Brookfield’s village board agreed to move on from discussing the details of a potential alley replacement program in relation to the referendum questions on the ballot in November, prioritizing public education around the main benefit if voters pass the referendum: a permanent, tax-neutral mechanism through which to implement a 25-year road improvement program.
Trustees and staff had previously undertaken three lengthy discussions of the possible alley program, which would see Brookfield’s gravel alleys gradually redone as so-called green alleys with concrete and permeable pavers, but had not reached a consensus, leaving lingering questions as to the program’s scope, timeframe and administration.
The village board on Monday, Aug. 10, agreed with the recommendation from village staff to focus on the main purpose of the referendum — replacing and maintaining roads — and look to nail down the details of an alley program only if the referendum is approved by voters.
“Staff has met since the last board meeting with our consultants, and it is our collective recommendation to, at this point, start the public education campaign and focus on where the lion’s share of the money is going, which is the roadway,” Village Manager Tim Wiberg said. “In the public education campaign, say that if a referendum passes, the village board commits to holding public workshops and meetings and having more discussion about what our alley program consists of and how as we move forward.”
Wiberg said village staff and representatives from Metro Strategies Group, Brookfield’s referendum consultant, are planning both online and in-person outreach efforts through Election Day on Tuesday, Nov. 3.
The campaign, which will look to explain the effects on residents and the village if the referendum passes and if it fails, will feature pop-up appearances at the farmers market and school events and an explainer article in an upcoming issue of The Brookfielder, the village’s quarterly print newsletter.
Trustee Kit Ketchmark emphasized the importance of educating residents to avoid a situation where Brookfield lacks a dedicated funding source to maintain roads.
“In 2016, we went to referendum for the series of bonds that were issued [to pay for street maintenance]. Those bonds are expiring now. There is no continuing source of revenue for streets after these bonds,” Ketchmark said. “If you simply read the question that’s being put out there to the voters, it’s pretty hard to understand what that means … The idea that your taxes will not go up with this, that’s key to it.”
How an alley program could look
Trustees had been weighing the pros and cons of two separate cost-share models for the alley replacement program.
One model would see the village cover 100% of costs for each alley replacement; village staff have estimated that program could, in the worst-case scenario, take up to 99 years to cycle through all of Brookfield’s alleys. That length of time could be reduced if staff are successful in receiving federal or state grant funding related to alley improvements over the years.
The second model would have proposed a 50% cost-share with the residents on the block of each alley as it is being replaced, asking them to match the village’s financial contributions. That program would have a minimum timeframe of 58 years in the scenario where Brookfield relies only on funding collected as a result of the passed referendum and other preexisting sources.
Some trustees worried about the consequences of the 50-50 program for lower income residents or in cases where residents on a block have clashing opinions on paying the costs, as well as whether it would lead to a first-come-first-serve philosophy to replace alleys whose residents were ready to pay sooner. Others felt it might be unfair to residents who had banded together with their neighbors in the past to get their alleys improved to pay for the rest of the town’s alleys with no resident contribution.
As a group, the village board supported seeking more public input on what residents would prefer the program look like to avoid implementing a less popular version down the line.
“We’ve heard consistently from staff that it’s the number one issue that they hear about from residents, and I know we’ve gotten a few public comments at our board meeting discussions, but certainly not a level of comment that I think is representative of the community as a whole,” Trustee Kyle Whitehead said. “Before we can make decisions about the specific structure of the program and the cost share, I feel like we need to hear more from residents, particularly if our goal is to, ultimately, get more alleys paved.”
