The Lafayette County Board of Supervisors at their August 24 meeting approved referendum language that would ask county constituents to approve or deny building a new Lafayette Manor with estimated construction costs not to exceed $45.5 million. That passed 14-2. A second question will also be asked to exceed the levy limit by $500,000 over five years (2027- 2031) for maintenance and operation of Lafayette Manor. That resolution passed 13-3.
In Resolution 22-26, the county board is looking to incur debt to support the construction of a new skilled nursing home. The constructed amount is estimated not to exceed $45.5 million.
The referendum question will state, “Should the Lafayette County Board of Supervisors authorize and approve the county incurring capital expenditures associated with the construction of a new nursing home, borrowing funds to support the capital expenditures and levying a property tax to support the debt service payments that will be above the allowed levy limit established in the state law?” A “yes” vote would be in support of Lafayette County building a new skilled nursing facility and a “no” vote would be against the building.
District #7 Supervisor Bob Boyle asked if that amount was enough. Kyle Kraemer from Kraemer Brothers stated that they broke down the costs and added the 10 percent contingency and six percent inflation costs, as a worse case scenario for the county and felt comfortable with the $45.5 million number.
The resolution passed 14-2 with District #2 Supervisor Mark Pinch and District #5 Supervisor Luke McGuire against.
Resolution 21-26 stated that the county recognizes the future demand for long term care services in the county, with the increasing aging population estimated to be over 25 percent of the county by 2030, and the increasing mandates from the State of Wisconsin have significantly impacted the county’s financial ability to meet the requirements of the mandates while also supporting the Manor for any shortfalls it incurs when the Medicaid reimbursement costs aren’t enough. The county believes that supporting an increase in the levy to support operations and maintenance at Lafayette Manor for a period of five years to allow for planning and implementation of the Manor is right.
The referendum question will state, “Under state law, the increase in the levy of the County of Lafayette for the tax to be imposed for the next fiscal year, 2027, is limited to 1.088%, which results in an estimated levy of $10,087,262. Shall the County of Lafayette be allowed to exceed this limit and increase the levy for the next fiscal year, 2027, for the purpose of paying a portion o the cost to operate and maintain Lafayette Manor, by an estimated total of 4.957% which results in a levy of $10,587,262, and include the increase of $500,000 for fiscal years 2028-2031?”
A “yes” vote would be to allow the county to increase the tax levy limit by $500,000 to allow them to pay a portion of its operating costs and maintenance for Lafayette Manor for five years. A “no” vote would mean not allowing the county to increase the tax levy limit.
The additional $500,000/year levy has an estimated $23.67 tax impact per $100,000 of the assessed value of private property.
The entire $500,000 would only be allowed to be spent on the Lafayette Manor, the current facility and the new facility being built. If the new Manor is built before the five years is up, that money could be used for operational purposes.
District #14 Supervisor Emmett Reilly was concerned with there being two referendum questions on the ballot. Chairman Sauer stated they are trying to not repeat others mistakes, talking about how Monroe School District had passed their referendum to build the new school but then found out they didn’t have enough money to operate and maintain the building so they had to go back to tax payers and ask for additional monies and that referendum failed.
“I don’t want to be not be sneaking and be right up front about how much it is going to cost,” Sauer explained.
District #10 Supervisor Gary Benson understood there is a need to keep the Manor facility running and felt that if the county were to sell the building, it would be more attractive to buyers if it was in a good working condition.
District #8 Supervisor Jed Gant added that after two information meetings, he didn’t see much opposition to the new Manor being built and didn’t think the $500,000 was too much of an ask.
Katrina Houtakker, administrator for Lafayette Manor, commented that as of June, the Manor saw $3.4 million in revenue and only $3.2 million in expenses, without the use of any additional levy money from the county. They are one of four departments in the county that has a surplus. They also received their gold star rating back, allowing them to take Veterans. The Manor currently has 42 residents and 70 percent of the patients are on Medicaid. The Medicare ratio is less than 40 percent.
Boyle hoped there would be informational meetings at several communities throughout the county so people know exactly what each question is asking and what they are voting for when they go to the polls in November.
“The more information you can get to the people, the sooner we get this thing done, the better off we are,” District #1 Supervisor Larry Ludlum added.
McGuire questioned the future elder care and if the Manor will have the patient level down the road or will elder care be changing and moving away from skilled nursing home facilities. He had been told that people are moving more towards in home care and trying to stay in their homes longer. He wanted to know not only the good news being shared at the Manor but the bad news.
“Progress has its price,” Boyle said. “And I personally say we pass both referendums and move on.”
Benson felt the constituents would understand that the Manor was not looking to use this money frivolously but putting it to good use in taking care of the patients.
The resolution passed 13-3 with McGuire, Pinch and District #9 Supervisor Joe Schutte against.
Southwest Wisconsin Library System
Southwest Wisconsin Library System’s Director Angela Noel spoke to the board about the system that covers five counties – Crawford, Grant, Iowa, Lafayette, and Richland – and their reimbursement for library services.
The counties do not give the SWLS any funds directly. The funds go straight to the individual local libraries within the county. SWLS does not charge the counties for any services rendered.
County residents that live in townships and not in established villages or cities are using those municipal library services within the SWLS and some outside. Lafayette county residents have used Lafayette County libraries 87.3 percent of the time. Lafayette County libraries served over 65,000 visitors in 2025. Some Lafayette County residents do use libraries in Green and Dane as well. Since Green and Dane are in the South Central Wisconsin Library System, the country is required to reimburse them. Each reimbursement is different because each libraries total circulation and operating expenses are different.
SWLS uses circulation numbers of physical items to determine whether or not something is eligible for reimbursement. Using township codes, circulation statistics are broken down by those who live in a municipality with a library and those who do not. These numbers are required to be reported on every library’s annual report to the state each year by March 1 for the previous year. In 2024, Lafayette County libraries had a circulation total for physical items of 69,386 and 18,477 digital items. In 2025, the county saw in increase of physical items to 76,569 and an increase in digital to 25,006.
After the libraries have finalized their annual report, the data is used to calculate what the cost per circulation is. The formula for calculating cost per circulation is the operating expenses for the prior year (minus any federal funds) divided by the total circulation on physical items. E-books and e-audio don’t count in that number. As part of the county’s plan, they have agreed to reimburse the county libraries 78 percent of the cost per each circulation to a county resident. Crawford and Iowa counties also reimburse at 78 percent. Richland is at 70, Grant is at 79, Dane and Sauk are 100, and Green is around 75 percent.
Libraries in the system have seen less physical items being checked out but they haven’t seen a major decrease in those who frequent the library for other uses. Unreliable broadband internet in the area is a major factor for use at the library. As Blanchardville Public Library’s Library Director Sarah Kyrie stated, librarians have taken on many different hats in the past years. Kyrie said that the Blanchardville Public Library is always busy, especially after school and during story time. They hold several different programs from education to historical to entertainment. Lafayette County libraries held 929 public programs and 133 self-directed activities for a total attendance of 22,948 participants in 2025.
Municipalities have to determined if they can exempt their residents from the county library tax. This responsibility falls onto the municipality. This may effect the way the county issues taxes. Once those numbers are gathered, counties use their required reimbursements to help determine funding for library services. Counties can decide to provide additional funding beyond what is required on their plan. Taxes for library services fall outside levy limits for counties in Wisconsin.
Schutte mentioned about the support Argyle has seen for the new library that is being built in the old First National Bank and Trust building at 321 E Milwaukee Street and is looking to be open the first week in October.
Within the SWLS, there are 39,500 cardholders. With a combined collection of 481,557 print materials, 288,180 electronic, and 92,274 audio/video materials, there is so much that can be found at the SWLS libraries. Other than books, people can check out other items such as games, blood pressure monitors, musical instruments and sports equipment, like paddles that can be used for the new pickleball court in Blanchardville.
Other business
The county board also approved:
– Resolution 17-26; the changing of the Lafayette County EMS Director from part-time to full-time. The fiscal impact will not be determined until the position is filled based on the applicants qualifications and benefit selections. The maximum potential increase would be by $30,000 by year end of 2026. This has not been included in the 2026 budget but will be in the 2027 budget.
Gant wanted to thank all of the parties involved and to the EMS Department for not having any interruptions of service during the time when the Director and Deputy Director put in their resignations. It was assumed that many of the issues that have occurred may have been due to the director not being a full-time position. The position did start out as full-time but was requested to be part-time.
Gant and other supervisors thanked Human Resource Director Chris Lange for his assistance while the county looked for interim persons. Interim EMS Director is Jedediah Shultz and Interim EMS Deputy Director is Kathryn Chase.
– Resolution 18-26: supplemental pay
adjustment for the interim director of nursing position at the Lafayette Manor, of 10 percent of pay for hours worked, effective as of July 17 and will continue until the start date of the new hire for the Manor Director of Nursing. The fiscal impact has not been determined due to the unknown timeframe of the vacancy but the costs will be covered with the wages and fringes not paid as a result of the vacancy.
– Resolution 19-26: changing the health insurance rates for the 2027 budget year so that Lafayette County will pay 74 percent of the average cost of the one qualifying ETF traditional plan. The impact on the levy is an increase of approximately $300,000 in insurance costs. But by lowering it from 78 percent to 74 percent, the county will save $160,000.
– Resolution 20-26: creation of additional position for Trails Coordinator position. The position was originally going to be split between Economic Development and Tri- County Trails. There were concern about having the economic development portion of the position. The role as Trail Coordinator has always been taken on by a current Lafayette County employee. Max Blackbourn had taken on the position as the part-time Trail Coordinator but due to the amount of work needed for the position and still needing to do his full-time position, Blackbourn has declined the position, and was done as of August 31. McGuire was concerned as to who would be taking over as the Trail Coordinator in the interim time while they look for someone for the position. Blackbourn stated he would be available to sign any paperwork or answer questions when needed. The fiscal impact for the position is approximately $27,300 annually. The funds are partially offset by trails and grant funding. It was not included in the 2026 budget but will be included in the 2027 budget.
– Resolution 16-26: authorizing application for the 2026 Small Business Development Grant.
– Resolution 14-26: land use change by Kenneth Norgard and the Community Evangelical Free Church in the town of Shullsburg.
– Resolution 15-26: land use change by Terry and Michelle Mayhall in the town of Fayette.