Loitering

Yet another issue where I can just recycle my folders full of paper. When this issue came back I was a little surprised . . .for several reasons, including that the ordinance isn't something that the Police Chief is asking for . . . and it had some serious racially charged problems last time around . . . and I actually found my folder.

Last night there was a "public hearing" on the issue. The notice for this public hearing said the meeting was expected to last one hour. And I don't think Alder Bruer tried to get or wanted other Alders to/at the meeting. So much for public input. I wasn't able to attend because I was working (TRC board meeting), but I wish I could have been there to hear what folks had to say.

Beyond my issues with the loitering ordinance, I am really struggling with how to find alternatives to a loitering ordinance. I've been thinking about it and I think the reason why I'm having such a hard time finding the alternatives is because the alternatives mostly don't include policing or include policing options that already exist and finally, that many of the solutions are already there . . . just not properly funded, including the police.

The second problem is that I'm not sure which "problem" we are trying to solve? Is it downtown muggings? Or violence at bartime? Or drug dealing? Each of these problems has various different possible solutions. I wish we had started examining the problems and then tried to come up with a solution instead of presenting a solution without examining the alternatives.

Finally, I think the statement by Jim Kellerman in the Wisconsin State Journal this morning sums up my point of view quite well . . .

Jim Kellerman, who lived in what was once the troubled Broadway-Simpson neighborhood, now the Lake Point Drive area, said his neighborhood's success in stopping crime problems "had nothing to do with the loitering ordinance."

Rather, holding landlords accountable for who they rented to, youth programming, community policing, and a strong but not overbearing police presence lifted the neighborhood to where it is today.

"Sometimes people go after a false promise, and then you hold it up and it just doesn't work," Kellerman said.

These are complex problems, with complex solutions, and the loitering ordinance is just a false promise. Let's get serious about finding real solutions for our real problems.



Read more!

Demolitions and Conservation Districts

This morning's WSJ has a half-way decent article about our demolition ordinance (yes, that was a compliment) and an upcoming conservation district ordinance. I'm currently sitting on a subcommittee of the Plan Commission that is looking at the City's demolition ordinance. Our goals of that committee are to create a new ordinance that is more consistent with our current practices and create some clear, understandable criteria to make decisions and create more predictability for the folks you are trying to demolish buildings.

While we have decided to scrap the current ordinance, we have decided to try to create criteria that would be different for residential buildings and non-residential buildings. We are also going to have additional criteria for buildings over a certain age. In addition to these issues, the committee will be thinking about how to deal with some additional issues:

1. Demolitions by fire - and notice to neighbors.
2. How to deal with lakefront property demolitions
3. How do deal with mixed-use buildings and what criteria we will use for building with both residential and non-residential uses.
4. How to reuse and recycle buildings
5. Demolishing buildings that create a safety risk
6. Replacing affordable housing that is demolished
7. Moving houses
8. Penalities for demolition by neglect
9. Penalties for asking for a permit after a demolition has occurred
10. Requirements for the propoerty if a new use is not imminent (seeding/landscaping and grading)

At the same time that we are talking about the demolition ordinance, we should soon be seeing a Conservation District Ordinance that would:

1. Seek to preserve the essential character of unique neighborhoods in the City of Madison.
2. Have different criteria for each district that tailors the regulations to the attributes of the built environment that make the place unique.
3. Allow neighborhoods to prevent insensitive development, and promote better harmony between new and existing structures.
4. The Neighborhood Conservation Districts criteria would apply to all new construction, exterior alterations, additions and demolitions of structures on all zoning lots located in such districts.
5. To be considered for designation as a Neighborhood Conservation District, an area must meet the following minimum criteria:
a. Be of a minimum size.
b. The proposed area must possess consistent, identifiable built environment characteristics to be conserved.
c. The proposed area must contain at least one of the following features:
- Distinctive building attributes: scale, mass, distinctive architectural characteristics, e.g. front porches, height, roof styles
- Distinctive land use patterns: mixed uses, parks/open spaces, or unique uses or activities
- Distinctive streetscape characteristics: lighting, street layout and materials
- Distinctive lot features: lot layouts, setbacks, alleys
- Location near designated historic landmarks and/or districts.

The biggest battle over the conservation district ordinance will likely be the neighborhoods fighting to get the City resources to create conservation districts in their neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are lining up at the moment . . .
Read more!

A dailypage comment: Is this news?

I had a somewhat odd experience with thedailypage.com forum, channel 27, Mike Hanson, the democratic party, the Mitch Henck show and the Vicky McKenna Show last week.

It all started when I posted some crime statistics from this blog and then said this on thedailypage.com forum:

Part of me is a little cynical in that we have a public information officer for the City of Madison who is running for Sheriff . . . and I wonder how that all plays into all this attention to crime of late . . . .

At first, I got a response where someone tried to twist what I said into this:

What are you implying? That Mike Hansen is out commiting crimes to support his race for sheriff?

Which blew my mind, cuz that wasn't at all what I had intended. So I replied:

That was not what I implied in the least bit.

Its just that someone running for sheriff benefits everytime his mug is in front ot the cameras or in the paper or on the radio . . . so the more attention he calls to the issues, the more attention he calls to himself . . . all those trolls concerned about taxes should be screaming from the rooftops that he is campaigning on the taxpayer's dime . . .

p.s. as someone who has had campaign lit sent out implying that I was causing rapes in the downtown, and been accused of causing people to commit acts of vandalism, I"m a little sensitive to what is implied and I certainly did not mean to imply that Mike Hanson was committing crimes . . . I've had that tactic used against me and its shitty. Apologies if that was somehow read into what I said.

And then the "discussion" deteriorated into . . . well, it went to that special place that only an internet forum can go to . . . and I thought it was over . . . but no . . .

I get a call from Channel 27, asking about my posting on thedailypage. I explain to them that it was a comment on a discussion board and that it wasn't news. They persisted. They said that they were going to interview Mike Hanson and that if I didn't comment it would look funny. Since this is the station that calls me at 3:30 when they don't really want my comment and then report "Konkel refused to comment" when I'm unavailable, I got the reporters point. If I didn't comment the story would have been "Alder accuses Police Public Information Officer of Misconduct in office". So, I did the interview.

But I did a little research first. And it seems I wasn't the first one to raise to this issue. In a letter to Wayne Bigelow, Chair Democratic Party of Dane County, Chief Noble Wray explains in response to Mr. Bigelow's request that Chief Wray assign Michael Hanson "a different role during the course of this campaign" for Sheriff that he cannot reassign Mr. Hanson unless it is "basedon performance or discipline". (Sorry, that was a horrible sentence!) Chief Wray goes on to say that he has requested that Officer Hanson review policy 4-1000 regarding political activity and that there was contact with Attorney May and that the following guidelines were discussed:

No campaign materials with pictures of Officer Hanson in Madison Police uniform
No campaign materials at work
No campainging or fund raising while at work
No campaign events during work hours
Discussed limitations on how he can state his profession, for example, it is OK to say that he is a Madison Police Officer in a resume fashion

So, I tried to get channel 27 to discuss this with the folks who had raised this concern in a more official capacity, but they didn't really seem interested. They kept asking if I'd call for his resignation. I said no. Or if I'd ask for an investigation. I said no. Or would I alleging something was done improperly. I said no. They ran the story anyways.

And then . . . enter, AM radio talk shows. The next morning, Jed Sanborn, filling in for Mitch Henck had Officer Hanson on the radio to talk about my concerns. And then later that day, Vikki McKenna was talking about it as well.

All of this, from a dailypage comment? Is this where this town gets its news? Is this news? Ugh. I hate to even bring it up again Mike Hanson's role or thedailypage), as its likely to cause more controversy. My point here is . . . how does an alleged "news" agency take a posting from an internet discussion board and blow it up into a news story despite the fact that the "source" of the news isn't alleging the story they are trying to create. And then, why is it that the AM radio talk shows are right there the next morning with their guests all lined up to discuss this non-news? And why do they do all of this when they do have a legitimate news story with the Democratic Party chair?
Read more!

Budget Non-Information

So, last Thursday afternoon the Common Council office was given 7 CDs the were provided so the the 20 alders could "check out". These CDs contained the Operating Budget Department Requests that met the Mayor's 3% cut (except police and fire) budget. These CDs were provided upon my request. Yesterday, I was able to pick up the Capital Budget requests, again only provided after I inquired about it.

Las night, the Mayor held a public hearing on the budget. However, the average Madison citizen has no idea what the department proposals for next year might include or not include, so its hard to give feedback. Heck, most council members haven't seen the information. I took some time to make this information available to the public via Dane101.com. If you are interested in seeing the department requests meeting the 3% cut (except police and fire), the "supplemental" requests by the departments, including police and fire and then the capital budget requests, you can fine the files at Dane101.com.

The question here is, why is an alder posting this public information on a blog site? Why doesn't the City make this information available to the public? How is the public expected to comment on something that they can't find information about?

The process for the budget and previous budgets can be found here. Now you have some time to review the information if you have a particular interest. If you see something you like or don't like you can give input to the mayor at mayor@cityofmadison.com or the council at allalders@cityofmadison.com. The mayor is also having his "Build your own Budget" meetings in the first two weeks of September and you may want to give your input there.

* Sept. 7, 6:30 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, Alicia Ashman Library, 733 N. High Point Road

* Sept. 13, 6:30 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, East District Police Station, 809 S. Thompson Drive

* Sept. 14, 7:00 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, South Madison Health and Family Center (Harambee), 2202 South Park Street

While this mayor has added the Mayor's hearing and the "Build Your Own Budget" sessions, it is clear that this process needs improvement. And it is even clearer that we need better information. However, while we try to figure out how to improve this process, I will continue to try to keep people informed here and at Dane101.com.
Read more!

What didn't make it in the budget requests . . .

The list is long . . . I've posted 56 requests from most departments here and the 30 police and fire requests here.

The long list of supplemental requests includes some pretty amazing things. The full list of community services items is at the bottom of this list but the list also includes:

Childcare assistance, Allied Drive Weed and Seed Coordinator, an Economic Development Plan, Homeless Services, Neighborhood Center, Community Gardens, Homeless Outreach on State St., Jobs for the Future, Library Books and Services, additional bus services, disability services, EOC outreach and education, sanding and snow removal services, health services for people with no insurance coverage, pedestrian safety programs, energy reduction programs, senior center items and services and some city employees. Take a look for yourself.

Below are the "various programs" being cut from Community Services.

COMMUNITY RESOURCES PROGRAM - 2007-2008

SUMMARY
Supplemental Requests of the Community Services Commission
for Program Areas II, IV, V, VI and VII

THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER:

Rape Crisis Center
B. Community Education 11,695

Omega School
A. GED/Basic Skills 11,018
D. Spanish Language GED 10,000

Youth Integration Into Cultural and Recreational Activities:
Kanopy School for Contemporary Dance and Choreography
A. YIP - Kanopy Scholarship Support 3,431
Millennium Soccer Club
A. YIP - Youth Indoor Soccer 3,120
Simpson Street Free Press
C. YIP - Museum Series 2,242
TAPIT/ New Works
A. YIP - A Classical Act 4,252
Urban League of Greater Madison
G. YIP - Achieving Greatness Through Service Day 3,431
Vera Court Neighborhood Center
K. YIP - Integration 3,431

Neighborhood Center Core Costs
Boys and Girls Club/ Allied 1,611
Boys and Girls Club/ South 17,333

Agency to be Determined
B. Community Assistance Rides 18,284
A. Sexual Assault Prevention Ride Service 70,916

YWCA of Madison
K. Girl Neighborhood Power - Management 3,789

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
C. Jefferson Youth Resource Center 2,795

Freedom, Inc.
B. Nkauj Hmoob: Southeast Asian Girl's Group 7,874

Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center
D. Teen Program 3,274
H. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Vera Court Neighborhood Center
E. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,500
F. Youth Leadership 3,789

YWCA of Madison
J. Girl Neighborhood Power-Southwest/Far West 10,789

Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
G. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Atwood Community Center
H. High School Leadership Council 4,693

East Madison Community Center
C. Youth Services 1,283

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
D. Project Teen Build Up 10,138

Common Wealth Development
A. Youth Business Mentoring 7,500

Atwood Community Center
G. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Simpson Street Free Press
A. Simpson Street Free Press 4,663

Neighborhood House Community Center
A. Youth and Families 18,768

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
F. Women Rise Up! 5,373

East Isthmus Neighborhoods Planning Council
A. Operation and Community Organization 4,003

Porchlight
H. Transit for Jobs
The Community Services Commission supports this high priority program and believes it has been effective for the short time it has operated. The program is currently receiving Emerging Neighborhoods funding through the Mayor's office and we understand it is eligible for a second year of funding from that source. The Commission will recommend that the Mayor fund this program again in 2007 utilizing Emerging Neighborhoods funds. The Commission will reconsider 2008 funding for this program next year.

T.J.'s Support Brokerage Firm
A. Madison Apprenticeship Program
The Community Services Commission supports this high priority program and believes it has been effective for the short time it has operated. The program is currently receiving Emerging Neighborhoods funding through the Mayor's office and we understand it is eligible for a second year of funding from that source. The Commission will recommend that the Mayor fund this program again in 2007 utilizing Emerging Neighborhoods funds. The Commission will reconsider 2008 funding for this program next year.

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREAS II, IV, V, VI AND VII: $264,362

COMMUNITY RESOURCES PROGRAM - 2007-2008
SUMMARY
Supplemental Requests of the Early Childhood Care and Education Board
for Program Area I

THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY BY THE EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION BOARD:

Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
F. Children 13,500

Community Coordinated Child Care
C. Training and Professional Development 32,555

Dane County Parent Council
A. Satellite Family Child Care 19,760

East Madison Community Center
A. Children Development Services 3,079
B. Summer Youth Program 1,022

Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center
A. Early Childhood Program 2,286
B. Children's Program 6,335

Neighborhood House
C. Summer Children's Program 6,309

Vera Court Neighborhood Center
B. Children 5,000
L. Life as a Boy 12,096

Wexford Ridge
B. Elementary After School & Summer Camp NA

Wisconsin Youth Company
A. After School 40,000
The Early Childhood Care and Education Board recommends funding of $40,000 for this new program to meet the very high need and growning need for elementaly school age programming in southwest Madison. Wisconsin Youth Company does not have funding to provide a consistent after school program for children. The Company is also seeking renewal of the $40,000 grant to keep their facility open, and has used its own resources to fund part of the required renovations. The Early Childhood Care and Education Board request relies on this renewal funding as a base for the after school program they support.

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREA I: $141,942

Supplemental Requests of the Senior Citizens Advisory Committee
for Program Area III

Priority
THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY BY THE SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

Restoration of funding for Focal-Point Based Community Assistance to the following agencies:

East Madison Monona Coalition of the Aging 1,328

North/Eastside Senior Coalition 2,589

South Madison Coalition of the Elderly 2,544

West Madison Senior Coalition 1,828

Restoration of funding for Senior Activities/ Volunteer Opportunities to the following agencies:

Atwood Community Center 558

Neighborhood House 242

North/Eastside Senior Coalition 3,192

West Madison Senior Coalition 9,034

Retired and Senior Volunteer Program 6,745

WilMar Neighborhood Center 2,958

South Madison Coalition of the Elderly 352

United Asian Services of WI 414


THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS AND ARE LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER:

1. Freedom, Inc.
Cambodian Wisdom Project 5,000

2. Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
Senior Program 2,000

3. South Madison Coalition of the Elderly
Client Directed Case Management 8,500

4. United Asian Services of WI
Senior Services Expansion 1,350

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREA III: $48,634
Read more!

BUDGET TIME!!!!!

Yup - it's city budget time . . . and it's gonna be a mess this year!!

Tomorrow night at the Downtown Public Library (201 W Mifflin St.) at 6:00 the Mayor will be having a public hearing on what his budget should look like. In order to assist people in determining what they should testify about, I have posted the department requests here. And soon, I will have the "supplemental" requests available as well.

Meantime, I think we are going to have a huge struggle over the definition of "basic services" and "economic development". In many ways, we are going to have a battle for the soul of our City. Are we going to be a City where we give police resources to arrest people and toss them in jail, or a City where we invest in our future through neighborhood centers and childcare programs to prevent the need for police resources. And how to we find the right balance?

And, are we going to be a City where when we talk about "economic development" we talk about biotechnology and high tech jobs at the University Research Park, or are we going to talk about having a bus system that can support people working 2nd and 3rd shift? And again, does it have to be one or the other and can we strike a balance?

Finally, I have to ask, are we going to continue to give millions of dollars in TIF to developers and not require that they build housing that more than the top 15% of the wealthiest people in Madison can live in? Are we going to get serious about affordable housing and put some money into some programs, or are we going to continue to talk about what is wrong with the programs that were developed because of the reluctance of the council to invest in affordable housing?

It's going to be an interesting budget. The time to get involved is now. I hope to see you at the public library tomorrow night. If you can't make it, you may want to try to attend one of the Mayor's "Build your own budget" sessions. I know there are many conflicts with the meetings that have been scheduled, but if you can make it, it's worth your time!
Read more!

What Does the Police Department Need?

Every budget, we have a discussion about how many police to add . . . and recently, mayoral candidate Ray Allen called for 6 more detectives for the department. Which got me thinking . . .

In 2002 I sat on the police staffing committee and we did a police staffing report. The reason I agreed to sit on the committee was my naive hope that if we had a plan, we could just follow that. Silly me.

In looking back at that report, there are several things I would have done differently, but here's some interesting facts:

• In 1997 a similar committee agreed that if we got federal funding (COPS grant) that we would recommend increasing staffing to 1.9 officers per 1,000 by 2000, absent funding, the ratio would be 1.8 per 1,000 people.
• Since 1974 (through 2002) the police department has added 100 sworn positions including 1 person added to the Management Team, 3 Lieutenants, 3 Sergeants, 12 detectives, 1 investigator and 80 police officer positions.
• In 2003, hiring a new police officer committed us to $65,481 for salary ($38,207), benefits ($18,577) and overtime, uniforms, equipment and supplies.
• 128 of our commissioned officers are command staff. 254 are police officers.
• Command staff consists of 1 Police Chief, 2 Assistant Chiefs of Police, 9 Captains, 19 Lieutenants, 34 Sergeants, 53 detectives and 10 investigators.
  
• Of our 254 police officers (not command staff), 184 were on patrol. At the time we had 16 Neighborhood police officers, 4 Educational Resource Officers (work in the schools), 1 Acting Sergeant, 14 Task Force Officers, 12 Traffic Enforcement Safety Team Officers (this has since been cut in half), 2 Traffic Specialists, 7 court officers/baliffs, 4 training officers, 3 Criminal Intelligence Officers, 4 Safety Education officers, 1 crime prevention officer, 1 public information officer, 1 crime stoppers officer.
• Out of 333 sworn officers, only 184 were patrol officers.
• They had an additional 83 civilian positions including 26 parking enforcement officers
• In addition, the City of Madison also has other law enforcement officers due to the UW and Capitol Police.
• In 1988 the police department budget was 21% ($20,517,917) of our total budget, 14 years later, by 2002 their budget had more than doubled and it was 23% ($41,397,279).
• From 1988 - 2002 we added 87 commissioned personnel and we went from 1.66 officers per 1,000 to 1.79 per 1,000 people in Madison.

In 2006 the police deparment budget remained at 23% of our total operating budget or $47,331,958. In the past, I have been concerned that we don't have much information about the police department budget. With all this recent attention to "rising crime" (or not) and the mayor's race, this will likely be a hot topic. I sure hope we can get good information this year on the police department budget so we can look at efficiencies so we can get more officers on the street if that is what is needed.
Read more!

Crime: Is it up? Or down?

Answer is: It depends upon what you look at.

Here are some interesting numbers I ran across about the last year . . .

• In Madison in the preceding 6 month period (July - Dec 2005) there were 213 Robberies. During the last 6 month period (Jan - June 2006) there were 206 Robberies. Are Robberies down?
  

• In Madison in the preceding 6 month period (July - Dec 2005) there were 220 Aggravated Assaults. During the last 6 month period (Jan - June 2006) there were 212 Aggravated Assaults. Are Aggravated Assaults down?

• In Madison, in the preceding 6 month period (July - Dec 2005) there were 791 Simple Assaults. During the last 6 month period (Jan - June 2006) there were 697 Simple Assaults. Are Simple Assaults down?
  

Mean while, the police are citing these numbers about all the muggings downtown . . .

• Robberies in the Central district went up from 27 (Jan - June 2005) to 55 (Jan - June 2006) or 103%

• Why aren't they mentioning the increases in the North and East District where the increase is 180% and 230% respectively, where's all the concern there?
  

In the past 15 years we find these relevant statistics

• In 1991 there were 15, 053 Part One Criminal Offenses (Homicide, Forcible Rape, Aggravated Battery, Robbery, Motor Vehicle Theft, Larceny, Arson and Other Assaults including Simple Assualts). That was 7769.9 crimes per 100,000 people.

• In 2005 there were 10,246 Part One Criminal Offenses. That was 4620.8 crimes per 100,000 people.

• Robberies have varied from as little as 125.5 per 100,000 in 1999 to 171.8 per 100,000 in 1997. The average for these years is 144.32 per 100,000 .

Crime is likely to be a hot topic of discussion through the budget and into the mayor's race. I just hope we can find a way to talk about it that takes into account the facts and the discussion isn't just based on fear.
Read more!

Trolleys vs Busses

A recent article in the Isthmus by Vikki Kratz about the Mayor suggesting that we pay for his street car proposal with local funds prompted one foron to ask "Is Mayor Dave insane?" I chimed in with my two cents:

Alternative? Busses.

1. They aren't restricted to one area (there's more flexibility) - they can change routes when necessary for greater efficiency.

2. If more people rode busses them we could have better (more frequent and longer) service.

and now I feel the need to lay out an alternative vision, so after sitting on the Transit and Parking Committee for three years, here it is:

1. Add express buses that go between the transfer points. One going clockwise, one going counter clockwise as well as a route running North/South and East/West. (Hopefully this will cut down on some ridiculously long rides people need to take.)

2. Run busses so that people who work 2nd and 3rd shift can ride the busses to work. i.e. Run limited bus routes all night. This might even be eventually expanded help prevent some drunk driving late night.

3. Late night, run smaller busses. (If we can buy a trolley with local funds, we can buy some smaller busses.)

4. Run express busses from park and ride lots in Sun Prairie, Verona, McFarland, Waunakee etc.

5. If these busses run and are more reliable, we should have more riders. More riders may mean we could increase the frequency of the busses, so people don't have to wait an hour for the next bus.

6. Make sure we find a way for small businesses to get in on the bus pass deals that the University and other big businesses can. In other words, have a purchasing pool for small businesses to buy bus passes for their employees.

7. Stop raising fares and discouraging riders and placing bus rides out of reach for low-income people.

8. Allow people to buy half-month bus passes for those who don't have enough money together to buy a full-month bus pass.

I'm sure I missed a few good ideas I've heard over the years . . . may add more later . . . but now, back to the streetcars . . .

So, the Streetcar Study Committee was supposed to have a report to the Common Council by November 1, 2005. They're a little late. I've heard estimates that the trolley would cost 100M and I don't know how much of that is operating costs vs. capital costs, but I'm guessing my plan would be a better long term investment, be more flexible and responsive to changing needs and with hybrid deisel-electric busses can be more enviro-friendly than our current system. Our 2006 Transit Utility budget has the Transit Utility spending $43,940,821 but the City of Madison is only contributing $9,238,720 (21%). Could you imagine what the $100M could do for the bus system? And, after all, a trolley downtown isn't going to serve most of Madison and we'll still need our bus system to operate efficiently, lets put our efforts there.


Read more!

Show me the money . . .

Some people have taken offense at a recent blog of mine regarding who was contacted by whom during the Inclusionary Zoning debate. Apparently, the allegation that these same people contacted get alot of money from these lobbyists, landlords, realtors and developers was offensive and I think some are suggesting unsubstantiated. I looked through some old computer files and found a few things that will help shed some light on what I was trying to say, so here are some more details for those who are questioning what I had to say . . . .

In 2001 - the following current alders got a substantial amount of money from the landlords, realtors and developers that I recognized on their lists . . . there may be more that I didn't recognize:

Judy Compton: $6,157
Santiago Rosas: $1100
Paul Skimore: $300 (unopposed)

In 2003 - this is what I found:

Paul Van Rooy - $6549 - which was 65% of what he raised
Paul Skidmore - $2,495 - which was 100% of what he raised and he was unopposed
Santiago Rosas - $2,100 - which was 89% of what he raised and he was unopposed
Judy Compton - $1750 which was 90% of what she raised and she was unopposed
Cindy Thomas - $1250 which was 39% of what she raised and she was unopposed

In 2005 I found:

Jed Sanborn - $4040
Cindy Thomas - $3155
Paul Skidmore - $755 (of $805) and he was unopposed
Judy Compton - $700 (100%) and she was unopposed
Santiago Rosas - $450 (100%) and he was unopposed
Paul VanRooy - $450 (of $475) and he was unopposed

Total:

Judy Compton $8107 (Opposed 1 of 3 races)
Van Rooy - $6999 (Opposed 1 of 3 races)
Cindy Thomas - $4355 (Opposed 1 of 3 races)
Jed Sanborn - $4040 (Opposed 1 of 1 race)
Paul Skidmore - $3995 (Never opposed)
Santiago Rosas - $3650 (Opposed 1 of 3 races)

Why are these folks who haven't had races collecting all of this money from landlords, realtors and developers? If we review the list of contacts this is what you'll find . . .

Brandon 52 - has never been opposed so raised very little money
Compton 52 - $8107
Skimore 41 - $3995
Sanborn 28 - $4040
Konkel (PD)28 - Doesn't take landlord, realtor or developer money and returns it.
Palm 23 - none?
Cnare 10 - minimal
Golden 9 - minimal
Rosas 8 - $3650
VanRooy 5 - $6999
King (PD)5 - none
Thomas 3 - $4355

Now, if my colleagues are offended that I posted this . . . I might remind them that all I did here was hold up a mirror for them to look into . . . if they are ashamed of their actions, perhaps they should reconsider them.

Campaign Finance reports can be found here.



Read more!

Loitering: It's Ba-a-a-c-k

Doesn't it sometimes seem that we keep changing the players but having the same discussions. It's true about smoking, even something I favor - Section 8 discrimination and now loitering. That's right, appearently, according to the State Journal this morning, we've brought back another ground hogs day issue . . . kind of. Sort of. We just don't know what it is yet.

I'm kind of curious, how can 11 people on the council make up their mind that this is the right thing to do without seeing the details? What kind of information did they base their support on? What problem did they identify? Do they think the problem they identified would really be solved by this proposal? Did they just do it because a lobbyist asked them to support it? Is it because it is symbolic and political as the Mayor and Verveer suggest? Is it because they lack imagination to come up with anything new? Aren't they concerned that 80% of the tickets were given to black people the last time this ordinance was in place? What about the proposals that the police chief and police department have proposed for the Downtown and King Street? What's wrong with them and why is this other proposal needed? Well . . . I'm shouting into the wind, I doubt any of the proponents of this proposal will answer any of those questions . . .

Oh, and one more thing. This is yet another issue with lobbying. Here we have a majority of the council and a lobbyist group making decisions for the city before there is even a hint of public discussion. So I should be able to look at the lobbying reports and figure out what happened right? Hmmm . . . when did Quigley do all this lobbying on behalf of the "grass-roots" Common Sense Coalition? It certainly didn't show up on their recent lobbying report. And I don't see lobbying listed as one of the legislative issues they are going to work on . . .

Hmmmm . . . . smells funny . . . . I guess I'll have to wait until next February to find out any information . . .
Read more!

Lobbying: Chamber comes in #2

People on thedailypage.com forum are upset with me for raising the lobbying issue.

They seem more upset about my posting on lobbying on the paid sick leave issue than the lobbying on the inclusionary zoning issue.

I'm not sure what it is about this issue that gets people so nuts. All I did was wonder aloud about all the money being put into lobbying by the Chamber of Commerce. This is a significant change from what we have seen before. I didn't even get into the bigger issue that I found that would also drive them nuts - - there are over 200 registered lobbyists (It's a moving target cuz there's several registrations not on-line that are sitting in the clerks office) and less than 100 filed their forms. (I sure hope they do so soon!!!)

What struck me about the money was that the Chamber of Commerce had the highest amount for any one lobbying group that didn't have a specific project before the City. (Joseph Freed, who did the Hilldale project, was the one registrant that spent more than the Chamber of Commerce at $94,929) While the Chamber of Commerce spent $44,758 the following groups only spent the following - their total combined is less than the Chamber!:

Common Sense Coalition $8,000
Downtown Madison Inc $2,416
REALTORS $11,673
Smart Growth Madison Inc $5585
Madison Area Builders Association $3120
Apartment Association $553

Even our most frequent flyers with all their clients combined (based on what I found in the basket - some appear missing) did not individually surpass the Chamber of Commerce

Ron Trachtenberg - 12 different clients - $32,750
Bill White - 3 clients - $20,442
Michael Christopher - 3 clients - $16,080

Even the bigger developers (based on what I found in the basket) didn't spend that much - combined!

Veridian - $22,592
Alexander Company - $7930
Gorman & Co - $3845

The Chamber made up nearly 15% of the cost of lobbying of the $311,413 I found reported. That's significant. That is a change. We have not seen this kind of money put into lobbying by one group before. They made a record number of contacts with alders. And I suspect, that also had a record impact on the Council . . . but I'll let you decide - cuz that's what caused all the controversy with my friends on thedailypage.com forum!

Read more!

Who is in whose pocket?

In the recent debate over Midvale Plaza, many of the community members accused Progressive Dane alders of being in the pockets of the developers. I thought this was odd . . . since many of us pledge not to take money from Landlords, Realtors and Developers. Recent lobbying reports show who the lobbyists for these groups think are in their pockets . . . here's the number of contacts from the REALTORS, Smart Growth Madison, Inc and Madison Area Builders Association lobbyists during the Inclusionary Zoning debate:

Olson (PD)0
Benford (PD)0
Verveer (PD) 0
Bruer 0
Knox 0
Webber (PD)3
Gruber (PD) 3
Radomski 3
Thomas 3
King (PD)5
VanRooy 5
Rosas 8
Golden 9
Cnare 10
Palm 23
Konkel (PD)28
Sanborn 28
Skimore 41
Compton 52
Brandon 52

TOTAL 246
Read more!

What will $44,758.25 buy you with the Common Council?

So, the lobbying reports were due on July 31st. I was kind of waiting to have them on-line before I looked at them, but the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce sent out a press release bragging about how much money they had spent. It seemed a little odd that they would really spend $44,758.25. But they made the following contacts:

Sanborn 14
Konkel 1
Cnare 16
Verveer 1
Webber 2
Olson 0
Brandon 47
King 4
Skimore 17
Golden 11
Gruber 6
Benford 0
Knox 7
Bruer 10
Palm 15
Compton 8
Rosas 11
VanRooy 11
Radomski 9
Thomas 11
TOTAL 201

Mayor 10
Piriano 12
Twigg 8
Mendoza 18
TOTAL 48

Council Members 4
Common Council 7
Equal Opportunities Commission 4
Economic Development Commission 5
Board of Estimates 2
Board of Public Health 2
TOTAL 24

That's a grand total of 273 contacts at $163.95 per contact. (As an aside, that doesn't count all the money they paid for radio ads and the wonderful NorthStar study.)

The contacts were primarily about "mandatory paid sick leave". They had 8 contacts about inclusionary zoning, 1 "general city business" and 3 to Alder Golden about Big Box Parking.

Look at who they conctacted . . . and how the paid sick leave vote came out (Konkel, King, Verveer, Olson, Webber, Benford, Gruber, Knox and Palm voted for - Golden was absent) . . . I guess you do get what you pay for, those 156 contacts with the council members who voted against the ordinance paid off . . . and I guess some council members care more about what the Chamber of Commerce thinks than their own constituents and the low wage workers in Madison . . .
Read more!

CSC: They are . . . They aren't . . . and they are again . . .

Ok - is the Common Sense Coalition going to endorse candidates, or not? Yes? No? Maybe?

Is the answer yes, once and for all?. Geesh . . . why didn't they just admit it up front?

As of July 26, 2006 they have registered as a PAC and it looks like they will at least be funneling money to candidates . . . at least, presumably, the ones that they "endorse"? Are they done pretending?
Read more!