Last Minute Changes to Edgewater TID Rushed Through Plan Commission

Last night was one of those nights that sucked to try to cover things in city hall. I managed to catch part of Landmarks, part of Plan, part of Landmarks again, park of Plan again and none of Board of Estimates. And, the kicker, my TiVo died so I couldn’t compensate. Boo. Anyways, here’s what Plan did on the Edgewater TID with bk comments.

Yeah, the aburdity continues. Late and wrong information, plenty of time, but its rushed through plan commission. What are they so afraid of?

DID PEOPLE EVEN KNOW THIS WOULD BE VOTED ON?
The agendas come out late Friday afternoon. This was voted on Monday evening. Unless you were watching for it or are a city hall junkie, chances are, you don’t know about it.

But wait, the alder is probably doing a good job of keeping people informed, right? Note, this information is sent out at 2:55 in the afternoon, about 2.5 hours before the meeting, its doesn’t include the alternate that will be considered AND it is only sent to one listserve, not the other three that it should have been sent to to ensure maximum possibility of people knowing about it. I don’t believe anyone from James Madison park was there to represent the neighborhood.

from Maniaci, Bridget
to “jamesmadisonparkneighborhood@yahoogroups.com”
date Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 2:55 PM
subject [JamesMadisonParkNeighborhood] plan commission tonight [2 Attachments]

Hi all,

I wanted to just drop a line and a reminder that at the Plan Commission meeting tonight the State Street TID 32 amendment will be considered (its the last item on the agenda: http://legistar.cityofmadison.com/meetings/2010/7/8597_A_PLAN_COMMISSION_10-07-26_Agenda.pdf ). Property owners received notices in the mail about this about three weeks ago. Here is the link to the legistar with information. http://legistar.cityofmadison.com/detailreport/matter.aspx?key=21040

Attached you will also find a spreadsheet and map with neighborhood information I’ll be presenting on tonight. (Dark purple denotes owner-occupants I was able to confirm through Access Dane).

Please email or call me with any questions or feedback.
All the best!
Alder Bridget Maniaci
608-516-3488
__._,_.___

Attachment(s) from Maniaci, Bridget

TID assesment map.pdf
TID 32 blight research(2).xls

Note: This email said that people were notified three weeks ago. Later, she says “15 days” and you only got notification if you were in the boundaries.

OOOPS, NEW INFORMATION, AFTER THE PUBLIC HAS SPOKEN
I missed the public testimony due to the aforementioned triple booking.

After the public had spoken, new materials were passed out. Or maybe while they were speaking, there were a lot of staff and alders frantically running around and you could tell something was happening, but it was unclear and since I hadn’t been there, it was hard for me to figure it out.

Anyways, here’s the Amended ALTERNATE TIF plan and the resolution. Verveer didn’t even have them electronically, so I couldn’t get them except on paper.

The plan commission also got the info from Maniaci in the email above, but no copies for the public that was there, mostly NOT from the James Madison Park area.

MANIACI’S ARGUMENT FOR THE BOUNDARIES
Bridget Maniaci says they have a number of spreadsheets in front of you that she put together, and she wants to talk to it, talk to the district, and the second amendment alternate, and that kind of came about after Mike and she sat down with city staff, she has been talking with city staff since last summer, talking to staff for a long time, asking how drawing lines, asking what about over here? Originally James Madison Park was included in TIF district expansion so they would have some resources for the houses in the park to sell the houses or fix them up, and she has a real problem not including houses in the neighborhood and leaving park in, had staff look at it, they did a blight study, she hopes you have it printed out. Look at the second one, by MSA, they went block by block and identified the blight, she thought it was helpful, it showed her she had a lot of neighborhood that needed help. She says in discussions with TIF review board there are concerns of schools and county, they want to know “what do we get out of it”, so she put together a cross reference of the blight study and assessed value of houses by type of properties. People don’t think of James Madison Park as homeowner type neighborhood, but there are large numbers of single family homes, currently single family homes, not chopped up 2 and 3 floats, but 38 owner-occupied houses in this 9 block area. Then look at the blight scores and look at the assessed values and there are a lot of very affordable homes for small cap TIF. The dark purple properties are owner occupants, 4 of the single family homes, notice much higher in value than non-single family homes. She points out the color coded map she got from the assessor’s office, she said it was also important to break down the number of properties, 23% of little area is sizable compared to others. Single family and 2 units can be targeted for owner occupied, this is an important area that needs help and sees a need for bringing every tool to the table to bring the neighborhood up, its been largely student rentals for decades, with the high rises the neighborhood emptied out, it is a transitioning neighborhood that can go up or down. We will see a lot of problems in the area, she wants to see us financially poised to see new homeowners come in, this area is great for young professionals getting feet under them financially, that is why she wanted to see it included and why valuable. Some want to expand to Langdon, and although this is a discussion about that, that area has to do with those properties built as large houses if houses at all, the blighted areas are in Peterson blight assessment, its more white to that side, property values are too high, small cap TIF would be a drop in the bucket for those properties, 5 new owners in this area is $300,000 per year, if 5 per year, you’d see a dramatic turnaround of the neighborhood. Extrapolating, you can see the block of single family homes, values have risen substantially. She says Verveer is not happy with the map, notices went out 15 days before meeting, she ran around like mad to make sure notices got out and told mike if he wanted to do an amendment he should do before plan commission and he called this morning and that is why it is landing on the desk tonight. She has one additional block, that block has only 4 non-blighted properties, that would be great to include. Mike’s properties are blighted, it is up to them to decide if extra $40M or $35M or $30 M is worth it to be $148M, to increase to $185M alternate, that’s for you to figure out. This has to be approved by TIF review board,they are concerned about amount of property taken off tax roll, they want to know what is in it for them. Maniaci says she doesn’t see the amendment and district as a cookie jar for infrastructure, as the charge has been levied at us, she is sensitive to those arguments, that is part of why she asked why it included James Madison park. They may have other sources for that, there is very good reasons for the map, as drawn currently, Mike can make his case about including the extra blocks, she wouldn’t support more on Langdon, it’s just infrastructure projects, have to be responsible here, have to weigh what we include carefully.

I’m sorry, I really did have a hard time following her, I felt like she jumped into the middle of a thought that I was trying to catch up with. I hope I captured it all accurately. I also had sthe problem with run on sentences and I’m not sure if it was me or her.

Judy Bowser asks if this is for residential improvement, not commercial development?

Maniaci says yes in her little neighborhood there is very little commercial, about a dozen commercial properties, that also has to do with apartment buildings, there is Klinke cleaners, Market Basket, convenience stores, this part of district commercial isn’t here, not the focus of what looking at with this.

VERVEER’S ARGUMENT
Mike Verveer says he’s in support of alternate, apologies, he is partially to blame for the new information at their places. The genesis is as follows, its not the gorilla in the room, all of you know he was not the biggest fan of the Edgewater, this is more important than this one project, it goes back many years, if Olinger here, he could tell you they have been in discussions for 5 years about amending TID #32 to include historic Mansion Hill district – in fact they contracted the first study before interest in hotel was known, it goes back many years, he would like to provide resources to the first and most important most vital historic district, through the magic of TIF. They need to underground the utilities, and do public works projects. He says Larry Nelson joked they should landmark the water and sewer lines since they have been there since before the city incorporated, some are still in use, but they do emergency repairs on a regular basis, the subterranean utilities are way past their useful life as are curb and gutter and street surfaces. It is blighted further by MG&E contracts with tree trimmers, they cut the not so attractive v’s in the tree canopies, he knows that there is no other way they can get utilities undergrounded without magic of TIF. He also wants to have period street lighting and would love to do something to try to preserve historic homes in the district and encourage homeownership. The small cap TIF was only in use less than year in Bassett, it had limited success, but they didn’t give it much time, they killed the TID prematurely before program could get off the ground. He would like to work together with anyone interested to figure out a robust small cap TIF program. The city Capital Budget includes small cap TIF funding for interim of boundaries. He says he doesn’t like to criticize staff, but he was surprised, and he is being charitable in saying that, by the map. He realizes staff is working under direction to have minimal values as possible, they gerrymandered the district to Edgewater and then to James Madison Park thanks to Alder Maniaci, ignoring several parcels if not blocks of historic mansion hill. He was not consulted when boundaries were created, unlike any other TIF district that has been in his district. !. They had a meeting weeks ago, he made his case and to staff’s credit they accepted his argument and worked on an alternate for tonight, bottom line is he argued for every parcel in district to studied for blight by Gary Peterson, not every block in 4th Aldermanic district in the amendment is in there, they were not all studied for blight. Many blocks in other district not part of alternate so testimony from Greeks and co-ops isn’t addressed because they didn’t study the area. The changes in the alternate goes a long way to lessen gerrymander, but does not include more blocks that could be 4 additional blocks in 4th. There is no sinister conspiracy theory, he is not trying to delay TIF for Edgewater, he has been working with staff for years to include Mansion Hill in the TIF, either as a freestanding TID or amendment, he knows from experience the magic an beauty and success of TIF. He realizes and fully appreciates other taxing jurisdictions, thinks community uses TIF wisely and smartly, the alternate will go a long way towards accomplishing the goal of testimony, it does not cover whole neighborhood. Hope you all will support it tonight.

QUESTIONS FOR THE DUELING ALDERS
Judy Olson says she gave away her map, (No doubt to some member of the public who didn’t have any other access to the information) but she asks why any part of Mansion Hill is not included.

Verveer says the only parcels of the historic Mansion Hill District not included and that have been studied for blight is one where Bethel Lutheran Church, but it is tax exempt. Staff is not recommending it, they are going through building plan process and intent is to use block for church purposes and related activities, he thinks that almost everything else covered. He says another exempt on N Pinckney st, by Judy Karofsky’s house, her block is included, but a block south is not included, they left out Pinckney closer to the square in Mansion Hill and it was not studied for blight, he is not delaying to get the study, wishes it was covered but it isn’t.

I’m beginning to think that there has to be a public process to determine what areas are studied for the TIF districts, because by the time you get to this point, you can’t do anything to change the outcome if you want to be added, except get labeled an obstructionist.

Maniaci explains other portions not included are the 100 block of Gilman, they are very large properties, like Verex building, they have to draw the line somewhere, they can’t draw everything in. These are lakefront properties with high property values, there is not substantial blight. She explains the roadway is included, if they desire to do infrastructure improvements the possibility is there. The Mansion Hill Historic District goes to the square and there is a lot of sensitivity to the overall value to district.

Brad Murphy interrupts to inform the plan commission the Mansion Hill Historic District does not run all the way to the square.

Maniaci explains she meant the neighborhood boundaries. She says that the boundaries were gerrymandered to begin with, says Gromacki can explain where can draw lines.

Tim Gruber asked Verveer about his opinion on the lake shore path from James Madison to union and if he’d support TIF for it, as suggested in the downtown plan.

Verveer says seen it, interesting recommendations in plan, Verveer says he lived there for part of undergraduate school and everyday trespassed through the Langdon area to get to class – if there is a way to improve it, we should do that. In terms of the lakeshore, there are some complications with easements and property owners, if can do it, it would be a great benefit. This district no longer includes the lakeshore, he would defer to alder Maniaci and Eagon on this.

Maniaci says that that housing boards and chapter members to a lot of lakefront properties are adamantly opposed to lakeshore path, they don’t like it from land use and safety perspective, these groups had houses there for over 100 years and she has to believe they will be there 30 to 50 years in the future, her constituency is not interested. It’s not just one or two of the houses, its mostly everybody, she says that has to represent her constituents [Now there’s an interesting idea, maybe she finally realized she has to get re-elected?]. They have to live with it, if you don’t live think its great. [Sound familiar to anyone? Funny, it matters now?] She says there are a lot of real concerns [as opposed to . . . not real concerns] and straight up opposition to the proposal. Walkway path is not a problem, lakeshore path is a major problem.

PUBLIC, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT ON THESE DOCUMENTS YOU CAN’T SEE?
Judy Bowser asks if people who spoke before we received the packet if they wanted to add additional comments now that there is new information.

Three people came back up to speak.
– Scott Resnick, Langdon Neighborhood President points out that the path wouldn’t be included in the amendments and it would be a big fight in the neighborhood.
– Peter Fiala from the co-ops asked for more time, he says he didn’t think they got the information 15 days ago, would appreciate some time to get more feedback.
– Ledell Zellers still opposed, slightly since more of Mansion Hill is included, but she doesn’t support going to the east.

MORE QUESTIONS
Who got notice
Maniaci clarifies that Fiala’s house is not in the original or the alternate so he wouldn’t have gotten a notice.

Bowser asks for map of proposed district including the amendment.

Amendments
Judy Olson asks if can amend this again?

Joe Gromacki, TIF coordinator says that they can amend it 4 times, this is the second one, so obviously there are 2 more.

How decide which districts?
Bowser says when got new map today, I wondered how you decided which TIF district to amend for this project, she looking at maps on website and TID 23 abuts much of the amended portion, how decide which one?

Gromacki says that there were a lot of factors, when they draw boundary have to look at state law, they can only include whole units of property and they have to follow right of way lines. So, he is bound by those shapes. They also look at the Capital Improvement Plan (Capital Budget) and Public Works and Engineering and their lists. The look at street improvements, they cross reference with neighborhood plans, they talk to planning and what area they would want to see them concentrate. He says that starts to shape the boundary, they also look at blight, one area might not have enough, have to take property out if it is in standard condition (i.e. good). He says that the magic or beauty of TIF is based on value, it has to generate value in the near term, so they need a TIF generator. TIF 23 is old, its about to close, not a lilkely candidate. TIF 36, which is blocks to northeast (south) needs a generator, having the Edgewater and strong potentials in the amendment area with TIF district throwing off residual cash makes it a logical choice. They look at it with comptroller’s office, to see what makes sense, then look at how much TIF this boundary would through off – that is where beauty and magic of TIF happens.

New Issue for drawing lines – Schools and County need their money
The new nuance is more broader fiscal policy, other overlying tax districts, before economic recession their budgets were good and they said ok to invest our portion of tax levy, now that budgets tight, taking very conservative look at lost revenues based on base value. TID 23 with the half mile rule amendment they sent a strong message from schools and county that they don’t want to see the city use it for the sole purpose to pad the Capital Improvement Plan. They want to see jobs and new value, they can bless that. They want to have something more once the distinct closes that didn’t have before. They want to know “what do they get for it”. Without their vote, they have the final veto, that is very important, without them this goes nowhere. Usually it is a 4 – 1 or 5 – 0 vote and now looking at 3 – 2 or losing a vote. They are listening to partners in this, in putting together district they were mindful of their concerns.

Gerrymandering
Gromacki says that he hears about “gerrymandering”. He says to look at any district, they all gerrymander cuz of statutory lnaguage, fiscal issue, blight and budget. That is what we do, this is like a dish cooked by many cooks, can we make everyone happy? No.

You can’t be added now.
People want to be added in all the time, this is the 2nd amendment proposal and alternate and facts of those two are that they have done the blight studies and gave the proper notice, if they propose to add Langdon it would put them outside of conformity with TIF statute, they need proper notice, he is not sure they were aware of that, we would have to start process all over, to have their option is not an option in terms of adoption of tif district for area.

Timing with Edgewater stalled?
Lauren Cnare asks about expectations for development, Edgewater was supposed to be ready by 2013, with the “current state of affairs”, does that change the numbers or life or viability of the district?

Gromacki says no. They were just estimates based on when value realized, they had a cushion, they fully assessed 2013, if delayed a year, it might add a year or two to the life of the district, but those are forecasts and they built in cushion.

What if Jt Review Board says no?
Olson asks if Joint Review Board turns it down, could they bring back another map?

Gromacki says yes, there is a time period in the statute for that.

Timing of Decision
Michael Basford asks the Joint Review Board is meeting to decide?

Gromacki says they meet as needed, he anticipates in September.

Basford says he heard they were meeting August 14th?

Gromacki says that is a special meeting – they have an organizational and final meeting, but because they are financial professionals they meet at noon and there is not enough time to hear from the public so they created a separate meeting at night on August 12th, at 5:00 in room 260 where people can testify, they won’t make a decision, they will just listen, they will deliberate in September.

Basford asks if the Common Council has to decide before the September meet.

Gromacki says it is required under statute.

MOTION AND SUBSTITUTE TO REFER
Cnare moves approval of the alternate.

Schumacher seconds.

Basford moves a substitute to refer to August 23rd.

Bowser sseconds.

Basford says that he needs time to chew what was dropped off this evening, since the Joint Review board only has a public hearing and decision isn’t until September there is pllenty of time to digest this and give Council an option to make a decision in advance of the Septebmer meeting. He asks Gromacki if that is true.

Gromacki says that he has to check the schedule, but typically referrals are problematic. He says they are on a schedule and they need Board of Estimates to approve it too and it might conflict, Board of Estimates is the lead.

Kerr asks him to confirm (as opposed to speculating as he is doing.)

Maniaci jumps in and tries to help.

There is a long . . . long . . .pause . . . as . .. staff . . . figures . . . it . . . out . . .

Kerr tells the commission there is a meeting on the 9th.

Gromacki seems like that won’t work.

Nan Fey asks why?

Gromacki says that Joint review meets on August 12th and they want to know the decision of plan commission by then. [Note, he just said that its just a public hearing and they won’t make a decision until September.] He says that Board of Estimates will meet on the 30th, the 23rd is kind of tight, it won’t work.

Maniaci says that she hopes they might go with the 9th, review board wants good info when they meet on the 12th, she wants plan commission decision at that time, her goal is to see it move forward, take a look with some time, but this is straightforward and simple.

Basford says its ok to change his substitute to the 9th.

Bowser, who seconded agrees.

Cnare says that since tight timeframe if people have questions, they should see page 6 & 7, its clear what the changes are, you should ask now, so ask to the questions can be answered quickly and easily on the 9th.

[Ok, sounds like its ok, everyone agrees, it will be referred to the 9th, right? Wrong.

VOTE: Basford is the only vote for referral. Everyone else is silent.

OOOPS BEFORE YOU VOTE, THE INFORMATION IN THE PACKET IS WRONG
Brad Murphy says that before they vote they should know that he talked to Rolfs and Gromacki and they will be looking at the existing zoning and making some changes to maps in the packet, the proposed land use and zoning map need corrections to be made, they will make the changes before it goes to Board of Estimates and Countil.

Kerr asks “what do you mean?” The neighbors might want to know, are the maps based on the comprehensive plan?

Murphy says that the proposed zoning map is the is same as the existing zoning map. They should have used the adopted comprehensive plan and the map should reflect existing land use approvals.

Kerr verifies the current project plan is incorrect?

Murphy says the proposed land use is same as existing and it should reflect adopted comp plan, most recent adopted plan.

Kerr asks if there was an updated neighborhood plan since the comprehensive plan was adopted?

Murphy says not for this area.

Murphy adds that there also need to be correction to the existing zoning and map. That is just clean up. Biggest change it to have the adopted comprehensive plan reflected, and reflect existing use.

Kerr asks to make sure that is noted to council, Kerr says public should know what doing here, as well as council members.

Michael Schumacher follows up because of the sensitivity of this project, have they made these kind of changes before.

Murphy isn’t sure, doesn’t think so, but wouldn’t be surprised if they did, but he doesn’t remember.

Schumacher asks another question I missed, but I think he was verifying something else was correct.

Basford says he’s voting no, he’s very disappointed in having to do that, nothing in substitute would delay this at all, and we could certainly afford the time, looking at the map and once cross Butler, he not convinced that including that area in this amendment was necessary, that is a real shame.

Kerr appreciates Basford comments, commends Verveer and Maniaci for being good advocates for their neighborhood, regardless of if she likes them, she will vote no, its very hard to vote no against colleague when someone asks for something for district, you assume they know their district better, but she doesn’t support TIF for Edgewater, she made it clear to her constituents and to colleagues, regardless of merits of small cap TIF and preserving Mansion Hill and enhancing those properties, does not support underlying genesis of the TIF, the TIF loan to the Edgewater, so she is voting against.

Maniaci says that she took the condition of neighborhood into account, she said ok, its in the best interest of neighborhood and city, there are a number of properties deteriorating, look at the yellow ones, with the blight ratings compared with satisfactory, its really huge, only 5 satisfactory, he rattles off numbers from her sheets that I couldn’t catch, she says indicators are the the neighborhood is going down, not up and that is why district in the best interest for neighborhood and city.

Bowser says that for same reason as Kerr, voting no

Schumacher says a year ago he was not supportive of TIF for Edgewater, felt early on it was an arbitrary number [and got more arbitrary through all the changes when the number stayed the same, right?]. He says after going through the northside TIF district he understand the gerrymandering, that came together for various reason, it looked very odd, there is nothing neat about TIF districts. He is also on the Board of the League of Municipalities and they have been looking at TIF districts around the state – looking at cities and townships and villages and how they are used and he learned that most have issues and questionable economic generators given the economy, if wait for the perfect we would never have any more. This is just like the northside with the weak generator, but over time it helps the community. $16M will have economic benefits in the long term, not immediately, because of alders and community members have to make improvements, it will feel good at end of day.

Olson might have been able to make referral if not just made big speech about referral, that was her reluctance to vote on it – amendment is really self explanatory and they don’t need a lot of time to consider it, she will vote aye, reason has to do with Small Cap TIF and there is an opportunity to apply TIF money to preservation of downtown, need more of it, hopes it works out. [So, the Edgewater gets $16M and the neighborhood get $300,000 for a couple years and that is why you vote for it? Why not at least increase the neighborhood money? Sigh. I ‘hope” its worth it.]

VOTE: Kerr, Basford, Bowser vote no
Schmacher, Gruber, Cnare, Olson and Heifitz vote yes