Good evening and welcome to the Candidate Forum for County Board Supervisory Districts 3, 12, and 20. Sponsored by the Sherboygan Branch of the American Association of University Women. AAUW seeks to empower girls and women through equity, advocacy, education, and research. We are a nonpartisan organization. We do not endorse candidates, but we do take positions on issues and have been instrumental in legislation to improve opportunities for women and girls. Our moderator this evening is Christine Smith. She's an associate professor of psychology at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay. She's also the program chairman for the Sherboygan Chapter of AAUW. And our candidates this evening are Kathleen Donovan and Lisa Salgado for Supervisory District Number 3. Mr. Siegelbauer for District 12. His opponent declined to participate. And the candidate for District 20 is Brian Hoffman. His opponent also declined to participate. So I'll turn it over to Chris. Hello, everyone. I'd just like to thank everyone for being here and for being engaged citizens. A little heads-up from the previous moderator. When you're answering questions, keep in mind that you're on camera, so you might want to address it towards the front rather than towards the moderator. So we'll go in order right now. We'll start out with Lisa and then Robert and then Kathleen and Brian. But then we will mix up the order so that nobody goes first every time or last. So the first question is, well, it's actually not a first question. You have three minutes to basically introduce yourselves. So you might, what are your qualifications? What do you bring to the county board? So we will start with Lisa. Hi, my name is Lisa Salgado. I'm running for Sheboygan County Board Supervisor for District 3. I've been a medical assistant for 30 years. I currently float to many different communities throughout Sheboygan County. And I've really gotten to enjoy the residents. I also get to listen to their needs and I always try to assist them with different resources that will help them. As a frontline worker, I've learned that you need to be flexible and that you have to stay informed. And the needs are constantly changing. And so I'm able to do that. I noticed that a big majority of the county board is health related. The county owns Rocky Knoll. They have VISTA care. There's residential facilities. There's food insecurity. There's foster care programs. So in the past, I've been an employee health nurse. I have written policies, trained employees, performed department audits, and helped make improvements. Also, I have been a supervisor of a department. So I'm used to working within budgets for health related needs. When you are a member of the county board, you work on different committees. And one of the committees that I think is the best fit for me is Health and Human Services Committee. I think I have a lot to offer that department. Currently, I serve on my neighborhood board and really community service is my joy. I've always been involved in my community. I've done volunteer work at the homeless shelter. And I have learned from that experience that for every person there, there's a different reason for homelessness. And it helped me to understand that there's not just one blanket solution to that. I've also volunteered in the county jail with women, and that was really inspiring to me because I could see the progress that they were making.  As a foster parent in the past, I've been able to feel what it's like to go through that process. And I think I would have a lot to offer to Sheboygan County, which is kind of redoing their child welfare system with an innovation project. So I would be interested in helping with that as well. Okay, next we have Robert. Thank you for having me. My name is Robert Zigglebauer. I'm a lifelong resident of Sheboygan County. Please excuse my voice today. I currently, I've been on the county board for eight years. The former incumbent asked me to run for his seat. I was on law and property. I am currently the vice chairman of Sheboygan County, and I'm very humbled by that. To be elected by your peers is quite something. It's an achievement that I will always cherish. I'm also, I'm on executive, finance, and I'm on transportation. I have a 20 year background in transportation. I worked for the highway department for 20 years. I'm a stone mason, a father of two beautiful daughters and two beautiful grandchildren. I love my community, and I'm very happy to be this involved in it. I'm also the vice chairman of the Sheboygan County Historical Society. It's something else I'm very proud of. We work in collaboration with the county. The county owns the property, and the nonprofit runs the museum. It is something that is truly important to this community, and it brings together both young and old. My participation level at the county board has grown over the years, and the relationships I've garnered are truly cherished. I'm involved in the worst force task force, one of the six task forces we've developed to find the needs of this community. And I tell you the truth, through that process, I'm finding the needs and wants of this community from the people who distribute it. And I'm very active in legislative breakfast and legislative processes that involve this county. My goal is to reduce the tax levy. I'm proud of the reduction in our tax rates for the last six years and our achievement of financial excellence over the last eight years that I've been a part of. It is something that is looked to by our peers, and it's just, we do good business here, and I'm very proud to be a small part of it. I consider myself one of the employees, and our employees stand out. And I don't know what else to say right now, but thank you for your time and energy. Kathleen. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Kathleen Donovan, and I'd like to thank the AEUW and the attendees for supporting this event this evening. I was appointed to the county board this past December in 2021, and I'd like to tell you a little bit about myself. I was born and raised in California and worked many years as a construction project assistant. Working with trades taught me the value of teamwork. I moved to Sheboygan with my husband in 2014 and immediately started looking for volunteer opportunities within my community. I currently am a member of First Congregational Church and I serve as a deacon. I started at Book Room Gardens as a volunteer and I am now a paid staff member in the education department. I'm a board member and a poll worker. I've also volunteered with Meals on Wheels, the lunch buddy program at my local elementary school, the library, and the Sheboygan A's. I currently am appointed by Mayor Sorensen, appointed me to the city board of review, which is property tax assessment appeals. So I understand the value of increased, I understand the impact of increased property taxes. In my current work as a supervisor, I serve on two committees, on the Health and Human Services Committee and the HR Committee. And one of my first votes was to raise wages for the essential workers at Rocky Knoll and our county correctional facilities. I've also participated in votes for staffing requests and wage adjustments to keep our county workers competitive with the private sector. I've also recently participated with the executive committee of the county board to hear from the six task forces on the ARPA funds and how those monies should best be allocated. I will be an advocate for the city. I know there are 25 supervisors, 10 of those represent city districts. And I understand what the county role does, but I also know that I represent city citizens. Why should you vote for me? I'm socially liberal and I'm fiscally conservative. I understand consensus building and partnership. I will represent all constituents, not just those with the same political views. I don't want Sheboygan to turn into a Madison or a DC, and I am opposed to the tactics that are being used in our other races. I believe I'm the best choice for Sheboygan because of my experience, my credentials, and I was selected by the chair and the vice chair of the county board and appointed by the board. Thank you. Brian. Thank you very much. I want to thank the AAUW for this forum, this opportunity, and I want to thank all those in attendance and those listening online. My name is Brian Hoffman, and I've been a resident of Sheboygan County since 1968. I came here only to stay a little bit, and I'm still here. I'm a retired history and political science teacher from North High, and I taught there over 35 years part-time and 35 years full-time and 15 years part-time. I have a Bachelor of Science from the University of Wisconsin, Oshkosh in History and Government, a Master of Science from the University of Wisconsin, Platteville in History and Government, and I have post-grad courses at the University of New York, Stony Brook, Long Island in Government. Yeah. Well, I have been a city alderman from 73 to 79. I have also served on the town of Wilson Board for the last 20 years, and I'm currently on the Sheboygan County Board. I'm a supervisor. 20 years on the county board. I serve on the law committee. A few years ago, I was chair. I'm on the Health and Human Services Committee, and I'm the current chair, and I've been on several other committees and subcommittees, such as EMS and the Aging and Disability Centers Committee. I've been on several other committees committee. The Human Resources Committee I've been on, the Health Care Center Committee I've been on, and I'm past chair of the Criminal Justice Advisory Committee. I'm asking the voters of District 20 for their vote and their support based on a record of service and leadership. I am part of a board, and I'm proud of this, your tax burden. And we've done that again, and we've done it in the past. It's almost unheard of in the state of Wisconsin. Well, I also want to continue to be part of that team, and I say we. I use we more than I. It's a we thing, the county board. It's a team thing, and that's what I like about the county board. We get a lot done and very little controversy. I mean, it's great. So, the most glaring event we've had recently is a pandemic, and I think we've done pretty well in handling that. If I get that question, I'd welcome that question. And I want to stay on the board to see the pandemic to its demise. I want to see it dead. In my spare time, I'm a licensed commercial pilot and a flight instructor. So I'm married and I have a wife and two girls and a boy and my most recent accomplishment was to go to my granddaughter's graduation from West Point. So, I'm very proud. Thank you very much for listening. Thank you, everyone. So, for the next questions, you all have only two minutes for your answers. So, we will start with, let's see, we will start with Robert. What are the three biggest challenges facing Sheboygan County and what is the greatest challenge as a county board supervisor? Three biggest challenges? Well, that's being developed with these tax force. The three biggest challenges is broadband for the rural areas and the funding of it and how that funding is coming from which different avenues and that's all being realized now. Another challenge would be our financial situation as far as labor. We use some ARPA money to fund congressional officers and Rocky Noel staff. That's going to create a hole in three years time that we need to fill. That's a big challenge and our challenges is keeping our workforce together and that's a challenge countywide for all industry and we're doing a good job of that. These challenges are constantly moving and they're just not three. Our finance is a challenge too sometimes to get funding for all these things. But we have done a good job and our record shows that. I don't know how else to answer that. It's a complicated question because it's a moving target. It's a constantly moving target and our staff and employees and department heads have done a fantastic job in keeping us abreast to their needs and how to apply it. That's where I'm going to go with that for now. It's a tough question. Sorry. So next we'll go to Kathleen. Thank you. I agree with Robert that our challenges in the county are moving targets. But I believe that our workforce development and hiring issues affordable housing for those folks and also our mental health challenges especially as we're coming out of the pandemic with regards to mental health I support the county's work with the ARPA behavioral health care task force to increase a partnership between law enforcement and mental health professionals particularly during crisis events when the joint mobile response is required and I also would like to see some additional areas of emphasis including assigning social workers to specific neighborhoods as well as additional assistance to those in need that need help to navigate an often complex system with regards to affordable housing 75% of the available jobs right now in the county pay between $12 and $20 an hour and while I applied the efforts of developers to build new apartments that will attract people to our area those are for residents for the 25% of the jobs that pay more those new apartments are too expensive for entry level and I believe that the county can support infrastructure subsidies for developers as they partner with local municipalities to increase affordable housing with workforce and development hiring issues there's an imbalance right now between labor supply and available jobs and affordable housing as I mentioned for those entry level workers access to tools and community resources designed to help new residents settle and be comfortable in their new community and I believe to address these issues the county can support advertising campaigns to attract job seekers to relocate to Sheboygan hiring a transition concierge is recommended by the ARPA task force and subsidize affordable housing thank you Brian thank you I agree with Robert and with Kathleen and you've taken a lot of my thunder it's okay that's alright the affordable housing needs to be addressed we do have housing but unfortunately some of it is out of the price range the workers that are coming to Sheboygan and the workers we're trying to attract and as Kathleen mentioned we are planning to use ARPA dollars to increase housing units in Sheboygan it's going to be a partnership of government and the private sector so stay tuned there's more to be said on this one I would also indicate we are working on equity and inclusion it means equal playing field for all people regardless of age race, education, sex or background and I think if we really ramp that up a little bit we'll attract more people to Sheboygan okay let's see what else can I come up with here there's a bunch trust me tourism since you guys didn't cover tourism I'll hit that one we have to work with industry to bring tourism more tourism to Sheboygan most people don't know it's the second largest sector in our county's economy I think we should work more with the Economic Development Commission and with the Sheboygan Chamber of Commerce so in mental health Kathleen covered that pretty well but one thing I think we should do is perhaps we could get some housing neighborhoods that have some severe problems and embed social workers that would live there so that is I think that's a pretty good idea besides having maybe social workers right around with police in certain areas of our city rather than just grab somebody and throw them in jail at least we'd have a social worker that could work with them and avoid jail thank you Lisa the three top challenges are recruiting and retaining workers during the COVID pandemic many women left the workforce they went home they took care of their children they're trying to keep them in online schooling and a lot of these women have not returned to work and one of the reasons is because of child care and Sheboygan is really lacking in child care we have a lot of manufacturing here and we need child care 24-7 we need people that can work shift work and have a safe place for their children to go and there's over 3,000 jobs open in Sheboygan County and in order to get people back to work we need the child care for that to support them also housing is very important we need more housing near manufacturing and farms a lot of times transportation is an issue when you're trying to get across the county for work if there was housing near some of the manufacturing places it might make things easier also we have a lot of aging residents that in the future may not be able to keep up a home and if we had more available apartments and housing for our aging residents it would open up the homes in our communities for families to raise a family there's also a program called University Alliance and it's college students that can solve community problems and I think we could take advantage of something like that the other challenge is mental health I work in behavioral care I see the shortages of providers we have waiting lists that are very long so we need to recruit more mental health specialists thank you so the next question is what are the three biggest assets of Sheboygan County and we'll start with Kathleen thank you I would say some of the biggest assets are access to the lake our public parks the community involvement and I would say one of our greatest assets is the library our MEAD library is like a community resource center it is so much more than a library and I would like to see that continue to be a strong influence in our community and I think the amount of social groups that we have the amount of opportunities we have to get to know people and get to be with people are also very helpful I have found through my church I now through my church have been so involved in the community I have connections to Bookworm and to many other places and so I think we have a lot of wonderful programs a lot of wonderful folks that live here and my entire family has moved here from California so I extolled the greatness of Sheboygan so I think it is just a wonderful place to live thank you Brian, you're up next well I'll keep it short I think our assets we've got four big assets one is our people these are great people like I said I came here just as a short stop over and I'm still here can't get rid of me the second big asset are our schools schools anywhere I know I taught in one and I also taught in the other high schools South for a while even though I live on the south side I taught at North most of my career manufacturing is another big plus for Sheboygan we have some excellent manufacturers and I could name them off I mean one after the other Kohler, Bemis, VPI goes on and on and on I would also say farming is a big asset to us we have a large amount of farming near bias and that has affected our culture and of course who doesn't like cheese I mean I'd be amiss if I didn't mention we are the cheese capital of the world or at least Plymouth is but I think Sheboygan is but anyway so those are our greatest assets our people, our schools our manufacturing, our farming and our attitude I forgot that one and our attitude I think we have a great attitude I'm proud to be from Sheboygan when I go anywhere they say where are you from and I say I'm from Sheboygan, Wisconsin and I'm waiting for them to say where's that so I can tell them oh by the way there is a Sheboygan, Michigan I've been there it's very small thank you thank you Lisa I love living in Sheboygan anybody that knows me knows I think it's one of the most beautiful places that I've ever lived we have we have so there's so much to offer in our area as far as parks and the lake front and I love the diversity of Sheboygan I meet people from all over the world here and it's very surprising how diverse our community is and I'm really proud of that and I enjoy meeting people from different cultures and I think one of my favorite things is the community and the people I know all my neighbors I know that I can count on them for anything I can when I first moved here my neighbor across the street she said Lisa if you need anything you can knock on any one of these doors and they will help you and I've really found that to be true and that is my favorite thing about Sheboygan Robert it's hard to be last in a question like this a lot of our assets are well spoken here our biggest asset is our citizens and their input in their community and our collaborative effort that we that we ask for and that we we get from our community it's these task forces for example to me that's the heartbeat of our community the people involved and the number of people involved in these is remarkable another asset of Sheboygan is Amsterdam Dunes it's a self-sustaining project that's second to none that is something we should all be proud of and it doesn't get enough attention it's just our citizens our employees are our assets I've been involved in county government and I've been involved at some level for 30 years I have never seen a stronger team that we have in place right now and that went through the toughest time that we have ever experienced in the last two years they are remarkable and we are a reflection of them and that is our greatest asset thank you Washington County has been consolidating services with neighboring counties to operate more efficiently are you in favor of this for Sheboygan County and if so what services would you consider sharing with our neighboring counties so we'll start with Brian what services would we share with other counties I think we already share a lot of services with other counties so we do a lot of back and forth concerning health items and what other services could we share hmm with other counties boy that is a tough one I don't know we meet with other counties at county convention and we get all kinds of ideas from them and some of the ideas that we've taken from them we've instituted here that have made a difference in policing and in social work and a few other fields I think the fact that we are a leader in what's going on for example one of the things that we have shared is the idea that how about using part of your tax money put it aside for transportation and share it with other communities like various towns cities and villages in Sheboygan County and we have done that and other counties are starting to do that now also so I think we're a leader and that's probably one of our big accomplishments is the roads are getting better I don't know if you have noticed that but it is definitely an accomplishment so we're always looking for ideas but right now I just can't come up with anything else being honest Lisa sharing with other counties maybe power I mean in the future right now we have coal and it's a finite resource if we did maybe more wind turbines and things it's more of an infinite power source and it helps us be more self-sufficient and not counting on outside sources like bringing in coal and things and maybe we can sell power to other counties I mean it's just an idea and maybe even tourism bringing people to Wisconsin in general and maybe for marketing and things like that we could share some of those things right Robert thank you there's a lot of things we share with other counties we some some parts of our black topping industry we share things with other counties patch material and such things like that and I think that's very important because other counties don't have the resources we do and although they have the black top plants for patch material and things like that I think broadband is something that we will be able to share with other counties it's a real possibility especially in your rural areas in your boundary people that's something that needs to be explored we just share our thoughts even with the Wisconsin counties associations we come up with ideas and we are looked to as a leader for a lot of these things legislative stuff we can share with other counties ideas and how we can promote advancement in those areas a lot of counties are so different it's hard to share things with them but it's always an open door to make things more efficient or to see how it works in one place compared to another I would always be open to sharing opportunities with other counties it generates a relationship that you can work off of and it has always proven to be successful Kathleen thank you I absolutely agree with what everyone up here has said and I think sharing our resources with other counties and working in cooperation with other counties is extremely helpful it benefits us and it benefits those other counties as well and I think being able to attend these county conventions and hearing ideas from other counties and sharing what our successes are seeing what their successes are and I think open communication and being open to new ideas and new ways of sharing whether it be energy broadband communication or paving materials to help folks you know some counties are not as lucky as we are and so if we can share our resources so much the better great thank you how should the county allocate the funds from the American Rescue Plan and let's start with Lisa understanding there are task forces in place already working on a lot of issues for the American Rescue Plan Act funds some of the task forces are affordable housing they're looking at building 600 housing units the behavioral care crisis is a big one here in Sheboygan County the broadband internet childcare and transportation I think it's hard to live in Sheboygan County if you don't have a car so if we want to get workers to work locations we need to be creative as far as transportation and workforce development there are resources out there such as the department of workforce development and they'll help businesses with social media marketing electronic resume intake job fairs there's also a division of vocational rehabilitation which assists people with disabilities to find work and the job center of Wisconsin I think employers need to remember that for recruiting some of the things that are important to workers are a flexible home and work life they want to be able to work from home another idea is retaining the PTO that they've already accumulated and letting them keep that and having flexible hours and so I think we just need to be creative and try to recruit people to Sheboygan County just having a good quality of life here which we do have so I think that's a big recruiting factor thank you Robert well we've already used 7 million dollars of our ARPA money to fill in the gaps that the pandemic created and to retain our employees at the corrections and rock you know the six task forces that we have that we have and we are currently scoring those to present to the board as a whole to see where they will be best spent but we have to keep in focus that the county's needs are paramount first we've got to realize what possibilities or fires may erupt again that we need to use that money to take care of the county and its business and the task forces this is a work in progress and we've made great strides in trying to realize where we can best apply this for some lasting positive actions but always in my mind is a caution of where we need to take care of the county's needs to keep it in a financially stable environment okay Kathleen thank you yes I was pleased to be able to attend the executive county board meeting that all six task forces presented their proposals to there are many many wonderful people that have worked very hard on all these task forces to present us with wonderful options and I am looking forward to seeing how those task force options will be used and I understand too that this ARPA funds are only for a finite amount of time and so putting the county's interests at the forefront but also remembering how are we going to continue with our own budgets once our ARPA funds have expired how are we going to continue to maintain these important competitive salaries for our county workers and affordable housing and so working with the private sector as well and getting some of our larger companies involved to kind of help continue what our ARPA funds are allowing us to start thank you okay Brian thank you I think it's worthy of note that the task force had people from all walks of life basically industry you name it medical field education and so on and so forth and they came up with some great great ideas and they looked at the issues that are facing the county housing and they looked at the pandemic what it has done to the county and they talked about diversity and inclusion and equity and they looked at the mental health crisis that we're currently experiencing in Sheboygan County and they also talked about doing more for tourism so it is going to be discussed at the full county coming up all of the recommendations and then we're going to take the best of the recommendations and implement them now Robert said we've already used 7 million dollars of our ARPA funds and we were given 22.5 million I believe was of ARPA funds but where to go with these funds that's a real thorny thing and an important thing and so that's what we're going to be discussing coming up in a couple of county board meetings so I have a couple of favorite ones mental health issues is one and diversity and inclusion is another because I think we can attract more people to Sheboygan to work here I mean if you go somewhere they say I don't want to go to Sheboygan and then they start issuing reasons why and well some of us know what they are and some of us don't but I want to bring them together and hopefully this ARPA task force will come up with enough juice and money on various areas that we can make some changes and differences thank you what public transportation services are available in the county for persons without their own transportation Ozaki in Washington County's operator rideshare taxi service for such residents would you support such a service for Sheboygan County and we'll start with Robert I would support such a service and that's one of our task forces and there's a lot of recommendations from that task force I remember years ago we had a stage coach that went from communities it's what is called the stage coach and I'd like to know what the volume of use was then and I'm applying it to the request from transportation task force now and see where our real needs are we need to get people to be available to get to these different work locations we have a great diverse workforce work availability in our county, countywide from your cheese factories on up and down the line that need employees and they need them to get there yes we are looking at this and I do support something like that Kathleen I too support that and understand that that was part of the transportation task force proposal and I would be very very interested to see how that would work because people need to get to work and a robust public transportation is a wonderful way for people who can't necessarily afford to buy a car or just don't want to have a car because of environmental reasons so I would certainly be in favor of a rideshare program which is part of the art to task force for transportation thank you Brian well I'm writing here we need to get people and I sit on the aging and disability committee and we need to get people to their doctor's appointments we need to get people to work it's especially tough on our elderly we need to expand service to random lake hours grove and places like that and maybe use of ARPA dollars would help that we are going to work with the city bus system to expand routes that is one of the things we're going to do and volunteers we're always looking for volunteers to help out whether it's taking people to various doctor's appointments or to the hospital or down to the VA and Milwaukee or whatever so I would put out there that we are always looking for volunteers and if you want a list of where you can get volunteers called the aging and disability resource center or call any member of the Sheboygan county board and give them a little heads up and I'm sure he can come up with some various places where he thinks or she thinks that we can help with getting volunteers and getting more people to get people where they belong not everybody has a car anymore thank you Lisa I definitely support ride shares I've also seen companies bus people when I go to work there is a bus that drops workers off in the morning near my home and I think that's one option also like I spoke of before shorter commutes to work if their workplace or their community is close to their work we can build maybe even more bike lanes and there's so many smart cities around the world where it's a lot cleaner it's healthier for people if they can bike and walk more so I think we could develop more systems in that in our community and I think that's thank you do you feel the county's policies on COVID have been appropriate we'll start with Kathleen yes despite the fluid nature of the COVID-19 pandemic with new virus variants revised CDC guidance, vaccines and boosters etc has set an outstanding example of providing accurate and timely information to our citizens and I personally followed the health and human services public health department on my Facebook page timely information so that we can understand where we can go get vaccinated where testing sites are the availability of being able to order tests and have them sent to your house and I think we must continue to partner with state and federal agencies as we come out of this to ensure that Sheboygan County residents take advantage of new programs such as the testing kits and access to FDA approved antiviral treatment so I think our department has done an outstanding job Brian I think we've done a great job I'm very proud that I am the current chairman of the health and human services committee and we have been involved greatly I'm very proud of the fact that we were right up front to get the National Guard for testing right away when this thing really was in its early stages our health and human services department has issued guidelines for people to follow and we didn't order anybody to wear a mask but we sure suggested it and we have worked one of our directors has received many awards for the work that she has done so I don't know I just could go on and on and on but we've just done a whole lot and could we have done more yeah maybe there's always more we can do but I think we did a great job I agree with Kathleen Lisa well as someone who has worked the testing sites I've given vaccines I think the county did a great job coordinating everything like Brian had mentioned having the National Guard come in also raising the wages of the CNAs and the correction officers they're working overtime they're working short and we are required to have certain staffing levels so I praise these people for all of the hard work that they did through the pandemic but Sheboygan did a lot of other great things too they had Zoom meetings with the public health director and the public health inspector and they helped businesses and churches figure out ways to make it safe for their customers they were willing to work with them one on one if needed and come into their place and see what measures could be taken that safety was first for our residents we have full-time contact tracers in place and just the task forces being involved as well in community so yes Sheboygan did a great job with the COVID pandemic Robert I think we did an outstanding job we are state mandated to give information to people so they can make a choice on their own and we did a stellar job in doing that especially with the new people that were just hired to perform these duties just before this pandemic hit they did stellar work like Brian said I can't say enough good things about our employees again they're the ones that get it done they're the ones that we hired to do the job right and their state mandates we have to follow and we have in shining form thank you currently the county holds a hazardous waste collection twice a year the infrequency of this probably results in residents disposing of hazardous materials with their regular garbage rather than keeping such items around for six months would you support holding such collections every three or four months rather than every six months and we'll start with Brian I would support that I have used those services myself and sometimes you have to drive to the other end of the county so I would like to see more stations available where people can take their hazardous waste and so on and so forth but I would support it I'll just make it short and yes Lisa I too support it I've worked the disposal days for my neighborhood and it's amazing what people find in their homes and around their areas but I'm just I'm very environmentally conscious and I think it is important to maybe have these services more so that people you know if they don't take the time to find out where to dispose of something they're just going to throw it away in the garbage and it's not good for our environment and it's not good for our health and our community and so I definitely would support more more of these services Robert I too would support them and use them myself and encourage others to use them when they ask where they can go with things another important factor this is the funding of them there's grant money out there that could be used for this too it needs to be pursued it's a funding issue it always comes down to the money I do support these wholeheartedly Kathleen I too support these wholeheartedly and I agree with Brian that we need more sites than just maybe one or two because I think the more sites you have the more accessible it is and the more likely people are to use it if it's in their neighborhood and I feel it's a positive for the environment it's a positive for our neighborhood it's a positive for our closets and our basements so yes I would definitely like to see more okay thank you how should the county address the issue of mental health and public safety and we'll start with Lisa mental health and public safety is very important these days especially after the pandemic and in our schools and all that the community has endured and all of our children have endured we do have some funds from the opioid lawsuit that can be used we're in definite need of more receiving homes in our foster care programs because of the opioid epidemic we need more treatment centers really like I said before the behavioral care services and I work in behavioral care as well there's just not enough providers and they're booked out for months sometimes and we need more critical resources for people they can't wait for months the neighborhood counselors is a great idea that some of the task forces have been working on also having mental health professionals in the police department and on dispatch I think is really important the officers are dealing with a lot of things to have them add that to their plate as well when they're not mental health professionals is a lot for them and I think it would be really beneficial for not only the community but everyone involved working in these situations we need to expand on the programs the county just hired two new full-time RNs that are fluent in Hmong in Spanish they could expand those programs there's also a youth development specialist at the UW extension that coordinates youth services and I think we can expand and utilize that program as well thank you thank you Robert this is something coming up in the task forces again and I'm a big fan of these ideas on the collaboration between the city and county and how to dispatch center and we've already have a collaboration there and how to send people to these calls maybe to reduce the level of anxiety or whatever that these calls produce or keep it to a level where it needs to be addressed the recommendations from the task forces are being looked at and scored and I'm a big supporter of these things anything to keep people out of jail that don't belong there is so important and to maybe have an avenue to reclaim themselves in a quicker manner Kathleen thank you I also agree and I was very pleased to hear the behavioral health care task force proposal because it did include things like having a mental health professional both in dispatch as well as riding along with the police officers and having someone in the dispatch helps them to identify those incidences where you will need a mental health professional along with the police officer to de-escalate situations that can sometimes easily get out of control if you don't have the right background and the professional training to deal with those issues I'm very excited to see these and other aspects of the behavioral health care task force in regards to mental health because with everything that we've all gone through in the last two years mental health is extremely important and needs to be addressed thank you I believe we're doing a lot but we could be doing more some of the things we could do in order of importance implement a city of shabuagan county crisis response pilot project to enhance trauma informed and behavioral health expertise of agency services now that's quite a mouthful but cooperation, coordination embed social workers in the city of shabuagan neighborhoods with significant challenges initiate a partnership of health care government and social service agencies to make community resources more accessible to people that need health and lastly expand the mindful educator initiative training to all of our schools in shabuagan county so those are right from the task force that a lot of us have been talking about here I'm kind of glad the task force came up with a lot of these ideas thank you we hear about the labor shortages and the need for affordable housing in the county how can the county help in recruiting the necessary workers and providing necessary housing and we'll start with robert I'm going back to the task forces in the heartbeat of our community the people involved in them they're coming up with these ideas for this we're in competition with any worker out there right now with everybody else to have a welcoming feeling here to help people along to get started and acclimated I work with a lot of young people at the color waste lab and their needs don't fit what we have right now and you need to understand that and we got to create a welcoming environment and to retain them not just to get them here but to keep them here it's a task force it's a task force thing again that we're working on and those are very valuable I hope we can fund all of it but if we can't we need to pick out the things that will work for this community and service its needs thank you kathleen thank you the workforce development task force has come up with some really wonderful ideas two that really stuck out to me for our entry level workers were a concierge that welcomes you into the community helps you get settled and continues to engage with you and so that you start to feel welcome in the community and helps you get access to services that you may not know about because you're new to the community the other thing that I really liked about the task force recommendations was utilizing some of the older lakeland diversity dormitories as well as the heritage club downtown as temporary housing when you come into a new entry level job you don't automatically have first and last month's rent there's many things you need when you move to a new community and so providing that safety net so that they have time to collect those first few paychecks to have that first and last month's rent so that they can get on their way and really build strength and strong ties to the community so thank you Brian thank you I believe housing really needs to be addressed there's a lack of housing especially affordable housing solution the county is creating a joint government business partnership to address this the plan is called the workforce and affordable housing program or WAWAH the plan is that it will use 3 million arpa dollars to increase housing units in sheboygan also one and a half million dollars is proposed to be used to spur existing home repair programs a proposed 600,000 dollars is to be used for a down payment assistance program to people coming here we will increase efforts with the sheboygan county economic development corporation to attract workers and lastly we have to make sure that we are providing top tier salary and benefit packages in government and in private businesses to attract workers to sheboygan county because that's the lifeblood of our community workers thank you Lisa I think in addition to some of the things that I already covered on housing would be revitalization of the neighborhoods there's a lot of neighborhoods that could be fixed up and they could be more affordable than some of the big apartment buildings that are going up you know it's helping people just revitalize those neighborhoods we also need more transitional housing for people experiencing homelessness or I know when I moved here you had to meet certain income requirements to even apply for some of the housing and so and it was really tough I was down here for two full days shopping for a place to live and it was very difficult and I think also another idea is to change the building code so we can have more tiny houses there's a lot of the majority of Americans or a good half of Americans are single and they don't need a big home or you know they might just want a tiny home or for young people starting out also I being part of the neighborhood board I think it's really important I love our neighborhood boards because it's such a great way to meet your neighbors and know what's going on in your community and a lot of the neighbors have done welcome kits for people moving into their neighborhood and I know that's something that our neighborhood board is working on currently so thank you thank you a few years ago the county adopted a sales tax for the purpose of improving county highways the city of Sheboygan received some of the funds were shared with local communities the city of Sheboygan received 28.44% the town of Wilson received 4.58% and the village of Kohler received 4.94% the city of Sheboygan has half the population of the county and county residents use city streets for business work and leisure do you feel that the amount being shared is appropriate and we'll start with Kathleen that's a wonderful question I would need to study it more but I believe that our roads right now are in good shape and it's lovely could you just repeat it one more time the point of the question I'm sorry so basically we have a sales tax for the purpose of improving the highways and some of those are shared with local communities and Sheboygan receives about 28% but is half the population of the county and so do you feel that the amount being shared is appropriate I believe so yes Brian well a little history here several years ago when I was on the board a proposal came up to add a half a percent sales tax for whatever well there wasn't a lot of happiness with that on the board well eventually we came up with a program that we would do is go to a 5.5% that's a half percent increase and use the roads to use the money to improve our roads a certain percent to the various villages a certain percent to the various towns and first a certain percent to the cities Sheboygan falls Sheboygan so on and so forth the the money was also to be used for tax relief and so we struggled to get this through and we got it through and it's been in effect now what about five or six years now yeah and it's been tremendous success tremendous I serve on the town of Wilson board and I got to tell you that the money that's coming in has really helped us improve our roads now as for the city not getting enough money I think maybe we could revisit that if it is a serious concern we probably could revisit that I don't see why not but I know people now support this and we do use that money for roads and our roads are improving thank you Lisa well for my understanding there is a plan to redo a lot of roads in Sheboygan as far as the fairness of the percentage I guess you'd have to look at the needs and that's something that you know you have to evaluate and the board would have to decide you know where the needs are most you know where the money should be most allocated to thank you and Robert the formula was based on equalized value and one million dollars of it goes to direct tax relief I believe it is a very fair program and it is proving out over the years roads are for commerce for all county citizens not where they're just concentrated so the equalized value portion of this is very important and getting people to and from is it's commerce and I think it's a fair program I don't think it needs to be revisited I think it's a work something that's really working and other counties are looking towards to emulate I think it's very fair okay thank you final question of the evening the issue of wind turbine farms has recently resurfaced towns can only reject wind project proposals on the basis of failure to comply with state regulations what is your position on wind farms in Sheboygan county and we'll start with Brian boy this is a hot one especially out in the town some towns would allow it some towns wouldn't there's all kinds of excuses it would upset duck migration or they'd be noisy or they really wouldn't give that much electricity to the grid and so on and so forth I think it needs study and I think this is an issue that we have to educate people about especially in towns cities and villages I don't think there'll be many wind turbines in the city of Sheboygan but in the outlying areas yeah and maybe in some areas it's a good idea this needs more study and I really like the idea of solar energy, wind energy and so on and so forth but let's remember some people don't want it in their backyard but we have to figure out a way if we're going to use it to put it there and make everybody happy and that's going to be a tough one Lisa wind turbines are the cleanest energy out there I mean when you're looking at coal and fossil fuels and the climate change and the earth heating up I think we definitely need to look at what our options are when you compare it to solar there are I've driven past many big solar fields and it takes up a lot of land mass and then it's a lot like in the future that's going to happen to all of that equipment when it has to be replaced I think the wind turbines are a good option in a way because farmers can farm around them it's not taking up a lot of land mass it's clean and like I said with coal you're relying on outside sources and we can see in today's world how that's going the wind is more infinite power and you can be more self-sufficient there are a lot of farmers that have started wind farms they're lucrative to them as much as their crop sometimes and so I think it's an option that we need to evaluate we need to educate people on and I think it's an opportunity for Sheboygan because we can sell power and it's something to evaluate and definitely look at thank you Robert this subject came up a decade ago and in that time the town of Sherman developed an ordinance to ensure that any developer would follow the public service code there's not much the county can do about it but right now the FAA is doing a study on these proposed turbines but there's no developer for these yet there's no developer announced it's a study to see how it would affect your airstrips and your air traffic if it would go into wetlands the county would be involved if it would go affect the airport the county would be involved but right now the towns are enacting ordinances based on Sherman's and I've been working with the town of Mitchell town of Herman town of Sherman's chair and to make sure that these towns know that they need to institute this ordinance in order to make sure that any developer if there ever is one would follow the PSC codes this is not something that's going to happen overnight and I would say to the landowner who rents this to maybe explore or rents the land to these developers if they decide to do this to maybe explore other counties and their land ownership and see where problems or advantages exist in this endeavor Kathleen thank you I'm a proponent of alternative forms of energy but I do agree that we can't just go out and do it we need to do a study and we need to make sure that if we want it in their backyard we have to abide by each municipality within the county and we need to do it as a county with consensus but I think studies need to be done and if the studies show that this is an effective program an effective way of harnessing energy then by all means anything that can make us more self sufficient is always a good thing thank you all for attending all candidates a big round of applause thank you good night everyone


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebreaks.com coming at you with the first team random The NT NBA team random with a 16% chance of getting the Pelicans or the Grizzlies in a full case This sells out the break very easy I just we just sell 12 spots or we can win spots into this $900 team random But however whether you win it or you buy it straight up. There's only 12 spots. We only randomize those 12 names Name on the bottom gets the Kings name on the top gets the Pelicans second name down gets the Grizz and everyone else gets a team We are guaranteed a team But really obviously you're chasing the two big ones right there very big. Thank you to these folks right here. I Think Danny and JC might have been the only two people to buy spots straight up I appreciate that good luck to you and congrats to the winners, too I know that that's a different challenge in itself trying to win spots into something like this So congrats to you on that and best of luck There it is right here the team randomizer for pick your team one There you go Let's roll it and randomize it lucky seven times six and a one one two three four five Six good luck everybody and a one seven the final time boom Zach Paul and Danny get the big teams right there congrats There you go Zach Paul. Thanks to blaster for Put a little rooftop next to him you win the pelicans Danny bought a spot straight up.  Thanks for watching everybody. I'm Joe for jazzy's case breaks calm We'll see you for the pick your team in a separate video. Bye. Bye


I'm Stuart Schieber. I'm a faculty member in computer science in the School of Engineering Applied Sciences at Harvard University. Also the faculty director of the Office for Scarlet Communication at Harvard. And this session is the session, What Price, Open Access. I'm accompanied by two esteemed colleagues who will also introduce themselves, well, Shimronavi Anderson. And we're talking about open access. And like many of the project briefings at this meeting, we're not all talking about a single project. We're talking about individual projects at different locations. And my responsibility, I think, is to introduce this topic before my clever colleagues talk about their insights. So I want to start just by taking open access as a good thing from the point of view of the underlying goals of scholarship. I hope you'll all redistipulate to that. But if you don't agree, we can certainly talk about that in the question period. But there are many things that would be nice that just aren't feasible. And maybe open access is one of those things. So the question is, what is the reality of open access from an economic perspective? Let's take a simple example. Imagine a major research university, let's call it Harvard, whose faculty and research staff published something like 8,000 articles a year. That's, in fact, the number of ISI-listed articles for Harvard in 2003. Suppose these were all to be published in open access journals that charge article publication charges of, let's say, $3,000 each. Not an unreasonable number in practice. If you look at the UK Finch report, it puts the cost for open access journals averaging between 1.5 and 2,000 pounds, British pounds. That's about $2,800 to $3,200. And that's also about what the journal's Public Library of Science Biology and Science Advances charge and almost every hybrid journal on Earth, hybrid journals are subscription journals that will take an additional fee to make an article open access. They typically charge a vicinity of $3,000 for that privilege. So if you have 8,000 articles, a $3,000 article, that would cost the university $24 million a year. Well, where is the university going to come up with an extra $24 million? One place to look would be the subscription outlays that the university already has to pay. This is my hypothesis. The journals have all become open access, and so all these articles are open access. The university wouldn't have to pay subscription fees anymore. But in the same year, 2003, Harvard only paid about $5 million for scholarly journals. So it looks like open access is grossly unaffordable, cost increase moving from subscriptions to open access of something like a factor of five more expensive. So yes, it would be wonderful if we could afford it, but we just can't. Switching to open access would just be too expensive. So this particular example I've given is based on data from an important 2004 report of the Cornell University Library Task Force on open access publishing. They noted these numbers for Harvard and did similar analyses for lots of other universities and concluded this. They set a model in which institutions pay for their faculty to publish and referee to open access journals would not bring about cost savings. In fact, their library, the Cornell Library, would likely see its serial expenditures rise significantly if the library used its current subscription funds to pay for author fees instead. So the rest of the discussion today will take a look, a closer look at this kind of analysis to see how more detail and new data may change this picture. But I want to set the stage by examining some of the underlying assumptions in this type of analysis and principles on which a sustainable open access system ought to be built. Now, the first thing to note is that there are reasons to be suspicious of this five times the cost claim. If we look at the economics of the situation, not at the micro level, looking at a single university, but at the macro level, looking at the scholarly publishing industry as a whole, the picture looks quite a bit different. So here's some data from Outsell for 2011, similar numbers accrue in 2003 as well. The scholarly journal publishing industry revenue for 2011 was about $9.4 billion, according to Outsell, covering the publication of something like 1.8 million articles. So that's an average revenue per article, $5,000 an article approximately. Now, compare this average revenue per article for subscription journals, $5,000 an article, with the $3,000 revenue per article, we hypothesized just before for open access journals. Suddenly, open access looks like a tremendous savings overall. If you imagine that the outlays for a scholarly journal publishing went from $5,000 an article to $3,000, that would be a 40% savings overall. So how can we square this macro observation about substantial cost savings with this worry about open access being financially unsustainable? What's going wrong with this university-specific analysis? Well, it turns out it ignores lots of things. Suddenly, there's plenty of echo in the room. Oh, that's better. Thank you. Ignores lots of things. I'll mention four. You can see what the effect is. So first of all, looking at universities like Harvard and Cornell, these universities are not typical. Whether the outlays for payments on the writer's side would be more or less than outlays for payment on the reader's side will depend on the proportion of writing that gets done as opposed to reading. That is, universities like Harvard and Cornell, which generate lots of articles relative to the size of the subscription budget, are the least sustainable cases. Whereas universities that generate relatively few articles, therefore, hypothetically few article publication charges relative to their subscription fees, would be more sustainable. And if you look at this kind of figure, here's a proxy for that figure. This is Serial's Expenditures for Published Article for a random selection of range of universities. Sure enough, Harvard looks like a far outlier. Harvard is on the far right in this slide. Very, very low Serial's Expenditures per article published. That is to say, the researchers at Harvard are writing lots relative to their reading. So that first of all should give us a pause that Harvard will not be representative if it is unsustainable. It's going to be representative of the vast majority of universities. Second, the university analysis assumed that universities should pick up the entire tab for all the articles that university community researchers generate. To my mind, the appropriate principle to determine who should be covering the dissemination cost is this, the one on the slide. That dissemination is an intrinsic part of the research process. And therefore, those that fund the research should be responsible for funding its dissemination. Now, sometimes research is done in a university, by a faculty member, who's paid to do both teaching and research. And that research is not funded by any external funder. And therefore, a university implicitly is the funder of that research. And therefore, the university should be on the book to pay for the dissemination, whatever that turns out to be. But often, there are entities outside the university who participate. So the consequence of this principle will be that if research is funded by granting agencies or foundations, they should be on the hook to cover the open access article processing charges. And it turns out that that constitutes the vast majority of articles in fact. Similarly, if an article has external co-authors, the co-authors institutions ought to share in the expense. So that will mitigate charges considerably. The next assumption that may be questioned is this estimate of particle charges of $3,000. That estimate is based on the high end of charging. Lamer journals like the Public Library of Science journals, the open access siblings of science, nature, and cell. And also, most problematic with the hybrid charges of the major commercial publishers. But the high end is not surprisingly above average. That's why it's the high end. Here's a chart of publication fees, article processing charges for all of the ISI indexed open access journals in a scatter plot with article influence. And I've highlighted with this blue background those charging over $3,000, it's a very small percentage. And there's this clump along the left edge. Of course, those are the, as it turns out, majority of open access journals that charge $0 article publication charges. Those $0 journals often are not even averaged in and average publication charges are measured. There's research by Solomon and Newark who actually did an empirical analysis of the average article publication charge. This was a few years ago, not too many years ago. Turned out to be $900, plus or minus a few, whether calculated per journal or per article. Welcome Trust reports about 1.5,000, that is 1,500 pounds per article, but those are mostly hybrid fees. So using them as a basis for the finished report estimate, you're going to get a very high estimate. At Harvard, we run a fund to pay researchers open access journal article publication charges. And on average, we've paid $830 per funded article since we started the fund in 2009. On average of $3,000, it's not particularly appropriate. Finally, fourth, the analysis assumes that as the publishing world moves to open access, everything else will just stay the same. But the economics of the open access article publication charge market are quite different from the economics of the subscription market. So things are not likely to stay the same and prices in particular. In fact, we're seeing huge changes already. Recent entrants into this market are operating sustainably at dramatically reduced fees. I mentioned public library of science before. The bulk of their revenue comes from articles from the plus one journal, which charges just $1,350 per article. Ubiquity Press has spin off of University College London as a base article publication charge of 300 pounds. So that's about $500 per article. Most recently, Peer J publishes articles based on a lifetime membership, lifetime membership for author of starting at at least $99. Estimates of the average cost of publishing a first paper in Peer J are something like $450. So a far cry from the $2,000 estimate. So let's see how all these factors affect the analysis for Harvard and then I'll turn it over my microphone to my colleagues. Imagine we're publishing 8,000 articles per year these days but now assuming open access article publication charge of about $1,000 per article. And of those, perhaps 75% are externally funded. So those internally funded and therefore be covered by the university itself would be 25% of the articles. Of which internal authors encompass something like 60% of the authorship. So the total outlay would be then 8,000 times $1,000 or the 25% of the articles pro-rated to 60% for the internal authors. That's something like $1.2 million. So it would be an estimate for kind of more current or current estimate for the total outlay. And of course in that time, since 2003 when my previous estimate was predicated, subscription costs have gone up. Harvard is now spending something like $7.2 million for subscription journals. So if you open access model would involve a cost decrease now of something like a factor of six. So which is it? Is it a cost increase of a factor of five or a cost decrease of a factor of six? Well, we don't really know. This is all hypothetical. It all depends on what would happen if many things changed that led to a wholesale modification of the market from reader side fees, subscription fees to writer side fees, article publication charges. But we can start doing much more detailed concrete analysis now that we have some data. And this is just the kind of analysis that Ivy and Ralph have done for their respective institutions. Let me stop there and I'll turn it over to Ralph. Thank you very much. It's a great pleasure to be here. My name is Ralph Schimmel. I come from Munich, Germany, representing the Max Planck Digital Library. And I want to say only a few words as an introduction. At the Max Planck Digital Library, I'm heading the Department of Scientific Information Provision. So I'm responsible for all the publisher contacts regardless of whether it's along the subscription model or the open access model. We in the Max Planck Digital Library have a consolidated single budget for subscriptions and open access charges since 10 years, already in place since 2005. Is this a, no, this is not better. Is this better? Yeah, okay. The Max Planck Society is known hopefully also in this part of the world as a very big supporter of open access and we support the, and we believe heavily in the golden road to open access. We at the Max Planck Digital Library have quite a large processing record of APCs, of article processing charges. We tend to believe that we are the largest library in the world with having these processes and we monitor the data over the years for quite a long time. So I want to show you some graphs and analysis which is all based on our own data analysis. So I'm not citing other people's work. You will see our own data analysis in this presentation. And my part in our setup here is the yes we can part. We believe that we can show that there is enough money in the system that we can make and finance a transition from the current subscription system on a large scale basis to an open access business model. So this is what we think we can show. There is enough money in the system and that the transformation can be organized on the basis of the current subscription spending without extra cost. And quite to the contrary, substantial savings in the market are to be expected. I want to show you this on the global, on the country and on the institutional level in the subsequent slides. So these are figures that we could analyze ourselves, but these are also frequently quoted figures in many, many studies in the last year. So this is what we know about the annual spending figures currently in the market. The market of academic research papers as they are published in scientific journals is in the order of magnitude of 10 billion US dollars at the moment. We know that the output volume is in the range of two million articles. 1.5 at the moment are indexed in the web of science and the rest is calculated by many others also based on some calculations that come up to in the range of two million total. So you can make this calculation from these given and known figures that there is at least $5,000 eight per article if we count the two million. And if we do limit the calculations only to the web of science share then we have even 6,700 US dollars per article that is currently spent in the subscription system. When we look now and go down to what do we know about the current APC charges? And Stuart has mentioned several and they are predominantly high in quoted and reported in the UK context in the FinF report and subsequently we believe that these figures are not very sound because all the published evidence in other instances where Solomon have been cited but also in other contexts indicate a much lower figure. Our own figures in the small funds in the bottom part is in the range of 12 hundred videos at the moment. And this is based on evidence across several years of record and observation. So we think for calculation purpose which includes already a substantial margin of error. We set it here for calculation purpose to 2,500 US dollars per article. Let's just see there's the use on that's meant to be dollars. I will just have some calculations. A few slides later that's based on yours. And so you can make this calculation with two million articles we will believe that with half the size of the current market open access could be financed. The output could be financed in an open access model. So what we believe the exercise, the transformation that needs to be organized on the global scale is that we now have the big spending on the left side. That's the current annual subscription big pocket. And on the right side, we know the current share of gold open access is in the range of 13% annually. Of course there's also some spending that goes in there but the two sides do not talk to each other. The open access is taking aware shares from the publishing system but it's not taking aware shares from the subscription spend. And we believe the exercise to be organized must look like this. We have to shift from the left to the right and by that shift we see the potential of substantial savings which would be at the same time or potential for new services in what area whatsoever. So in order to further substantiate this we now want to look at the country level. And the key message is here. You can never count the annual output in a given country all by itself because papers are co-authored also across national boundaries. And this graph shows you for the three countries Germany, UK and France in the last 10 years their output and the duplication and the limitation only to the corresponding author papers. And you can see if you look at the graph you can follow it from the left to the right and you see the pattern is very persistent over 10 years in all three countries. It's always in the range of around two third between two third and close to 70% that the papers are from corresponding author in this country. That means, and this is already a very fundamental limitation in the Finch report and in all the monetary calculations that have come out of the UK so far that they have failed to deduplicate in their cost analysis. So we would propose that the UK should reconsider their monetary calculations. All the figures and the costs that they report are tentatively significantly too high. In the next slide, yeah please look only at the, I take now the 2013 column and we do a close up on the 2013 column for the three countries starting from left to right. So you see in the left column you see the total figures of output. For Germany it's 103,000 publication index in the web of science for 2013. Counting only the corresponding author's paper reduces this figure to 70,000 papers.  And the same calculation for the other two countries. When you look on the right side, what do we know about this country in terms of current subscription spending? The UK is well reported. There are so many reports out there. This is already a figure that the research council and GIST collections and various other reports have repeatedly stated in the last year. So it's from Great Britain Pounds converted to Europe, it's 260 million compared to what they would have to pay 144 in an open access arena. And the same for Germany, 140 compared to minimum, this is a very conservative estimate. We don't in Germany, we don't have the many reports as in the UK but there are several working groups of which I'm a member where we have done some calculation and this is a very, very conservative estimate. We are just working on a data analysis project and by the end of the year we hope that we can collect hard evidence on our spend across the universities and research institutes in the country. So this is a very, very significant finding and this has not been reported and published so far in any report that we know and we want to bring this evidence and enlarge this in the coming months and years. So now I want to do another close up to the German figures for 2013. You see the same 100, 3000 publications for 2013 as index in the web of science. So this is the right a pie chart. The middle pie chart would do the deduplication. So the pinkish element, this is the element of articles that would not appear as APC invoices in Germany at all and the big publisher normalization. So the Elsevier share would go down significantly 21,000 total only 14,000 with corresponding author papers the same with Wiley and Springer. And so this is the share they would in terms of APC invoices Germany could expect like one third of the total output to go to those three big publishers. On the right, this is like an ideal of prototypical library. These are very much our own max-plank digital library figures that would represent a pie chart of the subscription costs as they are currently paid. And you can compare these to your own figures at your local library, your own institution. And I'm sure that your Elsevier, Wiley and Springer share is relatively similar to this here. And we know from some libraries that they will even exceed 70 or 75% even higher than this. So when you see this, you can already see where the savings will be secured. Now we want to break this down to our own level at the max-plank society. Similar to Harvard, we know our output. We have an annual output of 10,000 research articles per year and we have been able to monitor and observe the share of our corresponding author papers. It is in the range between 40 and 60%. With the open access publishers, it's closer to 60%. We are just in the process of doing a data analysis with Springer and there we have found that with Springer we have only 40% corresponding author papers. So this is a very significant finding. So in this pattern, we have been able to observe persistently over the last year and over the various publishers. It's recurring wherever we look to. So the average APC level that we monitor and you see a link here on the slide, we document our APC spending. So you can visit this website and you will find all our APC invoices documented and we continue to upload this as to some other German universities at this time. And this is how we come to a current spending level of 1,258 euros. And this figure even includes almost 20% taxes. So this is after taxes even, the figure. So our expected total expenditure is that we would think that we would have to pay a maximum of 6,000 paper in a year and if even multiplied with an average APC and we built in some safety margin, that's why we calculate with the 2,000 euros instead of only 1,200 that we observe at the moment. And so we think that the maximum cost to be anticipated for the Max Planck Society would be 12 million euros. And even that figure is already comfortably within the range of our current spending limit. But in reality, we would of course, according to what I said, expect even lower costs. So this is already with enough safety margins. So for us, the conclusion is very clear. We as a heavily output oriented organization think it is possible to make this transition and we are also committed to make this transition. This has already been a very high level decisions in the Max Planck Society, our president and all our boards with the research directors are pretty much united behind that goal. So we see a lot of discussion and reporting in the arena of open access and publishing. We would propose that we just leave all these functions and elements with regards to publishing alone. These are all important and shall be and must be discussed. But we would suggest that we just concentrate on the underlying business model and that we see that we shift steadily from the current tall access system and the cash flow for subscriptions to open access system as full as possible open access system. For us, we believe it's time to disrupt the subscription system. Ultimately, all subscription spending must be stopped. Otherwise, we will never get to a real open access future. The money currently locked in the journal subscription system must be withdrawn and repurposed for open access services. This is our dedication and this is what we are going for and we would hope that other institutions would get to similar analysis of their own and also then eventually join into such an initiative so that it can finally be accomplished. Thank you very much. I'm Ivy Anderson. I'm the director of collections for the California Digital Library. And in that, which is part of the University of California system, as most of you probably know. In that role, I'm responsible for system-wide licensing activities of the CDL and of many of the University of California campuses. And I'm also involved in business modeling around open access and this conversion. So that's how I come to this conversation today. So I'm gonna be talking about a project that's intended to be an exploration of the ideas that Stuart described and in many respects a response to a response to what Ralph had discussed here today as well. So this is a project called Pay It Forward. The Pay It Forward project is a grant from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation to investigate the impact on North American research-intensive universities of a large-scale conversion to Gold Open Access funded via article publication charges. And I should just say at the outset, we know that Gold Open Access doesn't necessarily always equate to article processing charge funded publication, but in the context of this project and this talk, I will use Gold Open Access in that way. So this is an 18-month project, January 2015 through June 2016. We were fortunate to have a planning grant from Mellon in 2014 to plan this project and now we're in the initial phases of making this project happen. So in this project, we're attempting to answer one fundamental question and that is, as we've just been discussing here, can a large-scale conversion to Open Access be funded via APCs be viable and financially sustainable for large North American research-intensive institutions? And we chose the words viable and sustainable purposely to signal a couple of different aspects that we wanted to approach in this grant. By viable, we're really talking about author willingness to publish under the right conditions and also a scholarly publishing system and infrastructure that can support high-quality research and allow scholarship to flourish. And by sustainable, we're talking about the financial side of things. Can we in fact afford this kind of publication? So why this project and why now? Well, I think we just heard a big part of the why now. There's a tremendous disconnect right now between North American and European and UK approaches to Open Access. In North America, the policy preference has been and continues to be towards green Open Access with things like the NIH Open Access Policy, USTP directive, Canadian Tri-Agency policy and so forth. But in Europe and the UK as a result of things like the Finch Report, the EU Horizon 2020 Project, the direction is very much a gold-funded Open Access. And so there's an enormous disconnect that's developing between our two regions which together are about two thirds of the world publishing system. So I think in the US is about 31% of worldwide publishing. The EU is actually a little bit more than that. So we're talking about a very large percentage of the scholarly publishing system that is moving in different directions. And so this is creating a very confusing economic situation. Institutional license fees and APC revenue are both increasing as we just heard. There's about 13% of Open Access gold, Open Access publishing, right? Actually, I'm not sure if the 13% is all gold or just it's all gold. Open Access publishing and that's forecast to accelerate at quite a rapid rate with the policy developments elsewhere in the world. There's a lack of transparency. There's a tremendous potential for publisher double dipping. And there's confusion about what we are actually paying for when we're licensing content. So that's a huge driver for this project. Another driver for this project, and this is maybe a local story, was a UC faculty Open Access policy that was passed in 2013. It's a green Open Access policy, but when that policy was enacted, faculty began to ask the libraries, well, does this mean I have to pay to publish? Well, it doesn't really mean that they have to pay to publish, but there's a lot of confusion about this. And at the same time, we had launched a series of Open Access pilots throughout all of the 10 UC campuses. And so we were also shelling out money for Gold Open Access, and the university librarians at the campuses wanted to know what the economic impact of this was going to be. So it really became important to us to understand what this cost might be. So in 2013, at the request of our university librarians, CDL did some preliminary modeling of APC costs and scenarios. And we took a range of publishers, about nine different publishers, and we looked at our publishing output and our licensing costs for those licenses. These are all system-wide licenses that you see. So I'm not giving the publisher names here because I wanna be careful about implications that might escape into other flora, but we looked at nine different publishers, most of the large commercial publishers, as you would imagine, and a handful of others. We also looked at a university press publisher, some smaller biomedical publishers. So we tried to look at a range of publishers, and we looked at our article, UC article publishing output with those publishers. It turned out that those, or it turns out that those nine publishers consume about half of, or capture about half of the publishing output at the University of California, about 18,500 articles or so out of a total of 36 or 37,000 articles. That was in 2010. So we did calculations that were very much of the type that you've just heard here today, looking at what we're spending with these publishers, what a variety of APCs and combination of APCs and grant funding might look like. And then what we wound up with was kind of a heat map that showed us which scenarios of APC and grant funding would produce either a more expensive or a less expensive cost per publisher. So you can see that we have scenarios of a $3,000 APC with no grant funding, $3,000 APC with 50% grant funding, $2,000 APC with 50% grant funding. These numbers were fairly arbitrary, but they're also within the range of what we know about the ranges of APCs. And we just scaled that down. I've only shown a few here, but we kind of did a sort of a normative series of different APC and grant funded combinations. And one thing you can see in this chart, the horizontal lines represent particular publishers. And you can see where the horizontal line is read all the way through that no amount, even as low as we might be able to drive the APC down and as much grant funding as we might be able to bring to bear, we're never going to make that particular publisher's cost less expensive than it is right now. And conversely, where the bar is almost entirely green, you can see in those cases that publisher, the open access strategy would be actually much more financially sustainable. And the sort of pink and the light green represent variances here. So if it was 15% positive or 15% negative, we sort of looked at that as a number, if you will, of an acceptable range of variation. So that's just looking at some very straight collaboration analysis by publisher. But what about if we look by discipline? The APCs and percentage of grant funding and so forth, many of the characteristics of publishing vary by discipline, not by publisher. So we wanted to take a look by discipline as well. We did this in a variety of ways that were a little bit rough. So we do have a categorization that we've done of all of the journals that we licensed system wide by LC class and we use that LC classification as our subject mapping. And then we took the publication output by discipline from an accountability report at the University of California prepares every year. So we took sort of the best data that we had, but it's somewhat rough data. And we looked at disciplinary output in three buckets, life and health sciences, physical sciences and engineering and social sciences and humanities. And then we did the same kind of calculation. And this produced a different kind of result that was interesting, which suggested that in the life and health sciences, even with very high levels of grant funding, and you can see that one of those, I have two models there, one of which is probably more realistic than the other, but a 1500 APC with 50% grant funding or $2,500 APC with 75% grant funding. Again, these are somewhat arbitrary figures, but they're also grounded in what we know about average APCs and the range of grant funding in those disciplines. In the life and health sciences disciplines, the gold open access looks like it's gonna be more expensive. But conceivably, there might be other disciplinary areas and social sciences and humanities and possibly in the physical sciences where the balance might be positive. And so in this particular hypothetical scenario, the bottom line number, which is that pink shaded $26 million figure is very close to what we're spending today. Well, none of this takes corresponding authorship into account. So what if we do factor in corresponding authorship, which is both Ralph and Stuart have talked about is a very relevant factor. Our proxy for this was one data point. We did some hand tabulation around that time of our corresponding authorship rates in nature journals for the University of California authors. And we found when we did that hand tabulation that in fact, about 43% of those articles were fourth, 43% of those articles, the corresponding author was from a non-UC institution. So that kind of mirrors that 60% figure that seems to be fairly, fairly common. And so we used that figure just from that one data point we extrapolated against, again, this was sort of an indicative model. A 60% corresponding authorship in the life and health sciences and also the physical sciences, but no 100% corresponding authorship in the social sciences and humanities where those factors might not apply. And in this model, the picture looks much more sustainable. So in this case, we looked at, again, a $2,500 APC with 75% grant funding in the life and health sciences, a $2,000 APC with 25% grant funding in the physical sciences and admittedly a reasonably low APC in the social sciences and humanities, but that's not unrealistic given the kinds of fees that some of those journals are charging. And this looks like a much more sustainable path. In fact, it's about 20% lower than our current subscription costs. So again, this was just some early, fairly, I won't say it's entirely simplistic. It used, tried to use some nuanced factors, but it used them in a very gross way because we didn't really have a very rich set of data points. So coming back to pay it forward, in this project, we want to build out that sort of model but do it in a much richer and deeper and much more nuanced way. So this project is now underway. We're in the first quarter or we're heading into the second quarter of the project. It has two main tracks. One is a qualitative track where we're investigating the perceptions and aspirations and behavior of academic authors, both faculty, graduate students and postdocs. And we're doing that through focus groups and also that we're planning a survey that will follow on survey to the focus groups that are now underway. And then we'll also be doing a publisher survey where we'll be surveying publisher attitudes, plans, perspectives on their current and future plans for open access. We're also doing quite a bit of quantitative modeling that will take the kind of work that Ralph has been, the German University has been doing and that I've just talked about but make that a much richer picture. So we're first going to be looking at the publishing costs and looking at the cost of publishing both by traditional and also non-traditional publishers to build more of a ground up model of what should publishing cost. And then we're going to be looking at both the publishing output of the partner universities and I'll get to the partners in a minute and also the subscription and licensing fees of those universities and do a much richer quantitative model. So the project is co-led by UC Davis and CDL for project team, you see here McKenzie Smith and Lane Farley are the co-PIs. Greg Tannenbaum is our overall project manager and I'm working with and coordinating a lot of the quantitative analysis components. We've assembled a tremendous group of partners. We didn't want to make this a University of California project. We felt it was important to embrace a broader set of institutions but again we're talking about institutions that contribute a very significant portion of the publishing output where that economic impact will be the most felt. And so Harvard, Ohio State, Ohio State University, University of British Columbia and then the 10 University of California campuses. We have three industry partners working with us in this project. So both Web of Science and Scopus are contributing bibliometric data. The ALPS, the Association of Learned Society and Professional Publishers is our publishing industry partner and will be working with us on a publisher survey. We've assembled what we think is an impressive and outstanding team of consultants on the project. I mentioned Greg Tannenbaum, also Carol Tenebier at University of Tennessee is running our user surveys. David Solomon and Brokester Bjork who both Stuart and Ralph mentioned and cited have done a lot of work on open access modeling and they are gonna be our modeling consultants. And then Mark McCabe at Boston University is also working in the scenario modeling but he's bringing an economic, sort of pure economic and market analysis approach to the project. Project Timeline, January through March is sort of the phase that we're coming out of where we're finalizing data specifications for the project. Carol Tenebier's group has been conducting focus groups and Greg Tannenbaum has been developing the publisher survey that will go out in the next quarter of the project and we'll be doing our data collection and refining and building models as we go. The expectation is that in 2016, the first half of 2016, we will really have our model to share and distribute and write up our findings. So what is a real deliverable here? Well, we think the deliverable is kind of a rich, detailed, flexible and publicly accessible financial model that can build a very rich picture of what the emerging APC model would look like in a North American environment, particularly for the larger research institutions in North America. And we plan to do this by rigorously modeling all of these different components and trying to really understand not only a static picture of what does the picture look like today, but also how is publishing growing over time and how do you factor growth over time into this kind of a model? So we hope that we will build a very rich model and a replicable methodology that then other institutions can use and apply in a local context. Just a little bit about work to date on focus groups. That's the work that actually is beginning to bear a little bit of fruit. So at this point, eight focus groups have been conducted with 60 participants, faculty, graduate students, postdocs at four of the project partner locations. So University of British Columbia, Harvard, UC Irvine and UC Davis. And OSU will also be doing a focus group fairly soon. As you can imagine, as we hope, there are a diversity of disciplines, ages and perspectives. And the group that's doing this work has begun transcribing the results and will be drafting the questionnaire soon. Just some early impressions from the focus groups. Not surprising a range of perspectives. So there's some true believers, there's some skeptics. There are a lot of faculty and students who don't really know a lot about this whole area and are just trying to understand it as many of us are. A lot of senior faculty said that they already post their articles and various repositories are on their websites. Many of the folks in the focus groups felt that they had very good access to journal content. They weren't deprived as readers, but they supported open access for others as readers and as a moral good, even if they didn't have a direct need themselves. Lots of concerns, of course, surfaced and these would be concerns in any transition. So where will the funding come from? Will they have to pay? Obviously a big concern for graduate students and postdocs. Concerns that richer nations might dominate publication, that there was a potential for APC prices to rise, just as subscription prices have risen over time. Concerns about lack of transparency, feeling that publishing is broken, but not necessarily a lot of clarity about how it should be fixed. And then concern that APCs are too high, a lot of folks seemingly not understanding or crediting why APCs should be as high as they are and feeling that publishers probably are just charging with the market will bear. There was some support expressed for library's role in coordinating this new area of activity and in negotiating around open access. So I just wanted to close with some thoughts about how this trend and the directions that we might be going in in the US and Europe and how does this look from a global perspective? And one of the things that Stuart and I both have talked about is the role of grant funding in potentially supporting open access charges. And in fact, if you look at the shifts in global R&D, you can see that in the last decade or so, the US share of global R&D is really declining as a share of the world's research. And that's largely because of the rise of the Asian countries and the developing nations in general. And so there's really a shift in investment that's happening globally. And that shift in investment is also manifest in global article share. So the chart on the right is from NSF's analysis of science and engineering global article share. That's, I'm guessing that's a little bit hard to read, but the EU global article share is the highest. US is below that. And there's quite a rising line for the developing countries and in particular China. And that's something that publishers will tell you and that our scholars have observed as well. And so really there's a shift in investment and a shift in activity that's going on around the world. And we've seen this in scope three also, which is a project that I'm involved with, where we've been looking at article share around the globe and high energy physics. And even in the last five years or so, there are palpable shifts in where the balance of publishing is happening. So whereas if you look at subscription distribution, the US is still by far the highest share of revenue in the STM global STM revenue. So it's interesting to contemplate and I think as we think about where we're all going in this environment to think about how the shifts in global output might drive and be a shift in the balance of investment around the globe. And part of the unsustainability that I know many of us feel is about the growth of publishing output in general. And there are some real questions about how much we in the US should be bearing the brunt of that growth when the growth is coming elsewhere, coming from elsewhere. So of course it is a global system, but it's interesting to contemplate these shifts in R&D versus where the balance of subscription revenue is coming from now. So that's just something to think about for the future. And with that, I think we can stop and open this up for questions.