The Notes: Week of July 6 - July 10, 2026

Happy holiday weekend, Neighbors!  I hope your Independence Day yesterday was a great one!  

We are now in a Committee Meetings Week in City of Appleton government.  But since the holiday fell between last week's skipped full council meeting and this week, there are again quite a few cancelled meetings this week.  Members of the following committees will get this week off:

• Municipal Services Committee
• Parks and Recreation Committee
• Fox Cities Transit Commission
• Human Resources and Information Technology Committee

Those who will be meeting this week will have some pretty weighty items to consider, though.  Take a good look at what is expected:

Monday, 07/06/2026

Finance Committee - 5:30pm  In a step in the direction of making it practically impossible for the common council to reject a development agreement and a Tax Incremental District (TID/TIF) for the Thrivent property, the one action item for this committee this week is a request to approve a transfer of funds from the "special Thrivent fund" to the city to pay for some acquisition of land owned by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) for planned intersection improvements at the intersection of Ballard Road and Evergreen Drive.  The amount expected to be transferred is $395,500 which would be paid by Thrivent to the city to reimburse the city for this land acquisition. 

I believe this action to be in haste as the transfer of funds is related to other approvals needed and putting this cart before this horse (so to speak) could improperly sway some council members to approve the development agreement (see the Community Development Committee notes below) and the Tax Incremental District (TID/TIF) as was proposed a few weeks ago and was held at full council until the development agreement came through.  It feels to me like a "buying" of votes from the council without all of the other ducks being in a row beforehand.  (Forgive the mixed metaphors.)  Don't get me wrong: it would be helpful for Thrivent to pay for this land acquisition rather than taxpayers.  But I believe that we need to iron out all other details on this before proceeding with this budget/funds transfer so that no one is improperly moved to approve the other items just because "well, Thrivent already paid the city for the land so we can't 'cheat them out' of all of the other perks that they are requesting."  I believe that this action should will be held until the other items are worked out in other committee meetings and the next meeting of the full council. 

What do you think?

Tuesday, 07/07/2026

Utilities Committee - 4:30pm  This committee will be faced with a much more straightforward action item on their agenda: potential approval of the creation of an ordinance to define and codify the policy surrounding the city replacing -- and helping private citizens to finance -- private lead water service lines.  The council will be asked to approve the city accepting loans from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to fund this.  But the "rules" surrounding how this program will work still need to be established with a city ordinance so that the program can proceed and homeowners with lead water service lines between the city service and their homes can get some relief to have those replaced for their health and safety.  I expect this item to be easily approved without much need for discussion.  

Wednesday, 07/08/2026

Safety and Licensing Committee/Board of Health Joint Special Meeting - 7am  In the first of their two meetings this week, these poor Safety and Licensing Committee members must join the early riser Board of Health members for a special joint session to discuss a recent resolution regarding "Excessive Vehicular Noise Data Collection."  The resolution was submitted in June by Alderman Martyn Smith (whose aldermanic district includes a fair portion of the downtown/College Avenue corridor) and at the time of submission was referred to the mayor's office for review. 

The mayor's office has several concerns regarding this resolution as it is written to direct city staff to perform some data collection.  The separation of powers called out in our form of government does not allow for exactly what is written in this resolution as staff direction is a power and duty of the executive branch (the mayor's office), not the legislative branch (the common council).  So any action of the council would require that the verbiage in this resolution be amended (should the data collection called for be desired by the majority of the council).  You can read the mayor's portion of the response to this resolution in pages 1 and 2 of this extensive memo. 

Further, the memo goes on to explain (through the city's Health Officer, Dr Charles Sepers) that 1) much traffic/vehicular noise data has already been collected in the city, but 2) there is no good way, in collecting noise data, to distinguish between that which is legal from that which is not through traditional acoustic measuring.  In other words: if a muffler is loud, it could just be that it is malfunctioning, not that it has been purposely modified to be louder.  And only the purposeful modifications are illegal.  So purely measuring sounds wave/decibel levels will not get to the heart of the issue that Alderman Smith has brought forward as a community concern -- curbing illegal excessive noise.  Here is exactly what Dr Sepers wrote in this regard: 

The fiscal impact of properly conducting the collection of data that's desired in this resolution comes to anywhere between $9,000 (for citizen-reporting agreements) and ~$200,000 (for automated noise-detection technology).  And again, none of these data collection options or technologies is sophisticated enough to determine if a particular noise incident is legal or illegal.  The latter requires human (Appleton Police Department officers') discernment and follow-up.   

After the thorough review contained in this memo, I have to say that I cannot in any way support this resolution (even if it were to be amended to address the concerns about the separation of powers noted by the mayor).  I know that noise is a concern for some citizens of the city.  But I do not see this resolution as a step in a direction to do anything more than muddy the waters in the hopes of getting city government to manage illegal excessive vehicular noise.  And the memo only addresses the downtown Appleton traffic corridor, so it does not support District 13 residents except for any concerns we might have when and if we visit the downtown area and are confronted with noise. 

If you have the time and the wherewithal to do so, please read the entire memo (much of which contains attachments that are referred to in the body of the memo) and let me know your thoughts in this regard?  

City Plan Commission - 3:30pm  Commissioners will take up three action items and review an important information item that will also later be taken up by the Community Development Committee.

Action items: 

• Potential approval of a proposed preliminary plat in the Town of Grand Chute (as a part of the city's extraterritorial plat approval jurisdiction)
• Potential approval of a preliminary plat for a small 5.28 acre, 8-lot subdivision in District 13 (on the west side of Kurey Drive just north of Broadway Drive)
• Potential approval of a final plat for a small 3.88 acre, 10-lot subdivision also on the north side of the city (just west of Haymeadow Avenue south of Clearfield Lane)

Information Item: 

• Review of an "Option to Purchase" Land Agreement for Thrivent to sell the city a portion (no more than 3.5 acres) of their large northside property for a future fire station on the corner of Evergreen Drive and Meade Street.  See below for more information on what I feel is bordering on a second "buying of our votes for the TID" action item this week.     

Community Development Committee - 4:30pm  This committee will do most of the legwork this week with three critical action items on which to vote this week.  All three are regarding the Thrivent property on the north side of the city. 

Here is what they are looking at approving (or not) for movement forward to the full council next week:

• They are calling it "North Meadows Investment" now... but this committee will be looking at potential approval of a developer agreement for the Thrivent Financial property.  This agreement hinges, of course, on the city (and other taxing entities') approval of a Tax Incremental District (TID/TIF) for a large portion of this property.  Key elements to this agreement also include 1) an $11M bond by the city for the public infrastructure for the development "in exchange for" an $11M letter of credit by Thrivent.  My question here is: Why is a bond needed if the developer (Thrivent) has the credit available with which to proceed with this infrastructure development? 
  
  The development agreement also calls for a "pay go" incentive provided by the city to the developer (why??) in the amount of $14M at 6% interest.  The memo regarding this agreement states that this is "to help fund, in part, additional developer costs" related to the development.  Why, I ask you, should city taxpayers do this?  This developer (Thrivent Financial -- a multi-billion-dollar entity) should be able to fully support its own development of this entire property without any incentive from the taxpayers of this city. 
  
  Included in the development agreement are a few "carrots" that this large corporation which already owns this large swath of land free and clear will throw at the common council/city government to entice the council to approve this agreement: the $1 patch of land for a potential new fire station for the north side of the city (mentioned above) and the $395,500 chunk of money from Thrivent to the city to facilitate the purchase of land for acquisition costs for infrastructure improvement at the intersection of Ballard Road and Evergreen Drive related to the development of this Thrivent property (also mentioned above). 
  
  Thrivent has money.  There is no disputing this fact.  So why do they need taxpayer funding and Tax Increment Financing to move forward with this development?  Answer: They don't.  Thrivent -- an organization which, in 2023 had a total consolidated enterprise revenue of $10B (that's B for BILLION) -- is not stupid to ask the city for this.  But the city (and your representatives on the common council) would be wrong to allow it.  As I've mentioned in earlier blog posts (here and here in particular):
  
  "It's... important to remember that all Wisconsin TIDs and TIF must pass a "but for" test which generally means that it must be proven that a development would not occur but for the use of TIF.  I cannot imagine justifying this particular project under this test.  Thrivent is a huge and wealthy non-profit organization who own this property on Appleton's north side outright.  It is impossible for me to believe that there are no other ways besides public/taxpayer funding for the development of this land to occur. 
  
  I understand fully that some will say that "it's more complicated than that."  However, I believe it to be just this simple: that the city should not have to subsidize the development of this land for development of it to occur.  The free market and a wealthy non-profit property owner can make development of this land happen without the use of TIF.  Maybe the development would take a bit of a different route than the current owner wishes, maybe it will look different than the current plans that the property owner envisions, and/or maybe it will take a bit more time to move forward or be completed.  But should this property owner truly desire to make this project occur, it no doubt will without TIF. 
  
  TIF should only be used to encourage growth that would otherwise not happen.  And I find it impossible to believe that a multi-Billion-(that's 1,000 million)-dollar financial organization couldn't otherwise make this development happen or sell portions of the property to private developers who could otherwise make the project happen.  Some have said that without this TID and TIF, the development of this land would happen "in piecemeal fashion" and that end result would be less desirable for the community.  I reject that notion as the rest of the north side of Appleton has been developing through the hard work and investment of individual developers for decades.  And those of us who live in District 13 know full well that this has not been detrimental to the overall prosperity of the city or made our neighborhoods any less desirable than had those same developers been given TIF to promote the development here in one fell swoop.  There is nothing to stop the current property owner from selling the land in parcels and requiring the buyers to follow certain pre-determined desires of the property owner.  Private developers willing and able to purchase and develop the land would surely be interested in developing portions of this property using some of the basic plan elements that the current owner has set in their current plans if the end profit is there."
  
  Since the development agreement up for approval this week hinges on the creation of this TID -- in fact, the development agreement is entitled "Tax Incremental Development Agreement between the City of Appleton, Thrivent Financial for Lutherans, and North Meadows Investment LTD" -- I cannot, in good conscience and in the name of the taxpayers of this city, vote to approve this agreement.  
  
  The $1 fire station land can be purchased by the city from Thrivent. Thrivent can reimburse the city for purchase of land to assist in improvements of the intersection of Ballard Road and Evergreen Drive.  But nothing can justify the 20-year deferment of the incremental value of the development of this land as the city taxpayers subsidize a large wealthy corporation to develop their own land.
  
  What do you think?  Do you agree with the sacrifice the city budget -- you, the taxpayers -- would be making to "encourage" something that would no doubt occur without taxpayer incentive?  If so, please do you best to let your voice be heard!  
  
  
• The committee will then take up the potential approval of the $395,500 reimbursement from Thrivent for the land acquisition supposedly needed for "improvements" to the Ballard Road/Evergreen Drive intersection.  (This item was also up for approval by the Finance Committee as mentioned above.)  I fully understand that the city will need to do something to improve this intersection as it's a critical piece to whatever development occurs on the Thrivent property.  But I do not think it wise for the city to accept this reimbursement unless no strings at all are attached.  Tying this to a TID creation and Tax Incremental Financing for a large portion of the Thrivent property gives me a very sick feeling of bribery.  If I were to vote to approve it, it must come with assurances that it is not contingent on TID/TIF creation.  Do you agree?  
  
  
• Third on the Thrivent + City of Appleton list of actions for this committee's potential approval is the proposed option agreement for the city's future purchase of some of the Thrivent land (at the corner of Evergreen Drive and Meade Street) for $1.  (This was mentioned above to have been already discussed by the City Plan Commission as an information item.)  The current land planned for a future additional north side Appleton fire station is already owned by the city -- a portion of Memorial Park.  But this land-for-cheap offer from Thrivent would be to allow the city to purchase up to 3.5 acres for one dollar... contingent, of course, on the TIF Development Agreement proposed above.  Again, I cannot, in good conscience and for the good of the taxpayers of the city, agree to this proposed purchase if it contains such a contingency.  The city already has the land available for future fire station use.  So this Thrivent land, while it may be a nice alternative to using current parkland, is not needed by the city.  It would be a desire, not a need.  This, it seems, is a another "Thrivent scratches the city's back" in the hopes of enticing unwitting council members into "scratching Thrivent's back" with TID/TIF approval.  I find that a good bit unseemly.

Of course this committee's agenda calls out a closed session to allow council members to discuss the ins and outs of the potential negotiation of purchasing of private properties.  So there may be some things that the general public will not be privy to until a later date.  But what you see above is what will be publicly discussed at this Wednesday evening meeting.  Please plan to attend if you wish to learn more or speak on behalf of yourself as a City of Appleton taxpayer in this regard.   

   

Safety & Licensing Committee - 5:30pm  The fun does not end with the previous meeting either!  This committee, in its second meeting of the week, will take up the following action items:

• The potential denial of a special event permit for an applicant with a "long history of behavioral concerns" including documented road rage resulting in a disorderly conduct summons for the applicant, multiple incidents and the eventual banning of the applicant from the YMCA due to concerning behavior (some involving children), a probation revocation for the applicant, and numerous other criminal charges against the applicant.  The application is for a special event for children to be taught the game of frisbee golf.  Since a number of the complaints against the event applicant deal with concerning behavior by him around children, I think it wise that the request is to deny this application.  We shall see, however, if the applicant attends this meeting to otherwise plead his case and if the committee could be convinced to approve the event application. 
  
  
• A previously held resolution regarding what to do about a potential extension of the city's truancy ordinance.  As I have many times expressed, I think it wise for the city to "re-up" the truancy ordinance for at least one more school year to see whether there is continued positive response and a continued uptick in positive student attendance records.  But I honestly do not know the direction this item will take in this subsequent committee meeting after the item was once referred back and then once held.  What do you think about the future for a truancy ordinance in the city?
  
  
• Several premises amendments for liquor licensed establishments to allow for outdoors beer sales and consumption and temporary liquor licenses for the upcoming Mile of Music event as well as several taxicab license, pet store license, and mobile home park license renewals.   

Thursday, 07/09/2026

Library Board Personnel and Policy Committee - Appleton Public Library Cornerstone Conference Room - 1:30pm   With what looks to be the least complex agenda this week, this sub-committee of the Library Board will meet to discuss and potentially approve the mid-year performance review for the library director,  potential revisions to library space use policy and library event rental fee schedule, potential revisions to the library's safety and security policy (which is quite interesting to read -- see here), and other proposed revisions to the library's art policy, piano policy, and community information and posting policy.  While there seems like a lot here, I don't expect that it will take them long to approve these rather benign proposed policy changes.

And that will do it for the week!  I sure hope that you've read this far and that perhaps you've made a plan to attend one or more of the meetings scheduled to speak your mind regarding the most important of these topics.  Please contact me should you have any questions or concerns and, of course, to share your feedback on any of the above subjects.

I hope you have a great first full week of July.  Thanks for joining me here for your regular city-government goings-on update!