Village Board — Agenda Packet

MEETING: REGULAR MEETING OF THE VILLAGE BOARD DATE & TIME: Monday, February 2, 2026 at 7:00 PM LOCATION: Germantown Village Hall Board Room N112 W17001 Mequon Road Any member of the body and/or citizen may attend the meeting virtually through the WebEx platform, Meeting #:2551 455 8667 Password: ywM4qU5krp2 which can be accessed by phone at 408-418-9388 or by clicking the link below: https://villageofgermantown.my.webex.com/villageofgermantown.my/j.php?MTID=m49bcd70fc98c6f1696315d2744b3586a Citizens not wishing to attend the meeting personally or virtually may submit any public comments by sending an email to comments@germantownwi.gov by 4 p.m. on the day of the meeting so that it can be provided to the members of the body for their consideration. Previously recorded VillageBoard Meeting Videos can be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCOYp0EgELzTCa9X_iCohyhQ AGENDA I. CALL TO ORDER: This meeting has been given public notice in accordance with Section 19.83 and 19.84, Wis. Stats, in such form that will apprise the general public and news media of subject matter that is intended for consideration and action. II. ROLL CALL: III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / MOMENT OF SILENCE: IV. PRESIDENT’S REPORT: V. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF FORTHCOMING EVENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST / COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS: VI. CITIZEN INPUT: (Please be advised per 19.84(2) that information and comment will be received from the public. It is the policy of this municipality that public input be limited to a four (4) minute period per person with a time extension granted at the discretion of the Chairperson. Be advised that there may be limited discussion of the information received but no action will be taken under public comments.) Comments that may be injurious to village personnel or other individuals will not be allowed. VII. CONSENT AGENDA: A. Meeting Minutes: January 19, 2026 (ACTION) VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: A. Report on Planning of 4th of July Activities (DISCUSSION) IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS: X. NEW BUSINESS: A. Countywide Emergency Management System Resolution (ACTION) B. Germantown Community Library 2025 Annual Report (DISCUSSION) C. Proposed Village Center District Community Engagement Program (CEP) - Presentation by SRF Consulting & Public Comment (DISCUSSION & ACTION) D. Broadcast and Recording of Meetings of Village Boards, Committees and Commissions (ACTION) E. Administrator 2025 Performance Evaluation. The Village Board may convene into Closed Session under Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(c) for the purpose of Page 1 of 121 VILLAGE BOARD AGENDA February 2, 2026 Page 2 considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility and then may reconvene into open session to take such action as it deems appropriate. (ACTION) XI. ADJOURNMENT: UPON REASONABLE NOTICE, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of disabled individuals through appropriate aids and services. For additional information or to request this service, please contact the Village Clerk at (262)250-4745 at least 2 days prior to the meeting. Notice is hereby given that a possible quorum of other boards, committees, and/or commissions may attend this meeting to gather information about an item over which they have decision-making responsibility. This may constitute a meeting of these bodies per State ex rel. Badke v Greendale Village Board, even though these bodies will not take formal action at this meeting. Page 2 of 121 MEETING: REGULAR MEETING OF THE VILLAGE BOARD DATE AND TIME: Monday, January 19, 2026 7:00 PM LOCATION: Germantown Village Hall Board Room N112 W17001 Mequon Road MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER: This meeting has been given public notice in accordance with Section 19.83 and 19.84, Wis. Stats, in such form that will apprise the general public and news media of subject matter that is intended for consideration and action. Village President Soderberg called the Village Board meeting to order at 7:16 PM. II. ROLL CALL: Present: Trustee Robert Warren, Trustee Meg Cutts, Trustee David Baum, Trustee Jan Miller, Trustee Kristen Borst, Trustee Jolene Pieper, Trustee Rick Miller, Trustee Terri Kaminski, Village President Bob Soderberg Also Present: Village Administrator Steve Kreklow, Village Attorney Brian Sajdak, Deputy Clerk Maddy Laufenberg, Village Associate Planner Jordan Yanke, DPW Director Matt Mortwedt, Police Chief Pat Merten III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / MOMENT OF SILENCE: IV. PRESIDENT’S REPORT: Village Presiden t Soderberg spoke regarding the passing of Germantown resident and former Washington County Supervisor Ken Miller; attending local events, such as the Chamber of Commerce's 2026 Kick Off Social, the Germantown School District's Community Leadership Think Tank meeting, and Village committee meetings; the upcoming election on April 7th; the expansion of Flamingo Marine into Germantown; and items of note from this evening's General Government & Finance Committee meeting. V. ANNOUNCEMENTS OF FORTHCOMING EVENTS OF PUBLIC INTEREST / COMMITTEE AND DEPARTMENT REPORTS: Trustee Kaminski announced the upcoming Public Works & Highways Committee meeting on February 4, 2026, at 5:30 PM. Trustee Rick Miller announced the upcoming General Government & Finance Committee meeting on February 16, 2026, at 5:30 PM. Trustee Cutts announced the upcoming Public Safety Committee meeting on February DRAFT Page 3 of 121 Page 2 2, 2026, at 6:00 PM. Trustee Jan Miller announced the upcoming Economic Development Commission meeting on February 10, 2026, at 6:00 PM. VI. CITIZEN INPUT: (Please be advised per 19.84(2) that information and comment will be received from the public. It is the policy of this municipality that public input be limited to a four (4) minute period per person with a time extension granted at the discretion of the Chairperson. Be advised that there may be limited discussion of the information received but no action will be taken under public comments.) Comments that may be injurious to village personnel or other individuals will not be allowed. Sarah La rson (W159N9737 Butternut Rd) spoke regarding New Business Item E (purchase of rifle suppressors) and New Business Item F (Police Department Feasibility Assessment). Melanie Smythe (N140W17938 Cedar Ln) spoke regarding New Business Item F (Police Department Feasibility Assessment) and New Business Item D (Holy Hill Gateway District Master Plan Consultant Review and Recommendation). Written comments were not read aloud, but are included with these minutes. VII. CONSENT AGENDA: Motion : Approve as presented Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: Robert Warren Consent Agenda Item G removed by Jan Miller. Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Roll Call Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) On consideration of Item G (to approve as presented): Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Roll Call Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) A. Meeting Minutes: January 5, 2026 (ACTION) DRAFT Page 4 of 121 Page 3 B. Open Purchase Order to Visu-Sewer for miscellaneous manhole grouting and Strong Seal application not to exceed $40,000.00. (ACTION) C. Open Purchase Order to Enercon for material processing for the Residential Yard Waste Facility not to exceed $30,400.00. (ACTION) D. Proposed 5-Year Sealcoat Program. (ACTION) E. A professional services agreement with TADI for the design of the County Line Road and Appleton Ave traffic signal and lighting improvements for an amount not to exceed $118,800. (ACTION) F. Purchase of the 2026 patrol truck up to the budgeted amount of $341,000. (ACTION) G. Purchase of the 2026 Parks pickup truck. (ACTION) H. Purchase of 1 year of GIS system hosting, management and software access from Ruekert-Mielke for an amount not to exceed $30,409.00. (ACTION) I. GFD Staff Command Vehicle Purchase (ACTION) VIII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS: X. NEW BUSINESS: Motion: Move Item F to After Item C Motioned By: Robert Warren Seconded By: Meg Cutts Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) Motion: Move Item C to the Top Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: Meg Cutts Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, DRAFT Page 5 of 121 Page 4 Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) C. Cirrus Property Group, LLC, Agent for Faith Lutheran Church, Property Owner. Rezoning application to create the "Carillon at Germantown" Planned Development District (PDD) and Rezone 5.4 acres from the Institutional (I) Zoning District into the Carillon at Germantown PDD; and a Certified Survey Map (CSM) for a 5.4-acre residential development comprised of 36 multi-family dwelling units located at W172N11187 Division Road in the Lannon-Mequon Road Corridor. (ACTION) Villa ge Associate Planner Yanke, DPW Director Mortwedt, and the applicant provided details and were available to answer questions. Motion: Approve CSM as presented Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: Rick Miller Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Bob Soderberg No: David Baum, Jan Miller, Terri Kaminski Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 6, No 3, Abstained 0) Motion: Approve PDD as presented Motioned By: Meg Cutts Seconded By: Rick Miller Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Bob Soderberg No: David Baum, Jan Miller, Terri Kaminski Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 6, No 3, Abstained 0) F. Police Department Building Feasibility Assessment and Next Steps (ACTION) Police Chief Merten, DPW Director Mortwedt, and Village Administrator Kreklow provided a feasibility assessment report for the proposed sites for the new Police Department building: the former Kwik Trip site, the former DPW site, and the current site of the Police Department. Motion: Approve the Former DPW Site as the New Police Department Site Motioned By: David Baum DRAFT Page 6 of 121 Page 5 Seconded By: Robert Warren Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 6, No 3, Abstained 0) A. Rescheduling of April 6th Village Board Meeting to Accommodate April 7th Election Preparations (ACTION) Motion : Skip the April 6, 2026, Village Board Meeting Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: David Baum Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: Jan Miller Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 8, No 1, Abstained 0) B. Jorden Rauch, Daniel Llanas, and Olivia Tatlock, Agents for Hack House Performance, LLC and Techplex, LLC, Property Owner. Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an approximate 6,000 sqft indoor baseball training and athletic development facility located at N115W19150 Edison Drive in the Germantown Industrial Park. (ACTION) Motion : Approve as presented Motioned By: Jan Miller Seconded By: David Baum Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) D. Community Development Department - Holy Hill Gateway District Master Plan: Consultant Proposal Review and Recommendation. (ACTION) Motion: Select MSA as the Master Plan Consultant for the Holy Hill Gateway District Motioned By: David Baum Seconded By: Robert Warren DRAFT Page 7 of 121 Page 6 Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) E. Purchase of Rifle Suppressors for 25 rifles (ACTION) Motion: Approve as presented Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: Terri Kaminski Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst Abstain: None Motion Carried by Roll Call Vote (Yes 6, No 3, Abstained 0) G. Report on Planning of 4th of July Activities (DISCUSSION) Motion: Table until the Next Village Board Meeting Motioned By: Jolene Pieper Seconded By: David Baum Yes: Robert Warren, Meg Cutts, David Baum, Jan Miller, Kristen Borst, Jolene Pieper, Rick Miller, Terri Kaminski, Bob Soderberg No: None Abstain: None Motion Carried by Voice Vote (Yes 9, No 0, Abstained 0) XI. ADJOURNMENT: Village President Soderberg adjourned the Village Board meeting at 10:01 PM. DRAFT Page 8 of 121 From: crb crb <cash2u@outlook.com> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2026 3:19 PM To: Comments <Comments@germantownwi.gov> Subject: COMMENTS FOR GGF &VB MEETINGS 1-19-26 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, Here are points of concerns that we HIGHLY DISAGREE with. 1. STILL DISAGREE WITH NOT READING ALL COMMENTS SENT IN EMAIL. 2. Just said to attached sent in comments to the "agenda". Did not really explain anything at all. 3. The BUDGET is out of " Wack " yet. 4. RIFFLE SUPPRESSSORS-IS THIS A WANT OR A NEED? This was not clear. 5. EMS-not enough "financial information" to even discuss. 6. No process of doing things in the village and or meetings. 7. WEBEX: should apply to the village administer & atty and all committee members too. Just asking a question: We have asked for a very long time, about the total amount of employees in the village staff. Never receive a reply back. So, what is the number of employees on the village staff? Thank you for your time! The Schneider's DRAFT Page 9 of 121 From: crb crb <cash2u@outlook.com> Sent: Monday, January 19, 2026 10:47 AM To: Steve Kreklow <skreklow@germantownwi.gov>; Comments <Comments@germantownwi.gov> Subject: Fw: OLD FLOWER SOURCE 2nd request CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, So much for saying you all read your emails from the residents! STILL BELIEVE ALL EMAILS SHOULD BE READ ALOUD!!! Don't care, if you read them or not! Never heard anything back on this project. So, now we have more questions for you! We would like to know when the "contract" was sign with the demo company? It was said they could start with in a week time! This was in the beginning of Dec.2025 Village Board meeting. Or Wasn't it sign? So, what is the start date to get rid of the eye sore? So, now that it is "freezing" outside-how many PUBLIC SAFETY calls to the old FLOWER SOURCE? By the way- how many "homeless people" do we have in Germantown? Never hear anything on that either! How about saying something tonight at the VILLAGE BOARD MEETING? We want answer now not whenever. Yes, we will be watching and listening to the meetings. Excepting to hear something to night. DRAFT Page 10 of 121 Thank you for your time again on this issue! The Schneider's P.S. You say most of you don't want to hear the comments read aloud. Then you all need to make sure that are getting done in the village on time! And COMMUNICATION needs to be to the residents! Then you would get less emails sent to you. From: crb crb <cash2u@outlook.com> Sent: Friday, January 9, 2026 1:14 PM To: Comments <comments@germantownwi.gov> Subject: OLD FLOWER SOURCE Hello, Running errand today, drove past the OLD FLOWER SOURCE. Notice it is "still standing" and the green shack is starting to fall down. Believe it was said, back in beginning of December 2024, that the demo could begin in a week or so. So, do you have a starting date to start the demo? Or Is there a delay on this project? If there is a delay, Why? Nothing was said at the last village board meeting about the project. The village residents would like to know when it happen. Thank you for your time! The Schneider's DRAFT Page 11 of 121 BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026 PLACEMENT: Presentation ITEM TITLE: Report on Planning of 4th of July Activities (DISCUSSION) SUBMITTED BY: SUMMARY EXPLANATION: ATTACHMENT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ACTION BY COMMITTEE: Page 12 of 121 STATE OF WISCONSIN VILLAGE OF GERMANTOWN WASHINGTON COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. _____-2026 A RESOLUTION TO STUDY THE CREATION OF A WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNTYWIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) SYSTEM WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown recognizes that Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and fire protection are essential public safety services that directly impact the health, safety, and welfare of residents, businesses, and visitors; and WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statutes §§ 59.03, 60.565, 61.34, and 62.11 authorize counties, towns, villages, and cities to provide emergency services necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the rising costs, staffing shortages, decreased volunteerism, and increasing service demands for emergency medical services (EMS) have created challenges for individual municipalities in maintaining reliable and sustainable local EMS systems; and WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statute § 66.0301 authorizes municipalities and counties to enter into intergovernmental cooperation agreements for the joint exercise of powers and the joint performance of duties; and WHEREAS, state-imposed levy limits significantly restrict the ability of municipalities to increase operational revenue, with allowable levy growth tied to net new construction, which has averaged approximately 1.7% in Washington County in recent years, while inflation and cost-of- living increases have averaged substantially higher over the same period; and WHEREAS, these fiscal constraints limit the ability of municipalities to maintain staffing at a level necessary to meet community needs, creating a future risk of increased response times and reduced service availability; and WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown recognizes that these challenges are not unique to Washington County, but reflect a broader statewide trend in which many EMS providers are experiencing staffing shortages and periods of unavailability to respond to emergency calls; and WHEREAS, a countywide approach to studying EMS service delivery and funding has the potential to create efficiencies through coordinated planning, shared resources, and reduced duplication of services while preserving local service identity and community-based response; and WHEREAS, such an approach may also allow for increased purchasing power, strategic joint procurement of equipment and supplies, coordinated training, shared staffing models, unified medical direction, and enhanced interoperability among departments; and Page 13 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. _________-2026 Page 2 WHEREAS, mutual aid and MABAS agreements already demonstrate the interconnected nature of EMS and fire response across municipal boundaries, with larger communities often carrying a disproportionate share of the financial and operational burden; and WHEREAS, a feasibility study conducted in partnership with Washington County and our County’s 20 municipalities would allow the Village of Germantown to have a ‘seat at the table’ in helping to evaluate potential governance structures, financial models, equity considerations, and service impacts before any policy or funding decisions are made by the Village Board; and WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown supports a collaborative planning process that includes representation from towns, villages, cities, and the County, ensuring that all local governments have a voice in evaluating potential countywide solutions aimed at creating a sustainable funding source for generations to come; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Board of the Village of Germantown, Washington County, Wisconsin, that the Village Board by passage of this Resolution that: Feasibility Study The Village of Germantown formally supports partnering with Washington County to participate in a comprehensive feasibility study examining the potential for a countywide EMS system or coordinated EMS funding and service model. Data-Driven Solutions The feasibility study should evaluate opportunities to: o Improve service reliability, response times, and system sustainability; o Identify efficiencies through intergovernmental collaboration and shared services; o Maximize purchasing power and reduce costs through coordinated procurement, when and where it makes sense; o Enhance recruitment, retention, and training of EMS and fire personnel; o Promote equitable cost-sharing among communities; o Maintain strong local involvement and accountability in service delivery. No Commitment to Implementation Participation in the feasibility study does not obligate the Village of Germantown to become a part of any countywide EMS system, levy, or governance structure. Any future participation or implementation shall require separate Village Board review and approval. Long-Term Perspective The Village Board acknowledges that EMS sustainability is a long-term issue and supports proactive planning to ensure that residents continue to receive high-quality emergency medical services despite fiscal and workforce challenges. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Village President, Village Administrator, and Fire Chief, and other appropriate staff are authorized to participate in study discussions, planning Page 14 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. _________-2026 Page 3 meetings, and data sharing efforts associated with this feasibility study, consistent with the direction of the Village Board. Adopted: ______________________________________ Robert A Soderberg, Village President ATTEST: ____________________________________ Donna Ott, Village Clerk Page 15 of 121 STATE OF WISCONSIN VILLAGE OF GERMANTOWN WASHINGTON COUNTY RESOLUTION NO. _____-2026 A RESOLUTION TO STUDY THE CREATION OF A WASHINGTON COUNTY COUNTYWIDE EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES (EMS) SYSTEM WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown recognizes that Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and fire protection are essential public safety services that directly impact the health, safety, and welfare of residents, businesses, and visitors; and WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statutes §§ 59.03, 60.565, 61.34, and 62.11 authorize counties, towns, villages, and cities to provide emergency services necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the rising costs, staffing shortages, decreased volunteerism, and increasing service demands for emergency medical services (EMS) have created challenges for individual municipalities in maintaining reliable and sustainable local EMS systems; and WHEREAS, Wisconsin Statute § 66.0301 authorizes municipalities and counties to enter into intergovernmental cooperation agreements for the joint exercise of powers and the joint performance of duties; and WHEREAS, state-imposed levy limits significantly restrict the ability of municipalities to increase operational revenue, with allowable levy growth tied to net new construction, which has averaged approximately 1.7% in Washington County in recent years, while inflation and cost-of- living increases have averaged substantially higher over the same period; and WHEREAS, these fiscal constraints limit the ability of municipalities to maintain staffing at a level necessary to meet community needs, creating a future risk of increased response times and reduced service availability; and WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown recognizes that these challenges are not unique to Washington County, but reflect a broader statewide trend in which many EMS providers are experiencing staffing shortages and periods of unavailability to respond to emergency calls; and WHEREAS, a countywide approach to studying EMS service delivery and funding has the potential to create efficiencies through coordinated planning, shared resources, and reduced duplication of services while preserving local service identity and community-based response; and WHEREAS, such an approach may also allow for increased purchasing power, strategic joint procurement of equipment and supplies, coordinated training, shared staffing models, unified medical direction, and enhanced interoperability among departments; and Page 16 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. _________-2026 Page 2 WHEREAS, mutual aid and MABAS agreements already demonstrate the interconnected nature of EMS and fire response across municipal boundaries, with larger communities often carrying a disproportionate share of the financial and operational burden; and WHEREAS, a feasibility study conducted in partnership with Washington County and our County’s 20 municipalities would allow the Village of Germantown to have a ‘seat at the table’ in helping to evaluate potential governance structures, financial models, equity considerations, and service impacts before any policy or funding decisions are made by the Village Board; and WHEREAS, the Village of Germantown supports a collaborative planning process that includes representation from towns, villages, cities, and the County, ensuring that all local governments have a voice in evaluating potential countywide solutions aimed at creating a sustainable funding source for generations to come; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Village Board of the Village of Germantown, Washington County, Wisconsin, that the Village Board by passage of this Resolution that: Feasibility Study The Village of Germantown formally supports partnering with Washington County to participate in a comprehensive feasibility study examining the potential for a countywide EMS system or coordinated EMS funding and service model. Data-Driven Solutions The feasibility study should evaluate opportunities to: o Improve service reliability, response times, and system sustainability; o Identify efficiencies through intergovernmental collaboration and shared services; o Maximize purchasing power and reduce costs through coordinated procurement, when and where it makes sense; o Enhance recruitment, retention, and training of EMS and fire personnel; o Promote equitable cost-sharing among communities; o Maintain strong local involvement and accountability in service delivery. No Commitment to Implementation Participation in the feasibility study does not obligate the Village of Germantown to become a part of any countywide EMS system, levy, or governance structure. Any future participation or implementation shall require separate Village Board review and approval. Long-Term Perspective The Village Board acknowledges that EMS sustainability is a long-term issue and supports proactive planning to ensure that residents continue to receive high-quality emergency medical services despite fiscal and workforce challenges. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that it is the position of the Village of Germantown that every municipality be required to reduce their property tax levy by the amount Washington Page 17 of 121 RESOLUTION NO. _________-2026 Page 3 County levies and provides to them for EMS, and that depreciation for all EMS facilities and equipment be included in funding formulas. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Village President, Village Administrator, and Fire Chief, and other appropriate staff are authorized to participate in study discussions, planning meetings, and data sharing efforts associated with this feasibility study, consistent with the direction of the Village Board. Adopted: ______________________________________ Robert A Soderberg, Village President ATTEST: ____________________________________ Donna Ott, Village Clerk Page 18 of 121 Maintaining Fire/EMS Services in Washington County Page 19 of 121 Problem: • Most communities are struggling to match the growing need for EMS/Fire services with qualified staffing levels. Page 20 of 121 Problem: • Adding Staff while keeping communities under state-imposed levy limits is becoming impossible. Page 21 of 121 Problem: • Levy Limits restrict a community in increasing overall operational levy by Net New Construction (NNC) which is averaging just 1.7% for communities in Washington Co. • Cost of living meanwhile, has averaged 3.6% over that same time (2018-2025). Page 22 of 121 Levy Limits Over Time vs. COLA Page 23 of 121 Problem: • With no way to increase staffing to match growing needs, response times will increase putting citizens in danger. Page 24 of 121 Solution County-wide Levy for Fire/EMS Services Page 25 of 121 What Does This Entail? Removes levy for Fire/EMS off local tax bills and shares that across County Tax Bill Provides avenue for future growth needs for Fire/EMS within communities in the future Provides local communities ability to use that levy to do with what they need most (safety/police, roads, etc). Page 26 of 121 What this proposed change DOES NOT DO… Does not impact local control of Fire/EMS Departments Does not consolidate Fire/EMS Departments Does not change MABAS agreements Does not remove/dissolve any Departments or positions Does not change the name/patch of any Department Page 27 of 121 Have other Counties in Wisconsin Partnered with Municipalities for Fire/EMS? YES! Other Counties who have adopted some level of this plan Walworth Portage Milwaukee Bayfield Florence Marquette Sawyer Waushara Door Lafayette Oneida Taylor Lincoln Rusk Green Lake Page 28 of 121 Map of Counties with Some Form of Countywide EMS System Page 29 of 121 This isn’t a temporary issue, think long term • While some communities have done well with maintaining their level of service while staying below levy limits through intergovernmental agreements and private contracts, the numbers show that sustaining this level will be impossible as costs rise higher than levy limit restricts. Page 30 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Why is this necessary now? • Increase call volume requires increase in staffing. However, local municipalities do not have the room under levy limits to address the need. • Levy Limits are based on a net new construction (NNC) which is slowing, not increasing. Less NNC results in less revenue to address all local needs including public safety (Fire/EMS/Police) along with roads, health insurance increases, etc. Page 31 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Why is this necessary now? • This isn’t just a “Washington County Issue” üStatewide, 29% of the EMS services do not have adequate funding to operate. üStatewide, 41% of ambulance services reported that they had open periods in their schedules where they were unavailable to respond to a single 9-1-1 call. üStatewide, 78% of services reported responding to a call for a neighboring service due to low staffing, which places their ambulance(s) out of reach for their own communities. * Source – 2024 EMS Study for Bayfield County Page 32 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Why would the County be doing this? • The County recognizes that the greatest gap in public safety is primarily in EMS/Fire. • The County recognizes that they need to get involved to help communities keep pace with basic needs of public safety. • Communities cannot address these challenges in isolation, and continuing on the current path is simply not sustainable. By strengthening collaboration across the County, we can streamline processes, reduce duplication, and ultimately save money while better supporting essential public safety services. Page 33 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Why should all communities share and support each other in providing these services? • Just like other health and human services needs (Aging and Disability Resource Center, Behavior Health, Children and Families, Economic Support, Health Department), providing public safety through EMS/Fire is a county basic need, not just local. • These services have long been coordinated through the MABAS (Mutual Aid Box Alarm System). Over time, this structure has led to some communities, particularly the larger villages and cities in our County, carrying a greater share of the cost to provide services. Page 34 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… How will this be governed? • As a part of the planning stages of the process, a Governance Board is proposed to be created which will represent all levels of local government including towns, villages and cities along with representation from the County. Page 35 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Will a Community Need to Reduce Their Levy? • Based on the information we have, as this is not a transfer of services, but merely a transfer of how it is being paid, the Department of Revenue requirements to reduce levy by the amount on local levy for that service or equal to what local levy for that service was as of 2013, would not be enforceable. Instead, that money could be used for other priorities including public safety and local roads. Page 36 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… Based on early numbers, some communities will be supporting other communities, how is this fair? • Due to MABAS and mutual aid agreements, when it comes to total Fire and EMS Service, larger communities have been forever carrying the majority of financial burden to support smaller Fire and EMS in our area. Through this County-wide levy, those costs will be more equitably distributed. Plus, through continued collaborations in the future, increasing levels of service becomes more possible through joint training and the sharing of resources. Page 37 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked What if things change at the County level, will this agreement thus change? • The proposal is to create a detailed intergovernmental agreement between all communities and the County which would be in place for 10 years. During this time, the only way something would change would be by the decision of this Governance Board for the betterment of all communities. Page 38 of 121 Questions Commonly Asked… What else can be accomplished through this effort? • Can support additional funding for Length of Services Award Program (LOSAP) to support “POC” recruitment and retention • Enhanced communication between Departments • Strategic purchasing opportunities • Unified Medical Direction opportunities • Sharing of equipment/supplies • Overall cost savings to residents Page 39 of 121 What Are The Next Steps? Work with County and Municipal Partners to Draft the framework an IGA for each community to consider by their respective boards/councils. Next, we would work to identify procedural or administrative tasks of this funding mechanism which need to be accomplished. For example, the creation of the ‘Governance Board’ which would oversee this IGA. Through continuous discussions we hope to have a Draft Resolution before all communities which would state that everyone is willing to continue to discuss this proposal. This Draft Resolution would come before boards/councils in the month of January. Page 40 of 121 Scheduled Efforts to Pursue County- wide EMS/Fire Funding Mechanism • Initiation – Charter Approval & Participation • Planning – Needs Assessment & Financial Modeling • Governance – Board Formation & Intergovernmental Agreement • Implementation – System Design, Staffing and Contracts • Go-Live – Regional EMPS System Operation Q4 2025 Q1 2026 Q2 2026 Q3/Q4 2026 Jan, 2027 Page 41 of 121 County Wide EMS Systems Portage County – County Seat – Stevens Point 2020 Census Population – 70,377 2024 Population – Estimated – 72,040 Square Mileage – 823 City – Stevens Point Villages – Almond Amherst Amerherst Junction Miladore Nelsonville Park Ridge Plover Rosholt Whiting Towns – Alban Almond Amherst Belmont Buena Vista Carson Dewey Eau Pleine Grant Hull Lanark Linwood New Hope Pine Grove Plover Sharon Stockton Communications Center / Dispatch – Portage County Sheriff’s Office - 108,713 total calls - 18,746 calls for “help” - 53,156 calls dispatched (2024) Portage County EMS – - Medical Direction – Medical oversight for the Portage County EMS System is provided by the physicians at Ministry Saint Michael’s Hospital Emergency Department. Dr. Michael Clark, MD, serves as the Portage County EMS System Medical Director. - Contracted with three ambulance providers: o Stevens Point Fire Department ▪ 55 Full time personnel (46 in 2024. Additional 9 FF’s in 2025 via referendum - $975,000) Page 42 of 121 ▪ 5,500 calls for service ▪ 5 Paramedic / ALS Units ▪ 2 Fire Stations ▪ SPFD - $4,637,857 ▪ Portage Countywide EMS Subsidy - $2,447,541 ▪ Total - $7,085,398 o Amherst Fire District ▪ Full Time and Paid on Call / Paid on Site mixture - 45 ▪ 1 Paramedic / ALS Unit ▪ Several EMR units ▪ 500 approximate calls for service – Total. Approximately 430 calls for EMS ▪ 2026 Budget - $291,736 o Plover Fire Department ▪ Full Time and Paid on Call / Paid on Site mixture – 45 • Full Time Wages – (2025) $287,496 • Paid on Call / Site Wages – (2025) $133,867 • Retirement Contributions - $60,533 o Total Plover RD 2025 Budget - $820,826.65 ▪ Portage County Subsidy - $1,001,648 ▪ 1 Paramedic / ALS Unit ▪ Several EMR Units *These ambulance services provide coverage across all of Portage County. The Town of Grant has chosen to contract on its own with United Emergency Medical Response out of the Town of Grand Rapids. **Portage County has 1 FTE for the Portage County EMS – EMS Coordinator - Andrea Krantz – 1 (715) 346 - 1591 Statistic and Performance Measurements 2024 2025 (Through June 30, 2025) ALS Calls 2,542 1,608 BLS Calls 1,451 1,547 Total Calls 3,993 3,155 Page 43 of 121 Third Party Charges $5,841,808 $4,429,724 Third Party Revenue $1,737,124 $1,654,216 2026 Adopted Budget Tax Levy $3,027,369 Public Charges for Services $2,190,810 Miscellaneous $25,000 Total EMS Budget $5,243,179 *Portage County Equalized Value for Portage County – 2025 = $9,330,147,100 ** 2026 Portage County Budget Total = $142,129,510. **Portage Countywide EMS Levy of $3,027,369 for 2026 equals a Tax Rate of .32 per $1,000 of equalized value. Microsoft PowerPoint - Portage County EMS Survey Results 2018 2026 EMR Grant Announcement FINAL 20251114.docx Emergency-Medical-Responders-Coverage-Area-Maps-Portage-County-PDF Ambulance-Service-Responders-Coverage-Area-Maps-Portage-County-PDF County-Ambulance-Zones (6000×6000) Milwaukee County – County Seat – Milwaukee 2020 Census Population – 939,489 2024 Population – Estimated – 924,740 Square Mileage – 241 Cities – Cudahy Franklin Glendale Greenfield Milwaukee Oak Creek South Milwaukee St. Francis Page 44 of 121 Wauwatosa West Allis Villages – Bayside Brown Deer Fox Point Greendale Hales Corners River Hills Shorewood West Milwaukee Whitefish Bay Communications Center/ Dispatch Centers – (Multiple) - Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Department – MCSO, Franklin, Greenfield, Hales Corners, Oak Creek and South Milwaukee, Greendale, Flight For Life - City of Milwaukee Communications (Recently combined Police and Fire into the Department of Emergency Communications) - North Shore Dispatch Center - West Allis Dispatch - Wauwatosa Dispatch Communications Center / Dispatch Center Call Volume – *All inbound calls (Emergency AND NON Emergency) - Milwaukee County Sheriff’s Office: o 2024 ▪ Total Call volume – 252,637 ▪ “911” calls answered – 67,436 o 2025 ▪ Total Call volume ~ 275,000 ▪ “911” calls answered - ~ 88,000 - City of Milwaukee – Department of Emergency Communications o 2024 ▪ Total Call volume – Handled over 950,000 calls. **The transition of the consolidation of police and fire dispatch into the Department of Emergency Communications in calendar year 2024, annual statistics are still transitioning. - North Shore Dispatch (Bayside) o 2024 ▪ Total Call volume for service – 89,318 Page 45 of 121 o Fire Calls – 13,077 - West Allis – Information not available - Wauwatosa Dispatch o 2024 ▪ ~ 10,000 Milwaukee County EMS – - Medical Direction – Medical oversight for Milwaukee County is provided by the Medical College of Wisconsin Department of Emergency Medicine, for nearly 50 years. Dr. Ben West, MD, serves as the Milwaukee County Chief Medical Director. - The EMS Division of Milwaukee County Office of Emergency Management provides administrative support and oversight of the Milwaukee County EMS System. The Milwaukee County EMS system is a collective of independently, autonomous, municipal agencies – 15 in total. Milwaukee county also provides financial support to the agencies that provide Advanced Life Support (ALS) level care and transport via a $2.5 million subsidy. The subsidy provided to the municipalities is prescribed below in the illustration: Page 46 of 121 - Cudahy Fire Department – 4.8 square miles – 18,100 population ▪ 25 Full time personnel ▪ 3,000 calls for service ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances, 1 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 1 Fire Station – New in 2024 ~ $10,451,893 (Originally had 2 stations and combined them into one). Borrowed $8,451,893 over 20 years. The average, $200,000, homeowner will realize a an average of $43 each of those 20 years for this fire house. ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $56,341.45 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $3,547,515.48 - Franklin Fire Department – 34.6 square miles – 36,816 population ▪ 46 Personnel ▪ 5,400 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 900 ▪ EMS Calls – 4,400 ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances, 1 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 3 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $212,472.10 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $7,677,095 - Hales Corners Fire Department – 3.2 square miles – 7,720 Population ▪ 14.8 FTE Personnel ▪ ~ 10 Paid on Call personnel ▪ 1,300 Total calls for service ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances ▪ 1 Fire Station ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $25,068.75 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $1,350,063 - Greendale Fire Department – 5.58 square miles – 14,854 Population ▪ 19 FTE Personnel ▪ 2,945 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – ~ 610 ▪ EMS Calls – ~2,335 ▪ 2 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulances ▪ 1 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $77,923.14 Page 47 of 121 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $3,232,222.60 - Greenfield Fire Department – 11.54 square miles – 37,803 Population ▪ 46 FTE Personnel ▪ 7,965 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 68 ▪ EMS Calls – 5,238 ▪ Other Calls – 2,392 ▪ 4 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulances ▪ 2 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $158,480.38 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $3,232,222.60 - Milwaukee Fire Department – 96.82 square miles - 2020 Census – 577,222 - 2024 Estimated Population – 563,531 ▪ 862 FTE Personnel ▪ 111,865 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 3,007 ▪ EMS Calls – 82,694 ▪ Other Calls – 26,164 ▪ 12 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulances ▪ 31 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $1,160,047.36 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - ~ $165,000,000 *Common Council amended the original executive budget due to “underfunding” aged out equipment and added $8 million dollars for front line apparatus. That measure was vetoed but the veto was overridden. **The City of Milwaukee contracts with Private Ambulance companies for BLS transports. Curtis and Bell ambulance provide this service to the constituency. At one point in time, the private ambulance company industry had 6 different entities operating in Milwaukee. Over the course of the last 25 years, these private ambulance companies had to shut their doors leaving Bell and Curtis. Again, at one point in time, the private ambulance companies required no funding other than “billing revenue to support their business. As of 2026, the city of Milwaukee is subsidizing Bell ambulance at $8 million to support the BLS call volume. These run types total almost 50,000 call for service on top of the 111,865 calls the MFD took in 2025. Page 48 of 121 - West Milwaukee – 1.12 Square Miles – 4,114 Population ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $6,756.86 *West Milwaukee Fire Department ceased to exist after contracting services with the City of Milwaukee in 1991. **The original contract price was predicated on population and run volume. The original contract was ~ $900,000. Present day, the contract price of $900,000 remains the same as the population has neither increased or decreased, along with the run volume, demonstrably. ***The original fire house in West Milwaukee is still the property of West Milwaukee but houses Milwaukee Fire Department equipment and personnel. ****West Milwaukee still receives the Milwaukee County EMS subsidy, however. - North Shore Fire Department – *The North Shore Fire Department consolidated 7 municipalities and began its’ operations January 1st, 1995. The following information depicts the 7 municipalities that form the North Shore Fire Department: o Bayside – 2.39 square miles – 4,482 Population o Brown Deer – 4.39 square miles – 12,507 Population o Fox Point – 2.86 square miles – 6,934 Population o Glendale – 5.97 square miles – 13,357 Population o River Hills – 5.33 square miles – 1,602 Population o Shorewood – 1.59 square miles – 13,859 Population o Whitefish Bay – 2.12 square miles – 14,954 Population Total – ~ 25 square miles – ~ 68,000 Population Funding Mechanism per Municipality – Formula Allocation Bayside 6.27% Brown Deer 20.02% Fox Point 8.49% Glendale 27.38% River Hills 3.15% Shorewood 17.35% Whitefish Bay 17.34% Page 49 of 121 2024 - General Fund Actual Revenues - $18.4 Million Dollars - Fire Dues 3% - Municipal Contribution 77% - Ambulance Collections 16% - Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy 1% - Permit Fees 2% - Miscellaneous Revenues 1% 2-24 – General Fund Actual Expenditures – General Fund - $18.7 Million Dollas - Payroll and Benefits 79% - Supplies and Operating Expenses 18% - Transfers 3% ▪ 120 Personnel ▪ 12,895 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 269 ▪ EMS Calls – 9,369 ▪ Other Calls – 3,257 ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances, 3 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 5 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $231,276.10 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $18,841,402 Wisconsin Policy Forum | Come Together https://www.nsfire.org/DocumentCenter/View/129/Better-Service-for-Lower-Cost-PDF https://www.nsfire.org/DocumentCenter/View/130/Mutual-Aid-vs-Consolidated- Response-PDF - Oak Creek Fire Department – 28.45 square miles – 36,497 Page 50 of 121 ▪ 57 Personnel ▪ 6,004 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 98 ▪ EMS Calls – 4,571 ▪ Other Calls – 1,335 ▪ 3 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 3 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $196,425.48 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $2,682,105 - South Milwaukee Fire Department – 4.84 square miles – 20,795 Population ▪ 26 Personnel ▪ (2024) 3,246 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 57 ▪ EMS Calls – 2,650 ▪ Other Calls – 589 ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances, 1 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 1 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $51,589.86 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $3,798,060 - St. Francis Fire Department – 2.57 square miles – 9,457 Population ▪ 24 Personnel ▪ (2024) 2,026 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 42 ▪ EMS Calls – 1,497 ▪ Other Calls – 487 ▪ 2 BLS (Basic Life Support) Ambulances, 1 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 1 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $37,285.73 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $2,855,570 - Wauwatosa Fire Department – 13.23 square miles – 48,387 Population ▪ 106 Personnel ▪ (2024) 10,237 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 2,004 ▪ EMS Calls – 5,828 ▪ Other Calls – 2,405 Page 51 of 121 ▪ 2 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 4 Fire Stations (Technically 3 – Operating out of one Milwaukee Fire House) ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $156,684.68 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $16,296,588 - West Allis Fire Department – 11.41 square miles – 60,325 Population ▪ 101 Personnel ▪ (2023) 11,637 Total calls for service ▪ Fire Calls – 134 ▪ EMS Calls – 9,300 ▪ Other Calls – 2,193 ▪ 3 ALS (Advanced Life Support) Ambulance ▪ 3 Fire Stations ▪ Milwaukee County EMS Subsidy - $161,473.71 ▪ Total Budget (2025) - $16,437,582 *The Wauwatosa and West Allis Fire Departments are currently discussing the consolidation of both of their agencies predicated on levy caps and not being able to fund each individual department independently. Several links to the ongoing process are included: - Milwaukee County applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this subsidy Final_Wauwatosa_and_West_Allis_Report__8.7.25.pdf Wauwatosa, West Allis take another step toward fire department merger Joint-Fire-Department-Term-Sheet (1).pdf - Bayfield County County Seat – Washburn 2020 Census Population – 16,220 2024 Population – Estimated – 16,838 Square Mileage – 2,042 Cities – Ashland Bayfield Washburn Village – Mason Page 52 of 121 Towns – Multiple Communications Center / Dispatch – Bayfield County Sheriff’s Office - All 911 services – Police / Fire / EMS runs through the Bayfield County Sheriff’s Office Bayfield County EMS – Medical Direction – Medical oversight for the Bayfield County EMS System is provided by Dr. Jonathan Shultz, MD, serves as the Portage County EMS System Medical Director. Oversight is provided by the Bayfield – Ashland County EMS Council Bayfield County EMS Coordinator – Bryan Ziemann Local Ambulance Services and Participating agencies: Nine EMS services provide emergency medical care for all of Bayfield County. These services include: o Ashland Fire Department – The Ashland Fire and EMS District covers 70.33 miles and 552 residences in Bayfield County. In 2023, they responded to over 70 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Fire Station o EMS / ALS covers approximately 445 square miles o 22 Paramedics o Provide ALS intercept to 11 EMT – Basic Service areas across northern Ashland and Bayfield counties. o Provide Interfacility Transports from Ashland to medical centers throughout Wisconsin, Michigan and Minnesota. o Total Fire / EMS Budget (2026) - $3,818,144 o Total Fire Budget (2026) - $1,015,085 o Total EMS Budget (2026) - $2,803,059 o Barnes – The Barnes EMS District covers 124.70 miles and 1,767 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 110 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Fire station o 2 FTE EMS personnel during weekdays: 1 Full time EMS personnel during weeknights Page 53 of 121 o 9 volunteer EMS personnel o 9 volunteer Fire fighters o 1 Ambulance Director – Brett Friermood o Total Budget (2026) - $355,185 o Bayfield – The Bayfield EMS District covers 81.79 miles and 1,417 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 230 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Fire Station o All volunteer o Total Budget (2026) - $485,399.81 o Total Fire Budget (2026) - $412,162.68 o Total EMS / Contracted Budget (2026) - $73,237.13 o Great Divide – The Great Divide EMS District covers 357.93 miles and 2,980 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 340 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 10 FTE – ALS Paramedics o Private Ambulance Services contracting with 4 different communities: Cable, Drummond, Namakagon and portions of Grand View. o Operates out of 1 station located in Cable, Wisconsin o Iron River - The Iron River EMS District covers 231.33 miles and 2,689 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 310 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Station operating 2 ambulances o Private ambulance service contracts with five municipalities for EMS services: Iron River, Oulu, Tripp, Hughes, Delta o Mason - The Mason EMS District covers 180.92 miles and 1,371 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 135 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Station o Ambulance service provides EMS to six municipalities: Lincoln, Kelly, Keystone, Mason, Mason and portions of Grand View. o Red Cliff - The Red Cliff EMS District covers 52.69 miles and 835 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 325 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Fire Station o Provides BLS EMS transport to area hospitals o Relies on Paramedic Intercept for ALS response Page 54 of 121 o South Shore - The South Shore EMS District covers 221.21 miles and 1,910 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 100 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Station located in Herbster, Wisconsin (Town of Clover) o Provides EMS services to the following municipalities: Clover, Bell, Orienta, Port Wing o 19 volunteer EMT’s on staff o Washburn - The Washburn EMS District covers 186.20 miles and 2,291 residences. In 2023, they responded to over 510 calls for help within their jurisdiction. o 1 Fire Station o All Volunteer o 24 personnel o Total Budget (2025) – $605,951 o 3 ambulances Bayfield County Countywide EMS / Dispatch Funding: 2026 - $408,395 – 0.088 Mill Rate - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Florence County - County Seat – Florence - 2020 Census Population – 4,558 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 4,673 - Square Mileage – 498 Medical Direction – Medical oversight for the Florence County EMS System is provided by Amanda Mulvey EMS operates three (3) station sites located in Florence, Aurora and Long Lake/Tipler to improve response time across the County. All 8 municipalities in the county participate in and support the countywide EMS service via agreements and a per – capita contribution. The 8 municipalities are townships: Aurora Commonwealth Fence Fern Florence Florence Homestead Long Lake Tipler 2 ambulances in Florence 1 ambulance in Aurora 1 ambulance in Long Lake/Tipler Page 55 of 121 Additional equipment includes UTV/command trailers for off-road and trail rescue Current staff: 8 – Full time personnel 2 - Part time personnel 7 – “casual” / paid on call personnel Skill mix includes: EMT’s, advanced EMT’s, Paramedics and Registered Nurses Goal – 23 full time professionals EMS operations are funded through a county tax levy, per capita municipal contributions, grants, and ambulance billing revenues In the 2023 Florence County Budget, EMS had a total operating budget of $1,883,699, funded primarily by property taxes, transport fees, and intergovernmental charges A special EMS levy (2024) was $1,768,966 to continue the countywide EMS operations Each municipality that contracts with the county for EMS service pays a $25 per capita fee as part of its support for the countywide EMS system. This per capita contribution is deducted from the total county EMS tax levy to lower the direct tax burden on property owners The EMS system is also funded by a tax levy based on property value, grant funding, and ambulance billing revenue Total Budget (2026) - $1,768,966 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy CIP Capital Improvement (2026) - $4,994,065 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy Florence County gets new three-station EMS service | News, Sports, Jobs - The Daily News - Marquette County - County Seat – Montello - 2020 Census Population – 15,592 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 15,743 Page 56 of 121 - Square Mileage – 464 City – Montello Villages – Endeavor Neshkoro Oxford Westfield Towns - Multiple Medical Direction – Medical oversight for Marquette County EMS System is provided by Robert Lulling - Countywide EMS system - Three EMS stations operating: o Montello o Oxford o Westfield - 4 ambulances with 1 ambulance serving as a “backup” - Staffed with Paramedics and EMT’s assigned to ambulances 24/7/365 o 20 Full Time Personnel o 30 Part Time Personnel o 7 volunteer first responders “groups” - ~ 2,000 calls for service (2024) Total Budget (2026) - $1,944,428 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy Marquette-County-WI-FINAL-EMS-Report.pdf EMS.pdf - Sawyer County - County Seat – Hayward - 2020 Census Population – 18,074 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 18,835 - Square Mileage – 1,350 City – Hayward Villages – Page 57 of 121 Couderay Exeland Radisson Winter Villages – Multiple - 6 EMS stations o Hayward – 2 o Radisson o Winter o Stone Lake o Round Lake - Staffing o 1 Ambulance Director o 16 EMT’s o 20 Advanced EMT’s o 8 Paramedics o - Mixture of Full and Part Time / Paid on Call Personnel - Run Volume (2025) - ~ 1,890 Total Budget (2026) - $1,516,075 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Waushara County - County Seat – Wautoma - 2020 Census Population – 24,520 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 25,079 - Square Mileage – 637 Cities – Berlin Wautoma Villages – Coloma Hancock Lohrville Plainfield Redgranite Wild Rose Towns - Multiple Medical Direction – Medical oversight for Waushara County EMS System is provided by Chad Voskuil affiliated with ThedaCare Medical Center – Wild Rose Page 58 of 121 EMS Chief – Keith Melvin - 4 Stations: o Station 1 ▪ MED 1, MED 3, MED 10 o Station 2 ▪ MED 2, MED 4 o Station 5 ▪ MED 5 o Station 6 ▪ MED 6 - Staffing o 26 Full Time Personnel o 16 Part Time Personnel - Skill Sets: o EMT through Critical Care Paramedics EMS Calls for service (2024) - ~ 4,500 Total Budget (2025) - $3,784,159 – Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Door County - County Seat – Sturgeon Bay - 2020 Census Population – 30,066 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 30,512 - Square Mileage – 482 (Land), 1,888 (Water), Total – 2,370 Cities – Sturgeon Bay Villages – Egg Harbor Ephraim Forestville Sister Bay Towns - Multiple Medical Direction – Medical oversight for Door County EMS System is provided by Aaron LeClair affiliated with the Door County Medical Center Page 59 of 121 EMS Director – Dan Williams - 4 Stations – 10 Ambulances o Washington Island ▪ MED 8, MED 9 • 1 ambulance staffed with 2 Paid on Call – 24 hours a day • 1 ambulance is the backup and is staffed with the closest available EMS / AEMT o Sister Bay ▪ MED 5, MED 6 • 1 ambulance is staffed with 1 Paramedic and 1 EMT 24 hours a day • 1 ambulance is staffed with 1 Paramedic and 1 EMT during peak hours year – round with an increase in hours from May – November o Sturgeon Bay ▪ MED 1, MED 2, MED 3, MED 4, MED 10 • 2 ambulances with 2 paramedics each • 1 ambulance with 2 EMT’s • 2 ambulances staffed as back up apparatus and during peak hours and during May – November with population increase and special events o Brussels ▪ MED 7 • 1 full time paramedic and one “casual call” EMT/AEMT 24 hours per day. EMS Calls for service (2025) - ~ 4,500 Total Budget (2026) - $5,192,652 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Lafayette County - County Seat – Darlington - 2020 Census Population – 16,611 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 17,306 - Square Mileage – 635 Cities – Page 60 of 121 Cuba City Darlington Schullsburg Villages – Argyle Belmont Benton Blanchardville Gratiot Hazel Green South Wayne Towns – Multiple EMS Medical Director – Shawn Phillips - Lafeyette County operates one Primary EMS station to serve the county’s rural area. o Combination of Full Time Personnel and Volunteer - In addition to the county EMS service, several independent municipal EMS/ambulance providers also operate in the county: o Argyle EMS - Primarily Volunteer o Belmont EMS – Volunteer / Part Time o Blanchardville EMS – Part Time o Shullsburg Ambulance Service – Part Time - In addition to those transporting ambulance service, first responder groups operate in the county, fully volunteer: o Benton First Responders o Gratiot First Responders o South Wayne First Responders o Wiota First Responders o Woodford First Responders - All EMS agencies and first responders are dispatch through Lafeyette County EMS Call volume: - Lafeyette County EMS - ~ 500 - All other EMS providers average - ~ 100 – 120 Total Budget - $178,524 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy 45476 - Oneida County Page 61 of 121 - County Seat – Rhinelander - 2020 Census Population – 37,845 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 38,175 - Square Mileage – 1,236 Cities – Rhinelander Villages – None Towns – Multiple 5 EMS Providers in Oneida County: - Rhinelander Fire – Fully Staffed - Woodruff Fire Department o ~ 20 Volunteer Personnel o Calls per year ~ 50-100 - Nokomis Fire Department o ~ 32 Volunteer Personnel o Calls per year ~ 100 - Sugar Camp Ambulance Building o Fully staffed via the Oneida County Ambulance service contracting with Aspirus Rhinelander Hospital and Howard Young Medical Center with MED 8. Two personnel on shift 24 hours per day - Three Lake Fire Department - ~ 35 Volunteer Personnel - Calls per year ~ 200 Rhinelander Fire Department: - 1 Fire Station - 21Full Time Personnel o 16 Paramedics o 2 AEMT’s o 2 EMT’s - 3 Ambulances (All function at the ALS (Advanced Life Support) level o MED 9-1 o MED 9-2 o MED 9-3 Calls for Service: Fire / Other – 140 Page 62 of 121 EMS – 1,860 Total - ~ 2,000 Total Rhinelander FD Budget (2026) - $2,343,173 Total Oneida County EMS Budget (2026) - $2,712,845 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Taylor County - County Seat – Medford - 2020 Census Population – 19,913 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 20,167 - Square Mileage – 984 Cities – Rhinelander Villages – Gilman Lublin Rib Lake Stetsonville Taylor Towns – Multiple - Multiple EMS Providers throughout Taylor County: o Taylor County Ambulance Service o Taylor Fire and Rescue First Responders ▪ 3 - Full Time Personnel ▪ ~ 20 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call volume - ~ 225 per annum o Jump River First Responders ▪ ~ 20 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call Volume - ~ 10 per annum o Gilman Rural Volunteer Fire Department ▪ ~ 37 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call volume - ~ 30 per annum o Lublin Area Volunteer Fire Department ▪ ~ 30 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call Volume - ~ 5 calls per annum o Medford Area Fire Department ▪ ~ 26 Volunteer Personnel Page 63 of 121 ▪ Call Volume - ~ 245 per annum o Rib Lake Fire Department ▪ ~ 26 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call Volume - ~ 25 per annum o Stetsonville Volunteer Fire Department ▪ ~ 36 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call Volume - ~ 25 per annum o Westboro Volunteer Fire Department ▪ ~ 26 Volunteer Personnel ▪ Call Volume - ~ 20 per annum - Taylor County Ambulance Service o A new countywide EMS property tax levy of up to .60 per $1,000 of taxable property value was approved by voters this past November, 2025. The levy is expected to generate roughly $300,000 per year for EMS funding once it takes effect. o This levy is being implemented because Taylor County EMS and local first responder agencies historically received little to no direct county property tax funding and relied heavily on billing revenue and volunteer fundraising. The new levy is intended to provide stable, predictable support for EMS equipment, training, recruitment, and possibly system improvements. o Funds from this levy will begin being collected in the 2027 tax year and become available in fiscal year 2028 - Lincoln County - County Seat – Merrill - 2020 Census Population – 28,415 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 28,461 - Square Mileage – 907 Cities – Merrill Tomahawk Villages – None Towns – Multiple Page 64 of 121 Medical Direction – Medical oversight for the Lincoln County EMS System will be provided by Dr. Carr Boyd, MD. - All EMS and first responder calls are routed through the Lincoln County Sheriff’s Office EMS Service Providers: - Merrill Fire Department o 26 Full Time Personnel o 1 Fire Station o 3 Ambulances ▪ MED 61 – Primary Transport Unit (Inter Facility Transports) ▪ MED 62 – Primary Response Ambulance ▪ MED 63 – Another First Response Ambulance ▪ Fire / Other Calls - ~ 194 ▪ EMS Calls - ~ 2,128 ▪ Total - ~ 2,322 - Fire Budget (2026) - $1,816,853 - EMS Budget (2026) - $1,304,866 - Tomahawk EMS o 1 station o ~ 16 personnel from Sacred Heart/St. Mary’s hospital who contract with Lincoln County o Total Calls - ~ 891 o Total Budget - ~ $824,900 o First Responder Groups: ▪ Corning First Responders • 9 Volunteer First Responders • 25 Volunteer Fire Fighters • Call Volume - ~ 40 ▪ Pine River First Responders • 10 Volunteer First Responders • 30 Volunteer Fire Fighters • Call Volume - ~ 86 ▪ Russell First Responders • 22 Volunteer Personnel • Call Volume - ~ 74 Page 65 of 121 Total Calls - ~2,250 Total Budget for Lincoln County EMS (2026) - $1,242,949 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy - Rusk County - County Seat – Ladysmith - 2020 Census Population – 14,188 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 14,168 - Square Mileage – 931 Cities – Ladysmith Villages – Bruce Conrath Glen Flora Hawkins Ingram Sheldon Tony Weyerhaeuser Towns – Multiple *All 911 calls for medical emergencies in Rusk County are dispatched through the Rusk County Dispatch Center Primary EMS Provider – Rusk County Ambulance Service First Responder Support: - Bruce First Responders / Fire Department o 1 Station o 27 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 40 per annum - Ladysmith Fire and Rescue o 1 Station o 28 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 99 per annum - Hawkins Fire Department o 1 Station o ~ 20 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 40 per annum Page 66 of 121 - Sheldon Fire Department o 1 Station o ~ 25 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 85 per annum - Flambeau / Reserve First Responders o 1 Station o ~ 25 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 20 Total Calls - ~ 4,197 Total Budget for Rusk County wide EMS service - ~ $1,558,206 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy Microsoft PowerPoint - Rusk County WI Presentation AmbulanceSerAnalysisRecom.pdf - Green Lake County - County Seat – Green Lake - 2020 Census Population – 19,018 - 2024 Population – Estimated – 19,370 - Square Mileage – 380 Cities – Berlin Green Lake Markesan Princeton Villages – Kingston Marquette Towns – Multiple Medical Direction – Medical oversight for the Green Lake County EMS System is provided by Dr. Craig Tschautscher, MD. All Emergency calls are taken and dispatched by the Green Lake County Sheriff’s Communications center. Ambulance and EMS Services are provided by the following: Page 67 of 121 - Southern Green Lake County Ambulance Service o 1 Station – 2 ambulances o 33 personnel consisting of: ▪ Part Time Personnel ▪ Per – diem Personnel ▪ Volunteer Personnel ▪ Contracted Personnel o Ranging in licensure in EMT, AEMT and Paramedic level o Call Volume - ~ 1,200 per annum - Berlin EMS o 1 Station o 4 Full Time Personnel o 22 Volunteer Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 850 per annum - Princeton EMS o 1 Station o 35 – Volunteer / “Paid Per Call” Personnel o Call Volume - ~ 1,400 Total o Fire / Other Calls - ~ 110 o EMS calls - ~ 1,290 - Green Lake Area TEMS Units Total Call for Green Lake County - ~ 7,554 (This number includes some mutual aid responses outside of Green Lake County) Total EMS Budget for Green Lake County (2026) - $2,613,800 - Applies Wisconsin Statute 66.0602(3)(e)(6) for this levy *Additional Revenue for Washington County Fire Departments / Municipalities: Page 68 of 121 Washington County Emergency Medical Services (EMS) & Fire Grants - This grant began in calendar year 2024 and was distributed for 2024 and 2025. Washington County approved this grant for calendar year 2026 - only. EMS & Fire Grant Distribution City of Hartford $144,000 Village of Germantown $177,000 Village of Jackson $74,000 Village of Kewaskum $46,000 Village of Newburg $29,000 Village of Slinger $63,000 Town of Addison $36,000 Town of Barton $26,500 Town of Erin $36,000 Town of Farmington $35,000 Town of Germantown $14,000 Town of Hartford $32,000 Town of Jackson $31,000 Town of Kewaskum $19,000 Town of Polk $36,000 Town of Trenton $34,500 Town of Wayne $28,000 Town of West Bend $44,000 TOTAL $1,000,000 / Per Annum TOTAL 2024 – 2026 $3,000,000 *Additional Funding for EMS Providers throughout the State of Wisconsin EMS: FUNDING ASSISTANCE PROGRAM Page 69 of 121 *This program was enacted in 1989 - Wisconsin Act 102 - and administered by the Wisconsin Department of Health Services **Historically, the program provided approximately $2.2 million annually under its original structure. Recent legislative and budget changes, most recently surrounding the 2023- 2025 biennial budget, greatly expanded the scope, eligibility and funding levels, including increased total funding and expanded eligible uses and applicants. 2024 EMS: Funding Assistance Program Recipients and Awards – Washington County Hartford Fire and Rescue $13,355 Jackson Fire $89,005 Kewaskum Fire $4,315 Kohlsville Fire $78,870 Lifestar Ambulance $43,825 Richfield $28,825 West Bend Fire $43,315 2025 EMS: Funding Assistance Program Recipients and Awards – Washington County **New formula for 2025 and going forward is: Page 70 of 121 Base - $10,000 (You apply – you receive) Training - $2,198 (You apply – you receive – Universal sum Across The Board) Per Capita - $2.78 Allenton Volunteer Fire Department $29,632.98 Boltonville Volunteer Fire Department $20,878.56 Fillmore Fire Department $23,276.64 Germantown Fire Department $74,848.52 Hartford Fire & Rescue $95,833.68 Jackson Fire Department $60,746.16 Kewaskum Fire Department $49,477.31 Kohlsville Volunteer Fire Company $21,935.85 Lifestar Emergency Medical Service, LLC $183,220.02 Newburg Fire Department $36,186.00 Richfield Volunteer Fire Company $50,612.18 West Bend Fire Department $119,965.72 2026 EMS: Funding Assistance Program Recipients and Awards – Washington County Allenton Volunteer Fire Department $28,311.88 Boltonville Volunteer Fire Department $0 Fillmore Fire Department $22,404.38 Germantown Fire Department $70,770.82 Hartford Fire & Rescue $89,922.24 Jackson Fire Department $49,431.54 Kewaskum Fire Department $30,698.23 Kohlsville Volunteer Fire Company $12,197.80 Lifestar Emergency Medical Service, LLC $171,630.40 Newburg Fire Department $33,543.84 Richfield Volunteer Fire Company $46,637.64 West Bend Fire Department $140,929.68 Page 71 of 121 5-YEAR FORECAST – FIRE DEPARTMENT 02.02.26 1 Page 72 of 121 ASSUMPTIONS • Salary projections are based on current union contract • Salaries after 2028 are assumed to increase 3.5% based on current contract • WRS and FICA benefits increase in accordance with State and Federal Law • Health and Dental premium increases of 3% YoY • Expenses increase by 2.5% YoY 2 Page 73 of 121 SALARIES AND BENEFITS 3 Year Wages FICA WRS Health Dental Total 2026 $2,299,181.08 $175,887.35 $337,979.62 $512,543.96 $24,125.86 $3,349,717.87 2027 $2,432,207.26 $186,063.86 $357,534.47 $527,920.28 $24,849.64 $3,528,575.50 2028 $2,591,224.27 $ 198,228.66 $380,909.97 $543,757.89 $25,595.12 $3,739,715.91 2029 $2,719,728.47 $208,059.23 $399,800.08 $560,070.62 $26,362.98 $3,914,021.38 2030 $2,850,511.17 $218,064.10 $419,025.14 $576,872.74 $27,153.87 $4,091,627.02 Page 74 of 121 EXPENDITURES 4 Year Expenditures Hydrant Total 2026 $ 438,644.00 $ 537,400.00 $ 976,044.00 2027 $ 449,610.10 $ 537,400.00 $ 987,010.10 2028 $ 460,850.35 $ 537,400.00 $ 998,250.35 2029 $ 472,371.61 $ 537,400.00 $ 1,009,771.61 2030 $ 484,180.90 $ 537,400.00 $ 1,021,580.90 Page 75 of 121 FIRE DEPARTMENT – TOTAL EXP 5 Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Salaries and Benefits $ 3,349,718 $3,528,575 $3,739,716 $3,914,021 $4,091,627 Expenditures $976,044 $987,010 $998,250 $1,009,772 $1,021,581 Total $4,325,762 $4,515,586 $4,737,966 $4,923,793 $5,113,208 Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 YoY Increase ($) $ - $189,824 $222,381 $ 185,827 189,415 YoY Increase (%) 0% 4.39% 4.92% 3.92% 3.85% Page 76 of 121 LEVY IMPACT 6 Category 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 YoY Increase ($) $ - $189,824 $222,381 $185,827 $189,415 YoY Increase (%) 0% 4.39% 4.92% 3.92% 3.85% Village Average NNC (2.68%) $274,488 $351,108 $360,518 $370,180 $380,100 County Average NNC (1.70%) $274,488 $222,718 $226,504 $230,354 $234,271 Remaining Levy (2.68%) $ - $161,284 $138,137 $184,353 $ 190,685 Remaining Levy (1.70%) $ - $32,894 $4,123 $44,528 $44,856 Page 77 of 121 THANK YOU Page 78 of 121 BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026 PLACEMENT: Presentation ITEM TITLE: Germantown Community Library 2025 Annual Report (DISCUSSION) SUBMITTED BY: Trisha Smith, Library Director SUMMARY EXPLANATION: ATTACHMENT: 1. 2025 Library Annual Report (Annual Report Graphic) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ACTION BY COMMITTEE: Page 79 of 121 WWW.GERMANTOWNLIBRARYWI.ORG (262) 253-7760 2 0 2 5 B Y T H E N U M B E R S GERMANTOWN COMMUNITY LIBRARY 7 , 0 0 0 + Items +The value of material checked out by patrons in 2025! 219,000+Print 57,000+Audio / Visual 14,000+Library of Things + 5,000+ Items Checked Out 356,377 & New Items Added = 111,92536,703 1 2 , 7 1 5Registered Library Cards Service Questions Library Visits in 2025! PeopleAttended Participants inSelf-DirectedActivities 27,000+ 34,000+ 740 15,000+ 11,000+ 1,600+ 1,400+ 1,300+ 1,200+ wireless Logins Community & Study Spaces Used People worked on community puzzles public computer Logins + 66,000+Digital E n r i c h L i v e s B u il d C o n n e c t io n s our Outreach Services department checked out Volunteer Hours Completed Programs $ 5 , 9 2 7 , 9 5 6 new library cards issued Page 80 of 121 BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026 PLACEMENT: Presentation ITEM TITLE: Proposed Village Center District Community Engagement Program (CEP) - Presentation by SRF Consulting & Public Comment (DISCUSSION & ACTION) SUBMITTED BY: SUMMARY EXPLANATION: In 2025, the Village Board decided to set aside the community visioning and master planning work that had been completed to date by the RINKA Group and embark on a different course of action. To gather more public input regarding potential re- development of this area and possibly other properties within the larger “Village Center District”, the Board directed Staff to initiate a comprehensive community engagement program to identify community issues, priorities, needs, desires and opinions that can be used to develop specific land use plans, development regulations and design guidelines for potential re-development in the Village Center District. To that end, a request for proposals (RFP) was issued detailing the intended purpose and desired outcomes for a consultant-led community engagement process to take place over the next 4-5 months in early 2026. At the time the RFP was prepared, the Board’s focus was on three (3) Village-owned properties located in the “Village Center District” including the 15-ac Flower Source property, the 4.6-ac Ascension property, and the 5.6-ac Grosenick property. After the RFP was issued, the Village Board discussed the possibility of expanding the scope of the community engagement effort to include other properties in the Village Center District (e.g. the Blackstone Creek golf course, the Village’s former recycling center property, etc.). At the December 15, 2025, meeting, the Village Board selected SRF Consulting to lead the project. SRF is proposing a “community engagement program” with specific engagement tools and activities to encourage participation and solicit feedback from Village residents, property owners, business owners/operators, and other community stakeholders. The community engagement program (CEP) will be presented to the Village Board for review, discussion and adoption. Copies of the preliminary CEP, SRF’s original project proposal, and a summary of the scope of work are included in the packet. As will be discussed, additional services, e.g. additional open house, pop-up events, focus group meetings, workshops, etc., can be added now or during the proposed 5-month process from February through June 2026. ATTACHMENT: 1. Village Center District - Preliminary Community Engagment Program (CEP) 2. SRF-Community Engagement Project- Proposal 3. SRF Consulting-CEP Scope of Work-Summary Table Page 81 of 121 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ACTION BY COMMITTEE: Page 82 of 121 MEMORANDUM www.srfconsulting.com 1600 Aspen Commons, Suite 650 | Middleton, WI 53562 | 608.298.5400 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer SRF Project No. 19881.00 To: Steve Kreklow, Village Administrator Jeff Retzlaff, Village Planning and Zoning Administrator Village of Germantown From: Mitchell Brouse, Project Manager Date: January 23, 2026 Subject: Preliminary Community Engagement Program – Village of Germantown Overview This Preliminary Community Engagement Program (CEP) provides the framework for the Village of Germantown to gather input to help guide redevelopment planning in the Village Center District and on three Village owned parcels located in the area. This draft is intended for review by the Village of Germantown Board, Plan Commission, and the public. Incorporating engagement results into planning activities is a key aspect in gaining community buy-in. This effort will seek to gain general and/or broad feedback regarding development/re- development within the overall Village Center District, with more focused or specific focus on the following three parcels: Property Existing Zoning Future Land Use Map Flower Source Neighborhood Business (B-1) & Agricultural (A-2) Village Center District Ascension Property Neighborhood Business (B-1) Village Center District Grosenick Property General Business (B-3) Village Center District This CEP provides written procedures that are designed to foster public participation in the village with the following goals in mind: • Employ both traditional and innovative methods of engagement. • Collaborate with residents, property owners, business owners and operators, community organizations, and other key stakeholders. • Utilize both virtual (interactive maps, online surveys) and in-person (stakeholder meetings, focus groups, pop-up events) engagement opportunities to engage community members. Page 83 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 2 of 9 • Ensure inclusive and equitable outreach and engagement with a variety of community partners. Included in the process are opportunities for the public to engage in open discussion, provide written comments, provide location-specific comments, and attend public involvement meetings. Additional Services In addition to the base services overviewed in this CEP, further engagement activities are available on a “as authorized by the Village of Germantown” basis. Those items can be added to the overall scope of work at any time prior to development of the final report. The additional services are as follows: • One Additional Community Survey • One Additional Community Open House • Up to Two Additional Pop-Up Events • Two Additional Focus Group Meetings • One Additional Plan Commission and/or Village Board Workshop SRF will work with the Village to determine which additional services will be requested and will incorporate them into the overall project schedule. Definitions The following terms are commonly used throughout the CEP, and the corresponding definitions provide a baseline for how the term is used. Audience: the portion or portions of the community that are targeted for participation in the engagement process or for whom the results of the engagement process are targeted towards. Community: a group of individuals living, playing, and working within the Village of Germantown, with individual interests, investments, and goals. Interest Groups: Groups or individuals with specific interests in the Village of Germantown, including community organizations, regional/state entities, and business groups. Engagement: Opportunities to connect and collaborate with the community and stakeholders on a specific topic to inform, consult, involve, collaborate, or empower groups in a decision- making process. Promotion and Branding: Activities, aesthetics, and phrases to encourage education, participation, and awareness of the planning process and engagement activities. Page 84 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 3 of 9 Stakeholder: A person or organization that is interested in or impacted by the project, who can provide valuable insight into existing conditions and community goals. Audiences This CEP is intended to guide engagement in the Village of Germantown catered to a variety of audiences. As defined above, audiences include both those that are participants in the engagement process and the parties that are intended to receive the results of the engagement process. Each of the following parties will have a role in the project. Village of Germantown Residents In general, this public input initiative is intended to engage any and all residents of the Village of Germantown. Understanding differences in the community is necessary to scope the blend of traditional and innovative/modern engagement tools. Interest Groups A key aspect of collecting useful and complete community feedback about the target properties is to identify interest groups that hold specific and unique perspectives about the area. The project team will work with the Village to identify specific interest groups to engage in the process. Each of these groups will receive direct outreach as a part of project promotion and engagement facilitation. For each of the identified groups, the project team will identify barriers to their participation and seek solutions to overcome them (e.g. translation services, provision of paper versions of documentation, etc.). The following preliminary list includes a sampling of interest group categories that should be considered for inclusion: Interest Groups Categories Germantown Chamber of Commerce Germantown Community Coalition Village Boards and Commissions Germantown School District Business Owners Property Owners Village Board Results of this CEP will be tailored to assist the Village Board in making key decisions regarding the creation of a detailed redevelopment plan with associated regulations and design guidelines to guide the redevelopment of the subject properties. The Village Board will be consulted on the finalization and approval of this CEP and will be presented the results of the final report to conclude the process. Plan Commission The Plan Commission will serve as a primary audience for the final report summarizing the findings of this engagement process. Commissioner will be provided the opportunity to review and comment Page 85 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 4 of 9 on this CEP prior to review and approval by the Village Board and will receive the final report for review and comment. Public Engagement Tools and Activities Engagement will include several opportunities for the Germantown community to participate in the process. A combination of online and in-person activities, and direct community outreach will help to ensure that a wide variety of stakeholders and interest groups will be able to engage in the process. As the project progresses through the schedule, activities will build on the results of past activities feedback. Specific engagement tools and strategies that will be used include: Online and Paper Community Survey Online Interactive Maps Community Open Houses Pop-Up Events Focus Group Meetings Project Website, Emails, and Social Media Updates Community Survey To kick off the engagement process, a Community Visioning Survey will be developed and shared with the community to gather initial feedback about the community’s vision for the Village Center District and three Village owned properties identified above. Topics that will be covered by the visioning survey will include, but not be limited to: • General vision for future development of subject properties. • Preferred built environment characteristics for the Village Center District. • Preference for land use type on properties in the Village Center District. Community surveys will be administered online to allow for easy distribution and access, however, paper copies will also be made available and distributed to community members who need alternative options. The project website will also provide easy access to the community survey. Interactive Comment Map An online mapping portal, utilizing ESRI ArcGIS Online and Survey123, will be developed and used to gather geographic based community feedback. Community members will be able to use the map to provide comments about specific locations on the subject properties and in the surrounding area. By dropping a pin on the map, participants will be able to identify locations with a positive association, areas that need improvement, or share general comments related to development, redevelopment, or land use. Page 86 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 5 of 9 Figure 1: Example Comment Map, Winona County, MN Comprehensive Plan Update Open House One open house will be held towards the end of the engagement process. This meeting will allow the project team to interact directly with community members to solicit feedback, share information, and educate the public about the project. Open houses meetings allow for in-depth conversations with stakeholders that can be difficult during pop-up events. Meeting materials will be made available online for community members who are unable to attend the meeting. Building from the community survey results, the SRF team will work with the Village to develop a set of engagement and educational materials for participants to view and respond to. Materials may include items such as, but not limited to, visual preference surveys, including photographs and graphics, educational materials about existing planning documents (such as the 2050Comprehensive Plan), and mapping activities expanding on the results of the Interactive comment map. Page 87 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 6 of 9 Pop-up Events The project team will collaborate with community event organizers to attend prescheduled community events to solicit community feedback and promote the project. Two pop-up events will be held at times that coincide with existing events in the Village of Germantown. Engagement typically requires approximately five minutes of stakeholders’ time with the intention of meeting people where they are rather than asking them to come to a specific event. Pop-up events are an opportunity to engage with community members who do not traditionally involve themselves in the planning process and often reach a wider audience than traditional engagement events, such as open houses. SRF Staff will work with the Village to identify opportunities, events could include: • Germantown Area Chamber of Commerce Leadership Luncheon (February 2026) • Germantown Community Scholarship Fund Dinner & Auction (February 19, 2026) • Family Trivia Night hosted by the Germantown Community Coalition (mid-March 2026) • Germantown Easter Egg Hunt (March 28, 2026) • Family Glow Walk (May 1, 2026) • Maifest Germantown (May 15-17, 2026) • Collaborate with the Germantown School District to attend a school district event Focus Groups Two focus group meetings will be held between mid-April and mid-May to solicit feedback from groups of stakeholders that have a specific interest in the project. Stakeholder groups could include, but are not limited to, property owners, business owners and operators, and/or community organizations. Discussions at focus group meetings will be facilitated in-person by SRF staff, with the participation of six to 12 community members. Meeting agendas and discussion topics will be shared with participants in advance of the meeting to ensure they have time to prepare. Discussion items will be catered to the interests of each specific group. Public Participation Timeline The following approximate timeline will guide the engagement process. Implementation of the engagement plan occur between February and May 2026, with minor timeframe adjustments as needed. Page 88 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 7 of 9 Event/Task Date(s), if applicable February March April May June July Community Engagement Program Workshop February 3 Community Survey Mid-February – Late March Interactive Comment Map Early March – Late April Community Open House Mid-Late April Pop-Up Events Mid-March – Late May Focus Group Meetings Mid-April – Mid- May Final Report Presentation to Village Board June Promotional Tools and Communication The project team will utilize a wide range of communication and outreach strategies to promote engagement opportunities. Outreach opportunities will be shared at popular community locations in-person, as well as online, to reach a wider audience. Project interest groups will also help with promotion throughout the planning process. Specific outreach tools that will be used include: • Project website • Email updates • Direct outreach to interest groups • Social media posts • Traditional media and press releases Project Website The project webpage will be used to share information and updates about the public engagement process and will serve as a one stop shop for all information related to the engagement process. The website will be hosted externally to the Village of Germantown website and will be maintained by SRF Staff. Participants will be referred to the website to access online resources (links to the online community survey and interactive comment map), and review relevant and timely information about the project, including engagement results, project status updates, information on virtual and in-person engagement opportunities, and meeting agendas and materials. Page 89 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 8 of 9 Direct Outreach to Interest Groups The project team will work with Village Staff to complete direct outreach to key community groups in the Village. As a part of this effort, the project team will ask these groups to share information about engagement events with their membership: • Germantown School District • Germantown Senior Center • Germantown Chamber of Commerce • Kiwanis Club • Germantown Community Coalition Social Media Posts The project team will use existing Village of Germantown social media accounts to promote the project and advertise specific engagement opportunities. Social media posts will provide a space for promoting engagement activities to a larger audience. The project team will also work with local partners to provide content for their social media outlets, to reach those who may not be following Village of Germantown social media pages. Traditional Media and Press Releases At the discretion of the Village, traditional media options, such as sending mailers and publishing press releases could be used to inform the public about upcoming engagement opportunities. If directed, the SRF team will develop press releases, mailers, or other traditional media materials to support these efforts. Reporting After completion of all engagement tasks, the consultant team will prepare a report that summarizes the results of engagement. That report will be provided to the Plan Commission for review and presented to Village Board for discussion. The final report will, at a minimum, include: • A summary of responses from each engagement activity. • A list of key findings. • Recommendations intended to inform the development of site-specific land use plans, zoning regulations, and design guidelines. • Appendices including full engagement results. Accessibility All public facing website content created by the engagement team will comply with Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 and meet any other reasonable standards for accessibility. Public facing materials (e.g. display boards, handouts, reports, summaries) will be Page 90 of 121 Steve Kreklow & Jeff Retzlaff January 23, 2026 Village of Germantown Page 9 of 9 prepared in plain language and have an accessibility check before sending materials to project team for review. Any in-person engagement activities will be hosted at locations with ADA accessible facilities. Online engagement activities and live virtual meetings will include opportunities to participate for those without broadband access, such as dial-in and /or paper options. Page 91 of 121 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT SERVICES VILLAGE OF GERMANTOWN NOVEMBER 21, 2025 Page 92 of 121 November 21, 2025 Steve Kreklow Village Administrator N112 W17001 Mequon Road Germantown, WI 53022 Subject: Village of Germantown – Proposal for Community Engagement Services Dear Mr. Kreklow and Members of the Selection Committee: Incorporating community input into planning and development efforts is a critical aspect of gaining community by-in. As the Village of Germantown determines redevelopment plans for Village owed parcels, it is vital that community sentiment is incorporated early and throughout the planning process. The SRF team understands that engagement is an important supporting component of any planning effort and are excited to bring our proven expertise in providing innovative, efficient engagement support for large regional planning efforts. SRF has assembled a team of engagement and planning experts that is specifically tailored to support the Village. We will develop a customized engagement process that will seek to engage a wide swath of the community and provide a strong foundation for future planning processes. Our team, led by Mitchell Brouse, AICP, with support from Alexander Brown, AICP, and Daniel McNiel, AICP has deep experience providing community engagement assistance for villages, cities, counties, MPOs, and transit agencies. Our team will bring: • An experienced and passionate team of engagement and planning experts specifically tailored to support Germantown’s needs. • A deep range of proven engagement tools including in person and online means, such as community and visual preference surveys, public open houses and meetings, pop-up events, and workshops. • Access to a wide range of professionals with significant experience in land use, zoning, development and redevelopment, and site design. Paul Schroeder will serve as our Site Development Advisor. Paul’s experience spans 30 years as a development consultant in the commercial, residential, and government markets. Paul enjoys collaborating with and leading multidisciplinary teams to develop creative solutions that address project challenges and assist with client objectives. With our broad engagement experience and local knowledge, our team is uniquely qualified to provide critical engagement support services for the Village of Germantown. We are excited to help the Village and we look forward to working with you! If you have questions regarding our proposal, please contact Mitch Brouse at 608-298-5413 or mbrouse@srfconsulting.com. Sincerely, MITCHELL BROUSE, AICP JEFF KNUDSON, PE Project Manager Project Director Marketing or promotional statements about SRF’s professional services are provided solely for general information and not as a contract commitment. Equal Employment Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer 1600 Aspen Commons, Suite 650 Middleton, WI 53562 Phone: 608.298.5400 | Fax: 1.866.440.6364 www.srfconsulting.com Page 93 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 2 The Village of Germantown is seeking assistance in the development and implementation of a community engagement plan to collect feedback from the Germantown community on the redevelopment of three parcels owned by the Village. Our understanding is that the engagement results will be used to support the development of a detailed redevelopment plan with associated regulations and design guidelines to guide the redevelopment of the following three properties: Property Size Existing Zoning Future Land Use Map Flower Source 15-acres B-1 – Neighborhood Business & A-2 – Agricultural Village Center District Ascension Property 4.6-acres B-1 – Neighborhood Business Village Center District Grosenick Property 5.6-acres B-3 – General Business Village Center District Our team understands that the Village of Germantown is looking for completion of the following tasks: • Employment of traditional and innovative public engagement methods; • Collaboration with residents, property owners, business owners and operators, community organizations, and other key stakeholders; • The use of surveys, stakeholder meetings, focus groups, and other in-person community engagement, such as pop-up events and open houses; and virtual and social-media based engagement; • Inclusive and equitable outreach and engagement with a variety of community participants; and • The development of a report provides a clear and concise overview of all feedback collected throughout the life of the project. SRF’s team brings excitement and passion for community engagement. We understand the importance of public input in any planning or development process. For that reason, our team prides itself in the development of innovative engagement plans. This engagement effort will seek to identify tangible issues, priorities, needs, and desires that will directly impact site redevelopment. Project Understanding and Interest Dan McNiel engaging with community members at a pop up event. Page 94 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 3 Key Personnel and Qualifications JEFF KNUDSON, PE | PROJECT DIRECTOR Jeff has successfully managed hundreds of multimodal transportation planning, traffic, and design projects, while working closely with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) and many other State DOTs and agencies on a wide range of planning, traffic, safety, and design engineering theories, practices, and applications. He will provide project oversight and support to the team as Project Director. Our team members are skilled at facilitating meaningful discussions amongst the public to gain constructive feedback that can be addressed and incorporated into the final deliverables. Each team member contributes select expertise and prior experience to match the scope of work identified in this proposal. The team and their respective roles are highlighted in the org chart below. Our team will be led by Mitch Brouse, AICP, a community planning leader in our Madison Office. With 10 years of planning experience in both the public and private sectors, Mitch understands and enjoys the complexities that come with developing and implementing a zoning and subdivision ordinance. With each project, he embraces the community’s identity and future vision using a collaborative approach to develop creative and implementable solutions. He stresses the importance of building deliverables upon meaningful public and stakeholder engagement. The project team will be supported by Dan McNiel, AICP, a leader in SRF’s engagement group. He brings expertise in public involvement of all forms, including youth engagement, online input and meeting facilitation, engagement promotion, and the development of welcoming engagement activities. Resumes, highlighting applicable project experience for the very capable planners and designers that will participate in the planning process are included in the following pages. SRF Project Manager Mitch Brouse, AICP 40% Availability Village of Germantown Steve Kreklow Project Advisor Dan McNiel, AICP 40% Availability Graphics Support Brooke MacInnes 50% Availability Site Development Advisor Paul Schroeder, PLA, ASLA, LEED AP 30% Availability Planner Alexander Brown, AICP 40% Availability Engagement and Communications Alexandria Coffman 50% Availability Project Director Jeff Knudson, PE 40% Availability The SRF teamis comprised of seasoned professionals who understand the complexities and opportunities the Village of Germantown faces leading a comprehensive community engagement program for potential redevelopment of three sites. Our team members have extensive experience in day-to-day administration, code, zoning, and site development knowledge, and the expertise to successfully engage the community and stakeholders. Page 95 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 4 MITCHELL BROUSE, AICP | PROJECT MANAGER Mitch is an experienced planner, with 10 years of experience between the public and private sectors. His resume that includes various planning efforts including long-range policy and code development and current planning. He brings a wealth of knowledge on code and plan implementation from his past employment with Snohomish County, Washington and Johnson County, Iowa, which allows him to bring a unique understanding of the intricacies of local government. Mitch enjoys working with communities to identify strategies to move the community forward. Throughout his career, Mitch has served a variety of roles ranging from project management to data collection and analysis to development application review. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Land Use & Comprehensive Planning • Zoning & Development Codes • Stakeholder and Community Engagement • Environmental Planning • Transportation Planning • Interagency Coordination EDUCATION Master of Science, Urban and Regional Planning, University of Iowa, 2015 Bachelor of Art, Economics, Ripon College, 2012 CERTIFICATIONS American Institute of Certified Planners #31069 PROJECT EXPERIENCE Winona County 2045 Comprehensive Plan, Winona County, Minnesota. Mitch is currently serving as project manager in the development of Winona County’s updated comprehensive plan. In this role, he is coordinating plan development, leading meeting facilitation with internal and external stakeholder groups, and guiding SRF’s internal workload. Calumet County 2045 Comprehensive Plan Update, Calumet County, Wisconsin. Mitch served as the project manager for the Comprehensive Plan Update process. In this role he supported the development of Calumet County’s comprehensive plan by crafting goal and policy statements and conducting plan analysis. He coordinated public engagement, including surveys and events, to gather input. Mitch contributed to creating an interactive ArcGIS Storymap and a user-friendly document emphasizing SMART actions and future maintenance. Marshall Comprehensive Plan Update, Minnesota. Supporting the development of the Comprehensive Plan Update. Efforts focus on the development of the future land use plan and plan element analysis. Mitch’s roles include plan analysis, data collection, zoning assessment, and GIS mapping. Focus River Falls, Comprehensive Plan Update, River Falls, Wisconsin. Provided assistance the planning process with the development of goal and policy statements and plan analysis efforts. Mitch also played a key role in the development of the Comprehensive Plan document. Imagine 2045 Isanti County Comprehensive Plan, Isanti County, Minnesota. Mitch provided planning support for the development of the Isanti County Comprehensive Plan. Project focus included support for plan development, guiding land use analysis, community visioning and goal setting, and zoning ordinance review. Worthington Comprehensive Plan, Minnesota. Supported updates to the comprehensive plan, focusing efforts on evaluating, identifying, and documenting recommended updates to the City zoning and development ordinances. Johnson County, Unified Development Ordinance, Iowa.* Served as the lead planner in the development and adoption of a new Unified Development Ordinance for Johnson County, Iowa, including zoning, environmental, and development regulations and standards. Developed policy memos, verbally communicated policy options to elected officials and the Planning Commission, and facilitated public discussions with decision makers. Completed stakeholder interviews and focus groups to solicit feedback on community needs. Researched and developed updated code provisions and assembled an updated ordinance that was adopted in place of the old standards. Johnson County, Zoning Administration, Iowa.* Served as a permitting planner interpreting and implementing the County’s Unified Development Ordinance. Reviewed subdivision and zoning applications for compliance with the zoning ordinance and prepare associated staff reports. Presented staff reports to the Planning and Zoning Commission, Board of Adjustment, and Board of Supervisors monthly. *Completed with previous employer Page 96 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 5 DANIEL MCNIEL, AICP | PROJECT ADVISOR Dan has eight years of experience in public engagement and planning, including youth engagement, transportation planning and parks and recreation planning. He has significant experience facilitating public engagement for infrastructure projects, and works to ensure meaningful opportunities to educate, engage and involve community members. Dan is committed to developing accessible and responsive community outreach and is passionate about incorporating underrepresented perspectives into planning processes. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Stakeholder and Community Engagement • Park and Recreation Planning and Public Engagement • Planning for Connected and Automated Vehicles • Youth engagement • Virtual Meeting Facilitation and Online Input Opportunities • Graphic Design, ADA Compliance, Plain Language • Welcoming, Interactive and Educational Engagement Events EDUCATION Master of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Minnesota 2019 Bachelor of Individualized Studies, Communications, Management, American Indian Studies, University of Minnesota, 2017 CERTIFICATIONS American Institute of Certified Planners #34234 PROJECT EXPERIENCE Winona County 2045 Comprehensive Plan, Winona County, Minnesota. Dan is serving as the engagement lead in the development of Winona County’s updated Comprehensive Plan. In this role, he led the development of the public participation plan, is guiding ongoing engagement efforts, and leading plan promotion efforts. Janesville Long-Range Transportation Plan Update, Janesville, Wisconsin. Dan is providing engagement support for the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan update process. Dan works with the team to develop public engagement strategies including focus group, surveys, and pop-up community events to gather input throughout the planning process. ROCOG Safety Action Plan, Olmsted County, Minnesota. SRF led comprehensive community engagement for the Rochester-Olmsted Council of Governments Safety Action Plan (SAP). The goal of the SAP is to develop a regional strategy to prevent roadway fatalities and serious injuries for all roadway users within the ROCOG boundaries. Dan prepared a comprehensive engagement plan and facilitated robust engagement, with more than 800 people engaged at pop-up events, four focus group meetings with key audiences, and over 500 comments on an online comment map designed to support the systemic analysis and identification of priority locations across the ROCOG planning area. Mankato/North Mankato Long-Range Transportation Plan, Minnesota. Dan assisted in developing public involvement plan. Planned for, executed, and attended meetings, including pop-ups events and open houses. Developed boards, social media posts, and website content. Summarized comments received from the public. La Crosse Area Planning Committee – Metropolitan Transportation Plan Update Public Engagement, La Crosse, Wisconsin. The SRF engagement team designed and implemented public outreach to diverse communities around the La Crosse Area Planning region to gather ideas and feedback regarding transportation uses and future desires. The team implemented in person and online engagement activities, tracked and summarized feedback to be incorporated into the Metropolitan Transportation Plan document. Focus River Falls, Wisconsin. Dan was the Engagement Lead for SRF and helped facilitate an 18-month Focus River Falls planning process. This process updated three important plans for the community, the Comprehensive Plan, Bike and Pedestrian Plan, and Outdoor Recreation Plan. The project included robust in-person engagement with multiple interactive open houses and pop-up events, a dynamic website for each plan that brought more than 1000 residents together to engage online, as well as active public outreach and development of visually appealing and ADA accessible engagement materials. City of Worthington Comprehensive Plan Update, Minnesota. Dan provided public input and community and stakeholder engagement support for the City of Worthington’s Comprehensive Plan Update. Dan works collaboratively with city staff, project team members and residents to ensure meaningful and measurable opportunities for community voice in the Comprehensive Plan update process. Page 97 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 6 PAUL SCHROEDER, PLA, ASLA, LEED AP | SITE DEVELOPMENT ADVISOR Paul has nearly 30 years of experience as a development consultant in the commercial, residential, and government markets and has worked on numerous projects over his career. He focuses on site planning, engineering/environmental coordination, and project aesthetics while bringing a complement of skills to assist clients in the project’s entitlements, site design, assessment, construction, and overall development success. Paul enjoys collaborating with and leading multidisciplinary teams to develop creative solutions that address project challenges and meet key target dates. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Project Management • Due Diligence • Entitlements/Permitting • Presentations • Coancept/Site Planning • ADA Compliance • Development Plans • Construction Documents EDUCATION Bachelor of Landscape Architecture, Iowa State University, 1994 CERTIFICATIONS Professional Landscape Architect: Minnesota #25820, Wisconsin #577, North Dakota #43, South Dakota #9469, Iowa #00538, Missouri #PLA2016037209, Kansas #868, Colorado #918, Texas #2656, New York #002243 Landscape Architect: Council of Landscape Architecture Registration Boards (CLARB) PROJECT EXPERIENCE Mid-America Steel Redevelopment, Fargo, North Dakota. Completed a redevelopment study of the 10.5-acre abandoned industrial site, that focused on site constraints (rail line, floodplain, environmental, grades, stormwater, utilities, access) and future development uses. With the assistance of other subconsultants, the study also identified alternative environmental remediation options and other next steps in the development of this project. Meander Park and Boardwalk Development, Medina, Minnesota. Project manager for all survey, wetland, civil engineering, stormwater management, and landscape architecture aspects of the project from design through construction for a 6-acre mixed use retail, data center, event center, and attached residential master planned development. Also includes solar parking lot canopy, geothermal, landscape water features, and boardwalks. Downtown Hugo, Hugo, Minnesota. A 4-acre mixed use redevelopment retail and office master planned project, complete with a downtown theme and lake front boardwalk. Complete site development services involving site planning, platting, wetland temporary impacts, traffic/ parking, civil engineering, and landscape architecture. Firestone, Waukesha, Wisconsin. Rail access extension study to private property for distribution of products. Worked with Firestone, CN Rail, and the City of Waukesha. Gundersen Health Care, La Crosse, Wisconsin. Civil engineering and survey coordination involving a downtown urban medical office building renovation, along with related parking/ pedestrian modification and additional utility connections. Norway House, Minneapolis, Minnesota. A complex urban event center addition for this non- profit Norway culture organization, and adjacent church. Design also involved multiple site planning changes to accommodate parking, pedestrian circulation, environmental remediation, sculpture/plaza, and aesthetics. Complete with survey and Travel Demand Management Plan. Fleet Storage Facility, White Earth, Minnesota. Indoor facility for White Earth Nation to store its fleet of cars that is used to service the community on a daily basis. Provide site schematic design and due diligence assistance, along with future design services for property development. Jackhaw Lake Property, White Earth, Minnesota. Boundary Topographic survey of large 26-acre parcel for future development. Page 98 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 7 ALEXANDER BROWN, AICP, PTP | PLANNER Alexander brings over seven years of public sector planning experience prior to joining SRF in May 2024. His background includes working with a city, a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and a Regional Planning Commission. Throughout his career, he has developed comprehensive land use plans, active and multi-modal transportation plans, and implemented transportation policies and initiatives at the local level. As a Project Manager, Alexander has led comprehensive and regional planning projects across Wisconsin, working in both urban areas and rural communities. Now part of the Funding & Grants Team at SRF, he enjoys collaborating with communities to identify innovative strategies that support their goals. Alexander’s previous experience has given him a deep understanding of the complexities of local government, especially in Wisconsin communities. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Transportation Planning • Land Use & Comprehensive Planning • Grants & Fundings Coordination • Multimodal Transportation EDUCATION Master of Science, Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin, 2017 Bachelor of Arts, Political Science, Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin, 2015 CERTIFICATION American Institute of Certified Planners Professional Transportation Planner PROJECT EXPERIENCE Janesville Area MPO Long-Range Transportation Plan, Janesville, Wisconsin. Alexander serves as the project manager for the MPO’s Long-Range Transportation Plan update process. In this role, he supports the development of the MPO’s multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan by crafting goals, objectives, and performance measures, and provided financial, demographic, and planning analysis. He coordinates public engagement, including focus group, surveys, and pop-up community events to gather input throughout the planning process. Goodhue County Long-Range Transportation Plan, Goodhue County, Minnesota. Alexander serves as the deputy project manager for the update of the County’s Long-Range Transportation Plan. His contributions include leading an analysis of existing conditions, establishing long-term goals, objectives and performance measures, and developing recommendations for future roadway management and maintenance. La Crosse Regional Transit Authority Feasibility Study, La Crosse, Wisconsin. SRF is working with the La Crosse Planning Committee to study the feasibility of a Regional Transit Authority (RTA) for the MPO’s planning area. Alexander is a planner on this project, helping to develop an assessment of existing conditions and policies, and producing financial analysis and recommendations for this study. Grant Writing Services. Alexander has served as project manager, lead writer, and supporting writer for multiple federal and state discretionary grant program applications, including the Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) program, formally known as RAISE. Clients range from municipalities in Wisconsin to state Departments of Transportation. An experienced grant writer, Alexander has contributed to multiple successful applications for highly competitive discretionary grant programs since joining SRF. Introduction of Full-time Transit Service to Sun Prairie, Wisconsin*. As Transportation Coordinator for the City of Sun Prairie, Alexander managed various transportation initiatives, including developing annual budgets for on- and off-road active transportation infrastructure. He designed street sections for road reconstruction projects aligned with “Complete Streets” best practices. Alexander also led the transition from a shared-ride taxi service to a fixed-route transit system with regional ADA paratransit, overseeing GIS mapping, data analysis, stakeholder engagement, equity analysis, interjurisdictional coordination, and public outreach. *Completed with previous employer Page 99 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 8 ALEXANDRIA COFFMAN | ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATIONS Alexandria joined SRF following her time with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation as an Urban and Regional Planner working on bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs. At SRF, Alexandria works on comprehensive planning, transportation planning, zoning, and grant writing projects as a member of the Wisconsin Planning Group. Alexandria is passionate about engaging community stakeholders to advance connectivity, accessibility, equity, and sustainability through planning projects. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Transportation Planning • Community Engagement • Comprehensive Planning • Geographic Information Systems (GIS) EDUCATION Bachelor of Arts, Urban and Regional Planning, Miami University, 2023 Bachelor of Arts, Geography and Sustainable Development, Miami University, 2023 Bachelor of Arts, Sustainability, Miami University, 2023 PROJECT EXPERIENCE Winona County 2045 Comprehensive Plan, Winona County, Minnesota. Alexandria is currently providing engagement and planning support in the development of Winona County’s updated Comprehensive Plan. Her role includes graphic development, direct stakeholder engagement support, report writing, and policy development. Superior Zoning Update, Superior, Wisconsin. Alexandria provides planning and public engagement support for the ongoing update of the City of Superior’s zoning ordinance. Work is focused on aligning the zoning code with the updated Comprehensive Plan 2040, using both form-based and traditional zoning approaches. Calumet County Comprehensive Plan, Calumet County, Wisconsin. Alexandria provided planning and community engagement support for the development of the Calumet County Comprehensive Plan. Work included identifying growth areas through geospatial analysis, completing extensive public engagement, and developing plan materials. MnDOT Statewide IIJA BIL Grant Coordination. In this ongoing project, SRF supports MnDOT in ranking and selecting projects for IIJA grant programs through the development and implementation of a grant prioritization tool. Alexandria’s work on this project includes managing GIS data, updating an extensive grants database, and analyzing funding eligibility criteria. Village of Harrison Comprehensive Plan, Harrison, Wisconsin. Alexandria provided planning and community engagement support for the update of the Village of Harrison’s Comprehensive Plan. Alexandria’s work included the development of engaging and informative activities for stakeholders and planning for a diversity of land uses. Standalone Curb Ramp Program Management and Project Prioritization, Wisconsin Department of Transportation.* Alexandria managed the Standalone Curb Ramp Program alongside the Statewide Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator. The program addresses non- compliant curb ramps that will not be addressed by other highway projects before 2037, the year of compliance established in Wisconsin’s ADA Transition Plan. Alexandria managed GIS data for the program, identified and programmed future projects, and adapted the project prioritization process to take advantage of federal funds. East Avenue Corridor Revitalization Plan, Hamilton, Ohio.* As a senior capstone, Alexandria collaborated with a team of fellow planning students to develop a corridor revitalization plan for East Avenue in the Jefferson Neighborhood of Hamilton, Ohio. Alexandria’s work centered on public engagement and identifying economic development strategies in line with community character and values. This revitalization plan was recently adopted as a chapter of the City of Hamilton’s Comprehensive Plan. *Completed with previous employer Page 100 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 9 BROOKE MACINNES | GRAPHICS SUPPORT Brooke has a proven track record in designing and delivering impactful print materials, interactive tools, and web-based solutions. She skillfully merges her passion for marketing and communications with a collaborative and comprehensive graphic design approach, consistently achieving project objectives and visions. Brooke has extensive knowledge of the Adobe Creative Suite, which she complements with skills in Wordpress, Wikimapping, and ArcGIS online, resulting in the creation of captivating designs and effective user experiences. Brooke frequently collaborates with SRF’s Public Engagement experts to meet the needs of a variety of projects and clients. She develops Wordpress websites, traditional and online engagement materials, assists with video editing and development, and specializes in Wikimapping, an interactive mapping tool to gather community input. AREAS OF SPECIALTY • Graphic Design • Multi-media • Engagement Support EDUCATION Bachelor of Arts in Business, Bethel University, 2016; Minors in Graphic Design & Studio Art SOFTWARE EXPERTISE • Adobe Creative Suite • Microsoft Office Products • Wordpress • Wikimapping • ArcGIS Storymaps PROJECT EXPERIENCE Saint Croix County/Dunn County/Eau Claire County Safety Action Plans. Developed a project logo and engagement materials for three county Safety Action Plans, including colorful open house boards and zine-style flyers. Created three interactive maps for public input using wikimapping.com and custom basemap tools, which received over 590 comments total. The project also included layout design for Safety Action Plan documents for each county, as well as related graphics like custom figures, graphical charts, callouts, and decision trees. Olmstead County TH 14 Corridor Analysis. www.us14corridoranalysis.com. Development of project logo and brand identity, Wordpress website, mailers, email blasts, open house boards, and several project alternatives maps. Chisago County TH 8 Preliminary design, Chisago County, MN. Developed project logo and brand, as well as communication materials, including mapping, newsletters, online Wikimap, open house materials, and virtual open house video and ArcGIS Hubsite. th-8-online-open- house-srfconsulting.hub.arcgis.com. MnDOT TH 23/TH 9 Reduced Conflict Intersection in New London. Developed project logo and followed MnDOT brand guidelines for public engagement materials and ADA compliancy standards. Developed illustrations, public meeting boards, mailers, handouts, and graphical maps to assist in public understanding of J-turn intersection. MnDOT Glencoe Comprehensive Transportation Study. Development of public engagement materials for the Glencoe Comprehensive Transportation Study process. Engagement methods included developing online engagement tools, in-person open house materials, and formatting processed engagement data into Study report. Washington County Comprehensive Plan Update, Washington County, MN. Design of an updated layout for the new comprehensive plan in addition to design of public engagement materials. US Highway 83 Alternative Study, Bismarck-Mandan Metropolitan Planning Organization, Bismarck, ND. Designed project logo, website, public meeting materials, alternative public engagement materials including interactive Wikimap. MnDOT TH 10/Rum River Bridge Improvements. Design and development of public meeting materials, interactive Wikimap. Apple Valley Comprehensive Plan Brand Identity and Materials, City of Apple Valley, MN. www.imagineapplevalley2040.com. Brooke designed a project logo and brand identity for the project to be cohesive with the City of Apple Valley’s existing brand. She also assisted in development of public engagement boards, banners, and survey data visualization. City of Richfield 2018 Comprehensive Plan Update, Richfield, MN. Design of public engagement materials, including infographic style flyer and presentation boards. Page 101 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 10 SRF is a full-service consulting firm with planning, engineering, and design services. SRF’s planners, engineers, and designers collaborate with our clients and their stakeholders to develop creative solutions for the most challenging projects. We create lasting solutions to strengthen communities. Our award-winning projects range from planning communities and statewide transportation systems to revitalizing neighborhoods and urban spaces to designing parks, roadways, trails, and bridges. SRF has a long tradition of responding to client needs and exceeding their expectations. Since 1961, we have been a highly respected member of the Midwestern consulting community. Our firm is home to more than 400 employees, and is headquartered in Minneapolis, with regional office locations in Madison, Wisconsin; Saint Paul, Minnesota; Fargo and Bismarck, North Dakota; Omaha, Nebraska; Chicago, Illinois; and Tallahassee, Florida. Our project team is led by staff from the Madison office with support from the Minneapolis office. Years of Achievements 60+ Offices in MN, IL, ND, WI, NE, and FL 8 Employee Owners 400+ Awards 100+ Successful Projects Delivered 10K+ Our team has the skills, experience and resources to connect broadly across communities. ENGAGEMENT PLANNING AND MATERIALS PREPARATION ONLINE MEETINGS AND FACILITATION TOOLS PHOTOGRAPHY, VIDEO, DRONE, VISUALS IN PERSON EVENTS, FACILITATION, AND EDUCATION CULTURAL COMPETENCE AND INCLUSIVITY Relevant Experience & References SRF has deep expertise in the design, development, and implementation of community engagement efforts, delivered with a high level of professionalism and quality. We understand the diversity of community voices and work intentionally to educate, inform and involve community in the planning process. Page 102 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 11 CALUMET COUNTY 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Calumet County, Wisconsin SRF assisted with Calumet County and ten participating cities, villages, and towns to develop an updated comprehensive plan covering the County and most of its municipalities. The intergovernmental approach to comprehensive planning included a series of outreach meetings with participating municipalities to develop a plan that will appropriately meet the needs of multiple towns, village, and cities. Key efforts throughout the process included the development of a planning document that is useful and understandable to a wide range of the community, including elected officials, governmental staff, and the general public. The plan development process was supported by a broad range of engagement activities, including multiple survey’s, pop-up events at key county events, and open houses to help in gaining community buy-in and to ensure the plan reflects the overall goals of the community. The final planning document utilizes an ArcGIS Storymap to effectively communicate key plan information through the use of interactive maps, graphics, and data tools. The final, streamlined, and graphic heavy planning document includes only the most pertinent information, with supporting documentation included in an appendix. Development of implementation actions reflected SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-bound) goal setting principles to ensure that actions can be accomplished. The final plan includes a maintenance plan that will guide future plan updates to ensure it remains relevant to all communities. CLICK HERE OR SCAN TO VIEW THE ACTIVE PROJECT WEBSITE KEY PERSONNEL Mitch Brouse, Alexandria Coffman REFERENCE Matt Halada, Planner Matthew.halada@calumetcounty.org | 920.849.1493 BUDGET: $160,000 | SCHEDULE: 2023-Present METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT La Crosse Area Planning Committee, La Crosse, Wisconsin SRF was hired to provide engagement, communications, and data analysis services to support the La Crosse Area Planning Committee (LAPC) in their effort to update their Metropolitan Transportation Plan. The SRF teamdesigned and implemented an engagement strategy to connect with stakeholders and diverse components of the public throughout the LAPC area, in both urban and rural areas. SRF designed communications materials, engagement activities, survey questions, and meeting presentations. The team gathered thousands of points of feedback on transportation issues, existing experiences, and future needs to help inform the Metropolitan Transportation Plan update. KEY PERSONNEL Dan McNiel REFERENCE Erin Duffer, Transportation Planner | LAPC eduffer@lacrossecounty.org | 608.785.5597 BUDGET: $74,719 | SCHEDULE: 2024 - 2025 Page 103 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 12 FOCUS RIVER FALLS 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN | River Falls, Wisconsin The Focus River Falls Process was an opportunity for the River Falls community to assess community needs and update their future vision. The community has a long history of active engagement with residents and stakeholders to inform decision making and was a key focus of the planning process. The Focus River Falls process included updates to the Comprehensive Plan and Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan, along with the addition of the community’s first Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. These three plans were completed together to ensure their goals and outcomes aligned with one another and also allowed engagement activities to support all efforts. Broad engagement to support these three plans included an online engagement platform, open houses, focus groups, pop-up events, walking/biking tours, and three steering committees. FOCUS RIVER FALLS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The SRF planning team assisted the City of River falls with an updated to their Comprehensive Plan in alignment with Wisconsin State Statutes and community desires. The plan began with a deep analysis of current conditions to establish a plan foundation. The process set five overarching goals that would apply to all plan elements. The development of a clear and useable implementation plan was a critical element in guiding future actions that also align with other planning efforts. FOCUS RIVER FALLS COMPREHENSIVE OUTDOOR RECREATION PLAN (CORP) The SRF teamsupported the city with an updated to their CORP in alignment with Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources guidance, exploring the existing outdoor recreation landscape and future needs. The plan used an existing inventory and community input to analyze future needs and opportunities within the community. FOCUS RIVER FALLS BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PLAN SRF supported their subconsultant, Alta Planning + Design, with the development of the community wide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. This plan explored spot and corridor improvements within the existing network and future extensions into upcoming growth areas. The plan identified a long list of actions with identified benefit and complexity to assist community leaders in decision making. KEY PERSONNEL Mitch Brouse, Dan McNiel REFERENCE Amy Peterson, Community Development Director apeterson@rfcity.org | 715.426.3425 BUDGET: $198,000 | SCHEDULE: 2022-2023 Page 104 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 13 WINONA COUNTY 2045 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN | Winona, Minnesota (In progress) SRF is currently assisting Winona County, Minnesota in updating its comprehensive plan. The basis for the plan is built from robust engagement with key stakeholders from the county’s 19 townships to understand community needs, develop a community vision, and increase community support for the plan. At the beginning of the planning process, SRF developed a public participation plan that established a toolbox of engagement strategies designed to engage a diversity of stakeholders throughout the planning process. The initial phase of public involvement included the launch of the project website (WinonaCounty2045.com) a steering committee meeting, two pop-up booths at community events, two workshops with special interest groups, an open house, and an extensive community survey available online and on paper. Over 500 community members participated in involvement activities during the first public involvement stage. This feedback shaped the vision and goals of the comprehensive plan, in addition to providing valuable insight into existing conditions and community concerns. Community members also expressed appreciation for the engagement opportunities and a better understanding of the comprehensive planning process. Currently, SRF is gathering additional community input through an interactive mapping tool and outreach to township officers utilizing land use worksheets. Engagement will continue throughout the completion of the plan to identify implementation actions, gather feedback on the Preferred Future Land Use Map, and present the draft plan to the public for comment. KEY PERSONNEL Dan McNiel, Alexandria Coffman BUDGET: $148,000 | SCHEDULE: 2025 to present LONG-RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN UPDATE (In progress) Janesville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, Wisconsin SRF is assisting the Janesville Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (JAMPO) in updating its Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). As part of this update, SRF is implementing a robust public engagement process grounded in best practices utilizing both in-person and virtual strategies. During the summer of 2025, SRF hosted “pop-up” engagement at community events in Janesville and Milton, engaging residents early in the planning process to identify key transportation issues for the LRTP to address. SRF also developed an online community survey available in English and Spanish to broaden participation. Later in the process, SRF convened a focus group to explore ways to incorporate active transportation and public health into the LRTP. For stakeholders unable to attend in person, SRF provided an interactive online map to crowdsource feedback on the proposed active transportation network. Upcoming engagement activities include a public open house in January 2026 and virtual opportunities for residents to review and comment on the draft plan. KEY PERSONNEL Alexander Brown, Dan McNiel, Alexandria Coffman BUDGET: $124,000 | SCHEDULE: 2024 to 2026 Page 105 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 14 The following section outlines our approach to the project and details the proposed scope of work that fully engagement key stakeholders and community members. TASK 1 (JANUARY - APRIL) | PROJECT MANAGEMENT: Mitch will work closely with Village staff to establish a project management plan, timeline, and a cadence of regular check-ins tailored to the project. These frequent meetings will serve to provide progress updates, coordinate efforts, receive direction from staff, and discuss any needed adjustments to the schedule, engagement program activities, or scope of work. We understand that there may need to be shifts to align with the project process as it moves forward. Mitch is a highly responsive project manager and will work collaboratively to build a management plan that makes this engagement seamless and worry-free for Village staff. This work includes preparing and implementing engagement activities and associated logistics, such as scheduling and securing permissions for all required facilities, equipment, websites, and social media sites. The SRF team will ensure all engagement-related tools, products, materials, images, graphics, content, websites, and promotional items are effectively branded, presented in plain language and approved by the Village staff. Additionally, regular and timely invoices will be delivered based on a mutually acceptable timeframe, providing a breakdown of time spent on each task and percentage of work completed. TASK 2 (JANUARY 2026): CONDUCT INTRODUCTION MEETINGS WITH VILLAGE OFFICIALS AND STAFF TO DEVELOP THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROGRAM The SRF team will collaborate with Village staff and the Village Board to craft a comprehensive Community Engagement Plan that broadly reaches Germantown residents and actively engages key stakeholders and adjacent property owners. Our team is well-versed in developing both traditional and creative engagement approaches. We believe meaningful engagement requires intentional outreach to underrepresented groups, ensuring a diverse range of voices shapes the project outcome. This includes using a variety of formats, locations, and languages to remove barriers to participation. Our initial efforts will involve facilitating a workshop with Village officials and staff to identify project goals, communication priorities, and necessary resources, which will inform the final scope of engagement. The workshop will help finalize a Community Engagement Plan (CEP) that will define all methods, audiences, and public input opportunities based on staff feedback and workshop recommendations. The CEP will also define branding, communications, and workback schedules for engagement tasks. We will create a shared tracking document for all deliverables, allowing Village staff to stay up to date with all materials in an easy format at their fingertips. This live document will include a schedule of all activities, target participants for each event, the specific feedback intended to be collected, and the media/technology being used for promotion and execution. This transparency ensures real-time project monitoring and facilitates quick collaboration between our team and Village staff. TASK 3 (FEBRUARY – APRIL 2026): FACILITATE THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS A toolbox of community and stakeholder engagement activities will be facilitated and actively promoted from February through late March 2026. The engagement process will be designed to raise awareness and solicit feedback from residents, businesses, developers and Village staff. We understand that engagement needs to be user-friendly, educational, and responsive to community needs. Our approach will work to inform the community broadly as well as strategically connect with key audiences across the Village of Germantown regarding priorities for future land use plans. The detailed project schedule on the following page outlines a phased approach to engagement and identifies tools for engaging key audiences. Additionally, we have identified opportunities to use innovative engagement tools and work collaboratively with Village staff to provide project updates and input opportunities. Work Program and Project Schedule Page 106 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 15 TASK 4 (APRIL – MAY 2026): PREPARE A FINAL COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT OUTCOMES REPORT The culmination of the engagement process will be the Final Report, designed as a clear, concise, and easily reproducible document of the collective feedback received. This report will be specifically geared toward use by Village officials and staff, highlighting the findings from feedback gathered from residents, businesses, and local partners. To effectively present the qualitative and quantitative information gathered, we will utilize highly visual elements, including color maps, graphics, images, plans, and renderings. The core of the report will be a structured list of key findings, feedback, and recommendations. This content will be presented using terminology and a level of detail that is easily explained to the public while remaining actionable for Village staff and future consultants. This detail will be sufficient to be directly applied to the development of site-specific land use plans, zoning regulations, and design guidelines for the three Village-owned properties within the “Village Center District.” To ensure accuracy and alignment, we will first provide a comprehensive Draft Final Report to Village staff for review and approval. Following staff feedback, we will prepare the conclusive Final Report and present it publicly to the Village Board at a mutually acceptable public meeting. Value Add: “Meeting in a box”. We propose working with Village staff to prepare a “meeting in a box” engagement materials that can be provided to neighborhood organizations. These materials are easy to use and convenient feedback methods will be used that funnel all comments to a central portal for analysis and tracking purposes. Awareness and promotion can drive success. Paid advertising, yard signs, sidewalk decals and offering an incentive for survey responses (e.g. chance to win a gift card to local business) can help to build community participation. Targeted outreach to under-served populations. Providing paper surveys at senior centers, providing translated materials, door knocking and outreach to neighborhood groups, community- based organizations, faith-based organizations, student groups. Interactive comment map. We can provide an interactive comment map to gather feedback in an intuitive method, providing rich geocoded community feedback. Work Program and Project Schedule Example engagement campaign materials used for River Falls. Page 107 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 16 JANUARY 2026: Project Introduction Meetings to develop Community Engagement Strategy Our team will work closely with the Village of Germantown staff to design and implement the public engagement strategy. Communications and Engagement Deliverables: • Workshop Agenda and Meeting Notes • Community Engagement Plan (CEP) FEBRUARY - APRIL 2026: Community Engagement We will build upon initial feedback from the workshop to deploy a community survey and develop in-person engagement to have in-depth conversations with stakeholders and conduct targeted outreach with key audiences that are typically underrepresented in community and development planning. Online Engagement • Establish a project webpage on Village of Germantown website • Community visioning survey • Online input map - Interactive comment map. We can provide an interactive comment map to gather feedback in an intuitive method, providing rich geocoded community feedback. In Person Engagement • Community Open House (mid-March) – Ideally this public input opportunity could be aligned with an existing event, such as Germantown Village Board meeting or Germantown Community Coalition event. • Focus group / Site tour – convene key stakeholders for a visioning session. • Pop-up engagement at a popular community event, such as the Germantown Area Chamber of Commerce Leadership Luncheon (February 2026) or Family Trivia Night hosted by the Germantown Community Coalition (mid-March 2026) • We will work closely with Village staff to encourage meaningful public participation and actively promote public input opportunities. Strategies to raise awareness and drive local participation may include: » Develop media and communications publicity materials to provide direct advertisements in local media outlets. » Support the coordination of stakeholder meetings and interviews with local businesses and other key community members. » Provide translation services as needed to support translation of key materials to be accessible to all residents. » Awareness and promotion can drive success. Paid advertising, yard signs, sidewalk decals and offering incentive survey responses (e.g. chance to win a gift card to local businesses) can help to build community participation. » Targeted outreach to underserved populations. Providing paper surveys at senior centers and on transit routes, providing translated materials, door knocking and outreach to neighborhood groups, community-based organizations, faith-based organizations, and student groups. APRIL - MAY 2026: Presentations and Project Reporting We will conduct wrap up activities including the development of a draft and final Outcomes Report outlining the feedback received throughout the process. The final report will then be presented to the Village Board. Communications and Engagement Deliverables: • Draft and Final Report Dan McNiel at a public meeting for the New London, MN Interchange project. Page 108 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 17 Cost Proposal Hours Cost TASK 1 - Project Management General Project Management 14 $2,628 Task 1 Total Labor Cost 14 $2,628 TASK 2 - Conduct Introductory Meetings with Village Officials and Staff to Develop the Community Engagement Program Village Staff and Board Workshop Assumes one trip to Germantown with two SRF Staff 22 $3,198 Develop the Community Engagement Plan 26 $3,942 Phase 2 Total Labor Cost 48 $7,140 TASK 3 - Facilitate the Community Engagement Process Project Webpage Creation and Maintenance 16 $2,064 Promotional Material Development 18 $2,406 One Community Visioning Survey 10 $1,334 Online Input Map 10 $1,334 One Community Open House Assumes one trip to Germantown with three SRF Staff 30 $4,376 Two Focus Group Meetings Assumes one trip to Germantown with two SRF Staff 24 $3,540 Two Popup Events Assumes two trips to Germantown with two SRF Staff 32 $4,720 Task 3 Total Labor Cost 140 $19,774 TASK 4 - Prepare a Final Community Engagement Outcomes Report Develop the Draft Outcomes Report Assumes one complete review by Germantown Staff 30 $4,250 Develop the Final Outcomes Report 14 $2,252 Present the Final Report to the Village Board Assumes one trip to Germantown with one SRF Staff 14 $2,206 Task 4 Total Labor Cost 58 $8,708 All Tasks Total Labor Cost 260 $38,250 Direct Expenses Unit Cost Mileage (at $0.70 per mile) 1110 $777.00 Meals (at $20 per meal) 10 $200 Total $977.00 Total Labor and Expenses $39,227.00 Page 109 of 121 SRF Consulting Group 18 Classification Staff Rate Professional VIII-VII Jeff Knudson $288.00 Professional VI -- $232.00 Professional V Paul Schroeder $215.00 Professional IV Mitch Brouse Dan McNiel $171.00 Professional III Alexander Brown $164.00 Professional II -- $136.00 Professional I Alexandria Coffman $124.00 Tech. Brooke MacInnes $134.00 Hourly Rates Page 110 of 121 Page 111 of 121 GERMANTOWN ENGAGEMENT SERVICES www.srfconsulting.com 1600 Aspen Commons, Suite 650 | Middleton, WI 53562 | 608.298.5400 Equal Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer SRF Project No. 19881.00 Scope of Work Summary Table Base Services: Total Cost $39,277 Task 1 – Project Management • General Project Management Task 2 - Conduct Introductory Meetings with Village Officials and Staff to Develop the C EP • Village Staff and Board Workshop • Develop the Community Engagement Plan Task 3 - Facilitate the Community Engagement Process • Project Webpage Creation and Maintenance • Promotional Material Development • One Community Visioning Survey • Online Input Map • One Community Open House • Two Focus Group Meetings • Two Popup Events Task 4 - Prepare a Final Community Engagement Outcomes Report • Develop the Draft Outcomes Report • Develop the Final Outcomes Report • Present the Final Report to the Village Board Additional Services (if Authorized by the Village) The following individual tasks will be provided only if authorized by the Village of Germantown. Task Total Cost • Task A.1 - One Additional Community Survey $2,172.00 • Task A.2 - Community Open House $5,061.50 • Task A.3 - Pop-Up Event #1 $3,025.50 • Task A.4 - Pop-Up Event #2 $3,025.50 • Task A.5 - Two Focus Group Meetings $4,205.50 • Task A.6 - Plan Commission and/or Village Board Workshop $3,521.50 Page 112 of 121 BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026 PLACEMENT: Action Item ITEM TITLE: Broadcast and Recording of Meetings of Village Boards, Committees and Commissions (ACTION) SUBMITTED BY: SUMMARY EXPLANATION: ATTACHMENT: 1. Village Board Agenda Item Request - Recording Meetings - 1.28.2026 2. Miller J Agenda Request Email 260128 3. Policy Regarding the Broadcast of Meetings STAFF RECOMMENDATION: ACTION BY COMMITTEE: Page 113 of 121 Page 114 of 121 Page 115 of 121 Page 116 of 121 Page 117 of 121 Page 118 of 121 For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later. Get Adobe Reader Now! Page 119 of 121 Village of Germantown Policy Regarding the Broadcast of Meetings All meetings of the Village Board, the General Government & Finance Committee, Public Safety Committee, Public Works & Highways Committee, Economic Development Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission and Tourism Commission shall be broadcast on cable channel 25, streamed on the Village YouTube station, recorded and made accessible to the public. Exceptions to this policy shall be allowed when meetings of these bodies are not held in the Village Board room. Page 120 of 121 BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING DATE: February 2, 2026 PLACEMENT: Action Item ITEM TITLE: Administrator 2025 Performance Evaluation. The Village Board may convene into Closed Session under Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(c) for the purpose of considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the governmental body has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility and then may reconvene into open session to take such action as it deems appropriate. (ACTION) SUBMITTED BY: Steve Kreklow, Administrator SUMMARY EXPLANATION: The Village Board may enter closed session pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(c) for the purpose of considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the Board has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility. Evaluations necessarily include the review of performance evaluation data, which is a expressly allowed basis to utilize a closed session under the statute. ATTACHMENT: 1. Administrator 2025 Objectives 260202 EVALUATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION: A motion to convene into closed session pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 19.85(1)(c) for the purpose of considering employment, promotion, compensation or performance evaluation data of any public employee over which the Board has jurisdiction or exercises responsibility. ACTION BY COMMITTEE: Page 121 of 121