F for transparency. Beyond the Eskrich debacle, this thing is a mess! Email your alder (allalders@cityofmadison.com) and ask them to scrap this thing! Start. over. This is not how good government works. While you’re at it, ask the mayor (mayor@cityofmadison.com) to veto it if it passes. If he can do it for State St. liquor licenses, he can do it for this one! This feels like a classic bait and switch type situation.
In discussing this issue with others and reviewing the documents for the council meeting tomorrow night I became quite horrified. There are multiple issues that make this whole thing just crazy . . . here’s the documents you might be interested in to catch up with this topic.
– Liquor license application (item 5)
– Beach House Use Agreement
– Operational Plan for Beirgarten
– Request for proposal
And here’s some things that just kinda stink . . . beyond the Eskrich thing.
PLACEMAKING OR PRIVATIZATION OF PUBLIC SPACES?
So placemaking has community based participation at its core. Where was the community participation in determining how our parks could be better utilized and discussions about what kinds of projects we are looking for. We’re about to do our new parks plan, why not wait and see what the public is asking for? And what comes out of that process?
NO EQUITY ANALYSIS?
Um . . . what do the people who currently use the park think . . . you know, those who are disproportionately people of color . . . who are fishing, playing soccer, etc. Or is this another “put food carts at the top of State St. to chase the undesireables away” type situation?
WHAT ARE WE (AS A CITY) AGREEING TO?? i.e. show me the money
– The operators make $62,500 in improvements by Dec 31, 2023. Improvements over $5,000 will be approved by the parks commission. At the end they get to keep the coolers, refridgerators, stoves and tap system, everything else remains the city’s property.
– City will pay $17,500 to upgrade electrical
– Operators are paying for the parks vending permit ($900), utility costs, and a $3,000 security deposit and a “use fee” of $12,350 (in 2017) to $30,000 (in 2023) – except see below as it requires Urban Design and Plan Commission approval
– 2 year lease (March 2017 – December 2019) – note, the RFP said it would be “The agreement, if issued, shall commence in the Fall of 2016 and end on December 31, 2019. Upon mutual agreement the City and selected vendor(s) may extend the agreement for up to two additional one year periods (i.e. 2020 & 2021).”
– 240 people can be in the biergarten and that is what the fees are based on
– By March 31st they have to obtain all permits, approvals, authorizations and consents including – Parks Vending Permit, Class B alcohol license, permission from Parks Superintendent to serve alcohol, Dane County Food and Drink License, conditional use approval from the City of Madison Plan Commission and Urban Design Commission for material building upgrades and landscaping – and if not they will renegotiate the terms and pro-rate fees.
Rumor has it, they also need zoning approval?! to operate a tavern in a park.
WAIT, ISN’T ALCOHOL BANNED IN OLBRICH PARK?
Why yes, yes it is. In fact, the council just passed an ordinance about this in October 2015. It was sponsored by David Ahrens, Mark Clear, Sara Eskrich and Marsha Rummel.
“(ee)Olbrich Park, except for the Olbrich Botanical Gardens and except with the prior approval of the Parks Division or the Parks Superintendent.”
Of course, Ahrens, Clear and Eskrich now support this biergarten. Why the double standard? (Ahem, rich white people can drink, homeless people can’t.)
Can’t bring a bottle of wine in your picnic basket, but when there is profit to be had . . .
WHAT DOES THIS THING LOOK LIKE?
Guess we’ll find out when they go for Plan Commission and Urban Design approval . . . but one word, fachwerk.
HOW LONG ARE WE AGREEING TO THIS FOR? WHY IS THE PUBLIC (AND OUR ALDERS) BEING CUT OUT OF THE RENEWAL PROCESS?
So, everyone keeps saying that there is no need to worry because we can get out of the lease at any point. And yet
To renew this Agreement, Permittee must, no later than October 1 in the final year of the then-current term,provide the City Parks Division with written notice of its intent to renew the Agreement.The City’s decision to renew or not renew the Agreement will be based upon mutual agreement including the Permittee’s performance under this Agreement during through the renewal request. The decision to renew or not renew the Agreement is not reviewable, and solely that of the Parks Superintendent, or his/her designee. The City will notify Permittee in writing of its decision to renew or not renew this Agreement no later than December 1 in the final year of the then-current term.
And, in an email to the Common Council based on questions from the mayor, the Assistant City Attorney had this to say:
Finally, one misconception that I have read about in the paper is that the City can terminate this agreement at any time if it doesn’t feel like it is working. That is not accurate. My original draft of the contract included our standard term allowing us terminate for any reason with 10 days notice. But that was eliminated early during negotiations with the operator, which is consistent with the other similar park contacts where a private entity is making improvements to our facilities and providing an amenity for park users (they don’t want to make improvements and have us terminate the contract a month later). Accordingly, this agreement may only be terminated if the operator defaults on a term of the agreement and doesn’t remedy it within 10 days. It would be a default if they violated state or city alcohol laws/ordinances. However, assuming they correct any default and don’t actually violate any City ordinance/State law, the soonest we can walk away from the operation because of a change of heart is after the 2019 season when we can elect not to renew the agreement.
Please let me know of any other questions.
Doran Viste
Assistant City Attorney
The initial idea was to have a traveling biergarten. How did they go from trying that idea, to a 6 summer lease with no public input on the 2 year renewals?
BUT, DON’T THEY DO THIS IN MILWAUKEE?
Yes, but the city runs it, not a private company that profits off public space. Why are our public spaces for sale with so little public input before the decision is made to privatize them.
WILL THE MAYOR VETO?
You’d think he would, wouldn’t he? It’s kinda his thing.
