Short Week Monday Morning Round Up

Edgewater free round up . . .

CITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MIA
So, where is our Economic Development Commission, our Economic Development Director and city leadership? With all the talk of jobs and the economy, wouldn't you think buying local would have been a top priority this shopping season?

NO WONDER THERE IS SO MUCH SHERIFF'S OVERTIME
What kind of management is this?

The biggest change in the Sheriff’s Office this year that reduced overtime was reversing a policy that allowed deputies to take whatever vacation days they wanted. In the past, the “red zone vacation days” — June, July, August and holidays — would have so many deputies out that the department had to schedule seven deputies on overtime each shift.

Holy crap, that's just irresponsible. Check out what Moody's has to say about it:

When Moody’s Investors Services downgraded the county’s bond rating — an indicator of the county’s financial health — in September for the first time in decades, the analyst pointed to the overspending in the Sheriff’s Office as one of the reasons why the county posted a $10 million deficit in 2008.

What bothers me even more is that I've heard County Board Supervisors defend the Sheriff by saying, "its what all the other sheriff's have done, so we can't blame Mahoney". I'm not sure I blame Mahoney, I blame the county board supervisors with that attitude.

WSJ AND SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION WANT YOU TO RUN FOR OFFICE
I wonder what they would have to say about the above?

CLASS BASED AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
I found this article interesting. This isn't a new idea by any means, but its interesting to see people talking about it.

SEE A PROBLEM HERE?
The city kinda screwed up and as a result, some of the poorest people in the city had a huge rent increase with little to no notice. Months later, they have not been made whole. Now, it add insult to injury, if the city gets money from the federal government here's what they are going to do with it:

If the city gets the extra money, it will be distributed to landlords, who will be required to make refunds to tenants whose rent was increased, said Rachel Strauch-Nelson, spokesperson for Mayor Dave Cieslewicz.

Does that make sense to you? Sounds like a recipe for disaster as the tenants fight to get their money back. Why not give it directly to the tenants? How can we be sure they actually get that money back and that the landlord doesn't get paid twice?

GRINCHOR A SIGN OF HOW DESPERATE THE TIMES ARE?
Nobody likes to see this. I think it's a sad comment about how desperate some people have become.

IS OUR WATER SAFE?
This was a good recap of the issues. More here.

COUNCIL BLOOPERS
I've heard people talk about doing this for years, kudos to this rookie class for finally getting it done!

DO OVER
Without the racism this time. I missed the Hip Hop discussion at ALRC, but I have to say, I didn't have high hopes. I can't wait until they come out with best practices for County music. Or Jam Bands.

WHERE CAN YOU RECYCLE YOUR PLASTIC BAGS AND HOW MUCH WILL IT COST?
Cost first? Nothing? Or waste of resources? This article has two points of view:
From the Business Commmunity we have this:

Brandon Scholz, president and chief executive of the Wisconsin Grocers Association and an early critic of the program, said Thursday the program was an ineffective use of city resources because many private companies in the city already offer the same service. He also predicted the city's outdoor bins would be hard to keep clean and difficult to monitor for misuse.

From City Staff we have this:

Dreckmann said the plastic bag recycling bins would be emptied about every two weeks, depending on their level of use, and the program wouldn't pass any new costs onto taxpayers.

Which do you believe?

Second, when I first read about the new plastic bags recycling program, the options seemed really limited and seemed to lack downtown locations, but it turns out the list is much longer than reported on channel 15.
Here's the list.

City of Madison Self Help Drop Off Centers
- East 4602 Sycamore Av
- South 1501 W. Badger Rd
- West 402 South Point Rd

Other City Sites
- Glenway Golf Course Waste Oil Site
- Monona Golf Course Waste Oil Site
- Warner Park Community Recreation Center

City Program Participants
- Aldi Stores - 3925 Lien Rd & 8222 Watts Rd.
- University Bookstore - 713 State St
- Williamson Street Co-Op - 1221 Williamson St.

Other Plastic Bag Recycling Sites
Capital Center Foods - 111 N. Broom St
Copps Food Stores
- 3010 Cahill Main
- 620 S. Whitney Way
- 1312 S. Park St
- 2502 Shopko Dr
- 6540 Monona Dr
- 3650 University Av
- 261 Junction Rd.
- 6655 McKee Rd.
HyVee - 3801 E. Washington Av
Kohl's Department Stores - 2602 East Springs Dr. & 7401 West Towne Way
Metcalf's Market (Sentry) - 726 N. Midvale Bl
Pierce's Northside Market - 2817 N. Sherman Av
Sentry Foods - 4602 Cottage Grove Rd.
Trader Joe's - 1810 Monroe St.
Wal Mart - 7202 Watts Rd & 4198 Nakoosa Trl
Whole Foods Market - 3313 University Av.
Woodman's - 3817 Milwaukee St & 711 S. Gammon Rd

On a slow week, its a good thing I still have 20 - 30 more emails labled "blog topic" in my blog folder. Expect some more, perhaps more stale round up tomorrow.
Read more!

Economic Development Commission Struggles to (Obviously) Support the Edgewater (final)

This was mildly entertaining. A few special moments.

At the beginning of the meeting Fred Mohs, Gene Devitt, the model and a small handful of immediate neighbors were there. Mohs and Devitt spoke, stating the obvious [this will be a running theme of the meeting] that they were not against economic development, but this was about a narrow Landmarks decision.

At the beginning of the meeting, Bob Dunn was no where to be found. No Edgewater supporters in the audience. No Mark Clear. No presentation.[The must have concluded that any decision to support was also a foregone conclusion and would have little impact.

Ed Clarke (Vice Chair of Downtown Madison Inc.) says he was the one who suggested that they make a statement. [That's quite the confession. I gotta wonder aloud, was he questioned about his ethics and why he shouldn't be voting on the project since he's on DMI's board and they have taken a position on the project. Just like the Landmarks Commissioner (Gehrig) was questioned because the Madison Trust took a position and she is on their board and some thought she shouldn't vote at the Landmarks Commission? Me thinks not.] Says there are good people on both sides. Says this is a choice between two goods and he is trying to strike a balance. He proposed that they not suggest Landmarks was right or wrong, they did as good as they could with situation. Not bad people, made best decision they could given the criteria they had. There was an appeal process and it goes to council where it is looked at in broader context, and the commission is here to advise city council. Mansion Hill is a gem, this project at this time at this scale is important for jobs, the city, and the economy. Says he encourages the commission recommend to overturn the decision. Notes it will create TIF, cash will be thrown off, which can accelerate development and repair and restoration of houses in the district.

Joe Boucher says he has lived here since '74, lived on Doty St for 3 or 4 years, saw everything from deterioration of the square to rebounding of downtown in last few years. Extensive public money was put in to create other activity and it enhanced economic development of the downtown. He has worked in the National Guardian Life building as attorney, not much done to Edgewater since 70s , not enhanced, has been run down, in need of substantial restoration. Someone is going to do this, he doesn't doubt that it will help with economic development, question is who is going to do it? Here we have a Madison citizen, who is willing to make a statement about economic development in the city and he's glad they are willing to do it. If someone else was willing, wishes they would step forward. He says he's not an architect, not knowledgeable out landscaping etc, building is dilapidated, 35 years in Madison seen improvements and until he sees an alternative and someone else is willing to redevelop the property, willing to support.[So, he went with the it's better than nothing argument - didn't address the laws involved - he just likes it.]

Julia Stone asked what the question before them is. If the question is "would this project have significant impact on economic development?" She would be in favor since it would create jobs and have a significant economic impact. She is in favor of a general statement to that effect. But, she is uncomfortable telling the council how to vote on overturning the Landmarks Commission. [And therein lies the problem for the commission that they will struggle with.]

Sandi Torklidson says this will have a positive impact, the downtown economics is that it has become an entertainment district, this will help the area, from that standpoint. We should also acknowledge this is a difficult time, there is a loss of construction jobs and this will give people who are hurting jobs – that is a good thing. She does not think that there will only be construction jobs only as long as the project is being built, but hopefully things are turning around and other jobs will be available after this project.

Mark Clear and Bob Dunn walk in together at 5:20. Clear apologizes for being late.

Peng Her says he has wrestled since the beginning with this project. As a committee member and community member he supports it because of the economic development. He says the commission strives to bring more jobs and investment to the city. He sees that in the proposal in terms of jobs and investment in hotel. However, as the Economic Development Commission (EDC) looked at the TIF and he was on the subcommittee on the TIF and one of the things that stuck with him was the "but for" clause. He personally has a hard time seeing it meet that clause of "but for", because of the amount of money they are investing and what you get for the $16M for the citizens of the city. He has a hard time looking at the handout. [That was brutally honest and refreshing to hear from a commissioner, the Mayor's appointment no less.] As Executive Director of EINPC, asks if we could use that money elsewhere? Mentions East Washington, Madison Dairy, Don Miller, Mautz Paint and other vacant buildings and notes this is the gateway to Madison, other opportunities there too. [Say it with me! EAST WASHINGTON!] From the 3 – 5 year strategic plans they said they wanted to encourage sustainable jobs, these are construction jobs and some part time or hotel service jobs which may or may not be more than min wage. Is there a way to invest in creating sustainable jobs that pay more than min wage and are long term and that would spur money in Madison – doesn’t know yet.[Wow. Eyes on the Prize! He really nailed it. Is this the right place to be making the investment and will we get the best bang for our buck. Good questions.]

Clear apologizes again for being late, asks if it would be helpful to get an update on where project is in process and what is before council tomorrow night. Clear says that two weeks ago Landmarks Commission denied granting Certificate of Appropriateness. They also considered a variance and the vote was 4 – 2. Says Dunn is here and can speak, Clear tells him to register to speak or answer questions, [but he doesn't move or in any way indicate that he needs to speak.] Clear says Dunn filed an appeal which will take a 2/3 vote to modify decisions of council. Meeting was going to be last Tuesday rescheduled to tomorrow due to snow. Process to appeal is different than what Landmarks could consider, points out the City Attroney's memo. [It was sitting on the table when we walked in. It's odd, I couldn't tell what they had before them, because nothing was attached to this agenda.] He says basically all that is before them is to grant Certificate of Appropriateness and if they should continue through the process not an up or down on the project, but developer will withdraw if the answer is no. Issues of TIF, jobs, PUD and all those things are not before the council, doesn’t mean they can’t take a position as a body. [Do I detect some re-spin happening here? The Mayor's office and Council Leadership was saying this was all about the bigger issues. Now that the votes are looking a little tough, its a narrow decision. Interesting.]

Gabe Sanchez - says the reason he came to Madison was the diversity and that economically things are looking up here. He is worried that every time someone proposes a project, we say no. [I'd like to see the facts to back that up. Madison rarely says no.]. He wants to see reputation changed so people don't go elsewhere with their projects.

Matthew Younkle says the Edgewater needs updating and that is not an "if" but a "when". Says he can’t comment on if a variance or certificate should be granted, but development will happen at some point, it’s terrific given the timing and the economy, development is stalled everywhere else. Remembers hearing same thing about Monona Terrace and there are not many people who don’t think it is great now. Some of the folks against it today will think it is great once built. From and economic development stand point, it’s a good thing.

Selkowe asks if someone is going to make a motion so she knows what she is talking to. [:)]

Clarke says that the EDC should say the Council should reverse the landmarks commission decision because of the economic development impact on the city. Seconded by Boucher.

Vicky Selkowe says its ironic and a bit of a shame that they are taking action at all when so little in way of updates, they just got information through the press. She says they have gotten more info on smaller projects, and TIF projects. She points out there was no formal presentation, weighing in at all seems all seems a little out of form. Second, that motion is fine, innocuous enough, but a feel good reactive action which states the obvious. It's not going to come as a surprise to anyone that the EDC supports this, not going to sway votes of council. It’s so obvious its almost irrelevant. Worse yet, telling them to overturn Landmarks is a uniformed decision. [She cut right to the chase.] She says they shouldn’t ask to overturn the Landmarks Commmission, we have a process, many commissions have ordinances that they have to learn and enforce and think through carefully. Commissioners need to be experts in that ordinance. We don’t know anything about those ordinances or whether they made the right or wrong decisions.[Oh, details Vicky, why don't you just behave and say you support economic development and ignore all those pesky ordinances! Troublemaker.] She says they wouldn’t want our decisions overturned. We would expect respect. The fact that we are in tough economic times, doesn’t mean ordinances should get trampled. [Well, that's it, now you're not getting reappointed! :)] She says it is a slippery slope if they do that until recovery is declared, we are setting a precedent that is dangerous that will hurt areas of the city we all love. Landmarks was clear, they are not prohibiting a project there, we’ll get a chance to weigh in on that later. Now, if we pass this, we are just stating the obvious and at worst, making an uninformed decision.[Anyone want to take bets on if she survives the next appointment process?]

Clear says that it is inappropriate for us to take a position on if the Council should override Landmarks or not. This is not the body to weigh in on that. Can support or oppose the project from an economic standpoint. Does agree that this commission not briefed on the project, because it and the approval process is not before them. When they get a TIF application, it will be before them. We’ve had the override experience ourselves, with Danisco, happens to us and others and in this case there is a specific provision for an appeal. Hesitates to use reverse or override language, says it is simply an appeal that will be granted or not.[Again with the splitting hairs. Interesting re-spin from leadership/Mayor.]

Stone points out they are advisory and that they couldn’t stop the project.

Clear says yes, we are advisory, as is the case for most city committees. Handful of others have actual regulatory authority.

Torklidson asks what the question before the council is? Appeal? Grant the Certificate? Variance? How are they different.

Younkle says appeal language is esoteric, specific criteria.

Clear agrees, those criteria are more broad in number of factors that could be considered for a Certificate or a variance. They can look at two things that Landmarks couldn’t, hardship to owner and overall benefits of the project. His feeling is that those are two things put in there for a specific reason, not to burden Landmarks with more specific reasons – but he points out he is not an attorney.

Clarke asks if they should just ask them to grant the appeal.

Stone says that is the same as overriding the Landmarks Commission and doesn't help.

Clear says they should be vague and say they support approval of the project, leave it to interpretation as to what it might mean.

Torklidson says its hard to approve a project they don’t know much about? What are we approving.[Good point!]

Sanchez says they are approving a concept, not the project.

[They want to approve this so badly, they just can't figure out how. All their arguments lead them to not make a statement in support, but now they are here and if they don't, it will look bad.]

Stone says Edgewater project will bring economic development to the area and without it that will be lost. Can’t weigh in on the appeal, doesn’t understand it. This will have devastating economic impact if not approved, so feels comfortable weighing in that, but notes that Selkowe is right, that is a painfully obvious statement and near meaningless.

Boucher says they city says "no" more often than yes. [Wow, that is just so blatantly ignorant it's scary. I can't believe that there are people on this commission that are so uninformed. It's been a while since I saw the data, but at one point, we had said no to 4 projects out of over 300.] Monona Terrace took since the 50’s and all we said was "no, no, no". Timing does matter. Even if city council does this tomorrow, still many months to get a spade in the ground and it will be a while. Some decisions get made for the wrong reasons, someone will do this, the question is who, and someone stepped forward - with all due respect to the critics, who is going to do it if this doesn't go forward.

Stone says that local people investing in our community is good.

Sanches says if he puts on his Realtor hat – this is good because it is attracting more business.

Clear is writing a substitute motion, so people are filling time by talking.

Torklidson says that ultimately, all our decisions go to the council because we are not elected and they are and the buck stops with them, they take all the factors into consideration and she thinks they should weigh in – that is not a disrespect of the process. She asks if they would we be here if they had to be elected. She says alders put in time and have broader range of issues to think about. No disrespect to government, that is how democracy should work. Important to listen to constituents, committee power has to be tempered by that process.

Clarke says that he couldn’t agree with Vicky more about that fact that the committee has not talked about this and other things like library and downtown plan. [Interesting, but that didn't stop him from making a motion to support it. Making the ethics issue look worse and worse. I wish he would make some smarter comments so I could say that he was thoughtful in his deliberations and not just swayed by the fact that he is VP of DMI. He's not helping himself at all.] He says in long range strategic plan we said we should be weighing in and not wait until this is ready to die to weigh in. Agrees that maybe we can talk about how to get in front of these things.

Clear makes a motion that the EDC supports the Edgewater project for the economic benefits including job creation, tax base enhancement and improvement of the historic district and recommends that it get land use approvals.[I'll get the final language at the end of the post. What amazes me here is that he didn't listen to a thing they said about how they didn't have any information or background to make a decision about the land use approvals. It's like those comments were never made.] He says that he crafted the motion to make sure they stayed out of the Landmarks and TIF issues. [What? Isn't Landmarks part of the land use approval. That makes no sense at all. Was that some attempt at a Rove/Bush not-so-slight of hand?]

Selkowe says she was tempted to second it because it sounded so pretty, she says it is an improvement and a better statement to make. She says they haven’t had a presentation, she doesn't know how many jobs will be created, doesn't know how much the jobs will pay, how long the construction jobs will last or what the economic impact of the project will be. [Details, details. Besides, the committee doesn't need to make sure its decisions are credible? No one cares . . . it just has to look good in the headlines. Ya think the Mayor will use it in his blog today?] She says she would like to know that before they endorsed a statement like that. Doesn’t know any info beyond what they read in paper, some in the TIF information they were given, some in staff report. Project may change considerably before we know the answers, too many unknowns to support even that.

Clarke asks what the motion is now since there are two. They explain Clear's motion could be friendly to his. He asks how to make it friendly. Torklidson asks if it is friendly and the body seems to agree.

Clarke asks what land use approvals covers?

Clear says UDC, Plan and other committees that need to weigh in to get construction approved, leaving out TIF. [i.e. Landmarks.]

Selkowe says worried about weighing in so strongly on something we don’t know about.

Yonkle asks if the project changes if they can change our minds and meet again.

Clear says could add language that says “as proposed today”.

Torklidson asks if we would like to have it move to the next step without saying support the project – she feels uncomfortable – not a complete project so to say they support it doesn’t know what supporting. Wants process to continue – but don’t know what that means. [And the struggle continues. They are clearly unclear about what they should do.]

Clear says knowing those details would be critical when considering TIF loan – that is exactly the details we need to know. Don’t need that level of detail to support the project itself. Those kinds of details won’t affect if he supports the project or not. [Really? Seriously. Sigh . . . so he's voting for it cuz its pretty and shiny?] That is why he wanted to leave out any question of the TIF.

Boucher says that he printed out a whole bunch of stuff from the web, says they got a substantial amount of background [It's all the land use approval information.] and says we don’t know how many jobs or multiplier effects. He thinks they got a lot of info to read. [But clearly didn't read it, or doesn't understand the motion, or what Clear claims the motion is.]

Clear says Dunn could give a presentation. Says he is willing to answer questions.
[Again, Dunn sits there with no clear desire to make a presentation.]

Torklidson asks if any more discussion.

Her asks for the words “as proposed” to be added to the motion because the project could change, but wants to support it based on what they know today. [which isn't much.] He then asks if land use includes appeal process tomorrow?

I don't think he got an answer.

Stone struggles with the land use proposal and process and endorsing something she doesn’t understand at all and that makes her uncomfortable. How can we weigh in on the land use? Understands the process, but not why we should weigh in on appeal.

Clarke says that she is being a little, "not naïve", but if not overturned, the project won’t happen.[Love that tactic. Insult someone, (usually a man does it to a woman) but say you're not while looking pained, somehow that is supposed to make it ok.] Struggling with it’s a good idea but today it is dead and unless something happens tomorrow, won’t be there the next day. What we are saying that when we look at it, is that it has a strong economic impact and wants the city to move it forward because it is worthwhile. [But that is not what the motion says. Sometimes its just better to say what you mean.] We have info on economic benefits, we encourage this to happen and others can weigh in.

Clear says we won’t see the land use, we don’t see that and we don’t want that.

Stone says that is her point, they don’t understand that.

Torklidson says to think about if you would you support project, not land use.

Boucher says they don’t know how many jobs will be created [Ok, seriously, he's said this three times, isn't this something the Economic Development Commission should know before weighing in?], but when there is a $90M project there ought to be quite a few. [Great, this is our leaders on our Economic Development Commission that are leading the city. We're seriously supposed to take their advice and find them credible when they say something like that?] He fumbles around a little then says there are some numbers in something he is looking at. He says it will have an economic impact and spillover and will it help many other people develop projects in the area? Who knows?[My confidence in this commission is at an all time high about now. eyeroll. And, I have to say, that comment rankled the neighborhood quite a bit. They keep getting told this parcel is special and that other developments like this won't be coming, but he just said the opposite.]

Selkowe says we know a little bit and it will create some jobs, but part of what she respects about the body is that they hold themselves to a high standards before they make decisions, this is based on 14 story tower and if that changes, who knows what that changes for what we support in the project.

Torklidson asks [The million dollar question] how important it is for them to weigh in and support it at this point in the process? She notes the city council didn’t give send this to them at this point. Do they care?

Clear [very carefully] says no one will be surprised if they support it. May have some influence over some members, but there are many issues at play. So, will it sway a vote or two or many? Probably not. Does that mean we shouldn’t do it? No. Still should do it. [How's that for some nicely worded brutal honesty? He basically told them what they think doesn't matter, but they should say it anyways.]

Boucher asks what if they say "no"?

Clear says "that would be surprising" and notes that if they support there is no story, if they don't, that is a story for the media. [So, they now know they backed themselves into a corner, they have to say yes to something.]

Staff reads the motion, it isn't quite right, Clear helps here out. This is what it ended up being.

The Economic Development Committee supports the Edgewater project as proposed for its economic benefits, including job creation, tax base enhancement and improvement of the historic property and recommends that it receive land use approvals.

Clarke says they are voting to approve project as proposed.

Roll call:
NO: Stone, Selkowe
AYE: Clear, Sanchez, Stone, Her, Yonkle, Boucher, Clarke and Torklidson. (I thought Stone voted no, but her vote was a very, very quiet yes, apparently.)

Motion approved. Move to adjourn.

The kicker is, who do you think they are sending to the council to speak on their behalf? To add to their credibility, the dude who kept saying they don't have any economic data and made the blatantly false statement during the meeting: Boucher. Brilliant. Just Brilliant.
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!

E Round Up: All Edgewater, All the Time

Yes, there's enough about the Edgewater for a round up dedicated to this subject alone . . .

I expect that this will be at the council on Tuesday, fierce lobbying has begun all around, seems like folks are scrambling, so here's a round up on some of the issues.

COMMENTS AND A FEW THINGS WORTH READING
I wish Dusty had been at the Landmark's meeting before commenting on it, I think if he had been there, he may have walked away with a different conclusion. The Landmark's Commission has specific ordinances that they have to look at and had a rather narrow decision to make. Levitan explains it well here. Dusty's arguments, much like Maniaci's would be better for when the project is ready for a council vote, but the city and commission have specific missions, with specific charges and ordinances to follow. Blaming the Mansion Hill folks for the Landmark's Commission votes ignores that it really was a coalition of preservationists, neighborhood groups (including the Tenney Lapham Neighborhood Association who voted unanimously) and activists that turned out that were concerned about the future of historic districts in the City of Madison and that there were complicated ordinance issues at play. Dusty disappointed me on that one!

Kristin, however, who was at the meeting did a good job of laying out the "what's next" issue as well as looking at the data presented to the Landmark's Commission that created the difficulties they had in approving the project, the fact that the building is 3 to 16 times bigger than buildings in the visually related area.

Other news has the Mayor urging them to go to council on Tuesday, Verveer urging them to go back to the drawing board, Bruer is predicting "game over", Clear is waiting for the Mayor to tell him what to think and Hammes is sticking with "no comment" in everything I have read, but they have to decide by noon today if they want to appeal and be at the council on Tuesday. Meanwhile, alders are getting lobbied, so if you want your opinion to matter, email them at allalders@cityofmadison.com to give them your opinion pro or con, my guess is they'll be dealing with this Tuesday night.

The Forward Thinking folks are still wondering about the anti-labor vote.

And then there's still the issues about if this is the right time and place to be building a hotel downtown.

IS MANIACI IN TOUCH WITH HER DISTRICT? 60 - 65% SUPPORT
This is the statement that had many of the neighbors and neighborhood associations that I am in touch with concerned.

“I would say that overall, my district is 60 to 65 percent [in support],” Maniaci said.

Any questions I have seen posed on neighborhood listserves about her position on this matter (and others) have largely gone unanswered (publicly and I think also privately) and I expect that she won't answer this either:

I am wondering how you know what percent of the neighborhood supports the Edgewater project? Is it by phone, letters, e-mail, personal conversations, etc? For the record, I do not support the project in its present form, nor am I aware of any type of survey of our neighborhoods opinions on it.
Lake front development does not require any TIF money. It is unethical to publicly subsidise one hotel that will unfairly compete with other hotels in the immediate area. It is just plain bad business, as well as not making any sense.
Also, the scale of the project does not fit in with the historic district. Among the many issues which still need to be satisfied, these are the two major reasons why I cannot in good conscience support this project. If the project were scaled down in height to fit the natural and historic surroundings, AND if TIF money was not a part of the project, I believe that it would be supported by a majority of our neighbors.


As you know, the TLNA Board voted unanimously to write a letter of concern to the Mayor, the City Council and the various Commissions regarding numerous concerns regarding the Edgewater project. I think there has been a rush to approve this project for the wrong reasons. I am not totally against this project, but certainly am not in favor of it in its present form.

I think that comment pretty fairly reflects the opinions of many, its not a "stop the project at all costs" mentality, but rather a long list of concerns that haven't been addressed. Additionally, Maniaci's lack of response to those (District 2 residents NOT in Mansion Hill, i.e. the rest of her district) who have asked questions about the Edgewater is unsettling.

MAYOR DOESN'T RESPECT THE LAW OR CITIZENS
You can read the Mayor's blog post here . . . or below with my purple comments below . . .

It would dramatically improve public access and public views to the lake. It would create 1,000 construction jobs at a time when one out of three workers in some trades is unemployed. It would produce over $1 million in new tax revenues per year. And it might not happen because a handful of unelected people on one committee think the building is too big.

[I generally think the Mayor is a relatively bright guy, so I'm a little confused about why he is choosing to make the "handful of unelected people" argument when the RTA and a referendum are looming out there.  He should know that will be used against the RTA over and over and over and over until none of us want to hear about it anymore.  It just seems wacky!

A second point here, is that he ignores that what is "too big" is defined in the ordinance that the Landmark's Commission needed to follow. If he doesn't like it, he could have proposed a change to the law at some point in the last 7 years.]

Last night's Landmarks Commission decision to not approve the Edgewater Hotel project reveals a broken City approval process that needs to be fixed. It's broken in two fundamental ways.

[Really? He pulled out that argument? The "broken City approval process" argument. We've also been "fixing" the broken process for at least 4 years, if he's unhappy with it, what's his proposal to fix it? The "one-stop shop" has been stalled for years by his office and many of the other recommended proposals have been implemented.]

First, the commission could only look at a very narrow question, which was essentially: does the size of the proposed building detract from the historic district? [It's much, much more complicated than that, you can see what they had to consider in my blog post from yesterday. I know the Mayor doesn't like to be bothered with the details, he just wants others to fix it to get him what he wants, and he doesn't care what the ordinance and rules are, but this is a gross mis-statement.] That is an entirely subjective decision. [Ugh, that's not true either, they had quite a bit of language to help them make that decision. They had to look as specific areas and at specific issues. Not all the language was as clear as many would have liked, but its not as simple as he states. Again, read yesterday's blog for details.] When I look at the drawings provided by the developer, I don't see it as too big. But what really makes the case for me is the model provided by the opponents of the Edgewater themselves. When I look at that model, I see a building that fits in with its site. Some people on the Landmarks Commission just looked at the same information differently. [Yeah, they followed the ordinance and were deliberate in their discussions instead of just supporting a project at all costs.] But regardless of how you feel about it, nobody was allowed to take into account any of the bigger, more important issues than the relatively less significant question of the size of the building.[Interesting framing, when commissions consider things beyond their mission, the Mayor accuses them of mission creep. When they don't consider things beyond their mission its a problem. I know politicians and consistency is a rarity, but that's another biggie along with the "unelected" issue. You really can't have it both ways.]

Second, under our ordinances, the decision of a handful of unelected individuals on the Landmarks Commission can only be overturned by a supermajority (14) of the twenty elected representatives of the people on the Madison City Council. This is fundamentally undemocratic.[He is soooooooooooooooo going to get bit in the ass on that one . . . and at least in this case, there is an appeals process.]

I am not necessarily placing blame on the Landmarks Commissioners. While I disagree with their subjective judgment, they were trying to follow the hazy prescriptions of the ordinance. [Funny, it sounded like he was blaming them.]I do think they erred significantly in that effort by interpreting the language of the ordinance with regard to "buildings directly affected by the project" to mean all buildings in the historic district. How can a building which is blocks away be directly affected by this project? [Well, ask Mario, he was there, he should be able to explain it to you.]And by the standards of the immediately surrounding buildings, I see this building as being compatible.

Second, the landmarks ordinance itself makes it clear that the commission can grant a project greater flexibility and imagination if it substantially complies with the basic intent of the ordinance. The Edgewater project does that in two ways. Most commissioners agreed it complies with four of the five criteria required for approval. In addition, by restoring the 1940s Edgewater Hotel, restoring the view of Lake Mendota and creating a public plaza for all to enjoy, the project advances other portions of the landmarks ordinance. [Yes, they could, but they couldn't make the findings they needed to make that exception.]

Lastly, even the opponents of the Edgewater concede that under these standards the revered Kennedy Manor apartment building could not have been built.

In the long run, we need to reform this process. [Ok, Mayor, tell us how. Just get rid of historic districts? Ignore their plans and ordinances? And if it is so broken, why haven't you fixed it in the last 7 years?]In the short run, I hope that the developer will ask the City Council to make the final decision on this. There is just too much at stake for the Council not to have the final say.

[What, no harsh words about the neighbors? No thanks to people who worked hard? No propping up your allies? That must be a post that is still coming.]

A MODEST PROPOSAL
Someone commented on my facebook page in response to my Edgewater Denied! post. Their response was this:

maybe they will take their pesky private sector jobs with them. keep celebrating.

It sort of set me off due to the business communities reluctance to have a job guarantee when they promise jobs to get TIF. I responded:

Maybe they could design a building that complies with the ordinances. Or should we eliminate all ordinances and standards as long as they produce jobs? Just let it be a free for all . . . but then, could we at least get a job guarantee and have them pay back the TIF if they promised jobs don't materialize? Just sayin'

The conversation continued a bit and then someone said:

How about eliminating zoning laws, similar to what Toronto and Houston did, so that every neighborhood could have the potential for high density. Think of all the jobs it would create.

Alternatively, I wonder if $16 million offered as $160,000 low-cost improvement loans to owners of a thousand buildings downtown would make any difference in the economy. Renovation creates more jobs than new construction. Google it.

Now I'm curious . . . what would be the calculation on that? And what would that have meant if they renovated the library instead of going with new construction? Hmmmmm . . .
Read more!

Monday Morning Round Up

So, it was a very busy week last week and this week looks to be more of the same. Anyways, here's a few items of interest to kick the week off! So much to catch uo on.

MORE EXPENSIVE POSTCARDS
So, several people got postcards that look something like this (side one, side two) from the Wisconsin Homeowners Alliance (a Realtor front group), the postcards direct you to go to www.danecountypropertyrights.com (who don't identify themselves) that directs you here, a conservative/republican group opposed to the RTA. Also with several realtors/lobbyists/real estate interests on their board. It all makes me wonder how many organizations the realtors need to create to create the illusion of support.

SOME SORT OF FREUDIAN SLIP
So, this is how the mayor describes his own budget and the council:

I thought they bought too much stuff at the grocery store and turned the heat up too high. They thought I blew too much money on a plasma TV and new golf clubs (but, hey, that new driver is sweet!).

So, the council wants basic needs like food and heat. The Mayor wants luxuries like plasma TVs and golf clubs . . . maybe he does understand how some people see the difference between Community Services and the Edgewater! And just doesn't care.

CENSUS JOBS
We wanted to make sure that you all are aware that the Census Bureau is accepting applications for Census jobs. For your reference, please see the WSJ article:

Interested citizens are encouraged to call the Census Bureau jobs line at 1-866-861-2010, call the local Census office at (608) 327-5600 or visit www.2010censusjobs.gov They are then directed to an application/testing site that is convenient for them.

The Census Bureau has established testing sites throughout the County and continues to add more sites. Here are some of the area testing sites:
-Stoughton Fire Dept.
-Verona Public Library
-Waunakee Village Hall
-Door Creek Church (Dominion Drive)
-Dane County Jobs Center (Aberg Ave.)
-Dane County United Way (Atwood Ave.)
-Upper Iowa University (Beltline and Midvale)
-UW Memorial Union (Langdon)
-Villager Mall (S. Park)
-Wil-Mar Neighborhood Center (Jenifer St.)

MADISON URBAN MINISTRY PRAYER AND MEDITATION VIGIL FOR HUMAN SERVICES

As you know, the Dane County Board of Supervisors will begin voting on the 2010 budget on Monday, November 16th, at 7:00 p.m. Madison-area Urban Ministry will be hosting an interfaith vigil for restoration of the proposed across the board cuts to human services, and for our most vulnerable neighbors.

We will gather at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, 11/16, at the steps of the City County Building, 215 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd., Madison.

Citizens will not be able to speak at the County Board meeting so we are hoping that the vigil will send the message to Supervisors that we are asking the cuts be restored. The proposed cuts will undermine the social safety net in our County, non-profit agencies are already preparing their lay off lists if this budget passes, many plan to renegotiate the contracts with the county as they cannot continue to serve the same number of individuals with what is, in effect, a much greater reduction in funding when stagnant funding over the last decade and increased costs of business are factored in. We are hoping that an amendment to restore the cuts will be introduced from the floor of the meeting. Amendments made at the Committee level to restore the cuts have been defeated, in addition, the Personnel and Finance Committee last week voted to increase the amount of money an individual facing evicted is charged for the actual eviction from $15.00 an hour to $50.00 an hour (these funds are to offset costs to the Sheriff’s Department for the actual eviction).

Faith communities across our county are reporting up to 30% increases in requests for help and many people are being turned away. Our shelter system is full and people are being turned away nightly. The proposed cuts to human service provider agencies will further exacerbate the current problems. The budget also includes a provision to close the Joining Forces for Families office in Stoughton. That office provides crucial assistance to residents of Stoughton and surrounding communities. The budget proposes relocating the services to Madison, which creates additional transportation problems for families in need.

Please join us on November 16th, as we raise our voices for our neighbors, as we call for a budget that reflects our values as a community.

A DAY OR TWO LATE
It's that time of year!

A reminder that Alternate Side Parking goes into effect at 1 a.m. on Sunday November 15th. That means that you should park your car on the ODD house numbered side fo the street on Saturday evening November 14th.

Alternate Side Parking restrictions are in effect throughout most of the City of Madison sevend ays a week, regardless of weather conditions from November 15th through March 15th with the exception of the Downtown/Isthmus Snow emergency Zone where the restrictions are in effect only during a declared Snow Emergency.

For more information visit www.cityofmadison.com/winter.

DEVELOPERS GET BENEFITS OF IZ, DON'T HAVE TO PAY OR BUILD THE HOUSING
Looks like the University Square developers won their court case against the city. They got the benefits outlined in the inclusionary zoning ordinance, but did not have to make their payments for the affordable housing they did not build. Wow. Could the city attorneys mess this up any more than they have?

LABOR ENDORSEMENTS
I was wondering how labor endorsements lined up with the labor vote on the Edgewater. Thanks to Lukas Diaz for breaking it down.


x Read more!

Council to Get Involved in Economic Development?

So, will they be told, or asked? Will they get to express their opinions and have an impact on the direction of the plan? Or will they be politely acknowledged and promptly ignored?

Ald. Tim Bruer, Council President, has scheduled a Council briefing by city staff on the 2010 Economic Development Work Plan for Monday, June 22, 2009 at 6:00 p.m. (location TBD).

An agenda with more information will be sent out prior to the briefing.

Read more!

Board of Estimates - Council preview of a few issues

Often, what happens at Board of Estimates is considered to be a preview of what will happen at the Common Council . . . if the Mayor's appointments represent a cross section of the council (plastic bag ban, TIF agreement on Capital West, stimulus money, personnel issues and paid sick leave for city staff).

START
The meeting started with only 4 members there (Bruer, Sanborn, Clear and Clausius). The agenda can be found here.

Stimulus money item was skipped for later.

PERSONNEL ITEMS
They quickly dispensed of items 2 - 19 which were all personnel items. Some of the items I pointed out were
- Mini reorganization in Community Development Block Grant office - here and here.
- Police are getting a new LTE position
- Human Resources folks seem to be getting raises - here, here, here and here.
- Finally, after 3 years, sick leave for hourly employees!! We put it in the budget 3 years in a row and they finally are going to have the ability to spend the money!

Thanks to Clear for asking what's going on with all the personnel changes. The answer, of course, is "nothing to see here". Except, the impact of all these incremental changes come at budget time, when the council has no ability to do anything. Clear asked the right questions, but I think the answer was tantamount to "none of your business". This is a tough area, as personnel drives so much of the budget, there is no alder on the Personnel committee and the Board of Estimates is mostly told to stay out of it. So, who's looking at the bigger picture and strategy when it comes to personnel costs throughout the city? I think that this is the biggest investment we make, and most of the time the city gets it right, but there are certain things happening that don't seem quite fair.

Also in these items was the paid sick leave. They explained that is it was already being implemented for the unions and the ordinance makes it applicable to non-represented employees. The Mayor bristled at the fact that the Council put the money in the budget instead of it being bargained and the comptroller said it was now going to cost $75,000 - 150,000, which is WAY OFF of the projections they previously made ($60,000). The mayor says that the paid sick leave has already been implemented this year. It's about time after us budgeting it in 2007 (not implemented), 2008 (not implemented) and again in 2009.

All the items passed unanimously on a voice vote.

POLICE OVERTIME
Assistant Chief Davenport said that the fact that it went down was a result of the new police officers. He said that briefing overtime was up, but the demand-driven overtime was better - however, Terri Genin pointed out that there wasn't the extraordinary event overtime as there as been in the past, which seems to be the biggest chunk of savings.

The Mayor seems a little sassy, giving Bidar-Sielaff grief for sitting in Alder Verveers seat "self appointing" herself to the Board of Estimates.

Report passes unanimously on a voice vote.

PLASTIC BAG ORDINANCE
George Dreckman explains this is the only ordinance of the kind in the country. He says that other cities either ban the use (usually restricted to larger stores or those with a certain number of chains), charge a fee or tax the bags (Irish model, but we can't do it), require retailers to take take the bags back (not clear if they actually get recycled) or require biodegradable bags (cost is the biggest issue there). The Mayor asked about if we could ban the use of them, and I don't think he got the answer he thought he would, George says that we do have the legal authority to do it according to at least on assistant city attorney (who no longer works for the city). There also is the issue of how the bags would be picked up - including perhaps another separate container to put the bags in - which is dicey so for now, it sounds like they would have drop off sites. The ordinance they are passing is just the ban and they will figure out how to implement it, and pay for it, later. In the future, we could pay for for recycling in our normal recycling containers when our contract comes up with the people who do the recycling for us - but that will have to wait 2.5 years until the contract is renewed. Alder Compton says she'd like to have curb side pick up a few times a year. George makes clear you can still use plastic bags to pick up after your dog or line your trash can. They want to encourage reuse of the bags. The Mayor makes it clear that the violation for throwing away a bag is the same as throwing away a pop can - which you can be fined for. But, they basically said that no one will really ever get fined. They continued to talk about the issue for nearly an hour. Sanborn spoke most vehemently against the ordinance, and I think the only one to vote against it.

REDOING MDC LOAN FOR THE AVENUE
One quick question - passes unanimously.

STIMULUS MONEY
Bill Clingan explains that we are getting $534,096 in CDBG funds. He says the funds which are usually for suitable living environments, affordable housing and economic opportunities are required to be spent on infrastructure which means rehabilitation, retro-fitting, energy efficiency and conservation activities. He explains that there is a tight time line and that they need to get the information to HUD by June 5th. He says Council would approve general spending categories for not and specific awards of the money would come back to the council later. Bill says 15% can be spent on service and he says that he is looking at foreclosure prevention services (hire an lte to answer questions) and he also said that he might want to have a job development job search with people who are pending homelessness. The rest would perhaps be spent on economic development around energy issues or home rehab.

Bill also talked about the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. He says there is a round 2 of the funding available ($2B nationally) and they have to apply for at least $5M. He says that there will be a need analysis.

The only other update was from Metro on cost of hybrid buses and they are more expensive than anticipated, so there will only be 15 buses instead of 18.

CAPITAL REVOLVING LOAN FUND
There were some questions about the Capital Revolving Loan fund for the Wingra project. Jed Sanborn votes against and speaks against us using the money in these ways.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INTERN
Alder Rhodes-Conway asks why we aren't getting an intern for free. He says that its true that it probably won't cost $9,000. Mayor asks him to explain what the intern will work on. Cooley says working on some projects and research they haven't had time for, looking into commercial real estate database software, and some software for entrepreneurs. He also explains that the $9,000 that should have gone for software isn't enough and not a high priority right now.

I believe it passed unanimously on a voice vote.

PLANNING FOR UNIVERISTY AVENUE
There was some questions and it was approved.

CAPITAL WEST TIF AGREEMENT
Cliff Fisher speaks about how he believes that the City shouldn't have given TIF money to Alexanders because they undercut his condos at Metropolitan Place. He says that the assessment of his project was impacted by $8M as a result of Alexander underselling him. Cliff talks about how he's been on Sly and Mitch Henck and other shows. Cliff publicly asks Alexander to come on Mitch's show to debate - Cliff gets directed to talk to the Board of Estimates problem - Cliff says that the Alexanders won't come on the show and debate them.

Clear asks Cliff about what would happen if Alexanders are required sell the units by the current deadline, won't the units get sold at rock bottom prices and won't that negatively impact him. Cliff doesn't understand the question whatsoever.

Schumacher asks the Alexander folks a few questions and the Mayor says that Cliff's comments seemed irrelevant given they were about the original granting of the TIF, not the current deal.

Sanborn points out the hypocrisy of the compromise, given the principles that people were so adamant about the last time they talked about this.

Clear says that the agreement should be followed and that it shouldn't be renegotiated at this time and that the City should stick to its agreement.

Clausius seems like extending this agreement won't do much, he also says its unfair to other developers.

Verveer and Bruer defend the new agreement. There are more questions of staff. Staff say that this agreement is sound and that they did review the financial info and it did not seem unusual. In fact, they seem to be saying that the new agreement to extend the time is a sound decision given the legal issues and the cost to the city and the market in pursuing a breach of the agreement.

They spent nearly an hour discussing this issue. Which is amazing in that this was a compromise between Bruer and Verveer. It passes, it was a 3-3 tie, with the mayor breaking the tie.

WALGREENS
No discussion - they approve Walgreens getting their money and then go into closed session to talk about several tax cases. I wonder what they learned?

p.s. It looks like alders Schumacher, Rummel, Bidar-Sielaff and Compton attended portions of the meeting and were staying for the closed session, but it was hard to tell from tv. Read more!

Mayor's State of the City

Do you see yourself being helped by what he lays out in his "speech"? Does this sound like the direction you want your city moving in? Are there things left out of his speech that you think should be worked on? I have several thoughts - which I will likely share tomorrow.

State of the City
April, 2009
By Mayor Dave Cieslewicz

The state of the City in 2009 is all about the economy. For the hundreds of Madisonians who have lost their jobs in the last year, the fact that we are doing better than the rest of the nation means little. Madison by no means is immune to economic recession. Just last week, Madison Dairy announced they would close, laying off 120 employees. Circuit City, Cub Foods, EMD Chemicals, Erdman Company, Famous Footwear, GE Healthcare, Henshue Construction, Sitel Corporation, Sub-Zero-Wolf have all suffered layoffs in recent months. For those in these industries and others who remain employed but face uncertain job prospects, the future may look precarious. And for those of us with relatively stable jobs – especially in government – we should be grateful for that stability and remind ourselves to work harder and more efficiently to speed the recovery for those who are unemployed.

So the economy needs to be our focus, and it will be the central theme of this year’s address, but it is also important to continue to make progress on the goals we established last year which remain intact today:

• We will make sure that our City is well run, and basic services are excellent.

• We will make sure that our City is safe.

• We will work with our public schools to keep them some of the best in the nation.

• We will continue to be a leader in green efficiency.

• We will be welcoming, accessible and connected to an increasingly interdependent world.

• We will build a great City.

• And we will strive to be both progressive and pro-business.

And it’s this last goal that needs to be our first priority in the current environment. The bulk of today’s address will focus on economic development, but let me first give a quick report on the progress we are making on our other goals.

In the area of basic services, this year we completed the first comprehensive customer satisfaction survey in a decade. We measured our customers’ satisfaction on 15 city services and found good levels of satisfaction on almost all. Now, we’ll continue to track results annually so that we can mark our progress compared to previous years and address problems when they arise. This year we will also measure the health of over 70 neighborhoods all across the City through the Neighborhood Indicators Program. This will allow us to deploy resources intelligently and early when we see signs of stress. We will continue successful programs to help administer excellent basic services. Our “Report a Problem” function receives hundreds of messages each month that our staff can respond to quickly and efficiently. The City is also moving forward on efforts to rebuild aging city streets through a 5-year initiative to significantly improve the quality of Madison’s key arterial streets, reducing by two-thirds the miles of street that are sub-standard. This year, we’ll start or continue major projects on University Avenue, East Washington Avenue and many other streets. Finally, we’ll continue using Madison Measures, our battery of about 100 indicators of on-the-ground performance to link to our budget priorities for 2010.

In the area of public safety, we continue to develop new and effective means of improving our safety and quality of life. I am happy to report that thanks to excellent police work and the cooperative approach launched by the Madison Police Department to address burglaries throughout our community, we have realized a 51% decrease in burglaries in the first quarter of 2009 compared to 2008. In 2008, we completed a landmark police staffing study and next year, we will implement a new data-driven patrol-staffing plan that deploys our resources in a smarter, more efficient way. The revamped federal COPS program as part of the federal stimulus also gives us the opportunity to hire new officers at little cost to the City for their first three years on the job. Working closely with Chief Noble Wray and his command staff, along with Council leadership, we have submitted an application for 20 new officers to be hired over the next three years. Combined with the new analysts authorized in the 2009 budget, these new officers will allow us to enhance our problem-solving capacity and focus on preventive public safety initiatives. Also later this year, we will open Fire Station 12 on the far west side, and we are preparing to deploy the City's eighth ambulance. I am pleased to note that under the leadership of Chief Debra Amesqua, the Madison Fire Department was successful in securing a highly competitive federal SAFER grant, which provides $1.9 million in funding over five years to help us hire and train the firefighters necessary to continue the excellent fire protection and medical services provided by the Department.

We recognize that public safety requires more than police and fire service alone - it requires a communitywide approach focused on neighborhoods and discrete problems. For the first time in many decades, there is no single neighborhood clearly identifiable as the most challenging in the City. Calls for police service on Allied Drive are down 53% from their peak in 2006 and new homes are starting to be built there. In strong partnership with the Madison Metropolitan School District and Madison Schools and Community Recreation, we launched a pilot neighborhood center in the Meadowridge Mall on the southwest side. Early reviews of the center indicate that neighbors of all ages are taking advantage of the programming and - as a result - problems in and around the mall are declining. The long-term problems at Brittingham Park have practically ceased thanks to a comprehensive list of interventions first put in place early last year. Our new Neighborhood Indicators Program serves as an early warning mechanism that monitors the health of our neighborhoods with a goal that there will never be another neighborhood in crisis. As part of this problem-solving approach, I have refocused the work of our Neighborhood Resource Teams and asked each team to identify specific problems and develop comprehensive interventions to alleviate them.

This year, we continue our collaborative approaches to address alcohol-related crime and general disorder. Our Alcohol License Review Committee is more rigorously evaluating applications and holding license holders accountable. We are partnering with Dane County and communities throughout the state in our lobbying efforts related to enhancing the penalties for drunk driving and increasing the state's beer tax to help fund prevention programs. Thanks to the great work by police Captain Joe Balles and Nan Cnare from the United Way, we have developed an empirical mechanism for addressing the most chronic offenders in our community. We have asked Rep. Tammy Baldwin to help us secure federal funds for a national demonstration program to work intensively with the small number of high cost offenders. The first annual review of the downtown Alcohol License Density Plan shows a 5% reduction in alcohol related calls for service without the feared displacement of problems or negative impact on our vibrant nightlife. Thanks to the leadership of Susan Schmitz and Downtown Madison, Inc., a broad group of stakeholders has formed the Downtown Hospitality Council to ensure that our downtown economy is safe, fun and profitable. Our Chronic Nuisance Ordinance continues to be extremely helpful in our efforts to keep our neighborhoods safe by holding property owners accountable. Finally, in partnership with Smart Growth Greater Madison, my office is putting together a local Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) training conference to help us build prevention into our environment. Several current CPTED analyses are already underway, focusing on Peace Park and Metro's South Transfer Point.

In the area of public schools, all of us continue to be impressed by our new school superintendent Dan Nerad. The School Board members made a great choice when they selected Dan. He's everywhere in our community, and he is really listening to everyone. Recently, Dan suggested that we attend each other's management team meetings several times a year. This gives us each an opportunity to better understand the challenges and opportunities each organization faces. Further evidence of this growing partnership is the City's continuing involvement in the District's strategic planning process, which is currently underway. Because housing policy and schools are so closely tied, I recently appointed School Board member Marj Passman to the City's new committee looking at long-term affordable housing strategies. For the same reason, the City has added a non-voting seat to its Plan Commission for the District, to ensure that we are growing and redeveloping with the needs of our children in mind. There's nothing more important to the future of our City than its public schools. My job is to work cooperatively with the School Board and the Superintendent, while respecting their autonomy in leading our great schools.
.
In the area of green efficiency, Madison continues to be a leader in incorporating green thinking into everything we do. Our Natural Step process for managing city government has gained recognition literally all over the world. We lead the nation in recycling with a diversion rate of 59%, and now it’s time to take the next step. We’re exploring the recycling of compostable materials and we may have a system ready to go in about two years. Jeanne Hoffman and our Office of Sustainability continue to work hard to make sure city government leads by example in reducing our carbon footprint. Lake management is always at the top of our concerns. Recently, the Department of Natural Resources took steps to better manage the flow of water through the Yahara chain of lakes, lessening the risk of flooding. But lower lake levels at proper times of the year would lead to stronger, healthier wetlands, a greater variety of plants and animals and cleaner, clearer water. We will continue to work with all of the stakeholders toward that goal. Finally, the recently adopted goals for the Northeast Neighborhoods put them on the map as one of the largest areas in the nation to be developed using a comprehensive set of environmentally friendly initiatives.

In the area of being welcoming, accessible and connected to the world, the Department of Civil Rights maintains its good work under Lucia Nunez by encouraging diversity on committees, commissions and boards, as well as in the workplace. The Department of Civil Rights continues to work to increase access for people with disabilities to public meetings through the use of DeafLink, a sign language interpreter service. DCR staff is working with Madison employers through the EOC Employment Committee to understand the rights of employees and responsibilities of employers. And DCR staff is closely working with targeted businesses to attain certification and work on City projects. We are also working to strengthen our Sister Cities program by showing progress in building business ties as well as cultural and people-to-people exchanges.

In the area of building a great city, Madison continues to move forward even in times of recession with major projects moving ahead like the Institutes for Discovery and Union South on the UW campus, Allied Drive housing, the Villager Mall and others. More on this when we talk about economic development.

And this brings me to my main focus today: the economy. First, let’s be clear about the dimensions of the problem locally. Our unemployment rate is 5.0%, much lower than the state rate of 8.8% or the national rate of 8.9%, but still substantially higher than a year ago when it was 3.5% or at any time in recent history since at least 1990. For the first time in decades, residential property values in Madison fell in 2008. Another measure of economic activity, building permit revenues for the City, are down 16% from this time last year. The number of building permits issued was down to 183 for 2008 compared to the 1,039 that were issued during the building boom of 2002. Based on first quarter earnings, the projected income from our investments of city revenues may be as little as half of last year's earnings.

So Madison is not immune to the recession, but there are some bright spots. Just last week, Money Magazine rated Madison the number two place in the country to find a job. And, we are making progress on several initiatives to foster economic development. But we need to do more.

Here are six basic themes and specific initiatives for us to focus on this year.


1. Make City Government More Business Friendly

We continue to work to make city government more business friendly through new initiatives, collaboration and continuing partnerships.

• As we respond to economic challenges, we are not starting from scratch. Over the past years, we’ve been prudent in our economic development planning. Back in 2004, we created a blueprint for the City's long-term economic development: The Healthy City. In it, we identified many of the opportunities and industries from which we are best positioned to benefit. We also have an Economic Development Implementation Plan, completed in August of 2008. Following that plan, we will have annual economic development work plans.

• These plans do not sit on the shelf – this year, we are implementing business retention software and continuing the process of modernizing our zoning code. The Zoning Code Modernization project is one of the most significant steps we as a city are taking to encourage economic development.

• For the first time in the City’s history we have an economic development director. His name is Tim Cooley. Tim is already doing a great job connecting city government to the business community, both large and small. He has regular, frequent and direct access to me.

• We created a virtual one-stop shop to help businesses, developers and homeowners work their way through the permits and approvals needed to build or improve their homes and businesses. A physical one-stop-shop is on its way.

• Next month, the City, together with the Chamber of Commerce and others, will hold the third Madison Small Business Conference, focusing this time on some of the challenges small businesses face in the current economy.

• This month, we worked with the Greater Madison Chamber of Commerce and the Small Business Advisory Council to launch a Roadworks website and a Small Business Construction Survival Guide – a set of best practices aimed at helping businesses survive and even prosper through the necessary disruption of major road repair projects. This is exactly the type of collaboration we need to continue.

• Last month, the Council passed a new tax incremental financing policy that now emphasizes job creation.


2. Grow Our High Tech Industries in Partnership With the UW

Dane County’s economic engine is the University of Wisconsin. Ideas hatched by UW researchers are often developed into products at the UW Research Park and then grown into full-fledged businesses.

• Last month, the Council voted at my urging to create the BioAg Gateway on the City’s far southeast side. We have applied for and expect to receive over $4 million from the Federal government to begin work on the BioLink incubator facility, which will be one of only a handful of centers like it in North America, linking our agriculture industry with researchers and entrepreneurs to bring new products to market. This is one of the seeds that will help grow our economy in the long-term.

• We need to work with the University Research Park to get Research Park II up and running on the far west side. We are making progress on the roadwork needed in that area to make the project a success.

3. Compete as a Region; Cooperate at Home

Increasingly we understand that Madison is competing not so much with our suburbs but with other regions. We need to pull together as a region and market ourselves to the world.

• Recognizing that economic development, like many other issues in our community, is not limited to municipal boundaries, the City has been an early and continued supporter of the Collaboration Council and its economic development organization: Thrive.

• We need to create a regional transit authority to help us improve our bus system, rebuild our streets and maybe, if we can get approval for Federal cost sharing, build a commuter rail system.

• We are working with our Federal representatives and with the City of Milwaukee to bring high-speed intercity rail back to Madison. The President recently announced a new five-year program to expand high-speed rail. I think we are very likely to see high-speed rail here in the next five years. We need to get to work on siting a station or stations in the city.

4. Build Our Image as an Arts, Tourism, & Convening Center

Madison has a well-deserved image as a place of ideas – some of them even unusual ideas. We should embrace our creativity – and our quirkiness. It’s who we are, and it’s an important asset that draws people to us.

• We are working with hotel developers to help meet the need for several hundred new hotel rooms that will bolster our tourism and convention industries and make Monona Terrace an even greater success.

• We should recognize that the arts play an important role in our economy. The Art Fairs On and Off the Square and the Wisconsin Film Festival and the Madison Book Festival draw thousands to our community. The Overture Center has played an important role in the revitalization of the downtown. While the Council and I have made it clear that the City will not participate in resolving Overture’s remaining construction debt, we should be at the table to ensure Overture’s long-term success after that issue is resolved. I know that the recession and the strain of growing into Overture have hit some of its resident groups hard. I lament the loss of the Repertory Theatre, and I hope it can return some day. I hope that the Chamber Orchestra can resolve its remaining issues with its union and play the much-loved Concerts on the Square this summer. And we will move forward on a first-ever cultural plan for our City.

• We will work with Commonwealth Development on the conversion of the Garver Feed Mill to an arts incubator and other uses.

5. Build On Our Natural & Neighborhood Assets

Our lakes define the City geographically and foster an environmental ethic that has nurtured John Muir, Aldo Leopold and Gaylord Nelson. Our neighborhoods are the strength or our City. We should build our economy on our unique places.

• We need to recognize that our lakes are important natural and economic assets. I strongly support the County Executive’s efforts to create a manure digester north of Lake Mendota – probably the single most important thing we can do to improve our lakes. We will also maintain a partnership we began with the county last year to step up cleaning our shorelines.

• Last month, the Council approved goals for what could make the Northeast Neighborhoods a national model for environmentally friendly developments.

• We should continue the exciting developments in the East Washington-Capital Gateway Corridor, including the urban research park that the UW is developing there, the new Google office and the new Central Park. We are exploring a new location for the massive Metro bus storage facility that is probably not a good long-term use for its current location in the corridor. We are also in the process of contracting for project management services to move the important work of that corridor forward.

• Last month, the City joined numerous community groups to break ground on new facilities at the Villager on South Park Street, including the Urban League Center for Economic Development and Workforce Training. And late last year, we broke ground on new rental units on Allied Drive, putting several Allied residents to work on the redevelopment through a new apprenticeship program.

• We need to continue the renaissance of the Villager Mall on south Park Street and move forward with an exciting new proposal for the old Bancroft Dairy on Park and Fish Hatchery. And the Meriter and St. Mary’s hospital expansions along Park Street are tremendously important to our local economy as health care will continue to be a growing part of our economy.

• Three conspicuous, cleared properties dot our landscape: Union Corners on the east side, the St. Raphael’s block downtown and phase II of the Hilldale development on the west side. In each case we need to work with the owners to develop them just as soon as is practical. But we should not settle for second-rate projects at any of these sites. It would be a tragedy if we allowed our vision to slip, creating inferior projects for a generation because of a short-term economic downturn.

• We should move ahead with a new Central Library. Tripp Widder’s work as president of the Library Board, the Library Foundation and Chair of the Central Library Disposal Surplus Property Criteria and Selection Committee has been exemplary. I will wait for his committee’s recommendations on a new Central Library this summer. While rehabbing the existing building is a tempting alternative, let’s not rule out a more aggressive solution that would add value to the City in both tangible and intangible ways.

• We should continue the development of the Public Market concept to build the connection between Madisonians and the rich and healthy local foods that are available in our region.

• The Stoughton Road Revitalization Plan is an effort commendable for its process as much as for its product. This public planning process has been lauded by Neighborhoods USA and the Wisconsin Chapter of the American Planning Association. Residents from 8 area neighborhoods, area businesses, elected officials and City staff worked hard to create a plan for an interconnected environment linking residents with neighborhood businesses and services through a multimodal transportation network. The plan helps give the Stoughton Road Corridor a sense of place through land use recommendations, building placement, streets, landscaping, site planning and public art, making this gateway to the City of Madison both attractive, and reflective of the bright future this area holds for our community's economic development.

• The Downtown Plan project seeks to both honor the distinct characteristics of our downtown, while also preparing this area for the next chapter in its evolution, as it fulfills a wide variety of roles: residential, governmental, cultural, business, recreational and educational. Also, the plan will continue to further the discussion on transportation options in the downtown area. The process for this planning effort has also endeavored to be open and interactive, including a storefront studio where the public can get and provide information. Final recommendations will be coming in the next few months.

6. Demonstrate That We Can Be Progressive and Pro-Business

Madison wants to be a City where there is a place for everyone who wants to contribute positively to the life of the community. So, our economic development strategies need to include everyone from high tech entrepreneurs to line workers.


• We are hard at work trying to maximize and to deploy as rapidly as possible the Federal stimulus money that will come to our community. We believe we could secure from $18 to $25 million dollars in stimulus funding. My goals here are to create good jobs, help those in need, and engage those resources in a transformative recovery that makes our economy stronger.

• We should remember that bicycles are not just toys. The bike industry brings in $1 billion to the Wisconsin economy – four times more than snowmobiles. And Madison is the center of much of it. Trek, Syrus, Planet Bike, Pacific Cycle and other companies employ hundreds. We should build on our already strong reputation to make Madison the center of the bike universe. We are working hard with the Chicago Olympic Committee to land some of the 2016 summer games biking events right here in Madison.

• We need to be especially aware of the challenges faced by low-income residents and the organizations that serve low-income populations. We’ll continue our lobbying efforts at the State Capitol to repair state statutes to provide tax-exemption status for low-income housing providers.

• We also need to work to take our affordable housing efforts in new directions. We worked hard to make inclusionary zoning a success, but I had to admit finally that it didn’t work. I still believe in the goal of providing a range of good quality housing for people of every income level all over our City and in the surrounding region. We now need to rededicate ourselves to that goal and work toward better solutions. To that end, I’ve created a new committee that will explore affordable housing strategies. And, work has already begun on joining our City’s housing authority with Dane County – because affordable housing should be a goal not just in Madison, but throughout the region.

• The federal American Reinvestment and Recovery Act creates new opportunities to weatherize our own buildings and the homes of low-income residents. We need to maximize this opportunity to create good paying entry-level jobs and to lower the energy bills of families who need it badly.

These initiatives are not all we need to do. Other needs and new ideas will no doubt surface as we go through the year.

Finally, a word about leadership in our City. I have already developed a good working relationship with new UW Chancellor Biddy Martin. Dan Nerad is doing an exceptional job at the Madison Public Schools. I am pleased that Dane County voters returned Kathleen Falk to the County Executive’s office so that we can continue the best working relationship between the City and County in a generation. Mark Bugher and Jennifer Alexander are two of the most progressive business leaders in the state. Madison legislators Sen. Mark Miller and Rep. Mark Pocan are co-chairs of the powerful Joint Finance Committee. Madisonians Gary Wolter and Alan Fish have headed up the State Office of Recovery and Reinvestment. Our important Economic Development Commission is under the strong leadership of Doug Nelson.

Most importantly from my perspective, the Madison City Council has remained focused and has resisted falling into divisive camps thanks in part to the leadership of Council President Tim Bruer and Pro Tem Mark Clear. Internally, for more than three decades, we have benefited from the leadership of City Engineer Larry Nelson. Larry is now preparing to leave city government and when he does, he will leave a gaping hole and an enduring legacy. Larry likes to say that no one is indispensable, but when he leaves, he will test that theory. For all you’ve done for Madison, thank you Larry.

Our City along with the rest of our nation faces the most serious challenges in decades. But I believe we have strong leadership in place at every level to help us get through this.

This is a time when many communities are wondering which way to turn. But Madison’s response to the current economic situation should be clear. Our answer – Madison’s answer – is to be bold, to invest, to move forward, to find all the possibilities in the moment. Where others can only see bad news, we should recognize opportunities.

And we cannot forget our goal of a transformative recovery. We cannot afford to recover back to an economy based on so many unsustainable foundations. Instead, we must recognize our opportunity to build a new economy. If the old economy was based on consumption; the new economy should be based on production. If the old economy was based on spending beyond our means; the new economy should be based on savings. If the old economy was based on over reliance on fossil fuels; the new economy should be based on environmental sustainability. If the old economy left too many of us out of health care and educational opportunity; the new economy should improve the health and education of everyone.

There has been a great deal of emphasis on basic services in the last two years, and that is appropriate. I believe it is important for city government to step back for awhile and reestablish that it cares about the basics. But once the understanding is established that city government will first take care of basic services and not waiver from that commitment, then I think it is possible to go beyond just the basics to do things that create a really great city.

A solid, consistent, and permanent commitment to getting the basics right will form the foundation for doing those other things that feed the civic soul. So, we will continue to add more police officers and build fire stations and add ambulances and repair streets. But a city is more than a low crime rate and fewer potholes.

A good city is measured by the opportunities it gives to those who can’t find opportunity elsewhere. It is measured by the quality of its architecture and the creativity of its people. It is measured by how well it tolerates dissent and how much it celebrates diversity. In a good city, factory workers, artists, students, teachers, entrepreneurs, homemakers, seniors and children should all feel at home; all feel that they have something to contribute and that the city has something to give back. A good city, like an interesting person, is complex and sometimes inconsistent but always fascinating.

So, this City Council and I should not want to be remembered just for getting the basics right. Let’s be remembered for doing that, but not stopping there. This economy is certainly bad, but the state of our City is good. And with some vision for the future and by working together, we will not just recover our economy; we’ll recreate our City as a place that defines what it means to be both progressive and pro-business.

Read more!