Community Development Block Grant (cdbg) Commission - Regular Meeting

Hey, everybody. If we could call the, redevelopment committee, AAC redevelopment committee meeting to order. We have a quorum, call

the roll. I remembered.

Alright. Glaser?

Glaser here.

Doctor. Anthony? Erickson?

Here.

Knox? Deshant?

Here.

Westmin Chin?

Here.

Stouffer?

Here.

Christianson? Here. Hershlob? Here. Engelberger? And Davis said she would not be here. And Levin? Here.

Okay. And we have a quorum. Correct? I asked that already.

Yep.

Okay. So we're good there. Okay. So the next thing I wanna do is well, the next thing is minutes. So if we can have a motion on those, please.

So moved.

Thank you. Do we need a second? Second. Yeah. Okay. All in favor? That carries. Okay. I'll post. Okay. So the next thing I would like to do, we do have one public speaker or one speaker today. If it's okay with everybody, we could have him go first, if there's no objection to that. Okay?

No objection.

Okay. Good. Okay.

So, Steven, I can go ahead. If you want you can sit up here. Yeah. Is it better if he sits here by the bike?

Yeah. By the mic, probably.

Okay. Alright. Welcome back. Yeah. It's good

to be here.

Your second time here.

Yeah.

So

Go ahead. Alright. So control of Dane County concert venue seating over the last eleven years has been dynamic. We've seen shifts in ownership and control of existing venues and new venues created. In 2016, Frank Productions controlled less than 5% of the concert seats market share.

After acquiring and or controlling the Majestic, the Orpheum, the High Noon Saloon, and increasing their use of the Barrymore and building the Sylvie, Frank Productions today has well over a 50% market share. If it were not for the creation of new competing menu venues such as the Atwood Music Hall of the borough, the North Street Cabaret, the Cafe Coda, Frank Productions would control well over 60% of Dane County Concert seating market share. Now with their upcoming control of the Veterans Coliseum of Faith Acomplis, Frank will control somewhere between 6070% market share in Dane County, which which translates to a greater than 1,000,000 seats offered for sale per year. And why does that matter? Well, if we look at the guidance or the benchmarks from case law and guidance from the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission, when there's a greater than 50% market share, courts often treat this as monopoly power if accompanied by exclusionary conduct.

With Frank's greater than 50% market share in Dane County along with their exclusionary conduct of not allowing competing promoters access to their venues, Frank should be treated as a monopoly. In addition, Live Nation Ticketmaster has an 87% market share nationally and has a controlling interest in Frank Productions Company. A federal jury has officially found it operates as an illegal monopoly. Do I personally believe that Frank Productions is an evil entity? I do not.

I've had great experiences interacting with their staff. They're nice people. Organizational attitude is a top down phenomenon, so I believe there's a nugget of goodness at Frank that's reflected by their staff. We recognize Frank Productions as ostensibly operates with autonomy for now and has a decades long relationship with the county. And this relationship created a certain level of trust for the county.

However, it must be emphasized that a monopoly power cannot be trusted. With Frank controlling over 50% of the market share and engaging in an exclusionary conduct, arguably, Frank in the Dane County market should be regarded as a monopoly, and a monopoly is power. And power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. If there was a technology or feature that was known to harm folks attending events at the redeveloped coliseum, would the county disregard this defect? I hope not.

The county has a responsibility to protect the citizens from harm and not enable the certain harm a defect can cause. Monopolies cause harm. The Coliseum project will cement Frank's monopoly and will harm the citizens of Dane County. Measures must be taken to mitigate the hazards and reduce the harm. In other words, the county has an obligation to rein in Frank's monopoly power.

So as much as we'd like to trust Frank productions, simple trust does not protect Dane County from its monopoly. Borrowing from the Russian proverb, trust but verify, my suggestion is trust but codify. Build into the terms of the Colosseum agreement protections, guardrails, and limitations. These must be essential elements of the negotiations and, ultimately, the agreement. The essential elements of the agreement should include prohibiting Frank from acquiring, controlling, or creating new venues in Dane County unless their market share combined with their affiliates is below 50% as determined by an agreed upon accounting firm or adjudicator.

It could be structured as a noncompete cost. There should also be the allowance of competing promoters to use the coliseum for events, and these terms should apply to all successors in a science. Now these two structural restraints, if implemented, would make all other remedies like fee caps, etcetera, unnecessary. At the town hall and with some and with some of the reporting I've seen, one gets the impression that there isn't much opposition to the project. And let me be clear.

I'm not opposed to the project. I just wanna see it done right. My experience is that newspapers are reluctant to express any view that harshly critiques a major advertiser. Frank productions is a reliable significant source of advertising revenue for local publications. And the adage, don't bite the hand that feeds you applies.

And since these issues and concerns are not presented to the public, only those that are pay attention and digging are understanding what may be at stake here. Yet even for those like me that are paying attention, the absence of transparency keeps the public in the dark, unable to provide input. We don't know what terms might be under negotiation that are not in the public interest, and, therefore, we are silenced, refrained from providing input. To remedy this, I propose either this committee provide a list of issues under negotiation and or publish the agreement at least thirty days prior to signing to allow for public review. It's the politicians and the bureaucrats that allowed us to get to the place where we can't afford to fix what's been broken by negligence.

By 2016, the Coliseum had suffered from at least fifteen years of deferred maintenance and now at least twenty five years of deferred maintenance. This negligence has created a situation where Frank Productions will now swoop down and rescue the county from a bad situation of its own making. Who doesn't like to be rescued in from a bad situation? The county should approach this deal with the objective being an agreement that protects the interest of the consumers and not the interest and the legacies of the politicians and the bureaucrats. Thank you.

Okay. Thank

you. Any questions for Steve?

I have copies of of this paper, and it's also been submitted as a PDF.

Okay. You emailed us then. Yeah. It's all Lauren. Lauren. Yeah. I

have did. Okay. Yeah.

But I have hard copies if anybody wants one.

Okay. Just leave them with Lauren. Okay. That'll be fine. So no questions received. Okay.

Great. Thank you. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So with that, we'll go back to the order. And we're today we don't have any action items or presentations, so we'll go right to reports to the committee. And the first one will be me. So a couple things I wanted just to mention. So we had our election a week ago a week ago. No. Yeah.

A week ago Tuesday, two weeks ago. And supervisor Glaser and Engelberger and chair Miles and myself were reelected. So then the three supervisors on this committee will have to be reappointed. So that's going to be Lauren, that's up to chair Miles. Correct?

Whoever's elected chair. Yep.

Or who I'm sorry. Whoever's going to be chair. So the other part in this is that the county board has its organizational meeting tomorrow evening. So at that meeting, we'll elect officers, which include chair first vice chair, second vice chair. The other update with that is in the past, it's been county board would be up for election one spring. Next spring, least city council. That's changed so that half the city council is each spring, if I have that correct. So Isadore was not running again. Noah Lieberman won. So Noah Lieberman will be sworn in tomorrow.

And then I think Lauren, help me out here. I think that he's the alder's automatically on this committee. Right?

Oh, okay. So We're

not the elder that represents the area.

Yeah. So that means that Noah will be, on this committee. So I look forward to working with him, and Isidore isn't here, I gather. So so, yeah, those are the changes that are, you know, affecting us. The other thing that I was gonna mention and going back to the last meeting, thanks for your flexibility with our lovely spring weather, I guess you could call it.

So I went ahead and decided to cancel based on I don't know. It just seemed like it was hard to get here. But one thing I was gonna mention at that meeting was, the previous Friday, I think, was Canucopia and Jerry's travel trailer, you know, event and Bikerama. So those are, I think, couple of my favorite events. So I was here from at least around 03:30 or something like that till eight, and I thought it was just great events great events that we have here.

I can't say enough about that. Okay. So then we're going to have, we have a presentation, and I'm doing slides where Slides three through eight. Okay. So that's one, I assume. Right? Are you doing this? No. That's all of you.

It's all me.

Okay. Great. Too bad for you guys. Okay. So we did have both of the listening sessions for the town halls, and, I mean, you can read all of this. I'm just very happy that we had them and that we had two of them. As you're probably aware, we had the first one was over at the, the hub, which is a really cool building and in, you know, South Madison, basically. And then we had the other one here. And I think the second one was, better or had more attendance, and I think that's you know, it could be because the account executive was at at that one. But, again, they are both great.

Great to have both of them. The numbers at the first one were maybe a little less, And then there was also, like, a lot of staff people there, I would call them. But we did have, I think, a nice number of neighbors, you know, people who have been aware of this, people who have been, you know, you know, wanting to participate in what's happening here. And in particular, we had, string folks were here to be able to talk about the issues of stormwater management and, you know, the roadway on or here, the ring road and access, really access to the facility from a pedestrian biking standpoint. And so the reason we have these is because we learned something historically.

So, we had storm water runoff has been an issue for the immediate neighborhood here. And, you know, I learned a lot of things historically, what's been done on-site. I mean, if you double the size of of a parking lot, you're gonna have more stormwater runoff. So that's something that's happened here in the past in addition to some other things. And just about drainage, those exciting things, but there's some piping and whatnot that goes over to Winger Creek, which I wanna learn more about.

The other thing let's see. There was a couple other things, but that was a Jamie just hearing from folks who have been around here. And the other thing I learned too was I've been saying that this whole area was Town Of Babson, you know, the whole area, and that's not exactly correct. I mean, it's it was very spliced up, which makes it confusing. And so there are parts of the neighborhood right over here, and then the the whole issue with, the the park here, that was actually City Of Madison.

So it's not as broad as, like, Town Of Madison everywhere. So that was something that was pointed out to me by a long term resident. So I thought that that was just very interesting and, you know, led to some things too about what is that park gonna be, how can we accommodate that. I think it's an asset to have those features within, you know, on the grounds that then the neighborhoods can use. So that was something that we talked a lot about or I talked a lot about or heard a lot about. So, okay. So this is just summarizing the two again. Was that the go back to the other one. Who's running this? You are. Oh, you are. No. You can do it. It's

okay. I know.

So the two again was the black business or I'm sorry. The urban league facility, the business hub. And then the other one was here, and you can see the dates. And then, you know, 2055, I think we had a good turnout. And the first one was targeted to community organization leadership and then people who are on the South Side, generally speaking.

And then the Alive Energy Center one was nearby neighborhoods, general public, and and the campus. So, guess you guys arrived on a bus or something together. Anyway, again, mass transit. So alright. What's the next Before I go Do I know how to work this? I do. Little. Maybe I don't. Here.

Yeah. That's that's

Because today. So I wanna be on this one. Right? So these are just some comments. I mean, we had total we've been totally 75 people registered. I think people did like the presentations. I thought all the presentations were excellent. All the expertise, I think, specifically the strength folks, it's great to have them because if you wanna really get in the weeds, like sometimes I do, specifically stormwater, it's great to have those folks around. But I thought what Kevin presented and what the county executive presented were, like, excellent outreach to the community. I think that by and large, there was a lot of support and enthusiasm for the project.

We have some concerns or that have come up. You heard them today. But I think everyone recognizes the value in proceeding, not just with the Coliseum, but overall, the site, you know, in general. And, also, I think everybody really recognizes the potential for what's here. So okay. You guys can read that, but that's pretty much what was said. Yes.

Just a quick question. Third bullet. Attendees expressed strong overall support from moving the Alliant Energy Center master plan forward. How was that presented in terms of, like, different phases or just like a general, hey. Here's what we're thinking about in general.

How did you present that? Good phases.

Yeah. We went through all the phases, and there was there were stations set up in the lobby where people could get specific information about the specific phases. But I think overall, in in general, the entire path that we're taking with the campus was seen as very desirable, creating this 365 a year activated campus was seen by both residents and nonresidents, so the neighbors and nonneighbors as as a positive. And I'll just one other thing

I wanted is to point

that over the last year then, these were we have done seven community outreach events. We did one last April with the general public. We did a committee of the whole last June. We did two town halls, the community listening phase. We did another community of the whole, and then we did a closed session with the county board in April. So the re the outreach that we have done with the community has been very significant, and even our our partners at CA ICON have commented that this is the most outreach they've seen of any project they've been involved with.

That's what I wanna hear. But I've done some informally, but then Kevin filled in for me. So, specifically, the Greenbush neighborhood, we went to their meeting, they were they I went to them once and presented at that stage. They had a ton of questions. I said, I'll come back. I'll bring an expert, you know, like Kevin or somebody. And I ended up having another meeting, so Kevin covered for me for that. So there's some others in there too, and let alone the informal play the informal outreach. I mean, babies hit a lot. I'm sorry. Bay So Tom and I did a presentation at Bay Creek. Creek, and I've talked to other folks individually. So so that's a good segue. And then what's the next slide? Is that good?

There was a couple of examples that Okay. That I would participants

submitted afterwards.

Can you go back one? This is first okay. Sorry. Go forward. Go back to so the We didn't rehearse this part clearly.

So

these, if not all of these, most of them were submitted by a nearby resident, a resident of Bay Creek, Stanley Jackson. And he's been he would before COVID and this committee was existed, he was, I think, more active with it, but he's still stayed up to date. And he's one of these, like, informal leaders in the neighborhood, group, and very connected to people. The one in the upper right hand corner there, right to the left is supervisor Glaser. That is, like, currently the way the access is, I think, on Bram Street. Right. He was just trying to draw a contrast to and, you know, what it could be. Then below there, I think, is

The bike path.

Correct. Okay. Then I think the one below that is is somewhere else, and all these others are just examples, things that he thought to make it, like, wow. You're really at a place now. So, you know, I think all those are pretty cool. I think it fits within our what do we work with you guys on? Experience. Experience aspect of it. And, again, those things in the bottom left hand corner, lower them down, then you can put vehicles in, but otherwise, a pedestrian access. Then can you go to the next one, please?

So this is one that I was really excited about. So these are, again, also from Stanley. And, initially, when I've talked about, let's see. My main things have been stormwater planning, storm water runoff planning, then access to here, you know, via bikes, pedestrian, making them more or and having an actual entrance. The third thing I've talked about are the parking lots.

What can we do with the parking lots? So, yes, in regard to storm water runoff, but just to make them feel like it's not another big acres and acres of asphalt. So that's what these three on the right are, I think, really interesting examples of what you could do with a parking lot to make it more interesting, have more trees, etcetera, etcetera, and then hopefully not reducing the number too much. I mean, that's just something I'd like to see. The two to the left of that are obviously bike paths, kinda cool with the wood poles below.

I also thought that was interesting from the city standpoint. I think it's something that we've run into is that we've got lots of people on bikes and then lots of people with strollers and people running or walking or jogging and walking. So I thought that was an interesting depiction of which lane is which there. And then, the bottom left hand corner, that kinda looks like arrowheads to me, but that's obviously a sculpture, you know, garden or sculpture area. And then I can't I have to mention the final one, the upper left hand corner.

That those sculptures are called updraft, and those are in my immediate neighborhood. And there's the bike path, and in the distance there, it doesn't show, but that's the Brittingham Park Park Shelter. And if you come back this way a little bit more, you have the community gardens, and that sculpture project was placed there around 2015 or 2016. And part of that sculpture is a fence that goes around the community garden and benches, and they all match. And that's called updraft. So, anyway, Stanley included that, and I was like, yes. Thanks for including that. That's a great addition. Sure is the door. Welcome. Welcome. Thanks.

Just the earliest slide about feedback, getting back. And so some of the feedback that I've been hearing particularly from, we have our South Metropolitan Planning Council meetings. Oh, you've saying people from Capitol View Yes. The adjacent neighborhood and Abrams Edition, where I which is right on the other side of the railroad tracks. So I know I know Capital View is definitely concerned about the storm water management. That's a big key for

Yeah.

For that neighborhood.

That's why I keep talking about it.

And And then I a couple of people have talked about access to the campus and how it blends in, in particularly walkability. Not I mean, we know the city's gung ho on the Viking piece, but some people just wanna know, will you be able to walk into the campus of someone was talking to me about this. I think it's what's the road? The dirt road right off of Rush Street? Think it's Branch.

Right.

Branch. We got the one down here. Yeah. Point.

Right. That's what that one picture.

And and they were saying they wish that that was redeveloped in such

a beautiful here, the upper right hand corner.

Yeah. A little walking to the campus.

You

know? Exactly. Yeah.

Not necessarily have to park, you know, but and still have assets. So those are some things that Okay. We hear a lot about. Yes.

Yeah. And one of these could be what I mean when I saw these, the arches and whatnot, I thought of our arch that go saw Randall Avenue going to the stadium. So, anyway, I just wanted to include these. He had sent these to me, and I told him it

would be included, and then we put it

in the presentation. Thank you. So far slide.

Pardon? Oh, winter. Oh, yeah. I forgot about winter. Yeah. Well,

these are all really great. I get more ideas that we could do. I mean, obviously, the Edgewater is up there in the upper right hand corner. But, you know, if we could do something like this as well.

And this was feedback we we received at both town halls that they liked some of the concepts, but they also offered that we probably should have something that we could do in the wintertime. There's a and there's some great examples around the country of people that do different things with ice skating and ribbons and that kind thing. So I think there's some opportunities out here for that. Great. Okay.

And then what's the next slide?

Okay.

So I can just touch on these real quick because I so think there was a there's a lot of general comments, then we tried to take each station area and just understand specifics, and these are summarized. I won't read every bullet because I I know we have a lot to cover today. But on the stormwater side, as it's been mentioned mentioned, concern on the West side of the campus, and also thinking about how Woodburn Park gets integrated, which future pond expansion and development and make sure that that still stays as a screening area on the West side of the park. There was some specifics related infrastructure and clog culverts and and panel washing stations that were mentioned and does do we handle the storm water? So all these things are taken into account as we look to the future.

Oh, sorry. A little more reactive than I thought Alright. As it jumps I'm gonna have to rely rely on you. So traffic circulation was the the next against station where we had representatives from GRAVE who was doing the traffic analysis right now. And, overall, we're about the opportunity that of having the Ring Road that would accommodate and get more people off of the local streets more quicker quickly by and then also moving the pay gates and things forward so we don't queue up onto BeltLine, Rimrock, John Nolan as much and get people to their stalls as quickly as possible.

The comment that was made earlier is something that we are working, and we're gonna be meeting with the city staff in a couple of weeks. And how does that whole area on the west side of the campus where Graham Street enters and the Olin Parkway connects and the inter all those things do not work well together, and, obviously, that's been quite well documented, that that needs to be part of the more detailed design. Bike bike and ped throughout all of the conversations, whether it's transportation or

other,

improving the access and facilities on the campus, but access to it from multiple directions. Wayfinding, better multimodal options are definitely were were heard during the conversation. Next. XHALL people were just basically positive about the expansion. I know there was concern about the loading ramp clearances from from, making sure that we have enough room there.

Wanted to understand more about phasing and and bike and ped, again, access to this facility, so that it doesn't mandate that everybody within, you know, a biking distance has to drive because it just is not conducive today. Mixed use areas, again, people wanted to make sure that it was authentic, local experiences, not just kind of in the generic entertainment district and make sure that we have enough parking within that area to hold the activities that happen there without significantly negatively impacting the rest of the campus. Again, bikes once again. Think they're so and then there was one station on kinda how does the campus fit into the longer or the the wider destination district area, and how do we make sure those connections happen. And I think you can see the comments, but people want to be able to connect through and to the campus even if there isn't events going on.

John Nolan being a challenge for people to get across, described as a nightmare by one of the participants. And also one that I thought was interesting that we is people really have a desire to have more of a North South connection through here. We're talking about these, and there's connections to the North, but how do people move North South? I thought that was a good comment, and we'll

be talking

with the city staff next in a couple weeks on that issue as well. So quick summaries of the specific stations just so you because it's important that I think everybody hear hear what what came out of those dialogues. So that was kind of a summary. There'll be all the comments, every one of them is posted on the website so you can go through and look at what the collective in input that we received.

Okay. That's all I have.

Okay. Great. And then the next thing I hit was the I guess we covered the listening session as well, but the committee the whole session, so that was something that Kevin mentioned. We had a committee the whole for the county board. Well, actually, it was no. We had a committee the whole where you get presentation. NCAA. Right. Right. So that was really helpful, and I think that you got a we got a lot of really good questions from supervisors.

This will have to go to the county board. We then had a joint meeting of personal finance at public works and transportation, and that was a actually closed meeting that all supervisors could attempt. And I think that was also very, very beneficial. So I don't know if you want to say anything more about the committee of the whole. Committee of the whole is the informational meeting of the county board. So it's not a county board meeting, but it's like a county board meeting, but it's on one topic. So we treat it like a meeting. And then the point is we usually have a presentation, and then supervisors can ask questions, and that's an open environment. So anybody can attest. Kevin gave a presentation, which I thought was great. Well, me and Brian

from CAA That's right. But, yeah, I think they both were were, you know, under the committee, the whole. I think everybody was there. I think we had about 20 people at the closed session, and we answered we gave between presenting and answering questions, we were about two hours at the committee of the whole and three hours at the closed session. So I think we were able to answer every supervisor's question. We were able to provide a lot of details on the project, and and I think we answered everybody's question. I hope we did.

I think the supervisors really like hearing from Briah

from Yes. Yeah. Heard enough from me, I guess.

Well, they hear you all the time, which they like to. But, you know, Brian works on this stuff nationwide all the time, whatever. So I think a lot of supervisors were happy to have him there, and I think we got a lot of really good questions, and we got a lot of really good information. So, Chair Miles, since you're here, do you wanna comment on either of those?

Yeah. No. Both were really important for supervisors to both be heard and to listen and learn. I thought it was important to have the community as a whole to be very transparent as much as we could be on proposal and any concerns and issues that supervisors had. And so there are a number of questions raised at the committee of the whole that that Brian and Kevin couldn't respond to because they're related to negotiations and our positions the county's position.

And, you know, so, obviously, that couldn't be discussed in in open session. So so I asked the personnel and finance and and public works transportation committee to hold a closed session meeting or a joint meeting at which we would post that there's possibility of a closed session. I did that because I want to be sure that we had a quorum. It was easier to make a quorum of two committees than maybe the entire board. But invited the entire board, and we did have 20 members attend.

We had several that were out of town that would have otherwise attended. But I think it was really productive for supervisors to, you know, raise those questions that couldn't be answered in an open session. I think my sense is that we all developed a stronger sense of confidence in in Brian and the and the how he's approaching the negotiations, learning from him some of the data and things that he is looking at, what what is possible and and what is not possible or reasonable to look for in terms of an agreement. So and I really appreciate Ryan, Kevin, and and the accounting executive for slowing negotiations down so that's so there could be engagement with county board members in this way. Because I think without it, it would have been a much, you know, tougher I think it would would have been much more questionable what would happen once presented with a contract when there's no more room for this give and take.

So I really appreciate the county executive creating that opportunity for the board. Thank you.

Great.

Yeah. The once I started learning more about it, but the whole process and couldn't you know, it was basically, you know, under closed session. I asked Patrick if we could do expand that to more supervisors. I thought it'd be really convincing and helpful, so I think that it was. So, alright. Anything any questions on any of that, anybody?

Okay. If not, Kevin, why don't you go ahead

and start?

So I'll be right back.

I've got a few things, I wanna talk about. Our review of our FY twenty five financial performance, the work calendar for this year, and I'm sure the information you all are excited to hear about is the review of the RFI results and then an update on the Coliseum. So I'm gonna run through your finances a little quicker than I wanted because we have a few more things we wanna talk about. But I will end by just saying we had a fantastic FY '25. We ended the year $350,000 better than 2024, a 40 improvement.

We increased our revenue by 11%, which resulted in roughly $1,000,000 more in revenue year over year. So that was a significant improvement. Obviously, that revenue came from primarily three sources: rent, equipment rental, and concessions. We did a much better job in 2025 of identifying what our customers were using and billing them for that appropriately, which helped us, obviously, generate revenue. New Holland Pavilions, Arena, and Ex exhibition Hall all turned profits on the campus.

Colosseum, parking lots, Will Wiley continue to to not, but it was good to see Pavilions Pavilions in 2024 actually ended the year in the red. So being able to turn that around last year was a good sign for us. Here's a little trend from our our net operating loss. I wish it was income, but it we do end the year, have ended the year, since the pandemic in the in the black or the red. But you can see significant improvement in that trend line.

So in 2022, we lost $1,600,000 on campus. This year, we were able to knock that down to $679,000. Our ultimate goal is to eventually turn this building or turn the campus back to generating a profit. So we are on the right path. We have a little more work to do, but we are making headway in that, and we expect we hope that 2027, we will be able to present a budget that was breakeven.

We might be looking at 2028 now, but we are on the right path and making a lot of good progress. By building then, we look at the trend line for the buildings. You can see the pavilions went from significant losses in 2020, 2022, 2023 to profits last couple of years. The arena building continues to generate some revenue. Coliseum continues to lose money.

And, really, the Coliseum, one of the oddities about that building is you want it obviously to be attracting people, Right? Having people go through there. But, unfortunately, the way that building is set up, you reduce your loss by not having as many events. So you see that as we as our event load has reduced over there, our losses have have reduced as well. And that's not something you wanna see. Right? You wanna see more people going through there and it's actually generating a profit. One of the oddities about the way our financial systems are set up, the conference center, which used to be the forum. And when we built this exhibition hall, we never switched those out. Right?

So the conference center is the meeting rooms as part of this building and not and not the revenue and expenses are not are separate from the exhibition hall. So you have two line items up there, the conference center and exhibition hall. Conference center, just because of the nature of it, it's more of the meetings. It's the meeting space. It doesn't have a lot of exhibit revenue in it.

So it tends to lose money where the exhibition hall continues to to generate a significant amount of prep profit. We're trying to change that when the conference center and the exhibition hall are combined, so it gives us a better accurate view of what this building is actually doing. Outdoor would be any outdoor space that we rent for different events in the parking lots. We do some events in the parking lots and it's I have an asterisk there just so everybody recognizes that even though we're showing that the parking lots, we lose $400,000 on the parking lot, all the revenue from parking is tied to the event that it is generated from. So that then goes with the building that that event happens in.

So we technically, we generate over a million dollars in parking revenue a year. The events that we host in the parking lot, though, don't typically generate revenue. The expenses to operate the parking lots are still in the parking lot now with the revenue that's in the in the event for sale. So a little miss misleading a little bit there. Our total revenue then for over the the last four years, again, you could see significant improvements there.

Next year, we hope to be over a million dollar or $11,000,000 in total revenue, and we are obviously on the right path recovering from the pandemic. Rent, which is one of our biggest indicators of how we are doing. This obviously ties to the number of events we're doing around the campus. You can see a significant improvement there. We typically raise rent every other year, and so there will be a little bump in 2026 from that aspect of it.

But generally, this is a good indicator of how we're doing as far as being able to attract events to the campus. Here are some trend lines for some of some of the other event revenue options. So or opportunities. So you can see parking continues to increase, and we're just under $1,200,000 in parking revenue in 2025. Concessions, which is another big indicator.

The dip from 2023 to 2024 was a decision was made to provide the concessionaire to reduce the percentage that we take from the concessionaire because of the impact that the pandemic had on that their operations. So you typically wouldn't see a a dip like that if your rent and every other indicator was going up. You wouldn't expect your food and beverage to go down. But the reason it went down is because there was a renegotiation, and the percentages that were paid to the county from the food vendor. And then the event revenue, this is all the other things that we generate off the event.

So people who rent tables and chairs, Internet service, electrical, anything associated with the event. And you can see a significant improvement from 2024 to 2025. And that was really just an opportunity for us to kinda level set, identify that what we were what we were charging our customers, making sure that what they were using is actually what they were being billed for, and making sure that our rates were in line with our competitors. And so you see a significant almost a million dollar improvement right there or over a million dollar improvement right there just in total event revenue across campus. Those are the kind of things we need to do to get us out of the red and continue our goal to be off the county general purpose revenue moving forward.

Our top 10 expense items, and this probably isn't to surprise anybody in here, but salaries and wages would be our top. Limited term employees would be our our number two, and limited term employees would that those are what county the county call would typically be referred to as part time employees, but I learned this morning that we shouldn't call them part time employees. We should call them limited term employees. Right, Caroline? Mhmm.

Those are ushers, ticket takers, people that work on a limited basis. They can only work no more than twelve hundred hours a year. They are really event oriented help, and and we rely on them heavily because of the different types of work that they do. Health insurance then would be the third, building maintenance, electricity, electricity demand over time, plumbing, parking services, and social security parking services. Our outside personnel, we help to manage traffic as far as people moving about the campus and then software we use to sell and collect parking fees.

You can see most of the expenses of our top 10 expenses are related to personnel, which is pretty standard in our industry. And we look at different types of events we host and what is our profit margin by the different type of event. And you can see that the consumer show, which is the second one, we typically generate about a 65% profit margin on that. And and the reason for that is those events typically generate revenue across all of our revenue spectrum. Spectrum.

So we're generating a lot of parking revenue. We're generating a lot of food and beverage revenue. We're generating a lot of exhibitor services revenue. People that have booths and they need power or tables or chairs, all those things, we generate a lot of revenue from them. And then they were also not as heavy labor intensive as some of the other event types we do.

So we don't need a lot of labor on the event day to manage that event as opposed to if we have a a rodeo in the Colosseum where we might have 80 part time employees. The boat show, we might have 10. And so significant opportunity there for us there. Again, then testing is kind of the same thing. We we set that, and there's not a lot of labor involved in managing that.

And so you can kinda see the ones that require a lot of labor and a lot of personnel to manage the events, we obviously don't generate as much on. And the ones that don't, we our profit margin is a little higher. Then gross revenue by event type. I mean, you can see again the consumer show is the highest, and that's because of all the reasons I mentioned before. We we generate revenue on all the different revenue opportunities there.

And so and we do a lot of those type of shows. So the Quilt Show, the home and garden show, the fishing expo, Chuck's favorite, the new copia, camping show, all those things. A lot of opportunities for us to generate revenue, and we do a lot of those types of events. And then the ag events, of course, our two biggest customers, we count in that category. So World Dairy Expo and Midwest Horse Fear are in in there.

And then sports, we do a lot of not only with the love, you know, team, but we do a lot with the help of Destination Madison and the Madison Sports Commission, getting a lot more youth sports in not only in Coliseum, but also in the Exhibition Hall. So that's a nice trend. They those folks, again, we we there's opportunities for us to make money on parking for that. Not as great food and beverage wise because they tend to go back to the hotels when they have a little downtime and eat, but still great opportunities for us to make some money. And then attendance by year by by broken down by event type.

Again, ag leads the way with the community. We do a lot of community events, and and the big one there is Broadfest. It's considered a community event, and the 100,000 people that come to that really skews that category significantly. But, again, you can see a significant increase in the amount of attendance, people that came to the campus year over year, and and we intend to see that continue next year as well. Well, that's on the finances. I don't know if anybody had any questions.

Just one on your the concert category. Does that mean when you had comedians here? No. There any concerts this last

year?

There hasn't been any musical concerts, stand alone music concerts. We do the Bulls, Bands and Barrels where there's a musical component to it, but there hasn't been a musical concert here, in three or four years.

Okay. 2022.

2022. Okay. But I just wanna that I've missed something. Yeah.

Would community include, like, political events, rallies, those kinds of things?

Oh, yeah. Yeah. Okay. That's in

there. Yep.

Any other questions? Alright. We'll move on to the six month calendar, and I'll have Rob come up and.

So I know we only meet once a month, but I just wanted to it felt like the right time to talk about just keep everybody in check with all the moving parts because between Kevin's staff and the consulting teams, there is an awful lot going on right now. So as we know, if you look at the top band, you know, coliseum proposals and negotiations going on right now with the expectation that if things continue to advance, that that would be then going to the county board this summer, and then that would if if all things move forward and and there was an agreement that reached then design and additional agreements moving forward, throughout the course of the rest of the year. On the XOL, the big pieces are the design. I know you saw that back in earlier in the year, kind of the 90%. They are now submitting to the city for the city review of the architecture and site plans.

Need urban design and plan commission approval for that so that Strang is moving that forward currently, and that'll be going on, as you could see, through into the early fall. Mixed use redevelopment, we're going to hear just in a minute on the RFI responses, the expectation for the mixed use areas that we will be submitting a rezoning for those particular areas of the campus in in the summer that also mandates that we submit and have an adopted master plan with the city. So we're condensing right now, taking the existing master plan, condensing it down. They wanted to maybe 10 to 20 pages as well as including the more up to date information that we have related to storm water, traffic, and kind of sequencing of all the different projects so they kinda see what's coming. So that is being pretty we're working on that right now with the other players who are providing information.

So that'll be going on this this summer with the ex continued expectation that that zoning and approval of the master plan would happen about the same time, kinda September, October. And and then the release of the RFP for those sites would happen still as as suggested in the past later this year, probably in in the fourth quarter. So that's the expectation there. The master plan condensed version will come to this body. We are planning for next month in May if it all lines up appropriately, and then it would go on to review with the county board as well.

Storm storm water and traffic, again, moving right now. They're taking all those preliminary concepts that they addressed at the last time we meet met, and now they're moving into the next phase of design and analysis of those areas with the expectation at the end of the year. Those plans would be in in good shape. And our estimation is that we probably because we've had front loaded the town hall meetings, probably a a newsletter, kind of our annual communication will happen sometime in the early early fall as well. So those are kinda just kinda hitting on all the things that are happening at once.

So it's a it's while we talk about each one of these occasionally, just I think it's important to know just how much work is going on in the background right now, and a lot of teams doing a lot to bring the plans and specifics to the table. Any questions on timing or submittals? And and we'll keep you updated with these because they will you know, things are going outside of this body to other city approval bodies, and we wanna make sure that everybody is aware of when things happen.

Yeah. And one one no.

I was gonna say one thing that went to an outside body was the demolition of the Farris Center that was approved in March, I believe, through the through the city committee, and so that project is moving. We plan to take that building down sometime this summer.

Still slightly. And, Robert, I

would just add under the public outreach communication, continue to update the website, you know, adding, like, all the, you know, stuff like this from our our meetings here because neighbors do go to that.

Right. No. That's great.

And Yeah. So I would just it looks like we're not doing all you know, one newsletter, but in fact, we continually update that.

Right. And that's a good thank you for mentioning that because the county was just in the process of updating the different websites that the county has, and that happened, I believe, most last week and a little bit the week before. So there was a little bit of delay in getting some things posted, but I think we're all up to speed now, and it'll continue to make

And the RFP responses on that website as well as the FAQs for the Coliseum. Good. Okay. Yeah. More stuff that's just out there, you

can point people to it. Correct. Yes.

I I have a question maybe more for Kevin or the group. Just when you look at the exhibition hall and there's the investigate funding source options, which is at the bottom. It's it's been a while since we maybe talked about this, and there's I totally understand. It's maybe hard to comment directly, but there are no funds that we have for building this facility today. Correct? It is all hypothetical in the sense that we're gonna try to get money from the state, but it's not like there is money set aside for construction. Is there at this point? No. Okay. No.

So is that and you might not be able to comment. Is that entering the end at all to the negotiations with the Coliseum in terms of, like, is some of that potential funding that would be earmarked to service debt for the Exhibition Hall? Is that something that's being talked about at all?

Or I mean, it's all it all flows together. Right? I mean, one of the reasons doing the p three on the Coliseum was to free up the cast that would need to go into it to free that up for other projects. You know, some of the funding sources we are identifying is the mixed use revenue from that. We have submitted a couple of grant requests through

The state building.

Federal. And think we we set a request through senator Baldwin's office and Pokan's office. We're, you know, we're looking at submitting some grant requests. We're pulling the the data together to put some grant requests through in September through the state. And so we are identifying potential sources and trying to we we recognize that the county will pay will likely pay a a fair share of the project, and we are trying to minimize that as much as possible.

Sure. So as as this committee would be involved in that, is that on our future agenda that we're gonna be talking about? Is this something I'm we're just looking at the plan. It just says investigate funding source option. Was just curious, is this anything we're gonna be involved with or is this sort

of not a meeting at 03:00 today. Okay. Great. So we can discuss about maybe having it as an agenda item at the next meeting.

Or or just an update just to, you know, is it

Or maybe because whenever I talk to a suite official, I immediately not bring this up, but I think the kind sex office had a lobbyist, but now she's in a different role. But the kind sex office, I think, has been working on that formally.

Mhmm.

But whenever I talk to a representative or a state senator or whatever, I bring this up. It's in my district. The state has a surplus. This would be a Mhmm. Valuable project from the state to invest.

Yeah. And as you can see by the balance sheet, the events are the biggest moneymaker profitability wise just as a raw measure in

terms of

this facility. So if we can increase that Yep. Yeah.

We did during dairy expo, we brought what do we have? Like, six or seven state reps out that we toured around and gave them an update. That's right. We also haven't updated our economic impact models in decades, I think. And so we are currently working with UW Whitewater, who has a great great program there where they can identify economic impact for events. So we have engaged them, and Aurora has done the same thing with them for World Dairy Expo. So we hope to to be able to quantify what everybody knows, you know, how how what the impact of this place is,

but being able to show people that, yeah, it's it's all of the 80,000,000 and more. So on that, will they be able to show the economic impact not only for the city, so for the county, the region, and the state?

I I can't remember if they can show the state.

They will show the region. I keep asking that. I asked Ali that in the past too. Yeah. Because I think that would be really effective if we can show that.

It is really exciting to see the RFP release listed on here and having the RFI change into the RFP. Do you have a thought on when you expect those responses back? And I only ask because looking at the lineup a bit on top for the Coliseum RFP, so you're going to be negotiating and doing all the approvals there. Is there how will those two at least communicate with each other, make sure that there's not anything that would be in conflict in the RFP responses that jive with everything that you're trying to do with the work at the Coliseum?

That's a great question. And, you know, I think that well, we wanna we wanna release the RP after we have the, obviously, the contract approved for the Colosseum. And then as we talk about the results of the RFI, one of the comments that came back from a lot of developers was to stage and phase the mixed use development so as to to not negatively impact not only what's gonna be going on with the Colosseum, but hopefully what's going on with the Exhibition Hall and and everything else on the campus. So we wanna make sure that there's some thought behind what goes first. And and one of the things that the developers indicated, and I don't wanna steal Sonya's thunder, but that, you know, they felt like the Olin Avenue site probably would be the makes the most logic to activate that first because it is it's on the campus, but it's further away from and it probably have the least amount of impact on our operations.

So so it was there is some thought, and we intend to once we get some more clarity as we move forward with Frank's on what their timeline is for constructing and how that footprint is going to impact campus, I think that will help help us as we plan the rest of the campus as well.

Thank you.

Other questions? Then how are we doing for time?

Now time is the destination of strict meeting.

Great. Okay. Yeah.

Okay.

Well, I'll bring Sonia on for me,

and I'll

turn it over to her,

but I didn't I didn't wanna say, you know, we did get again, it's kind of with the same with the Coliseum. A lot of interest. You know, it wasn't a record project views on the county's open gov site, but five fifteen project views for an RFI is pretty substantial. We got seven submissions. And the interesting thing is that, you know, we have three from Madison, one from West Allis, so four from Wisconsin, and three from outside of Wisconsin.

One from Indy, one from Chicago, and one from New Jersey. So good interest on the project, and what we're handing out are the actual attachments that the that the developers responded. One of the commitments we made, you know, if you you can go to the the personnel or the purchasing website and find this, but you'll notice that the different respondents are not identified on here, and that was a commitment we made. If anything we handed out as a committee, we would not identify them with a response. So I'll turn it over to Sonya now. Sounds good.

Just a few slides to summarize responses to each of the questions. We do have a slide for each number one through seven, and this first one here is a little bit of a combined summary with just the key takeaways from responses to all of the questions combined. Kevin, feel free to add any comments on any of these specifically as we go through. But we heard very strongly from all seven of the responders that high density multifamily is essential to include in the RFP for the mixed use sites moving forward. That was unanimous amongst all of the responders.

In addition, entertainment, restaurants, and public spaces or things that would activate the space and support that housing were key components as well. To the question that was just asked, there was some thought and response related to how this relates to the Colosseum, noting that it's critical to have that activated and have that be successful in order for the mixed use areas to also succeed. Some comments on phasing, both related to the Coliseum and to the Olin Avenue site. As Kevin mentioned, potentially that phasing sequence could go first if the developers wanted to propose that. I think one individual responder also mentioned that it was important for phasing sequence to lead potentially with market rate housing, and that would be a good site to test that in terms of the overall residential.

And that's related to the last comment there on a overall phased approach. So going through each of these, I'll just hit the highlights. Question one asked about the uses that are most important to drive activation and vibrancy, whereas the next question that you'll see is more about market feasibility. So this one was focused more on how do we make the uses work well together, not simply just what is most market feasible. And this was a ranking question.

So five responders selected multifamily housing as the number one most important to drive that activation and vibrancy. And people did also identify the indoor sports facility. And you'll see on the next slide that that wasn't as highly ranked for market feasibility, but seeing that as potentially important to drive activation and vibrancy. And then people selecting their second rank included some of those active commercial uses, restaurants, and entertainment oriented commercial, I suppose, public gathering spaces. Third rank, just kind of all of those items in different individual selection order.

Question number two here, market feasibility, rank fees. Everybody selected multifamily housing as the number one, one being most feasible and eight being least feasible. So probably not surprising that office was not selected highly. But multifamily housing, their number one, those activated commercial uses following an indoor sports and public gathering. There's a lot on this slide here.

It's kind of just for documentation of the ranges of responses that we got on here. But we were asking people to generally identify gross square footage that they would apply to the various lemon uses or other metrics like a parking ratio that you would use if you were proposing multifamily housing. So looking at line one, multifamily housing, there was a documented range of responders saying between 585 and almost 800 units with a parking ratio average amongst the responders of 1.27 per unit. Restaurants being a different metric with square footage identified there between 18,000 square feet and 23,000 square feet for restaurants and between five and six parking stalls per 1,000 square feet for that particular land use. Hotel, you know, up to over 200 units, a little less than one parking space per hotel room.

Entertainment square footage, 36 to 44,000 square feet, six parking stalls per thousand. Retail indoor sports here, identifying 55,000 to a 130,000 square feet, just over one parking space per 1,000. There was some office identified in terms of square footage. Kevin, did you wanna Yeah.

I'll just point out that not everybody responded to all these. So it's not universal that all seven some of them didn't said there was no office space. So it's not like this is an average or anything. It's just the ones that responded, this is the amount that the ranges were. And we really wanted to show that from the different uses what the impact on parking would be.

And so you can see from from a unit standpoint, the units include housing and hotel. We're gonna need between nine hundred and twelve hundred parking stalls. And from a from a square footage standpoint, so restaurants, entertainment, retail, office space, we're gonna need between five hundred and seven hundred. And campus or mixed use total, we're gonna need between twelve hundred and nineteen hundred stalls, they're going to be planned for that.

Question four was two parts. So this is 4a. Important is high density multifamily residential to the overall activation financial feasibility? We already heard that it was people's top most important choice, and this just reiterates that with some of the key takeaways. It's essential for success. Housing demand is strong in Madison. Residential density should be the first step. There should be both market rate and affordable housing, with market rate being developed first. Compatibility of housing with event and entertainment uses is good. And that mixed income housing could support workforce needs on the campus.

The lens of 4B here was then are there complementary uses, whether that's infrastructure, investments, or public improvements, that can help support that housing, knowing that housing on campus is a new use. What else might be important to bring along with that? People identified those commercial uses as complementary and important. Transportation both to the neighborhoods and to the downtown, so similar themes that we're hearing from the town hall summaries, sharing parking, having high quality public gathering spaces, plazas, green space, walkable connections, and continuing to emphasize pedestrian and bike connectivity. Olin Ave, we asked, does that change your interest at all?

Are you interested in the Olin Ave site if it's part of it? Everybody unanimously said yes. Strong desire for multifamily housing on this site, and we identified the potential benefit of phasing on that. We added this question six after discussion with the committee. How does the proposed Coliseum renovation enhance market feasibility and interest in the mixed use sites?

This was viewed amongst responders as a value add, a major driver of feasibility for the mixed use development, increasing events and consistent activation of the site via the Colosseum can support hotels, restaurants, entertainment, and retail. Housing demand and retail viability are improving with greater density. And some felt that the Colosseum was an essential piece to the entire campus development. And then there's noted here one strong opposition. I think that was a comment that was focusing on a prior discussed option to simply remove the building.

Is that right, Kevin? Mm-mm. So a little bit of a different context there while the counties move forward on a different path. I think that comment is included in the printout if you want to read that specifically. And finally, question seven, is there anything else that the county should consider to enhance feasibility, marketability, or long term success of the mixed use areas? It's a little bit small for me to read from here. I

gave you that.

Oh, thanks. I got I got a. Just overall integrating complementary uses, having a coordinated strategy is essential. So what Rob showed on that slide can show us how all of these uses are calendaring out and being coordinated across the rows. Overall, significant site upgrades, recommended utilities, signage, transit, branding, marketing, some stress importance of sequencing, the main RFP, and this question also touched on, should wait until the Coliseum and XL expansion plans are clarified, while the Owen Avenue site isn't quite as interdependent on those, so it could potentially proceed sooner.

New event anchors, professional soccer team, youth amateur sports could generate sustained multi day activation. And, again, phasing comments with potential starting with market rate housing. Well, any questions or comments? Otherwise, all of these will be continue to be looked at as we go through development of that condensed master plan and submittal to the city as well as considering this, of course, in developing the RFP.

You may have covered this. I'm sorry. You have to repeat yourself. But now that I've heard it, the seven respondents, are you able to classify? Like, are they able to take on a project at this? You know? Like, how how are they we're listening to them. How how do

we qualify that their responses?

They comment on the nature of the responders.

I haven't really investigated who they are, to be quite honest with you. If they I know the local ones, I think, probably could do it. The the ones the one in West Dallas and the ones out of state, I'm not sure, but I'm assuming that there was some ability or they wouldn't respond.

K.

And I think once we go out for an RFP, we will have significantly more interest. And, you know, the fact that we had, I believe, three responses last time when we put out when the county put out the master developer plan, narrowing it down a little bit might and and having it more focused. Right? The the idea of this exercise is then for us to be able to to draft an RFP that identifies what our objectives are in this process, and and really then we would be focused on people that could deliver that product. Thank you.

Did you get any sense of the obviously, there's a keen interest in the old one site moving forward there, but I heard mostly just high density housing with and maybe structured parking. Was there any any sense that they would bring an excuse to that site even though they would wanna wait on the outcome of the coliseum, the exhibition law for the rest of the

It seemed like that site was primarily designated as housing. Housing.

That's what

I think. The site closer to where, you know, our guests are and the density of the campuses, that's where you'll get more of the other uses.

Yeah. That's that's how this reads.

We did hear a pub a public comment at the town hall that would be interested in mixed use space there, but, again, feasibility depend on probably what happens across the street.

Yeah. Right. Okay.

Any other questions?

I'm just I know. You don't believe

that way. Can believe you.

Let's search something. I guess it it sort of soaking it in, but also a little surprised at the emphasis towards single family housing. And I'm trying to imagine how you know, and and some of the question the questions are directed, you know, really focused. And I think I raised this point when we're talking about the RFI draft of it or at least concepts. It's a focus about, you know, the the compatibility and workability, the importance of the Colosseum to other efforts here.

But there's a lot whole lot more going on here, and it's I'm just wondering about the compatibility of land uses here when we're talking about major events that go on here, and then you're talking about multifamily housing. You know, I mean, this we had the Midwest Horse Fairs last weekend, the the, you know, traffic buildup on the belt line and so forth. And it's just like, well, how is that going to work with folks living on the surrounding this campus? Think Well, it's you would be surprised

how many people want to live where the activity is. I

would echo that wholeheartedly. I mean, that's the first thing that I don't know how we could expect to hold any large event that uses multiple buildings on the facility and have a significant multi you know, multiple housing unit, you know, developments there. That would present some challenges for any number of reasons.

For World Dairy Expo, we're maybe using we end up using all that space over there.

All 164 acres. Yeah.

Yep. Mhmm.

This is a a really significant change in how Yep. I envision shot

value reaction, you know, living in this neighborhood. And I was like, wow. I know everybody's driving different housing options, but I know most of the neighbors would be in total shop if that was the strategy on this site. I'd be one ready to move. I'd say, no.

You know? It's just but I know that's what's driving a lot of things for the city is high density housing. Maybe I'm part of that. The neighbors who are like, we've been living here too long to kinda adjust to something like that, but it is what it is. And I would suspect these are people who thrive on building that type of thing and making the revenue for Different? Shoot.

Oh, you wanna No. I'm sorry. Delayed suicide. Oh. Oh. Yeah. Go ahead. You.

Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Chuck. I appreciate that. I mean, I have to admit this is incredibly frustrating.

Beyond, I mean, in addition to, what what's been mentioned in terms of adding residential here just in terms of complementing other site uses. If you were even going to feasibly consider adding residential, you would have to considerably open up the campus and the and the street access into the campus than what currently exists, which means rethinking the entire campus and how the design and access is done. And sure. Okay. I I think that's fair.

And I will add that that's kind of what this committee was doing prior to just throwing a bomb of doing the AEC in here. Because how the AEC works and how the rest of the site is going to is is going to interact with the events that are there along with all of the other stuff is exactly what this committee was trying to do. And to then, you know, decide, oh, we're gonna divorce the coliseum and parking from the entire rest of this decision is insane. I'm sorry. But it makes doing all of these other things considerably more difficult by not having control over the AEC and having that in independent ownership that not only is not answerable to the other uses on the clinic on on the campus, but has distinctly different priorities and distinctly different incentives for the use of that property than every other use of the property.

And so, I mean, if this is the direction we wanna be heading with this campus, I would propose we just put a pause on the coliseum and rethink this and how it goes. I mean, I I know that's ridiculous. I know I know nobody is actually going to seriously consider that. I I'm not actually proposing that. I'm just pointing out that where we are with this RFP makes all seven questions extremely more difficult to answer.

Yeah. I I guess I would push back a little bit and say that at at no point and I've only been on you know, involved in this for a little over a year. But I would imagine that this committee always envisioned that the Coliseum would be active or that there would be another venue in a parking lot somewhere else. And everything I saw everything I saw

That is true. This committee did consider was considering those things, but it was doing so in a diligent way where it wasn't even clear what the Colosseum was gonna become, let alone because of the other uses on the property, let alone that we were just gonna say, you know what? Heck with everything else going on on the campus, Coliseum's music only starting now. That's not what we were saying. We were not saying give the Coliseum undone to one person and let them control the parking. That's not

what saying. The parking. They're they're not controlling the parking, and I'll you know? And we we shared that at the committee of the whole. We shared that again at the closed session. They are they are not they are not controlling the parking.

Right?

And the master plan the master plan always envision something in that parking lot. Right? And so if we now have a concern of that that we're taking away parking, then we should have thought about that ten years ago when we created this master plan. And so, I mean, I I'm a little I'm a little confused at the at the response here because you asked us to ask the developers what they would put out here. We asked them. Did. This is the response. This is the response.

You to do this before the AEC even I wanted to do this along with the AEC so that the use of that facility was considered as we were building out or as we were thinking about or as we were phasing the construction, the the rest of the property. That's all I was asking.

It's a time

out here.

Yes. I asked for the RFI because that's because the RFP decision was already made, period. That RFP decision was already made. It was subtracted from the equation. So I wanted the best that I could get, but I am just pointing out that even if we ignore parking, even if we take away all of the parking, fact that somebody controls the AEC that is reverse incentives from the entire rest of the use of the property makes answering all of these questions significantly more difficult.

So, supervisor Glaser, just wanna clarify something. I think sometimes when you're saying A C, you mean the Colosseum?

Colosseum. Yeah. I'm sorry. Colosseum.

I thought I was confused, but I think that's Yeah.

No. Colosseum as opposed yes. I'm sorry. AEC, I mean, Colosseum. As I've been dancing in this

Yeah. Thank you for that. I just wanna be aware of time. You had a quick response. Then, Tom, did you wanna comment?

Yeah. I was just gonna say, I think I sensed earlier on in this community, we had some concerns and even you've just got about housing and a high, you know, a high visibility, high noise generating campus. I would just point out the Tidal Town in Green Bay has done high density housing right next to a seven or 80,000 person

Okay.

Stadium, and and it's worked.

Eric, thank you. Did you wanna point out sometimes?

I just I think sometimes we also kinda forget about the bodies that where this came from, and the 2018 master plan document, which is the document that guides the development of the campus, is I just wanna refresh everyone that there was you know, it's called for a Colosseum renovation. It's called for approximately 500 mixed use dwelling units on the 13 acre parcel that's right behind between the Colosseum and the intersection of John Nolan Drive, additional hotels in various locations. I just the the this isn't just coming out of the blue, and I wanted to make sure that everybody understood that we're still working very clearly with the traffic impact analysis, the overall use mix that was developed during the master plan process, and that's where we're at. And if there's significant changes that should be thought about, you know, we should be we should discuss those, but that's what I think the committee is working within today.

Well, I think it's started that was there. There was some concern about it in terms of the uses, then it came back. Part of where I was a little bit more open to it was because it was listed up along Olin Avenue, and that was it, which is different from what I Mhmm. So the latest map I saw headed up, which tucked up there, a little way for everything, street access. So I I don't know if I would agree that we have to revamp everything if it would be in that location. But my question is, what are the next steps for this? We have the responses to the

RFI, then what? Well, then we will continue to discuss and figure out how we wanna draft this RFP.

It's an input.

Right. Okay.

Jeremiles, did you have something?

Not right now. Okay. I will. Right now. Okay.

So thank you, Brie, for that. And then I'll delete this. And then the next thing was, not a small item, but the calcium update and FAQs.

Yeah. So we and there really isn't a whole lot to update other than we are continuing negotiations with Frank productions, generating the they're putting together the term sheet. Robin shown the kind of the timeline that we're working under, and we do have the FAQs and and posted those on the Alliant Energy Center redevelopment committee website.

So the update is that we're still in negotiations. Right. Right. Okay. Any questions on that? Anyone? Anyone? And that they choose something we'll have access to. Yep. Okay. I look forward to seeing that. Alright. If there are no other questions, it's 01:30. So our next meeting is May 18 at twelve. Please let us know if you can be there, or if you're not gonna be there. I mean and then, public comment on the agenda. We don't have that. And then any other business? And then I take a motion to adjourn.

No problem.

Yep. Second. Okay. That carries. Thanks, too. Okay. We're adjourned. Thank you.