Okay, let's call to order the Village Board work session for September 15th at 5 p.m.
Cali, would you please note the role?
I have no announcements.
Discussion items, discussion regarding the village of the forest budget and financial policies, the government,
finance officers association, distinguished budget presentation,
award program, and creating an equipment replacement plan policy.
Brandon.
All right, thank you much.
Welcome back.
You get to hear another session from me regarding budgets and everything else regarding two budgets within here.
We're going to split this up into two main theme topics within here.
The first one is going to be going over the policies in GFOA and then we'll take questions and stuff about that.
And then we'll have the equipment replacement plan kind of at his own thing.
So I'm going to pull up the just the first two items that are within the packet in here.
And then we'll start talking about those.
So the first item that I just kind of want to go through is GFOA.
So that's government financials officers association.
So essentially just what that is, is just a national group within the United States that just kind of set standards of what are its best financial practices,
policies that municipalities can strive for.
Something that was very specific within the job description or the recruitment or hiring for the finance director was to get to village to a point of where we get what's called the distinguished budget.
Presentation award.
That is something that my team and I we've been working towards since I've first started. However, in 2025 GFOA had to change some of the priorities and the way of how that scored within the entire process.
So it's not real feasible for us to get it for this budget.
However, we're going to be targeting for the next budget to get that.
Primarily the biggest difference that came with that reward now was the idea of strategic planning and specific departmental level plans and how those plans get fit within the budget and what are the performance measurements of those plans within there.
So we could throw something at the wall this year and try to make it stick, but quite honestly, it's just not a very good and intuitive document then for the departments or for the constituents as a whole.
So we figured we're going to take a step back, at least for that, we're going to really start analyzing a lot more of that in a departmental and village wide next year.
So it might just be a slightly longer budget process sorry team members next year, but it's going to be just a more in depth thoughtful process of how each departments themselves have their own unique plans.
How they describe those plans and narratives within a budget and then how they specifically budget those items and keep track of those within there.
So this document is essentially just an entire criteria guide that GFOA goes through when we submit ultimately for this award within here, and they're going to use this document to essentially say how good is your budget compared to everything within here.
So there's a lot of different sections so like table of contents first off that's going to be all kind of labeled like this. It's either going to be a mandatory section or a non mandatory section.
And then there's going to be just a couple of questions under like is it a comprehensive table of contents is it easy to navigate to all the table or all the pages within here, etc, etc.
So we're definitely going to be focusing at least on all the mandatory ones. However, if you just do mandatory it's not guaranteed that you get the award so we also have to blend in some of the non mandatory items within here.
Ultimately, at the end of the day, if and when we receive this award, it's not going to mean that we're going to get more state aid funding or we're not going to get like a grant for a dollar and anything.
It's essentially going to be a distinguished award of where on a national level we are presenting a budget to that is very clear to all of our constituents.
It's not going to be a state exactly what our goals are. It is financially understandable. It's easy to follow. It's essentially just a very good document when it comes to the eyes of the constituents within here.
So that's kind of really the biggest reason why municipalities go for this award is just to distinguish themselves of we have a document that we're very proud of.
Trustees are proud of and quite frankly, more than your common constituent can make sense of it.
Because right now, if you were to just look at our budget document alone, there's a lot of good information in there and there's a lot of stuff that I definitely know 100% of the bill does as well to a lot of department members as well.
But the average constituent may not know exactly what every single line is in there. And without enough narrative or thought within there, they could get confused.
Not saying that our budget is bad or anything at all, but we're just looking to take it a step further within here and just really distinguish ourselves on a national level.
In addition to that, our strategic plan specifies transparency and communications included with that also education materials on what we do here.
So as you may understand, the budget is a big part of what we do. And so as being a part of this, it's got some some good guidelines on how to be able to present a budget in more than just spreadsheets.
So that the public had adjusted.
Yeah, so the rest of this document just really goes through a lot of those other mandatory categories.
It's worth just a further review from you all. And if there's any additional questions or concerns, it definitely doesn't have to be answered at this time when we could be happy to talk about it some more.
But just know in the background that a lot of these items are already kind of incorporated within our current budget and other items that are going to take more time.
We're incorporating into future budgets.
But to really bring it along back to this and to the policy specifically is that there are required items within the GFOA criteria of this that does affect our policies. So each year from my understanding as well to the village and the trustees do go over and review.
Thank you. The villages, financial and budgetary policies, just for your own reaffirmation and just kind of a good process in terms of the entire budget process.
But looking at these and comparing to the criteria, there's a couple of just friendly suggestions that I'm throwing in here of just additional items to consider adding within here.
So there's a total of five of them that I have and then definitely opening up to the floor of what your thoughts on these and then any other issues, comments or concerns or suggestions you all may have.
But the first one is just underneath kind of the overall policies within here.
Just added additional paragraph that just essentially summarizes that we pass at what is defined as a balanced budget.
That is a direct criteria of their document and for the award is to is for the village to define what is a balanced budget.
Does it mean that everything zero does it mean that we're utilizing fund balances and mean that it is not balanced at all. So we threw together what we would say is a balanced budget within here.
Scrolling down to the next update that we had, it is within the operating budget policy section.
And this one just discusses the overall budget budgeting process on a very high level within here.
We didn't have really anything that really talked about what does even mean to create a budget.
We have budget listening sessions. We host a public hearing. We have these meetings together during work sessions to kind of discuss this stuff.
So this is just a higher level to just saying that we have all these things and more to discuss the overall budgeting process.
The next section, I believe, was within our capital section.
GFOA very distinguished. She says, when you build a capital improvement plan, how do you get to that plan?
What are some things that you may be considering? So kind of threw together a listing within here of just very common topics of things that we would be considering when it comes to capital improvements, things like health and safety.
What are paper ratings? Capital lifestyle costs, anticipatory costs in the future.
Just a lot of things that just capture overall what our team is already doing within here, but again, just throwing it in a document.
And again, just reassuring constituents and trustees of these are practices that we're already doing, but we're just documenting it now.
The fourth update that I had in here is just discussing the village's annual revenue estimates and essentially its forecasting schedule.
So right now in the finance department, I'd be more than happy to show you any of these spreadsheets one on one, but we do forecast exactly what our future operating costs are, what our revenue expectations and stuff are going to be.
This section just summarizes that essentially. GFOA asks of how do you get to your estimations when you put $2 million into the budget?
Why do you put $2 million in the budget? So this is just explaining that we do forecasting.
And the last edit that I had within here, at least for my own reviews, was just the discussion of this review process within here.
I'm just saying that annually, we do look at this all together as a board. We review financial policies. We ensure compliance of it and that we last revised it as of September, 2026.
So at least reviewing GFOA's criteria for that distinguished budget award. These are what I would recommend as minimums within our budget policies to add within here.
Of where at least on a policy perspective, we are meeting all the criteria within the budget distinguished award.
However, if there are anything else you all are considering any other edits, questions, comments, concerns, everything's on the table.
So I kind of turn it over for you guys to discuss these policies and what you may or may not want to see.
In a previous meeting, when we had discussed potential budgets, Jim, you had a question in regards to the fund balance policy.
Is that something that we want to address now? As we discuss our financial policies and whether or not we adopt changes moving forward?
Sure, I can't point to it right off the bat. I'm guessing you guys know it better than I, but as far as those.
I guess when I look at it, it's sort of more or less what I would call like on a personal level, like your, your saving funds or rainy day funds.
And there's those levels that we have set in the policy.
And I look at it say, like, talking to the citizens to me, it's like, well, that's money that could be in their pocketbooks rather than on our coffers.
So I try to balance that. So I think that's what Bill's alluding to. I've had conversations with him that we should taper those down because we're near the max of them in our policy.
But I guess you can speak to that or Bill. It's like there was other things that was actually beneficial to be higher as far as getting better credit ratings and stuff.
So even though, in my opinion, we should be lowering it to help taxes in some ways by keeping it higher. It actually helps taxes by getting us a lower rate per loans and things.
So I wonder if you can explain that better. So everybody, I guess knows.
Yeah, absolutely. So GFOA does have a recommendation of what your fund balance policy should be at a minimum.
Every year during audit presentation, it's always kind of noted in a quick three seconds, but then it's just kind of gets collapsed by after that.
GFOA recommends at least 13 to 15% for your general fund policy to have a fund balance at the village.
We keep ours at 25% and it's to exactly to your points, Jim, of when we have more cash on hand when we are going for future debt issuances and we go through bond ratings.
Those companies take a look at all of our financials where we are an open book at that point and they assess us based off of the level of risk that we have.
And the more money we have on hand, the less risk that we have, right? If something were to go catastrophic or anything, we have more fund balance to cover exactly what we need.
And as long as we're sticking to our own policies within there, it is much more beneficial to us.
And it is the goal of the village to creep up to that next and final bond rating level of where when we are forecasting with our debt issuances of who knows anywhere from a 15 to $20 million debt issuance in the next couple of years for a new public services building.
Save you an extra half a percent on interest at that point because we went up a bond rating is going to save hundreds of thousands of dollars within there.
Just a couple of points I wanted to make on fund balance at the end of the year.
So over the last couple of years, the reason for, I would say, access or more than 25% of fund balance is particularly due or have been due to interest coming in from our investment accounts.
And then also from fees generated primarily from building fees, building permit fees and from recreation fees.
So in regards to the amount of taxes being levied, we believe that that's proportionate to what we intend to spend.
We try our best to try to save money as much as we can throughout the year to make sure that we're being good stewards of taxpayer dollars.
So I want to make sure that we understand that distinction.
Secondly, in the past where we've had years, good years whereby we have a surplus budget.
We've come back to the village board to have whatever amounts over that 25% transferred into our fund for 100, which is our capital improvements fund.
And within that fund also exists, the expenditure restraint, excuse me, the equipment replacement fund, which Brandon will talk about.
And the ability to shift or transfer those one time.
Revenues into the fund for 100 to spend on one time expenditures allows us to reduce the overall cost to borrow or the amount that we borrow in the next year for equipment and for capital.
So that's how we've been utilizing and keeping on the years that we've been over 25%.
On the years, we've been fortunate to not be below 15%, but should we be below 15% at any given year, our policy dictates that we bring ourselves back above 15%.
And so we would have to fill that whole by transfer or by increasing the tax amount in the very next year to pull us back in.
That's just in generality, how does fund balance and adjustments to this fund balance would work in future years, depending on what the circumstances.
I think some of my question being that there is a range of say 25 to 15% and I don't know what that dollar amount is, but there's occasional or say there is asset or say a want or a.
A need that we could use that 10% difference to fund.
But I think Bill, if you can correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying that was not necessarily a good policy.
Yeah, so a couple of of impacts on that. So if you were going to use a portion of your fund balance to finance something.
It would not be my recommendation. Actually, it's against our policies to utilize that to offset reoccurring expenses using one time to money to offset reoccurring expenses.
It doesn't hurt you in the current year budget or the budget, the budget year that you're planning for.
What happens is the following year where that one time money longer exists, that you have that to fill that whole because you have that in your operation.
And so then you get into the spiral always using temporary money to finance for something that's long term.
So we have that that's explicit in our financial policies that we don't do that.
And if we were to do that, we would definitely see our reduction or a hit against our bond rating.
And so, you know, it's our tendency to try to try to try to at that higher level and then utilize whatever amounts is over.
And be react to react to react to it versus the intentionally spending down on that.
The other side is we don't know. We don't know what the market's going to do. You know, we've seen gas prices go up and down.
We've seen, especially in this administration, you know, things that we've never seen before.
We've seen pandemics. And so the question becomes, how dependent are we on market conditions?
And in a particular year, we can properly make an estimate of what it is going to be the following year.
What the costs are going to be the following year.
And so by spending down to gain in a particular year, the question becomes already putting future years in jeopardy.
And so I think we like to rely on sound financial policies and practices.
We've been in great financial status for quite some time here in the village of the forest.
And we've seen that these policies have stood true. And so we encourage that the board continue to all.
Yeah, I would definitely echo everything Bill had said regarding the use of fund balance for operating your overall accounts as well.
And another layer on top of that, Bill had mentioned, we got our bond ratings debt.
Debt issuances also get affected by using fund balance as well too, because when you go out to RFP.
Essentially for those debt issuances, again, we are an open book.
We're telling them, Hey, we're in need of a this past year, 14.1 million dollar debt issuance.
And if we start using fund balance to cover ourselves, they're going to class by a slightly higher risk in our 3.3% interest.
I believe we got this past time might have been 3.5 might have been 3.4, even 0.1% done up 14.1 million dollar issuance is going to add up pretty quickly in terms of interest price.
So yeah, definitely wouldn't recommend utilizing fund balance to cover operations at all.
Go ahead.
No, I was just kind of opening up still in the floor. If there's anything else regarding budget policies as at all.
If there's not, and these corrections all look good, we could definitely bring it back as a formal resolution just to adopt these changes within here in the next meeting.
Okay.
Thank you for that. I wanted to just know like how far off are we like, if you had to give a percentage on GFOA like from our current budget.
Like how next year, like how much will we see the process change or the actual budget change?
Yeah, so I wouldn't necessarily say that the budgeting process itself is going to change.
We're still going to have like these same recurring meetings and mom budget listening sessions and stuff,
but it's going to be a bit more of like our own internal process in here of how the department heads go about issuing their budgets because we're going to have to put again that layer of like strategic thinking amongst in here.
And it's going to really be challenging the department heads at that point of, well, what are your priorities and your plans and how do we create more of a departmental strategic plan and how to utilize that within the budget.
If you may recall, there's going to be a switch for this year, but a couple of years ago, the village had gone into an agreement with a program that's called ClearGov.
It's an online web program that is just essentially a better interface for the budget.
This year, when we hopefully have our meeting for our publication and set our publication, we're going to have a live ClearGov page to go along with that as well to of where we can reach out to our constituents of instead of this page narrative document they would set up before,
you can actually access our website and it's going to be a bit more user friendly.
So in terms of like next year process two, we're going to redefine that online web based product a bit more. So that process is going to change.
The user interface process is really going to change of where we want to make it much more friendly within there.
Because while I love spreadsheets and I can understand them, I completely understand that the common person does not.
Well, thank you. And then I like ultimately that the goal is so that people are constituents can better understand and I hope that with the changes, then that means we get more people at the meetings and feedback on the budget.
Absolutely. Thanks.
Perfect. If there's nothing else, I will shift gears over to a new topic of equipment replacement program.
So if you recall, this is a program that I had kind of alluded to a couple of times and meetings about how our current equipment is currently being funded funded using debt.
And we're hoping to create a new program of where we don't have to use debt for that. So I had included a memo within your packet.
Hopefully had time to review it. I'm actually going to switch over to an Excel program here instead on a worksheet.
Just to kind of explain this a little bit further. I did not include this Excel within the packet at all as it just be extremely long and perhaps cumbersome and not understanding.
So really we drafted this. We have an initial tab here that's just kind of going over our policy of what we want equipment replacement to be.
Essentially to summarize this is that equipment replacement is going to be equipment that's over $5,000 and has a useful life of less than 10 years.
Our debt issuance policies is that we are issuing debt for a 10 year period.
And so our thought process was if we need a new let's say a police vehicle that's the most relatable thing every six years.
Well, why are we putting a 10 year debt issuance on that? We're replacing it after six years and we still have four years worth of payments on a vehicle we don't have anymore.
So we want to instead fund this via an equipment replacement program of where we're paying for it all up front.
We're not having extra interest costs are tacked on to this. We're not having multiple years of extra payments on top of this.
But instead we're specifically levying dollars for a program like this to cover current equipment.
So this is where confusion and big spreadsheets and stuff are starting to come in.
So we wanted to put down here how much would it cost to cover this program.
On our very last tab in here, we have a listing of every single piece of equipment that we could identify between public services, police department, and a bit within the village hall too.
We have gone into this.
And we have identified the pieces of equipment.
There's serial numbers when they're purchased their current age.
A depreciable life, which is a depreciable life that's based off of auditing perspective.
So like a basic vehicle, for example, is the appreciable life of five years.
And then the recommendation is, Oh, hey, after five years, you should trade that in.
We do know and understand that some pieces of vehicles and equipment we may keep for longer than five years just because.
Again, the market's vital right now, the equipment may be really good.
Or there might be quite the opposite perspective to of after four years.
We got to get rid of this right now too. So this is all based off of assumptions within here, but just kind of explaining what we've been going through right now.
We captured the original cost of what the equipment is the cost and what the what the cost would be today if it were purchased.
Now that there's some numbers that are inflated within here as well to like, for example, this number is 300,000 versus 120,000.
Because this is Excel and Excel cannot really mess with like today's realizations or anything.
It's based off of formulas. Our best formula for for projecting out through two years was taking the cost of equipment and timesing it by 3%.
Well, we know something that was purchased perhaps 15 years ago that's coming up at the end of its depreciable life is not worth just 3% more.
So we had asked department heads at that time to identify those items and putting in and put in a realistic number of how much would it be today and then doing 3% after that.
So we built a base of where is our current equipment today.
And based off of that, we've built these spreadsheets that's projecting out exactly what is our future cost to replace this equipment all the way through 2050.
We had picked. Why 2050? I wanted to create a program where we're going to be doing this.
We're funding this not just for a short term period of five years, but instead we're looking at a program that is more long based.
Again, it's completely up to you all of how long you want to look at this or how we want to determine it and everything within here as well to.
But we at least wanted to present something here and get initial thoughts and discussion.
So this spreadsheet again goes off of a few assumptions that the cost of equipment is increasing at an annual rate of 3% per year.
So we'll get about $8.00 that we invest. We'll get about a 4% rate of return.
And then our last assumption, at least for the spreadsheet, is that all equipment is replaced as soon as it ends as to preachable life.
Again, as previously discussed, where there might be some equipment that we keep a little bit longer, some we might get rid of a little bit sooner, but at least just for projection and forecasting we're just assuming, hey, everything that comes to the end, we're at least putting away.
This is further proof too that this is going to be a living document and the number is going to change every single year as it's just a new budget process essentially that will go through with the department heads to identify current equipment needs and future equipment needs.
So it starts off with just this working capital fund balance here.
So as bill it alluded regarding the fund 400 transfers throughout the past three years, there has been one point, just under 1.8 million dollars put away for a future equipment replacement program.
So if we take that and we assume again a 4% interest earnings to fund the next 23 years, we'd be looking at levying $671,000 a year to keep up with our current equipment costs.
While the need for the equipment dollars is lower at these initial years of 865,742,674 when you get into future years, these gets up into the millions.
So $1.1 million, $1.145 million.
And so that's why this levy dollar amount is quite a bit because it's projecting out how do we fund it all the way through 2050.
Again, if we looked at it shorter and we did the 2040, that dollar amount would be smaller. If we did it through 2030, it'd be smaller as well too.
But again, we're at least for discussion purposes trying to propose a program that is long term versus short term.
So that's what it would be like if we used this type of formula of where we don't exhaust the fund balance, then we start levying dollars right away.
The total levy costs throughout 2027 through 2050 is going to be slightly over $16 million.
Now, if we look at it from a different model and let's say we have this $1.8 million, why don't we just spend all that first and then levy for the needs after that.
The annual or the cost all the way through 2050 is actually just under $18 million.
The reason for that is because we are not investing anything.
As soon as you exhaust that fund balance, there's nothing to invest. We're just going to levy a dollar amount for that year.
You're going to spend it all on the equipment and then you're going to do that cycle again and again and again.
So you're not going to have any of that interest earnings.
So it's going to prove or this at least proves that if we have a consistent model versus a variable model, you will be utilizing less doubt levy dollars to at least fund this program.
That's a lot of information and that's a lot of big numbers as well too.
I do want to emphasize as well that this is all for current equipment and current service levels.
As you all are known and aware, we are growing as a village.
With more people comes more responsibilities. We're going to need future officers.
We're going to need future police vehicles, more public services vehicles, another snow plow in the future, whatever case may be.
And new equipment costs are going to be much more expensive as well too.
So again, this is just trying to prove out that equipment's expensive and that we should start to think about and creating a program of funding this equipment.
So I'm going to at least pause for now. Bill looks like he wants to hop on the mic, so I'll let him talk and then we'll hear from you.
So I want to say that I don't believe that all of the equipment has to sort of be done in the fund 400 or finance through bonding.
So I don't want to indicate that or have you think that I believe in the past, in past budgets, we've seen items appear, equipment items appear in operational budgets.
So on the general funds by tax levy side, but under the specific department budgets and that's where you sometimes will see departments increase the department budgets increase significantly and then they'll drop off.
It's because of these equipment purchases. And so we've been over the last couple of years, we've been intentional in moving those equipments that the equipments that are on a cycle into this equipment replacement fund.
And by leveraging the different department needs at different time, we've been able to study that impact on the levy itself.
But, you know, $671,000 a year and levy is a big number. It's a scary number. But, you know, I think there's going to be opportunities of coming here.
And the next couple of years for the village to really, you know, put a dent into this.
And so you'll hear a talk more and more about this equipment replacement fund and how do we fund it moving forward.
So with that, we can take take advantage of the interest that can be earned from putting away money now to pay for the equipment later.
The cost of equipment will continue to go up.
So we need to be able to solve this sooner than later.
And this is kind of our first go at it. I know this is very new.
For this board and then for this organization as a whole. So we'll continue to work with you through this process.
Jim.
I would say it's a good plan to get this more or less under control. I'll say.
I can get it scheduled. The one thing that I look at is you're starting out with say the 671 and that's in year 2027.
And you're talking about like say the 4% increase.
And was there a 3% increase in the cost.
And I also don't think the 671 would stay the same.
I think we should be budgeting her.
Put in there and increase to this.
A few budget processes I've been through. We seem to try to stay around 2% or 3%.
I think that number should be racking up to.
I don't know. I'm guessing do you understand when I'm going to act because it would be bigger out the 20 some years.
But in 2027 it's going to end up being less.
And that's going to be something maybe easier to step into say I'm guessing it'd be 500,000 rather than 671.
You talk about compounding.
I'm not talking about compounding interest. I'm just saying that in general the cost of money is going to change over that time.
Yeah. So taking the initial levy and saying each year you're going to increase that by 2% to account for just the overall new equipment costs as well too.
Which is a fine idea and everything as well too because one thing I should have noted at least in the 2050 projection is very last number here is the ending fund balance.
And why 671 is not 700,000 or 650,000 was because this is the closest number I can get to to make the ending fund balance as close to zero.
So just like you're saying if 671 is a consistent model used within here by 2050 we're going to be like okay we need to fund even more than 671,000 and keep up with this.
But if you use 2% on top of that every single year this fund balance will be much more than $6,800 by 2050.
Yep. And the other thing that I wanted to question or understand better you're saying once we're I think sorry I don't normally use these terms there's the depreciation or something they were saying like five years.
Then things would get replaced.
I just question that because to me there's a number of things and that we wouldn't necessarily replace it when it gets depreciated because maybe it's got a 10 or 15 year life even though we depreciate over five.
So that allowed in your spreadsheet or do we? Yeah so at least for the forecasting purposes this is built just based off of everything being replaced by the end of their depreciable life.
Each depreciable life is different within here so there's some stuff that is 50 years, eight years, 15 years based off of the classification of what that equipment exactly is.
But again like I mentioned a little bit is that this is going to be a living document.
And when this eight year piece of equipment for example comes up.
There'll be conversations with the department heads and stuff too of like do you honestly need to replace this right now?
Or do we hold on to this and if we do will that the spreadsheet kind of gets updated for that and saying oh maybe we keep it for 10 years now or 12 years depending on how it is.
But at least just for building the spreadsheet and trying not to assume that oh this eight year one actually is going to be 10 years or seven years instead.
This spreadsheet was built off the assumption that everything would be replaced by the end of its life.
Okay, so thank you for clarifying that makes me feel better and then the last thing that I wanted to bring up is you talked about how what it doesn't include is like growth in the village and eating more equipment.
And I guess I question how does that relate to impact fees because I know there's some impact fees that go straight to that I'm thinking was it the fire or whatever impact fee which is probably outside of our budget but is there other impact fees.
So impact fees are generally applied to capital improvement items not necessarily equipment.
So doesn't depend and you know it's not dictated by which fundage and it's it's the type of project.
Yep.
So that's a that's a good point.
So you see the number you know 671 there and as we had equipment.
We need to as we update it annually, you know make adjustments to that number so that no equipment into that schedule.
And so you will see that that that 671 increase over time as we add more inventory into our, our equipment inventory.
You know, and that's just.
So what we're tracking is not only the life expectancy of equipment but when we come and get to add it in.
So you have to upgrade sometimes you can't find the same equipment.
So you got to get a different one.
Now, all of those are factors into kind of deciding what these numbers are going forward.
You know, addition to fleets, you know, we've talked about the sweeper, you know, in the in the CIP.
We're looking at it heading in an additional sweeper.
That's going to have an impact on this.
So as we go this equipment budget, it's going to increase.
And so we just have to be mindful of, of making sure that we properly funded more.
I guess.
Sorry, a final question.
So where is this going to more or less I'll say be housed because what I see is there's equipment from many different.
I think funds right now or say it's coming from storm monitor versus sewer and.
General, please.
Yeah.
So the way I'd recommend funding it is to keep it within fund 400.
So right now that 1.785 million of fund balance that's currently designated for this is sitting in on designated fund balance in there.
And so with fund balance policies, we can create designations within fund balances.
We can make some non spendable distinguished assigned fund balances.
So we would assign or we would move 1.785 million into a.
Distinguished fund balance within there where that's specifically just for equipment replacement and it would stay within fund 400 where the rest of our capital would live as well to.
Lisa, you have a question.
I think Jim alluded to a couple of things that I was thinking in my mind, but I was more so just thinking when bill said that there would be other funds that we would be putting in here. I was wondering kind of vague on that.
So what your ideas were about that is really just it. And other than that, I mean, I get that it's a start and I like that you said it's a living document because you know you're going to have yours where there's a 1 off and.
Then it'll sure, you know, sure it up to see how good we were at our projections. So.
But that was my.
Yeah, so currently, you know, whenever a vehicle goes to auction and whatever revenues we collect from that at auction would give recycle back into this fund.
And we'll get attributed as revenues going back into the replacement fund.
If there are any grants out there, you know, that would be cycled into this.
You know, obviously shifting up on balances at the end of the year, you could allocate that into this if there was a good year in addition to allocating the tax revenues at the beginning of the year into this fund.
So there, I think there's multiple ways that you can start to fund this.
And then considering that, you know, because this is on a schedule.
I think every time that you go beyond the schedule in regards to depreciation, you keep that equipment longer. You have that savings, right?
I'll be a purchasing equipment at a later time so that equipment is going to be higher, but you can get savings from that too.
So it will have to be managed. I'm not saying that it's a perfect system.
But we do recognize that this is one of those costs that's kind of in between operation and capital improvement often gets missed.
And it's very, you know, if you don't plan for it, it's going to surprise you.
So that's why that's why we're doing it now.
Colleen Brad has his hand up.
Go ahead, Brad.
Hey, thanks.
So one of the questions I had and I guess it's twofold.
Since if I'm understanding this right.
Would you expect to see some offset costs from that as well to offset the 671 from the department budget.
Being reduced by that amount.
Yeah, Brad, if I understand you correctly, you kind of cut out here, but my understanding of your question is that if as we move equipment from the department budgets, are we offsetting that with the tax revenues that previously were going in there.
And I would say yes, we are. We've done that in the past year.
It would depend on which, which equipment is captured in those department funds that would qualify to be placed into the equipment replacement.
And if they were accounted in those funds previously.
Okay. And then the second thing is.
And sorry if I'm hard to hear.
Would you expect the interest that we're making by the investments to offset the higher.
Cost in future years.
I see Brandon nodding has had.
Yes, yes, absolutely. So any interest earned within this program would stay within the program and hopefully help offset future costs as well to.
Yeah, I think the big differentiation here is that we're.
We're earning interest as the money is in the account.
Versus paying the interest over a bond. No, for notes, that is longer than the life of the equipment.
Wait, go ahead.
So do you feel like this is going to be.
Not necessarily a cost saving, but.
Benefit to the taxpayer to do it this way.
Does it.
You feel better about it? Yes, if I were looking at replacing equipment.
I mean, I would definitely want to find a consistent levy way versus like.
The second way of utilizing all fund balance.
If quite frankly, we don't cover our equipment costs.
Well, then if the teams do not have proper equipment service starts to go down a bit.
So the amount of time they may take to pick up leaves or snow plow or respond or call may be impacted by that.
So definitely having a program that states that we do want to continue funding our equipment so that we ensure that services are not interrupted.
I definitely be in favor of that. Absolutely.
If no one else has anything.
We'll move on.
Thank you. Thanks Brandon.
Okay, we'll move on to department updates administration update.
Yeah, just one thing or report.
Yesterday, the executive council of cities and villages.
Served by MMSD didn't hold a meeting.
We received a budget presentation from MMSD.
And they are expecting for for next year an average of 12% increase.
As they work through their budget process.
That will then be allocated individually to each of the communities through their calculations.
So it's a different percentage for each of the communities.
There are for next year significant capital improvement projects that they have.
And you'll kind of see that as a reoccurring team in the next couple of years.
And so we've been working the executive council has been working with MMSD to try to limit that as much as possible by looking at.
You know, what what that process is leveraging.
Funds on hand versus the clean water fund.
And so know that that is a continuing conversation with MMSD.
So in addition to that, I mean, they also appointed David Herves to.
Represent the DCC VA, which is the day and county cities and villages association.
Their appointment to the MMSD board.
And so I just wanted to provide that quick update.
We'll have additional information.
I believe that the numbers the final numbers will come to the village after November 1st.
And we'll have that as part of our annual sewer rate case.
Where at that point we look at MMSD's impact and then we look at our local sewer impact.
And then we provide a recommended rate at that point for next year.
Thank you, Bill.
I dance update Brandon.
Yeah, just two things.
You all should have seen an email from Bill just saying that we're going to be starting.
Budget one on one discussions again.
So if you haven't already talked to Bill or I about that stuff, we can definitely get something scheduled where we just have another meeting on it.
You do have any other questions, comments, concerns about budgets beforehand.
Again, I'm always available to reach out.
And then just the other thing is that our team has been just as a general update researching OBBA.
It's one big beautiful bill act essentially with that act that was passed at the federal level.
There is a new tax on over time.
Wages get treated differently on a W two perspective within here.
So we've been kind of researching that.
We have a few new codes.
We are going to be 100% compliant with the act, but just in case you get any questions, comments or concerns on how the village is dealing with the new federal guidance.
We are going to be in compliance.
Thank you.
Please department chief Olson.
Yeah, just one quick thing.
Last week we held our annual national light out.
We call it family fun night really.
The tenants was down a little bit, but there was like tons of things going on.
I looked at the same night, a football game.
They made it youth night.
First responder night.
There's a middle school track major is that just a ton of different things, but we still had a pretty good turnout for the event.
A lot of positive feedback from other departments that were there.
Other community resources that were there just about ours really tops a lot of other communities.
So thanks to all of those who came out.
We had great support from our local businesses from as far away as Milwaukee, the Milwaukee admirals donated stuff to a bunch of local businesses.
So it was just a really good positive night for the community.
Thank you.
Public service update.
Good.
And full of things for a acre Parkway was completed other than some punch list items.
So that pathway is.
Is a drivable again and it looks really nice.
Williamsburg Parkway and the Peterson roundabout is coming on.
Fabulously they're clipping right along.
They poured cement yesterday in the medians.
Colored concrete and whatnot.
So hopefully that will be done in the next three weeks or so.
As long as we're down that neck of the woods, the overflow parking lot or the new parking lot that the public.
The village will have on Peterson crossing and Savannah drive there.
Williamsburg, sorry, Williamsburg and Savannah.
That parking lot is being built as we just started last week and will be moving along as well.
You'll notice the trail environments park from Stevenson going that way.
We are going to be upgrading.
We would be asked fault out that's the crossing there for.
Across Jefferson down southbound.
We're going to be pouring that concrete tomorrow morning, improving that apron.
So there's some drainage issues on that trail section.
There's usually standing water there when we get to heavy rain.
So we're trying to help move that water along and then on the curve by the.
Pickleball courts.
There's some standing water.
So we're going to be looking to improve that.
That trail connection there and our guys always do a great job working on the trails.
Saves us quite a bit of money.
We should go out and calculate every year how much money we saved by our guys doing it versus going off for bids.
So.
Conservancy Commons Park was done.
We had a great.
Yeah, our river fest and we still go on that.
But that's Flashpad has been getting an awful lot of use while it's been opened.
And Conservancy Shane O'Donnell Park and Rivers Bend Park.
Those have had work done to them.
Play equipment installed.
The pickleball or.
Basketball with the word foot cell.
Can never remember foot cell courts.
They're in and ring.
They just need to be painted.
So that will be done.
And then there's a timeline, but which it needs to be accomplished for that asphalt to cure.
We did.
Thanks to Stacey's efforts and Greg and Tricia.
We were able to identify holiday lights.
Probably one of our largest ever.
Responses back in a short order of time for picking what set of.
Holiday lights and there'll be some additional pieces for the.
Park for the holiday lighting event that will have so bills that's in bills email box to approve that I can then submit that order.
For that.
We are Monday hosting a Wisconsin DNR and UW extension fall urban forestry workshop.
So we did this two years ago.
They have a former professor from the university students point comes down and teaches forestry people from the area.
On proper tree maintenance tree planting tree care.
Two years ago, we were able to prune a bunch of our trees this year.
We've got four free trees that will be planting in the park.
And having all kinds of hands help us do that work as well.
Because we hosted we also give them put five of our guys through the class while they're here.
So it's a win win all around and it works well.
We're centrally and it's a good night.
Finally, a family fun night the cheap alluded to we were there.
Rescreg on myself along with Corp.
Talking about mountain bike trails and again, we had nothing but positive feedback from people.
On the fact that the mountain bike trails are going in, there's no negative feedback.
Part of working with Corp, they put in an application for the UW for capstone project and it was selected.
So we have four university students that will be working with us primarily on trail design.
We believe in that park area.
So if that works well, that will.
Good end up saving us a little bit of money and planning and design scope.
So they're going to have a kickoff meeting here the 25th of this month with those university students Corp and then.
Greg and Reese will probably be a part of that. I'll be gone for that first meeting, but I'm excited to work with the University of Wisconsin.
We've had two other university groups work on the mountain bike area.
They provide a lot of really good feedback.
So we're hoping we're going to get similar results with this capstone group.
So.
Questions.
Jim.
I think the park is a rivers bend. That's in conservancy place.
Yeah.
Can you tell me when that might be done.
Those should probably be done early October.
Weather dependent, right? So when you got a paint, you have to.
It's got to weather's got to be right.
When you put paint on asphalt, so.
It's an epoxy paint. So it's just, it's a temperamental painting process.
So, but in theory, hopefully should be done by.
That's the timeframe really October.
Melanie has her hand raised.
Thank you, Kelly. Melanie, go ahead.
Thanks.
I was just wondering about the splash pads.
There's a lot of excitement about the new splash pad opening and just in chatting with other parents.
We're just wondering the date.
Of the splash pad closing. Is that something that could be extended?
Or is there a reason that there's that particular date for when the splash pads close for the season?
And is there flexibility to have them open longer if we have a really warm.
September or even early October. So just was curious about that.
So we've always had.
Previously, we always had a cut off a Labor Day. We just hard cut.
That was a shut off. I guess was more moral day to Labor Day work a couple years back.
We pivoted and said, Hey, we can keep them open longer because it is warmer through September.
They closed recently because it's cooler temperatures. We certainly can turn them back on.
I mean, it's.
We just, there's a point to where we have to cut them off because we have to then winterize.
And right, we have to blow them out and put in antifreeze.
So the pipes don't burst because if they burst, it's a super expensive process to rip open the cement,
put new piping into whatnot. So that's kind of how we base it on.
So if it does get warm again, over 70 degrees, we certainly can turn them back on.
But otherwise, if you have them on, but it's cold.
Oftentimes that it can trigger on its own on occasion, and now we're just running water for no really reason.
So that's kind of a kind of a dual purpose.
Thank you.
Okay. Community development update, Alex, nothing.
Administrative services update, Kelly.
So I have a couple of things. First of all, our sticker contest winners have been announced.
We did have a tie in our elementary school. So.
Mia and John, who is the clerk in Windsor decided that we were going to include both of them because neither of us wanted to break the hearts of a elementary school.
Okay.
So we are working now to get those stickers printed and they will be available at both pulling locations into forest and also both in Windsor.
A couple other things on Friday. I'm going to be going to the high school to help teach some students about the laws of voter registration.
There's a group of students and a teacher that are interested in holding a registration drive for this upcoming election.
So I am going to go and help educate them.
And another election thing, we will be conducting a badger book training with the village of Windsor.
For any of our election workers that are interested in learning the badger books or needing a refresher on how to use those, those are electronic pull books.
So we will be doing that along with the election inspectors in the village of Windsor and it will be on September 9 and held at the Windsor Village Hall.
And that is it.
What date?
September 29.
Oh, fine.
Okay.
So if any of you are interested in working at the polls on election day, as long as you are not on the ballot, you are able to do that.
So if you are interested, please let me know and I can work with you to get set up.
Thank you.
Recreation and community enrichment update reach.
Yes.
So it's just mentioned we had your hard river fest on Saturday. I think overall it went well.
We don't have the numbers back. I think attendance was also maybe down just a little bit.
But I know, John and Greg said that their attendance for the fishing tournament was probably one of the higher ones that they had.
I think the winter caught a 13 inch bass. So that was, that was pretty exciting.
But overall, it ended up being a good day. It was nice with a little overcast. So we didn't all get roasted out of there.
But our next event is going to be the candlelight hike and as a reminder, we didn't move that event up this year.
So typically it's the first Friday in December. We did move that up to mid November.
I'm just giving ourselves a little leeway between our holiday tree lighting as well.
Then this weekend, we have the special Olympics fall games that are going to be out at the divorce quick trip athletic complex.
So I know, Judd, Greg and I are going to be out there.
Quite a bit and we're hoping for the weather to change a little bit for them because it's looking like a lot of rain right now.
So I'm hoping it gets a little drier. And then we're starting to send out tournament agreements for 2027 already.
We have 16 tournaments confirmed and we'll be working on the fall tournament agreements in the next couple of weeks.
So just talking to the groups that we have in these later months.
And then that's it.
Thank you communications updates.
Just a quick follow up for September 23rd is the discover Wisconsin review.
Make sure you check your emails. I heard some of them went to spam or junk for your invitation.
If you didn't receive it, let me know and I can get it resend out to you.
And then also as Judd and Greg mentioned, we did the holiday decoration survey.
And in our one week, we had over 600 votes.
So I'm very proud of that initiative and the response we got from the community.
So stay tuned on that reveal. That's it.
Thank you.
Any other business that largely comes before the committee for discussion only.
Nothing I would take a motion to adjourn.
I'll make a motion to adjourn.
Motion.
Second by Wayne. All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
All those no.
Motion carries. We will be in recess until.
We will call to order the village board meeting for September 15th at 612 p.m.
Callie, would you please note the roll.
Our recitation of the pledge of allegiance. Wayne, would you lead us please.
Announcements. I have no announcements.
Consent agenda is the approval of the village board work session and village board minutes from September 1st.
Is there a motion to approve.
Motion to approve.
Thank you.
Second.
Motion by Wayne. Seconded by Alicia. Any discussion?
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
All those opposed. No.
Any abstentions.
I'm abstaining. Colleen. Thanks.
Thank you, Melanie.
Motion carries.
Four.
And then it's absent five and an abstention.
Right on there.
Okay.
General public appearances.
This section provides opportunity for public comments regarding items not listed in the current agenda.
We have none.
Presentations resolution 2026 dash 109.
A resolution proclaiming October 1 through 8.
2026 adds a week without driving within the village of the forest.
Alex.
So the Madison Metropolitan Planning Organization or Madison MPO is coordinating the week without driving for communities in the region.
And tonight we have Kayla has from MPO to talk a little bit about what they have going on. So I'll invite her up to the mic.
Oh, there she is.
Okay.
Hi, everyone. Thanks for having me tonight.
Like Alex said, I work for the greater Madison MPO and for those who aren't familiar.
We're a regional transportation planning agency and we also funnel down federal funding.
To local projects in the area.
So this is our third year organizing local efforts for a week without driving here in Dane County.
And to forest is joining eight other communities and recognizing the week this year.
For anyone who isn't familiar about week without driving, it's a national challenge that encourages everybody, but especially people who make transportation decisions to go one week a day or even one trip without driving.
That can be walking biking or asking a ride from someone or finding another option that works for you.
The point isn't that everyone can or should stop driving. It's really about seeing your community from a different perspective and thinking about the people who don't have the option to drive.
For example, if you broke your leg tomorrow, how would you get to work? How would you get to school or the grocery store?
Or if you reached a point where you could no longer drive, would you be able to live in the community that you do?
Those are important questions in every community, but especially in a place like the forest where transportation options are more limited.
It means thinking about things like safe socks, sidewalks and crossings, comfortable places to bike and connections between neighborhoods and the places people need to reach.
Divorce has been doing a lot of thoughtful work around growth and connectivity.
And week without driving is really just a chance to notice what's working well, where it feels easy to get around and where there may be some opportunities to improve still.
Most importantly, we hope it gives you a perspective to see your community through a new light so you can use that perspective when making future decisions and being here.
So we appreciate divorce joining us in recognizing the week without driving.
And we ask all the elected officials to maybe just try going one trip without driving your vehicle.
Or if you need to drive, just really thinking about that. So yeah, thanks for having me.
Thank you, Kayla.
Alicia wants to speak.
Yeah, I was going to say, I read it and I kind of started doing the thought exercise already if I wanted, you know, to take the whole week.
And so I also encourage everybody else to do that because during that process, I realized if I wanted to go to my kids football games, you know, that are like communities away, like how I'm going to have to start making some more friends.
But yeah, I'm already kind of starting to think that out in my mind how that would work. Thank you.
Me too, and I'm in big trouble.
Anybody else?
Jim.
I just say, I think it's a very good initiative to get people thinking and I'd like that's been on it.
I think it'd be very challenging for myself to go the week. I would just end up working from home because I'm at least allowed to do that, but not for a week. But.
Regardless, the one thing I do want to bring up to.
I think it again, this initiative can help bring light of that, but I do feel that we should be looking back at our sidewalk plan that's a good one dozen years old now or something like that.
Thank you.
So.
Thank you.
And we also invite everybody.
We'll be sharing experiences throughout the week.
So, you have a worry.
Thank you.
It looks like Jan has her hand up.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Jan, go ahead.
Worries.
Can you hear me?
Yes.
Great.
I think it is a really.
Nice idea. I like it. And I'm going to try to do what I can do. My bike is ready to go. And I can already figure out a couple of things that I can be doing that using my bike instead of driving. So I think it's a great idea. Thank you.
Thank you, Jan.
Anyone else?
Okay, let's take a motion to approve resolution 2026 dash 109 proclaiming October one to eight a week without driving within the village. I'll make a motion.
What was that?
I'm sorry. I don't know who made the motion.
Jan.
Thank you.
And is there a second?
Seconded by Melanie motion by Jan second by Melanie. I need a further discussion.
All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
I will suppose no.
Oh, I got somebody somewhere there wants to talk.
I just looked early.
That was me.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Okay.
Are we done voting then all those in favor indicated by saying aye.
All those opposed. There were no no motion carries unanimously.
All business discussion regarding village report public commenting policy.
Kelly and bill.
Jim.
Is it six or seven?
I don't know. Oh, there he is.
Where did you vote on the last one.
Brad, are you there?
I'm not seeing the screen wealth in this angle.
Brad, you want to speak?
Yeah, he's muted.
Okay. Can you hear me now?
No, yes.
I apologize. It was not allowing me to unmute from the host.
Thank you. Yes, I voted on both of those.
You voted affirmatively. Correct. Correct. Thank you.
That motion carried unanimously.
All business discussion regarding the village of the forest public commenting policy.
Kelly and bill.
So after the previous meeting when we discussed the public comment policy with changing to the zoom webinar,
I went back and made some changes to that policy.
Bill could pull that up.
So there's some changes and some different.
Questions that we were just more curious on before we brought you back a finalized policy.
We just wanted to make sure we were on the right path with what you had envisioned for that public commenting policy.
Yeah, so there's no action on this item. Again, we just want to clarify and then come back to the village board with the final policy itself.
As we look at the policy here, you'll see the first two sections speaks or provides instruction as to how and when to submit and public appearance form.
The primary concern that we have and wanted to address specifically was to be able to get a form filed in time to Kelly.
So that she would have the have it available going into our board meetings and so that she can work the webinar to allow for that specific person to speak.
As you remember, part of the conversation was matching up the name on the whole appearance form to the speaker that is within zoom to confirm that the speaker is indeed who they are.
And so that that was our primary goal of updating the policy.
However, since we are updating the policy, it begs to question whether or not there are any other sections within the public commenting policy itself that the village wishes to change or keep.
And this is pertaining to the sections under number three.
Leave as when this when the policy was amended a couple of years ago, there was some contention on the reading of statements by staff and or those board trustee that is submitted.
And as you can see, the only limit to reading that is that staff in order to trustees should not read it if it has foul language or profanity in the statement.
And so the question is this is this policy still relevant.
One of the discussion points at the time was the struggle of staff per se or trustees reading a statement that's not of their own and with no limitations on there.
So someone could submit a appearance form or statement on a national subject, something that the village may not have control over.
They could submit eight speech or a language.
And it just puts, I think, the village in a peculiar situation of having to read that because of the policy and not being able to to object to it because it does not have foul language in our profanity.
And so I just wanted to bring that to your attention. It's in the policy now.
And I don't think we've had many instances where we've had to read, but I think we've had had a few.
But this is just, again, one of those red flags as a manager of the staff.
You know, this is something that I find would be challenging to read.
Should we get us a middle of that type?
Moving on from there, section B.
This one provides opportunity for folks to read statements on behalf of others if they cannot appear.
We've seen kind of in the past where one member of the public may read multiple statements.
The question is, you know, whether that practice should still be valid.
Or if there should be some kind of combining of similar statements.
Again, this is in the bill just a policy now.
So wanted to check in and see if that is still something that the village board wishes to keep.
And then lastly, section C here requires for the staff and or the trustee to state the members name address.
And whether they support or oppose or have no stance on the subject, should they submit a form into the village.
So to clarify this, when a member comes in or a public member comes in and they submit a form.
They have the option to speak on the subject or to not speak on the subject.
I think in the past, what we found, although this was kind of a noble thinking of it.
But in the past, what's happened is that, you know, folks had then taken the name and address of folks and been able to.
To address them, you know, when, whenever the meeting was not in, in order.
And so what we've done is we stopped announcing that.
And so currently we don't, we don't follow this part of the policy technically wearing violation of policy.
The question is whether or not we remove this from policy or we reinstate the practice.
So those are kind of the three questions. I think we want to get direction on as we revise the policy, just to make sure that.
I think that our practices in order with the policy itself and that we're not in violation of it.
Happy to take any questions and go from there.
Jim.
I guess if you go back to those three, I'm, I'm still an opinion that I like all of them.
The, the, as far as one thing that I've noticed, the 30 seconds seems to be very challenging to get, say, the 50 word statements out.
So I would look to extend that or if it is 50 words, just let the 50 words be said.
I do hear what you're saying as far as that if it's a statement that may be.
Something that we don't want read, but yet is does that have profanity.
How do we deal with that if it's whatever slanderous or something.
So that would be challenging. I mean, we're lucky enough that we haven't had that yet.
But.
That's something we want to take into account. I guess.
If we, I'd rather have the ability for public to be heard, then worry too much about that, but maybe there's a.
A method that if the.
Board.
Bolts to not have it read, we could do that or something.
I don't know if that that's, I guess that's going to be a challenge, isn't it.
I'm looking at a lot.
Yeah.
So I guess in that light of that, my answering my own question, I would like to leave again and hope that that doesn't happen.
As far as.
Be goes, I forget what that was.
Oh, again, I would just.
I would like to keep that the same.
I think maybe the caution is, is that somebody could have.
Say four people.
Register just so they can go a full, whatever 12 minutes rather than.
Three, but.
I would, again, rather have the public input, the nine.
Sorry, the meetings might go longer because of it.
And then going to the sea.
I'd like the idea of.
To me, one of the main reasons that we have it in there is that there was times where we get a whole stack of people.
Say not wishing to speak.
And then it's like, well, did, did those 20 people that submitted forms where they for or against and we didn't really even know at the meeting.
So that's where we wanted a bread.
At least know what they were for or against.
That's the way I remember the reasoning for that one being in there.
Do you have some to say it looks like.
Yeah, well, I think that in an instance where this was not a policy.
I think the board could still request for the clerk to provide a report as to who vote who is submitting in favor or opposition.
So.
All right, the policy requires for us to do it.
I would just think it would be good practice.
If we have somebody submitting a paper, it'd be.
Okay, John, though, is registered for it or against it and move on.
I think that's good policy for the record.
So what you're saying is just the name and then whether they're there.
Or it or opposed to it or probably name a disability and then for against.
Is that what it states?
That's the way I was reading it.
Well, it's the member's name.
It's that dress.
It's whether they support our polls or have no stance on the subject.
I guess I would say the municipality because I feel like we've already.
Nailed that down because there's probably others places that we said address and people have been not using their address.
One thing that actually a couple other notes that I had is there was the deadline of 3pm.
And.
I just wanted to bring this up for conversation because 3pm.
Or a 5 o'clock meeting, say, make sense.
But then it'd be 3pm safe for planning and zoning would be 6.
Then I'm looking at.
There's other committee meetings that are earlier than that too.
So do we want to have it as more like 2 hours before the meeting.
I mean, I don't know when is like public safety or something, isn't that like.
Safety is a 5 30.
I 30.
I were boards of 4, but nobody's ever.
As long as I've been on it.
I'd recommend keeping in at one time because if you're trying to attract different times.
They can get confusing to the members of love against you when to submit.
Yeah, it's one of the bring that up.
And then the last thing I wanted to bring up is under the item 2.
There was a.
Where it talks about the village president.
We should also put in like brackets behind the village president has chair.
So.
Do you see what I'm getting at.
It says direction of the village president and then it should be bracket or chair.
Yep, yep.
I see which.
Okay. Yeah.
Because if you like read down and I think it's number 4, it's village president or chair.
I just think we should be consistent.
That's the last thing I had.
Alicia.
When it comes to the first item, I think that we could.
Probably be more creative.
And I kind of.
Agree with staff on.
I don't think staff wants to read or be on video, maybe reading.
Something that they don't necessarily agree with, but it's always out in the.
Metaverse.
So I mean, we have voicemail.
People can leave a voicemail.
I mean, I think there's other things if someone is not here.
If they want to register a voicemail and say it in their own voice, we could play that.
It's just an idea.
It doesn't limit speech.
It allows people to speak in their own voice without necessarily.
Kind of getting that if people want to say something nefarious, they can say it in their own voice.
And have a problem really per se with two because thinking back to other circumstances where there was a father speaking on behalf of his two children who couldn't speak.
I feel like that's okay.
And then the last one was.
I do think that we should scratch the address from there and just have people state their municipality.
For.
Basically the history and safety reasons.
So.
I just have a quick question on that on the form.
Do we want the person's address?
And then they just state their municipality or do you not want the address at all.
Does there have been situations where somebody's wanted to reach out to somebody that commented and the only.
The only way we have to contact them is from them placing their address on the form.
So just that clarification.
I would say we have address, but it could be optional.
I guess if somebody doesn't want to put it, but.
I do think it's important to have it.
It'd be really nice if people feel it if people are listening because there are so many people that don't know what municipality they live in.
And the address does help clarify that.
I would keep the address on the form.
Lane.
Yeah, I think the address is a good thing to keep.
I don't really have any issues with this.
I do like your at least his idea about voicemail or.
Even video, maybe some kind of video message.
I think that wouldn't be a terrible idea.
I don't want to limit people.
Limit what they have the same so.
I feel like I'm.
Good with keeping most of the stuff and.
Melanie.
Yes, thank you.
And my daughter just started singing in the background like right before you called on me. So this is perfect.
So for a.
I.
Just I don't have a problem leaving it in.
It's not something that happens often where we've had a staff or trustee have to read a statement for someone.
So in fact, I personally can't remember a time when that has happened.
So I think it's okay to leave it in the interest of.
You know, allowing people to have their voices heard at meetings.
But I'm kind of indifferent to it, I guess.
And then for be the question of like, do we need to place limits on how many times a person can speak on behalf of someone else?
I don't think so. I, you know, looking back to the data center, for example, those meetings where.
That's probably like the height of, you know, public involvement that we've seen at meetings in a long time that I can imagine.
So even in that type of a situation where we had a lot of public commenters and.
Multiple people, you know, reading statements for others.
I don't think that that was problematic at all and I'd be in favor of leaving it as is to encourage.
People to be able to do that.
And then first seed, I think I'm echoing what others have said. I think it is important to have the address on the form for contact purposes and also just verification that they're.
Of where they're from, but for reading it out loud when we're just reading.
Reading the name and whether they're opposed or against. I think it's fine just to state the municipality.
For the record for those security reasons that others have mentioned.
I think that covers everything that I had.
Thanks.
Anybody else?
Good.
I have a question for out.
If we allow audio and or video recordings to be submitted and then for us to share them, we have to hold those for a certain number of years.
Is that correct?
Seven years. Okay, just so we have to prepare it.
So.
Not saying it's a good or bad idea, but it just does work into our IT world and how much service space we will need to hold those things. So.
And then if some whatever they submit, we have to play and share.
No matter what is said or projected on the screen is that fair.
Like if.
Well, right, I'm just saying if the gentleman who likes to join our meetings on occasion and do whatever, if he decided to submit that video and it's a three minute video of.
We have to show that then.
If it's pornography, you wouldn't have to show it unless it was an integral part of the message.
You know, you get into a situation where you're determining whether or not the person is.
Whether that's that speech or whether that's activity.
There are situations where pornography can be considered speech.
But in a situation where you're talking about commenting on a public policy, you're probably not going to get into that and I.
There would be circumstances probably most of the time that you would not show a visual.
Pornographic video.
As long as you read the message that was.
We're able to let people hear the message that the person was giving.
I'm sorry I'm losing my voice.
Jim.
I'd say if we want to make a change to a I would.
Not have video just knowing the storage base of it and because of that.
It would just be limited to a voicemail if we would want to do it that way or video or audio.
I'm personally okay the way it is because I'm comfortable as a chair reading anything that would be submitted even if it wasn't my opinion.
I would be comfortable reading other people's with the disclaimer that this is the opinion of.
So and so of whatever municipality.
That I am reading on their behalf.
If you had to is that.
You comfortable with that.
I have had.
Situations I don't know how many within the last few years that we have had to read a statement of someone.
The one thing that is difficult is we have the parameters of 50 words or 30 seconds.
Which can get a little hairy.
Sometimes if it's a written out thing we don't I don't have time to count out that it's 50 words.
And so.
That that's one thing that can be a little difficult to abide by in the policy.
So do you prefer the award count.
I'm thinking a time limit.
A time limit is easier we can set a timer read the statement when the timer is done.
The statement is done.
The statement will be obviously written down so it is available to anybody else that would want to see it.
Any portion that wasn't read or didn't get through.
So does a written statement have to be read into.
This or can it be.
Submitted digitally and for people he'd rather than read in.
People always have the option to send in an email of their statement if they're unable to be at a board meeting which we see very frequently.
But the way the policy is written is if somebody.
Gives a statement we do have to read that into the record.
Just just to clarify.
There's no requirement that anything be read other than your own policy.
If that's what your question.
Well, I'm just wondering if we keep you know somebody.
Sends an email in or even a written statement can it just be.
You know put in digitally.
Anybody who wants to get an email with it that kind of thing or like the board would automatically get that so we can see that kind of thing.
That's done all the time. I mean people send things to us trustees.
A email or a letter carrier pigeon. However, they do it.
You can get those communications and you don't bring them to a meeting and read them typically.
This is just a policy that you guys have adopted that says if somebody says I want the shredded meeting.
They can fill out this form and then it has to be read.
So if somebody wants their opinion expressed.
On a topic and they submit something in writing.
There's no law says it has to be read.
But what you submit in writing becomes part of the official record of the meeting.
If you submit something for a meeting it becomes the record of the meeting.
It's always going to be a public record even if it's in your own email account and that's the only place that appears.
I'm just thinking in a room.
There's no requirement that anything be read.
No legal requirement that things be read out loud at a meeting.
They can still be communicated to you. The reading of them is public performance.
It's not communicating it to you because you already have it.
I guess that's where I'm getting stuck. Is public appearance before the board?
If that's what we're talking about is a public appearance before the board.
Whether it's zoom or whether it's I guess I'm kind of thinking out loud.
Whether it's zoom or whether it's in person.
It's that a separate thing from wanting the board to know your feelings on something.
In which case it can just be submitted in writing.
You follow me? I mean.
If you want to make a public appearance you come in or you go on zoom and you make a public appearance.
If you just want to register your opposition or your support.
You can do it via writing and it's part of the record.
There are a number of different ways people can communicate their feelings, their opinions, their thoughts to the board.
They can do it privately by email. They can do it by telephone. They can do it by showing up at a meeting and talking.
They're just different ways of communicating to the board.
Either way you get the information.
Either way anything that's documented in writing or recorded.
It's going to be a public record that anybody can get access to.
So it's really just a different medium in which they get their information to you.
Okay, thank you.
I mean we can always I think thinking more about this as we're kicking the ball around.
There's nothing that says we can't always update our policy, right? If we need be.
And Jim already said he has no problem reading everything.
So I'm just kidding.
But I feel like I feel like then if things get out of order or they turn that way,
then we can always look as a board to, you know, make changes.
So I know there's no action on this, but I'm kind of going back on what I said.
I just offered that as a suggestion.
But I feel like since we really haven't seen that issue and this is our policy,
we can change it whenever I'm okay.
I'm just trying to go through.
I was thinking while you were talking, Colleen, as far as like, who might you miss?
There's individuals that would say send us emails.
Some of them pretty frequently that then they, they feel like we're not reading the email.
I would be a reason that they'd want to come here and speak in front of us to make sure that we're hearing what they say would give us in writing.
And they could find somebody to read it for them and then they got the three minutes.
But if they don't have an opinion that somebody else would read for them or an individual that is willing to come in and read it for them,
then they would have the opportunity to have one of us read it for them by keeping that in.
So how many people is that? I don't know.
I guess.
But over the course of how long is this policy been a year or two probably.
I would say about a year and a half.
Yeah, we probably had them read. I mean, I'm thinking maybe 10 different statements. I've maybe heard maybe up to 15.
I would say 10 to 20 would be a fair guess.
So I mean, like I said, it will prepare the draft documents seems like the only change substantial changes.
As an item C kind of going away from the address reading of that address to the municipality, but requiring the address that I'm recording.
That right.
Okay.
Thank you.
So not much change.
All right, let's move on to.
8.2, which is resolution 2026-108, a resolution authorizing the village president and village clerk to execute a grant agreement with habitat for humanity of Dane County.
Alex.
So we had reviewed a draft and a red line version of this grant agreement at the last village board meeting, a couple issues that we're still working to resolve, one of which was insurance.
The last piece of it was regarding a potential future payment of pilot, which is a payment in the property taxes.
At the boards direction, they, you all revised that section to have habitat, potentially pay a pilot up to 180 days, especially after 180 days of them.
Constructing a housing unit and still owning it, and they were accepting of that change.
So outside of that, there's no additional changes beyond what we talked about last time.
Thank you.
We have no public appearances on this topic. Is there a motion to approve 2026-108.
Second by Brad second of violation. Is there any discussion?
I will just add just as an update that habitat did close on the property today.
Great.
Okay. All those in favor, renegade by saying aye.
Any opposed indicate by saying no.
Motion carries unanimously.
New business resolution 2026-110.
Resolution authorizing village president and clerk to execute an agreement for waste disposal services.
Doug and Greg will be doing the staff presentation.
Sorry, trying to get Brad a microphone that works.
Yeah. So I, there was a memo in the packet. We did get three qualified bidders.
It was GFL waste management and Pelletary.
Again, I were able to review those bids and found GFL to be the low bidder.
That cost for next year is $115,000 higher than this year. You can see it's a $2.18 per unit increase for that.
This is having the same exact services as we've had.
That's far, right? So it's a weekly garbage pickup by weekly recycling pickup.
We also have bulk items being picked up on a week on a monthly basis on a scheduled day or the week of the month that it'll happen.
We do have bulk containers. This does increase the bulk containers to two that will be out at the yard waste site.
So the one gets filled up rather quickly. So that helps get rid of that.
We also have the cardboard containers that we have at the yard waste site.
Very soon we'll be transitioning them back here towards the public services building for the winter time,
but that helps people with recycling.
Because if we went with weekly recycling as well as weekly garbage, that's another additional on top of the $115,000 increase and additional $230,000 increase.
Now, I have heard from some residents, not a lot, but I do hear from residents asking for weekly pickup.
They can contract with GFL on their own or any other garbage caller for that matter,
but GFL will probably be the most reasonable.
Because if they got a garbage, not because of the arbitrage, if another garbage seller has to start to coming into the village and pick up for somebody,
there might be an additional charge. GFL will provide an additional part and pick up four folks at the same rate were charged.
They're recycling at $4.35 per month. So that's what the resident would be charged or the extra cart in recycling.
You'd be picked up every other week.
So that is an option for those residents who feel like they have or who have more recycling than one cart full.
They can certainly opt to do that. It's a reasonable cost for just them versus, you know, myself personally living in the village.
I recycle as much as I can, and I still can fill a recycling cart every two weeks, right? So, but there are others who generate way more.
And so I think there are options available to them. So because of that, after reviewing all the stuff, we recommend we sign for another five year term with GFL.
Any questions from folks.
All right.
Here is how many additional units are we having in this quote from the last one since they were going up by a percentage every year.
Anyways, you wouldn't think the increase would be that drastic.
What do you say? How many, how many more units from the last quote?
Like, were there that? Is there that many more people in the village now that they're projecting?
So that much the cost of fuel is significantly higher. I'm sure the cost for tipping fees and other things to get rid of that garbage.
Those, you know, everywhere in the world costs to continue to inflation, right? It's driven things up.
So to take care of that, that's why this cost is there.
Had we decided not to go up for bid and just worked with GFL, we would have had to negotiate the price for the next number of years, right? So while in the past, history is dictated.
We've gotten a better quote. This is the first time we haven't.
But again, it's a different world we're in with the cost of everything going up. So we estimate.
So this is based on 4,416 units, I think it was ahead in there that are being picked. So I, we have a number every month.
A marsh in our office sends to GFL. Here's the number of new homes, basically, that have been added to our account.
And that adds up. So we act, we have an factor of 12 homes a month that we go by every month.
So when I put the base of 4,416, that was if I could do the whole year at once, right? So it's actually lower than that to start the year, but by the end of the year, when you average that out, it comes about 4,416 units per month.
I will add waste management on the weekly recycling. They didn't even submit.
But the rest of their bid was actually based on the previous year rate plus CPI WST adjustment, which is a waters sewer trash national rate, right? So we can either use that or use 5%.
So when I calculated, I just went with 5% because I, with the CPI, WST adjustment would be his variable. So it's hard for me to quantify what that could be. I mean, it could be significantly less or it could be higher, but I just want with a 5% just for budgeting purpose because it makes it easier for us.
Oh, garbage is expensive.
Okay, we have no public appearances on this.
Is there a motion to approve 2026-110 resolution authorizing the village president and clerk to execute an agreement or waste disposal services.
I'll make that motion.
Motion by Jim. Is there a second?
I'll second.
Was the second, please.
Go ahead, Alicia.
I'll second.
Motion by Jim, seconded by Alicia, any discussion?
See, no discussion. All those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
All those opposed, no.
Motion carries unanimously.
9.2, resolution 2026-111, a resolution authorizing the village administrator to execute a future growth plan agreement with your Becker, so it's incorporated bill.
So when I have the team from Fairbucker join us up front here, so they can answer any questions in regards to the proposal.
There's a memo in your packet here, the memo and the resolution treads long.
The need for a growth study.
So as you know, see levy limits indicate or obligate villages to grow as far as net need construction to be able to expand their budgets, their expenditure budgets.
So we do track the rate of growth in the village of the forest and what remains as far as develop properties.
And when I say develop properties, it's properties that have are reachable with utilities and have a owner that's willing to sell the property for development.
And then looking at the number of acres left in the village and understanding and talking with those property owners, we, we estimate that we have approximately 7 years left of development into forest.
Given the current rate of approximately 5% or 100 120 acres each year.
So with that part of what we do here as part of economic development and community development, as we, we do some forecasting and we do some projecting, you know, we talked to property owners and.
And folks within the real estate market to understand what the demand is in our area.
With that being said, we know that through our experiences and through the strategic plan objectives, we do need to look and project at how the village is going to look like in the future.
We understand that the only way for the village to grow is one through redevelopment, which is expensive and return on investment is smaller than if you are to expand into undeveloped areas.
And then we know that because we're bored by a village, those winter to the north and to the east.
We have a cooperative boundary agreement with Burke and to the south and then we've just entered a municipal boundary agreement and the town of Westport is expected to incorporate soon.
The only areas for us to expand growth is to the West into the town of Vienna.
That being said, one of the parameters that we take a look at initially when we look at development is whether or not we're able to service it with water and sewer.
And that is primarily driven by land formation, elevation and sensitivity in areas.
So that's what we are proposing to do here is to look out 25 years ahead and see and have where we project the growth of the forest may be.
And then we will study that area. You know, I think you'll see in the proposal that we take a look at things like population growth.
We take a look at analysis of so growth area spatial analysis, which includes the type of use that's relatable to the area.
We look at public infrastructure expansions or water sewer transportation.
And then we are able to utilize this information as we set up for our planning documents that guide the village.
I think there's a question as to why are we doing this now?
You know, this is something that that's been planned. It was identified in our strategic plan back on that was adopted in 2023.
We understand that our comprehensive plan needs to be updated every 10 years.
Last time around, we updated it at five years, just because of the rate of growth in the village.
So the last time that we updated the our comprehensive plan was in 2023.
So we are in year three of that iteration.
So, so two years from now, we may be looking at that updating again.
And this data and this information will be helpful for the planning and zoning commission and the village board at that time to make decisions on.
I'll potentially the village is going to look for the next 10 years.
In addition to that, like I stated, the strategic plan was adopted in 2023.
That's a five year plan. So we anticipate that we'll be looking at a new strategic plan in 2028.
This information also feeds into that. Not only are we looking at physical growth, but this information can provide us.
With with tidbits on what we need to do internally for in regards to organizational growth.
And so with that, I'll stop there.
I'll let the guys from from there by going to kind of walk through what the proposal is, including timelines and opportunities for public participation.
I do want to quickly just pull attention to the map that's at the back of this proposal.
Which includes the area of land, which we we believe.
From the data that's been presented in our current system.
That we may be able to extend to based off of elevations.
And so this is the study area that we are proposing.
It doesn't necessarily mean that this is all the land area that's going to be within the village of the forest by 2050.
Again, we need to study out to these areas to ensure that we're able to service these areas should development happen in the future.
And so that we're being proactive in those situations and not reactive to to develop an opportunity.
I can answer any questions at this point, or we can turn it over to the very better folks.
If you're back or folks.
Push the button on your microphone for the little circle and bottom turns green.
Talk nice and close to it so we can hear you tell us who you are.
All right.
Sounds good.
Thanks, President Little.
My name is Matthew Miller.
I'm a beer breakers urban planner.
With me this evening is my colleague, Tyler.
He's a part of our engineering team from our reefer office as well.
So building upon bills kind of outlining of the plan.
I think the easiest way to kind of categorize or explain the not just the intent, but kind of the components, the key pieces behind what the effort would entail.
I would say primarily three pillars to the plan or to this effort broadly.
One would be engagement.
Two would be analysis.
And three would be that the document creation itself.
So I'll kind of daisy chain through the three and if questions arise, we can go from there.
So on the engagement piece are chats with Bill as well as Alex.
You know, kind of wanting to ensure that as a game plan as a kind of a tool in the toolbox for the village going forward.
Obviously that ability to have the pertinent committees as well as obviously the public as well as residents voices to be heard.
So part of this part of this first pillar, this engagement pillar, the game plan is to have a couple of the upcoming committee meetings.
We'll have this as an agenda item.
To a certain extent, there may be some things where you got to go in depth.
Ironically, then have that bigger picture.
And what I mean by that is we'll talk with public services, for example, again, game plan.
Tell me about utility provisioning, for example.
Public safety.
It's okay.
If this growth continues, if the village grows westward into some or all these lands in the lifetime of this plan.
What would the game plan be for fire station, for example, not necessarily specific location, but thinking.
Okay, in terms of our usual metrics, we have to hit that desire to have a certain response time or criteria that we have to meet.
Okay, what, how does that kind of plan picture.
In addition, still kind of with this engagement piece.
Well, public services, public safety discussion with the fire and US board speaking to the, to the fire example that I just gave discussion with plan commission as well.
In addition, kind of book ending the process earlier in this process in this fall, kind of a public.
Open house kind of team up some initial information.
Here's, here's the village now.
And we're thinking about that.
What expansion could happen westward.
Hearing thoughts, ideas, concerns from the residents, both at the beginning of the process.
And also, near the end of the process, when we're in winter, early 2027.
Saying we had your initial feedback.
We had it at several village board committee meetings kind of talking to certain specific components.
Now we're at this point with a draft or near final version of hey, want to want to present this to the public one your eyes to be able to be on it again, prior to potential adoption by, by the village board.
So let's kind of the engagement piece.
The analysis piece bill spoke to it a little bit.
I would say probably under this kind of the second pillar.
Three or four key things really would be.
Okay. I had kind of thinking about. Thanks, Bill.
Review of these existing documents reference to your existing.
Comprehensive plan from 2023, but also some of the recent the water studies.
The 2011, it was the North Yohara.
Future urban development area. I'm remembering the acronym correctly.
That study that one's 10 to 15 years old now, but I know that harp see another regional bodies use that as a tool and they look at that and considering hey, what's what might be being proposed in a certain area.
So using the framework of existing language and village plans of.
Okay, what has been the game plan? What is still the game plan?
How might it need to change in the context of as we do our research and go through the study.
So what existing documents can tell us.
Demographic analysis of we're in one of the one of the counties in the state that is growing.
We're in one of the municipalities in Dane County.
That's growing population wise at a decent clip.
So what does that mean in terms of provisioning for housing single family.
Multi family, et cetera.
Kind of third kind of portion third building block of this pillar is.
Spatial analysis, taking the study area and saying, okay, this is the whole area.
However, kind of to think backwards. Okay, where's their wetland?
Where's their steep slope?
Where are their places that would be a nightmare to try to get utilities into?
Obviously, there may be circumstances where it's not the most efficient thing to put.
The utilities to that location, even if we are chatting 15, 20 years in the future.
It might be an area that's best preserved as open space or the game plan to have it as a village parking future.
Just just one example.
Kind of the fourth remaining piece of this analysis pillar is public infrastructure expansion.
And I can chat more on it, even though I'm not an engineer.
But if you want to speak to a Tyler.
Yeah, I mean, so we would definitely take a look at what we could serve with gravity, sanitary, sir.
But you can always have a lift station and the cost associated with that to serve these lands, including water systems as well.
There's plenty of in the water study. We looked at that as well, but trying to break it down more where we need a booster station if needed.
And then road system through these areas as well.
And then the kind of the third final pillar that I referenced was the document, that product itself.
And what this would, this would entail is tail end of this calendar year.
We would have we would basically bring together the efforts of the engagement component, these pieces that constitute our analysis into this draft product.
That would be provided the game plan, at least our schedule is a tail end around the time you're the holidays.
I know it's always kind of a crazy time of year for folks, but it's a good kind of line of the sand to help get things done and things moving.
So our game plan would be around the holidays, have that draft version one over to Bill Alex, broadly to village staff to put eyes on and say, okay, you know, XYZ thing.
Do we need to think about it a little bit more? Do we need to do fine tuning?
That really puts us in a position where early in calendar year 2027, a second round, a draft version two, if you will, can be a good place where we have, as I referenced earlier, that chat with that chat, almost like a public open house or that open forum
where it's available, residents can put eyes on and see, okay, this was, you know, the context or, oh, I heard a little bit about this or maybe a neighbor went to one of these meetings.
What was actually going on? Like what's what's it leading to, you know, and then that hopefully puts us in a position.
Middle of February where it could be considered by village board for adoption and subsequent to that, it can kind of be as I referenced at the very beginning.
A tool in the toolbox for you all to be able to leverage with a comprehensive plan update, strategic initiatives, your recreation plan, your, your corp.
If there's, you know, it can kind of feed into that plan from a DNR grant perspective as well of what might meet, we need to think about for trails and other amenities and services going into the future.
So, I guess that's kind of trying to keep it high level overview.
I'm happy to answer any questions or hear any feedback and comments.
So, again, this is a planning document.
It provides, I think, opportunity to be proactive so that if they're, say, a developer that is interested in the village, we can look to this and let the developers.
And let the developer know, you know, which places are favorable versus others.
If there's a landowner who was thinking about succession planning, whether it's in five years or 25 years, and now have an indication from the villages to where we plan to grow.
In a lot than other communities know how to plan, you know, whether it's the MPO with transportation, where it's carpsy with urban service cereal.
Or it's the town of Vienna in negotiating a boundary agreement.
The study provides a foundation for us to conduct that business.
Anybody have any questions?
Okay, I guess not.
I'm sorry.
I have.
Maybe questions, but I think my questions are going to be more opinions and discussion. So I'm.
Is it going to bring anything up at this point, even if it is a question?
Well, what's your question?
I can tell you, I look at your, your public comment sort of schedule and it looks to me being very front loaded with asking for surveys and opinions.
And then when you get to working with staff to formulate a report or whatever you want to call it.
It's more internal and not necessarily open to the public and then there's going to be something presented to the public at the turn of the year.
And at that point, it looks to me being very rushed.
To completion.
You appreciate it being completed and say February because even if it goes long, it can be done under the current makeup of the board.
But I'm just questioning.
Why so much input in the front end because I don't think the public is going to have anything really the comment on.
I think they're going to want to see some of like the, like the maps that are saying that engineering reaches and things like that.
So they can actually comment on something legitimate to look at.
So I would, I personally feel it should be flipped a little bit and move quicker to report.
They have more public comment at the end.
I wonder your pick on that. I guess that's my question.
Trustee Simpson appreciate the question in the comments. So I think.
From, from our team's perspective in terms of kind of being it up the, the approach and the thought process was.
I guess I go back a little bit to the earlier comment of.
Trying to have that the ability to go into that, into that specific detail, but still be able to have that broader picture.
And what I mean by that is that desire to have and chatting with those, the committees earlier in the process to say.
That broad direction kind of that broad vision of going from a full breadth of quote anything as possible to.
Okay, given constraints of geographical or otherwise to better hone that to get us to a point where it's okay based on the feedback.
From the appropriate folks on village committees village bodies as well as staff.
Okay, now that there's that more refined direction, then more fine, then the more fine tune approach to that analysis can occur.
That was our conception. I guess for Bill and Alex, I know obviously in terms of this agreement.
We T up showing two or three of these meetings front loaded.
Trustee Simpson as you referenced October, November timeframe.
I would say it doesn't have to be we're not married to that in the context of it.
It doesn't have to be in October, November.
And if those meetings are later in the process that I think would be okay for us.
It might give an opportunity analysis wise to see what stuff might come up earlier in the process that could be troublesome.
But it's ultimately, I guess, to directly answer your question of, hey, the public engagement was front loaded and then near the end that's.
Okay, now there's that product, but then it feels like your bigger team is more chatting with.
Village at that point.
I understand.
I understand that that's that is how it's kind of teed up.
Know that it was purposeful for our kind of vantage point in terms of strategy, but it's not something that's 100% locked in married to have to be there.
If there are concerns from other board members or staff in terms of how that engagement is kind of spaced out or approach.
So just to clarify for everybody, this is just a study that should the village decide to move.
Towards the West.
This is what it would look like if we did that.
Correct. I mean, that's really what we're talking about here.
So, yeah, so this document here is pertaining to this planning study or planning document provides guidance to the village.
So, you know, I think your statement, you know, if the village decides, I don't know if we have a decision in that.
So, you know, that's, you know, we've talked about this many times before.
But annexation addition of lands to the village.
That's that's that's driven by the landlord.
You know, whether they want to hook through the village water in our sewer or receive village services.
Landowner dictates that or the developer.
What we're doing here is we're being proactive in the science where we're taking the effort.
We're investing the funds to say.
If lands decide to add to the village.
These are the places that make sense where the village to grow.
And here are the places that don't make sense.
There's what's going to, you know, in this area, we project that's going to probably be a higher return of investment for the village.
Because we also have physical analysis tools that show for every subdivision, it's going to cost the village X amount to maintain and move forward.
Whether that's a that's a better return on investment or whether, you know, it's a it's a residential subdivision two miles away from the village.
You know, which doesn't make any sense.
So, you know, the study is going to be able to provide us again with with the data, the projections.
You know, we're looking at say population.
We know that from the same demographic surveys.
That our population went up 2000 people in one year.
Project that out with a more aggressive car seat projection to 2025.
What does that look like?
Does it make sense to be more spread out?
Or does it make sense to be more dense?
Which areas are should we, which areas make sense to have.
Say more industrial where potential land forms are later.
Versus land forms that are more.
Adaptable for residential housing.
What areas should be parks, which area should be put into environmental.
You know, so this that's what the study is is intended to do.
Again, it provides the information and knowledge.
It doesn't provide per se the obligation.
The information that we we obtain from this.
We then can put that into our comprehensive plan and start to decide.
You know, what are the future zoning areas?
What's the E.T.J. or E.T.Z.
What areas require a community part?
You know, depending on distance.
So it really helps us start the planning process.
And like I said, it's an indicator to those that are interested in the village of the forest.
No matter where they're from.
They can read this document.
It's a public document, right?
And it shows indication as to what we as the village of the forest plan to do.
And so that's that's one of the purposes of planning and getting, you know,
this far ahead when you're looking at a 25 year study.
By the way, our strategic plan calls for a 50 year study.
You know, there's just no way to project out that far and be accurate on something like that.
So that's why we decided on a 25 year study.
But I think, I think a lot of people have the question of how much does the village of the forest grow?
When does it, who does it continue on forever?
Or does it stop at some point?
What does it, you know, what makes sense as far as utility extensions?
When does it not feel like a community anymore?
Those are a lot of the questions that I think the study is going to start to address.
And then from there, who knows how we're going to look in 25 years.
If we stay at the rate that we're growing now, five to seven percent.
That's substantial.
If there's a, you know, I hiccup in the market or the bubble burst.
He could still be at 15,000 in 25 years.
It's just depends.
I'll just add to just, I mean, everything bill saying is another informational tool, right,
to provide a decision making, but also, as Bill mentioned earlier to in potentially looking at a boundary agreement.
It, this information obviously helps us plan our growth, but it also potentially helps identify.
However, that boundary agreement shakes out.
Where can we serve utilities?
Where does it make sense to coordinate on those types of things?
So I would say it's a broader planning document that could potentially have implications and benefits to those parties too, as that goes forward.
And then to clarify, and I think we could probably accommodate that within the structure.
Just to clarify, Jim, are you thinking so sort of like a.
Call it a preliminary draft document is sort of complete at one point and then put out to provide another engagement piece to then solicit further impact or input or like.
I guess feedback on that draft.
I would say what I'm feeling when I look at that is that there's engagement in the front.
And I must use that engagement to come up with the plan.
And then once it would go back out to the public, I'm afraid that is going to feel like it's a set plan.
So I think it needs to be presented again as more or less a draft and have an opportunity for public comment.
And the truth is I don't personally think an open house format is the correct format for that.
If that's one that we want to do, I think that's fine.
But I also feel there should be a public hearing involved with that.
Just so everybody feels like they are being heard.
I don't know if that's a planning and zoning or a board meeting or maybe a work session.
But I feel there's a meeting missing in that tail end before it goes to potential adoption.
I suspect that's something we could take up later.
Well, in terms of procedure.
I mean, for tonight's purposes, we're authorizing the.
Be your record to do this growth plan.
There is.
There is a potential issue in terms of changing the schedule.
The way the contract is written right now, if the schedule is extended by more than a month.
They may be entitled additional compensation beyond what you're contracting for.
So if you are going to have a change in what this protocol is,
I think you probably want to work that out before you approve a contract that locks you into a particular protocol.
Anybody have anything?
I think I just in hearing the sentiments.
I think that it's important to have something of substance for people to actually comment on. So.
I see how I guess I think that a more in favor of.
Changing if we have the availability to.
Move where that commentary comes.
So I'll just offer this for consideration for bill as much as for everybody else as well.
I wonder if there's an opportunity for us to build some of that in.
Engage the force and some of the platforms that we already have as.
Staff level, I guess.
Yeah, so there's a there's a virtual survey here that we in that agreement intends to put out here to engage. I would say, you know, I don't think that agreement here specifies as to when exactly these meetings are.
So I think we have a flexibility.
If it's done before the end of the deadline for the study itself.
A lot of so when I think about this, it's a lot like the comprehensive plan when we were putting that together. There's multiple things going on at the same time.
The planning team and engineering team are collecting a lot of technical data.
In addition to collecting social data, right? So comments coming in.
There are seven different meetings here that's that's identified.
And the question is whether or not some of these meetings can be combined.
Between the committees with joint meetings or a.
Committee of the whole.
To provide a meeting, an additional meeting to at the tail end of it to get to a public hearing per se.
So I think that's a good workaround.
You know, I think.
Rebecca has the villages municipal attorney has some.
Knowledge of what we want to do here in the village and flexibility to work with the village to accomplish these goals. And so.
If the board had wanted to approve it tonight, that would be my suggestion is just to blanket.
The engagement opportunities to the survey and then the seven meetings.
Public meetings and then let those board together a more.
Friendly schedule as to getting more comment on the tail end versus the front end.
If bill if I may.
With regards to trustee Simpson's comment on that potentially the desirability for public hearing.
I would say in the context of kind of that.
The runway we have in terms of kind of the game plan timing or the length.
Of when the agreement is going on, you're saying middle of February.
We do have kind of a bill alluded to.
We kind of have one or two placeholders in the plan of a public engagement event of some.
Or open house or otherwise not specifically locked down date wise, but I bring that up in the context of the desirability of public hearing.
We do they have that ability availability in terms of noticing just from timeline perspective of it needed to be.
Class one 30 day almost like if you were doing a comprehensive plan.
There is that wiggle room within the confines of the existing.
And a time frame to be able to do that. So I just wanted to put that out there as well.
Jan.
Let's see.
Where I was in my notes here. Okay. So I first wanted to say that I agree.
That with Jim in that I don't feel that the public open house is ideal.
And if we're going to do something like this, that a public meeting would make a lot more sense.
And then Ale had said and I can't quote him, but something to the effect of it may be better not to lock this in until we get this nail down.
So that being said, and also.
I still I'm questioning because this is an informational study.
Is it really necessary at this time?
And so for those reasons, I don't think that I can vote for this to go forward to me.
And that's I don't I don't need anyone else's comment, but that's just kind of where I'm at.
And just to.
That's a slightly good segue.
I'm glad you mentioned that, Jan, that it's an informational study because I think this might get to the heart of what you were asking earlier when.
And partially on Jim on some of your comments to.
I just want to be clear, even though this is titled infrastructure growth plan or whatever it's titled, it's not a regulatory or policy document.
So this is something that is informational and would feed into a potential comprehensive plan update, which then would have its own set of public engagement.
Actually, statutory public hearing, all of that stuff.
So kind of, I think when you were actually, Jim, you made the comment, well, it's like the public's looking at it and this is a done deal.
It's not there's not a deal, right?
Or say it's an informational guiding document to feed into them.
What would be future planning?
So all the comments are valid.
I just want to clarify to that.
This is not a policy or regulatory document.
Before we get.
Too much further into this, we do have a couple of public appearances.
We do have a couple of public appearances on this.
And I'd like to hear from them.
Did you have that, Kelly?
Oh.
Okay.
The first one I was.
Handed was.
Damn.
Mel is opposed and cannot be here.
So he is designating around the mind holds to read a statement on his behalf.
You ready, Kelly?
Okay.
Your members of the board.
My name is Sam.
I'm a 21 year old town of Vienna resident and a lifelong member of this community.
I cannot attend tonight's meeting because I am currently at UW Madison studying agronomy,
which focuses on craps and agricultural production.
I was made aware of the forest 25 year development development plan yesterday and to say I was disappointed would be an understatement.
I grew up on my family's dairy farm here in Vienna and I have worked on that farm since I was nine years old.
It was through working on that farm that I developed my passion for agriculture and ultimately decided to pursue an agronomy degree.
I'm investing in an education so I can have a future in agriculture, but I need farmland to have a future in.
When we continue taking productive farmland out of agriculture, we aren't just changing what the land looks like.
We're taking away opportunities for the next generation of farmers and agriculturalists.
When I look at this proposed development, I don't just see lines on map.
I see farmland.
I see my family's farm.
I see land I have worked on my entire life and land that I hoped could be a part of my future.
My family's farm has run in our family since 1852.
Four years before the forest was officially planted.
That is generations of history, hard work and pride tied to this land.
That history cannot simply be replaced with houses and development.
And this isn't just about my family.
It's about what kind of community Vienna and a forest want to be for the next generation.
I was recently selected as a rural champion by Comphere Financial and award given to one individual in Wisconsin.
When I was asked why I wanted to support rural communities and stand up for what I believe in, my answer was simple because this community has given me so much.
After my sister experienced a life-changing farm accident, farmers, teachers, business owners and countless others stepped up to help my family.
That is the deforest in Vienna community I know and I'm proud to be from.
Neighbors helping neighbors.
People doing the right thing even when it isn't the easiest choice.
That is why this is so difficult for me.
I have represented this community at the local, state and national levels through FFA and I am proud to call it home.
But I don't believe protecting our community means sacrificing farmland and the people who depend on it simply for continued development.
Deforest has an opportunity to change this narrative.
Listen to your constituents. Listen to your neighbors.
And think about what this community will look like not just five or ten years from now but for the next generation.
Please don't let short-term development come at the expense of history, agriculture and the people that make this community what it is.
Thank you for your time and thank you for considering the future and integrity of our community.
Thank you, Rhonda.
Next is Cass Summerfeld.
Hi, my name is Cassandra Summerfeld from Windsor.
I am an opposition of item 9.2 authorizing the village administrator to execute a future growth plan agreement.
Development shouldn't happen here in the future and there is no need to see if you can handle development.
The majority of this land is filled with precious irreplaceable habitats including wetlands and native forests.
According to Dane County land and water resources over half of the wetlands in Dane County have been lost over the last century.
Many of those that remain have been degraded.
Also, almost the entire area is farmland preservation.
I emailed all of you a map showing the preservation area.
This seems to be a waste of time and resources since this land is already planned for preservation.
Not to mention a logistical nightmare likely met with opposition due to the environmental impacts.
According to the UW Ag sector, one of the most pressing concerns is the increasing loss of agricultural land in Dane County.
Between 2001 and 2021, Dane County experienced a staggering 17% loss of ag land.
Alarmingly, 76% of new development is occurring on soils classified as important farmland directly impacting our capacity for food production.
While recent figures aren't available yet, I can only imagine how much more we have lost in the last five years.
You can see precious land disappearing everywhere.
The village administrator is directly contributing to the crisis of habitat and farmland loss with seemingly little to nothing the board or residents can do about it.
This seems to be a severe lack of consideration for the environment despite the prevalence of sensitive ecological areas.
I'm very concerned that the village administrator having more authority to coordinate and enable more development on such important land.
We need natural land and farmland, not development. Please don't assist in the destruction of this incredible environment and soil that surrounds us.
Opposing the agreement seems the only opportunity for the board to stop future development before the handshapes begin and it becomes a matter of developers just making it work.
Instead of poaching incredible land, perhaps we could focus on smart growth within our own village, not just growth.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
That concludes our public appearances. Is there any more discussion? I wanted to get those in before we got discussing any further than we already had.
What is the cost associated with this agreement?
I believe the proposed cost is about $43,000.
We were budgeted in our capital improvement plan to study infrastructure improvements and expansion at $40,000.
And let's see here I had a zip it up.
And this is indicated again in our strategic plan for the year of 2728.
It then reminded me early 2028 is when we're going to start reviewing the comprehensive plan again.
So the comprehensive plan the statutory requirement to update that plan is every 10 years.
The last update we did was five years.
So 2028 would be five years from our most recent update.
2028 is also the five year anniversary of strategic plan too.
So we have two different planning efforts going on at the same time there.
I'll just say a comprehensive plan update is that it would be a more extended process.
So it would be when necessarily happen in 2028, but certainly you could start with that.
Jim.
I guess I would say that I'm a large proponent for something going forward.
But this isn't exactly what I envisioned.
I guess I was thinking more of the limits of say the sewer extent without a lift station.
And if there would be a lift station, what could be potential or same same thing with water.
I know there's an elevation out there.
There's a feeling I worked on the development.
I want to say 952 when I'm making up the number.
My point is is that when we put homes above that elevation, we needed to have a lifter here.
I lost the net term, but anyway, my booster pump.
Yeah.
So all that stuff starts adding cost.
Why was a big for this is seeing that we have like Bill, you said to you got less port.
We have Burke and we have Windsor all in some respects, all boundary agreements.
There's one community that we do not have a boundary agreement with that.
I'm a proponent to do that.
But before to me, we can.
We need the information to move towards that.
And part of that information is knowing the extent of potential utilities and the cost of it.
So that's where I feel this is the one thing that we really need to move forward with enough knowledge base into an agreement.
So I don't want to lose sight of that.
But I've always envisioned it is more of an engineering document and not a whole lot of public involvement and stuff,
because I think the public involvement comes into place when we start talking about boundary agreements and comprehensive plan and land use.
So that's I think that's what I'm speaking of when I'm saying, like, why is it so front loaded with public comment rather than at the tail.
But.
I like it. I think it was Alex that you brought it up as like this.
This is not a comprehensive plan. It's not a boundary agreement.
It's not even like a food or land use, but that's what we this is to me what we need to move in that direction.
I mean, I was part of the food. I personally am still proud of that.
But one of the things that we did when we did that, we had what we call a community separation areas and things like that.
And we can't get to that without knowing this piece and moving into say boundary agreements.
And there's going to be so many times for public comment with annexation and discussions and different things, all those public hearings.
I don't want to lose sight of that, but I just feel.
I guess I just don't want this to not happen because I feel it's very integral to moving forward.
I can mention, say, like the hotel that came out.
And I personally am a big proponent of sidewalks. I wish there was sidewalks there.
But we lost sight of that because we didn't have a sidewalk plan because it wasn't in our planning area.
So we just need to get to the point where we can keep moving forward the better plan, what can potentially happen.
And that's what I think it's important that we move forward soon.
Even if it isn't tonight, I would think there's an option to move forward tonight.
Just modifying the public meetings or something, but I don't know.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think what you're talking about is this study. It's kind of the initial look into the technicals and with the addition of the meetings to confirm the public input portion of it.
We have a lot of meetings built in here for talking with and getting information from the different committees and commissions to understand what the priorities are.
But I think that's part of their communications collection or their information collection.
Maybe Tyler can speak more to this, but as we took a look at what the potential study area is.
And that's pretty much highlighting the extension of where our water and sanitary sewer can reach in elevation.
So I think in part, this is what you're asking for. It's in a different format.
Yep, and I can be good. And I'll ask you maybe the comment on what this really is because the other things I see in here is it seems like was a little bit of growth projections too.
So maybe that's not in there as much as I think it is.
And I did read somewhere where there was like a vision statement and I question why the need of a vision statement because we got the vision statements in our comprehensive plan already.
So, I'll just add something. I don't know if there's a question directed in which direction, but just to briefly touch on the public engagement piece to it.
Yes, definitely there's a technical heavy heavy technical piece of this, but I'll say what can come out of some of the public engagement piece is things like the living experience out in the area.
So, hey, did you know that there's wetland here? We heard comments through the whole data center thing like there's a drainage district, you know, there's drain tile in this field.
So I think you get when you when you have some level of that in there, you get things that a technical, the technical side, either misses or has an opportunity then to dig deeper into.
Okay, working closely with your background on a daily basis.
Having any plans that we have so should some landowner that is in Vienna that or that's currently in the village of the forest that wants to develop having a roadmap for us makes for a more efficient, smarter, and less expensive growth scenarios.
And then should we not have a plan and then that landowner comes forward and says they want to develop, we're scrambling trying to put together the plan, not knowing what the next step is beyond that.
Right. So, by looking at this plan and having this, this is it's not the end all be all, but it certainly gives us a starting point by which to look at each of these parcels should again, they want to develop right that's the.
That's an individual choice by a property owner. They bought that property. They've done what they've done with it.
They can choose to either sell it to another farmer or they can choose to develop it, right. And some that sometimes this is their retirement plan, right. That's how they operate.
So it leaves us short handed if we don't have some sort of plan for us to know what, what's the next step beyond that should this development come.
And then the next one come, if we don't have that plan played out.
We're, we're doing it less efficiently. And I'd, Tyler, if you can answer that or address how that doesn't work for us. If we're having to scramble at the last minute, the extra engineering costs.
Maybe also we have to redo things differently because we didn't put a sewer pipe at the appropriate depth to cover to the next one. Right.
I mean, that's the risk. I mean, if you don't have your sanitary projected out far enough, you're going to eventually get into the left station needing to pump that sewer back up higher to then go down to gravity.
And that utility is much more expensive long term as well.
And here I do believe we have some items covering future utility areas and including sanitary and water areas.
I think we have had a lot of discussion on this and it's probably time to vote on it.
It doesn't, this is just the gathering of information as to what's out there.
What it's, what's going to work, what's not because it's too high. It's too low. We're not annexing. We're not taking over. We're just looking.
Which might be interesting to Vienna too.
So in any case, at this point, I'm going to call for a motion to approve resolution 2026 111.
The resolution authorizing the village administrator to execute a future growth plan agreement with your Becker associates incorporated.
I'll make a motion to approve that. I do have one additional discussion.
Pardon me.
I'm making a motion to prove that, but I want one point of clarification.
Okay.
Hopefully.
Second.
I'll second.
Thank you.
Seconded by Wayne discussion. I'm sorry. Motion by Jim seconded by Wayne.
Is there discussion?
I guess I wanted to go back to the meetings and how we want to deal with that.
Can we just say, I think you said seven meetings and.
Let the schedule be modified by staff.
Yeah, so there's seven, seven different meetings or touch points in this agreement.
I've heard a couple of different things tonight.
One.
That there should be more public engagement. And then I also heard that it should be more technical.
So we just need more direction as to.
What it is that we're looking for in these public meetings.
Yeah, for me, I was initially wondering what the public meetings in input would provide if this is going to be a technical aspect of what our services concurrently extend to what's going to work.
I didn't understand how the public input would assist with that. I think Alex had a good explanation about how they sometimes provide information that we haven't seen, haven't studied or looked at yet.
So I'm actually okay. The way it's laid out because initial.
Input can be given and then there's a there's a step along the way for all of these committees to be able to provide input if people want to attend and see what the presentation is providing input.
There's a lot of avenues for input. And then at the end, it wraps it all up when there is a final more comprehensive look at this for a presentation for more public input and then a board meeting as well.
So I think there's plenty of steps along the way to gather whatever input.
And we all want more public input. So.
We have enough, I think, avenues for people to be able to give us that if they so choose.
Thank you, Brad.
Anyone else?
Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor.
Indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
Aye.
All those opposed.
Indicate by saying no.
No.
No.
No.
Aye.
Six one.
Thank you, your backer.
All right.
Thank you all.
Moving on, Resolution 2026 one one two, the resolution approving a partial release and modification of vision corner restriction.
Alex and Judd, this is associated with the CDA's redevelopment project at the intersection of main
and B. So currently, Bill Jordanens has a vision triangle restriction, an intersection, certain
intersections, which is going to lead on Tyler, our engineer on this, which is 50 feet of, it's a
50 foot off the right-of-way, and then a triangle. It's 50 feet from where the right-of-way is
meeting the night. There you go, that's the location of the village. And we're requesting a
reduction of that in this instance to 25 feet, based on the ample right-of-way that's currently
there beyond the current street worth. There is a letter from Dear Bicker, a memo from Dear Bicker,
and outlining that, but I can turn it over to Tyler to explain the rationale there.
Tyler, speak.
In looking at the surrounding areas and the right-of-way at both County Highway v and North
Street, taking a look at what could happen in the future. East of this area of Main Street,
there's houses right against the right-of-way, there's a trail on the North side, there's
sidewalk on the south side, there's not much room for that road to expand. Looking down the road on
Main Street, the same thing happens. After you get past the CDA property, all those parking lots
go right up to the right-of-way, going right up to the sidewalk. So we took a look at what could
happen in this intersection, and then we didn't see a good opportunity for it to expand beyond
what it is. Looking at the right-of-way right now, County Highway v is 110 feet,
which is pretty wide, and then Main Street at that area is 93 feet. So by looking at the future,
what could possibly happen in wider right-of-ways, we feel comfortable in having a smaller vision
trail in this area. I'll just also add for additional clarity. So the vision triangle
restriction prohibits structures, I believe, over two feet to be in that. So if there's
any structure in there, it has to be below two feet. So that's what the restriction is.
Okay, we have no public appearances on this.
So I would take a motion to approve resolution 2026-112, make a partial release and modification
of the vision corner restriction. I'll make a motion to approve resolution 2026-100.
I'm sorry, 1-1-2. Second.
Alicia, seconded by Brad. Is there any discussion?
Let's see here. Okay, all those in favor indicate by saying aye.
Aye.
All those opposed indicate by saying no.
Motion carries unanimously.
9.4 resolution 2026-113, resolution authorizing the recreation and community enrichment director
to execute a modified facility use agreement with the Wisconsin River Muskies football organization.
Rhys.
Yeah, so we had a semi-pro football team that reached out there looking for a new home
for their team. And when we were kind of going through the discussions, they just had a request
for a reduction in the our insurance requirements as Al reviewed any type of change to the agreements
specifically in insurance, where it deals with the villages liability. It is a board decision of
if they want to accept that. We did talk as staff of the potential for what type of damage they
might be able to do to the facility. We did not feel that they would be able to do $300,000 worth
of damage to the facility, so with being on the long field.
Okay, thank you, Rhys. We have no public appearances on this. I would accept the motion to approve
2026-113. I'll make the motion.
Thank you, Melanie. Motion by Melanie is our second.
I'll second it. I do have one question.
Seconded by Jim. We have a motion and a second discussion, Jim.
Question, so you say like the long field then? My question is, is are they also practicing or
just playing because I just worry a little bit about the field getting tore up if it's always
being used for practice too? Yep, so they're looking to do about one to two practices a week
and then one game a week. And certainly that would be part of the discussion and it's in their
best interest to keep the fields in a good condition. So a lot of times what football teams like even
daffle what they do is they kind of rotate to different spots of the field to make sure that
they're not doing wear and tear just in one area. So if we started noticing a bunch of wear and
tear in an area, it'd certainly be a discussion that we would have with the group of just saying like,
hey, like you guys need to move to different areas.
Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor and to keep by saying aye.
All right. Motion carries unanimously.
9.5, discussion regarding the village administrator's annual performance evaluation process.
I guess that's me. No, that'll be Bill first.
Well, you can go. No, be my guest.
No, I just want to state that from my point of view that my employment contracts are specified in
annual review. For me, it's good to understand kind of what your direction is and how you're
feeling about policy implementation. I know earlier this year when we discussed the extension
of my contract, we've kind of did an informal performance evaluation. I sent you assessment,
the 360 assessment of myself. I can definitely send that again.
So in talking about what potentially the process is, I'm open to what you think is
proper. I don't believe that there is a single way of doing this. And I think in the
a few years that I've been here, it's been done a couple of different ways. And so I think that's
where the bill is president and the board determined how much of this you want to,
how much of an official annual performance you want to conduct.
Whatever you decide, I just asked for the opportunity to be able to have
that evaluation as to the direction that we're going. And part of my job is implementing
the policies and the direction that you provide and how I share the staff and how we get these
implemented. Well, let me just say that I think we actually probably really did his evaluation
when we discussed the contract way back when. I think Bill would like some input from the board,
however. And I would love to hear some input. What do you think the best way to accomplish that is
Brad? Yeah, I think we had a really good discussion amongst the board. I would like to hear from
the department heads. I think there was one of the options that was presented that has been done
in the past. I think it was a really good option to be able to hear, have him hear from all of you as
well, just so we stay on a similar track and you can duplicate that year after year.
That seems to make sense. Okay, so we want to hear from department heads.
Do we want to do that like one on one? Do you want me to go around four to them or
reading thing or survey providing feedback? I'm open. Okay. Anybody else? Tell me. What do you
think, Jim? I guess in the past I worked for companies, I think they called it like a 360
review. And I guess I'm maybe looking at Bill as far as what was implemented in your current
policies. Do you say when you do an employee review, is there a paperwork that you send ahead of
better? I don't know. I'm trying to work away into the 360 reviews, so Colleen maybe doesn't have to.
That the people below the person rates say the supervisor and the supervisor rates the individuals
too. Yeah, so the 360 assessment, one was conducted as part of my certification for
certified managers. That was conducted at about the same time that we were talking about that
contract extension. That is the long document that I sent to you. So that incorporated or
sent a survey out to department heads to folks that I work immediately with and then trustees.
So it's done some of that work. Now I did not collect the specific questions that you may be
looking for. So it just depends on what type of information you're looking at or what to want to
collect. I just think they would be great and I guess Colleen, I don't know if you have the time,
but if you're willing to talk to the department heads, say one-on-one to get their honesty.
I'm fine talking to that. You can talk to people under bill.
But I just don't know if there's say a form that's already been prepared by the village that would
be there and maybe save some time. That's I guess what I'm questioning.
Yeah, so in the past I've tried to stay out of the logistics of the performance evaluation.
So the HR generalist or HR director in the past has helped or assisted the village president
in preparing a document or a survey per se to issue out to the department heads or to employees
to other trustees. So we, in this case, whatever the board decides or if you give authority to
Colleen to kind of take care of the logistics here, she would work with many folks who are
HR generalists too, but for some kind of survey and some kind of response for you to be analyzed.
Alicia, I think we answered some of the questions on that 360 survey, but I didn't know if that's
data that you would want to share. Yeah, I can share it with you as part of the
performance evaluation. Okay, would you please can you send that out again? I'm sure I won't be
able to find it. And I'm favorable to Colleen. You seek and self information from the department
heads, but also I think it's, you know, I like to hear from also, you know, I guess not just the
department heads. So, of course, time allowing, I know last year I did not participate in the
performance evaluation because I didn't feel like I was on the board long enough, but I did receive
like questions. So I don't know if that would be a part of the process again. And that's all I'll offer.
Or you may feel free to email any thoughts to me if you'd like to, that you'd like included.
Any of them, can we do that?
And make sure you don't violate foreign rules. Jan, Melanie, either one of you have anything to say on this?
I can say I'm in agreement with you handling it, Colleen, and with what the other trustees have
said. Okay, I'll make sure Brandi from Human Resources is involved too. So it's not just me
with the sake of you guys. Melanie, anything?
Yeah, the only thing I would add is, you know, we've talked a lot about kind of the evaluation
piece, but I'm also, I think there's this other piece on the summary document that talks about a
questionnaire regarding goals and objectives of the village. And I do think that's an important
component as well. Because that helps in, I guess, just sort of a temperature check of where
everyone's at and like what the kind of focus and objectives of the current board are. So I'm
wondering, is that currently part of the process or could that be part of the process?
Certainly it could be part of the process.
And wouldn't it be nice that the board could just talk and say what are our goals and objectives?
That's just too easy. Sure, so you want the goals and objectives of the board?
Explain that to me, Melanie. Well, I think if we're, I think that evaluation is a good opportunity to
just have some kind of, I guess, process whereby we have a chance to think about that again.
So I'm not envisioning something complicated, but it could just be a very simple
questionnaire that we, or it could just be, you know, send your thoughts to Colleen. I don't know,
was just throwing that out there as, you know, maybe something that would be a useful component
as we're talking about that evaluation piece too. So I don't know, it doesn't have to be something
formal, it could just be. I'm, yeah, I'm fine with it. I'm just getting a little cut and headed
tonight, so I may have to call you. Yeah, for sure. But yeah, okay, that's all I had. Thanks.
Jim. I think I'm wondering if it's almost two different things because we're talking about an
evaluation, then we're also talking about getting bored opinions of direction. Is that like a different
topic, then? Is that something you're looking for, Bill? I know you sort of mentioned it. It's like,
I hope you provide direction this staff and stuff. Yeah, so it's starting like it's a full performance
evaluation at this point, which includes, you know, an assessment of the performance
in accordance to summary from trustees and department heads, including the 360 assessment,
and then also a discussion on goals and objectives and direction for myself.
I will help if that's, you know, what the board wants to do, the direction that the board wants
to grow, that's perfectly fine. I can work with Colleen and Brandi to set that up. Colleen, you look
stressed out. Yeah, sure. And then you guys, you can confirm that.
Okay, so there's our discussion on its annual performance evaluation.
Communication, the register is in the packet. Committee Commission and Board reports public
library. Yeah, they're having problems still with the new ILS system that was installed across
Dane County and all the libraries are having problems with their circulation
counts. So they're trying to figure that out, just take up with the new software,
planning for the Halloween festivities that they put on every year, have a group that's
volunteered to help decorate, continue with a space study, and then working on finalizing our
strategic plan. Thank you, Brad. Public Safety Commission. That's us.
We just met last week. We had a little discussion about putting a new or an additional tornado
warning siren down near Staufaker's area there up in 19. We also apparently have a little traffic
problem at Bear Tree Crossing and Great Bridge Road that the Chief's already looking into that.
And we had a liquor license set. Unfortunately, we didn't have a big enough. We had a quorum,
but we ended up tied two to pass it or deny it. The Chief did not recommend
passing it so that person has the ability to appeal to the Village Board.
Cornerstone Community Center, that Jane? Yes. So I need to, I guess, bring everyone up to speed
on the inter-municipal agreement that we started working on. I think we're in the coming down on
two years now. And we're getting to the third quarter of the year again, or the fourth quarter
of the year again. And we are stuck now waiting on the Social Security Administration to approve
our nonprofit situation. So it's gone back and forth between Social Security, IRS,
Vector Social Security. And it's just been one snag after another. Our attorney has been putting
a lot of pressure on those government departments. And so has our President Monica Smith
to get a decision. And the reason that we are pushing, of course, is the end of the year,
the decision needs to be made because we need to know what to do with the employee's benefits,
which needs to be made at the January 1st. So here we are stuck again. The other big important
piece of this is that Windsor had contacted the Director Natalie and they had said that they
will allow one more year, if this does not get taken care of by January 1st, they will allow one
more year where the Community Center employees are allowed to be on the work comp plan through
the village of Windsor. But if it should go through next year, this will need to be revisited again.
So in any event, still it's been a huge struggle and a bit of stress there. And
we're still just waiting for answers, but it's just really difficult. Beyond that,
everything else is great at the senior center.
I'm sorry about that, Jim.
I'm sorry for them. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Community Development Authority.
Our meeting, what was relatively, went relatively fast. We talked solicited some feedback on
what we want to hear from financials. And we also had the opportunity to hear from,
I mean, really hear about the design elements of Yara Crossing. And so that was nice to hear
how they incorporated like part of our Norse tradition, I believe, and really the thought that
they're putting into the building. And then just happy to share that. I believe Alex has put
a sampling of just some of those design elements out there. If people want to see what that color
palette looks like, they can certainly look outside. Other than that, we did also, did we
finalize on our property? Yes. And we sold some 101 and 105.
Yeah, we authorized closing on 101 105, which is our last duplex property, though.
Which will be going to the Madison Land Trust. So kind of still keeping with our theme of
affordable housing that those properties will kind of go through that program. And that was,
that's all I really remember, guys. So thank you. Planning and zoning Zoom.
So planning and zoning, we had a relatively short meeting where we had two items on the
agenda, two main ones. One was a concept review for what many of us remember as the Knowles. I
don't know if that's going to be the end name. That's the way it was presented.
And that is the last remaining chunk of land that's residential on the conservancy place.
I'd say it was met with relatively favorable, some comments, but I think it will continue to
progress. And then the other item that we talked about is L. S. R. E. DeForest LLC,
which what that is, is a car wash that will be replacing the Arby's, or sorry, Wendy's that
used to be Burger King's lot on highway B. I don't remember the name of the car wash. Do you remember
Tommy's? Yep. And those were the two main items on the agenda.
Thank you. Public Services Committee.
We have not had a meeting. So nothing new. No meeting? That would have heard.
Thank you. Before it's Windsor Fire and EMS Board. Brad.
He didn't know that was coming.
Thank you. Madam President, that's a bad start.
They're come along with construction, actually. So they, I think they said they're almost halfway
through with the exterior and hope to get it watertight by the time winter comes.
We were trying to finalize some things with the budget.
All I recall, Anne.
Okay. Any other business that lawfully comes before the board?
I just wanted to mention that it was really nice to see so many people from all of you
and the community out at some events over the past week. So.
Great. Thank you.
Okay.
Yeah. There's a river cleanup on Saturday. If you want to continue that, I thought.
Is there a motion to adjourn?
I'll make a motion to adjourn. Motion by Alicia. Is there a second?
Oh, come on, gang. Second. Who said that, Jan? Yes, seconded by Jan.
All those in favor and to keep it saying aye. Aye.
Those no. Motion carries unanimously. We're adjourned aye 21.
Good night, everybody. Aye.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.