So, I’m sick, but I can’t skip this . . . so it will be whatever it is . . . probably brief. And definitely un-edited, as most of my posts are!
GETTING STARTED
The first 25 minutes are roll call, suspending the rules, reading poetry, declaring March Women’s History Month, recognizing Bill Vanderbrook for his years of service to the city.
CONSENT AGENDA
Everything is passed as noted on the agenda except
– Public Hearings – 2 – 14
– Items 15 (appointment for someone outside the city) and 67 (budget amendment) are extra-majority and recorded as unanimous.
– 65 – easement for bus shelter – recommended to adopt.
– 70 – will be referred to the next meeting to March 21.
– 34 – Lease for Olbrich park biergarten
– 63 – Connect Madison Economic Development Plan – they will be giving a presentation.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
#4 – Visions – placed on file without prejudice.
Passes.
#5 is placed on the table to get other public hearing items, then they will combine this with item 34 and each speaker will get 8 minutes to speak.
#6 – Hail Mary Sports Grill – recommendation is to deny. No registrations.
#7 – AC Hotel – No registrations. Recommendation is to grant.
#8 – Eno Vino – No registrations. Recommendation is to grant.
Items 6 – 8 pass as recommended.
Items 10 – 12 & 14gistrations, they are all granted. 8 and 14 are separated.
#9 – recess and refer to next council meeting, the application is still incomplete. Passes.
#13 – adds that they will close by 9pm, which was the motion at ALRC, but it didn’t make it.
OLBRICH GARDENS – #5 and #34
Sara Eskrich recuses herself. Mo Cheeks discloses that he serves on a non-profit board with one of the investors.
Mike Verveer moves to suspend the rules and combine the items and allow 8 minutes to speak. That is approved.
Verveer moves to grant with conditions the liquor license and approve item #34.
Public Testimony
There are 25 speakers (3 hours and 20 minutes if everyone takes their time). Verveer says they should hear from the applicants first. 16 minutes is given to the two speakers. Some technical difficulties slow things down. We’re 40 minutes into the meeting at this point.
Mike Bare – They are doing their dog and pony show/sales pitch about why biergartens are great. Honestly, I don’t care, that isn’t what this is about for me. So, I’m not typing it. They will be open 4 – 10 Mon – Thurs, 2 – 10 Fri, noon – 10 Sat and Sun. They will have last call at 9:00, stop serving at 9:30. They are local, they are hiring staff, they will be trained. They have proposed rules – show respect for neighbors and park, all alcohol in biergarten, no unaccompanied minors. There have been changes made – based on neighbors, staff, committees etc. Name is Biergarten at Olbrich, amplification is PA1 level only on Friday and Saturday, they will have ropes to designate the area, they reduced the capacity. They will have 20 ft buffer between premises and shoreline. They will follow parks seasonal hours. They will have yard games as well, not just the seating area. Restrooms are open to all members of the public, no bringing alcohol in. They show the overview of the park and the context of the neighborhood and pretty pictures of what is there now. They show more picture of what they want it to be like and biergartens around the country and in Germany. They show that $234,160 of benefit to the city over the 7 years plus they will clean and stock the restrooms. They say this is their 16th meeting. They were at ALRC three times. The proposal has been thoroughly vetted. They have addressed many of the concerns of those who are opposed, they made significant adjustments to the plan, the opponents may not think that they are enough. He says there are also supporters. More dog and pony show . . . they are great, just wonderful, awesome, just ask them, I think they are promising unicorns that fart rainbows. (Sorry, remember I”m sick . . . )
They are going to do the rest of the registrants and take questions at the end. Slips are sorted by support and oppose and he will alternate between them. Mayor says that the ethics issues involving Sarah Eskrich is being taken up by the Ethics Committee and not appropriate to discuss at this meeting.
Speaker (Tim) against asks that they be closed on night per week, have no amplified music, and maximum capacity of 175 based on what Mike Baer said at the previous meetings. He thinks they need to close before 10pm if the park closes at 10 pm. Neighbor is concerned about issues they have had with alcohol in the park in the past. He thinks the city is paying $30,000 for improvements, plus 5 city employees putting in a crushed stone path ($11,000) but supplies – $33,000. Why are we putting in this for a private business, he worked for the city for years, this is a misuse of city employees.
Speaker (Tom) in support talks about experience with Memorial Union. They only had 3 problems in 20 years, under age people, transients who have been drinking elsewhere and come in, and loud bands. The capacity there is 800 – 1000, beer is sold by the pitcher, they serve late and its a younger, student crowd. He thinks that the 14 conditions placed on the license by the ALRC address these issues. They have almost no police calls. Our Madison experience with a biergarten is good. He is characterizing opposition as an organized few and says the majority support this. There’s been lots of public meetings, he’s disappointed that people aren’t recognizing the changes that have been made, but happy people are participating. He’d hate to see the innovation be curtailed before they can try something new in the Parks department. The 4 gardens in Milwaukee have brought in $1M a year to the Milwaukee Parks department.
Carl wants peace love and happiness. No giraffes tonight. People are full of ego and pride and can’t solve problems with their head, need to use their heart and soul . . . I’m a hippy by many standards, but I can’t do it. Remember, I’m sick. No patience . . . not for 8 minutes . . . ironically, he’s registered neither in support or opposed, so I have no idea why he’s talking. He wants to reopen the master planning process for the park and strakweather creek watershed.
Ed waiting for computer hook up – so they take another speaker.
Jessica has two little kids, goes to the park often, thinks there is plenty of room for all types of uses. It will bring new people to the park and enhance the visit for those who already use the park. She is excited to have this within stroller distance. She asks for their support.
Back to Ed – but more computer problems. Alders are giving tech assistance. He says the Parks Commission is comparing this to Breese Steven, but that is apples to alligators. It’s easy to kick someone out of a walled in space, but not a wide open park. Drinking and alcohol are not new activities, Breese has had it for over 30 years. Sporting events have been happening for many years. The biergarten is a little over half an acre. It takes 2.5 minutes to walk entirely around the space, its a long perimeter. He talks about activities in the park. There are 32 acres of space on the side of the park that will have the biergarten separate from the space on the other side of the road. He shows pictures of the park and how much room it will take up. He says that 224 people in the band fit on the football field. The biergarten would hold 240 people, he says the fire department says it will hold 800 people. Half an acre is 8 tennis courts. He runs out of time, but he shows the memorial tree that will be in the tavern, not in the open park.
Patrick says that the terrain of the Memorial Union biergarten and Olbrich Garden are different. He says there are 7 taverns in the area, he’s a beer drinker and not opposed, but thinks this will scar the park forever. He is bothered by the “drunks” that will be roaming among the other park users – when people are under the influence they lose control and cause problems that will cost city taxpayers dearly. Alders are elected to represent constituents, and we expect you to weigh th facts without prejudice and personal opinion, that is what we expect.
Bill has lived in neighborhood for 8 years, supports, moved there for the park. Loves running through the park. Their children are looking forward to kindergarten soccer in the park, these activities won’t be negatively impacted, in fact, mom and dad will be able to get a beer.
Kathy is in opposition, she if president of the East Moorland (?) she has heard from lots of people. They are happy the bathrooms will be open more, and will enjoy this. She has also heard from people worried about how this will impact the neighborhood, where will the cars go, who will clear the park at night and if there is a problem no one will respond. There are not enough police resources to respond to non-emergency calls and only 3 park rangers for all our parks and the biergarten staff can’t address issues that happen outside of the biergarten. She wants the alcohol license denied. They don’t have the experience to run the largest tavern without walls and doors. Please keep all conditions if you approve it. This has divided the neighborhood, if the parks department wanted to bring something to bring people together, they should have started with the neighborhood associations, the people who use the park would have come together for placemaking. This has divided the community instead of bringing it together. She doesn’t understand why there is alcohol here since the RFP said there would be no alcohol.
Katherine is in support. She lived in Milwaukee and enjoyed their biergartens. She went to law school here and the Memorial Union is one of her happiest places on earth. She says that people are excited to have a community place on the water like the Memorial Union is for students.
Susan – lives across the street and has for 32 years, she is not looking forward to the alcohol problems returning, she has had drunks on her porch. She doesn’t think that it will be contained to people drinking one or two beers and going home. There are always people who have problems and will abuse it. She says there are lots of uses for the parking lot already, where are people going to park. Not all adults like to have their kids in close proximity to alcohol. The parks department shouldn’t add to the issue. She is worried about noise – they already have noise from the Tiki Bar, volleyball and basketball courts. This will be there 7 days a week.
David Wallner – President of the Parks Commission – starts off by thanking people, mostly Parks staff and commissioners who worked hard to make this happen, plus his friends Mark Clear and Samba Baldeh. He says its been a long process. He says that he takes ownership. About two years ago some friends who spend time in Milwaukee asked why they don’t have biergartens. He talked to staff about it. They thought about doing it at Olin Turville, but the shelter is used too often. They came up with Olbrich. RFP sent out in May, responses in August/September, along with Rutabegga and Parks will look at that tomorrow night. He thought this was a “dynamite” combination. They can use Rutabegga services and the biergarten. (hopefully in that order!!!) He says its a pilot project and if it doesn’t work, they can change it. If it works, great, if it doesn’t, they will move on. (WHAT THE HELL – that is not true) He says that he served on the body and everyone values transparency and process, its not true that there hasn’t been discussion. Eric Knepp says this is the most vetted project he has ever seen, they have bent over backwards to make changes for the neighborhood. He is concerned that they put so many restrictions on them that it might fail. He’s old and grey, this city needs new leadership, we gotta get ready for this and to tell them this is not appropriate, he doesn’t believe that, they deserve a chance to do it. He will be there alot, he likes beer, he is wholeheartedly convinced this will be great for the city. He thinks the concerns are legitimate, but he thinks in a few years people will think it is good.
Janet opposed. How can this private use be in a public park where there is an alcohol ban. She says that changes were made to improve the project and they should keep those conditions from ALRC. There are concerns about the porous boundary. Sound was addressed. When the wind blows, the sound goes back into the neighborhood. She says music only on the weekends was good, but they should extend it one more hour. To serve a 20 ounce bar at 9:30 it will be hard to chug it and clean up the space before the park closes. She is concerned about the lack of policing. Staffing is thin and calls to the MPD are triaged, so noise or out of control person or minors drinking or littering will not be answered. In a regular tavern, you throw people out, but there is no “out” in this park. How will these issues been addressed. Have you been out to look at the footprint. The footprint is large. Our precious green space can be gobbled up by private concerns, once the gravel pad it down, it will stay. Please vote against, or if you vote for it, please keep all the conditions. Regarding the lease, there was no input from neighbors, there was no gathering information from users, information was difficult to get. There was no real estate value of the 310 – 350 feet of prime lakeshore. The area has been increased without increase in user fee. Changes in the agreement shifted costs to the taxpayer. There is no way to increase revenue if they make more profit. Money made will not go back to the neighborhood. She wishes they could start over with transparency and participation and a smaller footprint. Parks accommodate weekend events, not a business. Be courageous, vote no. Let’s rethink this.
Mel – She is in support, great public-private partnership going forward, we will be able to learn from it and do more awesome projects in the future. She knows two of the owners and they are dedicated and professional people and this project could not be in better hands. She thinks this has been well vetted, she understands the concerns of the neighborhood and they have been addressed.
Samantha – She lives in the apartments Olbrich by the Lake – please don’t lift any of the restrictions, particularly the amplified sound. It will allow others to enjoy the park. She would like to limit the music to 9pm. She wants them to deny it, she is concerned about the business owners experience, they were unprepared at the 2nd and 3rd ALRC meetings, they didn’t know they needed special license for events, they have no bar manager on board, they didn’t know they needed to have a barrier. They didn’t have a security plan after three meetings and they never consulted with the police. The security of the project is a concern, they have had people break into their parking garage and rifle through their cars. BKM is required to have an incident log. Police are not likely to respond to issues, particularly since closing time is at shift change. There are only 3 park rangers for 300 parks, they won’t be able to address issues. BKM will hire security guards, but they can only refuse serving alcohol, get someone a ride, or write down a license plate number. She says Alder Ahrens says this is an opportunity to model responsible drinking behavior, but instead it will normalize it. If the city is determined to have a biergarten, then it has to be done right. Successful biergartens have experienced operators, these operators have none. The city should be properly compensated for this business in the park. They should pay for all the improvements – including electrical and bathrooms. Why are we not getting a portion of the profits, why aren’t we directing funds to the park, park rangers or MPD. Time ran out.
Dan – Eastmoorland Community – lived here for 10 years, 9 and 11 year old sons. Also works with soccer club. Urges support, thinks it will be a positive experience. He was at the first meeting and several other meetings. He thanks BKM for cooperative spirit and those who have helped with the community discussions. He says that alcohol abuse dangers are of concerns, people won’t argue that won’t happen, but this will encourage responsible use. He talks about the 700 members of the soccer club, they don’t have a position. The questions are will it be open in the spring, will they serve my favorite beer and can they get the field to be their home field. Many of the coaches support this. This will encourage families to stick around and support other teams. Olbrich isn’t a premiere soccer field, but it is the most compelling and this will help promote active and healthy lifestyle. Please approve this placemaking project.
Pauline – homeowner for 30 years. Not opposed to this use in another park, but this project in this location with this operator. She talks about her business credentials. She says they have no experience in restaurant or tavern operations. This is risky business. 8 of 10 businesses fail in first year. There are issues around the RFP process, by not using transparent bidding, many qualified people did not apply. This should be re-bid in an open and transparent way. She says she is not confident in their business plan, which seemed written from meeting to meeting. They have provided a professional drawing, they didn’t have a security plan. City taxpayers deserve a qualified applicant. She saw no market research, park usage studies, etc, only assumptions and conjecture. They made alot of assumptions. Youth won’t use the biergarten, neither will softball teams sponsored by taverns. There are 26 places to drink in 2.2 miles of this place. She is concerned about their market research and the competition from the Tiki Bar. She emailed several financial issues to the Board of Estimates, its hard to see the fiscal impact without a proper cost/benefit analysis. She is disturbed by the user agreement and the shift of costs to the city for the electrical. She thinks they should close for one day. One of the reasons new businesses fail is under capitalization, if they can’t close one day a week, then they have no business opening. She asks them to maintain the restrictions of the ALRC. She requests additional conditions, close one or two days a week to enjoy a quiet sunset, change the fees to correspond to profits. Milwaukee gets a much larger portion of funds. Require an escrow account to return the park to its current status.
Heather, lived in East Moorland for 17 years, has son who is 8 and is excited about more uses in the park that will serve him. They had his birthday at the Harmony and they are excited about the biergarten. She thinks this will be a great public-private partnership. She talks about events she attends that don’t have closed walls around them (Jazz at 5, community festivals, etc) She is worried about Sunday basketball game and hopes they can continue to stay there. People don’t hang out at the park except for organized activities. They are usually the only ones in the park. She says alot of people ask where they can get something to eat by the lake when she volunteers at Olbrich, now she has a place to send them.
Verveer says there are 11 more speakers in opposition.
Jen says her opposition has not changed. The fatal flaw was not engaging the community before issuing the RFP. This is a 240 person capacity bar, one of the largest bars in Madison. This is a challenge, removing doors and walls makes it worse. If you require 3 meetings before the ALRC you don’t have experience. They are inexperienced, they didn’t have a security plan or meet with police before the 3rd ALRC meeting. Their security plan is lacking. They based their capacity on the entire parking lot serving their biergarten, but what about the park users. Many of the people in the park are families and kids. This will be a burden for residents and park users. She been to every meeting, this is exhausting. This is a deviation from typical tavern license. It is easier to roll back a condition than add one later. With 10 days to fix issues they have, opportunities to solve problems. Public input is a developer responsibility, not an amazing feat. Their claim of staggering amounts of public outreach is in the eye of the beholder. They put up their sign while the beachhouse was closed and didn’t reach out to the neighbors. The parks department says this is a small project, so they didn’t do an equity analysis. We are ensuring only the voices of the most affluent are represented. The parks department continues to state this is the most vetted project in history. The RFP indicates there will be no alcohol, but that was a cut and paste error. THey were not required to hire an architect, as required by the RFP, is this extreme vetting. This is not the best we can do. Instead of creating a community gathering space, it has divided our neighborhood.
Tim Cordon – East Isthmus Planning Council. They work on participatory democracy and involvement. He likes beer and green spaces. This is the common green. It was pushed through over the winter. We all own the lakes and we have little patches where we can watch a sunset, put in my kayak. You want to put in a private establishment that profits, let the people decide that. THis is one of the few natural shorelines left. What’s the hurry.
Helen – (sorry, had to take a break) She talks about how they banned alcohol in this park. She wants them to keep condition 12, the barrier around the premises stay in place and the ugly design.
Missed the next person’s name. She talked about the priorities promoted by parks department and the developer. She says they are not a group of angry naysayers, just community members. THe inconvenience the developers have experienced pales in comparison to the inconvenience to the neighborhood. She isn’t worried about the drunks, but those who slightly over-indulge and don’t realize they are over the legal limit then drive through the neighborhood. Police say they will not respond. Keep the requirements and seek to improve the safety. The developer will not have jurisdiction over the park.
Jennifer – homeowner. She has a list of concerns. Their lack of experience running a tavern. Seems like this shouldn’t be given off to inexperienced entrepreneurs, especially for a pilot project. Milwaukee is successful because of the experience of the operators. The developers own inexperience created the need for so many meetings. They have been unprepared. If Frank Productions or the Great Dane was doing this, they would have breezed through. She is worried about closing time, its unrealistic to have patrons served at 9:30 to leave by 10 after slamming a 20 ounce beer. The operators say they will close early if there are issues. The police won’t respond unless there is a substantial safety threat. Park ranger staffing isn’t a viable solution. It took a park ranger 30 minutes to respond to unleashed dogs in the park. The park ranger can’t deal with people who are overserved. The number one concern of the neighbors was to reduce the size of the garden. The asked to reduce the number of hours. They didn’t. The project has changed alot since the beginning, many of the promises and benefits have been washed away – the bathroom and electrical upgrades are being paid for by taxpayers. The footprint has increased, but they are not paying more for the extra space. They have been told there is no risk and they can stop the project or pull the plug. That is not what the user agreement says. This process should be an example of what not to do. There was no input in the RFP, discussions were behind closed doors. All meetings except the first ALRC meetings have been more opposed. Input has not been posted in legistar. Claims that 75% of the people support could be called alternative facts.
Dan – submitted written comments. An open air beirgarten 7 days a week is alot different than a traveling biergarten, and you would have gotten a different response. This isn’t just about the amplified noise. He lives a half mile from the baseball fields and he hears that noise of cheering etc, he lives the same distance from the biergarten and he will hear the 100 – 200 people. The lots are often full, people park more than three hours, neighborhood parking happens often. He is concerned about the number of security staff they will have or how much staff they will have. There are insufficient details to know how issues will be addressed. He’s a contract administrator for the state and has been doing that over 30 years, the user fee is an issue. Given that this is new project, it is hard to know the costs and the benefits, there should be clear criteria to figure out market rates down the road. The group is well intentioned, but if something goes wrong, there is nothing besides the nuclear option, there should be interim steps to addressing issues.
Carol – 27 year homeowner, sees park from back yard. She is worried about health and quality of life for park users and neighbors. Her and her family have used the park in lots of capacities. She walks and does yoga, mediation and prayer. She enjoys the sunset and peace and quiet. Why are we going to privatize this green and blue space for a tavern. There are other places you can drink by the lake, but they are not in a neighborhood. She’s a licensed social worker in the schools and she talks about the impact of alcoholism and drug abuse and this will increase the drinking capacity 7 days a week, 6 months of the year. She talks about how people park in front of her house, then they pee in the front yard and litter. There will always be people who over indulge and the police won’t be around, this hurts my quality of life. Imagine if this was your neighborhood. She reads from the alcohol density report and how we should reduce access to alcohol. A 20 ounce beer is a beer and a half, there is much prevention work to be done, this is not it. She says that green space helps mental health and adding this beer garden will man a loss of uses of the park. She has gone to many meetings, but she keeps being told this is going to be approved. That is disturbing.
Joan (?) – Please listen to our concerns. She talks about denials of other alcohol licenses for health, safety and welfare. Why aren’t they required to have 50% food like the other licenses, this is 70% alcohol. How healthy is this? Saftey was used to deny the E Washington establishment. Parents drink 2 or 3 beers while the kids are our playing – an accident waiting to happen. Who will be watching the kids. How many staff will there be for 240 patrons. For who’s welfare is this, the operators, not the neighborhood. She doesn’t think the planters will be a good barrier, who will take care of them. What height will the rope be. 182 days a year this will be in existence. The max capacity is expected to be about 150 and the neighbors wanted it limited to that, but BKM said it will not be profitable, who will clean up if this project fails.
Elizabeth – she is concerned about the parks process. She is concerned about the lack of a equity analysis. Alder Kinney asked about it at BOE, staff said this was a small project, but will consider it in the future. Interestingly, it was used for playground replacement at Brittingham park, how did they not consider using this tool for the biergarten that is supposed to be placemaking. This is stunning. This shouldn’t be used at their discretion. You are aware of many of the RFP issues, the process should have screened out unqualified vendors, but they are unqualified and didn’t seek funds til 2 months after they were chosen. The city can do better. Support entrepreneurs, but not a large tavern in a public park with a permeable barrier. Initially the barrier was signs, that was approved by the parks staff. She is concerned about proper reporting by staff to the Parks Board. From looking at parks agendas and minutes, she could find no reference to the RFP and few on biergartens. Yet she found RFPs for rubber mulch playgrounds and weed maintenance. There was a biergarten concept meeting and a schedule for a pilot traveling biergarten, for three parks, none of them Olbrich, but that disappeared. And on May 25th this RFP was issues, don’t accept the promises to do better in the future. The staff should be held accountable to the equity lens, and a transparent process. You have a proposal that is before you based on a flawed process. Start over and use placemaking concepts.
Kyle – He lives at Olbrich by the Lake apartments, one of his main issues is the possible increase in traffic and parking in the neighborhood. He says there is planned construction coming up that will make traffic issues worse. He did informal research on the Walter St. parking lot, about 20 in the winter, but when it was warmer there was 25-26 cars like today and more usage along the street (from 1-2 to 5-7). He doesn’t think that portions of a public park won’t be accessible to everyone in the park, people will have to go around the biergarten to go to the restroom. He also doesn’t support taxpayer money to upgrade the beach house for a private business.
Jeanne – she doesn’t think public park should be leased to a private vendor. She says there was no input, no equity analysis or health impact assessment. This is the lakefront most accessible to the parking lot. Many of the people impacted likely don’t even know about this. Last week she met a man and his son that have used the park for 8 years and they consider it their park, but they didn’t know about this. She says that this will exclude people who don’t want to be around drinking for religious, health or mental health reasons. She says this will limit all physical accessibility and make it harder to get to the restrooms. She talks about the positive impact of green space and the negative impacts of alcohol. She says that placemaking has community participation as a focus, and that didn’t happen. This isn’t a pilot with an agreement for 7 years and it is renewed only by the parks staff. The guys running this are nice, but not experienced. The city hasn’t made this hard for them, they have bent over backwards to help them. She says the ecoli int he water should be addressed before development according to a study, but that hasn’t been done. People are willing to help pay for improvements and do activities everyone can enjoy. Your actions have spurred us forward on national issues, and we have to be sensitive to issues that don’t include all. You have made a commitment to social justice and please keep in mind those issues, including the environment.
The mayor reads off several registrations in support (8?) and opposition (5?).
One last speakers – former police officer for 25 years in Madison, 40 years total. Also part-time US Marshall since retirement. He’s not new to the neighborhood and the city. He says they fought a long time to get beer banned from the park, 90% of their problems with the parks come from alcohol. From the 70s to 90s they had staff to patrol the parks. We finally got it banned. He says most of his calls as a cop included alcohol. He says once they finally got alcohol out of the parks, but now it is going back. The operator might be responsible on their “premises” but soon, others will bring in their own beer. He explains how it will be hard to explain to people that they can’t bring beer to the park when they point to the others drinking beer. How will this be enforced? He says that they will have to remove the ban. He talks about all the problems caused by alcohol at Rhythm and Booms. If the parks department thinks there is no problem, that isn’t true. The same with State St. The parks down there don’t allow alcohol for that reason. He says people under the influence are responsible for a host of things, including sexual assaults, he has seen it. He doesn’t want his tax money used to promote a private enterprise. This is not how to teach kids to responsibly drink. Why does beer have to be the main element to be social with your neighbors. Why can’t you have community picnic? He thinks this is a big mistake for the city to publicly endorse a beer garden in a public park. Alcohol was banned, problems were solved, now you are putting in a beer garden.
7 minute recess. (It’s now 10:10)
Moving on to part two in next post . . .
