Everything passed with a few changes and minimal discussion. Here’s the items of some interest.
25 CENT CHARGE FOR ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS
Mike Verveer asked quite a few questions, eliciting responses of interest as follows:
– It costs 27 cents per transaction to the city, this is over and above credit card charges. They cannot charge the user for the larger % based charges.
– Paying on-line is still cheaper than mail, 42 cents for a stamp.
– Water and Parking Utility has some better charges for credit card usage.
– When you pay taxes with a credit card US Bank acts as a third party in the transaction and US Bank charges 2.5%. City is not involved.
Verveer asks why there is the unusual language that doesn’t require an ordinance change if they approve it in the budget and here’s the highlights:
– It was a suggestion by the city attorney.
– Reason was that in future there may be increases, but that would come back to the Board of Estimates prior to making any changes to “get their advice”.
– Verveer asks about other ordinances that have that language? He says this is precedent setting in that way.
– Michael May, City Attorney, says that IT has some language related to public records law, but that is the only example he gives. [And of course, that is dictated by state laws.]
– Dave Gawenda, City Treasurer, says he is ok with changing that.
– Verveer asks if it would be adjusted once a year, Gawenda says more like 3 to 5 years.
– Gawenda says the fees might get lower, the industry argument for the harges is that this is new technology and they have set up charges. to develop their processing ability.
– Verveer moves to delete the language because it is not the way they do business an not a burden to change the ordinance, Tim Bruer says its friendly.
– Verveer gives the example of them raising the parking fines in the budget and people not realizing that was done until the ordinance came before them. Alders don’t know unless they ask questions.
CENTRAL PARK
Satya Rhodes-Conway asked several questions that elicited the following points of interest:
– This is the Baldwin Earmark that is coming through the Department of Transportation.
– This allows them to begin drawing down funds for construction documents.
– Phase one includes the Gateway Plaza, crossing at Few Street, North Plaza, entire lawn area and improvements for Ingersoll and Wilson.
– It doesn’t include the skate park, that will be done at a future date.
– Baldwin money will only be used on city land or on the land (6.2 acres) that we are getting back from Center for Resilient cities.[Eyeroll, so much for this being a private park and the city not having to pay for it.]
– The skate park has to raise their own funding.
– Rhodes-Conway and Claussius are concerned about calling out the skate park and saying they can’t move forward.
– They say the language simply says they aren’t eligible for the earmark money.
– Rhodes-Conway says alot of things are not funded with that money and doesn’t know why they are singled out.
– She is concerned the city put the skateboarders off for a decade and they are waiting for us, she doesn’t want to send a signal that is going to make that worse.
– Mark Olinger, I don’t know what his title is since his contract was not renewed, and Rob Phillips, City Engineer ok with taking the language out.
– They decide they can’t go forward until they know about the crossings anyways.
– Claussius is concerned if take the language out he wants to make sure that they are still agreeing there will be a skate park.
– Olinger says skate park is part of plan and won’t change. [Even tho the plan has not yet been adopted.]
$300,000 TIF FOR SENIOR HOUSING, FORESHADOWING FOR THE EDGEWATER
Public, lobbyists, developer and alder all in support.
Verveer says he is suportive, but wants them to explain the unorthodox way they are doing this. There is no TIF district. Have we done this in the past? Is it because of the WHEDA tax credits and timeline.
Joe Gromacki, TIF Coordinator, says this is set up for 2011 capital budget. They would create the district in 2011. They don’t need it in place for this year. He explains it takes 5 months to create a TIF district and it needs to be done by Sept 30. He says they need a generator, this barely meets the $3M minimum. They will need to put money in the capital budget. He says they have done it once or twice, and mentions University Square and Madison Mark. Also, considering doing it for the Edgewater.
Clear clarifies that they will pass this resolution to apply for tax credits even though contingencies of budget and others, moot if don’t get tax credits.
[So, I get doing it to see if they can get the tax credits, I don’t get why they’d do it for the Edgewater. And there was no explanation.]
TRUAX, DARBO AND HOPE VI GRANT
Basically they have a mater plan and would like to do a HOPE VI project, but they need to hire someone who knows how to write those applications to do it. HOPE VI funds are for neighborhood development by housing authorities. They think they have a chance of getting funding and would be competitive. The NOFA is not yet out, so they don’t know what HUD is looking for this year. This money is to solicit firms that would help do the application. This would be matching money, so we’d have to have funds to equal and grant awards. They already have $15M in tax credits. Could include some development on Stoughton Road or Milwuakee Street.
Verveer expressed concern $150,000 is expensive. Olinger says that it should cost about $200,000 but with staff support they can cut the costs and much of the leg work has been done. They need someone experienced to put the application together.
CDA EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Gregg Shimanski, CDA Chair, explains that they approved a Project Manager in their budget. With changes in the planning department they rethought that. They are the biggest developer in town with Villager, Truax, Allied, Burr Oaks and other projects. He says that they hope this will cut back on consultants. Says it should be an open process and they have already talked with 5 or 6 potential candidates. Thinks they will get some good applicants.
Rhodes-Conway asks about the housing side, all he talked about was development.
Shimanski says they will look for candidates that have both experiences. Says housing has come a long way and essentially says they are ok on their own. Some of these projects could benefit them.
Rhodes-Conway asks about CDA/City relationship she appreciates separating the CDA and Director of Planning and Community and Economic Development (PCED) Director. But, will this make it easier or harder, who do they report to, are they city employees, etc.
May says that CDA is a separate political entity created by city, the Board of the CDA appoints the position, but they consult with the Mayor. They are a city employee. Alternative for them to hire their own employees would make them set up their own EIN and they would have to hire more people to do the accounting and HR work and that is not practical. Says tension will continue between City and CDA. They should look at the ancient operating agreement, but everyone is afraid of it and what that might open up. If get someone that is more the Executive Director in name, they can tackle that. He says it is like the Overture Center.
Clear asks about reporting relationship for the new position?
May says ED would report to the CDA Board and Mayor. They tried to spell it out – Mayor has authority to renew and discipline and if wants to get rid of them, CDA Board must approve. He says this is similar to the Monona Terrace Director. Says there will need to be changes to the Housing Operations Director position as well.
Bruer asks about the ED relationship to the DPCED Director. They report to that person, the Mayor and the CDA board.
Clear asks about budget implications?
This year there are no additional costs, the CDA project manager was $88K, this new position not til May 1st. The Executive Director is at a high classification. They say final amount will depend upon employment negotiations with the person they hire. [Uh oh, I think that means it might cost even more than the already stated higher price!]
Dean Brasser, City Comptroller, says that its all city money and that a couple years ago they set up a budgetary unit to figure out expenditures of the unit, very likely continuing operations funding through city’s operating budget like other entities.
Clear asks if CDA will someday become self-sustaining.
Brasser says that there are efforts to ID the time being committed to CDA activities of staff, all staff on CDA projects are in planning units, using systems of billing back an forth, would continue for most of other staff.
SETTLING NON-PROFIT PROPERTY TAX ISSUE
They don’t go into closed session. They ask for approval of the settlement since the original action was based on 2008 law, but 2009 law changed the intent. No point in continuing because of the policy change. Settlement is probably not as low as we would like and not as high as they would like.
Rhodes-Conway asks if the other taxing jurisdictions were consulted on this.
They says the school district is aware, this is small potatoes and got lost in the noise of their other budget issues.
WRAP UP
With the above discussed, like I said, everything on the agenda passed with a friendly amendment or two.
