Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout_Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF OSHKOSH, WISCONSIN MAY23, 2017 REGULAR MEETING held Tuesday, May 23,2017, at 6:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, City Hall Mayor Cummings presided. PRESENT: Council Members Tom Pech Jr., Lori Palmeri, Deb Allison-Aasby, Steven Herman, Caroline Panske, Jake Krause, and Mayor Steve Cummings ALSO PRESENT: Mark Rohloff, City Manager; Pamela Ubrig, City Clerk; Lynn Lorenson, City Attorney; and James Rabe, Director of Public Works Council Member Tom Pech Jr. read the Invocation. The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Reese Meszaros from South Park Middle School; and Sami Schulze from Lakeside Elementary School INTRODUCTION OF CITY STAFF Mr. Rohloff introduced John Ziemer, who was recently promoted to Assistant Fire Chief, and explained he had been with the fire department since 1990 and had held every rank in the department. He introduced Tim Heiman, who was recently promoted to Battalion Chief, and explained he had been with the fire department since 2007 and had recently completed the Executive Fire Officer Program at the National Fire Academy, which was a prestigious program. He explained they were great additions to the City's management team. ACANTHUS AWARDS Shirley Mattox presented the 2017 Acanthus Awards to Jeremy and Lori Herzog,for their home on 310 Waugoo Avenue, and the DeVooght family,for their preservation and move of the Schreiber house on Algoma Boulevard. 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 LICENSE STATUS UPDATES Mayor Cummings explained Council would need to review the applicants and determine if the renewal procedures should continue. He stated the first applicant was Packers Pub, 1603 W. 201h Avenue. Patrick Ruedinger, owner of Packers Pub, stated several individuals had been interested in the property and the contingency of each of the negotiations had been whether the establishment had a liquor license. He explained it would be difficult to move forward with the sale of the property without a license. Council Member Pech stated the facility had closed in August of 2015 and in May of 2016 the liquor license renewal had been approved through June 30th, 2017 based on information that without the license it would be difficult to market and sell the establishment. He explained it had been a year and there had not been any new development. Mr. Ruedinger stated they had been working with an interested party for 6 months who ultimately decided not to proceed. He explained he continued to receive phone calls from individuals interested in the property, one as recent as the day prior. Council Member Pech stated they had shared the similar information with Council a year ago and there had been no action. He explained he understood there could be no guarantees, but questioned what assurance Mr. Ruedinger would be able to provide Council that there would be action in the near future. Mr. Ruedinger explained any potential offers were contingent on the liquor license. Mayor Cummings questioned if the interested parties were planning to operate the establishment as a bar. Mr. Ruedinger stated three of the interested parties had planned for a bar and restaurant. Council Member Allison-Aasby questioned if Mr. Ruedinger would be able to obtain a letter of intent. 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Mr. Ruedinger stated if time would allow he would request a letter of intent. He questioned how long he would have to work with the interested party to put something together. Council Member Allison-Aasby explained she had hoped to see something tangible during the Council meeting, however, two weeks would be acceptable. Council Member Panske stated they held the license until June 30, therefore she did not understand why they would not be promoting that during any potential sale. Council Member Pech questioned when Council would take action on renewing the license. Ms. Ubrig stated there were license renewals on the agenda for that evening, as well as for the next two meetings in June. Council Member Pech stated he would prefer the letter of intent within two weeks. He explained if the party was interested in the establishment they would be willing to provide a letter in an effort to secure the liquor license. Council Member Herman questioned when the non-renewal hearing would need to take place. Ms. Lorenson stated during the June 271h Council meeting and explained she would need time for preparation. Council Member Herman questioned who Mr. Ruedinger was working with to market and sell/lease the property. Mr. Ruedginer stated he previously had it listed with a realty company and there had been no results. He explained he had signs up and listed the property on his own. Council Member Herman questioned if he was trying to sell locally or if he had it listed on a network of bars/restaurants for sale. Mr. Ruedinger stated he did not have it listed within a network. 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Council Member Herman stated Council would need to make a decision on proceeding with the non-renewal process at June 131h Council meeting. Council Member Pech requested the letter of intent and any other tangible proof that there was an interested party prior to the meeting. He stated it should be delivered to the City Clerk no later than June 131h Ms. Ubrig indicated it should be delivered prior to that date for inclusion on the agenda. Council Member Pech stated the deadline was June 6th, which gave Mr. Ruedinger two weeks to gather the information. Mr. Ruedinger agreed. Mayor Cummings stated the next applicant was Robbins, 1810 Omro Road. Wally Wagner stated he owned the former restaurant and had closed due to personal illness June 30, 2016. He requested a renewal of the license and indicated he had listed the property with a real estate company. He stated they had an offer to purchase from an investor in October who planned to lease the property to a restaurant group from Oak Creek. He explained although the investor had backed out, the restaurant group in Oak Creek was still interested and engaged in negotiations. He stated the restaurant group intended to invest in the establishment and ran a successful business in Oak Creek. He explained they were in the process of acquiring financing. He stated they would bring a bar/restaurant with live entertainment to Oshkosh. He explained he would not be able to provide a letter of intent at this time, although they had visited the establishment approximately five times since January. Council Member Panske questioned if there had been additional interest outside of the Oak Creek restaurant group. Mr. Wagner stated there was an investor in Appleton that had been interested, although he did not have a tenant lined up. Council Member Panske questioned if his intent was to sell the business. Mr. Wagner stated that was correct. 4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Council Member Herman stated he believed the property was being actively marketed. He explained he had a discussion with several Chamber members who confirmed what Mr. Wagner had described. He stated he was comfortable renewing the license. Mr. Wagner stated he had failed to mention that he owned properties east of Robbins;he had accepted an offer to purchase and the investors were in the process of developing a hotel, which he believed would help spur interest in the Robbins property. Council Member Allison-Aasby stated she was comfortable proceeding forward with the renewal as she had known Mr. Wagner for some time and could attest to his honest character. She explained she had witnessed activity at the establishment when driving by. Mr. Wagner explained they were actively working to sell the property as it was costly to maintain while closed. Mayor Cummings questioned if Ms. Ubrig needed further direction from Council. Ms. Ubrig clarified that Council would like to proceed with the renewal for Robbins. Mayor Cummings stated that was correct. CITIZEN STATEMENTS David Zerbe, 1031 Washington Avenue, explained he was present to share information on complete streets. He stated complete streets were streets for everyone; they were designed and operated for all users including pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists and transit riders of all ages and abilities. He explained complete streets made roadways easy to utilize and improved health and safety within the community. He stated it would help lower transportation costs was good for the environment. He explained the benefits had been proven through case studies, including data from Alexandria, Minnesota. He stated he would like to see the City of Oshkosh adopt a complete streets policy; Appleton, La Crosse, Madison and Milwaukee had already done so. He presented Council with material detailing the program, which will remain on file in the City Clerk's Office. Mayor Cummings questioned the date of the workshop at the university. 5 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Mr. Zerbe stated it was in the evening on June 13th,which would conflict with the Council meeting. He explained there was second workshop on June 141h during the day, which was one of only 7 being presented throughout the country funded by a grant. He stated he believed the workshop had been designed for government officials. Council Member Palmeri asked for an explanation of complete streets. Mr. Zerbe explained a complete street was designed to enable safe access for all users; depending on the width of the roadway and amount of traffic, complete streets offered different things. He described different options and explained the importance of green space and permeable surfaces. He stated large crosswalks and bump-outs near intersections were common, causing motorists to slow down and shortening the distance the pedestrian was in the street. He explained a complete street was for everyone; automobile, bicycle and on foot. PUBLIC HEARING Resolution 17-246 Approve Final Resolution for Special Assessments — Contract No. 17-12 Miscellaneous Utility Improvements MOTION: ADOPT (Herman; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings CONSENT AGENDA Report of Bills by the Finance Director Receipt & Filing of Common Council Minutes from April 11, 2017 Receipt & Filing of Museum Board Minutes from April 6, 2017 Resolution 17-247 Approve Initial Resolution for Special Assessments for Storm Sewer Laterals /Various Locations with Signed Waivers Resolution 17-248 Approve Acceptance of Waivers of Special Assessment Notices & Hearings 6 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Resolution 17-249 Approve Final Resolution for Special Assessments for Sewer Laterals /Various Locations with Signed Waivers Resolution 17-250 Approve Initial Resolution for Special Assessments for Storm Sewer Laterals /Various Locations Resolution 17-251 Approve Amendment to Engineering Services Agreement with McMahon Group for Design & Preparation of Construction Documents for the Urban Reconstruction of North Main Street (from New York Avenue to Murdock Avenue) ($79,511.00) Resolution 17-252 Approve Agreement with NES Ecological Services for Implementation of Storm Water Detention Basin Vegetation Maintenance Program ($116,156.48) Resolution 17-253 Approve General Development Plan for New Parking Lot; 220-224 Viola Avenue & 227 West Linwood Avenue (Oaklawn Elementary School) (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) Resolution 17-254 Approve Special Event — Oshkosh Area School District (OASD) Community Learning Centers to utilize Menominee Park for the Community Learning Centers of the OASD End of Year Celebration event/June 1, 2017 Resolution 17-255 Approve Special Event — Cool Events LLC to hold the Bubble Run 5K on the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) grounds / June 3, 2017 Resolution 17-256 Approve Special Event — St. Jude the Apostle Parish to hold their Parish Picnic/June 16-18, 2017 Resolution 17-257 Approve Special Event — Silver Star Brands to utilize Menominee Park for their Team Member Appreciation Day/June 22, 2017 Resolution 17-258 Approve Special Event — Oshkosh Elks Lodge #292 to utilize Rainbow Park for the Oshkosh Elks Sheepshead Fishing Tournament/July 15, 2017 7 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Resolution 17-259 Approve Special Event—Lourdes Academy to utilize City streets for the Lourdes Academy Eucharistic Procession/August 31, 2017 Council Member Palmeri stated she appreciated the inclusion of the maps with the applications. She explained she understood Witzel Avenue would be closed between 8:00/8:30 a.m. and questioned if closing down a major street during an active commute time was standard. Kathy Snell, Special Events Coordinator, stated it would not be a full closure of the street; it would only be closed while they crossed the intersection. Council Member Palmeri questioned if it would be a quick closure. Ms. Snell stated it would be a short period of time. Resolution 17-260 Approve Special Event—UW Oshkosh Department of Residence Life to utilize City streets for the Residence Hall Move In Days / September 2 —4, 2017 Resolution 17-261 Approve Special Event — Oakbrook Church to utilize Sawyer Creek Trail & City streets for the Babies for Heaven 5K Run Walk/October 14, 2017 Resolution 17-262 Approve Special Event — Oshkosh Downtown Business Improvement District (BID) to utilize City streets for the Downtown BID Holiday Parade /November 16, 2017 Resolution 17-263 Approve Block Party — Gregg Lux to utilize Evans Street between Nevada Avenue & Custer Avenue to hold a neighborhood block party/August 12, 2017 Resolution 17-264 Approve Council Member Appointments Resolution 17-265 Approve Appointments to Boards & Commissions 8 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Resolution 17-266 Approve Special Class "B" Licenses, Operator & Taxicab Licenses MOTION: ADOPT CONSENT AGENDA (Panske; second, Herman) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings ACTION TAKEN ON ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ordinance 17-267 Designate Bicycle Lanes & Modify Parking Regulations to Restrict Parking on West Side of Westhaven Drive from 91h Avenue to Patriot Lane MOTION: ADOPT (Panske; second, Krause) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings Ordinance 17-268 Approve Zone Change from RH-35 Rural Holding District to HI Heavy Industrial District for Property Located North of Atlas Avenue & East of Global Parkway; Southwest Industrial Park (Plan Commission approved) MOTION: ADOPT (Pech; second, Palmeri) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings Ordinance 17-269 Modify Parking Regulations on 171h Avenue FIRST READING; LAID OVER UNDER THE RULES Resolution 17-270 Approve Annual City Licenses (Renewals) MOTION: ADOPT (Herman; second, Pech) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings 9 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Resolution 17-271 Approve Tax Increment District No. 32 Project Plan; Designate Tax Increment District No. 32 Boundaries; Create Tax Increment District No. 32 Granary Redevelopment (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT (Pech; second, Herman) CARRIED: Ayes (4) Pech, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Mayor Cummings Noes (3) Palmeri, Panske, Krause Council Member Pech stated he appreciated the press providing coverage for City topics, and he understood that there was limited airtime/column space, however, it had been stated that the TIF was for a restaurant. He explained the other pieces of the development had not been mentioned. He asked for an explanation of the TIF. Allen Davis, Director of Community Development, explained that it was a blight elimination project which was required of a TIF project; the building had been vacant for over 10 years and had fallen into a state of disrepair. He stated the City did not dictate the types of uses that would compose a TIF district; they looked at future revenues and jobs. Council Member Pech questioned if the project fit within City policy. Mr. Davis stated that each TIF project went through a scoring process to determine if it would meet applicable criteria, and the project received high scores. Darryn Burich, Planning Services Manager, explained it was not just a restaurant project; it was a blight elimination project. He stated the project would result in a rehabilitated building with a restaurant and an office space for an employer who was moving and expanding their workforce. He explained when they tied the project back to the City's comprehensive plan, they linked it to items such as revitalizing the south shore area and rehabilitating a landmark structure. He stated it would preserve a significant historical structure in the area. Mayor Cummings explained that the Landmarks Commission had marked the location over a year prior, which would allow the developer to retain a great deal of the historic character of the interior. 10 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Mr. Davis stated the project scored high in multiple criteria categories, and he believed it was a worthy project for a TIF. Council Member Herman asked for an explanation of the improvements to the river walk that would be incorporated into the project. Mr. Davis stated they were working on the south shore of the river walk and most of the work had been complete in the Morgan District area. He stated City staff expected the river walk to go east to the Pioneer Island area. He explained until they were able to get through the Sweetwater Marina area, they would need to go around the perimeter, similar to the Mercury Marine area. He stated the developers were proposing streetscaping and beautification with landscaping to the area. Council Member Herman asked for an explanation of the proposed improvements to 51h Avenue. Mr. Davis explained the area between The Granary and Sweetwater was a public right of way, and was in disrepair. He stated the developers were proposing to make improvements on their property and the public right of way to allow for additional parking for customers to the businesses, as well as delineating the location of the public right of way. Council Member Herman asked for an explanation of the length of the TIF. Mr. Davis explained the developers had requested the 'pay-go' TIF based on the rate of return on their investments and it was possible to ask for 90% for the entire 27 years. He stated he believed that would be justifiable based on their single digit rate of return. He explained the details would be included in the development agreement. Council Member Herman requested the representative from Ehlers to provide a brief analysis of the TIF. Todd Taves, Senior Municipal Advisor, Ehlers, explained the statutory life of a TIF was 27 years. He stated Ehlers had estimated a 22 year span based on cash flow projections, and the point in time where the amount that the developer had requested would be attained. He explained the tax increment district would be expected to close in 22 years although there was the possibility it could remain open for 27 years. He explained 11 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 without TIF assistance the developer would receive an investment return of 2% and with the assistance they would receive a return of approximately 5%. He stated the developers financial statements/projections had been reviewed and determined to be a reasonable forecast. He explained an investor that was strictly motivated by a profit on the project would not be motivated by a 5% return. Mayor Cummings asked for an explanation of a 'pay-go' TIF. Mr. Taves explained when a gap occurred between the costs of a project and the developer's capital, the developer needed to find an alternative source to make the project profitable at an acceptable level. He stated one option to fill the gap was to have the City borrow the funds or apply funds from another source and give the funds to the developer up front; the City would then use the tax increments to repay itself or to pay the debt service obligation. He explained a 'pay-go' TIF was reversed; instead of the City using the tax increments to repay its own debt, it would provide the stream of increment to the developer who would take the proceeds to a financial institution in exchange for a loan against the future stream of income. He stated it shifted the risk from the City to the developer. Council Member Palmeri asked for an explanation of a developer vs a City led 'pay-go'. Mr. Taves stated if the City were to finance the improvements, they would be able to borrow at a lower cost of capital than the developer. Council Member Palmeri asked for an explanation of the future costs the City could incur in a City led 'pay-go' project. Mr. Taves explained when the 'pay-go' approach was used instead of the City providing the money up front, the deal would ultimately have a higher cost because the developer would not be able to obtain capital at the types of rates that the City could. He stated the City would accept that the tax increment district may take longer to pay off due to the developer's higher cost of financing as a tradeoff for shifting the risk onto the developer. Council Member Krause questioned what portion of the projected 5% return was related to the restaurant. Mr. Taves stated the projection was not broken down to that level of detail. 12 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Council Member Palmeri stated half of the project was not historic, in terms of the add- on building portion that was designated to be the restaurant. She indicated the City was attributing some of the scoring criteria to historic preservation, and asked for an explanation of how the entire project should be permitted to receive that scoring when only a portion of the property was historic. Mr. Davis stated he did not believe it was possible to separate the historic vs non-historic portions of the property in relation to criteria scoring as it was physically one big project. He explained City staff determined rehabilitation of the structure from 1883 was historic preservation, especially in light of the landmarks commission's decision to mark the property as historic. He stated the projection for the value of the project was approximately$710,000 although he hoped it may be higher in the future. Council Member Palmeri stated that she admired the quality of the work of the architect, Chet Weisenberg. She explained she appreciated the project from a design standpoint, although she understood there were concerns about the delay in realizing some of the financial benefits from the project. She stated she was aware the building had been vacant for some time, although she was concerned that the plan commission had only discussed the project for approximately six minutes in their meeting. She explained the project was adjacent to another TIF district that had been created to spur catalytic development; she stated she did not believe it was anticipated that the created development would be something that required an additional TIF. She stated she would not support the approval. Council Member Herman questioned if the applicable state statutes had been followed for the TIF application. Mr. Davis stated that it had. Council Member Herman stated the information had been reviewed by Ehlers and the City Attorney. He questioned if everything required by law was being covered. Mr. Davis stated it was. Council Member Herman questioned if the project followed both the City's TIF policy and state statutes. 13 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Mr. Davis stated it did. Mayor Cummings stated it was significant to note that a historic structure was being saved while eliminating blight in an area that was seeing new life related to the stadium. He explained the property had been an eyesore for over a decade and he commended the developers for their initiative. He stated it was necessary to look at the overall impact to the City and the revitalization of the Sawdust District. He explained he would support the approval. Council Member Allison-Aasby explained she would have preferred to have the property rehabilitated without a TIF, however, there had not been any interested parties within the last ten years. She stated with the recent revitalization to the district, if the City chose to wait, they may have a developer purchase the property, however, they may not be from the area which has proved problematic in the past. She explained she was not pleased with the potential of a 22 year TIF and would like to have further discussion on the length in the future. She stated she had heard individuals state that the TIF was specifically for a restaurant, which was not true, the TIF was for the entire project and the building. She explained the project was supported by the City's TIF policy, and while the City had approved other TIFs in the past that ultimately resulted in a building with no tenants, it was her understanding that there were two immediate leases for the building. She stated Council was not able to decide what types of businesses would occupy the space and there was a benefit to having already secured two tenants. She explained one of the deciding factors in the City deciding to invest tax funds in the downtown hotel was that they expected to see growth in other developments follow. She stated she understood that Robbins was looking at rehabilitation without a TIF,however, she explained there was a significant difference in location as Robbins was located immediately off of highway 41. She explained the Granary would have 1.4 million in renovations, and the TIF funds only accounted for a portion of those funds; the developer would still make a significant capital contribution. She stated she understood on paper it appeared questionable, however, when the bigger picture was examined, there was substance. Mr. Davis explained Council would have an opportunity to review the development agreement; there was a look back clause at the ten year mark to review the progress. He stated if the developer was exceeding the anticipated return percentage, the City would be able to decrease the TIF assistance. He explained the hope of City staff was to see the 14 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 south shore experience an appreciation in value, and he would like to see the developer's rate of returns increase to the point where the City would not need to remain as involved. Council Member Palmeri stated she had voted in favor of TIFs in the past, most recently for the arena, with the understanding that the development would not move forward without TIF assistance. She explained she believed the TIF needed to be approached by considering if nothing would develop in the location for 22 years should the City not approve TIF funding; she stated she was not convinced that was true. Council Member Pech stated nothing had developed during the past 10 years and the location had sat vacant. Mr. Davis stated that was his understanding. Council Member Pech stated there was not a guarantee if this development did not proceed that another opportunity would arrive in the next 20 years. He explained he understood Council needed to act as good stewards of the taxpayers' money and the developers were local and invested in the community. He stated they had already invested money into the project and were ready to move it forward. He explained it was a benefit that there were two lease agreements ready to be signed by tenants. He stated he supported approving the TIF as the property had sat idle for ten years, and with more time the property would continue to deteriorate and may get to the point where rehabilitation becomes too cost prohibitive, and the City would lose a historic building. He explained this project was an opportunity to rehabilitate a historic structure and revitalize a neighborhood. He stated he was not willing to wait and risk losing the development and would support approving the TIF. Mayor Cummings stated there had been homes of historical significance located within the central City that had deteriorated so badly the City had to purchase the properties and level them; now the City had two empty lots that would likely remain empty. He explained once deterioration happened it eventually would begin to accelerate and at some point residents would pressure the City to take action on the eyesore. He stated the project was part of the long term vision for the City. Council Member Herman stated the added benefit of the river walk would happen with the project at a minimal cost. He explained the developers had been invested in Oshkosh for some time and were members of the community, not an outside developer, which the 15 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 City had experienced trouble with in the past. He stated the City was protecting itself by utilizing a 'pay-go' TIF and had met state statutes requirements. He explained the historic building had been vacant for ten years and had experienced problems related to deterioration including mold. He stated Council had approved the TIF for the Beach building and it was already filled with tenants, and it appeared from the lease agreements that the Granary would follow suit. He explained he would support the approval. Council Member Allison-Aasby questioned if either tenant had an investment in the property. Mr. Davis stated not that he was aware of. Chet Weisenberg, 240 Algoma Boulevard, stated he was a minority partner in the restaurant. He explained he had been invested in the real estate portion for over a year, working towards making the development happen. He stated he had become invested in the restaurant for the same reason, to help make the project move forward. Council Member Krause questioned what percentage of the 5% projected return was related to the restaurant. He stated restaurants frequently failed and if the return was heavily based on the restaurant profit margins would be impacted. Mr. Weisenberg stated approximately 40% was based on the restaurant. Council Member Panske questioned how long the developers had been working on the project. Mr. Weisenberg stated he had been working on it for approximately 18 months. Council Member Panske questioned why the developers had not come forward until April 2017 with the TIF proposal. Mr. Weisenberg stated as an architect he was often asked to work on projects where there was not yet a deal in an attempt to move the project forward. He explained they had bid out portions of the project and the cost was prohibitive therefore the project had stalled. Council Member Panske questioned what the developers planned to do if the TIF was not approved. 16 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Mr. Weisenberg stated the tenants would back out and the developers would start the process over. Council Member Panske stated it was her understanding if the TIF was not approved, the developers would seek out other ways to rehabilitate the building and find new tenants. Mr. Weisenberg stated that would be a goal. Council Member Allison-Aasby questioned who owned the property. Mr. Weisenberg stated Andy Dumke and Cal Schultz. Council Member Allison-Aasby stated she had a conversation with Mr. Dumke who had indicated based on the rate of return that he had been interested in selling the property. She explained she understood that Mr. Weisenberg and another individual had expressed interest in keeping ownership of the property local. She stated Mr. Dumke had stated he had then reconsidered. She explained based on the magnitude of the project, she questioned Mr. Dumke why he would take development on. She stated he had indicated that the project was 'in his backyard' and the other individuals on the project had ties to the community. She explained she would have preferred the developers finance the project on their own, however, there had not been interest in developing the property in ten years and there was a benefit to having local investors. Council Member Palmeri stated she believed TIF had been a useful tool during times when development was challenging. She explained the City was starting to see benefits from utilizing the tool and would continue to see TIF applications coming forward. She stated she believed if the City was successful in redevelopment efforts in the south shore area, it should spur both out of pocket investments and shorter TIF investments. Mr. Weisenberg stated he appreciated the questions although he believed the fact that the developers were willing to move forward with a 5%return should speak volumes to their commitment to the project. Council Member Pech stated he understood. 17 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Resolution 17-272 Approve Specific Implementation Plan for Planned Development of 50 W. 61h Avenue & Parking Lot East of 40 W. 61h Avenue (The Granary) (Plan Commission Recommends Approval) MOTION: ADOPT (Pech; second, Herman) CARRIED: Ayes (4) Pech, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Mayor Cummings Noes (3) Palmeri, Panske, Krause Council Member Herman asked for an explanation of the resolution. Mr. Davis stated it was related to the physical improvements of the Granary that were part of the TIF. He stated the developer would pay for the proposed sidewalk and street improvements up front. He explained the City Assessor had estimated the value of the completed property to be approximately 1.6 million. Council Member Herman questioned if there was a parking lot proposed. Mr. Davis stated the parking lot would be located at the corner of Nebraska Street and 61h Avenue on a site that was currently owned by the Redevelopment Authority (RDA). Council Member Herman questioned if the RDA would sell the lot to the developers. Mr. Davis stated they would. Council Member Panske stated according to the plan commission minutes, there had been a concern expressed by a Mr. Koeppler. She questioned if the concern had been resolved. Mr. Davis stated yes; once Mr. Koeppler understood that it would be an easement to the City, he was satisfied with the easement requirement. Resolution 17-273 Support GO Transit's Application for Section 5339 (c) Grant Program Funding for an Electric Sus Replacement Project MOTION: ADOPT (Panske; second, Krause) CARRIED: Ayes (7) Pech, Palmeri, Allison-Aasby, Herman, Panske, Krause, Mayor Cummings 18 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 Council Member Herman stated he had witnessed a City bus being towed recently, and he believed it was one of the electric buses. He questioned if the electric buses were truly saving the City money. Jim Collins, Director of Transportation, indicated it had been a hybrid bus that was towed. He stated the newer technology burned particulates which made the exhaust cleaner, and the filter on the hybrid had become plugged, which was an isolated incident. He explained the City had been awarded grants within the last two years to purchase replacement buses and the ones they had purchased were diesel. He stated the grant application was for the purchase of an electric bus, which were different from the hybrids as they were 100% electric. He explained it was newer technology and becoming the trend that most transportation departments were investing in;Oshkosh would be the first municipality in Wisconsin that would have an electric bus. He stated because it was not a hybrid they would not experience as many maintenance issues. He explained City staff were not certain they would receive the grant due to limited funding, however, believed it was worth applying. Council Member Herman questioned if there would be a local match. Mr. Collins stated there would be a 20%local match which would be included in the CIP. Council Member Herman questioned if the match total was $168,000. Mr. Collins stated that was correct. He explained a diesel bus cost approximately $450,000 and the hybrids cost up to $800,000 and the grant was 80/20, therefore the City would likely purchase one electric bus instead of two diesel. Council Member Herman questioned if there was City staff capable of working with completely electric buses. Mr. Collins stated that the mechanics were highly skilled and had worked on the hybrid buses and knew enough about the technology to become accustomed to the completely electric. 19 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 COUNCIL DISCUSSION, DIRECTION TO CITY MANAGER &FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Rohloff stated the meeting date with state and local legislators remained to be determined. He explained June was a busy month due to budget preparation and availability was limited; he recommended Council move the meeting to July. He stated research had been ongoing in the boards and commissions study and City staff was prepared for a workshop to be schedule for June 131H Council Member Panske questioned how long the workshop would take. Mr. Rohloff indicated it should last approximately 45 minutes. He explained he would provide the report to Council in advance which would lessen the amount of time required for the workshop. He stated he was not expecting Council to implement each of the recommendations in the report, although he wanted to present each of the available options. Mayor Cummings explained he had been frustrated by trying to find participants for the City's various boards and commissions. He stated the goal was to make the boards and commissions reflect the diversity of the community. Council Member Allison-Aasby stated it had been direction Council had provided to Mr. Rohloff at the time of his review in 2016. Mayor Cummings stated that was correct. Council Member Palmeri stated they had experienced citizens questioning the purpose of various boards/commissions and whether the City was operating efficiently. She explained she looked forward to seeing some of the creative opportunities. Mr. Rohloff stated compared to other municipalities, Oshkosh had a high number of boards/commissions (26) although there were other municipalities that had similar numbers. He explained he understood Council's goal was citizen engagement. CITIZEN STATEMENTS TO COUNCIL There were no citizen statements to Council. 20 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 CO UNCIL MEMBER ANNO UNCEMENTS & STATEMENTS There were no Council Member announcements. CITY MANAGER ANNO UNCEMENT AND STATEMENTS Mr. Rohloff stated additional construction work on the arena would begin after they had received state approval for their revised building plans. He explained AECOM had been contracted to work on the site development associated with the State Street parking lot. He stated Bates Soil and Water Testing had started wetland delineation to gather information on the condition of Lakeshore Golf Course. Council Member Palmeri stated she had received questions from citizens regarding why work was being complete in the middle of golf season and the reason behind the work in general. Mr. Rohloff stated a proper wetland delineation needed to take place during a specific time of year, after winter melt off had occurred. Council Member Palmeri stated the citizen who had contacted her would also like to know the reason behind the work. Mr. Rohloff stated City staff had received questions periodically about Lakeshore Municipal Golf Course and he had directed City staff to complete the analysis. He explained they had not been able to answer questions related to the site because they did not have the information. He stated it did not mean the site was for sale. He explained City staff had conducted a similar analysis with the Buckstaff site. He stated not having the information prepared put the City at a disadvantage when answering inquiries from prospective developers. Brett Spangler, 2520 Hearthstone Drive, thanked Council Members Herman and Pech for their longstanding dedication to Lakeshore Golf Course. He stated he hoped the support continued. He explained the potential sale of Lakeshore Golf course to any private company was frustrating and the pace of the wetland delineation seemed suspicious. He stated he believed that the decision to sell had already been made. He explained he believed that Council was aware that there would not be much public support for the 21 PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMON COUNCIL—MAY 23, 2017 sale. He stated Oshkosh Corporation, which was the rumored buyer, was a billion dollar company and although he understood the benefits Oshkosh Corporation had brought to the area, he believed they would be able to find alternative land that was not on public property. He explained it set a dangerous precedent of selling public land to private companies. He stated the golf course was a direct equivalent of Menominee Park, South Park, Pollock Pool or any other public recreational space, yet it appeared to be treated as another entity. He explained there was considerable undeveloped land within the City, some of which was near the former Buckstaff building, that there was no reason to sell public land that was utilized by the community. He stated an official press release from the City stated the new 'Welcome to Oshkosh' signs cost $93,000 each, and totaled more than the sum of the golf course's debt. He explained he understood the Oshkosh Area Community Foundation had assisted with the purchase of the signs, and he believed had they been informed that the golf course and parks were in need of help, funding may have been provided. He stated he had been made aware of extensive renovations taking place at South Park, which only made money through the rental of shelters, and therefore the City must be losing money on that investment. He explained it was an example of how the golf course was treated as an'outsider . He stated the skate park was funded by the City although it made no revenue and was utilized by a lot fewer people than the golf course. He presented a budget/service plan from Reid Municipal Golf Course in Appleton to demonstrate that golf courses had the ability to make money. He encouraged Council to explore every option in an effort to preserve the golf course. He stated there was considerable wildlife that occupied the course and urbanizing the golf course would threaten their environment. He explained he believed there were various viewpoints that were not being represented. He thanked Council for their time. MOTION: ADJOURN (Herman; second, Pech) CARRIED: VOICE VOTE The meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m. PAMELA R. UBRIG CITY CLERK 22 23