And Today, the Greyhound Bus Stop Moved Again To . . .

The Northside bus transfer point. Seriously. Here's why.

Alder Bridget Maniaci, the Mullins, the Economic Development Director, etc etc etc

I'll let you see for youreself. When the Mayor's office sent out the message saying that tomorrow the bus stop would move to E Wash, Alder Manaici at 2 am sent out a message to neighbors letting know that morning the buses would be there. Not her fault I don't think. But then she went to work and asked neighbors what they thought. I only saw one or two positive responses, no complaints. However, the notice that says they are now moving to the North Transfer Point reveal the following:

THURSDAY
Alder Maniaci has questions

From: Maniaci, Bridget
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 2:36 AM
To: Harmon, Ray
Cc: Chaney, Brian; Plominski, Katherine; Rummel, Marsha; Schauf, Mary; May, Michael; Richard Linster; timothy.olsen@sbcglobal.net; Tim Olsen; Tucker, Matthew; Verveer, Mike
Subject: Re: greyhound stop

Ray,
There's a bar on that corner and no services anywhere nearby, nor room
for passenger loading. Did the contact say why they wanted Baldwin as
their stop? I have questions and a number of serious concerns.
Convienient they decided to tell us on the day before their lease is
up. I'd like police & Katherine to weigh in on impacts, and I need to
find out what the cafe and especially the bar owners feel about this,
in addition to the neighborhood. The bar has been a quiet, problem-
free establishment with prompt and responsive owners who have turned
the bar around since acquiring it 2 years ago.

With the closing of the bus depot, there was some interest in
ordinance language being put forward to regulate the bus stops. Mike,
what are my legislative options?

Matt, are there any zoning issues? Is there anything stopping them
from unloading passengers on the Capitol square?

Thanks all,
Bridget

Zoning Response

From: Tucker, Matthew
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 2:45 PM
To: Maniaci, Bridget
Cc: Chaney, Brian; Plominski, Katherine; Rummel, Marsha; Schauf, Mary; May, Michael; Richard Linster; timothy.olsen@sbcglobal.net; Tim Olsen; Verveer, Mike; Harmon, Ray; Murphy, Brad
Subject: RE: greyhound stop

Alder Maniaci- The City's zoning code regulates the use and development of private property. Since this activity sounds like it will be taking place within the public right-of-way, zoning has no jurisdiction.

They could off-load passengers on the square if they would like, I suppose.

Matt Tucker

John Purnell - People are gathering on Mullins steps

From: John Purnell
Sent: Thu 4/1/2010 11:00 PM
To: Jay Mullins; Sue Springman; Brad Mullins
Subject:
FYI regarding temporary greyhound bus stop at 1245 east wash. Lots of people
were gathered on the steps tonight when I left work.

FRIDAY
Sue Springman, from Mullins - We do not want this here

From: Sue Springman
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 8:34 AM
To: Cooley, Timothy
Subject: FW:

This is certainly not going to help us lease this building....I am not sure
what is going on as I am in Florida but if you could have someone look into
this I would appreciate it...we do not want this here.

Tim Cooley, Economic Development Director says Mullins not happy
Tim Cooley wants it moved.

From: Cooley, Timothy
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 9:48 AM
To: Harmon, Ray
Cc: Maniaci, Bridget; Olinger, Mark; 'jbower@bowergrp.com'; Studesville,
Larry; 'Susan Springman'; Mark Bugher
Subject: FW: Greyhound and Mullins

Ray...

Any idea what's going on with this? The owners of the property (Mullins) do
not want a pick-up site in front of their buildings. They were not
contacted re. the change.

Please let me know how we can get this moved.

Thanks.

Tim

MONDAY
Mark Bugher, UW Research Park, wants it moved too

From: Mark Bugher
Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 10:13 AM
To: Cooley, Timothy; Harmon, Ray
Cc: Maniaci, Bridget; Olinger, Mark; jbower@bowergrp.com; Studesville, Larry; 'Susan Springman'
Subject: RE: Greyhound and Mullins

I agree with the Mullins position on this one.

Mayor's office responds

From: "Harmon, Ray"
Date: April 5, 2010 3:49:49 PM CDT
To: Mark Bugher, "Cooley, Timothy",
Cc: "Maniaci, Bridget", "Olinger, Mark", Jim Bower, "Studesville, Larry", 'Susan Springman'
Subject: RE: Greyhound and Mullins

Susan-
I shared your concerns with Mayor Dave and he was very supportive of Greyhound moving to another location.

Greyhound will begin operating from the North Transfer Point starting tomorrow at 6:35am.

Please let me know if you have any other questions and or concerns.

Sincerely,

Ray

Neighborhood Notified

from Maniaci, Bridget
to "tlna@yahoogroups.com"
date Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 5:10 PM
subject [tlna] Fwd: Greyhound and Mullins

Greyhound will be moving from using Baldwin & E Wash starting tomorrow.
Bridget

OK, LET'S THINK ABOUT HOW THIS HAPPENED
- Alder sends out notice to neighborhood hours before the bus stop is going to get moved because she only got a few hours notice.
- Alder sends questions to staff, staff say zoning have no issues with moving to the square.
- One neighborhood response:

I like the idea of a Greyhound terminal on East Washington. And, perhaps eventually in the same complex as a Yahara station train depot. I think they could be complementary transportation services. I think ground tranportation needs to eventaully code share like the airlines do to make for more seamless destination options.

- Business community and UW doesn't like it and tells Mayor's office and Economic Development Director.
- Within 3 business days, over a holiday/furtlough/spring break weekend, changes are made to accommodate business community and UW and inconvenience bus riders.

Do you think the neighborhood could have gotten this kind of response? If the business community says jump, does the Mayor ask "how high"? Why wasn't Alder Rummel involved since its on her side of the Avenue? What do UW students think of the UW Research Park position on this? How surprised are people going to be when they get dropped off at the wasteland known as the North Transfer Point with not much around, except maybe Wiggie's. Why wasn't Alder Maniaici's suggestion of the square utilized? There's a lot more options for riders there and its closer to the density of the UW and downtown. It made more sense. Don't get me wrong, this was all poorly thought out, I don't know why that location was chosen with no shelter near by in the first place, but imagine getting dropped off in the rain this morning at the North Transfer Point. Or getting to E Wash and Baldwin and finding out the bus stop moved and having to try to figure out how to get to the bus stop. I'm sure glad the business community is happy and not inconvenienced, but this seems like another stupid decision, there have to be better options.
Read more!

Live Blog Attempt of the Council Briefing on Library (Edited Slightly)

Here's we go . . .

NOTE: The meeting got done about 1:14, these are the notes as I got them at the time. I hope I did ok. Please excuse the likely additional/traditional typos. You'll want to start reading from the bottom to read it chronologically.

NOTE 2: I edited a few sections so it was more clear, more editing to do, if I get to it.

1:13. Clear says that Bruer would have been here but his mother passed away. Mayor wraps up ans says feel free to contact Mayor, Widder or Palm.

1:12 Clear says that they may have a council briefing before the meeting on the 13th. Kerr says that is good, but she says that we should talk to the alder. T Wall proposal is not something Kerr is willing to support. Kerr walking out the door.

1:10 Kerr thanks Widder, pretty dismayed by whole thing, more comfortable now, thought renovation might be good positive, but concerned about how go to where they are. She wants to hear from Verveer before she supports it. Still his district, sorry he's not here, urge colleagues to consider talking directly with Verveer. She doesn't know where he is, if this was in your district would want colleagues to touch base with you before coming to conclusions. Kerr is leaving.

1:09 Clear says rebuild was more of a runner up than T Wall proposal. Clear says no one said we need to look at T Wall option.

1:08 Cnare asks why we can't pick up the runner up. i.e. T Wall. Mayor says uh . . . Widder says all same pitfalls of what we just went through. We could end up in the same place. Mixed use and that always was something that bothered him. But, its more to process, could spend 6 months negotiating. Palm says Wall had a new place to move library at every meeting. Mayor says they want a stand alone library. Capital Neighborhoods didn't support Wall. Cnare leaves

1:05 Schmidt says that we should do it right and move the library if we need to. Palm says we have done this condo thing before, library board was confident they could do it. Over time, more and more people in city government and Mayor's office got less comfortable because we were losing more control over design and details. That would have been one of the biggest issues with council, we had little control over exterior. Palm says more options with rebuild. Schmidt says trying to say he's willing to move library to make it right.

1:03 Schmidt says he asked Kunkler if they could do it. He said the look was pained but he said he could do it. $38.5 was entire project. Schmidt asks when that changed. Mayor says that they just couldn't move off their number, maybe they were hoping we would cut money from our interior space or increase public fundraising but $10M was tough. Palm says a lot of alders asked and got same response. Clear says it was a pained yes.

1:01 Schmidt asks about the process and RFP. Mayor says that the surplus property process requires people to get option to purchase. Schmidt asks if it is the sale of the site. No one answers. Widder says that buying new land would require RFP. Palm points out a similar situation where they didn't. Palm says that there are different things that trip the RFP. Mayor says they could work with one developer and sell it to them, but for a site of the prominence and importance, doesn't see us doing that.

1:00 Clear says that it is as much of a function of space. Palm says yes, if had computer lab could do more. Need more space. That is one of reasons by 104,000 isn't enough and 126,000 is better.

12:57 Maniaci asks about the cost gap, new materials and technologies, she wants a 21st century library, not happy with state of collection. Widder says top to bottom total rebuild only thing same is structure and location. Widder says goal is that square footage will make more accessible to the public to display primary collection as well as IT for 21st century. Maniaci asks about collection materials. Palm says that is a different issue, should talk to budget staff, operating budget issue. Palm says what we have is not bad, just too small. We don't have 1980 computer, they are good, great databases, how do we expand the use to meet demands, but the true collection should talk to library staff. Widder says it is operational issue. Widder says spend $1M each year on materials, if they had more they would spend more.

12:55 Maniaci asks will the library move or stay in place?. Widder says designers will have to figure that out. Can be done in phases but will add cost. Looking at taking collection out to another space and cheaper retail downtown. Maniaci says central collection is there and it will impact all branches and advocates taking it to some warehouse space. Widder says they are looking at it.

12:53 Maniaci asks about fundraising, how much will it be and will it be harder if people aren't excited about a new building. What have you been hearing from donors. Widder says to forget what current building looks like. Says if we take it down to skeleton it will be something none of us can imagine. Says at time they were looking at it they said $5M for rehab, they have retained outside fundraising consultant to figure it out, but design can be exciting and it will determine what they can raise. $5 -7M is the goal. Says one foundation is exciting.

12:51 Cnare asks about all the other grand ideas out there. Mayor talks about DMI discussion, thinks they made a great statement, would like to see it work but if it doesn't they support moving ahead on current site. DMI statement is reasonable. What Mayor has said is he will talk to anyone, but he doesn't think going back to square one is a realistic option. Mayor says we've been working on it over a decade, money is in the budget, requires additional action by you guys but not a budget amendment. If go back to square one, will have to re-fight this in 2011 budget, won't know where end up, but can be sure will cost us more.

12:49 Says that supported this last fall, but once phase 2 was pulled off, he thinks they got cold feet, once that was off he endorses what Mayor is doing now. Says that using underutilized capital parking ramp is a big issue for him. At another site parking will be an issue. Doesn't want a long debate about why it fell apart.

12:47 Maniaci? asks how you came to $5M apart. Mayor explained, I missed it. Clear and Kerr have exchange about the numbers they looked at. Kerr says that the numbers they are talking about is not what was in the budget. Mayor says what made the project sing was the room taxes on the hotel, that was the project they liked. When they pulled off phase two, we retain the asset, but we don't know what happens and then all the numbers get turned around.

12:43 Kerr says budget was $37, they said $38.x, how did this break down over 4% of the project? This is not atypical. By order of magnitude, this doesn't make sense. This seems odd. She uses a house example. Mayor says he has walked away from house over 4%. Mayor says hard to go back to council with these number which are greater than consultants said it should cost. $1.3M over is what council voted for, can't go back and ask for $1M to $1.5M more. Kerr asks about looking at other aspects of the project to get to 4% of the deal, did you look at anything else besides financing. Mayor says no. Widder says that they asked them to go back and look at the project and they couldn't shave any costs. They said they couldn't deliver for $23. Mayor says also 15 vote budget item. Kerr says not want to add, wanted to shave costs.

12:42 Maniaci asks why condo was taken off table over $900,000. Mayor says closer to $2M they were going to gurantee the price 23.9 and additional costs of interest and parking and it all added up to $2M. Fiore took it off the table. Says it was Fiore's idea.

12:41 Clear asks about timing and air rights and entitlements. Mayor says guessing. Widder says that Fiore teams didn't want to just be a seller of air rights.

12:40 Clear asks why phase 2 came off the table. Mayor says he doesn't know, it would just be speculation. They had multiple partners. Fiore is land holder and landlord, Ergens is a developer, Epstein Uhen is architect and Findorff was construction. Thinks it was something about their structure, but that is speculation.

12:34 Clear asks how we got here, how did it shift from Fiore to public works? How did that decision get made and when? Mayor says that T Wall was the beginning, T Wall has a project, needed a process. Process started with mixed use condo project like Sequoia, T Wall proposed the same, so that was what was anticipated and why responses came in the way they did. Went through long process and Fiore won. They weren't comfortable with the public-private partnership, but they did it. What turned them was that they couldn't get to $37M cuz wanted to build $14M on interior. Fiore couldn't guarantee less than $23.9 for the shell and they needs $23M, so they started looking at air rights and costs to develop project. Mayor says that costs were cost of doing business but Fiore said you are taking the project we designed, but what are they paying for. Mayor asks for a list, they never did it, gave us one number. They wanted over $1M. Mayor says if go to building on the site, straight public works, like building a fire station. Does that answer your question.

12:33 Palm says he wants to hear what others have to say.

12:32 There was only one copy of the handout for the three reporters, but I think the last two sections capture it all.

12:29 Widder says that if we wait it will cost more and we will get less. Construction costs will go up. Deferred maintenance could cost serious money. Delay means would need to start from scratch (acquire site, pay for structural costs which we already have and parking might be an issue. New Market Tax Credits will be harder to get (less projects and competition now) and there are limits to funding sources (Borrowing can't go over $17M, private fundraising is a challenge, new market tax credit issues)

12:26 Tripp Widder, Library President, served over 10 years. has a hand out to address why this is the best location for rebuild of the property. It is within 1 block of State St and Cap Square so more foot traffic. Adjacent to Overture and Museums. Allows for stand alone library which is best for identity. Close to existing municipal parking ramp that is underutilized. Serves as neighborhood/branch library to new developments (condos) downtown. Easier to operate and staff. This will have better loading, concern with Fiore was shared loading. Library board on record strongly supporting current location. We own the site. [He also noted Fiore project was selected because preserved existing location.)

12:24 Says point is we can build a great library and not compromise and in some ways better cuz more space and greener. Just as exciting as Firore project.

12:20 He says the advantages of new building are that they will have 1/3 more space, project will be done 12 to 14 months sooner, this will be one of the greenest greenest building, it will take more less private fundraising, and it will be more efficient to run. Says others can talk about it later. Shows other library remodels. Maniaci joins the group, up to 7 alders now.

12:17 Why the quick pivot? Mayor attempts to explain his flip-flop. But really he just explains how long the different scenarios will take. Rebuild is 24 months, New site is 50 months. Bids would go out 15 months later with new project and they would need to recreate process, rewrite RFP, etc. Construction on current site is 12 months, would be 24 months on new site. Would lose advantages of construction bids, people need jobs now, great alternative. Existing library will continue to deteriorate.

12:16 Points out language in budget from Mallards saying its a sample of how they did put negotiations in the budget and the budget isn't a done deal.

12:14 Mayor shows Fiore info from previous meetings that he says alders saw. The documents shows $35.7 is what consultants said it should cost and $35M for public works project. Mayor points out August 24 email from Fiore that says they will work to get to the number in the Mayor's budget.

12:09 How'd we get here. Mayor says the budget was 17M in borrowing, Fiore's last offer was 22.5M. $17M in borrowing for reconstructed library with half and full 3rd floor. Total is $37M in budget, $38.5 was last offer from Fiore, $27M total for half a 3rd floor and $30M for a full third floor. He cautions these are preliminary numbers, he needs to hire folks to get more concrete numbers. In terms of revenue for the project $4M is lost because there will be no sale of the building and New Market Tax Credits drops form $6 to $4.5M or $5M. Fundraising drops from $10M to $5.5M - $8M. But, we will have 126,500 square feet or 139,000 square feet of building instead of 104,000. Cnare now here as well as Kerr, we have 6 alders.

12:07 Mayor starts out with a brief overview. He says there will be pictures of new libraries that are reconstructions. Same presentation he will give later at Library Board. Claussius joins the 3 alders.

12:05 Continuing to admire Larry Palm's iPad, meeting not started yet.

12:03 So far, Mayor is in the hallway talking to the press. Clear, Palm and Schmidt the only alders here. A handful of staff and reporters. Powerpoint is set up. Will need to get a copy later. Read more!

Library (Shades of Edgewater Craziness)

And the twisting and turning and arm twisting continues . . . It looks like the logic behind council actions on the library will be a tortured as the some of the things going on with the Edgewater..

BUDGET LANGUAGE
This is what the council passed:

New Central Library
This project includes sufficient funding for a Central Library project. In their evaluation, development and design of the new Central Library, City staff is directed to study and consider the feasibility of including either a rooftop intensive community garden and/or a green roof. This project includes $1.6 million of borrowing reauthorized from 2009. Other funding in 2010 includes $6 million from the New Markets Tax Credit Program and $4 million from the sale of land. Private contributions of $10 million are anticipated in 2011 and 2012 ($5 million in each year). The City will not commence any significant portion of the construction of its portion of the project until it has received assurance that the federal New Markets Tax Credits are available.

I looked at it yesterday to prepare for my show, because I recalled Verveer saying that the budget language didn't say "new" and that is why they don't need to amend the budget. Well, I found some more surprises in there, and asked Rummel and Verveer about them. I'll get the interview up on Monday to see their responses, meanwhile . . . here's few things to think about.

RESOLUTION TO CHANGE BUDGET
This is the resolution Clear and Palm have drafted:

WHEREAS, the 2010 Capital Budget includes $23,000,000 for a new Central Library; and
WHEREAS, the new library project was dependent on successful negotiations with a developer for several phases of the project; and
WHEREAS, these negotiations were not successful; and
WHEREAS, the existing Central Library building systems are past end-of-life usage, and the current building is not adequate for 21st century library operations; and
WHEREAS, the structure of the existing building is sound and capable of being expanded by an additional story; and
WHEREAS, a re-imagined Central Library, built around the structure of the existing building, can be architecturally beautiful, environmentally sustainable, economically feasible, technologically advanced, operationally efficient, aesthetically welcoming and can function as a vital community asset for many years to come;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Common Council supports rebuilding of the
existing Central Library.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the 2010 Capital Budget, Library Project #2, is amended to strike the word "new" and replace it with "rebuilt."
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the Common Council supports the ongoing process of
Engineering Division Facilities Management to recommend an architect and design engineering firm for this project and present a contract to the Council for approval.
City

QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RESOLUTION
So, my first question is, where did this negotiation come from? What was to be negotiated? I thought there was a surplus committee and an RFP process and that was either accepted or rejected. But oops, wait, it looks like the council never voted on it - I think this turns out to be the fatal flaw. Instead they put money in the budget and made amendments (Amendment 1, 2 and 3) to the budget, but those just totally got ignored.

My second question is, what's the fiscal note on this, they are looking for co-sponsors, but there's no fiscal note. That would seem to have a very significant impact on the resolution and could result in this having to be a 15 vote item.

My other biggest questions are covered by Rummel:

From: Rummel, Marsha
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 8:27 PM
To: Clear, Mark; Palm, Larry; Verveer, Mike
Cc: May, Michael; Brasser, Dean
Subject: RE: Central Library resolution

Amending the Cap budget Library Project 2 by deleting the word 'new' and replacing it with 'rebuilt' does not address the adopted budget language of $6m in new market tax credits and $4m from the sale of the existing building.

Can someone provide an explanation?

Thanks

Marsha

There are many, many, many other questions, which will come soon, but those are the biggies. A taste of other things to think about are any where will the library be relocated during rehab? Will there still be community gardens on the roof top? Is the Mayor's timeline at all realistic? What's going on behind the scenes as the Mayor plows forward on the project regardless of what the council thinks? etc. etc. etc.

PALM EXPLAINS

Hello fellow council members-

I've been talking to a few of you about the unsuccessful effort to move the Central Library to the Network 222 site and sell the current site for redevelopment. As you know that deal did not (has not) worked out. As the Library Board member I was not part of the negotiations but as a Board of Public Works member I know of some of the complications that occur when trying to move from a "grey-box" purchase to a true public works project and how that could derail any negotiations. When the redevelopment of the current site was removed from the negotiations, it really did make the financial environment change. Change so dramatically that it brought a very worked-over reuse of the current site financially similar.

I'm not defending the Mayor for "selling" the project too well... Those Andrew Statz numbers were pretty compelling. Is this 'bait-n-switch'? Maybe. But the numbers were all based upon a framework of a deal as opposed to an actual deal. Nothing was signed,

I have said to many of you that my preference was for the 'remodel' option:
• Floor size. Simply put it is more economically to staff a larger floor size on fewer floors than on multiple floors. Years of library data proves this. A three story library will be more economical over the long run than the seven story library. This is from our operating budget and will be a cost year after year.
• Reuse of a current structure. The current structure is strong. It is everything that's wrapped around it that has fallen into disrepair, abuse. Just like the reskinning of the Meriter Hospital on W Wash, the basics are good. We can create a beautiful building on our current site.
• Location. I'm not sure what draws people to West Washington Avenue, but I find the connection to the Overture Center and State Street (and still be as close to the state capitol) to be very compelling. Technically this building serves two purposes: a local library branch and an administrative hub. For a local library branch, this is as good of a location as I think you will find in downtown Madison.
• Control. Simply put the city has much more control over a project that is on our own site versus another site. We control the architects, project managers, construction process and everything else you normally see with other city projects. Buying the ‘grey box’ was easy and convenient but it was a leap of faith. That might have worked on a project like South Madison and Sequoia, but it was certainly more challenging on an iconic project like the central library.

As always, I’m looking to get a library project done. I’ve been through two other attempts over the past decade, and it would be a great disappointment not have a new central library. I ask you to not to get too wrapped up in “what went wrong” or searching for another site. While I certainly want the new central library to be a strong civic building, the real impact will always be what happens on the inside. Any project that we do will create a 21st century library: where books, materials, information, technology and people co-mingle and create knowledge.
Sure, there are still those that wonder if libraries will have a place in the next 50 years, but to me it is clear that it will. We need flexible spaces that can support unimaginable offerings to us today. Our current building can not do that.

I encourage you to actively participate in whatever conversation we have. I appreciate the disagreements and discussions I’ve had with many of you over the years about the library, it’s position in the city and what the council should do to support the system.

Let me know if you have any questions, comments or concerns about what I’ve proposed. I know that there is an actual resolution that is going around pushing forward with a substantial remodel of the current structure. Give what I know; I believe that is the only way to go at this point in time. I hope I can count on your support.

Larry

Some other notes:
1. Current library: how did it get so bad?
a. When I started on the library board in 1996, the building was old then. There were some improvements made (technology, paint and carpeting) but we knew that until the basic mechanical systems were either replaced or upgraded none of those little things would make much of a difference.
b. During the days before our current director (who also started in about 1996) the library had not opened, remodeled or invested in a facility in some time. This was politics and the engagement of the prior director. I would defer to other Alders and citizens for the specifics but suffice it to say the library was not in a position to support the changes to our physical facilities. As demonstrated since 1996 we have:
i. Opened Alicia Ashman branch
ii. Moved and re-opened Hawthorne, Sequoia and soon South Madison.
iii. Remodeled Pinney (actually twice), Monroe
iv. Envisioned a new far-east side library at Grand View Commons.
c. The library board continues to support the development of the library branches. We are actively looking at where a far north/eastside library would be best placed and continue to work on options for the far southwest side.
d. After years of neglect the only solution is a total overhaul/replacement. In the future I would hope the Common Council and Mayor would support gradual improvements, much like our expected improvements to Ashman in the coming years. At about a decade old, Ashman is showing its age and continue re-investment will help keep it strong. This reinvestment must be part of the package for any central library so that this investment is preserved for years to come.
2. Library structure: centralized or not?
a. Our library is based upon a centralized support function. All support function – administration, book processing, print shop, support, etc. – are based at the Central Library. Sure we could de-centralize it placing some of these functions at each branch or creating additional administrative buildings. Over the years the library board has looked at these various functions and has continued to support the dynamic synergy that comes from support staff that is together and embedded in a library facility.
b. I believe we save money in our operating budget based upon these support staff members working together in tandem.
c. The Madison Public Library is well regarded and rates consistently high against our peers, even as other cities of our size spend considerably more in library funding. Ann Arbor – a university community about half our population spends nearly twice as much on their library facilities. Yet, we continue to rank high on library indexes. Our system must be working – over the years I have seen the incredible creativity, knowledge, support and connections our staff have to each other, the system and the residents of Madison.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
According to Clear:

Ald. Palm and I have drafted the attached resolution, with assistance from Library Board chair Tripp Widder. Our intention is to introduce it at the April 13 council meeting with referral to BOE. The library board will consider this resolution informally at their April 5 meeting (since it will not have been introduced yet), along with a resolution to "un-surplus" the existing building.

LABOR SUPPORTS
Sigh, should I ask how many jobs?

I am writing this letter on behalf of the 4000 member families of the Building and Construction Trades Council Of South Central Wisconsin to express, in the strongest possible manner, our support for the Downtown Library project.

As you may know, every craft in our council is experiencing at least 20% unemployment at this time; many have a much higher rate. Some are experiencing rates over 50%.

It is our firm belief that you cannot have a great downtown without a great library. In addition to this, we need the jobs now, not years from now.

I cannot overstate our case. A project like this will literally keep some of our member families in their homes and out of bankruptcy. We need your support for the project now not years from now.

Although some pundits say the recession is over, I can state unequivocally that the construction industry has not been affected yet. In addition to this there are few other project on the horizon for this season, which will be the worst in decades.

Please join with us and support the library project today.

Sincerely,
Scott Vaughn
Executive Director
Building and Construction Trades Council

Hmmm, are temporary jobs a reason to make a commitment for the next 50 years?

FINALLY
Overall, I don't mind a rehab, in fact I think I prefer it, but there's a ton of issues to be resolved. I hope the council doesn't let this discussion fatigue them like the Edgewater and they just go along to get along. I hope they sink their teeth into this and the many un-discussed issues with the Edgewater and take some leadership over the future of these two projects, but do that with an attitude to not just "get it done" but to "get it done right." Our community deserves that.
Read more!

Greyhound . . . oh, btw, we're moving. Tomorrow. In less than 12 hours.

The only story that ends up in my google reader to pass along to you. But the story is more about what you don't see. One might think this was some kind of April Fools joke.

From: Harmon, Ray
Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 5:06 PM
To: ALL ALDERS
Subject:

Dear Alders-

I wanted to let you know that yesterday I was contacted by Greyhound and informed the lease on their current temporary space on Stoughton RD ends March 31, 2010 and begin temporarily operate a curbside service at the intersection of East Washington and Baldwin St., beginning Thursday, April 1. From this location, Greyhound will continue to run 10 daily schedules. Tickets can be purchased online. Greyhound is working closely with city officials to find a permanent location in Madison.

Please see attached release from Greyhound for additional information.

Sincerely,

Ray Harmon
Office of Mayor Dave Cieslewicz

Working closely with the city, they give them 24 hours notice and the alders get even less. Poor Alder Maniaci sent the notice out at 2am to her constituents with a note:

On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:00 AM, Maniaci, Bridget wrote:
Neighbors,
Please let me know of your thoughts.
Thanks,
Bridget

I'll tell you what I think, and I'm not directing these comments at Alder Maniaci but Greyhound . . . this is a shitty way to do business. If someone were leaving on a Greyhound bus today, do they wait by Pug Mahones, or EVP or on the other side by the old Marquip building? Where do people wait in bad weather? What restrooms can they use while waiting? What do they do in bad weather? Is our neighborhood coffee shop to become the Greyhound bus station? Were they consulted about this? Aren't there city approvals needed for curb side pick ups? Are they removing parking spaces? Are they sharing Madison Metro's bus stops and how will that work? And, um, what about those who don't have a credit card to buy tickets on-line, who are also likely the same people who don't have internet access except at public libraries?

For what it is worth, here's the press release:

DALLAS (March 31, 2010) – Greyhound will temporarily operate a curbside service at the intersection of East Washington and Baldwin St., beginning Thursday, April 1. From this location, Greyhound will continue to run 10 daily schedules. Tickets can be purchased online. Greyhound is working closely with city officials to find a permanent location in Madison.

For Greyhound ticket information in Madison, call 1-800-231-2222.

About Greyhound
Greyhound is the largest North American provider of intercity bus transportation, serving more than 2,300 destinations across the continent. For fare and schedule information and to buy tickets call 1-800-231-2222 or visit the Web site at www.greyhound.com. Follow Greyhound on Twitter for the latest news and travel deals, http://twitter.com/GreyhoundBus.

So, if you bought tickets for this weekend to get out of town, SURPRISE! you're leaving from a new location, apparently, they'll twitter you about it? Or worse yet, if you left on spring break and left from Stoughton Rd, you're in for a surprise when you get dropped off at Baldwin and E. Washington Ave.

Don't get me wrong, its a much better location than Stoughton Road and I have at least one staff member who will be thrilled they don't need to bum a ride from friends to get to the station, but as I said before, this is a shitty way to do business. No notice, no working out logistics, no good information for the public.
Read more!

The Mayor, Blogging, Council Use of Web Pages & Woeful Use of Technology

Inspired by Kristin's puff piece on Mayor Dave Cieslewicz blogging . . . not her fault its a puff piece, not much news happening and I'm sure she had to write something and I'm sure the Mayor's office encouraged her to do it for the free pr. Anyways, here's my mishmash of thoughts on technology and the elected officials.

THE MAYOR'S "BLOG" - BREAKING THE LAW? ER, POLICY.
I've written about this before. None of the policies have changed. In fact, I double checked and about the only thing on the sorely-in-need-of-an-update IT website is their web policies from 2006. It still says, on page one:

Blogs, Chat Rooms, Forums, etc.
Creating blogs, chat rooms, forums, or any other avenues for content to be posted without prior review are prohibited on any sites associated with or hosted by the City of Madison. The City would be liable for the content and does not have the resources to review or monitor what gets posted. Current Network and Security Policies prohibit City employees from using personal email accounts, chat rooms, and instant messaging.

Now, on its face, you'd think blogs were not allowed and what the Mayor is doing is against the policy. He writes something called Mayor Dave's Blog. And this policy says that "creating blogs" . . . "are prohibited" . . .

There are three reasons that he is allowed to do it. One is, according to IT staff, it's not a blog. It doesn't allow comments. And it doesn't even link to anything, so its little more than a daily update of a website. Originally, it wasn't even archived. It's finally archived, which is good, since they need that for open records purposes.

The second reason that is given is that the policy was created because they don't want things posted to the web that have not been reviewed by staff. Since the Mayor's staff reviews it, they say its ok. However, I'm not sure they are reviewing it to make sure it confirms to the website policies of the City of Madison, which is the point of that requirement.

The third reason is, quite frankly, he's the Mayor. See below for why alders haven't yet been allowed to blog on the city's website.

Any which way, its a good thing he's blogging but a) its too bad that it's not a real blog with links and comments and b) I think that someone other than the Mayor's staff should probably be reviewing it to make sure it conforms to city policies, particularly to review if it has political content. However, I pity the city staff person that would have to tell the Mayor he can't post something because it doesn't comply with the web policies.

COUNCIL BLOGGERS ON PRIVATE SITES
Several Council members over time have started and stopped blogs:

My blog started at the end of November 2005 and it is the only one that has been around consistently for this long. I started mine because I had blogged for Dane101.com and Madison.com and I wanted to do it my own way and not interfere with or adhere to the rules of the other blogs or use their clunky software. I was also wanting full disclosure on how much I was getting lobbied since the lobbyists weren't filling out their reports, but I wasn't sure my content fit well with the other sites. I'm not sure my content is still on either site, but a HUGE thank you to Dane101 for helping be provide information to the public that was not available through the city website.

Zach Brandon started his January 2006 and ended December 2006.

Larry Palm's blog says you need to be invited to read it. Which, I'm not sure an elected official can do due to open records laws, depending up on what, if anything is on it. I don't recall when he started his, but I think it was shortly after Zach's.

Eli Judge had a blog that ran from April 2007 to April 2009. He incorporated video into his site and posted relatively frequently - meaning a couple times a month, but there were a few skipped months, typically in the summer when students were gone.

Brian Solomon had 5 posts in 2007, 3 in 2008 and 1 in 2009.

Bryon Eagon seems to have a post or two a month.

Bridget Maniaci has a blog, with 32 posts this year. You'll have to see for yourself what you think of it. Anything I say will be suspect.

Michael Schumacher has a blog. He started it in May and posted until about the same time he stopped being in town. He's talked to me about blog posts he was working on, but they never materialized.

And that's it, I think. I apologize if I missed anyone. Former Alder Webber now has a blog site. It's got 21 posts in the last two months. As you can see tho, most blogs are either failures, shut down or they post very infrequently. Part of it is that not many people read them if you post that infrequently, which is why it would be useful to have them located on the city website were more people might view them, or at least let them link to them from the city's website. That might encourage more alders to think it is worth it to start and maintain a blog.

ATTEMPTED ALDER BLOG ON CITY SITE
When I was an alder, I asked if I could have a blog on the city website, like the Mayor's. I wasn't quite sure how I was going to use it, but I envisioned using it for district news and comment about upcoming and past council meetings and larger issues within the city. Tho, I realized it would be a challenge to have appropriate content and to not link to anything not on the city's website, but I still thought it might have some value and could supplement my current blog. Mostly tho, I thought it would be an easier way to put content on my web pages that the council office and IT set up.

At first I had to wait for them to work out the kinks and get the archiving system in place. Then, I had to wait for policies to be written. (I requested a copy of the policy, I saw a draft in early 2009, but never saw a final version.) Then, I had to get permission from the "department head", that being the Council President. This email was sent . . .

From: Edgerton, Sarah
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 4:34:23 PM
To: Bruer, Tim
Cc: Clear, Mark; Konkel, Brenda; Veldran, Lisa
Subject: Alder Konkel's request for "Blogging"
Auto forwarded by a Rule

Good Afternoon Alder Bruer,

Alder Konkel has requested rights to the Web Alerts application. The application will allow her to “blog” to the District 2 Council web site. As the Council Department Head, I need to get approval from you, before we can give Alder Konkel rights to the site.

Thanks,
Sarah

And, uh, guess what, no reply. I finally asked in person, and I was told to wait until after the election. There was too much concern about politicians blogging on the city site - even tho the Mayor was doing it. And that was the end of that.

Finally, I'm real curious if having a link to the city's website would help with page views. The Mayor says he had 15,000 page views last month. This month, on this blog, I have over 20,000 at the moment. I have to believe that if it were connected to a site with other content, that number might be even higher.

LISTSERVES
The other thing I really wanted to do was have a listserve for District 2 residents that could be signed up for through the city website. I had listserves set up for my neighborhood associations, but I either "own" them or "manage" them separate from the city. Which, is awkward, cuz now that I'm not the alder, I still control the listserves. I've left them in tact and am encouraging continued use of them and have authorized other neighborhood leaders to manage the lists, but it would be great if the districts could have those resources so that when alders turn over, the lists remain in tact. As far as I know, this was also something we were going to work on after the election and based on the lists you can sign up for - it looks like that resource still isn't available for the alders. Or they aren't using it. See comment below about Mark Clear's Council website.

GRADING THE ALDERS ON THEIR USE OF THE CITY WEBSITE
DISCLAIMER: First, let me say, its not their fault. They get no support whatsoever. It's pretty sad for a city our size. The primary council office staff are too busy gossiping and playing solitaire to be bothered with being helpful to the alders. And the quality you might get from that staff is hit and miss anyways. In fact, as you can see above, the alders are almost discouraged from using new technology.

As far as a I know, the council members are in charge of their own content, get little or no support from council and IT staff and had minimal training on the Contribute software that was finally loaded on their laptops. I think they should get more support and help in keeping their websites up to date. It could be a powerful tool for communicating with and educating their constituents about what is going on in their districts and in the city. There are several flaws in the system, of course, the largest is the archiving tools/lack of tools. They have to manually transfer the information to the archive page. And, if I were to do an open records request for the information that was on my website when I was an alder, I'm quite certain they would not be able to provide you with that information.

Just so you know, the alders have 6 areas which they can influence
- DISTRICT X HOME
- BIOGRAPHY
- DISTRICT NEWS
- INITIATIVES
- PENDING & ADOPTED LEGISLATION (This could be automatically fed from Legistar, but its not)
- ARCHIVES

Here's their grades
- F (No content in any of the areas, likely doesn't even realize they can add content to the site.)
Steve King
Bryon Eagon
Chris Schmidt
Mark Clear - Content on every page except initiatives and would have been a C or C+/B-, however, he has link on his front page for a listserve that is linked to his inactive campaign website (markclear.com). It think that's a huge no-no. He's not real big on ethics and open meetings and open government type issues, so I'm not surprised. A huge failing for council leadership. For what it's worth and to save it for the future since it won't be archived by the city, here is what it says:

If you live or own property or a business in District 19, I encourage you to join my e-mail list by sending a blank e-mail to join-d19news@lists.markclear.com.

- D (Random minimal content.)
Jed Sanborn - Has a bio, that's it.
Bridget Maniaci - August Edgewater Meeting, that's it.
Mike Verveer - A September Lisa Link meeting, an archived meeting and a minimal bio.
Shiva Bidar-Sielaff - Two district items from early fall.
- Marsha Rummel - Minimal bio, some district news items and some archived info.
Paul Skidmore - A bio, some district news and a post from September on the fire station.
Brian Solomon - A decent biography.
Tim Bruer - Weak bio and nothing else.
Thuy Pham-Remmele - A minimal bio and some good neighborhood links and an archived meeting.

NOTE: Those with only a bio are alders who have been around for a while. Council staff pushed us to get a bio to them before they turned over access to the website to us, so, the newer alders didn't get that same assistance.

- C (Minimal content, semi-current. Semi-current defined as posted in last 3 months.)
Lauren Cnare - A minimal bio, a newsletter from 2006 and an October meeting.
Judy Compton - A minimal bio, a September and October neighborhood meeting listed.
Joe Clausius - Minimal bio and October meeting.
Michael Schumacher - Bio, one piece of legislation and some neighborhood links.

- C+/B-
Julia Kerr - Content in every area but Pending and Past Legislation, not current.

- B (A bio, minimal content and current. Current defined as posted in last month. Or, an attempt to have content on each page.)
Satya Rhodes-Conway - Content on every page, but outdated.
Larry Palm - He was the leader for so long, but I didn't find much current. It was probably frustrating if no one else was using the pages no one was looking there for relevant information.

- A (Current site, with relevant regularly updated content and content in all areas.)
None.

And, there you have it folks. The council could really be using the city resources to help keep people informed, but without support, its difficult. On the other hand, the Mayor has a full time press person, a total of 10 staff in his office, plus command of the entire city workforce and the ability to "blog". The council, for comparison's sake, has 2 staff people for all 20 alders and rules that make it difficult. Read more!

Still Talking About the Edgewater . . .

Even tho the project may or may not be dead, it seems it is still the main thing people are talking about, so . . . here's another round up dedicated to the Edgewater.

WHERE WAS THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ON THE EDGEWATER
Ok, I'm not sure what Tim Cooley's role should have been, but it probably isn't to bash the city after the fact. He knew so little about TIF and wanted to play poker with taxpayer dollars, but that didn't stop him from commenting, now, he's commenting ignorantly about the approval process. (By the way, good comments at the end of that post.) I laughed as one neighbor responded to the article:

If Tim Cooley doesn't like the messy democracy we have in Madison because he'd rather have an easy job giving into every Tom, Dick and Harriet developer that wants to deface our city, he's welcome to leave and I'd be happy to sponsor his going away party.

I was shocked when the Economic Development Committee had no information (how many jobs? multiplier effect?) when they tried to make a decision about the Edgewater. I was shocked again when at the council meeting neither the unions nor Edgewater folks could say how many jobs would be created. My response to Cooley's comment:

“Our approvals process has to be streamlined,” said Tim Cooley, the city’s economic development director. “It just has to. We don’t have a choice anymore.”

is that maybe if he and his staff had been doing their jobs, the alders could have found differently, but with no info on the jobs, it made it kind of hard. I'm just dying to hear how he thinks the approvals process needs to be streamlines, cuz its not what the Mayor is proposing. The Mayor is talking about ADDING to the landmarks process and having the council weigh in on MORE projects, not less. Quite frankly, I'm sick of this talking point that we have been hearing for years that still has no details, what exactly do they mean by streamlining the process. Details please.

HOW MANY JOBS
No one seems to know, but the forons has some ideas.

IRONIC . . . AND SAD
Looking back, this article seems ironic. Here's my favorite line:

But Cieslewicz insists this new business-friendly approach doesn't mean the city is abandoning its commitment to good projects. There needs to be a balance, he says, between promoting economic development and protecting neighborhoods.

BE HONEST ABOUT IT
Both Stuart Levitan and I ended up on the Landmark's Commission after being kicked off other committees. We openly joked about it being the punishment committee, which is why I find it so interesting that it is receiving so much attention now. As we continue to discuss it's fate, I think Zweifel is right, lets just be honest. Do we care about our history, or not? I think many do not, so lets just be honest about it.

MAYOR WAS HONEST
This is what the Mayor wants to do:

Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said he wants city staff next year to review and update the city’s landmarks ordinance to strip the commission of its authority to reject construction projects in historic districts. The commission is designed to protect the integrity of historic buildings and historic districts in the city.

At least that is what this reporter got out of it.

NATIONAL TRUST STORY
Here's the article on the Edgewater from the Nation Trust for Historic Preservation.

CAP TIMES CALLS IT LIKE THEY SEE IT
And I'm glad they did. Here's what they have to say:

The truth is that the mayor is less concerned about democracy than about his inability to get his way. Cieslewicz wants to see the Edgewater project go forward and is willing to cut corners in order to make it happen.

Sadly, the opinion piece is titled "Mayor’s role key to renewing Edgewater project". Given how he has bungled it so far, lets hope not.

WHAT DOES DUNN/HAMMES WANT
First, silence. Then, a statement that sounds like the developer has given up. I could be wrong, but this sounds like a guy who has moved on to stadium projects elsewhere. So, what if Schumacher moves to reconsider and it passes and then the developer is no longer interested? There's still a long road ahead for this project with the Zoning Board of Appeals variance issue - if the Mayor doesn't change the law first. And the matter of TIF and the rest of the land use process. Perhaps, they just gave up.

THANK YOUR ALDER
No matter where you stand on the issue and no matter how your alder voted, I think they all deserve a huge thank you! Well, most of them who attended the meeting last week. The sat through a marathon session, got blasted by hundreds of often nasty emails and phone calls (Seriously people, grow up. What makes you feel like you can say those things to elected officials that would make your mother blush?) and really had to dig deep to find out how they were going to vote. Many struggled with the decision but in the end, I think most voted their conscience and they should be thanks for that. You can find your alder email here, or just email allalders@cityofmadison.com.

There's still more . . . but that's all I have for this morning.
Read more!

Lazy Friday Afternoon Round Up

There's so much out there today . . . county and city. No snow or Edgewater today, that'll be saved for Monday.

WHERE'S THE GREAT BUS SERVICE
I understand cutting back on holiday hours for full route service, but I don't understand this:

The paratransit standing rides will end early on Dec. 24, with no rides given after 5:30 p.m. Customers who normally have rides after 5:30 should contact the customer service center (266-4466) by 4:30 p.m. Wednesday, Dec. 23, to arrange for an earlier travel time.

All standing and long-term paratransit rides on Christmas will be canceled. Passengers must schedule casual rides to travel.

Huh? Didn't metro have an extra $3M in their budget that helped bail out the city, couldn't they have saved some of that for holiday paratransit rides?

SHITTY CITY SERVICE
Yesterday I sent this message to city council staff Lisa Veldran:

Could I get a copy of the forms you use to track alder absences from the city for the last 6 months?
thanks!

She was out of the office, the other staff tried to get the info, but then I got this message from Veldran, coppied to the clerk and allalders.

Brenda Konkel can contact the City Clerk's office for official notices of absences. They should have them on file.

Now, remember, I was on the council for 8 years and was Common Council President for one year, I know the information is in the Council Office and that alders get emails informing them when alders are out of the city or country. The Clerk's office was very helpful and sent me this message:

Good afternoon. The City Clerk’s Office does not keep a file on Alderperson absences. However, I could have Information Technology do a search for any e-mail messages sent from the Council Office regarding Alderperson absences. Just let me know the time frame in which you are interested.
Thank you!
- Maribeth

As you can imagine, this refusal to give me the info the Council Office has didn't sit well with me. I'm not going to post what I wrote lest I further embarrass that staff member, but suffice it to say, I can hardly wait to see the results of my open records request and who she was trying to protect.

LOOKS LIKE THE SHERIFF'S AND FALK HAVE AN AGREEMENT.
All that, and they ended up with the same as everyone else.

Falk said the tentative agreement with the supervisors includes the same provision as all the other county unions have ratified: a 3 percent voluntary salary reduction for 2010 in exchange for eight additional days off and a guarantee of no layoffs in 2010. In addition, the agreement includes a 3 percent pay increase on December 17, 2011.

Why all the drama?

WHEN IS A 3% CUT NOT THE SAME AS A 3% CUT
Ok, the above just got my blood boiling all over again. How is it that the 3% for wages, benefits, overhead for non-profits equal to the 3% cut in wages only to the unions when they bargained and got various things (8 days off, promise of a 3% increase at the end of 2010, office space for unions, etc.) Can we get a 3% increase for 2011. I don't recall ever getting a 3% increase from the county.

JUST SAYIN'
When the County Board Supervisors attacked Kathleens appointments to the RTA last night, the separated Khristine Euclide from Dick Wagner, a former County Board Chair. Most, except Eileen Bruskewitz who attacked them for killing a county wide bus system, said they were both fine people, but they wanted someone from the Towns appointed, like in the resolution that the county board passed, but the corporation counsel said the decision was Falk's. What I found interesting was the difference in the votes:

Euclide
AYE: Erickson, Hesselbein, Hulsey, Levin, Manning, Matano, McDonell, Miles, Opitz, Richmond, Rusk, Schmidt, Stoebig, Stubbs, Veldran, Wheeler, Baryd, deFelice, DeSmidt, Duranzyck, Hendrick
NO: Ferrell, Gau, Hampton, Jensen, Martz, O'Laughlin, Ripp, Salov, Schlicht, Solberg, Wiggy, Willett, Bruskewitz, Downing. (All men except Solberg, Hampton and Bruskewitz)
ABSENT: Kostelic, Vedder
Passed 21 - 14 - 2 absent

Wagner
AYE: Erickson, Ferrell, Hampton, Hesselbein, Hulsey, Jensen, Levin, Manning, Martz, Matano, McDonell, Miles, O'Laughlin, Opitz, Richmond, Ripp, Rusk, Salov, Schmidt, Solberg, Stoebig, Stubbs, Veldran, Wheeler, Wiggy, Baryd, deFelice, DeSmidt, Downing, Duranzyck, Hendrick
NO: Gau, Schlicht, Willett, Bruskewitz
ABSENT: Kostelic, Vedder

I wonder what the difference was between the two in the minds of Ferrell, Jensen, Martz, O'Loughlin, Ripp, Salov, Wiggy, Downing. Like most county boards in Wisconsin, its an older white guys club, I don't know if that was a factor or not, but it looks wierd. Just sayin'.

OVERRIDE VOTE
Since I haven't gotten to the recap, here is how they voted:
AYE (Override): Ferrell, Gau, Hampton, Hesselbein, Jensen, Levin, Manning, Martz, McDonell, Miles, O'Loughlin, Opitz, Ripp, Salov, Schlicht, Schmidt, Solberg, Stoebig, Veldran, Wiggy, Willett, Bruskewitz, deFelice, Downing, Durancyzk
NO (stain veto): Erickson, Hulsey, Matano, Richmond, Rusk, Stubbs, Wheeler, Bayrd, DeSmidt, Hendrick
ASENT: Kostelic, Vedder

Override successful, 25 - 10, 2 absences

Here's Chariman Scott McDonell's explanation of his vote and urging colleagues to vote similarly:

Friends-
Some of you may have read or been contacted about the veto override vote tonight before the County Board on a 10 unit subdivision in the Town of Springfield. Just so you all understand that this is a rather nuanced issue from an environmental point of view, I thought I would share my thoughts with you on this topic.

Below is an email the County Board received from the Chair of the Town of Vienna. His central point is that the 10 unit subdivision is in the Town of Springfield Smart Growth Plan that the County Board adopted and the County Executive signed. This is true. While there is also language in the town plan regarding Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) and Conservation Subdivision planning, this petition was found by the Zoning Committee (controlled by progressives) to comply with the Town Plan. Complying with adopted plans is a central and critical componant of environmental protection and should bind not only the Towns but also the County.

In addition, a county-wide TDR ordinance is now pending before the County Board which the Towns may veto under Chapter 10 of the state statute. I have worked on this ordinance for years and it would positively affect thousands of parcels of farmland accross Dane County. One of the central premises of that ordinance is that towns would not be mandated to adopt a TDR ordinance, but rather the County will help them administer and implement a it. This veto does just the opposite. It says that because there is no TDR ordinance in place in the Town of Springfield a petition that complies with the Town plan will be vetoed (a town may adopt their own local TDR ordinance but it would not have the legal protection and assistance of the County). I have no doubt that if the County tries to force TDR on the towns over a 10 unit subdivision, the TDR ordinance will be vetoed by the Towns and I would not blame them for that since they were sold on this ordinance being voluntary. Reasonable people can have different views on this issue, but I do not believe that is in the best interest of smart and innovative planning countywide to uphold a veto of this petition. In my opinion it sends the wrong message about Smart Growth and adherence to planning.

Thank you for your time and attention.
Scott McDonell
County Board Chair

I hope to get a recap up, because there was some good discussion and it revealed some interesting things about possible motivations behind the veto.

Eh, that's all I have for my day off, there's actually much more . . . but I'm done.
Read more!

Edgewater Hang Over Round Up (Final)

Well, I got some sleep . . . but I feel like I have a hang over or something even tho I haven't had a drop of alcohol since the Packer's game . . . I'm calling it my Edgewater hang over. And I wasn't even at Dusty's party.

SCOTT MCDONELL SHOULD CHAIR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
Former Alder Robbie Webber and I watched the Edgewater debate from Media/Blogger Row in the Council Chambers. As we were sitting back there, we both noted that we thought the Mayor should take a more active roll in reigning in the council. Roberts Rules and the Council rules and a firmer hand likely could have shaved an hour or two off the council meeting the other night. Dane County Board Chair Scott McDonell is quick to reign in the county board members that stray. Particularly, when asking questions of speakers and staff, you should make sure they are really asking questions and not arguing through the questions asked of speakers. Additionally, we're quite certain at least one alder went over his 10 minute limit. Also, that "I gave Bob Dunn 25 minutes to Fred Mohs and Gene Devitt get to go on longer, but the rest of you have to stick to 5 minutes" decision really sucked. Finally, I don't know why people were told where they were on the list so they knew how long before they were going to speak, and then the people were called in a different order. All of the above just makes the council looks silly, and I think it could be better if the Mayor would actually chair the meeting up there instead of looking like he'd rather be any place by there. He could help rush the meeting along.

DID MAYOR DAVE HIT THE PANIC BUTTON
There was an unfortunate technology glitch when former city staffer Kitty Rankin went up to speak. City Channel has some automated system that cuts out soon after 11:30 and switches programming to something else. Luckily, Boyce was on the case and got it back up within a minute or two. However, it did cause those watching at home to wonder . . . Does Mayor Dave have a panic button up there . . .

GET ENOUGH BANDWIDTH ALREADY
City Channel got $70K from WYOU, maybe they can invest in some bandwidth so people don't get error messages when they try to watch the Council meeting on line? I heard several complaints from folks about this issue. Along with other problems with watching the Council meeting. I still maintain, if you want to really see what is going on, you should suck it up and come on down and watch it live. You can see how often Bruer is out of his seat and who bops around the room talking to whom. You could also see . . .

SLEEPING STAFF
Several people asked me why the council doesn't just recess their meeting and meet the next day. I think its fear of more people showing up to testify and a control issue so that votes don't change during the break. What I was noticing the other night was that there were an awful lot of staff at the meeting, who really didn't get asked any questions, but might have. I think I counted correctly and well after midnight there were the following staff there for the Edgewater debate: 2 city attorneys, 2 clerks, the City Engineer, the City Assessor, 4 planning staff, 2 economic development staff, 4 Mayor's staff and the Comptroller. Unfortunately, at various points, several of them can be caught sleeping. The worst was when the Mayor was the only one awake in the front of the room as the City Attorney and Clerk were both sleeping. I don't blame them. It's just absurd, they really need to do something about these long meetings. I don't know how any of them, or the alders, were expected to function at work the next day. And I can't imagine how much money was spent for that meeting - I'd love to see the bottom line as that was 11 hours of 17 of some of our most highly paid staff. Council leadership and the Mayor really need to learn how to manage these meetings. I hope the next Council President will take an active role in managing the meetings, they have several tools at their disposal to make this happen beyond having the Mayor chair the meetings more tightly.

SOGLIN JOINS IN
OK, I really don't get the argument that Mayor Dave and now former Mayor Paul Soglin are making. Do they really want ALL committee business to routinely get signed off on by the Council? Do they really, really, really want that? You could end up doubling the length of the City Council agenda. It's not just the Landmarks Commission, but many others that do city business without elected officials signing off. Additionally, in the zoning code rewrite, we trying to let staff make more decisions, make things that currently require Plan Commission approval only (conditional uses) be permitted uses. And trying to make some things the Council signs off on be a conditional use. You see, all of that is in response to the development community wanting a streamlined process. Da Mayors seem to want to reverse that trend, and it doesn't make sense. You can see here that any board, committee or commission that is listed as a "commission" or "board", except the Board of Estimates has some of these powers to make decisions without the council. As Alder Rhodes-Conway noted, she doesn't want to be determining what color someone can paint their house in certain neigbhorhoods. And I have to disagree, the system isn't broken, in fact, it worked. The appeal process is there to provide relief when a commission or board makes a bad decision. I can't imagine what changes folks are wanting to make, I'd love to see a specific proposal, as this could be a disaster. Finally, why is this only a problem with our current Mayor, I've been watching council meetings for 15 years and I haven't see this be a problem, until now.

OTHER EDGEWATER HAND OVER NOTES
Joe Tarr at the Isthmus does a nice job on the highlights. Some more thoughts here.

Sconz asks why they didn't refer? Here's my answer. They want the Certificate to be overturned and not just delay the vote and they knew they had reconsideration in their back pocket. If they refer, the question remains open, if they get reconsideration, they will pass a major hurdle in moving the project forward and can move on the Zoning Board of Appeals who could also stop the project.

DO OVER?
Schumacher makes headlines. Compton takes a more reasonable choice, chosing to appeal only if the developer wants to. Really, do they want to go through this all over again? I sure hope Judy Compton makes up her mind, and quickly, and I hope Council leadership and the Mayor make sure they can get the rest of the butts in the seats. I would HATE to go through all this all over again and not end up with a different result. And, I am wondering if Dunn wants to go through this again. Mark your calendars for January 5th. (And, by the way, did someone give Clear the wrong talking points? Was he out of the loop? Is he that much out of touch?)

I thought there were no winners. I felt much like Rhodes-Conway. However, this person disagrees.

A GOOD COMPROMISE?
The Mayor often says that if both sides are unhappy, it must have been a good compromise. I disagree, a compromise is win-win. He usually uses that phase when the "compromise" goes in his favor. Since the other night, most people walked away unhappy, is that, then, a good compromise?

ON A LIGHTER NOTE
Every (other) year the rookie on the council are required to provide entertainment at the holiday party for their colleagues. This year, the skit involved some Holiday Caroling . . . I happen to have gotten a copy of the lyrics. Enjoy!

Ha! Done by 9:30, only a half hour late . . . Read more!

Three Last Minute Legal Opinions On the Edgewater

Since most people aren't likely to know these exist prior to the meeting, I thought I'd share. The docs were sent to council members about an hour ago. I'm sure they'll all have time to thoroughly study them before the meeting, eh?

Common Council Members:

I have continued to receive questions on several matters related to the Edgewater Appeal on your agenda this evening. In the hopes of avoiding extended question and answer sessions tonight, attached are three brief supplemental legal memoranda discussing:


1. The Decision-Making Process.

2. The Question of Ownership.

3. The Question of Hardship under a Zoning-type Variance.

I request that Lisa Veldran make copies of these to be available for Council members.

Michael P. May
City Attorney
City of Madison

Read more!

I Can't Wait!!! Round Up (Final)

Silly, I know, but for those of us on the sidelines, this is like the superbowl.

EDGEWATER: IT'S DO OR DIE TIME
Geek Alert: I am just dying to hear the economic hardship argument and how they wade through the legal requirements of the ordinance. I'm sure there will be new information presented tonight. I tried to get it out of Dunn, but he was holding his cards close to the vest. I'm bummed I'll be at a board meeting working on the 2010 budget and trying to save WYOU instead of hearing it first hand. (No, I won't be at Dusty's party . . . but I wish I was . . . ) I will have it Tivo'd and will have to likely watch the performance after the meeting. I hope Dunn/Edgewater et al explicitly address the ordinance requirements and make their argument and don't just stand up there and say "jobs" and "good for the economy and neighborhood". Truth be told, I think its exciting to see redevelopment of this property. I was initially for the concept of a project when the Mayor was still against because "Fred Mohs would never let it happen". It's my dirty little secret. I think somewhere, there is a project that even I could approve and I actually kind of enjoyed working with Dunn and Supple one on one. I wish there would have been better leadership to help get this project to a point where it might be approved - I just don't think it is there yet. And I wish the Edgewater folks and the Mayor hadn't made such awful mis-steps along the way. I'm just bummed about the way this all unfolded and I REALLY don't want this project to destroy the landmarks ordinance and the council's credibility/integrity in the process. I have alot of respect for a few of the members of the council and I hope they do the right thing, or Dunn et al gives them the tools to justify their votes. But, I still haven't been convinced and can't see how it will happen. I'll be watching closely this evening. And, if it doesn't work out . . . there's always East Washington!

[Important note: Dunn said he'd buy me dinner if I said something nice about the project in my blog. So, nothing I said above should be considered as being "nice." :)]

THE REST OF THE STORY
This website made the rounds yesterday. The best endorsement of it tho, has to be this one from the former Landmarks' staff (for 30 years!) to the alders:

This site explains why you should not overturn the Landmarks Commissions decision:
http://sites.google.com/site/edgewatertherestofthestory2/home
Thank you,
Kitty Rankin

MORE ON THE EDGEWATER
Mayor Dave jumps the shark. That was my assessment as well. Although I personally found that he crossed the line long ago, it seems many are now taking note.

This response from Mayor Dave caused me to post this on my facebook:

Is Mayor Dave trying to write the RTA opposition's lit piece for them? Can someone get him to shut up? You can make alot of arguments for and against the Edgewater, but does "handful of unelected people" not being transparent and accountable have to be one of them? Come on Mayor Dave, you're smarter than that - think... about the RTA and how important it is!!!

He's just being reckless now. It's killing me. I wish he'd see the damage he is doing in the bigger picture. Or, if he does and doesn't care, I'm even more concerned.

More harsh words for Mayor Dave, and a challenge to the council.

Cnare vs. Bruer! I so wish she had run for Council leadership. I think she'd be much better and less likely to blindly do the Mayor's bidding.

OH BARF
What story lately doesn't say Mayor has an idea, Bruer thinks its great. And of course, staff say "yeah, but give us more money and we could do better". People, its Wisconsin, it snows here, this isn't news. Why is this such a problem? Does it take a study to figure it out. The Mayor has it figured out, he already apologized - he made a bad decision.

THOUGHTS?
People have been really helpful since I posted the "porch issue" yesterday in my round up. A particularly wonderful and helpful person sent me this. What do you think? Rob had a few other more creative ideas, and we're still wondering why we aren't grandfathered in. Several people commented that if I was in a Historic District I wouldn't be allowed to change it.

Still looking at all our options.

I have more, but . . . gotta get some work done. More tomorrow if I have time after the marathon meeting. Read more!

Mayor Dave's Hunger for Power

First it was the Water Utility, then the Transit and Parking Commission during the recent bus fare debate, now the Landmarks Commission. While the first two were obnoxious, this third one, raises some very interesting questions. I'll break it down.

IT'S OFFICIAL: IT IS AN OBNOXIOUS PATTERN
Seriously, anytime a body decides something not to Mayor Dave's liking he starts threatening members and trying to take away their power. It's just getting obnoxious.

The Water Utility issue was about who had the power to manage the water utility. The Mayor won that one with very little opposition. (2007)

The second one, the Transit and Parking Commissioners fought back a little, and some members were replaced. (2008)

Now, its the Landmarks Commission. (2009)

WHO'S NEXT?
Apparently, the Mayor wasn't paying attention when we revised Chapter 33 and, among other things, decided in 33.01(3):

(c) “Board or Commission” means a Sub-unit of the City, except for the Board of Estimates that is given some independent power to make determinations on behalf of the City of Madison.
(d) “Committee” means any Sub-unit other than a board or commission, and generally is limited to making recommendations or reports to the Mayor or Common Council or some other body, unless explicitly empowered otherwise. Any Sub-unit called task force, work group or similar name is a Committee.

I didn't hear the Mayor raising any objections at that time.

You've probably noticed that some committees have switched to commissions and some commissions have changed to committees, to reflect the above. Makes it easy to identify who might be impacted by this power grab. Anyways, if the Mayor wants to eliminate all decisions made by "handful(s) of non-elected people" he will have to review all these commissions and boards.

ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION COMMISSION
BUILDING CODE, FIRE CODE, CONVEYANCE CODE AND LICENSING APPEALS, BOARD OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
DISABILITIES, COMMISSION ON PEOPLE WITH
DISABLED PARKING ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE COUNCIL
EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES COMMISSION
ESTIMATES, BOARD OF
ETHICS BOARD
HEALTH BOARD OF FOR MADISON AND DANE COUNTY
HUMANITARIAN AWARD COMMISSION, REVEREND DOCTOR MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.
LANDMARKS COMMISSION
MADISON ARTS COMMISSION
MADISON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS
MADISON PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD
MONONA TERRACE COMMUNITY AND CONVENTION CENTER BOARD
PARK COMMISSIONERS, BOARD OF
PARKING COUNCIL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE/MOTOR VEHICLE COMMISSION
PERSONNEL BOARD
PLAN COMMISSION
POLICE AND FIRE COMMISSION
PUBLIC WORKS, BOARD OF
REVIEW, BOARD OF
SENIOR CENTER BOARD OF DIRECTORS
STREET USE STAFF COMMISSION
TRANSIT AND PARKING COMMISSION
URBAN DESIGN COMMISSION
WATER UTILITY BOARD
WEED COMMISSIONERS
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

I guess we could make these all advisory and take away all their powers and the Council could start dealing with all the mundane issues that they routinely work on with very little notice. I'm sure the Council can just take on all that extra work. Of course, some of these groups get their powers from state law, that might slow the Mayor down a bit.

WHAT ABOUT THE RTA
Need I say more? Every time he says what's in this article, as an RTA supporter, I cringe. Statements like:

That’s too much power for a commission without elected members, Cieslewicz said.

and

“The Common Council and I are accountable. If people have a problem with how we vote on a project, they can contact us. And if they don’t like the decision, they can make that point at election time.”

Can you just see the anti-RTA commercials and lit pieces now . . .

TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE
In that same article the Mayor says:

“I’m not criticizing the commissioners,” he said. “I truly believe they’re trying to do the best with an unclear ordinance. But I think legitimate issues have been raised about transparency and accountability.”

Well, what is more transparent and accountable than the City Council passing a law during public meetings, charging a committee, which also has public meetings, to follow it. And, if there is disagreement, taking it to a public meeting of the Common Council. How is that not transparent and accountable.

What isn't transparent and accountable is passing a law, then ignoring it when it doesn't suit your needs and spinning that as being ok, because of factors like economic development and jobs. What the laws are there for, are to provide predictability and transparency to avoid favoritism and ad hoc decision making.

WHAT ABOUT STREAMLINING THE PROCESS
Speaking of economic development . . . whatever happened to "streamlining the development process" in the name of "economic development"? It was one of the primary issues that led to our Economic Development Planning and beefing up the committee. This is interesting to me, cuz the push had been to have less decisions come to the Common Council, but if you follow his, and Alder Skidmore's logic . . . it means loooooonnnnggggger council meetings and more process for the developers. The exact opposite of what I thought we were trying to do.

You see, we've been working towards making the development process easier. Moving towards letting staff make more administrative decisions instead of having commissions vote on them. Moving towards making some more routine issues that needed full approval be conditional uses so the Plan Commission can make the decisions without going to the council.

The move to take away those powers from the Landmarks Commission flies in the face of all that work to reduce the unending whining we've been listening to from the development community for years. This is an about face. Makes no sense.

RESPONSE TO FACEBOOK COMMENTS
Ok, I did call the Mayor "nuts" on my twitter/facebook update yesterday. Really, I meant he had a nutty idea. Didn't mean to name call, calm down folks. But I stand by the concept, this is a nutty idea! (See Streamlining the Process above.)

P.S. Sorry about the lack of links this morning. I may try to put them in this weekend.
Read more!

Chilly Morning Round Up

A few topics to chew on as you drink your coffee or tea, or hot cocoa and try to warm up . . .

GOOD THING THE COUNCIL MEETING WAS CANCELLED
Maybe the Worker's Compensation Fund might not get so much money. They had slated it to get extra money from the general fund so that we spent up to our Expenditure Restraint Program (ERP) limit. But with this snowstorm that is supposed to break the bank, they'll like have to adjust that. Won't impact our general fund quite the way this article says, since they were going to put that money into the fund (optional), instead, it will go towards plowing. At least that is what should happen. Of course, the Governor did declare a state of emergency, so perhaps the state will come through for us?

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE TO WEIGH IN ON EDGEWATER
Gee, I wonder what they will say . . . I'm on the edge of my seat!

The Economic Development Committee hold a special meeting at 5:00 pm on Monday, December 14, in Room 260 of the Madison Municipal Building, 215 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. Please use the Doty Street entrance to get into the building.

This meeting is a rescheduling of the December 8 meeting which was cancelled due to bad weather, and has the same agenda. The agenda may be found at: http://legistar.cityofmadison.com/meetings/2009/12/8792_A_ECONOMIC_DEVELOPMENT_COMMITTEE_09-12-14_Agenda.pdf

METRO SPINS
Sound like many bus riders spent extra hours on the bus yesterday. Tales of two hour bus rides seemed common among my facebook friends. Lots of kudos for the drivers for handling the snowy conditions and not many complaints as the buses were stuck in the same traffic with everyone else. What did make me laugh was this:

Morning Madison Metro Announcement

Due to icy road conditions, Metro buses are running approximately 10-15 minutes schedule.

Drivers are maintaining schedules as conditions allow. Delays may increase through the rush hour.

Please plan extra time in your commute.

Evening Madison Metro Announcement

Thursday, December 10: 4:09 PM.

Due to icy roads, many buses are running 10-30 minutes behind schedule. Drivers maintain schedules as conditions allow.

Please plan extra time for your commute.

Optimistic group of folks they are! Sounds like they should have added an hour to that notice.

CITY WANTS TO KNOW WHAT YOU THINK

Sustainable Madison Information and Survey Available on the Web.

You can now view information regarding what Madison has done regarding sustainability and green initiatives from other cities.
You can also fill out an on-line survey and help the City priorities sustainability goals and initiatives.

http://www.cityofmadison.com/Sustainability/community/

BRUSH WILL BE COLLECTED
Sounds like the storm did quite a bit of damage to the trees . . .

Winter Storm – downed trees, branches and brush collection

Due to the heavy, wet snow Madison has many downed trees and branches. The city of Madison is asking citizens to do the following:

Street Tree – if a street tree or branch, by definition a tree planted in between the street and sidewalk, is blocking a street or sidewalk or if there is a hanging branch, please call 266-4816 to report the damage. City Forestry crews are currently responding to over 200 calls for service on damaged trees.

Private Tree – if your private tree was damaged, you may need to call a private contractor to address the damage.

Brush collection – please place the brush for collection on your property’s terrace just as you would normally. City crews will collect the brush after they have completed the clean up from Tuesday’s storm. The brush may not be collected immediately and we ask for everyone’s patience as city crews continue to work on the clean up.

You may also bring the brush to the Streets Yard Waste Sites. They are open Monday – Friday, 7:30a.m. – 3p.m.
East: 4602 Sycamore Ave. West: 1501 W. Badger Rd.
For more information on winter in Madison Parks, visit www.cityofmadison.com/winter

WOW, THAT WASN'T FAIR
The Tenney Lapham Neighborhood and others have been talking about a two-way Johnson and Gorham for years, its been in city approved plans for years. There are even plans for where the stop lights would go and that have identified costs and issues to be resolved. We just decided to get the Downtown Plan done first. When talking about this, the neighborhood was looking at slowing down traffic, returning the neighborhood to a more family friendly place with hopes of getting more owner-occupants downtown, quality of life issues like noise and actually being able to open your street facing windows in the summer and still hear the tv, making it easier to cross the streets and much, much, more. But how does the new alder frame the issue?

Ald. Bridget Maniaci, who lives on Johnson Street, has mixed feelings about the idea. "There are a lot of good reasons to do it, but we don't have a lot of data," she says. "We have to [show] why this is good for the city, not just that property values will go up."

What?! In all the discussions, pro and con, this hasn't been the issue. Every time she insults her constituents, I feel a greater sense of responsibility for letting my neighbors down. I think they deserve an alder that supports their positions, not insults and dismisses them.

STRANGER STILL
This is the email sent to the neighborhood listserve last week, in the middle of the Edgewater controversy:

On a non-Edgewater related topic...

A number of folks in the neighborhood have been interested in the long-term prospects of turning Johnson and Gorham Street back to two-way streets. Our council staffer, Lisa Veldran sent the following article to council members, and I thought it'd be worth it to send it on to you all and weigh in on. It's not that I've been totally skeptical, but such a prospect would require a lot of planning for our neighborhoods and a lot of city resources (millions of dollars) that requires broad city-wide buy-in. If our neighborhood wants this to happen, we need to embrace the full realization of what needs to happen and the full planning and impacts of the proposal. So let's try to be real and check the pie-in-the-sky philosophies at the door on this one moving forward and get working on the hard issues.

Some thoughts on how it could happen (maybe):

1) the major stumbling block to this idea is the intersection of Baldwin and Johnson/Gorham. One idea I've visualized is to put in a large roundabout to get access to both Johnson and Gorham Street. That roundabout would likely require the removal of the CDA assisted living facility on the peninsula between Johnson and Gorham to be consolidated with a new (larger, denser) replacement housing facility where the Baldwin Street facility and parking lot currently stands.

Pro: that housing could probably use to be upgraded & use more efficient use of the Baldwin lot.
Question: what happens to the residents of that housing while construction is underway?
Question: How much money would be required for new CDA housing & for the intersection reconstruction. My stabs in the dark: $3-4 million for the intersection, $7-10 million for the new housing (variable depending on underground parking).
Con: Streets city staff is totally opposed to this idea. Many alders are leery of this idea because of the impacts to their constituents' commutes and questions of manuverability (think Badger football weekends). Substantial studies need to be done to determine traffic flow patterns under this scenario. We need to hear what CDA's plans for their facilities are.

Question: who's going to pay/do those traffic studies? What reasons outside of our own parochial interests are there to convince Alders and city-staff that this is in the best interest of the city?

2) We usually talk about the farther end of the neighborhood, but what about the impact to the near isthmus neighborhoods?
Concerns I have: Blair Street is a small, residential sized road. We don't have our infrastructure built to handle the transfer of massive amounts of Johnson Street traffic to E Wash via Blair Street. -Blair St. reconstruction needs to get into the 5-year city budget & stop getting pushed back as it is because the road is falling apart.

Also, I'm very concerned with turning N Blair Street, which is residential, into a car-laden thoroughfare more than it already is (even if we physically had the street in a condition to handle the traffic). There is a great divide on S Blair between neighborhoods stemming from it's highway-like nature. N Blair has a very different character and I don't want to see a divide and disconnect develop when it's a continuous neighborhood from one block to the next. How do we mitigate that? -Could N Blair Street also turn 2 way? Would that do anything?

3) What is the cost to our neighborhood in real metrics under the current situation? What are our goals for change and can we make the case for millions of dollars such a plan would require for our neighborhood? How is our residential character & local businesses different/ more deserving of attention than other major thoroughfares throughout the city (Whitney Way, Midvale, Mineral Point Road, Bassett/Broom, Willy St.)

Some of these points are easier than others to work through, though none are simple. The Baldwin intersection/CDA tie-in is a 10 year plan idea. Other questions: Are any federal road funds available? This part of Johnson isn't a highway (like E Wash is). Are parking issues at all intertwined in this? What sorts of parking improvements could be made? Would we lose street parking by going 2-way? If so, how much?

The last sentence in the article hits the quandary on the head:
"I wouldn’t argue that two-way streets are any sort of panacea for urban revival, Vancouver’s experience notwithstanding. And I understand that they are not always practical. Some streets simply are too narrow to have traffic moving in both directions; others have to be designated one-way because their purpose is to feed traffic onto expressways. What I would say is this: When it comes to designing or retrofitting streets, the burden of proof shouldn’t fall on those who want to use them the old-fashioned way. It should be on those who think the speedway ideology of the 1950s serves much of a purpose half a century later."

Let's see if there's a way to work forward on this idea, but I ask you to acknowledge the amount of work and time ahead and realize that our neighborhood won't get everything we want out of this process. We have to be cost-conscious, realistic and pragmatic if we want this to go from a nice idea to a functioning, improved reality, if indeed this concept operates in the best interest of our neighborhood.

Like I said, Traffic Engineering has done the studying, and it will cost a little over $600,000 in 2008 dollars. There's so much else in there to respond to, I don't know where to begin.

IT'S ALL ABOUT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Immigration, that is:

Washington D.C. - The Immigration Policy Center has compiled research which shows that immigrants, Latinos, and Asians are an important part of Wisconsin's economy, labor force, and tax base. Immigrants and their children are a growing economic and political force as workers, consumers, taxpayers, and entrepreneurs. With the state working towards recovery, immigrants and their children will continue to play a key role in shaping the economic and political future of the Badger State.

Highlights from Wisconsin include:

* Wisconsin was home to 252,150 immigrants in 2007.
* 41.2% of immigrants in 2007 (or 103,291 people) in Wisconsin were naturalized U.S. citizens who are eligible to vote.
* Latinos accounted for 4.8% (or 268,879) and Asians 1.9% (or 106,431) of Wisconsinites in 2007.
* The 2008 purchasing power of Latinos totaled $5.3 billion and Asian buying power totaled $3.0 billion in Wisconsin in 2007.
* If all unauthorized immigrants were removed from Wisconsin, the state would lose $2.6 billion in expenditures, $1.2 billion in economic output, and approximately 14,579 jobs.

There is no denying the contributions immigrants, Latinos, and Asians make and the important role they will play in Wisconsin's political and economic future. For more data on their contributions to the Badger State, view the IPC fact sheet in its entirety.

* New Americans in the Badger State (Wisconsin)

DIDN'T EVEN TRY
Our house was fully shoveled by 10:30 or so, but still, no mail. Here they explain why the creed is dead. Not a bad excuse, probably a good decision. Just sayin', the times they are a changin'.

SPEAKING OF CHANGES
You may have noticed I've been playing around with the look of my blog and what extra tools are available on it. And I'm allowing anonymous comments. It's all a big experiment, so let me know what you like, and what you don't. Looks like I may have added too much, as its loading a little slowly. It's work in progress, feedback welcome. Read more!