Jim Arndorfer, Shorewood Village Trustee

06/08/2026

WHEDA approves low income housing tax credits for Oakleaf Apartments.

2025 9% HTC Award List

03/16/2026

This evening the Village Board will vote whether to approve the Phase Two application submitted by Spoerl Commercial LLC for public assistance to support a 19-unit affordable housing development at 4450 N. Oakland Ave. Barring anything unforeseen, I intend to support passage. And as I do, I likely will be thinking back to the events of spring 2021.

On March 18 of that year, the village Community Development Authority was tasked with voting whether the extend an expiring tax increment district by one year in order the generate over $2 million to support affordable housing. It was a vigorous debate. CDA Chair Peter Hammond and Trustee Davida Amenta supported the extension, arguing it gave the village a window of opportunity to support its decades-old priority of providing affordable housing and noting the village was becoming increasingly unaffordable. Arguments against the extension clustered around the lack of an identified project and reluctance to postpone the the passing of tax savings on to residents.

Ultimately Chair Hammond and Trustee Amenta couldn’t rally a majority to their side. The authority voted 4-2 to not extend the TID and not create a fund to support affordable housing (Trustee Kathy Stokebrand joined the majority as did current CDA Chair Jon Krouse, who proposed the prevailing motion.)

The backlash against the CDA’s decision was swift and substantial, with a wide range of residents decrying it on social media, in correspondence and at the board meeting where it was taken up, insisting the Village Board not follow CDA’s direction. Following this public outcry the Board voted 7-0 to support the extension of the TID to support public housing.

At the time, I was running for my first term for the Shorewood Village Board and applauded the decision. And since then the CDA and the board have explored a range of options to support affordable housing, including adding affordable units via vouchers and/or setting aside units in existing buildings (ultimately this was deemed not feasible). At the end of this journey a majority of the CDA has deemed the creation of the 19-unit affordable development as the best way to proceed. I recognize that not everyone in the Village supports the use of public money for affordable housing or this specific development. I disagree and believe a majority of residents support moving forward. That’s one of reasons why, barring anything unforeseen, I intend to support committing the funds the community insisted be set aside in 2021 for affordable housing.

03/15/2026

On March 16, the Village Board will vote whether to approve the Phase Two application submitted by Spoerl Commercial LLC for public assistance to develop an affordable housing development on what is currently a Village-owned parking lot at 4448-4450 N. Oakland Ave.

I’ve advocated for affordable housing since I was first elected to the board and after weighing the pros and cons of the development, including listening to concerns raised by members of the community, my intention — barring anything unforeseen — is to support the development.

One thing that will be on my mind is an anonymous flier that was circulated in the area surrounding the property in the run-up to a June 16, 2025 vote on the Phase One application.

The flier shared some of the same objections raised by other residents including the proportion of rentals in the Village, the elimination of parking spots and the opportunity to rescind the money set aside as part of the closure of TID 1 — a unanimous board vote in 2021 that received significant community support — and not use it to support the affordable housing.

But the first objection didn’t address any of those points. Instead it attacked the potential residents of the development. From the flier:

“The proposed new apartment building ‘low income’ or ‘affordable housing’ [sic] means the renters earn 30-60% of Milwaukee County’s median income. That means the 19 units will have renters with annual income between $21,500 and $42,900 per HUD Income 2024 Guidelines for Milwaukee County. Will these renters contribute positively to the community and financially support businesses, restaurants, and retail stores?”

Do most Shorewood residents share this view? No. Do most opponents of the development share this view? Also — to be very clear — no. But this view informed the policies in our country and in our region until far too recently in a manner that created racist and classist barriers to housing for millions of Americans that are still felt today. It’s unfortunate that someone thought this would be a good selling point in inciting residents against the development.

And that’s the history that will be on my mind for Monday’s vote. Is this development perfect? No. Do I wish that we could retain parking? Yes. Do I wish that we could add more units? Yes. But that would not be feasible to do so without going to the residents for more funding, which I find hard to do given the amount of pending infrastructure work before us.

But are these objections sufficient enough to pass up on the opportunity to provide below-market rate housing to 19 households for a minimum of 30 years? To my mind: no. I recognize that others may have a different opinion.

The Village has made the provision of affordable housing a priority for decades. The funding exists to proceed with this development, it supports our community’s values, and I look forward to supporting it.

Copy of flier in comments.

03/12/2026

On March 16, the Village Board will vote whether to approve the Phase Two application submitted by Spoerl Commercial LLC for public assistance to develop affordable housing at 4450 N. Oakland Ave. Barring anything unforeseen, I intend to support development of the proposed apartment building, which will include 19 units with below market rates locked in for a minimum of 30 years.

Our country, our state and our community face a housing affordability crisis. In 1991 the average age of a first-time home buyer was 28; it’s now 40. In Shorewood and communities across Wisconsin, homeowners have been shocked by the jump in their assessments; if you’re a homeowner imagine being on the outside looking in. Action is required to address this, now. Increasing housing supply and options is one way to do this.

For decades Shorewood has made the creation of affordable housing a priority. The problem is, it’s really expensive and it requires public subsidy. To its everlasting credit, in early 2021 the Village Board — with massive support from across the community — voted to extend the expiration of a tax incremental district to generate north of $2 million to support affordable housing. Rather than immediately see the tax benefit of the TID’s expiration, the community rallied around supporting the creation of affordable housing. The money is there. And with the proposed development at 4450 N. Oakland, we now have the opportunity to put that money to work. I believe it’s time.

When I first ran for Village Board in 2021 I applauded the Board’s decision and was very clear in my support for affordable housing. That commitment remains. I have weighed the pros and cons and in the end I believe that we should not pass on the opportunity to provide below market rate housing for 19 households for a minimum of 30 years.

Some of my considerations are below.

What’s happening?

The Village is planning to invest $1.6 million of proceeds from extending a TID to support the development of an apartment building with 19 below-market rate units on the site of a Village-owned parking lot at 4450 N. Oakland.

What’s the total cost of the development?

The total cost of the development is $7.1 million, with the vast majority of remaining funds coming from state and federal sources.

What does this mean for the current parking lot?

While the development has parking for the 19 units, the cost of supporting existing parking was prohibitive, which means that the 49 parking spots will be eliminated. Which means the amenity of parking on the lot (used largely by residents of the buildings on either side of it) will go away. I believe that the surrounding blocks have sufficient parking to absorb the displaced cars but it will be a loss of amenity and an inconvenience. That said, I think creating affordable units for 19 households for a minimum of 30 years is a better use of that property than a parking lot.

Is it true that the Village is selling the lot for below market value?

Yes, it is. And that’s a feature, not a bug, of affordable housing development. As mentioned, housing is expensive. Land acquisition costs are a big reason for that. If the developer were to pay a market rate for the property, they likely only could build a luxury development on the site for it to pencil out. Reducing the land acquisition costs helps support the development of affordable housing. If the project moves forward, the Village will sell the lot for $333,731. By comparison, Sturgeon Bay recently sold a parcel to create affordable housing for $100. This is how it works. And just to make an obvious point: If we sold the land to realize its full value we would be eliminating parking for 49 spots to establish luxury apartments.

What about working with local landlords to create housing vouchers or set aside units as affordable?

This was explored but deemed not feasible due to administrative costs and lack of interest from landlords.

Is it possible that in 30 years the current or future owner could do something differently with the property?

Yes, it is. In the best of all possible worlds we could dedicate that site for affordable housing in perpetuity. With the tools we have, 30 years is the limit. That said, 30 years is quite a long time from a policy perspective. And more housing options are needed now.

Would you do anything differently?

I wish we could create more units in that building but the only way we could do that is by asking for significantly more money from the community. Given all the other infrastructure costs we’re facing I would have a hard time doing that. This project enables us to provide below market housing for 19 households for a minimum of 30 years. I believe this project represents the values of our Village and I look forward to supporting it.