Candidates Say Water, Sewer Should Extend to I-94
The big question is how to pay for it, they said at Thursday night's candidate forum.
Photos
Development is a hot topic in the Caledonia Village Board election, and candidates had plenty of opportunities to give their views during Thursday's forum sponsored by the Racine Taxpayers Association.
Here's how candidates responded to the question of extending sewer and water out to Interstate 94, and how they would pay for it.
Richard Frazier would support extending sewer and water, but only if the tax base supports the cost of it.
Kevin Wangggaard said he would support the infrastructure improvement because not having sewer and water puts us at a tremendous disadvantage.
David Prott said he would support it, but that it needs to be done in a responsible way. "I don't think we should build it and people will come... we need commitments from businesses."
Ron Coutts said he would support it, but not right now because the economy is still on shaky ground. "We don't have land and money to give..."
Bob Bradley said he totally supports bringing water and sewer to the I. "If you don't put anything in the ground, you won't have anything anyway."
Read what the candidates had to say—or not say—about the proposed Walmart.
Ed Willing
1:45 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
I am running for seat one, and was unable to attend the forum last night (was not aware until halfway through it!)
My position is supporting extending the pipes out to the I. Sending these utilities westward is paramount to any future development in the village. My goal for the village is to raise revenues through natural growth and not through tax increases or fees. This is only accomplished by creating an environment where the village can grow it's tax base. This is literally a perpetual conflict of putting the cart before the horse before the cart. The only way I see any resolution here, barring any significant economic turnaround is to find creative financing options with the communities that would be with us in this. Including Raymond. Also, finding a cauldron of developers willing to put forth a good faith proposal for how these utilities could immediately return on their investment and would make it an easier sell to me, and to the residents who would have to pay for $50-60 million in potential costs.
I would take a very active role as trustee to establish a relationship with developers and with a cheap (or free) marketing push to make business aware that caledonia is open for business.
Perhaps the cart can be built and the horse can be put to work simultaneously. I don't think sitting around and waiting for revenues to rise is the answer
me
11:38 pm on Friday, March 22, 2013
You just unelected yourself if you can't keep up with the meeting due to your spam filter. Get real, son.
Ed Willing
12:46 am on Saturday, March 23, 2013
You mean, keep up with a meeting I didn't know about? I guess you're right....
Meanwhile, would you like to discuss some substantive issues? That is what this race is about. BTW, I was busy meeting other Caledonia residents and learning what was important to them, during that forum. Perhaps you have some of the same concerns?
Tansandy
6:34 am on Saturday, March 23, 2013
Lets not blow this chance to extend the sewer and water out to the I to attract business. We missed our chance the last time when Mt Pleasant want to do it as a joint venture. They went ahead a did it. We refused. We were too busy building water gardens, narrow, no parking streets in subdivisions. And a few of the leaders at the time were more worried about organizing horsey trails and starting up Save don't Pave.
Ed Willing
6:02 pm on Saturday, March 23, 2013
I completely agree with you Tansandy.
The time is now. We cannot afford to miss the opportunities coming up.
ms
4:52 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
What benefit would taxpayers see by running sewer and water out to the I. Caledonia doesn't need jobs, lowest unemployment in the state. Too close to 31&11 for shopping. $60M investment with no return.
Ed Willing
5:20 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
You are the first person I've seen say it has no return on investment.
I don't advocate building the pipes carte blanch, but $55-60 million would bring the potential and probability of light industrial, office, retail, manufacturing and housing to the areas by the interstate.
It is essential to grow that direction, since there is little interest in developing the central region of e village, where we treasure our open spaces.
Several million dollars in tax revenue per year could be realized. It's not about creating job alone. It's about growing the community to provide jobs to those who would move and stay here in the decades to come.
Again, I reiterate I feel it's important to already have development agreements or letters of intent in place before passing such a bond measure. But the argument you're making above would be like telling the first settlers in this area " it's a waste to spend millions building highway 32." Or 6 mile. Or the village hall. Or the ORIGINAL Caledonia utility. They all pay off in the end, when done wisely. :)
ms
5:25 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
Not saying there is NO return, just wondering what it is. Are we talking a 5 year return or a 100 years. I would think before a candidate proposes spending millions of dollars on something they should have an idea on the costs to the taxpayers.
Ed Willing
5:55 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
Well, it's the board and the utility that's proposing it, and it has been for over a decade. Coutts walked away from a potential deal that would have split costs long ago with Mt Pleasant.
Now, we must foot the bill ourselves, and the candidates are merely being asked what they think.
Running for seat one, I would support the measure, as long as we had arrangements or conceptual ideas to immediately build and put it to use. This isn't hard to do, it just takes vision and some salesmanship. The return to taxpayers.... 100 years? More like 5-10. The payoff would be almost guaranteed if done in moderation and wisdom in financing. We could find ways of reducing the up front cost until the revenues Generated from this new development could start flowing into village coffers. The alternative is continued infighting and division among the residents who want development in the eastern half of the village and those that don't. We are so far off the good one that is the freeway, that it leaves us little choice if we wish to grow and maintain low taxes with a balanced budget.
ms
6:27 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
A10 year return is probably a good return for government. So a $60M investment over 10 years is $6M a year payment. Using Walmart for an example, $60K a year in local taxes, it would take 100 Walmarts 10 years to pay off the investment. Is that why Mt Pleasant's taxes are so high? I'd rather give the land to the conservancy.
Ed Willing
7:08 pm on Sunday, March 24, 2013
I won't even dignify that last sentence. ;)
Actually, the $6 million a year timeframe is fictitious. Bonds are usually paid off over 15, 20 years or even long if done right and for a cheap rate. Also, factor in that we have a binding agreement with Raymond that we would supply them with services should we build out that way as well, leading to additional revenue and another government encouraging development along the corridor.
This doesn't need to be focused on Walmart. I am not proposing we solve our budget issues with Walmarts, and neither is anyone else.