Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tid29 Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises notice and displacement concerns at hearing for proposed amendment to TID 29
Summary
During a public hearing on amending Tax Incremental District 29, residents and a public commenter said notice and accessible project materials were lacking; staff said required notices were sent only to newly added parcels and that relocation language is statutorily required though the city has no current intent to purchase properties.
The Plan Commission opened a public hearing on July 24 for a proposed amendment to the boundaries and project plan for Tax Incremental District (TID) No. 29.
Lisa Sobe (434 Madison St.) asked the commission to postpone the hearing, saying her neighbor — who bought that house within the last two years — did not receive a mailed notice of the hearing and that the project plan materials were posted on the city agenda only around 2:00 p.m. the same day. She pointed to procedural expectations under Wisconsin statute and a prior resolution and said the project plan materials on the public notice board were incomplete and illegible.
Staff (Jeff) responded that notices are required and mailed only to parcels being newly added to the district; parcels already inside the TID (since 2020) would not have received new mailings. Jeff described the amendment as a framework to allow potential redevelopment of city‑owned land (including the former city hall annex and Delafield Street properties) and adjacent parcels, and stressed that the amendment does not commit the city to spend money — each project would be vetted through pro forma review by Ehlers and require development agreements and common council approval.
Jennifer (staff) clarified that language about relocation is included in every TIF project plan because it is required by statute if the city were to purchase property; she said the city currently had no intention of purchasing homeowners’ properties and that private property owners would drive redevelopment decisions.
No formal action was taken on the TID amendment at this meeting; staff indicated the commission would receive the item again (likely at a special meeting within roughly two weeks) and that subsequent municipal creation and joint review board actions are scheduled later in the process.
Provenance: the hearing presentation, questions about notice, and resident comments occurred during the public hearing portion of the meeting; staff answers and next‑step scheduling were part of the presentation and closing.
