HUD NEWSRead more!
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development – Shaun Donovan, Secretary
Office of Public Affairs, Washington, DC 20410
HUD No. 09-xxx FOR RELEASE
Donna White Friday
202-708-0685 July 31, 2009
http://www.hud.gov/news/index.cfm
HUD MAKES FUNDS AVAILABLE TO HOUSING AGENCIES WITH SECTION 8 DIFFICULTIES
HUD issues guidance to agencies to keep families housed
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is today advising all public housing agencies that administer HUD’s Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) program that additional funds have been made available to help them address funding shortfalls that may limit them from serving families participating in their HCV rental assistance programs. HUD issued this guidance to minimize the impact on families and prevent terminating housing vouchers.
“I know from experience how much of a challenge it is to manage this important program, especially during a recession,” said Assistant Secretary Sandra Henriquez, who heads HUD’s Office of Public and Indian Housing. “It was only a few months ago that I was an executive director, and now I stand as a partner with my former colleagues so that we can work through this funding challenge together to continue helping families who need support to live in affordable housing.” Prior to joining HUD, Henriquez spent 13 years as the Executive Director of the Boston Housing Authority.
Letters were sent to 2,400 public housing agencies today that administer the HCV program, also known as Section 8, to inform them of HUD's action thus far to address challenges they may be encountering as they manage their HCV program.
HUD has already worked with several public housing agencies to assist them to take administrative actions to lessen the impact on families. HUD has also awarded $89 million from its $100 million set-aside fund, provided by Congress to give additional support to agencies in certain situations, such as increased leasing or unforeseen circumstances.
In the coming weeks, HUD will award the remaining $11 million from the set-aside fund to agencies that are on the verge of terminating families. In addition, HUD will disperse another $30 million to agencies that are eligible to receive extraordinary administrative fees for technical assistance to prevent the termination of families. These funds can also be used to fund vouchers. HUD provides fees to housing agencies to administer the HCV program.
The shortfalls have so far impacted about 15 percent of all PHAs and HUD is working aggressively to resolve PHA shortfalls with existing funds. If it is determined that additional funding is needed, HUD will work with Congress on legislative changes, for example, authority to adjust allocations of available funding, to minimize adverse consequences to families and to the other PHAs that are not experiencing shortfalls.
In the letter sent today, HUD asks housing agencies to submit an e-mail no later than August 14th to pih.financial.managment.division@hud.gov if they suspect their available funding will force them to terminate families.
A combination of factors caused some housing authorities to issue more vouchers than their final budgets will support. HUD’s 2009 budget was not approved until March, which required the department to fast-track its process to verify voucher usage and distribute funds to housing agencies in May – five months into the calendar year. Also, nationally, the department saw an increase in the cost of vouchers due to decreases in families’ contributions towards rent and rising utilities. Additionally, voucher turnover slowed in major cities, which means families are holding on to vouchers longer due to the economy, and attrition is a limited option for reducing program costs.
###
HUD is the nation’s housing agency committed to sustaining homeownership; creating affordable housing opportunities for low-income Americans; and supporting the homeless, elderly, people with disabilities and people living with AIDS. The Department also promotes economic and community development and enforces the nation's fair housing laws. More information about HUD and its programs is available on the Internet at www.hud.gov and espanol.hud.gov.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Will HUD step up?
Could we get more money from HUD to solve our section 8 problem? Too bad they chose July 31st to potentially solve the problem, when the higher rent is due tomorrow. Check this out . . .
Partial Friday Round Up
Chamber later reports, TIF, Hotels, Bruer and other miscellaneous stuff . . .
CHAMBER, DID THEY REALLY KNOW?
A friend of mine sent me this about the Isthmus article on late Chamber of Commerce conduit contributions, so I can't take credit for the research:
DON'T BOTHER FILING CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS
I have to say, I wasn't surprised by the Isthmus article about the campaign contributions and lack of filing and the Chamber of Commerce's political bullshit. But I was more concerned and kinda shocked by Blanchard's response.
IS MARK OLINGER NO LONGER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT?
I've long had issues with Mr. Olinger's dual role of working for the CDA and being the city's DCPECD Director. But his recent vacation response on his email kinda surprised me, has he completely given up on being the director of the DCPECD and only works for the CDA?
NO TIF APPLICATIONS HERE
So, all this talk about eliminating the "but for" and financial analysis about if a company really needs TIF money and after taking a look at the lobbying reports, I decided to dive in and look at the TIF applications on the table. At the moment, I hear that the following entities are looking for TIF from the city: Edgewater, Danisco, Oscar Mayer, Pelliteri, Apex, Marcus Hotel and at one point Fiore was looking for TIF. So, I really wanted to see what they wanted and what they said they needed it for.
Well, guess what? Of all the above, the only ones to actually fill out the application for TIF were Danisco and Oscar Mayer. How is it that I'm hearing the Edgewater TIF is settled at $5.4M (for them and another $10M or so for "public improvements") before they even put in an application? Hmmmm . . . .
DO THEY REALLY NEED TIF?
So, rumors are flying all around about the Oscar Mayer and Danisco applications for TIF, I've heard this story from multiple people. Apparently, neither one of them need TIF. Oscar Mayer can get the money from the state and Danisco made a profit of $30+M last year, even in this economy. Plus, they are asking for some rather small amounts of money. Does anyone really believe that these huge companies can't come up with $300,000 or $400,000? So what's really going on here?
A FIFTH HOTEL?
My favorite rumor I heard recently . . . Kenton Peters also has a hotel plan. This is just getting ridiculous. All these proposals can't be serious can they? Has this just become some kind of ego battle between the big boy developers? Are people just tossing their hats in the ring to be players?
BRUER UPDATE
After about 5 too many beers with Bruer and much talking, he agrees to try harder. He better, cuz I'll be watching.
I have the day off, might want to check back this afternoon for more . . .
Read more!
CHAMBER, DID THEY REALLY KNOW?
A friend of mine sent me this about the Isthmus article on late Chamber of Commerce conduit contributions, so I can't take credit for the research:
Thought you might be interested in this for your blog:
So, the chamber claims not to know they need to file the reports of late disbursements for local candidates, but they complied with the rule (not just once, but twice) in 2007.
They may have simply forgotten to file the reports, but Delora is full of shit when she says they didn't know they needed to complete the reports for local candidates. Might want to note that Jim Imhoff is the signer of the reports back in 2007 and is still (according to their website) their political committee chair so it's not as if no one who knew about the reports then is around now.
DON'T BOTHER FILING CAMPAIGN FINANCE REPORTS
I have to say, I wasn't surprised by the Isthmus article about the campaign contributions and lack of filing and the Chamber of Commerce's political bullshit. But I was more concerned and kinda shocked by Blanchard's response.
"This office does not have nearly the resources to pursue intentional violations of the law regularly referred here by police, and so we certainly lack resources to pursue accidental or inadvertent violations."First, his office is slammed with more important issues and that is a problem and I don't want to ignore that. But to this point, he basically just told people not to bother filing their reports cuz he doesn't care and won't do anything about it. So, its a free for all! Expect the shenanigans to increase.
IS MARK OLINGER NO LONGER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT?
I've long had issues with Mr. Olinger's dual role of working for the CDA and being the city's DCPECD Director. But his recent vacation response on his email kinda surprised me, has he completely given up on being the director of the DCPECD and only works for the CDA?
Sorry I missed your message. I am currently out of the office, returning Monday, August 3, 2009.Hmmmm . .. . three CDA projects (Allied, Villager, Truax) and no mention of anything about the planning diivision, or community development, or economic development. I'd love to see the break down of how he spends his time vs. how he gets paid (City vs. CDA). I think there is something just a tad bit off here.
If you have questions re: Allied Redevelopment, please contact Percy Brown at pbrown@cityofmadison.com
If you have questions re: The Villager, please contact Don Marx at dmarx@cityofmadison.com
If you have questions re: Truax Park, please contact Augie Olvera at aolvera@cityofmadison.com
If you need immediate assistance, please contact my assistant Nancy Prusaitis at nprusaitis@cityofmadison.com.
NO TIF APPLICATIONS HERE
So, all this talk about eliminating the "but for" and financial analysis about if a company really needs TIF money and after taking a look at the lobbying reports, I decided to dive in and look at the TIF applications on the table. At the moment, I hear that the following entities are looking for TIF from the city: Edgewater, Danisco, Oscar Mayer, Pelliteri, Apex, Marcus Hotel and at one point Fiore was looking for TIF. So, I really wanted to see what they wanted and what they said they needed it for.
Well, guess what? Of all the above, the only ones to actually fill out the application for TIF were Danisco and Oscar Mayer. How is it that I'm hearing the Edgewater TIF is settled at $5.4M (for them and another $10M or so for "public improvements") before they even put in an application? Hmmmm . . . .
DO THEY REALLY NEED TIF?
So, rumors are flying all around about the Oscar Mayer and Danisco applications for TIF, I've heard this story from multiple people. Apparently, neither one of them need TIF. Oscar Mayer can get the money from the state and Danisco made a profit of $30+M last year, even in this economy. Plus, they are asking for some rather small amounts of money. Does anyone really believe that these huge companies can't come up with $300,000 or $400,000? So what's really going on here?
A FIFTH HOTEL?
My favorite rumor I heard recently . . . Kenton Peters also has a hotel plan. This is just getting ridiculous. All these proposals can't be serious can they? Has this just become some kind of ego battle between the big boy developers? Are people just tossing their hats in the ring to be players?
BRUER UPDATE
After about 5 too many beers with Bruer and much talking, he agrees to try harder. He better, cuz I'll be watching.
I have the day off, might want to check back this afternoon for more . . .
Read more!
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Community Services Committee Makes Horrible Decisions
Not because they wanted to, but because they were forced to. Not that their decision making process was bad, they just had all horrible choices. They clearly disagreed with making any cuts and felt that these are basic services that should not be cut in this economy - which they clearly expressed to the Mayor in a letter and at a meeting and reiterated throughout the meeting.
As a result of being forced to make these horrible decisions, this morning a few non-profit Executive Directors, and more importantly, the clients they serve are waking up to some nasty surprises. While they went to bed thinking they would get the funding that they were granted as a result of the application process last summer, instead they got recommendations that will go to the Mayor to give them 4 - 11% decreases in that funding.
This post is long because I included details of what changed, so you may want to skip down past that to read about the issues involved.
WHO GOT CUT & HOW MUCH/WHAT CHANGED
Here's a list of agencies and I think, the cuts they are now facing after the decision was made around 10:00 last night after a 4 hour meeting:
That's not really all the bad news, as these are the other programs that were cut as recommended:
These changes were the result of a 4 hour meeting last night where they heard powerful testimony from several of the agencies that would have had up to 21% cuts. The testimony was filled with heartfelt sentiments, some tears and at points was just agonizing. Discussion at the commission was mostly about the process, the pros and cons (ok, mostly cons) of across the board cuts, discussion of the Mayor's priorities and what that means to their process and a continued reiteration of the fact that they believe no cuts should be made.
THERE SHOULD BE NO CUTS
With the economy in the shape it is in, longer waiting lists and more families in more severe crisis as a result, these cuts just seemed cruel. And the real shame here is that so many of these programs help strengthen people and families to PREVENT further costs to the community in the future. A child helped at the age of 2 or 5 or 13, may be the difference between being a productive member of society and someone who ends up in the correctional system or continues the cycle of violence. A GED can mean college instead of the correctional system. Some of these services are critical to preventing violence and sexual assault. They felt that these should be basic services like police and streets and pointed out that what is done here, prevents the need for more police services and that even Chief Wray realizes that the police cannot do this alone and they need these services. They made it clear that they would recommend no changes and have told the mayor that. In fact, many think that there should be increases in this funding. Early Childhood Care and Education Committee said that all these programs are essential to the infrastructure that is fragile and said that every cut we make today has implications for tomorrow. People who were there to speak widely acknowledged that this was not the commission's choice and that they realized they were in a very difficult spot.
ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS VS SETTING PRIORITIES
There was widespread agreement that the death of a thousand cuts has been going on for the past 10 years. That many agencies are going backwards in their support as flat funding and small cuts are more common than modest increases and they have the net affect of not keeping up to rising personnel and health care costs - as well as rent, costs of supplies and general costs to operate a program. All this, while the population that needs services is growing and there are new challenges. And as a result, agencies have more turn over due to uncertain funding, the hard work that has to be done and the relatively low pay. One speaker said it felt like we were in the middle of a of a western movie. He said it feels like someone has a gun and is telling us to dance and every time we gain our footing, someone shoots again and eventually we're going to be lying there bleeding.
The discussion was about if some agencies that were lower priorities should have bigger cuts. But the problem is that the lower priority programs just don't get funded in the first place and have been cut in the past and they are at the point where there are no lower priority groups and some disagreed about who was where on the list. In the end, the cuts reflected above tried to give smaller cuts to the higher priority groups and larger, but not drastic cuts to the lower priority groups that so clearly important to the community. They struggled quite a bit to get to the end results, many motions failed, minds were changed and everyone felt horrible after the meeting. If I have time, I'll get the gory details typed up along with the public testimony.
THE MAYOR'S PRIORITIES
Apparently the Mayor wanted to prioritize programs that address youth violence. There was quite a bit of discussion about what that meant. The Mayor apparently was very blunt about this, was quoting statistics and said he thought long and hard about how this needed to be a priority. But then staff said that he had just gotten out of a briefing and that he wasn't instructing the group to change their priorities and that he was merely looking for ideas. There was some disagreement about what the mayor might have wanted them to do and meant. There was also concern that they not get whipped around by the latest political whim or public relations crusade and that they had set priorities approved by the council.
THE PROCESS
There was some concern that some of the groups who expected not to have cuts recommended did not show up last night. They were working under a very tight timeline. They had less than a month for three commissions to meet, make recommendations, let the agencies know and have a public hearing for them to comment.
Commissioners struggled with cutting agencies that didn't show up to speak, but also recognized that they had a public hearing and to listen and then not make decisions based on what they heard didn't make sense. Otherwise, why did they hold the hearing?
WHY NOT MY TYPICAL RECAP
There's alot of information in this post, and the meeting was four hours long. They talked about many complex issues and its all very hard to summarize. A play by play of this meeting would have been a bit painful to read through, tho I do want to get the public testimony and details of who led on what up so people can read about what commissioners were in favor of what types of cuts.
However, I'm conflicted, as I feel like some people get tagged as whiners because they show up and advocate for their agencies every year, because every year they are recommended to get cut. If you've been to these meetings, you could name 6 Executive Directors and lead staff in the room at the end of the meeting. Meanwhile, other agencies just sit back (for various reasons) and reap the rewards of that continued advocacy. Plus I want people to feel like they can show up and tell the commission what they think and then not get penalized by the politicians, so I'm torn about posting more details and I'd like to encourage more non-profit staff and boards to come forward and join in the fight to save the programs that help the people that are struggling so much in our community and that they pour their blood, sweat and tears into every day.
WHATS NEXT
The Mayor is holding public hearings, at a location to be disclosed at some point. Those hearings are
- August 5th 6:00
- August 11th 6:00
- August 17th 6:00
More to come . . . tonight, the Community Develpment Block Grant Committee gets to do through the same painful process.
Read more!
As a result of being forced to make these horrible decisions, this morning a few non-profit Executive Directors, and more importantly, the clients they serve are waking up to some nasty surprises. While they went to bed thinking they would get the funding that they were granted as a result of the application process last summer, instead they got recommendations that will go to the Mayor to give them 4 - 11% decreases in that funding.
This post is long because I included details of what changed, so you may want to skip down past that to read about the issues involved.
WHO GOT CUT & HOW MUCH/WHAT CHANGED
Here's a list of agencies and I think, the cuts they are now facing after the decision was made around 10:00 last night after a 4 hour meeting:
Program Area 7 - Neighborhood Organizing and Capacity BuildingThe agencies that got "good news"/less severe cuts as a result, I think, are as follows:
East Isthmus Neighborhood Planning Council - 6% cut
Northside Planning Council - 6% cut
South Metropolitan Planning Council - 6% cut
Grassroots Leadership College, Intensive Workshops - 6% cut
Neighborhood House, Connection Newsletter - 6% cut
Program Area 2 - Support to Families
Bridge/Lake Point/Waunona Neighborhood Center - Los Ninos Primeros - 4% cut
Canopy Center - Stress Line, Outreach, Education - 4% cut
Family Enhancement - Parent's Places and Early Childhood Center - 4% cut
Literacy Network - Family First - 4% cut
Respite Center - Crisis Child Care - 4% cut
Urban League - Fatherhood Responsibility - 4% cut
YWCA - Third Street - 4% cut
Program Area 5 - Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault
Rape Crisis Center - Crisis Line - 4% cut
DAIS - Shelter Support & Outreach and Education - 6.3% cut
Freedom Inc - Family Strengthening Program - 6.3% cut
Rape Crisis Center - Crisis Intervention/Short term counseling - 6.3% cut
Program Area 6 - Community Assistance/Access
Allied Wellness Center - 4% cut
ARC Community Center - RESPECT - 4% cut
Bridget/LakePoint/Waunona Neighborhood Center - Latino Family Resource Project - 4% cut
Centro Hispano - 4% cut
Kennedy Heights - Asian Outreach - 4% cut
Lussier Community Education Center - Support Outreach Leadership - 4% cut
Lutheran Social Services - Off the Square Club - 4% cut
Outreach - 4% cut
Porchlight - Transit for Jobs - 4% cut
Tenant Resource Center - Housing Counseling Outreach and Education - 4% cut
UMOS - Community Assistance - 4% cut
Vera Court - Latino Resource Center - 4% cut
YWCA - Day Transit Services - 4% cut
Program Area 7 - Neighborhood Organizing and Capacity BuildingI say, "I think" because there are no final numbers yet. Originally, these were the recommendations. Program Area 1 & 3, and I believe 4, stayed as originally recommended - programs cut there listed below.
Boys and Girls Club - Allied core services (cuts reduced to 6%)
Boys and Girls Club - South core services (cuts reduced to 6%)
Vera Court Neighborhood Center core services (cuts reduced to 6%)
Wilmar Neighborhood Center core services (cuts reduced to 6%)
Program Area 2 - Support to Families
Canopy Center - Family United Network (larger cuts reduced to 9.3 - 9.4% cut)
DAIS - Children of Violent Homes/Children Services (larger cuts reduced to 9.3 - 9.4% cut)
Family Service - Children from Violent Homes (larger cuts reduced to 9.3 - 9.4% cut)
Rainbow Project - Early Intervention & Children of Violent Homes (larger cuts reduced to 9.3 - 9.4% cut)
Youth Services of Centeral Wisconsin - Children of Violent Homes (larger cuts reduced to 9.3 - 9.4% cut)
Program Area 5 - Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault
Rape Crisis Center - Community Education - (larger cuts reduced to 6.3% cut)
YWCA - Transit Night Ride - (larger cuts reduced to 6.3% cut)
Program Area 6 - Community Assistance/Access
Omega School - GED/Basic Skills (larger cuts reduced to 10.8%)
MAP (larger cuts reduced to 10.8%)
TJ Brokerage VITA site (larger cuts reduced to 10.8%)
That's not really all the bad news, as these are the other programs that were cut as recommended:
Program Area 1 - Child CareThe only groups/programs that escaped funding cuts were as follows:
4C's Data Program
Satellite Family Child Care
Bayview Foundation After School Program & Summer Program
Bridge/lakepoint/Waunona Childrens Program
Dane County Parent Council - PEP, Wee Start and Great Beginnings
East Madison Community Center - Children Services & Summer Program
Goodman Community Center - Childrens Programs, Learning Center & Preschool Program
Kennedy Heights - Children Program and Early Childhood
Lussier Community Education Center - Afterschool and Summer programs
Neighborhood House - Summer Day Camp
Vera Court - Children's program and Life as a Boy
Wilmar - Summer Camp
Wisconsin Youth Company - After school and summer programs
YWCA Children's Programs
4Cs Training & Latino Projects
Rainbow Pride program
Program Area 3 - Senior Services
East Madison/Monona Coalition of Aging - Focal Point Based Community Assistance
North/Eastside Senior Coalition - Focal Point Based Community Assistance
South Madison Coalition of Elderly - Focal Point Based Community Assistance
West Madison Senior Coalition - Focal Point Based Community Assistance
Goodman Community Center Senior Activities
Neighborhood House Senior Activities
North/Eastside Senior Coalition Senior Activities
RSVP - Community Services
South Madison Coalition of the Elderly - Neighborhood Senior Center Services
United Asian Services Senior Services
West Madison Senior Coalition - Senior Activities
Wilmar Senior Services
Program Area 4 - Youth Services
Bayview - After School programs, Teen Night and Summer Recreation Program
Big Brothers/Big Sisters - Elver Park Outreach
Boys and Girls Club - High School Summer and School Year Programs
Bridge/Lakepoint/Waunona - Teen Programs and Girl Neighborhood Power
Centro Hispano - Juventud and Juventud MAS
Commonwealth - Youth Business Mentoring
East Madison Community Services - Summer/youth programs and youth services
Family Services - Bridges
Freedom Inc - Girls in Action
Girl Scouts
Goodman Community Center - Middle School, High School & Teen programs, Girls Inc
Kennedy Heights - Girl Inc and teen programs
Lussier Community Education Center - Jefferson Youth Resource Center and Project Teen Build Up
Neighborhood House - Youth Development
Simpson Street Free Press & Summer writing program
Urban League - Schools of Hope
Vera Court - Youth Programs, Girl Neighborhood Power, Youth Leadership and RISE
Wilmar - Soar
Wisconsin Youth Company - Middle and High School After School and Summer programs
Youth Services of Southern Wisconsin - Runaway and Homeless Services, Youth Groups and Youth Work Crew (Allied)
YWCA - Girl Neighborhood Power
Program Area 4 - SeniorsWHAT WAS DISCUSSED
East Madison/Monona Coalition of Aging - Case Management & Outreach
North/Eastside Senior Coalition - Case Management & Outreach
South Madison Coalition of Elderly - Case Management & Outreach
West Madison Senior Coalition - Case Management & Outreach plus Home Chore
These changes were the result of a 4 hour meeting last night where they heard powerful testimony from several of the agencies that would have had up to 21% cuts. The testimony was filled with heartfelt sentiments, some tears and at points was just agonizing. Discussion at the commission was mostly about the process, the pros and cons (ok, mostly cons) of across the board cuts, discussion of the Mayor's priorities and what that means to their process and a continued reiteration of the fact that they believe no cuts should be made.
THERE SHOULD BE NO CUTS
With the economy in the shape it is in, longer waiting lists and more families in more severe crisis as a result, these cuts just seemed cruel. And the real shame here is that so many of these programs help strengthen people and families to PREVENT further costs to the community in the future. A child helped at the age of 2 or 5 or 13, may be the difference between being a productive member of society and someone who ends up in the correctional system or continues the cycle of violence. A GED can mean college instead of the correctional system. Some of these services are critical to preventing violence and sexual assault. They felt that these should be basic services like police and streets and pointed out that what is done here, prevents the need for more police services and that even Chief Wray realizes that the police cannot do this alone and they need these services. They made it clear that they would recommend no changes and have told the mayor that. In fact, many think that there should be increases in this funding. Early Childhood Care and Education Committee said that all these programs are essential to the infrastructure that is fragile and said that every cut we make today has implications for tomorrow. People who were there to speak widely acknowledged that this was not the commission's choice and that they realized they were in a very difficult spot.
ACROSS THE BOARD CUTS VS SETTING PRIORITIES
There was widespread agreement that the death of a thousand cuts has been going on for the past 10 years. That many agencies are going backwards in their support as flat funding and small cuts are more common than modest increases and they have the net affect of not keeping up to rising personnel and health care costs - as well as rent, costs of supplies and general costs to operate a program. All this, while the population that needs services is growing and there are new challenges. And as a result, agencies have more turn over due to uncertain funding, the hard work that has to be done and the relatively low pay. One speaker said it felt like we were in the middle of a of a western movie. He said it feels like someone has a gun and is telling us to dance and every time we gain our footing, someone shoots again and eventually we're going to be lying there bleeding.
The discussion was about if some agencies that were lower priorities should have bigger cuts. But the problem is that the lower priority programs just don't get funded in the first place and have been cut in the past and they are at the point where there are no lower priority groups and some disagreed about who was where on the list. In the end, the cuts reflected above tried to give smaller cuts to the higher priority groups and larger, but not drastic cuts to the lower priority groups that so clearly important to the community. They struggled quite a bit to get to the end results, many motions failed, minds were changed and everyone felt horrible after the meeting. If I have time, I'll get the gory details typed up along with the public testimony.
THE MAYOR'S PRIORITIES
Apparently the Mayor wanted to prioritize programs that address youth violence. There was quite a bit of discussion about what that meant. The Mayor apparently was very blunt about this, was quoting statistics and said he thought long and hard about how this needed to be a priority. But then staff said that he had just gotten out of a briefing and that he wasn't instructing the group to change their priorities and that he was merely looking for ideas. There was some disagreement about what the mayor might have wanted them to do and meant. There was also concern that they not get whipped around by the latest political whim or public relations crusade and that they had set priorities approved by the council.
THE PROCESS
There was some concern that some of the groups who expected not to have cuts recommended did not show up last night. They were working under a very tight timeline. They had less than a month for three commissions to meet, make recommendations, let the agencies know and have a public hearing for them to comment.
July 13 - Mayor’s Budget Message announcement re: 2010 Operating Budget
July 15 - Community Services Committee (CSC)met to make recommendations for continuing funding of all currently funded programs and/or identify exceptions and publish Preliminary Recommendations to POS agencies within 2 business days
July 15 - Early Childhood Care and Education Committee (ECCEC) met to finalize preliminary funding recommendations and publish to POS agencies within 2 business days
July 15 - Senior Citizens Advisory Committee (SCAC) met to recommend continuing funding of all currently funded programs and/or identify exceptions and review and/or prioritize supplemental requests and publish Preliminary Recommendations to POS agencies within 2 business days
July 22 - Early Childhood Care and Education Committee holds public hearing on preliminary recommendations followed by meeting to finalize recommendations
July 29 - Public Hearing on ECCEC, SCAC and CSC preliminary recommendations followed by CSC meeting to finalize recommendations
August 7 - CSC budget recommendations to Mayor
Commissioners struggled with cutting agencies that didn't show up to speak, but also recognized that they had a public hearing and to listen and then not make decisions based on what they heard didn't make sense. Otherwise, why did they hold the hearing?
WHY NOT MY TYPICAL RECAP
There's alot of information in this post, and the meeting was four hours long. They talked about many complex issues and its all very hard to summarize. A play by play of this meeting would have been a bit painful to read through, tho I do want to get the public testimony and details of who led on what up so people can read about what commissioners were in favor of what types of cuts.
However, I'm conflicted, as I feel like some people get tagged as whiners because they show up and advocate for their agencies every year, because every year they are recommended to get cut. If you've been to these meetings, you could name 6 Executive Directors and lead staff in the room at the end of the meeting. Meanwhile, other agencies just sit back (for various reasons) and reap the rewards of that continued advocacy. Plus I want people to feel like they can show up and tell the commission what they think and then not get penalized by the politicians, so I'm torn about posting more details and I'd like to encourage more non-profit staff and boards to come forward and join in the fight to save the programs that help the people that are struggling so much in our community and that they pour their blood, sweat and tears into every day.
WHATS NEXT
The Mayor is holding public hearings, at a location to be disclosed at some point. Those hearings are
- August 5th 6:00
- August 11th 6:00
- August 17th 6:00
More to come . . . tonight, the Community Develpment Block Grant Committee gets to do through the same painful process.
Read more!
More of Bruer's Sexist Behavior
Hmmmm . . . sometimes, you just need to open your eyes . . . and when you don't, sometimes people need to help you out.
Check out this letter written back in March. And it was entered into Legistar, sitting right there in the public view. Go figure. I wonder why I first heard about this yesterday, it seems like its old news by now.
Is sexist too strong of a word? How much of this has to accumulate before we stop making excuses for his loutish behavior? How much longer do we need to just look in the other direction? I wonder how many other stories are out there?
Again, so much for the City's zero tolerance policies.
Read more!
Check out this letter written back in March. And it was entered into Legistar, sitting right there in the public view. Go figure. I wonder why I first heard about this yesterday, it seems like its old news by now.
Is sexist too strong of a word? How much of this has to accumulate before we stop making excuses for his loutish behavior? How much longer do we need to just look in the other direction? I wonder how many other stories are out there?
Again, so much for the City's zero tolerance policies.
Read more!
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
Help the Daily Cardinal Investigate Your Landlord!
This is an interesting approach to the fall dilemma . . . I've often thought what we need is a class action lawsuit over carpet cleaning fees, because students are taken for probably $100,000s each year. . .
Each year, many students are shocked when their lease ends and they find huge deductions on their security deposits. Oftentimes, students argue that these deductions were for illegal cleaning and repairs (i.e. peeling paint, ordinary cleaning, etc). Other times, students say their landlords charged for repairs and never fixed anything!It'll be interesting to see what he turns up! Read more!
The Daily Cardinal is making sure landlords don’t overstep this year by cross-checking tenants’ security deposit deductions with evidence and observations from new tenants to see which deductions are legit and which are bogus.
We need as many tenants involved as possible, so if you’d like to help, please e-mail reporter Ryan Hebel at rhebel@dailycardinal.com for more details.
Thanks and happy move-out!
Wednesday Round Up
There's so many things going on, looks like I'm going to do a mid-week round up as I continue to try to catch up with last week and things going on this week.
SCHMACHER NAILS IT
Yes, I believe he's getting a second compliment from me in two weeks - painful as it is! ;) His post on the "Strong Mayor, Weak Council" or "Weak Mayor, Strong Council" form of government is exactly what I was thinking. I've expressed concerns about the Mayor's office and Council Office resources in the past, even introduced budget amendments to cut the Mayor's office staff, but the weak council was unwilling to intervene. Just look at the numbers Schumacher crunched:
- Mayor's Office Budget - Mayor's Salary = $517K
- Council Office Budget - 20 Council Member Salaries = $83K
- Mayor's office increase in past 6 years = 35.5%
- Council's office increase in past 6 years = 15%
And when you add in the department head issues Schumacher raises (including standing orders from the Mayor to block alders requests for information or to make their lives otherwise difficult), it gets even worse when considering the level of resources available to the elected officials. Basford also has some other good points about the dynamics between the council and Mayor. What they didn't add was that the Mayor is a full time position, while the alders mostly have full time jobs in addition to their alder positions. This all makes for a severe imbalance, especially during budget time.
SPEAKING OF BUDGET TIME
Let the threats begin! It annual threat to not plow snow on the side streets until it gets to 4 inches of snow is baaaaaaaack. It's so annoying how some departments pick the items likely to cause the most controversy for cuts so that the Mayor and Council won't make those cuts, while other departments genuinely try to make meaningful cuts. Here's last year's attempts. The Community Services Commission will be struggling with this tonight, and CDBG tomorrow night and are doing so with little notice and on a tight timeline, but at least their process is transparent and accessible to the public. Meanwhile, some of the sacred cows go for the closed processes, well written press releases and ridiculous proposals. Most taxpayers don't see what happens cuz the local media falls for it every year and doesn't ask the hard/complicated questions and the weak council is well . . . weak.
BRUER TRIES TO NAIL HER?
Ok, I'm frustrated on this one. A couple weeks ago I heard about this and another questionable incident involving President Bruer and another questionable abuse of power issue with a different person who has worked in the clerks office, but was told it was confidential so I honored that. (I haven't been able to watch the video clip, tried on three different computers, but it didn't work - last time that happened, a server needed to be reset, so hopefully that is what is wrong this time.) I'm just glad that Joe Tarr at the Isthmus broke the story. However, I'm unhappy with the conclusion the guys in the City Attorney's Office came up with. Especially given the comments about how it impacted the city employee. I can't believe they only looked at if she was physically threatened and ignored other issues, so much for zero tolerance policy on sexual harassment.
I'm particularly concerned about what I'm told apparently happens a few minutes later in the video and even more concerning was the rumor I heard about the response from the employee and why she didn't complain about that! JFC.
And even worse, for Bruer to try to misuse his power and to try to connect this to personnel issues in the City Council office is just awful. Completely freaking awful.
BACK TO THE COUNCIL OFFICE ISSUES
I was heartbroken to hear that Debbie Fields in the Council office took a temporary position in the Mayor's office. IMHO, she's the best damn staff person I've ever had. She's a grammar queen and gentle in her criticisms, conscientious, proactively helpful, communicates clearly and timely and generally goes above and beyond to be thorough and thoughtful and helpful . . . well that, and so much more! A true public servant. And when you compare and contrast that to the other work done in the office, its just painful to watch as Ms. Fields and her much needed skills is being encouraged to leave the office. As many council members know (and probably a few others within earshot as I have yelled at Bruer about this on multiple occasions . . . and he responded to me with questionable threats of lawsuits), I worked hard to try to rectify this situation and keep the best damn staff person in the office, and I am greatly concerned that no one else will stand up to Bruer on this issue (Compton and Pham-Remmele have tried in the past, hope they continue) and that they will fall for his lies and tenuous legal threats as he continues in his one man crusade to save his preferred staff member. It just sucks and its so hard given that it involves personnel matters and confidentiality issues - because the public really should see this.
MADISON DOESN'T NEED NEW COPS . . . ENOUGH
Or so the Federal Government has determined. While Milwaukee got $10M for new cops with the stimulus money, Madison got the big goose egg. Why? Well here's the punch line:
TIF SHOWDOWN
Wow. Just wow. The new Economic Development Director's complete disregard for state law and the taxpayers wallet is just completely alarming. I have yet to see what his proposal is, because nothing is in writing or in the public eye, but WOW! It sounds like his proposal is to do away with the financial analysis of if the developers really need the money, and instead, just take their word for it - ignoring the legal requirement that when TIF funds are used, there has to be an objective standard to prove that "but for" the TIF money, the project would not go forward. Apparently, there was a pow-wow in the Mayor's office last week, trying to figure out how to get around this for two upcoming TIF applications. Hmmmmm . . . where's the lobbying reports on those TIF requests? Who's trying to get the funds? Is it Edgewater and Danisco? Or someone else? I don't see the registered lobbyists. And clearly, they've been lobbying the Mayor's office and Alder Compton based on comments at the last Board of Estimates.
Equally stunning is Noel Radomski's comments at the bottom of the story at madison.com.
Attempts to personalize this and portray Gromacki as Bruer's lapdog also neglects the other HUGE issue behind this. When we borrow all that money, we have to pay it back, with interest and that has to come out of our operating budget, and this year, part of our budget woes is paying back the $6M from all that borrowing. It hardly seems like now it the time to borrow more - especially if they are successful in getting rid of the financial analysis to determine if the funds are needed. I really hope the weak council does their homework on this one!
HOTEL MANIA - SHOW US THE MONEY
Ok - 1 out of 4 of the hotel folks seem to be appropriately registered/reporting as lobbyists. And I haven't really looked into that one, but I don't see Apex. Or Marcus Company. And I know Edgewater didn't register their attorney who lobbyied for TIF funds. Fiore is registered. We'll see who reports what come Friday, but its looking grim.
Don't be surprised, if tomorrow's blog post is just another round up, as the issues really piled up last week!
Read more!
SCHMACHER NAILS IT
Yes, I believe he's getting a second compliment from me in two weeks - painful as it is! ;) His post on the "Strong Mayor, Weak Council" or "Weak Mayor, Strong Council" form of government is exactly what I was thinking. I've expressed concerns about the Mayor's office and Council Office resources in the past, even introduced budget amendments to cut the Mayor's office staff, but the weak council was unwilling to intervene. Just look at the numbers Schumacher crunched:
- Mayor's Office Budget - Mayor's Salary = $517K
- Council Office Budget - 20 Council Member Salaries = $83K
- Mayor's office increase in past 6 years = 35.5%
- Council's office increase in past 6 years = 15%
And when you add in the department head issues Schumacher raises (including standing orders from the Mayor to block alders requests for information or to make their lives otherwise difficult), it gets even worse when considering the level of resources available to the elected officials. Basford also has some other good points about the dynamics between the council and Mayor. What they didn't add was that the Mayor is a full time position, while the alders mostly have full time jobs in addition to their alder positions. This all makes for a severe imbalance, especially during budget time.
SPEAKING OF BUDGET TIME
Let the threats begin! It annual threat to not plow snow on the side streets until it gets to 4 inches of snow is baaaaaaaack. It's so annoying how some departments pick the items likely to cause the most controversy for cuts so that the Mayor and Council won't make those cuts, while other departments genuinely try to make meaningful cuts. Here's last year's attempts. The Community Services Commission will be struggling with this tonight, and CDBG tomorrow night and are doing so with little notice and on a tight timeline, but at least their process is transparent and accessible to the public. Meanwhile, some of the sacred cows go for the closed processes, well written press releases and ridiculous proposals. Most taxpayers don't see what happens cuz the local media falls for it every year and doesn't ask the hard/complicated questions and the weak council is well . . . weak.
BRUER TRIES TO NAIL HER?
Ok, I'm frustrated on this one. A couple weeks ago I heard about this and another questionable incident involving President Bruer and another questionable abuse of power issue with a different person who has worked in the clerks office, but was told it was confidential so I honored that. (I haven't been able to watch the video clip, tried on three different computers, but it didn't work - last time that happened, a server needed to be reset, so hopefully that is what is wrong this time.) I'm just glad that Joe Tarr at the Isthmus broke the story. However, I'm unhappy with the conclusion the guys in the City Attorney's Office came up with. Especially given the comments about how it impacted the city employee. I can't believe they only looked at if she was physically threatened and ignored other issues, so much for zero tolerance policy on sexual harassment.
I'm particularly concerned about what I'm told apparently happens a few minutes later in the video and even more concerning was the rumor I heard about the response from the employee and why she didn't complain about that! JFC.
And even worse, for Bruer to try to misuse his power and to try to connect this to personnel issues in the City Council office is just awful. Completely freaking awful.
BACK TO THE COUNCIL OFFICE ISSUES
I was heartbroken to hear that Debbie Fields in the Council office took a temporary position in the Mayor's office. IMHO, she's the best damn staff person I've ever had. She's a grammar queen and gentle in her criticisms, conscientious, proactively helpful, communicates clearly and timely and generally goes above and beyond to be thorough and thoughtful and helpful . . . well that, and so much more! A true public servant. And when you compare and contrast that to the other work done in the office, its just painful to watch as Ms. Fields and her much needed skills is being encouraged to leave the office. As many council members know (and probably a few others within earshot as I have yelled at Bruer about this on multiple occasions . . . and he responded to me with questionable threats of lawsuits), I worked hard to try to rectify this situation and keep the best damn staff person in the office, and I am greatly concerned that no one else will stand up to Bruer on this issue (Compton and Pham-Remmele have tried in the past, hope they continue) and that they will fall for his lies and tenuous legal threats as he continues in his one man crusade to save his preferred staff member. It just sucks and its so hard given that it involves personnel matters and confidentiality issues - because the public really should see this.
MADISON DOESN'T NEED NEW COPS . . . ENOUGH
Or so the Federal Government has determined. While Milwaukee got $10M for new cops with the stimulus money, Madison got the big goose egg. Why? Well here's the punch line:
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder said the money was going to departments that needed it most, based on crime rates, financial need and community policing activities.They told us this was how the decision would be made when they briefed the Board of Estimates, so this is not a huge surprise, but it does say something interesting about the Madison police staffing issues.
TIF SHOWDOWN
Wow. Just wow. The new Economic Development Director's complete disregard for state law and the taxpayers wallet is just completely alarming. I have yet to see what his proposal is, because nothing is in writing or in the public eye, but WOW! It sounds like his proposal is to do away with the financial analysis of if the developers really need the money, and instead, just take their word for it - ignoring the legal requirement that when TIF funds are used, there has to be an objective standard to prove that "but for" the TIF money, the project would not go forward. Apparently, there was a pow-wow in the Mayor's office last week, trying to figure out how to get around this for two upcoming TIF applications. Hmmmmm . . . where's the lobbying reports on those TIF requests? Who's trying to get the funds? Is it Edgewater and Danisco? Or someone else? I don't see the registered lobbyists. And clearly, they've been lobbying the Mayor's office and Alder Compton based on comments at the last Board of Estimates.
Equally stunning is Noel Radomski's comments at the bottom of the story at madison.com.
It's unfortunate that the TIF coordinator--Joe Gromacki--appears to be trying to set and/or interpret policy, which I believe is the role of the executive and legislative branches. And why is the President of the City Council--Alder Tim Bruer--dragging his heels against more industrial jobs, jobs, jobs, especially when our unemployment figures continues to directly impact our hard working families. TID for industrial jobs is not corporate welfare. I hope that the other alders stand up for jobs, jobs, jobs.His comments show a fundamental misunderstanding of how the TIF staff team operates. If you ask me, While Mr. Gromacki crunches the numbers and makes recommendations in the best interest of the City and the taxpayer unless he's told otherwise by the Mayor's office, the most conservative ones are not Mr. Gromacki, but Comptroller Dean Brasser and Assistant City Attorney Anne Zellhoefer. They are the ones who keep their eyes on the financial/fiscal impacts and the legal issues and really push to make sure the taxpayers funds are being used in a judicious manner.
I wonder if Ald. Bruer's two years of serving as Council President is one or two years too long; and I wonder if Tim's buddy, Joe Gromacki, should run for city council and continue playing his game, which is more appropriate as an elected official not a city staff.
Attempts to personalize this and portray Gromacki as Bruer's lapdog also neglects the other HUGE issue behind this. When we borrow all that money, we have to pay it back, with interest and that has to come out of our operating budget, and this year, part of our budget woes is paying back the $6M from all that borrowing. It hardly seems like now it the time to borrow more - especially if they are successful in getting rid of the financial analysis to determine if the funds are needed. I really hope the weak council does their homework on this one!
HOTEL MANIA - SHOW US THE MONEY
Ok - 1 out of 4 of the hotel folks seem to be appropriately registered/reporting as lobbyists. And I haven't really looked into that one, but I don't see Apex. Or Marcus Company. And I know Edgewater didn't register their attorney who lobbyied for TIF funds. Fiore is registered. We'll see who reports what come Friday, but its looking grim.
Don't be surprised, if tomorrow's blog post is just another round up, as the issues really piled up last week!
Read more!
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Board of Estimates Recap
They actually discussed many of the items on this agenda. When can we use Google to plan Madison Metro trips, buying less hybrid buses to have operating costs for Madison Metro, new personnel rules, residency for managers and supervisors (ended up referred), Pham-Remmele against her own neighborhood plan, CDBG stimulus funding projects, stimulus funding updates and MAJOR changes to TIF policy rammed through quickly! Plus, closed session. Yeah, and they had a short agenda!
Bruer kicks the meeting off - late, since the Mayor is not there.
GOOGLE TRANSIT?
Clear asks if this is Google Transit (a program that allows us to plan Madison Metro bus trips by google maps) and will this help get us there. Kamp explains no, it just lets them use google format (i.e. students can get data to study issues), trip planning not happening yet. Clear asks what the stumbling block is, Camp says issue of liability. City Attorney May refuses to speak to the issues, Clear says other cities have figured it out. Passes on a voice vote.
HYBRID BUSES/OPERATING FUNDS
Kamp explains that original stimulus money they were going to buy 16 buses, amendment was made to the funding to use 10% to have operating funding, so getting 14 buses instead. Clear asks how the operating money will be used. Kamp says discussing with Comptroller and Mayor, but not TPC. Sanborn says he hopes that the funding will not create obligations for future years when they don't have the money. No response. Clausius asks what the buses will look like. Kamp says that roof will be different plus the windows will be more open. The look will help distinguish the hybrid buses from the old buses. Also, hears from other communities say its more European look and it provides more light. Clausius asks if they can wrap the buses. Kamp says yes. Kamp says that they will stay within the existing standards. Passes on voice vote.
No discussion on item 3, well rebate. Passes.
PERSONNEL RULES
One registrant. Lori Wendorf, President of Madison Professional and Supervisory Employee Association (MPSEA). Thanks Mayor and Staff for the fact that they redid the rules, doesn't agree with everything in there, but they appreciate the ability to comment and appreciates that they have been updated because they get lots of requests for the rules. [Previously MPSEA created their own document for their members, which I believe they used to update the rules.] Schumacher asks what they don't agree with. She says that comp group 44 [Madison Metro] is not in here. They need their own set of personnel rules. Would like 18 & 44 rules to align more. They voted and it passed.
Schumacher, who isn't even on the committee, had a question for staff so they did a do over, no motion to reconsider, they just kind of ignored that they just voted.. Schumacher says thanks for everything they did.
Schumacher asks if the Personnel Committee should have knowledge of the merit system, do they? Brad Wirtz, Human Resources Department Head says yes.
Schumacher asks about the analysis of a job, he asks why there is no timeline. Wirtz says they get to them as soon as they can. Some are move extensive so it could be hard. Schumacher says that this is usually driven by individual who has concerns, so a timeline would be helpful. Wirtz says "ok" [in a tone of voice that makes it clear it is not "ok" with him. He clearly bristles at being asked to do things differently in ways that take away his discretion] Schumacher asks what timeline would be appropriate? Wirtz says it depends, wants to do it as time permits. Also asks what if they don't meet the timeline? He prefers no timeline. Schumacher presses on. Wirtz says they will do it and they might not approve the request. Schumacher explains that this could sit there for years, Wirtz says he thinks it could, but he says it hasn't happened.
Schumacher asks about eligibility lists that are good for 6 months but can be extended for 2.5 years. Wirtz says they don't do it, but that was existing. Schumacher says that is a long time. He says that in 2.5 years alot of strange options could emerge. Wirtz says that this is up to the HR Director [him] and 98% of the time he wouldn't extend it, but there might be someone really good on the list and they might want to fill the position quickly. So, he is comfortable with it the way it is, [go figure, would you expect any other answer?] but he has never used it and can't remember his predecessors doing that. Schumacher says that this could be a backdoor deal made. Wirtz says that no one else could apply. 2.5 years later someone could get the job. Schumacher asks if it concerns him. Wirtz says no, because he makes the decision. [I'll give him props for being honest and transparent, but damn he is arrogant and no one says anything. Makes me sad for city employees.]
Schumacher asks a question about 3 days to appeal, Wirtz explains that they actually get 13 days. Schumacher asks if holidays could be a problem.
Schumacher makes some minor suggestion and then asks why Council also doesn't approve every 5 years. He says that if they make any changes, the Council would have to approve. Schumacher asks if this will go to the Council? They all say yes. Says he will add Common Council at the Council level.
They added personnel board clarification and it is a friendly amendment to what they already voted on.
Clear says thanks for the hard work and good summary.
Mayor has joined the meeting.
RESIDENCY
Lori Wendorf and Eric Keston representing MPSEA. Wendorf says that 10% of work force is in comp group 18 & 44 which they represent. She thanks Schumacher and says that they have been working with Schumacher for 2 or 3 years on this. She says MPSEA represents employees who are not represented by unions and don't have memorandums of understanding or contracts. They have identified this as a priority for 6 to 8 years and think it is an equity issue. The last time this issue came up, 5 years ago, stumbling block was impact it would have on police and fire supervisors. Fire has their own 15 mile radius requirement and no "me too" clause. Now police have same 15 mile radius requirement but they have a "me too" clause and so if they change this it would change for police. However, the police have one person who lives outside the 15 mile radius from the Capital and they have a waiver, so it would have no impact. She explains that people with blended families, people who have spouses who work in another city, child with special needs and didn't want to move child out of school district are examples of people impacted. She says she has never heard that the reason they want to live outside the city is cheaper taxes or cheaper housing. Many who live outside the city have been granted waivers from the Mayor and some have a 1% penalty and some do not.
Rummel asks how often the Mayor is asked about a waiver, he's not sure, says Wendorf would know better than him, thinks it might be once or twice a year.
Pham-Remmele asks about if police and fire are required to live in the City of the Madison, says she hears that if they don't live here, they don't understand the people they are working for and protecting. [She said that in way many more words.] Wendorf says that it is easy to assume that if you don't live here, you care less about what is going on here, but she says that of the 88% of the workforce who can choose where they can live includes garbage, police, first responders, etc. They already don't have to live here. The MPSEA folks are not those people. Wendorf says issues about work performance should be dealt with in performance reviews.
Pham-Remmele says it has nothing to do with performance, but it reflects on people if they won't live where they provide the service. Says people question city officials and we are working for the taxpayer, we say we believe, but we practice differently.
Wendorf says that it could be a debate on residency, but this is an equity issue since so many other employees can already live outside.
Kestin says decision was made a long time ago, nearly 90% of the employees already don't live here. Everyone else can do it already.
Schumacher agrees with Wendorf and Kestin - its an equity issue with pay. He also says that it is demoralizing.
Mayor is back facilitating meeting. They start to vote, but there is no motion.
Verveer says he can't support it. Says he has been consistent, the made a tragic mistake long ago and sympathizes what Wendorf and Kestin are saying, but thinks City of Madison is a good employer and have good compensation packages. He thinks this is different is because 18 & 44 are highest paid employees. So, he doesn't see why they can't just live in Dane County. He says he has a bigger issue with giving up a 1% longevity because it makes them think. It was a compromise when they waived the residency. Think about who the comp group is, think about AMPS and the "me too" provision, just because one person has a waiver doesn't mean this won't change that. Would support a substitute that says they don't have to live in Dane County, but has a bigger problem with the 1%, which is just a token incentive for supervisors and professional managers to live in the city that pays them for their great work. He says the only labor agreements he has voted against was when the residency issue was given away.
Clear thanks Verveer for bringing up the issue, Clear agrees from a moral perspective. He thinks it is a shame people see it as a value to move outside the city, but he's supporting it anyways. [Really, morally opposed but supports anyways? Again, props for the honesty, thumbs down on the integrity.]
Bruer echos both comments. He says that he was with Verveer up to the point they gave it away to the City Attorney's but the writing is on the wall and he thinks the police supervisors will be gone next. Reluctantly is voting for it.
Schumacher says that if this was about all removing all residency the sentiment might be stronger. He says that we're talking about regionalism and we want to attract the best and the brighest and we are going to have alot of turn over coming up. Why restrict ourselves? We need to think about people who want to live in the country. We are going to see major changes in the workforce. He says this will attract people to city government.
Pham Remmele says in an ideal world, people would have freedom to choose and be fluid, but reality is that city is falling behind in quality of life and to say that it is already happening, but to make it even easier and not looking at it as a value, we are kidding ourselves. We should be a leader and we are losing the high income families to help the family and we are condoing that. And we are attracting what in their place. [Stunned silence - her disdain for people she doesn't want to live here was palpable and stunning. Mayor cautiously wades in after prompting from Bruer.]
Mayor says when they changed residency for others a while ago, we didn't just give it up, we did it in exchange for health care co-payments. He doesn't want to give this up for nothing in exchange. That is his concern. Someone asks Brad Wirtz a question - Mayor hesitates, Wirtz argues it is "their issue", Mayor says its Schumachers issue. Wirtz is trying to explain that they don't negoitate with MPSEA like they do with the unions. Mayor then clarifies that it isn't the same as negotiating with the union. Mayor says he doesn't support it. [Wow! That was kind of stunning. Basic misunderstanding of how the city operates after all these years?]
Bruer is confused. Mayor says this isn't jihad, but this is a mistake. Bruer moves to refer to next BOE. Bruer says he assumed there were trade offs so that there can be further discussion. Doesn't want to turn it down without an opprotunity to see if they can make that parallel. Referred.
6 MetroTech land sale passes no discussion
7 facade improvements grants, no discussion, Sanborn faithfully votes no.
MIDVALE WESTMORLAND NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
Pham-Remmele asks for a presentation. Jule Stroick explains that the plan has a 5 - 10 year vision, working since 2007, extensive public participation process. Says neighborhood plan similar to comp plan with titles with high priority recommendations identified and outline how the City or other organizaitons can help make it happen. Chris Schmidt was co-chair for this plan until he became an alder.
Pham-Remmele says she has concerns and can't support it, she respects the process, but this is a bible for development and she says that her constituents are calling and saying they had no say. She says the 11 priorities were come up with at open house, and she says there were not alot of people there who were not there. She says that it was a private meeting, and wasn't done in a democratic way. Says 11 priorities do not represent the area. Will they still go forward and carve this in stone?
Stroik says that neighborhood plans are a point in time project, they did alot of things to get public input, focus groups, neighborhood survey, newsletter articles and info at public library. In the best world they would hear all the input, appears you have heard something different, but this neighborhood plan was the top 11 that gives guidance for what is most important, but it doesn't limit other ideas from going forward if people are willing to make it happen. Other recommendations can be worked on. [Pham Remmele seems to ignore that good advice and presses on]
Pham-Remmele says top 11 are not top choices. She says that she had someone who asked for a hearing device and it was not provided. She says that the neighborhood plan is grassroots but if you just work through neighborhood association then you have a small group making decisions. Some people in the association attend the meetings and make the choices that become carved in stone and then we take away choices for the citizens of the city. So if there is a development coming in, a small group of people who take the time to go to meeting then the whole area is dictated by that. She knocked on lots of door and they were not aware. People are shocked. People don't want rain barrels, they don't want bike paths or dog paths [I believe she meant parks]. That is scary. Local people have local businesses and they are scared. The neighborhood plan had programs to help them maintain the business and get more jobs, the neighborhood plan refused them to put that in there. She like the process, wants to support but can't support or sponsor.
Without further comment, Mayor quickly has them vote and it passes.
CDBG FUNDING
Bruer moves substitute on Higher Ground Urban Farm portion referred back to CDBG and Council. Staff think that is acceptable. Clear clarifies it won't come back to BOE. Mayor asks Clingan to describe the projects. 4 different RFPs, foreclosure prevention, employment, economic development, housing rehabilitation. This approves the rehab, employment and part of the economic development piece. Mayor asks about specific projects and groups that will get money, Bill explains what is in the packet. YWCA employment programs will work with homeless and near homeless. Commonwealth program is loan program for solar energy.
There are questions about the referred part. People seem concerned that this won't come back to BOE. Clear argues it won't slow it down to come back to BOE. Clingan says that they were waiting for HUD guidelines and then once they came they wanted the money committed by mid-August. Clear says he was mistaken. Clingan says the Higher Ground proposal is an urban farm on the northside to grow herbs, fish, hire 4 low-income individuals and an on-going business. Mayor asks if it is like growing power from Milwaukee. Clingan says yes. They have a lease worked out. Sanborn asks if they have it come back to BOE if that is a problem, Clingan says yes, because it won't hit the HUD timelines. Not sure what HUD will do if they miss the timeline. Sanborn is ok if there is a true time pressure.
Comptrollers staff explains to them that if they strike the language and send a portion to CDBG that will be a problem. She doesn't know how to do that with the resolution. She says maybe they need something different. May suggests that they approve with the proviso that it go to CDBG for further consideration. Pham-Remmele asks Clingan to give them copies of the proposal, Bruer wants it sent to the council. Mayor reiterates the motion, Bruer tries to make it clear he is trying not to debate this on the council floor. Passes.
MORE STIMULUS CDBG/HPRP MONEY
$800,000 for recovery dollars, you amended the plan, did an RFP, CAC worked with 10 groups (CAC, Porchlight, TRC, Legal Action, Ind Living, Tellurian, YW and so forth) Homeless prevention services, similar to ESG program you have approved in the past. Sanborn asks about the criteria used to determine who gets the money. Clingan says that the need in this category far outstrips the resources. Likely won't go up to a higher income bracket without changing eligibility. It will serve 600 unduplicated individuals. Outcomes are laudable. 75% landlords will report they are still in housing 6 months later, 60% will report that still in housing 12 months later. Idea is to do case management. Sanborn says people will be facing eviction and we use the usual AMI levels. Clingan thinks so, says it won't be middle income people. Clausius asks about CAC being lead agencies and disseminated to the other 8 groups by end of September. Clingan says that is doable and also adds that the program will be using Service Point to track information. Pham-Remmele asks about goal to prevent eviction, so she asks what about accountability? Is there a time when we get a report to show how successful we are? Clingan says that the outcomes are important. They need to work to keep themselves in housing. Says they will get a report. No more discussion. Passes.
BUDGET PROCESS
Bruer moves adoption of 11. Budget process. Clear asks comptrollers office if the dates are ok. He asks about the short turn around. Staff asks if that is about amendments? Simon says that used to get Wed and turn around by Fri and now Tues for Thurs but of course, the earlier the better. Don't wait til Tuesday. They can do it. Mayor snarkily points out that the amendment process is completely unnecessary. Passes.
STIMULUS MONEY REPORT
Staff report on stimulus money. She says this morning they did the ground breaking of the first stimulus project. Shovels are in the ground. Not so good news is WISDOT Hwy 113 money was denied for stimulus, still interested and still doing planning and design. Metro the number of hybrid has gone down 16 to 14 because can use 10% for operating. $1.1M for capital, they have to spend $100,000 on capital costs which will be spent for items that went over budget. $2.75M application for public housing upgrades. Heard CDBG allocations moving forward. City is partnering with County to do foreclosure prevention fairs. Can come in and talk to mortgage brokers and get them renegotiated and Rachel will send out info tomorrow. The first fair is Saturday and there will be more. Schumacher asks about Hwy 113 (Northport) and he says he just had a meeting last week, this is news to him. Janet can't answer questions. Janet says she heard beginning of July. No further questions.
TIF POLICY
Bruer moves referral to EDC, CCOC and BOE.
Mayor asks about the Danisco resolution by title only that was introduced at the last meeting. He says that the discussion of that resolution will be the vehicle to discuss the change in TIF policy. [Interesting, cuz it sounded like it was a resolution to address the needs of one company, not change the whole policy, tho I've heard rumblings that this is what was happening and that is why they were supposed to have this discussion.] Mayor says they can refer the discussion until EDC takes up the resolution on August 5th.
Compton says that this is a grave situation, but she says that there are so many variable in interpretations of TIF statutes, and it is frustrating to turn people away or have people walk away because we have no carrots to offer them. Denisco was going to do a $50M expansion and they were going to move their world head quarters to Madison, when found out TIF was closing, they walked away. Once TID 39 reopened, they came back for a $70M expansion, but the "but for" clause doesn't work. They have purchased property NY. Expansion is now $13m, but after meeting with them, they will be back in the ballgame, but we have to see what we can do for them. Industrial TIF are different than residential TIF and are we using them to the full potential? We are looking for Oscar Mayer to expand. We have to re-visit it. You will likely get alot of information and keep an open mind and think about economic devleopment and we need to take some of these major players away from Verona, Cottage Grove, McFarland, Middleton and Sun Prairie, and, she stresses again, Cottage Grove.
Bruer says he'll put it on the CCOC agenda as well. [WHAT? It wasn't referred there, he's just putting it on the agenda, that's interesting. CCOC has never discussed TIF before.]
Mayor says they can schedule a discussion on the issue.
Bruer says he wants all legal opinions that come forward go to all council members.
Clear asks Compton when more info beyond the title will be available. Mario says by the end of this week, so it can be posted for EDC meeting. Compton said the presentation was supposed to be tonight so people wouldn't be blindsided. Compton doesn't want to lose Denisco.
Bruer again asks about a city attorney opinion and getting it done in a timely manner.
Mayor says no action required and asks for a motion to go into closed session. Read more!
Bruer kicks the meeting off - late, since the Mayor is not there.
GOOGLE TRANSIT?
Clear asks if this is Google Transit (a program that allows us to plan Madison Metro bus trips by google maps) and will this help get us there. Kamp explains no, it just lets them use google format (i.e. students can get data to study issues), trip planning not happening yet. Clear asks what the stumbling block is, Camp says issue of liability. City Attorney May refuses to speak to the issues, Clear says other cities have figured it out. Passes on a voice vote.
HYBRID BUSES/OPERATING FUNDS
Kamp explains that original stimulus money they were going to buy 16 buses, amendment was made to the funding to use 10% to have operating funding, so getting 14 buses instead. Clear asks how the operating money will be used. Kamp says discussing with Comptroller and Mayor, but not TPC. Sanborn says he hopes that the funding will not create obligations for future years when they don't have the money. No response. Clausius asks what the buses will look like. Kamp says that roof will be different plus the windows will be more open. The look will help distinguish the hybrid buses from the old buses. Also, hears from other communities say its more European look and it provides more light. Clausius asks if they can wrap the buses. Kamp says yes. Kamp says that they will stay within the existing standards. Passes on voice vote.
No discussion on item 3, well rebate. Passes.
PERSONNEL RULES
One registrant. Lori Wendorf, President of Madison Professional and Supervisory Employee Association (MPSEA). Thanks Mayor and Staff for the fact that they redid the rules, doesn't agree with everything in there, but they appreciate the ability to comment and appreciates that they have been updated because they get lots of requests for the rules. [Previously MPSEA created their own document for their members, which I believe they used to update the rules.] Schumacher asks what they don't agree with. She says that comp group 44 [Madison Metro] is not in here. They need their own set of personnel rules. Would like 18 & 44 rules to align more. They voted and it passed.
Schumacher, who isn't even on the committee, had a question for staff so they did a do over, no motion to reconsider, they just kind of ignored that they just voted.. Schumacher says thanks for everything they did.
Schumacher asks if the Personnel Committee should have knowledge of the merit system, do they? Brad Wirtz, Human Resources Department Head says yes.
Schumacher asks about the analysis of a job, he asks why there is no timeline. Wirtz says they get to them as soon as they can. Some are move extensive so it could be hard. Schumacher says that this is usually driven by individual who has concerns, so a timeline would be helpful. Wirtz says "ok" [in a tone of voice that makes it clear it is not "ok" with him. He clearly bristles at being asked to do things differently in ways that take away his discretion] Schumacher asks what timeline would be appropriate? Wirtz says it depends, wants to do it as time permits. Also asks what if they don't meet the timeline? He prefers no timeline. Schumacher presses on. Wirtz says they will do it and they might not approve the request. Schumacher explains that this could sit there for years, Wirtz says he thinks it could, but he says it hasn't happened.
Schumacher asks about eligibility lists that are good for 6 months but can be extended for 2.5 years. Wirtz says they don't do it, but that was existing. Schumacher says that is a long time. He says that in 2.5 years alot of strange options could emerge. Wirtz says that this is up to the HR Director [him] and 98% of the time he wouldn't extend it, but there might be someone really good on the list and they might want to fill the position quickly. So, he is comfortable with it the way it is, [go figure, would you expect any other answer?] but he has never used it and can't remember his predecessors doing that. Schumacher says that this could be a backdoor deal made. Wirtz says that no one else could apply. 2.5 years later someone could get the job. Schumacher asks if it concerns him. Wirtz says no, because he makes the decision. [I'll give him props for being honest and transparent, but damn he is arrogant and no one says anything. Makes me sad for city employees.]
Schumacher asks a question about 3 days to appeal, Wirtz explains that they actually get 13 days. Schumacher asks if holidays could be a problem.
Schumacher makes some minor suggestion and then asks why Council also doesn't approve every 5 years. He says that if they make any changes, the Council would have to approve. Schumacher asks if this will go to the Council? They all say yes. Says he will add Common Council at the Council level.
They added personnel board clarification and it is a friendly amendment to what they already voted on.
Clear says thanks for the hard work and good summary.
Mayor has joined the meeting.
RESIDENCY
Lori Wendorf and Eric Keston representing MPSEA. Wendorf says that 10% of work force is in comp group 18 & 44 which they represent. She thanks Schumacher and says that they have been working with Schumacher for 2 or 3 years on this. She says MPSEA represents employees who are not represented by unions and don't have memorandums of understanding or contracts. They have identified this as a priority for 6 to 8 years and think it is an equity issue. The last time this issue came up, 5 years ago, stumbling block was impact it would have on police and fire supervisors. Fire has their own 15 mile radius requirement and no "me too" clause. Now police have same 15 mile radius requirement but they have a "me too" clause and so if they change this it would change for police. However, the police have one person who lives outside the 15 mile radius from the Capital and they have a waiver, so it would have no impact. She explains that people with blended families, people who have spouses who work in another city, child with special needs and didn't want to move child out of school district are examples of people impacted. She says she has never heard that the reason they want to live outside the city is cheaper taxes or cheaper housing. Many who live outside the city have been granted waivers from the Mayor and some have a 1% penalty and some do not.
Rummel asks how often the Mayor is asked about a waiver, he's not sure, says Wendorf would know better than him, thinks it might be once or twice a year.
Pham-Remmele asks about if police and fire are required to live in the City of the Madison, says she hears that if they don't live here, they don't understand the people they are working for and protecting. [She said that in way many more words.] Wendorf says that it is easy to assume that if you don't live here, you care less about what is going on here, but she says that of the 88% of the workforce who can choose where they can live includes garbage, police, first responders, etc. They already don't have to live here. The MPSEA folks are not those people. Wendorf says issues about work performance should be dealt with in performance reviews.
Pham-Remmele says it has nothing to do with performance, but it reflects on people if they won't live where they provide the service. Says people question city officials and we are working for the taxpayer, we say we believe, but we practice differently.
Wendorf says that it could be a debate on residency, but this is an equity issue since so many other employees can already live outside.
Kestin says decision was made a long time ago, nearly 90% of the employees already don't live here. Everyone else can do it already.
Schumacher agrees with Wendorf and Kestin - its an equity issue with pay. He also says that it is demoralizing.
Mayor is back facilitating meeting. They start to vote, but there is no motion.
Verveer says he can't support it. Says he has been consistent, the made a tragic mistake long ago and sympathizes what Wendorf and Kestin are saying, but thinks City of Madison is a good employer and have good compensation packages. He thinks this is different is because 18 & 44 are highest paid employees. So, he doesn't see why they can't just live in Dane County. He says he has a bigger issue with giving up a 1% longevity because it makes them think. It was a compromise when they waived the residency. Think about who the comp group is, think about AMPS and the "me too" provision, just because one person has a waiver doesn't mean this won't change that. Would support a substitute that says they don't have to live in Dane County, but has a bigger problem with the 1%, which is just a token incentive for supervisors and professional managers to live in the city that pays them for their great work. He says the only labor agreements he has voted against was when the residency issue was given away.
Clear thanks Verveer for bringing up the issue, Clear agrees from a moral perspective. He thinks it is a shame people see it as a value to move outside the city, but he's supporting it anyways. [Really, morally opposed but supports anyways? Again, props for the honesty, thumbs down on the integrity.]
Bruer echos both comments. He says that he was with Verveer up to the point they gave it away to the City Attorney's but the writing is on the wall and he thinks the police supervisors will be gone next. Reluctantly is voting for it.
Schumacher says that if this was about all removing all residency the sentiment might be stronger. He says that we're talking about regionalism and we want to attract the best and the brighest and we are going to have alot of turn over coming up. Why restrict ourselves? We need to think about people who want to live in the country. We are going to see major changes in the workforce. He says this will attract people to city government.
Pham Remmele says in an ideal world, people would have freedom to choose and be fluid, but reality is that city is falling behind in quality of life and to say that it is already happening, but to make it even easier and not looking at it as a value, we are kidding ourselves. We should be a leader and we are losing the high income families to help the family and we are condoing that. And we are attracting what in their place. [Stunned silence - her disdain for people she doesn't want to live here was palpable and stunning. Mayor cautiously wades in after prompting from Bruer.]
Mayor says when they changed residency for others a while ago, we didn't just give it up, we did it in exchange for health care co-payments. He doesn't want to give this up for nothing in exchange. That is his concern. Someone asks Brad Wirtz a question - Mayor hesitates, Wirtz argues it is "their issue", Mayor says its Schumachers issue. Wirtz is trying to explain that they don't negoitate with MPSEA like they do with the unions. Mayor then clarifies that it isn't the same as negotiating with the union. Mayor says he doesn't support it. [Wow! That was kind of stunning. Basic misunderstanding of how the city operates after all these years?]
Bruer is confused. Mayor says this isn't jihad, but this is a mistake. Bruer moves to refer to next BOE. Bruer says he assumed there were trade offs so that there can be further discussion. Doesn't want to turn it down without an opprotunity to see if they can make that parallel. Referred.
6 MetroTech land sale passes no discussion
7 facade improvements grants, no discussion, Sanborn faithfully votes no.
MIDVALE WESTMORLAND NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN
Pham-Remmele asks for a presentation. Jule Stroick explains that the plan has a 5 - 10 year vision, working since 2007, extensive public participation process. Says neighborhood plan similar to comp plan with titles with high priority recommendations identified and outline how the City or other organizaitons can help make it happen. Chris Schmidt was co-chair for this plan until he became an alder.
Pham-Remmele says she has concerns and can't support it, she respects the process, but this is a bible for development and she says that her constituents are calling and saying they had no say. She says the 11 priorities were come up with at open house, and she says there were not alot of people there who were not there. She says that it was a private meeting, and wasn't done in a democratic way. Says 11 priorities do not represent the area. Will they still go forward and carve this in stone?
Stroik says that neighborhood plans are a point in time project, they did alot of things to get public input, focus groups, neighborhood survey, newsletter articles and info at public library. In the best world they would hear all the input, appears you have heard something different, but this neighborhood plan was the top 11 that gives guidance for what is most important, but it doesn't limit other ideas from going forward if people are willing to make it happen. Other recommendations can be worked on. [Pham Remmele seems to ignore that good advice and presses on]
Pham-Remmele says top 11 are not top choices. She says that she had someone who asked for a hearing device and it was not provided. She says that the neighborhood plan is grassroots but if you just work through neighborhood association then you have a small group making decisions. Some people in the association attend the meetings and make the choices that become carved in stone and then we take away choices for the citizens of the city. So if there is a development coming in, a small group of people who take the time to go to meeting then the whole area is dictated by that. She knocked on lots of door and they were not aware. People are shocked. People don't want rain barrels, they don't want bike paths or dog paths [I believe she meant parks]. That is scary. Local people have local businesses and they are scared. The neighborhood plan had programs to help them maintain the business and get more jobs, the neighborhood plan refused them to put that in there. She like the process, wants to support but can't support or sponsor.
Without further comment, Mayor quickly has them vote and it passes.
CDBG FUNDING
Bruer moves substitute on Higher Ground Urban Farm portion referred back to CDBG and Council. Staff think that is acceptable. Clear clarifies it won't come back to BOE. Mayor asks Clingan to describe the projects. 4 different RFPs, foreclosure prevention, employment, economic development, housing rehabilitation. This approves the rehab, employment and part of the economic development piece. Mayor asks about specific projects and groups that will get money, Bill explains what is in the packet. YWCA employment programs will work with homeless and near homeless. Commonwealth program is loan program for solar energy.
There are questions about the referred part. People seem concerned that this won't come back to BOE. Clear argues it won't slow it down to come back to BOE. Clingan says that they were waiting for HUD guidelines and then once they came they wanted the money committed by mid-August. Clear says he was mistaken. Clingan says the Higher Ground proposal is an urban farm on the northside to grow herbs, fish, hire 4 low-income individuals and an on-going business. Mayor asks if it is like growing power from Milwaukee. Clingan says yes. They have a lease worked out. Sanborn asks if they have it come back to BOE if that is a problem, Clingan says yes, because it won't hit the HUD timelines. Not sure what HUD will do if they miss the timeline. Sanborn is ok if there is a true time pressure.
Comptrollers staff explains to them that if they strike the language and send a portion to CDBG that will be a problem. She doesn't know how to do that with the resolution. She says maybe they need something different. May suggests that they approve with the proviso that it go to CDBG for further consideration. Pham-Remmele asks Clingan to give them copies of the proposal, Bruer wants it sent to the council. Mayor reiterates the motion, Bruer tries to make it clear he is trying not to debate this on the council floor. Passes.
MORE STIMULUS CDBG/HPRP MONEY
$800,000 for recovery dollars, you amended the plan, did an RFP, CAC worked with 10 groups (CAC, Porchlight, TRC, Legal Action, Ind Living, Tellurian, YW and so forth) Homeless prevention services, similar to ESG program you have approved in the past. Sanborn asks about the criteria used to determine who gets the money. Clingan says that the need in this category far outstrips the resources. Likely won't go up to a higher income bracket without changing eligibility. It will serve 600 unduplicated individuals. Outcomes are laudable. 75% landlords will report they are still in housing 6 months later, 60% will report that still in housing 12 months later. Idea is to do case management. Sanborn says people will be facing eviction and we use the usual AMI levels. Clingan thinks so, says it won't be middle income people. Clausius asks about CAC being lead agencies and disseminated to the other 8 groups by end of September. Clingan says that is doable and also adds that the program will be using Service Point to track information. Pham-Remmele asks about goal to prevent eviction, so she asks what about accountability? Is there a time when we get a report to show how successful we are? Clingan says that the outcomes are important. They need to work to keep themselves in housing. Says they will get a report. No more discussion. Passes.
BUDGET PROCESS
Bruer moves adoption of 11. Budget process. Clear asks comptrollers office if the dates are ok. He asks about the short turn around. Staff asks if that is about amendments? Simon says that used to get Wed and turn around by Fri and now Tues for Thurs but of course, the earlier the better. Don't wait til Tuesday. They can do it. Mayor snarkily points out that the amendment process is completely unnecessary. Passes.
STIMULUS MONEY REPORT
Staff report on stimulus money. She says this morning they did the ground breaking of the first stimulus project. Shovels are in the ground. Not so good news is WISDOT Hwy 113 money was denied for stimulus, still interested and still doing planning and design. Metro the number of hybrid has gone down 16 to 14 because can use 10% for operating. $1.1M for capital, they have to spend $100,000 on capital costs which will be spent for items that went over budget. $2.75M application for public housing upgrades. Heard CDBG allocations moving forward. City is partnering with County to do foreclosure prevention fairs. Can come in and talk to mortgage brokers and get them renegotiated and Rachel will send out info tomorrow. The first fair is Saturday and there will be more. Schumacher asks about Hwy 113 (Northport) and he says he just had a meeting last week, this is news to him. Janet can't answer questions. Janet says she heard beginning of July. No further questions.
TIF POLICY
Bruer moves referral to EDC, CCOC and BOE.
Mayor asks about the Danisco resolution by title only that was introduced at the last meeting. He says that the discussion of that resolution will be the vehicle to discuss the change in TIF policy. [Interesting, cuz it sounded like it was a resolution to address the needs of one company, not change the whole policy, tho I've heard rumblings that this is what was happening and that is why they were supposed to have this discussion.] Mayor says they can refer the discussion until EDC takes up the resolution on August 5th.
Compton says that this is a grave situation, but she says that there are so many variable in interpretations of TIF statutes, and it is frustrating to turn people away or have people walk away because we have no carrots to offer them. Denisco was going to do a $50M expansion and they were going to move their world head quarters to Madison, when found out TIF was closing, they walked away. Once TID 39 reopened, they came back for a $70M expansion, but the "but for" clause doesn't work. They have purchased property NY. Expansion is now $13m, but after meeting with them, they will be back in the ballgame, but we have to see what we can do for them. Industrial TIF are different than residential TIF and are we using them to the full potential? We are looking for Oscar Mayer to expand. We have to re-visit it. You will likely get alot of information and keep an open mind and think about economic devleopment and we need to take some of these major players away from Verona, Cottage Grove, McFarland, Middleton and Sun Prairie, and, she stresses again, Cottage Grove.
Bruer says he'll put it on the CCOC agenda as well. [WHAT? It wasn't referred there, he's just putting it on the agenda, that's interesting. CCOC has never discussed TIF before.]
Mayor says they can schedule a discussion on the issue.
Bruer says he wants all legal opinions that come forward go to all council members.
Clear asks Compton when more info beyond the title will be available. Mario says by the end of this week, so it can be posted for EDC meeting. Compton said the presentation was supposed to be tonight so people wouldn't be blindsided. Compton doesn't want to lose Denisco.
Bruer again asks about a city attorney opinion and getting it done in a timely manner.
Mayor says no action required and asks for a motion to go into closed session. Read more!
Edgewater Presentation at Landmarks
I was standing in the hallway for most of this . . . so . . . this will be a little bit briefer . . . It was hard to type and listen and have the noise in the hallway, but the room was crowded and HOT! Ridiculously HOT! And of course, people were talking to me. Comments in purple. Here's the landmarks commission players.
SPEAKING OF STANDING IN THE HALLWAY . . .
So, the room was crowded, with a double row of chair on one side of the room, but the hope was that there would be a few people leaving after items 1 & 2 were done. There were about a dozen people in the hallway waiting for the room to clear. Of course, I'm standing in the hallway with Bob Dunn and staff. He happened to asked me why I was against the project. I told him I was against the process and it didn't have to become so contentious and divisive. He asked me to sit down and talk with him about that. I told him I thought it was too late, that the damage was done, but . . . agreed to sit down and talk. And, he can buy me lunch and not have to fill out a lobbying report! :) Sadly, I don't think I'll accept his offer of free lunch. It still just seems wrong.
BREAK AND RESUME
They have to take a break to get the meeting started as people shuffle around, but 5 of us are left standing in hallway, including a city staff person and others. Several people offered me a chair, but I opted for the electrical outlet and slightly cooler temperature.
The chair announced there were many registrants and asked how long the presentation would take. The Edgewater folks said they could do it in 15 minutes. Levitan stopped them and asked if they presentation would present an elevation as seen from capital and if it was in the room? And if they had information on the impact on the mansion hill historic district. Bob Dunn replied yes and yes.
PRESENTATION
I believe these were the only materials that the commission had.
Bob Dunn outlined has a presentation that:
- Outlined their vision, skipped the detail to put us out of our misery
- Shows a map on urban context, again, skips the details
- Outlines parts of the comprehensive plan he feels are reflected in the project
- Talks about draft of Mansion Hill plan, talks about how meets it the concepts in the plan
- Talks about the Mansion Hill plan saying the neighborhood is
-- 55% parcels are non-residential
-- 94% residential is rental
-- 60% of residential are in building that have more than 10 units
-- 56% of residents lived there for a year or less
- Shows the blight study picture from their submission.
- Shows current pictures of the Edgewater.
- Talks about the design overview parts of the presentation - building expansion, lakefront terrace, historic presentation [you'd think he'd be focusing here for the Landmarks Commission, but that didn't happen], waterfront access and core building.
- Shows picture from the lake.
- 107 rooms today, total 228 guest suites in new project.
- Today 165 parking stalls, proposal more than doubles that to more than 400 with valet parking.
- Most significant change to project is expansion out of right of way.
- 11 story building from Langdon. [i.e. 18 story building with the other 7 floors]
- Building is 75 feet from the water.
- Talks about public space on the terrace.
- Shows original rendering of 1940's building. [I wonder why the rendering and not the actual photos that I know they have?]
- Talks about reviving the 1940's building by doing the grand stair and pulling back the 70's addition and restore the building. [No renderings of what the remodel will look like?]
- Talks about waterfront access but only shows view from the terrace, nothing about the plans for the lakeshore.
- He didn't show any of the "core building" elements.
- Talks about the process - says working on a daily basis to get as much input as they can. Met with neighborhood groups, business interests, surrounding neighborhoods, mayor, planning, economic development unit, ADA groups, Environmental Groups and flashes lists of others.
- Says trying to balance the interests in the comprehensive plan and urban infill to concerns from neighborhood and downtown.
- Project webpage, office hours (Tuesday and Thursday 4 - 6 if you believe their submittal to the city, Thursdays 4 - 6 if you believe their website), number of neighborhood meetings scheduled with a variety of neighborhood groups. Says worked hard and will continue to. [He didn't give out the website, say when the office hours were or when the neighborhood meetings were, I filled that information in where I knew it. And the website did a little number on my computer, its heavy on the graphics or something, so click with caution.]
- Talks about changes they have made. His staff points out he's only hitting the things he thinks are interesting to this group. [Obviously, they either don't know their audience, or don't care.]
-- Shows where the new building was originally, and then the footprint of where it moved.
-- Reduced gross volume of building area by 30%
-- Says he has addressed the right of way issue, was 28 feet into it and now completely out of it.
-- Mass and height, shows original, doesn't show current.
-- Lakefront terrace, 40,000 sq feet open and accessible to the public. [Again, nothing about the actualy lake front.]
-- Says studied view corridor, pulling building back 30 feet.
- Skips through historic district slides. [??]
- Talks about "visually related area", says they did a series of studies, but skips over it and has no detail. [UGH, know your audience! This is the key issue for the committee and he just blows by it.]
- Compares project to 2 Langdon and National Guardian Life Building. Shows elevation from the water side. Trying to scale the building to be like others in neighborhood.
-Formal PUD submission is still coming.
Levitan asks about a view from the capital. Dunn says this is it. Levitan says he doesn't want to see a helicopter view, he wants to see what the human will see. Dunn tries to say that he is showing Levitan what he wants, clearly it isn't.
Chair Stephans describes what the commission needs to see. Dunn says they have focused on the corridor views. Says they are doing a series of studies so that they can pick a point you want to see the project from. Says will do James Madison Park, Union Terrace etc. Also more positions from the Lake.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Fred Mohs - Talks about existing conditions. Commercial project in the heart of a residential neighborhood. If it weren't for the current conditions, no one would consider doing this. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Harvey Wendel - from Pickney Place Condos, 6 members all supporters - wants their lake to become first class. 60% blighted neighborhood, including the Edgewater. Association supports it. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Mary Mohs - talks about how bad the neighborhood was, students have moved on and now have a permanent neighborhood core. This project will destroy the neighborhood. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Kennedy Manor resident - Faulkner family members, she says they worked hard, we know it needs what Bob Dunn has offered. You are being offered a good opportunity, it makes her proud. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Joe Lusson - concerned about the height of the tower since this is in a national and local historic district. As owner of home in a historic district, wants to be assured that he has predictability that the historic district will be protected. Says the Madison Trust has two very popular walking tours in the Mansion Hill area. He says that unmasking and fixing the historic building can and should be done without the 11 story building. Talks about Archipelago Village and how large it was and now it isn't even a project. He says that reducing a huge project by 30% isn't much when you start out 70% outrageous.
Scott Watson - Supports, long time resident of Madison. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Missed who this was - wants better architecture and for the developer to be more creative and show what he can do. They should show off the potential beauty without an edifice that isn't incorporated in the neighborhood.
Susan Schmidt - left - in support on behalf of DMI.
Ledell Zellers - Talks about Mansion Hill being a concentration of historic buildings, but importance isn't each building themselves, but the fabric itself. Says most of the area is R6H historic zoning and she is concerned about piercing the 50 ft height limit which would establish a precedent that would lead to more requests to have tall buildings elsewhere within the historic district. Talks about places in Mansion Hill area that would be appropriate places for infill, but none of them should have projects over the 50 ft limit. Says she recognizes that portions of the Edgewater property have another zoning, but part is R6H. She says that they need to look at the landmark ordinance. She says the visually related area cannot just look at a building like National Gaurdian Life that doesn't meet the historic district requirements and use that to justify a building that is out of character with the historic district.
Tom Link - Doesn't think the hotel fits the historic neighborhood.
Jim Skretny - Suggests that they request the views that the developer talked about, also during different seasons of the year. Wants to know what buses would look like in front of the building. Agrees with Lusson, has a home and rental property in historic district, thought ordinance was there to protect people like him who invest and restore buildings. Worries that if this is allowed, something like that could happen in his neighborhood. On another project he was told that "visually related area" meant that it was compared to buildings in the historic district, not outside, uses MG&E building as an example. He also notes that neighborhood meetings have not be advertised to the public, except one where he showed up and was asked to leave otherwise the developer would not present the project.
Cnare [Rebecca (staff) not Lauren (alder)] says didn't do their visually related study yet.
Dan Burr - Labor 464 - building buildings for years. With these economic times, this project would push everything forward. 500 craftsman would be used throughout the project, and that would have a triple affect, once money comes in to the area, the employees spend it at grocery stores etc. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Maniaci asks the labor guy what projects this group has approved that they have worked on. He says the new project on the square (glass bank?) and Hyvee then struggles to think of any others. [and neither of those projects went to Landmarks Commission.]
Gib Dokken - Owns several properties in the area. Doesn't consider this the heart of the mansion hill neighborhood, its State Langdon neighborhood. [He should probably look at a map.] Says should build it at 11 stories or more. He has all students in his buildings, it has changed the area. He says this isn't about Mansion Hill, but will affect people all over the world. He lives across the lake and would like to travel across the water and come use their facilities. Thinks a marina would be a good addition to the city. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Erik Minton - here for purely self interested reasons - loves living downtown. Active and involved in many small businesses. Read about Cafe Montmartre and Cardinal closing while vacationing out of town. Asks how long can we kick people without giving them some substance. When he first saw the building he was excited about how he and friends would use the building. Says its a tragedy they lost project on Blair St. and the Gorman project loss set the E Wash corridor back 20 years. People of his generation struggle in the downtown to proactively change the downtown and this hotel could change much of that. [He, of course, said alot more but I missed it as someone was talking to me. Seems like karma since he was the reason I missed what others said. Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK
Several people have left and everyone finally everyone fits in the room. There are still about 19 people left.
Levitan asks if this is informational , when will this com back to the commission. Cnare says it will come back for a certificate of appropriateness and Landmarks will be the lead. She explains that for the PUD/Zoning discussion, Plan commission is the lead and Common Council will also vote on it. Levitan asks what happens if the certificate of appropriateness was denied, could it be appealed? He asks if PUD can be approved without the certificate of appropriateness? And Levitan reminds them to stay focused on their purview and jurisdiction. Cnare says she will get a flowchart of the various decisions to be made about the project. She lists off various issues and who is the lead on those issues:
- Lakefront access issue is a decision made solely by the Zoning Board of Appeals, unless appealed.
- Conditional Use for the elevator tower is a plan commission final decision, unless appealed.
- Certificate of Appropriateness - Landmarks final decision, unless appealed.
- Zoning/PUD submittal Plan Commission is the lead, but Common Council has final decision.
Maniaci says she wants to see various views. Stephans says he wants to see the views from eye level coming and going, to show context of neighborhood, from those points in the neighborhood and from development to those points.
Cnare says things are still changing, that they haven't received a formal application for the certificate of appropriateness so they haven't started their analysis.
Levitan asks if this is a corner parcel. Cnare says there is no formal submittal, so that hasn't been determined by staff. Also don't know what the parcel will be since part of it is being built on National Guardian Life property.
Stephans says they need to address the foliage situation with the views.
Skretny reminds them that the use can impact the view and that needs to be considered.
Maniaci asks if they are going to give feedback on the architectural features and asks for a two minute overview. Supple talks about how they designed the windows (punched, recessed, balconies) to break up the design. Says this is more residential than first drawings, wrought iron detailing, awnings, flower boxes, rich classical appearance to relate to buildings on Wisconsin Avenue.
Stephans asks about the original building. Supple says old building doesn't meet the standards of today. The 40's building floor plate is very narrow. ADA, elevators, stairwells need to be expanded and puts alot of constraints on the building. It is an important building, but there are difficulties. [He's trying to get them to talk about issues of interest to Landmarks Commission and the certificate of appropriateness, but they seem to be missing the point.]
Stephans asks why the style of the new building is so different from the old building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says when they tried to carry over the 40's style to the new building it looked like a movie set, it looked fake. Says the public stair lets the 1940s building stand on its own. Dunn says strength of building is stronger if it stands on its own. Supple says that this is a collection of buildings around a public space, each piece stands on its own, like a collection of buildings around a public park.
Stephans asks about renovation of the 1940's building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says they are putting in suites, maybe even permanent residents in the building. Dunn says the uses will be programmatic, Brigadoon Room, fitness area, back of office, meeting space, things that they can adapt better.
Stephans asks if it includes restoration of the building. [By now, the developer should have made that clear in an informational presentation to Landmarks Commission, and why he didn't is beyond me.] Dunn says yes, need to restore the lower tier of the building, replace all windows. Asbestos, ADA, etc issues.
Slattery asks about sky walk and other exterior changes to the building [Again, should have been covered.] Says there will be changes for the banquet area.
Levitan added a view he wanted to see. They want to see what is there now as well.
Stephan says good not to carry the architecture through. Dunn says that they changed the whole scale of the building. Stair didn't exist originally. Big facade over the rooms was taken off the building.
Stephans asks if they considered lowering the building as they approach the lake. Dunn says no, cuz of the terrace on top of the building. He then talks about the grand stair.
Maniaci asks what the front of the 1940's building will look like. [Again, should have been part of the presentation and Landmarks commissioners shouldn't need to be asking all these questions.] Dunn says he wants advice on entry way to 1940's building and the pier area. [I'm not sure how you get that advice if they don't present that information.]
Stephans asks about how they will maintain the pedestrian view when you approach the large mass of the 11 story building. He says that other attempts have been failures. Wants to maintain the pedestrian feeling. Dunn says they have spent alot of time on that. He says the stone detailing draws out the awnings, etc that give it a human urban scale. Strong stone ledge a few stories up.
A member of the public asked about the "public park" that Supple talked about. Can she bring a picnic basket and lawn chair and hang out for the day without using the hotel amenities. Dunn doesn't answer the question.
Another member of the public asks about how long the buses will idle. Dunn explains how they plan to treat the buses.
With that, the meeting is over, but they discuss when the packet for the certificate of appropriateness will be submitted and the answer seems to be, sometime in August.
[Overall, it was strange. The developers didn't present hardly any issues that related to the certificate of appropriateness which is the decision before the Landmarks Commission and the speakers there to support the project did not talk to issues related to that issue either. While the neighbors who had concerns about specific issues stayed rather focused and got few answers. And about sums up the problem with this project. It's all a sales job, with no details or answers to the things that really matter.] Read more!
SPEAKING OF STANDING IN THE HALLWAY . . .
So, the room was crowded, with a double row of chair on one side of the room, but the hope was that there would be a few people leaving after items 1 & 2 were done. There were about a dozen people in the hallway waiting for the room to clear. Of course, I'm standing in the hallway with Bob Dunn and staff. He happened to asked me why I was against the project. I told him I was against the process and it didn't have to become so contentious and divisive. He asked me to sit down and talk with him about that. I told him I thought it was too late, that the damage was done, but . . . agreed to sit down and talk. And, he can buy me lunch and not have to fill out a lobbying report! :) Sadly, I don't think I'll accept his offer of free lunch. It still just seems wrong.
BREAK AND RESUME
They have to take a break to get the meeting started as people shuffle around, but 5 of us are left standing in hallway, including a city staff person and others. Several people offered me a chair, but I opted for the electrical outlet and slightly cooler temperature.
The chair announced there were many registrants and asked how long the presentation would take. The Edgewater folks said they could do it in 15 minutes. Levitan stopped them and asked if they presentation would present an elevation as seen from capital and if it was in the room? And if they had information on the impact on the mansion hill historic district. Bob Dunn replied yes and yes.
PRESENTATION
I believe these were the only materials that the commission had.
Bob Dunn outlined has a presentation that:
- Outlined their vision, skipped the detail to put us out of our misery
- Shows a map on urban context, again, skips the details
- Outlines parts of the comprehensive plan he feels are reflected in the project
- Talks about draft of Mansion Hill plan, talks about how meets it the concepts in the plan
- Talks about the Mansion Hill plan saying the neighborhood is
-- 55% parcels are non-residential
-- 94% residential is rental
-- 60% of residential are in building that have more than 10 units
-- 56% of residents lived there for a year or less
- Shows the blight study picture from their submission.
- Shows current pictures of the Edgewater.
- Talks about the design overview parts of the presentation - building expansion, lakefront terrace, historic presentation [you'd think he'd be focusing here for the Landmarks Commission, but that didn't happen], waterfront access and core building.
- Shows picture from the lake.
- 107 rooms today, total 228 guest suites in new project.
- Today 165 parking stalls, proposal more than doubles that to more than 400 with valet parking.
- Most significant change to project is expansion out of right of way.
- 11 story building from Langdon. [i.e. 18 story building with the other 7 floors]
- Building is 75 feet from the water.
- Talks about public space on the terrace.
- Shows original rendering of 1940's building. [I wonder why the rendering and not the actual photos that I know they have?]
- Talks about reviving the 1940's building by doing the grand stair and pulling back the 70's addition and restore the building. [No renderings of what the remodel will look like?]
- Talks about waterfront access but only shows view from the terrace, nothing about the plans for the lakeshore.
- He didn't show any of the "core building" elements.
- Talks about the process - says working on a daily basis to get as much input as they can. Met with neighborhood groups, business interests, surrounding neighborhoods, mayor, planning, economic development unit, ADA groups, Environmental Groups and flashes lists of others.
- Says trying to balance the interests in the comprehensive plan and urban infill to concerns from neighborhood and downtown.
- Project webpage, office hours (Tuesday and Thursday 4 - 6 if you believe their submittal to the city, Thursdays 4 - 6 if you believe their website), number of neighborhood meetings scheduled with a variety of neighborhood groups. Says worked hard and will continue to. [He didn't give out the website, say when the office hours were or when the neighborhood meetings were, I filled that information in where I knew it. And the website did a little number on my computer, its heavy on the graphics or something, so click with caution.]
- Talks about changes they have made. His staff points out he's only hitting the things he thinks are interesting to this group. [Obviously, they either don't know their audience, or don't care.]
-- Shows where the new building was originally, and then the footprint of where it moved.
-- Reduced gross volume of building area by 30%
-- Says he has addressed the right of way issue, was 28 feet into it and now completely out of it.
-- Mass and height, shows original, doesn't show current.
-- Lakefront terrace, 40,000 sq feet open and accessible to the public. [Again, nothing about the actualy lake front.]
-- Says studied view corridor, pulling building back 30 feet.
- Skips through historic district slides. [??]
- Talks about "visually related area", says they did a series of studies, but skips over it and has no detail. [UGH, know your audience! This is the key issue for the committee and he just blows by it.]
- Compares project to 2 Langdon and National Guardian Life Building. Shows elevation from the water side. Trying to scale the building to be like others in neighborhood.
-Formal PUD submission is still coming.
Levitan asks about a view from the capital. Dunn says this is it. Levitan says he doesn't want to see a helicopter view, he wants to see what the human will see. Dunn tries to say that he is showing Levitan what he wants, clearly it isn't.
Chair Stephans describes what the commission needs to see. Dunn says they have focused on the corridor views. Says they are doing a series of studies so that they can pick a point you want to see the project from. Says will do James Madison Park, Union Terrace etc. Also more positions from the Lake.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Fred Mohs - Talks about existing conditions. Commercial project in the heart of a residential neighborhood. If it weren't for the current conditions, no one would consider doing this. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Harvey Wendel - from Pickney Place Condos, 6 members all supporters - wants their lake to become first class. 60% blighted neighborhood, including the Edgewater. Association supports it. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Mary Mohs - talks about how bad the neighborhood was, students have moved on and now have a permanent neighborhood core. This project will destroy the neighborhood. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Kennedy Manor resident - Faulkner family members, she says they worked hard, we know it needs what Bob Dunn has offered. You are being offered a good opportunity, it makes her proud. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Joe Lusson - concerned about the height of the tower since this is in a national and local historic district. As owner of home in a historic district, wants to be assured that he has predictability that the historic district will be protected. Says the Madison Trust has two very popular walking tours in the Mansion Hill area. He says that unmasking and fixing the historic building can and should be done without the 11 story building. Talks about Archipelago Village and how large it was and now it isn't even a project. He says that reducing a huge project by 30% isn't much when you start out 70% outrageous.
Scott Watson - Supports, long time resident of Madison. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Missed who this was - wants better architecture and for the developer to be more creative and show what he can do. They should show off the potential beauty without an edifice that isn't incorporated in the neighborhood.
Susan Schmidt - left - in support on behalf of DMI.
Ledell Zellers - Talks about Mansion Hill being a concentration of historic buildings, but importance isn't each building themselves, but the fabric itself. Says most of the area is R6H historic zoning and she is concerned about piercing the 50 ft height limit which would establish a precedent that would lead to more requests to have tall buildings elsewhere within the historic district. Talks about places in Mansion Hill area that would be appropriate places for infill, but none of them should have projects over the 50 ft limit. Says she recognizes that portions of the Edgewater property have another zoning, but part is R6H. She says that they need to look at the landmark ordinance. She says the visually related area cannot just look at a building like National Gaurdian Life that doesn't meet the historic district requirements and use that to justify a building that is out of character with the historic district.
Tom Link - Doesn't think the hotel fits the historic neighborhood.
Jim Skretny - Suggests that they request the views that the developer talked about, also during different seasons of the year. Wants to know what buses would look like in front of the building. Agrees with Lusson, has a home and rental property in historic district, thought ordinance was there to protect people like him who invest and restore buildings. Worries that if this is allowed, something like that could happen in his neighborhood. On another project he was told that "visually related area" meant that it was compared to buildings in the historic district, not outside, uses MG&E building as an example. He also notes that neighborhood meetings have not be advertised to the public, except one where he showed up and was asked to leave otherwise the developer would not present the project.
Cnare [Rebecca (staff) not Lauren (alder)] says didn't do their visually related study yet.
Dan Burr - Labor 464 - building buildings for years. With these economic times, this project would push everything forward. 500 craftsman would be used throughout the project, and that would have a triple affect, once money comes in to the area, the employees spend it at grocery stores etc. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Maniaci asks the labor guy what projects this group has approved that they have worked on. He says the new project on the square (glass bank?) and Hyvee then struggles to think of any others. [and neither of those projects went to Landmarks Commission.]
Gib Dokken - Owns several properties in the area. Doesn't consider this the heart of the mansion hill neighborhood, its State Langdon neighborhood. [He should probably look at a map.] Says should build it at 11 stories or more. He has all students in his buildings, it has changed the area. He says this isn't about Mansion Hill, but will affect people all over the world. He lives across the lake and would like to travel across the water and come use their facilities. Thinks a marina would be a good addition to the city. [Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
Erik Minton - here for purely self interested reasons - loves living downtown. Active and involved in many small businesses. Read about Cafe Montmartre and Cardinal closing while vacationing out of town. Asks how long can we kick people without giving them some substance. When he first saw the building he was excited about how he and friends would use the building. Says its a tragedy they lost project on Blair St. and the Gorman project loss set the E Wash corridor back 20 years. People of his generation struggle in the downtown to proactively change the downtown and this hotel could change much of that. [He, of course, said alot more but I missed it as someone was talking to me. Seems like karma since he was the reason I missed what others said. Seems off topic, doesn't talk about landmarks commission issues.]
DISCUSSION, QUESTIONS, FEEDBACK
Several people have left and everyone finally everyone fits in the room. There are still about 19 people left.
Levitan asks if this is informational , when will this com back to the commission. Cnare says it will come back for a certificate of appropriateness and Landmarks will be the lead. She explains that for the PUD/Zoning discussion, Plan commission is the lead and Common Council will also vote on it. Levitan asks what happens if the certificate of appropriateness was denied, could it be appealed? He asks if PUD can be approved without the certificate of appropriateness? And Levitan reminds them to stay focused on their purview and jurisdiction. Cnare says she will get a flowchart of the various decisions to be made about the project. She lists off various issues and who is the lead on those issues:
- Lakefront access issue is a decision made solely by the Zoning Board of Appeals, unless appealed.
- Conditional Use for the elevator tower is a plan commission final decision, unless appealed.
- Certificate of Appropriateness - Landmarks final decision, unless appealed.
- Zoning/PUD submittal Plan Commission is the lead, but Common Council has final decision.
Maniaci says she wants to see various views. Stephans says he wants to see the views from eye level coming and going, to show context of neighborhood, from those points in the neighborhood and from development to those points.
Cnare says things are still changing, that they haven't received a formal application for the certificate of appropriateness so they haven't started their analysis.
Levitan asks if this is a corner parcel. Cnare says there is no formal submittal, so that hasn't been determined by staff. Also don't know what the parcel will be since part of it is being built on National Guardian Life property.
Stephans says they need to address the foliage situation with the views.
Skretny reminds them that the use can impact the view and that needs to be considered.
Maniaci asks if they are going to give feedback on the architectural features and asks for a two minute overview. Supple talks about how they designed the windows (punched, recessed, balconies) to break up the design. Says this is more residential than first drawings, wrought iron detailing, awnings, flower boxes, rich classical appearance to relate to buildings on Wisconsin Avenue.
Stephans asks about the original building. Supple says old building doesn't meet the standards of today. The 40's building floor plate is very narrow. ADA, elevators, stairwells need to be expanded and puts alot of constraints on the building. It is an important building, but there are difficulties. [He's trying to get them to talk about issues of interest to Landmarks Commission and the certificate of appropriateness, but they seem to be missing the point.]
Stephans asks why the style of the new building is so different from the old building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says when they tried to carry over the 40's style to the new building it looked like a movie set, it looked fake. Says the public stair lets the 1940s building stand on its own. Dunn says strength of building is stronger if it stands on its own. Supple says that this is a collection of buildings around a public space, each piece stands on its own, like a collection of buildings around a public park.
Stephans asks about renovation of the 1940's building. [Again, this should have been the center of the presentation.] Supple says they are putting in suites, maybe even permanent residents in the building. Dunn says the uses will be programmatic, Brigadoon Room, fitness area, back of office, meeting space, things that they can adapt better.
Stephans asks if it includes restoration of the building. [By now, the developer should have made that clear in an informational presentation to Landmarks Commission, and why he didn't is beyond me.] Dunn says yes, need to restore the lower tier of the building, replace all windows. Asbestos, ADA, etc issues.
Slattery asks about sky walk and other exterior changes to the building [Again, should have been covered.] Says there will be changes for the banquet area.
Levitan added a view he wanted to see. They want to see what is there now as well.
Stephan says good not to carry the architecture through. Dunn says that they changed the whole scale of the building. Stair didn't exist originally. Big facade over the rooms was taken off the building.
Stephans asks if they considered lowering the building as they approach the lake. Dunn says no, cuz of the terrace on top of the building. He then talks about the grand stair.
Maniaci asks what the front of the 1940's building will look like. [Again, should have been part of the presentation and Landmarks commissioners shouldn't need to be asking all these questions.] Dunn says he wants advice on entry way to 1940's building and the pier area. [I'm not sure how you get that advice if they don't present that information.]
Stephans asks about how they will maintain the pedestrian view when you approach the large mass of the 11 story building. He says that other attempts have been failures. Wants to maintain the pedestrian feeling. Dunn says they have spent alot of time on that. He says the stone detailing draws out the awnings, etc that give it a human urban scale. Strong stone ledge a few stories up.
A member of the public asked about the "public park" that Supple talked about. Can she bring a picnic basket and lawn chair and hang out for the day without using the hotel amenities. Dunn doesn't answer the question.
Another member of the public asks about how long the buses will idle. Dunn explains how they plan to treat the buses.
With that, the meeting is over, but they discuss when the packet for the certificate of appropriateness will be submitted and the answer seems to be, sometime in August.
[Overall, it was strange. The developers didn't present hardly any issues that related to the certificate of appropriateness which is the decision before the Landmarks Commission and the speakers there to support the project did not talk to issues related to that issue either. While the neighbors who had concerns about specific issues stayed rather focused and got few answers. And about sums up the problem with this project. It's all a sales job, with no details or answers to the things that really matter.] Read more!
Monday, July 27, 2009
The Week that Was . . .
Last week, I was on vacation, but there were a few more obscure things that were worthy of comments, so here they are . . . better late than never . . . A few other bigger issues to be covered later this week if there is time!
LANDLORDS! WEATHERIZE YOUR BUILDINGS!
There's stimulus money to do it! The project is aimed at larger buildings housing low to moderate income families. For more information call Home Energy Plus at 866-432-8947 (toll-free) or send an email to WImultiunit@wisconsin.gov. Applications are due July 31st for the initial round of pilot projects and will continue to be processed through August 26th.
HOLY CASH!
From Wisconsin Democracy Campaign:
NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT NEEDED!
What do you want to know about your neighborhood associations?
IDLING CAN BE STOPPED!
Based on on-going discussions with one of my local neighborhood businesses (that used to idle next to a school) it can't be done! Well, except when fuel prices were high. But it appears, that some businesses have found a way in any economy. Hat's off to Sentry Hilldale!
CONGRATS TLNA!
Looks like the neighborhood had a great first neighborhood block party! And raised $1,000 for the Tenney Park Shelter!
IT'S ABOUT TIME
Sometimes, the county seems ahead of the city, sometimes the city seems ahead of the county. In this case, its about freakin' time county!
KUDOS TO KING
Wow! Can you believe it, last week, the minimum wage was raised to $7.25. Thanks to our very own visionary Austin King and the efforts he lead locally, the state pre-empted Madison and did it even better!
COULD YOU IMAGINE . . .
If every city department was required to "break even". Lets start with the police department . . . could you imagine what would happen? So, why the public pool? Obviously, it contributes to the community in ways that I hear about frequently, so why the obsession over it breaking even? Should that be required of every city project and every city service?
CRIME IS DOWN!
So now can we invest in social services? Or do we still need more cops? I guess that mean the police have time on their hands.
GREEDY?
Who were the two county board supervisors who refused to take a pay cut?
ALIBI?
Where was Duane Steinhauer? And why is ok when a landlord does this?
There's more, I'm sure . . . as I catch up I may have a few more relics . . .
Read more!
LANDLORDS! WEATHERIZE YOUR BUILDINGS!
There's stimulus money to do it! The project is aimed at larger buildings housing low to moderate income families. For more information call Home Energy Plus at 866-432-8947 (toll-free) or send an email to WImultiunit@wisconsin.gov. Applications are due July 31st for the initial round of pilot projects and will continue to be processed through August 26th.
HOLY CASH!
From Wisconsin Democracy Campaign:
In the two statewide races on this spring's ballot, those with the most money won. In the state Supreme Court election, it was the incumbent chief justice who set a new record for fundraising and blew the competition out of the water. In the election for state school superintendent, a single interest group spent more than all five candidates combined. For more on this spring fling, see the report the Democracy Campaign issued today.
NEIGHBORHOOD INPUT NEEDED!
What do you want to know about your neighborhood associations?
The Planning Division is updating the Neighborhood Association Website. We are interested in knowing what you would like to see incorporated into the new site. Please contact Jule Stroick, Planning Division at 608-267-8744 or jstroick@cityofmadison.com with suggestions!
IDLING CAN BE STOPPED!
Based on on-going discussions with one of my local neighborhood businesses (that used to idle next to a school) it can't be done! Well, except when fuel prices were high. But it appears, that some businesses have found a way in any economy. Hat's off to Sentry Hilldale!
CONGRATS TLNA!
Looks like the neighborhood had a great first neighborhood block party! And raised $1,000 for the Tenney Park Shelter!
IT'S ABOUT TIME
Sometimes, the county seems ahead of the city, sometimes the city seems ahead of the county. In this case, its about freakin' time county!
KUDOS TO KING
Wow! Can you believe it, last week, the minimum wage was raised to $7.25. Thanks to our very own visionary Austin King and the efforts he lead locally, the state pre-empted Madison and did it even better!
COULD YOU IMAGINE . . .
If every city department was required to "break even". Lets start with the police department . . . could you imagine what would happen? So, why the public pool? Obviously, it contributes to the community in ways that I hear about frequently, so why the obsession over it breaking even? Should that be required of every city project and every city service?
CRIME IS DOWN!
So now can we invest in social services? Or do we still need more cops? I guess that mean the police have time on their hands.
GREEDY?
Who were the two county board supervisors who refused to take a pay cut?
ALIBI?
Where was Duane Steinhauer? And why is ok when a landlord does this?
There's more, I'm sure . . . as I catch up I may have a few more relics . . .
Read more!
Input Needed on Capital Springs
Here's the info . . .
Dane County and Wisconsin DNR to Host Public Information Meeting for Review of Draft Capital Springs State Recreation Area Master PlanRead more!
The public will have an opportunity to review and comment on draft plans for how the state and county should develop and manage the Capital Springs State Recreation Area in Dane County, Wisconsin. The project area includes nearly 2500 acres of land stretching east to west from Upper Mud Lake to the Wisconsin DNR South Central Service Center on Fish Hatchery Road. Some of the proposed additions to the project area include hiking and biking trails, an amphitheater, additional public hunting areas and fishing access, canoe landings, a disc golf course and dog exercise area.
Since the property’s purchase in 2000, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Dane County have been working together to gather information needed about the project area that has guided the planning process. This base information has been used to work with the public and local governing bodies to identify issues of interest and to receive comments on the vision, goals and management alternatives for the properties. Based on this information the master planning team has developed a Draft Capital Springs State Recreation Area Master Plan and conducted an Environmental Assessment for the property.
The draft Master Plan and Environmental Assessment will be available starting July 22 for public review and comment. The plans will be available on the DNR web site at: http://dnr.wi.gov/master_planning/capsprings/index.html. Copies of the Draft Master Plan and EA will also be available at the Lussier Family Heritage Center, 3101 Lake Farm Road, Madison, Wisconsin 53711.
A public information meeting will be held on Wednesday, July 29th from 7 to 9 p.m. at the Lussier Family Heritage Center, 3101 Lake Farm Road, Madison WI, 53711. The Center is accessible to people with disabilities.
There will be a 15 minute introductory presentation, followed by an open house style discussion and listening session. Members of the public will have the opportunity to ask questions and discuss the draft Master Plan and EA with DNR and County staff.
Comments on the draft plan can be submitted between July 22 to August 22 and can be made via the website or by contacting:
Kevin Swenson, Park Manager
Capital Springs Centennial State Recreation Area
3101 Lake Farm Road
Madison WI 53711
Phone: 608-224-3606
Email: kevin.swenson@wisconsin.gov
UW Demolition
Another demolition from the demolition alert service . . .
Please be advised that Gary Brown will be filing a demolition permit application on July 22, 2009 for Plan Commission review that calls for a university building located at 1220 Linden Dr Madison, WI 53706 to be demolished. For more information regarding this forthcoming application, you may contact the applicant, Gary Brown, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 610 Walnut Street Madison, WI 53726 at gbrown@fpm.wisc.edu or (608)263-3023.Read more!
Applicant's Comments:
The University of Wisconsin is proposing to remove two buildings (the Preschool Laboratory at 1440 Linden Drive and Human Development & Family Studies buildings at 1430 Linden Drive) to make way for a proposed addition and renovation to the School of Human Ecology Building.
If you have any questions about the Plan Commission demolition permit approval process, please contact the City of Madison Planning Division at (608) 266-4635.
The "5th" Day Week Ahead
Meetings I think could be interesting this week . . . a low standard I know, but here's my items of interest. Of course, most of the time all the meetings are not posted in the beginning of the week and I may have missed something of interest to you, so here's the weekly schedule.
Monday, July 27, 2009
4:30 PM BOARD OF ESTIMATES ROOM 260 MMB
- Finally adopting new personnel rules, for the first time since 1970. Yeah, that's not a joke!
- Allowing City of Madison managers and supervisors to live outside the City of Madison without a 1% pay decrease.
- Facade improvement grants to businesses.
- Midvale-Westmorland Neighborhood Plan
- Who gets the CDBG stimulus money?
- Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing stimulus money
- 2010 Budget Schedule and Rules
- Report on local impacts of stimulus money
- Attempt to stop financially analyzing TIF projects when determining if projects should get your tax money - I'm not kidding. Of course, lots of useful information can be found here.
- Closed session contract negotiation update. Glad to see this happening before its a done deal.
4:45 PM LANDMARKS COMMISSION ROOM LL-130 MMB
- Standing room only for the Edgewater project. I hear there could be fireworks over lack of necessary information.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
12:00 PM MADISON BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS SUITE 500, 116 N CARROLL ST
- Useless agenda, as per usual.
4:30 PM WATER UTILITY BOARD 119 E. OLIN AVE. ROOMS A & B
- Report, reports, reports
- Policies on treating iron and manganese in water
- Flouridation in our water.
5:00 PM PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION ROOM 260 MMB
- Midvale-Westmorland Neighborhood Plan
- Northport-Warner-Sherman Neighhborhood Plan
- Repealing car door ordinance
- Annual Platinum Bike report and discussion on bike boulevards
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
9:00 AM LABOR RELATIONS ROOM 501 CCB
- I don't recall ever seeing this publicly noticed. It's the firefighter's contract that will be discussed.
5:35 PM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE, PUBLIC HEARING WATER UTILITY OFFICES, 119 E OLIN AVE
- Cuts, cuts, cuts. Do more with less!
5:36 PM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE WATER UTILITY OFFICES, 119 E OLIN AVE
- Discussion of final recommendations for cuts. If you feel like this snuck up on you - it did! Less than two weeks notice.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
5:00 PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMMITTEE, SPECIAL MEETING ROOM 260 MMB
- More CDBG stimulus money discussions
- 2010 Budget discussions - no info available this Monday morning.
- Myseterious discussion on STAFF
- Also mysterious discussion on the 5 year plan. Also, no info available this Monday morning.
Its a last week of the month, with several "5ths", so it should be slow, but don't be surprised if more meetings pop up after this morning! Read more!
Monday, July 27, 2009
4:30 PM BOARD OF ESTIMATES ROOM 260 MMB
- Finally adopting new personnel rules, for the first time since 1970. Yeah, that's not a joke!
- Allowing City of Madison managers and supervisors to live outside the City of Madison without a 1% pay decrease.
- Facade improvement grants to businesses.
- Midvale-Westmorland Neighborhood Plan
- Who gets the CDBG stimulus money?
- Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing stimulus money
- 2010 Budget Schedule and Rules
- Report on local impacts of stimulus money
- Attempt to stop financially analyzing TIF projects when determining if projects should get your tax money - I'm not kidding. Of course, lots of useful information can be found here.
- Closed session contract negotiation update. Glad to see this happening before its a done deal.
4:45 PM LANDMARKS COMMISSION ROOM LL-130 MMB
- Standing room only for the Edgewater project. I hear there could be fireworks over lack of necessary information.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
12:00 PM MADISON BOARD OF POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSIONERS SUITE 500, 116 N CARROLL ST
- Useless agenda, as per usual.
4:30 PM WATER UTILITY BOARD 119 E. OLIN AVE. ROOMS A & B
- Report, reports, reports
- Policies on treating iron and manganese in water
- Flouridation in our water.
5:00 PM PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION ROOM 260 MMB
- Midvale-Westmorland Neighborhood Plan
- Northport-Warner-Sherman Neighhborhood Plan
- Repealing car door ordinance
- Annual Platinum Bike report and discussion on bike boulevards
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
9:00 AM LABOR RELATIONS ROOM 501 CCB
- I don't recall ever seeing this publicly noticed. It's the firefighter's contract that will be discussed.
5:35 PM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE, PUBLIC HEARING WATER UTILITY OFFICES, 119 E OLIN AVE
- Cuts, cuts, cuts. Do more with less!
5:36 PM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE WATER UTILITY OFFICES, 119 E OLIN AVE
- Discussion of final recommendations for cuts. If you feel like this snuck up on you - it did! Less than two weeks notice.
Thursday, July 30, 2009
5:00 PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMMITTEE, SPECIAL MEETING ROOM 260 MMB
- More CDBG stimulus money discussions
- 2010 Budget discussions - no info available this Monday morning.
- Myseterious discussion on STAFF
- Also mysterious discussion on the 5 year plan. Also, no info available this Monday morning.
Its a last week of the month, with several "5ths", so it should be slow, but don't be surprised if more meetings pop up after this morning! Read more!
Sunday, July 19, 2009
The You're On Your Own Week Ahead
I'm on vacation all next week, so I won't be blogging and I won't we there to tell you what happens at the Council meeting. Other bloggers will have to let you know what happens!
Monday, July 20, 2009
4:00 PM SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND ENERGY COMMITTEE ROOM 103A CCB
- Northeast Neighborhoods Development Plan
4:30 PM COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT ROOM 108 CCB
- Recycling of demolition and construction materials.
5:30 PM PLAN COMMISSION ROOM 201 CCB
- Informational presentation on the Edgewater Hotel
- Authorizing the study for the neighborhood conservation district for Schley/Dewey/Wilson.
- Spending TIF money outside of a TIF district?
- Zoning code update
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
6:30 PM COMMON COUNCIL ROOM 201 CCB
#1 - Larry Nelson & #2 Pam Williamsons both retire
#4 - Project at First and East Washington
#13 - More full time bus drivers to cut down on overtime
#19 - Money for Catholic Multicultural Center
#28 - Bus tickets for working people
#36 - Declaring trees infected with Emerald Ash Borer a nuisance and allowing for the removal of the trees.
#38 - Moving CTH M/Junction Road/Mineral Point forward
#53 - Approving plans and specifications for public improvements necessary 600 E Johnson Project
#62 - Sidewalk replacement in district 2, 6 AND 15
#66 - Changing composition of ALRC
#67/68 - Changing composition of PSRB/C (somehow, this got listed twice and the EDC changes didn't make it on the agenda, someone should fix this tomorrow so EDC gets properly noticed.)
#69 - Allowing Council President to form temporary subcommittees.
#71 - Increasing fines for landmarks violations
#72 - Urging on-line voter registration
#73 - Changing boundaries of BioAg TID and allowing expenditures outside the district.
#77 - 911 services from the county (this was the item discussed at PSRB/C) and reaffirming the desire for a countywide (?) 311 system.
#82 - Edgewood bus pass program
#83 - Multi-space parking meters
#87 - An exercise in trust in the city attorney's office
#90 - Shady Wood Neighborhood Plan
Items being introduced and referred, not discussed, that might be of interest:
#94 - More members on CDA Housing Operations Committee
#95 - Changing what they look at when suspending or revoking liquor licenses
#96 - Preventing selling liquor where gas is sold.
#97 - Affordable Housing Trust Fund changes to allow funding for Section 8 rent increases
#99 - Finally changing the personnel rules, for the first time since 1970
#102 - $800,000 for homelessness prevention
#104 - Establishing rules for this year's budget process
#105 - Creating a Madison City Channel Ad Hoc Advisory Committee
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
8:00 AM EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE ROOM 260 MMB
- The most painful meeting of the year, when they have a public hearing to hear what needs are not being met already and how cuts to funding will make it even worse. Who's getting their funding cut this year?
3:00 PM ALRC SUBCOMMITTEE ON BAR MORPHING ROOM LL-120 MMB
The title says it all, no information provided with the agenda.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
12:00 PM EOC AD HOC COMMITTEE ON TASERS ROOM 523 CCB
- I'm so glad they are doing this!!!
4:30 PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ROOM 313 MMB
- Special meeting to talk about Villager Mall and Burr Oaks Senior Housing proposal
6:30 PM ZONING CODE REWRITE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 201 W MIFFLIN ST, ROOMS 202 & 204
- Reviewing list of unresolved issues and mapping out the major changes to the zoning code.
Read more!
Monday, July 20, 2009
4:00 PM SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND ENERGY COMMITTEE ROOM 103A CCB
- Northeast Neighborhoods Development Plan
4:30 PM COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT ROOM 108 CCB
- Recycling of demolition and construction materials.
5:30 PM PLAN COMMISSION ROOM 201 CCB
- Informational presentation on the Edgewater Hotel
- Authorizing the study for the neighborhood conservation district for Schley/Dewey/Wilson.
- Spending TIF money outside of a TIF district?
- Zoning code update
Tuesday, July 21, 2009
6:30 PM COMMON COUNCIL ROOM 201 CCB
#1 - Larry Nelson & #2 Pam Williamsons both retire
#4 - Project at First and East Washington
#13 - More full time bus drivers to cut down on overtime
#19 - Money for Catholic Multicultural Center
#28 - Bus tickets for working people
#36 - Declaring trees infected with Emerald Ash Borer a nuisance and allowing for the removal of the trees.
#38 - Moving CTH M/Junction Road/Mineral Point forward
#53 - Approving plans and specifications for public improvements necessary 600 E Johnson Project
#62 - Sidewalk replacement in district 2, 6 AND 15
#66 - Changing composition of ALRC
#67/68 - Changing composition of PSRB/C (somehow, this got listed twice and the EDC changes didn't make it on the agenda, someone should fix this tomorrow so EDC gets properly noticed.)
#69 - Allowing Council President to form temporary subcommittees.
#71 - Increasing fines for landmarks violations
#72 - Urging on-line voter registration
#73 - Changing boundaries of BioAg TID and allowing expenditures outside the district.
#77 - 911 services from the county (this was the item discussed at PSRB/C) and reaffirming the desire for a countywide (?) 311 system.
#82 - Edgewood bus pass program
#83 - Multi-space parking meters
#87 - An exercise in trust in the city attorney's office
#90 - Shady Wood Neighborhood Plan
Items being introduced and referred, not discussed, that might be of interest:
#94 - More members on CDA Housing Operations Committee
#95 - Changing what they look at when suspending or revoking liquor licenses
#96 - Preventing selling liquor where gas is sold.
#97 - Affordable Housing Trust Fund changes to allow funding for Section 8 rent increases
#99 - Finally changing the personnel rules, for the first time since 1970
#102 - $800,000 for homelessness prevention
#104 - Establishing rules for this year's budget process
#105 - Creating a Madison City Channel Ad Hoc Advisory Committee
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
8:00 AM EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE ROOM 260 MMB
- The most painful meeting of the year, when they have a public hearing to hear what needs are not being met already and how cuts to funding will make it even worse. Who's getting their funding cut this year?
3:00 PM ALRC SUBCOMMITTEE ON BAR MORPHING ROOM LL-120 MMB
The title says it all, no information provided with the agenda.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
12:00 PM EOC AD HOC COMMITTEE ON TASERS ROOM 523 CCB
- I'm so glad they are doing this!!!
4:30 PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ROOM 313 MMB
- Special meeting to talk about Villager Mall and Burr Oaks Senior Housing proposal
6:30 PM ZONING CODE REWRITE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 201 W MIFFLIN ST, ROOMS 202 & 204
- Reviewing list of unresolved issues and mapping out the major changes to the zoning code.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)