All right, are we good?
So we will continue with our agenda.
We I don't have any announcements for tonight other than we will hopefully go through this
meeting as respectfully as we've gone through other meetings.
We look forward to hearing from people at the regular board meeting.
And with that, I'm going to go directly to discussion items.
And I'm going to ask Carol Thompson for her presentation regarding the sewer rate study.
And do we have someone from Baker-Tilly on Zoom?
Yes.
Yes.
So Baker-Tilly completed our sewer rate study for us this year.
And Ryan is here of Baker-Tilly to walk through the study with you.
This is your opportunity to ask any questions that you have.
And then the resolution to implement the new rates will come up in the regular board meeting.
Wonderful.
So Ryan, if you're ready, go ahead.
All right.
Thanks, everyone.
I'll go ahead and share my screen and just pull the report up.
I'll start with just a brief overview of kind of how we go about the rate study.
And I'll jump into a few of the schedules just to summarize what the results were and
then open it up for any questions or happy to dive into anything deeper.
But so this year we have the test year 2026 rate study.
We do the sewer rate study annually.
So when you're looking at that, you're forecasting out costs and revenues for a test year.
So we align up that test year as 2026 as that's when the rates will be in effect.
But there's really three parts to this rate study.
Your first one is your revenue requirement.
So I'll go ahead and jump over to schedule one, which really summarizes kind of the overall
results.
The purpose of the revenue requirement is to forecast out what your expenses are going
to be and design your revenues, you know, to cover those expenses.
Your revenue requirement, if you look down on the bottom half of this schedule, and I'll
zoom in a little bit if I can, outlines what your forecast is operating and principal payments
and things like that are.
So you can see your operating expenses here and I'll touch on this a bit later in the
discussion as well.
But the sewer utility has two rates.
If you recall, the first rate is referred to the village rate that covers the village
charges.
And then there's a separate rate for the Madison Metro sewerage district treatment charges.
So again, when we get to some of the later schedules, I'll show you how that's split
out.
You do have routine cash additions here, which are unbarrowed for, and then your principal
and interest payments that are covered as well.
So that details out what your revenue requirement is.
And then the upper half here is what the forecasted revenue is.
So at the end of the day, what we're adjusting for rates are what we can control up here
to make sure that, you know, your forecasted revenues are sufficient to cover your expenses
in that revenue requirement.
So you'll see here we have a overall percentage increase needed of just 1.69% overall.
And again, that weighs differently between those two rates.
So I'll dive into that in a couple minutes.
The second part of part of the rate study is the cost of service study, which I'll jump
up to schedule eight, I believe, summarizes that and kind of at a detailed level.
But what the cost of service does is it takes that revenue requirement and it allocates it
out to, you know, different customer classes, I think all your customer classes receive
the same rate, but it splits it out by type and probably most importantly, it splits it
out by what would be your volume charge versus your fixed charge to customers.
So it puts it into those two main buckets, which really drives kind of between those
two, what the rate is going to be.
And there's a, the schedules following this are in pretty good detail, but they split
out, you know, by line item, what your expenses are and what weight they have as a volume
versus a customer or fixed charge.
And then lastly, I'm just going to jump to the last page, it summarizes this, the rate
calculations themselves are in the schedules before and I'm happy to jump into those if
needed.
But this, I think the schedule does a good job of laying out what, what the impact is
to the rates.
So the top half just splits it out by customer class and, you know, what your average customer
might be with this overall, again, the overall impact to an average customer is just 63 cents
per billing, which is 1.4% of their current bill.
And the impact to the rates themselves are shown as below.
So I mentioned the village rate is a separate rate here and you'll see the percentage change
being proposed here for the volume rate is 3.5 and on for the, for the fixed charges.
On the MMSD side, you'll see that there's no proposed change to the rates.
We have a schedule that details out the MMSD treatment charges, but essentially what's
happening this year is MMSD plans to increase their rates for 2026 by less than 2%, which
I think if you were to look back at the last few years, that's probably the lowest increase
that you've seen over the, over the years.
This schedule, this is schedule seven that outlines the MMSD charges.
Yeah, there, so their rate increased 1.3%.
Call to order.
There's no talking in the audience and anybody who is talking needs to go out.
Yeah, as I mentioned, so the rate for the MMSD rate only increased 1.3% this year, but really,
that's been offset by a forecast forecast and slight decrease in volume.
So the way that we've historically forecasted what the volume to be treated by MMSD is,
is on a three year average.
So in certain years, you might have a year dropping out of that average that was a,
that was a wetter year that, you know, more rain is entering the system and being treated.
Versus a dry year coming on, you'd see a slight decrease in forecasted treatment.
So the increase that MMSD is increasing their rates by is offset by that forecasted decrease
in average volume.
So management, in this case, elected just to leave the rate the same.
And that's why you're seeing no change at the bottom of this last schedule.
So with that, I know that was, there's a lot of information in this report and a lot of data
within it. So I'm happy to take a pause and answer any specific questions you have or open it up to anything else.
Are there any questions from the board?
Yes, Brad.
I think I saw that there was 100,000 in proposed capital expenditures.
Yeah, that's correct.
Is that not budgeted separately through capital through the village or is that just separated out to specifically?
Yeah, good question. So I think it's, it's still budgeted through capital, but there's two different ways you can recover capital costs through a rate study.
The first one would be depreciation.
So any capital asset, whether it's budgeted for, borrowed for, used cash on hand goes into that calculation.
This study is performed on the cash basis. So you'll see that instead of depreciation on the very bottom of that revenue requirement, a schedule one here is your principal and interest payments.
So that $100,000 of capital costs is really just an estimate of what capital goes in, goes into capital assets during 2026 that's paid for with cash on hand so that you're recovering those costs still.
All right, did that answer your question?
Okay. Any other questions?
Are the.
So what is the bottom line for our rate payers in terms of cost for the new rates?
Basically, so if you, it would be this $47,000, which is basically the deficiency you would have or the shortfall you'd have if you didn't do anything to rates at all.
But that's not per household. What are we talking about per household?
Yeah, per household on the very last schedule here shows what the monthly impact would be. So that's to the average residential customer. You have 63 cents per month. So, yeah.
Thank you.
Any other questions, Jan.
So the MS, the MMSD, those rates are not going up this year. Correct.
Those. Yeah, the rates that you're charging your customers for MMSD treatment are not changing this year. And they're not proposed to change.
And the last time that divorce took an increase was that 2017.
No, that's not true.
We did increase volume charges last year, but we have not increased our meter charges in three years.
Okay. Thank you. So.
Okay. Any other questions?
Okay.
Well, if there's no other questions, we will wait for the resolution in the regular village board meeting.
Thank you, Ryan, for the presentation. It helped to help to have someone go through the report. So thank you.
Certainly. Thank you all.
All right.
We will then go on to updates and I would have an administration update from Bill Chang.
Yeah, well, as you know, we are currently negotiating a cooperative plan between the town of Westport.
The village of the forest village.
One of the key cities of Middleton and Madison.
We are at the final drafting stage. And so.
Kind of Westport is looking for a public hearing date.
They've proposed February 11, which is a Wednesday.
At 6 30. So if you could let me know if you'd be available to attend.
The objective is to at least get one member of the board. Of course, we can have more.
Again, 6 30 on Wednesday February 11.
That would be at the town of Westport.
You need also me, we need a quorum of the board.
What do you say?
We would need a quorum of the board. So at least four.
Okay.
I can be there.
All right, finance update Carol.
I just wanted to give you a reminder there is in the next step of our water rate study.
There is a public hearing the PC is putting on on January 22.
So just a reminder that that's coming up. If anyone's interested.
Okay.
Anything else from you, Carol?
All right. Thank you. All right, police department chief Olson.
Yeah, just a couple things.
Saturday is our 8th winter wonderland community event.
We're looking forward to it. It's for children with intellectual disabilities and special needs and their families kind of building a stronger relationship with the members of the police department.
We can help those families when they're in times of crisis. So we're looking forward to that.
And then an update in December, I talked briefly about an increase in retail theft cases that we're experiencing.
We've launched operation holiday presence.
P-R-E-S-C-E, not T-S.
Play on words. Nice.
But really good success.
As a matter of fact, the first stop on the operation that was there.
Officer O'Connell made a stop of somebody who just stole something from her retail theft before they even realized the store did.
So we recovered probably in excess of $10,000 stolen property during the course of the either nine deployment days on top of just on shift deployments.
So pretty successful.
And we've already started planning for future usage.
Thank you. Good work.
Can you ask people in the entryway to quiet down?
Thank you.
All right.
Public service update.
Judd.
Yep.
If you guys could pass a resolution for the snow and or precipitation to stop every other day, that'd be great.
I don't carry any weight anywhere.
But our part of our guys doing all their work though to keep the roads as open and trails open as we can.
And ice-free. So we've been battling that sounds like maybe more snow this weekend.
And we've been doing a lot of natural resource work.
Quercus is our natural resources group that we work with.
And they've been doing a lot of invasive treatment of buckthorn cutting that stuff and moving in our own.
They may have some burn days as well coming up that will happen.
But so otherwise it's just we've been.
You know, snow and or other things. So.
And you guys, I saw Christmas trees being ground up on my block today. So.
Yeah, they're all collecting trees. They were out like it was a prize.
We had snow, right? The 26th, I think it was like the day after Christmas, we had to move some snow around and there was already trees at the curb.
I don't know.
My neighbors through there.
So Christmas Eve and I was like, oh.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Thank you, Judd.
Community development update, Alex salon.
Just an update from the CDA. So you'll notice that the corner of the main street, the demolition has been completed on those properties.
The fences come down. We will likely get a new construction fence up there in the coming months.
This week we'll have some drilling on site to do further environmental investigation.
So if anybody asks you why are there.
Real is operating on site. That's what that's about.
All right. Thank you.
Administrative services update, Kelly.
All right.
Recreation and community enrichment update, Sam Fredrickson.
Yeah, just a quick update between after the holidays, you've been busy your time for us.
So this week and next week, we have about like 25 plus programs starting up during that time's timeline.
So kind of busy with that. And then also working on the spring summer guide.
That's something we're really getting ahead of because that's going to be releasing here in February.
So working on that planning a lot of stuff for 2026.
And then we're hosting some of the travel basketball teams this weekend.
First weekend posting and that's kind of what's been keeping us busy.
Where do they host the basketball?
We hosted all over at the middle school.
Okay.
Great.
Wonderful.
All right. Well, we've moved through this agenda pretty quickly.
So I would ask if there's any other business that comes lawfully comes before this body.
If not, I would entertain a motion to adjourn the work session.
And after we adjourn this session, we will take a break and at six, we will begin the village board meeting.
Motion to adjourn.
Second.
We have a motion and a second to all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed.
The meeting is adjourned at 518 p.m.
So.
We'll call the meeting of the village board to order at six p.m.
On Tuesday, January 6th, 2026.
It's a new year. Happy new year, everyone.
I would note or ask Kelly to know roll call.
I would ask Brad to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
Congratulations to the right of the United States of America and to the republic for what we can say.
One reason under that, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Okay.
All right. I have a few announcements. I want to remind everyone that this is a business meeting and it requires that everybody show respect for one another and be civil.
There'll be no cheering. There'll be no noise. There'll be no clapping.
There'll be no getting up and down and going in and out of the meeting. If you're in here, you're in here. If not, please don't get up and down and disrupt people.
If you're if you're signed up to speak, we will call your name as as they come up and you can come up to the front table, turn on the microphone and speak for three minutes.
We're glad that you're all here. We're glad to hear from you.
But we do require that we all treat this as a as an important business meeting of the village of divorce.
If for some reason it gets a bit rowdy, we will ask people to leave.
If it still gets rowdy, I'll adjourn the meeting. So it's important that you all behave and I appreciate it.
I know sometimes it's easy to get excited about an issue and I'm just going to have to ask that we not get too excited and that we get through our business meeting.
With that, I would move to the consent agenda. I would like to begin by asking if anybody has any items that they want to separate.
If not, I would entertain a motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion to approve.
Second. Second.
We have a motion and a second. All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
The next item is item six presentations. This is a presentation regarding financial impacts, a proposed QTS data center.
And we have Bill Chang, Carol Thompson and Kayla, you want to introduce yourself from Ellers or Carol, you can introduce her.
Yeah, so I can start out here. As you know, there's a memo in your packet that basically just explains that.
Village staff has been working with representatives from Ellers to go through an analysis of the.
Financial impact of what bringing a data center into the community could do.
So we are just here to kind of go through that. I'll let Kayla go through her presentation and then we can kind of talk a little bit about.
Some of the final numbers that are noted in the memo. I just want to remind everybody that obviously this presentation is based on a lot of assumptions.
So we've realized this probably isn't how it will actually pan out, but based on the assumptions as we know right now.
We did the best we could to come up with an analysis to give you an idea of how this could impact us financially.
So this is Kayla.
Ellers.
Thank you.
Can everybody hear me?
My name is Kayla Thorpe and I'm an install advisor with Ellers public finance advisors.
We serve as the villages finance or finance advisor for things related to debt issuance economic development planning and so on and so forth.
We were specifically engaged by the village to provide a preliminary fiscal impact analysis for the QTS development and what that could potentially mean for the villages tax rate and then a preliminary look at the all in tax rate with all of the other taxing jurisdictions.
Through the build out of what we are calling the first kind of wave or phase of the proposed developments with what we know now.
Like Carol mentioned, it is built on a number of assumptions.
I will walk through the methodology of how we came up with those assumptions, what they are and kind of our methodology for putting together the projections that we have.
Our objective in this is to really review the financial trends and strengths of the village in the past financial performance, both on the general fund side, but all of the funds supported by the general property tax levy.
We will then project forward a long range levy forecast that incorporates all of the levy supported funds and our goal with this is try to determine a stress test of the levy.
We take a number of assumptions and we will go through those on the expenditure side for the trends of what the villages general fund and levy supported fund expenditures are.
And then we really hold all other non property tax revenue sources flat to get an understanding that if our expenditures continue to rise, what is going to be the general property tax levy needed to support our operations.
That's critical to get an understanding because then we can determine what assessment ratio or assessment level is and then what a tax rate is and then apply some assumptions for QTS and get an understanding of what would be the long term tax rate with the QTS development and without the QTS development.
So we will walk through both scenarios for today.
We've analyzed equalized and assessed values to determine those tax rate implications.
And like I said, these are very conservative estimates based off of what we know now a lot of these items are still under discussion and negotiations.
And so it's really kind of a snapshot in time of what we know now as things progress and if they progress these analyses will be updated with more reflected or more accurate reflections of where any type of negotiations are in time.
Our goal today is to educate to and provide context to you to continue to have these conversations and to have the context of what the financial implications could be as you go along the journey of your decision making process in this development.
I just want to kind of start with levy limits and other statutory guidelines. So we're all starting kind of the base understanding of the minutes full levy and the restrictions placed on it.
Statute 660602 of statutes limits the ability of a municipality to increase its property tax levy equal to the percentage of net new construction, which is just that it's the value of improvements added net of those removed.
And then annual basis or zero if there is none. So this is where we come up with the philosophy of that the municipal property tax rate cannot increase outside of net new construction.
There are a number of different exemptions available to minutes parties across the state. The number one allowed and taken exemption is the line exemption, which is for general obligation debt.
You are allowed to exempt 100% of your principal interest payments on an annual basis for all of your general obligation debt.
So that net new construction factor is your base levy increase, and then your allowable levy increase on an annual basis that fluctuates as that geo debt payment, because in the calculation of the next year's levy limit that drops off.
I have replicated the levy limit worksheet so we will work through that to get an understanding of just of those mechanics, but the general understanding is that there is no ability for the minutes ability to increase the property tax levy outside of that net new construction.
The levy limits and net new construction apply to all minutes palities in the state.
Fortunately, the village is in a growing position and has had a strong new construction period over the last five years.
It has an average of 5.66% that is that five year average where Dane County as a whole's five year average is 2.4%.
There is also a limit to the general obligation of borrowing capacity statutes limit the ability of the minutes pality to borrow principal outstanding principal that is not in excess of 5% of the hidden equalized value.
So you're limited to that amount. Currently, the village utilizes very low or has low utilization of their debt capacity currently at 5% of that 5% value, which remains of $133 million borrowing capacity available to the village.
Next, we'll dive into what goes and makes up the village property tax levy. It's the general and operational funds, which are subject to levy limits, capital funding, cash funding capital through the property tax levy is also subject to levy limits,
special revenue funds, which in the village's case are the community and service senior center, the recreation fund and the events and promotion fund.
Those are also subject to levy limits. And like I mentioned before, the general obligation debt service paid through the debt service fund is not subject to levy limits and is exempted online.
I'm going to now jump into some equalized and assessed value projections, both with and without QTS to get an understanding of the scope of the project, the build out the potential build out schedule and when those values will come online.
There's a number of key assumptions we've taken into account for this. For the village growth, we've just taken a five year history of both the net new construction and natural economic appreciation of property values to remain conservative.
We've discounted that five year average by 25% to project forward to get an understanding that even if we slow down a little bit slower than we've been in the past five years to the tune of 25%.
What can we reasonably expect our natural economic appreciation and our standard growth not taking into account this development? What could that be moving forward?
We project that forward on both a TID in and a TID out basis.
The reason why we're doing that on a both TID in and TID out basis is all eight of the villages.
TID districts are expected to close within the scope of this analysis on this analysis projects taxes and levies through 2041.
And so all eight of the TID districts are expected to close within that time. We've built those closure years in and the assumption as well as the levy limit adjustment accordingly.
And I will kind of illustrate this all for you when we take a look at the levy limit worksheet.
We've then built out what the QTS build out is as of now. Right now it is a four year build out.
The total equalized value is based off a percentage of total construction costs.
It is not a dollar for dollar realization of what the developer pays to construct the facility as what it will be valued at as an equalized basis.
There is a fraction of what that construction cost is to what the actual taxable or equalized value of that facility is.
And that goes for all construction within your community.
And then there's an assessment ratio model that we use as an fluctuating assessment ratio based off of a biannual revaluation that the village does.
The four year average of assessment ratio is 94.8%.
So whatever your market value is of the any building, whether it's manufacturing, industrial, commercial, residential, the four year average of assessment to full value is 94.8% and the villages do for revaluation in 2026.
To give you an understanding of TID closures and when those things will come online.
There's also an understanding of construction year versus valuation year versus budget year just to set that level playing field to get an understanding of when you see shovels in the ground or when you see things close when they're going to come online for taxable value.
Things constructed within 2025 will be valued as of one 126.
So everything that you saw constructed last year will have its value as of last week.
That value is then calculated taxes to fund the 2027 budget.
So there's that two year lag between when we're seeing shovels in the ground or when we see things change to when the village and other tax and jurisdictions will actually take in property tax revenue related to that.
The same philosophy is with the kids tonight. There was a resolution to close to district number three.
If you close it to district prior to April 15th of that of that budget year, that value comes back online as of that budget year. So given that to three is being closed tonight, the value will be online as of 11127 that will then be factored into your tax rate calculation for
27. It'll be online as of 11126. If you close a district after April 15th, it then comes online the following year. So there, some of these are all based off of their creation date. So some of them are as of first half the year.
Some are as of second half a year. So that's kind of why we see things staggered and split up.
But getting an understanding of when that valuation will come online in the dollar amount, it will come online. And then what budget that goes to fund we wanted to just give everybody a base understanding of what that will happen.
Fortunately, all of the villages existing districts are successful and are expected to close with significant value that will come online. So one thing that is to be cognizant of is why we wanted to show you both with QTS and without QTS is there are going to be significant impacts to the value
of the tax rate just because of the tick closures. That amount of value coming online will have an impact on the villages value and related tax rate. There is a levy limit adjustment for a tick closure. And again, I'll walk through that. It's half
it's a half of the value of the district as a percentage of equalized value. There's a one time adjustment for that and we show that in our analysis.
To get an understanding kind of the TID out projections without QTS. Like I said, we replicate the statement of changes in economic or statement of changes in equalized value from the Department of Revenue that is released every year.
And those account for kind of three buckets of values that go into affecting the villages overall equalized value. And that is TID closures. And so we've mapped out the TID closures.
That is new construction or is that that's that net new construction here, which we are projecting forward at that discounted rate on a TID out basis of 3.49% annually.
Which in 27 were projected to be about $67 million through the end of the life of the analysis about $263 million in new construction.
Not taking into account the development we're here tonight for. And then about 4.66% in economic change. Again, a significant amount that results in about anywhere from 9% to 15% annual changes in your TID out.
You are in a growing area in a desirable area to live. We are seeing this in the Metro Madison area to begin with. And so while these projections are very conservative still they're discounted again from your 25% from your 5 year history.
They are still healthy growth factors that the village should be proud and appreciate that there's still value coming online regardless of any new development.
We will then build in the development assumptions for QTS with construction starting in 2027 potentially.
And again to highlight 2027 construction means evaluation year of 2028, which means a revenue year of 2029.
And so I will continue to kind of hammer that home just so an understanding of there will be no immediate impact the second you see a shovel and ground.
There is that two year leg between construction and valuation.
There's an assumption that the first construction year will have about 2 million square feet constructed and the following two years will be 1900 square feet.
And the third year will have some small wrap up of about 400,000 square feet for an equalized value of about 1.25 or 1.2 billion dollars for those developments over those four construction years.
Applying the current assessment ratio that would assess out to about 1.19 billion dollars of assessed value added onto your tax rolls.
Because this is not in a tit district.
This will have the immediate ability to come on the tax rolls. This will not be that increment is not part of this conversation like we would talk about in a tax to increment district.
That's an immediate on to the tax rolls and immediate benefit to the overall tax rate.
Building in QTS and understanding of when those values will come online getting understanding that kind of the five year history of net new construction within the villages 3.49% alone that first year will be a 17.8%.
Again, these are projections based off of what we know now.
And then kind of 13 and 10 and one after that. So building that all in, you'll see those revenue years of 29 through 33 really have large jumps in values.
And that really is combination of one, the tit district closures are kind of jumped into that timeframe as well.
But also the significant value coming online related to the QTS development.
I'm not going to run through a 15 year levy projection. And I'm kind of setting the story of what is the values going to be? What is the villages property tax levy going to be during this time?
And what's that going to equate to on a property tax rate to do that and get an understanding that some of these things are down the line and get an understanding of once this entire build out is done.
For what we know now, along with the tit closures, we needed to do this 15 year projection. And like was mentioned, it is built on a number of assumptions.
They are very conservative based off of the past financial performance of the village, but are also have the ability to be tweaked at any point.
Time should anything change. And so we've reviewed these with your staff to get an understanding of what could be expected moving forward.
And then an understanding of what we see kind of statewide as far as trends and expenses.
And so we've applied a number of year over year assumptions for your expenditures within your levy supported funds. So anything supported by property tax levy.
And we've grouped them into a number of kind of categories commodities at 3% year over year increases.
Employee insurances at 8% year over year, your property and liability insurance at 4% services at 4% and then wages at 4%.
Remember, this is expenditures, not revenues.
This does take a little bit of a broader paint brush to these expenditures, but it's our best kind of way to not get into the weeds too much of, well, please department.
Paper versus village hall, paper costs. We kind of just take these buckets to give us an understanding of a approach to move forward.
And then on the non property tax revenue side, we heard we held most all non property tax revenues flat to get an understanding of what would be the demand on the property tax levy.
The two things we did account for increases for our transportation aids and state shared revenues, mostly due to the legislation change. There are some expected increases in those.
We understand that all the other non property tax revenues may fluctuate up or down permit revenues, new special fees, copies, kind of all of those bartender's licenses type things may fluctuate.
But to get an understanding of where the demand on the levy is going to be, we held them flat.
Again, and then we solved against budgeted expenditures, net of non levy revenues to determine our property tax levy.
The current village CIP ends in 2031. We have built out the regular debt issuances through that time to fund the capital improvement plan.
Our assumption moving past 2031, since our analysis goes to 2041, is that the village will continue to borrow at its current rate to fund the CIP.
And so while those have other funded portions of it, utility pieces that will pay their own portion of it.
We're assuming that the general fund or the road type projects, your general property tax liability projects will continue at the current pace that they are today.
I know this is very small.
This is in the blue here is budget 2026 for your general fund.
And then 27 through 2041 to get an understanding of what your general fund only will be.
Your general fund expenditures and revenues in 2026 were budget, are budgeted for just over $10.3 million.
We have about six to seven, or I should say five to seven percent annual increases in that revenue and expenditures year over year.
So by 2041, the reasonable expectation or the conservative expectation is that the villages revenues and expenditures for the general fund will be just over $20.2 million,
which is about after the kind of the current CIP ends about 5% or 6% annual increases, which is in line with the villages trends traditionally.
But that has a lot to do with non property tax revenues as well.
And that is without QTS. So I didn't. This is the full levy summary with QTS.
Now we're taking into account the general fund in which we just reviewed the debt service levy to fund the general obligation debt payments.
Your capital levy, you do have a piece of property tax levy that cash funds capital every year.
Your community and senior center levy and your recreation events and promotional levies.
Those are all the pieces of the villages portion of the property tax levy that are divvied up to provide those services.
So in 2026, your property tax levy was $10.4 million, which was about a 7% increase in total levy over the prior year.
That those major fluctuations are almost 100% attributable to the debt service levy changes because that's really the only major levy change you can have in a year.
There are some upcoming debt service levy changes mainly in 27.
But an expectation that between 4% and 8% annual increases to 2041 of a property tax levy all in without this development of about $21.6 million.
Taking into account with QTS and now there is at least what is the expectation as of now is there will be very little to know service level changes staffing additions or service changes related to the development.
And so most of this analysis, the levies remain relatively constant.
There are two significant variations between the with QTS analysis and the without QTS analysis.
One of those is the fire district funding formula on the expense side.
The fire district formula is based off of equalized value.
So even without the QTS development, the villages contribution to the fire district is going to increase based off the tick closures.
And then with the QTS development, it will increase at a more rapid rate because the significant value coming online that is accounted for in the with QTS analysis.
And in both situations, the village will be disqualified from the expenditure restraint program.
The expenditure restraint program is a program in which the state invent incentivizes municipalities to limit their year over year growth in expenses.
But to qualify for that your tax rate needs to be at least $5 per thousand in both our situations with QTS and without QTS.
The village at some point in time will dip below $5 per thousand, which will automatically disqualify you from the program.
I've built both of those assumptions in and I have a summary which outlines in which years that will happen.
So getting to understanding that the full levy summary with QTS at by 2041 is about $2.6 million or 21.6.
21.8 million dollars by 2041, the full levy summary, including all levy supported funds.
And again, highlighting the red line here is the delineation mark of when the village's current CIP ends and the current debt structure that we know and have built out ends.
And then those debt levies moving forward are the assumption that one, the village will continue to borrow at its current rate for CIP and we will continue to structure the debt at the same way on the village structures.
So getting an understanding that those are the assumptions moving forward based off of the past practices of the village.
And some key points I wanted to point out about the levy projection.
Both projections include wages and benefits that were previously allocated to the TID districts.
We've accounted for those dumps in both projections, meaning that you have staff time planning time and other administrative time that is currently allocated to each of your eight tax and jurisdictions.
Are taxing increment jurisdictions so that those buckets are paying for their proportional staff time dedicated to that.
The assumption is is that that all of that time will come back to the general fund and then fall on the general fund burden.
We've accounted for that in both situations here that we are expecting very few service changes or additions expected to the QTS development.
So it does not have a great fluctuation one way or another on expenses and revenues.
Both projections include that disqualification from the expenditure restraint program without QTS and projecting that will happen in the 2033 budget year and with QTS that will happen in the 2031 budget year.
So within the next kind of time frame looking forward that that will happen.
I've also built in that the water utility pilot payment will increase about $100,000 annually due to QTS.
That pilot payment is a basically a payment in lieu of taxes.
The tax value of the infrastructure of the water utility.
They still pay a tax to the general fund.
So that's a general fund revenue and that the bill just share of the fire district funding formula will increase with QTS as well.
This is where we kind of get into that projected levy and the allowable levy and kind of where those gaps are.
This is a direct replication of the levy limit worksheet. I've hit all of the there's like 20 different exemptions.
I've hit them because the village does not regularly utilize those.
The two that are regularly utilized is the increased for annex lands and the general obligation debt exemption.
And so how this practice works just to give everybody kind of the general background is this is the 25 levy for 26 budget actual levy limit worksheet.
And the calculation of the 2027 budget levy limit worksheet.
The process is that you take your prior years allowable levy. So the $10.41 million.
You subtract out from that what you levied in the prior year for general obligation debt.
And you get your base levy. So while the village of property tax levy in 2026 was $10.4 million,
only $8 million of that is base levy. That then is applied net new construction in TID closures.
So you don't get to apply those increases to what you levied for debt in the prior year that is netted out of your base levy.
And then you apply that net new construction in TID closures.
And so for the TID 3 TID closure, you will get about a 0.8%.
Ev benefit, which is about a $70,000 levy limit adjustment for that.
That is a one time adjustment and that is built into your base moving forward.
We have structured that out all for all the tax increment district closures.
TID 3 is the smallest of those. And so you will see that there's a greater benefit as some of those larger tax and jurisdictions,
or taxing increment jurisdictions close.
We then apply the net new construction value moving forward.
And so that allows you basically on a net new construction basis to increase your property tax levy by $342,000 annually.
And so this is where we start to provide the perspective of where net new construction doesn't keep up with the cost of inflation.
We're seeing 8% increases in our need in our levy need every year,
but we're only allowed to increase our property tax levy really by 4.2%.
And this is the conservative projection. This is 25% discounted or $342,000.
You then get to add in what you need to pay debt that year and you get to your total allowable levy.
In this situation without QTS, our goal was to stress the levy and see where we're starting to run into levy pressure and I'm projecting that the village will run into levy pressure.
And I'm not saying that this will happen. This is a may happen should no other circumstances change.
The village may run into levy pressure as soon as 2028 or as soon as 2029.
The village has been able to manage this one. There is levy capacity that is not utilized right now to the full line E.
And so while you are only levying $2.3 million on an exempted basis, your actual general obligation debt payments are more than that.
So you still have that levy capacity ability built in within your budget.
There are also the exact odd years out where you will have more net new construction.
Your net new construction for 2026 was 7.88% as well as abated debt capacity.
So there are tools and mechanisms available to the village to mitigate this.
And these are dollar amounts in which at this time don't really concern me because this is really the doomsday scenario is if we don't take in another penny from non property tax revenue,
do we have the ability or what is our property tax levy revenue need?
And so this is really just to paint that illustration of when you could run into levy pressure if this development did not happen.
Now taking in this exact same picture with QTS, you will see in those years in which we're projecting the value to come online.
There is more significant net new construction and that's really where we start to talk about the direct benefit to the taxpayers and to village operations related to the value coming online of the development.
Where in a without the QTS development, the village would only be able to increase its property tax levy about 4.2% or that $340,000 during the height of the build out of just the kind of the situation we're looking at today.
The village would be able to increase its property tax levy about $1.4 million to $1.3 million during those first two years.
Now that's important for a number of things. One, the proportional increase in that levy and we'll see this in a couple of slides related to the amount of value coming online is going to have a decrease in taxes.
So mean even though that the village will be taking in more property tax dollars, that levy is spread out a lot or over a lot more value, therefore decreasing the property tax rate overall for all taxpayers.
And so we would then be projecting just a property tax surplus, a levy surplus, meaning to find your operations in this case, we're not even projecting that you need to take your base allowable levy.
This presents the village with a number of strategic options available to you to stabilize the levy long term, meaning the decades that follow the filled full build out of the QTS development and really prolonging any.
Large increases that may be associated kind of once that that pool of net new construction moves out and the ability to buy down debt faster and reduce the overall villages debt burden.
These will obviously be discussed as this discussion progresses, but with the QTS development, it provides the village with a unique opportunity to really stabilize property taxes for potentially decades to come.
And those additional levy amounts are really reflected on the bottom red line in which we are only projecting that the village would need about $14 million in 2032 to fund its budgets and and levies, but you could levy up to about $17 million.
And so that $2 million would be that property tax stabilization or buying down the debt related to the current outstanding debt obligations.
The key takeaways on this and some of these I've already highlighted is that without QTS, the village main counter levy capacity pressure, that is not a unique situation.
We do these type of analysis, not for this specific kind of development, but through our financial management planning mechanism for many municipalities out the state and every single one of them at one point in time is going to run into levy pressure.
We are now 21 years into levy limits and their every cut nick savings has been made.
And so there's only so many opportunities to increase your property tax levy.
And so in all of these situations across the state, we project levy capacity pressure.
The key on that is that our assumptions are very conservative.
Our assumption is that you're not going to take in another penny of non property tax revenue, but our ability to kind of foresee and foreshadow those issues is the goal through this.
But then also getting the context of, again, in a situation where we have this amount of value coming online, what could be the benefit with no other property tax dollars coming in the door, non property tax levy coming in the door.
Our analysis shows a potential levy surplus cumulatively throughout the analysis of $17.8 million.
This could be levied and placed in a separate fund to stabilize future levies and reduce borrowing for capital projects as well as buying down debt.
Those are strategies that would be authorized by the governing body discussed at length, but it's just kind of that high level overview of showing you what at least how this could affect village operations and sustain property tax increases moving forward.
I'm now going to break this down into assessed values and local tax rate.
We've been talking about equalized values equalized values kind of determine what that net new construction is, but the textbook that you receive in the mail annually has an assessed value on it.
And so we are going to talk about how we've made our assumptions for that.
I've made some pretty broad projections on an all in tax rates, all of the other tax and jurisdictions, and I'll run through that as well.
And so we've got the actual budget years and value years of past history of equalized values versus assessed values and kind of what that meant on a tit in and tit out basis, as well as projecting forward.
What those assessment ratios could be, and then what those take out assessed values are going to be.
And so the village does commit to biannual revaluations. And so in those off years of revaluations, I'm showing that the property assessment ratio is going to dip, but that's just that's going to happen.
The amount is is really up to kind of the market fluctuations at any point time, but it's really based off of kind of the history of what it has dipped to.
So in 2024 value 2025 budget, the assessment ratio for the village was 96.7%.
This most recent valuation and budget year, dip to 92.
And so with a 26 reval, I'm projecting, it'll go up to 97 and that's going to dip back to 93 kind of that fluctuation we see annually.
And then that has that direct correlation on the tit out assessed value.
We wanted to kind of show you what the value change is due to the take closures and the net new construction.
And then what the year over year assessed value change is because of that.
And this really is poignant to show you that your assessed valuation is still going to have significant changes due to the level of net new construction outside of the QTS development and the significant take closures that are projected to happen.
And so in the height of the tit closures, we're showing that your assessed value is going to change projected to be about 19 and a half percent without anything on the QTS development that again will have a direct correlation on the tax rate to the tax pain residents and businesses.
To kind of get an understanding of the household average or the average household impact without QTS as you are accustomed to seeing throughout your budget process.
We really boil that down to what is the percentage increase related to growth and what is the percentage increase related to market value and then how does that boil down to the non growth percentage of property tax levy and rate.
And so this percentage change in TIT out takes into account both net new construction and the tit closures and the market adjustments in the odd years, you will see a large or the, I should say, yeah, odd years, you'll see large adjustments.
That's because you're basically bringing your assessed value back up to market rate with your evaluation.
And these are just inflationary rate adjustments at the 3.37%.
I'm showing that in 2026, your most recent budget year, the tax bills that just went out your tech local tax rate, local tax rate only was $5.86.
With the TIT 3 TIT closure, I'm projecting that that could drop to 546 next year.
All the way down without QTS to about $2.71 by 2041.
And then you'll see kind of those year over year fluctuations due to the market only adjustment.
There are fluctuations kind of negative and positive throughout those and those are directly correlated to the debt service levy changes.
There are some jumps and dips in the debt service levy.
Again, those are projections based off of kind of our estimates.
Our goal when we structure debt for the village is to flat line that as much as possible and avoid any peaks and valleys.
But right now, these are our best projections.
And so the kind of the takeaway on this is that our understanding based off of just the TIT closures and the market revals for the village,
along with the conservative approach to growth right now, we could see the property tax levy by 2041 decreasing from $5.86 to $2.71 per thousand.
We will now walk through the same approach on an assessed value with QTS.
Same approach on the assessment ratio fluctuating year over year to year because of the biannual revaluation.
Obviously, with the new growth coming online, we see large fluctuations in the TIT out assessed value.
And really to the benefit or the kind of doubling up.
A lot of these TIT closures happen at the same time or will be coming online at the same time.
And so at the height of the build out of QTS along with the TIT closures, we can see about a 31% increase in your assessed value.
Really sustaining for a number of years before it dips a little again and then comes up because of the remaining TIT closures.
And so a TIT out assessed value by the end of the district or the end of their analysis of about $10.8 million with QTS as opposed to $7.9 million without QTS.
Or I should say $7.9 billion without QTS and $10 billion with QTS.
Putting that down again to that average household impact and understanding of what is due to growth and what is due to market adjustments in this situation.
All of it is really due to growth because of QTS and the TIT closures in your net new construction.
And so with QTS by the end of the analysis, we are projecting that the tax rate could drop from $5.86 to $2.02 per thousand.
To give you kind of the snapshot of well, what does that mean and kind of what is that year over year?
This is just the comparison of the local only mill rate with QTS and without QTS.
So there's about a 69 or 69 cent variance by the end of the life of the district, but in the life of the analysis,
but in the height of the analysis, the variance between the tax rate with QTS and without QTS could be potentially $1.23.
And so kind of multiplying that out on your, if you do the math in your head on your average homes, that is a pretty significant change in the local only tax rate.
And now understanding that this value is going to come online for all of your taxing jurisdictions and their levees adjusting accordingly.
We've kind of projected that forward as well.
These projections I'm going to start on the second slide are based off of some very broad strokes. And I want to paint that picture because one,
the school district is performing their own independent analysis on this because they are the largest taxing jurisdiction on the tax bill.
And so their fluctuations in their levy are going to have probably the most direct impact and really outside of them doing their own analysis and get an understanding of how their funding works.
We've just painted a broad picture of their average change year over year. The school district funding formula is different than how municipalities are funded.
They are profunded on a per pupil basis of equalized value. So the higher the equalized value goes without any new students. They're going to receive less state aides.
Therefore, their levy is going to increase. And so it's my understanding that they'll be potentially before you next month to present their independent analysis and what their levy could potentially be throughout the life of our analysis.
But for this specific purpose, I've taken a five year average change of what each other taxing jurisdictions levies have changed.
So over the last five years, Dane County's levy has increased 27.3%. The school districts has increased 26.5% and the technical college has increased 11.5%.
So an average change of about five and a half for Dane County 5.2 for the school district and 2.3 for the technical college projecting forward.
I have done those increases year over year to their actual 25 levy for 26 budget, which gets us this picture.
This is with both QTS and without QTS to get our total property tax levy.
So this is the total levy of all taxing jurisdictions that are on the village of divorce tax bill on a QTS basis and without QTS.
So for 27 and projecting so 27 and 28, they'd be the same because no new value would be coming online significantly about $17.63 per thousand and seven dropping to 17, 17 per thousand.
Then we start to see some variances coming online when the QTS value comes online, which would create initially about a $2.30, 38 cent variance between tax rates up to $4.23 per thousand.
So the all in tax rate with QTS at the height of the build out could be $10.45 as compared to $17.63 today.
Or without this, we're still going to drop, but to about $14.68.
Once all the value comes online and all of the tid closures happen, we could reasonably expect that with QTS, the all in property tax rate could drop to $6.70 with QTS or $9.08 without QTS.
So let's roll us back to what we've talked about. The village's current tax rate is $5.88, 86 cents alone.
So basically a fraction of what the current all in tax rate is is what it could end up being by the end of the 2041 analysis.
So this really just kind of gives you, while these are built on a number of assumptions, it's what we know now is based off of past financial performance, as well as past actual levy growth for our other taxing jurisdictions.
This analysis will be updated once we get the results of the deforest and your area school district independent analysis to really drive down what a more realistic levy for them is going to be.
Some final thoughts just kind of wrap up and hit home again. Our projections are very conservative and designed to stress test the levy and the ability for the village to levy those funds.
Taking into account current statutory limitations and history of village financing operations.
We can't project what if the state law is going to change if the world is going to end.
This is just to give us a general understanding of what is how can we evaluate the development given what we know today.
The build out schedule, the minimum value guarantees and phasing are still under negotiation.
And so this is just an understanding of the snapshot in the time of what we know now, what could be reasonably expected.
And this analysis is built on historic trends and assumptions.
And it's meant to provide context for you. This is not marrying you to any of this stuff, but really just provide context of based off of past what we can assume moving forward.
This is going to potentially be the end results for the village and all the other overlying taxing jurisdictions.
And then what is the overall impact on your property taxpayer moving forward.
So that is all I have. And I'm happy to ask or answer any questions.
Everyone take a deep breath. That was a lot of information. A lot of good work on your part. Thank you. I appreciate it.
I would ask the board members if they have any questions.
Just quickly, I want to note that the slide and the video will be posted after the meeting so that for folks that may not be in the room or not another room can also listen to the presentation on our engaged to forest website.
Thank you. All right.
Did you have a question, Jim?
So at one point during your presentation, you said part of the assumptions was that you were not building in like increases in staff and things like that.
But I'm wondering.
I think what you are included is increases in the budget. So is that actually taking that into account or not.
Correct. And so your current staffing model and the practice of accounting for staff for your current growth is continued forward in our model.
We are not adding additional staff directly attributed to the QTS development.
And there will be no significant service level, new service or kind of expenditures related that could be reasonably related to the QTS development.
None of those are built into our analysis.
All right. Any other questions or comments?
Thank you. This was really helpful. And it does give us some more context and some some basis for thinking about all of this. So we appreciate it.
Just to note for the those in the audience.
There if anybody wants to comment on this, you can do that under item nine.
We're not doing individual comments on this section. So just so that folks are aware of that. Thank you.
All right.
I'm just impressed you got through that without any water or anything.
Good job.
All right. Now we'll move to old business.
There is no old business. We're going to move to new business.
And resolution 2026-004, a resolution authorizing the village president to execute an agreement with Marco technologies for a new copier lease.
Judd.
So the memo on the packet and the resolution is there.
We're we were working with the damaging system for the last number of years with the copier.
We had gotten a.
Perspective code from Marco that showed it was a significant decrease in savings that we could have for our copier costs.
We reviewed that extensively and we plan then our ask you to approve the authorization for staff to enter into an agreement with Marco.
Marco is our current IT vendor. We've had them for just about a year.
They're doing great work for us.
And this would just be an added thing. So if we have issues, there's no more of this going on like it's their problem or their problem.
It's Marco's problem because they're the copier and the IT company for us as we move forward.
So we do have three copiers that the village has. There's two in village hall and one at public services.
So as.
So this is just one copier has those other two run out of their lease agreement will bring them on.
Marco bring in the next one and the next one and they'll actually make them co terminus.
So should we ever need to leave in the future?
All three copies would come to it one time so you're not lingering on within the old.
Higher cost process.
Okay.
There was information in your packet. Are there any questions for Judd?
If not, I would entertain a motion to approve.
Motion to approve.
Second.
Motion and a second.
Are there any further comments?
Are there any public appearances on this? I don't believe so.
All right.
Well, then I would ask if there's no other comments that all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Post.
Motion carries.
8.2.
Resolution 2026-005.
A resolution approving a second amendment to the development agreement with American packaging corporation.
Bill, do you want to add some comments for this?
Sure. Yeah, so this item previously came for the village board.
Currently the village has a development agreement with American packaging company.
A term within that agreement required for a PC to construct a phase four of their building before the end of next year.
They've approached us and have informed us because of business operations and the current market that they do not intend to expand their four phase by the item next year.
They've asked for the bill is to extend that in additional four years, along with the potential incentives that come with it.
Under review, we did see that they constructed their phase three about approximately four years, I've had a time.
And so the village did recognize those tax benefits in that in those four years.
And so we thought it was fair to provide this opportunity for a PC.
They've been a good partner for the community.
What we've done here, we revised the agreement to include language to extend construction that line for four years.
And then just the benefit, just the incentives for that or phase for the four years.
Incentive pieces for phases one to three will expire as ran previously.
We do recommend approval of this.
Any questions for Bill.
I make a motion to approve second with a motion and a second.
Do we have we have some public. No, we don't on this one.
We have no public appearances on this. So I would ask if there's no other comments or questions, all those in favor signify by saying I.
I.
Post.
Motion carries.
I'm sorry, could I ask who made them.
You made the second.
Thank you.
8.3.
Resolution 2026.
A resolution authorizing the village president and village clerk to execute an agreement for code enforcement services with municipal code enforcement LLC.
Alex is going to do a presentation. You might remember we talked about this quite extensively at a previous meeting.
Yeah, so we've kind of been discussing this as you mentioned on and off for a couple of years now.
In August.
Represented from.
MCE municipal code enforcement came and presented their services to you all.
This was approved in the as part of the 2026.
Budget and.
Recommending approval, assuming this moves forward will be connecting with MCE here and the not too distant future to get them familiar with our systems.
And kind of on board to move forward with code enforcement.
Yes, Brad.
Well, what's expected ROI for this is there are different metrics that they're supposed to meet during this process for the first year.
Yeah, so our goal is not necessarily to have an ROI with us.
We're the intention with code enforcement and how we've approached this in the past.
Has not to be punitive, not generating revenue, but more.
Kind of educational and compliance in nature.
So I think our focus is really going to be more on.
You know, providing education via some of the door hangers that our team has put together on different aspects of the code and ordinance.
And then falling through from that. So there's not necessarily we're not viewing it as a revenue generating source. If that makes sense.
All right, if there are no other questions, we have a couple of people who wanted to speak on this.
So I would ask for Winona storms. Is she in this room? If not.
And after Winona is Christian Belkey.
Is Greg back there?
Okay, I'm forward.
Just before you begin, will someone let Trisha Belkey know she's next?
Trisha.
Can you hear me now?
Your name and address if you please.
My name is Winona storms and I live at 417 East Lincoln drive to forest.
I am opposed to contracting out with municipal code enforcement LLC to handle code enforcement services.
The proposed contract states that we would pay $49 an hour for up to 20 hours a week from April 1 through October 31.
And $49 an hour for up to 10 hours a week the rest of the year.
Why would we pace out so much money when a person could work directly for the village doing the same work at a lower cost rate to the village?
Why are we looking to hire a contractor who to paraphrase Alex Allen's memo to the board.
The village would be looking to in state for proactive monitoring and response and give notices of violation to our citizens.
If we are in such dire need for money that we entertain being courted by companies like QTS and our penny pinching with such aggression.
That we can't afford to properly outfit our village with public use trash receptacles.
Why are we spending money to contract out to overly police our own community.
Is it to make money via ticket issuing for violations or is it just to aid in another threat looming over our heads.
If we are so worried about the day to day minute neighborhood new census.
Why are we so quick to usher in QTS with their very large and loud public new census.
Please reject the resolution to approve a code enforcement services contract with municipal code enforcement LLC.
Thank you.
Tricia.
If it's green it's on.
Hi.
I'm Tricia bulky.
I live in deforest my address is on the form.
I would like to register my opposition to this ordinance revision based on three things.
You say that we need to bring this data center into our community because we do not have enough money.
It seems quite irresponsible to spend more money that we don't have on an independent consultant outside of our own government.
To it's quite clear that you cannot control the community with the existing government to enforce ordinances in our municipal code because you are offering that this be put in place.
If you can't control what's happening in your own backyard with everyday residents.
How can you even begin to think that you could control any ordinances put in place to prevent QTS from breaking the rules.
Why would you farm out municipal code enforcement now when you have QTS on the agenda and you won't be able to enforce that either.
If you are so concerned about the new census that are mentioned here, how is it that you are not concerned about the new census that would be presented with the project.
New census such as noise pollution, light pollution, construction noises, generator fumes, the noises, noise created from the breaking of trucks driving through.
And that is only the beginning of the new census that are against current state mandates.
It seems that you do not have a money problem because your net growth numbers are better than all of the towns in Dane County combined.
What it seems to have is a spending problem and we do not need to spend any more money on the silly ordinance because you think you need to control your residents.
What we need is maybe a task force to figure out where you could spend less money and then we wouldn't be faced with the situation that we are.
And now bringing a multi mega data center into our community.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right. We, I think, are done with the public appearances on that item.
I would ask or entertain a motion to approve.
Motion to approve. Is there a second?
Second. We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion or comment? Yes, Jim.
I just want to note that I'm looking at say brandy more than anybody that.
One of the code enforcement's we're going to.
That's proposing here is our these are recreational vehicles.
And I looked a little bit at neighboring municipalities and I hope to revisit our code at some point.
Great.
Thank you.
Okay.
You guys know it gets cold in here. The more people in the room, the air conditioning goes on to get air flow.
So it gets quite cool right under the air event.
With that, we have a motion and a second.
So all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed? Motion carries.
Item 8.4 discussion and possible action regarding a direct legislation petition titled an ordinance requiring voter approval for a referendum for certain large annexations and major development actions.
Al, do you want to.
Give us some context and.
Yeah, this was a direct annexation. I'm sorry, direct legislation petition that was filed by a number of residents.
Village clerk to determine that enough signatures were.
Aimed on the petition.
We've provided you with the memo with our analysis of what the ordinance would do.
It's very different from what I think people think it would do in our recommendation that the board not take any action on it.
I brought my partner Dan Evans with me. He did the.
We took the laboring or trying to figure out the ordinance as well as the law that applies to it.
And he can answer any questions that the board has.
And thank you for all the work you did on this.
Are there any questions?
Okay.
With that, I would go to direct legislation comments.
We have a number.
Nominek.
And I apologize if I say this wrong, but.
Agna.
And the next person is Trisha Billkey again.
Right,
you sit there, make sure the mic is turned on. It's green when it's turned on.
And you have to pull it quite close to yourself.
And then if you'll introduce yourself with a name and an address, we're glad to hear from you.
Hi, my name is Dominic, and I live at 711 Sunnybrook Drive to force Wisconsin.
More than 100 children legally employed and hazardous jobs federal investigation fines is the title of findings on Packers sanitation services by the Department of Labor.
These children were as young as 13 using caustic chemicals to clean razor sharp saws and slaughterhouses during illegal overnight shifts.
Many of these children sustained chemical burns from this work.
They paid only 1.5 million in fines. This exploitative child labor was caught in 2023 in the US.
Many of you have children, and I ask you, what kind of horrible company would do such things in fragrant violation of laws and morals?
Would we let such people conduct business here?
Well, you're considering it. UTS and Packers sanitation services are both owned by Blackstone.
A sign of similar conduct. QTS is facing penalties.
Both Iowa and New Jersey for everything from unpermitted wells to chemical spills and unpermitted discharges.
Lies and fines are just a way of doing business for Blackstone and its subsidiaries before they build is our only chance to stop them.
If you unleash this beast, your minor fines are meaningless in the face of a $1.2 trillion asset manager, especially since they can take away the 50 million they promised.
They could withhold their promised funds if they're caught lying about illegal wells or dumping chemicals and then simply ignore the maximum fines you can levy on their $12 billion facility.
Our neighbors in Vienna told them exactly where they can shove that bribe and I ask you to do the same.
Vendors like QTS employs staggeringly few people per data center. Some napkin math of their 1900 employees and 75 data centers tells me they have 25 per data center.
That's ignoring the higher paying office workers in Virginia.
Anyway, you crack it. There's 700 long-term jobs. It's just a typical lie to your face and deal with the minor consequences later playbook.
More than 10% of the town signed a petition to stop this in just six days.
You didn't even get a large enough venue for everyone tonight. This is not a small minority of the town and any attempt to create as such as intentionally misleading or delusional.
I ask if it's such a small minority, why don't we have a vote on it?
I know there'll be a lot of proverbial silver offered by Blackstone to stab your town in the back.
So my question is, will you stand with your community or avert your eyes as you sell it to the billionaires?
Thank you. I yield my time.
Tricia Billkey.
The next speaker is Alicia Wellhouse.
My speaking on behalf of, I have two people. I don't know who was called because I'm outside.
I'm not allowed to come in here because the capacity has already been reached.
It says the next person is you and then Alicia.
I'm either speaking for Laura Morrison or Sam Mel on the petition.
Okay.
I need to state my name again, even that I'm speaking. Okay. I'm still Tricia Billkey and I live into forest and my address is on the form.
I am speaking on behalf of Sam Mel who could not be here tonight.
Hello members of the board. My name is Sam Mel. I'm a 20 year old lifelong resident of Vienna and a proud to forest graduate.
I'm unable to be here in person tonight because I am preparing a conference in my role as a Wisconsin state FFA officer representing to forest and advocating for the future of agriculture.
Agriculture isn't just something I talk about. It's what I live, what I believe in and what I am fighting to protect.
I've been told that some landowners think my debate is irrelevant because it's their land and they can do whatever they want with it.
And sure they can. But when large farms use money as a weapon to take land from small family farms, it becomes clear this isn't about rights anymore.
It's about who can write the biggest check and that they don't care who gets pushed out in the process.
The result is always the same. Small farms disappear and the community is left to deal with the damage.
The average farm sites in Wisconsin is 237 acres. The proposed data center would remove nearly seven Wisconsin family farms worth of land from production.
That land represents family livelihoods, local food production and generations of work.
This is not progress. It is the slow erosion of the heart of the forest and the backbone of American agriculture.
We often say that we don't want agriculture to lose its connection to the community that decisions like this push us in exactly that direction.
This isn't just about farmland. It's about food security, local businesses and the identity of our town.
That is why I am urging you to approve this ordinance. The people of Vienna have made it clear that they do not want this data center in their community.
Approving this ordinance shows that divorce respects that decision and wants people to decide the next step.
It sends a message that growth into forest will be responsible, ethical and community driven.
I'm also asking you to postpone any decisions on the QTS development until this ordinance can go to a referendum.
This allows the people who live here, work here and raise families here to have a direct voice and a decision that will permanently shape their future.
You are elected to lead, but leadership also means listening.
Our nation was founded on the words, we the people approving this ordinance honors that principal and shows respect for both your constituents and your neighbors.
Tonight you have the opportunity to stand up for small family farms for local control and for the long term future of the forest.
I urge you to approve this ordinance. Thank you for listening to the future of agriculture and the future of this town.
Thank you.
Alicia, well house.
And after Alicia is Lauren, cyber sent.
I just pushed this then. Oh, it's already us. And then if you'll introduce yourself, that would be helpful.
You bet.
My name is Alicia, well house. I live over by the middle school here in town.
Good evening members. Oh, sorry. Good evening members of the village board.
My name is Alicia, well house and I'm here tonight to ask you respectfully.
From my heart to say no to the proposed annexation from the town of Vienna.
And for QTS data center and yes to the petition.
I'm here to, I'm not here to rehash studies or answer questions. You've already heard those tonight.
I want to talk to you about who we are.
Divorce is a special place. It's not just lines on a map or parcels of land. It's a community.
It's neighbors who look out for one another. It's kids riding their bikes families walking to activities and people who choose to live here because the values of the village represents them.
I'm raising my family here. My children go to school here. This is the place where we're going to teach them what it means to be part of a community.
We care about others to act responsibly and to do the right thing even when it's hard.
That's why this decision matters so much. This annexation isn't about partnership.
It's about a massive corporation using pressure, money and speed to force its way into a community that didn't ask for it.
That's not how good neighbors behave. And it's not how we want our children to learn that decisions get made.
We love our neighbors in Vienna. We love our Dane County. We love Wisconsin.
Strong communities don't grow by pitting towns against one another or overriding local voices. They grow through trust, cooperation and respect.
If we allow a company this large to come in and bully its way through annexation, what lessons does that teach? That power matters more than people.
That money speaks louder than community values. I don't want my children to learn that lesson here.
The forest has worked hard to build a community is today.
Please don't rush the annexation. Please let our village become a precedent for corporate overreach instead of community change.
Don't let tonight you have an opportunity to stand up not just for the forest, but for the idea that communities matter that neighbors matter and that growth should never come at the cost of our values.
I ask you to say no to this annexation to say yes to the petition to community.
Say yes to our neighbors and say yes to the future. We want our children to inherit. Thank you for your time.
The next is Kristin Maccovitch.
And after Kristin is Sherry Stoch.
Wasn't that one.
But that was Lauren.
That was Alicia. So now it's Lauren Cyberson. Thank you. Sorry, Lauren.
Sorry, Lauren. That's all right. No problem.
Then the next one is Kristin Maccovitch.
You ready? Hello board members. My name is Lauren.
You have my address on the forum.
I came here today to implore each of you to adopt the petition submitted by our constituents who allowed to force residents to decide for ourselves via referendum, whether or not we would welcome a billion dollar corporation like UTS and their parent companies to have access to our lands and resources.
I've lived here for almost 10 years, raised my son for his whole life here, taught in the area for 10 years, and I'm a small business owner and some prairie.
We decided, however, to put down roots here instead of a large place like some prairie because we wanted to be part of a community that cares deeply for the needs of its residents and fights to ensure that no one falls through the cracks.
This board has claimed in several previous meetings that they don't feel like our community has spoken out enough about the QTS data center proposal.
And that's why, and that is why they have not yet rejected the corporation's request.
However, I wanted to take a moment to consider the outpouring of concern about the data center with a new perspective.
According to the Dane County voter records on the community, I'm sorry, the county government site.
There are currently 7,726 registered voters into forest.
To forest on average over the past five years has turned out around 74% of the population in presidential elections, 28% in state elections and 21 in local or municipal elections.
Our most recent municipal election had 2,404 voters.
Therefore, if looking at the fact that over 1,100 out of our 10,000 residents signed the petition for referendum, that's almost 40% of regularly voting residents.
That number would then indicate that this opposition represents a bipartisan bisection of your constituents.
In a time when Americans faith in their government is at an all time low, you have a choice before you to push this data center project through and validate your constituents beliefs that government officials will only serve their own best interest once in office,
or you could restore people's faith in this board and our local government in general and allow your constituents to decide their fate for themselves via referendum.
In closing, I'd like to leave you with what I closed almost every class with as a teacher.
Make good choices, ones that you can be proud of at the end of the day.
Thank you.
Kristin Mackovich.
Hello, my name is Kristin Ms. Gorbich. I live in DeForest. I believe my address is on my form. I also have taught in the DeForest School District for about 10 years.
I asked the board to vote in favor of the ordinance change that DeForest residents have requested via petition.
In the absence of supporting a vote in favor of the ordinance, I asked the board members to postpone any decisions on QTS development approvals until after the proposed ordinance change goes to referendum. Thank you.
Sherry Stoch, and then Shane, our mussman.
Hello, I asked Sherry Stoch on Scott Drive into forest. I asked the board to vote in favor of the ordinance change to forest residents have requested in the petition.
In addition, I asked the board members to postpone any decisions on QTS development approvals until after the proposed ordinance changes go to referendum.
I am against the data center development for all of the reasons already suggested in the various meetings so far and beg of you to listen to the many, many residents of DeForest who are against the data center.
Please honor the will of the people living here. Thank you.
Shane how are mussman and then Stephen McDonald after that.
Oh, good evening. My name is Shane how are mussman and I live at 4097 bear tree parkway here in the forest with my wife and I'm a senior field service engineer and biotech and I have spent the last decade building my career around biotech industry for both large and small companies.
I'm not afraid of progress. I'm certainly not anti tech. This gives me the understanding exactly of what kind of infrastructure is required for the data center.
But simply being pro technology does not mean we should accept a project of this massive scale without the direct consent of the people who live here.
I'm here to ask you to vote. Yes.
On the draft ordinance petition. I support this ordinance because it establishes a clear safety valve if a project requires annexing annexing more than 30 acres or if it has projected financial implications of more than $10 million.
The voters should be the ones to approve this.
A data center of the size changes our water usage our energy grid and landscape permanently for decades and generations to come.
When the stakes are this high the decision shouldn't just happen with a few folks that should happen with the entire residents of the entire community.
Our village is a great place with a great set of values listed on our village website.
One particularly stands out to me of being inclusive.
And it starts off as everyone has a voice and a valued opinion.
A vote of no on this ordinance says that our biggest land decision in history, the residents voices do not legally matter.
A vote of yes turns that core value into action.
This tells the residents that everyone has a voice when it matters most.
Finally, there is the matter of financial exposure.
We know that large scales annexations like this can rely on to financing and infrastructure upgrades that fall in taxpayer.
In my industry, when any project has any large scale investment, we just don't push it through.
We get buy in from the stakeholders and this scenario, the residents are your stakeholders.
And right now, if we are assuming the risk, we should be in part of that investment decision.
This ordinance is an opportunity for partnership.
It is a way for this board to say we trust the community enough to let them decide and make the right decision.
Please leave value the honor of inclusive.
Please value the inclusivity value and let residents decide what is best.
Oh, yes, to adopt this ordinance. Thank you.
Stephen McDonald, and then after Stephen, Senator Sarah, I'm Kiyoski.
My name is Steve McDowell. I live right up a street. I'm not going to give you my address because I already signed the form.
I'm going to start by saying, thanks to everyone who spoke up.
It's inspiring to see all these community members standing up for their community.
I worked for a DOD NASA contractor and I work with hazardous chemicals.
And I would just like to point out that.
Stephen, can you talk closer to the. Yes, I can talk closer. Sorry.
So like I said, I worked for a DOD NASA contractor with hazardous chemicals.
And I would just like to point out that all the evidence that has been.
Shown to the world about how these Denny centers operate.
They pollute groundwater with PFAS chemicals that are impossible to clean up.
So if we move forward with this data center, we will have polluted groundwater for the rest of the existence of this community.
And I'm just going to leave it at that. Thank you.
Thank you, Stephen. Senator Sarah, and then after Sarah is run to mind.
I'll wait for my three minutes.
Thank you.
Good evening. Hi, everyone. I'm Sarah Kieske, state Senator for district 14, which includes the village of de Forest.
I'm here today in support of the petition presented to the village board that would allow community members to vote on a proposed referendum.
Let me be clear.
I am not here to put my finger on the scale of the proposed data center project for.
Because I don't live here. I live in Lodi.
And I don't pretend to know what is best for de Forest residents.
That is for all of you to decide.
Tonight, however, I'm here to support the community having an opportunity to weigh in on and vote for or against something that is very new.
Very big coming very fast and with a lot of competing factors.
It's complicated.
I have heard from many local constituents about the large beneficial tax base it would create, which you all heard about tonight.
It's significant.
There is additional economic development that may come around the site that would be beneficial for this town village.
Sorry.
And the hundreds of good paying jobs, the building projects would create for years.
For my friends in organized labor.
And there's more.
I have also heard from a large number of people who have voiced their concerns about the loss of local farmland.
The potential negative impact on the environment.
And the concern about an increase in residential energy costs, etc.
I have learned about data centers just recently, like most of all of you.
And I find this issue really hard.
I commend the village board.
And the overflowing rooms of people here tonight, putting in the time and effort to learn as much as you can about this complex proposal before making a decision.
And because I believe strongly in our democratic process.
And the right provided in Wisconsin statutes for citizens to pursue a legal avenue to petition for a referendum where they get a voice.
Tonight, I stand in support of the petition that was signed by over 1000 residents requesting the referendum.
Finally, I'm going to say this fast. I only have a few.
I also want to let you know that there was a recent Senate bill put forward by my colleagues and I currently there are no statewide guardrails for data centers and understandably that has people very uneasy.
Wisconsin Democrats are leading with a proactive balanced approach, ensuring innovation and accountability go hand in hand.
State bill Senate bill 729 is available to look at and I have copies.
Thank you Sarah.
Rhonda is next. And then.
Oh, I see what and then we have.
A designated speaker.
Rebecca.
Oh, that's me again.
Lucky you.
Okay.
She sent me an email. I have that if you needed to see that she asked me to read that for her, but I don't think she filled that out on the forum.
Okay.
So I'm speaking on behalf of my myself first. I'm Rhonda.
My notes live in the town of Vienna. You have my address on file.
As mentioned many times previously, I'm a lifelong member of the divorce community. I grew up in what is now the village of Windsor and have lived in the town of Vienna for the past 24 years.
I grew up on a farm and my family continues to farm today.
Over the years, my family's farm has changed a lot.
They went from raising dairy cattle hogs beef cattle and crops to now strictly raising crops.
The livestock industry has changed dramatically over the last 40 years, making it very difficult to be profitable unless you have hundreds, if not thousands of animals, which my family is not interested in trying to manage.
One thing that has not changed dramatically is the amount of land that my family farms.
While they would love to grow their land base, it has been almost impossible for them to do that.
My family used to farm the land where quick trip Burger King Taco Bell and Starbucks currently sit.
My family used to farm the land where jump around gymnastics in a development of homes on the west side of River Road now sit.
My family used to farm the land on the north side of the forest where the business park currently sits.
I think you can see the pattern.
Unfortunately, in all of these cases, they were not the owners of any of that land.
They were simply the renters and they had no control over the situation when the owners chose to annex their land into the village of the forest and then subsequently sold the land for development.
Farming is a tough life and it's very hard to continuously lose farmland while trying to support your family.
In order to survive these huge losses of land, my family could choose to try to take land away from other farmers in the area by outfitting them on land.
But they choose not to do that.
Instead, they respectfully wait until another farmer chooses to retire from farming and they make every attempt to try and rent that land or buy it.
Why am I bringing this up?
Because it is proof that you don't need to take something away from someone else in order to grow or in order to survive.
When the village of DeForest has swallowed up the entire town of Vienna, how will they continue to grow?
At that point, they will be forced to figure out how to grow or survive by living within their means, much like my family does.
My family has had to figure out how to adapt to changes by getting creative, not by taking something away from someone else.
I'm asking the village of DeForest to follow suit by getting creative instead of relying on land grabs from the town of Vienna in order to grow.
Otherwise, when will enough be enough for you?
We all know Vienna stands on the data center project. They aren't interested.
It does not fit within their comprehensive plan, nor does it fit within DeForest's comprehensive plan.
And if DeForest is going to amend their comprehensive plan, every time a developer wants to do something that doesn't fit within the parameters of their current plan,
why even bother to have a plan in the first place because you aren't following it?
The residents of both municipalities as well as those around us have spoken loud and clear, they don't want this.
The risks far outweigh any financial benefits.
I'm asking you to listen to the residents and let this annexation be put to a referendum.
Thank you.
All right. And now you're speaking on behalf of Rebecca Gotta.
Correct. And do you have her address?
Yes. Okay.
So, yes, I'm speaking on behalf of Becky Godat. She is a village of DeForest residents.
I asked the board to vote in favor of the ordinance changed to forest residents have requested via petition.
In the absence of supporting a vote in favor of the ordinance, I asked the board members to propose.
Postpone, any decisions on QTS development approvals until after the proposed ordinance change goes to referendum.
Also, Vienna has said no to this effort, both via its residents and its town board, even when offered a lucrative sum to just go along with it.
That should give DeForest pause.
While there are some gains in property tax levy increases, this may give the lip village.
The fact that our neighbor is adamant about not having this occur says a great deal about the annexation and the data center.
I want to remind the board of our DeForest motto, growing the good life, which includes protecting our natural resources and environment for future generations. Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
All right.
The designated speaker is Mike de Rubas.
And he's speaking on behalf of Robert Whitaker.
And after him is.
Again, Michael de Rubias speaking for.
Prosper de Rubias.
Are they online?
Are they coming?
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
Okay.
Good.
My name is Mike de Rubas.
I'm speaking on behalf of Bob Whitaker.
Who has been a diverse resident for nearly 20 years.
My address is on the forum.
My name is Bob Whitaker and I've been a divorce resident
for nearly 20 years.
Thank you for the opportunity to be heard,
even though I could not attend in person.
I'm asking you tonight.
To be influenced not by the outside powers,
but by those who should influence your decision-making, the community that elected you and entrusted
you to lead our village government. Surely there is a voice of conscience within each
of you questioning if this project should continue. Please listen to that voice and let
the voters decide. Accepting empty promises of jobs that, at best, would be temporary
and of imagined riches to the village tax base will alter the quality of life here immeasurably
and forever. I'm wondering who will purchase homes in this community in the future once
deforest becomes the data center of the midwest. I can't find a community anywhere that has
had a positive experience after approving a data center. Data centers are well known
for making false promises. The big question, why is it so difficult for you to see how
detrimental it will this will be to the deforest residents? I know you cannot consider each
business decision via a referendum, but this is a such a critical decision that the voters
should have the right to make it, not a handful of people. Please let the voters decide and
don't be pressured and influenced by smooth talking representatives from QTS. If via referendum,
the voters choose to approve the data center, then they must live with the consequences.
Thank you, Bob Whitaker.
All right, we're going on here, but you're listed three times as a speaker, and I'm not
sure about this, actually. So he's speaking now. Now for PASPER, Darubius?
I'm speaking also on behalf of two of my children who are 18 and 22. They were not able to be here tonight.
So I'm speaking on behalf of PASPER, Darubius, who goes by Schuyler, also lives with me and DeBoris.
She says, I think DeBoris is big enough, and we can continue to grow within our existing boundaries.
Why annex new land when we have plenty of land already? I am 18 years old and looking for a career
that will not be overtaken by AI. This is a scary time to becoming of age as things are changing so quickly.
The data center will employ lots of people at first, but what about 10 years from now?
Perhaps a data center job would be a good fit for me, but it seems there will be very few.
I thought about working at Epic Systems in Verona. The commute is quite far.
The Epic campus sits on about 1,600 acres, similar and sized, to the proposed annexation.
The difference is that Epic employs more than 13,000 people in a variety of capacities.
How many people with this data center actually employ a long term?
What value would the data center bring to our community here?
I support the petition to an adopted audience that will require a vote of the people for any annexation larger than 30 acres or $10 million.
All right, and now you're speaking for yourself.
All right.
Just speak closer because we don't hear most of what you're saying.
Thank you for telling me. Okay.
My name is Mike Turribles. I live in the forest. My name is on the farm. I've lived here for over 10 years in northern Dane County for 25 years.
I support the petition to adopt an ordinance that will require a vote of the people for any annexation larger than 30 acres or $10 million.
The abundance of natural space and the value place there by the village is part of what drew us to the area.
There seem to be a focus on balancing human needs and the natural world.
We should be pursuing smart growth and find more innovative uses for the land we have.
Reading over farmland and converting it to an industrial data center is not smart growth.
Why does the village of divorce board and administration want to annex want this annexation to occur when its residents clearly do not.
The answer to me is the desire to create net new construction, which is required by Wisconsin state law statute 66.06.02 to enable a municipality to increase its levy limit.
The forest currently has the highest net new construction in all of Dane County.
Within its existing boundaries, it already has significant land that is yet to be developed.
Additionally, the rapid expansion caused by this annexation, but have significant impact in future years on the village's net new construction.
In 2025, the village that the value of new construction was over about $178 million.
UTS has been posing at $12 million data center over multiple years.
This rapid change in net new construction, along with the variability of timing, will create as many problems as possibilities for the village.
Likewise, at the end of the period of construction, it will be nearly impossible to find another option to create a comparable increase in the following years.
From a size comparison, the new quick trip campus into forest is on 150 acres.
The Amazon distribution center going up in cottage Grove, also about 150 acres.
This annexation will be more than 10 times the size, but over 1600 acres.
The scale of this is just too big.
The pace is too rapid.
Smart growth requires us to slow down and be intentional.
As far as hyperspeed, DFO needs to go slow.
As far as hyperscale, DFO needs to say no.
I support the petition to adopt an ordinance that would require a vote of the people for any annexation, which are 30 acres or $10 million.
Thank you.
The next speaker is Kim Du Bois and then Janelle Wolf.
Du Bois.
I'm sorry.
It's okay. I'm French by marriage.
I'm Kim Du Bois. I live here into forest. My address is on the form.
I am here to implore all of you to pass the ordinance that's in front of you and take this to a referendum.
I honestly can't figure out why you wouldn't want to do that.
This is a big decision.
I can't imagine why you would want to shoulder all of this alone.
Somebody said before that you guys mentioned somewhere that you weren't sure what that the entire village was opposed to this or not enough people had spoken out against it.
And honestly, people here have been unwavering. We've shown up. We've showed out.
We have been unwavering in our opposition to this. And at the very least, we want a voice.
It is time to listen to your constituents. It's time to listen to the people that voted for you and put you in those seats and give us a choice. You can still have a vote. You can have your own vote and we can all have our own vote.
It is time to listen to your voters. Not I'm not talking about the people that come in in their high vis in their logo gear and stand in the back and don't live in this village talking about the people that trust you with their futures, their homes.
And give us a voice in us. Thank you. Thank you.
Janelle Wolf, and then you'll know the Griffiths, still NASA.
All right.
Yourself, but first it's Janelle Wolf.
Okay.
Oh, there we go. Sorry, let me unmute for a second.
Can you hear me?
Yes, we can hear you. Okay.
My name is Janelle Wolf, and I am a resident of the forest. I live on Apple Blossom Drive into forest.
As a resident, I am deeply concerned by the village of divorce, lack of disclosure and transparency on recent hot topics like fluoride and the QTS data center.
Many elected board members have made statements and decisions that have reflected to the divorce residents that our voices and concerns and opinions are not value valued or wanted by the village and the board.
This is why so many residents have joined together to support a new request for an ordinance to give us residents of the forest, our voices back with a referendum on the status center.
As a resident, I have many concerns about the QTS data center.
QTS's lack of transparency.
In studies from data centers as they come along, come along.
There has been new studies that show that longer periods of time.
The exposure to increased risk of cancers, miscarriages and long term health impacts to residents of communities with data centers have increased.
The impacts to our village water, what assurances will the village ensure us residents with increased testing and reviewing of the water quality to us residents.
How can we be assured our drinking water, our shower and bath water, etc will be not be contaminated and that we will be safe and our children will be safe.
In July of 2025 QTS was fined by Cedar Rapids for drilling 40 wells without the notice to the city and without the proper permits.
On July 7, 2025, the Iowa DNR observed on Cedar Rapids QTS data center site.
The QTS was exceeding their daily water usage by 25,000 gallons a day that had not been registered with Iowa DNR.
What protections and guarantees will the forest do to ensure QTS does not do this here.
Drilling more wells than allowed and permitted using more water than registered.
What measures will the forest put in to ensure the excessive water and energy on the village.
Water works and energy grids will not be passed on to us residents.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Don't know so Griffith.
Don't know so pronounce your name for me.
Okay, I was right. Thank you.
Good evening. My name is so not the Griffiths. My address is on the form submitted.
When I grew up in a former Soviet Union, you don't get involved in local business or politics in general.
It is it is unwelcome and you can even say say not safe.
There are a few powerful that control all facets of their life of our society.
And so it's pretty much futile to try to get involved in community life.
I strongly believe in civil engagement for the betterment of our lives because of that perspective.
I have always admired the American democracy where we the people have a say in what happens in our country and in our communities.
As soon as I learned about the forest area action team, I was at that field office that same weekend.
I have met some of you through through that organization.
I have met some of the most passionate people and worked alongside them.
I canvassed for election and reelection of some of you here.
We have celebrated. We have shared meals.
And today I am in front of you before you asking for you to listen to the community to really listen to people who elected you.
We elected you to represent our interest to protect our interests.
This massive burden shouldn't have been placed on ordinary citizens to organize to protect our own village to draft a petition to knock on doors.
We elected you to represent us.
Instead, we have been living the stressful and very anxious reality with the looming threat against everything we love and will live for here.
It has taken time and days away from our families with our loved ones.
The stress has been enormous.
The community of the forest in overwhelming majority stands against the center of development in our village.
If there is any doubt in the majority of residents stands on this, then please put it to referendum and let the community vote.
There is still time to make things right for our community and adopt the ordinance before you today.
In absence of supporting a vote in favor of the ordinance, I ask the board members to delay any decision on QTS development until this change goes to referendum.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Lindsay femurite, and then.
Mike Dubuvius for a kind rubus.
If some of you in the back want to sit.
There are some seats open.
Okay.
Lindsay femurite here.
Is she online?
All right, I'll set her aside.
Hi, my name is Lindsay femurite, my address is this time of form.
I have lived in force with this address for over 20 years, but I've been in the forest area for well.
Over half my life.
I settled into force because of its small community values and general environment and raised a son here based on that.
Things seem to be changing now and while change is good, not all of it is.
This is my first board meeting attendance in all my years here.
I have never gotten involved with village politics until the last year or so.
I was unable to sign the petition being addressed tonight before it was submitted.
In lieu of that, I'm here in person to ask you to vote. Yes.
On the petition that many signed in a very short time for an ordinance requiring voter approved.
Approval by a referendum for certain large.
Annexations and major development actions as outlined.
I feel that.
I feel that the decisions looming in our future of this magnitude.
Often negatively affect public health, utility bills, water usage.
Electric resources, community climate.
Property taxes and overall property value, among other things.
As of 2020 to force to the population of about 11,000.
I'm asking for the many to be heard and not just the viewer.
Especially when the average income earning.
Tax payer will suffer the most.
With some of these decisions and increase costs.
Every way should be heard.
And residents should have more time to educate themselves and their neighbors and industrialized.
And questions answered accurately and transparently.
Once land is industrialized in certain ways that cannot be restored.
With annexation, especially this amount of land, we should be respectful of our neighbors and surrounding in surrounding communities.
Such as Vienna, who will be affected as well as many others by the decisions we make here.
By Anna has already rejected the proposal directly related.
To the reason that sparked this petition by the people in the first place.
To that note, if data centers are so advantageous, why are communities rallying against them instead of for them.
Again, I'm asking for the petition address tonight to be adopted so that we can put these massive decisions to a vote of the many and not the few.
I ask that if this petition is not passed at all planning efforts related to projects that this would impact or put on hold.
Trust is in the title for a reason. It is what people seek and expect from leadership.
Thank you for hearing me tonight and a special thank you to all those working tirelessly behind the scenes to represent the many of us.
Thank you.
Well, guess who Mike Darubius for Ky Darubus.
And then after Mike, we have Melinda Murphy.
This one's quick. So I'm representing my son, Ky Darubus lives also into forest on the form there.
The annexation does not align with our comprehensive plan.
Something this message should be voted on in a referendum so that we all have a place in how our community develops.
I'm in favor of getting more power to the people and such large decisions should be made after a deliberative process that involves the entire community.
As an artist who is studying graphic design, I'm extremely concerned about the impacts of AI and my field.
We are being taught to use AI and as part of our artistic artistic process in class.
It just feels like we're moving humanity from art, which is the essence of what makes it special.
I have many concerns regarding the data center, probably too many to get into today.
How we use water use graphic impact noise levels, the list goes on.
Bottom line, the people should have a voice and how we grow.
I support the petition to adopt an ordinance that would require a vote of the people for any annexation larger than 30 acres or $10 million. Thank you.
Linda Murphy, and then Lydia Reed for Elizabeth McKenna.
Linda's online. Okay.
Can you hear me? We can hear you. Thank you. I was trying to put my video on, but I guess you don't want my video on.
No, okay. That's true. Okay. So my name is Melinda Murphy. You have my address on the form. I am a resident and homeowner in Windsor.
My name is Melinda Murphy. I'm a lawyer and a resident of Windsor and I'm here to strongly support the ordinance requiring voter approval for large annexations and major development projects.
The decisions made here ripple far beyond to forest borders.
They impact families in Vienna, Windsor and neighboring communities who share the same roads, schools and public services.
When, and that will happen for future generations to come when an annexation over 30 acres or a development, creating more than $10 million and financial obligations is on the table.
Those decisions are simply too big to be made without direct public input requiring a referendum isn't about stopping growth.
It's about responsible growth. It's about transparency, accountability, and making sure residents and neighboring communities have a real voice before long term financial commitments are locked in.
Once those decisions are made, the costs don't disappear. They show up in budgets, taxes and limits on what we can invest in for our kids and future generations.
This petition is fully consistent with Wisconsin law and reflects what many people are asking for a seat at the table.
Supporting this ordinance sends a clear message that to forest values, openness, fiscal responsibility and community trust. Thank you for listening and for taking this seriously.
Okay, thank you.
Designated speaker is Lydia Reed and on behalf of Elizabeth McKenna. And then after that is Melinda Murphy.
Oh, okay.
And after that is Winona storms.
Are you ready? Yeah, I'm ready. All right.
I'm Lydia Reed. I'm speaking for Elizabeth McKenna. I believe you have our address and you have mine because I will be speaking later to.
And this is Elizabeth's statement that she'd like to mean to make.
Currently to forest has seven tid districts. A tid district allows communities to use future property growth to fund improvements and spur growth by funding projects.
While it can be argued that the use of these areas to fund projects by developers may not be needed to cause new new development, they already exist.
What is also a given is that these areas are not completely filled out. There is still new development that occur can occur in them.
Thus, the reasoning that to forest must allow the annexation of land and Vienna to ensure future growth is unfounded and should not be part of the rationale to justify this request.
Thank you.
Daniel Janssen.
And then after Daniel, we have Lydia Reed.
Twice.
Oh, are we.
Okay. Oh, she spoke on code enforcement.
Yeah. Yeah. So she.
Yeah.
Okay.
Good to go.
My name is Winona storms and I live at 417 East Lincoln drive right here in the forest.
I signed and support the petition requiring that all large annexations go through public referendum.
I have spoken to hundreds of people and I've also through my social media's brand platform reached thousands of people and I have not had a single person tell me that they are opposed to this petition.
Regardless of people stands on the data center. One thing has remained consistent.
People want to have a voice and what happens in their community.
Here in the forest, we have a very large and loud group of people who live here and are telling you that they need their voice to be heard when it comes to huge decisions.
When those decisions are being made on the behalf of the deforest people.
You have an opportunity today to approve the petition and make sure that your constituents are heard loud and clear.
You have the opportunity today to give voice to the very people that you are supposed to represent.
If you were to vote no for this petition, your constituents will hear you loud and clear that you are not for the deforest people and that you only care about furthering your own career and personal interests.
Please hear me today right now when I am begging you with over 1000 petition or petition signers by my side to vote yes on this petition to put all large annexations to referendum.
This is my future. This is my children's future. This is your future. And this is all of our future.
Let us have a voice in shaping that future. Thank you.
You might as well just stay there because Lydia read.
Are you don't? You're not.
All right. Never mind.
Daniel Janssen. I just figured it out.
There's a lot of you.
Yours too.
Um, yes.
Um, can you folks hear me?
Okay. My name is Dan Janssen. I'm a resident of the village of deforest over 20 years now as of 2026.
I'm here today to ask you to vote in favor of this ordinance and in the absence of that I asked that you support postponing any action on the QTS data center development until after the ordinance has gone to referendum.
If the ordinance passes the QTS project can go to referendum itself and be decided by the citizens of deforest.
I know from recent conversations with a few of the trustees that a sticking point in approval of this ordinance is the 30 acre threshold.
Above which annexations would go to referendum.
In anticipation of this concern, we've done some analysis of department of administration data relating to village of deforest.
Uh, uh, uh, uh, those today annexations.
Over the years, 2015 through 2024, the most recent 10 years span for which data was available. There were 19 annexations approved by deforest in the database.
And a 30 acre threshold for of those could have been approved by the village board on other proposed ordinance. And while this may seem limiting, there are other details to consider.
If you raise the threshold to 50 acres, which was a number that was proposed to us by a couple of the trustees that we spoke to a total of six annotations would have been within the board approval threshold.
Raising it higher begins to defeat the intent of the petitioners, which is that these larger annexations should in fact be approved by citizens and not the board.
The average size of all approved annexations is over that time period was over 60 acres, more than twice the size, what we asked for in the ordinance and the average size of just those annexations that were over the threshold was over 77 acres.
What's more interesting is the frequency with which these occur.
Only seven of the last 10 years we analyzed had any annexations recorded at all. And in a 30 acre threshold, only four of the last 10 years had annexations that would have gone to referendum under the new ordinance.
My conclusions are that the annexations above the proposed threshold simply aren't frequent enough that approval of this ordinance would still the wheels of commerce in the village.
Or over the average size of annexations above the threshold is such that we absolutely would want them to go to referendum. I'm hoping that that addresses any concerns that you may have about the ordinance.
The ordinance materially impeding growth into forest and ask that you approve the ordinance.
Thank you.
Lydia read.
And then Carla, Peggy.
I'm Lydia read I live in the forest and my address is on the form.
I'm a resident of the village of the forest. I am here today to ask you to vote in favor of the ordinance.
In the absence of that I ask that you support postponing any action on the QTS data center development until after the ordinance has gone to reference referendum.
If the ordinance passes the QTS development project can go to referendum itself and be decided by the citizens of the forest.
I hope you listened to the speaker right before me and the about the acreage and it not being a risk constraining you on the decisions that you're making.
And that decision such as this really deserves the vote by the citizens of the forest considering our number that is here.
And I would just like to say, I'm a little disappointed in the lack of respect that I feel like some of the speakers have been given or the entire large community that's here.
I believe you all were informed that there were probably going to be a lot of people here.
And yet there's not a larger room, which has caused delay as people have been standing outside either in the cold or in the entryway.
And so I hope that you take that into account. We're here anyway.
And we really do not want this annexation and we do not want this data center. Thank you.
Thank you.
Hi, my name is Carla, I've been a resident of the forest since 1978 my address is on the form that I submitted.
Which is our small community has continuously grown in size, expanding in all areas both residentially and commercially.
It has always been my understanding that our village board and community development group have committed to being good stewards of this land, whether it belongs to the forest or a neighboring community, and also the environment.
Although we trust you as our elected officials to make the best decisions for the forest and its residents, there are some expansion projects and ideas, which many of us feel are too large in scope for just the board to decide for us all.
You have been, or you have before you a proposal and petition, which addresses this concern that proposal will give a broader scope of approval or disapproval to large projects looking to come to the forest.
We must keep in mind that there are many levels to each large project. It isn't just about the land itself.
Large scale projects will affect the landscape, nature reserves in the area, possibly schools, extra causes to the village, which may or may not be recouped by the businesses and businesses which are looking to join our town.
We ask that you take this proposal and approve it, or at the very least, put it to the vote of the people you represent.
For those of you that are taking our concerns seriously, we thank you.
And we remind you, we know it's really late today and you're listening to a lot of people, but you did ask us to get involved.
So here we are. Thank you.
All Vanderbloomer and then Amber Peterson.
Okay.
You see them coming.
Is Paul Vanderbloomer on Zoom? If so, would you raise your hand?
Well, I'm going to set it aside if he appears and then we will go to Amber Peterson.
Okay. Thank you.
Amber, are you Amber Peterson?
All right. And then after Amber is Michael, because this is a handwriting problem.
Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, Amber.
Hello, my name is Amber Peterson. I live at 400 Columbia here in the forest.
I would like to voice my support of the proposed new ordinance and my opposition of the annexation of Vienna Township land.
I personally would like to have more say in how the land that makes up our community is cared for.
I find that the rate at which is being consumed in the past year is alarming.
As the seventh generation of my family to call this community home.
I enjoy the heritage and legacy this area has to offer. This includes our rural heritage.
Members of this community have been shaping it since its founding.
Creating lasting legacies for future generations. An example of this is the prairie that makes up western green park.
The seeds of which were collected and sown by my grandpa, Rod Jimin.
These result, the results of those seeds are enjoyed by many today.
Please let the community speak and have more power in how we are shaped and how we grow, especially in large scale matters like a data center.
Please let matters this large that will forever change this community go to referendum so all of our voices are taken into consideration.
Thank you for your time. Thank you.
Michael.
You hear me? Okay.
Good evening board. Thanks for having me.
I want to say that I support that you should look at the ordinance. I'm sorry.
Sorry. I'm sorry. I live in the forest. You have the address on the form.
So I do think I do want you to look at the ordinance. I don't have anything formally prepared here.
So I'm just going to speak on the top of my mind here, but I think you should leave it up to the people and support the ordinance that's been put forth.
There were a lot of good statistics that people brought up here.
Just looking at the data. I think some one of the teachers. I can't remember her name. So there was about 1100 people that we got to sign it within six days, which is 40% of the constituency.
For local elections, that's pretty darn good. I think that shows engagement. You see the people here who are for.
I think some of the union folks report some people against it, which is fine. Leave it up to leave it up to the people to decide. I mean, I think it's pretty clear there.
I know there was some concerns. There were some good data that was brought up to about this would slow down the rate of commerce, but that seems a little bit unfounded based on that for over the last 10 years. I think that gentlemen said back there.
That would be, you know, go to referendum, because that is something to consider.
And so, you know, then you start just adding up all these things and it's like, well, why would why would this go to vote? I'm just confused as to what.
Like, if I'm just tracking logic here, why wouldn't we put that and let the people decide? There's a lot of engagement here.
And, you know, you start asking, well, why? And then, you know, we might give an answer, ask another why. Like, what is the root cause? I just don't understand the root cause.
I'm very confused about that. And then if you don't decide to pass the ordinance, I think you have to pause any decisions on QTS. They try to move these things quickly.
I mean, I think everybody's not naive to the fact that Blackstone is far from an altruistic institution. They're not their private equity.
I don't think we have to go into detail, delve into details there. So I just really hope the board considers this. My wife and I moved to divorce about a year and a half ago from Pittsburgh.
You know, we thought it was community based. I'm hoping that we see the light at the end of the tunnel here. The board does and takes us in a consideration.
It seems pretty clear to me what the community is asking for. And I just really hope that there's some consideration here. Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you, Michael. James Vanden Wimmoll Limburg. I'm sorry, but it's.
And then after that, Kelly Mack, I can handle that.
Is James here?
Can we get through the last? Yeah, or do you want to do it now? Yeah.
Jane, can I just ask you, individuals have to leave early changes, read what their stance was so that we can have it on record? Sure.
I think only one lot.
All these will be.
All right, is James here?
Kelly Mack.
Okay.
We'll take the bus.
Good evening.
I was hoping you'd say my last name to see if you could pronounce it, but no.
All right.
I'm here. I'm in favor of the.
Introduce yourself for the rest. Sorry.
My name is James Vanden Wimmoll Limburg.
I'm a resident of the forest on the Van Salestreet.
I've been here.
I have been a resident for 12 years now.
So I am in favor of the referendum proposal.
I'll keep this short.
Even with all the proposed financial benefits that were listed today.
We have all these deforest residents speaking against this data center.
Why not put it to a referendum?
There's no legitimate reason why you should not put it to the residents.
Again, we had over a thousand signatures for a referendum for this referendum in a very short period of time.
We all we have the concern residents showing up in opposition of the data center.
A lot of these are in the entryway standing for almost two hours now.
Why leave the decision to a few elected officials who are elected to serve the residents?
I think we are speaking loud and clear about our intentions.
Again, I am in favor of the proposed referendum. Thank you.
I've been asked by a board member for a five minute break.
So we're going to take a five minute break.
Thank you.
My name is Kelly Mack.
I'm a resident of Windsor and my address is on the forum that I filled out tonight.
I'm here to talk about the petition that went around the forest and how amazing.
I think this opportunity is pretty forest.
I would love to see something like this on Windsor.
Would love to see our communities get more involved in the government.
Speak to the my queen.
I would love to see our communities more involved in making decisions in our government.
And I just really hope that you guys do follow through and follow it.
Say yes to this tonight.
I did also want to mention that, you know, if after two years, this doesn't work.
You do have the opportunity to go back and to end that.
This petition request.
It's not something that has to be in the works forever.
So I think at least giving the opportunity in the trial out there for the people is would be an amazing opportunity.
And something that would really look awesome for the board here in the forest.
My second point is about the data center in the forest.
I'm one of probably really few people in this room that have actually been in one of these data centers.
It's kind of my bread and butter.
It's what I do for a living.
I had an AI information security privacy data centers and environmental health systems.
I provide certifications at a global level.
And I know the impact at a global level.
I've seen these communities and what these promises that don't typically come all the way through to the residents.
What it does to these people.
I would just like to give that warning out to you guys that you know these promises are amazing.
But you know what's going to happen when they don't follow through.
Do we have the resources for money? Do we have an amazing attorney?
I think you're doing a pretty job.
But do we really have the knowledge and to go against a company like Blackstone?
I just don't feel like anybody in Wisconsin is really up to that measure yet.
I mean, they're huge.
But with that, I'm going to end it real quick tonight.
I just wanted to put it out there and it's been a long night for everybody.
But please say yes, this ordinance and no to the data center.
That's it.
Thank you.
Mark storage.
And after Mark is Jonathan.
Runk.
Runk.
Mark Stork, 616 Jefferson Street here into forest.
I know that all of you as board members are concerned about doing what's best for the village and its residents.
Sometimes some of you and some of us may disagree as to what the best thing is.
But the intent is always there.
In the past, you have had to make decisions on things like improving our streets,
adding sporting areas and the next thing I am for residential or mixed use.
In all of those cases, those decisions were able to be made using past experience.
When we add new land for residential development, we know what it takes to add the infrastructure in.
We know what the impact will be on the village in a year or more.
We have been there before in several months duration to determine if the petition to annex should be approved or denied.
There's plenty of time to determine answers to questions that may arise.
That is not the case with QTS, where I would offer any other annexation request of that size and time.
We have no history of similar requests to fall back on.
You saw today in the analysis that we're using tons of suppositions to figure out what the actual monetary benefit would be.
We have no history of any other types of impacts to our community that this may bring that have been raised and are yet to be answered.
This is something that impacts our community that it will be impossible in a short few month period to actually determine answers for.
That is why I urge you to accept this petition as well as slow down the decision on QTS.
Then the need for you to decide quickly and potentially limited ability to gain knowledge for this is not there.
You have more time to gather and assess information.
You have more time to help us, the residents understand if this is a good or a bad opportunity for our community.
It allows you to have a share in the results of that decision no matter where it goes and realize that with this petition,
it's only there for two years and cannot be changed.
After that, either through referendum or through you voting, it can be altered.
It can be done away with. This is not a forever thing.
Having the petition in place is a win-win is how we work together.
Together to make this community the place that we all want it to be.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mark.
Jonathan Bronx and then Jean Jacobson.
Jonathan Bronx, my address is on the form.
My name is Jonathan.
I lived in the forest for seven years and the Windsor to forest area for 12 years.
And I'm asking the board tonight to approve the direct legislation petition.
I believe citizens should have a voice and significant annexations,
but especially when they are counter to what the approved community zoning and development plans are.
1100 citizens sign this petition that this were a survey.
Where we're looking for a statistically significant sample size for the forest, it would be 373 responses.
This isn't a vocal minority that I put this forward, but 9% of the population and triple what's required for a statistically significant.
Add a set if you're looking for.
You know, trying to get a sense of how the community feels on this.
So again, please hear what the community is speaking about and vote to approve the petition. Thank you.
Thank you.
Jane Jacobson.
You have to pull it close to you.
My name is Jane Jacobson. I live in divorce at the address on the form.
MTS project is a very large industrial project that will rely on power, water and infrastructure from our local community.
It will have an impact on the environment and on the residents quality of life.
Therefore, I feel it is critical that all the forest residents have a voice in whether it is allowed in our community.
I request that the village board vote in favor of the ordinance change submitted by the divorce residents via petition.
If the village board doesn't vote in favor of the ordinance, I asked that all decisions regarding the QTS project be postponed until after the proposed ordinance can be put to referendum, allowing the residents of divorce to make this important decision.
This is far too large of a project to be made a decision made by just seven residents when it will impact thousands of people.
I want to have a voice in that vote. Thank you. Thank you. Brenda Horn Edwards.
And after Brenda, we have Janet Burger.
Hello, everyone.
My name is Brenda Horn Edwards and I live in the village of divorce. You have my address on the form.
Can you pull the microphone closer. I sure can.
Thank you.
I'm here in support of the petition for an ordinance and I strongly oppose the data center in our community.
Since someone already spoke about the annexations I kind of simplified mine a little bit because he did an amazing job.
But the petition indicates that any land larger than 30 acres or projected public financial obligation of more than $10 million.
I believe that those amounts are reasonable, sufficient and necessary.
Again, since he spoke about the annexation, I'm just going to talk about two of the ones in the last, I don't know, 30 years that have been contentious.
And both of them were litigated. So there is a substantial financial tax burden to the taxpayers. The first one was in August, or I'm sorry, December of 2000 for the approximate 2100 acres of land from the towns of Windsor and Burke.
They resulted in a multi year dispute in lawsuit town of Windsor versus village of the forest.
In 2003 the Wisconsin Court of Appeals declared that the divorce correcting ordinances were void.
This 2000 annexation conflict was finally resolved 10 years later in 2010 through a mix of court rulings and comprehensive 20 year boundary agreement.
The second annexation was in August of 2022 for 123.6 acres lawn a gray lane in the town of Vienna.
This X annexation also prompted a lawsuit from Vienna as of today three and a half years later the dispute remains contentious with Vienna, which is continuing to fight the land grab following the expiration of the joint joint boundary agreement.
The above two lawsuits created a financial burden for taxpayers. I have been in the legal field for over 35 years. I have firsthand knowledge of attorney costs litigation fees and expenses.
And I can guarantee that the cost of this 10 year lawsuit in this three and a half year lawsuit are significant and each of these were funded by taxpayers.
As for the proposed data center. This is also going to end up in litigation and it's going to rack up substantial attorney fees.
In the early stages that we are right now the town of Vienna has already hired a specialized municipal, a municipal attorney to oppose the QTS annexation.
The village has its own attorneys currently negotiating a pre enix agreement. And it is my understanding after speaking to legal colleagues of mine that community members may sue the village if it fails to comply with section 9.2
of the Wisconsin statutes courts have ruled that once a petition is certified as sufficient by a clerk which ours has the village board has a positive and plain duty to act.
It is also my understanding you are legally required to pass the ordinance without alter alteration or submit the ordinance to vote on the next election.
And if you fail to do either the community can file a lawsuit for a writ of mandamus.
The proposed petition for an ordinance is reasonable necessary sufficient and has legitimate purpose to protect the public interest.
And I'll just finish my sentence and it unnecessary burdens to taxpayers.
Thank you.
Janet Burger.
And then after that is Aaron who prefer.
Hi, I'm Janet Burger, village of the forest. My address is on the floor.
First, I asked the board to vote in favor of the ordinance to change the excuse me in favor of the ordinance change to force residents have requested in the petition.
Second, if you do not support a vote in favor of the ordinance, I asked the board members to postpone the decisions on QTS development approvals until after the proposed ordinance change goes into to the referendum.
I'm sure there are many more individuals that can speak much more eloquently on this topic than I can.
I'm also not an expert on environmental impacts, health impacts of environmental pollution or how data centers operate in general.
What I am though is a concerned citizen that believes that this is completely wrong for our community, specifically the village of the forest.
There are many reasons I oppose this building of the data center, but I'm mostly concerned for the residents of forest, Vienna, and all the surrounding communities that will be affected.
This is a vibrant community with a lot to offer as far as farmland nature, tight knit neighbors sought after housing and proximity to Dane County and surrounding communities have to offer.
It's a great place to live. I don't want that to be ruined.
There's a town of Vienna land that was being debated here, and they have already said no to the QTS data center, even after promises of lots of money to their community.
The village of the forest should respect Vienna's decision, and like Vienna also be very wary of the vague, shiny promises of all this money and jobs for the forest.
I've seen this before. Companies make promises that are not kept or find vague contract terms to get out of holding up their end of the bargain.
Remember, Foxconn, Wisconsin residents are still paying for that mistake.
Let's make sure the forest doesn't fall into that same trap.
Well, I'm well versed in financial impacts of decisions that know my way around a balance sheet and income statement with the short lifespan of the data centers.
And once they're obsolete in companies like QTS have extracted everything they need from us and leave the residents holding the bag to pick up the pieces.
The forest residents will be stuck paying the bill for all this higher utility and tax bills, polluted water, and lower property values.
Again, thank you very much for your time. And I, I believe for you to actually put this ordinance in place, or at least wait until we can be voted on in the next election. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Aaron Whipperford.
Aaron Whipperford, are you online? Oh, here he is. Thank you. After Aaron is Savannah kind. And then finally, we have.
Cast Summerfield after that.
Do I have to hold the button or.
You don't have to hold it.
Okay, sorry about that. Good evening, village of the forest board. I'm Aaron Whipperford. I'm a divorce resident.
My address is on the sign in paperwork.
I'm here tonight just to add a voice and a face to one of the 1100 signatures on the petition.
I asked the board to vote in favor of the agenda item 84 to direct legislation petition title and ordinance requiring voter approval by referendum for certain large annexations and major development actions.
Please adopt the ordinance that the village residents and taxpayers have requested via petition.
I want to thank you for your time, but I have one little comment that maybe I heard earlier was mentioned that.
That before the public experience was made that there was a comment made about this may not be as it appears intended.
Could that comment slash suggestion made I believe by one of the board members be elaborated in section 843 discussion of possible actions.
Thank you.
Savannah kind.
Hello, my name is Savannah kind. I live at 609.
I'm speaking to the board today in favor of this ordinance members of this community have come together in support of this legislation.
The community has continued to speak their opposition to the QTS data center for months begging for a voice.
We are engaged, educated and passionate about this issue and our community at large.
This legislation protects our community from future projects that would take advantage of our community and our environment.
This legislation is not meant to hinder our community. It is meant to empower us as individuals.
Why are you afraid of letting us have a voice on this issue and other issues like it?
Is it because you know what we will say that you know you're acting against the will of many of your constituents.
If you will not approve this ordinance tonight, please at least hold off moving forward with any decisions related to QTS until this can go to referendum.
Give us a voice.
We live in this community. We breathe the air. We drink the water.
We live side by side with the wildlife. We pay the taxes. This is our home. Thank you.
Thank you.
Cast Summerfell.
And then after Cass, I did find one stuck to the back of her form for Lindsay Frey.
My name is Cassander Summerfell and I'm from DeForest.
My family moved to DeForest from St. Perry over 27 years ago because DeForest was a small quiet town close to the city, but still had a country feel with tons of nature.
It seems like we're getting rid of some noise.
Go ahead.
Okay.
Are they gone?
It seemed like DeForest prioritized natural spaces and farmland and we didn't like how some prairie was growing.
DeForest no longer feels like that, but instead now feels like industrial parks and apartment complexes.
Tonight I asked the board to vote in favor of the ordinance change. DeForest residents have requested via petition.
DeForest has a comprehensive plan which was updated in just the past few years during that time.
The land now being discussed to be potentially annexed was shown as agricultural preservation to allow this annexation a plan that was developed only two years ago must be revised.
If only two years ago DeForest saw this land as important to preserve.
The reasons for changing this so extremely and paving over and destroying that agricultural land must be better understood and approved of by the residents of DeForest as well as those impacted in Vienna.
I know one concern of adopting the petition is that it will delay future projects.
However, if projects like QTS AI data centers are what is going to be pushed through, then being delayed is the smart thing big decisions are best to take time on and do thorough research really assess the values and detriments.
According to the DOA in the last 10 years, there were 19 total annexations recorded.
Only seven of the last 10 years had annexations at all, and only four of those 10 years had annexations above 30 acres.
Annexations of large scale haven't been frequent enough that the 30 acre threshold would limit the board's ability to make decisions.
Our farmland and natural spaces are diminishing at alarming rates to the extent that certain areas have been designated to protect due to their highly valuable resources.
The town village county and state have all recognized the incredible preciousness of the land surrounding the forest, including in Vienna.
In Dane County, there are three significant agricultural enterprise areas, the largest of which is in Vienna, consisting of over 20,000 acres.
Another is on the east side of the forest.
Agricultural enterprise areas or EAAs are productive agricultural land that has received designation from the state.
As part of the state's farmland preservation program, AEA's strive to support local farmland protection goals.
The proposed annexation would take a significant chunk of the middle of this agricultural enterprise area.
It's important to note that the majority of the town of Vienna is categorized as agricultural enterprise area.
As shown in the maps that I will give you, I'm very concerned how and why the forest can try and take protected land.
This annexation literally goes against every comprehensive plan I've looked at.
The forest is surrounded by irreplaceable farmland, and I'm very concerned state protected farmland is not being taken seriously.
Since you are considering annexing a big part of it, this is why the residents should have the ability to vote on your time as is expired.
Okay.
Thank you.
Can I give you the maps now?
Hello.
My name is Lindsay for I and my address is on the form.
Hello.
Thank you for your time tonight and thank you.
I always thank you for putting things on zoom for people that can't always attend in person.
First, Wisconsin statute, 66 point zero to 173 a know a lot of numbers letters here.
After an axe annexation petition is filed, the municipalities governing body may act upon it, not less than 20 days after publication of the notice.
And not later than 120 days after the petition is filed.
If this were a small, typical annexation, as for the hotel being built west of the interstate, 120 days would be plenty of time to determine the validity and impact of what it was being asked for.
We're talking here about over 1,600 acres of land, a huge technology infrastructure with multiple huge buildings and many potential issues to explore.
Expecting all these variables can be determined, understood, and solutions validated is totally unreasonable in that timeframe.
The forest needs to hit pause.
Use more time to evaluate this request and engage with its citizens.
This ordinance would allow and encourage engagement between the village and its citizens.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right. Those were all the speakers for 8.4.
Um, I don't, I didn't have that.
We can take the statement that they did in the record.
It's not in here.
All right.
All right.
We have gotten through the speakers on item 8.4.
And I appreciate your time and I know you all have been here as long as we have.
So we understand that everybody's tired.
With that, um, we have the memo from L L or Dan. Do you want to say anything else or bring up any issues with your memorandum?
If you did, it's under item 9 and not under 8.4.
I don't have your name, Brian.
I have yours here for the data center, which would be fall under item 9.0.
I, I only have one.
You'll be able to speak under item 9, Bernard.
All right.
Um, let's proceed.
Yeah, well, just one point of clarification.
Um, I mentioned before that the ordinance has written doesn't do what people think it does.
Um, when the village and acts and ordinance, whether you do it directly through the board or whether it's gone through direct legislation, that becomes law.
And when the village drafts ordinances, it doesn't just, you know, your public works director doesn't draft ordinances. You have lawyers draft them because the words matter.
If this ordinance as proposed were enacted, it wouldn't stop.
It wouldn't require an annexation, an annexation to go to a referendum.
What it says is referendum required for any development of annexed land.
What that means is that before any land could develop, if it was part of a previous annexation that was more than 30 acres, it would have to go to a referendum.
What that means is that if somebody in tip seven wants to put up a convenience store, that would have to go to a referendum.
If somebody in tip two wanted to build a single family home, that would have to go to a referendum all because it's development of land that was included.
It was annexed in an annexation that was more than 30 acres.
And our memo lays out all the reasons why that's illegal.
You can't, you can't have land development approvals decided by popular vote.
There are rules in place put some by the state, some ordinances of the village, all of which are law that have to be followed when a development proposal is made.
So for that reason, we're suggesting that you definitely don't want this ordinance in place because you're going to, you're going to end up being sued by anybody who you deny a building permit for because it hasn't gone to a referendum.
Or by somebody who thinks that you should be requiring a referendum before issuing that building permit.
And that is why you recommend no action on this item.
All right.
We have the recommendation of no action.
And I would.
Yes.
Would it be possible to provide the memo.
To the public.
The memo is confidential because it's privileged under the attorney client privilege.
That privilege belongs to the board. So if the board decides it wants to waive their privilege and release the memo, it can do that by a majority vote.
So I don't have any objection to you doing that.
These are the same arguments that we're going to make in court if we're sued by these people who are going to say they're going to sue us for connecting the ordinance. Okay.
So let's, let's start with the release of the memo.
Do we want to make a more make a motion.
We have two two motion.
We have a motion and a second.
To release the memo.
And I think that's a great idea. All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye. Opposed.
Motion carries the memo will be released to the public.
And with that, I would say that we won't be taking.
Action on the on the item based on the information.
That we receive from our attorneys.
Any trustee could make a motion if they want to, but if no motion is made, that would die.
Right. Okay.
Okay.
Thank you. I know that was a tough decision.
All right.
We will then be moving to general appearances.
Item nine, and we have a number of them.
Um, so we will start going.
Can you say.
Well, I'm going to stand for some of these as a woman who had a hip replacement two weeks
ago.
This is a long time to sit.
So I'm going to stand for a while.
We're going to go through these general appearances.
Um, and hopefully if you've already heard your points made,
be kind to the audience and don't spend a lot of time repeating everything that's been said.
Um, with that, I will begin with Joe Whitney.
Good evening.
Uh, my name is Joe Whitney on township of Vienna.
It's my address is probably in the form too.
Uh, so good evening.
Uh, my name is Joe Whitney.
I'm a local farmer and business owner.
I'm born and raised in Wisconsin, uh, graduated from UW lacrosse.
And have grown food locally for the last three years here in this area.
Dane County, especially to the president and to the village board members.
I appreciate the opportunity to express why I believe this project should be considered.
Uh, let me explain why.
The main topic I would like to emphasize this evening is the financial impacts of the project.
I believe that the project has great potential to change the local community for the better.
Uh, to achieve that potential, I encourage board members to require QTS to meet certain standards to put in place safeguards to protect local community members from potential issues that might arise.
Much of what I'm referring to has been discussed already in the pre annexation agreement, which I support.
The financial impacts of this project are immense QTS has stated plans of $12 billion project on 1600 acres, which we've all talked about tonight.
There'd be estimates of the tax revenue that would go towards Dane County, the village up to forest and the local school systems.
The project has estimated 5000 construction jobs, several hundred permanent jobs up to 700.
Uh, and furthermore, QTS has stated there'll be a $50 million community investment across Dane County and also partnerships with UW Madison for research and workforce training.
This is how we grow and develop for generations to come. I truly believe this is an opportunity for real progress in our community, especially funding teachers, schools, and the youth.
Lastly, why I think it's a great economic opportunity is because one of our largest energy producers in Wisconsin is involved, Alliance.
QTS's partnership with the lion energy is a key aspect in this decision QTS has committed to investing in a lion to help them push for more cleaner and sustainable sources of energy.
This will not only be mutually beneficial for both QTS and Alliance, but also for all residents of Wisconsin.
We can produce energy right here in Wisconsin and do it in a sustainable way.
The proposed agreement will be facilitated by the sale of renewable energy credits from approximately 750 megawatts of new renewable energy.
This is clean and sustainable energy and I believe QTS can help us achieve that progress that we need for our electric grid.
The money for all Wisconsin, this saves money for all Wisconsin residents and reduces the reliance on fossil fuel imports.
Currently, 72% of our energy is created by fossil fuel. 72%. Wisconsin has about 50 fossil fuel plants that use 4 billion gallons of water per day.
This is severely damaging our water sources unnecessarily. On top of that, Wisconsin has imports.
We import all of our energy because we do not have a source for fossil fuel here in Wisconsin. It's all shipped in.
A lion has already stated that they plan your time has expired. Thank you.
I just want to remind people, if you have written statements, you can submit them to Cali and they will be submitted to the record and to the board.
And then after Rebecca is Pete Snyder.
Hello, my name is Rebecca Lark Santowski. I am not a resident of the forest, but I pay taxes here for the school district.
I live out in Leeds Center. I graduated from this high school. My parents graduated from this high school. I have a fifth generation to be on a farm that's in the Empire Prairie.
Vienna, Westport, North Leeds, South Leeds, Leeds Center. Look it up.
Know your history. The Empire Prairie was named such for the state of New York Empire State and the settlers named this prairie that because of the quality of the land.
We always want to build and we need to prosper. We need to go forward. But at what point do we say 1600 acres for one project is okay.
I'm going to talk about the water. We don't want another Aaron Brockovich here.
QTS may say that this is a closed loop system.
The chemicals they're using inside of that closed loop system to stop the pipes from eroding.
I was going to close with this and I have a statement, but I'm not going to read the whole thing because you're all tired. We've heard most of it already tonight.
I think I will close right now in the essence of time with a reminder of the full rotary four-way test. Anybody here know it?
I see one head shaking. Everybody should know it. You should have it printed hanging on your office wall or your home bathroom wall.
It goes like this. That was meant to be funny. The full rotary four-way test created in 1932 has four parts.
Oh, by the way, I worked for Walgreens for 34 years back when it was a good company. It's crap now.
But this hung on my wall every single day and it was part of our mantra as a corporation, as Mr. Walgreens directed us to use.
And I still use it. I'm closing today with it.
Number one, is it the truth?
Number two, is it fair to all concerned?
Number three, will it build goodwill and better friendships?
Will this project build goodwill and better projects?
Fourth, and last, and really important.
Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
If we can't answer yes to each one of these questions for any project or decision that you as a board member will make, this is not the right time to do this for the community.
I'm sorry, your time has expired.
That's good. Thank you.
Thank you for your time board.
Pete Snyder.
And then after Peter Scott Watson.
Well, President Wolf Graham and trustees, my name is Pete Snyder and I'm a resident of Sumpuri.
I want to start off by saying I appreciate how carefully the board has approached the QTS proposal so far.
This is a significant decision and their deserves thorough review, not rush approval or automatic rejection.
I mean, speaking in support of continuing the annexation and zoning process for QTS was strong in course conditions, not because the project is perfect.
But because I believe divorce can shape it responsibly.
Data centers are not speculative developments.
QTS is a national operator with facilities across the country, many of them in communities like ours.
Ability facility generate a high value tax base with minimal daily traffic, no residential screen and long term predictability.
I like to make a comment about the referendum.
I am one of the landowners selling my land to QTS data center.
So I have a vested interest in this project proceeding.
But I want to support it if I didn't trust that the project will bring tremendous benefit to a divorce in the region.
And you're to stand at for some people a project represents on known understandably change can be hard and creates a lot of questions.
That's why this process is so important. So those questions can be answered.
But I want to make sure that the board understands that this project represents economic opportunity.
My family would not be able to have our land valued at the same amount, if not for the data center.
As a private landowner, I believe that it's my right to take advantage of opportunities like this, which is why I'm concerned about the petition to force project like this to go to a referendum vote.
The ordinance change would go far beyond just determining local developments.
Instead, it would allow the public to dictate private matters.
I'm concerned that if it passes, its impacts will be much greater than we may think now.
And at that point, it may be too late to reverse the course.
Instead, I encourage the board to continue protocol and process that we rely on projects like these.
The community deserves to have its voice heard and to be confident that through the review process safeguards and legal binding commitments will be made to ensure community benefits.
That can be done through public engagement, not public votes that jeopardize private matters.
I respect that some of the residents may oppose the project outright, but I asked the board to distinguish between opposition to growth and responsible management of growth.
The force has always grown deliberately.
This is a chance to continue that tradition while strengthening the villages tax base in a way that minimizes residential burden.
I urge the board to continue its rigorous review and consideration of the process for the annexation and rezoning to demand strong conditions and let the facts, data, and enforceable agreements guide the final decision.
Thank you for your time and service to the village.
Thank you.
Scott Watson.
All right.
I'm Scott Watson. I am a longtime Dane County resident.
I've been here 61 years.
I am a resident of Madison, but I am talking like the other ones about the economic development on this, what this would propose to myself be in a colony resident and a lot of workers that I do work with.
This is a great opportunity. I heard one gentleman talk about possibly his kid doesn't know what to do for a career or something like that work to work out.
Well, the trades are one thing.
The union trades, they provide a substantial.
So several wages and benefits that they could do. We have second, third year apprentices that are actually buying their own homes, first time home buyers.
So, you know, these guys are starting out to four year program. They're starting out $28 an hour plus full benefits medical and everything. These are a career. It's not a hobby. It's nothing.
They're sustainable jobs. They're local jobs. These project is one in the lifetime coming to these areas. I hate seeing when projects like these end up being shut down.
You understand people's concern, but we do have stuff in place. You have the DNR. You have everything else. You guys have a tough decision.
Your constituents should be believed in the decisions that you're going to make for this community. They elected you to do that. So it's, I feel it's your duty, you know, to use your best judgment and make those decisions.
But back to it with the thing, like I said, I represent these. There's a lot of individuals that can benefit from this. Our organizations, we give second chance to people that come out of incarceration where no one else would offer them the opportunity for employment,
giving them a living job of wage, a job, a career, something to move to change their lives, better their families. And these projects would do it. It's going to be up to four year project. These individuals will go in with and get the training free.
We provide it. Our members pay for our future workers. It doesn't cost taxpayers nothing.
They can work on this project from the beginning to the end. This project is going to create up to 5,000 jobs through all trades. Just imagine the economic impact it's going to have once it's completed to the community and to the other areas. You look at Dane County right now, 33 million in the hole.
I'm in the city of Madison. I see my taxes going way up.
Services dropping. Here's the opportunity for the people at the forest to have that not to be into that thing where I'm at.
This is a good opportunity for local workers, local contractors, and they're promising it's going to be done. They're going to.
I don't know all the what do you want to say? Techno technical stuff. That's a for the energy companies in QTS to talk about that. But my thing is labor.
We need to provide labor training for the younger generations that they can get a career, have sustainable jobs that can provide for their family and everyone. Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Mitchell Johnson and then Noel Gallagher.
Okay.
Are you know, Noel?
Noel Gallagher, my address is on the form.
I'm here speaking today in support of the QTS data center, which we create thousands of jobs for construction workers as a longtime member of waivers local 464.
I know how important projects like this data center are.
These are not just short disposable opportunities.
Projects like this add up to a career and provide years of work for union members like me.
I've been a member of Labor's Local 464 for 25 years.
I can't tell you how many different job sites I've worked on, but I can tell you how many times I worried about my next job site or my next paycheck was coming from.
I can also tell you how many times I worried about providing for my family.
Not just the basics, but making sure my kids had opportunities and those opportunities are free.
A project like QTS won't take me to retirement, but it'll provide a solid chunk of work for me and my union brothers and sisters.
That steady work is what matters. It's possible for us to support our families.
That's why I've chosen to speak publicly today in support of QTS facility.
I want to be clear, the benefits of this data center are real and personal to many of us in the area.
This isn't just about a construction job.
It's about the continued livelihood of working families in our community.
From a union perspective, this is exactly the kind of project we should support.
Data centers are built with union labor, which means good wages and a skilled workforce.
Please remember that supporting QTS is data center means supporting local jobs, local families and a strong future for our workforce.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
All right.
Sherry Stoch.
Chasm supported.
Sherry Stoch.
I don't know.
If not, the next person is Macy Bueller.
Hello, my name is Macy Bueller. You have both of my addresses.
I have lived here for over 29 years and about 10 years ago is in front of the board building my business.
So I'm an employer in the area. I have raised two sons in the area.
I've been very involved with the community.
And in the last five years, I've been super involved in advocating for small businesses.
And I'm just going to share a little bit as a business owner.
So 10 years ago, I was here and you guys approved my plans.
And the next year, even one of the best new business by J-Ray of Commerce.
I put my whole livelihood, my retirement, my home into my business.
That is my future. And if it fails.
I'll be in the poor house and work till I'm 90 or till I die.
I built a place for families and children.
I own the childcare center.
I built a place where teachers could come and raise their own children and just feel supported.
I am a teacher trainer in my background as well as teaching myself.
I am also a apprenticeship site.
I also work with future students who go on to be in the care fields, in the teaching fields.
Lots of different apprenticeship opportunities are available to people outside of the trades.
My heart, my soul, my life's passion is around the importance of early childhood in education.
I am going to implore you to stop the annexation, to really just put the brakes on this.
I have been approached by other small business owners,
moms who want to move here because DeForest is wonderful.
They have literally stopped me and said, Macy, what is going on?
Why? What will they gain?
And I understand it's money, but we're going to lose community.
This is going to harm us in the long run.
I strongly, strongly advocate for you guys to follow what you had promised and what you had planned.
We don't need to annex more of this farmland and water.
This is like a watershed area.
This is a huge concern to people who are talking to me about our future as a community.
It will not be a safe place to raise children.
It will not.
There are already concerns before this about things that we took out of our water and what that means to children.
I implore you to stop the annexation, to stop.
I understand jobs.
Believe me, my sons are in the trades. I get it.
I just don't know why if you look historically, we are trusting Blackstone.
Why are we trusting them to do the right thing? That is not what we're seeing.
That is not what we're seeing.
That's what people are talking about.
I have more in here, but I will just submit that.
Thank you.
All right.
Stephen McDonald.
And then they'll know as a Griffiths for Sean.
Stephen McDonald.
All right.
All right.
Then don't know if for Sean.
My name is Galloza Griffiths.
My address is on the forum. Sean submitted.
He couldn't be here today.
Board members.
On January 5th.
I emailed all of you a comparison about Epic and Verona.
Hopefully you had a chance to read it.
For those here at the meeting, what are the amounts to is that was $1.36 billion of assessed value.
Epic pays a tax bill of $22.5 million.
The city of Verona receives $5.68 million of that was the school, county and medicine college receiving the rest.
I reviewed a random property in the city of Verona to see what that did to the taxes on that house.
The home I looked at was assessed in 2003 at $219,000 was a total tax bill of $5,000.
Due to rehab evaluations in 2025 that house is now assessed at $489,000 was a total tax bill of a little over $8,000.
The numbers being given out for the QTS project are similar to Epic.
1.2 billion in assessed value over four years.
That would result in tax payments to all taxing jurisdictions totaling approximately $20 million, just like Epic.
As you can see from Verona's numbers, it did not result in a significant savings to the resident.
Their taxes went up from $5,000 to $8,000.
If you allow this project to happen, there will be additional expenses that will occur that will offset any benefit from the increase in assessed value.
There will be additional costs for road maintenance, public works, fire protection, water, sewer and many other projects that come up.
I would not be surprised to see you use the money from this to fund the buckies interstate interchange improvements.
Once phase one is completed in five to 10 years, you will be scrambling to come up with increases in net new construction.
Your percentages of net new construction will decrease as your assessed value grows.
QTS has admitted that a lion cannot currently provide them the powers they need for phase two.
I doubt it ever will.
In 10 years, when phase one is complete, most of this village board will be gone.
A lot of the staff will change, but we will be stuck with this for the rest of our lives.
Then a new village board will have to clean up the mess.
Is that what you want for our community?
Thank you.
All right, Tricia for Laura Morrison.
Hi again.
Hello again.
I'm Tricia bulky.
I'm speaking on behalf of Laura Morrison, a deforest resident.
Her address is listed on the form.
I am out of town this evening.
So I prepared the statement in advance to be read at tonight's meeting.
I'm opposed to this project and ask you to consider the following as you proceed.
First, I respect the enormity of the decision at your feet that need to strike the right balance of economic growth for a viable financial future for deforest is a difficult task.
This is an unprecedented project for this community and it deserves deliberate and careful consideration.
Second, I urge the board to look beyond the promises of revenues and financial investments proposed for this project.
The money being promised is only a fraction of the profits QTS is projected to make.
Our abundance of natural resources and the ability to upscale them cuts their operating costs significantly while we bear the risk.
Once these resources have been compromised or depleted, no amount of fines or court settlements will restore them.
These centers are largely unregulated so much so that the state of Wisconsin is getting involved.
There is no harm in slowly slowing the project pace to work toward common regulations to ensure the best possible outcome.
Third, I am concerned with the pace that technology changes.
What is cutting age today might be obsolete in six months to a year.
The way a data center looks and operates can be completely different at that time.
It is wise to invest such significant funds for a future that is certain to change.
Fourth, the residents deserve to have a say in the project this complex and contrary to the village's zoning plan.
While there have been designated open houses and meetings for public comment, none everyone can beat during those times and silence does not equal approval.
There is a petition before you requesting an ordinance change that would take this matter to a village wide vote.
I urge you to approve this change or at least delay any further discussions about the data center and let this request go to referendum.
I would personally like to see a committee formed a village administration, residents, county leaders, environmental advocates, et cetera.
It would work together to create fact sheets for residents to educate themselves on this topic.
A balanced approach where we work together as a community for the best outcome and then let the residents decide.
Lastly, I am disheartened to see the willingness of the forest to continue to consider this proposal.
Our neighbors in Vienna held meetings and their residents spoke clearly.
The Vienna town board voted down a significant amount of money to stop this data center.
Where is the cooperation from the forest?
Where is the respect for Vienna's decision?
We should be standing with our neighbors, not against them. Thank you very much for your time and consideration.
Lori Richard and then Emily Coltenberg.
Hello.
This is my first time speaking and I've had to alter my speech because everyone else has said everything I wanted to say.
But anyway, I wanted to come tonight.
I'm Lori Richard.
I live on Flemble Parkway in divorce.
I've been a resident for over 14 years.
My husband and I moved here from the north side of Madison.
We wanted a more safe.
We wanted a safe community and we wanted a community with more of a rural field.
As a result of us moving there, my three kids, their spouses.
And now, excuse me, eight of my grandchildren live in this community.
So I have a vested interest in the divorce area.
I understand the opportunity for work for this QTS project.
But I also have a concern as a grandmother and as a mother.
And as a community member, I have a concern of the natural resources that happen.
Where I left, right, my backyard is Little Lake Mendota.
I don't know if you've heard of it. It's this beautiful body of water.
It's a little lake that flows into the Yohara watershed.
Which then flows into Cherokee, which flows into Lake Manona and Mendota and Kaganza.
So whatever we do here, we'll have an impact not only on divorce, but also Dane County and the rest of the state.
So I implore you to please think about the natural resources that could be impacted by a project of this magnitude.
I'm concerned about the water.
I have a real concern about that.
We have eagles, we have egrets, we have cranes that are routinely nest in our area and over by where the QTS site is going to be.
I think it's really important for us to keep those natural resources, which makes our community very special.
So with that in mind, that's all I have to say.
So thank you for your time and thank you for all of your attention tonight.
Emily Coltenberg and then Melinda Murphy.
Okay.
Hi, my name is Lindsay. I'm reading for Emily Coltenberg.
She would be able to read it much better than I to the village of the forest board.
I'm requesting that my letter be read because I am unfortunately unable to be here in person to address you with my concerns related to the QTS project.
I am a tonic by Anna resident.
The completion of this project directly impacts my home, my resources and my family.
The location of this proposed data center will greatly impact all residents in the area. However, it will impact those of us in Vienna more so due to our proximity to the location.
My family had already made it clear to the town board members of Vienna that we are not in favor of the data center.
We were genuinely concerned regarding the resources needed to support something of this nature and how that would impact the resources we have.
Examples air air quality water quality and quantity electric grid stability and availability, etc.
The town of Vienna decided to say no as they listened to their constituents as there is a large number of us that oppose this with similar concerns.
I am not in favor of this annexation nor the building of this data center.
I am rightfully upset that this is being entertained as the town of Vienna and their constituents spoke clearly that this is not something we want.
I have minimal recourse and zero representation by the village of the forest because I do not live in the forest.
This village board does not represent me nor many Vienna residents.
Our voices are not being considered as there is no political ramifications.
We cannot sign petitions, do recalls or vote you in out, etc.
I do not consent to an entity making decisions that directly impacts me when I do not have representation.
Many of us in Vienna feel very strongly that we are not being heard and we are not being represented because we do not live within the village of the forest.
To conclude, I am asking the board to be mindful that their decisions impact people they do and do not represent.
I implore the village board to speak to Vienna residents outside of their regular constituents to hear their voice.
Our representation matters as this decision directly impacts our well-being and our resources.
More importantly, speak to the town of Vienna board because they listened to their constituents and they voted in accordance of those they represent.
Sincerely, Emily Coltenberg, a very concerned Vienna resident.
Thank you.
Melinda Murphy.
She's on Zoom.
Okay.
Melinda, can you raise your hand?
You ready? Okay.
Can you hear me?
We can hear you.
Great.
My name is Melinda Murphy.
I'm a homeowner and resident of Windsor.
You have my address on the form.
Tonight, I'm going to speak about the potential risks to the village finances from QTS annexation.
Again, my name is Melinda Murphy. I'm a lawyer and a resident of Windsor and I'm here because this decision is too important to rush.
The proposed 1600 acre annexation for a proposed QTS data center is being pushed on projections built on assumptions and verbal promises, not enforceable binding commitments.
The $1.2 billion valuation depends on future phases that may never happen.
And if they don't, the financial risk lands squarely on the village and its residents.
Any promised mill rate relief could be quickly erased by the real costs, new roads, utilities, public services, and increased emergency response.
At the same time, pulling value out of existing tax increment districts could undermine projects that current residents and local businesses are counting on.
And once annexation happens, it's permanent. There's no reversing it.
I urge the board to slow this process down.
Ask the hard questions and demand firm enforceable binding commitments before making an irreversible decision to forest residents and the neighbors who share its future deserve leadership based on facts, not promises or hope.
Thank you.
Thank you. Elizabeth McKenna and Lydia read is speaking for her.
Lydia read.
So maybe we've already had some of these.
He spoke.
Okay, then we'll go on.
Did he speak?
All right, James closure.
And then we have another one for Delosa on behalf of Randy Griffin's.
Okay, is James closure here?
Okay.
Hello, my name is Jim Calcher. I live on flywheel circle into forest.
I want to touch base on a little bit different than what some of the other people have been talking about.
And I want to talk about more community in the last year, we obviously have seen a recall in the forest.
The community right now is divided.
The community spoke up very loudly on that recall because that we have a new board member. I want to make sure we're still listening to the community.
A lot of us feel unheard.
Disrespected the same as some people did because of the.
Which led to the land graph recall.
I want to make sure we come together as a community.
My wife and I moved here to starter family because of the community because of the nature because of the trails.
And I feel like this QTS does not speak the same does not lend to that.
I'm afraid that the fracturing that this could cause would be much worse than what happened with Florida or anything else.
I don't know that we would come back from it as a community.
It would that instability that the board I'm afraid knee jerk election after election would change hands would make the entire community unstable.
That's instability would not only lend to the board. It would live to the village down to the schools, which are very important to me with my daughter in school.
I'm asking that before any before we proceed with any kind of annexation that we make sure that all reasonable questions have been answered.
And that all contingencies have been addressed.
QTS said over and over again, they are want to be part of our community.
If that's true, I think they'll wait for us to make the rights decision for the forest.
Even if this decision ends up being what we did that the board decides is right for this community or for this village.
It may not be at this and the right thing for the community and.
The forest has nothing without its community.
Please work to restore the community, not divide it more. Thank you.
You'll knows up.
Or Randy Griffith.
I'm speaking for my spouse who had to stay homeless children today.
Hello board members. My name is Randy Griffiths. The foreign resident, my address is on the forum.
One of the key elements of making residents feel assured that all the issues and concerns of our residents are addressed is that the village use education and neutral sources of expertise in helping us navigate the critical topics of this annexation.
We find it concerning that the village has chosen the firm of one Bryson and Roper to assist with the data center evaluation.
Their role, their role has primarily been focused focused on navigating the legal and municipal aspects of these developments, including zoning standards, property tax assessments and annexation issues for municipalities who over the objections of their residents pushed forward to approve the data center.
A case in point is Port Washington, where they provided to the city legal guidance on large scale development and annexation agreements to help make that expansion possible.
The fact that after significant opposition to the data center, the city of Port Washington still moved forward indicates a lack of transparency, as well as examining the negative impacts of the development.
Hiring a more neutral firm, which would assist in evaluating and guiding the village through the concept of the proposed annexation would indicate a willingness to look at both sides of the issue.
Rather than simply to seek to, it will appear its acceptance. Thank you.
Thank you.
Bernard Cox said.
Good evening. Thank you.
My name is Bernard Cox said I'm a 30 year resident of the forest.
I've been through right before your board many times tonight.
I want to be clear that I hardly support residents efforts to call for referendum.
On a project with this level of community impact. However, a referendum by itself is not enough to protect the public's interest.
If it asked to do so without full pre physical transparency, unlike major project actors taken in the community, such as puppies.
In Florida, he's been seekers and unchecked.
And he didn't worry this proposal involves long term your reversible commitments that extend well beyond the seal vote.
The village has not been fully transparent.
And the public has been led to believe that the issue of trust was mostly with the developer.
When in fact, trust must be shared obligation between developer, the villages elected officials and village staff.
The project of this magnitude must.
Or should not be left to trust alone, nor should the public be asked to vote in the dark with a clear enforceable pre without a pre project agreement that is disclosed before approval and not negotiated behind closed doors and executive session.
Just as important the public needs and open debate.
One where no one can hide behind process lawyers or three minute two way mirror spirit speeches that allow officials to speak without being.
They don't allow officials to speak without being questioned.
Attached as a proposed document designed to protect the public interest for duration of the project.
I urge judges to support not only a referendum, but a full and open debate of the issues with the elected president.
I challenge you, Madam President.
So decisions are made transparently and accountable.
Before the community is locked into consequences, it did not meaningfully evaluate.
I'd like to associate with the lawyer from Windsor comments and your attorney.
The devil's in the detail without a detailed enforceable mandatory pre development agreement contract.
This is an albatross that will destroy this village.
You need a pre development agreement that protects everyone.
And it has to be transparent.
One of the decisions are made.
It can't be done in executive session. It can't be done by lawyers agreeing.
It has to be done by us. The people of.
The village of the forest are asking for that.
They're just asking to be part of this. Thank you very much for your attention.
Thank you for an hour.
All right, we have Beth Storch on fluoride.
And then after that, we have Beth Storch on the data center.
Beth, I called you on both your topic so you can just be here once.
Thank you.
Beth Storch 616 Jefferson Street, the forest.
As you heard, I'm here to talk about fluoride and also the data center.
This past fall, you heard from many residents asking you to reinstate fluoridating our drinking water.
At the November 4th board meeting, a motion was passed to generate a report regarding issues surrounding fluoridating our water was passed.
However, the date for when this report would be completed was that part of the motion.
Since that meeting, the ongoing discussions about the data center have been front and center as they should be.
But I'm asking the board to put fluoridating our water back on the agenda next month.
While the entire report may not be completed by them, an update on the progress of compiling the information and a date for when it will be completed should be addressed.
I do not want fluoridating our drinking water and the health of our residents to fall through the cracks as we address the concerns about the data center.
We need to work on both.
Now for the data center.
I'm not going to read what I wrote because it's not necessary right now.
What happened here tonight?
I know that several of you campaigned on transparent open and honest communication.
I was told that for me to be involved and to know what was happening in this community, I should go to the website.
And by God, I did that.
I spent over an hour trying to find where do I find this report and where do I find these minutes and I did.
And then I found the packet for tonight's meeting.
But there was no memo.
Now there's legal reasons for that.
But that is not transparency.
That doesn't promote open and honest communication.
And then there's the comment being made of us and their lawyers.
Oh, gee, doesn't that sound like us working together as one.
That's us against them.
Is that really what you want to be telling the community right now?
When you had such a large vocal appearance of residents coming and staying and expressing their views, they want to trust you.
And you blew it tonight.
Think outside the box from going on.
Think about how you can work with the residents.
Don't make yourself against us.
We are not the enemy.
The enemy might be the data center.
And a couple last things to think about and these I did write down.
The amount of money that QTS is throwing at us is a bribe.
And bribes are not good.
And second, if it's too good to be true, it is.
Thank you.
Okay.
And after her Nancy brought.
Okay.
I'm a resident of the forest.
My address is on the form.
So I'll amend my statement a little bit.
So bear with me because I don't want to keep us here longer than we need to be.
But fun fact, I'm also a citizen of the United States.
I say this because I wasn't always once I lived in a place where people didn't have a voice and things were done to them and not for them.
People didn't have a say in how their lives changed and how things changed around them.
They cannot protect their children and their futures in many ways.
Any concerns they had fell on deaf ears.
They were blinded by corruption, greed and doing what's best for them.
There were no routes to speak ones mind safely.
There were no routes to get in front of people like you who were open and able to listen and who were part of a greater process.
That is one of the many reasons why I left where I lived and now come to the United States and have become a naturalized citizen.
Now I live in the forest, a town that was very lovingly chosen for the way of life that it inspires.
It's changing very fast. We're building condos and more homes with only one grocery store and barely enough infrastructure support, but I'm hopeful.
We ask for a pool for many, many years, nothing, but I'm still hopeful.
With QTS, I'm not hopeful.
These are little examples petty compared to the QTS data center.
They are examples of differing opinions and what our community wants, be it pool or pickleball court.
As defined as we can be one thing on little things, the populous overwhelming majority are unified.
We're strong, unwavering, clear and cemented in one sentiment.
We do not want a data center.
The reasons you hear tonight from everyone are my reasons too.
Whatever assumed and projected benefits for the community are best a guess and no comfort to infrastructure that cannot support this.
Who will want to move here and fill those many homes and how many will stay if this is approved?
Who will want to live and deal with the fallout of a gamble to the environment, health, utility and beyond that could come from this?
I want to be very clear when I say as a voice you've not heard from before, we don't want a data center in the village.
We would like to vote as a community and clearly show you this.
If there is an opportunity to do so, please do better than where I came from.
Listen to your citizens, put any differences aside and just hear what we are seeing and pleading for.
Do this for who voted for you, for yourself as a reminder of why you took this office and for our children's future and community well-being.
Thank you for your time.
Someone left a pan on the table.
There's been here for other.
My name is Nancy Roth and I have lived in the Vienna area for 40 years on 76 25 or 90 road day.
On December 23rd, I finally received the answers to those famous 100 questions that I sent to QTS.
You've seen them, I think.
Take a grease and also copied those answers to Jane and to Bill and to Alex.
Since then I have analyzed the questions, answers and shared my thoughts and emails to the other six of you.
For public record years, a brief synopsis of what I learned.
QTS confirms that they were invited into the area by a lion energy.
They admit they started conversation about building here as early as late 2024.
But QTS did not provide exact dates or the names of the individuals they negotiated with.
Repeatedly, QTS states they picked this location specifically for its power, connectivity and skilled workforce.
All three of these factors are available without annexation to the forest.
QTS states that when Vienna refused to amend the comprehensive plan that Vienna had been working on for over two years.
Immediately, QTS opened negotiations with someone in the village of the forest.
Quote, these delays and decisions presented a challenge to our project's feasibility.
QTS openly admits that they cannot accept delays.
This annexation request is not about your infrastructure.
It is about the speed of the project.
In the choice of words, QTS admits there will be a great number of negative effects on our environment and community.
About a dozen times QTS explains they will have to mitigate negative impacts.
The most outrageous offer of mitigation is this response to my question about agricultural land.
We will be, quote, supporting agricultural programs and preserving farmland elsewhere so we can maintain your region's farming heritage.
Let that sink in.
They say they will mitigate our loss by supporting farmland somewhere else.
It is also clear in QTS's choice of words that they are asking to the village of the forest to annex 16 acres of Vienna for a project that is, quote, only a concept.
I counted the frequency, the use of words that I call hedge phrases.
Quotes like, we might hire. It is a concept. It is a potential phase two.
If blasting might occur, these phrases occur in QTS's responses over 43 times.
I'm sorry, Nancy.
Your type has expired.
Please say the last one, please, please.
I'm sorry.
You can submit it.
Last one.
Someone else was ready to claim it.
I was posted on engage.
Brian Goodman.
And then levy. Oh, Brian.
Hi, Brian Goodman.
I live in the forest addresses on the form.
I'm here to oppose QTS.
And we've all been here for a very long time.
I'm not going to reiterate what everyone else is.
Pretty much said whether it be in person.
Here for months, probably in all of your inboxes via email.
Instead, what I'd like to do is talk about just the showing of people that you all have seen here.
Several of you have been on the board for a long time.
So Jane, Jim, Colleen.
Have you all ever seen this many people show up to any, anything?
We've seen pen seekers.
We've seen the fluoride thing.
But I don't think anybody's ever shown up in this kind of stature, right?
So what I would say is I'd look at each and every one of you and say,
why are you sitting in the chairs you're sitting in?
It's because you're the voice of us, right?
And as Al said, words mean things.
Well, louder than words is the presence of people, especially when these stickers, right?
Everyone that came here late talking about being in favor of QTS,
are they residents here?
Is it a short-term game?
Is it a long-term game?
We have to live with this stuff, right?
So do you all.
So I don't want to take too much time.
Again, I was supposed to be home a few hours ago with a newborn.
So we'll see how that works out when I get home.
But probably watching.
This is proof of life, I guess.
Anyways, what I'm getting at is your vote matters, okay?
And I want you to think long and hard about which way you vote.
If you were to vote, yes, for QTS.
Because the petition didn't go through.
Although I would ask that maybe we could reword it in a way that makes the lawyer talk legit.
Now, whether that means we have to hire our own, so be it.
Well, if you vote, yes.
How many residents for village of the forest residents lives will be drastically affected.
And the answer is a lot, arguably everyone.
But if you vote no, how many village of the forest residents are truly going to be impacted by that no vote?
A handful, maybe five or less people that have monetary gain.
So the landowner.
Who else?
That's all I have to say. Thank you.
Levy O'Brien.
And then after him is Elliot long.
Thank you.
My name is Levy O'Brien.
I live at 509 Valley Drive.
My wife and I have been here almost 30 years.
We've raised four children in public schools here.
I've studied watershed management land use and regional planning at UW Green Bay.
And I have an understanding of what's at stake here.
Data centers are being constructed with a no holds barred mentality all across the country.
It's time we hit the pause button or the stop button to see if this proposed development is right for the community.
And if it's a vision for the future all of us have, or if this is a vision that just a few have.
We don't know what kind of impact there will be with the initial draw of water used to start up the center.
We don't know how the Harris River will be impacted.
In a way, the river is the heart of the village.
The forest sits on the headwaters of the river, which is also the major contributor to Lake Mendota.
How will it affect the groundwater aquifer and the lake and stream levels of the watershed?
We don't know for sure.
We don't know the impact that this huge draw of water will have on the Cherokee Marsh and the wildlife.
There are no federal or state laws regarding disclosure on the amount of water being used.
I'm concerned about the quality of our drinking water that will be potentially affected due to leakage or intentional discharge from the center.
We don't know what harmful chemicals may leech into the ground beneath the data center.
I'm also concerned about the groundwater not being able to be replenished adequately when there will be over a thousand acres of hard surfaces that alter the way the water will be entering the streams.
And eventually into the groundwater aquifer.
Additionally, the village sits just southwest of the proposed data center location and the winds prevail from the northwest in the fall and winter.
The data center could affect the air quality and this would flow directly to the village and could pose significant health issues.
Economically, there appears to be a little direct benefit to the community.
Sure, there will be jobs created.
M-A-T-C-U-W Madison and the village of DeForest will get millions of dollars as will former landowners, farmers selling their land.
Cost to local residents for water and electricity are already going up and will likely increase due to the need to create infrastructure to support the project.
But for the 10,000 people who live here, it is not known what the benefit will be.
The larger questions remain.
It seems clear that a significant contingent who live into forest do not agree with the vision of a community with a 1,600 acre data center.
What is the rush?
Why not hit the pause button or the stop button and take our time to review the environmental, cultural, emotional impact of this massive construction.
This is a huge project, almost a quarter to a third of the size of DeForest itself at 1,600 acres when completed.
It will be the size of the epic campus in Verona.
Village, please take action.
Your time has expired.
As the town of Vienna did to block the construction.
Thank you.
Okay.
So long.
And after Elliot, we have Megan Harrier.
Well, we're waiting for people is Steve McDonald here.
Mm hmm.
All right, Winona, come forward.
All right, my name is Winona storms.
I am speaking on behalf of Megan Harrier, which is who is a DeForest resident and her addresses on the form.
She asked me to speak because, as she says, I am disabled and had to leave the meeting because there was not a place for me to sit.
I can only stand for short periods of time.
Please note this for the record. Thank you.
Thank you.
Steve McDonald.
He doesn't want to speak again.
Okay.
Kimberly.
Zach.
No.
No.
No.
Please correct your last name.
I'm sure I killed it.
All right, I'm Kimberly Zachanino and I'm a.
Village of DeForest resident and on the paperwork, we've got my precise address.
I am speaking to express my opposition to the proposed data center in the town of Vienna.
The villages aquifer and water supply will be at risk by this project.
Data center proposes to use 3 million gallons of water.
QTS claims that the cooling for the data center is closed loop, but they have never described how heat will be rejected from this closed loop.
Typically, the water in the closed loop rejects its heat to a second water loop, which is not closed.
How much additional water will be required to reject this heat?
Even if the primary loop is air cold, which seems unlikely as air is not as good a conductor if heat is water.
The primary loop will require some makeup water.
QTS has not shared any of these details as of yet.
A village meeting in late 2025 had a presentation outlining needs for the villages water systems for the next 10 years.
Irregardless of QTS, the study mentions the need for additional wells and storage towers to support the growth of the area served by the water district.
Not known if the existing aquifer can support the proposed growth, let alone the demands of the data center.
It is not known how water will be prioritized between residents and the data center.
Finally, it is unknown what this increased water demand will have on existing wetlands and the Yohara River.
There are also long-term and unintended consequences of the data center.
This project could jeopardize its deforest ability to expand.
The town of Vienna could be so incensed by deforest actions to annex 1600 acres on one fell swoop that they could incorporate into a village.
Windsor has already done it just because of what a previous board did in years past.
This would mean the roadmaps been laid, the laws been changed.
This would leave deforest landlocked by the villages of Windsor and Vienna with no room for expansion or revenue growth in the 30-year window.
All of these issues and others should be thoroughly explored by the completion of an environmental impact study.
This study will clearly investigate all potential effects that the data center project will have on the environment and our community.
The village should hire a qualified firm to conduct the study.
This firm should be hired and paid for by the village, not QTS.
The proposed QTS data center is a massive project that would fundamentally transform the environment,
our village and its relationship with other communities.
I strongly encourage this process get slowed down in order to be properly assessed.
Thank you for your time.
All right, Sarah Anthony.
And then.
After Sarah is.
James Bender.
I still can't say that name.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
I don't know.
My name is Sarah Anthony.
I'm a resident of the village of the forest.
My address is on the form.
I'm here tonight because of my concerns about the energy demand that this data center is going to pose.
And the impact is going to have on our electrical grid.
We don't, as far as I know, know we have received any estimates from QTS as far as energy usage.
Now, in their other data centers, they've used solar energy.
But they're starting to make statements about bringing up small nuclear power plants.
I'm not sure that we want that in this area or in the state of Wisconsin.
And I strongly suggest the board start talking to QTS and find out what kind of agreement
they've got with alliant energy.
I heard mention that they're talking renewable energy.
And frankly, nuclear energy is considered renewable energy.
So before you vote on this, you need to know what we're talking as far as energy.
The other thing that concerns me is the cost of this electrical power.
I have a friend who lives down in the Phoenix area.
Phoenix has become multiple data centers around it now.
Their electric bill went from $160 a month up to $500 a month.
That's a substantial increase.
I'm not sure that the average resident can absorb that kind of increase,
especially senior citizens who are on Social Security.
We've already seen a significant raise in our property taxes to have that continue
and then have a rise in our electric bill to that extent in the next few years.
Might cause people, might cause senior citizens to end up losing their homes.
So I want you to think long and hard about that potential when you're deciding whether to move forward with this data center or not.
Thank you.
Thank you.
We have pillar, farfin, guzman.
It's a pillar online.
E-I-L-A-R.
We'll keep going while we wait while you look for a pillar.
Jared Dick, is that you?
Well, she had another topic.
She wants the village of course to have more events and activities year-round Easter egg hunts and activities for all ages.
She sounds fun.
Jared Dictor de Porres resident addresses on the form.
I've lived here for almost seven years.
I am here to speak against QTS.
A little bit about me real quick is I'm a dues paying union member for seven years.
I sat on the board of my union for three of those years.
I was the chairman of the negotiating committee within that union.
I've negotiated billion dollar contracts.
What you're being told and what you're being sold are different things.
It's not always true.
Your job sitting there is working for us, not working for the company that is selling you something.
People behind me all have stickers on tonight.
Raise the hands.
Anybody?
Stickers again?
There were about 200 other people here tonight.
You cannot tell me that you know what the majority of this village wants.
Right now, you have a sample size that's pretty good.
I understand that the language and the referendum piece was not legal enough.
I encourage you to rewrite that language.
Put it out for a vote.
Prove us wrong that if you think you're in favor of this, prove us wrong that we're not.
You're elected by us, not the other way around.
Understand that and remember that when it comes time to vote.
Thank you.
Rhonda, mine holds.
Hello again.
I'm still around to mine holds and I still live in Vienna.
One thing really quick.
Thank you so much to the board members and the staff who are sitting here tonight.
Several hours into this meeting and you are still giving us an opportunity to speak.
We appreciate that.
We appreciate not being limited to a certain amount of time for public comment.
It is really important for a topic like this to be heard and make sure that everybody has a voice.
That being said, I am so proud to be a part of an incredibly well organized group of people.
Who clearly is supporting the residents of this community and are not in support of the annexation or the data center.
That is very clear.
It's very clear we are well organized.
It's very clear this community does not want this.
I have two things for you.
First and foremost.
We have created a legal entity for ourselves, which is called no data center into forest and it is an unincorporated association.
We have our own EIN number, all of that established.
Second, we have retained legal counsel to support us going forward.
I have a three page document in front of me from our attorney of statement from him,
which he may or may not have sent to you earlier today.
I don't have enough time in my speech to read it.
Among other things, it is a list of concerns he has based on things that have happened up to date today regarding this project.
And not following procedures specifically.
I have copies of all of those in front of me.
I would like this to be a part of the public record and I have enough copies for all of you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
My name is Trisha bulky.
I live at the forest.
I am speaking on behalf of myself this time, but I did enlist the help of Prescott,
who was at your last board meeting and spoke to some of the financials and I had concerns about the financial analysis.
So I sent to Tim and he sent this to me.
Your financial impact presentation claims a potential reduction in individual property taxes of up to $1,220 per year.
But it does so with the important caveat of if all other items are held constant.
Sure, we'll grant that you if you will add all the data center evaluation to the tax rolls and skip the opportunity to increase the levy and the residents will get a sizable reduction in their tax bills.
But over the last several years, are there any instances where the village is neglected to take advantage of new construction to raise the levy.
It appears we've always been at or near the max allowed by our net new construction.
Every dollar and levy in Christ, Chris, we take, we will erode that $1,220 savings.
If you take half of it, the benefits or residents will be $610 a year.
Take three quarters of it and we're down to $300.
Shall we ask the community if they want a data center in their community in exchange for $600 or less per year.
Are we chasing this project for the tax revenue or the tax savings?
Your model implies for tax savings.
Your actions imply for tax revenue.
You can't have it both ways.
Deformis does the highest study as growth in the state of Wisconsin, 4.15% per year over the last eight years.
We're growing fast enough already, maybe even too fast.
When you add $2 billion to our evaluation, you will never again grow at 4%.
You will get half that at least.
The growth delta to inflation will erode the benefit we seem to desperate.
So desperate to grab now.
The data center project is financially short sighted slow and study wins the financial race.
And this project is a get rich quick screen scheme.
It looks too good to be true.
And it is.
Thank you.
Kelly Mack.
After Kelly, we have with Nona storms again.
I'm sorry.
Okay.
Well, Nona, were you trying to speak again?
Okay.
All right.
Once again, one on a storm.
I'm sure you guys are sick of me already.
I live at 4.17 East Lincoln, the forest, and I oppose the data center.
So we've made it pretty late.
So far, you guys are exhausted.
We're exhausted.
Obviously, this is an important issue to a lot of us.
And what we have left here, plus in the other room, and I think there might be a couple people still outside.
It goes to show we really care about this.
So first, I just want to state my disappointment that a larger venue was not found to use for this meeting.
Knowing, as I'm sure everyone in this room does, that this meeting would have a large turnout.
Per chapter 19, sub chapter four of Wisconsin statute, 19.81, 19.98.
All meetings of state and local governmental bodies should be reasonably accessible to the public and open to all citizens at all times in rooms that are reasonably calculated to be large enough to accommodate all citizens who wish to attend.
The Wisconsin Department of Justice and their open meetings law compliance guide further states that the open meetings law should be liberally construed to achieve its purposes and the rule of liberal construction applies in all situations.
The public interest about the data center is massive, and we need to find a meeting location that allows the majority who wish to be here in person to actually be inside the building.
I myself was outside for an hour and a half into the meeting before I was finally able to make it inside per fire code.
The data center is already drowning out residents voices and the construction and operations haven't even started yet, at least not legally with the approved permits anyway.
We can't allow giant business to rush in woo us and sweep us off our feet all for a few pretty words, several nice dinners and a couple measly dollars that would go to the county and not even directly to our village.
Once again, I am Winona storms and I oppose the data center. Thank you.
Thank you, Daniel.
We have James bander.
Still here.
My name is Dan Janssen. I'm a resident of the forest. I submit the following comments for the public record regarding communications.
By the village president related to the protea pose QTS development obtained through an open records requests. I also submit the records received from that request into the record meeting.
On November 20, 2025, a resident of the forest emailed the village president seeking her perspective on whether her connection to K Hill wolf grim associates constituted a potential conflict of interest regarding the QTS development.
As I understand at the village president and her wife Steve wolf grim principles in that firm.
On November 25, 2025, the village president responded that no such conflict existed stating, quote, either of us has ever worked for or represented data centers are related finance companies and quote, and that she had quote remained neutral and quote on the topic of the QTS development.
The village board members were copied and the email was forwarded a village staff and notably to Brian Herlihy of QTS.
Approximately three weeks earlier on October 30, the village president received an email from jet and green of UTS outlining the companies intent to pursue annexation to to forest and including a one page project summary.
On October 31, the village president sent two responses providing feedback stating in one quote, Steve looked at this this morning and we offer his comments and a couple of others.
End quote.
Among the feedback she noted that, quote, calling this a Dane County project is inviting opposition from county board members in parentheses Patrick Miles and staff in parentheses.
Some are organizing a task force in opposition end quote.
She also advised QTS to maintain consistency and communications regarding cooling because quote, lots of these folks are college educated and smart and looking for ways to question end quote.
One message concluded, quote, another note that came to my attention last night, a local newspaper editor Roberta Bauman lives in Vienna, her reporter even paralyzed by most reasonable but she has claimed the story end quote.
These communications raised questions about whether the village president's claim neutrality aligns with her interactions with QTS Wisconsin ethics standards emphasize disclosure of private interests recusal or impartiality may reasonably be questioned.
And avoiding the appearance of a variety.
Residents reasonably expect that village leadership maintain an arm's length relationship with developers to protect accountability.
Additionally, is this Steve referenced in the October 31 emails the village president's husband. If so, what's his role in this matter.
The records include references to dinners, evolving Steve and QTS representatives and a tour provided to Steve by Brian Hurley.
Given these concerns and the strong public interest, I respectfully request the village board pause decisions related to the QTS development until the public receives written clarification on these matters.
There are three other requests in this message that are in the packet for the record. Thank you.
Thank you. Is James van der Wyland burger here.
Jonathan Brahm.
So again, Jonathan Bronx, the forest resident and then my addresses on the form.
I'm speaking against the data center.
Today we heard a financial impact assessment regarding the QTS development.
In an effort to understand what would be a quote net positive for the forest.
What is considered a net positive. Is it financial to environmental quality of life.
Will there be similar studies done to understand what the impacts to the environment would be or to the effect on the health safety and welfare of the community members in the community as a whole.
Is there going to be a study on existing data centers and their impacts on the communities they are in.
The forest is the fastest growing community in the fastest growing county in Wisconsin, projected to grow to 17,500 by 2050 tax base and jobs are not concerns.
We will be fine without the center.
So as rapidly as the forest is growing, we need to be smart, sustainable and strategic about how and where we develop.
That's why we have a community comprehensive plan and zoning.
When my family visits, they do not gush about all the land and its potential for development or data centers or how fast we are growing.
They gush about our parks or trails, particularly the your horror river trail.
We gush about the adjacency to family farms and the perfect blender community has of small town with city amenities and natural spaces minutes away.
I can hop on my bike and be tracking the country roads, taking in the architectural agricultural landscape that help defines who we are.
As a data center, the best use for 1600 acres according to our comp plan, it isn't.
We need to adhere to that plan, which went through a rigorous design and community input process.
It tells us how the community wants to grow and how we can do it efficiently while meeting the goals set forth by the community.
We need to look at the long term impacts to our community at the short term strings attached deals.
Thank you.
Michael Kistagno.
All right, good evening again.
My name is my custodo. I live in deforest.
My address is on the form.
I know we're all tired here.
So I'll try to keep this short.
I don't know if you want to start the timer.
Okay.
Okay.
So just listening to what Melinda said, you know, hey, we want to contract.
There's just a lot of red flags.
What the individual mentioned before on the open records law.
You know, if there's any verbal agreements, they mean nothing with somebody like blackstone.
I'm not even a calm QTS. They're really blackstone.
That's, that's what we're dealing with here.
And so again, I mentioned before, we know private equity companies are the most altruistic.
They buy companies.
They load them with debt.
They lay people off.
That's just one example of a plethora of examples.
And so I just think that raises concerns that there's no, you know, environmental impacts
and data centers like, you know, you hear the joke.
Nobody wants to live next to a prison, a wastewater facility or a data center.
That's an ongoing joke that's out there.
And so you think, Hey, deforest has all this growth and people keep citing statistics.
Will deforest still have that growth with the data center?
People might not want to move here with the data center, quite frankly.
And I think you should, you know, take that into consideration as well.
Um, I don't know.
It's just, you know, when I think about this, it's like we have to.
Somebody's like, Oh, we've, we've created a legal entity.
We've hired an attorney and then, you know, with, with other things.
You didn't words matter.
They do. You didn't structure this right.
But it's, it's just disappointing that we're having to go to this level.
Versus talking as a community that seems to be mostly against the share.
There's some people that are for it.
Small constituency for it, but then we have to go to this level to hide behind.
Attorneys to hide behind, you know, things that aren't that there's a lot of
opaqueness going on.
And I don't know.
I just find that very like sad and kind of disappointing quite, quite overall.
And it's just very, very disheartening that it seems to be all about the mighty dollar,
which, you know, somebody, you know, a couple of decades told me, don't get yourself confused.
The US is all about money in it.
It just feels like we're just making some short sighted decisions here that we really
need to pause and think through cute.
Blackstone wants this to go through quickly for a reason.
There's a reason they might say, Hey, you have to make a decision board and you're in a
difficult position.
I get it.
You, you buy this point or we're going to withdraw our application.
I mean, they're probably pushing pretty hard here.
And that's for a specific reason.
And it's just like, I don't know.
If you wake up and just look at yourself and say, is this who you want to be?
Is this the decisions that you can live with?
Maybe you can.
Maybe you can't.
That's a decision you each have to make.
Thank you.
Okay.
That's the last speaker for the evening.
No, you have.
Yeah.
That's the last one.
What were you saying?
She's just leading your case over here.
All right.
Number 10 communications check register was in your packet.
Committee commission and board minutes were also in your packet.
I don't have a report.
Other than to remind you that we have an extensive process that we're going through with.
QTS and other projects as required by regulations and laws.
So I would ask if there's any other business that lawfully comes before the board.
I just wanted to say, I know a lot of people have gone already.
This is my third term on this village board and I got to tell you,
I am humbled by the number of people that are getting involved and wanting to be heard.
And I personally just want to say thank you because that's what we are in divorce.
We're a family and we should hear one another and.
Engage respectfully and I am so proud of how our meetings have progressed.
And how we've been able to sit and listen and hear each other,
and then still see each other and pick and save and still smile and say hi.
So no matter what, just continue to remember that our children are watching us
and how we behave will instill in them how they should behave not only at school,
but in our community.
So we are setting the stage and I just want to say thank you for everyone who sat out here
and everyone who was outside cold.
I appreciate you and I thank you.
Thank you.
Is there any other business? Yes, Brad.
I just wanted to make it common that it seemed like a lot of people were confused
when we moved on from the discussion about the petition and I just wanted to make it clear
that I think we're trying to be transparent as a board up here.
And that's why I think everybody here decided let's release this memo that we received
so that it can be out there for everybody to look at about why we decided not to take action
at this time because there's a lot of things that opened my eyes when I read that
and I think I'm hoping all of you can see the same thing I'm seeing about this specific topic.
So I'm guessing that will be released to the engage to four sites for everybody can review that.
But I think we clearly heard the voices of everybody here and the amount of residents
that have shown up, you know, when I ran to this position,
I wanted more engagement on our servers and everything else.
And I think we got it.
We're there.
So thank you all.
Thank you.
All right.
With that, I'd entertain a motion to the question for a turn.
Quick question.
Got to go to work.
Yes, I get it.
Just when are we going to release the, um, the memo?
Is there a timeline on them?
Work tomorrow morning to get it on there.
So.
All right.
Okay.
Entertain a motion to adjourn.
We got a second.
All right.
We have a motion and a second.
All those in favor signify by saying I.
Opposed motion carries were adjourned at 1028.
All right.
Thank you.