Transcript
How Do, Or How Should Elections Work? (Hour 3)
Daybreak w/ Brian and Jamie · Fri Feb 27, 2026
You're listening to Civic Media.
You can tune into any of our live shows on any radio station across the state with the Civic Media app.
Find us in your phone's app store and listen anytime,
anywhere.
Let's not get into that.
We got to turn to a new lawsuit.
It seems every day there's a new lawsuit against the Trump administration, a coalition of health and environmental groups, including some from Wisconsin, sued the EPA Wednesday, challenging the rescinding of a scientific finding that has been the central basis for U.S.
actions to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change.
To give us some background out of that, Amy Berrio joins us.
She's Communications Director for Clean Wisconsin.
She's host of the Defender Project, and she's
working on Clean Wisconsin's lawsuit against the EPA.
Amy, thank you for being here.
We appreciate it.
So let's get to the nuts and bolts of the lawsuit.
What are the claims in this lawsuit?
I mean, it's pretty clear that the EPA has no scientific or legal basis to rescind the endangerment finding.
So basically, the endangerment finding came out of a 2007 Supreme Court decision, US Supreme Court, Massachusetts versus EPA.
And that finding basically said that the EPA, your mission in federal statute is to protect public health.
And under the Clean Air Act, if
greenhouse gases are a danger to public health, then you have a responsibility to set regulations and enforce those regulations to protect people.
And so they gave the EPA marching orders, okay, go do some scientific studies and figure out, do these greenhouse gases harm public health?
And that is what the 2009 Endangerment Finding is.
It is that scientific analysis and finding that yes,
greenhouse gases hurt public health.
So this has all been litigated.
It's all been decided.
It's all been researched.
And in fact, you know, if you think back on what we've experienced here in Wisconsin since 2009, you can see that there's just more and more and more evidence that these greenhouse gases are hurting us.
You know, we've seen an explosion in tick-borne illnesses.
I think a quadrupled number of Lyme disease cases over the past 20 years.
We've seen threefold increase in severe storms that caused more than a billion dollars in damage here in Wisconsin since 1980.
And we've all experienced that toxic wildfire smoke that we've had the past few summers.
In some cases, Wisconsin has had the worst air quality in the country and in the world in some moments during our past summers.
This kind of notion that, oh, never mind, these greenhouse gases are just fine and they're not harming us.
I think we all know that that's just not true.
It's frustrating because that's always the line that you get when you hear about an environmental regulation and the forces that are pushing back against it.
But oh, this is going to cost us too much money.
But what we see here in Wisconsin and all across the country is there are health costs associated with pollution.
Certainly, I just mentioned storms at a billion dollars apiece.
We know that we're paying costs every day health costs, cleanup costs, you know,
tick prevention costs but this is a lazy way to frame the issue to say well you know wow that coal plant might have to put some pollution controls on it and that might cost the you know coal plant power plant powers that be money so we just shouldn't do it ignores all of the impacts that come from people being exposed to that pollution.
I'm just going to pull it up because we're joining a coalition of groups.
We're the only one in Wisconsin, but it's the American Public Health Association, the American Long Association, Alliance of Nurses for a Healthy Environment.
So you can see that.
These are public health groups because there is wide acknowledgement that this is a public health issue, plus, you know, a number of environmental groups, the Clean Air Council, Friends of the Earth, Physicians for Social Responsibility.
You know, so this is a, I think.
If we acknowledge that it's a wide variety of groups, we can really see what the harms are of rolling this back.
The EPA had signaled that it was coming, so we were ready just a couple of days after the repeal.
We filed suit, and I imagine that other groups will file suit as well.
groups have 30 days from the publication of that rule to to announce legal action and to file and so we're not we're still in that 30 day period so but again I think what we have to realize is the EPA's mission is to protect
protect public health.
That is what is set forth in federal statute.
That is why it exists as an agency.
It's not as the new EPA administrator might say to make the United States the leader in AI.
That has nothing to do with the EPA's mission.
Its mission is not to prop up.
Coil coal oil and gas industries.
That's not the mission The mission is to protect public health no matter what the Trump administration says or the EPA administrator says about you know unleashing the power of American business If you look at what the EPA is supposed to do there is no legal basis for it to take the action is taken
history.
And obviously groups like Clean Wisconsin call it the biggest attack on federal climate authority.
What is, you've mentioned some of the increases that we've seen and some of the impacts we've already started to see even under the endangerment finding.
But what, if we lose these regulations completely, Amy, what does that look like for a state like Wisconsin?
But we have to keep in mind that this is the EPA's main tool for doing something about climate change.
And I think that's important to understand.
If you take that away, then what are we doing?
This is the biggest public health crisis that we have ever faced.
And to take away the tool for the government to react to that and to start taking steps to control that and to prevent harm, then that's a really
extremely concerning thing.
And this is part of a big picture of rollbacks and really failing to protect public health on a number of levels, so if you're worried about.
PFAS forever chemicals.
Well those standards that got passed by the EPA a few years ago are now in the process of being repealed.
If you're worried about mercury coming from power plants or getting into the fish you eat, well the Trump administration is getting ready to roll back the mercury and air toxic standards that were tightened just a few years ago.
So if you're worried about
Any of these things that you're exposed to, pesticides, that's been in the news lately that a new pesticide has been allowed to come, or not new, but a concerning pesticide has been allowed to come on the market.
There's a whole host of this kind of action that's been happening.
It's a list that's almost too long for me to name and I'd have to go spend several days putting it together.
But we are really seeing.
up and on all fronts.
And I think we realized that when the EPA administrator, Lee Zeldin, came out as soon as he was confirmed and said, OK, the EPA, this is what we got to do.
We got to unleash the power of business and the auto industry in the United States.
And we have to make the United States the capital of AI.
And that is so far from what the EPA is supposed to do.
Nobody wants more mercury in their air.
Nobody wants more greenhouse gases.
Nobody wants more storms and toxic smoke.
Not one person.
There is nobody who is saying, please give me more pollution.
And I think we all have to understand that that's what we're getting.
Amy, I want to go back to something you said at the beginning of our conversation in case somebody's just joining us.
And forgive me if we're rehashing a little bit, but you mentioned this has all been adjudicated before.
All of this has been investigated, researched, ruled on by the courts.
What possible footing can the Trump administration have to fight this lawsuit?
So that was the law of the land.
Yeah, should be it.
And then the EPA doing its due diligence, putting together a real thorough scientific finding, the endangerment finding that, yes, greenhouse gases are a danger.
to us, to people.
So there is no, certainly no scientific basis, no legal basis for any of this to be happening, but I don't think that that is what the concern is of the Trump administration.
I think it's, let's go ahead and get rid of all this stuff and then see how far we can take it.
And we've seen that in a number of ways from the Trump administration.
So, you know, in our minds, this case,
should not move forward if anybody takes a look at it on its face.
you know, we feel like that they certainly should rule that the endangerment of finding will need to stand.
She's the communications director for Clean Wisconsin.
She also hosts the Defender podcast.
She's part of helping with this lawsuit against the Trump EPA.
CleanWisconsin.org to check out some of the work that they're doing over there.
If we take a look at this on mostly an everyday scale too of what this can mean, we're talking
basically eliminating standards for cars and trucks.
We've seen a lot of progress in electric vehicles in this country.
But what could it mean for on those practical standards of cars, trucks?
We look at power plants, the gas, oil companies, data centers moving into Wisconsin.
How does all of that play with this rollback of these regulations?
Yeah, so if you want to talk about your everyday experiences, well, first of all, most car and truck makers in this moment have implemented these standards already.
Again, this is not new stuff, but what you'll see is now particularly new power plants that are being constructed and maybe new cars that come on the market don't have to worry about meeting these kinds of emission standards.
which should be really concerning because, for example, with cars and trucks, some of these greenhouse gases that are admitted come with other types of pollutants or themselves can mix with other types of pollutants and cause ground-level ozone, for example.
And Southeastern Wisconsin is already in non-attainment for ozone in this part of the state for federal ozone regulations.
So that means, you know, ground-level ozone, I don't...
If you've got asthma, you're really aware of what that means for your health.
There will be days when you can't go outside if we're in a bad ozone level, especially in the hot days of the summer.
So there will be an immediate impact on public health as some of these protections start falling away.
Again, there's just, as I say this all the time, I feel like nobody's saying.
Please give me more car exhaust.
Please give me more of that pollution.
Let me have more days when I can't go outside in the summer in Wisconsin.
But that's what you're going to see.
And again,
I think there's a recognition that technology is moving past this moment.
Burning coal is not something anybody wants to do anymore.
Having cars and trucks that are making it terrible to go outside is not something people want anymore.
So this isn't responding to what people are asking for.
It's really responding to what coal, oil, and gas companies are asking for.
If you're old enough like me to remember before all the emissions regulations went in on cars and trucks, it wasn't pleasant.
Amy Berrio is the communications director for Clean Wisconsin.
She hosts the Defender podcast and she's working with Clean Wisconsin on the lawsuit against the EPA.
Cleanwisconsin.org is the website.
Amy, thank you for being here this morning.
Have a wonderful weekend.
We appreciate your time.
Thank you.
Thank you.
involves one of your favorite burger places.
Want to join in on the conversation?
Call or text 855-75-CIVIC.
Now back to Brian and Jamie.
Starship said that.
They were knee-deep in the hoopla.
It used to be Jefferson Airplane, then there were Jefferson Starship, then there were just Starship.
Starship actually was knee-deep in the hoopla.
And there's your abstract musical reference for the day.
You're welcome.
Send all your cards and letters
Ha ha ha!
Uh, yesterday, we were telling you that Burger King had decided to give out their CEO's phone number so you could call and leave him a message and either
compliment or complain or have suggestions and allegedly they would get back to you.
When we were skeptical, I'm not going to lie.
So on the air we called and Jamie and I left a nice message.
And Jamie, all of a sudden we get the gloop, the show gets a message from you in the
executive assistant here at Civic Media Megan.
She sends me a message while I was sitting at home working and she says, hey, you got a message from a guy named Tom at Burger King and she attaches the message.
And so Tom Curtis is the CEO of Burger King and we left him a very nice voicemail explaining who we are, what we were doing and he actually responded and we have that voicemail that we want to play for you right now.
So this is cut five.
No, he didn't address some of our concerns.
It was.
First of all, I complimented the Whopper, which we have a follow-up story on that as well.
Yes.
But the royal raps, the crunch raps.
said the tortilla is too big for the amount of chicken in there and I understand for it's a low priced item you're not gonna put a ton of chicken but then make the wrap a little smaller so it seems more bountiful
he'll put up with some y'all going, and I had a tomato one time, Tom, and it had a lot of green.
And listen, I like a fried green tomato, but I don't like a tomato on my, a green tomato on my whopper.
It's a little too chewy.
I like my whopper tomatoes very ripe so that I can bite right through them.
And they kind of, they kind of just ooze in with the other condiments.
You know what I'm saying, Tom?
Can we make a check?
Is there any way you can only buy
But the nice part is, is Burger King is actually listening.
They are actually, they want your thoughts, they want your suggestions.
So 305-874-0520.
If you want to call and complain about your two green tomato on your Whopper as well.
305-874-0520.
But they are actually listening because this is where the next story regarding Burger King comes in.
This is a great story as well because obviously they're home.
of the Whopper, Brian, which is one of your favorites.
They are
Well, now, because of you, American burger eaters, myself included, they've listened to our complaints.
which I didn't realize was a complaint, but some people are upset.
They're making subtle changes to the whopper.
Subtle is the key word, but they will be noticeable to the whopper.
So a lot of people, Jamie, I don't know if this happened with the chicken whopper.
People would say they were too mushed,
Oh.
and a creamier mayonnaise, which I didn't, and they said franchisees were suggesting the creamier mayonnaise, it seems like a higher end compliment to the other condiments.
Back when I was a big fatty, I used to order extra mayo on my whoppers, and man, I didn't mind that it was, I thought it was creamy because it's spread around, but so they're doing that.
And the
Network.
All facts, no fiction.
It's Daybreak with Brian and Jamie.
Twice a one show, Jamie.
It's obvious that I'm doing a lot of research.
Rub it off on you.
I love it too, because I want...
did a lot of research on this topic yesterday and I don't understand why it's not a thing because everybody agrees, I think, that our political system is broken.
But the question is, is it really broken?
Or is it just functioning the way it was designed to function?
If you've ever looked down at your ballot and you held your nose, you're like, oh, I got to pick between the lesser two evils.
You might have thought that there's got to be a better way.
Well, five states do think that, and they found the answer.
It's open primaries and ranked voting.
Now, could it work here in Wisconsin and across the country?
Tracy Hunter from Voters First Wisconsin is here to talk about it.
Tracy, thanks for being here.
We appreciate the time.
And again,
It's an amazing concept, but before we get started briefly, what is voters first Wisconsin?
What do you guys do?
Yes, thanks for having me.
By the way, I'm excited to let people know more about this Final Five voting concept.
Yeah, Voters First Wisconsin is a Wisconsin-based organization, all volunteer, nonprofit, cross-partisan, bipartisan.
We don't have any political leaning.
And our goal is to create better election systems, actually, to change things, not just to promote civics.
So we have three different things we're working on.
Today, we're going to be talking about
We're also involved in the money in politics, which I heard your show yesterday.
Thanks for that.
And then also Fair Maps.
We're doing a lot with Fair Maps.
It's working exactly as it was designed.
So explain that to us.
And what does that mean?
You know, because he alluded to sometimes you just vote for the candidates that you have to because it's a lesser of two evils.
But is that actually the purpose of our elections?
Because we want to obviously we'll get into how we make them better.
But explain that phrase to
us.
Sure.
The.
Problem that final five voting is trying to address is, it has to do with how we do our primaries.
And when primaries were introduced, it was actually for a good reason back during the progressive era.
The two major parties have found out how to kind of use that to their advantage.
And at this point, they have used the primaries, created a primary system that's a duopoly.
It's a monopoly times two, right?
to guarantee that they're the only ones that ever have a chance of winning.
Um, and, um, I can explain, you know, how that works, uh, take about 60 seconds at some point.
Yeah, do it.
Yeah, let's
go for it.
Yeah.
So let's talk about how the current system works.
So today, um, we have a primary election either in the spring or the summer, uh, and, and, uh, the parties run those and then we have a general election, um, in the fall in, in the primary election, um,
the parties exert a great deal of control over who gets nominated.
They get to direct the money, they get to direct the dark money, they get to direct who they nominate, and they almost always get the way.
Also in primaries, only 10% of the voters, the eligible voters across the country, actually vote in primaries.
So that's a very small segment that are picking
the winners of the primaries and they tend to be more partisan you know we all probably vote in primaries that's a good thing but they tend to be more partisan and then what happens then we usually get um two
candidates picked from by the parties and they advanced to the general election and that's when most people show up two-thirds in usually in presidential elections and often we look at the ballots for president or congress or whatever and it's like you say the lesser lesser of two evils and we say none of the above and they say why is the system broke well they're they're controlling it to make sure that they're partisan very partisan candidates make it to the general election and one more thing
If you talk about the US Congress, the House of Representatives, five out of six districts across the country are guaranteed to be one by one party or the other.
Not necessarily do the gerrymandering, but just do the demographics.
It's either going to be a blue or a red.
So whoever wins the primary in that party is guaranteed victory.
So 10% of the voters plus the dark money and the party leadership are picking, you know, 85% of
of the Congress and that's why the number of bills they're getting done is going to used to be around seven or eight hundred fifty years ago last year there were less than a hundred.
Now when did primaries become a weapon too because we never used to hear about primaries uses a verb but now you know now we do and that's another part of the issue one is.
they're using it as an attack.
And two, if you're an independent, you don't get to vote in primaries because you have to pick a side for your ballot if you were to go vote, which is another lesser of two evil things.
If I want to vote in the primary and I'm an independent, I have to go in and either pick a Republican or a
Democrat.
I don't know when the idea of primarying an existing candidate to make sure that they don't get reelected came in, but it's been used for a while and it's been used a lot lately.
The other thing I wanted to highlight was both for candidates running for office, they know what they have to do in order to get elected, who they have to satisfy.
It's that 10% post money.
If they make it in office,
especially in Congress.
They only have two years before the next election.
They're really starting their reelection campaign immediately.
And they know who they have to please to get reelected.
So it makes total sense that they don't really care that much about their constituents because they don't need their constituents.
They just need those others.
A majority of the states, first of all, we're talking with Tracy Hunter from votersfirstwisconsin, votersfirstwi.org.
A majority of states right now have those closed primaries, speaking of the independent voters.
But there's only a handful of states right now that use fully open primaries.
So how does that compare to what you're proposing with final five voting, Tracy?
Yeah, that's an important distinction.
So let me explain how final five voting works So it does have an open primaries concept, but that's not really what makes it effective It it also has a rank ranking component, but that's isn't the same as rank choice voting necessarily It's just something that we use so the way that final five voting works is there are two changes we would make To how we do elections we would change the primary and we would change the general election in the primary We would no longer have a column for each party
Everybody would be on one single column, and all voters would get to pick one candidate just like today, and it would be completely open.
You don't have to designate that you're leaning left, leaning right, leaning independent, or green, or whatever.
Everybody gets to pick one.
Here's the important thing.
Five candidates advance to the general election, not two.
Five and you may very well get two from team red and two from team blue and independent But they all move on so now you have a competition in the general election for the best ideas In fact, you have people from the same party competing for ideas.
They don't just get to win because their party picked them The other half then is what happens in the general election now we have five
There's no more guarantee that every party is going to be represented there.
It's really the five most popular primary winners.
And they have to compete all the way through the general election.
And the voters use a ranking system there.
So there's five there, and they get to pick their first choice, second, third, fourth, fifth.
You don't have to vote for five, but it's to your advantage to do that.
And in order to win in the general election, you need a majority.
That's huge.
because you know that whoever wins
favored by most people.
So if somebody wins in the first round, great, we have our winner.
If not, let's suppose somebody only got 40% and the rest were split out, then what happens is the lowest vote-getter candidate is removed and there's second place votes.
Everybody that voted for that candidate that was removed, now we take their second choice.
So their vote is still alive.
It gets added to the other four.
And we look again, do we have a winner?
And you keep doing that until you have a majority winner.
It depends how the law is written.
But that wouldn't be any different than what we have today.
Because conceptually, today we could have a tie with the left.
So would it be
Another important question.
It would be an instant runoff.
And so it would be calculated, would take seconds of processing.
And it's auditable at every step.
If you're going to try and game this somehow in the software, sometimes you hear that criticism.
It would have audit steps all the way through, and it would be audited.
But it would be instantaneous.
All of the voting systems, the tabulation machines in Wisconsin have the ability to support this ranking mechanism.
They may have to do software upgrade, but the software is available.
Correct.
Everything else is the same.
Right.
So in order to win, you need broad support.
You can no longer just get that 10% plus the money.
So that means you have to appeal to people across
the spectrum and in order to do that you have to be going door to door you have to be doing more local campaigning today like in my district they don't even campaign it's almost scary
issues so it opens up um access to these these candidates so that they have
But I know one of the other things that So you're talking about getting out and campaigning it also affects negative camp because we all complain about the negative ads Oh always sees negative ads that changes to when you have this because as you mentioned you may have two candidates who are Republican two or Democrats then you're thrown in independent You can't attack everybody
Right.
So the question, you know, is this going to help with the money and politics problem?
We think it should.
It's too early to tell.
We don't have the data yet that supports that.
But common sense would say, like you just brought up, if you're a big donor, today all you have to do is throw it into one pot.
Now you have to spread it around.
So number one, you may not be as excited about spreading it around.
But if it's not effective, and number two, there's going to be less money going to those candidates, more visibility.
support both of, from the same party, you know, they're going to be competing with each other.
So, you know, that may be cut both ways for the money you donated.
I want to take a look back at Alaska, because we were talking about that a little bit before the technical issues.
And since they adopted a system similar to this, because this is kind of a test case, right?
Alaska has, have we seen signs that elected officials are working across the party lines more because of the way that they are voting in their elections?
Right.
This is one of the most exciting things about the Alaska story.
So one of the first things they did was they formed a bipartisan ruling coalition.
So the way it works in every other state is whatever parties in control, they set the agenda for the whole session, right?
They control everything.
In Alaska, this final four system they have there encouraged so much
cooperation that the extremists on both sides didn't want to participate.
So what they did is they formed a coalition in the middle from both parties and they set the agenda.
And this is true both in their assembly and in their senate.
They've had
huge success there.
They did election reform last year.
Who's doing election reform, right?
They had a balanced budget.
They had a huge number of women that were encouraged to run and win.
And in fact, their state Senate has more females than males for the first time.
The indigenous people there, which is a huge percentage of their population, feels much more represented.
You know, just it looks like a win across the board.
I went to a referendum and the citizens of Alaska went, no, we like how this worked.
And so they passed it.
And so it stands.
Tracy Hunter is with us.
He's voters first Wisconsin.
If you want to learn about final five voting, which sounds like a great idea to me, go to votersfirstwi.org, votersfirstwi.org, and learn about it.
Because once you start learning about it,
It makes a lot of sense.
Tracy, thanks for
listening to Daybreak.
I am Jamie Martenson.
And I'm Brian Noonan.
It's 8.52
So we are premiering or debuting, we should say, Dairyland Diaries.
So every Friday at this time, we are going to highlight some of the stories you might have missed from the week around just around the state.
These are local Wisconsin stories focusing on real people and stories that we hope are going to give you a little emotional lift to send you off into the weekend because, you know, we're dealing with a lot of stuff.
Sometimes it's nice to have a feel good story as we as we go.
This is coming off the heels of the Olympics.
We have the Paralympics coming up and Matt Tombs is a lifetime Wisconsin resident from the Wausau area.
He played for Team USA's wheelchair curling team in 2022 in Beijing at the Winter Paralympics.
He's heading to Cortina, Italy to participate in this year's games which are happening March 6th through the 15th.
He recently did an interview with WPR and he said while the venues for the Paralympic Games may be enormous compared to his local place.
the game is exactly the same.
He is the skip for the wheelchair curling team, so he's essentially the captain.
It's his job to strategize how the team are going to throw its rocks, not a euphemism, and he usually throws the final two in the match.
So he went to the, he discovered curling at the Warsaw Curling Club.
Because they were offering a little clinic and come learn to hurl.
And so he and his wife went down there.
Hurl is hurling is the Irish game and to hurl is another verb altogether.
So they go down he and his wife and at first the people at the center weren't sure how to do it with a person in a wheelchair, but they figured it all out and they did some experimentation and he was hooked and he said between the
Olympic and Paralympic curling.
There's not too many differences.
They use sweepers to help guide the rock in the Olympics.
In the wheelchair curling, there's no sweeping.
It's just however much weight and the line that you put on the rock.
And once you let go, it's all in there.
So good luck to Matt Dooms as he heads
So congratulations to him.
I hope he brings home a medal.
We also have a whole burger fast.
Come on now.
This is gonna who doesn't love a good burger fest.
It's gonna take place in Seymour, but it's actually moving from its traditional August spot on to September of this year The city's annual celebration as the home of the burger will be on September 19th I feel like I need to go check out something that calls himself a place.
I know the home of the burger Did
I did not know Seymour.
I don't I'll be honest.
I'm not a Wisconsin native So somebody'd have to tell me even we're seeing
more is actually at.
I wanna learn on this show too.
So according to a February 22nd announcement on the home of the burger Facebook page, which now I definitely have to go check out, they say this year we're building something even bigger, more fun and more community focused than ever.
So there's been plans for incorporating a fall festival type activity into all of this.
This is the 36th annual event by the way.
There's a harvest style farmer's market, pumpkins for the kiddos and adults.
bobbing for apples and a lot of other fall family activities.
And if you visit, you can expect a little involvement from some vendors, some local businesses.
There's also live music, some expanded beer selections.
And yeah, the festival has also confirmed the ketchup slide will be back when someone asked in the Facebook.
I was
So that'll be fun.
Now, we both saw this story.
And this is another good story.
This is great.
It comes to you from Green Bay.
A mother and daughter have raised over.
over $20,000 to open a Puerto Rican food business as a recent TikTok video went viral because, Jamie, as you can imagine.
big government and big regulation tried to stomp
The mom and daughter are Rebecca and Judy Valentin.
They launched a cafe on February 1st from the community center inside the fort at the rail yard in Green Bay where they are residents.
Just a couple of hours after starting to sell their empanadas though, some neighbors called the police who shut them down for not having proper licensing.
A retail food license or food processing plant license is required to make and sell food items in public, according to the Wisconsin Food Processing, blah, blah, blah.
Right.
Rebecca said she thought the LLC creation and the Safe Certification, which certifies food service professionals, was enough to start selling their food.
And then a guy got hold of this on social media, Brian.
He sent it out and people were not happy.
So Jake started a GoFundMe campaign with a $20,000 goal.
As of the 15th, they had reached that goal.
They got $20,000 $410.
And then so now they're going to use that money to get permits and to buy a small food truck or they're going to rent out a building with the community kitchen.
And it will serve authentic Puerto Rican fried snacks, including empadillas, those
So pastries, including...
Pastelitos, which is a small version of an empanada with sweet filling.
So good for them.
That's a nice story, and it's entrepreneurial, and it's people helping people.
And it's a beautiful day.
Media Network.
but it can be hard to find news about your local community.
Civic Media is dedicated to providing quality local and state news coverage across Wisconsin.
With the Civic Media app, you can get notifications about local stories that matter to you and your community.
Find the free Civic Media app in your phone's app store and choose notifications from the menu to tell us what kind of news you want to hear about.
