Village Board - Regular Meeting

recording in progress.

All right. Welcome to the Village of Cottage Grove Village Board of Trustees meeting on Monday, May 18th, 2026. This is a hybrid meeting um occurring both virtually on Zoom with the link at the top of the agenda um in person at Village Hall and then it's also streamed on our YouTube channel. 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.

We'll move on to the public appearances, public's opportunity to speak. So, this is the portion of the meeting opportunity for community members to share comments and concerns, but it's not an open dialogue with the board. Um we ask that um everyone respect the rights and viewpoints of others. Um state your name, address, and limit your comments to three minutes. We'll start with individuals who have submitted a request to speak form and are present tonight. Um and then open the floor to anyone else in the room or joining us on Zoom. If you are on Zoom, we ask that you hover over the react button and use the raise hand feature so that we can unmute you. We'll start with Peter D. Okay, thank you. Publishing village board meeting minutes in the in the local paper may sound like a transparency measure, but in reality it is unnec is an unnecessary expense that provides very limited public benefit. The village already makes agendas, packets, minutes, live streams, and meeting recordings available online at no cost to residents. These resources are accessible immediately, searchable, and available to far more people than a printed newspaper. The local newspaper printed circulation is currently only 229 copies, and that's across both the town and the village combined. Spending taxpayer dollars to print lengthy meeting minutes for such a limited audience is difficult to justify when the exact same information is already available through multiple existing village communication channels. Just as important, since the village stopped publishing meeting minutes in the newspaper in January, Village Hall has not received a single request from any resident asking where to find minutes or requesting a printed copy. that strongly suggests that the current system is working and residents are already accessing information through

village website and other village resources. This proposal may seem minor financially, but this is exactly how municipal budgets grow over time. One small reoccurring expense after another. Residents are already concerned about rising taxes and government spending. Adding ongoing publication costs for service with little demonstrated demand sends the wrong message about fiscal priorities. If the village wants to improve transparency, there are far more effective and lowerc cost ways to do it, including continuing to time continuing timely online posting of agendas and minutes, maintaining live streams and archived recordings, providing printed copies of minutes upon request at village hall, and using newsletters, social media, and others to notify residents of meetings and actions. These tools already already provide broader access, faster communication, and significantly lower costs than newspaper publication. The village should focus on responsible spending and modern communication methods rather than reinstating outdated and unnecessary recurring expenses. So, let's use some data-driven decisions and uh move forward. Thank you,

Mark. got to say in preparation for this public

is your mic your mic on

and 11 for us. So I mean we're doing a lot with very little for information for our our book. So, I see on the agenda tonight there's a um you're looking at revising the handbook for new trustees. And this is these are my thoughts, especially after evaluating everything and reading it all of it. When evaluating the integration of governance handbooks between the village of Cottage Grove, the city of River Falls, and Belleview, the purpose should be clear to improve consistency, accountability, and the operational clarity within village government. However, what much what must also be examined is how authority shifts when multiple governance, ethics, conduct, and administrative policies are merged into a single highly structured framework. Both the River Falls and Belleview models introduce a more centralized and procedural system strengthens administrative control over communication, meeting structure, policy interpretation, confidentiality expectations, and professional conduct standards. On paper, this increases efficiency and reduces ambiguity. However, when layered governance documents are combined, broader subjective standards such as professionalism, reputational protection, confidentiality, and or orderly conduct can unintentionally shift how disagreement is treated within the system. While begins as administrative guidance may in practice become a framework where strong criticism, policy challenges, or procedural objections are increasingly filtered through compliance or conductbased interpretations. In that environment, legitimate oversight by elected trustees such as questioning administrative decisions, challenging challenging policy direction, or speaking publicly on controversial issues, can risk being interpreted through a disciplinary or procedural lens rather than a governance one. Similar people like similarly people kind of like me engaged residents who participate actively in public meetings or request information may experience their participation being

more tightly regulated through these formal rules of procedure. The key issue is not the existence of rules but how they are enforced and interpreted over time. Once integrated, these systems also expand the role of administrative leadership and vintage village legal counsel, both of whom are funded by taxpayers in managing disputes, interpreting conduct standards, and determining procedural respond responses. What does this mean? This can shift municipal legal resources from purely advisory and protective functions into tools that may intentionally or not be used to defend institutional decisions against scrutiny. This becomes more significant in the structure of the village itself. Only trustees in the village president are required to be residents of our community. While the village administrator, staff and legal council may reside outside the village. That creates a governance dynamic where non-resident administrative authorities supported by institutional and legal processes can increasingly influence how elected officials and residents experience participation, oversight, and accountability. This is not an argument against structure or professionalism. It's a caution about unintended consequences. The goal of governance integration should be to strengthen transparency and accountability, not to create systems where disagreement is constrained by process or where oversight becomes harder to exercise. A well a well-designed governance framework should make it easier to ask questions, challenge decisions, and engage the public, not more difficult. And one final point, if a data center is ever considered by leadership in our village of Cottage Grove, I strongly in the most strong words that I can come up come up with suggest it be put to referendum so that the village taxpaying residents can decide for their own future. Thank you.

Is there anyone else in the room that would like to speak? Is there anyone on Zoom that would like to speak? See any hands? All right. Uh, with that, we're going to move on to discuss and consider the minutes from the village board meeting from May 4th. And those meeting minutes are linked in the agenda. I'd move approval of the minutes as presented. Second. Motion by Murphy, second by JP. Any other discussion or clarification on the minutes? All those in favor? I opposed.

Opposed? Abstain. Motion carries. Oh, and just a reminder for our two trustees online, if you can raise your hand if you'd like to speak and then Lisa and I will monitor the hand raising so we make sure that we um give you an opportunity to speak tonight. All right, we're going to move on to presentations from the bo to the board. Um this is a concept presentation from LAR for a potential 162 unit single family home development off Ridge Road. It's for feedback only, so no action will be taken tonight. Um invite the presenters up. You can either stand or sit. Um, and then just make sure you have your microphone on. Um, it's the little man speaking there, or little individual speaking. Sorry.

How about that? Thank you. I wanted to introduce a couple of my team members here tonight. Uh, Reed Bayanucci is one of my associates at LAR. and we brought our land planner, uh, Zach Lukes from, uh, GRWA Associates, our our designers. So, I want to thank you for hearing us tonight. We did go before the plan commission a few weeks back, quite a few weeks back, and um, wanted to introduce ourselves to you and talk about our thoughts on um, the property. Um, a little bit about LAR. We've been working in this area for three or four years now at least I think um in several communities. We are publicly traded company. We've been around and since 1950. Okay, there's the site plan. Um we do we do have a PowerPoint. We don't need it right now. It's fine. Um since 1954 publicly traded since in in the middle 70s. So, you know, over a million homes built over the time. We're first or second largest uh home builder in the country depending on how you measure um and what year. So, um we are working in our division here works out of northwest Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. So, we're working about 50 different communities. Uh five or six or more in uh Wisconsin locally. I think we we talk about Stoton, Windsor, Oregon, uh Columbus, Pleasant Prairie, Sock City. So, been around a little bit, had a few communities started and actually completed and uh we're committed u to growing. Um as far as our L our team here, um we have a lot more resources than than a lot of communities. We built

last year I think about uh 16 miles of road and 20 2200 2500 home sites. We build and close. We build uh I think we started 20 21 280 homes and almost 1,900 closings. So very uh fairly vertically integrated. So, um, we have a mortgage company and, uh, it's crazy good deals, uh, that we figure out how to get people in homes. We do mortgage buy downs. You might you might see promotions where you get 3.99% introductory for a year or two and then your 30-year mortgage goes to maybe it's 4.99 or something. even in this this market right now where rates are over six I think they go up and down a little bit but as a company 70,000 homes annually so not to it's really more about the resources that we have and able to to to fulfill our commitments to our communities relationships are very important to us and um um being able to start finish keep everybody happy, abide by our commitments to the community and uh build communities that uh people want to live in. So, you won't see uh design that's that's um totally gritted out or anything. We'd like to have uh land dedicated to amenities and and some of the features that that I think Zach's going to be able to show you in a minute here. But uh maybe this is a good good time to introduce him and let Zach go over some of the site features we're talking about. So with that uh come on up, Zach, and introduce yourself. Thank you.

Hello. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you for your time. We we appreciate it. So, as we look at the site, the site is a 68 acre site located just north and east of downtown. It's located on Ridge Road. Um the site is is bisected by Ridge Road and um as we we've got 55 ft and 65 ft single family homes that we're proposing on the south side of Ridge Road. We're proposing uh ranch style um homes. We do butt up to a community um to the west and we've provided a nice 40 to 50 foot buffer in between our homes and and those homes with a two different parks in the community. naturalized detention basins and a walking trail path that in um working with staff we hope will continue um all the way south to um a regional trail eventually. Um so that's what you're seeing on the west side of of the site here. As I mentioned, two different parks, one one park space on the north, one park space on the south. And um I personally know that LAR when when coming to a site like this um really values a park space in general, um walking trails in general and uh we design, you know, pretty premium um products in their parks. Um, like I mentioned, the detention basins are all naturalized. So, um, we

do have a series of of planting styles that go, um, from a prairie style down to wetland style. Uh, so very attractive and provide for some uh some nice amenities in the community and premium home sites that back up to some of the detention basins. Lastly, as I mentioned, walking trail that goes through through the site on the north side and down into the south portion. Um, and as I mentioned, lead would eventually lead down to a regional park or regional trail system and link up to that. Thank you and appreciate your time.

Hi, Rick again. Yeah, you know, I wanted to expand a little bit about what Zach was talking about on our plan. And if if you take a look at Ridge Road where we're entering both sides of the community, you you'll notice that's where we focus a lot of green space. So, when you're coming in, the parents and presentation of coming in is uh it's fantastic. Um and that path, you know, the path that we're talking about does you does wind down u or straight along the west side and down down along to that connection. So just trying to pull everything together with you know um a really a great appearance in in the front of the community. So with that I you know we might talk about product a little bit. Um, like Zach said, um, ranch homes are focused on the southern area and, um, that's kind of a more of a tends to be a a move down kind of buyer because it's more expensive construction. On the north end, uh, we have single ranches and two-story homes, traditional homes, uh, ranging from about 17,800 ft² up to about 2,900 ft². If if you ever get out to a place called Oregon, uh Highlands Netherwood is where we're building those homes. So, very beautiful community over there. Um and I think um I don't know. Oh, there we go. I didn't see we changed, but that's a little homes. And then I think the next couple pages is it's sample communities that we did. Highlands and the wood, Cardinal Heights and Columbus. Not very many homes, but it's gonna it's going to be neat. Kettle Park West is behind uh I think there's a Walmart and stuff on the corner. Um

Cardinal Estates is all the way out in Sock so S sock City. Another very nice community. Um so got a couple aerial photos and some sample photographs of or renderings of some of our home. This is the last page I have in the PDF. Oh, that's the one you have. Okay. We have to do better on uh page organization. I apologize for that. But uh anyway, I just want to open it up for questions and uh um tell you anything you I can help you with and open it up to board feedback. Yes. Um Renee has her hand up.

Yes. Thank you for the presentation and for your information shared tonight. So, I um I guess I have some questions about how you would um plan to collaborate and communicate with the village um given the volume of national consumer complaints and litigation involving largecale production homebuilders related to drainage and grading uh construction quality and infrastructure issues. So, what additional due diligence um could be expected from your company? And that would include um storm water engineering, grading plans, infrastructure durability, roadway maintenance and impacts, inspection, oversight, and of course, long-term taxpayer exposure um exposed or that's that rides along with this proposed development. Okay. Well, um land development and uh production home building uh especially land development and engineering standards have come a long way in the last 30 or 40 years. Um, and uh, we hire nothing but the the best uh, consulting engineers. And of course, the village has its own protocols in place. And the state of Wisconsin also has its own protocols in place for storm water, wetlands, uh, wildlife, erosion control measures, um, oversight. As far as uh village protections go, um very standard to issue a letter of credit to cover the cost of improvements in case um in case things were a builder were to fail. We've actually since I've been at the company now for

eight years. When I started, that's all we were doing. We were going in and fixing and recommissioning and restarting communities that other builders had failed. Now, we didn't fail because we're publicly traded and you know, our reputation is important to us. So, our reputation is important here and in communities and we also welcome you to call any community that we're working in to to see how they feel about us. We do value our relationships and um you know research on the internet um will get you various um answers that may not be accurate. Let's just say that. So, uh,

right. And I I received my information from the Wall Street Journal and the Better Bureau, um, uh, Better Business Bureau, and there was, um, as a matter of fact, a an article that just came out today from the Wall Street Journal. So, that just I guess Can I interrupt you, ma'am? I would just say that'd be caution. This is not the venue for for that kind of discussion. I It really isn't. Um

well, I guess the venue should be appropriate for this type of concession um discussion when we're vetting uh vendors to come into the community and and build the sizable home. So to me, it's a huge red flag if a vendor cannot have these open discussions or we're hap happy to discuss those with you. That's not that's not an issue. So I I think what we're talking about is we have um all the protections that is afforded every every home builder and developer. Okay. Nothing less and probably more. Okay. I'll tell you that. Um

I think Casey had a question. Yeah. Um so you uh the walking trail that helps to connect the regional. Is that the I'm looking at the picture here. So that it's like the solid black line that runs on the southern part west of the the park there and then crosses over and kind of loops under like where it looks like it says 107 110 115. Is that is that the proposed walking trail or am I misreading that? Yeah, you I think you basically have it. Yeah, but it it it connects it touches both of the park.

Yes, it does. It's hard to see on there because of the scale really, but it does go along and it it doesn't it doesn't quite touch the black line, but it's, you know, it's a few few feet behind it. And then there's that, I don't know, 30 foot spacing with some landscaping in there as well. So, it's intended to be buffer between the neighbors and us, right? And, um, the I I appreciate that you mentioned you hope to, you know, connect it to the regional trails. Um yeah,

this isn't strictly related to the feedback on this particular proposal, but there's um been a lot of concerns with the neighborhood you mentioned there to the west Arowwood. Um they don't have any other outlet to Main Street for Cottage Grove. Um so there's there's a lot of extra traffic concern. Um, so I think it's important to mention it anytime there's development discussed in this area, but um, anything that can contribute to to connections like that to to lend itself to eventually getting a second outlet in there, I think is steps in the right direction, not necessarily saying this is sufficient for that, but I appreciate that that's there. So, thank you.

Yeah, I understand. So obviously it's part of that and it's part of the process uh that we all go through and I think it's I'm sure it's in your codes to get a traffic study. So that is in if you look at the north end there is a provision for connecting roadway the north end at such time as um as that property is developable. Rene you have your hand back up. Yes, ma'am. Sorry about that. I don't think I took it down from before. Okay. Um, Chris, go ahead.

Yeah. So, I just wanted to make sure I'm reading this right. The southern portion that says the lots are 55 by 125 on average. Is that right? That's that would be the minimum uh the minimum minimum width. Yeah. So, so that what that typically entails is I think about a 7 foot minimum setback on each on average on each side.

Okay. So, like Casey was saying, a lot of what I've heard from the people that live around there are they're generally okay with new development there. They're just they just want to make sure we get the infrastructure right. So, I know we're going to talk about residential TIDs later, but um it's a new law. I don't I'm not sure if you're familiar with it or not, but I'd be interested to see if there's anything we can do with that so that we can maybe make a residential TID generate some increment and make sure we get that infrastructure right. So, that would be something to look into if if you would be willing to. I'd appreciate that.

Are you talking about for off-site improvements? Because I I think I mean we're we're open to discussions about the you know the frontage here. Obviously that would be an engineering and traffic uh

traffic study issues as well. So um this is all part of the process. So you know the first submitt that we have would would you know include your requirements for preliminary and engineering and preliminary plat. Um um I can imagine this would turn into a PED just because of probably restrictive zoning uh standards, but nonetheless, the um engineering studies that need to happen are state-of-the-art for us as as well as everybody else. So um I know for a fact that most of the places we work I think the storm water and I don't know if we have an engineer here um but those standards have gone up just based on recent data. So you know what you see in in community design and development is is uh probably far beyond what you'll see in some of these older communities. Not only that, that, you know, dedication for open space that we just do as a as a practice.

Can I ask a question about your timeline, your proposed timeline, and how many houses you anticipate building per year?

So, of course, um, and I think I think we have that on here, but a little bit basically. So, on the south on the south side here, uh, of Ridge, that's south, right? Yep. Um, that's about how many homes was that? It's only uh 38 down there and then um 124 on the north side. So the total is about 162. How long will that take? Um I could see this, you know, going through the design process and the studies and everything. Um probably the course of this year and and is it possible to get an early start in construction in the fall? It it's possible. um could be, you know, in the spring. But either way, I mean, the ideal thing would be to be able to do some grading and start going on the underground infrastructure and try to have model homes open next year for, you know, for that's the other thing that we do a lot of builders don't do. We we usually have a dedicated welcome home center for our customers. And I know we have our engineer online and then also um you it seems like you understand the process in Cottage Girl pretty well, but if Erin at the end of this if you could just remind the public kind of next steps. Um

yeah, thank you. That's just preparation. I see Paula has her hand up so I want to get to um her question.

Thank you. Um I actually have a couple of questions. Um, so first of all, you have a pretty pretty good social media presence and um I've seen advertisements that maybe it's targeted at me, but for um movein ready homes for 55 um and older kind of seniors. Um, I'm getting close. Not quite there, but I'm wondering um if that's something that you would consider for this area because we have been working um JP Chris and I um on housing needs for our community. And one of the things we've identified is the need for more senior housing um as people want to downsize and still age in place in their own community. So that would also allow some housing stock to open too for some first-time home buyers. So is that something that you would consider for this area at all?

Well, absolutely. It's funny you say that because actually that those home sites on the south of uh Ridge Road are exactly that home. Now, we don't restrict these because we don't want to restrict our home buyers. And just because you're over 55 doesn't mean uh that's you need to have all your neighbors over 55 as well. So like I said, you know, ranch home construction is a little more expensive and you know, theoretically a move down buyer can this is the kind of lifestyle they want to lead. You know, one floor living and uh that's exactly what uh we had drawn up for that side of the of of the road. So, no, I we recognize that need.

Yeah. I mean, the ad because I clicked on the ad and I looked at these 55 um plus communities that that you all do and it really they have some very attractive features. So, I guess I would advocate for for more of that. But, um next question. Um if I buy a lot um in your subdivision, am I able to use a local Cottage Grove builder? Um we we will intend we do intend to build all the home sites here. So we are not a developer for you know selling home sites to other builders. But the natural uh course of events is local contractors and uh what we call them trade partners naturally uh should turn out to be local. Not always, but um that's that just kind of uh it kind of makes sense for someone that lives within minutes as opposed to hours away. So, um we have a lot of local contractors and we're we're actively trying to grow that that um team.

So, are you the the general contractor or are you more of a paper contractor um for your developments? uh we're we would general we general uh the homes. So we we we we do our own land development. That doesn't mean we don't hire uh land developers that do most of the different trades. Uh but we can certainly handle on the land development side. We can build it and then on the homes too. So, u one other thing about our homes is we we have kind of a um a standard where we we do um I think we we used to call it everything included and it's like the things that people order a lot. Okay. Quartz countertops um instead of getting one or two cuz people upgrade it. That's just became standard, you know, and a lot of smart home features. Uh 42-in cabinets, double bowl in the uh main bedroom. Uh what do you call it? The uh the owner suite. Um glass enclosed shower. A lot of upgrades that people were taking. So when you look at our home models, you don't see it's not a massive upgrade where you go in there and go, "Oh, I people come in and said, "What's it like the model?" It's It's not going to blow you away out of the water with the price because and and the other thing we do is we know our customers so well. We start homes on a regular basis. Good. It's good for our trade partners because they can come out and say we we plan on doing three or four a month. We'll start three or four a month before they're sold. So, we might have probably 15 or 20 homes for sale on site in this community and you might come in and say, "I need to I'm looking at home. What do you have?" Certainly, I think you can go buy a a home site that's available and order a

home. You could do that. Or we could say, "Well, I have we got two here that are available in 30 days. It's a couple more, a few more 60, 90, and so on." you know, over the course of say the five month construction period. So, we're we're there to figure out how to get people into homes. So, and I, you know, whether there's any concerns about affordability. It's very, it's very difficult to uh build homes. I mean, I think I mentioned kind of a rough idea with the pricing. Of course, we'd love to be under 450 or 500. It's not that easy. So, it all depends on um

Casey had a question and then Josh, can you maybe speak a little bit to the infrastructure needs after Casey's question? I I think you answered it. Uh with regards to the timeline, you're you're expecting to build three or four a month and and about a fivemon construction time on average or does it vary when you get buyers? You don't build until then?

No, it's a good No, we we actually are confident enough in our homes that we will start them and you know, so when we get our model ready, we're going to follow that up. After that starts, we're going to start building homes. Even though technically they're not sold, we try not to open a a model welcome home center until it's completed because that's just uh you know, we want to knock their socks off with presentations. So, um the official, you know, start, but we will have homes available in in very short order. And to your point, 95% probably at least 95% of our homes are a lot of builders call them spec, we call them quick moveins. And uh same thing goes with our mortgage company. Our deals are so good. Most people buy take

Sure. No, I'm sorry. I'm just trying to clarify about how quickly you expect the whole area to fill up. Yeah. Yeah. So I would say typically what I we kind of think about two, three, four, five a month per per lineup. So we this is technically up two lineups really. So at the beginning when we have all the products available I I could see the I could see the ranch homes going quicker actually. So this could be this could be five a month both five a month in the north, five a month in the south. So 10 a month. So this could be, you know, all filled up in a year and a half, maybe two years. Oh, that's pretty fast. Probably two to three years. Yeah,

two to three years. Two or three. And can it go faster? Yes, absolutely could. Sure. Again, you know, um I think there's a real I mean, lack of affordable single family homes in the market, right? You see all a lot of people, a lot of apartments and a lot of rental out there. And that's it's a I think it's a it's a it's not a great sign for home home ownership, right? Again, just balancing concerns with the existing neighborhood with traffic, no outlet, um it being if it fills up faster, that becomes an issue sooner is as all but that clarifies it.

Yeah. So the traffic engineers uh it's it's more of a science than people think but they've they've built that into their their models and also they use I think state data and projections and population they take all that into account. Right. Can I have more than I could tell you? Uh Josh or Kyla talk kind of just generically about infrastructure needs in this area. Um and what would and feel free to jump into if you um have sure ideas. You want me to start? Yeah, go ahead and start, Josh. No, it's okay. You guys can hear me. Okay. Yeah, we can hear you.

Can you guys hear me? Okay. Okay. Sorry. Um yeah, I mean this area has been planned for a little while, right? We've been talking about it for the last two, three years with some decent interest um from developers. Um probably most of the people on the board are aware that, you know, we did move ahead and have a design to about the 90% level for for a regional lift station just south of where the south part of this development is. uh coming off Dentara Denturia Lane um and and creating a new coals sack down there and then feeding all of this development um by gravity down to that to that system and that size to also go above and beyond and to the north almost all the way up to um across BB um and serve some of that area as well as you get close to Commerce Park. So, it's a large reach. That's kind of the sanitary side and that's been planned for for quite a long time as uh a plan for the eastern part of the village as it grew. Uh water would come down, you know, Ridge Road here, get connected back up to BB and back down into the subdivision, you know, as and if as and if things continue to develop. Um storm water, I think the the um gentleman talked about storm water and yeah, I mean it's state, county, and your local standards uh ordinance-wise. um detention basins, infiltration basins, storm water management will be a big deal. Um you know, there'll be environmental corridors like wetlands and other things on on the property that they'll have to avoid. Part of the reason you don't see more uh building to the south where kind of like Ridge Road here is and and these 38 lots is there is a fairly goodized wetland south of that. So, it is hard to construct um a piece of that to the south and that's probably why the developer here is kind of keeping to the limits that they have. You know, there's always been this talk about traffic um which is is definitely um something that will have to be studied. Uh we know the school district is kind of already looking at that

intersection over there and we'll get traffic counts at Taylor Main and Weldbridge. this would then add to that, build off that traffic. Um, and that would have to be taken into consideration. We had a developer probably a year or so ago come and look at this piece plus even more of the of the piece to the east. Um, kind of where the cursor is, or at least I'm sorry, my cursor, but where the other development is kind of east of here as well as part of this overall large development. And they started a traffic impact analysis, but they didn't finish it because they didn't they didn't go the full way. But ultimately a connection to the north I know has always been in the talks and I think we want to definitely plan for you know one or two different con you know roads that will go north as it's as the same as it goes kind of to the to the east to kind of plan for future development. So all that will kind of be taken into consideration as they actually lay this out and plat it and see what some of their constraints are.

Right. Thanks Josh. Yeah thank you. I think we did uh recognize a few of those u wishes and uh we did talk to those folks that you're talking about and um you know you can tell by the some of the lines we've drawn on there that were completely aware of wetland issues and situations and those kind of things. So we're quite familiar with the infiltrations. We do uh extensive geotechnical work in you know addition to

regular engineering works. Our team is I think some one of one of the you know we're really um we don't want to go part way and get stuck so we we get through this at the beginning. Um Paula has her hand up and then Renee and then I'll throw it over to Aaron to kind of wrap up uh next steps. Thank you. Yeah.

So go ahead Paula. Thank you. Sorry. I was gonna try to get this in. Um I just wanted to share that I I share some of the concerns that both Casey and Chris have. Um although I think um that the secondary access point really should be part of the proposal itself. Um because it's it's fundamental to the safety, traffic flow, quality of life, and we really want to set up um the existing residents and future residents for success. Um so we want to make sure that they're safe. um that that we can get to them in a crisis that um traffic isn't um negatively impacting their way of life. So, I guess I my preference would be that when you come back for um approval that that is part of the plan. I know you said you built 1600 miles of roads um in your presentation and I'd love to see something with that as well.

Renee, yes. Thank you. Thank you for that. And um I would like to um uh support what the other the concerns that the other board members um or comments that they have raised and and to also add that morning traffic in that area is already of a concern. And I have another question is who is going to pay I would imagine that there's going to need to be a lift station and and uh so who's going to be responsible for that along with the infrastructure that we're discussing.

Okay, that's an item that I go ahead. I think someone has a better answer than me. who's either Josh or maybe Erin can just touch on um next steps and um where the developers agreement comes in and that kind of thing. Yeah, I can get to that. Maybe Josh and Kyla can cover the left station and the process for that.

Yeah, I don't know Erin if you have control of the map or not, but like to the south of this development, Renee, is is where uh the bigger regional lift station will go. So, all of this will drain south. There you go. just to the end down there where Darion Tarion kind of ends. Yep. In that area. So everything will grow flow by gravity and then from there it will get pumped over to the main lift station. Half of that force man's already under progress drive all the way to Hydrate. So the next step is extending it through Hydrate, bringing it over to here and then pumping everything from this side back to your main lift station that sends it over to MMSD. You had a good question about cost and when we designed that we worked with Cameron and staff to come up with a large area that it would serve and everybody's going to have to pay probably a portion of that cost as it only serves this area. Cameron if he's there has has been working some numbers on the impacts and and who pays what as you know as that development happens.

So an impact fee would have greatly helped this. Cameron, do you want to talk a little bit about the impact fees we approved last meeting and

Yep. So, we we currently have a couple things um kind of next steps and kind of what the current process is. Um so, we adopted at the last board meeting to have any area that the Ridgelo station would be served um would be charged a impact fee. So, that would be any of these these these parcels on here. It's it's based off of meter size. So based that most of these look like they're single family residential that'd be a 3/4 inch meter. Um so the big conversation next with the developer would be okay well the village wasn't planning to do this project to 2030 2031. What moves the needle to do the project earlier? And that would be the discussion between the developer and the village on maybe some of that how much we might need ahead of the the impact VR credited to kick off that project sooner than when it was originally planned for that infrastructure. Um one of the things that we talked about was um getting some updated pricing figures on the lift station. Um, and so because we originally had that project planned for 2030, 2031, when or if we have a developer in this area that's interested in moving forward, that would be part of the uh reimbursement fee reimbursement agreement where we already have 90% fee. We'd have Strand update the numbers and then um kind of bring that forward to the board and the utility commission at what the cost would be. Um, but we are not going to update those figures until we have a signed reimbursement agreement with uh development or developer in that area just because that that that's time and effort that would that would be costing the village money to do it before when we we were required to do it.

Thank you. We'd be look forward to exploring that with you. All right. Uh so next steps Aaron then we'll move on.

Yeah. So, the planning process is a two-step process, preliminary plat and final plat before they submit for that. They're required to do a neighborhood meeting. Um, that's developer organized and led. They can do it here if they want to. Um, but just kind of explaining the the project to the neighbors. Um, the plat, as I said, a two-step process. Um, as was mentioned, as currently designed, this whole neighborhood would have to be a planned unit development. Um, the lots are smaller than what our typical zoning would allow. Um, it' be worth noting the 65 foot lots, if those were 70 ft wide, then they could qualify for our SR6 uh zoning, but as currently configured, this would be a planned unit development. Um, that's also a two-step process. It also requires a neighborhood meeting. It can be the same neighborhood meeting. Uh, they don't need two separate ones. Um, and those processes can happen concurrently. um preliminary plat with the general development plan and then the final plat with the precise implementation plan.

Erin, a question. Yeah, you said two neighborhood meetings. I No, I'm saying the the plat requires one, the planned unit development requires one, but they can be the same meeting that covers both things. So, so that's that's one that we you recommend that we handle uh before we submit a preliminary platform. They have to do right before you submit a point. Okay. Thank you.

All right. Thank you for that. Um I'm not seeing any other comments or um questions on this for and feedback for you. So, thank you for coming tonight. Um I did hear kind of staff direction to kind of start to investigate the road more to the north. Um, so I know that that's not part of the property that you own um for this and that would be something the village would have to start to investigate to include um a continuation of a road to the north. Yeah, sorry. Yeah, just to echo that. Um I wasn't sure if that would be a staff direction.

Okay. I wasn't sure if that would be a staff direction now or like emails in between prior to the next meeting, but but yes, in particular, um I I know there's been a lot of different proposed solutions for a second outlet. I would I would love to see, you know, a clear list of each of them, what what they entail, what the pros and cons are kind of thing. So that's what I'd like for that. I think the challenge there is obviously the options are very limited and the control is not much.

Yeah. So um you know uh the question is coming up with a reasonable um solution to that qu problem I guess if you so to speak.

Okay. So I mean mainly the other thing is um is are the members trustees uh open to the PUD scenario with some of the framework that we're talking about here mainly um you know it's very important to have have your support going into it. you know, of course staff, we're all here to please, you know, if we don't have their support, we don't have anything. But also, um, you know, I think some of these features, some of the dedications that we made for the off, you know, common areas and stuff and that's that's how we're able to, you know, with the homesite sizes. I think the the days of of people all wanting to get riding lawnmowers and have big first off, nobody can afford it. Secondly, it's just it's not the lifestyle that most people want, you know. Um there are plenty of course.

So he's looking for kind of some feedback on PUD. Yeah. And I can add they are dedicating more park space than they would be required to provide by ordinance. So I think that does make an argument for offsetting the smaller lot sizes. Okay. Uh Thanks Heidi. Um so again I stated this during the plan commission meeting um but u overall the villages as Paula mentioned earlier we're we have a housing chapter committee that's looking to you

thank you um housing chapter committee that's looking to kind of update um our ordinances and kind of do the long-term planning. One of the things that we really want to push for and uh one of our priorities is these smaller format more affordable type housing and as Aaron mentioned our current uh zoning does not allow for that. Um especially the widths in there and so since that is definitely a priority that's definitely something that we I would be open to a PUB to allow for that smaller format um housing in there. Yeah, I would just echo that. Um, the smaller the smaller lot size, you know, provides for more affordability. Um, it provides another type of ownership opportunity for people that, you know, we have some developments that have big lots, we have some developments that have small lots. It appeals to maybe different types of home buyers, but provide that ownership opportunity at uh, you know, a more affordable price. um because land is so expensive and if we're developing a little bit more densely we're consuming less you know open space farmland that's you know on our on our borders too. So it has you know multiple benefits to to reduce those lot sizes. So that I think that part um you know I'm I'm in support of I am I think the traffic piece and how you know the traffic study and how we'll handle the traffic flow is probably going to be the the biggest question as we move forward.

All right Paula. Yeah. So um since the developer asked about a pod um he asked us about our support. I'll just, you know, be honest that I'm not inclined to support a PUD for this proposal. You know, they can offer flexibility, but really it can also shift some critical decisions to later stages of the development. Um, in this case, I'd rather see a plan um that kind of align with our existing zoning stat standards and and addresses the traffic concerns. So, so I think that's

I don't think we're we're trying to avoid the studies and the requirements of a typical um subdivision approval process and there are design features that are built into the preliminary planning process and actually in a lot of ways prelim a PUD is fairly restrictive for us. So I I I just maybe remind you of that that maybe talk with the planner about the merits of that. So I appreciate your perspective and I I I know this is a is probably a common um concern.

All right, I think that kind of wraps up the feedback for tonight for you. Thank you. Thank you for coming. Thank you for listening tonight. I appreciate it. Right. Uh we're going to move on to um unfinished business. Discuss and consider the timeline for additional budget review committee meetings and provide staff direction on the scope of the items to be reviewed. This is followup from village finance director Sawyer's um agenda item from last time. Go ahead, Cameron.

Thank you. So included in your packet, um really the the intent of this memo was just to kind of describe some of the things that maybe have historically been happening behind the scene to start giving the the board some framework for what additional budget review committee items could look like um throughout the budget process. Um so laid that out here in the memo. Um and just asking the board to provide some staff direction. Um, the biggest thing is with May 27th being next week, it's it's likely um not enough time to prepare a packet and provide the budget review members with the information to make those decisions. So, um, also kind of as part of this discussion tonight, if there's an additional meeting that's scheduled, uh, we'll want to look at the calendar and provide a recommendation.

All right. feedback um on additional budget review agenda meetings. Go ahead, Heidi.

Thanks. Um so, kind of what I was, you know, the FMP meeting and then the budget meeting, budget review does and then uh to the board, it's kind of all about where we're going. So, I was thinking the the premeating might be helpful like where we are. So to go over some of those things that happen behind the scenes just so we have the the presentation on it. We can review like what are you know yeah kind of like our current state before we jump into the next FMP spot. So I don't does that is that I'm not really sure how to say that with more detail. I don't

Yeah, I guess just, you know, I'm just because I'll be involved in this process, I'm going to try to regurgitate what board members are saying just so I have a clear understanding. So, what I'm what I'm hearing from you, um, is possibly kind of look at the last set of financial statements at a high level, look at where we are year-to date, from a budget to actual, kind of address what those impacts may have on the budget is kind of a step or

Yeah. Yeah. I think before we're looking ahead at the next year, yeah, where we are this year, where all of our um projects and debt ended up in the last year, we have a number of financial statements that came out since then. And we get the presentation here, but I think just getting that all collectively in one packet as like an overview where we are before we see where we're going to go. So three three key metrics kind of when you're looking at historical documents like that in budget to date. Um so reserve balances are would would be something that would I I think should be talked about. What are the current levels? Um you know is there some consideration to either spending down or or saving up? Um asset condition. Um I think a lot of the times that gets kind of skipped over where the village assets in general from a depreciation perspective. um where is our kind of maintenance sitting overall on village assets? Um and then obviously debt is is a big factor into what is the current you know debt load um look like and you know what are possible decisions.

Yeah, I think I had asked you in April for an additional meeting to discuss debt and I do like the idea of um kind of looking at like a where we are to date. Um I guess my question is where what what's the objective then? What's the recommendation coming out of budget review to inform this board on what's going to happen at next steps? And is that information about the reserves and whether we make decisions about that? Is it setting some type of new policy? Is is that what you envision kind of coming out of this or is it just kind of a um information session which we already kind of do here? I know we have the quarterly report on this this month's agenda,

right? I mean, I suppose that some kind of policy recommendation could come up if um the information indicates that, but maybe it's more of a transparency overview for community to have more of a one specific place at one meeting that goes over kind of all of this background information rather than scattered bits and pieces here and there that it's kind of collective all in one overview. Certainly. Paula, you have your hand up.

Yes. Thank you. Um, so you know, my preference would be for us to meet a couple of times just because there's a lot of things to cover. And I think some of the topics that I personally would like to see in addition to what Heidi mentioned with the the debt and the financial management plan, um, I'd like us to review um, compensation and benefits um, for staff. Um, my guess is we're going to see health insurance increases this fall. Um, so let's do a little pre-work on that. Um as well as you know I know you uh mentioned in the budget kind of what has typically been done and when we talk about our major service providers are reviewed annually and present to the board um as an opportunity to assess performance and confirm expectations. They do a good job telling us what they do for us but that doesn't necessarily mean that we understand the financial impacts and we don't talk about those things. And so I would like us to dig deeper um into those types of things. You know, what are the rates we're paying? Um how much is this in our budget? Um all of those kind of things. Um I know uh County Executive Melissa Agard um was kind of doing that with their 200 whatever um service providers and just really reviewing those contracts um and the nuts and bolts. And so I think that's another area where we could really make an impact. So, I'd like to see a series of meetings that we can dig a little deeper on those three topics in particular.

Paula, just a quick clarifying question. Oh.

Um, just a qualifi clarifying question, Paula. Um so for the annual service provider reviews um was the was they asked to have more of a financial aspect like summary before the village board meeting or having that information discussed at budget review. um having that information discussed at budget review, but then also making it obviously available to the full board so that when those providers come in and they're talking about um you know what they do for us and how they perform for us um we have those dollar amounts in mind, right? We we can tie the cost to the level of service we're receiving. Rene

does that help?

Yes, definitely helps. Sorry about that. Um I just wanted to say that I agree with what you're proposing, Paula. Um I I I think that it would um give board members, including um newly elected board members, uh deeper understanding. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Um yeah, I think so. Uh Cameron, the end of your memo mentioned this and um about staff requesting direction on you know the intended scope, priority topics, um timeline and and you know how you need that to prepare you know meaningful data and and an effective discussion. Um, so I think I'd uh, you know, while I'm not on budget review, I'd reiterate that that I would like to see um, when it when it when budget review comes back to the full board. Um, you know, very clear uh, results, I guess I should say, on what things are just informational versus what if there's like specific actions being called for. Um, I think, you know, sometimes there's a perception of of like, oh, we, you know, here's the taxes lever, here's the debt lever, and we can just set things wherever we want them. Um, I think it would be helpful for the public to for if there's a specific action being suggested um that that we make sure it's clear that that that's something that we can do as a village board and, you know, and why and and and what's allowed and isn't allowed. Um so just sort of echoing as you said Cameron the I'm I'm not speaking to you I suppose here I'm sort of speaking to everyone who's going to be on budget review to um to bring us back you know clarity in in specific actions not just

oh we looked at all these things and you know here are the issues with it but what are we going to do about it is is what I'm saying. So less staff direction, more committee direction, but yeah. So I guess I if if contracts is something that we want budget review committee to to take a look at, um, you know, I'm just kind of picturing myself at at at the meeting. We're we're starting to talk about you know provider X um you know what meaningful data would you want budget review community to be looking at you know when we do this internally um typically I reach out to you know 10 15 communities you know what are you know what are you seeing for hourly costs what are you you know what are you seeing annually cost um how are you funding X um so those are the kind of things I guess that's meaningful when I'm analyzing those those contracts and those services. Um what is the board looking for as far as the deliverable? Like let's just say if it's contract review, um what what should we be looking at if

I mean I guess if if like I'd want all of that information along with the service provider there to kind of work through you know whatever we need to work through. And so I'm wondering if that if service providers is a better a better use of time to have that how we have several each meeting um August through September um if we're going to attack on the financials because we'll also know then what their proposed budget is for next year whether it aligns if we need to make changes. Um I don't know. So, one of the recommendations that Matt and I have slowly been working on is trying to get the professional service provider reviews earlier and earlier each year because ideally if a board member was not happy um with a a provider, I want there to be enough time to make a change. Um and so ideally trying to push that up as early as you know July and August as so then if for some reason you know we need to go out for a proposal or or evaluate the providers or rewrite a contract language kind of similar with Colonial Club this past year um for expectations that we have enough

time to do to do that. I guess one thing that you know it's hard to we're going to have the service provider there and then it seems like you should also have the service provider like at the village board meeting right to do the review and overview with them. I mean, we can ask them to come to another budget review committee meeting um to go over financials, but it's it's also difficult to determine comparing communities because some people have like an an IT person on staff versus um you know, we have Johnson block and what projects were specific for that year like were there server migrations? I mean, those are things that we could have budget review go over or what's proposed for the next year. Um, I guess I I'm just trying to find a way to like narrow how do we get the broad overview information that we need, but also like, you know, without knowing every single detail like that seems like I'm trying I don't know

because we're really not going to have that information until budgets are due at the end of September thing, Right. And then what big projects are next year? Like maybe we're doing a big server thing next year and that's why we're projecting the cost to be higher. I guess

I I guess just I'm going to be very honest in the levy uh environment that we're in, most of our professional service dollars stay relatively the same year-over-year. Um where we do see increases and decreasing by year is what projects do we have going on? So, and those are those are projects that appear on the bills list as a two 210 expenditures which ultimately get paid for entirely by the developer. So, you might see one year legal fees is 300,000 but the general fund portion of that is 80,000 and again you might see another year where it's 120,000 but again the general fund portion of it's 85,000. So, it it it's really really hard. Um, and that's why part of the reason why I'm talking about May 27th being a little close in order to fully educate budget review and kind of keep them up to speed on kind of the dynamics of of the budget. Um, just making sure we have a defined scope and we have enough time to get the materials out to budget review to review.

Casey, go ahead.

Yeah, sort of echoing on you, Heidi. I think so, I mean, in my mind, you know, budget review uh, needs to look at the cost for things. So you you mentioned already, you know, reaching out to other communities for for comparison. Um, and that and Heidi, as you said, that might not be exact depending on what projects and so on they're doing, but maybe if it makes sense for, you know, to to compare like the the costs, you know, the cost by activity or by project. And and then budget review has that information. And then we can put that together with the you know uh the provider evaluations of did they do a good job at at the task. So then we'll have you know the performance and uh cost comparison we can put that together as as a board. So I I I would expect that for budget review they wouldn't be getting the performance data just like the cost data and comparisons to other communities and other providers doing a similar service.

Sure. And and not only with reaching out communities, you know, getting the cost, it's also nice when I reach out to communities if there something's working well or something's very efficient getting that information so we don't have to reinvent the wheel on everything. Um that I mean that's really important to us. Go ahead, Paula.

Thank you. So I I'm just going to give an example of what I mean by service provider contracts and where I think the budget review committee could be helpful. Um I'll use Aaron um as an example. Aaron worked for Grafe and so for a long period of time we pro they were our service provider for planning services and at some point the village board said you know what I think we're at the place where we need a full-time onstaff planner for us. Um, so it's those kind of things that we look at, um, you know, with different service providers to say, you know, is it more cost-effective to have this person be a member of staff versus continuing, um, to go with a certain agency or provider. So, those are the kind of things um that I'd like to just talk about and evaluate. Um, you know, I don't want to necessarily create a ton more work for Cameron and and the team. Um, but I think that's where uh the the committee can dig into some of this information and help um just to make sure we're kind of, you know, doing our due diligence um as we go forward. So,

and I

I I can just add additional due diligence um certainly worthwhile and um welcome, but certainly if if there's ability for the village to save money by um hiring staff rather than a consultant, we would certainly recommend that. And that's what I did with Aaron. And um yeah, we would continue to bring people in house when it makes sense. I guess how much of the the work should be done in existing committees and like staffing needs for example. I mean that all comes up you know through the budget process starting now for capital needs and then prioritization and then eventual operational budgets for all of our departments and how does then a budget review committee meeting now can is there a way we can structure it to give them the information they need to make sure that it's being analyzed appropriately? I don't know that we can make decisions on staffing or consultant. I just I don't know where that fits in. I don't think I'm making any sense.

So, one of the the hot topics right now is collaboration. And you know, at a a couple recent um conferences that I've gone to, we there's this concept of sharing services with communities that are are near you. So like I think I think of an opportunity like let's just say and I'm just going to say it cuz it's been brought up like is there a scenario where Manona and the town of Cottage Grove and the village of Cottage Grove could share resources to be able to be you know effectively you know attributing their their time where it's needed because the the problem with and and I'll just pick on it for example realistically and I know we have some IT experts here there's there's three different very distinct scopes of it. You got cyber security, you got network administration, and you have front front front end user support. And so to find the one rare person to that can do all of it is great up until okay, this person has two weeks of vacation, some sick time, and whatever. And and then there's kind of no backup plan. Um, and so when I look at um ways as as we're kind of looking at service providers, that is an idea that intrigues me, working with other communities and and maybe coming up with a way that we can maybe be more cost-effective by sharing resources. Um, it it's difficult because every community has different service standards. So like getting a community that's in like size that has like operations that has like system is always becomes a challenge. Um, so kind of what Paula is mentioning for and and correct me Paula as I'm going through this if if I'm not speaking correctly is that the task of budget review committee would be okay what are our current service provider operations engineering attorney

um IT assessing waste management and at least show to the public that the current model is more costeffective than what than hiring staff or whatever to kind of that that due diligence to show that you know because I think too you know if if garbage trucks were were cheap you know certainly we only would have to run garbage trucks twice a week but okay each garbage truck is $500,000 so that's where it doesn't become efficient for us unless we had a partner is that kind of Am I summarizing that correctly Paula

you are spot on Cameron that's exactly what I'm looking looking for is that um extra level of not just scrutiny but transparency about you know where things are at. That's exactly right.

So then Paula your other recommendation for service provider financials. So would that also so that can obviously the the the contract amount can be presented you know through that budget that that kind of proforma essentially. Um, but that would also come back during, you know, I would have like before a meeting or I'd have a summary handout on this is what the provider is and this is the estimated budget impact, you know, just so the board can re review it as they present. Yes, that'd be great. Okay.

All right. I'm at least clear what's on the table so far. Any other comments on this item? I guess I kind of I guess I still think it's duplicative then. I don't know what the information still has to come to the village board to make a final decision anyway. And the budget review committee as a recommending body would just see this first

and then we would invite them back and do this. We would repeat it in September. So I think what you're saying, Cindy, is like we would maybe have additional pages in the financial management plan on services provided kind of like the wise because that's something that the idea I think it's a great idea to have you know if this were in house like this is what it would cost. I think that's that's a great ad um to the budget documents. I'm not sure if we I don't think I'm convinced we need to change our budget timeline and process with additional meetings to get that information. I guess is what I'm saying.

It's just the same as any other standing committee really is what I see it. When public works discusses an issue in depth, right, and we work through that, we recommend to the board. It's basically the same sort of concept. It's it's taking pieces of the budget, going into detail, um asking questions, and providing a recommendation. So, it's just kind of digging a little bit deeper. Um that it's the same concept as any other committee work. Um basically, it would just be a little bit just a couple more meetings. I think um you know I had suggested June, July and September um to just kind of take some of these issues and and parse them out and you know I mentioned compensation and benefits. I think um we need to look at our compensation protocols and um you know everything from merit increases and different things like that and make sure that we are evaluating them not just from a budgetary perspective but from a fairness and equity perspective. So that's why I'm suggesting a few more meetings. I'd like to do that work. Casey.

Um, sorry. I I was just going to say I mean I wonder Cameron if you if you think that extra meetings are necessary for that or if with the what is it too normally pencled in that that we could that the that the budget review could cover you know evaluating in-house or shared resources or stuff if that it could be fit in there. Um I have one other thing after that but I mean you're the one you know who's going to be preparing a lot of this. Do you think that that could be done in existing meetings or how many you know how much does that add?

So I think kind of always you know what are we doing and what are the next steps. So I think if it was at the if we were talking about what we were talking about at those meetings it would be very hard to apply those action items. Um so kind of that's in the in the memo that's drafted kind of having their their work done by the end of August would be helpful to start to implement that for uh the g kind of the things that are effective in in in January. Um because once you start obviously as every you know most most of you have been through a budget cycle already. It gets pretty quick in September because it has to go to all the committees and then it goes to budget review and then goes to um the board and then to um public hearing. A and so um just making sure that we have enough feedback early on in the process to to make meaningful change. Um, if that makes sense.

Yeah. Um, again, yeah, I feel like I mean I'm not opposed to, you know, more meetings if that's necessary as opposed to having, you know, two six-hour meetings or whatever it would turn into. Um, so that part's sort of fine, but I wanted to also ask Paula, um, you've you've mentioned compensation a couple of times here. uh I keeping in line again with with trying trying to limit these things to very specific uh actions, you know, cause and so on. What is specifically what are we you looking to look at there? Because I mean again there's only so many levers of action there's only so many things that both like the the board and the budget review committee could do. So what what are you looking to do in that regard?

Yeah. So, yep. Thank you for that question. So, I think what I'm looking at is not necessarily individ individual compensation or anything like that. I'm looking at our systems and processes um you know that we we have um because I know that I haven't since I've been on the board, we haven't had a conversation about our compensation protocols and um the different things that we have. So, it's really looking at the process, right? Does this make sense? Um does the structure that we have um you know for either merit increases or equity increases um you know do it is that applicable? Is it working for us? Um is there a better way to um go through this process? you know, we do have some unionized employees and some non-union and then, you know, comparing and making sure that we are um treating both equitably, I guess, is is where I'm looking to go with this.

Okay, that that makes sense. Um I would but I would then say that I feel like that sort of conversation is outside the scope of the budget review committee. um that's going to get into uh you know labor laws um and and personnel uh discussions and things like that. Potentially things need to be closed meeting and so on. So I I feel like that's not something that should be added into budget review, but that's that's just my view on that. I think that that direction might be a formal wage study um

which I think would have to be budgeted for. I think those can be um kind of pricey, but it should be unbi I suppose it should be an unbiased study um if we're going to make recommendations on our current policies and a formal wage classification study might be the way to go at that point and budget for that in in 2027 or future. Yeah, agreed. I mean again um ex examining all these things, reviewing them is is very good. I just think there's we need to make sure that's in an appropriate avenue. So I think that would be something done by the board as a whole, not by a subcommittee. Um and and yes, potentially with a study as you're mentioning, Cindy, but go ahead Paula. And then I see you had your hand up.

We used we we did used to have um the budget and personnel was kind of grouped together. And we currently don't have any sort of personnel committee. And so I'm just kind of reverting back to what we used to do um which was put those two things together. Um so that I don't know any other mechanism and obviously everything the budget review is going to go to the board. The board sets the policy. Um but I think we should have some of those procedures in play.

Sure. And I think I think the mechanism I'm thinking for that other than obviously it coming to the full board is uh we have Matt as administrator and Eningga as HR. Um and they would be if not the start of very involved in that sort of process. Um, and as you say, Cindy, you know, full wage study, things like that. Go ahead, Renee.

Though I disagree with any type of wage study, um, I think that us collaborating together um, as board members or future board members um, working towards more transparency. And case, you brought up a good point that um and and Paula as well is that maybe like salary and wages it goes to, you know, whatever committee is is uh designated to, but I too as a board member um feel like more information as we work together will definitely provide um less public mistrust. um you know we we can look at other comparable municipalities publicly. I mean this information for government employees is is available somewhere online. Um so we we can discuss compensation philosophies and and and uh budget impacts, organizational pay structures. um we can do these things within open session, but I don't think or at least to my knowledge since I've been on the board that this has really been openly and robustly discussed. And and I I think Paula, if I'm not hearing you or interpreting what you're saying correctly, please do correct me. is that that's part of what you're saying in addition to, you know, uh the budget review, taking an a look at um like uh Cameron, you gave the great example of of having garbage trucks, you know, is it is it better to do it the way we do or have our own? So, it's what I'm hearing from Paula and from Casey is that we need to have more discussions and and come up with a more structured way to evaluate these concerns.

To clarify, my position on is we should have these conversations. I don't think they should be at a subcommittee. I think they should be, you know, with the staff who deals with um with our workforce with employment again, HR, village administrator, labor law, and brought to the board. But

and I guess I'll just clarify clarify my position is that we do all of these things through our budget, current budget protocols, and I know staff are given direction in board meetings and we have kind of everything in I feel like we have everything in place. I don't really at this point see a need for an additional meeting. Although I did um I do like the um the idea from Heidi to kind of have a like a a goal setting or a grounding meeting um and maybe go over current status for um some of the policy that we've already set and whether that needs to come back to the board with additional recommendations. And I like the idea of the certified providers and having kind of additional um transparency measures in the budget packet that show that this is the the cost savings for using our consultants. And if there isn't, then the board evaluates that. And I don't know if you can maybe move that up a little bit, but I guess my perspective on this is that we do all of these things and we I think we do them fairly well with a little bit room for improvement. So I don't see the need for additional meetings. Cindy, I have to say that I respectfully disagree with you that, you know, to me it appears that there are several village policies regarding raises and and you know that we just don't have um a a real uh structured firm um more datadriven process to this and and I think you know for better public transparency and and us representing the taxpayers um that would be helpful to for board members to know and Casey to your point of you know having Eningga and um Matt as in their roles it's not appropriate for them to set their own salaries and and uh wages and maybe I misunderstood what you were trying to say but you know that that's part of the board's role

right is to look at and I I I'm not singling out Um um Matt or Enga, I'm saying all board or excuse me, all department heads and employees of the village um be looked at. Um so I I didn't mean to and I I hope I didn't misunderstand what you were saying, Casey. Yeah, I I wasn't saying Matting is at their own salaries, but for everyone other than department heads and for the policy as a whole, for for a compensation policy, that's an HR issue, that's an administration issue. Um so not saying that they would set it but they again they would be the start of that process and and those recommendations and review which then be brought again to the full board rather than again establishing either putting it to budget review or establishing some other additional committee for it. Um as you said Cindy I agree that we we have these mechanisms we have times for this sort of thing. We should use them but that's that's enough on that

I think. Yeah. Yeah, thank you for clarifying that, Casey. Um but yes, I I think that that is definitely part of a trustes role is to be well aware of these processes and the data that's included in compensation, merit pay, bonuses for department heads, for the village administrator, for employees, and um having more conver more open conversations about all of this. Um whether it be subcommittees I'm I'm definitely for that. Heidi,

thanks. I just want to add on um in my time on the board uh we have at the board level discussed uh various compensation and reorganization um when staff have departed and adding uh responsibilities to other staff which resulted in a savings after um some staff have departed. Um we've t discussed um retention um I mean within within the budget process um committees talk about um you know their seasonal staff. We have talked about some seasonal positions such as camp counselor in the past at parks committee um when we've been unable to hire at you know the prior pay on how we need to adjust pay to make sure we're competitive in the region. So, you know, maybe we haven't had those discussions in the last year because it hasn't necessarily come up in the last year. Um, but in my experience on the board, those discussions have happened in the past in certain cases. Um, so, you know, it just may not have happened in the last year. Um, so I'm not sure how if any of those questions come up during budget in committees or just more questions need to be asked at committees or the representatives here that are on each committee um can talk about those kind of wages um you know within the budget process.

I guess staff bring those things forward to the board for recommendations when they're appropriate to when we need those outside of our budgeted authority. So the board approves everything. Um we put together uh in um compensation protocols that we share with the board that at any time that the board would want to review those um we could do so. But those are aligned with and built from the vill's mission, vision, values, primarily core values on retaining good staff and um rewarding excellence. And then the board approves um most years a merit pool of funds and um as personnel director I'm responsible to make sure all full-time employees are evaluated. So staff put together evaluation guidelines for how those take place and excuse me. Um, and that process kicks off with the board's review of me and you all know that you receive plenty of data, tons of data on comparable communities for for me. Um, so then that's that's looked at. Um and and ultimately the board approves uh most years a a merit pool that then we we utilize um in the way that's disclosed in the compensation protocols which again are all shared with with you and can be reviewed any time that you would like. Um up until um now no one's asked to have those discussed but they certainly can be. I think part the the biggest question I get is the difference between full-time and and part-time. Um

full-time staff go through that robust process. Um part-time staff, as you've seen in previous budget, um we really ask department heads to be the ones that if there's a if there's a problem with compensation, retention, hiring, um that they're bringing that forward and bringing that forward as a recommendation uh uh through their committee. So, we did that with uh crossing guards recently. um election workers um most recently and then uh parks and wreck was mentioned in their uh wreck programs and things but um typically um those don't go through um and there there's maybe updates coming down the pipeline but um haven't gone through the full review process that we have through NEOGV right now that's only a process that is going through um full-time employees. Um and then from a compensation perspective, um we try to be very clear on compensation. Um so from a what is going to be in the in the budget is an unbiased number and that's coming from Wisconsin CPIU. I don't that's not a number that any staff um make make up. We we grab that from the CPI table, drop it in as a starting point for for board conversation. Um, so another thing that that's been helpful is, you know, throughout the year it's kind of very transparent to employees that work for the village that this is about where CPI could end up uh when it comes time to the budget for and kind of anticipating for planning in the the next year. Um, so we've had some feedback from employees that they they like having at least a general baseline of of what is going to at least be considered in the cost of living adjustment. Um,

yeah. So, yeah, I think we've covered this in great detail. So, uh, I'd like to make a motion. I apologize. This is my first motion, so I want to get it right. Um, but I'll move that we um I'll move that staff proceed with the direction given um for the budget review committee to consider uh provider contracts in comparison with other communities and other providers and add meeting to the timeline if necessary. I apologize if that's really unclear. I'm

Yeah, it's a Can you please clarify that a bit further? Casey, I'm not fully understood that you help me out a little bit here. Um, so I I I'd like to move that we that I that we go ahead with the direction we've given to staff to for for this budget review committee, that they look into the issues with contracts and such that we've that we've told them directly. Um and no additional meeting. So the the discuss and consider is um an additional budget review committee meetings and provide staff direction on scope of items to be reviewed.

Yes. So so I move that we that we uh that we approve the the one additional meeting as prop or sorry is is it actually proposed in there currently or or I didn't see a timeline in the specific memo with the meetings. No worries. So, um the budget the draft budget timeline um that was approved had May 27th. Uh my recommendation is if we move forward with the meeting that that that gets changed to a future date. Um do you have a future date in mind? I would probably reach out to budget review um to see what availability is, but I would target sometime in June.

Okay. Then I then I move that we approve a timeline for a budget additional budget review meeting in June as the budget review committee is available with can you then clarify the the scope of the items to be reviewed by the budget review committee at that meeting

with the scope for that additional meeting to be as we've directed staff reviewing provider costs and collaboration I could try to summarize. Um I'm going to only summarize the things that have consensus that I believe or general consensus. So the first one being is kind of a fiscal year recap along with kind of a year-to-day update on bud budget progress professional service provider with comparison to internal slashin-house alternatives. Um, and then the one that I don't think has con um consensuses is is the staff salaries and compensation. So I guess needing some general consensus on that, but the two it the two big items were the recap of the prior year and then the

service provider service providers. So yes, my motion will be that the scope is the fiscal year recap and the professional service provider evaluations. Is there a second? I'd second. All right. And then Lisa, can you please read that so we have clarification for all voting members? I will try to summarize because it went back and forth, but it was motioned by Erin to direct staff to proceed with the fiscal year recap and the professional reviews and comparisons with an additional meeting in June to follow that scope. Seconded by Murphy. That's perfect. Thank you so much, Lisa. Other discussion, Chris. Other discussion, Chris.

I just want to reassure Casey that it gets easier. Uh Paula, you have your hand up. Sorry, Paula, you have your hand. I can wait. Sorry for my confusion. I just want to clarify that we are going to be adding in um looking at the salaries and compensation um with an additional meeting. That is was not my intention with this motion and as Lisa clarified that's that's outside of

you read it again for us please. Motion by Erlandson to direct staff to proceed with the fiscal year recap and professional reviews and comparisons at an additional meeting in June for the budget review committee. Paula, go ahead.

So, just a um two things, a point of clarification. I think the June meeting was actually supposed to be what was originally attended as May 27th. So, this really isn't adding an additional meeting. Um, so there's that. And then I do think that and and obviously I mean we can have it be its own agenda item, but I do think that the budget review committee is the appropriate place to talk about um compensation and um protocols for staff. So um I'd like to see that in there. Um and yeah, I I will vote no otherwise. I'm um in alignment or agreement with Paula. Um if we are not adding in salaries and compensations, my vote will be no.

Right. Go ahead. Uh so just a quick point of clarification on like the actual meetings. So the board can direct them to hold a meeting in June. The ordinances do allow them to schedule more meetings as needed. So I don't think we can say like you're only going to meet once or like on a certain meeting date. So, if the budget review committee does decide they need additional meeting dates, they theoretically could do that by a motion of the chair and two other members. All right, there's a motion in a second. We can do a roll call vote on this. Benzo, no. There's not enough transparency. Erinson, I Nelson, hi. Murphy, hi.

Severson, no. Stoa, yes. Via Vasencio, I. All right, motion passes. We're going to move on then to discuss and consider ordinance 10-20 26 bicycle E bike and e scooter. This originated I think as maybe in plan commission moved over to LEC, came up to the village board, went back over to legal for revisions, and now is back for consideration tonight. So, I'll let Rick kind of take.

Right. So, the chief and I have been working on this ordinance um since it was last year. I don't remember when that was, but basically tried to follow the intent of what was sort of originally presented to the board. What makes this type of ordinance slightly more complicated is um I don't want to get too deep into the weeds on preeemption with state law versus local law, but basically if the state has like highly regulated an area of the law, there's sort of this um analysis that goes into like what's pres what's preempted at the local level that we can and can't regulate. So actually e- scooters and ebikes is one of these items that is heavily regulated in statutes. So the ordinance in front of you for the most part mirrors a lot of things that are in state law. Some things that aren't necessarily touched on by state law. We're, you know, regulating on our own as far as like pedestrian paths and things like that. And um but generally it's going to follow the the same rules that are in state statute. The one item I do want to call out is the helmet requirement. So that is not found anywhere in state statute. Um there are communities that require helmets. Um but it's one of those things that is not crystal clear about whether it's preempted or not. So if somebody gets a citation for wear not wearing a helmet, somebody could theoretically make that argument that this is preempted by state law. So, I just don't want you to get the sense that everything in here is is um you know there's no like beyond a reasonable doubt that it's like all um I don't want to say enforceable but somebody could make arguments which in that case the result is the ticket gets dismissed. Um, so, uh, a couple of other things like we

did keep the parental liability in there that mirrors state statute. Again, um, some of the items as far as like um, reckless driving of or riding of these um, ebikes and e- scooters we we kind of stole from like the reckless driving statute, I guess. So, it's a it's a little bit um, trying to get a little creative. So, but otherwise, for the most part, we've tried to mirror this for what state statute allows. Comments or questions on the ordinance? Casey,

I think Chris, you're about to say it as well, but uh I would just like to suggest an amendment to the towing section. Uh I wrote something but I'm not a lawyer but um something along lines that trailers specifically designed for bicycles such as child seats um you know camper trailers or the little child camper trailers, bicycle cargo trailers, etc. are permitted to be towed by bicycles and electric bicycles but not by electric scooters. As you mentioned, I think at plan commission or something, Chris, you know, I think people with bikes and ebikes should be allowed to tow their kids behind them in those little tent things. I think, if I may. Yeah.

Um, it says trailer designed for a motor vehicle. So, I think a trailer designed for a bike is okay. That I think that was the intent that a trailer for like a a kid trailer or something like I saw that. But it's only that one parenthetical about trailer and you know then there's a number of other things like sled coaster and stuff that don't have that parenthetical. So I don't know if clarification would be helpful. Rick, you can.

Yeah. So maybe um I can add something like um either somewhere in the middle of that sentence or at the end just like um like a comma except for um like trailers that are designed to be towed by an electric bike or an electric scooter, something along those lines. So we could add something like that. We would just need an amendment or a motion to amend the ordinance or approving it with that amendment. Other comments or questions? Uh Renee, you have your hand up.

I do. Thank you. So, I just wanted to say that from when we first had these conversations about the ebikes that the ebike ordinance um is much more detailed and riskmanaged. So the proposed ordinance obviously is not considering banning ebikes or scooters because of safety concerns. Uh rather I see that this ordinance is looking at operating rules, age limits, roadway restrictions, helmet requirements, speed limitations, pedestrian protection, parking enforcement, and traffic law applicability. So, um I certainly support this thoughtful safety regulation and understand that um the board we have responsibility to evaluate potential risks associated uh with this new transportation use that's proposed within the village. Um so um I do believe that it's reasonable to ask why the village is willing to address safety concerns related to electrical ebikes and scooters uh throughout uh excuse me or through operational safeguards including restrictions enforcement mechanisms. While similar mitigation strategies were not meaningfully explored regarding the use of ATV access proposals brought forward in coordination with the township. So in my view both situations the core policy question is not whether or not risks exist but whether or not reasonable regulation can appropriately manage the risk while balancing mobility tourism. Um the township mentioned that they would like to use our businesses which would increase tax base and revenue. So as elected official, I feel like we should definitely strive to apply policy standards consistently and

evaluate all proposals using this objective criteria rather than differing levels of institutional receptiveness depending on the subject matter referring to the UTBS. I feel like the v the village um appears willing to regulate and manage risk for ebikes and scooters through operational safeguards, but was unwilling to seriously explore whether or not comparable safeguards could mitigate concerns regarding limited UTV access. I have a question for Chief Gary.

Yeah, go ahead, Heidi.

Um, about enforcement and I see a lot of kids that are like middle school age in my neighborhood driving around like they have a motorcycle. Um, and I think that this provides that guidance on where they should be operating. Um, so is are you expecting to start some educational like now that you have an ordinance to fall back on some educational pieces for some of those kids you see out there or that it's also I think at least in sixth grade they have a biking unit that started that the SRO can do some outreach to preemptively. I I guess I'm just wondering how you envision this being enforced out in the community. So yes, uh once this ordinance is passed, uh officer Lee is already aware to bring it forward at the school level, uh to help with the education component for the majority of the riders of sud vehicles. Um and we will continue that in the the next school year. Also, uh, in addition to our officers are out trying to educate as they encounter the individuals if they're, uh, doing anything that's, uh, inaccurate or unsafe.

Yeah, I saw some kids talking with an officer, I'm sure, talking about an unsafe situation. I think it was over last weekend or maybe the one before. So, um, I really appreciate that and I think that that's an important part. you I don't even know that citations are going to you know just talking with an officer about what's acceptable I would hope would be a good start for a lot of the a lot of the kids yes we definitely especially because this target range is the adolescence unlike adults um so it's educating the adolescence and also educating their parents

and I think that I know that you and your staff put a lot of looked at a lot of different ordinances and they came up through looked at it through LEC and um really important to you know right now there are no restrictions in Cottage Grove and so to put some um rules and reminders to to everyone out there. It not only for their safety but for the pedestrians that are walking and they're coming up behind them and for the cars and just overall community safety. It's really important to have kind of these standards. Um so really appreciate the work that you've all done Casey. Um I uh would like to move uh approval of the ordinance 102026 regarding bicycles, ebikes, and e- scooters with uh the amendment suggested to section it 2714G on towing to allow for uh to allow for towing designed for bicycles. If that's clear enough for you, Rick.

Second. Motion by Erland Sentin, second by Stella. Any other discussion on this? I have a question a question. I don't know that it was um fully addressed. Is that um if the 45 mph mini bikes are ridden by 12y olds, will they be taken off the road? Is that a question for legal or for um Chief Gary?

Uh whoever can answer. So, it's on the record and will be formally addressed because obviously there's a great deal of hypocrisy going on with the UTVs restricting them at 25 miles an hour um with a great deal of safety precautions. So, I'd like an explanation and clarification, please.

So, the uh the definition of electric bicycle like basically by state law the they're designed to go up to 28 miles per hour. Um, so they're really limited to where um, they can go. Um, and I believe we regulate they can't go on certain streets if the speed limit is um, above a certain threshold. So um, if they are faster than 28 miles per hour, it would no longer qualify as an electric bicycle. I'm guessing that would be in the motorcycle territory, but um, that's that would be my understanding. So, can you please address my question of what will happen then? I mean, is the are their bikes going to be taken away? Will they be taken off the road?

Chief Gary, can you talk a little bit about enforcements? Enforcement action for offhighway motorcycles will remain the same as they have always been. They won't be permitted. Yes, they will be issued a citation. Um, will they be confiscated? No. will be allowed to uh remove their bike legally uh by having somebody pick it up or make arrangements. There is a motion. Thank you for clarifying. Um JP, additional discussion.

Yeah, quick question on um operation on roadways part four. It says on oneway roads the user may ride as near as practable within to within 5 ft of the left hand curb or edge of the roadway yet on three right above it where a two-way public highway shall ride as near as practical so shall ride as near as practical to the right side. Is there a reason why we went with May for one way? I do believe because it's statutoily uh allowed on a one-way you can ride either right side or left curb versus on a two-way you have to be on the right side curb. Yeah, I believe that these are basically following what's in state statute as far as like, you know, the the one way is more of like a writing suggestion. Um I guess but um yeah, these are basically following what's in state code.

Thanks for clarifying that. All right, we have a motion in a second. We'll do a roll call vote. Benzo, no. due to the hypocrisy surrounding the eight UTVs. Erinson, I Kell Nelson, I Murphy, hi. Severson, hi. Stowa, yes. Via Vasencio, I motion passes. Let's move on to new business. We have discuss and consider resolution 2026-10 um transportation. So, this was a coordinated effort with our partners at the League of Municipalities. you see that attachment in um the agenda.

So the intent is then to send it to our representatives to communicate our yes needs. I would make a motion then to approve resolution 2026-10 regarding transportation. I'll second. All right. Motion by Murphy, second by Erinson. Any other discussion on this resolution? All those in favor? I I opposed.

Abstain. Motion carries. Um review the missions, the vill's mission, vision, values, and considering um affirming or amending. Um I'll turn this one over to Eningga. And the current um MMV is attached in the in the agenda for tonight.

Yes, it is. Um so every year around this time the village board takes the time to review the mission vision and values that they've established. Uh village staff had an opportunity to provide comments on the mission vision and values through a survey and about a quarter of staff responded to it. Um overall the theme to me was was positive. Um there were some suggestions for wording changes. Um for the mission there was some um some comments about the wording distinctive community charm and um suggestions on maybe looking at that wording a little bit. Um for the vision there were some comments about selecting a different word other than dynamic. Um one person suggested thriving, vibrant or connected. And then um feedback on the values was overall positive. One comment just suggested that having uh listen more that's listed under integrity be changed to active listening. So those are the the summary of the comments from staff comments or questions from board members. I'll say I I agree there could be some a little language changes not quite as many as two years ago. Um but I would suggest um removing distinctive and charm and just enhancing our community period um with the mission. Um, I love the word connected in the vision instead of dynamic. Um, and I do agree that active listening um is an appropriate change in the values, but otherwise I think um my opinions are that they're really great and I know that staff take them very seriously and they really use them to ground um the work that they do and I appreciate that. Apolla.

Yeah, I I I would agree. Um I just want to call out um two things. um that I I believe are important. Um one is honor diversity. Um that is under respect. Um I think we um need to make sure that that diversity is not just racial racial or gender diversity but also includes political diversity, diversity of thought. Um so I just want to call that out. And then I also want to call out under innovation um where it talks about asking the tough questions and making tough decisions and having the difficult conversation. Um, this is something that I've done throughout the last year is ask a lot of questions and I've been criticized for asking those questions and I think if we are going to keep this in our mission, vision and values that we need to all as a board um you know make sure that that is being I guess honored equally among us all that you know if if Heidi's asking questions and and maybe I don't see the need, but to give her the space and the grace to do that. That's what we're called to do as elected officials. So, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page with that because I've not really experienced that throughout the last year.

So, is your um under respect? So, honor diversity of all types. That would be a good addition. Yes. think if you have if you have that. Um and then is there are there is there language you want to add to under that um under celebration or under innovation? I mean no I don't believe that there needs to be a wording change. I guess I'm you know more from a um just calling it out and making sure that that's the value that we're living by is is really I think the wording is fine.

Other comments. So just quick reviewing, I have dynamic change to connected just as a track change. We can go back and change that as well, Cindy. That's what I heard from you. And then under respect, honor diversity of all types. Any other changes at this point that the board is considering that I can add in? I like the active listening. Oh, yeah. And then I had some minor tweaks to the mission um to remove distinctive and charm and just enhancing our community. period. I have other changes, but we don't have to go there. Heidi,

um I think it's important to revisit and recommmit to these things every year. So, I'm glad that we have the opportunity to review these together and um yes. So you know so then yeah it starts at the top us at village board and um and through our entire staff which I think um so it's important to for us here to to reaffirm these commitments. So I'm glad that we bring this forward. Thank you. Any other edits make a motion? I

your turn JP go ahead. Okay. Uh I I move to approve the mission vision and values with the uh updates that uh have been stated by Eningga and um so far. Okay. Motion by JP. I'll second. Second by Erinson. Any other discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I I I

opposed abstain. Motion carries. All right. We have discuss and consider creating and adopting a village board member handbook. Um so there's a memo by um me and Heidi. And then there's um our elected official orientation handbook um that has already been um used and our newest members received during their orientation. And then there's um a River Falls and a Belleview um handbooks that just are a little bit more robust. and we thought we could pull from that and I think really our um if there's interest from the majority of the board to move forward with this is to um give staff direction to create a draft of a handbook um probably come back for another meeting so that we can provide Edison guidance and then um at a future meeting um consider a final draft.

Yeah, go ahead. Um yeah, as a new board member I think this is an excellent idea. Um staff have been you know very helpful and very flexible in you know doing orientations in in meetings and things like that. Um and but uh have also having you know in addition to that having this comprehensive document um would would be really great. You know learning styles vary not everybody you know future board members and so on will absorb everything from from in person. And so I think um you know formalizing this because they're not they're not rules or regulations, they're guidelines. They're to help you know us as trustees do our job. And I think that's that's a great idea. So yes, Renee, go ahead.

Thank you. Um yes, I went through both of the handbooks and uh the current village handbook. So, um I have some notes and comments that I'd like to um share is that um um per the direction that has been proposed to staff, I feel like there's an important sentence um please consider directing staff to update the elected official orientation handbook. Um so this to me means that administrative administration and staff would draft the government handbook govern which governs the elected officials. So to me this bears a very significant structural issue because the handbook defines trustee behavior, governance expectations, board staff boundaries, communication norms and institutional culture. yet the people drafting it is the administrator, department heads, administrative staff or individuals affected by the board oversight. So, uh to me this creates a an inherent institutional interest concern and the reference handbooks are not neutral examples. The memo prevent the proposed memo presents that the Belleview and River Falls handbook are ordinary examples. So I'll go into further detail in just a moment, but both of them heavily reinforce administrative authority, policy versus operation, separation, institutional cohesion, indifference, and difference uh to professional staff structures. So the memo does not acknowledge alternative governance philosophies, trustee oversight protections or models emphasizing aggressive transparency and accountability. So the examples selected already shaped the direction of the

proposed governance framework. This this is not checks and balances. This to me appears to be censorship and control. Um the timeline to me is quite concerning as well. Um this is one of the biggest process flaws in government. The proposed uh process schedule is May 19th through the 28th for a draft. uh June 1st review, June 18th final approval. This is an incredibly fast recommendation for government framework development um along with elected official standards, procedural expectations, and board conduct policies, especially given that there are political tensions, governance implications, and the potential for long-term impact. A handbook shaping elected governance should ideally involve substantial trustee input, public transparency, legal review, governance best practice discussion and careful deliberation. So this timeline appears to be optimized for efficiency, not deep governance discussion. And the shared expectations can also become a majority control expectation. The memo says that the handbook would quote set shared expectations for how we work together and govern together unquote. This sounds collaborative, but in politically divided boards, shared expectations can evolve into majority defined behavioral norms, conformity pressure, or informal discipline mechanisms against dissenters, especially when paired with civility language. support official board actions and respect quote unquote administration provisions. The transparency that's mentioned but oversight is not mentioned. So notice that the memo repeatedly references

transparency procedures role expectations but it does not mention trustee in independence. Nor does it mention fiduciary fiduciary scrutiny, minority viewpoints, investigative authority, taxpayer oversight, or challenging administrative recommendations. This me this omission to me is quite revealing. The government's philosophy appears appears to be primarily order oriented, structure oriented, and administrative oriented, not oversight oriented. The memo to me quietly expands institutional and governance authority. The current handbook is described as it described as quote unquote a helpful reference and introduction. The proposal would transform it into a broader more comprehensive handbook reviewed annually. This is a major escalation. This moves fromformational onboarding to an evolving governance framework potentially shaping

I'm sorry Rene point of you just let her finish sorry go on go ahead sorry

yes that is very that's a very different institutional function um annual review can become a political tool uh this is this line's important because quote unquote revise the handbook with village mission values vision each year. The annual revision sounds harmless, but it creates an ongoing mechanism for governance rule, evolution, continual refinement of behavioral expectations and opportunities for future additions. In contentional political environments, government documents can gradually accumulate, becoming more restrictive norms, more behavioral expectations, and more pressure for institutional conformity. Number eight, the memo positions governance tension as a procedural problem. So the underlying implication is governance conflict exists because expectations are unclear. But sometimes conflict exists because legitimate oversight, disagreements exist, policy differences exist, or trustees are challenging institutional power. A handbook cannot solve political disagreements. Just as you mentioned, Casey, it's a guide. It's a guideline or a framework. And government documents become problematic when they subtly redefine vigorous oversight as problematic behavior. And an important structural concern that I have is that the memo is co-authored by the village president and another trustee which is um any of our any of us can can practice this but the proposal really states um um placing staff in charge of drafting. So this really creates a coalition structure of executive leadership aligned trustees and administration. Meanwhile, dissenting trustees may

become reactive participants rather than equal architects of the government. Um, this to me is a dynamic that is uh politically important. So, I am done. Paula, you have your hand up. Uh, did you want to take Casey's point of information inquiry first? Sure. Sorry. I Or go ahead, Casey.

I mean, as there can still be discussion after it. Um, I move uh approval of or I'm I'm I move approval of the direction to staff per this memo to update the elected official orientation handbook um with the timeline as presented where the village board can review the drafts and make changes. There's a motion by Erinson. I'll second by Murphy. All right, continuing discussion. Go ahead, Paula.

Yeah, I guess I thought you had a point of information inquiry, otherwise I would have gone first, but that's fine. Um, so I think my my challenge, I'll lower my hand here. My challenge with this is in essence, um, the memo is tasking staff who are accountable to us to write our code of conduct in our handbook. And I think, you know, I look at that from an employer employee perspective and it's it's um it's counterintuitive. Um you know, in my workplace, I wouldn't have our executive team wouldn't ask me to write their code of conduct, right? Because I'm subordinate to them. So, I think there's a big mismatch with doing that. Um, however, I do think there's a lot of value in um the people who have hired us, which is the voters, the residents, to provide input to us as to what any sort of code of um conduct might look like. And we've already had one resident email us information and some feedback. So, I guess what I would like to see um is that we as a board um write these and solicit the input of the residents we serve. um and and do it workshop style like we did last year when we were trying to come to consensus on the police station. Um where we did it workshop style where each of the trustees kind of brought their thoughts and their information and their questions and we were each allowed to present. Um this is a lot more collaborative. Um, and then also again allowing citizens to have feedback because really part of this um, code of conduct and for instance the things that the citizen emailed us really are are going to shape how we interact with our residents. And so my preference would be for us as a board to tackle this um, and to define those roles and

responsibilities. I agree that a handbook really could help new trustees. Um, it also can help clarify those roles, but I think it needs to be done by us and the people who elected us. Go ahead, Heidi.

Thanks. I think um there are parts that of course the code of conduct and such that um the board can be more heavily involved in, but a lot of these sections fall back on state statutes. Um ethics, which is, you know, also defined in state statutes. Um, and so it's open meetings. Um, I mean there's a lot in a handbook that not just new trustees but you know trustees that have been around for a while. Um, how you know that they would want to fall back on. So, I think there's a good bulk of this that, you know, staff and legal, you know, can can weigh in on and our staff being experts in that that kind of um how like what laws we have to operate under and what our existing ordinances are for various committees and how to get things on an agenda. all these things that are already defined in our ordinances that can be placed kind of together in the one document where you know maybe certain sections will have more um oversight on creating and you know kind of stemming off the presentation from last meeting which is kind of where this started you know that we have this this shared governance um and understanding so

we we're all operating that's already in our village handbook. That's I mean all of all of what you just mentioned is already in so why do we need

So I think we're just looking to create a little bit more uh robust of a of a handbook um compared to what we have. We noticed that other communities had um some additional guidelines um that we thought were a good thing for this board to consider. Um, and I think the idea was that we can give staff direction, which is the part of the job of this board, and then it comes back at the next meeting so that there can be public comment and we can give additional feedback to staff or we can make our own edits or we can bring additional ideas forward and then it gets incorporated into another draft and then that's what we would approve. So, it's not just approving something at the next meeting that staff writes. It's a collaborative effort, but it falls within the guidelines and it's a little bit efficient too. JP,

as someone who just went through the orientation process, um, in comparing what's in the handbook to all the other presentations, uh, we've had and other documents that sent with to us, it would be very helpful to have it all in one centralized document, one centralized place that can be referenced instead of me having done kind of dig through I mean, what case we've had like eight different documents sent to us um, that build upon some of the basic elements ments are here in this handbook. And so I really do appreciate the idea of um taking it a little bit further to go in depth to have given staff the direction to do the orientation that they already do but put it more in one document that we can reference not only during orientation but throughout our terms here.

There is a motion and a second. Um any other discussion on this? Might as well do a roll call vote. Benzo, no. Because I definitely while I support ethics and professionalism and civility, um any government's governance framework really must equally protect independent oversight role of elected trustees. And this includes the ability uh to question administration and scrutinize and not have um administration and department heads create a handbook. So no Erinson I Nelson I Murphy I

Severson no Stowa I via Vasencio I motion passes. Uh we are going to move on to discuss and consider 2027-2036 capital prioritization guidelines and those guidelines are outlined in the PDF and I will they can rock paper scissors. Matt versus Cameron.

Yeah, I I can take a initial swing at this. So, um I guess I just want to put this out as this is an agenda item for tonight um to allow kind of some discussion if this ends up getting uh you know pushed to the next meeting to allow some additional feedback. That's it doesn't affect our budget timeline at all. Um, so just every year, you know, just wanting to remind everybody this is what our current structure is in place that kind of identifies monies that are that we set aside in the budget specifically for vehicles and equipment for road maintenance and what and a third bucket which is our quote unquote major projects. Um so through the prioritization process um which the board will take a look at um ranking in July what will happen is or sorry not July end of June um you will be asked to look at the the major bucket um for for projects and grade them based off of available resources. Um so typically what this looks like in in my experience um you know working with the boards is originally we come together with a financial management plan where the tax even even following these parameters high level guidelines a tax impact that is higher than what has traditionally been um acceptable or or politically acceptable for a a levy. And so what this then happens as the process goes is we continue to refine and take projects out until we kind of get to that final budget document. Um so it's not uncommon through this process um to have, you know, a couple pro initially, you know, we may have 30 to 40 projects by the but by the time we get to the end over that 10-year period, we might only end up having um eight or eight to 10.

Um a and so what is going to look like different from prior years is we've now finished or the process on the police station. So we need to understand um and that has been accounted for in these in these debt figures in here. We need to understand that um we had a major project and now we're going to have several years where there's not going to be as many large projects included in the plan um in order to make sure that our debt capacity um stays within a reasonable tax impact. Um I've gotten um some feedback on here um before this meeting um there was some desire to increase the amount of um dollars available for road maintenance um and certainly is um something definitely we we can explore here. Um so what we kind of as we went through the process last year um had established instead of doing road maintenance annually kind of combining the two years of estimated um of the estimated $1 million to do $2 million large chunk projects to get a better uh value on um each each project. So um if we do bigger chunk projects again we we continue to get more efficiency there. So what we're asking for the board to eventually consider is obviously approving uh capital prioritization process plan um and just understanding that um the prioritization plan will come back following or closely aligning what these plans are. So, this really sets up really what what is the board's expectation is of us for a plan that we

bring back based off of prioritized projects. Um, so that being said, I want the board to have plenty of time to review this document to provide feedback. So, if the board's not comfortable with a formally approving this document today, like I said before, approving this at the next meeting would not not cause any issues or defer anything in our budget timeline. I think I've gone back and forth on whether I like the prioritization and the categories or not, but going through it the last couple of years, I think it there's a lot of value in it. I think we're a unique community and that we do it every year. We take it really seriously. Um, and it definitely helps create the financial management plan. Um, so while I would probably make a lot of changes, I think it I think it does actually work really well. Um, did you want feedback on the $2 million earmarked tonight?

The board can decide what they're willing to or wanting to move forward tonight. I would say um wanted obviously approved at some point either today or next meeting, but definitely factoring in that this is not tied to a tax impact yet. And so this is just that baseline. So we're not saying, "Oh, we must take out $4 million next year." No, it's it's just to get over a 10-year course. How do we layer projects in to make sure that we're not um un having unintended consequences of having our bond rating suffer because we're overloading

projects. And I think Kyla and her team have done a good job of categorizing our roads and sidewalks and knowing what needs to be done in what year. Um, and if if her team feels that the two million, I think the change we made of combining the years and doing more bang for your buck um has is working out to our advantage, too. So, I I like the system that we have. And one of those things where we have a benefit, too, is obviously when we do a construction progress, we have to do mailings. So, so doing a bigger project in one year instead of doing smaller projects in consecutive years helps mitigate kind of that administrative overhead as well. Heidi,

I guess I'd add that the FM or the pre FMP meeting that we'd have with budget review committee that kind of goes over where we're at. That would be a good time to like check in to advise the board like is this $2 million and $2 million for vehicles like is that adequate or what any adjustments that maybe would be made? might be an interesting outcome from that meeting.

Yeah, one of the things that is challenging is we have obviously a really large, you know, $2.3 million ladder truck that's coming in 2028. Um, so over the last couple of years, I've tried to be less than a million dollars to kind of in essence save up capacity. Um, so that's one of those things that we again could explain to the budget review party. Part part of the process and why we're not going to be or try not to be at that full million is we're trying to make sure that over that 10 year we're averaging about that 1 million, not having um, you know, going over it one year and saying who cares.

Any other discussion on this? Come on. Nothing. So, I guess if you want to make a decision on that tonight, you can. Otherwise, we can we can have it on next agenda item to allow for any additional feedback. Paula, sorry. I I appreciate that, Cameron. That would be my thought is to have some additional time to provide feedback. Paula, go ahead.

I would agree. Um, you know, I think, you know, where I'm I like the process. I like the grading. Um, where I'm getting a little bit hung up is on this $2 million a year earmark um or benchmark or whatever we want to call it. So, I think maybe some conversation and and uh you know um Cameron, if I could sit down with you, maybe ask you some questions about that, I think that would be helpful.

Happy to. comments or so we're going to postpone until next meeting. JP, go ahead. Sorry, I just want to make check my understanding here, Cameron. So, the 2 million is just more so as what you would bring forward within that realm. It's just as a starting point for the discussion um regarding the plan. It's not what we're set in stone. We can always adjust that as we go forward as part of the budget process.

Yep. And to be very clear, it's 40 million over the course of 10 years. So, it's two mill So, $1 million for vehicles, $1 million for streets, and $2 million for major projects. major projects are are intersections, um reconstructions where we're actually going down taking out the water and sewer means um traffic circles if you want to say call it that. Um so so those are the kind of so so when we're talking about $40 million over the course of 10 years, that's that's a significant amount of of infrastructure and projects. Um, so the the the rationale behind the million dollars in vehicles and million dollars uh in in equipment was it was a starting place to start to catch up on some maintenance to be a little bit more aggressive to kind of eventually establish and and kind of like as we're talking about data driven. Is there a paser rating that we want to be at? Do we want the the median or average of our roads to be a seven, six or a seven? Okay. Well, how many miles a year do we have to get there? Okay. And then what is the cost per linear square foot of that that pavement? That's really the goal, but just trying to get a an amount that can be readably kind of assumed that that that bucket's going to be there to be able to successfully plan over 10 years because even as Kyla's doing this, you know, and she's went through the first process of doing the pacer ratings, some of those updated us and and not all roads deteriorate at the same rate. So going from an every other year structure, um we want to make sure that we have enough time to plan and not only plan to assume we have the money. So a lot of there's there's other grants and other opportunities that if we can count on funding being there, we can apply for grant fundings or other matching opportunities that are out there. Um and we can demonstrate to those to the state and other granting

agencies that this is our process and there is going to be funding available.

Okay. Thank you Cameron. I really do appreciate you clarifying that. Um as such because this is just a guiding document um I will be comfortable making the motion to approve uh this uh document with the um increase in that was that uh you and Kylo have kind of asked for in there. Um I'll Okay. Is there a second? Just clarify your motion JP. So that is in there. So that would be as presented.

The $500,000 additional per year would not be in there. So that would be increasing the that would be increasing it from 4 million a year to 4.5. Um happy to provide a happy to provide a plan that is there. Just knowing where we've been with estimated tax impact within the $4 million a year, I would be I don't think there's going to be a tolerable plan from a tax perspective to come back with a with a plan that has that much additional capacity in there. I think there's opportunities where given there's some feedback where if we find efficiency, we can certainly come to the board and say, "Hey, this this plan might be a little front-loaded because these subdivisions were all built at the same time and they're all coming up." Or Commerce Park is a large project and we need to do pulverization. So, it just makes more sense for us to even maybe do a three-year plan, but we're going to need a little bit more. Um, so I think for now until until we've kind of gone through the process with the updated Paser ratings, maybe then we can come back and ask for more. But I just don't think there's going to be a acceptable tax impact at the additional levy capacity. And hope maybe I'm surprised. Maybe I come back with a financial management plan and it's in way better tax impact.

Thank you Cameron. With that clarification, I will second your motion, JP. All right, there's a motion and a second. Will you read it and we can do a roll call vote? Motion to approve the 2027 20 to 2036 uh capital prioritization guidelines with an increase of 4 million a year. Did I capture that correctly? I if you're if the intent is to not change the dollar amounts, it should be as presented. As presented? No, my intent is to include the increase. So that would be so $4.5 million your total. Okay.

Uh so this would be in the survey and then presenting the FMP. I guess I'm just trying to wrap my head around how this would change what our rankings are or like how not at all

because the the $500,000 of additional funding would go towards pulverization projects which this year um because we just did the Paser ratings and it was I was back there. Um our our thought was to kind of give a public works committee a preliminary review of that um because we have not done that in the past. It's kind of ended up in the prioritization process to allow some additional feedback. Um so the only projects that are getting rated are the major construction progress projects. Um,

and so within our process then like we can still send questions to you about what these different amounts mean. the budget review committee would still analyze, you know, where our debt is, where we're going with FMP and then up to the board on what is like what is the acceptable number that we're comfortable

use. So, you know, in my view, there's no need to to do it now. You can have it be an all-encompassing moratorum and just if the right circumstances come up, you could relieve him of the of the moratorum. Um, is there is there a mechanism to do a moratorium for like a principal land use but leave it open for like an accessory land use so that that would be a smaller scale quote unquote data center but still um moratorium on the principal land use so that there's not a large scale moratorum or

I just finished I I just finished one for another community had a similar thought as that what they ended up doing is in the moratorum itself exempting any data centers of less than I want to say 20,000 square feet. So we could certainly draft the moratorum to uh you know include a a sort of dimminimous exception if it was below x number of square feet that the moratorum would not apply. Go ahead.

I mean I guess I'd rather just do a blanket to start with and then we can make exceptions if we need to. Yeah, sounds good to me. Um Paula, go ahead. J. Yeah, I was going to suggest that we do an all-encompassing um because the inquiry that we've had um would have tied it to um a a business park um and other uses. So, I think really it needs to be very broad and factor all those things in.

And then I guess the other um question for uh is for the board. Um 12 months to 18 months was kind of the range we had given. I fall more on the 18-month end knowing that the work of the Dayne County Advisory Committee um is probably going to be extended and take an additional it's going to take a year from now most likely to come up with guidelines which would then give us additional time to review, make changes, go through all of our processes. So 18 months probably makes a little bit more sense. Um I don't know if there were there's nodding heads in this. I would agree, Cindy. Okay. Yeah, 18 months.

All right. Yeah, I think 18 months makes sense. But can you can Mr. Cole just um explain to us a little bit? You said something about relieving the moratorum. So what's the purpose of having a moratorum if there's that relief trigger or can you say more about that please?

Sure. So so the moratorum would be just like any ordinance that the village board would pass. You would have the authority to amend that at any time if you thought it was in the public interest. So you could you could lift the moratorum completely. You could lift it for certain areas. You could lift it for certain uh uh you know smaller data centers. That's sort of up to the discretion of the board. Um, but I guess my point was maybe at this point in time pass an an all-encompassing moratorum because you're your hands are not necessarily tied. If something came up that that you were to consider, you were you'd always be free to lift the moratorum either partially or completely to address that.

Thank you. All right, Casey. Yeah. So piggybacking on to that um so would would any the only scenario I'm I'm imagining is like if it's some other sort of business but they say hey the data center in our building is you know we want to make sure that that's permitted. Um, so would the the mechanism that we'd have to to wave it like would we just be able to issue them something like a conditional use permit or would we have to actually amend the ordinance that put the moratorium in in the first place?

You could do it either way. The way I've been drafting them is to define a data center in such a way that it is the principal use of the the the structure. so as to exclude um sort of IT computerized things that are secondary to uh the principal business operations.

Okay. Yeah, that that makes sense. Yeah. As long as there's as long as both the language initially for the blanket one is covers that situation and we can, you know, issue a permit if we really needed to. Yeah, I'm comfortable with that sort of thing. Okay. So, we do have a motion and a second for a 18month direction for an 18-month um moratorum. Okay. Any other discussion otherwise? Yeah, we'll do a roll call for fun. Benzo, I Erington. Hi, Kell Nelson. Hi,

Murphy. I Severson. I Stowa. Yes. Via Vasencio. I. All right. Motion passes. Thank you for being here, Bill. I know you're at multiple meetings tonight. Thank you. Have a good night, everybody. All right. Discuss and consider establishing a building permit waiver period for significant storm events. Point of order. Do we need to get Rick back in? Oh, Rick, come on back. Okay,

I'll I'll take that one, Matt.

Yep. Um, so we've noticed when there's following significant storm events, especially hail, and we um end up inevitably with an influx of additional um building permits for re- roofs and things like that, um it's obviously not a a notable revenue generator for us. we essentially break even on that sort of thing. Um, and when we're it is important for property records and it's a it's a difficult thing to communicate because it looks like it's a it's a bad PR look for the for the village. So, um staff is proposing that the board considers a um allowing the village president to give um the village president authority to declare a waiver period following a a significant storm event. Um and uh we'd coordinate, you know, an appropriate time frame for that. Maybe um a couple months or something like that following a storm event where fees would be waved for for relatively minor permits like re- roofs and um maybe siding damage and things like that.

Questions or comments? Casey. Um, I guess Matt, I just wanted to clarify that this this sort of perid period would only be waving the fees. You know, contractors still need to meet all other sort of permit requirements like lensure, bonding, insurance, etc. Yes. We still want to make sure all all that's being followed and that the permits are being taken out. We don't want to Yeah. Okay. Exactly. Yeah. as long and this would really incentivize that also happening and that um and and also we can

communicate and remind people without it also it serves the village a benefit from not having it be a um it appear badly. Yeah. As long as as long as we're still you know keeping all all other requirements um because I know obviously with all these recent storms we've had a lot of you know fly by night contractors and things like that and residents have been concerned. So, as long as those are maintained, that's fine. Any other comments?

I just want to make sure that the board is clear. Um, so while this waiver does not So, we would no longer collect a fee for this. Obviously, each permit that's pulled for this, we would still get charged for, but when when benefiting the cost benefit on this to incentivize uh community members to be getting permits and making sure that they're not getting taken advantage of um outweigh the minor basically administrative permit for this. So there is a cost, but like we said before, this is this is not critical to the village budget by any any mean.

Um I'll make a motion to approve establishing a building permit waiver period following significant storm events. I'll second. Second. Oh, Paul Severson second. Erinson with the motion. Severson with the second. Any other discussion? You want to do a roll call? Just get in the habit. Sure. Benzo

I Erinson I Kell Nelson I Murphy I'll abstain Severson I Stowa yes via Vasencio I motion carries right we have discussed and consider publishing meeting minutes in the local newspaper Casey and Heidi with the memo Mo.

Um, so this came up uh a number of months ago and at the time I was not in favor of taking the minutes out of the newspaper. It's um a venue that people have, you know, people have historically gone to this and I know that technology has changed but some people do not have access to technology. um changing technology and I believe that we should have the minutes available um in as many outlets as practicable and um while this is you know of course incurring an additional cost um I don't believe that the cost outweighs the benefit of having this open and transparent additional way that people can access information about their local government. So, um, that's why I worked with Casey to propose this. So, Casey, I don't know if you want to add something.

Yeah, just, you know, same sort of thing. Um, because I know it was mentioned that there uh the through a records request, you know, that there were no requests directly received by the village um to to have these added back in. Um, but the the kinds of folks who uh, as you said, Heidi, don't have internet access already and relied on these in the newspaper also aren't very likely to email in and and request this sort of thing. Um, I I've I've directly spoken with a number of residents um, especially seniors who did say that they that they utilize this that they relied on it. Um and as was said, you know, there is a cost for this. Um but it's in proportion to, you know, the rest of our expenditures and budget, it's very very minor, $2 or $3,000 a year. Um and we've already, you know, dropped that cost. Uh Lisa had reduced it in 2022 by submitting, you know, more condensed version of the minutes. Um, and so I think that's a worthwhile cost, you know, to to make that accessible to everyone, not just people who have internet access or have the ability to come into Village Hall and get the minutes physically.

Paula, um, just first a clarifying question for Heidi and Casey. Um, in your memo, you said a number of constit constituents have expressed concern on their accessibility. Can you tell us how many and how you were contacted? That portion um was more from Casey's experience. Um you know, I didn't have anyone um on their accessibility contact me directly, but Casey had some experience with them.

Yeah. So, um the when these were removed was January the January 20th meeting. Um, you know, it was over the course of campaign time. So, this is people I was talking to outdoors and so on. Um, and I had about 10 12 people who who mentioned that they think it is a good idea. And I had uh four residents specifically who when they when they learned that it had been removed at the January meeting said, "I use that. I would like that back." Something to that effect.

Okay. Thank you for that clarification. Um I think you know it we obviously voted to take these away because there's only like 200 subscribers in the town in the village. Um and so it it didn't make financial sense. And I guess you know my preference would be I'd be willing to donate my trustee stipen to mail copies of minutes for the people who don't have computer accessibility. Um, in that regard, I I think we made a sound decision in January and I stick by that other comments. Well, are you making a motion?

Um, is there a motion on the floor? I'm sorry. Discussing. So, is there other if you were if you were going to Sorry for any confusion. No, I'm just trying to clarify. Oh, yeah. I mean, I can I mean, I can move that I'll donate my stipen to cover the cost of mailing residents who don't have access to a computer. I would second the motion because I I feel like it's an unnecessary expense. All right. There's a motion and a second. Any discussion on the motion as presented?

Um, well, first just to clarify, regardless of whether that mo this motion passes or fails, we would still be discussing the the existing one. Correct. This is the current motion for discussion. Rick, you want to So, yeah. So, it does it depends on what the action is. So, if if the motion passes, um I mean, typically there's no further like discussion or motions that follow it. So, you'd want to have your motion be all-encompassing of what the action is. If it fails, then I think there's opportunity for more or for follow-up main motions or primary motions. Great. Is there any other comments or discussion on the motion as presented?

Yes, I I I want to I apologize for my confusion. So, the motion on the floor is that uh Paula will donate her village stipen to those who do not have email access. Is that correct? No. Is that the correct motion? Do you want to read the motion, please? Motion by Saver to talk to cover the cost of mailing to people that do not have computers is what I captured.

All right, we'll do a roll call vote on this motion. Or Heidi, did you want

I just had further Yeah. discussion point. The intent of my memo is um publishing the minutes. Again, I reiterate it was in the memo signals that we're open and transparent by placing official records and public business in front of residents without requiring them to seek out that information. And I think that that's an important part of um transparency in government and ensuring that um the information and the the public records are available to residents and it doesn't this the extra step of contacting village hall and asking them to be mailed and that that's creating additional burden on residents to find that public information or having a internet accessibility or a computer or a smartphone. Um, those are all requirements to access the information, the official records of their local government and I don't think that that should be a barrier for people to um access those records. So, that's why um I propose this and um yeah,

Casey.

Yeah. And echoing as you said, Heidi, um I think having having it as a mailing system is is um again creates this this extra hurdle for it if they're just in the paper that's available to anyone. They don't have to go through and requesting them. I I also don't know that that would cost any less than than doing this um than than I don't know that mailing would cost any less than publishing in the paper. I think they would be comparable or even that mailing would would cost more because we'd have to find out who wants it. We'd have to update that sort of thing frequently. So, um yeah, I don't I don't agree with that sort of thing. I think it's it's cheaper and more efficient to do it with publishing minutes. I just wanted to offer a point of information too is that um I had reached out to the leader back in when I had worked with trusty doll on this in January. Um and they provided me with the numbers for um male, web, and single copy of who receives the leader independent and it was 2283 was the number that they gave me.

Yeah. And they they I looked at that as well back from January and they they broke it down for the zip code as well and it was it was about 200 people as as been mentioned a couple times here. So with the cost, you know, for the the past three years since we since uh Lisa adjusted it, it's works out to about $10 per per resident who's getting this. I think that's that's pretty reasonable to ensure accessibility. $10 per person. If I may just um since I made the motion um I absolutely 100% support transparency and um that's why I've offered my to give up my stipen um for this effort. Um you know please remember too that people have to buy the newspaper. So I mean people are already paying a cost and you know I'm offering an alternative that I'll pay the cost for right in essence. So, um, that's why I suggested it. So,

all right. There's a motion and a second on the So, this original motion. Can you do a roll call vote, please, Benzo? So, because of I am sorry. Because of the discussion, the motion on the floor is as presented by Murphy and um and Erinson. Is that the current motion? No. The motion is from Severson to cover the cost of mailing to the people that do not have computers. Seconded by yourself. Okay. Thank you for clarifying because there's been a lot of discussion. So I Erinson. No. Calm Nelson. No. Murphy. No.

Severson. I Stowa. No. Via Vasencio. No. Motion fails. we can consider a a another main motion or I would make the motion that we uh publish the meeting minutes in the local newspaper. I'll second motion by Murphy, second by uh Erinson. Will you read this motion out again and then do a roll call, please? Actually, we'll do discussion, but please read the motion so everyone's on the same page.

Sure. Motion by Murphy to approve publishing the minute me excuse me meeting minutes in the local newspaper. Second by Erson. All right. Discussion on this motion.

And and so this is residents purchasing the newspaper at their own cost. Is that correct? They may get the newspaper from their neighbor. They may read it at a local diner. They may may be in the community room at their 55 plus apartment building. There's a lot of ways that people may access the newspaper that doesn't create a public record that um doesn't require them to call someone and ask for that information to be mailed to them. So you they may yes buy the newspaper, but they may also have another access to the newspaper.

Okay. And can you please read back the motion one more time? Motion by Murphy to approve the publication of meeting minutes. Seconded by Erinson I. You do a roll call vote. Benzo I Erinson I Cal Nelson I Murphy I Severson nay Stowa yes via Vasencio

I motion passes we're move on to reports from village boards commissions and committees um border review lengthy meeting go ahead Heidi

all right well we held um statutoily required. Board of review um had to convene by a certain date. Um but because uh we have the revaluation this year, uh we need more time for the numbers to be sent out to everyone and then for the open book and all of that. So, the next iteration of board of review, which I was the chair of this last meeting, um, but I will no longer be the chair because I'm no longer on the committee, but they will meet in September to go over the official business of board of review as statutoily required.

Nothing to add.

All right. Uh, police commission chief. So, police commission met on apologize uh May 7th at 5:30 p.m. at MSB. All uh commissioners were in attendance. Uh they approved the minutes from January 8th meeting. They then moved into close session to conduct interviews for police officer candidates. Uh upon coming out of close session, they forwarded two names uh for eligibility that are currently in background process. They then held elections for the chair and secretary position for a one-year period. Uh Jess Robinson was elected chair and uh Joanne Williams was elected secretary. And at that meeting uh the former chair Stadmiller announced that he was uh resigning from the commission uh after several years of service to the community, 10 plus I do believe. So, and they then uh advised they'd wait to set a future agenda item and meeting date once a new commission member was appointed and adjourned at 7:25 p.m.

comments or questions for chief.

All right, we'll move on to plan commission. Um the plan commission met on Wednesday, May 13th, approved the minutes. Um and then there was a long list um that we went through which most of those agenda items are on our agenda for tonight. Um we discussed and considered a request um from Binmar Church to for approval of the CSA to consolidate parcels. Um we discussed and considered an annexation petitions from Lindstöm acres for the annexation um of 108 plus acres. We had a public hearing um regarding potential amendments to chapter 274, the subdivision ordinance. Um we uh then also um considered those amendments and then um in another item gave um staff direction to review and amend language for purpose statements for the chapter 274 and then also 3 um 25 the zoning ordinance. We had an overview of the truth and planning law which is also on our agenda tonight. Um we talked about residential TIDS and we talked about the Dayne County Advisory Committee on data centers and the work we're doing and that led to the discussion of um the item tonight. So we can um that's kind of a generic overview of what happened at plan commission. Um so we can take these kind of in order. Um so the first one is discuss and consider um the CS um M to consolidate parcels for Binmar Church.

Yeah. So the church owns obviously their own building but they also own the single family home immediately north of the church. They currently rent that out. Uh but these are all spread out over six different parcels which doesn't make a lot of sense. So they're doing a little bit of house cleaning to um put the church and parking lot on one parcel, the home and adjacent land on the other. uh which will give them some flexibility in the future if they want to do something different with the the home parcel. Um so no objection to them doing that. The only caveat is that one corner of the church parcel is actually zoned planned industrial because I think it originally came as part of the business park. Uh so they're going to come back next month and get that reszoned. So we can approve the CSM but it'll just be conditioned on uh them getting that zoning cleaned up. comments or questions on this one?

I'd move approval of the request from Binmar Presbyterian Church for approval of their CSM um to consolidate six existing parcels into two parcels um and then with the staff recommendation that they come back on the zoning. I'll second. All right. Motion by Sever and second by Stow. Any other discussion on this item? Just do roll call as you have it. Benzo. Hi, Erinson. Hi, Kell. Nelson. Hi, Murphy. Hi, Severson. Hi, Stowa. Yes. Via Vasencio. I.

All right. Motion carries. Um, we're going to discuss and consider the potential amendments to chapter 274, the subdivision ordinance. Yeah, these are a series of um modifications to the subdivision ordinance. Um, some of these came out of the housing study. Some came from a document that the Madison MO did where they reviewed u requirements in different municipalities and there were a few where the village was a little bit of an outlier. Um, so this first was discussed at the plan commission I think late last year. Um, we kind of put it on hold again until uh this month. Um, we did discuss these back at the time it originally came to the planning commission with uh Nick and April from the fire department. Um, another component of this at that time was adding residential alleys. Uh, they had some questions about dimensions and maintaining access and things like that. So, for now, taking the alleys out so we can look at that in a little bit more detail. Uh so the parts that are remaining are uh looking at street design standards. Uh specifically the width of streets. Currently we just have an overall width called out. Uh this would break it down by the individual components um lanes, parking lanes, bike lanes. Um adding an element that has a maximum curb radi. So the radius of the curb at the intersections. uh when those are a little bit smaller that means the crossing distance for pedestrians uh is shorter. It's also less pavement that we have to maintain from that point forward. Um larger turn radius also kind of leads to people speeding around the corners a little bit more. So it's a little bit safer to have the smaller radius. Uh the building setback lines are just kind of redundant redundant because that's already handled in the

zoning ordinance. Um the sidewalks, we just want to change the minimum 4 foot width to five. Uh that's typically what people are doing now anyway, but we just want to codify that and uh change the text to make sure it's referencing our current standards and details, which is something that we give out to the developers. Uh the second sidewalk section is just dealing with multi-use paths. Um, again, we have previously allowed those in lie of sidewalks, but we just want to make that clear in the the ordinance that the board can require that. Um, and then also the dimension of those that they would be 10 ft wide unless otherwise approved.

Comments or questions on this item? I will make a motion to approve the amendments to chapter 275 subdivision ordinance. Second 274 274 you did say so. Yep. And I'll second it. Okay. Motion by still a second by JP Benzo. Ison I Kell Nelson. Hi Murphy. Hi Severson. I Stowa. Yes. Via Vasencio.

I uh we have overview of the 2025 Wisconsin Act 173 truth and planning and 235 creation of residential um TIDs. Yeah. Do you want me to go? Yeah. I mean I can go through the memo and just jump in if I'm taking us in the wrong direction. Sure. Sounds good.

Uh the first one, Act 173, the Truth and Planning Law. Um, this act requires the land use element of the comprehensive plan to specifically describe phasing and density of future residential development. Uh, looking ahead 20 years and fiveyear increments. Um, in most cases when a developer would uh request zoning on a project that is consistent with what you have in the ordinance, you would have to approve it. Uh there are exceptions related to um potential overburdening of public facilities or if there's a threat to public health or safety. Uh but the burden would be on the village to prove that that's the case. Um if a request like that comes forward and the plan does not include the phasing and density, the municipality would have 180 days to uh rectify that. Um obviously we're starting to undergo our comprehensive plan. So this would all be taken into consideration obviously in the reddrafting of that. Uh that act also uh makes an adjustment to the TID extensions. Currently you can add one year to the life of a TID and use that increment uh to support housing and affordable housing in particular. This would extend that to two years instead of one.

I guess I'll stop there in case Rick wants to add anything.

Yeah. So just a quick just follow up on the density. So your comprehensive plan basically has to plan out your residential areas and say um in the future like in 5 years we expect this to be residential area. These are the the minimum and maximum densities that would be allowed there. So you have to do that for fiveyear increments. You could just say like these are the minimum maximum densities for every five-year increment. Um but basically the reason that's important is if somebody brings forward a proposal that has a um that is for residential housing and it meets those minimum or max like it's within that range of housing densities, you are required to approve that unless the village can demonstrate otherwise that it meets some sort of other requirements. So, as we're going through the comprehensive planning process, it's just really important to think about your future land use planning as far as like what the residential areas are going to be and what the densities that you feel are sort of consistent with your future land use planning. Um, and this is effective January 1st of 2028, so we've got time to adjust the comprehensive plan. So, it's kind of perfect timing for the village, honestly, um, with where we're at. Um but as Aaron mentioned there's you know a few things that we can consider. Number one is u public infrastructure is you know we don't have to prove something if we don't have the public facilities to um or they're not addressed adequately by what's being proposed. So but again the burden is on the village. So typically the there's a presumption that whatever the village does is correct, but it's usually on like the landowner to demonstrate that they're satisfying certain standards. Here it's really on the village to demonstrate that an exception exists. Um so I just wanted to sort of emphasize those couple points um just because they are very it's very different in the in the sense

of um typically there's a lot of discretion with legislative decisions such as resoning but here this is saying no you have to approve this reszone if it comes before the village. So it's a very different context as far as resoning decisions are made but again only to residential. It's not a commercial industrial um it's only for residential reszones.

Yeah. Thanks Eric. Um then act 235 creates uh residential tax increment districts or our tids is what they're calling them. Uh these are intended specifically to promote workforce housing. Uh there are a lot of uh regulations on what qualifies. Um the lot size in an RTID cannot exceed 7500 square feet uh for a single family or 12,500 for a duplex. The lot width cannot exceed 70 for single family or 80 for duplex. Uh setbacks can't be more than 10 ft. Um those are not super restrictive. um a lot that meets our minimum standards for SR6 would qualify. Uh what gets a little bit more restrictive, I think, is the um limitations on the size of the home. 1500 square ft for a single story or 2,000 square feet for a two-story home. So, for example, the 55- foot lots that Lar was showing a couple hours ago would qualify for an RID, but the homes that they were showing would not because those were 1,800 feet as a ranch or over 2,000 for uh twotory structure. So, if that was something they were interested in, they would have to show us some floor plans that met the criteria. Um, and then current TIF districts are subject to what's called the 12% rule. So, a new TID can't be created or modified if the equalized value in all TIDs exceeds 12% of the total equalized value in the village. Uh, so currently with Amazon, we're over our 12% so we can't create or uh modify our current TIDS, but this would be counted separately. So, our TIDs are not part of the 12%, but they

do have their own 3% rule. Um, they the law prohibits municipal borrowing for an RTID project. So, essentially this means would have to be a developer funded or pay as you go system, which is kind of how we handle most TID incentives anyway. Um, we can kind of weigh in on this too, but I think a couple of these are a little bit I don't know be interesting to see how they get enforced or how how they unfold. Um these are required to be owner occupied homes which is kind of strange because ordinarily we can't say that something has to be single or has to be owner occupied versus rental. We you know someone's allowed to rent out their house if they want to. Um, so I can see that getting challenged where somebody who lives in an RIT wants to rent out their home and does this qualify or or not as owner occupied at that point. Uh, the other thing I could see potentially being problematic if somebody builds a 1500 square foot home and then 5 years later they want to add a sun room or something. Do we have to say no because they're in a did I'm not quite sure how that's going to play out. Um Rick, I would turn it over if you have any other comments.

Uh you hit a lot of the high points for me. Um so just on the financing side, like Erin said, there are only two methods that we can fund um project cost in the TID. So it it can either be developer financed or it has to come from the special TID fund. We can't borrow for anything. It basically can only be paid for via increment or developer financing. So really limited in how we can actually finance project costs in these RTIDs. And then there are just some things that I, you know, can give you an educated guess on how to interpret some of these things, but we'll probably be waiting to hear guidance from do on some of them. So like the owner occupied, there are potential issues with that as far as like well Airbnbs, right? So if if a house is allowed or if we have single family housing allowed in the zoning district or um any sort of residential use allowed in a zoning district, we have to be allowed uh we have to allow the use of that property for Airbnb. So that doesn't have to be owner occupied. Um so there's just weird sort of quirks with how we would actually enforce the owner occupied provision um that we just need to give some thought to if that's something that the village is interested in. and talking with do about how we actually go about requiring that or if you know one of these parcels does become a rental property what does that mean for the village or what does that mean for the the art so um it'll be just interesting to see how the state interprets this

uh so I'm super interested in the residential teds because I think it could be a good mechanism for us to get some smaller houses maybe some smaller price points points. Um, and maybe still get that owner occupied like a town home or something. Um, I would like I don't know how the other board members feel about it, but I'd like to sort of direct Aaron to maybe look to see where we could implement that. Oh, that was my other question. When does this go into effect? Uh, October 1st of 26. Okay. So, um, yeah, I I mean, I'd be interested to hear from the other board members, but I I personally would like to have Erin see if he can find anywhere that might it might make sense to do some of this. Heidi,

thanks. Um, I guess the intent of this is to reduce the cost to develop land so then the home is more attainable to um, you know, different demographic than is able to obtain housing. Now, um, how is that like written in an agreement? Like how how do we quantify this agreement to potential home buyers? It's an excellent question because that's what I've been trying to figure out is I mean I think we almost have to put it in the development agreement that the developer like if there's financing you know village assistance being provided in any manner that it is that the developer is subject to the state requirements like and if they are if they take any action or do anything that puts us in violation of the TID requirements like They have to hold us harmless for that basically. So I I think it's going to come down to what we put in our development agreements and they're just gonna have to be probably a little bit more robust on compliance with the the TID requirements.

Yeah. Because it's hard because costs of everything is also going up. So cost of actually building the structure of the house is going to go up. But we like trying to do this to make it attainable and making sure that that is what the developer is doing. So yeah, I guess developer agreements best. Yeah. And as far as like the lot sizes go, I mean that can be regulated through zoning, right? Like so or the the plat approval process, but the owner occupied thing is just I don't know how we actually enforce that one. Has this been discussed or will it be discussed at a housing chapter committee meeting?

It has not been discussed, but it would be helpful to be discussed at the next meeting whenever that may be. Mhm. I guess the other helpful thing that maybe if staff hears anything from other municipalities that are you know have some interesting ideas that to bring that back to I don't know either housing or plan commission whatever the appropriate venue would be if you hear of anyone starting something that's sure it will be a topic of conversation among the planners.

Any other discussion on this item? All right, hearing none. Let's move on to public works, Properties, and Sustainability Committee. Chris,

we met on Wednesday, May 13th. Uh, we called the meeting to order at 5:33. Um, no public appearances. We approved the minutes. We reviewed the official traffic map. um handy dandy map to show you where all the uh stop signs and the different u uh kinds of roads in the village that's linked in the public works packet. Uh we discussed and considered the Johnson Healthtech plan um for a for um sorry Johnson Healthtech to extend a no parking area in commerce. Um that passed 5 to one. We discussed and considered uh no parking on bus road which passed 5 to one and uh we talked about the change order for the Johnson Health Tech bike path uh adding that back into our street and ped project that passed 3 to two. Um and then in directors and engineering report rain barrel sale everything was sold. We talked about salt purchases. Uh got the safe streets for all grant. Going to do an intersection study. We're going through the traffic management and stop sign policy. E-waste event was a big success. Uh semi and a half of waste was recycled. Um we're going to have a joint meeting with the utility commission. Um and then then we went through the uh different developments updates. So, we have three discussing considers along with that. Uh, the first one tonight is the no parking signage on the southern portion of bus road from Cottage Grove Road to the dead end in the Shady Grove neighborhood. So, I will pass it over to Kyla for an explanation.

When the Shady Grove subdivision was created a handful of years ago, um it was not included that the medians would be um have curb gutter associated with them. In 2024, public works um and the village board moved forward with adding curb and gutter along the medians to clean up bus road from um Cody Cottage Grove Road to the dead end there. If you look, it's about 13 ft of drive length, not including including curb. If you drive out there and you see someone parked, it's very very very difficult to get around, including Amazon vehicles um and with the buildout. So, it's being recommended both by myself, the committee, and in discussions with chief and PD to uh make that entire boulevard no parking.

Go ahead, Chris.

So, I'm going to tell you why I don't think we should approve this. I went over to Shady Grove and I measured those lanes and they're 18 ft wide curb curb. Um I think that's enough to to accommodate a normal 10 to 11T travel lane and 7 to 8 foot parking lane. Um, you know, keeping these roads narrow, uh, can help ensure slower speeds, especially in a residential area like this. Uh, it's got no tree cover. It's the visually it's wide open and that, you know, people can have a tendency to speed up there. So, having an 18 foot wide travel lane is only going to speed lead to higher speeds. Um, and while I was there, I actually parked um, and someone passed me and it it was not particularly difficult for them to pass me. Uh, there was enough space in between my car and theirs. Um, I just don't think we should be building roads that are big enough to have a parking lane and then ban parking because it just makes everything way too wide, encourages higher speeds, and I think that just kind of a disaster in a residential area. Um, really, I think if we want roads without parking, we need to build them smaller. Um, the standards that we just approved in the the subdivision update are 10 feet travel lane and 7 to 8 feet for a parking lane. So, I think this road is wide enough to accommodate a travel and a parking lane. Um, and you know, if that means cars got to go a little slower to get through there comfortably, I think that's a good thing. Uh, I think we need to prioritize the safety of pedestrians over convenience of cars. Um, I think, you know, if we're building a new residential area, nobody's going to suggest that we build an 18 foot wide travel lane. That's just it's too that's 50% bigger than an interstate lane. Um, I'm just going to give a couple of quotes from the the NACTO street width design guide. Narrow streets help promote slower driving speed, which in turns reduces severity of crashes. Lane widths of 10 ft are appropriate and have a positive impact on a street safety without impacting traffic operations. Lanes greater than 11 ft should not be used as they may cause unintended speeding.

Restrictive policies that favor the use of wider travel lanes have no place in settings where every foot counts. Research has shown that narrow narrower lane widths can effectively manage speeds without decreasing safety and that wider lanes do not correlate to safer streets. Travel lane widths of 10 feet generally provide adequate safety while discouraging speeding. Uh and parking lane widths of 7 to 9 ft are generally recommended. And I my final point is from a study called design factors that affect driver speed on suburban streets. Quote, "As the width of the lane increased, the speed of the roadway increased. When lane widths are 3.3 feet greater, speeds are predicted to be 9.4 miles an hour faster.

Paula, you have your hand up."

Yeah. Um I I supported this at public works. Um and um I I still support it. I think one of the things that we need to be mindful of is not just cars parked on that road and cars getting through um but cars parked on that road and the ability for our emergency responders to get through an ambulance um a fire truck. You know, if you've ever ridden um shotgun in a fire truck, you would see um how challenging it can be to get, you know, that road's already curved um and and to get apparatus down there. So, I think it's more of a safety thing um for me and I'm I'm going to continue to support it like I did at public works.

Yeah, I I thought about that, too. But in the end, we have 60,000 car trips per day in Cottage Grove. Last year, fire and EMS had a combined 868 calls. So, I guess my question would be, do we design our streets for the 21.9 million car trips per year, or do we favor the 900 per year that fire and EMS do? I think we design our streets that are safe. I mean, fire doubles in size every minute that um a fire happens. And if apparatus can't get through, that could be a life or death situation. So, I'm going to put the safety of our residents before um anything else.

Heidi, thanks. Um, I guess I'm wondering, Kyla, if there are other like speed control measures that would be could be added, you know, obviously our police force can't be everywhere all the time. So, are there other ways like paint on the road or other things that we can do to help make sure traffic is slow slower or encouraging them by force of infrastructure to be slower?

Absolutely. So, through that intersection or through the bus road intersection, you can kind of see from my zoomed in not great Google view, but you kind of have medians that provide that refuge. um for pedestrians walking through here. One thing that should be noted is when this development was approved and went through the future of bus road was looking to be a boulevard section leading from Gaston Road all the way south through the village as another alternative way to come through the village. what that looks like now. Um the same thing was kind of anticipated along the um along the school and heyday. Obviously that has not moved forward at this time. Um it is a tight intersection at to Chris's point. You can make it work. Um it's ultimately based on comfort. Um one thing you we could look at is providing bumpouts at these intersections. I would hate to reour a bunch of curb that was just installed 5 years ago, not even. Um, but it is something that we can look at.

Is there anything with paint that we can do that like We can definitely add crosswalks um through those intersections as well. Yeah. Or like sometimes you see like a bike lane and then like a hashed thing. I know you're not really there's the driving lane and then the hashed mark and then the bike lane. It's like a protected bike lane, but it's not actually protected by anything raised other than paint. I don't know if that actually I don't know what the data is if that actually slows people down or

there probably wouldn't be enough room for a parking lane, a drive there. There isn't enough room for a parking lane, a drive lane, and a bike lane. But a drive lane and a bike lane is that I'm just trying to think what are other things that we can do besides just pouring and maybe this is like a long-term brainstorm, but I do think it's important to try to slow people down because there are, you know, a lot of kids and it's close to a park and Absolutely. I can definitely do some brainstorming on that as well. So, currently if a car is parked on bus road, fire and EMS cannot get around it. You said 18. It's 18 feet wide. It's But you said it's 13.

13 is a rough. I did I will be completely honest. I did not go out there and measure it like Chris did. Um now Chris is yours from the face of the curb vertical to the vertical to vertical. So that would be including the um inch and a the foot and a half of um space between the cur. That would include driving on the curb, which some people do, some people don't. It all depends on who who is parking where as you can see how people park. To be clear, that's the on the concrete part of the curve that's that's level with the asphalt, not mounting the curb.

And then there are homes that are being built right now on bus. There's homes further down and across from the park. So that those homeowners along that entire stretch in this residential neighborhood have no access to street parking. Correct. Okay. I think I'm gonna align more with Chris on this um topic if anyone cares. Other comments, Casey.

So, how I'm trying to think of of if there's anywhere comparable to this in the village right now, anywhere with a boulevard other than, you know, Main Street. Um, is there anything like this, Kaiwa, at this time? No. Okay. And and currently there is there is boulevard, driving lane and parking lane. It's not it's not designated a parking lane, but it's not striped for parking lane. It's just big enough that people do and it's not prohibited. So people do. Correct.

That kind of thing. Okay. And you and you don't. So you said it's definitely not big enough for a for striping for a driving bike parking lane. Is it big enough for striping for driving and parking? I would in your opinion I would be hesitant to mark it as parking. I would leave it as any other of the residential roads um that allows you to park.

Okay. So, I'm I'm I'm torn between because there there are two safety concerns here. You know, as Paula brought up, there's, you know, fire EMS access, but as as Chris has brought up, you know, speed kills, too. Um I mean, you know, and and like we've seen in other, you know, traffic contentious areas, you know, um uh Taylor Street, you know, the the perception of what the lane of what the lane is, you know, yes, people should be obeying the speed limits. people don't do that. Um, so if it looks, you know, wide, as as you say, Chris, people will tend to go faster and that's dangerous, too. Um, so I'm I'm I'm torn. I'm ambivalent.

I was just ahead. wondering did the fire department or EMS did they weigh in on that at all or I did not reach out to them specifically kind based off of that um if they if we do reach out to them I would also be curious on their thoughts about a fundamental way as an access point for this neighborhood which is to the right um whether they would would that to be If we do um allow parking in there, would Fundamental Way be enough to effectively service this neighborhood if they were needed?

I mean, there's also going to be houses continue to built on bus road itself, right? So, I mean, yes, even if that works, they may not be able to get to the actual house on bus if there's some issue with that. But I think I think that has some just the reaching out to them to evaluate that half of things. Maybe that's a direction to a referring this to a committee is a good idea or so or just asking them the staff direction. Chief Archable or Chief Lang on the call. Chief Paula, you have your hand up. Maybe Chief Lang can also weigh in.

Yeah, I think um so typically fire apparatus is about 8 to 10 feet wide. Um, so I think I think the idea, Casey, of you know, asking our fire department to weigh in on this would be um a very good thing.

Can we postpone action and see what they say? Is that all right? Do we need a motion to postpone? I would move to postpone until the fire department weighs in on the bus road. No parking situation. EMS. Can you include EMS in your motion? And EMS. Yes. I'll second. Second. There's a motion by Murphy, second by Erinson. Any other discussion? Right. Benzo I Erlandson I Cal Nelson I Murphy hi Severson I Stowa

yes via Vencio I Okay, there was a second discuss and consider uh a request from Johnson Health Tech regarding the addition of no parking on the north side of Commerce Parkway across the from the entrance of 29 9 Commerce Parkway. Kyla or our guest?

Our guest, Adam from Johnson Health Tech. He's the facilities manager here. He can answer any questions for you if you are interested. They recently are leasing um this 209 Commerce Parkway building and they have semi- deliveries um through this entrance here. And they are looking to add additional no parking right in front of their driveway, which would be about three car lengths. Go ahead.

Okay. I I was I'm also gonna I'm uncomfortable with this. It's across from a daycare, so again, having the cars line the street to slow things down makes me I I would rather have the cars there to slow them down. I understand reasoning behind this, but again, I think we should be prioritizing the safety of pedestrians. Um, one of the public works members uh stated that we have to remember that this is a commercial zone and we need to take care of our um, commercial businesses. I think that's a little bit of an oversimplification. Um, I think we should be prioritizing uh, protecting pedestrians regardless of what zoning district they're walking in, but go ahead, Paula.

Yeah, I I guess I differ. I I agree that I think um you know the problem here is the semi is trying to turn in and you know the concern really being that um they're going to sideswipe one of those cars that's parked there. Um again this is our commerce park so I think we need to be able to allow our businesses to actually engage in commerce. So I I supported this at public works and I support it now.

Other comments questions Casey? Yeah, I think I'm looking at this on the Google Maps and I mean if it if this is just a limited space only about three car lengths long, I think we still get the slowing traffic effect that we otherwise have from all the other parking on there. The daycare has a parking lot. Um, and I mean I think I think the safety for the I think safety for pedestrians by not having you know semis having to dodge parked cars right where they need to pull in I think I think outweighs that. So I'm inclined towards it as well. The attached picture is something that Adam sent me this morning um regarding the location of where they're interested in. So, it would just slightly be extending the no parking for the fire hydrant a little further down past their driveway.

Any other comments? I'd make a motion to approve the request from Johnson. Oh, go ahead, Heidi. Okay. regarding the addition of no parking on the north side of Commerce Parkway across from the entrance of 209 Commerce Parkway as presented. Second motion by Murphy, second by Severson. Any other discussion

Benzo I Erlingson I Nelson. Hi Murphy. Hi Severson. Hi Stowa. No. Via Vencio I. All right. Motion passes. Thanks for being here.

Thank you for staying so late. Um, we had one more discuss and consider from uh public works. That was regarding the Johnson Health bike path repaving to add the project back into the list of 2026 street and ped improvements. There was a memo included in your packet that kind of reiterated where we were at after the bid opening in March. Public works did not meet in April after village board decided not to move forward with the Johnson Health Tech path um at the village board meeting at that point in time. Um, you also village board received an email based on some questions on what that escalation cost would look like if we delayed repaving the Johnson Heltech path until 2031 when the Commerce Park improvements are currently planned. Um, based on 5% escalation rate and the average cost in 2026 of the 60K between the two biders, it would look like it could be around 80K in 2031. However, it should be noted that one of the high biders this year was $71,000. Um, so that price can be all over the place. It also depends on fuel and continued escalation costs. The condition of Johnson Healthtech path does have a lot of base issues is my is going to be my recommendation on that. Um with pulverizing it and doing an EBS and making sure it's stabilized, we can kind of get rid of some of those chunks of asphalt that you're seeing. Public works has continually placed cold patch in it for the last several years and the cold patch only lasts for so long. Um I know there were previous comments about usability of the Johnson Health Tech path. It is used um quite often during lunch. I actually went up there at lunch today and took some pictures around 12:30 and saw four different people um

walking up there for context as well. Happy to take any questions um with moving it back into the project. It would just be change ordered in. Wolf Construction has agreed to honor their price with the original bid. So it would be the $50,000 as originally presented. Right.

Board member questions. I went up and walked the path today also and I saw eight people in the afternoon walking the path. Um, and there are some areas that are, you know, are beyond repair from, uh, you know, someone who's not an engineer. And I could, you know, as has been previously discussed, as things continue to deteriorate, then they're more expensive to um, to repair later. So, I'm in favor of moving, you know, this back in the in the change order.

Renee So, um I walked it as well and unless those willow trees are taken care of, um that path is going to continue to have trees growing up in those areas. And Heidi, you're right. There are some areas on the bike path that are um quite damaged. Um but those willow trees along uh along the path need to be removed or this is the problem is not going to be resolved.

Paula, go ahead.

So I voted no um at public works on this. You know, obviously I work in that area um daily and I've never seen that many people in the past before, but that's neither here nor there. Um I would just say that um two things. Um one is I believe that we have roads that have a tremendous amount of potholes um that we should probably deal with first. Um if we have extra money in our budget, I think you know bumping some of those up um that are in our road improvements would be a better idea. Then the other thing is the consideration of um when creed is done with construction and what the whole landscape looks like in terms of walkability up in that area and what those paths look like. It might be that a whole investment is needed to um better connect all of those paths. Um there may be a desire to have you know a path from East Gas Gaston up to Creed. So, personally, I'd like to see a little bit more um intentionality put toward this and um have it be part of that whole project that we're going to have to take on because a lot of the concrete is failing um in the in the Commerce Park. And I I truly believe that we're going to need to address it before 2031. Casey.

Um, so, uh, Kyla, you had mentioned, I think at the previous meeting, uh, about getting fresh pacer ratings once winter conditions ended. Has that yet been done? I have pacer ratings on all the roads. I do not have pacer ratings on the bike paths. Construction snuck up on me quick and so it's on my list of things to do. Fair enough. Um what uh so you you also mentioned you know you've been doing the like the cold patching for for several years and more than once a year. Um if if you have it exactly or ballpark it what like how much has that been costing each year?

Uh couldn't tell you per se exactly. I mean cold patch costs about $70 a ton um just to patch those little spots. It doesn't always stay. While we do have a hot box and hot asphalt um capabilities as of this year with our fleet and equipment purchases, the most we can do is a 10 x10 patch. If you walk down there, that would be a lot of 10 x 10 patches and it would be more joint failures which ultimately would result in the same type of failures. Okay. Long term,

right? Because I, as several of us did, I also walked it uh this afternoon. I saw four people on the path, two people fishing who took the path to get there. Um, and I mean, yeah, it is it's terrible, especially if as it is a multi-use path. You know, the um I and Kyler, correct me if I'm wrong, but it seemed like the the significant damage was on the surface potholeing pitting that's like from water and freezing damage, not from the roots or or anything from from willow trees. Um, but also, I think you'd mentioned that we didn't really know that there was maybe an underlying issue. Yeah, it's hard to tell without um doing uh what's called a proof roll on the base. I would recommend um and what's included in the plan is to pulverize that, do a proof roll and kind of see what that base looks like. Some of those trees could be an issue. That'd be something that would be taken a look at once you can kind of actually see what's underneath that asphalt when everything's being mixed up,

right? Um yeah. So I because I think in general, you know, um as as you detailed several times, you know, we're getting we have this very good bid this year. It was it was a 70k bid last year. It dropped $20,000. That's great. Uh and and they agreed to to keep it um with this delay. It's going to, you know, it's going to go up. uh and we're we're already spending money on these repairs and we would still have to spend at least this 50k or whatever the new cost was regardless of when we did this. Um so delaying it only makes us spend more money on repairs now maybe you know very likely makes it more expensive in the future. Um and and and yeah, I the the 2031 redoing plan for it. It was uh you know for for connectivity for for increasing connectivity in the area if I remember right. Not so much for repairs for things.

It would be a com combination of both is what's going to be presented in the capital improve improvements plan. pavement's going to be needed to be replaced, but then there al are missing connectivities between different locations that would should be looked at in the future,

right? Yeah. I just think in general, yeah, pushing this off for four years certainly doesn't seem to save us any money um because this has to be done one way or the other. And it seems like it it almost certainly costs us a lot more money, maybe maybe almost double. Um so I'm inclined to to do it now rather than, you know, lose out later. Yeah, I think I agree with your points, Casey, and the um and to Paula's point about the, you know, sports development complex, you know, moving forward kind of increases the need for um walkability on that sidewalk. So, uh, Renee,

so again, I I'd like to if if you could maybe speak to this, Kyla, um, or maybe Sean, um, until those willow trees are taken out, um, the problem is that those little um, roots in development are going to continue to, um, create pathways under the bike pathway. So, how is that going to be addressed?

If the project moves forward, we would take a look at that um as part of the pulverization and looking at the base course. If there is a need um that trees need to be addressed, it'd be something that I'd work with um Sean and the forestry department. Some of those trees are not located on our village property either. So, it'd be something I'd have to discuss with Johnson Healthtech. And lastly, there are locations where those willows aren't by some of the spots with um deteriorating conditions as well. So, it's a combination of all different aspects, Paula. Right. Right.

Um Casey, your your comments about um rising costs is duly noted. Um I believe that um the al the same also applies to road repairs, right? I mean, those costs are going up. And so, personally, I think that our money would be more valuably spent on road repairs um than this. So, yeah, costs are going to go up for everything. It's what we prioritize right now.

Right. Any other discussion, Casey? Um, I will make a motion to uh approve the change order regarding Johnson Health Bike Path Repaving to add the project back into the list of 2026 streets and pedestrian improvements as presented. Is there a second? I'd second. All right. Motion by Erland, second by Murphy. Roll call. Any other discussion? Roll call. Benzo,

no. Because the tree problem is causing a great deal of problems on the bike trail and you can put a new pavement, new trail there, but until those willows are taken care of, it's going to continue to be an issue and it's money not well spent. Erinson, I Cal Nelson. Hi, Murphy. Hi, Severson. Nate, Stowa, yes. Bia Vencio I motion passes a utility commission Chris. Yes.

We met on May 13th at 5:00 p.m. Um no public appearances. We approved the minutes from the previous utility meeting and a special utility meeting in March and April respectively. Approve the bills. We had a presentation from the MA Madison Metropolitan Sewer District Director Eric Dundy and uh the director and reports uh there's a water main break on Dentaria um on Thursday, April 30th. Um a couple other main breaks have happened there. So, um when Dentaria is rehabbed in, um 2028, part of that project is going to be to replace the water main. Tower 2 had its 10-year cleaning and maintenance staff. Is staff done with hydrant flushing now or is it ongoing?

It's still ongoing.

Okay. Um we had an update about our GIS, which is going to be changing a little in the summer. Um, Frontier is working on their villagewide project. There will be a joint meeting with the public works committee. Uh, all public utilities and heyday have been installed. Storm sewer that didn't meet requirements was removed and restored and final walkthrough and punch list items will be completed by the end of spring. Um, pre-construction meeting to discuss schedule for rehab on well number two happened in February. Pre-construction meeting occurred on May 5th. Uh construction beginning late summer, early fall. Farm interceptor project is substantially complete and uh there's going to be a storm water utility feasibility study. Anything else, Kyle?

Comments or questions for utility commission? I I would highly encourage watching Eric's presentation if you're not on utility commission. Um there was a lot of things that we can do as a community from a communication perspective and things as you're talking to your constituents. I thought he did a really good job on his presentation. Paula, I was just going to ask Kyla with the um hydrant flushing. I've noticed that um in in different neighborhoods where that's done that there has been a lot of um debris that has come from that to our storm drains. So, are we going to be going out with our street sweepers after this?

Yes, we will be. We typically follow around with our street sweeper after we flush. Thank you. Absolutely. All right. If there's nothing else, we'll move on to reports for village officers. Rick, uh nothing else for me tonight. Uh I think at the next meeting, I'll probably have uh presentation or just a quick um thing on open meetings. uh things like that. So, all right, we'll move on to u my round two of committee appointments for 2026 vacancies which are listed in your agenda. I'll move approval of the committee appointments as presented. I'll second.

All right. Mur motion by Murphy, second by Erinson. Any other discussion of these committee appointments? Benzo. Hi Erson. Hi Kel. Nelson. Hi Murphy. Hi Severson. Hi Stowa. Yes. Via Vasencio. Hi. All right. Report from village administrator.

Yes. Just a couple things to highlight. Um, officers uh Chase Ratkkey and Ross uh Pette um were have graduated from the uh police academy that was uh last week. And then um if you followed our social media, you would have seen um uh several ducklings that were saved by our wonderful public works uh crew out of a storm drain. So, um, thank you for that and happy to take any questions on the report or tracker.

All right. Uh, we'll move on to assistant administrator, finance director with our Q1 financials. And I'm gonna pass it off to Cassie because you guys have heard me talk too much today. Um, in the packet you'll find the quarter 1 report. Um, overall pretty favorable. We did note the rising fuel costs. Um, and we're kind of starting to plan what that might look like for the future, but um, if you have any questions, let us know.

Comments or questions for Cassie? I'm just going to add one quick kind of note to what K or what Cassie was mentioning. Um so while this is an important piece of our kind of budget to actual monitoring understanding that uh March 31st was already almost you know two months ago. So um one of the things that we're actively monitoring right now is the effects with the current conflict in the in the Middle East. So, um, I've asked each department to kind of go through and and kind of say what what absolutely is necessary to do and and what are things that we can kind of pull back on to help cover some of the kind of planned fuel overages. Um, I'm estimating that we're going to probably have fuel overages between between garbage and recycling pickup and filling our fleets between 20 and $25,000. um we've identified at least that much in funding for things that we can hold back on until there's clarification um kind of on the ongoing fuel um environment that we're in. Um right now the direct effect is fuel prices. obviously aware that almost everything we use on a day-to-day is petroleum based and so just being conscious of that as we develop the budget in the next year um that there's going to be some high degree of variability until things start to stabilize on a um price per barrel. Um but just wanted to make sure that this board is aware that that is being very proactively managed at this time. Other comments, questions? All right, we'll move on to communications and miscellaneous business. We had emails from about the village handbook um which the village board received. I forwarded it to staff as well. Um there was another email about um residential

ordinance violations which um I think staff will follow up on. And we have um a little meeting tomorrow about from a girl scouts for a gold award about um kind of safe or changes we can make for windows and building code to um improve migratory birds which is kind of exciting. Um other communication You skipped vouchers. Oops. Skipped vouchers. Oh, I just want Oh, that's correspondence. Sorry. What are my classes on? Back up. All right. Does anyone have any other correspondence? And I'll hop back up to vouchers. All right. Uh, con consider approval of vouchers bills listed in the agenda. Make a motion to approve the vouchers as presented.

Second. All right. There's a motion by M Murphy, second by Erinson for approval of the vouchers. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none. Benzo, obtain. Erson, I Cal Nelson. I Murphy. Hi, Severson. I Stowa. Yes, Via Vasencio. I

All right, we'll go down to upcoming community events. All right, it's May. Engel, what do you got? announcements.

Oh, we have a um a farewell for now uh to Taylor uh Prairie um picnic with the Cottage Grove School and Families organization and it's open to the greater neighborhood and community. It is on Thursday, June 4th from 5 to 7. Um we have a fun um community project um art project that everyone in the entire community is invited to participate in and um have a hot dog and say hello to teachers and see you later.

You I'll just add um some former teachers are also planning on being there as well too. So it's a pretty holistic event. Any other community events? Fireman's festival is coming up and don't forget to register for the hat to trap. All right, the future agenda items. Um, what do we have?

Rick's going to give us a presentation. Yeah. And just to follow up on the agenda item tonight for the waiver of the building permit fees, we'll put together an ordinance that actually codifies that. Um, so try to get that on for the next meeting.

And I guess I'm also looking for board feedback. So we have um in the last you know nine months maybe have had concept presentations come to plan commission and then also then come and repeat at the village board. Um our typical planning uh workflow is that concept plans for feedback come to plan commission and get reported on. Um, and then it goes through the process. And I'm wondering if the board would consider, um, given that we kind of talked about being business friendly and maybe being a little bit more efficient, um, considering having plan concept plans go to plan commission and not have to do a, um, pull a double duty. I'm seeing nodding head.

So, that's like a future agenda item. Um, I'm not sure if we need a future Rick, do we need a future agenda item on it? We're just kind of We had a concept plan tonight. Yeah. So, we can't take action on anything like that tonight. Um, I don't know if we actually like established that as a policy. We didn't I don't think it was a formal policy. It was more of just kind of a preference. Um, yeah. So, I guess if we're changing practice, we let me give that some thought. So, that might be a future agenda item if the board is willing to consider kind of having that. Okay. Yes. Willing to consider that as a future agenda item if you need that on the record.

I see nodding heads in the room. So, okay. Um All right. We're going to um we have a closed session for um village administrator midyear check-in. Um so I'll make a motion that the village of Cottage Grove village board enter into a closed session pursuant to Wisconsin state statute 19.85 85 PN1 parn C considering employment promotion compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibilities. Is there a second? Second. Second by JP and we'll do a roll call vote. Benzo I Erinson

I Nelson. Hi Murphy. Hi Severson. Hi, Stoa. Yes, VFencio. I sure. I've got things for you to sign, too.