Development committee for March 20th, 2026 at 9 05 AM.

I'm Alderman Bauman chair of the committee.

To my right is Alderman Stamper.

The Vice Chair to my far left is Alderman Spiker, uh Alderman Jackson and Cogs will be joining us shortly.

We're also joined with Common Council President Perez.

Item one, file 251837, an ordinance relating to property deconstruction.

I understand it.

This is uh basically an ordinance to continue the moratorium on the deconstruction ordinance.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

Thank you.

For one year, right?

Yes, thank you.

Mike Mesminian uh Deputy Commissioner Neighborhood Services.

Okay.

Anything else you want to add or that's um so we're asking for additional year.

We hope to have uh revisions to the ordinance to um shift the program into something that's more geared towards a salvage and reuse as opposed to full deconstruction, but um that's in the works, and we're happy to continue working with you to bring that together.

Very good.

Mr.

Chair.

Oh Mr.

Chair.

Uh you you're gonna develop a new ordinance?

Make modifications to the existing ordinance, so rather than requiring full deconstruction, um shifting something that's more towards a an evaluation and salvage and reuse, so uh the buildings would get evaluated, all the materials that could be reused or that would have some value would be taken out of them prior to uh demolition.

I thought that was in place already.

Yeah, we pass an ordinance, but then we've put a moratorium on its enforcement for the last yeah eight years.

Okay.

So we haven't used left over valuable material for income since since the inception of us trying to develop a deconstruction program.

Yeah, part of the part of the one of the challenges that we had with the program was was there being a market for those materials that were salvaged um in Southeast Wisconsin.

So when you get time, uh I I would like an update, so you guys just come by and just go to full update.

Yes, sir.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, so Alderman Spiker moves the recommendation.

Uh Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, Alderman Specker.

Question.

So yeah, I I recall um the ordinance going into effect before I became Alder and it's been punted every year for eight years, was it now?

I think since 2021, Jumani Cheatham Department of Neighborhood Services.

Okay.

Since 2021?

I believe so.

I believe that was the first year that it was the moratorium was issued.

Okay.

Is it has it?

Absolutely.

We we it we it was it was essentially never in force.

That's what's my could figure out how to do it.

Because technically it applied to all one to four family structures built before 1930.

So technically, any demolition, private or city, would have required deconstruction, right?

I mean, that was the original intent of the ordinance, and it very quickly turned out, became apparent that that for whatever reason, and there's no point getting into the reasons, that wasn't gonna work.

And it hasn't worked.

Now we experimented with some selective deconstruction activities, more or less on a pilot basis.

We did have some RFPs that were put out there.

There were some responses of varying cost.

Did actually have a contract with one contractor who basically maybe deconstructed partially one property and then went belly up and had all the equipment repossessed and left a pile of wood sitting over there at 33rd and Valete where there's a ward yard, and it may still be in there for all we know.

And we did try to, there were other contractors that responded to the RFPs, specifically recycling, which is based out of Kenosha, that actually has a yard sitting right down here on Greenfield Avenue between the Union Pacific and the Canadian Pacific Railroad properties, where they had are literally down there doing recycling activities, and they have piles of lumber stacked up.

Uh they're credible.

They've done deconstruction, they've done it for years, but they would not comply with RPP.

So they were deemed unqu they they couldn't qualify, right, for our program.

But they were ready, willing, and able to do it.

But for various reasons, and we had this debate some couple of years ago with with the Office of Equity and Inclusion, and they were unwilling to bend on the RPP issue.

So the environmental and cost savings that this ordinance was originally intended to achieve haven't been achieved because the competent contractor in the business was unwilling to do the RPP because they had their own crews who were experienced in doing the work that they do.

Is that essentially in a nutshell?

Yeah, essentially in a nutshell, absolutely.

Yeah, essentially in an absolutely I think ultimately smart's question was to more towards when did the moratorium start?

Almost immediately, like a year or two after the ordinance was passed.

Yeah, I don't remember because it seems silly to keep putting in a moratorium in so this will be the last time I vote for that.

Hope Springs Eternal.

But so there are concrete plans, not just hopes for how you might tweak or change the ordinance.

Absolutely.

Because it is just silly to keep it.

I'll be honest with you.

I I would not want to repeal this because believe it or not, there is a national movement towards deconstruction, given the environmental and benefits and the ability to reuse wood products that are in fact superior to wood products produced today.

And by repealing this, we are essentially declaring defeat.

We are essentially saying Milwaukee can't do this.

It's beyond our capabilities.

Okay, very good.

One vote.

So I guess we should consider though be that eight years, there's an almost an two-thirds of a new council versus what was in at the point.

So I'm fine with going one more year, but I I do want to know what the game plan is here.

If we're just waiting, that that doesn't seem like a good strategy.

If there are substantial changes that could make this um live, where we don't have to kick in another moratorium, but uh a lot has changed in eight years, including most of the council.

Sure, thank you.

Okay, well then uh Alderman Jackson will move to the recommended passage and hearing no objections, so ordered moving on to item two.

Thank you.

Thank you, uh item two, file two five zero seven two four resolution approving a final certified survey map for land located on the south side of West Bob Link Avenue, west of North 122nd Street in the fifth Aldermanic district.

Why are we s why is this coming?

Normally these don't come to us, correct?

Yeah, so this one is coming for um the dedication of right-of-way that's occurring.

It's this area was not originally platted.

Sorry, Johnny Latskay, Department of State Development.

Um this area of the city wasn't originally platted, so it's a little piecemeal.

The West Bobalink and North 121st Street.

There was just it was unclear in the title to the land if that was city right of way or if that was their property.

Uh so the owner, Alexis Morgan, she's the homeowner there.

In dividing the land, she's also dedicating what is a street right now just for a title clarity.

Okay.

That sounds reasonable, Mr.

Alderman Stan.

Is there a dispute?

There's no dispute.

This is a pretty standard practice for when it's unclear who basically how that right-of-way was entitled to the city.

This is the easiest way to clear it up.

Is the right-of-way information online or they still have to go down to the 809 building?

Um certified map boundaries.

To to get uh survey map boundary, um, if they have something on file, there are some of the resources online.

There are some things that are a bit older that are still in like our microfilm.

Right.

So in 809.

And then unfortunately, if we don't have anything on file, they'll have to hire a private land surveyor.

Gotcha.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

All right, very good.

Alder and stamp removes the recommended option, hearing no objections, so ordered.

Thank you.

Moving on to item three, file 251 868.

Top substitute resolution approving a project plan and the anti development agreement authorizing expenditures and creating tax incremental district number one thirty in the 12th Aldermanic district.

Chris, can I get out one time?

Since these are the same project.

Well, no, we'll do them one at a time.

I'll take it.

Yeah, uh we'll do them one at a time, Yarish.

Yeah.

All right.

Thank you, Chris.

All right, good morning.

Uh Larry Kilmer, Department of City Development.

Um the first project that uh you're considering today is uh the project it's TID 130 uh via apartments.

Geographically uh located in Walker's Point, and you can see here in the uh purplish box uh the approximate location of that site within the neighborhood.

Uh the address itself is 1000 South Fifth Street, uh and the TID boundary is a single parcel, uh, which is here located at the southeast corner of South First Street and West Mineral Street.

Um I'm gonna turn it over uh Joey Rizneski from uh Newland Enterprises is going to talk about kind of new land the company, uh give you an overview of the project itself, and then I'm gonna finish with uh with the financing and how it fits into the neighborhood plan.

So, Joey.

Thank you, Larry.

Uh first of all, uh my name is Joey Wisneski.

I'm with New Lane Enterprises Senior Development Coordinator.

I just want to take this quick opportunity to thank uh Commissioner Crump, Larry, and the DCD team.

Um this has been a little bit of a longer process, but it took a lot of collaboration, a lot of patience, a lot of back and forth uh and a lot of um willingness to get this done.

And so I just want to thank um all the DCD team.

I also want to thank Alder Perez for his support, but all the alders who met with not only uh our team but uh the development community, DCD, um NIOP to think about workforce housing and to understand how complex it really is.

So again, I thank uh all the alders that took the time to do that.

Umland is very passionate about housing.

Um we're passionate about growing MKE and we're passionate about uh progressing the city as best we can to the best of our intentions.

And I think that this program, uh something that we all worked on, uh has uh really uh has the potential to unlock uh high more high quality housing for working class folks uh at an exponential level.

So again, we think this is uh a great opportunity for for everyone.

Um mixed-use residential, multi-family, um, much more community-based, um, thinking about the broader community of the of the neighborhoods that we work in.

We've done almost our entire portfolio of development has been done here in Milwaukee, uh, including several in the Walkers Point neighborhood, uh, but also um downtown East Side as well, Bayview.

So uh via the on fifth and mineral existing conditions, it's a partial two-story, partial one-story uh former industrial building, the American uh metal cast building uh has been vacant uh since the early 2017s and uh has some environmental contamination.

Um, but we've been able to work with WEDC to get a grant to do more site investigation and clean up at the site, and the site's currently being um deconstructed uh as we speak.

So demolition is underway now?

It's a deconstruction actually.

So yeah, so it's it's uh I think separate from what you all were talking about, but yes, it's the same, it's uh deconstruction process, saving as much of the materials as we can.

Um the brick has been painted.

There is some salvageable brick.

Um the timbers are not in great shape.

The building was the building was is not in good good shape.

So we're saving what we can.

Um and then there will be more environmental testing and uh remediation after that.

What are you doing?

Who you who's who's your demolition contractor?

Uh, they're called recycling.

But it is recycling.

See, there we okay, there you go.

Yeah, so the uh the proposed project has 82 units.

Um uh it's a mix of studios, ones, twos, um uh bedrooms.

Um they're all scheduled to be workforce housing units.

So these will all fall between 80 and 100% area median income.

Um there's also included 4,000 square feet of commercial space on the project on the corner that faces uh um 5th Street.

Um and we are like I said, underway right now uh for deconstruction and uh scheduled to be completed in early 2028.

So if somebody needs a true dimension two by four, they better get over there right now to I don't think that's how that's not how exactly how it works.

Um they have sub yeah, they have uh yeah distributors and things that they work with.

Thank you.

All right.

Um so as uh as Joey mentioned, uh this is the first uh workforce housing um new construction uh TID project that uh we brought to you.

Um so understanding that I think is um uh is very valuable as in uh the the next project that we'll you'll uh you'll consider is as well.

Um so specifically for VIA uh behind uh the dollars the financing for the project.

Uh the total investment is uh just shy of 24 million dollars, so 23.68.

Um the sources of funding are uh the first mortgage, um, some equity, the site grant that Joey mentioned, uh, as well as a TIFF that you're considering today.

Uh the uh the TIFF is for uh up to uh 3.802 million dollars.

It is developer financed uh as we do, and uh for up to 24-year uh term at 6.5% interest.

Um a couple of uh items worth noting.

Uh so uh we have come to an agreement on both on uh all a cost savings provision, uh a clawback provision, uh the safety valve provision, uh which is essentially um once the building is uh is built is constructed uh at the point of trying to get to stabilization or any time in the future if it drops below uh an approved or pre-approved vacancy uh for a period of time.

Uh we have the ability then to uh work with the developer to see what they've done for marketing, how they've tried to get folks in the in the building, qualified folks in the building, uh, and then uh have an opportunity for a a brief uh period of time where um if uh if income uh caps need to change, uh we could consider um, but that doesn't mean that the the rents would change.

So the rents are still capped, uh and it would be a predefined uh period of time.

Uh just kind of recognizing that you know um we haven't uh actually executed this program uh in its current form uh in this form before.

Can you explain with these other things?

Uh cost saving provisions.

What are those examples?

Yeah, so cost savings provision essentially if um so at the at the point in time where we execute the development agreement, so right before we close on the TID, uh we lock in a construction dollar amount with a developer.

Uh at the end of the project, um we sort of we have a certification of actual construction dollars in the project, uh development dollars in the project, how much it costs.

If it comes in under budget at that point, we would then share in whatever those cost savings are, essentially saying that um you know, looking back, if we would have kno known that it was going to be uh less to develop, we might not have put in as much TIFF.

Um so that's pretty pretty standard on the construction uh cost savings provision.

Um the clawback is then more of kind of an uh a forward-facing component.

So at a point in time where the developer were either to refinance or say uh sell.

Uh if there is a um uh a cost, a uh uh return on investment over 17 percent, then the city would share in a percentage of any value that the developer is experiencing over that 17% um uh return on investment.

Share how I mean how would that money come to us?

Um how's the percentage determined?

So the percentage was determined with the developer, so we have kind of a starting point.

It was negotiated, yep.

Um you said after 17%.

17%.

Period.

Um so uh so awkwardly we're using 17% twice.

So it's 17% is the threshold for the uh return on investment.

After that 17%, then we're sharing in 17% of every dollar above that.

Um they tax them basically so essentially like do we get 17% and he gets nothing or an investment until they refinance?

Correct.

Right, of course.

Well I'm saying whatever it is, what is the negotiated deal?

After 17%.

Yes, right.

It it would be then uh uh so for every dollar uh the the uh for every dollar experience above the 17% return on investment, we would share, we would get 17 cents back, they would keep 83 cents.

17 percent gotcha.

Correct.

I got it.

Okay, thank you.

And that calculation is triggered by refinancing or sale.

Yeah, so um so year over year situation.

Correct.

It's it's at the time of refinance or sale.

Uh and and we recognize that over year return wouldn't be anywhere near 17 percent.

We were and we wouldn't be looking at it year over year, right?

It would be at that point in time.

So um and and I just I just want to clarify too, you know.

Every I I can't I can I don't know of any deals that um don't have construction financing to begin with, and then refinance or transition into a permanent debt.

We're not looking at that refinance right after construction.

This would be longer term.

Okay.

Um and then the last item is the commitment to RPP uh and SBE requirements, 40% RPP and 25% SBE.

Okay.

Um the project is consistent with uh both the near South Side Area Plan and the Walkers Point Strategic Action Plan.

Uh and here I've outlined a few of the items to highlight uh that consistency.

Mr.

Chair.

Yes.

Yeah, you mentioned something about a pre-approval vacancy.

What does that mean?

You have the apartments are approved and they're just vacant or what?

Uh no, um, so you know, any and and maybe well I can give kind of a general concept and then Joey, if if you want to kind of fill in kind of how a developer would look at it, but essentially um it's never expected that a building is full all the time, right?

There's going to be turnover, those units have to be turned, they have to be painted and cleaned up and etc.

So there's a given, there's an expected vacancy rate on a property, um, usually between five and seven percent, depending on affordable workforce market rate.

Um so that's the that's the understanding that there will be a vacancy on the property.

If it drops below that uh for an amount of time, that's when the developer can come back to us and talk about you know if there's a different marketing approach to try to get more interest in the property.

Not changing the rent, uh not changing the rents, but looking for a different applicant pool.

That's the safety valve.

That's the safety valve, correct.

I haven't heard these terms in other things.

Yeah, these are new parts of the something new, a new model, a new format that we're basically looking to adopt.

So um cost savings.

So the cost savings is something that I've seen on many of our deals, like looking back in time.

Right.

Um, I know we've been including on deals that we've brought to you.

Uh club act gets a little bit more uh tricky um on truly affordable housing deals because they're structured differently with the tax credits.

There's really no refinancing that's happening any time before the 15 year period of affordability uh compliance period.

So that's that's something we could put in the agreements, but it's it it's not actionable.

There's no actual transaction that's going to happen.

Um so on the workforce units, um uh kind of since the program launch deals that we've started to look at, um uh as well as a commercial conversions deals that we've started to look at since the launch.

Um, this is a component, and I believe um uh one of the committee members, I I don't want to speak for that uh that committee member, but I believe one of this uh committee members here at ZND did ask for this to uh be consistent on workforce and uh commercial conversions, the clawback component.

Um the safety valve is something that uh we've worked with new land on uh on these two deals just to see you know we haven't seen new construction workforce, and we want to make sure that everybody is comfortable in getting for uh in moving forward in making sure that there is a market uh for the properties.

Um so it is something that is new on these two deals, um just to kind of test it out and see see how they fill up.

But Joey I'd happy to and and to be clear, this is only something we we don't want to enact.

We we anticipate these buildings to fill up rapidly.

So this is only to say should there be some sort of blip in the market that we are allowed to expand the renter pool but still keep the rents capped.

So this is only for some sort of unforeseen circumstances, but really we we anticipate and market studies have shown that there's significant high demand for this type of product, especially in this neighborhood.

And and I would add too, it's it's not anticipated, it's not ideal, and it actually is financially negative, like you feel it wouldn't be the financial hardship having units at a deeper vacancy than expected.

Uh correct, yeah.

So it's you wouldn't be increasing the rents.

Correct.

Okay.

What are the rents?

So right now the rents are between eighty and a hundred percent of the area median income.

So you're looking at um approximately um thirteen hundred dollars to up to twenty three hundred dollars.

Okay.

And what's the square footage?

Average square feet for this project is just under eight hundred square feet.

So again, that's including studios, one bedrooms, there's a few one bedroom and dens, um, which people really tend to like.

It can be flexible space for working at home or maybe have a small child or a single parent.

Um, and two bedrooms as well.

Where's the nearest grocery store?

SURMAC.

Okay.

Yeah.

All right.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, all in Speiger.

Um on the 56 one bedroom units, what's the mix of 80, 90, 100?

I know it's encompassed, but yeah, give me one second.

Hey Joe, what kind of marketing do you do for workforce house?

So this would be a first for us specifically for workforce housing.

Okay.

Um, but we have done several other projects, similar projects like this in Walker's Point.

So if you've seen our if anyone's seen our marketing or social media team, we're very robust.

Um we do uh heavy marketing, both uh on three different rental platforms, obviously all the types of social media, but it really, like I said, is we are community-based and community focused, so everything's about building a a very um safe, fun, um, and nice community, not just in our spaces, but right around the spaces and in the surrounding neighborhood.

So our s a lot of our marketing focuses on that too, is that you're not just getting a place to live, you're getting a community.

Alderman Spider, uh, to your question.

So on specifically on the one bedrooms, um make sure the maths right here.

Um 11 one bedrooms are maxed at 80 percent.

Twelve one bedrooms are maxed at 90 percent, and 33 one bedrooms are maxed at 100%.

Okay.

And they come with appliances and everything.

Yep.

Floor and walls, ceilings, too, they get all in Jackson.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Um 82 out of 82 of so this particular project doesn't have fall under the 20 percent rule like the time twenty percent of like elderly or low income or things like that.

No, yeah, only the answer, yeah.

Sorry, all of all of the units fall between 80 percent and 100 percent of the area median income.

All right.

And uh real quick, um why can't we change the name for workforce house and just call it what it is, middle class housing?

Just make it very simple.

You know, there isn't really a national consensus on what the definitions are.

Uh that's just the term that's been used more um across the state and regionally.

So um agree, I I think it's middle class housing, it's workforce housing, it's uh service industry housing, it's young professional housing, it's people on um uh you know, dedicated income housing.

It's really kind of every for it's that kind of that catch all word that's gotten all those.

So now have you been looking at as far as the models downtown, the higher end properties that are not filling up, this should be a better model to capture um all the middle class people or the workforce people.

I think you know the it's interesting there's uh several ways to look at it, but I would say that this type of housing is what's not being constructed in the city right now.

As you said, there's you know, four very luxurious towers that are being built, one of which that we have built.

Um but and there's a lot of really excellent affordable housing, and that's 60 percent median income and lower that's being that's being accessed.

There's more funds at the state level to access uh and more programs to to use.

There's really nothing like this yet that I've seen in the state.

So this program would be uh innovative, uh, but it would also release new types of construction that we haven't seen at this at this price range uh in the city for a little for a while.

Because the tax credits are available for the lower income housing and for luxury housing, but there's nothing for the middle.

There's no tax credits for luxury housing that I know of, but they're unless it's historic, right?

So so there's there are tax credits for historic or affordable, but there's no tax credits for the middle.

And so, like I said, this program would be um the first I've heard of it across the state, but it would be something unique, but I like I said, is that I think the demand is there and people want to be able to have housing that is within their price range, that's also new um and this will allow that.

Okay.

We need you to be successful so we can make some change at the state, man.

We I think I think that's a great call.

Um, and we hope that you know not only for new land, but we know that other developers are um very anxious, uh in a good way, sorry, very excited um to use this program.

And like we like I said, I think we can unlock thousands and thousands of units with this program.

Okay, when we say eighty percent, for example, of AMI, is that for a household of one, two, four?

What is that?

So the it's eighty eighty percent of the area median income is for the for the whole household, right?

So if it's a two-bedroom, it's gotta be for two people.

Uh and it depends on how many people live in the unit, right?

So it but it's but we're basing it on one person in a studio or one bedroom, one person in a one-in-den, and then two people in a two-bedroom.

Okay, and what is eighty percent of area median income for a single person based?

What is the actual in income level that we're talking about?

I want to say oh, yeah, it's um twenty yeah, sixty-two thousand is probably around sixty-two thousand.

And then the upper range would be eighty-five thousand.

So for a single person, eighty-five thousand household income is equivalent to a hundred percent of AMI.

Correct.

I I'm unless I have the year.

I think that's the two person.

So okay.

Single person one hundred percent AMI is seventy-seven five.

And so the rent would be thirty percent of that income rate.

I mean, that's that's the whole concept of right?

No, I but you're you're spot on.

That's the so these numbers are given by HUD.

HUD gives us both the income uh number and the rent cap.

And if you dive into the mechanisms of how HUD creates it, it is truly it is based on a household of I think um uh households with halves of people um to figure out how many people live in a two-bedroom or a three-bedroom.

Um but that's absolutely right.

You kind of back in HUD backs in um from the income, they back in using thirty percent to create uh the uh the rent cap.

And you are right, all that it is thirty, yeah, that thirty percent is the is the standard metric.

Okay.

And and what would be market rate for property of in this location with these amenities?

Just curious.

Yeah, it would yeah, it would be more.

It would be more.

And we're seeing rents, and if you uh you know we are seeing rents comparable to these types of units, like I said, we've built several uh in in the neighborhood that are getting higher rents.

And and if you were in and if this were to be market rate, so much higher or much higher rents, that would theoretically eliminate the need for a city tax incremental financing.

You know, which which is creates the whole point of why we're here basically to provide public assistance to provide a certain quality of housing at a rate attractive to people earning between 80 and 100 percent of area mediums forward.

Correct.

And we want to make sure that we are building these units like they are market rate quality.

So um we're not trying to strip away any quality from the interior of the units, the exterior of the building, as we would for any anything like this in the neighborhood.

Okay, and in the financing of 3.8 million, that's essentially the gap between what it will cost to build a property and what the expected rate will be, rate of return will be uh 17% projected amount.

Right.

So in the in the uh internal rate of return, the IRR and the clawback numbers.

Um and Joey, feel free to uh either um add or correct me.

Um but that th those calculations are how they calculate the equity component of their capital stack, right?

So so they have debt from a lender, they have equity from an investor.

My understanding is how the equity is created, is their under is that equity providers understanding of what they're what their return on investment is.

We're filling a gap.

And have we have we vetted the legitimacy of that gap by analyzing the performers and the construction estimates to determine that that is a real number?

Yeah, that's right.

So um so it took so long.

Okay.

Um so we uh we have done that internally.

We also have a third party consultant that we do work with um on the vast majority of our TIFFs, they'll underwrite, they'll look at the market, they'll help us kind confirm that the numbers that we're seeing are um comparable, are accurate.

Uh and certainly between now and the time we get to uh uh development agreement signing, if anything changes.

Um these are these are estimates, right?

Okay, very good.

Any other questions?

Yeah, but sure.

Yeah, so how's your experience with RPP?

Um this is your first project that this is Newland's first project that requires TIFF assistance in the city of Milwaukee.

Um we do have TIFF experience in uh the as the as a whole group of the development team has TIF experience outside the city of Milwaukee, which does not require SPE and RPB.

So we've had multiple meetings with Leary and uh the team here at the city to help us get acclimated to it and understand it.

Um we are looking at third parties to help us get through the process to make sure A, we're doing it the best way we can, and B, that we're doing all the reporting and tracking the best way we can.

So um we know it's uh a challenge, but it's nothing outside of our scope in terms of what we can or can't do.

Okay.

Well the key is just getting started early.

Correct, yeah.

And so we've like I said, we've been working with several general contractors because over time, you know, since we first started talking about this in late 2023, uh interest rates have changed, construction costs have changed, so we're kind of we've been constantly tracking with multiple people on how we can still get these projects to the finish line, assuming we have some assistance.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, all this micro.

Um so doing the quick math then of the 82 units, I'm getting something like 49 or 60 percent of them being at the 100% of AMI number, 25 percent at the 80, the low end, and then something like 15 percent at the 90.

Um I mean, this is an idea.

I'm certainly behind um I have a district that's very strongly middle class, uh, not a lot of super wealthy folks, but not a lot um struggling um deeply financially, although everybody's struggling.

Um so it is um good to see areas of the city um not be forced with a choice between um you know complete market or um the uh the state funded um alternatives.

I don't know if he put it that bluntly, but probably um so yeah, he did actually.

Um but it would be interesting to see, especially given the current housing struggles, how our mix sits historically, and then whether there's um a meaningful change with this bold new move.

So thank you.

All right, pretty good.

No other questions or comments.

Alban Jackson moves the recommended adoption.

Hearing no objections to order.

Mr.

Chairman Waldman Press, sorry.

Well, I just wanted to thank um Larry and his team and also Newland.

I mean, this has been a long time coming.

Um this development is I think uh added value to the already existing diversity of housing um east of the highway in my district and walkers point.

Um I look forward to seeing and monitoring how um this is really kind of a pilot to figure out how this works so that we can uh continue to add some of this west of the freeway and some of our uh more challenged areas to to provide some housing uh diversity there.

But um I'm just glad we got to the finish line, look forward to it.

Um it's been a blighted property for a very long time.

Um the world has changed with construction costs and interest rates where um developers did not have to come to the table and um this workforce housing has been uh a demand in the neighborhood, and um, I take a lot of pride in my district, especially in that area, having market affordable, market affordable, all within walking distance.

Now we're gonna add uh the workforce housing to the diversity of what's there and uh figure out how we provide those opportunities for everyone.

So just thank you and appreciate the committee support on this.

Very good.

Thank you.

All right, so Alderman Jackson moves the recommended option and hearing no objections, it passes on a four-zero vote.

All the Alderman Cog is excused uh from the meeting, by the way.

Hearing no objections to order.

Okay.

Moving on to item four, file two five one eight six nine.

Substitute resolution approving a project plan and development agreement, authorizing expenditures and creating tax increment incremental district one thirty-one in the 12th Aldermanic district, also sponsored by Alderman Perez.

All right.

Same developer, same neighborhood, correct?

That's correct.

Thank you, Chris.

That's correct, Alderman.

Um so again, Larry Kilmer with the Department of City Development.

Uh to the Alderman to the chair's point.

Um, same developer, same neighborhood.

Um, very, very similar structure to the deal.

Um, this property does not have the commercial component that we saw on the first property, but everything else is very, very similar.

Um so the item before you is TID 131 uh Forma apartments, geographically uh to the north of the previous uh project, but also still in uh the Walker's Point neighborhood.

The property itself is 412 South Fourth Street, and here you can see the boundary.

It is a single parcel TID located on the southeast corner of South 4th Street and West Florida Street.

Um do you have anything else?

Good to see you again.

Uh from New Land Enterprises.

Um like I said, yeah, same same information as before, as Larry mentioned, um in terms of who we are.

So basically structured the same way as the last deal.

Yeah, that's right.

Absolutely.

With just a few different numbers because it's a somewhat smaller project.

That's correct.

Uh those two houses, uh one of those is being moved, is that correct?

We were approached by a local um uh a local developer that was trying to figure out a way to do it.

It just is not feasible.

One of those is pre-civil war, correct?

I don't believe it's pre-civil war.

I um it's it's very close.

It's very close.

Um neither home is in great condition.

Um one of them is a little bit better, and that was the one they were they were trying to move.

Um it just it it was not it's just not financially feasible for that uh that is being demolished that house.

Uh yes, both houses.

Deconstructed or the plan is all yes, the plan is to first look at deconstruction to see if it's feasible to see if there's uh a way to do it in the best way.

Um the second option would be uh just demolition.

But we did already have um we talked to the uh historic uh historic alliance.

Mr.

Chair, Ms.

Perez.

Yeah, I I spoke extensively to the local developer.

He lives right down the street.

Um he had exhausted every opportunity to move that house, had two parcels in the district already kind of um secured in order to do that, and in the end the cost was just way too high for because that house is huge also, by the way.

Um and so yeah, that that was a long process to actually try their best to salvage one of the two houses and get it to a parcel nearby on Bruce Street and just could not make the numbers work.

We could have included that cost in this project, however.

Yeah.

Um that I'm not sure of in the end if that would have been part of that, but moving is feasible, but it can be costly.

And uh interestingly, one of the highest cost elements is utility line relocation.

That is something that we're working through with We Energy's, and they've been uh working with us since like I said, 2023 on um alternatives to complete line burial, and so we're looking at other options to save as much possible dollars on this as we can.

Um also on the on the part of the parcel is the corner that faces the intersection um is a surface parking lot, and that's um that's used as overflow parking for uh the hotel um uh iron horse.

Um so that you know, and right around there facing that intersection is other businesses, uh other apartments that have been uh rehabilitated from you know warehouses and industrial uses, so um this is the blighted corner of that of that intersection.

Mr.

Chair?

Yeah, all this and just to add to that, I know the Riveros that own the two properties that were brothers.

Um they had told me a while back that they weren't gonna move and the family was gonna stay there and their nieces and nephews and another generation, and then called me and said, Hey, we changed your mine, we're selling, we're leaving.

I asked them very specifically if they felt forced out, they said no.

And in the almost 14 years I've been here in office and with all the development uh in the district and in and in Walker's Point is specifically with the new development, this is only the second time that a residential property is being raised for development.

The first one was tax co and there was a blighted, I think 16 unit building on the corner there that um really was not well managed.

Uh the deferred maintenance uh on it was ridiculous, and this is only the second time that uh a properties being raised.

Well, two properties actually.

Two properties being raised for development.

So those were owner occupied previously?

Yes.

Wow.

Okay.

They had been there very long time.

They were a second generation living there.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments?

So the uh new construction uh again would be a hundred percent of the units would be workforce housing, sixty-five units total, uh another mix of um studios, one bedroom, one bedroom plus dens, and two bedrooms.

Um and we uh uh estimate that this project could start a little faster than the previous one.

And so this one could we think we could get completed by the end of next year.

Mr.

Sheer.

Will this be happening simultaneously with double workforce, double arc uh RPP, a lot of different work opportunity.

Right.

So that's the interesting thing is because these properties location and proximity to each other, uh, one of the cost-saving measures we've looked at over time and talking to GCs is how can we exactly how can we create efficiencies between these two projects and treat them as one?

Again, that keeps versus having two separate GCs, two separate processes, right?

You have one team working on everyone understanding the whole process.

Um so that's one of the efficiencies that we've built into our budget already.

So that's again that keeps the cost of the total project lower than it would be if you did it otherwise.

What's the proximity again?

I want to say five or six blocks.

Okay.

So once one once four mucks starts, right?

You do you do the deconstruction or demo.

Um, then you can start doing the foundation work and things, right?

And then once that team's done, they can move over down to fifth and mineral.

And so that's kind of that's exactly that's exactly the point is is to kind of keep the efficiencies moving.

I'm familiar with this site.

I mean, there's a one-story manufacturing building to the east that's not part of this development.

Correct.

That's empty it.

That's vacant as well, correct?

I don't believe it's vacant.

I'll rent it.

Oh, it's not vacant.

Okay.

No.

So that's a unique opportunity to build a little workforce pipeline.

I agree.

I think that's kind of the that's kind of where our thought is as to that this is this this is the first domino.

Uh and then that kind of keeps things moving.

So we're so like I said, from our from our perspective, I know other developers too are looking at it like you know, you build you build a relationship with the city, you build a relationship with the right GCs and the SPP uh SP E RPP uh team, and you continue this keep moving, keep growing.

So is it just just as a footnote to the uh I mean I had a case of similar to this in the Marquette campus area, there was a one and a half story house built in the eighteen eighties, so newer than this house.

And basically they were gonna demolish it in favor of building a fraternity house in the corner of 16th and Kilborne on the southwest corner.

And I told them, well, why don't you move the house?

And they well, they made the same it's gonna cost too much.

I said, Well, it's gonna cost you a lot more if we historically designated and they said, Okay, we'll move it.

And they did move it, and it's currently occupied and providing housing on 19th Street, two blocks away.

So this is entirely feasible to do.

And it's it was a similar size property.

And I would have taken the garage myself had I but I could no way I could have fit the garage on my property.

There was a little one-car garage attached as well.

You could have got it.

Good job.

Good job, Alderman.

Good job.

All right, so Alban Stamper moves the recommend uh adoption, and that's on a four-zero vote.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hearing no objections to order.

Congratulations.

Thank you all.

Appreciate it.

Thank you for your time.

Yes, sir.

All right, moving on to item five.

And authorizing the city controller to distribute excess incremental revenue to overlying taxing districts.

Uh good morning.

Uh I'm David Schrader with the Department of City Development.

This and the next three files are all very similar.

They are closing out uh TIDs.

Uh just to give a an overview for all four of them uh in terms of the process and where we're at.

So this is the final step of the process for these TIDs.

Uh in November, the council adopted the 26th budget.

That included a one-year extension for affordable housing from these TIDs.

So that budget authority you'll see was represented in the 2026 capital budget.

Uh and then those resolutions approving that were approved by this committee back in December of last year.

Uh with those passing resolutions now, the final part is to close out these TIDs.

State statute requires us to close them by April 15th.

Um and then as we do that, then the final there is going to be some excess increment uh for these TIDs, and that will be split then amongst uh the county, the city, MPS, MMS, MMSD, and MATC.

That excess revenue was also approved by the council in the budget.

Uh you'll see that uh there's a full 15 million dollars of budget authority to pay that out in uh in uh section I of the budget, which is the economic development fund.

Uh and then there's five million dollars recognized or five million and thirty seven thousand five million thirty-seven thousand dollars is recognized for the city's portion in the general fund, and that's under general fund revenues.

Um it's under the section uh source of funds for city general city purposes, taxes and payments in lieu of or taxes and payments in lieu of taxes, TID excess revenue.

So there's five million dollars into the city's general fund budget.

Uh the all four of these TIDs are complete.

Their project plans have been completed.

Uh they are all past their expenditure date, so we can't extend them or or amend them anymore.

Uh the TIDs have already had infrastructure amendments earlier, and then of course, as I mentioned before, the TID extension for its TID has $51 million in leftover increment, excess increment.

Do I read that correctly?

No, no, that's uh $501 million of tax base.

Uh produced.

Okay.

Yes, so that becomes then just general city tax base, then $51 million over the over the term or no, or well that's how much it generated over its over its lifetime, and now that moves from the T ID.

That's the entire assessment, or that's just the incremental that's the incremental part.

Okay.

Yes.

So now $51 million is to the tax stabilization fund?

No, no, no, no.

That's just that's not money, that's tax base.

That's the value, the accessible value of that property.

Gotcha.

Do you have the number of the value of the money, actual cash?

Well, it uh oh, for the excess revenue portion?

3.2 million of which we get 34%, is that correct?

Um yes, I believe so.

Let me uh I have I have all four of them actually here for while we only get 34%.

Because it's just it's distributed to the other taxing bodies.

Our that's our portion, I got you.

Yeah, so out of the five million dollars uh that uh of excess revenue that the city's counting, TID fifty or let's see, TID 39 is about 1.1 million.

Okay.

We get a 1.1 million a year.

No, no, no.

That's a one-time deal for closing it out.

So and that was already recognized in the 2026 budget.

But now that it's built and has a uh higher value, correct.

Do we have that amount that's going to the city every year?

Technically, no, that's not how it works.

So this so when we talk about money for the city budget, you're talking the tax levy.

Tax levy is not determined by the assessed value or the rate.

The tax levy is a conscious decision voted upon by the mayor and the council.

Tax levy, so then the assessed value then just determines the rate.

So having more assessed value doesn't give you more money, it'll lower the rate.

Lower the rate which conceivably everybody's taxes go down in infinitesimal amount.

Fractions of a penny to the rate, yes.

All things being equal.

Correct.

How would you respond to putting this property back on the tax roll?

How do you respond to that then?

Well, that's if that's the way it goes.

How do you respond to that question?

By putting it back to the general tax rules, it lowers the city's tax rate.

Increase.

Infinitesimally, but overall it'll lower the tax rate a little bit, and then theoretically then everyone would pay a little bit more.

The reverse is true when we we create a TIFF, we infinitesimally decrease increased increased the tax rate.

But that's offset by the but for argument.

That tack that that additional tax rate wouldn't have been there anyway be but for the city investment.

Correct.

So that's why there's a but for requirement in the law which is very loosely applied, shall we say in the world of tick tax incremental financing.

Correct.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, Alvin Schmaker.

Um I do think there's a story here we could be telling and maybe a little more clearly.

So I get that assessment just distributes the levy, it doesn't set the levy.

Um but if something comes online of value that wasn't there while it was offline, that means that property now absorbs as it were a bigger share of the overall levy.

And so if we look at our policy here, which it's a good time to do when you close out TIDS, um the whatever policy is leading us to create these TIDs, if it's resulting in a substantial increment, that's money that then comes out of those new um newly valuable properties that because of the butt four class would clause would not be newly more valuable.

And so we are shifting through this development strategy, we are shifting as it were the cost um over to the newly valuable properties.

Is is that fair?

Correct.

Yeah, and it's it's all little bits at a time, but it does grow throughout the years.

Right.

But still, if people are saying, why the heck do you do all these TIDs and stuff?

Are you just like feeding back at no, you're actually increasing the value of certain properties in the city in a way they wouldn't be without this tool?

Correct.

And so this is uh a generally a good idea to the extent we can promote development that wouldn't happen without it, it it helps lighten the load for everybody, even though if you look individually at each item, it's incremental.

On the whole, the policy, I mean, we could add up the dollars, but um it's a substantial um benefit to the non um increased value tax.

I can say to them, look, this isn't a stupid policy, it's putting the burden more on these new developments than on you.

Correct.

And and and even more so is upfront within the TIDs.

When we do, for example, infrastructure uh amendments, which we've done for for most TIDs when you can, or these housing extensions, you're taking all of the taxing jurisdictions monies to put directly into these projects.

So for example, the 2.3 million dollars of increment that was put into the 2026 budget, that represents all the taxing jurisdictions, not just the city's portion.

Uh also with the infrastructure amendment.

So so there's a there is a great benefit to the that district, and then also outside of that district, especially infrastructure can go a half mile outside.

So that's the that goes entirely just to the city, not to the other taxing authorities.

It goes to our infrastructure here in the city and it goes to the housing needs of the city of Milwaukee.

So I I think we ought to have a very clear story to tell here that um our beat reporter here can write down um of every time we close one of these things where we sing the hymno from the hymn no about what the benefit is because it does get if you get two in the weeds you completely lose um what the overall impact of this policy is regardless of what this individual closure should do.

And and as all properties whether or not they're in a TID but as all properties increase in an assessed value that gives you the opportunity to either hold or lower a tax rate.

But it but as going back to the original point does it produce money no that's always just a conscious decision of what are you setting your tax levy at the yes but a higher value automatically provides a higher amount of money available.

No it actually doesn't that's the whole that's that's the only if you hold the tax rate though.

Right.

Yeah.

But but it does shift the burden towards those newly valuable properties.

So it does spend long term could help individual homeowners for example a lower tax rate of choice do I sit in a city without the TID policy or do I sit in a city with the TID policy I'm gonna vote for with it because that's going to decrease my tax burden over time relative to how things would otherwise progress.

You'll notice it too like especially now that we do assessments every other year is that that when you see assessments go up a lot you can see the tax rate uh either hold hold steady or can go down.

I mean it it's and you're going back over decades but very specifically in Heather Park tax have increased significantly triple assessments have gone up.

But that's what I just said you saying the assessments doesn't equal more tax money for not more tax money higher tax bill tax bill no doubt about it.

A higher tax bill doesn't mean more money to the city no and you've got to remember when you're looking at for example your own personal property tax bill as we all do you have to look at all the taxing jurisdictions.

For example when MPS increased their levy by 100 something million dollars.

No that was a different number well whatever the number right we represent about 34% of your tax bill right total tax you know so that's where out of the 15 million dollars of excess revenue from these TIDs about 34% of it five million will go directly back to the city.

And then the rest of it's split among the other taxing jurisdictions based on their percentage of the tax bill okay so there's no more available money even though the whole neighborhood um value goes up significantly well you got to look at it across citywide and then at the end of the day it's still a decision by the council and the mayor of what the tax levy is going to be we set the amount of money we want to collect yeah how it's collected is based on two moving parts the assessed value the total assessed value of the city as a whole which is what the third for 40 billion dollars nowadays 38 billion dollars but if a house costs 100 one year and make sure it's 300 thousand you multiply that by your tax more tax money no they they pay more taxes the tax the amount of money we have to the whole neighborhood pay more in the aggregate and that money goes split up between all the taxing entities but everyone else pays less yes yeah because they represent more of the everybody else pays less in the city yeah in that in that strict example yeah think of it as a people these neighborhoods are complaining about the increase in taxes that they pay my tax bill will go from five thousand dollars to ten thousand dollars so they can't technically say where's my tax money going if my tax if my if the complaint is my taxes have gone up triple but the services have dwindled are they legitimately complaining about where's my triple in tax money going is that a legitimate complaint well it it there's a couple other things that feed into that one is first of all let's say my property went up 25% in value what was the average across the city so I mean if the average across the city was 25% we're all I'm I'm even Steven in terms of if the levy stays exactly the same for all the taxing jurisdictions my tax bill would be the same.

Someone else is paying less.

But at the end of the day, still, as as Alderman Bauman pointed out, too, is that it's not more money.

You guys decide how much money to collect first.

That's the first number you guys come to.

And then simply these are the other parts of the equation.

So for example, it's it's A times B equals C.

C is the tax level.

So a leg drive property, taxes.

The city gets the same amount as uh second and right property.

Taxes.

Well, I'm not sure that's gonna be quite because they're assessed values.

Go ahead.

There's been years where my own house, my tax bill went down despite our levy going up.

Why?

Because my pers my assessment went down by a greater percentage than the tax rate went up.

Correct.

And so I actually, in my individual case, the tax bill declined even though the levy increased.

So it's all dependent on that's why I tell people if you feel your per house is being overassessed, object, because that's the key, is that's gonna drive your tax bill, is that assessment.

Absolutely, no question about it.

And for all the jurisdictions, but the city isn't benefiting.

That's what you're saying.

The city benefits from higher assessments by having well, technically let's put it this way.

I think the city benefits because if we had a lower tax base and we decided to spend the same amount of tax levy every year, the property taxes would be astronomically higher.

Yes, yeah, I'm talking in the reverse, though.

And people would leave and not want to move here, and it would become increasingly unattractive.

That's kind of happened already over the last 50 years.

That's why suburbs are attractive, because they have lower tax rates because their assessed value per resident is way higher.

That's why it's cheaper to live in Brookfield for the same level of city services than in Milwaukee because their assessed value per taxpayer, if you want to look at it that way, is higher.

But their taxes are lower.

And they get because their tax rates are lower.

And again, when people are looking at their tax bill, you've got to look at it piece by piece because like we like mentioned before, you know, when any indic any entity, whether it's the city, the county, MPS, M E T C greatly increased their levy.

That piece is what usually drives Hawaii your.

I mean I look at it this way.

I mean, I I I think one year I broke it down that my property tax bill for the city was about eight hundred dollars.

And I thought, hmm.

Do I get eight hundred dollars worth of service to have if no other services existed to have the fire department show up in three minutes if there's a mishap or someone falls ill?

That's less than a hundred dollars a month to have that service to have that security.

I said, that's a good deal.

Yeah.

That's a good deal.

Yeah, I mean it.

I may never need it, but if I need it, I'm very glad.

I'll gladly pay that $80 a month to have that fire department show up in three minutes.

Definitely.

Mr.

Chair, to tie it all together.

So what we did in an earlier file with promoting workforce developments and thereby the the prevalence or the uh the growing, as it were, by small increment, um, the middle class, I mean that's what you want, and that's what you have in a healthy city is the diversity of incomes.

If you have just the really rich and the really poor, then the really rich are subsidizing the heck out of the really poor, and at one point they might say, What am I doing this for?

Right.

Um, if you have a a balanced middle class in there, you have much more um participation in the benefits accrued from your tax dollars.

So that's why the whole motivation of encouraging workforce development and encouraging the growing middle class in our city is related to the health of the city, and it ties into this debate.

The real object the real objection comes regarding MPS in my experience.

Well, if you look at the tax bill, that's what triple.

Right.

Correct.

So I understand your point.

Yeah.

Counties was minimal, I think cities MPS was first for sure.

I think city then county.

Yes.

And and so at the end of the day.

Yeah, they are.

Yes.

Small though, very small.

Very small portion.

And MMSD, their capital budget is funded through the tax levy.

So at the end of the day, if if if the city wants more money, you guys then simply set a higher tax levy, period.

And then the tax rate and the assessed value will will basically create whatever levy you.

And that would have been those years because.

In some cases, significantly.

Well, I thought it was a good thing to do the two-year tax assessment.

I'm not so sure now because kind of need to monitor it.

The sticker shot problem.

Yeah, kind of need to monitor it.

Yeah.

Because the people get it in two years, they'd be like, what the but they didn't look at it last year.

All right, well, good.

We've got a little primer here on refresher course and the tax levy and tax economics.

I'm just saying this is an interesting discussion.

But I'll rejoin.

So finance in general, it is an interesting discussion, which is out to you.

Admittedly hard for folks not to are immersed in it to fully understand.

Because there's too many, there's a lot of layers, because then you got gentrification, then you got displacement, then you got neighborhood improvement.

So there's a lot of different layers to it.

Correct.

Okay, but the bottom line is Alderman Samper moves the recommended uh.

That is the bottom line.

Hearing no objections so ordered.

Moving on to item six, which is the same process here.

Item 251905 resolution dissolving tax incremental district number 42 and authorizing the city controller to distribute excess incremental revenue to the overlaying taxing districts.

All right, same deal here, right?

Yes.

These are all these the central central city um project.

Any tax money still paying off that debt in the 7th automated district, or we paid have we paid that off?

Century City, are you talking about it?

Century City, yes.

What else I say?

Central City, yes.

Uh I believe whether last year or this year that we've finally through donor TIDs were able to pay off that debt.

Okay, okay.

Do we still have those houses that were to be developed in the original TID?

For Century City?

Oh, for yeah, I don't believe we changed the boundary to take them out.

It it was interesting to say which houses were eligible, you know.

All right.

Thank you.

Yeah, they did it did cause issues when the housing market the bubble popped and and those values.

Well, that's the Achilles heel of tax incremental financing is a perpetual motion machine, provided real estate values continue to appreciate.

Correct.

Once that reverses, then tax incremental financing, especially if it's city financed, can become very expensive with potential big liabilities to the city.

And and that is also why uh certain projects, especially higher risk projects, you'll see a lot of them come through as developer finance.

Because that pushes that risk on to the developer and not the city, right?

I thought your next statement was going to be how important downtown is.

No, I that's self-evident.

Uh yeah, you used to say it.

Why'd you stop?

Because uh today's the perfect day.

So all right, Alderman Sam removes the recommended adoption of this item as well, hearing no objections to order that brings us to the share that was 3.4 million for the city on a one-time oh, for midtown?

Um 3.4 million and was being re uh as part of the uh I'm looking at excess revenue tax statements, so I know it.

But okay, thank you.

And this excess revenue now did that this comes in to the 2026 cycle?

Yes.

So it was already in the 2026 budget.

So when we get to our 2027 budget deliberations, oh so this was this revenue was recognized already for the 2026 budget.

Correct.

So this is built into our 26 budget already.

All right.

So this is already recognized revenue.

This is not new money or free money.

Correct.

Correct.

Is there a way to know about this money before we uh embed it into the I think they did that?

We did that we did during the budget, yeah.

Yeah, it's a separate, it's a separate revenue line in the in the budget.

You'll see it uh under general fund revenues.

Okay, very good.

So Alderman Stamper moves the recommended adoption of this item.

Hearing no objections to order, that brings us to item seven, file two five one nine zero six resolution to dolly tax incremental district number forty-six, the new arcade project and authorizing the city controller to distribute excess incremental revenue to overlying tax districts.

Same deal here just for the record, how much money is involved?

Uh this one has about three hundred and forty-five thousand dollars of excess revenue for the city portion.

Okay, very good.

Sure.

Yeah, all the way up.

Are we um still eligible to do are we still doing TIDs for neighborhoods with excess uh TID surplus funds?

No, a couple times I had like $10,000 available for the resident for roof and repair, but it came from excess TID money.

Uh are you are you speaking of maybe like strong home loan type programs or it was it was TID money?

It was there are some neighborhood TIDs that yes depending on where where it is, there are still TIDs that have funding available.

Are these overlays eligible for neighborhoods?

Well, these are done, so no.

Okay, that's why I can keep saying that.

These are completely overviews.

All right.

I I keep forgetting we were using very good.

Alderman Stamper moves the recommended adoption of this item seven, hearing no objections to that.

There's about 180,000 dollars of excess revenue for the city portion.

Very good.

All right.

No questions or comments.

Alderman Jackson moves a recommended adoption, hearing no objections to order.

Moving on.

File this about here.

Oh okay.

Item nine, file two five one eight six six communication from the Department of City Development, the Department of Public Works related to the final report for the reimagining.

Thank you.

Wisconsin 175 study Wisconsin Avenue to Lisbon Avenue.

Okay.

What is this?

Oh yeah.

All right, who wants to take the laboring order here?

Okay.

Uh good morning.

Um Monica Walk Smith from the Department of City Development.

Before you is a communication file relating to the final report for the uh reimagining Wisconsin 175 study from Wisconsin Avenue to Lisbon Avenue.

I'm joined here by Mike Amston from the Department of Public Works.

Also with Doug Cain and Benedict Aruchelieu from the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and Andre Oost from the Grafe um Consultant Team.

Um Doug and Andre were the project managers, and they'll provide a brief summary of the process and the results.

Um just as a brief background, file number 221692 was a resolution.

It was adopted in 2023, directing the commissioner of the Department of City Development, the Commissioner of Public Works to execute a memorandum of understanding with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and with Milwaukee County to undertake a reimagining Wisconsin 175 feasibility study that could be adopted by the Common Council as part of the city's overall comprehensive plan.

And we're here today to provide a summary of that collaboration and the results from the study.

And it was part of a freeway network that was never built out.

Um it's a grade separated freeway that provide um poses many challenges.

It disconnects neighborhoods, it limits connectivity for people traveling by transit, by bike, on foot.

Um it's overbuilt for the traffic that it carries, and some of that land could be put to better use.

Um the study identified.

I use that all the time.

You made a sound like pretty bad hindrance on them.

I didn't look at it like that, but going to those public meetings.

I did go and you didn't go.

Well, I'm not in favor of tearing all this out, but that's that's just me.

So that that that bank that was removed.

Is that that's part of this correct?

Correct.

Okay, because that was the first step.

So um I feel like it was more than two years ago when we first started those meetings.

We did a um a f um a visioning study in 2017.

That's right when the bank um when the bank was uh foreclosed in the city purchased that property.

So yes, so we further there's no plan in here.

There is there a locally preferred alternative?

There is not a locally preferred alternative, but if I could um I'll sorry, yeah.

I think we'll have a presentation that kind of explains the no, there I'm not but no, there's a draft report, but it has not been um um made public or finalized.

So we wanted to offer the community meetings and those studies and up till now.

Yes.

Yes.

I'm just curious, why does it come in to this committee versus public works?

Because um because of the connection with the comprehensive plan.

Um the the MOU, um, it went before Z and D three years ago.

Um so it came to Z and D and it relates to the unclear this is not part of the widening of I-94 or the reconstruction of the stadium interchange, correct?

Correct.

This is something unfunded, not even on WISDOT's radar in terms of an actual project to be executed, correct?

It's not funded at this point.

That's correct.

So this is 20 years, 30 years down the road.

We uh right now we're in the process of trying to put together the funding, the project currently is not funded for the next phase.

Okay, continue, make this short because it uh there's okay.

Okay.

Um very briefly just wanted to mention that um the study had extensive public engagement and met and exceeded all of our um public um participation procedures, and it was a successful successful collaboration between the DOT, the city, and Milwaukee County.

So with that, I'm gonna hand it over to both Doug and um Andre for a brief presentation.

Thank you.

Thanks for the opportunity to give you a quick update on the final report.

Yes, sir.

Uh this is for the reimagining WIS 175 study.

The study began back in 2022.

Uh the project was a or the study was a completed as a partnership with the Milwaukee County and City of Milwaukee.

It goes from the stadium interchange to Lisbon Avenue, about 1.8 miles.

Uh it was a three-step process to narrow alternatives and included three public involvement meetings.

Uh the goal was to involve local communities and stakeholders.

We partnered with 20 community-based organizations across 14 neighborhoods.

We had five CBOs that were compensated, paid partners to focus on underrepresented neighborhoods within the study area.

Um we looked at a number of uh alternatives, actually 27 alternatives at one time that we did some analysis on.

Um we our goal was to have a robust public outreach, and the report identifies viable alternatives that meet traffic community needs with a focus on reconnecting communities.

So the purpose and need um the alternatives that we looked at uh for the future corridor, we're looking at addressing aging infrastructure, outdated design, improved safety and traffic operations, uh support transit, biking and walking, uh reconnecting neighborhoods and promoting economic vitality, and then looking at the transition of where the freeway ends and how it connects to the local street network.

Right.

Whoops.

So some of the highlights from the study.

Um public input shaped the alternatives, uh, the three public meetings.

We started out with just listening and uh doing research and understanding the corridor, then we developed some alternatives and we took that to the public for uh input.

Those were our initial alternatives, and from that we narrowed down and did a more detailed analysis um four alternatives that were presented in this final report.

Mr.

Chair.

Go ahead, Mr.

Yeah, I don't know.

Why are you only saying three meetings?

Because I've been I've went to more than that.

So we started with those those tablets.

Remember those tablets?

Yeah, we've had we were choosing how we wanted the area to look.

Yeah.

We had three that was out to like three meetings right there.

Yeah, we had three public involvement meetings that were open to the entire public, and then we had um uh what were our things, Andre?

You got different you call them different meetings?

Yeah, we had different committees.

Yeah, there were three public meetings as a piece of this phase of the project.

I know before the city of Milwaukee, their visioning study had additional meetings that took place before this DOT project started.

So you're not counting those meetings.

No, no, we're talking about an overall plan.

This was just part of our DOT effort that we did these.

So this plan was a larger plan than the original visioning study that the city had completed.

So this this study went the whole way to I-94 as the visioning study was really focusing more on the north end.

But all those people that came out of those input, is that part of this study though?

The three meetings we had, yes.

Um we might have that discussed a little bit in our final report, but that was an effort that the city completed.

Um there were also um other advisory committee meetings that you may have attended.

There's also attendance at community events, so there were um in addition to the three main public involvement meetings, like other other types of meetings and advisory.

Yeah, but uh the current city attorney used to attend the meetings uh all the time, and that and he he's been elected what two years, so we had a bunch of meetings.

I just want to know y'all if y'all got that data.

Do you all have those data from all those meetings?

Yes, okay, yeah, yeah, we do.

Yeah, okay, gotcha.

So, yes, the study report, um, the final report here compares four alternatives, one of them being the replacing kind, and no preferred alternate alternative was selected in this report.

This was basically to get gather feedback, understand community priorities, um, work with the county and the city, and come up with viable alternatives that could be carried forward into our future study.

Um, so our third public involvement meeting which was our last one was held April 2nd, 2025, and that was to share these four alternatives that we had done some preliminary uh analysis on and gather comments.

Um we did a high level traffic analysis to look at potential delays and diversion.

We did a safety review on the existing corridor.

We looked at environmental uh impacts and didn't have any major concerns, and we looked at reconnection for all the alternatives that included physical economic and social factors.

Okay.

Uh so the study report sets the stage for a future um Pell or NEPA phase, which would be the next um environmental phase of this.

A Pell would be more of a planning study.

It's a it's a planning and environmental linkage study, is what they call it.

Uh so that's where these alternatives could be reviewed, further evaluated, refined, and reduced.

Um the final report we hope to have published on our project website in the next couple of weeks.

We met with the county last month, and now we're meeting with the city.

Okay.

So some of the takeaways from our last public involvement meeting or from the study and all uh you know, throughout, was that there was high support for slower speeds and safer roadways for all users, uh support for multimodal facilities along 175, which would include bike pet and transit, looking at reconnecting existing regional trails, the Oakleaf Trail and the Hank Aaron Trail are both in the area of WIS 175, and then better mobility connecting parks and services.

Um Washington Park Access.

Uh we heard a lot of comments about improving all modes of access to Washington Park.

Uh the replace and kind alternative uh did not meet the study's goals and received the least positive feedback.

So that would just be replacing the inner the freeway as it is today.

Um there was a lot of support for having a preferred alternative along 175 that included at grade intersections from Vallet to Lisbon, and then there was support for development of surplus lands that might be created, and that the new development should maintain uh the neighborhood character that's out there today.

So some of the opportunities um of of reimagining WIS 175 that would be addressing user safety, um looking at transportation operations, multimodal mobility, neighborhood design, social reconnection, and economic reconnection.

So with that, I'm gonna turn it over to Andre to run through the alternatives that were presented at PIM number three.

All right, going to page 12.

I'm just curious about alternative three, nine relocations.

That's nine property takings and removal of either residential or commercial properties?

Yeah, yes.

Um well do you want do you want me to go in order or you know how you'll like go ahead the case?

Okay, I'll do it.

And I'll explain why.

Do what you want, okay.

Um four alternatives were shared, were shared with the public.

Um one of them was replaced in kind, uh, along with uh three different ones that really vary to where the expressway section ended.

And so the expressway, how we're defining it is the piece of highway that is 40 to 45 miles an hour, grade separated intersections, so you know, not signals primarily.

You know, bridges.

Um, and then it would transition to a boulevard, and that would be 25 to 35 miles an hour.

Um, all of them were looking to provide uh options for bus service, bike, multimodal, um, and pedestrian, and tie those trails together.

So that was a focus on all of the options.

Um the intersections go ahead, Alder Santa.

Yeah, hey, I'm trying to if you do cut it off at the leader state street.

How would you get how would you go in the south if it's because it's gonna be cut off?

How would you get south?

Just 47th Street?

Or would you have to build streets all the way to would you have to build like a 48th, a 49th, or 50th?

Uh I'm sorry, so it's just how it would transition.

This is all academic because this is not even a formal NEPA alternative analysis leading to a project.

This is it can spend 30 seconds on this because none of this is what's really gonna push forward.

Were there ever money to do anything seriously?

Well, I think all the alternatives could be changed, they could all be modified.

You have to go through a whole new process, more public hearings, different priorities could be expressed, different groups could show up, and I think I think they're here because they made progress towards possibly getting some money because the issue was how much it's gonna cost.

So I assume you guys, I'm just assuming based on the state.

We've moved we must have made some progress.

I'm sure we made some progress.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but to your point, Alderman regarding Volete.

Uh the the freeway would still extend south of Volete.

The changes into a boulevard would happen from Volete North, is what Andre was saying.

So the the continuity would continue all the way down to I94.

It's just where does it transition from a freeway to a at grade boulevard type street?

So let's say Lisbon, you go straight Lisbon would go straight down, then you have the park.

So Lisbon is one street now, all the way to Walnut.

If you if you if this if the highway is cut off.

I'm not quite sure I understand.

Yes.

So right with the with the fence.

Yeah, well, so I think that's where the alternatives can show what that could look like at that point.

Yeah, that's why the bank was taken.

Okay.

So development of the northern city school.

And and remove that danger from coming off the highway.

Yeah.

Correct.

Yes, all the alternatives show that instead of being that free flow ramp, being a an intersection with signals like a traditional intersection versus the freeway ramps at that Lisbon and yeah.

But has we made progress in obtaining some funding?

At this point, we are looking at uh uh putting together the funding for the next phase, which is possible to be at Bow or NEPA study, but we don't have the fund at this point.

Yeah.

We're walking on it.

Gotcha.

Yeah, so all of the projects were shown to match into the stadium interchange improvements with M94.

So even the replacing kind did show you know what the future stadium interchange with the diverging diamond would look like and how that would match into existing.

Uh and the existing really was the baseline of comparison.

So if you were to replace it in kind, we had a comparison to what that would cost um along with those impacts.

What it what would it be?

Um so the costs were in that table.

Um that wasn't page 12, it's also shown small there.

It was 100 to 126 million dollars and uh 2025 dollars.

Um so alternate one was where the expresso would end to the furthest north, but still uh south of where it is today.

So it was ending it at Lloyd Street.

Uh it would be maintaining the grade separated expressway to the south.

Uh what it did um was a a couple different things.

So it would create a boulevard section between Lloyd and Lisbon.

It was probably the most similar to the visioning study that was started by the city in 2017.

Uh Wisconsin Avenue was still shown as an interchange.

Uh this one showed it with a roundabout type of interchange to it.

Um Martin Drive had a new interchange shown, so that's something that doesn't exist today.

Uh and then to the north uh the piece of expressway was shown towards the eastern piece.

Um near Washington Park with retaining walls, it did remove the ramps at Washington and Vine Street.

This one's more of a neighborhood feel.

The last one.

Yeah, so they all had basically perspective views kind of showing what it can look like.

Um there were there's videos of kind of like fly throughs for each of the three alternates that were shared at the public meeting.

Those things are on the website still, um, along with other views and perspectives to show what this really could look like in the future.

Um alternate two ended this go ahead.

Alternate two ended the expressway towards the middle, so this was near Martin Drive.

Um Martin Drive would have a new jug handle intersection that would provide access down to State Street.

Okay.

Um north of that, all of the intersections would be at grade with signals at the Washington Boulevard, Lloyd, and Lisbon.

Uh this one still had uh an interchange at Wisconsin Avenue.

This one was shown with a single point interchange.

Um all three of the options of the build alternates uh did remove the vehicular crossing bridge at Wells Street.

And um for this one for the northern piece, the roadway was shifted towards the east, but was maintained as a four-lane uh boulevard.

Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, go ahead, Hall.

I went to a few of these uh meetings at the library myself.

So I asked how come it wasn't thinking about you know transportation as far as having a single track monorail or hop as you make coming from Lisbon going to the stadium.

So I asked how come it wasn't thinking about you know transportation as far as having a single track monorail or hop as you may come in from Lisbon going to the stadium so I mean I I know we did look we did communicate early with like MCTS and other transit about some of the options and things that they would like to see and what you know they they believed could be funded.

Big and big money for street cars.

We don't have money for street cars.

That's an easier money to get access to DLT then why he was open here.

Did you want to discuss that?

Yeah, I mean I'm see I would say the transit options were driven by MCTS's um input and that's really how we arrived at how transit was going to be addressed.

It's only jammed up during the game time, so it seemed like if you had a parking ride and a train or some quick access, it seemed like make it a lot easier.

Sure.

Um alternative three is where the expressway ended most to the south.

Uh so it ended at State Street, uh State Street for this option was brought up to grade.

So um it was raising straight street up to 175.

Right now, State Street goes under, but still keeping 175 over the railroad track.

So if you know in that area, the railroad tracks are right next to State Street.

Um with this option, it would be bringing the roadway up.

Uh this is the one that had the most relocation.

But that that's a lot of real.

That's what drove the relocation.

There are businesses and houses down there.

I'm very familiar.

I'm frequently use that route.

Yep.

Yeah, and and there are there are things to balance with all of these, and then that's that's why we show what the impacts are very clearly.

I do have one question all this potential development land you show north of the lead.

Wasn't that all parkland originally?

Uh sections of it or yes.

Because this freeway took out the zoo, which is why this moved to where it is now.

Correct.

The zoo was on that site back in the middle of the state.

So can you can you basically would that not revert to parkland, or it can become developable real estate at this point?

Yeah, I mean, right now it's under the ownership of Wistat.

Um, and so those those are the things that are that would be a lot that would have to work through in the next phase.

You know, about what you can do with right-a-ways through parks.

That was a big issue in the 60s and 70s, right?

Yeah, it was.

I'm not sure what the current status would be monitoring.

And we looked at um, we worked with our attorney's office looking at deed restrictions, looking working with uh DOT as well as what the underlying lying deed restrictions are.

The um one thing to note is that the uh park did not extend all the way to 47th Street.

So there is areas that were never never parkland to your point.

Okay.

Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair.

Uh thank you so much.

I just want to really quickly thank the the team for the extensive work um that's been done thus thus far.

Um this is uh for me, it's an amazing opportunity for district 10 um because it allows um an opportunity for us to talk about housing.

This would be the largest piece of i if we're able to figure out how to move this opportunity forward.

This will be the uh largest piece of land mass in District 10 that we would be able to have some conversations around when it comes to housing.

Um we did see options as far as what that could potentially look like and what that could feel like.

And so I'm really excited that we're having these conversations now, especially with the development of night um I-94.

Um, that you know, this is this is the I I like that we're having these conversations ahead of time versus oh yeah, let's you know, rush and have these conversations now with residents that residents get an opportunity to really really be engaged in this process, and that's what I love the most.

Um, even though this particular area abuts with district um 15, um it will still provide a great opportunity for all of the res, you know, for a lot of the residents um in that particular area as again, especially as we talk about you know our housing crisis and again this is this is something that is not a year or two from now.

This is definitely down the line as we still continue to have conversations around um funding and how this area um can look as well as bridging the divide um with you know the both sides of the park with the east and west side um of the park.

And so this is an opportunity for us to begin to have those conversations of how do we rebuild um community and and really push to um make our communities walkable um and and livable.

So um just want to express my gratitude um to the team for the the immense work um that has gone into the community engagement piece.

Thank you.

Mr.

Chair.

Uh well member Gellis.

Thank thank you.

Um and this was my old county district.

Uh so I'm intimately familiar with a project uh that's four years long, right?

Uh this really showed that DOT can do the community engagement piece well.

There are over 50 neighborhood uh community stakeholders that were involved in this process throughout some were uh in the middle of the of the process, um but that takes an incredible amount of leg work and there's so much community input in this study that it's invaluable for that entire part of the city moving forward.

That said, to have a a very extensive report like this ready to go, we can't just put it on a shelf.

So um which of these so I have two questions.

Which of these four options uh or I guess which of the three options would provide the most developable land uh for the uh for the community after the project's done.

Page 12.

I those are very small numbers, and I can't I can't read that far.

So the so the answer is uh alternative three, 37 developable acres.

Yep, yeah.

Um that it does have the most relocations, um and it and it has um but it is the cost is also in the middle of those uh four options, right?

Um the I-94 East West uh interchange project at the stadium um was not the most expensive option that DOT looked at, correct?

Um the the uh hybrid high flyover intersection interchange option was ninety million dollars more expensive than what was ultimately selected for that project.

Are any of those dollars from the East West Freeway project available to continue this next step that we've been talking about for the future to not put this four-year study on a shelf, but to use it and move forward with it?

That's 90 million dollars in savings on the East West project from the preferred design and all alternatives out there.

How much would the next step um NEPA is that correct?

Neep, how much would the next step NEPA study cost?

Well, for the um for the first question regarding the uh 90 million, uh that would be probably be handled by the planning uh fiscal section.

Um for the uh uh NEPA studies, um we looking at uh uh three years if we have to go with the NEPA from these fees then uh we may go uh for Pell based on the funding, but currently I think we looking at uh roughly about the NEPA study we looking at about uh is it 14 yeah it was 14 to 14 million to 14 million dollars for the full study.

But a lot of that work, the community engagement work has already been done, so it wouldn't be a full price.

No, this was for the if we went to a next phase, that would be the price for the next phase.

10 to 14.

Yeah, you start over.

That's why it that's my point here.

Exactly.

Well, it's but it all starts over from the community engagement is there, the the wish lists, the um needs analysis is already there.

And that gets you to an alternative analysis.

That gets you to a preferred alternative, correct?

That's not final design, it's not preliminary engineering, correct?

Right.

Uh some of the uh work we did for these studies definitely will be carried into the next phase.

Yeah.

Uh so with the state of Wisconsin taxpayers have uh invested in this part of the town with uh uh incredibly expensive two billion dollar freeway expansion project.

How much of that two billion dollar price tag, which we saved 90 million dollars having a smaller footprint stadium intersection, right?

How much of that ninety million dollars can come back to the community to right size this freeway?

Like I said before, that would be handled by the planting section, you know, the fiscal department will work on the details of that it leaves a lot a lot.

This is a great study, a lot of hard work has been gone into it.

I think I would call it a successful study identifying the needs and priorities of community residents and the stakeholders because it's not just people who live in uh the 10th district that are impacted by the stadium, right?

I grew up in Wawatosa.

I used the stadium to get to uh um to get downtown uh it was a very quick shortcut, um, probably quicker than it should have been.

Um my second question um are any of these community priorities feasible today?

Some of the biking infrastructure or community connections.

Is there anything from the study that would be that the city or the county or the state could uh implement before this long-term 10-year plan?

I think there'd have to be more discussion on that.

I mean, until we get into NEPA, we don't have a pre preferred alternative, so we wouldn't want to do something that might limit us in the future, but there might be opportunities you know, where some of the work is done off the corridor.

My biggest my biggest observation as the county supervisor in that part of town was Washington Park is the crown jewel or central park of Milwaukee, and the closest county park to Washington Park is Doyne Park.

Try to ride a bike from Doyne to Washington Park.

You're either going west to Tosa or east to 35th Street.

There is no good connection there.

The fault of our uh predecessors, right?

Um, but if we recognize that pedestrian and bike infrastructure is a priority for our community.

We've recognized how we can fix it really, really well in three different options.

But my ask is to see what's available now instead of ten years from now.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Mr.

Chair.

Yes.

I am I just have a question in regards to what you stated earlier as far as this starting over.

I need to understand that a little bit more because I thought something like this would move into and it was sort of eluded that this would be used to move into the next phase.

Um what is the you know, when we you know, when you said, well, we'll have to start all over, what does that m essentially mean?

No, our intent is to build on what we've done.

You know, this was kind of the initial, let's go out there, see what the public priorities are and identify some of those and come up with some viable alternatives that can be taken further and refined further.

Um this initial study we just did a high-level traffic analysis.

We haven't even done a full detailed analysis.

That would be kind of be the next step.

Got it.

And if we go into a Pell, that's a document, still a planning document, but that could be rolled into a NEPA phase.

Yep.

So it would just be more detailed.

Yeah, and this study already narrowed down some of those options.

Like through when we began this study, I think in the public involvement meeting number two, we had dozens and dozens of options.

We ended up with three.

So and then now we're taking those three potentially into a further study.

So this is already um already winnowed some of those options.

So we started with 27.

Yes.

So in theory, you would you would go back to an open plate of options in an alternative analysis.

You'd have to by law.

Well, if correct?

Only a feedback provided that they should come back, but otherwise we've documented.

You can't just say it in the alternative analysis process, you can't say here here's this study.

Okay, we don't have to do steps one, two, three, and four of the alter of analysis process, right?

We may have to reevaluate some of that, but yes, we're hoping to take.

Thank you.

That's my point.

Yes.

You retrace your steps.

So I mean that this report does document the decisions that were made, which is the important thing to be able to move into the next phase.

Got it.

Got it.

Thank you.

All right, very good.

So I think we're at an end, all of a Jackson moves to receive in place on file.

Here are no objections, so we're thank you.