Trolleys: Missing Information, Stretched Numbers?

I was talking with a few alders about trolleys the other day and tried to look up additional information about them. Someone was telling me that they had identified 91 development sites along a proposed route that were going to help raise taxes to pay for the system. I wanted to see the information that was provided. Their advice, read the Wisconsin State Journal? That wasn't a very satisfactory answer, but the information wasn't available anywhere else.

First, I checked the last agenda (4/23/07) of the Streetcar Committee. No links or additional information were provided.

Then, I checked the streetcar portion of the City website. Also, no recent information about routes, ridership, budget or development sites. Many of the minutes of the meetings seem to be missing? Or didn't they meet since November?

Finally, they were correct, I looked at the Wisconsin State Journal on-line and found some information. I didn't find the map I wanted to see, but I did find this article that had some budget information. And this article that mentions the 91 development sites, but no map. Now I hate to rely on a newspaper article to be accurate, but if this information is true, it's absurd. It starts off with:

The potential first phase of a Madison streetcar system would cost $58 million to build and would increase Downtown property values enough to offset some of that cost, Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said Monday.

Then it tells us that:

Based on the effect that the consultants say the streetcars have had in other U.S. cities such as Portland, Ore., Tacoma, Wash., and Tampa, Fla., the properties would increase in value by 5 percent to 10 percent five years after groundbreaking, or about $100 million to $200 million, Cieslewicz said, citing the study. That would generate about $720,000 to $1.4 million a year, based on 2007 property tax rates.

Unless they forgot to report something, that means that it will take 41 - 80.5 years to pay for just building the tracks, if the cost and taxes remain in proportion.

If the feds (we) pay for half, it will be 20 - 40 years.

And then, if all that money goes to the trolley, where will the taxes to serve those additional properties with police and fire services etc., come from? And finally, where will the money for operating costs of the trolley system come from? Surely, the fares won't cover the costs to run the trolley system.

Too bad more information isn't available to the public. Or even council members.
Read more!

Housing: What's Next?

Anyone who lives in Madison knows that finding a good place to live that you can afford is a bit of a struggle, even for those of us who enjoy a relatively comfortable life. If you're only making $10 per hour or $20,800/year, and if you have kids, it becomes much more of a challenge. Even when you can afford your housing, other problems like inattentive landlords often become a problem. This week, there are two meetings to get community input on what the biggest issues folks are having are and what some solutions might be.

REVIVING THE STUDENT TENANT UNION
The first meeting is tonight at the UW Campus at 7:00 tonight, check TITU for the room. This first meeting is a meeting to find out if there is interest in reviving the Student Tenant Union. The Students for the Tenant Resource Center were denied $55,000 in funding for the 2007-2008 school year because the SSFC determined that their connection to the Tenant Resource Center, which recieved the funding, did not meet the SSFC funding criteria. They made this decision despite the fact that this is the funding structure that the SSFC has funded for the past 11 years. So, the meeting tonight on campus will explore if students are interested in continuing to have resources to help with their tenant issues, what resources they want and what the top issues they face are.

MADISON AND DANE COUNTY COMMUNITY MEETING
The second meeting is Saturday at 10:00 at Immanuel Lutheran Church 1021 Spaight St. This meeting is sponsored by the Affordable Housing Action Alliance and the Progressive Dane Housing Committee. We'll be getting together to talk about what the biggest housing issues are and what can we do to solve those problems at the County and City levels. These issues may be tenant/landord issues, fair housing/discrimination issues, development issues or affordable housing issues.

The public is welcome to attend both of these meetings and give these organizations your input about what the biggest issues are and what our priorities should be. If you can't make the meetings but want to give your input, I can pass along the info if you email me at brendakonkel@yahoo.com.
Read more!

Buying Local . . . did you notice it passed?

How does it happen that when Ray Allen and Mayor Dave, the Common Sense Coalition and Progressive Dane, Brenda Konkel and Russ Frank (Madison Top Company), Vicky Selkowe and Larry Palm agree on something . . . it still takes a year to get it passed through the council?

Take a look at the few events you might have seen in the news.

March 17, 2006 - Common Sense Coalition continues their call for a "buy local" initiative and I decide to draft a resolution to get the discussion started.
October 7, 2006 - "Buy local" is now the Mayor's initiative.

Ald. Jed Sanborn said that it would be "kind of absurd" if every municipality focused on buying services within its borders, and Ald. Zach Brandon questioned the ability of the city to define what's local and what's not, as well as the costs of doing so.

and

"It sounds good, and it feels good," Brandon said. "But we have to have a much larger discussion about what it means."

October 16, 2006 - WSJ slams the proposal.

It also could lead to retaliatory measures in other cities, hurting the many businesses in Madison that sell elsewhere.

and

There is no problem, just an opportunity to pass a law that sounds good to Madison's liberal constituency leading up to an election. And along the way, the proposal is likely to increase the city's tax burden and red tape.

and

A careful look at the consequences should show that "buying local," when mandated at the local level, won't change much and might even hurt.

October 25, 2006 - Opinion piece from Progressive Dane.

Meanwhile, in City Hall . . .
March 21, 2006 - Resolution introduced to study local purchasing. Resolution was sponsored by Brenda K. Konkel, Tim Gruber, Brian Benford, Robbie Webber, Austin W. King, Michael E. Verveer, Judy K. Olson, Zachariah Brandon, Paul E. Skidmore, Noel T. Radomski, Paul J. Van Rooy, Judy Compton, Larry Palm, Tim Bruer, Lauren Cnare and yet it takes until August 8, 2006 for the resolution to pass.

October - We get reports from the City Attorney and Comptroller's office.

November 7, 2006 - Larry Palm introduces his own ordinance, which is later "placed on file" - i.e. tossed in the garbage.

December 2006 - The committee fininshes their work.

April 17, 2007 - A policy finally passes! Unanimously.

Why and how does this happen? It was a great idea. Nearly everyone agreed it was a good idea - except the WSJ who has a knee-jerk reaction to anything Progressive Dane supports. We had the information we needed 7 months ago. A committee was formed, they met, they made recommendations that were widely accepted and finished their work last December.

Was it the wrangling by Mayor Dave and Alder Palm to take the credit? Was it petty politics to make sure that nothing the Common Sense Coalition supported passed the council? Was it election year politics?

Whatever the answer is, we shouldn't let this happen again. There is no reason for something that is good for the community and widely supported to take so long to pass.

And finally, when something that is good for local businesses passes the council, where is the media coverage?
Read more!

What is the Role of the Economic Development Commission?

I was surprised at the last Common Council meeting when we tried to refer an item to get advice from the Economic Development Commission and we were requested not to.
There were two schools of thought by two council members who have served on the committee. One member thought that the commission served as a place where the business community had the ability to share its thoughts and ideas and make recommendations to the Council. In short, he said it was a place for the business community to have a voice. The other member of the commission was under the impression that the committee should only be looking at the bigger picture and not get bogged down in details by making recommendations on specific policy proposals to the Common Council. I thought, it could be both.

This prompted me to look up the mission statement:

MISSION: Responsible for preparation and periodic updating of the city's economic development plan and strategy for recommendation to the mayor and Common Council; evaluating economic conditions in the community; identifies economic problem areas; recommends specific policies, programs and projects; recommends items for inclusion in capital and operating budgets in support of the development strategy.

In the past four years (note the dates on these links) where we have been making efforts to increase our awareness of economic development and show we are serious about changing the perceptions that we are anti-business, it seems to me we haven't made very much progress even when there is agreement about what should be done.

• We still don't have an economic development plan. The last one was completed in 1983.
  
• The committee hasn't identified a specific problem we need to address, beyond the "perception" issue.
• The committee hasn't presented initiatives during the budget process.

However, there has been one attempt that resulted in a few policies, programs and projects that have moved very slowly forward, but it seems we have made very little progress. And thankfully, we ditched a few duds.

With the new shake up of the Common Council, it seems like a bad sign for economic development issues that two members of the Economic Development Commission can't agree on what the function of the committee is. I sure hope that we can get that settled. We've been talking economic development for the past four years and I don't think that much has changed. Or could it be that efforts and positive steps we have taken just aren't recognized?
Read more!

More on the City of Madison and Gender

It's not just the City of Madison employees, based on current appointments posted on the web today:

Of the 805 appointments to the 88 Standing and Ad Hoc City Committees with members appointed:

• 499 or 62% of the appointments are men
• 306 or 38% of the appointments are women
• 82% (72) of the 88 committees have more men than women on them
• 26% (23) of the 88 committees have 75% or more of their membership being men
  

FOLLOW UP
Apparently, the City no longer does the report that I cited in this morning's post.
Prior to Jim Hess being appointed to the Monona Terrace Director position - that post was also held by a woman.
Read more!

Gender in City Hall

I made a comment about gender in City Hall the other day. Of course, people immediately freaked out and said that I was accusing someone of being sexist. That was not what I was doing. However, it did get me thinking even more. Working in City Hall it seems as though I work with many men, and very few women. And those women I did work with seem to be disappearing. I looked at the City's organizational chart (new planning and development chart on page 51) and here is what I found.

Men in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Assessor - Mark Hanson
*City Attorney - Michael May (previously Eunice Gibson)
City Comptroller - Dean Brasser
*Human Services - Roger Goodwin (position previously held by a woman)
Information Service - Richard Grasmick
City Channel Station Manager - Brad Clark
Monona Terrace Director - James Hess
*Overture Center President - Tom Carto
*Police Chief - Noble Wray
*Public Health Director - Dr. Thomas Schlenker (previously Kate Vedder)
Public Works and Transportation & City Engineer- Larry Nelson
Fleet Service Superintendent - William Vanden Brook
Parks Superintendent - James Morgan
*Street Superintendent - Alan Schumacher
*Traffic Engineering and Parking Manager - David Dryer (previous Parking Manager position held by Robin Williams, position was eliminated)
*Metro Transit General Manager - Charles Camp (previously Cathrine Debo)
Water Utility Manger - David Denig Chakroff
Planning and Development Director - Mark Olinger
Planning Unit - Brad Murphy
*Housing Operations - Augustin Olvera (previously Deborah Garrett-Thomas)
*Inspection Unit (I forget the new name) - George Hank (formerly Linda Grubb)

Women in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Clerk - Maribeth Witzel-Behl
*Civil Rights Director - Lucia Nunez (formerly EOC - Anthony Brown/Ariel Ford and AA- Kirby Mack/Enis Ragland/Norm Davis)
Fire Chief - Debra Amesqua
Library - Barbara Dimick

Vacant Positions
City Treasurer
Economic and Community Development in the Planning and Development Department- This position will supervise some offices that previously appeared higher in the organizational chart and a few more women. Those offices include:

Community Development Block Grant Office - Hickory Hurie
Community Services Supervisor - Dorothy Conniff
*Office of Business Resources - Matthew Mikolajewski (previously Kathrine Naherny)
Senior Center Director - Christine Beatty

WOMEN AS % OF WORKFORCE
In the past few years, of the 14 positions that were hired (indicated by a *), 8 of them replaced women in higher positions in government. Even if you count the offices now under the new Economic and Development Department, there are only 6 women out of 28 positions (21%) where there formerly were 14 out of 30 positions (46%).

I didn't look a whole lot at the 2004 Affirmative Action Report - the last one I could find, but what it did tell me was that:

In 2004, of the 2,661 permanent City employees . . . 898 (33.7 percent) were women.

This compared to the County:

In 2004, of the 2,083 permanent Dane County employees . . . 1,079 (51.8 percent) were women.

And State:

In June 2004, of the 40,475 permanent State classified employees . . . 20,703 (51.2 percent) were women.

WOMEN AND SALARIES
Additionally, I noticed when reading about the folks that get top salaries in the City of Madison, there was only two women mentioned. Top salaries were for:

Dean Brasser at $133,927
Larry Nelson at $133,463
Michael May at $125,040

Others of the 43 making over $100,000 that the article mentioned were:

• Bus drivers - John Nelson, the 18th best-paid city employee at $113,610 and Roger Waggoner No. 32 at $103,786.
• Mayor Dave Cieslewicz was 23rd on the list at $111,544.
• Other top city salaries of note include outgoing Metro general manager Catherine Debo at $117,115; embattled city water utility manager David Denig-Chakroff at $116,440 and city planning and development director Mark Olinger at $115,015.
• Interim Overture Center director Michael Goldberg, who resigned after not getting the job permanently, was paid $102,999 last year.

And this was interesting to me:

Fire chief Debra Amesqua was paid $112,673 last year but that figure was topped by three of her assistant chiefs: Michael Dirienzo ($117,340), Paul Bloom ($114,959) and James Keiken ($114,451).

As opposed to

Police chief Noble Wray was the city's top-paid cop at $121,349 followed by assistant chiefs Randall Graber ($117,772) and Charles Cole ($114,384).

Now, to be clear, am I accusing any one individual of being sexist? NO! Do I think it is an issue that we should start paying attention to? YES!

Updates here.

Read more!

Random thoughts of the day . . .

Short and sweet . . .

1. I want my paycheck too.
2. Thank goodness that did not work out. Didn't even make it out of committee to be discussed. 14 - 19.


Read more!

Couldn't or Wouldn't?

The Cap Times reported that

Konkel said it was "clear it (the mayor's action) was retaliatory for something." However, she would or could not say what it was in retaliation for.

Well, the answer is "could not".

Since the Mayor will not talk to me and his staff are equally unhelpful, its very difficult to say exactly why he is furious with me. However, it is clear, he is outraged over something. I've asked his staff if we could try to settle this like adults on several occasions, but apparently, the Mayor is unwilling to even discuss whatever his grievances are with me.

Given the above, the most annoying part of this is his explanation for taking me off the plan commission.

I am looking for consensus builders, and I don't think Ald. Konkel had filled that role.

Does he forget all the work I did for him getting to compromise so he could take credit for the Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance in his first year in office? That was one HUGE consensus building exercise. And I have a history of working on various projects and issues with the real estate industry. Most notably, the work I did with the neighborhood and a developer in my district to get land use approval for a major project in the stagnant East Washington Avenue corridor. Of course, the Mayor eventually killed the project because of TIF rules that we routinely seem to ignore for other projects. This even prompted the developer to write a letter to the editor praising my work. Did he forget the work Alds. Olson, Onken and I did to review the TIF policies and work with the business community to come to some compromises on the policy, which he then delayed for nearly a year.

My best guess at what is going on here, is that the Mayor and I disagree about the meaning of compromise.

Compromise is not inviting some parties to the table to "compromise" to the exclusion of other stakeholders - most notably, the main sponsors of the initiatives. (i.e. Minimum Wage - King and Lobbying - Konkel)

Compromise is not requiring someone to agree with you and if they don't, proclaiming that they won't compromise. As one of the new alders put it to me. If you say "give me $50" and I say "no" and then you say "ok, give me $25", that is not a compromise.

Compromise is not when in the end, someone declares "Everyone is unhappy, so this must be a good compromise."

Compromise is when two parties who disagree, sit down and discuss an issue and figure out where the agreements lie and where the difference are. Then, you work together to find a win-win solution that you both can live with.

Compromise and consensus cannot be reached when one party refuses to participate, is excluded or doesn't work in good faith. And my guess is, that this is where our real disagreements lie. However, since the mayor won't talk to me, it is difficult to know if my guess is correct.

So it is clear, we won't be reaching any type of compromise on this issue. On thedailypage, I offered a beer (later amended to a pitcher of beer to reflect the difficulty of this task) to anyone who can figure out why the Mayor is mad at me AND get him to admit it! My guess is, I'll never have to make good on that promise, but I'm willing.

(Sorry, I had problems with several links and will try to link them later if I can access them.)
Read more!

Civility, Aldermanic Courtesy and Working Together

Yesterday, outgoing alders were given the opportunity to say their good-byes, impart some words of wisdom to us and give us some words of advice. Across the board, the speeches were classy, well thought out and some of the best speeches I've heard from some of these folks. It was a moment where I was proud to be a member of the Common Council and despite our differences, proud to serve with these fine people. If you have time, it would be worth it to view their speeches on Channel 12 when they put them on the website or replay them on television.

Among the general words of advice, were several comments about being more civil to each other. Alder Golden urged us to remember a little practiced concept of "aldermanic courtesy", where you give an alder the benefit of the doubt and allow them additional time or follow their advice in matters involving their district or policy issues they have worked on, instead of voting against someone because you disagree with their ideology or to retaliate for some vote that they took.

In talking with many of the new alders, it seems that they want to follow that advice. There have been several comments from people on the full spectrum of the aisle about how we need to work together better. There seems to be a strong desire to be colleagues, and not automatically retreat to various factions. There seems to be a strong desire to make sure that we learn together that we can disagree and not be disagreeable. You know, fight about the issues fairly without getting personal and then go grab a beer after the meeting. Which we did last night. Despite the desire of some to remain in our factions, the new Council President Mike Verveer and Pro Tem Tim Bruer, started a new tradition and we went to one "neutral" establishment that will rotate.

By all appearances, its seems that the Common Council is off to a good start. However, someone forgot to send the memo to the Mayor's office. This spirit of cooperation and collegiality took an ugly turn yesterday.

On Monday, the Mayor called everyone on the council to give them their appointments to the committees they would be serving on. That is, everyone, except for me. So Monday night when we went out with the rookies and outgoing alders, everyone was talking about their assignments and I had to tell them all that the Mayor had not called me. I told people it was because he was mad at me, but I think many people didn't believe me. On Tuesday morning, I called their office to talk to them about that. I was treated in the same fashion I have been treated in for about the last eight months.

9:00
BK: Is the Mayor there?
Wanda: No honey, he'll be back around 10:00.
BK: Is George there?
Wanda: Sure, just one moment . . . . Oh, sorry, George has someone in his office. I'll tell him to call you.

10:00
BK: Is the Mayor there? Or George?
Wanda: Sure honey, just one moment . . . . Oh, sorry, they seem to be in a meeting. I'll leave them a message.

So, I call Debbie in the Council office, who calls Pam in the Mayor's office and ask her to try to find out what appointments the mayor gave me. Pam informs Debbie that "George has emailed Brenda". Debbie calls me, I check my email and sure enough, 10:21, I'm informed I'll be on Landmarks, Early Childhood, James Madison Park and State St. Oversight (I'm automatically on the last two committees.) I never received a call from either George or the Mayor.

Now, obviously, the Mayor has apparently taken me off the plan commission, but since I hadn't heard who was on the plan commission, I decided to wait until we got our appointments at the traditional time, the noon council meeting, but that didn't happen. The appointments were not handed out. I went to lunch with the council after the meeting and went back to my office and then called to get the appointments to verify that I wasn't on plan commission and find out when we would get the official assignments. Eventually, I was was able to get a staff person to send me a link to view them on-line, but you couldn't find them linked to yesterday's agenda. The Mayor had appointed Julia Kerr (who didn't request plan commission) and Tim Gruber (who requested plan commission, but was expecting to replace Ken Golden, not myself).

By the time this all got sorted out, there was about 2.5 hours before the council meeting and the vote on the appointments. I talked to Alder Gruber who was pretty disturbed about this turn of events. I explained to him that in taking me off the Plan Commission, the Mayor also took me off the Inclusionary Zoning Oversight Committee, TIF Policy Committee, Long Range Transportation and the Demolition subcommittee. These committees are where about 3/4 of the issues I am working on are being dealt with. We agreed we didn't want to make any decisions now and the best thing to do would be to refer this back to the mayor's office while we sorted it all out. There would be no harm done since the appointments for Plan Commission don't take place until May 1st and our next council meeting is on May 1st.

However, about 2 minutes before the meeting started, Alder Gruber was informed with the mayor about 2 inches from his face that "You will be on the Plan Commission" (i.e. don't refer this back to my office). The meeting started. We took care of a couple items and then Alder Brandon requested a 5 minute recess while many of our guests left the room.

Then it got ugly. In a fine display of their shuttle diplomacy skills, with the Mayor standing on one side of the room and I on the other, after about 10 or 15 minutes Alders Verveer and Bruer "struck a deal" with the Mayor's office and Alder Brandon to appoint me to the Housing Committee (Alder Verveer gave up that appointment) and create a new seat on the IZ Oversight and TIF Policy Committees. The Mayor promised to appoint me to those committees and got Alder Brandon to agree not to block those appointments.

Not our finest moment. A poor example of civility. It set a bad tone after all of the talk of working together. I may have more to say about this later. Meanwhile, I'd like to thank Alder Gruber and Alder Kerr for the sensitivity they showed in dealing with this matter. They showed that they are people of great character. I'd also like to thank Alds. Verveer and Bruer for their efforts.

And finally, I'm aware that in the world of politics, you win some and lose some. Not being on the Plan Commission is disappointing, but on the other hand, I have new challenges and opportunities to pursue . . . and about 15 extra hours every other week to focus on the goals I want to accomplish.
Read more!

How much TIF for "business" is enough?

Budgeting for and actual spending for TIF, and particularly for the business community as opposed for City projects, has increased dramatically in the last few years; however, you'd never know it from listening to some members of the business community. Here's some of the numbers for the geeks among us.

BUDGETING (These numbers are a little difficult to discern due to vague budgeting documents and they are taken from the Planning and Development Budget in the Capital Budget)

2007 - $15,549,000.00
$14,949,000.00 or 96% for businesses and developers
$600,000.00 or 4% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2006 - $13,189,000
$11,674,000 or 89% for businesses and developers
$1,515,000 or 11% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2005 - $11,952,500
$10,185,000 or 85% for businesses and developers
$1,767,500 or 15% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2004 - $8,201,000
$4,376,000 or 53% for businesses and developers
3,825,000 or 47% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2003 - unavailable

2002 - $5,200,000
$3,500,000 or 67% for businesses and developers
$1,700,000 or 33% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2001 - $9,265,000
$5,565,000 or 60% for businesses and developers
$3,700,000 or 40% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

2000 - $7,260,000
$3,500,000 or 48% for businesses and developers
$3,750,000 or 52% for infrastructure improvements and City projects

ACTUAL SPENDING FOR BUSINESS COMMUNITY
2007 - $4,900,000
2006 - $4,404,000
2005 - $5,517,000
2004 - $2,200,000
2003 - $1,553,000
2002 - $100,000
2001 - $0
2000 - $3,567,000

I find it interesting that the budget documents have so much more budgeted for businesses compared to what gets reported for the downtown and city-wide.
Read more!

City Owned Properties at Allied Drive

The City of Madison made the decision to buy properties on Allied Drive last summer. The properties have 129 apartments and 9 buildings. Since then, we have slowly emptied the apartments and haven't moved forward on much of anything. Last September we had four days of a big splashy public meetings . . . and not much has happened since then.

Mostly, it boils down to having to make a decision about how much of the property will be home ownership and how much will be rental. And then how affordable will the units be and will people on Allied Drive be able to afford to live there, or will they be displaced from the neighborhood.

So, the City, in its typical fashion, have been making sure that as many families leave the buildings as possible, so that technically, no one will be displaced. I believe there were 80 families when we bought the buildings. Last I heard a month or so ago, there were only 40. I suspect, looking at this months profit and loss statements, that there are now even less, despite our resolution to allow people to continue to live in the units.

I noticed something else interesting in the profit and loss statements. If we are emptying the units and boarding up buildings, why are we spending money on "unit preparation"? In January, we were charged $3,858 on "unit preparation". $1,729.41 in February and 624.62 in March. Some of this is for new carpeting, new appliances and painting.

The other thing I noticed was that they charged us the following charges.

January
Apartment Preparation - Maintenance Payroll - $2,477
Commons and Exterior - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $2,664.50
General Repairs - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $2337.50
Professional Management - $5,100
Total Maintenance and Management - $12,579 of the $26,870.79 total expenses for the month
That month, we were in the black $720.88, with $27,591.67 in rental income.

February
Apartment Preparation - Maintenance Payroll - $745
Commons and Exterior - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $3,349
General Repairs - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $5,077
Professional Management - $5,000
Total Maintenance and Management - $14,171 of the $49,257.67 total expenses for the month
That month, we lost $25,505.67 , with $24,191.88 in rental income. I presume the majority of the losses are because the previous month's utility bill was only 482.61 and February's bill was $19,528.44.

March
Apartment Preparation - Maintenance Payroll - $352.50
Commons and Exterior - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $3,257
General Repairs - Maintenance Payroll - Meyer - $3,125.50
Professional Management - $5,000
Total Maintenance and Management - $11,735 of the $23,200.33 total expenses for the month
That month, we lost $1,908.28, with $21,292.05 in rental income. Utilities were only $1,044.01.

Wouldn't you think that with less than 40 families living in the units, we could manage the buildings with our current staff and do our own maintenance? And I know that they have to board up the buildings and do a few things, but do we really need to be spending that much in maintenance on buildings we are likely tearing down? And, if we're going to be paying this money for management, shouldn't we be moving people in to these units and getting income?

This whole thing seems so absurd. I sure hope that now that the election is over, this new council takes this on, and soon.

Note: Sorry, no time for links this morning.
Read more!

Negative Campaigning

I wish I could say that this last round of elections was a new low for negative campaigning. Unfortunately, it was sort of "more of the same" from the right and their media, and in many ways it was actually tamer than two and four years ago, except for one or two incidents.

There were a few odd incidents that do merit mentioning.

• The eerie similarities in the lit of Thuy Pham-Remmele and Duane Steinhauer was interesting. I'd love to know the story behind that.
  
• The full picture of how much money the Chamber of Commerce and Realtors dumped into the campaigns won't be available until the July reports are in.
  
• The WSJ refusal to endorse Brian Solomon because he was a "fan" of mine was a little over the top since he won by such a landslide and was clearly the better candidate.
  
• The new WSJ "Vicky is the ringleader" of Progressive Dane rhetoric was also interesting, given that they used it more than once. What is sad is that they clearly knew that they were inferring some type of criminality on her which doesn't exist and continued to use it.
  
• Larry's lit that claimed about Vicky Selkowe that "she answers to Brenda Konkel and Austin King" and that "Selkowe is endorsed by Progressive Dane, which has aligned itself with groups like the Socialist Party who believe that the ONLY way to solve all our problems is to spend more money" was also a little over the top.
• And Wayne Bigelow the chair of the local Democratic Party, appearing on lit of candidates as the chair of the local party that the executive committee recommended but were rejected by the membership, well, as the leader of a local party, that just seems unthinkable. I guess some parties don't hold their leaders accountable to their membership.
  

Of course, all of this pales in comparison to the new lows that some people chose to sink to. I'm still waiting to get the police report on one incident that arose out of an Alder allegedly stealing lit off of a person's porch. And then, there is the Mike Quieto non-scandal.

In this day-before-the-election "scandal" Zach Brandon emailed the City Clerk's office at 9:31 - after he was already screaming from the roof tops on AM radio about the "scandal" of Mike Quieto (connected to Progressive Dane) working in the clerk's office. The email was signed by "the boys" including council members, Zach Brandon, Larry Palm, Noel Radomski and Paul Van Rooy, and candidates, Troy Thiel, Eli Judge, Michael Schumacher, Chris Schmidt, Joe Clausius and Mark Deadman according to the Cap Times. (My copy of the email has the names cut off.)

Anyways, here's the text of the email:

Dear Maribeth,

It has come to our attention that the [sic] MR. MIKE QUIETO is currently employed as an LTE, with the election responsibilities, in the City of Madison Clerk's office. While we understand and appreciate the need for additional staff resources during an election, we the undersigned, are unnerved by MR. QUIETO having access to election materials.

MR. QUIETO is an active participant, both professionally and personally, in mulitple local races currently underway. He is the chair of the Teaching Assistants' Association (TAA) Political Action Committee. TAA-PAC has made endorsements in this election cycle and has directly contributed money to candidates that have been endorsed by the local political party, Progressive Dane.

Last Thursday, MR. QUIETO was identified by the Isthmus as partaking, in "phone banking" for local candidates and MR. QUIETO has personally endorsed in at least 3 current local elections.

More disconcerting is the fact that, last summer, MR. QUIETO publicly admitted to coordinating and executing an [sic] potentially illegal political communication that engaged in express advocacy without identifying the source.

This type of "the ends justified the means" behaviour makes us leery of his ability to be trusted with election materials.

While we are not currently aware of any wrongdoing by MR. QUIETO in the Clerk's Office we firmly believe that allowing the head of a Political Action Committee with a track record of questionable campaigning to have access to election materials is a grave situation.

We believe that it is imperative that election officials be uninvolved and neutral in order to ensure the integrity of our elections. Even the appearance of any conflicts of interest should be avoided in order to maintain public confidence in the process.

Therefore, we respectfully request the MR. QUITO be reassigned to non-electoral duties and that he be precluded from participating in any election capacity in the Clerk's office until after the Spring Elections have been certified.

Well, on the radio and thedailypage, they tried to tie this to Progressive Dane. Only one problem, he's not a member. And the phone banking he was doing was for the Democratic Party.

Oh, and then there's the problem that he's not actually the chair of the TAA-PAC.

And . . . there's the little problem of the potential illegality of removing him from the position. Here's part of the statement from the clerk's office:

I have verified with City Attorney Michal May and Human Resources Director Roger Goodwin that the City of Madison cannot prohibit City Clerk staff from exercising their First Amendment political rights when they are off the clock.

The City Clerk's Office has a strict policy forbidding the discussion of political views while employees are on duty, but, according to Madison General Ordinance 3.47(8)(b), there are very limited restrictions on employees when they are off duty. I cannot, for example, prohibit employees from engaging in all political activity.

When interviewing potential employees, I ask the about their qualifications, not, "Are you, or have you ever been, a member of a political party?" That would be inappropriate at best, and possibly illegal. It is worth noting that the employee in question has neither been accused of nor observed engaging in any wrongdoing whatsoever . . .

So, these last minute antics may have been a new low. Luckily, at least at the City level, we won't have to deal with this for another two years. Unfortunately, these lousy campaigning tactics reflect on all of us and I sure hope that we can find a way to clean up these local elections and all the negative campaigning. I would have much preferred that candidates and some media had focused on the issues instead of shallow labels. Based on this spring's election, what do you think the "big issues" will be for the next two years . . . can you think of anything except trolleys and water? I'll let you think about that.
Read more!

WSJ: Getting Personal and Just Plain Mean.

It's no surprise, that I'm no fan of the Wisconsin State Journal. Especially the editorial board . . . which can't seem to get their facts straight. So, my criticisms of them are probably growing quite old. However, its hard not to notice their year long obsession with Austin King and the whole new level of mean we've seen in the last year.

I took my fair share of the shots from them when I was council president, but it strikes me as odd that they would be so viscous to a 25 year old former UW student. Shouldn't they be encouraging young people to be involved in local government? Take a peek at some of tamer things that they have said about Austin King in just the last few weeks.

King Of Mandates Finally Leaving: The Leftist Alderman Pitched A Slew Of Proposals That Grabbed Headlines But Distracted The City From Its Basic Needs. It starts out with "We're almost going to miss Madison Ald. Austin King. Almost." and ends with "But those of us who have made Madison our permanent home will not miss King's distracting and draining agenda." With nothing nice to say in between.

After the elections last Tuesday, the write the opinion piece about Progressive Dane, Pd Slips Again: The Leftist Political Party Has Lost Another Seat -- A Sign That The City Council Should Be More On Track.  In the opinion, they start out ripping on Austin and gloating about a loss of one seat on campus and then launch into their snide remarks about "This is good news for Madison and suggests the City Council will be more on task and less willing to dabble in national, international or even intergalactic politics."  They continue by literally calling Austin names.

They couldn't even endorse someone for District 8 without taking another swipe at Austin.  I wonder where they think Austin got his "national social agenda" from?  And in Milfred's recent rip on the light bulb proposal, they assign all kinds of motives to Austin, likely without ever even talking to Austin himself.

And then, there have been the cartoons . . .
And that is just a small sampling of what you can find in their archives in just the last few weeks, the jabs have been nearly endless over the past year.  Say what you will about Austin King, I don't think anyone can deny that the debate has been richer, the campus well represented and the City better off for his four years of service.  Too bad the Wisconsin State Journal can't look beyond their narrow agenda of hating Progressive Dane and therefore anyone connected to Progressive Dane, and recognize the remarkable efforts that a relatively young person made to make Madison a better place for all of us to live.  If only all of our elected officials were as passionate, intelligent and committed as Austin has been, we'd all be better off.

Read more!

So now what?

Another election, another two years . . . but what does it all mean?

The answer is, no matter what anyone says, is that it is too early to tell what this new council will be like. I didn't listen, but I'm sure AM radio and the conservative spinmeisters will be falling all over themselves because Progressive Dane lost a seat on the council. A seat on campus, where everyone was on spring break. Hardly the sea change they were looking for, I'm sure. Progressive Dane has held 6 - 8 seats on the council for the last 10 years and not much has really changed. No one group has a majority and it will still be hard to get to the 11 votes necessary to pass anything.

I think the one thing that is certain is that it is hard to beat an incumbent. The ones that had challengers Jed Sanborn, Robbie Webber, Paul Skidmore, Tim Gruber and Larry Palm all won.

Another thing that remains true is that money alone doesn't win, but it sure does help. These campaigns saw record amounts of money, which we won't know the full picture of until the July reports are in.

Finally, it will be interesting to find out if the Realtors and Chamber of Commerce have an agenda. By that, I mean, their only agenda seems to be to vote against Progressive Dane. Do they have a positive agenda of how to improve the city? Or are they just naysayers to everyone else's ideas?

Like I said, its hard to tell much yet, but theoretically, the Realtors have 10 seats on the council, the Chamber of Commerce has 9 and Progressive Dane has 6. For fun (I know, I'm a geek), I figured out the success rates of some of the groups that endorsed. Here's how they did.

The Chamber of Commerce 9 out of 11 or 82%
Won : Jed Sanborn, Lauren Cnare, Zach Brandon, Paul Skidmore, Tim Bruer, Judy Compton, Joe Clausius, Michael Schumacher, Thuy Pham-Remmele
Lost: Troy Theil, Mark Deadman

Green Party 4 out of 5 or 80%
Won: Konkel, Rummel, Rhodes-Conway, Webber
Lost: Woods

Progressive Dane 6 out of 8 or 75%
Won: Brenda Konkel, Mike Verveer, Robbie Webber, Marsha Rummel, Tim Gruber, Satya Rhodes-Conway
Lost: Lauren Woods, Vicky Selkowe

Wisconsin State Journal 10 out of 14 or 71%
Won: Schumacher, Clear, Kerr, Rummel, Pham-Remmele, Judge, Clausius, Sanborn, Palm, Skimore
Lost: Deadman, Ogden, Schmidt, Theil

Capital Times 10 out of 14 or 71%
Won: Webber, Rummel, Skidmore, Solomon, Gruber, Phodes-Conway, Kerr, Clausius, Schumacher, Clear
Lost: Backer, Woods, Selkowe, Poulson

Affordable Housing Action Alliance 7 out of 10 or 70%
Won: Konkel, Verveer, Webber, Rummel, Solomon, Gruber, Rhodes-Conway
Lost: Woods, Pasha, Selkowe

The Realtors 10 out of 15 or 66%
Won: Jed Sanborn, Lauren Cnare, Zach Brandon, Paul Skidmore, Brian Solomon, Tim Bruer, Larry Palm, Joe Clausius, Michael Schumacher, Thuy Pham-Remmelle
Lost: Troy Theil, Carl DuRocher, Mark Deadman, Duane Steinhauer, Curt Brink

Downtown Madison Inc. 7 out or 11 or 63%
Won: Sanborn, Skidmore, Solomon, Gruber, Kerr, Clausius, Schmumacher
Lost: Theil, Woods, Deadman, Poulson

Democrats 6 out of 10 or 60%
Won: Verveer, Solomon, Rhodes-Conway, Kerr, Clausius, Clear
Lost: Backer, Pasha, Becker, Poulson

Paul Soglin 6 out of 11 or 54%
Won: Judge, Skidmore, Schumacher, Rummel, Solomon, Kerr
Lost: Theil, Schmidt, Selkowe, Backer, Poulson

TAA 6 out of 13 or 46%
Won: Webber, Rummel, Solomon, Gruber, Rhodes-Conway, Kerr
Lost: Backer, Woods, Pasha, Selkowe, Florino, Becker, Poulson

Sorry, I missed a few groups, but I ran out of time this morning . . .

So, what does it all mean? Ask me again in 6 months . . . these endorsements are all over the place and we won't really know until some of these folks take their first controversial votes.
Read more!

Vote Today!

I know it's raining . . . but you can do it! Vote Today!

Before you vote, be sure to check out the candidates, be informed! My choices haven't changed, except to add Satya Rhodes-Conway in 12, Sarah Florino in 17 and Jon Becker in 18. And PD has now endorsed Lauren Woods. But make up your own mind; do the research about where their money is coming from and think about who they'll be representing when they get elected. Will they be representing you and your neighborhood, or will they we representing the special interests of the Chamber of Commerce and Realtors that heavily funded some of these campaigns?

Then, on to the parties!

But only if you voted!
Read more!

Campaign Finance Reports - Take 3

Here's all the campaigns . . . and its updated as best I could . . .

Here's what you will find in the post with the top 5 in each category (and a little more in some cases.) Complete information below. (Sorry, wish I had time to better format this.) What you will find is amount raised, including some late conduit reports; amount self financed; average contributions; how much money they got from the Chamber of Commerce, the Realtors and the total conduit amounts; how much money they got from outside the city; and how much money they got from the real estate industry.

• Amount raised (pre-late reports)
• Vicky Selkowe $14,286.64
• Mark Clear $11,696.26
• Satya Rhodes Conway $10,743.53
• Troy Theil $10,208.85
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $10,109.00
• Amount raised as of Friday
• Vicky Selkowe $ 14,286.64
• Mark Clear $ 11,696.26
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $ 11,509.00
• Michael Schumacher $ 11,471.42
• Troy Theil $ 10,808.85
• Amount of Campaign Self Financed
• Mark Clear $ 2,550.00
• Eli Judge $ 2,200.00
• Jon Becker $ 1,955.21
• Joe Clausius $ 1,600.00
• Larry Pasha $ 1,250.00
• Percent of Campaign Self-Financed
• Eli Judge 67%
• Larry Pasha 55%
• Chris Ogden 44%
• Jon Becker 29%
• Joe Clausius 27%
• Average Contribution
• Curt Brink $ 154.54
  
• Jed Sanborn $ 126.65
• Paul Skimore $ 123.16
• Eli Judge $ 110.02
• Joe Clausius $ 106.49
• Amount from Chamber of Commerce Conduit (pre-late reports)
• Mark Deadman $2,462.85
  
• Michael Schumacher $1,962.85
• Troy Theil $1,712.85
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $1,702.85
• Jed Sanborn $ 615.00
• % from Chamber of Commerce Conduit (pre-late reports)
• Mark Deadman 30%
• Michael Schumacher 21%
• Thuy Pham-Remmele 17%
• Troy Theil 17%
• Paul Skimore 12%
• Amount from Realtors Conduit (pre-late reports)
• Troy Theil $1740
  
• Mark Deadman $1485
• Michael Schumacher $1200
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $785
• Jed Sanborn $674
• % of dollars from Realtors Conduit (pre-late reports)
• Michael Deadman 18%
• Troy Theil 17%
• Michael Schumacher 13%
• Jed Sanborn 10%
• Thuy Pham-Remmele 8%
• Total from conduits (pre-late reports)
  
• Mark Deadman $3947
  
• Troy Theil $3817
• Michael Schumacher $3162
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $2487
• Jed Sanborn $1864
• % from conduits (pre-late reports)
• Mark Deadman 49%
• Troy Theil 37%
  
• Michael Schumacher 34%
• Jed Sanborn 27%
  
• Thuy Pham-Remmele 25%
• Amount from outside the City
• Satya Rhodes-Conway $5053
• Vicky Selkowe $3310
• Michael Schumacher $2594
• Jed Sanborn $2337
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $2240
  
• Troy Theil $2220
• Michael Deadman $2080
• Eli Judge $2000
  
• % of Dollars from outside the City
• Eli Judge 100%
• Satya Rhodes Conway 47%
• Paul Skidmore 39%
• Jed Sanborn 34%
• Carl Durocher 31%
• Curt Brink 29%
• Michael Schumacher 28%
• Lauren Woods 27%
• Mark Deadman 26%
• Joe Clausius 25%
• Chris Ogden 25%
• % of contributors from outside the City
• Eli Judge 100%
• Satya Rhodes Conway 44%
• Chris Ogden 43%
• Joe Clausius 43%
• Curt Brink 41%
• Jed Sanborn 39%
• Paul Skimore 34%
• Michael Schumacher 28%
• Aaron Backer 27%
• Amount of money from the real estate related industry (pre-late reports)
  
• Mark Deadman $4180
• Michael Schumacher $3614
• Paul Skimore $3030
• Jed Sanborn $2956
• Troy Theil $2811
• Thuy Pham-Remmele $2750
• Joe Claussius $2375
• Curt Brink $1355
• % of dollars from the real estate related industry (pre-late reports)
• Paul Skimore 79%
• Mark Deadman 51%
• Jed Sanborn 43%
• Joe Calusius 41%
• Michael Schumacher 38%
• Curt Brink 32%
• Troy Theil 28%
• Thuy Pham-Remmele 27%
• % of contributors from the real estate related industry
• Paul Skidmore 59%
• Joe Clausius 57%
• Curt Brink 50%
• Jed Sanborn 43%
• Michael Schumacher 42%
• Mark Deadman 27%
• Thuy Pham-Remmele 25%

These are the numbers I had before I broke my spreadsheet, sorry I don't have the rest of the info at the moment.

Amount raised (pre-late reports)
Vicky Selkowe $14,286.64
Mark Clear $11,696.26
Satya Rhodes Conway $10,743.53
Troy Theil $10,208.85
Thuy Pham-Remmele $10,109.00
Michael Schumacher $ 9,416.42
Mark Deadman $ 8,092.85
Jed Sanborn $ 6,839.09
Marsha Rummel $ 6,839.09
Jon Becker $ 6,707.09
Julia Kerr $ 6,470.00
Larry Palm $ 6,288.19
Lauren Woods $ 5,883.00
Joe Clausius $ 5,859.53
Chris Schmidt $ 5,638.08
Gary Poulson $ 5,565.00
Aaron Backer $ 4,802.99
Robbie Webber $ 4,742.83
Tim Gruber $ 4,594.42
Curt Brink $ 4,285.31
Brian Solomon $ 3,826.26
Paul Skimore $ 3,817.85
Eli Judge $ 3,300.20
Larry Pasha $ 2,265.00
Chris Ogden $ 1,580.00
Carl Durocher $ 1,271.91
Sarah Florino $ 1,137.00
Duane Steinhauer EXEMPT

Amount raised as of Friday (Based on call to the clerk's office. i.e. includes late conduit reports.)
Vicky Selkowe $ 14,286.64
Mark Clear $ 11,696.26
Thuy Pham-Remmele $ 11,509.00
Michael Schumacher $ 11,471.42
Troy Theil $ 10,808.85
Satya Rhodes Conway $ 10,743.53
Mark Deadman $ 8,717.85
Jed Sanborn $ 7,214.09
Marsha Rummel $ 6,839.09
Jon Becker $ 6,707.09
Julia Kerr $ 6,470.00
Larry Palm $ 6,288.19
Lauren Woods $ 5,883.00
Joe Clausius $ 5,859.53
Chris Schmidt $ 5,638.08
Gary Poulson $ 5,565.00
Aaron Backer $ 4,802.99
Robbie Webber $ 4,742.83
Tim Gruber $ 4,594.42
Curt Brink $ 4,285.31
Brian Solomon $ 3,826.26
Paul Skimore $ 3,817.85
Eli Judge $ 3,300.20
Larry Pasha $ 2,265.00
Chris Ogden $ 1,580.00
Carl Durocher $ 1,271.91
Sarah Florino $ 1,137.00
Duane Steinhauer EXEMPT

Amount of Campaign Self Financed
Mark Clear $ 2,550.00
Eli Judge $ 2,200.00
Jon Becker $ 1,955.21
Joe Clausius $ 1,600.00
Larry Pasha $ 1,250.00
Larry Palm $ 1,242.43
Tim Gruber $ 1,090.24
Curt Brink $ 1,040.00
Troy Theil $ 1,000.00
Michael Schumacher $ 1,000.00
Thuy Pham-Remmele $ 800.00
Chris Ogden $ 700.00
Aaron Backer $ 519.55
Mark Deadman $ 500.00
Julia Kerr $ 500.00
Robbie Webber $ 402.83
Chris Schmidt $ 346.08
Vicky Selkowe $ 100.00
Sarah Florino $ 100.00
Carl Durocher $ 75.00
Lauren Woods $ 40.00
Jed Sanborn $ -
Marsha Rummel $ -
Paul Skimore $ -
Brian Solomon $ -
Satya Rhodes Conway $ -
Gary Poulson $ -
Duane Steinhauer EXEMPT

Percent of Campaign Self-Financed
Eli Judge 67%
Larry Pasha 55%
Chris Ogden 44%
Jon Becker 29%
Joe Clausius 27%
Curt Brink 24%
Tim Gruber 24%
Mark Clear 22%
Larry Palm 20%
Aaron Backer 11%
Michael Schumacher 11%
Troy Theil 10%
Sarah Florino 9%
Robbie Webber 8%
Thuy Pham-Remmele 8%
Julia Kerr 8%
Mark Deadman 6%
Chris Schmidt 6%
Carl Durocher 6%
Vicky Selkowe 1%
Lauren Woods 1%
Jed Sanborn 0%
Marsha Rummel 0%
Paul Skimore 0%
Brian Solomon 0%
Satya Rhodes Conway 0%
Duane Steinhauer EXEMPT

Average Contribution (pre-late reports)
Curt Brink $ 154.54
Jed Sanborn $ 126.65
Paul Skimore $ 123.16
Eli Judge $ 110.02
Joe Clausius $ 106.49
Sarah Florino $ 103.70
Michael Schumacher $ 87.67
Chris Schmidt $ 81.42
Julia Kerr $ 71.93
Tim Gruber $ 70.08
Jon Becker $ 68.87
Chris Ogden $ 67.69
Larry Palm $ 67.28
Mark Clear $ 66.76
Gary Poulson $ 66.25
Thuy Pham-Remmele $ 65.10
Brian Solomon $ 62.73
Aaron Backer $ 61.19
Larry Pasha $ 59.71
Troy Theil $ 59.03
Satya Rhodes Conway $ 58.39
Carl Durocher $ 57.00
Marsha Rummel $ 56.52
Vicky Selkowe $ 50.49
Mark Deadman $ 46.30
Robbie Webber $ 45.68
Lauren Woods $ 35.63
Duane Steinhauer EXEMPT

Amount from Chamber of Commerce Conduit (pre-late reports)
Mark Deadman $2,462.85
Michael Schumacher $1,962.85
Troy Theil $1,712.85
Thuy Pham-Remmele $1,702.85
Jed Sanborn $ 615.00
Joe Clausius $ 502.85
Paul Skimore $ 462.85
Chris Ogden $ 100.00
Curt Brink $ 75.00
Julia Kerr $ 50.00
Mark Clear $ 50.00

% from Chamber of Commerce Conduit (pre-late reports)
Mark Deadman 30%
Michael Schumacher 21%
Thuy Pham-Remmele 17%
Troy Theil 17%
Paul Skimore 12%
Jed Sanborn 9%
Joe Clausius 9%
Chris Ogden 6%
Curt Brink 2%
Julia Kerr 1%
Mark Clear 0.43%

Amount from Realtors Conduit (pre-late reports)
Michael Schumacher $1,740.00
Thuy Pham-Remmele $1,485.00
Troy Theil $1,200.00
Paul Skimore $ 785.00
Jed Sanborn $ 674.85
Joe Clausius $ 200.00
Chris Ogden $ 150.00
Curt Brink $ 150.00
Julia Kerr $ 50.00





Read more!