[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6569945,"mediaKeyId","3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a","parentId",3213735,"title","County approves purchase of van for ADRC nutrition program, 26‑0","audioSeconds",2888,"startMs",3511000,"endMs",6399000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a&start=3511&end=6399","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a/thumbnail_3511000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6569945/Eau-Claire-County/Wisconsin/County-approves-purchase-of-van-for-ADRC-nutrition-program-260","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569945-d5718abd8e157606803bd980ea9dbc49/orig.mp4?Expires=1776545681&Signature=NhEgqypSR9hCwZSU~ofgRHSndZnlDQpkJuXN1LuCS34sAE7iayPHnxgEI6trxVp6tpLZ1aF3BIPQVbWGkyaSjIlYqk0DuuPecb0K-QwIHmh-agc8mFNZz9QcAIHjDdBAyzOoh8Z6iZ-mfM~YHgC0G~YU5tefLiyc1FuAN3gAIS2SyCR0cwgorWfLnzi~nf2XTAhtr2HFXNUSOGKkky2liFA7VCvpHiX6VeTxxcwqGVR8bAgpY5DnwLbE70ldrijoRgaYLi4GhACluy72KDQqioGtpH3UNJBxU3imvXWzBSi1DRyxUcLnD80WLuPAIO53cQQ306ewhnXgPLyjg5TClw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Eau Claire County","date","2025-05-06T19:00:00Z","article","The Eau Claire County Board voted 26‑0 on May 6 to authorize the purchase of a Ford Transit van for the Aging and Disability Resource Center (ADRC) Nutrition Program, using funds from the ADRC nutrition fund balance.

Supervisor Leary moved the resolution and Supervisor Jenkins seconded. Supervisor Pagonis explained the request to the board, saying the current van had required “about $17,000 worth of repairs” last year and had reduced reliability; the new panel van will carry insulated containers and staging equipment for both Meals on Wheels deliveries and congregate meal sites. Finance and Budget had recommended the purchase (5‑0), and ADRC had recommended it with a vote the presenter described as “10 yes with 1 absent.”

Administrator Schaff and Supervisor Pagonis said the purchase is funded from ADRC fund balance (not the county’s general fund). Schimanski reported the ADRC fund balance was about $400,000 (presentation discussion). The purchase price in meeting materials was $55,000.

Board members asked about retrofit costs and whether the van would be converted to electric; staff responded there is no additional retrofit cost known at this time and that an electric van would be substantially more expensive and was not proposed for this purchase. Administrator Schaff said the purchase opportunity had a favorable price and was being presented outside the capital cycle so the county could take advantage of the vendor offer.

Procedural votes and related committee actions: the Finance and Budget Committee passed the resolution 5‑0 and the ADRC committee recommended it (committee tally reported as 10 yes, 1 absent). At the full board, the resolution passed by voice roll‑call confirmations recorded as unanimous; the clerk announced passage: “We have passed 26 to 0.”

Why it matters: The van will support delivery of nutrition services to homebound residents and congregate meal programs; funding comes from the ADRC nutrition fund balance and requires a two‑thirds vote per the presenter because fund‑balance use is an off‑cycle appropriation.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Eau Claire County - County Board of Supervisors - May 6, 2025 - May 06, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The county board approved a resolution to purchase a Ford Transit van for the Aging and Disability Resource Center’s nutrition program using ADRC fund balance; board vote was 26‑0. Committees had previously recommended the purchase.","taxTitle","Eau Claire County, Wisconsin","taxId",4139,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6569950,"County finance director outlines budget basics, levy limits and capital priorities",176,2661000,2837000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a&start=2661&end=2837","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a/thumbnail_2661000.jpg","/articles/6569950/Eau-Claire-County/Wisconsin/County-finance-director-outlines-budget-basics-levy-limits-and-capital-priorities","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569950-d46b0eb3628193b21fbcc2e1ea0d5233/orig.mp4?Expires=1776545681&Signature=RTM7POyhsG6ndmz5Zj6WzI7AtTgBVZ2gY21m0qEHrhT5QgFbhRz2RG-p0EwWdU7VkGsFkNZ2fMKt8t5iUICQG3S74oM0olxwuEgJ3QobuHbVKWMukvY6cnG~MfWxgj3hNl7ZBCeZDFSCbh-fExGLHkrsp38sC2LLB-LP6qEyA-tNSP0X0yQxP9PEXfQe-AIcvcK5dJo6EolopBBzKyTE2yUdLCUs~CzwEXFQSVsu30KrGrZwVkOD9eUs5iJoB5i7p2GdeA3TkeLDdkv1SQwEyjvm0O~lai6vKQYYQ6UP-hZuhSFL-T43mUYeeUCJksXoMI3oCNxS2Jfoe6O3Ky6KqA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Director of Finance and Innovation Jace Schimanski gave the board a Budget 101 briefing on May 6 that explained Eau Claire County’s operating and capital budgeting processes, major revenue sources and constraints including the state levy limit.

Schimanski described the operating budget as the county’s day‑to‑day spending — funded by property tax levy, sales tax, state grants/aid and fees — and the capital budget as longer‑term investments such as buildings, major repairs and equipment funded by bonding, short‑term loans or fund balance. He said the county’s operating levy is limited by state statute and grows in two ways, principally through net new construction; he quantified that, in the county’s calculation, roughly $145 million of new construction is needed to generate a 1% increase in levy capacity.

The director said personnel costs account for the largest portion of county spending (about 53% in the county’s presentation) and that mandated services and personnel are the main cost drivers. He showed historical trends in the county levy and sales tax receipts and said that the operating levy has not kept pace with inflation and population growth — leaving a real‑dollar gap the county must manage.

Supervisors raised timing and accuracy concerns. Supervisor Hirsch asked how departments produce reliable estimates when early fiscal data are limited; Schimanski acknowledged some departments carry greater forecasting risk, especially human services, and said estimates are the best available at the time and that staff will respond if state or federal allocations change. Supervisor Wilkie asked for more historical context in the budget materials to better inform departmental requests.

On process, Schimanski described the sequence: administrator issues budget guidance to departments, departments submit requests, the county administrator compiles a recommended budget, committees review capital and operating proposals, then the county board holds a public hearing and adopts the budget (county must adopt by the statutory deadline in November). He said the county is proposing to move joint oversight meetings for department budgets to after the administrator’s recommended budget is released to focus discussion on impacts of recommended funding levels.

Schimanski said the county has benefited from increased sales tax revenue in recent years, but cautioned sales tax is a volatile funding source; he noted the county’s large reliance on intergovernmental grants and said the county gets significant federal dollars pass‑through via the state. On fees, he said some fees are discretionary but others (for example marriage license and some court fees) are set by state statute.

Why it matters: Budget choices determine service levels, staffing and capital investment across county departments and constrain what supervisors can add during the amendment process. Schimanski said supervisors may propose amendments during Finance & Budget deliberations; the administration will work with supervisors to cost out proposals.","Director of Finance and Innovation presented a 'Budget 101' that explained the county's operating and capital budgets, revenue sources (property tax, sales tax, state aid), levy‑limit mechanics and a capital planning process; supervisors asked about timing, risk and fee authority.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6569955,"Eau Claire County planning director reviews rezoning process for board",1094,275000,1369000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a&start=275&end=1369","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3213735-bc8afb1711a143dd19f24b57996ea55a/thumbnail_275000.jpg","/articles/6569955/Eau-Claire-County/Wisconsin/Eau-Claire-County-planning-director-reviews-rezoning-process-for-board","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6569955-64ba679bffcafc1ebd898e1f88937008/orig.mp4?Expires=1776545681&Signature=ghE78t~79f2yCl1WOz38LdvTD1PId4nEGjqvlaWFAIhxMKo9n8-Az4w7hU4RX3okoAa9tAfLyvy4ga2mZlE5y9T1wpetqUvrTplkpZi-vEi-4CvMTJtgENXoa0NB6v7KlCDm7dMGHsKkH9-V08GUS114vmK~hQ7-F56zHZ9oWbt15QoS0b-pAV6m9jOI-UwNu7qBEu2lc4~GD9Env2KCe7~E8EXckXTOGiSLNnXXk4-k~ppX0dq35vg1WUqKeUk4nQG5JYjA5P11JSl6nUqADSEoI2gEDt3LjNwPqmHCIhOy3EDHY0sO53~Dg9meVeKWp0k0XZQXFBBWPYwAf2Y7aQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Radha Eslinger, Eau Claire County director of planning and development, gave a step‑by‑step “refresher” on the county’s rezoning process during the Board of Supervisors meeting on May 6, explaining how petitions move from a property owner’s application to staff review, town input, a Planning and Development Committee public hearing and the county board’s final action.

Eslinger told supervisors the process “starts with the property owner” who files a rezoning application, and staff then prepares a fact sheet and notice area. She said towns that have adopted county zoning have a statutory role: if a town objects, the Planning and Development Committee cannot recommend approval over that town’s objection. She added staff includes the town’s recommendation in the committee and board materials.

The presentation noted the county uses maps comparing current zoning to future‑land‑use (comprehensive plan) maps and examines adjacent land use and soil classifications. Eslinger said the county flags “prime soils” (class 1, 2 and 3) when a petition would remove land from agricultural‑preservation districts. She described the technical paperwork that accompanies petitions, including legal descriptions and a rezoning checklist staff provides applicants.

Supervisors asked detailed procedural and policy questions. Supervisor Zook asked how the term “density” is applied; Eslinger replied that density is effectively set by zoning district standards such as minimum lot sizes (she cited an example where an A2 district’s minimum lot size is 5 acres and an A3 district’s is 20 acres) and that the number of lots possible depends on the parcel size and practical constraints such as road frontage. Eslinger also warned that conditional‑use decisions are governed by case law and state law changes she referenced as “Act 67,” and that denials of conditional uses must be supported by “substantial evidence” in the committee’s findings to withstand appeal to the Board of Land Use Appeals.

Supervisors also asked about cross‑jurisdiction projects. Supervisor Larry asked about projects that would span counties (for example, a hospital), and staff advised that such facilities typically are in municipalities because of sewer/water needs and would go through the municipality’s permitting processes; staff said the village of Lake Hallie administers its zoning and works with the Triple County zoning office on technical assistance.

On farmland preservation, Eslinger said participation is voluntary and depends on zoning status: towns that have adopted county zoning can participate; unzoned towns cannot unless an agricultural enterprise area is established through the Land Conservation Commission and state review (the presenter identified the Land Conservation manager as the contact for that process). She confirmed that seven of the county’s 13 towns have adopted county zoning, five towns are unzoned, and one town (Lincoln) has its own town zoning and administers it locally.

Eslinger closed by inviting supervisors to call staff with questions and asked, “Are we getting you enough information? Are we getting you the right information?”

Why it matters: Rezoning determines how land can be used, affects farmland preservation and development patterns, and carries legal constraints (notice requirements, town input and state statutes) that shape what the county can and cannot require or deny.","Director of Planning and Development reviewed the county rezoning process, town roles, soil and density considerations, and effects of conditional-use law as supervisors asked questions about cross-jurisdiction projects and farmland preservation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

County approves purchase of van for ADRC nutrition program, 26‑0

County finance director outlines budget basics, levy limits and capital priorities

Eau Claire County planning director reviews rezoning process for board