* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:10] I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE PLAY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 21ST. WERE IN THE PACKAGE. UM, ARE THERE ANY CORRECTIONS? NO. THAT BEING THE CASE WILL RECORD THEM AS PRINTED. UM, WE'LL START, UH, WITH THE BPA QUARTERLY REPORT. ALRIGHT, GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. UM, I DON'T HAVE A LOT TO UPDATE ON THIS QUARTERLY REPORT. UM, MOST EVERYTHING IS ON TRACK AND CONTINUES TO BE ON TRACK FROM THE LAST TIME I PRESENTED. UM, THE NEXT TIME I PRESENT YOU WILL I, [a. BPA Quarterly Report] AND I WOULD EXPECT TO SEE SEVERAL OF THESE GOALS, UM, MARKED AS COMPLETE. UH, I JUST GOT A UPDATE TODAY AND EARLIER THIS WEEK ON A COUPLE OF THESE, AND WE'RE TRACKING TO BE, UH, TO BE COMPLETED ON TIME AND I'LL HAVE A, I'LL HAVE A BETTER UPDATE NEXT TIME, BUT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU'VE GOT ANY ON WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU. ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY. WE HAVE A BIG AGENDA, SO WE'LL KEEP MOVING RIGHT ALONG. UM, NEXT UP IS A FINANCE QUARTERLY REPORT. GOOD AFTERNOON. UM, SO MOST OF OURS HAVE, UM, KIND OF MOVED INTO THAT COMPLETION AREA. WE'VE GOT A COUPLE THAT ARE CURRENTLY ONGOING, BUT WE'RE ON TRACK WITH, UM, ONE THAT WE'LL CARRY INTO NEXT YEAR ALREADY, UM, WHICH WE HAVEN'T [b. Finance Quarterly Report] STARTED, BUT WE WILL BE FINE WITH THAT ONE AS WELL. UM, SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M WILLING TO ANSWER THAT, BUT NOTHING'S BEEN NEW ADDED. SO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY, THANK YOU. OUR NEXT ITEM IS, UH, RESOLUTION FOR WIST LAND ACQUISITION FOR SIDEWALK RAMP IMPROVEMENTS. MAKE A MOTION. MOTION BY SUPERVISOR SHARAN, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR SCH. HI SCOTT. CERTAINLY [c. Resolution – WisDOT Land Acquisition for Sidewalk Ramp Improvements] CAN SPEAK TO THIS. UH, THE SIMPLE, UH, CONCLUSION IS THAT WISCONSIN DOT IS COMING IN AND LOOKING AT IMPROVING THE CURB RAMPS THAT ALONG. UH, SEE HIGHWAY 33 IN FRONT OF US ALL THE WAY FROM INDIANA, RIGHT IN OUR MIDDLE, MIDDLE BLOCK, AND ALL THE WAY DOWN BY ROS AVENUE. SO, UM, IT'S A GOOD PROJECT. THEY'RE GONNA BE, IF YOU DIDN'T LOOK AT THE LA THAT ARE OUT THERE, THERE LATH OUT THERE SHOWING THE LOCATIONS. BUT IF YOU DRIVE DOWN 33, YOU'LL SEE IT'S ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE CITY. IT'S NOT JUST ON OUR CAMPUS. IT'S ACTUALLY FROM ONE END OF THE CITY TO THE OTHER END OF THE, THE CITY. SO CERTAINLY HAP HAPPILY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THEY'RE PAYING US FAIR MARKET VALUE FOR, FOR THE LAND AND A TEMPORARY LIMITED EASEMENTS. UH, THEY HAD TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF GRADING, AS YOU IMAGINE, LIKE IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. THE SIDEWALK'S GOTTA SLOPE DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT TO MAKE SURE THE CURB RAMP, AND SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO MOVE THE SIDEWALK CAN ACTUALLY MEET THE NEW STANDARDS FOR A DA COMPLIANCE. I HAVE, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. DO THEY USUALLY LINE THEM UP STRAIGHT WITH THE CROSSWALKS AND THE SIDEWALKS? THAT IS PART OF THE PROJECT. THEY MAY HAVE TO DO SOME REPAINTING AND RES STRIPING AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT YES, WE'RE HAPPY AND EXTREMELY HAPPY THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO THE MIDBLOCK CROSSING THAT WE HAVE RIGHT OUTSIDE THE GOVERNMENT CENTER THAT GOES ACROSS THE STREET. SO WE HAD TO WORK FOR THAT ONE AND THEY'RE HAPPY, THEY AGREED WITH US TO LET THAT ONE IN PLACE. OKAY. I HAVE A BONE TO PICK. I HAD A BIKE ACCIDENT BECAUSE OF 45 DEGREE RAMPS INSTEAD OF PERPENDICULAR. SO, MM-HMM. . UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. UM, SPEAKING OF THE, UH, MID, MID-BLOCK CROSSWALK MM-HMM, , UH, I, I NOTICED THAT THEY WERE ADDRESSING THAT. WHAT IMPROVEMENTS ARE, ARE THEY MAKING ON THAT? 'CAUSE I DO HAVE CONCERN WITH OUR EMPLOYEES WHERE THEY CROSS THEIR, UH, NOT THAT THERE'S A LOT OF IT, BUT SURE. TRULY JUST, TRULY JUST THE RAMP BETWEEN THE CURB AND GUTTER AND THE SIDEWALK. SO THAT'S ALL JUST THAT SLOPE THAT'S THERE. THE CURRENT SLOPE IS JUST A LITTLE BIT TOO STEEP AND IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT RAISED AREA. OFTENTIMES YOU'LL SEE A, A THREE FOOT BY TWO FOOT PAD. UM, IT'S USUALLY METAL AND YOU GET THE RAISED BUMPS IN IT. SO PEOPLE THAT ARE, UH, CAN'T SEE OR, OR SIGHT IMPAIRED, YOU KNOW, CAN, CAN FEEL THAT WITH THEIR FEET OR THEIR CANE. UH, SO THAT'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE MATCHING. IN THE OLD DAYS, YOU JUST TOOK THE CONCRETE AND SCRIBED THE CONCRETE. UM, SO THAT'S NO LONGER MEETING THE STANDARDS, BUT THEY ARE DOING, UH, NO SIGNAGE IMPROVEMENTS, NO MIDDLE OF THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT. UM, WE WERE, UM, HAPPY TO GET WHAT WE GOT SO FAR. YEAH, I WAS HOPING TO SEE ONE OF THOSE PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS WHERE YOU PRESS THE BUTTON AND YOU GET THE YELLOW FLASHES. UH, I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S SUCH A BUSY STREET MM-HMM. AND WITHOUT AN ACTUAL [00:05:01] CROSSWALK RIGHT THERE, IT, IT WOULD BE, I THINK BE, UH, GOOD FOR SAFETY, BUT IT'S UNFORTUNATE. THANK YOU, SIR. YEP. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? AND WE'LL VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. UM, THE NEXT TWO ITEMS ARE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF OUR CLERK, ASHLEY, WHO IS COMING A BIT, A BIT LATER. SO WE'LL MOVE TO ITEM F USE OF ARPA FUNDS FOR UNIQUELY WISCONSIN. UM, AND THIS IS JUST A CONSENSUS, SO I DON'T NEED A MOTION. UM, BUT WE'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, AS YOU MIGHT SEE FROM THE PACKAGE A COUPLE YEARS AGO, AND THEY'RE COMING AROUND WITH A SECOND [f. Use of ARPA for Uniquely Wisconsin] ROUND. SO, UH, IT'S ARPA MONEY THAT WE JUST SAY CONSENSUS. OKAY. AND THEN IT MOVES ON. SO ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS? YES, IT'S, UH, MY OPINION THAT THE LAST TIME THIS WAS DONE, THEY DID A GOOD JOB WITH IT. SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING. YEAH. AND I THINK AGREED FOR THOSE OF US GOING TO LACROSSE, WE MIGHT GET A LITTLE BIT MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. I THINK THEY'LL PROBABLY DO A PRESENTATION LIKE THEY DID LAST TIME, RIGHT? PROBABLY. SO. UM, IT MIGHT GET A LITTLE BIT BETTER, BUT, UH, YEAH, I AGREE. IT WAS WELL DONE LAST TIME. IT REALLY BROUGHT TO LIGHT OUR TOURISM AND ALL THE REST OF THAT, WHAT WE GOT GOING ON. SO, SO WE HAVE A CONSENSUS. MM-HMM. CONSENSUS. OKAY. UM, NEXT UP IS OUR GUIDANCE ON JOINT REVIEW BOARD PARTICIPATION, WHICH WILL BE GIVEN BY AARON DAHL. ALRIGHT, GOOD EVENING AGAIN. UM, SO THIS THE CONCEPT, YOU KNOW, UH, TAX INCREMENTAL FINANCING [g. Guidance on Joint Review Board Participation] AND TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS. SO TIFF AND TS, UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T TALK A LOT ABOUT THAT AT EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. UM, SO AS I GO THROUGH THIS, I'M GOING TO, YOU KNOW, EXPLAIN SOME CONCEPTS AS NECESSARY. I'M NOT GONNA DO A, A TIFF 1 0 1. UH, IF WE NEED TO HAVE EXPERTS IN TO DO THAT, I'M HAPPY TO, YOU KNOW, FIND AND INVITE THOSE FOLKS. UH, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AT SOME POINT. BUT, UM, FOR THIS DISCUSSION, REALLY I THINK WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW IS, UH, A JOINT REVIEW BOARD OVERSEES TS TAX INCREMENTAL DISTRICTS, UH, AND THE JOINT REVIEW BOARD MUST GIVE ITS APPROVAL WHEN, YOU KNOW, NEW DISTRICTS ARE CREATED WHEN THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY AMENDED, ADDING PROJECT COSTS AT CREATE, YOU KNOW, CHANGING BOUNDARIES, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT. UM, THE COUNTY IS ONE OF FIVE, UH, VOTING MEMBERS ON JOINT, ON THE JOINT REVIEW BOARD OR THE JRB. UM, SO THAT'S FOR ALL, UH, DISTRICTS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, EVERY, YOU KNOW, ALL THE MUNICIPALITIES. UM, THE REASON JOINT REVIEW BOARDS ARE GIVEN THIS ROLE IS BECAUSE THE JURISDICTIONS THEY REPRESENT. SO, LIKE I REPRESENT THE COUNTY, UH, WHEN YOU CREATE A A TID, YOU TEMPORARILY FORGO FUTURE TAX REVENUE, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF FUNDING PROJECTS WITHIN THAT DISTRICT. UM, I'LL KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS THAT. UM, BUT THAT'S REALLY THE REASON WHY JOINT REVIEW BOARDS ARE SO IMPORTANT AND, AND, UM, HELP TO DECIDE ABOUT CREATION AND AMENDMENT OF, OF TS. UM, THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE AND THE COUNTY BOARD CHAIR ARE INCLUDED IN ALL THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT HAPPEN WHEN DISTRICTS ARE CREATED OR AMENDED. UM, AND STAFF, AKA ME FOR THE LAST YEAR OR SO, UM, I, I ATTEND, PARTICIPATE, VOTE, UH, IN THOSE JOINT REVIEW BOARD MEETINGS AS A MEMBER, UH, REPRESENTING THE COUNTY. UM, HISTORICALLY, OUR PERSPECTIVE ON, ON TIFF IS, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ONE OF THE ONLY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TOOLS AND MUNICIPALITY HAS, UM, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS IT'S BEING USED REASONABLY, UM, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY TYPICALLY WE DON'T, WE DON'T STAND IN THE WAY OF DEVELOPMENT. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY WE SUPPORT THOSE DISTRICTS WHEN THEY'RE CREATED. UM, WHEN IT COMES TO MODIFYING DISTRICTS, YOU KNOW, ADDING COSTS, AMENDING BOUNDARIES, WE'VE HISTORICALLY BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THAT AS WELL, WHEN IT MAKES SENSE. UM, YOU KNOW, USUALLY WE, WE AMEND A DISTRICT WHEN, UH, WHEN IT'S DONE WELL, WHEN NEW DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED, YOU AMEND THE DISTRICT AS THAT HAPPENS, RATHER THAN CREATE SOME PIE IN THE SKY DISTRICT TO START WITH. UM, SO WE'RE, AGAIN, WE'RE GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE OF ALL OF THAT, AND THAT'S JUST SOME BACKGROUND ON, UM, ON OUR PERSPECTIVE. WE WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF CLOSING THE DISTRICTS, UM, AS EARLY [00:10:01] AS, AS FEASIBLE. UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU CLOSE A DISTRICT, THE, THE, THE TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUE IN THAT DISTRICT, UM, IT'S KIND OF A COMPLEX, COMPLEX THING TO DESCRIBE, BUT BASICALLY THAT, THAT VALUE, UH, IT BECOMES TAXABLE FOR THE OVERALL OPERATIONS, WHICH REDUCES THE TAX RATE. UH, BASICALLY WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS WHEN A TID CLOSES, IT REDUCES THE SLICE OF THE PIE FOR THE FOLKS THAT AREN'T IN THE TID BECAUSE THE FOLKS THAT ARE, ARE NOW TAKING ON A SLICE OF THAT PIE FOR FUNDING OVERALL GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS. UM, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE SUPPORTIVE OF CLOSING THOSE TS EARLY, UM, OR AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE. UM, SO THE REASON I'M HERE TODAY, UH, I'M LOOKING TO GET THE INPUT OF ELECTED OFFICIALS, UM, WHEN A DECISION POINT MAYBE SEEMS GRAY, UH, AS IT RELATES TO, YOU KNOW, CREATION OR CHANGES OF, OF, UH, OF A TIF, UM, OR A T RATHER. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, RATHER THAN HAVING ME AN UNELECTED COUNTY EMPLOYEE, UH, I DON'T, I HESITATE TO USE THE B WORD BUREAUCRAT, BUT THAT'S WHAT I AM, UM, RATHER THAN HAVE ME MAKE THE CALL ON MY OWN, UH, I'M LOOKING TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT YOUR PERSPECTIVE AND, YOU KNOW, GET, GET YOUR THOUGHTS ON, ON SOME OF THESE DISTRICTS, YOU KNOW, AS, AS ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COUNTY. UM, UM, PLEASE, IF WE MAY INTERRUPT JUST A MINUTE, UM, I'M FAMILIAR WITH TIFFS, I'M SURE THAT YOU ARE AS EX PRESIDENT OF JACKSON. UM, WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE TEACHING, UH, THING AT ONE POINT, UM, THAT CHRISTIAN TETLOCK DOES ALL THE TIME. ARE YOU TWO INTERESTED? UM, OR, YOU KNOW, ABOUT TII KIND OF KNOW THE BASIS OF 'EM. I MEAN, IT'S LIKE A TAX BREAK TO GET THE BUSINESS GOING AND STUFF LIKE THAT. IN SOME CASES, SEND OTHER PEOPLE PICK UP THE TAB, UM, BUT I DON'T KNOW THE INTRICATE PARTS OF IT. MM-HMM. . UM, IT'D BE GOOD TO KNOW THAT. I MEAN, IF THERE'S SOMETHING I COULD READ OR SOMETHING, OR A VIDEO SURE. I GOOGLE VIDEO . I COULD, UM, I COULD LOOK AT SOME EASY, UH, MATERIALS. CERTAINLY THE TID MANUAL IS OUT THERE, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO READ THAT . HOW ABOUT, HOW ABOUT, YEAH. RIGHT. HOW ABOUT TID FOR DUMMIES, MAN? OKAY. I'LL SEE IF THAT'S OUT THERE. CLIFF, CLIFF NOTES. YEAH, SURE, SURE. IF THOSE STILL EXIST, IT WOULD JUST TO REVIEW IT AND GET AN UNDERSTANDING. AGAIN, SUPERVISOR TIES YOUR THOUGHTS. OKAY. I, THE MORE YOU LEARN, THE MORE YOU KNOW YOU DON'T KNOW. YEAH. I MEAN, WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT MONDAY AND TODAY AND THIS ONE, UM, MPTC IS PART OF THE TAXING DISTRICT, SO IT'S JUST A LITTLE BIT, BUT THIS TAX AFFECTS PEOPLE IN RIPPING MM-HMM. BECAUSE IT AFFECTS HOW MUCH THEY PAY TO MPTC. SO IT'S, IT'S NOT JUST WEST BEND. IT'S, IT HAS A BIG EFFECT. SO YOU WANTED TO SAY SOMETHING? UH, YES, PLEASE. THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB? YES, THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN. UM, IN GENERAL, I'M IN FAVOR OF TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS, PROVIDED THAT THE NUMBERS WORK OUT, AND IT'S BEEN MY EXPERIENCE THAT ELLS DOES A VERY THOROUGH JOB PLANNING THEM OUT. AND ON THAT BASIS, I REALLY DON'T, UM, SEE A REASON TO DENY OR OR TO VOTE AGAINST VERY MANY TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS. IN THIS CASE, I'M A LITTLE BIT, I STRUGGLED WITH THIS ONE BECAUSE IMPROVING A ROADWAY ADJACENT OR INTO THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT, UM, SEEMS TO ME TO BE A, A LITTLE BIT OF A STRETCH IF THE ROADWAY WAS INSIDE THE DISTRICT ITSELF, IF IT WAS A ROADWAY THAT THAT, UH, CAME UP IMMEDIATELY TO IT, AND INDIANA AVENUE DOES. BUT IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S A BIT OF A STRETCH TO INCLUDE THAT IN THE TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT. MM-HMM. , AND, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG. UM, MAYBE THERE'S SOME INSIGHTS THAT SOMEONE ELSE HAS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, UM, THE CITY OF WEST BEND SEES ITSELF AS, AS NEEDING ADDITIONAL FUNDS FOR ROADWAYS. IF THIS WERE DIRECTLY INSIDE THE DISTRICT ITSELF, I'D SAY IT'D BE A NO BRAINER. BUT IN THIS CASE, I'M, I'M STRUGGLING A BIT. DO YOU WANNA CONTINUE? NO, THANK YOU. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY, UM, THAT'S EXACTLY WHY I, I BROUGHT THIS ONE FORWARD HERE TODAY. UM, WHEN I, I [00:15:01] GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, START BRINGING THESE ON A REGULAR BASIS, MAYBE, UM, MAYBE AS A CONSENT AGENDA FOR THE ONES THAT MAKE SENSE, UM, OR THAT, THAT DON'T HAVE THAT GRAY AREA. UM, BUT AT LEAST FOR THIS, THIS BODY TO, TO SEE WHAT'S HAPPENING OUT THERE. UM, I THINK THAT MAY BE USEFUL TO YOU, BUT IN CASES LIKE THIS, I WOULD LOVE, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK AND THE DISCUSSION ON THAT. UM, AS A CONTRAST, YOU TALKED ABOUT A COUPLE OTHER KIDS AND COMPARING THEM. YEAH. DO YOU WANT TO GO INTO THEM? SURE, SURE. UM, YOU KNOW, THE SEPTEMBER'S BEEN A BUSY MONTH, RIGHT? UM, THERE ARE, THERE ARE FOUR RIGHT NOW BEING PROPOSED OR AMENDED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME GOOD EXAMPLES THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT COME TO MIND. UM, YOU KNOW, ONE GREAT EXAMPLE, TID NUMBER NINE IN GERMANTOWN. UM, IT'S, IF THERE IS A NO BRAINER, THIS ONE SEEMS LIKE IT. UM, IT, IT'S BEEN PERFORMING, IT WAS CREATED LA IN 2022. IT'S BEEN PERFORMING VERY WELL EVER SINCE. UM, YOU KNOW, STERLING PHARMA IS A BIG PLAYER IN THIS TID, THE VILLAGE. THIS IS A CASE WHERE THE VILLAGE IS COMING BACK SEEKING, UH, AN AMENDMENT TO ADD MORE TERRITORY. UM, THEY USE A VERY CONSERVATIVE APPROACH. UM, THE, THE DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE, THE DEVELOPER INCENTIVE STRUCTURE IS, IS VERY, VERY CONSERVATIVE, VERY REASONABLE COMPARED TO WHAT ELSE IS HAPPENING OUT THERE. UM, AND ON TOP OF ALL OF THAT, IT'S GOING TO REDUCE THE LIFE OF THE TID BY, BY, UH, FOUR YEARS. RIGHT. SO, I, I DIDN'T INCLUDE ALL OF THESE EXAMPLES IN THE PACKET JUST BECAUSE I DIDN'T WANT, YOU KNOW, YOU TO HAVE THIS, THIS MANY PAGES TO, TO WADE THROUGH. BUT I WANTED TO JUST HIGHLIGHT THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF, OF A CASE, YOU KNOW, WHERE, WHERE IT MAKES SENSE FOR US TO JUST SAY THIS, THIS LOOKS GREAT. MOVE ON. UM, YOU KNOW, ANOTHER EXAMPLE, TID NUMBER FIVE IN KI WASUM. UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S, THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S BEING CREATED TO, UH, TO FACILITATE THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE, THE FORMAL REGAL, REGAL WEAR HEADQUARTERS, RIGHT? UM, INTO, YOU KNOW, MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT. SO AGAIN, THE, THE, THE ESTIMATES ARE CONSERVATIVE. UM, IT'S ESTIMATED TO CLOSE EARLIER THAN THE STATUTE ALLOWS. SO, AGAIN, A GOOD STORY, YOU KNOW, FULL DISCLOSURE, THIS IS THE NEXT GEN HOUSING DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, THIS, THIS TID IS NOT A RUBBER STAMP BY THE COUNTY BY ANY MEANS. YOU KNOW, EARLY IN THE PROCESS, THE COUNTY EXEC IDENTIFIED A COUPLE THINGS, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE OF CONCERNS HE HAD WITH THAT INITIAL PROJECT PLAN. AND THE VILLAGE WAS VERY OPEN. SO KUDOS TO THE VILLAGE AND, AND, YOU KNOW, VILLAGE PRESIDENT MARTIN, UM, AND, AND ADMINISTRATOR ADAM GITTER, THEY'RE, THEY'VE BEEN GREAT THROUGHOUT THE, THE PROCESS. AND SO THAT'S, IT'S ANOTHER CASE WHERE THERE'S THAT BACK AND FORTH AHEAD OF TIME. IT, IT ALL MAKES SENSE. IT ALL LINES UP. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S JUST A CONSENT AGENDA THAT THIS ONE LOOKS GOOD. YOU GUYS CAN TAKE A LOOK AND, AND CONFIRM THAT. UM, SO THE WEST BEND ONE THAT IS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE PACKET IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT GRAY AREA WHERE, WHERE I WOULD APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION. UM, AND, AND, YOU KNOW, TO SUPERVISOR SCHWAB'S POINT, THERE'S, THERE'S ONE OTHER NUANCE I'D LIKE TO IDENTIFY, UM, WITH ANOTHER, WITH THE, THE FOURTH AND FINAL EXAMPLE OF, UH, UM, ANOTHER TID THAT'S BEING CONSIDERED, WHICH IS TID 13 IN HARTFORD. UM, WITH THAT ONE THERE, THERE'S ANOTHER ROAD PROJECT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED THAT IS JUST OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT ITSELF. UM, IN THIS CASE, THE, THE T IS BEING CREATED TO, UM, TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ASSISTED LIVING CAMPUS. SO 96 ASSISTED LIVING UNITS. THE PROPOSED ROAD PROJECT IS TO CONNECT, UH, AN EXISTING ROAD. I BELIEVE IT'S, UH, IT'S AN, UH, I THINK IT'S CALLED SHOWER, SHOWER DRIVE IN, UH, HARTFORD. ESSENTIALLY, IT'S CONNECTING THEIR NEW SATELLITE FIRE STATION TO A MORE MAIN THOROUGHFARE, WHICH WOULD THEN, YOU KNOW, FACILITATE, UH, EMERGENCY SERVICES TO THAT, UH, THAT ASSISTED LIVING [00:20:01] FACILITY. SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A, THE, THE ROAD PROJECT ITSELF, IT'S ONLY $500,000, SO IT'S A LOT LESS THAN THE, THE ONE IN WEST BEND, BUT STILL, IT'S OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT AND IT'S A ROAD PROJECT. SO IT'S A, BUT IT IS FOR A PUBLIC SAFETY PURPOSE. SO I WANTED TO JUST GET SOME THOUGHTS ON MAYBE THAT NUANCE, IF, IF THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE TO YOU OR, OR, UM, YOU KNOW, IS, IS IT MAKE SENSE TO ASK THE, THAT THE DISTRICT FUNDS ONLY A PORTION OF THAT COST, OR, YOU KNOW, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS? SUPERVISOR, SHAMAN COMING IN HERE, KIND OF NEW, RIGHT? YEAH. WITH AN UNDERSTANDING. SO WITH YOUR HARTFORD EXAMPLE, AND THEN GOING BACK TO THIS TIF 16, UM, MY QUESTION WOULD BE, UH, FOR INSTANCE, ON THE 16 IN WEST BEND HERE, IS THERE THAT ROAD THAT'S TIED INTO THE TIF DISTRICT? IS THERE ANY REASON THAT THAT ROAD WOULD HAVE ANYTHING TO DO, LIKE MIKE SAID WITH THAT, THAT TIF DISTRICT? LIKE, ARE THEY THINKING THAT THE TRAFFIC COUNT'S GONNA GO WAY UP BECAUSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT THERE? THEREFORE THEY NEED TO DO SOMETHING WITH THAT ROAD, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S TIED IN? WELL, SO A LANGUAGE LIKE THAT, I MEAN, IS THAT, UM, THE OTHERWISE, WHY ELSE WOULD IT BE BROUGHT IN? AND RIGHT HIGHLIGHTED LATER ON IS AN AFTERTHOUGHT. THE LANGUAGE THAT WE WERE PROVIDED WAS THAT THAT ROAD IS A MAIN THOROUGHFARE. UH, AND, AND THAT'S, THAT'S IT. UM, IT DOESN'T, IT DOESN'T SAY MUCH ELSE ALONG THOSE LINES. ONE, ONE THING TO POINT OUT IS THAT WHEN WE ORIGINALLY, UH, APPROVED THIS DISTRICT, THAT ROAD WAS NOT IN THE PROJECT PLAN. IT WAS KIND OF ADDED IN. NOW, UH, SO MY, IN MY MIND, YOU KNOW, A QUESTION IS RAISED LIKE, WHY NOW? RIGHT? RIGHT. JUST BECAUSE WE CAN AFFORD IT NOW DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULD NECESSARILY. SO HENCE, YOU KNOW, THIS WHY I AM, I'M BRINGING THIS TO YOU TODAY, SUPERVISOR KELLY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. UM, SO I READ THROUGH THIS PRETTY WELL AS A, A SUPERVISOR OF WEST BEND. UM, AND I LOOK AT THIS, UH, FROM WHAT I SEE OF THE NUMBERS, UH, YOU KNOW, NOTHING'S REALLY TRUE. THEY'RE JUST PROJECTIONS. MM-HMM. , I MEAN, IT PROJECTS THAT IT'S GOING TO POSSIBLY BE UNDER, IT IS OVERPERFORMING NOW. BUT OF COURSE, THERE'S NOTHING TO SAY THAT IT, THAT MIGHT CHANGE WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS, DEPENDING ON THE ELECTION OR WHAT HAPPENS. WE DON'T KNOW. SO IT'S, IT'S, THERE'S A CERTAIN GAMBLE ON THAT, WHICH I'VE, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE WITH. UM, ALSO, UH, TO MR. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB'S POINT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT, IT, YOU MAY SAY OVERALL THAT IT, IT SERVES THAT TID DISTRICT AS A WAY IN, BUT THERE'S ANOTHER CROSS STREET HERE ALSO THAT I SEE THAT COMES IN. AND INDIANA FROM THE SOUTH ALSO COMES IN. SO I FIND THAT AS A BIT OF A STRETCH. UM, AND, AND KEEP IN MIND, I'M, I'M A WEST BEND RESIDENT. UH, SO WHILE I WOULD LIKE OUR ROADS TO GET FIXED IN WEST BEND, IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING I CAMPAIGNED ON WHEN I RAN FOR MAYOR. UM, I DON'T SEE IF, IF, IF A T IS GONNA, YOU KNOW, BE ABLE TO BE CLEARED OUT EARLY, UH, WHICH WOULD BE GREAT, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL THE PARTIES INVOLVED, ALL THE TAXING AUTHORITIES. UM, I THINK IT SHOULD BE. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, YOU KNOW, ADDING THIS ROAD BENEFITS WEST BEND GREATLY, BUT I DON'T SEE THE VILLAGE OF JACKSON, UH, CONTINUING WITH THIS T AND CONTINUING TO NOT RECEIVE PAYMENTS FROM IT, HOW THEY BENEFIT OR THE TOWN OF WEST BEND OR, OR RICHFIELD. YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE WITH THIS IDEA. IT'S SORT OF ALONG THE SAME LINES AS WHEN THEY DID THE TID OVER FOR THE DISTRICT WHERE THEY ADDED IN THE RIVER WALK AREA. WELL, THAT'S, TO ME, THAT'S A PARK THAT'S NOT REALLY PART OF REDOING LAND. AND, AND, AND CLEANING UP BROWNFIELD SITE AND REDEVELOPING LAND THAT WAS BLIGHTED, OR, YOU KNOW, GIVING YOU ALMOST LITTLE TO NO TAXING, UH, YOU KNOW, I DON'T SEE HOW THIS NECESSARILY INCREASES THE TAXING AUTHORITY OF THE TID, WHICH IS ANOTHER REASON WHY WE DO TS IS TO INCREASE THE TAXES THAT COME OUT OF IT. YOU'RE GIVING UP YOUR MONEY NOW FOR MORE MONEY LATER. I DON'T SEE HOW THIS ACCOMPLISHES THAT GOAL AS WELL. MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW, IF I WERE TO GIVE YOU GUIDANCE, IT WOULD BE THESE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE, THESE ARE THE CONCERNS AND THE PROBLEMS THAT I HAVE, [00:25:01] AND I WOULD BRING THOSE THINGS UP TO THE REST OF THE GROUP. NOW, I'M NOT SAYING WE SHOULDN'T NECESSARILY DO IT, BUT I WOULD WANT SOME KIND OF SATISFACTORY ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS. MM-HMM. FROM THE, UH, PROPOSERS OF THIS, YOU KNOW, TO SAY, YOU KNOW, WELL, WHY MM-HMM. , UH, WHY SHOULD JACKSON AND TOWN OF WEST BEND, AND RICHFIELD AND GERMANTOWN AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS BE CHIPPING IN ON A TID THAT, YOU KNOW, DIRECTLY BENEFITS WEST BEND, A BRAND NEW ROAD, $2.6 MILLION, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT HELP THEM? YEAH. AND, AND IN THE PACKET THAT WE RECEIVED IT, IT SAID THAT THIS PROJECT COST WILL NOT HAVE, IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO HAVE ANY IMPACT IN THE INCREMENTAL VALUE OF THE DISTRICT ITSELF. UM, SO YOU'VE, YOU'VE ARTICULATED THE BALANCING TEST THAT A JOINT REVIEW BOARD NEEDS TO GO THROUGH, RIGHT? DOES DO THE IMPROVEMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS, UM, BENEFIT THE DISTRICT ENOUGH TO OUTWEIGH THE CONCESSIONS BEING MADE BY THE OVERLYING TAXING JURISDICTIONS. AND, UM, SO YOU'VE, YOU'VE ARTICULATED THAT BALANCING TEST THAT, THAT THE JRB NEEDS TO GO THROUGH. SO EXCELLENT COMMENTS, SUPERVISOR TIES. SO AGAIN, BEING VERY NEW TO THIS WHOLE TID AND TIF, UM, CONCEPT AND ACTUALITY AS WE DISCUSSED, THAT'S GREAT. YOU'VE GOTTEN SOME THOUGHTS. YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING INTERESTING ABOUT, SO MAYBE IS THERE A PORTION OF IT THAT WE, WHAT, WHAT OPTIONS DO WE HAVE IF WE SAY, YEAH, WE'RE NOT, SO YOU, YOU TAKE THAT INFORMATION BACK, CAN IT BE REWORDED REBUILT IT? I I THINK IT CAN. THE, YOU KNOW, AN EXAMPLE OF THAT IS, IS THIS THE KIOSKI, UH, TID NUMBER FIVE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, UM, TO SERVE THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT. THEIR, THEY, THEIR, THEY'RE, THEY, THEY'RE, THEY NEED A, UH, A LIFT STATION TO BE BUILT FOR, FOR THE, THE WATER PIECE. UM, UH, THE DISTRICT IS FUNDING 10% OF THE COSTS OF THAT LIFT STATION. UM, THE REST OF THE COSTS ARE BEING BORNE BY THE UTILITY AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, UM, SO YES, IT, IT, THERE IS A, A, SOME, SOME DISTRICTS USE A CALCULATION WHEN IT COMES TO PROJECT COSTS OUTSIDE OF THIS HALF MILE OR INSIDE OF THIS HALF MILE BOUNDARY. UM, SO ABSOLUTELY THAT IS A, A DISCUSSION POINT THAT COULD BE HAD. SO THANK YOU. SURE. YEAH. I'LL JUMP IN TOO. THAT, THAT COMMON SENSE PIECE, IS IT NECESSARY FOR THE T TIF TO BE SUCCESSFUL? AND IN THAT CASE, IN KI WASUM, IT'S LIKE, YEAH, YOU CAN ARGUE 10% OF THAT LIFT STATION IS GONNA SERVE THAT DEVELOPMENT MAKES PERFECT SENSE. THIS ROAD CALLED A THOROUGHFARE. I DROVE DOWN IT THE OTHER DAY. IT'S JUST A NEIGHBORHOOD STREET AND IT'S NOT IN HORRIBLE SHAPE COMPARED TO LOTS IN WEST BEND. SO, YOU KNOW, BALANCING THE INTEREST OF THE TAXPAYER, FOR ME, I WOULD NOT LOOK AT THIS ONE FAVORABLY NOW AS WAS JUST BROUGHT UP, PAY FOR A COUPLE BLOCKS OF IT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT'S REASONABLE, BUT THAT'S IN THE HANDS OF THE JOINT REVIEW BOARD. MM-HMM. OUTSIDE OUR EXPERTISE. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB. I THINK ONE THING TO REMEMBER AS WELL IS THAT YOU'RE ONLY ONE VOTE OF FIVE MM-HMM. . SO, UM, EVEN IF YOU WERE TO, TO RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS, UM, IT MAY, YOUR OUR POINT OF VIEW MAY NOT MATTER. MM-HMM. . RIGHT. UM, THAT'S, SO THERE'S THAT AS WELL. THAT'S A GREAT POINT. YOU KNOW, I, MY MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT SOME SCHOOL DISTRICTS ARE, ARE, UM, ARE USING AN APPROACH SIMILAR TO THIS. UM, AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK, I THINK THE GOAL WOULD BE TO COMMUNICATE THAT TO, UM, SOME OF OUR PARTNERS ON THE JRB, JUST, YOU KNOW, AND NO WALKING QUORUMS, NO ANYTHING LIKE THAT. UH, NO SHENANIGANS, BUT, UM, JUST, YOU KNOW, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR, FOR MORE DISCUSSION TO, TO HAPPEN, USE COMMON SENSE IN ALL THESE SITUATIONS. MM-HMM. SUPERVISOR KEL. AND, AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, WITH THE POINTS THAT I RAISED, THEY'RE NOT TO SAY THAT WE SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE A NO. RIGHT? IT IT, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, IF GENERAL CONSENSUS AMONG THE JRB IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING WE, WE SHOULD LOOK AT, WE COULD LOOK AT, ALL I'M SAYING IS ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS. MM-HMM. , YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THIS DIRECTLY BENEFIT ALL THE PLAYERS IN THIS, YOU KNOW, IS IS IT'S SOMETHING THAT MAKES THE DISTRICT BETTER. UH, [00:30:01] HOW DOES IT IMPROVE IT, YOU KNOW, WHAT EFFECTS THIS MIGHT HAVE. AND, AND THOSE ARE THE THINGS YOU SHOULD BE ASKING YOURSELF IF YOU WANT TO DO A PROJECT LIKE THIS, YOU KNOW, UH, ON, IN THIS TYPE OF FORMAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO FINANCE ROADS AND MAYBE THIS IS JUST A WAY THEY THOUGHT THAT THEY COULD, YOU KNOW, AND I'M NOT COMMENTING YES OR NO. MM-HMM. , I MEAN, YOU KNOW, HECK, IF I WERE THE ADMINISTRATOR, I'D PROBABLY GO THIS ROUTE TOO. WHY NOT? IT'S WORTH THE ASK. UM, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY ALSO WORTH THE STANDING UP TO THE SCRUTINY AND THE TEST. AND, AND IF GENERAL NCES, UH, CONSENSUS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, UH, YEAH, WE CAN LIVE WITH THIS. WE THINK IT'S CREATIVE. WE THINK IT'S GREAT. I'M NOT GONNA SIT THERE AND SAY, YOU MUST STAND FIRM AGAINST THE, THE HEADWIND, YOU KNOW? UM, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THINGS ARE ABSOLUTELY RAISED. GREAT. MAKES SENSE. THANK YOU. YEAH. ONE LAST ITEM TOO, UH, WITH REGARDS TO THE INDIANA AVENUE IN PURPLE HERE. I MEAN, IF THEY'RE REPLACING THAT JUST TO DO THE ROAD, THEN LIKE EVERYBODY SAID HERE, I'D QUESTION IT. BUT IF THEY'RE DOING IT BECAUSE MAYBE THEY HAVE TO BRING A NEW WATER SUPPLY FEED FOR THE PUMPS, WELL, NOW THERE'S A REASON, RIGHT? YOU GOTTA DO WORK, YOU GOTTA TEAR UP THE ROAD ANYWAY. YOU MIGHT AS WELL IMPROVE IT. YEAH. SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME ADDED THOUGHTS THAT DEFINITELY SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, I HOPE MY VERY LAST COMMENT, , UM, IF, IF THIS WERE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR THE SUCCESS OF THE TIT, I'M SURPRISED IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE BE IN THE BEGINNING. THE FACT THAT IT'S CONCLUDED AFTERWARDS, THIS SUSPECT LEAVES ME TO QUESTION IT'S NECESSITY. MM-HMM. , THANK YOU. THAT WE HAVE, SO MR. DAHL, DO YOU HAVE THE INPUT YOU NEED ON? I DO. I DO. I, I THINK I'VE GOT PLENTY. OKAY. I, I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE GOOD DISCUSSION AND FEEDBACK. THIS WAS VERY HELPFUL AND I THINK THIS COMMITTEE WOULD WELCOME THE CHANCE TO CHIME IN IN THE FUTURE. ABSOLUTELY. ANYTIME YOU WANT US TO. AWESOME. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UM, I SEE OUR CLERK IS HERE NOW, SO WE'LL GO BACK TO ITEM 3D ON TAX DEED PROPERTIES. THANK YOU. UH, SO IN YOUR PACKET, YOU HAVE TWO COMMITTEE REPORTS, UM, WITH THE LISTING OF TAX DEED PROPERTIES THAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD TODAY. UH, THE FIRST COMMITTEE REPORT WILL [d. Review and Make Recommendations on Tax Deed Properties] BE ASKING FOR A MOTION TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TAKE THE DEEDS OF THE PROPERTIES AND THEN SEND THEIR STANDARD NOTICE TO THE FORMER OWNERS, ALLOWING THEM THAT ONE LAST CHANCE TO REDEEM, UH, WHICH IS WHERE THEY HAVE TO PAY THE FULL AMOUNT OF TAXES, INTEREST PENALTIES, AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS DUE, UM, BY THE DEADLINE SPECIFIED IN THAT LETTER, I DO WANT TO, UH, POINT OUT ONE PROPERTY THAT'S ON THE LIST, WHICH IS, UH, V THREE, WHICH IS VILLAGE OF JACKSON 0 1 4 1. THAT PROPERTY WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING TO TAKE AS OF RIGHT NOW. UH, WE'RE WORKING THROUGH SOME BROWNFIELDS, UM, ISSUES OR CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE WITH THAT PROPERTY BEFORE WE TAKE IT. I NOTICED THE ONE BELOW THAT HAS SOME BOLDED NUMBERS. IS THAT SIGNIFICANT? NO, I THINK THAT'S JUST A FORMATTING ISSUE. OKAY. SO I GUESS WE NEED A MOTION AND A SECOND FOR THIS SUPERVISOR, SCHWAB SUPERVISOR SHARAN. UM, ANY DISCUSSION OR QUESTIONS, MR. CHAIRMAN? YES, SIR. MY MOTION WOULD BE, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PROPERTY, NOTED, THE, TO MOVE THE RECOMMENDATION AS PROVIDED IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. AND IS THAT AGREEABLE TO THE SECOND? YES. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION THEN? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN THE SECOND ITEM, THE COMMITTEE REPORT SPECIFIES EACH OF THE PROPERTIES, AND OBVIOUSLY WE WILL BE, UH, SKIPPING OVER THE V 3 0 1 4 1 PROPERTY BECAUSE WE, YOU JUST VOTED NOT TO TAKE THAT PROPERTY. SO JUST DISREGARD THE MINIMUM BID AMOUNT RECOMMENDATION. UM, BUT ALL OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES ARE LISTED [e. Review and Set Minimum Bid Amounts on Tax Deed Properties] WITH THEIR TAX KEY NUMBER, ADDRESS, AND UM, PRIOR OWNER'S NAME AND THE RECOMMENDED MINIMUM BID AMOUNT FOR THOSE PROPERTIES. UM, SO ONCE THE TIMELINE HAS EXPIRED FOR THEM TO REDEEM, IF THEY STILL HAVE NOT, THEN THE NEXT STEP FOR OUR OFFICE IS TO, UM, WE PUBLISH A NOTICE AND THEN WE PUT THE PROPERTIES OUT FOR BID ON WISCONSIN SURPLUS, UH, FOR THE MINIMUM BID AMOUNT. THAT'S THE STARTING POINT. AND THEN WE LEAVE THEM ON THEIR WEBSITE TYPICALLY FOR A WEEK TO TWO WEEKS. AND THEN WE BRING THE WINNING BID AMOUNTS BACK FOR FINAL APPROVAL. UM, BUT AS YOU CAN SEE, THE MINIMUM BID AMOUNTS WE HAVE JUST ROUNDED UP TO BASIC, BASICALLY COVER THE TAXES, INTEREST, PENALTIES, AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS THAT ARE DUE TO THE COUNTY AND THE MUNICIPALITY. [00:35:01] THANK YOU. ON THIS ONE, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION. I'LL LOOK FOR A SECOND. ALL SECOND SUPERVISOR SICE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THERE BEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK ON THIS, ASHLEY. YEAH, THANK YOU. UM, OUR NEXT ITEM IS THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING FRAMEWORKS UPDATES. HI. IF YOU STRUGGLE TO HEAR ME, LET ME KNOW. UM, AND I'LL ADJUST. I DO APOLOGIZE FOR THE MASK. ADAM AND I, UM, [h. Next Generation Housing Framework Updates] HAD AN INTERESTING WEEKEND AFTER A CONFERENCE OF BEING EXPOSED, SO, UM, BUT WE ARE FEELING MUCH BETTER NOW. SO, UM, IF YOU WOULD LIKE FOR THE FRAMEWORK, I CAN GO ITEM BY ITEM OR, UM, THROUGH ALL OF THEM AT ONCE. I BELIEVE THE CHANGES ARE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED IN OUR PACKET. YES. DO WE HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS? UH, YEAH, THERE WAS, AT LEAST ON THIS FIRST ONE, SO I DUNNO, LITERALLY MAYBE YOU CAN EXPAND A LITTLE BIT. ABSOLUTELY. UM, SO I WILL START WITH ITEM NUMBER ONE. UM, AND ALL OF THESE WERE APPROVED BY OUR NEXT GENERATION HOUSING COMMITTEE AND RECOMMENDED TO THE EXECUTIVE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE FOR APPROVAL. UM, THE REALLOCATION OF FUND WITH FUNDS WITHIN AN APPROVED PROJECT, UM, AS A PART OF A LARGER PROJECT SCOPE, THERE MAY BE MANY DIFFERENT CONTRACTS TO TRY TO GET, UM, A NEXT GENERATION HOUSING PROJECT TO COMPLETION. SO FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE OAKS OF JACKSON, THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS, WHETHER THAT BE ENVIRONMENTAL WORK, PLANNING WORK, ENGINEERING WORK, AND THEN INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION ARE KIND OF THE BIG ONES. UM, AND SOMETIMES THOSE CONTRACTS THAT HAVE BEEN CLOSED OUT HAVE REMAINING FUNDS AVAILABLE THAT OH, YES. SO TO BE CLEAR, ALL THE WORK IS COMPLETED, CORRECT. AND THERE, OKAY. YES. SO THE CONTRACT IS CLOSED, UM, BUT THERE'S, UH, AN UNUSED BALANCE ON THAT. SO WHAT THIS ITEM IS SAYING, 'CAUSE THE FRAMEWORK DOESN'T ADDRESS THIS RIGHT NOW, UM, IT IS SAYING THAT AT THE DISCRETION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, UM, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO REALLOCATE THOSE FUNDS THAT ARE REMAINING IN THAT CLOSED OUT CONTRACT TO AN APPROVED PROJECT SCOPE, UM, WITH A CONTRACT THAT MAY BE STILL OPEN. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WITHIN THAT STANTEC CONTRACT, THERE'S ABOUT $1,300 REMAINING. UM, THAT MAY BE ABLE TO BE REALLOCATED TO AN INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING COMMITTEE AND THIS COMMITTEE, IF THERE IS REMAINING WORK THAT MAY NEED TO BE DONE. SO, UM, IF THERE IS A REQUEST FOR REALLOCATION FOR A NON-APPROVED SCOPE, THAT WOULD BE A NEW REQUEST THAT WOULD COME THROUGH THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING COMMITTEE AS WELL AS THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. MAKES SENSE. OKAY. AND THEN, UM, ITEM NUMBER TWO, THAT IS JUST, UM, MINOR FEE CHA OR MINOR LANGUAGE CHANGE FROM, UM, REMOVING THE WORD ALSO AND ADDING THE WORD, IF ANY, BEFORE PROCURING CAUSE. AND THEN CLARIFICATION FOR BUILDER'S REVIEW OF ALL OFFERS, IT WOULD BE REMOVING THE PLACE CONDITIONS IN ADVANCE BECAUSE BUILDERS DO SOMETIMES PLACE CONDITIONS LIKE PRE-APPROVAL LETTERS WHEN THEY'RE POSTING ON MLS. UM, SO THIS WOULD JUST BE TO ALIGN WITH THE INTENT OF THE SECTION, NOT TO LIMIT OR PRESCRIBE WHAT THE BUILDER, UM, MAY WANT OR WHAT THE CONDITIONS ARE, BUT THAT THE BUILDER IS JUST REVIEWING ALL THE OFFERS THAT THEY RECEIVE. AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS CLARIFICATION OF EARNEST MONEY. SO, UM, THIS IS ALSO WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK. UM, THIS IS REPLACING OUT OF POCKET LOST WITH THE LANGUAGE. UM, ACT ESTIMATED ACTUAL LOSSES OUT OF POCKET LOSSES OFTEN DEAL WITH THIRD PARTY CONTRACTORS THAT THE BUILDER IS DIRECTLY PAYING. UM, SO THIS IS JUST REFRAMING IT FOR THE INTENT OF THE SECTION, WHICH IS TO BE, UM, ESTIMATING ACTUAL LOSSES FROM THE BUILDER IN THAT INSTANCE. ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? OKAY. CLEAR SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, WE HAVE A MOTION. I'LL SECOND. MOTION BY SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR SICE, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? COMMENT? YEP. NOW, UH, WITH REGARD TO ITEM NUMBER ONE, AND WE MAY NEED, UH, MR. DOLL'S INPUT ON THIS ONE. DOES DOING THIS IN ANY WAY CON CONFLICT OR IMPACT EXISTING FISCAL POLICY WITH REGARD TO JUST MOVING FUNDS FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION. THAT [00:40:01] WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN. I THINK IT MAKES SENSE, BUT IF IT CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING POLICY, WE MAY WANNA RECONSIDER. I BELIEVE THIS WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH THE POLICY. WE, OUR POLICY IS ON THE, AT THE FUND LEVEL. UM, THE, THE FUND ITSELF IS AN UMBRELLA OVER THE TOP OF THESE INDIVIDUAL PIECES. SO I BELIEVE WE WOULD, WE WOULD STILL BE WITHIN OUR EXISTING POLICY TO, TO WORK UNDER THIS MODEL. THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. SURE. AWESOME. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? THERE BEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THE NEXT ITEM IS THE HOUSING FUND REQUEST FOR THE OAKS OF JACKSON FROM THE VILLAGE. IS THAT YOU ALSO? YES. . I'LL BE, UH, HANDLING ALL THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING ITEMS TODAY. OKAY. UM, SO THIS ONE IS FOR A REQUEST FOR $40,000 FOR THE FINALIST LIFT OF ASPHALT WITHIN THE OAKS OF JACKSON. THIS WAS NOT INCLUDED [i. Next Generation Housing Fund Request by Village of Jackson for Oaks of Jackson] WITHIN THAT INITIAL PROJECT SCOPE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION. UM, THE PROJECT SITE CONCEPT PLAN PROPOSED 101 UNITS AND THAT IS WHAT WAS PROPOSED AND BID OUT. AND, UM, WHEN THE VILLAGE WAS WORKING WITH HILLCREST BUILDER, SPECIFICALLY WHO IS CONSTRUCTING THE, UH, DUPLEX UNITS ON THE SITE, THEY ARE ACTUALLY ABLE TO FIT ONE MORE BUILDING OR TWO MORE UNITS ON THE SITE. SO THE TOTAL UNIT COUNT IS GONNA GO UP FROM 101, 203. THEREFORE, THE VILLAGE ISN'T UTILIZING THAT FULL CAPACITY THAT THEY'RE ABLE TO WITH NEXT GEN HOUSING IDENTIFYING $20,000 PER OWNER OCCUPIED UNIT. SO THIS, UH, ESSENTIALLY REQUESTS THAT ADDITIONAL $40,000 FOR THOSE TWO MORE UNITS THAT WILL BE USED FOR THE FINAL LIFT IN THE FALL OF 2025 OR THE SPRING OF 2026, UM, DEPENDING ON HOW CONSTRUCTION IS GOING AT THAT POINT. SO I SAW THAT THE TOTAL PRICE OF THE ASPHALT IS 150,000, BUT WE'RE ONLY PAYING 40,000 BECAUSE IT'S ON THAT PRORATA BASIS, CORRECT? YES. AND I DO BELIEVE THE VILLAGE WOULD NEED TO GO THROUGH ANOTHER BID PROCESS FOR THAT. OKAY. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, I WOULD MOVE RECOMMENDATION OR MOVE APPROVAL PER THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE COMMITTEE REPORT. I'LL SECOND ANY, ANY DISCUSSION? I'M GOOD. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. NEXT IS THE FUND REQUEST FROM HILLCREST BUILDERS FOR THE OAKS PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE WATER BREAK. UM, , UH, THE YES, THIS ONE IS ALSO WITHIN THE OAKS OF JACKSON. HILLCREST BUILDERS IS PROPOSING CONSTRUCTING THE [j. Next Generation Housing Fund Request by Hillcrest Builders for Oaks of Jackson – Permit Fee Incentive] TWO OUT OUTLET DEVELOPMENTS, WHICH IS THE TOWN HOME AND THE REAR LOADED SINGLE FAMILY. SO AS A PART OF THAT, THEY'RE REQUESTING $318,000 AS A PART OF THE CORE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE. THAT IS A PART OF NEXT GENERATION HOUSING 2.0. UM, SO THERE IS GOING TO BE A TOTAL OF 53 UNITS BETWEEN THE TWO OUTLETS. THEY'RE GONNA BE FOCUSING ON OUTLET EIGHT FIRST, WHICH IS CONSISTENT OF 18 TOWN HOMES AND THE 13 REAR LOADED SINGLE OR FEE SIMPLE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. SO THEY'RE GONNA BE WORKING ON CONSTRUCTING THOSE. THEY ARE ALSO GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTING THE INFRASTRUCTURE ON THAT SITE. SO AS A PART OF THAT, THEY ARE REQUESTING THAT THESE UP TO $6,000 PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE, UM, FOR THOSE HOME CONSTRUCTIONS. AND THE FEE WOULD BE PAID TO THE VILLAGE, UM, AT THE TIME. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE IS A TOTAL OF JUST UNDER, UH, THERE'S ABOUT $9,000 IN PERMITTING FOR THE SINGLE FAMILY AS WELL AS, UM, JUST UNDER 18, JUST OVER $18,000 FOR THE PERMITTING FOR TWO TOWN HOMES OR JUST OVER $9,000 AS WELL. SO EACH UNIT AVERAGES OUT TO $9,000 FOR THE PERMIT FEES. AND ELIGIBLE USES OF THAT FUNDS IS JUST OVER, UH, JUST UNDER $8,000. EXCUSE ME. SO, UM, THIS WOULD BE ALLOCATING THAT UP TO $6,000 AND THEN THE BUILDER WOULD BE PAYING THAT REMAINING AMOUNT AND THE PARK IMPACT FEE IS EXCLUDED FROM THAT. SO IN SIMPLE TERMS, THE OTHER PARTS OF THIS PROJECT THAT ARE ALREADY COMPLETED HAD SIMILAR FEES. MM-HMM. . AND NOW WE'RE STARTING A NEW PHASE AND WE'RE DOING THE SAME THING. CORRECT. BASICALLY, YES, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE HOMES THAT HILLCREST IS CONSTRUCTING, THOSE INTERIOR LOTS ARE PRICED UNDER $320,000 AS WELL AS THE DUPLEX UNITS. UM, AND WITH NEXT GENERATION HOUSING 2.0, THAT PRICE POINT DID INCREASE. UM, SO THAT WOULD BE REFLECTED [00:45:01] IN THAT NEXT PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT AS WELL. BUT THEY WOULD BE UNDER THAT $340,000 PRICE POINT. OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION SUPERVISOR KELLY? AND WE NEED A MOTION ON A SECOND. AGAIN, A MOTION MOTION BY SUPERVISOR KELLY. SECOND. SECOND BY SUPERVISOR SHARIN. UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. MM-HMM. , AND I'M NOT SURE IF I'M EVEN ON THE RIGHT TRACK WITH THIS, BUT YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STARTED THIS WHOLE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING PROJECT, WE WERE KIND OF LOOKING AT THE EXPENSE OF PERMITS. MM-HMM. , UM, AND WHAT, UH, OUR MUNICIPALITIES HAVE PER HOUSEHOLD TO ADD ON. AND, AND SOME OF THEM REALLY MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. UH, WHEN I LOOK AT LIKE, YOUR ELECTRICIAN AND YOUR PLUMBING AND, AND YOUR, YOU KNOW, OCCUPANCY. 'CAUSE SOMEBODY HAS TO PHYSICALLY GO THERE AND LOOK AT THE STUFF AND, AND SO THAT'S TIME. UM, AND, AND MAYBE EVEN SOME MATERIAL. UM, BUT THEN SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF, AND, AND I'M FAMILIAR WITH EROSION CONTROL AND STUFF LIKE THAT TOO. UM, BUT SOME OF THE OTHER STUFF LIKE THE FIRE SERVICE IMPACT FEE, THE POLICE SERVICE IMPACT FEE, THAT, YOU KNOW, AND A LITTLE LESS, UH, INCLINED ON SOME OF THOSE THINGS BECAUSE, UH, THE IDEA WAS IS TO MAKE HOMES MORE AFFORDABLE AND MUNICIPALITIES, UH, THEIR FEES MAKE THEM SOMEWHAT LESS AFFORDABLE. AND THIS PROGRAM IS DESIGNED TO TRY AND WORK WITH THE COUNTY, THE DEVELOPERS TO MUNICIPALITIES. UM, HAD WE SEEN ANY KIND OF MOVEMENT ON MUNICIPALITIES OR IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO TRY AND BRING THESE FEES TO, UH, MAYBE SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT MORE REASONABLE? MM-HMM. . YEAH. AS A PART OF NEXT GENERATION HOUSING, WE'RE DEFINITELY EXPANDING THAT CONVERSATION TO TALK TO MUNICIPALITIES ABOUT THE IMPACT FEES. AND, YOU KNOW, UM, THIS DOES SHINE A LIGHT ON THAT WITH $9,000 PER UNIT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY, WHICH IS, THAT'S A REL THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, A 1300 DO OR 1300 SQUARE FOOT HOME APPROXIMATELY. UM, WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANY MUNICIPALITIES DIRECTLY REDUCE FEES TO MY KNOWLEDGE. UM, BUT WE ARE DEFINITELY HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE MUNICIPALITIES AND I THINK THAT, UH, THIS PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE IS A REALLY GREAT WAY TO START AND TO, YOU KNOW, SHINE THE LIGHT ON THAT. BUT DOES IT THEN INCENTIVIZE THEM TO KEEP THEIR FEES 'CAUSE THEY'RE GETTING THE MONEY? OR DOES IT CAUSE THEM TO LOOK AT THEIR FEES AND GO, YOU KNOW, WE ARE BENEFITING IN THE END, YOU'RE GONNA BUILD THIS HOUSE IN JACKSON AND, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE TAX BASE THERE AND, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HOPEFULLY MOVE IN A FAMILY THAT CAN WORK IN YOUR STORES AND YOUR SHOPS. MM-HMM. AND YOU, YOU KNOW, SO THERE'S OTHER BENEFITS, UH, WITH DOING THIS. THAT'S WHY THE WHOLE PROJECT EXISTS. MM-HMM. . BUT I THINK IMMEDIATELY COLLECTING FEES JUST SEEMS TO ME TO BE COUNTERPRODUCTIVE TO WHAT IT IS WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH HERE. YEAH. WELL, AND I, I BELIEVE THAT THIS PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE IS DIRECTLY HELPING THE HOME BUYER AND THE BUILDER THEMSELVES BECAUSE THEN, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T HAVE TO BORROW AS MUCH FROM THE BANK AT A 9% INTEREST RATE TO BUILD THIS HOUSE. SO THEN THAT LOWERS THE COST OVERALL FOR THE HOME BUYER AT THE END. AND AS A PART OF THIS $6,000, THAT'S GONNA BE A PART OF THAT END OF DEED RESTRICTION THAT, YOU KNOW, THE BUILDER DOESN'T GET TO MAKE MONEY ON THIS $6,000. IT'S PART OF THAT COST REDUCTION. SO, UM, WE'RE DEFINITELY STILL HAVING THOSE CONVERSATIONS. UM, BUT THIS HAS BEEN, WE HAVE THREE, THIS IS GOING TO BE THE SECOND, AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS THE THIRD REQUEST FOR THIS PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE. SO IT IS PE BUILDERS ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THIS SUPERVISOR, SCHWA SCHWAB. THANK YOU. YOU, YOU RAISED AN EXCELLENT QUESTION. UM, THERE'S TWO ASPECTS I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER. FIRST IS THAT WHEN THE IMPACT FEES ARE CALCULATED, TYPICALLY IF IT IS A COMPANY LIKE LERS THAT SPECIALIZES IN MUNICIPAL FINANCE AND, AND HOW ALL THAT WORKS. AND SO THE, THE, I UNDERSTAND EXCLUDING THE, THE PARKS PARK SERVICE IMPACT FEE, BUT LIKE THE FIRE SERVICE, POLICE SERVICE, SEWER AND WATER, THOSE ARE ALL CALCULATED AS ACTUAL COSTS OF WHAT IT COSTS TO EXTEND THE LINE TO THAT AREA OR, OR PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. SO I THINK THOSE ARE LEGITIMATE COSTS. THE OTHER THING I THINK WE SHOULD CONSIDER IS WE STILL, I'M NOT SURE EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY IS STILL ON BOARD WITH NEXT GENERATION HOUSING. SO AS ESPECIALLY, UM, IN MY COMMUNITY, I RECOGNIZE THAT THERE WERE PEOPLE WHO WERE VERY MUCH AGAINST IT. AND IF PEOPLE WOULD SAY THAT WOULD SEE THAT, OH, THE, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BUYING NEXT GENERATION HOUSING, UM, DON'T HAVE TO PAY THOSE SERVICES. HOW COME I DID? I THINK IT CREATES A DISPARITY AND A CHALLENGE THAT, UH, THE WHOLE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING PROGRAM [00:50:01] WOULD HAVE TO WORK VERY HARD TO OVERCOME. IT'S DEFINITELY A HEALTHY CONVERSATION TO HAVE. YEAH. ON, ON BOTH SIDES. NOW I'VE GOT A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF IT AND I GET IT. UM, BUT ALSO, YOU KNOW, WE WANTED TO HAVE EVERYBODY HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A HAND IN THE GAME. YEP. NO, YOU GO FIRST. NO, HE HAD HIS SAY, NOW IT'S YOUR TURN. OH, OKAY. , I HAVE TWO ITEMS. NUMBER ONE, THAT'S A GOOD ONE. BUT WOULD WE ALLOW THEM, OR COULD WE HAVE THEM WORK IT OFF LIKE WE DO WITH THE DOWN PAYMENT INCENTIVE PROGRAM AS PART OF THE PERMIT FEES TOO? WOULD THAT BE LESS OF A HIT TO THE TAXPAYER SAYING, WELL, WE'RE NOT JUST HANDING IT OUT, WE HAVE TO WORK IT OFF. I THINK THAT'S A THOUGHT WE THROW BACK IN THE, IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE SETTING UP THE PROGRAM. MM-HMM. . SO THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING INITIATIVE IN THE HEART AND HOMESTEAD ARE TWO SEPARATE, UM, PROGRAMS THAT ARE OPERATED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. SO THE HOME BUYER, ACTUALLY, THEY'RE NOT RECEIVING THIS AS A HANDOUT. IT'S A PART OF A DEED RESTRICTION THAT WOULD BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY. SO IF THEY SELL THAT HOME, THE DEED RESTRICTION LASTS FIVE YEARS. IF THEY SELL THAT HOME WITHIN FIVE YEARS, THEY HAVE TO PAY A PORTION OF THAT BACK TO WASHINGTON COUNTY. SO THEY'RE NOT, IT'S NOT JUST GIVEN OUT AND GIVEN OUT FOR FREE. IT'S THE SAME WITH THE PROPERTY LIEN WHERE THEY'RE PAYING THAT BACK AT, UM, HOMES CLOSING OR AS A PART OF THE SINGLE FAMILIES, UH, IN THE OAKS OF JACKSON OR IN SOME OF THE OTHER NEXT GENERATION HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS, THEY, THERE'S A DEED RESTRICTION OF A MORE SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT WHERE IF THEY SELL, THEY HAVE TO PAY THAT BACK. THAT'S RIGHT. SO THAT DOES KIND OF WORK IN, UH, MY SECOND QUESTION IS, AGAIN, AARON, IF YOU COULD REMIND ME THIS, THIS 318,000, THIS IS STILL PART OF THAT FUNDS THAT WE ALLOCATED FOR NEXT GENERATION, RIGHT? IT'S NOT COMING OUT OF LIKE THE GENERAL FUND OR THAT WAS ALL. OKAY. IT'S STILL ARPA MONEY. YEAH, THAT'S, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE STILL PULLING OUT OF THAT FUND. SO THANK YOU. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, YOU'RE CURRENT NOW I THINK, I THINK YOU MAKE A VALID POINT WITH REGARD TO, UM, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT COMMUNITIES THROUGHOUT OUR COUNTY START TO LOOK AT WAYS TO MAKE HOUSING CHEAPER. AND AS WE CONSIDER, UM, SETBACKS AND LOT SIZES AND ALL AND HOUSE SIZE RESTRICTIONS, I THINK THOSE ARE ALL VERY IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER. I THINK THE, UH, YOU KNOW, SIDEWALKS AND LIGHTING AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT SOMETIMES GET ADDED ON, THOSE ARE ALL VERY IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER. BUT AS FAR AS THE, THE FIRE POLICE SEWER, THE WATER IMPACT FEES, I THINK THOSE ARE ALL THINGS THAT ARE LEGITIMATE COSTS. ACTUAL EXPENSES, YEP. YEAH. AND I, AND I CONCEDE THE POINT. ABSOLUTELY MAKES SENSE. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, AS A FORMER VILLAGE PRESIDENT, YOU BRING A GOOD PERSPECTIVE ON THIS SORT OF THING. EDUCATE US. SO THANK YOU. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY, NEXT WE COME TO CEDAR CREEK TOWN HOMES ITEM K. ABSOLUTELY. SO THIS IS ALSO UTILIZING THAT 100% CORE CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEE INCENTIVE. THIS IS WITHIN THE VILLAGE OF JACKSON, BUT SEPARATE FROM THE OAKS OF JACKSON, CEDAR CREEK TOWN HOMES IS BEING DEVELOPED BY AMERICAN COMPANIES. UM, THEY'RE [k. Next Generation Housing Fund Request by American Companies for Cedar Creek Townhomes – Permit Fee Incentive] REQUESTING $216,000 FOR 36 OWNER OCCUPIED TOWN HOME UNITS IN THE VILLAGE OF JACKSON. UM, THEY ARE GOING TO BE PRICED WITHIN IN THAT $299,000 TO $339,000 PRICE RANGE. SO THEY DO FIT WITHIN THE NEXT GENERATION HOUSING 2.0 FRAMEWORK. UH, IF YOU LOOK AT A PER UNIT ELIGIBLE COST FOR PERMIT FEE INCENTIVES, IT DOES AVERAGE OUT TO BE JUST ABOUT $7,300. UM, AND THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE CONTRACTOR PERMIT FEES. UM, SO THE TOTAL COST OF ALL OF THE PERMITS ELIGIBLE OR NOT, IS JUST UNDER $300,000 FOR THE SITE ELIGIBLE PERMITS IS TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY THREE NINE TWO HUNDRED AND SIXTY $3,000 900. SO THIS IS ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT. THEY WERE INITIALLY GOING TO BE UTILIZING THAT $20,000 PER OWNER OCCUPIED UNIT. UM, INSTEAD IT IS BEING FUNDED THROUGH PRIVATE INVESTMENT AND THEY ARE INTERESTED IN USING THAT $6,000. SO, UM, AGAIN, THIS WOULD ACT AS THAT DEED RESTRICTION ON THE PROPERTY FOR THAT $6,000. UM, IT WOULD NOT BE, UM, GIVEN OUT TO THEM IF THEY WERE TO SELL, THEY WOULD PAY A PORTION OF THAT BACK. SO, UM, YOU'LL SEE THE, UH, A SCREENING CHECKLIST, THE PERMIT FEE LISTS, AS WELL AS THE SITE PLAN. THEY'RE GOING TO BE STARTING WITH BUILDING SOUTHWEST A AND CURRENTLY, I BELIEVE THE SITE PLANS ARE GETTING REVIEWED BY THE STATE RIGHT NOW. [00:55:01] SO THE REQUEST RIGHT NOW IS 216,000. CORRECT. A MOTION TO MOVE THAT FORWARD MOTION BY SUPERVISOR KEL. SECOND BY SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, WHERE EXACTLY IS THIS? IT IS JUST SOUTH OF THE PIGGLY WIGGLY. UH, THERE IS A, IF YOU LOOK ON YOUR SITE PLAN HERE, THIS IS AN EXISTING SENIOR CENTER. UM, SO IT'S JUST ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE VILLAGE OF JACKSON, SOUTH OF 33. THANK YOU. 60. UH, ANY FURTHER OR 60 FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION? ? NO, I'M, I THINK WE COVERED 'EM ON THE FIRST ONE. MM-HMM. THE QUESTIONS I HAD. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS ITEM L, BROWNFIELDS COUNTY ASSESSMENT FUND, REQUEST BY MATTER DEVELOPMENT. ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYBODY. SO, UH, BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE A FUNNY REQUEST FOR, UH, A SITE CALLED THE GAELIC PIT AND, UH, THE CITY OF HARTFORD. SO I, [l. Brownfields County Assessment Fund Request by Matter Development – Assessment] I DON'T KNOW IF THE TID THAT YOU HAD MENTIONED BEFORE WAS THE SAME TID, BUT THERE IS A TID ON THIS, UH, RELATED TO THE SITE. SO THIS IS A NEW SITE FOR THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. UH, CURRENTLY IT'S BETWEEN 20 OR 40 ACRES. AND IT WAS PREVIOUSLY USED AS, UM, A FILL SITE. WELL, IT WAS A QUARRY, AND THEN IT WAS BEING USED AS A FILL SITE FOR A FIRE. SO THERE'S A LOT OF WOOD ASH, UH, THAT WAS USED AND FILLED ON THE SITE. UH, PREVIOUSLY THERE WAS A PHASE ONE AND A PHASE TWO COMPLETED ON THE SITE, UH, FROM A DEVELOPER, I THINK IN ABOUT TWO, UH, BEFORE EITHER WAY THE PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO WAS COMPLETED, BUT FOR SOME REASON THEY CHOSE NOT TO CONTINUE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE AND THEY, THEY STEPPED AWAY FROM THE SITE. UM, SO THAT PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO WAS NEVER ACTUALLY REPORTED TO THE WISCONSIN DNR. SO AS A PART OF THIS FUNDING REQUEST, UH, THE INITIAL PART IS ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING. SO, UH, IT WOULD BE REPORTING THOSE TWO, THE RESULTS OF THOSE TWO PHASE, UH, THE PHASE ONE AND THE PHASE TWO, AND THEN ADDITIONAL SUPPLEMENTAL FA UH, ASSESSMENT WORK. UH, SO ADDITIONAL SOIL BORINGS, UH, GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO MIGHT IT BE THAT THEY FOUND SOMETHING THEY DIDN'T LIKE AND DROPPED THE PROJECT? IT'S, I'VE HEARD STORIES ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT WAS EITHER ISSUES WITH THE CONTAMINATION ON THE SITE OR IT WAS, UH, DISCUSSIONS WITH THE CITY AND LIKE, UH, UH, SITE ACCESS THAT MADE THE DEVELOPERS WALK AWAY. UH, THE NEW DEVELOPERS ACTUALLY, THE, UM, JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I MENTION IT. THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE IS THAT IS, IT'S THE SENIOR, UM, LIVING, UH, FACIL, WELL, IT'S NOT A SENIOR LIVING FACILITY. IT'S, IT'S LIKE RENTAL, UM, SISTER DUTY. YEAH. AND, BUT THEN ALSO THAT'S ONLY FIVE ACRES OF THE PARCEL. AND THEN THE REMAINING PORTIONS WERE MEANT TO BE MULTIFAMILY, UM, DEVELOPMENT. SO IN TOTAL IT IS, UH, $60,400 FOR THE TOTAL PROJECT COSTS. OF THAT 48,360 WOULD COME FROM THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND 20%, UH, WOULD, UH, THAT $12,090 WOULD COME FROM MATTER DEVELOPMENT. UM, THAT'S, THAT'S ALL THE ADDITIONAL, WELL, I CAN MENTION THE PHASE TWO RESULTS HAD, UH, VOCS VAULT, UH, UM, ORGANIC COMPOUNDS AND YEAH. SO, BUT THAT'S IT. AND THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE? YEP. AND THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? I'M GOOD. I WANT TO, BUT ? NO, I GUESS I, UM, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND I MOVE. SO SECONDED. MOVED BY SUPERVISOR SICE, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR KELLY. UM, , THE GOOD NEWS IS THESE SITE REDEVELOPMENTS REDEVELOPMENT SITES, THEY MAKE TAX DISTRICTS OUT OF WHAT IS WASTELAND NOW. SO ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? UM, ALL IN FAVOR? JUST A LITTLE BIT. OH, OKAY. SUPERVISOR KELLY. SO BASICALLY THIS 48,000 IS GOING TO BE FOR FILING WITH THE STATE? NO. UH, SO IT'LL BE FI IT WILL BE WITH FILING WITH THE STATE, UH, BUT IT'LL ALSO BE, UM, HERE I CAN GET THE, UM, IT'S ALSO SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORK. SO IT'S ACTUALLY LIKE ON SITE ASSESSMENT WORK OR STUFF LIKE THAT. YEAH, THEY'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE SITE MORE AND SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER, OR BASICALLY CONFIRM THE PHASE TWO RESULTS AND [01:00:01] THEN J JUST ASSESS IT MORE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER CONCERNS. YEP. SO DO WE HAVE THE PHASE TWO RESULTS FROM BEFORE? YES. THEY'RE JUST NEVER REPORTED TO THE STATE, STATE. THEY JUST HAVE BEEN REPORTED TO THE STATE. SO WE HAVE SOME DATA, SO WE HAVE TO, THE PROCESS WOULD BE TO SEND THAT TO THE STATE FIRST. THEY WOULD ASSIGNED IT WHAT'S CALLED A BURT'S NUMBER, AND THEN THAT BURT'S NUMBER WOULD, IT'S BASICALLY JUST, UM, IDENTIFYING THAT THERE WAS CONTAMINATION ON THE SITE AND HERE'S WHAT WAS ON THE SITE. AND IT'S CURRENTLY OPEN AND IN THE PLATE, IN, IN THE PROCESS OF BEING, UH, REMEDIATED OR REDEVELOPED. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU. WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE TWO ON REGAL PLACE. YES. SO, UH, THIS ISN'T A NEW SITE TO, FOR THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. THIS IS THE SITE THAT'S CONNECTED TO NEXT GEN HOUSING. UH, THE OLD REGAL OFFICE. UH, SO THEY HAD COME TO THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR, UH, [m. Brownfields County Assessment Fund Request by Regal Place LLC – Assessment] PHASE TWO. UH, THEY COMPLETED THE WORK FOR THE PHASE TWO. THEY IDENTIFIED PFAS AND, UH, CHLOROFORM ON THE SITE, AND NOW THEY NEED ADDITIONAL ASSESSMENT WORK TO DELINEATE THE EXTENT OF, OF THAT. UM, IN THIS CASE, UM, I MEAN I, IN THIS CASE, UM, THERE'S ALSO THAT ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING ASPECT, BUT THAT'LL BE COVERED IN THE NEXT FUNDING REQUEST. SO THIS FUNDING REQUEST IS JUST FOR THAT SUPPLEMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORK. UM, EXTRA SOIL BORINGS, UM, GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS. UH, AND THEN ADDITIONALLY, UM, IT WILL BE, THEY'RE ALSO REQUESTING FOR A VAPOR MITIGATION SYSTEM, UH, ENGINEERING SPECS. SO THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT THE SRC HAS APPROVED OR SEEN IN THE PAST. UH, THEY WE'VE NEVER SEEN IN THE PAST. UM, BUT IT DOES QUALIFY FOR FUNDING THROUGH THE FRAMEWORK. UH, SO THIS IS KIND OF LIKE THINGS LIKE, UM, IT, IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO LIKE A SITE OR A CAP MAINTENANCE PLAN THAT WE'VE APPROVED IN THE PAST. IT'S BASICALLY JUST THE, UM, DESIGN WORK FOR THE MITIGATION OF THE CONTAMINANTS, BUT NOT THE ACTUAL MID, LIKE THE, IN LIKE THE INSTALLMENT OF THE VAPOR MITIGATION SYSTEM THAT WON'T FALL KIND OF THE ENGINEERING WORK BEFORE THE ACTUAL WORK. RIGHT, RIGHT. SO, UM, THE SRC, UH, I MENTIONED THAT TO THE SRC AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THAT. SO THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THIS SITE AS WELL. UM, THERE IS ACTUALLY ALSO ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING ASPECTS TO THIS FUNDING REQUEST, UM, THAT, UM, ARE RELATED TO A REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN AND A REMEDIAL ACTION OPTIONS REPORT. UM, LOTS OF ACRONYMS. UM, BUT BASICALLY IT'S THE WISCONSIN DNR ASKING LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU GONNA DO TO REMEDIATE THE SITE? AND, UM, THOSE ARE KIND OF THE ACTIVITIES, UH, RELATED TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING. BUT, UH, IN TOTAL IT IS 65,000, UM, AND 52,000 WOULD COME OUT OF THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. AND THEN THAT 20% MATCH WOULD BE 13,000 FROM, UH, REGAL PLACE LLC. SO, UM, THAT, THAT IS ALL I HAVE. SUPERVISOR SCHWAB, I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL OF THE RECOMMENDATION PER THE COMMITTEE REPORT, $52,000. I'LL SECOND THAT. ANY DISCUSSION QUESTION? UM, THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. I, AND THIS I GUESS IS MORE OF A PROCEDURAL QUESTION. THIS DIDN'T COME BEFORE LAND USE IN PLANNING? UH, DOES, I MEAN, SHOULDN'T THIS, HMM. UM, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. I MEAN, IT'S COMING DIRECT. ALL THESE, UH, SEEM TO BE LAND USE AND PLANNING, AND YET ALL OF 'EM ARE COMING DIRECT TO EXECUTIVE AND BYPASSING. WELL, NO, THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW. SITE REDEVELOPMENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN UNDER THE EXECUTIVE FRAMEWORK OF EXECUTIVE. MM-HMM. . YEAH. OKAY. SO, AND IT'S, THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. CURIOUS. OH, I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE. . THE TYPICAL PROCESS IS, YOU KNOW, THE SITE REDEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, UH, WHICH, UH, IF YOU'RE, I'M NOT SURE IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH IT, BUT IT'S A, UM, A COMMITTEE MADE UP OF, UH, COALITION PARTNERS FROM, UH, IT'S LIKE 12 ENTITIES, BUT BASICALLY ALL OF OUR INCORPORATED, UH, COMMUNITIES, SO LIKE THE VILLAGE OF JACKSON, THE CITY OF WEST BEND, THEY ALL HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE ON IT, AND THEN THEY RECOMMEND, UM, AND THEN, AND THEN AFTER THAT RECOMMENDATION, IT'S THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE THAT'S, UH, TYPICALLY IT'S BEEN SENT TO AND ON THAT COMMITTEE WE ARE REPRESENTED BY ME AND SUPERVISOR KREBS. YEP. SO SUPERVISOR SCHWAB. [01:05:01] THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. UM, I UNDERSTAND THAT SUB SLAB, PASSIVE VAPOR MITIGATION SYSTEM, ENGINEERING SPECS AND SOME OF THE OTHER ASPECTS OF THIS ARE NOT PART OF THE NORMAL, UM, SITE REDEVELOPMENT COSTS. IT'S MY OPINION THAT THEY ARE NECESSARY TO GET THIS PROPERTY BACK INTO USE AND INTO A, UH, BACK IN USE BACK ON A, A HIGHER USE ON THE TAX ROLLS. AND SO WHILE IT MAY BE OUT OF THE ORDINARY, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S WHAT HAS TO HAPPEN TO, TO MAKE IT HAPPEN WHEN THE CAPITAL HAPPENED, BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA PUT HOUSING ON THIS. THE LAST THING WE WANT TO DO IS HAVE ANYTHING HAZARDOUS REMAINING THERE. SO IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AGREED. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. AND HE OPPOSED PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT IS REIMBURSEMENT. NOW EXPLAIN TO ME THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ASSESSMENT AND REIMBURSEMENT. YES. IS THAT SOME WORK THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DONE? YES. SO, UM, AS I HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTING ASPECT, UM, A PORTION OF IT WAS ALREADY COMPLETED, OR, [n. Brownfields County Assessment Fund Request by Regal Place LLC – Reimbursement] UM, IT WAS, IT WAS RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE COMPLETED EARLY. SO, UM, ONCE THE PHASE TWO RESULTS ARE COMPLETED, IT HAS TO BE SENT TO THE DNR AS I'VE KIND OF MENTIONED BEFORE. UM, AND DUE TO THE SCHEDULE OF THE PROJECT, UH, WE WANTED THEM TO GET ON, GET AHEAD OF THE GAME, UH, ESPECIALLY WITH THE DNR OF LATELY. UM, OUR, OUR, UM, THEY'RE, THEY'VE BEEN A LITTLE BIT SLOW, UM, ON REVIEWING SOME OF THESE ITEMS AND IT, IT HAS TAKEN SOME TIME. SO WE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY ACTUALLY, UH, SUBMIT THE BI, UH, HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE DISCHARGE FORM AND THE, UH, HISTORIC FILL EXEMPTION FORM TO THE WISCONSIN DNR AS SOON AS THE RESULTS WERE COMPLETED. UH, AND THEN ASKED FOR THE REIMBURSEMENT FOR THESE ACTIVITIES AFTER. UH, TYPICALLY THIS WOULD BE REQUESTED IN A FUNDING REQUEST, AND THEN IT'D BE APPROVED, AND THEN IT WOULD BE SENT TO THE DNR. SO THESE ARE ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ALREADY, HAVE ALREADY BEEN FUNDED IN PREVIOUS SITES. UM, AND, AND SO THE, THE, THE, THE NEW ASPECT IS JUST ASKING FOR REIMBURSEMENT, UH, INSTEAD OF FIRST ASKING FOR THE FUNDS AND THEN, UM, AND THEN SENDING IT IN. SO, UM, THAT, I MEAN, THAT'S, THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT IN A NUT IN A NUTSHELL. BUT, UM, AND WAS THIS WAS ALL APPROVED BY THAT AND THIS WAS APPROVED BY THE SRC? I MEAN, THEY HEARD IT AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY UNDERSTOOD, UM, ESPECIALLY WITH THE PROJECT AND WITH THE TID TIMELINE, AND THERE'S A CERTAIN TIME THAT THE BUILDING HAS TO COME DOWN THAT WE WANTED TO ENGAGE THE WISCONSIN DNR AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. SO, UM, IN TOTAL IT'S THAT $3,500 AND 2,800 WOULD COME FROM THE SRP AND 700 WOULD COME BACK, UM, FROM REGAL PLACE. LLC. YEAH. OKAY. KNOWING, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. KNOWING THAT THE WHEELS OF GOVERNMENT OFTEN TURN SLOWLY AND IN ORDER TO GET ANYTHING DONE, SOMETIMES WE HAVE TO, UH, MOVE AHEAD AND, AND STEP BACK TO THE GOVERNMENT TO, TO KIND OF COVER OUR BACKSIDES. UM, I WOULD DEFINITELY MOTION THIS FORWARD. OKAY. AND CONSIDER, THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND, SECOND, SECOND SUPERVISOR SHARUN SECONDS. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I CAN ALSO MENTION THAT THE DNR HAS GOTTEN BACK TO US ACTUALLY THIS WEEK, SO, UM, IT IS, IT'S BEEN POSITIVE THAT WE, WE EXCELLENT. ASKED THEM TO, UM, LOOK AT IT AHEAD OF TIME, SO, YEP. THANK YOU. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ALSO PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. OUR LAST ITEM IS THE RESOLUTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE NEXT GEN 9 1 1 GRANT. I'LL TAKE A MOTION IN A SECOND, PLEASE. SUPERVISOR SCHULTY. SUPERVISOR SHARIN. I DON'T KNOW WHO'S PRESENTING THIS, IF ANYBODY OH, AARON IS, [o. Resolution - Acceptance of Next Gen 911 Grant] THANK YOU. ME AGAIN. UM, OUR, OUR, UH, GIS DIRECTOR IS, UH, OUT ADVENTURING IN NEW ENGLAND, SO I'M GONNA TRY AND, UH, TAKE THIS ONE FOR HIM. BUT REALLY THIS IS, IS JUST A SIMPLE, UM, GRANT ACCEPTANCE, UH, RESOLUTION. SO THE, THE RESOLUTION WOULD ALLOW US TO MODIFY THE BUDGET IF AND WHEN WE DID, UH, GET THE GRANT. WE, THE TIMING OF THIS WAS SUCH THAT IF IT, IF IT, DEPENDING ON WHEN IN OCTOBER IT WAS ANNOUNCED, UM, WE WANTED TO HAVE OUR DUCKS IN A ROW BEFORE, UM, YOU KNOW, BEFORE THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND THE TIMELINE WOULD [01:10:01] POTENTIALLY LAPSE BEFORE WE COULD, YOU KNOW, GET FORMAL APPROVAL. SO WE JUST WANTED TO DO THAT NOW. UM, THE APPLICATION CONTAINED, UM, REALLY TWO PROJECTS. UH, ONE IS SORT OF A CONTINUATION OF A PROJECT THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, UH, IN THE 2024 FISCAL YEAR, UM, WHICH IS REALLY DATA, DATA CLEANUP, ESSENTIALLY, UM, FIELD VERIFICATION, UH, OF THE DATA. THAT'S A, THAT'S A SMALLER DOLLAR AMOUNT. THE OTHER PROJECT IS, UH, TEMPORARY FUNDING FOR, UH, GIS ANALYST, UH, WHICH WOULD, YOU KNOW, THAT IT WOULD TAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A, UH, SOME OF THE BURDEN OFF OF, UM, SOME OF THE SHERIFF STAFF IN THE COMMUNICATION CENTER. UM, RIGHT NOW THEY'RE DOING A LOT OF THE NEXT GEN 9 1 1 PREP WORK OVER THERE. UM, AS YOU KNOW, THEY'RE ALSO IN THE PROCESS OF ONBOARDING, UH, GERMANTOWN, UH, WITH, WITH CONSOLIDATED DISPATCH. SO THEY GOT THEIR HANDS FULL OVER THERE RIGHT NOW. THIS WOULD HELP RESOLVE SOME OF THAT WORKLOAD FOR THEM, BUT ALSO IT WOULD ALLOW OUR EXISTING GIS STAFF TO, UH, WORK ON OTHER PRIORITIES. UM, YOU'LL LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE NEXT MONTH ABOUT WHAT THOSE PRIORITIES ARE, BUT, UM, BUT IT'S, IT'S IN THE SHARED SERVICES, UH, ARENA. AND SO YOU'LL, YOU'LL HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE NEXT MONTH ABOUT WHAT THAT ACTUALLY IS. UM, WE GET THE, WE, IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE DONE THESE BOTH AT THE SAME TIME, BUT LIKE I SAID, THE TIMING OF ACCEPTING THIS GRANT WAS SUCH THAT WE HAD TO BRING IT A LITTLE BIT EARLY. SO, UM, I, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER, UH, SOME OF THE QUESTIONS. UM, IF YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF TECHNICAL NEXT GEN 9 1 1 QUESTIONS, I, I MAY HAVE TO LIMP THROUGH IT OR MAY HAVE TO GET BACK TO YOU, BUT, UM, GENERALLY SPEAKING, I THINK I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I THINK WE'RE ALL PRETTY FAMILIAR WITH THE FRAMEWORK AND WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING ON NEXT GEN 9 1 1 FOR QUITE SOME TIME NOW. MM-HMM, . SO, UH, I'M GOOD WITH IT. ANYONE ELSE? GOOD. GOOD. WELL THEN ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? GREAT. EXCELLENT. THANK YOU. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. THIS WILL COME BEFORE THE COUNTY BOARD. OUR NEXT MEETING DATE IS WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 16TH, 2024 AT 4:00 PM THIS MEETING'S ADJOURNED SURPRISINGLY FASTER THAN I THOUGHT. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.