six at five. I would ask Callie to note roll call. I don't have any announcements at this meeting,
except for two. We cannot stand against the cabinets and block that aisle at all. And we can't stand
either on the outside or the inside of the door for safety and fire concerns. So we ask that
you respect the signs and we don't stand there. So Callie, do you have any other announcements or
Bill? No. Okay. We will then proceed with our agenda. We have two items for discussion under item
four. The first is a presentation from Kapoor and Associates. The public service commission
oversight and regulatory role role for power and utilities. Alex, are you here? Yep. So
continuing sort of our due diligence process and trying to get a little bit more information
from various stakeholders who have a role in the proposed data center inviting Jeff Stone,
who's with Kapoor and Associates, he'll introduce himself here to talk about the
PSE, the public service commission, how rates are set, some of the reporting requirements,
and then the regulatory role of that organization. So Jeff, turn it over to you.
Thank you, Alex. As Alex mentioned, I'm with Kapoor.
Just can you, you've got to get the mic pretty close in order right in there. Thank you.
Very good. Okay. So I am with Kapoor and Associates. We're consulting engineers,
scientists and surveyors. We have an organization of about 450, mostly based here in Wisconsin,
but across the center part of the United States. And we have other offices around the country.
I am a vice president there. I am not an engineer. My background is more government
and community relations and public information. And so I've been asked to present today on the
public service commission and their regulatory authority and process here in Wisconsin.
So my background personally is one that brings what I think is a pretty full perspective
that I hope to share with the board tonight.
All right, Jeff. That's all right. So I spent three years as a division administrator for
water telecommunications and consumer affairs. And I was a member of the executive committee
for the agency at the public service commission. I had oversight as well of the PSC in a very
general way in my time as a legislator in the state of Wisconsin. But I think of more importance
for perspective tonight is I also have a background as a local elected official. So I hope to bring
that perspective of dealing with development and interactions with the PSC
as to this presentation for you this evening. In addition, I served as the executive director
for the municipal electric utilities for the state of Wisconsin, as well as a board member
and chair of the Metropolitan Milwaukee sewerage district. So I've been around utilities and
both energy, water, and regulatory and rate setting for a number of years now.
So the public service commission is one of the oldest regulatory bodies in the United States,
the public service commission here in Wisconsin. It trades its origins back to the 1800s. It started
off as a railroad commission and it regulated the rates and operation of railroads. But then
in the early 1900s, there were the growth of electric utilities, other utilities in the state.
There was a movement to have the role of the railroad commission expand into regulating
all of the monopoly utilities in the state, including electric, gas, water, telephone services.
So the public service commission grants monopoly status to businesses or to utilities.
And in exchange for that, they do regulation of rates and service for those utilities.
The Wisconsin model of regulation is one that's been used as a template throughout the country.
So we have a very early and very substantial model for regulation that's been copied by a
number of states. The establishment of the public service commission in its current form really
dates back to about 1931. And that was when it started consolidating its more modern regulatory
authorities over utilities. And over that time since then, they've expanded to nuclear regulation
as well as renewable energy like solar and wind power. More recently, they've also been involved
in grants for broadband and for energy innovation throughout the state.
So the utility, the public service commission, excuse me, it's structure and governance,
is one that's an independent state agency. And it's structured so that its core leadership office
has five specialized consulting divisions. And we'll talk about those a little bit later.
But it's governed and its authority really rests in three commissioners
that vote on the actions for and carry out the really the control of the agency and vote in
order to choose make decisions on rates and on regulation of the utilities.
As I mentioned, they're independent and they operate without day-to-day influence from state
government. They're funded by fees that come from the utilities that are regulated. So it's in
that way, it's really lifted away from a lot of political influence on a day-to-day basis. It's
filled with very focused staff that are specialized in all these areas, water, electric rates,
construction. So there's engineers, there's accountants. That's the real makeup of the public
service commission. They regulate over 1100 public utilities in the state. And that includes
investor-owned utilities in the areas of gas, electric, and some of our water utilities in the
state are investor-owned. There's municipal-owned utilities. Many of those are water and electric.
And their goal is to ensure that there's adequate service and reasonable rates for electric,
natural gas, water, and telecommunication for residents and customers in Wisconsin.
The commission is charged with a responsibility to ensure that there are safe, reliable, and
reasonable rates for all customers. And those areas of regulation include energy,
water, as we mentioned, digital access, broadband. They also have divisions that deal with business
operations and office management, as well as the Office of General Counsel for any legal
requirements. One of the things I would note about the public service commission is that it's
really recognized as, as I said, as an independent body. So it has its own legal department and
it has administrative law judges who make decisions about cases. Those can be appealed into courts,
but the courts regularly defer to the experience and the expertise of the public service commission
because it's such a unique area of regulation. Rate setting and construction authorization,
those types of processes that the utility commission oversees really require a lot of
specialized knowledge and the courts are usually reluctant to overturn decisions that are made
by the public service commission. So for the most part, it kind of points to that
independence of the commission.
We talked a little bit about the different utilities that are regulated. There's the
investor owned electric utilities and gas utilities that we've mentioned. The commission
also regulates municipal electric utilities that are owned by different local governments.
That's not the case here, but there are a few that you might be familiar with in the area,
sun prairie utilities, Jefferson utilities, Columbus water and light are a few examples of
communities that have their own utilities. The commission doesn't regulate cooperatives,
so we have a number of those in the state, Darryland Power, Adams, Columbia, Richland.
And the reason I mentioned those different types of utilities and the regulatory authority is that
there may be some of you or residents who've lived in different areas. And you might,
the way that development or expansion of service and rates would impact you as a municipal utility
or as a cooperative might be different than it would be under the regulatory structure of the PSC.
So what you might find is with a municipal electric utility that a major expansion of power demand
would create, all of that cost would have to be borne by the customers of that municipal electric
utility in that community, as opposed to growth in a larger investor owned utility, where that's
spread across a number of ratepayers across the entire investor owned utility.
So we'll talk a little bit about how rates are set. Utilities file rate cases in the PSC,
that often occurs maybe every other year. It might be a little more often if there's some special
cases. But as a rule, there's usually about every two years, there's a rate case that's
filed by the utilities and the utilities that are here can address that if that schedule is
different. The PSC audits costs and investments that are made by the utility.
So they have a staff of auditors that I've mentioned before and accountants who dig into
the records that are prepared and presented to the commission. And that's part of the regulatory
process is to review those figures independently of the utility. They also will then hold public
hearings with the general public and consumers as well as interveners who have a special interest.
Sometimes those are industrial representatives. Sometimes it's consumer representatives that
will appear and give testimony regarding the impacts of rate cases, the amount of return
that's being allowed for the investor owned utilities or also for the service level that's
being provided. So those interveners give input and a broader perspective to beyond just the
utilities presentations that are made to the PSC.
So what drives the ultimate rate decision for the PSC? There's the operating and maintenance
cost of the utility, which is ongoing. So those are costs that are considered. There's also
the capital investments that are required for the utility to make to continue to oftentimes
improve or expand its operations. Then there's return on equity, which is
the amount that's set aside as really kind of the profit for the utility to make.
Even the local utilities that are owned by municipalities get a rate of return on the
investment the community makes into the utility. So those are established by the commission and
also by looking at rates of return for utilities across the country.
Finally, the commission will vote an issue in order that includes a rate tariff for different
classes of customers. Some are residential, commercial, industrial, and those costs,
as a part of that rate case, those tariffs are established to fairly distribute the costs of
operating the utility to a number of rate classes.
So when you look at the information that's brought to the public service commission,
there's annual financial and operation reports that the utilities have to provide to the PSC.
There's also a uniform system of accounts, and what that allows is for the staff at the PSC
to look at what money is being expended in each area and compare it directly to what other
utilities are doing. So it creates consistency and clarity and the information that's being
presented about the costs of operation and the investments that are being made for the utility.
So that uniform system of accounts is provided for all the utilities to follow.
And finally, there's also ongoing regulation of the service and quality and reliability.
There's meetings normally throughout the year monitoring service outages, also looking at
responsiveness to consumers, whether they're calling in for information or if they're sending
information requesting information through a web request or an email. So the commission looks
at how is the utility responding to customers, so that there's not a decline in service and
there's standards that are being met. So when you look at, I mentioned the different types of
utilities are regulated. The municipal electric utilities are regulated similarly to public
utilities. The PSC approves rate changes that are required for them and also has the same annual
report reporting. The co-ops are treated differently because they're owned by the members and so
those members have their own governing boards. They set their rates internally and the PSC doesn't
approve those rates. There's a few other elements there but I mostly wanted you to understand
that your utility if you're working with an IOU is subject to all of those regulations and
controls of the PSC for rate setting. So the key takeaways when you look at the PSC in the
state of Wisconsin is that we tightly regulate the investor owned utilities. We look at all their
costs, we look at all the investments they made, we make sure that the services are being provided
at a quality level and consistently and I guess when you reflect on that, you can look around the
country and you can see areas where they don't have this type of a regulatory structure. We saw a
few years ago in Texas where they had tremendous blackouts in the winter because there weren't the
investments made in order to properly weatherize facilities. You've seen other areas where
there's concerns about rates that are going even higher and there might be a large profitability
for the utility. But in Wisconsin, the profit levels and the investments are all analyzed and
regulated. So in that way, we have, as I mentioned, probably one of the oldest, one of the most
modeled regulatory structures in the country and it's one that brings a lot of accountability
to all utilities that are regulated by the PSC.
So those are the things that I want to share with you. I do have my information. I am a resource
that has been retained by the village. So if you have questions, we can either direct those
through Alex or this or I'm definitely available at any time to respond. But my role here is
really to bring to you that perspective of an independent role of what's our regulatory structure
here in Wisconsin and how does it serve the community and the residents? How do we arrive at
rates and how do we make sure that those rates are fair, that there's quality service and its
fair service and that those rates are allocated appropriately and fairly across all customers?
Are you willing to take a few questions now? Sure. Anybody on the board, Brad?
All right. Thanks for coming. So if there was concerns or comments about price gouging, is that
something that would be submitted to the PSC and then we would review that from the commission
and report back to the municipalities? Correct. And in that rate setting process, just so you know,
there is that opportunity. There are always public hearings that are held. The public has
the opportunity to participate in those rate setting cases. You can also have groups, as I said,
customer, add the kit groups that intervene. So there are a number of opportunities to participate
in that process. When you look at rate gouging, it's different than other types of businesses
where someone can just say, I'm going to charge more because there's a lot of demand.
There's a tariff on file. Those tariffs have to be filed and their operation of the utility
will be checked against those tariffs when they come in for their annual reports and audits.
Anybody else? Alicia? I just had a quick question. When you talked about like how you regulate
profits, do you guys put a cap on profit? There is a rate of return that is established in the
rate hearings. So I'm not familiar with most recent rates. The utilities might be able to address
that matter. But in my role at the PSC, I had delegated authority to do that for water utilities
in the state. And normally we established a rate of return. And then we applied that to all the
utilities across the board. So they had a standard rate of return. They were profitable and that
produced revenue that they could use to reinvest in the utility.
Other questions? Are you familiar at all with the review that the PSC is giving to
tariffs related to data centers right now? I know that there's at least one case that's
in front that's alliance I think is broad. It's an individual customer rate case. I would let them
address maybe the details of that. So that can be done kind of outside as a separate process
outside of a general rate case. I will point out once again in my experience with the water
division and setting rates that when we had sometimes an extremely large customer who needed to have
many times in water it can be even stronger than an energy where a water client in a community
may use 90% of the water that's provided in the community. And so we would often look at those
cases kind of individually and say how can we establish a rate here. And there was always the
goal of protecting the residential customers from the costs that were associated with that large
customer in those types of decisions and tariffs. Thank you. Yes, Jim.
So my curiosity question is say you're a utility and you need to come forward with a large investment
be it in maybe a new powerhouse or sewer plant or something. How does that typically go when it
goes to the public service commission? I mean do they spread it out over five years or 20 years
or is that far less up to the utility? How they structure their debt? So I let the electric
possibly utility can address it a little bit more on the electric side. My experience with water
was that if there was a large investment we normally in many cases they were bonded for a
period of years maybe 10 years for say a water tower. Maybe you've done that here in the
village. And then those are put into your rates as a cost and that investment for those bonds
were added into your cost of operations going forward. So normally in order to make that
investment you apply for construction authorization. So you have to ask permission to make that
investment and then that's wound into your rate so you're moving forward. Thank you.
Any other questions? Yes, Colleen.
When people have talked about their concerns for instance specifically with the data center
and that the higher rate is going to be absorbed by the local residents and then other people
will respond well that we have a PSC the PSC will make sure that doesn't happen etc.
So that's really kind of by showing you how the rate setting works. I guess what I would say is
if you were a cooperative or a municipal electric that served a small group the likelihood of that
being a burden to your utility payers would be more challenging because it would be a larger
percentage of your rates within the community. When you're looking at a larger IOU like
a land or we energies or excel energies those investments get spread across a larger
rate payer base and they also are paid for by the class of customers. And so those costs are
allocated by staff within the rate case within that tariff decision that is issued.
So they can't just pour those costs on to an individual community particularly when they're a
larger independent or utility that's owned independent. Is that clear? I may have.
Not really. Maybe we can try it again. Is the PSC dealing with the data center question at all?
So they do have the one rate case that's been there that individual customer rate that's there
but what they normally do is they look at customers by class by how much power they use
and so that's really what happens. They don't necessarily look at business but they have industrial
rates and they also have rates that are based on what type of demand does the customer have.
Do they have what's called peak demand which means there are certain times when they just
demand a lot of power. Peaking energy costs are usually the highest and I can relate to that my
role with the Metpalmokki sewerage commission is we tend to need all our power for pumps when it's
raining so it's hard to use things like solar energy or something like that so we're usually
going to the market when there's a lot of high demand and when there are other things aren't
available so we pay higher prices for that power at that point in time. So you know the rates are
really structured so that those who are requiring the power pay the cost for that power.
Maybe I could ask and maybe it's Alex or Bill that takes responsibility for this.
My understanding is that both the legislature and the PSC has been looking to make sure that
the data centers which are large and generally well funded pick up any infrastructure costs
so that that doesn't fall on the rate payer but rather on the data centers and that that is
something they're looking at across the whole state. So if someone could get that clarified
for us that would be very helpful because that's the understanding that we have and we we've said
that to people understanding that to be a fact so that's an important thing for us to know.
Thank you. All right anything else? If not we thank you Mr. Stone and we look forward to
working with you going forward. Thank you.
All right with that we'll move to item 4.2 and presentation from line energy regarding power
usage and infrastructure associated with the proposed QTS data center. Perhaps you have the
answers to our question. I do she says so thank you. So as we transition from Jeff's presentation
just one invite Becky Valk who's the president of line energy's Wisconsin utility company to
give a brief presentation overview of the electric grids to get a little bit more of a basic understanding
and then obviously talk about the proposed use and then any questions that you all may have.
Thank you for being here with us. Thank you for having me and I'll just battle a little bit of clean
up to Mr. Stone. The answer to your last question is yes in fact the governor has a working group
that has been meeting on a regular basis. There are two proposed bills sitting out there right now
from both sides of the aisle. There's a Democrat sponsored bill and a Republican sponsored bill
and the purpose of the governor's working group is to take the ideas that have been put forth
in both of those pieces of draft legislation and to figure out what the best middle ground is.
But from both sides of the aisle the the predominant concern is that data centers wherever they are
located within Wisconsin are allocated their fair share of costs associated with the infrastructure
that's necessary to serve those customers. So that's pending and then just a further clarification
about what's in front of the PSC right now. The PSC has four applications pending. Two are from
WEC energy group which is known as WE energies and then there are two pending applications from
us at Alliance. One to serve a data center in Beaver Dam and one to serve the proposed data
center in North Madison. So the dockets for those the PSC has a very intuitive electronic record
system and the docket number for Alliance proposed individual contract rate to serve QTS here in
North Madison is six six eight zero dash T E dash one one six and if you go on to the PSC's
website you plug in that docket number it will show you every document that's been filed in that
case. We expect to go to hearing later part of February or early part of March and there's always
an opportunity to provide public comments to the public service commission as Mr. Stone indicated
there's a lot of input that the PSC takes from that and I can speak to it it's near and dear to my
heart because I served for five years as chair of the PSC. So thanks again for having me here.
I'm Becky Vock. I'm the president of Alliance energies Wisconsin utility known as Wisconsin
Power and Light and I'm entering my 27th year in the energy industry. I started off as a baby lawyer
an in-house regulatory lawyer back in 1999 and became so interested in and driven by
the industry and just being able to provide an essential service that I stuck around. So I
practiced law and then I was appointed to the chair of the public service commission and now
I'm back at the utility and part of my responsibility is to ensure that there's transparency that
there's transparency when it comes to what we are doing as utility but more importantly that
am I doing this? I'm not. This is all. It should be let's just scroll down. So can I do?
Hey, I'm better. So really my my goal and my passion is to ensure that there's transparency
and that we're all working from the same set of data because there's a lot of misinformation
out there and our industry is complicated and it's really easy to try to sort of boil things
down into little bitty sound bites that sound good and sound simple but when you start peeling
back the layers of how our grid works if you realize very quickly how complicated it becomes
and so I want to put myself here as a resource. If I can't answer the question I will endeavor
to get you the correct answer so that everybody's working from the right set of data. I also think
Mr. Stone did a really good job of explaining Wisconsin is the model in terms of the regulatory
compact that we have here. If you open up the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times and
you read an article about a place like Northern Virginia experiencing 16 to 18 percent increases
on electricity rates you have to remember they are operating in a deregulated market. So as an
example my counterpart the Alliance Energy counterpart operating in that state does not own their own
generation. We at Alliance own our own generation so the question about the useful life of a power
facility that's set by the by the commission. Typically a generating facility has a useful life
of between 30 and 40 years so if you think about it in terms of a mortgage payment when we go in
and we put down that capital to build additional generating facilities the public service commission
has to go through and look at our projections that yes we think this particular plant will
last 30 to 40 years. So we and the public service commission ultimately have control over that
generating facility that is not the same case in a place like Northern Virginia where those
utilities don't own their generation so they're going out to the market oftentimes paying an
inflated price due to the way the market is structured. Wisconsin isn't structured that way
so all of the investor owned utilities own their own generation and then we're responsible for
getting that generation to the transmission system and ultimately the transmission system
is what brings it to all of our homes and businesses. What we have in Wisconsin we are part of the
mid-continent independent system operator. What that is is that's the grid so it's the 17 states
within the central part of the United States where all of the utilities within that MISO footprint
the territory map that you see all of those utilities are required to put their available
generating units to MISO. So we say tomorrow we will have X number of solar facilities available
X number of wind facilities available to you MISO then MISO acts as almost an air traffic
controller so if you think of that all the generating facilities within the MISO footprint if you
think of all of those facilities as airplanes MISO's job is to say a lion flip on 200 megawatts of
solar we energies turn on 300 megawatts of wind right so they're the ones that are saying
they're the energy is needed in Wisconsin so North Dakota you're producing in an
ordinate amount of wind right now we're going to move that wind from North Dakota to Wisconsin
where it's needed so that's how electricity flows when you're talking about a state within MISO
okay and it's really important that we keep it focused on MISO because that's the construct
that we operate in so when we're talking about the cost of generation or the cost of transmission
we have to really be focused on MISO and we can't get distracted by places like PJM,
ERCOT as Mr. Stone mentioned California ISO those are all different operating systems
so for our purposes we talk about what's happening within MISO and the MISO footprint
and and why that becomes important is because when you look at a company like a lion
we serve a million customers between Wisconsin and Iowa and we have about 430,000 gas customers
also split between those states where the top five largest regulated wind owner and operator
in the entire country we're also the top five largest regulated solar owner and operator
why that becomes important is because when you think about what is the load going to do to the
grid what is it going to do to alliance customers there's two levels of planning that go on
there's the level of planning that we do at alliance to ensure that we have enough generating
capacity to meet the needs of our customers and then the state on top of it requires that we
carry extra so as we sit here right now I have to plan at alliance what's our peak demand
and any given day if it's going to be a hot hot summer and we have manufacturing customers that
are running three shifts and all of their lines of production what's the maximum amount of
electricity that they're going to need we have to plan for that plus a reserve margin of 14.5
percent and why that's important is because it goes directly to reliability there are a lot of
questions about well if you're bringing on additional load does that mean that me as a
residential customer that I'm going to run out of electricity that I'm going to come home on a
95 degree day I'm going to go to turn on my air conditioner and there's not going to be enough
because all of the large load customers have taken that the answer is no because again coming
back to the construct in Wisconsin Wisconsin the state the psc has oversight and the legal
responsibility to ensure that every utility is carrying that extra the reserve margin and that's
called the resource adequacy so even though we're all interconnected those 17 states from that first
map on the first slide yes we're interconnected but we in Wisconsin have an additional obligation
to ensure that there's that cushion the other reason it's important to think about where we sit
in terms of MISO is when you're talking about how it came to be that QTS is looking in particular
in in this part of the state and that's because of investments that were made
due to MISO so MISO came out and said we're going to propose multiple multiple value projects
okay it was 17 projects that MISO independently looked at all the states within its footprint
and said there are reliability concerns and therefore we're going to require additional
transmission investments one of the transmission investments that was identified was here in north
Madison so when we talk about what so what makes this area so special it's because there were
investments made in the infrastructure the transmission infrastructure that were required
by MISO and one of the key driving factors was we needed an increased ability to bring additional
renewables from the western states into Wisconsin so that investment was made once the investment
was made we go through an economic development process within alliance to say we have space
in our service territory we have extra capacity on our system we have investments that have been
made in the transmission infrastructure which makes this particular parcel or area perfect
for a large load customer doesn't have to be a data center it can be advanced manufacturing
it can be electrification right so electrification is driving a lot of the increase in demand
but our approach is we say we have specific sites within the territory that we serve
that are ripe for the taking essentially where the investments have been made so
unlike what you read about some other projects in different parts of the state like port Washington
you hear numbers like billions of dollars in transmission upgrades that's not needed here
that's why from alliance perspective it has been important to us to make that available to
potential customers why why do we care why do we want to go out and make it available to
to multiple different types of customers because it actually helps lower costs for customers
and it seems counterintuitive and it seems like it shouldn't hold in a traditional
economic supply and demand scenario but it does the reason why is because the majority of all of
our energy bills are made up of fixed costs so when mr stone talked about the infrastructure that
has to be made and that utilities are granted an exclusive monopoly in exchange for that monopoly
that is granted to utilities by the government the other side of that coin is that the utilities
shareholders then have to put the capital up front to pay for power power plants the distribution
system the meters everything that it takes to get the electrons from where they're generated
to your home where it's eventually consumed those are fixed costs that are taken on by the
utility to the extent that you can grow the denominator that you can spread out those fixed costs over
more customers the end result is going to be it will lower the costs for all customers right because
you're dividing that fixed number by a greater amount there are a couple of studies that have
been commissioned by independent bodies the Lawrence Berkeley national lab came out with a study and
that study indicates that same that same phenomenon where states that have strong electricity low
growth often have lower or declining prices in states that have taken the tact of we're going to
separate a utilities generation from its distribution we're going to mandate that a certain number of
a certain percentage of electricity come from certain types of sources those policy decisions
often lead to higher prices so why do we at a lion care about economic development and growth
because it helps keep our customer costs low because as the regulated utility we have an
obligation to serve each and every customer that comes into our service territory we don't get to
choose we don't get to say oh you're going to manufacture cheese we're not going to serve you
oh you're going to you want to build a car manufacturing plant we're not going to serve you we think
that's too much we don't have a choice if a customer comes into our service territory we have a legal
obligation to serve that customer because of that obligation to serve we also have an ongoing
obligation to continue to invest in the infrastructure that's necessary to serve customers so those two
obligations then put the onus back on us to say if we can attract more customers to our service
territory we can continue to invest in the system and ultimately those investments will be spread
across a greater number of customers so that's that's why when we talk about why is a utility
interested in growth if you're a regulated monopoly if if nobody in the service territory has a choice
you don't get to pick who your provider is why is the utility out there talking about growth
because it's it's good it's good for us because it helps us continue to invest at the right pace
to ensure reliability and it helps our customers so that we don't have to go in front of the public
service commission more often than two years because nobody wants to go in for a rate review
every year right and then finally a question that we get often is what about reliability
okay so if a large load customer comes into the electric utility service territory what's that
going to do for the reliability of the system and if for some unforeseen reason something
horrible happens on the system and you have a blackout does that mean you're going to plug in
that new large load customer first and then the hospitals and the schools and the emergency
providers are going to be the last to hook up the answer is no again the public service commission
dictates that the highest priority electricity electricity users have to be brought back on first
so from a reliability perspective we are constantly constantly every second of every day
matching projected load with projected generation and then we're feeding that into MISO and MISO
tells us if you have solar capacity dispatch that now because there's no cost to the sun right
there's no fuel cost associated with that so our job is to constantly be balancing supply
with demand we don't get to tell the electrons where to go right we we produce it it goes onto
the system and it goes where it's needed actually from a reliability perspective utilities want
large load customers because they're a steady hum they have what's called a high load factor
so they're consistent you can predict they're going to pull the same amount of energy
every hour of every day versus a place that might run off shifts where they're going to come in
they're going to run a line for the first eight hours their usage is going to spike and then
they're going to skip that second shift their consumption drops that's hard on the system
to manage those spikes so from a reliability perspective it's also beneficial for utilities
to try to go out and attract large load customers because of that of that high that high demand
that they provide and the consistency that they provide to to the system as a whole so
um that's all I have from a very high level I hope that was high level I hope it was helpful
and now I'm happy to answer any questions okay yes Jan thank you Becky for all that information
there was a lot and um a lot that I have never known or heard of when it comes to electricity
and energy and it's difficult to take all of that in hearing it for the first time because
there was a lot but um one of the things that I wanted to know is you're talking about the MISO
system and currently do we have anyone on the system um that's a data center or anything similar
as what is being proposed by QTS in Wisconsin we have multiple data centers already in existence
on the system yes and are they as large as what QTS is proposing I don't know the answer to that
um I do know that the size that QTS is proposing is not abnormal but I don't have the information
readily available then um one last question um regarding solar would does a lion have the say
of what solar would be put out by QTS if if QTS wants to build their own solar
so if QTS wants to build solar we have a community solar program that we could partner with them
on that type of a tariff offering as mr sewn indicated everything that we offer is on file
with the public service commission so you can go out and you can see okay we do have a community
solar program where we've we have one in jamesville as an example where what the way that it works
is we go out we build the solar and then we make blocks available for customers to subscribe so
if you're a renter and you don't have availability on your rooftop but you want to have the benefits
of solar and you want to support the development of solar you would subscribe to one of those blocks
of community solar and that essentially goes to pay for us to go out and build that system
so we do have a say and then in wisconsin third parties are not allowed to build and own and
operate generating facilities so if it's over a certain size any new solar generating facility
within our service territory we would have to be involved yes okay thank you
one of the questions that came to me and then i'll ask for other questions but was
how does a must run facility that into this scenario and can you just elaborate on that a
little bit sure so a must run facility from the mysos perspective right is designated as such
it's needed for reliability purposes meaning you're not allowed to turn it off
and so if there were periods of constraint within the mysos system there are steps that they have
to go through warnings that they would have to issue and they would designate if a certain
generating facility is a must run there aren't any consumers in other words a data center would
never be labeled must run because the data center is the customer okay great thank you
other questions Jim I got just a i'll say three or four questions but I think they all sort of
interrelate to each other so you mentioned about you got the 14.5 percent reserve margin
and the way you've portrayed it alliance is carrying that say over their peak usage and
what i'm curious about is that usage say a large user would come in it might be hard to
say anticipate how much usage that is so you might say lose that 14 percent or maybe gets down the
five or maybe you actually go negative how does that uh happen to say it's like i'm assuming you're
now pulling from the myso grid is that and say you're in that negative is that charges than that
alliance takes because now you're pulling more than you're giving yep so initially to answer the
first part of your question in in the case of large load customers we go out and we have a service
agreement that we negotiate with the customer and one of the terms says to the customer you are
not allowed to pull more than fill in the blank so we we use the contract to protect us
from having to go into that net negative situation so contractually we're protecting
ourselves and it's similar with large industrial customers that don't have special contracts
they they have to take service under a filed tariff but a requirement of that tariff is they
enter into an energy service agreement part of that energy service agreement tells them
you're not allowed to consume more than a certain number so that we can make sure that we're always
staying within that reserve market okay in a continuation you mentioned how like um there was
like 17 and investments at myso went out and looked and one of them happened to be in the what you
call it the northern Madison and during that conversation you mentioned that was set up to
pull a lot of let's say the solar and wind from the western states or western territory of myso
is that something that we're looking to offset i know there's a solar farm going up now and i'm
sure there's other ones that i'm unaware of sure and i guess really i just want to talk about is
that way myso is always going to be set up just that the western portion is always going to be
passing this way or are we trying to counteract that so Wisconsin's in a bit of a unique position
just because of our geography right so we can't pull anything from the north we can't pull anything
from the east because of the Great Lakes and then on our southern border Illinois it's a
deregulated state so they're not required to carry reserve margin so if and when we ever get to
the position where we're looking at our supply and our demand and we're saying we need more supply
the only place we can look is to the west and that's why myso is constantly looking at the
transmission infrastructure that can bring energy from the western part of myso into Wisconsin in
particular now our goal as a state has always been to get us back to a position of being an
exporter you always want to be an exporter of energy we are an importer in wisconsin it's
largely because of our geography i guess my last quick question you mentioned
Lawrence Berkeley study i don't think i quite have that i'm wondering if you can provide it or
if we've already got that so sure it's the Lawrence Berkeley national lab
it was featured on pbs not too long ago and um the washington post also published the results
but i think if you just google Lawrence Berkeley national lab and then data center study it'll pop
right up okay thank you very much anybody else yes Alicia okay um i think i was trying to pick
up what you're putting down so um really just have a quick question so you can't say without
uncertainty because a lot of people have sent me a lot of emails that just say you know with this
large load customer coming can you guarantee that my rates are not going to go up and i think
with you said that you can't say that right i mean i yes i can't guarantee that any of our rates
won't go up i i would unless we were in a rate freeze the likelihood that rates are going to stay
stable are probably very low because as mr stone went through anytime we build a new facility
right so we we have to build it first then once it becomes operational it moves into our rate
base and we start charging customers for it so it's not it's not the existence or the addition
of new large load customers that has a direct relationship to rates it's the in the investment
in infrastructure that's being made okay so secondary to that you said that you have an
obligation to serve and what was the second obligation to carry that reserve margin okay thank you
i just so really then on the other side what you're saying is that this area is prime has
always been primed for a large load customer and by bringing the large load customer into the area
is crazy as you said it sounds right it doesn't make sense but that's going to allow for infrastructure
investments that would ultimately lower the cost for consumers right so what's going to happen is
if you if we are successful in attracting a large load customer whoever that customer is right
the revenues that we will get from that customer because it's going to be revenues that are
contractually negotiated ultimately it has to be approved by the public service commission
but the way that the rates are structured is to make sure that we're bringing in more revenues
than our marginal costs to serve those customers okay so we always want to bring in more than
it actually costs to serve them that then helps drive down everybody else's costs because we're
bringing in more revenues and the cost yep the cost to us to invest is going to get lower okay
one last thing to or two more if that's okay that's right okay so this project aside you're
saying that you guys pretty much it sounds like are trying to attract large load customers to
this area right yes so that should be something that should be like if not this one it's not
another large load customer that is primed to come here yes okay thank you for that
infrastructure yep because of the infrastructure and then a secondary would just be let's look
at Iowa for example because Iowa has a lot of data centers so are there any in Iowa that are
similar to this large load QTS yes in our agency rapids okay yes and so what and when we're thinking
about MISO and how that works with Illinois you said is not regulated and we are not like
where are they getting their power from yep so Iowa is exactly like Wisconsin okay yep so it's a
perfect it's a perfect comparator Iowa and Wisconsin are same regulatory construct same sort of I
would say economic development efforts same rate structure Iowa and Wisconsin are the same okay
but lastly just so I know where we're at because we are working on both of these issues on both
side of the aisle it's kind of like we're regulatory like sorry that's weird we're regulatory Larry
they're working on it right now right so the PSC is everybody is working on it because these
issues are coming to us but we can't say without certainty you know what it is right and I would
say it's really important also when we're thinking about where we sit in Wisconsin that Wisconsin
has followed the cost causation method of making electric rates for more than 100 years and and
what that means at the highest level is that it is the legal responsibility of the public service
commission to ensure that costs to serve customers of utilities are assigned appropriately it's
called the cost of service model and it is used across the country but that is cost causation and
it's very in its most basic form and that is what is the cost to serve the customer that's how we're
going to structure the rates to ensure that you're you are collecting enough to cover the cost to
serve that customer. I'm trying to understand that rate fixed rate versus the divided by the
total load and if the total load just multiplied by 10 let's say and once you just go back to
a line would go back to the PSC and say because there's a 10-fold increase we need to increase
a fixed rate. Well if the denominator increased by 10 then we would only have to go back to the
commission if we increase the denominator by 10 right because what you're saying what I'm saying
is that that denominator is the amount of load the numerator is our generation investments so
as you as the the numerator stays the same right because it's never going to be a one-for-one
that's not how we plan the system we don't say well customer X is coming on so we're going to run
out and build that's not it's actually you make investment decisions on a lagging basis because
you have to look across your entire system and you say what needs to be upgraded what can we
repower what potentially could convert from one fuel type to another fuel type so it's not
necessarily that you're going to go out and you're we don't build generation for specific customers
so we wouldn't we wouldn't be in that position because we wouldn't be growing the numerator at the
same time. Okay Bill it's in just a note it's 604 we're beyond our time we're starting our next
meeting so we'll we'll kind of go through this quickly now. Becky thank you for the presentation
at the beginning I think you mentioned that there are a couple of Ray cases before the PSC
and there are also two bills being introduced how does how does the how will the bills impact
those Ray cases whether they're approved before or after the bill the bills are approved. So that's
still being discussed whether or not the pending cases in front of the PSC would be
grandfathered or whether any new legislation signed into law by the governor would actually
put those projects back to the sort of restart and they're they're all considered tariff filings
they're not they're not rate they're not rate filings so it this is happening outside of a
traditional rate review they're they're single tariff filings. Okay any other questions?
I would ask staff if they had any burning updates to give us. Bill?
I don't talk about that during our presentation and the regular meeting agenda. Okay anybody else?
Callie I just have a really quick update we will be having a spring primary election on
February 17th that also is a our second February board meeting so that will be moved to Thursday
the 19th typically how we thank you and thank you for being with us and making that presentation
so we appreciate it it was good information I worked in the energy industry for 45 years so
it's all good to hear again thank you yes can I ask Callie what is the primary that we're having
and could you tell us how many people are running for trustee and stuff? Yeah so the primary we're
having is for the circuit court judge branch one it is a county race and for village trustee we have
four candidates we have Colleen Little to see Dr. Allen Alicia Williams and Melanie
I'm going to say Burke off sorry if I said your name wrong Melanie but that's who we have for
village trustee. All right with that if there's no other business to come before this committee
I would entertain a motion to adjourn but before we get that motion I want to know we're going to
take just a short break before we have our village board meeting and that will start
in about five minutes. All right is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn. Is there a second?
Second. The motion and a second all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?
Motion carries were adjourned at 6.08 pm.
Call the village board meeting to order at 6.16 pm on Tuesday January 20th 2026.
I would ask Callie to note roll call. I would ask Colleen to lead us in the pledge.
Question you can just put it in your life. I mean I just say it's in America.
Since it's going to be public for which it's been one of the reasons under the individual
the validity and the justice for all.
Announcements. I was just note that there are signs on the doors on both sides and along the
cabinets we ask that you keep those areas open for not only safety but fire reasons so
we appreciate your cooperation with that. I would ask if anyone else has an announcement.
I just have a quick announcement. I appreciate everyone coming out today and I wanted to just
make a quick announcement about really just our conversations with the public and what it is like
what you see us doing up here. There's been like pictures of us posted online that we're
sleeping during the meetings and I just wanted to say like our we have to look down to look at this
board and so although you might not think that we're engaged up here we actually are just like
looking down and so I just wanted to address that because I don't think that at least for
speaking for myself it's disheartening to see those things and we're all volunteering here to
serve you guys and I don't want it to be a circumstance like where we as your board have to fear
walking out the front door. I want to be able to walk out the front door after these meetings
with my held high and along with everyone else so I just thought I would just put that out there
as we start this meeting. Thank you. Thank you Alicia. All right Bill do you have anything?
All right with with that we are going to move to our consent agenda and I would ask for a motion
to approve. Motion to approve. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying
aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. All right. Presentations. A lot of presentations tonight but
this one is a presentation regarding water, sanitary sewer, storm water and transportation
impacts of the proposed QTS data center and this is Bill Chang, Judd Blau and our favorite
veerbecker and associate. So Craig. Yeah so quick introductions here. Craig Matthews is our
village engineer, crew, veerbecker. It's been with the village for plenty of years. He'll go into
his background here and then Judd Blau is obviously our director of public services
and he'll he can speak to the operations operational systems of our utilities.
Take it away guys. Thank you for having me and good evening everybody. As Bill said my name is
Craig Matthews, work for veerbecker associates. We've been the consulting engineer to the village
of the forest for many years. Going back even into the 1980s and beyond earlier than that even.
I didn't know I had to talk about myself but to Bill's point I've first stepped foot in the
village of the forest in 1993. Performing work with veerbecker associates and on behalf of the
village. So been here a long time. I've been functioning in the capacity of the village
engineer since 2004. Yes thank you. With me tonight online is Darren Pope. You guys would have seen
him at the water study presentation that we did about a month ago and any more technical or
detailed questions that I can't handle. Heels is available for any of those types of questions.
As you all know we're here tonight to talk about the public infrastructure components as it relates
to the data center development. And you've seen in the packet that we have a lot of information
to cover. I don't need to talk on or interrupted the whole time so please feel free to interject
if you have any questions along the way. Also to set the table again I'm representing
you know this board the community the village of the forest in this capacity tonight.
There's a lot of information included here in here but there's still a lot more discovery that
we're going through and learning about all this. The development has to bring to the table here.
It's not any kind of an approval or any kind of recommendations. It's simply presenting you know
what we know about the development to this point and how that relates to the infrastructure that
you folks currently have in place. Slide. Just a high level talk about you know what this
presentation is going to entail. We're going to talk a lot about the water utility.
We'll move on into the sanitary sewer system infrastructure, stormwater management components
and then we'll conclude with some conversation about traffic and transportation facilities.
And of course all as it relates to the data center development.
First of all what I have here is a slide to talk about just the operation of a municipal
water system at a high level. So municipal water systems function by supplying water to the system
by pumping water from groundwater wells. Water is pumped by the wells throughout the distribution
system through a network of underground pipes. That water is used to fill elevated storage tanks
hopefully from here on out it'll be water towers. And then as demand is realized water flows out
of those towers through the public distribution system where it provides water to the individual
customers. Within the villages water system the height of the water towers provides the pressure
to the system. This is a function of the law of gravity. The higher the tower is above the
ground the more pressure that the system provides. Currently the villages system operates in two
separate pressure zones. The original village village system which I'll call the north system
is that one pressure zone and the former Tope & Creek water system in the south is a separate
second pressure system that the village operates.
So the villages existing water system includes four water supply wells on your slides. Those
are the red symbols. They're all located east of the interstate at this point in time. There's
three water towers also shown on the map. There's a network of underground pipes that exceeds
430,000 lineal feet of distribution mains that range in size from four inches in diameter to
16 inches in diameter. The village has one water booster station and that booster station is a device
that pumps the water up from lower elevations to higher elevations and it includes reducing
valves that allows that water to then transfer from the high elevations down to the lower elevations.
Well placement is restricted locally through zoning ordinances and by the DNR
with the goal of limiting wells from being in locations where there's possible pollution concerns.
We avoid placing wells in areas that may present these pollution risks specifically
avoiding industrial land uses or practical. An elevated storage tanks are often located
in areas of high water demand or high water usage and in the forest we have a unique opportunity
to watch out for airplanes. So the flight paths from Dane County Regional Airport do affect where
we place our towers. As of 2024 the village serves 4,365 total water customers.
The breakdown includes residential, commercial, industrial and public authority customers,
the numbers of which are indicated.
And as of 2024 you'll hear this number probably too many times but the village uses on average
868,000 gallons of water per day. Over the course of the year that comes out to be
just over 316 million gallons of water annually. The table on the slide shows a breakdown of
water use by customer and as you can see residential customers represent the largest water users in
the village system. By land use residential customers use approximately 550 gallons per acre per day
and commercial and industrial land uses use on average 300 gallons per acre per day.
Now to relate this to the data center development based on information that we've
provided to this point through their consulting engineers would suggest that their usage would
be 83 gallons per day per acre over the course of the total development area.
Slide, this slide is a table that shows the 10 largest water users or water customers in the
village as of 2024 and the top 10 users range from 3,600 gallons per day to over 45,000 gallons per day.
So relating this to a per acre basis it amounts to about 276 gallons per day per acre
so over 3,000 gallons per day per acre based on your top 10 existing customers.
And again the data center we project most information provided to this point at 83
gallons per day. Last month we...
Again that's per acre so we're assuming all 1600 acres. Yes. Okay 83 gallons per day.
Okay. All of the per acre usages I've tried to equate to the you know the total area of land
use so there's probably some ins and outs to that. So last month we presented the 2025 update to
the water system study. Again this information is based on water usage at the end of 2024
and from that evaluation we determined the water distribution network to be adequate.
A new well was recommended to be added to the system currently and this was without consideration
of water use associated with the data center. The construction of the new well is planned to
begin in 2026 with the drilling of a test well and depending on the results of that the production
well should go into construction in 2027 or 2028. The new well site that's being evaluated is in
the conservancy place residential development on a lot that's currently owned by the village.
In terms of water storage it was recommended that somewhere between the years of 2030 to 2035
based on growth assumptions that a new water tower would be required.
And it is recommended that this tower be placed west of the interstate based on the location of
your existing towers and then anticipated growth patterns.
Water needs from the data center again based on information provided to us at this point
would include daily domestic use of 125 000 gallons per day
without respect to area that's total water use that we've been provided with. This is domestic
use that would go towards restroom showers drinking water and other day-to-day needs.
And this again compares to the 868 000 gallons per day that the village uses.
And so at full operation the data center would result in about a 14 and a half percent increase
in daily water use. Consideration to protect against changes in land use the village may
consider deed restricting the lands to a reasonable maximum daily water use to serve as a guardrail
for the data center development as well as any potential future changes that could result from
redevelopment or repurposing this land in the future.
Touching on the cooling system so this is proposed to be a closed loop cooling system
and so this system would require an initial fill with water.
It's estimated that the volume of water in the overall development all phases all buildings
would require upwards of a million gallons per building per phase per individual unit.
And so that would be upwards of a million gallons to fill one of the cooling systems
associated with the development and I will in full transparency hope to get better
information on those numbers but that's kind of where we're at today with what we've been shared.
And again 868 000 gallons per day is what the water system users use today or 316 million gallons
per year. Since you don't want to hear yourself talk the whole time I'll just interject that we are
requesting a full engineered spec of what that closed loop system looks like so that we better
evaluate that too. Thanks Alex. I needed a drink if nothing else.
All right oh yeah maybe in those my place um
Well he's looking first place I see a lot of board members writing quickly can you send us
copies of your slides please. Yes thank you. After I tried market.
The proposal for the cooling system does include the data center purchasing that water from the
village and that would be they would do intend to use villages water to fill that system.
We would obviously not just say okay turn on the the valves and let it flow. We would want to
make sure that we phase that or you know regulate it that so you don't want to turn on your
deposit and not have water so we would require a phased approach for that filling of the system.
And again particularly regarding the cooling system and other elements seek to gain more
information as we move along and continue to evaluate this.
Jim's got a question. Just a quick question. Say part of that engineering research
how much does it take cost to fill or take to fill if there's like a one-time
flushing or something like that. When it's guessing there might be a cleaning of the
the whole system before they would get into using it. Yeah all that information we would
expect to get with the engineering. All right um moving on to serve the data center there's
obviously going to be need to be new water mains installed and extended to the site.
Currently the village has existing 12 inch diameter mains west of the interstate that have the
ability to be extended to serve the data center. Water mains schematic are the blue lines on the
on the map on the screen and where they dead end to the right there that's that would be
connection points to the existing villages water. The data center is anticipated to require
approximately 35,000 linear feet of new water mains to serve the development
and this amounts to about an 8% increase in the length of the existing distribution system.
No additional wells are required to provide service to the data center.
We talked about pressure zones earlier so the data center will require a new water tower
and that water tower is required to provide adequate system pressure to the development area.
So system pressure as we said is determined by elevation difference between ground elevations
in the height of the tower and the existing village water system provides adequate water
pressures to ground elevations ranging from approximately 905 to 995. The data center lands
range in elevation from approximately 970 to 1065. So those lands are above the elevation at which
we can provide adequate pressure at this time. So due to the higher ground elevations
that's the reason for the new water tower specifically related to the data center.
I'll just add too I know you mentioned this earlier correct but just to confirm because I
think I've heard different things in the past too these towers are not drawing directly from
the lands underneath in terms of drying water simply a pressure boosting.
Correct so again your water supply comes from groundwater wells that again are typically located
in residential areas with low risk of pollutants and the water tower is a tank that holds the water.
As a quick question about the water tower you mentioned how we're in the flight path are we
getting Arna out of the flight path that the elevation doesn't matter if the tower then?
Yeah it's kind of a fun trivial fact to mention but yeah the more north and the more east or west
that we get from a line extending north of the airport you know the more flexibility we have.
Okay that being said well we would have to design it and understand the exact details of it to
make sure. I'm guessing it all has to go through if a correct won't be as regulated as if it was
on the drag line. Correct you know and obviously the data center development spans quite a distance
east to west and so there's probably some leeway to that it can shift one way or the other if
that becomes an issue. Again this would be a third pressure zone introduced to the system
and so there would also be required a pressure booster station and reducing valves that would
allow that water transfer between the existing system and the new system that would pump it up
to the higher elevation and reduce it down to the lower elevations. This infrastructure would all
be developer funded of course the tower booster station is probably a three to four million dollar
infrastructure investment and I would note that with a new water tower that would be associated
with this development if it goes forward the village would not need to add additional water
storage facilities until the years 2040 to 2045 again based on growth assumptions that we're using
as compared to the 2030 to 2045 or 2030 2035 timeline as we presented in the 25 water study
that would delay that improvement significantly and the timing is again really depends on what
happens from a development standpoint. I just want to reiterate so you touched on needing linear
feet new additional mains that will run that will increase about 8 percent. All of those water
infrastructure costs will be worn by the developer right that's part of the grantee station development
agreement will be part of the development agreement should we get to that stage of this project
so none of that will be funded directly by the utility but all those improvements will come
to the utility and benefit us for years to come after that.
Next agency review so all of this infrastructure goes to numerous review channels water system
infrastructure would be reviewed by engineering and public works for local design guidelines and
operation. Carp-C through the urban service area amendment process and the public service commission
reviews certain large water infrastructure projects to protect the ratepayers and so the
towers booster station and large diameter mains fall under the purview of PSC and so the basically
what the PSC would do is review that and if approved issue a construction authorization for
those components and then the Department of Natural Resources has review for new main extensions
towers booster stations for statutory requirements and that concludes my water conversation so we
can address any additional water questions otherwise we'll move on. Are there questions?
I have a couple questions. Some people ask me who's financially responsible of stormwater
systems fail decades from now and we'll talk about that when I get into stormwater but
I'm just gonna answer it now and it'll be fun to talk about again. There's detention basins that
are publicly maintained and the village of the forest will maintain those and then there's basins
that are privately maintained. We don't know the makeup of what we're looking at here yet but then
those if you if you implement a private detention basin you have to sign a maintenance agreement
that's recorded against the property and you're required then as the private landowner to take
care of those. The other thing I'll add is the village has a stormwater utility which collects
fees are based on impervious surfaces and so I did do a calculation and I have no idea if it's
right or wrong at this point but it's 500,000 to 750,000 dollars in annual stormwater fees that
would go towards that particular question that you asked. In the head of myself you were talking
about improvements so I thought I'd hit the other side. Can I ask another one? Sure and then Greg.
So on the total charge you had said like 120 gallons but 83 gallons per day at 1600 is 132,000.
Is there like a once they use the water are we putting a cap on how much water they can use?
Is once full build out like is there a I know they have to charge the system but are we capping
them at all? So that won't be me deciding it but what I did mention is that you know with the
village yeah I had some conversations that we can deed restrict the property to limit water use.
Okay yes I can chime in on that so our planning team as part of the rezoning application that's
been submitted one of the things that we're contemplating which would take effect in a
deed restriction is conditions placed upon rezoning that would cap water usage and so the thought
being there is if in the future a different form of development took place say that development
ceased operations we'd still have some protections against the heavier water usage that would potentially
place higher demand on our system.
And our current water system is monitored by remote right everything we can see every
day usage of the water and each individual user so we can understand what their uses are and
should we see a spike just like in a consumer home we see a spike we'll reach out and say hey
what's happening here you might have a leaky toilet you might have a faucet that's dripping you know
something like that that ends up saving the homeowner some money in the case of a business
that we may hate what's happening here and they may say oh we had this happen all right well we
need to accommodate for that but we will know that and we can know that every day what's happening
and base our average is out on that.
Yes Bill.
So to address the least this point in between the difference of kind of the
everyday usage cap versus the initial fill cap the way that we have it set up in the
pre-annexation agreement right now is that there would be a separate agreement for that initial
fill so that's going to set up you know the phasing of it the cost of it which is determined by rates
through the PSC currently in our tariff so that's that's a separate we consider that as a separate
issue from the system water usage which is the daily use.
Greg has been trying to say something for a while now.
Oh sorry so part of the storm private stormwater base and maintenance and our MS4 permitting
through the DNR with the stormwater agreement that's put in place with a developer or a business
every year they have to send the report of the stormwater basins to the village with pictures
and saying that they inspected and it's working properly so I just want to mention that.
Good thank you yes Brad.
Just for my own knowledge is well one in five closed for various reasons.
Correct well one was closed a long time ago well five we turned it online and
radium was present we couldn't get the radium to stop so we ended up closing that well and
capping it. Okay just want to make sure it wasn't missing it and then was there any
considerations that we would have a QTS truck in water instead of using our own supply?
Yes so initially we were considering that it's still an option at this point as we
negotiate through the pre annexation agreement and eventually the development agreement
but we saw benefit of having the water supply there and then being able to realize the
revenues from the sale of the water to help supplement and stabilize the water from fun
or yours to come.
Just to add one other aspect to that one part of the discussion was the environmental impact of
transporting a billion gallons of water by truck. It's diesel trucks probably a lot of diesel trucks
traveling a lot of miles to deliver a lot of water. Thank you yes Jan while we're talking about QTS
and the closed loop system. Do we know what the largest QTS loop system that they operate?
Do they come out right? I understand what you're asking but I don't know the answer to that I
don't know that. Yeah we don't have that information we can certainly ask but again I'm hoping that we
would well we would request the specific information for the system that would be proposed here too.
Sure I guess another important question to go along with that would be to know the age
of their oldest system and longest system.
We all have a lot to say about water I'm going to come back to Alicia's question quickly so
my point of the gallons per day per acre which I say it too many times but in terms as it relates
to water cap but I wanted to point out what normal industrial or commercial land use is used and
that's on average 300 gallons per day per acre. In terms of if you're doing math there's probably
some rounding you know it could have been 1500 or you know different numbers used in there but it's
approximately and I'm not hanging my hat on 83 or 125 thousand dollars as we sit here today we still
need to see the calculations that that they arrived at that number with so.
And it probably makes a difference that a lot of the acreage that they are
are working with is not going to have a plant on it it's going to be other uses.
Yeah there's a fair amount of open space really.
Yeah okay all right you want to share more with us?
We're going to get dirty now and talk about sanitary sewer.
So sewer just as far as an overview goes sewer generated throughout the village is collected
in a series of underground pipes that sewer generally flows by gravity from the point of origin to
the point of treatment and at times to overcome gravity or topography challenges wastewater needs
to be pumped through a pump station and a forest main next.
So the village currently has over 370,000 linear feet of sanitary sewer collection mains in place
that range in size from four inches to 24 inches in diameter.
There's one pump station in the system which was down in the south system near Tocancreek.
In wastewater from the village of the forest is treated by the Madison Metropolitan
Sewage District at their nine springs, nine springs treatment facility is located on the
south side of Madison south of the belt line.
Sewer generated from the village is conveyed to the treatment plant through a series of
interceptor sewers and pump stations that are owned and maintained by MMSD.
The village has an adequate network of appropriately sized collection mains under
existing conditions. We have 12 inch up to 18 inch diameter mains west of the interstate
that have sufficient capacity for new development.
MMSD sewer interceptors are in place and have additional capacity to handle growth
including that that would be generated from the data center.
The MMSD's treatment facility currently treats approximately 40 million gallons per day,
40 million gallons of sewer per day with the capacity to go up to 56 million gallons,
so there is capacity at the treatment plant. MMSD collects fees from new developments
for maintaining and upgrading their existing facilities. This fee is a per acre per square
foot charge. It's billed to the village. The developers are required to reimburse the village
and this provides a long-term reliable funding source for upgrades to the treatment plant system.
Under the proposed conditions, the data center water use as we noted is anticipated to be 125,000
gallons per day at full billed out and this is all considered domestic use, so most of this will
be returned or dumped into the sewer system. With a peaking factor applied for safety,
the data center is anticipated to generate a wastewater flow rate of 0.77 cubic feet per second.
Means a lot, right? So to put that into perspective, an 8 inch sewer pipe at a half a percent slope
has sufficient capacity to handle this and as I said, we've got 12 inch to 18 inch diameter
pipes that can serve this area and then that increasing capacity is not linear based on size.
It's more exponential, so there's significant capacity within that existing sewer system.
In terms of the wastewater that's generated, we anticipated all to be normal strength,
domestic sewage, we don't anticipate any high-strength sewage that would require any kind of special
treatment. Village of the Forest works in cooperation with MMSD to jointly monitor wastewater flows
and composition through a series of existing monitoring manholes throughout the system
and this development would be required to add additional monitoring manholes
for the village and MMSD to access for that monitoring.
The data's... I'll just interject quick. That is something that we do on a regular basis already
is monitor several high-strength users that we have in the village, so this would just be one
more site that we could add and my team is fully capable of handling that, and MMSD has said they
can continue to do that testing force as well. So the data center through development is
anticipated to require approximately 18,000 linear feet of new sewer manes to provide service.
This constitutes a 4.8% addition to the length of the overall existing collection system.
There would be two new pump stations required to serve the data center to overcome topography
challenge where gravity sewer can't be achieved. All of the sewer system would also be developer
funded. And per the proposed agreements, the developer would be required to provide funding
for operation and maintenance of these pump stations that would include operating expenses,
pump maintenance, and replacement costs.
Our view of the sewer system would fall under our engineering and public works teams for
local standards and operation. Carp C has part of the urban service area amendment process
and for individual sewer extensions, MMSD for capacity and design guidelines, and the DNR
for statutory requirements.
If there's any sewer.
I wanted to ask about the MMSD, say funds or fees, I think they're more rightly so.
When somebody wants to join MMSD or pay those fees, it comes in as a per lot. Is that correct?
It's like you mentioned how there's different sort of uses. There's like more of an industrial
and open space. But if it's on one lot, they're paying for the entire lot, correct?
Correct. So there's a few minor exclusions, but it's basically gross land area. So they can
exclude right-aways and they can exclude wetlands and environmental corridors. But other than that,
even if it's green space on a lot, it's paid for. And sent you, I asked because I was interested,
I think that this number could approach 15 plus million dollars one-time payment for that,
basically that ability to connect to the system.
Thank you. All right, stormwater management.
So the village of the forest and the development are located within the
Yohara River watershed. Water generally flows north-west to southeast through the
village, through the Yohara River, the Madison Chain of Lakes, into the Rock River, and ultimately
the Mississippi River. Key considerations within the watershed today include water quality
degradation due to high phosphorus and nitrates from agricultural runoff, flood management,
and water temperature. The development occupies approximately 1,572 acres of mostly
undeveloped agricultural lands. There are 29 acres of delineated wetlands within the development
area. There are no mapped flood plains. And water quality, as stated, is currently impacted
primarily through agricultural practices, including phosphorus and nitrates through fertilizer
applications, other potential contaminants through herbicides and pesticides, and sediment
due to soil runoff and erosion. In the proposed conditions, the development will result in
approximately 40% of the total area in impervious surfaces. Typically industrial developments,
obviously on a much smaller scale, result in about 70 to 80% impervious surfaces,
such as a ram of reference there. There will be approximately 140 acres of land
dedicated to stormwater management that would include stormwater basins and conveyance systems.
All but one acre of the 29 acres of wetland would be preserved with a 75-foot vegetative
protective buffer provided around the wetlands. The one acre wetland fill that would be proposed
would have to go through DNR and potentially Army Corps of Engineer permitting processes.
There's really no local purview on that piece. A 75-foot buffer, that's a DNR regulation
as well. More locally, it's a carpsey environmental corridor requirement.
And the development proposes to set aside approximately 160 acres of natural area that will
include some level of wetland restoration.
Starwater runoff from the development would be mitigated through wet detention basins
for water quality improvements, detention basins for flood prevention,
and infiltration basins for groundwater recharge and temperature reduction in the runoff.
And in addition to these regulatory requirements, the development is advised to incorporate gray
water reuse and recycling measures, participate in Dane County's salt-wise program to reduce
chlorides in the runoff, and incorporate native plantings into open areas to promote infiltration,
water filtering, and habitat improvements. Performance standards.
I'm just curious if you've done any research or if we don't know this, if we can ask it of the
proposal, or Craig, maybe you later, have we looked at the different basins?
As I suspect that some of this area that we're talking about goes south to what I call
pine springs or through the Sahara quarry. And I think that some on the eastern sign,
probably actually, I'll say heads more used and goes, say, around springbrook. And what I'm
really curious about if there's areas out there that maybe don't even out, that there might be
more of a pocket. Yeah, I would say your description of the drainage areas is, yes, roughly equivalent
to my understanding. There are closed drainage basins within the development area, which means
basically they're just low depressions or where kettles where the water actually does not flow out
of. And those will have even additional special regulations to to medicate runoff in those areas.
Okay, thank you. I think that will be instrumental,
winter, if we ever get to regulating the storm water. So thank you.
Performance standards. So the standards that will need to be achieved in order to
approve a stormwater management plan will be a reduction in sediment and pollutant loading
post development of 80% as compared to no controls. And this is a statewide and county level
requirement in addition to local runoff rate control to reduce post development runoff
equal to or less than pre development conditions for up to the 200 year storm event.
And this requirement exceeds statewide requirements. It's a recent Dane County addition to storm
water management requirements. The development will achieve 100% of the pre development infiltration
and groundwater recharge. And this exceeds the state and county ordinance of 90%.
Water runoff temperature reduction would be achieved through infiltration practices.
And development of a stormwater pollution prevention plan and spill prevention and mitigation plan
will be required as part of the development, likely on a per building per site basis.
And review of the stormwater management system will fall under the purview of engineering and
public works again for local ordinance requirements, design guidelines, operation,
long term maintenance, etc. Carpsey will review through the urban service area
amendment process and for county ordinance requirements and the DNR for statutory requirements.
I'm going to move into transportation unless there's questions here.
So sorry again, but with storm water, I remember say like, I want to say 15 or 20 years ago, whenever
we redid our storm water ordinances, we had some pretty stringent ordinances. And at that time,
different other communities were also putting rather stringent ordinances. And some of them
were put in place, say, by like a carpsey review and things like that. I guess I am looking at you,
Alan, because when I sort of got out of that end of my career, there was some sort of
regulations being put in that you couldn't go stronger than what the state was. Are we still
in that situation? Or I guess I'm sort of looking again at you, maybe, Alan, if they're willing to
go over and above what is required by the state, is that something that we can hold to in an
agreement or is it in place with our ordinances? First of all, your recitation of the history is
spot on. We used to, there was a period of time when the forest and some other municipalities were
pushing the envelope in terms of the infiltration rate that was required on new developments.
And we got to the point where we were requiring 100% infiltration. The DNR came out with new
regulations that said you can't require more than 90%, which means that from a regulatory
standpoint, there's a development that had the right to develop. Somebody is in an industrial
area. It wants to put up an industrial building. We could not require them to do more than 90%.
QTS has agreed to 100% or more. And because it's being done by agreement that by regulatory
control, we can employ that. Thank you. What he said.
All right. Let's move on to transportation. All right.
The proposed data center is bounded by County Highway B to the south,
County DM to the north, and the interstate to the east. Han Road would be the primary east-west
road through the development. WIB road being the primary north-south road.
Patton Road would also serve the development on its west end.
And the existing roads of generally rural sections with two travel lanes,
roadside ditches for stormwater conveyance, no curb and gutter. And there are no dedicated
transit, bike or pedestrian facilities that serve the area currently. A traffic impact analysis,
or TIA for the proposed development is currently being completed. The TIA is going to take into
consideration other TIA's that are being completed in the area, including the TIA for
buckies and the Hickory Lane corridor all west of the interstate here. The data center
whooped by agreement would contribute financially to the currently proposed interchange improvement
associated with the buckies development. The TIA would advise intersection and on-street
improvements both during the construction period as well as post development.
On the far right side of the map, there's a red road that's a southerly extension of Han
Road west, just west of the interstate that's proposed as part of the process to enhance access
and other road connections to future developments to the west and south of that road.
And intersection geometrics would be analyzed and incorporated into the development as determined
necessary. The TIA is going to cover both construction and post construction, right? So, correct.
I know that's a question that was asked. So whether it's the traffic impact analysis,
we'll actually look at what's happening during the construction as well as then what happens
when construction is done and shall we say normal traffic resumes. And that TIA is addressing
the numbers of trips, traffic volume, and so Judd adequately addressed that. Another question
that comes up is the type of traffic and heavy duty construction traffic and dump trucks accessing
rock quarries and so forth out here. So, the village has extremely robust design standards,
you know, in every infrastructure component as far as I'm concerned, specifically including
roadways. All of our roadways are designed with 18 inches of gravel and 3.75 to 5 inches of asphalt.
So, all of the roads that you're putting in in today's world are very robust and can handle that
kind of traffic. So, the road improvements as we just got done talking, obviously they would
need to be sufficient to serve construction traffic and then anything that results from
the permanent employees that are working there and daily operations of the facility.
Han Road and WIPU Road would be upgraded to village standards, meaning curb and gutter and
pedestrian facilities. Upgrades to the county highways would be reviewed and determined by
Dane County Highway Department. Upgrades to Patton Road would be advised but will require
intergovernmental consideration as much of Patton Road would remain in the town of Vienna.
And we may have situations where roads are adjacent to municipal boundaries
to be determined what those roads be fully completed to urban standards or what the
town section be left in a rural condition. We've done both and so both of those are options.
Intersection geometrics would be analyzed and incorporated into the development as determined
by the TIA, new streets and upgrades to existing streets consistent with the
village of the forest guidelines. New and improved streets in the village will include pedestrian
facilities including sidewalks and or multi-use trails. The village comprehensive plan amendment
and proposed agreement suggests that transit extensions to serve the development potentially
as part of the broader plans to serve employees and village or employees in residence village-wide
is recommended. All new streets and upgrades to the existing streets would be developer-funded.
Well interject, it kind of ties in both to the streets and the storm water component.
One thing that we do when you put in an urban street section is you contain that water rather
letting us run into a ditch and flow freely. When we do designs with that, we look to put in
inlets that capture that with some so it settles sediment so we can capture that stuff again
preventing pollutants from flowing down and getting into the storm water and conveying out, right?
So we add in extra steps where we can to protect those waterways before what we're discharging to
them is pollutant loaded. We try to capture as much of that pollutant beforehand. And so that's
part of what happens when we approve street sections with curving gutters. It helps
collect that runoff like balloons that come from cars, trucks, as well as debris that's in the area.
And my last slide then is just a summary of the review agencies associated with transportation
improvements and again engineering and public works. According to local ordinances planning
documents, design guidelines, operation and maintenance practices, the Dane County Highway
Department for the highways for their design guidelines, and then the DOT for potential review
of the traffic impact analysis. Now we're open for any and all questions.
Well, let me ask if there are any more questions.
You do. Okay, go ahead, Alicia. I think you kind of answered this already,
Judd, but you said that the traffic study includes multi-year construction, right? And
heavy traffic. Correct. Okay, that was one of my questions someone had asked me and then
does rebuilding of Han Road? This is just like a pretty detailed one. West of Patton Road account
for dump truck traffic for the current quarry. Han Road is a bill to a higher standard currently.
So is. Yeah, when I touched on the 18 inches of aggregate base course,
that goes into making sure that road is built to a robust standard that can handle heavy traffic.
And the last one, I think this is addressed in the our pre-antigization agreement, but road
damage caused by construction and ongoing operations.
Yeah, so as part of the pre-antigization agreement, we are requiring that after assessment by the
village, if there's construction damage to that road, then they would have a year to repair it.
I will say that during construction, it's you know, whether it's this construction project or
another intention is to not pay the final layer as well until a majority of that construction is
completed. And so we make we try to be efficient with how those roads are paved. And then just
clarification, the question about Han Road, you said West of Patton Road? Yeah, that's a pretty
specific question someone had asked. So West of Patton Road account for dump truck traffic for the
pericore? Yeah, so it depends on because if you look at the annexation petition,
half of that portion of Han Road, it was proposed to be annexed to the village,
and the northern half was proposed to remain in the township. So that's one of those municipal
boundary roads, whereby we would then reach out to the out of sea if they would like to have their
side of the road improved as we improve our side of the road. Generally, when we make that
improvement, it is to the spec, the higher spec, so it'll be the village spec standards.
Okay, thank you. Any other questions? A lot of good information, Craig, thank you,
and John and Bill, did you have anything else, Bill? Okay, Alex? This was an awesome presentation,
we kind of touched on environmental and stormwater. I just wanted to mention that at the next
village board meeting, February 3rd, we will be bringing on a representative from Kapoor,
who has been with the DNR in the past for roughly 20 years, who is currently doing a deeper dive
into some of that environmental as well, and hopefully we'll be able to answer some questions
and provide more information on that front. All right, thank you. All right, if we have nothing
else on the presentation, and I note there's no old business, I noted that a lot of people are warm.
I am running a heater under my desk, so it's not me again, but I think what we're going to do
is take just a three-minute break, and I mean just three minutes, so people can
step out in the hall and get a little cooler breath, and then come on back in.
you
you
you
you
you
you
all right, moving on to item eight
point one under new business resolution 2026-007, a resolution authorizing the village
president and village clerk to execute a contract for municipal building inspection and plan
examination services with general engineering company. Alex? Yeah, so if you recall, we went out
to RFP for building inspection services back in October of this year. We currently contract
with GEC, general engineering company, and felt it was time, I think we'd been with them for close
to a decade to get a refresh on who else is out there. I think what we learned through this process
is that it's challenging to find qualified building inspection services. Capacity is an issue
across the board, likely statewide. We did receive four responses. Two of those we felt as a staff
were most qualified to handle the scope of development that the villages currently has been
experiencing over the last few years. Ultimately, one of the qualified candidates was again unable
to solicit the required staffing and they wanted to make sure that they were doing the best for us,
and so they essentially disqualified themselves from that. Hold on a minute. Will somebody let
people know that their voices out there are carrying? Thank you. So based on that analysis and
reviewing those four proposals, we have determined that GEC presents the best inspection services
for us moving forward. I did note in the memo there are a couple changes. The fee structure will be
instead of hourly, for the previous contract, we'll shift more towards a fee-based model
or square foot similar metrics, which I think most communities are transitioning to these days.
There's additional insurance provisions in there as well as record retention. This would
essentially have continuity with our current staffing and carry forward into the next phase
of building inspection. The one addition here too is that we are having them perform a commercial
plan review, which typically is done through the state. The force is a delegated plan review
authority, so they'll be performing that for us as well. All right. I would ask if there are
questions of Alex? Yes, Jan. So we've used GEC for a long time. Nobody's here to represent them
tonight. That's correct. Okay. Well, we've had some complaints in the past that residents have
brought and also village staff, and so what are we going to do going forward with that?
Yeah, so that's been an ongoing conversation that Administrator Chang and I have had with
their representatives silver, I would say the last year or so. In the proposal that they did submit,
we felt that some of their staffing choices contained in there reflected some changes
to where it is currently, and that was a key factor for us.
And I repeat, a search for other services didn't really provide us much option in terms
of getting a new company. Is that accurate? There are definitely challenges in the market.
Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Other questions on this? Yes, Bill.
We also considered as part of our analysis, you know, what does it mean to potentially hire
internally? And we believe because of the labor market, it would be challenging to find one,
if not two, building inspectors that are, you know, going to be on staff and in the office every day
and conducting inspections. Also with that, we wanted to be flexible in regards to,
you know, future development potential revenues coming in compared to expenditures of hiring
full-time staff, which you're going to pay a significant salary plus benefits on.
And so that's why we ended up going the RFP route. Thank you. Other questions regarding this?
If not, I would entertain a motion to approve. I'll make a motion to approve.
Is there a second? Second. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion or comment?
If not, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion carries.
Moving on to 8.2, discussion regarding an intergovernmental cooperative plan between the town of Westport,
cities of Madison and Middleton, and villages of DeForest and Wanna Key.
Oh, we didn't do public appearances on the last item. I apologize. Were there any public appearances
on 8.1? I didn't have any written ones, so okay. Thank you.
Discussion regarding an intergovernmental cooperative plan agreement on Westport, cities of Madison,
et cetera? So Bill and Ale?
So as you know, the town of Westport has filed their petition to incorporate into a village.
As part of that process, they are seeking adjacent municipalities approval or support
or non-objection. And as part of that process, we then engage in negotiation of a cooperative plan,
which is an intergovernmental agreement to set up future boundaries of the municipalities
and the township. And so that's currently at the stage that we are at. We believe that we have
a tentative agreement that is agreeable by all communities. The attorneys have been working
back and forth, including the administrators on this. And so the next step in this process would
be to go to public hearing. And then after public hearing, there's a set time for which
folks can comment. Once that comment period is over, separate ordinances will go then to the
the various villages' municipalities for adoption. And then thereafter, there potentially is an
appeal process or a challenge process whereby anyone can appeal that. And then we'll then go
to a referendum, I believe. So that's the process. Document itself, including exhibits, which allocates
the boundaries in the timing of when land transfers between municipalities is in the packet.
The agreement offers more than just the village of the forest, obviously, because it is a cooperative
plan. I'm happy or else happy to walk through provisions with that that specifically impacts
the village of the forest. But I'll take direction from U.S. to how you want to do that in respect to
the time, the audience that we have. We can run through the whole agreement or we can focus
specifically on the forest. And then in addition to that, public hearing for this is
tentatively scheduled for Wednesday for a very low. They have 630 at the town of Westport,
Town Hall. I think I have four of you that have confirmed attendance. And so we have enough for
quorum. For those that I haven't spoken with, please let me know. You're definitely invited
also to that. And so that I can seek accommodations for you.
Okay, let's maybe take it from the position of divorce part of this agreement unless
does that make sense to people?
I think you've been volunteered, Al.
And you pull up the GIS one. There's not a lot of magic to this particular
agreement from the poorest standpoint. What we're looking at is the area that is
essentially just west of the Fleet Farm area that is shown in green on that map.
That area would become part of the village at the time of incorporation of the town of Westport.
In addition to that, we have a sort of community separation area delineated
around that area basically that will remain primarily undeveloped. A lot of that land is
already in conservation. We've set it up so that there will be a pretty consistent
community separation area where you go from whatever they developed in Westport to open area to the
village. Other than that, we would not oppose the incorporation. That's essentially what the
agreement says from the religious standpoint. All right, questions? Jim?
Can I see a bit of processing? Could you maybe pull that map back up too?
I sent an email to you, Bill, on Saturday. I don't know if you want to address that,
but I don't know if it needs to be addressed or not because what I'm wondering is we're going
to public hearing. Would it be better for say everybody, including myself, to submit it as part
of the public comment and we address it as we move forward from there because I'm assuming we're
not really asking for changes until after the public hearing and there'll probably be
community discussions. Is that correct? I guess one clarifying thing is we talked about the
what did you call community separation and Bill, you were sort of circling in the area,
but the way I read it and the agreement was two complete sections of section one and two
is that so that does encompass everything in Westport in sections one and two or is there
locations that are out? Do you know that? Okay.
So in regards to process, I think you can do it both ways, but the proper way since we participated
in negotiating this and I've heard not to surprise to other communities would be to allow
or provide them notice of the concerns and then have the concerns made during the public hearing.
Since I believe that there's going to be there's as part of the public hearing there is
going to require a public notice period and so this plan as drafted is probably out there and
it's laid to make those changes now before it gets notified.
Okay. That makes sense and I just say for the trustee is there is a I had three changes that I
thought were relatively quick just more or less graphical to the to the what we were looking at
on our screen now and then I had sort of two more policy questions that we can address in the
future if we ever sold shoes. Is Alan, are you trying to find the section one and two thing there?
Page 10 of the agreement, 10 a I wrote down.
The way I read it, it's the entire two sections. It's going to be the merit sections outside of
the divorce. It is the entire two sections and the provisions are basically that the current
comprehensive plan that the town has would stay in effect and in addition to that the conservation
easements that are on the on the land in that area would also become enforceable by the village
so that we could make sure that it stays conservation easement. It couldn't be released without the
village's approval. Yep and I guess that brings me to like one of my two policy things I wanted
to talk about is to me that seems seems rather restrictive as far as for chances for development
and I do feel that that's in say the best interest of the forest to keep that community separation.
Is there any concern that that ever could be developed because sorry to say I think some of
those areas say are better suited to develop into forest versus west port if as far as sanitary
sewer connections and stuff so to me as long as it doesn't develop then I'm good with the way as
it's written but if there's somehow could trigger development I don't know how. I guess that's where
I may be looking at you Alan is the chances like 1% the none that there ever could be developed
in this community separation area. I would say that's a pretty good estimate. Okay thank you.
All right any other questions? All right and this was just going to be discussion tonight no
approval correct. That's correct. All right and we will move on to item 8.3 discussion regarding an
intergovernmental agreement for fire station construction and cost sharing with the village
of Windsor. This is going to be a staff presentation by Bill and Al. There was a copy of the agreement
in your packets and so I would ask Al and Bill to share with us anything that they
want to share and then we can ask questions and this is just for discussion tonight.
Yes so as you all know we've been on this train venture with the village of
Windsor and the fire district to locate construct design a fire station to the location as in Windsor
crossing that was resolved several years ago or agreed to several years ago.
And so a few years ago I could look at a year and a half ago the village is agreed to share
costs for the design of fire station 2. Thereafter in resolving phase 1,
villages consented to the fire district to move on to phase 2 which is the detail
drawings for eventual bidding of the project. We anticipate that those drawings will come to
this board at the next village board meeting as those drawings have been approved by the fire
district I believe at a meeting last week. So as part of that process and in my recommendation
would be that before we approve going to bidding or consent to go on to bidding that we settle
how we're going to pay for this thing. Obviously we don't want to bid out there if we don't have
solution to financing the construction yet. So that's what this intergovernmental agreement is
about. This allocates share percentages between Windsor and the forest in accordance to
the district agreement. The district agreement is a separate intergovernmental agreement which
resolves the service of the fire district to both the villages and the townships surrounding the
villages. Two villages recently extended that agreement and then in addition to considering
upcoming costs here the village also adopted both Windsor and the forest adopted ordinances
for to implement public safety impact fees and a study was conducted and now we are currently
collecting fees from all of the new development that we have so that the construction costs of
fire station number two won't go on current taxpayers. So that's the background here.
This agreement itself again discusses the payment of project costs. It also takes a look at
responsibility for insurance during construction and then after construction. The items highlighted
in red is representing a language that Windsor has proposed and then we are rebutting.
And so the sections that you see in the red and blue print are the final items that need to be
resolved yet in this agreement. Again the reason the draft is being shown now is so that we can get
to a final draft by our next meeting. We've also built in
while we are calling contingent reimbursement. So as part of our district agreement we built
in protections in case the district were to dissolve or if some if a municipality leaves the agreement.
And so as we've done that with the district agreement we needed to resolve that for both
the facilities. So if you remember I believe in 2022 the village of Windsor committed
a certain but a financing amount for the remodel and fire station one. And so this
these two sections talk about okay if one community was to leave how much of that funding
investment could they leave with both for the fire station number two and then for
investment into the fire station one. This is an effort to equalize each community's
investment into a facility that is not within the boundaries of their village.
We have a section about the particular use of the project. We want to ensure that what we're
paying for as a village is truly what it's intended for. So things related to operations
direct operations of the fire station and fire department itself and then an emergency management.
You'll see here we have provisions in there in regards to lease and upkeep and then lease
agreement. We want to ensure that as it is in Windsor that we guarantee that the department
is able to stay within a facility that is continually maintained and that's the same thing as expected
from us in our facility here in the forest. As you know currently there is a lease agreement
between the village and the district for their use of village space within the public safety
building. As now there are facilities in both communities we're proposing that the lease
payments go away rather than have the lease payment here and have a lease payment there
and being charged to the operational fund. We're essentially paying each other out.
It made more sense to forego that and shift the capital costs and the remittance costs over
to the capital side providing us a little bit more flexibility on the operational side which
we're eventually going to need. As the fire and any mass departments you know continue to grow
and so when we talk about lively limits etc this opportunity provides us a way to reshuffle that
equation.
And then the last section here is in regards to terms so we're trying to align specifically
the term of disagreement with a couple of different things. One life of the facility is a concern
life of the intergovernmental agreement is a concern and so we've settled here
I'm 50 years from initial occupancy in that that is an alignment with the facility use itself.
The rest of the site excuse me the rest of the sections are our legal lease here
a pretty standard in our agreements at this time. If you have anything in it or if you have any
questions happy to answer just so for public and then we'll move to Colleen. The reason
this has been slated for the site it's at is because a lot of our development has happened
in that direction you have Savannah Brooks you've got Fox Hills the Hooper area we have a great big
Bell Labs facility there's a lot down there and this increases our our shortens actually
our response time to get to those facilities so as we were looking at where our hotspots were
where our calls were it made more sense to go in that direction so that's why that site was chosen.
All right any other questions I think Colleen you had your hand up.
Yeah I just want to ask why the completed no later than this blank.
Why don't we have a projected completion date like even the end of 2027.
Because we don't have any information on the timeline that's going to be bit out at this point
at least I don't.
Yeah so you'll see I believe one of the recitals refers to like makes a bit one
which will have the updated timeline if you remember back I believe that tension was to have
bid out right now and so I think it's been been delayed by a couple months because of design.
So once we once we see that that updated timeline will fill in the expected to be completed by date.
I do know again in discussion with with the district and with Windsor
that they want to try to get to bid at least by the end of March to be within the mid-season.
I would imagine a bottom off bid time and then construction started shortly after that.
And then completion sometime in early 2027.
Okay other questions can I ask one more. Sure.
On page four in red and emergency management my understanding is is that the emergency
management will be at the village halls rather than the fire station.
Is that a big deal there or what's what's that about.
Seven.
So I believe one of the section is the allowed use within that facility.
It doesn't necessarily dictate that it has to be in that facility.
Okay any other questions.
Well this is just for discussion tonight so we won't be taking any action on it.
If you come up with more questions over the next week or so feel free to send them to bill.
So reaching.
No there was no registered appearances on either 8.2 or 8.3.
All right so we will go on to 8.4 resolution 2026-008 a resolution authorizing a director of public
services to apply for a dang County urban water quality grant for storm water mitigation
for the Acre Parkway reconstruction project.
Mr. Blau.
Yep so as we were working through planning for the Acre Parkway reconstruction project
one of our ongoing elements is how can we best protect the storm water that's going and Greg
brought forward again the idea of using a base separator system.
We have two of those in place throughout the village currently one near Main Street where the
storm water enters the Haur River and then there's one on River Road where that water
enters the Haur River. There is a direct line from Old Indian Trail where it connects there's
a trail that connects into the western green park that dumps right into the Haur River there
currently without that base separator system. So as long as we're doing this reconstruction
project we thought we'd add this in as an alternate for the project and one of the things we
dang County Land and Water Resources Department offers a urban water quality grant program
that we would like to apply for they cover up to 60 percent so they cover the base separator
components and then also the storm water components so a little further down is seminal way ties
into Acre Parkway there's inlets there that we would those currently run underground between
homes into the western green park we'd actually bring that water down to that base separator
system so all that water pollutant can be treated it's about a 19 acre watershed area
we calculated with runoff from homes streets other things so it would be a great way to again
help protect our contribution to the Haur River which runs down to the Channel Lakes and the
Rock River and the Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico Gulf of America whatever it's called now so
all right questions yes good judge with this grant are there any requirements that you guys
would have so some grants is just free money some grants require some type of reporting and
different things of that nature is there any extra work that you need to do or what was the
grant application there'd be some reporting as we're going through the project and implementation
part of our MS4 that Greg touched on during the utility topic was that this would be a requirement
this would be stuff we would track the debris that we collect from that so we know how much we're
preventing from going in and we'll report that to the DNR so those are those standard I didn't
see anything that was requirement though other outside of that from Dane County yes Jim
I think with that MS4 too this is actually beneficial for reporting at the end our next what is an
annual update so again I think that's a big positive I'm obviously very much for it I am
curious for the question I want to get to is he said be part of the acre parkway project but I
think some of those limits or some of these manholes are actually outside of the limits the roadway so
you just is that correct I think he said old Indian isn't that further down acre parkway then
so the acre parkway reconstruction project goes from Main Street down to Seminole
Seminole comes in and acre in Old Indian is in between those two that's the big steep hill that
comes down and ties right into that trail section there so all that part all that is planned for
reconstruction next year okay so we're not really having extra asphaltic service it's no
extra added asphalt no it's the base separator system would go in our right away area there by
the trail segment at the end of old Indian trail okay thank you for clarifying any other questions
if not there are no registered public appearances so I would entertain a motion to
authorize staff to apply for the grant motion to make room second there's a motion and a second
um if there's no further comment all those in favor signify by saying I post motion carries
I just want to add I really appreciate how you guys go after grants and bringing money into
our village so that we can continue to enhance this so good job thank you all right we're going
to move to item 8.5 discussion impossible action regarding the village of the forest chloride
report I'm going to ask Bill Chang to do the staff presentation and then there are public
appearances on this item and just so people know it's getting cold up here if it's warm back there
all right so just a little bit of history here in summarizing this issue I believe at the beginning
of the year the village board at the time voted to remove fluoride additives from the water system
here in the forest at the time only the north system so as Craig had discussed earlier the
the village's water system is actually two different water systems combined one being the
north system and then the other being the token creek system the north system was fluoridated
the token creek system was not fluoridated at that time and so since then at the most our
the most recent meeting that we had discussed this the November 4 2025 meeting we were directed
to provide a report that included potential costs associated with reflorinating the water
and potentially the impacts of of that to the system and then also then providing kind of a
historical context for for the two newer trustees as to what had been submitted through the various
number of meetings ever since I believe the end of 2024 so that's what this report does
in short we did take a look at what the costs are to reflorinate the water
two primary issues associated with that one it's our understanding that to reflorinate
the water system we would be required to fluoridate the full system not just half the system
so you can correct me if I'm wrong on any other stuff and then secondly we did confirm
that while number two which is in the north system that was previously fluoridated
that while was grandfathered in at that time and can be continued to be to be grandfathered in
and therefore wouldn't require any improvements however the the dnr is highly recommending that
we separate the chemicals and that's for the health and safety of our staff and ns staff who
would meet that recommendation also so the other impact in here is wow number six which is in
the token creek portion of the system that system has never been fluoridated and so to fluoridated
it does require a separation no answer buts about that and so we have as part of our analysis here
the cost assessments to add those the separation for both wells two and well six
we also include costs that we believe would be associated in in the internals
so your your palms two barrels piping and then obviously as this is this is a construction would
be a construction project is required to go out to bed because it's over a certain threshold so
drawings would be required for that for both for their improvements to both the wells we
anticipate that it would cost anywhere between 200 to 245 000 dollars
now following the november 4th meeting i did receive a number of emails and communication
we do know that there is a grant program out there we however that that grant program only covers
the internals so it doesn't cover uh like engineering fees or or brick and mortar
and so that is a reimbursement grant therefore as part of the application requires a budget
and once then we spend the money then we can get the reimbursement from that it only covers again
internals and up to them that 30 000 threshold
I feel like I just interject with with the plans that we have to go do with the dnr we need with
their requirement is their state certified or stamped plans from the state of wisconsin
so any buildings remodeling or additions require state review and certification so that process
will take some time as well under this process so it's not like we can just go do this we have to
there's a lot of compliances that we have to follow from the dnr that they'll cite it in this memo
from the section of the code so if we want for that grant no no if if you want us to add fluoride
back into water we'll have to go through all of these steps to get there all right thank you
so as part of as part of the report uh the the remainder of the report uh it goes through
all the materials that were submitted uh as part of the report we did not try to analyze whether
fluoride is good or fluoride is bad um it was my intention to simply provide the context uh to
the board and for the board then to make your decision um on the fluoride itself
um if you choose to not do anything there's no nothing farther no additional cause associated
with it um if you do choose to move forward with fluoride um you know we did list it as as um
discussion possible action however the action tonight shouldn't be too direct staff to prepare
uh a resolution or resolution resending um 2025 or 2020 yeah 2025 that's 001 and then
instructing us to prepare to move forward on reintroduction again um the decision as the boards
and just acknowledge that we we need some time to prepare for that okay with that um we can
ask a few questions now or we can go to public comment yes Brad I know you said it's a all or
nothing approach here but is there a possibility of doing reinstating what was there restoring the
fluoride to the pre-existing wells uh and then asking for a waiver while we get funding for
the rest of it to do well six uh we couldn't clarify in regards to waiver we've been informed
that that it would have to be the full system my advice would be if if the village board decides
to move forward on this um you know it's probably more cost efficient to do it all at once versus
to do it separately anyways as you have the contractor in in town can you address the ways
we could pay for this yeah so there's a couple options one it could be added uh as part of the
borrowing proceeds and we go out annually for capital improvement that could then be um paid
off as debt service to the rate structure that we have um two we have a number of of uh fund
balances primarily general fund which we have a healthy fund balance obviously you're using
general fund dollars to pay for a utility dollar so it's a contribution to the water water utility
separately we do have a a uh capital improvement fund um out of fund 400 where we've reserved uh
fund balance for equipment purchases um and for any overages um in our annual capital borrowing
the revenues from there come come from different sources so it comes from you know things like
auctions remaining borrowing um whenever uh we get grants that we utilize it goes into that
fund thank you all right Alicia good question so um if we make a motion to rescind this evening
as part of the next steps is that looking at the cost or is that a separate approval so if you
were to make the motion this evening it's my recommendation that the motion be to direct staff
to prepare a resolution and then prepare the steps to uh we need to still amend the capital
improvement budget and capital improvement plan because it wasn't included in that
and then be able to allocate that funding um properly so there's a couple more steps
that resending the previous resolution is only a part of that
and we would have to start to build so with that then we would get an act so the numbers provided
were estimates we went out and talked to a contractor and say give us a ballpark of what it would
cost to rehab well six to meet the needs and to add to well to what would those costs be
but they were not done through any engineering and or architectural plans so we would need to
get in an architects docket so gurbekker has an architect um on uh their staff that can do this
for us um but he's backed up with work and if we went to another outside architect they're all
so backed up I mean they're just all worked up so there's those steps that we would need to do so
we could generate a proper opinion of probable cost um and find out the steps that are necessary
to work through the process uh with the Department of Natural Resources.
Sam going back to the funding um do either bill or carol do you have an opinion on what would be
best to use to pay for this you're all hates these questions I know
I wouldn't say either one is better than the other it's a matter of who do you want
where do you want the money ultimately to come from because if the village pays for it and they
contribute it to the utility your taxpayers have paid for it if you make the utility pay for it
we end up building it into the rates and they're going to pay for it through usage so I mean
it's you know six after doesn't know the other there's in a better way
so I can make a recommendation so my recommendation would be to come out from the the capital improvement
fund balance um you know we we are healthy there uh man is intended for these types of
improvements primarily facilities and equipment thank you all right we should
did you have your hand up I think yeah I'll ask my question so really with kind of what
Judd was saying and um really just all the other things we'd take into consideration
does anyone have an idea of timeline like realistic or so probably by the time we got um
engineering and architectural it's two three months uh we would then need to put that out for bid
um and that's probably another month process and then it's the little bidder to contract what
timeline he has to fit it into his schedule right so I would think if hedging my bets we
probably have construction started by the end of the year early part of next year um
would be the soonest I don't know Greg or Craig you have other thoughts I'd probably say it'd be
early next year um just with the architecture and those state approvals and that all takes time
their questions Jim
just a couple questions in the bit of an opinion eat talk about which way would be better
the fund that I personally lean towards having it go on the water bill just because it's
more of the users paying it rather than the taxpayers and just remembering a lot of discussions about
people were concerned about say they're their family using the water in the school district
and things like that so I personally feel it'd be a bit more appropriate to be on the utility
rather than on our taxpayers um as far as I'm I'm concerned about the dollar amount
and I wonder about if we've really researched if there's other delivery methods that might be
better I don't know if that was looked at now or if we want to spend some time looking at that
I don't think we've really done that and again I'm going back to when this was
discussion and there was different other people that spoke about different ways we could do topical
fluoride treatments um so I guess that's one question
one clarify question for you Bill is that you talked about the grants and how it could only be
used for internals and I am curious what internals mean and then my last question that's maybe for
Alan is some of the conversation has been talking about that we'd want to rescind
and I don't think we want to rescind we'd probably like prepare a new resolution
do you know what I mean because I think rescind has
kinds of meaning from Robert's rules of order and I don't think we can actually rescind without
going back to the old boat or something so those are my three questions.
So in regards to internals saw anything like pumps, barrels, pipes within
the facility itself that's not a wall or our record water so tanks etc.
I think it might cover ventilation things but I don't think it yeah the the structure the
drains um like if there's significant construction costs it's not it's more
all the incidental things that you use to contribute the fluoride into the water.
Okay and I guess Alan let's rescind I think the rescind doesn't somebody have to actually
change their voltage to go back to rescinding well that's reconsideration you're thinking
rescission can be done at any time so either a resolution rescinding the previous resolution
or a new resolution reinstating fluoride they do the same thing it's not going to matter
Robert's doesn't stand any way on that. Okay thank you. As to your first question of other
things that we might have looked at we did explore other ways they add fluoride to the water
there are greater in costs and time to manage those things whereas for other
topicals and other things like that I don't know that we were directed to look into that I don't
so we we certainly didn't just like if we put fluoride in out there ways to treat it for those
you don't want we didn't look into that either too much but those are the certain things that we
can explore if that's what the word would like us to do.
Yes thank you so one of the things that I remember is that this was a pretty contentious discussion
that went on for a really long time and what we're learning right now is that the public is awake
and they want to speak and they want to share their opinions and so not to belabor the timeline
or extend it is there any way that we can go about getting other than just public comments
at our meetings because there's a lot of people that can't come right is there a way for us to
learn from history from this topic and just really go after public opinion in this matter
before we just move straight ahead and the reason I say that is because this discussion this this
decision nearly tore our community apart you know and and I don't want to see that again
and I also know that there's a lot of people that want to share their opinion and so I was
wondering if there's a way that we can capture that this time I know last time we had this discussion
when I was a part of it it felt like the cart became before the horse and then we were back
paddling right and so is there a way not to belabor it or delay it or make it seem like we're not
looking into it but just to really reach out to the community as a whole because there's
arguments on both sides right and then ultimately seven people have to make a decision one way or
the other and so I'm looking to you guys because I know engaged a force is very powerful I know that
Facebook is pretty powerful and we've had different you know public meetings and different things of
that nature is there any way that we can do this so that we at the end of the day say that we
did our due diligence we weren't capricious in our decisions and we can just
come up come at this as a as a community like we want to do with any big decisions
yeah so this initial report you know addresses specifically the costs and
the historical context it's up to you whether or not you want to set
an additional process to this in the timing of when the board wants to make a decision on this
I am I must remind you that through the previous process you know there were things like listening
sessions public commenting emails engaged a force was utilized that will actually turn out to be a
black eye for the village I believe and that it really pulled some negatives from participants
within engaged a force I guess the question is if we revisit those methods what are the parameters
to it and at what point and how do you weigh those comments coming in again as part of
this process in the short time of you know February through November the village has gone
through a lot of significant change which has actually caused I believe division within the
community and ultimately led to where we are so if the village board was to go to go through
that process I'd like as staff to understand what parameters are what are the guidelines and
and for what and how do we intend to measure those so that we can clearly set out that path
for the constituents to be able to respond and for you to make use of that response properly
okay Madam President nice be go ahead the question I just want to say something for the record
when this issue first became the before the board members of the public asked us to slow down
and to fully understand the implications before making a decision
which I believe the board did and take more time in listening sessions at that time the cost I
think when we look back being discussed was relatively small I think I noted around $9,000
so now that we're back before the issue we're looking at a very different reality a six-figure
capital investment to reintroduce because we have to go full fluoride so it's not to kind of assign
blame but I'm just like more talking about it because it shows kind of why pacing and process
matters you know I think that I definitely think that there was an answer from the community on how
they wanted us to move so to go back through the process again I think would you know I offer
that and say I don't think that would be constructive okay Colleen
I have to say that I'm not in favor of going back and going through all that all over again
that just keeps retching this out too thank you all right Brad
uh another question I had and maybe this is for you L RFK is pushing to eliminate fluoride
nationwide is that something that could eventually affect what we're trying to do here
or proposing or would that more be a state right or a village decision to make
it would generally health recommendations by the CDC or the Department of Health and
in my services whatever it is um those are generally uh followed by the states and the states are
generally who regulate things like drinking water and groundwater um so I think I would have to say
there is a possibility that um the feds could step in and they have no drinking water uh I have
no one sudden all I can get is bad okay so with all that um I would suggest we move a couple of
periods to everyone's back and let it begin with our students um which is
you
hello
what
hello can you hear me
we can hear you oh okay okay I just I didn't know okay just go ahead okay go ahead and start
wait wait a minute Rick can you identify your name and your municipality and then um also we'll
start the three minute clock okay sure uh am I can I get our video or not
no no oh okay all right okay uh my name is Rick north I'm from Wellesley, Massachusetts
okay uh I'm not from the forest yeah and I'm not even from Wisconsin however I do have
information I'd like to share and I think is very pertinent to this discussion so please indulge
me for a few minutes my background is in non-profit health management I worked 21 years for the
American Cancer Society the last five as CEO of the Oregon chapter and seven years for the Oregon
physicians for social responsibility before retiring most of my life I supported fluoridation
mainly because the American Dental Association and groups that followed them had endorsed it but
one day I got a call from a friend who asked me to review the science I'm not a doctor but she
knew I worked closely with physicians and scientists when I worked more closely I was amazed and
very concerned there were all kinds of increased health risks linked to fluoridation especially
IQ loss in children bone fractures and hypothyroidism to name just three so armed with this new knowledge
I changed my mind I felt so concerned about the health risks that I became a full-time
volunteer 15 years ago opposing them since I work all over the country with a large group
of doctors scientists and dentists I wanted to address the forest in a national context
over the past three years 77 cities have voted to end fluoridation while only two have voted
to start it two states have ended it completely and many more discussing it this overwhelming
trend against fluoridation is based mainly on three factors one the science on fluoridation's
harms grows stronger every year two the 2024 federal court ruling the fluoridation was quote
and unreasonable risk to human health and three the fact that fluoride is a drug everyone should
have a choice whether they ingest a drug or not the people off fluoride they can get it easily
and cheaply through toothpaste or mouthwash but no one should have the right to force it upon
others who don't want it through the water especially low-income families who can't afford
an expensive filter to avoid it this isn't right the US is catching up with most of the rest of
the world out of 195 nations only 23 have any fluoridation in Europe only three out of 44
countries fluoridate and many nations such as France Germany Norway and Sweden have prohibited
the forest made the right decision before by ending this outdated practice please stay the
course you're on the right side of history thank you all right thank you mark storage
please give us your name in your community
Mark Stork 616 Jefferson Street so first of all I would like to thank you all for bringing this
back to the table this is something that both myself my wife Beth our daughter Kate I really
respect the board for looking at things when the residents say we'd like to have this revisit it
in discussions prior to the fluoride being removed up to that point there were many dentists other
scientists other residents with experience in this area that wanted fluoride to be maintained
I can tell you from my own personal experience walking the village during the recall effort
how many residents said and what the heck happened with fluoride that was loud and clear
likewise I do respect the fact that the cost is not inconsequential doing things for the public
good which is where the science actually indicates when fluoride is used properly
which is what we would be doing it is in the best interest of the public
likewise I would like to note that we all make decisions that sometimes we come back
and we change our minds on there's nothing wrong with that I ask you tonight to begin the process
of changing a decision that was made because we know better now and lastly because I have time
I want to thank you all you've been tremendous tonight you've been engaged you've asked great
questions of the individuals that have been presenting that's what we as residents want you to do
and it was so heartfelt to see that occur so thank you
thank you mark
our next appearance is Dan Janssen
and
he's identified yourself in your community
my name is Dan Janssen and I am one of your resident of the forest I too would like to thank
the board it was wonderful to hear the questions tonight on other topics I am speaking today in
favor of the village pursuing reintroduction of fluoride to the water system I was glad to hear
trustee cord's question and have a comment about that a little farther down here
the 2024 decision by justice Chen has been criticized for its misuse of the findings
of the 2024 national toxicology program report upon which it was based the levels of fluoride in
that report find dangerous it finds dangerous excuse me the levels of fluoride that that report
finds dangerous are twice the level at which water systems are treated in the us today
likewise Chen's decision itself is being misused by activists to justify complete removal of
fluoride from water systems when this topic was discussed a few months ago one alternative that
was identified for treating water and I believe administrative chains documentation referenced
this was the use of topical treatments or oral supplements for those in in favor of using fluoride
unfortunately the current national administration has weaponized the FDA against the industry that
produces these types of products going so far as to issue warnings to makers of those types of
supplements and publishing unsubstantiated guidance recommending that supplements not be
used this was the alternative that was proposed in the absence of having fluoride in the water
moreover like-minded state governments have initiated investigations of makers of fluoride
toothpaste finally the recent and inaccurately named big beautiful bill has made it even harder
for lower-income families to obtain affordable oral and dental care the cdc under previous
administrations identified fluoridated water as one of the most significant health benefits in our
history and the american academy of pediatrics continues to recommend it as a preventative measure
please support the reintroduction of fluoride into the village of divorce water system thank you
thank you mr. Janssen our next appearance is bernard coxhead
indeed thank you for the opportunity to speak
i'm here tonight to respectfully urge the board to i don't know how to interrupt you mr.
my name is bernard coxhead i live in 809 liberty drive i've lived here for 30 years i think everybody
should know that by now but i'm here tonight to respectfully urge the board to take no action
to reintroduce fluoridation into our public water systems this is not an abstract for me
it's personal i'm currently battling stage five kidney disease fluoride is eliminated from
the body primarily through kidneys when kidneys function is paired florida is not cleared
as effectively leading to a accumulation of the body this is well documented in public health
neurofology literature and i have submitted seven research summaries and citations in appendix
i want you to pay specific attention to the years and dates of that studies that's not
recent weaponization that's science fluoridation kills your kidneys everybody should check your
EGFR with your doctor for people with chronic kidney disease a failing kidney fluoridation
is not a neutral policy we cannot simply flush it out our bodies already struggled to filter
substances they're already test that take for granted this population is not small
today millions of americans live with chronic kidney disease and that number continues to grow
to age diabetes hypertension and other chronic conditions these are not hypothetical residents
they're your neighbors your constituents and in each case me fluoridation forces people like me
into unreachable choices ingest chemicals or bodies and not efficiently eliminate
or spend thousands of dollars there's one specialized filtration system that alone
gives the board should give the board pause but this concern is compounded by the cost of the
village reintroducing fluoridation is eliminated between 250 000 and i would say an upper end is
700 000 by the time the cost overruns come in in addition capital and startup expenses
before and ongoing chemical purchases monitoring label compliance equipment replacement and
liability exposures what's the cost benefit justification for spend is hundreds of thousands
of dollars in chemicals that are not required to make water safe can be voluntary obtained by
anyone obviously i'm going to be running out of time much of these science supporting fluoridation
relies on decades old population studies conducted before modern exposure standards
this does not require the board to declare fluoride safe it requires recognize the uncertainty
mandatory exposure and significant public expenses are not sound public policy
thank you from a doctor somewhere along the line how many times have you heard
do no harm don't force people to do things that they shouldn't do this is more of a civil liberties
thing than is anything else in a public health will your homework please thank you
i want to remind people in the audience when people are speaking we don't shake our head and
and smile and comment or say things under our breath it's very distracting and not helpful
so please don't do that our next person is Rebecca Witherspoon
good evening trustees and staff my name is Rebecca Witherspoon i'm a tourist
resident as all of you know i served on this board when despite intense intimidation
defamatory attacks and threats directed at multiple board members we made the careful and
responsible decision last year to remove fluoride additives from our public water
the decision was cautious and reflected evolving science ethical responsibility
and respect for public health hydrofluorocillus acid is a highly corrosive acid
containing fluoride and other heavy metals including lead mercury and arsenic let me start
with undisputed facts because these substances accumulate in the body and cause serious often
irreversible neurological harm the EPA has stated there is no safe level for exposure to lead
mercury and arsenic especially for infants children and pregnant women who are most vulnerable
federal courts also concluded that the current recommended fluoridation levels pose an unreasonable
risk of injury to health expert testimony in sworn depositions showed regulatory agencies
never proved fluoride safe at any exposure level instead they admitted knowingly accepting a level
of harm they deemed tolerable while publicly calling it safe and effective i know personally
what happens when government assurances turn out to be devastatingly broad my husband was exposed
to agent orange during his military service in vietnam the us government had evidence that
agent orange was harmful but the full extent of that danger especially long-term health effects
was downplayed ignored and not disclosed and broader accountability came only decades later
the exposure caused the cancer that ultimately took his life this past september and the government
continues to acknowledge and bear liability for that harm that is why i cannot accept the word
safe without proof once the governing body is placed on notice of credible evidence of harm and
proceeds anyway it increases its exposure to legal claims and ignoring risk does not remove it it
just delays accountability courts have consistently held that knowingly authorizing or reintroducing
substances that document that documented neurotoxic effects especially via a public utility like
drinking water creates foreseeable risk and potential liability governments are accountable
for deliberate policy choices made in the face of credible science particularly when
exposure is involuntarily or involuntary and disproportionately affects vulnerable populations
proceeding despite known risk or disseminating evolve or dismissing evolving science without
consent exposes a broad broad municipality to claims of negligence failure to warn bodily
integrity violations and in some cases civil rights violations history shows liability often
arises years later but the warning signs are clear in ignoring them does not shield a government
from accountability thank you thank you rebecca chris camar
hello okay hi ready to be back into forest i've been here a number of times in my lifetime most
recently here uh a handful of times so it's great to be back first time i was every
year i was at the on chris camarham from madison so not from the forest but i've been to forest for
this and of course saw the grass roots and three dog night at the firefighters fundraiser
many many years ago so love to forest okay so thank you board i appreciate alicia
mentioned that you know you all volunteers and i think that's great you say here because you
care about people so i'm here care about people too um for a moment let's just talk about the
money we're talking about maybe a quarter of a million dollars to put floor and i'm a dentist
today say that i'm a dentist everybody okay um quarter of a million dollars to put fluoride
back into the water and that'll give you 25 reduction of risk of tooth decay okay how much do you think
it would cost for me to offer to forest a 90 reduction of risk of tooth decay how much do you
think that would cost that won't cost you a thing and i'll tell you how it's called school based
program to put topical medicines on tea and then you know and so that's the most effective way to
do it and so school based sdf soberdiamine florida and glass anomer sealant programs are the most
effective way to prevent and control childhood dental cavities if community water fluoridation
returns every dentist in this room will agree that waterfront fluoridation is not a primary disease
control tool uh for children or anyone for that matter dentists know that water fluoridation
does not control the disease of tooth decay like i said it's 25 reduction in risk
if your goal with this fluoride discussion is to actually reduce childhood decay not just talk
about it but actually reduce it then a school based sdf and glass anomer sealant program must
be the primary strategy this program will turn cavities off now last time i spoke about you
know i said hey we can bring this into the schools we'll call it the deforest plan and um i said
you know this is something i could i would love to help bring the deforest but it was just sort of a
thing i was talking about well now i got the plan so this is the deforest plan and it talks about
how we can bring this into the schools you know they bring these programs into schools
this is the most effective the american dental association would say that all dentists should
prioritize with this kind of care and it's all done without drills without shots very simply
topical applications can be done by dentists hygienists uh expanded function dental assistants
or even dental assistants and and even nurses allow to do this kind of care so i have this program
here i would love to be a part of the discussion jim thank you for bringing up the topical
aspect of it you can do this you can get this done you can get childhood decay under control
while now it's the most out of control disease and and that's with florida all over the place
it's supposed to be here three minutes done thank you very much and here's my plan it's called
the deforest plan let's do it let's show the nation an amazing way of doing it thank you
all right i spent Donald
uh my name's chris mcdonald they're the four thousand long fellow court in the village of
winzer i'm going to talk fast because there's a couple points that i wanted to follow up on but
i've reviewed the study of costs to reimplement florida dill has proposed and i just i was not
surprised at this cost at all um i kind of want to go through some of the line items uh with the
board and hope you'll consider this uh twenty thousand dollars for florida equipment was nine
thousand dollars last year uh a dhs was not engrained we'll pay for that check expense for the village
fifty five to seventy thousand dollars to update well six and the token pre-water system i was not
surprised um that this cost came back in that we're losing the ability to have a separate system
into forest because i had discussions with the dnr uh before you guys commission this study
um i will say and i was encouraged at the vote um in november that everybody said if we're
going to reimplement this we need to do it everywhere and we've got a well um down to the south that
we've had for twenty years and we just never really tried to bring that up to what the northern
system looked like and probably for good reason uh but today in that area um it's one of the fastest
growing residential areas we're building a fire station down there because of that savanna brooks
bear tree to forest yard fox hills i've talked to dentists and parents in these neighborhoods
during the recall in the election they all want florida in their water so that is uh cost that
the village should be willing to invest in ninety to one fifteen for well two that cost is optional
dnr will not require that update but from worker safety we should consider it i got all the time
in the world for worker safety if jot and gray came to you and said hey we have this optional
requirement i need a hundred thousand dollars for it we'd probably ask if there's any alternatives
and if not we should probably look at spending that money cost should not be a reason to avoid
reinstating florida when you run the numbers it's actually the most fiscally responsible option
the alternatives people were told to rely on uh last year when it was removed rinses run four
dollars a month florida tablets eight dollars a month uh until the who can't get them anymore
because the FDA bans them our varnish treatments at twenty bucks a pop
all current expenses year after year
being stated as a one-time cost that two hundred and twenty five thousand dollars can be financed
for example and carol knows more about this than i do but you could finance it over 20 years from
the dnr state drinking water loan programs spread across forty four hundred ratepayers
it comes to a little three dollars per household per year just a quarter a month to reimplement
florida compared to some of those other options tonight i'm asking the board to
instruct staff to prepare a resolution to rescind the previous ordinance instruct staff to reinstate
florida wells two three and four as soon as possible to return to the previous state the dnr will
be flexible on the timeline to update well six versus when you bring up the other wells
make sure staff asked for the phasing plan because they will allow you to phase that out
the forest has spoken loudly all right thank you chris make it like another 15 minutes because of
the mikes 15 seconds yes no man and president can i finish my paragraph sure if you
the forest has spoken loudly about how they feel about this decision and i would argue that trust
and the board has been damaged you see that and other matters that come before this board today
please take the first step in repairing that trust tonight and vote to reintroduce four i thank you
joe dish
i'm beginning to understand the sign language back there thank you
i'm joe dish when i said let me oh sorry i'm joe dish i live at 213 south main street i've lived
into forest 25 years and i oppose adding florida to the water or any other medical treatment i
think it should be an individual decision um it's associated it's a toxic compound that's
associated with a number of health conditions and i don't think that it should be forced on
everyone thank you all right chila how
my name is chila how i live in led to forest village i want to thank you to the board members
current and former who voted to remove the hydrofluorous silic acid from our drinking water
do not confuse this acid for calcium fluoride the mineral found naturally in lakes and rivers
hydrofluorous silic acid is an industry scrubber waste from fertilizer and aluminum smokestacks
known to contain contaminants like lead as well as other things like are we in a trance into
forest why would anyone want to drink lead contaminated industry acid we've already been
through this discussion i think it's a waste of time energy it has torn our community apart
i'm here as a member of the community even though i've had several add
several attacks online the last time i stated my opinion i do not consent to be
medicated or poisoned
knowingly or unknowingly and i also want to thank Brenda Stautemeyer the Wisconsin mom who sued the
EPA and brought out all this information that has been suppressed please do the right thing
and don't revisit this issue thanks
we finally Brenda Stautemeyer
oops i turned it on Brenda Stautemeyer both 78 Dodie Street Green Bay
many of you know me as the Wisconsin mom who sued the us EPA over the neurotoxicity
of florid chemicals added to public water after a seven-year federal trial reviewing the best
available science from both sides the federal court ruled in 2024 that water fluoridation
at current levels presents an unreasonable risk to human health last week the european
union closed public comment on classifying florid as a known or presumed endocrine disruptor
in humans the european chemical agency states that florid exposure at levels experienced by
people consuming fluoridated water or florid salt in the EU the EU acts as an endocrine
disruptor causing hypothyroidism and developmental neural toxicity endocrine disruptors interfere
with hormone systems that are linked to thyroid disease obesity sleep disruption
fertility problems diabetes low birth weight and certain cancers all of these things i have
documented on my website florid lawsuit dot com slash science this concern is not new in 2006
the national research council of the national academies of sciences identified fluoride as
an endocrine disruptor and urged the EPA to lower its allowable limit that same report
brain concern for neural toxicity and fluoride induced brain changes related to Alzheimer's
there is a critical regulatory contradiction this board must confront the FDA prohibits
ingestible fluoride drugs for children three and under if ingestible fluoride is not considered
safe for infants and toddlers in controlled doses how will this board notify parents and
protect children under three from ingesting the same fluoride levels through drinking water
and infant formula that is an ethics and liability question there is no safe level of lead yet
floor salicylic acid used for fluoridation contains leadin arsenic reintroducing it
diverts funds from essential infant structure to support a highly controversial optimal program
that exposes the entire population including infants kidney patients diabetics and cancer
patients to uncontrolled dosing of a dirty lead contaminated acid dental disease is best addressed
through targeted care at dental clinics not mass medication many studies claiming no harm failed
to examine pregnancy infancy or individual exposure differences and approach well documented in the
history of tobacco science a vocal minority has promoted fluoride door to door without disclosing
current science excuse me under your time miss thank you thank you all right that includes the
people who have signed up to speak on this issue thank you with that we will um move on to item
nine which is general public appearances yes jenna oh i'm sorry you're right yeah we just did
the public appearances we still got to do the just right we still have to deal with it you're
right i was just getting anxious um i just reading the report that came through the alert and the
cold weather and snow that's supposed to start in a half hour so i got distracted um with that
we will remove or move on to eight point five point three to discussion and possible action
so um i would entertain comment or emotion i'll make a motion so i'll make a motion to rescind
resolution two zero two five zero zero one directly and taking steps towards reintroduction
a fluoride back into the divorce water system okay we we now have a motion i yes jenn
i have a i have a question i don't know if we can discuss it till the second
yeah we need a second to discuss it i think the motion was going to be
related to um to instructing staff to prepare a resolution
so we either need a second or um second okay we have a second um and we can vote it down
or we can take the motion back and redo the other one
go ahead so our options are to take the motion back and redo it okay uh so do i need to make a
motion no okay you can withdraw your motion and a second also withdraws then okay so i'll withdraw
my motion i'll withdraw my second so then we're looking for a motion to um if
you still move to instruct staff to prepare a resolution for consideration at a coming meeting
so i'll make a motion to instruct staff to prepare a resolution for an upcoming meeting
um and also am i adding the rescind resolution two zero two five zero zero one
all right she got that in there all right is second we have a motion and a second
is there any comment or discussion i guess i have some but uh jenn was maybe first i'm sorry i have
a couple comments but i thought jenn was and then jim red go ahead i just want to make the
comment that i i appreciate the eight hundred and fourteen page document that i was able to
pour over over the past week so um seriously there's a lot of really good information some a lot of
it i didn't know um i've been sent a lot of emails with studies as well and everything that i've
researched um you know there none of the studies are from the u.s which is fine but
all the studies were at 1.5 or even up to six times the amount of the levels that we provided
our water system so uh well there's a lot of information a lot of things about lowering i
key levels and everything else everything was done at a level that was between two to six times
the levels that we provide here so um one of the specific quotes i just there was no correlation
with some of these studies but uh sorry there's correlation but no causation another one was that
they say they didn't have enough data to know whether the levels of floor that's recommended
for drinking water at point seven as any effect on children's IQ and then um you know this went
on and on and on about how the levels that we put in our water are just not applicable to what
they were saying in all these studies so it's really hard and i'll agree there's a lot of
unknowns i think there's some things that we don't know that we're still trying to find out but
all the studies that i've read that were sent to us that were used in um making the decision to
remove the fluoride just didn't seem applicable to what we're dealing with here thank you thank you
brad jim thank you and say brad i think it's funny you mentioned like the seven hundred and
seven or whatever you said eight hundred fourteen pages that was very impressive i know there was
some duplication in there but i'd also state i i suspect we got maybe even more email during that
time and i neglected to see i know there was listings of meetings but i'd also
ask that the board members that weren't present at that time maybe go back and and listen to some
of those meetings because there is a lot of good data we heard some of it tonight but there was
hours and hours there and uh i think calin you stated i don't necessarily want to revisit
all of those hours of testimony um there was mentions of slowing down back then and i i feel
myself personally i feel like we did a good job of hearing a lot of testimonies my
memory was somewhere like maybe around two three months that we went through that process
and i'm a little bit concerned now that we've more or less had one meeting and we're talking
about rescinding i think there should be maybe another opportunity it sounds like we'll likely
get that if we're coming back with the with the new resolution or motion so that's good
i do want to state that a lot of my uh reservations with putting it back in does go
down to like civil liberties and things like that i am a bit more concerned and i can hear
other people's conversations about how it was maybe less cost back then or what if i'm like about
a year ago or whatever and now it's 240 000 i i think there is some additional costs that were
unknown then that still wouldn't necessarily be unapplicable i am concerned how much that is
and want to make sure that is taken care of in budgets and stuff so i'm i'm not personally
if we want to go down this way and that's the board decision i personally think that we want
to work it into the budgets and again i already stated my preference for being it in the utility
versus on the taxpayers um part of what i think we should do too is people that have less means
that maybe don't want to have fluoride in their water we want to look into situations of how
to have some sort of i don't know what the term is scholarship or grant to allow for partial
even full filtration systems for things like that um again i'm just thinking more about like
the alternative methods of delivering fluoride and i personally don't feel that it's in our best
interest or i again i guess in my personal opinion i don't feel like i want to force people to
take fluoride if they don't want to so is there any way to help offset those costs of the filtration
system i think that's all the bullet points that i wanted to bring up all right
i don't want to go down a rabbit's hole again but i do want to honor
the individuals in our community that do not want something and i think we need to figure
out a way to honor that voice you know and as a nurse who is forced to get a flu shot just to work
to support my family that does not feel good when you don't want something and you're being forced
to get it with that being said you know the community is speaking and you know during the recall and
different things of that nature i hope we don't blur the lines i know that the recall is for lots
of reasons right but i think as a board we need to do our due diligence to protect the voice of
those that aren't able to speak up for themselves and you know unlike development if we're building
putting in buildings or putting in roads those are things that you know don't directly impact
someone's health or someone's autonomy or someone's right to say what they do and don't want with
their body and i think that we should honor that as a board and if we are going to revisit
this topic and if we happen to put it back into the water i agree with jim we need to come up with
a way to really honor the individuals that are speaking up via email so their voices may be the
minority but their voice still matters right and it's not fun when you are the minority
and you're subjugated to things that you don't want right and so i personally think i made this
decision back then not based on science i'm a scholar i love science i love research i live
for that stuff i put that aside cost i put that aside because health and wellness and your ability
to speak and be heard and know that you matter shouldn't have a price tag on it going to bed
at night knowing that you're ingesting something that you don't want you can't put a price tag on
that and so i think as a board whatever is decided because this is a collective group of seven
trying to make decisions that are best for the community i think we need to honor and really
figure out ways to help individuals who have health concerns you know i mean it's scary when
you have a disease and your kidneys aren't working and you know you're ingesting something that's
ultimately going to expedite your returning to dirt okay so i just think that there's no happy
way to say that right death is real for everyone but it's expedited with people who have health
concerns and so just in my summation no matter what we decide i think that we need to figure out
ways to honor both sides whether we keep it or whether we put it back we figure out how to honor
those who don't want it and if we keep it out we honor those who want it and and honestly we
can't make everybody happy but we should at least seek to keep everybody safe and healthy
all right yes chan um during the whole fluoride process that we went through
when i voted last year i think i told everybody it was a very difficult decision for me and i
learned more about fluoride than i ever thought there was i never really even thought about fluoride
before that when i voted last year i had said that um i was i myself could do without fluoride and
i feel that even more so now i feel that um the scientific data that's out there is really closing
in it's getting close on both sides and i can see the arguments both ways um so i
i see this more as a political issue not scientific since i feel the data is very very close on both
sides i don't think that the people that spoke out before that wanted fluoride i don't think many
of them have changed their minds um just like the people that um do want fluoride i don't think that
they've changed their minds um maybe a couple here and there so i'm still thinking that
um if we move forward with this i too like jim and tashita would be interested in knowing what we
could do for those that don't want to ingest fluoride so that would be an important point if we could
do something there um beyond that i like i said i i see it more as a political um vote at this point
it's all i got all right so at this point um we have a motion and a second on the floor um and so
if there's no other comments i would ask all those in favor yes jim i just asked that the motion
be restated to make sure i don't know what we're voting on nor do you want callee too
then i can make sure i have the right motion um to direct the staff to draft a resolution to
rescind resolution 2025-001
order steps on reintroduction as well in that second motion i think that's what i said too
go ahead and take the steps towards reintroduction or fluoride into the
water systems
do i do roll call
okay trusty simpson no trusty stuff and hang on yes trusty williams yes trusty allen no trusty
cords yes trusted little
yes resident k-hil wolfgram yes motion carries fine too thank you
there's the board want us to look into if we do introduce reintroduce fluoride to the system
there's a couple of mass trusties suggested that we what alternatives we could provide for
residents who don't want florid you also want us to investigate that or is that
we can we can do it as part of our research and added as part of the memo that way the
resolution is clear and if the village board elects to have the additive or our game program i think
there's a budgeting question to be asked about that and potentially administration of such
gram program and so i think we need more clarification on that
well we'll bring him back since it's not on the general thank you all right
the next item on our agenda is item nine which is general public appearances and this under this
section shall be only appearances regarding items not heard above or before so that we're not on
the agenda before so we have some people signed up for appearing and i will call their names
we're getting lots of weather alerts here guys
all right we'll begin with Dean Julian or Julian i'm sorry if i said that wrong
good evening everyone thank you for allowing me to speak my name is dean julian i'm a business
agent for steamfitters local 601 i live in greendale by the way i represent 3 000 members and i'm
speaking on behalf of my membership in support of the qts data center here in the forest
um why are we why are we in support of us it's it's jobs this is a project that's going to last
two and a half to three years provide steady employment for my members not only is it supply
good wages our benefit funds our health fund our pension our 401ks we also have a what we call a
dollar bank kind of an HSA on our insurance funds we need hourly requirements all of that stuff
is based off of ours worked so a job like this where we're working five six days a week you know
depending on what the schedule is going to be weather related everything that's going to
supply our members who many of them are your neighbors that live in the community that's going to
that's going to supply them with long-term stable jobs we as a local and there's other
labor reps here we we long for these jobs where we know they're going to be long-term our
you know sometimes our positions are a little cyclical sometimes in the winter time right now
we're a little bit slow but with a job like this we will be able to go right through winter
for a couple of years this also will supply our training schools with money
I don't know if you know this but we pay for our own training there's no public money there's no
federal money there's no private money in our training schools you know our training facility
on the south side south east side of Madison on town center drive we built that and we paid for
that with our own money and we do that with our ability to work and get our hours in
you know there's comments that are made they've seen them multiple times that oh this is just
this is temporary and then the construction jobs go away well yeah it is temporary right I mean
if our jobs lasted forever you wouldn't have hospitals or grocery stores or oral class university
because we would never finish your right so yeah they are temporary but in our in our world
two and a half years is a long time and I hate to break it to you but I've been doing this for
36 years so I don't consider my job temporary so I would like you to give great consideration to
approving this I know there's more I could say in three minutes about the closed loop system and
you know how responsible actually QTS is being about using your cool chillers and the minimal
water usage once the system spilled and if I had another 10 minutes I could go through this for you
but I know I'm limited in time so thank you for hearing me out I appreciate it thank you Madam
President we love to ask follow-up questions one okay I'll give you the time for the follow-up
question if you want to provide in say on closed loop systems
oh well so if you can imagine what a data center is is a giant computer room right they're not
manufacturing anything there's no polluted water or dirty water I've seen those commas too they're
gonna pollute the water system they're not doing that what a closed-loop system is it's basically
like the cooling system in your car right there's water that circulates to the system it goes down
to the equipment exactly how they're cooling the equipment I'm not quite sure I'm sure there's
connections to it but the water cools the equipment it goes back out to the chillers the chillers cool
that water back down and it goes back in to the same equipment so that water just circulates around
right it gets cold it goes back inside cool you know all these computers in these rooms generate
a tremendous amount of heat so that water goes in takes the heat away from the equipment because
that all that equipment is temperature sensitive it goes back out to the chillers the chillers cool
the water and it goes back in so it just is it's an enclosed loop so once that system's filled and
I realized I believe the engineer said there was about a million gallons going in I realized the
origin the initial fill is quite large once that system's filled you'll see very little loss
in that system we only give one minute for follow-up questions but we may invite you back
right thank you all right Joe Whitney
Joe Whitney Town of Vienna my address is up good evening I'd like to thank everyone in attendance
and I'd like to thank the board for your service to this community I appreciate the opportunity to
express why I believe this proposed QTS data center should be continued to be considered I'm a USDA
licensed farmer and I help feed our local communities my business along with many other
businesses grow food for residents in Dane County and throughout Wisconsin I'm simply here to give
you a local farmer's perspective of this project this was touched on in your earlier meeting with
a lion but undoubtedly fossil fuels are destroying our communities we need to change the way we are
producing energy 72% of our electricity in Wisconsin comes from fossil fuel plants right now those
fossil fuels are currently using four billion gallons of water a day that water is severely
damaged and contaminated coal plants are closing all throughout the state and we all know fossil
fuels are not sustainable the time to push for clean energy is now statewide we have a target
for a hundred percent clean energy production by 2050 Dane County has a target to have a hundred
percent clean energy by 2035 QTS is willing to heavily invest in a lion and help accomplish this
feat which will not only help save all that polluted water from fossil fuel plants but also
provide access to cheaper and more sustainable energy production I also don't know if anybody's
been paying attention to the news but farming is pretty tough these days farmers are struggling
all across the United States 12 billion dollars in taxpayer subsidies was just distributed to
help alleviate some of the struggles but the problems are likely to persist what I can tell
you about Wisconsin as many of you might know we grow a lot of corn believe or not we grow too
much corn that 12 billion dollars in farmers that farm in aid that farmers desperately needed
to survive well besides that subsidies have been in place to help pay farmers to grow corn for
ethanol production and the corn market has historically had a surplus meaning there's been too much
corn on the market 15 years in and we know ethanol production is not efficient or environmentally
friendly within the 1600 acres on this project the overwhelmingly majority crop is corn none of
that land is being used to grow food to support the health of our local community but we can change
that with the help of a lion and QTS you may know the land was strategically chosen for the
electrical infrastructure that's already in place anyone who has been to the site can clearly see
the electrical power lines and substation we should build and develop projects responsibly
we should put in place safeguards for local residents we should continue listening to the
opposition because their voices matter but we should not blindly oppose the project that could
have potential to improve our community and state for the better whether this project gets approved
or not I urge the board to continue to look at this project in its entirety including the potential
risk but also the enormous amount of potential benefit thank you for your time and I appreciate
you all being here thank you all right um Austin Blodgett
Good evening my name is Austin Blodgett I live into forest and I want to start off saying that
I understand and respect the concerns of many people in our community um many people in our
community have raised about the proposed data center these are fair questions and it's important
to talk about them all openly at the same time there's a lot of misinformation circulating online
I think it's important that we have an honest conversation about what this project can mean for
our future I came to the forest because of the opportunity to work here I learned about the
growth in Dane County and to forest specifically and that with new projects that were coming up
and I knew that I can mean um business for my welding company
Data centers that are typically sorry I hate speaking public so uh data centers that
type of are that type of opportunity for business owners and entrepreneurs
these projects rely on local skilled labor and utilize local resources I appreciate the board
making clear to QTS that your expectation is that the project will source locally from Dane County
first then the rest of Wisconsin I get that there are still questions and details to work through
and that's fair but instead of rejecting it outright we should be asking these questions
and listening to the answers so we can really understand how this project should could affect
our community and our resources QTS is not claiming to be perfect but they're engaging with us
they're showing up to board meetings and trying to answer all of our questions I think we need to
give them a fair shot uh to do that and give to forest a fair shot at this opportunity
thank you for your time thank you all right Timothy Powell
thank you for the time to see you uh my name is Tim Powell sorry and I'm I live on uh
Lake Rowan Windsor um I support this data center because of its benefits to the community
and not just to those of us that are going to be building it I'm a proud member of the local
601 as you can tell by the field board on my back um and my understanding I've lived in this
community for about 10 years my understanding is that there are a lot of tradesmen that live
in the forest area um I also and I don't have numbers I'm more of a simpleton and not
on your educational level about things like this but my understanding is that quite a few
students that graduate from the deforest area high school there's a large percentage of that
join the trades that go into the trades my son graduated from there and I currently have
two more sons in the high school there um three of my six children have attended to forest high
school so I'm pretty vested in this community um union workers are employed on large projects and
our wages don't just support our families but as you all know there's a ripple effect
throughout the community in the local economy um the construction workers they're going to be
coming here we're going to be spending money a lot of money it's going to benefit restaurants
service providers um small businesses and local contractors are going to experience a lot of
benefit from it every dollar earned on these projects um are going to improve the overall
economic health in our neighborhood I believe roll this down so I would say it properly and not
fumble um QTS from what I understand also um there is a 20 million dollar tax revenue from this
project it's going to be used and from what I understand they do not have um the determination
on how it's going to be used that's going to be determined by the intelligent members of this
village board and community and uh that's why it's important I think that the board
makes sure that these funds are invested in ways when they come that make a real difference
such as our roads our schools um our uh property taxes and things such um this gives families
a real chance to prosper in our community um without facing multiple referendums and things
like that um helps us make ends meet with six children eight grandchildren um I'm busy with
and every every tax and referendum really affects me at the end of the day the status center project
isn't just about one building it's about laying the groundwork for long-term growth
and opportunity right here to force and by supporting this project I think we're investing in a stronger
more resilient community where families businesses and future generations can thrive thanks very
much for your time and I appreciate you all um dealing with all the pros and cons of this project
has brought up to your ability to handle all this thank you
Sherry Stoch Stach
sorry if I pronounced your name
Sherry Stach 312 Scott Drive
Vienna and its residents are vehemently against this project by moving forward with it by
annexation to deforest our village would be become the playground bully we should respect
their desires they live there I am also against justifying annexation and related agreements moving
forward to supposedly secure funding for the transportation related needs to buckies we should
not sell our soul to get that funding we should heed the opinion of the department of administration
and their annexation denial I have no faith in QTS upholding the end of their pre annexation
or any other agreement as history shows in other areas with data centers property values into
forest will plummet eventually electric rates will rise and many residents will move away
they're already talking about moving and people are hesitating to move here already
the lovely village of deforest will irreparably be changed and not for the good
before retiring I worked for the department of natural resources for 32 years whether reviewing
air pollution control permits or water permits DNR staff are required to pace their decisions
strictly on rules and regulations that apply often citizens would raise concerns about a project
and ask the DNR to deny the permit however because the DNR's review is limited by law
staff would explain that broader decisions about whether a project should pursue
are made at the local level through zoning and oversight bodies in this case that responsibility
rests with you the village board please listen to the overwhelming concerns of village residents
and do not approve the QTS data center or enter into agreements with them I really appreciate
all your time thank you thank you all right on zoom we have melinda murphy
and you hear us melinda you should be able to unmute yourself
Melinda the long the long delay was because you had a message that said the host wouldn't
allow me so I'm so sorry can you hear me now we can hear you good I am Melinda Murphy
Lake Windsor Windsor resident good evening I'm Melinda Murphy attorney and Windsor resident
I grew up in Stoughton another yahara river community so I know how this watershed supports
generations my family chose Windsor for its land and water especially the yahara river
which flows through the forest vienna and surrounding areas it's not just scenery it sustains wildlife
recreation and downstream water quality the village engineer's presentation was professional
and thorough but it's dangerous it makes a project of extraordinary scale feel routine as fiduciaries
the board must protect health safety finances natural resources and future generations
you are not deciding if it can be engineered much of what we've heard assumes the village will adapt
roads widened utilities extended stormwater engineered what's missing is a discussion of
weather to forest should permanently reshape its land infrastructure and watershed including vienna
for a single hyperscale industrial use proposed by qts blackstone owned a near trillion dollar
company whose priority is extracting our resources for profit not local welfare 40% impervious
service equals roughly 650 acres paved irreversibly altering water flows stormwater models
cannot predict extreme storms frozen ground deferred maintenance or ownership changes
decades from now communities do responsibility rests with the village and its taxpayers
you have the authority and fiduciary duty to pump the brakes defer action and require
independent review of cumulative impacts long-term infrastructure other communities lead by example
Madison enacted a one-year moratorium with a six-month extension option and a committee
to study impacts approval does not just allow a data center it commits to forest
to decades of risk long after qts and blackstone have extracted our resources for profit
if qts withdraws the forest will be ready for future opportunities thank you
all right our thank you moinda our next speaker is jenna frost
okay sorry about that good evening board members my name is jenna frost and i am a resident of
sun prairie i respectfully request that this comment be placed in the public record i'm concerned
about the proposed qts data center and any pre-annexation agreement that would be entered into with qts
entering into such an agreement now would be premature uh dane county resolution 205
establishes an independent advisory committee to study the impacts of hyperscale data centers
including electricity and water use infrastructure needs and land use compatibility
signing a pre-annexation agreement before these findings are complete could commit the village
and the region as a whole to long-term obligations without fully understanding
and environmental economic or legal risk i urge the village to wait for the advisory committee's
findings and use them to guide any pre-annexation agreement doing so doing so ensures that any
commitments reflect not only community values but protect our resources and remain consistent
with lawful local authority please protect dane county and and all of the surrounding areas
that the yahara affects thank you for your time in placing this statement in the public record
thank you thank you gerson versus gerson did i say that wrong i apologize if i did
hi i'm back each yourself and my address is on the form
good evening board members my name is back each yourself and i'm a resident of deforest
i respectfully request my following comments regarding the comprehensive plan change proposal
be placed in the public record changing the villages comprehensive plan to accommodate a single
developer like qts would override decades of community planning and farmland preservation
policies comprehensive plans represent our long-term vision for land use sustainability
and rural character dane county resolution 205 is conducting an independent study on the
potential impacts of hyperscale data centers including water energy infrastructure and land
use capability i urge the village not to change the comprehensive plan until the advisory committee's
findings are complete waiting ensures that any amendments are informed responsible and consistent
with the values and long-term interests of the residents of the deforest area thank you
thank you james sulliman
hello everyone my name is james sullivan i was a resident of the forest i've recently
moved to madison though i want to thank the board for giving me the opportunity to speak today
i'm the owner of chaos custom walling until recently i lived in deforest but i've since moved
to madison strong local economies are built by projects that put people to work close to home
as the owner of chaos custom walling i see how closely our success and business are tied to the
economic development brought by investors like qts data centers create wide-scale construction
projects that include demand for welding and fabrication with rising costs we need those
projects and many local workers feel the same way consistent work strengthens our entire workforce
we rely on projects like data center development to deliver real work paychecks and opportunities
standing in the way of data center development only hurts our community that's why qts is
wisconsin data center needs to be accepted and welcomed many businesses rely on projects like
this being accepted thank you thank you ronda mine hopes
i'm still one of my notes and i still live in bianna
i would like to submit my statement along with its attachment into the meeting record
deforest comprehensive plan is only three years old it was created through a robust public process
in which village residents clearly articulated their priorities for land use growth and community
character since adoption it has been amended only a few times and never in the manner currently
under consideration comprehensive plans are meant to guide development for a decade or more
not to be rewritten on demand the proposed comprehensive plan amendment is not being
driven by new information changed conditions or community input it exists for one reason only
to accommodate a zoning request by a single developer qts for a large scale data center
all parties involved including village staff and the developer acknowledge that the requested
zoning is incompatible with the current comprehensive plan and based on the presentation that
alliance energy just did tonight it appears that alliance is driving this as well they have carefully
planned and executed this entire thing without any input from the residents who live here
at what point do we get a say in what happens in our community
Wisconsin law is explicit zoning decisions must be consistent with the comprehensive plan
when a proposal conflicts with the plan the lawful response is to deny the zoning
not to rewrite the plan to make the conflict disappear amending the comprehensive plan solely
to accommodate an incompatible zoning request nullifies the intent of that statute and renders
the plan meaningless approving this amendment would discard the goals and objectives established
by village residents and replace them with the priorities of qts a multibillion dollar data
center operator owned by blackstone a trillion dollar private equity firm this is not organic
planning it is the subordination of resistant resident driven governance to corporate interests
made to appear routine and inevitable through a coordinated process involving village staff
and leadership that is not what the comprehensive plan was created to be and it is not how democratic
local government should function one of the issues we have observed is how dysfunctional
the village board appears to be operating the board is elected to give direction to village
staff not the other way around this dynamic needs to change the board has the authority
to resolve this situation quickly and transparently by adding the annexation request to the agenda
of the next meeting discussing it openly and voting on it the board could send a clear message
that it is listening to residents and will no longer tolerate non-transparency from village
staff members or large developers should the board choose to put this item on the agenda it
effectively signals the problematic behavior will continue undermining the local trust in
local governments and resident input thank you sure question I have a clear clarifying question
yes so tonight you said you want the village board to vote on the pre-annexation agreement
not tonight I'm asking you anyone here put this on the agenda for the next meeting right
right oh that's what I meant yeah however we've also been told and this was this is very confusing
that by much of your group that you want a moratorium and you want us to figure it out and
take time and so just last week when I was talking with bill because all those emails that were
coming in that's what I asked for so I just want to clarify and I know you're are you just
speaking for yourself or are you speaking for your group and I am what what are you really
asking I'm speaking to myself I don't want this to happen a moratorium isn't going to change that
you have the option right now to put this on the agenda for another meeting and if you all know
how you're going to vote vote on it be done with this ideally with this to rest it is not normal
for village staff to be directing you as to how you guys are supposed to be handling this going
forward these dates have been established for a long time that is not normal go back and look at
your history of any time you guys have done any annexations in the past you don't have these
forward dates of how everything is going to play out why is the situation different it shouldn't be
you're allowing it to happen and you have the power to stop that right now thank you
all right Pete Snyder
hello everyone thanks for letting me speak tonight my name is Pete Snyder and I was born and raised
in the township of Vienna I currently reside in Sumpuri and I'm one of the land owner selling my
land for the post QTS data center like most people here I'm a normal person but I've had to learn
a lot quickly because this project affects my family and this community when I first considered
selling my land to for the project I had a lot of questions I wanted to know if my energy bills would
go up I understand why that worries people because it worried me too nobody wants higher bills
QTS isn't just plugging in and hoping for the best I've had direct conversations with them
and with Alliance at their public meetings I've heard a lot today they're committed to paying for
the energy infrastructure needed for this project new electrical equipment and connections are on
them not on us it's planned it's contained and it's paid for by QTS I just think we should
remember how much this could bring to the community I know we have all for these points before but
they're still through thousands of union jobs for construction and about 20 million dollars
in revenue each year I feel this is a big opportunity for us and that's something that we should
overlook we don't act on it they'll go somewhere else and that area will see the benefits
for my family this sale means a lot 44 us this data center means larger long-term tax base
without adding strain on our neighborhoods I like to thank the board for their service
and the opportunity to sleep tonight thank you Julie and Maya
Hi my name is Julie Myrie my address is on the forum in DeForest
I'm here to testify about the QTS data center project
after retiring about nine months ago from my 40-year career as a civil engineer water
resources professional I moved from Texas to DeForest so that I can live in a clean healthy
and fairly environment these are my personal values and I think everyone here shares those values
before coming to testify I closely studied the water impact presentation slides and on the
surface it appears that the water impacts are minimal however a deep dive needs to be made
to looking into these water resource issues and to ensure that there's going to be no problem
serving and treating the water to this hyperscale project if this project moves forward
the forest must demand a full and complete environmental review or impact statement be
prepared so you all know the full extent of the impacts that this project is going to have on
our community the wastewater should be continuously monitored because PFAS
it's well known and documented that data centers use fluorinated chemicals in their
equipment I know it's a closed-loop system but you know I think right now the city of Madison
measures the PFAS in their water and they just did a rest of for your study and it's very low
which is awesome another reason I love living here what are the groundwater impacts I know I
read the agreement they're going to do some studies or the agreement says they're going to do within
a quarter of a mile of the site I don't know if that's big enough maybe an environmental impact
statement will identify if a quarter mile is enough to measure for groundwater impacts to the from the
from drawing down the new well that's being proposed how is the what's the plan to mitigate
the 24 7 365 noise and air and you know light pollution that's going to happen and what's the
visual impact these are the things that an environmental statement would you know draw what's the plan
when the data center isn't needed anymore this is a permanent impact to the land and
you can't change it back to farming after it's all done and also the loss of tax
revenue because of the decrease in home values that wasn't addressed last board meeting they
were just talking about all the positive impacts of the tax revenues this behemoth project will
affect all the surrounding communities not just the forest and my hope is that the board
has the courage to take Madison's lead as me one year more time has expired any data center
proposals or agreement thank you thanks for letting me complete my sentence um you'll know
so Griffith
that right you'll know so
hello the little the Griffiths the forest resident my address is on the forum
good evening board members I want to speak not about the project itself but about the process
many residents have taken time to attend meetings submit comments and ask questions
yet we do not feel heard there is very little dialogue few follow-up questions from the board
and no indication that the resident concerns started shaping the discussion
today was an exception thank you for that from the outside it appears that the direction of this
project is being driven primarily by staff and primarily by staff while the board role feels
passive that is troubling because staff advise but elected official decide I also want to raise
a concern about balance in this process the city administrator plays an important role
but residents are increasingly concerned that staff presentations are driving outcomes
rather than supporting board deliberation when decisions appear to be framed as already settled
it leaves residents feeling excluded and the board sidelined we respectfully ask the board to
reassert this role as the decision maker slow the process and ensure that multiple perspectives
including resident concerns are given equal weight thank you thank you all right Winona storms
no it is oh I got it hello my name is Winona storms I live in DeForest my address is noted
she good evening trustees yes I speak tonight I want to ask each is I want each of you to ask
yourself a simple question is this what you ran for when I read the villages 2023 strategic plan I
was struck by its emphasis on public engagement transparency and open communication it spoke about
encouraging residents to participate in local government and to run for village board it described
trust and partnership between the village and the community but that vision does not match reality
I have reviewed open records involving village board leadership staff and QTS representatives
what I found was deeply troubling a significant amount was planned coordinated and decided
without the knowledge or involvement of six of our trustees so when residents express outrage
about a lack of transparency of course they're upset there was not even one iota of transparency
within our own board emotions are high in our community and understandably so but accountability
matters not just words used to soothe and placate residents should stop attacking the board as a
whole and instead recognize which trustees are trying to serve in good faith without full access
to the information or the capability to making decisions without full competency of what is
actually happening here the pre annexation agreement is incomplete underdeveloped and
dangerously one-sided it answers few questions while exposing the village to serious financial
and legal risk it leaves the forest responsible for nearly every demand of QTS and this agreement
should not be approved it is reckless and the village cannot afford it and frankly is it any
wonder that so few people want to run for village board why would anyone volunteer to serve when
real decision-making appears concentrated in the hands of the village administrator the community
development manager and the village president while the other six trustees are left to absorb
the public backlash for decisions made without them why step into a role where secrecy overrides
collaboration and corporate interests are quietly accommodated i want to be very clear
about this next part i will stand up for the six of you months of correspondence show your name's
absent you were not included copied or meaningfully consulted when residents concerns were raised
they were treated as inconveniences to be explained away to a corporate partner rather
than issues to be brought before the full board and that speaks volumes so i ask you again
is this what you ran for because this community deserves better and so do you your time has expired
all right um Trisha is on zoom Trisha bulky
can you hear me we can hear you okay
my name is Trisha bulky and i live into forest i couldn't be there in person tonight due to a
personal emergency but the situation is so important to me that i'm still speaking to it
the proposed qts data center for deforest is estimated to require more than 1000 megawatts
of energy which would make it one of the 10 largest data centers under construction in the
country today it would use the same amount of energy as the city of philadelphia population 1.6
million using gas fuel generation it would release two million metric tons of carbon dioxide into
the atmosphere annually or the equivalent of 400 000 cars running non-stop for five years
this threat to our community and to the climate is alarming to allow this would be irresponsible
i urge the trustees to recommend addressing the comprehensive plan and urban service area
amendments before any decision is made about annexation to not do so would also be irresponsible
or you could decide to stop it now i also want to speak about the painful and stressful process
we seem to be currently going through in regards to qts i don't understand why this hasn't been shut
down yet by village trustees based on all the previous testimony from experts and residents
and lack of concrete information from qts many of us have taken the time to attend the meetings
submit comments ask questions yet we don't feel like we're being heard there has been
not much dialogue back and forth and hardly any follow-up questions prior to tonight we've seen
no indication that our concerns are shaping your discussion and i still haven't gotten all trustees
to meet with me on this issue our ua ndcd has even gotten confirmation that some trustees haven't
yet talked to another trustee despite legally being able to talk to two of them about this
extremely enormous issue and that is troubling from our perspective it appears that this project
is being driven primarily by village staff instead of the other way around which is especially
disconcerting given the information we learned regarding our village president talking to qts
without your knowledge has anything changed since learning that decisions were being made
without the rest of you the other decision makers decisions seem to be made by staff
at a rabbit rate leaving the residents of this community feeling excluded and the trustees
appearing passive and unnecessary which is unfair this is especially evident being that
several items are on the agenda at the february 9th p&z meeting we hear qts is not in a hurry yet
village staff appears to be pushing through this process as fast as possible despite the state's
decision to reject the annexation request trustees please if you're not ready to make a motion to
reject the annexation proposal and end this right now then at least please slow down the
process take back your decision making and ensure that all perspectives are given equal weight
thank you and also thank you to the trustees who engage tonight it has not gone unnoticed
evening my name is brian um i live in the area my address is on the forum thank you for taking
the time to listen to the public on this matter i'm a union member with smart 18 sheet metal
workers i work on the other half the system then he does there i support the proposed qts data
center into forest as a working person i understand the importance of building infrastructure that
supports how we live and work nearly everything in our daily lives depends on computers
even things people many people don't think about like traffic systems school technology
utility management and supply chains all depend on technology all of that requires modern well-built
data centers i imagine that much of the research that was done and many of the comments that were
written tonight used ai and with 100 certainty all of that used a data center on the other end
of the internet connection as a business representative i have the privilege of representing nearly
600 hard-working people in south central wisconsin over 300 in dang county and 62 of them right here
in the local area as a union worker i'm proud that my brothers and sisters in the trades will build
this facility safely into the highest standards supporting this project means supporting the
infrastructure our daily lives depend on while creating good union jobs over the past several
meetings and i'm sure at meetings to come in the future you have heard a lot of people speak
out against the proposed data center probably from the same people multiple times and multiple
meetings when large projects come around is easy for the naysayers and haters to come out and speak
they can latch on to and spread misinformation misdirection and even lies there is no consequence
for that they can come up here and speak out against it say that there are too many questions
that they need answers to and then not even stick around to hear the answers to those questions
those who are in support do not have the same advantage there is no long-term gain for them to
spread lies and misinformation they risk credibility integrity and respect if they are found to be
untruthful i would ask you to think about all the people that have not come out to speak to many
people this proposal does not sway them strongly one way or another they are not wrapped up in the
zealous nature of being firmly planted on one side of the topic they only want to carry on with their
lives do it as best for their family and enjoy the strong healthy community that they live in
and to see that community prosper please take into consideration those people that are in the
middle of the road the people that don't come to speak out but will enjoy the benefit of the parks
improved public services school improvements and strong investments that will be made in this
community thank you trustees for your time Megan Harrier
Good evening my name is Megan Harrier I live here in DeForest my address is included on the
forum nice a minute I want to speak about why I posed the QTS proposal
I want to speak about the consequences of constant noise and vibration that is felt
not just heard particularly for children and people with sensory and neurological differences
for many people low frequency noise and vibration is not a nuisance that can be mitigated by trees
shrubs or buffers it is like being trapped in a room where someone is lightly tapping on the wall
not loud not dramatic just constant
vibration travels through the ground and into the body it does not magically disappear at a quarter
mile it fades but it persists it's not temporary like a mosquito you can't see can't escape and
can't swat away you're told you'll get used to it but the nervous system does not adapt
it escalates in my own home I see this impact directly in my son who's autistic
when sensory stress is ongoing it affects his behavior his comfort his sleep
you can leave a meeting
these children cannot leave their schools their homes their bodies their disabilities
I've reviewed the pre-annexation agreement and I'm concerned that it does not clearly say
what will be measured how it will be measured or what happens if limits are exceeded
without objective metrics impacts cannot be independently verified or adequately enforced
while revenue projections have dominated the conversation long-term community costs are not
meaning fully addressed moving forward without enforceable disability informed standards is a
statement of confidence either that this project will not harm children like mine or that such harm
is being knowingly accepted when a public body knowingly authorizes conditions that
disproportionately harm people with disabilities that is not an accommodation
it is discrimination excuse me your time has expired thank you thank you
what do you read
I'm sorry
I did hear so that's cool
let me read the forest I have been here before and I appreciate the opportunity to
again speak with you I too am concerned with the speed that we're pursuing this
and some of the presentations I've seen where it seems to be a given that we're going to move
forward presentations where it seems like there's no risk and there's no need to think about it more
and I have these concerns that this is happening behind the scenes without a sense
of transparency I recently saw some records from an open records release where I saw emails
going back and forth between Mr. Alon Mr. Chang and Alliant and I will send these emails to you
so you can see that I'm not making anything up I'm not lying that these were going on
asking for Alliant to respond to the public's concerns and I'm concerned that they're working
with Alliant who's a bidder on this they're not reaching out to other communities of what
their actual experience is as opposed to what Alliant says it's going to be with power usage
I was disappointed when the woman who was here from Alliant who said she didn't know the size of
QTS and is my understanding it's going to be much larger than any of their other data centers
so for her to be able to say exactly how this is going to impact is disconcerting
her ask that we become exporters when clearly with this amount of power usage we're going to
continue to be importers I just felt like there was some contradictions in her speaking
and I definitely was concerned when there was conversations about how QTS village staff
and Alliant could work together to come up with FAQs to answer the public so I just asked for
you guys to slow down talk to the other data centers look beyond what you're hearing and make sure
you're getting a full and thorough review and independent analysis of what's being asked of
this community which as many have said doesn't fit our plan it isn't what we wanted we can still
have development but it should be according to the plan and I see and I see union people
every day outside my door building housing so we're not against development we just don't want
this one thank you all right thank you Lydia Elizabeth McKenna
turn it off
good evening bard members my name is Elizabeth McKenna we moved here less than a year ago
um came here for the nature in this small time feel and it's been a whirlwind
um I would like you to please place this comment in the official public record
rezoning agricultural or rural land for a hyperscale data center like QTS could have irreversible
impacts on farmland rural character water resources and infrastructure these decisions need to be
based on sound actual information and communities need to be equipped with an understanding of what
decisions are within their power when responding to proposals for data center developments
Dane County resolution 205 provides independent evidence based analysis of these impacts and
clarifies the legal authority the village has to regulate such developments approving rezoning
before the advisory committee completes its work would be premature I urge the board to wait
for the findings from resolution 205 and to use them to ensure any rezoning decisions protect
the villages resources long term planning goals and community values thank you so much for listening
thank you
um Tammy Mitchell
sorry my name is Tammy Mitchell and I'm a resident of the forest my address is listed on the form
that you have before you I'd like to have my comments entered into the public record
I'm here tonight to speak in opposition to the proposed pre annexation agreement
between the village and QTS regarding the plan data center as well as to express serious
concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding this agreement and the process that has brought
us to this point first regarding the pre annexation agreement itself this proposal represents a
significant long-term commitment that will impact deforest land use infrastructure utilities
and tax base for decades to come decisions of this scale should be approached with great caution
and broad public involvement not decided solely by seven individuals behind closed doors
and in private meetings with those who seek to benefit from this agreement many residents
remain unconvinced that the benefits claimed by QTS outweigh the potential risks including strain
on our water and energy resources changes to the character of our community and long-term
obligations that are difficult if not impossible to reverse once they are locked in and this doesn't
take into account the financial burden that will be visited upon the various citizens who will
suffer the consequences of this monstrosity second I want to address transparency too much of this
process has occurred with limited and delayed communication to residents many people first
learned of key details only after negotiations were well underway while minimal information
has been shared with those who will be most impacted it has come after decisions appeared
to be largely settled this creates the perception and reality of a process driven more by agreements
behind closed doors and by open dialogue with the voters you represent that perception undermines
trust even among residents who are generally supportive of growth this brings me to my final
point democracy and accountability voters in the forest have exercised their civic rights by
submitting to you a petition requesting that this issue be placed on the spring ballot that petition
represents not obstruction but engagement it reflects the desire to participate in the decision that
will shape our communities for future and yet you refuse to act on it I respectfully urge the
village board to accept that petition and allow the voters of the forest to decide this matter at
the ballot box doing so would demonstrate confidence in your constituents reaffirm your commitment
to transparency and help restore trust in the decision-making process in our community
Growth can be positive but only when it is guided by openness accountability and consent of those
governed please give the people of divorce the opportunity to make their voices heard you are
here because you were entrusted by your constituents to look out for our best interests and the best
interests of our community I will not disappoint us thank you Madam President can I ask a follow-up
question here he's he spoke about decisions being made can you provide some insight
I think the feeling of the community is that certain members of the board have had outside
meetings with representatives of QPTS and made agreements if you will that are being forced on
both the board and the community nobody has
Stephen McDonald
all right Stephen McDonald
all right we'll move on unless Stephen appears
Luke Jo's we act
Luke Jo's we act
My name is Luke Jazook I'm a resident of the village of the forest my address is on the form
I was disappointed in the overview that QTS presented in December they presented numbers
that contradicted themselves like the number of employees QTS has and a projected staff at this
data center they subtly avoided questions and provided vague answers I've heard closed loop
cooling system enough the past few months of QTS has failed to provide any extra information
about these systems this was reiterated earlier tonight during the utility discussion how often
is the system flush to refill topped off where does that flushed water mix go what else is in
the pipes this is information that they have not provided he has transferred from the system
with mass amounts of coolers using excessive electricity in regards to water usage there have
been a lot of mentions of water being pulled into the pipes for cooling what about extra water needed
during power generation for electricity for the data center if renewable energy is used that's
more farmland taken for solar farms and wood mills it didn't provide any final drawings that I saw
in that initial meeting or what the end result of their phases of construction would be they solely
provided initial build-out plan in regards to the 50 million dollar pledge they said themselves
this money would be used for when not if things go wrong so this money potentially wouldn't be
used to better the surrounding area but to fix their own problems also with the net worth of QTS
and their owner blackstone 50 million dollars is a drop in the bucket it's not worth it's not worth
selling out a community over many large organizations will cut corners to save costs this will impact
environmental and community health it will pay minimal fines instead of doing things the right
way the forest is growing at a rapid rate and accelerating i'd like to see the forest focus
more on local small town endeavors and businesses looking at surrounding communities they have
downtowns that draw people in the forest seems lacking in that area i appreciate your time thank
you thank you
hey there hopefully that's a good volume my name is Cassandra my address is on the form
to forest i am also a graduate of the deforest high school so i did have a few issues with
the presentation earlier today with the the water now i'm just curious how much long
britain was involved in that are you guys allowed to answer that right now okay um just because it
seemed like there was quite a conflict of interest uh based on on how that was presented since
von Bressen uh was said that they were being brought on as a consultant um and that they are
being paid for by QTS uh so i do just have a few problems with the water presentation
especially since it does seem catered for QTS and the data center they only discuss uh water
for filling their closed loop system what about continual water use and loss as well as water
needed for extreme energy requirement what about all water use how can they say infrastructure is
adequate if we can't even get a solid number for total water use and water withdrawals um
doesn't discuss oh it also doesn't discuss managing spills and leaks as well as the chemicals
that are being added to the water and then the contaminants entering the water table and how
that would be handled uh there was a federal report estimated that the indirect water consumption
footprint of data centers in the united states was roughly 211 billion gallons in 2023 i just
want to say that that's just from energy that they're requiring the uk's largest proposed data
center is being developed by QTS and it's only 15 percent of the size of the proposed annexation
they are also promoting their closed loop uh cooling system there however recent research
found QTS water claims to be way off a study of the power and water footprints of AI production
by data scientists in the uk highlighted the underestimated scale of indirect or embedded water
consumption caused by data center operations they included the water needed for electricity
generation and found that the need for water was 50 times greater than what QTS estimated
so while yes they focus on the one aspect of water use we need to be looking at every single
aspect of it because there's a reason we're only being pointed towards one
and then the other thing i also want to mention with closed loop systems is that while they do
technically use typically use less water they do actually also use more energy so that is going
require more water for the additional energy thank you sure um thank you for the information
i will say that i have not gotten through all my emails in the last couple of days and if you've
emailed me i haven't seen it but can you tell me have you emailed this to us i have not would you
yes thank you all right james tie
good evening uh my name is james tie i work for the clean lakes alliance here in the ahara
watershed clean lakes alliance has a very narrow focus based on our community plan that was adopted
in may of 2022 that is to look at stormwater runoff from both agriculture and urban areas
carrying phosphorus and E. coli to our lakes one pound of phosphorus can create 500 pounds of
algae in our lakes and E. coli is something that we are actually looking at from both urban areas
mammals and birds we encourage the forest when looking at your annexing agreement
to look at two priorities specifically to ensure water quality in our lakes
we are not here to tell a community to build something or not build something
but if we are here to tell in every project that you do to build it to the most responsible
possible one is looking at the infrastructure going above standards currently in your annexation
agreement you are going to be going to the 100 percent runoff for a 200 year event
i would also encourage you to possibly look going above that and or say in examples such as green
roofs and other types of things to protect the watershed the other area is the inland
drained areas to protect those and so those areas that are currently internally drained
not exposing those to become not entirely drained and going into the watershed
also is identifying areas in your community that are special that need to be conserved
for water quality not all spaces are going to be will be protected from future growth
in communities from the village of the forest to make fireland to middleton to miff itchburg
but we are going to have to do a better job and come into consensus of what are those special
places we might even suggest is there 1600 acres that are more special than this land that you
don't have the money for and could you do a 100 replacement value looking at those places
in your comprehensive plan that you can't afford but maybe now you can again we're not here to
tell you what you should do for annexation but really do the hard work and the engineering
studies to protect the watershed as most possible of new development i'm available for questions
i don't think we have any terrifying questions i'll ask a good question
i think what i would ask is what could you email your um you're asked to the board
yes and i do think i'm coming up with a future agenda by him about something else on if i'm
correct uh with the staff i guess i can all right thank you
all right i'm not sure is Lois Lyman still here i think she
yeah she was next to you yeah yeah she told me to tell you all right
you state what was she here for or she said the pre-annexation agreement item nine
yeah sometimes she's here for coyotes that's her thing so anyway there are rif
I'm sorry my name is Sarah rick i am a resident of the yana and i appreciate you all listening
to me again um a lot of people have already said the points that i was going to make in my speech
so i'm shooting from the hip and i apologize but ultimately i respectfully urge the village
floor to wait for the dean county's resolution 205 advisory committee to share their findings
and use them in any zoning permitting or pre-annexation agreement decisions this ensures that all
decisions reflect community values protect resources and remain within lawful authority
and i would like to remind you all of my unique position and standpoint i've heard a lot of
union members coming up sharing that they would like the job um and i am a truck company owner
and undoubtedly my employees will be called to this job whether it's the hauling the
agriculture hauling asphalt sorry um not agriculture aggregate
or the asphalt to it and as much as i want my employees literally to work five miles down the
road for my shop i don't want this here period there's no ifs there's no ands and there's no
but about it um we also have a dairy farm and so this conflicts with our farming
roots and i just wanted to make that clear to you all thank you for your time and i hope you
take this into consideration and feel free to ask questions thank you all right and last but
not least is daniel janson
what
i'm sorry what is your name
okay well after dan then you can come up
my name is dan janson and i'm a 20-year resident of village of deforris
with this statement i'm submitting for the record legally obtained communications of village
staff and war workers you have already heard from ronda trine and mineholds about the unusual
request that qts is making to modify the village of deforris comprehensive plan in order to make
its rezoning request legal as ronda noted this is essentially allowing qts and as i
discovered tonight a lion to dictate to the residents of deforris what our comprehensive
plan goals and objectives should be yes we should purred we are ripe for the picking
i don't envy qts it's a tough sell to a community of mid-westerners who generally have
pretty good fertilizer can detectors the developer is also up against the fact that
five of the seven board members must approve the annexation ordinance because of the way it was
filed to overcome these challenges qts's strategy is to convince you that by the
this project is already a done deal you want you to believe that the development is inevitable
by the time the annexation ordinance comes to a vote and they only have 120 days from the
filing of the annexation petition to make that case to minimize the risk qts is asking the village
to have your counterparts on the planning and zoning commission approve a comprehensive plan
change and zoning change before the board even considers the annexation ordinance
the strategy was developed by alex alan bill chain and qts representatives through a series
of meetings and communications between march and october of last year the reason given
was the developers quote clear preference to gain as much certainty as possible prior to
annexation and quote want to acknowledge that mr alan repeatedly emphasized in these
communications that this strategy was not the village's preference that the village team quote
would still advocate for running the annexation first end quote at one point mr alan described
the strategy as quote particularly aggressive end quote and warn that it was quote putting
the proverbial kurt before the horse end quote yet if you look at section two b of the pre annexation
agreement the village administrators essentially asking you to codify this strategy on qts's behalf
in light of this information i urge the board to vote against the pre annexation agreement
the comprehensive plan change the zoning change and the annexation ordinance the village should
not do business with this developer i also want to remind you that regardless of what village
administrators or the president may say the only criteria required for considering the
annexation ordinance was the department of administration's finding which was not in the
public interest please think carefully about what the village of divorce administrators and presidents
whether the village of divorce administrators and president have the residents best interest at
heart when you attend the p and z public hearings on the comprehensive plan on february 9th
okay all right and mark webster sorry mark your quorum got stuck to someone else's
my name is mark webster to live in hurlington wisconsin so it's about
six eight miles north of town here but i got lay in don viana that i taxes on i got a
duplex over here bubby avenue i pay taxes on so i pay attention what's going on a little bit
on the board but i'm not associated with any group or anything i'm just a grumpy old
part that's purring to figure out why we're going through so many meetings
and you say you're here to serve the people and you guys all agreed you know and then you also
say that somebody took a picture on social media of your eyes closed i think that's just just
illustration of they're not being heard that you're all like an a coma and nobody's paying
attention let go around um the people of viana spoke but that didn't seem to make a difference
with any of the board here all right now in my little mind i compared this to that i'm from
want to go over greenland 70 percent people say no but he wants to do it anyways so that's
it just compared that for the whole thing um the other thing is um there's a reason why
westport is going through what they're going through with the village now it's because middle
tin and madison are all annexing their areas in my opinion viana to do the same thing incorporate
so that they're not being invaded by the township or by the village of the forest
um my other thing is i'm getting i'm not prepared i just wrote down notes from you guys got here
you know anytime you talk about d and r and they're talking about getting a consult from d and r
make sure they're an employee by d and r just not getting paid by ctf for me out it's on your
behalf we went through that with an equitable plan in our own and they were consultants but
they didn't work for d and r um the other thing is is um everybody's got their own little
agenda here you know the labor guys they got their job that they got to do you don't understand
they want to work but why is there so many of them available i mean there's a lot of data
centers that are being not hold even city of madison but a hold on there's you know what's
surprised the heck out of me um so they got that year to make decisions on what they're going to
do and what's best for them you know so i don't see why the forest has to push into it
if cts wants it today if they're going to want it more next year you know if they're not going
to get any less for these data centers to be requested their demand is out there but here's my
agenda i live in parlay ten if this gets adopted the farm that's in right where this cts is going
he's going to move to the um township of arlington which is like the way the bird flies is two
miles to the west of town and they're going to bring in seven thousand cows to their facilities
and i always have a lot of dawn so that stuff's got to go someplace excuse me mark your time has
expired right but anyways the water from arlington watershed was downhill the aquifer so it's coming
toward the forest thank you all right and that concludes our public appearances for this evening
and we will continue with our agenda
um item 10 communications check register was in your packet unless there's any comments or
questions we will continue item 11 committee commission and board reports update regarding
the tourist area library do you have anything Brad oh this last meeting we passed the budget
for the year so thank you for everybody who took that in consideration and helped get that
move forward thank you um divorce public safety commission
we approved a couple of operating licenses and we um had to take back on
alcohol license because the construction of the business is just not holding along
thank you and we have other businesses that are going to be looking for that license
all right divorce area community community and senior center we did not have a meeting this
month for the first time in years wow all right um community development authority um
we were awarded up to a hundred fifty thousand dollar site assessment grant for demolition
environmental on the new project over there okay um planning and zoning commission
I'd say Alex can you correct me I'm looking for my paperwork and I'm not finding what was our
meeting or the last one I had was December 8th yeah with the holidays we didn't end up meeting
after that I think that's accurate yep we didn't okay um public services committee
we haven't had a meeting we had to reschedule for next week okay all right to force Windsor
fire and EMS district um we met on and and spent some time discussing the upcoming fire station
the intergovernmental agreement um how we have improved our revenue um how we have worked on
some of our systems internally anything I'm missing Colleen
okay all right um and then item 11.2 committee commission and board minutes were in your packets
um so those are there for your review um
my report um you know everybody has has walked out but I just briefly want to say I'm being
accused of behind the scenes meetings I did meet with QTS once without all of you there
for the purpose of getting answers to questions people from the community had asked me and said
they weren't getting from QTS so that is why I met with QTS without the entire public there
it was on your behalf um and I know people don't want to hear that but that's reality um
and a lot of this is made up I too would like to hear what decisions you think we've made
we've made no decisions and we are obligated by ordinance and law to review projects that come
before us so all of these accusations are very painful when we are doing what we're obligated to
do on behalf of this village that's what I'll say my our lawyer will tell me I've said too much
but that's real guys um so with that unless there's something from DCCBA no all right Jim did you
have something under 13 all right any other business that lawfully comes before the board
Jim right and I wish there was more people here because it's brought up tonight and one thing I
want to get some clarification on is how do we even set agenda items and it's been stated a
few times that any village trustee can set agenda items and that is soundly untrue that we went
through that years ago that for a village trustee to put an agenda item we have to have three people
and create pretty much a resolution they even get it on the board so that is adamantly untrue I
mean there's other ways I think I don't know if somebody can speak to that or Alan maybe or I think
Jane you can maybe do an agenda item or working with staff but a straight up trustee could not
do one um another question I want to bring up is that we were asking questions tonight and I think
people were appearing under appearances so I don't think that was proper maybe I'm looking at
Cali I know we can ask questions when it's a public hearing but I didn't think we could do
that under appearance those that may be a policy decision we want to revisit let's go to Al on that
and then it's not on the agenda so we really have my recollection is the policy that was
been adopted by the board allows one question uh and I on public appearances on items that are on
the agenda yep okay thank you for those no no problem thank you all right with that I would
entertain a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn is there a second we have a motion I could
and a second all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed motion carries
you
You
You