all at the first build. Does that

[1:06:31] » I don't know if a vibrant spaces grant would work like that.

[1:06:34] » Kyle, you brought up you. Yeah, go ahead.

[1:06:37] » Can you get as much clarification on the grant

[1:06:41] » and then present that to us? >> Well, I'm see I think we're there now.

[1:06:45] We've got way more than we have more than 50% match and they only require 25.

[1:06:53] » Sure. But if you're saying that the grant needs the plan like this plan

[1:06:56] can't be deviated from in a wide sense, then it we're already locked into this.

[1:07:03] You know what I'm saying? Like it doesn't we can't parse it down.

[1:07:08] » Does that make sense? >> We certainly need to clarify what

[1:07:10] qualifies us as complete by the side. >> Thank you. Do we need to add that to a

[1:07:15] motion? >> Uh, I think we need to start off.

[1:07:18] » There's already a motion on the table. We have to deal with

[1:07:20] » amend the motion. >> The motion on the table was basically to

[1:07:23] move forward with the Veroa Green project and you had

[1:07:27] » as proposed by public safety which are you wanting to remove that piece is what

[1:07:31] I'm asking. >> Remove public safety if that was not

[1:07:34] supposed to be part of your second and then you need to vote on this one and I

[1:07:37] I if you're approving this and there's money involved, we need to do a roll

[1:07:41] call. So, are we ready for the Roll call on this.

[1:07:46] » I just want to say one last thing. I promise it'll be quick because I asked

[1:07:50] one question about the budget and then chaos ensued.

[1:07:54] Um that was not my intent. I just wanted some clarity. Um I am going to be voting

[1:08:00] no to this project. Has nothing to do with the budget. I just wanted that to

[1:08:04] be clear because I I'm going to get a lot of kickback

[1:08:08] and I just I I'm opposing it because of the project scope. I just want to be

[1:08:12] clear about that to the public. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a

[1:08:19] second by Todd >> Herking.

[1:08:24] » Can we Can you clarify what my current motion is?

[1:08:29] » Motion by S, second by Todd to move forward with the Veroa Green project.

[1:08:34] That was the end. If you're taking out that Okay.

[1:08:37] » All right. Then we will take a roll call. Tanya,

[1:08:41] » no. >> Steve,

[1:08:45] » hi. >> Seth,

[1:08:48] » hi >> AJ.

[1:08:50] » Hi. >> Todd Kirking.

[1:08:51] » Hi, >> Kyle.

[1:08:53] » I >> Todd Spaith.

[1:08:55] » Hi, >> Cindy.

[1:08:56] » Hi, >> and John.

[1:08:57] » Hi. >> Motion carries.

[1:09:02] » Way less complicated, but public school.

[1:09:07] » What she said. >> Okay. So,

[1:09:11] Before we move on to item 14, I want to call attention to item 15, which is the

[1:09:16] second period for public comment. There is a Thank you. Um,

[1:09:24] so there are two people currently signed up to make public comment on item 14.

[1:09:30] We're going to start with the presentation and then open it up for

[1:09:34] public comment. Each person will have three minutes to talk on this. Does

[1:09:39] anybody else want to add to this list? And if not at this time, that's fine. If

[1:09:47] you want to come up, um, what I'll do is I'll call from the top of the list down

[1:09:51] and then when we get to the end of it, if anybody else would like to start

[1:09:55] commenting, um, we'll just come to the podium in

[1:10:00] line. So, item 14, presentation on public school tax bill transparency.

[1:10:08] Christina Reer James is here. Uh some background on this. Christina emailed uh

[1:10:13] me as the mayor and said that she has been doing advocacy work on this. I

[1:10:19] remember her being at the empowering education event that was held in West

[1:10:24] about a year ago. with some of this on the presentation agenda. Um,

[1:10:32] I want to set some expectations that we are not here to have debate about where

[1:10:39] money is going or what things that the city cannot control. We are here to talk

[1:10:46] about the decision of what the city could do and how. Right? So, if the city

[1:10:54] council hears and decides there's something that they want to do, then

[1:10:59] there's the how do we actually do it? Um, so the conversations about what

[1:11:04] budget it comes out of and who does the work um would then be discussed

[1:11:10] and that is the intention of this. There are some additional community members in

[1:11:16] the room tonight from the public school, also from the county because uh along

[1:11:22] with the city, the county, the public school, the DPI, there are a lot of

[1:11:25] people involved in how this transparency of where public dollars go gets to your

[1:11:32] tax bill. So, with all that in mind, I'm going to um invite Christina Racer James

[1:11:37] to start her presentation.

[1:11:43] Um, hello. My name is Christina Reer James and I'm not a big public speaker,

[1:11:47] so I've written this, so I'm just going to read it to you guys. Um, I'm here

[1:11:51] today as a concerned community member. I'm a resident of Vernon County and a

[1:11:55] graduate of Kikapoo High School. In the past few years, I've become a strong

[1:11:58] advocate for an accidental advocate for public education. I stand before you

[1:12:03] today on my own accord representing only myself, no school district or no other

[1:12:08] organization. I want to bring attention to an issue

[1:12:11] regarding our property tax bills that has bothered me for some time and I

[1:12:15] would like to bring forward a possible solution.

[1:12:18] When I reached out to the mayor to ask if I could address the council, I did

[1:12:22] not know that the Veroa area schools was going to announce an operational

[1:12:25] referendum. I want to make it clear that to everyone that I am not addressing you

[1:12:31] on that I am addressing you on a completely separate issue. This has

[1:12:35] nothing to do with the school's work to educate the public on their referendum

[1:12:38] and I apologize if I have made a complex situation even more complicated.

[1:12:44] I'm here today to address only one topic, transparency on our tax bills. My

[1:12:49] issue is that the public money funding tuition for private voucher schools is

[1:12:54] included in the public education portion of our property tax bills. I believe

[1:13:00] this is misrepresenting where our tax dollars are actually going.

[1:13:06] Legislation um to require separating the aid

[1:13:11] reduction caused by education vouchers from the public education portion on the

[1:13:16] property tax bills has been introduced in the state legislature for the past

[1:13:21] decade, but it has never even received a public hearing. This is why I feel it's

[1:13:26] incumbent on us to take action at a local level. We can no longer wait for

[1:13:31] them to legislate. We have the ability to tackle this here on our own.

[1:13:38] Because the voucher programs were expanded statewide under the budgeting

[1:13:42] process and were not voted on by the public, many community members are

[1:13:45] unaware that there are currently four taxpayer-funded private school tuition

[1:13:51] voucher programs here in Wisconsin. The original program, the Milwaukee Parental

[1:13:55] Choice Program, is funded off the top of the general purpose reserve. The other

[1:14:00] three programs, the rine parental choice program and the statewide Wisconsin

[1:14:05] parental choice program and the special the special needs scholarship program

[1:14:10] are all funded through state aid reduction deductions that reduce local

[1:14:16] public school district revenues. The two programs that affect our area

[1:14:22] schools and most rural schools are the Wisconsin parental choice program and

[1:14:27] the special needs scholarship program. The current 2025

[1:14:33] and 20 through 27 state budget which allocates state funding for public

[1:14:39] education gave zero new general aid to our public schools for the next two

[1:14:44] years. The same budget did increase the voucher

[1:14:48] payments for private schools, which in turn did increase the amount of tax

[1:14:52] dollars going to private schools. Although I have always found this issue

[1:14:56] to be of transparency troubling, what spurred me into action at this time is

[1:15:00] the fact that since 2017 when the voucher program was expanded statewide,

[1:15:05] there has been an enrollment cap limiting the percentage of students in

[1:15:09] the district that could participate in the voucher program.

[1:15:13] This coming year, this coming school year, the caps fall off. There will be

[1:15:18] no limit to the number of vouchers per district. I feel it is more important

[1:15:22] than ever to give tra property taxpayers a more honest understanding of where

[1:15:27] their tax tax dollars are going. Local property taxes have been funding

[1:15:32] the statemandated private school voucher programs for years, but this cost has

[1:15:37] been inaccurately bundled into the single education line

[1:15:42] item. Even though the public schools have no control over the use or use use

[1:15:47] or account accountability of those funds, by separating out the amount

[1:15:52] levied for the voucher programs, property owners would be able to

[1:15:57] understand what portion of their tax dollars do not actually go to their

[1:16:01] public school. Depending on the location of the voucher school, your tax dollars

[1:16:06] could be leaving the district entirely to support private schools in other

[1:16:10] communities across the state. Last spring on April 15, 2025,

[1:16:17] last year in April 2025, um the Green Bay City Council voted to support adding

[1:16:23] a line under the note port section of the tax bill. The note reads, "Of the

[1:16:29] amount levied by the Green Bay Area public schools, X amount of dollars is

[1:16:35] for the purpose of private school vouchers. This was an effort for clarity

[1:16:40] and transparency. Since then, other Wisconsin cities have

[1:16:44] taken similar action to address this issue, either through a line on the tax

[1:16:49] bill or through inserts included in the tax bill envelope. These cities include

[1:16:55] Milwaukee, South Milwaukee, Racine, Oaklair, Shbboan, Bay View, Westburn,

[1:17:00] and Ashland. Wisconsin public schools educate over

[1:17:04] 800,000 children each year. the public schools are held to a strict standards

[1:17:09] regarding mandates, transparency, and accountability. I believe the taxpayers

[1:17:13] deserve transparency regarding what amount is being diverted away from our

[1:17:18] public schools. I am not here today to support or oppose educ education voucher

[1:17:23] programs, but rather to ask that we all do what we can to provide transparency

[1:17:28] for the general public. In in order to begin this process, I ask

[1:17:34] that the Veroa City Council consider following the example of Green Bay and

[1:17:39] pass a transparency resolution. You could use this resolution

[1:17:46] to direct staff to work with the Veroqua Area School District to follow the

[1:17:50] example of the growing list of Wisconsin cities and municipalities that are that

[1:17:55] are providing more transparency for the general public.

[1:18:00] Um, we do not have to reinvent the wheel. We can be guided by the

[1:18:04] blueprints used by these other communities.

[1:18:07] I want to thank the city council for allowing me to speak. I chose to address

[1:18:11] Veroa City Council first as the county seat in the largest school district in

[1:18:16] Vernon County. I do intend to share this information with other cities and

[1:18:19] municipalities. Um, members of the council as well as

[1:18:23] interested community members are welcome to reach out to me for additional

[1:18:27] conversations. Thank you.

[1:18:31] Thank you, Christina.

[1:18:35] Um,

[1:18:39] so at this time

[1:18:44] we're going to Christina's going to stay, but we're going to open up um

[1:18:49] public comment, the second period for public comment.

[1:18:53] And

[1:18:57] during so with this in mind that during the item 16 discussion with possible

[1:19:02] action towards a tax bill transparency resolution that portion will be a

[1:19:08] discussion by council in collaboration with questions or

[1:19:16] any kind of input that might need to come for education of council in this

[1:19:22] decision from the public school um or the county. I believe the

[1:19:28] treasurer may be online um at this time and Lori

[1:19:36] as city clerk. So >> may I make a suggestion?

[1:19:39] » Yeah. Y >> I just wondered if Christina could talk

[1:19:42] about this because this is very important. She could just talk about

[1:19:45] that line. >> Do you have a spec about that specific

[1:19:49] line? Yeah, Roa, just talk about how exactly are you talking this is

[1:19:53] affecting. >> Okay, so these are the numbers um the

[1:19:56] aid reduction from each school district. I just chose these because they're area

[1:19:59] schools and the biggest point of this is the increasing amount and Baroco went

[1:20:05] over a million dollars. Um, I just think people should understand where that

[1:20:09] money is going because it is separate to, you know, the the money that's going

[1:20:14] to our public schools and it has always been identified as in one line and I I

[1:20:19] don't understand why we can't separate that out.

[1:20:23] » Thank you. >> I would even ask that you go one step

[1:20:28] further and explain what aid reduction means. Does that mean that's that less

[1:20:35] money going to our public schools because Okay, I just wanted to make sure

[1:20:40] everybody was on the same page. >> Thank you, Seth.

[1:20:44] » Yep.

[1:20:47] » Um, yeah, let's let's talk more on that when we open the discussion and let's

[1:20:55] come Yep. No, that's valid. I mean, I I I'd be happy to answer, but I just feel

[1:20:59] like if there's somebody who knows more than I do, then they should probably be

[1:21:01] talking. >> So, we'll move on.

[1:21:03] » We move on to public comment. We can't actually dialogue with the people

[1:21:08] speaking. So, I think it's okay to ask. >> Is that why you're here, Chris?

[1:21:13] » Yeah. To to answer that question before public comment.

[1:21:16] » Do you feel comfortable answering that? Okay. Do you want to come up to the

[1:21:19] microphone so anybody that's listening online can hear? Um, so Seth, do you

[1:21:24] want to re ask your question just for clarity? And then

[1:21:28] » I was simply from a wide openen perspective

[1:21:34] wanting the explanation of aid reduction and what that term means in terms of

[1:21:42] what's getting pulled from public schools.

[1:21:45] » Sure. Uh, we we refer to this as our voucher number, if you will. So, uh, it

[1:21:51] it's the amount that the DPI bills the school district every year for

[1:21:59] private school vouchers. >> So, it's not necessarily money they're

[1:22:03] taking away from you. It's money that you have to pay as a school district to

[1:22:07] support the vouchers >> overall. You you could look at it that

[1:22:12] way. I mean, I could get into I could get into the weeds on a whole lot of

[1:22:15] things. Um, >> meaning and I don't necessarily want to

[1:22:18] do that. um here uh I want to be able to answer questions and those kind of

[1:22:23] things, but um it it is it that number comes out of our June 8 aid payment. Um

[1:22:30] you know, there are things we can do with our levy um and the revenue limit

[1:22:34] that allow us to be able to offset that cost though.

[1:22:38] » Can you state your job? >> I am the director of business services

[1:22:43] for Roary Schools. >> And your name? Sorry. Go ahead.

[1:22:48] Um, for the the purposes of our deliberation and discussion tonight on

[1:22:55] the tax bill says public school and a number,

[1:23:00] what happens

[1:23:04] with this number in your world that would help inform a city council

[1:23:11] decision to help with transparency? Does this get subtracted from that? Is

[1:23:17] that that simple? >> We we've got we've got different levies.

[1:23:24] We've got our operating levy. This is part of our operating levy. We've got a

[1:23:27] debt service levy. We have a community service levy as well. Um the reduction

[1:23:35] th this number is born out of um I guess our operating levy is born out of our

[1:23:41] revenue limit. uh that is set by the state. Uh there's a per pupil amount and

[1:23:49] it fluctuates based off of enrollment. The as you kind of work down the uh the

[1:23:57] the revenue limit worksheet, it uh does then remove um this dollar figure from

[1:24:04] the money that's coming to the school district. Every district in the state

[1:24:09] also has the ability to be able to claim a revenue limit exemption

[1:24:14] for this number. So in essence and and and most do the

[1:24:21] the district could not afford to cover this by itself. So essentially by

[1:24:25] claiming that exemption we are the the that dollar figure is passed directly to

[1:24:32] the taxpayer.

[1:24:38] Appreciate the clarification. >> Can I ask a question?

[1:24:42] » Is it is it similar to like if like we collect property tax the levy for the

[1:24:48] city and then we had to write a million dollar check to back to the state to you

[1:24:55] to distribute to other municipalities

[1:25:00] » potentially. I think it depends on when you look at how much you can levy

[1:25:06] because that that's specifically controlled on our end. I I don't I don't

[1:25:11] know the levy the levy side of um it for the the municipality. um you know so

[1:25:19] it it it it has a significant impact. The the the place where it becomes more

[1:25:25] challenging especially in the environment that we're in right now is

[1:25:28] that when we're going and we're you know we we see no new general aid. Um

[1:25:34] expenses increase. We don't get regular inflationary increases to our revenue

[1:25:39] limit and heaven for decades. Um, and you see the inflation that we've seen

[1:25:44] over the last number of years, things become more expensive. We don't get more

[1:25:48] money. That squeezes budgets. That results in us having to go to an

[1:25:53] operational referendum to be able to ask our taxpayers to exceed our revenue

[1:25:58] limit. This comes as part of the conversation

[1:26:02] when we're talking about our mill rate. Um, this is an additional cost for

[1:26:06] education that taxpayers have to pay. um you know so when we're communicating

[1:26:13] our mill rate in those conver in those conversations that we have about

[1:26:17] operational referendums this is part of that number. Um you know

[1:26:22] so when we're you know when someone's looking at their tax bill and they're

[1:26:26] and they're and they're trying to determine how much the school district

[1:26:30] is actually you know getting from them. Um right now this number is part of

[1:26:36] that.

[1:26:41] Does anybody have more questions before we go to public comment?

[1:26:46] Did you want to add anything on that? No.

[1:26:51] » Thank you, Chris. >> Thank you.

[1:26:53] » Okay. So, we will move to item 15, the second period for public comment. Um,

[1:27:00] I've got two people on the list and once we go through those two, if anybody else

[1:27:04] wants to come forward in person or online, I will invite you to do it at

[1:27:10] that time. So, we'll begin with Kim Little.

[1:27:16] Kim, can you state your name and address and then you'll have three minutes for

[1:27:20] public comment? >> Kim Little, 425 Chicago Avenue. I've

[1:27:24] been here about many things before, but um I

[1:27:29] do want to say I'm not representing the Veroa school board. I am a member of the

[1:27:33] Veroa school board, but I am not representing the school board. I'm just

[1:27:36] representing myself. I myself went to um 12 years of private education for which

[1:27:45] my parents and myself we paid for that. So that I'm not opposed to private

[1:27:50] education in any way, shape or form. I think the question this brings is the

[1:27:56] transparency so people understand and as you discussed earlier you were talking

[1:28:02] about you're applying for these grants where these where these money is coming

[1:28:05] from that is a transparency thing you're trying to understand and see what's out

[1:28:10] there and yes it does make a difference for us that as a school system a million

[1:28:17] dollars goes out and I will say you know people just need to understand the

[1:28:22] difference because you know what Tanya brought up a thing but you talked about

[1:28:27] going to other government agencies in essence with that money not to private

[1:28:32] agencies which I think that's that's a difference that people need to

[1:28:36] understand and they need to understand that public school educates everybody if

[1:28:42] you appear at the door you get an education have to meet their needs no

[1:28:47] matter what they are and everything private schools do not have to they can

[1:28:51] say, "We don't want to deal with you anymore." As a matter of fact, they can

[1:28:54] enroll you and two weeks later they can say, "We're not going to enroll you."

[1:28:59] And they come back to the public school, but the third Friday counts already, so

[1:29:02] we've already missed a half a year of state aid. So, I think really budgets

[1:29:07] are very complicated as you kind of were indicating even in your discussion about

[1:29:12] the the the park or whatever you the green space, you know, having that

[1:29:17] transparency. This is really about transparency. It doesn't change where

[1:29:23] the money goes. It's just so the public understands that a million dollars of

[1:29:28] your tax money goes to private schools. That's really what it's about. I if it's

[1:29:34] complicated to do and everything else, I don't know the ins and outs. I'm sure

[1:29:39] Lori's thinking, "Oh, now I got to figure this out and put it on the bill

[1:29:42] and everything." But I I would encourage you to do that. Thank you.

[1:29:48] » Thank you, Kim. Matthew Vos, you state your name and your address in

[1:29:55] three minutes. >> Uh, my name is Matt Vos, uh, 815 Chicago

[1:29:58] Avenue. I'm also, well, I have I have had five children go to, I think, every

[1:30:04] form of public and private school in this entire community.

[1:30:08] Um, I'm also the administrator of Youth Initiative High School, which has been a

[1:30:12] private high school here, uh, since 1996.

[1:30:16] Um I guess basic thing I want known is that uh you know we are not a voucher

[1:30:22] school. So if uh there's ever any problems with vouchers that you have

[1:30:26] lose my number. Um but I will say that you know I think in

[1:30:33] terms of uh transparency I have never I've always voted against um every

[1:30:39] public education referendum that has ever been put up um recent and that's

[1:30:45] because I have felt that the public school um yeah has has not always

[1:30:50] represented the whole public. My views on that have changed pretty

[1:30:55] dramatically. Um, I think I will definitely be voting for this

[1:30:58] referendum. Um, because the public school has become, I think, more

[1:31:03] transparent about what they're doing and more cooperative with working with the

[1:31:07] entire community. I think it's important to remember that these, you know, this

[1:31:11] money is going, this is not just flying to some, you know, these voucher schools

[1:31:16] are heavily regulated. Um, they are accountable to state standards in many

[1:31:22] of the same ways that public schools are. Um,

[1:31:26] you know, I think if you want to take transparency all the like are are you if

[1:31:30] if someone wants to pay if the school system wants to pay a million dollars

[1:31:34] for a new athletic field, is that going to go on the tax bill? Not everyone's

[1:31:37] going to agree with that. Um, in fact, that's why I didn't vote for the last

[1:31:42] referendum. But, um, the I think taking a wider view is really important here.

[1:31:49] the these schools in this community um have been an engine for economic growth

[1:31:56] for an expansion of tax base and economy generally. I mean I know I can look at

[1:32:04] dozens of people um in this room who made the decision to move here to buy a

[1:32:10] house here um in whole or in part based on the educational choices they have in

[1:32:16] this community. So, um I guess it doesn't putting just the private tax or

[1:32:23] the private um payout to the voucher program on the tax bill doesn't feel

[1:32:27] like transparency to me. That that feels like targeted transparency. Um and if

[1:32:32] you want to do full transparency, put the whole, you know, put the entire

[1:32:36] school's budget in the envelope. Um and and people are going to have they're

[1:32:41] going to pick and choose what they like and what they don't like. But part of

[1:32:44] living in a, you know, diverse community is

[1:32:48] sometimes means paying for things that you don't actually like. There's a lot

[1:32:53] of things that my tax dollars go to that I don't agree with,

[1:32:58] but I think that's part that's part of living in a community with other people

[1:33:02] who have different views. And it's part of supporting choice. And I think that's

[1:33:07] really important. um and has been while you watch other small towns fade into

[1:33:13] the distance, this town continues to be vibrant and even growing and I think

[1:33:17] private education plays a huge role in that.

[1:33:22] » Thank you, Matt. >> Yeah, go ahead.

[1:33:27] » State your name and >> My name is Christina Reer James, Retown,

[1:33:30] Wisconsin. I just wanted to a couple things. um they do not have the same uh

[1:33:37] accountability and transparency as public schools. But that isn't the issue

[1:33:40] we're talking about right now. The issue that we're talking about is

[1:33:43] transparency. Like how many of you knew that your tax dollars were going to fund

[1:33:49] public schools? And not I'm not I'm not saying anything I or private schools.

[1:33:53] I've I sent my own children to a private school. I have nothing against it and I

[1:33:57] understand the value of the public schools in our community. But your tax

[1:34:01] dollars are also going to the Academy of Excellence in Milwaukee or wherever, you

[1:34:06] know, because some of these schools are online. So, and also like public

[1:34:11] schools, you can go to the DPI and look at the public school budget. You can see

[1:34:16] it all. It they it is transparent. It's all available. It's public information.

[1:34:20] And that is not true of of voucher schools. But my issue is just that the

[1:34:27] community understands where they're talking. I don't think that the public

[1:34:30] school should carry that burden alone on the tax bill. And and that isn't saying

[1:34:36] anything bad about the school, any school. It's just saying this is where

[1:34:41] your money's going. There's nobody in this room that has

[1:34:45] anything bad to say, I'm sure, about the good schools we have in our community.

[1:34:50] We just think people should understand how the money is being spent.

[1:34:55] » Thank you, Christina. Does anybody else from the public either

[1:35:01] online or in the room want to come forward for

[1:35:06] public comment?

[1:35:10] » Sarah. >> Yep. Sarah's gonna

[1:35:14] » Can you state your name and your address and then you'll have three minutes?

[1:35:19] » Yep. Hi, this is uh Karen Dap. I'm the Vernon County Treasurer uh at E7130

[1:35:26] Swenson Road in Baroqua. Um I just wanted to talk a little bit about what

[1:35:31] should and shouldn't I guess go on the tax bills. Um so really what should go

[1:35:37] on there is how much they should pay, when they need to pay it, and where it

[1:35:42] needs to get paid. Um I know uh they used uh Green Bay as

[1:35:49] an example and I just wanted to kind of state that when they did that they had

[1:35:53] to abbreviate a lot of things which caused a lot of confusion to the

[1:35:57] taxpayers. So because our systems don't allow for a lot of notes. Um they had to

[1:36:04] abbreviate GBAs I believe on there and then a dollar amount. So, a lot of

[1:36:11] people didn't know what that stood for. Um, so I would recommend if there is

[1:36:17] going to be something with the transparency to put it on the the back

[1:36:21] of the tax bill or in your insert that shows the DPI website and where more

[1:36:27] information can be found. Um, I'm going to be the one taking a lot of those

[1:36:32] phone calls along with Lori um, in regards to where those numbers come from

[1:36:37] and we don't always know those answers, but the school would probably know that

[1:36:42] or DPI would know that. So, that's just my concerns. Thank you.

[1:36:47] » Thank you, Karen. Um, are you staying online for So, we're in the public

[1:36:52] period or public comment right now. Um, I'm hopeful that you'll stay online for

[1:36:58] the next discussion with possible action where we can talk and ask questions in

[1:37:03] more detail about what you just shared. >> Sure. Absolutely.

[1:37:07] » Thank you. For the public, Karen Dap is the um treasurer for Vernon County. So,

[1:37:14] that's who we just heard from. All right. Um, is there anybody else online

[1:37:19] at this time who wants to make a public comment?

[1:37:28] Thank you. Um, you can come forward, state your name, your address, and

[1:37:32] you'll have three minutes. >> Do I press a button here first? It's

[1:37:35] already on. Uh, my name is Michael Brown, uh, 410 East South Street here in

[1:37:40] Veroa. Uh I just want to take a moment to to thank uh Christina immensely uh

[1:37:44] for taking the lead on uh understanding a very complex issue that has been with

[1:37:51] Wisconsin for uh for quite a while now. Um what we have seen in the in the

[1:37:57] public is that not a lot of people understand how money goes from one place

[1:38:01] to another and what's happening. Uh and I I personally support the transparency

[1:38:06] effort um to uh to understand where money is going. um and so that we all

[1:38:11] can make better decisions uh as we think about uh what we need to do for

[1:38:17] ourselves uh in in elections uh with elected officials and start to think

[1:38:21] about how to affect change that can um uh that can really affect a community

[1:38:25] positively. Um, I think the the issue overall that we're looking at, um, I

[1:38:31] think people are just tired and people are exhausted and there is a lot of

[1:38:37] noise in the world. And when it comes to something like this, looking at this

[1:38:42] grid and saying, "What money am I talking about?" Not many people can sit

[1:38:46] there and and take the time to absorb that. But um Christina, thank you for

[1:38:50] taking the uh taking all your personal time to to figure this out and actually

[1:38:54] come forward with a proposal that can help people understand better what's

[1:38:58] actually happening in very complex systems. Uh and I just want to voice my

[1:39:02] support for seeing more transparency uh within our tax bills. So thank you.

[1:39:08] » Thank you, Michael.

[1:39:14] » My name is Sonia Newuenhouse. I live at 422 Hickory Street. Um I have a daughter

[1:39:19] at 8th grade at Veroqua. I support having transparency but mostly my reason

[1:39:26] being um with declining enrollment not at all just due to private schools but

[1:39:31] to population changes. Um we really need to support our public schools and that's

[1:39:38] how our our town will stay vibrant. um as well as having the additional schools

[1:39:43] to keep our you know people wanting to move here. Um and when people see a

[1:39:48] higher and higher proportion of their tax bill going to public schools they

[1:39:53] might just be like you know so I think it would be just um wonderful to spell

[1:40:01] it out a little more. I think it should be an insert. I'm very grateful that

[1:40:05] Karen took the time to be on on the call today. the treasure um to remind us of

[1:40:12] the details and the potential headaches. But I also think we could use that

[1:40:16] insert as an opportunity um because many people don't go on the website of the

[1:40:21] city. So now I'm not talking about schools, but it's an opportunity for the

[1:40:25] city to maybe make some other announcements

[1:40:28] um you know like uh something about shoveling if if it's winter time and the

[1:40:33] tax bill is coming out then. But um I think we could really use that insert

[1:40:36] for some other key aspects that we want everybody to know about because I don't

[1:40:41] think people go to our website to find out information about mowing and

[1:40:46] shoveling etc. Thank you Sonia.

[1:40:57] There anyone else at this time? All right, we will move on to item

[1:41:05] 16, discussion with possible action on tax bill transparency resolution. We do

[1:41:11] not have a resolution drafted at this time. We have looked at um some of the

[1:41:17] other resolutions that are public that other places have

[1:41:24] either put forward or adopted. Um but at this time we are at the very first step

[1:41:30] of opening this conversation in our community and this is a conversation

[1:41:34] that is not uh something that the city does on its

[1:41:40] own. This is something that the city is a

[1:41:44] piece of the pie or piece of the puzzle of how tax bills come and um what it's

[1:41:51] included. And so where we can make decisions, it's our intention tonight to

[1:41:55] ask questions to the other people who have to make some of these decisions

[1:42:04] there. Um, we do not have anybody from school board here representing, but we

[1:42:08] do have two people in the room who are from the public schools. Uh, Dr. Jeremy

[1:42:13] Hill, our district administrator superintendent, is here and Chris

[1:42:16] Rosseski is here. And you heard from him a little bit earlier.

[1:42:21] Um Lori Pamus is our city clerk and Karen Dilap is online. She's the Vernon

[1:42:28] County treasurer. And I think in this conversation and

[1:42:33] discussion, we're all going to learn a whole lot about

[1:42:37] how this all works because as council we, you know, discuss and think about

[1:42:42] what we want to do, a park, school funding, tax bills, all the things. And

[1:42:47] then these fine partners help implement and figure out how we're going to do it.

[1:42:53] So anything that we decide we might want to do here, this is an opportunity to

[1:42:58] ask the questions about, well, how would that actually go? And then also to

[1:43:02] listen to hear what actually occurs in the offices upstairs and down the street

[1:43:10] because we're the county seat um county buildings nearby, but also at our

[1:43:16] schools. So um with that we'll open for discussion on this topic.

[1:43:27] » Well I have an easy question I think. Um if we were to move that we wanted to

[1:43:32] have this line item or this insert, how would that would that just be the

[1:43:39] city collected ones? You were thinking the same thing, weren't you? Because the

[1:43:43] county sends out a postcard. So, we can't do an insert with the postcard.

[1:43:48] » Okay. I just been sitting here quietly worrying about this one because I know

[1:43:53] there's a lot of people in the room that don't know how a tax bill actually is

[1:43:56] created. The city itself does not create those tax bills. That's why we have the

[1:44:02] county treasurer that does that. There are only so many lines, as you did hear

[1:44:06] her say, to be able to put on that tax bill. And there's only so many places

[1:44:10] that you can actually make those changes. There's not a lot of room left

[1:44:14] because the state tells us what we have to put on there. And Karen, you may want

[1:44:20] to answer this one. When you said put it on the back of the tax bill, I don't

[1:44:23] even know. Is that possible? >> I I'm not sure. I I think so, but a lot

[1:44:30] of the the back of the tax bill is actually like statemandated. What's on

[1:44:33] there? >> Correct.

[1:44:35] » That comes from like the Department of Revenue. So, I I'm not sure if that is

[1:44:39] an option. the insert is probably the best option in my opinion and not

[1:44:44] putting it on the tax bill. The problem is the font size is going to be tiny. It

[1:44:49] might work for the city of Aroa that only has one school district, but when

[1:44:52] you start talking multiple school districts, those are going to be

[1:44:55] different numbers and that's going to cause a lot of I mean I don't know how

[1:45:00] that would even work. Um because the the notes would have to be the same for each

[1:45:05] municipality. So, as far as I know, that's not even a

[1:45:10] thing that we can do right now at this time.

[1:45:13] » Okay. So, I just want I just wanted to make sure everybody heard that

[1:45:16] originally, the back of the tax bill. So, that's probably not an option. The

[1:45:20] second option that we've talked about here is the tax inserts.

[1:45:24] Everybody is required by the PSC, we have to send out notices on when they

[1:45:30] have the the the listing of how much you're paying in your utility bills.

[1:45:35] Plus, they have that other options. And so, that's already a two-phase or

[1:45:39] twosided thing that goes in as an insert. The other thing is your dog and

[1:45:44] your cat and all those licensing that one-third sheet. These are not free. We

[1:45:50] use a third party that actually stuffs and sends out our tax bills. We cannot

[1:45:55] send them stuff just to attach and throw in there. We have to pay for them to

[1:46:00] print and stuff that. So, if we add another insert, that is going to

[1:46:05] increase our postage. They only allow us three inserts, and we already have

[1:46:10] basically three already. So, we can't even add anything in there at this

[1:46:14] point. So, I'm just saying that if you decide

[1:46:18] that you want to do an insert versus maybe if there's a line item that would

[1:46:22] like say reference someplace, I know everybody wants to have that ooey gooey

[1:46:27] letter saying what everybody's doing in the city. It's a great idea. I love the

[1:46:32] idea, but I don't think it belongs in the tax bill. I think it belongs at

[1:46:36] maybe another time of the year because we are always at the end of the line of

[1:46:41] basically the time frame and when we can get this stuff out based on when the

[1:46:44] budget happens because we're waiting on the school district, the county, all

[1:46:49] those entities to get us the information to get to the county so that they can

[1:46:53] even get those processed and then sent out to our third party. We get calls

[1:46:58] every year, where's our tax bill? It's like the middle of December and they

[1:47:02] still haven't gotten it yet. Well, there's a lot of factors that get it to

[1:47:05] that point, but if we add things into that tax bill as another insert, that's

[1:47:09] another delay for you guys getting your bills. So, I just want you guys to all

[1:47:14] be completely aware of all the additional cost that just one insert can

[1:47:20] do to your PAX bill that we are already required to do.

[1:47:25] » Can we take out the dog and cat licensing thing and put in the

[1:47:31] if you don't want to collect dog and cat licenses, I I'm required to do that,

[1:47:35] too. So, something's got to give. And I don't know where that I mean, I I

[1:47:40] totally agree with the fact that we need transparency. I just don't know if the

[1:47:44] tax bill is the actual location. I would rather somehow teach our residents that

[1:47:50] there are other options for resources than just spoon feeding it. Because if

[1:47:55] you look at the number of tax bills that go out, a lot of them don't live here.

[1:48:00] We've got Airbnbs up the wazoo in this city and they they don't look at that

[1:48:04] information. Half the time when they send their payment back, those inserts

[1:48:07] are coming back with the payment. They never even opened and read it. So, I

[1:48:12] don't think that that's the place that they're going to actually a lot of

[1:48:15] people will, but I'm just saying what I've seen that I don't think that that's

[1:48:18] the most greatest use of our resources and our our tax dollars to spend to send

[1:48:26] that stuff out. I think that's important to include what

[1:48:30] she just said is that it's going to cost us more

[1:48:36] if we try to tackle this as an insert that it will cost more tax dollars

[1:48:43] to help educate about where the tax dollars are going and that's just

[1:48:49] important to note. Um Karen, do you have anything to add on this topic at this

[1:48:55] time? and then I'll ask some of the others in the room who might have an

[1:49:00] idea on this. >> No, I think I, you know, basically just

[1:49:05] stated that I I do think if you just put it onto the tax bill, um it's just going

[1:49:10] to be minimal characters. It's going to be very small and it's going to cause a

[1:49:14] lot of confusion and nobody's going to understand it. So, I don't think it's

[1:49:18] really going to serve its purpose there. Thank you.

[1:49:23] Can you talk a little about what you shared with me the other day, like the

[1:49:27] cost of actually trying to change the form for the tax bill?

[1:49:34] » Sure. So, I'm I'm not super familiar with that. I just um I did reach out to

[1:49:39] Lacrosse County Treasurer um because she has had this come up. She's had, I

[1:49:44] believe, three school districts request a resolution to put it on the tax bill.

[1:49:48] And so she did a lot of research um and she was the one that I discussed this

[1:49:55] with. Um she informed me that um you know just due to the minimal characters

[1:50:00] that we'd have they'd have to um make changes to the program and there would

[1:50:05] be a cost associated. I don't know what that cost would be. I don't know who

[1:50:09] would um have to pay for that cost in order for us to do what we actually

[1:50:14] would want to do. And in regards to if there's multiple school districts that

[1:50:19] are included in one municipality, how do you, you know, how do you

[1:50:24] determine which tax bills are going to have $1 amount versus the other based on

[1:50:30] the school district? Our system isn't smart enough to figure that out. It just

[1:50:34] be a blanket statement for a municipality, if that makes sense.

[1:50:42] » Thank you. >> Yep.

[1:50:46] Dr. Hill or um Mr. Roseski, if you want to add anything at this time, uh

[1:50:55] not that you need to, but if you do want to, please come up to the podium and and

[1:50:59] do so. >> Could one second. Could this be

[1:51:05] something as simple as instead of coming up with a dollar amount on your tax

[1:51:10] bill, >> a percentage?

[1:51:12] » A percentage. Okay. So I get

[1:51:17] a letter say or it doesn't have to be that. It could be in the newspaper. It

[1:51:20] could be on the right anywhere saying 8% of your tax school tax money goes to

[1:51:30] outofcount schools instead of putting it in the

[1:51:36] sending it out with your taxes. Is it something that could be that simple

[1:51:40] instead of coming up with a dollar amount? It's a great offering of an

[1:51:44] idea. Go ahead. >> Uh, thank you, mayor. My name is Jeremy

[1:51:49] Hill. I'm the district administrator for Veroa Area Schools, and I am at 5386

[1:51:54] Birdie Court. We appreciate this conversation. We

[1:51:59] appreciate the partnership with the city and with the county and we think that it

[1:52:04] is important for people to know where their tax dollars go and and what we pay

[1:52:10] for at the at the school. I think the the question raised about municipalities

[1:52:16] is is actually probably the opposite of that. This one municipality

[1:52:22] is all Veroa area schools, but Veroa area schools includes several

[1:52:27] municipalities. So when you make a resolution to say

[1:52:33] that that this is what you would like to do if that were to be the case, it

[1:52:38] doesn't cover the Veroa Township, doesn't cover Jefferson Township, it

[1:52:44] doesn't cover any of those additional township pieces that would be very

[1:52:48] difficult for the county to try to disagregate and break apart.

[1:52:56] Any other questions that you would have for me?

[1:53:02] Okay. >> I was just trying to look up what our,

[1:53:05] you know, an image of our tax bill, which I think would be helpful.

[1:53:10] I mean, so, and I'm very familiar with what the county postcards look like.

[1:53:18] There's not a lot of room on the postcard, but the city bill like there

[1:53:22] is a line item that has Are you saying that we can't add a sec

[1:53:27] another line item? Like our like there seems like there's plenty of room on a

[1:53:32] on a city tax bill. >> So before we answer that, I just want to

[1:53:36] make sure we stay in the frame of the agenda, Mr. McClur. Um that the goal

[1:53:44] tonight is to start this discussion and to understand the nuance of just how

[1:53:48] detailed this is because in order to continue with this work, council does

[1:53:54] need to think about the amount of work that would possibly need to go into

[1:53:57] unwinding and then clearly and transparently communicating it which

[1:54:03] would take a a an approval of do we want to work towards this or not

[1:54:11] and if we do are we approving city t staff time to work on that and so that's

[1:54:17] the frame of tonight from that we would then bring an update

[1:54:23] to a future the other ideas that do should there be a committee formed or a

[1:54:30] separate team formed for this task these are some things that we can take action

[1:54:37] on tonight >> the other thing that I want to say

[1:54:40] before I sit sit down is that I work for the Veroa Area Schools Board of

[1:54:47] Education. They instruct me in the work that I do

[1:54:53] and they have not had a chance to talk about this either. And so it's important

[1:54:58] for them to be part of that conversation.

[1:55:01] We're lucky that we live in Veroa and that we have partnerships across our

[1:55:06] community. This is an incredible place to raise your kids because there are so

[1:55:11] many choices for schooling. This is a community of choice. And the great thing

[1:55:15] about Veroa is that there is a place for everybody in this community. So, I want

[1:55:20] to state publicly that that we are grateful for those partnerships. We're

[1:55:23] grateful for our partnerships with the private schools in our community because

[1:55:28] we share resources. We provide opportunities for their students to take

[1:55:32] two classes in our school system. We're grateful for the partnership with

[1:55:38] the city. We don't want to lose sight of that as well. So, thank you for having

[1:55:44] this conversation. >> Thank you for coming. And I want to also

[1:55:48] as a leader here share gratitude for everybody in this room and that we are a

[1:55:53] strong place because we have options. And we're also a

[1:55:58] phenomenal picture at a time in the world of a lot of different people

[1:56:05] coming together to say, "Huh, that's a tricky problem. How do we want to solve

[1:56:10] this?" Because at the end of the day, this is what will keep us strong is that

[1:56:15] we're going to look at the challenges that any one or parts of us are facing

[1:56:19] and say, "Yeah, we should look at that

[1:56:23] differently or we could do this to overcome things that maybe we can't

[1:56:27] control at a local level, but we can do something to help each

[1:56:32] other through it." So, thank you for coming and I totally agree with your

[1:56:37] sentiment. You

[1:56:42] just to well I'll try to keep it quick. So I you know my parents were both

[1:56:47] educators. My grandparents I have grandparents that were educators um in

[1:56:51] the public all in the public school district. Um what I'm hearing here I

[1:56:56] think is sort of a root cause that we need more support for our public schools

[1:57:01] and that they need more money. I'm not sure that this methodology of pushing

[1:57:06] that education campaign out to the public makes sense to me. Um, I love the

[1:57:11] communication campaign. I love I love the passion that you're putting into it,

[1:57:15] Christina. That's why I'm that I love that I'm engaged in this council as like

[1:57:20] the junior most member of this council because I'm learning so much. Like I can

[1:57:23] I now know that $1 million figure. If I could remember, I could tell you how

[1:57:28] much it costs to patch the concrete bump outside of Aldi or Walmart. Like

[1:57:34] I'm learning like an excav how much a new excavator costs. A used ambulance

[1:57:37] costs $55,000. Um,

[1:57:42] but I don't know that I want to put all that in the tax bill for property tax

[1:57:46] owners. I mean, I'm I want to educate myself more on where my tax money is

[1:57:49] going. I do believe that even though this money is being funneled out of our

[1:57:53] p public schools, it is still mostly going to help children in the state of

[1:57:57] Wisconsin, which I'm happy about. I do also suspect that some of the money I

[1:58:01] spend on taxes, not Veroa taxes, does maybe go to potentially harm children,

[1:58:06] and that is a concern, and I'm embarrassed that I don't know what that

[1:58:09] number is. Um, so I I can't imagine personally voting in favor of this

[1:58:14] resolution because it's just like where does it is this the beginning of some

[1:58:18] larger thing where we decide one onesie twoozy what we put into our property tax

[1:58:23] bill and how how could we instead use this body to somehow promote or or

[1:58:29] figure out how to better support our public schools and and educate the

[1:58:34] larger public about like why do people not want to pass resolutions? That's

[1:58:38] crazy. Of course, we all want the best for our kids, right? So, that's just

[1:58:42] kind of where I am at. Thank you. >> Thank you, Kyle. I think that's

[1:58:51] exactly what we're doing tonight is just opening this conversation like is a

[1:58:54] resolution the right path? Is a tax bill the right place? What other options do

[1:59:00] we have? And I want to encourage us to ask those questions of do we want to

[1:59:06] create a subcommittee on something? Do we want to approve working

[1:59:13] collaboratively across our community to figure out how to tackle

[1:59:20] supporting public goods, not only just obviously public works and

[1:59:25] public safety, but um continuing to have strong schools, school choice, safe

[1:59:32] places for all people in our community. Um,

[1:59:38] I'd like to hear more about what what your thoughts and deliberations are.

[1:59:52] Okay. I definitely think the public needs to know because I I agree that a

[1:59:56] lot of people don't know that their money is going to the private schools.

[2:00:00] Whether they like that or not, they need to know. I think that's important. I

[2:00:05] think we need to figure out a way to tell them and and I certainly would, you

[2:00:09] know, listen to what Lori had to say and our county treasurer about how it would

[2:00:14] affect them. I'm curious, I guess, how the other cities, Oaklair, other cities

[2:00:19] that did that they have a did they have the same problem as Green Bay? I don't

[2:00:22] know. But if some other suggestion, I'm open to something so the public knows.

[2:00:30] Well, the you had asked a question regarding is there room on our tax bill.

[2:00:34] We are statemandated to if there's a referendum at all, that is the one thing

[2:00:39] that has to go on there. So, the more referendums that end up on there, that

[2:00:44] is what has to be on there 100%. That's not saying that there's going to

[2:00:48] be room to do that every year if it's possible. Well, I guess I would have to

[2:00:54] work with our county treasurer to know if it's even possible because we that's

[2:00:58] one thing that we have to put on there is how much of your tax bill is paying

[2:01:02] for this referendum for this school district. That is one of our

[2:01:05] requirements. Now, I believe on the last tax bill, I think there was was there

[2:01:10] three referendums listed? I can't remember what dates they were that that

[2:01:15] they came through, but it seems like there was three lines of different

[2:01:19] referendums. Yeah.

[2:01:23] Yep. So there might been two left, but if they go for another referendum, then

[2:01:27] that's another one that has So all them spaces have to be used specifically for

[2:01:31] that. So there may not be room. There may be this year, but maybe not next

[2:01:35] year. So you can't count on that on the tax bill.

[2:01:42] Is there a way right now to find out what like if I wanted to call somebody

[2:01:48] right now and figure out what percentage I paid to this,

[2:01:53] is there a person I can contact? >> Yeah.

[2:01:59] » So, if that information is already readily available,

[2:02:03] transparency is great. But do we Yes. My own taxes

[2:02:09] » of your personal Yeah. I think it's just a probably a percent.

[2:02:14] » So transparency is great, but if it already exists,

[2:02:19] if people want to know, >> right? Why spoon feed them?

[2:02:23] » They don't even know the ask the question though.

[2:02:25] » Maybe they don't care though. >> Oh, I think

[2:02:28] » right. Like I mean, >> but if they care, they should go

[2:02:31] looking. >> But if people don't,

[2:02:34] » I mean, I think the question it's a good question, AJ, but the question is like,

[2:02:37] were you surprised by that number? And if you were surprised by that number as

[2:02:40] a council person who's involved in making those decisions, then maybe other

[2:02:45] people would also be surprised by that number.

[2:02:48] » Agree with that, D. >> And we didn't ask the question.

[2:02:51] Christina was just brought it to us. >> Appreciate Christina.

[2:02:55] » It's good question. >> I'm saying if it's already there to get,

[2:02:59] right? Like >> we now see this if Yeah.

[2:03:04] like they can get they can get that information if they really needed it

[2:03:07] without us spending x amount of dollars to put it on a tax

[2:03:13] bill or an insert.

[2:03:18] » I think anything relating to the school tax le you can always call me about. Um

[2:03:23] that's that's definitely part of my job. >> Do you want to state your phone number?

[2:03:28] » Just kidding. >> Um that that number changes every year.

[2:03:33] I mean, we could we could come up with a percentage of what the total total levy

[2:03:36] is b what the percentage of the the voucher piece is out of our total levy

[2:03:42] and you could apply that to your uh your the amount that you've got on your tax

[2:03:46] bill for the school district. And that is essentially what that number would be

[2:03:49] if you're ever interested in knowing what that would be. I like doing math um

[2:03:54] and can figure that out for you and let you know.

[2:03:59] So, thank you for that answer and I appreciate what you're asking

[2:04:05] tonight. Do we want to move forward with continuing work on this? And

[2:04:12] I'm not suggesting we have to move towards a resolution, but continuing to

[2:04:18] work on this means that we would have to approve the ability to do so.

[2:04:24] I would make a motion we continue to work on this just to see how we should

[2:04:29] proceed.

[2:04:36] I mean I I'd be in favor of at least finding out what a resolution looks like

[2:04:40] or what some other >> You got to get a second before we can

[2:04:42] discuss if to her motion. >> I'll second it. So we

[2:04:48] » So motion by Cindy and a second by Tanya.

[2:04:51] » Further discussion. >> Yeah. So hearing that there is interest

[2:04:54] in in my thought. Can I finish my thought?

[2:04:56] » Oh de cut me off. >> Yeah, please do.

[2:04:58] » Sorry, I'm just trying to do rapid rules here.

[2:05:02] » Uh to find out what the other options are, you know, it sounds like putting it

[2:05:07] necessarily a line on the tax bill isn't isn't maybe the best option, but years

[2:05:11] ago, I remember asking Nate if he could do one of those pie charts so people

[2:05:14] could see like for every $1 of your tax money, how much of that goes to

[2:05:20] different departments? because I found that enlightening when somebody showed

[2:05:23] that to me and I feel like that's it's just another exercise. So like finding

[2:05:27] the way that actually gets the information to people is more important

[2:05:30] than so moving forward is just

[2:05:35] how to maybe it's just a something on our website that just is very very clear

[2:05:41] or you know apparently the only place people get their information and news is

[2:05:45] on Facebook. So >> you know post on Facebook but I'd be in

[2:05:51] favor of moving forward. But I'm not in favor of having the staff

[2:05:55] take this on as something that they need to solve necessarily.

[2:06:02] » Some of how that >> volunteering to be on a committee, the

[2:06:06] budget committee. >> Some of how it happens is a question

[2:06:08] comes in or an email comes in to the any any office staff person, right? someone

[2:06:17] calls, hears this meeting, calls or calls because they saw something around

[2:06:22] town and then it takes time during the day to

[2:06:28] route that and answer that question. So knowing that there are going to be

[2:06:35] questions asked because we have an active school referendum. So people

[2:06:40] inevitably ask questions. Do we want to Yeah. the you know that's

[2:06:47] one of the ways that this happens is time is allocated because the public's

[2:06:51] asking how do we want to move and I'm hearing a motion in a second but Kyle

[2:06:57] also wanted to >> yeah just the question and it can be

[2:07:00] totally be left unanswered but um for those of you that that are interested in

[2:07:05] moving this forward let's say we realized that there was a magic wand

[2:07:09] right now and we could wave that magic wand and all of a sudden every property

[2:07:14] tax payer in Veroa.

[2:07:17] This information was in their mind right now and they knew exactly what that

[2:07:21] number was, what the total budget for the school was, what percentage of the

[2:07:24] budget, what percentage of their payout was was being funneled out

[2:07:30] of the community or out of the public school. Um, what would happen? Like what

[2:07:36] is the greater good that would happen from that? All of them knowing because

[2:07:40] that's ultimately what we're trying to accomplish, I think, is what I'm

[2:07:42] hearing. We want everybody to know this and we want them to know what their

[2:07:46] contribution is that's being taken out of the public school system that they

[2:07:50] thought was part of the public school system. That's my question.

[2:07:52] » One thing comes comes to mind is do we want to have a voucher system? And that

[2:07:58] would be something that you contact your representative about

[2:08:02] » if you didn't like that what was going on.

[2:08:06] What I heard um is that the line item calls it public school funding and it's

[2:08:13] not. It's public and private school funding. So that's what I heard and that

[2:08:18] I think is a fair delineation. If the state in their folly or wisdom has

[2:08:25] decided that that money is no longer public school money, but now it's public

[2:08:28] and private school money, then that's what we should actually be telling

[2:08:34] people. >> Just those private schools that have

[2:08:36] signed up for the school choice program. We wouldn't want to throw all the

[2:08:39] private school. >> But it's money that is going to private

[2:08:41] I didn't say it's all private schools. I said it's going to it's funding private

[2:08:45] schools. Some private schools. It's funding private schools. So, it's not

[2:08:49] just funding public schools. So, I sent my kids to both public and

[2:08:55] private schools. And I never once asked my neighbors to

[2:09:00] help me pay the tuition at my private school.

[2:09:03] And um that's where I stand.

[2:09:15] Do you have an answer to your own question or an idea on it? Or

[2:09:19] » if I if I could if if I had a hundred of those magic wands that would put

[2:09:23] information about where people's tax money was going, this was not this would

[2:09:27] not be the magic wand I would wave first. That's all I'm saying. I I think

[2:09:31] this is important. I want everybody to know everything. I agree. But it's not

[2:09:35] the top priority in my mind for what we need to educate our public. push an

[2:09:39] education out to property owners about >> everybody. Remember that my name is on

[2:09:45] those bills. So, whatever you decide, I'm the one that's going to get the

[2:09:49] call. >> I do want to make a motion, but I won't

[2:09:51] actually make a motion about the dog register.

[2:09:55] » Yeah, we have a motion to continue working and a second by Tanya. Um,

[2:10:01] » what's that look like? Who's the who's working on it?

[2:10:12] Some of this comes in um

[2:10:17] in calls and emails and it's my understanding in

[2:10:22] conversations with the school that this is something that

[2:10:28] the board may take up to work on. I don't want to speak for them or make

[2:10:34] assumptions for the school. So, if um Dr. Hill wants to help clarify that um

[2:10:43] I would be very open to that.

[2:10:55] It was left on for me earlier. Made me look good.

[2:10:59] I I would say that right now our board is committed to two board goals which is

[2:11:06] uh ensuring that 100% of our students make a minimum of one year's growth in

[2:11:10] one year's time and that 100% of our students manage 95% attendance. So those

[2:11:17] are the two big board focuses that they have right now. um as you learned and

[2:11:23] this is not necessarily germanine to this conversation and and we've all said

[2:11:26] that they voted last week to go to operational referendum and that will be

[2:11:31] their major focus until November 3rd. Um I will bring this to their attention. I

[2:11:36] I did share with them this morning that I was coming this evening. Uh and I

[2:11:41] think that that will be up to them if they want to to take that conversation

[2:11:45] on.

[2:11:54] Do we want to work on a resolution?

[2:12:05] » I'm sorry. Do we need to vote on what we already

[2:12:10] » You put forward a motion in a second, but Steve asked a question of what are

[2:12:15] we working on or doing? Sorry, clarify. >> No, who's doing the work? You say we,

[2:12:24] » but like so we we talked in this greater sense of the community.

[2:12:30] » Like if there's going to be a subcommittee made up of members of this

[2:12:35] body plus other members, I guess I'm not going to be on that board. I don't have

[2:12:41] any more time with all the other boards I'm on to do something that is just to

[2:12:47] inform and doesn't change ultimately

[2:12:52] anything, right? Like the money is still going to come out.

[2:12:56] You know what I'm saying? Like >> I felt

[2:13:00] a lot of work to >> nothing.

[2:13:06] And I'm not saying education's not >> No, I understand. And I think I hear

[2:13:09] that you're saying like we don't have the magic wand

[2:13:14] » to make this possible for everybody to know tomorrow.

[2:13:21] » We're working within systems that we learned from Karen and the

[2:13:26] county of what is possible to put on a tax bill. What's put in there? We have

[2:13:33] only so many hours in a day to do the work of using tax dollars to

[2:13:40] take care of, maintain, and do projects for public goods across the city.

[2:13:49] Unfortunately, decisions that are made at other levels

[2:13:53] of government are making it challenging for some of

[2:13:57] our public goods or most of our public goods to remain

[2:14:02] well resourced and that is not public information at this time.

[2:14:08] So what we can do at a local level is tell

[2:14:15] is to make that transparent and then tell that message

[2:14:19] out to say it's we need this to resource our community the way we want

[2:14:28] to resource it right if we want to have choices how do we want to do it if we

[2:14:32] want to have you know I think the discourse of this

[2:14:38] across the city with partners is an important thing and I I hear the motion

[2:14:44] and second to work on it and I think we don't yet know because we are coming to

[2:14:48] the table in support of

[2:14:53] a community conversation that will be on a ballot in November.

[2:15:00] I would prefer that we if this does move forward that we have that if somebody

[2:15:05] has a resolution that they actually want to bring forward for us to vote on that

[2:15:08] that's what happens next. >> Okay. I kind of feel like rescending my

[2:15:12] my second only because I don't think this body gathers together

[2:15:19] to to do the work you're talking about

[2:15:23] happens outside of council and then a resolution or a proposal is brought to

[2:15:28] council. So I I while I still want to move forward with this, I'm not sure

[2:15:33] this body needs to necessarily vote on it. I think that that anybody at any

[2:15:38] time can put on the agenda an actual proposal to vote on and that

[2:15:44] if there's folks who want to work on that outside of that, I'm not I'm just

[2:15:47] not convinced we need to

[2:15:52] decide or appoint that tonight. Does that make sense?

[2:15:57] » Totally. one of the I. >> So, here's some insight is that if let's

[2:16:04] say let's say Seth was going to work on this tomorrow. In order to do so, he

[2:16:09] would have to pick up the phone and call Lori to get information. So now Lori's

[2:16:15] » we're doing this work in some of the committees that we're working with

[2:16:18] housing board. That's what we're doing. We're doing the work in the committee

[2:16:21] and then we sometimes have to ask Lori questions and then we bring a proposal

[2:16:25] to council. Is there a committee that this belongs in?

[2:16:38] Why don't we just vote on it so we can move on? We spent a lot of time on this.

[2:16:42] » So, you're in favor of it being worked on?

[2:16:44] » I don't care anymore at the moment. I think we need to move on.

[2:16:53] » No offense. I'm sorry. >> No, I just think

[2:16:56] Um, >> I think the public needs to know, but I

[2:16:59] agree with Trina. >> So, how do they know?

[2:17:01] » Tanya makes good points. >> How do they know? That's the question.

[2:17:05] » Well, call Can we call the question? >> Can we call the question?

[2:17:13] » Well, I know you have a meeting tonight.

[2:17:19] Oh.

[2:17:30] All in favor? Roll call. >> You want a roll call? I can do a roll

[2:17:35] call. >> Let's do a roll call.

[2:17:41] » No. >> No.

[2:17:44] » Hey, >> no.

[2:17:47] » No. >> Kyle,

[2:17:49] » no. >> No.

[2:17:52] Cindy, >> no.

[2:17:54] » Don, >> no.

[2:17:56] » No. >> That means we don't want to continue

[2:18:00] this. >> All right. Well, that means we don't

[2:18:02] want to continue with this >> motion.

[2:18:04] » Motion. If somebody wants to bring a resolution forward that that this did

[2:18:08] not stop that. >> Thank

[2:18:14] resolution.

[2:18:18] » All right, we'll move on.

[2:18:24] So item 17, presentation on resolution opposing the Marbel 765 KV project. No

[2:18:30] 765 Line Inc. and the Coalition against Marbel 765 Inc.

[2:18:37] So

[2:18:42] again to keep this in boundaries the there is a resolution that will be

[2:18:47] coming up as item 19 whether or not the city wants to take

[2:18:53] that up opposing this project. So to hear about this project, uh, Michael

[2:18:58] Brown and Tim Woodhouse are going to share a short presentation ahead of the

[2:19:05] final period for public comment.

[2:19:16] » Do I get my name again? >> Okay. Okay.

[2:19:20] » Uh, sorry. Go ahead and tell who which organization you're with.

[2:19:23] » Yes. Yes, my name is Michael Brown and I am a board member uh treasurer and media

[2:19:29] lead for no 765 Line Inc. Uh and this is >> my name is Tim Woodhouse from Genanoa.

[2:19:37] I'm the leader of the coalition against Marbel 765.

[2:19:42] Uh we're a group of directly impacted land owners about 70 uh families.

[2:19:51] Uh, so I don't know how uh well acquainted everyone is with the 765

[2:19:57] uh Marbel project lines. Uh, you may have seen signs. Uh, you may have seen

[2:20:02] me, you may have seen a number of things uh around town and throughout the uh

[2:20:07] southern Wisconsin region. Um, I think the the thing I really wanted to open up

[2:20:11] with today is, you know, why is this happening? Uh, and then also explain

[2:20:15] what exactly is happening. Um, these are the biggest power lines ever proposed uh

[2:20:20] in Wisconsin. And the the order of the presentation today is we're going to

[2:20:25] look at the the the machine itself, the the money, uh the stakes, and then uh

[2:20:29] you know, the the fight and what's happening out there in the um uh in the

[2:20:33] world. So, we can move on to the next one. Um you know, 765

[2:20:39] kilovolts. Uh that is a lot. Uh it is more than we've ever seen. Uh if you're

[2:20:45] familiar with uh the drive from Madison out to um like Spring Green uh is it 14

[2:20:52] I think. Um those towers that have gone up uh those are 345 uh kilovolt towers.

[2:20:58] So we haven't seen anything uh that carries that load in Wisconsin. Um and

[2:21:03] the Marabel project is the is the project that is uh being proposed right

[2:21:08] now to carry those lines. Next one.

[2:21:13] These are tall towers. Uh really, really, really oppressively tall towers.

[2:21:19] Um roughly 200 feet. Um and a design that uh we really haven't seen before.

[2:21:26] Um this proposed uh proposed towers, uh like I said, they're 200 feet, but they

[2:21:30] and they carry 765 kilovolts. Uh but they're also designed to uh to carry

[2:21:35] additional uh loads off the side. So, um, they are, uh, I think this is the

[2:21:41] thing that catches most people off guard. It's like, oh, wow. Uh, you know,

[2:21:44] we we we see electric lines all over the place. Transmission, it is what it is.

[2:21:48] Um, but this is, uh, enormous. Um, and the enormity of the project itself, the

[2:21:55] towers itself is one thing. I I would encourage everybody to think through um,

[2:22:00] what it takes to actually construct and build something like that. you know,

[2:22:04] when you put steel and concrete in the ground, uh what is that going to do? Uh

[2:22:10] how does that actually come about? Uh that comes by way of trucks and trucks

[2:22:15] on roads and um there's a lot that goes into this. I'm not going to go into all

[2:22:20] this today um because there are many uh many facets of the issue. Um and the

[2:22:26] website that we've developed is a really great resource to understand um

[2:22:30] everything at play. Um but I want to start here. Towers are huge. Towers

[2:22:35] weigh a lot. Towers have a lot of wear and tear on your roads when they come

[2:22:38] through.

[2:22:43] It's five times the voltage or five times the power, double the voltage. And

[2:22:49] uh one thing that I have heard in the multiple opposition uh resolutions and

[2:22:54] conversation around those opposition resolutions is the is the safety

[2:22:58] elements um involved in building something like this? Um when something

[2:23:04] goes wrong with uh power like this, uh are municipalities equipped to handle um

[2:23:12] emergencies when they happen? uh our local EMTs uh are they equipped to to to

[2:23:17] handle this? Uh so something else to think about.

[2:23:24] This is the the biggest uh shock that I've seen in my in my learning journey

[2:23:29] of this um uh of this project is that Wisconsin's been great about electricity

[2:23:34] use. You know, for the past 20 years, uh it's been on a decline uh 4%. That's not

[2:23:39] 4% annual, that's 4% overall over the last 20 years. Um, and this has come by

[2:23:44] way of um, you know, focus on energy programs, uh, people putting on their

[2:23:49] own solar panels. Um, there's a lot of reasons that this has been happening.

[2:23:53] Um, and so you might ask yourself, why is this uh, if if we've been on a

[2:23:59] decline of energy use, uh, then why is this being proposed? Um, so we can go

[2:24:04] forward to the next one here.

[2:24:08] That's okay.

[2:24:14] So, keep that in mind. Uh if you don't know how uh energy projects are uh

[2:24:20] managed, proposed, uh who does the permit issuing and who does the

[2:24:24] building, these are the three players to understand. Uh MYSO or MISO, uh depends

[2:24:31] on who you talk to. Um this is the uh this is the 15 state uh uh body that

[2:24:38] says hey this is how we want transmission to happen throughout the uh

[2:24:41] throughout the region. Um and they are the the organization that came through a

[2:24:45] while ago and said hey we're going to uh improve the grid in this way and we're

[2:24:50] going to ask for uh more transmission to be built. and the public service

[2:24:56] commission of Wisconsin is the the ones who say uh hey developers come in um uh

[2:25:02] we will look at your we'll look at your bids and then um award those bids to

[2:25:07] various developers. Um so when you think about how the projects come about can

[2:25:12] this can be very very confusing. Uh it was to me when I first uh first started

[2:25:16] learning about all this but uh those are the three entities to really think

[2:25:19] about.

[2:25:24] Uh so in 2022

[2:25:28] uh the build out uh known as the as the tranch uh was a $10 billion buildout

[2:25:33] that got revised uh two years later to be a $22 billion buildout. Again, this

[2:25:38] is out this is across the the 15 state uh region. Um, and two of the lines uh

[2:25:44] that we're looking at right now are the the 765 kilovolt lines uh coming through

[2:25:50] southern Wisconsin. Right now in the news, you'll hear about the the Marbel

[2:25:53] line uh which is going from uh Genanoa uh Tim's area uh all the way down to to

[2:25:59] Bell Center. And then when you hear about what's called the Becky or BECI

[2:26:03] line, uh that's the one that goes from Bell Center uh wraps up around Madison

[2:26:07] and uh goes down to uh the Boet area. Um, so those are the the big ones that

[2:26:13] we're looking at right now. >> Go ahead.

[2:26:17] » Ask a question. >> Yes.

[2:26:18] » Maybe you're gonna answer this, but how far apart are these? So like how many of

[2:26:22] these towers are we talking about? Are they going to be between Genanoa and

[2:26:26] » uh I think they're Tim, you're I think they're 800 feet.

[2:26:29] » It depends on it depends on the geography as far as how much uh where

[2:26:36] those placements will be. So, we've been told um

[2:26:40] on a straight level stretch uh roughly three structures, current structures

[2:26:47] would be replaced by one tower. But then if you're familiar with well any of the

[2:26:52] area around here, you've got some pretty traverse. So, so I don't think that they

[2:26:58] know and they certainly haven't told us yet.

[2:27:02] » I'm just thinking how many towers we're really talking about. Yeah,

[2:27:06] » quite quite a few. >> Quite a few.

[2:27:10] » Oh, yeah. So, this is the breakdown of the the Marbel and the and the Becky

[2:27:14] lines. And um they are operating on a uh on a different pace, a different

[2:27:19] program. Uh they're they're permitted differently. Uh and and right now, the

[2:27:23] important thing to know is that the the PSC has not issued a docket or or handed

[2:27:27] out uh the starting of a permit for either of these projects. Uh the

[2:27:32] Maraveel line has been in in development for a while now. Uh you know, land

[2:27:36] owners have been made aware of what's happening. Uh and uh coalitions have

[2:27:41] formed. People are being made aware. Um you know, and and that is really the uh

[2:27:46] the one here that has been of most concern to Verning County. Um and then

[2:27:51] separately, this this Becky line. Um that is a a separate topic. Uh and that

[2:27:56] one is accelerating uh at a pace that we haven't seen transmission line projects

[2:28:01] uh develop before. They've uh fun fact, they issued um uh mailers to land owners

[2:28:08] and we're expecting within a month for landowners to uh open up their mail um

[2:28:16] attend an openhouse and issue their comments. Uh and then after that, the

[2:28:20] developer would then go in and make some revisions in a back room somewhere. Um

[2:28:25] but typically these processes take much longer than that. Um so we can move on

[2:28:31] from this slide. Thank you. So earlier I said uh 4% reduction in

[2:28:39] electricity uh in demand. Uh why is this happening now?

[2:28:44] um the forecast uh all of a sudden flipped and said, "Guess what? Uh we're

[2:28:49] expecting a 40% increase um uh in in demand." And uh that 40% increase um

[2:28:57] roughly 70 72% of that increase uh in Wisconsin can be attributed to three uh

[2:29:05] three data centers specifically. Um there I just attended a couple open

[2:29:09] houses that uh there's breakdown of all of these charts and graphs and there's a

[2:29:14] um a fair amount of um smoke and mirrors going on in describing

[2:29:19] what the load is and uh uh conflating peak demand with constant demand. Um and

[2:29:26] uh I I think everyone that I've spoken to has concerns around well if this 40%

[2:29:31] increase uh is there and you're anticipating more data centers coming on

[2:29:36] the path, what happens if those data centers don't materialize? Um why would

[2:29:40] we need this massive transmission project? Uh if that doesn't actually

[2:29:44] happen, um and if they don't happen, then we're

[2:29:48] stuck with some very large uh obtrusive towers uh and the cost that goes along

[2:29:54] with it.

[2:29:59] Uh, one particularly concerning issue is that uh you will hear a developer claim

[2:30:06] uh that there is uh for every dollar $1.80 to $3.50

[2:30:11] uh spent or for sorry for every $1 spent there's roughly$180 to 350 in benefits.

[2:30:17] Um but the way this organization works uh myo there is an individual named

[2:30:22] David Patton. He's basically the internal watchdog. Um and he he does

[2:30:26] checks and balances. He runs the math. He says well if you hadn't if you had

[2:30:29] considered these things um maybe your math is not uh is not accurate and he's

[2:30:34] raised he's very vocal uh opponent to this specific fact. uh and he is uh

[2:30:41] standing in front of MYSO saying uh no for every dollar you spend we're

[2:30:45] actually only going to see uh 40 cents or less benefit uh towards this project.

[2:30:50] Um and that in in and of itself doesn't sound okay great somebody's losing money

[2:30:55] on the project but who's losing money on the project? Um and we'll get to that

[2:30:59] here in the next slide.

[2:31:04] Oh, we won't get to that in the next slide. Sorry.

[2:31:08] Um, no, that's okay. We'll we'll we'll uh we'll uh change the narrative here.

[2:31:12] Um the the three reasons that I would like to see Veroa uh pay attention to

[2:31:18] this um is that uh around us uh more than 20 resolutions

[2:31:25] um uh opposition resolutions have been passed uh within Crawford within Vernon

[2:31:30] um and these are communities standing standing up and saying we don't want

[2:31:33] these projects uh for for various reasons. Um so our neighbors uh within

[2:31:39] our county, within our community are saying we don't want this. Uh and this

[2:31:43] is an opportunity for Veroa to stand up and say uh as the county seat uh Vernon

[2:31:48] County itself has already uh entered an opposition. Um this is a chance to join

[2:31:53] in and say we agree we don't want to see this. Um you know geographically I say

[2:31:59] you know the ridge you know while there is not a tower necessarily proposed to

[2:32:03] come through here. I'm using this ridge as like the sort of the metaphor for

[2:32:07] like what happens upstream really is going downstream to our our neighbors.

[2:32:12] So, we have a chance to be uh to be leaders here. Um organic farms as well.

[2:32:17] We have 230 in Vernon County. Um and when lines like this uh go up, uh these

[2:32:25] are I I hear from from land owners almost every day. Um I've been taking a

[2:32:29] call from a woman uh near Poinette. uh she runs a strawberry farm that she's

[2:32:34] been cultivating for for decades now. And she's just distraught because this

[2:32:38] line is proposed to go directly over her strawberry farm. And when they come in

[2:32:42] with the towers and the lines, that's an easement that they have the um that they

[2:32:46] have the ability to say, uh we're going to maintain this line in the way that's

[2:32:50] appropriate to us and they can destroy her uh organic soil. Um then there's not

[2:32:55] a whole lot she can do about it. Um, so many reasons that we as a community

[2:33:00] should be concerned about this. Um, and we can go on to the next slide here.

[2:33:04] Thank you, Sarah. Um, this one, I mean, I I asked Tim to

[2:33:10] to come here. You know, we we've been we've been involved in many

[2:33:13] conversations today, but I I think this one is most appropriate for for Tim to

[2:33:17] to speak to. Well, I should have

[2:33:23] um so I I got I always got a caveat that I'm the leader of the group, so I got to

[2:33:28] keep my personal opinions to myself. Um but you know, I work for the Genoa

[2:33:35] Township, so I understand the role of government, the role of eminent domain.

[2:33:39] Um, and you know, I' I'd like to make note that our group is um funded

[2:33:45] privately up until now taking donations. Um, we've taken this the step of

[2:33:52] retaining an attorney. We've got a court date in Vernon County that speaks to the

[2:33:58] use of eminent domain in a project such as this. It's massive. Is it needed?

[2:34:04] that's going to be debated in the court system with the various lawyers. So,

[2:34:10] I'll just leave that up to your own. Um, you know, we feel that that the use of

[2:34:14] eminent domain on our farms isn't appropriate. So,

[2:34:20] and I should say farms, our properties, homes.

[2:34:23] » We've got a lot of different vacant land owners.

[2:34:27] » Can you give a little bit of detail on what eminent domain is used for?

[2:34:36] Why? Yeah. Why? >> So, you know, in generally speaking,

[2:34:43] eminent domain is used for the public good and and I think that's why this uh

[2:34:49] issue has spilled over into the public forums. You know, you might be sitting

[2:34:53] here thinking, why is this the city council's um but I I think this has

[2:34:59] opened a huge can of worms as far as what is the appropriate use of eminent

[2:35:03] domain in situations such as this if it's for a data center, you know, and

[2:35:08] our group doesn't want to get into this whole. Our premise is the last 20 years

[2:35:14] our rates or our usage has declined four to 4% stayed around that. Now, if this

[2:35:21] thing gets built, everybody in this room will be required to pay for that. And I

[2:35:27] think that's the larger issue that we're trying to shed some light on. You know,

[2:35:32] I'm not here to cry a SAB story about our members and our individual, although

[2:35:37] we are very concerned. We're directly impacted and then we would be stuck

[2:35:43] paying for this. But I think the larger community would see that you know the

[2:35:48] use of eminent domain on on projects such as these will be required to pay

[2:35:54] for. >> Do we get anything from that payment?

[2:36:00] » So that's that's also up for debate. And uh I think um the community outreaches

[2:36:06] like the town of Genanoa, you know, they've sat through the presentations

[2:36:12] uh utility tax, you could get into all these different various things. They

[2:36:16] have not seen any benefit. Therefore, their opposition to the proposal. I

[2:36:22] think Vernon County with the presentation and their thoughts, they

[2:36:28] haven't seen any benefit to the county. I can't speak for the state. I know as

[2:36:34] members of the coalition, there's no benefit to us on the use of eminent

[2:36:40] domain. >> Thank you.

[2:36:43] » And I just want to uh iterate here on um when the when a company came comes in

[2:36:50] and uses eminent domain for the quote unquote public good. Um what's happening

[2:36:55] is they're building the transmission line and then the cost of that project

[2:37:00] is uh is actually going back and being paid for by the rateayers as a whole. So

[2:37:06] anybody who gets an electricity bill uh is paying for these projects and that is

[2:37:11] uh at the return of roughly 10% per year for the life of the project and

[2:37:17] sometimes that's 20 years sometimes that's up to 60 years. So 10% per year

[2:37:24] for the foreseeable future is being paid back to the company that developed the

[2:37:30] project by you and you and you and me and all of us.

[2:37:36] And many of us are looking around saying we didn't need the project in the first

[2:37:41] place. Why are you uh overdeveloping these lines? Um so uh keep that in mind

[2:37:48] as we think about uh standing up uh in solidarity and saying we don't need

[2:37:54] these projects. Um next slide please.

[2:38:00] Uh and these are just an explanation of the the people and the organizations

[2:38:04] that are doing some of this work. Um CAM 765 that is a coalition against Marbel

[2:38:09] that is Tim. Uh no 765 line. I represent that group here today. Um, we have uh a

[2:38:17] lot going on right now, especially with the launch of the the Becky project. Uh,

[2:38:21] and then new coalitions are forming. Um, and you will continue to see this issue

[2:38:26] in the uh in the news. Um, next slide, please.

[2:38:34] Uh, so, you know, Vernon County has uh has passed its resolution um opposing

[2:38:39] the line back in uh in March. uh and a number of other towns uh have these

[2:38:44] opposition resolutions on the books um and many others are pursuing these uh

[2:38:49] pursuing these right now. And so I encourage uh encourage Veroa to uh

[2:38:55] consider uh joining the ranks and I think that's the last slide.

[2:39:02] Oh, nope. Uh uh here's here's some action you can

[2:39:06] take. Of course, I'd be an an awful uh nonprofit member here if I didn't say

[2:39:12] here's the actions we can take. Um these projects, this project is being built as

[2:39:16] a as a done deal by any developer that you speak with. Uh we see it as not a

[2:39:20] done deal. Um so join us uh and please um

[2:39:27] consider passing a resolution. Thank you.

[2:39:32] » Thank you. So,

[2:39:36] we'll open up item 18, final period for public comment on item the presentation

[2:39:42] from 17 that we just heard of. If anybody wants to come forward with

[2:39:46] public comment on this, either online or in person, please do so.

[2:39:55] Sarah, do we have anyone online? Uh, there's a few people online. I don't see

[2:40:00] them unmuting, but that would be what you do. you'd unmute or put your hand

[2:40:04] up. It's one of the actions you can do through Zoom.

[2:40:10] I don't see anything. >> Okay.

[2:40:13] » All right. We do not have anybody. So, we'll move on to item 19, discussion

[2:40:17] with possible action on a resolution opposing the Marbel 765 KV project. And

[2:40:23] we have that resolution drafted. This has gone to George and

[2:40:29] Stephanie. Um, this is a resolution similar to what

[2:40:33] has been put in front of other um others on the list, Vernon County, etc.,

[2:40:42] and has been modified to be more clearly related and specifically related to why

[2:40:50] the city of Veroqua

[2:40:54] would be interested in passing this. I make a motion we pass the resolution

[2:40:58] opposing Marvel 765 KV project. We've got a motion by Cindy.

[2:41:05] » I'll second it. >> Todd Kirking the second. Any further

[2:41:08] discussion?

[2:41:11] All in favor? >> Any opposed?

[2:41:16] Motion carries. >> All right. Item 20, payment of the

[2:41:21] bills. >> I make a motion we pay the bills.

[2:41:23] » I don't second it.

[2:41:27] Roll call, please.

[2:41:33] » Okay, Seth. >> Hi,

[2:41:36] » AJ. >> Hi,

[2:41:37] » Ty Kirking. >> Hi,

[2:41:39] » Kyle. >> Hi,

[2:41:40] » Todd Spaith. >> Hi,

[2:41:41] » Cindy. >> Hi,

[2:41:43] » John. >> Hi,

[2:41:44] » Tanya. And Steve, >> hi. Before we make a motion to adjurnn,

[2:41:48] I just want to point out that the differences between these things

[2:41:54] that we just talked about is that there's been a lot of time put into

[2:41:58] organizing and getting to a resolution to educate people like us.

[2:42:05] If we believe in the aha moment we all just had about where our public dollars

[2:42:10] are going, which is not to public schools fully as it is shown on a tax

[2:42:16] bill. We need to care enough to say that we want to approve and recognize that

[2:42:21] city hall staff are already working on this because people are calling

[2:42:26] because there is a referendum for our schools and there's declining enrollment

[2:42:29] and challenges from places we can't control.

[2:42:35] that I encourage us all to take control of what we can do and I am saying this

[2:42:39] out of frustration however also encouragement that we focus on what we

[2:42:45] can do here together and that if we want to see a resolution I hope that people

[2:42:49] will know that I want to work on that and if someone wants to work on that

[2:42:53] with me I will volunteer my time towards that in the name of public service

[2:43:00] because I believe in transparency and in dollars going into places where

[2:43:04] accountability is upheld and transparency follows that money. And I

[2:43:10] just want to make that a clear statement as we close this out. So, thank you for

[2:43:16] being participatory in a long meeting and taking on things that I'm sorry that

[2:43:21] we all collectively have to deal with at this level because they're not being

[2:43:26] legislated on in a way that they need to be. So, thank you for bearing with and

[2:43:31] if anybody wants to make a motion for adjournment, please do so.

[2:43:34] » Steve, I make a motion we adjourn.

[2:43:39] » All right, motion and a second. All in favor? I I

[2:43:42] » Okay, we are adjourned.

Common Council meeting 8-25-2026

Transcript