Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Strategic Plan Implementation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission debates implementation scope for Franklin’s economic development plan; schedules follow-up and enters closed session
Summary
Commissioners debated an expanded implementation appendix proposed by Chairman Steve and consultant input, discussed staff capacity and the longstanding 70/30 residential–commercial guideline, and approved a closed session under statute 19.51 to discuss potential industrial/manufacturing development.
The Franklin City Economic Development Commission spent much of its meeting reviewing implementation strategies appended to the city’s draft economic development plan, debating how much detail to include in an adoptable plan and whether to treat more prescriptive implementation steps as a working document.
Consultant Corey (arriving from Appleton) explained she had incorporated Chairman Steve’s notes into additional implementation pages and asked the commission how it wanted to prioritize and operationalize the new material. Chairman Steve’s suggestions — which were added as multiple “page 13” implementation pages — emphasize more proactive marketing, targeted incentives, infrastructure analysis and further outreach to developers.
Commissioners debated the scope of the added material. Several members expressed concern about staff capacity and budget implications if the commission adopts the full set of implementation tasks. One long-standing planning guideline was raised repeatedly: maintaining a roughly 70/30 residential-to-commercial assessed-valuation ratio. Commissioners asked whether that ratio remains appropriate and who would be responsible for studying or enforcing it. Discussion noted the ratio had historical roots and that measuring and applying it would involve planning, finance and council-level decisions.
Consultant Corey urged the commission not to let the work “sit on the shelf,” offering to help prioritize tasks and to facilitate next steps. Director John cautioned the commission that some of the more detailed strategies require additional staff time, engineering and finance input and potentially council approval before they are operational.
On a formal motion, the commission voted to enter a closed session pursuant to statute 19.51 to discuss “delivery potential to industrial manufacturing developments and government actions in relation thereupon” and to reenter open session afterward to take any appropriate action. The motion to go into closed session carried.
Commissioners agreed on next steps: staff will prepare a prioritized summary (recommended: retain the three high-level goals as the primary plan to present to the common council) and circulate options for a facilitated follow-up meeting. The group discussed scheduling a July meeting if Chairman Steve could attend; otherwise the next regular meeting is August 15, 2025. The commission also discussed treating the extensive implementation pages as a separate working document that can feed priorities and individual action items to staff rather than as a single, final document for council adoption.
