This Side of Town . . .: Mayor Dave

Showing posts with label Mayor Dave. Show all posts

Monday, April 5, 2010

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

Here's we go . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Friday, April 2, 2010

Mayor's Non-vite to the Alders to Discuss the Library

Wow, the Mayor has become so blatant in his disrespect to the council its kind of staggering.

At 4:00 yesterday afternoon - the mayor's office sent out this non-vite to the alders:

From: Phair, Connie
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 4:12 PM
To: ALL ALDERS; CL Meetings
Cc: Harmon, Ray; Piraino, Janet; Strauch-Nelson, Rachel
Subject: 04/05/2010: Council Briefing on Central Library (Please post)

Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, Tripp Widder, and Library Board member Alder Larry Palm will be holding a briefing (brown bag luncheon) for the Common Council on the Central Library project on:

Monday, April 5, 2010
12:00 p.m.
Room 260, MMB

Please find attached the notice for this meeting. If you have questions, feel free to contact Ray Harmon in the Mayor’s Office at (608) 266-4611.

Alders, please reply to this email to confirm your attendance.

Thank you,
Connie

Alder Rummel's response:

Mayor-
If you or staff had at least checked in with all alders with some potential meeting dates and the majority could meet at noon, it would be easier for me to accept that I could not attend. But you did not.

This briefing appears to give you cover to go to the Library Board on Monday before the resolution has even been introduced. Don't forget the Library Board commissioned HGA who presented three rehab option during the Surplus committee meeting discussion, I believe they know what it could entail.

The bottom line? You will have met with DMI Exec and the Library Board before discussing your proposed change of course with the full council. I object.

Marsha

Well said. But I don't think the mayor really cares. He's in charge here, and doesn't care what the council thinks, if he can manage the media and make it look like a done deal then those who ask questions can be dismissed as being obstructionists. Now be a good girl and quiet down and let the men make the important decisions, no need to worry your pretty little head.
Read more!

Monday, December 28, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Zach Brandon started his January 2006 and ended December 2006.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Good Afternoon Alder Bruer,

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

Thanks,
Sarah

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monday, December 21, 2009

Still Talking About the Edgewater . . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tuesday, December 15, 2009

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Still looking at all our options.

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

Monday, December 14, 2009

Here We Go Again, Monday Morning Round Up

Here's what I have this slippery Monday morning . . .

MAYOR DAVE IN TROUBLE?
Wow. Mayor Dave is the talk of the town. Everywhere I went this weekend, people were talking about who is going to run against him. The way he handled the Edgewater and is shoving it down our throats, his abandonment and criticism of his own appointees to the Landmarks Commission and other committees and posts, his complete abandonment of the left and of course, the snow were some of the highlights. On neighborhood listserves the plowing issues were a major issue, many not believing his apology is very sincere or his excuse well reasoned. Paul Soglin explained what he thinks is wrong. I wish I could find Mayor Dave's comments made during budget discussions about cutting Streets workers and why Madison Metro drivers can't just run snow plows - it showed his fundamental misunderstanding of what it takes to get the streets plowed. Once you read his blog, you can see what his motivation for the apology is - he's worried about being Bilandicked. With good reason. I had assumed that he had built up a war chest making it hard for someone to run against him, but I was surprised when I looked and found he only had $27,000 in his account. Things aren't looking so good, he's Baumanized himself and has no base as he has annoyed everyone left to right. Now, who's going to run . . .

COUNT ME ANNOYED
So, you participate in the Downtown Living Tour (October 4th), get an inspection complaint. Nice.

I put up with alot of crap, but this kind of pissed me off. This week, it will be one year that we've owned our new house (a block and a half from our old house). We moved in last February after doing some interior work (refinished floors, plaster work, painting) and so far, we've gotten two complaints filed with Building Inspection. The first was for putting our leaves in bags instead of letting them blow into the streets and down the drains. Of course, by the time we had gotten the order to fix it, the city had already picked up our leaves and left the bags with a rock on top of them so we could reuse them.

This time, the day after the Downtown Living tour, a complaint and inspection (10-5-09) was done. And although it says the order was issued 10-10-09, we just got the order in the mail on Friday. You have to understand our neighborhood gets pretty good, thorough systematic inspections every few years. Living downtown, we've been the subject of them for years. So, you would think that most of the things on the outside would have been written up in the last few rounds of inspections, or when we got our leaf complaint. So, imagine my surprise when we were written up for something that has been in existence for at least 35 years. Compare the (1973 or 1974) black and white photos with the color picture from this summer, look at the front porch railing:

Photographer: WHS HPPH

Apparently, we have to

Install or add to the existing guardrail system around the front porch. The existing guardrail system is below the minimum height requirements of 36 inches. Ensure that the new or increased height guardrail has no areas where a 4 inch sphere (ball) could pass through any area below the top rail of the guardrail.

So, its been that way for at least 35 years, our neighborhood has been the subject of MANY programmed inspections where orders weren't written, and they first noticed this now? The inspection was the day after the Downtown Living Tour, was that a coincidence? And why did we get the order in the mail two months after it was allegedly ordered? We were planning to do some work anyways, which we told people as they came through the house, so its not that big of a deal, I just don't know what type of railing would be appropriate for this house, especially with those stone pillars where they are. I'm just annoyed that someone called in something that is the same as it has been for the past 35 years and it happened after trying to be a good neighbor and opening our house up for the Downtown Living Tour. No good deed goes unpunished, I guess.

FRUIT AND NUTS
Loved the tag line on the website . . . "because Madison needs more of both"

Madison Fruits & Nuts - Urban Orchards Citywide Grant Planning Session

Do you want a small orchard of peaches, pears, raspberries, hickories, or other delectable fruits and nuts at a park, community garden or other public space in your neighborhood? Do you want to make fruit and nuts freely available for you and others in your community? Let's make it happen by attending this planning session rescheduled for Dec. 15th!

* Madison Fruits & Nuts -- Urban Orchards Citywide Grant Planning Session *
* Tuesday, December 15 at 7:00 pm, at MATC Downtown Campus, 211 N Carroll Street, Room D240. *

Madison has been invited to request free fruit trees and training in their care by the Fruit Tree Planting Foundation. At the meeting, we'll select orchard sites together and apply for the funding. Then sites will be selected nationally by internet voting. So if you can't make the meeting, but you support an orchard your neighborhood, send us an email. We'll let you know when the vote happens. Or better yet, if you can help out with the planting and care of an orchard, please join us for the meeting on Tuesday! Chances are good that Madison orchards will be selected.

Contact: www.madisonfruitsandnuts.org email: madisonfruitsandnuts@gmail.com Please drop us an email if you would like to be on our contact list for future Madison Fruits and Nuts events. Phone: Christie Ralston, Community GroundWorks at Troy Gardens – 608-240-0409 for further information.

-- Madison Fruits & Nuts

EDGEWATER
The Cap Times has a good editorial on the Edgewater, asking the council not to sacrifice civic values for the project. The Badger Herald, on the other hand says,

Madison’s alders: quit worrying about the language of one unclear ordinance.

Whoa. Seriously? They took the Mayor Dave line of just ignoring inconvenient ordinances. So, can we also ignore snow shoveling and alternate side parking laws?

Looks like news of a compromise by Cnare hit the news. I'm sure that if asked, the Edgewater folks will stand up in front of the council and say that they need to know today and no compromise that delays the decision will work.

And I'm not sure what to make of the lack of a Project Labor Agreement and how that will play with the alders.

And, are Palm, Schumacher and Pham-Remmele really the absences for the meeting? I had heard reports of Compton being gone and Palm being back. It'd be nice if the correct information would be available to the public.

COUNTY BUDGET CUTS HITTING THE STREETS
Along with homeless seniors? I'm surprised we didn't hear more about this during the budget discussions.

JOB OPENING
With the RTA coming up, this job is critical. Hope someone good applies:

Employment Opportunity: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING MANAGER
Agency: Planning and Community and Economic Development Department
Category: PROFESSIONAL/TECHNICAL
Salary: $74,938 to $90,309 annually
Date Posted: 12/11/2009
Application Deadline: 1/18/2010
Residency: Dane County Residency is Required for this Position.

Job Announcement Details

BREWERS AND BANDS EXEMPT?
So, Schumacher says the "total ban" on drinking while working in a bar might have some exemptions. I'd say, that's the only way its going to pass, because without those exemptions, the law seems ridiculous.
Read more!

Friday, December 11, 2009

Mayor Dave's Hunger for Power

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

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

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

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

Now, its the Landmarks Commission. (2009)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and

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

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

TRANSPARENT AND ACCOUNTABLE
In that same article the Mayor says:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monday, December 7, 2009

Monday Morning Round Up

Lots to comment on . . . not just the Edgewater . . .

MADISON SCHOOLS GET VISIT FROM POCAN AND MILLER
Last Monday they stopped by for a chat with the school board. Here's a report on their meeting. It's the only one I could find and I had been curious how it went as I had gotten an email about it. At the end of the post he includes this suggestion that I thought I'd share for those who care about school funding:

It isn’t easy to move elected officials from words to action. One thing that helps is a show of public support. You can do this in two ways (do both): First go to the Penny for Kids website and sign the petition; second, send Mark Pocan a quick email saying you support Penny for Kids and he should too. You don’t even have to explain why — he gets it.

OH . . . THE IRONY . . .
Apparently, this played right before the Joint Urban Design Commission and Landmarks Commission meeting. You know, the "handful of unelected people" that should be ignored because the Council knows better . . .

I don't know who took the time to do that, but I appreciate it. I had gotten a clip of it from a neighborhood person but the video wasn't working, only the sound. Their description with the video is as follows:

Madison, Wi Mayor Dave Cieslewicz bashed members of his Landmarks Commission after they ruled in a way he didn't like. He called them a "handful of unelected people on one committee" and described the process as "fundamentally undemocratic" even though he appointed them. In this PSA, Mayor Dave asks residents to serve on city committees. He does not mention that he'll publicly bash your hard work . See here.

THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG
Dorothy Borchardt was quick to respond to news of the RTA appointments on Friday:

I bet the Mayor won't think their decisions are "undemocratic."

The WSJ reported that the Mayor thinks "unelected people on a committee shouldn't be able to block important development it should be decided by the elected representatives of the people." TCT reported the Mayor thinks it is "undemocratic for unelected people" to make decisions."

If the Mayor feels unelected people shouldn't be making big decisions ...why did he support appointing an RTA Board before the referendum on an additional sales tax, to cover commuter rail, goes to the voters? Why didn't he let the voters decide? Or, does it only apply to decisions made by the unelected individuals that the Mayor agrees with? If that is the case ...look for trolleys to be added to the trains before Metro is expanded to meet the needs of the community.

HARSH WORDS FOR DAVE FROM FORMER CITY STAFF
Jay Rath continues his excellent coverage of the Edgewater issue. What surprised me tho, was this comment:

Kitty Rankin, for three decades the city’s preservation planner, is alarmed by such talk. "The mayor is in the development community’s lap by repeating a phrase that the Landmarks Commission process is flawed," she says. "I have yet to see that it is indeed flawed."

Ouch. Even more interesting is what Bob Dunn says:

"No, no," says Hammes president Bob Dunn. The company promised from the start that its project would not set a precedent for the neighborhood. Now, however, it could set a precedent for the entire city. Dunn has plenty of problems with the ordinance, and he’d welcome change, but that "in no way was the intention of this project."

Intention or not, that is the impact. Read the article, its good. I hear there is another one coming today.

STATE JOURNAL BACKFIRE?
Several folks have mentioned they'd like to thank the State Journal for urging people to contact their alders in support . . . they promptly contacted their alders in opposition. Alders have heard that as well from people who called.

SCREW THE LAW AND PUBLIC PROCESS
In the State Journal editorial on the Edgewater, they list 7 alders, who haven't been engaged to the extent of Rummel and Verveer, who have made up their minds that they are voting in support of the Edgewater. I find it interesting, because to date, there has been no testimony or evidence provided that there is a hardship for the owner (not Hammes). Just a reminder, this is what the council must find first, then also find that that the meet the criteria for a certificate of appropriateness or variance (more here):

after balancing the interest of the public in preserving the subject property and the interest of the owner in using it for his or her own purposes, the Council finds that, owing to special conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, failure to grant the Certificate of Appropriateness will preclude any and all reasonable use of the property and/or will cause serious hardship for the owner, provided that any self-created hardship shall not be a basis for reversal or modification of the Landmark Commission’s decision.

SURVEY SUCKS
I didn't want to choose any of the option in the Channel 3 poll on the Edgewater, they too, are ignoring the law and just wanting people to vote on if they like the Edgewater project or not. The survey is really lopsided, but you can just keep voting, so its easy to manipulate. From the alders I've been talking to, their districts are either against or running about 50/50. No surprises that the downtown districts lean more against. As Alder Rummel put it, her constituents who live in historic districts don't understand why they have to follow the law when replacing a porch railing, but a huge developer with lots of money gets to just ignore the laws.

ZWEIFEL JOINS IN
No, not in criticizing Mayor Dave . . . but, I was pleasantly surprised to see Zweifel write this piece in support of state legislation that would, among other things, restore funding for WYOU. Thanks Dave!

WHY IS OLINGER LEAVING?
Most people know, I'm not a big fan of Olinger. Many I know and respect are. So, I'm torn by the news of his departure personally. Politcally, I'm very nervous. While no one is talking much, Bruer pretty much said it all:

City Council President Tim Bruer said Cieslewicz is exercising his authority to shape the city's administration, and that the mayor wants someone more in line with his vision and beliefs and desired management skills. Olinger has done nothing inappropriate, Bruer said

"The mayor is looking at changing demands and challenges facing the city and felt he needs to bring in a different manager," Bruer said, adding that he supports the mayor's decision.

Do we really want someone in line with his visions and beliefs?

STILL TIME TO GET YOUR SHOT
Public health is still hosting clinics for people to get their H1N1 flu shots. Here's who's eligible:
• Pregnant women
• Persons who live with or care for infants less than 6 months of age
• Children and young adults 6 months through 24 years
• People 25 through 64 years with underlying health conditions. For a listing of underlying health conditions
http://www.publichealthmdc.com/disease/swineflu/K12/UnderlyingConditions.cfm
More details here.

NEED TO HEAR FROM ARTS COMMUNITIES

Dear Madison Arts Community;

The City of Madison has been updating zoning codes to make them more user friendly, align with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and neighborhood plans, reflect newer growth and work patterns, encourage biking and transit use, facilitate mixed-use sustainable development, and achieve quality in-fill development. Roughly two months ago, a new draft zoning code was introduced to Madison’s Common Council. Last month, that draft zoning code was referred to the Madison Arts Commission for their review and recommendations.

On Tuesday, December 8, at their 5:00pm meeting in room LL 110 of the Madison Municipal Building the Madison Arts Commission will discuss Madison’s proposed new zoning code language and how it may affect area artists.

There have been many opportunities for public input during the process of developing the new zoning code. However, members of MAC feel that, because zoning codes affect so many artists in our community, extra efforts should be made to inform artists of when and where the Madison Arts Commission discussion of this item is taking place and to invite participation. The commissioners welcome citizen input as they formulate their thoughts and their recommendations to council.

At a previous MAC meeting, City staff briefed MAC on the rewrite and identified the areas of the new code that had the greatest potential to impact artists. Therefore, commissioners are paying particular attention to areas of the code that relate to live/work space and use of accessory dwellings for artistic production.

The proposed code can be found on the City’s Zoning rewrite website:
http://www.cityofmadison.com/neighborhoods/zoningRewrite/

If you cannot attend Tuesday night’s MAC meeting, please feel free to email your comments prior to or at their meeting and they will be shared with the commissioners (note: any written comments become a part of the permanent public record). There is also a “your thoughts” link on the zoning rewrite website that welcomes citizen input.

Sincerely,
Karin Wolf
Staff to the Madison Arts Commission

CANCELLED CITY MEETINGS
With snow coming, this is good timing. Looks like you can now sign up for an email list or rss feed to alert you to cancelled meetings. Much appreciated!
* RSS Feed: Cancelled Weekly Meetings RSS
* Email List: Cancelled Weekly Meetings (under City Hall), can subscribe at : https://my.cityofmadison.com/)

COUNTY ELECTIONS
It's widely rumored and I keep getting asked, but no, I am not running for County Board Supervisor. I like my supervisor Barbara Vedder just fine, thank you.
Read more!

Friday, December 4, 2009

Friday Round Up . . .

Ex-alder gives advice to colleagues, Olinger leaving the city, kudos to public health, Kailin service, Brews for WYOU, Homeless Memorial Day, composting, and more, more, more Edgewater . . .

ANOTHER EX-ALDER WEIGHS IN ON THE EDGEWATER . . . PROCESS
Former Alder urges colleagues to do the right thing, not the politically expedient thing. Good letter.

CLARENCE KAILIN MEMORIAL RE-PLAY

Clarence Kailin Memorial will play in its entirety ( 03:00Hrs) starting @ 3pm Saturday Dec.5 - WYOU ch 991 or WYOU ch 95 or wyou.org
Thanks to Judith leurquin and Russ Attoe for letting their program "third world view" be preempted
Peace
Luciano

OLINGER - OUTTA HERE!

From: Olinger, Mark
Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 6:02 PM
To: ALL ALDERS
Cc: Mayor; Veldran, Lisa; 'Gregg Shimanski'; Harmon, Ray; Strauch-Nelson, Rachel
Subject: Information

Dear Alders:

I wanted to let you all know that effective January 5, 2010, I will no longer be under contract as the Director of the Department of Planning & Community & Economic Development.

The Mayor has asked me to continue to serve as Director on a provisional basis subsequent to that date to help finish a number of projects that are in critical phases of implementation or financing. I have accepted the Mayor’s offer in order to make sure that these projects get across the finish line.

It has been a pleasure working with you as Director.

Thank you.

KUDOS
I happen to be one of the "lucky" people who have an "underlying condition" (Type 1/Insulin Dependent Diabetes) so I was able to get a H1N1 flu shot the other day. It reminded me how great our Public Health Department is. So, kudos! And thank you!

WHAT MY NEIGHBORS ARE SAYING ABOUT EDGEWATER (FROM LISTSERVES)
Why not East Washington.

I know most are getting sick about the Edgewater discussion. Everyone on this list is well aware of the condition of the commerce on East Washington -- or lack thereof. We have a newly abandoned Madison Dairy, a vacant Mautz paint factory, an almost vacant Marquip factory, Don Miller is almost completely gone, and we have a huge abandoned Union Corners development. Some influential people in this city are bending over backwards to give $16 million to a luxury hotel that will charge $300/night that none of us will ever stay in. No serious amount of long term jobs. The developer refuses to build to the standards of which the property sits, so let's wake up and kill this project now while we have a chance, and divert this money to a stimulus package to invite real jobs to town. Let's invite proposals for all these decaying properties and long lost jobs so that we can once again be proud to bring visitors up East Washington Avenue. I would bet the mayor never brings guests up East Washington -- and it is a shame that the gateway to our city is falling apart.

This is a shameful hour for our city.

Need a new leader.

I think it is time for a future mayoral candidate to step up and address the infantile, temper tantrum histrionics of our present mayor. I hope there is someone out there to step forward and challenge his ability to lead.

E-mail your alders

Please e-mail allalders@madison.com. This entire project is fraught with deception and inaccuracies too numerous to mention. For me, what really is at stake now is the democratic process – including the citizen committees which are a time-honored tradition in Madison. These largely consist of experts in their particular fields who give their knowledge, experience and time freely.

To see so many ordinances violated, as well as the process itself, puts our city at great risk.

Once again, please e-mail allalders@madison.com and let them know that they are accountable to all of us to uphold the ordinances as written, not to bend to the will of a capricious despot.

No TIF

There seems to be an assumption on the part of a lot of people that TIF is free. But the city issues bonds. Issuing bonds affects the city's credit rating. Issue too many and the credit rating goes down and the cost of issuing the bonds go up. Or, another way to look at it, issuing 16 million in TIF bonds for the Edgewater project reduces the amount of money available for other projects, or raises the cost of all city borrowing.

Second xxxxx mentions that TIF is an investment. Again there seems to be an assumption on the part of a lot of people that TIF districts always repay the investment. That assumption is based on the notion that the TIF district gets better as a result of the project, all property values raise, and over time more money comes back to the city. It very questionable whether the Edgewater project will ever pay back the TIF expense. What additional development is theproject going to cause? There is no vacant land in the area to speak of. There are no empty buildings to redevelop. It's a residential area. Is having a large hotel as a neighbor going to inspire landlords to maintain their buildings better? Or maybe they'll let them deteriorate to make it easier to get their own TIF handout. It will probably actually lower the value of nearby residential buildings.

The Edgewater project doesn't meet the city's stated TIF goals and objectives. Giving the project TIF will simply make it harder to say no to all future mediocre-to-bad projects.

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

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!