Town Board Meeting — Agenda packet

Town of Oregon 1138 Union Road, Oregon, WI 53575 Phone: (608) 835-3200 townoforegonwi.gov MEETING DATE TIME LOCATION Town Board Agenda Tuesday, March 10, 2026 6:00 PM Oregon Town Hall 1138 Union Road Oregon, WI 53575 Join the meeting from your computer https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81370736737?pwd=cC9oVE9XS2xwanhNbjltTDV4V3lzUT09 To Call In: 1-312-626-6799 Meeting ID: 813 7073 6737 Passcode: 1138 Administrative 1. Call meeting to order 2. Roll call 3. Approval of minutes 4. Approval of Financial Report, Loan Update and Payment Vouchers a. Update on Payne & Dolan Invoice of $ 11,254.17 b. Consolidation of bank accounts; designation of park donations Public Input & Presentations 5. Public Comment - No formal action will be taken during this meeting, although issues raised may become part of a future agenda. Participants are allotted a 3-minute speaking period for comment. 6. Appearance by Jesse Straubhaar re: property adjacent to Bicentennial Park Action/Discussion Items 7. Discussion and possible Action re: Land Division/Rezone/CSM Petition #DCPREZ-202-12255; Parcel #0509-164-1001-2; 930 Hillcrest Lane, Oregon, WI 53575. This request is to divide existing residential lot into two lots, rezone 4.6 acres from RR-4 to RR-2. Applicant/Owner is Scott Templeton, 930 Hillcrest Lane, Oregon, WI 53575. Public Hearing and PC Recommendation on 2/27/26. 8. Discussion and possible Action re: Dane County submitting blanket rezone petition to correct zoning errors from the conversion to new zoning code adopted in 2019 9. Discussion and possible Approval re: Intergovernmental Agreement; Sugar River Emergency Medical Services District 10. Discussion and possible Action re: Resolution 01-2026, Resolution Accepting Vision 2040 Summary Results and Vision Survey Results 11. Discussion and possible Action re: 2026 Road Bid Paperwork; set date to open road bids 12. Discussion and possible Approval re: 2026 Small Structures Engineering Contract; Hofmeister Engineering 13. Discussion and possible Action re: town hall furnaces and air conditioning replacement (1994) 14. Discussion and possible Action re: 2026-2027 DOT State Salt Contract 15. Discussion and possible Action re: employee handbook create town administrator, and land use coordinator positions 60.37(3), job description Reports 16. Oregon Area Fire & EMS District 17. Brooklyn Fire & EMS District  a. Grant Application 18. Belleville Fire & EMS District 19. Plan Commission 20. Road & Traffic Safety Committee 21. Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) a. New Employee 22. Park Committee 23. Building Committee 24. Emergency Management Committee a. Signed Agreement 25. Monthly Building Inspections 26. Public Work Department a. Update on Windridge Road gravel 27. Business Office Communications 28. Board Communication 29. Future Agenda Items 30. Meetings Scheduled: Tuesday, March 17 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Thursday, March 19 Road & Traffic Safety Committee Meeting 9:00am Wednesday, March 25 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 7 Spring Election 7am-8pm Tuesday, April 14 Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 21 Annual Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 28 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, April 29 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Tuesday, May 5 Business Office Closed Tuesday, May 12 Meeting to Adjourn Board of Review 6pm Tuesday, May 12 Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, May 19 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, May 27 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Tuesday, June 9 Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, June 16 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, June 24 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Monday, July 6 2pm-4pm Open Book via phone ONLY – appointments accurateacessor.com Tuesday, July 14, Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, July 21 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Thursday, July 23 Board of Review 12pm-2pm Wednesday, July 29 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Wednesday, July 29 Joint Meeting of OAFED 6:30pm-Village of Oregon Community Room Adjournment 31. Adjournment NOTE: Any item listed on the agenda is subject to discussion and action. Public Notice: Agendas are posted in the following locations: Town Hall bulletin board & Town website townoforegonwi.gov Special Accommodations: Requests from persons with disabilities who need assistance to participate in this meeting should be made to the clerk’s office at 608-835-3200 with at least three business days advance notice. Possible Quorum: A quorum of members of other town governmental bodies may be present at this meeting for the purpose of gathering information and possible discussion. Unless noted, no official action by other town governmental bodies will be taken. Posted:03/06/26  Town of Oregon Town Board Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 10, 2026 1. Call Town Board Meeting to order Town Board Chair Carl Walser called the meeting to order at 6:00pm on Tuesday, February 10, 2026. 2. Roll Call Clerk Hanson called roll. Present: Carl Walser, Laurie Fitzgerald, Arlan Kay, and Steve Jernegan. Also Present: Clerk Jennifer Hanson. 3. Approval of minutes Walser approved by unanimous consent the Town Board minutes from Tuesday, January 13, 2026. Walser moved to agenda item 11a. 4. Approval of Financial Report, Loan Update and Payment Vouchers Motion by LeBrun to approve the January 2026 financial report, loan update and payment vouchers of $3,758,396.65 which does not include the $11,254.17 payment to Payne & Dolan. Second by Kay. Motion carried 5-0. 5. Public Comments There were no public comments. 6. Discussion and possible Action re: employee handbook, create town administrator and land use coordinator positions 60.37(3), job descriptions The updated format for job descriptions was presented, and the board approved the new formatting. The job description for the TORC Attendant position was also presented. Discussion followed regarding reimbursement for employee cellphones. It was noted that the Public Works job descriptions will vary, as each position will have different responsibilities. The board agreed that the job description should follow a functional layout rather than a task-oriented format. Chair Walser called for a recess at 7:30pm. Chair Walser reconvened the meeting at 7:35pm. 7. Discussion and possible Approval re: 2026 WI DOT Equipment Rates Motion by Kay to approve 2026 WI DOT Equipment Rates. Second by Fitzgerald. Motion carried 5-0. 8. Fire & EMS Report (Oregon, Brooklyn, & Belleville) Belleville: Town of Oregon Representative Mike Grochowski gave an update on the Belleville Fire & EMS District. The fire and EMS meetings are separate but right after each other on the same night and will now be held monthly. The fire department had 299 calls last year with 31 employees. The new ambulance is in service. The roof of the fire department building needs replacement. The EMS department had 1,125 calls last year with 80 employees. The EMS district was asked to cover the town and village of New Glarus. The EMS staff will have use of a building in New Glarus. There is a grant opportunity for eligible consolidation that will be pursued. Walser moved to Agenda Item 4. Oregon: LeBrun discussed the Oregon Area Fire & EMS district continuing to address both space needs and safety issues. Representatives are meeting with adjoining landowners near current fire station for possible additional land. They are focusing on safety issues such as decontamination. The Village of Oregon is meeting with City of Fitchburg about fire & EMS consolidation and other joint ventures such as joint business park and water/sewer expansion. Other communities may also want to be included in  Town Board Meeting Minutes February 10, 2026 - Page 2 the consolidation discussions. Brooklyn: Jernegan said Brooklyn Fire & EMS district did not have a meeting in January but there is a meeting in February. 9. Town of Oregon Refuse (TORC) Report Fitzgerald said the cold weather has affected the number of residents using TORC. TORC hours and electrical wiring of the on-site office were discussed. 10. Plan Commission Recommendation and Report Kay said they are working on Conditional Use Permit language and Comprehensive Plan formatting. The plan commission is working on reviewing the properties within the blanket rezone request from Dane County Zoning and Planning. 11. Road & Traffic Safety Committee Report a. Update Payne & Dolan Overage Raven Oaks There was lengthy discussion on the Payne & Dolan invoice of $11,254.17 remaining from the 2025 Ravenoaks roadwork. The board reviewed the January 12th email from Dustin Ronforf at Payne & Dolan regarding the remaining balance. The town board agreed to not pay the invoice and have Supervisor Kay draft a letter to Payne & Dolan that the board will review. Walser added a note to the payment voucher approval signature page that the payment to Payne and Dolan is excluded. Walser moved to Agenda Item 8 Belleville Fire & EMS District. b. 2026 Road Work Bids – LRIP project Clerk Hanson reported that the LRIP application for Judd Road will require Town of Montrose to bid their portion of Judd Road separately from the Town of Oregon portion of Judd Road. The towns will have to coordinate timing of bids. The LRIP reimbursement requires an engineering certification which can come from any licensed engineer. The town should consider who will do this for the town. c. Right of Way (ROW) Application Kay said the Road & Traffic Safety Committee will review the ROW applications as their meeting this week. 12. Public Works Report a. Update on salt shed door Clerk Hanson said the fascia around the roof of the salt shed is falling off because the wood underneath is rotting. That will need to be addressed when the parts for the door arrive. The public works office trailer was delivered today. 13. Park Report a. Alliant Underground Line – Kennedy Park Park Chair Frankson and Eugene Lewis were looking at where the underground line was to be buried at Kennedy Park. The next park meeting is in March. There was question if the Town of Rutland decided to participate in the funding of new park equipment at Kennedy Park. 14. Vision Statement Report a. Set date of report presentation Walser reached out to Sharon Lezberg to see if she wanted to present the final summary, but  Town Board Meeting Minutes February 10, 2026 - Page 3 she has retired. Walser will combine the summary and survey results for the town board to review and approve by resolution at the March town board meeting. 15. Building Committee Report a. Town Hall Rood Leak Clerk Hanson reported that the leak in the town hall was looked at by Helmer Construction. It appears to not be a roof leak but condensation. There is one spot on the roof that will require black jacking. The leak will continue to be monitored. b. Future Needs: i. Plugged Garage Floor Drains Kay explained that the garage floor drains are plugged and not immediate concern but add to next year maintenance. ii. Additional Garage Bay for Equipment Maintenance Kay mentioned the possibility of adding a garage bay for equipment maintenance. This would require approval at an electoral meeting. iii. Town Hall front door accessibility/drop-off, water fountain Clerk Hanson said that the front door accessibility can be addressed with future building maintenance and updated with electronic opening for handicap. The current water fountain is broken and decision for replacement or alternative is water cooler. c. Current Town Hall Location Life Expectancy The board discussed the current life expectancy the town staying in the current town hall building. The town board would like to find land that might be suitable for a new town hall. 16. Building Inspections Report Clerk Hanson said the building inspections were with the payment vouchers. 17. Board Communication and Future Agenda Item(s) Jernegan discussed the Wisconsin Towns Association meeting held in Barneveld and communication shared by someone representing Ron Johnson. There was lengthy discussion on association allowing partisan commentary. Fitzgerald will reach out to the Dane County Towns Association. a. Future Meeting Dates: Wednesday, February 11 Road & Traffic Safety Committee Meeting 9am Tuesday, February 17 Spring Primary 7am-8pm Tuesday, February 24 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, February 25 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Tuesday, March 10 Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, March 17 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, March 25 Park Committee Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 7 Spring Election 7am-8pm Tuesday, April 14 Town Board Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 21 Annual Meeting 6pm Tuesday, April 28 Plan Commission Meeting 6:30pm Wednesday, April 29 Park Committee Meeting 6pm  Town Board Meeting Minutes February 10, 2026 - Page 4 18. Clerk’s Report a. End of Year Audit Clerk Hanson and Treasurer Goth will have a kick-off meeting with the auditors next week. b. Annual Meeting Clerk Hanson gave an overview of the draft Annual Meeting agenda. The town should recognize Rachel Brickner for all her years of service with the Oregon Senior Center. The board discussed amending board salaries, so the chair and the supervisor positions were more aligned by decreasing chair salary and increasing supervisor salary. The board discussed creating numbered town board seats to help with candidates interested in running and for voters looking at a ballot. 19. Adjournment Walser approved by unanimous consent the adjournment of the town board meeting on February 10, 2026, at 9:10pm. Respectfully Submitted, Jennifer Hanson, Clerk  Account Balances Title 1/31/2026 2/28/2026 1-10001 Cash - SBCP Checking 197,659.48 181,301.58 1-10003 SBCP General Tax Account 3,892,913.06 705,491.50 1-10004 LGIP Bi-Centenial Park 190,581.66 191,180.86 1-10008 LGIP General 569,638.24 571,413.71 1-10009 LGIP - Lamont Park 40,442.19 40,569.34 1-10010 SBCP Bi-Centennial Park *1 12,766.19 12,802.96 1-10014 SBCP Park Fund *1458 41,632.83 41,752.73 1-10019 LGIP Capital Outlay 54,169.99 54,340.30 1-10020 LGIP Cultural & Recreation 2,365.37 2,372.81 1-10021 LGIP Hwy Equipment 48,245.74 48,397.43 Total Cash 4,764,991.88 $ 1,563,317.33 $ Total Park Funds 285,422.87$ 286,305.89 $ Total Cash 5,050,414.75 $ 1,849,623.22 $  3/1/2026 Beginning Interest Principal Total Balance Payment Balance Payment Payment Payment Due Due LakeRidge Bank 121,000.00 $ 6,352.50 $ 121,000.00$ 127,352.50 $ - $ 10/31/2026 5.25% - Fire Equip, Roadwork, Equip Pay Off 2026 Brooklyn Fire/EMS District 105,834.19 $ 3,704.20 $ 9,022.79 $ 12,726.99 $ 96,811.40 $ 3/15/2026 3.5 % - Building Loan Paid 2/10/26 Pay Off 2035 Commissioner of Public Lands 256,624.97 $ 14,755.94 $ 124,726.59 $ 139,482.53 $ 131,898.38 $ 3/15/2026 5.75% - 2023 Roadwork & Equipment Paid 2/10/26 Pay Off 2027 Commissioner of Public Lands 516,600.00 $ 18,916.05 $ 125,908.70 $ 144,824.75 $ 390,691.30 $ 3/15/2026 5.50% - 2025 Roadwork & Equipment Paid 2/10/26 Pay Off 2029 *Starts 2026 Commissioner of Public Lands 230,000.00 $ 5.0% - 2025 Roadwork & Equipment Pay Off 2030 *Starts 2027 Total 1,230,059.16 $ $43,728.69 380,658.08 $ 424,386.77 $ 619,401.08 $ 2026 Town of Oregon Loan Balances  Town of Oregon Payment Approval Report Page: 1 Report dates: 3/1/2026-3/31/2026 Mar 09, 2026 02:47PM Vendor Invoice Number Description Invoice Date Net Amount Paid Date Paid Voided Invoice Amount Belleville, Exeter & Montrose Fire Assoc 75 2026009 2026 Levy Amount-Capital Budget 02/20/2026 10,367.00 .00 Blaser Pest Control 1026 128241 Pest Control 02/11/2026 270.00 .00 Bucky's Portable Toilets 120 WB107285 Solid Waste Expense 02/07/2026 150.00 .00 Cintas 968 4260623732 Uniforms, Rugs 03/03/2026 672.55 .00 Computer Magic, Inc. 159 13734 Moving Cable for Public Work Office 02/17/2026 1,247.65 .00 159 13764 Computer Support; Office 365 02/26/2026 760.50 .00 Coverall North America, Inc. 169 1000516495 Cleaning Town Hall 03/01/2026 150.00 .00 Dane County Treasurer 192 47792 Tax Envelopes 02/17/2026 45.73 .00 192 47871 Danecom Costs 02/23/2026 1,376.00 .00 Gordon Flesch Company 312 IN15530584 Copy Machine 02/28/2026 202.76 .00 Kwik Trip 439 5794598 Fuel for Town Vehicles 02/28/2026 777.94 .00 Monroe Truck Equipment-Monroe 547 5662000 Repairs and Supplies 02/28/2026 4.58 .00 Murphy & Desmond SC 559 8215041 Legal Fees 03/01/2026 336.00 .00 Oregon Area Fire & EMS Dist. 580 530 Budget Payment - 1st Installment 01/30/2026 177,463.00 .00 Pellitteri Waste Systems 606 6720615 Solid Waste Expense 02/28/2026 479.67 .00 606 6720615 Residential Recycling 02/28/2026 5,087.25 .00 606 6720615 Residential Trash 02/28/2026 12,065.76 .00 606 6720615 Solid Waste Disposal Residential Landfill 02/28/2026 371.07 .00 606 6720615 Fuel Surcharge 02/28/2026 275.31 .00 SAFEbuildt, LLC. 700 3397508 Building Inspections 02/28/2026 2,726.38 .00 US Bank 842 02252026 Amazon 02/25/2026 399.00 .00 842 02252026 Amazon 02/25/2026 35.96 .00 842 02252026 Hyvee 02/25/2026 213.86 .00 842 02252026 Amazon 02/25/2026 107.29 .00 842 02252026 Pitney Bowes 02/25/2026 206.00 .00 842 02252026 Pitney Bowes 02/25/2026 103.00 .00 842 02252026 Costco 02/25/2026 194.46 .00 842 02252026 Costco 02/25/2026 46.96 .00 842 02252026 Alliant 02/25/2026 120.15 .00 842 02252026 Alliant 02/25/2026 817.65 .00 842 02252026 Alliant 02/25/2026 350.42 .00 842 02252026 Adobe 02/25/2026 253.07 .00 842 02252026 Frontier 02/25/2026 133.62 .00 842 02252026 WMCA 02/25/2026 65.00 .00 842 02252026 Pitney Bowes 02/25/2026 206.00 .00 842 02252026 Costco 02/25/2026 74.69 .00 842 02252026 Spectrum 02/25/2026 326.48 .00 842 02252026 Kriete Truck Center 02/25/2026 202.75 .00 842 02252026 Dorn Ace 02/25/2026 173.99 .00 842 02252026 Dorn Ace 02/25/2026 11.99 .00 842 02252026 Stoughton Lumber 02/25/2026 31.08 .00 842 02252026 Dorn Ace 02/25/2026 36.36 .00  Town of Oregon Payment Approval Report Page: 2 Report dates: 3/1/2026-3/31/2026 Mar 09, 2026 02:47PM Vendor Invoice Number Description Invoice Date Net Amount Paid Date Paid Voided Invoice Amount 842 02252026 Dorn Ace 02/25/2026 96.46 .00 842 02252026 NAPA Auto Parts 02/25/2026 67.98 .00 842 02252026 Sloan Implement 02/25/2026 315.56 .00 842 02252026 Dorn Ace 02/25/2026 61.67 .00 US Cellular 843 0788767905 Cell Phones for Public Works 02/10/2026 176.77 .00 Grand Totals: 219,657.37 .00 Dated: ______________________________________________________ Town Board Chairperson: ______________________________________________________ Town Board Supervisors: ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________ Town Clerk: _____________________________________________________  Town of Oregon Check Register - For Board Review Page: 1 Check Issue Dates: 3/1/2026 - 3/31/2026 Mar 09, 2026 02:53PM Check Issue Date Check Number Payee Amount 03/09/2026 24564 Belleville, Exeter & Montrose Fire Assoc 10,367.00 03/09/2026 24565 Blaser Pest Control 270.00 03/09/2026 24566 Bucky's Portable Toilets 150.00 03/09/2026 24567 Cintas 672.55 03/09/2026 24568 Computer Magic, Inc. 2,008.15 03/09/2026 24569 Coverall North America, Inc. 150.00 03/09/2026 24570 Dane County Treasurer 1,421.73 03/09/2026 24571 Gordon Flesch Company 202.76 03/09/2026 24572 Kwik Trip 777.94 03/09/2026 24573 Monroe Truck Equipment-Monroe 4.58 03/09/2026 24574 Murphy & Desmond SC 336.00 03/09/2026 24575 Oregon Area Fire & EMS Dist. 177,463.00 03/09/2026 24576 Pellitteri Waste Systems 18,279.06 03/09/2026 24577 SAFEbuildt, LLC. 2,726.38 03/09/2026 24578 US Cellular 176.77 03/09/2026 99917829 US Bank 4,651.45 Grand Totals: 219,657.37 M = Manual Check, V = Void Check  Town of Oregon Payment Vouchers March 10, 2026 Town Board Meeting Paychecks 25,699.26$ Payroll Liabilities 12,975.96$ Monthly Vouchers 219,657.37$ Total 258,332.59 $  Outlook Re: State Report Comp From Eisen, Jen <Jen.Eisen@bakertilly.com> Date Fri 2/27/2026 7:57 AM To Jennifer Hanson <jhanson@townoforegonwi.gov>; Stephanie Goth <sgoth@townoforegonwi.gov> Hi Jennifer, Park donaƟons are typically externally restricted (as they are donated by an individual/business who says they need to be used for a speciĮc purpose). The Town can always consolidate park accounts and then just track the restricted porƟons internally via an excel document or do this within your accounƟng system. I agree that the Lamont Park CD sounds like it would be externally restricted. Let us know if you want to talk through this further and JusƟn and I can jump on a call with you. Jen From: Jennifer Hanson <jhanson@townoforegonwi.gov> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2026 1:32 PM To: Eisen, Jen <Jen.Eisen@bakerƟlly.com>; Stephanie Goth <sgoth@townoforegonwi.gov> Subject: Re: State Report Comp Hi Jen, I wanted to ask about the town's actual bank accounts and how they appear on the CalculaƟon of Various Cash Balances. As we discussed at the pre-audit meeƟng, the Externally Restricted are for funds designated for a certain use. For example, Impact Fees had allowable state mandated uses (we have used all of those funds in 2025). In that discussion we talked about Park donaƟons. Are Park DonaƟons meant to be externally restricted or internally restricted? I ask because we are considering consolidaƟng some of our park accounts. There are many accounts across diīerent banks and bringing them together may make more sense. For example, the Lamont Park CD was a donaƟon. We have since received more donaƟons. We thought about renaming this DonaƟons and then would that be considered Externally restricted? As that is a true park use only fund? Thanks, Jennifer From: Jennifer Hanson <jhanson@townoforegonwi.gov> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 6:02 PM  Held for Internally Externally Overlying Account Title Total Designated^^ Restricted Taxing Districts Undesignated SBCP Checking 89,310 $ - $ - $ - $ 89,310$ SBCP General Tax 3,828,435 - - 3,300,035 528,401 LGIP Bi-Centennial Funds 181,892 181,892 - - - LGIP Town Park Funds 41 41 - - - SBCP Impact Fee Svgs. 26,210 - 26,210 - - LGIP Money Market 397,328 - - - 397,328 Settlers Lamont (Park) CD 38,598 38,598 - - - SBCP Bi-Centennial Park 12,179 12,179 - - - SBCP Park Fund 39,717 39,717 - - - LGIP Capital Outlay 51,700 51,700 - - - LGIP Cultural & Recreation 2,258 2,258 - - - LGIP Hwy Equipment 46,046 46,046 - - - Totals: 4,713,714 $ 372,432 $ 26,210 $ 3,300,035$ 1,015,038 $ ^^Internal designations can be changed at the discretion of the Town Board. TOWN OF OREGON CALCULATION OF VARIOUS CASH BALANCES - UNAUDITED December 31, 2024  Form Version 04.00.00 Dane County Rezone Petition Application Date Petition Number 02/09/2026 DCPREZ-2026-12255Public Hearing Date 05/05/2026 OWNER INFORMATION OWNER NAME SCOTT TEMPLETON PHONE (with Area Code) (608) 220-5079 BILLING ADDRESS (Number & Street) 930 HILLCREST LN (City, State, Zip) OREGON, WI 53575 E-MAIL ADDRESS stempleton2942@gmail.com AGENT INFORMATION AGENT NAME ROBERT TALARCZYK PHONE (with Area Code) (608) 527-5216 ADDRESS (Number & Street) 517 2ND AVENUE (City, State, Zip) New Glarus, WI 53574 E-MAIL ADDRESS bob@talarczyksurveys.com ADDRESS/LOCATION 1 ADDRESS/LOCATION 3 ADDRESS/LOCATION 2 ADDRESS OR LOCATION OF REZONE ADDRESS OR LOCATION OF REZONE ADDRESS OR LOCATION OF REZONE 930 Hillcrest Lane TOWNSHIP OREGON SECTION 16 TOWNSHIP TOWNSHIPSECTION SECTION PARCEL NUMBERS INVOLVED 0509-164-1001-2 PARCEL NUMBERS INVOLVED PARCEL NUMBERS INVOLVED REASON FOR REZONE DIVIDE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL LOT INTO TWO LOTS FROM DISTRICT: TO DISTRICT: ACRES RR-4 Rural Residential District RR-2 Rural Residential District 4.6 C.S.M REQUIRED? PLAT REQUIRED? DEED RESTRICTION REQUIRED? INSPECTOR'S INITIALS SIGNATURE:(Owner or Agent) PRINT NAME: DATE: RUH1 Applicant Initials_________ Yes Yes YesNo No No Applicant Initials_________ Applicant Initials_________      12255 Legal Description RR-4 to RR-2 Lot 1 of Windridge, being in the Northeast ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of Section 16, Town 5 North, Range 9 East, Town of Oregon, Dane County, Wisconsin.  Outlook Cleaning Up Zoning errors stemming from the 2019 ZO rewrite From Van Belleghem, Bridgit <VanBelleghem.Bridgit@danecounty.gov> Date Wed 11/19/2025 4:42 PM To Stephanie Goth <sgoth@townoforegonwi.gov>; Jennifer Hanson <jhanson@townoforegonwi.gov> 3 attachments (603 KB) Oregon Blanket Rezone 2025_ Proposed.xlsx; Oregon Blanket Rezone 2025_ Proposed.pdf; Oregon_2025_BRZ.pdf; Hi Stephanie and Jennifer: The planning and zoning teams have come together to review the zoning in the town with the objecƟve of correcƟng errors that may have stemmed from the conversion to the new zoning code adopted in 2019. Mostly, these are size mismatches. However, there are a few RH properƟes that may have been converted to RM-16 (many allowances like mineral extracƟon, livestock) because of their size. But given that they are in the middle of subdivisions they are likely intended to be RR zoning. If the town wants to change these, I will pull out the Įve or so speciĮc parcels and add them to this list. Let me know. Please Įnd the proposed list, with accessdane links and a place for the town to put their decision. The parcels should be preƩy straight forward. I also included a crude map. If the town could take a Įrst look at these. Make an iniƟal decision on them ( I can discuss these with them if needed, but most towns have just loosely approves the list). Then I make an oĸcial zoning app, send a targeted leƩer to the land owners, formal town acƟon occurs. Once town acƟon occurs, updates are taken up and the ZLR public hearing will occur. Can you please add this to the next PC meeƟng and share these material with the members? Can you remind me who the OC Chair is? Eek. Thank you, Bridgit ________________________ Bridgit Van Belleghem Senior Planner, Department of Planning and Development VanBelleghem.Bridgit@danecounty.gov 608.225.2043  PARCELNO Owner Address Billing Acres Reason Rezone From Rezone To Other Comments Town Decision 0509-031-4022JENKINS JT REV TR, RONALD R & JULIE M- 5400 W NETHERWOOD RD 6.17 DR preventing dev with residential zoning. Is it developable or not? RR-4 FP-1 0509-041-8320RITA MAE KLUEVER 5824 MADSEN CIR 5848 MADSEN CIR 4.46 Less than 35 acres in size and not farmed FP-35 FP-1 0509-041-6166RITA MAE KLUEVER 5849 MADSEN CIR 1.21 Check RE FP-1 rezone 6123 0509-044-8050RITA MAE KLUEVER 5850 MADSEN CIR 26.92 less than 35 acres FP-35 FP-1 0509-061-8720WILLE LIVING TR 980 AUTUMN WOODS LN 16.54 DR that prohinits development RM-16 FP-1 0509-062-6098GERRY K LARMORE 6218 TRAIL RIDGE CT 0.40 Part of a property with RR-2, make them match SFR-08 rr-2 Partridge Hill aSeveral In rewrite several R-1 where changed to RR-2, which allows animals. We believe RR-2 SFR-2 up to the town 0509-084-9030MARY LAWECKI SMITH 5892 LINCOLN RD 5892 LINCOLN RD 7.06 only 6 acres RM-16 RR-4 0509-093-9502FAHEY TR 5774 LINCOLN RD 20.46 Was RH before not allowing all the uses in RM-16, should have been changed to RR-4 RM-16 RR-16 Original intent 0509-093-9570FAHEY TR 5774 LINCOLN RD 5774 LINCOLN RD 19.96 see above RM-17 RR-17 Original intent 0509-092-8052CLARK REV LIVING TR, MARY J 950 TIPPERARY RD 16.57 Mapping error that should have labeled the parcel as A-1 Ex, but it was made A 2 application RM-16 FP-35 rezone 9802 0509-141-9510PURDIN FARMS LLC 626 INVERNESS ST 16.57 one parcel with two zoning districts, was previously all RH-4, equivalent is RR AT-35/RMRR-16 0509-142-8330BUBBA 1 LLC 866 ASHWORTH DR 19.56 Less than 35 acres, 4.4 AT-35/RMFP-1 0509-153-5000EUGENE E LEWIS 865 JEAN CIR 865 JEAN CIR 3.16 previous zoning was all R-1 and when updated they were changed to RR-2, which allows animals RR-2 SFR-2 0509-153-4273KENNETH D CASPER 833 JEAN CIR 833 JEAN CIR 2.41 previous zoning was all R-1 and when updated they were changed to RR-2, which allows animals RR-3 SFR-3 0509-163-9211TG HANN LLC 200 N MONROE ST 1.51 Is part of a larger farm FP-1 FP-35 0509-171-8500JEREMY A STAAS 5891 LINCOLN RD 5891 LINCOLN RD 17.94 Was RH-4, so should be RR-16, so not to allow extra uses in RM RM-16 RR-16 0509-172-8300OREGON, TOWN OF 1067 STORYTOWN 1138 UNION RD 7.40 Town recycling center, maybe keep it, but RI minimum lot size is 16 acres and this is only 7. RI town decision to change 0509-192-9720STUESSY REAL ESTATE TR 714 COUNTY HIGHWAY D 670 PRISK ST 1.08 Is part of a larger farm FP-1 FP-35  0509-202-9510CERQUA LIVING TR, DAVID L 5993 COUNTY HIG 5993 COUNTY HIGHW12.36 Has a house and farm FP-1 RR-16 0509-201-8601Robert Dicke 5886 COUNTY HIG 5886 COUNTY HIGHW17.68 Previous zoning was RH-4, RM is more expansive RM-16 RR-16 0509-211-6910Moreland Rev Living Trust 780 Heather Lane 0.40 Permiter parcel with no environmental feaures or trail NR-C UTR 0509-243-8571DANIEL W SCHMIDT 4965 ROME CORNERS RD 17.39 Less than 35 acres in size FP-35 FP-1 0509-243-9071DANIEL W SCHMIDT 4966 ROME CORNERS RD 3.70 Less than 35 acres in size FP-35 FP-1 0509-252-8720MICHAEL A LEGGETT 536 UNION RD 536 UNION RD 6.11 Random spot zone for LC, was RH-4 before reqrite LC RR-4 no rezone petition 0509-264-8570DANIEL L O'BRIEN 552 GLENWAY RD 11.30 Part of a larger farm FP-1 FP-35 0509-322-9600MCSHERRY REV LIVING TR, DONALD & BONNIE 187 TIPPERARY RD 7.67 Part of a larger farm FP-1 FP-35 part of alrger farm 0509-333-9770ROSALINO ANTONIO RUIZ 5676 ALPINE RD 7.57 One split parcel with two zoning districts that were illegalland divisions RR-8 FP-1 Other option is to legal lot the whole thing into RR-16 0509-341-9000THOMAS H WENDT 421 GLENWAY RD 20.17 parcel is less than 35 acres FP-35 FP-1 0509-341-9600THOMAS H WENDT 422 GLENWAY RD 2.57 parcel is less than 35 acres FP-35 FP-1 taken together with above parcel they are 26 acres combined 0509-353-8561ROBERT L HALBLEIB 172 GLENWAY RD 24.88 parcel is less than 35 acres FP-35 FP-1   Outlook Sugar River EMS District Agreement From Josh Wescott <jwescott@bellevilleems.com> Date Thu 3/5/2026 12:13 PM To Kelsey Jenson <administrator@newglarusvillage.com>; Gabe Altenbernd <GAltenbernd@bellevillewi.gov>; Steve Miller <1skeeter@litewire.net>; cnarveson@townofnewglaruswi.gov <cnarveson@townofnewglaruswi.gov>; cnarveson@greencountywi.org <cnarveson@greencountywi.org>; tedfaheym3@gmail.com <tedfaheym3@gmail.com>; Mark Pernitz <mpernitz@gmail.com>; Montrose@chorus.net <Montrose@chorus.net>; customcowcare@yahoo.com <customcowcare@yahoo.com>; Jennifer Hanson <jhanson@townoforegonwi.gov>; Kevin Hendrickson <kevin.hendrickson@newglarusfd.com>; Jim Moldenhauer <jim.moldenhauer@newglarusfd.com>; Chris Backes <cbackes@bellevilleems.com>; Roger Truttmann <rtruttmann@newglarusvillage.com>; Mike Zirbes <MZirbes@bellevillewi.gov>; mike1953821@yahoo.com <mike1953821@yahoo.com> 1 attachment (58 KB) SUGAR RIVER EMS DISTRICT AGREEMENT.docx; Good afternoon friends and colleagues: The attached reflects your much good work together. We appreciate your thoughtful insights and continued collaboration on a finished product we believe is truly a template for how folks can work together to improve public services.£ Together - you are leading the way! We appreciate your continued collaboration and support of innovative and effective emergency medical services.£ Please keep us posted as you review and act on this agreement. In partnership, Josh Deputy Chief Belleville Area EMS  Intergovernmental Agreement Sugar River Emergency Medical Services District June 30, 2026 – December 31, 2036 Village of Belleville Village of New Glarus Town of New Glarus Town of Exeter Town of Montrose Town of Brooklyn Town of Oregon Adopted: ______________ Table of Contents Section I: Emergency Medical Service District Created ............................................................ 4 1.1 Creation ................................................................................................ ............................... 4 1.2 Purpose ................................................................................................ ................................ 4 Section II: Management of the District ...................................................................................... 4 2.1 Board ................................................................................................ ................................... 4 2.2 Duties of the Board ................................................................................................ ............. 6 2.3 Powers of the Board ................................................................................................ ........... 8 Section III: District Meetings ....................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Regular Meetings ................................................................................................ ................ 8 3.2 Special Meetings .......................................................................................................... ....... 9  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 2 3.3 Who to Preside ............................................................................................................ ........ 9 Section IV: Expenses of the District ............................................................................................ 9 4.1 Budget Increase Cap ................................................................................................ .......... 9 4.2 Operating Expenses ................................................................................................ ............. 9 4.3 Capital Expenditures ................................................................................................ ......... 10 4.4 Annual Budget Process ................................................................................................ ..... 10 4.5 Budget Amendments ................................................................................................ ........ 10 4.6 Undesignated Funds ................................................................................................ .......... 10 4.7 Budget Apportionment ................................................................................................ ..... 11 4.8 Time for Payment ................................................................................................ ............. 11 4.9 Application of Innovation Fund Monies ................................................................ .......... 11 Section V: Ownership of Assets ................................................................................................ 11 5.1 District Owns ................................................................................................ ................... 11 5.2 Equity of Municipalities ................................................................................................ ... 11 5.3 Earned Equity of Newly Added Municipalities ................................ ................................ 11 5.4 Start-up Costs of Newly Added Municipalities ................................ ............................... 12 5.5 Disposition of EMS District Property .............................................................................. 12 Section VI: Contracting with Third-Party Municipalities ..................................................... 12 6.1 Contracted Services ................................................................................................ .......... 12 6.2 New District Membership ................................................................ ................................. 12 6.3 Budget Apportionment ................................................................................................ ..... 12 Section VII: Withdrawal from the District ............................................................................... 12 7.1 Notice Required ................................................................................................ ................ 12 7.2 Distribution to Withdrawing Municipality ................................................................ ...... 13 7.3 Liability of Withdrawing Municipality ................................................................ ............. 14 Section VIII: Term and Termination of District ...................................................................... 14 8.1 Term ...................................................................................................................... ............ 14 8.2 Termination of District ................................................................................................ ..... 14 8.3 Distribution of Assets upon Termination ................................................................ .......... 14 Section IX: Dispute Resolution ................................................................................................. 14 9.1 Informal Dispute Resolution ................................................................ ............................ 14 9.2 Mediation ................................................................................................ ......................... 14 9.3 Arbitration ............................................................................................................... .......... 15  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 3 9.4 Authority of Arbitrators Limited ....................................................................................... 15 Section X: Miscellaneous Provisions ........................................................................................ 15 10.1 Severability ...................................................................................................................... 15 10.2 Non-Integration ................................................................................................................ 15 10.3 Effective Date .................................................................................................................. 16 10.4 Amendments ..................................................................................................................... 16 Agreement Pursuant to Section 66.0301 of the Wisconsin Statutes and in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the Villages of Belleville and New Glarus and the Towns of New Glarus Exeter, Montrose, Brooklyn and Oregon, hereinafter referred to individually as a “Municipality”, and collectively as the “Municipalities”, hereby agree as follows: Section I: Emergency Medical Service District Created 1.1 Creation. The Sugar River Emergency Medical Services District, hereinafter referred to as the “District”, shall consist of all lands within the Villages of Belleville and New Glarus along with the Towns of New Glarus, Exeter and Montrose and partial lands in the Towns of Brookyln and Oregon is hereby created. (A) Village of Belleville. All the area within the corporate limits of the Village of Belleville, Dane and Green Counties, Wisconsin  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 4 (B) Village of New Glarus. All the area within the corporate limits of the Village of New Glarus, Green County, Wisconsin (C) Town of New Glarus. All the area within the corporate limits of the Town of New Glarus, Green County, Wisconsin (D) Town of Montrose. All the area within the corporate limits of the Town of Montrose, Dane County, Wisconsin (E) Town of Exeter. All the area within the corporate limits of the Town of Exeter, Green County, Wisconsin (F) Town of Brooklyn. The South 1/2 of Section 7 and the whole of Section 18 in the Town of Brooklyn, Green County, Wisconsin (G) Town of Oregon. Section 18, 19 and 30 in the Town of Oregon, Dane County, Wisconsin 1.2 Purpose. The District shall provide for the administration of Emergency Care Procedures, and to provide transportation for sick, disabled, and injured person(s) to institutions providing health services. The provision of services shall be guided and governed by Wis. Stat §§ 60.23(1), 60.565, 61.34(1), 61.64, and 66.0301. Section II: Management of the District 2.1 Board. The Sugar River Emergency Medical Services District Board, hereinafter referred to as the “Board”, is hereby created to set policy and provide direction for the District. (A) Appointment. The Board shall consist of seven (7) board members, one from each municipality, with each member having equal voting authority. Municipalities that decide to contract with this district for emergency medical services are not entitled to a board seat unless they are formally added to the District as an official member. See section 6.2 (B) Term. Each municipal appointed board member shall be appointed to serve a term as designed by the respective Municipality. (C) Removal. Any municipal appointed board member may be removed by the appointing Municipality. (D) Vacancies. Vacancies shall be filled for the remainder of the term. A Municipality must fill any vacancy in the Board created by death, relocation outside of the Municipality where appointed, resignation, or removal of its appointee within forty-  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 5 five (45) days of the creation of such vacancy. In the event that the Municipality is unable to fill the vacancy within this time-period the Village President, Town Chairperson or their designee shall serve until a replacement is appointed by the Municipality. (E) Compensation. Board members shall receive no compensation from the District for attendance at Board meetings or for any time spent on Board business. (F) Officers. The Board shall annually elect a Chairperson, Vice Chairperson, Secretary, and Treasurer to serve in that position starting at the first regular meeting in June. (1) Chairperson. The Chairperson shall represent a municipality whose full territorial area is part of the District. The Chairperson shall preside at all meetings of the Board; ensure that all the actions of the Board are effectuated; execute all documents authorized by the Board; and do all the things prescribed from time to time by the Board. (2) Vice Chairperson. The Vice Chairperson shall represent a municipality whose full territorial area is part of the District. The Vice Chairperson shall perform the duties of the Chairperson in the event of the absence or disability of the Chairperson. The Vice Chairperson shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed from time to time by the Board. (3) Secretary. The Secretary may be a non-Board member. If the Secretary is a member of the Board, they shall have voting rights and will not receive compensation. If the Secretary is selected from outside the Board, they shall not have voting rights and may receive compensation. The Secretary shall keep a complete record of the transactions and proceedings of the District and shall have other responsibilities prescribed by the Board from time to time. (4) Treasurer. The Treasurer may be a non-Board member. If the Treasurer is a member of the Board, they shall have voting rights and will not receive compensation. If the Treasurer is selected from outside the Board, they shall not have voting rights and may receive compensation. The Treasurer shall establish and act as custodian of one or more segregated funds that shall be used solely for receipts and disbursements relating to emergency medical services. The Treasurer shall see that all monies allocated to the District shall be properly received, deposited, segregated, applied and accounted for. The Treasurer shall have such additional duties as may from time to time be prescribed by the Board. (G) Meetings.  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 6 (1) Open Meetings. Board meetings shall be open to the public. A notice of date, time, location, and agenda will be published in the official publication(s) of each Municipality and/or posted at the prescribed locations in the municipality. (2) Closed Meetings. If needed, the Board may hold a closed session, per applicable Wisconsin Statutes. 2.2 Duties of the Board. Decisions of the Board shall be made by a simple majority vote of the Board members attending a meeting. The Board, by using its best efforts and by working in cooperation with the EMS Chief shall: (A) Develop, review and approve an annual budget for operations and capital expenditures. (B) Approve the budget for the succeeding fiscal year on or before September 30 th of each calendar year for review and approval by the municipalities (C) Host two annual budget hearings, one each in New Glarus and Belleville, to review operating and capital budget needs of the Emergency Medical Services department. (D) Make rules and regulations for its own proceedings and establish policy, operating procedures, and providing general direction of the EMS District, and make adequate provision for the enforcement of such rules and regulations. (E) Maintain books of account. The District shall: (a) have charge and custody of and be responsible for all funds of the District; and (b) receive and give receipts for monies due and payable to the District from any source whatsoever, and ensure deposit of all such monies in the name of the District in such banks, trust companies, or other depositaries as shall be selected by the Board. (F) Review the following: (1) Reports summarizing the affairs of the District; (2) Monthly fiscal reports; and (3) Annual audit (G) Make provision for the management of the District. (H) Make provision for the control, maintenance, acquisition, and placement of all real and personal property acquired by the District.  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 7 (I) Establish user fees for the services provided by the District and see that all charges therefore are duly made, collected, and deposited into the account(s) of the District. (J) Obtain all necessary liability and property damage insurance, not otherwise provided by other agreements or contracts. (K) Obtain such licenses as may be required by the District to operate as an ambulance service provider. (L) Should any member of the Board request the Board to forward an issue to legal counsel for review, the Board shall forward the issue to counsel for a review not to exceed two (2) billable hours. The Board, by a majority vote of the voting members, may authorize legal counsel to exceed the two (2) hour limitation for a specific question. Should counsel deem additional time is necessary to review the issue, counsel will be instructed to provide an initial report to the EMS Chief and advise the EMS Chief of what additional work may be necessary to completely review or opine on the issue. The Board may by a majority vote of the voting members authorize additional review by legal counsel. (M) Keep records of each Municipality’s equity interest in the assets of the District, in the manner provided by Section 5.2. (N) The Board shall review and base decisions on staffing and/or operational resource allocation based on the following: (1) Monthly and annual call volumes; (2) Vehicle performance, with review of maintenance either completed or needed; (3) Percentage of calls requiring mutual aid response; (4) Percentage of time at least one unit remains available in the system; (5) District wide membership updates (6) Chief, Assistant Chief and Primary officer group updates, which should include information from the training division, training center, special events, and overall District highlights. (O) Audit District finances annually and make these findings publicly available 2.3 Powers of the Board. (A) The Board shall have the power to:  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 8 (1) Subject to compliance with Wis. Stat §§ 60.47 and 62.15, enter into contracts or agreements in the name of and for the benefit of the District with approval of all the Municipalities. (2) Establish and maintain, in a bank of its choice, an EMS Fund. (3) Hire/terminate and conduct performance reviews of the department Chief and Assistant Chief(s). (4) Ensure that all District policies and procedures align with County, State, and Federal guidelines and regulations. (5) Delegate authority to the EMS Chief (who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board) to manage the day-to-day operations of the District and carry out the powers enumerated in subjections (4) and (5) of this section. (B) The Board shall not have the authority to levy taxes, issue bonds, or borrow money; or to enter contracts or commit funds in excess of the budget without approval of all the Municipalities. Section III: Board Meetings 3.1 Regular Meetings. The Board shall have a regular monthly meeting. Attendance of a majority of the voting members shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting all business. The notice given for any meeting shall state the purpose, date, time, and place for the meeting. The chair of the Board can forego hosting a monthly District meeting in the event there are no pending action items or matters to review/discuss. 3.2 Special Meetings. Special meetings of the Board may be held for the purpose of transacting any business of the District upon the request of the Chairperson and/or two (2) Board members. Notice of a special meeting shall be given at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the commencement of such meeting, unless for an emergency, in which case shorter notice may be given, but in no case may the notice be provided less than two (2) hours in advance of the meeting. Attendance of a majority of the voting members shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of transacting all business with the exception of voting for operating or capital expenditures. The notice given for any meeting shall state the purpose, date, time, and place for the meeting. 3.3 Who to Preside. The Chairperson of the Board shall preside at the meeting when present, but if absent, the Vice Chairperson shall preside. If both the Chairperson and Vice Chairperson are absent, the Board shall select one of the Board members present to preside. Section IV: Expenses of the District  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 9 The District and Board will maintain its year-to-year level of monetary effort as required by 2023 Wisconsin Act 12 to avoid reduction of county and municipal aid payments. 4.1 Budget Increase Cap. The annual District budget increase over the previous year shall not exceed the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus two percent (2%). CPI shall be determined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics as of August 1st of the current year. 4.2 Operating Expenses. (A) Defined. The term “operating expense” shall mean and include any expense paid or accrued during the fiscal year which is attributable to the actual day-to-day operations of the District including but not limited to expense for salaries, rent, utilities, repairs or equipment, fuel and insurance. If any questions arise regarding whether any expenditure or expense is an “operating expense” or a “capital expenditure” the matter shall be resolved by the application of generally accepted accounting principles. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any single expenditure of less than $5,000 shall be an “operating expense”. (B) Payment. All operating expenses shall be paid from the income of the District. If the District income is not sufficient to meet the operating expenses, each municipality shall pay their fair share of the operating expenses, which is determined by same calculation used for the budget apportionment. 4.3 Capital Expenditures. (A) Defined. The term “capital expenditure” shall mean all expenses for acquisition of physical assets not included as operating expenses, and includes any expenditure made or liability accrued in the amount of $5,000 or more for a physical asset which has a useful life in excess of one (1) year or which extends the life of a physical asset more than one (1) year beyond its current useful life. (B) Non-Budgeted Capital Expenditures. Any non-budgeted capital expenditure shall require a majority vote of the Board, and a unanimous vote of the Municipalities. (C) Apportionment. Each municipality’s proportion of a capital expenditure shall be determined at the time of approval of purchase. Proportion shall be determined with percentage rounded to the nearest two decimal points. (D) Bid Requirement. All capital expenditure items above $100,000 may not be approved without a bid. Where possible, multiple bids are preferred for review  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 10 (E) Ten-Year CIP. The District must maintain a 10-year capital improvement plan, that will be prepared by the EMS administration and modified as needed annually 4.4 Annual Budget Process. The EMS Chief shall submit their annual recommended operating and capital budget by September 1st. The Board shall review and recommend for approval the Emergency Medical Services operating and capital budget requests by September 30th. There shall be a joint meeting of the Board and the Municipalities on or before October 30 th for final approval of the operating and capital budget. The annual operating budget and capital expenditures will be deemed to have passed when it has been approved by a majority of the Board. If the Municipalities have not passed the proposed budget by December 1 st, the previous year’s budget less capital expenditures will be used, except that budget increases previously approved by all Municipalities for salaries and benefits, may increase in accordance with the previous year’s approval. 4.5 Budget Amendments. No changes in the amounts of the various appropriations and the purposes of such appropriations as stated in the budgets finally approved shall be made unless approved unanimously by the Board. 4.6 Undesignated Funds. The EMS Fund shall have its own undesignated fund. Monies not expended by the end of the fiscal year shall be placed into the individual undesignated fund. The Board may utilize the excess funds for operating budget shortfalls or for cash deposits for capital expenditures. The use of the undesignated fund must be approved unanimously by the Board. 4.7 Budget Apportionment. For the first three years of the term of this agreement, each municipality shall contribute funds to the approved District operating budget in the proportion of that municipality’s current population within the District, to the current population of the District, by using the most recent population figures as provided by the Wisconsin Department of Administration (DOA) as determined for purposes of state tax sharing and Wis. Stat. Ch. 79. Beginning in the fourth year and extending through remaining duration of this agreement, cost apportionment will be determined by a formula consisting of a rolling average of the previous three years of EMS call volume, equalized value, and the population of each participating municipality. Each municipality’s portion of the budget is determined by an apportionment percentage derived from the average of population percentage, share of equalized value plus EMS calls for service in that respective township/village. For Example: If a municipality has 30% of the population of the district, 40% of the equalized value of the district and 50% of the call volume, it would pay 40% of the District’s annual budget.  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 11 4.8 Time for Payment. The Municipalities shall pay their proportionate share of each operating budget, as billed, to the District Treasurer in two (2) installments: (a) fifty percent (50%) shall be paid by February 15 th of each year; and (b) fifty percent (50%) shall be paid by September 15th of each year. 4.9 Application of Innovation Fund Monies. All participating municipalities of this EMS District agree to dedicate any grant revenues awarded related to this EMS project via the Wisconsin Innovation Fund directly to EMS related expenses. Section V: Ownership of Assets 5.1 District Owns. The title to all property whether real or personal and regardless of how it is obtained shall vest in the District. 5.2 Equity of Previous EMS District/Municipalities. Each Municipality shall be deemed to have an equity interest in the assets of the District. The value of assets obtained prior to the creation of this new district, as previously acquired by the Belleville, Montrose, Exeter Fire and EMS District, shall remain solely with those member municipalities. An appraisal of the Belleville EMS Station at 480 River Street shall be completed prior to the effective date of this agreement. Equity of assets acquired by this new district will be determined by multiplying the current value of each asset by the appropriate budget apportionment at the time the asset was purchased. Equity interests shall be reduced to reflect depreciation of the assets on the straight-line basis. The Municipalities shall have no equity interest in assets of the District acquired by gift or donation except in the event that the District is terminated. 5.3 Earned Equity of Newly Added Municipalities. Any municipality joining the District after the effective date of this Agreement shall only be eligible for equity interest of an asset if the municipality participated in the purchase of said asset or provides assets when joining. 5.4 Start-up costs of Newly Added Municipalities. Start-up costs to a new municipality entering into this Agreement and the District will be determined through negotiations at the time of entry and are subject to unanimous approval by all District Municipalities. 5.5 Disposition of EMS District Property. The Municipalities acknowledge that this Agreement will dissolve the EMS District previously created by the Municipalities in order to create a new EMS District. All property owned by the previous EMS District located at 480 River Street, Belleville, WI 53508 (the EMS facility location) shall be transferred to the new Sugar River EMS District created by this Agreement upon executing this Agreement. The real property in which the current EMS facility is located (Dane County parcel 050834187551) shall be conveyed to the EMS District upon executing this Agreement. Section VI: Contracting with Third-Party Municipalities  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 12 6.1 Contracted Services. Upon request of a third-party municipality, the District may enter into agreements providing emergency medical services to non-member municipalities. The contract shall be negotiated between the non-member municipality and Board. Approval of the contract shall require a two-thirds vote by members of the Board. A third-party municipality solely contracting for service shall not have any equity interest in the assets of the District. 6.2 New District Membership. A portion or entirety of any city, village, or township may petition to join the District at any time. New members shall adhere to the provisions outlined in this agreement, including having representation on the District Board and expense sharing as outlined in this agreement. Approval of any new participating member is subject to approval by member municipalities. 6.3 Budget Apportionment. Any future contract to provide emergency medical services to a non-member municipality shall require that the third-party municipality pay the District based on the funding formulas described in Section 4.4, except that the Board, when it determines that it is in the best interest of the public, may use a different funding formula with the third-party municipality. Section VII: Withdrawal from the District 7.1 Notice Required. A Municipality may only withdraw from the District at the end of a fiscal year (the District’s fiscal year shall be the calendar year) only if the withdrawing Municipality has provided written notice to the Board and each participating Municipality prior to January 1st of that fiscal year. Any municipality providing this one-year notice of intent to withdraw will continue to receive EMS service from the district while still being responsible for its share of costs to provide that service consistent with the formula outlined in this agreement. If all Municipalities or all but one Municipality provides a notice to withdraw, then at the end of the fiscal year provided by the first notice, the District shall terminate as provided in Section VIII. 7.2 Distribution to Withdrawing Municipality. (A) Definitions. (1) For the purposes of this section, the generally accepted accounting principles in place at the end of the fiscal year shall govern all calculations. (2) The term “assets” shall include, but not be limited to, cash, accounts receivable, and equipment. (3) The term “equipment” shall include all tangible property. The value of equipment at the time of withdrawal will be calculated.  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 13 (B) Audit. (1) Upon withdrawal, the previous year’s audit shall be used to determine the assets and liabilities of the District. (C) Calculations. (1) Equipment will be valued at the existing value as of the date of the withdrawal. Equipment shall be calculated as the purchase price of the equipment and less depreciation using straight line deprecation as determined by the auditors. (2) Any item listed with an anticipated useful life of less than one (1) year will be considered an operating expense. (D) Commencing on the date of withdrawal and continuing for twelve (12) months after withdrawal, cash and accounts receivable attributable to the withdrawing Municipality, for periods prior to the date of the withdrawal, shall be held in a separate bank account. When the audit has been concluded, the amount due and owing the withdrawing Municipality shall be finalized shall be based on its equity in the District determined pursuant to Section 5.2. The District will then have the option to pay out the value of the equipment either in five (5) equal annual payments with the first payment to be paid one (1) year after withdrawal or as a single lump sum to be paid within three (3) years after withdrawal. 7.3 Liability of Withdrawing Municipality. (A) In the event that the liabilities of the District exceed its assets at the time of withdrawal, the withdrawing Municipality shall pay that percentage of the deficit, which is determined by the withdrawing Municipality’s budget apportionment calculated in the most recent year. The withdrawing Municipality shall have the option of making such payment to the District in a lump sum or in annual installments over a period not in excess of five (5) years from the date of the withdrawal. Election of the installment method shall not entitle the District to earn interest on the unpaid balance.  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 14 (B) The withdrawing Municipality shall remain liable for its percentage of any adverse claim asserted against the District which occurred during the time the withdrawing Municipality was a member of the District. Section VIII: Term and Termination of District 8.1 Term. This Agreement, as amended from time to time, shall remain in force and effect until December 31, 2036 8.2 Termination of District. The District may be terminated by the unanimous written consent of the Municipalities and shall be terminated if its membership drops to one (1) Municipality. 8.3 Distribution of Assets upon Termination. Should the district be terminated, its assets, including those acquired by gift or donation, shall be liquidated and the money remaining after payment of all the District’s obligations shall be distributed to the Municipalities which are then members of the District. Each Municipality shall receive that percentage of the money, which is equal to its equity in the District determined pursuant to Section 5.2. In the event of dissolution, an appraisal will determine the value of the Belleville EMS Station at 480 River District (unless the District sold this asset throughout the course of this agreement). The difference in value between this appraisal and the one obtained at the effective date of this agreement shall inform the share of equity from this asset to members of the District. Section IX: Dispute Resolution 9.1 Informal Dispute Resolution. If any municipality has a dispute concerning any of the matters in this Agreement, the Municipality asserting the dispute shall first seek to have the matter resolved informally by providing each other Municipality with a written notice stating the nature of the dispute. If informal resolution is not reached within sixty (60) days from the date of the notice, the Municipalities agree to mediate the dispute. 9.2 Mediation. (A) The Municipalities agree to name a mediator within fourteen (14) days of the expiration of the time period to reach informal resolution. If no mediator is agreed upon within said fourteen (14) days, each Municipality shall name a third party and the third-parties so named shall pick a mediator within ten (10) days. The Municipalities shall present their dispute to the mediator within sixty (60) days of the mediator being named. Nothing in this provision shall preclude any  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 15 Municipality from filing a notice of claim or taking other action required by statute to preserve its rights under applicable notice of claim statues. (B) The mediator shall not have the authority to add, change, alter or modify any of the terms or provisions of this Agreement. (C) The expense of the mediator shall be divided equally between the Municipalities. 9.3 Arbitration. Arbitration is to follow any unsuccessful mediation unless the Municipalities agree to forego mediation and proceed directly to arbitration. If any of the terms, duties, obligations, or responsibilities of this Agreement cannot be resolved via mediation, or if any Municipality believes that a provision is unenforceable or that there have been a material breach of this Agreement, the Municipalities agree that they will timely notify the others, or their successors or assigns, of any intent to seek arbitration for a final and binding declaration concerning such dispute or breach of this Agreement. A determination of disputed matters described in this Agreement and/or whether there has been a material breach of this Agreement, will be conducted via arbitration hearing, that the arbitrator’s decision to be final and binding upon the Municipalities. The Municipalities shall agree upon a single arbitrator to decide the dispute, or if no agreement on selection of an arbitrator can be reached within five (5) business days of notice of arbitration, any party may petition the Dane County Circuit Court for appointment of the arbitrator. Each Municipality shall bear equal costs of any arbitration proceeding. All other provisions of the arbitration and the conduct of the hearing shall be pursuant to Wis. Stat. Chapter 788, or its successor, unless otherwise ordered by the arbitrator or agreed by the Municipalities. 9.4 Authority of Arbitrators Limited. The arbitrators shall not have the authority to add to, change, alter, or modify any of the terms or provisions of this Agreement. Section X: Miscellaneous Provisions 10.1 Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Agreement is held to be invalid by reason of a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of any other section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof. 10.2 Non-Integration. Beginning on the Effective Date, this Agreement shall supersede any and all agreements previously made between the parties relating to the subject matter of this Agreement. Beginning on the Effective Date, all previous agreements are hereby rescinded and repealed. 10.3 Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective June 30, 2026 (the “Effective Date”).  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 16 10.4 Amendments. Amendment(s) to this Agreement shall require a majority vote of all board members, and unanimous approval by each Municipality. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the municipalities have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers. Village of Belleville Village of New Glarus Village President Village President  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 17 Village Clerk Village Clerk Date Date Town of Exeter Town of Montrose Town Chair Town Chair Town Clerk Town Clerk Date Date Town of Oregon Town of Brooklyn Town Chair Town Chair Town Clerk Town Clerk Date Date Town of New Glarus Town Chair Town Clerk  Intergovernmental Agreement | Emergency Medical Services 18 Date  RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF OREGON RESOLUTION 01-2026 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE TOWN OF OREGON VISION 2040 SURVEY REPORT AND THE VISION 2040 SUMMARY WHEREAS the Town of Oregon, Dane County, Wisconsin, by this resolution, adopts the Town of Oregon Vision 2040 Survey Report and the Vision 2040 Summary, WHEREAS the Town of Oregon contracted with the Survey Research Center of UW- River Falls (SRC) to administer the survey to 1,152 households online and 108 landowners via mail, WHEREAS the Town of Oregon received expert guidance from Community Development Educator at UW-Madison Extension Dane County to conduct the visioning process, WHEREAS the Town of Oregon held a community input meeting on September 16, 2025, which 36 residents attended, WHEREAS the SRC collected mail survey responses and online survey responses for an overall 39% response rate, and a sample size indicating a smaller margin of error than the statistical standard margin of error and therefore greater accuracy in the report. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Town Board of Oregon, Dane County, Wisconsin, hereby adopts this resolution accepting the Vision 2040 Survey Report and the Vision 2040 Summary. Adopted by the Town Board on the 10th day of March 2026. ______________________________________ Carl Walser, Town Chair Attest: _______________________________________ Jennifer Hanson, Clerk   ii THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER The Survey Research Center (SRC) is a research organization at the University of Wisconsin – River Falls in River Falls, Wisconsin. Since 1990, the SRC has provided statistically sound, low- cost information gathering services for academics, local units of government, non-profit groups, school districts, and other organizations. The SRC conducts surveys on a wide variety of topics including customer satisfaction, resident experience, business climate, equity and inclusion, labor needs, and other areas, completing about 25 to 30 survey projects per year. In alignment with its mission of strengthening communities and supporting education, all SRC projects have the goal of improving the welfare and quality of life for community residents, along with furthering the advancement of scientific research.  iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The SRC thanks Sharon Lezberg, Community Resource Development Educator at UW-Madison Division of Extension, Carl Walser, Chairperson of the Town of Oregon Board, Tim Yanacheck, Chairperson of the Plan Commission, Jennifer Hanson, Town Clerk, and Stephanie Goth, Treasurer and Deputy Clerk, for working with the SRC to develop a productive survey instrument, providing consistent feedback, and promoting the survey. The SRC also thanks members of the Town Board for their input in the survey process. Finally, the SRC thanks the residents of the Town of Oregon for completing the survey. Without their robust engagement, the successful execution of this project would not have been possible.  iv TABLE OF CONTENTS THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER ......................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... iii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 SURVEY PURPOSE AND METHODS ........................................................................................ 5 SURVEY RESULTS ...................................................................................................................... 7 Community and Quality of Life .................................................................................................. 7 Overall Quality of Life ............................................................................................................ 7 Why Residents Choose to Live in the Town of Oregon ......................................................... 7 Factors That Impact Quality of Life ....................................................................................... 8 Facilities and Services............................................................................................................... 10 Quality of Town Facilities and Services ............................................................................... 10 Importance of Town Facilities and Services ......................................................................... 11 Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup Service ....................................................... 12 Natural and Cultural Resources ................................................................................................ 13 Importance of Preserving Natural and Cultural Resources ................................................... 13 Land Use and Growth ............................................................................................................... 15 Importance of Agreements with Neighboring Communities ................................................ 15 Land Use and Planning Activities ......................................................................................... 15 Town of Oregon’s Agricultural and Rural Character ........................................................... 16 Concerns about Annexation of Town Property..................................................................... 17 Ownership of Land in the Town of Oregon .......................................................................... 19 Future Vision for the Town....................................................................................................... 20 Plans for Continuing to Reside in the Town of Oregon ........................................................ 20 Future Directions for the Community ................................................................................... 20 Future of Town Facilities and Services................................................................................. 22 Future of Community Initiatives ........................................................................................... 23 Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved ................................................................ 24 Aspects of Community That the Town Should Address ...................................................... 24 Housing ..................................................................................................................................... 26 Current Residential Status of Residents ................................................................................ 26 Where Residential Growth Should Occur ............................................................................. 26 Design of New Housing Development ................................................................................. 27 Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years ......................................................................... 28  v Transportation ........................................................................................................................... 29 New Bicycle Routes .............................................................................................................. 29 Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure.................................................................... 29 OPEN-ENDED FEEDBACK ....................................................................................................... 31 DEMOGRAPHIC ATTRIBUTES ................................................................................................ 34 SURVEY RESULTS BY RESPONDENT ATTRIBUTES ......................................................... 37 Female Residents vs. Residents of Other Genders ................................................................... 37 Senior Residents (Age 65+) vs. Younger Residents ................................................................. 46 Households with Children vs. Households without Children ................................................... 55 Household Income Under $150k vs. Higher Income Households ............................................ 64 Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents...................................................................................... 73 SURVEY INSTRUMENT ............................................................................................................ 83 LIST OF OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS ...................................................................................... 91 Growth and Rural Character ..................................................................................................... 91 Housing and Development ........................................................................................................ 95 Facilities and Services............................................................................................................... 99 Biking Paths ............................................................................................................................ 102 Town Infrastructure ................................................................................................................ 105 Property Taxes ........................................................................................................................ 107 Agriculture .............................................................................................................................. 109 Town Government .................................................................................................................. 110 Survey ..................................................................................................................................... 111 Recreation and Natural Areas ................................................................................................. 112 Businesses ............................................................................................................................... 114 Sustainability........................................................................................................................... 114 Communication from the Town .............................................................................................. 115 Miscellaneous ......................................................................................................................... 115  1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Town of Oregon Vision 2040 survey aimed to gauge residents’ opinions on the future direction of the Town. The SRC distributed the survey in mail and online formats. The printed mail survey was sent to 108 landowners with 35 or more acres. The online survey was distributed to 1,152 households through a postcard with a QR code and URL. The SRC collected a total of 489 responses, including 48 responses from the mail survey and 431 responses from the online survey, for an overall 39% response rate. The sample size received exceeded the minimum sample size needed (329 responses) and led to a 3.9% margin of error, much smaller than the statistical standard of 5% margin of error. Therefore, the estimates presented in this report have greater accuracy than estimates that follow the statistical standard. Key findings from the survey are as follows: Community and Quality of Life x About 91% of residents are satisfied with the quality of life in Town of Oregon, including 40% who are “very satisfied” and 51% who are “satisfied.” Only 2% are dissatisfied. x The top three reasons for why residents chose to live in the Town of Oregon are small-town atmosphere and the rural lifestyle of the area, natural features and open space, and the quality of the school system. The least popular reasons are property taxes, cost of housing, and recreational opportunities. x In terms of factors that impact the quality of life, there is widespread agreement among residents that the Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family, the overall character of the Town should continue to be much like it is today, and that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town. The majority of residents disagree that the Town should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots, or more homes and people. Facilities and Services x The facilities and services with the highest “good” and “excellent” ratings by a large majority of residents include fire protection and EMS/ambulance, Town government, garbage and recycling, parks and recreation, street and road plowing and treatment, and police. The lowest ranked facilities and services include cell service, street and road maintenance, and airstrips. x The facilities and services that residents consider to be most important are fire protection and EMS/ambulance, cell service, and street and road plowing/treatment and maintenance. Among these, residents are highly satisfied with fire protection and EMS/ambulance, but many are dissatisfied with cell service and street and road maintenance. x Almost two-thirds of the residents prefer the bi-weekly (current) recycling pickup service and only about one-in-five residents would like a more frequent weekly service.  2 Natural and Cultural Resources x When asked about which natural and cultural resources are most important for the Town to preserve, by a wide margin residents ranked groundwater quality at the top. Other highly ranked resources include wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors, air quality, lakes, rivers, and streams, and open space. Hunting and fishing areas, historic and cultural sites, and cemetery space were ranked at the bottom. x Over three-quarters of residents feel that it is important for the Town of Oregon to seek agreements with the City of Fitchburg, Village of Brooklyn, and the Village of Oregon on future land use and growth. x Regarding land use and planning activities, the top four activities that residents placed the highest importance on all relate to either discouraging new development or alleviating the potential impacts of new development on local infrastructure and resident quality of life. x A large majority of residents agree that marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. More residents agree than disagree that conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town, and that converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. x Residents have a high level of concern about potential annexation of Town property by the Village of Oregon. Over two-thirds of residents are more than somewhat concerned about the annexation. Two-thirds feel that the Town should consider mechanisms to avoid annexation, but half of all residents would support only those mechanisms that do not lead to higher property taxes for Town residents. x Over half of the residents who responded own 2 acres or less of land, including 28% who own less than an acre and 26% who own between 1 and 2 acres. Only 3% own 100 acres or more. x One-quarter of the residents own farmland in the Town. Less than half of these residents farm themselves, while the rest contract out the farming. Future Vision for the Town x About 62% of the residents stated with certainty that they expect to be living in the Town of Oregon by 2040. x When envisioning the Town in the year 2040, both statements that received the highest support relate to natural and agricultural resources. An overwhelming majority of residents project that the natural areas will be preserved and enhanced, and agricultural lands will be used for a variety of farming purposes. The prospects of more development or higher-density housing (e.g. greater tourism-related businesses and multi-generational housing) received much less support, with one-quarter or more of the residents expressing opposition to them. x Statements about the future of Town facilities and services were somewhat polarizing, as a tangible proportion of residents agreed and disagreed with each statement. More residents agree than disagree that the Town should reduce use of salt on roads based on protocols recommended by the Wisconsin Saltwise program, expand and improve yard waste  3 composting facilities, and purchase land to build a new Town Hall and Garage to be proactive about a potential annexation of land that current facilities are on. However, more residents disagreed than agreed that the Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. x Community initiatives that received the highest support all relate to better communication or education, and agriculture. Residents feel that the Town should arrange periodic informational sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics, develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between the Town government and residents, honor its farming history and the farm families actively farming, and celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. x The top three community strengths that residents feel should be preserved include natural areas, farmland, and low population density. The top three aspects of the community that residents feel that Town should address include farmers actively farming, population density, and businesses located in the Town. Housing x Virtually all respondents own a single-family home and reside in the Town of Oregon. Only 15% own a farm residence, and 3% own property in but do not live in Town. x Over half of the residents feel that residential growth should occur near the Village of Oregon boundaries. About one-third feel that it should be in new subdivisions adjacent to current subdivisions. One quarter said that no residential growth should occur in the Town of Oregon. x Two-thirds of the residents prefer the cluster design of housing (smaller lots with preserved open spaces) while one-third prefer the traditional design (larger lots with no open space). x Most residents are opposed to new housing development in the Town of Oregon. A large majority of residents feel that housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town, and that the Town should restrict new housing development. Transportation x Residents generally agree that more bike paths should be created in the Town, albeit with different levels of agreement in terms of how the paths are built. There is strongest support for building designated bike paths to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail, followed by creating bike lanes when streets are being repaved and by creating bike lanes on existing streets with signage and striping. x Only small proportions of residents oppose increasing taxes for the maintenance or improvement of existing roadways. There is substantially more opposition to increasing taxes for biking infrastructure. One-third or more residents oppose using tax increases to expand the bike trail network or developing new bike lanes.  4 Open-Ended Feedback A total of 345 text-entry comments were received in response to an open-ended question that asked residents to share additional feedback on the Vision 2040 project. The following themes emerged from these comments: x About 15% of the comments emphasized the need for preserving the Town’s rural character and avoiding rapid growth. These residents noted that the Town’s strengths are open space, farmland, and low population density, and that dense housing and commercial expansion should be avoided. x Another 15% of comments voiced concerns about encroaching residential and commercial development. While most residents feel that growth is inevitable and that more housing is needed, they want to ensure that it does not occur at the expense of the small-town feel and rural character of the Town. x Thirteen percent of comments related to Town facilities and services. A common theme was TORC, with residents complaining about the recent changes. Residents expressed support for expanding TORC hours and establishing a 24/7 drop-off facility. Residents also commented on road maintenance, snow removal, and winter services. x Nine percent of residents commented on biking paths, and a majority stated that improved biking infrastructure and connectivity with other areas is needed. x Eight percent of the comments included calls for better infrastructure, including roads, walking paths, equestrian and hiking trails, parks, and shelters. x Seven percent of residents expressed dissatisfaction with rapid increases in property taxes in recent years. These residents feel that the Town should avoid making costly investments and support increasing the tax base through modest development to reduce the tax burden on residents. x Five percent of residents emphasized the importance of preserving the Town’s agricultural identity by supporting farmers and agribusinesses. These residents feel that vibrant agriculture is essential to preserving the town’s rural character. x Five percent of residents commented on the Town government. These comments were split between appreciation for the work of the Town staff and complaints about excessive spending, misaligned priorities, and lack of communication.  5 SURVEY PURPOSE AND METHODS The goal of the Town of Oregon Vision 2040 survey was to gauge residents’ opinions on the future direction of the community. Along with Sharon Lezberg, Dane County Community Development Educator at UW-Madison Division of Extension, and the Town of Oregon Board and staff members, the SRC developed a survey instrument in two formats: mail (paper) and online. Below, we present the definitions of statistical terms that will aid in the subsequent discussion regarding the sampling strategy: 1. Population: the population is the universe of all subjects that are relevant for a survey. For our study, the population was all residents of the Town of Oregon. 2. Sample: A sample is a subset drawn from the population for surveying. A sample is used to make an inference about the population by using statistical analysis. 3. Margin of Error: The margin of error indicates the accuracy of a survey’s results. The smaller the margin of error, the greater the accuracy of the results. For example, a margin of error of 5% at a 95% confidence level means that there is a 95% probability that if the opinions of everyone in the population were measured, the result would fall within 5 percentage points of the survey result. 4. Statistical Significance: Statistical significance indicates the reliability of an estimate. If the differences between statistics are labeled as “statistically significant,” this indicates that there is a 95% probability that the differences are not the result of some random chance. Survey Distribution Two methods of distribution were used. The printed mail survey was distributed to the 108 landowners with 35 or more acres through postal mail. A QR code and a URL for an online version of the survey were also included on the cover letter. A postcard reminder was sent to non- respondents 3 weeks after the initial mailing, and a second copy of the survey was sent to non- respondents about 2 weeks after the postcard reminder. A total of 48 responses were received from these residents, for a response rate of about 47%. The online survey was distributed to 1,152 households through printed postcard invitations which included a QR code and a URL and were sent through postal mail. A reminder postcard was sent to non-respondents about 4 weeks after the initial postcard mailing. Responses that were less than 50% complete were dropped from the analysis. The SRC received 431 complete or near-complete responses from the online survey, for a response rate of about 37%. Overall Sample Size and Response Rates The survey was live for about 8 weeks, with data collection concluding on May 5. The SRC collected an overall sample of 489 responses, including 48 responses from the mail survey and 431 responses from the online survey, for an overall 39% response rate. Given an estimated 2,284 residents of age 18 or older (US Census Bureau, 2023), a sample size of 329 responses was needed for statistical validity (5% margin of error and 95% confidence interval). The actual sample size (489 responses) far exceeded the minimum sample size needed (329 responses), leading to estimates with a 3.9% margin of error. Therefore, the estimates presented in this report have a much higher level of accuracy than the statistical standard of 5% margin of error would provide.  6 Demographic Analysis In addition to summarizing the response to each survey question, the SRC conducted statistical analysis to assess the statistical significance of differences between residents in discrete demographic groups. We analyzed the following demographic groups: x Female: Female residents, compared to residents of other genders. About 41% of residents in the sample selected their gender as “woman.” x Seniors: Residents aged 65 years or older. We compared these residents to residents of age 64 years or younger. Senior residents are less likely to be in the workforce, are often more engaged in their community, and have different priorities regarding housing, development, recreation, land use, etc. than their counterparts. About 43% of residents in the sample are senior citizens. x Households with Children: We compared residents who live with children with those without children in the household. Residents with children tend to have larger household budgets, a shared perspective on the school system, and be longer term residents of their locale. Those without children may include residents who do not have any children, or residents with children who do not live in the same household (e.g. adult children who have moved out). x Household Income Under $150k: Residents who have a household income of less than $150,000. We compared these residents to residents with higher household incomes ($150k+). For reference, the median household income in the Town of Oregon is $143,056 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2023). In other words, residents with household incomes under $150,000 represent roughly 50% of the Town population. x Farmland Owners: Residents who own farmland, including those who farm the land themselves and those who contract the farming to others. Given the Town of Oregon’s robust agricultural history, these residents are likely to have shared opinions on agriculture, land use, natural resources, etc. About 25% of residents in the sample are owners of agricultural land. Survey Report The survey report is organized in the following way: 1. Responses to each survey question are summarized using a figure or a table. 2. A categorization of open-ended (text-entry) comments is presented, including a summary of common themes that emerged from the comments. The full list of open-ended comments is given at the end of the report. 3. A demographic snapshot of the survey sample compared with estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau is provided, including a discussion of how well the survey sample represents the population of the Town. 4. Results of statistical analysis comparing different demographic groups are described, with accompanying tables showing statistically significant differences in bold font and highlighted.  7 SURVEY RESULTS Community and Quality of Life Overall Quality of Life Residents were asked about their level of satisfaction with the quality of life in the Town of Oregon. Figure 1 summarizes the results. Residents are highly satisfied with their quality of life in the Town of Oregon. About 91% of the residents expressed satisfaction with the quality of life, with 40% indicating that they are “very satisfied” and 51% indicating that they are “satisfied.” Only 2% indicated that they are at all dissatisfied. Why Residents Choose to Live in the Town of Oregon Residents were asked to select the three most important reasons, in no particular order, for why they chose to live in the Town of Oregon. Figure 2 shows the results. The most popular reason for living in the Town was the small-town atmosphere and the rural lifestyle of the area, selected by 44% of residents. The second most popular reason was natural features and open space (41%). Around one-third of the residents selected the quality of the school system (32%) and one-quarter selected proximity to the urban center (25%). These results align with the top three reasons selected by the residents of other rural and suburban communities in Wisconsin for which the SRC has conducted similar surveys. The least popular reasons for choosing to live in the Town were selected by about one-in-ten or fewer residents. They include property taxes (11%), cost of housing (7%), and recreational opportunities (4%). Agriculture, while a recurring theme in the survey results, was selected by only 15% of residents. 40% 51% 7% 1% 1% Very Satisfied Satisfied Neither Satisfied Nor Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Very Dissatisfied Figure 1. Overall Quality of Life in Town of Oregon  8 Factors That Impact Quality of Life The survey asked residents about their level of agreement with six statements regarding the quality of life in the Town of Oregon. Figure 3 on the next page summarizes the results. Residents were asked to rank each statement on a scale of “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree.” The ranking of each statement was based on weighted scores. For each statement, the “strongly agree” response was assigned a score of 3, the “agree” response a score of 2, “neither agree nor disagree” a score of 1, “disagree” a score of -1, and “strongly disagree" a score of -2. The scores were then multiplied by the number of residents that selected that response. For example, for the statement “Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon”: x 114 residents selected “strongly agree” for a weighted score of 342 (114 × 3) x 216 residents selected “agree” for a weighted score of 432 (216 × 2) x 84 residents selected “neither agree nor disagree” for a weighted score of 84 (84 × 1) x 25 residents selected “disagree” for a weighted score of -25 (25 × -1) x 4 residents selected “strongly disagree” for a weighted score of -8 (4 × -2) 44% 41% 32% 25% 22% 18% 16% 15% 15% 15% 15% 13% 11% 7% 4% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Natural features and open space Quality of the school system Proximity to urban center Quality of the local natural environment Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Near family and friends Near job or employment opportunity Quality of neighborhoods Low crime rate Agriculture Born and raised here Property taxes Cost of housing Recreational opportunities Figure 2. Reasons for Choosing to Live in the Town of Oregon  9 The total score was 829 (342 + 432 + 84 – 25 – 8), which was the third highest score among all the statements listed in Figure 3. This approach is replicated throughout the report in all the opinion-based ranking questions using the five-point scale described above. Virtually all residents agree that the Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. About 93% of residents selected “agree” (45%) or “strongly agree” (48%) for this statement. There was also widespread agreement with the second- and third-highest ranked statements in Figure 3. Almost three-quarters of residents agreed (“agree” or “strongly agree”) that the overall character of the Town should continue to be much like it is today (74%) and that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon (74%). Statements that suggest that the Town of Oregon should experience growth that results in greater development or more people received substantial opposition from the residents, and more residents disagreed than agreed with each of these statements. About half or more residents disagreed (“disagree” or “strongly disagree”) that the Town should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots (50%) or more homes and people (55%). Less than one-third of the residents agreed with each statement. These results indicate that residents would like to preserve their current quality of life in the Town and would like to avoid growth that results in more development (commercial or housing) or a larger population. A similar sentiment has been echoed by residents in other parts of the report. 26% 25% 7% 6% 8% 24% 30% 7% 17% 19% 41% 23% 24% 45% 41% 49% 36% 20% 16% 48% 33% 26% 14% 7% 5% The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Figure 3. Factors That Impact Quality of Life in the Town of Oregon Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  10 Facilities and Services Quality of Town Facilities and Services The survey asked residents to rate the quality of the facilities and services that are available to the Town of Oregon residents. Figure 4 summarizes the results. The ranking is based on the same scheme used in Figure 3 and described in the previous section. Residents who selected “don’t know/no opinion” were excluded from the analysis. The highest ranked services, rated as “good” or “excellent” by over three-quarters of residents include fire protection and EMS/ambulance (92%), Town government (91%), garbage/recycling (86%), parks and recreation (86%), street and road plowing and treatment (79%), and police (81%). Less than 5% of residents selected “poor” for any of these facilities/services. The rest of the facilities and services in Figure 4 were rated as “good” or “excellent” by less than two-thirds of residents and over 10% rated each as “poor.” The lowest ranked facilities and services include cell service, street and road maintenance, and airstrips. 2% 4% 3% 4% 3% 13% 17% 12% 12% 16% 8% 8% 10% 11% 17% 16% 24% 20% 28% 30% 20% 61% 54% 51% 60% 54% 63% 48% 42% 46% 49% 53% 31% 36% 35% 26% 25% 18% 15% 21% 13% 9% 11% Fire protection & EMS/ambulance services Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, permits, etc. Garbage and recycling service Parks and recreation Street & road plowing and treatment Police and law enforcement services Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) High speed internet and broadband service Cell service Street & road maintenance and repair Airstrips Figure 4. Quality of Town Facilities and Services Poor Fair Good Excellent  11 Importance of Town Facilities and Services Residents were asked to select the level of importance of the Town’s facilities and services on a four-point scale from “very important” to “not at all important.” Figure 5 summarizes the results. The ranking scheme used in Figure 5 is the same as Figures 3 and 4. The highest ranked category is fire protection and EMS/ambulance services, rated as “important” or “very important” by 96% of residents. Encouragingly, this service is also ranked at the top in terms of the quality of services as shown in Figure 4. However, for several other facilities and services, there are large discrepancies in the importance residents place on them and their quality according to residents. For example, 95% of residents feel that cell service is “important” or “very important”, while only 59% feel that cell service in the Town is “good” or excellent. Other such facilities and services include street and road plowing and treatment (96% feel it is important, only 79% feel it is at least “good”), street and road maintenance and repair (95% vs. 58%), and high speed/broadband internet (90% vs. 63%). These are all areas in which residents feel that the Town of Oregon should prioritize making improvements. 7% 9% 10% 4% 4% 3% 4% 9% 8% 12% 14% 23% 24% 23% 25% 30% 30% 27% 29% 40% 36% 33% 36% 73% 71% 67% 65% 63% 61% 46% 43% 35% 29% Fire protection & EMS / Ambulance Services Cell service Street & road plowing and treatment Street & road maintenance and repair High speed internet / Broadband service Police and law enforcement services Town government services (Clerk's office, voting, permits, etc.) Garbage and recycling pick up Parks and recreation Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Figure 5. Importance of Town of Oregon Services Not At All Important Somewhat Important Important Very Important  12 Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup Service Residents were asked to indicate whether they prefer the recycling pickup to be bi-weekly (current frequency) or weekly (more frequent), or if they do not have a preference for the frequency of garbage pickup. The question informed residents that the current garbage pickup is weekly, while recycling pickup is bi-weekly. Figure 6 shows the results. Almost two-thirds of the residents indicated that they prefer the current bi-weekly schedule for recycling pickup. Among the remaining 34% of residents, 21% prefer more frequent recycling pickup, while 13% have no preference. Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) 21% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) 66% No Preference 13% Figure 6. Frequency of Recycling Pickup Service  13 Natural and Cultural Resources Importance of Preserving Natural and Cultural Resources Residents were asked to select the level of importance of preserving natural and cultural resources on a four-point scale from “very important” to “not at all important.” Figure 7 on the next page summarizes the results. The ranking scheme used in Figure 7 is the same as Figures 3 and 4 and is based on a system of weighted scores. By a wide margin, residents place the greatest importance on preserving groundwater quality. Almost all (98%) residents indicated that it is important to preserve groundwater quality, with 86% rating it as “very important.” No resident selected “not at all important.” About nine-in-ten or more residents rated the next four highest ranked resources as “important” or “very important.” These include wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors (91%), air quality (90%), lakes, rivers, and streams (90%), and open space (91%). Only a handful (3% or fewer) of residents selected “not at all important” for each of these resources. Albeit less emphatically, residents consider it important (“important” or “very important”) to preserve an environmentally sustainable community that meets current needs without compromising the needs of future generations (84%), wetlands (85%), reduced stormwater runoff and flooding (86%), and good farmland (82%). Again, only 4% or fewer residents selected “not at all important” to each of these resources. Resources that residents place the least importance on include hunting and fishing areas, historical and cultural sites, and cemetery space. Each was rated as “important” or “very important” by about half or fewer residents. Greater than 10% of residents selected “not at all important” for hunting and fishing areas (17%) and historical and cultural sites (12%). A large proportion (42%) of residents indicated that preserving cemetery space is “not at all important.” Not surprisingly, the natural and cultural resources that received the greatest support from residents include those that a large proportion of residents are either directly impacted by or are exposed to on a frequent basis. Examples include groundwater quality, air quality, and open space. Conversely, resources that smaller proportions of residents are impacted by received much less support. For example, only a subset of the wider population visits hunting and fishing areas, historical and cultural sites, and cemeteries frequently. One exception is good farmland, rated as important by about 82% of the residents. As shown in Figure 14, only about 25% of the residents own agricultural land in the Town. Yet, a wide majority of residents feel that preserving farming is important for the Town of Oregon.  14 2% 3% 2% 2% 4% 3% 2% 1% 17% 12% 42% 2% 6% 7% 8% 6% 12% 12% 12% 17% 29% 33% 35% 12% 27% 26% 31% 33% 28% 33% 41% 36% 34% 42% 18% 86% 64% 64% 59% 58% 56% 52% 45% 46% 20% 14% 5% Groundwater quality Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Air quality Lakes, rivers, and streams Open space An environmentally sustainable community that meets current needs without compromising the needs of future generations Wetlands Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Good farmland Hunting and fishing areas Historic and cultural sites Cemetery space Figure 7. Importance of Preserving Natural and Historical Resources Not At All Important Somewhat Important Important Very Important  15 Land Use and Growth Importance of Agreements with Neighboring Communities Residents were asked how important it is for the Town of Oregon to seek agreements with the City of Fitchburg, Village of Brooklyn, and the Village of Oregon on future land use and growth. Figure 8 summarizes the results. About three-quarters (76%) of residents feel that it is important to seek such agreements, with 43% indicating that it is “very important” and 33% indicating that it is “important.” Only 8% selected “not at all important.” In other words, there seems to be strong support among residents for the Town to seek agreements with neighboring communities. Land Use and Planning Activities Residents were asked to indicate the importance of a series of land use and planning activities on a four-point scale ranging from “very important” to “not at all important.” Figure 9 summarizes the results. There is widespread support among residents for the five highest ranked activities in Figure 8, as over eight-in-ten residents rated each of these activities as “important” or “very important”, and well over half indicated that each activity is “very important.” Notably, the top four activities all relate to either discouraging new development or alleviating the potential impacts of new development on local infrastructure and resident quality of life. Addressing the effects of encroaching development on the Town of Oregon seem to be a top priority for residents. Consistent with these results, a much smaller proportion of residents feels that decisions regarding development should be left to the landowners or that new commercial enterprises should be encouraged to locate in the Town. 43% 33% 16% 8% Very Important Important Somewhat Important Not At All Important Figure 8. Importance of Agreements with Neighboring Communities  16 Town of Oregon’s Agricultural and Rural Character Residents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with a series of statements regarding the Town’s agricultural and rural character. Those who selected “not applicable” to each statement were excluded from the analysis. Figure 10 on the next page shows the results. Over three-quarters (78%) of residents agree that marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. Hardly any (2%) residents selected “disagree” or “strongly disagree” to this statement. In addition, large proportions of residents “agree” or “strongly agree” that quarry operations (45%) and solar farming (43%) are consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. More residents disagree than agree with the two bottom ranked statements. Over one-third (34%) of residents disagree (“disagree” or “strongly disagree”) that conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Less than one-in- five (19%) agreed with this statement. Moreover, almost half (48%) disagreed that converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character, and only about one-quarter (27%) agreed with this statement. 2% 2% 2% 3% 3% 9% 22% 8% 8% 8% 10% 11% 35% 30% 24% 27% 30% 31% 28% 31% 30% 65% 63% 59% 57% 58% 26% 17% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Using or developing land is determined by landowners Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Figure 9. Importance of Land Use and Planning Activities Not At All Important Somewhat Important Important Very Important  17 Concerns about Annexation of Town Property Residents were asked to state whether they are concerned about the Village of Oregon annexing the Town of Oregon’s property and whether the Town of Oregon should consider mechanisms to avoid Town property being annexed. Figures 11 and 12 show the results. Residents who selected “no opinion” were excluded from the analysis. Figure 11 shows that residents have a high level of concern about potential annexation of Town property. Over two-thirds (69%) of residents are either “very concerned” (43%) or “concerned” (26%) about the annexation, with another 21% stating that they are “somewhat concerned.” Only 10% of residents selected “not at all concerned.” This sentiment has also been echoed by residents in other parts of the survey. However, concerns about annexation vary by demographic group. As discussed in the section Survey Results by Demographic Attributes, senior residents (ages 65+) are much more concerned about annexation than younger residents, and residents who live with children are much less concerned about it. 10% 15% 8% 22% 14% 15% 26% 26% 20% 32% 27% 47% 25% 47% 30% 28% 12% 18% 31% 14% 15% 6% 9% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Figure 10. Importance of Town's Agricultural and Rural Character Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  18 Town of Oregon property owners can apply for annexation of their property that is contiguous to either the City of Fitchburg, Village of Brooklyn, or Village of Oregon. Residents were asked to indicate whether the Town of Oregon should consider mechanisms to avoid annexation, and if yes, even if it comes at the cost of higher property taxes. Figure 12 shows the results. Exactly two-thirds (67%) of residents support the Town of Oregon considering mechanisms to avoid annexation; however, 46% of residents support the initiative only if it does not increase residents’ property taxes. The remaining 21% support the initiative even if it leads to higher property taxes. One-third (33%) of residents do not support finding ways to avoid annexation. Among this group, 22% feel that annexation is the property owners’ decision to make and another 11% feel that more housing and commercial development is needed but it should be located in the Village of Oregon. 43% 26% 21% 10% Very Concerned Concerned Somewhat Concerned Not at all Concerned Figure 11. Concerns That the Village of Oregon May Annex Town of Oregon Property 11% 21% 22% 46% No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Figure 12. Opinions on Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation  19 Ownership of Land in the Town of Oregon The survey asked residents to indicate whether they own any land in the Town of Oregon, the acreage of the land they own, and whether they own any farmland. Figure 13 shows that over half (54%) of the residents own 2 acres or less of land. About 28% own less than an acre and 26% own between 1 and 2 acres. Almost one-third (31%) own between 3 and 20 acres of land, and 12% own between 21 and 100 acres. Only 2 residents indicated that they do not own any land in the Town of Oregon, so the SRC excluded them from Figure 12. Figure 14 shows the proportion of residents who own agricultural land in the Town of Oregon and whether owners of farmland actively farm the land themselves or lease/rent the land for farming. One-quarter (25%) of the residents indicated that they own agricultural land. About 10% of the residents farm on the land they own, while 15% contract the land to others for farming. 28% 26% 15% 16% 12% 3% Less than 1 acre 1–2 acres 3–5 acres 6–20 acres 21-100 acres 100+ acres Figure 13. Land Ownership in Town of Oregon Do Not Own Farmland 75% Own and Farm 10% Own and Contract Out 15% Figure 14. Ownership of Agricultural Land in the Town of Oregon  20 Future Vision for the Town Plans for Continuing to Reside in the Town of Oregon Residents were asked to indicate their future as a resident of the Town. Figure 15 shows the results. About 62% of residents stated that they anticipate living in the Town over the next 15 years. In other words, well over one-third (38%) of residents either plan to move or are not sure if they will continue to live in the Town in the next 15 years. About 13% of residents stated that they plan to move elsewhere, 9% are considering a move but are still undecided, and 17% of residents selected “not sure.” Future Directions for the Community Residents were asked to consider what the Town of Oregon will look like in the year 2040 and indicate their level of agreement regarding the future state of the Town. Figure 16 on the next page summarizes the results. The two statements with the highest level of agreement from residents both relate to the Town’s natural and agricultural resources. Over eight-in-ten residents agreed (“agree” or “strongly agree”) that the Town’s natural areas will have been preserved and enhanced (88%) and that agricultural lands will have been used for a variety of farming purposes (82%). Only a few residents disagreed with either statement. Over two-thirds of residents agreed with statements that relate to improved quality of life for residents and the preservation of the small-town character. While a tangible proportion of residents disagreed with these statements, the proportion of residents who agreed far outweighed the proportion who disagreed. These statements relate to improved recreational opportunities (72% selected “agree” or “strongly agree”), fiber-to-premises broadband internet (71%), bike routes and paths connecting to neighboring communities (67%), availability of housing (65%), and the existence of small, local businesses that operate in the Town (66%). 9% 13% 17% 62% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Not sure. I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Figure 15. Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon  21 Statements that hinted at more development or higher-density housing received much less support from residents. About a quarter or more residents disagreed that there will be housing for first- time homebuyers (23% selected “disagree” or “strongly disagree”) or multi-generational housing will be available (25%). Similarly, over a quarter disagreed with the prospect of greater tourism and recreation-oriented businesses (26%) and larger agricultural businesses (34%) in the Town. 3% 5% 3% 8% 3% 4% 5% 7% 9% 10% 12% 10% 3% 3% 3% 6% 6% 9% 10% 11% 10% 16% 16% 16% 18% 24% 9% 14% 22% 19% 18% 15% 22% 19% 27% 32% 40% 39% 32% 45% 30% 45% 36% 28% 45% 27% 42% 41% 33% 32% 23% 26% 25% 15% 58% 37% 35% 43% 28% 40% 23% 25% 25% 13% 12% 9% 13% 6% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. The Town has increased in population. There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring… There is housing available for young families. There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. There is housing that allows aging in place. There is housing available for first-time buyers. There is multi-generational housing available. There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. There are senior apartments available. Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Figure 16. State of the Town in 2040 Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  22 Future of Town Facilities and Services Residents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with statements regarding the Town of Oregon services over the next 15 years. Figure 17 summarizes the results. Just under two-thirds (64%) of residents agreed that the Town should reduce use of salt on roads based on protocols recommended by the Wisconsin Saltwise program. However, almost one-in- five (18%) of residents also disagreed with this statement. About half (52%) of residents agreed that the Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. There is considerable polarization among residents regarding the last two statements in Figure 17. Almost half (47%) of residents agreed while about one-quarter (24%) disagreed with the statement regarding the annexation of land by the Village of Oregon that may require the Town to build a new Town Hall and Garage. On the other hand, almost half (49%) of the residents disagreed, while about one-quarter (24%) agreed that the Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. 4% 3% 9% 22% 14% 10% 15% 26% 18% 35% 29% 28% 36% 34% 30% 21% 28% 18% 17% 2% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Figure 17. Facilities and Services over the Next 15 Years Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  23 Future of Community Initiatives Figure 18 shows residents’ level of agreement with a series of statements regarding community initiatives and projects in the Town of Oregon over the next 15 years. The four highest ranked statements have agreement from over two-thirds of all residents. Only a handful of residents (6% or fewer) disagreed with each statement. It is noteworthy that all four statements relate to better communication/education for residents or agriculture. About three-quarters or more residents agreed that the Town should arrange periodic informational sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics (82%) and develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between the Town government and residents (74%). Over two-thirds of residents agreed that the Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming (69%) and celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents (69%). 11% 5% 15% 43% 3% 5% 3% 7% 8% 17% 19% 16% 22% 25% 25% 21% 39% 44% 15% 56% 51% 41% 43% 34% 36% 18% 11% 26% 22% 28% 26% 28% 11% 6% 13% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. The Town Center should include community gathering areas. The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Figure 18. Community Initiatives over the Next 15 Years Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  24 Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved Residents were asked to select, in no particular order, the three most important strengths of the community that should be preserved or built upon. No more than three selections were allowed. Figure 20 summarizes the results. By a wide margin, the most popular selection among residents was natural areas (71%). The next two most popular community strengths were selected by over half of all residents. About 56% of residents selected farmland and low population density each. Less than half of the residents selected any of the other community strengths among their top three. Local cemeteries (5%) received the lowest number of votes. Aspects of Community That the Town Should Address Residents were asked to select, in no particular order, the three most important aspects of the community that the Town of Oregon should address or support. No more than three selections were allowed. Figure 21 on the next page shows the results. Consistent with the results discussed in other parts of the report, residents expressed their support for farming in the community. Almost two-thirds (65%) of the residents indicated that the Town should support farmers who are actively farming, the most popular selection by a wide margin. The next popular aspect, population density, has also been one of the common themes throughout this report. About 46% of residents selected population density among their top three and only 15% voted for the Town supporting attractions to bring people to the Town. 5% 21% 32% 42% 56% 56% 71% Local cemeteries Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Park lands Schools Low population density Farmland Natural areas Figure 20. Most Important Strengths of the Town of Oregon  25 15% 28% 33% 39% 46% 65% Attractions to bring people here Lack of downtown area, commercial district Community gathering facilities Businesses located here Population density Farmers actively farming Figure 21. Most Important Aspects That the Town of Oregon Should Address  26 Housing Current Residential Status of Residents Residents were asked to indicate their current residential status, with the option to make multiple selections. As shown in Figure 22, a large majority (81%) of respondents stated that they own a single-family house that is a non-farm residence. About 15% of residents reside in a single-family house on a farm that they own. Only 3% of respondents (or 16 respondents) indicated that they own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon. There were virtually no renters in the survey sample. Only 1 respondent selected “rent home.” No respondent stated that they live with parents, family, or friends who are owners. Where Residential Growth Should Occur The survey asked residents about where they prefer residential development to occur in the Town. Residents were allowed to make multiple selections for this question. Figure 23 (on the next page) summarizes the results. The results indicate that over half (52%) of the residents want residential development to occur near the Village of Oregon boundaries. About a third (35%) of the residents indicated that they would like to see residential development in new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions. The third most popular response, selected by about one-quarter (26%) of residents, was that residential growth should not occur in the Town. Other responses were selected by less than one- in-five respondents. 0% 0.2% 3% 15% 81% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Rent home Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Own single-family house — farm residence Own single-family house — non-farm residence Figure 22. Residential Status of Respondents  27 Design of New Housing Development Residents were asked to indicate their preference between two designs for new housing development: a traditional design with larger individual lots and no open space, or an open space/cluster design with smaller individual lots and an open space that is permanently preserved. Both options would contain the same number of housing lots. Figure 24 shows that about two- thirds (67%) of residents prefer the cluster design of housing and one-third (33%) prefer the traditional design. 2% 9% 13% 16% 26% 33% 52% Clustered in farming areas No opinion Scattered along Town and County roads In new subdivisions Residential growth should not occur in the Town In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Near Village of Oregon boundaries Figure 23. Where Residential Growth Should Occur Traditional Design 33% Cluster Design 67% Figure 24. Preference for Design of New Housing  28 Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years The survey asked residents about their level of agreement with statements regarding residential growth in the Town over the next 15 years. Figure 25 summarizes the results. Results imply that most residents are squarely opposed to new housing development in the Town of Oregon, as evidenced by the two statements that received the highest level of agreement from residents. About two-thirds (67%) of residents agreed (“agree” or “strongly agree”) that housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town of Oregon. About 62% of residents also agreed that the Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. In the same vein, a greater proportion of residents disagreed than agreed that the Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue (42% disagreed vs. 32% agreed) and increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability (53% disagreed vs. 25% agreed). 6% 6% 14% 21% 26% 11% 13% 16% 21% 27% 16% 19% 25% 25% 22% 28% 30% 30% 25% 20% 38% 31% 15% 7% 5% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. The Town of Oregon should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Figure 25. Residential Growth over Next 15 Years Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  29 Transportation New Bicycle Routes Residents were asked about their level of agreement with statements concerning bicycle routes. Figure 26 shows the results. At least about half of the residents agreed, with more residents agreeing than disagreeing, with all three statements. Residents generally agree that more bike paths should be created in the Town, albeit with different levels of agreement in terms of how the paths are built. There is strongest support for building designated bike paths to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail, with over two-thirds of residents (68%) expressing support for this initiative. Similarly, there is greater support for creating bike lanes when streets are being repaved than creating bike lanes on existing streets with signage and striping. Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure Residents were asked if they would support a tax increase for the development or maintenance of transportation infrastructure. Figure 27 shows the results. Almost half or more expressed support for increasing taxes for the maintenance of existing roadways (55%) and improving existing roadways (49%). Less than one-in-five opposed each initiative. There was less support and more opposition to tax increases for bike-related infrastructure. Just under half (46%) of residents support increasing taxes to expand the bike trail network while one- third (33%) oppose it. In addition, over one-third (36%) support increasing taxes to develop new bike lanes while 40% oppose it. Notably, the opposition to each bike-related tax increase is expressed by well under half of the residents. 8% 9% 12% 7% 16% 17% 16% 15% 22% 29% 27% 25% 39% 33% 23% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Figure 26. Opinions on Bicycle Routes Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree  30 15% 16% 33% 40% 31% 35% 21% 24% 55% 49% 46% 36% Maintenance of existing roadways Improving existing roadways Expanding the bike trail network Developing bike lanes Figure 27. Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure Oppose Neutral Support  31 OPEN-ENDED FEEDBACK In an optional open-ended question with a text-entry response, residents were invited to provide additional feedback to the Town regarding the Vision 2040 project. Residents were instructed to consider what the Town would look like in 2040 in their responses. A total of 345 comments were received. The SRC categorized these comments based on common themes. The table below shows themes on which 5% or more residents commented on and is followed by a summary of each theme. A comprehensive list of comments is given in a separate section at the end of the report. Themes Frequency Perc. (%) Growth and Rural Character 53 15% Housing and Development 51 15% Facilities and Services 44 13% Biking Paths 31 9% Town Infrastructure 28 8% Property Taxes 23 7% Agriculture 17 5% Town Government 16 5% Growth and Rural Character (15%) Residents strongly value the Town’s rural character, citing open space, farmland, large lots, and low population density as key to the community’s appeal. Many expressed concerns about high- density housing, large subdivisions, and commercial development, which they believe would erode the Town’s identity and quality of life. There is broad support for maintaining the Town’s rural nature through careful planning, limited growth, and the preservation of agricultural and natural areas. Most prefer small subdivisions with large lots over dense housing or commercial expansion. Similarly, residents feel that growth should be directed primarily to the Village of Oregon, with the Town focusing on open space, connectivity, and maintaining its quiet, community-oriented atmosphere. Many stress the importance of balancing future growth with environmental protection, infrastructure improvements, and maintaining a high quality of life. Overall, residents feel that maintaining the Town’s rural identity is essential to its future. Housing and Development (15%) About 5% of residents commented specifically on housing, and 9% provided more general comments on development (including residential development). While many residents voiced concerns about rapid growth, high-density subdivisions, and environmental impacts, others emphasized the need for thoughtful expansion to accommodate future generations. There is significant support for low-density, eco-conscious development that includes larger residential lots, preservation of farmland, and integration with green space, bike paths, and existing infrastructure. Several residents advocated for allowing secondary homes on large parcels to support multi-generational living and aging in place. Affordable housing, senior living options, and assisted living facilities were identified as important future needs, alongside strategic zoning for commercial areas. Residents called for growth that avoids sprawl and maintains the rural character that defines the Town.  32 Facilities and Services (13%) Residents expressed a strong desire for improvements to core municipal services, particularly enhanced access to high-speed internet and reliable cell service. Many respondents voiced concerns about the transition from the TORC drop-off site to curbside garbage and recycling collection, citing increased costs, inflexibility, and negative environmental impacts, such as roadside litter. There is broad support for expanding TORC hours, including the establishment of a 24/7-yard waste drop-off facility, as well as offering greater flexibility in waste and recycling service options. Some residents also advocated for a pay-per-use waste system that incentivizes sustainability, rather than a flat-fee model. Road maintenance, snow removal, and the need for timely and efficient winter services were recurring themes. Biking Paths (9%) There is a high level of interest in improving biking infrastructure that emphasizes both safety and connectivity. Many supported the creation of dedicated bike paths—separated from traffic—that connect neighborhoods, parks, and neighboring communities such as Fitchburg, Madison, and the Village of Oregon. Specific areas like Sun Valley Parkway and Sayles Trail were repeatedly cited as dangerous for cyclists due to narrow shoulders, hills, and high-speed traffic. While some residents voiced skepticism about the utility and cost of bike lanes on rural roads, the majority favored expanded trails and paved shoulders. Residents also advocated for investments in infrastructure for non-car transport, and the integration of green spaces to support safer and more environmentally friendly transportation options. Town Infrastructure (8%) These residents desire improved infrastructure focused on road maintenance, safety, and connectivity. Numerous roads, especially Sun Valley Parkway, Hillcrest Lane, and Purcell Road, were cited as being in poor condition, with concerns about dangerous curves, heavy truck traffic, and high speed limits posing safety risks to drivers, bikers, and pedestrians. Many called for better enforcement of speed limits and improvements to intersections and signage to enhance pedestrian and cyclist safety. Several respondents supported expanding public access infrastructure, including equestrian and hiking trails, natural path networks, and small-scale shelters in parks. There was also support for public transit connections to the Village of Oregon and Madison. While opinions varied, a significant number supported basic infrastructure investments such as safer walking routes, better parking at recreational areas, and accessible trailheads, with an emphasis on maintaining the rural and natural identity of the Town. There was limited support for costly infrastructure additions like UTV access, solar or wind farms, or new park developments. Property Taxes (7%) Many residents are concerned about rapidly rising property taxes, which they say have nearly doubled in recent years and are making it increasingly difficult for families, especially seniors and those on fixed incomes, to afford to stay in their homes. There is strong sentiment that the Town must take action to reduce the tax burden, either by managing spending more effectively, attracting smart growth that broadens the tax base, or reassessing budget priorities like unnecessary services. Some suggest that larger lots or modest development could help offset tax increases without compromising the Town’s rural character. Overall, maintaining affordability is seen as key to the Town’s livability and appeal.  33 Agriculture (5%) Residents commented on the importance of preserving farmland and agricultural activities. Residents support protecting productive agricultural land from residential development and favor encouraging small-scale, sustainable farming, including agribusiness and local farmers markets. Some residents suggested allowing housing only on non-tillable or marginal land, while strictly limiting or banning rezoning of farmland for subdivisions. There is also support for development in less agriculturally viable areas to minimize land use conflicts. Some concerns were raised about farming practices, including chemical applications, and these residents advocated for the enforcement of environmental protections. Town Government (5%) Many residents expressed gratitude for the work of the Town Board, clerk, and public works staff, and feel their voices are heard. However, others criticized perceived financial mismanagement, wasteful spending, and decisions that seem out of step with rural values. These residents want the Town to be more fiscally conservative, especially regarding projects like bike lanes or sports facilities. Concerns were raised about lack of adherence to the existing Land Use Plan. Residents also called for maintaining the Town’s rural identity in decision-making and land use policy, greater transparency, more public involvement, and flexibility in land parcel regulations. Some residents stated that they hope the Vision process will lead to a plan that reflects the community’s long-term goals and is revisited regularly.  34 DEMOGRAPHIC ATTRIBUTES Table 1 shows the demographic attributes of the survey sample juxtaposed with the 2023 estimates for the Town of Oregon from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) where possible. The survey asked residents to provide their gender, age, employment status, number of adults and children in the household, annual household income, and number of years in the Town of Oregon. Some notable observations from Table 1 include, x The gender distribution in the sample was remarkably similar to the ACS estimates for the Town of Oregon. Note that the U.S. Census does not include the “non-binary” and “prefer to self-describe” categories. When excluding the proportion of respondents who selected “prefer not to say” or “prefer to self-describe”, about 53% of the survey sample identified as “man” and 47% identified as “woman.” x The survey sample overrepresents seniors (age 65+) and underrepresents the younger population. About 43% of residents in the sample selected their age as 65 or older while, according to the ACS, only 23% of the Town of Oregon residents are in that category. Similarly, only 16% of the residents in the survey sample are younger than 45 years old compared to 28% of residents in the ACS. This outcome is consistent with other such surveys in communities like the Town of Oregon conducted by the SRC, and this discrepancy is partly due to the greater tendency of older populations, particularly those 65 and over, to respond to community surveys. x About 51% of the residents in the sample indicated that they were employed (full-time, part- time, or self-employed). This estimate is somewhat lower than the ACS estimates which show that 66% of the area’s population is employed. About 44% of the residents in the sample selected “retired”, corresponding to the 43% of residents in the sample who are 65 or older. In other words, similar to the age distribution, the survey sample overrepresents the retired population of the Town of Oregon. x About 60% of residents in the sample live in a household with two adults (including the respondent), while 15% live in a single adult household. One-quarter (25%) of the residents live in a household with more than two adults, likely including adult children or the elderly. x Over three-quarters (78%) of residents do not have any children in the household. Note that this could represent residents who are living alone, are married/cohabiting without children, or have adult children who live separately. The survey sample somewhat overrepresents this population as, according to the ACS, 72% of the population in the region do not have children in the household. x About 59% of the residents have annual household incomes of under $150,000. This threshold is roughly equivalent to the median household income of $143,056 in the Town of Oregon according to the ACS. Compared to the ACS, the survey sample somewhat overrepresents the households with incomes under $150,000, as about 51% of the residents in the ACS reported having a household income in that category. This result is not unexpected because residents  35 with less than a $150,000 household income likely include a disproportionate number of senior or retired residents who are no longer in the workforce. As discussed above, these residents generally have a higher response rate relative to other age groups. x Most residents have been long-time residents of the Town. Well over half (54%) have lived in the Town for over 20 years, and another 17% for more than 10 years. About 13% of the residents can be considered “new residents” as they have lived in the Town for 5 years or less. Three percent indicated that they own property but do not reside in the Town.  36 Table 1. Demographic Attributes of Town of Oregon Survey Respondents Gender Count Man Woman Non- Binary Prefer not to say Prefer to self-describe Survey Sample 477 47% 41% 0% 11% 1% ACS (2023) 2,284 51% 49% - - - Age Count 18 – 24 25 – 34 35 – 44 45 – 54 55 – 64 65-74 75+ Survey Sample 473 0% 3% 13% 15% 27% 30% 13% ACS (2023) 2,284 6% 6% 16% 22% 27% 17% 6% Employment Status Count Employed Full- Time Employed Part-Time Self- Employed Unemployed Not Employed, or Looking Retired Prefer Not to Disclose Survey Sample 478 40% 3% 8% 0% 1% 44% 3% ACS (2023) 2,407 -66%- 1% -33%- - Adults in Household Count 1 2 3 4 5+ Survey Sample 470 15% 60% 16% 7% 1.5% Children in Household Count 0 1 2 3 4 5+ Survey Sample 364 78% 15% 6% 1% 0 1% ACS (2023) 1,088 72% -28%- Household Income Count Under $25K $25K - $49.9K $50K - $74.9K $75K - $99.9K $100K- $149.9K $150K+ Survey Sample 434 1% 7% 10% 14% 28% 41% ACS (2023) 1,088 2% 6% 14% 10% 19% 49% Years Lived in Town of Oregon Count Own Property, Do not Live in Town < 1 year 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years 20+ years Survey Sample 481 3% 1% 12% 14% 17% 54% 1. Survey categories have been aligned to conform to U.S. Census classifications.  37 SURVEY RESULTS BY RESPONDENT ATTRIBUTES In this section, we compare the responses of residents from different demographic groups. The demographics we considered include gender, age, presence of children in the household, household income, and farmland ownership status. Tables 2 through 6 present the differences in responses to each survey question. Differences that are statistically significant are denoted in bold font and shaded blue. Each table is preceded by a short summary of the results. Female Residents vs. Residents of Other Genders We compared the survey responses of residents who identified their gender as “woman” with residents who selected another gender, including “male”, “non-binary”, and those who self- described a gender. About 41% of residents in the sample identified their gender as “woman.” Tables 2.1-2.7 on the next few pages show the results. Community and Quality of Life x Among the top three reasons for choosing to live in the Town of Oregon, female residents are 10% less likely to select “near job or employment opportunity” and 8% more likely to select “proximity to urban center” than residents of other genders. x Compared to residents of other genders, female residents are less likely to agree that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town (-12%), preserving and celebrating the community’s history is important to their quality of life (-10%), the overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today (-8%), and that the Town should grow to accommodate more homes and people (-11%). Facilities and Services x Female residents are more likely to consider street/road maintenance and repair (4%), street/road plowing and treatment (3%), and parks and recreation (10%) to be important Town services than residents of other genders. x Female residents have a higher preference for a more frequent weekly pickup service (8%) than the current recycling pickup service (-12%) than residents of other genders. Natural and Cultural Resources x Female residents place higher importance on preserving natural and cultural resources than residents of other genders in several instances. These include air quality (11%), environmental sustainability (7%), good farmland (8%), lakes, rivers, and streams (7%), and open space (8%). Agriculture, Land Use, and Growth x Female residents are less likely to agree that quarry operations (-10%) and converting farmland to non-farm uses (-16%) is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character.  38 Future Vision for the Town of Oregon x Female residents are less likely to indicate that they are considering a move elsewhere but are still undecided (-7%) and agree that in 2040, the Town’s agricultural lands would be used for a variety of farming enterprises (-7%). x Female residents are 16% more likely to agree that the Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change than residents of other genders. Housing x Female residents are 11% more likely to agree that the Town should allow building a second home on a property.  39 Table 2.1. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference COMMUNITY and QUALITY OF LIFE Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Life Satisfied/V. Satisfied 90% 93% -3% Reasons for Choosing to Live in Town: Agriculture Selected 13% 16% -2% Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Selected 16% 20% -5% Born and raised here Selected 13% 13% 0% Cost of housing Selected 7% 8% -2% Low crime rate Selected 15% 15% 0% Natural features and open space Selected 44% 38% 7% Near family and friends Selected 17% 15% 2% Near job or employment opportunity Selected 11% 21% -11% Property taxes Selected 11% 12% -1% Proximity to urban center Selected 29% 21% 8% Quality of the local natural environment Selected 26% 19% 7% Quality of neighborhoods Selected 16% 15% 1% Quality of the school system Selected 30% 32% -2% Recreational opportunities Selected 6% 2% 3% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Selected 44% 45% -1% Factors That Impact Quality of Life: The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. Agree/Strongly Agree 88% 91% -3% Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Agree/Strongly Agree 62% 74% -12% Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. Agree/Strongly Agree 44% 54% -10% The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Agree/Strongly Agree 70% 78% -8% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Agree/Strongly Agree 15% 27% -12% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. Agree/Strongly Agree 25% 30% -5% FACILITIES and SERVICES Quality of Town Facilities and Services: Airstrips Good/Excellent 12% 15% -3% Cell service Good/Excellent 63% 54% 8% Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services Good/Excellent 76% 77% -1%  40 Table 2.2. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference Garbage and recycling service Good/Excellent 87% 83% 4% High speed internet and broadband service Good/Excellent 59% 65% -6% Parks and recreation Good/Excellent 81% 81% 0% Police and law enforcement services Good/Excellent 67% 72% -4% Street and road maintenance and repair Good/Excellent 57% 58% -1% Street and road plowing and treatment Good/Excellent 77% 80% -3% Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, etc. Good/Excellent 86% 87% -1% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Good/Excellent 51% 56% -5% Importance of Town Services: Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services Important/V. Import. 97% 95% 2% Police and law enforcement services Important/V. Import. 90% 88% 2% Street and road maintenance and repair Important/V. Import. 97% 93% 4% Street and road plowing and treatment Important/V. Import. 98% 95% 3% Parks and recreation Important/V. Import. 73% 62% 10% Garbage and recycling pick up Important/V. Import. 80% 77% 3% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Important/V. Import. 65% 62% 3% High speed internet / Broadband service Important/V. Import. 90% 88% 2% Cell service Important/V. Import. 96% 93% 3% Town government services Important/V. Import. 88% 83% 4% Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup: Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) Selected 25% 17% 8% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) Selected 60% 72% -12% No Preference Selected 15% 10% 5% NATURAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Importance of Preserving Resources: Air quality Important/V. Import. 93% 82% 11% An environmentally sustainable community… Important/V. Import. 86% 79% 7% Cemetery space Important/V. Import. 18% 16% 2% Good farmland Important/V. Import. 82% 75% 8% Groundwater quality Important/V. Import. 99% 97% 2% Historic and cultural sites Important/V. Import. 50% 53% -4% Hunting and fishing areas Important/V. Import. 46% 50% -3% Lakes, rivers, and streams Important/V. Import. 92% 85% 7% Open space Important/V. Import. 95% 87% 8%  41 Table 2.3. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Important/V. Import. 87% 81% 6% Wetlands Important/V. Import. 86% 81% 5% Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Important/V. Import. 93% 88% 5% AGRICULTURE, LAND USE, and GROWTH Importance of Seeking Agreements with Neighboring Communities Important/V. Import. 71% 75% -4% Land Use and Planning Activities: Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Important/V. Import. 86% 86% 0% Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Important/V. Import. 90% 88% 2% Using or developing land is determined by landowners Important/V. Import. 53% 56% -3% Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Important/V. Import. 91% 88% 3% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Important/V. Import. 88% 88% 1% Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Important/V. Import. 44% 46% -2% Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Important/V. Import. 84% 89% -5% Agricultural and Rural Character: Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 38% 48% -10% Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 19% 35% -16% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 78% 74% 4% Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 15% 20% -5% Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 38% 46% -9% Concerns about Annexation of Property by the Village of Oregon Concerned/V. Concerned 65% 63% 1% Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation: Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Selected 37% 42% -5% Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. Selected 19% 17% 2%  42 Table 2.4. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Selected 10% 10% 0% No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Selected 18% 20% -2% Amount of Land Owned by Residents in the Town 2 acres or less 56% 52% 4% Ownership of Farmland: Do Not Own Farmland Selected 75% 73% 2% Own and Farm Selected 10% 8% 1% Own and Contract Out Selected 13% 17% -3% FUTURE VISION FOR THE TOWN Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon: I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Selected 63% 61% 2% I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Selected 12% 13% -1% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. Selected 6% 12% -7% Not sure. Selected 20% 14% 6% Future Directions for the Community: The Town has increased in population. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 71% 4% Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. Agree/Str. Agree 78% 85% -7% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agree/Str. Agree 89% 87% 3% There is housing available for first-time buyers. Agree/Str. Agree 46% 45% 0% There are senior apartments available. Agree/Str. Agree 37% 40% -3% There is multi-generational housing available. Agree/Str. Agree 35% 36% -1% There is housing that allows aging in place. Agree/Str. Agree 58% 59% -1% There is housing available for young families. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 64% 1% There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. Agree/Str. Agree 71% 64% 7% There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 68% 6% There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 64% 2% Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 20% 21% -1% The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. Agree/Str. Agree 70% 72% -2% There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 34% 35% -1%  43 Table 2.5. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference Future of Town Facilities and Services: Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. Agree/Str. Agree 47% 48% -1% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 59% 8% The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 54% 50% 4% The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 27% 21% 7% Future Community Initiatives: The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 65% 4% The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Agree/Str. Agree 20% 26% -6% The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. Agree/Str. Agree 68% 52% 16% The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 22% 25% -3% The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 68% 1% The Town Center should include community gathering areas. Agree/Str. Agree 48% 46% 1% The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. Agree/Str. Agree 73% 71% 1% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. Agree/Str. Agree 81% 82% -1% Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved: Farmland Selected 59% 53% 7% Local cemeteries Selected 5% 6% -1% Low population density Selected 56% 58% -2% Natural areas Selected 74% 68% 6% Park lands Selected 34% 30% 4% Schools Selected 40% 45% -5% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Selected 19% 25% -6%  44 Table 2.6. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference Community Aspects that the Town Should Address: Attractions to bring people here Selected 15% 15% 0% Businesses located here Selected 36% 42% -6% Community gathering facilities Selected 35% 31% 5% Farmers actively farming Selected 65% 63% 2% Lack of downtown area, commercial district Selected 28% 27% 1% Population density Selected 44% 48% -4% HOUSING Residential Status Own single-family house — non-farm residence Selected 82% 81% 1% Own single-family house — farm residence Selected 15% 14% 1% Rent home Selected 0% 0% 0% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Selected 0% 0% 0% Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Selected 2% 4% -2% Where Residential Growth Should Occur: Near Village of Oregon boundaries Selected 51% 54% -3% In new subdivisions Selected 14% 18% -4% Scattered along Town and County roads Selected 16% 11% 4% Clustered in farming areas Selected 3% 1% 2% In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Selected 31% 35% -4% Residential growth should not occur in the Town Selected 29% 23% 6% No opinion Selected 10% 7% 3% Preference for Design of New Housing: Traditional Design Selected 31% 34% -2% Cluster Design Selected 69% 66% 2% Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years: The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 59% 7% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 64% 6% The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. Agree/Str. Agree 31% 34% -4% The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. Agree/Str. Agree 50% 39% 11% The Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Agree/Str. Agree 24% 26% -2%  45 Table 2.7. Difference between Female Residents and Residents of Other Genders Variable Indicator Female Other Genders Difference TRANSPORTATION Opinions on New Bicycle Routes: Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Agree/Str. Agree 63% 58% 5% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Agree/Str. Agree 71% 66% 5% Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Agree/Str. Agree 50% 47% 4% Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure: Maintenance of existing roadways Support 57% 52% 6% Improving existing roadways Support 53% 45% 8% Developing bike lanes Support 37% 37% 0% Expanding the bike trail network Support 46% 45% 1%  46 Senior Residents (Age 65+) vs. Younger Residents We compared the survey responses of residents who indicated that their age is 65 or older with younger residents (age 18-64 years). About 43% of the sample includes senior residents. Tables 3.1- 3.7 on the next few pages show the results. Community and Quality of Life x Among the top three reasons for choosing to live in the Town of Oregon, senior residents are more likely to select agriculture (8%) and less likely to select the availability of parcels of land of 5+ acres (-7%), property taxes (-7%), and the quality of the school system (-11%) relative to younger residents. x Compared to younger residents, seniors are more likely to agree that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town (20%), preserving and celebrating the community’s history is important to their quality of life (13%), and that the overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today (9%). Facilities and Services x Senior residents give higher ratings to the Town’s fire protection and EMS services (11%) and street and road plowing and treatment services (8%) than younger residents. In addition, they place greater importance on the police and law enforcement services (6%) and street and road plowing and treatment (4%), and less importance on parks and recreation (-14%). x Senior residents have a stronger preference for the current bi-weekly recycling pickup service (21%) and a weaker preference for a more frequent weekly recycling pickup service (-23%) compared to younger residents. Natural and Cultural Resources x The resources that seniors place a greater importance on preserving include cemetery space (8%), good farmland (13%), and historic and cultural sites (11%). They place less importance on preserving lakes, rivers, and streams (-6%) compared to younger residents. Agricultural, Land Use, and Growth x Seniors consider seeking agreements with neighboring communities (9%) and maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape (13%) to be more important than younger residents do. x Seniors are more likely to agree that quarry operations are consistent with the Town of Oregon’s agricultural and rural character (10%). x While seniors are more concerned about the annexation of Town property by the Village of Oregon, however, they are less likely to support the Town of Oregon considering mechanisms to avoid annexation as they feel that more housing and commercial development is needed and it should be in the Village (8%). x Seniors are 11% more likely to own farmland and 7% more likely to contract out farming than farm themselves compared to younger residents.  47 Future Vision for the Town of Oregon x Seniors are less likely to stay in the Town of Oregon in the next 15 years (-20%) and more likely to move elsewhere (9%). x When considering the Town 15 years into the future, seniors are less likely to agree that there will be a variety of small, local businesses (-12%) and tourism and recreation-oriented businesses (-14%) operating in the Town. x Senior residents are less likely to agree that the Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads (-10%). x When asked about community strengths that should be preserved, seniors are more likely to select farmland (16%), local cemeteries (6%), and TORC (8%), and less likely to select park lands (-11%) and schools (-12%). x Regarding community aspects that the Town should address, seniors are less likely to vote for attractions to bring people to the Town (-13%) and more likely to vote for farmers actively farming (20%) and population density (12%). Housing x Seniors are 7% less likely to own single-family non-farm housing. They also feel that residential growth should occur in new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions (11%) and less likely to say that residential growth should not occur at all (-12%) compared to younger residents. Transportation x Seniors are less likely to support new bike paths, either paved bike lanes on street shoulders when a street is being repaved (-9%) or designated bike paths to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail (-11%). Similarly, they are less likely to support tax increases to expand the bike trail network (-15%).  48 Table 3.1. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference COMMUNITY and QUALITY OF LIFE Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Life Satisfied/V. Satisfied 92% 91% 0% Reasons for Choosing to Live in Town: Agriculture Selected 19% 11% 8% Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Selected 14% 21% -7% Born and raised here Selected 16% 12% 5% Cost of housing Selected 6% 8% -3% Low crime rate Selected 16% 14% 2% Natural features and open space Selected 44% 39% 4% Near family and friends Selected 17% 16% 1% Near job or employment opportunity Selected 14% 17% -3% Property taxes Selected 7% 14% -7% Proximity to urban center Selected 27% 24% 3% Quality of the local natural environment Selected 23% 23% 0% Quality of neighborhoods Selected 15% 16% -1% Quality of the school system Selected 25% 36% -11% Recreational opportunities Selected 2% 5% -3% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Selected 46% 43% 3% Factors That Impact Quality of Life: The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. Agree/Strongly Agree 89% 90% -1% Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Agree/Strongly Agree 79% 59% 20% Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. Agree/Strongly Agree 56% 43% 13% The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Agree/Strongly Agree 79% 70% 9% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Agree/Strongly Agree 19% 23% -4% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. Agree/Strongly Agree 24% 30% -6% FACILITIES and SERVICES Quality of Town Facilities and Services: Airstrips Good/Excellent 15% 12% 3% Cell service Good/Excellent 62% 55% 7% Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services Good/Excellent 83% 72% 11%  49 Table 3.2. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference Garbage and recycling service Good/Excellent 86% 85% 1% High speed internet and broadband service Good/Excellent 64% 59% 5% Parks and recreation Good/Excellent 81% 81% 0% Police and law enforcement services Good/Excellent 70% 69% 1% Street and road maintenance and repair Good/Excellent 63% 55% 9% Street and road plowing and treatment Good/Excellent 84% 76% 8% Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, etc. Good/Excellent 87% 87% 0% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Good/Excellent 56% 51% 6% Importance of Town Services: Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services Important/V. Import. 98% 95% 3% Police and law enforcement services Important/V. Import. 93% 87% 6% Street and road maintenance and repair Important/V. Import. 97% 94% 3% Street and road plowing and treatment Important/V. Import. 98% 95% 4% Parks and recreation Important/V. Import. 59% 73% -14% Garbage and recycling pick up Important/V. Import. 75% 80% -5% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Important/V. Import. 63% 63% 0% High speed internet / Broadband service Important/V. Import. 89% 89% 0% Cell service Important/V. Import. 96% 94% 1% Town government services Important/V. Import. 87% 84% 3% Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup: Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) Selected 8% 31% -23% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) Selected 77% 56% 21% No Preference Selected 13% 13% 0% NATURAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Importance of Preserving Resources: Air quality Important/V. Import. 89% 88% 0% An environmentally sustainable community… Important/V. Import. 82% 83% -1% Cemetery space Important/V. Import. 22% 14% 8% Good farmland Important/V. Import. 86% 73% 13% Groundwater quality Important/V. Import. 97% 99% -2% Historic and cultural sites Important/V. Import. 57% 46% 11% Hunting and fishing areas Important/V. Import. 46% 49% -2% Lakes, rivers, and streams Important/V. Import. 85% 91% -6% Open space Important/V. Import. 93% 90% 3%  50 Table 3.3. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Important/V. Import. 85% 84% 1% Wetlands Important/V. Import. 83% 84% -1% Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Important/V. Import. 90% 91% -1% AGRICULTURE, LAND USE, and GROWTH Importance of Seeking Agreements with Neighboring Communities Important/V. Import. 79% 70% 9% Land Use and Planning Activities: Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Important/V. Import. 93% 80% 13% Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Important/V. Import. 90% 88% 2% Using or developing land is determined by landowners Important/V. Import. 60% 51% 8% Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Important/V. Import. 91% 89% 3% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Important/V. Import. 91% 86% 4% Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Important/V. Import. 43% 47% -5% Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Important/V. Import. 89% 84% 5% Agricultural and Rural Character: Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 49% 39% 10% Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 29% 26% 3% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 77% 76% 1% Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 20% 16% 4% Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 41% 43% -3% Concerns about Annexation of Property by the Village of Oregon Concerned/V. Concerned 70% 60% 10% Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation: Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Selected 37% 42% -5% Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. Selected 17% 19% -2%  51 Table 3.4. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Selected 14% 6% 8% No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Selected 17% 20% -3% Amount of Land Owned by Residents in the Town 2 acres or less 50% 57% -7% Ownership of Farmland: Do Not Own Farmland Selected 68% 79% -11% Own and Farm Selected 10% 8% 2% Own and Contract Out Selected 19% 12% 7% FUTURE VISION FOR THE TOWN Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon: I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Selected 50% 70% -20% I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Selected 18% 9% 9% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. Selected 9% 9% 0% Not sure. Selected 23% 13% 10% Future Directions for the Community: The Town has increased in population. Agree/Str. Agree 73% 74% -1% Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. Agree/Str. Agree 83% 81% 2% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agree/Str. Agree 86% 90% -5% There is housing available for first-time buyers. Agree/Str. Agree 49% 43% 6% There are senior apartments available. Agree/Str. Agree 43% 36% 7% There is multi-generational housing available. Agree/Str. Agree 37% 35% 2% There is housing that allows aging in place. Agree/Str. Agree 63% 56% 7% There is housing available for young families. Agree/Str. Agree 66% 65% 0% There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 70% -6% There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. Agree/Str. Agree 68% 75% -7% There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 71% -12% Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 21% 22% -1% The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. Agree/Str. Agree 68% 73% -5% There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 27% 41% -14%  52 Table 3.5. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference Future of Town Facilities and Services: Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. Agree/Str. Agree 46% 48% -2% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 61% 6% The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 53% 52% 1% The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 24% 24% 0% Future Community Initiatives: The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. Agree/Str. Agree 70% 66% 4% The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Agree/Str. Agree 17% 27% -10% The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. Agree/Str. Agree 63% 59% 4% The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 23% 23% 0% The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 67% 2% The Town Center should include community gathering areas. Agree/Str. Agree 46% 48% -3% The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. Agree/Str. Agree 74% 71% 3% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. Agree/Str. Agree 83% 80% 2% Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved: Farmland Selected 65% 49% 16% Local cemeteries Selected 9% 3% 6% Low population density Selected 56% 57% -2% Natural areas Selected 68% 73% -5% Park lands Selected 26% 37% -11% Schools Selected 35% 47% -12% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Selected 26% 18% 8%  53 Table 3.6. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference Community Aspects that the Town Should Address: Attractions to bring people here Selected 8% 20% -13% Businesses located here Selected 37% 41% -3% Community gathering facilities Selected 32% 34% -1% Farmers actively farming Selected 76% 55% 20% Lack of downtown area, commercial district Selected 29% 27% 3% Population density Selected 53% 41% 12% HOUSING Residential Status Own single-family house — non-farm residence Selected 78% 85% -7% Own single-family house — farm residence Selected 18% 12% 7% Rent home Selected 0% 0% 0% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Selected 0% 0% 0% Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Selected 3% 3% 1% Where Residential Growth Should Occur: Near Village of Oregon boundaries Selected 52% 52% 0% In new subdivisions Selected 13% 18% -5% Scattered along Town and County roads Selected 11% 15% -5% Clustered in farming areas Selected 3% 2% 0% In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Selected 39% 28% 11% Residential growth should not occur in the Town Selected 20% 31% -12% No opinion Selected 12% 6% 6% Preference for Design of New Housing: Traditional Design Selected 32% 33% 0% Cluster Design Selected 68% 67% 0% Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years: The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. Agree/Str. Agree 62% 62% -1% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 70% 65% 5% The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. Agree/Str. Agree 31% 34% -4% The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. Agree/Str. Agree 40% 48% -8% The Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Agree/Str. Agree 27% 24% 3%  54 Table 3.7. Difference between Seniors Residents (65+) and Younger Residents Variable Indicator Seniors (65+) Younger Residents Difference TRANSPORTATION Opinions on New Bicycle Routes: Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Agree/Str. Agree 55% 64% -9% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Agree/Str. Agree 63% 73% -11% Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Agree/Str. Agree 45% 50% -5% Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure: Maintenance of existing roadways Support 60% 52% 7% Improving existing roadways Support 50% 50% 0% Developing bike lanes Support 32% 40% -8% Expanding the bike trail network Support 38% 52% -15%  55 Households with Children vs. Households without Children In this section, we present the differences between residents with children in the household and those without children in the household. Residents without children may include residents who do not have any children, or residents with children who do not live in the same household (e.g. adult children who have moved out). Tables 4.1-4.7 on the next few pages show the results. Community and Quality of Life x Among the top three reasons for choosing to live in the Town of Oregon, residents with children are more likely to select availability of land parcels of 5+ acres (16%) and, not surprisingly, quality of the school system (36%) compared to residents without children. However, they were less likely to select low crime rate (-11%), proximity to urban center (-12%), and quality of the local natural environment (-23%). x Residents with children are less likely to agree that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town (-25%) and that the overall character of the Town should continue to be much like it is today (-11%). Facilities and Services x Residents with children are 17% more likely to feel that parks and recreation are important for the Town of Oregon. x Regarding recycling pickup service, residents with children have a stronger preference for more frequent weekly pickup and a weaker preference for the current bi-weekly service. This is likely due to the larger household size and the more frequent need for recycling disposal. Agricultural, Land Use, and Growth x Residents with children consider maintaining the Town’s rural, agricultural landscape less important than residents without children. x Residents with children are less concerned about the annexation of Town property by the Village of Oregon than are residents without children. Future Vision for the Town of Oregon x Residents with children are more likely to stay in the Town of Oregon in the next 15 years (26%) and less likely to move elsewhere (-13%). x When considering the Town 15 years into the future, residents with children are more likely to agree that the Town would have increased in population (12%) and that there are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults (17%). x There is less support for tax increases to pay for increased services and facilities among residents with children compared to residents without children. x Regarding community strengths that should be preserved, residents with children are more likely to select schools (29%) but less likely to select farmland (-13%) and TORC (-16%).  56 x When asked about community aspects that the Town should address, residents with children are less likely to select farmers actively farming (-20%). Housing x Residents with children are less likely to agree that the Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability (-13%) compared to residents without children. Transportation x There is greater support among residents with children for new biking lanes, especially bike lanes that are established on existing streets with signage and striping (12%).  57 Table 4.1. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference COMMUNITY and QUALITY OF LIFE Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Life Satisfied/V. Satisfied 91% 93% -2% Reasons for Choosing to Live in Town: Agriculture Selected 9% 12% -3% Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Selected 33% 17% 16% Born and raised here Selected 9% 11% -2% Cost of housing Selected 6% 7% -1% Low crime rate Selected 6% 17% -11% Natural features and open space Selected 38% 44% -6% Near family and friends Selected 8% 14% -7% Near job or employment opportunity Selected 22% 15% 6% Property taxes Selected 14% 11% 3% Proximity to urban center Selected 15% 27% -12% Quality of the local natural environment Selected 5% 28% -23% Quality of neighborhoods Selected 23% 15% 7% Quality of the school system Selected 63% 27% 36% Recreational opportunities Selected 5% 4% 1% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Selected 44% 45% -1% Factors That Impact Quality of Life: The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. Agree/Strongly Agree 95% 89% 6% Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Agree/Strongly Agree 46% 71% -25% Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. Agree/Strongly Agree 47% 49% -2% The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Agree/Strongly Agree 65% 76% -11% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Agree/Strongly Agree 24% 21% 3% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. Agree/Strongly Agree 33% 28% 5% FACILITIES and SERVICES Quality of Town Facilities and Services: Airstrips Good/Excellent 14% 14% 0% Cell service Good/Excellent 54% 60% -5% Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services Good/Excellent 73% 77% -4%  58 Table 4.2. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference Garbage and recycling service Good/Excellent 90% 85% 5% High speed internet and broadband service Good/Excellent 63% 64% -1% Parks and recreation Good/Excellent 85% 82% 3% Police and law enforcement services Good/Excellent 72% 70% 2% Street and road maintenance and repair Good/Excellent 61% 59% 2% Street and road plowing and treatment Good/Excellent 75% 83% -9% Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, etc. Good/Excellent 89% 85% 4% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Good/Excellent 49% 56% -7% Importance of Town Services: Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services Important/V. Import. 96% 96% 0% Police and law enforcement services Important/V. Import. 87% 89% -1% Street and road maintenance and repair Important/V. Import. 92% 96% -4% Street and road plowing and treatment Important/V. Import. 94% 98% -4% Parks and recreation Important/V. Import. 84% 66% 17% Garbage and recycling pick up Important/V. Import. 84% 79% 4% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Important/V. Import. 54% 66% -12% High speed internet / Broadband service Important/V. Import. 91% 87% 4% Cell service Important/V. Import. 94% 96% -2% Town government services Important/V. Import. 85% 84% 0% Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup: Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) Selected 46% 15% 30% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) Selected 41% 71% -30% No Preference Selected 14% 14% 0% NATURAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Importance of Preserving Resources: Air quality Important/V. Import. 90% 89% 1% An environmentally sustainable community… Important/V. Import. 87% 83% 4% Cemetery space Important/V. Import. 11% 16% -4% Good farmland Important/V. Import. 68% 78% -9% Groundwater quality Important/V. Import. 99% 99% 0% Historic and cultural sites Important/V. Import. 39% 51% -12% Hunting and fishing areas Important/V. Import. 46% 50% -4% Lakes, rivers, and streams Important/V. Import. 92% 89% 4% Open space Important/V. Import. 94% 90% 3%  59 Table 4.3. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Important/V. Import. 84% 86% -3% Wetlands Important/V. Import. 81% 84% -3% Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Important/V. Import. 91% 91% 0% AGRICULTURE, LAND USE, and GROWTH Importance of Seeking Agreements with Neighboring Communities Important/V. Import. 70% 74% -4% Land Use and Planning Activities: Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Important/V. Import. 75% 87% -13% Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Important/V. Import. 91% 89% 2% Using or developing land is determined by landowners Important/V. Import. 51% 55% -4% Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Important/V. Import. 90% 89% 0% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Important/V. Import. 89% 89% 0% Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Important/V. Import. 44% 47% -2% Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Important/V. Import. 87% 86% 1% Agricultural and Rural Character: Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 37% 38% -1% Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 26% 25% 0% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 76% 77% -1% Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 13% 18% -5% Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 37% 43% -6% Concerns about Annexation of Property by the Village of Oregon Concerned/V. Concerned 50% 68% -18% Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation: Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Selected 38% 41% -3% Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. Selected 14% 19% -5%  60 Table 4.4. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Selected 9% 10% -1% No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Selected 20% 18% 2% Amount of Land Owned by Residents in the Town 2 acres or less 58% 56% 2% Ownership of Farmland: Do Not Own Farmland Selected 80% 79% 1% Own and Farm Selected 10% 7% 3% Own and Contract Out Selected 10% 13% -3% FUTURE VISION FOR THE TOWN Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon: I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Selected 82% 56% 26% I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Selected 3% 15% -13% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. Selected 9% 8% 1% Not sure. Selected 6% 20% -13% Future Directions for the Community: The Town has increased in population. Agree/Str. Agree 82% 70% 12% Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. Agree/Str. Agree 77% 80% -3% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agree/Str. Agree 94% 88% 6% There is housing available for first-time buyers. Agree/Str. Agree 46% 49% -3% There are senior apartments available. Agree/Str. Agree 34% 44% -10% There is multi-generational housing available. Agree/Str. Agree 30% 39% -9% There is housing that allows aging in place. Agree/Str. Agree 57% 60% -3% There is housing available for young families. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 64% 10% There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. Agree/Str. Agree 73% 69% 5% There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. Agree/Str. Agree 87% 71% 17% There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 65% 10% Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 20% 19% 1% The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 73% 2% There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 41% 36% 5%  61 Table 4.5. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference Future of Town Facilities and Services: Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. Agree/Str. Agree 44% 47% -3% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. Agree/Str. Agree 61% 66% -5% The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 51% 53% -2% The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 17% 27% -10% Future Community Initiatives: The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. Agree/Str. Agree 64% 67% -3% The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Agree/Str. Agree 29% 20% 9% The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 63% -4% The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 27% 24% 3% The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 69% -10% The Town Center should include community gathering areas. Agree/Str. Agree 53% 47% 5% The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. Agree/Str. Agree 75% 71% 4% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. Agree/Str. Agree 78% 83% -5% Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved: Farmland Selected 42% 56% -13% Local cemeteries Selected 1% 5% -3% Low population density Selected 54% 54% 0% Natural areas Selected 65% 76% -10% Park lands Selected 38% 31% 7% Schools Selected 69% 40% 29% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Selected 9% 25% -16%  62 Table 4.6. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference Community Aspects that the Town Should Address: Attractions to bring people here Selected 22% 15% 6% Businesses located here Selected 42% 41% 1% Community gathering facilities Selected 38% 32% 6% Farmers actively farming Selected 43% 63% -20% Lack of downtown area, commercial district Selected 27% 27% 0% Population density Selected 38% 49% -11% HOUSING Residential Status Own single-family house — non-farm residence Selected 85% 85% 0% Own single-family house — farm residence Selected 11% 12% -1% Rent home Selected 0% 0% 0% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Selected 0% 0% 0% Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Selected 4% 2% 2% Where Residential Growth Should Occur: Near Village of Oregon boundaries Selected 62% 50% 12% In new subdivisions Selected 20% 17% 4% Scattered along Town and County roads Selected 18% 10% 7% Clustered in farming areas Selected 1% 2% -1% In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Selected 32% 33% -1% Residential growth should not occur in the Town Selected 25% 25% 0% No opinion Selected 8% 9% -1% Preference for Design of New Housing: Traditional Design Selected 38% 31% 7% Cluster Design Selected 62% 69% -7% Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years: The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 59% 0% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 66% 64% 2% The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. Agree/Str. Agree 38% 33% 5% The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. Agree/Str. Agree 51% 45% 6% The Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Agree/Str. Agree 16% 29% -13%  63 Table 4.7. Difference between Households with and without Children Variable Indicator With Kids No Kids Difference TRANSPORTATION Opinions on New Bicycle Routes: Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 60% 7% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Agree/Str. Agree 73% 70% 3% Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 47% 12% Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure: Maintenance of existing roadways Support 48% 54% -6% Improving existing roadways Support 51% 48% 3% Developing bike lanes Support 49% 38% 12% Expanding the bike trail network Support 57% 49% 9%  64 Household Income Under $150k vs. Higher Income Households In this section, we present the differences between residents with an annual household income of less than $150,000 with residents who have an annual household income of $150,000 or more. For reference, the median household income in the Town of Oregon is $143,056 (US Census Bureau, 2023). Tables 5.1-5.7 on the next few pages show the results. Community and Quality of Life x Among the top three reasons for choosing to live in the Town of Oregon, residents with household income less than $150,000 were more likely to select agriculture (7%) and indicate that they were born and raised in the Town of Oregon (12%), but less likely to select the availability of land parcels of 5+ acres (-15%) and the quality of the school system (-13%) than residents with higher income. x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 were more likely to agree that seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon (10%). Facilities and Services x Residents with household incomes of less than $150,000 were less likely to agree that street and road maintenance and repair (-4%) is an important service in the Town. x Regarding recycling pickup service, residents with lower incomes have a stronger preference for the current bi-weekly service and a weaker preference for the more frequent weekly service. Natural and Cultural Resources x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 place greater importance on preserving cemetery space (14%) and good farmland (8%) relative to residents with higher incomes. Agricultural, Land Use, and Growth x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 are more likely to state that it is important to let landowners determine how land is used or developed (10%) compared to residents with higher incomes. x They are less amenable to the Town considering mechanisms to avoid annexation of Town property at the expense of higher property taxes. Future Directions for the Community x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 are less likely to agree that in the next 15 years, there would be housing available for young families in the Town (-12%), the Town would have pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households (-12%), and that there will be a variety of tourism and recreation-oriented business in the Town (-15%).  65 x These residents are also less supportive of preserving the community’s low population density (-10%) and schools (-17%), and more supportive of preserving farmland (17%), local cemeteries (5%), and TORC (10%). x Among factors that these residents feel the Town should address, residents with household incomes under $150,000 are more likely to select farmers actively farming (12%). Housing x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 are less likely to agree that the Town should allow building a second home on a property (-15%). Transportation x Residents with household incomes under $150,000 are generally less supportive of developing new bike paths. They are less likely to agree that new bike paths should be created on the street shoulders when a street is being repaved (-15%), to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail (-9%), and on existing streets with signage and striping (-12%). x They are also less supportive of increasing taxes for transportation infrastructure. These residents are less likely to support tax increases for improving existing roadways (-12%), developing bike lanes (-14%), and expanding the bike trail network (-17%).  66 Table 5.1. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference COMMUNITY and QUALITY OF LIFE Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Life Satisfied/V. Satisfied 91% 93% -2% Reasons for Choosing to Live in Town: Agriculture Selected 17% 10% 7% Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Selected 11% 27% -15% Born and raised here Selected 17% 6% 12% Cost of housing Selected 9% 7% 1% Low crime rate Selected 16% 15% 0% Natural features and open space Selected 42% 39% 3% Near family and friends Selected 17% 12% 5% Near job or employment opportunity Selected 14% 16% -2% Property taxes Selected 10% 15% -6% Proximity to urban center Selected 26% 27% -1% Quality of the local natural environment Selected 26% 19% 6% Quality of neighborhoods Selected 14% 17% -3% Quality of the school system Selected 26% 39% -13% Recreational opportunities Selected 4% 4% 0% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Selected 45% 45% 0% Factors That Impact Quality of Life: The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. Agree/Strongly Agree 90% 90% 0% Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Agree/Strongly Agree 71% 61% 10% Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. Agree/Strongly Agree 49% 47% 3% The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Agree/Strongly Agree 75% 73% 2% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Agree/Strongly Agree 19% 26% -7% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. Agree/Strongly Agree 27% 29% -2% FACILITIES and SERVICES Quality of Town Facilities and Services: Airstrips Good/Excellent 15% 12% 2% Cell service Good/Excellent 58% 59% -1% Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services Good/Excellent 79% 72% 7%  67 Table 5.2. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference Garbage and recycling service Good/Excellent 84% 88% -4% High speed internet and broadband service Good/Excellent 61% 62% -1% Parks and recreation Good/Excellent 81% 84% -3% Police and law enforcement services Good/Excellent 70% 72% -1% Street and road maintenance and repair Good/Excellent 58% 60% -2% Street and road plowing and treatment Good/Excellent 78% 81% -3% Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, etc. Good/Excellent 86% 89% -3% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Good/Excellent 55% 53% 2% Importance of Town Services: Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services Important/V. Import. 96% 96% 0% Police and law enforcement services Important/V. Import. 88% 90% -1% Street and road maintenance and repair Important/V. Import. 94% 98% -4% Street and road plowing and treatment Important/V. Import. 95% 98% -2% Parks and recreation Important/V. Import. 66% 72% -5% Garbage and recycling pick up Important/V. Import. 77% 80% -3% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Important/V. Import. 64% 62% 1% High speed internet / Broadband service Important/V. Import. 89% 89% 0% Cell service Important/V. Import. 96% 93% 4% Town government services Important/V. Import. 87% 82% 5% Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup: Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) Selected 15% 30% -15% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) Selected 70% 56% 14% No Preference Selected 14% 14% 0% NATURAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Importance of Preserving Resources: Air quality Important/V. Import. 88% 88% 0% An environmentally sustainable community… Important/V. Import. 81% 86% -5% Cemetery space Important/V. Import. 22% 7% 14% Good farmland Important/V. Import. 81% 73% 8% Groundwater quality Important/V. Import. 97% 99% -2% Historic and cultural sites Important/V. Import. 52% 49% 3% Hunting and fishing areas Important/V. Import. 47% 49% -2% Lakes, rivers, and streams Important/V. Import. 86% 90% -4% Open space Important/V. Import. 91% 90% 1%  68 Table 5.3. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Important/V. Import. 86% 82% 4% Wetlands Important/V. Import. 84% 82% 1% Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Important/V. Import. 89% 93% -4% AGRICULTURE, LAND USE, and GROWTH Importance of Seeking Agreements with Neighboring Communities Important/V. Import. 73% 74% -1% Land Use and Planning Activities: Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Important/V. Import. 88% 82% 5% Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Important/V. Import. 90% 89% 0% Using or developing land is determined by landowners Important/V. Import. 58% 49% 10% Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Important/V. Import. 90% 89% 1% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Important/V. Import. 87% 89% -2% Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Important/V. Import. 46% 45% 1% Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Important/V. Import. 88% 87% 1% Agricultural and Rural Character: Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 45% 40% 5% Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 28% 24% 4% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 72% 78% -7% Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 18% 15% 3% Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 44% 44% 0% Concerns about Annexation of Property by the Village of Oregon Concerned/V. Concerned 67% 58% 9% Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation: Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Selected 41% 38% 3% Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. Selected 15% 23% -9%  69 Table 5.4. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Selected 10% 9% 1% No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Selected 19% 18% 1% Amount of Land Owned by Residents in the Town 2 acres or less 56% 53% 3% Ownership of Farmland: Do Not Own Farmland Selected 75% 77% -2% Own and Farm Selected 9% 9% 0% Own and Contract Out Selected 16% 14% 2% FUTURE VISION FOR THE TOWN Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon: I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Selected 59% 68% -8% I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Selected 13% 10% 3% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. Selected 10% 8% 2% Not sure. Selected 18% 15% 3% Future Directions for the Community: The Town has increased in population. Agree/Str. Agree 72% 72% 0% Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. Agree/Str. Agree 81% 83% -2% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agree/Str. Agree 86% 90% -4% There is housing available for first-time buyers. Agree/Str. Agree 44% 45% -1% There are senior apartments available. Agree/Str. Agree 42% 34% 9% There is multi-generational housing available. Agree/Str. Agree 35% 37% -2% There is housing that allows aging in place. Agree/Str. Agree 58% 58% 0% There is housing available for young families. Agree/Str. Agree 59% 71% -12% There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 73% -8% There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 76% -7% There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 62% 71% -9% Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 21% 20% 1% The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 79% -12% There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 30% 44% -15%  70 Table 5.5. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference Future of Town Facilities and Services: Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. Agree/Str. Agree 46% 53% -7% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. Agree/Str. Agree 61% 66% -5% The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 53% 52% 1% The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 25% 23% 3% Future Community Initiatives: The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. Agree/Str. Agree 64% 70% -6% The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Agree/Str. Agree 22% 26% -4% The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. Agree/Str. Agree 60% 63% -2% The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 24% 24% 0% The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. Agree/Str. Agree 70% 66% 4% The Town Center should include community gathering areas. Agree/Str. Agree 49% 45% 4% The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. Agree/Str. Agree 69% 77% -7% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. Agree/Str. Agree 83% 78% 4% Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved: Farmland Selected 62% 45% 17% Local cemeteries Selected 7% 2% 5% Low population density Selected 53% 63% -10% Natural areas Selected 70% 74% -4% Park lands Selected 34% 32% 2% Schools Selected 35% 52% -17% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Selected 26% 17% 10%  71 Table 5.6. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference Community Aspects that the Town Should Address: Attractions to bring people here Selected 14% 17% -4% Businesses located here Selected 41% 39% 2% Community gathering facilities Selected 35% 33% 2% Farmers actively farming Selected 69% 56% 12% Lack of downtown area, commercial district Selected 29% 26% 3% Population density Selected 45% 49% -3% HOUSING Residential Status Own single-family house — non-farm residence Selected 79% 86% -7% Own single-family house — farm residence Selected 17% 10% 6% Rent home Selected 0% 0% 0% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Selected 0% 0% 0% Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Selected 3% 3% -1% Where Residential Growth Should Occur: Near Village of Oregon boundaries Selected 48% 57% -9% In new subdivisions Selected 16% 18% -2% Scattered along Town and County roads Selected 12% 14% -2% Clustered in farming areas Selected 2% 3% -1% In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Selected 34% 32% 2% Residential growth should not occur in the Town Selected 25% 30% -5% No opinion Selected 10% 6% 5% Preference for Design of New Housing: Traditional Design Selected 33% 30% 3% Cluster Design Selected 67% 70% -3% Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years: The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. Agree/Str. Agree 64% 60% 4% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 69% -4% The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. Agree/Str. Agree 34% 34% 0% The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. Agree/Str. Agree 38% 53% -15% The Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Agree/Str. Agree 29% 23% 6%  72 Table 5.7. Difference between Households with Income Under $150k and Higher Income Households Variable Indicator Income <$150k Income $150k+ Difference TRANSPORTATION Opinions on New Bicycle Routes: Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Agree/Str. Agree 55% 70% -15% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Agree/Str. Agree 66% 75% -9% Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Agree/Str. Agree 45% 56% -12% Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure: Maintenance of existing roadways Support 53% 58% -4% Improving existing roadways Support 45% 57% -12% Developing bike lanes Support 33% 46% -14% Expanding the bike trail network Support 40% 57% -17%  73 Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents We compared the survey responses of residents who own agricultural land (farmed by them or contracted out) with residents who do not own any agricultural land. About 25% of residents in the sample are owners of agricultural land. We found a large number of statistically significant differences between these two demographic groups. Tables 6.1-6.7 on the next few pages show the results. Community and Quality of Life x Farmland owners are 10% less likely to be satisfied with their overall quality of life in the Town of Oregon than non-farmland owners. x Among the top three reasons for choosing to live in the Town of Oregon, farmland owners are more likely to select agriculture (41%), availability of land parcels of 5+ acres (20%), and indicate that they were born and raised in the Town (31%). However, they are less likely to select the cost of housing (-10%), natural features and open space (-19%), property taxes (-7%), proximity to the urban center (-18%), and the quality of the local natural environment (-16%), neighborhoods (-15%), and school system (-12%). x Among factors that impact the quality of life, farmland owners are less likely to agree that the Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family (-8%) and more likely to agree that preserving and celebrating the community's history is important to their quality of life (12%). Facilities and Services x Farmland owners rate higher the quality of airstrips (12%) and fire protection and EMS/ambulance services (14%) but rate lower the quality of garbage and recycling service (- 14%) and high speed internet and broadband (-15%) in the Town. x Farmland owners consider all listed Town services to be less important relative to residents who do not own any farmland. Statistically significant differences include street and road maintenance and repair (-6%), street and road plowing and treatment (-7%), parks and recreation (-23%), garbage and recycling pick up (-21%), and Town government services (-13%). x Farmland owners are less likely to prefer the bi-weekly recycling pickup service (-15%) and more likely to state that they have no preference (13%) for the frequency of this service. Natural and Cultural Resources x Farmland owners place lower importance on the preservation of most natural and cultural services. These include air quality (-15%), an environmentally sustainable community (-19%), groundwater quality (-4%), lakes, rivers, and streams (-20%), open space (-14%), reduced stormwater runoff and flooding (-19%), wetlands (-15%), and wildlife habitat (-14%). However, they place greater importance on preserving cemetery space (15%) and good farmland (14%).  74 Agricultural, Land Use, and Growth x Farmland owners are less likely to consider seeking agreements with neighboring communities on future land use and growth (-14%) important compared to their counterparts. x Farmland owners consider it less important than non-farmland owners for community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur (-24%), to protect resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties (-9%), to require new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development (-8%), and to ensure that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood (-17%). They consider it more important for landowners to determine how land is used or developed (27%). x Farmland owners are more likely to agree that quarry operations are consistent (19%) but less likely to agree that converting farmland to non-farm uses (-11%) is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. x When asked about whether the Town should consider steps to avoid annexation, farmland owners are more likely to state that annexation is the property owners’ decision to make (11%). x Not surprisingly, farmland owners are much less likely to own 2 acres or less of land. In other words, they are more likely to own larger acreage. Future Directions for the Community x When envisioning the Town of Oregon in 15 years, farmland owners are less likely to agree that the Town has increased in population (-14%), natural areas have been preserved and enhanced (-11%), there is housing available for first-time buyers (-13%), there are senior apartments available (-15%), there is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities (-20%), and there are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults (- 26%). x Regarding the future of facilities and services, farmland owners are less likely to agree that because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations (-11%), the Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the Wisconsin Saltwise program (-25%), and that the Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities (-11%). x Regarding the future of community initiatives, farmland owners are less likely to agree that the Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change (-22%) and post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town -10%). x In terms of preserving community strengths, farmland owners are more likely to select farmland (27%) and cemeteries (13%) and less likely to select natural areas (-15%) and park lands (-15%). x Farmland owners are more likely to feel that the Town should address the community aspect of farmers actively farming (16%), but are less likely to feel that the community should address population density (-14%).  75 Housing x As expected, farmland owners are more likely to own single-family farm residences (56%) and less likely to own non-farm residents (-67%). x Farmland owners are more likely to feel that residential growth should be clustered in farming areas (4%), albeit by a small margin. x These residents are also more likely to feel that the Town should allow building a second home on a property (18%). Transportation x Farmland owners are strongly against both, the development of new bike paths and tax increases for transportation infrastructure. They are less likely to agree that new bike paths should be created on the street shoulders when a street is being repaved (-17%), to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail (-29%), and on existing streets with signage and striping (-20%). x They are also less likely to support tax increases for maintenance of existing roadways (-16%), improving existing roadways (-17%), developing bike lanes (-24%), and expanding the bike trail network (-31%).  76 Table 6.1. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference COMMUNITY and QUALITY OF LIFE Overall Satisfaction with Quality of Life Satisfied/V. Satisfied 94% 84% -10% Reasons for Choosing to Live in Town: Agriculture Selected 5% 45% 41% Availability of land parcels of 5+ acres Selected 13% 32% 20% Born and raised here Selected 6% 37% 31% Cost of housing Selected 10% 0% -10% Low crime rate Selected 15% 15% -1% Natural features and open space Selected 46% 26% -19% Near family and friends Selected 14% 21% 7% Near job or employment opportunity Selected 14% 20% 6% Property taxes Selected 13% 6% -7% Proximity to urban center Selected 30% 12% -18% Quality of the local natural environment Selected 26% 10% -16% Quality of neighborhoods Selected 19% 4% -15% Quality of the school system Selected 35% 22% -12% Recreational opportunities Selected 4% 3% -1% Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle Selected 46% 39% -7% Factors That Impact Quality of Life: The Town of Oregon is a good place to raise a family. Agree/Strongly Agree 91% 84% -8% Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. Agree/Strongly Agree 67% 71% 4% Preserving and celebrating our community's history is important to my quality of life. Agree/Strongly Agree 46% 58% 12% The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. Agree/Strongly Agree 76% 68% -7% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. Agree/Strongly Agree 21% 21% 0% The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. Agree/Strongly Agree 26% 30% 4% FACILITIES and SERVICES Quality of Town Facilities and Services: Airstrips Good/Excellent 11% 23% 12% Cell service Good/Excellent 57% 63% 6% Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services Good/Excellent 73% 87% 14%  77 Table 6.2. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference Garbage and recycling service Good/Excellent 89% 74% -14% High speed internet and broadband service Good/Excellent 65% 50% -15% Parks and recreation Good/Excellent 82% 78% -5% Police and law enforcement services Good/Excellent 69% 72% 2% Street and road maintenance and repair Good/Excellent 55% 65% 9% Street and road plowing and treatment Good/Excellent 79% 80% 1% Town Government: Clerk's office, voting, etc. Good/Excellent 88% 83% -5% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Good/Excellent 54% 52% -2% Importance of Town Services: Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services Important/V. Import. 97% 92% -5% Police and law enforcement services Important/V. Import. 90% 87% -3% Street and road maintenance and repair Important/V. Import. 97% 90% -6% Street and road plowing and treatment Important/V. Import. 98% 91% -7% Parks and recreation Important/V. Import. 74% 50% -23% Garbage and recycling pick up Important/V. Import. 83% 63% -21% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Important/V. Import. 65% 59% -6% High speed internet / Broadband service Important/V. Import. 91% 85% -5% Cell service Important/V. Import. 96% 92% -4% Town government services Important/V. Import. 88% 76% -13% Preference for Frequency of Recycling Pickup: Prefer Weekly (More Frequent) Selected 22% 19% -3% Prefer Bi-Weekly (Current) Selected 68% 54% -15% No Preference Selected 10% 23% 13% NATURAL and CULTURAL RESOURCES Importance of Preserving Resources: Air quality Important/V. Import. 92% 77% -15% An environmentally sustainable community… Important/V. Import. 88% 69% -19% Cemetery space Important/V. Import. 14% 28% 15% Good farmland Important/V. Import. 75% 89% 14% Groundwater quality Important/V. Import. 99% 95% -4% Historic and cultural sites Important/V. Import. 49% 56% 7% Hunting and fishing areas Important/V. Import. 50% 43% -7% Lakes, rivers, and streams Important/V. Import. 93% 74% -20% Open space Important/V. Import. 94% 80% -14%  78 Table 6.3. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding Important/V. Import. 89% 70% -19% Wetlands Important/V. Import. 87% 72% -15% Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors Important/V. Import. 94% 79% -14% AGRICULTURE, LAND USE, and GROWTH Importance of Seeking Agreements with Neighboring Communities Important/V. Import. 76% 62% -14% Land Use and Planning Activities: Maintaining the Town's rural, agricultural landscape Important/V. Import. 85% 87% 2% Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur Important/V. Import. 95% 71% -24% Using or developing land is determined by landowners Important/V. Import. 48% 75% 27% Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties Important/V. Import. 92% 83% -9% Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development Important/V. Import. 90% 82% -8% Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs Important/V. Import. 44% 47% 3% Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood Important/V. Import. 91% 74% -17% Agricultural and Rural Character: Quarry operations are consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 38% 57% 19% Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 29% 18% -11% Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 76% 73% -4% Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 16% 21% 5% Solar farming is consistent with the Town's agricultural and rural character. Agree/Str. Agree 44% 36% -8% Concerns about Annexation of Property by the Village of Oregon Concerned/V. Concerned 65% 60% -4% Whether the Town of Oregon Should Consider Mechanisms to Avoid Annexation: Yes, if it does not increase residents' property taxes. Selected 41% 36% -6% Yes, even if it increases residents' property taxes. Selected 19% 17% -2%  79 Table 6.4. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. Selected 9% 11% 2% No, it is the property owners' decisions to make. Selected 16% 26% 11% Amount of Land Owned by Residents in the Town 2 acres or less 71% 1% -70% Ownership of Farmland: Do Not Own Farmland Selected - - - Own and Farm Selected - - - Own and Contract Out Selected - - - FUTURE VISION FOR THE TOWN Future of Residence in the Town of Oregon: I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. Selected 61% 69% 8% I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. Selected 13% 7% -6% I am considering a move elsewhere, but have not decided. Selected 9% 9% 0% Not sure. Selected 18% 15% -3% Future Directions for the Community: The Town has increased in population. Agree/Str. Agree 76% 62% -14% Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. Agree/Str. Agree 80% 87% 7% Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. Agree/Str. Agree 90% 79% -11% There is housing available for first-time buyers. Agree/Str. Agree 48% 35% -13% There are senior apartments available. Agree/Str. Agree 42% 27% -15% There is multi-generational housing available. Agree/Str. Agree 35% 36% 1% There is housing that allows aging in place. Agree/Str. Agree 60% 50% -10% There is housing available for young families. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 58% -9% There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. Agree/Str. Agree 72% 53% -20% There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. Agree/Str. Agree 78% 52% -26% There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 67% 60% -7% Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 19% 23% 4% The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. Agree/Str. Agree 73% 66% -7% There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 37% 29% -9%  80 Table 6.5. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference Future of Town Facilities and Services: Because current facilities are on land that may get annexed, the Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and Town operations. Agree/Str. Agree 50% 39% -11% The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 60% -5% The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 58% 33% -25% The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. Agree/Str. Agree 27% 16% -11% Future Community Initiatives: The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. Agree/Str. Agree 68% 65% -3% The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. Agree/Str. Agree 20% 33% 14% The Town should support residents' attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. Agree/Str. Agree 66% 43% -22% The Town should post "Welcome to the Town of Oregon" street signs at roads entering the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 25% 15% -10% The Town should honor its farming history and the current farm families actively farming. Agree/Str. Agree 68% 70% 2% The Town Center should include community gathering areas. Agree/Str. Agree 49% 42% -7% The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between govt. and residents. Agree/Str. Agree 74% 67% -7% The Town should arrange periodic info. sessions for residents on topics including taxes, zoning, and other topics. Agree/Str. Agree 81% 83% 2% Community Strengths That Should Be Preserved: Farmland Selected 50% 76% 27% Local cemeteries Selected 2% 15% 13% Low population density Selected 58% 51% -7% Natural areas Selected 75% 60% -15% Park lands Selected 36% 20% -15% Schools Selected 44% 39% -5% Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) Selected 22% 21% -1%  81 Table 6.6. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference Community Aspects that the Town Should Address: Attractions to bring people here Selected 15% 12% -3% Businesses located here Selected 40% 35% -5% Community gathering facilities Selected 35% 27% -8% Farmers actively farming Selected 60% 76% 16% Lack of downtown area, commercial district Selected 27% 28% 1% Population density Selected 49% 35% -14% HOUSING Residential Status Own single-family house — non-farm residence Selected 97% 30% -67% Own single-family house — farm residence Selected 1% 57% 56% Rent home Selected 0% 1% 1% Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners Selected 0% 0% 0% Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon Selected 1% 12% 12% Where Residential Growth Should Occur: Near Village of Oregon boundaries Selected 51% 53% 2% In new subdivisions Selected 17% 12% -5% Scattered along Town and County roads Selected 13% 13% 0% Clustered in farming areas Selected 1% 5% 4% In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions Selected 31% 40% 9% Residential growth should not occur in the Town Selected 27% 23% -4% No opinion Selected 9% 8% -1% Preference for Design of New Housing: Traditional Design Selected 31% 38% 7% Cluster Design Selected 69% 62% -7% Residential Growth over the Next 15 Years: The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. Agree/Str. Agree 63% 59% -3% Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. Agree/Str. Agree 66% 67% 1% The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. Agree/Str. Agree 34% 30% -4% The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. Agree/Str. Agree 40% 57% 18% The Town should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. Agree/Str. Agree 25% 26% 1%  82 Table 6.7. Difference between Farmland Owners vs. Other Residents Variable Indicator Farm Owners No Farm Difference TRANSPORTATION Opinions on New Bicycle Routes: Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. Agree/Str. Agree 65% 48% -17% Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. Agree/Str. Agree 76% 47% -29% Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. Agree/Str. Agree 53% 33% -20% Tax Increases for Transportation Infrastructure: Maintenance of existing roadways Support 59% 43% -16% Improving existing roadways Support 53% 37% -17% Developing bike lanes Support 43% 18% -24% Expanding the bike trail network Support 54% 23% -31%  83 SURVEY INSTRUMENT March 2025 Dear resident, The Town of Oregon is conducting a survey of residents to gather input on the future direction of our community. Your input is critical in this process. Survey responses will be used to help guide vision planning, future comprehensive plans, and ongoing policy making. We expect it will take you no more than 15 minutes to complete this survey. Please provide your input by completing the attached survey and returning it using the postage-paid envelope included. We ask that an adult member (age 18+) of your household fill out the questionnaire. The Survey Research Center (SRC) at the University of Wisconsin – River Falls is conducting the survey on our behalf. Your response will be treated in a completely confidential manner 1. The SRC will combine all responses, and results will be available in summarized form only. Your name will not be associated with your responses to survey questions. After you submit your survey response, if you would like to discuss the survey or Vision 2040 project with a Town official or staff member, please contact us via the Town of Oregon website at www.townoforegonwi.gov/contact-us. Please stay up to date on Town activities by subscribing to the Town’s email list for notifications of Town news and events. Sign up by navigating to www.townoforegonwi.gov/subscribe-to-updates. Thank you for your time and input. The Town of Oregon Board If another member of the household would also like to participate, please access the digital version of the survey by typing www.tinyurl.com/townoforegonwi into an internet browser or by using a device to click on the QR code: 1 This research has been approved by UW-River Fall’s Institutional Review Board (IRB# FY2025-42). Participation in this survey is voluntary, and you can stop at any time. If you choose not to participate or stop participating, or skip any questions, there will be no negative consequences to you. Participation will not expose you to any risk beyond the normal level of stress that is encountered in your daily routine. If you have concerns about the study, please contact Greg Ruegsegger, Chair of the IRB, at irb@uwrf.edu.  84 Fill the circle that most closely matches your opinion about the following questions 1. In general, how satisfied are you with the quality of life in the Town of Oregon? Very satisfied Satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Dissatisfied Very dissatisfied O O O O O 2. From the following list, select the THREE most important reasons you and your family choose to live in the Town of Oregon. Select three only. O Agriculture O Availability of land parcels of 5 + acres O Born and raised here O Cost of housing O Low crime rate O Natural features and open space O Near family and friends O Near job or employment opportunity O Property taxes O Proximity to urban center O Quality of the local natural environment O Quality of neighborhoods O Quality of the school system O Small town atmosphere or rural lifestyle O Recreational opportunities 3. Indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements about the Town of Oregon. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A a. The Town is a good place to raise a family. O O O O O O b. Seniors can live safely, independently, and comfortably in the Town of Oregon. O O O O O O c. Preserving and celebrating our community’s history is important to my quality of life. O O O O O O d. The overall character of the Town of Oregon should continue to be much like it is today. O O O O O O e. The Town of Oregon should grow to accommodate more homes and people. O O O O O O f. The Town should grow to accommodate more businesses and commercial lots. O O O O O O 4. The Town of Oregon provides weekly garbage pickup service and bi-weekly recycling service. What is your preference for the frequency of recycling pickup service? O Prefer weekly (more frequent) O Prefer bi-weekly (current schedule) O No preference 5. Rate the quality of each of the following services/facilities available to the Town of Oregon residents. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know/ No opinion a. Airstrips O O O O O b. Cell service O O O O O c. Fire protection and EMS/ambulance services O O O O O d. Garbage and recycling service O O O O O e. High speed internet and broadband service O O O O O f. Parks and recreation O O O O O g. Police and law enforcement O O O O O h. Street and road maintenance and repair O O O O O i. Street and road plowing and treatment O O O O O j. Town Govt.: Clerk’s office, voting, permits, etc. O O O O O k. Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) O O O O O  85 6. How important is it for the Town of Oregon to plan for or preserve each of the following: Very important Important Somewhat important Not at all important No opinion a. Air quality O O O O O b. An environmentally sustainable community that meets current residents’ resource needs without compromising the need of future generations O O O O O c. Cemetery space O O O O O d. Good farmland O O O O O e. Groundwater quality O O O O O f. Historic and cultural sites O O O O O g. Hunting and fishing areas O O O O O h. Lakes, rivers, and streams O O O O O i. Open space O O O O O j. Reduced stormwater runoff and flooding O O O O O k. Wetlands O O O O O l. Wildlife habitat and existing natural corridors O O O O O 7. How important is each of the following statements regarding land use and planning in the Town of Oregon. Very important Important Somewhat important Not at all important No opinion a. Maintaining the Town’s rural, agricultural landscape O O O O O b. Community planning and zoning to guide where and how development should occur O O O O O c. Using or developing land is determined by landowners O O O O O d. Protecting resident quality of life and property values from impacts of activities or development on neighboring properties O O O O O e. Requiring new development to pay fees to help defray costs of roads, parks, and other public services associated with that development O O O O O f. Encouraging new commercial enterprises within the Town to increase the tax base and local jobs O O O O O g. Ensuring that proposed developments consider the look and feel of the neighborhood O O O O O 8. How important is it for the Town of Oregon to seek agreements with the City of Fitchburg, Village of Brooklyn, and Village of Oregon on future land use and growth? Very important Important Somewhat important Not at all important No opinion O O O O O 9. Town of Oregon property owners can apply for annexation of their property that is contiguous to either the City of Fitchburg, Village of Brooklyn, or Village of Oregon. Should the Town of Oregon consider mechanisms to avoid annexation? Yes, if it does not increase residents’ property taxes. Yes, even if it increases residents’ property taxes. No, we need more housing and commercial development, and it should be in the Village. No, it is the property owners’ decisions to make. No opinion O O O O O  86 10. How concerned are you about the Village of Oregon annexing Town of Oregon property? Very concerned Concerned Somewhat concerned Not at all concerned No opinion O O O O O 11. Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements regarding agriculture and land use in the Town of Oregon. Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree N/A a. Quarry operations are consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. O O O O O O b. Converting farmland to non-farm uses is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. O O O O O O c. Marketing agricultural products locally is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. O O O O O O d. Conflicts between farms, commercial operations, and neighbors (dust, noise, traffic, odors) are common in the Town. O O O O O O e. Solar farming is consistent with the Town’s agricultural and rural character. O O O O O O 12. Which of the following statements best describes your future as a resident of the Town of Oregon. I anticipate still living in the Town of Oregon in 2040. I anticipate moving elsewhere between now and 2040. I am considering a move elsewhere but have not decided. Not sure. O O O O 13. Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements concerning community services, projects, and initiatives offered in the Town of Oregon over the next 15 years. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree a. The Town should celebrate the diversity of farm, rural, and neighborhood residents. O O O O O b. The Town should allow ATV/UTV traffic on Town roads. O O O O O c. The Town should support residents’ attempts to adapt to the local effects of climate change. O O O O O d. The Town should post “Welcome to the Town of Oregon” street signs at roads entering the Town. O O O O O e. The Town should honor it farming history and the current farm families actively farming. O O O O O f. The Town Center should include community gathering areas. O O O O O g. The Town should develop its communication networks to maximize the exchange of information between Town govt and residents. O O O O O h. The Town should arrange periodic information sessions for residents on topics including taxes, property, zoning, and other topics. O O O O O  87 14. The following statements suggest future directions for the Town of Oregon community. Please indicate your level of agreement for each when considering the Town in 2040 (15 years into the future). Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree a. The Town has increased in population. O O O O O b. Agricultural lands are used for a variety of farming enterprises. O O O O O c. Natural areas have been preserved and enhanced. O O O O O d. There is housing available for first-time buyers. O O O O O e. There are senior apartments available. O O O O O f. There is multi-generational housing available. O O O O O g. There is housing that allows aging in place. O O O O O h. There is housing available for young families. O O O O O i. There is a network of bike routes and paths connecting the Town to neighboring communities. O O O O O j. There are recreational opportunities available for youth and adults. O O O O O k. There are a variety of small, local businesses operating within the Town. O O O O O l. Larger agricultural businesses have chosen to locate in the Town. O O O O O m. The Town has pursued fiber-to-premises broadband internet for all households. O O O O O n. There are a variety of tourism and recreation- oriented businesses in the Town. O O O O O 15. How important to you is each of the following Town of Oregon services? Very important Important Somewhat important Not at all important No opinion a. Fire protection and EMS / Ambulance Services O O O O O b. Police and law enforcement services O O O O O c. Street and road maintenance and repair O O O O O d. Street and road plowing and treatment O O O O O e. Parks and recreation O O O O O f. Garbage and recycling pick up O O O O O g. Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) O O O O O h. High speed internet / Broadband service O O O O O i. Cell service O O O O O j. Town government services (Clerk’s office, voting, permits, etc.) O O O O O  88 16. Indicate your level of agreement with the following statements concerning services offered by the Town of Oregon over the next 15 years. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree a. The current Town Hall and Garage facilities are on land that the Village may eventually annex. The Town should purchase land to build and own a new Town Hall and Garage to accommodate staff offices, resident services, and operations. O O O O O b. The Town should reduce use of salt on roads for winter de-icing, based on protocols recommended by the WI Saltwise program. O O O O O c. The Town should expand and improve yard waste composting facilities. O O O O O d. The Town should increase taxes to pay for increased services and facilities. O O O O O 17. Community Strengths — From the following list, select the THREE most important strengths of the Town of Oregon that you believe we should most preserve and/or build upon. Select three only. O Farmland O Schools O Local cemeteries O Town of Oregon Refuse Center (TORC) O Low population density O Other 1, please specify: __________________________ O Natural areas O Other 2, please specify: __________________________ O Park lands O Other 3, please specify: __________________________ 18. From the following list, select the THREE most important aspects of our community that you believe the Town should address or support. Select three only. O Attractions to bring people here O Lack of downtown area, commercial district O Businesses located here O Other 1, please specify: __________________________ O Community gathering facilities O Other 2, please specify: __________________________ O Farmers actively farming O Other 3, please specify: __________________________ O Population density 19. What is your residential status in the Town of Oregon? Select all that apply. O Own single-family house – non-farm residence O Live with parents, family, or friends who are the owners O Own single-family house – farm residence O Own property but do not live in the Town of Oregon O Rent home O Other: ______________________ 20. Regarding the design of new housing in the Town, would you prefer: Option A — housing built in a traditional design with larger individual lots and no open space; or Option B — an open space/cluster design with smaller individual lots and open space that is permanently preserved? Both options in this example contain the same number of housing lots. Option A O Option B O  89 21. Where in the Town do you prefer residential growth to occur? Select all that apply. O In new subdivisions O In new subdivisions adjacent to existing subdivisions O Near Village of Oregon boundaries O Scattered along Town and County roads O Clustered in farming areas O No opinion O Residential growth should not occur in the Town 22. Indicate your level of agreement regarding residential growth in the Town of Oregon over the next 15 years. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree a. The Town of Oregon should restrict new housing development. O O O O O b. Housing development should occur primarily in the Village of Oregon, not in the Town. O O O O O c. The Town of Oregon should encourage housing development as a way to increase tax revenue. O O O O O d. The Town of Oregon should allow building a second home on a property. O O O O O e. The Town of Oregon should encourage increased density and smaller lots to expand housing availability. O O O O O 23. Would you support or oppose tax increases for the following? Support Neutral / Not sure Oppose a. Maintenance of existing roadways O O O b. Improving existing roadways O O O c. Developing bike lanes O O O d. Expanding the bike trail network O O O 24. To what extent do you agree with the following statements concerning bicycle routes? Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree a. Paved bike lanes should be created on street shoulders when a street is being repaved. O O O O O b. Designated bike paths should be built to connect to the Oregon Rotary Trail and the Badger State Trail. O O O O O c. Bike lanes should be established on existing streets with signage and striping. O O O O O DEMOGRAPHICS 25. How long have you lived in the Town of Oregon? Property owner only. I do not live in the Town. Less than one year 1—5 years 6—10 years 11— 20 years More than 20 years O O O O O O 26. How do you identify your gender? Man Woman Non-binary Prefer not to answer Prefer to self-describe: ________________ O O O O O  90 27. What is your age? 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+ O O O O O O O 28. What is your employment status? Employed full-time Employed part-time Self- employed Not employed, looking for work Not employed, not looking for work Retired Prefer not to disclose O O O O O O O 29. If you own land in the Town of Oregon, please indicate the total number of acres you own. Do not own land in the Town of Oregon Less than 1 acre 1—2 acres 3—5 acres 6—20 acres 21—34 acres 35—100 acres 101—200 acres More than 200 acres O O O O O O O O O 30. Do you own farmland in the Town of Oregon? Select all that apply. No, I don’t own farmland in the Town Own and farm agricultural land Own agricultural land and contract out farming O O O 31. Including you, how many adults and children are in your household? 0 1 2 3 4 5+ Adults (18 or older) O O O O O O Children (under 18) O O O O O O 32. What was your approximate household income in 2024? Include income from all sources such as employment, farming, public programs (e.g. Social Security), etc. Less than $15,000 $15,000 - $25,000 $25,001 - $50,000 $50,001 - $75,000 $75,001 - $100,000 $100,001 - $150,000 More than $150,000 O O O O O O O OPEN-ENDED COMMENT AND FEEDBACK (optional) In this section, you are welcome to provide more details about or clarification of your survey answers, offer ideas or comments related to the Town’s Vision 2040 project, suggest topics and perspectives that were not covered in the survey questions, and provide any other feedback. Please also consider these questions: If you could be transported to the Town of Oregon in the year 2040, what would the Town be like? What would be similar to today in 15 years, and what would be different? What would be better? What would not be better? What should we do today to make living in the Town better in 2040? THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THE SURVEY Please return the survey in the postage-paid envelope provided.  91 LIST OF OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS Growth and Rural Character I would like to see a town that cares to include goals related to diversity and inclusion in their mission, this is a very nice place to live and I would like to see that in 15 years we have more diverse neighbors, enjoying what this community has to offer. Also, I would be saddened to see new build developments eating up the natural spaces - like those in the village. Growth is important, but making sure it is controlled to maintain our natural resources, small and local business, quality of life is critical. In 2040 would hope to have strong agricultural base in the Town with maintenance and expansion of natural areas. While the population may be anticipated to increase some the density should remain low. I do not see business or commercial development in the Town as that should be part of the Village which by 2040 undoubtedly will be the City. I hope very much that the Township will have a similar feel to today in 2040. Keep it the same! Keep Oregon small and well maintained Keep the town as is! It would be wonderful if, in 2040, I could drive around the town and see that nothing has changed. Our population is aging with fewer young families moving in. Stay the same. The level of noise pollution from small aircraft, powered parachutes, motorcycles, and vehicles has become a significant issue and negatively impacts the quality of life that made living in the town attractive. The population must stay low to preserve the character and quality of life in the town The Town of Oregon should try to maintain what we have today. Obviously, the will be growth in the next 15 years but to try and preserve what we have today is what will make the area enjoyable to live in. I am in favor of growth, but it should be implemented in a way that tries to preserve the area as it is. Village must not expand beyond current limits, it is already too large. We hope that the town will be very similar to what it is now in 2040. Our children may want to live here after we have passed on. I like the feel of the Town, however we are seeing more and more traffic on town roads, as people commute to Madison. The Town does need to grow, and any development should be responsible for incorporating infrastructure, not the current residents. We have numerous bike riders using the Town roads, it would behoove us to add a bike lane where and whenever  92 possible. Is there any way to target bike riders to help fray the cost of bike paths/lanes. A wheel tax of some sort or a license of some type. I'm in favor of limited, smart growth, with large lots. We shouldn't lose too much of our farmland. I would pay higher taxes to ensure we aren't overrun with new housing or lose our agricultural and outdoor land. In the future, I hope that the town will be more connected to other communities through recreation, while maintaining open space in farmland and implementing smaller residential subdivisions spread out as to not have an urban feel Residents would be required to keep their land according to ordinances (IE no excessive junk on properties and yards maintained). There would be plenty of parks with hiking, biking and trail systems. Residential development would be the same as today with no new developments which take up green space. Better connection of sidewalks to the Village of Oregon. Increased commercial corridor would be in the Village and not the town The same environment. Dane County is rapidly growing as is our core city Madison as well as the surrounding ring of villages, including Village of Oregon. The rural towns are not growing as fast and I do not anticipate them to grow as fast. We should encourage growth in our cities and villages and maintain our agriculture base to provide food and fiber. This will be a combination of large farms and smaller specialized farms like Carandale and the orchards on Alpine Road. This is a huge opportunity for the Town to gather input and achieve a great balance for all the residents of Oregon. Change is inevitable, but that does not mean that it has to be a negative. The Town is located around great job centers. The overall tax base of the Town can be managed to achieve growth while also building resilient infrastructure so that long-term costs can be controlled. If you build quality subdivisions like Hampton Hills and Raven Oaks there is relatively low maintenance cost but an increased tax base that can help support the infrastructure throughout the rest of the Town. Without proper growth the Town of Oregon will not be sustainable in the near future. Property taxes will continue out of control. Focus on the town hall for a central information/service hub. Signage to direct new people and visitors to promote an enjoyable town experience. The town is being annexed by the Village of Oregon and therefore needs to increase new construction to maintain/ increase that Dose to provide needed services/ revenue. Increased revenue would lessen the need to borrow funds for general maintenance and town services. I think a town center (like the Paoli mill) would be nice and would grow small businesses. Something should be done about baking safety on roads - the roads are narrow and winding, and cars go very fast around curves, plus there can be a lot of bikers! I would not like to see a bunch of new large subdivisions be built, they ruin town character. smaller groupings of homes could be built more tastefully, without ruining the character. We moved here from CA. We were attracted to the land and spacing, knowing we weren't too far from town or big cities. It's the perfect middle ground. There aren't a lot of places that can  93 claim that, and that is what makes Oregon such an ideal and attractive place to live. Small towns that continue to grow unchecked lose their history, their charm. There are other ways to grow than in population. In 15 years, I hope that the businesses grow and thrive and that population remains relatively a happy medium to honor the balance of natural land and community. That it is someplace I want to grow old in, and can be glad to have chosen this town as our place to raise our family. I have enjoyed living here for more than 50 years. My children received an excellent education’s primary importance. Live in a rural development with the best neighbors and am grateful each day for my quality of life. Close enough to urban amenities and am able to walk out my door and have a good, long hike in the woods. I would hope someone would be able to say the same in 2040 I live here because of the rural, non-crowded feel. That should not change. I really like the rural feel of our town and how it is not commercialized with chain stores/restaurants. I grew up in a small Wisconsin town of 2,700 people, so I am biased of course :) I think our strengths lie in our rural setting and history. I understand the need for development and growth, but am deeply saddened to see huge apartment blocks eat up beautiful natural settings, such as one finds along Irish Lane, and on MM. Imagine a community of housing built around green space, with a "barn" community building, community gardens, connecting bike trails, and businesses that would support and thrive in such a community. I would hope that the town would still be beautiful; that Union Rd, Glenway Rd, Tipperary Rd, and CRC A and D would continue to attract bicyclists for their rural character. I would hope that the town would not disappear as a result of incursions from the surrounding communities, the addition of sprawling subdivisions within the town, an expanded commercial presence, or a peppering of overbuilt estates throughout the countryside. I would prefer maintaining the small town, rural feel of the town by restricting development and maintaining natural spaces. Increased taxes are preferable to increased residents to maintain the town as it is now. I’d like the town of Oregon to continue to be a great place to raise a family, with parks and excellent schools. I think it’s important to create housing opportunities for others as well as keep the feel of being a small town, with lower taxes and a more rural lifestyle, while still attracting business to our area. Ideally very similar to how it is today. Without Village of Oregon annexation. Mostly farmland without invasion of subdivisions, solar farms and high density housing. A rural community with affordable taxes. If people wanted to have all the amenities of city/village living, that’s where they would choose to live. People chose rural/country for a reason. Larger lots, more trees, nature, less people and more space. Keep that spirit alive in the town of Oregon. Important to preserve rural characteristics Maintain population density to keep rural feel. Maintaining the Town's rural character and identity is very important.  94 Please keep the Town rural, open and green. Please maintain the current rural character and don't develop further. Look at how Fitchburg is being ruined. Population expansion should come from the Village of Oregon, if necessary. The majority of the Township should remain rural. Protect the towns borders from being annexed. Make it so people want to keep their property in the town when they sell their land instead of annexing to a nearby village. Add some subdivisions to increase tax base. Keep rural feel-enough neighboring communities have businesses. The Town Board faces tough decisions which are made more difficult due to the State of Wisconsin's restrictions on the ability of local governments to raise revenue and enact local priorities. As much as possible, I would like the Town to retain its rural character and avoid housing development. I think the Town should consider raising tax bills if needed rather than reducing Town services and quality of life and sometimes this costs residents less (example: the cost to residents for Pelleteri's services vs. the cost when it was done by TORC). The Town of Oregon should do everything in its power to remain a rural haven. The town of Oregon should remain rural and not encourage more residential builds This was a rural farming community. I strongly feel it should remain that way. We are hoping the Town of Oregon can continue its rural/agricultural feel for the foreseeable future. We bought land here to farm and to also rent for farmlands. We would like to add to our acreage of FARM acres, but it is too expensive to do so as everyone thinks their land will be the next big "development" land. We moved to Swann Creek in Fitchburg 20 years ago because of the closeness to Madison while still providing a smaller town feel. The DNR hunting land was still used regularly by hunters and the Northeast Neighborhood had not been developed. We moved out eight years ago as the density increased and the subsequent challenges occurred. It is rare to find the combination of a rural area in close proximity to an urban area such as the Town of Oregon to Madison. I feel if I were looking out to 2040, I would like the Town to retain nearly all the rural character it has today. Sometimes we mistake that to make living in the Town better means things should change. I would argue the way to make the Town better in 2040 would be to maintain its population density and character of today despite the pressures otherwise. There are communities all around us that will continue to develop farmland into residential developments and business parks. I would love that what made us unique was maintaining why people moved to the Town of Oregon to begin with. We should preserve the rural feel of our community. We should focus on larger lots and preserving wooded areas if there is growth. A moderate amount of population growth would be OK. We should maintain our ability to recycle and dispose of natural waste at the torc or something similar. We waited patiently for years for a properly zoned piece of land to become available upon which we could build. We want to build our forever home in the Town because of its rural nature and charm. We love the local farmers and support their local farmstands. We love the small  95 community that knows each other well. We love and support the village too, but chose to make the Town our forever home BECAUSE of its dedication to preserving farmland and open space and tight-knit residents. The Town has always been so pro-farmland and rural lifestyle, it would break our hearts to have developments pop up and lose everything we waited so long to be a part of! Would like to see Dark Skies all over town. Would like to see small farms and open space. Any business would be small and rural directed or focused. Clean air and water. Non-polluting energy - solar, wind, geothermal, nuclear. Stable population. This survey has MANY ambiguous questions and many answers are determined by state, county, and local zoning regulations and laws which make many answers impossible to interpret. Obviously, certain changes will have to be made in the Town of Oregon - ie roads need to be maintained/upgraded as needed, trash collection updated as needed, etc. But many residents here I believe purchased their properties because of the current lifestyle and would like it to continue for many years. Housing and Development I don't necessarily see the need to keep Town of Oregon separate from Village as long as the zoning is used so that there would still be open areas of farmland with residential housing communities and light business scattered in between. Even with increased need for housing, people still need areas of less density just to be able to breathe. The trick of course is how is the cost of services allocated among closely packed populations who have the greater use/need of those services and folks who hardly need them at all. I'd rather see the town establish a business park in a strategic location, then allow businesses (especially mfg or commercial) to pop up just anywhere. The Town should limit new buildings - limit new housing, limit new businesses, limit developments. I am pretty sure the developers and investors will try to bribe or force their way to develop the town lands and unfortunately some may succeed. I own a parcel adjacent to the village. There is one house which I rent to my sister. I am exploring a conservation easement for the 5 acres that were previously used as a hayfield and are now being developed as a prairie restoration project. I would like to see less sprawl. build in neighborhoods but don't pack them in. Don't force farmers out of their property just to build a neighborhood. don't be stingy on the lot size. Make it safe for bikers on the roads (they don't seem to want to travel on the bike paths. I’m proud of the community we live in. While I want to see it grow and kept up, I am fearful of it growing too rapidly. My family has deep farming roots and this is what attracted us to the community and our property to begin with. As urban sprawl continues south from Madison, it challenges the identities and benefits of our smaller communities. I feel it is the Town’s responsibility to protect this way of living. While I do want to see our community continue to grow and prosper, it needs to be done mindfully and at a pace that will protect our identity. Just because something is the new normal in Madison or even the Village of Oregon, it does  96 not mean we need to feel pressured to adapt to it. If potential residents want a more urban feel, there’s plenty of other communities closer to Madison for them. More competition for restaurants and bars with many having opened and closed. More parks with bathroom facilities on/in all neighborhoods and border areas as well as easy access to and from areas ....with no gated communities and plenty of police or security throughout Please do not make it non-stop subdivisions like Fitchburg. Please end quarry operations. Preserve farmland and avoid building large apartment complexes or town houses. The quarry should not be allowed to expand. They violate the agreements in place by operating as early as 6 am in summer and on weekends. Calling to complain each time they are in violation shouldn't be the responsibility of residents. They know they are violating the rules, and I think our Town should police them regularly. They are a nuisance. The way things are going right now there will be subdivisions destroying every open space. Country living will be a thing of the past. I live where I do because I’m in the country. Please don’t bring a subdivision and increased traffic to me. We do not need to duplicate what is already in the Village of Oregon. People moving to the Town of Oregon should accept it for what it is and not try to change it to adapt to their lifestyle. My new younger neighbors complain of the lack of conveniences. Then why move here? If you want urban conveniences, move to urban areas. Farming needs to be protected and encouraged. Any new developments will follow a low-density, eco-conscious model, integrating green spaces, walking trails, and community gardens. Growth in both the village and the township are inevitable. However, so is the need for open space. Recent large scale developments, like Bergamont are, in my opinion, inappropriate with regard to scale, land-use, density, resource utilization and aquifer impacts. High end sprawl is still sprawl. Cluster development with maximum preservation of open land, as well as policies that encourage density in the village and walkability/ bike ability would be possible solutions to the inevitable growth pressures that will occur. To leave the determination of future growth--in the village or the township--to the vagaries of developers' self-interest and "the market" would be a missed opportunity and a huge mistake. I prefer open space to new upscale housing developments. I propose pausing the construction of homes and apartments for a couple of years. This pause would provide the community with time to adjust to the rapid population growth. Love the Dog Park at Anderson Farms and the new Library in the village. Those were examples of good additions and smart development. New housing developments should be connected to the existing infrastructure of the sewer and water in the Village of Oregon.  97 Open land and natural resources are very important. We don’t favor housing development in the Town. We moved here to be close enough to convinces, but far enough away from others. Now housing is slowly encroaching on our place. If housing continues to build closer to our place we will be moving out of the area. We moved to the township because of the ability to have a hobby farm with livestock and space. I’d prefer more land stay consistent with single families homes and acreage but recognize that limited residential development will help provide an adequate tax base. Surrounding development with protected park and wildlife land will ensure that we don’t see too much development that ruins that character of this area. It would be nice if we were able to develop a second residence at our property because of the needs of our aging parents or perhaps adult children after high school. I’d much prefer this approach versus tearing down a farmhouse to build a multi generational home. We need to be thoughtful about expansion and development. If it's planned well it can match the look and feel of the community. But when it's haphazard it can be an eyesore. What we really like about the town is that we have space to breathe and enjoy our home without excessive noise or development. It is very important to us that taxes remain low, and that the town resist the high density housing that seems to be popping up everywhere. We live in a neighborhood that’s fairly isolated, it would be helpful if there were bike paths that families could safely use to get into Town or elsewhere. Biking on the county highways is just too dangerous. Something that we see as a general problem is that everything is getting too expensive and that only wealthy people will be able to afford living here in the future. I would love to see affordable family homes in this area for middle income earners, right now it seems that the housing or land availability favors the rich or existing landowners. Try to stop the village from taking land!! You have to become more than a township to prevent this. More police on roads the village is sending cars. Trucks more TRAFFIC. Keep development to a minimum. People like this area because it is rural. OUTSIDE of town. Quiet. More housing availability and sustained pro-active efforts to promote new businesses locating in the Town in order to maintain or reduce the tax burden for residents. Agreements with neighboring cities/villages regarding annexation issues. Substantive talks with the Village of Oregon regarding a merger in order to prevent unwanted annexation by others. Relocate the Town Hall and Shop/garage and utilize the sale proceeds of the current location to fund much of the costs involved. Invest in recreation areas. Be proactive in identifying specific areas for residential subdivision development ahead of time that can meet both goals of keeping ag land in ag and maintaining the rural feel of the Town. Nice quiet rural town that doesn’t get overtaken by housing developments. Hope it stays farming community The Town will still have a strong rural identity, but with strategic development focused on agriculture, conservation, and controlled residential expansion. We like the mix of the rural and village life in our area, with easy access to cultural/enrichment activities in surrounding communities. However there is a need for more senior housing  98 choices, that are affordable, along with services to support seniors. More small business opportunities would enhance the quality of life , and provide some variety and choices. We should not allow High Density McMansion developments to be constructed in The Town of Oregon. The Rural / Pro-Farming / undeveloped areas are what make town of Oregon special. We should not allow neighboring towns to annex ANY of our property. We strongly need road repairs on many rural roads which could lead to tax increases which we support. Using or Developing land is determined by the owners. Does this mean an owner could put a gun range on their property? Build a 2nd home? Also large lots to encourage residence with small business on same property. It needs to grow, bring in some business and more housing. I believe a second house on a large property should be allowed if occupants of the 2nd house are related to the owner of the first. I also think a limit to house square footage when applying for a building permit should be instituted. I feel strongly about being able to build a second house on my 14 acres so I can downsize and pass my large home on to my family 1. Population density same but more diversity and some low income housing. 2. Roads better and safer. 3. Address garbage/refuse in and on roadsides and right of way areas due to garbage pickup service. I don't understand why new homes are so ridiculously large and expensive with no land and why they are built 10 feet apart. I consider this destruction, not development. Also, I worry about crime near low income apartments. I support the creation of affordable housing. I think Oregon (village and/or town) is going to need more assisted living or retirement-stepdown communities by 2040. It's also likely going to need more childcare facilities if we plan to build more homes. I would love to see farm fields preserved. I would also like mor housing in the town. I believe there are many wooded areas in our town that could be developed without affecting the rural life/landscape of the town. I believe they could be used to help create density units in the town and protect our farm fields. Increased Housing and support for economically struggling people. More homes here is good. We might as well benefit from the growing tax base vs other Towns or the Village. No more new housing. The town is getting crowded enough. Don’t force residents to pay for garbage pick up when they don’t want it. No bike lanes, bikers are a giant pain in the ass. We have loved living in the Town for over 35 years. We are currently considering our options for "aging in place.” It seems the only option within the Town would be to remodel our home which would mean an addition. Really wish there was an option similar to Raven Oaks  99 neighborhood available that offered availability for single family, or even multi-generational housing which will likely be an important part of housing solutions going forward. I dream of 1 acre+ home lots with ability to add second home by attaching to existing like a duplex to encourage extended family or aging family. Large residential lot to encourage use of gardening, solar and pets in keeping with rural life. (There is plenty of high density living in other parts of Dane Co) I would hope for our town board to seek to keep the Town of Oregon similar in its rural character, but allow for some residential expansion next to the Village of Oregon border or next to standing neighborhood developments. Keeping the open farm spaces is important to that rural character. To serve young families in the area, developing and maintaining more park areas is important. Knowing that some tax base has to be developed, judicious zoning for commercial or business development near the border of the Village of Oregon would probably be necessary. No new subdivisions!! No increase in residential housing stay with one lot for every 35 acres owned. Leave people alone. Let them have their privacy. Do not encourage more bicycles on rural roads Of course we as current homeowners would love for the town to remain rural. But none of my working kids, or their friends, can afford to buy homes. Being this close to growing Madison, we need to accommodate additional growth which helps make homes affordable. There is a dire shortage of housing and the larger area is growing. The Town needs to change from all rural and large lot for the sake of younger generations. Preserve rural feel, parks and open green space while encouraging housing for affordable housing. Facilities and Services I feel we need to keep a small community and our police need to drive through the township more. They never come through Fahey heights more and the snow removal has been unacceptable the few years. The township doesn't want to join the village. If the township is removed I will sell my property. I enjoy a quiet friendly small community. But people drive to fast in Fahey heights so it would be nice if the police came out here more to stop the speeding. Access to high speed internet and improved cell services would improve life in this area and be helpful for new businesses and developments. I wish curbside garbage services had never been adopted and that TORC had been expanded to include more opportunities for "trash" to be recycled and up-cycled (for clothes, bikes, intact furniture, hardware, etc.) and to have included a library of tools (not limited to gardening tools, but bike repair, construction, shop vacs, sewing machines, generators...all of . which could easily have been sourced via donations.) And in light of that.. transparency in local government operations to prevent conflicts or interest and to discourage unhanded manipulation by parties to influence outcomes. If I clean up my yard on a Sunday, I have to store my lawn waste for 6 days. If it rains during that 6 days the lawn waste is wet and stinky and much harder to pack up and haul to the dump.  100 New centrally-located Town center/government facilities. Slightly increased density of housing. commercial development limited to ag businesses. No big stores. No conveniences/grocery stores. Extend hours for dropping off yard waste to include one day midweek, spring through fall. A few hours during that day. You should only need one attendant for this! Fiber needs to get here ASAP. I don't mind the at-home garbage collection situation now (instead of bringing it to the TORC), but I am paying a lot more for it now because we typically put garbage/recycling out only once a month. It would be great to find a better solution that doesn't also cost more; brighter minds than mine may come up with something better. I value the Oregon TORC. I do like having the ability to drop off items during the week as well as weekends. I would like recycling to be weekly in December. Too many overflowing bins during the Christmas season. On the garbage pick up - we have a 1000 foot gravel driveway, and already had a dumpster on the site - so being forced to sign up for additional pick up wasn't very helpful. I'm sure it's fine for others with a different situation. Recycling is not frequent enough. Provide two cans if necessary. Road maintenance in the Raven Oaks neighborhood is poor and getting worse. The area for brush and tree disposal can be somewhat chaotic and congested at times. Better traffic patterns would help. The scouts bring a lot of value to the community; can they have storage space? Can we get a space for community camping? The TORC availability is very poor since contracting with Pelliteri. It should accept all recycling and large items and have much better hours. The town should have a place to dump lawn waste 24/7 just like the Village of Oregon has. To make things better today, give more access to the recycling center/dump. Difficult for residents to get rid of refuse - cardboard, electronics, etc. TORC could have one area to allow lawn waste to be dumped at any time unmanned. Dropping off lawn waste only on Saturday mornings is inconvenient and the area is usually crowded and unorganized. We would like the TORC to be open more hours in the summer and fall. There just isn’t enough time in one day to haul all the yard waste, especially leaves in Autumn. We would like TORC hours increased, and open on additional days in the growing season and fall. Would like to see TORC trash/recycling be brought back / made optional instead of curbside. Curbside - would rather do recycling every week and trash every other (many produce more recycling than trash). Many things without strong opinions because it depends on what the  101 plans presented would look like. While we need support for EMS/Fire/Law enforcement, we need to make sure we continue to have access through neighboring communities - as we largely do today. Would love to see the TORC expand. I feel the Township is generally under good leadership, except for the inept failure of communication for the TORC. Much of the community thought trash pickup was a joke. Many of us are on very long driveways. I feel for seniors that were forced to push/pull bins to the road. Have lived in the town for over 40 years and loved it. The only problem that appeared was the weekly trash pick up replacing Torc. Someone should have their head examined . We just love seeing those lovely barrels be the homes. Would like a site (whether at TORC or elsewhere) to be open 24/7 for yard waste drop-off, such as in the Villages of Oregon and Brooklyn. Most homes in the Town have much larger yards than in the villages, and TORC has extremely limited hours for drop-off which often times are incompatible with our schedules. Better access to utilities like high speed internet and natural gas. Improved roadways High speed internet would be available I hope we have internet and better cell service than we do now. Internet omg. I would have preferred that township let individual households make the choice to contract for trash/recycling or make it an opt in program partially administered by the township. I already pay for large dumpster service so the curbside pick up is of no benefit to me and I feel like it has significantly increased the amount of litter along the rural roadways. I’ve personally seen trash fly through the air on windy days during the pickup process. I don’t understand why the township needed to provide this service versus allowing households to contract privately - maybe you can pull our resources and provide septic pump outs at lower cost next? I would like the town to have a wider view of the people that live in the community. We should not be divided by the political lines that seem to haunt the entire nation. Most of us choose to live in the town because it is a quieter life. We need to honor that with our views of environmental sustainability and wild spaces. A few examples of areas that the town needs to have a wider view...garbage, by paying a flat fee for garbage and recycling, we are rewarded people that throw a lot of things away. By paying per bag of garbage we are rewarded people who recycle and compost. I only have a bag of garbage every other month. We should I have to pay the same amount as someone that throws out four or five bags a week. Also...not being able to fight for our rural lifestyles...for instance not having a say about an asphalt plant in our backyards...that has destroyed our water quality. I now have arsenic in my water ever since the asphalt plant and gravel plant became part of our community. Find ways that generate income that are NOT destructive of our planet. More broadband options will increase rural property values. prefer this over higher density. Add 24/7 for TORC for yard compost or add a totally new drop off area. See if McKay Purple Cow would partner/sponsor.  102 Maintain services without increasing taxes. Re open the dump and let us haul our garbage there! The dumpsters at the end of my driveway are an eye sore. The additional taxes are a problem. Closing the dump was the worst public policy ever... We love living in the town of Oregon and feel the services provided at the town hall are excellent (especially the ease of voting and permits). We support things that are environmentally friendly and we enjoy the bike paths and parks that have been added. One thing that we hope to see in the future is hi speed internet and cable options as well as better cell service. We also would like to see Lincoln Road widened for the safety of walking and biking. We hope to also see more doggie parks. We support planned growth and are willing to increase taxes for more services. It would be nice to have additional staffing/equipment for snow removal. The town has a lot of ground to cover with only two plows/drivers, so often times it takes a long time for roads to be cleared adequately, and the snow is compacted down by traffic making it more difficult to clear. Plow roads very early morning, even on weekends. People work early shifts on weekends. Prioritize plowing dangerous hills. Seniors who need services ( including transportation) should live in areas those services already exist. Town of Oregon should not go out of our way to create those services. Sweep roads in Spring, especially after plows disturb new road surfaces and generate large amounts of gravel on roads. Village should not annex town hall, garage etc. Why do we need the expense of building new facilities? Oregon should have a brush drop off site that is open at all daylight hours, like the village does. Roads should be adequately maintained. No school questions. Biking Paths Farms that are various type service businesses more small housing developments better roads with safer intersections some bike paths on roads that make sense bikes on the hilly twisting roads seem unsafe and inefficient we all like those roads but don’t want to hurt anyone because we have to share them with bikes no priority to bikes in other words I would hope it would be similar to today, but with more bike lanes and a thriving downtown area that has an abundance of shops and dining options owned by small businesses owners Bike lanes on wider roads would be great! Bikers prefer not to go on the trails (they are too flat) it’s a real problem in our Sun Valley neighborhood. So many hills and too many bikers. Not a good combination!  103 I just moved to the town of Oregon and love the neighborhood feel here. I would love to see more bike paths and sidewalks so our neighborhood is more accessible for walking, especially when we have few hours of daylight in the winter. I live in Raven Oaks, and I would like to see the town work with the state to put in a sidewalk or bike path leading from the Badger State Trail parking lot on Purcell up Sayles Trail to the entrance to the Raven Oaks neighborhood. Sayles Trail is getting busier and busier with foot, bike and car traffic, and the shoulders are not suitable for pedestrians. Please help us make this short section of road safer for everyone. I would strongly support the expansion of bike trails to connect the town to the badger State Trail. I would also strongly support making bicycling throughout the town and into Fitchburg safer. I would hope that we prioritize our residents ability to enjoy natural spaces such as hiking trails similar to the Ice Age trail segments around here. More extensive bike trails connecting neighborhoods to other areas. Why would I envisions things getting worse? The biking connectivity could be better; existing roads should be modified to create wide area loops so people can take longer bike rides without fighting cars. Bike paths that connect the community to city center, kids can’t currently bike to town. This is a quiet place to raise a family. It