City of Milwaukee - Meeting of PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, UTILITIES, AND WATERWAYS REVIEW BOARD on 6/24/2026 at 9:00 AM

File #	Ver.	Agenda #	Type	Title	Action Details	Video
				1. Call to Order Minutes note: Meeting was called to order at 9:08 a.m.		Video
				2. Roll Call	Roll call	Not available
				3. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes (May 10, 2023) Minutes note: The meeting minutes from May 10, 2023 were approved without objection.		Not available
260221	0	4.	Communication	Communication relating to the creation of a publicly-owned electric utility by the City of Milwaukee. Minutes note: Chair Ald. Bauman stated at the outset that the board would take no formal action and that the meeting today was for information only. Ald. Brower thanked staff and the public, noting that many had taken time off work. He described rising costs from landlords, grocery store closures, and We Energies rate increases as a single affordability crisis, and cited Chapter 197 of Wisconsin Statutes as the existing legal path to replace We Energies. He identified himself as a socialist and argued that democracy should extend into the economy, contrasting a corporation obligated to shareholders with a utility obligated to residents. He said that the current arrangement should be reconsidered so every life is valued, and that fighting oppression was worthwhile. Member Carpenter commented. He had ridden the Green Line with his wife and believed in both public transit and public utilities. He was an economics instructor and a member of the Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America, and he supported a mixed economy. Electric grids as natural monopolies were best run as monopolies, and a profit-driven monopoly often blocks the best solution, such as efficiency investments that reduce sales. A recent We Energies notice of a 10.28 percent increase was unacceptable. Analysis from Citizens Utility Board showed that the PSC had rejected a WE Energies proposal to charge customers about 25 percent of the cost, roughly one billion dollars, for gas plants to serve data centers, and had required protections for smaller data centers. There were CUB recommendations to stop allowing profit on retired plants, to restore balanced planning, and to link profits to affordability. Profits should be ended. Expert testimony was given. Ursula Schryver, American Public Power Association, presented. APPA was a Washington-based trade association. The United States has more than 2,000 public power utilities serving 55 million people in every state except Hawaii, representing about 15 percent of customers, compared with 13 percent for rural cooperatives and 66 percent for investor-owned utilities. Los Angeles, Seattle, San Antonio, Omaha, Orlando and Jacksonville were large examples. 80 percent served communities of 10,000 or fewer. There were five core tenets: public ownership, local decision-making, not-for-profit operation, cost-based pricing, and customer-first service. Wisconsin public power already had lower rates and bills than investor-owned utilities. Interest in municipalization was higher than in her 29 years at APPA, driven by rate increases, storm response failures, desire for renewables, economic development, and expiring agreements. There have been 90 new utilities since 1973 and 20 in the last 25 years, mostly small or greenfield. She gave three examples: Jefferson County PUD in Washington formed in 2013 with about 18,000 customers through a negotiated purchase; Winter Park, Florida formed in 2005, reinvested profits, undergrounded 80 percent of its lines in 20 years, and restored 250 customers within 12 hours after Hurricane Milton in 2024; and the Long Island Power Authority formed in 1998 with more than one million customers after nuclear cost overruns, now operated under contract with PSEG Long Island. St. Petersburg, Florida had just funded a feasibility study. Clearwater, Florida had just completed one. APPA does not advocate but provides information. Atty. Kat Grant, Pines Bach LLP, presented. Her research was requested by the Milwaukee DSA. There were two acquisition paths. Condemnation would require a public referendum first. If the indeterminate permit predated July 11, 1907, the City would need to sue and prove necessity, defined as more beneficial than not. WE Energies traced back to a 1911 permit, so a lawsuit would likely not be required. After referendum the City would give speedy notice to the PSC, which would hold a hearing with 30 days notice to set just compensation, then issue an order vesting title, subject to circuit court appeal, with a 90-day window to discontinue. Chair Ald. Bauman commented on Wisconsin law in context. He explained that unlike Illinois or Colorado, where cities renegotiate expiring franchises, Milwaukee operates under indeterminate permits, which give We Energies the right to serve indefinitely unless the city acts under Chapter 197. Atty. Grant said that that understanding was correct and added that We Energies traces its permit to 1911, meaning a court action to prove necessity would likely not be required. Atty. Grant continued. Negotiated purchase, available to Milwaukee as the state's only first-class city, would require approval by the Common Council, the utility, the PSC, and voters, with a one-week newspaper notice before council action. The PSC would not price a hypothetical system. Valuation would average trended historical cost depreciated and reproduction cost new depreciated, often using the Handy Whitman Index, with adjustments for age and damage. Chair Ald. Bauman asked whether the PSC would conduct a valuation on a hypothetical. He noted some members of the public wanted a precise purchase price before any referendum. Atty. Grant replied that it would not, stating the commission lacks resources to price a transaction that might never occur. The PSC would only set just compensation after voters approved the taking, following statutory notice and a hearing. Atty. Grant continued. Partial-taking was a problem because WE Energies serves much of southeastern Wisconsin, and system property serving other communities would likely be excluded unless a multi-municipal district were formed. Financing would most likely be revenue bonds repaid from rates, not taxes, with the PSC typically allowing a six to seven percent return plus depreciation. A seven-person board would likely govern the utility. Direct city operation would subject workers to Act 10. A third-party manager would be suggested and selected by competitive bid as a way to preserve pensions and the existing collective bargaining agreement. Cooperatives were unlikely to be approved for an urban system. Sam Rozenberg, IBEW Local 2150, testified. He was the vice president of his local union. His union strongly opposed municipalization because it would put reliability at risk. Milwaukee would have to recreate an entire utility, not just acquire assets. Their workers had the ability to move crews, trucks, poles, transformers and expertise across the state, and restore service. Their works recently restored more than 80,000 customers. A City utility would need to hire and train staff, establish dispatch, buy and maintain equipment, manage inventory, and build a supply chain and storm preparation. All this would not be quick or cheap. Bryan Rogers, Walnut Way Conservation Corps, testified. He advocated for affordability and housing justice. The issue should be reframed as a systematic one on who should govern life conditions, not just a technical question. Investor ownership shapes all priorities. He had participated in about a dozen PSC dockets, including rate cases and affordability investigations. PSC staff were capable, rigorous, but resource-constrained, with commissioners confirmed by the legislature. The 2022 rate case had led to a three-year investigative docket on low-income affordability. There was data showing energy burdens in black, brown and low-income neighborhoods were significantly higher than average, with households spending well over six percent of income and some reaching fifteen to twenty percent. The PSC offered grants for solar feasibility studies. Walnut Way planned to build one megawatt of solar in Lindsay Heights. Wisconsin lacked community solar enabling legislation. Their plan was to generate power and return value to residents as bill credits through the neighborhood improvement district. Chair Ald. Bauman described the physical reality of the system — essentially no large generation inside the City except a small steam plant, with transmission, substations, distribution, material yards stocked with poles and transformers, and what he estimated as hundreds of line trucks spread across the region — and asked how a split would work. Ms. Schryver replied that most public power utilities in the country are distribution-only. Milwaukee would most likely acquire only the poles and wires inside city limits and purchase power elsewhere, either on the wholesale market or through a joint action agency such as WPPI Energy. Trucks and inventory could be negotiated, but the city would probably procure its own fleet and establish its own supply yard. Reliability would be supported by local crews whose first priority would be Milwaukee, backed by a formal mutual aid network coordinated nationally by APPA and supported in Wisconsin by the Municipal Electric Utilities of Wisconsin. Chair Ald. Bauman asked whether a County-wide model would be more efficient, citing Milwaukee's 96 square miles and about 570,000 residents compared with the County's 245 square miles and about 940,000 residents. Ms. Schryver responded that a larger footprint might be legally cleaner but would face the same complication because the infrastructure is intertwined throughout southeastern Wisconsin. Ald. Brower asked whether revenue bonds issued to acquire income-producing utility assets would not count against the state constitutional debt limit under Article 6 and whether such bonds would not jeopardize the city treasury. Ms. Schryver replied that was correct to her knowledge. Repayment would come solely from utility revenues, that this debt was separate from general obligation bonds. Tax-exempt bonds could be used for upgrades after acquisition. This structure had not historically impaired other cities' credit. Chair Ald. Bauman said that the City had previously received payments from utilities into the general fund. Member Carpenter asked whether a municipal utility would be required to build its own power plant and said that WE Energies had performed poorly in purchasing power from homeowners with rooftop solar. Ms. Schryver replied. The vast majority of public power utilities do not own generation, with only a few maintaining small peaking units. Most purchase power on the market or through joint agencies. A publicly owned utility could choose to buy local solar if the community directed it, and a feasibility study would evaluate the costs. Ald. Taylor said she was excited about the possibility and asked how the needs of low-income customers would be addressed. Ms. Schryver replied that an investor-owned utility serving multiple states could not tailor services to each community, while a municipal utility could better customize programs because decisions would be made locally. Ald. Brower questioned how the PSC process works, whether utilities would file proposals, the commission would adjudicate them, and whether a municipal utility could propose low-income protections such as a shutoff moratorium similar to Los Angeles. Mr. Rogers replied that the mechanism exists and described what he characterized as regulatory capture. Commissioner are confirmed by the legislature, which creates pressure to align with incumbent interests. He had participated in about a dozen PSC dockets, including rate cases and affordability investigations, and that advocacy after the 2022 rate case had forced the commission to open a three-year investigative docket on affordability. Bills had continued to rise, The community needed to build alternatives, not only resist. Mr. Rodgers continued. PSC offers grants for solar feasibility studies. Walnut Way planned to build one megawatt of solar in Lindsay Heights in the near term. He explained that translating that project into immediate bill relief was complicated by legal ownership structures and by the absence of state community solar enabling legislation, which he attributed to the influence of private capital. He described the planned workaround as generating power, storing a portion, selling the remainder, and distributing the proceeds as bill credits to residents through the neighborhood improvement district. The system was brittle. Public understanding of regulatory pressure points could be effective. Member December questioned whether a municipal utility would remove PSC oversight and whether any municipalities had privatized their systems. Atty. Grant replied no and said that Wisconsin was one of only twelve states where public power remains under commission jurisdiction. Ms. Schryver replied. There were municipalities that had privatized their systems. Ownership changes in either direction were rare and roughly even. Such cases typically involved very small communities with deferred maintenance that sell to a surrounding rural electric cooperative rather than to an investor-owned utility. Wisconsin previously declined from 82 to 81 municipal utilities when a town of about 600 residents voted to dissolve its system and join Dairyland Power Cooperative. Mr. Rogers commented. Continued PSC oversight of a public utility could be an advantage. Commission staff were capable, rigorous, would accept well-supported proposals, and provide an additional layer of oversight on top of local control.	Action details	Video
				5. Public Comments Minutes note: Public testimony in support for creation of a publicly-owned electric utility by the City of Milwaukee: Marlo-Aaron Lawler-Velk, resident John McIntyre, Power To The People Lisa Cottrell, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Andy Barbour, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Anne Steinberg, resident Amy Donahue, resident Ava Danzer, resident Bryan Atinsky, resident Samuel Mendoza, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Autumn Pickett, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Quinn Gordon, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Rep. Ryan Clancy, Wisconsin State Assembly District 19 Tim Schaefer, Office of Rep. Darrin Madison Bryce Zacharias, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Cleopatra White, resident Lydia McDowell, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Octavio Leon, resident Katie Tallard, resident Blue Pelikan, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Ophelia Lehman, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Jason Dermay, resident Sarah Zarling, resident Audra Hale, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Allison Hochmuth, Milwaukee MTEA Ian Gunther, AFSCME Local 47 Rita Maniotis, Greater Milwaukee Green Party Joe Cole, resident Amanda Isler, Power To The People Jim Harris, resident Tom Hansberger, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Tyler Kochmyn, Milwaukee Democratic Socialists of America Shua Sanchez, resident Sam Michael Speakers described themselves as tutors, psychologists, teachers, students, nurses, librarians, electricians, construction inspectors, small business owners and elected officials, and nearly all identified as Milwaukee residents. Speakers testified on cost and control. Many cited PSC-approved increases totaling about 12 percent over 2025–2026, average Milwaukee bills over $580 a month (more than $4,350 a year), and rates 30 to 40 percent higher than Wisconsin's 81 existing public power utilities — which serve about 11 percent of the state's load, or 300,000 homes and businesses, with roughly half the outage time (48 minutes a year versus 108 minutes for private utilities). Multiple persons noted WE Energies' roughly 9.8 to 10 percent guaranteed return on new infrastructure, $1.6 billion in recent profit, over $1 billion in annual income, and more than $32 million in executive pay, with one speaker citing a $13,000 utility donation to Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez after a vote on a tax bill affecting utilities. Speakers testified on health and reliability issues. A psychologist described a patient enduring 90-degree nights without AC due to cost. A Riverwest resident said she survived three home gas leaks. An MSOE student reported a $350 bill during January's minus-13-degree arctic blast (minus-42 wind chill) and received only LEDs and a night light from the utility's efficiency kit. A UWM student described a $600 winter bill with five roommates due to a landlord's broken window. A homeowner testified his professionally installed solar sat idle for seven months awaiting interconnection, losing peak season while the utility offered about 4 cents per kilowatt-hour (dropping toward 3 cents) for power it resells at 17 to 18 cents. Speakers testified on climate concerns and corporate behavior. WE Energies supplies only about 6 percent renewables, plans to end coal by 2032 and reach carbon neutrality by 2050 — slower than the state's carbon-free 2050 goal — while building two new gas plants and, citing Wisconsin Watch, seeking to shift data center risks onto ratepayers. Speakers testified on job-loss fears. An IBEW electrician urged his Local 2150 members to consider bargaining with the city, and a former Los Angeles inspector described LADWP's 12,000-person, largely in-house, unionized workforce (about 20 percent of city staff) as a model for secure, well-trained public power jobs. Speakers testified to having a 15,000 signed petition citywide, that the issue was democracy versus guaranteed profit, for the City to use Chapter 197 to create a publicly owned, locally controlled utility, that the Common Council act accordingly and include safeguards to prevent a private corporation from returning after a public takeover and in exploiting workers or the environment.		Video
				6. Adjournment Minutes note: Ald. Dimitrijevic said she had come to listen, heard powerful testimony from neighbors in her district, and thanked everyone for coming to City Hall. Ald. Brower thanked the board, experts and the public and further commented. Today's meeting helps to start a push to transform Milwaukee. A municipal electric power utility would be self-funded like Water Works, not be reliant on state aid, and would be the first real challenge to corporate power since the sewer socialists. WE Energies were welcome to testify. The fight would be 90% political will, and WE Energies could spend virtually unlimited money against a future referendum. Chair Ald. Bauman said that the testimony given today was persuasive and that next steps would be to form a council-administration task force, commission a feasibility study, and determine how to finance a study. Meeting adjourned at 12:15 p.m. Chris Lee, Staff Assistant Council Records Section City Clerk's Office		Not available

Meeting Details