On 06/01/2022 Resolution 5-R-22, the Water Main Resolution, was taken up first by a joint meeting of the Finance and Utilities Committee and then by the full Common Council.
During the joint committee meeting, the resolution was amended to remove the language about reallocating American Rescue Plan Act funds to go toward replacing 4” and 6” water mains and language was inserted in which the Appleton simply asked the State of Wisconsin for $12 million to go toward that project.
During the Common Council meeting, the resolution was amended further to ask the state for $35.1 million instead of $12 million because that would be enough money to cover the cost of replacing all of the remaining 4” and 6” watermains in the city.
The amended version was then passed by the Common Council by a vote of 12 to 2 with Alderpersons Brad Firkus (District 3) and Chad Doran (District 15) casting the 2 nay votes.
There were some major audio issues during the committee meeting, and only half the speakers were picked up by microphones and could be heard on the video, so I’ll just give a brief overview of what happened during that meeting.
Alderperson Doran explained that he was bringing the resolution forward because, as noted in the staff memo, Appleton was on a trajectory to replace the city’s roads and utility infrastructure on a 200-year cycle when, ideally, they should be replacing it every 50 years. Additionally, the city was continuing to borrow more and more for those infrastructure projects. 15 years ago, the city was paying for 85% of those projects with cash from the general fund but now they were paying for around 80% through borrowing. The reasons for that change were not all within the city’s control, but the bottom line was, he believed, that the city was not addressing the problem at the rate which it should be. They were putting infrastructure projects off, the cost of construction continued to rise, the cost of borrowing was going up, and that was going to saddle the city with more debt in the future. He understood the resolution didn’t address the entire problem, but he thought it was a start.
As I noted, multiple speakers were not picked up by the microphone, so I can’t relay what all of the arguments were for and against the resolution.
Alderperson William Siebers (District 1) talked about the long-standing water pressure issues experienced by District 1 residents and mentioned his own inability to do laundry and take a shower at the same time. Some of the infrastructure in that district was approaching 100 years old and he thought a lot of district residents felt like they were the forgotten people of the city of Appleton. He appreciated Alderperson Doran’s attempt to do something to improve Public Works.
Alderperson Vered Meltzer (District 2) said that Appleton was on par with other communities in terms of the timeframe for replacing infrastructure and expressed concern about reconstructing too many streets at one time because that would cause an excess of road closures and wayfinding issues for residents.
Several alderpersons did not like the idea of taking ARPA dollars away from previously allocated issues and projects. Alderperson Meltzer expressed the view that needing to repair and replace infrastructure was a constant but the pandemic was a point of crisis the city was trying right now to recover from.
Alderperson Vaya Jones (District 10) said that in her job for a local healthcare system she worked with patients who experienced housing needs, food insecurity, transportation problems, and financial issues. “The spirit of the American Rescue Plan is taking care of those who have been affected by the pandemic. And yes, very much so, I’m sorry to the constituents who do have to live with the life of not being able to do laundry and showering, but I can be one hundred percent sure that if I have the ability to support early childhood children in developing and leading better lives and having a warm meal and a warm place to stay at night, I am willing to give up taking a shower during my laundry.”
Mayor Woodford talked about how they gathered community feedback on spending ARPA dollars and tried to spread the funds across as many categories as they possibly could.
In light of the staff memo and the different ways that the memo indicated the money could be put to good use, Alderperson Doran started the meeting out by making a motion to amend the resolution to reallocate the $6 million to the Department of Public Works generally for the purpose of addressing road infrastructure replacement projects instead of specifying that the money had to be used to replace 4” and 6” water mains.
That amendment ended up being defeated, and Alderperson Vered Meltzer (District 2), based on a suggestion made by Alderperson Nate Wolff (District 12) (who was not a member of either the Finance or Utilities Committee and could not make an amendment himself), made a motion to amend the resolution by removing the language about reallocating ARPA dollars and instead had the city request $12 million dollars from the State budget surplus to replace water mains. Alderperson Meltzer arrived at that $12 million figure and opted to not to ask for the full $35.1 million the city would need to replace all undersized watermains because the $6 million from the original resolution was “just a drop in the bucket and so doubling that seems like a reasonable thing to do without being too extreme. I don’t think it would be reasonable or rational to ask for 36 million.”
Alderperson Doran appreciated the effort to try to address the issue and find some common ground, but he thought the amended resolution was, realistically, not an option. The city didn’t control state funds. “We can ask, but I think it’s sort of short sighted in the fact that we have an opportunity here with funds that we control to address this, and I think would have been a better use that money.”
Alderperson Brad Firkus (District 3) also appreciated people trying to find different ways to address the issue but “My issue with this amendment is I just feel like it’s too gimmicky with this. I mean I just don’t see us being able to ask this. […] We’re far from the only city that needs more help in funding our operations. We used to have that funding. We don’t anymore. Unfortunately, we don’t get to make those calls. If we did, I would 100% support this amended resolution. We’ve got to do what we can within our own means.” He had not supported the original resolution because he thought it took away from allocations that the community had asked for and which added vibrancy to the community. He did not support the amended resolution due to the gimmicky nature.
Alderperson Meltzer’s amendment was approved and then the amended resolution as a whole was approved.
Later in the evening the amended resolution was taken up by the entire Common Council.
Alderperson Chris Croatt (District 14) started the discussion out by asking, if the resolution were approved, what would be the process for reaching out to the state. He also wondered if there was precedent for the city to make a formal request for funds for a special use.
There was precedent for the Council to correspond with the state. Clerk Kami Lynch said that, in the past, when a resolution addressed the state or a higher governing body, she took a copy of the resolution and the minutes from the meeting in which it was passed and sent it to the state agency at which it was directed.
Regarding specifically the request for money laid out in the resolution, Mayor Woodford said that the city had had some success with grants, however “In terms of a general request outside of a grant program, I’m not aware of having any success on that. I can also speak from personal experience with lobbying the legislature to take action and the governor to take action on shared revenue for example. I’ve sent letters to legislative leaders of the various committees. I received no reply.”
Alderperson Croatt mentioned the dark store issue that was never resolved. Now Appleton was going to ask for $12 million to take care of its watermains, but he thought the reality was that they were not going to get a response or else the response would be “No.” He wondered if there had ever been any successful attempts at making such a request.
Mayor Woodford was not aware of any successful attempts.
Alderperson Doran said that he would be voting not on his own resolution because he did not find it practical anymore. “We know the state’s not gonna give us $12 million just because we ask them to. It’s not how state government works. It’s not the state’s job to fund our individual infrastructure projects, and honestly it’s unserious to expect them to.” He agreed with Alderperson Firkus’ belief that the amended version was gimmicky. “In my mind, it’s a political stunt. We know it’s not gonna work, and I’m disappointed in my colleagues for kicking the problem down the road again when we had a real opportunity to make headway on it.”
Alderperson Van Zeeland (District 5) responded, “I have a real problem with calling us asking the legislature that works for us and for our constituents—asking for something is not a political stunt. We ask them for things all the time. We write grants. We contact our representatives. Our constituents call on us and we answer, and when we go above us to the legislature, they should answer to us and our constituents.”
Alderperson Meltzer did not disagree with Alderperson Croatt’s observations, but said, “If we can start a movement, if we can get more cities to speak like this to our representatives, to our state, then maybe something will happen.” The lack of shared revenue from the state to municipalities was an issue “which is not just an Appleton issue. It is a statewide issue, and I think that this type of action, if it happens statewide, can be effective. We just have to all do the work together. If it only happens here and there that people speak up, then it’s easy not to listen. But if we get enough—if enough people do speak up then I do believe that our state will listen. I have to believe that, otherwise I would not run for office and I would not sit in this chair. I have to have faith in the way that our democracy is supposed to work.”
Alderperson Meltzer also believed that Appleton had maintained a reasonable level of repairing roads and infrastructure (even in the face of shared revenue from the state being shut off) and disagreed with the reallocation of ARPA funds as originally called for in the resolution. “The city is working very hard on an insurmountable issue that no matter how hard we work and no matter how much money is dropped on us, the nature of the city is for infrastructure to need to be replaced at regular intervals. That is always going to be a constant, and I think that for us to have taken this opportunity tonight to avoid removing money from places where it’s sorely needed in our community in response to the pandemic crisis and instead turn towards proactive reaching out to the state and simply asking them to do their job and to listen to us and to understand that communities have serious problems because of actions that the state did, I think that’s a really important thing for us to do, and I encourage my colleagues to support this resolution as amended.”
Alderperson Kristine Alfheim (District 11) said that anybody in the state senate or assembly who had come from a municipality or county was fully aware that there was a funding issue in terms of a lack of shared revenue going back to municipalities and schools. She wondered if somebody could give a ballpark estimate of what the annual loss was for Appleton.
Mayor Woodford answered that shared revenue had been held essentially flat since around 2011. Because the revenue had remained flat but inflation had increased that effectively meant that the amount of shared revenue Appleton received each year was cut, even prior to the recent sharp increases in inflation.
Alderperson Alfheim pointed out that if there was an average of 3% inflation per year over the last 10 years, “We are literally running 30% behind where we were. That is a state funding issue.” She thought that every municipality and school district should start lobbying the state, which was hoarding cash, to release more funds to local governments. “We have to start getting this message out. We have tightened our belts. We continue to tighten our belt. We are more than 30% behind the cost of living. We are doing our part. We have to start asking the bigger team to start representing the community across the entire state.”
Alderperson Wolff, who had been the one who originally recommended that the resolution be amended to ask for this money from the state, disagreed it was a gimmick or a political stunt. Instead, “This is me seeing that our state has an incredible surplus and cannot decide on how to spend it. One political party decided they wanted to spend it the one way. The other political party said they wanted to spend it a different way. So, we are telling them how we want it. It’s kind of that simple. This will go further than the resolution as it was.” [At this point he became what to me appeared to be visibly angry.] “The resolution as it was was dead on arrival. A fact that it would not have passed here. It was written poorly. It was written as a political stunt. That’s why the media was here.” He turned and looked at I assume Alderperson Doran and said, “Let’s just face facts, that it was dead on arrival.”
At that point, Mayor Woodford interjected and reminded him to direct his comments to the Chair.
Alderperson Wolff went on to say, “And I, knowing that in my district we have problems with water and we do need to address this problem, am trying to do it, but taking money from mental health programs is not gonna happen. Taking the ARPA allocations is not gonna happen. This is the way forward where we can actually get it done. So, yeah, it’s the best proposal. Even if it doesn’t work, we tried a way that would actually work.” [I’m not sure what the criteria for being “the best proposal” is. The original resolution would have resulted in some infrastructure being repaired whereas the amended version is not going to result in any infrastructure being repaired.]
Alderperson Denise Fenton (District 6) said that the original resolution would have paid for 1 miles of road reconstruction and replacement of underground utilities and it would have taken that money from what Appleton residents had asked for it to be allocated to such as the housing crisis. “Yes, we all understand that we’re shouting into the void by asking the state legislature to provide us this money for anything, and we will continue to be shouting into the void as long as […] legislators pick their voters and the voters don’t pick the legislators. But I posit that this statement that we’re making is no less gimmicky than taking these funds that our citizens have asked us and approved the allocation to replace less than a third of a percent of this infrastructure.”
Mayor Woodford reminded the Council members that they were discussing the item as amended, so they were not discussing a reallocation of ARPA funds. He also reminded them to keep comments, be they positive, negative, or neutral, directed to the Chair. “I understand that we’re passionate about these issues. We’re passionate about our community and the ways that we solve problems. Passion’s a good thing. That’s what gets us out of bed every morning and out and doing the work, but it’s also important we maintain decorum here and that we maintain respect for each other.”
Alderperson Croatt said he was not opposed to asking the state for funds, but he thought it likely they would not get a response. He didn’t think that sending a letter from the clerk’s office would be effective and instead whatever was sent needed to include the voices of the Common Council members and the mayor.
He went on to say that he would be voting for the resolution, but he thought they should “go big or go home” and asked for the full $36.1 million needed to replace the city’s remaining 4’ and 6” water mains. He made a motion to amend the resolution to that effect which was seconded by Alderperson Siebers.
Alderperson Wolff, who was the only alderperson to comment on the motion to amend, said, “I think this is a good suggestion and I support it. I think that we should go big or go home. So, yeah, I just wanted to say I supported it and that I agree that everyone needs to be on board for this to work.”
The motion passed 12 to 2 with Alderpersons Firkus and Doran casting the dissenting votes.
Once the item was amended, Alderperson Israel Del Toro (District 4) said he appreciated the change. He encouraged all members of city government to proactively lobby additional cities and build allies. He thought that if Appleton was to be heard that they couldn’t be the only ones shouting into the void and suggested that if Wisconsin’s top ten cities all shouted into the void, then something might happen. He also pointed out that they were asking for 0.5% of the state’s budget surplus. “That is not a ridiculous request by any means. That is not a stunt by any means. That is simply upkeep. And I encourage us all to collectively reach out to our colleagues in other cities and build those allies and bridges.”
Mayor Woodford noted that there was significant advocacy around shared revenue and local government finance reform. He himself was a part of it and believed that all the mayors of the 10 largest cities in the state, among hundreds of others, were a part of those advocacy efforts.
Alderperson Doran appreciated the effort to amend the resolution to make it make more sense; however, “We all know that this isn’t going to happen. We’re not going to get funding from the state for this. So, while I support all my colleagues reaching out to our elected officials at the state level, I would also encourage my colleagues to open up our budget book and continue to look for ways that are actually within our control to address this issue as we go forward.”
Alderperson Firkus said that this request would likely go unheard and nobody at Madison was going to listen to the request. “But there is one group that is going to be listening to this discussion this request and making judgments, and that’s the people we represent. I think we owe it to them to make a serious effort at serious solutions and do the things we can and the things we control.”
The Council proceeded to vote 12-2 to approve the resolution. Again, Alderpersons Firkus and Doran were the two dissenting votes.
[It was a little painful to watch these meetings, and I was reminded several times throughout them of the Ernest Hemingway quote about how someone went bankrupt: “Two ways. Gradually and then suddenly.”
Yes, the city isn’t facing bankruptcy in this particular situation, but it is facing both rising costs and a compounding amount of work to maintain an infrastructure that it has already not been keeping up with. It has been known for 10 years that infrastructure maintenance was going to become and issue but dealing with it has been put off over and over.
While watching these meetings, it felt to me like the Common Council was only at the very beginning of genuinely coming to terms with the issues Appleton is facing re: maintaining our city’s basic infrastructure. I suppose it’s a normal human response when faced with a very serious problem to hope for some kind of deus ex machina intervention to help resolve the crisis. The reality is that such assistance very rarely happens in real life and more often than not when confronted with a big problem one has to suck it up, assess the options that are genuinely available, and sometimes make some hard decisions.
The importance of mental health services was mentioned several times throughout the meetings. While mental health support may indeed be important, it should be pointed out that mental health assistance can be provided from a number of sources both public and private, formal and informal, and funding for those different sources can come from many different entities outside the City of Appleton. Our roads and utility infrastructure, as unsexy as they may be, can only be maintained by one entity: the City of Appleton. Residents don’t have other options when it comes to replacing and repairing our roads, sewer pipes, and water mains. When money is flowing in excess, that’s not necessarily a problem, but when money is tight and the city chooses to spend its dollars on things that other entities can fund rather than sufficiently funding a service that is both vitally important to the basic functionality of the city and also something that only the city can perform, well then, what is to be done?]
View full committee meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=979965&GUID=B3FBFBD5-4707-46A2-837C-7B70BE58B9F0
View full Common Council meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=964880&GUID=33504F12-B5EB-45EA-B60F-29CFA54A0CD4
2 thoughts on “Water Main Resolution Passed After Being Stripped Of Language That Would Reallocate ARPA Dollars; Council Votes To Ask The State To Give The City $35.1 Million”