[0:03] Good evening, we're calling the meeting of Finance and Personnel to order at 6 p.m. on Thursday, September 3rd. All members of the Finance and Personnel Committee are present in chambers.

[0:15] Moving to our first agenda item, unfinished business 26-0-545, resolution-approving assignment of parking assignment at Market Square, parking ramp from Cameron Park on to association to free-heal capital.

[0:32] No, the committee and or council may convene in close session pursuant to Wisconsin

[0:37] statute, 19.85 per and 1 per and he, to formulate and update negotiations strategies

[0:43] and parameters following such close session, the committee's and or council may reconvene

[0:47] an open session.

[0:52] Council member Janssen.

[0:54] I'd like to move to refer this for 60 days to allow our staff to have discussions and

[1:00] negotiations with the new owner of market square building.

[1:02] To

[1:07] refer by consumer chance and second by consumer K-Low,

[1:15] is there any discussion 60

[1:31] days?

[1:38] Smart for chance and motion and consumer K-Low seconded and just as a matter we have a speaker

[1:47] Is we referring do we still open public hearing?

[1:58] I'm sorry, I don't know the answer could

[2:06] I have a motion to open up public hearing?

[2:12] Motion to open by consumer K-Low seconded by consumer Northwood, all in favor of raise your hands, any post

[2:21] Open public hearing,

[2:25] Nicole Frank, would you like to speak?

[2:36] It appears that Ms. Frank isn't in the console, so we will.

[2:42] Could I have a motion to close public hearing?

[2:47] Motion to close by council member, northward, seconded by council member K-Low,

[2:52] All in favor of raise your hands.

[2:55] Any opposed?

[2:58] That the console, there are the close session is closed.

[3:04] Okay, new business, oops, oh sorry, we need a vote to under referral, move forward

[3:11] the vote by showing you the hands,

[3:17] any opposed that motion passes unanimously,

[3:23] now we'll

[3:23] move on to new business.

[3:26] 26, 180, 401 resolution amending appendix, C, C schedule regarding fees relating to fire

[3:33] prevention.

[3:48] While we're waiting, let me just explain that we're not using the normal vote

[3:53] cast because we don't our system is in up. So we'll be doing this by voice and hand.

[4:02] Thank

[4:02] you.

[4:09] So, resolution, I'm going to just repeat it. Resolution, I'm ending appendix C,

[4:13] fee, schedule, regarding fees relating to fire prevention. Consomer, my newberry.

[4:21] Motion to approve.

[4:24] Motion to approve by Consomer, newberry, seconded by Consomer, Slesonical, any discussion?

[4:28] Seeing

[4:31] none, we'll move forward with the vote,

[4:37] all in favor,

[4:42] any opposed?

[4:44] That motion passes unanimously.

[4:47] Next item is 26-108-59.

[4:50] Resolution, approving a change in project scope for the lacrosse on our basketball floor project.

[4:57] Don't forget to subscribe our channel and click on the bell icon.

[5:00] Move to a dot.

[5:03] Move to a dot by Council Member Janssen, second by Council Member Slesniko, is there any discussion?

[5:10] Council Member Slesniko.

[5:13] Thank you, Chair. I just want to thank the lacrosse and staff for looking to save money when we can do a renovation rather than a full, you know, replacement any time we can do that and improve the longevity of our infrastructure at a lower cost. I think that's a win, so thank you for the work on bringing that forward.

[5:32] Seeing

[5:35] no other discussion, we'll move forward the vote on favor, any opposed,

[5:43] that motion passes unanimously.

[5:47] Next item is 26-10869, resolution authorizing determination of the least between the city and the cross.

[5:56] And Girl Scouts of Wisconsin, Badgerland Council Inc. for 2710, Cory Road, and authorizing the acquisition of the building.

[6:07] Council Member Sleson Colm, who to adopt?

[6:12] Motion to adopt my Council Member Sleson Colm is seconded by

[6:15] Council Member Northwood, is there any discussion?

[6:21] Council Member Kahlo.

[6:23] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[6:25] With this, then I assume it will become city of across

[6:29] own again and will be surplus property,

[6:34] or I guess I'm winning what the next step is.

[6:40] Mr. Kisone, you have an answer for us.

[6:43] Yes, sir. Thank you.

[6:45] So, yes, if approved tonight, the building would then become property of City of Lacrosse,

[6:49] our intention would then be to come back in the next month of the month after

[6:52] declared surplus property, go through an RFFP process and eventually sell it.

[6:57] We could also, but if this doesn't come to City of Lacrosse, we also had the option to lease

[7:00] this space as well.

[7:02] Thank you.

[7:05] Any further discussion or questions?

[7:08] Seeing none.

[7:10] All those in favor?

[7:14] Any imposed? That motion passes unanimously. Next item 26-108-71. Resolution

[7:22] of appropriating additional funds from tax and criminal district, TID, number 11 to the Civic

[7:28] Center Park Project, CIP, number 7-7-8.

[7:36] Call some member, Jameson.

[7:46] Some member,

[7:47] to adopt?

[7:52] Motion to adopt by council member Kalo, second by council member Janssen.

[7:59] Council member Janssen. I'd appreciate if staff could kind of just give a more update.

[8:05] Are we changing the project? Or is it just coming in this expensive?

[8:14] Good evening. Thank you. We put this project out to bid. We got one bit from Father Hammer.

[8:23] And because it is tied to TID 11, the contract has to be under contract by October 12th.

[8:32] Normally we'd have probably taken this back out to bid in order to get those funds under contract.

[8:39] And used TID 11, there was not enough time to do that.

[8:43] And the bid came in way over.

[8:46] You know, we put this project together probably three, four years ago

[8:50] Cost of construction just keeps going up. So is it feasible to take anything out of it to keep the price lower?

[9:02] If we can award it I can value engineers some some of the money out of it

[9:07] But we really can't do any of that until we award it.

[9:19] You're welcome.

[9:23] just to be clear that what was approved the first time was 450,000 and this is going up to

[9:34] 815,000 is all right. Correct. So it's the 450 plus the 365. Correct for a total of 815,000. Correct.

[9:55] Thank you, that's all.

[10:03] But I thought I saw a second amendment for 400 and 14 plus some thousand dollars, where does that work into this?

[10:11] That came, that number came from the finance department because we've already spent some of that 450.

[10:17] We had to increase that number in order to award the bid to get the full amount to award.

[10:25] So we're actually looking to add four, four in that way, to the amendment, correct?

[10:32] The second amendment that's listed in legislature, the second resolution.

[10:40] Thank you.

[10:44] Conspiracy.

[10:46] Oh, and I don't have a question for you.

[10:48] But then I would make a motion to amend and it would be the, and I don't have it in front of me,

[10:55] but it is emending to $414,003 dollars.

[11:04] Yeah, amendment number two.

[11:07] So I would make that motion.

[11:14] Council member Kalo, motions two amend

[11:17] and seconded by Council member Slesniko.

[11:26] The proposed amended resolution for FMP number two,

[11:31] it's attached in the file.

[11:40] Kalo and Slesniko,

[11:45] any discussion?

[11:45] Council

[11:49] member Newbury. Thank you. Sorry, let me hold my calculator. So that brings us up to

[11:56] 864,000 is that correct. Okay.

[12:04] Okay. Thank you.

[12:08] Council member Kelo.

[12:10] Thank you, Madam Chair.

[12:13] It's a lot of money.

[12:16] But I believe, and I think I've stated this often, that I think it's important that the money

[12:24] in or close to the Tid when possible because that was why the Tid was created.

[12:31] And I think we heard from Parks that this park, and it's a connection between the river

[12:37] and downtown, has not been updated since it was built in probably the early 80s.

[12:45] So this is Embarred Money, this is money in the Tid that should be used for this.

[12:51] And yes, it is a lot of money, but I am going to support it.

[12:57] Conferences to call.

[12:59] One additional note, and thank you, Council Member Trost.

[13:03] The amended resolution has the money coming from TIT 17, not TIT 11.

[13:08] So I just wanted to make sure that people were aware of that, that that was also part

[13:12] of the amendment number two.

[13:19] And I guess if Director Trane can just confirm that that is his fair game for this, I would

[13:30] Yes, it is. It's something that parks and finance and planning went through to make sure that we would

[13:36] appropriately use the funds from TIT 17. And this is a reflection of what Dan talked about

[13:41] during the Board of Estimates meeting with the change and increment from

[13:46] that has gone down from this year to next year, so just making sure that we've got enough

[13:50] cushion and all these TITs. We just adjusted some of them from TIT 11 to TIT 17.

[13:57] Thank you.

[13:57] Council member Jamson. Dr. Train, so if we asked

[14:02] parts to go back and get additional bids, the money would then still be available to take out

[14:08] of TIT 17, it would just be the original money that would not be available anymore.

[14:13] We just looked at the additional amount of the 400 for the cement

[14:17] minute. We didn't look at it as if it was the whole package. So I wouldn't have that answer

[14:22] for you right now.

[14:29] Thank you.

[14:32] So the vote is for the proposed

[14:33] The amended resolution for FMP number two, is there any further discussion,

[14:41] all in favor?

[14:44] I'm just going to say that I'm going to go no just for the purpose to keep it off of the

[14:48] consent agenda next week for the discussion if there's more information that needs to be found

[14:53] out between now and then.

[14:54] Okay thanks.

[14:55] Thank you.

[14:57] So moving on forward with the vote.

[15:00] All in favour?

[15:08] That passes 5-1.

[15:16] Next item on the agenda is 26-0886 Resolution Awarding a 3-year contract to Coney in the amount of $434,164.24 for preventative maintenance service for all city escalators and elevators.

[15:36] Council Member Janssen, move to adopt.

[15:42] Motion to adopt by Council Member Janssen, second by Council Member Northwood, is there any discussion?

[15:47] Council Member Sleznikov.

[15:49] I'm just wondering what this is, is this something that when this contract comes up, this goes out for a bit,

[15:55] or there really no other, you know, companies that can handle this or what was the reason we're specifically going with this company again?

[16:10] So for a service agreement of this size, our

[16:14] personcy policy doesn't require us to go out for bid.

[16:18] It recommends that we go out for quotes.

[16:21] So we did reach out to four different vendors for quotes.

[16:25] We did receive quotes back from three of them.

[16:28] So in addition to Cone, we received a bid from Otis and Schindler.

[16:34] And we went with Cone as the cheapest and best option.

[16:41] So were they actually the least expensive of the bid?

[16:48] They were, so they were, the highest bid was Otis, Schindler's base bid came in lower,

[16:56] but there was addons that they didn't, to do with state testing.

[17:01] We're not included in their bid, so if we factor those in, it was, what our person

[17:13] Thank you.

[17:15] Councilmember Nubary.

[17:17] Thank you.

[17:18] Do you know how many escalators and elevators the city owns for me that need preventative

[17:24] maintenance?

[17:25] I do not have that.

[17:26] I don't know.

[17:27] Does anybody in the room?

[17:36] Councilmember.

[17:37] It's actually part of the document.

[17:39] If you scroll through, there's a whole list of various pieces in the structure.

[17:50] Is there any further discussion?

[17:53] Thank you, Deputy Chair.

[17:54] with

[18:00] the vote, all in favor,

[18:05] any opposed?

[18:09] That motion passes unanimously. Moving on to

[18:12] our next item 26-0892. Resolution creating and reallocating existing unspent funds for

[18:20] new capital improvement project for the extension of sanitary sewer service to three city

[18:25] of lacrosse parcels that cannot currently reach sanitary sewer infrastructure purminous

[18:31] and we'll go on the west side of Sunset Lane.

[18:38] Council Member Northwood, move to adopt.

[18:43] Motion to adopt by Council Member Northwood,

[18:45] second by Council Member Janssen, is there any discussion?

[18:48] Council Member Sosenko.

[18:51] I'm one of Director Gallagher.

[18:52] Can just describe what's going on here.

[18:55] And I believe I read in here that there

[18:57] still could be assessments to the property owners

[19:00] for this reconnection I just wanted to confirm that.

[19:06] So what's going on here is that due to the elevations of the road of Sunset Lane, some of these properties are kind of up at the crest of it when the sanitary sewer was installed it drains away both ways.

[19:18] So there's really no way for us to extend the main that's in the street to get there.

[19:22] This would be an extension of a main that's actually off the road behind the properties that would then allow these properties to

[19:29] to meet COVID by not crossing other property lines

[19:32] and connect into the extended main.

[19:34] I don't have a final answer on assessment,

[19:36] but I didn't believe that there was going to be any,

[19:38] because typically it's only when we put a new main

[19:40] into a road that there would be assessment.

[19:43] I think this would just be additional infrastructure

[19:45] that the utility would own, but I could get a final answer

[19:49] on that, if you'd like.

[19:51] I'm just curious, and I'm sure the property owner

[19:54] is curious on that too.

[19:55] Yeah.

[19:55] This is basically at the request of a property owner

[19:58] everyone's to develop a lot of them.

[20:02] Any

[20:06] other discussion?

[20:10] See, none will move forward the vote on favour?

[20:14] Any opposed? That motion carries unanimously.

[20:21] Next item is 26-08-93 resolution reallocating existing unencumbered tiff number 11 funds for replacement of failing brick sidewalk in the 500-black of Main Street.

[20:34] Councilmember Kelo. Motion to adapt.

[20:40] Motion to adapt by Councilmember Kelo. Second by Councilmember Northwood.

[20:46] Councilmember North or Kelo.

[20:51] I was going to ask you that I was going to amend, but you probably should stay up there because you might have a question.

[20:57] I would like to move the amendment, per most proposed amendment, on Legislature.

[21:02] or it is, and I know it's very hard to see,

[21:05] but it is changing it from 20,000 to 40,000.

[21:09] It is not 420,000 or zero.

[21:13] So I'd like to move that amendment first.

[21:19] Motion to move.

[21:20] Amendment by council member K-Lose.

[21:22] Second by council member Northwood.

[21:24] Is there any discussion?

[21:28] Council member K-Lose.

[21:29] Well, director Gallagher, you're already there.

[21:32] I'm going to let you have the floor.

[21:33] If you can just explain what this is, in case people are aware.

[21:36] I was going to say if there's no discussion, that's great, I'll go sit down.

[21:40] We presented the option to Councilor Kilo to replace the brick that's currently in the

[21:46] sidewalk area to the Boulevard area.

[21:48] This is one of the streets where for ADA compliance we're looking at flipping the brick in the

[21:52] sidewalk.

[21:53] So when that was presented and it looked like it was roughly double the cost to that was

[21:57] the suggested amendment.

[21:59] So this would cover both the sidewalk portion in the Boulevard brick.

[22:05] Council member Chanson. So it kind of insinuated in the report that there's a variety of things that caused this.

[22:13] So it appears that one of them was previous work. How long goes that work?

[22:21] I don't know how many times that area has been maintained. I know this was one of the first area of streetscaped,

[22:26] dating back to possibly late 90s, early,

[22:30] and so it could be that this was related to settlement around the building or foundation issues.

[22:36] But what became apparent when we tried to replace a few bricks was that the area was just too large and it needed to be, you know, a larger fix.

[22:48] Conspiracy law.

[22:50] I don't have anything for you. Thank you, Dr. Gallagher.

[22:53] I just want to point out that the original bid was to take out the bricks and then the

[23:01] whole sidewalk would have been concrete and I think some of us can recall this happen

[23:07] maybe last summer, downtown and second and third and a lot of the business owners were

[23:13] very upset that the option wasn't to put the brick terrace in and Dr. Gallagher and I have

[23:21] talking for a couple of years about their department wanting to flip that because that

[23:27] maintenance of that brick on the sidewalk is so hard. So I just thought I'd best instead

[23:32] of tearing it up later to add brick on the terrace that we do it all at once and the cost was

[23:40] pretty nominal compared to having to rip it up again.

[23:48] Any other discussion?

[23:51] We'll forward with the

[23:52] vote, all in favour? On the amendment, this is on the amendment, all in favour of the amendment.

[24:00] Any vote opposed? Seeing none of the amendment passes unanimously, then back to the original resolution.

[24:10] as amended, any discussion?

[24:17] Seeing not, I'll ask for the vote, all in favor,

[24:21] any opposed?

[24:23] Seeing not, that motion passes. Next on the agenda, 26-108-96. Resolution reallocating existing

[24:32] unencumbered tid, number 11 funds for additional funding for the King Street neighborhood greenway

[24:38] from front street to third street south.

[24:43] Conspiracyllo. Motion to approve.

[24:49] Motion to approve by Conspiracyllo.

[24:51] Second by Conspiracyllo. Any discussion?

[24:56] Seeing none. Move forward with the vote. All in favour?

[25:02] Any opposed? Seeing none? That motion passes unanimously.

[25:08] Moving on to 26-0899, resolution,

[25:12] authorizing increase in court costs for municipal citations.

[25:19] Council member Janssen.

[25:21] Move to adopt.

[25:26] Council member moved to adopt by council member Janssen, second by council member Northwood, any discussion?

[25:34] Seeing none, we'll move forward with the vote, all in favour?

[25:41] Post.

[25:42] Seeing none.

[25:43] That motion passes unanimously.

[25:47] Moving on to 26 dash zero nine zero zero.

[25:50] Resolution authorizing renewal for the Wisconsin Urban Search and Rescue Emergency Response Services.

[25:56] Twenty twenty six to twenty twenty eight agreement.

[26:01] Consumers says Nicole.

[26:04] Move to adopt.

[26:06] Motion to adopt.

[26:06] I can't remember, so last week I was second by Council Member Kelo, any discussion.

[26:11] Council Member, so last week I'm just wondering if Chief Schott could just give us an overview

[26:16] of the emergency services that the City of La Crosse Fire Department provide.

[26:22] Just so we have a handle on what type of scenarios might come under this purview.

[26:28] Appreciate the question.

[26:30] We've had a longstanding relationship with the state of Wisconsin dating back to the early 2000s

[26:35] In regard to the training that we receive specifically for low frequency high impact rescue types

[26:43] situations, so people that get stranded on the bluff, people that are in confined space,

[26:48] incidents, or in structural collapse.

[26:51] So what this contract does in the spirit of things is a little bit of a trade-off.

[26:55] They allow us to come to their training at the React Center at both field and we supply

[27:01] the staff for that.

[27:02] they in turn provide the hourly contracted rate, which is the change in this contract, which

[27:07] went from $55 to $60 an hour.

[27:10] So the state trains and pays us the hourly wage to send our employees to get certifications

[27:17] in Swiftwater Rescue, Technical Confine Space, all the disciplines that allow us to provide

[27:23] a higher level of service here in our specialty disciplines.

[27:26] So, this is just a renewal, if you will, of that relationship, and honestly, there's some

[27:35] differences in how the team is deployed now with e-Mac agreements, which is like mutual aid

[27:39] for other states.

[27:41] And if you've been paying attention on what's going on around the nation, the amount of flooding

[27:46] collapses, natural disasters has increased the need for these teams to be stood up and deployed.

[27:51] So we've had people deploy in the last contract here and I think that probably will continue but fortunately the state does reimburse us for that

[28:03] Thank you Chief for bringing up the current situations that we're experiencing in the last few years related to extreme weather and flooding

[28:09] And I can only imagine that deployment may increase as time goes on because we're seeing very large events where it requires emergency personnel to become involved

[28:19] So thank you to you and your team for making yourselves available to help, not only our community, but potentially others.

[28:28] Thank you for that mention and for all of you, I hope that we aren't deployed, but we will be ready. Thanks.

[28:38] Any other discussion?

[28:42] Seeing none as for the vote, all in favor?

[28:48] Any opposed? Seeing none, that motion passes unanimously?

[28:53] Moving on to 26-0901, resolution authorizing the issuance of not to exceed 13,805,000 dollars

[29:03] in aggregate, principle, amount of general obligation promissory notes of the city of LaCrosse

[29:10] County, Wisconsin, for the purpose of completing certain capital projects in and for the city

[29:17] and purchasing certain equipment for the city, prescribing details of certain notes in the form

[29:22] of note, authorizing the award of set notes to the purchaser, therefore,

[29:27] levying taxes and related matters.

[29:33] Let's remember, Janssen.

[29:35] Move to adopt.

[29:38] Motion to adopt by councilmember Janssen, seconded by councilmember

[29:41] Slesniko, is there any discussion?

[29:49] One more forum with the vote?

[29:51] All in favor?

[29:58] That motion passes five.

[30:02] Next item on the agenda is the 2016-0936 resolution, authorizing the appointment of an interim director of finance, effective August 25th, 2026. This is short circuit by Mayor Washington's wife on 91226.

[30:21] Council member says Nicole moved to adopt council motion to adopt by

[30:27] council member says to go second by council member Janssen is there any

[30:32] discussion council member newberry I just have a quick question for direct

[30:38] foranson as you're coming up your last question what is the difference other than

[30:45] the fiscal impact of the difference which is in the in the documentation here is

[30:50] what's the change in roles from deputy Dan to director Dan.

[31:03] It is allowing him to

[31:05] receive the compensation for the position in which he will be performing, making sure

[31:09] we compensate appropriately, it will also allow him to receive the vacation benefit of

[31:15] city executives and recognition for his hard work. Absolutely. Thank you. I'll just

[31:22] Any other questions or discussion?

[31:28] Thank you, Director Fransan.

[31:30] Seeing none, we'll ask for the vote.

[31:33] All in favor?

[31:35] Any opposed?

[31:36] That motion passes unanimously?

[31:41] Item 26-0824.

[31:43] Resolution approving an amendment to the development agreement for the Driftless

[31:47] Apartments and Townhomes?

[31:49] No, the committee and or council may convene

[31:52] close session pursuant to Wisconsin's stage to 19.85 parent, one parent-e to formulate an

[31:58] update negotiation strategies and parameters, following such close session the committee and

[32:03] or council may reconvene an open session.

[32:10] We feel we need to go into close session.

[32:29] Director Trinion, would you like to weigh in on this? Do we need to go into close session?

[32:33] Direct. Director Trinion. Oh, excuse me. Julie, I didn't see you back there. Julie,

[32:45] I'm

[32:50] It did come out of ECDC, we had extensive discussion on this item and ECDC, and it did come out with

[32:56] unanimous approval with a recommendation to approve for this, you know, going forward.

[33:02] Is there anything about the resolution that you want to explain or expand on?

[33:07] I guess I could just add, this really came about during just annual compliance review for this development.

[33:13] So again, this is the Driftful Department of Development.

[33:14] that's over a river point to strike the apartment building with the surrounding town homes.

[33:19] And it just came of note that there were a few items in the development agreement that needed to be addressed.

[33:25] And we did that collaboratively working with the developer, it's outlined in the amendment.

[33:29] But the three topic areas are just correcting the Minimum Sess Valley guarantee date,

[33:35] treating land as increment, and then also how the deficiency pilot is treated.

[33:39] So those are the topics that are in the amendment are clarified.

[33:44] Thank you, Julie.

[33:46] You're welcome.

[33:49] Councilmember Jansen.

[33:50] Given that, I would move to adopt.

[33:54] Motion to adopt.

[33:55] I can't remember Jansen.

[33:56] Seconded by Councilmember Northwood.

[33:59] Any discussion?

[34:02] Seeing none, I'll ask for the vote.

[34:04] All in favour?

[34:07] Any opposed?

[34:08] Seeing none that motion passes unanimously?

[34:13] Next item on the agenda is 26-0825.

[34:16] Resolution approving a development agreement with

[34:20] C, Copper X2, LLC, Copper X3, LLC, and Copper X4, LLC.

[34:27] For a mixed-use development at 2415 state road.

[34:32] Note, the committee and or council-making being in closed session

[34:35] pursuant to Wisconsin's statute of 19.851 parent e-tformulate

[34:40] and update negotiations to address in parameters.

[34:43] Following such closed session, the committee's and or council

[34:46] may reconvene an open session.

[34:48] This meeting was short-circuited by Mayor Washington's by the director Treen, would you like to speak to this issue or would I defer to Julie as well?

[34:58] Thank you, Julie.

[35:06] All right. So just as a reminder, this is a three-faced development. With mixed use, that's going at the former

[35:14] Kmart site, is proposed to have 214 apartments and 33 town homes, 163 garage and 136 service parking spaces, as well as 25,000 square feet of commercial space and 3,000 square feet of community and a

[35:33] in January of 2025, and we work with them to move forward in conjunction with

[35:40] others or financial consultants, review that request, and we're able to bring a

[35:45] term sheet to the ECDC in September of 2025. There were a lot of moving pieces to

[35:50] still with the development as far as the phasing and whatnot. The ECDC unanimously

[35:55] approved the terms that were recommended by the staff at that time, and we've

[35:59] been working with a developer to try to get to a development agreement.

[36:05] And one of the things that also came to light is the need for public infrastructure

[36:09] improvements, specifically public utilities at that site.

[36:13] This was tied to the donor-tidd, and then our resolution that came through the ATF&T

[36:19] in Council last month to help make Tid-Eleven a resource to pay for the utility improvements

[36:25] that were needed at this site.

[36:28] It's estimated that those improvements will cost a maximum of a million dollars, so we're

[36:34] working through that as well to make sure we had a funding source to pay for what would

[36:38] be the city's responsibility aside from any pay-go that would go to assist the project.

[36:45] Through that, we also negotiated to have some pathways, least to participate in this development,

[36:54] And so originally, what was approved by the ECDC was 18 to 23 units, our 25 units, the

[37:01] developer was amenable to that as we further into the wease of that program and hashed

[37:06] out some details and realized some needs for rent controls and things like that we did

[37:11] settle on having it doesn't units in the development and they would be divided up among two

[37:18] of the apartment buildings.

[37:19] So, as a result, we needed to bring that term sheet back to the ECDC earlier this month.

[37:25] And that resulted to just an alteration to the tip amount as well.

[37:29] We did discuss this project relatively in depth as well.

[37:33] Had the ECDC and it did get approval with the vote with six to two,

[37:39] proving the terms and the ECDC also did approve us moving ahead to bring this to FNP with

[37:45] development agreement tonight so it has the short circuit. The time at the when we brought the

[37:50] term sheet to the ECDC, gosh is that last week. So yes, just last week. We did have a

[37:56] development agreement all but drafted. We just had some things that we needed to to get

[37:59] ironed out and specifically that pathways home component we wanted to make sure that that was

[38:03] still still worked for everyone. So with that we do now have an agreement that's in line with

[38:09] standard to policy and provisions that we typically have in our agreements, as well as in line

[38:15] with the term sheet that was most recently approved by the ECDC. And the developers are

[38:20] here too as well. Should you have any questions for them?

[38:25] Consumant for newberry.

[38:27] Thank you. I guess what I want to know is what action comes after if this is approved and

[38:35] what is that, what can the public expect after this?

[38:40] You mean after accounts, so obviously it goes on to counsel?

[38:44] Yes, so then we will need to execute the development agreement and get signatures.

[38:48] But now we will have, there is a timeline, all of our development agreements have timelines and all sorts of requirements that need to be met with the developments.

[38:56] We have a deal made for them that we can hold the developers too as well and that they can also hold us too as far as what we would agree to do for them.

[39:04] So, we'll, I'd like all of our developments that we have development agreements with, we have regular compliance that we're checking into make sure that they're meeting the requirements of whether it's the timeline, the project, the scope of the project itself, the assessment that's supposed to happen, the increment that's supposed to be created, and we check on that on a regular basis, we have mechanisms in place to if that doesn't happen, that we can come back and deal with that.

[39:30] you know the deficiency pilots is a great example of that. Something that we that we utilize if we need to.

[39:36] Okay, thank you.

[39:38] I, too, Councilman Renew Berry, we do also do with this project.

[39:42] Have a idle site grants with the state that also requires for demolition of the building that the city has for this project.

[39:49] So that's something else to that is another lever to that that it also is part of this project that the city has helped to support.

[39:56] Can't remember, so I think I'll...

[40:00] Julie, I'm not sure if this is something you can answer, but I'm curious why we have four LLCs for this.

[40:07] I probably would probably have better for the developer to answer. I mean, I know some of it is, I think, financing and making the numbers work on that, and if getting the financing they need, would you like Jeremy to come up?

[40:19] Yeah, I guess if we can, I guess this is the first time I've seen that so I'm curious what

[40:25] what is the mechanism in the rationale for that.

[40:31] Thanks for the question, Jeremy Novak, with 360 real estate solutions.

[40:36] So the purpose of the 4 LLCs was really to mirror the different parcels in the CSM

[40:42] so that we can do each parcel, standalone financing.

[40:46] So it's just a, it's a function of the financing and the capital stack for the project.

[40:53] Okay, thank you so much.

[40:54] Any other questions?

[40:56] Councilmember Northwood.

[40:58] I think this question would be for Julie.

[41:01] I think.

[41:07] So you said 12 of the apartments will be pathways apartments, and they'll be into a different apartment buildings.

[41:14] Yep.

[41:14] So the development agreement requires for them to participate in the pathways program for 10 years for all of those units.

[41:21] And so they'll be treated like our pathways,

[41:23] leases, they'll have right control of the pathways team.

[41:26] We'll determine which tenants will be in those units.

[41:30] And so on, essentially, the developers committed those units

[41:33] to participate in the program.

[41:35] And you answered my next question.

[41:37] It was going to be for how many years, 10, 10 years.

[41:41] OK, thank you.

[41:42] You're welcome.

[41:43] Council Member Jansen.

[41:44] And will those units be spread out throughout the units?

[41:48] So, because the phase has, you know, north, south, east and west are the different phases.

[41:54] The first two apartment buildings to go over, east and west, and so they are one bedroom units.

[41:59] And so they will be a half and half, so six and one apartment building and six and the other.

[42:08] But not like all on one floor or anything like that.

[42:11] We didn't, we didn't hash up those details.

[42:13] Also, you know, I don't, we don't have anything in writing or in the development agreement that says that specifically.

[42:24] The other discussion or questions for Julie?

[42:28] Council member noise what?

[42:29] How many apartments did you say?

[42:32] There's 214 apartments total, but there's 33 townhouses.

[42:40] There's a lot of numbers floating around sometimes.

[42:42] Thank you.

[42:46] And it might not be appropriate, but thanks for all you've done, and I think this will be your last F&B meeting with us.

[42:51] So, you'll be missed.

[42:55] Seeing as they're in constant memory cable.

[42:57] I don't have a question for you, Julie.

[43:00] Thanks, so.

[43:01] I just want to comment not on the project, but on the infrastructure side,

[43:09] just again to make folks aware.

[43:13] mostly my district part of council new berries in a little bit of McKenzie-Mindell's.

[43:18] The money for that is coming from Tittle Levin, so, you know, this is taxpayer dollars

[43:24] from Tittle Levin, but they're going out to another development, which is good, that's

[43:29] how we're paying for that public infrastructure to pay for that.

[43:33] So I just want everyone to be aware where the city money is coming from.

[43:43] We do need a motion on 26-0825.

[43:48] Concentmember of Northwood.

[43:50] Move to a dot.

[43:53] Concentmember of Northwood.

[43:54] Concentmember of Northwood.

[43:55] Secondmember of Northwood.

[43:56] Secondmember of Northwood.

[43:57] This is cited for closed session.

[44:00] Is there a need to go into closed session?

[44:07] Seeing no need.

[44:10] I'll call for the vote.

[44:11] All in favor.

[44:14] Any opposed.

[44:16] That motion passes unanimously.

[44:18] And I do not believe there's a bargaining, a collective bargaining update, so with that, this meeting is adjourned.

Finance & Personnel Committee on 2026-09-03 6:00 PM

Agenda

Transcript