Oconomowoc council deadlocks on $5M Village Green plan after heated public debate

Mayor Magnus opened the March 18 City of Oconomowoc Common Council meeting to public comment and heard multiple residents and business owners divided over a proposed Village Green reconstruction that includes a permanent pavilion and year‑round public restrooms.

The council approved an additional design payment for the project but failed to award the construction contract and budget amendment after multiple motions and roll calls, leaving the project in limbo.

Why it matters: The Village Green sits at a prominent downtown lakefront location and is used regularly for community events. Supporters say the proposal will fix a longstanding lack of public restrooms and support downtown events; opponents say the pavilion is too large, may violate the downtown historic overlay guidelines, and could expose the city to legal risk with a neighboring property owner.

Staff presentation and design costs

Staff member Jason Herzog described the long design process and the costs that have accumulated. “The design right now, as it sits, it was $163,710 design. And the request right now is to add $68,500 to complete the design work that's finished, so that we could award and work with a contractor to build this,” Herzog told the council, citing a combined design total of about $232,210.

Herzog said the low construction bid came back at roughly $3.6 million and that when other project elements and contingencies are added the overall project estimate being discussed in public rose to about $5 million. He described the scope as more than a pavilion and bathrooms, noting boardwalk work, seating walls, lighting and stormwater adjustments included in the package.

Public comment: split views

Several downtown residents and business owners spoke. Gary Kollenberg, a resident at 345 River Bluff Circle, urged the council to pause the vote and consider expanding the Village Green instead of building a pavilion, saying the city has “roughly $1,000,000 in TIF money to spend with a use it or lose it soft deadline of 2025 and a hard deadline of 2026.”

Linda Gilson, who identified design documents by name, criticized the pavilion’s design as inconsistent with local rules: “The proposed design of the Village Green Pavilion and bathroom do not comply with . . . the Downtown Revitalization Plan, and Downtown Historic Overlay Zoning District Ordinance,” she said.

By contrast, Sarah Ninman, downtown business owner and director of community events for the Chamber of Commerce of Oconomowoc, urged approval. “We all know you all voted that we need bathrooms. If we want bathrooms, we're in dire need of restrooms,” Ninman said, asking that a “yes” vote not be followed by no plan to provide an alternative solution.

Council discussion and funding

Council members debated design revisions, the effect on neighboring property owners, legal risk and how to finance the gap between identified funding and the low construction bid.

Alderman Rosack and other aldermen outlined a funding package that combined TIF dollars, park impact fees, tourism funds and contingency/reserve dollars. Rosack said the plan included $1,750,000 in TIF money (a $1,000,000 allocation from one district and $750,000 from another, as described in council remarks), $663,000 in park impact fees, $400,000 from the tourism fund and other sources; that financing left an estimated funding gap the council discussed as approximately $846,543. Rosack emphasized the amount financed would be small per household if debt were used, saying it would be roughly “$11.37 per year for 10 years” according to the figures his remarks used.

Concerns raised included project scale, architectural fit and litigation risk. Alderman Rosack and others said negotiations with the adjacent property owner, referred to in the record as Rockwell Partners, had occurred and that the developer’s attorney had warned that litigation was possible if the city proceeded without additional accommodation. Several aldermen said they believed the city had legal defenses but acknowledged litigation could delay or stop the project.

Votes and motions

The council took multiple formal actions on the project during the meeting: - Resolution 25‑R‑3264 (additional design services): The council approved payment to complete design work (the $68,500 addition to the earlier $163,710) by roll call; all eight sitting members voted yes.

- Motion to table consideration of the reconstruction contract and budget amendment: A motion to table the award failed on a roll call vote (3 yes, 5 no). The roll call on the motion to table recorded Ayes: Shellpepper, Rosick, Ellis; Nays: Mulder, Maroney, Douglas, Altman Cloth, Spiegelberg.

- Resolution regarding awarding the Village Green reconstruction contract and a budget amendment (identified in the meeting materials as the contract award and budget amendment that required a supermajority): The motion to approve the construction award and associated budget amendment failed by roll call (3 yes, 5 no). The roll call recorded Ayes: Alderman Mulder, Alderman Maroney, Alderman Spiegelberg; Nays: Alderman Shellpepper, Alderman Douglas, Alderman Rosic, Alderman Altman Cloth, Alderman Ellis. Because the item required six yes votes (a supermajority of the eight members present), the motion did not carry.

What remains unresolved

With the award vote failing, the council did not commit to construction. Council members who opposed the award said they support adding public bathrooms at the Village Green but favored a smaller footprint, different siting, or further fundraising rather than the current packaged pavilion. Supporters argued redesign would push costs higher and that delaying could forfeit TIF funds with looming deadlines.

Next steps mentioned in the meeting included: (a) the possibility of redesigning to reduce the pavilion or move restroom placement, (b) exploring private fundraising and naming rights to reduce the funding gap, and (c) continued negotiation with the adjacent property owner. Several council members explicitly said they want a solution that produces public restrooms and protects downtown businesses, but they disagreed on scale and timing.

Ending

For now, the Village Green project remains active in city files (the council approved additional design costs) but not approved for construction. Council members and staff said they will continue discussions about layout, funding and legal exposure before bringing a revised proposal back to the council.

Votes at a glance

- Resolution 25‑R‑3264 (approve additional design services for Village Green): Approved, roll call 8‑0. - Resolution to award Village Green reconstruction contract and associated budget amendment (required supermajority): Failed, roll call 3‑5 (motion did not pass).