James Madison Park: Selling the Land and Houses

I'm a little hesitant to say what I think should happen to all this property in the district I represent on the City Council, as the council has a very poor record (for the past 11 years) of listening to the alder or residents of the 2nd district regarding matters in our own backyards . . . but I suppose I can't stay silent much longer. So here are my preliminary thoughts as I am still asking for input from neighbors and want to hear from them at several upcoming neighborhood meetings . . . .


LINCOLN SCHOOL

• Sell the land. (Yup, I agree with the WSJ editorial board.)
  
• Use part of the money to provide services in and fix up the park.
• Put land use restrictions on the building to protect the historic building & requiring anything rebuilt has to have the same footprint and be generally the same (or less) mass
• Put in an option for the city to purchase back the land at assessed value if the building is destroyed - tho I doubt we will ever purchase back the land because we won't have the money at the time.
• Have the same level of affordability in the building as was initially required.
  

A few myths to address:

• This doesn't include lakefront property, it is only the land under the building which is on Gorham St.
• There will be no inclusionary zoning units and even tho the Parks minutes say this, its not true, I never said this or anything like it:

The Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance would not be triggered by the conversion of apartments to condos. However, the Alder is adamant that she would only support this sale if it has IZ units in it and that number would need to be determined.

• The Parks Commission minutes also have the following statement that isn't true, in fact, I believe there are two errors in their statement that said they ". . . don't support selling land in order to support the city's Affordable Land Trust." Well, a) we don't have an Affordable Land Trust and b) I believe they are talking about the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and that fund only gets money if the City of Madison sells over $1M in properties this year.

• The MINIMUM amount of money the city will get is $600,000, but it will be based on an appraisal (or three) and will be the fair market value of the land. (Several downtown developers and a realtor have been outraged by the $600,000 price and say it is worth twice that amount.)
  

COLLINS HOUSE

• Sell the house, not the land.
• Keep it some sort of public use. By public use I mean a business that is open to the public (coffee shop, bar, restaurant, bed & breakfast, bakery, etc.) not a private residence. After all, we placed that restrictions on the Pratzel's when they wanted to purchase the home after running a business there since the 1970's.
• If the house is destroyed, allow the city to buy the rights to return the property to unencumbered parkland.
• If the city doesn't buy the rights, rebuilding must be done in the same style as the historic Claude and Starck building that is there now.
• Anything rebuilt has to be on the same footprint and not have a massing that is any larger than the current building.

ZIEGELMAN HOUSE & WORDEN HOUSE

• Sell them to the highest bidder. (i.e. no preference for the current tenants.)
  
• Keep them on site. (i.e. don't move them.)
  
• Require new owners to either have some type of public use (see above for definition of public use) or require the right to public viewing of the historic houses.
• If the houses are destroyed, allow the city to buy the rights to return the property to unencumbered parkland.
• If the city doesn't buy the rights, rebuilding must be done in the same style as the historic Claude and Starck buildings that are there now.
• Anything rebuilt has to be on the same footprint and not have a massing that is any larger than the current buildings.

Read more!

Surface Parking Lot . . . Brilliant!!!

So, the Gorman project is dead.

No TIF generator for the TIF District . . . no users for Central Park . . . no riders for the trolley . . . no kids for Lapham School . . . no catalyst for revitalizing the E. Washington corridor . . . no affordable housing options for workers in the downtown area . . . brilliant! Just brilliant! Read more!

That darn tortuous TIF process . . .

Oh, that poor, much maligned, Joe Gromacki, the City of Madison TIF Coordinator . . . he gets it from everyone. And now, it seems, he thinks I piled on as well . . .

You know, I too, hated Joe at one point, along with Anne Zellhoefer, the Assistant City Attorney who is on the TIF staff team. (Somehow Dean Brasser, the City Comptroller who is also on the TIF staff team escaped my wrath at the time.) It all stemmed from my first attempt to get the City to invest in affordable housing. The proposal at the time, was that all TIF projects had to have 15% affordable housing in them, sound familiar? Well, the staff didn't like it . . . and I didn't like them. But since those fateful meetings in Mayor Bauman's office in the late 90's I have come to actually like Joe, and I don't know Anne as well, but I truly appreciate all that the two of them do for the City of Madison and respect their work.

Having said all of that, the TIF process still sucks. It is tortuous. The process for TIF for the Gorman project on the 800 block of E. Washington Ave. has been excruciatingly painful. However, in my humble opinion, it is not because of the staff.

Back in 2004 the Board of Estimates set up a subcommittee (Alders Olson, Onken and myself) to look at the TIF process and policies. We came up with a series of recommendations based on things we were hearing in the community and our own observations about the TIF process. The report of the subcommittee issued in June 2005 made several recommendations to fix the "tortuous" process. Specifically, we made the following recommendations about process:

1) Establish a deadline to create new TIDs required to provide TIF assistance.
This recommendation involves situations where a developer requests TIF assistance where no Tax Incremental District (TID) exists. TIF Law requires that a TIF district be adopted by Common Council prior to September 30 in order for it to be effective as of the year of its creation. The typical TID creation process takes about five months, or it must start no later than April. Industrial TIDs take about four months to create (no blight study required), therefore the deadline for such requests for industrial development would be May 1. TIF Law also requires that all project expenditures demonstrate that “but for” TIF assistance, the project could not be built. This becomes problematic when a district is created and no such finding is reached for the developer’s project. The members concluded that in order to create a TID prior to the statutory deadline of September 30, developers seeking the creation of a new TID as part of their request for TIF assistance must complete the gap analysis and land use approval process prior to April 1 (see simultaneous approval section in #9).

2) Develop an annual vetting process for TIF projects in existing TIDs.
Developers are often unaware or ill informed about the City’s annual budget cycle and are surprised when, at the conclusion of TIF negotiations, the project cannot be funded until the next budget cycle. In order to keep both TIF requests and the budget process in the same decision loop, the subcommittee recommends that TIF assistance requests for funding in the next years’ capital budget would have to be submitted by a deadline (approximately June?). This approximate date coincides with the commencement of the annual capital budget cycle. Those projects that miss the vetting deadline may apply later but are subject to a 15-vote budget amendment. Requests would be predicated upon a mutual agreement had been reached concerning gap analysis and land use approvals between the City and the developer. Further, in the event that the requests exceed available City funds or concern projects that do not meet annual TIF goals or objectives, the City should explore a project evaluation and prioritization or “vetting” process that grades projects according to established TIF objectives and criteria.

3) Create a TIF Pre-Application to be submitted to Board of Estimates.
Projects are often presented before the Board of Estimates that propose considerable policy exceptions, exceed zoning or land use guidelines or do not meet goals and objectives of TIF Policy. The subcommittee agreed that providing policy makers an earlier view of such potential issues was important and would recommend that staff create a TIF Pre-Application form with vetting criteria for developers to evaluate their potential eligibility for TIF consideration. On this form, developers must demonstrate gap, completion of due diligence concerning the site conditions and satisfactory meetings with the district alder and planning staff concerning building height, density and other land use issues. It is possible that such a Pre-Application could be available on-line so developers could gauge their eligibility for TIF consideration.

4) Present potential TIDs to the Board of Estimates prior to starting the TIF creation process.
The subcommittee believed that staff should submit a general plan concept sometime during the early stages of developing a TID project plan. This would apply for TIDs that provided assistance to private development as well as TIDs created solely for infrastructure.

5) Require developers to pay the non-refundable application fee.
This recommendation institutionalizes the application fee (currently .05% of the amount requested) to be paid to the City at the time of TIF Pre-Application.

6) Establish a forum for developer appeal.
Generally, such appeals already occur before the Board of Estimates. The sub-committee agreed to institutionalize one developer appeal, after initial BOE review of the TIF Pre-application, as a part of TIF policy.

7) Require developers to demonstrate due diligence on the purchase of land.
This would include requiring developers to option land while conducting studies of soil conditions, comparable land prices, environmental issues and initial meetings with the district alder and planning staff concerning building height, land use and other issues and provide such findings to the City.

8) Explore BOE review of IZ Waiver requests.
The members proposed that BOE review IZ waiver requests, either independently or jointly with Plan Commission due to their direct impact on TIF.

9) Implement simultaneous TIF and land use approvals.
Members expressed interest in pursuing a simultaneous process where consideration of TIF and the land use approval, which were often inter-related, would make more sense than a process where the land use is already approved and the City left with few options or adjustments that might make TIF assistance unnecessary or more feasible.

10) Require developers seeking TIF to identify this in their land use applications and simultaneously apply for TIF.
Land use approval review and TIF consideration should be simultaneous.

In this particular case, had these policies been in place, specifically numbers 2, 3, 5, 6, 9 & 10 the process would have been alot smoother and transparent. Specifically . . .

• An annual vetting process would have allowed us to appropriately budget for this project and the Todd Drive project and would have given alders and the public a more realistic expectation of what the numbers might be, instead of creating sticker shock.
  
• A pre-application process would have allowed Board of Estimates to make preliminary decisions about TIF on this project earlier, which could have guided the staff and the developer in their subsequent discussion about TIF for this project and we wouldn't be talking about potential exceptions to policy at this late date.
• If developers were required to pay the fee, based on the amount of their request, up front, the developer would put more effort up front into the amount of their request and we would know how serious the developer is about their number.
• If there was an opportunity for developer appeal, we wouldn't hear complaints that the staff is taking to long, followed by claims from the staff that they were waiting for numbers from the developer. We could save weeks of wasted time due to miscommunications and lots of fingerpointing.
  
• If developers declared their intent to use TIF up front and applied simultaneously, we wouldn't have bad feelings about some people believing the developer said they didn't need TIF. (I"m pretty sure they didn't say that, but instead they said "We don't know yet")
  

There are several other procedures listed above that would be very useful in other cases, and we need to get the Board of Estimates to put this on their agenda, and end the stalling of the last 8 months. It will help the staff, the developers, the neighborhoods, the general public and the alder and save us all some time. And maybe, the process, might get a little less, um . . . tortuous.

So Joe, you can wipe away your tears . . . relax, its not your fault, it's the process, not you!

Note: For those of you who think I'm being mean to Joe, I'm not. I'm teasing him. We joked about my blog making him cry on Friday and he's well aware I used to hate him and we laugh about that now. And "but for" Monday, at the Board of Estimates, when we're talking about the Gorman project, I usually agree with Joe on the policies.
Read more!

That darn EDC . . . hates the public?

So, prior to the second attempt the Economic Development Commission made to have a public hearing on paid sick leave, another controversy of sorts threatened to flare up, got resolved, then became an in issue again. What is it with EDC and "public process"? Do the chair and alder realize that this is a government committee, subject to open meetings laws and other laws to ensure that the sun shines on government activity, and not a private enterprise?

At first, a representative from Healthy Families, Healthy Cities was told that people had to register on time and late registrants would not be able to speak? What? That didn't sound right cuz that is not the EDC's standard practice and I couldn't imagine them turning businesses away because they registered late. So the representative from Healthy Families, Healthy Cities talked to another staff person and confirmed, late registrations would be accepted.

So, fast forward to the hearing. Apparently, they only had the room reserved until 9:00, so as people were registering, they were told that they might not be able to speak if it got too late. I talked to at least two people who, after being given the impression they wouldn't get to speak, left. I know when I showed up, very late, around 8:15 I was told there wouldn't be time for me to speak, so I registered and wrote on my sheet that I wanted to speak but there was no time. I was told that testimony would end at 8:45, so I stayed to watch the last half hour of testimony.

Imagine my surprise when I turned around and saw it was 9:05 and Mark Bugher, the chair of the commission was announcing that they could use the room longer than what they were originally told. At that point and for the last 15 minutes as he read through many registration slips, most people had gone home, perhaps because they were told that if they didn't get to speak by 8:45 they wouldn't get to speak. Also, because he said the room would be available longer, I went up and had to tell them that there were more speakers who wanted to speak. Four of us who were there and registered were able to speak, but I don't know why the chair didn't originally have our registration slips.

I'm not sure what was going on, I know that there were staffing issues as Katherine Naherny has retired and Michael Gay is out on medical leave, but shouldn't the alder and chair know better by now? It seems they have one controversy after another when it comes to public process and understanding that they are a government committee that has to follow rules.

• First, they keep their EDC report secret until they can hold a press conference, leaving questions about how or if the committee ever voted on the thing.
  
• They don't understand the issue of negative quorum and quorum by email while discussing TIF and potentially held illegal meetings.
  
• They allow members of the committee to be present by phone for quorum purposes, tho I have never seen another city committee do that.
  
• They don't seem to think that open meetings laws apply to them and try to take informal testimony from the public during their first attempt at a public hearing on paid sick leave.
• And now, most recently they mislead the public regarding their ability to speak to the commission.
  

Geesh, get it together boys . . . at least give us the appearance that you understand you are a public body and care what the public thinks. Read more!

Chewing Tobacco and Cigar Bars . . .

I took a quick look at Verveer's proposed ordinance last night, sorry, its not on-line yet . . . I can support the part of the ordinance that allows "chewing" and "spitting" of tobacco products . . . but I'm wondering, why can't you "swallow" or "snort" or "ingest" . . . not that I know anyone who would want to or want anyone to . . . but . . . to me, this was all about clean indoor air and worker health, and what individuals choose to do to themselves with tobacco is their own business/problem . . . if it isn't effecting the worker health and indoor air, I don't think we should be regulating it.

As far as the cigar bar exemption. Smoke . . . is smoke. It still effects the worker's health. Additionally, I don't understand why we would allow this unlevel playing field and give the competitive advantage to one or two bar owners. Additionally, I am aware that some of the proposed ordinance supporters want to allow cigarette smoking in the cigar bars, if this is about a business plan that is built around cigars, why do they need to smoke cigarettes too?

Here we go again . . . Read more!

TIF Assistance for the Gorman Project (800 E Washington Ave.)

So, apparently everyone wants to hear from me what I think about supporting TIF for the Gorman & Co project for the 800 block of East Washington.

First, let me say some things about the project, with or without TIF assistance.

A. I've been very pleased with how engaged, well-informed and understanding the neighborhood was in working with the developer and how responsive/open the developer has been in addressing the neighborhood's concerns. I couldn't have asked for a better process for those who participated in it.

B. I'm looking forward to some progress in beginning to revitalize the E. Washington corridor and bringing more housing options to the north side of the avenue and employment opportunities to the south side of the avenue.

C. I'm glad that we were able to find a way to have a more intensive use on this entire block (E Wash to E Mifflin, Patterson to Livingston) of downtown and still keep the Don Miller business in the City of Madison.

D. This is a great place for an infill project. It preserves existing housing (i.e. no demolitions) and adds to the downtown housing stock and replaces a surface parking lot.

E. This project is important because it will provide relatively affordable housing options for the area and has family-friendly housing along E Mifflin that will hopefully help increase the school age population so that we can keep Isthmus schools open.

F. I very much appreciate that this developer has worked on several affordable housing projects and just gets it. No unnecessary arguments about inclusionary zoning, in fact, an inherent understanding of why it is important.

Having said all of that about how good the development process was, the TIF discussion has been excruciatingly painful. While the development approvals for the GDP stage and the neighborhood process were wrapped up in about 6 months, the TIF discussion has been going on for nearly a year. I've said all along I wanted to know what number the staff believes is the amount of the gap and could support, because I do believe this is really a blighted area, not just within the very broad definition of the statutes, but at a common sense level, unlike Monroe Commons. (And when I say the property is blighted, I don't mean to imply that the Don Miller business there is not valuable, its just that a surface parking lot on an entire downtown block is not the best use of the property and the E Washington corridor needs improvement.) I also feel that this is a pioneering project for the area and that without ("but for") TIF, the project will not happen.

In January, at the Board of Estimates, the numbers that staff presented were a maximum of about $1.2M for a gap. Between that last meeting and now, it seems that we found several instances where the developer was counting costs differently or they have since agreed upon various assumptions and it turns out that the number that the staff now supports is $2.2 million for the first phase of the project. Since staff are comfortable with this number, it is a number I can support for this project.

But here's the catch . . . you knew it couldn't be that simple . . . we still have an additional $2M gap.

Gorman originally asked for $7 - 8 million. Obviously, we only have $5M in the 2006 budget. So, like other projects, the City of Madison asked the developer to phase their project. This helps the City of Madison in controlling our budget, but also allows us to assess a large project as it proceeds. In many cases the project may do better than originally anticipated and may not need additional (or as substantial of) assistance in later phases and the success of initial phases may make traditional financing more feasible.

In cases where we make the developer phase their project, we don't allow them to count costs of subsequent phases at the time of the initial TIF request. This makes sense, but it also creates an additional $2M gap on the Gorman project because they need to purchase the whole piece of property now. (Staff agrees that the $2M number is correct.)

So, what to do about that additional $2M gap?

I'd argue that in this particular case, this is not at all like other phased TIF projects. In other cases, phasing of the land purchase was possible because there were no existing uses on the land or the existing uses were separable and the purchase of just part of the property was feasible. In the Gorman case, we have an existing business on the entire site and although other portions of the Don Miller business will be staying downtown, there is no obvious separation of the business that is located on this block. Therefore, Gorman has to purchase the entire block and there aren't other feasible options. Additionally, I have been told (and have to confirm), that acceptable TIF expenses are for relocation of existing businesses. So purchasing the land for subsequent phases due to the relocation of the existing business is a legal use of TIF dollars and seems reasonable to be considered in this case. Also, I've been told that price that is being paid for this land is reasonable and to purchase it all now, before it goes up in price, seems to make sense to keep further TIF expenses in the future at a reasonable amount.

Having argued for giving additional TIF assistance, I have also asked that we try to find a way to be creative . . . is there some way that we can impose some protections for the City of Madison if for some reason the second phase doesn't happen or it turns out that the project does so well that the additional $2M wasn't needed? I'm ready to support the additional $2M if we can narrowly craft the reason for why we allowed purchase of the land for the second phase (help to relocate the existing business) and we adequately protect the City of Madison tax dollars.

One final complicating factor here . . . at some point, during 2006 we are anticipating a TIF request of about $4 million for the Todd Drive project that was referred by the Plan Commission last night . . . and leaves a $3M gap in our 2006 budget . . .

And lastly, I can't write all of this without bringing up the fact that almost a year ago the Board of Estimates subcommittee (Judy Olson, Warren Onken and myself) finished a report on changes to TIF policy . . . and the plan commission acted on it . . . but it has been delayed at the current Board of Estimates since June or July . . . we need to get those changes in effect before more people have to go through this tortuous process. Read more!

Concerns about Mayor's IZ workgroup

Kristian from thedailypage.com blogged about the Mayor's IZ workgroup that met today. It's a great summary of the meeting. In fact, I don't think I'll bother to write my own summary, but instead, refer people to his posting.

The meeting went relatively well for a meeting about process . . . tho I am concerned about this workgroup for several reasons.

First, let me say I'm willing to play along, play fair and I'm excited to finally get the other alders to talk about Inclusionary Zoning and get their proposals for changes on the table - cuz up to this point, they haven't added anything constructive to the discussion. Vague criticisms, strong talking points, secret counterproposals, questions, bad data, press releases, but not a single constructive suggestion except from Jed. I'm at the table willing to listen, willing to agree to a fair compromise and willing to keep an open mind about things.

That said . . . does the committee appear "balanced" to you? I mean, of the 6 alders, I'm the only one who was a sponsor of the original ordinance and sponsored the changes suggested by staff. Doesn't feel very "balanced" to me - seems to me I'm set up to be on the losing end of everything.

I am also concerned because I don't think that that the purpose of the committee is very clear. Is the purpose to allow the lobbyists to get a better venue to talk? I've already stated pretty clearly that I don't think we should give them a "special" table. I think they should participate in the process as it exists, and if that process isn't good enough for the paid lobbyists, we should change the process, so everyone has a better chance to provide their input, not just the paid lobbyists. However, I also don't think they should be excluded from the discussion and recommended that they, and anyone else who shows up, continue to participate in an informal way and they agreed to that process. My concern is that we need the actual real estate industry folks show up, the folks who are working with the ordinance, not just their paid lobbyists.

My other concern about the purpose of the committee is that it seems some alders think they are at the table to create a compromise that the Plan Commission and other alders will de facto be forced to accept. This last issue has me most concerned. I feel very uncomfortable cutting that many people out of the process and declaring ourselves to be the arbiter of this issue. I really hope that isn't what the other alders are expecting, cuz I don't think I can agree to that.

Finally, although I have these concerns, I am looking forward to some open, honest discussion about the equity model, marketing and several of the other issues. I really hope that is what this workgroup ends up doing and it doesn't wind up being just a bunch of political games . . . but I guess, only time will tell. Read more!

Ellen Foley from WSJ doesn't get it . . .

I had the, ahem, pleasure, of listening to Ellen Foley, the Editor of the Wisconsin State Journal, speak to a group of non-profit representatives at a Community Shares of Wisconsin meeting this morning. Two things she said kind of got to me: one old, one new.

The new one was . . .

Ellen started off her talk this morning offering to help non-profits learn how to write press releases and lamented that she has been offering this service, but that no one seems interested. Then she goes on to tell us about how in the age of email the press release is a thing of the past and its really all about personal relationships, how we need to make sure that all our personal contacts are in their database, and how we need to provide them with people willing to tell their stories and be photographed . . . and she ends by offering, once more, to help with a training on how to write a press release . . . what? Did she read her little speech before she gave it or listen to herself?

The old one was . . .

The Wisconsin State Journal has changed their focus. Their focus is on the University, Quality of Life and Economic Development. No surprises there, she's been out saying that to everyone who will listen and clearly they play a huge role in continuing the anti-Progressive Dane, anti-business rhetoric. (I don't even know where to begin to provide links here.)

She went on to talk about what her middle class readers wanted - she said 74% wanted shopping news - i.e. advertising. Really?

She explained that life has gotten complicated and we don't know when a suicide bomber might walk into the supermarket . . . so she said that the role of the newspaper was to make sure people were entertained, that the newspaper had to be fun and inspirational and an entertaining break in the day. She suggested if we wanted to get our stories out there we should have a high profile person with an interesting story and we should call Melanie Conklin and get them in her gossip column. Her theory was that if we could feed people this "fun stuff" that will draw readers in, then they might read that serious story about sexual abuse.

If you looked at the WSJ lately, this next suggestion won't surprise you at all, she emphasized that we needed to provide pictures, visuals and charts so they could print "charticles" for busy people.

Anyone get the sense they are dumbing down their paper to the point where it won't even include news anymore?

Finally, she explained that they had reduced their government coverage - which has been clear to me for some time - apparently government isn't fun and entertaining. All I could think was, isn't this the same paper that doesn't understand why people don't run for office and have been voting in lower and lower numbers . . . don't they see the connection between lack of information from the newspaper and lack of interest . . . geez, 90% of the people I talked to today didn't even realize there was a school board primary today . . . I wonder why . . . Read more!

The Chamber of Commerce said what?

I got this email this afternoon . . . and fell off my chair. Is there no end to the arrogance of the Chamber of Commerce . . . remember that study they released, where they botched simple arithmetic and made all kinds of erroneous assumptions . . . the report that was so laughable on its face that it was embarrassing that they ever let it see the light of day . . . those same folks are now having "issues" with a report put out by the Healthy Families, Healthy Cities campaign. Here's the e-mail . . . .

Members of the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce have heard many claims from the Healthy Families, Healthy City Coalition and others on mandatory paid sick leave. HFHC has released a 3-page report from the Economic Policy Institute which provides some employment and benefits data, but does not provide the level of detail needed to fully understand who it would impact in the City of Madison and surrounding communities.

Therefore, we've sent a list of questions designed to clarify the issue and add meaningful information to ongoing discussions. We hope that the answers received will also be useful to you and other public officials as you make your decision on this important issue.

Sincerely,
Delora

Delora Newton

Director of Public Policy

Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce

Ummmm . . . . before they start demanding answers to questions . . . shouldn't they answer a few of the questions put to them about that piece of propaganda "Chicken Little Report" crap they put out . . .

Well, at least the Healthy Families, Healthy Cities folks will try to answer the questions to the best of their ability and try to add to the conversation, unlike the Chamber of Commerce who seems to care more about whipping the business community into a frenzy and putting out propaganda based on flawed studies than helping solve important public policy issues.

I mean seriously, how many of their members don't offer paid time off that can be used for sick leave? Is this really an issue for their members? Are their members the "bad eggs" in the community who force sick employees to come to work? If so, can I get a list of restaurants and bars and other places of public accommodation that are members of the Chamber of Commerce and have sick employees coming to work . . . I think I'll avoid them during the flu season . . . Read more!

Don't forget . . . .

I agree with Zach.
Vote.

I was number 3 at 10:30 this morning . . . and that was unusually low for my ward, I'm usually number 20 - 40 around 8:00 . . . and around 3:30 I got a report that only 11 people had voted . . . 11!!!!

Vote, people, vote! Remind others to vote . . . let's not send the message that we don't care about our schools. Read more!

The Problem with Vinyl: It kills people and is bad for the environment/food chain.

Recently, there has been a discussion about how to create affordable housing on the Isthmus on thedailypage.com. That discussion has gotten very wonky and ended up being mostly about types of materials that are used in building, the quality of homes built now and then and the pros and cons of different types of materials. That discussion, however, has mostly been about how cheap something is, how maintenance free it is and how well it holds up over time.

This discussion, however, was leaving out a few other measurements of what makes good building materials: Human health/death and environmental impact. One thing that immediately caught my eye was when they were discussing the virtues of vinyl over wood siding. A controversy I was made painfully aware of when we decided to paint our wood sided home instead of buy vinyl siding. Our decision to keep our wood siding was originally one of aesthetics, lack of color choices and keeping our home original. As time went by and we had issues getting it painted, several people suggested we just put vinyl siding on it, but we were pretty stubborn, and I'm glad . . . because at some point, I believe it was Matt Sloan, handed me a video called Blue Vinyl and it gave me a whole new perspective on vinyl. (ooops, my boyfriend Rob found the video after Matt Sloan suggested we get vinyl siding at the Council holiday party . . . and I made Matt watch the video . . . sorry Rob!)

When I watched the video, I found out all kinds of information about polyvinyl chloride, including how the production of this material exposes workers to dioxin and other nasty chemicals that cause cancer, endometriosis, neurological damage, immune system damage, respiratory problems, liver and kidney damage, and birth defects in the workers (and their children) who have worked with this stuff. It showed how workers who worked with resin would get a rare form of cancer called angiosarcoma of the liver. It also showed how in Venice, Italy, there were whole departments in PVC plants where 100% of the workers have died or ended up with cancer of the lungs or larynx. Is showed how women who used hairspray with PVC in it has higher levels of dioxin than industry workers.

The movie shows people in Lake Charles, Louisiana where PVC is being produced talking about how they don't go outside because they have asthma, the high rates of cancer in the town around the plant, brown trees, incidents where people couldn't breathe outside and stuff was falling out of the sky on people in the area, how air samples have 10 times the amount of toxic chemicals than air in other places. It showed how there were warning signs telling people not to eat the fish or touch the water around the plants where polyvinyl chloride is produced. It showed a whole community that had to move because the ground water was contaminated by the nearby plants.

It showed how when vinyl products burn, people die from the toxic fumes like at the fire at the MGM Grand in 1980 and how one house fire with vinyl siding can cause permanent respiratory damage to people in the area.

In addition to the dioxins that are released into the environment during the production of PVC, the lifecycle of the vinyl is also a problem and disposing of this stuff creates a second hazard to the community. Obviously, dioxin is toxic, but worse yet, it builds up in our bodies and the environment, including the food chain, causing us to ingest more dioxin.

Unfortunately, the construction industry is responsible for 75% of the PVC market - not just the low maintenance and cheap vinyl siding, but the PVC plumbing and other materials. In the U.S., PVC is predominately manufactured near low-income communities in Texas and Louisiana. You can find out more information about polyvinyl chloride, where places in Wisconsin are that incinerate and create PVC materials, and much more here.

Watch the movie . . . or at least go to the sites listed above and tell me, are low-maintenance and cheap materials really "better" for our community or worse yet, the low-income communities where PVC is produced? Shouldn't we look at the environmental impact and the human
health/death factor as well when choosing our building materials? It's not just about the ugly cookie cutter communities we build - this stuff is toxic.

Read more!

Smart Growth Madison Inc. Changes their Mind . . .

So, not only has Smart Growth Madison, Inc. a lobbyist group for Madison developers changed their staff from Delora Newton (who now works for the Chamber of Commerce as their lobbyist) to Carole Schaeffer (who was a legislative staffer at the Capitol*) - they also are changing their tune about Inclusionary Zoning.

I had the pleasure of meeting the new staff person, Carole Schaeffer yesterday. I have to admit, when she asked to meet with me, my response was:

Why? I didn't think Smart Growth Madison was interested in talking . . . no
offense, but it hasn't been the friendliest group lately.

I was surprised when she responded:

Moving forward, considering that this ordinance so closely affects both the people you represent and the development community that would provide this housing; I am hoping that we can be a part of the dialogue.

So, we met. Apparently, they agree, repeal isn't going to happen. (They previously had supported repeal and took their ball and went home with the Chamber of Commerce, Realtors, Apartment Association and others.) They also think that now that the mayor has a work group that they would like to participate in those informal discussions.

Sigh . . . so I couldn't let that go. What is it with these lobbyists groups that think that they deserve a "special process"? First the Realtors, now Smart Growth. Apparently, they somehow think they are entitled to better process than the rest of the public. Or maybe it's not that the process is "better" but it is "special". How long are we going to continue to cater to the business community and give them special processes? Why can't they go to the committees and testify and participate the way everyone else does? If the process is so bad, why don't they come up with suggested changes so everyone can be treated the same way? Ah . . . but I digress . . . and they're not going to be part of the solution anyways . . . they'd rather fight against things than come up with their own ideas.

Anyways, I asked if they could make a list of the things that they see as major issues with the IZ ordinance. Since we're still waiting for Phil Salkin from the Realtors to write that letter for the plan commission that he promised over a month ago, I thought I'd try another lobbyist group. She did say that she thought the two top issues for her group were the marketing period and incentives, but obviously, she has to talk with her members.

So, another group agrees to participate, only 4 months after the ordinance changes were introduced, they finally want to talk about them . . . will the Builders be next? Apartment Association? Individual developers?

Meanwhile, partially because Zach's equity model is terrible and partially because the time that the marketing period needs to be fixed and partially because we need to find a way to make sure that the developers are marketing their units in good faith, we have lost units that would have been inclusionary zoning units. Was this part of the plan, are they just stalling? And will they continue to stall and drag out the "mayor's special process" while we lose more units? Or will they come to the table in good faith and make the changes happen quickly? Only time will tell, but one thing is for sure, this is about to get interesting.


* Here's the full announcement regarding the staff change at Smart Growth Madison Inc.

Smart Growth Madison, Inc. (SGM) is pleased to announce that Carole Schaeffer has joined the organization as the new Executive Director. (You'll recall that in agreement with the Chamber of Commerce, the Chamber hired Delora Newton to fill the open position left by Henry Sanders who left to head up MAGNET.)

Carole, a graduate of LaFollette School of Public Administration, comes to SGM from the Wisconsin State Senate, where she served as a staffer to a member of the Joint Finance Committee. Subsequent to this role, Carole spent three years as a budget and policy analyst for the Governor's State Budget Office. Her other experience includes being an analyst for the Legislative Reference Bureau and a research assistant for the Governor's Blue Ribbon Task for on State Local Partnerships for the 21st Century.

Carole has had experience working with 'both sides of the aisle' and in fact, came recommended to SGM by a prominent local Democrat.

Carole looks forward to the opportunities offered by this new position. She is planning to meet and work with each of you in the next few weeks to ensure the continued dialogue and involvement on issues of importance to economic development industry. Please join SGM in welcoming Carole to her new role.

Carole can be reached at cschaeffer@smartgrowthmadison.com or (608) 663-2005. In the interim her office will remain at 2810 Crossroads Drive on the east side, but this spring we anticipate Carole will have a new office located downtown.

-Terrence

Terrence R. Wall, President
Smart Growth Madison
608-663-7651
cell 345-0701
twall@twallproperties.com

Read more!

Chamber of Commerce inciting class war?

I was watching the video stream of Stuart Levitan's show Access City Hall. The episode I was watching was with Ald. Robbie Webber and lobbyist Jennifer Alexander from the Chamber of Commerce and Vicky Selkowe, Healthy Families, Healthy Cities campaign and lobbyists Delora Newton, Chamber of Commerce (formerly lobbyists for Smart Growth Madison Inc.) talking about the paid sick leave ordinance.

I couldn't believe my ears! How out of touch is the Chamber of Commerce?

On the one hand, the supporters of the paid sick leave ordinance were talking about families who are going to get evicted cues they can't pay their rent because they lost pay due to time off because they were sick or to take care of sick family members.

On the other hand, the Chamber of Commerce was talking about having to not give employees tuition reimbursement or pension plans.

WTFO? How much of a bigger disconnect could there be. Does the Chamber really believe that the same employees who are on the edge of being evicted have jobs where their employers offer tuition reimbursement and pension plans as benefits?

Somehow, I don't think those are the employers that are going to have issues with the paid sick leave ordinance. My guess is their policies already offer vacation and sick leave that exceed the ordinance as proposed.

Seems as tho the Chamber of Commerce is trying to get middle class folks concerned that their benefits will go away because this ordinance will force employers to take away middle class benefits in order to give "benefits" like paid sick leave, that most of us take for granted, to "those people". Class war anyone? Read more!

February Lobbying Contacts

Sorry, I very much likely missed some folks in February, due to my own tendencies to disorganization that were exacerbated by the silly belief that I could actually take a vacation . . .will try to do better in March. I'm still working on February but much of it is here.

Wednesday, February 1, 2006
Email from Carl Loeffel, Carl's Cakes re: Paid sick leave (exempt)

Thursday, February 2, 2006
out of the country, no communications actually read or heard by me
Email from Micheal Christopher, representing Pres House re: IZ amendment (not exempt)


Friday, February 3, 2006
Email from Barb Arnold, Sharon Krueger & Einleen Rousseau of Brio's Hair Design re: paid sick leave (exempt)
Email from Eve Gallanter of Mad City Broadband re: Wifi

Saturday, February 4, 2006
out of the country, no communications

Sunday, February 5, 2006
out of the country, no communications

Monday, February 6, 2006
IZ brown bag
Plan Commission attendees
Phone call with Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: marketing Veridian Homes and IZ (exempt?)
Phone call and email with David Simon, Veridian Homes re: marketing Veridian Homes and IZ (exempt?)
Discussion with John , Veridian Homes re: marketing Veridian Homes and IZ (exempt?)
Email from Shawn Smith, MPI & Affiliated Companies re: Paid Sick Leave
Email from Jim Mankowski, JBM Patrol & Protection Corp re: paid sick leave
Email from Ron Trachtenberg, representing ???, re: inclusionary zoning (exempt?)

Tuesday, February 7, 2006
IZ brown bag, Randy Bruce, architect, Knothke & Bruce
Council meetign attendees

Wednesday, February 8, 2006
Email from Susan Schmitz, Downtown Madison Inc re: Inclusionary Zoning (not exempt)

Thursday, February 9, 2006
Plan Commission on IZ
Email from Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: Inclusionary Zoning (exempt)

Friday, February 10, 2006
Phone call with Alex Salutos

Saturday, February 11, 2006
Scott Faust

Sunday, February 12, 2006
None

Monday, February 13, 2006
Email from Cynthia Reed regarding paid sick leave because her company told her about the ordinance?? (exempt??)

Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Meet with Don Esposito & Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: Grandview Commons II plat application (not exempt)
Meet with Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: Inclusionary Zoning (exempt)
Email with Carole Schaeffer, Smart Growth Madison, Inc re: inclusionary zoning (not exempt)

Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Email with Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: Grandview Commons II plat application & Inclusionary Zoning units (not exempt) & Inclusionary Zoning (exempt)
Email from Vicky Lowell, Study Director, Institute for Women's Policy Research re: paid sick leave

Thursday, February 16, 2006
Email from Sue and George Krug, Ancora Coffee re: paid sick leave

Friday, February 17, 2006
Meeting with Carole Schaeffer, Smart Growth Madison, Inc re: general stuff and IZ (not exempt)
Phone call from Chris Laurent, Gorman & Company re: 800 E Wash TIF
Email from Randy Bruce, Knothke & Bruce for Great Dane Development re: 627 E Mifflin

Saturday, February 18, 2006

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Monday, February 20, 2006
Meeting with Gary Gorman, Pat Mullen, Chris Laurent, Tripp Widder all from Gorman & Co re: TIF for 800 E Washington Ave. (not exempt)
Phone call from Greg Shimanski, Landlord re: Sticky Section 8's
Email from Scott Wieland, Hausman Johnson Insurance re: paid sick leave
Email from Michael Christopher representing Pres House re: IZ ordinance change
Email from Bruce Worden, TeamSoft, Inc re: paid sick leave

Plan Commission

Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Meeting with Phil Salkin, Realtors Association of Southcentral Wisconsin, Kent Disch, Madison Area Builders Association & Carole Schaeffer, Smart Growth Madison Inc. re Inclusionary Zoning (not exempt)
Phone call from Kami Eshraghi, Kimia Lounge regarding liquore license capacity issues
Email from Delora Newton, Chamber of Commerce re: paid sick leave

Council meeting


Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Phone call with Chris Laurent, Gorman & Co re TIF for 800 E Wash
Phone call with Gary Gorman, Gorman & Co re TIF for 800 E Wash
Email from David Phillips, Verona Area Chamber of Commerce re: paid sick leave
Email from Don Gors re: too many mandates

Meeting with Fred Mohs, Erik Minton, Cliff Fisher, Sheridan Glen re: sales price of Land on Lincoln School property

Sick Leave hearing registrants

Meeting with Kami Eshraghi, Kimia Lounge re: Liquor license capacity issues

Thursday, February 23, 2006
Phone call with Chris Laurent, Gorman & Co, re TIF for 800 E Wash
Phone call with Curt Brink, re TIF for 800 E Wash
Meeting with Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: IZ and Grandview II plat
Email from Julie Evans, anti-business/fascists
Email from Tom Christensen, T Christensen LLC re: paid sick leave
Email from Jeff Tallard, Tallard Apartments re: paid sick leave
Email from Travis Ganser, Ganser Co Inc re paid sick leave

Friday, February 24, 2006
Email from Chris Laurent, Gorman & Co, re TIF for 800 E Wash


Saturday, February 25, 2006

Sunday, February 26, 2006
Email from Chris Laurent, Gorman & Co, re TIF for 800 E Wash
Email from Maria Milsted, Milsted Enterprises re: paid sick leave

Monday, February 27, 2006
Phone call with Dick Stern re: IZ
Phone calls, emails and meetings with Chris Laurent, Pat Mullen, Tripp Widder & Gary Gorman re: TIF for 800 E Washington Ave
Meeting with Denise Matyka, Project Home re: Sticky Section 8's
Email from Tim Johnson, Landlord re paid sick leave
Email from Patrick Ryan, Ryan Brothers Ambulance Service re paid sick leave
Email from Olive Taylor and Mary Nahn, salon owners re paid sick leave

Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Meeting with Jeff Rosenberg, Veridian Homes re: IZ
Email and phone call to/from Chris Laurent, Gorman & Co re TIF for 800 E Wash
Email and phone call t0/from Gary Gorman, Gorman & Co re TIF for 800 E Wash
Email from Mark Schemmel re paid sick leave

Mayor's meeting on IZ
Read more!

Buy your illusion of democracy here . . . .

Remember when, a little group called Smart Growth Madison, Inc. got started . . . way back in January, 2003? Remember who wrote the letter founding that group? Remember who the executive committee of that group was? (Answer: Gary Gorman, David Simon, Jeff Rosenberg, Curt Brink and Terrence Wall) These guys and others (who remain anonymous because Smart Growth won't say who their members are) ponied up about $73,000 to form this group. Remember that their staff person Delora Newton (now working for the Chamber of Commerce) was the first one to bring up the quote from Dave that started all this anti-business crap. And remember how poorly Smart Growth Madison's candidates did during election time.

Fast forward a bit . . . remember when the Common Sense Coalition got started . . . way back in April 2005? Remember who wrote the letter (and denied) founding that group? Notice some familiar names on the executive committee of that group was and who appeared at their news conferences? (Answer: Delora Newton, Curt Brink, Terrence Wall, Dan Guerra) Try searching their site - I tried to figure out who holds those 11 seats on the executive committee, but couldn't find it. Remember how they hired a consulting firm Putnam Roby to get this group started? And how they said they wanted to be a broad coalition, but definitely wanted to leave some people out? We don't know yet how much they ponied up for this group (but they did offer sponsorships at $5,000 to $25,000) or even what the group does besides issue press releases.

Remember that Spring Out the Vote campaign. This time Wood Communication Group and the Chamber of Commerce seemed to be in charge. It was supported in the press by Gary Wolter, president of Madison Gas and Electric Co., and chairman of the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce. Companies who tried to get their employees to vote included: Capital Newspapers, MG&E, American TV, UW Hospitals, WPS Health, UW-Madison, Oscar Mayer, CUNA Mutual, American Family Insurance and Rayovac. Jennifer Alexander at the Chamber of Commerce didn't know how much the effort cost when asked by the Wisconsin State Journal in the article about how this effort failed, but that it was in the "four figures".

Did you read today about Civitas? See any familiar names? It was formed by the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce and Wood Communications Group. Its main sponsors include CUNA Mutual Group, the Curt Vaughn Brink Cos., Madison Gas & Electric and Wood Communications. It also draws funding from American Family Insurance, First Weber Realtors, the Blettner Group and T Wall Properties.

Here we go again . . . This all feels like one really bad re-run. How much money are these supposedly smart business people going to sink into these silly groups that don't work? How long before they figure out that they can't buy a political front group, give it a cute name, hire someone to do the work for them and force employees to attend a seminar then call it democracy. Read more!

Back from vacation . . .

Ok - I'm back. For those of you complaining that I haven't updated my blog, here it is, but don't expect much - I've read my home mail, my council mail, my work mail, my council e-mail, my work e-mail and most (still have 450 left) of my yahoo email, read the dailypage forum, dane101, madison.com forum, read several local blogs, the plan commission packet, most of the council agenda and packet, but I still haven't read the daily papers, I did quickly flip through the Isthmus. I've also checked in with all my staff, various community members and board members. Interesting what happens/doesn't happen when you have a week out of the country/disconnected from the world . . . and interesting which of the above was most useful in telling me what I needed to know to get caught up. I'd have to go with a few key people, the on-line info and email, if there was anything in newsprint that was relevant, it was referenced on-line.

Will try to update the lobbying contacts ASAP, but there's alot of scraps of paper all over the place and I'm not quite organized, it may take a while, so you may find a gap of information, but I'll start getting current.

Don't have much time for anything substantive, but I posted this on the dailypage today about why I blog . . . it's partially a response to Jason Joyce's blog on thedailypage and partially a response to forum comments - thought it may be of some interest.

Note: Sorry, it's unedited and it needs editing, but again, that's kind of the point of a blog . . . ya can't take this stuff (grammar, spelling, punctuation) too seriously folks! Life is to short to obsess over commas. If you understand the communication, close enough.

****************************************************************************

JJ - I don't blog to entertain you or anyone else. Read it, don't read it, I don't care.

What I use my blog for is:
1. Explaining something that takes more than a sound bite. Our political viewpoints on just about anything are limited to about 12 words, and if we're lucky (or sometimes unlucky) it our actual words and not a paraphrase that may or may not hit the point we were trying to make.

2. It is a useful tool to refer people to when they ask you a question that you have already answered. Check out my answer here. Makes it so that I don't have to repeat myself.

3. Sometimes, I just have something to say, its not a news story, its not a big deal, but something irritating me that I think people should know about, so I write about it.

4. Sometimes, I want to respond to something and don't want to spend my time cutting it down to a 200 word editorial someone may or may not print in a few days.

5. Sometimes, something is on my mind, I need a blog topic and I just say it.

6. My Dane 101 blogs are usually something that would be a letter to the editor that I would write to the WSJ or Cap Times, that they probably would not print or not print in a timely manner.

7. I don't know why I post on Madison.com . . . except my theory was . . . I might reach a broader audience . . . not sure its working.

8. My blog also has my (un-updated) lobbying contacts, which I wanted to be somewhere for public viewing - It was the catalyst for my starting my b log.

If these aren't good enough reasons for reading my blog, don't read it. Its not for everyone. Some people like it. Before vacation I was getting 100 - 200 people looking at 200 - 400 pages a day. Even while I was gone and had a notice I was gone 20 - 60 people looked at my blog each day.

Am I going to respond to every Larry Palm entry about IZ, never. I'm sorry I even got into the back and forth with Paul Soglin - its a waste of my time since he hadn't looked at, and doesn't care about the details of the ordinance, he only wants to make the global political point - not create affordable housing for the city or talk about how to make an ordinance work.

Why I blog is probably a bit of an organizing tool, a bit of a chance to blow off some steam and a bit of a chance to respond to some things I'm hearing that I think are wrong or things that have been said about me . . . I have so many people spinning what I think, I hardly ever get the chance to say what I want in my own words . . . and to tell you the truth, I'm still trying to figure out blogging, but so far, its worth it.

Now . . . as to the time issue . . . I don't spend more than 20 minutes on any one post, and it probably shows . . . but that was kind of the point, I'm not going to spit shine and polish every entry . . . it was supposed to be a quick way to convey a message or information . . . hence, the run on sentence issue - I can write with proper grammar and punctuation if I take the time . . . but i dont' have time . . . and the blog actually ends up saving me time everytime i can refer someone back to it . . .

(this entry alone probably could have been a blog if I wanted it to be and I'd have my blog entry for today . . . in 10 minutes or less) Read more!