At next week’s Village Board meeting, the Village President will present her recommended appointments for the Village’s boards, committees, and commissions. Under Village governance, it is the Village President’s responsibility to make these appointments, subject to confirmation by a majority vote of the Village Board.

That process is more than an annual agenda item. It is a reminder of how much local government depends on residents who are willing to serve, learn, and help shape the community’s future.

It also gives us at CG Forward a good opportunity to explain the differences between boards, committees, and commissions, their respective authorities, and how decisions are made. Increasing public participation and supporting transparent decision-making ultimately help build trust in local government and ensure more voices are part of the process.

Why These Groups Matter

No Village Board can do all the work of governing alone. Strong communities function best when many residents with different backgrounds, skills, interests, and motives are involved in public service. Thus, the Village’s boards, committees, and commissions create a structure for that involvement. They help study issues in greater detail, draft plans and policies, and make important recommendations for the Village Board to consider. Importantly, individuals who volunteer their time provide specialized expertise that helps guide decision-making.  

Some groups are advisory to the Village Board, such as the law enforcement committee and parks committee. Some have limited decision-making power (e.g., the plan commission). Others, like the police commission and utility commission, are established by ordinance or state law with specific duties and act independently of the Village Board. Almost always, there are department staff, legal counsel, financial specialists, and others who serve as consultants and collaborators to broaden the breadth of knowledge.

The Village of Cottage Grove is part of intergovernmental agreements with the Town of Cottage Grove for fire services (with the independent non-profit Cottage Grove Fire Inc.) and the Town of Cottage Grove and Village of Deerfield for EMS services (contracted with Deer Grove EMS). Those commissions are unique because they are composed solely of board members from the respective municipalities, who must weigh the district’s needs alongside those of the communities they represent. This could and perhaps will be a standalone future blog topic!

What Is a Board?
A board is typically a formal governing or oversight body with defined responsibilities. In some cases, boards manage a specific function or institution, like the Library Board (governed by state statute chapter 43). They oversee budgets, policies, strategic direction, and operations. Boards often carry broader responsibility than committees and usually meet on a regular schedule with established procedures.

But, boards do not micromanage staff. Instead, they set direction and provide oversight. Most importantly, they are majority-controlled, meaning decisions only move forward when a majority supports them. Without that majority, there is no official action.

What Is a Committee?
A committee is generally created to focus on a specific topic (parks), project (tourism), or policy area (ordinance review). Committees are often smaller working groups that review information, discuss options, and bring recommendations back to the Village Board. Village ordinances state how committees are to be structured. Some committees are standing committees that meet regularly. Others may be temporary, ad hoc, and created for a specific purpose (e.g., a centennial committee). Regardless, committees are where much of the detailed work happens. They ask questions, debate alternatives, and refine ideas before matters move to the full board.

What Is a Commission?
A commission is usually a body created by ordinance or statute with a defined public role. Depending on the commission, it may advise elected officials, conduct hearings, review applications, or make determinations within its legal authority.  Commissions often deal with areas such as planning and zoning (plan commission), ethics, and public safety (police), or community services (utility). Because many commissions have responsibilities established in law, their procedures are often more structured than those of committees.

How Decisions Are Made
Each body has its own scope and purpose, but decisions generally follow the same basic principles:

1. Open Meetings
Meetings are publicly noticed and conducted in accordance with transparency laws. Agendas are posted in advance so residents know what will be discussed. The Village website has multiple ways to sign up for alerts, agendas, and other communications.

2. Discussion and Deliberation
Members review materials, hear staff input, ask questions, and discuss options in public.

3. Motions and Votes
When action is needed, a member makes a motion, another seconds it, and the body votes. In most cases, the majority of those present determine the outcome.

4. Recommendations or Final Action
Some groups only recommend action to the Village Board. Others may have the authority to act directly within their jurisdiction.

5. Village Board Oversight
The elected Village Board remains accountable to the public and is the final decision-maker on many major issues, including budgets, ordinances, and confirmations.

Why Appointments Matter
Appointments matter because the people serving in these roles influence the quality of discussion and the strength of decisions. Because appointments happen annually and terms are staggered, it is very rare for committees to become “stacked” or dominated by any one group at a single time. Just as the elected Village Board reflects the community, these groups do as well. All effective boards, committees, and commissions need members who are prepared, respectful to staff, curious, and committed to the community. While diverse perspectives strengthen decision-making, good governance depends on both expertise and collaboration.

A Healthy Community Needs Participation
Local government works best when residents stay engaged, not only by voting, but by attending meetings, sharing public comment, applying to serve, and understanding how decisions are made. These groups may not always make headlines, but they shape the policies, priorities, and projects that affect everyday life in our Village.

That is why next week’s appointments are worth paying attention to. They are part of the ongoing work of building a stronger community together.

I want to start with a simple disclaimer: I am not a municipal finance expert. I do not have the extensive credentials or graduate-level training associated with those titles. I do not work in public finance, bond markets, or government auditing. But I was interested in learning more about how the Village of Cottage Grove’s finances are actually evaluated, because I think many of us hear words like “debt,” “bond rating,” or “audit” without always knowing what they mean in practice.

The more I looked into it, the more I came away with two impressions. First, the Village already has multiple credible financial review processes in place, which help maintain a healthy portfolio and accreditation. Second, any conversation about creating a “Debt Reduction Task Force” should begin with an honest understanding of those existing safeguards. I also went into this with a specific question in mind: whether creating a “Debt Reduction Task Force” would add meaningful value beyond the systems already in place.

What I found is that Cottage Grove’s finances are not evaluated through just one lens. There are multiple layers working together: Village staff, public partners, and consultants prepare the budget and financial statements; an independent outside auditor reviews those statements annually; a municipal advisor helps structure and manage debt issuance; credit rating agencies evaluate the Village’s ability to repay; and Wisconsin law sets legal limits on general obligation debt. Taken together, these layers form a system of professional, independent oversight. Village finances are not evaluated informally or casually. They are reviewed by auditors, guided by licensed financial advisors, tested in public credit markets, and constrained by state law. That context matters, especially in a public conversation that sometimes treats financial decisions as if they are made without serious scrutiny. 

One thing I wanted to better understand was the Village’s S&P rating. In the official statement for Cottage Grove’s 2025A General Obligation Promissory Notes, the Village is listed with an S&P Global Ratings grade of AA with a Stable Outlook. At a basic level, a credit rating is an independent opinion about the Village’s credit quality. In ordinary terms, it is one signal to investors about how strong the Village appears as a borrower. The “AA” category is considered very strong, even if it is not the very highest tier. For residents, that matters because stronger credit typically leads to better borrowing terms and lower interest costs than a weaker rating would receive. A Stable Outlook suggests that, at the time of issuance, the rating agency did not see a near-term risk of downgrade. A rating is not a guarantee, and it does not mean every borrowing decision is automatically wise. But it is a meaningful external assessment of financial strength and one that directly affects taxpayers.

I also spent time looking into Ehlers and Associates, Inc., the municipal advisor for the Village. Ehlers helps public-sector clients with debt planning, structuring bond issuances, managing repayment schedules, running competitive bond sales processes, and ensuring regulatory compliance. This is highly specialized work. Most residents, and frankly most elected officials, are not experts in municipal bond structuring, arbitrage compliance, or disclosure rules. A municipal advisor brings that level of expertise. Under MSRB Rule G-42, municipal advisors are also subject to a fiduciary duty to their public-sector clients, including duties of care, loyalty, and conflict disclosure. That does not make any advisor beyond question. The Village Board and staff still need to understand the advice they receive and make sound decisions. But it does mean that debt issuance is not being done casually, it is being guided by professionals operating under regulatory standards. The benefit is expertise. The risk is that complex financial decisions can become less accessible to the public, which is why transparency and clear communication remain essential.

I was also curious about the Village’s independent auditors. For the 2024 financial statements, the outside audit firm was Baker Tilly US, LLP in Madison. In its audit opinion, Baker Tilly concluded that the Village’s financial statements are fairly presented and follow generally accepted accounting principles. That matters because an independent audit confirms that the Village’s financial reporting is being presented accurately under established standards. What I found especially helpful was that the audit materials did not read like a political talking point. They included both reassurance and caution. Baker Tilly reported that it did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that it considered material weaknesses. At the same time, it identified one deficiency: account reconciliations prepared throughout the year should be performed by someone independent of the transaction processing for the account. Baker Tilly also reported no significant difficulties in completing the audit, no disagreements with management, and no misstatements identified during the audit. To me, that is actually what a credible audit process should look like. It should not be a blanket claim that everything is flawless. It should be an independent review that says where things are working and where internal controls can still improve. The pros of using an outside auditor like Baker Tilly seem pretty clear: independence, technical expertise, and the ability to compare the Village’s numbers to broader municipal benchmarks. The caution is that an audit is not the same thing as day-to-day management. Auditors review whether statements are fairly presented and whether internal control issues meet certain thresholds; they do not run Village operations. So an audit is essential, but it is not a substitute for good budgeting and good oversight throughout the year.

Another question I had was: what helps ensure that Village funds are not mismanaged or stolen? What I found is that there is not just one safeguard, but several layers of oversight. Village management is responsible for internal controls, and the annual audit provides reasonable assurance that financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. Our Village has a finance division that includes staff with CPAs. In the 2024 audit, Baker Tilly reported no known or suspected fraud and no material weaknesses, and as noted in the audit findings regarding independent reconciliations, oversight works best when duties are separated, and records are reviewed by more than one person. At the same time, the Village operates within formal policies and legal guardrails. The 2026 adopted budget sets a target for the unrestricted general fund balance between 20% and 30% of annual operating expenditures, and the 2024 audited balance of 28.42% falls within that range. The Village is also well within its legal debt limit, with approximately $31.9 million in outstanding general obligation debt against a limit of $67.9 million, or about 47% utilization. In plain language, the Village relies on internal controls, independent audit review, financial policies, and legal constraints to reduce risk, maintain stability, and identify areas for improvement.

At the same time, I understand why some residents may still have concerns. Government finances can feel complex, and when decisions involve long-term debt, it is reasonable to ask questions about transparency, accountability, and long-term impact. Those concerns are valid and worth engaging with directly.

I understand why the idea of a “Debt Reduction Task Force” might sound appealing. It suggests additional oversight, more transparency, and a dedicated focus on long-term planning. But it is important to be clear about what such a group would actually do. A task force would not conduct independent audits, issue credit ratings, structure or price municipal debt, or replace legal debt limits or financial policies. Instead, it would largely review and reinterpret information that has already been analyzed by auditors, advisors, rating agencies, and Village staff. At best, it could serve as a forum for public education and discussion. However, the Village Board and Budget Committee already carry out this work through annual budget reviews, workshops, financial planning, capital prioritization, and careful decisions about when and how to use debt. At worst, it risks duplicating work and adding an additional layer of interpretation to processes already designed to provide independent, professional analysis. The Village is already subject to multiple independent layers of financial oversight. Creating a new task force would not introduce new expertise; it would replicate work already being done by licensed professionals and regulated institutions, which could result in misalignment of procedures and risk our bond rating and debt issuance. 

After looking into all of this, my takeaway is fairly straightforward. Residents should absolutely keep asking questions about the Village’s finances, and have multiple opportunities through the budget process to do so. There are budget feedback forms, public involvement meetings, transparency modules, and public comment opportunities available for residents to share their input. Public engagement is healthy and necessary. But it is equally important to recognize what already exists. Cottage Grove’s finances are not evaluated through informal debate. They are evaluated through a structured system that includes independent auditors, professional financial advisors, credit market assessments, and legal constraints. The question is not whether oversight exists. It clearly does. The question is whether creating an additional layer of review would improve decision-making or simply duplicate work already being done by qualified professionals, thereby introducing risk. Before adding new structures, it makes sense to fully understand the ones already in place.

Sources:
Village of Cottage Grove, 2024 Financial Statements
https://www.vi.cottagegrove.wi.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3703/2024-Financial-Statements

Village of Cottage Grove, 2026 Village Board Adopted Budget
https://www.vi.cottagegrove.wi.gov/DocumentCenter/View/4008/2026-Village-Board-Adopted-Budget

Village of Cottage Grove, Village Board Agenda – May 19, 2025
https://www.vi.cottagegrove.wi.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_05192025-2192

Village of Cottage Grove / Edward Jones, Official Statement – General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2025A
https://www.edwardjones.com/sites/default/files/acquiadam/2025-05/WI-Cottage-Grove-POS.pdf

S&P Global Ratings, Cottage Grove 2025A Rating Information
https://disclosure.spglobal.com/ratings/en/regulatory/instrument-details/sectorCode/PUBFIN/entityId/15609/issueId/1844931

Ehlers, Debt Issuance & Management
https://www.ehlers-inc.com/services/debt-issuance-management/

Ehlers, Company Website
https://www.ehlers-inc.com/

Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, Rule G-42: Duties of Non-Solicitor Municipal Advisors
https://www.msrb.org/Rules-and-Interpretations/MSRB-Rules/General/Rule-G-42

The HeyDay development provides a good example. The project consists of 114 townhome rental units and fully complies with the approved Comprehensive Plan. No changes to the plan were required, and the project is actually less dense than the maximum density allowed. The developer entered contract in 2020, received all necessary approvals, and met every condition required by the Village.

As part of the project, the developer funded and constructed several community improvements, including:

• Construction of a public road (Fundamental Way)
• Bike and pedestrian connections along County Road BB and Buss Road to improve school access
• Intersection and roadway improvements
• Park development fees that funded Shady Grove Park in the neighborhood across the street

This approximately $40 million private investment includes private utilities and roadways (that the Village does not need public works to serve). This single development is projected to generate about $900,000 annually in property tax revenue, supporting public services and public safety. To put that into perspective, it would take roughly 70–80 single-family homes to generate a similar tax base, and those homes would also require the Village to maintain the associated infrastructure long-term

The Village uses impact fees to assign certain capital costs to new development. Cottage Grove’s draft impact-fee ordinance states that the fees are used for a developer’s proportional share of capital costs made necessary by land development, and that they are paid when a building permit is issued. The Village is not starting from zero. It already has a policy framework to ensure growth contributes.

Village materials also show that impact fees are tied to the Capital Improvement Plan and updated as the community grows. Projects likely to occur in the next three to five years are typically included in the needs assessment. That is exactly what responsible local government should be doing: planning ahead, matching fees to actual capital needs, and revisiting assumptions as the Village changes.

Growth also supports the Village in another way: it expands the tax base. The Village’s 2025 budget packet reports that net new construction in 2024 was 4.36 percent, one of the highest rates in Dane County. The same budget document notes that net new construction is critical under Wisconsin’s levy-limit system. In plain English, growth can help create fiscal capacity.

Between 2023 and 2025, building permits were issued for 122 single-family homes and 195 multi-family units. New housing creates demand for services but also adds value to the tax base. Growth is not just a cost. It is also part of how a community builds long-term fiscal strength.

At the same time, Village staff are clear that growth increases operating costs, especially in public safety. That is the part slogans usually skip. Growth is not free. But it is also inaccurate to pretend that growth contributes nothing and that existing residents pay everything. The reality is more serious and more complicated than a bumper-sticker phrase.

Cottage Grove also uses tax incremental financing as another development tool. The Village explains that TIF can fund infrastructure and that the increased property-tax collections generated by new development are used to pay debt associated with those project costs. The Village’s own budget materials state that TIF districts typically bear major development or planning costs. Again, the point is the same: growth already helps pay for growth.

So what is the actual responsibility of the Village Board? It is not to rely on slogans. It is to make sure the system works. That means following the Comprehensive Plan. It means phasing development so roads, utilities, and public safety keep pace. It means using impact fees carefully. It means using TIF only where it makes sense. It means being honest that growth can strengthen the tax base while also increasing service demands. And it means making decisions based on facts, not just campaign and political messaging.

The Village already has tools to ensure development contributes to infrastructure costs. The real responsibility of the Board is not to invent new slogans or committees, but to use the planning tools we already have effectively.

Cottage Grove works best when residents stay informed and participate. The Spring Election is approaching, and it is a good time for Cottage Grove residents to review the candidates and make a plan to vote. Local elections shape decisions that directly affect our community, from infrastructure and public services to long-term planning and growth.  The post may be updated with additional links to new information as provided by the candidates. The official Village website about elections is https://www.vi.cottagegrove.wi.gov/316/Elections.

Candidate Info

Below are the candidates who will appear on the ballot for Village Trustee, listed in ballot order with their candidate info. These are links to each candidate’s campaign information.

Peter Doll	Facebook
Abbie McDowell	Facebook
Chris Stoa	Facebook	Campaign Site
Jordan H. Archer	Facebook
Casey Erlandson	Facebook	Campaign Site
JP Villavicencio	Facebook	Campaign Site	Instagram

Candidate Interview Links

As of March 14, there are two newspaper articles that provided candidates the opportunity to answer several questions. Residents who want to learn more about the candidates can find posted candidate interviews at the following links:

Leader Independent	Get to know the candidates running for Cottage Grove village board	February 5, 2026	Site
Wisconsin State Journal	Meet the candidates for Cottage Grove trustee	January 31, 2026	Site

Meet and Greet Opportunities

Letters to the Editor

Publication	Date	Title	Candidates
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 6, 2026	Letter | Erlandson would work for Cottage Grove’s future	Erlandson
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 16, 2026	Stoa cares about us all	Stoa
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 16, 2026	Important election for Cottage Grove	Erlandson, Stoa, Villavicencio
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 16, 2026	Support for three Cottage Grove candidates	Erlandson, Stoa, Villavicencio
WSJ	March 11, 2026	Casey Erlandson cares about the future of Cottage Grove	Erlandson
WSJ	March 8, 2026	Back candidates to help Cottage Grove grow responsibly	Erlandson, Stoa, Villavicencio
Cap Times	March 6, 2026	Erlandson would work for Cottage Grove’s future	Erlandson
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 9, 2026	Support for Villavicencio	Villavicencio
Leader Independent (HNG)	March 9, 2026	Erlandson reliable, impartial, trustworthy	Erlandson
Leader Independent (HNG)	February 9, 2026	Be sure to vote in Cottage Grove primary on Feb. 17	Doll, McDowell, Archer
Leader Independent (HNG)	February 10, 2026	Be sure to vote on Feb. 17	Erlandson, Stoa, Villavicencio
Leader Independent (HNG)	February 10, 2026	Three Cottage Grove candidates have needed experience	Erlandson, Stoa, Villavicencio

Where to Vote in Cottage Grove

Polling places will be open on Election Day from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.

Village residents vote at one of the following locations, depending on their ward. If you are not sure which ward you live in, you can look it up online before heading to the polls. https://myvote.wi.gov/en-us/Find-My-Polling-Place

Cottage Grove Village Hall
221 E. Cottage Grove Road
Wards 4, 6, 8, and 9

Granite Ridge School
4500 Buss Road
Wards 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10

Absentee and Early Voting

Absentee voting is available for any voter who prefers to vote early. Residents can vote absentee in person at Village Hall during the clerk’s office hours in the weeks leading up to the election. You can also request that an absentee ballot be mailed to you. Ballots returned by mail or in person must be received by the clerk by 8:00 p.m. on Election Day.

Absentee ballots requested for the upcoming Spring Election were mailed today, March 10. There is still time to request an absentee ballot to be mailed to you. Go to the MyVote website (www.myvote.wi.gov) to request your ballot today.

Reminders:

• The United States Postal Service recommends putting your completed ballot in the mail at least 5-7 days before the election. Ballots received after 8 p.m. on Election Day will NOT be counted, regardless of the envelope’s postmark.
  
• The drop box for absentee ballots is open and located outside the main door to Village Hall. It will be open until 7 p.m. on April 7.
  
• The last day to request an absentee ballot to be mailed is April 2 at 5 p.m.

Check Your Ballot

If you want to see exactly what will be on your ballot or confirm your voting location, the easiest place to start is MyVote Wisconsin.

The site allows voters to check registration status, view a sample ballot, request an absentee ballot, and find their polling place.

Visit myvote.wi.gov to look up your information.

Make a Plan to Vote

Spring elections often have lower turnout than fall elections, but they are just as important for the future of our community. Taking a few minutes to learn about the candidates and making a plan to vote helps ensure your voice is part of the conversation.

During local elections, it’s common to hear concerns about “village debt” and to equate it with impacts on property taxes.  I have often heard people say that our government should be run like a business or that municipal budgeting should be compared to personal finances. Treating budgeting and financing, including debt management, as the same as government, business, and personal planning is a mistake and can lead to poor future planning decisions. Our Village Trustees must lead and act with an understanding of the differences and realities of government financing and debt, and be able to explain why they differ. Municipal debt is not the same as personal or business debt.  If we treat them as identical, we end up drawing the wrong conclusions.

Households and businesses often plan around relatively short horizons, years or decades tied to income, retirement, or market cycles. When a household takes on debt, there’s a ticking clock. An adult has a working career that eventually ends. Debt must be paid off or significantly reduced before retirement, or you risk serious financial trouble.

A municipality is fundamentally different. A village does not retire. Governments manage infrastructure and services that last 30 to a 100 years. Roads, water systems, libraries, and public safety facilities are designed to serve multiple generations. Financing them strictly from current revenue can actually be unfair to future users who benefit but didn’t help pay. It has ongoing authority to levy taxes and collect fees. Because it exists indefinitely, it can responsibly spread the cost of long-lived infrastructure over decades. In public finance, this is called intergenerational equity: people who benefit from an asset over time help pay for it. If Cottage Grove builds a road that will last 30 years, it makes sense for residents over that period to share in paying for it, not just today’s homeowners, but tomorrow’s new property owners.

Businesses use loans and business credit cards to supplement cash flow and fund payroll, inventory, and other short-term expenses. In personal finance, loans are taken out to purchase homes, automobiles, and educational expenses. Credit cards are used for home goods and services. In business and personal financial management, if a loan or debt is not paid off, the risk is that the asset will default and lead to bankruptcy.

Municipalities have guardrails that significantly reduce the risk of loan defaults. Wisconsin municipalities operate under a state law that caps General Obligation (GO) debt at 5% of equalized property value.[1] This creates a hard statutory ceiling. Debt levels are publicly reported and audited annually. These guardrails are built into state law — something households and businesses lack.

According to the Village of Cottage Grove’s 2024 audited financial statements:[2] the equalized property value is $1,358,209,100, setting the legal GO debt limit at $67,910,455. The Village’s outstanding debt is $31,936,707, which is 47%.  These figures place Cottage Grove in the middle range of comparable growth-oriented Dane County communities based on Wisconsin Department of Revenue municipal debt reports.[3]

Municipal debt typically finances long-lived capital assets such as roads and street reconstruction, water and sewer infrastructure, stormwater systems, fire stations and equipment, public safety vehicles, as well as parks and community facilities. These assets often have useful lives of 20 to 50 years. Borrowing spreads costs over the period in which residents benefit. However, municipal debt can not be used to fund services and operations.

Instead of focusing solely on the total dollar amount, public finance professionals evaluate debt as a percentage of equalized value, the percentage of the statutory debt limit used, debt service as a share of the operating budget, fund balance reserves, credit ratings, and alignment with long-term capital planning. The Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau notes that municipal finance comparisons require context, as accounting categories and funding mechanisms differ across communities [4].  This is a lot for the Village Trustees and Administrative staff to consider as they plan for our community’s long-term future.

Municipal debt becomes concerning when it approaches the 5% statutory cap, debt service crowds out essential services, funds are borrowed for operating expenses instead of capital assets, reserves are depleted, or credit ratings decline. Simply having debt, however, is not, by itself, evidence of fiscal mismanagement or a financial crisis.

Municipal debt is far more comparable to a long-term mortgage on infrastructure than to a credit card balance. Based on audited 2024 data, Cottage Grove is currently utilizing about half of its allowable GO debt capacity under Wisconsin law. The meaningful discussion for residents is not whether debt exists, but whether borrowing is strategic, sustainable, and aligned with long-term community goals. Debt is a tool. The question is whether we are using it wisely to build a strong future for Cottage Grove.

Personal credit ratings, like a FICO score, are automated scores based on an individual’s borrowing and repayment behavior, such as payment history, credit utilization, length of credit history, and recent applications. Municipal credit ratings are forward-looking opinions about a local government’s ability and willingness to repay public debt, based on factors like the strength of the tax base, financial reserves, budget performance, debt burden, management practices, and legal revenue-raising authority [5]. Our Village has an S&P Global Ratings credit rating of AA on its general obligation borrowing, which is considered high-grade and reflects a strong capacity to meet financial commitments; in practical terms, that “AA” level is viewed as a solid, favorable rating that typically supports lower borrowing costs and signals sound financial management compared with lower-rated municipalities. This rating demonstrates our Village is not in a debt crisis. Long-term debt can be used to spread the cost of growth out over years to account for new developments and businesses. 

Public finance tries to answer a key question: Who benefits, and who should pay? Sometimes the right answer is current taxpayers, sometimes it’s future users through debt, sometimes it’s new development through fees or a combination thereof. When those distinctions are ignored, communities often end up with two common problems:

• Deferred maintenance and infrastructure gaps, or
• Short-term tax decisions that create higher long-term costs.

Government debt has been a historic tool used since the need to fund the American Revolution. Alexander Hamilton saw government debt as a powerful tool rather than a fatal weakness, as long as it was managed responsibly. In his view, public credit could help a young nation stabilize its finances, build trust at home and abroad, and create the conditions for economic growth. He argued that honoring debts in full and on time would establish the United States’ reputation, making it easier to borrow in emergencies and attracting private investment. At the same time, he did not endorse unlimited borrowing; he emphasized regular revenue (especially through taxes and tariffs) and careful administration so that debt strengthened the nation’s capacity rather than undermining it.

During the upcoming April 7th election, please consider how the Village Trustee candidates’ understanding of how to use municipal debt responsibility to plan the future of our Village.  

— Stefan Wahe, Village Resident

Sources

Please note that I used ChatGPT to assist in researching this topic and identifying reputable sources for information.  I verified that the references were accurate and the writing is my own work.

[1] Wisconsin Statutes §67.03 – Municipal Borrowing; 5% debt limit based on equalized value.

[2] Village of Cottage Grove, Wisconsin. 2024 Annual Financial Statements (Audited), Management Discussion & Analysis and Debt Note Disclosures.

[3] Wisconsin Department of Revenue. 2024 Municipal Debt Margin Report (Statewide Data).

[4] Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau. Informational Paper on Municipal and County Finance, 2025 Edition.[5] S&P Global, Understanding Credit Ratings