Good morning.

I like to call this meeting to order.

I am ordered woman chairwoman Melila A.

Cox, we are joined.

We will be joined shortly to my right by Ottoman Lamont West Morland.

Also to the right, we are joined by Otterman Bauman, as well as DPW infrastructure.

Um to the left, we are joined by Miss Carmen Roman staff assistant.

To her left, we are joined by Otterman Alex Brouwer to his left, we are joined by Alder Woman Larissa Tyler.

We um so that's the committee, but we do have other um auditors who are sitting with us, Alder Woman, Joe Casa Zamaripa and Otterman, uh Peter Um Bergelis are also on with us today.

Um before we begin, I do want to say apologies to those who may be here for item eight.

Um there was a error on our part about what district um this was in.

Um, in all fairness, since it does involve a denial.

Um we just figured out it's actually in my district.

In all fairness, I want the opportunity to speak with the applicant um before we hear a file for denial um here today.

So I want the applicant for item number eight um to know that we'll be holding that today.

Yeah.

And I will be in touch because I do want to talk privately with you before I schedule it again.

Uh first, um, item number one, file number two six zero four three eight resolution relating to approving the levying of assessments and construction of accessible public improvement projects at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes.

Good morning, Holly Rutten back with DPW.

I will be advising on the special assessment process and project details.

For those projects approved this morning, a bill will be sent to each property owner sometime after completion of the work.

Within 45 days upon receipt of the bill, the full amount may be paid without interest.

If the bill is not paid within the forty-five-day grace period of charge of eight point five percent simple interest per year will be added.

If the assessment is at least a hundred and twenty-five dollars, the assessment can be paid over a period of ten years on the tax roll at eight point five percent interest.

For those projects approved with late billing, a bill will not be sent before January first, two thousand twenty-eight.

Is there anyone here to provide testimony on this item?

The older person is in support.

Oh, wait, I don't want to speak for you.

Sorry.

Uh any questions for committee?

The motion by Ottoman Westmoreland is for uh approval.

Adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing that's all ordered.

Continuing the Fifth Alderman A district, West Land Glade Street from North 110th Street to North 112th Street, install traffic calming speed humps.

Is there anyone here to provide testimony on this item?

Out of 19 impacted properties, 16 were in favor and three were opposed.

The motion by Otterman Westmoreland is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing non so ordered.

In the 7th Aldermanic District, North 38th Street from West Keith Avenue to West Capitol Drive, concrete pavement reconstruction and asphalt pavement resurfacing, replace curb and gutter, sidewalk and driveway approaches where necessary.

Sodding, eight foot with tree border area grading and tree removal where necessary.

Out of 102 impacted properties, only five were opposed.

The alderman supports the project.

The motion by Alderman Bauman is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing not so order in the 9th Aldermanic district, West Green Tree Road from North 51st Street to North 60th Street, install traffic calming speed humps.

Out of 43 impacted properties, only four were opposed.

Oh great.

Just a quick question about that one, if that's okay.

So we requested two, so we're getting the two speed humps in that.

Actually, between North 51st and North 60th Street, it would be five proposed speed humps.

Awesome.

Okay.

And then so we're not doing the speed table at all.

Correct, just speed humps.

Mr.

Speed Humps.

Okay.

Uh move for approval.

The motion by Audrey Woman Taylor is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so ordered in the 10th Aldermanic district, North 49th Street from West Vine Street to West Lloyd Street, install traffic calming speed humps.

Is anyone here to provide testimony on this item?

Out of 32 impacted properties, only one was opposed, and the alder woman supports the project.

The motion by Alderman Brower is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing nine, so ordered.

In the 11th Aldermanic District, South 37th Street from West Ruskin Street to West Lake Field Drive, install traffic calming speed humps.

Is anyone here to provide testimony?

Come on up.

Please state your name and address for the record.

Thank you.

My name is Excuse me.

My name is Joette Rocco.

And I live at 3640 West Lake Field Drive in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

And 37th Street is uh intersects with Lakefield, uh, and I live on that corner.

Um so uh as far as 37th Street goes, um we I live on that corner, I have a big picture window that uh looks out on 37th Street from Lakefield.

Um I can sit there on a daily basis and watch people drive down 37th street.

The speed limit is 25 um 40, 45 miles an hour down Lakefield until they get to the four-way stop, which they often run, the four-way stop.

Um I wish I had a dollar for every time someone did not stop at the four-way stop.

And I wish I had five dollars for every time someone was going 35 or 40 miles an hour down 37th street.

So I'm really confused as to why the people on that street would not be in favor of putting some speed humps to slow the traffic, except for the fact that sometimes uh living on that street, I can see people pulling out of their driveways or coming down the street uh at a very fast pace and then pulling into driveways that are farther up that street.

So um I voted in in uh now I don't live on 37th, I live on Lakefield, but I did vote in favor for the speed humps on Lakefield.

Um, and uh I can't tell you how much we need some traffic calming measures in that area.

We have people walking, we have people walking their pets, we have children riding bicycles and playing in these neighborhoods.

And when I see the traffic and how it behaves in that area, it's just going to be a matter of time before something happens.

And we did have a child get hit by a car uh uh on a bicycle a couple of years ago.

So I would really really like to see some traffic calming measures on 37th Street and on Lakefield Drive.

Thank you.

Any questions from committee?

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here to testify on like filter?

All right, we have the representative on the 11.

Um thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh 24 for 24 37th Street, 24 uh properties impacted, seven uh were opposed uh for various reasons, mostly don't raise my taxes.

Uh we've added stop signs uh in the last few years uh near their it's a very busy residential street that connects Oklahoma Avenue with Audubon School and also uh uh the college uh El Verno.

Uh uh most of the the speeding that I've seen are school buses, but um, but I do think that it was one speed hump on 37th Street uh between Russell and Lakefield would be beneficial to the neighborhood.

Any questions from committee?

Move approval.

Uh the motion by Audamand Bauman is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so ordered continuing in the 11th Aldermanic District, West Lakefield Drive from South 36th Street to South 38th Street, install traffic calming speed humps.

Is anyone here to provide testimony on this item?

Audeman Gallis?

Yep.

Um similar uh right around the corner from this.

Uh we had one opposed neighbor for this project.

Move approval.

The motion by Otterman Bauman is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing not so order.

Thank you all.

In the 12th Aldermanic district, South 11th Street from West Cleveland Avenue to a dead end north of West Cleveland Avenue, install traffic calming speed humps.

Is anyone here to provide testimony on this item?

There are 21 impacted properties.

No alter manic survey was performed because a donor on the block offered to pay all of the special assessments.

And the alderman supports the project.

Is that secret that who the donor is or not?

They haven't asked me to share their name, but yes, shout out.

The motion by Audamand Brower is for adoption.

Hearing no objection, so order.

Wow.

Continuing in the 12th Aldermanic District, South 18th Street from West Lincoln Avenue to West Beecher Street, concrete pavement reconstruction, narrowing roadway, install permeable pavers in the west side parking lane, replace all curb and gutter and driveway approaches, replace sidewalk as necessary, soding, five foot width tree border area grading and tree removal where necessary.

Yes.

Go ahead.

How did they win the lottery to get per permeable pavers?

I mean, I'm just curious why this project and not others.

So I work directly with our green infrastructure group, and they perform a utility survey to determine if there are utilities that would be in conflict for putting in stormwater improvement.

So the green infrastructure, either bioswales or pavement or permeable pavers, and on this street, they determined that this was a good candidate.

Yes, it is.

Okay.

Out of 55 impacted properties, two were in favor and three were opposed.

So only five responded out of 55.

Correct.

And what is the local order?

He did not indicate whether there was support or not.

And we already asked if anybody's present.

Yes.

We have a motion.

I'll move approval.

The motion by Otterman Bauman is approval.

I mean, is um adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing not so ordered.

Uh Otterman West Marlin would move adoption of the entire file.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none.

So order item number two, file number 260439.

Resolution determining it necessary to make various accessible public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city engineering cost estimated to be $30,000 for our total estimated cost of these projects being 470,000.

And we do have a proposed uh substitute.

Audiman brouwer will move to have the substitute uh in front of us.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing now, so ordered.

Good morning.

This is for setting up engineering on future accessible paving projects.

Any questions from committee?

Other man um Bauman would move adoption.

Are there any objections for that motion?

Hearing uh so order item number three, file number two six zero four for zero resolution determining it necessary to make various non-accessible public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city engineering costs estimated to be two hundred and twenty-one thousand six hundred and seventy-five dollars for a total estimated cost of these projects being uh one million eight hundred thousand dollars.

And we do also have another substitute.

Um, Artoman Westmoreland will move that we have the substitute in front of us.

Um are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing now, so ordered.

Good morning.

This is setting up engineering for future non-assessable projects.

Are there any questions from committee?

Hearing now, Audaman Brower would move adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so order item number four, file number two, six zero four four one resolution approving construction of non-accessible public improvements at various locations and appropriating funds for these purposes with the city construction costs estimated to be four million nine hundred and fifteen thousand dollars for total estimated cost of these projects being six million one hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars.

And we do have a proposed substitute.

Artoman Brower would move that we put the substitute in front of us.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so ordered.

Morning.

This is setting up construction funding for non-assessable projects.

Are there any questions from committee?

Hearing none, Audiman Baum will move adoption.

Um hearing no objection, so order item number five, file number two six zero four four three substitute resolution authorizing the commissioner of public works to execute a project agreement titled Cost Sharing Memo of Understanding between the City of Milwaukee and the Brady Street Business Improvement District for the cost sharing of installing traffic calming on East Brady Street, North Farwell Avenue to North Van Buren Street in the third automatic district.

Good morning.

So this is setting up a memo of understanding for the Brady Street bid to pay the cost of special assessments for the requested traffic calming improvements.

Um we do have the bid director here.

I don't know if you want to come up and provide any information as well.

Madam Chair.

Yes, Automan Baum.

What's planned for Brady Street?

Three raised crosswalks and six concrete pinned on traffic islands to slow down traffic and also prevent any illegal passing or illegal parking too close to the intersections.

And this will be executed this summer.

That is correct.

Okay.

Please state your name.

My name is Anna Antoine, and I'm with I'm the executive director of the Brady Street bid.

Um we've been working with Alderman Brouwer and uh DPW on this project for it's my understanding almost years now.

And it's been um discussed through the business, the businesses, and through uh with the residents, and everybody is really excited about the possibility of having the um traffic calming on Brady Street.

It's it's really needed.

People are speeding down Brady Street, and they're just they're just going.

So any questions from committee?

Ma'am chair.

Audiment Brouwer.

Yeah, thank you so much.

So just want to I just want to um I would urge adoption of this um here, and I'll I'll make that motion in a moment, but I just want to say how grateful I am for DPW and the engineering department to to get this done as fast as they could.

Thank you so much.

And for the bid.

Um, I know that a lot of residents uh who live along Brady Street and and property owners there are really pleased that the bid is um and just you know, so that everybody is aware just like just like this anonymous donor at the other uh with the other speed hump in a residential area.

The bid is covering um the entire costs of the um levy assessment that would have been placed on those property owners.

So I just really appreciate that.

I think that demonstrates that the bid and the businesses along Brady Street are committed to the safety and well-being of everybody on Brady Street.

So I just I just really appreciate that.

I know they've put in a bunch of work, and Anna's just come in as the bid executive director.

Our office has been really happy to work with her.

Um with you know, with that, if there's if there's nothing else, um I'm sure I would move adoption.

Any other questions from committee?

The motion by Otterman Brower is for adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing now, so ordered.

Item number six, file number two, six zero three one four resolution directing the commissioner of public works to execute a document titled 7th revision state municipal agreement for a state-let highway project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the Proming Design and Real Estate Acquisition of West National Avenue from 39th Street to 1st Street with a total estimated cost decrease for the project of 2037 with an estimated decrease of granted share of 2,678,850 and an estimated increase of city share of 2,475, 150,000.

Good morning, David Tappy.

150 dollars.

I'm sorry.

Okay.

Good morning, David Tappia, major projects manager.

Uh this file uh just came back from uh town council, and so um here to answer any questions.

Has the Department of Public Works um discuss with um President Perez the concerns that he um has and has that been addressed?

Because I believe if I'm not mistaken, that's why it was sent back.

Yeah, uh good morning, everybody.

Uh uh chairwoman and all those members of the committee.

Uh Kevin Mews, city engineer, part of the Department of Public Public Works.

Yes, I met with uh President Perez uh a little over an hour last Friday to discuss of this.

Um I think as he may have communicated, um his primary concern is is parking availability for the businesses in the area, and we certainly understand and are sympathetic to that.

Um there is throughout the process of doing public outreach, there was a balancing act between what we were hearing from the public, which was overwhelmingly traffic calming uh pedestrian and bike and trees.

Um and we did try to balance that based on the data we had from our parking study um on parking on the corridor versus versus those uh uses.

Um the east end of the corridor in particular um gets pretty tight in the right-of-way, and so there's there is more balancing that needed to be done in that area.

But I did meet with Oliver Perez on Friday.

All right.

Arnold Ms.

Amaripa, I know it touches your district too.

Did you have any questions?

Yes.

Um in fact, I want to note for my colleagues that the bulk of the work happens in the eighth aldermanic district.

And um I attended multiple public information meetings over the years as we got ready for this huge project.

Um, and I do support it.

Um, as you as my colleagues should recall, I was very concerned because we literally have where we are under the wire and need to get this um, need to get this going.

The construction is already have happening in my district, and we don't want to delay construction any further.

Businesses there, in particular on National Avenue, which I invite you all to come and spend your money at.

Um, are certainly struggling, and we want to get through to the finish line as soon as possible.

So I am in support of this file, madam chair.

Um are there any questions from committee?

All right, um, honorman Bama would move adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so ordered.

Thank you.

Item number seven, file number two six zero four one eight resolution directing the commissioner of public works to execute a document, title second revision state municipal agreement for a state-led STP urban project with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the programming design and construction of West Lisbon Street, North 100th Street to West Burlai Street.

So this file uh allows us to uh utilize legacy funds that the Department of Transportation had left over and apply them to the project.

Are there any questions from committee?

No, but a comment on the yesterday, and it absolutely looks beautiful.

The work that's already been done on that stretch.

Yes.

Well looks beautiful.

Your area.

You're welcome.

Appreciate that.

Any other questions or comments from committee?

Automan Westmoreland will move adoption.

Hearing no objection, so ordered.

Item number eight, file number two five one two five five substitute resolution denying the honor uh that honorary name FM Eason to North Palmer Street from West Townsend Street to West Concordia Avenue in the 6th Automatic District.

Um, are the woman Tyler will move to hold this item as was stated earlier um in the meeting.

Good job.

Um, are there any objections to holding?

Hearing nine.

So ordered.

Item number nine, file number two six zero one seven zero.

Substitute resolution to vacate the eastern portion of 12th lane between West Cherry Street and the Northern Alley and the 15th Automatic District.

Thank you, Chairwoman Cogs and Committee members.

Taylor Jones, DCD planning.

Um item nine is a request to vacate the eastern 4.98 feet of 12th lane between West Cherry Street and the Northern Alley to correct historical recording inaccuracies, which were found by the surveyor when submitting the certified survey map associated with this development.

The proposed vacation would accommodate the new view development shown um not there, um, which is a mixed-use development by New Life Community Development.

Dave Rhodes from GCS construction company is also here to answer questions you may have about the development.

The applicant has submitted for costs associated with the vacation to the Department of Public Works.

The vacation will not restrict access to private property nor reduce the city's ability to provide services to residents.

Staff finds the proposed vacation would not be detrimental to the city and recommends approval.

City Plan Commission also recommended approval.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from committee?

Um hearing none.

Are there any objections for that motion?

Hearing none, so ordered.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Item number 10.

File number two, five zero one five seven.

Substitute resolution to vacate the east-west alley north of West Cherry Street, between North 12th Street and North 12th line in the 15th Automatic District.

Um thank you.

This is also for the new view development.

Item 10 is a request to vacate in East West Alley.

The applicant has submitted payment for costs associated with the vacation to the Department of Public Works.

The vacation will not restrict access to private property nor reduce the city's ability to provide services to residents.

Staff finds the proposed vacation would not be detrimental to the city and recommends approval.

City and commission also recommended approval.

Any questions from committee?

Hearing not Ottawa Westmoreland would move for adoption.

Hearing no objection, so ordered.

Thank you.

Item 11 resolution authorizing permanent and temporary limited easement with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the properties at 2237 North 7th Street and 3463 North Eighth Street to assist in the improvements for the Interstate Highway 43 project in the 6th Automatic District.

Um Alderman Brower would move to have the substitute put before us.

Hearing no objections, so ordered.

Sure where they are.

Um hearing no objections, so ordered.

Um item number 12, file number two, six zero three nine nine.

Resolution authorizing execution of the department of natural resources, principal for given financial assistance program.

So ordered item number 13.

A substitute ordinance relating to native plants.

Yeah, first of all, I want to thank um, you know, everybody, all the folks over in LRB who helped to make this a reality.

This this legislation is coming out of um a need from constituents of uh in our district and across the city who've reached out who want to be able to um basically replace lawns.

Um we know that you know the current lawn culture that exists here in this country isn't um doesn't comport with sustainability or with uh supporting native um um you know plant species or animal species or insects and and pollinators and all these things where we have um habitat loss occurring um across this country and in Wisconsin due to development um and the proliferation of basically just mowed lawns that don't support biodiversity.

Um so this ordinance is gonna allow it is my attempt to allow for um residents here in the city of Milwaukee to replace their lawns with native plantings um to allow for the creation of pollinator and insect and natural uh species habitat um within the city of Milwaukee and to allow them to avoid um being penalized, or in a case that happened here in the city of Milwaukee, have their native plantings actually cut down by our department of neighborhood services.

Um which did happen because there wasn't a way within our ordinance, so there wasn't a way um for DNS to say, oh yes, this is a this is a native planting versus just somebody is just letting their grass grow uncultivated in any sort of way.

So this this creates that avenue.

Um and I um yeah, I I I really appreciate all the work that's gone into this, and I appreciate the constituents that reached out um and residents to help make this um a reality here.

Okay.

All right.

Um I'm I do have a question on when you're done.

Okay.

Um Aaron Stokel, forestry services manager.

Um just wanted to communicate the department's support of the ordinance.

The forestry department is what uh the governing body that enforces the tall grass and weed ordinance for the city of Milwaukee.

Sorry, I said I apologize.

Yep.

There's just a couple of things that we manage, and that's one of them.

Um but I'm glad to see it legislated.

I think it helps codify what we would like to do in practice, although it's not without exception that occasionally we make a mistake, and like native plants sometimes are um unfortunately mowed, but in general, it's our our view too that natives should be supported, and it's just helps codify that and kind of lay out some general guidelines for residents that want to do this in a way that is um protected and legal by a city ordinance.

Who decides what's intentional deliberate design-wise?

Um well, I would say like that combined with the piece that says it has to be native plants, those are like hand in hand.

So if it's intentional, to me, um that's the difference between I've actually gone and purchased and installed or planted native plants versus I've just let my grass grow and I stop mowing and it's called it a native garden, and that's not a native garden.

Um so this helps I think delineate that difference because I we've seen that issue on the other side of it too, of people calling and saying, like, oh, this is a native wildlife supported area, but um it really doesn't go very far, even biologically speaking, if you don't also incorporate native plants and actually intentionally design it that way.

Okay.

What about the grain spice between the curve and the sidewalk adjacent people's property?

So um people are allowed to plant in that space.

Um I think the uh section of this ordinance also specifies it can't obstruct any um site lines or vision from either the sidewalk or any other right-of-way.

And that's the same kind of practice that we follow, whether it's a native plant or not.

If you're in the tree border or that right-of-way space, um the plants can't grow over three feet tall or any way obstruct traffic or sight lines.

Um three feet is like the height limit there.

So if people did plant native plants, um they would have to choose to pick species that don't grow very tall.

Would they only be able to do it to that um grassy area adjacent to their own property?

Yes.

Yeah.

Um what about neighbor complaints?

So I think um part of this, like having a little bit of an intentionality behind it too, you know, some of the things that we recommend are like you know, mowing a little border around the native area, showing some kind of like visual way of delineating what you're growing versus like just a neglected property.

But um we would be on behalf of like the resident who actually is growing the native plants, helping to like point and educate to what their neighbor is actually doing, and I think this ordinance helps us do that too.

All right.

Ma'am sure Adam Brown.

For forestry, does this um does creating this framework allow us to, in some way, I I know that for no moy, we actually have in the ordinance a specific registry of those properties.

Um this this particular uh ordinance as written doesn't stop us from establishing some sort of registry that forestry then can know which properties are doing this or um is there a way maybe we can just to kind of you know so that we know deli definitively whether okay, here's a native plant property, this is the or this is one that's just um you know, we don't want to just say that a unmowed yard and now all of a sudden has one milkweed plant as well.

Right, yeah, is now a native planting, right?

So there it would this stop us from establishing something like that under our administration.

I don't think it would stop us by any means.

Um, but we would have to look into that a little more of like I mean we have a registry like you said for no MOME.

Um but if it if we were to go that route like and we wanted to make it like that's the requirement, then there probably would need to be an adjustment to the language.

Like just say that you have to be a registered native plant garden or whatever.

But aside from that, I want to also say that um it's our forestry technicians that are usually laying eyes on each of these properties and they have horticultural knowledge.

Okay.

So while I well I know occasionally unfortunately sometimes um natives are um mode, it's I would say it's the far it's the minority because we do have a lot of a technical expertise, the people who can recognize and identify native species.

Um so with the administration, would your uh department be comfortable then without a specific registry being included in the ordinance?

I would be comfortable with that.

Okay, yeah.

Being able to implement this and potentially in the future, maybe we could look at something like that, but it sounds like this could be implementable as soon as this is signed by the mayor.

100% to protect these um yards.

Yes.

Okay.

Madam Chair.

Audible woman's regular.

Um well, it sounds like a nice idea.

Um but you said that it I guess in here, all those specifics that you guys were just talking about, like the three feet.

Yeah.

Um that's not in here.

And then there's no registry, which I think we probably should have a registry, because otherwise you end up with what um Alderman Breller was just saying, one one plant, and then you know, um someone might say that well, I have a native native garden.

Yeah.

Uh and then also there is in here for the no more may that um people would get a sign uh from the department.

So would that are they registering and then would you mail the sign out, or do they have to come pick it up, but they have to display that sign.

Yeah, part of your right to help with that kind of communication to the community, right?

Of like I meant to do this, and yeah.

I just when we do it, just um make sure all the specifics are there.

Yeah.

So I would I can touch on a couple of three redone so that those specifics are in there.

Um so you're aware too, like the three-foot rule isn't in this legislation, but it is in other legislation.

Oh, it is.

Um there are like guidelines for planting in the tree border that I I don't um so it exists, although it might not be specifically referenced here.

Um Should it be though?

I'm not uh who wrote this?

Which um LRB person?

Our member, who was the uh Chris is here from LRB.

Um I mean, I would just opine generally that like you know, one section of a law doesn't need to reference every single other applicable, you know, piece.

I mean, the speed limit laws don't need to say that you also have to be sober while you're driving.

I mean that's a different different statute that they could be enforced concurrently when that happens.

So I don't like necessarily think as a matter of you know, promulgation of the law is that we need to like reference every single thing that's also applicable in that situation.

You also can't just like you know put your car on the terrace.

I mean, either way, right?

So but um anyway, I yeah, um Chris is there a reason, uh Christopher legislative reference bureau.

Can we state the question?

I'm sorry, I just want to make sure that I'm answering what you um why the three-foot thing is not in here?

Yeah, it's it um so I believe that that is um forestry policy, right?

Uh I I don't know the ref I'd have to look at I don't have the I couldn't cite it right now, but the the way that this was written was essentially to be able to give forestry a lot of discretion when it came to those sorts of things.

Forestry already has when speaking with them, they already have um specific policies when it comes to how they deal with the the hell strip area in particular.

Um and then the remainder of it was uh really addressing the lawns specifically um and to and the um what we tried to do was give as much flexibility to the people who are trying to plant and also forestry when it comes to enforcement.

So we just wanted to make sure that it wasn't obstructing anything um and it wasn't encroaching on anything, was sort of what we were aiming for.

So is the three feet in ordinance or in po in practice?

I would need to check that.

I thought it was ordinance, but I got we'll we'll have to double check.

I think that they decided it's like my understanding was it was was it was um forestry's policy, but I would I will I will I can look that up though.

Um also if I could just speak to like the the because I would I I wouldn't am concerned too about like the single meek milkweed and like as as an example.

Um thought about that with this legislation, the piece that specifies that it has to be a native species or a native cultivar or a cultivar of a native species.

I think that that that solves it for me because if you have one milkweed growing in a um, you know, just a lot of Kentucky bluegrass, Kentucky bluegrass isn't really a native species, so that kind of covers it where you could have that single milkweed, but you still have to mow all the way around it.

It doesn't kind of exempt you from doing everything because you have one native plant, you know what I mean?

Like it that one native plant is protected, but you still have to mow your turf grass.

Um you still have to keep your property free from any noxious weeds.

I think that's like part of one of the lines of the legislation too.

So um, and and if I may too as well, speaking as someone who is currently has a tremendous amount of plastic over their backyard trying to kill it, um planting with natives does does take a tremendous amount of intentionality.

It's very, very difficult.

Um especially if you're trying to eliminate non-native stuff that is already there.

So for what it's worth in my experience and in the code of code enforcement side of things, whenever there's a question of like, is this a native garden or not, or somebody says this was a native planting, um we don't really have to go much farther past asking them what did you actually plant, and then it's usually over because they didn't actually plant anything.

So so why why aren't we doing the um registry?

Because if you're registering for no more may, yeah, I mean it doesn't sound like it would be a difficult task to just have people register for the native native garden for their lawn.

Um I I would I would leave that to the will of the committee.

Um I don't think it's I don't I think it could work either way.

Um because we can if I didn't have the technical side of it in my department to be able to recognize it, I would be more concerned and would want that registry there.

Yeah.

Um I guess uh I guess then the question would be if you're not registered and you do have a native garden, are you still good?

You know what I mean?

Like just registered.

Just re okay.

Well yeah.

But I think that from a a drafting standpoint, part of the reason that that did not come up was just concerns about uh adoption that it would fewer people would adopt it.

Um if you require registration.

Yeah, because it's just one more barrier.

Um so that was that was the technical reason why it wasn't put in again.

That's a policy question.

But that is why it is not in there.

Ma'am chair.

I'm fine with adding a registration component between now and council day as a sub to create a substitute if people, if that would help uh gain support.

I mean, I'd be curious what other people think.

Um I think that you know, discretion of the I mean what we're talking about in practicality is a complaint is lodged and a forestry employee goes out to do a field examination of the of the property in question and would then therefore, based on their knowledge.

I mean, I've done rivals with you guys, you guys know plants, like they would they would to make a determination right there, yeah, this is or isn't, and they would potentially make an attempt to contact the resident or property owner um at that time to make to maybe ask some questions.

Um so in and if they're not registered, I mean we wouldn't want them to just like mow that down if there's no registration.

We'd want to then say, okay, please register.

So in some ways the creating the registration element doesn't I mean it we would have the same result, what there's not a register, or there's a registration or not.

There might be an additional administrative I don't I guess everything uh additional steps might be an additional administrative cost to the communication that would be needed if we come across a native garden and then want to do that outreach or you know, it's another letter to send or something if you can't, if nobody's home, um, to let them know that they would have to register um going forward.

And and that is a complaint that we do get, you know, around these parts at City Hall that like there's all forms that have to be filled out all the time and then layered and so this would add, I mean, in a very practical way, add another layer of bureaucracy to that rather than just the agent um of forestry's discretion on site on the spot.

Um but I'm not I don't want to die in this element.

I'd be curious whether people think like I'd like to get this you know going so that um you know so that for the remainder of this year anybody who has a native planting um can keep it without risk of it being um uh uh mowed by forestry.

Um so I would like this to get passed by the end of our um council cycle.

Um so there's a couple of ways that you can do that.

Um is um we could hold it here today and you could um at council pull it um the amended version.

We could pass it here today, and you could put a substitute um at council um with the amendment in there.

And I I wonder, and Chris, you may know more than I is the is that something that we could just barbely amend here today.

Yeah, that'd be fine.

You just tell me what you um want me to do and I'll put together the sub and add it to the file.

I'm fine with adding a registration.

And I so I think we could and and my um I would like to have this passed today, and I could have a substitute by council that would require registration.

I think what Chris is saying is we can you can make the motion a substitute here today.

So what will appear at council will reflect that.

Oh, thank you.

I'm sorry, I appre I would like to make that motion then to substitute here today.

That's true.

Can I because yeah, I believe at meetings it does not need to be written.

Um at council meetings it does need to be written, but at our committee meetings it does not need to be written.

And Madam Chair, we still need to verify that three-foot rule, whether it's an ordinance or practice.

Yeah.

Um if I may too, just another thing with the registry, it probably would be ha something you have to do annually as property owners change and levels of maintenance change too.

So I wouldn't want it to be like I registered and then I just and then now it's been neglected.

It doesn't, you know, like some flexibility to it's not an automatic.

Like we we you register and we verified it's native today.

That is not for in perpetuity because the conditions of the property could change.

I was imagining it would be annual.

If we did a scheme like this, then it would be an annual registration and potentially a fee associated with that to cover the cost of us, you know, handling all that.

So the uh motion by Alderman Brower is to amend um this file to um add a uh requirement for a registry annual.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none, so order um before we take the vote to Audible Matt Tyler's point.

If between now and council, you guys can let us know if the three feet is in ordinance or in policy.

Um move approval.

I mean uh adoption.

Adoption passage.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none.

So ordered.

Uh Otterman Westmoreland will move reconsideration of item 11.

Um file number 260303.

Uh resolution authorizing permanent and temporary limited easements with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation for the properties at 2237, North Samuel Street, and 3463, North A Street to assist in the improvements for the Interstate Highway 43 project and the sixth automatic district.

Good morning.

Uh committee.

Rosita Ross with uh Department of City Development uh regarding that file that you just cited.

Um the uh property at 2237 North 7th Street.

Uh DOT is looking to uh acquire uh 45 feet is a fee title for 88 compliance uh for the uh improvement project that they're working on uh on the highway.

There is a temporary temporary limited easement for their construction um products that they'll be placing on the land.

Um this um file will not hamper any future developments for this parcel.

Um actually it would be a benefit for the people in the community who are uh 88 and the uh the sidewalk to be a little bit widened.

Do you have any questions regarding that?

Any questions from committee?

Hearing none, honor woman um Taylor would move we have the substitute in front of us.

Yes, you do.

There was uh a substitute motion is my point that we are we reconsider and then choose doing that.

We need a move.

Okay, first um Ottawa and Tyler will move that we have the proposed substitute in front of us.

Hearing no objections, so are so ordered next.

Artum and Bama will move adoption.

No objections, so ordered.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item number 14, file number 260403.

Resolution approving sites for federally funded electric vehicle charging stations.

Morning, madam chair.

Uh as most of you will remember, we have a uh about a 15 million dollar federal grant to build a public electric vehicle charging network.

Um this resolution approves this second batch of sites.

There are 26 sites.

Um each of the sites that are listed there.

Uh we have a letter of uh intent from the the private property owner um, you know, specifying that they are serious about this, and uh so we look forward to you to any questions or uh that you may have.

Thank you.

Can you remind us what those sites are?

Uh they are in the file.

Um so there's 26 of them.

There are two at UWM.

I actually don't see them in the file.

So it's the third attachment.

I don't even see attachments on here.

Do you guys, yeah.

It's uh for 260403.

You're looking online.

Oh, yeah, I'm on Legislature.

Yeah, I'm on the public-facing web portion.

There is, yeah.

It's exhibit A, batch two sites, version two is the name of the file.

Okay.

This is the granny because it's an updated.

I can run through them.

Yeah, I'm familiar because of other files, but if you for the public, go ahead.

Yes, sure.

So there are uh two sites at at UWM, uh the Chapman Lot and the Cunningham lot.

There are three Milwaukee County Park sites, including Hoyt Park, um McKinley Park parking lot right across from the Collectivo in the Cool Waters Aquatic Park in Greenfield.

Um there is the Milwaukee Athletic Club structure on 777 North uh Milwaukee Street.

Uh so there's about we've got one, two, three, four, five uh lots that are controlled by interstate parking downtown.

So it's the Milwaukee Athletic Club, the Lake Lot on Van Buren, uh Safe Lot on 431 North Milwaukee Street, uh sixth and state uh near MATC and that lot uh would be level three fast chargers.

Gimbal's parking structure on Michigan uh near the Grand Avenue Mall.

Sherman Phoenix, uh Century City Tower on uh Hope and 27th Street, Pettit National Ice Center, Office of African American Affairs, Midtown Center, the city-owned parking lot on um 1915 East North Avenue on the east side.

The Milwaukee County Zoo, the Applecrest Plaza on 10202 West Silver Spring Drive, Applecrest Shopping Center.

Um let's see, Hart's Mill Lot, that's in the Tosa Village.

We have the Shorewood Village Hall on Murray Avenue, the Well Point Care Network on 8901 West Capitol Drive.

Uh the outpost on East Capitol Drive, that would be a fast charger.

And the outpost in Bayview on Kinikanic and Bay View, that would also be a fast charger.

Holiday Inn and Suites near the airport.

The ones that are not in the city of Milwaukee, why are we doing those?

What is that part of the grant?

So in the original app in the original file, um we had said that we could do up to six outs within Milwaukee County but outside of the city limits, and those particular mayors had stepped forward when we were trying to do some collaborative uh climate work.

The other thing I would say is that most people who drive EVs, you know, aren't don't aren't limited to just the city.

They you know travel around uh the area at large.

But um any other questions from committee?

Yeah, madam chair.

Automat Bauman.

Yeah, refresh our recollection who where you're locating these chargers on private property.

What's the arrangement with the property owner?

Yes.

Um so this is a $15 million federal grant, which requires a 20% cost share, which the city does not have.

So we are the plan is that we would issue an RFP in this coming week to hire a um basically through a public-private partnership, hire a private sector provider who would provide the 20 percent match, as well as um have a credit card situation where somebody would you know pay to use the stations.

So we have the letter of intent basically says the site host agrees to allocate four uh parking spots on the site, and they agree to allow you know create and allow a basically a private vendor to install these on their site um for a period of at least five years.

And so the the value add to the properties is you know it's it's an amenity that they can have to their customers.

So the revenue is for the the private operator.

And we have said in the in the RFP, we've we've sketched out, you know, that there will be a negotiation for some form of revenue sharing.

Obviously, they'll have to be able to recoup their cost for putting in their own private investment.

What we don't know is, and we don't know how lucrative these are going to be.

We don't know if they're gonna be make a ton of money or make no money or you know be a a loser.

So we're putting the risk and the investment on the private sector with some opportunity for revenue sharing if it be really doing.

Well, we're gonna find out with our RFP, but we're paying So it may come back with no proposals.

It may of course the money is frozen, so we don't have this money in the bank from the federal government, correct?

So correct.

So we have a $15 million contract, of which we have access to the engineering money, and we have use the engineering money to uh you know, pay for city staff, engineering staff, um to do all of the environmental reviews and all of that stuff.

All of that was required in the original contract, it said we have to do all the environmental reviews before they were released the money.

We have done that on the first 13 sites.

Um we are asking for your approval to then start that big long process on this next batch of sites.

How much has been spent down of the grant?

Couple hundred thousand dollars.

Is that it?

Yeah, about I would say pro I mean I can get you the exact number, but it's under a million.

I mean is somebody in the city government monitoring this.

Yes, our office manages this this grant.

So we only have access to the engineering money and the staff for Mr.

Co.

here.

So we are using that for salaries and the engineering money.

As for the federal money that has been frozen, there is a lawsuit.

The State Attorney General has filed a lawsuit along with uh about 13 other states to release the funds which have been allocated by Congress.

And moreover, we are also in discussions with the State Department of Transportation to use the state money for the elect for for what's called the Nebi network to potentially go for the first 13 sites that already have um where we already got the NEPA approval.

The pr the private sector provider.

So it is called a design, build, operate, maintain, and finance arrangement.

So they would they have standards that the federal government has set forth for uptime and all of that.

That's the theory, yes.

So Quick Trip has done it.

Well, I don't understand why that's funny, because Quick Trip has done it already on many of their stations through the state program.

Um there are Charge Point, there are uh a small number of private sector uh providers already in the city.

Uh but there are we are very give me a list of the um providers um in the city.

I'd love to see that.

Um if there are like there's a common website plug share that is list you know chargers around the country.

So there are many places in the country that have these already, but Milwaukee is pretty far behind, I would say, in the number of chargers.

If is have you given thought to um when is when you do put out the RFP, what if it's providers who don't want all of the sites?

Have you all given thought to I'm sorry can you repeat that?

Have you when whenever you do do the RFP or whatever for that private sector vendor, have you given it thought to what if they don't want all of the sites?

Yes.

So possibly of more than one vendor for the sites?

Yeah, I mean I think the part of the rationale for doing it in batches like the way we did was so that we could try to get a contract and get a vendor to to go and see it.

Let's see how they do on the first third team before we pledge that they get everything, right?

Um that yeah, I mean I think we want to see how they do.

We want to see what kind of bids we get back.

Um there uh and and again try to try to do this incrementally, but we're also trying to manage through a whole big haze of fog with the you know the federal government, are they gonna pay for this or are they not?

And in a technical way, um whenever we do if we do get uh some good responses, and we do go with a vendor, that final contract and the terms of that revenue share and all that kind of stuff, that will come back to the committee to be voted on, right?

Um you want to you if you like approval for the to do are you asking for approval for the actual contract with the vendor?

Is that yeah.

It that would be it will come back, right?

To finance and it wouldn't have to, but I mean I guess I we could if you want to review it.

I don't have an issue with that.

Yeah.

I just would think because of the amount likely that it would anyway.

I was just checking.

Um I personally would like to see the contract before um before it goes.

I don't know if the whole council does or whatever, but I would have thought, because of the likely amount that it will have to come back before finance once you select the vendor, but the one time crunch that we have with the state DOT is they are trying to obligate their funding before the September 30th of this year.

Um so we just heard of this opportunity in the last month because that's we anticipate that we would take the first 13 sites that were already approved.

So for the reminder, those were at the libraries, six or seven libraries and uh six county parks.

So we were planning to apply for the state funding for those.

And that might be a little bit of a time crunch there.

When are you putting up the RFP for that?

So we are trying to get it finalized this week.

I was waiting on it because I was like, is anybody gonna bid on this if we don't know about it?

That is more.

That there's federal money coming, right?

Like if I'm a bidder and it takes a lot of money to put an RFP, I don't know.

I'm bidding on it if I don't know if there's a project there.

But when the state said that they likely have some money to apply for this, I was like, okay, I think we gotta go.

Thank you.

Any other questions on committee?

I'm sure.

Audeman Brower.

Yeah, I'm looking at this website, Plugshare.com um that you that you referenced, Eric.

And uh we've got there looks like there's several operators within the city of Milwaukee that might be interested in this ZEF Energy Charge Point, um, Tesla destination, um BERF.

But um the uh yeah, so there could potentially be people and entities that will bid on the operation of this if we decide to move forward.

Obviously, I'd be a fan of in the future this being publicly available or publicly operated and bubblegum, but I think at this point, given some of the unknowns and some of the capital requirements, we may have to look um elsewhere at this point.

Any other questions on committee?

Uh Mam Chair.

Oh, go ahead.

And I forgot to ask earlier.

Uh Eric, when um so given that, when are we looking at these being installed?

Um I would say uh hopefully the first batch is 2027.

I will had the original plan was that we would have the charges going this year, but since they were sitting on the money, it's it was hard to, you know, it's a lot of it is up in the air about when we can actually get this funding.

And of course, I don't really have a good sense of the you know the timing of the lawsuit um and when that would bet would get resolved.

So um again hoping to get something installed in in 2027 at this point.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh there are no other questions.

Um Brouwer would move adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing us all order.

Right, thank you.

Item 15, file number two 60425.

Resolution authorizing an exclusive right to negotiate with U.S.

Venture Inc.

for the city on parcel at 1776, South Harbor Drive, Parcel F at Port Milwaukee in the 14th Artomatic District.

Good morning, Madam Chair and Committee members.

Benji Tim, director at Port Milwaukee.

Um joined here by Neil Frontier from U.S.

Energy.

Um so Parcel F is a three and a half acre parcel in the port.

Um it's currently adjacent to U.S.

Ventures currently's hold.

Uh they've been a long-term tenant for about 12 years now.

Um there.

They use the bulk um liquid cargo pier as well as um their facility for um managing ethanol and some other products that are coming moving in and out of the port.

So uh we're they have requested uh two-year exclusive right to negotiate um so that we can work out uh uh new lease.

Um we would of course, once that lease is negotiated, come back to both the Board of Harbor Commissioners and the Common Council to get it approved with all the details.

Um they're going to pay us five thousand dollars a year for this right.

Um and uh that's that's essentially it.

So um any questions?

Any questions from committee?

Uh hearing on Artman Westmoreland would move adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion hearing now?

So order item number sixteen.

Thank you.

You're welcome to file number two six zero for a two resolution authorizing the city of Milwaukee's Department of Public Works, Milwaukee Waterworks and Abbey City Departments to execute a participation agreement.

Let's say in the city of Milwaukee and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin system to participate in the Panther Age internship program.

And this is sponsored by Arder Woman Moore.

Auditable Moore, I see you're on the board.

Did you want to say something?

Do we need to unmute Audible Man Moore?

My apologies, you all.

I am with my interns, and uh since the meeting is starting a little late, we are late to our meeting.

So I apologize.

Um yes, I am um in support um of this item.

I think the author is there to um share a little bit about um what it does.

Thank you.

Please, Dr.

Maya, good morning.

Jane Isle, uh Waterworks Administration Manager with Milwaukee Waterworks.

Good morning, Madam Chair.

Alexander Founders, City Attorney's Office.

Uh Carrie Smith, Department of City Development.

Um, I'm here because we worked together on updating this contract so that it was something that could be used by all city departments.

Um so we worked closely with them for quite some time to come to uh renewed contract for this uh internship program with UWM.

So just a little bit of background.

I guess I would call it a standard, you know, student inter internship program at UWM.

And there was a previous incarnation known as the Community Learning Internship Program or CLIP.

Waterworks and I believe DCD both employed interns through that program.

But UWM recently rebranded the program and required a participation agreement.

And that's what brought us to have to kind of work through that process and seek your approval to sign those documents so that we can get this restarted.

Certainly speaking for waterworks, this has created a pipeline.

So we're very eager to get this uh restarted so that we can uh bring more interns in.

All right.

Any questions from committee?

Um Arduan Tyler will move.

Um Adoption.

Are there any objections to that motion?

So order.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item seven, uh file number two six zero.

I'm sorry.

Um file number two, six zero four one five communication from the Department of Public Works Infrastructure Services Division relating to a statement of mid-year review of financial condition of the sewer maintenance fund.

Uh good morning, madam chair and committee.

Uh Kurt Spranger is the engineer in charge of the sewer maintenance fund.

Uh the file before you here is a requirement uh to inform this body of financial status of the fund.

So it's a comparing the revenues generated by the fund against the uh debt service of the fund and look at that ratio and then it has to meet certain thresholds.

So the uh background or the backup information is in the file, but uh the ratios are above the required minimums.

Any questions from committee?

Yeah, I do have a question.

Go ahead, Honor Member Bauman.

Are we adequately maintaining our system?

There's been considerable media coverage of some major backup issues, flooding issues, and now the clogged outlet, which is presumably MMSD.

But I mean, uh fine, we're we're financially well off, but are we adequately investing in and maintaining the existing infrastructure and making sure these catch basins are cleaned out and making sure that the blockages throughout the system are eliminated in light of the significant property?

I mean, this is fine.

The numbers add up, I get it, but I think people are interested in way more than just the numbers adding up.

Sure, no, I understand.

Uh file that was at this uh committee, I think uh last cycle is uh sort of a review of our practices and procedures in terms of the amount of maintenance that we do.

Um that's the one that goes uh it's called CMAR, but it's uh a DNR process, and we get a grade on that.

Um that came back positive.

Uh we do look at how we compare with other municipalities.

Um, I guess maintenance is one of those things you could always do more, but we do try and meet some of our targets in terms of frequency of cleaning basins, frequency of cleaning sewers.

We do track the number of clogs in our own system.

Uh so yeah, I these are all things that we're definitely aware of and working towards how many miles of uh sewer relay do we do every year?

Uh relay we are in the neighborhood of usually between seven and eleven miles or relayed per year.

That includes lining as well as actual physical.

That includes the lining work, yes.

Okay.

And how many total miles do we have?

Uh about tw about 2500 total.

2500 miles of correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

And is that an adequate replacement rate?

In the sense of just the strict number of miles per year.

Uh there probably will be at some point that may be an issue, but in terms of the amount of miles of sewer that we identify as needing to be replaced, it definitely seems to be adequate.

Great.

Any other questions from committee?

Um I just want to put this out here.

Um my name is Jesse Hagan.

I'm a senior financial analyst with the city of umkey's controller office.

Um, just to look at something that um we're going to be reacting to.

There's been a change in accounting of how um the city's uh fees for storm water management, how they're paying for a lot of the um street sweeping and and those type of fees.

So in the past they were just looked at as a transfer from um the sewer fund to the city.

Whereas to the microphone, I'm sorry, thank you.

You can read it too.

Okay, they were looked at as just a transfer um outside of this calculation and process.

Um but recently there's been some changes that will affect fiscal year 2026 and going forward that move those changes, move those those transfers to operating costs.

And so what what that's what's gonna happen is that 2026 is fine.

We do meet the thresholds in 2026, but in starting in 2027, we will not meet the second lien debt coverage ratio that we need to hit in order to um qualify for the Wisconsin DNR's favorable loan terms.

And so um, I think we were walking through some calculations.

I think um, you know, there may be an additional revenue, two percent of revenue or something like that for fiscal year 2027 would be needed to kind of make sure that we have that headroom on that coverage ratio.

So I we talked about this.

Um they're kind of thinking about what that's gonna mean for the fiscal year 2027 budget, so just something to watch out for any questions from committee.

Honor Member Brown.

Yeah, thank you so much.

I appreciate you guys coming here and being accountable uh to elected officials in this way.

Um I would agree and echo the sentiments of Alderman Bauman that it, you know, just broadly nothing is too nice for the residents of Milwaukee.

Um, right?

And nothing not so our residents deserve the best, you know, when it when it comes to this.

And so I just I want to underline that I think that you know that the maintenance of this stuff, obviously the issues that happen in Bayview that are the subject of the letter that Alder Roman Dmitrievich and other electeds from Bayview signed.

Um hugely important.

Obviously, that's that's MMSD, but there's you know it's all it's all synergistic, right?

We should be setting the standard um for how everything is cleaned out and how everything is maintained, and if there's you know uh you know a change in the way that we're accounting for things, you know, that might result in it you know, maybe financially not looking as great.

Well then we just need to either bring in more revenue or get more revenue from the state, or in some way, you know, improve um in some way, you know, improve that financial picture, but in no way should that um result in a lessening of services.

In fact, what I think what what I want and what my residents want is an increase in services.

Um, you know, and so things you know can't be cleared out.

I do also appreciate that we should be looking holistically at this.

I mean, I'll just say that I think that you know, making sure that we're you know, I appreciate the commissioner's commitment to regular street sweepings across the city, and even in um uh exemption parking areas.

That's gonna be a critical piece of making sure that things are things are cleared out.

Once the um once we can um you know get the get the rip rip the legislature from the snowflake woke conservatives that it won't let us ban takeout containers here.

We can ban these plastic bags, we can ban these takeout containers that end up going into the sewer and clogging things in the first place, these single-use plastic disposables that now we're with these funds that you all are presenting on, you know, dealing with, right?

And that's uh so it's a really um unfortunately um politically unfortunately unfortunately a politically synergistic situation that where it's gonna require everybody to you know work together.

So I I appreciate that from the commissioner that we're gonna be sweeping more.

I wanna, you know, I I appreciate hearing commitment from you that we want top-notch services and cleaning schedules and replacement schedules.

I we want all those things, even if um, you know, I I think like I said, Milwaukee deserves Milwaukee residents deserve nothing but the best um here.

So I I appreciate that.

And but it's all I'll just also offer for the rest of the committee that it is also synergistic.

We have to change me how we call we have to change what we uh what we do, you know, and as far as our politics here in Wisconsin to be able to, you know, really capture the the real problems.

I mean, there's all kinds of disposables that are ending up in our city sewer system.

I mean, I think that, and maybe I'd be curious if you if that is what you guys are finding on the ground with our crews that it's the disposables or what else that that could be that we could actually prevent no pun intended upstream from um going in and causing some of these backups and and issues.

Yeah, definitely.

I mean, the the trash and debris that we find in the catch race and grates is certainly a concern.

It was in April, um, and but any storm event it can be a problem as those wash from parking lots and wherever else down to our uh to our catch basins for sure.

Uh are you done, Arnold?

I am thank you.

Art Member uh the cost of catch base and clean out and street sweeping, is any of that covered by the sewer maintenance fund or is that tax levy?

That is all covered by the sewer maintenance fund.

So street cleaning, uh, street sweeping is oh, I'm sorry, street sweeping.

Uh so that's part of the transfer that goes to um forestry.

That's part of that 27 million dollars.

So there's a transfer from the maintenance fund to forestry current to fund some or all of their street street sweeping costs?

Yeah, I believe it's a portion of street sweeping, tree trimming, and I thought there was a third one that I'm blinking out at the moment.

And the sewer maintenance fee is c is collected from tax exempt entities as well as crimes.

Okay, yep.

Very good.

Thank you.

Any other questions from committee?

Uh hearing onerman uh move to place on file.

Hearing no objections, so ordered.

Thank you.

Next up, we have item 18, file number two, 60484 communication from WE Energy's and other agencies relating to rate cases current before the state of Wisconsin's public service commission, as well as the impacts of the recent proliferation of data centers.

And this is sponsored by Alderman Brower.

Honderman Brower, did you want to speak?

Yeah, thank you so much, Madam Chair.

I really appreciate it.

I believe we do have representatives from WEC energy groups, so I would invite them to come forward at this time.

They did submit.

I appreciate it.

They responded to our email and are able to come out this morning uh to talk with us.

I appreciate the conversation.

I believe they have a presentation as well that they can share.

Um so I would actually say that before you know we get into you know a huge conversation.

I would love to you know hear and see this presentation that they have uh here before us today.

Thank you all for coming in, really appreciate it.

Um but broadly, you know, we um I continue to get calls and and contacts from residents that are concerned about the situation, you know, here with rates and especially this communication file also talked about the proliferation of data centers.

That is a huge issue politically right now.

Um, and so I'm I'm really appreciative of we energies coming in here, but I do have questions, but I want to I want to hear their presentation first.

I have questions that I'd like to ask.

I know other members of this committee um and constituents have submitted questions to me as well.

If you could please say um thank you, uh Chair Cogs and um other members of the committee for inviting us to speak here today.

Um my name is Bert Garvin.

With me is Michelle Benesek and Jennifer Buchanan.

Um I understand the committee has some questions for us uh about the rate filing we made this past spring, and we're happy to address those questions.

Um to set the stage, I do have to go through a short presentation we put together, the team put together, uh, we'd like to go through to that explains some of the important details of the filing and also addresses the committee's interest in talking about data centers.

So I just want to make sure um I can share share the presentation.

Okay.

Is that thank you, Corbin?

This isn't my computer, so I'm okay.

So that's fine.

We should be able to get up for you.

Is that I mean that's the screen I hit to share.

Yeah.

What is your position again?

Thank you.

My position.

Uh I'm the executive uh VP for external affairs at the parents, so we have seven utilities.

I'm responsible for the regulatory um for compliance and uh government affairs for the corporation.

Thank you.

Okay.

And Michelle, you want to vice president of Wisconsin field and system operations.

So I do have wee energies under my umbrella.

Do you want to sit there?

And internship and apprenticeship director for our high school student programs and also some of our adult programs.

Can you give your name again?

What was your name?

Jennifer Buchanan.

McCann.

Okay.

Whatever.

So just so move it here.

That'll move it for me to go back to see that, okay.

Okay, so um after the technical challenges, uh we have we have about 10 slides.

Um I'm gonna go through uh six or seven, and then I'll turn it over to Michelle and Jennifer.

But uh the first thing I wanted to talk about um with any rate filing for any of our utilities, we have some key objectives, and our rate filing really delivers on four objectives.

One is delivering on our responsibility to continue to provide safe and reliable energy.

The second is working to keep our customers' bills as low as possible.

Third, investing every year in the energy grid to ensure we can continue to provide the safe and reliable energy that our customers expect.

And the last, and this is new from our previous rate filing two years ago in terms of objective, and it's part of this uh subject matter of this hearing is protecting our non-data center customers from data center customers' uh costs.

I'm sure I have a question on that.

Um, wouldn't there be a fifth objective, and that is to maximize the rate of return to your private shareholders?

Is that a consideration in any of these rate cases?

Well, considered in our application is the return requirement, which is set by regulators.

But it is your recommendation.

Oh you argue for those rates of return.

It just doesn't come down from heaven somehow.

You argue for a rate of return.

Yeah, we advocate a position.

That's correct, all the time.

And isn't one of the goals of a shareholder-owned utility is to generate profit for shareholders.

Well, it's it's part of uh being a uh privately held company.

There is an expectation of a return on and of your investment.

So that would be a fifth our rate review objective.

That would be a fifth objective.

That's your position.

So you you you disagree with that, say No, I don't disagree with it.

I'm just I highlighted what were the key objectives for our company.

There are many.

So let's um let's let them get through with the 10 slides, then let's ask the questions.

Sure.

Go ahead.

Okay.

The next uh the next slide I wanted to hit on.

Um, and and I would before I before I leave the last slide, I did want to talk a little bit about the process.

Um the public service commission in Madison, of which the City of Milwaukee is a party.

Um staff and intervener testimony.

Uh we filed our application in April.

It's been through a very thorough audit the last four or five months.

Um then staff and interveners will file testimony early next month on August 11th.

We'll file some rebuttal.

Uh the public hearing in the area um, which is in Milwaukee, I'm not aware if that's been scheduled yet, and there's technical hearings um scheduled uh in Madison on September 15th.

And then the way the process works is then we brief it along with the parties, and then the commission has a uh discussion of record where they go through the findings, the testimony, all the evidence, and then they um decide they complete the rate review by issuing an order in December that um describes the revenue requirement, what we're authorized authorized to recover from our customers.

And that decision again is expected in December.

Um, you know, the point I made at the outset of what are we doing to keep uh bills as low as possible, uh, you know, a key element is working every day with our team to keep bills as low as possible as we meet our customers' needs.

Uh our filing this year uh includes hundreds of millions of dollars of credits and customer savings from Federal tax credits uh and earning sharing.

And later this year we expect with commission approval to um flow back another 30 uh 31 million in fuel savings to our customers.

The other thing we've done over the last we worked with the Citizens Utility Board back in 2021 to expand the program called Lyft, um, which is specifically for our customers.

Um we help uh tens of thousands of customers every year that are struggling with their bill with uh with uh assistance through that program.

And I think where I think we could work together where we need help, whether it's Chicago or Milwaukee or wherever we serve, is making sure that people that are eligible for low-income assistance actually get it.

Um so that's that's uh something we I frequently say when I make speaking engagements with public officials, that's where we could uh could use your help.

Um and I think that's um, you know, again, we try to be as efficient as we can, but these are the sort of resources that are available uh to our customers.

Now on data centers, um there's been a lot of uh discussion in our state about um data centers, and we're pleased to have two uh you know, Wisconsin has become a hot spot for data centers, and we're currently um assisting large hyperscalers at two sites in Mount Pleasant and Racine County and in Ozaki County uh at Port Washington.

And uh it's something uh we've been very proud of over the last couple of years, working both commercially and through a very public process leading the effort to protect our customers from these costs.

Because this is a unique time in Wisconsin's history.

Our growth used to be, you know, 0.1 percent, now it's 40 percent over the next five years, and it's a fair question we get asked whether we're in Madison or here.

Okay, I think this this is good for Wisconsin, but I don't want my constituents paying for it.

And the other question we get is what happens if they don't show up.

You're building all these plants.

Uh we don't want to be stuck with the bill.

And on both those fronts, we've really been successful with our state regulators who recently and unanimously approved our very large customer tariff proposal that ensures that none of these costs that are being borne by uh data centers will be shifted to your constituents and uh throughout our footprint.

And we've really spent uh a lot of time with both customers stakeholders to come up with a one of the toughest and most transparent uh very large customer tariffs in the country.

And um, you know, and just giving an example that we were trying to do two things, and this this process started a year and a half, two years ago is how do we demonstrate that whether it's wires or generation that our non-data center customers are not going to be stuck with those costs.

And in our rate filing, um we've we've disclosed that there's I mean, don't hold me to the exact number, but it's roughly two billion dollars in over the next two years will be charged directly to our uh data center customers at those two sites to pay for the cost that we are required to serve them.

And this next slide is turning back to um you know the rate case.

And this is this slide is one we use frequently just showing at the at the corporate level what we're spending in renewables um over the next five years.

And this includes both uh We Energy's Wisconsin public service, um, so it's not just we energies.

As part of our all above strategy, we've really integrated a lot of renewables into our fleet, not just going forward the next five years, but we've put over two gigawatts of renewables that are under operation now in southeast Wisconsin.

And you can see there these are uh very big numbers in terms of uh you know, if you give g give you a sense of idea, our We Energy's capacity, our generating fleet is about 5600 uh megawatts.

This shows you we're building more than that, and again, across the whole footprint uh over the next five years.

And that's something that you know we get a lot of questions is solar, battery storage, uh, and wind.

Uh but we've the commission in Madison has obviously been this the not just us but the other utilities of the state have a tremendous amount of construction applications because each one of these need requires uh the approval and review.

It's reviewed by the staff there over uh you know, these applications take well over a year in many cases, uh goes through a full um and transparent process.

So it's not we we this is what our plan is, but it obviously we need regulatory support to execute on that.

And it is a driver in our rate cases.

It was in the last rate case, I think, you know, we recover these renewable investments over 20 to 30 years.

The last rate case there was about a billion um a little under.

And in this rate case, you know, a key driver in in our uh requested uh ask at the commission is uh six over six hundred million dollars in either most of these have been approved, but uh we have another tranche of solar, wind, and battery projects that we use to serve all of our customers, and here's just the numbers.

So um this this show this slide shows what our typical customer would see as a as an increase in their monthly bill if our application is granted as it's filed.

Now I would tell you, I've been with the company for 15 years.

We do the the commission in its audit process reduces our ask.

We're required by state law to come in every two years or by by order to come in every year.

We just wanted to highlight um this is for 2027 uh for the typical We Energy's residential customer, $13 in 27, $8 to $9 uh dollars per month uh in 28.

Again, that's if we get 100 percent, which is very unlikely.

And then at Wisconsin gas, it's eight dollars in twenty-seven and five dollars to five dollars and fifty cents per month at Wisconsin gas.

Um and then I wanted to present the uh the right at the right, you can see our increases incurring this rate case over the last decade.

It generally tracks with the challenge a lot of utilities have had.

Our our increases are consistent with inflation at or uh at or around uh inflation, and that shows you uh the number over the last, you know, with the projected uh application with the projected revenue uh increases we've saw it for 27 and 28, what that would pencil out at.

So with that, um one other thing I did want to mention before I turn it over to Michelle.

I mean, as we balance more and more renewables and um and as we face more uh severe weather, we're fortunate to have our our top person here who manages that um uh Michelle, and I'd like to turn it over to her to go through the next couple slides and show the nexus to the rate case.

Thank you, Bert.

So part of our 27 and 28 rate review also includes sustaining our reliability investments.

We have seen an improvement and a success story in increased tree trimming and tree removal.

So in 25, we trim nearly 3100 miles.

So that's a 334% increase from 2024.

We also removed 8600 hazard trees of those 8600, 7600 of those were affected by Emerald Ash.

Forestry related outages are down 25%, and those outage durations are 75% shorter compared to the three-year average.

And in 26 through 28, we will be treat uh trimming on an annual basis 2500 to 3,000 lines, removing 8,000 to 10,000 hazard trees, and forestry related outages will continue to improve.

That is we energy's um overall.

But if I want to just give a statistic on the Milwaukee area, so from 2025 through 2028, nearly 20 million dollars will be spent on the lines that serve Milwaukee.

Next slide.

Thank you.

So continuing on sustaining reliability, so uh future investments in our grid resiliency and storm hardening to strengthen the grid.

In 25, we installed 58 miles of underground cable.

We installed 101 sectionalizing and automation devices.

And what these devices do is they reduce outages, and then in some cases, depending on where the fault is, it can also then shorten the length of an outage if there is an outage.

And we're gonna continue that trend in 26 through 28.

So the plan is to install 60 to 80 miles of underground cable each year and install 100 to 150 sectionalizing and automation devices, and again, that goes to reducing the outages and shortening outages.

So Milwaukee specific, we will be investing 22 million dollars in 27 and 28 combined.

And Jennifer, I'll pass it to you.

Thank you.

So other things that we're investing in is our future workforce, and I'm um very thankful that you have us here today um so that I can talk about our careers and energy program.

Um we employ students, high school students, as juniors and seniors to get into trades with Weenergies.

Um of those students that since 2019, we have approximately 40 full-time employees at this moment um that have come fully through our programs.

Um we partner with Milwaukee Public Schools and also other participating high schools within Milwaukee County.

Um of those 40 employees, we have 18 MATC degrees.

So we have nine that would be engineering associates degrees, and then we have our electric power distribution diplomas um from MATC.

So a total of 18 of those 40 um have completed formal education at MHC as a result of our programs.

Um 71% of those students um that have been involved with our programs identify as African American, Hispanic, or Latino, Asian, or of two or more races.

Um, as I mentioned, MATC, they are a huge partner of ours.

Um, something that we learned early on in supporting our students, making sure that they were successful, that they could get to school every day and on time when attending MATC.

Um, we learned that they had transportation barriers.

Um many of them didn't have their own transportation, or if they did, it wasn't reliable.

Um, the only school at that time was in MECON for MATC, and the first bus of the morning would get them there, but they would definitely be at least 20 minutes late.

So, not a good start of the day when you're already like first generation student um at MATC, and then you're 20 minutes late every day.

Um, so we partner with MATC, many others, including leaders and residents of Metcalf Park, um, to ensure that we had uh at MATC campus that was accessible for our students.

Um as a result of that, our students are in their own neighborhoods, they're on the bus line, they're on time, they're focused when they get to school, which ensures that they're successful.

Um, and we also can exhibit careers and energy right there in the Metcalf Park neighborhood.

Um, those that are driving by, walking by, they at some point in time will see our students out learning and working, um, assembling cross arms, climbing poles.

So if you can see it, you can be it a very big deal to have a technical college right in the city of Milwaukee.

Um we do a lot in the community.

We're doing several things this week.

Our careers and energy team not only helps how high school programs, the goal is that we get careers and energy out there to many people, whether it's high schoolers or adults.

Um so we are at resource fairs, career fairs.

Um we do partner with the neighborhoods, Metcalf Park, Lindsay Heights, um, we'll be at Sherman Park this weekend at the grocery store.

So the goal is that whether it's students, their families that were impactful and putting the word out about careers and energies because we do want to invest in our future.

Um and it is life, I mean, life-sustaining careers, it is changing for the the families in general.

We've had students that have been able to take their families to Disney World.

They've never been there before, buy cars, um, for a mom, help them with mortgage rents.

So our programs are true truly life-changing, and we're very proud of it.

So again, thank you for having us here.

Um we we will be at all the high schools in September and October with Milwaukee Public Schools and other participating ones.

So if you have a loved one, someone that's near and dear, tell them to check us out because we'll be at their high school.

And then I think our last slide, thanks, Jennifer.

Our last slide, I just wanted to highlight.

I know Eric was in the room earlier, but uh, you know, we have partnered successfully for the city for with for over 12 megawatts of uh of uh solar generation.

Um, and you can see it, I mean it's helping you meet your climate goals, and you know, we're we have ours as well.

So uh it's been a good partnership, and we appreciate working with you and your team.

So that uh that concludes our our presentation.

Thank you.

Are there any questions from committee?

Yeah, madam chair.

Honor member Yeah, thank you so much.

Again, thank you guys for showing up.

I I really do uh appreciate it because our constituents are just you know super concerned about what's going on here.

Um you know, when it comes to the when it comes to the rate case, um I understand that it it you know that you guys are gonna have a back and forth with you know the Citizens Utility Board and the potentially your rate case um your rate proposed rate increase maybe dropped.

Um so if that is a part of what you guys are um you know proposing, what what is stopping you or have you guys ever given consideration to either proposing uh uh no rate increase um given that I'm looking at a presentation here from I'm looking at um a file that was given.

I actually asked for this to be included in the file too.

A presentation transforming the future of the investor update from May of 2026, where I'm literally seeing um history of consistent strong earnings and dividend growth.

Have we considered having a conversation with investors that um a rate freeze is gonna be more appropriate um given what's going on with the inflation environment currently in Wisconsin right now over um and given that investors have you know received strong earnings and dividend growth according to your own presentation?

Was that a part of the conversation?

Was a zero rate increase something you guys considered, and would you be willing to amend your application right now?

Well, again, I've been with the company 15 years in previous year, you know, a decade or ago, we did propose a rate freeze.

We're simply for 27 and 28, we're not in that position.

We don't have revenues sufficient.

Uh we have shortfalls in our revenues that we're asking for uh an increase to deal with the recovery of capital costs, and also you know, on Michelle and other team.

I mean, labor costs are up, whether it's construction or uh operations and maintenance, and that um those are those are key drivers for this deficiency.

So we have not proposed to freeze, and uh we will not um you know that our advocacy position is as as we filed it, and it's in our direct testimony.

Yeah, no, that no that makes that makes sense.

I mean, I understand the labor costs are going up.

I support labor costs increasing because it's really hard out there for a lot of working people.

Um but I'm seeing um literally, I'm looking at um uh from your guys' presentation.

I'm looking at page four of the investor uh presentation.

The it like literally almost shows an exponential curve of annualized dividends per share increasing.

I mean, what like it it um that seems to be the investor returns seem to be a major part of the equation when we're talking about these rate cases, wouldn't you agree?

Well, as Alderman Ball Bauman uh mentioned, yeah, it is a cost that it's included in our revenue requirement, the return on and return of of our capital investments.

That is a part of the revenue requirement.

No, totally, and I mean I would I would argue that that shouldn't be.

I mean, I you know, as a socialist, I believe that something that serves the public should be owned publicly.

I mean, you guys are a great assets to your teams.

We want you in the public sector, all three of you individually.

We want you working for the people of Milwaukee accountable, just like these individuals from DPW who come and answer it to us all the time.

Um, the difference between this presentation and with what's going on at DPW is that you know those individuals are fully by their jobs accountable to the elected officials.

Um you guys are accountable to people that answer to shareholders.

I think that's a power dynamic that a lot of people don't want to see here.

Although I can I can acknowledge that some of the stuff you presented is good work.

Um I I question whether I would be curious from Alderman Bauman, whether the solar partnership has been smooth as as is claimed in the past.

Um I just downloaded this morning um from the public service commission's website a comparison.

I actually compared all municipal utilities in Wisconsin uh with Webco with Wuy Energies here, and looks like um from a kilowatt hour rate basis that compared to every single municipal utility, all 81 of them across Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Electric Power Company came in at the highest rate per kilowatt hour at 19.342 cents per kilowatt hour.

That's of a bill that would be dated on June 1st of 2026.

Um and and we have um, you know, the next highest municipal utility was um I'm probably gonna pronounce this name wrong because these are Wisconsin cities, uh Wanawalk electric and water utility at 17 cents, but then it precipitously drops for all the rest of the 80 other municipal utilities, all the way down to looks like uh Princeton municipal water and electric utility pays seven cents per kilowatt hour, which is less than 50 percent of what we're paying here in Milwaukee.

Um 7.4 cents per kilowatt hour for um Maryland municipal electric and water, the largest municipal utility in the state of Wisconsin, Manitowak Public Utilities, um, is paying as of June 22nd, 2026, 9.3 cents per kilowatt hour.

That is almost half of what we are paying here in Milwaukee.

That's another large city.

Obviously, Mannixwalk's not as large as here in Milwaukee.

Um, but I just like why is that the case that these municipal utilities have such a difference with maybe one municipal utility being the exception?

Why is there such a difference in the kilowatt hour rate um for residential customers?

Well, first of all, I grew up near Waniwok, about five miles away, but um that it's just a different business model.

I mean, a century ago there were issues with getting, I mean, it's why you said that the rural utility service and you know, entities like MEUW uh were created.

Uh this is a just a different business model.

Um we started here, we've probably served here over 125 years, and you know, we take that responsibility to provide safe and reliable um energy seriously for every customer in our service territory, and we have a responsibility to also plan for the future.

Um, you know, so we can continue to have the energy we need, you know, 24 hours a day, 365 a year, and the investments we're making today and are reflecting the rate filing are part of that effort.

So are you suggesting that the 81 municipal utilities aren't planning for the future?

Given the fact that across the nation, according to the American Public Power Association, the outtage rates for municipal utilities are more than half the rates of an uh the rates of outages are more than uh is less than half the rates of outages for investor-owned utilities.

I mean, I think it seems to me that they're that the business model that you're describing is the difference between a investor-owned model where we're only answering to shareholders, which is a not a democratic situation, right?

Because someone can own more than one share.

It's not one person one vote, like in a democracy that elects those of us up here, that it's maybe you know, it's the it's the golden rule that is applied to our corporations, right?

Which is he who has the gold makes the rules.

Um the uh and so that's what's going on over here at uh you know at WEC Energy Group.

So the given given that that's the case, I mean, I'm just I'm just really confused.

I mean, I would I would say that that is the essential business model difference, is that we have the private and investor rate of return that's so touted um in the WEC energy group um May 26 2026 investor updates that we are having this growth in return.

Um and so I would I the everything I'm seeing is pointing to, I mean, I you know, I mean, do I mean do these workers at these municipal utilities make less?

I don't think so.

I think a lot of these, even though there's Act 10 concerns with these municipal utilities, I am aware that local 2150, which represent which you guys deal with as well, you know, does represent some of these workers at municipal utilities and fights for them as well, even if they don't have contract rights under Act 10.

Um, but I just I'm I'm can really confused by like can you just elaborate more what you mean by the business model?

I mean, they seem to be providing service.

The voters of those municipalities, Oconomwalk, and some of these areas are very red, right?

Some of these areas were, you know, when I went on WTMJ4 and said that Oconomwalk has the hammer and sickle flying over it every single day with a municipal utility.

You know, that's I mean, they even may have some have heard my words on that, and they still have decided there's no resolution before the Ocamawak Common Council to eliminate their municipal utility.

None of these places have votes on them.

And there's an election coming up on August 11th.

A common council could very well of any of these municipal utilities put on the ballot because they're against public ownership ideologically, could put on the ballot the question of eliminating their public utility, their publicly owned utility, excuse me.

So what what is the what is what are some of the more could you just elaborate more on some of the reasons and what you mean by business model because these places are serving their customers, otherwise they would vote to get rid of them.

Sure.

Well, it's not just a business model.

I mean the consumer-owned utilities have their own governance through their uh, you know, whether you're a Cacona or O'Connor, they have their own boards that um set their rates and set you like plan for the future.

I did not suggest that they're not planning for the future.

Um many years ago, 1906 or 07 when they set up the public service commission, it was to regulate privately held utilities and ensure that they provide that uh their costs were reasonable.

And it even if you look at chapter 196 today, there is an obligation we have to our customers, to the public, and to our shareholders.

So that's sort of the three-legged stool that regulators apply when they look at um making public interest findings.

So that's been codified in was under Wisconsin law for well over a century.

And that's so it's a different construct of regulation, but um both consumer owned and privately held utilities, uh, you know, we we uh we all have the same goal, which is to ensure safe and reliable power for our customers wherever they are.

And um, I would I would argue that um you know, as as Dan Hone said over a hundred years ago, when that law was passed, that regulation has proved to be an utter fizzle.

I mean, we now have, I mean, by the facts that we have here before us, that we now have higher rates than any other municipal utility in the state of Wisconsin, period, right now, here in Mo here in Milwaukee.

And it and it really, you know, I know there's out though there's like a thing out there like, oh, you know, that's you know, that's just for municipal utilities are just for these lily white, you know, communities out in the outstate areas, but you know, I think if it can work in a small scale, it can work in a large one.

The LA Department of Power and Water, um, you know, provides one uh power and water for 1.4 and natural gas for 1.4 million customers um at a reasonable rate with a unionized workforce uh that pays potentially even more generously than than the Wisconsin Electric Power Company here.

Um so I think it would just be a difference.

I mean, I would argue to you that the regulatory environment hasn't worked.

We're looking at a situation where we may have um data centers here in southeastern Wisconsin that consume more power than the entire Milwaukee metro area combined as far as its power usage if this continues.

And actually, that would be another question that I would have is that is We Energies or the or WEC Energy Group, are you guys actively recruiting data centers to come to Southeastern Wisconsin?

Are you guys um are you in favor of what's going on uh here with the proliferation of data centers?

Well, again, I guess I'll sound like uh uh typical utility exec executive.

We have an obligation to serve, whether you're a hardware store or a data center.

And that's what we've been doing.

And uh that's different than recruiting.

Yeah, it's different than recruiting.

We but at the end of the day, we have an obligation to serve.

Now we're all we're obviously involved with um talking to data centers.

Um it is a huge economic development win for our our community to land one of these because of the amounted jobs, direct and indirect jobs.

It's good for the community, and we have an obligation to serve that load.

Again, whether it's uh one megawatt or whether it's you know 2300, and that's what we plan for.

And um, and that's why we feel very good about the the arrangement that state regulators have approved, because the last thing we wanted to do as a company was appear before committees and say, we really, you know, we're we're shaky on whether or not your bill is gonna get up.

We've seen other states that have not been as successful as Wisconsin in planning for this, and there have been increases that have been shifted to non-data center customers, but that's not the case here in Wisconsin.

Again, we're very proud of the tariff we put together uh that received over a year of scrutiny, and they just issued an order on May 21st uh setting the um, you know, directing us to file tariffs consistent with that order, and it's a very transparent and fair arrangement for the data centers and our you know, it protects our non-data center customers, which is in 26, 27, 20, that's that's that's our goal.

So uh, and we feel like we we're in very good shape to achieve those objectives.

And I think I would agree with you that I did support the ruling that the public service commission made that required data center applicants to shoulder the cost of their energy infrastructure um build-outs and creation for the purposes of you know, constructing those data centers.

But I think the question here is I you know that I think people be wondering is like when a data center approaches you, and because I I wouldn't agree that those are good for our communities.

I would say that those things that those things are I mean, Beaver Dam, I was born in Beaver Dam, it's getting destroyed by the data center up there.

I don't know if that's in your service territory or not.

But it's you know, Deaver Beaver Dam is being detrimented by that Port Washington.

Um, you know, the residents there, it's a complete political upheaval right now in Port Washington with the mayor being recalled and other things happening where the residents said we don't want this.

It's it's I mean, from a lot of people's perspective, yes, I would acknowledge that there are a lot of building trades positions created in the construction of the data centers.

Um I don't I don't uh disagree that that's a factual situation, but we have I'll say this we have plenty of roads and schools and public infrastructure that you know, if we didn't have private capital pulling the resource, you know, from the rest of the United States and directing it towards data centers that we could actually take that resource and rebuild all of our schools, get this lead out of our city, um whether it's paint or pipes, get let out.

I mean, that's that's the issue I think that's fundamental that we might disagree on is the question of you know the allocation of resource and power, and that we don't believe, I don't believe personally, and my and a lot of my supporters don't, that a lot of Milwaukee doesn't that we should have the investor ability to make these decisions.

But to get to an actual question that we can um actually talk about here rather than just theory, like when a data center approaches you guys, because I'm assuming they must get on the horn with you to talk about a proposal.

Um would you guys be willing right now to say that Southeastern Wisconsin doesn't want new data centers, so please find another utility or another location?

I mean, would you guys I mean, we're unfortunately we're saddled with Port Washington, we're saddled with Beaver Dam.

Um, but we're you know, I'm supporting legislation along with colleagues up here to to do a as best we can to regulate and stop data centers here in the city.

But would you guys be willing to commit and just say, hey, our people here don't, you know, Wisconsin doesn't, this is America's dairy land, not America's data land.

We want um we want no more data centers, no more hyperscale or smaller scale data centers.

Would you guys be willing to just let people know that that's not gonna be politically feasible?

And of course you have an obligation of the law to provide the power line to whomever is built.

I'm not doubting that.

But would you guys be willing to join the rest of the movement that's happening here and just say that you know we energies doesn't isn't interested in working with new data centers?

Again, we have an obligation to serve any customer, so we're not taking a position, you know.

We're we're aware in Dane County, other areas where you know, and I've talked to a lot of legislators, there's gonna be a lot of interest next session on rules and regulations having to do with data centers to address, you know, the issue we've been talking about in bio, you know, water usage and that we're happy to participate in that, but uh on behalf of our company, we would not support a moratorium.

Okay.

We just have a disagreement on that.

No, no, I mean that's and that's fair.

And I think the question this really gets the fundamental question is like the decision by WEC Energy Group to not support a moratorium, um, you know, is is driven as a decision that's made by individuals on the board of directors of WEC Energy Group that aren't elected by the people.

I mean, I I want when there's that closed door meeting at the facility uh downtown here, just a few blocks away, when there's a closed door meeting of the board, I want who sits in that room to be elected by ratepayers and residents rather than by shareholders, because maybe you can confirm that there is a potential, or maybe you can even confirm the possibility that some people on the board of We Energy's or WEC energy group, excuse me, um, are not ratepayers here, might be representing other interests from Wall Street that are on the board currently.

100%.

Is that is that the case with uh WEC energy group?

Our our governance, yeah, your governance with your bank.

We have board of directors that includes both Wisconsin and non-Wisconsin residents, but they're obligation, fiduciary obligation is the best interest of the shareholders of the corporation.

Yeah.

I do I do have a question.

Hold on, Honor Member.

You know, for your governance board.

Who makes the decision as to its membership?

Well, it's ultimately voted on by the shareholders.

There will be a slate of nominees at our annual meeting that will stand um for election, and those are um they're nominated by the board of directors.

Um you know they come in and out, you know, they they they uh ever but that's uh that's the that's the process.

Okay, thank you.

Sure.

Um, Honor, sorry, I interrupted you.

No, no, please, I'll up I would love to have other people ask some questions here.

I just wanted to make sure that some of the main questions got out because I think that is the fundamental difference is that you know, when when we direct, you know, for as um as many issues as we have in the city of Milwaukee, anybody with Department of Public Works or our water utility, we can we can drag them right here and fire them if we you know and through that process if they're not if they're not serving you know the public's needs, so that governance structure, I mean, every single one of us here had to win an election where everyone who was eligible to vote, and that obviously is a subset of people, unfortunately, not as expansive as we'd like, but where everybody who was eligible to vote got to choose who their elder is.

And that's so that's like the fundamental, I think, disagreement that a lot of us up here and so many people in Milwaukee have with what W.

I mean, a lot of the things you're talking about is great.

The work you're doing, I I support that, I appreciate it, honestly.

I just I just want it to be publicly accountable and under public ownership so we can make even more positive decisions like that.

You know, I'd be curious from Alderman Bauman if this last slide, the claim that we've you know partnered, you know, the city of Milwaukee's had a positive partnership with We Energy's is true.

Um I guess the last you know, one of the other major big picture questions I would have would be um you know, regarding return on equity.

Some of your guys' equity is from bonds, some of it's from shareholders, and and can you just explain, you know, for everybody what um return on equity is and what you guys are talking about with this return current rate case uh regarding the return on equity piece?

Well, I'm not I'm not our finance wizard.

I can just give you the 35,000 foot level.

When we do investments, we finance them with a little over 50 percent equity, and the rest is debt.

That's how we finance and that's you know, we get a return of uh that debt, you know, cost and then return on the investment, which is set by state regulators.

That's how at a high level we get recovery off our capital investments, both the return of and the return on.

Okay, no, that's fine.

Because I was I was informed by an individual who was in the know on this that there was some the part of the proposal was an increase um in um you know sh shareholder returns as part of uh part of some of the returns on here.

But maybe if we can't answer that question today, that's that's that's fine.

Um one of the things I know another a lot of people are concerned about as well is just you know, these these issues of the the stranded assets, the power plants that aren't working anymore, um or that haven't continued to work like Pleasant Prairie, some of the generation down there.

Um and that's a and that is in tangent with AI data centers as well, right?

Because we're building infrastructure for the for the public, no, you know this, but for the public's knowledge, you know, we're building new infrastructure for AI data centers.

Um as part of the PSC's ruling, they concluded that there needs to be um capital requirements on the part of the data center companies to potentially cover the cost of if they need to close down um to cover the cost of some of those what you might call stranded assets, and so that ratepayers don't foot that bill.

I mean, I would like to see some of these, you know, we um we owe according to Wisconsin Watch here, we owe over a billion dollars on shuttered power plants currently.

And um thankfully with this PSC ruling, we may not be on the hook for data center um infrastructure, but oddly enough, Oracle, which is one of the partner parent companies of the data center being constructed in Port Washington, is actually suing the PSC right now to get rid of some of those credit requirements.

And what so what is um I guess first of all, what is We Energy's position on stranded assets?

Are you guys looking to potentially just write those off or have shareholders eat some of the cost um uh rather than ratepayers of of stranded assets and additionally, like do you guys what are your thoughts on this lawsuit that Oracle is currently bringing against the PSC's ruling that requires Oracle to have money ready to cover these costs, which apparently they're saying after their credit was downgraded, um that they shouldn't have to you know provide those letters of credit.

So what's you know, as far as as far as stranded assets, like with the current ones that we have, is there any way that shareholders or you guys be open to shareholders eating those costs and then with the data centers, what is your opinion on the um current lawsuit that Oracle is bringing against the public service commission?

Sure.

On the stranded cat uh cost issue, you mean with regard to the investments that the uh the generation investments were making to accommodate the hyperscalers?

I'm talking about current current um because the because we like I mentioned in my initial comments, we've negotiated payment and cancellation agreements with the hyperscalers and they're backed up with credit supports, um, you know, letters of credit, parental guarantees.

So we feel very good, you know, that we've taken a very uh good and solid approach to protecting our non-data center customers from that risk.

Because that was sort of a cornerstone of what when we were negotiating with the hyperscalers is that we have to have protections in place so our customers, our shareholders are not left in a situation where they would have to uh you know absorb those costs.

And that's and that's uh appropriately placed on the uh hyperscalers.

And I agree that that that that has been.

Um I'm just I'm looking at an article from the journal sentinel from just yesterday that Oracle is in the middle of a lawsuit right now with um with the public service commission on their on their ruling.

Do you guys support that lawsuit?

We filed.

We filed uh to preserve our rights, we did file something last late last week.

Um, you know, as we're a party in that litigation.

Okay.

Um so but the issue in that litigation on which on which side are you a party?

We we just said we're we're we're we're in that case.

Okay.

I mean it was a one-page pleading.

But the issue there uh in that litigation was whether or not the commission's decision to increase the credit requirements um was supported by record evidence.

That that's the that's the legal claim.

Uh I haven't, I mean, it's all 17, 18 page pleading, but that's the that's the nuts and bolts of what that litigation is going to be over.

They they ratcheted up the credit um the the triggers to have to pay a letter of credit for their investments versus a parental guarantee.

They ratcheted that up, and the issue is did the commission's decision to do that, was that supported by the record in the case?

So that's what that litigation is about.

And do you guys believe it wasn't supported by that?

Well, we I I can tell you I'm a lawyer too, so I'm saying we we uh we're weighing our options on the um the main commission order on May 21st on whether we appeal that aspect or not.

So I'm not really authorized to give you my comment uh for the company.

And that's fine.

No, no, and I understand that that I mean needs to, you know, we have we have you know meetings with our you know, city attorney's office as well where we have to keep things confidential.

So I I under I understand why a corporate entity would would be in that.

I mean I think that I'm just saying there's two tracks.

There's that litigation.

We don't know whether we or our partners will appeal that portion of the commission.

Because this was a great decision for the state.

I mean, very um we're we uh applaud the state regulators for for the uh the order that they approved.

It's just this issue.

Um I'm not, you know, we haven't made a final decision whether we will appeal that portion of the order.

And the question of who decides still looms of whether you make that decision or not.

I mean that, you know, we we do have decisions, you know, as a council about litigation, you know, before the city in our legal direction in court could cases as well.

And so I can understand you need to have some you know private meetings about that, but that's you know, that's the central issue is that is that that decision will be made behind closed doors by people that were not elected um at WEC Energy Group.

I mean, that is that is is the central issue here, and that comes down to even when you guys are making a rate proposal, what the initial proposal will be.

When we make a decision about our water works, it comes before this body.

I mean, that's the that's one of the one of the key issues.

But Madam Chair, I've I've had a lot of questions.

I know other people have them, so I I appreciate the time.

Uh thank you.

Um I have a couple of questions.

Um earlier you were talking about the right pay and how you're not in a position financially this for the request for next year to um be able to do a freeze.

As you all look towards the future um and and do your estimations, um you said there was a freeze 10 um 10 years ago.

Do you anticipate um being able to not have to request an increase um any time soon?

Well, I first say I'm an advocate for the company, I'm running the regulatory group.

So if our senior management team thinks there's a revenue shortfall in 28, they will direct us to um file, you know, if we don't have adequate revenues to support our current operations, uh that decision will be made then.

But we do that every time.

We take a fresh look every two years, because again, we're directed by commission order to um file an application, whether you ask for freeze point one four percent.

Um that process occurs every 24 months.

So um I hope that's responsive.

But we'll we we would we would in once this rate case is resolved and it'll set rates for 27 and 28.

The next it's called the test years in 29.

We will decide sometime in you know early 28 if we're gonna go in again.

And we do that for we do that same analysis regardless of whether we're in the other three states where we serve, we do the same.

All of them are traditionally regulated jurisdictions, so we take the same management approach, whether it's here or in the other three states where we serve.

I have to believe that as a company that you look at more than two years.

I know you might formally look at two years, but I have to believe I have a bigger financial outlook than that.

So I guess I was just you gave the example of 10 years ago.

I just I just was looking for if if in your calculations there was even the potential of it ever happening again.

Well, I mean, I guess I would just say, I mean, we many people in our community community are facing challenging times, and and no one wants to see rising energy bills, and that's why I've tried to emphasize we're work hard, everyone at our team works as hard as they can to keep bills as low as possible and run as efficiently as we can while we deal with, you know, you look at what we've done on tree trimming.

You know, Emerald Ashbore, the these are huge issues in terms of ensuring the reliability people expect, and we have really ramped up our tree trimming with commission support, but there's a cost to that.

You know, you know, we have we're doing all this miles, but we have to pay for all that, and that's a rising cost of service.

So those are some of the challenges we have.

But then on the good side, as we integrate more renewables where you don't have fuel, you don't have a lot of O and M, that's delivering savings on our fuel portion of the bill where we don't really see that as much, but it's delivering tens of millions of dollars because as we rely more on um, you know, solar is a incredible resource during peak periods for us, and that that saves our customers running money.

And at the end of the day, that's what when we go in for these um generation projects for state regulatory approval, we have to show a benefit to our customers.

That's why we're doing it.

So long-winded answer, but uh we we always are uh looking at ways to be efficient and we take the same approach every you know, wherever we are to try to run efficiently across the footprint.

Thank you.

On the data center piece, you know, data centers already exist um in the state of Wisconsin, and I'm sure you service them.

So I guess my question is a lot of the concerns um that residents have about data centers or that they've seen be a problem in other places um like you know, rolling brounhouts or increased electrical bills for residents um who are in uh in a close proximity um to some of the data centers.

Those kinds of things um have you um in the servicing of the data centers you already do, have you noticed any of those things in those in those areas?

Well, in terms of reliability impacts, I mean that's job one, that's non-negotiable.

So that regardless of who we're serving, whether it's a hyperscaler or manufacturers, we've got to make sure that any customer coming out lake, we we have adequate generation and resources to deal with that customer, and that's why it's been such a huge undertaking for our company to plan all these generation additions and sync them up with our existing fleet to ensure that in no situation is reliability going to be harmed by the addition of these these major new data centers.

So in the data center.

And we're confident that we've done that.

So in the data centers that you already service, there have not been brownouts or increased electrical bills for nearby residents as a result of the utilization of the data centers, use of your services?

Yeah, not to my knowledge.

I'm Michelle.

We have not had any brownouts due to uh our current data centers.

And no increases in utility um bills for nearby residents caused by the existence of the data center in close proximity.

Well, like I mentioned in our rate filing, we have segregated the costs for the data centers, and we can show and our regulators um and interveners, this was a key thing before we filed, is that this is going to be a different rate case because we're creating a separate set of transparent books so you can see what the hyperscalers over the next two years are going to be paying in 27 to 28, and it's roughly two billion dollars.

And it's all transparent, like it's subject to audit, and uh it's exactly the type of public policy that we think is appropriate during this time given the concerns many customers have about the impact of data centers on their bill.

Is that something you've already done or something you're doing for the future?

No, we're doing that right now.

That's in the current filing that we filed in April.

Thank you.

Any other questions from the committee?

Yes, ma'am.

Um, Honor Obama, then on the woman's highlight.

Okay.

Uh a couple of questions on context based on this presentation.

Sure.

Uh page three.

You say 40,000 customers benefit.

What is the total population of your service area?

Uh meters, it's one point one point one meters.

So I mean, by in terms of population.

So 1.1 rate pairs?

1.1 million meters.

So this is when we say customers, the customers is, you know, it's a meter set.

So when we see the other thing, I understand that, but you've made no calculation on how many actual people that comprises?

Well, I mean, we could I could million, three million?

Yeah, yeah.

That's a fair Okay.

So this 40,000, is that 40,000 Milwaukee residents or 40,000 out of three million?

A significant I I you know, we will get well, first of all, the first answer is we'll get back to you on that, but I know a significant uh amount of the participation uh the participants in the lift program are Milwaukee residents.

Okay.

But I couldn't tell you today, but we this is why we'll follow.

Going to page five.

Sure.

Uh trying to get my head around the context of the other.

What page was that's uh that's the got your solar battery wind.

Uh did you did you say that you currently have 5,600 megawatt generating capacity?

Yeah, roughly the nameplate capacity at Weenergies is about 5600 megawatts.

And that includes, you know, everything gas, coal.

Um that's why I'm trying to get my head around some rules.

So you are literally in the next five years planning to more than double capacity, if not triple, because I'm sure it's it's not all going the additional capacity is not all gonna be attributable to solar battery or wind.

You also have gas plants.

Oh, yeah.

And the commit no, that's a good question.

I should say that the commission has approved um two significant gas uh plants, but those are all being paid 100 percent by the hyperscalers.

And when I look at and what's the megawatt capacity of those?

Um again, subray check one they're they're uh I don't know, 1.2, what 1200 megawatts, I think.

I don't know.

Do you know?

I mean, we can get back to you on that, but it they're they're big generating facilities.

Right.

And along those lines, what's the current status?

I have that here.

I mean, I can I can't.

What's the status of Oak Creek, which is a coal burner, correct?

Yeah, we've ex the Oak the older Oak Creek units.

Um, we have two units.

We have two units.

Um we're gonna be running the newer units, dual fuel, they'll be able to run on natural gas, or they are they will be they are running on natural gas.

And um uh on the older, you know, Eisenhower level units, the Oak Creek 7 and 8, we extended them through um I think the end of next year.

What is that mean?

Yeah, but I mean it with we no yeah, it'll we we um we already have the replacements there that are uh cleaner natural gas units that are at that interconnection point.

Coal burning units will be shut down effectively.

Yeah, because the air permit the we have issues with the air permit.

You also have generation interconnection uh an issue because we've already committed the natural gas units to be interconnected to the grid, so yeah.

That's their uh going to the uh page well page eight and nine, all this trimming and and underground.

You you say you have uh just again context.

2500 to 3,000 line miles each year.

What's your total line miles?

Yeah, so the total oh of electric across the grid, I'll follow up on that.

I did try to.

I try to get a context.

I mean, if you have 10,000 line miles, I'd say, oh, trimming a third of it is impressive.

If you're trimming up one percent of it, I'd say not very impressive.

So context seems to be missing in a lot of these slide presentations.

I will get back to you on that.

Uh same with the cable.

I mean, it's all fifty-eight miles of underground cable.

How much underground cable is now in the system, how much is not underground and above ground?

I mean, it's again that that may be an impressive number or maybe totally unimpressive, my point.

I'll get back to you on that.

The job training business on page 10.

Uh since the start of this program, when did it start?

2017.

So it's been in operation nine years and you've hired 40 people?

Yes, keeping in mind that we've hired more than that.

These are the students that actually made it through the entire program, meaning all their apprenticeship programs.

If they needed formal training, like with MATC, they completed their degrees, which sometimes take longer than two years.

35 per year.

So in total, we've hired over 300, and that's going back to 2019.

So already have survived this process.

40 people, yes.

And what's the total employment of We Energies?

Um well, WEC is 7,000.

I don't know what it is.

It's over 7.

That's that's all of our companies.

But we have yeah, I understand.

And let me just add on to this because um we don't look at success just as those 40.

We have judges that come in and they educate our students on driver's license, making sure that they're clean, um, keeping the driver's license clean, making sure your circle consists of people that are going to support you and keep you in a like a positive aspect of life, making sure you know who's in your car, what they bring in the car, is there a key in the ignition.

We are teaching the city kids those things.

Um, but I just want to make sure there's context here.

For sure.

And those thousand employees in this program is how to do that.

Yeah, that and that's W E CY, just to be clear.

So we are giving them tools in their tool belt that maybe they may not even receive at school.

We also teach them financial management, whether it's to do with 401k, invest investing their money, saving their money, um FICO, like all of those things, we're teaching those students, and and that's not something they're necessarily getting in school.

So those are items that no one can take away from them.

They can share with their family members, other people in the community, friends.

So it's bigger than just 40.

I mean, we we were at over 28 high schools last year.

I don't know how big it's the numbers you are representing to us as part of this.

Yeah, so just to add some context, since it's not there, we spoke with over 600 students last year at over 28 high schools.

The year before that, it was close to 750.

So we're educating about careers in energy and many other things.

It's a lot bigger than 40.

And in addition to that, we're at career fairs, and I would say since 2017, we talked to thousands.

Fair enough.

I'm just going off your I just want to make sure you have it.

We're pretty impressive, and I want to make sure you know that Alderman Baume.

And Alderman Baum.

Alderman Bauman, the one thing your question about um the natural gas units that have been approved.

We the the Oak Creek units are um 1,100 megawatts.

Um that those are the CTs, and then we have uh uh a unit at Paris, a rice unit that's much smaller, it's 128 megawatt.

And these are gonna be newly constructed?

Yeah.

Okay.

And when is construction started?

And that and that one is at the Oak Creek location.

Yeah, they're already under construction.

They've received state regulatory approval.

Yeah.

Okay.

And what's the total because we get a lot of questions of decree for all units?

Elmroad units, it's a lot.

I don't know.

Um that's your biggest facility.

Yeah, yeah, it's our biggest, it's a big before the hyperscalers that that was the biggest capital investment in state history.

Right Elm Road units.

I remember it was a lot of lobbying about that back in 2004, 2002.

2006, right?

Correct.

You were there with the company that at that time?

No.

I know she was.

Okay, and then one last question.

I mean, I I was very intrigued by your dialogue with Alderman Brower on the publicly owned utilities and how their rates compared with shareholder owned utilities.

And so going back to page two, your your four objectives.

I infer from your comments that you are would concede the point that publicly owned utilities are capable of delivering on all those same objectives as well or better than shareholder owned utilities.

Capable.

Now, whether they do or not is obviously an open question, but are capable of delivering on all those objectives as well, if not better, than shareholder owned utilities.

I don't know if I'd agree or better, but yeah, I agree that they have the same objectives we do in terms of providing a service at lowest cost and uh ensuring reliability.

That's that's a cornerstone of our business.

Well, you said okay.

If it's an editorial comment, yeah.

Uh that's just not true.

They are incidental objectives of your business.

The prime directive of your business is return on investment because absent shareholders, none of you would have a job.

The shareholder return is critical to every privately owned corporation ever invented that ever existed.

These other objectives are incidental to that, I'll grant you that.

You would prefer to have low bills, but if it interferes with your return on investment obligation, you're gonna have high bills.

Just that simple, or else you wouldn't have a job anymore.

And your board of directors would remove your senior management because they're not delivering what the investment community, what Wall Street fundamentally looks for, and that is return on investment.

And that that's so fine.

I I get this to the cookbooks and all this other stuff, public relations make people feel good and fuzzy about reenergies.

But the bottom line is you are a private corporation owned by shareholders who are expecting to make money off of that investment, and that is the prime directive of the company.

I wish somebody would just admit that and then acknowledge that there can be a policy debate on whether having the public in that role of ownership or the private sector in that role of ownership is good or bad.

And have that debate out in the open without all this subterfuge about well, we're fundamentally directed to delivering.

No, it's delivering on your investor returns, period.

You're an attorney, you studied corporate law, you studied corporate finance in law school, just as I did, and that's the fact.

I wish I had we acknowledged, and then we go from there to debate which process is better for the public who we represent.

So there you go.

Any other questions from committee?

Yes.

Ottawa time.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, thank you.

Um one, I looked at I was um also looking at this um program you have on uh page 10, and thank you to Alderman Baum Bauman for um getting a little more detail in that because um as a long-standing teacher over 20 years with MPS.

Uh I know it's difficult for programs to get in there and recruit students from MPS as not an easy task because they spend more time doing a lot of other things versus um doing this community engagement.

So I was concerned about um when you say Milwaukee students, how many of those actually come from MPS schools?

I know you said you talked to 600 students at 28 different schools.

How many of those are MPS schools?

Um much success have you had with getting MPS students into this program?

We could um I don't have those stats as as with the 40, but we just started including other Milwaukee County high schools probably two to three years ago.

So a lot of our our success does come from Milwaukee Public Schools.

Um of the 28, I want to say 24 maybe were all Milwaukee public high schools, and the rest would have been other participating high schools.

So really MPS is very good about letting us into the schools.

We're there every Friday, September through like mid-October, um, maybe three schools a day, and they also do field trips to ship like the smaller schools over to the like a Rufus King or Golden My Ear.

Um so we've talked to all the students that are interested in careers and energy, um, even just a bit so they can learn more about it.

So that most of that is Milwaukee public schools.

And uh out of the 300 that were hired, and you're saying that we have that that success rate of 40 out of the 300, that that's a big difference.

So do we look at what would cause them not to be successful?

So one of the reasons we have a judge come in and speak with the students, um, some of it is driver's license.

Um we've had students that have gone all the way through MATC.

They've obtained their their um diploma from MATC, and then we find out that they have speeding tickets or they've been in accident, so they didn't make it through the program.

Um we've also had some some kids come back and then reapply once their driving record is clean and they get into the company.

Um their students, you know, they're young, they get hired when they're as young as 16 years old, they're learning.

Um at times they don't have as much support.

We offer them support, whether it's with testing, preparing for testing, so that they can get into the company.

Um if there's if there's issues with transportation, we work with the schools to make sure that they have that transportation, whether in the form of a taxi.

Um sometimes the schools are their counselors are dropping them off as needed, um, just depending upon what's going on.

So we we partner with the schools, we park partner with the local community to make sure that they have the resources they need to be successful.

But again, um I have four kids and um two of them MPS graduates.

I know what I went through as a parent with my kids, I was I was very engaged, um, but things come up.

They're high schoolers, there's peer pressure, there's other things, and if people aren't employed with you at We Energy's to see what an opportunity it is, you will have friends that steer you away from that.

You will have friends that pull you in the circles you shouldn't be in, and now you're missing school.

Um, there's also other things that compete with that.

If if you have a student that maybe is up all night because parent has to go to work, right?

Third shift, and I'm watching my siblings.

Now I'm tired, I didn't make it to school.

We do have, you know, criteria to even get into our program and stay.

You have to have good attendance, your your grades have to be a certain way.

We partner with the schools so that we can get tutoring.

Um, if we see a student is struggling with math with reading comprehension, um, we do intervention right away so that the student is successful.

So we've been at it a really long time, which is why it says we're nationally recognized because we are.

Um we're actually we meet with other state utilities because they want to know how we do it because it is difficult.

Um so with that said, we as we've learned over the years, we've put a lot of things in place to catch a student if they fall.

We can't catch everything.

We're not um in their neighborhood, we're not at their school when someone, you know, is picking a fight with them and now they're in a fight and they're eliminated from the program, right?

Um we can't be everywhere, but for what we can do, uh, 40 students like where they're designers, they're line mechanics, they're making three like six figures, you know, like that is a huge success.

Um, especially when I can say I have a student to this day that has been in contact with us since he was a sophomore in high school.

He now is a line mechanic journeyman, meaning he can go anywhere in the United States and be a line mechanic.

He's worked that hard, he's persevered, um, peer pressure, everything else, family dynamics.

Um, he's built the house, he's done things for his family.

Um 40 may sound small, but it's a huge number considering the impact that it has, not just on our students but their family.

Thank you so much for that.

Um so it is good to hear that you have provided a lot of wraparound services to address more than just the student coming into your program.

Um because we do know that there are certain challenges that many students have in the Milwaukee area, and they have to they don't know how to get around those challenges, and sounds like that you have over the years um implemented some things that will help them overcome those challenges so that they find success in your program.

So I'm happy to hear that.

So thank you so much for that.

Um the next um question I have would be regarding um I have a two more only, um, those solar fields.

Uh so there has been some talk about maybe implementing another solar field in uh on the north side of Milwaukee, and just curious how would that impact the customers um maybe lowering their their rates.

Um I'd have to follow up on that because I don't know where we've we've talked over the last three to five years about doing some solar investments in that you know area, but I I'd have to follow up with our commercial team to find out where that is.

Okay, because I don't know today.

Today I'd like to know what the benefit would be of having that because I saw that you had the the one uh picture of the solar field that was up there, and um it sounded like that it may be uh a benefit to helping to lower some rates.

Um, you're talking in the city of Milwaukee.

Yes.

Yeah, okay.

And then the other last thing is I'm very disappointed, and I'm not quite sure if and maybe I'm not understanding it, but it sounds like um from what Alderman Bowman Brouwer, I'm sorry, was reading here when he looked at the rates of your 81 plants that you have, that there were some.

I guess I'm trying to figure out why is it the business model such that um there's such different rates across the state where some are paying half than what other uh areas are paying.

I mean that just sounds like why isn't it um universal across the state of what the rate is?

Because a lot of that boils down to population density, miles to of distribution line.

Every territory, you know, we have franchises is different, and there's higher cost structures um where we serve versus where I grew up.

Just a lot less people.

That that's one.

I mean, there's other criteria too, but I mean, like I said, we're a traditionally regulated utility, all our costs are reviewed by uh the public service commission of of Wisconsin every two years, and they determine whether those costs are reasonable.

And they look at everything.

They uh they do a good job looking at you know how many sales we're making, what are your forecast for that versus what we're putting into.

So if someone was really interested in really understanding all those details, how would they go about um learning more about that?

Well, the the every two years we file an application, and as you know, your city, I don't know how much discovery they've thrown.

It's normally done through litigation.

Um, you know, parties throw uh you know, discovery requests at it.

We do it informally or informally to try to it's not all litigation because some of it we just provide to interveners if they want to know what are you spending on this at this plant.

We have questions about what you know this is.

We get we're we're very transparent on that.

So um that's I don't know if that's responsive, but that's generally how it works.

You have to have a uh a party, you know, that's interested, you know, whether it's citizens utility board or you know, walnut way or whoever, uh, that's generally how they you know get some comfort as to what our cost structure is for different investments and you know, O and M.

It's runs the whole gamut all the night.

I don't know.

It's hard to answer that.

Yeah.

I I think that uh I I would definitely like to have more information on that because I think we have a lot of residents who are really struggling because of those high cost utilities.

Um that just seems to um really dig into the bulk of the income that they uh may be re receiving, and um I know that there are some assistance with um utility cost, and you mentioned this Lyft program.

Uh so um, but it it is still um uh having to apply for that, and um, I guess I just would like to know a little bit more and be able to um to help many of our residents understand why um there is such a high cost and they have to go through these programs just to afford um to live in some of the houses that they're living in, and that's um when you compare it to someone else paying half of that that cost.

So um, yeah, it is a little bit um I am a little bit taken back by by that and would like to have a little more understanding of it.

So thank you.

Thank you for the answer you gave, but I l like to figure out how to follow up with you.

Thank you.

Any other questions from committee?

Yeah, uh comment I'm sure.

But I think like I I do appreciate the work that you guys are doing to recruit, you know, folks from all backgrounds in Milwaukee to enter into work programs, but I would just argue that the some of the things that you guys are trying to prevent um are in some ways like products of the system that you guys are promulgating with the work that you're doing, right?

The We Energies um We Energies has a political action committee that employees voluntarily, I believe, choose to contribute to, and that is um directed into political contributions that support or oppose candidates that um are try in some cases are trying to push policies that would ameliorate the concerns that you're very talking about with your students are facing, right?

Low wages are a problem across this state.

We haven't raised the minimum wage in this state.

So in 725 for as long as that was raised in the in the Bush era, right?

Um so for a politician to propose even a wage increase that could benefit low and I'm just gonna say could that will benefit low income communities here in Wisconsin, um, right?

There is a political action committee controlled by a utility that would oppose those politicians.

And so therefore, and and you may have or you may have I'm gonna be a little silly here with some sarcasms, or you might have a proposal for a public transportation plan that includes a streetcar here in Milwaukee that will that that implementation of that streetcar will be litigated for years and years and years by our utility, and that was the case with the streetcar here in Milwaukee.

The location Long Waters was litigated by We Energy's for years and years and years, and then when that utility or any utility, you know, um has conversations with um you know with the governor about who should be on the public service commission.

I mean, there are people that have worked in utilities that have served on the public service commission.

So we have a private entity that's pushing for more and more profits at all cost that is influencing the systems that they're that your program is attempting to ameliorate with you know some of these some of these job programs.

I mean, that like and additionally, you know, we're talking about solar.

I mean, I have so many complaints from constituents.

I have a constituent on Dowsman Street right now that at the approval process through the bureaucracy, people think we have bureaucracy here.

They don't know bureaucracy until they know trying to get a solar panel put on their roof with We Energies, you know, that is dealt with months and months and months of bureaucracy, you know, from instituted by We Energies to get an approval for panels on their their roof.

So the the very We Energies, not in whole, but We Energies and the rest of the capitalist interests that are driven by Wall Street and by shareholders are contributing to the very problems that you're attempting to ameliorate with your position.

So it is it is literally um it is in some cases, like uh for the corporation writ large, not you, but for the corporation writ large to claim to want to ameliorate these problems and then in turn be causing the problems that they're attempting to ameliorate.

Like that's that's what's going on.

I mean, I I would love to see a commitment at this table that the that we shut down the WEC Energy Group Political Action Committee so that it no longer influences politics, so it can actually be objective and can be determined by the people, not influenced by corporate PACs that our decision making at the state level and here um can be you know free of corporate and shareholder influence um in that and that would I mean something like that would go a long way to to a lot of people actually believing that WEC Energy Group is solely here to serve um the public interest with you to with uh utility delivery.

Is that a commitment you guys can make right now?

Uh on unceasing operations of the WEC Energy Group PAC.

I I'm gonna I think this is a little further than the file was noticed.

Okay, um, to be had.

But I do I do um encourage you to hear what he's saying.

Um but but yeah, um are there any other questions uh from committee?

Um I do before we end the file, I do want to say this.

Um thank you all for coming.

Thank you.

If I'm honest, I'm surprised you guys tell.

So I do appreciate your presence, the information you share.

I do hope that you do follow up with the additional information that some members requested that you commit it um to providing.

Um and I'll just end with um Jennifer, the I'm familiar with the Antioch program because of it coming to my daughter's school.

Um and her sitting in that workshop.

And although she does not and will not work for We Energies, um, she appreciated even just the workshop and the outreach.

I later ran into the woman who ran the workshop um a couple weeks later, and she shared with me her take on my daughter and the impression she made and the other young people um in the room.

So when you say just the program affects more than the 40, I can truly um agree with you on that.

I know it had an impact on my daughter, and I know that those young people um also had an impact even on the staff that does um does the program and in in recent weeks as uh our own public works department has shared with us different things that they're doing.

I know I and some others have encouraged them to examine how you all do the program to see more ways for our public works department to get into the schools and to offer opportunities, particularly that lead to trades and um you know family supporting uh work that we even have available.

So I understand why it's a national model and why people um are looking at it as well.

I think the debate over public or private, the debate over the data centers, did this is gonna go on for quite some time.

Um but I think there is no debate in my mind about the need to continue to create opportunity for young people to have family supporting jobs and careers they enjoy.

Um so I do see the value um in that and erasing the barriers for some that have been there.

So I appreciate that work that is being done.

Yeah, thank you.

Um with that, Madam Chair, just one last thing.

Could you please share your contact information?

There is another school cutting edge that's in my district, and there it's a trade school.

Um so I would like for you guys to kind of work together and see if there's anything that you can do to support each other while we're encouraging our students to to get involved in those those trades.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

If there are no further questions, Artoman um Brower will move to place on file.

Are there any objections to that motion?

Hearing none.

So ordered.

Okay.

Next up, item 18, file number 260.

Oh no, no.

Item number 19.

File number 260491 communication from the Department of Public Works relating to developing and presenting uses for urban wood taken in by the forestry services.

And this is sponsored by me.

Umbers may recall for the last several years, um, done a series of files to um try to get us to think about um all of the wood that we um dispose of um as a city and to think of maybe some creative, maybe some different um ways that we could be uh using or supporting the use of um by uh different companies and individuals in the community uh of this wood than we were doing.

Um so this file is um is the communication between public works as they examine the possibilities of what other uses they could uh have for the wood or what other things they could be doing.

Um this is the file where they're supposed to come back to us um to tell us.

So that was the point.

And I know I think Ottoman West Mormon, you also have some concern about the wood.

Um so this is the point of the file, and so I will allow um Department of Public Works to go ahead and update us.

Okay.

Um Aaron Stoke, Forestry Services Manager again.

So I I wanted to just kind of um share where we're at with how we want to move forward with the with this exploration.

Um the last time um this was like formally examined was in February 2025.

We put out an RFI at that time to um see if there was interest in the community or any by partners, whoever public or private, or not public, you know, private or small to whatever scale, um, to manage the the amount of logs that we produce annually.

And there was no response to that initial RFI.

Our current arrangement is with um oh my god.

Uh with Kettlebell Rain Harwood, sorry, I totally blanked on that for a second.

Um, but they take all of our logs annually.

The status quo is they take all of our logs, we pay to ship them to Kettle Moraine, and then they harvest maybe 20 to 30 percent of the logs that we use, the rest is waste.

And we the the way that the reason that arrangement is mutually beneficial is we aren't charged any tipping fees, uh, which is unique for Catalan Rain.

For other municipalities organizations, they do charge those waste uh tipping fees.

But to see like what other options are out there, and um we're gonna be putting out another RFI with a little more, I guess, room for exploration on what the capacity is in the community.

So last time it was put out with okay, can you take all of the tonnage that we produce every year?

We still want to know that information, but also leave room for um people to respond and say what if they can't handle the 2,000 plus tons that we handle every year, what could they handle or what is their interest to give us a better idea of how we may be able to be creative and like supporting smaller scale operations or um working with individuals or even to the point where there's like with urban wood in general, it's kind of considered a niche um market, meaning it's a lot of like small woodworkers or like smaller scale operations that are interested in this.

Um our approach so far has been to think that the market may be saturated with a little bit the with kettle moreine, and then there's also Hobby Tree service that does urban wood um milling and supplying, but anyway, or I'm sorry, but yeah.

Other problems do they take all species of wood or is it is there some wood that's more desirable than others?

Uh kettleburine, they take all of it.

They take all of it, they take all of it, yeah.

Even even what what box elders?

Well, we don't really have box holders.

They I mean they take all the wood that we produce, which is made up of our urban canopy population.

So we don't have box elders, that we're not sending them that.

Um, but they I would, you know, other species that are less desirable for milling, or like silver maple, or they're more prone to disease or decay or um, they're not getting like ideal, they're not all walnut, you know.

And this had this arrangement with them affects how we cut the trees, right?

Because we you gotta have long trunks.

I mean, you gotta keep length for them to be useful, right?

Right.

When we harvest the logs, we do try to harvest as long of the length as possible.

But the other uh thing to note too compared to like a traditional forestry milling operator or um harvest operation, we're not pruning the trees to get the maximum like log trunk length.

So on average the uh logs we produce are like four to six feet long.

Ideally for like a milling operation, they'd want at least eight feet.

So they're they're dealing with nuances that way, and then just contamination from metal or nails and things like that too.

Right, okay, thank you.

Any other questions from committee?

Madam Chair.

Just a question on when you say waste, what is that usually turn into for them?

Yeah, mulch, mul for like for the it's either mulch or sometimes firewood if they can get firewood from it too.

Um for anything that isn't that can't be harvested to a higher use.

And they sell that or do they supply it to they might they could they might sell it?

There a lot of milling operations also have like a co-regeneration system to like help with the drying process, meaning that they'll take like the wastewood and and use it as biomass to fuel and heat their their operation to have some energy saving that way.

So I I know at least part of the like waste is used that way, but I I would not sure how much of it.

Got it, thank you.

Yeah.

Have we taken any recent assessment on what they make off of the wood that we send to them?

I'm not sure how much they make other than the amount of logs that they've told us they can use, like for higher use, which is 20 to 30 percent of like 2600 tons.

So how much does it cost us to ship the wood to them?

That is um uh between 72,000 and like 90,000 annually.

If um, I think the RFI we uh with options for for people not having to take all of the wood, um is great.

Um I would also just ask that you also uh you you all did this, I think, a couple years ago uh peripheral look, but I would just ask that you update a look at what would it look like if we um if we took care of the wood ourselves and we set up an operation at take care of right now.

Um I did find we a feasibility study that we did do like um this is before I was in this position, but to look at just the local market and then also just to get an initial operating cost for the first year.

Um and that can the total of that came to about 3.3 million for like facility construction, staffing, equipment, the like a um the code generation system that I referred to um previously, and then the concern was that that wouldn't that cost doesn't it because it's a niche market um that already may be saturated between kettle marine and like hoppy for instance, the the three whatever million plus the additional ongoing costs wouldn't it wouldn't be it wouldn't be um financially feasible.

What was the um when was that studied on?

Uh I think in 2025.

Really?

Well that I have yeah, I can share it with you if like if you have okay, yeah, yeah.

Any other questions on committee?

I also would ask before you put out the RFI if I could see it and if I could know the timing of it.

Yeah.

All right.

Is there any other another if there are no other questions?

Um Westmorland will move to place on file.

I can share it with you if like yeah yeah any other questions on committee I also would ask before you put out the RFI if I could see it and if I could know the timing of it yeah all right is there any other if there are no other questions umderman uh Westmoreland will move to place on file hearing objections so ordered um on our 930 a.m agenda item 20 file number two five two two three five motion relating to the recommendations of the public works committee relating to licenses we have uh the cheddar sink taxi cab license renewal application which one of you are not chatter soon all right raise your right hand right hand okay are you translating are you in yes you should raise your okay thank you did you suddenly affirm under the penalties and sanctions of perjury of the state of Wisconsin that the testimony that you're about to give is the truth and only the truth yes yes are you in receipt of notice of today's meeting with the possibility that your application may be denied application keep me ask my objection yes uh please state your name and address for the record uh shaker single uh 447 east jordan lane oak creek tell him he could put his hand down and we'll also get your name and address as well mine yes and fee Singh 3136 South uh 56th Street Milwaukee Wisconsin um there's no police report there's no police report this was scheduled for an objection is is um was the objector notified yes and you provided the link as well um there are there any neighbors present testify doesn't look like it um let the record reflect that there are no neighbors present to testify does the committee have any questions so there's no neighbor um here to testify but I did read what the objection was and the objection seemed to be about um the fact that he um allegedly gave them a flat rate as opposed to letting the machine count it up and that he overcharged um is he aware that that's not allowed don't know what we are gonna have a few uh uh yes you don't yes okay um because the concern is just that he does not do that uh he's not gonna do it again yeah all right um where we're if nobody else has any other questions we're in committee I'm sure ohderman bomb I have a question for the who's the actual applicant here yes you're the you're the driver you're the license holder okay uh what's your response to these allegations well what he told me before I can let's tell you let's have him actually respond and then you can translate for him as opposed to interpret very okay so we do the food again agenda is supposed to be the remote give me the those question let me guys to talk to the microphone okay uh uh letter well he said it's been almost a year with this happened but she he said that she told him she wants to go to two three places so that's what he gave her a flat rate which is improper yeah yes so that's that it that is also improper so it doesn't matter agreed yeah so how long is this gentleman held ahead of license 23 years 23 I like driver now I have that complaint okay I've heard enough so does he understand that even with the multiple sites that's still not you can't give the flat right to see if it mattered needed a second that's okay I'm sorry next time I didn't have a give all right thank you any other questions from committee all right we're in committee do we have motion that that motion was made the motion by honor and bombing is denial do we have any objections to that motion other than my own I object I'll object um motion fails three to two um do we have another motion move approval the motion by the motion by I

No, that motion was made.

The motion by Alderman Bauman is denial.

Do we have any objections to that motion other than my own?

I object.

I'll object.

Um motion fails three to two.

Um, do we have another motion?

Move approval.

The motion by the motion by I do have a question before we take it up.

Are we able to do like warning letters and stuff like that, like we do for licensing?

Yes.

Um, would the maker of the motion be amenable to add in a warning letter?

Yes, I'd like to move up uh renewal with a warning letter.

All right.

The motion by Alderman Um Brower is approval renewal with a warning letter.

Um are there any uh objections to that motion?

I object.

One hearing one objection, the motion passes.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Thank you.

All right, that's it.

Uh with that, uh that is our final business with no further business.

We are adjourned.