Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Board hears arguments both for and against renewing Knowles‑Nelson Stewardship Fund support

2786413 · March 21, 2025

Loading...

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

Supervisors debated a proposed county resolution endorsing renewal of the Knowles‑Nelson Stewardship Fund, with pro‑renewal speakers citing park and forestry benefits and opponents raising concerns about state debt and lost property tax base.

Marathon County supervisors debated a proposed resolution Thursday supporting renewal of Wisconsin’s Knowles‑Nelson Stewardship Fund, which provides state funding for land acquisition, trail projects and local grants.

Supporters said the program helps county parks and forest purchases, funds trails and recreation projects and has delivered grants to many local units of government. “Almost every community within the county has received a grant at some point since 1989,” Marathon County staff noted while reviewing packet materials that list local recipients.

Opponents cautioned about the program’s cost to state taxpayers and the long‑term effect of large amounts of publicly owned land on local tax bases. Supervisor Sandalski argued that counties with large public landholdings can struggle with tax revenue, and Supervisor Marshall asked for clearer fiscal analysis, noting state debt service obligations tied to prior stewardship purchases.

Why it matters: the Knowles‑Nelson program is a state‑level conservation funding mechanism that also funds local projects. Several supervisors connected the resolution to the county’s own strategic plan goals to identify and preserve natural areas and to acquire park and forest land. Supervisor Lemmer pointed to the county strategic plan target of approximately 320 acres per year as a supporting policy rationale.

Board action: the item was presented for review and will appear on the Tuesday agenda for a formal vote. Supervisors asked staff for supplemental fiscal data, including county and state acreage tallies and the fiscal impact per taxpayer, prior to the board’s vote.

Ending: staff agreed to provide additional information — including county acreage totals and a Legislative Fiscal Bureau report reference — before the formal vote at Tuesday’s meeting.