The City Week Ahead That They Want You To Know About

Check back here later in the week to see what didn't get published on time . . .

This is what I find of interest . . .

Monday, November 2, 2009
3:30 PM LOW INCOME BUS PASS PROGRAM DETAILS SUBCOMMITTEE ROOM LL-120 MMB
- Length of eligibility of certification, how eligibility card works, who distribute eligibility cards and can Transit for Jobs and Transit for Economic Self Sufficiency programs purchase this pass for their clients?

4:00 PM SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND ENERGY COMMITTEE ROOM 108 CCB
- Zoning Code rewrite

4:45 PM LANDMARKS COMMISSION ROOM LL-110 MMB
- 1252 Williamson Street - Third Lake Ridge Local Historic District, Proposal for a new three story mixed-use building on a former service station site at the corner of Williamson Street and South Baldwin Street.
- 120 West Johnson Street/129 West Gorham Street - Mansion Hill Historic District and Landmark site. Proposal for a new 5-story apartment building on the site of the Holy Redeemer R.C. Church and School.
- 617-619 Mendota Court - Informational Presentation on the demolition of two buildings and constructing an 8-story apartment building in the Langdon National Register Historic District.

5:30 PM PLAN COMMISSION ROOM 201 CCB
- Informational presentation regarding revised plans for the proposed redevelopment of the Edgewater Hotel located at 666 Wisconsin Avenue (No links or information)
- Reaffirming commitment to Complete Streets a.k.a. Thuy bait.
- 1246-1252 Williamson Street and 308-310 South Baldwin Street. Note: This matter will be reviewed at the Landmarks Commission at 4:45 p.m., November 2, 2009. The action of the Landmarks Commission will be reported from the floor.

Tuesday, November 3, 2009
4:30 PM COMMON COUNCIL ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITTEE ROOM 108 CCB
- Report from city lobbyists (no links)
- Mator's spin on what new with the RTA
- Hiring practices report
- Mayor's Alcohol Czar explains what she is working on

6:30 PM COMMON COUNCIL ROOM 201 CCB
- #1 Public hearing on Operating Budget
- #2 & 3 Rejecting projects at 430-434 South Thornton Avenue, 1526 Jenifer Street and 430 Cantwell Court & 1148 Jenifer Street
- #5 Urban Design Standards for Capital Gateway Corridor (E Wash)
- #6 Rejecting liquor license for Kami Eshraghi
- #16 Segredo Liquor license
- #18 Northport/Sherman/Warner Neighborhood Plan
- #23 Adding a student to the ALRC
- #24 - Banning liquor sales at gas stations
- #38 - Increasing capacity for the Nitty Gritty
- #49 - $180M bonds for WARF
- #57 Peace Park plans and specs

Wednesday, November 4, 2009
12:00 PM PERSONNEL BOARD ROOM 525 CCB
- CCOC Hiring report

4:30 PM BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS ROOM 108 CCB
- Reaffirming commitment to Complete Streets

4:30 PM URBAN DESIGN COMMISSION ROOM LL-110 MMB
- 1012 Fish Hatchery Road - PUD-GDP for a Four-Story, 62-Unit Apartment Building.
- Target
- 617-619 Mendota Ct
- Edgewater presentation

5:00 PM HOUSING COMMITTEE ROOM 260 MMB
- Police ticketing landlords
- Landlord entry ordinance
- Licensing landlords who are found in violation of the chronic nuisance ordinance
- Requiring landlord to have two contacts for who can exercise control over the property
- Zoning code rewrite

5:30 PM CULTURAL PLAN STEERING COMMITTEE CENTRAL LIBRARY, 201 W MIFFLIN ST, 2ND FLOOR MEETING ROOM
- First meeting

7:00 PM MADISON AREA TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BOARD 119 E OLIN AVE, RM A-B
- Consideration of The Madison Area Transportation Planning Board Supporting Dane County Resolution No.152 2009-2010, Authorizing Dane County Membership in the Dane County Regional Transit Authority and Thereby Creating the Dane County Regional Transit Authority Pursuant to s.66.1039 (2)(b) of the Wisconsin Statutes.

Thursday, November 5, 2009
7:30 AM FUNDING PROCESS SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE, EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION COMMITTEE AND SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE ROOM 260 MMB
1. Update on Funding Process Tasks and Timelines
2. Best Practice Documents-Process and Timeline
3. Participant Income Language in Application
4. Application Language for Neighborhood Program Area
There are attachments noted on the agenda, but none of them available to the public.

5:00 PM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT COMMITTEE ROOM 300 MMB
- Affordable housing trust fund
- Eliminating shared appreciation and thereby ending an income stream for afforable housing and community development projects.

5:00 PM TRANSIT AND PARKING COMMISSION ROOM 260 MMB
- After 4 months of decreased ridership, finally a month with an increase.
- Public hearing onParatransit fares. Voting at the next meeting.
- Reaffirming commitment to Complete Streets
- Perimeter seating?
- Badger Buses/Dutch Mill Park and Ride

5:30 PM COMMUNITY MEETING TO DEVELOP THE CITY'S SUSTAINABILITY PLAN 4340 TOKAY BLVD.
- No agenda items
Read more!

Costume or No Costume . . . See You Tonight?

I have three events tonight where costumes are encouraged and sometimes expected . . . and I am not a fan of Halloween! So it always presents a dilemma . . . and so you'll have to decide if I tried hard enough (I'll give you a hint, the answer is likely no!) . . . and depending upon where you see me, you may or may not think it qualifies as a costume!

First and Foremost, I hope to see you at fundraisers to support the Tenant Resource Center and Dane 101!

TENANT RESOURCE CENTER
TRC is 5 - 7 at the Brink Lounge, donate what you can at the door, free food, cash bar, costumes encouraged, not necessary. This is a first time we tried this, so I have no idea if people will come with costumes on . . . any which way, please thank our sponsors and donors for the great food and silent auction. And if you can't make it, you can always donate here!

SPONSORS

Green-Built Universal Design Dream Home
Michael Donnelly
Amy Westra

Affordable Home with a Lake View
Russell Ainsworth
Sheila Guilfoyle
Hawks Quindel, S.C.
Tom Hirsch
Jesse Kaysen
Jennie Mauer
Tim Radelet
Juscha Robinson & Steve Herrick
Vicky Selkowe & Jason Engle
Judy Wilcox

Charming Flat in a Restored Victorian
Mary Anglim
Mike & Pam Barrett
Carousel Bayrd & Tim Sobota
Carol Carstensen
Bill Clingan
Community Pharmacy
Tom & Kia Conrad
Gene Farley
Cathy & Tom Kaplan
Bill & Linda Keys
Betsy Lawrence
Anne Reynolds
Paul Rusk
Arlene Silveira
Tom Stoebig
Dick Wagner
Dace Zeps

Sunny and Spacious Studio
Ginny Borman
Mary Kay Baum
Jean MacCubbin
Tom Powell
Kerry Schumann
Brent Sieling
Echnaton Vedder
Carol Weidel
Ledell Zellers & Simon Anderson

FOOD DONORS
Bahn Thai Restaurant
Eldorado Grill
El Pastor
Great Dane – Hilldale
Ha Long Bay
Harmony Bar
Ian’s Pizza
Jamerica
Lao Laan Xang
Monty’s Blue Plate Diner
Ramona Natera
Pasqual’s
People’s Bakery
SuperCharge! Foods, LLC
The Bayou New Orleans Style Tavern
The Dardanelles Restaurant
Weary Traveler Freehouse

AUCTION DONORS
Absolutely Art
A Room of One’s Own Bookstore
Biaggi’s
Buddy Squirrel
Budget Bicycle Center
Community Car
Daisy Café & Cupcakery
David Bacco Chocolats
Four Star Video Heaven
Gentle Tiger Acupuncture LLC
Heidi Konkel
Bill Lueders
Machinery Row Bicycles
Madison Mallards Baseball
Morgans Shoes
New Orleans Take-Out East
Orange Tree Imports
Taste of India
Tex Tubb’s Taco Palace
The Bayou New Orleans Style Tavern
Trader Joe’s
Will Power Flower Massage and Energy Therapy

DANE 101
They're having their Freakin' Halloweekend event at the High Noon 8 - bartime. They very much seem to be encouraging costumes, in fact, they have a whole complex costume judging thing going on . . .

We have now selected all of our secret judges who will be trolling the High Noon starting at 8 p.m. and secretly judging you. After the third band each night the results of those judgments will be placed in an envelope and handed off to me and I will announce the winners. What will our panel of judges be looking for and what can you win? Answer to this question is below (and a big thank you to the High Noon, the Mad Rollin Dolls, and the Madison Mallards for providing some fantastic prizes):

Grand Prize: Best costume on Friday - Mad Rollin' Dolls Season Pass
Grand Prize: Best costume on Saturday - Madison Mallards Duck Blind Party for Eight

Sexiest Friday - $15 A Women's Touch
Sexiest Saturday - $15 A Women's Touch

Best Couple/Group Friday - Eight Mallards Game Tickets good for any game
Best Couple/Group Saturday - Eight Mallards Game Tickets good for any game

Geekiest Friday - $20 Food Fight Gift Card
Geekiest Saturday - $20 Food Fight Gift Card

Best Look-A-Like - $25 Gift Card High Noon and t-shirt
Best Look-A-Like - Four Mallards Game Tickets good for any game

NIGHT OF THE DEAD
And then, there's the Night of the Dead . . .

Read more!

Illegal Meeting Regarding The Future of the Downtown Alcohol Density Plan?

So intrigued by a very, very vague agenda, I attended the meeting. It just got more and more confusing as the meeting went on and got even worse after the meeting when Verveer explained what was really going on . . . the more I asked, the worse it got . . . i.e. lots of [BK comments sprinkled throughout] and a little rant at the end.

I thought I was going to a meeting of the "Alcohol License Review Subcommittee on Downtown Alcohol Issues and Ordinances".

I thought the most obnoxious part of it was the vague agenda that read:

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
1. Discussion of 2009 annual review of density plan
2. Downtown Ordinances
3. Downtown Alcohol Issues
ADJOURNMENT

I should note, the agenda included a typical disclaimer of "A possible quorum of the Alcohol License Review Committee may be in attendance."

It also noted that the contact information for the meeting was listed as "Contact Katherine Plominski in the Mayor’s Office at (608) 266-4611."

This will all become important as the meeting unfolds. So here it is!

The meeting starts off with Katherine Plominski (City's Alcohol Coordinator - non-voting member of the ALRC) announcing she is chairing the meeting [Red flag number one: Why is the Mayor's staff chairing a committee? Alders can't and while the ordinance doesn't say that the Mayor's staff can't, it seems equally inappropriate. We have a strong policy position of having our residents of the city who volunteer on these committees, chair these committees.] She asks the people in the room to introduce themselves, including the non-registered people sitting in the audience. [Red flag #2: She starts with me and says "Brenda introduced yourself" and I was kind of taken aback as I'm not supposed to address city committees for a year after I'm off the council - at least not representing anyone for pay or volunteer. Because I'm involved in so many groups, its hard for me to talk without being accused of representing someone. So I have refrained from doing so. So I just laughed and said "Hi, I'm Brenda". At the time, I didn't understand why she was asking us to introduce ourselves and had I known, I would have explained that I was just an observer.]

The people sitting at the table and the audience introduce themselves. [There are 13 people in the room not sitting at the table and then several people sitting at the table who I assumed were the committee members so I only wrote down their names as we went around the room.] Sitting at the table were at the beginning of the meeting were:
Marsh Shapiro - a non-voting member of the ALRC and he takes the time to note that he is the Tavern League representative and he hopes no one mixes that up.
[You know what dude, either you believe in what you're saying and stand behind it, or you don't and you should resign. You're representing a group and you need to take responsibility for that. You can't escape responsibility for the positions you take by blaming it on the group you represent.]
Dawn Crim - Non-voting member of the ALRC
Mark Woulf - Non-voting member of the ALRC
Mary Carbine - Staff/lobbyist for Downtown Business Improvement District (BID)
Susan Schmitz - Staff/lobbyist for Downtown Madison Inc.
Dan Cornelius - Also on the BID Board
Rick Petri - Says he's representing the BID Board - also former city attorney turned lobbyist for the alcohol industry
Pam Dean - The only actual member of the ALRC in the room.

[Red flag #3. I couldn't figure out, at the time, why the committee was so unbalanced. It seemed odd, but more and more we see committees dominated by business interests, so I wasn't too surprised, tho disturbed. I'm sorry I didn't write down who else was in the room, but Hawk (owner of Hawks on State St., probably obvious), Curt Brink (perhaps equally obvious, owner of the Brink on E Wash.), Ron -oh shit, how do you spell his name - Trachtenberg (one of the two biggest lobbyists for the alcohol industry claiming not to be representing anyone at the meeting and loudly announcing that after the meeting, for my benefit - or perhaps, actually the benefit of my readers.) and Mary Schauf (Central District Police Captain) actively participated in the meeting. Red flag #4: Why were these non-members participating so freely - there never was an explanation of how the meeting was going to work and I thought they were just using an open public format as we did in the TIF and other committees.]

THE REPORT
Plominski starts out by reviewing the draft of the Annual Review of the Alcohol Beverage License Density Plan. [There are, of course, not enough copies. Someone gets some additional copies made after a little confusion.]

Plominski sort of goes through the sections, reading headers for each area but noting that in #3 they went back and some of the info is modified from past reports, it is now even more accurate. Additionally, they added data from 2006. They also separated calls for service for Mifflin St. Blockparty and Halloween and she notes they make up a very small number of calls. No significant shift in those events. She notes that #4 will have more maps this year. She notes that the houseparty data doesn't support all the discussion about increased bar raids and house party raids, the data is actually down from last year.

Bean asks what the reference to "INSECT" means. [That made me giggle, totally reasonable question! Lady bugs? Butterflies? Spiders?] Plominski says it refers to police sectors. [I believe it is supposed to say "In Sector" or something, but its clearly a draft.]

Plominski says that the specific requirements of the report are listed in the ordinance.

Petri says that it would have been nice to have the 6 page document to review prior to the meeting. Plominski says it is fresh off the press in the last few hours.

Hawk asks why in 2006 the total calls is lower and the numbers go up in 2007 and 2008 after the ordinance is enacted. Plominski says that the population has actually grown in that time and she'd like to get the population increase in the report.

Bean asks if there more awareness. Plominski points out category 28 is liquor license violations and that could be a result of more aggressive enforcement.

Carbine says on page 2 & 3 the report would be easier to understand if you explained the numbers in the chart not after in the notes. She also wants to know what the overall citywide crime comparative is for that period. Plominski asks Schauf to address that, she says she'd like to review the data and get additional information. Plominski asks for Schauf's response to be mailed to her in the next two weeks.

Bean asks why liquor law violations decrease in 2008 and 2009. They note this is full year data as the Ordinance went into effect in October. Why numbers have been reduced in 28 to almost half? Schauf speculated that is might have to do with Mifflin and Halloween violations being removed, but needs to study the data before she comments further. Plominski explains that before Schuaf got there she had told the group that those were actually very few of the violations. Schuaf says she'd need to review the report. Plominski says she'd like to hear Shauf's thoughts once she has time to review the data.

Cornelius notes that the ALDP (alcohol license density plan) was supposed to limit the number of licenses. He asks what is the correlation between drop in crime an number of licenses. Plominski says that will be added later, but won't get to the impact of the ALDP.

Hawk asks about awareness and enforcement and how that could have impacted the data. He notes they don't need an ALDP to do the awareness and enforcement.

Carbine asks if the geographic limits of the ALDP corresponds with police sectors. Plominski says no, its essentially Blair to Park St and lake to lake.

Carbine asks how the data relates to property assessment and asks if they will do that mapping. She says the BID has suggested ways to measure the long term economic impact of the area. She says they should also look at sales tax data in that area. She says that their board had responded to the preliminary presentation on the plan that they got, so they made suggestions about the report. [Hmmmm . . . I thought it was hot off the presses, what kind of a briefing did they get on the report? And when?] She says the BID board would like to see the ordinance amended and she lists things they think should be in the report.
- Compare crime in the density zone to the overall crime in the city.
- They should compare look at the capacity in the bars downtown not number of licenses. She seems to be saying that the larger the capacity of the bar the more problems. Plominski says they can map that.
- They should look at the sales tax data or economic value of assessment of the properties in the area.
- There were concerns about why house party violations were included. Plominski says she went back and made sure that the house party data was not included.
- They wanted football game related tickers separated like Halloween and Mifflin St. Block Party.

Plominski asks what sales tax records are public records.

Shapiro says that tax is built into the alcohol, and with the food ticket it is tacked on. Not sure how you can get the true figure but it all has to be submitted to the state.

Hawk says technically every month you do sales tax, but hard to figure that out - accountant figures out food and drink at the end of the year.

Carbine says ok to have alcohol and food sales data combined reviewed.

Plominski asks if they can get that data.

Brink says no.

Trachtenberg [shit, I hope I spelled that right! It's funny, of all the people's names I've spelled wrong - and I'm sorry to all those who I have, just let me know how to spell it and I'll try to get it right - only Wiggie - not Wiggy - and Ronald were offended and obnoxious about it.]) says amount paid is public but the return is not, but he can explain it to Plominski tomorrow after he goes home and talks to his wife who works for the state.

Carbine asks Trachtenberg if there is a number for an area as opposed to looking at each business. He says he'll call his wife and ask.

Carbine asks if they can get revenue for a certain type of business in the area. Trachtenberg says he'll ask his wife.

Shapiro asks why that data is relevant?

Petri says the economic impact of the plan was supposed to be measured and they are grasping at straws to find a way to measure that. He says development might be impacted adversely in the area as an example. He says the rental value of vacant spaces could be driven down.

Bean says that they need comparative data from before and after the ordinance was passed.

Petri says that there is a problem with economic data as you can't get the causality you have to make some assumptions and conclusions about what the data means.

Bean says alcohol sales revenue and crime correlations will tell us something. If there are more sales and more crime that means something. But, what are you getting at with the question. Do you want to know the economic impact as it relates to crime? Someone says no, they just want generic information.

Hawk says more alcohol, more crime is what proponents claim. There is a possibility that it has an adverse economic impact. A good restaurant owner isn't going to take the chance of losing their liquor licenses if have 40% sales of food, not 50%.

Cornelius says that there are lots of variables, but you could take one area that would have developed before the density plan.

Carbine says an analysis of the economic impact is required in the ordinance, you have to measure something. Vacancy rate and business mix would be one way, but the BID isn't like a mall where you have to report your sales to the owner. She says in other states, BIDs can have tax status. They don't have the means to track it.

Shapiro points out that malls get a percentage of the sales in their rent.

Brink asks for map of sectors. Brink says that alcohol is regulated more than any other business in the city. Your liquor bills have to be paid and your sales tax has to be paid or you lose your license. He says if you look at sales tax records you need to look at all the businesses on State St. He says it creates a competitive disadvantage if you ask for information others don't have to provide.

Crim says the city should determine the analysis.

They ask the what the intent of the council was. Plominski says two alders added this report in at the last minute. They ask me if I did it. I just shrugged. I didn't think so but honestly didn't remember and shouldn't be addressing a committee about something I had control over . . . and I voted on this ordinance. I had to check the amendment and saw it was Solomon and so then I had to check the the minutes (page 6) to find out who the second alder was. It was a meeting that went til 3:30 am and I had just gotten back from Austin City limits and everything was kind of a blur by that point. I may have helped Solomon, who sat behind me and we often collaborated, draft that, but I'm not sure.]

Here's what the minutes said for those who are too last to click on the link:

A motion was made by Ald. Solomon, seconded by Ald. Webber, to Adopt the following amendment : add the following sentence to 10: "This annual review will be due November 1st of each year and include the following: 1) The number of license applications for each license type filed with the City Clerk for establishments both within the density plan area & the areas immediately adjacent. 2) The number of license applications for each license type granted by the Common Council for establishments both within the density plan area & the areas immediately adjacent. 3) The frequency of alcohol related crime & disorder, both within the density plan area and in the areas immediately adjacent. 4) The correlation between alcohol license density and the occurence of alcohol related crime & disorder. 5) An analysis of the economic impact of the ordinance over the previous year. 6) An analysis of the campus house party situation including, but not limited to the number of house parties broken up by the police & number of sexual assaults reported and number of violent crimes reported." The motion passed by acclamation.

A motion was made by Ald. Solomon, seconded by Ald. Konkel, to Adopt the following amendment : change the sunset date in 11. from four (4) years to three (3) years. The motion passed by acclamation.

A motion was made by Ald. Konkel, seconded by Ald. Sanborn, to Adopt the following amendment : strike "c. Exceptional Circumstance. ii. An establishment providing live music in a tavern environment is not considered an exceptional circumstance."

The motion passed by acclamation.

[Shit, I thought I voted against it, but without a roll call that doesn't get recorded and even when you asked to be noted as voting no, it doesn't always end up in the minutes and since the minutes aren't approved by the council, there is no way to get a chance to review them and make corrections.]

Plominski says she asked the assessor for information but wasn't sure she could get what they wanted.

Crim says that this report shouldn't be so difficult to compile that they can't get it done.

THE FUTURE OF THE ORDINANCE
Plominski says they need to talk about the future of the ordinance including needed adjustments, sunset and repeal. They need to decide if they want to modify it or just have it go away. She,of course, wants to start with possible adjustments. No one says anything, so she says that she gets a lot of calls about "one in, one out". She says when one bar leaves, the new bars don't necessarily want to go into the same space and they might have found better space elsewhere.

Shapiro says that the intent was to try to let the alcohol licenses go in and out by attrition.

Crim said the intent was also to free up licenses to be available throughout the city and not have such a density and to try to get more retail downtown. Crim says ongoing concern was that it was to impact capacity and density - can't just look at type of license.

Carbine says they know a lot about the business mix and how hard it is to rent in the area. After investing in a build out, to abandon that for another style of business creates a problem. The time period that is put in there of one year is important- it can take years to find an appropriate tenant with appropriate credit to make it work for them. One year turn over not unusual. You can wish more retail will come in, but not reality of economy and retail. The internet is the competition and not how it works any more. Don't have population and income density to attract large retailers that can fill the spaces. Overall trend in the area is a slight decrease in retail and increase in food and drink. Limiting bars will not necessarily create more retail.

Plominski asks if BID is or is not supportive of one in, one out. She says they misunderstood what she meant. Would they support allowing more than a year? No, not in the same space is the issue.

Shaipro asks what you say to them when they call. She says they can't do that. They don't want to go into the same space.

Carbine says they'll ask the board what their position is on that. She thinks board would be supportive.

Hawk says Ramshead has been a bar forever, to think that something else will go in there is not realistic. Pub or Mondays the same is true, if there the bar was there more than 10 years it will likely be a bar unless an Old Navy type business goes in. Nitty Gritty has been a bar forever so not feasible to think something else will go in there. Ramshead is just going to sit there, still 70% liquor and still a bar. No natural attrition - its just going to be a bar.

Shapiro says he thought anything that goes in there would have to be 50% food, Plominski says no.

Bean says she thought they were here today to talk about changes to the ordinance.

I missed a little bit here.

Petri says "one in and one out" is a good modification, but he says he wants to ask what kind of a downtown do we want. Downtowns by their nature are different, until the culture changes, food and drink will be an integral part to what makes it a downtown - supports investments we have made. Meeting place to socialize, including food and drink.

Shapiro says don't forget about University.

Plominski says that he's talking about the big picture and changing the culture but we need to talk about specific changes to the ordinance. Petri presses on, he says pressure from neighborhood association who have concerns is what started this, but in reaction to that is satisfied by letting the ALRC and Council exercise disrection.

Plomisnki tries to cut him off, he preses on. She says he is on category 3, repeal. She is looking for specific adjustements now.

Plominski talkes about the bowling alley exception they passed, if they have 33% alcohol.

Shapiro says never heard it. Plominski says passed. Members says they referred it and it didn't pass.

Hawk says that numbers are arbitrary. Arbitrary numbers just means they sell more "t-shirts". Numbers are arbitrary and not reducing crime.

Plominski asks if the police have any recommendations for adjustments, it seems to be working for them. Shauf doesn't immediately say anything. Plominski says taht the restaurants that are bars at night are a problem for officers she talks to. Schauf says that the police department supported it and that it gets to some of the goals, very interested in the discussions, some positives, but not ready to weigh in. She says that alot depends upon the owner.

Plominiski says that most corporate chain restaurants are 80% food.

Hawk says good if you want chains downtown.

Carbine says these are independent bars in small spaces and that isn't a good index - it won't be appropriate for comparison. Carbine is in favor of repeal but in favor of adjustments to allow more innovative entertainment opportunties. She says they can't be more specific until someone proposes it - ex bowling - the market is innovative. Downtown should be the center of innovation. One exception, but what if a bowling concept is 40%.

Plominski says that what she is hearing is that the section should be more flexible and deliberately vague, open to discretion.

Woulf says that one of the general ideas was to reduce alcohol related crimes, so that is why are campus house parties and citations in there. Says if look at overall crimes and take out Halloween and Mifflin have to take out house parties.

Shapiro agrees it is skewed.

Bean says the numbers should still be included.

Plominski says she will try to go through them individually to make sure the data is clear.

Verveer has entered the building. That makes two ALRC members in the room. Plominski explains what they are discussing to Verveer.

Petri suggest expanding the 365 requirement.

Schmitz says Crim talked about the goals of the ordinance and reducing capacity/density. So reducing the number of people in the downtown, the number late at night, this is where the this conflicts with the work of the DHC (Downtown Hospitality Committee). She says we need more people downtown to have a healthy vital nighttime community doing all kinds of things, not just verical drinking.

Plominski says to look at the drafters analysis of the plan, but can't speak for Crim.

Petri says that he thinks that if there is a 10,000 capacity, they want to reduce it to 9,000 or 8,000 in all establishments with any kind of alcohol license.

Schmitz says they wouldn't support that. She says they are looking at it being so strict that they are not allowing the basic market actions to take place. Should be open enough that someone with a good business plan will come to Madison.

Kathryn says economy is poor and they want to expand the 365 restriction. She says other density plans have 500 feet requirement.

Shapiro says that was part of the original discussion. They also looked a having capacity requirements within the block, feet restrictions and alot of other variables.

Tractenberg says he lives on far west side, comes downtown to eat and drink and go for a walk. Need to look at streets by zones, are you in the middle of a neighborhood or on a commercial streets, there should be more density there. Lower the number of licensed establishments and that is contrary to what we want. Not just economy, Anthropology would have been good for state st, they went to Hilldale. That is what belongs down here. When talk about density need to look at the neighborhood. Retail trade is not just he economy but trend since 1950.

Woulf says that a feet proximity, the geography of the area prohibits it. It would bump people outside the area.

Trachtenberg says when he was an alder the approved 5 new licenses one night, Delanies complained and asked where it will stop. Trachtenberg says natural economics dictate that you will reach a point where no one else will come in due to the economic factors.

Shapiro says that the pie is the same size, the slices just get smaller, when have more coming in, then everyone is fighting for survival, deeper cuts on food and alcohol (discounting) which is what they didn't want. He brings up the price fixing lawsuit - wants to encourage businesses - we won't have all bars on both sides of the street, says they wouldn't survive.

Plominski says that is contested.

Hawk says that the well run ones will survive. If city of Madison would have done what they did this year earlier we would have been better off. He says he got raided for their first time in 7 years. They are trying to attract people to live downtown yet make capacity less - those two things are against each other. More crimes happen when people are crushed into bars - adding capacity to prevent fights would make sense. From his own personal business perspective, it makes no sense to get rid of the ALDP because his bar became worth more money when it passed, but he's against it for the betterment of the downtown. He says we will attract more young professionals, you can't keep taking away places and expect young professionals to stay here. Enforcement was what was needed. Bust me and everyone else, we deserve to get busted but that is how you separate the place that is run well and those that are not. That will cause the natural attrition. Ramshead couldn't survive if didn't have underagers in the bar. Ticket me if I have problems, ok, that is how natural attrition happens. He says they don't say that I can't have a jean store next to jean store.

Plominski says alcohol is regulated, there is a 3 tier system, so not same commodity as jeans. Many places don't allow free market to control the system.

Cornelius says this ordinance was set up to stabilize the situation. He says they needed enforcement and patrolling the side streets, but also remembers that Verveer said that we didn't want State Street to turn into Bourbon St. That resonated with alot of people, this isn't just about State St - this is Blair to Park and that is different. If you want to redevelop areas, you can't have the same standards.

Plominski says she hears that they should decrease the boundaries.

Trachtenberg says to zone it, different rules in different zones.

Shapiro says already zoned. There are certain areas you can't have commercial in residential.

Trachtenberg says different rules for different areas not just different zoning requirements.

Brink says that density plan has prevented certain areas from developing and caused them to be blank. When did tour of downtown, if look on the street where the Ivory is, you would have several other music places there. If 1500 - 2000 sq foot place won't try to meet food requirements. Frequency can't expand capacity because not 50% food.

Plominski says that is a bathroom issue.

Brink says 701 E Washingtong (Brass Ring, High Noon and Brink) would not be allowed one block to the west. Brink says used to be $30 tickets for parking on the street cuz workers were afraid, now it is different. Extra capacity could make a difference. To bring adults 25+. No way to get people to invest.

Plominski asks about repeal or sunset.

Hawk says that ALRC always had the power to deny a liquor license. They wouldn't allow a hip hop club. This is the exceptional role, that is what ALRC could already do.

Plominski agrees discretion has always been there. Legal was involved and supported the density plan cuz not individuals who could allege discrimination were a concern and this way everyone is equal.

Hawk says that ALRC as a body didn't have the guidelines and just decided on their gut. Don't want to open up to lawsuits, but ALRC has to have standards that they apply equally. He says he got favoritism, he got to stay open an extra hour because of a connection there. Those were the Tim Bruer days and he benefitted from things being unequal. The same night his license was approved, another guy had to close at midnight. He notes that its a good think he banks at Park Bank because that is how he got his exception. He says they should look at the business plan and decide if there is no way it is going to be a bona fide restaurant.

Bean asks why she is hearing two different things, hearing no one will come downtown and start a business and also that everyone want to come here.

They says there are people out there who don't know what they are doing. Bad operator will say yes to anything, a good operator will look at it and say that is not going to happen.

Trachtenberg says that most small businesses fail in first year or two, liquor or not. He talks about a small business that failed that everyone thought would fail. Says liquor licenses is a legislative act, council makes decision and courts won't double guess the legislature. They talk about a court case in Milwaukee where a black bar owner went to court. He says council can do what they want.

Plominski says R Place on Park also filed a suit. She says of criteria we could elimiate some of that potential.

Carbine says we need metrics beyond criteria, not legislative policy.

Verveer gets in the last work and says he is surprised by the turn out and hopes it is the beginning of the discussion. He glad to see the dialog between the Downtown Hospitality Council and downtown bar owners and ALRC. After the DHC presentation, hopes this new subcommittee - despite his tardiness - hopes and expects good things out of the subcommittee. He says this likely won't be a debate about whether or not to kill ALDO a year early, but his concern is that commercial brokers and landlords are concerned that the current ordinance does not allow them to open a business that he feels will be unique. Not a tavern, but different twists and angles - bowling is latest example. He says he convinced Schumacher to amend ALDO for the first time. He says the numbers in the ordinance might not be right and he found a location where he can open, hope to unanimously grant the license, so hopes the annual review and look specifically at ALDO in the last year - doesn't see political support to repeal if sunset in a year. More constructive to amend it in its last year on the books. Don't want to throw cold water on the unique businesses. Other examples was live music venue, gourmet grocery and tavern, brew and view. Hopes that subcommittee can meet on a regular basis. And go through the ordinance line by line and hear from the industry. Where in ALDO is a reason why you can't open a business. Wants Petri and Trachtenberg to help them with that.

Plominski is getting nervous and cutting people off so she can leave for some meeting. She says we need to have the room locked by 5:30 [Seriously? Why? That just sounds like bullshit.]

There was only one voting member of ALRC for most of the meeting until Verveer got there. So they were concerned about that. They say the next meeting might not be until December.

Bean says if they can be flexible, they will be solving alot of the things we discussed today.

OK, NOW, MY RANT
After the meeting, I ask Verveer who is on the committee and kicks off a discussion, interrupted as Plominski is kicking us out of the room, that goes something like this.

Konkel: Who's on this committee?

Verveer: We don't appoint member of the committee, we just notice the meeting and whoever can show up does.

Konkel: How do you know if there is quorum?

Verveer: He smiles. Tells me to ask Plominski.

Konkel: I ask again.

Verveer: The city attorney's office said it was ok.

Konkel: Seriously? No way, this isn't legal. How can you do this.

Verveer: Still smiling . . .Catherine, come here and talk to Brenda, tell her how we can notice the meeting.

Plominski: She explains what they do, but not how it is legal.

Konkel to Verveer: No wonder this committee seemed so lopsided. I was wondering why they didn't just vote to repeal and get it over with. Who supports this ordinance staying in place.

Verveer: Mostly no one that was at the meeting.

Konkel: I'm still blown away, I thought the agenda was awful cuz I didn't know what the meeting was, but I didn't realize it was that bad. How'd all those people know what was going to be talked about at the meeting and who decided who sat at the table.

Verveer: This was a joint meeting between the Downtown Hospitality Council and the ALRC.

Konkel: What? That isn't what was noticed.

Verveer: More smiling.

Konkel: Gives shit to Verveer for allowing this to happen this way and grumbles that this is now going to be a very long blog post.

How in the hell can what they are doing be legal?

p.s. In case it wasn't clear, Verveer was smiling because he was looking forward to reading my blog! :)
Read more!

Another Round Up

Panhandlers box, Madison's Cultural Plan, Sheriff's Overtime (doubled what has been budgeted for years), Future Cities, Nancy Mistele screams at County Board Supervisors, Bus Pass program for small employers, Edgewater coverage & Friday Night plus a couple extra things thrown in there.

LITTLE GREEN SQUARE
So, I found it interesting that this morning, as I was watching channel three they showed the little fluorescent green box where panhandlers are now allowed to ask for money by Peace Park. It appears to be about 3 x 4 or so. Don't hold me to that tho, cuz I am a horrible judge of distance. It is clear that only one person can stand there. What I found appalling, was the statement to the effect that "News 3 has confirmed that the police department plans to move garbage cans into that space to prevent further panhandling." Makes me think, I'd love to know the story behind that new ATM there that created these changes, did the police encourage that as well. And how demeaning to make someone stand in that little box - maybe that was why the police painted it there?

MADISON'S CULTURAL PLAN
An Important Opportunity for Individuals and Neighborhoods to Participate in the Madison Cultural Plan

The Madison Cultural Plan is launching a Toolkit designed to allow interested citizens to contribute ideas and information.

The Toolkit will be previewed in a hands-on workshop at the 2009 Mayor's Neighborhood Roundtable, an annual convening hosted by the Mayor to connect neighborhood activists with current city issues, projects, and resources. At the workshop, neighborhood residents will learn what the cultural plan can mean at the neighborhood level and how to use the Toolkit to host discussion groups and submit opinions and ideas from those groups directly to the planning team.

Since arts and cultural activity at the neighborhood level is a critical and often ignored part of any city's creative environment, it's important to make sure your neighborhood is included. In addition, the Toolkit can be used in other settings such as businesses, faith community organizations, professional associations, schools, or even among friends-where ever a small group of interested citizens can be gathered.

Please come, and ask you neighborhood association to attend the workshop as well. Bring others who are interested in the Madison's arts, cultural, and creative issues. We need your support to make sure every city neighborhood has an opportunity to be heard.

Details about the Neighborhood Roundtable can be found here and you can register there. The Roundtable is a free event.

AND I THOUGHT THE MADISON POLICE SUCKED AT BUDGETING
Check out how the sheriff's department over-spends consistently every year. Why bother budgeting for overtime if you're going to just ignore it and double (or more) your spending every year, to the tune of $7M over spent in the last few years. I understand extraordinary circumstances and one time issues, but this is a clear pattern of complete disregard for the budget process. The numbers below are the budgeted numbers, the amount they went over and the difference between the two.

2008
1,225,377
3,182,944
(1,957,567)

2007
1,210,112
3,294,344
(2,084,232)

2006
1,254,911
3,065,463
(1,810,552)

2005
1,113,810
2,789,333
(1,675,523)

Total
11,672,496
24,596,250
(7,558,510)

FUTURE CITIES
You might be interested in this . . .

Future Cities 2009 will help you to strengthen and practice democracy at the local level to move our society toward a greener, more peaceful future. If you want to learn more about making the shift from carbon and nuclear energy sources to renewables and conservation, from war spending to a peace economy, from sprawl to greener transportation and development practices, from nuclear proliferation to global elimination of nuclear weapons . . . then Future Cities 2009 is for you!

Future Cities 2009 will take place November 5-8th, 2009, at the Wisconsin State Capitol building and at the Inn on the Park hotel in Madison. To register and for more info, see www.FutureCities2009.org

This will be a participatory conference. Numerous workshops will help you explore how to make a positive change with initiatives ranging from climate-friendly transportation policies, to participatory green planning and budgeting, to working through your city for the abolition of nuclear weapons.

Panel discussions will feature local, national, and international experts on climate protection, nuclear power and weapons, and sustainable cities; the positive role cities are playing in these areas and what more can be done; and empowerment of citizens at the local level. A special panel will feature mayors and cities who are making a difference. For a full list of panelists and workshop leaders, click here.

Future Cities 2009 is inspired by the active role cities have assumed in nuclear abolition and climate protection initiatives, and by the growing global movement for local democracy. For more, click here.

IS THIS THE WAY TO MAKE YOUR POINT
An email from Nancy Mistele to County Board Supervisors is a great way not to make your point:

County Board Supervisors, I am unable to attend the hearing tonight about the authorization of the RTA but wish to add my voice to the large numbers you are likely to hear from tonight.

I DO NOT SUPPORT THE AUTHORIZATION BEFORE YOU TODAY AND ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO LOOK YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR, GET SOME COURAGE AND JUST SAY NO! YOU SHOULD BE (AND I AM) COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO A NON-ELECTED BODY IMPOSING TAXATION ON THE CITIZENS OF THIS COUNTY OR ANY IN THE STATE FOR THAT MATTER.

FURTHERMORE, YOU ARE ABOUT TO CREATE A TAXING BODY THAT WILL PROVIDE NO REPRESENTATION FOR THE TOWNS OF DANE COUNTY. IF YOU CREATE THIS BOARD AND BY DEFAULT TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION, AND THINK YOU CAN PASS THE BUCK TO THEM YOU ARE MISTAKEN.

It goes on, but I doubt many read past this point . . . she might want to bone up on email etiquette.

CITY SHELLS OUT MILLIONS IN TIF
This isn't Madison, but it sounds like it. Looks like their priorities are as misplaced as ours.

SMALL EMPLOYERS CAN GET BIG EMPLOYER BUS PASS DISCOUNTS

Coming in 2010

Metro plans to expand its unlimited ride pass program to smaller businesses, non-profit groups, schools, and college/tech-school campuses.

This program is currently being organized and expected to be available at the beginning of 2010.

If you or your businesses would like to be contacted about this program once it is underway, contact the Metro customer service center at (608) 266-4466 or mymetrobus@cityofmadison.com.

For more information on the existing pass program, visit here.

WHO NOTICES IF A BUILDING IS 8 OR 11 STORIES
Seriously, does it matter. Once its over 3 to 6 stories, it kind of just becomes a very tall building, doesn't it? Plus, I've never thought we should measure buildings in stories, instead, we should look at height measured in feet. Just saying.

OH, WAS I TALKING ABOUT THE EDGEWATER?
Maybe. :) What I find interesting is the difference between the Isthmus coverage and the Wisconsin State Journal coverage. In one, it says:

As a sign of how quickly Hammes needs to move, the company wants to take the new project designs, located in city and national historic districts, to the city Plan Commission Nov. 2, and to the Urban Design Commission Nov. 4.

The response of Ald. Mike Verveer is a loud, "What?" As of early Wednesday, neither he nor Ald. Bridget Maniaci had seen details of the new designs. And he wishes there had been more opportunities for public engagement.

In another:

Alds. Bridget Maniaci and Mike Verveer, who represent the area, said Dunn has responded to concerns in good faith and produced a strong proposal.

I bet you don't need to click on the links to figure out which is which.

I'll wait to see more details of the plan to decide if I think the changes are significant enough or not. It looks like next week will be filled with opportunities since they seem to be planning to be at Plan Commission Monday, Urban Design Wednesday and they have a public meeting planned at some time, some where for Thursday.

SPEAKING OF FUNNY COVERAGE . . .
They Mayor cuts the ice rinks, the public responds with its displeasure and suddenly, according to this article headline, he's the hero who vows to save the ice rinks . . . from . . . himself. To the Mayor's credit, he sheepishly admitted that council leadership warned him this was a bad idea, and he went forward anyways.

IT'S BUDGET TIME, PERHAPS SOMEONE SHOULD CUT THIS
I wonder how much we are paying for this? Do we really need it?

Madison Parks Hayrides noon – 5 pm:
Madison Parks Trick or Treat Hay Rides on the Capitol Square
Friday, October 30, noon -5 pm
Hay rides around the Capitol Square, pulled by tractor, leaving approx. every 20 minutes.
$2.00/person, no reservations required.
Call (608) 266-4711 or see www.cityofmadison.com/parks/hayrides.html for more information.

HOPE TO SEE YOU FRIDAY
Busy, busy, busy, I want to be in all these places . . .
Tenant Resource Center Fundraiser 5 - 7 at the Brink Lounge.
Dane 101's Freakin' Halloweekend 8 - bar time at the High Noon.
Soul Shaker at the Brink 9 - bartime, Brink Lounge
Night of the Dead 9 - bar time? at the Barrymore.
More details here.
Read more!

UDC Makes Zoning Fun and Interesting!

Ok - that might be a bit of an exaggeration, but . . . they did point out several items of interest and made me realize just how much has changed in the zoning code . . . or could. I have to admit that even I find the thought of reading the zoning code a real snooze and I haven't done it. I can't imagine doing it. I've heard that essentially the code is just being written into a different form and not alot has changed except trying to make more things permitted uses, but I think the Urban Design Commission brought up issues that might be of interest to many. They only reviewed the portion of the code that pertains to them, and didn't finish, but here's a start of their list of questions, concerns and tidbits of information I learned at the meeting.

- The ordinance was introduced at the last council meeting and it will be officially referred to the Urban Design Commission.

- They sent subsections related to UDC and a link to the entire ordinance which is 240 pages long. Existing ordinance is 320 pages with the index and we don't have downtown districts yet and the index. But they don't care how many pages it is as long as it works. Most people only look at a few pages as a reference. They just want to make it right. 1960's code was 215 pages.

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS - This section replaces the PUD process.
- Wagner asks who makes the decisions about if the project is a "similar pattern of development". Initially the decision will be made by staff and they will go to Plan or Council.

- Wagner asks the UDC will see fewer developments? They say that's the theory, but we'll see. Not sure if the work will be reduced because of other provisions in the code.

- They asks what the concept presentation is (page 91)? Murphy says that downtown design zones are the only ones currently required to do it, but its a good idea and should apply to others, especially if there will be less of them it won't be a big burden. This will be before a formal submittal or a plan has been circulated to all the agencies. It's like the pre-design conference with staff where they can provide comments about what is submitted.

- Wagner notes that 5(a)(2) that commission can ask for additional info but he asks if that is just to the applicant or if it includes staff. Staff agree that this is the time to bring up issues and ask for additional information staff, applicants and consultants. They ask for this to be specifically stated in the ordinance or remove a portion of language that makes it specific to the applicant.

HISTORIC DISTRICTS
- Rummel asks how historic districts fit in to this. That is in another part of the ordinance but they will be overlay districts like an Urban Design District. They may or may not be in a Planned Development District and they might want to require a concept presentation for overlay districts as well. Murphy says he expects that applicants would provide that info, but it doesn't always happen.

INITIAL AND FINAL APPROVAL
- They ask about the initial and final approval process and if that stays the same. Staff say that was never in the code, it is practice or procedure of the Urban Design Commission. They ask for clarification if the new language required final approval before going to Plan Commission. They suggest that they could recommend something with conditions that it returns to UDC. Staff suggests that might go in c(1) and e(1) by saying something to the affect that "some design comments ma;y be subject of further design review."

GENERAL PROCESS ISSUES
- Staff explains there are both design standards and requirements that say Plan Commission may waive the requirement if they find it difficult for the applicant to comply, but they need to get Urban Design review. This is why their workload might increase, but they hope that it is the exception and applicants don't ask for many waivers.

- They discuss if they need to have additional criteria about what would require a concept presentation such a a larger projects. Staff say that they'd have to come up with that criteria to determine which additional projects would require a concept presentation. They debate if that belongs in the code or the procedure manual. Staff say 70 - 80% of the apps they see there is a pre-app. They decide staff should strongly encourage it with applicants.

- They ask how the transition from the old code to the new code will work. Staff say there will be an effective date and they will apply the old code to applications before that date and the new code to applications on or after that date. If their approvals expire, they need to go through the process with the new code.

CAMPUS AND HOSPITALS/LARGE INSTITUTIONS
- Wagner asks about the Campus Institutional District. Staff explain that right now they only have to get approval for zoning changes. Under this, if they have an approved master plan and it is in compliance, we won't see their projects. He notes more decisions will be made at the plan commission level and not go to the whole council. They discuss the legal reasons the UW has different review requirements because they are the state. Right now, most of the institutional uses require a conditional use but don't comply with the bulk standards so end up doing a PUD. They say that they would have to go through a master planning process and get that approval and once they have that, they can develop as long as it is consistent. In the absence of the master plan they will still need to get reviewed. They note this also applies to the large hospitals.

- They ask if Transportation Demand Management (TDM)plans would be put into the Master Plans. They note that this is not specifically in there, but the language allows them to look beyond traditional TDMs.

PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING
- They ask for stronger but realistic requirements for plants that struggle to grow in a parking lot. They want to know what it will look like in 15 years. They suggest that they have special standards for trees that likely won't last more than 15 years in a parking lot. There are only about 30 tree species they use in parking lots and they could put together some guidelines about them.

- They discuss that trees need larger space to grow in parking lots and they seem to think they are doing that for newer parking lots.

- They think they the larger the parking lot, the larger the need for diversity of tree species.

- There is discussion about parking lot lighting not interfering with trees and finding ways to have smaller islands for lights that are not in the tree islands.

- They note that the reason the trees don't do well is that they have small planing pods and they need 4 feet of dirt not gravel.

- They discuss not prescribing the number of bushes to plant because they grow to different widths, they should say continuous plantings or recommend a percentage of coverage instead.

- Grasses will count as plantings in the new code, but not perennials.

- They discuss the need to have a good review of pedestrian movements in parking lots. They suggest having a pedestrian walkway every 50 - 75 feet and they discuss many complications with that concept and suggest they do a pedestrian circulation plan. They note that there might need to be more work in chapter 10.

- They discuss the need to break up parking lots and that there should be a break every 12 spaces. They discuss various ways to give trees more room to grow properly.

- They discuss the lack of enforcement of zoning in parking lots and note that the staff only reviews it if there is a complaint.

- They discuss having the requirement to place trees be by the next growing period instead of allowing them a whole year.

- They discuss how current violators are dealt with. They explain most of it is up to the court, but they try to work it out ahead of time. They typically give thema high/low choice and if they fix the problem by a certain date, they get the lower fine. If not acceptable, they go to prosecution.

MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM PARKING
- They have minimum and maximum requirements for bikes and cars but not mopeds.

- They'd like to see more waivers for parking along transit corridors and change it from 25% to 50% reductions. They should also add reductions for TDM plans and shared parking or shared cars.

- They note that they don't want to allow them to reduce bike parking, only car parking.

- Staff say there is a memo and more work to be done on the bike issues.

- They throw out the idea for downtown areas to pay a fee in lieu of bike parking to help pay for city bike racks.

HOTEL AND RESIDENTIAL PARKING REQUIREMENTS
- They discuss changing the maximum parking requirement from 2 spaces per room to 1.5 spaces per room but allowing waivers from the plan commission if they need more for convention centers.

- They question why someone would need 4 parking spaces outside of the garage for a single family home.

- They ask why there is only one standard of 2.5 maximum spaces for multi-family buildings (3 units and up) and why they don't have different requirements for larger buildings. They also note that they don't treat a building of efficiencies different than a building with 4 bedrooms.

- They discuss when to count storage lockers as bike parking. They note that they can't say that is where the bikes have to be parked.

- They discuss what counts as an outdoor parking space. They discuss wood chips, grass, impervious surfaces, gravel, pavers, landscaping stone and don't come up with any real answers.

BUS STOPS
- Are covered in conditional use standards in big parking lots. Bus stops in the right of way are not in the zoning code.

BUILDING STANDARDS
- There are some who don't like the requirement to have a certain rhythm to the architecture like in the big box ordinance.

- There is some concern about restrictions on types of materials.

- And with that, the two hours were up and they adjourn with another meeting in another month to discuss further issues. Read more!

What Are You Doing Friday Night?

Personally, I'd like to split myself in three to be at three places at once!

First of all, I know I will be here!

The Brink Lounge (701 E Washington)
5:00 - 7:00
Tenant Resource Center Fall Fundraiser!
Free Food, Cash Bar, Silent Auction, Good Friends, and A Good Cause.
Donate what you can at the door, suggested donation $25, but give as you can in these economic times!

After that, it gets a little hairy . . .
I'm definitely stopping by here to support my Dane101 Friends!
They're upstairs at the High Noon, so its and easy stop!

Freaking Halloweekend at the High Noon 8:30??
$7 and all these bands!
Gold Rush - John Statz and the Cheap Shots as Neil Young
Bingo Hand Job - Members of Tangy and Digibot as REM
Dead Zeppelin - Members from Helliphant and Falling Upstairs as Led Zeppelin
Lip Service - Sean Michael Dargan and members of The Kissers as Elvis Costello
VO5 - V05 as V05 (disco and funk covers)

Also, downstairs at the Brink Lounge is one of my newer favorite bands

Event: Soul Shaker-Live @The Brink Lounge!
What: Performance
Start Time: Friday, October 30 at 9:00pm
End Time: Saturday, October 31 at 2:00am
Where: 701 E Washington Ave, Madison WI

And of course, by the end of the night, I will definitely be here!!!

Night of the Dead
Barrymore Theatre
2090 Atwood Ave
Madison , WI
(608) 241-8864

with Clovis Mann, Grasshoppers
$10 Advanced, $12 Day of Show

Night of the Dead 2009
Third Annual Halloween concert returns to Barrymore Theatre
The Barrymore Theatre is proud to announce the return of the Night of the Dead Halloween concert and costume party to the historic Madison venue on Friday, October 30th, 2009. This year's line-up includes three Madison area bands: The Grasshoppers, Baghdad SCUBA Review, and Clovis Mann, with all three bands taking on musical "costumes". This year's event is sure to be the best yet.

The inaugural Night of the Dead party was held at the Barrymore on November 2nd, 2007, and featured the now defunct Madison band Run Side Down, and last years headliner, Baghdad SCUBA Review. The show was considered a success selling just over 300 tickets, about one-third of the Barrymore's capacity.

In an attempt to be closer to the UW student body, last years Night of the Dead was moved to the Majestic Theatre, a move which seemed to lessen the awe of seeing three local bands play the Barrymore.

In its third year, this "jamband" showcase is beginning to compete with the other major parties that take place in Madison over the Halloween weekend. Besides the return to the Barrymore, this year's event will include musical "costumes" by each band, meaning that each group will pay tribute to one band, or in the case of Baghdad SCUBA Review's costume, one genre- FUNK. The Grasshoppers will pay tribute to the psychedelic works of Pink Floyd, while blues-rockers Clovis Mann will take you on an epic journey through the Allman Brothers Band catalogue. Tickets for this years event will be $10 in advance and $12 day-of-show, available at all Barrymore ticket outlets.

sans costume . . .
Read more!

This is just a little too convenient . . .

Seriously?

For those of you not following along closely, this was the meeting where they were supposed to discuss 2011 funding priorities and finally, after two failed attempts, show us the money.

Instead, I just got this email . . .

CSC Meeting Cancelled Tonight

Hi Everyone,

The Community Services Committee meeting is cancelled for tonight due to lack of quorum. Details of when it will be rescheduled will follow.

Thank you,
Jennifer Stoiber

Methinks I smell a rat. Read more!

A little late Round Up . . .

I had a little blogging mishap this morning, so . . . this is later than usual (luckily, I have worked lots of extra hours thanks to all these ridiculous early morning and late night meetings with funders) . . . More on the RTA and RTA and RTA, a little WYOU/cable company/WSJ editorial rant, buy a home for $1, the "new" Edgewater that we won't show you yet but is eligible for TIF but don't worry we made all the changes you wanted, what happened to our 400 low-income bus passes that are now only 300 and would have been less?, fall leaves and that was about all I could do cuz my 45 minutes are over and I have to get to work!  More tomorrow.

RTA UPDATE FROM FITCHBURG
Fitchburg Common Council tonight adopted a resolution urging the Dane County Board to establish the Dane County RTA by a margin of 6 to 1. Thursday the signed resolution will be mailed to the Clerk and the Supervisors representing Fitchburg, and e-mailed to all Supervisors. We are counting on our Supervisor Jack Martz to support the RTA for his constituents.

GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY LIES
Wow, this is just wrong. They are reporting the following:

10/27/09 Dane County Personnel and Public Works and Transportaton joint meeting results: It passed. No surprise there.
Public works/Trans cmte: 3-2 YES [Dave Wiganowsky and Jack Martz were the NO votes]
Personnel cmte: 6-2 YES [Ripp and O'Loughlin were the NO votes]

Speaking/voting Yes to establish a RTA: 29 people.
Speaking/Voting NO to establish a RTA: 35 people.
The total public vote was 35 NO, 29 yes.

This means it will go to the full county board Likely R Nov 5th and/or R Nov. 19.

Thanks to all who attended to speak and vote NO.
Please mark your calendars and watch for updates regarding the November vote. We need to make it clear that there is a strong base of opposition!

Um . . . 29 registered in support and 35 registered in opposition. See my theory about who they were here. What they neglect to note is that those who testified were overwhelmingly in support. There were 7 or 8 people against and 32 - 35 in support. (Depends upon who counted! Some simply asked questions and there was one I couldn't tell what they wanted.)

$500,000 FOR THE RTA IN THE COUNTY BUDGET
Wow, I have got the county supervisors attention. They sure are quick to point out if you say something you disagree with or spell their name wrong. I guess they're not used to all this exposure . . . let the sun shine in!!! :)

One supervisor was concerned that I said there wasn't $500,000 in the budget for the RTA. So, I tried to figure out where they think it is. The County Budget really is vague, so I wanted to know where they thought they saw it. Turns out, its on page 798 of the budget and it is labeled something like "Commuter Train Contingency" and it is carry over money from last year or maybe even years previous to that. I tried to look at the budget, but as far as I can tell it's not on-line. It's not here, or here. And here the budget doesn't go up to page 798, it only goes up to 307. So, more than half the budget information is not readily accessible to the public, but I'll try to hunt it down, as I am truly curious.

Upon talking to a supervisor supporting the RTA, they said that isn't what the money is for and it is likely hold over money from Transport 2020 and they'd be willing to take it out of the budget if it will stop the suspicion that it is for the RTA.

I assumed this money can't be for the RTA because it is in the Capital Budget and it would be money for staffing which belongs in the Operating Budget. The supervisor who brought page 798 to my attention says they do that at the county level. Seriously?

PUT US ON TV, WE'RE MORE IMPORTANT
Every month, you pay 63 cents in your cable bill for Public Access, Education and Government television. The city gets about $410,000 of which 2/3 goes to Government television to cover the politician's meetings and the Mayor's show he does. 1/3 ($140,000) goes to the public to fund WYOU. Then, the city adds another $190,000 for their government channel. This year, to show a little tough love to WYOU and make them try harder to find other ways to fund the station, they are taking another $70,000 away from the public and using it keep their faces plastered their faces on TV. I find it interesting no one asked, what is the city doing to raise money to keep City Channel on TV? Apparently, public access can just use the internet, but government has to be on television. Maybe they should just use the internet as well . . . oh, wait, they can't seem to quite figure it out. This looks bad. It looks like a bunch of self serving politicians with double standards. I think both stations are important, but I'm about to ask for my $.63 back. I wonder who gets more viewers beyond the city staff and politicians too lazy to go to the meetings or vacationing in Las Vegas, government channel with long boring meetings, or a station with over 65% local coverage and a wide variety of programming and producers? Ok, done ranting. I just think we're being ripped off.

IN RELATED NEWS - DOES THE WSJ EDITORIAL BOARD READ THEIR OWN PAPER?
First, news with facts:
Price promises of backers of cable bill fall flat Here's a little exerpt:

Nearly two years after an intense lobbying effort helped push the controversial video competition bill through the Legislature, those lower cable prices haven't materialized. A recent study found prices for expanded basic cable increased nearly 28 percent from late 2006 to early 2009. Madison-area provider Charter Communications has said it will raise rates on its lower-tier cable-only customers by $3 in December.

Meanwhile, and editorial on the success!
Cable Competition Paying Off
They must have meant for the cable companies. But at least they are honest when they say that they don't really care about the facts:

A Minnesota study suggesting cable television prices increased by 27.6 percent from December 2006 to February of this year in Wisconsin is hardly relevant.

BUY A HOME FOR $1
Sounds like a deal! You don't need heat or running water, do you?

THE NEW EDGEWATER
Huh? This is just a story with the old picture, spouting the developers talking points, no balancing point of view and no details. Um, its the internet, you can put up a link and make the information available to the public to see. I don't care if the rooms and parking are reduced what about the rest of it? It means nothing without some concept drawings. Again, the public has no info, but decisions at the city have already been made about TIF and the Wisconsin State Journal has information. When's the next public meeting when they will unveil what they have come up with? They could have at least put that little detail in the article. Is it the November 5th time and location to be determined meeting? (Uh, that's about a week away.)

400? 300? INQUIRING MINDS WANT TO KNOW?
When did the promised 400 monthly low-income bus passes get reduced to 300? And why did Metro's original budget reduce it even further? Wasn't that part of the promise when we raised the bus fares?

THOSE FALL LEAVES
I was sitting on my porch this weekend and noting, once again, that is really sucks that our streets don't get swept in my area until May, especially with all the leaves . . .

 

 

You see, the streets department doesn't think the "students" who live here can be bothered to move their cars.  Instead, the landlords don't rake the leaves, they go in the gutters or rot in the streets and up a nasty goo in the spring that washes into the gutters long before they sweep the streets after school is out.  I didn't get to finish explaining that to my friends before they quickly reminded me that it was no longer my problem and I should complain to my alderwoman . . . i.e.  not them.  But it is all of our problem . . .

That's why I was glad to see these on some some neighborhood listserves:
Neighbors, when raking leaves, please consider taking a few extra minutes to rake leaves out of the street and onto the terrace, to help keep leaves and algae-producing nutrients out of the lakes. Every bit helps!

You can read more about the issue and get much more information here .

and

It's that time of year again when we turn our attention to keeping leaves and other yard waste out of the streets. Since 2003, watershed groups, friends groups and the Madison Area Municipal Storm Water Partnership have been working to raise awareness of how leaves in the street contribute to algae blooms by posting yard signs and sharing brochures. The annual campaign has a new look this year, which can be seen at www.myfairlakes.com. Contact your municipality to get your yard sign and brochures or info@myfairlakes.com.

Unfortunately, in my neighborhood, I don't think the landlords are listening. And I should get out there and rake those leaves off the street in front of my house!
Read more!

Spending another evening with the Public Works and Transportation Committee

I went there for the Vehicle Registration Fee discussion . . . but got an extra gem while Supervisors where shifting agendas as they tried to be at several meetings at once . . .

AMENDMENT - BUS SHELTER AT THE AIRPORT
This was taken out of order because Bayrd had to go to another meeting.

She has an amendment for $15,000 to have the Airport pay for a Madison Metro bus stop.

Bayrd says there is a bus stop there. The shelter is only for the hotels, not Madison Metro. The problem is that the shelter is not handicap accessible and the Madison Metro buses can't be there when the hotel shuttles are there. And, Madison Metro can't use a non-accessible bus stop. Metro would like to keep the bus shelter where it is. A shelter can cost $7,000 - 15,000. The $15K is the high end but if it is in that range they can negotiate a price. The expenditures for this would come out of the airport budget. They know about it and they are ok with it. They would like to figure out how to make it work, but they haven't figured it out.

Martz asks why is this the county's responsibility, not the city? Bayrd explains that it is county property and the policy of Metro is that they will provide the buses, not the shelters. Opitz says that is their policy, Middleton has to pay for their shelters.

They ask her about the price.

Wiggie [Note: He was sure to point out to me that I've been spelling his name wrong. Wiggy is someone who lives in Janesville. So noted.]

Wiggie asks it they pay for the Metro service. Bayrd doesn't know but a combination of Veldran, Opitz and Bayrd guess they don't. Veldran says that we couldn't pay for ground transportation from the airport budget when they talked about express busses.

Wiggie asks what the numbers are, how many people are riding the bus. Veldran says they added a second route out there. They both go to the North Transfer point. Veldran says that the importance is the size of the shelter if we want to encourage people to use it, especially because the buses don't come on a regular basis. You will be waiting 20 - 30 minutes.

Bayrd says that they have taken the bus and its never packed and never empty, anecdotally. She notes that she is married to a Madison Metro Planner that was involved with this project and wanted to disclose that.

Schmidt says if they find a design that is less than 15,000 is that ok? Bayrd says yes, she doesn't want to tell them what kind of shelter they should get.

Opitz says they have a look and design at the airport and they might want to have that flexibility to make it look consistent and it is their funds, he doesn't have a problem with that.

Wiggie makes an amendment that they have to meet all ADA federal and state stnadards.

Veldran asks if the accessibility problem is about getting to the stop or the stop itself. Bayrd says it is a separate issue, the shelters are not accessible.

Martz and Wiggie keep grumbling about the RTA and trains. Martz says that he is worried that we are planning for an RTA and in Fitchburg won't sell land cuz might need it for RTA. Wonders if RTA will make this shelter more expensive later.

The grumbling dies down, Amendment to the amendment and the amended amendment passed.

VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE
Richmond says he has a companion amendment to the one Opitz has that is going to be discussed at Personnel and Finance. You are not considering it but they go together. Richmond's purpose in introducing the amendment and the accompanying resolution are to put the vehicle registration fee in affect in March to raise almost $4.5M and do two or three things. One is to restore 3% cut to human services and second is to build a reserve fund. He addresses the editorial in the State Journal that says they are shifting money from general fund to human services from highway fund. They say not any money will be spent on transportation expenses. That is false. That is the only thing the county can do with that money is spend it on transportation costs. Richmond says there is $4-5M in transportation expenses that the taxpayers currently pay for. If you think only taxpayer dollars should be spent on transportation expenses then you won't like this fee. He notes the state does this - spends transportation fees on transportation expenses. There is a 24 month sunset on it. He is proposing it because he feels strong about the 3% in human services. One supervisor says it should be sunset because its no flatter of a tax than the property tax and it is a way to get funds. If you want to reduce property taxes in 2012, he has no problem with that.

Wiggie asks if it is $15 on all motor vehicles - is that the same for a car and semi. Richmond says that it is $15 on vehicles they are allowed by the state. He says the tax is not on semi's or motorcycles, includes pickups and cars and I think he said minivans or RVs or recreational vehicles, but I missed it.

Martz asks why not all vehicles? We use dollars for roads and roads have bikes, scooters and motorcycles. He grumbles about slow mopeds on Fish Hatchery Road and asks why they are exempt. Kyle says the state made that distinction. [Dude, pay attention, that's what Wiggie just asked.]

Schmidt asks if they have flexibility in terms of a fee that would be on a second vehcicle or of a certain value. Richmond says they can't do that. He says they considered rebating money to people who were under a certain income level in the past.

Richmond says he knows its not popular, the budget is not popular and he won't vote for budget as is. Knows it is a serious question for everyone. Hopes they can have a debate at some point. Has lost a job and wasn't working, people are scared and don't want another $15 charge. He says if we really want to talk about how they do the budget - all we do is monkey around the fringe - while we do things like use one time $5M ATC money with no plan to replace it next year and he wishes we would have a serious conversation about how we fund things and think about why in a time of need we are making a 3% cut, especially to the people who really need the services.

Schmidt doesn't disagree. Not a more progressive tax. Would support discussion about how to raise money in a more progressive fashion. Understands the constraints about how we can't do anything to fix the vehicle registration fee and we're getting screwed by the state in so many ways. Thinks people in her district will struggle with a property tax increase - and this is something she can't do now. Agrees with where he wants money to go, but this will hurt people in her district that are barely making it.

Opitz moves no recommendation. Schmidt seconds.

Wiggie says they should vote up or down and let the finance committee take it up. He says its a good proposal, concerned about state law and it could bring more revenue, would like more info. If its a wheel tax, it should be everything.

Opitz withdraws the motion. Opitz moves approval. Veldran seconds.

Kyle says they don't have control over state, they know it is regressive. He says people ask "Why are you doing this, you know it won't pass". He says many sit on the sidelines and do nothing. He can't. You were at the hearings, people are suffering. There are people with small houses and alot of vehicles and people with big houses and one car and there is no clear pattern. It may be $15, $30 or $45 and in some cases in his part of Fitchburg it will be a 4 car garages and $60. But they don't have alot of options. This editorial says it is irresponsible. It doesn't say what they would do with a property tax increase. A guy the other night came and testified he wants no increase in his taxes, but they never say what they will cut.

Veldran says it is difficult to add it on to people struggle but it is valued that you bring this forward. You are the only person that said they have something.

Richmond says Vedder's amendment will not have a funding source.

Opitz voted for it, I think every one else voted against, but I was unclear about Veldran.

That was on the resolution in front of them and some confusion about what they were voting on, but they also still had the budget amendment in front of them. So thye have a motion to deny. Schmidt makes the motion seconded by Veldran. There is no further discussion. The budget amendment fails 4 - 1, or more accurately, is denied 4 - 1. Opitz was the only no.

When I left the building about 7:15, the Health and Human Needs meeting was still packed with about 30 - 40 people after 2 hours. I was the only one at the meeting on the Vehicle Registration Fee.

Read more!

Board of Estimates Operating Budget Amendments

Ok - here's a partial report . . . public testimony and amendments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (10 & 11 partial) & 14. I was almost done with the updates and lost them, so I'll have to redo them tonight or tomorrow morning. Sorry.

PUBLIC TESTIMONY
I was harassing staff and didn't hear Rosemary Lee's testimony. [Sorry Rosemary, I didn't expect the Mayor to get started so quickly!]

Barbara Bolan the Executive Director of WYOU spoke in support of amendment #4. She celebrated her first-year anniversary at the station on October 14th, having come on board after the 2009 budget decision that funded WYOU at its 2008 level from PEG funds. Things have changed since October, 2008. The Cable Consumer Repair Bill authored by State Representative Gary Hebl is gathering sponsors now and, if passed, could restore dedicated PEG funding for Wisconsin Community Media in 2011. On the Federal level, Tammy Baldwin’s Community Access Preservation Act now circulating will also help strengthen community media in local communities, including here in Madison for WYOU, City Channel and Madison Metro School District Channel. Right here at WYOU, things have also changed. We’re running events and membership drives that are bringing in donations from the community. We’ve created a “Media Services for Hire” category that, while still in its infancy, shows excellent revenue-generating promise. They set of goal of fundraising $20,000 and as of today they are 83% there. One thing that hasn’t changed at WYOU is its historical and current ability to act as an incubator for people to learn how to express themselves, gain confidence in and grow pride in themselves and create community for themselves. David Runyon, the creator and producer of the 20-year-long running show “Nothing To Hide” honed his television and documentary skills at WYOU. Through WYOU, he created an amazing visual record of a changing LGBT community locally and nationally, and an extraordinary archive of political thought in the last part of the 20th century. At his death in 2001, “Nothing To Hide” was the longest-running LGBT television program anywhere. On November 13th WYOU will bequeath 800 tapes of “Nothing To Hide” to the University of Wisconsin’s Memorial Library at a reception featuring Tammy Baldwin. The library will archive the collection, restore and digitize the masters and place the shows in circulation for access by scholars, students and community members. Several weeks ago we were approached by a local law firm to help them sift through and prepare 8 hours of footage for a court case. We charged an hourly rate of $40 and asked several volunteers experienced in the editing software to help do the work. We passed through $15 per hour to them for their work. One volunteer, Ben, did the majority of the work and he earned $382. His father wrote a letter of support for WYOU to Mayor Dave last week. It reads:

Dear Mayor Dave,
Thank you for the opportunity to connect. My adult son has cerebral palsy. He has a degree in visual communications but no place to work and gain experience. WYOU has given him an opportunity to work and volunteer. Isn’t that something we envision? Public money supporting local people, helping people in a real, meaningful way. Corporations have options. Like my son, WYOU has few to no options. If you can help with the PEG funding, you will be helping my son. Of course, I’m his father so, yes, I think he’s worth $70,000.
Sincerely, Wayne Ruhland

I ask you to support WYOU as it changes and to secure future revenue sources. I ask you to support WYOU as it retains its mission to teach and incubate future voices. I ask you to vote “yes” on Amendment #4.

[I have to apologize in advance, first I don't know how people spell their names and second, it was really noisy and hard to hear due to people talking in the back of the room and the heater making noise.]

Jim Carrier runs a non-profit film school In 1972 when FCC regulated cable television, they required public access television based on the quaint notion that the public airwaves belong to the people. He has lived all over the United States and he has never seen the mission of Public Access fulfilled like WYOU. He says with no training you can walk in, get trained and put your voice on the air. He reads off the various shows that were on the air today. He says WYOU looks more like Barrack Obama's United States. He says that his non-profit film school puts on trainings for non-profits and they provide scholarships so under-served communities so they can have access. He says that WYOU has faced three whammies. First charter changed them from Channel 4 (replaced by QVC) to stations people don't see as much. Seocnd, AT&T bill attempted to get rid of PEG. And third, the Mayor took half the money. He says if this stands, the Mayor will have extinguished hundreds of voices and faces from the air - and we'll be left only with his face.

Rick Richards says he has been a member of WYOU for 3 years and for the last year or so has been the chair of the board. Please support amendment #4. He sympathizes with the budget woes, but PEG money is meant to support channels like WYOU. We would lose 1/3 of our annual budget and won't be able to provide services it provides. WYOU began planning since heard PEG going away. Hired Barbara Bolan, adopted a strategic plan to secure multiple income sources, expand awareness and support. He says WYOU has become a member of DMI, the Chamber of Commerce and Dane Buy Local. They sought assistance from companies like 5 Nines Data, Restech, Supranet and Inbox box which all support the station. Met with community leaders to find out how to connect. They have had community events, fundraisers and on-air pledge drives, they changed program schedules and worked with the producers to improve their shows. They are actively seeking underwriting, seeking grants, increasing membership, providing video services and partnering with schools with internships and classes. They are increasing the number of classes. However, we cannot rely on fundraising and grants when so many non-profits are applying. He says we can't continue unless we have staff.

Joe Dean owns University Audio Shop on Park St and is a producer on WYOU. He says it has been a wonderful experience and he has learned how to produce video. He has supported the station with with his own funds ($10,000 in last year) because he puts his money where his heart is. WYOU was not built to have to be a self-sustaining organization. This is a service to city residents. Since the PEG funding has been eliminated, staff now have a second duty to raise alot of money. Any fundraiser knows that is a big job. WYOU specialty is video and getting people involved, not fundraising. However, they are going forward with verve and spirit and there is a good chance that we will be self sustaining, but if you cut half the funding that chance is minuscule. The staff now have two jobs, and there is a small staff but they are learning the ropes. We would be remiss in responsibility to local democracy and the people of Madison who want to learn video if they give up now. At least give us a chance to become self sustaining.

Luciano - Thanks his alder for the amendment. Says he has been a producer since 1987, and like alot of people he started with something in mind for his show. But in 1991 when the war started it dawned on him that because we had the station we had the responsibility to balance the propaganda and misinformation. We were the only station at time presenting other information. At that point we opened WYOU at night, before that it is only open until 10:00. Since then, there has been more and more people, now cablecast 24 hours a day. He also says that we have been very good at telling people that this is tax money. This is 63 cents on his bill every month. He talks about the deal last year with the Mayor. He says the only deal he makes every month that is that he gives 63 to Charter. This is not tax money. You can do a slight of hand, this is still my fee. You are taking money away from me. He says he gave them $5 a few years ago because he didn't want them to take the money away from the station - he paya 63 cents every month and he wants WYOU.

Jane Ann Morris - she has been working on community gardens on the library. An effective transit system and bike paths and other things make a city great. A well informed citizenship is important and it comes through a library and WYOU and the information they provide. [She was much more eloquent, but it was hard to hear and I got behind and missed some.]

Jason Kwiatkowski has been involved with WYOU for 10 years, he was a member volunteer and later (volunteer?) Executive Director for a few years. His wants to talk about his personal experience of why WYOU and why it matters. He was a student at the UW, couldn't afford the Madison Media Institute and there weren't other types of universities you can go to today. He went to WYOU and for a nominal fee he learned and accessed a skill and has been able to use that for the past 10 years. He has his own video production company now and makes a small amount of money doing that along with his state job. The important thing is that he could come in the door, he was welcome and could learn how to use camera, edit and have a format to express himself. He thinks this is the fabric of what this country is about. So little of that today, everyone is priced out of the market. Television is not an option for you if you don't have money. A fundamental principal is we don't have to agree, but we can have a public debate, you're not going to get that from FOX or MSNBC, that door is closed for most people. WYOU is open to everyone. If you get an opportunity, you should look at the variety of people that we serve, this is what it is about - you can say I don't like what's going on in my neighborhood, I'm from another country and I want to share info with you. That's important and I hope you realize that.

Xiong Vang - He is a public citizen. He got alot of experience at WYOU. He is a student at Edgewood and works. Last year wanted to do something for the Hmong community and he worked with CPR and he wanted to translate some of the skills he learned. He wanted to do it in a way Hmong people would connect to. He tried to find some place to learn the skills and only place he could find was WYOU. He finished a video - Conscious choking prevention. He was a producer, writer, director and got lots of others involved, doctors, red cross and other agencies and learned to use skill and extend the knowledge he is getting at Edgewood. He hopes that they will consider WYOU and help the community that sometimes there is no voice and this station provides a voice for the people.

Mary Cardona - speaking for herself, but she is the Executive Director of the Wisconsin Association of PEG Channels (WAPC). Mr. Brad Clark, City Channel station manager, serves on our Board of Directors and is our Public Policy Chair. We have 61 members representing PEG stations from Superior to Kenosha. All three stations from Madison are members. She has lived in Madison long time, worked with all three stations and they are all very distinctly different. The schools channel shows school board meetings and City Channel is meeting coverage and issue program, but the public access station has a role. Give a regular person an opportunity to speak. It also give people the tools to learn and that is irreplaceable. You can say there is the internet, but the internet doesn't give you training, you can't collaborte, the latino community can't come do a live show in the studio. Cable should have a place for people to speak. She has been lobbying on the state and federal level. The industry always says why should we give 1% PEG fees, we already give them 5% franchise fee and its hard to come back with an argument for that. The 5% is $2M+ that the city gets, WYOU is asking for %70,000 - public subscribers deserve it, we have the revenue in 2010, if we lose the PEG fee lets come back, but we have the PEG fee and franchise fee. Let WYOU have more time to develop synergies.

Judy Lourquin - Russ Adloe and her produce 3rd world issues. She knew the state said that they only had PEG funding for 3 years and 2011 they would go away, but she didn't know the city could change that. There is legislation at the state level and federal level - if passed, it will alter some of these things. We can't count on this at this point. It is careless and shows a lack of respect for ordinary people who produce a show or enjoy watching the shows. WYOU provides a venue beyond mainstream TV, here they do a show on third world issues and tape a series of lectures and show them on the channel. They filmed . . . and she lists off an impressive list of national speakers which I'm sure I missed some of and I'm doing from memory but it was - Noam Chomsky, Medea Benjamin, Amy Goodwin, Michael Moore, Ralph Nader, Phil Donohue. She talks about Ralph Nader being here and they were the only ones to film it. Without the good information, she doesn't know how people can make informed decisions. The major networks are covering balloon boy and Michael Jackson when people are dying all over the world form war, bad water supply, etc. People who have money and run the stations don't care.

David Williams said he retired early in 2004 after being a public reference librarian for 28 years. What if someone suggested and seriously decided to zero out the library. WYOU is a public utility, just like a public library. He says he doesn't need to lecture about media monopolization and shrinking of public discourse. You turn on TV and there is right and left "discussion" and someone in the center. That is what we see on tv networks. This country is in an economic crisis and Madison is financially stressed and there is a strong argument to chop WYOU. But in our community we have forums going on all the time about the economic emergency and how we can respond and all of that is covered by WYOU and that will be obliterated if you eliminate WYOU. Adam Shesch and history of insurgencies, student of Afghanistan and Pakistan spoke to a community meeting in Duluth and he came back and said it was filmed by community cable. They have 26,000 subscribers there and supported by the city government, why can't we do as well as Duluth MN. Do whatever is necessary to save community television.

There were two other registrants in support.

Dode Lowe was there to support 11 & 14. If you take a look at the reduction in these workers hours, you come to the conclusion that its simply another way to encourage department heads to chip away and chip away and chip away. They seem to be saying there is not enough work. I don't think anyone believes that. Admin and managers need to manage, schedule and not look for ways to reduce work hours for workers in these departments, simply to save a small chunk of change. For 14 we need some courageous council members to restore funding on #14, based on the snow that fell and how quickly the workers took care of his street, we need to look at that like other public safety issues. It is a public safety issue when the snow is removed. When you eliminate the positions it has an impact on public safety.

Mayor clarifies that Lowe is speaking on behalf of himself not AFSCME.

Lori Kief is there on 11 & 19 and is speaking for AFSCME Local 60. She is a Building Inspector for the City of Madison. She says that the lower level positions are always the ones that are gone. The savings are always minimal, its 4 positions - they are the first contact with the public. The savings is so minimal and we could look for other places to downsize positions. The two positions in parks to reduce to 75%, there really is full time work to be done there. Good services and great programming in parks and hate to see boat launches or concession stands suffer to save money. Disappointed that people doing the jobs (mow lawns etc) are the jobs that are cut or held open. You also really need to fill the vendor coordinator position.

Steve Schooler in support of #15 - He's the chair of the low income bus pass committee and they are hard at work and will have a report out. This amendment is to allow them to continue what it is now. There may be some turn aways. (Missed part of it)

Sonya Newenhouse - #13 - Madison Environmental Group - Small business person with a budget so understands the issues. She is here to explain and ask them not to be cut and to keep Streets advertizing. Enact is a deep changing program. Creates awareness, its free, book is on-line and she rattles off numbers about how much water they saved, etc. This also builds community as well as the environment. They have staff and 800 line to answer questions. Please keep the money in the budget. Maybe we should partner with WYOU to get the word out.

Judy Skoag #13, loves the program. Effective. On a monthly basis she studies a topic, declares in front of friends what we are going to do and then fesses up the next month what we did. That keeps them accountable. Friends cut electric use in half after being in the program. Working to educate a group of independent seniors that live in their homes. They are working on a promotional piece for this group which is a prime target since elderly pepole have old appliances and no compact fluorescent light bulbs. She has started teams in her neighborhood and she has become friends with her neighbors as a result of this program.

There were other registrants. 1 in support of #13, 1 in support of ice rinks.

AMENDMENTS ONE, THREE, SEVEN AND FOURTEEN

ONE
Sponsor Cieslewicz.
Provide levy funding of $19,000 to keep the monthly health insurance co-pay amounts for non-represented employees at the current levels of $10 per single plan and $20 per family plan. The Mayor has promised non-represented employees that he would not go forward with the co-pay increase if remaining residency incentives were not repealed. The Common Council rejected an ordinance amendment to repeal residency incentives at its meeting of October 6, 2009. Adds $19,000 in costs back to the budget.

THREE
Sponsor Cieslewicz
Adjust General Fund Revenues to accurately reflect updated estimates based on currently available information and pending ordinance changes.
Miscellaneous Licenses (Increase) (7,000)
Liquor Licenses (Increase)(16,000)
State Computer Reimbursement (Decrease) 43,673

Adds Total: $20,673

[Can I just say that every year we hear him whine about the council adding money to his budget, but every year, there are a few of these types of amendments that add money to his budget. And mistakes like the next one.]

SEVEN
Sponsor Rhodes-Conway and Clausius.
Provide funding to correct a budget error in which the salary and benefits expense for the DCR Human Resources (Personnel) Analyst 1 was insufficiently funded. (Note: $2,689 is funding to support a potential reclassification from a Human Resources Analyst 1 to a Human Resources Analyst 2, pending a determination by the Human Resources Department.)

Adds $32,290.

FOURTEEN
Sponsor Cieslewicz and Clear.
Amend Highlight No. 6 of the Streets Division Operating Budget to delete two (vacant) SMO1 positions instead of two (filled) SMO2 positions. Marginal costs are minimal ($3,955), and will be accommodated within the existing Streets Division budget by management of salary savings. No levy impact.

Bruer moves adoption of items 1, 3, 7 & 14 saying they are non-controversial, technical corrections. Mayor explains, 1 is agreement with MPSEA, 3 is comptroller recalculation, 7 is a mistake and 14 is a technical adjustment. No discussion, they all

pass unanimously

on a voice vote.

AMENDMENT TWO

Sponsor Sanborn.
Dissolve the Capital Revolving Fund and eliminate Façade Improvement and Lighting Enhancement Grants. Transfer fund balance and loan repayments from the Capital Revolving Fund to General Fund Revenues - Miscellaneous Revenues. Add a corresponding amount of expenditure authority to the Direct Appropriation to Capital/Special Revenue line in Miscellaneous Appropriations.
Direct Appropriation to Capital 1,008,731
General Fund Revenues (Increase) (1,008,731)
No levy impact.

Sanborn moves adoption. He would like to apply this to the outstanding debt, doesn't think facade improvement grants are appropriate - theme with his amendments is that we need to think about what the city does that affects very few people, most things effect just about everybody. We tax everybody and some of it goes to small slivers of the community. Thinks we need to take care of our own . . . The capital revolving fund picks businesses in Madison that we think are special for interest free loans. Last one they never even borrowed the money. We should dissolve the fund.

No other comments. Jed is only one who votes for it, it

fails.

AMENDMENT FOUR

Sponsor: Rhodes-Conway and Verveer
Restore funding for WYOU to the 2009 level of $139,189 from PEG funds. This will reduce the amount of PEG funding available for Madison City Channel and increase its levy funding by an equal amount.
PEG: WYOU 69,594
PEG: MCC - Operating Fund (69,594)
MCC: Transfer in From Other Restricted (Decrease) 69,594

Total levy impact $68,594

Rhodes-Conway has questions for speaakers. Please let them know the scope of the operation, how many volunteers, numbers in the programs and educational efforts. She also asks to talk more in depth about fundraising efforts. She says she has had more contacts in last 6 months to year. How are you attempting to build your budget without PEG?

Bolan says that there are about 65 active volunteers - producers and support for fundraisers and answering phones, run cameras and editing. They have 3 full time staff, and 2 people who work 8 and 5 hours for 2 week pay period. The membership is about 650, but active current members are about half. Richards says alot of turnover because of colleges in the area.

Richards talks about education - core mission is to enable people to have learn and put a show on the air. Regular classes in how to use cameras, editing and they are partnering with UW mini-course system and working with MATC to get more involvement and had a good intern.

Bolan talks about youth groups they work with the Madison Youth Company every other week June - August - they learn cameras and a little editing and put on a live show. The program is middle school students and early high school students. Also working on Goodman Center Media Works, they have a program, training facilities but no access to the media. Also Boy Scouts Glacial Edge Council meets every 2nd Tuesday from 5:00 - 8:00. 3 different cub scout groups visit the studio, they are tiger cubs, learn their badges in media.

Richards says that three full time staff and provide support for 60 some producers and volunteers, but putting local content on the air 24/7 and running business functions of the office and they work with people learning their craft and doing their work and staff is constantly mentoring.

Bolan says they set a goal to raise $20,000. On air fundraisers, one in March - live programs, special programming. They ran a pledge drive, learned alot from WORT to run it. Just completed in the last 8 days. They also have held event driven fundraisers where they donate money for entertainment. They have had house parties and have another one coming up craft brews for WYOU - local craft brewers donating funds. Looking for grants, got close to being a Cmmunity Shares member, starting to be invited to write for grants, which is a big steps. Submitting grant applications willy-nilly with no connection is a waste of time, lots of other work to do, but now the doors are staring to open - small, but open. Learning more about fundraising world and meet more people.

Richards says Bolan has been running staff ragged to all the summer events to network and be involved. That is what we need to do to make the fundraising viable.

Rhodes-Conway asks about state and national efforts. If they disappear, will a year more be enough to get us into a position where we could survive after that. Bolan says that we will further develop liaisons to replace the funding and restructure and partner with organizations that expressed interest that would provide funding or help us with overhead - uses rent as an example. She says tto the question of if they will survive, it is a qualified "I'm not sure".

Clear says you've had one year to prepare for this transition.

Bolan says when she walked in the door it was a broken place, needed to get things working to get started on looking for funding. Phones have to work.

Clear presumes technical and organizational broken. Bolan says yes.

Richards says we started a new process before the budget, knew the 2011 issue was coming. Last year Mayor restored funding. Richards says the key was to hire Barbara and change culture and business side of organization to pursue diverse funding. Wants to be diversified even if public funding continues, bad situation to be in. Another year is still quite a challenge but can do it.

Clear asks if they did a fundraising study to know what capacity is. Bolan says no study and help from WORT. The pledge drive in March helped dictate what they would see. The size of the pledges has increased. Average donation was $54 in March, average is $103 this time. Other interesting thing is that she came from outside of Madison, so she has colleagues and friends that are from around the country and that first fundraiser has a number of people who supported the stations because she worked there. This time around, the number is less without her friends, but she is encouraged that there was $7,100 for 8 days, but this time there was a 400 piece mailing and there will be a longer fatter tail on this fundraiser. Thinks the money will be more than in March. Increasing amount of support and more local.

Richards says that one of the things that slowed them down was moved from channel 4 to 991 - one of most powerful tools to fundraise has been taken away because people don't know where you are. There are also technical difficulties with people getting the channel and one component needs to be to help them find us. He says they are not just asking for money, but other revenue - underwriting, video service and diversify to make it more stable.

Clear asks about production vs distribution. Alot of people who spoke about outlet going away. How much of budget is distribution vs production? Bolan says that they met with technology companies to be able to stream 24/7 off the website. Very little fees for that. Not paying charter or other providers, would like to be on UVerse, but would have to purchase an encoder to allow the programs to be distributed through AT&T and the remedial bills have a piece in them where the require them to provide the equipment.

Clear says even with severe budget cut, distribution is still possible. How much is locally produced? 65 - 70% is locally produced. A small amount from Free Speech TV via satellite network - Democracy Now is one they like to watch. Greater opportunity to source other local programming through a site call pegmedia.org and they look at that, and interested in providing that programming if it reduces number of repeats. The shows usually air 2 or 3 times in a 7 day period.

Clear asks of the 65% of local programming is produced with WYOU equipment. Bolan says half or 60% is all our equipment - cameras and software. A number of producers have purchased cameras, not necessarily editing software or equipment. As producers get better, they would like to get higher level equipment. Richards says also have a studio. No producers have that, they have a green screen space.

Compton says that it has improved tremendously over the years, can you tell her about partnering with UW. How much funding coming from UW? Bolan says that they do the mini-course system. They charge $59 per class and pass through $40 per class. No other kind of funding from them.

Compton asks if the instructors are approved through UW. Bolan says its WYOUs instructors and facilities, the UW just provides the marketing. They work with others in this capacity. She explains how the mini-course system works.

Richards says the classes are not certified.

Compton asks in 2008 how much money came from outside. Richards says that they would guess it was probably about $20,000 in 2008 and this year doing $60,000. In 2009 raised $45,000 at this point of the 60,000 budgeted to bring in.

Rhodes-Conway says that speakers did better than she could. Listen and hear and she thinks this is a community service that we should give an opprtunity. It could be moot in a year, but if we don't pass this they don't have a fighting chance. If we give them a chance, they have an opportunity to survive. She hopes the legislation passes for each of the stations.

Compton says that she wants them to vote against. She says that Satya is voting with her heart. She was on BTRB and they tried to get them to earn their own money. To be a free speech station you should not get government funding. She says that they made them raise money and she has contributed. She says that this is not one time we have given them a chance and we have done this over and over and over again. It is time for us to realize that WYOU needs to stand on its own two feet. They have had plenty of money, changed Executive Directors plenty of times, they have met with leaders and every time she thought they would work. Mayor made a tough decision, proud of him for doing it. Need to put money into city channel to have transparency. Call numbers got changed for city channel - it went out loud and clear that it was changed. This is a business, they need to act like a business and we need to treat them like a business.

Rhodes-Conway - Makes it clear that city channel's budget doesn't suffer, not a choice being presented.

Mayor says its complicated. All the PEG fees go to WYOU and City Channel and together it is about $410,000 in PEG and $190,000 in taxpayer funds. By cutting WYOU they can use PEG fees for city channel. He understands how tough it is, ran and started a non-profit. There were months when he didn't cash a paycheck. Still on the board at that non-profit and last year lost a major foundation grant and that was really tough and needed to lay off a staff member - 20% of the staff and another went to part time and others took a pay cut. Doubt many non-profits don't have the same story. Difficult for everyone out there. Promises to support Hebl and Baldwin bills. Hopes they pass, but not optimistic. And last point is that it is difficult to go from $140,000 to $0 in 12 months and expect to make it back. Its tough love, easy to go to supporters and donors and make up $70K next year than to go cold turkey. He says in 2009 budge they said they would do that.

Fails 2 - 4. Verveer and Rhodes-Conway voting aye. Sanborn, Clausius, Bruer and Clear voting no.

AMENDMENT FIVE

Sponsor: Alder Verveer.
Add the following narrative to Highlight No. 5: "$80,000 is included for overtime and fringe benefits, with an additional $20,000 provided for the mounted patrol (veterinarian fees, farrier costs, boarding fees and supplies). No funding may be spent in 2010 on the Downtown Safety Initiative until a specific plan, with goals and benchmarks, is adopted by resolution by the Public Safety Review Committee and the Common Council. The plan shall be due by March 31, 2010."
No levy impact.

Verveer moves adoption and its seconded. Verveer says it is truth in budgeting. Not much of a change but the second part says that the Downtown Safety Initiative, which he supports, continue but they need to present a plan on how that will be used. He thanks the Mayor for keeping it in the budget and the Mayor is trying to get money from the business community. Verveer says that this year they are trying to get $20,000 in donations and he hopes this document will help with the fundraising.

Clear asks if the DSI has had a plan before? Verveer says there has been a plan but never approved by the policy council. Mary Shauf that Verveer summarized it well.

Clear asks if it has gone to PSRC before. Shauf says no. Clear concludes that is all that is changing.

Motion passes unanimously on a voice vote.

AMENDMENT SIX

Sponsor: Rhodes-Conway, Verveer
Restore funding for the currently vacant Program Assistant 2 position to allow the hiring effective January 1, 2010, rather than delayed until May 1, 2010. Add the following language to the budget highlights: "Current staff sharing between the Mayor's Office and the Office of the Common Council will end on January 1, 2010."

Adds $19,616 to the Mayor's Office Budget

Motion is placed on file due to the following email:

Dear Colleagues,

As you all know, Debbie Fields and Lisa Olmsted have been fulfilling a voluntary transfer of duties since July. Debbie has been covering the Program Assistant 2 duties in the Mayor's office after Pam Williamson's retirement, and Lisa has been fulfilling Debbie's position in the council office.

When we began this arrangement, all agreed that it would continue until the PA2 position could be filled on a permanent basis, which was originally expected to be in January, 2010 (though no date was specified in the agreement).

Several weeks ago, Janet Piraino, Lisa V. I met with Lisa O.and Debbie to discuss continuing the arrangement beyond January, since the executive budget anticipates savings from keeping the PA2 position open until May, 2010. After the meeting, both agreed to continue.

Since then, however, Debbie has decided that she prefers to return to the Council office, so by mutual agreement, the transfer of duties will end on December 31 and Lisa O. and Debbie will both return to their respective offices.

Council leadership and the Mayor's office would like to express our appreciation to both Lisa O. and Debbie for their service during this time and for rising to the challenge of new responsibilities.

If you have questions about this, please contact Janet, Tim or myself. Thank you.

Mark C.

AMENDMENT EIGHT

Sponsor: Rhodes-Conway
Delete funding for alcohol inspectors.
Saves $10,000

Rhodes-Conway moves, Verveer seconds. She says not much more to add to the previous discussion they had. Reiterates that we have heard over and over about how this isn't the time to do anythign new and that we have a soft hiring freeze and we shouldn't be hiring new positions. Holding positions open to the extent that staff can't use their comp time. Two reasons for the amendment. First is its not the time to start something new. Second is that the program sounds like it would be great to make sure people are complying with their conditions of their licenses, not just immediate public safety issues. But disagrees that the position should be funded by the industry that it is inspecting. Its a fox and hen situation. If we want to revisit this when we are doing new programs, she would welcome that and think about how to fund it.

Bruer says this is not a new initiative. Police department has been doing it and it has been taking up alot of their time. It has been effective and brought revenue in and educated people. This lapse of the on site review is disheartening. This is valuable and this is a small amount of money. For those worried about public safety and licenses this is important. Some have suggested raising license fees to pay for it. This city led a statewide effort to do the economic development initiative to help small license holders reduce their fees. We should have some clear oversight, this is a small investment for a large benefit to the community. This is also an educational tool to bring licensed establishments up to their legal responsibilities. Will help with quality of life.

Clear asks what is new? Are we replacing functions of another department. Plant says police have the authority to do all this, and they do alot of it downtown. In the outlying areas, there is very little compliance checks going on. The police will maintain their authority in this area, but they are essentially civilianizing the function.

Clear asks if these people will do this in the downtown area, or just outlying areas. Plant says it would replace some of the administrative functions downtown and start doing it routinely in the outlying districts.

Clear asks if this will produce revenues in terms of tickets. Plant says that they educate first and enforce second.

Clear asks Plant to speak to the fox and henhouse issue. Plant says he understands the concern, says the industry has been asking for this. Miller brewing is doing some of that work now on their own dime. The producers, distributors and retailers are asking for some kind of a mechanism to do more preventative work.

Plomiski says that Miller has been doing Respect 21 program for 2 years. They do spot checks for underage sales. This is done on a voluntary basis. The want to expand that. There are always hitches with a voluntary program because who would subject themselves to that kind of scrutiny, so they are supportive of this. This is mandatory and levels the playing field.

Plant says they encourage voluntary compliance as much as possible. He says the purpose is to educate and make sure they have the capacity to follow the rules. What will happen is that a handful of bad actors who are purposefully skirting the law will rise to the top. They will be able to document those violations and take actions.

Clear asks if this will address recent issues by intervening earlier.

Plominski says that if you are not buying your alcohol from a licensed distributor, then that indicates you are trying to evade taxes or something and that would be a good indicator something is wrong.

Clear asks if the city doesn't have the capacity to do that now. [Shocker,] she says yes. She says the state does some checks but they have 4 inspectors for the entire state.

Plant says right now the only way they know if the distributor is not licensed is when distributors report that someone is no longer buying from them, but it is inconsistent.

Bidar-Sielaff asks if there is a 2 page description about what this person will do. She's been to the meetings, but this is a new role and new way to do things and she assumes there are other conversations. Is there a summary some where that says what the role is, what enforcement authority role they have and how they will work with the police department.

Plant says no synopsis available. It was thought to be presumptuous to do that without budget authority. Plominski has been to lots of national conferences [I see something to cut!] speaking about this and it would be possible to put together a summary of what they do elsewhere.

Bidar-Sielaff asks about the process from here. Where is is the final approval, who will be in on those discussions. This seems like a policy decision in the budget. She would like to know more about the policy behind this.

Plominski also says there are 4,000 liquor related licenses and so it is a huge scope.

Bruer bristles every time he hears this is new. Police used to perform these functions. This was suspended due to budget considerations. Isn't this similar to vending oversight? Or building inspection?

[He used a whole lot more words than that and ended with "isn't that so". Plominski had nothing left to say but "that's spot on.".]

Mayor wants to address Rhodes-Conway's point about new programs. He thinks she brought up a good point. For the most part we really have said no. There are four things that might be new, but all of them are in quotation marks. New finance software & 8th ambulance are things they committed to in the past. The enhanced gang task force, with 4 new members, and just and expansion of that program. This is also an expansion and it will make conversations more efficient and allow police to do other things. This is just an enhancement of an existing program.

Motion fails 2 - 4. Rhodes-Conway and Sanborn voting no.

AMENDMENT NINE

Sponsor Verveer
Add the following narrative to Highlight No.4: "Before any funding is spent for the alcohol-licensed compliance inspection program, the Alcohol License Review Committee and Common Council shall adopt a detailed project plan by resolution. This plan will include a position description for the alcohol inspectors and a detailed plan as to how the program will operate, including goals and benchmarks."
No levy impact.

Says that this just memorializes what perhaps the intent of the mayor's office was in the first place. He wants it properly vetted beyond the position description.

Passes on a voice vote.

AMENDMENT TEN


Verveer says this one should have been on the list of non-controversial items. We have do to this anyways under the ordinance we adopted requiring the clerk to mail to nearby residents and property owners when there is an alcohol license. We are uncomfortably forcing the clerk to do this and she has alot of work with the four elections in 2010 and we don't want to make her come back for a contingent reserve amendment or use the fund balance. They are pretty frugal in that office, but we don't need Maribeth losing sleep at night. This was in the fiscal note when we passed it. He says there was $16,000 in amendment three but the comptrollers office used that for something else even tho he was the main sponsor on those amendments. He says that he had 4 ordinances and one of the is late filing fees and that will raise an undetermined amount of money because we don't know how many people will file late. Part of that intent was to do this public notification. So, not only do we have to do it, but we are trying to find the money to pay for it.

Sanborn agrees that if we pass the ordinances we have to pay for them but since he didn't vote for the ordinance, he won't support the amendment.

Passes on a voice vote.

AMENDMENT ELEVEN


Rhodes Conway moves adoption and Verveer seconds. She says this is the most important one on tonight's agenda. She says that they got a piece of paper with all the position reductions in the executive budget. She was worried about how long the list was and she asked alot of questions when they did the briefings. The bottom line is we are reducing almost 21 staff positions, but the majority - all but 5 - its a vacant position or people will be able to move around. The 5 that are a full or partial layoff are the subject of this amendment. These are the most important positions. These positions are the ones she wants to restore. She understands that we are in the worst possible economic times that any of us can remember, with the possible exception of Alder Bruer. She understands that it is certainly one of the worst budget years in recent memory and that is why we should pass this. If we are in the worst economy we can remember, the last thing we should be doing is laying people off. And, leaving our city workers to suffer through that economy. If these folks from these departments were able to say exactly what they thought, they would not want to lose these positions. People said everything from this is really going to hurt to we'll find a way to make do. None of them would choose to do this. She feels that it is important to support our workforce and offer high quality service to our public by providing the number of workers it takes to do the job. We're getting into dangerous territory when we squeeze more work into fewer person hours. We're seeing the result of that, we just recently made a change that would allow HR director to be more flexible in when people use their comp time and the reason for that is because people can't use the comp time because there is no one else to cover for them. That says to her that we are already at the edge and cutting more people is not the thing to do. She says this is the most important thing in this years budget. Think about the impact on just 5 people's lives and weigh that against $100,000 she doesn't know how you can't come down on the side of 5 people keeping their jobs.

Sanborn says that you say in tough economic times that is the worst time to lose positions, but of course if it were good economic times and a good budget we wouldn't need to cut. It a heads I win, tails you lose kind of argument. In tough economic times is the worst time to be raising taxes as well.

Clear doesn't disagree with Rhodes-Conway or Sanborn. He is having trouble prioritizing positions based on ones that are open or not. This makes it less painful, cus no human face or family or living wage, but that is not the way to prioritize which positions should be cut. He says this amendment would be undoing those decisions.

Bruer asks them to elaborate on the impact of the Mayor's budget.

Wirtz says there are bump rights in labor contracts as well as non-represented bump rights. It is highly unlikely that anyone will get laid off. Some people may exercise the bump right or take the cut. Knowing where we are at filling vacancies during the soft freeze, it is unlikely we will be laying anyone off.

Rhodes-Conway says 3 are partial cuts and 2 people that they will have a job with the City. Wirtz says it is very, very likely they will have a job with the city, but can't guarantee that.

Clausius says that they could be implied layoffs but not set in stone. It's a possibility. Rhodes-Conway says the positions will be cut. Wirtz says it is very unlikely that anyone will be laid off. They work hard to find a place for that individual.

Bidar-Sielaff asks about if that is why we hold the vacant positions. It seems like a self fulfilling prophesy that people bump and we hold open the vacancies Is that how we end up with vacant positions.

Wirtz says those positions go away. The people in those positions assume vacancies and the vacancies go away, so this is one way we fill those vacancies. Vacancies are from retirements and other staff decisions to leave the city. We turn over 5% positions.

Bidar-Sielaff clarifies that three will become part-time.

Mayor says that as he was putting his budget together there were alot of bad choices. He tried to make alot of small tough decisions instead of a handful of deep cuts. If you look at this budget compared to other government, private or non-profit, it comes out pretty well for the workers. We talking about a budget in which no one loses their job and no one gets a pay cut. The state is giving 3% pay cuts and layoffs. If you look at the county, 3% or layoffs. Yet in our budget no layoffs and no cuts. He understands it is tough, and its harder when someone is in that position. Cut 22 positions, in 5 cases there are real human beings. Appreciates Rhodes-Conways comments about how a cut impacts a family. But he thinks we did well compared to other governments.

Motion fails on a voice vote, I think Rhodes-Conway and Verveer voted for it, there rest no.

AMENDMENT TWELVE

AMENDMENT THIRTEEN

AMENDMENT FIFTEEN

AMENDMENT SIXTEEN

AMENDMENT SEVENTEEN

AMENDMENT EIGHTEEN

AMENDMENT NINETEEN

Read more!