I took the day off, slept in (a little), so this will be a little slow getting posted this morning, but this and the morning round up should all be done by noon. I’ll post bits and pieces as it gets done. My comments in purple.
GETTING STARTED
The meeting started late, per usual. 6:40. As I noted earlier, Thuy Pham-Remmele was absent. [There was plenty of eye rolling and grumbling about this. Some alders were told she’d be absent from Bridget Maniaci the evening before, but no one seemed to know why she was absent. Rumors were that it was her birthday so she didn’t show up, that she was sick (seems unlikely as they knew this the day before if not earlier) and that she was gone because her mother died (which was why she missed the December 15th meeting and seems unlikely as she was reported to be in town.) So, no one was talking if they knew why she was gone and there was no email sent to alders regarding her absence, except the notified absence in the consent agenda sent out late yesterday. Which is not how absences are usually noted.]
OPENING REMARKS
Joe Clausius said this was the strangest most bizarre holiday season he has had. He had his knee replacesment, the 11 hour meeting and then lost his mother on Christmas day. He said he appreciated all the cards, condolences and kind words from everyone and the beautiful flowers that were sent. He said his mother was a remarkable woman, that she led a full life that left them lots of memories and he just wanted to thank everyone.
Mayor Dave Cieslewicz extends condolences for the group.
SUSPENSION OF THE RULES
Council President Tim Bruer moves to suspend the rules they suspend at every meeting to introduce things not noted on the agenda and take things out of order. No discussion, or objections. It passes.
RESOLUTION HONORING JIM FLEMING FROM WISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO
Mayor reads resolution.
Fleming promises not to take too much time. After decades in radio, not used to seeing people he is talking to. Great honor, he’s been a resident of Madison for 60 years, left several times as a young man and 36 years ago when he came back it felt right, wouldn’t have guessed that it would come to this tho, this (the resolution) is a treasure and he thanks them. He says Madison is a wonderful place to live and it will continue to be and Fleming hopes grandson will enjoy it as much as he has when he reaches his age.
EARLY PUBLIC COMMENT
There were some registration statements, one was a mistake, one was in support of public hearing item 2.
CONSENT AGENDA
It was as reported, no additional items removed from the agenda for discussion due to alder request or public registrations. There was a unanimous vote recorded on number 19. #63 (Badger Bus stop on W. Washington) was also referred to the Transit and Parking Commission. The public hearing items and item 60 (small business bus pass) and 61 (Edgewater) were separated for discussion, everything else passed as noted on the agenda.
PLAN COMMISSION RECESSED PUBLIC HEARINGS, ITEMS 2 & 3
#2 – A project in Jed Sanborn’s district on Maplecrest Drive and Hawks Reserve Lane
A woman testified in opposition. She was concerned about the narrow streets and problems with parking. She said people were parking on the street even tho the building across the street was empty, she was concerned the building has no parking lot. She said the overall size of building does not blend with neighborhood. The neighborhood wanted duplexes close to the single family homes then have the bigger building be further away, instead large buildings are across the street. Also concerned about water flow, dirt and sand run off into the roads causing gravel etc. Wants more green space and some would like a blending into the neighborhood.
No questions from the council.
Bruer moved adoption of the Plan Commission report, number 2 & 3.
Mike Verveer says on #3 (115 – 117 S. Bassett) that this issue was split in two at plan commission and they attempted to address consditions on this piece of the application that is in front of the council tonight and there may be one they missed. He states for the record that city engineering will look at item 13 and the requirement regarding the connection to the public storm sewer system. He said because this was an SIP and not a new building, staff wanted to make sure that was on the record.
No further discussion, motions on items 2 and 3 pass unanimously on a voice vote.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ALCOHOL ISSUES, ITEMS 4 – 14
One registration on #12 – Lucky’s Bar & Grill
Rodney Ripley asked the Mayor if there were questions or if he wanted him to speak.
The Mayor asked him to give a quick overview.
Ripley said they were working on several issues. They are working on improving the food sales ratio,, they hired a new chef, optimistic they can increase food sales. He says he had an ALERT meeting [Meeting with police and alcohol policy coordinator] and having one owner will improve communications. He attended training session and will address best practices addressed and some issues with beer garden layout with the sidewalk, they will address that with the police. He met with Vilas Neighborhood Association and they had recommendations for some changes there. He will put a sounded alarm door in the alley. He also agreed to sound test in August to appease concerns they have and consider re-directing speakers.
Bruer “asks”, but first notes that he is in favor of repeal of 21 year old drinking age, what they are doing about underage drinking?
Ripley says they addressed that in training and in the ALERT meeting and there are some some simple things they can do. He says a black light will help because 44 of 50 states have a hologram that helps you spot a fake id. Adding a tape measure on the wall will help determine if the height on the driver’s licecnes is off and they’ll easily be able to see that. Simple things.
Julia Kerr asks about black light.
Ripley said that the partners said no changes until the ownership changes. That will be late Jan. This was the last hurdle now just financing, agreement is for the ownership change to take place before Feb 1. It will be in place within days after that.
Bruer recesses items 4, 9 and 14 recessed, moves approval with recommendations on the other items.
No separations, questions or discussion. Motion passes.
PLAN COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS
Item 15 is recessed (Edgewater PUD).
Item 16 0r 17? (W Gorham or Fish Hatchery) there is one registrant, but there are no questions.
Item 18, Chickens! No registrants.
Bruer moves approval with recommendations. All recommendations pass on a voice vote without discussion.
Item #60 – Small Business Bus pass
[I missed part of this]Mark Clear snarkily notes that he wished bus advocates would be here tonight to support this and wonder where they are. [He may have had another point in there, but it got lost with his snotty comments.]
Satya Rhodes-Conway [No doubt prompted by Clear’s comments]says this is something she started working on through Progressive Dane, before she was on the Council. She said when Progressive Dane, Downtown Madison Inc and the Chamber of Commerce agree on something, that’s kind of amazing and a good thing. [Susan Schmitz from Downtown Madison Inc nods her head in agreement She thanks staff, particularly Metro staff for working through this. She notes that you can get information to participate in the program at mymetrobus.com.
Passes without further discussion on a voice vote.
RECONSIDERATION
7:03 – Michael Schumacher moves reconsideration. He read the motion.
Mayor says that its quite likely there will be a motion to refer and also quite likely it will prevail this evening, and says if the public doesn’t speak, that is acceptable. He notes that Fred Mohs has agreed not to speak. He says they can take speakers now, or after vote on reconsideration motion. He asks what the sense of the ocuncil is. It seems they want to hear from the public after the motion to reconsider.
Without further discussion, they vote on the motion to reconsider. Which passes on a voice vote. Kerr asks to be recorded as voting no.
MOTION TO REFER
Maniaic makes motion to refer.
The Common Council hereby refers the appeal by the Hammes Company of the Landmarks Commission decision for the Edgewater redevelopment to the February 23rd Common Council meeting following project deliberations and recommendations on the project being made by the Urban Design Commission to the Plan Commission and a recommendation being made by the Plan Commission to the Common Council by February 23, 2010. Additionally, the Common Council supports the rehabilitation of the 1940s buildings and redevelopment of the Edgewater site as a whole.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
I didn’t take notes on the public testimony. You can find more info at the Isthmus live blog which I participated in and at the Cap Times where Kristin C live blogged the meeting.
I just have to say that Tim Bruer left his seat at 7:12, spent time in the hallway, talking to the press and wandering around the room for 52 minutes while the public testified. He sat in his seat for about 2 (literally 8:03 to 8:05) minutes before the break, and that might be a generous estimate. “Bruer watch” can be seen on the live blog.
BREAK
Kerr asked for a 15 minute break after the public testimony at about 8:05, which took 20 minutes and they resumed discussion about 8:25.
DISCUSSION
When they returned from break, they took roll call. Everyone was there. Bruer is standing in the back of the room, talking to Janet Pariano, the Mayor’s chief of staff. That goes on for about a half hour. Bruer did get back in his seat for the last 15 – 20 minutes of the meeting, where he goes into an interesting tirade . . . which I think indicates he didn’t hear a word anyone said. Also, it makes me wonder what Janet was talking to him about . . . who’s message was he delivering?
Bridget Maniaci says she appreciates how long and hard we worked to get here. She notes there are still differences, but appreciates the input. Wants to give the project opportunity to go through the process. For first time there is a consensus that this needs to go to committee. Wants to break the inertia and move forward together. Referral is a good decision for the committee process ahead. Glad colleagues worked with her.
Marsha Rummel says that some of testimony was about timing and it seems rushed. This will require materials to be provided in advance, thinks Dunn is committed to doing that. Also wanted to note, 3 UDC and 3 Plan commission meetings before 2/23 and special council meeting on the last Wed or Thurs and joint UDC and plan commission meeting being planned. Trying to address issues, while not explicit in the motion, this referral will be on the minds of commissioners who review it.
[I think this timing issue is a critical one, and I’m surprised several issues didn’t come up, so I’m just going to address them here.
First of all, no one mentioned that the Zoning Board of Appeals still has an issue to be resolved and that, like the Landmarks’ decision, can be a show stopper. And, unlike the Landmarks Commission appeal, that appeal doesn’t go to the Council, it goes to the court.
Second of all, no one mentioned TIF. Our policies say that TIF and land use have to be considered at the same time.
3.1 TIF Application Process (See Figure 2a)
(1) Simultaneous Land Use, TIF Application.
(b) All development projects seeking TIF assistance must receive project land use approvals simultaneous to the review for TIF assistance. In the case where land use process is completed before the TIF process, the land use resolution will be referred by the Plan Commission until the TIF Application process is completed and the Board of Estimates recommends approval of a TIF resolution to the Common Council. Land use approval does not constitute or otherwise influence TIF approval.
Given the two issue above, and Verveer’s request for a neighborhood meeting, I’m trying to figure out how this all works. Especially because the Edgewater still isn’t in a TIF district. I think the timeline will be the subject of another post.]
Steve King thanks Bidar-Sielaff, Verveer, Maniaci and Rummel, he says he’s a supporter of the project, at end of the day wants to be excited about it. Doesn’t want it to be an epic battle where economic development wins, or we have to over rule landmarks. [I missed some here, but he was essentially saying that with all the other good things that could happen with the project, having those issues win at the cost of someone/some issues losing didn’t seem worth it. I think.]
Kerr says referral is good, supported it last time, it was a good idea two weeks ago, good idea tonight. Thanks Maniaci for leadership, tough project for a rookie, doing an admirable job, appreciates council supporting her. At break someone asked why voted against reconsideration, she’s glad they are referring it. However, Dunn, the public and most of us were here two weeks ago, they carefully considered the issues, she’s sorry some alders not there, but there is no new information that merits reconsideration. She’s not one to get on a process hobby horse, but this is a substantial abuse of process to move reconsideration cuz not at meeting.
Palm said that supported referral last time and thanks Cnare for putting the idea in motion. 🙂 Constituents are asking about TIF and taxes and he wants to speak to those issues, but they will have the TIF discussion later,[See note on policy above.] and that meeting could go til 5:30 again. And, just like speakers had questions on the numbers, those are the numbers that he is really looking at. He says that why we would put public TIF dollars in the project is a good question and those will be critical issues at that time.
Lauren Cnare thanks people that left table and came back – she feels like this is the academy awards with all the thanks – but she appreciates that people came back to the table. She says the most important piece of language is that we support the project. When she said that, I worried the whole deal was going to fall apart. I think people want to support something there, but not this exact project, and I think people thought that was what she meant, as no one addressed it.] She says that some people think that Madison just wants to fight with each other. She says that is not true, she says we just want the right thing. She is imploring everyone to vote yes so headline doesn’t read “Edgewater killers” but instead they will say the project is moving forward.
Compton says that we may not have been all been here on the council floor, but several of us were involved, she says she sat there and watched the meeting til 5:30. [I guess here would be a good place to point out that she may have been on a 3 week holiday break in South Carolina during the last meeting, but that absence from the city did not show up in the alder emails or council calendar. Which means I need to add 21 days to her absences and she is catching up to Schumacher.] She says there was careful discussion, but also animosity, no project with this big of an impact needs to be decided with political angst, needs to be thought out well, considered professionally and thoughtfully, needed to get off this dime, the dime that is the locking horns and everyone hating each other. We have intelligent and worthy of praise people who oppose the project that don’t need to be belittled and looked down at. Mohs has done more for the creation of this city than most anyone else and the problem is that we have young, new exciting thoughts for our city, we can’t lock those thoughts out, need to take old and work with new, for something that is going to be a blessing for our city and an anchor for the neighborhood and jewel for the city. This whole argument has been about Landmarks. It put people at each others throats, we have a lot of people who were married there and want it fixed up and some people don’t want to put more tax dollars in it. 75% of the people she talks to think the city is going to pay $93M for the project, all of it is stirred up by misinformation. Have to do this so people who have thoughts can take it to UDC and Plan, to get the best project for Mansion Hill, the city, community at large – county and state. When we come together, hoping at UDC and Plan we can make adjustments and work together cuz we need it. Thanks [someone?] for trying again. Thanks landmarks, Mansion Hill for protecting history of our city so we can have both things together [missed part of what she said here, Bruer and Piraino are now talking more loudly and Compton was talking more softly and I couldn’t hear] She talks about traveling in Philadelphia and staying in a hotel in a historic district that is 13 stories and it doesn’t take away from the project.
Bryon Eagon thanks people who gave input, at first it was a nuisance, but come to appreciate awesome amount of civic participation and can say that he wasn’t supportive of referral last time, but will be tonight cuz he has heard from colleagues and others that this can help us get it right, gets all pieces of puzzle on table.
Shiva Bidar-Sielaff thanks Maniaci and Verveer who have spent countless hours on this. Delighted that they are here tonight telling our citizens and the city that we can engage in good civil dialog, that they are careful thinkers, independent thinkers. She says they are accused of different things, but she can assure you that they are all very independent individuals. We’re going to take the time to get all the information to make informed decisions. Supported referral last time, will again tonight. Gets us back on track to discuss issues germane to this project and not get sidetracked with other issues mixed up in this proposal. Wants good balance for historic preservation and future of city and that takes talking and good civil dialog – thanks . . . . [I missed it, it was my fault]
Verveer [Now it’s really my fault, I think he started thanking people and I took it as an opportunity to do something else quick . . . :)] Verveer says this is a restart, notes its Shiva’s birthday, he says when they left at 5:30 three weeks ago, no one was happy, it left a nasty sour taste in our collective mouths, none of us who voted on prevailing side were happy. This is a new clean fresh start. [This is the second restart, right. I wonder how this one will be different?], Several people met for 6 hours last night and they adjourned shortly after midnight, most of us kind of did the heavy lifting last night, you all are the beneficiaries of that work. He notes the city attorney did opine it was not a violation of open meetings laws [unless there was a walking quorum . . . ], that is where they hammered out the language. If he had his druthers, the language would be different, would have preferred stronger nod to landmarks commission. Cnare’s motion last time directed UDC and Plan to address those issues of volume and height and this doesn’t, but of course, that is the issue, so even tho it doesn’t say it, it is inherent. Hopes colleagues and citizen members on the commissions will work hard – it may all be back, he’s glad they are not debating hardship tonight. In closing, [Er, that’s one mighty long closing!]in a perfect world, this project will get to a point where it can and should and then would go back to Landmarks for a certificate of appropriateness. Doesn’t want to have to vote on the appeal, wishes it would go away and the way to do that would be fore Landmarks to approve certificate of approval. [He’s so totally right, but I’m not sure it fits in the timeline . . . ] He really wants it to go to UDC and Plan but also Landmarks, not in words of motion but it can happen. It also needs a fully public neighborhood meeting, sponsored by Verveer and Maniaci, he says they did that on earlier proposal, not the newer one and certainly not on a tweaked proposal. Hopes it happens before it goes to plan commission, that is the way we do business downtown and in our aldermanic districts and we never did have that meeting. Third, it is critical to have very timely information by the applicant, this isn’t stuff made up tonight, he sat through the meetings, at landmarks and udc time and time again requested specific info that they didn’t get. Hopefully hitting restart button tonight, wants to recognize hard work of several alders, Cnare, Rummel, Bidar Sielaff, Maniaci [Good work ladies! Makes me wonder why they did all the work and Bruer, Clear and Schumacher were the ones all over the press. Sigh . . . ] He appreciates Dunn not walking away, thinks he is the right person and company to do it, just wants it done the right way, in keeping and compatible and a true asset to the Mansion Hill neighborhood, similar to the pictures on the walls in the chambers [Gates of Heavens, etc], hopes it is unanimous and get off a to clean fresh start.
Note: Verveer just added three things to the process that make it harder to get it done by the 23rd. They want information up front, which pushes the timeline for the developer to get materials done. He also wants a neighborhood meeting before plan commission. AND he wants it to go back to Landmarks. Like I said, this will be the subject of another post as I try to work out the timeline that it would need to be on.
So, also note, up to this point, it was a relatively cohesive and united front, so leave it to council leadership to mess it up . . . that’s some “leadership” . . . after not paying attention all night, we get this . . .
Bruer says he’d like to have a little reality check. He says he has had a number of conversation with people, there were those that thought that this was going to come back anyways this evening and the reality is that the Hammes company had a commitment for financing, part of another project and that went away and we need to be real about this. Even if go through the process, this has to be financially feasible, it can be competitive, there is only a handful of banks nationally that can finance a project like this, they need to think about what this cost Hammes, besides time and effort, it cost guaranteed financing of the project. He has 3 or 4 hotel proposals in his district with strong financial backing and not one was able to attract financing, [he just contradicted himself adn I’m unclear what he was trying to say, but I think he misspoke] part of the package if it moves forward has to be competitive for national dollars, they will need to put millions of additional capital in that they didn’t have to do weeks ago, don’t forget competitive world we are in. Verveer comments concern him, if Madison decides we don’t have a project we can support because of volume that supports financial feasibility, just realize, if we go forth and make that determination, we not only impact the financial assurance of the project, but also be conscious of the fact that this will also undoubtedly affect the financing market, it will also affect realities of other projects in the city at large. [It’s so galling every time he says that, it wouldn’t have to if he would quit saying that. He should be sending a message that this project is unique and other projects shouldn’t take their cues from approval or not of this project. Well, except to send a message that we follow our laws and plans so submit projects that are close to compliance.] Great we want to dictate volume and size and well intended people have decided what they think the height and scope should be but the bottom line is what the bottom line is – do they think the jobs, shot in arm for broader econ devo, and ??? outweighs compatibility with the mansion hill neighborhood, that’s a tough call folks. If we are just sending this off to committee to beat and batter the same message and hope committees will reduce the size, he has told alders, if this is what it is all about, if we want to move it along, in a short period of time we will not have a project. He looks at Solomon and mentions him by name and says people don’t have an idea of how much time and effort went into bringing this back, it was not coming back, you have my word on that, [he was virtually the only one saying that – again, out of touch with the council he is allegedly “leading”] the mayor and labor and others plead with developer to bring it back, it’s on life support, before goes into committee structure and continues to beat same drum we have been listening to, we won’t have a project. Thanks everyone for time and energy, hopefully we will see the energy and effort results . . . may have missed some here . . .
[Note: during the public testimony, Dunn made it really clear that some people are saying what he thinks, and that he would like to speak for himself, and I wonder (and I should have asked) if he’s referring to Bruer, since he seems to be off on his own message . . . ]
Brian Solomon says he wasn’t going to speak, but after Bruer comments he is. He says the folks who voted no last time, as he said it three weeks ago, did so for valid reasons and folks who voted yes did so for valid reasons. This is not an easy thing, it’s a huge important project, he hopes all of us will recognize we won’t agree with every part of this. He says he talked to Dunn on phone today, he said I’m hoping that when this all comes back and as it comes forward that you look at the full breadth of benefits to this project, and if can’t support one part, you can support 6 or 7 or 8 parts. However, the ends don’t justify the means, not just this project, there are a lot of incredible ends with this project but we have to keep in mind what the means are too – no one wants to turn their back on millions in tax base, jobs for unemployed, of course not, anyone who voted no did not vote no with fingers crossed with it coming back or to kill economic development, they voted no for valid reasons. He can understand why people who voted yes disagree, some were 51/49 and hopes as move forward – only speaking because called me out by name, but he’s not the first to do so, mentions the Wisconsin State Journal editorial, and that’s fine. He stands behind what he did, he’s proud of it, and I’m guessing most people are proud of their vote, glad here tonight voting on referral and glad project moving forward, hopes they can come together.
[Take a deep breath folks . . . ]
Bruer says to Solomon that no one appreciates and respect his principles more than him on the body [I wonder how many people threw up in their mouth a little when he said that] He’s not going to get into ends justify the means issue, [yeah, probably a good idea, cuz it will just make him look worse . . . , the point is about recognizing the consequences of our actions. Solomon is clearly one of the most principled, but he has to recognize consequences of our actions – that was going to clearly end up with this not being before us, much work to bring it back, if we don’t like or love the product the consequences will impact us for decades – jobs, economic growth. The former mayor may be comfortable with being instrumental in killing a hotel and that was his opinion and he respects it, disagreed with it, we paid a price for it, lest us understand that we don’t hide behind referral and vote for or against and stand on principles.
[Someone observed after the meeting that most people were thanking the women on the council Rummel, Bidar-Sielaff, Cnare, Manaici for all their work and yet Bruer went after Solomon and Verveer . . . why? I didn’t have an answer for them.]
Maniaci says she wants to end conversation on a positive note. She is excited about moving forward, lets not let this be ruined, lets continue to work to see project forward and all work together to see it happen, thanks those who worked collaboratively. [Ok, that was classy and gutsy to stand up to Bruer. Someone had to do it and I’m glad she did.]
With that, they vote on reconsideration. It was a voice vote with no “no” votes.
It dawned on me this morning, after all that, Schumacher never said a word. He didn’t participate in the discussion at all. He was all over the media, but not a peep at the council meeting. That’s just icky.
ITEMS INTRODUCED
Schumacher introduces a purchase agreement for Cherokee Marsh, refers it to Parks, Board of Estimates and Plan commission. Says it is a great opportunity to get more land in conservancy.
Rummel introduces CDBG (and Community Services?) 2010 budget 2 year purchase of service agreements. By the time these pass and the contracts get signed, we’ll be well into the year without contracts for the non-profits.
Bruer wished Alder Thuy (Jan 5th) and Shiva Happy Birthday on Jan 7th, and Cnare on the 15th. Then he moves to adjourn about 9:05.
After the meeting I was talking with Bob Dunn and he reminded me that I had offered for him to write a a guest blog on my site if he wanted, particularly if he thought I was saying anything terribly inaccurate . . . I said I was still willing . . . it will be interesting to see if he comes up with anything . . . and what it is!
