Sawyer County committees direct Bug Tussle, GenComm to revise radio-tower proposal; borrowing cap set at $16 million

Sawyer Countypublic safety and economic development committee members voted unanimously to ask Bug Tussle and GenComm to produce a revised proposal for a countywide public-safety and cellular radio network, and to present that proposal at the committeesFebruary meeting.

The vote capped the countyborrowing capacity for the project at $16,000,000 for the purposes of developing a refreshed plan and cost estimate. The motion, made by Supervisor Mark Helwig and seconded by Supervisor John Riggheimer, passed on a roll-call vote recorded in the joint committee meeting.

The committees opened the discussion after public comments calling for faster action. Linda Zollmer, an Edgewater property owner and Village of Birchwood resident, told the committee the "public radio safety network issue should have been a joint collaboration between the public safety committee and the public works committee" and said Sawyer County "seems to be lagging around behind all other counties." She also said Bug Tussle had offered free colocation and asked the committees to pursue that option.

Steve Bining, a resident of the Town of Draper, described recent improvements in cellular coverage in his area and urged clarity on what 911-capable service exists. "Verizon does provide that service," Bining said during public comment, demonstrating how modern phones can route emergency communications.

County staff said the committees and vendors have discussed multiple tower-location options and equipment heights. "We did have a joint call with GenComm and Buck Tussle to go through the tower sites earlier this week," Andy (county staff) said, noting Bug Tussle already has towers in the county and that taller towers (300 feet, versus equipment at 150 feet on a 250-foot tower) would allow broader coverage and fewer towers overall. Andy also said the county zoning ordinance allows 300-foot towers subject to conditions that would need to be addressed.

A Bug Tussle representative apologized for a delay in attending the meeting and said the company was willing to work with the county. "We are more than happy to discuss doing towers," the representative said, and emphasized the company would need clarity from the county on whether taller towers would be acceptable and whether waiver approvals would be required from the county or townships.

Committee discussion centered on three technical and budgetary variables: whether towers would be built at roughly 150 feet of equipment mounting height or at taller 300-foot structures; whether to rely primarily on new towers or to lease space on existing towers (for example, the Verizon Oxbow tower and a station tower identified in discussions as WOJB/WLJB); and whether the project should be developed in stages that prioritize emergency services coverage first and broadband/cellular service second.

Members asked Bug Tussle and GenComm to return with a short, updated plan that: (1) clarifies coverage differences between the previously discussed $10 million and $16 million options, (2) shows the effect of increasing tower heights on coverage and number of towers required, and (3) identifies opportunities to use existing towers to accelerate initial coverage for emergency services.

The committees set a schedule: Bug Tussle and GenComm were asked to present a revised proposal to the joint public safety/economic development committees at the February meeting (the motion specifies presentation to the joint committee). The motion was: "to have Bug Tussle work with GenComm to provide a proposal not to exceed $16,000,000 in borrowing capacity and presented at the February meeting." The motion was made by Supervisor Mark Helwig and seconded by Supervisor John Riggheimer; a roll-call vote recorded multiple "yes" responses and the motion passed.

The request for a revised proposal follows earlier work on coverage maps and tower siting; staff noted GenComm had prepared coverage maps that showed gaps in the countyeast and southeast portions that could be reduced by taller towers. Speakers also discussed funding sources (bonding/credit capacity) and recent county and neighboring-county bond measures for similar projects.

The committees also clarified process and timeline: no ground work would start during winter, but the committees want the coverage and cost decision made in February so construction could proceed in spring. Committee members emphasized that while the county could consider owning or building towers, the current plan under discussion assumes private/vendor-led construction with co-location agreements. Committee members said they want a fresh, consolidated proposal so the joint committee can make a decision in February.

Votes at a glance: Motion to direct Bug Tussle and GenComm to provide a revised tower and cost proposal (motion text recorded in minutes). Mover: Supervisor Mark Helwig. Second: Supervisor John Riggheimer. Outcome: Approved (roll-call vote recorded as affirmative). Notes: Motion instructs vendors to present to the February joint committee meeting and sets borrowing-capacity cap at $16,000,000 for the purposes of the proposal.

Next steps: The committees asked staff to coordinate a single joint-meeting agenda for February and to request that Bug Tussle and GenComm reconcile tower heights, site selection and a cost estimate that reflects current grant/funding conditions.