Ok, a few brief items, $13M in TIF and Allied Drive Grocery. One item demonstrates the power of one citizen paying attention to city hall, the other, is just absurd, after talking about applying equity to their agenda, the fail to apply equity to the agenda after it was pointed out twice. Equity, its just talk.
Here’s the audio in case you want to listen yourself
#19 POLICE SCOPES DONATION FROM MILITARY SURPLUS
Marsha Rummel has asked to be recorded as voting no.
Denise DeMarb moves approval for the donation of police scopes for their rifles.
Scott Resnick will be voting no, wants to explain. Hopes this will be discussed at a future date. He says one of the issues raised with Furgeson and other events is the program 1033 program, military style gear that is donated to police officers. This is 10 scopes for SWAT. He sees a a bridge between those programs. He will be voting no. He brought it up at a late date, the police chief isn’t here to discuss the program, he wants them to discuss in the future.
Paul Skidmores says the Chief is at a neighborhood watch meeting, he is sorry he is not there, he didn’t know this would come up. This isn’t buying new equipment, these are replacements, they are specialized tools for the SWAT team, its not a new idea, its a means to defray city costs. If we decline the grant they will get new scopes, we would be taking $18,000 from another item in the police budget. If we are going to have this discussion, we should do it with more notice. (SERIOUSLY?! WHAT IS THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA?! That IS the notice. It comes out on Friday. The consent agenda comes out between 2:00 and 3:00 on Tuesday. Is he saying that you have to do more besides have it on a public agenda? Implying they can’t discuss items on the council agenda unless they do . . . what?)
Voice vote, Scott a clear no, I think Rummel was as well.
ITEM 21 – KICKSTARTER FOR ELVER PARK FIREWORKS
Anita Weier says $15,000 already in the budget and if they raise enough with kickstarter they may be able to use that for something else.
Maurice Cheeks asks if Kickstarter was a generic term or if other crowdsource funding could be used.
Matt Phair says city has relationship with Kickstarter, it was specific.
ITEM 22 – $575,000 FOR SOFTWARE FOR THE BRT
Susan Schmitz, Downtown Madison Inc lobbyist, registered in support. She isn’t there. There is no discussion. 🙁 Passes on a voice vote. (Sure wish they would have discussed this as I asked several alders what it was and they couldn’t explain it to me.)
ITEM 23 – $13M IN TIF FOR ANCHOR BANK FOR WHAT?
Public Testimony
I (awkward) registered against and wished to speak. I said I expected them to take item 44 out of order since there were more people here to speak (Allied Drive Grocery). I registered to speak because this is the 3rd largest TIF the city has ever passed. I tried to find out the discussion but it was done at Board of Estimates in closed session. It is a different project than when it went to Board of Estimates, at that time it was a single purpose TID and now the TIF district would include other projects and it was contingent on State approval of the TIF district and approval of the Joint Review Board. Those things didn’t happen. I find it surprising you’re going to lend $5M before the TID is created and there is a mechanism to pay back the city if the TID isn’t approved. I was also shocked that at the Board of Estimates (BOE) there was no report to the BOE in legistar. So there was no information available to the public and BOE passed it without discussion, it was on the consent agenda. I’m also confused because the report refers to the Constellation which is in an entirely different TIF area and I don’t understand why that would be used pay back this other TID if there is an issue with them using 71% of the TIF generated. I am confused because there has been no public discussion on this. THe other issue is does this really meet the goals of TIF, what is the public benefit, I thought we were getting away from TIF in the downtown area and look other areas of the city that really need it. I don’t see this meeting goals like jobs or housing as set out in the goals. The last thing is how do you meet the TIF policy and find that it meets the goals of the TIF district (or TID) when there isn’t one created yet. There has been no public discussion of it being 71% of the TIF increment, discussion of the goals of the TIF district and what the public good is. I am shocked there has been no public discussion of this since this is the third largest TIF in city history. I thought I’d pull a 21st alder move and ask that you discuss this when it is important to the city, when you think about wringing your hands over $300,000 for a grocery store on Allied Drive and then quickly pass $13M for TIF with no discussion and where I don’t see a lot of value coming back to the city makes no sense to me.
Brad Binkowski, from Urban Land Interests, the group redeveloping the site. He says he is there to tell them the history of the project. They have been working on it for 3 years, it is the only project they have presented to the city that got unanimous approval from every committee. The reason for that is because it is compelling and transformational impact on the square. The Anchor Bank has a parking ramp that is deteriorating, the building is falling apart and can’t be repairs, without putting parking under Carroll St. and the construction of a new office and housing project where the parking ramp is now and it will be a $94M project. This will transform the entire Southwest Corner of the Square, without this support it can’t happen. He thinks it will transformational like Block 89 and he appreciates their support tonight.
Questions for staff
David Ahrens asks about the December 1 memo, he asks why it says two different things where one part says there will be $13M in TIF and the other section says $4M.
Joe Gromacki, the City TIF Coordinator says that was a typo. They used the document from a previous project, the Constellation, and it still had some of that data in there.
Ahrens asks about this parking being in competition with city parking and he thought that there would be an amendment prohibiting lower rates than the city at the same time, the evening and weekends, did that happen? Gromacki says in the term sheet #12 and that was negotiated with staff in the city attorney’s office, parking utility and developer. Ahrens asks if “negatively impacted” is specific or are there more specifics to this? Gromacki says the concern at the time was that the developer could use city funded parking ramp to undercut city parking ramp, he says they addressed the issues as fairly as possible, but he defers to the city attorney’s office. Ahrens says that he doesn’t think that this is specific about the rate structure being lower than city rates, there is nothing that specifically says the rate structures on non-business hours can’t be lower than city rates. Does it say that anywhere? Gromacki – long, long, long painful pause, he’s reading. He says that only the option to rent up to 200 stalls at $150 per stall, he doesn’t see it. Ahrens says that the problem raised by the parking manager at the time was that it would undercut our rates in evening and weekend hours and he doesn’t see anything dealing with it and Don Marx said they would. Gromacki says that was the city attorney and parking utility and he wasn’t involved.
Mike Verveer asks Gromacki about the concern that TID 45 is not yet created, we haven’t started the public process yet, can you explain where we are at with that as much as you care to disclose and the geographic area – he has seen some draft maps, and additionally the concerns of the $5M disbursements if there is not TID created. Gromacki says there is a project boundary and blight study, the area starts at Anchor Bank and goes west around the square, not on the square, there is no blight. It picks up W. Washington and goes to the AT&T building and they pick up buildings on both sides of W. Wash. It met the blight study. He adds it is not uncommon for the city to authorize funding contingent on Joint Review Board approval, did it at University Ave and Wingra Clinic in TID 41 and prior to that, it was under Brenda’s term the Avenue 800 prior to creation of TID 36 (not true!), they have had that before, but they prefer for it to be wrapped up, up front, but sometimes it doesn’t happen. Because of the timing of the project, they have to start in the spring to move it forward, it is necessary to front some funds. Typically it is a $2 – 3M loan, but if there is a REMOTE chance of a problem, if there is a minor defect they would have to repay it, and should that occur (this is like having iceberg insurance, in case it hits the building then we would be covered) then we would be repaid principal and interest back to the city, typically its smaller projects, but for a $13M loan amortized at 10 years, that would be too much to bear for the development, so they negotiated to cut it in to manageable pieces, so it is only $5M up front. Once whatever error is rectified with Department of Revenue, then they can turn it into a conventional TIF loan recovered by tax increments. Basically this is not unusual, they have done it before, the unusual is the amount is a lot more and it would have more impact if there was a minor defect. He says that the Department of Revenue only looks at the specifics of the notice and if the plan commission said they would meet at 6:00 and they meet at 6:30, they might say that is a minor defect. They have legislation about substantial compliance and they state review for that, that the public has a chance to attend, they can then waive that defect. (AHEM, I’m more worried about Jt. Board of Review approval that is not yet done and council approval of the TIF district and the public process around that, not state approval)
Verveer asks Gromacki to refresh their memories about what was discussed at Board of Estimates, which was entirely in closed session, Ms. Konkel is correct about that, can you refresh our memories about what the financial participation originally proposed by the developer was, in terms of using the Block 89 modal and the community development authority tools and why staff recommended the more traditional TIF loan. Gromacki says that they asks for a 27 year lease revenue bond for $27M, which meant two things, it would be owned by the city and off the tax rolls, reducing the increment generated by the project. The TID would have had to support more than 100% of the project in a new TID. They went to BOE per the policy and he can’t say much, but they came up with an alternate solution by looking at underground commercial parking stalls, the gap was roughly $13M, and based on the projected value on the tax rolls, it could support $13M or 71% of the TIF it could be paid back in 10 years, instead of the 27 year deal where no one in the room would be left when the deal was completed. They got approval from Board of Estimates to negotiate, ULI worked with them in good faith and they were able to put together the term sheet.
Verveer asks about the TIF policy exceptions. Gromacki says the only exception, which was granted by BOE, was the 71% which goes past the 55% gateway. It does better than some of our most recent projects where we were asked to waive the personal guarantee.
Verveer asks about the errors, are there enough errors to refer? Gromacki says he will redraft it, he is Leary of what happened, the report was there in November before Thanksgiving, when it went to the clerk it disappeared and they put it back on there and he is not even sure it is the right draft. He is happy to put the right report on there. Verveer says what they have is dated December 2nd and you aren’t comfortable going throught corrections? Gromacki says he needs to go through it to check it all, there might be just two corrections.
Marsha Rummel says she asked about this at the BOE but didn’t get any traction so she will ask again in front of the whole council, she wants more information about the Class A office space demand and what she has experienced with blight and where they need to jump start something otherwise it won’t happen. What do we know about the Class A market and what do we look at as far as alternatives for underground parking and above ground parking. Would they lower the TIF by doing a different mix of parking. Gromacki says with the Class A market, what they have is a former class A development that is reaching its obsolescence, it might have been great features in the 70s when it was created, but the elevators need to be wider, the electrical needs to be updated and it needs adjacent parking to command the type of rents it commanded when it was first constructed. Also, they have a number of downtown tenants they don’t want to lose to outlying areas where buildings are newer, they have amenities and better access to parking, the mayor and staff were concerned about that. This isn’t so much about class A, but it is business retention and an attempt to stabilize the corner of the square. On the parking he defers to the planning staff about that, but because the land is expensive downtown, its hard to squeeze in above ground parking to built to design standards.
Rummel asks if there is going to be more efforts to improve the square, can we have more information about if it is business retention or Class A office space, she doesn’t feel like they had that information and she asks Matt Mikolajewski, the Economic Development Director (interim, but will likely be approved as permanent) to share the discussion they had earlier in the day. Mikolajewski says that the office market downtown or elsewhere in the city, they can pull that together for future projects, there is data available for vacancy and absorption rates, the city can purchase that. Rummel asks if they had that knowledge at the BOE, he says that to the best of his knowledge that wasn’t requested at that time. He says that based on some data that is 3 to 4 months old, the vacancy rate for class A is low relatively speaking, its about 8.4% (HA! and the residential vacancy rate is between 1 – 3%, that is the definition of “LOW”) compared to all office space throughout the city at 14.2%. (I’d be happy with 8% for housing that would be a little higher than what is recommended, 14.2 would be a dream! Tenants would actually have negotiating power and a level playing field.) To Gromacki’s point about high vacancy rates, that is in Class B and C office space and this building is sliding into class B space. So seeing someone take a class B building and investing in it to make it a class A building is a good thing for the downtown.
TABLE THIS ITEM?
Chris Schmidt suggests they table this item and go on to the Allied Drive Grocery Store report. Ledell Zellers suggests that they refer this due to the errors in the report. Lisa Subeck seconds it.
Mark Clear asks Gromacki and the applicant if that will endanger the schedule for the project. Gromacki says that the only errors is the total TIF recommendation and the reference about the Constellation, alders are points out other errors. Clear asks if the errors substantively change the action of the resolution. Gromacki says that any delay will result in a delay of the project, but they could come back at the next meeting. Clear says now you are answering the first question, he wants to know if the errors are substantive. Gromacki says no.
Verveer asks to suspend the rules to ask the developer if a delay will be ok? They suspend the rules. Verveer says that the next meeting is Feb 3rd. Binkowski says that he won’t be here, that the project is complex and moving along quickly, it has passed every committee and the council voted on the letter of intent unanimously. Clearly if we are going to do the project, they have a series of things to target, if a residential project is not completed in spring you are in trouble with your absorption rates. They have a 22 month construction timeline, they need to start in June to achieve that goal. They have an SIP approval for the apartments that they need to go to plan commission on that they plan to submit the 3rd week in February, the creation of the TID is of great concern, Gromacki can speak to that. It is a complicate project that has been extraordinarily well received. On the parking, they met and they charge higher rates than the city, 90% is private parking.
Chris Schmidt interrupts and says that Binkowski is going beyond the question. He keeps talking, says it has been fully vetted and the impact is critical. He says he would ask Gromacki. Gromacki says it won’t impact the creation of the TID at all, he doesn’t see the errors in the report as substantive. He says the cash flows and analysis are all correct. He doesn’t see a two week delay, as a benefit or it won’t impact the TID, he doesn’t see a delay for the typos in the report. Schmidt says that they already took more time than if they would have tabled it for him to review it.
Zellers asks if he could tell them what the typos are, especially the financial risk to the city? Gromacki tells them to look at the fiscal note in the resolution, they spent a lot of time on that, it has all the details in there. The report is meant to be an ancillary document to see if you are within the bounds of the TIF policy. (yeah, minor details . . . ) He says because he is a detail freak, he let the fiscal note to speak for the numbers, but he put the numbers in the report and and you have to double, triple, quadruple check that and they had something slip through the cracks. He says the biggest items in the report are in paragraph 2 where it references percentages, it shouldn’t be 40%, it shoudl be 29%, it also talks about a grocery and soil compaction and that is from an old project. Also, there is . . . .
Schmidt interrupts . . . Shiva Bidar-Sielaff raises a point of order, they had two requests to place this on the table and out of respect for the speakers here she would like to do that, Schmidt says they didn’t have a motion. Bidar-Sielaff says they don’t need to be discussing this now, they have members of the public that have been waiting for 3 hours. Schmidt says he doesn’t disagree. Bidar-Sielaff asks if she can make the motion to table now. Schmidt says he can recognize her again, she makes the motion to refer, its seconded by DeMarb, no discussion and passes.
ALLIED DRIVE GROCERY
Denise Demarb makes the motion to accept the report on the Allied
Public Testimony
Molly Plunkett, representing Prarie Unitarian and Allied Partners Board (churches that support the neighborhood). She says they have been waiting a long to time speak to them. She missed the meeting where the alder, she doesn’t know his name, was present. Her husband was saying to her that her committee should get a business to come in to the neighborhood. Walgreens served its purpose for prescriptions and some food. The mall is starting to pick up. The city does many creative things to help corporate businesses when they need it and she hopes they can find a way to support this neighborhood.
Stepanie Rearick, Allied Community Coop. She is in favor of the staff report, thanks Cheeks for his action on the issue. Some of you know that the Coop has been trying to get the city’s attention for some time, there is a group of people in the neighborhood working on solutions, putting in lots of time, unpaid, doing the legwork. Please release the $15,000 as quickly as you can, its a short timeline for you, but has been years for the neighborhood. Please consider solutions created by the neighborhood. Madison and Dane County have finally admitted to we have a problem and if we want to solve the issues around race and equity and ownership, we need to change the way we do business, please support honegrown solution, people are ready to step up, and they deserve anything you invest in that neighborhood.
Kristin ?. representing Willy St. Coop. She is here in the spirit of cooperation. Communities statewide are working on these issues, including Green Bay and Deerfield, the hurdle is the securing the capital to start. Please accept the staff report and recommended funding. They know in the Marquette neighborhood how important a grocery can be to improving a neighborhood.
Dorothy Krause says that when you say Fitchbug, you don’t necessarily mean well of white people. She is on the city council there and the county board and both of her districts are majority-minority. And we know poverty ends up following most minority groups, and certainly in her neighborhood. She wants to point out the good work going on in the neighborhood, she likes the work the CDA is going with housing, Fitchburg has Habitat for Humanity that just bought 25 lots adjacent to CDA development, there is so much good, there are problems but good people in community have taken the reigns. Traditional groceries don’t work in their neighborhood and they need to come up with more creative options. She is interested in home based businesses and community spaces for the neighborhood. They need the help of the city to grow their solutions. She went to Walgreens today, it is now empty. What the community is left with is the Mobile gas station which is now their grocery store. The $15,000 will allow them to get to other grocery stores.
Sue Brideson, volunteers with Allied Partners board but not speaking for them, she believes in their food pantry, eviction prevention program, Joining Forces for Families and the Allied-Dunns Marsh Neighborhood Association. She supports this report. The area needs your support for a grocery on the Allied side of Verona Rd sooner rather than later.
6 others are registered in support representing various neighborhood groups.
Cassandra ? is the President of the Allied Coop, she is here because they have worked hard to come up with options to replace the Walgreens which should have never been a grocery store, it is a crisis, it is a health issue. She believe the City is a great City, she lives in a great neighborhood with no grocery. They buy their food at the gas station and McDonalds. She says this is a crisis that will lead to obesity, heart disease and diabetes with eating the processed foods. They have discussed with other grocery stores, oops, pharmacies, some people can’t get their medications, she is a registered nurse and she gets phone calls all times of day to get their prescriptions, we need to resolve this, they want their neighborhood to be great too. Thanks for considering this report and the $15,000 for solutions and $300,000 for incentive for the grocery. She says if they can pay $600,000 for a billboard, they can definitely do this. She is concerned about the health of the children, they need good schools.
Questions of staff
Ahrens asks what happens when you accept a report, May says agree with the conclusion, if they adopt, there might be specific actions required of staff then you are directing those actions be taken.
Steve King apologizes on behalf of the council, they had this discussion within the last two months that they would apply the equity lens to their agenda and if they had done that they would have moved this up to the front of billboard at least, they laugh. He says they will learn as they go, and acknowledge this was a mistake, and thanks for sticking around for the highlight of the show here and be thankful you don’t need to stick around for the end.
Schmidt echos the apology, he says he didn’t do that because he was running the meeting.
Cheeks looks forward to support for this. He says that one of the things that has been a great success with this body being a learning body and our staff embracing public input, as we create policy and establish practice and as we lead. We have been really responsive to the neighborhood as they put together the report. The three priorities were initiated by the neighborhood, and he thanks the Allied Cooop for calling the meeting and asking people to listen. That is where these solutions come from, supporting the cooperative, $15,000 for emergency transportation and $300,000 incentive. He thinks they did a great job of listening and responding instead of coming in with a solution and guess what you are lucky you get to be helped by government. He emphasizes the importance of the $15,000. The majority of the neighborhood without being able to go to Walgreens will continue to go to Woodmans, they would need to spend $20 to $25 to get to the neighborhoods. It is one of the neighborhoods most dependent on transportation and if you can’t walk or don’t have a car, it is expensive to get to a grocery. He says there will be a budget amendment for the $300,000 at the next council meeting, that is the next step. He says that he will continue to support food issues throughout the city, many of your districts have these issues, that is not news, he appreciates their support and he will continue to show support in their neighborhoods.
Ahrens asks if they have to vote for a budget amendment for the $15,000. Michael May, the city attorney, doesn’t know what is in the budget. If its not in the budget, then yes. They might need an appropriation. Ahrens says that it sounded like the $15,000 was already appropriated.
Cheeks says that given the nature of the legislative process, he thinks that $15,000 can be reappropriated from another area and it is below the amount they have to go to RFP for, he thinks it is the mayor’s intention to take action accordingly if the report is accepted.
Mark Woulf, Food Policy Coordinator in the Mayor’s Office, the $15,000 wasn’t budgeted, however they want to make sure the $15,000 is for people who don’t have access to a vehicle, they think JFF (Joining Forces for Families) will administer the money and they would do a Purchase of Service Contract and move to have the money approved, they would probably have to suspend some rules to do that. For the $300,000, Cheeks is correct, there will be a budget amendment at the next meeting.
Ahrens says that he opposed accepting the report on the emergency funds, he thinks the idea of a grant or incentive for the grocery is a necessary use of funds. He says that on the emergency funds, this is a new initiative and he represents 100s of residents at Truax that don’t have a grocery store, in fact they only have a Walgreens (several alders are mouthing the words HyVee!) it’s 4 blocks away and they would like to get a taxi or bus fare to Woodman’s East as well, they and a number of other areas have no access to transportation, private transportation and he doesn’t know why we would use $15,000 for one neighborhood and not others. He thinks this is a decent response to this crisis, but he is not sure it is managed and why not b, c, d or f. They have JFF in that area, they could administer the funds as well, will these funds only go to one area. He thinks it is just unfair.
Matt Phair echos what Cheeks was saying, this is a major issue the committee he is on is working on, they are working on broader solutions to they don’t manage this crisis by crisis. There are funds in the budget to work on Health Food retail and they are looking for ideas. This is a serious issues and they are taking it seriously and any help is appreciated.
Bidar-Sielaff is also on the Food Policy Council and echo’s Phair’s comments. The emergency is the Allied Dr. Walgreens is closed, even the stop gap is closed even tho it was overpriced and not the right place to buy food, now even that won’t be available. She thinks it is their reprehensibility to respond to this crisis, it is drop in the bucket for us, but it is a huge, huge need. She thinks it is their responsibility as alders to identify these needs and bring them to the council. That is what Cheeks did for his district and if others identify those needs they should bring those forward. She says they don’t have those needs in her neighborhood, they are over saturated with groceries. This is the kind of thing she would like to spend 3 hours discussing as opposed to billboards.
DeMarb says there are many other areas of the city that have needs, she has them in her district, the point is this area is in need now, they did the work, they gathered and they asked. The report is before us, they need money to get to the grocery store until we can do something else, this isn’t about fair, she has areas in her district, Owl Creek is isolated and has no grocery or Walgreens, they need to set precedent and they need to understand that there are folks in our city that need a leg up and we can’t do it all at the same time, it might be neighborhood by neighborhood and it is needed. She has talked about the urgency to do a citywide study, where do people need food and can’t get to it. Allied Drive is in need, there are people working that have come together and she is going to support this.
Joe Clausius says that he takes exception to Ahren’s Truax comment, he says within two blocks there is a HyVee grocery store and there is a shuttle service between Hyvee and the East Madison Community Centers, it happened on his watch and its one of his proudest accomplishments but there is not a lack of groceries in the Truax area.
Lisa Subeck says that they have to start somewhere if we are going to make progress on this, she worked in Allied Drive area many years ago at Head Start and at the time they were trying to get a grocery store, Cub came in and didn’t solve problems and went away and here we are again. We have to do something for this neighborhood and she said for Alder Ahrens and for others who sometimes make similar statements, our job is not about bringing home the pork for our districts and certainly there are things they do for their districts and they fight hard. She might be grouchy enough to say some things she hasn’t said before, but there is needs in her district too, but if we take the leap of faith and do what we need to do for one neighborhood then we can take a leap of faith and do it for another neighborhood and another neighborhood and we can do what is right, but if we constantly argue over what is fair, we can’t move forward, we can’t get hung up on that, we do represent our districts first and foremost and we have a responsibility to the city as a whole and to the neighborhoods and people who are struggling and if we don’t do that, we will never move forward as a community.
Anita Weier says that when the northside had a gap, they had a shuttle and she thinks that makes a lot of sense and she hopes they can do that instead of taxis and we do have a bus company.
DeMarb says this is a first step we can learn from, model after and then we can say “me too”. Maybe we need something a little different, smaller or bigger, but we will learn and someone needs to go first and she is glad they stepped up because we need this all over the city.
Schmidt appreciates us taking a new approach to solving an old problem. Seems to have passed on a voice vote, seemingly unanimously.
TAKE TIF OFF THE TABLE
Motion is to refer. Ledell Zellers says that Verveer reports that the developer agrees the two week delay will be ok. Passes.
INTRODUCTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Verveer introduces a 3rd amendment to purchase and sale agreement with Hovde, referred to Baord of Estimates
Resnick has an item about entrepreneurship and resource fund, referred to Board of Estimates and the Economic Development Committee.
Alder Steve King moves to adjourn.
