OpenPublica

Accountability starts with access.

© 2026 · Filed for the public record

Use casesAboutAPIPrivacyTermsLinkedIn
Home/Milwaukee, Wisconsin/City Plan Commission
OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Milwaukee Public Transportation, Utilities, and Waterways Review Board Meeting on Publicly-Owned Electric Utility - June 24, 2026

City Plan Commission — Wednesday, June 24, 2026
BodyMilwaukee, Wisconsin
SessionCity Plan Commission
DateWednesday, June 24, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 3:06:30

Transcript — VerbatimClick a timed line to jump · ⧉ to share it
0:00

board and why don't we go around uh the room quickly and introduce ourselves we'll start on the left to the newly appointed member of the board as of yesterday uh Alderman Brower please uh thank you so much Mr.

0:10

Chair Alman Brouwer Alderman Third District I am now in my for it's been fourteen and a half months in office okay and it's been a pleasure to serve the residents of district three very good and thank you please good morning Mr.

0:21

Chair John Rogers Deputy Director for the Milwaukee County Department of Transportation.

0:25

Excellent good morning Mr.

0:27

Chair James Washington Public Works Coordination Manager in the Department of Public Works uh good morning Mr.

0:34

Chair Jim Carpenter, advocate of public transit, Jim make sure you're speaking speaking of the mic, there's a microphone in front of you.

0:42

Uh good morning chair Jim Carpenter here and advocate of public transit uh just like you good morning Kevin Susie Citizen member.

0:54

John December, resident of Milwaukee, advocate for transit.

0:58

Alderman Scott Spiker, 13th district.

1:01

Alright, excellent.

1:02

We have one file in front of us today.

1:04

It's item 260 221 communication relating to the creation of a publicly owned electric utility by the City of Milwaukee sponsored by Alderman Brower and myself.

1:14

I think we'll start today by having brief opening comments from some of the board members who have indicated a desire to make comments so we'll start with Alderman Brouwer.

1:22

Yeah thank you so much, Mr.

1:23

Chair.

1:24

I really want to uh express my deep gratitude to you and to the staff here at City Hall um and this body for meeting today to discuss this really really important topic because we are we are faced with so much here in the city of Milwaukee.

1:40

Not only are we faced with um rising prices across the board whether it's these landlords gouging us or Kroger shutting grocery stores down and then raising prices or whether it's frankly our current utility continuing to raise prices again and again the working people of this city are suffering right now.

2:03

And I am so glad that this council and this body are taking heed of that and exploring this possibility today for us to utilize chapter 197 of the Wisconsin state statutes uh to replace we energies with a utility that's democratically owned as a socialist alderman I believe that we should have democracy in every single part of our economy.

2:27

Because it's one thing to just elect people it's one thing to be able to vote for president it's one thing to be able to vote for your representative but it's another thing to be able to have a say in the material conditions that affect you every single day and when you have a corporation like we energies that's first um you know they they may suppose and present that their first um uh priority is to deliver electricity but as with any company that you can trade on wall street the real hidden or maybe not so hidden priority of that entity is to deliver profits for shareholders and I think it's about time that in this world we seriously reconsider that economic arrangement where we have an economy where every single human life is valued everybody has an equal say no matter what zip code you live in no matter what your skin color is no matter what your gender is that we have equality and that we have democracy and so this is one step that is allowed under the current state law we're not asking Madison to do us any favors here although we do think they should um but we're not asking Madison to do us any favors we are advocating under current law and I I ran on this and I am I am so proud that we are hearing this right now to have um this conversation about whether uh we use this statute that currently exists in law which is one step for us to be able to um have an economy that works for every single person where everybody is self-actualized where everyone can reach their full potential where no one is oppressed and I know there's probably some right wing troll out there that's gonna comment on me saying that because 1130 talk radio was just talking about how making fun of people fighting oppression this morning but I actually think it's a good idea to fight oppression because yeah I actually think we should be doing that in this world I actually I mean you know call me call me a crazy leftist Marxist here but I think that the people should be able to live their lives how they want and have a say in every single aspect of their lives.

4:34

And so I um is really appreciated, Mr.

4:37

Chair, the opportunity of you calling this meeting.

4:38

I appreciate everybody on this committee for showing up today.

4:41

And I especially um well, and also I want to thank our experts I'm here who are going to testify and provide testimony, as well as the members of the public who are here as well.

4:51

Look at this crowd.

4:52

Look at these people who've shown up on a work day.

4:54

Some of you I know have taken off of work uh because this issue is so important to discuss here today.

5:01

So I just want to say from the bottom of my heart to every single person present here, thank you for raising your voice.

5:08

It's one thing to be an elected official, um, but it's another thing to really be a member of the community and advocate and stand up when it's difficult.

5:16

So all of you are doing that today.

5:18

Um, thank you all so much.

5:19

And thank you so much for allowing me to have some remarks, Mr.

5:21

Chair.

5:21

Thank you all.

5:32

Yes, I would like to make an opening statement too.

5:34

First of all, I want to reiterate that I took the public transit here, the green line with my wife, and I believe in public transit.

5:43

So the government does a lot of good things in providing services, public transit being one of them.

5:48

That's why I'm on this committee.

5:49

But I also believe in public utilities.

5:52

Um, let me uh read a few comments using my background as an economics instructor.

5:57

I'm a proud member of Milwaukee DSA, yeah, also I believe in a mixed economy, whereas there are there is a place for markets and competition and profit, but also a place for government provided services.

6:16

The provisions of utilities like sewer, water, and energy have proven to be a good place for government services.

6:25

When I first started reading about publicly owned nonprofit utilities, I learned this is no far out fringe idea.

6:34

It is a model supported all over the country by people of different political persuasions.

6:42

Let's get the facts straight.

6:44

Energy networks are what economists call natural monopolies, allowing multiple companies to provide redundant energy networks in a given geographical area makes no economic sense.

6:59

Energy networks are best provided by monopolies.

7:03

The problem is We Energies is a profit-driven monopoly, and sometimes profits get in the way of providing the best solution to a problem.

7:15

For example, sometimes it is more cost-effective to improve energy efficiency rather than pro than to provide more energy.

7:24

But a for-profit utility does not have the incentive to provide energy efficiency because this reduces the consumption of energy, and this reduces profits.

7:38

All over this country, communities are enacting moratoriums on data centers because of negative effects of these data centers on utility bills, the environment, and other negative externalities.

7:52

But profit-driven utilities have no incentive to oppose data centers because data centers lead to higher energy consumption and higher profits.

8:02

Recently, We Energy's proposals were reviewed by the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin.

8:08

And let's review some of the things that Thomas Content said about this review process.

8:15

Some of the things that We Energy try to pull off because they're a for-profit company.

8:20

But before I do that, I just want to bring attention to the bill I received to a notice I received from We Energy's with my last energy bill, saying that my energy bill will increase by double digits next year.

8:33

Uh 10.28%.

8:35

That is totally unacceptable.

8:39

And it's being driven by a for-profit motive.

8:42

I believe that a publicly owned utility would not be increasing my bill by double digits next year.

8:49

But let me let me uh make uh take a couple quotes uh from this uh excellent article uh in the journal Satinal by Tom Content, Thomas Content, who is the executive director of the Citizens' Utility Board of Wisconsin.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Engineering And Infrastructure█████████████████████████████████████████████49%
Miscellaneous████████████████17%
Energy and Utility Governance█████████10%
Public Engagement████████9%
Fiscal Sustainability███3%
Pending Litigation██2%
Public Safety██2%
Personnel Matters██2%
Community Engagement██2%
Summary of Proceedings

Milwaukee Public Transportation, Utilities, and Waterways Review Board Meeting on Publicly-Owned Electric Utility - June 24, 2026

The Public Transportation, Utilities, and Waterways Review Board met on June 24, 2026, from 9:08 a.m. to 12:15 p.m. in Room 301-B of City Hall to discuss communication 260221 relating to the creation of a publicly-owned electric utility by the City of Milwaukee. Chair Ald. Robert J. Bauman stated at the outset that the board would take no formal action and that the meeting was for information only. The meeting featured expert testimony, public comments, and board discussions on the legal, financial, and operational feasibility of municipalizing the electric utility currently operated by We Energies.

Consent Calendar

  • The meeting minutes from May 10, 2023 were approved without objection.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Over 40 individuals testified in support of creating a publicly-owned electric utility, including residents, students, union members, and elected officials. Many cited rising costs: PSC-approved increases of about 12 percent over 2025–2026, average Milwaukee bills over $580 a month (more than $4,350 a year), and rates 30 to 40 percent higher than Wisconsin's 81 existing public power utilities. They noted that public power utilities serve about 11 percent of the state's load (300,000 homes and businesses) with roughly half the outage time (48 minutes a year versus 108 minutes for private utilities). Speakers also highlighted health and reliability issues, such as a psychologist describing a patient enduring 90-degree nights without AC due to cost, a Riverwest resident surviving three home gas leaks, and a UWM student reporting a $600 winter bill with five roommates due to a landlord's broken window. Other speakers criticized We Energies' slow renewable transition (only about 6 percent renewables, plans to end coal by 2032), corporate behavior (over $1 billion in annual income, $32 million in executive pay), and a 15,000-signature petition for public power. An IBEW electrician urged his union to consider bargaining with the city, and a former Los Angeles inspector praised LADWP's 12,000-person unionized workforce as a model.

Discussion Items

  • Opening Remarks: Ald. Alex Brower described rising costs from landlords, grocery store closures, and We Energies rate increases as a single affordability crisis, citing Chapter 197 of Wisconsin Statutes as the legal path to replace We Energies. Member Jim Carpenter (economics instructor, DSA member) argued that electric grids are natural monopolies best run as monopolies, and a profit-driven monopoly blocks efficient solutions; he noted a recent We Energies 10.28 percent increase and PSC rejection of a proposal to charge customers about 25 percent of the cost (roughly one billion dollars) for gas plants to serve data centers.
  • Expert Testimony:
    • Ursula Schryver (American Public Power Association) presented national context: 2,000+ public power utilities serving 55 million people in all states except Hawaii (15 percent of customers), with 80 percent serving communities of 10,000 or fewer. She described five core tenets (public ownership, local decision-making, not-for-profit operation, cost-based pricing, customer-first service) and noted that Wisconsin public power already has lower rates and bills. Interest in municipalization is at a high, with 90 new utilities since 1973 (20 in the last 25 years). She gave examples: Jefferson County PUD (Washington, 2013, ~18,000 customers, negotiated purchase); Winter Park, Florida (2005, reinvested profits, restored 250 customers within 12 hours after Hurricane Milton in 2024); Long Island Power Authority (1998, 1 million+ customers, public-private partnership). She emphasized that most public power utilities are distribution-only and purchase power through joint action agencies like WPPI Energy.
    • Atty. Kat Grant (Pines Bach LLP) detailed legal paths: condemnation requires a public referendum first; if the indeterminate permit predates July 11, 1907, the City must prove necessity in court. We Energies traces to a 1911 permit, so a lawsuit is likely not required. After referendum, the City gives notice to the PSC, which holds a hearing with 30 days notice to set just compensation, then issues an order vesting title (subject to circuit court appeal, with a 90-day window to discontinue). Negotiated purchase requires Common Council, utility, PSC, and voter approval. Valuation averages trended historical cost depreciated and reproduction cost new depreciated (often using the Handy Whitman Index). Revenue bonds would likely finance acquisition, repaid from rates, not taxes. A seven-person board would govern; a third-party manager could preserve union pensions and collective bargaining.
    • Sam Rozenberg (IBEW Local 2150, vice president) opposed municipalization, arguing it would put reliability at risk: Milwaukee would have to recreate an entire utility operation (hiring, training, dispatch, equipment, supply chain). He noted that We Energies recently restored more than 80,000 customers after storms, and that a regional system provides mutual aid.
    • Bryan Rogers (Walnut Way Conservation Corps) reframed the issue as a democratic and justice question, not just technical. He shared data from PSC dockets showing energy burdens in black, brown, and low-income neighborhoods significantly higher than average (households spending over 6% of income, some reaching 15–20%). He described regulatory capture and the need to build alternatives, including a planned 1 megawatt solar project in Lindsay Heights (workaround for lack of community solar enabling legislation).
  • Board Questions and Discussion:
    • Chair Bauman asked about the physical split of infrastructure; Schryver explained that distribution-only acquisition is typical, with the city likely procuring its own fleet and supply yard, supported by APPA's national mutual aid network.
    • Bauman raised the possibility of a county-wide model (Milwaukee County: 245 sq mi, ~940,000 residents vs. City: 96 sq mi, ~570,000); Schryver responded that a larger footprint might be legally cleaner but still faces intertwining complications.
    • Ald. Brower asked about revenue bonds not counting against the state constitutional debt limit; Schryver confirmed repayment from utility revenues, separate from general obligation bonds, and that this structure has not impaired other cities' credit.
    • Member Carpenter asked about building power plants; Schryver said the vast majority of public power utilities do not own generation. She also noted that a public utility could choose to buy local solar if the community directs it.
    • Ald. Taylor asked about low-income customer needs; Schryver replied that a municipal utility can customize services locally, unlike multi-state investor-owned utilities.
    • Ald. Brower questioned whether a municipal utility could propose low-income protections like a shutoff moratorium; Rogers cited regulatory capture but acknowledged PSC staff are capable and rigorous.
    • Member December asked if a municipal utility removes PSC oversight; Grant replied no (Wisconsin is one of 12 states where public power remains under commission jurisdiction). Schryver noted that privatization of municipal utilities is rare and typically involves very small communities with deferred maintenance selling to rural electric cooperatives; Wisconsin declined from 82 to 81 municipal utilities after a town of ~600 dissolved its system.

Key Outcomes

  • No formal action was taken by the board; the meeting was informational.
  • Chair Ald. Bauman summarized that next steps would include forming a council-administration task force, commissioning a feasibility study (potentially costing several hundred thousand dollars), and determining how to finance the study.
  • Ald. Brower emphasized that the fight would be 90% political will, as We Energies could spend virtually unlimited money against a future referendum.
  • Ald. Dimitrijevic (not on board) thanked the public for powerful testimony.
  • Ald. Brower concluded that a municipal electric utility would be self-funded like Water Works, and that this was a challenge to corporate power not seen since the sewer socialists.

Meeting Transcript

board and why don't we go around uh the room quickly and introduce ourselves we'll start on the left to the newly appointed member of the board as of yesterday uh Alderman Brower please uh thank you so much Mr. Chair Alman Brouwer Alderman Third District I am now in my for it's been fourteen and a half months in office okay and it's been a pleasure to serve the residents of district three very good and thank you please good morning Mr. Chair John Rogers Deputy Director for the Milwaukee County Department of Transportation. Excellent good morning Mr. Chair James Washington Public Works Coordination Manager in the Department of Public Works uh good morning Mr. Chair Jim Carpenter, advocate of public transit, Jim make sure you're speaking speaking of the mic, there's a microphone in front of you. Uh good morning chair Jim Carpenter here and advocate of public transit uh just like you good morning Kevin Susie Citizen member. John December, resident of Milwaukee, advocate for transit. Alderman Scott Spiker, 13th district. Alright, excellent. We have one file in front of us today. It's item 260 221 communication relating to the creation of a publicly owned electric utility by the City of Milwaukee sponsored by Alderman Brower and myself. I think we'll start today by having brief opening comments from some of the board members who have indicated a desire to make comments so we'll start with Alderman Brouwer. Yeah thank you so much, Mr. Chair. I really want to uh express my deep gratitude to you and to the staff here at City Hall um and this body for meeting today to discuss this really really important topic because we are we are faced with so much here in the city of Milwaukee. Not only are we faced with um rising prices across the board whether it's these landlords gouging us or Kroger shutting grocery stores down and then raising prices or whether it's frankly our current utility continuing to raise prices again and again the working people of this city are suffering right now. And I am so glad that this council and this body are taking heed of that and exploring this possibility today for us to utilize chapter 197 of the Wisconsin state statutes uh to replace we energies with a utility that's democratically owned as a socialist alderman I believe that we should have democracy in every single part of our economy. Because it's one thing to just elect people it's one thing to be able to vote for president it's one thing to be able to vote for your representative but it's another thing to be able to have a say in the material conditions that affect you every single day and when you have a corporation like we energies that's first um you know they they may suppose and present that their first um uh priority is to deliver electricity but as with any company that you can trade on wall street the real hidden or maybe not so hidden priority of that entity is to deliver profits for shareholders and I think it's about time that in this world we seriously reconsider that economic arrangement where we have an economy where every single human life is valued everybody has an equal say no matter what zip code you live in no matter what your skin color is no matter what your gender is that we have equality and that we have democracy and so this is one step that is allowed under the current state law we're not asking Madison to do us any favors here although we do think they should um but we're not asking Madison to do us any favors we are advocating under current law and I I ran on this and I am I am so proud that we are hearing this right now to have um this conversation about whether uh we use this statute that currently exists in law which is one step for us to be able to um have an economy that works for every single person where everybody is self-actualized where everyone can reach their full potential where no one is oppressed and I know there's probably some right wing troll out there that's gonna comment on me saying that because 1130 talk radio was just talking about how making fun of people fighting oppression this morning but I actually think it's a good idea to fight oppression because yeah I actually think we should be doing that in this world I actually I mean you know call me call me a crazy leftist Marxist here but I think that the people should be able to live their lives how they want and have a say in every single aspect of their lives. And so I um is really appreciated, Mr. Chair, the opportunity of you calling this meeting. I appreciate everybody on this committee for showing up today. And I especially um well, and also I want to thank our experts I'm here who are going to testify and provide testimony, as well as the members of the public who are here as well. Look at this crowd. Look at these people who've shown up on a work day. Some of you I know have taken off of work uh because this issue is so important to discuss here today. So I just want to say from the bottom of my heart to every single person present here, thank you for raising your voice. It's one thing to be an elected official, um, but it's another thing to really be a member of the community and advocate and stand up when it's difficult. So all of you are doing that today. Um, thank you all so much. And thank you so much for allowing me to have some remarks, Mr. Chair. Thank you all. Yes, I would like to make an opening statement too. First of all, I want to reiterate that I took the public transit here, the green line with my wife, and I believe in public transit. So the government does a lot of good things in providing services, public transit being one of them. That's why I'm on this committee. But I also believe in public utilities. Um, let me uh read a few comments using my background as an economics instructor. I'm a proud member of Milwaukee DSA, yeah, also I believe in a mixed economy, whereas there are there is a place for markets and competition and profit, but also a place for government provided services. The provisions of utilities like sewer, water, and energy have proven to be a good place for government services. When I first started reading about publicly owned nonprofit utilities, I learned this is no far out fringe idea. It is a model supported all over the country by people of different political persuasions. Let's get the facts straight. Energy networks are what economists call natural monopolies, allowing multiple companies to provide redundant energy networks in a given geographical area makes no economic sense. Energy networks are best provided by monopolies. The problem is We Energies is a profit-driven monopoly, and sometimes profits get in the way of providing the best solution to a problem. For example, sometimes it is more cost-effective to improve energy efficiency rather than pro than to provide more energy. But a for-profit utility does not have the incentive to provide energy efficiency because this reduces the consumption of energy, and this reduces profits. All over this country, communities are enacting moratoriums on data centers because of negative effects of these data centers on utility bills, the environment, and other negative externalities.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com