Carolyn Fath
Built in 1905, the building has been vacant since 1997.
When Baum Development won city approval in April 2015 to redevelop the Garver Feed Mill into an artisan food production facility, there was talk of construction starting as soon as November 2016. Now, nearly a year past that date, the developer and the city are still working toward finalizing the development agreement.
Baum has until Oct. 31 to close on the sale of the building and sign the ground lease, says Dan Rolfs, the city’s community development project manager. The deadline was set by a Common Council resolution approving the modified development agreement. If Baum misses the date, the project will be kicked back to the Council — it could authorize another extension or void the development agreement if Baum defaults.
Rolfs, who has been working on the Garver project for more than a decade, is hopeful that the agreement will come together in time. “We’re making it happen,” he says. But he emphasizes the unique challenges of the development agreement, which is among “the most complex closing [he has] ever seen — anywhere.”
The $19.8-million project relies on funding from federal New Market Tax Credits, plus a bank loan, equity, historic tax credits and grants. The Common Council initially committed to contributing $1.82 million to assist the redevelopment, but in August approved spending an additional $1.6 million for environmental remediation. “The number of documents and the number of parties taking part is truly staggering,” Rolfs says.
This isn’t the project’s first delay. In January 2016, amid concerns from the city about the project’s viability, the city’s Board of Estimates (now called the Finance Committee) set a Dec. 1, 2016 deadline for Baum to secure financing and close on the sale of the Garver property. Baum later asked the city to push the date back to March 15, 2017. In January 2017, Baum Development President David Baum told the Wisconsin State Journal that the company had “everything in place” but the tax credits — by far the most critical piece of the funding equation, providing $2.5 million for the $14.4 million building renovation. “We’re on the 1-yard line,” he said at the time.
Baum secured the all-important tax credits in March, but it’s unclear why the company has not yet closed on the sale of the building. Baum project manager Bryant Moroder did not respond to a request for comment.
City officials, including Mayor Paul Soglin and Council President Marsha Rummel, whose district is home to Garver, have been supportive of the project despite the delays. But Ald. David Ahrens, whose district abuts Garver and who was the only member of the city’s development committee to vote against the Baum proposal in March 2015, remains skeptical.
“The city has been at it for 10 years. We’ve already given millions of dollars and staff time,” he says. “You sink, sink, sink into greater cost, and pretty soon you’ve been at it for years and it’s too late to stop.”
Ahrens has asked the city to consider issuing a bond to pay for the Garver restoration in the event that the project fails, but he says other council members don’t share his concerns. Baum is contractually required to fix up the building. “But if they go broke, how are they going to restore the area?” Ahrens asks. “We could be stuck with it.”
Ahrens is also frustrated with the revelation that the site’s environmental remediation costs would be higher than previously estimated. He worries that when crews start digging, they’ll find more contaminants. But Eric Oelkers, a senior project manager with SCS Engineers, the firm that studied the site, says the Garver property is not “grossly contaminated.”
Crews will excavate soil contaminated with ash and combustion residue and transport it to a licensed solid waste landfill. Beyond removing contaminated soil, Oelkers anticipates a fair amount of earth-moving to accommodate construction work. “What’s out there is a remainder of 100 years-plus of industrial operations,” Oelkers says of the contamination. “It’s not something that’s really a high level of environmental concern.”
