Personnel & Finance Committee - Regular Meeting

So, yeah, so American Family has stepped up. There's another tentative donation I'm waiting to hear from from the Madison Area Builders Association. I probably have about three or four more of the, quote, unquote, regulars to reach out to. And there's one foundation that I haven't worked with before, but the person who's the executive director is out of maternity leave, so that probably won't happen for another month or so. I would now rate my my success the likelihood of success at about thirty to forty percent at this point. And I'm happy to share all the people I've reached out to and and the responses I've gotten. But yeah.

Okay. So if I can just with one follow-up. So I I think I have it right. So raising private money basically to fund this position? Half

of the position.

Correct. Yeah. Mhmm.

And we're gonna leave it vacant until sufficient funding is secured to ensure the viability based on that division of cost. Correct. Okay. Got it. Thank you.

So 64 is half of the position? Correct. Okay. Any other questions, honestly, anybody in the chat? Anything? Okay. Thanks. Do have any speakers, Chuck?

No. We have no speakers on the CLR amendments. Really?

Oh, that's our supervisor.

Unregistered Right. What I meant.

Thank you, mister chairman.

So

I've got a slightly different take on this. I I'm a sponsor of this as well as, I believe, supervisor Posler is also. I sent a letter to the the full board and this committee earlier today. I hope you had a chance to take a look at it. If not, I'm just gonna highlight a few things that I said.

This is a very important, position. September 22, this Regional Housing Strategy Initiative was introduced by, executive Preci at the time, Chair Miles, and and Madison Mayor Satya Rogers Conway. So we've been working on this, housing strategy for the past three years and we have there's been a lot of progress made. So we've there's ongoing committees that are still working on this. They're trying to make updates to zoning codes for all the different municipalities.

There's all kinds of, there's probably over a 100 people that have worked on this over the three year period. We had 70 at a meeting, for most of our 11 meetings. And then we've had committee work also, which is still going on. And they're doing things like updating zoning codes. They're doing best practices for how to make it easier to, to build in each of our jurisdictions, each of our municipalities.

So there's a lot of good things that have been going on. So I I just I don't want to, lose the momentum we've got built up. And the one thing that I would would ask, I'm hoping we can at least fund it to the 64,000. But if at all possible, if we could do more than that, if there's any money available beyond that, that would really help because I don't wanna see it go down just because, Olivia wasn't able to, for some reason, raise enough money. This is that important of the thing.

It's not just something that's dealt with in in the outlying areas. Madison has been involved in this the whole the whole way through. They've been actually leading the charge as far as changing some of their zoning and and being able to make it easier to build and, advance some of our, needs in affordable housing system. So anything you can do to keep this thing funded would be would be great. The one other thing I just wanted to point out is, we've we had two positions.

My understanding is we only have one planner for housing in this in the county within the planning department. We had two position two positions funded and they were both taken away. So this would at least get us one more position and and keep the momentum going, forward for regional housing strategy and, very important. Anything you can do, I appreciate it.

Thanks. Did you have something else? You just look like you're

The other thing that The other thing that we might add is that more homeowners in Dane County, more property tax revenue, which is is something. And it's a way of building generational wealth for more residents, and and that that is an important piece too.

Great. Thank

you. Any questions? Cool. Thank you.

And supervisors representative Holsey?

I know you got tired of listening to me if you work for me.

So I the

last ten years, I have fixed up old houses starting with a Ray Peterson house on Milwaukee Street, housed homeless people and section eight disabled people, a blind lady. And I have six homeless people living in my house right now. The crew the job that I just came from, I had my crew chief was homeless four weeks ago. So this is important, but winter is coming. We need to get every homeless person off the street by winter.

And in everything we do about the homeless, we ask, does it put somebody does it get them into shelter tonight? This room right here, I could I could house 50 homeless people in tonight when your meeting's over. Dane County has enough real estate downtown to house every homeless person in town. With a with a a supervised area, they can put sleeping pads down. We can get donated sleeping bags. So this is great. It's abstract. Homeless people are real. They're on the street. One challenge they have with with and I fed 300 of them in the last month.

I've I like I said, I've gotten I don't know how many have slept in my house, so it's hard to keep track. But it's like the the thing to remember is they don't have driver's licenses. They don't have cars. They don't have cell phones. They need to be close to the services. We need to get the state to open up all their vacant office space to shelters. And, again, people could be inside tonight if we really are focused. So I would say, vote for it if you've got the money. But the thing to focus on is how much surplus you know, Alliant Energy Center. How many homeless people could we sleep at that tonight?

Yes. They need to be supervised. Yes. There needs to be services for them, but all those services are focused on the East Side Of Madison, the beacon, the Salvation Army. So we want them to be as close to the services that they need, drug and alcohol treatment. And there are bad apples. I had to evict one last year. He was a sword wielding, drug dealing girlfriend beater. You know, they're bad apples, but 95% of them are there, but by the grace of god, go us. So just keep that

in mind. Thank you. Thanks. Supervisor Posler checked in on chat. He'd like to comment on this with supervisor Posler.

Yeah. Thank you, mister Scherer. I just wanna comment as a sponsor on this. You know, the this is one of those neat opportunities that we have to help other units of government that are having budget discussions that are equally as challenging as ours and and and to help unlock funds to to bring into our community. WIDA has an immense tool chest available and and, if if you can unlock it.

And, unfortunately, as as the earlier testimony said, that this is something that we need to do some planning work, and we need to do this legwork, which is not the exciting part of, providing housing, no disrespect to, Olivia. But, it's incredibly necessary to unlock these funds and really get this this money into our communities. And, approving this and and finding a way to fund the the full position and, you know, not not leave it entirely to chance on on the fundraising angle is really vital to to making that investment in our rural communities and, even the not so rural communities, but outside of Madison, that that need that that support. So I just, ask you to really give consideration to, funding this through any any means that, you can find, through your your very difficult role here on, PNF. So, thank you very much, and thanks for the work that you do.

Capital. That's always about the time. Okay. Thank you. We have oh, no. Is it under p little p and f, or is it under excuse me? Is it under p and f? Do we keep it

under there? Presented here because Right.

Right. Okay.

Under the

Just because that's what

we're saying.

Right. Okay. Supervisor chair Miles has an amendment that was not presented at and. What? For capital.

Alright. And this is here, because, I didn't, get this in time and in time for p and f I mean, I'm sorry, zoning and land regulation to consider it. This is a small capital amendment proposing to carry on a program we established in this year's budget where we provided enough capital to fund the placement of at least six historical markers around the county for priority for areas identified by the historic preservation commission highlighting, underrepresented populations that have made significant, contributions to Dane County's history. And so this is a small amendment to continue that beyond those first six identified sites.

Questions for Jim Miles? Are those first ones where are they in the process? Are they Pardon? Are they where are

they first ones in the process? They actually been established and The commission has identified the through public hearing and public input, determined six the six first sites and, are in the process of, at least for two of them, I think, the signs created, the language of the sign and so forth. The others, will be done in some point in the coming year. So we'll those those capital funds will be carried forward for those.

Great. Do you have a question? Do I need to okay. Thank you, sir. K.

None. Thank you,

Thank you.

Public works is next. Is there anything to present? Right?

We really don't have anything to present. As, Yogesh stated earlier, the one amendment we did have was to defund a position in the Alliant Energy Center, that was denied five to nothing and two to nothing with our IGPs, in committee. And the reason was because the position that that they were was trying to be removed was to it it it was projected to gain revenue. So, you know, we didn't wanna go backwards and we wanted to move forwards and we're trying to get, the AEC, off of GPR. So I appreciate that, that it wasn't brought up again and we're trying to get off of GPR so we can fund other programs within the county.

I also think it's problematic to take positions from one department and put them and fund another department. I just think that creates a lot of problems. So thank you.

Any questions? Okay. Moving on one. And we did executive. And two amendments that were not presented at executive. P f o five. Chair Miles, 96.

Can you just scroll up? What does this one say?

Board. This is board. Well Increase expenditures by 11. Alright. Awesome.

This is pretty simple. Chair Veldron requested an ordinance amendment to modify a pay increase to the county board that's scheduled to begin April 2026. And by eliminating that increase and, you know, this this amendment basically anticipates the passage of that OA I don't if it's OA resolution. Last week.

Mhmm. Oh,

was it last week already?

Yeah. Last Thursday. Sorry.

I'm losing all track of time right now.

Committee on time.

At any rate, so since the board adopted that, that means we will be this is recognizing the salary savings by eliminating that last increase in the schedule.

Yep.

And then the board pay and so forth will just be flat after that. There's no further increases scheduled for

the next board to to sign on. And oh, at eight. Can't read my t f o eight is reduced printing and supply line and clerk's office by a $100,000. Yes.

So our county clerk has been working with a different vendor. So there will be probably a no bid contract for this, but it's a situation where a company that does other work, has significant printing resources, and the clerk has had some challenges in timeliness and quality, in the current vendor's printing of ballots. So, he's negotiated a an arrangement with this other vendor that will, produce the ballots in a more timely fashion, better quality, and considerably less money. So and has the benefit of being union labor doing the work. So

Right. And I've talked to other clerk too. I'm not a big fan of no bid, but this sounds like this was a good solution. And, also, there's better security, which I know. And elections now is very important. So that's any questions on that?

No.

And then the note on the on the comments is that is it directly gonna go to fund

Well people already

It could or could stuff.

Yes. Yes. The intention was to use some of it towards offset and other areas where there wasn't sufficient offset.

Gotcha. Thank you. Okay. And executive had no capital. Now we're to the bulk of our evening.

PPE and J committed payments. We proposed the operating budget. Chair Andre.

Chair Baldwin.

Alrighty. Good evening, everyone. So happy to present on the action from PP and J. We had six operating amendments and no capital, and all six of those amendments are before you with recommendations for approval from the committee. So I'm just here tonight to share the action in committee and not speak to my own perspectives on these.

So PP and J one, this is about the special projects position in DOA and the need for a Clerk three in the Deferred Prosecution Program. I know we've got folks from Deferred here tonight if there are questions. But essentially there there's a position in that office that an LTE has been doing work for, for several years now. We authorized an FTE position for that work in the budget this year. Well, for 2025, that position was never filled.

And LTE continues to do the work today. We just, at the Board meeting last week, extended the LTE hours for that position. The district attorney did identify this position for elimination, And this seeks to restore that partially or fully using the funding from the special projects coordinator position in DOA. So that is PP and J o one.

That's the one that Ingers and

PP and J o two, o three, and o four all relate to offsets for human services amendments and elimination of deputy positions that were vacant according to a vacancy list from, I believe that was September, but we get updates to that. So each of these positions each of these amendments did pass, but with varying vote counts in committee. Note that I did have an amendment to an amendment for PPNJ02, so we debated that in committee for a bit. That would have eliminated half of the positions and half of the POS cuts, etcetera, but that failed in committee two to five, and then ultimately we passed PP and J two five to two. And then PP and J three and four again relate to human services amendments related to housing, shelter services, and again do so through funding of vacant deputy positions.

And then PP and J five and six both passed unanimously. So five restores two Clerk three positions in the Clerk of Courts. Those were not positions proposed for elimination by the Clerk of Courts. They are roles that help with a sound functioning of the judiciary. The clerk was able to identify additional revenue sources that were not allocated or known when the budget was submitted to the executive.

So that is reflected in finding significant offsets there, unrealized revenue. And then there is a remaining gap, a GPR impact of $73,400 that I've been in communication with folks on this committee about how else to close that gap. And essentially, that was identified as more or less an error in the proposed budget before us. And then, PP and J06 is a policy only amendment, no fiscal impact, and it relates to reinstating relationship with the U. S.

Marshals Service for federal residents in transit, one that was eliminated in November 2023, part of jail consolidation work. And that is a $1,550,000 new revenue line for the sheriff's office, and the primary way that the sheriff's office sought to bring new revenue and address the executive's budget direction about the 4% reduction. So it requires various or requests, rather various components related to Federal Residence in Transit, and then also has specific clarity about the Board needing to authorize that contract before the relationship is reinitiated. So those are the six budget amendments PP and J deliberated on. And I'm happy to provide more or less narrative.

We decided not to prioritize things, but just to let votes on various items speak for themselves since we did not have consensus in committee.

K. Any questions? I know there's something else going on that the chair will address. I think, obviously, cutting that many

We have a number of speakers on PP and J.

Should we do it?

Well Do wanna

Should we do everything? Yeah.

All the Sure. All the operating amendments, including those not presented?

Indian. Right. That's what I think. I was It running it through my my head as well. Questions on any of the other amendments from chair Andre? If not, we have chair Miles has an amendment. What's your p and f o two? It is. Go ahead. What's up?

Alright. So PNFO two falls under oversight oversight of PP and J because it is related to the sheriff's office. Excuse me. And as there was a lot of discussion moving on over the three PP and J amendments proposing to eliminate vacant positions in the sheriff's office, I was hearing from a number of our colleagues that we're uncomfortable with that volume of positional elimination. And and I have some of my own concerns around that.

So supervisor Glaser and I worked together on coming up with a compromise and different very different approach. And I guess before I go into the details of that, I just wanna take a a minute to share some thoughts about how we debate these things. And and I I shared some frustration earlier today in a conversation with the sheriff because there was a letter to the editor from him last week, which is perfectly fine. You know, get your opinions out there in in various forms. But to what was frustrating in in that letter was that the sheriff named three of our colleagues by name and, in my opinion, by a leap of logic, called into question their ethics.

And I recall more than a couple years ago that I was moved by the sheriff's words when we found a way forward funding the jail project. And he had worked with then supervisor Palaban and supervisor Kagea on that and spoke about the importance of finding common ground and working from there to find compromise. And that is something that I've kept in mind, especially as we face this tough budget and, you know, the resources. There isn't enough resources to meet the the demand and need out there. And, you know, to for people to make accusations, put labels on people.

It's what leads to basically tribal politics where people get in their camps and there is no discussion and compromise, talk towards compromise breaks down. And, so, I just wanna say I approach these issues, these tough subjects, keeping in mind that and trusting that all of my colleagues have the best interests of those we serve in mind. And, you know, we may disagree on on the nuances of of issues, but I will continue to operate in that fashion until people show me otherwise, break my trust in that regard. And I I think it's important for all of us to keep that philosophy in mind as we work through this and other tough issues. And I'm anticipating next year's budget is going to be considerably harder because we'll be seeing, expenses outpacing our revenues again, and and there won't be vacant positions to eliminate.

We're gonna have to be making decisions about what services to cut, what what and maybe even what, positions need to be laid off. Those are gonna be tough conversations, and, it's really important that we all are able to talk openly and debate freely. So, so enough of my soapbox. I just wanted to, put that out there. So PPG o two is an alternative to the others, an alternative to eliminating vacant positions in the sheriff's office.

This proposal would, understanding that that the sheriff has has a a serious challenge ahead of him and has over the years now of filling these vacant positions. We we can anticipate that there's gonna be a certain volume of vacancies throughout the year. And so what this amendment is proposing is why not budget for and recognize the salary savings of a certain number of positions and use that salary savings to offset the costs in other areas of our budget. So the proposal specifically is to require that the sheriff maintain 20 vacant deputy positions through the year through 2026. That would generate $2,380,000 in salary savings.

We would not be eliminating vacant positions nor defunding them. So the, 2,380,000.00, like I said, to me, it it it's a reasonable number that I think we can anticipate the sheriff would not need to go would not be able to go under. I like I said, I think he's got a challenge ahead of him of needing to solve the a problem around recruitment. And that 2,380,000.00 in addition to the 1 and a half million in federal hold revenue that's proposed in the budget combined equals the 4% GPR target that that was part of the executive's direction to all departments to achieve in their in their budget recommendations. So excuse me.

I recognize that the executive had a few other positions, non sworn, positions in her budget proposal to eliminate in the sheriff's office. And my view that those positions are, you know, obviously above the 4%. Everybody had to hit that 4% or was asked to meet that 4% target. That 4% target achieved 14,000,000 in addressing the $31,000,000 budget. So, all the other cuts after that, including 4% POS reductions, is an effort to meet the remaining $17,000,000.

That said, I know those other three positions are important to the sheriff, and and I think what we can do with those positions and I know supervisor Brower has a budget amendment to reserve, and we'll talk about this on Thursday. It wasn't ready in time for us to have here tonight. It's to main for certain positions, including some of these in the sheriff's office, proposed by the executive to to eliminate to instead maintain the position authority. That's a whole different thing. Just wanna throw that out there and for all to know that I recognize the importance of those positions, and we wanna leave as much flexibility for the sheriff as possible.

And speaking of that, I think one thing that's lost in the conversation around, the sheriff's vacancies and whether or not, there's the latitude there to eliminate those positions. You know, some of them have been vacant for quite quite some time, so it's easy to assume that the sheriff's office is functioning just fine without these positions. But I think what gets lost in that in that conversation is the fact that that the work demand is still there. Those hours still need to be filled. And what is happening is is deputies are being required, not asked to volunteer, but required to work overtime.

Because there just isn't enough people voluntarily working overtime to to cover all those hours. And, that I don't think is sustainable. It's driving the overtime budget beyond what is budgeted, so it's it's a direct hit to our reserves. And, so I don't think it's unsustainable from a staffing standpoint. I don't think it's sustainable from a health standpoint for for the deputies.

You know, like other positions, county or, sheriff's deputies or county employees too, they need work life balance, and, they have the added challenge of needing to be at their best at times that people are at their worst. And my fear is if if the sheriff is not able to resolve the recruitment problem, you know, we're in a in a we're looking ahead at bad outcomes. And if we eliminate the positions, we're taking away the flexibility and ability for the sheriff to resolve his recruitment problem or making it that much harder for him. So so, like I said, this is a compromise. It is a bit of kick in the can down the road.

I think we'll be right back here again having this debate again next year, but it does recognize that there's salary savings that we can put towards other areas that, in another form, address public safety, and that is some of our, critical human service needs, housing needs, and so forth. So this is the compromise that Jeff, supervisor Glaverser, and I have come up with, and I'd be looking for the committee's guidance on on this and other things, how we balance this in since this is a different approach than than what came out of PP and J. So, looking for guidance from the committee on what to include into sub one. Questions

from the committee? Any, so this doesn't fully fund or this doesn't fully replace the the cuts from the Nope. Originally?

No. I it it does not, and I have had conversations with a number of supervisors, in particular, super supervisor Weigleitner, given that she and supervisor Traveler are primary sponsors on on health and human needs, amendments, that had originally looked for the other PP and J amendments as offsets. So so, yeah, I've worked with supervisor on on compromise and how we could best address some of those human service amendments with what we have what resources we

have. Nice. I'll acknowledge that now and later. Thank thank supervisor for working with you on that. There. Just a second. Did you I'm just in the middle of something. I'm trying to figure something out. So are you speaking on this?

Well, I don't know if you're done presenting all of

the I don't think we I think we are.

Once you're done, I'd like to speak.

I have a number of speakers. I also have something else. I'm having a capital Do

we have no capital? Do we have any capital or no?

No. There's no capital. Okay. Hold on a second. Supervisor Engelberger. And the folks that are about to speak, I apologize for everyone. There was an oversight of a speaker that wanted to be an eener. You can come up, Chad. So I'm gonna Chad Haynen want to speak on the Ener amendment. So I'm just gonna let him speak now, and then we'll get right back to

Thank you very much. I think there was some tactical issues, and I really appreciate you giving me

the options. Amendment were you speaking on?

The amendment to restore the volunteer coordinator position. My name is Chad Haynen. I'm a park ranger at Dane County Parks, but these are my own statements that I don't speak on behalf of the department. But I wanted to speak in support of restoring the volunteer coordinator position, which I think is one of the most important positions in the land and water resources department. I say this as a ranger who fought really hard with our management team to get a fifth ranger only to see that get cut this year.

As much as that hurt, I know that this volunteer coordinator position means so much more to the department. It's been thirty years that this position's existed. And before I get into what the critical roles of this position is, I wanna address some misconceptions as well. When this position was created thirty years ago, there was this belief that volunteers were taking positions away from full time employees, and I've heard that argument resurface again recently. As vice president of my local, I can tell you that the work they do is supplemental to what we do.

We could not pay enough people to go out and harvest expensive prairie seed from our prairies. We would not have been able to have burn crews over the last thirty years without volunteers. We could not pay enough people to get on their hands and knees and pull invasive species out of the dirt. Last year, we logged our volunteer coordinator logged 54,000 volunteer hours for 2024, which is about the equivalent of 22 full time positions if you're looking at a 2,400 work year. That work is supplemental.

It's not work that could get done without our volunteers. And I want to emphasize that members of the public want to volunteer with the county, and they deserve to. They have a right to be involved with their local green spaces, and we should be able to help accommodate them and support them in doing so. And the reason we've been able to build the program into what it is to get the 54,000 people or 54,000 is because we have a volunteer coordinator building relationships. That volunteer coordinator helps make sure we our volunteers are trained, that they know how to organize, that they address, or they identify projects that meet are within the lofty goals that this county is set in the parks and open space plan and that the that their efforts are coordinated.

The other misconception I wanna address is I've heard multiple times now that there's a LTE volunteer coordinator. I just wanna be clear. There is not an LTE volunteer coordinator. There is a volunteer coordinator assistant, which is not semantics. Our volunteer coordinator is a professional class position, p class.

Our assistant coordinator is a considerably pay paid at a considerably lower level in addition to not having health benefits or any other kind of retirement benefits or anything that the county provides. But she is at a much lower pay class than that volunteer coordinator. And if you want her to do the job, she should be paid for it. It'd be unconscionable not to. I kinda wanna wrap this up by just affirming that, you know, the volunteer coordinator, in addition to building these relationships, making sure our our volunteers are supported, that make sure our volunteers are getting the resources they need, and keep them engaged.

I've had many volunteers who appreciate when a staff person is there to take their call, to answer a quick question, and clarify safety issues, which is a key part. There there's a a liability issue if we don't have constant contact with our volunteers, whether it be making sure they're doing burns appropriately, that they're following all regulations or any kind of restrictions put on by the DNR or local municipalities. This is a critical communication link between our volunteer groups and the Dane County Parks. I think that's all I got. But if you have any other questions for me,

free. Questions?

Thanks. Thank you so much for letting me speak. Yep. Appreciate it. Okay.

Okay. I'm gonna get the end. Go ahead.

It's very bullish.

We're back to the PP and Jang. Thank you, mister chairman. I just wanted to put my 2¢ in on this funding you know, removing funds from one department, putting funds into another department. I think it's problematic. Like I said, I've I've always been supportive of of the sheriff's department and the human services as far as funding things.

I know the sheriff's got difficulties with recruitment because of I mean, everybody all of the departments out there throughout the nation are having problems, and and it is a a problem other than funding ICE. Apparently, they just take people off the street and do what they need to do for that, but that's kinda that's pretty much crazy. So I understand or I I believe. I'm not sure. I'm not an expert in in either of those two fields.

That's why I do the construction, field. But as far as as far as I can tell, there's there was quite a few vacant positions in the human services department. And I'm just wondering why, some of this money isn't coming out of some of those positions as opposed to out of the sheriff's, department. Like I said, I think it's problematic to take from one department to fill another department's needs, and it's a problem. And, I don't know how you're gonna solve it, but I just wanted to get that out because it's difficult to make those points after everything's said and done and trying to vote on something at the full board. So thank you.

Thank you. And can we Sorry.

I

apologize for that. For the wait on I didn't not for his comments. The speakers now for PP and J.

And first one we have is Brian Tischer.

Walk. Thank you, chair Baljen. Right. Thank you, committee members. The first thing I wanna do is I wanna thank chair Miles for the public recognition on the floor tonight of the sacrifices that the members I represent of the Dane County deputy sheriff's association have been making. I often forget to do this. I am Brian Tischer. I am the president of the Dane County deputy sheriff's association. And in that role, I represent approximately 380 sworn members of the sheriff's office. I'm here tonight to speak in opposition to the three amendments calling to remove 28 positions from the sheriff's office budget.

I am not in opposition to the goals behind these amendments. I think that serving the least fortunate in our community is something we should all strive for. I'm only in opposition to the idea that sacrificing my members' well-being is the only way to arrive at that goal. The first reason I'm in opposition to these amendments is that the county executive requested that departments reduce budgets by 4% in an attempt to deal with a substantial portion of a $31,000,000 structural deficit. Although the sheriff did not comply with this request, it was not done out of spite.

It was done because in his trying to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars, he submitted an initial budget proposal that was bare bones. I say that it was bare bones with a great measure of confidence because I would hope that if he had submitted a request that went beyond bare bones, the top item on that list would have been to get back the two positions we lost last year. He only requested what he felt was needed to safely and effectively run the office that he is constitutionally charged with overseeing. The biggest thing I want to point out is that these proposals do nothing to help solve the structural deficit. These three proposals will not dig us out of a hole nor will they save taxpayer dollars.

All these proposals do is take even more money away from the sheriff's office and give it to a department that already has the largest buzz budget in the county. I thought it's strangely ironic when I attended my in service session yesterday that it ended with a speaker who was there to talk to us about resilience. Instead of finding ways to help the members that I represent, we give them training to be more resilient, to put up with more, to keep digging down deeper and finding a way to push on. Sorry.

Take your time.

We ask them to not just to continue to endure, but we ask them to give up even more. Perhaps it's because we are the ones that are expected to show up when others call for help that we find it hard to ask for help ourselves. Most cops will laugh it off when you ask if they're okay. They'll smile and say I'm fine even when they aren't. Tonight, on behalf of the members that I represent, I'm not going to smile and tell you that we're okay.

I'm here to ask for help. I'm here to tell you we're struggling. But we're not asking for more. We're not asking for money to be added to the sheriff's office budget. We aren't asking for some new fancy toy. We're not asking for additional training. None of what we're asking for is more. We're just asking that you don't take more away. Please don't support these amendments, and I'm sorry for being so emotional.

It's fine, Brian.

Thank you.

Any questions? Okay. Thanks, Brian.

Hey. We have, Tory Mueller online. She has been promoted followed by Sandra Brown. Sandra in person. Thank you.

Go ahead. You have five minutes.

Hi. Are you able to hear me?

We can.

Okay. So thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight, and thank you for your dedication to the residents of Dane County. I have had the honor to work in homeless services for over twenty years. This work is hard, but I continue because I believe that all people have some type of gift, big or small, they want to provide to their community. With housing, people are better positioned to share those gifts with their neighbors.

When people are experiencing homelessness, our community misses out on so many opportunities. I am here today as I would like to see the amendments passed that restore the 4% cut to nonprofits, fully fund operations of the men's shelter, and provide funding for an overflow shelter. I recently completed a training on a housing focused shelter. At the beginning of the training, the presenter posed several questions for us to think about. In thinking about the new men's shelter, one question has really stuck with me.

In your community, who gets shelter? Those that need it or those that were lucky enough to get it? Today, I would say that for the most part, the men who need shelter are able to get it. In fact, last week, there was a night where 373 men in our community needed shelter at Porch Light and were able to get it. In early twenty twenty six, our community will open the doors of the new men's shelter.

It is an exciting time for our community as we provide the first purpose built shelter in Dane County. It will be a welcoming space that provides safety and the opportunity for guests to connect with services. The capacity at this new shelter is two fifty guests. When planning for the new shelter, a capacity of two fifty was more than enough to meet the need. Now we consistently see over 300 guests at shelter.

Remember, last week, there was a night with 373 guests. That is 123 more than capacity at the new shelter. What happens to the 123 people who do not get into shelter? What if the temperature is going to get down to seven degrees that night? Even if half of those people can find someone to stay with or scrape together funds for a hotel room, that still leaves over 60 people who want to access shelter and are unable to do so.

They're going to end up sleeping on the streets, doorways, park benches, in the woods, in a car. Most are gonna be out in public spaces. Outreach staff will connect with them and help them get on the shelter waiting list. They will also help them explore other housing options. But the people are going to likely remain outside as there is not a plan for shelter to be available. So I ask again, in your community, who gets shelter? Those that need it or those that were lucky enough to get it? Thank you.

You.

K. Sandra Brown followed by Paul Seaman. Paul's in person, I believe. Welcome. You have five minutes.

Chair Beldren, board chair Miles, and supervisors, thank you for this opportunity to testify this evening. My name is Sandra Brown. I am the president of Moses Madison organizing in strength, equity, and solidarity. Moses' mission is to build collective power to dismantle the systems of mass incarceration and mass supervision and to eradicate the racial disparities in our communities that contribute to them. Moses speaks on behalf of its 22 member congregations, including several Lutherans, Episcopal, Methodist, UCC, Unitarian, and Saint Paul African Methodist Episcopal, Madison Friend Meeting, Unity of Madison, second baptist, catholic call of action, holy wisdom monastery, and snowflower buddhist sangha, and many more individuals committed to social justice.

Moses supports the operating budget amendments passed by the Public Protection and Judiciary Committee, PP and J, and its Health and Human Needs Committee, HHN. We have listened to all of the committee meetings leading to these amendments. We have testified at many of them. Moses calls on Dane County to refrain from eliminating precious resources used to serve communities in need throughout the county and to move the county toward lower rates of incarceration for people of color. It is well documented that the racial disparities in Wisconsin's prison system and the Dane County Jail persist as the rate for exceeding the rest of the county and the world.

Poverty and lack of human services are major contributions to the overall task of the well-being in our community, especially among black and indigenous citizens, including families with children who suffer disproportionate housing instability, hunger, and lack of basic human needs. The HHN amendments are essential from a human's wellness perspective and are also essential public safety. We need to focus on priorities and funding where they are most needed. Not approving these amendments will, over the long term, require the county and municipalities to invest more in policing and the jail, which is precisely the opposite of what we should be doing. You understand the difficult choices that you face with the budget deficit, but we urge you to carefully, and I say again, carefully consider the human impact of the loss of funding that the HHN amendments address when you make your decision about these amendments.

And we hope, and we humbly urge you to adopt them all. Thank you.

Thank you.

K. Paul Seaman followed by sheriff Barrett.

Well, you have five minutes. Thanks.

My name is Paul Seaman. I'm the co chair of the Moses Justice System Reform Initiative task force. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. On behalf of all of Moses, our task force members have focused on the reform of the Dane County criminal legal system for over a decade. Moses engaged in creating and supporting the compromise jail consolidation project adopted in 2023.

We were able to support the compromise because of a strong commitment to implement reforms. I'm speaking in support of the operating budget amendments passed by PP and J and HHN. The first broad issue of this debate is the status of our social safety net. This is the driver for the HHN amendments, which focus on the crisis in the human services, particularly problems of homelessness, but also fiscal challenges to POS agencies that have been hit twice in the budget. Cuts to social services are accumulating, starting with federal cuts seconded by state and local cuts.

With this budget, Dane County cuts are magnifying the other social service cuts. We call in our elected Dane County supervisors and executive to resist unnecessary cuts and to find another way. This should not be framed as an urban versus rural debate. All Dane County residents benefit from the public protection and wellness services provided by the sheriff's office. All Dane County residents benefit from the public protection and wellness services by the providers and programs that are facing severe cuts.

County Resolution five fifty six, guiding principle number four, states that arrests and incarceration will be reduced by having a coordinated system of community treatment for substance abuse, mental health treatment, and for people with developmental disabilities. Since adoption of Resolution five fifty six in 2015, Dane County services are more coordinated and have been improving. Let's not take a step backward. The second broad issue comes from the challenge of paying to fix the problems budget cuts have created with the social safety net. This is the driver for the PP and J amendments.

If there are better options for funding the HHS amendments, they should be brought forward for consideration. The argument that led to the construction of the new jail was a compromise that resulted in the building of a smaller jail and a commitment to implement reforms to safely keep people out of the criminal legal system and out of the jail. This is a test of that commitment. We value and support the reforms the sheriff has brought to our jail during his tenure. However, more reforms are needed, and the county needs to continue to pursue additional efforts both within the administration of the jail and in the continued services to shore up the social safety net in our community.

Taking a large amount of funding off the table in anticipation of staffing needs for the new jail in 2027, as projected by the consultant's staffing report, is not justified when the county is facing multiple crises that if not addressed will result in unneeded suffering and decrease of both public safety and community wellness. This is a matter of our moral commitment to the safety and well-being of the people throughout Dane County. The 2023 consultant staffing report for the new jail should be studied and evaluated in the context of the full set of county goals and objectives like any other consultant report. If the recommendations of the report were accepted and pursued, the proposed staffing level would cost with inflation about $1,000,000,000 over twenty years. This would, like the current budget, leave little or no funding for the many reform objectives previously declared and supported by the county board and the county executive that are needed to keep people out of the criminal legal system in the jail.

In light of the current budget shortfall and the probability of future budget shortfalls, the need for each position should be challenged and scrutinized. Moses urges you to approve these proposed amendments and send them to the county board for a full debate and consideration. Retaining the services and staffing that the HHN amendments addressed must be seen as a critical priority that reflects the values of Dane County. Thank you for your deep consideration of the affirmation of these Dane County values as reflected in the HHN and PP and J amendments. Thank you. It's perfectly timed.

Went dark, and I didn't see the minute.

Here we have sheriff Barrett followed by Matthew Julian. Matthew's online. I'll promote him while the sheriff is speaking.

Let me share. We have five minutes.

Well, good evening, and thank you members of the committee. Thank you, chair Miles, and thank you, chair Veldren, for the opportunity and the tough job that you have before you. I wanna thank you, chair Miles, for acknowledging the great work and the service and sacrifice that the brave women and men of our Dane County Sheriff's Office do on a daily basis. As we sit in the building right now, there are deputies in a building serving and ensuring that the people that are incarcerated in our jail facility are safe, and it is our job and our duty to continue to do that. We are mandated by the Wisconsin state statute to operate the jail.

There is no if, ands, or buts. There are no days off. There are no half times. There are no holidays. We have to man these positions twenty four seven, three sixty five. I wanna touch base and and really talk about something that's really deeper than just the idea that it's always public safety pit against human services. We saw this last year. Why is it always the two most important parts of our community, human services and public protection, are always pit against each other? There are many other ways to get funds to staff both because this issue is not a this or a that. It's a this and a that.

We have to have both human services and public protection. Let's be very clear. The duties of one of those, human services and public protection, does both. Public protection doesn't just include enforcement. It's not just arresting or walking around the jail with keys.

We do so much more than just simply arrest people. Matter of fact, a lot of the connections that are made with human services start with our law enforcement out in the community because it is us that is out there at 02:00 in the morning on Christmas. It is us that responds to that call on a Saturday afternoon or Sunday. It is us that are making those it is our mental health deputies making those referrals to the county. We do so much more than simply enforce the law, and that's why social services or human services is part of what we do on a daily basis.

If you didn't know, was a deputy that provided their own personal backpack to a resident that was being released from the jail two weeks ago. If you didn't know, two and a half weeks ago, a Dane County sheriff's office deputy ran into a burning house, pulled out a resident, and saved their life. If we've forgotten the tragedy in December at abundant life Christian school, it was a Dane County sheriff's office deputy that arrived first in Madison. These are the things we do on a daily basis, and I'm here to continue the message of chair Miles about compromise and understanding and stop the pitting of human services against protective services. We need both.

But what we can't have is one or the other. The positions that we have are designed to open the safe, humane, and rehabilitative jail facility we all voted to open, the facility that has medical and mental health housing. Because if we don't open that building, we will continue to house those that are going through behavioral issues, medical issues, and mental health issues in the same place, and that's solitary confinement. And that's the worst place we can put someone going through an emergency. The staffing is nothing more than what we need to simply maintain.

And from a cost standpoint, as we're at personnel and finance, overtime doesn't save money. If we are appropriately staffed, we are paying people at the regular rate. Right now, we're paying time and a half. And after four hours, they go to double time. So we are losing financially money by continuing to go to operate less than what we need to be staffed.

I wanna apologize if there was a thought that I was not trying to, go forward or to comply with the county with the county executive's instructions of the 4%. As mentioned earlier, I was simply honoring the badge that's on my chest, honoring the expectation that everybody in this room has of me to be honest and have integrity. And I put forth a budget that was lean. Now could I strategically have sent forth a budget for a 130,000,000 and then had you guys cut 30,000,000 and say I gave my 30,000,000? Yeah.

But I didn't do that. I did it because that was my part in order to help with this budget deficit. Lastly, do please do not punish us for doing the right thing. And that is something that breaks down law enforcement peace officers more than anything else. Sitting here, I was the first person, the first law enforcement officer in Dane County to stand up to an administration that was trying to enforce or to implement ICE here in Dane County.

I was the first one to end the SCAP grant. And in ending that SCAP grant and honoring and protecting our immigrant community and the values of this Dane County community, we lost $200,000 in revenue. $200,000. That's nearly two positions and doing the right thing. But here we are getting getting scolded and getting looked at for not honoring that 4%.

We have lost $257,000 in the three positions that the county executive took from us. So based off of the conversations tonight, if we have now met with the 20 position compromise that's coming forward, if we've met that 4%, we've actually gone over the 4% and have given more than what we should have. Because those three positions totaling 257,000 are still not gonna come back. So in closing, we are here to serve and protect you. I'm simply asking for the resources to do that.

We are never gonna stop serving the great people of Dane County, but we're not gonna be able to provide the people with people if we don't have them. Imagine if that detective wasn't able to be there at Abundant Life Christian School. Imagine if you didn't have BeltLine bomb when you broke down on the side of the BeltLine. Because those are the things that we are gonna have to get rid of in order to maintain what we're mandated to do by the state of Wisconsin. So thank you again for your time, and I look forward to continuing the conversation. And please continue to keep please vote this down and keep the positions for us so we can serve you and the commune communities you've been elected to represent. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any questions for sheriff? Sheriff, does the compromise, chair Miles? Is that something you can work with, do you think?

Yeah. I think, obviously, every position is needed, and we're in a position right now where tough decisions have to be made. And if we're looking at taking or permanently eliminating 28 positions or having the opportunity to freeze 20, that is definitely something I think our membership and our community would be happy with moving forward. But, again, we're gonna need those positions and because the training starts for that new jail facility next year.

Thank you.

Thank you, chair.

Yes.

K. Matthew Julian followed by Alison Belburn.

Hi. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. And, so I spoke last week at the county board meeting. My name is Matt Julian. I'm a social worker in a social work and nurse program at UnityPoint Health Meritor that works in the community with folks that are unhoused.

Just to reiterate what Tory has already said, if our new shelter was open last week, a 120 plus men would have been denied entry at shelter. To give you an idea of what that looks like, in the last week, I've worked with guys that have had amputations. I've worked with I've delivered ostomy supplies for individuals that depend on shelter, medications, wound care. The list can go on. The our need for the shelter as the basis minimum of care, it it it can't we can't put a price on it.

Like, we absolutely need this to be able to serve the folks who are suffering the most in our community. If we don't fund, an overflow shelter as well as adequately fund our current shelter, we will see a significant more amount of people on the streets further criminalizing poverty. And when that happens, that's when we see our jail get filled with people with mental illness and substance abuse issues. We need to be serving them outside of

the

jail. We need to be reaching folks and meeting them where they're at, And having a base level of shelter should, at bare minimum, be what our community has to offer

them. In

closing, I'd just like to say I I I can't imagine I've I've worked in homeless services for ten years. The shelter system has gravely improved over those ten years. We would be stepping back in time before I got here with with having a wait list and the 900 plus folks at the door. So thank you for considering this. I encourage you to pass these amendments.

Thank you. Questions? Alright. Good luck.

K. Some of our other online registrants have declined to be promoted. Derek, is Derek in the room? Yep. So Derek Wallace. Is there a Joanna Fratch here? Okay. Thank you.

Okay.

Thanks, everyone. I'm really grateful to be here this evening with you and also with everyone in this room tonight. I'm really fortunate to be the president of Local seven twenty, which represents hundreds of county employees across every single county department. And I think tonight, you're getting to see a view into the world that I'm fortunate enough to see on a daily basis. Every day, I get a window into how important county government is and all the services that we provide, whether that be in public safety and the judiciary, human services, public health, parks, and natural resources, 91 call center.

List goes on and on. You know, tonight, we have a lot of county staff, line staff, union representatives, managers, department heads, elected officials, our friends in the POS agencies and community groups like Moses. And as difficult as this budget is, I think the silver lining is that's really highlighted how critical county government is in the wide range of services that residents rely upon. So regardless of how this particular budget shakes out, I hope we can all come together as a community and fully fund county government going forward. So just briefly speaking on PP J o five.

Hi,

Pete. There's PP and J o one as well as PP and J o five. Already talked about PP and J o one to some extent with this committee with the deferred prosecution clerk three. PPNJ o five does restores poster restore two other clerk threes in the clerk of courts. I kind of been tag teaming with, clerk Okazaki.

I think he was at PP and J made a really, forceful case for why those are really important positions, in a nutshell. You know, you have 17, branches of underjudges, and, they each have two clerical support support staff, a clerk three and a and a court clerk. And so this this, the executive budget proposed to eliminate two of the clerk threes in the judicial branches, and so you're leaving, you know, two branches understaffed with half the resources as the, the other, judicial, branches. So, really appreciate on the clerk of Courtsu Okazaki for his leadership on on finding ways to to try and restore this position, and, hopefully, that we will be able to get that across the finish line. So that's really all I have for you, and I will certainly answer any questions if there are any.

Question for Derek? And thanks again, Derek, for your service.

We have Joanna next, followed by Dan Fitch.

Hello, supervisors. Thank you so much for allowing me to speak tonight. I really appreciate it. And I really don't envy the positions you're in with this budget. It's really tough.

I just want to speak in favor of PPJ o two, PPJ o three and four. And I want to start by saying that I grew up in a rural community in Central Wisconsin. The nearest village to where I live did not have its own police department, and oftentimes, it was a sheriff's deputy who was the first first responder. The school I attended didn't have a resource officer, so it was a deputy that filled that role as needed. From current students' domestic disputes and a neighbor or family member suffering from mental health crisis, it's a deputy who answers those calls.

However, all of these often involve an officer connecting those people with further services to support them after that contact. These services must also be fully funded in order to ensure service and support is available after the initial call in order to prevent recurrence and further calls. So thinking about my youth, I kind of did a Google Google search. I wanted to see how many other law enforcement agencies Dane County had. So including the city of Madison, and it appears there's about 23, plus or minus.

I didn't go on everyone's website. I also ran into an article from the Cap Times that I started reading that was entitled County Sheriff Outraged Over Proposed Cuts to Deputy Positions. I started reading it, and I was like, well, this doesn't sound what I heard in the committee meeting. And I looked at the date, and it was from October 26. So I just wanted to point out that 30 positions were vacant at the time that article was written, and about 30 positions are still vacant in the sheriff's office today.

As a public sector employee too, I know that if positions aren't filled, our legislature periodically rescinds them. It's a use them or use them type of thing for other agencies. It's the nature of public budgets. It's the nature of being in public service, unfortunately. So I think the sheriff's department shouldn't be exempt from the process of balancing the budget.

And it should be making sacrifices too and personnel. Asking you to vote in support of these amendments to commit to the shelter funding and commit to providing funding services that support people and help ensure their basic needs are met. HHS workers are on the front lines as well, suffering from overwork and constantly being asked to do with more or less more with less, too. But we know that crime goes down when people's basic needs are met. And we're facing a tougher time where perhaps a lot more folks won't have their base basic needs met.

Thank you.

Thank Any questions? Thank you. Shakar.

Hey. We have Dan Fitch, followed by Brenda Conkle.

Howdy. Can you hear me? Hello, Am Yep. I

Yep. Sorry.

Thanks, folks. Hello, supervisors. Thanks for your time. I'm just a citizen, not like any of these experts you've just heard. But a speaker early on talked about it being problematic to transfer positions between departments. And like the last speaker, I think I find it problematic that the sheriff's department couldn't submit a 4% cut like everyone else. Brian Tischer claimed that, quote, these proposals don't solve the deficit, but I think we need to remember that they directly address keeping people out of the jail, which is something really worth investing in. I want people who work for the county to have good jobs, and I don't think jail jobs are good jobs. And I think that's why we're having a hard time filling them. I think we should be trying to replace jobs in caging with jobs keeping people housed and cared for in our community.

And do we not think that the giant hole in our budget that we're dealing with might have something to do with the sheriff getting mostly everything he wanted from the jail consolidation project? I I do wonder what things would look like if we had some of that money back right now. And I remember hearing four to five years ago, a consultant during those meetings recommend downsizing the jail positions back then. I'm wondering if there are any other departments who got who get this kind of, like, temporary option in the 4% cut. I understand that we're trying to leave as much flexibility with the sheriff as possible, but I would like to see that flexibility extended everywhere.

And finally, one last thing. PP and J chair, Andre, talked about and briefly on screen was an amendment that reinstated $1,500,000 for federal prisoner contract, but I couldn't find that in Legistar under either of the p p j items. Anyway, I'd like us to think very carefully about collaborating with federal government as fascists attempt to take permanent control of it. Thanks for your time, everybody.

Thank you.

K. We have Brenda Conkle. Do we have Elizabeth? I'm sorry. Elizabeth Barone. Is she in

the room?

She just registered. You can handle it.

I think she

had to leave.

Oh, okay. Harry Richardson will be after Brenda.

Alright, Brenda. Five minutes. Good

evening. I just wanted to speak to oh, I wanna speak for PPMJ amendments two, three, and four and against personnel and finance amendment o two in the PP and J amendments. Earlier, one of the sheriff's deputy representatives spoke about what how this feels, very emotional about how it feels to have these cuts made to them. And for nonprofits, I've been doing this for over thirty years, and this is the way it feels four out of five years that we're looking at budgets. Nonprofits have been making cuts after cuts after cuts after cuts.

He talked about resilience. And as far as resilience goes, you know, they got to have training on resilience. I don't have money to train my staff on resilience. And my staff who work in homeless services turn over every one to two years because people don't stay in this field. It's a nationwide crisis trying to find workers to stay in our field.

And quite frankly, the county pays really well, and a lot of our best people get hired by the city or they get hired by the county. And it's difficult for us to keep really good employees because of those cuts year after year after year. We're just not paying at the rates that others are doing. He talked about how he can't smile and say we're okay. I know of so many people who cannot sleep at night right now knowing what it's going to be like if we do not find some sort of solution for homeless services, particularly with the men's shelter.

Many speakers have talked about it. Mhmm. But already in October, we have, you know, a 100 more than a 100 people who wouldn't be able to get into our new shelter. Where do those people go? I run an outreach program. The outreach workers are supposed to help them. What are we supposed to do? There's no legal place to sleep. There's no shelter we can bring them to. We have not much to offer.

We can offer them, what, some hand warmers and a sleeping bag and a tent. And then, you know, they can't find a place to put up a tent because there's no place legal to do it. So we are facing the biggest crisis I have seen in the thirty years that I have been working in this area. Our people are struggling, and the people who we serve are struggling 10 times more. I we ran Dairy Drive, and that recently got closed down.

And the residents there that had to go back to sleeping outside are struggling harder than I've ever seen some of the folks struggle. We just don't have resources in the community to support these folks if they are not in the shelter, and we really need this money for shelter. And those shelters, they're not they're gonna keep people alive this winter. Mhmm. You know, some of the people were were talking about stories that people face in their in their jobs as deputies.

Well, we too find frozen people sleeping outside. Like, that's what homeless homeless services people do. When you're out there on outreach, you could find somebody who's passed away and frozen to death. That's the kind of work we're doing at a fraction of the cost of what the sheriff's deputies are getting paid. Our staff don't get paid nearly that well. We need we need these positions. I they're vacant. They're gonna be vacant again. We need that funding to keep people alive next year. That's what this is about.

I think the other thing you guys need to realize is that we did produce a statement of need from the Homeless Services Consortium. And one of the big things about that statement of need is there's lots of things that we didn't even ask for in the county budget because there just isn't enough money to go around. No matter how we look at it, this is the bare minimum of what we need in HHN one, two, and three, the absolute bare minimum, and we are still going to struggle. You know, Matt talked about, you know, how what it's been like over the last ten years working with people who have all these medical needs. Right now, they told us if we prioritize everybody who had medical needs or who was using a walker or a wheelchair, the shelter would basically the new shelter would basically be full with only people with medical needs or people 55.

Like, if that was the criteria that we used, the shelter would be full and nobody else would be able to get in.

You have thirty seconds.

We are facing one of the biggest crises we have ever seen. This is the highest amount of people we've seen in our shelters ever, and we really do need this funding. If these positions are gonna sit there vacant, we really need this money, and we need it this year. I don't otherwise, I don't know what you expect is gonna happen in our community.

Thank you.

K. We have Harry Richardson, and I was successful at promoting Alison Bilburn and Joanna Anderson. So the Alison Bellburn will be after Harry. Right?

Is Harry

in the room? He was registered in person. We'll have Allison go next. Maybe he's in the annex.

Where are

going? There's several almost Oh. Gonna talk.

No. What was that? Allison? Looking at her. She's right there.

Yeah.

Just

Hi. Can you see

me and Harry?

That's Allison.

Yes. Harry Richard.

Hold

on just a second. We can't hear you.

Wait. Is it

It's Allison. Harry. Excuse me? I just lost my sorry. Hello?

Tell us when you're ready. Are you ready?

Me? No. Okay. Yes. I'm ready. Yeah. Thank you.

You have

five minutes. Thanks.

Hi. Yeah. My name is Allison. I'm grateful to live in Heidi Heidi Weigleitner's district, kind of in an oasis of racial justice in the midst of democratic liberalism. I did a lot of speaking at these meetings, what was that now, five years ago, four years ago.

And I among the people who kind of got tired of preaching to the choir slash people who don't seem to be super open minded about what I see as the blatant facts. It seems like with this vote here, there's really two reasons to vote to fund human services rather than the jail. And one is because of people's needs, because people need services and especially housing. And the other reason is because jails, sheriffs, prisons, police are harmful. I don't think from experience that I'm gonna have a lot of success in convincing you about the latter argument.

So I'm gonna, I guess, probably stick more to the formal or at least the tension between those two arguments. And I think I think it's really important right now, obviously, as other people have testified to the moment that we're in, to think right now about voting for incarceration in a time of looming human needs is really a frightening thought. It's really scary to think that I live in supposedly one of the most progressive places on the planet. And nonetheless, we would even conscience voting for carceralism when there are people who not only have been struggling but are going to be struggling a lot more. Right now, part of why I came to speak is because there's

a

really clear juxtaposition It really does pit jails as a form of safety versus meeting people's needs as a form of safety. And we can't pretend now that we can do both because right now we really can't do both. And the facts for those who dare to look at them are really are clear about what creates actual safety beyond

for all of

us, not just because we are bleeding hearts who want to help those people who are struggling the most, which is an argument, of course, in itself. But to think, though, that we would, at this time, possibly even think about voting to fund not only incarceration, but eight vacant positions. So we'd be voting you'd be voting essentially to increase police spending at a time when human needs are going to be at their highest in years. That's That's really something worth, I think, really thinking about. Not just, oh, let's share the hurt.

Let's everybody take their turn to get a budget cup, which there's that argument too. There I I heard a woman testify that she loves her sheriffs, but she even agrees. This is not the time to fund those positions. I don't love the sheriffs because I know the history. I know the history of what they were created for. I know that their primary jobs now are to oversee a jail, to be the overseer the literal overseers of the jail, to do housing evictions. I I know what their jobs are, and I don't love the sheriffs. Something personal, but I know my history. And I and I wish that I could convince all of you guys to join me in learning that history. I haven't been super successful at that.

Like I said, when I testified, used to testify before I became one of the more apathetic ones, the sad and tired ones who no longer participate with enthusiasm in the political process. But all I can say is is there's I mean, there's so many reasons you've heard from from the whole spectrum. I mean, I guess from everybody but the serious Trumpers who are I'm assuming want you to fund the sheriff's jobs. But everybody anywhere to the left of that stance is saying, please cut these positions. Cut these unfilled, unused, unnecessary, and I will add harmful positions.

I have thirty seconds.

Thank you. Okay. Well, I think that's about my time. Again, I I really hope that you consider this specific moment. I appreciate your consideration on Wisconsin. Have a good night.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Hey. We have Joanna Anderson followed by Linda Ketchum.

Hi there. My name is Joanna Anderson. I'm a nurse on staff with Madison Street Medicine. We're a nonprofit that works with the unhoused population in our city. We currently set up weekly clinics at the porch light shelter and the Beacon Day shelter in addition to doing street outreach.

I'm deeply concerned about the upcoming decrease in shelter avail ability for those who are unhoused. A lot of my role is helping clients access the local health care system, which we all know is already challenging and confusing enough. But if people have to worry each day about finding a safe place to sleep each night, this work becomes all the more challenging. And just in my four years of doing this type of work, we've seen an increase in the aging population in the unhoused community and the high level of medical vulnerability and needs that we see at our clinics and within our street outreach can be astounding. If people don't have access to basic shelter, these issues will only worsen as will their access to health care, which will lead to worse health outcomes and not to mention increased burden on the local health care system.

We see clients with significant mobility needs that I just cannot imagine how they will navigate sleeping outside. We see clients who have medical equipment that requires electricity such as oxygen concentrators, CPAP machines, power wheelchairs. We frequently see clients who don't have reliable access to their necessary medications due to the lack of a secure place to store them, or clients who need insulin has to be refrigerated. That's a huge issue. And with weather turning colder even now, I'm already worrying about how many cases of frostbite we'll see this year.

Our clinics see multiple people every single year that have significant wounds, and even amputations from frostbite injuries. And with having a smaller shelter that does not accommodate the number of people that need it, I'm even more worried for next winter. Like, where will people go to stay warm? This is an entirely preventable medical diagnosis that can have lifelong effects, and not having basic access to electricity and shelter will only exacerbate already existing really high medical needs within our community. I could go on with more examples of how lack of basic shelter will harm many, many unhoused people.

And in my work at Medicine Street Medicine, we only see problems exacerbated when someone doesn't have a safe, warm place to stay at night. So I urge you to vote in favor of funding an overflow shelter and additional funds for the, shelter to keep it open twenty four seven. Thank you.

You. Any questions? Thanks.

Hey. Our last speaker on in this section, it would be Linda Ketchum.

Thank you. Now

Go ahead, Linda. Yep. Here you go. You have five minutes.

Okay. Thank you. And thank you for your service. I'm Linda Ketchum, the executive director of Just Dane, and I'm here to speak in opposition to p and f o two and in support of amendments h h n o one, o two, o three, h h n c two, c three, p p and j o two, o three, and o four. These amendments preserve a safety net that's already fraying.

With federal cuts to human services, the strain is already being felt and need is growing. We're talking about people whose lives are hanging in the balance, people who are unhoused, hungry, sick, people in need of treatment, who need help to stay in their homes, to name just a few issues. We're talking about neighbors, yours and mine, and we're talking about your constituents. The proposed 4% across the board cuts to POS agencies will negatively impact a wide array of supportive services, including mental health and addiction treatment, senior and children's services, programs for people with disabilities, reentry supports, housing and shelter, and food supports. Many of these services help reduce incarceration rates, which is especially important given that we're building a smaller jail.

You've likely heard from law enforcement about their concerns regarding the loss of detox, and we share that concern. It's a cautionary tale of what can happen when the county doesn't invest sufficient funding for services. The proposed 4% cut will further reduce access to services by reducing positions that are currently filled in the nonprofit sector. The impact will be increased incarceration rates. Community services are cost effective response to community need in terms of both investment in people and in community safety.

For the past two decades, Dane County has inadequately funded critical services for some of our most vulnerable neighbors. When cost of living increases were provided to POS agencies, they were far below the inflation rate. Last year, no increase was provided, and this year, a 4% cut is proposed. At the same time, we're expected to continue at the current service levels. There's a tipping point, and we've reached it.

Our costs go up like any other business. We work hard to raise the additional funds to cover those costs. In fact, nonprofit agencies in Dane County leverage and bring in more dollars to the Dane County Department of Human Services budget than county GPR funds are used to invest in that system. Leveraged funding will be reduced when we have to reduce services, and the ripples of those cuts will become waves felt across the community in Dane County. The purchase of service agencies in Dane County have been collaborative and generous partners in this work, but we've reached a point where it seems that the county does not see us as partners, but rather as entities to be exploited, and it's harming our program participants and our staff.

United Church of Christ theologian William Sloan Coffin said, quote, let me suggest that we not look overly to our political leaders as their ethical impulses tend to be so much weaker than their political ones. In order not to stand out, they'll do almost anything to fit in. They're right to think that politics is the art of the possible, but wrong to forget that politics is also the art of making possible tomorrow what seems impossible today. Yet, as our county supervisors, you are our elected leaders, and we must look to you, urge you to find the courage to stand out, to preserve the safety net. Otherwise, the number of people who fall through those holes will increase, and the suffering will increase.

The original amendments to restore the proposed focus and cut to purchase the service agencies and invest in shelter services are the ethical response to growing need in Dane County. It's an opportunity to make possible tomorrow what may feel impossible today, and I urge you to pass and support those ordinances to protect the safety net in Dane County. Thank you.

Thank you. Go ahead. Provide your representative, former. Yep. Thank you, mister chair.

I did

take a little break. I hope you appreciate that.

I appreciate that.

And Oh, yeah.

I can say that.

And I'm sorry I didn't do my homework earlier. I've been in 17 other counties in Wisconsin last two weeks, so I've been on the road. But so are you ready to solve the problem? What we have here is a classic choice of do we wanna lose our right hand or our left hand? Everything we've everything we've heard, all of these people are important.

So let's figure out how to do it. So, one of the things I, as part of my day, began my day at the coffee shops and in them at the bars at night like Tommy Thompson used to. But it's, I have noticed, especially on a Friday, Saturday night down on the campus, there's a continual flow of people who have consumed too much alcohol into the Dane County Jail. And it's one that I talked to it's one of the the primary causes of our of needing more jail, and we weaken judges and other problems. A public health Madison Dane County in 2022 estimated the cost of impact of alcohol, the cost of alcohol in Dane County is $397,700,000.

I then looked up. So that's the cost mostly to property tax in counties, to and looked up the revenue from alcohol statewide is 73 folks, can you give me a second over there, please? It's $73,000,000. So county taxpayers paying $397,000,000 for health issues and and incarceration and alcohol, and the county's paying estimated $7,300,000. That's one tenth of what their total payment is.

Beer tax is, 6.5¢. Wine tax is 25¢. Our colleague, Trice Bursault, for years tried to pass the beer tax in in legislature unsuccessfully. But now we're at the point where Dane County has the authority to do impact fees. You have the authority to do sales tax.

You do a wheel tax. And you could enact a a fee, I would call it alcohol impact fee on alcohol to pay for keeping our sheriff deputies, stocking our jail, keeping the human service programs. And, frankly, we gotta do a lot better job in Wisconsin at giving people drug and alcohol treatment. We are one of the top drinkers in the nation. I'm the only one of the three in my family doesn't have a DUI, and I'm working hard to keep it that way.

But so you could put an impact fee on and so you take the total cost at 3.97 minus the 7.3. You could tax with rational nexus in economic in economic terms. What we're doing is we're taking the cost of alcohol and asking the people who consume the alcohol to pay that cost. And there's a rational nexus between the two. The programs you fund with that have to be related to alcohol, which is easy to do in the sheriff's office, easy to do in human services.

And between now and the time you consider your budget, you can have corp council. I mean, I could draft this resolution tonight on the back of an envelope, but you wanna have I I need professional help, as you know. So so I would propose the solution to your problem is an alcohol fee. So I just ran it by the chairman. He's I've sent him one of the links.

I I just did this on my phone. Again, I apologize for not doing my homework, but I think that's the solution to your problem. And I would actually table if where I chair finance, table this. I know you hate to do that. I know you don't like to do committee work on the floor, especially if I I'm sorry. Just the committee. So I apologize. But if you can come up with this solution and I I've talked to Taverley members across the state. There are some things that they want. One of the things is the place that sobriety checkpoint should be is at the bar.

We should have bartenders should have, you know, breathalyzers there so they can check their but, again, you know, the process on this, know, is is somewhat complicated, but I think the potential benefit to have all the above, we get to keep all of our fingers and toes in this budget process. It could make it worth it. Thank you, mister Sheriff.

Thank you. Any questions? Quick question. Go ahead. Sure. I'm honest.

So you sent me

I sent you the link

on the costs. And you recall that counties only have authority granted to them by the state. There's a Do you

have authority?

Well, my question for you is Sorry.

Go ahead.

Do you have a statutory reference that suggests that counties can impose an impact an alcohol impact fee because I'm seeing statute that says that grants impact fee authority to cities and villages. It's for Not

the company. For developers. I I I was trying to read the the county state document on sales and use tax, and I only got about halfway through it. I think I think that I and I'll send you a link to that document. I I think that's where we've got the best shot. And, again, may not be there, may need, you know, to change that in the future, but I I think it's worth I know you have the half cent sales tax, and you've got the wheel tax. So but, again, I I gotta do more homework there. I'm sorry, mister chairman.

Okay. Thank you. That's my only question.

Okay. Thanks, sir.

Thank you.

Okay. And our last speaker in this area is Ed Karski. Go ahead, Ed.

Hello. My name is Ed Kaharski. I'm an architect here in Madison, and my main business line is Housing Justice. And so I was the designer of the two tiny house villages that are open now and have done co op housing, and I'm working on other housing justice initiatives. But, you know, it's a it's only a drop in the bucket. And so what I wanna speak to here, I'm old enough to remember that and through my later learning that before the great society, housing and health care for every citizen in the county was required of the county, and all 73 counties in Wisconsin had a home or a farm

or both and

did it. And then the great society program came along. And rather than just improve things, it was used as a grand excuse to redefine what the county's obligations are, which now is only that which the federal government will give us funds to do. Pretty much that's what it is. And now given what's going on right now, the absolute folly and vulnerability of that to the destruction of federal government has arrived.

Right? November 1, you're gonna see it big time. And so we need to back up and say, we it's our job to do it ourselves for our ourselves. And that may not come quickly, but it needs to happen. And that's one way we're gonna get beyond this absolute destruction of our federal government and our really overdependence on federal government for things that matter.

Things that really matter, we shouldn't trust the profit making, the corporate sector, and we shouldn't trust the federal government now because it's become worse than profit making corporations. That it's just clear to me. So I want to back up and think about at the big level, what are we trying to do here? Because I don't I've never heard a real clear comprehensive declaration of what are we trying to accomplish here. For me, it's we want an actual decent healthy life for everyone.

No exceptions. None. K? But we have lots of exceptions. What we're here arguing about is the crumbs we're gonna throw to the homeless people versus the budget skinniness we're gonna send to the to the sheriff's department. Okay? But, you know, what we have here is we all know this for the car or our house. If you don't change the oil, you're gonna be buying a new car. It's gonna be it's the most expensive way to operate a car. K?

We are operating our whole county that way because it's very inexpensive to stop damaging lives, which end up in bad condition and arrive at the jail, soon to be a very the world's most expensive jail that is like a very large Schmidt's impound lot for humans. And it has a little bit of Dutch's auto repair in there, but it's only a token amount, actually. And that is not a formula for success. And that is also a very well, probably the most expensive way to operate this county. I'm gonna give you a couple of examples.

We as I understand the the proposals that Heidi Wegliner has put put forth to improve or restore services in human in the human service side is about 3,700,000.0. Now my adjusted numbers from HUD study going back to 2012, it's annual cost to not house a person for a year is $52,000 per capita per year. Okay? So so for the 50 I'm sorry. For the 17 people that just got evicted from the Dairy Drive facility, we can look forward to a cost through the community, and it's spread around, which is why you guys aren't tracking it, of $884,000.

$52,000 times 70 times 17. That's that number. K? And that cost is real. It happens. It's it's spread around government and nonprofits spending government money and health care and private individuals and damage to our overall economy. And that's before you get to the actual human beings we're talking about here, which we really should prioritize, but we don't. Okay? But you don't have to care about humans to care about this money. And that's your job as finance, I guess, is to care about money.

Now let's take and project that out. 700 unhoused people from the point in time study, that translates into an annual cost to not house of $36,400,000. That's way bigger than we're talking about the the sheriff's problem or any of this. So we need to spend money where it saves us money. We're not doing it, and we're ending up with all kinds of very damaged individuals. And the cost is obvious. We should we we could fix this easily, but we have to think big. Am I am I out of time?

Yeah. I sorry. I was enthralled by. I didn't even

look at the clock.

I can talk another time, though.

I'm sure you're good, Ed.

We'll do that another day.

We appreciate that. Thank you, Ed.

Hey. That's all the speakers we have on the PP and J area. There are a number of speakers on HHN, some of whom all crossover in the different same topics, but that's the ones that listed TP and J as their primary point of com comment.

I know you guys are still waiting to talk on HHN, and you were talking on the same amendment to you. We'll we'll pick you up, after supervisor Weglater. Supervisor Weglater? HHN committee amendments.

Okay. Thank you, Chair Valderon and members of the committee. This has been a really challenging budget for all of us, and certainly for the Department of Human Services, which provides such vital care and support and service to folks all throughout Dane County. And as you probably remember from the department budget request presentations, the department met its 4% GPR reduction target. And then following the release of the executive budget proposal, we saw a number of additional PUTS face the Department of Human Services.

And so a lot of time and effort has gone into having conversations with committee staff, with employees, with our community partners and the purchase service community, people most impacted, end users of our services, and with all of you. So I know I've been on the phone with many of you, I really appreciate your time and thoughtfulness to approaching this really difficult budget year. In seeing that the county executive's budget proposal included an additional 4% across the board cut, that seemed like something we needed to find a way to reverse. HHN01 is a result of that effort. As was in the department request, you know, you heard about the department looking, and one of the factors used, which is by far from a perfect factor, was past utilization on human services contracts.

But it has been used before as a framework for looking at reductions. And so the way department leadership described it was the department request approach was a scalpel based approach. And that's not, you know, 100% accurate, but it was one of the guiding philosophies for achieving those more targeted cuts. What the county executive's budget proposal did with the additional cut to our POS agencies was an across the board 4% cut. So you have some programs, know, programs that were already cut, sometimes pretty deeply, having an additional 4%.

And then some that may have been spared, like some of the homeless shelter contracts who not all, because Jerry Drive was eliminated but some of them that have been spared from that 4% cut because of their division's approach that now are receiving a 4% cut under the executive budget proposal. So you heard about the offset for this amendment already, but really the driving force was to create more equity and try to reduce the disproportionate burden that human services has suffered in the executive budget approach. So this I I should start by saying all HHN amendments passed unanimously out of committee. And so I'm I'm grateful for the the co sponsors on this one, Supervisor Chawla, Welsh, Jackson, Fries, Huzelman, and Rylander. Really, I think when you look at the all we've heard from our POS leadership, some of whom have already spoke, some who will probably speak later, and many of the folks who showed up at our public hearing on October 20, they're already facing a really difficult time with other funding losses and trying to brace to prepare for what was in the department's request.

To me, eliminating this reversing this 4% reduction seemed like, excuse me, kind of

the least we could

do. One other factor I want you to consider is that also in the executive budget proposal was a change to contracting policy to stop using advanced payments to ensure compliance with state statute related to 112 contracts. So based on that change in contracting, that means additional operating costs that the agencies will have to front at the beginning of their contracts because they will not be able to be paid in advance. And that's something that recognized an additional $1,000,000 in savings out of the Human Services budget the in county executive's budget proposal. So really, there's multiple hits.

And to the POS community already, this is an effort to try to mitigate that harm. And one thing that we heard a lot in committee was that and I think Linda Ketchum spoke to this as well, which is sort of this compounding nature. When we're all cut, we feel it even more, because they work so closely together. And so those it really does ripple out and impact our whole community's ability to access the services they need. HHN02 is $900,000 to provide funding to support additional expected operating expenses of the purpose built shelter, the first purpose built shelter that I think our community has ever really had that we have partnered with the city of Madison to build over off of Bartillon Drive.

So the city put in, I think, 1,700,000.0 total, dollars 1,500,000.0 going to Porchlight, the selected operators' operations. This $900,000 would essentially add to approximately $600,000 if that 4% cut is restored in the budget. That would make our commitment $1,500,000 And my understanding and communication with the folks at the Shelter Friends Group, which is leading the private fundraising. But if we can have you know, a strong level of support like this, the shelter, hopefully, they'll be able to raise the rest so that there's $4,200,000 in operations to open a 20 fourseven shelter at Bartillion Drive. This is going to be a different way of doing shelter, a more housing focused approach, and a more trauma informed space, a healthier space designed to sort of be more healing, be more productive, and hopefully mitigate tension and the impacts of experiencing homelessness and having to sort of live and sleep around a lot of people.

So this is exciting, but as you've heard, there is a lot that some still needs to be figured out. The funding piece is part of what's before here, but there's still policies and procedures that are being worked through with the Homeless Services Consortium, the advocates that and service providers that work collaboratively to address our community's growing needs in this area. So, you know, issues related to priority preferences and placement in the shelter, medical vulnerabilities, age those are being considered, as well as, you know, how intake is going to happen, how long people can stay. These are all issues that matter a whole bunch and should be informed, in my opinion, by what's best for the clients and what is evidence based practice. Because our system has worked really hard over the last decade plus to move towards an evidence based approach that centers people who are experiencing homelessness.

So anyway, that's why you see this language in here about the funding being subject to an intergovernmental agreement with the city of Madison, because they will have the contract with Porchlight, the operator. We will provide them funding, but I think it's important that we have a say on how these operations, know, kind of big picture operations and standards about the ability to access that service and how that plays out. So anyway, that's HHN02. And HHN03 is kind of the other component of that because the new shelter will actually provide a much better space. But unfortunately, it's also very limited capacity relative to the Zaire Road temporary shelter we've been operating.

So as you've heard already, 123 people in excess of the shelter limits at this new shelter were served at Zaire Road within the last week, I think. So this would provide a very bare bones kind of survival based overflow shelter in the kind of coldest months of winter. And just to echo an earlier point, like, we're talking here about emergency type of supports. And this is completely that. And it's unfortunate that that's where we're at with our resources, but that's why this is so important, because it really is a matter of people's lives, people's limbs, and the harsh elements of winter.

So really grateful for all the support on these shelter amendments. You see a number of co sponsors. I know AT Gen02 talked extensively with Supervisor Furman about his support and a number of other supervisors on there as co sponsors as well, and Supervisor Chawla Bruschuk, Jackson, Fries, Ritt, Huzelman, and Rylander in support of the shelter. And many of those same supervisors on HHN 'three as well for the overflow shelter. HHN 'four is a very modest expenditure increase to kind of just match an increase in our partnership with the City of Sun Prairie to fund tenant services at the Sunshine Place administered by the Tenant Resource Center.

This you know, there's a growing need of and a large population of renters in Sun Prairie, as well as kind of that Sunshine Place serves beyond just some Prairie City limits, but they are serving folks in really Eastern Dane County. So we've seen growing poverty in Marshall and in some of those communities, and they also access services at the Sunshine Place. So this is just $2,000 to increase that contract and continue that partnership with Sun Prairie and Tenant Resource Center. HHN05 is to one of now there were 12 positions, human services positions proposed to be eliminated in the county executive budget proposal. Seven of those the net loss of seven was in the department request.

An additional five were in the county executive's budget proposal. HHN o five risk would restore provide a $124,000 to restore the immigration affairs social worker. This is certainly a high priority, probably for obvious reasons. I think, you know, the immigrant neighbors are really being targeted by the federal administration, And the needs for these services are more important now than ever. Unfortunately, because of limited capacity in that office, which is a relatively new office but very important one that we've tried to grow since since it was created, You know, the wait times are like three to four weeks to get responses to address new requests for service.

And in this environment, we can't, you know, we have to maintain capacity in that office and make sure that we can restore, you know, this position and hopefully fill it. So grateful to have a number of co sponsors, including Supervisor Yang, join me in sponsoring this amendment. HHN 'eight I'm sorry, 'six is an additional $325,000 for involuntary admissions to try to continue involuntary admissions, at least for a period of time while we are evaluating an RFP that we put out for not I guess voluntary admissions and intoxication monitoring that basically, as you may have read in the papers or heard from emails and news reports, Tellurian was running a significant deficit in operating its program under the county contract and gave notice in September that they would be ending their contract at

the end

of the contract term, which was is December. And so negotiations basically broke down between the county and Tellurian. I worked with supervisor Andre, whose name probably should be on here. But to to try to get more sunshine on this topic, and we heard about it a couple of times in committee, there is some tension because this this cost has really increased. And and basically, what the Tellurian is is operating is essentially a hospital, a very intensive medical model in a community based setting at the county owned building off Industrial Drive.

So that is not the funding level that the county had budgeted for this service. And they had increased staffing to address safety concerns, which is understandable. But our budget doesn't really match how they change their budget. So there's a gap here with what they would require, a significant gap, and what they would require to operate the program as the county has contracted in the past, which they have not been in compliance with in the last year due to budget their budget constraints. There's a big financial gap there.

And last week at HHN, I think they said they would need a million dollars to basically run that program. And earlier in the conversations, they said they were running an annual deficit of 700,000. So I don't I think what we're looking at is if we want to continue the involuntary admission, which we've heard a lot of support for from law enforcement, from the hospital systems, You know, much smaller number of beds, and it would impact our ability to continue providing treatment readiness beds and services that have program and a part of Tellurian's contract and have been highly utilized and successful in getting people, you know, their withdrawal management prepared for residential treatment. So what this funding would do is basically provide the department a little more money and flexibility in seeing if we can work out a solution. But there will be no long term solution without other funding coming forward.

This is not enough to do this. This is not $1,000,000 as you see. And so what we're looking at is a few months, a few beds, maybe, if the parties can come to an agreement as to the terms of sort of a contract extension while more sustainable options are pursued, hopefully. What concerned Supervisor Andrea and I was that the county was putting out an RFP that did not include involuntary admissions. This was a big change for our system.

Very vulnerable people will be potentially impacted, and certainly stakeholders care a lot about this piece of our system. So it just felt like a big change that needed more time, that needed more people to be able to weigh in and hopefully problem solve. I don't know if we're gonna be able to problem solve in a way that meets our community's needs, but maybe at least we'll be able to have more input and understanding and move forward in a way that doesn't feel as coercive or forced, where our hand is a little bit up against the wall because of our funding limits and because of the proposed end of this contract. So that's what this is about. It's, you know, it's no silver bullet, but it might buy some time and hopefully get parties back to the table to come forward with some sort of program that might meet the county's needs and the community's needs.

Tellurian did offer a proposal that is not this that is not reflected here, where they said they would, with existing funds, you know, be able to provide four involuntary admission beds in their the new building that they bought on Main Street. But if the county were to take that, that would mean we would have no treatment readiness program. And I don't think that's I'm not comfortable with making a decision like that at this point in time, although we have heard some support from that from other stakeholders. And I'm happy to answer questions at any time or at the end of all these. I know there's a lot, and I'm talking a lot, but some of this stuff's pretty complex.

We do have human services staff. Todd Campbell is available particularly to answer questions on this one. And director Schluter is here as well.

Actually, you there's the two other PNF that weren't the PNF ones that weren't presented.

That No.

I'm not done.

Okay. You sound like you're wrapping up. Sorry.

I'm just talking too much.

We're just following.

Yeah. Sorry. The

next amendment is HHN o seven. So this is a another position restoration. This is an ADRC lead specialist in the Department of Human Services. There were two ADRC positions eliminated as part of the executive budget proposal, and this would restore the lead specialist. There's some question over whether there was funding support both positions that were eliminated.

It really never became clear to me that there was in time for me to put forward an amendment for it to restore the other one. But you may hear from EGRs about their ideas with, you know, the the ADRC grant revenue and additional revenue that that is billed from these positions that that could be used to possibly support restoration of another one. And then there were, yes, a couple P and F operating that did not make it to committee in time.

You finished your list. Your committee list.

Yes. Do you well Other than that, please. Mine. I don't know if you want me to speak to it.

Other than that, I'm presented.

Okay. What? Yeah.

The ones that weren't present.

Right? Go ahead.

Okay. So 4?

Yeah. P and f O4.

Okay.

So this one did not make it in time to get in the packet, and really was kind of a last minute, entry. Obviously, it's

a p

and f amendment. And I the reason it was that is because in my mailbox, on Monday, October 20, I was well, actually brought to me by our wonderful chief of staff. Firstly, I got this binder. And if you don't have one, you should try to get one because it's the sequential Model Mapping Report for Dane County prepared by Policy Research Inc. So this is, you know, kind of out of Pauline Clark's office and our our ongoing effort to to figure out how to improve our criminal justice system and keep people out of jail, and better served in the community.

And so I was going through it and seeing gaps. And one thing that I'm certainly been aware of in my experience in my day job, but also have heard in my experience as a county board supervisor, is that we have this great program that we launched about a decade ago called CCS, Comprehensive Community Services, where folks that are Medicaid eligible and have qualifying substance use or mental health disability can get CCS benefits. It's a self directed program. There's sort of an array, I think, of 13 different services that somebody could utilize access with the help of a service facilitator, you know, case management, individual skills development, mental health therapy, all sorts of things. And it's it's based on what they wanna do.

And so it's a very empowering model. And ding ding, it's fully reimbursable benefit from, you know, Medicaid, and and it's a state Medicaid funded program. So we have really it's been exciting to see this program really grow because it didn't exist when I started on the board. And it it we're talking about it, and then it it's really grown. So I was like, oh, jeez.

Why haven't we seen that grow? What what? Was there a consideration this year of adding positions to the budget? Because while we work with CCS agencies, in the community to provide services, the county controls the intake. So getting in, you have to get through the county's intake process and functional screen to get enrolled and start getting benefits and connected with a service facilitation agency.

Well, that process takes a long time. There's different hoops to jump through, different verifications and documentation and doctors' notes and all that stuff, paperwork that needs to be signed. So it it takes too long, and people need these benefits like yesterday. Right? So trying to streamline that intake and screening process is really important, getting opening up that bottleneck, getting more people through.

And so I had reached out to Todd Campbell in a kind of last minute rush. Like, did you think about adding positions for this? I'm reading this report. And he's like, well, now that you mention it, we could use a supervisor for our CCS intake unit and a lead social worker. And and then, you know, I I read his thing.

I sent it off to Chuck Hicklin in the Google form. And this, know, amendment gets spit out. I did not have the time to talk to I I was rushing because I was trying to get into HHN. I still meant the cutoff. But the employee groups I've talked with Kate Gravel, and she's here to talk to you as well are concerned that this amendment, particularly the supervisor position, may not have the intended impact of reducing the wait time.

And they favor a intake case manager or I think that's what it is or social worker instead of a supervisor and and possibly a a lead worker. So, I'm certainly guilty in terms of having done this in a quick manner to try to get under the timeline and not having the chance to do this sort of outreach I would typically like to do in advance of moving forward in an amendment. But I remain, as always, open to suggestions on how the amendment could be amended, and certainly happy to meet with the workers in that unit. But, and also, like I said, Todd is here if you have particular questions with this. We had some back and forth about what's needed.

Another thing that would help that I think is in process, but I don't know why it's it's taken so long, is DocuSign or some kind of electronic signature function, which apparently doesn't exist yet in that unit. So we need to figure that out hopefully sooner rather than later as well. But you don't see that in this amendment. You see two positions that with the goal of trying to get more people through intake and screened and enrolled. Each CCS unit currently has each CCS supervisor currently supervises 12 intake workers.

There's another supervisor in CCS that does quality assurance, and that's managing, I think, four county staff, but then doing a lot of work, training, oversight, engagement with the CCS agencies in the community. So there's a lot of extra work beyond supervision related to kind of the oversight and training compliance quality assurance of all of the different agencies. And we've really grown the number. You see them come through in our board process in terms of awarding new CCS contracts. We just had one, I think, within the last month.

So so, anyway, so that's that one. It's like I said, it it came about pretty quickly, but it's something I'm hoping we can do. And maybe I've already talked to a couple of you about it and and some of the EGR concerns, which I'm certainly receptive to. So I think those are all mine. I think there's another PNF one that other supervisors will probably introduce to you.

PNF 10?

Okay. I can introduce this one. Excuse me. So as was discussed or mentioned yesterday, there was a period of time in which Planned Parenthood Wisconsin has had suspended abortion care services in Wisconsin. And and I also mentioned last night that yesterday they announced there were they are resuming services.

But I prepared this amendment along with supervisor Yang in consultation with, probably the only provider in the area that can provide supportive services for people needing to access abortion care. So the intention of this with the idea that, people would need to travel to either Milwaukee, which is the only without Planned Parenthood, the only other location is another clinic in Milwaukee that is not Planned Parenthood, or somewhere in Illinois to travel for for care. So excuse me. This amendment was, to create a one year grant program, so it wouldn't be in the base, but it'd provide one year of money to support people in need of traveling to access abortion care. So related costs like transportation, lodging, childcare, and so forth.

With the news that Planned Parenthood is resort Zooming services, it it does mitigate the need for this to a a degree, but I think there is still a need. One, I think the situation is fluid. We also don't know what's, you know, what's unpredictable, what will happen at the federal level. The services, I wouldn't be surprised if they were suspended again. And, but that aside, with the restrictions in our state and the limited number of providers, there there is still a need for people to travel to get care.

So it's my hope that we can still fund this to a degree, and I'm thinking, at a cost of $20,000, to provide the supportive care. So that's the amendment.

Supervisor Yang, did you wanna add anything?

Sure. I can add a little bit. Well, also because of Wisconsin's legal requirement that, a person receiving abortion care in a clinical setting has to attend, like, a minimum of two in person appointments at least 24 apart. And because of that, there's travel costs incurred in there. So within an average of maybe the need is around maybe $2,250 to $500 per person.

So that can amount up to, you know, 31,000 to 75,000 per month. So this is what it's trying to do is to kind of adjust the cost for people who are needing the support, especially if they go to Milwaukee or even Illinois. So this is what this is trying to to do is to help people in in need of that support. Thank you.

Thanks. Okay. Why don't I think I should let you do your

Do want me to do the capital?

Yeah. I just wanna try to get all your done, and then we can do questions if that works for everybody.

Sure. It works for me. Just a couple of capital this year, trying to respect the guidance to use restraint in in capital borrowing. So this c one just adds $10,000,000 to the $10,000,000 in the executive budget proposal for our successful affordable housing development fund. Last year, we put out 20 actually, 25,000,000 because we had some funding sort of returned from projects that didn't move forward.

So you saw those awards recently announced, and it's exciting to see it come through the process in its various phases. So this would put out you know, we'd be able to put out $20,000,000 maybe a little more if we get some back before our RFP goes out or our application, rather, usually in early summer. We've gradually been moving the needle as it relates to getting more folks who face the most housing barriers because they are extremely low income, under 30% of the area median income, or they have other barriers related to lack of housing history or eviction records or criminal legal records. We've really, I think, been quite successful in getting a good bang for our buck when it comes to tenant protection and fair housing and helping this making sure this is part of our solution to homelessness as well. So there's always room for improvement.

And our housing staff that we've added in our housing division help to ensure that our funded projects, operators are complying with their requirements under those stipulations. So if you ever want to see where there are projects, maybe in your district, go to the Housing Access and Affordability website where you can look at this awesome map and click on the pins and see the name of the project, the project contract, and all sort of the protections and stipulations related to the county funding in that project. It's a great resource. And the next one is HHNC three. So this is for you may remember if you were on the board in the 2021.

We were in the pandemic and and dealing with a lot of, issues related to unsheltered homelessness, people not having lawful places of sleep. Yeah, it's four years. That's still a thing. But there was a resolution that passed that created an interagency staff team to look at available county lands to see if there's anything suitable to have a car campground or campground program because there's no legal place to sleep. That report came back.

It took a little while. We had a preliminary report, and then we got the final report, I think, in a little while later, maybe a couple years later. And it said, well, there's really no suitable county property. So the suggestion, the alternative strategy, was to invest in increasing shelter capacity. So when the city was operating Dairy Drive, we funded that, And we were able to support that program while it was in existence until October.

Well, yeah, the end of last month. So this actually just will provide some funding to possibly buy a property, since we don't have one currently within our portfolio, that could be used for lawful sleeping options. You'll note that there is no operating money. There's no program money to support a car campground that you see in the operating package. This is just kind of a first step, knowing that we're going to need some place.

This population of unsheltered folks is growing, and our staff needs some tools in the toolbox to help start addressing those problems. We're all on notice that this is a need, and the first thing we need to do is find a place. So I'm happy to answer any questions, of course.

Other questions? I hope. To walk away for a few minutes.

You're hoping that what?

Do you have any questions? Yeah. Very bad.

So going back to the the detox funding. So putting the numbers together, it sounds like this amount is 675,000 short of what Telerion has argued they need in order to operate basically under the terms of the existing contract, which is being withdrawn from. Right?

Yes.

And so in the event that this money runs out and, somebody is identified by authorities as in need of emergency involuntary detox, those people are gonna be sent to the emergency room at local hospitals. Right?

Yes.

And there's no other facility where they'll go. That that that'll be the primary landing spot or will be the only

landing spot. I mean, I, you know, I think people are worried, and we've heard from law enforcement that the people might be brought to jail. That's not a good place for people to be in this con condition. But yeah, or left on the street, you know? I mean, it's not a good we don't want to be at this place. We're not in a good spot right now. It's trying to figure out where we go from here, I think, is a real challenge.

And so then thinking about the treatment readiness beds that are the other component of this, this agreement with Tellurian is the only treatment readiness beds that the county funds? Is that right?

Currently, but we have an RFP that's out. So we're looking, you know, that there's the possibility that another provider might come forward and respond to the RFP that was released for two programs.

Okay.

Well, Chair Waldron isn't here, guess I'll get to go on with some more questions.

So

then jumping to the CCS, I know we had the benefit of of some discussion about this. But it am I understanding that these positions, no matter their configuration, whether they're managers or lead workers or other frontline staff that they're fully reimbursable? Or should I should we bring in Todd Campbell on that? I don't know.

That's my understanding, and that's what the budget amendment reflects.

Okay. And then hey, Todd.

Hi, Todd.

Thanks for the affirming nod. Todd, if I can just tag you in here to ask about the configuration of those positions and how the manager the inclusion of the manager will help that sort of movement of people through the initial intake process.

Thank you, supervisor Brower, for the question. The supervisors who are there, as, supervisor mentioned, they are each supervising, 12 intake staff, and they are stretched, as it is. And so staff are having difficulty in accessing their supervisors and getting good supervision around, making sure that they're covering all bases with individuals who are either entering into the program or are being rescreened for continued eligibility in the program. That's also a function of the intake unit. So by adding another supervisor, it helps us to run a much more efficient operation, stay on top of deadlines, make sure that we have coverage available and arranged, so that we are meeting those deadlines, and we are moving those applications at the front end as quickly as we can.

Thanks. And if I can, just with one follow-up on that same theme. So in thinking about the workload of a supervisor versus a lead worker, a lead worker would be kind of dealing with, like, a caseload essentially. Right? And a supervisor, do they have any maintain any caseload?

They can The supervisors do not have a caseload. No.

K. Okay. Thank you. Thanks. Can I

ask you one quick question?

Of course.

So in the my laptop is acting weird. So it was o two, and I think that it says that the amount that we were going to contribute to the men's shelter, right, was at 1,100,000.0. But then we're increasing it by 900,000.

What might be showing up there is the fact that Bartillion's gonna open midyear. And maybe Well is a question for Chuck. But the the total amount budgeted for men's shelter, including Zaire and Bartillon, would be about $1,500,000 I think the 1,100,000.0 reflects sort of the proportion post Bartillon opening. Is that accurate?

Right. For 2026, some of the county's 1,500,000.0 roughly will be used to keep Zaire Road open or contributed towards Zaire Road for the first quarter or so of the year. And so about 1,100,000.0 of the 1.5 will be going to the new shelter. And that's why the amendment language that talks about the intergovernmental agreement talks about 1,100,000. The total amount will be 1.5. And so in 2027, barring, you know, a reduction of some sort, there would be 1.5 for operation of the Bertillon shelters. So here's my

Portslide operates.

Oh. Right.

It says one point one million one hundred and forty six thousand nine sixty three

Correct.

To assist the city. This budget amendment then, I think, is adding 900,000. Correct. Okay. So that comes out to about 2,000,000.

No. No. No. No. I'm sorry. So the 1,100,000.0 so right now, there's about 5 just around 600,000 in the budget already that we you have been using to support shelter operations for a long time.

Okay.

Zaire Road, before that, some of that money was for, porch lights operation at Grace. Carryover. Right? No. It's not carryover.

It's a base.

Just let me let me finish. So that money was already in the base.

Right.

The 900 adds to the base to make a total of 1.5.

So that's where you're getting now. Okay.

So of the 1.5, a million 1 revenue, a million $1.50 is gonna be to the new shelter, and the balance will be continued to be funding for Zire Road.

Okay.

Okay? So it it does seem confusing when I wrote this. I thought this might create some confusion.

But Great.

The nine it's so it's 900 plus a base of about one about 600,000 gives you 1.5.

Okay.

Great. Thank you. And just just follow-up quickly. So then 'three, you started talking you started saying that 123 people Zaya Road. So that's what Chuck was just saying then.

No. No. So right now, the men's shelter operates at Zaya Road in a city owned building. Okay? When Bartolon is done, it's going to operate there, hopefully, when all the funding's there and everything's ready to go. So when they move out of there, Zara Road will be empty.

Okay.

Okay? And hopefully, that might be a place that we could run an overflow program. But that's not there's still some time to figure that out. The overflow program would the idea is it would be for the winter and start in the kind of 2026.

Okay. That helps. Thanks.

Anything else? Nope. Back to you.

Anything else? Reggie. I still am confused also on the Zire Road funding. That's immediate?

It exists already because we have

a are in

growth. Right. Yeah.

But the money you requested for on that amendment is and you said what? It's for repair

cost more money. Okay. So which one amendment? HHN o two or o

The three.

Okay. So o three would be to hopefully partner with an outreach program to run a bare bones survival shelter in the cold winter months of next year. We're not gonna need that this winter, the '26, because Zaire Road will still be open.

Okay? Okay.

So they have that budget, that part of that budget is is, you know, is in the executive budget proposal. So they'll have that money to operate continue operating at Zaire Road until Bartellan opens.

So then it is it for the '26? Yep. After Bartolian opens?

Because it's

scheduled go

Cold weather, overflow survival shelter, sleep and bare bones, sleeping bags on the ground, probably, like, you know, I don't know, cold lunches premade sort of

It's for Halsey's. I think he might have a bunch.

It's it's not ideal, but it's for safety. You know?

That's fine.

I got a better opera I got a better understanding now. Because that's supposed to open one in this fall summer twenty Bartilian Drive?

Bartilian, I it's scheduled for spring, April, I think. But yeah. We'll see.

I mean, as a Cisco's last chair, and it was brought up, you didn't look at any human services positions to fund any of this.

Vacant position. So human services there are human services positions that were eliminated in the executive budget proposal that are are not being restored by any of these amendments.

Right. But there were other vacant positions. Right? Were there other open I thought there were some other positions.

I think what you see here is two positions restored out of 12. That's what we were left. Budget.

I said, I'm just asking because I asked the chair about his amendment about why didn't you why did you cross over. And I know there's been a fairness issue, that's and I

Because human services put in way more than 4%. And we can go through the list, and I've done it at PP and J and and at HHN. But it's it's not you know, it's the 4% GPR target reduction that they complied with. Then it's the 4%, additional POS cut. Then it's, you know, the positions being eliminated.

Then it's, you know, there there was revenue recognized in the executive budget proposal from Badger Prairie. So human services has provided a lot of revenue to support county programs beyond the department, and that's not fair.

It's right. And I just I just wanted to sort of put put it on the record in here. Not that I said that was first should have been first. I'm not saying that at all. Let me ask you one more. The detox. Are we I don't wanna get into the whole new contract. Were they in doing more than we wanted them to do them? Less. But they were talking you were talking about all this medical services, I thought.

Right. So so they sort of changed their staffing model. They brought on a new medical director in, I think, the 2024, perhaps. And so there were some staffing changes they made to, I think, increase the number of nurses and staff in response to what they thought was a more safer model and needed to run the operation. The amount the county had budgeted for the contract didn't support that high level of staffing.

They started you know, they were running a deficit that continued to increase. And so, you know, they're under contract, and we're not providing the number of beds that we had contracted for. And so there are a number of discussions over you know, or throughout this year about that and trying to to figure out how to how to fix it. So they were providing a reduced number of beds. The access to that program is already quite limited given that their budget situation and what's been going on right now.

So, you know, that that that's the reality, I think, that we're seeing is that if we are continuing to to partner with them, if we can come to some arrangement, given the the finances, it's probably gonna be for a reduced number of program participants.

And is that at our facility? Or

We own a building Right. That they've operated the program for for a

long time.

Like, even what you just said, that they kinda changed I know they changed their model, but did they do it in the middle of our contract? So they were saying, the why why it got more expensive? Because they sort of did that on their own?

They made some changes to their level of of staffing, I think. That's my understanding. And and so that that was not, like, a a different level of medical service and cost than what I think when when the relationship started or even when the contract was negotiated, we were expecting given the money available. So, you know, you you you want the program to be able to operate as as budgeted and your number of beds to be what you're contracting for, and that is not what we've experienced over the last year.

Right. And

Todd knows this a lot more than I do. And but I you know, we've had a lot of conversations with folks, and it's a tough situation.

Todd, did you wanna add anything? Or so on did you feel like it was changed? Their their model was changing?

I thought supervisor summarized it very well. The expenses for the provider went well beyond the contract that we had and the resources that we had in the contract. That that's essentially what happened.

Oh, I so we've we're in the middle of are we are we in the middle of the RFP process right now? Are you still writing it? Or

No. The RFP is is public now. When Telerium pulled out of their out of the contract, we issued, shortly thereafter, an RFP for, two different services. And so those are pending. They're due to close November 26.

Does that include the involuntary or not?

It does not include the involuntary. Okay.

Thank you. Okay. I think I'm done. Okay. At this point, we are going to Actually, if

I'm sorry.

I'm sorry. I miss something?

Since Todd is online, I wanted to ask

I had something for you.

Excuse me. Going back to the c CCS lead worker and supervisor. This is not an area I'm well versed in, so forgive me. So because we're I think we're gonna hear some argument that that another supervisor isn't needed, that efficiencies can be gained from two lead workers. Can you what's your perspective on how adding another supervisor is gonna increase efficiency versus an another lead worker, an additional lead worker processing more applications, getting through that volume.

And, also, answer that question first, and I have another one.

I

can tell you that adding two more workers to the two existing supervisors, will, create more inefficiencies in how we're managing intakes and rescreens for eligibility in the unit. It the supervisors there are very stretched. They are struggling to keep up with regular check ins with staff, and it is, the number of deadlines that they have to hit as a unit are a challenge to manage in in addition to, making sure that people have that we have coverage for, all of the inquiries that we're getting from folks in the community who want CCS.

Okay. Alright. I know you're repeating a little bit of what you said earlier, but, just wanted a petition helps, I guess. My other question is around what so the division of labor for the supervisors you have in that area. So you have supervisors.

You said there's, I think you mentioned there's supervisors supervising 12 workers. But then there's are there other supervisors or managers without as many, and is there room for reallocation in that? Or what else are those other managers what are their responsibilities?

Yes. Supervisor mentioned the quality assurance supervisor who has four direct reports. That supervisor is also responsible for quality assurance among our our CCS agencies. She meets regularly with the service facilitation agencies. Supervisor Weigleitner, I was using an old number earlier, but we, when we were corresponding but we have 40 service facilitation agency that she's responsible for, making sure that their activities, as we're seeing their billable activities come into our office, are conforming with state and federal regulations.

And she is also responsible for providing clinical consultation and guidance to those agencies, training new CCS personnel who come into the into the network. So it it goes well beyond her responsibilities go well beyond supervising four direct county employees.

And the work this person does with agencies, and it sounds akin to maybe a contract manager. No? Or okay.

Akin to it. Yeah. Yeah. That's Kinda sorta.

Alright. Is that something only a a manager can do? And and if so, why?

It is, and it has to be done by somebody who is clinically licensed. And so it's it's required for that position because of the consultation that is required in that role and in the in the role function that she serves. That's required by state administrative code.

Thank you.

Okay. Supervisor Wegliner chair Miles' amendment earlier where it about redoing those deputies. It doesn't cover me where I know there's a couple of folks that said reject that and stay with the original. And I know it's difficult, and it's hard for you because you do live a little more than we do.

Yeah. Thanks for the question. I mean, I think the goal for me in in getting the PP and J amendments passed was to to fund these critical human services programs. So that's that's what, you know, I think is the most important aspect of this. It's like why we need that funding, is so we can meet these really basic human needs.

So if there will be a recommendation for you all to look at in terms of how it gets there in funding these HHN amendments. And I'm hopeful, and I think supervisor Miles has been receptive to doing that. So this is a compromise process. There's 37 of us. I understand that.

I do think that we're going to have this conversation again next year. And I'll be coming here with similar amendments because it's not gonna have changed that some of our structural problems. Right? But we're in a tough time and taking things year by year. I mean, the reality is we're gonna hopefully adopt a balanced budget that does the best we can and and mitigates the harm of these challenges.

And then we're gonna have to be working on the budget again because these are ongoing, very persistent issues. We're gonna have to keep working together with transparency and good faith and in communication with our stakeholders. So, you know, I'm I'm open to compromise, and I've indicated that I'm open to that format. I do think, you know, additional revenue beyond what's shown with the 20 deputies is necessary to get the the level of funding we need to support HHN amendments. So I'm hopeful that that will be in the recommendation before you.

Thank you. Okay. We're gonna take a pseudo break here.

I have a question.

Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead.