Village Board - Regular Meeting

I guess that means we're get ready gonna start right now. All right. Welcome to the village of Cottage Grove Village Board of Trustees meeting on Monday, March 2nd, 2026. This is a virtual meeting, meaning it's taking place um in person at Village Hall and also on Zoom with the link at the top of our agenda and you can watch it um live stream or later on on our YouTube channel. Um, it's 6:30, so I'll call the meeting to order. We have a quorum and the agenda was properly posted. So, we'll stand for the pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right. This is the public appearances, public's opportunity to speak. Um we do have a public hearing regarding the impact fee ordinance which occurs later on in the agenda. Um so we will um start with anyone in the room um that would and or has filled out a wish to speak form that has not to do with the impact fees and then we'll make sure we um address anyone on Zoom who would like to um address the board as well. So, the board did receive communication from Craig Spencer at 111 East School Road um with the dissatisfaction with the documents in the agenda for the flock sources and the letters of recommendation. Um he is asking for oversight and transparency. Um a monthly or quarterly report from the um police should be um standard for all inquiries. Um, and this will be addressed later on in the agenda and we'll have um, chief specifically address some of um, his comments in the email and then also um, respond to him via email as well. Stephan um, Wah 100 um, Coyle Parkway. he is a village resident um and um is against the creation of a debt reduction task force um stating that there's a process already in place including um a bunch of things that the village board goes through um throughout the course of the year and um that the um village staff who are trained and have years of experience should be guiding the elected board. Lisa Zwartz 10002 um St. John Street is a village resident. Um would I'm sorry, Lisa, you're on um Zoom,

correct? Yes. Right. She would like to um to speak.

Hi there. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Go ahead. Is is this the portion to speak about the impact fees or the reduction? Um we you can save your impact fee comments for the public hearing. So

yeah. So if I can speak on the debt reduction task force, um this is already part of the budget process the village underos each year and would be a redundant process especially considering the task force is not led by experts in municipal finance. Rather it would be led by trustees and residents. Municipal finance is very different from personal finances and budget debt discussions should be led by these experts. We currently have a higher Right. And then there's one more wish to speak for him. JP Vivvenencio 702 Wheelbridge Road is a village residence. Excuse me. Good evening everyone. Um, I want to speak uh for the proposal on the debt reduction committee because before we create something new, it's important to acknowledge our current process in that we already have in place. The village currently manages the debt through three established and reoccurring processes. First is the annual BA budget process. Each year of

the board reviews outstanding obligations, debt service schedules, projected borrowing, levy impacts, and fund balances. This is where we afford or where we evaluate affordability and timing. Second is the capital prioritization process. Projects are ranked in sequence based on necessity, useful life, infrastructure capacity, financial impact so that we can avoid sharp spikes in debt or overwhelming the operating budget in a single year. And third, the financial management plan. So, Cottage Grove has maintained this plan since 2009 uh in partnership with Ellers. Uh so each year staff and elers and the village board u project five years of operating budgets and capital needs model debt capacity and present policy options to the board. Financial management plan is not required by statute yet. Cottage Grove does this every year and that discipline matters has contributed to the highest possible management score from S&P something confirmed from Ellers in a recent village board meeting. That score directly impacts interest rates which uh we received when we issue bonds. In practical terms, it saves taxpayers money. So the core question is simple. What would the debt reduction committee do that these three existing processes are not already designed to accomplish? If there's a specific gap, I would think it would be helpful to identify it clearly, but as proposed, this committee appears to duplicate responsibilities already assigned to the the board uh through this budget process, capital improvement plan, and the financial management plan. I would also note that the professionals we retained to evaluate fiscal health have been clear. Ellers has told the village board that we're in stable financial condition. We are currently um at 50% of our statuto debt limit um which is well below what Ellers recommends. Creating a separate debt committee risks sending unintended signal that there is

a financial emergency or instability when the data does not support this conclusion. It also risks diverting staff time and board focus from the structured processes that have already earned strong ratings and measurable savings for residents. If there are concerns about specific projects, specific borrowing decisions, specific debt service levels, the budget process exa is exactly where those discussions belong. that process is public, comprehensive, and designed for the level of scrutiny. For those reasons, I do not believe the additional committee is necessary. Strengthening and utilizing the tools that we already have is the more responsible path. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the room that'd like to give public comments?

Just state your name and address. My name is Terry Benzo. I live at 806 Stony Hill Lane. Um, I'd like to say I'm in favor of the debt reduction task force because clearly when you are 30, 40, 50 and million in debt, your existing process does not work. I don't know how anybody can make a claim it does. U, so go for it. I I think you need to do this. And as far as the impact fees, um, when I worked in government for 20ome years, we had impact fees for all different things and they worked great because it would spread the cost to the new developers or or whatever versus the existing people and it was a lot more fair to them. And uh, but one thing that we did do is we looked at them regular twice a year for some of them. uh may seem like overkill, but there's a lot of moving parts to them and it only took us 15 minutes of meeting to do it. So, I'm in favor of that. Um, and then also at some point, and this is getting ahead of things, uh, I'd be looking at nuisance fees are a great tool. So, if you've got some, oh, let's say an apartment building with several hundred police calls a year, you can maybe try to get a little bit of your money back on the extra burden or other nuisances out there. And I I think that's long overdue. Okay, that's it.

Anyone else in the room that'd like to speak? Is there anyone on Zoom? I'm not seeing any. Then we'll move on to discuss and consider the minutes from the village board meeting on February 16th, 2026. Those minutes are linked in the agenda. I would make the motion to approve the minutes as presented. I'll second. There's a motion by Murphy, second by Kell Nelson. Any discussion on the meeting minutes?

Yeah, I had one small change. Um, let's see. Where was it? You referred to me as Pete, not doll. Um, Lisa. So, I think just a minor change. I'm trying to um see where it was. It was under 10A. Motion by Pete to approve. I think we used the last name. So, one minor change. Any other discussion? Heidi, you okay with that change? Yep. All right. Me, too. All right. All those in favor? I I

opposed. Abstain. Motion carries. Um I'm going to ask the board to please um consider having the EMS discussion first because there's a contract the village board um has to consider and chief needs to get over to the town meeting. Um, and then also to move up the Colonial Club because Melody has come um here in person as well and those items shouldn't take too much of our time if that's okay with the board. All right. So, Pete, I'll turn it over to you for a um review of the EMS and chief invite you up to talk about the contract as well.

Okay. Uh let's see here. So, we met um we started uh we approved the the minutes January financials and January bills. There were no hardship requests uh under the chief report. There were a couple items here. Mandy did accept the full-time position uh of the administrative services manager. So, we're moving on there. Uh we did have two casual members that resigned, but uh due to some personal reasons, but we do have a pretty deep bench there. So, um nothing significantly impacting service. We did have three correspondences. uh one thanking for help with uh um EMS expertise at a town meeting and then there were two for for appreciation uh regarding response and service. Uh we did review the 2026 and to 2035 capital replacement schedule just sort of uh getting everybody aligned as as we kind of get into the year here. And then we did discuss and consider the Striker Medical Service contract for the cotton load system and the stair chair. So, Chief, maybe you'll kind of want to walk through uh the nuts and bolts.

Absolutely. Uh so, we have the district owns three ambulances and inside each of the three ambulances is a power load system and a power cot. Uh the cot and the load system are how we um load patients that we transport to the hospital into the ambulance. Um they are roughly combined $70,000 to purchase brand new today. Since we've owned them, we've maintained a pretty um comprehensive maintenance and annual preventive care package for them. U because if we need to replace any one component, um it's a surprise somewhere around $35,000 purchase that we'd like to avoid. whereas we can pay a little bit of money uh throughout the course of the year for the maintenance that also covers any potential uh repair needed to include catastrophic repair. So this uh the agreement that's in front of you and to approve is a budgeted expense. Um but we bring it to you uh to approve it because of its overall value. Our IGA says that the commission itself can approve a contract up to $15,000, but doesn't specify whether that's $15,000 per year or $15,000 total value. Um because of the total value of the the contract, it's almost $30,000 total, so about $10,000 per year. Um this is just for CS and load systems. Um our stair chairs don't see quite the amount of uh abuse that the CS and load systems do. Uh and they're much less expensive. a stair chair. Um, while you you'll probably say, "Wow, that's expensive for a chair that has a couple wheels on it is about $5,000." Um, but it's medical grade equipment that helps us get people up and down stairs um easily. So, that's kind of the nuts and bolts of um what the Striker agreement would be. Uh the one request from the commission was that we reach out to Striker and see

if they would change the court from Michigan because that's company location to Wisconsin. Um and the agreement that you would uh hopefully approve tonight is uh listed as Wisconsin for courts if there were ever to be a lawsuit.

Thanks, Chief. I think the the total dollar value is there. You can see it. It's a three-year contract at $9,895 per year, but there is because we did purchase um a new cotton load system last year, there was a credit of $2,700. So, the total for year one is below budget, it's at $7,100 versus the budget amount of $7,500. So, I think all all in all um it certainly is um the right thing to do for the commission to make sure that we've got equipment that our paramedics and EMTs um can manage patients.

Yeah, this maint maintenance agreement also includes replacement of uh batteries. So, the cot that the cot itself is battery operated. So we uh are able to replace one per year and because of this agreement we have a regular rotation where the batteries themselves we only own for three total years before we swap it out of cycle. That ensures that uh it'll function for the time frame that we we require it to before it it is able to get back and charge itself. The the power load portion of of the system also has a battery inside of it. The only time that it's attached to vehicle power is when the cot and the load system are both together in its home base, if you will. So, the lifting the hydraulic motor in the in the in the load system uh is battery operated as well. So, uh that's the more expensive of the two batteries. Um if I remember correctly, that one was $1,000 or more. And then the CAT batteries are about 800. So, it's as part of the deal, we're able to replace those regularly. This is a discuss and consider

questions for chief. I'll make a motion to approve the contract as proposed and I'll second. All right. Motion by Dell, second by Murphy. Any other discussion? All those in favor? I I opposed abstain. Motion carries.

Awesome. Thank you for moving uh me up or us up in in the agenda. And one thing I forgot to mention, this is also a pretty significant um employee retention piece. Um this is has become a standard piece of equipment in the market. Um and it allows some of our our folks that might be a little bit longer in the tooth to stay in the business rather than injuring their back while trying to lift people in awkward uh positions. Right.

Thanks, Chief. All right. We're also then going to move new business letter D up, which is discuss and consider agreement for services with the Colonial Club Incorporated. So, there's a memo in the packet and also an updated agreement for services um which has taken us some time to kind of uh get through. So, we um have met several times over the last um six months or so to kind of talk about improving senior services in Cottage Grove and making sure that we get that information out to seniors. Um and I think we have a pretty good plan going forward for the next year. Um and so this um theou is just um our old but updated um taking out some of those really kind of numerical um deliverables and making them a little bit more realistic. Um and then uh we did have a meeting included the town in there too to make sure that we can communicate better um to our residents and we have a new web page that has the Colonial Club information linked to that so that residents can find those types of services. So, looking for a um approval of this and then we can expect Melody back at our next meeting to give kind of a an updated annual report to us. Thanks for working on that. It's important to connect um seniors in our community with resources that can help them and the Colonial Club for being there to help um those seniors that that need a little extra support. um and activities. Um I think it it really benefits their quality of life here in Cottage Grove. So um thanks for your work on this. Uh with that, I would make a motion to approve the agreement for services with Colonial Club as presented.

I'll second that. Motion by Murphy, second by D. Any other discussion? Just a quick comment. Um so this would pull their service. So under our normal service providers, we have them come in in August unlike So this would pull that from that review cycle, put them in the review cycle based off their presentation so we don't make them come twice um just to be more effective for everybody. All right. I say all those in favor.

I I opposed abstain. Motion carries. All right, we're going to hop back up in the agenda um and move to presentations to the board. A presentation from Frontier Communications regarding upcoming proposed villagewide fiber optics projects. I'm going to give a brief introduction here to um Phillip. Uh this was mentioned at the last village board meeting. Um we have Frontier here to discuss their plans for a villagewide fiber optic presentation. Thank you. Uh my name is Philip Winn. I am the senior construction manager for Frontier um for the state of Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska. I'm here to just show you a little bit about what we have to what we're bringing to the community here. To start, we are Frontier Fiber Optic uh a Verizon company. Sorry. And the reason why I wanted to point that out initially is because we have just been recently purchased by Verizon. And so in the next couple months, you're going to see the transition from the from the Frontier logo as well as the Frontier name into just Verizon with a standard V. So we're excited about that. We hope and we think the community will be excited about that somehow already. So the one thing I want to point out is that we are a fiber optic internet company. We do have existing copper plant which has been around for a while, but we're going to transition all of it over to fiber optic service. The reason why it's a reliable product, it is um it also provides us uh you the our our residents, our customers the ability to have symmetrical speed. So if you're paying for 500 megabit per second internet service, you're going to get not only 500 megabit per second download, but you're also going to get 500 megabit per second upload. That's important for people that rely on uploading pictures, for instance, to a

website so that they can show uh their customers. It's also important for the kids to be able to play video games. So, um we do it does come with superior service I mean premium 247 tech support as well as many other things but we'll talk we'll continue on. Um this slide is mainly to let you know that it is a very um reliable product. you should not have bottlenecking. And what that means is when all of us get off of work and we come home and we start to get on the internet or you know all of a sudden we got multiple neighbors getting on the internet uh with some of the older technology you would see sort of a bottleneck where the speed starts to you know um cycle and just slow down. We don't have that issue with fiber optic service. And in fact, um, that the the the, uh, the equipment that's coming into our central office is so new, there's so much bandwidth, it's going to be quite a while. Even if everybody in the community decides to go with seven gig service, which is what we offer on the high end, um, you should not see that issue. And, um, yeah, and as far as the discrete inhome equipment, we utilize a product called ERO. You've probably heard of that. It's, um, you can see it on Amazon and other other shops. It's a very reliable um router that we provide and it does give the the speeds that you um should see that you're paying for. Um one time when I was in uh one of my friends home, he was paying for two gig service. He I was surprised that I was able to get two gig service wireless on my cell phone with the with the Wi-Fi connection that is available. So, next please. Just to give you an idea of what the pricing is like, the lowest speed we have is 500 megabit per second internet. We're offering it to the residents and this is nationwide. Um any customers

that want Frontier Internet service for $29.99. I think that's an incredible price. And in addition to that, um the promotion that they're having going on right now is the first three months is free. Um, in addition to that, if you if we have residents that qualify for lowinccome, there's an additional $10 off. So, we're talking about community members that have the ability to have 500 over 500 internet for just $20 a month. Um, I I think that's great. And for those who feel that they need seven gig download and seven gig upload where you have a family of maybe five where everybody's playing video games or working with AI technology or something of that nature that requires that much bandwidth it's available for you and for $109.99 that's a pretty good price. Why you need seven gig, I don't know for a resident, but eventually it's going to be available to all of the businesses as well in this community, which is I think going to be very impactful, especially when they have websites that need to to be able to have good upload speeds to sell their product. um for anyone who needs to have the ability to upload into a web server or if you have like if you were to be say GM where my friend works for Peterbuilt um and you have a modeling computer, the ability to access remotely that modelingu computer to be able to um mimic certain situations for a bumper per se is incredible. So, uh, and we plan to even go beyond 7 gig because, uh, the more we the the higher the speeds we offer, the more we seem to see our customers want even faster speeds. I don't know what they use it for exactly. I just have 500 over 500 where I am, and I think that's more than enough, but it's just me and my wife. Um, this is a slide just to go over the

process of what we normally do. You can just go on to the next one. What we're currently doing right now is working with the the permitting team to um let them know that we're coming into town and we're going to start building. This is good right here. And um the process that usually works is uh we work with the permitting team and get see what what they would they want the city, the township, the village wants us to do. We try to follow whatever is needed. The way our internet service works though is that it starts first at the central office and then it goes to a distribution hub that is usually at the entrance of a neighborhood. I believe there's going to be 7 to 10 hubs. Yeah. Because it's going to be about 7 to 10 neighborhoods uh that will be getting internet service. I believe it's like 2499 households here in this community that's going to be able to h get the service if they want to. Um, from there it it goes to it distributes out to the individual uh roads, the homes. Usually there is a line lot where we'll have a a handhold that's in the ground or it'll be in the air with the pole depending on how how the existing plant is. If our old existing plant is aerial, it will be aerial. If it's buried, it's going to be buried. And um from there once the c once the resident does want internet is when we will actually connect from the terminal to the home. So you can you can move to the next one. We just want to show you what a hub looks like because I don't want you to be scared. It it's not everywhere. It's not going to be in front of your home. It's usually on the corner on the edge uh where our our our technicians can safely park and get access to it. Um, you'll only see it, like I said, at the entrance of the neighborhood for um, a particular project. And I I believe there's 10 projects maybe. I think I think

there's 10 hubs. So, you can you can go to the next one. Once once we get the hub there, we actually build out to the individual homes. And if you do have existing old frontier plant that was buried, you probably see those little copper plants pipes uh ped pedestals, they won't be sticking out up out of the ground. Ours will actually be buried flush to the ground and the lids are usually green to try to minimize the impact on how it looks on the on cut on the resident's lawn. And they're usually, like I said, on the lot lot line uh between two homes uh for that. And if it's not buried, it will be aerial. And the next picture should show that where you'll see an aerial terminal. It looks like this small this small portion right here. There will be four anywhere from four to 12 ports on that to connect to four to 12 residents in the neighborhood. And usually it's just four because we don't want too much cables running around everywhere um at most. And then when the customer is ready to have service installed, we will actually uh get the order set up. Uh we'll send a technician out that will actually walk over the c with the customer how the process works, where the where they would like the fiber optic line to either come from the aerial portion to the side of the home or from the terminal um handhole to the home. Um you you may see a temporary line until we get a buried crew to bury the po that portion to the side of the home. Um otherwise if it's aerial it'll it'll be a permanent connection. Um that is a fiber optic terminal by the way. Yeah to the right here. What that does is the reason you're able to have symmetrical speeds of seven gigs up and down is because it's shooting a laser back to the central office. So there's lasers being shot both directions and that's how we're able to

provide that high speed. We are only limited by the mechanical technology that we can do create now. But we can go as fast as the speed of light if the technology allows us to do that. But that's our limitation right now with the technology. Um now you can go to the next slide when uh our our vendor goes out here to start putting in conduit. I don't want to surprise anyone. Um, but you will see areas where they will dig up and put pipe into the ground. This will be what it looks like. But if it does get does happen, it will be fenced off. And if it's not being worked on, it will be backfilled and covered until it's ready to be worked on again. But usually they want to come in and get out of that neighborhood because we don't want to disrupt the uh the neighborhood as much any more than we need to. All right. Go ahead. So, we won't just come in to a neighborhood and blindside your residents. We will actually go out there a couple weeks in advance. Um um you anywhere from uh two weeks to four weeks depending on when your team can get out there. Duca is our vendor and I have my vendors here to that's doing the uh the build for me. Um, we'll have A-frames at the entrance of the neighborhood that will let the let your residents know that we are coming into the neighborhood and we are going to be uh putting in fiber optic uh internet service for them that will be available to them. In addition to that, if you'll go to the next screen, there will actually be door hangers that we'll put on on any resident's home where we're actually going to bore underneath their uh underneath their yard so that they know that we are coming in advance. In addition to that, if you look at the door hangers as well as the A-frame, they should have two things on there. It should have a QR code that if they're if they know how to

use it to get be able to contact us and get reach uh somebody to leave a message or actually reach somebody that will actually um contact one of my team members that's here. Usually the turnaround is usually 24 hours for us to come back when there's like for and this is for like customer complaints. For instance, say you know we have a bore rig on their grass and it damages a bush or something like that. The resident wants that bush replaced. They'll call this 800 number. Actually, it's going to be a local number on there and a QR code and they'll get someone. They'll tell them what's going on and it it comes immediately to my team. My team will actually send someone out there, like I said, within 24 hours and we usually have that resolved within 24 to 48 hours depending on the situation. If it's something more, you know, uh, substantive, it could take a little bit longer. But we want to make sure that we address any issue that comes up before it comes to you and to your your permitting team. So, um that's what we do before we start coming in into the uh the community. You can you can go ahead and move on.

Uh yeah, I just put up the map. So, even just because we come in and we notify the residents and we give them the ability to have a contact for us doesn't mean it stops there. After we're done with the uh the build, we will come back in and make sure that whatever we disturbed, we restore. So, we you should see minimum impact. Now, it takes time for grass to grow. And so, we'll you know, you may have sod down on the ground. And if it's um I don't think the build's going into the winter months, so we don't have to worry about um putting straw and all that stuff in because everything should be uh easily easy to resolve this by the end of summer at the latest. Um this is kind of a map, an overview of where we're building that that turquoise color is is all the areas that we're building in. What is orange is already in place and it's basically what we call feeder fiber. basically uh fiber optic fiber that's going from central office to central office. So um thought you would like to see where this is just a overall view in terms of specifics. Um what you what residents can do is click on that QR code where where they they uh go to and it should give them a link to the ability to see when it's coming into their neighborhood if it's available. In addition to that, it also has a link to wh what what exactly is happening as far as the process. And what I can do also is provide uh links if you have a a website for the village so that the residents can see uh the door hanger as well as having links to you know the process of what how we go about building and also you know who to contact if they want service. But I can tell you, uh, the sales team usually, the moment we open it up for sale, um, the sales team has already been out there letting everybody

know that it's probably going to be ready in a couple days or something like that because they they they know it immediately. So, um, there are times that you may even see in the post office, there'll be a sign that says, "Frontier is coming. You know, call this number here and use this this promo code." But it's usually one of the technicians that want to come out and start selling because they get uh credit for selling to the residents here in the community. Does anyone have any questions? I can go over anything questions from the board.

So to comment on this, um I've been working with Frontier. I've already met with them. Me and Aaron and my staff already met with them previously before they came here. They have submitted seven of their 14 permits. if I believe there's 14 of them. Um, and there were some comments that I had for them. Um, a lot of the work thus far that I have seen is in easements or supposed to be in easements in the back of um, everyone's houses where existing pedestals are located. The permits will be going through public works commission um, and then ultimately will be coming to village board given the large project and the biggest and such a big disturbance. So, if there's any concerns or questions that you have, you're welcome to ask them or you can reach out to me and we can discuss as well.

And assuming we'll put together a project page then so that if residents do come on to our websites, they'll be able to find what's going on. Absolutely. I I'll I'll send you those links too because there's two links that I think are very important to have. One is the how the construction process works and the other one is how to get service. And um I'll also send you um the um the uh basically a copy of the door knockers, the front and the back in English and in Spanish so that you can have it for the community to put on the website if you need to. Thank you. Questions or concerns or comments at this time?

I just want to be sure that I understood. So, if let's say a resident does have an issue, they don't feel that their yard was cleaned up like it should be after something was added, is the process then to reach out and contact public works or contact

Please contact us. I'm one of the things that I'm proud of uh my team in Wisconsin is we do lead the nation in terms of restoration and making sure any resident uh concerns are addressed immediately. Uh we have a a week a monthly meeting with a bunch of senior vice president that just goes state to state to state to state. You know, why is the residents complaining this much stuff? Because it affects our branding and the last thing we want want is that our branding is affected because we can't take care of the community and be a good partner. So, thank you.

Thanks for the presentation. I guess I had a couple questions. So, you showed a picture of a hub and it looked like it was kind of on the property side of the terrace. Are the hubs going to be back along the backs of the the lot lines kind of where the utility boxes are or seemed it was on the front of the They should usually be in the rightway. So, for instance, if Spectrum or TDS or Charter, wherever theirs are, we usually will try to keep it together if possible. If it's just us there, we try to stay within the uh right away. We well we stay within the rideaway. That's that's there. And we can we always uh we will I'm sorry.

Non-negotiable whether they're on the rideway or an ement. They've got to be located whether in an easement or the ride of where the location right by the street. It just looks so odd. That one right there. Yeah. This this is a this is a neighborhood in Texas though. Okay. So, uh, there for the for for the for Texas, the rightway is from here to the fence line. Okay. So, Texas, they put it in the front. These will all be along the back lot lines. Uh, these hubs will actually be um up front, right? And in the terrace, not where would they be? Because that's where the rightway is.

It It'll probably depend on the location of where they're installing. A lot of their infrastructure is being installed in easements of the seven permits that I've reviewed and looked at, but I do not know the exact location of the hubs, but I will that's already on my list as I was reviewing to make sure that I know where those locations are, but the intent is not to be in the middle of someone's yard. They would be obviously we prefer them where boxes are where they're kind of rear lot line, not at street level. Correct. Yeah. Okay. No, that's great.

Yeah. I know in so I'm I'm coming from Texas here so this for me everything up here is new. Um but in Garland, Texas, I do know that we keep them in the rear uh you know in the alleyway if possible. Um or on the side where it's not in front of anybody's yard. Usually like there's a side street stuff we try to keep it on or in the alleyway. Here it might be a little bit different but uh Jerry and his team will work to make sure that we make it in a manner that's Yeah. We try to we will work we will work with the community. So we haven't had any issues. So I have no problems working with whatever with you and doing what we need to do. So Kyla Kyla knows. Yeah.

Um couple other quick questions. So you've got some great education. I think putting on the website is great. How how far in advance do you do the door hangers as far as awareness for for my understanding it's anywhere from two to four weeks in advance. Okay. So So yeah, it's not going to be like the day before. Yeah. Yeah. So, good. Great. So, great. Um, am I right? You're right. It just depends on how long it takes the young ladies. Yeah. I'm pretty picky on the permit on what I want on the plans. So, yeah. The moment the permits the moment the permits are approved, we're going to be out there putting door hangers on there. Okay, great.

So, um, two other quick questions. So, duration of the install. So, you're going to come in, put the hangers up two weeks or whatever before once you begin. How long does this process take? Yeah. with a number of projects. Sorry.

So my name is Jerry McCoy. I'm with Duca Group. We've been in business 50 years. So been doing this a while. 25 on telecommunications side. Uh we build a lot of fiber plant around uh the country and uh uh we have an office here. Mario Duca is with us, our CEO and president uh owner and uh uh he lives here and we have a couple buildings, one in uh across the highway here, couple buildings here. So, a lot of our folks are are local to the area that'll be building uh for each one of the hubs that she was talking about. On the print, there is an address where each hub resides, where it's going to sit, so you'll know exactly where those are. Uh, and then I forgot the other question.

Talk to me how long from beginning to end.

Yeah, sorry. Yeah. So, uh, 10 projects. We got them slated. Well, we got them slated to start in April or whenever we start getting permits. Hopefully, it's far enough in advance of April, May, June, and probably July, and then we're we're done. So each project on average uh from an underground construction perspective or aerial perspective were probably about four weeks for each one. And then we pull the fiber through, splice the fiber, activate this fiber, and turn it back over to uh Frontier/Verizon for for selling. around around four weeksish and that includes us doing uh restoration as we go. One of our companies, Duca Companies, is a commercial res uh restoration or landscaping company, right? We do commercial landscaping and commercial snow plowing for the country or for the comm community uh Wisconsin. Question.

Nope. One thing I wanted to add as um as we're reviewing the permits and one comment that I've already had to their team is I would like to see not only they provided us today with the project location of where they're going to be, but how they're planning on kind of phasing that throughout. So this way, not only do I know where we're at in a million different places, but also there's a large um burden on our utility staff as well, which we're looking to um sub out um for them to be able to do that work. Yeah. Yeah, because if it's going to go over 3 months, it would be good on our village website to sort of Yep. have the neighborhoods and when you could expect this just so there's transparency and information for everybody. Yes, sir. And and we'll probably be working one, two, three projects at a time. So, no more than that.

Yeah. Yeah. As we kind of move through, but you expect to be done by the end of July. Yeah. And then we usually start from the central central office outwards. Um, but yeah, it's not going to be like down here in the south and then way up there in the north. It's usually together. Um, so that it's not impacting multiple neighborhoods. And I just had one other quick question. So you were purchased by Verizon, which is really kind of fascinating. We do have a Verizon store here in Cottage Grove. So is sales and service going to be supported out of the store here, or is it a different division?

No, it's going to be all together. In fact, one of the things I didn't mention is you will have the ability to bundle your home internet service with your cell phone. So you actually would save more in the process. Um you can pay your bills at at the Verizon store too if you just want to walk there. Customers that want to complain can go there and complain to them as well about anything that they have, you know. But um as far as the build is concerned, um my goal is to try is to be a good partner to work with um your community and to make sure that we're doing everything we can to make it um seamless if possible. Great. Thanks.

And just one adder, we might damage a bush. We might do that, but we will we will fix it quickly. So, but some things will happen, right? It's construction. Uh not a lot, but we do have some things pop every now and then as we're moving through. So, just wanted to add that. Go ahead. But yeah, if there are any complaints, please send them to us. So, we want to take care of it so that you don't have to worry about that.

Yeah, that was exactly going to be my comment there. Um, you know, a number of years ago when I first joined the board, we had another um company come in and you know, a first impression of a product says a lot. So, I really appreciate all of the communication that you're starting off here and I look forward to having those open lines for our residents um that have concerns or uh you know are worried about restoration or how how they can contact you because you know if you're doing the work it's hard to do like a between our staff and your staff. So I think the communication lines between our staff and yours and then between the residents and you are really important to make this an easy process and people that you know would be interested in getting your product. You know I think that keeping that uh communication line open is really important. So thank you.

Absolutely. One of the um one of the uh the mandate that my director has uh put on me since coming up here is that we be more we overcommunicate and that we provide um a clear um means for the community to uh contact us. And so um Kyla has had has you have all of our contacts, right? Mike Nelson has sent it to you and I mean she we we can share it with you as well who we can contact. Um, my number is on there. I have no problems uh responding back. I may be a little bit busy, but I will respond at this point. Just go through me.

I did have one other Do you have additional subcontractors under you or will everyone that's working report to DUCA because I think that, you know, having that reporting chain or will there be additional subs that don't necessarily report to you? Well, all subs report into us, right? So, uh, on the splicing side, we use some sub labor to do fiber splicing. Um, we have all our own W2 crews or employees, but we do from time to time, and we'll probably have uh a couple different subs here on this project, but we'll also have a supervisor on this project. Uh, we'll have a manager on the project, uh, all loco. And then uh the vice president of uh operations for construction will be housed here as well. So all of those individuals will be on the project as the project's unfolding. We will have some subs. Sometimes some of the aerial guys might might be a sub, but uh some of our W2 guys will be on the project as well. And all of our supervisors, managers, and vice president will be here.

Sure. Any other questions or comments from board members? Otherwise, thank you for coming tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Oh, yeah. Got it. All right.

All right. We will move on to number seven. Um, public hearing. Um, the public hearing for the impact fee ordinance 04-2026. So, it's 7:17 and I'll open the public hearing. I'll invite John up um from Ellers to give us a um an introduction to the um the presentation for the impact fee study. Um and then um we'll open it up for public comments and then close the hearing. We can ask clarifying questions to John as he goes through this and then we'll close the hearing and then have discussion amongst the board.

Okay. Good evening everybody. I'm John Cameron with Ellers and I'll give an overview of the impact fee study. Um if you don't mind going to the next page. So, uh, just as a precursor, and I I know you've seen this, uh, as we were, uh, getting engaged to do the law enforcement, uh, portion of the impact fee analysis, but just, uh, by way of introduction, impact fees, uh, statutoily have been in place for many, many years. uh they generally recognize the impact that uh both residential and non-residential development have on uh capital facilities and are designed to recover the proportionate share of the capital costs that benefit new development within the municipality. If you go to the next page. So again, I have already gave the what are impact fees and um in addition to that one-time fee, they are generally payable at the issuance of the uh building permit. They can uh and are designed to be specifically used for capital cost recovery. Uh that can also include uh legal engineering, design, land acquisition uh in addition to standard construction expenses. What's shown on the slide are the most common uh impact fees under state statutes. Uh actually I'm sorry this is all of the impact fee potential impact fees under state statutes. There are a number of them. Um if you sample and I know you have municip different municipalities. Uh water and sewer in my experience are generally the most prevalent. Uh and then after that you get into parks uh uh public safety libraries etc. Let's go to the next page. On the flip side, impact fees cannot be used really for anything that's not listed and enumerated in the state statute. Specifically calls uh out that you cannot use it for city village or town hall facilities. Uh you cannot own it use it for facilities that are owned

by a school district and you cannot use it for vehicles. And I think the the downside or the most common comment that we get with impact fees is what about fire trucks? Those are obviously large capital apparatus, mobile station, technically considered a vehicle. If you go to get the next page, thank you. You're doing great. Um the um process to uh perform the impact fee under state statutes is called a public facilities needs assessment. It requires us to take an inventory of existing facilities, identify the new and improved uh or expanded uh costs by type. So there's a specific calculations for each different impact fee and then go through a deficiency growth analysis to determine the impact fee share of the facility costs as well as calculate the effect or calculated effect that impact fees have on housing affordability within the municipality. The study is placed on file for a 20-day period in the office of the clerk. And uh after that period of time, you've got the public hearing that we're at tonight uh to consider the ordinance uh update. If you look at the next page in terms of just general impact fee uh information and and really where municipalities uh kind of engage us or others like us in the process is uh what types of projects should be included. Uh and our messaging is that you really should be zeroing in on projects that you know uh are for sure going to happen or have a very high degree uh of likelihood of happening. Uh and there are a lot of communities over the years when especially in the early 2000s that put impact fees in place just anticipating continued growth and development. Of course we went through the great recession um and a lot of those projects uh either got pivoted or or uh did not happen. So, kind of the takeaway uh lessons learned over time is to ensure that you're uh putting

projects in the impact fee study and looking at recovering a portion of those project costs through impact fees uh or all of those project costs through impact fees for projects that are for sure going to uh occur. Um furthermore, if you do not use impact fees, meaning money in, money out, so spending impact fees uh collected in any one year by the end of the eighth year. So, uh, ensuring that you're sweeping that account and most municipalities, uh, will use them, sweep the account in advance of the project, potentially help reduce the borrowing that might be needed for for the project, and then on an annual basis, use, uh, impact fee revenues to help uh, pay a portion of the principal and interest payments on the debt associated with the project cost. Um, furthermore, impact fees should be evaluated regularly. Uh, really as conditions change. One big one is oftentimes impact fees are put in place in advance of a project. Once the project is concluded, coming back and ad and updating the fee with the actual capital costs um is uh good practice. It's also good practice to uh update the growth projection. So there's a number of assumptions that go into the the study. Uh the biggest one is the amount of growth over a period of time. In this case, we're looking at roughly a 20-year uh planning horizon for residential and non-residential growth. So as conditions change, as maybe updates get done to the comprehensive plan or uh uh conditions change on the ground, it's important to come back and memorialize those in the impact fee analysis. If you look at the next page, just jumping into the fees specifically. First one, law enforcement. Uh the village as you know is planning to is uh constructing a 20 thou 27,500 uh square foot standalone facility. The law enforcement impact fee examines the growth related cost and the impact fee recoverable cost um for that uh facility. Uh the current cost uh less

funds on hand and grants uh is $14,663,044. Uh, the impact fee identifies 52% of the new facility as recoverable through impact fees. That yields an impact fee per single family home of $2,158, $1,439 per multif family unit. Um, 087 square uh cents per square foot for office and industrial development and then $18 uh cents per square foot for commercial development. So one thing to uh point out and really kind of hammer home is this is the maximum amount that you can justify uh per the um study itself uh municipalities certainly have the flexibility to go below that amount if you so choose to uh but the study document shows the maximum amount that you can justify uh through the needs assessment process. Hey, John. And then just the the intent of this study, if the the board goes forward with the law enforcement fee, um because this is a project that hasn't actually occurred in its entirety, we'll re-evaluate once we have incurred all the costs, adjust the cost, the impact fee for the actual construction cost. We right now we have some levels of estimates for grants, um some level of estimates for contingency that's actually going to be utilized. So that's why this number does not directly tie to that $16.2 million total cost. Um but our best estimate at what that net is going to be. Thank you. Um if you look at the next page, just a precursor on the, you know, on the explanation for the fees. Um, with the law enforcement fee, we're looking at uh developing um standards per square foot uh of uh employees and vehicles uh out through the planning period through 2044.

looking at the future uh or uh um current population and uh based on those service level standards identifying and quantifying the amount of square footage that the village should have currently uh for this facility and then looking that as as a percentage of what is being constructed to identify the uh new growth share of the facility cost. So of that 14.6 million uh approximately 7.6 6 million is identifiable through uh recovery through the uh law enforcement impact fee if you so choose to implement it. If you go to the next page and look at the water impact fee calculation, there's uh a number of projects that are included in that uh impact fee calculation. The largest one is the well five uh uh project with estimated cost of $4.55 million. That cost is 100% attributable to new growth and development uh based on the uh utilities master plan that was completed in 2022 by Strand that identifies uh no current deficiencies in uh water source uh facilities. Uh this project is uh solely needed to serve new development within the village. There's also uh three different oversizing uh projects that have uh deficiency percentages of 39% growth or impact fee recoverable percentages of 61% uh with a total impact fee recovery of 306,000 out of an estimated uh half a million dollars of total oversizing expenses. The next page shows the calculation of the uh water impact fee which is broken down into two components. The impact fee per uh uh space uh residential equivalent unit is $1,422.

The uh impact fee for oversizing is $96 uh per residential equivalent uh connection for a total of $1,518. And that applies to a uh meter size of 5/8 or 3/4 in uh which is shown uh on that page. Um and and increases with the size of the meter. So uh the current impact fee uh is based on number of reus. This uh takes the reu uh principle but then applies it towards uh water meters where one reu is equivalent to uh 1 5/8 or 3/4 in uh meter equivalent and then uses the equivalency ratios uh within the uh um villages uh water rate uh tariff and extrapolates that out for larger meter sizes. And that's uh very common. The nice thing with that as opposed to the reu method is that it's uh uh very easy to understand and administer. It's also easy for those who are pulling the permits to be able to to know what meter size they're uh looking at and and figure out their costs uh pretty rapidly.

John, one quick comment here. Um so by far the most feedback I got from developers on this side was um a confusion of lateral size does not fall on this side. The most laterals going into residential homes is 1 in. Most meters in almost all of our residential homes besides two is uh 3/4. So that's where there was some confusion where people were saying well the two that 2,000 amount was way higher than what they saw in other communities. So just wanted to make sure that you know one of the things if we go forward with the impact fee is making that abundantly clear in communication material just so there isn't that confusion. um when people are are questioning or pulling permits.

So on the table it actually entitles it meter size. So it's meter size and what you're saying is most residential meters are 3/4. Yep. Most are 58 or 3/4 has nothing to do with the lateral and that's and and I think where developers mind is a lot of their heads are services. The service that they put in as a one inch service and so it's kind of making sure that we're the using the right terms and communication. Thanks, John.

Uh, switching gears to the sewer impact fee. The sewer impact fee is, uh, broken into two different components. Uh, there's the ridge lift station and interceptor project and then the oversizing component of the east, uh, VAS, uh, sewer extension project. The ridge lift station project is recoverable from a specific uh, area within the village, which is shown on the next page. The East Vasa's uh sewer extension project is recoverable from all uh new development within the village. I'm going to jump to the sewer impact fee calculation piece which again is broken down into two different components. Uh the ridge lift station project uh has a growth percentage assigned to it at 93% with an impact fee per residential equivalent unit. Again, think that 5/8 3/4 inch meter uh at $2,263. The oversizing component is at $300 per residential equivalent unit. And the fee recommended fee schedule is shown on the next page here. So, in summary, uh if you look at um the recommended impact fees from the study per single family home, you have law enforcement at $2,158, water at $1,5818, and sewer for both components uh at $2,563 for a total amount, maximum amount chargeable of $6,239. And the final piece is uh quantifying the effect that the impact fees have on housing affordability and then we've broken out the additional monthly cost or estimated cost on a mortgage uh payment between the different impact fees. So we've defined an affordable house at $450,000

assuming 10% down payment. You can see the amount financed under no impact fees under the existing uh impact fees, the water sewer impact fee and then the proposed so the law enforcement, the the new water and the new sewer. the uh estimated impact uh for that property owner uh is $41 per month for uh the if you were to adopt uh all three impact fees uh as proposed. And that breaks down between law enforcement at $14, water at 10, and sanitary sewer at $17. uh opposed to the current impact fees uh for water and sewer which have a uh $21 impact to that same property owner. Uh breaks down to $13 for sewer, $8 for uh water. And with that, I will turn it back over. All right, Cameron, do you have anything to add

um at this point? Not yet. Okay. Um, are there any clarifying questions for the board for to John? Is he gonna be able to come up back up for questions? That's fine. Okay.

All right. So, we'll um open it up for public comment then. Um, we have a few wish to speak forms that um do not wish to speak. So, Katrina Floyd, 733 Crest Haven Drive, is a village resident. um is concerned about the consideration of the impact fee and how it blames newer residents for services the entire village will use and need um specifically for the law enforcement impact fee. Um Ben Wheeler Floyd from 733 Crest Haven Drive is a village resident um does not support another cost being passed on to new homeowners, especially not one that chases away new businesses. We should be planning ahead, not fear-mongering our investments and giving into buyers remorse. um against the law enforcement impact fee. And then Stefan Wei 100 Coil Parkway. Um the impact fees agrees that um the village board ordinance should be updated to reflect the current financial cost extending sewer and water utilities for new development. Does not agree with the new fee to pay for existing services. Um imp like building staffing etc. Um impact fees are legitimates. Um, utilities like water and sewer make a lot of sense and are grounded in measurable capacity expansion. Expanding impact fees into public safety introduces greater subjectivity, legal complexity, and economic risk. Um, encourages the village trustees to remove um the impact fees for law enforcement. And then we do have several um wish to speak forms from individuals who are here. So, we'll start with Casey Erinson. Good evening, trustees. Uh, I'm here tonight to speak out against the proposed law enforcement impact fee. Uh, this is not an appropriate solution to village debt. It is reckless, divisive, and unsupported by both residents and the data. It is a knee-jerk response when what we need is a measured

long-term approach. Impact fees are almost always passed on directly to the potential homeowner or business, often at a rate of 1.2. two or two times or in some cases three times the fee itself. More importantly, they only pay us back if properties are built in the first place. But adding a law enforcement fee on top of our existing water and sewer fee can more than double what a potential community member was expecting to pay. Uh this makes a new and uh unmeasurable fee like this an uncertain gamble. We could easily lose more growth and more tax dollars than we might make up with the few properties that decide to weather the burden. then we not only fail to address the police station debt, we lose out on further tax revenue and business development. That's a price that we'd be paying for years to come. Impact fees also only affect new construction, a fact that has been touted as making growth pay for growth. But we already do that. Taxes are collected equally. We all pay a fair share and reap the same benefits. Tipping the scales like this with a cost that only newcomers pay will create a rift that villainizes new residents, renters, and stifles small business. Moreover, there's no real numbers that support this notion that recent growth or apartments are the actual driving force behind the police station project. The need for a new building with vehicle and personnel space was first identified a decade ago before much of the denser housing was even planned. It was always going to be necessary and blaming our newest community members is untrue and unfair. It's not being the good neighbors that we want to be. Finally, community voices as well as expert data have not supported this measure. I attended both of the uh earlier public meetings last week and the resident response was overwhelmingly negative. Um our village recognized that this is not the right tool for the job um and would do more harm than good. One great point raised was that the uh impact fees in Cottage Grove have been historically for the water and sewer only or in other municipalities um some for utilities which works uh because these are measurable and quantifiable. Uh safety or law enforcement fees however have no

possible metric. there's no value that they can be tied to, which may even subject the village to legal liability if we implement one. That's been raised. Um, only a few other Wisconsin communities have done a law enforcement or safety impact fee, and so they've only been on the books for 2 or 3 years. Uh, there's also uncertainty about how the commercial or industrial square footage uh has anything to do with law enforcement demand, but that's the way they're proposed to be built. Uh, as another actual example, a recent development of single family homes planned 250 units over 10 years. Uh, as proposed, that would only recover 250,000 out of the targeted 7.5 million after 10 years, while sending a decade's worth of other developers looking elsewhere and missing out on untold tax revenue. There's a time and a place for this kind of instrument, but it needs to be stable, evenly applied, and backed by solid evidence. The water and sewer fees raise few objections from homeowners and developers because they meet those terms. this reactionary law enforcement fee does not. We should stay the course with our sensibly managed and assetbacked investment funding rather than roll the dice. Thank you. It's uh JP. Hello again. Excuse me. Um I want to start by being clear. I support uh updating the water and sewer impact fees. Those are tied to measurable infrastructure capacity, wells, pipes, lift stations. That's engineering based, that's defensible. That being said, I have a few questions centered on the law enforcement impact fee, including what is proposed in the trustee memo. First, on structure, the professional study calculated the proportional fees across residential, commercial, and industrial development. Trustee memo before you proposes a flat 10,000 fee applied only to residential units. If the study allocates growth across residential, commercial, and

industrial development, but the ordinance charges only residential, are we comfortable placing financial burden of growth disproportionately on residents rather than distributing across all sectors that contribute to the demand? And if we depart from the proportional framework outlined in the study, does that make the fee more vulnerable to legal challenge under the relationship to growth requirement of the state law? Second on housing impact affordability analysis in the study treats the fee as a simple dollar fordoll uh in addition to the price of a home but research constantly shows that the impact fees often increase home prices by the kind of the gold standard uh is 1.6 but research has shown that even goes up to three times the fee for higherend uh units. So my question is did our affordability analysis account for the multiplier effect? If the real impact on home prices exceeds the face value of the fee, are we understanding the effect of housing types that the housing community is prioritizing? Furthermore, a fee of 10,000 per residential unit is a a regressive tax that will have a disproportionate impact on more affordable and senior housing, the very types of housing, the very types of housing that the housing committee is prioritizing. Third, on growth and long-term fiscal impact. Impact fees increase the cost of new home and act as a barrier for developers entering the market. When costs rise, development can slow. And in Wisconsin, our levy limit growth is tied directly to net new construction. So, here's the key question. If the fee slows growth even modestly, what happens to our levy capacity over time? What is the long-term financial trade-off between the revenue that the city generates and the potential reduction in the taxbased growth? Because when levy growth slows and we are at capacity, we are left with three options. Reduce services, defer maintenance, or increase the burden on existing taxpayers. And fourth, on service standards, since police staffing are policy decisions, not fixed engineering capacity limits like water or sewer, what explicitly adopted service standard is the fee

anchored to? And if those assumptions change in the future, what happens to the basis of for the fee? And finally, nearly half the project cost is attributed to existing defic deficiencies for the police department costs that impact fees cannot legally cover. My concern is is if we adopt this fee that disproportionately burdens residents, proportionately unates housing impact and risks slowing growth. We may weaken the very tax base that helps us fund services sustainably in the long term. Before moving forward, I believe residents deserve clear answers to these questions and the village board should take a look at the data to make an informed decision. Thank you.

Uh Tim rolling over this going over some of the numbers here. Um, we figured he he fig Joe figured four $400,000 for the typical home in Cottage Grove is what he took. If you look at that as an assessment, that number that you get from that is $3,180. The the impact is 6,200 bucks. So roughly, you're welcoming new people into the village of Cottage Grove by charging them their first two years of Village Cottage Grove taxes. Well done. Nice. He talked about a water uh tower for a new residential development. a as a developer, you can come in here and with with the village's approval put in your own private well system at no cost to the municipality. It can be done. It has been done throughout Wisconsin. It happens a lot. This is not a way to welcome new neighbors. If you're if you're charging the impact fee for the police and I live in that new neighborhood and policing I want to see it in my new neighborhood more than more than older neighborhoods. Why would why would you want to create that kind of disparity, especially with with law enforcement and policing? Why would you want to do that? Impact fees are terrible because they're called impact fees. You're taxing people that aren't

even here yet. They're not even members of your community. They're not teachers. They're not law enforcement. They're not volunteer firefighters. They're not shopkeepers. They're not anybody that even lives in your community. You're taxing people before they even build a house in your village. That is unfair. You talk about taxation without re representation. That defines it. They haven't even pulled a building permit here yet. And you guys want to want to have impact fees on them. It's ridiculous. As to whatever supervisor's note where Joe came up with $1,500 for the impact fee on the 3/4 inch and I read in the supervisor's note that it's more like $2,200. I don't know where where where the figure from Joe's note came and the supervisor's note was even higher. That's an interesting question. It increases housing costs and and to put it on somebody's mortgage and to figure it in into their mortgage as an impact fee, I think is terrible. I think it's a terrible way to try to get an impact fee. Oh, it's only 40 $41 a month. That is a terrible way to promote an impact fee and anywhere. Totally against the impact fees. Uh I do have more questions, but there are more people here to speak. Thank you.

Um Michael Swanson. Sorry, I got to move this up. Uh, good evening. My name is Michael Swanson. I'm a resident of the town at 2563 Bass Road, but I'm co-president and co-owner of Atlantis Valley Foods, an independent locallyowned small business, which has been based in the village since 2016. Across two business entities, my family has built three commercial buildings in Cottage Grove, including the current municipal services building and two more in the Commerce Road Industrial Park. We made a conscious decision to base our business in Cottage Grove uh based on our long relationship with the village and their commitment to continued uh commercial growth among other reasons. Cottage Grove has always been an inviting municipality to build new development and has handled this growth rationally and reasonably. We believe the addition of the police impact fee is an imperfect idea and shouldn't be adopted. Any additional any additional fee, especially one that could be as significant for commercial building as the proposed square footage fee would be, would simply serve to dissuade further development and could therefore further impact the potential growth and development for which the new police station is being constructed. Further development that serves to increase this uh overall tax base would certainly factor uh to be more beneficial outcome than collecting a fee, a short-term fee which is limited in scope and time. Finally, adding a new fee when all indications are that the village is in a strong financial position sets the tone that the village is not serious about continuing our reasonable growth. Uh, thank you for your consideration and time. Um, Robert Proctor

Good evening. It's good to see so many of you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak tonight in the presentation. Um I my name is Robert Proctor. I'm the government affairs director for the Realtors Association of South Central Wisconsin and general counsel for the Wisconsin Builders Association. uh understand that paying for things is very difficult. So there's there's never ever a super easy answer for all the services you want to provide. What I passed out to you tonight, I'm going to start out a little this one is to just kind of show the comparison of where you all are at. This was based on a report done by Verbecker for the W for the Madison Area Builders Association. I didn't want to kill this many trees by so I'm going to give a copy to Matt before I leave and if anybody wants it I'm sure he can get you a copy. But uh the first one I'm looking at is this paper right here and you'll see the one this is the one where it shows the different impact fees for different municipalities. And you'll see that Cottage Grove is kind of near the middle and the top right now. But if you if you include the entire police impact fee as if you're looking to you're going to move much higher. And one thing I'd like to point out if you look at which municipalities you want to be grouped with you look at the village of Wanaki the city of Middleton the city of PR Sun Prairie and the city of Verona is where you see a lot of the single family owner occupied growth. And what you also see for those communities is the lowest impact fees. And so one of the problems I have with impact fees is I think they dis disproportionately hurt single family ownership products that they are paid at the time of the building permit. They increase the cost for people who want to buy a house. And I think that they're disproportionate that it's easier. The

one reason you're starting to see so many multi so much multifamily in Dayne County because it's simply easier to build. It's easier to get it approved. you buy a smaller lot, you don't have to pay for the road, you don't have to pay for the sewer, you don't have to pay for the uh water, you don't have to pay for all that infrastructure. You don't have to hold it while you try to sell it over three, four, five years. And the impact fees just add to that. We're in a multif family. It's a much easier product to get done. And so, what do you start seeing? A disparity of multif family and um and single family not coming back. If you look at the report prepared by the Madison Area Builders Association, you'll see um that right now Cottage Grove ranks 11th out of 16 on impact fees with number one being the best. So you're you're near the bottom. Now that's a middle group in there. You're not far off from the average. But one thing, if you look to the right, you'll see that the Dane County Regional Housing Strategy indicated that Cottage Grove needs to build approximately 83 new units a year, and its annual unit starts 24 this year. To kind of put where Cottage Grove has been, and I know Aaron knows this number better than me, so he can correct me, but I'm going to be pretty close. Prior to the housing crash in 2008, the two years prior to that, Cottage Grove was in the like 60 to 70 housing starts and 100 housing starts. It's never recovered from back then. There was years where almost nothing was built here. 24 housing starts for Cottage Grove prior to that recession is very low. And so when you see 24, that's not a big number. And when you keep increasing the barriers to creating affordable uh owner

occupied housing, that creates a problem. The 30-year mortgage analysis drives me crazy because by that when you do that and say you can pay it off over 30 year, like that's how you look at it, that becomes a justification for almost any kind of spending. Uh, Cottage Grove had a lot of opposition to the library. The library is cheaper on an annual basis than the $40 a month by the impact fee. And so to pretend that that impact fee is insignificant is is not fair. It's a death by a thousand cuts. That's what happens to single family owner occupied and why you don't see it. It's all of these that accumulate and make the ability for somebody to purchase a house uh too expensive. And the people purchasing those houses are going to be people from Cottage Grove, Manona, people moving from their a teacher who's now renting that wants to buy the house or the new family, the downsizing senior. Those people, those houses don't exist. And I would like to see more owner occupied. I think raising impact fees sends the opposite message than trying to create that type of housing, but I do understand that it's easier on my side of the table than your side of the table. So, I appreciate the time and uh happy to answer any questions, but uh thank you.

Is there anyone else in the room that would like to give public comment during the public hearing? I just want to make a quick comment on the presentation. And there was a decimal place error um for the instead of being um 8 cents, it should have been 87 cents. Um so that just wanted to make sure that that was clear. And then is there anyone on Zoom that'd like to give public comment? You can raise your hand using the reaction button. If there's nobody on online, I'd like to go over the public input session, just general summary if that's okay.

Yes, please.

Um, so really wellreceived. Um, you know, our goal here at the village is to always make providing feedback as easy as possible. So, a couple things we learned during the budget process last year was people like filling out online forms and people like having an option during the day to provide feedback just in case um you know even if they can come over their lunch hour and and provide feedback. So um while um we didn't have 100 plus people on the online session, we did have better better um attendance than um prior kind of input sessions. Um so just in general a general sentiment was just making sure um that we're trying to stay consistent with other municipalities in um the Dayne County area um to try to look at things also holistically. So if we make an adjustment to these impact fees, is there give or take in other fee structures that could possibly uh be revisited? Um a lot of concern um you know on the square footage related to um commercial and industrial and trying to build make a connection between the um square how does square foot translate to um police services. Um, so we had a fair amount of questions there, but I did include in the packet a summary kind of all the feedback that was provided. Um, so there's so not only was there the impact fee input sessions, uh, utility commission was asked to provide some feedback um, on the impact fees. Um, I had asked them specifically to just focus on the water and sewer fees that's included. The input session is and then there was um, some board member questions that I included in the packet. um and happy to um you know continue to feed pad additional feedback on how we could reach residents to make sure we're

getting uh feedback for these kind of items. All right. Is there anything else for the public hearing portion? Right. Otherwise, I'll close the public hearing um and we can open it up to board discussion for the consideration of the water and sewer and the law enforcement impact fee for ordinance 042026.

I'd like to start the reading that I've done. I I would like to see the um water and sewer be one consideration and the police station be another consideration for impact fee rather than grouping them all together. We do have the discuss and consider separated out. Um do you want to start just start with water and sewer first?

So I Yes. Go ahead. Um so I have uh based on my reading um from the uh UW extension office it's estimated that about 10 to 15% of Wisconsin municipalities uh with a population similar to Cottage Grove um use impact fees for uh law enforcement. So, I know we just talked about water, but so we'll reverse that thought. Um, go through my notes here. So, research also um indicates that impact fees do increase the cost of homes, but the effect on driving people away is complicated by capitalization. meaning further is that um there's a study notably by the National Association of Homebuilders show that for every $1,000 in impact fees, the final price of a new home rises by about $1,200. So there's another new view theory where economists at the Florida State and other institutions have found that while impact fees may rise raise raise prices, they often reduce property taxes for that home. Homeowners are sometimes more willing to pay a higher price upfront because there is going to be an additional need for services including EMS, uh, law enforcement. Um really impact fees are should be considered the grease for growth because um new development is a call for services and by having these impact fees upfront is going to save the taxpayer money in the long run.

Yeah, I think our water and sewer impact fees have been in existence since the early 90s. um this is a a necessary update um in order for growth to pay for growth for infrastructure purposes. So um I'm definitely in favor of um moving forward with water and sewer impact fees. Um Chris, you have your hand up.

Yeah, I just wanted to clarify something with Karen. So that $41 that includes removing and reinstating the So looking at this actual increase for actually correct and um just as a reminder that would only be it would be a net increase on the west side of the village. On the east side of the village the impact fee would reduce to 300 only $300. Um so then you're actually seeing a decrease in the impact fee for for sewer. Okay. assume

and we did not sorry we didn't we didn't calculate what the that number is right

um and again I guess part of the the frustration with the statute um we have to calculate affordability um there's a million different ways to calculate affordability but we have to go through the action this is by no means to justify the fee it's to to just try to illustrate what is the possible impact on the of the fee so obviously everybody has different you know when they qualify for a loan that everybody has different interest rates. So, it's going to impact people differently depending on your situation. There's multiple situations here in the village now where there's half of the village on the sewer side's going to be charged one impact fee because the the infrastructure is directly tied to um the infrastructure that's serving that watershed. And so again, um, we try to do our best to illustrate what this can be in that affordability analysis, but there's no there's no rhyme or reason. So we're always welcoming feedback on how to present things um, in a way that is understandable and transparent.

Okay. So say at it it's most expensive it's an additional $6 a month and that would pay for 100% of five 93% of the ridge lift station and% of the miles extension.

Yep. Oversizing. Yep. And and really um if we kind of back up to ridge lift station so 7% that's calculated as the current share would actually be what's current what Trillium lift station is currently serving. So we are not able to recover a 100% of the cost because 7% of the capacity of the new lift station is serving existing users. So if it was covering all new users, we would try to calculate the fee to recover 100% of the fee.

Okay. And this this might be um out of scope for this discussion, but do you know you or anybody else there? Um is that 7% plan to be recovered by the elder around that area.

So the 7% would be uh so the way that we recapture rates on the utility side. So the 7% of that infrastructure would be recovered and John's an expert in this so he's in the room primarily through the fixed portion of the utility fees when we look at our the rate structure. Um, so just like if we were going in and replacing a water or sewer mean, all of that gets layered into the the fixed and variable portion of the utility bill every time we do a a rate case study. So to answer your to answer your question, no, a developer would not be paying the 7%. The 7% would be shouldered on the existing users because it's serving existing rateayers. Okay. Um, so now

Sorry. Um, what's going on? I guess that's why that was very dramatic. I have I have a question for Karen since we're focusing on sewer right now. So, in the 2025 financial management plan that Ellers had put together, um the Ridge Lift Station was listed as um being in 2030 2031 um with revenue bonds or and then in 2026 and our current financial management plan um ridgelift station says developer paid. So

developer paid or impact it's essentially the the cost of development will primarily fall on impact. So that the primary area where that's serving um if we shift for let's say that for some reason we need that lift station early we would more likely than not require a developer to kickstart or promise so many homes so we don't have to take out as large of a debt for that project. And I guess part of the financial planning is we do these processes and things change. So for example, a development either kicks back or or or no longer proceeds to move forward. So we're always on the financial management plan and other documents using the best information that we have available. Um, so when we were looking at the impact fees for that specific infrastructure, it ended up in our opinion being the most equit equitable way to recover that cost of that that asset using all the service area that would be eventually recovered for um that area.

So that makes sense. I feel like I'm getting an echo. No, I don't know. Um, so that makes sense. But I guess my question is like we haven't at least since Renee and I joined the board last April, we haven't had any conversations about the Ridge lift station and any of that detail. You know, I know that that the board prior kind of put the brakes on it for a little bit um needing to solve for a second outlet of that neighborhood. And so I guess I was just a little surprised to see it in the packet since we haven't discussed it. And so I guess my question to you is um what those things are grouped together um for the fees. So if we take ridge lift station out of the potential sewer impact fee increase, what what dollar amount are we looking at?

Uh you're looking at $300 for a 5/8 and 3/4. Um so I guess I do want to kind of let's let's take a step back. So the utility commission manages the water and sewer operations. So what was brought forward to the village board was a site plan. So um the site plan has not came back to the village board because that project is not anticipated to start till 2030 or 2031. So when that happens, the utility commission will resubmit an application for a site plan um as we get a little bit closer um to that date. The kind of trigger factor in is the Trillium lift station is in an area that cannot be improved. So, we're not going to be able to retire and bring that lift station up to the standard that it needs to be. Um, so that is why the utility commission identified this location um for the the future site of to replace Trillium. Um, so I know there was a long time there was talks about the only reason why this lift station is happening is because of a specific development. It kind of is dualfold. Some of it is related to if that develops at that frequency, we have to push it up in our schedule, but it has always kind of been in the plan to be a asset that is added. Um, I don't know the specific street, but in 2018, uh, we put in piping to kind of prepare for the connection to that lift station to kind of connect that neighborhood. So, currently there's a 18-inch uh force mane that exists along progress drive. If you ever go and see the little like goose necks that are along progress drive, those are air release valves for a force man that currently has no flow in it. That force man was installed in 2018 for the intent of this ridge lig lift station project. The Trillian lift station that exists across the street from um Houston Park. You'd probably have no idea it's there if you walk over

there because it's this small little hole in the ground. It has been there for almost 30 years. We're about hitting its lifespan and going to have to put in half a million dollars, if not more, to that lift station to upgrade it for capacity on where it needs. And that doesn't include the fact that it needs a generator. We have generators at all of our lift stations, all of our wells in case power goes out, we're able to not flood that entire neighborhood's backyard. So with the ridgeel lift station, the entire neighborhood of the Arrowwood Hills would flow to the ridge lift station and allow for the village to continue to grow to the east side. Right now the village cannot grow to the east side um and service using sanitary sewer without a lift station. Typically we typically do not want lift station to lift station to lift station because the more mechanical parts you add, the more chance for failures. So in this case we would redirect flow from the trillium lift station to the ridgelift station and then from there the ridgel lift station pumps directly to vi lift station whereas right now trillium pumps to our south main station and then from south main it pumps to our vi lift station. So you've already double pumping there. Um that's long story short. I can go into way more technical details if you're interested. Well, I mean, I think it's I think it's important because, you know, if we're talking about a 7% deficiency, right, as part of um the Ridge lift station being, you know, 7% of the cost is because we have to obviously do something to replace the deficiency. And so, I guess my point is we really haven't had these conversations as this board sitting here today. So, if this is a an impact fee for a project that's in 2030 or 2031, why do we have to resolve it or vote on that impact fee now?

So, if the intent is to recover the fee before you build it, you'd want to recover the fee through development as it happens as opposed to taking out debt and then trying to recover remaining development in that area. So, you just reduce the amount of recoverability in that area. Um, I guess from a a a project perspective, I this has kind of been talked up at the utility commission quite a bit. Um, so it's just one of those things that that's just what that commission has tked to discuss and more than happy to bring any updates to the board on that project, but

and and I get the recoverability and such. I guess my my point is I feel like we have like a couple of dominoes that need to fall in place. We're talking about development in that area, right, to start collecting these impact fees to be put for the ridge lift station and yet we still have traffic issues and different things in that area that we need to solve for. So, I feel like we're putting the cart before the horse um in this scenario. So, I sure I personally would like to see that taken out of there and just vote on the the project that we have going now. um whatever the current rate increases that were recommended and pull that piece out. Yeah. Go ahead, Matt.

Um there's a developer looking to come and give a concept presentation for 162 single family homes um in the Ridge Road area on next Wednesday, which would trigger the need for this lift station.

Yeah. Yeah. And I guess from a timing perspective, the clock doesn't start till we actually collect the fee. So if we have if we establish a fee and we don't collect the ridge lift station portion of the fee for two years, it doesn't hurt us because we haven't that that 8year timer doesn't start. Um where my where I'm coming from on my side is I want to make sure that we have the we can recover as much cost as possible. Um because obviously once those those prop those those pill building permits and things start getting pulled that's less that we can collect through impact fees and more that have to come and we have to put on the user fees. Um so that's that's where I'm coming on my side. I'm trying to expand as long as possible the horizon which was a big reason on why well five and ridge lift station were the two assets the two primary assets that were modeled uh for these fees. So the ridge lift station the the 20 or the impact fee you said that can only be charged on the east side. So was there

only the service area? Yep. So that's the east and that's it. So any development elsewhere in the village is on the east side does not it just has the flat 300. So the west side of the village the blue and the orange is the only spot where this fee would Yep. The 2263 for 5/8 and 3/4. Okay. It's it's not super clear in the packet. I guess the other question I had was, you know, the existing sewer fee, for example, was $2,55. Yep. Have we recovered everything that was identified when that impact fee was in place or is there still remaining that rolls over?

Nope. So, we we will So, regardless of the action taken tonight, um with the completion of the SCADA project, um I'm recommending that or I I can no longer as of April 1st continue to collect uh water or sewer impact fees. we've recovered all the costs that were identified in the plan. So, it's either zero or um anything that's in this plan. So, when I when I look at the summary sheet that you put together, so for developments not in this area, it would only be $300. Correct. And that so it drops significant.

It dropped dropped significant. And part of that, a big part of the old impact fee was was VIUS, the the large VIUS lift station that had to be constructed um to pump things to MMSD. So, it makes sense that it drops because it was a a larger regional lift station. Chris, you have your hand up.

Yes. Um, so I'm just looking through the costs of these three projects for water and sewer. Well, five, ridgelift, and violet sewer. All five is 4.55 million. Ridgelift is um 7.2. So 93% of that is 6.7 million. And then the um oversizing is $150,000. So basically what we're saying here is if we add $6 a month in impact fees at the most expensive, we can save 11.4 million in future debt. Is that accurate? I don't like answering in absolutes but yes it would reduce the future future borrowing.

Okay thank you. So like Chris, there could be a situation where like well five we would collect half of the recoverable cost take out debt for the rest but have it have the repayment for the revenue bonds or revenue go debt be tied to um the collection of the fees. So I don't want to say so yes the intent would be either to reduce the amount that we borrow or reduce future debt service depending on when those those projects trigger. Rick, did you want to say something?

I think we've covered it at this point, but I just wanted to sort of reiterate that right now the village charges a general I guess sewer water impact fee that's anywhere in the village. So this is we're changing that approach and going to a more regional obviously. So I think Cameron and Pete got there. Yeah, best more aligned with kind of best practice, too. And that was really why we went to the the meter approach as opposed to the the prior kind of conversion. It it's more consistent with what we see across other municipalities.

So, just a quick followup. So, is the clock running on this or like could we look at as Matt mentioned the developer who's coming in to do a presentation and kind of wait to see like I know you said something about April 1st or so basically to answer your question I have to retire the existing fees because we've recovered our costs so there could be a period of time where we're not collecting any fees for impact for permits that are pulled. Um so obviously if the board's comfortable with that we can we can go with that approach. Um the other thing the other thing to consider is once someone applies

for any development whatever the impact fees are is what they'll pay. So if there's none they won't pay anything when you say developer. So anybody that applies for a develop for a building permit not a devel. So the state law is basically once somebody submits an applica a complete application for an approval and they identify the full project scope of it development regulations applicable to that are frozen. So it's not just any building perimeter zoning. It's arguably included in there is the impact fees.

So it's if it's a phase neighborhood the entire acreage is going to be impacted or not if it's not in place. So if it's not in place, you're saying that entire development, no matter where it is in the planning process and the phasing process, would be exempt. There's there's an argument for that. Yes. So it's within the our best interest to work this out if there's potential at the next meeting.

It might have been nice to have this conversation earlier because now I kind of feel like we're being held hostage and I don't like that feeling. like why didn't we discuss this like when we started talking about impact fees last year about ridge lift station and such because the the September document said developer paid there was no clarification and now our feet to the or to the fire because somebody's coming next week like that that feels kind of underhanded honestly.

So those are utility conversations that been that has been had. So, um, again, we're always happy to go into more details on things that are presented at utility commission, but yeah, no, by no means was it intended to make anybody feel hostage here.

So, kind of on that same line, in the ordinance talking about reduction of impact fees and that they shall be reduced to the extent required by Wisconsin statutes. So that allows us like if if the lift station were developer paid with the exception of the 7% um of the capacity for existing users. I mean if it's developer paid then we give them credit for the sewer impact fee because they paid the cost of that improvement or like how does that work? Uh I'm sorry. Could you repeat the question?

Sure. Sorry. So if the developer is paying for the lift station because their development is, you know, kicking this off earlier, then we reduce the impact fees for those units because they paid for the lift station. Yes, that that's generally correct. So basically the impact fee statute says if we require them to make any sort of payments of those facilities we have to that cost offsets any applicable impact fees they would have. So if we didn't have the impact fee can we still require them to make that improvement because their development needs that improvement?

We could. There's a different question about to the extent how big we could make them build the lift station. So we could ask them to build a lift station to service their development because that's that's a public improvement actually needed. Our ability to require a larger lift station that would be in a more regional scale. That would not be um something you would typically ask of a developer unless there's tip funding involved.

Sure. But we could pay for the oversizing of it like we're talking about the upsizing of park view. But then that would fall on all rateayers and not be recovered through impact fees unless we implemented the impact fee then before the next proposal. Correct. Um yeah. Then there's just coordination issues with getting payments and um you know trying to make sure that we've got the lift station we want built to the size and capacity we want and how we recover those costs from the developer. But generally, we would just have to agree with the developer on what that would look like.

But we could potentially fall into then this developer only builds this big for that development and then this one builds only as big as they need for their development. Then we have all this infrastructure that we have to maintain and more room for error where having like a bigger facility is like Yeah. It would be more or less like a lift station per neighborhood. Yeah. that depending on what's needed or what could be served by gravity. The more infrastructure that you have that you can consolidate to a regional a regional station, the better off we are as a community, not only for the service to our residents, but just with our staff as well. If I could just add to that, I mean that in a nutshell

defines or quantifies the need for for an impact fee. So the municipality is taking on uh and doing responsible growth planning uh taking on the asset addition doing the project and then recovering the growth related share through the impact fee analysis instead of requiring developer A to build just their portion of it. Developer B then we're going to come back and over reoversize the lift station a few years down the road and etc etc. So it it fac it it it allows for uh proper planning from from an infrastructure development standpoint. So the the 8year time horizon. So the ridgelift station impact fee only impacts the eastern development that's along the interceptor. Right right now it's 2026. We're saying we're targeting to build in 2031. That's five years. So, if there's any delays, there could potentially be a point in time where we hit that eight-year mark and we have to refund money, right? If

potentially. Yes. Okay. Okay. But does that apply the eight-year window apply to when the payment was made? So, meaning it does if we go forward with this and we don't collect anything for three years because there's no activity. The first the first impact fee on any permit would be say three years from now, that's when the 8-year clock starts. Correct. Okay. And then we just need to spend it all by the 20th year from that initial payment.

No. Um, you really just need to ensure that impact fees collected in any one year are spent by the eighth year. You're really looking at identifying like you're like you're doing right now, collecting up to the maximum dollar amount uh that's in the impact fee study. So this these are the facilities we're recovering impact fees for. These are the percentages that we're doing it. until we recover the dollar amount associated with the percentage. We we're going to continue to to collect those impact fees, but that eight-year clock starts when the payment is made. So, it's going to be made over a certain period of time. So, it's it's going to vary. You've got to be able to demonstrate that you've spent the money collected in any one year by the end of the eighth year.

Yeah, it's a first in first out. So, yeah, we have a pretty rob system of of tracking. Um a lot of the times leading up to these major facilities there's signi significant engineering site acquisition other type of planning. So if we feel like we're getting close to that that time frame that's when we would starting trying to not trying but like incurring the costs that are required before having to refund the those costs. Guess I had another question about the ridge lift station since you know this group of uh trustees hasn't talked about it as much as like I've heard some about it for a while um as I used to sit on utility commission. So it's not just that neighborhood that was being proposed down Ridge Road that would be the driver for that need like it's this whole eastern portion. I just like I'm pretty sure I know that but you know just to talk about that for you know anyone listening also like it's all of the red area and all of the blue area that would send

correct to that entire yellow line that you see in the presentation that is the interceptor and that is what will feed the lift station. So anything that can be fed to that yellow line will then ultimately end up at the ridge lift station. So like Lindster Acres for example or the Lakewood Lar the current developer that's looking at the ridge area. So there's two activeish developers. All right. Any other comments on water and sewer?

So just so I kind of reset myself here. So the ridgeel lift station is the recoverable amount is 6.7 million, right? And if we're going to have an impact fee of 22 uh $2,263, that would represent $2,964 residential homes or living units. Seems like a lot.

You're looking at 3,187 total residential units of capacity. So the 6707 divided by the impact of 20. So you're you're blending the different meter sizes for different I couldn't connect myself to the 3187. So the 3187 is the total residential equivalent units of capacity in that lift station. Okay. Now, now I got you. So, this area has been estimated to have 2,964 lots. In in theory, that's possible, but you never know what the density is going to

Okay, it's just a it's a preliminary estimate. Okay. But you could also have one large user come in with a large meter size and eat up many resident residential equivalents of of capacity. I guess to to some of the comments we heard earlier and I'll talk about this again later. this um additional cost on homeowners is you when I built my house here, my builder was quite frankly Florida, you know, the the expense of the the impact fees. So, and you know, it did it did get passed on to homeowner. Um however, you know, if we're requiring developers to build individual lift stations, you know, that cost gets passed on to homeowners in a different way. So, you know, if we're requiring that the infrastructure be built, it's just that we're like um John said earlier, we're coordinating it to be in a smart way with infrastructure that works best for our staff and in the most efficient way possible. So, um just bringing those fees together to to make our our infrastructure, you know, the most sustainable uh resilient um less room for error. So I think um you know I appreciate the the planning ahead and looking ahead for what this uh these infrastructure needs would be.

All right, final comments on water and sewer impact fees. Otherwise entertain a motion on the water and sewer. Um point of information we have one um ordinance to decide on. Why are we why are we segregating these two things out? I thought this was done as a package.

Yeah. So, the impact fees are brought together. So, the ordinance is one ordinance. Um, it's kind of up to the board, I guess, how they want to proceed here. We could make a motion on each of the sewer and water and the law enforcement. It's easy to separate them out from the ordinance, or I guess if you choose not to impose any impact fees. So, it's just it's not really a great process for how we do this as far as um having a single ordinance, but we you know that was the direction to the board of you know, bring it all forward together. So, we can have a motion to say yes, impose the sewer and water impact fees and then law enforcement a vote on that to impose it or postpone discussion on any one of the impact fees. So, um there's not really a set process for how to do it. Uh but if there's, I guess, consensus on the best way to move forward, um it's really up to the board.

Well, can we at least have a conversation about the law enforcement impact fee? I mean, we're we're treating these like two different silos and they obviously play off each other in terms of what the final fees are going to be. If the majority of the board wants to have a discussion, we can move on to the law enforcement impact fee. I just had one comment on the on the ordinance language, Rick. Under 198-10, you know, it talks about the sanitary sewer system facility impact fees, but under two, it's just says um it'll based for the areas identified in the public. It it doesn't reference there's no clarity of area that's impacted within the document,

right? So we reference the study as the way of identifying the areas. Um so we're required to keep the the study that Ellers's performed like that has to be available for inspection. So that's the reference to the study is the areas that are identified in the actual study and we discuss it internally about do we want to include the map in the ordinance and we felt it just made the most sense to just reference the the study itself for the areas. similar to like a traffic map. It's it's easier to not have to update the ordinance every time and save some money and just have a document online.

Yeah, understand it. Just in that section, it doesn't it doesn't it's not super clear, but you know, at the preface public facilities needs assessment, I see that. But in the in that subchapter where it's got the actual costs, it's not super clear. So that that's fine. As long as it's as long as you're comfortable, that's fine.

All right. We can have a discussion on the law enforcement impact fee. Can I ask Ellers some questions? So, um, obviously you heard some of the resident testimony tonight and there are some residents that are questioning if it's legal to do this. Um, I think they're questioning the, um, verifiability of the public needs assessment you did. Um, and also whether or not this is measurable. So can you speak a little bit to that to your process with the the assessment that you did this whole process that you've taken part in? Sure.

Um so from from a public facilities needs assessment uh and the process that's uh specified in the statute. It really uh the statute is silent on how the impact fees are to be calculated for each uh type of facility other than to say you've got to use identifiable service level standards. So in the case of law enforcement, we're looking at um existing uh uh staffing and law enforcement uh uh service level standards of number of uh staff members per thousand residents and then extrapolating that out through 2004. Uh we're then uh able to look at the size of the new facility and uh based on the estimated uh staff level as well as vehicle uh level which uh as part of that uh was vetted with the the department. um uh st uh service level standard in terms of number of square foot for uh per staff member uh on the law enforcement side and then number of square foot for uh uh vehic per vehicle uh on the vehicle side. uh then uh able to take those service level standards and apply it to the existing population to quantify how much uh square footage uh the village should have currently for law enforcement facilities and then apply that against uh what is being built to identify uh the growth uh share of the facility. So that's the process uh by which the impact fees were were calculated um or at least identified in terms of the growth share of the facility.

And so you have a tremendous amount of data that went into this. Correct. There's a tremendous amount of analysis that that went into this. Sure. Thank you. And in terms of and maybe this is more for Rick um both in the resident comments um and and here tonight there seems to be this question or assertion that a law enforcement impact fee might face legal challenges. Can you talk as to that please?

So the statute specifically calls out um law enforcement facilities under an impact fee. So, our ability to impose an impact fee for a law enforcement facility is is clear in statute. Um, I could maybe see some communities getting in trouble with if they're tying it to like the actual service provision because we can't be using it for service. It's just the capital facility. Um, so how you calculate it out like I have full faith in Eller's analysis. That's not what I'm paid to do. Um, but as far as like our legal authority to impose it, if it's just tied to the the actual facility itself, that's a clear statutory authorization.

Thank you for that clarification. So, our two experts are saying that they've done the work. It's measurable. There's data. It's defendable. It's within state statute. Correct? Okay. Thank you. Um, so I guess just a couple things. Um well more than a couple things and there may be a question or two wrapped in here so stick with me. Um so um there were a lot of comments made um from the members of the Paula Severson fan club um at the beginning of the meeting. So I want to make sure I address all these questions and such. Um and you know there were questions about um let me just go back because I wrote them down. Um let's see. obviously the um the measurability. Um I do want to make one clarification. Um a resident asked about uh the fact that I didn't have a commercial amount in my trustee memo and that was an oversight. Um I did intend to have that in there that I was going to recommend Eller's recommendations. I was three days po posttop from surgery so I made a slight error. So, I'm saying that verbally now. Um, so those were some of the the things that were brought up and um you know what I'm looking at and why I suggested this is obviously um there are numbers that we can point to. Um that was another resident comment about um not having the numbers and those numbers are measured in for instance um the population growth between 20 and 2026. Um the increase in debt which we'll get to the debt task force later. Um the the police department budget alone from 2020

went from 1.5 million to 2.9 million in 2026. Chief, what can you tell me what the calls were at the end of 2020 versus end of 2025? So total calls for service at 2020 was 10,283. Uh total calls for service uh for 2025 was 16,958.

Thank you. I appreciate that. Um so obviously there are numbers that support this um and that show that the growth in population has had an increase in call volume um in the cost of our police services. We've added more um you know officers obviously Ellers outlined future growth and having um more officers as well um in 2045. So I suggest suggest this because if we look at the total cost of the police station as it is, let's just take the a round number of $14 million. Right now the debt load or the debt responsibility per man, woman, and child in this village is $1,500 each. So $1,500 each for our population of $9,400. In my memo, I suggested a flat fee for residential of a thousand. So, when I think about this, and I think as an existing taxpayer who's lived here for well over 20 years, um, and the fact that I've obviously paid for the cost of police operating, um, and now I'm paying for the cost of this police station. Um, my debt load is 1,500. and we're asking a new household coming in to potentially pay two over 2,000, which is what our expert Ellers recommended. I thought a compromise um solution that would get us close to our regional partners was $1,000. That's why I suggested it. Um now, some people might say that's not smart. You should have started and held the line at 2,000 and then came down. But instead of that, in good faith, I put $1,000 out there um to begin with because I think that's reasonable um for a household. And again, if we're looking at 14 $14 a month, um you know, I I

don't think that's a huge barrier when you put in park fees and permits and sewer and all the other things. um as well. Um I guess I would just say and we didn't even group that in with in Eller's report, the planning, the engineering, the 1 million plus, right? Like we didn't include that in terms of the into the total project cost. It's it's based on the 14.6 million.

So just the construction, right? Um, so I guess where I get a little frustrated and particularly when I hear residents speak about and and members of this board since I got on 11 months ago, trust the experts, follow the data. I have heard that so many times it's like dra, you know, drilled in my head. And so now we have our expert who a resident called an expert when they talked about debt, but now we're questioning the expert in the data that they're providing us. So I'm just going to call out the hypocrisy right off the bat. Um if we don't approve this, basically we're not saying, you know, trust the experts and follow the data. We're saying screw the existing taxpayers. Let them share the whole burden just like they have been over the last six years. The people of this community have have not just not just police, the EMS budget went up a ton, all budgets. And it's due to the resident growth. Now, I I don't know how to say it any other way than that. And we have an opportunity to not only make an impact in our possible debt load, but we have an opportunity to say to our existing taxpayers, we hear you. And not just the 8 to 10 people that come and speak at every meeting, but the people who are struggling to pay their property tax bills and tell us when I'm in Piggly Wiggly, why do you keep raising my taxes? What am I getting for this? Why are all these apartments coming here? We have the ability to say at least we did something to help pay for the growth. Growth should pay for growth. And $1,000 for a household. I don't see that being a huge issue. And I I just I think we need to do it. I think we need to tell our existing taxpayers they're important. You're not less important

than people that don't even live here yet. And that's the message that this board has sent them for years. So, I I know I'm a little cranky about it. Um, but I'm passionate about it. And the the public comments that have come out against this, I I'm half tempted to just have somebody else start con, you know, coming up with ideas and putting to the board because apparently any idea that I put forth, the whole public's going to just rally against I shouldn't say whole public, the 10 people. Um, but this is something that we can do that is going to actually make a difference. So, I say we move ahead with it.

Just for just for the record, Paula, in your recommendation, you you did say and approve Eller's recommendations for industrial and commercial. So, post did I Oh, thank you for rereading that. You did. I thought I did, but I was fuzzy. So

you you know I would say none of us want to add fees to builders to add to the cost of construction. We don't want to disincent growth. Um but there are real costs. The police station itself, if we didn't have growth, would only cost taxpayers $7 million. But we're building it for the next 20 years. So we're building a $14 million police station. And it does seem unfair to bear uh that cost uh amongst existing taxpayers, the full cost of all that growth. And I you know I do I made notes as well in terms of the needs assessment and it's it's quantifiable. I mean we've got ratios of staff to population. We've got that linkage of the staff to the square footage which drives the size of the facility that we are in the process of building. So I agree with you Paul. I mean, I think the recommendation you have, I think, is directionally where we need to go. I think when I look at at the comparisons amongst neighboring communities, we certainly don't want to be um on the high end. We want to be competitive. Um but at the end of the day you know other facility or other communities do have fees and I think like you had said Paula um half the cost is at least some recovery um of those of that $7 million versus putting it on the backs of all the existing taxpayers. So I I agree with you Paul. Think my question would be, you know, to you John, if if we went to a smaller amount, does it have to be prrated? I mean, Paula had suggested a thousand, which is a little less than half, but you've got residential and then you've got multif family and the numbers are different. Is there a way to simplify that? Because you said this is the most we can charge so we can reduce it.

You can and that's a just like the taking up the the concept of the impact fee itself. It's a policy question that you have to consider. Um, just realize that the lower by lowering the amount you're obviously going to collect less than what is shown in the public facilities needs assessment. So I think part of what you're asking too is is a legal question in ter and I would I would suggest that if you're prorating downward for residential you you need to do likewise for non-residential so that uh it it's a recognition of of the reduction across uh different customer classes. But I would toss that to Rick. Sorry to put you on the spot, Rick.

No, it's something I've been giving a lot of thought to is is this. So the statute does allow for an ordinance to impose different impact fees on a diff on different types of land development. So again, statute says we can do it. I would just want to make sure that if we're charging a different I guess proportional cost on one class of development versus the other that there's a rational basis for why the board is is doing that. So, you know, just at least putting on the record like why the the differentiation between residential and the residential commercial.

Yeah. I I I would suggest that that if you're going to lower one, you you need to do the same in kind to to your non-residential so that you're you're kind of taking it

so question in the analysis. So, this was done based on acreage and based on square footage, right? And I guess the chief when you look at, you know, another metric that could be used is the call demand for the different types of properties. So residential call demand versus commercial because at the end of the day, commercial and industrial are the two segments that are easier to pay their their full their full cost through the property taxes that would be collected versus the services and the incremental costs that the village takes on. So do we have metrics like that? And I don't know, John, if you looked at those

um that is that is another identifiable service level standard. In the case of the the overall growth percentage, we looked at staffing now versus the the future. Could you also look at something on a call volume basis? Sure. in terms of defining the growth percentage. But this is what we looked at because it directly correlates to the size of the facility when you look at, you know, number of square footage for for identifying the that uh um uh growth percentage overall. Um again, I I think my my point is if you're if you're going to reduce, you know, adopt a reduced impact fee, that is totally your prerogative. uh where I would push you towards is um doing that if you're going to reduce it, make that reduction then applicable to both residential and non-residential development.

So for example, if if we cut it in half, we cut every number that you have in half. Correct. One other question I had is on the single family versus multifamily correlation and how you derived that. Uh and it was all populationbased. So the single family dwelling was assuming three persons at $719 a person and multifamily just lump sum two persons. So in terms of the mix of onebedroom, two-bedroom, threebedroom that that number I mean I don't know how you came up with that number if there's some sort of index that you used because it would vary, right?

It would and it's it's obviously impossible to know what each individual housing unit is going to develop on over a 20-year period of time. Um so it is uh based on industry standard. So that industry standard could that be I mean the the the variation within that industry standard could it be applied that the average multif family would be three persons so that a dwelling unit would be the same amount and then we basically prorate off of that or is that not it's generally an attempt to recognize that multifamily development generally comes with less people than a single family dwelling unit. That's that's really the intent of the a lower fee for multif family, but it depends on the number of units. A threebedroom is going to have four or five units.

Absolutely. Right. It does. I just want to say I obviously Yes. I wholeheartedly agree about prorating just cutting the numbers for non-residential in half as well. And just a quick clarification, Rick. I believe that this impact fee and other impact fees the board does have the ability to exempt um in state statute for affordable housing, does it not?

Yes, there is that um there. Yeah, there is an exemption for that. Um and I don't have the specifics off the top of my head here. Um, so

Rick, one other program that we have is when we closed TID 7, we extended extended it for affordable housing. Um, so kind of the initial parameters of that program was as long as it met that affordable housing parameters that the park fees of the permit could be covered through that program. that would definitely be something that we would we could expand in that program. Um, as long as it follows, you know, the definition of affordability, right? And it's if we're going to make exemptions, I would want to have a that an ordinance. So, it's just spelled out exactly like when these exemptions from impact fees would apply. Um, so I pulled up the statute here. So it's um yeah, an ordinance enacted under the six se section may provide for an exemption from or reduction of the impact fees on land development that provides lowcost housing. Um and usually there's no definition of lowcost housing in statute. So that's um kind of ambiguous about how we define what low affordable housing is. So, we've tried to define that as more no more than 30% of the median income um in Cottage Grove. So, I guess my recommendation would not to be exempted because we have those funds. We can pay ourselves with those funds until they're exhausted and then I think it would be a good idea to add that exemption, but we might those funds can't be used for anything else besides affordable housing and improving the housing stock. Um and so that would be a good use of those funds. Um, I think the big issue in here and could maybe speak more. It's really hard to build anything for $450,000 or less, which is kind of what we're calculating as that no more than um 30% median income. So, that that's that becomes the other challenge.

I think Chris has his hand up.

Yeah. I just wanted to do a sort of call back to um comment that was said earlier about the rich lift station. Why do we do this now? And I think this this whole situation kind of proves why we want to do it now and have some forward planning because now we're in a situation where we've approved $60 million in debt and we're trying to cobble together a solution after the fact. Um and I agree with what Paul said. people are struggling to pay their their taxes and you know that's that's why I voted against the police station because it was a huge cost. Unfortunately, I was the only one and I don't I don't know that trying to cobble together a solution after the fact is the right way to do these things. We got to be proactive about how we are able to pay for these things. Um I'm super concerned about this disincentivizing housing. Um, I think in the end, a new home that pays property taxes is gonna is going to contribute more to the police station than a hypothetical home that pays property taxes impact fees, but doesn't actually get built because the cost of housing is too high. I've been on the fence about this for the for a while. I just don't think this is this is a solution. Um, I wish we had had more time to fix the scope and cost of the police station because I think the time to work to save taxpayer dollars was before it was passed, not passing it and then figuring something else out afterwards.

Just a point of information, I did actually bring this up prior to us um, voting on the police station last summer. So, go ahead, Heidi.

A question for John about the new facility space and how the community room was factored into the new square footage because we have a community room that it's not really something we offer now and it we didn't really add it in because we're growing. We added in because we don't have any community space that can be used for, you know, like the scouts to use. like we have another facility. So like that square footage is an addition in the new facility, but wasn't really added attributed to our growth of our community. It's just we don't have that now. It's not like a huge square foot. I think it's like 1,800 square feet or something. But I was just wondering how how we factored that into the equation.

It was a shared it was shared space, right? The police was going to do training in there as well. So, believe it or not, there's a very small training little conference room in MSB. So, with the expansion of operations, the intent of that room and other spaces was additional training space. Um, we're still waiting to hear on a grant for that. So, hopefully the state is listening and they give us our our money um for that space or a portion of that space. Um, but yeah, that was it was kind of prrated and and that's the thing that we have to be careful. John mentioned we can't enhance our services by implementing an impact fee but um supplement obviously.

Wasn't that space also designated as our emergency operations center chief? It was designated as a possible option if the village wanted to head that direction. Yeah, I was Yeah, we were hoping um after like having that conversation with with with those individuals, we didn't want we wanted to first make sure that that space worked. Um but that was one of the key um how do we pull emergency operations out of the facility where everybody's responding to so you can have response separated from critical response. So that was one of the the recommendations of that space and then obviously having it rentable. Okay.

Okay. Thanks. Um, and I guess, you know, some of this conversation goes back to the fees overall because the higher costs on new housing, you know, it makes it harder for first-time home buyers, older residents that want to downsize and if our fees and, you know, commercial investment because, you know, if our goal is to relieve tax pressure on property owners, we want to grow our commercial and tax base. And so adding fees that are, you know, not in line with our other regional competitors might cause, you know, investment, development, business to go to neighboring communities. And so then we get less growth, less new tax base. And then the people already here will end up sharing the larger proportion of the cost because we'll be growing at a slower rate than projected. So, you know, I think we we also have to look at it through the lens of how we want to compete regionally and kind of calibrate our fees so we can we can stay competitive with our neighbors because, you know, we have sports complex, we have breweries, we have restaurants. And then if we have, you know, if we were able to um, you know, if the sports complex decides to invest here, that might draw further investment that'll improve the, you know, the quality of life that people that live here already and improve our tax base. So I think you know looking at things through the lens regionally as well because we don't if we if our fees are so high that we don't have any new commercial investment our taxes are you how are we going to we're just going to rely on the residential homes that are already here to continue to pay increasing costs and if we go back to you know why some of these things have increased when I started on the board EMS was only stationed in Cottage Grove two days a

week or two days here and two days in Deerfield. So if you called an ambulance for an ambulance half the time it was responding from Deerfield that when I started on the board yes it was half the time it was stationed in 2019 we decided 247 365 coverage in Cottage Grove and now both stations are sta staffed 247 365 and our contracted municipalities were paying a very old rate of when it was when they first signed a contract and it hardly went up to increased cost. And so through the EMS contract negotiations, our contracted municipalities now pay, you know, Pleasant Springs, for example, pays their greater share so we can have this service where we have an ambulance 24/7, 365 in the Cottage Grove station. And this is there are reasons why service levels have improved over time. And so it's not just due to growth. Why these service levels I mean calling 911 people have an expectation that you know if your loved one's having a heart attack that someone is going to be there you know within a certain level not responding from a neighboring municipality. And I know that's how it worked well for the district for enough time but those are improvements that we've made in service over time. So, you know, when someone asks, you know, why are taxes going up? In addition, we also only have so much control over the village portion, which of course we're talking about here. But taxes, just because the bill comes from the village of Cottage Grove does not mean that all of this is due to the village of Cottage Grove. Voters passed a school district referendum that also increased taxes, you know, at the ballot box. So,

We have to look at all of these things. We can't just focus in on one issue. We have to look at the general picture and how do we create a long-term financially stable consistent expectation for services and tax rates. And that is, you know, to have these long-term outlooks and position ourselves to be competitive regionally so we can have that commercial break base and, you know, really take the steps needed to relieve the taxpayers and help broaden our tax base and get more commercial growth. and adding more fees that are you know excessive and outside of the regional kind of norm um you know will disincentivize growth which will hurt us in the long run. So I think we need to take a very close look at our comparable communities and you know set our set our impact fees to compete regionally. And you know, if you look at our comparables, you know, the the median um public safety impact fee is about $700. So, I think we really need to to look at how do we position ourselves to have a strong financial outlook in the future and having that long-term tax revenue is a much greater benefit than just one smaller short-term payment. So, you know, if we can balance those two things, I think that that would be beneficial for our future. Thanks.

Just two things to follow up. Um, one on EMS, the Dayne County Comm Center has always and will always call the closest unit available for a patient in need. And that's and and if the Cottage Grove Ambulance is out right now, um, the closest unit is actually in Madison. It's not in Deerfield. I've actually done done the map. But anyway, I'm glad you said we should look at a broader thing about fees and the cost to homeowners because one of the things we haven't talked about is park fees. So, our park fees are pretty substantial as well. So, why don't we throw that into the mix and actually look at a whole listic picture of all those things? Why do parks get a pass? So, let's have that conversation. We did talk about the parks fees when we implemented them. If we want to relook at and look at all all of our fees all together before implementing this impact and really look at what the full picture is to build uh you know I think we should look at all of our fees to make sure that we're staying competitive um and also paying for the the services that a new you know a new development demands. So, you know, if If we want to really see what it costs for a new homeowner, we can postpone this and look at the whole the whole picture. You know, it's interesting. You brought up some good points in terms of as we've grown, we've been able to do more, right? We've been able to uh staff two ambulances 24/7 in the two communities. There's other things that we've done, but what's happened is taxes or our levy has gone up faster than inflation since I've moved here. So, that's my concern. And so, we build a 14 million police station, which really only the existing residents are are covering or the needs

assessment is for half. it just seems unfair to double the impact to the existing residents on top of the crazy increases that we've seen. So, I really think and I agree with you. I think looking at our our neighboring communities and and looking and we should probably look at all the fees because our park fees are high, but at the end of the day, we don't want to have impact fees that drive developers away. I agree with that. Well, I have a few things to add myself. Um, I cited my uh resources with research earlier and I don't I didn't hear that from any audience members. Um, maybe you have that, maybe you're willing to share, but I also want to add um Heidi, a lot of what you said is not supported by research with all due respect. So, impact fees are really about fairness. They're not about limiting development. Um, new development creates new service demands. Um, without impact fees, existing taxpayers subsidize growth. Um, impact fees reduce long-term debt pressure. Impact fees protect the operating budget. Um like just as you mentioned Pete um the police facilities are capital projects and their consequences financially are operational that existing taxpayers are mostly responsible for. Impact fees are legally designed for exactly this purpose. Um and uh one of the major myths is that impact fees do not stop development. It encourages development. Serious developers already plan for impact fees, utility extensions, park fees, road requirements. What discourages development far more than any fees are

unclear infrastructure planning, um future emergency tax spikes. So clearly impact fees are setting for the most part a clear signal that um growth is welcome and it's going to be responsibly planned. Growth that pays for itself is not supported by fiscal reality. So um it's obvious that impact fees and I don't I didn't hear any outlandish fees proposed. I hear that the group is willing to maybe look at what's reasonable, but impact fees support sustainable growth. They do not slow growth.

Other comments on the law enforcement impact fee? I just want to make one comment because I've just heard it a couple times that police station number will be adjusted for final. So, I'm not it's not saying that 14.6 is the final number. We just have to be a little bit conservative in there because I don't want to collect more than's legally obligated. So once we know how much of the contingency we've eaten, once we know what the net effect of the grants are, we'll come back if this is passed and adjust that number. I just want to make sure we're not intentionally lowering that number. It's a conservative kind of net effect of what we anticipate for grants and and and contingency usage.

And Cameron, I would just add to that. Um when I met with the village of McFarland economic development director last summer, they did exactly that. They waited until the project was done. They knew the exact cost. Consequently, he also told me that he has not seen any slowing in development because of their impact fee. It's pretty high. I mean, so so so just to replay what you said so I understand it. You're saying that in support of a lower fee for two reasons. One is you don't want to have a fee that gets recovered in five years and then burden the first five years of development versus the entire duration, right? Meaning

over char I I don't want to charge them out. That's so like let's let's say I had 16.2 which is the project estimate but it ended up being 15.8. I wouldn't want to charge people more than what was calc like actually the final calculation. And so, um, yeah, as a reminder, 16.2 is the the cost. There's $600,000 of contingency in there. There's roughly three or 400,000 of grant money in there. So, there's other factors. So, that's why um, obviously with residents and other people saying, I just want to be crystal clear. The cost of the police station is estimated to be 16.2. This is just calculating on some conservative numbers for now until we'll adjust it. Likely that number is going to go up. So for me, if we move forward with the police station, it would be helpful if we were implementing something, let's just say 60% of the calculated cost. Once these numbers get updated, it would be easier to come back and say final cost, here's what the new 60% cost is, unless you guys are just fine with a flat. I'd still come and present an updated cost, but I would just need that for the future once that project is completed. So what you said is in support of a lower fee which certainly helps developers and and is is a a smaller hurdle as they're looking at development. Right.

I I can't support one way or the other, but yes, it um and and I guess the the one comment I guess I'll have on the park I do agree our park fees are high. Um we're talking about two different two projects that both get levied for. So just because we reduce one and increase the other, like we're still levying the same amount. So the intent would be to try to bring it down if we're trying to reduce building costs. So just want to make sure that um those are pulling from the same resources. I think I've said I mean since last summer that I didn't support the law enforcement impact fee but I think there's a lot of lessons learned and the conversations we're having tonight would be very applicable to we finished the fire and EMS study and it makes a lot more sense to me to look for a um a substation fire and EMS um impact fee versus the law enforcement fee which we've already you know budgeted for and had a financial plan for. Um, but I wish this conversation would have happened a decade ago. Um, and we would have had impact fees collected for, you know, the building of this police station. I think the conversation again tonight, it it I think it should be directed towards fire and EMS. But

well, whether we had it before or now, there's $7 million or half. I don't want to keep using that number. approximately half of the cost of this police station, certainly the space is related to planning for future growth. And that future growth is what's driving the need. Without that future growth, we'd have built a police station that's half the size. So, I don't know if the timing of the conversation is as important as getting it right and not increasing what existing homeowners have to pay in taxes to cover for the growth and and and a reduce and I like what Paul had suggested is a reduced amount from from the maximum amount that John you'd put together seems reasonable and dovetailing it in with neighboring communities so that we don't stand out as the high other comments. I think generally there's there's a lot of unanswered questions and there's um obviously differing viewpoints. You know, Robert Proctor, you gave some good information for us to consider. um perhaps we table this whole conversation and include the park fees with it. Um to really have a holistic view and then look at some of the data that has been provided to us. Um I I don't know what the board thinks about that but something to consider. Well, I think we really want to be competitive and fair and so I think that that's in the best interest of our future financial stability and uh recovering some of the costs and yet planning for the future. Um, so and we

want to make sure that there's attainable housing for uh, you know, families, seniors, individuals, anyone that wants to call Cottage Grove home, anyone that wants to invest their business um, in Cottage Grove, bring jobs here, um, provide services to people in Cottage Grove, um, bring tourists here. I think that, you know, those are all goals and then also help spread the tax burden across more more people, more businesses, you know, that that will help our our future um you know, become more more stable, more predictable. Um to have these, you know, strategies in place to help offset the cost to our existing residents. But we don't want to disincentivize investment in our community. So I think if we look at this full picture um look at all of the fees and calibrate them so we are you know we maintain a a strong competitiveness regionally uh yet you know help offset the cost for our infrastructure investments that our whole community will benefit from. Um I think that you know yeah if we can if we can get you know more data across more communities and include you know the total cost to build um you know I think that would help us you know make a make a decision on you know what the right fee is for our community. So if if we can expand on that, you know, commercial and uh housing so we can kind of make sure we're remaining competitive yet recover costs. Is that something we can get for next as kind of suggested here?

I mean, so here's the challenge, right? We've already said a developer is coming Wednesday, right? And so we know that if we're going to do the ridgelift station, it really should be tonight. So, what about some sort of compromise? I'm not crazy about the ridge lift station because I feel like there's other issues that aren't addressed. You guys aren't crazy about the law enforcement impact fee. I've already offered a compromise number. What if we find numbers that work for both and try to work toward a compromise? I'm open to a compromise.

Chris has his hand up. When you say that, Paul, you're talking about a compromise on the law enforcement. So that Are you saying a compromise that includes some alteration of the the water and sewer? Yes, I'm saying law enforcement, but also the sewer, but also that dollar amount because to the point that Robert and others have made and you guys have made, right, there's the affordability with, you know, first-time home buyers. So, can we come to maybe our total number of impact fees that we're all comfortable with um of some sort, Chris? Go ahead.

Yeah, I was just going to say that I'd be hesitant to table the um water and sewer just because I'd hate to get to April 1st and then have it get zeroed out and have one or multiple developments come through and then we don't capture any of that. One point of clarification is the plan commission a week from this Wednesday is a concept. It's not a they're not applying for any development. They're coming for feedback. So that that wouldn't apply to that rule, but it's still a tight time frame regardless with April 1st, but it's not necessarily urgent tonight.

So we have some time on that. I guess, you know, when you look at the fees, I mean, half the fees are are park fees. So, there's two buckets of park fees. And I'm just wondering if the park fees, which I think are applied to all parks, benefits all members of the community. And so, moving that to the levy, reducing the hurdle to actually build and reducing it 2500. And I don't know

there's some rest. So, park fees a little bit different, not impact fees. those park fees collected, like for example, all the park fees collected in Shady Grove have to be used in that area. They're not general fees. Um I don't I'm not an expert on where those where that statute came from. Maybe Rick knows more, but um those those do have to follow. Understood. What I'm saying is if it's a park fee that's a part of a building permit, it needs to go to that development, that particular parcel or that plat, right? Y that's what you said. So if we took it off, it would go to the levy, but it benefits all residents. Yeah.

So it seems more plausible on some of the park fees should be part of the levy, not part of an upfront hurdle to build. Same with the police state. It's a moving lever. They're both levy fees. So yeah, if you lower lower the park fee and increase the the PD, yeah, it's the same the same same bucket. It's you're squeezing the balloon, but the point is the the analysis that John did showed that, you know, for every thousand people, we have a officer which requires so many square feet which drives the police station to be twice as big as it would otherwise. Right.

Correct. So the question really is a lot of the park fees we collect are for future parks. So if we redo the park fees. You're not going to have as much money for future facilities, but you'll have more money to help service the debt service payment. So, that's a policy decision.

So, the parks fees, we have u the parks and open space plan which dictates how many square feet of park we should have per person. So generally we want to maintain that over time. I mean it's it's not like as as much of a it's more like the public safety, you know, what service level is acceptable for our community is the same with law enforcement or public safety as it is with parks versus the engineering question with water and sewer. like we need this size pipe to serve this much water usage where those are kind of not laid out. It's sort of a community decision. How much parkland do we want per resident policy? Yep. Same with service level like two officer minimums, you know, how it's whatever level of service you want. Obviously then dictates the facility which then dictates how much is growth compared to existing. And so then the fee in lie of parkland is if a developer either dedicates enough land to maintain that acreage per resident or how much the equivalent would be to purchase that acreage.

That's the fee and that's the fee and loo. So getting a nod from Aaron that's how we develop those numbers with the committee over time. And then you know if you're building also the cost of building a park have increased much like the cost of building any infrastructure has increased. Um so I guess that's when how we updated that over time but you if we want to take a look at those and make sure that we're remaining competitive with that then you know which should be a separate agenda item because that's not in the yes

for discussion tonight. Okay. So Matt, you're saying we're not under the gun for tonight. So we could move this to the next meeting and also have a conversation about park fees for that regarding that residential development. Yes. Um yeah, regarding Ridge Road, um would would Lindstöm have applied? I mean there's not a that was that was a tabled pre-annexation,

right? So, a an approval is um it's kind of broadly defined. I don't think an annexation or um uh let me just pull it up. So, an approval is a permit or authorization for building, zoning, driveway, storm water, or any other activity related to a project. So, I think that arguably includes plats. Um, so if somebody's just coming in for a concept, that's not an application for an approval. So, it's when they submit their complete application for any sort of development approval that they would need from the village. Um, so annexation wouldn't count as like a an approval. Uh, but I think any zoning approval obviously or any plat likely the first things you would see, but they would have to identify the full scope of the project when they're submitting that application. So, if I'm hearing you right, Lind Lindstöm Acres, LAR next Wednesday would um it could be covered if this was delayed. Uh an example of one that would have already applied would be like the sports facility,

right? So, sports facility, they would be under the current regulations as they are written in the ordinance. I would make a motion to table the um ordinance conversation for impact fees to the next meeting. I'll second. There's a motion and a second. Any other discussion on tableabling?

Um I guess do staff have enough guidance on what we would like to see to be able to get to a a compromise on this Yeah, from what I'm understanding, it's just additional data. Um, taking a look at park impact fees. I think it would also be maybe helpful to work with Sean on what future parks are going to be that are intended to be used with impact fees and what the possible debt implications would be. I think from what I remember, I'm pretty sure there's the only really big project that's left is the big park after Westl. Um, but yeah, I mean, we can I I'm a little bit hesitant committing to March 16th or 18th. That's a really tight timeline. We have our audit in two weeks. So, I just my capacity to to pull that together might be a little tight. Um, but we could make we can certainly aim for that.

So, you're saying that um so bringing it back April 6th. I I think I'll target my best mark. Recording stopped. Recording in progress.

Just to make sure enough time passed before the recording started back up. Um I'll target March 18th, but if it falls off of that, it's just a capacity. So it would be then the April 7th. And I guess what what what information do we would we need for the parks fees? I mean what they are existing and add add those to these other fees as far as hypotheticals in comparison to a handful of comparable Dane County communities.

Yeah, just like we did with law enforcement and water and sewer. I think that would be helpful. And then also more information on the ridgelift station. And it doesn't have to be for the full group because I know they've been through it, but perhaps for Renee and I since it's new to us being on the board. Um, sure. So that would be fabulous as well. Yeah, we definitely Does the I guess does the whole board want a presentation on bridge or or do we want just the Renee and Paula? I don't need an update on it.

Okay. Yeah, we could we could schedule something. So basically, are you saying so there's a document in the agenda tonight that has all of the building permit fees when you pull it's called building permit fee, right? That has the parkland and the sewer and the water. Correct. And all of that. So it's building this out for with more municipalities like directly adjacent to us where competition might go. So I mean, is that what you're looking for? And then also this is for a residential home which we want to see industrial. want to see commercial too.

Industrial and commercial. Make I would say the when you're putting a table together like this, it becomes challenging because there's 25 I use the same the study that was referenced earlier. I use the same 2500 square foot that was in that Madison building study because it was a baseline and you know obviously there were professionals who have that study. Um but yeah, I would agree. Um maybe what the average Cottage Grove is, a large home is, and then commercial would be helpful in each context. Um we could we could put together outside of Wanaki to Forest, Windsor, McFarland. Um you know, I I think of other communities that are somewhat similar is like Oregon. I mean, Maple Bluff is kind of landlocked, so that's not really a good comparable. Verona.

Verona. Deerfield is really tough. Pitchburg. Pitchburg would would be a good one. Stoen. Stoen. I I will listen back on the recording for these these additional um and again I will make every effort to get this on the 18th um and pull that information together. So then the direction I mean we had the expert in the room give us the you know what the um the fee could be at the max but then there's been some talk about a flat fee cutting it down to 700. So where's that direction going?

I think you said a flat fee is not really feasible. It needs to be prrated. If it's 50%, 60%, 40%, it would be the I guess what's coming back at the next the next I think I I think well I think it depends on how these other compare and you know where we'd be is if you know Paula had suggested some something that's somewhere around the 50% mark. Right. Right. But we'd want to see that across classes I guess is Yeah. Right. So then in the table to have it the different scenarios for us, I guess. Does that make sense?

Okay. All right. There's a motion and a second on tableabling until a future meeting. All those in favor? I opposed saying. Motion carries. Right. Move on to unfinished business. Discuss and consider moving the March 16th meeting to March 18th. Um historically we've can't remember I mean for many years they've moved the board meeting because of the um strings fest that occurs for the entire district. Um and so there is request to move it from that Monday to Wednesday and the library board is willing to um forego their meeting.

I would move um moving the March 16th village board meeting to March 18th. A second motion by Severson, second by D. Any other discussion on this one? I just want to make a a comment that I think that's a Wednesday night. Yep. Um I don't get done with work until 7 that night. So I will be late. Okay. Could we just have a later start time? Do you want to start at 7 and log in virtually? Yeah, I can log in virtually. Chris, does that work for you? Starting at seven? Yeah. Start at seven. All right.

All right. There's a motion and a second. Um, all those in favor? I opposed. Abstain. Motion carries. Um, we have discuss and consider restoration and demolition plans for TID 9 with two um attachments. And I'll turn it over to staff member four

um sorry um so kind of obviously tit 10 or sorry t 9 is in various stages of demolition cost. So, one of the things we wanted to bring forward tonight was kind of one getting clear direction on restoration on 101 East Cottage Grove Road, but also to kind of reaffirm what current staff direction is as it specifically relates to when a property is uh ready to be demolished and restored. Um so in the memo tonight um we are requesting um kind of a budget in between 9 and 10 or 11,000 for uh to contract to have a company come in uh clean up the the kind of the rest of the rubble and prof kind of professionally restore uh the that corner just due to the high visibility. Um, we we reached out to a couple when I say we, I mean Kyla reached out to uh several vendors. Uh, Houston, Hamburgg, and the Ultimate

GeForce and GeForce Ground Force.

Um, because this is under 25,000, it's something that's not required to be publicly bid um for public improvements. Um, but just because we're not required to do publicly bidding doesn't mean we don't want to get multiple pricing for this restoration. Um due to the like I said the the the corner being kind of a public corner, it just what staff would be able to do from a quality perspective um probably does not match the high visibility of and and frankly capacity of said staff to be able to go out there and and take care of that. So all that cost would be borne by the TID district. Um, do you want to pull up the map?

Motion to approve. Oh, perfect. Well, okay. There's a couple couple other a couple other in the recommendation in the memo for a second. Um, so sorry. Um, but essentially, we just want to make sure that as these properties come available, working with law enforcement, EMS, and and fire for training opportunities. As long as there's no red flags, great. And then secondly, um 612 we've identified as no longer rentable. We've disconnected grass or gas and electric. And we're going to start that process of working with EMS and fire to training opportunities followed by a demolition plan to be presented at a future meeting. All right, there's a motion. I'll second it and then we can discuss.

So I had two questions. One is I'm assuming it's just seed seed mulch grading. make sure everything grades properly. So, as long as it's done in the spring, it it should re it should recover nice. The other question is 612 foundation problems. I mean, are they structural where it's condemned or is it I mean,

so it's our property, so we'd have to condemn it ourselves. So, uh Jim, our building inspector, uh noticed some cracks in the so in the foundation. So, it's either us going and spending money to have an engineer determine if it's structurally uh unsafe to to continue. And so, I would prefer to not spend those additional funds to make that determination before we lease it out. Um, and go ahead and demolish and restore it. The location of the foundation is something you would never see unless you walk around the very back side of the building to like this back back parking lot. So you're walking all the way around and it is not in great condition. It's pretty easy to determine if it's a safety hazard. If it is, obviously then demolition is

the preferred option versus spend the money on it, but you know, I think everybody has a crack in their basement somewhere. So it just depends on the severity. And I see that it is still marketed. Has there been interest at all? I mean, uh, no, because it's basically cold storage. And that's part of the reason. It's really hard to have somebody invest in the and recover the capbacks in the course of a lease. So, yeah. Thanks. Good question, Pete. All right. Other comments.

It would be nice if fire um or EMS or police came and gave a presentation again like they did before and like what they plan to do or how they would use it. I think that's good for us to see and for them to, you know, tell us and the public to see as well. So, I'd like to see that if that if those buildings are um wanting to be used for training purposes. Yep. 100%. And uh kind of looking forward to 107 um when we close on that property. Um I it would be nice to have a preliminary plan for both properties presented now for remaining of the year training opportunities and then we can push communications out help you know with their recruiting efforts and such. Yeah. All right. Motion to second. All those in favor?

I I opposed abstain. Motion carries. Um, new business, discuss and consider resolution 2026-05 recognizing women in history month. Motion to approve. I'll second. Right. Motion by Severson, second by D. Any other discussion on this? We will hopefully have some social media cottage Grove things planned, but we'll see. Um, all those in favor? I I

opposed abstain. Motion carries. We have discuss and consider ordinance 05-2026 recycling with a bunch of documents at part of the administrative code. There was a bunch of updates that we had to do for a recycling ordinance. There's a memo that kind of debriefs that and then the DNR correspondence with what exactly has to be updated for the recycling ordinance mostly based on um responsibilities for multi-unit dwellings. Stafford updated the ordinance and that per the DNR requirements and then cleaned up a few other things that were out of date as well. That's what's included in the packet. Any questions or comments?

Make a motion to approve ordinance 05 2026 regarding recycling as presented. Second. Right. Motion by Murphy, second by Severson. Any other discussion on the recycling ordinance? All those in favor I I I opposed abstain. Motion carries. Right. We have discuss and consider creation of the debt reduction task force with a memo in um the agenda. Turn it over to Trusty Severson.

I'd like to actually propose that we table this um agenda item until the next meeting, please. Can I or should I make the motion? Is that okay? I don't know. I'll second that. I'll second that implied motion. We'll say that's a motion by Severson and a second by D to um postpone until the next meeting. Just carry that over onto the next agenda. Um any other discussion on the table? All right. Otherwise, all those in favor? I

I opposed abstain. Motion carries. Oh, we already did the Colonial Club. Um, so we'll move on to reports from village boards, commissions, and committees. The library boards up first. Um, the library board met on Wednesday, February 18th at 6 o'clock. Um, we discussed, um, revising our very long FAQ and pulling everything together. Um, we also discussed um, new programming to occur at Glen Grove. Um and Monica is going to work in um some additional um Friday nights um community programming there. Um we had a Colonial Club talk which is a really great kind of kickoff to our new um partnership with them to get the the word out about senior services in Cottage Grove. Lots of story times between scene and um we have the teddy bear sleepover um coming up with the police station. Um, we received an international brain research grant. So, you probably have seen that um kind of released. We've got books available. We've got multiple talks. We've got brains at the bookmobile. So, a lot of um fun things happening this month. Um, and shout out to Monica who read to every single 4K student in the district. Um, we approved our bills list and um, had some correspondence and a friends report and our next meeting will now be in April since we just moved the village board meeting. Although I suppose we could meet as a library board if we wanted to right before the village board, but I think we can probably just push it off. So, any questions on the library board? Okay, we already talked about Deer Grove EMS. So, we'll move on to the Cottage Grove Fire District, me or Peter. I sub I sub for Heidi.

Thank you again for subbing for me. I appreciate it.

I can keep going if you want. Um, Cottage Grove joint fire district commission meeting was on Monday, February 23rd. Um we discussed and considered the minutes. We um had the chief's report. There are 41 people um on the roster. Um there about 50 calls as of 218 which puts this kind of right on um the same path as last year. Um there was a some a couple issues with um the ladder truck which was um repaired. We had a discussion or update on the revising the town and village ordinances regarding false alarms. And I think Rick and the three chiefs met, discussed, and really had good conversation and had some collaboration. And I think that will be coming to a future meeting, perhaps the next one. Um

yeah. Um right now, so we have an ordinance draft together. I sent to the chiefs for comment and I think after that, I'll send it to the town attorney. So we'll see when it comes back.

Yeah. And then the town will also be adopting something probably similar. Um they we didn't have to consider funding replacing the chairs in the fishbowl because um there was donations and the foundation that took care of that. Um we approved the sale of old thermal imaging cameras and then um use the unspent um capital funds to purchase kind of little um thermal imaging cameras that'll go on their uniform. Um yeah, and with the extra money that was in the budget for that, um which was about I think it was enough to purchase four four. Yeah. Three of them.

Yeah. Um and the next meeting date then is March 23rd at 6:30. Any questions on Cottage Grove Fire?

Just a comment, Paula. Um so fire um overheard the meeting. Um there was just a comment that you know we required them to provide their budget in July which resulted in kind of a more conservative budget that um than that they needed. Um it's not due until September for our by line. But anyways we're only invo we're actually invoiced for actual costs. So if the costs never incur, it's just a budgetary savings that that we will um end up seeing. Um so there's not like we're overving or overcharging. It's we'll just fall into fund balance and move into next year. So um no concerns there.

And given this is the first year for the paid per call, are they doing quarterly reports on that financial reports or

I have yet to see an invoice that has the paid per call on it? I I'll have to touch base with April and Nick to I believe they thought quarterly was better than monthly. Um I'm not sure I if they worked with their attorney on how like that compensation works because you got to define the payroll and so I don't know what where that is in their process because they could say they're pay they're kind of like board members compensated quarterly and that could be their frequency of payroll. It would be interesting at least to get the quarterly reports back to the board so we would know kind of how that how that's looking I guess. Yeah,

seeing how the calls are tracking almost a slightly more than I April had really really good data on calls and call type by month. Um it was actually pretty exceptional. Um so I think we're going to be pretty close to what she estimated. Okay.

Um Chris law enforcement We met on February 24th at MSP at 5:30. There were no public appearances. We approved the minutes. Uh old business, we had an update about the police station project. Rally construction is going to get started in the first couple weeks of uh March here and they're going to have a groundbreaking on March 25th at noon. Uh we reviewed the annual reports. I recommend everybody take a look at it. It's pretty good. uh talked about the teddy bear sleepover. On March 11th, we had a discussion related to the uh um relationship between Manona and Madison and uh mutual aid. Uh we gave some direction on some potential ebike and e- scooter usage in the village um using sort of McFarland's ordinance as a framework and we're going to refine that from from um once we once we talk about that next time. Uh we approved moving future meetings to village hall so that uh they can be recorded and um people can watch them afterwards. We went over the January chief's reports and um that is it. We also have on the agenda tonight a flock equipment overview. So unless there's any questions, Chief, take it away. Thank you. Um so again uh LEC was given a overview documents that are included uh covered uh basically the insight. Um I have actually uh representative uh Carrie McCormack that is uh on line this evening. Um I'm going to turn over so he can start presentation for the board. I

I envision that he will be brief and concise uh in in uh attending to uh the meeting. So Carrie, it's yours. Thank you so much, Chief. Can you all hear me? All right. Um so good good evening. My name is Carrie McCormack. I'm on the public affairs team at Flock Safety. Um I was a Cleveland city councilman for 10 years in Cleveland, Ohio. So, I am very cognizant that you are in a late meeting right now. Um, to confirm to our our chairperson, do you want me to run through the presentation? I can be pretty quick or do I just answer questions?

There's been so much p um kind of public comments about this. It'd be nice. I know it's late to have the presentation. You got 100%. All right, I'll talk fast. Okay. Um, can you see my screen? It's loading. Yes. Yep.

Okay, great. So, again, my name is Carrie McCormack. I'm on the public affairs team at Flax Safety. Um, as I noted previously, I served um for 10 years as a member of Cleveland City Council. So, appreciate your public service. Um, a quick overview of our company. Um, we are an American company. We were founded in our headquartered um in Atlanta, Georgia, but like me out of Cleveland, we've got a lot of folks around the country. um that work for uh Flock. We partner with about 6,000 communities across the country. Um and so those are small towns to big cities, everything in between. Um 49 out of the 50 states. The only state we are um not partner with is Alaska at this point. Uh and then we've got about 1,500 uh business customers. So those are HOAs, uh, homeowners associations, they are mom and pop shops to big retail. Um, and then as you can see here, some quick data points. We are proud of the work we do across those 6,000 communities every day to um, reduce crime and also to find missing people, which is a big component of our mission. So um as we look at kind of a our major issue here um many uh law enforcement agencies across the country are dealing with resource issues be it financial um be it the size of their police stations um or be it you know um many many many with uh personnel. So, we are a tool for law enforcement uh to really bring efficiency uh as well as support for the good work that they do on a uh daily basis. So, we're we don't replace police. We're just a tool uh to really help them do their jobs more efficiently and effectively. So, I'll talk about two products tonight. First one is license plate readers. This is the one product that we're most known for. Um what this

does is it takes a photo of a back of a vehicle on a public rightway. So on a public road. Um and what this captures is the license plate of the vehicle uh as well as the back of the vehicle. Um the cameras are infrastructure free. Uh so they are generally solar. Um they have 247 coverage. Um and they also um they work around real time alerts. So, what that means is is that if there is a license plate in either a local or statewide, for example, um database, because it is associated with a crime or a missing person, um it will ping your police department um to say, "Hey, that vehicle that you're looking for just passed this intersection, wherever that camera is located, uh if your license plate is not associated with a crime or a missing person, it will not create an alert. Um, and then these are also ethically built. Um, they do not do facial recognition. They don't do speed tickets. Um, and they also do not do any um, personal information. So, the camera does not have BMV records or the system doesn't know who's driving the car. Uh, doesn't have again facial recognition or any of that type of personal information. We just talked about those alerts, so I'm getting ahead of myself here. But again, if a um vehicle drives by a camera uh associated with a crime or a missing person, um it will alert your police department. Um and these include amber alerts for missing children uh as well as silver alerts for missing senior citizens that have cognitive challenges. Um so the vehicle fingerprint is the back of the vehicle. So, we find that, you know, if you talk to law enforcement, uh, at times individuals, especially those who commit frequent crimes, will remove their plate, uh,

will switch their plate out, put a temporary tag, things like that. So, the camera is able to pick up on the vehicle, make, body type, color, those types of components of the vehicle, live video cameras. Um, so our live video cameras again are 100%, um, cloud-based. So they do not require um you know significant IT. Um they are proactive monitoring and also record generally generally for 30 days is the retention period and then all that software and hardware and cellular connectivity is included in that camera. And then if it is a PTZ pan tilt zoom camera uh your PD can move the camera around remotely. So this is again PTZ video. We also offer fixed video and they're very high quality. So uh we understand that public safety is critical to communities as is privacy and transparency. Uh and this is why we take this so seriously and it's built into our ethos and operation systems. So on the right hand side um this is a summary of um our how we work to protect privacy. So 100% um of our customers data is owned by the customer. So data is the photos of the license plates um and the videos taken by those videos. Um and Flock does not sell um any data period. Um private customers, so those um retail mom and pops or HOAs do not have access to government data or hot list. So essentially, they can't see what your law enforcement can see through your law enforcement's existing systems. The data um is deleted after 30 days. So um on a rolling basis, the photos of the

license plate or the video recording of a live camera is hard deleted after 30 days and it is unreoverable. Um, this is important because it allows enough time um for your police department to uh find it useful for investigations, but it also gives it a finite period uh so community members know that that data is not being preserved for long periods of time. Um, Flock LPR only takes images of publicly available information. Uh, again, that license plate on a public road. Um and then if your uh agency decides to share with other communities that is completely up to you uh and your agency and so um different communities have different approaches to sharing completely up to each community uh on how or if they do that. the right hand side. Without walking through all this, um while the data on the um our databases again are not personally identifiable, we still treat that data very seriously from a protections standpoint. So you'll see here on the green side um the independent certifications uh that stress test our system. Um our systems data, customer data has never been hacked and we want to keep it that way. Transparency also really important. Um, every search in the system requires a registered ID with a search reason or case number and all of the use of the system either by your police department or let's say you share with a neighboring community. Any use of your system is permanently audited. So, while that data, the photos and the video deletes after 30 days, a really important uh transparency component of this system is you're able to look back until the very beginning um of your contract to see how your system was

used. And we really encourage folks to run those audits on a regular basis um just to keep up on how the system is being used. Uh and we're also working on proactive auditing alerts for potential misuse. right hand side of your screen. This is what we call a transparency portal. Um, and what this is is it just shows this is a public facing website. It's optional for your community whether you want to do it or not. It doesn't cost anymore. And it just shows uh the information about your system. So your retention period, how many cameras do you have, your um you know your policy of your use policy, who you share with as well well as other um components. So other um just things to highlight um there are really important search filters that are built into the system that your community can choose whether to turn on or not. So for example, some of those would be um we there are search filters that prevent anyone internally or anywhere from um that you share with from searching any issue related to immigration or reproductive health. Um there is also no federal access in our national or state lookup. um only agencies can share that data. So when you sign up with Flock, um there are no sharing privileges on. You have to opt into those sharing relationships. Um and there are guard rails in place to ensure that if you share, who you're sharing with matches your values. We're proud of our partners. Um so we work with the National Center for Missing and Endangered Children. Um, you know, I think to date the number is around a thousand children in the existence of the company that they've partnered with law enforcement to bring home. Um, we're very proud of that. We also partner with folks like Mothers Against Drunk Driving and um NAAC NAAC branches for example the branch in Oakland, California who

highlighted flocks technology uh as a technology that helps produce equitable justice and reducing police bias as well. And then I won't go through these but we have over 200 law enforcement agencies um in Wisconsin. You can see a few there. And these are all real life examples reported out in the public media of how our technology was used uh partnering with law enforcement on real issues. So here this is a missing endangered man reunited with their family. Um stolen U-Haul truck so theft. This one here is an armed robbery out of Wisconsin that was solved using our technology. Oh, and I think that is the end of my slide deck. So, again, uh we're really proud of the impact that the technology has uh on public safety and um finding missing folks as well as the privacy and transparency components that are built into the system to ensure public trust. Thank you.

Turn it back over to Chief. Yeah. Um just a quick question for um the I'm sorry I forgot his name but um from Flock um there was an NPR article um that had mentioned that Flock uses workers in the Philippines to train the AI using real images from the United States. Can you speak to that a little bit?

Yeah, sure. So again, um vast majority of our employees are here in the United States. uh we have a contract with a firm around when there are pro uh glitches in the system that help the machine learning um rectify whatever that glitch is. So for example if um a license plate if a new license plate comes out in a state and the the plate is being misread by the cameras that issue can be lifted up to be rectified so that they're properly reading the cameras. Um and again that's a group um an international group as you noted that reviews those video or th those mistakes

chief. Do you want to talk a little bit about the program that we have in Cottage Grove?

So uh Cottage Grove uh started util utilizing flock cameras back in 2022. Um it's been a very instrumental tool uh for the agency in dealing with a lot of various um matters and incidents as was highlighted there was obviously the uh location of a elderly dementia patient that came out up from Illinois. Uh in addition, it's been utilized uh for dealing with elderly resident scam victims, financial institution thefts, uh quick change scams, burglaries at businesses, entries to vehicle thefts here in the the village, uh location of um an out ofstate homicide suspect was uh utilized up here in Dayne County. Um and also uh dealing with a specifically here in God drove a a work violence threat investigation. Um we've had a lot of collaboration with uh not only our neighbor agencies but agencies here in Wisconsin and also other states uh in resolving some of uh the crimes that have occurred in the area. Uh we as was referenced uh we do not share with any agencies uh related to medical or immigration uh status or anything of that nature. Uh we do have a very u healthy share component uh with uh other law enforcement entities. uh that has been very beneficial um not just for us but also for them in their criminal investigations when we deal with as you're well aware I've mentioned it before uh criminals don't know

boundaries there it's a very mobile society um we've had international uh criminal elements that have come through college grove uh that have been involved in crimes in multip multiple states. Uh so this has been a um truly a great resource for helping us to effectively investigate and resolve some crimes. Um so uh with that we are uh seeking to implement the transparency portal that was referenced. You saw Maple Bluffs there. Uh we have one ready to go and release and that's forward facing as they stated. So it'd be on the website. Click on it. Um literally you can see um all the information to include our policy that references uh automated license plate readers and also one of the functions that uh that portal has is you can do a self audit uh i.e. as a citizen and you can see how many uh checks or searches they've done. It doesn't give you any personal information. Uh so it's protective that way. Uh we have implemented uh in our policy. The internal audit uh component we've been doing them monthly. Um in policy we have it that we have to do it at least quarterly as a minimum. Uh but we have been doing it monthly uh to make sure that there's no abuses because I don't want Cottage Grove to be as some of the other communities that have been in the news of late to the east of us. Uh so we're uh staying on top of that and making sure that uh these this equipment and these tools are being utilized to

the benefit for the community and its safety. comments or questions on flock.

So, I just we obviously discussed this at LEC, but you know, wanted to have this venue. Um, so the ACLU of Wisconsin has called for more reporting as well as um stopping data sharing out of the state. So, I know that we have a wide swath of who we data share with. Um, what would be the reasons why we would share with outofstate entities? The reason share without estate entities is truly the mobility of personnel whether it's an endangered individual and or um the criminal element as I referenced we had uh literally a business that was burglarized here in the village um utilizing the flock uh we were able to locate individual who was from the state just south of us um and also address the other businesses that he hit. Not it was a couple um they hit not only here in Cottage Grove but in Illinois um that's one. We've also had some that have come from Indiana, from Iowa. So, we've recovered a stolen vehicle that was out of Texas. So, again, it's a it's a true resource that helps minimize the amount of man-hour that it would take to track this stuff down. And I know when we talked at LEC, we talked about the high-speed chase that happened in Cottage Grove and um that the car um that was coming in triggered the flock camera as a stolen vehicle. Dne County was um responding. You tried

to call Dayne County off because you were trying to work something. So, how how much does that happen where something triggers and you see an outside agency like that kind of coming in and muddying the waters, if you will, on on our response. Um, to say it doesn't happen would be improper. Um, does it happen all the time? No. Um, and again, there's usually good collaboration that occurs. Um the circumstances that occurred with that one, I'd like to say it's a one-off and that's what we try to make sure we have open lines of communication to try and limit that so that we do limit the exposure to the community.

And then one final question and it's actually for Rick. Um there was a court case in the state of Washington where the judge ruled that um images are subject to open records. Do does Wisconsin have a law in that regard in regard to flat cameras?

Um it's a difficult question. So because any any document or any recording that we have is technically a public record under Wisconsin's public record law. Um but there are exceptions and there's a balancing test. So um basically if the interest in public disclosure is outweighed by the interest in not disclosing, you can withhold disclosure of that record. So I'm not aware of any Wisconsin cases on that at this point in time. Um, but if you know if we have a recording and it's our data, it is still technically a record that somebody could request, but there are security concerns and especially like the location of flock cameras. Like that's something that we'd want to keep guarded to the extent possible. Um, so I don't know if it's a clear-cut case of if somebody requests that if it would automatically be disclosed. So, the fact that they delete the data every 30 days, does that potentially create a challenge?

No. Basically, you have a as long as you have a set retention schedule and you're following your retention schedule for the data, that's that's important for the public records law.

One other caveat to that is obviously Wisconsin has the Marcy's law that protects victims uh from any crimes. So that also plays into effect and also the disclosure of uh private information as uh attorney referenced that balancing act um where we're not jeopardizing somebody's safety by disclosing information. I really appreciate this presentation because I think um it's it's good to hear you know from flock and from you chief Gary on how we utilize the data in our agency. So I just want to go back to a little bit about data sharing with out of state and how that process works. Do out of state agencies do we open it up that they can just search our database on their own or do they contact your agency to get that information? So, they make a request to have permission to be able to access the flock cameras that we have here in the village. Um, if we grant that permission, they can then search and check them, but they still fall under the same guidelines. Um, they have to notate what the reason is for the the search, i.e., So like here our protocol is you have to have the case number and the reason you have to have both of those elements for why you're looking at that information. Um so that's a criteria they have to meet also.

So it's not when you're sharing data it's not an open like these these specific agencies can have access at any time for any reason. There needs to be a specific reason and it's limited to that scope and beyond that they have no access. If if we find that they're abusing it, then we cut their privilege to look at our system. So these agencies are set up as open access. That they're set up that if we give them permission, yes, they have open access. Again, that's why we do our audits. So if we see that there's an abuse, we then take that permission away.

So if they make a request, they're enabled, they're online, it doesn't it doesn't sunset. that it continues and they can they have access open access. It's collaboration amongst the law enforcement entities. Seems a little excessive in terms of privacy. But I mean if there's a reason I mean what you'd said originally was that they got a reason and case number okay you can have access but other than that it seems unless there's a purpose. It seems a little too open. We It's the same as calling calling another department and saying, "Hey, do you have this information?"

Go ahead. Um, I guess the the other question I want to ask because, you know, I've been asked this, uh, is about how there's there's no expectation of privacy when you're out in public, but there is an expectation that you're not subject to unreasonable search unless you're So, that's where it goes into filling in, you know, the case and the reason. um to search the data and so we have the internal audit of that and we're working on an external uh facing public where the public can see why you know the flock was searched. So those are the steps that we're taking to show you know how this data is being used um and that we're following our own written policy on how information is accessed. So to talk to someone about their concerns about privacy and surveillance like th those are the steps we're taking to to maintain privacy and ensure that we're not just surveying you know the public.

Correct. Um and one thing related to FLAC it's a it's a photo in in time or in an instance. It isn't. There's this that you could put a plate in to the system and then it would track it all every camera that it encountered. That's not how the system works. It's a photo in time. Um it's still if you were going to try to utilize it that way. That means an officer or a detective would have to literally sit down and go through and plot out how the vehicle traveled. And again, I say vehicle because that's what the Flock camera is capturing a motor vehicle that's out on the public roadway. It doesn't capture the driver. It doesn't capture anything related to the operator of the vehicle. Any other discussion for flat camera?

Right. I just say thank you for the presentation. I think it was helpful to have it here at the board in addition to law enforcement. So, I'm glad it came. Thank you. All right. Let's move on to parks, recreation, and forestry committee.

All right. So, we met on Thursday, February 26th and we uh talked logistics of uh festival weekend and we'll have Miracle League games overlapping on the Thursday night of the festival. So, um Kevin Laughenberg was it worked out very well that he's on parks, track, and forestry and then as the festival chair. Um so we could we could talk about the the parking flow and ensuring that the ADA um accessible that the parking lot is you know priority for Miracle League but then of course we have the overflow parking as discussed for the festival. So um you know we kind of just have a couple of chunks when the first game people are arriving and the second game people are arriving. So, um, you know, talked with Kevin about the flow for that. Um, then we talked about tile wall options for the Bachan Park playground. Of course, the Miracle League um playground is looking to um they'll be starting construction coming up late spring, early summer, and kind of working back from the timeline of pouring the port in place. um surfacing has to be poured with uh certain minimum temperatures overnight.

So, uh you know, if we're working with that goal of, you know, making sure that's in in September, working back, uh they're looking to start deconstruction in the first week of May. Um, so thinking about how we're deconstructing everything and the tile wall options, uh, the way the tile wall was installed, we can make it work with the, uh, new port and place surfacing around and the recognition wall for the miracle league. So the the tile wall will remain as is and we'll be installing everything around it. So, um, we didn't really have to talk about many options with that, just about the timeline and the investigation of how that was installed in the first place. So, um, and Mike Hackle gave a lot of information about the installation in the first place. So, that was quite helpful. Um, then we I don't think this is on I

there's no discuss and consider on the dinks and drinks. So we'll that'll probably come back then next meeting um because we did recommend to um

yeah to allow alcohol at Bakan Park for the drinks and drinks as discussed at parks and recck. So we'll have that on the next agenda. Um it was a relatively short meeting. Um Sean's director's report was attached as well. Um, one thing to note is our mowing routes are now in our GIS system. So, um, staff found some adjustments in routes and, uh, committee, uh, kind of gave some feedback about some areas that we need to adjust our mowing that was not really in our purview of what should be mowed. So, um, out Ridge Road, like out on some more rural sections, uh, we were mowing regularly where it should be treated more like a rural area where, you know, like the town only mows it a couple twice a year to to keep down because it's more of a rural roadway than an urbanized roadway. So, um, modifying those, um, mowing routes. So, finding some, um, efficiencies in our system there. Otherwise, um I will be meeting again fourth Thursday of March. Any questions or Sean, if you had anything to add?

You nailed it. Comments from the board. All right. Otherwise, we'll move on to emergency preparedness committee met on Friday, February 27th. Um we uh approved um with some minor edits an emergency management preparedness plan and ordinance changes for recommendation to the village board. Um because this meeting was just on Friday, we didn't have it for today's meeting. Um but we will work on having that at the next board meeting on the next agenda. Um yeah, there's just relatively minor formatting issues we're going through and fixing. Yeah. Right now. Um but otherwise it would

Yeah. plan and ordinance were all unanimously approved. Yes. Um new committee name um and structure will also be coming and we hope to meet again in May with the new committee appointments. Village attorney I think we've covered everything tonight, so I'm good.

Um, couple things. Uh, some appreciation to Chief Gary for securing about $4,700 in a federal grant for uh, bulletproof vests. Um and uh we had um or have uh five different uh service anniversaries in the month of March. Uh and leading the way there is uh Kristen Krauss, our utility clerk at 17 years. Happy to take any questions from the uh tracker or um anything you may have. No, I appreciate you putting it together, Matt. It really helps to have that that tracker list, but you know, when things are like deadended or something, it'd be great to take them off. Like the authentic second edition, I think that was on last month, just minor cleanup stuff. But overall, I really appreciate

my my system is that once something's been on there and stagnant for a year to take it off because it it it reflects the it kind of coincides to the monthly briefings that you guys get. So, um, I can adjust on that. But sometimes there's there's other things that then someone will say I just want to I just want to have a standard for what when something comes off so someone doesn't say, you know, why was this arbitrarily taken taken off sort of thing. My only thought is a month after it's clearly not going anywhere, take it off. But, you know, again, I it's better to have more information than not enough. I just was going through it and I saw it again. It's just a lot every

I've had the same I've had the same thoughts. The the tough thing there is on the development side just when just when you think something is never coming back, it does. So, but yeah. Um, communication and miscellaneous business approval of vouchers with the bills list. Keep it super sweet. There's some questions that were sent out. Thank you for taking the time to go through my questions today. And so with that, I'd approve I I'd make a motion to approve the bills as presented. Second.

Just just with the bills listing. Um questions are encouraged. Um so that's obviously a way that we go, you know, go through make sure we're reviewing. Um you know, sometimes you might catch something that we can investigate further. So if there's ever an item that you're like, hey operational wise maybe that let's have an additional conversation as a department how something is running. We welcome that feedback. It's just the board being that second set of eyes um you know helps us stay efficient. So thank you for any questions that do come in. All right. Um all those in favor I I I opposed

abstain. Motion carries. um correspondence. We did have the um flat camera email. So, Chief, will you please respond to that? Other correspondents? Yeah. Okay. Upcoming community events. Saturday is the corn, beef, and cabbage. Um I don't know if folks are planning on attending if we should notice that um like publicly notice that. Um, I know I will be there most of the day. So, just throwing that out there. I don't think we need a public notice for it. Um, I think it's the presumption that we're not doing business at a

so social or chance gatherings are not meetings. Um, under the public meetings law, if we know that there's going to be a quorum there, best practice is to just notice that there's potential quorum, but no discussion or official action will take place. Do you want to just notice it, Lisa? Okay. It's a community event. The foundation's dance recital was uh yesterday and it was fabulous and all the dancers in Cottage Grove were fantastic and um great. Um you know, our youth has so many opportunities in Cottage Grove. So, um I think that was showcase of one of them.

And we did move our meeting for Strings Fest. And I know that there's band concerts tomorrow and upcoming choir concerts and all of the spring things that are happening before spring break. So, it's a busy month in the schools as well. Um, future agenda items. I think we had a list from tonight, but we'll bring back the um impact fees and um Paula's discussion item on the task force and the dinks and drinks. Um

Paul Paul, I got or sorry not Paul, I got one item. Um we will our new credit rating will be released on Friday. So we'll have Greg here to answer any questions about what our new rating is on our new debt. um that comes out on Friday. I will email it out as soon as it becomes publicly available, but oftentimes we get questions after that's released. So that way we'll bring in Greg to if you know if he's available to answer questions. Um I did say that I would be ready to present our financial results for 2025 at the next meeting. Um given that it's the meeting starts at 7 um and what what the agenda items are possibly on I can certainly kick it back to April 7th or continue to present as planned for the 18th. I'll just look for board direction on it will be available maybe an email out when it's available and then a presentation on the 7th.

That sounds I think good compromise. Just oh, one more thing, Cindy, just as a heads up to the village board. Um, I will be talking, me and Josh will be talking about the Amazon um off-site improvements at public works next week on Wednesday, and there'll be a follow-up presentation at Village Board following that. All right. Otherwise, we'll move on to 13. um discuss and consider entering into close session to provide direction on negotiating parameters regarding property acquisition in TED 9.

Um so I I think this was from the last meeting there was um under the future agenda items was to have a discussion like this. There's not any imminent offers I guess at this point in time, but um if the board feels that it's required to go into close session to talk about its negotiation strategy for future TID9 acquisitions, that would be appropriate. Is there interest from the board to go into close session? Absolutely.

Okay. So, the village of I'll make a motion that the village of Cottage Grove village board enter into close session pursuant to Wisconsin state statute 19.85 PN1 PNE deliberating or negotiating the purchasing of public properties, the investing of public funds, or conducting other specified public business whenever competitive or bargaining reasons require a close session. Is there a second? Right. Roll call, please. Benzo, I do. Hi. Severson Stoa. Yes.