Parks Committee Backs $30 Million Domes Deal

Proposed Nature Learning Center addition. Rendering courtesy Friends of the Domes.

The idea of providing $30 million for the Mitchell Park Domes did not receive a warm reception from the Milwaukee County Board’s Committee on Parks and Culture Tuesday, but it did, ultimately, receive its support.

The committee voted six to one to recommend the funding proposal for approval. But supervisors are already expressing concern about what other parks projects will be boxed out in coming years as the county pays for the preservation and redevelopment of the Domes complex.

The plan for the Domes was created by the Milwaukee Domes Alliance, formerly known as the Friends of the Domes, with Milwaukee County Parks. It would use $30 million in county funding to leverage approximately $103 million in private fundraising for a multi-phase restoration and redevelopment of the Domes, which would include a $27 million nature learning center built entirely with private funding.

The project is being broken down into two general phases. First, restoration and redevelopment of the Domes, which will actually be broken up into three stages, with public funding released when private matching funding is secured for restoration of one dome at a time. The second phase is development of the nature center.

The $30 million in county funding would be paid over six years, $5 million per year. The Domes Alliance and the county are still negotiating a lease agreement that will be presented to the board in September. The Alliance, which already runs the operations of the Domes, would assume ownership and all operating and maintenance costs for the Domes for a period of 99 years, with opportunities for renewal.

Park Director Guy Smith noted that this year will mark a decade since the department had to temporarily close the Domes because pieces of concrete started falling from the structure. Over the intervening years, solving the problem of fixing the Domes has at times seemed impossible, due to the county’s inability to pay. But the Domes Alliance plan has changed that, and a fundraising feasibility study has confirmed there is philanthropic appetite for a public-private partnership to save the Domes.

“So I think we’re at this momentous point where we can solve this, and it’s one of those points where it’s not just like surviving, but thriving,” Smith said.

All supervisors on the committee expressed some support, or affinity for the Domes. But even supervisors that voted for the project also registered concern about what will be sidelined to pay for the Domes.

“What parks projects, capital projects or even maintenance projects, are gonna be delayed with this next six year investment of $5 million [annually]?” Sup. Sheldon Wasserman, who chairs the parks committee, asked.

It was a question neither Director Smith nor Dep. Director James Tarantino could answer with any certainty. The decision of what to fund and not to fund is, ultimately, up to the board during the annual budget process. If the project moves forward, supervisors will be in a position of voting, every year, to push back $5 million in parks projects to make room for Domes funding.

The department provided a breakdown of the funding it has had since 2019 for infrastructure and maintenance. It excluded from the list projects funded through federal stimulus funds released during the COVID-19 pandemic through the American Rescue Plan Act. At the low end of the list, in 2019, the department received approximately $5.2 million in infrastructure funding. At the high end was 2024, shortly after the county approved the new 0.4% sales tax, and $20.4 million was budgeted for parks infrastructure.

The county is facing massive projected budget deficits over the coming years, beginning in 2026 with a projected $46.7 million budget deficit. County Executive David Crowley did make addressing that deficit slightly easier on supervisors, having negotiated additional funding from the state for mandated services that were previously covered by local taxpayers. But even those gains won’t be enough to close the projected gap in future budgets.

Parks officials know the Crowley administration, and other county departments have their own priorities, including the new county courthouse project estimated to cost as much as $500 million. So, to keep the Domes from competing with everything else for funding, the department is proposing to keep all Domes costs within the parks system infrastructure budget.

“So if we do include this in our 2026 request, we would consider this a high priority from our department, and it would reasonably squeeze out other projects that might otherwise get funded, and we wanted to be very upfront about the impact of that,” Tarantino told supervisors.

Sup. Jack Eckblad pointed out that if the county finds itself funding parks at the level it did in 2019, “We’re not talking about a percentage of our capital projects, we’re talking about all of it.” He suggested supervisors will have to consider what the purpose of the parks capital budget is: “Is it the rescuing of the Domes, or is it the maintenance of the parks?”

Eckblad voted in favor of including Domes funding in the 2026 budget, but he also pointed out that there are many neighborhood parks in his district, and across the county, that need investment.

“In all honesty, we have projects in nearly every supervisory district,” Tarantino said. “We have needs across the board.”

Sup. Steve Taylor admitted that the Domes are nostalgic for him, but that he also represents a district with major parks projects awaiting funding. “I got 55,000 people that I answer to, and I have needs that I do not want pushed off six years,” he said.

Sup. Wasserman pushed parks officials to identify some major parks projects that could be affected if funding is set aside for the Domes.

While officials could not speak with certainty, Tarantino ticked off some of the large projects near the top of parks list of priorities, including funding for a revetment along Bay View Park to protect it from lake erosion, funding redevelopment of the Kosciuszko Community Center, and irrigation and golf cart paths at Whitnall Golf Course. He also noted that the department is finishing up an aquatics plan for the parks system that will include a list of investments needed in county aquatic facilities.

Sup. Felesia Martin, who also voted in favor of the funding, said she is more concerned with preserving a horticultural facility in Mitchell Park than with preserving the actual structures known as the Domes. If the Domes were lost, she said, “That would, to me, be awful. But would it be life altering? No, it won’t.”

Sup. Juan Miguel Martinez told his colleagues he would “fight tooth and nail” for the Domes, saying the county had an opportunity “put our money where our mouth is” in terms of racial equity and to “create something special.”

“We have the chance to make the 12th the environmental hub, the environmental culture hub of Milwaukee,” Martinez said. “The possibilities are absolutely endless. $30 million is a lot, and it also makes me very nervous, because who knows what’s going to happen in the next coming years… but when this is all over, we will be able to stand back and look at something like this and say, that we actually did something in the city.”

The committee unanimously voted to approve an amendment authored by Martinez conditioning the release of funds on the Domes Alliance complying with the terms of the still pending development agreement. After which, the committee voted to recommend adding an initial $5 million to the 2026 county budget for the Domes project, though that installment is still subject to approval during the budget process.

Sup. Taylor voted against the recommendation at committee. Supervisors Wasserman, Martin, Eckblad, Martinez, Priscilla E. Coggs-Jones and Anne O’Connor voted in favor.

Update: A previous version of this story incorrectly stated Sup. Sequanna Taylor voted no. It was Sup. Steve Taylor.

Existing members must be signed in to see the interactive map. Sign in.