September 23, 2026 – Village of Kewaskum, WI – Since the TID #6 Village Board Public Forum, I found information I believe Kewaskum deserves to know. Information surrounding statements made by the developer, past developments, failed closings, liens, litigation, and experiences from other municipalities. I prepared much of this for public comment at the tonight’s Board meeting. I wasn’t allowed to finish, so I’m sharing the rest here.
This isn’t about being upset that my three minutes ended, but more about making sure the information didn’t end when the mic turned off.
So here’s what I found, and why I believe it matters for Smokey’s Crossing.
At the public forum, Billy Webber stated that he has an Arkansas development “in excess of $4 billion,” approaching approximately $480 million.
I tried to clarify which project he was referring to and what Work Horse’s actual role was in projects presented as theirs, but at that meeting I was cut off by the Board before I could finish the question.
So I looked into it myself.
There is a $4 billion development underway in West Memphis, Arkansas.
But that investment was publicly announced by Google, and Arkansas identifies Google as constructing the campus.
I looked at other multi-billion-dollar developments in Arkansas. Those are publicly tied to companies such as AVAIO Digital and Serverfarm.
In the public records and sources I have reviewed, I have not been able to independently verify Work Horse’s involvement in any of those multi-billion-dollar projects.
That does not mean the involvement doesn’t exist.
It means I have not found documentation showing what that involvement is.
Work Horse does publicly list another Arkansas development: the Majestic in Hot Springs.
So I looked there next.
The property associated with Work Horse was roughly five acres.
When Hot Springs evaluated redevelopment proposals in 2026, the process came down to two finalists: Summit Properties and the Garland County Library.
Work Horse was not one of them.
The committee unanimously ranked Summit first.
That led me to a more important question:
What has happened when Work Horse has actually entered the development process with other communities?
Since the last meeting, I contacted Hutchinson, Minnesota.
Their City Administrator told me Work Horse: “never followed through with getting us the information we needed,” had incomplete submittals, and “cut off communication” after receiving a Preliminary Development Agreement.
He also told me a Notice of Termination of Purchase Agreement had been initiated stating Work Horse “had failed to close on the property.”
His conclusion was direct: “I don’t believe we would be interested in working with them again if they approached us.”
That isn’t my characterization of Hutchinson’s experience.
That’s what their City Administrator told me.
Then I found Princeton, Minnesota.
Court records show Work Horse had the property under contract and then assigned the transaction to another developer responsible for purchasing the property and paying certain engineering costs.
If the development reached final plat and TIF approval, Work Horse was positioned to receive approximately $850,000.
It never got there.
According to Work Horse’s lawsuit, the developer it assigned the project to failed to make required payments and failed to close.
That developer disputed Work Horse’s claims and said it had already spent hundreds of thousands of dollars advancing the project.
The relationship fell apart.
Work Horse moved to regain control of the property.
The assigned developer later filed a $307,000 mechanic’s lien on that property for engineering and surveying work it said it had funded.
Those are disputed court claims. I don’t know which party will ultimately prevail.
But Princeton raises an important distinction:
Being involved in a development is not the same thing as having the financial capacity to carry that development through.
And that brings this back to Kewaskum.
After years of discussion surrounding Smokey’s Crossing, Work Horse still has not purchased the land.
Land & Resource Consulting, the original engineer involved with Smokey’s Crossing, has a $208,189.76 construction lien docketed against the Kewaskum property.
The court record I reviewed showed no satisfaction of that lien.
And, as previously noted in my other posts, LRC and Work Horse remain in federal litigation.
LRC alleges more than $400,000 in unpaid engineering services across six Work Horse developments, including Kewaskum and Hutchinson.
Work Horse disputes those allegations and has brought counterclaims of its own.
So these are allegations, not findings of wrongdoing.
But now step back and look at the pattern.
Hutchinson:
A development pursued. Information the City says it needed wasn’t provided. The property didn’t close. And its City Administrator told me they wouldn’t be interested in working with Work Horse again.
Princeton:
Property under contract. Purchase and engineering obligations shifted to another developer. That relationship collapsed. Litigation followed. Then a $307,000 mechanic’s lien was filed for engineering and surveying costs that developer says it funded.
Kewaskum:
Years of planning and approvals, but the land still hasn’t been purchased. The original engineer has a $208,189.76 lien docketed against the property, while that engineer and Work Horse are now in federal litigation.
And zoom out further:
That federal case includes allegations of unpaid engineering services across six separate developments.
Different projects.
Different circumstances.
Different parties.
I’m not claiming they’re identical.
I’m pointing out what keeps appearing around them:
Land under contract but not necessarily purchased.
Projects dependent on other parties to fund or complete obligations.
Disputes over engineering costs.
Failed or disputed closings.
Liens.
Litigation.
And projects advancing significantly through concepts, approvals and financial projections before the underlying development is completed.
Any one of those things could have an explanation.
Maybe all of them do.
But when similar questions keep appearing across different projects, different states and different communities, asking whether Kewaskum has independently verified the developer’s financial capacity, funding structure and completed-development track record isn’t an accusation.
It’s due diligence.
And I want to make one correction of my own.
I previously took the Board’s projected $11.25 million in Village revenue over twenty years and divided it evenly.
That comes out to approximately $560,000 per year.
Billy correctly pointed out that the revenue will be skewed rather than received evenly.
He was right.
I used $560,000 as simple math to put $11.25 million over twenty years into perspective. I should have made clearer that it was an average, not a prediction that the Village would receive that amount every year.
Realistically, the first five to seven years could be closer to $200,000–$300,000 annually, while later years could potentially reach $600,000–$700,000 as the development builds out.
I expect other people to stand behind their numbers, so I need to do the same with mine.
But correcting the number doesn’t remove my concern.
It sharpens it.
If Kewaskum receives substantially less revenue during those first five to seven years while roads, infrastructure, public safety demands and Village services increase:
Can the Village maintain what is being built and provide those increased services during those years on only a fraction of the projected full-buildout revenue?
Because the later revenue only arrives if the later development arrives.
That’s why all of this connects.
The track record matters because the buildout matters.
The financing matters because the buildout matters.
The land purchase matters because the buildout matters.
And the buildout matters because Kewaskum’s projected return depends on it.
I don’t expect this Board to have known two or three years ago what couldn’t have been known then.
Some of these events hadn’t happened.
Some of these court records didn’t exist.
It wasn’t there to know.
But it’s here now.
I’m not against Smokey’s Crossing.
I’m not against development.
And I’m not claiming this project will fail.
I’m asking something much simpler:
Knowing what we know today, are we still comfortable with the level of risk Kewaskum is being asked to accept?
Maybe every concern above has an answer.
I genuinely hope it does.
But if the information has changed, our level of scrutiny should be allowed to change with it.
Two years ago, we couldn’t see the pattern we can see today.
Now we can.
And what matters is what we do with it.
God bless you, and God bless Kewaskum.
Jack Felten
Kewaskum, WI
WCI COMMENTING RULES OF ETIQUETTE:
While open and honest debate is encouraged here, Washington County Insider asks that you comply with the following rules for posting. Those who do not comply will have their posts removed which may result in being banned from commenting.
Washington County Insider will not publish comments that:
Are considered likely to provoke, attack, or offend others. This is known as “trolling.” Trollers know when they are trolling, and so do we. *See definition of “troll” below. If you notice a few consistent blog trolls disappear, you’ll know why.
Are sexually explicit, abusive, or otherwise objectionable.
Contains inappropriate or vulgar language that is likely to offend.
Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes breach of copyright, defamation, and contempt of court.
Advertise products or services for profit.
Are seen to impersonate someone else.
Repeatedly post the same or similar messages (‘spam’)
Include personal contact details such as telephone numbers and postal or email addresses.
Include a link or photo that has not been approved by the editor prior to posting.
Are considered campaigning. See also “trolling” above.
Are unrelated to the topic.
NOTES:
Just because your comment doesn’t show up right away doesn’t mean you’re being censored. When you post a comment, it must first go through our filtering software. If it fails, your comment goes into a queue for manual approval.
Just because a comment or advertisement is on the site, doesn’t mean WCI endorses it.
The above rules are not intended to stop criticism or dissenters, but rather to stop those who are incapable of participating in a civilized manner.
*Trolling: a troll is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal, on-topic discussion,[3] often for the troll’s amusement. (source: Wikipedia)
All letters must include a US Postal address and direct cell/phone number for record keeping.
Letters to the editor should focus on the candidate you support and less on slighting the opponent.
All letters to the editor for the November 2026 General Election must be submitted by the end of business October 19, 2026.
Letters to the editor require a US Postal address and direct cell phone number for record-keeping purposes only. Respectfully, letters to the editor must be from taxpayers and residents living in Washington County, Wisconsin.
