 |
| Happy Bike Week! Bike Week kicks off today with a fun community bike ride at 3 pm starting and ending at Stonehorse Green. The ride will last about an hour and is open to all ages and skill levels. After the ride, stick around the Green to check out one of Madison Metro’s BRT buses and explore the mobile Trash Lab, which is a collaboration by Dane County and Madison Children’s Museum. I hope to see you at the Green!  Community Campus: Opportunities and Challenges Last month, I reported on the six options for a new Community Campus that would consist of larger, more modern facilities for our City Hall, Public Library, and Senior Center. On May 7, Council heard directly from the consultants for the project and discussed the options at a Committee of the Whole, or COW, Meeting. Following this meeting, the Community Campus Committee, or CCC, met for one last time on May 22 to review the feedback from Council members. After much discussion, they selected Options 4, 6, and 7 to formally recommend to us. (Option 7 was added to the slate of options at the April CCC meeting.) The presentation of these three options is on the agenda for the Council meeting coming up on June 3. We won’t be taking any action on Tuesday — that will come later. Recapping the COW meeting, there was universal support among Council members for having facilities with sufficient space both now and well into the future. That we need a new City Hall is obvious to anyone who has ever toured the office areas inside the building. Both the Senior Center and the Library are too small to fit the current needs, much less future needs. We also agreed that new construction or renovation should reflect our goals for environmental sustainability. Council members were also united in their alarm at the very large price tags for all the options that involved new construction. Of the options that would meet our space needs, the range in estimated costs was $113 million to $137.4 million. For comparison, in October 2023, I toured the McFarland Public Safety Center, which opened in August that year as the first net-zero public safety building in Wisconsin. The 56,000 square foot facility houses McFarland’s Fire and Rescue Department, Police Department, and Municipal Court. This impressive new facility cost around $20 million. In other cost comparisons, before the COVID-19 pandemic put the project on hold, the CCC was considering three options for Middleton’s Community Campus — the Hub, the Helm, and the Heart. The estimates at the time (2020) projected the construction cost in 2025 to range from $52 million up to $85 million for new buildings that would provide slightly more space than we’re looking at now. While still significant, these cost estimates seem reasonable, and I can imagine asking taxpayers to let the city borrow sufficient funds to provide this much-needed office and community space. But a project that costs over $100 million? That is hard to imagine. So what do we do given that we need new facilities but the estimated costs are way beyond our means? We need to tweak the options to come up with something that will work. We could, for example, consider ways to shrink the footprint of the buildings. At the final CCC meeting, the Commission on Aging representative asked about the projected space needs for the Library — over 80,000 square feet, which is more than twice the current space. For City Hall and the Senior Center, though, the space needs are closer to 40% more than the current space. He said Sun Prairie’s library is smaller even though their population is bigger and growing at a faster rate than Middleton’s. With over half the cost of the Community Campus being for the Library, these are valid points. We can also consider ways to make use of at least some of the existing buildings. City Hall isn’t worth saving, but the Library building isn’t in bad shape. It’s just too small for our needs. But it’s a good size for the Senior Center. Option 4 includes the option of renovating the existing Library building for the Senior Center rather than constructing a brand new building. The estimated cost of this option for just the Senior Center is less than $7 million compared to over $23 million to construct a new building under Options 6 and 7. The tentative timeline is for the staff and consultants to refine the options and the cost estimates this summer and fall for presentation to the public at community listening sessions to be scheduled in late 2025 and early 2026. I intend to hold at least two listening sessions, possibly combined with building tours, so that District 6 residents can learn about the options being considered and share their thoughts with me. Further refinement will happen following the listening sessions, after which Council will select an option to pursue. Then we’ll hold a round of public information sessions in the summer of 2026 in preparation for a referendum to appear on the ballot in November 2026. Rest assured that I’ll be giving a lot of thought to this project in the coming year. I’m committed to finding a solution that is both workable and affordable. Stormwater Successes At the Finance and Personnel Committee on May 7, my colleagues tapped me to represent the committee on the Water Resources Management Commission, or WRMC. I’m very pleased to continue in this role, especially given the importance of our water resources and our stormwater management facilities to District 6 and the city as a whole. The May WRMC meeting was a rare and welcome opportunity for members to spend some time focused on learning. We heard a presentation from Todd Stuntebeck of the U.S. Geological Survey, or USGS, about the monitoring that is done using stream gages on the North and South Forks of Pheasant Branch and also at Parmenter Street (see map). Our Parmenter Street gage is one of the oldest operating gages in Dane County. It’ll be celebrating its 50th anniversary this year! The North and South Fork monitoring stations are young by comparison, going back to just 2011.  Middleton pays the USGS for this monitoring. In 2025, we’re paying $15,000 for the monitoring at Parmenter and $35,000 for the North and South Fork monitoring. We also pay for the cost of sample analysis for the North and South Fork monitoring, which is estimated at $15-20,000 per year. (Wisconsin DNR pays for the sample analysis costs for the Parmenter Street monitoring.) The funding for these monitoring agreements comes from TID 3 and will shift to the Stormwater Utility later this year due to the upcoming closure of TID 3. So how do we benefit from all this monitoring? The data the USGS is gathering helps us to better understand the magnitudes of water flow, sediment and nutrients in the water, identify hotspots and sources of pollution, and improve models to help document how well we’re doing in meeting water-quality standards. Above all, the monitoring helps us to make science-based decisions to better protect our surface waters, both here in Middleton and throughout the Yahara chain. One of the big things we’re obligated to do is to reduce the amount of phosphorus entering Lake Mendota. Monitoring data collected here and throughout the watershed show that, from 1990-2024, the average amount of total phosphorus entering the lake from its tributaries was about 62,000 pounds per year. Pheasant Branch contributes about 12% of this and animal agriculture in the North Fork area is the major source of that. Because of the great year-to-year variability (see graph), this average of 62,000 pounds is also the trend over time — meaning, despite all the work that has been done in the area on infrastructure and education to reduce the amount of phosphorus entering the lake, we’re standing still (or treading water). That’s because over that same time period, climate change has resulted in more frequent, stronger storms that drop more water on our land.  Todd’s analysis shows that we’re much better off than we would have been without those investments in improving stormwater management. He normalized the data to compare apples to apples and showed that we actually have made progress in reducing phosphorus loads, especially in Pheasant Branch. We still need to do more, though, even as climate change makes it more challenging to reach the goal of 32,000 pounds for the phosphorus load entering Lake Mendota each year. If we can reach that goal, we can substantially reduce the number of algal blooms and beach closures that occur each year. Following Todd’s presentation, WRMC Chair Warren Gebert provided an update on Pheasant Branch streamflow and water quality for calendar year 2024. Warren presents this information each year using the monitoring data collected at the three gaging stations. Last year was a relatively wet year, with 48 inches of precipitation over the year compared to the average of 35 inches. The North Fork is the largest source of sediment and phosphorus in Pheasant Branch, with the commercial area between Highway 14 and Airport Road contributing a substantial volume of runoff due to a large impervious area and a lack of infiltration. Warren’s analysis shows that Confluence Pond continues to be very effective in reducing flood peaks, sediment, and phosphorus loads. His presentation suggested some actions related to Confluence Pond for the WRMC to consider in the future. These include enlarging the pond to further reduce sediment and phosphorus loads, conducting a sediment depth survey to determine when sediment removal should occur, and possibly changing the pond’s outlet to reduce flood peaks. This agenda item was for discussion only, so the WRMC didn’t discuss or take any action on these recommendations at our meeting. We’ll do that at a future meeting. Finally, thanks to the increased revenue being generated for our stormwater utility, dedicated city stormwater staff are now making progress on some of our deferred maintenance projects. Staff conducted grading, installed stone, and removed sediment on the South Fork at UW Health Court. They’ve also started doing some work to restore the Donna Drive/Police Department pond. Thanks again to everyone who supported last year’s Stormwater Utility referendum! You made it possible for us to have the resources to complete these projects. Five-Year Street Improvement Plan On May 20, Council approved the Five-Year Street Improvement Plan for 2026-2030. Prior to the meeting, I expressed concern about High Road now appearing in the plan for reconstruction in 2027, which is one year later than the most recent schedule approved in the 2025 budget. I reached out to the new Public Works director, Benjamin (Ben) John, to find out why the project had been bumped back a year. Here is Ben’s response: “At present we do not have a design for an urbanized High Road. Per the 2025 budget there is $120,000 of fund balance that has been earmarked for this project. It is my intent to work with [Public Works Committee] and the [Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Committee] to issue an RFP to firms this year, with the goal of having a finalized design by 2026 and ready for bid in early 2027. By somewhat delaying the road project, development construction traffic should be waning, giving the new pavement the best chance for a long life.” While I’m disappointed that construction will have to wait until 2027, I understand the potential benefits of that delay. I’m also pleased that the work on designing the new road will still be initiated this year. I’ll report on the progress of that work and any opportunities for public comment on the design. The other District 6 projects in the Five-Year Plan involve Century Avenue. The bridge near Branch Street will be reconstructed in 2027, with resurfacing of the road from Parmenter to the new bridge scheduled for 2029. Before that resurfacing occurs, Public Works will complete a “road diet” study of Century Avenue to determine whether it’s feasible to change the configuration to two lanes with a shared turn lane and bike lanes similar to Gammon Road north of Old Sauk. Any decision to change the roadway like this would be made by Council. One major project that currently affects District 6 is the reconstruction of Parmenter Street north of Century. This project is finally underway! We can look forward to being able to walk and bike more safely on this road and to having a much smoother ride when the work is finished. Affordable Housing Work Kicks Off The two joint subcommittees of the Workforce Housing Committee, or WHC, and the Community Development Authority both met for the first time in May. I’m on the Strategy and Finance Subcommittee, which met on May 14. The Outreach and Education Subcommittee met on May 12. Both groups are posting their meeting notices on the city’s website and streaming their meetings, if anyone is interested in attending. The Outreach and Education Subcommittee will meet on the second Wednesday of each month at 5 pm. The Strategy and Finance Subcommittee was missing a few members at our first meeting, so we’ll decide on a regular time to meet when we hold our next meeting on June 10 at 4 pm. The Outreach and Education Subcommittee identified four target audiences for educational materials: general public, business community, renters, and potential partners, including developers. They’ll be working on concepts for one or more web pages, FAQs or other one-pagers about housing, and ideas for in-person outreach. The Strategy and Finance Subcommittee discussed what our goals are for affordable housing in Middleton, who we’re doing the work for, and what we envision for our end product, that being an Affordable Housing Action Plan for the city. We also talked about information needs that we have as a group, including an updated Housing Affordability Report and a Housing Needs Assessment. When we gather on the 10th, we’ll elect a chair and vice chair and will walk through a discussion guide to help us define our scope of work. I anticipate that both subcommittees will involve a not insignificant amount of research, writing, and other work in the interim between our monthly meetings. On May 30, two of the WHC members joined me in conducting just this type of research at a Smart Growth Madison workshop titled “Building Blocks: The Housing Development Process and Financing.” At the day-long event, we heard presentations about the current state of the Dane County housing market; the nuts and bolts of planning, financing, and constructing new housing; the challenges and opportunities of constructing affordable housing; legal obligations and constraints when reviewing development projects; the cost of constructing new houses; and “How Local Governments Can Take Costs out of New Residential Subdivisions to make New Houses More Attainable to More Families.” Here are a few key takeaways I thought readers might finding interesting: – In Wisconsin, through state-mandated Comprehensive Plans, municipalities are required “to provide an adequate housing supply that meets existing and forecasted housing demand in the local governmental unit.” That means we’re obligated to make sure housing is available to meet the forecasted need. Our forecasted need is significant because we are a high-jobs, high-income, high-amenity area. The job market is strong in Dane County and Middleton schools continue to draw new families to the area. – Municipalities can’t affect the hard costs of construction, but we can help reduce other costs. Updating zoning codes, for example, to allow more development “by-right” is one way to lower the costs. We’ve already done that in Middleton, but we haven’t yet focused on streamlining our processes to reduce the time it takes to get through planning and permitting. I asked one speaker what specific steps we could take. He said getting everyone — committees and departments — on the same page at the start would be very helpful. He also urged us to break down the wall between what’s put in writing by the Plan Commission or Council and how the permitting department interprets those requirements and commitments. – Requiring affordable multifamily buildings to have commercial space on the ground floor isn’t always a good strategy. Rather than have a “token” commercial use, it would be better to build more housing units. Similarly, requiring minimum parking for affordable multifamily housing is not a best practice. Developers who specialize in affordable housing know their market well and they take on the risk if their units don’t get leased. Instead of requiring a minimum number of parking spaces, we should let the market decide. I learned a great deal more at this meeting and appreciated the opportunity to attend. I also appreciated my two colleagues taking the time to further their own understanding of housing to help inform the city’s Affordable Housing Action Plan. If this kind of work interests you, the Workforce Housing Committee has two openings for new members. If you’d like to apply to join, the application is available on the city’s website. Other City News At the Council meeting on May 21, Council approved the first reading of an ordinance change that would require all members of the Airport Commission to possess “specialized knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education outside that generally available from ordinary human experience relating to aviation.” What this change means is that a non-resident with such aviation-related experience would be preferred as a member of the Airport Commission over a Middleton resident who doesn’t have that experience. I support having aviation-related experience required for at least some members of the Airport Commission. I argued against the change, though, for a few reasons. First, our other committees don’t require all their “citizen members” to have specialized experience. The WRMC, for example, addresses highly technical issues, yet only two of the four citizen members are required to have expertise specifically related to stormwater or water resources management, engineering, or soil conservation. The Conservancy Lands Committee has three citizen members, “one of whom shall possess expertise in engineering or land conservation, if available, and one of whom shall be selected for his or her concern and ability to work in attaining land conservation objectives in the public interest.” Only the Plan Commission requires all its members to “be persons of recognized experience and qualifications,” and that’s mandated by state statute. Second, I argued that these various ways of requiring (or not requiring) specific expertise pointed to a need for a more comprehensive review of what is required for membership on all our committees, commissions, and boards. Earlier this year, Council standardized the liaison-appointment process for all our committees, commissions, and boards. We did this because we recognized that there was wide variation among these processes in our ordinance — variation that resulted from piecemeal changes to create these liaisons over time. I thought it would be good to take a similar approach to standardizing experience requirements rather than doing it piecemeal. I also noted that, just two weeks earlier, we had appointed the new members of the Airport Commission, so there was no urgency to the request to change the ordinance. Alder Todd Kalish agreed with me about doing a comprehensive review rather than look at one committee in isolation. The rest of Council disagreed, so the change passed by a vote of 6 to 2. I expect the vote to be similar when the second reading occurs at our June 3 meeting. Another change to our ordinance imposes an attendance standard for members of all committees, commissions, and boards. Both the mayor and the Common Council have the authority under state statute to remove a member at will (the mayor) or for cause (Council). Given some past problems with attendance, we added a section to Chapter 2 of our Municipal Code to clarify that missing three regularly scheduled meetings in a row or one-third of all meetings in a 12-month period could be grounds for removal. This change was unanimously approved on the first reading and will be finalized on June 3. Last, but certainly not least, I want to acknowledge the recent or upcoming retirement of key members of the city’s staff. As previously reported, in May, long-time Public Works Director Shawn Stauske retired. Following him, Human Resources Director Brian Walhaupter retired. This month, we’ll be losing two more people to retirement — Captain Steve Wunsch, the EMS Director, and City Planner Mark Opitz. This kind of “gray wave” has been predicted for municipal government for a long time. Even though it was expected, it presents challenges when it happens — especially for the people who have to do the hiring and onboarding. As a member of the Plan Commission and former member of the Ped, Bike, and Transit Committee, I have worked most closely with Mark Opitz, who is also a constituent. Mark is a font of institutional knowledge about Middleton city government, and he has been very helpful to me during my time as an alder. I have thoroughly enjoyed working with Mark, despite his frequent groan-worthy puns, and I hope he’ll remain engaged in city government some way. I wish Mark and all the other retirees the best of luck in this next chapter of life. Thank you! Thank you for reading “E-News on 6.” Feel free to email me or call/text me at 608.630.7500 if you need help with a city matter, want to relay your thoughts on an issue, or have questions about city decisions and my votes. I’m not active on social media, so the best way to reach out to me about anything official is by phone or using my district email. If you find this newsletter helpful, I hope you’ll share it with friends, family, and neighbors who live anywhere in Middleton. Just please make sure to ask them not to unsubscribe you and not to report this email as spam. Thanks! Not receiving this free e-newsletter directly? Sign up here. Important Stuff to Know I produce this newsletter all on my own, at my own initiative, to help District 6 residents stay informed. This is not an official city publication, I don’t speak for the city, and producing this newsletter isn’t one of my official responsibilities as a member of the Common Council. If you’d like to reproduce or create new content from this material, please ask me first and make sure to cite the source. Image credits: – Bike Week: Madison Bike Week – Map of Pheasant Branch Watershed: Todd Stuntebeck, USGS Graph of total phosphorus load from Lake Mendota tributaries: Todd Stuntebeck, USGS |