Salem Lakes EDC weighs regional shared services as route to state innovation grant

The Salem Lakes Economic Development Committee discussed pursuing a state "innovation" grant and exploring shared services with neighboring municipalities to reduce costs and qualify for funding. Committee members agreed to assemble draft ideas by Feb. 1 so staff and the board can review ahead of the state application due March 31.

Why it matters: The grant favors collaborative projects that consolidate or streamline services across communities and can provide a state contribution equal to 25% of qualifying prior-year expenditures, officials said. For small villages, pooling services could lower operating costs for permitting, human resources, IT and some public-works functions.

Ideas and scope: Committee members listed several candidate areas. Unidentified Speaker 6 (committee member) proposed consolidating human resources, centralizing IT services and sharing code-enforcement or inspection capacity across towns. "HR, IT and code enforcement jumped out at me," that speaker said during the meeting.

Libraries and statutory limits: Unidentified Speaker 5 explained the library option is complex because state rules administered by the Department of Public Instruction limit how library systems cross county lines. He said creating a countywide or intra-county joint library arrangement could make municipalities, including Salem Lakes, eligible for the grant for up to five years, but added that a county executive had shown limited interest in partnering with the City of Kenosha on such a plan.

Roads, procurement and equipment-sharing: The committee discussed a road consortium and shared-procurement models instead of direct joint ownership in some cases. Participants said coordinated bidding for multi-community road work or equipment leasing might be more practical than pooled ownership. One participant cited a vendor quote for a vac truck at about $830,000 and noted leasing as an alternative.

Grant mechanics and next steps: Committee members clarified that the state's 25% contribution is calculated based on last year’s expenditures in qualifying service areas, so transferring an administrative service or bundling existing costs could create eligible match. The group agreed to focus initially on "low-hanging fruit" (services that are already similar across communities) and begin outreach to neighboring villages to gauge interest. Unidentified Speaker 2 asked staff to draft materials and to aim for a Feb. 1 committee-ready packet.

Disagreements and governance: A dispute arose over whether village staff should attend an early Dec. 10 road-consortium planning meeting. Unidentified Speaker 2 urged early staff involvement; others said the consortium team was in a very preliminary phase and preferred to return to staff with a draft plan. The committee recessed the dispute and kept the consortium kickoff as a near-term step.

What’s next: Members agreed to collect ideas, pursue outreach with possible partner municipalities and prepare an internal draft by Feb. 1 for committee and board review ahead of the March 31 application deadline.