Waukesha Joint Review Board reviews draft TID 29 amendment, appoints members

The Waukesha Joint Review Board met and unanimously approved a corrected set of minutes, appointed a public member and a chair, and reviewed a draft project plan to amend Tax Incremental District (TID) 29.

At the start of the meeting S1 noted attendees including Riley (City of Waukesha), Darren Clark (Waukesha School District), Jane Kittle (WCTC), Andrew Thelke (Waukesha County) and Dan Booty/Buti. The board approved the minutes of June 18, 2024, with a correction that Jane Kittle represented WCTC and was not absent.

John Cameron, identifying himself as "John Cameron with Eller's," told members the board’s primary role is organizational at this first meeting and that at the second meeting the board will be asked to take an up-or-down vote on whether the amendment meets the "but for" test required under tax incremental finance law. "The primary purpose of the Joint Review Board is going to be at the 2nd meeting ... to have an up or down yes or no vote as to whether or not the amendment adheres to kind of the key underpinning of tax incremental finance law," Cameron said.

A presenter briefed the board on the draft project plan for TID 29, which was created in 2020 as a rehabilitation/conservation district. The presenter said the amendment would adjust boundaries to add parcels mainly along North Street, update project lists and financial assumptions to reflect rising construction costs, and identify potential sites for redevelopment including the existing Waukesha Water Utility location and several commercial properties.

"TID 29 was originally created in 2020 as a rehabilitation conservation district," the Presenter said, describing prior proposals that did not advance and noting increases in construction and site-preparation costs since the original project plan.

Cameron reviewed the financial worksheets and statutory tests that guide TIF amendments. He explained the 12% equalized value test required by state statute and said the city remains well under that limit: "So right now with the addition of the space value, the city is just over 4%, so well under the 12% limit," Cameron said. He also described project-cost changes and added potential development incentives that could be delivered through "pay-as-you-go" financing or municipal revenue obligations, noting that inclusion in the project plan does not commit the city to any expenditure.

The draft project plan lists a development assumption that contemplates roughly $78,700,000 in potential new taxable value beginning in 2026 with a buildout estimate in 2034. Cameron explained cash-flow timing and lag: new construction is assessed as of Jan. 1 after the year of construction, tax bills are issued in December, and increment revenues typically arrive about two years after construction.

Cameron also described required analyses and approvals for any future assistance: independent pro forma reviews and development agreements would be required before TIF-eligible incentives could be provided to developers, and any specific projects would be evaluated on their own merits.

The board raised technical questions about reporting labels; one member asked that a column labeled "Waukesha County area" be expanded to clarify it refers to the Waukesha County Technical College district. Cameron agreed to update the label. Members also asked whether changes from Act 12—state legislation that will limit claimable new construction to 90% for new TIFs after Sept. 30—would apply to amendments. Cameron said the Department of Revenue (DOR) is currently taking the position that Act 12 does not apply to amendments to existing TIFs but cautioned that DOR guidance can vary and is not the same as a statutory ruling.

Board members questioned the feasibility of redeveloping the Waukesha Water Utility site, noting the parcel’s shallow depth and elevation change could limit buildable options and may increase the likelihood that redevelopment would require financial assistance. The board did not make any development-level commitments; members emphasized that any assistance would depend on future detailed analyses.

Procedurally, the board appointed a public member (record name appears as "Dan Buti" in one place and "Dan Booty" in another) and accepted Mayor Riley as chairperson of the Joint Review Board. The board set its next meeting for Sept. 4 at 11:30 a.m. in the same room, with a Teams link to be provided.

Next steps identified in the meeting: the plan commission will take the amendment up that evening through a public hearing and then send a resolution to the common council, which is scheduled to consider the amendment on Aug. 6. The Joint Review Board will reconvene during the notification period (roughly late August through mid-September) to take its required vote on whether the proposed amendment satisfies statutory tests.

The meeting adjourned with no further business.