WW Photos
Northwestern Mutual Life’s $14 million proposal to buy the Milwaukee County-owned O’Donnell Park parcel on the lakefront will go to the Milwaukee County Board of Supervisors for an up-or-down vote on Dec. 18. Although much has been reported about the deal NML struck with the Abele administration, Supervisor Patricia Jursik, an attorney and the chair of the Economic and Community Development Committee, says that the full story about the potential sale hasn’t been told. Jursik told the Shepherd that she opposes the deal as it’s currently written, saying that it makes no guarantees about preserving public access to the site and vastly undervalues its true worth. Here, she explains her greatest reservations about the sale.
Shepherd: The public’s view of the site is that it’s just a crumbling parking structure with a bit of greenspace and the county would be better off without it so taxpayers don’t have to pay for its upkeep. Do you agree?
Jursik: It’s not a crumbling parking structure. In fact, we just spent $6 million upgrading that parking structure. It’s in fairly good condition. There’s one leak that comes through and in the proposal there’s a $1.3 million credit going to Northwestern Mutual to repair that leak.
I could be more critical of the plaza, and that’s focused on the Parks Department. They’re supposed to care for that plaza. That parking garage produces over $1 million in revenue. I’ve been very critical of the way the Parks Department runs that parking garage. That parking garage could earn more revenue than it does. The Parks Department had artificially capped the number of monthly parking passes that they would sell, so there was actually a waiting list for parking passes.
Shepherd: Of course, there’s more to the parcel than the parking structure.
Jursik: There’s a building there. That building has been pretty much ignored in terms of the appraisal. This is the thing that really started to make me think. If you’re in the parking garage, you can get on the elevator and go up and get to the Miller Room and Coast and the Betty Brinn Children’s Museum. That is a significant location. It’s at the foot of Wisconsin Avenue, it’s on the lakeside part of the property and it will be kitty-corner from the new Northwestern Mutual location.
|
|
Shepherd: So does the $14 million appraisal reflect the true value of the entire site, besides the parking structure?
Jursik: That parcel, that building, has never been properly appraised. Because the appraisal used the income approach. They took the income from the parking garage, which I already criticized, and then you’ve got that building. About four years ago we renewed the Betty Brinn lease. I remember Sue Black complaining loudly about the deal we were giving Betty Brinn. We decided not to charge them market rate rentals. The fact that it is a county-owned facility, we made the decision based on the common good. But if I’m a private owner and I want to maximize the revenue in that spot, you would have much greater rental income coming in than you would have right now. The appraisal never took any of that into account. That building has not been appraised. All they did was take the revenues and say here’s the value of the entire site based on the income it produces. But the income it produces has never been maximized so it’s a false appraisal.
Shepherd: But hasn’t NML promised to keep the parkland?
Jursik: Northwestern Mutual has made some assurances. They said they’d bring in NEWaukee to do some planning. As they put it, they are going to “activate” the site. There are some exciting ideas. But it is all talk. If you go to the actual documents, there’s a purchase agreement and then there is a side agreement called for in the purchase agreement on use and preserving some of the parking spots for the public use, et cetera. None of those written documents, which comprise the real agreement, guarantee the public use. In fact, they include some language that says: This is the entire agreement; there is no agreement besides what is written here. Those kinds of boilerplates that lawyers put in. They exclude all of the promises that they are making outside of that agreement. There is no promise for public access or use.
Shepherd: But wouldn’t the current deed restrictions preserve public access and use? Isn’t that why the appraisal is so low?
Jursik: That’s another fallacy. Currently there is a deed restriction only on the northernmost portion of this property. If you take this property and draw a line down Wisconsin Avenue, the south curve line, to Lincoln Memorial Drive, that just about cuts the property in half with a north half and a south half. It’s almost exactly half. Only the north half has the deed restriction. It’s an old deed restriction from the city of Milwaukee. There are two deed restrictions, actually, and they overlap one another. One of the deed restrictions says that this property may never be sold to a private property owner. Well, Northwestern Mutual is a private party. The city of Milwaukee is going to have to completely remove that deed restriction should this deal take place.
The other deed restriction says this property must always be used for a public purpose, like a park. Keep in mind that we’re only talking about the north side of this property. Because there is no deed restriction on the south portion. That deed restriction will be retained, but it’s very unusual the way the proposal is calling for it. When the county gives its deed to Northwestern Mutual, we will not include the language that specifies a deed restriction. We’re going to get a notice provision that should Northwestern Mutual ever seek to remove the city of Milwaukee’s deed restriction, the county would get notice. And the question I asked at the last board meeting was, what if the city of Milwaukee unilaterally, by themselves, removes the deed restriction and there’s no action taken by Northwestern Mutual? The way I read it, we have no recourse there.
Shepherd: What’s the city’s role in this deal?
Jursik: I believe very much that this whole transaction very much involves the city of Milwaukee. I don’t think Northwestern Mutual stepped forward and said, let’s see if we can buy O’Donnell Park. I think it was very much that the city got together with Northwestern Mutual—I’ve heard of some of those meetings—and said, it would be great if we could include this in the whole project you’re doing. Why don’t we work out some agreement with the county to let you also own O’Donnell?
I’m not saying that Northwestern Mutual is not interested in this. But I think the city of Milwaukee was very much involved in creating this whole idea. It’s very much in favor of the city, from a property tax viewpoint, because when Northwestern Mutual, a private party, purchases it, they will pay property taxes and that will benefit the city. Of course, the county will lose income by doing that. We do of course, receive property taxes, but it will be much reduced compared to if we owned the property [and generated revenue]. Of course, we use that income to support our Parks Department. There are so many things here that are not in the interests of Milwaukee County.
Shepherd: The county board can no longer amend contracts, thanks to Act 14, but haven’t you tried to work out a deal with Northwestern Mutual to ensure public access to the site?
Jursik: I met with John Schlifske, the chair of Northwestern Mutual, and to his credit he gave me a full hour to lay this out. I said, you’re getting something of great value here. I’m willing to take this very low-ball number from the appraisal but only if you give us the deed restrictions on the north and southeast quadrants. That frees up your southwest quadrant, which someday could be developed should you choose to develop it. I thought I was giving them a great offer. By the way, I was willing to say, and the county will not have any restrictions, no notices of zoning, you wouldn’t have to deal with the county on just the southwest portion of the development.
And he basically said to me, we don’t want our hands tied. So what does that translate into? Someday they plan to develop the entire south portion. If you draw that line from Wisconsin Avenue to Michigan Avenue, all the way to Lincoln Memorial Drive, which is your lakeside access, they would have the right to develop that site. They’re getting an extremely valuable site for very little money. This is not a good deal for Milwaukee County residents.
Shepherd: What’s County Executive Abele’s role in this?
Jursik: I’ve been very critical most recently, and I’ve begun saying so, of Chris Abele for not protecting the public interest on this transaction. He’s supposed to be representing the county. It’s not just the county board that represents residents. He does too. And his deal favors Northwestern Mutual. He’s been way too cozy with Northwestern Mutual and maybe with the city of Milwaukee too in wanting to turn this into a taxpaying property instead of looking out for the public interest.
Shepherd: Is any of the O’Donnell Park property on former lakebed and therefore restricted by the state constitution’s Public Trust Doctrine?
Jursik: If you were asking Preserve Our Parks, they’d say yes. I’ve seen their maps. Yes, the line that they claim goes through the Transit Center and The Couture project also goes through O’Donnell. It’s that southeast quadrant. I don’t even have to make the argument about Public Trust because it should be deed restricted and preserved for public use as a lakefront park as it is today.
Shepherd: Will you support this when it comes to the full board for a vote on Dec. 18?
Jursik: I have a strong opinion on this. I think it’s a bad deal. I’m willing to work out a compromise on this that protects the public good. But there’s no way I’m supporting this deal as it’s currently structured. We have no obligation to give Northwestern Mutual a great deal on this. Let’s not sell our soul. This is lakefront property. I am not going to give away lakefront property for commercial development, but that’s what’s in this proposal.
