Peterson Rindflesh did I get it right? So golly Stefan yeah, man Akron the under wheel and water And work 12 I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes of October 18th meeting Motion was made in second to approve the minutes of October 18 any corrections to be made Seeing none all in favor Contrary very tonight's presentation Will be concerning Walmart tonight's presentation will be by Paul at Enders Steve Sokolowski Tom Holton and then Mr. Ryan Swanson of arc design Will have Paul at Enders Stand and start the proceedings up here What I wanted to do was give a brief history on what Happened Bit about the development agreement and then if you have any questions you can ask either Tom Holton or Ryan Swanson representative for Walmart Okay, several months ago city staff met With consultants working for Walmart regarding development of a new Walmart Supercenter on a parcel of land near the southeast corner of Washington Avenue and Taylor Drive The land use approval process was discussed with Walmart consultants Because a proper property was properly zoned the only land use approvals necessary Involved the conditional use permit and architectural review At the same time the land use approval process was discussed A traffic impact analysis was requested by the city due to the developments anticipated impact on the area City staff was very clear That the possibility of the city sharing in the cost of any necessary improvements would be unlikely as The analysis was being completed and reviewed by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation representatives for Walmart submitted a Conditional use application as well as renderings for architectural review Because city staff felt strongly about the need for public improvements based on the magnitude of the development a Condition relating to entering into a development agreement that would address infrastructure improvements was added This issue is coming before the Common Council tonight Strictly due to the improved the public improvements required Based on the traffic impact analysis and addressed in the development agreement before you What I'm gonna talk about is a little bit about the conditional use process itself which took place on July 29th of this year Walmart came in we had a hearing that was noticed to the public As our typical conditional uses for any use throughout the city Whether it's Walmart, whether it's a restaurant, whatever conditional use they always require a public hearing as did Walmart in this case As some of the plan Commission members were here as well as some of the staff that was here was It was kind of interesting because there was There wasn't a lot of people at the meeting, but it was definitely noticed Obviously staff the plan Commission had lots of concerns as far as public improvements conditions with the Walmart in just in general And as part of that we had actually drafted 23 conditions of approval that Walmart was to meet I don't know how in depth you would like me to go if you want me to read through each of them I guess I would ask the committee for direction that way But if you want I could read through those conditions or just highlight some of the More important ones, but obviously the most important one that we felt as a staff was the developers agreement which deals with all the public improvements the traffic the water sewer what have you and Once we got to an agreement with Walmart the only people who can approve a developers agreement are you? So that's why we're here this evening is to make sure that we've covered our basis in terms of covering all those traffic impacts all The water sewer issues things like that that need to be addressed and therefore the we feel as a staff that the agreement that has been developed Covers the issues that the plan Commission had dealt with as well as the concerns that staff had about the development in general So I don't know if there's anything specific that you would ask of me or if you'd like me to read those conditions, but Please let me know Yes Concerns at the staff work. Yeah concerns of the staff or traffic And a lot a lot of the concerns had to deal with the the site itself in terms of Lot a lot of times these Walmart super centers and things like that have trailers that just stay in the parking lot Some of the conditions that we're dealing with that was you know You're not gonna have any of the trailers just parked out there if they're not Unless of course if they're coming in and they're just getting rid of their stuff and things like that But you can't store them out there constantly in the parking lot There was discussion on the RVs RVs Walmart has a Policy of allowing RVs to use the parking lots that was discussed and indicated that we shouldn't have that many Many of the uses were again the aspect of the outdoor storage and things like that where you see the snowblowers the garden centers things like that Making sure those things were interior making sure all areas that were going to be used for storage were paved If they're not going to be used for storage that they're landscaped in some type of fashion Vision obviously vision is always critical at the ingress egress points that we're not creating any Issues there in terms of signage so that we're creating any traffic hazards Forklifts and things like that that are going to be used for the building that those are all kept on the inside So we are very concerned about the type of storage and things that we're going to learn out there But I think the biggest concern again was the aspect of a that we wanted a developers agreement for the public improvements That we're going to be required and that no building permit should be issued until that time so right now until this Until it was important from the plan commission's perspective that we didn't want to issue a building permit when we didn't have these public Improvement aspects all worked out now we're to the point where we have the public improvements ready In terms of figuring out what needs to be done now it takes this agreement to get us to the point where yes If we come to the agreement that which we believe is a good one that that Walmart would then be able to get their building permit only at such time as the developers agreement was signed I Don't know if that answers a question. If you have any additional Taking care of the rules construction as needed and all that and also flood control that was good to see One of my concerns is beyond that development agreement actually is doing what the existing Walmart store What are the plans for that store? Are they gonna market it things like that so maybe that's a little further on in the discussion here We can address that if you're not prepared for that. Yeah, actually, I don't know I would probably actually refer that to mr. Swanson to see what input he would have from Walmart themselves at this point in time But as far as part of this discussion We are focused strictly on the public improvements for this and that aspect was not addressed as part of this agreement Okay Sheboygan county slash Sheboygan support three super stores being the one at limit 13 miles away One on the south side and one on the north side of Sheboygan. We have no access from the east whatsoever We only have west north and south. Are we able to support those three superstores? Again, I would refer refer that to Walmart but I would say the answer from a staff perspective is when an applicant comes in with an application for a use such as a Retail use or whatever in a particular area of town. That's what we're going to take a look at is First of all is the use permitted or conditionally permitted in the zone that they're talking about and secondly What are the impacts of that proposed use? that's what we as a staff take a look at every time we have a conditional use come in as far as Whether or not something can be supported Basically again, I would let that applicant deal with that And I think it would come down to how the market drives it and how they feel if they're going to be successful or not And I guess if I would speak for Walmart, and I'm not don't want to do that But I'm thinking they made the termination that yeah, they could be successful Okay, another question And this is probably a city attorney question If the council would turn down these highway improvements Could Walmart still be built would you like me to give my two cents? I Would say what we have here is an agreement That I think first of all that the council needs to be aware. There are existing issues out there All right, there's existing issues from the development. That's occurred right now Acuity the business park things like that In a way Walmart has agreed to do some things with us to help with some of those existing besides what they have In terms of their impact, so it's it's something that you know Right now the plant commission has approved the use So what it would come down to and yeah, I'd have to I'd have to work with Steve a little bit on this one, but There would be some questions as far as Having your body who approves these Conditional uses saying yes and then get to the improvement standpoint and then say no yeah, I understand I read the entire agreement end-to-end and they're also willing to add on to the Retention pond et cetera and needless to say I mean it all sounds fine and dandy But I don't think we're going to support three moments. I'm very honest Anybody else got any questions for Steve one There's a city have a Good or authority over how that building that's going to remain baby That's going to be maintained. I agree with all the work. What is it that they have in fact? That's a very key business very that little shopping center that they're going to pull out people out of The a huge negative impact Concerned for the citizens the business people do we have any say so Any guidance to maybe how we can help the Rerocation and the maintenance of our buildings that continues, but doesn't become an eyesore There's no question that our Staves are always concerned about issues like that because yeah, it's going to leave a vacant space in a very highly used retail area We're going to encourage and support people and any any questions that we would field would be hey We have something that's open here. I'm I can't answer for Walmart again and I'd look forward to hear what their response is to that but the only thing as far and Paula if you have anything to add here is just be the aspect of Making people aware of a space of that size. That's available I don't think I can tell you oh we can do this We can do that to to make someone go in there But we certainly can make people aware of it and do whatever we can to encourage people to get there And and and that's I don't know if there's anything really to add to that Think and that was one of the first questions that we asked was what was going to happen to the building That you're going to vacate is that going to go dark and underutilized and what we were told was that and Ryan could speak to This too is that typically you know they market those buildings They don't want to see it sit there and they're making some kind of a lease payment to you know Either they own it or they lease it and they try to turn it over and like Steve said we typically do that with any vacant Building in the city as we we try to move them along also for developers because it doesn't help the city to have vacant buildings And then also That's true. I mean it has to meet the proper zoning and also They have to meet the building code and so if the building becomes deteriorated. Well, then we have a method to Make sure that it doesn't Supercenter just doesn't fit that way through the plan commission or anything but I'd like to see a plan to market that come along that building and you know, I don't want to see turn into a Blighted area where they have the century building sitting over there, which is Problematic but they're paying their taxes and Walmart would have to maintain the outside of the building according to city standards If they get letters and everything else Hopefully they would do that but there are other businesses in that shopping center that are impacted by Going out and I think it's important to the city that they Come together with something that would address. I mean right now. They're a major anchor We generate a lot of traffic and a lot of customers for that that mall area Thank you, yeah, as long as you're standing there again You use the phrase city cost Unlikely That the many cost of the city unlikely. Do we have more positive term than unlikely? That was the initial discussion that we had With Ryan Swanson and other representatives was that you know, the chances were slim that the city would be Stepping forward and paying for these public improvements and then subsequently they've stepped up to the table and said they would pay for those costs okay, so Unlikely means there's still a chance, but can they positively say that we won't have to pay for their roads and they're There the things they need to make a profit that we won't subsidize that. Yes That's what's addressed in the in the development agreement. Okay, the unlikely made me unlikely was that initial discussion that we were up front with them Okay Steve have you got me? Thank You mr. Chairman I guess I'd start out by saying what What came to me was the issue of? It's condition number 22 in the conditional use permit It says a developers agreement for all required public improvements shall be executed prior to the city issuing a building permit I had discussions with Walmart's outside council from Michigan and and I think we had a couple of telephone conference calls with Mr. Swanson was included in one that I participated in I know and Started out the basic understanding from the beginning was that We were going to look to Walmart to be responsible for the cost and What I was presented with originally was alluded to earlier. There was a traffic study being undertaken and I was then provided with the laundry list of road improvements that needed to be done and those of you that were at the Public Works Committee saw and what came in originally to council was the initial version that just just addressed the road improvements And those are if everyone has copies of the agreement those are the first part of exhibit C those are the list that I Believe the DOT concurred in and everything there's a Listed September 29 2004 scope of off-site improvements that page and then the top of the the next page is what originally came in and was what Was discussed at Public Works Committee Subsequently, I got a phone call from the water utility saying that They had reviewed the plans that from the water utility standpoint and had made some comments back to Walmart's design people and they really hadn't heard back and So that got me to thinking well. There are other Other improvements here. We're talking about the other city improvements that in looking at the Conditional use permit had talked about all required public improvements that To me was a broader phrase than just roads So I felt it was important to include everything that we were asking for all public improvements And we're we're just talking about Public improvements here not what Walmart has to do on their site for their facility parking lots and and all that so I'd contact with the water utility and engineering and planning department and What was added then was the the bottom part of the second page of exhibit C the green wing drive road improvements and The exhibit D the other public improvements includes all the stormwater items sanitary sewer and water mean and You note at the bottom of exhibit D It says all the above to be constructed in accordance with final approved construction and utility plans because to my knowledge Those plans aren't all fully complete at this time, but it includes a quite an extensive list of public improvements that Walmart has Has agreed to pick up the tab for the the gist of the agreement is that They pay for all the improvements They are eligible for a an occupancy permit when they're substantially completed with the improvements Provided that if there are a few minor things still remaining Typically, it would be like landscaping if they're you know ready to open and it's it's not appropriate time to be putting in the landscaping that they will Provide a letter of credit in the amount of the the balance of the public improvements to be completed and They'll complete those improvements and within 60 days and if they don't we can take that letter of credit and Use that to do the improvements to finish them up ourselves if we come up short on that letter of credit They agree to reimburse us for whatever additional costs there are if you know on our submittal of a bill within 30 days so In my view Walmart has done Everything we've asked them to do I don't I can't see what more They could do from the standpoint of what they've been asked to do with respect to agreeing to To pay for The the public improvements that are required. I think there was a question earlier about if we didn't do the road improvements You know what would happen. I don't think we would And I don't know that the state would either allow Walmart to open up without those street improvements the all the additional things with The lanes off of the interstate lanes onto the interstate turning lanes and things like that we've got a great opportunity to Have a lot of that stuff funded by Walmart the Figure I saw on the paper. I don't know if it's accurate or not Maybe mr. Swanson can address this but it's a million and a half dollars worth of improvements. I'm not sure if that includes Things besides the roads or if that's included in there, but it's In my 17 years of a city attorney I'm not aware of any other Builder or store owner who's gone to this point in Their willingness to agree to pay for all these improvements that are basically public. They're not they're not Walmart improvements so Unless there are specific questions about the agreement or any other questions about anything related to the Walmart project Oh, that's all I've got Thank you, mr. Chairman. So basically Steve if we if we both know this we're actually saying no to what we're asking And it's not gonna prohibit Walmart from building there and it's still be they could still ask us to make those improvements And we might have to accommodate at our own expense Well, certainly in my view if we if the council votes no and certainly can do that Voting no from based on what we've asked them to do I Don't see the benefit to doing that. I guess I would raise concern From the city side as to whether we've dealt with Walmart and good faith if we Asked them to do all these things we give them Permission to build the store and condition that they Enter into a development agreement with regards to these things give us everything they want we want and then say no We're not gonna let you build the store You know all the a lot of the issues that town should boy gets facing are driven by Things that really aren't an issue here as far as the location of the store and the proximity to residential areas and things Bill, I just wanted to clarify All in the service question. I mean You said yeah, they've done everything we've asked them to do and but if we would vote no, they couldn't build it without our approval You know it's part of like the second part of the question or something. They couldn't do it if we wouldn't know Beyond this obviously well, I think they would have you know an issue that they could raise a legal issue with us as to our Dealing with them and good or bad faith if we were to vote no on this this we've insisted on this as a condition of the conditional use permit and They've given us what we've asked for To vote no, that's In effect you're circumventing the plan commissions grant of the conditional use permit and that's that's really within the purview of the plan Commission I guess I see your logic, but you know staff has done their job with their concerns, you know, they weren't dishonest they weren't you know Plan Commission dealt with it on their issue, you know plan Commission What are they stable sharing part, you know, I mean doesn't mean we're obligated to listen to the plan Commission I think they've all dealt with it fairly and honestly Yes, that doesn't mean that the council has that same feeling it may it may not you know I'm not saying when we're together, but I just I don't know if I'm not aware You know seems to me there's two different issues there, you know if the council says no way to want Doesn't mean they didn't come you know do everything they could do In my mind, you know, I just don't see that you can say it's unfair just because the car Go ahead with it, you know like in the police station We all said let's build a police station beforehand and then now we're working on the specifics of it But the issue here is not whether to build a Walmart or not. It's whether the Whether to prove the development agreement Well Yeah, mr. Swanson, would you like them? I should note too that Attorney Jim Conway is here on behalf of Walmart as well and I don't know if he's got any comments along with mr. Swanson or no Eric did you have a question? I just had a comment actually In in a large degree we did have control over what's going in there when we approve that it's going to be commercial Property in zoning and once we create commercial property zoning if an applicant meets the guidance that we set We really can't restrict who it is If it's super K mark came in and one of the same thing would have an open property on the south side of town Prisker's are in there We would be granting that approval as well as long as they met all the other Guidelines and that that's something that we have control over in terms of zoning But once the guidelines we really can't restrict. I think you create issues of a Discrimination if we start restricting certain people and not restricting other people by ownership or otherwise That's what we have zoning guidelines Anybody else that has a question from now on please use your mic Okay, now mr. Swanson Yeah, again, I'm Ryan Swanson. We're the civil engineers and work with staff early on as Stephen Paul I mentioned on the project. I guess like if I could answer any questions I've heard a few pop up here that I can try to answer at this point My one thing I can address up front was the the old store This store does is intended to replace the current store I can't say with some confidence that efforts have been underway to Market that I cannot tell you exactly the status of that. Unfortunately. I Have some thoughts of that there has been some interest, but I can't tell you exactly so I can say though that the existing store how they how they structure their Operations that store the empty store would be a drain on the new store. So they have it every intent to sell off Their empty property vacant property as soon as possible. So I guess from that perspective The intent is extremely clear that they do want to sell it off and I believe they do own that store currently It's not a lease situation Mr. Chairman I'd like to know it does The city do we have a requirement that they have to have that store bought and leased or anything in a certain amount of time or they can just lay dormant as long as they want to Once they if they by chance would move to the south side They have the right to leave that store dormant as long as they wanted to or does like I said does the city have a Timeline with that they have to have that Aldermen's a galley from a legal standpoint if they own the store they can do what They want with it They've got to pay their taxes. They've got to maintain it so that it is in conformance with our Building codes so it couldn't deteriorate and become a nuisance But there's there's nothing that we can require that They have to do something with it if they they choose not to as Mr. Swanson said I'm not aware whether they own the building or lease it but assuming they own it They do have a big financial incentive to to sell it and get Get somebody else in there One of my main concerns is that that store lay dormant And all those other businesses around there that are run by Local people and our owned by local people will start to deteriorate also because there's no activity in there And what like you said Walmart bought a lot of activity was good for the senior centers senior citizens and the whole bit get Them there now is that if that starts to deteriorate then what do we have? We don't have anything at Taylor Heights anymore, and that's not that's not Right for the people that are working very hard to keep their businesses up in that area You've got Pigley wiggly. You've got Sally's you've got a you got the battery shop You have all of these that probably have based a lot of their livelihood on Walmart now Walmart's going to pull out Well, that's an economic decision that Walmart makes they're not pulling out of town that you know Actually, they're they're adding to new stores Because they think this is a good place to do business obviously, but you've got the Sentry store That's dark right now. Now. It's my understanding that the century's got a long-term lease in there and they're making lease payments They don't own the building they have to make lease payments and and the landlord as long as they're getting the lease payments While I'm sure they've had the property on the market Doesn't have a tremendous incentive to sell if they're getting the lease payments from Sentry But you got the same issue and in that location, but that building stands by itself There isn't other businesses Around that empty building right now where there is going to be at Walmart And I'm a firm believer that we support our local businesses who own and operate those businesses well, there's only so much control the city has City Council has on on the economics and Who's in and out of stores? I mean it happens all the time people close one place and move to another That's The economics of the marketplace. I would you know based on what you're saying That would bode well for someone else going in there because it is a high-traffic area. It's got great visibility It's in the center of the city And it should be very positive for Future reuse of that building. I would think but that you know, I'm I'm a lawyer I'm not an economist or or a business person. So but that isn't our building to sell or to lease out It's Walmart, right Do you have anything more to say Mr. Swanson? I guess there's any other questions I can address directly Yeah, there's been some confusion in the paper and stuff how many people is are gonna work at this Walmart Supercenter I mean roughly have you this is a this is one of the bigger actually the biggest store they have and I think the total number is Approximately 400 Okay, and then how many work at the current one now that won't be there anymore. This is just a guess but probably 250 it's a good size store there so we're adding a hundred fifty I guess for the public out there. That's not a work Could you kind of highlight some of the things that the Walmart Supercenter does that the Walmart doesn't? Currently the biggest thing would probably The expansion I think the current store does have a good Good portion of grocery inside that store if I recall, but it would definitely be an expansion of that first and foremost secondly, they offer Have some internal uses that kind of a bigger spectrum of uses including expanded pharmacy the Limited automotive tire and battery service lube changes so it's basically it just expands on Kind of the commercial uses inside it more of a there's a much more enhanced garden center temporary seasonal garden center, too So it really just takes what they've had what they have at the current store and expands that I Guess the logic behind my question is I share the concerns of both, you know, we've heard before Especially we're having three in such a small area. I mean nobody gets their car oil changed more Because super Walmart's doing it. Nobody buys more laundry detergent or more meat or you know Because you have stores that you might go there and I understand that's economic interest But nobody does it more we consume what we consume, you know, and I'm concerned that Who's gonna want to go into that? I mean I'm trying to think of a Of a retail use that's gonna want to go into the old store Because they're probably gonna be fighting against the super Walmart, you know, or three of them within 15 miles And I guess, you know, it's just it seems to me It's Having one I probably wouldn't even vote for truthfully but having three in that little area to me Just seems like you're gonna crucify a lot of the businesses in the mall area in that area I you know, I just I wrote problem with that and and I want to be clear I think the staff has done everything we asked of them, you know, Tom and And Paulette and Steve, I mean that's not their issue, you know They did a fantastic job of getting everything and I think we have everything we could have asked for as far as improvements, but you look at You know again what I don't know exactly but what the town is negotiating with and they've got future land values in there They've got all these other things and it seems to me like all of a sudden This one's more important because we want to get this one done because maybe in my mind I'm thinking maybe the town's gonna end up with a better deal than we got because they're talking about, you know I mean if again, I don't know what that how serious the Walmart people are negotiating it But certainly the residents who want it are talking about, you know, what if their future land values go down? Oh, what about this? What about this? They've got a whole litany of things Whereas we don't have that many issues and it might be I don't know why we benefit in moving first in that issue Okay, I Don't know what you know, it doesn't it to me It just seems like we're devastating that area and they we've done everything to fix this area I 100% agree with that but what's the value of having an empty blighted, you know area over there We've had stores at the mall half the mall was empty for months.  They've got Pigley Wiggly stores all over this area and you know We're crucifying them if we have three Walmart's in 12 miles And I guess I have a real concern with that and again, I think staff did everything we can ask them to do as far as You know taking care of the cost of adding this new one But I just think there's other costs that aren't figured in the brick and mortar that I won't be supporting this and I can't you know Unless there's some type of Agreement that you know, I trust is that our involvement Thank you, your honor the question was not answered can Shibuigan County the city of Shibuigan and Anywhere else support three super stores within this 13 mile radius We have no access from the east. I asked us before it wasn't answered now. You can answer it Can we support them? Yes According to Walmart's data the marketing data they believe this area can support Three stores and I I say three assuming the north store would be built which is an assumption at this point as well as the adding the Plymouth store in there I'm not privy to that marketing information But you know, they've looked at the trade areas where people are coming from credit card data They've looked at anticipated growth of the community and they've decided that For this area, that's what they're proposing at this point. It are the three One more question and I know that really it's not your responsibility to answer this but I will ask it what type of Pay and benefits will these employees get at this store? You don't have to answer if you feel that you don't need to I guess I'm not kind of the same with the marketing I'm not privy to that it would be consistent with I'm assuming consistent with the current store and the policies of that of that store in general Our men better really. Thank you I mean we can push Walmart out of the city and make us so there's no Walmart here And then they'll just go out of the city and the tax base will go somewhere else and we'll lose that tax base I mean if that's what this council wants we can do it, but my question is It's not clear. Is it just gonna be a super Walmart or is it gonna be like a strip mall concept? It's strictly for this site It's just we're just proposing The Supercenter there's really not any additional land for like out parcels like say across the interstate at the Target Home Depot It's not it's not that big And frankly the Supercenter fits on the site quite well, but that's it Every other piece of the property is really taken up with green space Parking things like that. So right now. That's all we're talking about To add to that though one thing the study did look at was a substantial area both commercial future commercial development and Additional industrial development to the south of the site. So I Think we've we've considered that the traffic study that this area could expand even further than just just the Supercenter I Agree that that any Development we do need to look at social costs with that in terms of employment and union jobs versus non-union jobs family businesses can we forward to Have more than one Supercenter or not as I made a comment in the paper that I you know No offense the business by him, but I have friends that will work at Fresh Brands and I'll continue to shop at Pigley Wigley I won't shop at Walmart because of that, you know, I understand my I can vote with my dollar my business decision to keep going with Pigley Wigley versus Walmart But as Alderman Vander wheel said They don't have to build in the city of Shipwagon and we would still will have an empty lot And we still will have small businesses family run businesses up at Taylor Heights that are impacted when they move out They can go to the town of Wilson if they want Just across the way they could go on the west side of I-43 closer to the Kohler plant the Kohler Development and deer trace and then we do not get those dollars that we currently would get right now From the one whoever does fill in the current existing Walmart store and to the new developments that we get the new Additional tax base and the third part of that is if even if they build elsewhere outside of the city of Shipwagon The city will still have to pay for all this traffic improvements as well as other improvements with the water and what and sewer and what have you And without any guarantee that anybody else will make us the same deal that Walmart currently is offering us right now Any development that's going to go in there Walmart or otherwise, which will happen because it is zone commercial They may not come in and offer us to build additional Green Wing pond You know I think You know we can analyze the type of business I urge people to vote with their dollars if they disagree with the type of business It is but obviously people currently vote with their dollars to support Walmart by the amount of traffic that are getting up there and You know hope for their sake in terms of business that will continue otherwise We only end up with something empty but In terms of the decision we have to make today is do we have them pay for these improvements? Do we pay for them ourselves? Do we add additional tax revenue tax base to our our city or do we let? The towns continue to take away our ability to expand so I will support for this But like I said I will continue to support local businesses as well Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too will be supporting the resolution to allow this to go forward. I think As Silas stated in and and Eric stated it is important that we keep Walmart in the city We don't know that there's gonna be a third Walmart That's an issue. They have to work out in me or may not happen It's not a guaranteed thing on the town I know the town has its concerns and they'll have to deal with that as a town We have to think about the city overall Walmart's if they if they do leave the city completely We end up with nothing might do have a concern about Taylor Heights I want to make sure that billing gets marketed and I hope our staff works on it But I think putting a supercenter in the business park is the best place you could put it That the the roads and everything that they're gonna be putting in there is gonna be a positive for all the businesses down there Yes, they're gonna have an impact on our businesses. We know that they're a larger store They have great sales All kinds of things that that make people want to go to Walmart are there. They're gonna exist in this supercenter I like those people come to Sheboygan. I want to see them come to Sheboygan. I want to see them shop on Sheboygan Property city Sheboygan property. They're gonna spill over into other things. There'll be other developments around there that are Positives on the end of Walmart There's gonna be other buildings and restaurants and things that are going out there in that area Surrounding there that will get positive impacts from Walmart. Yes, Taylor Heights is a concern And I will look I want to see that market. I have no a lot of people that over there. We go to Taylor Heights a lot So I have that concern but for the best interest of the city in the long term That is the best place for it. Frankly. I hope it doesn't work out in the town of Sheboygan And it does work out in the city Sheboygan. It belongs there. It's almost a perfect fit There's no homes around there that are gonna be impacted. No residents It's industrial area There's an on and off ramp that'll take The major traffic that we would be concerned about if it was put somewhere else in the city right there It's they're not gonna be driving all the down Taylor Drive to get there except for people that live in the city Most people would take I-43 to get there quicker. I think all in all it's a win situation for the city I do still have a concern about Taylor Heights. I'd like to make sure that they might get that we can't tie that to this It's a different different issue, but I think we can work through that with our planning staff and And hopefully that happens. I will be supporting it Person modern air Thank you Alderman Berg. I Pretty much agree with Alderman Rindfleisch I will support it if I were living in the town and representing the town There's no way I would support it because so many people feel against it. However, I will support this I personally won't shop there I've not spent a dollar in Walmart yet in my life and I won't but I will vote for you to go down the south side If there's no more questions for mr. Swanson Warner I just just one thing mr. Chairman. I'd like to say, you know, you have to get to the if you have a concern about Walmart and Supercenter Shop at some of your local stores more often Don't just go to Walmart and I'm saying that to everyone in the public I go to Trilling Hardware as often as I can sometimes I forget to go there. I automatically go somewhere else. Menards or wherever But get into Trilling Hardware when that flyer comes out or any other time You can support your local businesses that way and and do that as often as you can I guess I just hope we can have the option to go to Trilling Value in 15 to 20 years Is I'm concerned and I guess, you know, I agree with a lot of what's been said But I think the major concern of even everybody who's forwarder against it is the fact You know, there's two new ones and there's one implement I mean if we would wait and find out what happens in the town And it doesn't end up getting built there and they build one in Sheboygan. I think, you know The industry could handle that a lot better, you know, I mean sure we can say well Yeah, it's gonna otherwise it's gonna be the town of Wilson Does anybody really think the town of Wilson won Super Walmart there? Township wagon doesn't want him to tell Wilson's even more rural than the town of Sheboygan is, you know So you can say that and it's kind of like a nice way of putting it off saying we've got to have it But I just don't think in the long run. It's a benefit to our people and I won't be supporting it Since we can pretty much talk as much as we want I Guess because we're having a discussion I guess, you know, I look back when I was a kid It was Benzman's Market. It was Grocer's Market on Ghillie Avenue on 8th Street, Benzman's on Michigan Avenue There was one on 20th and Seaman Avenue, Benzman's Supermarket, all little supermarkets And along came Park and Shop and Piggly Wiggly and they built a little bit bigger supermarket stores You know, I came back from California in 73 and And saw some of the changes and we started shopping at Park and Shop Northgate And that and eventually that turned into Park and Save on Corps Memorial Drive and all through all those things all these supermarkets put out all the little mom and pop stores Out of business basically because people could get everything they wanted there. They had lower prices and And that changed everything now the bigger stores are coming in and they're kind of having an impact on our smaller grocery stores You see Park and Shop is no longer there became Park and Save and and the rents sold it and became roundies pick and save now and That's just a natural progression. But what you do see you see all the little Oriental grocery stores popping up the little Mexican Grocery stores and things popping up specialty stores and they're making a good business out of those and I think there's a cyclical thing Here that's going to go around and around again But at this time I think this probably isn't the best interest of the city so And for myself, I would say I will definitely support this Resolution tonight because we shouldn't worry about what's going on in the town of Sheboygan right now with the Walmart Worry about Sheboygan. This is what we have to think about Sheboygan Town of Sheboygan will take care of himself Okay You had just a final question to the real question at hand today or It's the real question question is do we accept the the development plan which is for Walmart to pay for all the improvements down there? Once again, those improvements are gonna have to be made and if you want against this I hope you have a good explanation your taxpayers of why you're gonna ask them to pay for that instead of having a Completely private enterprise donate that money to us Okay, they're seeing no more lights. I will entertain a motion. Oh I'm sorry Attorney Conway very quickly My name is Jim Conway Walmart got a hold of me last week They asked if I could just be here this evening so that they would know exactly what's going on from an attorney's perspective I assured them that this was not going to be an adversarial matter I assured them that this was not a hearing about whether or not there should be a Walmart Because the permits already been issued and it's just a matter of implementing the development agreement and your city Attorney just told you that this is not a hearing about whether or not there should be a Walmart This is not a hearing about whether or not Walmart can close their existing store This is a hearing about whether or not Walmart is prepared to meet the development agreement Your city attorney. I probably didn't need to be here tonight because he's explained this to you better than I can And he stood here and told you this is the best deal he's seen I think Steve you said in 27 years 17 17 years I'm not trying to age you any more than that 17 years. I better change my notes. Sorry about that But 17 years of experience with the city best deal he's seen so Walmart people have done everything that's been asked of them They've worked with your your engineering office with your development office They've acted in complete good faith and they're ready to carry out their part of the bargain. Thank you. Thank you, Jim Okay, now I'll entertain a motion on Resolution 1 21 0 4 0 5 Alderman Warner I'd move for passage Mosher was made And second it on resolution 1 21 any questions Steve To make clear for Clarify I would suggest that the resolution, you know before you act on it be amended In two places to strike out roadway. It's in the caption and also in the be it resolved Currently it talks about concerning certain required public roadway improvements, so I would suggest Amending it to delete the reference to roadway Okay, then we will take a vote on resolution 21 as amended Okay, all in favor much you take a roll on it, okay, we'll take a roll call vote on the amendment The amendment is to strike out the word Montemay or I press Rindflash Segali, no Stefan Hi Dan Akron. Hi Vanderbilt Warner. All right 11 eyes to know that's on the amendment. Okay Amendments out of the way now. We will go to Resolution 121 0 4 0 5 as amended Burr hi Surtain Manny Montemay or I press Rindflash Segali, no Stefan, no Van Akron. Hi Vanderbilt. Hi Warner And Bob And three notes and three okay Motion to adjourn Motion to adjourn Second it all in favor we are adjourned


Here's the new Chest Home page Okay, there's some bright new colors and branding and some of the fundamentals will be of no surprise to anyone But we have made some significant changes So what have we done? Well, we've built an integrated solution for assisting of the website, which is built in an open-source content management system called Unbrecco We've built a Dynamics 365 CRM solution to manage contact and license information And we've linked the whole lot to the editor so find that system for invoicing purposes


Hey Weirdos, be sure to click the like button and subscribe to this channel, and click the notification bell so you don't miss future videos. I post videos seven days a week, and while you're at it, spread the darkness by sharing this video with someone you know who loves all things strange and macabre. If you want to listen to the podcast, you can find it at WeirdDarkness.com slash listen. Welcome to Microterrorz, scary stories for kids, where it's always the spooky season, full of chills, thrills, and spine-tingling spooks. Microterrorz are family-friendly frights for those ages eight and up, and while our stories are for younger years, we are still talking about things that go bump in the night, and some children may not be able to handle what others can. Parental consent is recommended. Now for tonight's Microterrorz. I created a hoax. Little Charlie Russo woke with a start, sweating and out of breath. He had a nightmare, one that felt so real, but there was no way it could have been. He was walking in the woods, searching for Dumbledog, the family's rat terrier who had run off. He'd been calling out, but his voice only echoed through the trees without a bark or a yip in response. Nighttime had settled over his small town in West Virginia, bringing with it an icy chill in the air where his visible breath was just as present as he was. That's when little Charlie Russo saw it.  It was much taller than he, a lot wider too. Charlie aimed his flashlight at the massive object and called out, Dumbledog, is that you? Obviously, Dumbledog didn't respond. Obviously, the large white mass that was now rising up and down as if it were breathing was not his family's teeny, tiny chocolate-colored rat terrier. Within the logic of Charlie Russo's dream world, he moved closer to the strange mass, unable to explain why he would even want to. But, nonetheless, he did. And as he moved closer, the beam of his flashlight illuminated a vast majority of the invasive thing. It slowly turned round to reveal its head sandwiched between two imposing shoulders. The white surface of the thing was covered in red veins that resembled an intricate road map. Its solid white eyes were bloodshot and its toothless mouth hung open, continuously dropping further down its body while expelling an unnerving, whistling howl. Charlie screamed. The white monster in the woods lunged forward and that's when little Charlie Russo woke up, sweating and out of breath. He spent the day in school, thinking about his impossible nightmare. He sketched out the creature on his worksheets as detailed as he could remember. But as the school day was coming to an end, and just like with most dreams, his memory of it began to fade. What's that, Ruben, a classmate of Charlie's, asked? He looked over his shoulder at the crudely drawn monster. Charlie was annoyed by Ruben. The kid had no sense of personal space for others and was always being nosy. No matter how hard Ruben would try, Charlie didn't want a friendship with him. Charlie was quick to slap his hands down on the paper to cover it up. It's nothing, he said, just some cool monster I saw in and then Charlie had an idea. He smirked and looked up at Ruben, lifting his hands off the paper to dramatically reveal the sketch. A monster I saw in the woods last night, Charlie said in a deeper, more ominous tone. Ruben looked closer at the drawing. A monster? What woods? The woods behind my house. My dog ran off and I went after him. That's when I saw it. It attacked me and I barely escaped with my life. Ruben swallowed hard, trying not to believe the tale Charlie was spinning. No way you saw something like that, Ruben said. Oh, definitely way, Charlie said. It's out there. It comes out on cold nights and tries to eat people. What about your dog? Did it eat your dog? Charlie thought for a moment, not remembering ever finding his dog in the dream. I never saw my dog again. Ruben was unsettled. That much was clear and little Charlie Russo was pleased with himself. Ruben began passing the story along to other classmates and before the school day had officially ended, it's all the students could talk about. Some of them believed the story about the monster. Others claimed Charlie made it up. Some kids picked on Ruben for believing such a tale, while others came directly to Charlie for more details. Yes, Charlie responded to some of them. It was terrifying. It had no teeth, but its mouth just continued to open like a dark cave.  The hoax continued to spread like a disease and Charlie sat at home later that day laughing at all the attention it had grabbed within his social media circle. A girl claimed to see it on her way home from school. A friend of a friend of hers said the monster was going through the dumpster behind the school. Won't find anything there except mushy tater tots and cardboard-flavored pizza. Charlie laughed. Charlie then felt nervous when he saw the news had officially spread to the local police's social media accounts. His hoax was in the big leagues now. How a simple dream made it this far into the awareness of his small mountain town was unreal. The power of words and gossip, little Charlie Russo thought with a smirk. Charlie's parents came home from work not long after his hoax had spread its wings on social media. While Charlie's dad started cooking dinner, his mom called for a double dog to come eat his supper. Charlie sat down at the kitchen table where his dad had his phone propped up, playing the six o'clock news. He wore the same ornary smirk on his face that he had all day. Hey, dad, guess what? Little Charlie Russo said with a grin. Um, you found a treasure map and dug up the ground where the X had marked the spot and found a hundred gold bars? His dad playfully answered. Nope. Charlie said, I created a hoax. His dad's playful smile went away and he cocked his head at his son. What do you mean you created a hoax? Charlie retained his smile, although his father's lack of one was concerning for the outcome of the story he was about to tell. I had a dream last night where I was in the woods looking for a double dog and I saw a monster. I drew some pictures of it today at school and told some kids that it really happened. Now it's blowing up all over social media. Wow, his dad said. Uh, that's, uh, his dad's attention turned to his phone where breaking news was coming across the tiny screen. His dad turned up the volume and held it in his hands. Little Charlie Russo could see the images on screen reflecting off the lenses of his dad's glasses. He listened to what the reporter was saying. The reports and starting numbers claimed to see what they described as a large white beast. As the police continue to call the woods, I can only tell you that there has been a constant whistle or howl of some kind coming from the forested region behind me. What that is, I don't know, but authorities are currently aware of its been promised to get answers. These reports come mere hours after an online panic described a monster here in Grafton. We'll continue to... His dad turned the phone off and flew to the kitchen window. He pulled the curtains aside to see snow steadily falling in front of the wooded region depicted on the news. That's our property, Charlie's dad said. He turned back to his son. Look what you started, Charlie. Little Charlie Russo didn't know how to respond. He didn't know what to say. He felt embarrassed now. I didn't mean to. I didn't. Charlie's mom came into the kitchen. Where's Dumbledog? She asked. Concern on her face. I've been calling for him. I looked outside, downstairs in the bedroom. I can't find him. Charlie's dad looked at his son again. You did find him last night, right, Charlie? Last night? Charlie asked. He tried to remember last night, but all he could picture was the dream. He was looking for Dumbledog in the woods, but that was his dream. He remembered the cold on his face and the snow in his hair, but that was the dream. He remembered seeing the monster. He remembered it lunging for him. He remembered little Charlie Russo remembered dodging the monster. He remembered it reached out for him and grabbed his leg. He remembered kicking himself free and running home as fast as he could. He remembered jumping in bed, covering his head and trying as hard as he could to remove the monstrosity he had seen from his consciousness. It was horrifying. Bone-chilling. He didn't want to remember. He didn't want to believe something like that was real and lurking out in the woods behind his home. Where's Dumbledog? Little Charlie Russo's mom desperately asked again, beginning to tear up. Just then, from the woods behind their home, the Russo's heard screaming and shouting. They heard gunshots and an ear-splitting howl. Then, silence. Charlie's parents looked at him, wide-eyed and mouth-sugaped. Then little Charlie Russo stuttered. But I created a hoax. Didn't I? Thank you for listening to Microterrorz. Join us each Saturday for another scary story. For more fun, visit our website at microterrorz.com where we will also have spooky games you can print out and play, like wicked word searches, mysterious mazes, and more. Microterrorz.com is also where you can find us on your favorite social media and even send in your own scary story for us to tell. Plus, you'll learn more about our author, Scott Donnelly, who has other horrors for both young and old. I hope you'll join me again soon for Microterrorz. Scary stories for kids.


Okay, who is ready to finish their jumpsuits today? This is McCall's 8218. You are watching a video for in a five part series where I take you through each and every step of sewing this cutie little jumpsuit knit jumpsuit from McCall's.  There have been four videos prior to this one, including episode zero, which doesn't technically include any sewing, which is why I call it episode zero. But if you haven't seen those yet, you're going to want to go back and watch those videos to see how the bodice came together, how the pants came together, and all the prep work that we did leading up to even turning on our sewing machine. If you would like this video, subscribe and click notification bell. If you want to get notified of all my videos, if you're new here, welcome. I'm Lindsay. I sew all my own clothes and about, I don't know, every three months or so. I post a sew along series just like this one, where I take you step by step through sewing a particular garment. This one happens to be this cutie little knit jumpsuit. So if you're curious about sewing knits, curious about sewing jumpsuits, then you are in the right place. This video is kindly sponsored by Aliso. I will be talking to you guys about them a little bit more later on in the video, but you can thank them for this ad-free experience. OK, that's it. Let's jump into it. Take you over to my cutting table where we can wrap this all up. No pun intended because there's kind of a little wrapy tie thing happening. All right, over to the table. OK, so we have pants and a bodice. And now it's time to attach those two things together. So I'm going to lay my pants right side up for the front side up and right side out for what it's worth. And then the top needs to have the front facing up, but it needs to be inside out. That way, when we tuck our pants into our bodice, we have right sides together. Where are the pants? Right. And then start at the side seam, right? Sides together and the fronts matching. And then you are just going to pin all the way around this. I like to, like I said, start at the side seams and then. Match those up like so. And then I have my center's center of the pants is marked. And when I was cutting out the fabric, I went ahead and cut the center snipped into the center of the bodice as well. If you don't have that marked, you can just fold your side seams till they match, you know, like this and then mark your centers that way. So I'm going to do the center on the back as well. I've gotten in a pretty good habit of clipping my pattern pieces when they're on the fold, clipping that fabric right at the fold because I know eventually I'm going to have to match some centers. All right. So now we're going to go to the sewing machine. You cannot do this part on your serger and we're going to sew this at three eighths of an inch, but I'm sorry, three quarters of an inch. And that is for our three eighths inch elastic. So I actually prefer to only have a quarter inch of ease in the elastic channel. So if I were going to be using the three eighths inch elastic, then I would actually only sew the casing at. Half an inch, but as I told you in video zero or one, I'm going to be using half inch elastic. I just like how substantial the half inch is. I don't know if it's because I have more of a full tummy or if it's because I'm on the higher end of the size range, but I don't like to go less than half an inch on my elastic. So three quarter inch seam allowance all the way around. OK, and once you have that, again, you should have your pants sewn to your bodices. The overlay should be hanging loose. You shouldn't be sewing that to anything. And it fits one to one all the way around. There should be no easing, none of that kind of stuff. It's pretty easy and straightforward. Now we need to come in and sew the raw edge at a quarter of an inch. I'm going to zip this through my serger because my serger thread width is a quarter of an inch, and so that's going to give me the exact seam allowance that I need for the channel. When you do this, though, you need to leave a little bit of an opening to get your elastic in, but so all the way around, except for a couple of inches. All right. And once you get that raw edge sewn, except for an inch or so, you're going to want to feed your elastic. Please don't judge my elastic. I am reusing it. It came out of that same fitted sheet that I used for the lining. So it's a little worn, but I think it'll be just fine. And again, if it's not, I can replace it one day. No big deal, but I want to try and reuse it if I can. So this is my absolute most favorite tool for feeding elastic through casings. It only works on casings that are like half an inch or bigger, though, because it has to get over this like humongous hump. But this is by Clover. It's awesome. I love it. But if you don't have one of these and you just do the old safety pin trick where you attack your safety pin and then you feed it through.  It's really, really awesome. Makes really quick work of all this. OK, done and done. So I'm going to overlap this and then at this point, this is when we want to try this on. We want to make sure that the elastic is tight enough. We want to make sure that our hem is going to be right. You know, we can do like an initial fitting at this point. But if you're good, like assuming everything's fine, then all you need to do is where did the hole go? So what this obviously you will sew the elastic together. I like to just use a zigzag stitch and go over the parts where it overlaps. And then you're going to sew up this and that is going to be done. Also, make sure your elastic is not twisted. I swear, no matter how hard I try, my elastic my elastic is forever twisted. So I will have to swap that around. But that's OK. All right. Once you get that in, then you're going over to your ironing board where we are going to press. What? Oh, my God. So where we are going to press you guys. Oh, my gosh. OK. Where we are going to press this whole thing up toward the bodice and also because we already pre-pressed our hems. Do you see how it's just suddenly got that little fold in it? So now we don't have to futz with this over at our ironing board and trying to get it around and measure and do everything right. We can just fold it in on its little fold that is already in place. And go ahead and hit it. All right. And while while I am pressing my hems and pressing my waistband up, I'll talk to you. A last thing about the Aliso iron that makes it super unique and such a great iron is that it lifts up all by itself off of the table. And it has a little foot here and then this big plate comes out as well so that when you are in between pressing, you do not have to turn it up on its heel and turn it back down again. It has genuinely saved my wrists. I don't know about you guys, but I start to feel like fatigued when I am in the middle of sewing. And this one little thing has just really changed everything. It's made it so much easier. It's less work on my wrist, on my shoulder, even. So if you have issues with any of that stuff with your with your preferred hand, I mean, this is this is a real real game changer. So with the Pro Plus, another one of the advancements that they made was adjusting the kind of like the sensitivity to that. And I think what was going on with the old one is that you would go to like you would move your hand ever so slightly and it would pop up. But now you can see you can kind of sort of let go and it's not going to pop up on you. Like you really have to fully let go of it for it to respond.  But you can see now that totally is fixed and it only lifts up whenever you like fully, fully let go. And I'm telling you, it's not just a gimmick. Like it really, really makes such a big difference. They are done. I'm not going to show you too much of mine because I don't want to give it away. But you should have finished your jumpsuit at this point. Everything should be taken care of. Of course, you can go in, clip those extra threads, you know, give it a nice good press and a steam and wear it proudly. In the last part of this series, I'm going to be showing you the big reveal how my jumpsuit turned out. I'm going to do a pattern review talking about my thoughts about this pattern. I already have plenty, the good, the bad, the ugly of it, just like I normally do every single Monday for my Make It Monday videos. If you want some more helpful information about garment sewing, download my free Ultimate Garment Sewing Guide of Guides. Why did I give it such a complicated name? I can never say it. I have a link in the description box. Like I said, it's totally free to download seven different guides, all in one massive guide. Huge, huge, huge shout out to Aliso for sponsoring this series. I hope that you were able to kind of learn a little bit about their product, their main smart iron, as well as the mini iron that we covered, I think in episode one, and we'll be considering it for your next big iron purchase. I'm telling you, I've used them for years. I love them. And I am just so excited about the improvements, true improvements that they made for the new Pro Plus. So I'm happy to share all of that with you and hopefully maybe inspire you to get a new iron. I have linked here in the Inslate the playlist for this specific sew along. Every single video has chapters, so you should be able to go to the video you need, the section of the video you need and pick up where you left off. But that is going to do it for me today, y'all. Thank you so much for watching. I will see you all very soon. Bye.


I mean this has been rumored for a long time that Biden was going to do it. This was a big agenda of the Democratic Party for a number of years now. This is something that was expected. Biden was under a huge amount of pressure from the left wing of the party to fulfill this as an election promise. This is something that Elizabeth Wands of the world were pushing for and have been pushing for for a very, very long time. They really wanted, and Elizabeth Wands had proposed in her campaign, to do away with all student debt, to write it all off, to go down to zero. Ultimately what they really want is for the government to fund all education. Biden wasn't quite willing to do that. I think he even Biden, or at least his economic advisors, realized the devastating economic consequences of such a plan. Maybe they even have an inkling of the moral consequences, but I doubt it because it seems like almost nobody has those kind of inklings. So basically what's happened is if you make less than $125,000 in 2021 or 2020, if as a couple you made less than $250,000 during one of those tax years, you're eligible to write off up to $20,000 of student debt. That is government student debt, although almost all student debt today is government student debt. The $20,000 is available for those who had Pell Grants. Pell Grants are giving to low-income individuals. So Pell Grants are one of the things that they try to write off. If they really wanted to help poor people, if their goal was really just to help poor people who got a college education, they would have just written off all Pell Grants. I don't know what the number is there, but they just would have written that off. $10,000 is the cap for regular student loans that people get that were not Pell Grants. But there is this income issue. What to make of this? Well, it's horrible policy from every perspective. It doesn't really help the Democrats that much electorally other than they can say they fulfilled an election promise because most college graduates, most people who graduate from four-year colleges certainly, have college graduates vote Democratic overwhelmingly. Now, it is true that many of the people who are going to benefit from this may be more than 50 percent. It's not clear exactly. Don't actually have four-year degrees. They might have dropped out of college. They might have two-year degrees. They might be in college right now. They might be grad students who haven't graduated yet. But again, if you're grad students, you're probably a Democrat. So it's not clear that this is a huge political win in terms of buying votes. It suddenly fulfills an election promise, and you can say he did that, and the left is maybe more motivated to come out and vote for him because of it. But there's some huge costs here. Maybe they're not political, and maybe all they care about is politics. But there are economic costs, and there's a mass of moral costs here that are important. It's interesting because all you really hear from Republicans and conservatives about this is, or not all you hear, but most of what you hear is about the economic costs. It's going to cost the economy between $400 billion and $600 billion. Now, why is that? How do you measure that? What does it mean that it'll cost it? Well, what happens today is that students pay their loans back with interest. The government takes that money, and it spends it on other stuff. But it's going to spend it on other stuff anyway. So if the government suddenly is not getting that money because of this loan forgiveness, then it has to take on more debt in order to fund the stuff it's going to spend the money on anyway. Now, it's important to note that over the last, what is it, two and a half years now, student loans have not been repaid because there's been a moratorium on student loans that's put in place by Trump, another brilliant program by Trump, and never taken away. Biden's not going to take that away. I mean, supposedly it'll end in January, and at that point they'll write down the 10,000 or 20,000, however much it is. But students haven't been paying their debt, whatever that income the Treasury would have and has had in the past is no longer there. And as a consequence of that, by that amount, the Treasury has to borrow money and thus increase the deficit, increase the borrowing, suck money out of the private economy. They're not sucking money out of the private economy by taking it from students, this sucking money out of the private economy by selling bonds to whoever is willing to buy them. Either way, that's either way, it's harmful for the US economy. So you're exchanging one type of taking money out of the hands of individuals with another. But the deficit is increasing, the deficit has to be paid, future generations are either going to have to pay higher taxes or going to suffer from higher inflation in order to be able to get rid of all this debt that the government is taking on.  This is potentially inflationary to the extent that you believe that debt is, and the government's signaling to the world that it's never going to pay you back, it's debt. If you believe that is inflationary, then it certainly seems that this would be inflationary in a sense that it creates inflation expectations sometime in the future because if they don't pay back the debt, well then they're going to have to inflate. There's no other way to get rid of the debt. It's either through inflation or through default. There's no inflation default or paying it back, raising taxes. And what you're getting here is a declaration that we're never going to pay back the debt. We're forgiving that. So we're taking on more deficits. Government is never going to pay back its debts. That is potentially inflationary. So that's kind of the economic consequences. There's all kinds of mal-hazard consequences. You've forgiven this debt. What about other debt? Other markets are not going to expect bailouts now. Government has bailed out banks. They bailed out. We'll get to PPP loans in a minute, but they bailed out all kinds of businesses out there. Why not students? Government bails out the poor. Food stamps, welfare is a big bailout. You know, the left validly argues that government provides subsidies to businesses. So yes, it's part of the problem of arguing just over this. Government should stop bailing out everybody. Government should get out of the business of bailing anybody out, the business of subsidizing anybody, the business of trying to manipulate our behavior through taxes and bailouts. But the criticism, even with regard to this, needs to be more comprehensive. The fundamental problem here is not the college loan forgiveness. The fundamental problem here is that government gives student loans to begin with. That is the real perversion. That is the real distortion. That is what is causing tuition to go through the roof. That is what is causing students to be unmoored from reality in terms of what they study in school. That is what is providing higher education, spending in higher education priorities and higher education engagement. The federal government, I mean all government, but we're focused on the federal government right now, should just get out of education. And that primarily involves student financing of education. Now, the government has for many decades been guaranteeing student loans. So the worry was banks won't give students loans to go to college. And this is primarily a problem for poor kids who are then at a disadvantage because they can't go to expensive colleges. So what we need to do is we need to incentivize banks to give college loans. So what the government did is basically subsidize these loans. They went to the banks and gave them guarantees and subsidized them and encouraged banks to give loans to primarily poor students who couldn't pay them back because the banks were going to give loans to middle-class and rich students or they were also going to give loans to kids who are smart, kids who scored high-end tests, kids who would probably get a degree in an income earning profession, kids who had a future. And therefore the bank had a certain confidence that they would get paid back for the concept. So the government came to the banks and said, don't worry about whether they can pay back or not. Give loans to everybody. We'll guarantee the loans. It also got into the business of giving out these kind of Pell grants and other kind of grants to low-income students to make sure that the students would go to college. And as a consequence of all this college enrollment skyrocketed and of course college tuition skyrocketed because why is college tuition skyrocketed? Because no matter what the tuition was going to be, the student could always get a loan. The bank, going back 15 years, the bank didn't worry about, ooh, this tuition is really high. Are you ever going to be able to pay it back? Because they knew they had a government guarantee. So no matter, every time the universities raised their tuition, students kept coming. They raised them again. Students kept coming. They raised them again. Students kept coming. Why? Because they kept getting loans and grants. And the more the government got involved in higher education, the higher tuition got. Surprise, surprise. When the government buys a hammer, it pays a lot more than when I buy a hammer. They don't go to Walmart. They don't go to Home Depot. It's not their money. So the fundamental, well, one of the fundamental problems in American education is the government funding of the educational system. It's, you know, almost better just to pay for the education, but to give these loans. You're incentivizing the universities to increase tuition at Infanitem. You're creating a problem for the students being able to pay it back, but yet the government is guaranteeing all the loans so the lenders continue to lend. And then Obama comes along. And what's amazing about this is when Obama did this, there was very little criticism of him. It was very, I mean, the right was so obsessed with Obamacare. This kind of flew under the radar. Obama basically said, and I'm sure a lot of economists supported this. He said, and it makes a lot of sense, really, from a status perspective, look, we're already guaranteeing these loans. We're ready on the hook for all of them. Why do we need the banks? Why do we need the middleman? Why do we need these extra expenses? Why do we need bankers making a profit? We should get the profit. We're guaranteeing the loans. So basically what Obama did, and I can't remember the year, is he brought all student loans into the government. The government would provide all the loans. Banks had no role anymore. And whatever discipline banks might have had in not giving loans maybe to a gender study student who was going to get into debt with $250,000 or whatever went out the window. And now the government gives loans to anybody who submits, anybody who applies, anybody who wants them. And that means tuition explodes, continues to explode.  It means debt goes through the roof and a complete distortion, a perversion of the make and high educational system. Because our universities, even though they complain bitterly about not having money, are flush. They don't know what to do with the money. You know, some of the dormitories and the cafeterias at these universities are just unbelievable in terms of the quality that they provide students. They build beautiful buildings, beautiful sports facilities. What they don't provide is an education. So the fundamental problem here is government involvement in education, government financing of education with no limit, no limit. It's not like they give every student, imagine if they give every student a voucher, I don't know, $5,000 and you can go spend it on anything. That would be better. That would be better than giving them loans, making the students pay their own back. But the loan is unlimited in terms of its size. With $5,000, you'd at least get some competition. Universities would try to attract that $5,000 and then the student would have to bring, I don't know, bank financing or some other financing to bear on the decision. And maybe then these high tuition students would suddenly realize, wait a minute, I really can't afford this. Particularly if I'm going to study gender studies because it turns out that a bank, a rational bank, would charge interest rates on a gender study graduate of, I don't know, 20%. Whereas if you are in STEM, the interest rate might only be 4%. But that's discrimination. Yes, I'm all for discrimination based on risk, based on ability to repay. So yeah, it's a crazy world out there. I wish I don't see enough of this kind of critique of, you know, you don't see enough of this critique of the actual loan program among Republicans that's so focused on, ooh, the economic damage, they're even focused on, you could argue them all case, but one aspect of it, which is, well, I paid my loans back already, I got, you know, I feel screwed because I didn't get any of this benefit. It's not fair. Some people get it, some people don't. No, I mean, that's not fair. You're right. But that's true of any new government program where they're giving out handouts. Some people get them and some people didn't because they don't qualify. If they have a new farm subsidies, which Republicans love to vote for, what about the farmers who planted those seeds five years ago? How come they didn't get a subsidy and now they do? That's not fair either. There's nothing fair about government subsidizing, government taxing, government involvement in the economy. The immorality is fundamentally government involvement in financing education. That's the immorality. Let private charities, let banks, let financial institutions worry about that. There are loans that financial institutions do where they basically give you, and I think some of the government loans are like this now, where they basically give you a loan and they collect a percentage of your future earnings. And now they have an incentive for you to finish your education, to encourage that, to have an incentive to make sure you go study something you can make a living off of. Maybe that would change the dynamics within academia if that incentive actually existed.  And of course it's massively immoral because you're basically redistributing wealth from people who are not getting degrees to people who are getting degrees, trying to get a degree. You're penalizing people who haven't, you penalize people who got degrees in the past and who were responsible and paid back their debt. Generally, a lot of what government does is penalize responsibility and reward irresponsibility. And again, you're penalizing people who are responsible for paying off their debt. So this is a immoral policy, a financially irresponsible policy that could potentially increase, will increase deficits and debt and potentially would increase inflation. And it is a reflection of the real evil, which is the underlying policy. And that underlying policy is the policy of state involvement in funding of education, which is just going to lead to a disaster, particularly the way it's done in America. Sometimes these mixtures of private and public are worse than the government is taking it over because they just know what it is. It's pure. Like the American healthcare system, it's such a mess. In some senses, it would be easier to criticize it if it was just so socialized that we'd know what we were criticizing. Here, it's this mishmass of socialism, some freedom and some private and some not. And how do you make sense of it? And how do you entangle it? And what is bad and what is good? It's almost impossible. And the same with our educational system. And then the Europeans look at us and they think they're nuts because they have decent universities and they don't pay any tuition. It's free for many of them. And then look at us and they think we're nuts, taking on $250,000 of debt. Now, my argument is that $250,000 debt is the cause government is involved because the government finances it, because we're in a mixed economy. We're not. And of course, in many respects, Europeans pay, well, Europeans pay for that education quote-free in their tax code. They just, Europeans generally are just better at the redistribution. They've accepted it. They accept it. They don't challenge it. And therefore, it just gets done. In America, we redistribute what we pretend we're not. We're giving them loans. We're not really giving them. Everything is pretend. We play pretend constantly. All right. My stick on the horrific loan forgiveness program that the Biden administration has engaged in, immoral, impractical. And I don't even think it will buy in many votes.  Thank you for listening or watching The Iran Book Show. If you'd like to support the show, we make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. You get value from listening. You get value from watching. Show your appreciation. You can do that by going to iranbrookshow.com slash support by going to Patreon, subscribe star locals, and just making a appropriate contribution on any one of those, any one of those channels. Also, if you'd like to see The Iran Book Show grow, please consider sharing our content. And of course, subscribe. Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who are already subscribers and those of you who are already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.