Ok – here’s everything except the budget discussions. CDBG and Office of Community Service merger, University AVe/Whitney Way TIF, sale of house in James Madison Park and police overtime. Not as thorough as usual, but some quick notes.
ITEMS ONE AND TWO
Satya Rhodes-Conway asks about changes in the CDBG and Office of Community Service Department restructuring. The staff explained that grant administrators and people working in the neighborhoods are in the same class category. Rhodes-Conway says they are not the same skills. They say it is a broader definition in the job descriptions that fits them both. I didn’t hear the description of the second job description. Rhodes-Conway asked questions about how staff were informed of these changes. Clingan says they have been working with Human Resources for months. Rhodes-Conway asks questions about how the restructuring took place and how they would know about these issues. Human Resource staff say that the changes were noticed on the personnel agenda as required. Rhodes-Conway says that is not sufficient and argues with him about if the staff knew about this before the personnel committee meeting. Clingan says that youth, seniors, housing all need the same types of positions into the future, they need to emphasize those types of areas of expertise. He says that there were inequities when he arrived and this is just to treat people fairly and give them a way to advance in the department. Rhodes-Conway asks if this is because of the merger. He says this is good policy and pathway up through the department and will assist management of the department. This will be for CDBG and Office of Community Services but not childcare which will have their own reclassification. It passes.
Note: I had trouble reading between the lines about what is going on here, but basically, there was a weird merger of this department that was never really discussed or overtly voted on by the council and I’m not sure people understand what is going on here. Personally, I’m really annoyed with the “merger” as it just creates more rules for non-profits that are unnecessary. The entire rules of the federal government are being applied to the City of Madison tax dollars so that they can be “consistent”. It’s absurd.
ITEMS 3 – 9
No comments, questions or debate. All pass.
POLICE OVERTIME – 3RD QUARTER REPORT
Rhodes-Conway asked for the highlights. Police staff have none, no changes really, overtime is due to the protests. Report is accepted.
SELLING HOUSE IN JAMES MADISON PARK
No discussion, comments or questions. Motion carries.
TIF FOR UNIVERSITY/WHITNEY WAY
Public Comment
Amy Kinast says she is the one that filed a Landmark nomination on this property where this new project would go. Its the Marshall Erdman office and shop. It was built in 1949 and used for 35 years by Marshall Erdman. Landmarks agreed this is a historic figure and building, but maybe other buildings could honor him. She shows a sculpture that they are proposing to save, she thinks the sculpture is worth saving, and hopes they do right by it. She says they should deny the funding because we don’t know how polluted the land is, who will own it and its feels like we are paying money to tear down a perfectly good historic structure that tells us about our history and culture.
Discussion
Rhodes-Conway asks Joe Gromacki the TIF Coordinator to walk them through a TIF report and issues since this is the first time the new Board of Estimates is dealing with a TIF request. Gromacki says the developer usually provides staff with the sources of funds and costs of the project and estimates of the value once completed. The analysis is a balance of costs, values and sources of funds. The verify that there is a shortfall in the funding or “gap” that shows that “but for” the funding the project would not occur. They work with assessors office to forecast the value. TIF policy says they can get up to 50% of the present value generated by the project over its life. This project requires much less than 50%, its 9% (er, correction! 29%! But still good!). The gap is due to non-assessable infrastructure costs. These are costs over and above what would be otherwise assessed. They think the lease rates are reasonable. The developer also has to have more equity in the deal than the TIF and that is the case here. The cashflow can support the mortgage. He said some other things, but it was unusually hard to hear last night.
Rhodes-Conway asks about a PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes), have we given TIF to a non-profit before?
Gromacki explains that if UW clinics or another non-profit purchases the property they would have to repay the TIF and pay a PILOT into the future. This is extra and not usually in TIF agreements.
Rhodes-Conway says we can’t do TIF loans to non-profits?
Gromacki says it wouldn’t make any sense.
Rhodes-Conway says in this case the PILOT protects us in case a nonprofit would buy the project.
Gromacki says yes.
Mike Verveer asks about the written report.
Gromacki says that the fiscal report has everything, he wasn’t able to attach it but he can attach it, it says what he
said, this is the longest fiscal note ever written.
Verveer asks if there are not policy exceptions.
Gromacki passes around the report, I believe he indicated that there were none, but I’m unclear.
Mayor says getting nervous about private property being turned over for public purposes. We have all these new relationships with nonprofits, governmental and private entities and wants to makes rue that if it becomes a nonprofit we can collect a PILOT.
With that, the motion passed and they moved on to the budget.
NOTE: I can’t believe they didn’t have a TIF report that was available to the public prior to the meeting. And that it was there at the table and the alders didn’t have it until they asked for it. This is basic information that should be automatically provided, without question. Now I’m pretty curious what is in that report and why they didn’t just hand it out and put it in legistar.
