The Ashland County Board Planning Committee on Oct. 29 reviewed a draft community survey prepared by Northwest Regional Planning and agreed to multiple wording and design changes before the surveys digital release in January.

Emily, a planner with Northwest Regional Planning, said the meeting would continue topics left from the Sept. 30 meeting and asked the committee to confirm the housing section wording. "Based on today's discussion about the draft community survey, Northwest Regional Planning will take that feedback and put that survey into its digital version," she said.

Committee members reached quick consensus to simplify a key housing perception question. The draft originally asked whether Ashland County "lacks affordable housing" for "low and middle income residents." Members said the income labels could be interpreted inconsistently; several members argued the survey should instead ask a single perception question that can later be cross-tabulated with respondentss reported municipality and income. The agreed text: "How would you describe housing availability in Ashland County? Sufficient, insufficient, or unsure?" Lisa Radke noted that the demographics section will allow analysis by location and income.

The committee also clarified the scope and phrasing of several other housing questions: the item on housing-types will read, "Which types of new housing should be prioritized in the next 10 years?" (options include single-family, duplexes/townhomes, rental apartments, senior/active-adult housing, tiny homes, and "convert vacant commercial or industrial buildings into housing"). Members emphasized that renovation and conversion of existing buildings should be captured.

On prioritization items (for housing strategies, transportation, and other investments) the group debated forcing respondents to rank choices versus allowing "select all that apply." Several members preferred ranking for clarity on priorities, but also raised concerns that ranking can reduce participation. The staff take-away was to convert several "select up to 3" questions into ranking questions where the committee requested a clearer order of priorities.

The committee added and clarified multiple transportation and infrastructure items: it asked planners to add ferry terminals and water-transportation infrastructure to the list of transportation facilities, and to specify that "short-term rentals" refer to short nightly/weekly platform rentals; several members recommended defining the term in the question (committee suggested a parenthetical such as "short-term (1 month or less)" or listing examples like Airbnb/VRBO).

Members also recommended splitting a combined travel-mode question into two items: one asking preferred mode of travel to work and a separate item for regular activities (shopping, appointments). The committee agreed to add "Not applicable" for commute-time items to accommodate retirees.

Utilities and community-facilities questions drew debate about county jurisdiction and respondents understanding. The committee elected to keep a broad list of services so residents could report perceptions countywide (even for services the county does not directly provide), but asked for clearer wording on sanitary systems. After discussion the committee endorsed wording that would capture sewer and on-site wastewater concerns (for example: "sanitary waste and disposal (sewer, septic, holding tanks)") and asked that cost-related dissatisfaction be separable from service-quality dissatisfaction.

Other changes captured in the meeting summary that Northwest Regional Planning will implement: add Lake Superior separately from inland lakes in the natural-resources item; list recreation areas and marinas; include community resources such as the county fair and Ojibwe cultural events; add manufacturing/fabrication and forestry-related value-added businesses to economic-development choices; and include a renewable-energy exploration question (wind, solar, EV, heat pumps).

On process and outreach, the committee directed planners to: produce a digital survey with a linked Word/print version for residents who prefer paper; include a QR code and distribution via county website, newsletter, social media, tax-bill inserts and local newspapers; and advertise that the survey will likely require about "15 625 minutes" to complete. Emily said the team expects to release the survey in January and leave it open for four to six weeks.

The committee also discussed accessibility: Melissa asked that larger-print paper copies be available for seniors and others not online; members suggested placing notices in tax-bill mailings and other county communications.

Votes at a glance
- Agenda approval: Charlie Ortman moved to approve the agenda; Pat Kenny seconded; voice vote passed. (Motion recorded at start of meeting.)
- Minutes approval (Sept. 30): Charlie Ortman moved; Paul Wilharm seconded; voice vote passed.
- Schedule Nov. 20 meeting: The committee took a roll-call vote on whether to hold a comprehensive-plan meeting on Nov. 20, 2025; votes recorded were: George Poussey: Yes; Elizabeth Franek: No; Pat Kenny: Yes; Paul Wilharm: Yes; Dan Grady: Abstain; Lisa Radke: Yes; Charlie Ortman: Yes. The motion carried by majority to hold the Nov. 20 meeting at 2 p.m.

What happens next
Northwest Regional Planning will incorporate the committees wording and structural edits into the digital survey, add the agreed items (ferry terminals, sanitary waste phrasing, Lake Superior distinction, etc.), and return a final digital draft for distribution and public release in January. The committee scheduled a follow-up meeting for Nov. 20, 2025, to review progress on the comprehensive-plan elements and subcommittee reports.

Attributions
Quotes and attributions in this account come from the meeting transcript and are attributed to listed participants with their role in the meeting.