Correspondence for March 21, 2017 County Board Meeting:
1. Memo from Sheboygan County Chairman Tom Wegner regarding Sheboygan County’s Transportation Proposal, The Solution, and Memo to editors of Sheboygan newspapers regarding Sheboygan County’s Transportation Proposal (relates to Special Business Item D on the agenda).
2. Annual Report under Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit No. WI-S050075-2.
3. Letter from State Representative Ron Tusler regarding Calumet County Board Resolution 2016-18 relating to County Veterans Service Office Grants.
4. UW-Oshkosh County Board Supervisor Training Survey (hard copies will be handed out at the Board Meeting).
SHEBOYGAN COUNTY
Thomas G. Wegner Adam N. Payne Chairman of the Board County Administrator
Date: July 8, 2016
To: Sheboygan County Board of Supervisors
From: Chairman Tom Wegner
Re: Sheboygan County’s Transportation Proposal
A safe and reliable transportation system is essential for a community to prosper and our quality of life. Due to limited resources, the State, Sheboygan County and all local units of government are struggling to adequately maintain our transportation system. If we want to attract and retain good employers, enhance tourism, and be fiscally responsible, we must address this challenge.
The life span of an asphalt road overlay is approximately 15 years. In order to maintain 450 miles of County roads to adequate standards, 30 miles of road should be paved each year. However, over the past five years, Sheboygan County has not had sufficient resources to do so, and on average, has paved approximately 18 miles per year. The County is also responsible for maintaining 73 bridges, with the oldest being constructed in 1916.
In addition to the 450 miles of County roads and 73 bridges being maintained directly by the County, our Transportation Department is contracted by the State and local townships to perform maintenance on 170 miles of State Trunk and Interstate Highways, 465 miles of township roads, and also performs assessments and general maintenance on 79 bridges.
Each mile paved differs in the amount of work that needs to be done depending on its condition, traffic volume, and time elapsed since it was last rebuilt. Current cost estimates for maintaining County roads is broken out as follows:
Adding a 2 ½ inch overlay to one mile of road = $120,000 Pulverizing and adding a 4 inch paving to one mile of road = $250,000 One mile of reconstructed road = $1,200,000 Unfortunately, over the past ten years, the cost to do one mile of overlay has more than doubled. Investing in a comprehensive plan of road maintenance would enable the County to adequately maintain its roads rather than continuing to fall behind, which leads to higher costs. The Transportation and Finance Departments estimate that this comprehensive plan will cost approximately $11 million per year to keep up with our transportation system needs. This cost does not include city, village and town road needs and the fact that our municipalities are also falling behind on road maintenance. We all can see roads in disrepair, and we all are hearing increasingly more concern about our transportation system from our friends, neighbors,
Administration Building [email protected] Telephone (920) 459-3103 508 New York Avenue - Room 311 [email protected] Facsimile (920) 459-3144 Sheboygan, WI 53081-4126 www.SheboyganCounty.com
Sheboygan County Board of Supervisors July 8, 2016 Page 2 community leaders and elected officials. In fact, since the Transportation Committee unanimously introduced the proposal to the County Board in early June, the Heads of Local Government, and the Sheboygan County Economic Development Corporation Board of Directors have voiced their support for the County’s transportation proposal as well.
I support the attached proposal that presents a solution to the problem. Enacting a 0.5% county sales tax to support the transportation infrastructure needs of Sheboygan County will accomplish the following objectives:
Adequately maintain a safe and reliable county transportation system and be fiscally responsible Share sales tax revenue with municipalities to help support their transportation needs Provide direct property tax relief by reducing borrowing Provide operational flexibility to help maintain essential services and workforce Our County Transportation Proposal includes the following:
The 0.5% county sales tax will provide a reliable funding source to accomplish at minimum 30 miles of County road work annually $1.5 million is shared with municipalities based on their respective equalized value. Each municipality must spend the funding on additional road maintenance and their allocation will grow on a percentage basis going forward as the annual sales tax revenue increases. $1 million earmarked for direct property tax levy relief attained through reducing debt service Operational flexibility is gained through utilizing sales tax revenue rather than property tax levy to support highway capital and equipment needs By significantly reducing borrowing to maintain roads and bridges going forward, the County will avoid borrowing $47 million from 2017–2030. This represents avoidance of interest expense of $12.9 million, totaling $59.9 million. As our debt service is reduced over time, this will provide direct property tax relief.
In order to maintain the County’s transportation system and be fiscally responsible, we must have an adequate and dedicated revenue source. By implementing a 0.5% sales tax, we will address a growing problem, and be far better positioned to maintain our transportation system going forward. We will also be able to assist municipalities with their transportation needs, reduce borrowing, reduce debt service, provide property tax relief and gain operational flexibility.
I want to thank and acknowledge former Chairperson Roger Te Stroete, County Administrator Adam Payne, Finance Director Wendy Charnon, Transportation Director Greg Schnell and the County Transportation Committee for their key leadership and support in preparing the attached proposal for the County Board’s consideration.
Maintaining Sheboygan County’s Transportation System
The Solution
Prepared By:
Finance Director, Wendy Charnon
County Administrator, Adam Payne
Transportation Director, Greg Schnell
Past County Board Chairperson, Roger Te Stroete
County Board Chairperson, Thomas Wegner
July 8, 2016
1
The Problem
The average life span of an asphalt road overlay is 15 years. In order to maintain 450 miles of County roads to adequate standards, 30 miles of road should be paved each year. However, over the past five years, Sheboygan County has not had sufficient resources to do so, and on average, has paved approximately 18 miles per year. The County is also responsible for maintaining 73 bridges. The average bridge is 45 years old, with the oldest being constructed in 1916.
In addition to the 450 miles of County roads and 73 bridges being maintained directly by the County, the Highway Division of the County Transportation Department (hereinafter referred to as Highway) is contracted by the State and local townships to perform maintenance on 170 miles of State Trunk and Interstate Highways, 465 miles of township roads, and also performs assessments and general maintenance on 79 bridges. Due to limited resources, the State and all local units of government are struggling to adequately maintain their roads and bridges.
Each mile paved differs in the amount of work that needs to be done depending on its condition, traffic volume, and time elapsed since it was last rebuilt. A paving project can be as simple as laying new asphalt, require drainage and ditch work, or in some instances, require a complete rebuild of the road and road base. Because the County had the foresight to establish and maintain its own paving operation, it is able to complete work efficiently and keep costs at the lowest possible level.
Current cost estimates for maintaining County roads is broken out as follows:
Adding a 2 ½ inch overlay to one mile of road = $120,000 Pulverizing and adding a 4 inch paving to one mile of road = $250,000 One mile of reconstructed road = $1,200,000
Unfortunately, what the County cannot control is the cost of oil. Although we have experienced recent reductions in oil prices, the oil market remains quite volatile. Costs illustrated above are derived from a five year average. Over the past ten years, the cost to do one mile of overlay has more than doubled.
Investing in a comprehensive plan of road maintenance would enable the County to adequately maintain its roads rather than continuing to fall behind, which ultimately leads to higher costs for larger road projects that require more work to bring the roads back up to standards. The Highway and Finance Departments estimate that this comprehensive plan will cost approximately $9 million per year over the next ten years (2017-2026). Further, to keep up with this plan, investments of approximately $2 million per year will need to be made in Highway capital equipment. Therefore, the total cost of needed capital projects and equipment is nearly $11 million per year for 2017-2026 as shown in the following graph.
2
The Solution
Enact a 0.5% county sales tax to support the transportation infrastructure needs of Sheboygan County.
Authority
The 0.5% county sales tax is authorized by 77.70 of WI statute. The authority was originally granted in 1969 but required counties to distribute all revenue to municipalities; no counties adopted the sales tax under that requirement. In 1985, the law was changed so that counties could keep the sales tax revenue; the next year, two counties adopted a sales tax.
Since then, 62 of 72 Counties have implemented a 0.5% sales tax. The authority to implement the sales tax limits use of the revenue “only for the purpose of directly reducing the property tax levy.” A 1998 Attorney General opinion interprets that clause as allowing a county to “reduce the overall countywide property tax levy or to defray the cost of any item which can be funded by a countywide property tax.” The opinion further states that sales tax revenues could be used to “offset any individual budgetary item which can be funded by the countywide property tax.”
3
In brief, the State provided the county sales tax option decades ago to help alleviate the pressure on property taxpayers.
Estimate of Revenue Potential
A September 2015 Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance Report estimates that the 0.5% sales tax would have generated between $8.43 million and $10.14 million in 2014, or approximately $9.5 million.
Estimating expected sales tax revenue is uncertain, for it is sensitive to economic cycles. Additionally, events like PGA tournaments will add one-time revenue in the year of the event.
Status Quo Baseline for Comparison
Implementation of a sales tax will allow the County to better maintain our transportation system and help prevent a future backlog of work and higher costs. To appropriately assess the impact of a sales tax, it is important to compare the following:
The status quo – continuing to provide the same levels of service with existing revenue sources – and its property tax rates and levy per capita to A forecasted solution that includes sales tax revenue funding highway needs – including a portion of funding being shared with municipalities for their own transportation needs.
To establish the baseline, a number of assumptions are made to forecast continuing the status quo through 2026:
Annual new construction is estimated to be 0.75% per year while annual growth in equalized value is estimated to be 0%. Population estimates are based on Department of Administration (DOA) forecasts for 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030. Debt service is forecast based on borrowing the annual $5.5 million allowable authority, taken as $11 million every other year starting in 2018. In addition to the annual authority of $5.5 million, debt service for a $10 million borrowing in 2017 and a $10 million borrowing in 2018 is represented to finance the new Transportation Complex. Tax rates are of County operations and do not include library aid.
Based on these assumptions, without implementing a sales tax, the tax levy picture in Sheboygan County through 2026 would look as follows:
4
Status Quo: Forecasted Property Tax Rate without Sales Tax $6.00
$5.75
$5.50
$5.25
$5.00
$4.75
$4.50 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Status Quo Tax Rate
Status Quo: Forecasted Per Capita Levy without Sales Tax $425
$400
$375
$350
$325
$300 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Status Quo Per Capita Tax Levy
5
Forecasting Sales Tax Revenue
The first step in determining the impact that a sales tax could have is to forecast how much revenue a 0.5% sales tax would generate in Sheboygan County. To do this, two assumptions are made:
Based on a Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance memo (September 8, 2015), it is estimated that sales tax in Sheboygan County would have totaled $9.5 million in 2014. To be conservative, these comparisons assume that sales tax revenue would grow at a 1.5% rate per year.
Were sales tax implemented beginning January 1, 2017, that revenue would be as shown in the chart below. With a January 1 implementation date, the state would not begin transferring revenue to the County until April 1, reducing cash flow in the first year to three-fourths of the normal annual amount. Note that the tax rate and per capita levy would vary depending on how sales tax is utilized.
Sales Tax Revenue Forecast: 2017-2026 $12,000,000 3/4 revenue in first year $10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$0 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
When you compare the forecast of sales tax revenue with Highway’s capital project and capital equipment needs, one can see that most Highway capital project and equipment needs can be met.
6
This graph projects a 3% inflationary increase in highway’s capital and equipment each year. It does not include City, Village and Town road needs and the fact that our municipalities are also falling behind on road maintenance.
The Solution
Enact a 0.5% county sales tax to support the transportation infrastructure needs of Sheboygan County and accomplish the following objectives:
1. Adequately maintain a safe and reliable county transportation system and be fiscally responsible 2. Share sales tax revenue with municipalities to help support their transportation needs 3. Provide direct property tax relief by reducing borrowing 4. Provide operational flexibility to help maintain essential services and workforce
When the sharing of revenues with the Municipalities is included in the above graph, the potential County Sales Tax Revenue compared to the County’s Highway needs will still present challenges.
7
Sales Tax Revenue Forecast & Highway's Capital & Equipment Needs
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$0 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Highway Capital Project Needs Highway Capital Equipment Needs Potential Sales Tax Revenue Potential County Share of Sales Tax Revenue
The allocation of this solution is illustrated below and will include the following:
Revenue Allocation o A reliable funding source is established to accomplish a minimum of 30 miles of road work annually o Shared with municipalities – $1.5 million annually is shared based on equalized value. Each municipality must spend the funding on additional road maintenance and their allocation will grow going forward as the annual sales revenue increases o $1 million earmarked for direct property tax levy relief – direct property tax relief is attained through reducing debt service o Operational flexibility – $1.8 million is gained through utilizing sales tax revenue rather than property tax levy to support highway capital and equipment needs o By significantly reducing borrowing to maintain roads and bridges going forward, the County will avoid borrowing $47 million from 2017-2030. This represents avoidance of interest expense of $12.9 million, or in total, an avoidance of debt service of $59.9 million. 1
1 Future Bond issues amortized over 10 years at 4.25%
8
Bonding o The County’s self-imposed annual bonding authority is $5.5 million. With the Highway’s capital needs being met with sales tax revenues, the County will be able to decrease the annual levels of debt and debt service. For these comparisons going forward, it is estimated that the County would be approving $2.5 million annually for other Capital Projects. o In addition to the annual bonding estimate of $2.5 million, debt service includes a $10 million borrowing in 2017 and a $5 million borrowing in 2018 (utilizing $5 million in fund balance) to finance the new Transportation Complex.
Funding Highway capital project needs will produce better roads, reduce the County’s reliance on borrowing, and decrease debt service. Approximately $3 million of Highway capital projects that are normally funded annually through borrowing would now be funded with sales tax. This reduction in debt would also mean a reduction in the tax levy, as debt service would begin to decline as existing debt is paid off. By significantly reducing borrowing to maintain roads and bridges going forward, the County will avoid borrowing $47 million from 2017-2030. This represents avoidance of interest expense of $12.9 million, or in total, an avoidance of debt service of $59.9 million.
With the County’s obligations to the new Transportation Complex, the implementation of the sales tax to support Highway needs will result in keeping the debt service levels lower. Significant decreases in the debt structure would begin to occur in year 2024, and again in 2028, leveling off to an average debt service of $3.25 million annually, compared to $6.7 million
9
today. In summary, property taxpayers will not shoulder the burden of being responsible for millions in tax levy increases going forward, and also experience directly property tax relief.
Additional impacts are realized through funding Highway’s equipment outlay providing for efficiently managed road maintenance; vehicle maintenance expenses will decrease; and property tax levy funding that had previously been used for Highway overlay and equipment can be reallocated to help address essential needs in the Transportation and other departments, such as maintaining our workforce and replacing squad cars. This additional operational flexibility is demonstrated below using the most significant factors faced by the Counties on-going operations:
10
Flexibility Gained by use of Sales Tax Revenue supporting Highway Capital & Equipment Needs $2,250,000 $2,025,000 $1,800,000 $1,575,000 $1,350,000 $1,125,000 $900,000 $675,000 $450,000 $225,000 $0 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Pay for Performace Health Benefit Premiums Other Department Capital Needs Operational Flexibility Net New Construction
By increasing flexibility through utilization of sales tax to support the Sheboygan County transportation system, the County will also be better positioned to maintain staff and essential services.
The overall levy impact of this solution can be seen in the two graphs below, which compare the property tax rate and per capita levy with and without sales tax being allocated for Highway needs.
11
Comparing the Status Quo Tax Rate to the Proposed Solution $6.00
$5.75
$5.50
$5.25
$5.00
$4.75
$4.50 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Status Quo Tax Rate Tax Rate - Proposed Solution
Comparing the Status Quo Per Capita Levy to the Proposed Solution $450
$425
$400
$375
$350
$325
$300 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
Status Quo Per Capita Tax Levy Per Capita Tax Levy - Proposed Solution
Although sales tax would diversify revenue and provide much-needed resources for our transportation system, it should not be seen as a cure-all. There will still be funding challenges
12
for the County going forward, and the need to establish priorities, streamline, and gain efficiencies will not change.
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Unfunded Highway $3.1 $1.5 $0.9 $.2 $1.4 $1.9 $1.6 $2.2 $2.3 $2.5 Capital million million million million million million million million million million Project Needs Unfunded
Highway $1.2 $1.2 $1.3 $1.2 $1.2 $0.6 $0.5 $0.6 $0.6 $0.6 Equipment million million million million million million million million million million Needs
However, this proposal does position the County to significantly address our transportation needs, and helps our local units of government as well. If the sales tax revenue grows at a rate higher than projected, this will obviously help close the gap further.
Revenue Sharing with Municipalities
A cooperative agreement would be established to assure the funds are utilized for transportation needs. The sales tax revenue will be shared based on the municipality’s respective equalized value (excluding Tax Incremental Districts) and be adjusted on a percentage basis going forward as the annual sales tax revenue increases county-wide. At present, the distributions of $1.5 million would be as follows:
Town of Distribution GREENBUSH $24,045 HERMAN $21,992 HOLLAND $56,371 LIMA $38,562 LYNDON $29,496 MITCHELL $20,452 MOSEL $22,536 PLYMOUTH $57,659 RHINE $58,856 RUSSELL $6,308 SCOTT $25,999 SHEBOYGAN $124,603 SHEBOYGAN FALLS $35,283 SHERMAN $23,884 WILSON $67,377
13
Village of ADELL $6,072 CASCADE $6,683 CEDAR GROVE $23,601 ELKHART LAKE $49,690 GLENBEULAH $5,153 HOWARDS GROVE $39,690 KOHLER $74,937 OOSTBURG $30,243 RANDOM LAKE $24,343 WALDO $5,347 City of PLYMOUTH $108,144 SHEBOYGAN $411,184 SHEBOYGAN FALLS $101,491 Total $1,500,000
Administration
From the Department of Revenue Publication 209 “Sales and Use Tax Information for Wisconsin Counties and Municipalities”, the sales and use tax is defined as:
1. Sales tax is imposed upon the sales price of sellers (such as governmental units, department stores, restaurants, etc.) who sell, license, lease, or rent taxable products or services at retail in Wisconsin. The seller is responsible for collection and payment of the sales tax. 2. Use tax is imposed upon the storage, use, or other consumption in Wisconsin of taxable products and services that were not subject to the Wisconsin sales tax when originally purchased from a seller. Use tax is also imposed upon a purchaser when taxable products or services are purchased without tax for resale or other exempt purposes or from an out-of-state company and are stored, consumed, or used by the purchaser in a taxable manner.
The Wisconsin Department of Revenue administers the county tax. The County does not collect or administer the tax collection. Retailers who make sales subject to the 0.5% county tax must collect 5.5% sales tax on their retail sales (5% state sales tax and 0.5% county sales tax). Both the state tax and county tax are reported by retailers to Department of Revenue (DOR). After DOR receives the county sales taxes from retailers, they make monthly distributions to the counties.
In brief, for those who already collect 5% state sales tax, the only change in their administration is they would now collect 5.5%.
14
Sales Tax Revenue from Tourism
More recent tourism reports from the state shows that the Sheboygan County tourism spending has been:
Year Total Tourism Sales Tax Revenue from Business Sales Total Tourism Business Sales 2013 $329.0 million $1.6 million 2014 $340.9 million $1.7 million 2015 $358.6 million $1.8 million
How much sales tax can be attributed to tourism depends on how you define tourism, but it should be approximately $1.7 million, or 18% of the sales tax revenue. Additionally, events like PGA tournaments will add one-time revenue in the year of the event. As Sheboygan County continues to attract more visitors, they can help us as they do in other counties support the transportation system they use and rely upon.
Sales Tax Exemptions
What sales and uses are exempt from sales tax in Wisconsin? According to the DOR Publication 209, “sales of food and food ingredients are exempt from Wisconsin sales and use taxes, with the exception of candy, soft drinks, dietary supplements, and prepared food.” Note that packaged cheese is not considered prepared food. Alcoholic beverages are also subject to tax.
Additional food and food ingredient sales that are exempt include: Sales by institutions of higher education Sales by hospitals, sanatoriums, nursing homes and other institutions Mobile meals on wheels Sales to certain governmental units and American Indian Tribes Sales by elementary and secondary schools Vending machine concessions
Other items exempt from sales tax include, but are not limited to: Medications Durable medical equipment Mobility enhancing equipment Prosthetics Printed publications Diaper services United States & Wisconsin flags Machines & processing equipment used directly and exclusively in manufacturing Items that become an ingredient or component part of the good being manufactured Fuel and electricity used directly in the step-by-step manufacturing process Other items when a certificate of exemption is received by the seller from the purchaser
15
Because of the clause exempting items used in manufacturing mentioned above, companies in Sheboygan County including cheese packagers, packaged brats and other manufacturers would not be paying sales tax on any commodities that they purchase that are used directly and exclusively in the manufacturing process or those that are ingredients or components of the final product, if they are not currently paying the State sales tax.
0.5% Sales Tax Impact Examples
Renting a video for $2.00 would cost $2.01 A fish fry for $10.00 would cost $10.05 A case of beer for $17.90 would cost $17.99 A new outfit for $100.00 would cost $100.50 A flat screen TV for $800.00 would cost $804.00 A new car for $25,000 would cost $25,125
Summary
In order to adequately maintain the County’s transportation system and be fiscally responsible, we must have an adequate revenue source. By implementing a 0.5% sales tax, we will address a growing problem, and be far better positioned to maintain our transportation system going forward. We will also be able to help assist municipalities with their transportation needs, reduce borrowing, reduce debt service, provide property tax relief and gain operational flexibility.
A safe and reliable transportation system is essential for a community to prosper and our quality of life. The state of transportation in Wisconsin is not as strong as it needs to be, and a U.S. Department of Transportation Report ranks Wisconsin’s transportation system 47th out of 50 States. If we want to attract and retain good employers, enhance tourism, and be fiscally responsible, we must address this challenge.
Now is the time.
16 Wisconsin County Sales Tax Map
Bayfield Douglas Ashland Iron
Vilas Washburn Sawyer
Burnett Price Forest Florence Oneida
Marinette Polk Barron Rusk
Langlade Taylor Oconto
St. Croix Dunn Chippewa Marathon Menominee Clark
Pierce Door Eau Claire Pepin Kewaunee Wood Portage Waupaca Buffalo Outagamie Brown Jackson
Tremp- Juneau Calu- Manitowoc ealeau Waushara Winne- met Monroe Adams bago
La Mar- Crosse quette Green Fond du Lac Sheboygan Lake Vernon Sauk Columbia Wash- Richland Dodge ington Crawford Ozaukee
Waukesha Iowa Dane Jefferson Grant Milwaukee
Lafayette Green Rock Walworth Racine
Kenosha
1/2 % County Sales Tax Stadium Tax Only No 1/2 % County Sales Tax
December 2016
SHEBOYGAN COUNTY
Thomas G. Wegner County Board Chairman
Date: July 12, 2016
To: Editors of the Sheboygan Press, Plymouth Review and Sounder
From: Tom Wegner, Chairman
Re: County Transportation Proposal – Guest View/Column
I support the Sheboygan County Board enacting a one-half percent county sales tax to maintain our transportation system. As the newly elected County Board Chairman, I readily admit I am not enthusiastic about supporting a new tax. However, I strongly support working together to problem-solve, and this revenue is needed in order to address our growing transportation needs and be fiscally responsible.
Our transportation infrastructure is aging, and due to escalating costs and limited resources, the State, County and all local units of government are struggling to adequately maintain our roads and bridges. I think most people understand that borrowing significantly more is not fiscally responsible. If we don’t have the collective strength to take action, our transportation system will continue to get worse, and there will be far greater costs down the road.
County Transportation Proposal As has been widely reported, the County Board is considering enacting a one-half percent county sales tax to support our transportation infrastructure needs and accomplish the following objectives:
• Establish a dedicated funding source to maintain county roads and bridges. • Share $1.5 million with local municipalities based on their respective equalized value. Each municipality must spend the funding on additional road maintenance and their allocation will grow on a percentage basis going forward as the annual sales tax revenue increases. • Significantly reduce borrowing to maintain roads and bridges. • Provide direct property tax levy relief through reduced debt service. Community Support and Commonly Asked Questions Maintaining our transportation system is a key community investment, and essential for economic development, employment and our quality of life. We have a collective responsibility to take care of it. Passing the buck to future generations is wrong, fiscally irresponsible, and not the kind of legacy I want to be a part of.
The County’s transportation proposal was unanimously supported by the County Transportation Committee on June 2, 2015. We have since received input, much of it positive.
Administration Building Telephone (920) 459-3103 508 New York Avenue - Room 311 [email protected] Facsimile (920) 459-3144 Sheboygan, WI 53081-4126 www.sheboygancounty.com
Guest View/Column to the Editor July 12, 2016 Page 2
The Heads of Local Government, which is comprised of the chief elected official of each of our 28 municipalities, fully understands the transportation system problem we face, and have voiced their support for the proposal. In addition, the Sheboygan County Economic Development Corporation Board of Directors, which is comprised of many of our communities largest employers, also recently voted in support of the county’s transportation proposal. Like most people, they don’t like taxes, but they recognize and appreciate that we must establish a dedicated funding source in order to maintain our transportation system.
As you can imagine, we have received both positive and negative feedback, and the following are some commonly asked questions:
Why can’t you cut more programs and services to cover growing transportation costs? Over the past decade, Sheboygan County has streamlined and consolidated a number of services and departments. On average, the property tax levy has increased less than 1% per year. Our staffing levels have been reduced by 38%, from 1,349 to 841, and our total payroll is less today than it was in 2005. Sheboygan County has a strong fiscal track record, and has been recognized for its responsive and cost-effective operations.
It will cost approximately $11 million per year to keep up with our transportation system needs. If you exclude law enforcement, health and human services and our transportation departments, all of which we are experiencing demands for more service, and completely eliminated all of the remaining departments combined, that would equate to less than half the funding that is needed to maintain our road and bridges. In addition, to date, no one has suggested a specific service to cut or eliminate.
Why not raise property taxes instead? State legislators have imposed property tax caps on local units of government. Surveys have shown that property taxes are the most unpopular form of taxation. Significantly raising property taxes to cover our transportation needs would be contrary to constituent feedback, state law, and the County Board’s impressive fiscal track record.
Why the ½% county sales tax? The State provided the one-half percent county sales tax option decades ago to help alleviate the pressure on property taxpayers.
How many other counties have implemented a county sales tax? 62 of 72 counties have already implemented a county sales tax, including Ozaukee (1990), Washington (1999) and Fond du Lac (2010).
Will all of the ½% county sales tax be used to maintain our transportation system? Yes
How will revenue be shared with local municipalities? A cooperative agreement will be established with each municipality to assure the funds are utilized for road and bridge maintenance. The county sales tax revenue will be shared based on
Guest View/Column to the Editor July 12, 2016 Page 3 the municipality’s respective equalized value, so it is objective and fair. As each municipality’s housing grows and/or they attract more economic development, their equalized value will increase and so too will their share of the sales tax revenue. If the cooperative agreement is not followed, or the municipality does not want the revenue, those dollars will be reallocated for other transportation needs.
Do any other counties share county sales tax revenue with local units of government? No.
How does the county sales tax get collected? In brief, if you are paying, or a retailer collecting, the 5% state sales tax, going forward, it would be 5.5%. The sales tax revenue is forwarded to the state, and the ½% county sales tax portion is subsequently returned to the county.
Time for Action In order to maintain the County’s transportation system and be fiscally responsible, we must have an adequate and dedicated revenue source. By implementing a one-half percent county sales tax, we will address a growing problem, and be far better positioned to maintain our transportation system going forward. We will also be able to help assist municipalities with their transportation needs, reduce borrowing, reduce debt service, and provide property tax relief.
State of Wisconsin Annual Report under MS4 Department of Natural Resources dnr.wi.gov General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 1 of9 Due by March 31, 2017
Notice: Pursuant to s. NR 216.07(8), Wis. Adm. Code, an owner or operator of a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) is required to submit an annual report to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) by March 31 of each year to report on activities for the previous calendar year. This form is being provided by the DNR for the user's convenience. Personal information collected will be used for administrative purposes and may be provided to the extent required by Wisconsin's Open Records Law [ss. 19.31-19.39, Wis. Stats.]. This form is for reporting on activities undertaken in calendar year 2016. Instructions: Complete each section of the form . If additional space is needed, attach additional pages. Provide descriptions that explain the program actions taken to comply with the general permit. Complete and submit the annual report by March 31, 2017, to the appropriate address indicated on the last page of this form .
Name of Municipality Calumet Mailing Address 206 Court St County(s) in which Municipality is located Calumet
of Municipal Contact Person Reali Mailing Address (if different from above)
Email (include area code) reali. w1.us 849-1442 Has the contact person changed in the last year? No Part Ill. Certification I hereby certify that I am an authorized representative of the municipality covered under MS4 General Permit No. Wl-8050075-2 for which this annual report is being submitted and that the information contained in this document and all attachments were gathered and prepared under my direction or supervision. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons under my direction or supervision involved in the preparation of this document, to the best of my knowledge, the information is true, accurate, and complete. I further certify that the municipality's governing body or delegated representatives have reviewed or been apprised of the contents of this annual report. I understand that Wisconsin law provides severe penalties for submitting false information. Authorized Representative Printed Name Todd Romenesko Signature of Representative
Email Fax Number (include area code) (920) 849-1481
a. Describe the municipality's efforts to invite the municipal governing body, interest groups, and general public to review and comment on the annual report. The annual report is posted on the County's stormwater webpage for public comment, presented to the Land & Water Conservation Committee, and communicated to the County Board. A press release is distributed to local newspapers such as the Appleton Post Crescent, Brillion News, Chilton Times Journal and Tri-County News announcing a public comment period. Hard copies of the the report are offered at the Land & Water office. b. Describe how the municipality has kept elected and municipal officials and appropriate staff (such as operators, department heads, and those that interact with the public) informed of the municipal storm water discharge permit and its requirements. See additional pages
c. Has the municipality prepared or updated its own municipal-wide storm water management plan during the reporting year? 0 Yes@ No If yes, provide the title and date of storm water management plan and list any updates: 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 2 of9
Part IV. General Information (contmued) If yes, has the information been submitted to the Department? O Yes @ No d. During the reporting year, has the municipality entered into a written agreement with another municipality or a contract with another entity to perform one or more of the conditions as provided under section 2.10 of the general permit? O Yes @ No If yes, describe these cooperative efforts:
If yes, has the information been submitted to the Department? 0Yes 0 No e. If the municipality has an internet website, is there current information about or links provided to the MS4 general permit and/or the municipality's storm water management program? @Yes 0 No
If yes, provide web address: http://www .co.calumet. wi. us/ Part V. Evaluation of Permit Conditions Section 2 of General Permit Minimum Control Measures: For each of the permit conditions listed below, provide an evaluation of program compliance with the general permit.
1. Public Education and Outreach (Section 2 1 of General Permit) Description of Program( s) County staff works to inform and remind the citizens of Calumet County of the impacts of stormwater pollution and practices or behaviors that can reduce those impacts. Please see additional pages for more information. Measurable Goal(s) See additional pages.
Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned As the Stormwater Management Plan is revised and updated measurable goals will change changes to program. to reflect progress made and efforts still needed. 2. Public Involvement and Participation (Section 2.2 of General Permit) Description of Program(s) County staff works to increase public awareness of stormwater impacts and to promote changes in behaviors to reduce these impacts. Measurable Goal(s) Listed with Public Education and outreach goals. See additional pages.
Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned As the Stormwater Management Plan is revised and updated measurable goals will change changes to program. to reflect progress made and efforts still needed. .. 3. llhctt Dtscharge Detectton and Ehmtnatton (Section 2 3 of General Permtt) Description of Program(s) Identify and remove illicit connections and discharges to the County's MS4.
Measurable Goal(s) See additional pages.
Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned Add areas recently included in the MS4 area to the field screening schedule. changes to program.
4. Construction Site Pollutant Control (Section 2.4 of General Permit)
Description of Program(s) Permitting program used to control construction site pollutants.
Measurable Goal(s) See additional pages. 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipalily Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 3 of 9
Part V. Evaluation of Permit Conditions (contmued) Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned Continue to to work toward a year over year improvement in compliance as a percentage changes to program. of inspections. 5. Post-Construction Storm Water Management (Section 2.5 of General Permit) Description of Program( s) Permitting program used to control peak flow and water quality in stormwater runoff from developed properties. Measurable Goal(s) See additional pages.
Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned Continue to to work toward a year over year improvement in compliance as a percentage changes to program. of inspections. 6. Pollution Prevention (Section 2.6 of General Permit) Description of Program(s) Establish procedures and education for county employees to prevent the discharge of pollutants from County facilities and operations into the MS4 Area. Measurable Goal(s) See additional pages.
Result(s) Achieved See additional pages.
Describe any planned Modifications will be made to improve the Sherwood facility SWPPP after some changes to program. experience and DNR comments on the submitted plan.
• Storm Water Management Facilities (Section 2.6.1 of General Permit) List any new municipality owned or operated structural storm water management facilities (ponds, biofilters, etc.) added in the last year. None
• Routine Inspection and Maintenance (Section 2.6.2- 2.6.4 of General Permit) Does the municipality have an inspection and maintenance program for installed structural storm water management facilities? @Yes 0 No Describe the inspection and maintenance program and any activities that have occurred for structural storm water management facilities in 2016. If available, attach any additional information on the inspection and maintenance program. None were undertaken by the County. No reports from privately owned stormwater management facilities were received.
Describe the street sweeping and catch basin cleaning efforts, and the disposal of waste. See additional pages.
• Winter Road Management Activities (Section 2.6.5 of General Permit) Provide the name, title, and phone number of the individual(s) with overall responsibility for winter roadway maintenance. Brian P. Glaeser- Highway Commissioner- 920-849-1463
Describe the types of products used for winter road management (e.g. deicing, pre-wetting, salting, etc.). Salt Brine (liquid NaCl), road salt 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 4 of 9
Part V. Evaluation of Permit Conditions (contmued)
Report the amount of product used by month over the last winter season (approx. November 2015 through April2016). Table on additional pages.
Report the snow disposal locations, if applicable. Not Applicable
Describe anti-icing, equipment calibration, and salt reduction strategies. Anti-icing units calibrated to road speed. Tailgate spreader calibrated to WisDOT specifications with ground speed controllers. Calumet County uses an identical salting operation. See attached pages.
Describe any other additional data or information used to evaluate the winter road management activities. Calumet County uses RWIS and MDSS for information on weather related events to minimize the use of materials.
• Leaf Management (Section 2.6.6 of General Permit) Describe the management of leaves and grass clippings. The MS4 area leaf management is handled by the local municipalities. All of Calumet County's MS4 area resides within other incorporated areas.
• Municipal Pollution Prevention (Section 2.6.7 of General Permit) Provide the location (street address) of each facility (municipal yards and/or maintenance facilities) and contact information (name, title, and phone number) for the individual(s) with overall responsibility for each facility. Sherwood Highway facility N205 STH 55 Sherwood, WI Andy Fuhrmann Highway Superintendent 920-418-2320 Map(s) included? ® Yes Q No - Include a map of each facility, drawn to scale and include the following features: • Location of major activities and storage areas • Identification of drainage patterns, potential sources of storm contamination and discharge points. • Identification of nearby receiving waters or wetlands • Identification of connections to the permittees's MS4 Describe the housekeeping activities and best management practices installed at municipal yards and/or maintenance facilities to reduce or eliminate storm water contamination. Clean up is undertaken after the loading or unloading of material at the site and the lot is swept by street sweepers twice a year.
Discuss recommendations for improvements to current storm water management practices at the facility(s) and provide a timeline for installation and/or implementation of these recommendations. The canopy over the fueling island was recently installed; drip pans or secondary containment for inside storage may be considered in 2017.
Provide information on facility inspections. Identify and address potential sources of storm water contamination. Inspections will be done quarterly. The SWPPP was developed in 2016. Potential stormwater contamination is from drips or leaks from equipment and sediment deposition.
Describe the municipal facility(s) employee training on storm water pollution prevention (frequency, duration, objectives, percentage of employees trained this year, etc.). The first SWPPP training will occur with the spring safety meeting. 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 5 of 9 Part V. Evaluation of Permit Conditions (continued)
Describe the spill prevention and response procedures in place at the municipal facility(s). Any inside storage is contained and absorbent is on hand for spill clean up.
7. Storm Water Quality Management (Section 2. 7 of General Permit) Has the municipality completed a pollutant-loading analysis to assess compliance with the 20% TSS reduction developed urban area performance standard? @Yes 0 No If yes, provide the following: Model used WinSLAM Version 9.4 Reduction(%) 19.1 If no, include a description of any actions the municipality has undertaken during 2016 to help achieve the 20% standard.
8. Storm Sewer System Map (Section 2.8 of General Permit) Describe any changes or updates to the storm sewer system map made in the reporting year. Provide an updated map if any changes occurred during the reporting year. No changes in 2016
Part VI. Fiscal Analysis a. Provide a fiscal analysis that includes the annual expenditures for 2016, and the budget for 2016 and 2017. A table to document fiscal information is provided on page 8. See additional pages b. What financing/fiscal strategy has the municipality implemented to finance the requirements of the general permit? 0 Storm water utility [8] General fund 0 Other ------C. Is adequate revenue generated to implement the storm water management program and meet permit requirements? @Yes 0 No Please provide a brief summary of the municipality's financing/fiscal strategy and any additional information that will assist the Department in understanding how storm water management funds are being generated to implement and administer the storm water management program. See additional pages.
Part VII. Ins ections and Enforcement Actions Note: If an ordinance listed below has been submitted to the Department previously and has not been amended since that time, a copy does not need to be submitted again. If the ordinance was previously submitted, indicate such in the space provided. a. Has the municipality amended its illicit discharge detection and elimination ordinance in accordance with subsection 2.3.1 of the general permit during the reporting year? 0 Yes @ No If yes, attach copy or provide web link to ordinance: b. Has the municipality amended its construction site pollutant control ordinance in accordance with subsection 2.4.1 of the general permit during the reporting year? @Yes O No If yes, attach copy or provide web link to ordinance: http://www.co.calumet.wi.us/index.aspx?NID= 195 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 6 of 9 c. Has the municipality amended its post-construction storm water management ordinance in accordance with subsection 2.5.1 of the general permit during the reporting year? @Yes O No If yes, attach copy or provide web link to ordinance: http://www.co.calumet. wi.us/index.aspx?nid= 197 d. Has the municipality adopted any other ordinances it has deemed necessary to implement a program under the general permit (e.g., pet waste ordinance, leaf management/yard waste ordinance, parking restrictions for street cleaning, etc.) during the reporting year? O Yes @ No If yes, attach copy or provide web link to ordinance: e. Provide a summary of available information on the number and nature of inspections and enforcement actions conducted during the reporting period to ensure compliance with the ordinances described in a. to d. above. See additional pages.
Part VIII. Water Qualit Concerns a. Does any part of the MS4 discharge to an outstanding resource water (ORW) or exceptional resource water (ERW) listed under s. NR 102.10 or 102.11, Wis. Adm. Code? (A list of ORWs and ERWs may be found on the Department's Internet site at: http:l/dnr.wi.gov/topic/surfacewater/orwerw.html) 0 Yes @ No If yes, list:
b. Does any part of the MS4 discharge to an impaired waterbody listed in accordance with section 303(d)(1) of the federal Clean Water Act, 33 USC§ 1313(d)(1 )(C)? (A list of the most current Wisconsin impaired waterbodies may be found on the Department's Internet site at: http://dnr.wi.gov/water/impairedsearch.aspx?status=303d) @ Yes O No If yes, complete the following: • Impaired waterbody to which the MS4 discharges: Lake Winnebago, Garners Creek, Kankapot Creek (Lower Fox River)
• Description of actions municipality has taken to comply with section 1.5.2 of the MS4 general permit for discharges of pollutant(s) of concern to an impaired waterbody: Calumet County is heavily involved in implementation strategies for the Lower Fox TMDL, specifically in the Plum-Kankapot watershed. Calumet County is an active partner in a 5-County Lake Winnebago System Planning Effort, focused on improving management of the entire Winnebago System to improve water quality. c. Identify any known water quality improvements in the receiving water to which the MS4 discharges during the reporting period. The County is not aware of any water quality improvements to Lake Winnebago or the tributaries to the Lower Fox River in 2016. d. Identify any known water quality degradation in the receiving water to which the MS4 discharges during the reporting period and what actions are being taken to improve the water quality in the receiving water. The County is not aware of any water quality degradation in Lake Winnebago or the tributaries to the Lower Fox River in 2016. e. Does any part of the MS4 discharge to an approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) area (Section 1.5.4 of the general permit)? @Yes 0 No If yes, fill out below. If no, disregard. Required reporting for TMDLs approved prior to the effective date of the permit for 2016: Name ofTMDL: Lower Fox River Date TMDL approved? 05/18/2012 Map(s) included? @ Yes 0 No - Submit a storm sewer system map (may be the same map submitted under section V.6. of this form), which includes the TMDL reachshed boundaries and associated acreage within the municipality, and the MS4 drainage boundaries and associated acreage within the municipality.
Part IX. Pro osed Pro ram Chan es Describe any proposed changes to the storm water management program being considered for 2017 and the schedule for implementing those changes. Proposed program changes must be consistent with the requirements of the general permit. See additional Pages. 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 7 of 9
Part IX. Pro osed Pro ram Chan es (continued)
Part X. Other Any other municipal storm water program information for inclusion in the Annual Report regarding their storm water program may be added here or attached. In 2017 with the conclusion of the pollutant loading analysis Calumet County will be updating the Stormwater Management Plan to reflect progress made and update measurable goals for the programs. 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-8050075-2 Form 3400-195 (R 11/16) Page 8 of9
Fiscal Analysis Table. Complete the fiscal analysis table provided below.
Annual Expenditure Budget Program Element 2016 2016 2017 Source of Funds Public Education and Outreach $20,003.08 $20,000 $20,000 Grants, Tipping Fees, County Tax Levy
Public Involvement and $11,228.28 $25,000 $25,000 Grants, Tipping Fees, County Tax Levy Participation
Illicit Discharge Detection and $4,888 $10,000 $10,000 POWTS Fees, County Tax Levy Elimination
Construction Site Pollutant Control $13,381.2 $25,000 $25,000 County Tax Levy, Permit Fees
Post-Construction Storm Water $3,008 $10,000 $10,000 County Tax Levy, Permit Fees Management
Pollution Prevention $8,569.62 $10,000 $10,000 County Tax Levy
Storm Water Quality Management $1,283.68 $26,500 $25,216.32 County Tax Levy, Grants (including pollutant-loading analysis) Storm Sewer System Map $750 $750 County Tax Levy
Other: $1,000 $1,000 $1,100 County Tax Levy NEWSC Dues 33653 Calumet County Annual Report under MS4 FIN I Municipality Name General Permit No. Wl-5050075-2 Form3400-195 (R11/16) Page 9 of 9 NORTHERN REGION COUNTIES WEST CENTRAL REGION COUNTIES Ashland Langlade DNR Service Center Adams Marathon DNR Service Center Barron Lincoln Attn: Storm Water Program Buffalo Monroe Attn: Storm Water Program Bayfield Oneida 5301 Rib Mountain Rd. Chippewa Pepin 5301 Rib Mountain Rd. Burnett Polk Wausau, W154401 Clark Pierce Wausau, WI 54401 Douglas Price Phone: (715) 359-4522 Crawford Portage Phone: (715) 359-4522 Florence Rusk Dunn St. Croix Forest Sawyer Eau Claire Trempealeau Iron Taylor Jackson Vernon Vilas Juneau Wood Washburn La Crosse
NORTHEAST REGION COUNTIES SOUTH CENTRAL REGION COUNTIES Brown Marquette DNR Northeast Region Columbia Jefferson DNR South Central Region Calumet Menominee Attn: Storm Water Program Dane LaFayette Attn: Storm Water Program Door Oconto 2984 Shawano Ave. Dodge Richland 3911 Fish Hatchery Rd. Fond duLac Outagamie Green Bay, Wl54313 Grant Rock Fitchburg, WI 53711 Green Lake Shawano Phone: (920) 662-5100 Green Sauk Phone: (608) 275-3266 Kewaunee Waupaca Iowa Manitowoc Waushara Marinette Winnebago
SOUTHEAST REGION COUNTIES Kenosha Sheboygan DNR Service Center Milwaukee Walworth Attn: Storm Water Program Ozaukee Washington 141 NW Barstow Street, Racine Waukesha Room 180 Waukesha, WI 53188 (262) 574-2100 SECTION IV. General Information a. EFFORTS UNDERTAKEN TO INVITE GOVERNING BODY, INTEREST GROUPS, AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO REVIEW AND COMMENT ON THE ANNUAL REPORT
Answered on report form. b. HOW ELECTED AND MUNICIPAL OFFICIALS AND STAFF HAVE BEEN KEPT APPRISED OF THE PERMIT AND ITS REQUIREMENTS.
Officials and staffhave been kept apprised of the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) General Permit and its requirements in 2016 by participation in the following meetings and communications:
• Frequent meetings and email correspondence between County staff to discuss methods and strategies to meet permit conditions. • Staff attendance at semi-annual full consortium meetings of Northeast Wisconsin Storm Water Consortium (NEWSC) to discuss permit requirements. • Staff attendance at semi-monthly meetings of the General Public Committee (NEWSC) to discuss public education and outreach requirements and methods to meet them. • Staff attendance at semi-monthly meetings ofthe Building and Development Committee (NEWSC) to discuss new permit requirements and training opportunities targeting contractors, building inspectors, and others responsible for implementing construction site erosion control and post construction stormwater management practices. • Monthly meetings of County Land and Water Conservation Committee to discuss permit compliance, implementation and education outreach. • One staff assisted with Fox-Wolf Storm Water Conference planning, attended by officials and staff. • Meeting with County Board Supervisor regarding County Stormwater Management Plan • The MS4 Report was given to the County Board for discussion at the March 21, 2017 board meeting.
The following workshops, conferences, and training meetings were attended by County Staff: Lower Fox TMDL Streambank Study February 17 • Fox-WolfWatershed Conference; March 1 & 2 • WI Land & Water Conference March 2-4 • Lower Fox TMDL Ag Implementation March 8 • Upper Fox/WolfTMDL Update June 15 • Calumet County Stormwater Plan update planning June 30 • IECA Great Connections Conference storm water track July 27 & 28 • Lower Fox TMDL Implementation August 4 • Fox P Trade Webinar September 28 • Introduction of facility SWPPP for Sherwood shop/Highway Dept. November 9NEWSC Stormwater Pond Workshop September 30
11Page • Several TMDL Agricultural Committee meetings Throughout 2016
SECTION V. PERMIT CONDITIONS a. MINIMUM CONTROL MEASURES
1. Public Education and Outreach
NEWSC General Public Committee: Active and strong supporter ofNEWSC General Public Programming. The county will continue to promote NEWSC General Public Efforts as NEWSC is able to target Calumet County residents beyond the County's MS4, including Harrison, Appleton, Menasha, and Sherwood Residents. Staff provided assistance with • Fox-WolfWatershed Clean Up; 2 Clean Up Sites, assistance with celebration event • AIS Snapshot Day; 1 Rendezvous Site, 10 Bridge Sites, 8 volunteers
Calumet County staff served on the NEWSC General Public Committee in 2016. The General Public Committee and its parent organization developed materials for and implemented public education and outreach activities designed to meet permit requirements 2.1.1 through 2.1.8. The committee is responsible for administering an ongoing marketing strategy to target a large general audience; as well as specific audiences such as business owners, homeowners, elected officials, builders, etc. about the impacts of storm water pollution. The Committee guides NEWSC staff on location of programming and big event scheduling to ensure that constituents of NEWSC members are equally targeted, including the Calumet County MS4 area. This staff person also served on the NEWSC Leadership Council. Please refer to the Public Education and Outreach sections of the 2016 annual report submitted by NEWSC to the DNR for a list of the materials and activities.
Calumet County staff served on the NEWSC Building and Development Committee in 2016. The committee is tasked to update model ordinances as well as educate those responsible for the design, installation, and maintenance of construction site erosion control practices and storm water management facilities as defined in 2.1.6. Please refer to the 2016 NEWSC annual report for a Committee report.
County staff served on the Fox-Wolf Watershed Conference Planning Committee for both the 2016 and 2017 conferences. The conference offers multiple opportunities for storm water education and training for illicit discharge program implementation, erosion control and storm water management BMPs, TMDL implications, and general education. The target audience for the conference includes urban storm water planners, engineers and other professionals, municipal staff and elected officials, and other non-point pollution professionals. The 2016 conference planning committee met multiple times in 2015 and 2016, and the conference was held on March 1-2, 2016. The 2017 conference is scheduled for March 7-8.
Staff presented at the Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association conference held on March 2-4, 2016 on efforts to address agricultural production area stormwater runoff. The conference is a gathering ofland & water department employees and land conservation
21Page committee members from counties around the state for education and training of various topics pertinent to land & water departments including stormwater management and erosion control.
Annual measurable goals for Public Education and Outreach as well as Public Involvement and Participation are established in the County Stormwater Management Plan: • 2.1.1 Develop and distribute educational material, one presentation for new or existing staff, maintain membership in NEWSC, submit one article for newsletter, public notice and hearing for ordinance changes. • 2.1.2 Conduct Clean Sweep programs including educational material, direct mailing to Clean Sweep target audience, apply for grant funding from appropriate opportunities, conduct three educational presentation annually. • 2.1.3 Conduct three educational presentations/display booths annually, conduct one presentation for local officials as requested, develop and distribute educational material. • 2.1.4 Distribute educational material, public notice and hearings for ordinance revisions. • 2.1.5 Distribute rain barrel and rain garden educational material, offer technical assistance for the development of rain gardens for landowners, Hold one rain barrel workshop, assist with local rain barrel program. • 2.1.6 Education as projects are discussed and onsite education with landowners and contractors • 2.1. 7 Distribute NEWSC educational material from general public committee. • 2.1.8 Promote Smart Growth plan and design principals.
The following actions were completed in 2016 to accomplish measureable goals in the plan and to meet permit requirements. The section numbers listed below refer to both the Public Education and Outreach Plan and the MS4 General Permit.
• Calumet County UW-Extension, Land and Water Conservation, Planning, and Emergency Management Departments conducted several hazardous waste disposal Clean Sweep programs in 2016. In conjunction with Winnebago and Outagamie Counties, Calumet County residents were offered drop off locations in the City of Menasha on April22 and the Village ofHarrison on April23. The program collected just over 19,000 pounds of hazardous waste at these two locations from households, farms, and businesses. There were 108 Calumet households that took advantage of these programs, 1 business, and 1 farm. Note that it is not possible to identify a specific weight of hazardous materials collected from only Calumet County residents due to the collaborative nature of the program. • Calumet County conducted 5 additional Clean Sweep collections in May through October in Chilton, Harrison, New Holstein, and Brillion .. There were 6,815 pounds ofhazardous materials disposed at these programs. In addition, the county held two collection programs for electronics and appliances which served an estimated 475 households and collected 29,819 pounds of these items. • Educational brochures and advertising materials were distributed to inform people of why proper disposal ofhazardous wastes is important. The 2016 Clean Sweep program was advertised at businesses, local government offices, libraries, and other public places throughout Calumet County. Press releases were included in the Kaukauna Times
3IPage Villager, Tri-County News, Chilton Times-Journal, and the Brillion News. Boosted postings (paid ads) about the program were made via Facebook and Twitter, and e-mail messages to promote the program were sent to partner organizations in the County. Most local government newsletters provided information about the program and other options for safe disposal of hazardous materials. In addition, there was a full-page ad placed in the 2016 Tri-County Recycling Guide that described all of Calumet County's hazardous waste and recycling programs. This guide was distributed in the April 16 Appleton Post Crescent, and an additional 250 copies were distributed within the county. • The County supported year round drop off sites (four permanent sites) for proper disposal of medications. They are located in the Cities of Appleton, Brillion, New Holstein, and Chilton. The sites are located in the police and sheriff's departments. Quantity of materials disposed through these sites is not tracked, but anecdotal information such as drop off boxes filling up more frequently, indicates participation is increasing. Educational and promotional materials about these programs were distributed throughout the County during the year. Booth -"Renew our Waters" materials were displayed at Sundae on the Farm. Information regarding rain gardens, rain barrels, and native plantings were the most requested flyers. • Booth- County staff displayed NEWSC's "Renew our Waters" materials at the Calumet County Fair. • Presentations - County staff presented to local high school and middle school science and biology clubs. Locations are on the spreadsheet included with this report. • Erosion Control and Stormwater Specialist conducted a construction site erosion control training in conjunction with NEWSC in Oshkosh on January 26, 2016. • Direct Mailing: In 2016 Calumet County mailed 1,400 POWTS Maintenance letters to land owners throughout the County. The mailing informs landowners when their POWTS must be inspected and their septic tanks pumped. The maintenance program is intended to ensure that all systems in the County continue to function properly and if repairs are necessary. • One-on-One Contacts: Staff received numerous phone calls from landowners regarding the County's POWTS Maintenance and Property Transfer programs. Phone calls provide one-on-one opportunities to educate POWTS owners on POWTS design, proper system maintenance, and guidance on making system repairs or installing a replacement system.
2. Public Involvement and Participation The County's Public Involvement and Participation Plan is contained within its Public Educational and Outreach Plan. The following actions were completed in 2016 to accomplish the Plan's measureable goals and meet permit requirements. The section numbers listed below refer to both the Public Education and Outreach Plan and the MS4 General Permit. To meet public involvement requirements under section 2.2 the public was made aware of and asked to participate in the following: • Annual Storm Water Report to DNR: Press release regarding public comment period for Calumet County stormwater annual report was sent to four papers (Appleton Post Crescent, Brillion News, Chilton Times-Journal, Tri-County News) for publication on the weeks ofMarch 6 through March 17, 2017.Clean Sweeps: Calumet County residents were asked to participate in Clean Sweeps held on April 22-23, 2016 (in conjunction with Outagamie and Winnebago Counties), on May 6, June 3, August 12, September 9, and
4JPage October 14, 2016. See program efforts and results in Public Education and Outreach section of the annual report.
3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination Staff conducted on-going IDDE screenings on mapped outfalls along County Rd AP from Coop Rd to Oneida St on October 4 and 10. The outfall IDs were changed to reflect groups of storm sewer inlets that drain to a common point. All of County Rd AP resides within other MS4s; each storm sewer inlet is a Calumet County outfall.
Outfall Sample Taken Observations I Description CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 1: A-D
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. Area around inlet A needs to have the excess 2: A-H vegetation cleared.
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 3:A-D
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 4: A-J
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 5: A-F
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. Some trash at inlets of the roundabout. 6: A-J
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet 7:A&B
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 8: A-C
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. Trash around the inlet. 9:A-D
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 10: A-H
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 11: A-G
SI P age CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 12: A-E
CountyRdAP no Dry storm sewer inlet. 13: A&B
CountyRdAP No Dry storm sewer inlet. 14: A-J
No Samples were taken, all outfalls were dry during field screening.
2016 Reported Illicit Discharges Date Municipality Location Report 3-10-2016 New Holstein Natural gas line leak. Evacuation of local residents for a short time.
3-11-2016 Village of State Park Rd Manure spill. Material cleaned up. Harrison 4-29-2016 Chilton Chilton Chlorine gas leak, no release to the environment. WWTP 5-13-2016 Rantoul Riverview Rd Manure spill. Material cleaned up.
6-16-2016 Kiel Whey cream container overfilled, flowed over impervious surface to grassed area. Material cleaned up. 7-4-2016 Town of Brillion CountyRdK Manure spill resulting in fish kills. DNR and Bastian monitoring. Rd 7-14-2016 Village of Hwy 55 and Vehicle accident. Material cleaned up. Harrison CountyRdKK 7-24-2016 Village of Hilbert Electric transformer released mineral oil. Material cleaned up. 7-26-2016 Forest Junction Hwy57 & Fertilizer spill. Material cleaned up. Hwy10 7-27-2016 TownofNew CountyRdHH Hydraulic fluid leak from County Rd J to Seven Holstein Comers Rd. Highway Dept. put down absorbent. 8-1-2016 Town of CountyRdH Vehicle accident with gasoline release. Gasoline Brothertown & St. Charles evaporated. Rd 8-29-2016 Town of Chilton CountyRd E Manure spill, 4,500 gallons. Material cleaned up.
6IPage 8-30-2016 Chilton Quality Painters Building fire Hazmat monitored runoff; no release detected. 8-30-2016 Town of Chilton CountyRd E Manure spill. Material cleaned up.
9-6-2016 Brillion Hwy10 Dry cattle feed. Material cleaned up.
9-15-2016 Chilton Multiple Hydraulic oil spill. Absorbent applied to puddles. streets 10-19-2016 Town of Brillion CountyRdK Manure spill. 8,000 gallons. Material cleaned up. &BastianRd 10-27-2016 Town of Chilton Town of Diesel spill. Material cleaned up. Chilton
Private Onsite Waste Treatment System (POWTS) Program Calumet County issued 77 sanitary permits in 2016. Of those, 49 were for replacement systems. Calumet County also sent out 25 enforcement letters in 2016.
4. Construction Site Pollutant Control The County's Construction Site Erosion Control Ordinance and Reference Guide can be found on the County's Storm Water Website at: http://www .co.calumet. wi.us/index.aspx?nid= 195
In 2016, 24 new permits were issued (17 sites smaller than an acre, 2 manure storages, 1 industrial project, and 4 large agricultural projects). There were 26 construction site erosion control permits active at the end of the year. County staff performed inspections on sites to ensure compliance with the project's Construction Site and Erosion Control Plan as well as Chapter 10 of the Calumet County Code of Ordinances. Sites that met compliance with permit requirements were inspected less frequently. If inspections identified issues such as BMP installation problems or lack of maintenance, staff followed up with both project owner and contractor via phone, email or letter in regards to the violation, and specific timelines to correct identified issues. Staff also made follow-up inspections to ensure that violations or BMP deficiencies were resolved within the appropriate timeframe. There were 4 enforcement letters sent in 2016, all for land disturbance without a permit.
Calumet County adopted a revised erosion control ordinance on May 17, 2016 to comply with section 2.4.1.3 of its MS4 permit. Calumet County works to improve compliance year over year. To measure this performance passing inspections are counted as a percentage of total inspections. In 2015 58% of inspections passed. In 2016 56% of inspections passed. Part ofthe decrease is attributed to the adoption of revised erosion control and storm water management ordinances, 2016 was the first construction season with changes to applicability and post construction standards.
5. Post-Construction Storm Water Management
71Page The County's Post-Construction Storm Water Management Ordinance and Reference Guide can be found on the County's Storm Water Website at: http://www.co.calumet. wi.us/index.aspx?nid= 195
In 2016, 24 post-construction storm water management permits were issued in conjunction with Erosion Control Permits. There were 5 permits issued in 2016 that required the project to meet numeric performance standards. Of those 4 permits only needed to meet peak flow control standards and 1 permit also met water quality standards.
Measureable goals are set in conjunction with the erosion control program; compliance with inspections is listed above. The post construction ordinance was revised and adopted on May 17, 2016 to meet the requirements of section 2.5 .1.3 of the MS4 Permit.
6. Pollution Prevention The Calumet County Highway Department contracted street sweeping in urban areas located in the County's MS4 permitted from the City of Appleton and Outagamie County Highway Department. Sweeping activities are accounted for the WinSLAMM pollutant load reduction modeling. Below is a list of the months that street sweeping occurs on County highways in 2014. Only street sweeping located in the County's MS4 permitted area are reported here. Outagamie County sweeps the roundabouts at STH 55/CTH KK, STH 114/CTH N, the two on CTH AP, CTH KK and CTH N urban areas once a month during the months of April to October.
City of Appleton sweeps CTH AP east in the urbanized area from Oneida Street to the Round-a Bout at Plank and CTH AP once a month from April to October 2016.
Additional sweeping is monitored and conducted on an as needed basis when warranted after seasonal storm events occur where debris is washed along curbed areas and into storm sewer inlets.
Annual calibration of Calumet County Highway Department de-icing equipment that performs winter maintenance on State and County Trunk Highways was performed on January 18, 2017.
Annual Calumet County Highway Department Staff training on proper application of deicing materials as well as the Calumet County Stormwater Standards/Pollution Prevention initiatives was conducted on November 10, 2016 at the fall safety meeting.
Calumet County does not own or operate structural storm water management facilities that fall within the current urbanized area and adjacent areas covered by this permit. The Calumet County Highway Department facility in Sherwood is now within the urbanized area, a SWPPP was completed in 2016. However, there are County highways and grassed ditches within these areas in which the County Highway Department is responsible for cleaning, maintenance and deicer applications. The Highway Department also assists other permitted communities and the State of Wisconsin with street sweeping and catch basin cleaning of their roads and facilities.
De-icer applications, street sweeping, and road and facility maintenance may be completed by the County on non-County highways and properties. The County will continue to work with other permitted communities to implement all pollution prevention programs.
8JPage Month County Rd Use of State Hwy Use of Total use of Salt Road Salt Road salt Brine
January 2016 192.99 Tons 162.3 Tons 2,341 Gallons
February 2016 519.27 Tons 410.21 Tons 4,598 Gallons
March 2016 584.11 Tons 424.04 Tons 8,171 Gallons
April2016 144.55 Tons 158.49 Tons 0 Gallons
November 2016 0 Tons 0 Tons 1,150 Gallons
December 2016 730.26 Tons 565.15 Tons 13,865 Gallons
January 2017 1087 Tons 850 Tons 18,585 Gallons
February 2017 282.97 Tons 271.26 Tons 6,501 Gallons
b. STORM WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT The pollutant-loading analysis was prepared using the Source Loading and Management Model for Windows (WinSLAMM version 9.4) in 2009. Baseline pollutant loading was calculated by incorporating a "no controls" condition in the software program. The baseline loading for Calumet County MS4 is 27,001 pounds of Total Suspended Solids (TSS). Twenty percent (20%) pollutant loading reductions in TSS were determined from the baseline pollutant load to be 5,400 pounds TSS. Current best management practices (BMPs) that are in place and operated by Calumet County reduce TSS loading by 19.1% (5,164 pounds ofTSS). As required by Sec 2. 7.1 of the permit, the target goal of 20% reduction is not being met with current County-operated BMPs. However, sediment detention ponds operated by other permitted MS4' s are receiving storm water discharges from the County's MS4 and reducing the pollutant load in excess of what is needed. The County began discussions in 2010 with these permitted MS4's and a storm water utility for permission to use these ponds to reduce the County's TSS loading in WinSLAMM modeling. Use of these ponds in the model will result in a pollutant load reduction of 32.3% - 41.7 %, depending on which and how many ponds are used. Further discussion on using these ponds has continued to be delayed because of uncertainties in modeling procedures and TMDL allocations for the approved Lower Fox TMDL. Therefore, the County waited further guidance from the DNR to move forward with the re-model. The County contracted with McMahon Associates in 2016 to update the pollutant loading analysis to reflect TMDL allocations and changes in the Storm Sewer System Map (inclusion of Sherwood with 2010 Census). Infiltration testing began in 2016 and the final analysis is expected to be finished in 2017. The County intends to move forward with the negotiations with the municipalities and utility once pollution load reduction models are updated and pollutant load reduction goals are established by the Lower Fox River TMDL. c. BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE MAINTENANCE
9I Pa ge Current County operated BMPs, including street sweeping and grass swales, were and will be maintained to meet required TSS reductions. Calumet County does not own or operate structural flood control facilities within the current urbanized area and adjacent areas covered by this permit.
SECTION VI. FISCAL ANALYSIS
Funding for Education and Outreach will remain the same for 2017.
The Illicit Discharge budget will remain the same. Expenses in 2016 were lower than anticipated since outfall testing was significantly under budget. The 2016 budget reflects the funds for illicit discharge testing, including any new outfalls located in the expanded MS4 area (20 10 census changes) as well as cost associated with administering the County's sanitation ordinance within the County's MS4 area.
The Construction Site Pollutant Control budget will remain the same. The Post-Construction Site Storm Water Management budget remained the same to reflect the anticipated workload for 2016. Funds to support these programs are generated through permit fees.
The Pollution Prevention 2017 budget will be similar to the 2016 budget. Some staff time will be devoted to helping the Highway Department implement the SWPPP that was developed in 2016. It is also anticipated that more funds will be needed in future budget years to construct and maintain best management practices to meet TSS reduction requirements dictated by the Lower Fox River TMDL.
The 2016 expenditures for Stormwater Quality Management include the amount spent to begin updating ofthe pollutant loading analysis. The 2017 budget reflects the remaining cost of the update that will continue in 2017.
SECTION VII. (e) INSPECTIONS AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
Inspections In 2016 Calumet County conducted 78 recorded inspections including 34 failed inspections. In addition, numerous site visits and preconstruction meetings onsite were held to address specific questions and issues.
Enforcement Actions County staff attempt to gain compliance with County ordinances in a voluntary manner. In 2016, numerous emails, phone calls, and onsite visits were made to ensure compliance with the ordinance. Permittees who fail inspections are copied automatically on the inspection report through the Permitrack System. Four letters were sent regarding failure to apply for a permit before land disturbance began.
10 I P age SECTION VIII. Water Quality Concerns b. Description of actions municipality has taken to comply with section 1.5.2 of the MS4 general permit for discharges of pollutant(s) of concern to an impaired waterbody: • Promoted best management practices for storm water through the County's Information & Education Plan including: o Proper management of household materials and practices o Onsite reuse of leaves and grass clippings o Proper use of lawn and garden fertilizers and pesticides o Proper management of stream banks and shorelines o Promote infiltration of residential storm water runoff o Proper use of construction site erosion control practices • Included erosion control, storm water and illicit discharge ordinances and activities in updated County Farmland Preservation Plan. • County Zoning Ordinance requires all new development to have limits on their impervious surface ratios (ISR). Additional impervious surfaces can be permitted provided the owner does mitigation, such as installing a rain garden to handle some of the increased runoff. Zoning staff are equipped with ISR information to share with landowners. • Proper maintenance of ditches and grassed swales by the County and proper management of snow and ice removal. Zoning Ordinances amended to include greater buffers along waterways and some ditches. • Proper use of construction site BMPs during highway construction projects according to county ordinance requirements. • Sanitation Ordinance requires all failing systems, including those that do not meet current soil requirements, be replaced at time of real estate transfer. • County has an Intergovernmental Agreement with Village of Harrison to provide County assistance in enforcing nutrient management and runoff standards. • The County continues to be strong partner in current efforts to implement the Lower Fox TMDL and the regional Winnebago Waterways efforts to improve Lake Winnebago water quality.
SECTION IX. Proposed Program Changes
Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination The County will perform field screenings that include areas new to the MS4 map.
Winter Road Management The County will install a larger tank for salt brine to encourage more use of alternatives to road salt in appropriate conditions that was bought in 2016.
Public Education and Outreach Updates are needed to the measurable goals to reflect ways that the County can improve efforts to improve awareness of storm water impacts.
11 I Page 12 I Page · 0<::- '1>-s. -o"() ._'l ~~ ~'1><; ·~'l-<; 'l-<::- .§'l ~ ~ ~ ?:P"c.; ·~~ o' ;:.._0~ ~-<> c:r (;)'l-.::,'l- c,'l-<; ~ &~~ ~0 ~<.'I><; V:-'1>'" ,<::- 'I>c.;'? ~'I> ~:r;. ·~/' !0' (j- '1><::- · 0<::- ;_,,o "~'"" 'l-<::- ~e (joe ~~ ~ ~ ~'l-<; ·~'(, ~
Covered Dumpster
Legend
Ill. Drainage - Drainage Area 1
- Drainage Area 2 0 Drainage Area 3 - Drainage Area 4 1 ~ .. ~: ·• Wetlands 75 37.5 0 75 Feet ContoursTHarrison ~ Federal Highways """' stale Hlglmaya """' Coool)< Highways ~"""'-., Local Roads "-' CltyStroe1S ....,..._ Perennl• Rlvars
- -- lntem~tttentStree.!T\1
Both Threa1ened or Endangered Species
DiKlabaer: Thi•IDiflilncitbtrlkpltyra:ordcdnaprx~raJ'QI'Ve)'mdil:notincendedtobtusedua\Xh. CllualccC doa 1101 .,..WM the IOOidaJ, CIID'Gillllllll, or complmne. oftbe IIUIIaill CCIIItaiDtd bcr'dn lftd il ftQt £y~ ~lcforllfjmimoorra~afttWilllonalltionotitsdcriYitiws. InnonaJtlhaDC.I Couaty become JiabletoUI:en oftb.U dltaf« IRY ICID .Uina from the use orJDiluleollbtwm.aps. The U:x r-ed dlta il compiled tram omcil1 rtconh, ildiiq N'Yq'plaad dotds, batonlyc:ontailu the ~ JnfQt!IIWCI:I t'IQIIiml for Calomd' Colnybusiaal. Qrlai.!!M ncordcd tcMU dclcalnaltllocated in the t:OW'Ily 2,0001 ,000 0 2,000 coudhoulc &hould be uscd b-lq~l or fUMY pwpotn. Tbe COOJnty Jblll remain tbc cxdWiift owwcflll riahU,.litlc. md b:Jr.crelt in .U tpeclfic;ally copyriahted infatiJ!tllioaccriainedbcnin ~ iFeet ouc&ll.lbd.Cu1Yit1 dlh~idtldbyMc:Mahoa4 AuoeiM.u u wdl•tbcTownofHirrilon. --- - RoN TusLER - - - - STATE R EPRESENTATIVE • 3 rd ASSEMBLY DISTRICT
February 21, 2017
Calumet County Board C/0 Ms. Beth Hauser, Calumet County Clerk 206 Court Street Chilton, WI 53014
Dear Calumet County Board:
Thank you for providing me with County Board Resolution 2016-18 relating to County Veterans Service Office Grants.
Further, the discussion we had on County Ambassador Program Day about this issue provided good context on the issue. I am in favor of the CVSO Grant returning to its 1973 intent to be used strictly for supplementing the salary of County Veterans Officers. The grant is important to support our veterans, who have earned our support. I think this is a reasonable request and I will co-sponsor legislation when it is circulated.
Thank you again for contacting me on this issue. If you have any questions or concerns about this or other issues that affect Calumet County, please let me know at (608) 266-5831 or Rep.Tusler@legis. wisconsin.gov. ;;~L/~ Ron Tusler State Representative Third Assembly District Wisconsin State Assembly
P.O. Box 8953 • Madison, Wisconsin 53708 • (608) 266-5831 • Toll Free: (888) 534-0003 Rep. Tuslcr@lcgis. w i.gov R ITYo WI ONSN -OSHKOSH
County Board Supervisor Training Survey
March 10, 2017
Dear County Board Supervisor,
You are being invited to participate in a research study titled An Exploration of Training options for Newly Elected County Board Supervisors in Wisconsin. My name is Jennifer Fechter and I am graduate student under the direction of Dr. Karl Nollenberger a professor in the Master of Public Administration Department at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh. I am conducting a research study to identify gaps in the current training available, pinpoint additional training topics for future development, and gauge preferred delivery methods for county board supervisors in Wisconsin.
I am requesting your participation, which will involve completing a survey about your training that will take approximately 10 minutes of your time. Your participation in this study is voluntary. If you choose not to participate, you will not be penalized in any way. You are free to skip any question that you do not want to answer.
The attached survey is anonymous. The researcher will not know the identity ofthe participants, or those that choose not to participate. The resu lts ofthis study will be shared with the members ofthe University of Wisconsin Oshkosh Master of Public Administration Capstone class, the Wisconsin Counties Association, the University of Wisconsin Extension Local Government Center, and the County Clerks Association. Th e results of this study may be published, but individual participants will not be known by the researcher and will not be included in any report.
The risks of the study are minimal, you could potentially suffer from a papercut, and by taking the survey you are giving up about 10 minutes of your time. The potential benefits of the study include identifying the gaps in currently available training, identifying additional training topics for future development, and an understanding of the preferred delivery methods for county board supervisor training.
If you have any questions concerning the research study, please e-mail me at [email protected].
This research has been approved the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh's Institutional Review Board. If you have any questions about your rights as a subject/participant in this research, or if you feel you have been placed at risk, you can contact the Institutional Review Board at (920) 424-3215 or by email at [email protected]. More information about the IRB can be found at: http://grants.uwosh.edu/sample -page/research compliance/institutional-review-board-irb/
You must be 18 or older to participate. Return of the questionnaire will be considered your consent to participate. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Fechter Dr. Karl Nollenberger [email protected] [email protected] UNIVERSITY oF , .. llr-r""'r-•"! Calumet County OSHKOSH County Board Supervisor Survey In an effort to determine how county board supervisors prefer to receive education and training about their roles in county government, all county board supervisors in the state of Wisconsin have been asked to complete this voluntary survey. Your response will be used to uncover gaps in the available training and help identify topics for future development. Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey!
Think back to when you were first elected to the county board, please rate the Not at all Neutral Extremely following on a 5 point scale. 1 2 3 4 5 1. How familiar were you with the functions of county government? 2. How familiar were you with the activities of the county board and its committees? 3. How satisfied were you that the training you received adequately prepared you for your position as a county board supervisor? 4. How soon after being elected would you like to receive: Within 2-4 1-2 2-6 6+ (Select one for each row) 1 week Weeks Months Months Months Training via an in person meeting/seminar Training at a state wide conference A welcome packet or orientation packet An assigned mentor Training via informational videos Training viae-resources (online) Printed materi als: fact sheets, papers, and/or books 5. In the past year in what ways did you learn about your job as a county board supervisor? (Check all that apply) . ' Welcome Packet or orientation packet Informational videos E-resources (online resources) In person: meetings, conferences, workshops, Print: fact sheets, papers, and/or books and/or seminars Mentoring Other (Please explain)
6. In the past year what prevented you from obtaining additional training? (Check all that apply). ' Funding Time constraints Internet access Unaware of trainings offered Travel Other (Please explain) 7. As a county board supervisor have you received training or information materials from any of these source s? (Select yes or no). Yes No UW Extension Local Government Center Wisconsin Counties Association Calumet County Other (Please explain)
Please select "yes" or "no" for the following questions. Yes No 8. Did the timing of training you received meet your needs? In other words, were you provided training or access to training prior to participating in policy making decisions? 9. Do you have access to training materials that you can complete on your own time? 10. How would you like to receive additional training and information? (Check all that apply) In person meetings I conferences Informational Videos Welcome packet or orientation packet E-Resources (Online) Mentor Other, please explain:
PLEASE COMPLETE PAGE 2 AND THEN RETURN THIS SURVEY TO THE COUNTY CLERK 1 of2 11. Ho w helpful would it be to you to receive additional training and Not at all Neutral Extremely inform ation on these topics? Rate these on a 5 point scale. 1 2 3 4 5 County government structure WI Stats. Chapter 59 Open Meetings Law Public Records Law Ro les and responsibilities of elected officials and dept heads County board rules County board schedule Parliamentary procedure Committee structure and duties County budget process Budgeting and finance County department structure and operation Conflicts of interest and ethics Leadership Policy governance Conflict management and reaching consensus Civility Public engagement and dealing with the media
Please select "yes" or "no" for the following questions. Yes No 12. Do you have access to reliable high speed internet, that is, the abi lity to w atch high definition videos online? 13. Would you benefit from additional training materials? 14. Are you willing to travel across the state for a half-day workshop? 15. Are you willing to travel across the state for a full-day workshop?
16. Select the day or days of the week you would prefer to attend in person training seminars or workshops. Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
17. Select the time or times of day you would prefer to attend in person training seminars or workshops. Early morning Mid morning Early afternoon Noon hour Early afternoon late afternoon Evening
18. How long in total have you served as county board supervisor? (Select one). Newly elected (two years or less) 2nd term (3-4 Years) 3rd term (5-6 Years) Beyond 3rd term (7+ years)
19. Please use this space to provide an additional comments you have about your access to training, methods and delivery of training, and/or any additional training topics you would like to see.
This survey was made possible through the help and guidance of Dr. Karl Nollenberger at the University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Jennifer Bock at the Wisconsin Counties Association, and Dan Hill at the UW Extension Local Government Center. I want to thank them for their guidance and support on this project. Thank you for your t ime! PLEASE RETURN THIS SURVEY TO THE COUNTY CLERK 2 of 2