The Rock County Board of Supervisors voted to authorize the county administrator to apply for the State of Wisconsin Grants for Local Projects program to seek funding for the fairgrounds grandstand reconstruction and a park shelter. The board added the park shelter back into the application and declined to add a proposed Rock County Jail solar project after extended debate and questions about roof condition, security and oversight.

The action to allow filing the applications passed 16–9 on the motion introduced by Supervisor Mawhinney and seconded from the floor. Earlier amendment votes returned the park shelter to the proposed projects (passed 16–9) and rejected an amendment to include a roughly $300,000 solar installation on the jail (failed 9–16).

The board considered technical and substantive edits that originated in finance committee. Corp. Counsel Rich told members that the version on the table included committee amendments and technical punctuation corrections, and that supervisors could propose additional changes during the board meeting. Administrator Light and staff emphasized that the vote before the board was to permit administrators to apply for the grants, not to accept awards or commit to construction if funding is offered. "Applying is just one step out of many," Administrator Light said. "It doesn't mean you're going to accept any of them."

Supporters of including the park shelter and grandstand argued the county should pursue every funding opportunity. Supervisor Woodman said approving the grant applications could allow the county to "recoup" previous expenditures tied to the grandstand roof project, which staff and supervisors identified as roughly $400,000 in potential recovery if the county receives funding.

Supporters of the jail solar idea, including environmental management members, said federal tax credits and consultant analysis made a near-term solar project attractive. Brent Sutherland, who presented the county's review of energy options, said a consultant had vetted a smaller, roughly $300,000 solar project that would produce an estimated one‑fifth of the jail's power over its lifetime and that timing mattered for tax credits: "If we got these tax credits start before July 4, we could start having it paid off in 14 years instead of 21." Sutherland said tax credits and grant support could reduce the county's net cost substantially.

Opponents— including those expressing operational concerns in the jail chain of command—pressed for caution. The sheriff, who asked to address the board during debate, said he was open to exploring solar on county buildings but raised multiple operational and safety questions about placing panels on the jail roof: maintenance responsibility, roof leaks, who would be allowed on the roof, and whether the jail inspector would approve such work. "I have concerns with that," the sheriff told the board, noting he had not yet received a full review from the jail administrator. Several supervisors said those unresolved concerns and the short timeline argued against adding the jail solar project to the application at this time.

Board members also discussed the application deadline; staff said the county needed to submit materials by the next day to be eligible. Counsel and administrators repeatedly framed the board's vote as permission to apply, not an acceptance of grant awards should they be made. Counsel explained that if the county were later awarded funds and wanted to accept them it would be a separate decision requiring budget amendment and, if construction were proposed, other approvals such as a two‑thirds vote where applicable.

The resolution as amended directs county staff to file applications for the fairgrounds grandstand reconstruction and park shelter projects. The motion carried 16 in favor and 9 opposed. Supervisors who wanted to pursue solar said they would continue to explore other building options and vet technical issues if a future opportunity emerged.

The board completed the vote and moved on to adjournment.