Milwaukee City Board Hears Testimony on Creation of Publicly Owned Electric Utility - June 24, 2026
Milwaukee City Board Hears Testimony on Creation of Publicly Owned Electric Utility - June 24, 2026
On June 24, 2026, the Milwaukee City Board held a public hearing on communication item 260221, sponsored by Alderman Brower and the Chair, relating to the creation of a publicly owned electric utility under Wisconsin Chapter 197. The meeting featured expert presentations from the American Public Power Association (APPA) and Pines Bach LLP, testimony from union representatives and community members, and discussion of next steps including a potential task force and feasibility study. No formal action was taken as the file was informational.
Consent Calendar
- The board unanimously approved the minutes of the previous meeting held on May 10, 2023.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Sam Rosenberg (IBEW Local 2150) opposed municipalization, arguing it would jeopardize reliability by breaking away from We Energies' regional system of crews, materials, and backup support. He emphasized that trained workers and coordinated response across Wisconsin are essential for restoring power after storms.
- Brian Riger (Director, Wisconsin Eco-Justice Builders / Walnut Way Conservation Corps) strongly supported public power, framing it as a democratic question of who governs essential services. He highlighted high energy burdens in Black and low-income neighborhoods (some households spending over 6% of income, up to 15-20%) and criticized the profit-driven structure of We Energies.
- Over 40 community members testified, nearly all in favor of public power. Key themes included: unaffordable bills (e.g., $580 average monthly bills in Milwaukee, double-digit rate increases), We Energies’ $1.6 billion profit and executive compensation, slow response to solar interconnection (one speaker waited 7 months), reliability concerns, health impacts from unaffordable heating/cooling, and the need for democratic control. Several student and renter speakers shared personal stories of financial strain. A representative for State Representative Darren Madison and a representative for State Representative Ryan Clancy voiced support. One speaker from AFSCME Local 47 (city workers) endorsed the campaign, noting 81 Wisconsin municipalities already use public power. The IBEW member who spoke (Sam Rosenberg) was the only opponent; other organized labor voices (DSA, AFSCME) supported.
Discussion Items
- Opening Statements: Alderman Brower expressed strong support, stating the goal is to replace We Energies with a democratically owned utility to reduce costs and increase community control. Board member Jim Carpenter (economics instructor) argued energy networks are natural monopolies best run as public services, noting We Energies’ proposed 10.28% rate increase and citing Citizens’ Utility Board reporting.
- Presentation by Ursula Schriver (APPA): She outlined that there are over 2,000 public power utilities in the U.S., serving 55 million customers with lower rates, higher reliability, and local decision-making. Examples included Jefferson County PUD (18,000 customers, negotiated purchase), Winter Park, FL (formed due to poor reliability, now underground 80% of lines), and Long Island Power Authority (1M+ customers, public-private partnership). She noted increasing interest in municipalization nationwide, driven by rates, reliability, and renewable energy demands.
- Legal Presentation by Kat Grant (Pines Bach LLP): She detailed two paths under Chapter 197: condemnation (requires public referendum first, then PSC valuation hearing) or negotiated purchase (referendum after agreement). The PSC uses a formula averaging trended historical cost depreciated and reproduction cost new depreciated. Financing would likely be via revenue bonds (not counting against city debt cap). To protect union rights under Act 10, the city could contract operations to a third-party manager or worker co-op, allowing collective bargaining.
- Q&A and Board Discussion: Alderman Brower clarified that a public power utility would not be a new tax burden; it would be self-funded through rates, similar to the city’s water utility. The Chair asked about models for large urban utilities; Schriver noted most public power utilities are distribution-only and purchase power. The possibility of expanding to Milwaukee County was raised but acknowledged as legally more complex. Alderman Taylor asked how a public utility could help residents with outdated, inefficient homes; Schriver answered that public power allows local customization of programs like energy efficiency retrofits. The IBEW representative declined to say whether the union would support public power if worker protections were ensured.
Key Outcomes
- No vote was taken; the board received the file for informational purposes.
- The Chair stated that next steps could include forming a task force (involving council, administration, and possibly the Controller’s Office) to issue a request for qualifications for a feasibility study, which might cost several hundred thousand dollars.
- Alderman Brower emphasized that building political will is essential, noting We Energies can spend unlimited funds on a vote-no campaign, and urged continued community mobilization.
- The meeting adjourned at approximately 12:09 PM, within the scheduled time.
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.
openpublica.com