Newsletter Archive: March 2025

Draft Conservancy Lands Plan Available
The city’s draft Conservancy Lands Plan for 2025-2030 is available for public review and comment through March 20. The Conservancy Lands Committee heard a presentation on the draft and discussed it at their meeting on February 27. The committee recommended referring the draft plan to the Plan Commission, the Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Committee, and the Water Resources Management and Stormwater Utility Commission. I’m on all three of those, so I’ll have many opportunities to provide comments.

I haven’t yet read the entire plan thoroughly. At 301 pages, there’s a lot to read. In all, the plan contains seven goals and 79 actions that Adaptive Restoration, our consultant, recommend the city take to protect, restore, and maintain our conservancy lands. The plan isn’t a replacement for the master plans for the individual conservancies. The Graber Pond Master Plan, for example, will be released for comment later this year. Speaking of Graber Pond, it’s featured on the cover of the Conservancy Lands Plan (see below). The photo caption appropriately notes that, “[u]nfortunately, the majority of the vegetation in the photo is the highly invasive reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), demonstrating the ongoing vegetation management needs in the Conservancies.”



Conservancy lands are defined as public lands managed for natural vegetation, habitat, water quality, and passive recreation. In Middleton, we’re fortunate to have a conservancy lands system that provides over 900 acres of open space, representing about 15 percent of all the land in the city. Those 900 acres consist of 19 conservancies (770 acres total), at least 69 acres of native vegetation management areas, and 27 miles of trails.

Of the seven goals, one that stood out to me, as chair of the Finance and Personnel Committee, is Goal #2: “Provide adequate funding, management and staffing to oversee the maintenance of conservancy lands.” The authors note that “[c]urrent staffing levels are insufficient to adequately manage conservancy lands” and that, since 2018, the budget for conservancy lands hasn’t kept up with inflation. As readers know, funding is always tight for the city. As I look ahead to 2026, I don’t see that changing. But I do highly value our conservancy lands, as I know constituents do. And I recognize that we don’t invest as much as we should in these lands, including in the area of staff resources. The new plan will give Council documentation to support staff budget requests for our conservancies as we develop next year’s budget.

District 6 contains two of Middleton’s five kettle ponds: the Middleton Hills pond and Graber Pond, which is the largest of the five. The Graber Pond Conservancy area officially includes the Misty Valley stormwater faciilty and native plantings along Belle Fontaine Boulevard. Along with these conservancy areas, District 6 also has the newly renamed Pheasant Branch Ridge Greenway (formerly called a “drainageway”), which runs from the Pheasant Branch Ridge Park to Pheasant Branch Road north of Whittlesey Road. In the public survey that informed the plan, this greenway apparently ranked low in terms of visitors. I find that hard to believe, since it’s a conduit between Pheasant Branch Conservancy and Graber Pond Conservancy. I see people walking, running, and biking on it frequently. The same survey also indicated that visitation at Graber Pond is “moderate” — I find that hard to believe, too. I welcome feedback from readers about their observations.

Another goal that resonates with me is Goal #4: “Expand partnerships for maintenance of conservancy lands through hands-on restoration and learning opportunities for the residents of Middleton.” At one of the public meetings related to the plan, I advocated for organizing “Friends” groups to help out with the restoration and maintenance of specific conservancies. Graber Pond, in particular, strikes me as a conservancy area that might have enough support from local residents to organize a Friends group — perhaps with guidance and mentoring by the Friends of Pheasant Branch Conservancy?

Apparently 274 survey respondents (28 percent of the total) indicated they’d be interested in volunteering to help maintain our conservancies. I hope District 6 was well represented in that 28 percent. When the Graber Pond Master Plan comes out in draft for review, I’d like to hold a meeting for area residents to discuss the plan and — heads up — consider joining an effort to organize a dedicated Friends group. Having support from volunteers factored into the plan’s scoring and prioritization of work on the conservancies, so even a small core group of volunteers could make a difference (but many hands make light work).

I’ll have more thoughts on the draft plan as I compile my specific comments for each of the three reviewing bodies that I serve on. If you would like to read and comment on the Conservancy Lands Plan, visit the city’s website, where you’ll find the document itself and a public comment form. Comments are due no later than March 20.

Stormwater Ordinance Changes
As I reported last month, a letter from the attorneys for Middleton Beach Road Neighborhood Association challenged the decision of the Water Resources Management and Stormwater Utility Commission, or WRMSWUC, to charge the developer of the 2159 Allen Boulevard site “fees in lieu” for the stormwater management plan not meeting 100% of the city’s infiltration requirement. The letter cited this provision in our stormwater ordinance, Chapter 26 of our municipal code: “In order for the City to accept fees in lieu of constructing on-site storm water control practices as per the requirements of the ordinance, alternative off-site practices sufficient to meet the storm water control requirements of Section 26.06(5)(b) must be in place downstream of the proposed development and upstream of the point of discharge to a sensitive water feature.” The law firm said WRMSWUC should not have allowed fees in lieu in the absence of any such downstream practices.

This challenge prompted a very close reading of our stormwater ordinance — specifically our fees-in-lieu program. That close reading led City Attorney Matt Fleming and city stormwater expert Erik Sorensen to recommend some changes to the ordinance. These changes were the subject of much discussion at the WRMSWUC’s meeting on February 19 as well as emails of opposition from some residents of MBR.

Before I tell you about that, I need to tell you about this: WRMSWUC is changing its name. Once the License and Ordinance Committee and the Common Council approve the necessary ordinance change, the new name will be Water Resources Management Commission, or WRMC. The likelihood of these approvals happening is high, so I’m going to call the commission “WRMC” starting right now.

Back to the February 19 WRMC meeting: The meeting packet posted on the website contained the proposed changes to Chapter 26. Notably, one of the recommendations was to strike the very language that the law firm had cited in its letter challenging the WRMC’s decision. Did our city attorney recommend striking this language to get around the requested review and the neighbors’ concerns about infiltration? Absolutely not. But judging from the letters of opposition the commissioners received, that’s how some people are perceiving it.

So why were these changes proposed? There are both practical reasons and legal ones. In his opening remarks, WRMC Chair Warren Gebert said, “It’s been our policy all along, since I can remember — 50 years — when we accepted ‘fees in lieu of,’ it was for anywhere in the basin to be applied,” not just downstream. He explained that the infiltration requirement is intended to replenish the groundwater supply and base flow to the streams, “so that should go anywhere in the basin where you get the best infiltration and produce a base flow.” He cited locations like behind city hall where there is very good sand that increases the base flow to Pheasant Branch. He noted that, for peak flood, it might make sense to require a downstream location. But not for infiltration. Neither Chair Gebert nor anyone else on the WRMC recalled why this downstream requirement was put in the ordinance.

Attorney Fleming explained that there’s a “need to perfectly marry the engineering knowledge with the legal knowledge.” For infiltration in particular, that “marriage of knowledge” showed there aren’t many or even any lands in Middleton where it would be possible to send water downstream for infiltration. That creates a significant practical problem because it wouldn’t allow development anywhere in the city.

Equally important is the legal problem. City ordinances on stormwater must be in “strict conformity” with state statutes and regulations. Our fee-in-lieu program isn’t part of either of those, but we justify having it because it allows us to do other things — like generate revenue to build stormwater management facilities elsewhere — that we feel are necessary to comply with federal Total Maximum Daily Load, or TMDL, requirements. So that makes it okay to have such a program. But to have a requirement that infiltration measures be downstream for any particular development doesn’t serve a TMDL-related purpose, and so we can’t have that requirement in our ordinance.

As the WRMC discussed, the proposed ordinance change would remove a provision that 1) can’t really be met anywhere in the city, 2) is not in strict conformity with state statutes and regulations, and 3) can’t be justified by one of the exceptions in state law that would allow us to impose a more restrictive requirement. After much discussion, I moved to accept the recommended changes and to pass the ordinance change on to the L&O Committee and the Council. The WRMC approved the motion by a vote of 4 to 2. I also asked that an email from Erik be included in the meeting minutes. He had emailed the commissioners earlier in the day in response to a letter of opposition by an MBR resident. One of the key points Erik made was this: “The proposed Ordinance revision does not change or loosen the stormwater management performance standards required for development of the 2159 Allen Blvd. site or any other site. All development sites must meet the performance requirements Middleton’s Chapter 26 as well as Wis. Adm. Code NR 151 and Dane County Chapter 14.”

At the meeting, it was explained yet again that fees in lieu do not give developers a pass on stormwater management. They are a charge that the city imposes in addition to requiring developments to meet our requirements to the maximum extent practicable. The WRMC will continue to review this ordinance in the coming months and will likely have more recommendations to Council to consider.

If you’d like to learn more about the recently proposed ordinance changes, the discussion at the WRMC meeting may be helpful. And if you read or hear anywhere that the city moved the goal posts, invented a new interpretation or application of the ordinance, or eviscerated requirements so we can charge fees for the benefit of city coffers, rest assured that those claims simply aren’t true.

Complete Streets Policy Implementation
On February 6, the Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit, or PBT, Committee reviewed and approved a progress report on the city’s Complete Streets Policy. The Common Council adopted the policy in 2022, and this report is the first attempt to summarize the progress we’re making as a city in trying to implement the policy. It focused on our accomplishments in 2024.

“Complete Streets” is really a way to make sure our roadways are designed and maintained to support all users, not just vehicles. Anyone who has walked, rolled, or taken transit in Middleton knows that the streets were originally put there to accommodate cars and other vehicles. We’re trying to gradually move away from being a car-centric city, so checking in on how well we’re implementing our policy is an important step.

I found the report’s information on crashes to be particularly interesting. Approximately 237 crashes involving vehicles occurred within city limits (not including the Beltline). A few dozen other crashes occurred in parking lots. Forty-five crashes resulted in injuries, but fortunately no fatalities were reported. Eight of the crashes involved a motor vehicle and at least one pedestrian or bicyclist. And of those eight crashes, five occurred at Century Avenue! Two were at Branch, one at High Road, one at Parmenter, and one at the Highway 12 path (technically Airport Road). I think this statistic can provide support for conducting a road diet study for Century Avenue and implementing measures to improve safety for bikes and pedestrians.

With regard to transit, Metro Transit’s F and R bus routes in Middleton saw an 8% decrease in average daily weekday boardings from 2023 to 2024. The average in 2024 of 343 weekday boardings showed improvement over the COVID-era boardings, however. Like Metro Transit as a whole, ridership is still down compared to pre-COVID levels. Keep in mind that, in addition to the pandemic, the implementation of Bus Rapid Transit and changes to our two routes make it tricky to draw too many conclusions from year-to-year comparisons. With some stability over time, we should be able to identify more meaningful trends in ridership data.

Takeaways in the progress report include the need for better, more reliable data collection, documenting pedestrian and bike incidents that don’t involve motor vehicles, and identifying the challenges we encountered in implementing the policy. One of the things the PBT Committee will do this year is make recommendations for the 2026 budget to highlight projects that help Middleton implement the Complete Streets Policy. Safety education is another opportunity for improvement, with the committee interested in having signs saying “Look Both Ways” installed where paths cross streets and commercial driveways, like at Costco. We’ll also be looking at safety education for our city’s multi-use trails, including proper etiquette for sharing the trails.

This is a first annual report, so it’s a work of progress and a work in progress. In future editions, it might be helpful to add goals for the coming calendar year and to preview funded capital projects that advance our policy. If you’d like to review the report, it’s part of the Council’s meeting packet for March 4.

Also on February 6, the PBT Committee talked about implementing “leading pedestrian interval,” or LPI, programming at the city’s 17 intersections controlled by stoplights. LPI programming adds an interval of time — e.g., 3 seconds — to allow pedestrians to begin crossing before any vehicle traffic is signaled to proceed. The city had contracted with SRF Consulting to analyze these intersections and identify the feasibility and cost of improving traffic control at each one. Having received the results of the analysis, the Public Works Committee asked the PBT Committee to recommend our priorities for implementing this programming in Middleton.



The cost and feasibility of LPI programming varied among the 17 intersections, and even among the different sides of a single intersection (see map above). During our discussion, we talked about the need to think not just about the relative cost of improvements but also the relative risk and the vulnerability of specific users, such as children walking to school. Committee members relayed their own experiences with close calls involving cars, bikes, and pedestrians, noting that turning traffic is the most significant problem.

Ultimately, we unanimously recommended implementing LPI programming at eight intersections in this order:

1. Allen & Maywood
2. Century & Branch, Century & Allen
3. Century & High/Park, Century & Donna/FLW, University & Park, University & Parmenter
4. University & Bristol

We also recommended programming the signals to result in a faster response when the walk button is pressed so that pedestrians and bikes don’t have to wait several minutes before they get the signal to walk. Our recommendations will head back to the Public Works Committee for any further action.

Affordable Housing Action Plan
The Workforce Housing Committee and Community Development Authority, or CDA, met on February 13 to continue our discussions about how to best meet the need for affordable housing in Middleton. We passed a resolution recommending that Council extend Tax Increment District 3 for one year, through April 2026, and use at least 75% of the final year of increment to promote affordable housing in Middleton. Council will consider the resolution at its meeting on April 15, with the timing determined by our timeline for paying the city’s debt obligations related to TID 3.

Between now and April 2026, the Workforce Housing Committee and CDA will work together to develop a specific plan for how to use the money to further the city’s goals. Last year, the Workforce Housing Committee had sketched out five possible components of a future action plan:

1. Buy: Acquire land and distressed buildings, especially those near current or possible future transit routes, to be redeveloped for affordable housing units.
2. Build: Partner with affordable housing developers to build all types of housing, including condominiums, with a focus on locating housing near transit corridors.
3. Finance: Invest in new housing and refurbishment, partner with banks to manage loans and grants, and allow the use of land value for down payment.
4. Refurbish: Preserve naturally occurring affordable housing by offering grants to low- or medium-income households, providing opportunities for residents to obtain services through group buys, and investing in programs for retrofitting rental units; and
5. Educate: Update a housing needs analysis every 5 years, create online resources such as a housing dashboard, present information to residents on housing-related issues (e.g., how to buy a house, renters’ rights, aging in place, etc.), and share information with Middleton residents about the connection between housing and the city’s well-being.

On March 13, we’ll hold another joint meeting with CDA to discuss members’ preferences for each of these components and to talk about what our priorities might be in terms of funding. Over the coming year, our two bodies will divide into working groups to further develop the components of our action plan.

Join a Committee, Commission, or Board
Every month, I report on the goings-on of city committees and commissions, particularly those on which I serve. I hope I have managed to show how wide-ranging, interesting, and important these advisory bodies are to the operation of Middleton as a city. If you have particular skills and/or interests, you, too, can help make decisions that benefit our city. Applications are now being accepted for positions on all committees, commissions, and boards. March 31 is the deadline, so submit your application soon.

Some committees meet in person with a hybrid option, others meet almost exclusively on Zoom. The Plan Commission, Public Works Committee, and Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Commission meet twice each month, but most committees meet monthly — and some meet quarterly or as needed. People with backgrounds in engineering, architecture, planning, and water resources are particularly in demand. The process involves submitting an application and identifying which committee or committees you’re interested in. Then it’s just a matter of time before you’ll hear from Mayor Kuhn or City Clerk Lorie Burns about your status. Terms for these positions typically start on June 1.

Learn about the various committees and submit your application on the city’s website. If you have any questions about committees, feel free to email me or the staff person for that committee (they’re listed in the membership table on each committee’s page).

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.

Photo credits:
Conservancy Lands Plan: Adaptive Restoration
City stoplight map: SRF