Madison council adopts resolution to allow recouping extraordinary mutual-aid costs, adds report-back requirement

The Madison Common Council on Jan. 13 adopted a resolution (Legistar 90986) establishing a procedure for the city to seek reimbursement from other municipalities for "extraordinary" costs incurred when agencies provide mutual aid to the Madison Police Department.

Public commenters and neighboring officials urged caution. Kim Richmond, a representative of a local Good Neighbor project, and Bonnie Rowe warned that formalizing invoices for mutual aid could damage reciprocal regional relationships and introduce hesitation during emergency responses. "Mutual aid is built on a foundation of neighbor helping neighbor," Rowe said, urging partnership over penalties.

Patrick DePula, an alder from Monona, also opposed the resolution and said the document mischaracterized a cited national guide as Department of Justice policy; he noted that the cited material contains a disclaimer and urged that factual claims be corrected.

Chief Patterson told council members he has convened and planned additional discussions with Dane County chiefs and proposed a subgroup to examine pursuit policies and find common ground. "We are committed to forming a subgroup within the Dane County Chiefs Association to come together and examine this topic of pursuits in particular," he said. The chief also cautioned that while the statute authorizes seeking reimbursement, Madison has historically relied on cooperation with neighboring agencies.

City Attorney Haas told the council the Wisconsin statute authorizes law enforcement agencies to seek reimbursement from municipalities for costs incurred during mutual-aid responses; Haas read that reimbursable items include "wage payments, disability payments, pension and workers' compensation claims, damage to equipment and clothing and medical expenses."

Alder Figueroa Coel offered an amendment requiring the Madison police chief to continue engagement with other chiefs and report back on the status of collaborative conversations during the chief's second quarterly report in 2026; the council added the amendment by unanimous voice vote. Council discussion stressed that the resolution was intended to spur dialogue and policy clarity rather than to immediately begin punitive billing.

The council recorded a unanimous voice vote to adopt the resolution as amended. Chief Patterson said he would aim to provide an update in his second-quarter report and to pursue county-level chiefs' dialogue and possible joint training opportunities.

Next steps: the police chief will continue interagency talks, the chief will report back to the council in the second-quarter report of 2026, and the city attorney and risk manager will identify procedures and guardrails for any future billing under state statute.