Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Middleton council approves housing action plan after debate over provider references and early staffing
Loading...
Summary
The Middleton Common Council unanimously approved Resolution 2026-10, a housing action plan aimed at addressing affordability, after members debated removing references to specific service providers and whether to hire a dedicated staffer in year one.
The Middleton Common Council voted unanimously on April 19 to approve Resolution 2026-10, the city’s housing action plan intended to address affordability and help residents remain in the community. Alder Anairo moved approval and the motion was seconded by a representative of the Community Development Authority; the resolution passed following extended discussion about how the plan references service providers and the timing of proposed staffing.
Ald. Anairo, the plan’s sponsor, framed the proposal as the product of nearly three years of work by the workforce housing committee, the Community Development Authority and staff. “This plan represents the hard work of a number of members of the community development authority and the workforce housing committee as well as our incredible and succinct staff,” Anairo said, summarizing the long-term research and stakeholder engagement behind the recommendations.
During public comment before the vote, Ellen Carlson, president and CEO of WayForward Resources, urged passage and cited local input: “Two hundred seventeen people responded to the public survey and about 92% supported Strategy 2, which highlights the importance of funding supportive services for the most vulnerable,” she said, adding that WayForward served 294 Middleton households with housing support last year.
Council debate concentrated on two specific concerns. First, one motion sought to strike references to particular service providers from the plan on the grounds that listing named organizations could create the appearance of pre-selecting vendors for future work; that motion was put to a recorded voice vote and failed, 1–7. Supporters of keeping the language said the items were illustrative examples and that the document uses an open RFP approach when programs are implemented.
Second, several members raised financial questions about hiring a dedicated staffer in year one to administer the fund. “The cost to hire a staffer will be somewhere north of $100,000 a year,” one council member said, cautioning that interest from an originating-loan fund would not immediately cover those personnel costs and recommending that staffing be delayed until the program shows results. A motion to remove year-one hiring from the plan did not pass and died without a second in that form.
Council members also noted added metrics and thanked the volunteer committee and staff for the breadth of input incorporated into the plan. With the resolution approved, staff will proceed with the plan’s implementation steps and any future actions (such as issuing RFPs or proposing staffing) will return to council for approval as required.
The vote on Resolution 2026-10 was recorded as unanimous; the council did not change the plan’s examples of program models or the proposed sequence for implementation during the session.
