Meeting Minutes

MINUTES OF THE TOWN OF UNION PLAN COMMISSION MEETING June 4, 2026 Call to Order: Nathan Peleschak called the meeting to order at 6:30 pm. Adopt Agenda: Danny motioned to adopt the June 4, 2026 Agenda. Nathan Peleschak seconded the motion. 7/7 ayes in favor, 0/7 nayes; motion carried. Roll Call: Members Present: Jennifer Meyer, Nathan Peleschak, Sarah Peleschak, Rusty Naylor, Shelli Naylor, Danny Xiong, Ruth Burr Members Absent: None Review/Approval of May 7, 2026 Meeting Minutes: Jennifer Meyer motioned to approve the May 7, 2026 Meeting Minutes. Danny Xiong seconded the motion. 7/7 ayes in favor to be approved, 0/7 nayes; motion carried. Update from Warwick’s: A quick update of progress by the Warwick’s was presented by Nathan Peleschak. Land Sale to the City of Eau Claire Discussion and Public Comment 21.18 +/- acres; Parcel ID #022101502250. Location: north of I-94, south of Hwy 12, east of Vollendorf Lane. Nathan and Sarah Peleschak shared facts from the Eau Claire City Council Meeting on May 26, 2026. Town of Union residents shared comments, concerns, and questions. Comments/Concerns: ● Multiple neighbors stated that they were not given any notice that the City of Eau Claire was looking to purchase the 22 acre parcel between Hwy 12 and I-94 prior to the sale. They learned of it from the news, after the land was already approved by the City Council and purchased by the city. ● Worried about future property values decreasing with homes located so near a brush site. ● Worried about having farm animals in close proximity to a public brush site or city facility grounds. ● The city will be taking good farmland out of productivity. ● Major increases in traffic–city residents utilizing the site for brush drop-off, heavy city vehicles utilizing the site if it is used for storage of aggregates or vehicle maintenance/storage, as well as if it is used as the city’s compost location. ● Vollendorf Lane can’t support the future trucks and traffic. The road isn’t in good condition. ● The city doesn’t want the brush or compost site in any of their backyards, but it can be in the town resident’s backyards. The city’s future brush site or maintenance/storage facility should be located away from any residents. ● The aesthetics of the parcel will be negatively impacted–no longer will be utilized as farmland and could be replaced by large piles of brush, aggregate materials, and city vehicles. Peacefulness and quietness will be replaced by traffic in and out of the site. ● The way of living for these residents and farmers will forever be changed. There will be added noise pollution from the trucks and city machinery. Light pollution could negatively impact the residents if they add lights to the site. Air pollution from the vehicles and machinery, as well as dust from any of the stored aggregates and sand. 1 ● Possible land pollution by the leaching/contamination into groundwater of salts and other things being dropped off at the site or stored. ● There could be an increase in rodents and seagulls, especially if they use the site for brush or city compost. ● There is currently a low area of land that has major ponding of water in the NW corner of the parcel; the city says they had a delineation performed and that it determined there were no wetlands, but did the delineation really take place? ● This will become a foothold to annexing this and other neighboring land. The city will continue to expand into this area. ● The Town of Union will lose out on future taxes, especially if other lands in the town are purchased by the city–the future land use is commercial/industrial, so this could be a major impact years down the road for our sustainability if the city ends up buying up more town land in our land designated for future commercial/industrial use. The town will lose that tax base. ● Worried about property taxes–taxes in the city are much more expensive. Questions: ● Why weren’t the neighbors or the town notified before the sale was finalized? ● If it becomes a brush site, how tall is the city allowed to pile the brush? ● What type of fencing would they look to use to border the property? ● Why doesn’t the city locate the site where there is poor farmland or where it is sandy? ● Why doesn’t the city put the new brush site near the new Country Jam Grounds? ● Why can’t Eau Claire County store the city’s salt and other aggregates in their facility? ● Wouldn’t the “Old Dump” land, which is currently being utilized by the city for the city’s shooting range by the police and sheriff, be a better fit for the future brush or compost site? It is approximately 275 acres or more. There is ample space and land, and being it was a previous dump, with no nearby homes, wouldn’t this seem to be a much better area for a brush or compost site? ● Is there anything similar to this brush site south of the city? ● Why would city residents want to drive all the way down Hwy 12, away from the city, to dispose of their brush? ● Can we find any rare species–animals, insects, or plants to report to the DNR to protect the site? ● If the city annexes the land, do they annex Vollendorf Rd too? ● Culver’s wasn’t allowed to annex since Nuss didn’t allow the city through their lot, so how would the city be able to annex this property they own into the city? Some of the landowners said they would not allow the city to annex through their property to get there. ● If the parcel remains in the Township without annexation, will the city not pay taxes to the town if it is a “public used” space? ● Why can the city own all of the town land they own and not be responsible for paying taxes to the town? ● How will the neighboring properties be affected if this general area were to become part of a new industrial park for the city? ● What is the Town of Union going to do? ● Does Eau Claire County have any input or say on any of this? ● Do we make any requests to the city for adding additional trees/landscaping borders/buffers? ● Do we create an agreed upon price for services? Fire, EMS, etc. Proposal of Guiding Questions/Checklist for Certified Survey Maps, Rezones, and Conditional Use Permits: The committee reviewed the documents and will use them as a resource for future application reviews. 2 Proposed Future Agenda Items: Next Plan Commission scheduled meeting: July 2, 2026 at 6:30pm . Adjourn: Jennifer Meyer motioned to adjourn the meeting at 7:44pm. Ruth Burr seconded the motion. 7/7 ayes in favor, 0/7 nayes; motion carried. 3