powered help
header-left header-center header-right
Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
Meeting Name: BRONZEVILLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Agenda status: Final
Meeting date/time: 2/15/2017 9:00 AM Minutes status: Final  
Meeting location: Room 303, Third Floor, City Hall
Published agenda: Agenda Agenda Published minutes: Minutes Minutes  
Meeting video:  
File #Ver.Agenda #TypeTitleActionResultTallyAction DetailsVideo
   1. Call to Order.

Minutes note: Meeting called to order at 9:09 a.m.
    Not available
   2. Roll Call.

Minutes note: Member Crump joined the committee at 9:15 a.m. during agenda item 5.
    Roll call Not available
   3. Review and Approval of the Previous Meeting Minutes from January 12, 2017.

Minutes note: Member Montgomery Baker moved approval, seconded by member Perceptions, of the meeting minutes from January 12, 2017. There were no objections from those members present.
    Not available
   4. Discusson on the First Stage "Welcome to Bronzeville Play".

Minutes note: Members briefly commented that the pay was well done, well attended, consisted of talented young actors who need to be further nurtured, presented new information, and brought back old memories. Member Perceptions added that Maures Development is interested to acquire the backdrop that was used in the play to install in one of the buildings of the Garfield school redevelopment project.
    Not available
   5. Discussion on the Equitable Economic Development Fellowship’s “CROP” Program.

Minutes note: Individuals appearing and participating: Kenneth Little, Department of City Development Amy Turim, Department of City Development Montavius Jones, Department of City Development Deshea Agee, Historic King Drive Business Improvement District Mr. Little gave a presentation and overview on the Milwaukee Equitable Economic Development (EED) Fellowship Project. The project is in its first year and sponsored by the National League of Cities (NLC), Urban Land Institute (ULI), and PolicyLink. Milwaukee was chosen as the first of six cities. Other cities are Houston, Texas, Charlotte, Boston, Minneapolis, and Memphis. Program is about equitable economic development. The participating cities each have their own projects and are visiting each other for peer review. Milwaukee’s project is called the Community Revitalization Ownership Project (CROP). CROP is centered on city-owned tax foreclosed properties. 10 to 15 percent of the properties are commercial inclusive of mixed use retail, restaurants, churches, taverns, day care centers, and more. These properties are vacant, in poor condition, and have a negative impact on the community. The properties offer opportunities for timely and low-cost commercial space in underserved markets. There has been success for buyers who generally are ready to own real estate, but not every business is ready to own a building. CROP aims to cultivate community ownership of central city neighborhoods by positioning the City’s inventory of foreclosed commercial properties to maximize opportunity for start-up developers and entrepreneur tenants. Goals are to increase sales and redevelopment of commercial buildings, provide opportunities for minority and immigrant developers to obtain development experience, attract entrepreneurs to occupy City property, and return jobs and business to distressed commercial districts. Strategies are to create a model for ownership, renovation and management of small foreclosed commercial buildings; and create partnerships to develop a pipeline of entrepreneur tenants, identify financing for building renovation and business development, and identify technical resources to support entrepreneurs. Available assets for the program are city stock of foreclosed commercial buildings, city commercial corridor grant programs, local entrepreneurship support organizations, Associates in Commercial Real Estate Development ACRE) training program and alumni, CDFI and conventional lenders, and expertise of NLC, ULI, PolicyLink and other city participants. The City’s toolbox for property owners includes the commercial corridor matching grant programs (façade, signs, whitebox renovation, and foreclosed commercial property fund) and environmental site assessment grants. The toolbox for business owners includes business loans (Milwaukee Economic Development Corporation loans and Retail Investment Fund grants for job-creating uses). There is an EED fellowship advisory team inclusive of the ACRE team, finance team, entrepreneurial pipeline team, site selection team, executive committee, and other ideas. In this program, appropriate city-owned tax foreclosed commercial properties are made available to the ACRE class as real live projects to develop. The ACRE program is made up of a majority of residents from challenged areas who have the passion and interest to develop properties in those areas as opposed to conventional strategies which have not often worked. The finance team is made up of a former ACRE student, a bank representative, and a representative from the Greater Milwaukee Foundation. The team will focus on finding creative ways to fund ACRE developments. The executive team will coordinate with the Mayor on marketing and outreach. Mr. Little proceeded to discuss various 12 sites that have been made available for the ACRE team to pursue. The 12 sites are still open to the market. Those sites within the Bronzeville district have been vetted with Ald. Milele Coggs and will be brought to the committee for vetting if the ACRE class pursues them. There are two sites in the Bronzeville district. The first site is a cluster of infill and vacant land on Martin L. King Jr. Drive consisting of 2340-56 2438-50, 2453-65, and 2673-79 N. MLK Drive. The second site is 628-630 W. North Ave. Members questioned the boundaries of the CROP program, sustainability of developments, popup retail possibilities, occupied properties, opportunities for existing tenants, level of community outreach, and assistance from the advisory committee. Member Crump said that the resources and opportunities for acquisition under CROP should also be made available to existing business tenants of city-owned tax foreclosed commercial properties to acquire the buildings that they occupy. Mr. Little replied. CROP is citywide but functions mostly on the north side since the majority of city owned tax foreclosed commercial properties are on the north side. The program brings attention to the most disinvested areas of the city, creates another crop of developers benefiting communities, and gives opportunities to young entrepreneurs. For sustainability, the program creates a pipeline of what should be developed in the identified areas. The market will ultimately determine the sustainability of a development or business at a site. Popup retail, including mobile ones, is a good idea to gauge feasibility of a business and a community’s support. There are other creative ideas such as co-ops and incubators. Properties under CROP are being held tightly, but there have been city funds provided to independent or existing businesses for other city-owned tax foreclosed properties. There should be a general understanding and teaching in the ACRE program that aldermanic and community support is needed for a project. City staff can influence and direct developers who are acquiring city funding and resources to do outreach accordingly as well as notifying them of any major conflicts with conformity to neighborhood appearances. He can inform ACRE developers about the advisory committee, and they should come to the advisory committee on the front end for input on their projects. Ms. Turim said that occupied commercial spaces are very few. The local alderperson would have the discretion to determine whether or not an existing business stays or not. Mr. Jones said that there is a learning curve but ACRE fellows, as they gain experience, will incorporate community meetings and outreach on the front end. Mr. Agee added that the ACRE program has evolved and now incorporates community and stakeholder outreach, especially after site control, as opposed to the past. Chairman Hollmon said that as CROP projects are identified in Bronzeville, the developers should come to the committee on the front end for sharing of plans and input. The advisory committee is another level of community input.
    Not available
   6. Discussion on RFP Review Process.

Minutes note: Individuals appearing and participating: Deshea Agee, Historic King Drive Business Improvement District Amy Turim, Department of City Development (DCD) Mr. Agee announced a book release signing event for “Sensitive Warzones for Black and Brown Boys” authored by Antoine Nixon for Saturday, February 18, 2017 from 2 to 5 p.m. at the MLK gallery space. Details are to be forwarded to clerk staff to disseminate to members. Chairman Hollmon said that the committee is to review and discuss an outline of suggestions and recommendations provided by DCD staff, which they were requested to assist with. The committee should not be compelled to take specific action today. Ms. Turim gave an overview of the outline. The outline references and adds specifically the committee’s (BAC) involvement, participation, or role in DCD’s normal RFP procedure. Of significance are the following: • Sharing RFP listing page to BAC for input, with consideration of preferred uses, details, and BAC vision, prior to becoming public. • Forwarding RFP listing webpage link to BAC for promotion, including social promotion, of the RFP or listing. • Option of the local alderperson scheduling a public information session before BAC. BAC to inform DCD. • DCD selecting higher scoring proposals to present with BAC without DCD involvement during the presentations. BAC to provide feedback and recommendation. • DCD to confirm BAC recommendation with local alderperson and provide final recommendation to BAC. BAC to work with alderperson on promoting final decision to the media. Member Montgomery Baker inquired about the processes for RACM and city-owned properties, number of RACM owned properties in Bronzeville, BAC review of RACM properties, and boundaries of Bronzeville market areas to match BID or TID boundaries. Ms. Turim replied. RACM and city-owned properties are governed by two separate ordinances. City-owned properties are tax foreclosures taken in rem for unpaid property taxes. RACM owned properties are those strategically bought by RACM, due to blight and/or environmental concerns, and managed for redevelopment. There is significant RACM owned properties in Bronzeville, such as 628 W. North Avenue. A map of RACM and city-owned properties can be forwarded to clerk staff to disseminate to members. DCD tries to treat both property types similarly. RACM properties are likely listed for RFPs. City properties have more flexibility and can be listed to the market, listed as RFPs, or become unsolicited offerings. The CROP program properties are an example of unsolicited offers requiring no RFPs. The Bronzeville Cultural and Entertainment district is referenced as from Meinecke Avenue to Garfield Avenue and 4th Street to 7th Street. BAC has considered projects outside of these boundaries. There are BID and TID boundaries for Bronzeville that have different boundaries with some overlap. She would defer to BAC to determine the market boundaries for its consideration. Based on how BAC is operating in considering projects inside and outside of the cultural and entertainment district, the outline should be kept as worded to allow flexibility for the BAC. Chairman Hollmon said that BAC should revisit to suggest expanding the Bronzeville boundaries to be uniform with the Bronzeville TID boundaries. BAC reviewed a map with boundaries previously and should revisit that. Vice-Chair Manual commented. City funds were set aside to acquire and strategically control sites on North Avenue for the CROP program when focused development was determined on North Avenue. Discussion is taking place to expand the Bronzeville TID boundaries; however, the Bronzeville TID is losing increment. The Bronzeville TID received $2.5 million from another TID to pay down its debt. It is not feasible to expand the boundaries until the increment can be brought back up. New TIDs can be done for specific redevelopment projects, such as TID 89 for the Garfield school project. Member Montgomery Baker said that consideration should be given on how to incorporate BAC in DCD’s review of proposals and determination of the highest scoring proposals. Member Verdin concurred and added that consideration, too, should be given on how to incorporate community input in RFPs, open listings, and unsolicited offers such as the anticipated CROP program ones. Member Crump said that consideration should be given for the ability of BAC to look at all proposals, even those not chosen, in summary form to gauge interest and provide feedback based on DCD’s disposition of proposals. The summary should include name, type of land use, and disposition of each proposal. Ms. Turim said DCD does not object to presenting only top scoring proposals or all proposals, but she will have to check with the local alderperson to determine her preference. Ms. Manuel said that all proposals in summary form were forwarded to BAC for review during review of the Garfield school project. Chairman Hollmon suggested that the committee should develop its own RFP review process outline draft set apart from the DCD process outline to discuss, critique, modify and perhaps agree on for the next meeting. The chair will initiate the draft and work with clerk staff and DCD to put into final draft form. The draft shall be submitted to Ald. Milele Coggs and members for advance review prior to the next meeting. Members should be prepared for commenting. Any feedback from members on the draft outline should be reserved until the next meeting. The last part of the process is for BAC to use its judgement procedure on a case by case basis. Chairman Hollmon said that his initial RFP review procedure outline would include: • DCD notifies BAC of RFP for front end input • BAC to provide feedback on RFP before its release • DCD briefs BAC on the number of RFP submittals and rankings • BAC asks for more information on rankings • BAC interviews top proposers • BAC make recommendations Members unanimously concurred. Ms. Turim asked members to consider ways to reduce the number of BAC meetings and its review timeframe for the benefit of producing a timely process for both buyers and DCD staff. Member Crump questioned land use analysis of proposals as part of DCD’s procedure outline, vetting of a fast food restaurant proposal from the last RFP review that did not seem to be a sit down restaurant, use of committee input or the redevelopment plan to construct the type of uses on RFPs, and inability to see proposals identified with desirable uses on the frontend. Ms. Turim replied. Zoning is listed on each RFP. DCD Planning division reviews for allowed uses and variances. DCD will examine how to incorporate land use analysis as part of its outline. There is a TOD planning grant assisting in the writing of a new redevelopment plan. DCD will make it clear and highlight preferred uses in listings brought before BAC. Vice-Chair Manuel added remarks. The redevelopment plan contains preferred uses. RFPs should contain preferred uses from the plan that complement the cultural and entertainment Bronzeville district. She will forward a copy of the plan to members.
    Not available
   7. Agenda Items for the Next Meeting.

Minutes note: Barring any immediate items, the sole agenda item is to be the discussion on the RFP review process.
    Not available
   8. Set Next Meeting Date and Time.

Minutes note: Wednesday, March 22 or Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 9 a.m.
    Not available
   9. Adjournment.

Minutes note: Meeting adjourned at 10:34 a.m. Chris Lee, Staff Assistant City Clerk's Office Council Records Section
    Not available