The Appraisal was missing: No Body Asked Why?

I am delayed in commenting on this following the lengthy discussion at last week’s Council meeting. 

Alex Saloutos: “When I looked at Legistar File No. 92015 on the morning of March 2, the day the Finance Committee was scheduled to vote on it, one number stopped me cold. The City of Madison proposed paying $5.2 million for 17 vacant parcels along Cottage Grove Road. The City’s own Assessor valued those same parcels at $1,481,000.” 
The following ACTION ALERT published by Mr. Saloutos asked specific questions about critical information missing from the Royster Corners resolution passed by the Finance Committee. The item was on the Consent Agenda on the Tuesday evening Council Agenda, a speaker registered, item was pulled for discussion. Appraisal, assessment and sales price was noted as missing…. staff had the information readily available. Missing data was immediately emailed to all Alders. Why was this information not originally requested by the Finance Committee, as part of the Legislative File; the Finance Committee did not request the additional information resulting in the analysis provided by Alex Saloutos of critical missing data, recommending that the legislation be referred back to the Finance Committee. Mr. Saloutos’ statement read in part: “That is not a rounding error. The proposed price is 3.5 times what the City’s own Assessor says the land is worth, with no explanation anywhere in the public record.

The resolution was item 12 on the Finance Committee agenda. No appraisal had been posted to the Legistar file. I emailed city staff that morning asking for a copy, and Dan Rolfs, the Real Estate Development Manager, sent me one the same day. The Finance Committee voted unanimously to recommend approval anyway. The full Council votes Tuesday night.” After detailed questions and answer exchanges between staff and Council members, the item passed unanimously. The questions from Council members was not about supporting or acknowledging the diligent work staff or the land banking successes and future opportunities; it was the public’s demand for transparency.  Mr. Saloutos and others demanded transparency in how the City spends tax payer’s money. That accountability is both in the hands of City Staff and the Finance Committee. Ultimately, the Council received the additional information, resulting in the unanimous support vs referring this back to the Finance Committee. Transparency and trust in our government and how taxpayer’s dollars are spent will continue to be a challenge. The Finance Committee  should have asked the question: Why? 

Thank you Mr. Saloutos.