Community Development Block Grant (cdbg) Commission - Regular Meeting

Maybe to keep things moving.

I think you have, like,

a a lax question maybe in the that acknowledges that this huge adjacent process is is underway. And if the respondent has anything they'd like to say about if that process were to fail, would they would they be interested in something bigger? I I'm not saying that eloquently. But, you know, just acknowledging that that process is underway to go either way. They're gonna be well aware of the RFP and what to call for. But but just to acknowledge that

it might not exceed it, and

what do you have to say

about that in in a negative five response?

It's sort of a way to it's a suggestion to keep things moving while making sure that they're not

Yeah. I would I would ask the kind of supervisor how they would feel if that was the question. Because if the answer comes back that, yeah, we're we wouldn't invest in this mixed use space if the Coliseum wasn't

Yeah.

Renovated, and how would they go into the pond if they

have to vote on that?

Share vials. Share vials.

Oh, I

heard town supervisor. I was like, who who? I'm sorry. I was thrown there. Yeah.

I agree with what, supervisor Glaser is saying, and and, I guess, it ties into what Heather was just saying. I I think the process for the RFI can move forward without I mean, while the the RFP process completes its course. Like I said, I'm not it's I I'm concerned about whether or not there'll be support at the board because of many unanswered questions as well as I think the case needs to be made with the single response that it's that it's in our interest to move forward with that. So I think while that plays out, if there's something incorporated into the RFI that leaves open the door for if and and you don't need to say in the RFI that just in case this other process doesn't come to conclusion with the contract, rather just, you know, incorporate the Coliseum as part of the question of exploration about what interest and feasibility there might be in the context of all the other things that are being asked. So but I also just wanted to follow-up with with, I guess, comment some provide some historical context sort of working backwards in time.

You know, the committee this committee, as supervisor Glaser said, wasn't wasn't entirely, yeah, let's go this separate route for the on the coliseum versus everything else. That was something that was proposed back I don't know if it was last summer or spring by county executive Kevin. And supervisor Erickson, and I did raise questions in that initial meeting that, you know, whether or not that there should be a broader context, also whether or not we should be gathering more data before moving forward with an RFP. So and then before that, Kevin referenced the last RFP process. And that one, many of you weren't here then, was done during the pandemic or, right, maybe towards the near end of it without any consultation.

It was it was put out by a former director of the AEC and the county executive without any consultation with the redevelopment committee, without any consultation with the city, destination Madison. It was done in isolation and not consistent with the master plan. And so this committee was really displeased to say to put it mildly with that. But, nonetheless, that that RFP generated three responses compared to this one getting one. So, also, there's again, just providing some historical context, there's been comments made that this committee wasn't getting anything done.

Leading up to prior to the pandemic, we were moving forward with the one thing that we the committee had isolated was expansion of the Expo Hall. As the data showed, that was one area where we get the most immediate return on investment and that it could potentially that public investment could inspire private investment for other parts of the campus. So so we were moving forward with that with quite a bit of momentum, and then the pandemic hit, and everything shut down. The other thing that was happening before that RFP was done was there was growing interest and curiosity about the feasibility of an indoor sports facility on the campus. And so there's a lot of interest in that.

It got shut down once that RFP was put out without any consultation with everybody. So just wanted to give that historical context to everyone.

Thanks.

That last part there, when you

say when that RFP was out without any consultation, which RFP are you referring to?

The previous one of 2,000

Master. Year was.

Yeah. So Pre post master plan. Pre post. Correct.

That was a

It's the only outside of an RFP for the the Expo Hall, that that that's that was the only other RFP.

And the committee wasn't included in that. So that's not bad. Okay. So you're gonna say something else.

Yeah. I would just say I think I think I will echo Doctor. Anthony's thoughts and say, I think before we evaluate the proposal, we need to see what's being offered. And I think we're we may be putting, you know, the part the cart before the boards on some

of the stuff. So let's

I I would encourage to let the evaluation committee continue their work, And that and once once that is completed and they are able to share the information publicly, I think then we decide what's the next step as a as an organization.

Think it's So this it sounds like, though, we're going to go ahead with the RFI. Going back to pro pro solicit sits now due to the county's, whatever it is, procurement process, it has to be for legal purposes. Yeah. We'll interfere to talk about it. That's why we're not aware of what's in it.

So with the RFI, the RFP. I'll see. Right. So because it's because we don't know that lots of things, you know, people consider it's corrupt, shall we say. So I'm looking forward to seeing it so we know what's in it, what isn't and then we can speak for other supervisors.

Think other supervisors have questions, but there's also, I think, a strong interest on the board for the AC to be successful and to be self sufficient financially so that we don't have to commit more operating funds to it. Because if we don't get to do that, we can correct that those funds to other things that we come up to do. So I look forward to see what's in the proposal. But it is nice. But put it in.

So I don't know what's in it. I'm looking forward to seeing that. So I think the general sense, though, is that we want to put you know, consider it that, you know, it's one piece based on we don't know what's gonna happen. So I think that's what we want to put ahead.

Sure. I was just gonna say, I think it's a very thoughtful piece to include in terms of if the coliseum RP is not accepted. I think my caution would be I think it's important to phrase it correctly. So it's not there's not any sort of negative connotation. Right. One way or another, I think it's more about you know, we're really trying to explore all options and possibilities. If you know what I mean? Like, so I think it's it's just we have to be sensitive as not to give any sort of negative connotation. That would be my recommendation.

Yeah. I think it's

surprising. So

what you're

I'm sorry.

What you just said, Chuck, you're saying that next Wednesday, we should put that on our thiol for this Wednesday?

Is that what you're saying? That the committee

should vote yes to that?

Well, I think that there's a sentiment to keep the process being clarified. And even if you don't want to, you could pull it I guess. That's why it's nice to see about here. So here

so here's my question. What what is the rush with moving forward with this RFI, with the whole development of whole campus, to find out what is what's the rush to do that before finding out what's gonna happen with the Coliseum? I mean, it sound it sounds to me like we may we may know what's gonna happen with the Coliseum if if we this information gets released shortly, isn't it?

No. It's gonna get released shortly? When they re release it. Right?

Yeah. There could that'd be somebody

correct me. Dave Gulch or whatever,

that somehow goes into a thing, a contract or a resolution that we have to vote on. So I think the bigger issue is once it's, like, revealed so we got it, but then it goes coming forward and moving phase so that that take a little bit longer. So

But what's the rush on on getting this out within the next few days as opposed to in two months? Tell me tell me what the deal is, sir.

I I wouldn't say it's a rush. I mean, this was the timeline we discussed. We've discussed it for a while.

But we also thought we would know what was going on with the calisthenia by now.

Right.

And But we don't.

But we also I mean, at the last meeting, we shared the questions. There was no such at that point about pushing it off until about two months or whatever. There was no rush other than the fact that to keep this process moving, it's not just this is an RFI to get information so that we can then use that to help us guide our our discussions with the city on rezoning. And is that parcel these parcels will have to be rezoned. So that process doesn't happen overnight.

It's gonna take us a while to get that done. And then we would then use the information to detect the therapy. So there's a lot of steps that have to happen. Is it going to be a big deal if we wait until we release the response if we at that point or if, you know, we let the evaluation committee do the work. I don't think a week or two is gonna make a difference.

Yeah. I don't don't necessarily know. I don't have any idea how long if hypothetically, if the evaluation committee says move to the next step, I have no idea how long that process But

we'll know something shortly. That's why I think I would wait. That's my opinion.

So you could wait till the next PD?

I I hope we have an answer by then.

Right. So we will we will not release it on Wednesday is what I'm hearing. We'll we'll wait till this the this committee reconvenes next month. We'll tweak the questions a little bit and maybe maybe put the the take out his idea about putting the graph in there about how much space for gross square footage and how much parking the items.

Modifying question four. I think what I was saying was that I think there's a sense to desire to keep the RFI process, you know, moving. You know, that's all I was saying.

But I don't think waiting a short period of time is gonna hurt them.

Well, right. I don't necessarily think it will. But even though I've heard what others were saying in terms of concerns, I didn't

hear that. Like,

it's you know? Can I just say one other thing? Sure.

Is there a way we I mean, what's the reason that we're not hearing? Why why the the committee isn't putting out the information to us?

Is there a certain reason It's the process. Dave, are you there?

Dave.

Dave Cook.

He's He's there. There.

I'm here. I'm here. I'm here.

Yeah. So

this is this is why

I want you here is because this question has come up before when you do

an RFP. And there's a response. Supervisor.

That doesn't assist you on a completely different one. Like, I wanna see the response because I wanna see the response because I was told, no. You can't until it's it's reviewed, everything else. So just can you describe the process? Like, why I'm not on the committee. Kinda sucks on the committee. Whoever 's on the committee's on the committee, evidence, whatever. So that basic I think that is being locked up. Like, I don't know what's in it as a supervisor. Or

In other words, what are we waiting for?

Well,

why is it not be applied by RPC and everything and all of the you know, that's a question I've got more than once over the years. So please explain that.

I'll try. I'll try. Carlos and I have had discussions about this, and I've I've we've I've had discussions with Kevin. And it basically involves an interpretation both of the open records law and the open meetings law, at least the context we have looked at it from, which was that the terms of the RFP or the proposal can be kept confidential if there is a legitimate purpose for bargaining and negotiations. And I I think our conclusion was even if there was only one one bid, you could still legitimately say that there were reasons to keep the details of that confidential for bargaining and negotiation purposes if we were still making a determination of whether to move forward with that bid or not.

But once the group that's actually reviewing that and makes a determination to, yes, we're gonna move forward with a contract or attempt to move forward the contract on this bid, then the the the statutory the legal reasons for keeping that confidential goes away. There is really there really isn't any purpose in keeping that confidential from a from a bargaining standpoint anymore because we've already decided we're gonna contract with them. So when I talked to Kevin late last week, my understanding was that that determination hadn't been made as to whether the one bid was met all the criteria and was a successful bid or not. But our our position was once that determination was made, then we really don't have any justification not to make the the terms public. I don't know if that answered your question or not.

Did just stop? Right. Hope that helped. It does. But, I mean,

if that's the case, there must be something that's holding it up that that they're not releasing. I mean, is there more negotiations to happen?

If there's no negotiation that started, I think what Dave's saying is the evaluation committee hasn't completed their work, and so you don't wanna unduly influence them. If you release the details of the proposal and the evaluation committee is still in the process of evaluating, there could be influence pulled on those people to vote one way or the other. And And so so to keep this process clean, you keep the the details of the proposal only to the evaluation committee so that they can do their work. Once their work is completed, as Dave said, then then there's no reason to go in to hold the information. So once the evaluation committee is done with their work, we envision that the entire proposal will be released. If that would be when? Hopefully, the next week.

That's why I would hopefully, we can get that answer, and then we can judge whether we wanna move forward.

Yeah. Next week. So the example that I always give is had to do it, like, help desk. There were three responses. So I had to I had something I wanted in notes. I wanted to see a a file, and I was told, no. You can't see that until it's actually been reviewed directly to any doubt committee. Then once it's ready for the policy, the fee is the supervisor. And I was very frustrated by that, to be honest. It's so does that make sense? We gotta hear something soon only, and that's the first step. The next step is that it's gonna get into some format, right, Dave, that then goes to the county board. So that's gonna be

a whole different thing. But maybe by the next meeting. Well, that won't be done by the next meeting.

But I'm talking about our next meeting, which will be next month. Yes. I thought it sounds like Yeah.

But the contract people have a contract. The contract with the committee. They can have

this email. Issue. Yeah. This work done. Cool. Next week or two, which would be before our next meeting. Yeah. That's how I hear things. Does anybody yeah. Go ahead. Sorry. Sure because this is you know?

So we get I'm sorry. This is a really elementary question. We get the information from the evaluation committee, and what is the what is the answer that we're getting from them, and then what happens? Sorry.

I don't Well, it would be either you accepted. You don't accept the Either accept the reduction set.

Accept the proposal as written. And then if it's accepted, then it goes to the coming board. So they're accepted.

We your the decision would be either you have to send to contract.

I have

to Or the proposal doesn't need the responses to meet the

criteria, so we're not. So Right.

Either you use the next step would be to initiate negotiation contract, or you don't act on it at all. And who

makes sense?

Evaluation. Evaluation. Evaluation. Evaluation. So they

will advise this is going. We suggest this will be contracted or not,

then we'll get to see. Is that

right? Does it come back here or not?

To this committee.

What No. You will be able to see what the proposal thought is. Right. And then the county

mean, does this committee get a chance to recommend this to the county?

No. The the value

They've done that, basically.

The evaluation committee recommends a contract, and that contract is going to be normal.

Process. Already gave that that committee the opportunity to do that.

So you gave the so our we we saw our PD. We had some contribution to that. Yep. So, basically, the evaluation committee Yes. Says whether we're that or not

Yep.

Say we are. Mhmm. Then it goes to the folks like Dave Gahl's lawyers.

So we work on the

Concrete language. Contract language.

And that

goes in the form of, like, a resolution.

To the county board. Right. Got it. And that's what

that goes through the county board process. Yeah. Okay. And that depends upon what goes to the county board. County board chair assigns it to whichever committees, probably public works. But In public works, that line, I guess. That's what the

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

She's a brother, Eaglebird Eaglebird Michael Mike, Inkberger's chair of that, probably to personal finance, which I'm on. And it has to go through those normal steps. So it gets introduced to the county board, goes to committees, then it goes back to the county board when the county board votes on it.

Thank you.

Sorry. It's all apologize. Sorry. No.

I just want everyone to be clear with that. That's why I ask a lot of questions. Sometimes well, a lot of times people don't like when I ask questions, but

I still I don't care.

Okay. So everybody who's online, have you been hearing this? Is there any other clarifications, questions on this?

Yeah. I just let me just add a little bit of clarification. So once a contract is drafted, what comes to the county board is a resolution that basically summarizes the the the contract in a sense or the what the agreement is. And what is basically being acted on by the board is authorization for the administration to execute, I. E, sign the contract.

And that's the only choice the board has, and that's why these discussions ahead of time are so important because the board can't modify the contract at that point. All it is is an up and down up or down vote on the resolution. So just wanted to offer

that clarification. Pretty sad about Right. So, know, you somebody has certain spot. You know?

Yeah. Good. That's

can't proceed unless

there's that one. Right.

K. Thank you. Yes. No.

That makes sense. So I'll see if we can also ask you. K. Anybody else have any questions? Everyone heard this? Supervisor Glaser, you heard all this? Doctor. Anthony?

Okay. Alright. Are you clear?

We'll be back looking forward to You

know? So Alright. So what's the next thing? Do you have anything else to start conducting? Is this under you, or is it

I don't know. So plan.

Okay. So we in these next two slides, just want to keep you generally informed of the sequence of other moving pieces here from a city zoning master plan perspective. These all communicate, like, it's a general sequence, the timeline set, required or sort of confirmed at this point, especially based on the conversation you just had. These are just what steps will occur and what general order and considerations that could on each phase of the process. So when we met last week, it was December 15.

We sorry. Last month, we met December 15 and then met with the city later that night just before the holidays to continue conversation on zoning approvals required for X Hall for the Coliseum and for the future mixed use areas. And part of that conversation is the related master plan approval that would be required by the city in order to advance the specific mixed use re solving pieces. This is a slide that we shared last time. The three big pieces here, X Hall, addition, Colosseum, and mixed use areas, tentative timelines across the top, how the three would relate together, the X Hall being the furthest along in design at the 90% design stage.

It would potentially be ready to submit to the city in the future for conditional use permit approval of permanent design, commission review. Next, the Colosseum, all contingent on partner negotiations. Before that would move into a sort of review and application phase. With the mixed use areas, the steps sequentially that would be happening would be release of this RFI first to receive feedback from the development community to ensure that, you know, when we do submit a master plan and rezoning applications, that we are on great track. Those two entitlement pieces, the master plan and the rezoning, would happen before an RFP is released soliciting actual development proposals for the site, and then the rest would proceed based on that process in the future.

Just a reminder, again, of what the master plan adoption piece really means. In the city's comprehensive plan right now, the land uses that are here are anticipated to continue until a master plan is sort of adopted that identifies what the potential changes would be. So while this committee has worked on since 2018 its own master plan, that has not yet gone through any sort of city acceptance process, and that is needed in order to create a pathway for rezoning. So in the mixed use areas right now, those are just the anticipated or sort of identified as in the PMR, park and rec, existing zoning district. Once a master plan is accepted, then that triggers the ability to rezone.

That rezoning district is not set in stone yet, but we do believe that it would probably be one of these categories that enables a wide range of mixed use development, and those are listed there in RMX or CCT. There are some some differences. Maybe one is applied differently to the Oakland Avenue site. Those are how those two pieces relate together. Specific to the mixed use areas, this would be the general sequence.

So the last slide is all three, the ex fall, colisee, and mixed use. This one is just a time frame that looks at how to approach the mixed use areas, continuing to work with the city on predevelopment guidance from Q4 here to the 2026, release of the RFI, and then approaching those select city entitlements by the county with bullet points under there being masturbated and something that I just covered before tomorrow.

So That I guess, that that sequence, the rezoning happened before the RFP was released even though you response to the RFP might be slightly different than what the master point calls to work

very tightly? And

the idea is that you'd be more likely to receive responses to the RFP because some of that work is done proactively. So if the site is entitled the steps that are.

How long does it We

have gotten good feedback from the city on what exactly that master plan submittal looks like and what master plan acceptance or approval means, and that we talked through the fact that you have the 2018 master plan. It's a very long document. There are things that have changed, evolved. It's not intended that that entire packet be submitted to the city and become a regulatory document, but rather that you would be able to proceed with a summary, something in the range of 10 to 20 pages that really communicate some of the big picture moving parts. So an updated master plan graphic would be included, which is slightly different than the 2018 version.

One notable item being just the arena future arena being slightly south of the main road. We might identify general land uses that are expected in the mixed use area, general phasing, talking about all Okay. Curtailments, construction of the various projects, phasing of parking improvements will be generally addressed in that sort of conversation. Stormwater, the traffic and traffic circulation, connectivity between the sites, just ensuring that when decisions are made in the future for rezoning, that all pieces aren't working together. That's generally what the master plan would Again, just bringing this forward today to keep the conversation open and open and open to any questions for how these pieces come together.

Heather, I would just ask if there's anything else that you have that I missed or if you want to add. Please feel free.

The

master plan would would include this whole site shown here, but it would basically include the fact that that mixed use area would be, you know, something something different. And it's it's just it's needed in order to support a rezoning of that portion of the site, assuming that most of the site can remain in its existing zoning district.

Wasn't there some about three holes that may

Flat at a different meeting?

It could be. There's options to flat.

Well, there's actually flats right now. Right?

Correct. There's, like, three parcels.

Three pieces staying on the campus today. They're technically consisting three different parts.

Talk to

your advice. Three parts.

They want to be

read the Right. The Right.

The whole thing would be included.

Can save this one session. But

We'd be so Just Yep.

And we wanna be committing to the details of a land division, for example, when we go through something like the master bricks that'll that'll help inform what that future

K. That's great.

What was the next? Oh,

okay.

I'm very happy we're talking.

Alright. So next thing is the town hall or outreach. Yeah. I can cover that. I

think as we've talked about it in the last quarter, we're following up from the April town hall meeting that was what was held really in the Coliseum and the other campus improvements back in April. The idea was to step at another town hall at the very end of the year in '25. With all the different pieces going on, I think we decided, well, let's let's just because there's so much work that is being done, but it's this initial analysis of the storm water and things with the Coliseum. It makes use, like, we push it a little bit. We're gonna have enough information to share, and it it could be more valuable conversation.

So the idea here is to update with two different events, update stakeholders on the recent progress, and also kind of give people's input on some of the initial analysis being done, store water and traffic information and and all the upcoming projects. So mentioned two two events, and there was been discussion with Doctor. Anthony about potential again having one event here at. Late February, early March is kind of the timeline that we're shooting for. I think it seems like it's gonna line up a lot of other inputs.

Probably a really brief summary of a lot of these because there's a lot of topics to hit, but I think there's enough there there's ways to condense that information into a succinct presentation about the topics that are below. Obviously, kind of remind people of what they've heard in the past, a little description about what's happening with the next call, the expansion of timeline, Coliseum, stormwater, and traffic certainly be a conversation that people continue to have good, useful input on, looking on a discussion of the mixed use area, zoning. I also like to call it, obviously, here if there's other ideas people have related to potential uses, that's a great opportunity for the other stakeholders and neighborhoods to to weigh in on thoughts there and then also how is the campus itself and its relationship to the broader destination district and all the other things that are going on between what's happening on Park Street to what's happening with the with the Pass and Lakeway and how it's that all tied together would be another element to the idea here is because there is so much information to brief verification, but also breaking it down into stations so that people can have topic, cover their individual topics and gather input in that manner.

So that's kinda the

the general gist of where things are looking right now. If people have ideas or thoughts about input or suggestions, it would be great to hear that.

And just one question I had.

So if we're looking

right now at two events, they both be the same. Essentially. Okay. Because in the past when we did this, we had one that was geared toward computers in South Madison. Another one that was supposed to, geared

for numerous.

Yeah. So these are gonna be the

same geared for Fairly similar.

Suggests. We

will have

neighborhood But it's And,

also, yeah, organizational leaders. Last time the event to get the Urban League was largely focused on There's 53 different organizations that were invited, 47 of which, attended. So it was fantastic input session. There was also local neighborhood, leaders and neighborhood representatives. So certainly be putting we can

buy out to all of those

members that are.

So those both are gonna be the same.

Right. Okay. I would We we may clean things a little

bit, but but that was the idea.

But if people have any particular perspectives on that Leaders.

Okay. Great. Any questions on that?

And I did we got a couple of questions from people recently about what past events have happened. So we did just just make sure people are aware that, you know, there

has

been an awful lot of input, especially during that master planning process back in 2017. And I gotta read through this, but you can see both within. Events put in presentations to several organizations that have happened to gather organizational input and then more in this kind of post pandemic after this group kinda took a hiatus. Yeah. The redevelopment kind of implementation phase is that for the neighborhood open house, which you just mentioned at Penn Park at Penn Park, community Organizational Forum, which I just referenced in in April, the town hall here at the X Hall related to the Palisade renovation as the.

Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So just as a refresher, there

has been some outreach. So yes.

Okay. Great. Thanks for pointing that out. Okay.

Is there any other questions

by start water and traffic update.

Yeah. There's not a whole lot to update there other than we we have their initial or it's actually the the listening phase and the discover phase for both of them. We're evaluating those documents. Be begin to the design phase this year. That design phase will include their recommendations for addressing the

concerns that

were raised in both of the the initial stages. So we'll have more information for you all at future meetings. But we have a lot of good data, a lot of good analysis that I think will be improvements based on that.

That's from strain. Right?

And Strain is the lead. Right? It is pretty much the one that's kind of leading the the work on that.

R a e. Right.

And then He's working on the. Great.

This part is Also,

Friday. Friday.

Alright. That goes. Friday. I I have a question, Kevin, either in February or March, bringing some of those. Okay. Because you wouldn't wanna read all of the, you know, traffic. But what does it mean? What are the suggestions that come out of that cyst, both from the storm water data analysis and the traffic? So we kinda, like, okay. Boiling it down here. The kinda key takeaways from their initial.

Very sharp.

Can you describe did you

say they weren't completed, like, getting good for sleep sessions at all? They did One they did they did review past sessions where they Okay. There new But but There were new ones with, like, city folks. And Yeah. They always come up. Right? They all come up with a name.

Yeah. Definitely.

Well And then that's the intent also in the town hall that there will be a a station related Stormwater. Okay. Yeah.

That's right.

Bloody storm water management, the the issue.

Yeah. Forever. Right.

As long as I've been, you know, all over there. Before this was in my history too, so it's been very important to me. Okay. Any questions on that?

No? K. If not, yeah. Double comment. Don't go back.

Very much. It's like both.

Had to try a long time.

Thank you very much. I can hear it. Yeah.