Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Economic development director: Chula Vista financing still unresolved; Sand Valley expansion draws interest

5929321 · September 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Adams County economic development staff told the Administrative & Finance Committee that Chula Vista developers are still seeking financing and that Sand Valley remains a major property-scale project. The county anticipates contributing through its special projects fund and partnering with Central Wisconsin Economic Development; no county funding

Adams County’s economic development director updated the Administrative & Finance Committee on large local projects and site-development efforts.

The director said the Chula Vista project is still working to secure financing and that the county’s special projects fund and Central Wisconsin Economic Development are expected to be part of the financing puzzle. “They're still working on finding financing for that,” the director said; he added the project team has asked that details not be broadly released while financing is pursued.

The director characterized the Chula Vista plan as a large, one-time project — likely the single largest dollar-value project he has seen locally in the past 20 years aside from the long-running Sand Valley development. He recommended county board members consider a site tour of Sand Valley, noting the operation is expanding and that facilities and amenities beyond golf (trails, fishing, practice facilities) are available to visitors.

On a separate property-development matter, the director said outreach to developers for a former school property had not yet produced firm offers; he noted the city mayor favored a 16 single-unit-home option from a housing study, which the director said is less attractive to developers because it is more expensive to build than multifamily options.

No county dollars or commitments were approved at the meeting; the director reported a $25,000 state economic development grant had been received to support the county housing study and an additional $1,000 came from the Adams County economic development entity. Staff said roughly $10,000 of the housing study cost was paid with ARPA funds.