Thinkstock
The Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors narrowly rejected the sale of O’Donnell Park to Northwestern Mutual Life (NML) for $14 million while agreeing to proceed with a sale of the Transit Center site to Barrett Visionary Development—provided it can clear legal hurdles.
Supervisor Patricia Jursik, an attorney and chair of the Economic and Community Development Committee, told the Shepherd the O’Donnell vote was “a win for the taxpayers.”
Now that the site is firmly in the county’s hands, she said she and fellow supervisors Gerry Broderick and Jason Haas would propose a resolution that would require the Parks Department to take better care of O’Donnell Park.
“This was purposeful neglect—let the place look like hell so that Northwestern Mutual can make a good argument that they could do a better job,” Jursik said.
Adding a beer garden and coffee shops could also boost revenue at the site, Jursik said, which would remain in county hands. Currently, the site generates $1.8 million for county parks annually.
Last Thursday’s 9-8 vote to reject the sale hinged on the actions of Supervisor David Bowen, who was elected in November to represent the North Side of Milwaukee, Shorewood and parts of Glendale in the state Assembly in January. In October, Bowen had supported the sale in the ECD committee. Last week, he proposed delaying the vote until January so that opponents could work out their differences over the sale. But, in the end, Bowen joined supervisors Broderick, Haas, Willie Johnson, Jursik, Theo Lipscomb, Michael Mayo, John Weishan and Peggy Romo West in opposing the sale.
Thanks to Act 14, the board can no longer amend a contract; it’s allowed to vote on contracts worth more than $300,000 but it can only approve or reject them. All contracts are solely negotiated by the administration of County Executive Chris Abele.
The sale of O’Donnell Park has been mired in controversy from the start. Abele accepted NML’s no-bid proposal to purchase the site, preventing other developers from bidding on it. What’s more, the agreement struck between Abele and NML lacked provisions that would guarantee public access to the site or even require that NML maintain the site as a park. Instead, the city of Milwaukee could change zoning on the site. In addition, supervisors who opposed the sale argued that the $14 million price tag was far too low for an almost 7-acre parcel on the lakefront that could be commercially developed. It currently encompasses a park, a parking structure and a pavilion that’s home to the Betty Brinn Children’s Museum, Coast Restaurant and the Miller Room.
|
|
NML released a statement saying it would no longer pursue that property and would develop a parking structure elsewhere.
The Couture Moves Forward—A Bit
The board also approved the sale of the Transit Center site, also on the lakefront, to developer Rick Barrett for the planned Couture high-rise. But there’s a catch: The board also approved a requirement that the county go to court to clear up any legal issues over the ability to build on that site.
Critics of the Couture development say that the parcel is at least partially located on former lakebed and commercial development isn’t an option. That’s because the state constitution’s Public Trust doctrine prohibits commercial development on former lakebed and guarantees public access to it.
Earlier this year, Abele pushed conservative Republican legislators to back a bill that redrew the lakeshore line in favor of commercial developers on the Transit Center site, as well as O’Donnell Park. But some county supervisors and parks advocates doubted that law would hold up in court and argued that it would threaten lakeshore land throughout the state.
“The real story is that we are going to do litigation to clear up the Public Trust so that we understand where the line is,” Jursik said. “Rick Barrett may have to come back and revise his plan if in fact part of that property has Public Trust land on it.”
John Lunz, president of Preserve Our Parks, said his group would likely be part of the litigation.
“It was purchased for parkland,” Lunz said. “The whole site has always had public access.”
Lunz said the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is tasked with enforcing the Public Trust doctrine, “but with the way it is in Madison these days, the head of the DNR is not about to challenge any development. So they won’t do it but a private party could file suit.”
Lunz said he’d like to see development on the site, but only on any portion that isn’t on filled lakebed.
“As long as they don’t sell the filled lakebed portion to [Barrett], we really don’t have an argument,” Lunz said.
