Will Zach be asked to Apologize?

Will George Twigg ask Zach Brandon to apologize?

After all that overzealous grandstanding the day before the election about the "Progressive Dane operative" working in the City Clerk's office, the ethics complaint filed against Mike Quieto and the ordinance proposed to address the issue were both unanimously rejected by the Ethics committee last night.

At least one person on thedailypage.com forum has asked for Zach Brandon's apology. Given the Mayor office's recent history of asking for apologies for city staff, do you think they'll ask Zach to apologize? I'm guessing not.
Read more!

When $70M still isn't enough . . .

"Crisis" isn't a word you throw around loosely, but folks, I think we have a childcare crisis. The cost of childcare is growing for the average worker, childcare workers still aren't getting paid adequately and its growing increasingly difficult for high quality day care centers to serve low income children.

The "good news" is that the State Joint Finance Committee recently amended the governor's budget by $70.2M to increase the amounts of money for Wisconsin Shares. Wisconsin Shares is a program that helps working families pay for childcare. This program has been cut for the last two years and this amendment does nothing to restore those cuts.

The bad news is that they eliminated all other initiatives in the child care area, including the local matching grants for child care the the City of Madison relied on. These Local Child Care Initiatives were federal pass through dollars and funded several City of Madison child care programs. Locally, the following programs are at risk:

1. A half-time child care specialist position. Currently this is the City's lead person on afterschool child care.($36,776)

2. Direct grants to child care centers to help them achieve and maintain quality programs.($28,530)

3. The following Community programs ($64,398):

• Rainbow Project $23,483 to provide training and support for centers that serve children with emotional and behavioral issues

• 4Cs $26,985 for training and support groups for potential Hispanic family child care providers

• Satellite Child Care $13,930 for Hispanic Family Child Care recruitment and accreditation

In addition, the City of Madison will lose $6,827 in administrative support money that has helped the City send staff to training programs and build a database.

This, piled on top of all of the other recent changes like:

• changing the Dane County formula that determined how much assistance people on Wisconsin Shares received;

• reduction in reimbursement co-pays for poor families (extra $18 co-pay per week for families);

• ending the $50 annual registration fee reimbursement for families;

• childcare must be 35 hours per week (as opposed to 30-34) to qualify for full-time reimbursement;

• if families quit a daycare program without adequate notice, the they have to pay additional fees, the state will not reimburse them; and

• there was no a cost of living increase in the reimbursement rate for 2007.
  

I'm not an expert in this area, so I'm certain I've missed other recent changes that are exacerbating the situation. However, I don't need to be an expert in this area to see the stress this is adding to the working families in Madison and Dane County or the day care centers that are trying to serve these children. Something has got to change.
Read more!

Gender, Managers and Salaries

In my quest for knowledge about the role of gender in employment for the City of Madison, I have some more information. Out of 113 people in Compensation Group (Comp Group) 21, 18 and Metro 44, or in layman's speak, the top two tiers of management positions in Madison, 30 are women. That's 26.5%.

In Comp Group 21:

• There are 5 women (20.8%), 19 (79.2%) men.
• There are 2 women (12.5%) and 14 men (87.5%) who get paid over $100,000.
• Women's salaries in this Comp Group range from $70,624 to $119,941, while men's salaries in this Comp Group range from $89,116 to $131,000.

In Comp Group 18 & Metro 44:

• There are 25 women (28%), 64 men (72%) .
• There are 11 women (32%) and 23 men (68%) who get paid over $85,000.

In all groups combined

• There are 12 women working for the City over 20 years, they get paid $62, 738 - $105,535. There are 30 men working for the City of 20 years, they get paid$74,802 - $131,368.
  
• The average women's salary in these ranges are $84,544 compared to men at $87,266, which is a little better than in 2006 where women averaged $83,191 while men averaged $87,086, but worse than 2005 when it was women at $82,171 and men at $82,681.
  

Read more!

Still Not Convinced.

Yesterday, the Council members were emailed a new version of the Public Nuisance Ordinance. I also attended a Community Meeting in the Darbo Drive neighborhood hosted by the East Isthmus Neighborhood Planning Council and several neighborhood associations. Tonight, there is a Council Briefing on the ordinance and apparently they will be looking for input on the ordinance. However, I have to say, that I am less and less convinced that this law is a good thing to do or that it will help address the problems cited by the police department.

Last Friday, I taught a Housing Law Seminar in Appleton. Among the attendees were 3 Oshkosh police officers and someone from their planning department. They were concerned after learning about landlord and tenant rights and responsibilities that it was going to be difficult to actually implement the ordinance. After all, they can't ask a landlord to change a written lease in the middle of the lease, because the tenant doesn't have to agree to any changes. And a landlord can't evict someone for something that isn't a violation of the lease, and if the lease isn't in writing, the only thing someone can be evicted for whatever was orally agreed to, which is often very little.

Meanwhile, here in Madison, the police department and city attorney's office are busy trying to convince us that there are other things that can be done besides evicting the tenant. However, when pressed, they have a hard time coming up with many examples of what could be done. So far, we've heard about cutting bushes, posting the property with no trespassing signs, fixing the locks, increasing lighting and having the landlord visit the property more often.

Bottom line is, this ordinance will lead to more tenants being evicted and make it harder for people with arrest and conviction records to find housing. Which led the folks working with tenants in the Fox Valley to ask, where are they supposed to live? (There is no good answer to this question.) And leads me to ask if there isn't a better solution to the problems presented. Do the police and building inspectors really need this tool? And will the unintended consequences of this ordinance (tenants being afraid to call the police) outweigh any good that it will do? I have that, and many more questions to ask tonight.
Read more!

It's not that simple.

Mike Ivey and Paul Soglin would have you believe that we have to grow up or grow out and the downtown neighborhoods are standing in the way of progress. These current comments are about the East Washington BUILD plan. However, it's much more complicated than talking simply about heights. I think that is a false way of characterizing the issues that remain. And, finally just because there are 20 meetings, doesn't mean they were good meetings or that they offered an opportunity to discuss the outstanding issues.

On Saturday, Alder Rummel and I, the Marquette Neighborhood Association and the Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association and Downtown Madison, Inc. held a meeting about three outstanding issues on the East Washington BUILD. The three issues were:

1. What is the transportation/parking plan for this area?
2. What do we do about the heights on Main St.
3. What do we do about the mis-match of heights between Baldwin (3 stories) and Ingersoll (10 stories)?

We spent the most time on the first issue. This is the issue that everyone wants to characterize as the neighborhood being opposed to heights. To me, that is a ridiculous notion. At the moment, most of the avenue has buildings that are 1 - 2 stories tall. The neighborhoods support heights that are 3 to 12 times those heights.

There is actually quite a bit of agreement, on the North Side - Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association (TLNA)

• 600 block - Agree on 8 stories
• 900 block - Breese Stevens Field
• 1100 & 1200 - Agree on 3 stories
• 1300 & 1400 - Agreement on 8 stories

Here's the discrepancies between the neighborhood recommendations and the BUILD recommendations on heights:

North Side - Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association (TLNA) and Plan

• 700, 800 and 1000 block - TLNA 8 stories, BUILD 12 stories
• 1600 - 1800 blocks - TLNA plans for a transit complex, no height recommendations, BUILD is 8 stories
  

South Side - Marquette Neighborhood Association (MNA) and East Rail Corridor Plan (ERC)

• 600, 700, 800 & 900 blocks - ERC is 8 stories, BUILD is 15 stories
• 1000 block - ERC is 8 stories, BUILD is 12 stories
  
• 1100 & 1200 block - ERC is 5 stories, BUILD is 10 stories
• 1300 & 1400 - ERC is 5 stories, BUILD is 12 stories
  

On Saturday, about 20 neighbors and property owners discussed approving the lower level of heights until a transportation/parking plan is established for the area, then revisiting the heights to make sure that the transportation/parking plans mesh with the land use plans. The major concern at the moment is that there is a whole lot of discussion about transportation options that affect this area, and yet none of the alternatives are included in the plan. No planning for transit (bus) stops, no planning for train or trolley stations and we may have parking designations that don't work with the rest of the land use and transportation plans. I think people feel more comfortable with the taller heights if there is a clear way to get people in and out of the rather narrow Isthmus, but until the transportation and parking plans are at least considered in conjunction with the land uses, there is a great deal of unease.

Clearly, we don't want to wait for the great trolley vs commuter rail debate to be settled, but we do want to include various ideas in the plan. We need some sort of plan that brings all the transportation plans together with our land use plans. In fact, the Mayor did agree to put $200,000 towards a consolidated transportation planning effort for the Isthmus, unfortunately, no one knows what he was thinking when he made that offer. The idea discussed at the meeting on Saturday morning was to create a transit overlay district that would take the current thinking in transit and parking plans and incorporate them with the land use plans.

The alternative, seems to be everything developers do not want. The alternative is to do a traffic impact study project by project (i.e. more costs to the developer) and have the Plan Commission and Urban Design Commission impose various parking and transportation alternatives to the projects on a case by case basis (i.e. no predictability). Clearly, the better alternative for all involved is to settle this now, instead of on a case by case basis, project by project. Because then, we may get no projects at all.
Read more!

Apologize?

No. I didn't accuse anyone of any official misconduct, the Mayor's office did. Apparently, the Mayor thinks I should apologize to Larry Nelson. Apparently they think that I'm accusing Larry Nelson of "official misconduct". Wow. That's a pretty cool tactic, put inflammatory words in someone else's mouth and personalize it.

Here's what I think about this situation. It's oddly similar to the whole Clerk/Treasurer situation we had a few months ago. The City of Madison advertised for a Clerk/Treasurer. Apparently no one was qualified, so they came up with a candidate and tried to hire a Clerk. The Council had to approve the position and instead, we sent it back to re-advertise the position. It didn't seem fair to advertise for one position and then hire a person qualified for a different position. Sound familiar?

Seems as though it's the Mayor's office that has a history of creating jobs that are hard to fill based on the job descriptions that they create. Apparently, according to the Isthmus, Larry was looking for someone with a different set of skills than what was advertised. And apparently, the HR department qualified people for interviews without regard for the advertised skills and knowledge. And apparently, the Mayor's office, for the second time, thinks this is ok.

Well, I don't. This doesn't pass the "smell test" any more than the Clerk/Treasurer situation. Now I'm wondering, is this a common City practice? Is this a pattern that is emerging? And does the Mayor really condone this practice?
Read more!

More Qualified.

Many of you have been following the hiring issues with our Facilities and Sustainability Manager, well, here's the qualifications of the other candidates:

Applicant One:
Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technologies

Facilities Manager 2002 - present
Corporate Facilities Engineer Sept 2001 - April 2002
Facilities Engineer Aug 2000 - 2001
Regional Facilities Manager July 1998 - Dec 1999
Chief Engineer Apr 1991 - July 1998

Applicant Two:
Bachelor of Science in Environmental Engineering

Project Engineer Feb 2006 - present
Superintendent April 1990 - Sept 2005
Design Engineer Jan 1988 - April 1990

Applicant Three:
Bachelor of Science in Natural Resources
Masters in Architecture

Project Manager Aug 1998 - present
Association Institutional Facilities Group Leader Feb 1987 - Aug 1998
Designer and Job Captain Mar 1986 - Jan 1987
Designer/Draftsperson Sept 1984 - Dec 1985

Applicant Four:
Law Degree
Masters in Business Administration

Information redacted for current job
Financial Specialist March 2004 - Feb 2005

Applicant Five:
Master of Science in Energy Management
PhD in Air Resources Management

Program Manager July 2006 - present
Air Management Specialist Aug 1997 - June 2006
Climate Protection Engineer Nov 1998 - April 2001
Manager, Renewable Energy March 1990 to April 1997
Energy Engineer Jan 1989 - March 1990
Read more!

Loopholes.

I finally got a peek at the ordinance Zach Brandon is proposing to address the alleged Mike Quieto problem. While the objections to his employment in the clerk's office has morphed over time, one thing is clear, I don't think this ordinance gets the folks that had objections where they want to go. What is even more interesting is that the misplaced accusations uncovered some real issues that involve some of the original complainants.

I agree that a local elected official (Paul VanRooy) who is retiring and is the treasurer for a candidate (Michael Schumacher) should not be a poll worker in the district where that candidate is running for office. I think this ordinance fixes that, but then goes too far.

The ordinance says that if you were involved in "political activity" in the past 12 months you can't be "employed" by the clerk's office to work on elections (i.e. be a poll worker). Political activity is defined as serving as an officer or director of a political party, political action committee, a conduit or a 527. It also says that if you engaged in "campaign activity" in the past 12 months you can't serve in any Aldermanic District where that campaign activity took place. "Campaign activity" is being a candidate or serving as an officer or director of a campaign committee.

Here's a list of issues to think about . . .

1. It's only the officers or directors of the conduit that are precluded from political activity, but not the officers or directors of the group that set up the conduit. In other words, the Common Sense Coalition votes to set up a conduit. They name a treasurer, Michael Quigley and fail to name any officers. Then Mike Quigley gets fired. Is he the only one precluded from serving in an election capacity? Several directors of the Common Sense Coalition are clearly involved in political activity, however they don't disclose who their directors are. Shouldn't they be precluded from being poll workers. And how are we going to enforce this if we don't have information?

2. In the case above, its not clear if they actually engaged in political activity or not, because they did not file any additional reports. Did they engage in political activity by simply setting up an account, or does the conduit actually have to collect money and disburse contributions? What about those groups that fail to file their reports, how will we know who engaged in political activity?

3. What about the groups in town like the Chamber of Commerce? Or Downtown Madison Inc.? They made a big deal about how they are getting more involved in politics and making endorsements, or not. Aren't they engaging in political activity? Should they be precluded from serving as poll workers? Should Jennifer Alexander and Susan Schmitz and their officers and directors be sitting at the polling places on election day?

4. What about the labor unions and the advocacy groups that make endorsements? They are clearly engaged in political activity, but they aren't addressed in the ordinance. Maybe the labor union PAC folks are, but what about the key leaders of those groups that clearly are involved? Can Tim Sullivan, Dode Lowe, Sue Villbrandt or Jim Cavanaugh be poll workers?

5. What about the newspapers, they make endorsements, should Dave Zweifel, John Nichols or Scott Milfred be sitting at a polling place?

6. If someone is the chair of the elections committee of a political party, they don't seem to be precluded from being a poll worker, unless they fall within the definition of the "officer or director". If political party committee chairs are included, then are the chairs of the newsletter committee or the economic development task force of the political party also precluded?

7. If a neighborhood association makes an endorsements, should the officers and directors of that neighborhood association be precluded from serving as a poll worker?

8. Does this include volunteers? Lauren Azar, Tammy Baldwin's partner, often volunteers in the clerk's office on election day. Should she be precluded from volunteering?

9. How does this affect people who ran for School Board or County Board or worked on one of the races? The districts they ran in are not co-terminus with the Aldermanic Districts.

10. One of the original complaints about Mike Quito was that he contributed money to campaigns and made phone calls for campaigns, but that isn't addressed in the ordinance.

11. Campaign managers, volunteer coordinators, lit designers and other key campaign volunteers are often not listed anywhere as being involved in the campaign. Are they officers or directors of those campaigns? Are they precluded from working as a poll worker?

I could go on . . . If you ask me, the brain damage required to try to fix this ordinance isn't worth it. While I agree we need to make sure our system is free from shenanigans, at the moment, the only "problem" I see is the one I listed above. The sponsors of this ordinance haven't identified the problem or written an ordinance that addresses the issues that they were concerned about. So now we have a solution that seems arbitrary and is full of loopholes. And meantime, we're making it harder for the clerk's office to find the poll workers we need to run elections. This ordinance needs some serious work.
Read more!

Tonight's Council Meeting

What's interesting on tonight's Council Agenda?

#1 - The Mayor sticks with the current trend when making new committee appointments. Only 12, or 37.5% of the people being appointed are women. To be fair, 27 of the appointments are re-appointments. Of the 5 new appointments 2 of the 5 are women. These appointments are only being introduced and get referred to the next meeting.

#2 - The Mayor's appointments to the Capital Area Regional Planning Commission (The new RPC) are somewhat curious. He is appointing two people who really have no background or experience sitting on committees that deal with planning or transportation issues. (Do a people search here to see what committees Alders Palm and Brandon sit on.)

#3 - 11 - Here's a geeky thing to notice, but did you ever notice if you click on the legislative file (see example here) for Alcohol Licenses you get no information? You'd never know that number 4 on the agenda is being denied if you just looked at the item we are voting on. You have to look here at the legislative history or on the agenda.

#14 - We will be authorizing condemnation for pieces of 4 properties for the Starkweather Creek bike path. (Sponsored by Larry Palm)

#36 - Once again we're giving more money to the Fire Department, outside of the budget process. And reducing our $1M Contingent reserve by $156,330. (Sponsored by Mayor and Paul Skidmore)

#57 - We're approving plans for up to 7 bus shelters on the Capital Square. For the same amount of money in the budget, we can get an extra one or two shelters. (This item just comes to council without sponsors)

#66 - We're approving a policy that city vehicles can't idle for more than 5 minutes with a few exceptions. Hopefully we can make this a little stronger at the meeting. (Sponsored by Larry Palm, expect additional people to add their names tonight.)

#76 - We're making covenants in deeds and other neighborhood documents unenforceable when it comes to the storage, placement or location of the recycling and garbage carts. This item got stuck in the system for TWO YEARS! The Urban Design Commission recommended denial of this in 2005! Solid Waste Advisory Committee recommended approval 4/5/07. I don't think the Plan Commission ever voted on it, or at least not recently. On 4/4/05 we asked for a legal opinion which I don't believe we ever got. The notes say that on 4/18/07, when there was no meeting, the Plan Commission recommended approval, but that can't be right . . . (Sponsored by Mayor)

#78 - We'll be passing approval of an Request for Proposals (RFP) for a bus pass pool that would allow small businesses to get the same benefits of offering unlimited ride bus passes to the employers as the largest employers such as the UW and the Hospitals. (Sponsored by Satya Rhodes-Conway, Mark Clear, Brenda Konkel and expect names like Robbie Webber, who should already be on there, to be added tonight.)

#79 - We'll be asking the Common Council Organizational Committee to explore putting an additional alder on the Board of Water Commissioners and discuss additional information that the Common Council would like to receive from the Water Utility. (Sponsored by Brenda Konkel, Satya Rhodes-Conway, Robbie Webber, Marsha Rummel, Tim Gruber, Brian Solomon, Mike Verveer, Tim Bruer and Julia Kerr - this was passed around the council but no one else chose to sign on.)

The resolutions to look at gender balance for top management positions and commissions and committees are being referred to the Affirmative Action Commission for input prior to the Council approving them. (These are currently sponsored by Brenda Konkel, Lauren Cnare, Satya Rhodes-Conway, Marsha Rummel is being added and they will be passed around tonight to get additional sponsors.)
Read more!

Random Monday Morning thoughts

Gender, City's Hiring Practices, Schools, Affordable Housing and more . . .

Gender - Paul Soglin has some comments about a news article about the resolutions I introduced about lack of gender and pay equity in top management positions and gender equity on city committees based on information I provided on my blog post and follow up . He asked what took me so long to notice that so many women managers were replaced by men. Good question. It wasn't that it took me this long to notice, it took me this long to feel like I might get support on the council. There's still only 7 women on the council, but its one more than before. Even so, I had a hard time getting co-sponsors, even from the women. So far, Lauren Cnare signed on, followed by Satya Rhodes-Conway and Marsha Rummel. ThuyPham-Remmele had this to say:

Thank you for sharing this.

Currently I don't see the need for more "feel good" resolutions.

Staffing is the Mayor's job and I expect him to do it right.

Also, as Common Council we approve his hiring/appointing decisions and can address this matter through established city process without having to create more work for the already backlogged Affirmative Action Commission.

Furthermore, the City of Madison encourages volunteers to participate in civic duties, I don't see how CC control/select the volunteers. Currently we have many vacant positions, for the sake of "gender balance" we may end up NOT accepting dedicated male volunteers until sufficient females meet the quota, if ever.

Thuy

I still have to circulate it among more council members, but generally speaking, it seems gender equity is a difficult issue to address. Yes, even here in Madison. It still needs 11 votes and it seems incredible that we can't even count on the women to vote for this. Luckily, I'm certain several men will sign on without hesitation. Oh, and for the record, I talked to Affirmative Action Commission members, they are not backlogged, the Council hasn't addressed this issue in the past 6 years I've served on the Council and I'm not aware of any city committee commission positions we are holding open for gender balance because we don't have quotas and we shouldn't. Paul Soglin had some good recommendations and I agree, its about recruitment. That's why I was so surprised to read the hiring practices for the City of Madison and find this:

Job announcements will be sent to all city agencies via e-mail and to a mailing list for recruitment purposes. The Human Resources Department will only pay for local advertising if funding is available. Ads in professional publications will be paid for by the hiring agency.

City's Hiring Practices - Maybe the above quote explains how we hired someone for the Facilities and Sustainability Manager position that was unqualified. However, I don't think so. I've requested additional information about the other applicants and will share them when I get them if the media doesn't. Several people have asked for the job description and application. I am hoping that the good folks at Isthmus will make all of this information available when it becomes available. Vikki Kratz did an open records request and they told her to pick up the information on Friday at 4:00, but when she got there, everyone who knew anything had gone home for the day, so hopefully she will get the information today.

Schools - School Board members, please do the right thing tonight. Do not consolidate Lapham and Marquette to save $81,000. It's an incredibly short-sighted thing to do and it is not good for the community as a whole. I've heard so many good arguments about why consolidation is a bad thing, but the ones that probably bother me the most are:

1. Health and safety of the kids as they try to get to school. It's hard to promote a healthy lifestyle and walking and biking to school when kids in these areas have to cross E. Washington Ave, Williamson St., E. Johnson and E. Gorham. The less kids that have to cross these streets the better. The current set up isn't ideal, but it is better than what was passed in the budget. (Please don't stop the bussing for crossing guards, we couldn't possibly fund enough crossing guards for these streets!)
2. The Tenney-Lapham and Marquette Nieghborhoods have worked really hard to get developers to include family-friendly housing in their new developments so that we can increase the number of kids in the area. Consolidating the schools sends the wrong signals and sets the efforts of the neighborhoods back.
3. Projections indicate that within 5 years, the schools will be overcrowded. Again, this seems incredible short-sighted to consolidate the schools now.
4. It's only $81,000 that will be saved. We can't be that desperate for money. Or, we need to re-examine our priorities.

Affordable Housing - I don't know much about RDM, but they are offering 3 bedroom condos starting at $94,900. Their project is The Crossing at Elver Park. What amazes me the most is, if they can convert the 3 bedrooms at Elver Park to condos at this price, why can't the city create affordable housing on Allied Drive when we've put $5.5M of TIF into the project?
I was so surprised I picked up the phone and called the sales folks and asked them how they did this. They had no federal, state or local money to help make it affordable. The ad didn't seem to be a scam where they list the lowest price to drag you in then sell you something at a much higher price. I probably should have asked what kind of reserves they were providing for the condo association and what kind of warranties were included on the condos. Nonetheless, if a private company can do this with no federal subsidies, the City can certainly do much better in Allied Drive. Some of the numbers I have seen have us spending that much money just to renovate the units.
Read more!

Unqualified.

Warning: This post might not be "nice", but after thinking about it for a few days, I believe it is right. Unfortunately, doing what is right isn't always "nice".

Late Monday afternoon on my way to a meeting, I ran into a City Staff person who asked me if I had seen the announcement about the new staff person in the Mayor's office and the new Facilities and Sustainability Manager. I said yes. Then, this staff person, proceeded to get so upset they were red in the face. What upset this City staff person? The fact that this person felt that people who were much more qualified for the Facilities and Sustainability Manager job - engineers and architects - were turned down, and instead a person who was clearly not qualified for the job, a former Mayoral staff person, got the job. They felt that it was nothing but political favoritism. So I decided to look into it.

In the job description it listed

QUALIFICATIONS

Knowledges, Skills and Abilities:

Considerable knowledge of facility planning and construction principles, techniques, practices, and materials. Thorough knowledge of construction plan review, cost estimating, governmental bidding and contract processes, overall building construction contract administration, and space needs analysis principles and practices. Thorough knowledge of environmental engineering principles and practices incorporating energy conservation, energy utilization analysis and building maintenance. Working knowledge of computer aided design systems relevant to building design and construction. Working knowledge of construction inspection techniques. Ability to plan, assign, and carry out a comprehensive municipal facility development and maintenance program. Ability to manage building maintenance and cleaning. Ability to prepare and evaluate working construction plans and specifications, determine appropriate change orders, and authorize payments. Ability to communicate effectively both orally and in writing. Ability to establish and maintain effective working relationships. Ability to prepare comprehensive reports and recommendations. Ability to maintain adequate attendance.

Training and Experience:

Three years of directly related managerial and professional work in directing a facility design and management/maintenance program, emphasizing cost-effective energy management considerations. Such experience would normally be gained after graduation from an accredited college or university with a Bachelor’s Degree in environmental engineering, mechanical engineering, or architecture. Other combinations of training and/or experience which can be demonstrated to result in the possession of the knowledges, skills, and abilities necessary to perform the duties of this position will also be considered.

So, I asked for the application for the person who got the job. It's fair to say that they listed none of the experience, knowledge or skills bolded above. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Here's the experience listed:

Mayoral Aide, City of Madison April 2003 - Present: I am responsible for working with city agencies regarding issues such as, planning and development, environmental, transportation, and public works. I also am involved in developing annual Executive Capital and Operating Budgets, coordinating the Federal Appropriation requests, and tracking Federal policies. I have worked extensively with policy makers and community stakeholders through the City's legislative process. Finally, I coordinated major policy initiatives of the mayor. Highlights of these initiatives include, adoption Inclusionary Zoning, an affordable housing program, implementing a new recycling and refuse program and negotiating the acquisition of 230 acres of open space in the Cherokee Marsh.

Deputy Campaign Manager July 2002 - April 2003: Developed a fundraising plan and raised approximately $200,000 for primary and general election through a combination of events, direct mail and phone solicitation.

Executive Director, Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin July 1996 - July 2002: Supervised approximately five full time employees. Under my direction the members grew from 150 to 1000 members and the annual budget went from $21,000 to $150,000 through increased grants, advertising, donations and membership revenues. The Bicycle Federation of Wisconsin developed bicycle education programs, produced state bike maps, published a bicycling event booklet and opened a Milwaukee office.

Administrative Assistant, Citizens Community Fund 1994 - 1996: Administrative: Payroll, Accounts Payable, etc. Human Resources: Health Insurance, Retirement Plans

Project Assistant, UW, Stevens Point, College of Natural Resources 1993 - 1994: Project Assistant: Assisted in organizing a conference regarding ethanol production in Wisconsin. The conference theme was the effectiveness of taking various biomass and agricultural waste streams and converting them to ethanol.

B.S. in Business Administration - Marketing UW-Stout 1993

It wouldn't be so bad, but the position is Comp Group 18, Range 16. Which means the salary is $68,068.52 - $85,124.52. This is the same amount of money paid to a Senior Administrative Analyst, City Architect, Principal Engineer - Water, Personnel Services Manager, Principal Engineer IV, Transportation Planning Manager.

Bottom Line: This is not good government. That employee was right to be upset. I'm sure its not considered "nice" that I pointed this out, but taxpayers deserve to know.
Read more!

Tearin' Down the House!

Are there any houses in the downtown area that are worthy of saving? Or should we just flatten the downtown, kiss the house good-bye and build large zero lot line buildings with no backyards, no trees and no open space? Or are there some individual houses worth saving? Are there some areas of the downtown worth saving? And how do we decide what and when to save a house? Or a neighborhood?

Should this house be torn down?

Or this one?

Or this one?

Do you care what year the houses were built? If it was built in the 1800's does that change anything? How many houses do you think we have in town that were built in the 1800s? Is an individual house built in the 1800's worth saving? Are they more worth saving is someone who helped found the city lived there? Does the architecture have to be important? Does it matter when the houses built around it were built?

These are issues facing the Old Market Place Neighborhood, recently renamed the James Madison Park Neighborhood. Cliff Fisher has proposed knocking down the three houses above to build a 35 - 38 unit apartment building with underground parking. The houses are on Butler St. but the underground parking would be accessed from Hancock St. And the building would be built all the way to the end of the lot line on Butler and the underground parking would be under the Hancock St. properties. The building proposed is much better looking than it used to be, it fits in better with the neighborhood than the original proposal, but what is to become of this neighborhood? Is it to be flattened to make way for height and density? Or is there something worth saving? Consider these buildings and the other buildings on this block:

Picture 1 - 119 N Butler - Built in 1894
Picture 2 - 123 N Butler - Built in 1937 - Katherine P Regan House - Designed by Ed Tough
Picture 3 - 125 N Butler - Built in 1874

Based on some research I did several years ago, the other houses on this block include:

103 N Butler - Built in 1854 - Hiram G and Annette Dodge House
129 N Butler - Built in 1900 - Chester W and Hortense Constantine House - It's a Claude and Starck
133 N Butler - Built in 1897 - William W Herrington Apartment
141 N Butler - Built in 1900 - William J and Emma Teckmeyer House - Also a Claude and Stark
(I used to live here.)
145 N Butler - Built in 1887 - Berger Olson House
149 N Butler - Built in 1909 - Charles L Pryor House
305 E Johnson - Built in 1892 - William J and Elizabeth Oakey Residence
317 E Johnson - Built in 1891 - A.N. Fjeld
319 E Johnson - Built in 1891 - Andrew & Karen Fjeld Residence
323 E Johnson - Built in 1914 - R.A. Fjeld
310 E Mifflin - Built in 1926 - A. J. McCann Apartment Building - Designed by M.P. Schneider
314 E Mifflin - Built in 1857 - A.H. Campbell House
318 E Mifflin - Built in 1854 - A Noyes House
322 E Mifflin - Built in 1900 - Anton Hebel House

Houses across N Butler St. and to the west include:

128 N Butler - Built in 1904 - George W and Lydia Kindschi
130 N Butler - Built in 1916 - George Kindschi residence
134 N Butler - Built in 1913 - Sophie and Frank Fleckenstein Jr
136 N Butler - Built in 1909 - Mary Roland House
140 N Butler - Built in 1886 - Henry B and Sarah French residence
203 N Hamilton- Built in 1857 - George Paine Residence
205-207 N Hamilton - Built in 1894 - Meyer Roberman residence
213 N Hamilton - Built in 1909 - Wayne Apartment Building
217 N Hamilton - Built in 1853 - E. J. Oakley residence

Houses one block to the east include:

107 N Hancock - Built in 1899 - Ole Knutson
125 N Hancock - Built in 1899 - James H Cummings
133 N Hancock - Built in 1900 -
139 N Hancock - Built in 1869 - Luke Gilligan House
143 N Hancock - Built in 1892 - Chris and Caroline Jaeger Residence
402 E Mifflin - Built in 1922 - Gloria Dei Church, Swedish Lutheran

Houses two blocks to the east include:
101 N Franklin - Built in 1857 - William F Reiche residence
111 N Franklin - Built in 1850 - George Baker House
119 N Franklin - Built in 1899 - George H and Dagmar Ambrecht residence
129 N Franklin - Built in 1890 -
(I also used to live here.)
153 N Franklin - Built in 1887 - JJ Van Keulen house
515 E Johnson - Built in 1877 - JJ Van Kenlen/Patrick & Bridget Conlin House
216 - 218 N Blair - Built in 1911 - Elizabeth McCormick Duplex
516 E Mifflin - Built in 1919 - A.L. Weaver Commercial Building

Houses on the three blocks to the north include:
301 N Hamilton - Built in 1893 - Christiah F Rinder Grocery
303 - 309 N Hamilton - Built in 1904 - W. J. Oakey Apt Building
321 N Hamilton - J A Stein House
308 N Hancock - Built in 1890 - J A Steinle House
310 N Hancock - Built in 1897 - Samuel Todd Residence
324 E Johnson - Built in 1867 - William Manning House
506 E Johnson - Built in 1872
512 E Johnson - Built in 1872
518 E Johnson - Built in 1877 - John Leyden House
308 N Blair -Built in 1877 - RR Smith House
312 N Blair - Built in 1886 - Alfred Smith House
316 N Blair - Built in 1885 - Al Smith House

Of the 139 houses in this area, 69 are listed in the Wisconsin Architecture and History Inventory. And there are another 33 on the 5 blocks to the south between E Mifflin and E Washington.

Is none of this worth saving? Is any of it worth saving? If the individual homes are not worth saving, are they worth saving because it is a group of buildings and an intact neighborhood? Or must we get rid of it all in the name of progress? Is some history of Madison worth preserving?
Read more!

Throw the Landlords in Jail! Not.

Alder Tim Bruer has an ordinance that would charge landlords for too many police or building inspection calls to their property and if they are fined and don't pay, they could go to jail. You'd think that I'd be all in favor, but I'm not. In fact, I have quite a few concerns.

The ordinance would allow the police department or building inspection unit (it has a new name no one can remember) to charge the landlord for the services, give the landlord a fine or enforce the ordinance through an injunction if they have too many calls to their property. The police only need 3 calls in 90 days that would result in a ticket or arrest, one search warrant or 1 arrest for manufacturing, delivery or distribution of drugs. Building inspection would need 5 calls in 1 year. I have fewer problems with the building inspection piece . . . however the policing end causes me some greater concerns.

Tenant Fear of Calling the Police or Building Inspection
I've volunteered or worked at the Tenant Resource Center since 1991. That's 16 years experience of talking to tenants and landlords. I've learned a few things over time. First of all, landlords who hear about ordinances like this often panic and are much more reactive to small incidents than they need to be, due to fear. In other words, if they think that the City may come after them, the first thing they are going to do is give the tenant an eviction notice if the police or building inspection is called because they will be afraid they may get too many calls to their property. In fact, for police calls, they may believe that is what a "good landlord" is expected to do.

The second thing I know is that once the word gets out that someone got evicted for calling the police or building inspector, other tenants will fear calling the police or building inspector because they will be afraid they will be evicted.

Some of this might not be rational, but it is a reality that cannot be ignored. People often do irrational things due to fear.

Domestic Violence
The landlord will be responsible if a tenant or someone on the property even has a person attempt to enter or visit the property or wait to enter or visit a property. In other words, even if the person is unwelcome on the property, the landlord, and subsequently the tenant, could get into trouble. Those people who are afraid to call the police due to the irrational fear this ordinance may create may end up letting people into their apartments, even if they don't want to let them in, because they will get in trouble simply because they are outside. Seems to me we need some better discussion about how this impacts victims of domestic violence and we need some protections for victims of domestic violence.

List of Offenses/200 feet of the property
The list of offenses that could lead to an action against the landlord includes some serious issues like battery, indecent exposure, keeping a place of prostitution, theft, arson, drug sales, discharging a gun or running a drug house. However, it also includes production or creation of noise, obstructing a street or sidewalk or giving away alcohol without a license. And of course, it includes some of those violations like disorderly conduct that are kind of vague and cover quite a bit of activity. And finally, a tenant or someone associated with them, doesn't have to do these activities on the property, but the landlord can get in trouble if they do them within 200 feet of the property.

What happened to innocent until proven guilty?
I have issues with us taking action based on a search warrant because the only burden of proof is "probable cause". Technically, they wouldn't even have to arrest anyone and it would be enough to start an action against a landlord. I also have a problem with starting an action when there is an arrest but no one has been proven guilty yet. Seems to me if a tenant could risk losing where they live, it should be only after they've actually been proven guilty of the thing for which they are losing your home.

Overall, this ordinance has a few other problems.
1. A four unit building is treated the same as a 250 unit apartment complex and it won't apply the same to a downtown landlord that owns 8 properties on the same block.
2. There are multiple drafting issues resulting from multiple edits, the whole thing needs to be cleaned up. There are entire sections that don't make any sense.
3. The whole ordinance works if the police exercise appropriate discretion. As a policy maker, I think we need to give more direction about how and when to exercise that discretion.

This will be discussed at the Equal Opportunities Commission on Thursday. There is a community meeting on it at the Salvation Army at Darbo on the 21st and there is an Alder briefing on the issue on the 22nd.

Read more!

$81,000 would keep our neighborhood school open?

Is it true that $81,000 is all it would take to prevent the Lapham-Marquette pair from being consolidated? And that if it remains consolidated, it will be overcrowded in 5 years? I'm not on the school board, and I don't know their budget that well, but if that is true, it seems there has to be a better solution.

My cursory understanding of the budget is that the consolidation saved $522,000. Of that amount $201,000 was from salaries of a principal, a librarian and another staff person. The other 321,000 was for rent saved by having the alternative programs in school district owned space instead of renting.

In other words, if Lapham and Marquette kept the same kids in their schools and added the alternative programs, it only saves $201,000 to consolidate the schools. Another $119,000 could be saved by not having a second principal, by sharing a principal between the schools. That leaves $81,000.

Surely, we're not closing a neighborhood school over $81,000, are we? There has to be a better solution.

p.s. sorry so late this morning, google was giving me a rough time!
Read more!

Allied: Will it be affordable? Or Gentrified?

It was nice to open up the Isthmus and see Carousel Bayrd's smiling face. However, what she had to say, was nothing to smile about. Allied Drive. There is so much promise in what could be. Our opportunities are unique. We have the ability to do something different than we have ever done before. We have the opportunity to help lift families out of poverty. However, we need the political will.

"BRIEF" HISTORY
Last April, over a year ago, the Common Council voted to authorize the city to bid on 9 buildings on Allied Drive, adjacent to two additional buildings we owned. We purchased them in May and hired Meyer Management to start emptying the buildings. In June we authorized money to hire a consultant to help us plan a process to plan for Allied Drive. In September, we held a community meeting to start to plan what we would do with this 9 acre site that we now owned. Which is ridiculous, as I have been asking since March 2006, what we are going to do with these properties. We started not renewing leases of the people who lived in the buildings and people in the area started getting evicted due to City actions. Last January, I introduced a couple resolutions so that we could finally have a discussion about what we were going to do with the properties and to allow people being evicted due to nuisance actions to live in the City-owned properties. The resolution on how affordable the units would be was referred to the Allied Drive Task Force and they came up with their (preliminary) recommendations (I don't think that is the final version, but I can't find a link on-line. What I have on paper is different and dated 3-22-07.)

WHERE WE ARE NOW
Last Thursday, the staff presented their response to the Allied Drive Task Force recommendations. Unfortunately, there is no link in legistar for their response. You had to attend the meeting to get a copy of it. Or, read the recap in the Isthmus this week.

The staff presentation that I saw, was not quite what people were expecting, as Carousel explained in the Isthmus article. My understanding is that when the consultant explained things, it got a little better.

CAN'T USE TIF FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
What's concerning me at the moment is this part of the article:

Mark Olinger, director of Madison’s Planning Department, says the city can’t afford to do more. Offering low-income units “requires significant subsidies,” and there are no federal programs to help. The city can use a tax-credit program through the Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority, but Olinger says the maximum amount of tax credits a city can get through WHEDA in a single year is $750,000. Building just the nine low-cost units will take $650,000 in tax credits.

Also, the city can’t use tax-increment financing to fund the new units because it has already poured $6 million into the neighborhood, paying for streets and bike path improvements and funding a private housing development at the old SuperSaver site on Verona Road. “At some point,” says Olinger, “we need to recover our costs.”

Um, we are recovering our costs (see page 11, TID 29). Looks like we're making $600,000 a year. The TID doesn't have to close until 27 years. I think it opened in 1998, so we have until 2025 to pay it off. At $600,000 per year we can pay off the $7.5M in a little over 12 years or by 2019, with 6 years to spare, and that's if very little of the property value changes. In other words, we don't need to recover costs because we will if we do nothing at this point. In other words, we can make the housing even more affordable.

I have to ask, when was the policy decision made that we can't do more affordable housing because we need to recover our costs? And even more interesting, perhaps for a separate blog, who decided that the CDA was going to be the developer of the project? And does the CDA know? It's been nearly a year that we've owned the properties without a plan, we're losing money on the empty properties, and we seem no closer than we were to begin with despite my efforts. Who's running this ship?
Read more!

Managing the Water Utility

It's seems there is not a day goes by that someone doesn't ask me what we are going to do about the Water Utility. It's a frustrating question. First of all because of the state law that sets up the Water Utility takes away the Council's ability to do much at all:

Wis. Stat. 66.0805 Management of municipal public utility by commission.

(1) Except as provided in sub. (6), the governing body of a city shall . . . provide for the nonpartisan management of a municipal public utility by creating a commission under this section. The board of commissioners, under the general control and supervision of the governing body, shall be responsible for the entire management of and shall supervise the operation of the utility. The governing body shall exercise general control and supervision of the commission by enacting ordinances governing the commission’s operation. The board shall consist of 3, 5 or 7 commissioners.

We are required to have a Water Utility that is responsible for the "entire management of" and is supposed to "supervise the operation of" the utility. However, we are supposed to still have "general control and supervision of the governing body". So, we have adopted chapter 13 of the Madison General Ordinances.

MGO 13.01 says:

BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS.
(1) Board of Water Commissioners . There shall be a board of five (5) water commissioners, whose duty shall be the management and operation of the City Water Utility. One (1) commissioner shall be a member of the Common Council. Pursuant to Sec. 66.0805(2), Wis. Stats., commissioners shall be appointed on a staggered basis for a term each of five (5) years. In case of vacancy the Common Council may at any regular or special meeting elect a member for the unexpired term. In addition, the Director Public Health under Sec. 7.02, M.G.O., or his or her designee shall serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of the Board in order to provide advice and information to the Board on health issues related to the Water Utility. The Director of Public Health shall not vote, may not make motions, and shall not be counted as a member in determining quorum or majorities.

So, the only thing we do is appoint people for 5 year terms. (Most other City appointments are 2 or 3 years.) That, too, is controlled by State Statute

66.0805(2)
(2)The commissioners shall be elected by the governing body for a term, beginning on the first day of October, of as many years as there are commissioners, except that the terms of the commissioners first elected shall expire successively one each year on each succeeding first day of October.

Anyways, on Tuesday night, I introduced a resolution co-sponsored by Satya Rhodes Conway, Robbie Webber, Marsha Rummel, Tim Gruber, Brian Solomon, Michael Verveer and Tim Bruer that would add one or two seats to the commission as well as ask for formal reports to the Common Council. I'm asking that we consider adding an additional alderperson to the Board so that we have more representation. After all, the public and the media want to hold us responsible for what is going on, we may as well have more representation.

The second thing this resolution does is to request the Common Council Organizational Committee to consider requiring additional formal reports to the Common Council so that we are informed and have the ability to ask additional questions and discuss issues with the Water Utility in a public forum on a regularly scheduled basis.

I know its not much, but its all I could think of to try to address the on-going concerns that I keep hearing about nearly every day and feel pretty powerless to impact. Meantime, if you are looking for Council action, you'll have to work through Alderperson Lauren Cnare.
Read more!

Analyzing the New Council

Everyone is watching closely as this new council takes its first votes. People are anxious to see who falls into what categories and who falls in line with each other. Unfortunately, our first votes won't tell you much. Last night, there were three or four votes that may or may not tell us anything. Here's a few conclusions that you could draw . . . but then again, maybe not. I think its too early to tell.

We like infill development.
We voted unanimously to approve the project on Monroe St.

We're all fiscally responsible.
Alder Brandon had a test for us to find out if we were fiscally responsible. He insisted that we amend our operating budget instead of our capital budget to buy a $200,000 piece of software. The difference is that if we buy it in the capital budget it costs us $280,000 because we would be borrowing for 10 years and if we buy it through the operating budget, it is only $200,000 because there is no interest or borrowing. Pretty much a no-brainer and it passed unanimously after a big unnecessary speech by Brandon. Congratulations! We all passed the test and are fiscally responsible! (Alder Brandon's amendment is not currently in legistar, but should be soon.)

We want more information.
The proposal to issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) to find a vendor to advertise for our small(er) business bus pass pilot program was sorely lacking on detail. While many agree that this is a great idea and that we should do it, it was clear from the resolution, that we didn't have any detail. And it was clear from the staff testimony that we didn't have any goals laid out for the folks responding to our RFP. The issue was referred.

We're a mixed bag.
On the issue of textbooks, we had an unusual split. There were multiple amendments, but when we finally voted, the split in the votes was a bit unusual.

The pro-business, libertarian streak, anti-student, anti-mandate, pro-staff, pragmatic voters were: Pham-Remmele, Rhodes-Conway, Sanborn, Schumacher, Clear and Konkel.

Those who were anti-business, anti-civil rights, pro-regulation, feel-good were Compton, Gruber, Judge, Kerr, Palm, Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Webber, Brandon, Bruer, Clausius and Cnare.

We're long-winded.
We only discussed two items of any substance, the bus pass pool and textbooks, and it took us 2.5 hours. Hopefully, people are just settling down and figuring out how to do things more efficiently and effectively, otherwise we're going to have quite a few long meetings.

"Aldermanic courtesy" is alive and well.
Alders Rhodes-Conway, Webber and myself asked several questions regarding the bus pass pool and the council agreed to refer to the next meeting while we get a copy of the RFP and determine if we need to amend the resolution to set out some clear goals for the pilot program.

Also, we all proved that we could congratulate our fellow alders when they work hard and that we all know how to thank people.

Some of us are serious about being more collegial.
Our pub rotation choice last night was Restaurant Magnus. Our "cruise director" Tim Bruer made sure that we continued in our attempts to be a council that may disagree in meetings, but can be more social and friendly after the meetings. Joining in the after-meeting chat were Pham-Remmele, Schumacher, Clausius, Rummel, Konkel, Bruer, Clear, Judge, Kerr, Webber, Verveer, Gruber and I think that was it. Noticeably missing were the Mayor and his staff as well as the band-of-merry-moderates (Brandon, Cnare, Palm) caucus.

Conclusion.
So, maybe this doesn't tell us much, but its fun to put the ridiculous labels on us and draw the ridiculous conclusions that the media and some politicians often do, just to point out how ridiculous the labels and conclusions are. If you were to analyze the one split vote you could conclude that:

1) the Progressive Dane caucus is split, watch for the WSJ editorial declaring one more time that our party is losing power and for Vicki McKenna to continue ringing her hands as she worried about who she is going to trash on AM radio; and
2) the aforementioned band-of-merry-moderates caucus is sticking together and being divisive on the council.

Or maybe, just maybe, it's just not that simple.
Read more!

A WTF morning.

So, I started three different blogs this morning, I delayed two of them cuz the links I was trying to use on the city website weren't working. The third, I decided to save for tomorrow. Plus, I think I was just so disconcerted this morning after reading the WSJ and watching the channel 3 news.

All I can keep thinking is wtf? I went to bed, as I think many of my neighbors did, thinking that the Marquette and Lapham schools would not be consolidated. At least that was what we were told by the very folks that were voting on this issue. It's been 4 hours since I read the news and I think I'm still stunned. This is so totally unacceptable. As downtown neighborhoods struggle to increase homeownership, keep housing affordable, bring and keep families downtown and create neighborhoods that have a high quality of life, this is a huge blow. And how ridiculous is it that we will have to bus our kids across East Washington because it is too hard for the kids to cross, instead of having so many of our kids being able to walk to school. I have to believe that the $522,000 they saved just wasn't worth it. And I'm afraid that future school referendums will suffer as a result. Please contact your state representatives today - something has to be done about school funding.

My second wtf moment was a little more petty. Who cares who gets the credit? Seriously.

The point is, there is now $3.8M in the Affordable Housing Trust Fund and that is good news for the families who, for years to come, will be assisted by this fund. Now, since I'm on the Housing Committee, I guess I'd better get to work making that money work for us as we reach our goal of $10M. I've already started talking to the chair of the affordability sub-committee about three ideas. Stay tuned!

Read more!