Should City 'Give the BID a Decent Burial'?

Property owners in downtown Waukesha have mixed views on the Waukesha Business Improvement District's operations and special taxes.

By Sarah Millard
Email the author
March 6, 2013

25 Comments

‹ Back to Article

new

Embed | Share

Photos (1)

Photos

Credit Sarah Millard

Upload Photos and Videos

Property owners in downtown have mixed feelings about paying taxes to the Business Improvement District – and that contention could lead to the BID’s demise.

Some property owners feel the BID, which was established in 1987, is a necessary part to the operations of downtown Waukesha. Others are concerned about recent changes to the operating plan that would focus more on events. But some just don’t want the expense of additional taxes.

More than 60 percent of property owners downtown are asking for the BID to be dissolved after contentious relationships downtown ended with the BID executive director resigning in July, citing a hostile working environment for her departure.

The petition is under review and if property owners do not change their minds about the BID’s future, it could disband in early April.

The BID’s operations are funded by a special tax assessment paid by property owners in downtown Waukesha. For one Waukesha property owner who spoke at a public hearing Wednesday night before the Waukesha Plan Commission, not paying the BID taxes would be a welcome relief.

“I am on a verge of losing everything,” said one man, who identified himself as a downtown property owner. “I just need help getting the building sold. The extra money I have to pay for the BID is not helping.”

However, losing the BID would be a “great disservice” for Waukesha, said Dan Italiano, the owner of Magellans.

Italiano was quick to admit he hasn’t always been a fan of BID directors, however, he said the BID always made sure everything was “looking good downtown.”

“No one puts as much heart and soul in it like they did,” Italiano said. “I think it will be a shame to see it go.”

Other property owners were frustrated with the new bylaws and operating plan that were recently passed. Calling the changes “the new regime,” another property owner said he was frustrated that property owners weren’t given opportunities participate in the operating plan and budget process.

“You presented to us a whole new ball game,” the man said.

Plan Commissioner Kevin Larson read a letter to the commission from property owner Phil Lee, who was unable to be at the meeting. Lee was willing to give the new operating plan a chance, the letter said, but with the increased “animosity” downtown, the city should just "give the BID a decent burial.”

Catherine Huelsman of Berg Management simply called for greater representation by the BID board if the BID is to remain downtown.

“We as property owners … we have not seen that that has been the case,” Huelsman said. “If there is really an intention to save the BID, there has to be an assurance that the board will represent the people who are paying the taxes.”

The Waukesha Common Council rescinded its approval of the BID’s special assessment Tuesday night, effectively voiding its operating plan. The move was done in an effort to save the BID from disrepair.

Alderman Roger Patton fought for the changes Tuesday and became emotional Wednesday evening as he again tried to keep the BID alive.

“The board is not set in its ways,” said Patton, who was among BID members to resign during tumultuous times. “Last night we showed that people we will listen. There is hope.”

Thanks. We'll email you the next time we update this story.

glasses

10:29 pm on Wednesday, March 6, 2013

Perhaps someone should tell Catherine Huelsman that 5 of the 8 BID board members own or occupy property in the downtown, including her father-in-law (Bill Huelsman) who is on the BID board.

Mr Lundt

7:11 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013

Lots of talk about effort and heart.
No talk about results.
With out pointing fingers, how long do taxpayers have to support a failed project . It's not about intention but results.

TOM

7:48 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013

The cow has been milked dry nobody wants to be the last one with there hand through the fence its time for a evoporated cow

Jay Dee

9:54 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013

The growth and expansion of business in downtown Waukesha has been exciting to watch after seeing so many businesses leave over our 25 years of residence in Waukesha. What will happen to events like the Farmers' Market, Art Crawls and FNL without the BID board? I wish someone would share with those of us outside the downtown area the specific effects on the events that bring people into our city.

I can't blame the building owners for wanting the added taxes gone. Who among us wouldn't like our taxes to decrease? I would like to see the bickering stopped also because it doesn't seem to help solve any civic issues. That being said, can someone report on the next step without the BID board?

Sarah Millard

10:47 am on Thursday, March 7, 2013

Janet, the BID does not run Friday night live. Art Crawls are run by the West End Artists Association (although I do not know if they get funding from BID..can't recall at this exact minute). Right now, the Farmers' Markets will be run by the Downtown Business Association, which is a dues-based group downtown.

Double

12:44 pm on Thursday, March 7, 2013

Mr Lundt is correct. The BID taxing district did not produce results.

Sarah Millard is also correct. The things people love experiencing downtown will be continued by private organizations.

jeff Barta

5:28 pm on Thursday, March 7, 2013

The BID absolutely produced results. BID Directors were critical in helping downtown revitalize. The negativity downtown did not come from the BID, it came from business owners who refuse to consider their neighbors concerns, treat all of downtown like they own it, spread rumors and bad mouth other businesses.

The downtown has grown by sound business locating downtown. It is not due solely to FFNL. That can supplement business but cannot be the foundation of business as the WDBA believes. FFNL benefits more from the renaissance downtown than the other way. Its a myth that FFNL is what revitalized downtown. It's entrepreneurs, from the WDBA and many outside of that group that invested in downtown that has made the difference.

Property owners like myself, voted to disband the BID because our mayor and his appointed Board wanted to change the focus of the BID to a grantor organization. In other words, they wanted the money. They ignored the pleas of property owners and put the BID in jeopardy. It could be saved if they reversed course and went back to the BID model that served downtown well for over 25 years. I would gladly pay the tax if we could avoid the blatant money grab from the mayor and his Board. Based upon his prior actions, I have little hope that the mayor will admit he was wrong and do the right thing.

Mr Lundt

7:25 am on Friday, March 8, 2013

Fair enough Jeff--- i will rephrase ---In its current form the BID is not producing results.

I was not around when the board started but I will accept the argument that it was key in kick starting the downtown.

What is clear there are now competing agendas and a lack of trust. Lack of trust is earned and the disfunction We have seen recently is the symptom.

The downtown is nice but still needs work.

It appears that the next phases of the downtown improvement will have to wait until the Mayor can organize a board the downtown trusts.
To date that is not a skill the mayor has shown a penchant for...

N Schmidt

11:33 am on Friday, March 8, 2013

If you discover a skill the mayor has shown a penchant for, let us know what it is, K?

Mr Lundt

12:40 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

He can apparently win an election

N Schmidt

1:41 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

True, but that was before he demonstrated that he has the social and leadership skills of an amoeba.

the rest of the story

12:53 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

The mayor appointed, and the common council approved, the following people to the New BID Board:

1. Ed Henschel
2. Bill Huelsman
3. Natalie Walters
4. Vance Skinner
5. Jim Taylor
6. Sandy Cianciolo
7. Ron Lostetter
8. Nick Martinez

Five out of eight of these members own or occupy property in the downtown. This Board is responsible for setting the direction for the BID.

jeff Barta

1:50 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

Yes, three board members own property downtown and two occupy property downtown, this is true. However, the direction taken by this Board caused over 60% of the property owners who pay the tax, to petition to disband the BID. It was not a balanced board from the beginning. Yes, the Board is responsible for setting the direction of the BID and clearly it was the WRONG direction. They did this despite many pleas to get more input from the property owners.

The mayor has a responsibility to appoint a board representative of all interests downtown, he failed miserably on this account.

The mayor, members of the Board and the mayors friends will point out that there was public comment at the BID meetings which is true. However, public comment is a monologue not dialogue. There was no exchange of ideas or compromise. The Board chose a predetermined path and the majority of property owners obviously object.

If the BID is to be saved, it is on the mayor and his Board to find a solution that the property owners can accept. I wish the mayor would reverse course, appoint more property owners to the Board and put aside his ego so downtown is not left with a big hole in services. I have little hope that will happen but if it does I will be the first to extend him accolades and congratulate him on sound leadership.

Shawn Reilly

2:00 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

Once again, whenever there is a Patch story about downtown, there are posts by anonymous first timers that are never heard from again.
"glasses", "double" and "the rest of the story" all joined the day that they made their comment. I think a person that posts under their own name tells other posters that he/she believes in what they are saying enough to have their name attached to it. i also understand that others desire to remain anonymous but at least they post under the same name over a period of time and then others can measure all the comments of that poster and determine if their opinions are fair and consistent. These first time, never to be seen again posters though just seem to be agitators and nothing else. I assume that the first anonymous response to this post will not be to provide an intelligent reply but to ask, "Reilly, what have you ever done for society?" Anyone else find this strange or annoying?