Village board votes to move police, fire and administration project into construction-document phase

The Village of Hartland Village Board voted Monday to move the multi-agency facilities project into the construction‑document phase and begin public engagement, following presentations on design options and financing.

The decision came after Greg Johnson, financial advisor with Ehlers, reviewed two project cost scenarios — a $25 million figure on the low end and $29.5 million at the high end — and outlined the estimated debt service and property tax impacts for each. Johnson said a $25 million borrowing would generate roughly $1.9 million in annual debt service over 20 years under the plan shown to the board; the larger scenario would push annual debt service to about $2.27 million.

The board’s vote authorizes staff to proceed with preparing construction documents, continue community engagement and finalize related procurement and contract details. President Fannerstil opened the motion to proceed; the motion passed on a vote of the board with all present voting in favor.

Why it matters: The consolidated project is intended to replace aging police, fire and administrative facilities and to centralize public safety operations. Board members and staff said the new facilities would address space and operational limits in current buildings and could create redevelopment opportunities on the current municipal campus.

Key facts from the presentations: - Greg Johnson, financial advisor, presented two financing scenarios. Using level principal-and-interest payments over 20 years, the estimated annual debt service would be about $1.92 million for a $25 million project and about $2.27 million for a $29.5 million project. Johnson used a conservative 4.5 percent interest assumption for modeling and noted refinancing or partial calls are possible in the future if market rates change. - The modeling translated to an approximate incremental tax impact of about $3,200 to $3,800 per $300,000 of assessed value in the first full year of debt service, depending on the scenario chosen and assuming the modeled assumptions. - Project budgets presented to the board were fully furnished estimates that included furniture, fixtures and equipment.

Board discussion centered on whether the village could afford the project and on the level of conservatism in the cost and interest assumptions. Trustees and staff noted the village’s existing debt capacity (legal limit under state law), and Ehlers’ Johnson said borrowing the amounts modeled would use roughly 35–39 percent of the village’s legal general‑obligation borrowing capacity depending on the final project cost.

Public engagement and next steps: The board asked staff to schedule public outreach (open house / public hearing) and to return with construction‑document contracts for final review. Staff and the project team said construction documents would inform more detailed cost estimates and allow refined budgeting before final bidding.

The board’s vote authorizes staff and the consultant team to proceed; the board will receive subsequent updates and retain final approval at major milestones.