[0:00] 
[0:02] Roll call, please.
[0:03] Chair Gary.
[0:04] Yes Vice Chair.
[0:06] Make sure.
[0:06] Yes Debbie.
[0:07] Dean here.
[0:08] Alder Cathy.
[0:10] Steven Strogatz.
[0:11] Here no, I just probably not.
[0:16] This one right here.
[0:20] I used to have one uniform.
[0:24] Motion to approve
the agenda, please.
[0:26] So moved.
[0:26] Second and now.
[0:31] Steve got it.
[0:32] Steve, really quick
before you read it.
[0:34] Yeah OK.
[0:35] OK Steve.
[0:36] Question by saying Aye.
[0:40] Aye Aye.
[0:40] Opposed motion carried.
[0:42] We have some minutes
from February
[0:44] 10, which were attached.
[0:46] So moved.
[0:48] Second All in favor,
signify by saying Aye.
[0:52] Aye Aye.
[0:54] Motion carried.
[0:55] Thank you.
[0:56] Regular business.
[0:58] Consideration with apostle
axeman action on Amendment 3
[1:02] to the development
agreement 2020 101
[1:05] with merge LLC for the
redevelopment of 236 armes
[1:09] street and 101 Bridge Street.
[1:12] Parcel three, 551 and 35560.
[1:17] All right.
[1:18] So you may recall we've
been working with merge
[1:20] for a number of years with
regards to redevelopment,
[1:23] and the apartment area
at the shipyard downtown.
[1:27] We transferred
property Waterville.
[1:32] And so we've been working
with merge on updating
[1:38] the development agreement with
regards to dates and status
[1:41] and where we're at.
[1:44] We really need to get
this project going.
[1:46] Absolutely right.
[1:47] So when you look at what
we're looking at amending,
[1:51] really none of the financial
portions of it are changing.
[1:56] What we're looking at is
moving up some of the dates
[1:59] on things and to some cleaning
up on the development agreement.
[2:04] We need proof of
equity and financing.
[2:06] We like that.
[2:08] We would like commencement
of vertical construction
[2:12] up out of the ground no later
than June one of this year.
[2:16] We plan to be completing
our street and Bridge Street
[2:20] by the end of this year.
[2:23] We would like this.
[2:24] The whole project
completed by July of 27,
[2:29] and then it still
needs to achieve
[2:31] a minimum assessed value of 15
million by January one of 28.
[2:36] And then we'd also
like to add, which
[2:38] wasn't on the
original agreement,
[2:40] we'd like the RDA to have a
conditional option to repurchase
[2:43] the properties for $1.
[2:45] If that construction doesn't
start in the timelines
[2:48] that we're talking about.
[2:50] We sent these over.
[2:52] Brent had a little bit of a
Brent dahlstrom for merges here.
[2:55] He had a little bit of
time to look at this,
[2:58] but he's here really to give
an update on the project.
[3:01] I think where things are at
and maybe make some commentary
[3:04] on this open meeting.
[3:06] Well, Steve, if there's anything
I. A meeting with Brent.
[3:12] Sure all yours, Brent dahlstrom
with merge urban development.
[3:15] Thanks for having me today.
[3:18] Understand the need to
tighten the timeline,
[3:22] and everyone deserves to see
this project move forward.
[3:26] And we are excited to do so.
[3:27] Some of those dates
are mathematically
[3:31] impossible to start.
[3:32] I was just with our foundation
team, absolute concrete,
[3:36] and they need three months from
the moment they start to even
[3:39] be prepared to go vertical.
[3:40] So some of us will
have to go back.
[3:42] I just don't want to
stand up here and say,
[3:44] I can hit the dates
that were laid
[3:45] out because it's not possible.
[3:48] And then buildings of
this size have been
[3:49] taken an average of 18 months.
[3:51] So even from that it
just doesn't work out.
[3:55] Now that's the bad news, but I
just want to start with that.
[3:59] The good news is that we
had the conditional approval
[4:03] of the foundation permit.
[4:04] They did ask for a
few minor changes,
[4:08] and our team has been
delivering those to them.
[4:13] We still need full
approval of the plans,
[4:16] but that is imminent as well.
[4:19] So I suppose we could go
a lot of different ways
[4:23] and I'll take some questions.
[4:24] I think the last
thing I want to do
[4:26] is stand up here
and make excuses.
[4:28] But I think if I was you,
I'd want to ask the question,
[4:30] are you developing or are
you not actively developing.
[4:33] And we are.
[4:36] We are many projects
under construction.
[4:40] A couple of them
have been severely
[4:42] delayed, which has impacted our
ability to start another one.
[4:45] But we are currently have seven
active projects in construction.
[4:51] Yours is of the utmost
importance important in is next.
[4:55] It was delayed to start due to
some differencing in different
[4:59] and engineering
and some elevation
[5:01] issues and some settling.
[5:02] There's been a lot of things
along the way, but all of those
[5:05] are now solved in my experience,
which this is almost 20
[5:10] years for me now is right
when you get to the end
[5:13] is where patience runs out.
[5:15] When we're so dang close.
[5:17] And that's where we are today.
[5:19] And so we do need more time.
[5:22] You guys have been beyond
the mayor, the staff,
[5:25] everyone has been unbelievably
patient and great to work with.
[5:30] Even when there has been issues.
[5:31] It's been great.
[5:33] There's literally no
one on staff that hasn't
[5:36] been Matt who's not here today.
[5:38] He's been excellent
the whole time too.
[5:41] But we were excited
and I am ready to take
[5:44] any questions, no matter
how hard they are today.
[5:47] And that's why I came for
I think some of the dates
[5:50] that you're uncomfortable with.
[5:52] I'm sure you'll come
back with your version
[5:54] of what the needs are.
[5:56] One of the other big
changes, of course,
[5:57] is that at a certain
point in time,
[5:58] we're going to
take the land back.
[6:00] Can you live with that.
[6:01] I mean, it would
revert back to the RDA.
[6:04] I think obviously, that has
to be in there at some level.
[6:07] It has they have to have the
ability to get the land back.
[6:09] So I'm not against that clause.
[6:12] But even a bank wouldn't.
[6:14] As far as the other
dates, a banks
[6:15] would never allow me to
start with the language
[6:18] that as it's currently proposed.
[6:20] That's too much risk for anyone.
[6:22] I wouldn't start with it either.
[6:24] When you're talking
about if you.
[6:26] I think if I could
understand the goals
[6:29] and maybe you could tell me.
[6:30] But once you start
and I understand
[6:31] there was a project
here that started
[6:33] and then stopped for a period
of time before it went vertical.
[6:36] So I can understand the need or
the desire for that language.
[6:39] But I've never seen vertical
that word in any development
[6:45] agreement that we've done,
and we've done $500 million
[6:49] worth of development.
[6:50] So we've never seen that.
[6:52] But I do understand how it got
there due to some other things
[6:56] that have happened in the city.
[6:57] But there are
certain language that
[6:58] just wouldn't be palatable for
us or for a lending institution.
[7:04] Questions for Brett.
[7:06] Yeah for me, I think
the big question when
[7:08] I saw the amendments is right.
[7:10] All the dates are
moving like two years.
[7:13] From the dates that
were in there, like,
[7:15] how did we lose two years.
[7:18] It wasn't physically
possible to build with the.
[7:23] Our engineer and
the city engineer
[7:24] were in a discussion
for a long time,
[7:26] so I couldn't even
put it on the roadmap
[7:28] to put within our pipeline.
[7:30] I couldn't even say
like that one's next.
[7:33] While that conversation
was going on,
[7:36] and that conversation got solved
last year so that we could then
[7:42] move forward full go
on plans which we have
[7:45] already figures
committed to this project
[7:48] and paid for this project.
[7:50] So we are heavily
invested in this,
[7:52] but we weren't able
to do that until then.
[7:55] And at that time, I suppose I
should have came back before we
[7:58] ever did that, before coming
to a meeting like this
[8:00] and have the possibility
of losing over $1 million
[8:05] would be tough.
[8:06] We don't want to see that.
[8:10] Yeah but I'm still
just trying to how
[8:13] do we get that far behind.
[8:17] Where we're needing to move.
[8:18] Like, it almost seems like
if the agreement was signed
[8:21] with those prior dates,
you signed them knowing you
[8:26] couldn't achieve those dates.
[8:28] No, that's not necessarily true.
[8:29] When we first started,
we thought the ground
[8:32] was ready to be built on it.
[8:33] It wasn't.
[8:34] There's compaction issues.
[8:36] There's then there had to be
collaboration between your city
[8:41] working on those two streets and
our project, which those plans
[8:45] were not finalized either.
[8:46] So the unknowns
at the time truly
[8:49] I don't want to
sign an agreement
[8:51] that I'm going to fail on.
[8:53] So that did happen.
[8:55] But not I don't
think anyone was.
[8:58] 
[9:01] Withholding information
or doing it on purpose.
[9:03] Nobody was right.
[9:04] Everyone was just
acting in good faith
[9:05] to move the project
forward at the time.
[9:08] And there was just hurdles,
like many developments
[9:11] have to overcome, and they
now have been overcome.
[9:16] And what are the hurdles
then, that you're seeing today
[9:20] on the project that are between
today and starting construction.
[9:26] We have to get the final
approval of the plans.
[9:30] And who does that come from.
[9:32] The city and the state.
[9:36] You have to get the
contractors on site
[9:39] to start after that, which
would require signing up
[9:43] every contractor,
which you can't
[9:45] sign up all the contractors
until the final plans are
[9:47] approved.
[9:49] So you have that
chronologically.
[9:52] It needs to happen.
[9:53] You need to get the
full plans approved.
[9:54] We already have the
contractor for the foundation
[9:56] because those
plans are approved.
[9:59] Everyone past that relies
upon the final set of
[10:02] plans to actually fully
give us a contract.
[10:06] After that, then we already
have the lending institution
[10:10] that we're going
to use, but we have
[10:11] to use those final
numbers to give
[10:12] to the financial institution
to show the final costs.
[10:17] We have a great idea of it,
but until the final plans are
[10:20] approved, I cannot get the
final cost and the bank
[10:23] would never believe me, I did.
[10:25] So all those things three
things need to happen
[10:27] and then you need to
start now to sell.
[10:31] Sticking with me.
[10:32] If someone else would
start right now,
[10:34] it would take over a year to get
to where I am even today, right.
[10:38] And we are there.
[10:40] And so getting final
approval of the plans,
[10:49] what's needed to get that done.
[10:51] 
[10:54] Just that architect submitting
anything that's left over.
[11:00] When does that happen.
[11:02] They say they are
like they're right.
[11:04] I don't know.
[11:06] I don't work for the
architecture that company.
[11:09] But they work for
you guys, right.
[11:10] They do work for us.
[11:11] And I can get back to
you within the week.
[11:15] Yeah I think for
us to get everybody
[11:19] comfortable on
real dates because.
[11:22] It just feels like
when I look at the old
[11:24] and they weren't real
dates that if we're
[11:29] going to sign an agreement,
it should have real dates.
[11:33] Yeah some.
[11:34] Yeah I don't disagree with you.
[11:37] I do know I don't think
you disagree at all.
[11:39] I'm just trying
to make sure we're
[11:41] identifying applying
everything that it
[11:43] takes to get to real dates.
[11:47] I agree, I agree.
[11:52] So if we look at what's been
laid out, proof of equity
[11:55] and financing,
vertical construction,
[11:59] you had said those are
dates you can't meet.
[12:02] That's correct.
[12:02] Well, the proof of
equity and financing.
[12:04] I do believe I
can meet that one.
[12:07] So vertical construction.
[12:09] No later than June 1.
[12:10] When were you thinking.
[12:13] Three months past that.
[12:15] If you have.
[12:16] If the word has to be vertical.
[12:18] If that is the word
that cannot change,
[12:20] I would propose that we
go with construction,
[12:24] starting and having penalties,
or the ability to hold
[12:31] the developer accountable to
not stop for a couple of years
[12:35] like another project did.
[12:36] I do believe there's other
opportunities for better
[12:41] language that both protects
you, but also allows
[12:44] the project to move forward.
[12:46] So if you start on 9/1, then
your project completion date
[12:49] would be 18 months,
with the ability
[12:52] to extend based on events
outside of my control.
[12:55] I mean, 18 months would
be the National average
[12:58] for a building of this size.
[12:59] 
[13:02] And then that leaves when the
land would revert back to us.
[13:05] 
[13:11] It's a conditional option to
repurchase if construction
[13:15] is not completed is what it is.
[13:17] It's not.
[13:18] It's not like the land
is coming back to us.
[13:21] And we wouldn't even
be able to have it.
[13:23] Just I have to be
honest, there's
[13:24] no way I could move
forward with an agreement
[13:27] that says I could be 90% done,
and you can buy it back for $1.
[13:31] I won't be able to do it.
[13:32] I mean, I just won't sign it.
[13:34] And yeah, so some
of that language
[13:37] is just so punitive
that it just.
[13:41] I understand why you
have it in there,
[13:43] but it's not possible
for a developer to sign.
[13:46] Well, and I think
the language that's
[13:48] in there was not about you being
90% done with the building.
[13:52] If you don't commence
construction by a certain date,
[13:56] I think that's fine.
[13:57] And that to me seems fair.
[13:59] I think it's fair to
put in, especially
[14:01] when you think about the period
of time that's elapsed here.
[14:05] We're just looking for
a solid commitment.
[14:08] I think both parties
have worked together
[14:10] here over multiple years.
[14:12] There's been a lot
of site work that's
[14:14] gone on that site,
areas around that site
[14:17] to make it a more
desirable development area.
[14:22] I think both parties
have been very committed.
[14:26] I do think, and I love
the fact that you're
[14:28] here saying we are here to
develop, we're going to develop.
[14:32] We want that.
[14:34] I think now we just have
to get to the point.
[14:36] We can't be here two years
from for now, no we can't.
[14:40] And if that's really
the path that we're on,
[14:43] I think it's better
for everybody to say,
[14:46] OK, this is where we
got and it didn't work.
[14:52] So we need to go
find someone who's
[14:54] going to develop the property.
[14:55] I think you still want to.
[14:58] I just think we need to
find language in states that
[15:03] keep us on that trajectory.
[15:04] Yeah, even if I could propose
that with the buyback option,
[15:11] if the city, the city goal,
I'm sure goes beyond tax base
[15:15] and also is just
solving a housing
[15:17] shortage that the community
has and the area has.
[15:20] But even if there's language
that penalizes delays
[15:24] and there's fees to extend so
that you can at least get right,
[15:29] if we can agree upon a
date and say, OK, but man,
[15:32] if you don't hit it
and you want to extend,
[15:33] it's going to cost
you this much.
[15:34] I'd love for you to talk about
that that's something that
[15:37] happens in other agreements.
[15:39] So that if I do come back,
it's not just me with trying
[15:44] to be as nice as I can.
[15:45] I have to come with a
check in order to extend.
[15:48] That would be
something that I feel
[15:49] like could at least
be a bridge in case
[15:53] that the worst
case would happen.
[15:56] So that the city starts to
get revenue off this property
[15:59] or your group.
[16:02] Do we still have the
option of damages
[16:06] in the contract like that.
[16:07] Sure yeah, we've
done that before.
[16:10] So I think we're talking
about a shortfall.
[16:14] Payment for value is
what he's referring
[16:17] to or just an extension fee.
[16:20] Correct both.
[16:21] I think that both
need to be there.
[16:22] You I do understand.
[16:28] Do you have a project in
Ashwaubenon going like.
[16:34] Where's that one.
[16:36] I think, because that just
went just recently, right.
[16:39] Year two projects.
[16:40] We have the same
teams working on them,
[16:41] same team's going to build them.
[16:43] They are two months
ahead just because they
[16:47] have the plans fully approved.
[16:50] So we have the same contractors.
[16:51] What you're saying.
[16:52] Yeah same subs that are
like same foundation
[16:55] team, same framers,
same everyone is
[16:57] going to work on both projects.
[16:59] Who's like your contractor
for the construction.
[17:02] The overall contractor.
[17:03] We are now seeing ourselves.
[17:06] We had a project, two projects
that were delayed nine months.
[17:11] And so we've decided to
take upon back in Iowa,
[17:14] we do all of our own.
[17:15] We've done a few hundred million
dollars in development, GC
[17:19] and ourselves.
[17:20] We started in Wisconsin by
having other firms do it,
[17:22] but we are no longer moving
forward with that model.
[17:24] 
[17:28] Alderman Johnson, one second,
one last quick question.
[17:31] And I know you haven't got
final financial approval could
[17:35] be awaiting for the
final plans, but.
[17:37] Have you got
preliminary approval.
[17:38] Yeah OK.
[17:39] Yeah so that's one thing
that's drastically improved
[17:42] over the last 12 months.
[17:43] Access to funding
and loans a year ago,
[17:47] if you were sitting here,
that it was just harder.
[17:49] I can ask any
developer in America,
[17:51] we have projects in
New Mexico, and they
[17:54] had 5,000 units
delivered last year,
[17:57] which started two years ago.
[17:58] They have 500 today.
[17:59] And it's a town of
1 million people.
[18:01] It was just harder.
[18:03] That is not the case today.
[18:05] Finding a lender today
is no longer the issue
[18:07] that it was a year ago.
[18:10] Alderman Johnson.
[18:11] Thank you.
[18:12] Chair Brent, good
to see you as well.
[18:15] And staff could certainly chime
in on this, but what I'm seeing,
[18:20] the January 1, 2028 date for
the minimum assessed value.
[18:24] So if you're saying 18 months,
because it seems to me,
[18:26] that's probably the
most pivotal date.
[18:28] So 18 months would
be from that June 1.
[18:31] I mean, is that
January 1, 2028 even.
[18:35] Is that date possible to hit
if you change the language
[18:37] to eliminate vertical.
[18:39] No, there'd have to be where
we'd have to have the ability
[18:41] to fill the gap of
what is not met,
[18:45] so that the taxes could be paid
outside of what the actual value
[18:51] is at that time.
[18:52] And again, I'm looking
at this thinking
[18:54] that's probably the pivotal
date from the city end.
[18:57] And I'm sure
there'll probably be
[18:58] some closed session discussion
here where we can have that.
[19:01] My question back to you.
[19:03] Have you done any level of
pricing on your plans to date.
[19:08] Do you have confidence
in what the construction
[19:10] cost will come back at.
[19:11] Yeah since we're doing
so many projects,
[19:13] we already have some of the key
aspects with dollars and cents,
[19:17] but so many of them are just
consistent across the board.
[19:21] Cabinets are the same
price everywhere.
[19:23] So that's stabilized.
[19:24] Yeah everything
costs are stabilized.
[19:26] If not in the last
year, maybe even someone
[19:29] will take a little
bit better of a deal
[19:31] than they would have a year ago.
[19:32] For us, we could
get a little better.
[19:34] Now we all know we
went through an insane
[19:36] period there before that.
[19:38] OK And then just to follow up
to that then because obviously,
[19:42] PAYGO as is the butfor clause.
[19:45] And if we change this
date, you're essentially
[19:49] losing a year of incentive.
[19:52] Assuming that you don't
hit the cap prior to that.
[19:54] And I haven't done the math
to know if the cap would come
[19:56] into play, but does
that jeopardize
[19:59] the capital stack for you in
any capacity if this is delayed.
[20:03] No, I don't think so.
[20:05] I think it holds me accountable.
[20:07] It is punitive.
[20:08] Every day that I wait
because it takes away
[20:11] from the years on the back end.
[20:12] And I'm also willing
to put in the agreement
[20:15] that we will make up for
the taxes on the front end
[20:18] if we don't hit those, if the
full assessed value hasn't hit
[20:22] that yet, because
that's obviously
[20:24] and I know you know this, but
that's the risk for the city
[20:27] is you extend this and
you lose another year
[20:30] to market and gain
that increment
[20:31] with a different developer.
[20:33] And so I would like to propose
that I would fill that gap.
[20:38] So to take away from that so
that you don't have that risk,
[20:41] your risk comes down
to only not having
[20:43] units in your town under that.
[20:45] That's the language
I'd like to have,
[20:47] is that I'd take away my risk
that this gets taken away
[20:50] midstream and that I take away
the city's risk of losing out
[20:54] on the valuation and the tax.
[20:56] OK thank you Mr. mayor.
[21:03] No, I appreciate that you guys
are still at the table, Brent,
[21:07] and appreciate the
relationship that's
[21:08] been developed over the years.
[21:09] I think you just felt
today growing impatience.
[21:13] I don't think there's a better
site in the city of Green
[21:17] Bay that's as ready for
construction as this one
[21:21] that you have.
[21:22] And we just want to
make sure that we
[21:23] have a partner with
us who's really
[21:25] serious about moving forward.
[21:28] Because that's a
priority area for us
[21:30] in the city, the shipyard.
[21:32] And it's a tip that's
been open for a while.
[21:35] And so we need to start.
[21:37] Diane is nodding her head.
[21:38] And our finance
director is we need
[21:40] to start building some increment
there and doing it quickly.
[21:44] And so if you are
not the guys, what do
[21:48] we need to know that and gals.
[21:50] Yes, absolutely.
[21:51] We have many, many
women on the team.
[21:52] Yes, absolutely.
[21:54] Thank you.
[21:54] Yeah that's what you're
hearing today and feeling.
[21:59] And the questions
that Alder Johnson
[22:01] had for you is what I
was interested in asking
[22:06] is, as far as modifying
that vertical language,
[22:10] construction commencing
in some capacity by June.
[22:15] And then that January 1, 2028.
[22:18] Maybe that can be modified
with some of the language
[22:21] that you were suggesting.
[22:22] But I think we really need to
zero in on some hard targets
[22:26] arguments to give us everybody
around the table confidence
[22:31] that we're committed to them.
[22:33] I didn't come here thinking
that you were going to just
[22:36] say yes with no conversation.
[22:38] I understand that the
patience is wearing thin,
[22:41] so I just want to do
my part by saying,
[22:44] I understanding that you
need to start getting
[22:47] revenue and taxable value.
[22:48] I want to put language in
there that we take care
[22:51] of that no matter what,
in order so that I'm
[22:53] serious to move forward.
[22:55] And that is what I can offer
and I can offer you up the fact
[23:00] that we are actively
developing, I
[23:02] can open up my financial
statement and all those things.
[23:06] I'm happy to do all of that for
you, that as much as I can do,
[23:10] other than getting your team's
buy in to give more time.
[23:17] Thank you, Mr. mayor.
[23:17] Have you had time to react
to the language on this.
[23:20] OK sorry, Gary.
[23:21] I was just asking him if
he had an opportunity yet
[23:23] to react to this language
to offer substitute it.
[23:27] His response was not yet so.
[23:28] 
[23:32] He has seen the language.
[23:33] Yeah, but I mean to have,
like his attorney vetted
[23:35] to offer alternative language
that we could react to
[23:39] and either agree to or reject.
[23:41] I think it was important
for me to come today.
[23:44] I haven't had a chance.
[23:46] The legal team hasn't
had a chance to respond.
[23:48] I have seen the dates.
[23:49] I have given feedback
that they're not possible.
[23:52] I know that I'm not
an attorney, but I
[23:53] know that the dates don't work.
[23:55] But now we have to.
[23:57] We have to change the dates and
the legal team has to weigh in.
[24:00] It was important to come today.
[24:01] That's the reasonable statement.
[24:02] Like, OK then what
dates do work.
[24:06] Like, if you're a
million bucks in
[24:07] and you don't have a project
schedule like that feels.
[24:11] That feels peculiar, right.
[24:13] You're almost ready for pricing.
[24:16] Ready set of drawings.
[24:17] And you don't have the project
schedule, but you like it.
[24:22] Just that feels fishy.
[24:23] So, OK, if these dates don't
work, what dates do work.
[24:27] That's reasonable.
[24:30] I think I can give you
a project schedule.
[24:32] I just didn't we've talked
a little bit about it today,
[24:35] but this just came
to me and I needed
[24:38] to meet with the team
today, which I just left,
[24:40] walked from that meeting
with the foundation team
[24:43] to you today so that I
could have real dates.
[24:46] I mean, I came here as
a sign of good faith,
[24:51] but we're not there
to the dates yet.
[24:53] But I do respect.
[24:54] You're saying I need to have
those to you, and we will.
[24:57] That's not a problem
in a solution.
[24:59] Yeah, that's pretty standard.
[25:00] Yeah any other
questions for Brent.
[25:05] Yeah just given dates.
[25:07] This discussion
that when could you
[25:09] have a proposal to a
proposal back on the dates.
[25:12] I don't know about the attorney,
but as far as high level
[25:15] like dates, I would
be happy to get those
[25:17] to you no later than next week.
[25:20] End of next week.
[25:21] Yes but I'm not.
[25:24] I can't promise an attorney
can do anything beyond.
[25:28] I can do that.
[25:29] Personally the attorney
language, I don't know.
[25:33] I would think it would
not take long anymore.
[25:36] I would generally
think it would.
[25:38] I don't either, but.
[25:39] But you're asking me to
give a specific time limit.
[25:44] I can tell you what I can do.
[25:45] I can't put somebody
else on that clock
[25:47] to without talking to them.
[25:49] 
[25:52] OK Any other
questions for Brent.
[25:56] If not, we'll see you back
to regular order of business.
[25:58] Thanks for having me.
[26:00] I appreciate it.
[26:00] Thank you.
[26:01] Thanks for your input.
[26:04] Second Debbie Gibson with a no.
[26:09] I will entertain a motion
to go into closed session.
[26:12] Ma'am what's it.
[26:17] The authority to convene
in closed session
[26:19] pursuant to sections 19.85.
[26:25] Let's see I sub section D,
Wisconsin statutes for purposes
[26:29] of deliberating and negotiating
the sale of public properties,
[26:32] investing of public funds
or conducting other.
[26:35] Specified public businesses
necessary for competitive
[26:38] or bargaining reasons.
[26:39] The authority may thereafter.
[26:41] Reconvene in open session
pursuant to Section 1985,
[26:46] subsection 2, Wisconsin
statutes to report the results
[26:49] of the closed
session and consider
[26:51] the balance of the agenda here.
[26:53] OK, I'll make a motion and
a second by elder Texas.
[27:00] I need a roll call over here.
[27:03] Yeah roll call please.
[27:05] OK here.
[27:07] Yes OK, so we are
in closed session.
[27:17] Thank you.
[27:17] Yep don't know.
[27:20] Yeah in progress.
[27:24] You're back on the record.
[27:25] Jeff is here.
[27:27] Oh he is.
[27:29] Well are you.
[27:31] OK here we are.
[27:38] Back into open session.
[27:40] And so I will entertain a motion
based on discussion in process.
[27:44] I would make a motion that
we hold any action on today.
[27:49] Agenda item until our
next regularly scheduled
[27:54] meeting, which is March 10.
[27:56] And that we will have a
communication with the developer
[28:00] and request a response from
them by end of day March 5.
[28:04] So a week from Thursday
to get current status
[28:08] of construction documents.
[28:10] And then a schedule
from them that
[28:12] has dates for proof of financing
what their full development
[28:17] schedule is a start
of construction date
[28:21] and a proposal on
the income increment
[28:24] to be paid to the
city of Green Bay
[28:27] if the project is not
completed by December 31, 2027.
[28:34] It's pretty clear
there a second.
[28:38] Oh, there it is.
[28:39] OK motion and second.
[28:42] Any questions or comments
in regard to the motion.
[28:46] All those in favor.
[28:46] The motion say Aye.
[28:48] Aye opposed.
[28:49] Motion carries.
[28:50] Thank you.
[28:52] Great discussion.
[28:53] Thanks, everybody Mr.
Johnson Mr. mayor, everybody.
[28:56] Excellent discussion.
[28:57] Well, we got one point
done at this pace.
[28:59] We only have two hours
to go a little faster.
[29:03] OK agenda item number two.
[29:06] Oh my God.
[29:07] Yes and I really
appreciate your patience.
[29:10] Patience number two.
[29:13] Consideration with possible
action to approve a scope
[29:15] of work Amendment to
isg's contract to include
[29:20] construction, observation
and reporting services
[29:22] to the duration of the
construction of the light park
[29:25] shelter on a material basis,
with an estimated total
[29:29] cost of 230,000, and that is.
[29:34] Turn that over to
Director ditscheit.
[29:36] Totally damed today to
say we just approved this.
[29:41] Yeah so as we approved awarding
the construction contract.
[29:46] We do have a pre-construction
meeting next week
[29:49] scheduled to kick off the
construction of the shelter.
[29:54] So as part of that,
what we'd like to do
[29:57] is hire ISG on a time
and materials basis
[30:00] to do on site
construction supervision.
[30:04] So in essence, they would
be on site making sure
[30:07] that the contractor is building
everything to appropriate plans
[30:12] and specifications.
[30:14] And then they would
report out accordingly.
[30:17] This is something
that public works
[30:19] doesn't have the
staffing available to do
[30:23] a project of this magnitude.
[30:25] So we'd like to
outsource those services.
[30:28] So public works did reach
out to five vendors.
[30:32] Only one vendor provided a
quote with the availability
[30:37] to do that in the
time frame that we're
[30:39] looking for construction.
[30:42] As I mentioned, we would pay
them on time and materials,
[30:45] so we would dictate how
much they would be on site.
[30:48] We would tell them we want you
on site on these days and times
[30:52] to supervise this construction.
[30:54] We would pay them on an hourly
rate based on the attached
[30:58] fee of service charges.
[31:00] That's attached to
the agenda packet.
[31:02] That's their hourly rate,
depending on which engineer
[31:05] or inspector is on site.
[31:07] We would pay them per hour based
on that particular individual.
[31:11] And like I said, it would be
paid on time and materials.
[31:14] ISG is saying that based on
a project of this magnitude,
[31:18] they're estimating
that the total
[31:20] cost would be about $230,000
at the end of the project.
[31:25] Again, that's not a
final end dollar amount.
[31:29] It's really based on how
much we need them on site.
[31:32] It might be higher or lower.
[31:34] I will say that there is enough
money in the TID right now
[31:38] to approve this scope of work,
assuming that in the end,
[31:43] it comes into about $230,000.
[31:46] But I will also let that eats
up most of our construction
[31:50] contingency moving forward.
[31:52] So we'll have to
come back and have
[31:54] a discussion at a later date
about the project budget
[31:57] as a whole.
[31:59] But that being
said, I don't think
[32:01] that the decision
today prohibits
[32:04] us from having that discussion.
[32:06] So if construction is starting
in the next couple of weeks,
[32:10] we want somebody on
site supervising that.
[32:14] And we'll be having the budget
discussion sooner than later
[32:19] for this project.
[32:20] And so we do want
somebody on site.
[32:22] And since we're paying
them time and materials,
[32:25] we're not locked into a
contract Amendment of $230,000.
[32:30] So I would recommend
approval at this time.
[32:33] It just really amends
their scope of services
[32:36] and allows this
additional service that
[32:38] wasn't in the original quote.
[32:41] Your past experience
obviously with ISG is good.
[32:44] Yes yeah.
[32:44] They've been a great
company to work with.
[32:48] This is our first time working
with them as a Parks Department,
[32:51] but I think the city has worked
with them on other things.
[32:55] OK I just don't remember.
[32:57] What was the construction cost.
[32:59] Was that contract
value for this.
[33:01] I don't have that in front of
me, but it's roughly $5 million.
[33:05] Yeah, that's not exactly
right, but it's close.
[33:09] So when we approved that,
we approved the contractor.
[33:13] The contractor isn't doing this.
[33:16] Well, the contractor is
building it to their best
[33:19] of their abilities.
[33:20] What we want is just to have
somebody on site making sure
[33:23] that they are actually building
it to plans and specifications.
[33:27] We do that for nearly
every single project.
[33:30] So if you go to a road
project in the city,
[33:34] you'll see that
public works will
[33:35] have a staff member assigned
to do that on site supervision.
[33:39] We're currently doing some
renovations to the pavilion.
[33:43] We do have staff members
out there supervising that,
[33:47] making sure that
it's done properly
[33:49] and to our satisfaction.
[33:51] The difference with this
is just the magnitude of it
[33:54] and the complexity of it.
[33:56] It's kind of a
highly skilled trade
[33:58] to be able to monitor a
construction of this magnitude,
[34:03] and public works does
not have the staffing
[34:06] available to commit to it
for this particular project.
[34:10] Is that who normally
would do it.
[34:13] Yes and no.
[34:14] So there are some projects,
the majority of them,
[34:17] and Trista is here who can
answer some of those questions
[34:20] directly.
[34:21] But the majority of Public
Works construction projects
[34:24] are done internally,
but not all of them.
[34:27] There are some projects
that are quoted out,
[34:31] and we have inspection services
provided as the scope of work
[34:35] of that particular project.
[34:38] So you're paying somebody time
and material no matter what.
[34:41] Just either our payroll
or you're outsourcing it.
[34:44] Correct OK.
[34:47] Questions for Jen.
[34:48] 
[34:51] Deanna doing quick math.
[34:53] 3/4 of a mil.
[34:54] Over 15.
[34:56] Over $5 million
worth of construction
[34:58] is like 15% fee
5 2% Or it's 280.
[35:06] Well, seven 500 plus 250.
[35:09] So total their total design
services for three quarters
[35:13] of a million on $5 million
worth of construction
[35:16] is about 15% fee.
[35:19] It's a little steep.
[35:20] But they also designed the
other half of the project.
[35:24] That would be another 5 million.
[35:25] That's not being done right now.
[35:27] That starts to make more sense.
[35:28] Yes OK.
[35:29] Yeah That makes more sense.
[35:34] Yeah OK.
[35:36] And is it common
when we put stuff out
[35:38] for bid, like, five vendors.
[35:40] Sounds like quite a bit.
[35:41] And only one response.
[35:43] Yeah, it depends
on what the service
[35:46] is that you're quoting out.
[35:47] There are times when we just get
one vendor quote on something.
[35:51] There's other times when
it's more competitive.
[35:53] In this case, these
services, there
[35:56] aren't a lot of people that
can provide these services.
[36:00] And a lot of the
consultants that
[36:02] have the capabilities
and skilled
[36:03] are already locked
up for the year.
[36:05] They kind of have their
inspectors already
[36:07] scheduled for other things.
[36:10] So this is something
that of the vendors
[36:14] we reached out we
only got one quote.
[36:17] I'm sorry, what did you say.
[36:18] I would respond to the RFP.
[36:22] I'm looking over somebody
else's stuff like that.
[36:24] I mean, it was a
pretty small community.
[36:25] That's weird.
[36:26] Anyway like you got it.
[36:30] There's some cultural.
[36:32] Well, yeah.
[36:32] I mean, if you want to sync
up and take your County,
[36:35] then you would then you
would sign up and tell all
[36:37] the terrible things they did.
[36:38] But then nobody wants
to play that game.
[36:40] That's not good.
[36:40] But in this case,
it is also helpful
[36:43] that the company that's doing
the construction observation
[36:48] is also the company
that designed it.
[36:51] So that's extremely helpful.
[36:53] I would agree.
[36:54] 
[36:56] I have a question for Dan.
[37:00] If not, I'll entertain a motion.
[37:02] I'll make a motion to approve
the Amendment to refuse contract
[37:08] for the duration of the
construction on a time
[37:12] and materials basis,
with an estimated total
[37:14] cost not to exceed $230,000.
[37:19] Second second.
[37:21] Motion and second.
[37:23] Any questions or comments
in regards to the motion,
[37:27] but all those in
favor of the motion.
[37:28] Please say Aye.
[37:30] Aye opposed.
[37:31] Motion carried.
[37:32] Thank you.
[37:34] Information Our next meeting is.
[37:38] 
[37:43] We might have amended
the agenda 24.5 hours.
[37:49] We have a meeting.
[37:50] The meeting.
[37:52] OK I guess I don't
have it talking about.
[37:54] I do number 3, consideration
and possible action
[38:01] to approve an extension for
gem cap Green Bay fire station
[38:05] apartments, LLC,
extending the lease
[38:08] payment deadline to April 30.
[38:11] Thank you.
[38:11] OK I see Lisa, please.
[38:14] Yes thank you.
[38:15] So I apologize that
there's not a document
[38:17] and this was added last minute.
[38:19] So as this is for general
capitals, our developer
[38:22] at the New fire station as well
as their affordable apartments.
[38:26] So there's a number of
perspective financing processes
[38:34] playing out right now.
[38:35] And our ground lease, which
was one of the many documents
[38:39] you approved last year had
that was dated September 25,
[38:43] and that ground lease payment
needed to be paid by October 26
[38:48] for compliance with
other requirements.
[38:49] We are asking to push that
out to April because we've
[38:52] run into some issues
where some of that
[38:54] was going to be paid from
era funds from the County,
[38:58] from the Department of Treasury.
[39:00] And we've run into some pushback
on eligibility for that,
[39:03] and we're trying to work
through that right now.
[39:05] So pushing it out to April
will give us some more time
[39:08] to work on that while keeping
the developer in compliance
[39:11] with their requirements
and the developers
[39:14] on if you have any questions.
[39:17] Good afternoon, everyone.
[39:18] Hello I'm all set.
[39:21] Yeah I'm sorry.
[39:22] You said you had sat
around for a month.
[39:25] From my opinion,
this one doesn't
[39:27] need a lot of discussion.
[39:28] He loves us unless
he wants to take
[39:30] the risk of saying something
and potentially leading
[39:33] us down the right track.
[39:35] I know better than that.
[39:36] You just.
[39:39] You just nod and say thank you.
[39:40] And we're looking forward to
continuing down this path.
[39:44] So just remember this was
a very complicated capital
[39:48] stacks structure.
[39:50] And I remember
talking about this I
[39:52] couldn't explain it very well.
[39:55] Legal standpoint.
[39:56] So I'll make a motion to approve
the extension for Green Bay fire
[40:00] station apartments,
LLC, extending
[40:02] the ground lease payment to a
deadline of April 30 of 2026.
[40:06] Motion by Alder.
[40:08] Second Second by Matt.
[40:10] Questions or comments
in regard to the motion.
[40:12] If not, all those in favor of
the motion, please say Aye.
[40:15] Aye opposed.
[40:16] Motion carried.
[40:17] Not only is our next meeting
is Tuesday, March 10 and.
[40:25] 
[40:28] And so we are
getting our updates.
[40:31] We did it all.
[40:31] March yeah.
[40:32] Yeah thanks, everybody,
for coming out.
[40:36] Great turnout for
a special meeting.
[40:38] Thanks, everyone,
for coming in person.
[40:40] So much easier with
closed session.
[40:42] Oh my God.
[40:43] Great motion to adjourn.
[40:45] Second everybody in favor.
[40:50] 
[40:53] Say Aye.
[40:54] Aye Motion carried.
[40:58] Deliverance
[40:59]