2007 Budget - Sick Leave Not Implemented, And More

Wouldn't you assume that when something gets put into the budget and it gets the votes on the council, that it would get implemented. Not so.

I'm not one for press releases for many reasons, but here it is nonetheless . . . .

Konkel Raises Serious Concerns About Integrity
of City Budget Process
Review Reveals Items Funded as Part of
2007 City Budget Not Implemented

Madison – Madison Alder Brenda Konkel (2nd District), released today a list of items that the Common Council approved as part of last year’s city budget deliberations, but which were never implemented by the City. The review by Konkel came in the wake of a meeting last week by the city’s budget committee (Board of Estimates) where Mayor Cieslewicz and City Comptroller Dean Brasser as well as other City staff, in response to questions by Konkel, acknowledged several failures to implement budget directives from the approved 2007 City Budget.

“What became clear when I started looking into items we had adopted last year is that the Council’s priorities have been overlooked or flat out disregarded in several areas,” said Konkel.

The list of items approved but not implemented includes:

• $63,000 in funding to provide paid sick days to City employees who did not have this benefit, was unanimously approved by the Council on a voice vote but never implemented (2006 Operating Budget Amendment #1);
• Funding of $300,000 for the Tax Incremental Financing (TIF) 10% set-aside that was approved by the Council but never spent;
• $50,000 for neighborhood planning grants, approved on a voice vote by the Council but never distributed to neighborhood associations conducting or updating their neighborhood plans; (Operating Budget Amendment #26);
• Funding to hire a neighborhood planner (Planner 3) was approved by the Council but a planner was never hired; and
• Further study on the role of and priorities for neighborhoods as part of the reorganization of the Department of Planning and Development. The Council required that this study and a report be delivered to the Council by mid-October; no study has been conducted and no report provided. (Operating Budget Amendment #25, modified by Council resolution in March)
  

“Learning that several budget items approved by the Council as our funding priorities have not in fact been implemented raises tremendous concerns as we look ahead to the Council’s deliberations and votes next month on the 2008 budget,” said Konkel.

Konkel added, “The Common Council trusts the Mayor and City departments to fully implement the approved budget, or at least to let us know if there are problems in doing so. This list puts that trust and integrity of our budget process in jeopardy.”

In response to these failures to act and a history of funds not being spent in the capital budget, Konkel will introduce a resolution at the Tuesday, October 16th City Council meeting requiring quarterly budget updates to the Common Council and specifying that each year’s annual executive proposal shall include a report on which areas have been over or under-spent by more than 5%, along with explanations of these spending discrepancies from the approved budget.

Read more!

Budgets - City and Personal

Cute. Actually, that picture is kind compared to the rest of the rust, peeling paint and dents that you can't see.

What'd you expect on an alder's salary (click on 3.29)? According to the Council Office Staff we actually get $592.75 per month, which is $7,113 a year, the ordinance linked there is OLD (it should have been updated twice, once for alders starting in 2005 and once for alders starting in 2007). Anyways, as you can see, we got a huge raise from 2003 when we got paid $6,771 or $564 per month. I bet you couldn't pay some people $600 bucks to sit through one council meeting per month*, let alone two, plus committees, neighborhood meetings and constituent contacts.

If we ignore all the costs we have as alders:

At minimum wage ($6.50) we get paid for 21 hours of work per week.

At the City's Living Wage ($10.58) which we require our contractors to pay, we get paid for 13 hours of work per week.

At a housing wage ($12.61) for one person to live in a one bedroom at below market rates (4oth percentile) we get paid for 11 hours of work per week.

My theory is, by the time you factor in breakfasts, coffees, lunches and beers for meeting with all the lobbyists and other interested individuals plus random office supplies and gas for driving around town, you probably end up paying to be an alder in this City.

Anyways, here's my thinking on my car, it still runs with a occasional trip to the mechanic, it gets decent gas mileage and only has 125,000 miles on it. Why throw away a perfectly good running vehicle just cuz its ugly? This society focuses too much on aesthetics.

* Ugh, Nevermore just pointed out to me that there are people (he named names) who regularly get paid $600 to sit through a council meeting, they're called lobbyists! Read more!

The Politics of Policing

So, 600 people on the Westside want more police services. Maybe. I'm not sure what they want. The angry emails I have been getting say they want a loitering ordinance and a chronic nuisance (it's been drafted for over a year and we've had council discussions on this, but the sponsor is still working on it) ordinance and they don't want trolleys and swimming pools. Interesting. I wonder what they know about these two ordinances and what they think they will do and how they seized on these two "tools" to solve their problems.

The TV news reported they just wanted more police. That's something I understand a bit better. Last year at budget time, I sponsored the following amendment so that we could look at how police are using their resources and try to focus their efforts on neighborhood concerns. This is from my four part blog (1, 2, 3, 4) at budget time last year:

Amendment #13 - The original amendment would have made the 10 new police officers neighborhood officers. After asking the police chief some questions about previous police staffing committees and the plan for how they were spending the $50,000 for a staffing study, I offered the following substitute:

A police staffing subcommittee shall be established by the Common Council to review the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget, if completed, and shall make recommendations to the Common Council and Police Chief which shall include, but not be limited to recommendations regarding the number of neighborhood officers, the staffing levels for Community Policing Teams and other community policing initiatives. This committee shall report back to the Common Council by October 1, 2007.

There were several amendments and friendly amendments to this and we voted on if the language should just say:

A committee shall be established by the Common Council to provide input in the creation of a the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget.

That motion failed on a voice vote.

Then we went back to the substitute language above. At issue was whether the Council gets input into major policing philosophy changes or if we just hire the police cheif and let him make the decisions. I was hoping we could have a community discussion about what community policing means to us. However, that motion failed. Votes were as follows:
Yes - Webber, Benford, King, Konkel, Olson, Sanborn, Skidmore, Verveer
No - Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Gruber, Knox, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Thomas, VanRooy
Present: Golden (this essentially means they don't cast a vote in favor or against)

I find that interesting in that several of the emails accused us of not supporting their alder's efforts. Well, if their alder is Thuy Pham-Remmele, she hasn't proposed anything. In fact, I think the only thing she did was send out that crazy press release. If they're talking about Cindy Thomas, I'd say she didn't support the budget amendment above that their neighborhood seems to want and need.

As for me, what I really want, is some damn communication. This isn't a new issue, we've been through this before. I swear, they police have mastered the press release and the media and are very savvy users of the media, but they can't seem to give us alders the information we need. I've had two sexual assaults (1, 2)that affect my district in the last three weeks where I got the press release or information from the newspaper or from neighborhood listserves before the police contacted me on them. In fact, the police didn't contact me. I had to contact them to find out what is going on and didn't hear back until days later. This, despite the fact that we've had this discussion with them and they promised to do better.

There's no doubt, we need to take a serious look at what the police are, or are not, doing in this City. We need to see the results of that police staffing study. As the largest budget in the City ($50M), one has to believe that there is room for efficiencies and improved management. Tho, as I've stated before, we won't know until we get more information about how that money is spent. This ought to be an interesting budget season. I'm afraid, instead of making good budgeting decisions, we'll be making political ones that are based on fear.
Read more!

City Budget: Where it's at . . . (Part III: Operating Budget)

All that, for $1.03 increase over the Mayor's budget (with changes made at the Board of Estimates) on the average homeowner's tax bill . . . have mercy on my grammar etc today . . . I'm a little tired, but here it is . . . .

The first motion of the evening was to place the following items on file:

• Amendment #7 - cutting $100,000 for the downtown safety initiative
• Amendment #8 - cutting $300,000 from the affordable housing trust fund
• Amendment #9 - cutting $200,000 from the affordable housing trust fund
• Amendment #10 - adding $200,000 to the affordable housing trust fund (Ald. King added that in there as a show of good will)
  
• Amendment #12 - cutting funding for the police department Management Information Specialist and adding money for overtime actually added $4,250
• Amendment #14 - cutting $4,579 from the Common Council budget
• Amendment #15 - cutting $10,013 from the Mayor's budget
• Amendment #18 - requiring us to to zero-based budgeting
• Amendment #19 - cutting $8,008 for an Occupational Accommodations Specialist
• Amendment #32 - cutting $37,531 from various afterschool and summer youth programs and childcare
• Amendment #33 - cutting $89,200 from the agency that would replace the Women's Transit Authority
• Amendment #34 - cutting $44,375 for the ARC Community Services/Respect program (prostitute rehabilitation)
• Amendment #37 - cutting funding to existing planning councils by dividing their money among 4 planning councils instead of three

Ald. Brandon, knowing he didn't have the votes, offered to essentially withdraw those items from consideration. Needless to say, it was unanimous. And we all appreciate Ald. Brandon's decision to do that and the good nature in which he took the bit of teasing we gave to him. That couldn't have been easy.

Amendment #11 - A substitute motion was made to do the following:

Increase General Fund Room Tax Revenue by $350,000 from $683,200 to $1,033,200 and provide Room Tax Funding of $350,000 to decrease the General Fund subsidy to the Overture Center.

This effectively uses 1/2 of the additional revenue generated by increasing the Room Tax rate from 8% to 9% to reduce the property tax levy. This amendment also results in a decrease of $350,000 in the projected balance available in the Room Tax Fund at the end of 2007.

This amendment included a "Footnote to council members: Those voting "YES" last year...Konkel, Cnare, Verveer, Webber, Olson, Brandon, King, Golden, Benford, Palm (Gruber excused). And he's right, last year, I made essentially the same motion(s).

Amendment #10 - Agency/Service: Room Tax Fund/Estimated Total Room Tax Receipts - Page(s): 16
Sponsor(s): Alds. Konkel, King

Raise the Room tax by .5 percent (from 8 percent to 8.5 percent).

Room Tax Receipts (Increase) $ (430,000)
Total $ (430,000) Levy Impact: $ -
(Note: Funding is in the Room Tax Fund; therefore, there is no impact on the levy.)
Amendment No. 11

Agency/Service: Room Tax Fund/Transfer to Overture Center
Page(s): 16, 78; Supplement page 73
Sponsor(s): Alds. Konkel, King

Provide Room Tax funding of $430,000 to decrease the General Fund subsidy to the Overture Center.

Room Tax Uses/Other $ 4 30,000
Overture/Trf. From Room Tax (new) $ (430,000)
Total $ - Levy Impact: $(430,000)

This year, the votes were as follows:
Yes - Webber, Benford, Brandon, Cnare, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Palm, Sanborn, Skidmore
No - Bruer, Compton, Knox, Olson, Radomski, Rosas, Thomas, VanRooy, Verveer

Interesting set of flip-flops.

Amendment #13 - The original amendment would have made the 10 new police officers neighborhood officers. After asking the police chief some questions about previous police staffing committees and the plan for how they were spending the $50,000 for a staffing study, I offered the following substitute:

A police staffing subcommittee shall be established by the Common Council to review the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget, if completed, and shall make recommendations to the Common Council and Police Chief which shall include, but not be limited to recommendations regarding the number of neighborhood officers, the staffing levels for Community Policing Teams and other community policing initiatives. This committee shall report back to the Common Council by October 1, 2007.

There were several amendments and friendly amendments to this and we voted on if the language should just say:

A committee shall be established by the Common Council to provide input in the creation of a the police staffing report funded in the 2007 budget.

That motion failed on a voice vote.

Then we went back to the substitute language above. At issue was whether the Council gets input into major policing philosophy changes or if we just hire the police cheif and let him make the decisions. I was hoping we could have a community discussion about what community policing means to us. However, that motion failed. Votes were as follows:
Yes - Webber, Benford, King, Konkel, Olson, Sanborn, Skidmore, Verveer
No - Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Gruber, Knox, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Thomas, VanRooy
Present: Golden (this essentially means they don't cast a vote in favor or against)

Amendment #16 - $19,371 for AASPIRE interns - passed on a voice vote

Amendment #17 - $10,000 for sign language interpreters - passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #20 - There was a substitute motion that add 2 arborists instead of the 6 that were originally proposed. I'll have to find that motion and come back and fill in the details. The motion passed on a voice vote

Amendment #22 - Raised admission prices for the pool. $.25 for children, $.50 for adults and $10 for seasonal passes. The motion passed.
Yes: Benford, Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Golden, Knox, Olson, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Webber, Gruber, King, Konkel, Rosas

Amendment #23 - This amendment was originally in the motion to place on file by Ald. Brandon, but Ald. King pulled it out of that motion. It would have saved $15,000 and then spent $500 for the fans. It would have had no impact on the taxpayer as the saved money would have gone into a reserve for the Pool. The motion would have denied air conditioning to the concession stands at the swimming pool and instead, put in fans. The discussion was about if we owed it to our hot sweaty employees to provide air conditioning in a place that was often over 100 degrees and air condition the outdoors, or if we should save money and have unhappy, uncomfortable employees working in miserable conditions. It was a tough one for many. Alders Webber and Golden voted present/abstained. The motion failed.
Yes: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, King, Palm, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas
No: Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Radomski, VanRooy, Verveer

Amendment #24 - $5,000 for AASPIRE intern for the Office of the Director of Planning and Development. Passed on a voice vote without comment.

Amendment #25 - There was a substitute to the proposed amendment that would have referred the reorganization of the Department of Planning and Development to the Common Council Organizational Committee. That amendment read as follows:

Department of Planning and Development Reorganization:

1. The Budget is intended to make the necessary financial changes to allow the Department of Planning and Development reorganization to go forward.

2. Implementation of the department and unit name changes and the creation of the proposed Economic Development Unit to be made up of the Office of Business Resources, the current Community and Economic Development Unit, Real Estate, Community Development Block Grant Office, Office of Community Services and the Senior Center shall be subject to further approval of the Common Council by majority vote. These issues will be taken up when the Common Council considers ordinance #04859. Ordinance #04859 is hereby additionally referred to the Plan Commission. Rejection or alterations of the ordinance shall be accomplished by a simple majority vote. Rejection or alterations will not require a budget amendment.

3. The issue of Neighborhood Services shall be further studied by a joint committee of two (2) plan commissioners, two (2) Community Development Block Grant commissioners, two (2) members of the Office of Community Services commissioners and 1 mayoral appointment. This group shall study services to neighborhoods and, after consulting with planning councils and neighborhood associations, report their recommendations to the Common Council by June 1, 2007 for consideration in the 2008 budget. This committee shall be staffed by the Director of Planning and Development and/or his designee.

This passed without comment on a voice vote.

Amendment #26 - $50,000 for neighborhood planning grants. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #27 - $5,000 for "Jobs with a Future". Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #28 - $41,280 for a "Neighborhood Ombudsman. This was placed on file because of Amendment #25 in hopes that the committee in #3 can discuss this and make a recommendation.

Amendment #29 - $18,920 in savings because it will take time to hire the new Neighborhood Planner. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #30 - $25,000 for the Salvation Army for the warming shelter. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #31 - $30,000 for the Wisconsin Youth Company for running a neighborhood center and afterschool child care programming. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #35 - $21,000 to TlJ. Brokerage Firm to provide 12-week life skills training program for low-income or disadvantaged adults. Passed on a voice vote.

Amendment # 36 - $33,000 for the Westside Planning Council. Alot of discussion on this one. Mostly the issue was whether they were ready and/or if there was enough support. Motion passed.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Golden, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas

Amendment #38 - $23,000 for the Neighborhood House for a half-time program assistant. This was a long and tortured discussion that had more to do with how we decide what to fund than the needs of the over-worked staff at the Neighborhood House. Most bizarre comment of the evening to me was when Ald. Cindy Thomas, after getting $30,000 for her neighborhood center in her district, launched into a tirade about how we can't fund things outside of the CDBG and Office of Community Services process. Motion passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #40 - $10,000 for adult and children's programming at the Library.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, Verveer
No: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, VanRooy

Amendment #41 - This one was introduced from the floor by Ald. Cnare and Olson. Passed on a voice vote.

Allocate $43,000 from the former Women's Transit Authority ride service 2006 unused money to support start-up costs for the transportation service provider that will be selected after a formal RFP process. The allocation must be matched by donations of cash or materials/supplies secured by the selected provider. In the event no provider is selected, the City's $43,000 will revert to the General Fund.

Amendment #42 - This one was introduced from the floor by Ald. King. The following motion passed on a voice vote. The following people added their names as a co-sponsors - Mayor Cieslewicz, Golden, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Knox, Konkel, Rosas, VanRooy, Verveer, Webber.

Final vote on the budget.
Yes: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Cnare, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Sanborn, VanRooy, Verveer
No: Brandon, Compton, Skidmore, Thomas

And what did all of this get us . . .
We increased spending by $471,000.
We increased revenues by $350,000
So, we increased the amount we need to tax by $121,784
This is a total 5.1% total increase
The mill rate is at 7.2138
The taxes on the average home (about 239,500) is $1727 for the City's portion
The council actions increased the mayor's budget by .022% or increased the taxes on the average home by $1.03.

More to come, after I get some sleep . . . .

Read more!

City Budget: Where it's at . . . (Part II: Operating Budget)

At 10:30 last night, we started the Operating Budget, here's the run down . . .

Amendment #1 - $66,000 for paid sick leave for City employees. Passed unanimously on a voice vote.

Amendment #2 & #3 - Cutting $10,000 in funding for the Sister City Program or in the alternative adding $10,000 so there was $20,000 total, but taking the additional $10,000 from the Room Tax funds. Ald. Brandon first moved his proposal to cut the $10,000 entirely. Ald. King then moved his proposal to give the Sister City Program $20,000 but taking $10,000 from the Room Tax funds designated to go to the Greater Madison Convention and Visitors Bureau (GMCVB). Ald. Brandon then amended that to reduce the funding to $10,000 and take it from the Room Tax reserves. So, here's the votes . . .

Giving the Sister Cities $10,000 but taking it from the Room Tax Reserves (by the way - Ald. Brandon said if this motion passed, he'd never bring another motion to cut the Sister Cities program) - Yes votes included Webber, Benford, Brandon, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Palm. No votes included Cnare, Compton, King, Radomski, Rosas, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, Verveer. VanRooy absent.

So then we voted on Alder King's original amendment, amendment #3. This would have given the Sister Cities $20,000 and taken it from the GMCVB. Yes votes included Webber, Benford, Gruber, King, Konkel, Olson, Verveer. No votes included Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Golden, Knox, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas. VanRooy absent.

So, then we voted on cutting the $10,000 and that failed. Voting to cut the $10,000 were Brandon, Cnare, Palm, Skidmore, Sanborn, Thomas. Voting to continue funding Sister Cities were Webber, Benford, Bruer, Compton, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Radomski, Rosas, Verveer. VanRooy absent.

Amendment #4 - Cutting $5,000 from the Mayor's fund for various miscellaneous activities such as sponsorships and community meetings. Funny, no one called roll call on this one! Motion failed on a voice vote.

Amendment #5 - Cutting $18,000 from the Collaboration Council. This was Ken Golden's amendment. He made the point that we scrutinize all the CDBG and Office of Community Service and non-profit groups and yet we give money to the business community without asking them what they're going to do with the money or what goals they have and we don't ask for a report back on their successes. After discussion about how the running theme of the "we need to have a discussion" crowd was inconsistent with this funding, the motion was made to "place on file" and it passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #6 - This would have cut $100,000 from the Emerging Neighborhoods Funds, because there wasn't a plan. Alder Cnare had a substitute motion to modify a footnote in the budget that would state:

This funding is for childcare, tuition assistance, housing, neighborhood revitalization, early childhood education and other programs to enhance the quality of life in the City's emerging neighborhoods. These funds will be spent in the Allied Drive, Bridge Lake Point, Northside, Southwest area, and Southside neighborhoods. The allocation of the funds will be determined by a workgroup consisting of staff from the Mayor's Office, Community Services, CDBG and the Common Council President and will be approved by the Mayor an Common Council.

Several friendly amendments were made. They added the Planning Unit to the workgroup. They allowed the Council President to appoint a "designee" and the eliminated the sentence that says which neighborhoods the funds would be spent in, ironically, because now, it was too specific.

At this point it was about 11:20 and we tried to find some quick, easy amendments we could take care of so that we would not make those staff come back the following evening, so we took up two more items.

Amendment #21 - Adding $14,175 for funding for notification of neighbors when they are spraying for gypsy moths. Passed unanimously on a voice vote.

Amendment #39 - The damn coffee urn. They tried to cut $2,500 for a commercial grade, restaurant style coffee system. Once many of the sponsors saw a picture of what we were talking about, I think they rather sheepishly decided that it was money well spent. The motion failed on a voice vote.

And that's as far as we got. We continue tonight at 7:00 in Room 260 of the Municipal Building.
Read more!

City Budget: Where its at . . . (Part II, Capital Budget)

Here's my run down of day 2 of the City Council Budget deliberations:

Last Night we dealt with amendments 7 - 13, plus an added #14 on the Capital Budget and passed the Capital Budget. We started the Operating Budget and dealt with amendments 1 - 6, 21 & 39. So, we've handled 23 of 55 amendments plus a little over 3 hours of public testimony. We have 32 amendments left to consider tonight. Here's a brief summary of what we passed.

CAPITAL BUDGET

Amendment #7 - Santiago Rosas moved reconsideration of the improvements to James Madison Park. He had asked the Comptroller Dean Brasser to provide us with a memo about his thoughts on how it was a bad budgeting practice to use a one time influx of money to offset the Operating Budget. The comptroller's comments were as follows:

It is the Operating Budget impact that I find troubling. My concerns are twofold:

1) The $1,200,000 land sales revenue is a very speculative revenue source. I will always argue that we should build our Operating Budget using revenue sources that are predictable and assured, and I do not believe the proposed land sales revenue meets that test. Typically, our revenue estimates are based on solid past trend data and known fees and rates. Without a known buyer or a consensus to sell the properties in question, we cannot say with any confidence that the budgeted revenue will materialize. And if the City does not receive payment for these properties within the calendar year, we will face a substantial hole in the 2007 Operating Budget.

2) The proposal to see land in the vicinity of James Madison Park is a fairly unique opportunity. Essentially, this is a one-time revenue source that is being used to fund ongoing operating costs. It is unlikely that such a revenue stream can be expected in future years, unless the City adopts a policy of selling parkland or other property on a consistent annual basis. In the absence of such a policy, the City will face a $1,200,000 Operating Budget hole in 2008, even if the James Madison Park land is sold in 2007.

As I tried to describe last night, the City has historically deposited property sales proceeds, when received, in the General Land Acquisition Fund. Then, through the Capital Budget process or mid-year budget amendments, the known and available funds were used by the council to purchase specific parcels of land for park expansion, or undeveloped land on the periphery for future City use. This policy of "banking" property sales process was used effectively to purchase desirable lands when rare opportunities occurred.

The motion to reconsider passed. I offered a substitute that would spend $200,000 in 2007 and $1M in 2008 on park improvements. Ald. Brandon proposed a substitute which Ald. Golden amended. The issue was tabled to work on it further and we eventually passed an amendment that read as follows:

Reduce other funding to $200,000.

Replace current language with the following:
The project provides for improvements at James Madison Park and development of a detailed master plan for the park. Expenditures will not occur until funds from the sale of related properties are reviewed by the City. Other funding consists of land and property sales revenue.

All the proceeds from property sales will be deposited in the General Land Acquisition Fund Account #810347.

This amendment essentially does what I proposed, with a slight twist/dirty trick by Ald. Brandon. It may prohibit us using excess land sales proceeds for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund as allowed in MGO 4.22. I attempted to make an amendment that would have allowed making this an 11 vote item at a later date. Alders Webber, Benford, Bruer, Cnare, Konkel, Olson, Sanborn, Thomas and Verveer voted to do this. Alder Brandon, Compton, Golden, Gruber, Knox, Radomski, Rosas and Skidmore voted against. Ald. King was out of the room. Ald. Palm "wasn't paying attention" and abstained. Ald. VanRooy was absent. I'm not sure how many Alders actually understood the issues, but the motion failed (the Common Council requires 11 votes for anything to pass regardless of how many people are present). So, it was a bittersweet victory for me, excellent news for James Madison Park, but it may end up costing the Affordable Housing Trust Fund a million dollars, so not so good news for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The amendment ended up passing on a voice vote, with me being the sole "no" because of the "dirty trick".

Amendment #8 -Removing $3,000,000 for funding for the Mid-State St. Parking Ramp. This amendment would have no effect on the taxpayers bills because it is funded out of the Parking Utility. This is similar to our discussion last year when Alder Webber and I wanted to remove this funding.

02392 CAPITAL BUDGET AMENDMENT # 7 - Parking Utility / Mid-State Street Ramp, Project No. 5, p. 114
A motion was made by Ald. Konkel, seconded by Ald. Webber, to Adopt. The
motion failed by the following vote:
Aye: Konkel, Palm and Webber (3)
No: Benford, Sanborn, Brandon, Bruer, Cnare, Compton, Golden, King,
Gruber, Olson, Knox, Jr., Rosas, Skidmore, Thomas, Van Rooy, Verveer
and Radomski (17)
Non Voting: Cieslewicz (1)

This year the amendment to do this was sponsored by Brandon, Sanborn, Cnare, Skidmore, Knox, Palm, Compton, VanRooy, Radomski, Thomas. Verveer made a substitute motion that would:

Replace the project narrative with the following:
This project would provide funding for the land acquisition, plan preparation, site preparation and construction of approximately 200 public parking stalls in the Mid-State Street area. Initiation of the project is dependent upon demonstrated support and promotion from the Downtown Business Improvement District, the Greater State Street Business Association, Downtown Madison Incorporated, the neighborhood and other related agencies and individuals for locating such a facility. The Buckeye surface lot has been chosen as the proposed site. This lot currently produces approximately $150,000 in parking revenues. Common Council approval is necessary before any funds may be expended.

This substitute passed on a voice vote.

Amendment #9 - To remove borrowing of $500,000 in borrowing for the project. This amendment would have saved the taxpayer $64,752. After a brief statement, Ald. Brandon acknowledged he didn't have the votes and the item was "placed on file".

Amendment #10 - Removing $70,000 in borrowing for the East Isthmus Arts Incubator. This would have saved the taxpayers $9,065. I wish I had the notes but Ald. Olson listed off the many jobs created and businesses started in other incubators around the City. These incubators have a tremendous economic impact, and yet, several champions of economic development sponsored and voted to remove this funding. This motion failed and the Arts Incubator will be funded. Voting to remove funding were Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas. Voting to keep the funding were Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Knox, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, Verveer. VanRooy absent.

Amendment #11 - Removing $300,000 in borrowing for the TIF 10% set aside program that provides affordable housing. This may or may not have had a $38,851 impact on the budget. If the funds were available in the TIF district, the borrowing may not need to occur. The borrowing is necessary because in the past, developers have come forward with projects approved by the neighborhood and the funding was not available. Voting to keep the funding were Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Olson, Rosas, Verveer. Voting to remove the funding were Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Knox, Palm, Radomski, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas.

Amendment #12 - Removing $1.7M in borrowing for the Badger-Ann-Park and Todd Dr-Beltline project. This would have saved the taxpayers $220,158 in the operating budget. This item had alot of discussion but was "placed on file" with voice vote that contained a few persistent "no" votes.

Amendment #13a & b - These were competing ideas about how to handle the excessive manganese in well #29. Neither of the amendments would impact the taxpayer. Ald. Cnare's (amendment a) proposal allowed the Water Utility to look at re-siting the well at the same time as they did a pilot test on a filter. Ald. Brandon's version would have only looked at the re-siting of the well. And if that didn't work, we could be back in the same place we are now. Since we need to get the well up and running by 2008, it became apparent that plan a was more reasonable. Plan a passed on a voice vote, plan b was placed on file.

Amendment 14 - This was introduced from the floor by Ald. Gruber. It was borrowing of $404,000 for the Automated Collection Equipment Project. Funding was from the Fleet Service Reserves and therefore had no impact to the taxpayer. This motion passed on a unanimous vote.

Capital Budget Final Vote - Ok - here's where it got nutty. Before voting on the budget, Ald. Gruber moved for a 5 minute recess at around 9:40. When we returned from break, Ald. Gruber explained that there were several projects on the periphery that he could have cut, but that he didn't. This started a discussion about our budget process, the Council's role in the budget, micromanagement, periphery vs downtown voting, etc etc etc. It's the subject of a whole other blog for another day. Around 10:30, we finally voted. The following people voted against the operating budget: Brandon, Compton, Gruber, Sanborn. VanRooy was absent. The remaining people voted for the budget.

Whew! Check back here a little later this morning for updates on the amendments to the Operating Budget.
Read more!

City Budget: Where it's at . . .

Ok - due to popular demand, here's the run down on what happened last night . . .

We heard excellent public testimony from 6:30 - 9:45 or so last night. Thanks to everyone who came and tried to figure out how to be most effective. Obviously, we have some work to do on our process. 5 minutes to talk about 54 budget amendments with only a few days notice isn't a good way to do things. But I digress . . .

Around 9:45 we started plowing through the Capital Budget amendments. And we didn't get very far.

Amendment 1 - $319,759 in borrowing (costs the taxpayers $41,410 in the operating budget) to move design and engineering services for a new Far West Fire station from 2008 to 2007 passed on a unanimous voice vote. We have a site and own it and we are very likely to start this work in 2007.

Amendment 2 - $58,866 in borrowing (costs the taxpayers $7,623 in the operating budget) to purchase a new ambulance passed on a voice vote. There is some lingering concern about if it is the city's role to provide extra ambulances on football saturday or if the University should start hiring a private ambulance service for this function.

Amendment 3 - $70,000 to remove funding for the bus shelter replacement for the bus shelter in front of Walgreens on the square. This would have no impact on the taxpayers in that it is TIF funds that are used for this shelter. Despite the difficulty getting answers out of staff about how much money goes for the actual shelter and how much is for the demolition, electrical work for the lighting and plumbing for a water source for the folks who maintain the capital square, the motion to remove this funding failed. Votes to remove the funding were: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Knox, Palm, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, VanRooy (9). Votes to replace the bus shelter were: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Olson, Radomski, Rosas, Verveer (11).

Amendment 4 - This would have removed Capital Square and State Street upgrades. Ald. Brandon knew he didn't have the votes and moved to place this item on file. ("Place on file" in City speak basically means to remove from consideration.)

Amendment 5 - $75,000 in borrowing (costs the taxpayers $9,713 in the operating budget) to upgrade electronics at the railroad crossing at Johnson and Fordem Ave. These upgrades could make it so that there is a quiet zone in this area and the trains will not blow their horns (waking up the neighbors many times a night) unless there is a safety reason to do so. This passed 15 - 5. Voting against were: Brandon, Compton, Knox, Palm, Skidmore. Voting in favor were: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Cnare, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Olson, Radomski, Rosas, Sanborn, Thomas, Van Rooy, Verveer

Amendment 6 - Removing $900,000 in funding for quiet zones around Union Corners. Would have saved the taxpayers $116,554 in the operating budget. This failed 12 to 8. Voting for removing the funding were: Brandon, Cnare, Compton, Knox, Sanborn, Skidmore, Thomas, Van Rooy. Voting for the quiet zone upgrades were: Webber, Benford, Bruer, Golden, Gruber, King, Konkel, Olson, Palm, Radomski, Rosas, Verveer.

Amendment 7 - Removing $1.2 million for upgrades to James Madison Park. This was a bit of a complicated discussion given that it was more about how we budget than the improvements to the park. At this point, the funding is removed, but I think we can expect an amendment from the floor to modify this. The funding for the improvments is tied to the sales of property involving the land under Lincoln School, the Collins House and two other houses in James Madison Park. Stay tuned on this one, I don't think it's over.

At this point, it was a little after 11:30 and we adjourned for the evening.

Tonight we start at 7:00 and we will be in room 260 in the Municipal Building (215 Martin Luther King). There is some confusion by several folks who I have talked to who wanted to show up tonight to testify. If many folks do show up, I may try to suspend the rules to allow them to testify. I'm not sure that my colleagues will go along with that, but it seems several people thought they could show up on any budget night. Read more!

Operating Budget Impacts

Here's the list of proposed cuts in the Operating Budget and how much they can save you on your tax bill. Again, looking at the programs and how they add to the quality of life in Madison, I have to ask, is it worth it?

Here's what the following cuts will save the taxpayer:

• Sister City Programs $10,000.00 or $.12 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Planning Resources $5,000.00 or $.06 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Emerging Nieghborhoods $100,000.00 or $1.22 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Downtown Public Safety $100,000.00 or $1.22 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Affordable Housing Trust Fund $300,000.00 or $3.67 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Room Tax Reserves $350,000.00 or $4.28 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Cuts Police Dept Info Specialist and but provides more overtime so adds $4,250.00 or $.05 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Common Council Budget $4,579.00 or $.06 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Mayor's Office Budget $10,013.00 or $.12 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Occupational Accommodations Specialist $8,008.00 or $.10 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Bridge Lake Point Waunona Center $13,500.00 or $.16 on the tax bill for the average home.
• East Madison Community Center Children Development Services $3,079.00 or $.04 on the tax bill for the average home.
• East Madison Community Center Summer Youth Program $1,022.00 or $0.01 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center Early Childhood Program $2,286.00 or $0.03 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center Children’s Program $6,335.00 or $.08 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Neighborhood House Summer Children’s Program $6,309.00 or $.08 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Vera Court Neighborhood Center $5,000.00 or $.06 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Women's Transit Authority Replacement $89,200.00 or $1.09 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Project Respect $44,374.00 or $.54 on the tax bill for the average home.
• Senior Center Coffee Urn $2,500.00 or $.03 on the tax bill for the average home.
  

Plus they are raising admission price for swimming pool and if the Westside Planning Council passes, all Planning Councils will get a funding decrease because the funding will be split 4 ways instead of three.

These cuts result in a reduction of $1,256.955 or $15.36 for the owner of an average priced home.

One has to ask is $15.36 worth it for an increased quality of life for so many? And how many of these cuts now, will lead to more expenses down the line?


Read more!

Capital Budget Amendment Impacts

Below are the specifics of some of the proposed cuts to the Capital budget and how much it would save you as a taxpayer. The question is, is it worth it?

The numbers below are based on the savings on the average price of a Madison home which is up $16,521 from $222,928 last year. This year the average price of a home is $239,449.

Amendment #3. Bus Shelter - Won't save anything on your tax bill but will save $70,000.00 in TIF funds

The Capitol Concourse Bus Shelter Replacement project involves replacement of the seven existing bus shelters around the Capitol Concourse with five new shelters. Four shelters were budgeted for in 2006. This project funds the fifth shelter. Funding is from TID 25.

These costs include demolition, electrical and plumbing work in addition to labor and materials for building a new shelter

Amendment #4. State St. Streetscape - We already authorized borrowing $150,000.00 in 2006 however, the project was not completed in 2006. Additionally, the $150,000 we borrow will be leveraged by $525,000 in funding from TIF. This project total cost is $675,000. Cutting this will prevent us from spending $675,000 but will only save $19,426.00 per year for the next 10 year, or $.24 on the average home.

The Capitol Square Streetscape Updates project involves the replacement of built-in benches with benches of the same style being installed on State Street, the completion of granite curbing around planter areas, the replacement of brick pavers with exposed aggregate concrete, the replacement of existing kiosks, and other streetscape amenities. It also includes a test area in 2007 for the replacement of pedestrian lighting with the State Street style lights, and streetlights with the West Washington Avenue style lights. Funding sources include $175,000 from TID #23, $175,000 from TID #25, and $175,000 from TID #28. General Obligation borrowing of $150,000 is reauthorized from 2006.

Amendment #6. Railroad Crossings - This would save $900,000 in borrowing or $116,554 in the operating budget or $1.42 on the average home. However, this money is reimbursable by TIF.

This project will repair deteriorated railroad crossings by funding crossing repair outside of the railroads area of responsibility. The project will also fund upgrades to increase motor vehicle safety at railroad crossings. Funds in 2007 will be used to upgrade at-grade railroad crossings on the near east side located within TID # 37. Those crossings include Winnebago Street, Division St, Second St, and Fourth St. Funds in 2008 include Cory St, Waubesa St and S Fair Oaks Ave. G.O. funding of $900,000 is reimbursable from TID #37.

Amendment #7. James Madison Park Improvements - This money would only be spent if houses and/or land are sold in James Madison Park. This cuts $1,200,000.00 in improvements in the prk. This would then be applied the operating budget and would save $14.66 on the average for one year.

This project provides for improvements at James Madison Park. A detailed master plan will be developed for the park, and may include many of the following components: grading and restoration of house sites ($55,000); garden, terrace and accessible paths ($170,000); parking, lighting, and public art ($300,000); lakeshore pier ($35,000); lakeshore staircase and gazebo ($150,000); playground and shelter furnishings ($55,000); irrigation, signage, bocce, horseshoe, and exercise areas ($210,000); relocation of basketball courts ($100,000); and major shelter renovation for restaurant-concession ($150,000). Costs of $1,200,000 are to be entirely offset by land and property sales at the park. Other funding consists of land and property sales revenue.

Amendment #8. State St. Ramp - This saves $300,000.00 in borrowing out of the Parking Utility, however, since it is Parking Utility money, it saves you nothing on your tax bill.

$3 million in funding is for a scaled back project to provide an affordable, simple two-story ramp. This will almost double the capacity of the current lot, responding to a decades-long concern for State Street businesses while improving the aesthetics of the site. However, if a mixed-use plan is brought forward that could be developed without creating the need for a parking rate increase, and within City TIF policy guidelines, these funds could be used for that project instead.

Amendment #9. Allied Terrace - Saves $500,000.00 in borrowing so impacts the operating budget by $64,752.00. This will save $0.79 on the average home.

Reauthorization of a project to eliminate blighting influences, promote housing
redevelopment, stimulate desired land uses, upgrade public improvements and revitalize the area, generally bounded by the West Beltline Highway, former Illinois Central RR (now WI DOT) right-of-way, the former Chicago & Northwestern RR (now the Union Pacific) right-ofway, the City limits of Madison and Fitchburg and a property line 150 feet west of and parallel to Helene Parkway. Funding in 2007 will be used for the redevelopment of City-owned properties in Allied. Funding in 2008 will be used for property acquisition of a building and relocation of the tenant to extend Atticus Way from its present terminus through to Red Arrow Drive.

Amendment #10. East Isthmus Arts Incubator - This saves borrowing of $70,000.00 and impacts the operating budget by $9,065.00. This will save $0.11 on the average home.
This money is reauthorized from 2006.

Reauthorization of projects approved in the 2006 budget. These projects provide long-term deferred payment loans to non-profit agencies to acquire, construct, or renovate facilities that will serve as public resources and generate positive neighborhood effects in those neighborhoods that address the Mayor's neighborhood or economic development goals. Funding includes $300,000 in reauthorized General Obligation debt and $300,000 in Federal funds for the second phase of the Wexford Neighborhood Center project, and $70,000 in reauthorized GO debt for the East Isthmus Arts Incubator project. Funding of $650,000 in 2008 is for the renovation of the Atwood/Kupfer Ironworks for a neighborhood center and
adjacent gymnasium.

Amendment #11. TIF 10% set aside - This funding is for possible TIF projects that want to include affordable housing. In the past, projects have come forward, but we haven't had a budget for them. This would save $300,000.00 in borrowing and save $38,851.00 in the operating budget, or $0.47 on the average home.

The Council adopted a method to promote affordable housing within TIF districts that reserves 10% of the estimated increment for projects selected through a separate decision process which includes neighborhood representation and Council oversight.

Amendment # 12. Badger-Ann-Park & Todd Dr - This saves $1,700,000.00 in borrowing and saves $220,158.00 in the operating budget. This saves the taxpayer $2.69.

The project is for the implementation of a variety of community, economic, development, and housing activities in the Bader-Ann-Park and Todd-Beltline areas in conjunction with the Park Street planning effort and South Madison neighborhood plan. Priority projects will be or have been identified by the Badger-Ann-Park Street Redevelopment Committee.

TOTAL:
Saves $3,990,000 in borrowing.
Saves $1,668,806 in the operating budget
Saves the taxpayer $20.39. Read more!

Budget Amendments! Oh My!

My head is still spinning from reading the 54 amendments we got on Friday at noon and I've been at the Neighborhood Conference all day . . . so I still can't tell you what I think and can't begin to figure out how to prioritize it . . . but I'm working on it. Meanwhile, here's some links to the information:

Capital Budget Amendments
Operating Budget Amendments
Full Budget

The short list that I think people are interested in are as follows:

Removing funding for
- Train Whistle Quiet Zones
- Improvement to State Street
- Improvements to James Madison Park
- Allied Drive
- East Isthmus Arts Incubator
- Affordable Housing
- Sister Cities Programs
- Emerging Neighborhoods Program
- Downtown Public Safety
- After School and Summer Programs for Kids
- Program to replace Women’s Transit Authority
- Program to help rehabilitate prostitutes
- Planning Councils

Adding funding for
- Arborists to improve Tree maintenance Schedule
- Neighborhood Grants Program
- Neighborhood Ombudsman
- Warming Shelter for the Homeless
- Southwest Neighborhood Center and Youth Programming
- Westside Planning Council
- Neighborhood House
- Adult and Children’s programming at Libraries

Increases admission prices for the new pool

Plus, a decision on Reorganizing the Department of Planning and Development

If you have feedback, please don't hesitate to get involved:

Email the Alders:
allalders@cityofmadison.com

Come to the Council meeting on Tuesday November 14
6:30 Room 201 City County Building
Register and Speak if you can (most effective!)
Otherwise, just come and register your support or opposition Read more!

Budget Amendments Come Out Today

So, today we find out what we are voting on this Tuesday. I hear there will be plenty for folks to be upset about. Here's what I know so far . . .

I've sponsored the following:

• Add $75,000 for improvements to the Railroad Crossing at Johnson and Fordem. (Konkel, Olson)
• Add $25,000 for the warming shelter at Salvation Army that allows people who would be turned away to sleep on a mattress on the floor instead. (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $50,000 additional money for neighborhood grants (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Remove the conditions placed on the Affordable Housing Trust Fund at the Board of Estimates (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $10,000 for the sign language interpreters that we are required to provide. (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $5,000 to the Office of the Director of Planning and Development for an AASPIRE intern (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $19,371 for AASPIRE interns in other departments (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Require the 10 new cops to be neighborhood police officers in 2008 (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $63,000 to have 1 hour of paid sick leave for every 30 hours worked for our employees working more than 18 hours of week (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $10,000 in funding for libraries for adult and children's programs (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $5,000 for the Jobs with a Future program (Konkel, Benford, King)
• Add $41,280 for a Neighborhood Ombudsman (Konkel, Benford, King)
• And I submitted a placeholder amendment on the Planning and Development Reorganization that would refer all of the rearranging of departments to the Common Council Organizaitonal Committee to make recommendations regarding the reorganization. This amendment provides for some savings through truth in budgeting as well. (Konkel, Golden)
  

I also signed on to a few amendments that other folks had

• Add $10,000 for Sister Cities and remove $10,000 from the Greater Madison Convention and Vistors Bureau Funding (King)
• Add about $40,000 for Westside Neighborhood Center functions (Thomas, Sanborn)
• Remove the $18,000 for the Collaboration Council (Golden)
  

I heard from Ald. Zach Brandon about a few amendments that will likely be of interest to some folks including removing the funding for improvements to James Madison Park and removing money for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund.

We'll get the rest of them around noon and I'll share them as soon as I can but I have several meetings this afternoon. If they come out soon enough, I'll post others and my reactions prior to those meetings.

Sounds like this year isn't going to be the smooth sailing many of us were hoping for.

Note: For more info, see the Wisconsin State Journal today (which I should have read before posting, but I don't really read that paper any more . . . . only when someone points articles out to me . . .) Read more!

Advertsing . . . and Fiscal Awareness

One of the latest mantras by the band of merry moderates on the City Council is that we need advertising to fill the gaps in revenue to help Madison Metro. Well, there's a few flaws with that . . .

First of all, remember all the hoopla 4 months ago about being able to raise $260,000 by starting a pilot program to have busses are fully wrapped in advertising. Well, its been 4 months and I haven't seen a fully wrapped bus yet. Have you?

Truth of the matter is, that advertising revenues for Madison Metro has been steadily declining. A recent report by Madison Metro says that income from advertising has declined as follows:

2001 - $284,420
2002 - $341,276
2003 - 390,405
2004 - 301,100
2005 - $169,112*

And part of this advertising revenue has to be paid to someone to install and remove the advertsing and sell the advertising. This costs the City $100,000 a year.

And at the same time, its interesting that while some council members act like we haven't been getting enough revenues from bus fares, the fares have gone up by $1M in the last 5 years:

2001 - $6.6M
2002 - $6.4M
2003 - $6.1M
2004 - $6.6M
2005 - $7.6M

But council members remain fixated on advertising that isn't performing the way they anticipated. Another example is that adverting in parking ramps isn't meeting its goals either. Last I checked with staff, we were supposed to raise $75,000 with our advertising in parking ramps, but we're only on track to make 82% of that or $62,000.

So, when the proposal came up for advertising on bus shelters, I felt like we were being sold another promise that wasn't going to be kept. These are proposals that might make folks feel good and give the illusion of "holding the line on taxes", but they aren't delivering they way they promised. Talk about having "fiscal awareness", these proposals are feel-good gimmicks that don't deliver and I think the public should be more aware of the fiscal impact of these proposals and rhetoric.

*Please see the report to interpret these numbers on your own. Seems that either in 2001 - 2004 these are not all advertising revenues or we should add $124,134 to this number. Read more!

Budget Non-Information

So, last Thursday afternoon the Common Council office was given 7 CDs the were provided so the the 20 alders could "check out". These CDs contained the Operating Budget Department Requests that met the Mayor's 3% cut (except police and fire) budget. These CDs were provided upon my request. Yesterday, I was able to pick up the Capital Budget requests, again only provided after I inquired about it.

Las night, the Mayor held a public hearing on the budget. However, the average Madison citizen has no idea what the department proposals for next year might include or not include, so its hard to give feedback. Heck, most council members haven't seen the information. I took some time to make this information available to the public via Dane101.com. If you are interested in seeing the department requests meeting the 3% cut (except police and fire), the "supplemental" requests by the departments, including police and fire and then the capital budget requests, you can fine the files at Dane101.com.

The question here is, why is an alder posting this public information on a blog site? Why doesn't the City make this information available to the public? How is the public expected to comment on something that they can't find information about?

The process for the budget and previous budgets can be found here. Now you have some time to review the information if you have a particular interest. If you see something you like or don't like you can give input to the mayor at mayor@cityofmadison.com or the council at allalders@cityofmadison.com. The mayor is also having his "Build your own Budget" meetings in the first two weeks of September and you may want to give your input there.

* Sept. 7, 6:30 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, Alicia Ashman Library, 733 N. High Point Road

* Sept. 13, 6:30 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, East District Police Station, 809 S. Thompson Drive

* Sept. 14, 7:00 pm: "Build Your Own Budget" workshop, South Madison Health and Family Center (Harambee), 2202 South Park Street

While this mayor has added the Mayor's hearing and the "Build Your Own Budget" sessions, it is clear that this process needs improvement. And it is even clearer that we need better information. However, while we try to figure out how to improve this process, I will continue to try to keep people informed here and at Dane101.com. Read more!

What didn't make it in the budget requests . . .

The list is long . . . I've posted 56 requests from most departments here and the 30 police and fire requests here.

The long list of supplemental requests includes some pretty amazing things. The full list of community services items is at the bottom of this list but the list also includes:

Childcare assistance, Allied Drive Weed and Seed Coordinator, an Economic Development Plan, Homeless Services, Neighborhood Center, Community Gardens, Homeless Outreach on State St., Jobs for the Future, Library Books and Services, additional bus services, disability services, EOC outreach and education, sanding and snow removal services, health services for people with no insurance coverage, pedestrian safety programs, energy reduction programs, senior center items and services and some city employees. Take a look for yourself.

Below are the "various programs" being cut from Community Services.

COMMUNITY RESOURCES PROGRAM - 2007-2008

SUMMARY
Supplemental Requests of the Community Services Commission
for Program Areas II, IV, V, VI and VII

THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER:

Rape Crisis Center
B. Community Education 11,695

Omega School
A. GED/Basic Skills 11,018
D. Spanish Language GED 10,000

Youth Integration Into Cultural and Recreational Activities:
Kanopy School for Contemporary Dance and Choreography
A. YIP - Kanopy Scholarship Support 3,431
Millennium Soccer Club
A. YIP - Youth Indoor Soccer 3,120
Simpson Street Free Press
C. YIP - Museum Series 2,242
TAPIT/ New Works
A. YIP - A Classical Act 4,252
Urban League of Greater Madison
G. YIP - Achieving Greatness Through Service Day 3,431
Vera Court Neighborhood Center
K. YIP - Integration 3,431

Neighborhood Center Core Costs
Boys and Girls Club/ Allied 1,611
Boys and Girls Club/ South 17,333

Agency to be Determined
B. Community Assistance Rides 18,284
A. Sexual Assault Prevention Ride Service 70,916

YWCA of Madison
K. Girl Neighborhood Power - Management 3,789

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
C. Jefferson Youth Resource Center 2,795

Freedom, Inc.
B. Nkauj Hmoob: Southeast Asian Girl's Group 7,874

Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center
D. Teen Program 3,274
H. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Vera Court Neighborhood Center
E. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,500
F. Youth Leadership 3,789

YWCA of Madison
J. Girl Neighborhood Power-Southwest/Far West 10,789

Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
G. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Atwood Community Center
H. High School Leadership Council 4,693

East Madison Community Center
C. Youth Services 1,283

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
D. Project Teen Build Up 10,138

Common Wealth Development
A. Youth Business Mentoring 7,500

Atwood Community Center
G. Girl Neighborhood Power 3,789

Simpson Street Free Press
A. Simpson Street Free Press 4,663

Neighborhood House Community Center
A. Youth and Families 18,768

Wexford Ridge Neighborhood Center
F. Women Rise Up! 5,373

East Isthmus Neighborhoods Planning Council
A. Operation and Community Organization 4,003

Porchlight
H. Transit for Jobs
The Community Services Commission supports this high priority program and believes it has been effective for the short time it has operated. The program is currently receiving Emerging Neighborhoods funding through the Mayor's office and we understand it is eligible for a second year of funding from that source. The Commission will recommend that the Mayor fund this program again in 2007 utilizing Emerging Neighborhoods funds. The Commission will reconsider 2008 funding for this program next year.

T.J.'s Support Brokerage Firm
A. Madison Apprenticeship Program
The Community Services Commission supports this high priority program and believes it has been effective for the short time it has operated. The program is currently receiving Emerging Neighborhoods funding through the Mayor's office and we understand it is eligible for a second year of funding from that source. The Commission will recommend that the Mayor fund this program again in 2007 utilizing Emerging Neighborhoods funds. The Commission will reconsider 2008 funding for this program next year.

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREAS II, IV, V, VI AND VII: $264,362

COMMUNITY RESOURCES PROGRAM - 2007-2008
SUMMARY
Supplemental Requests of the Early Childhood Care and Education Board
for Program Area I

THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY BY THE EARLY CHILDHOOD CARE AND EDUCATION BOARD:

Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
F. Children 13,500

Community Coordinated Child Care
C. Training and Professional Development 32,555

Dane County Parent Council
A. Satellite Family Child Care 19,760

East Madison Community Center
A. Children Development Services 3,079
B. Summer Youth Program 1,022

Kennedy Heights Neighborhood Center
A. Early Childhood Program 2,286
B. Children's Program 6,335

Neighborhood House
C. Summer Children's Program 6,309

Vera Court Neighborhood Center
B. Children 5,000
L. Life as a Boy 12,096

Wexford Ridge
B. Elementary After School & Summer Camp NA

Wisconsin Youth Company
A. After School 40,000
The Early Childhood Care and Education Board recommends funding of $40,000 for this new program to meet the very high need and growning need for elementaly school age programming in southwest Madison. Wisconsin Youth Company does not have funding to provide a consistent after school program for children. The Company is also seeking renewal of the $40,000 grant to keep their facility open, and has used its own resources to fund part of the required renovations. The Early Childhood Care and Education Board request relies on this renewal funding as a base for the after school program they support.

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREA I: $141,942

Supplemental Requests of the Senior Citizens Advisory Committee
for Program Area III

Priority
THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE OF EQUAL PRIORITY BY THE SENIOR CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE:

Restoration of funding for Focal-Point Based Community Assistance to the following agencies:

East Madison Monona Coalition of the Aging 1,328

North/Eastside Senior Coalition 2,589

South Madison Coalition of the Elderly 2,544

West Madison Senior Coalition 1,828

Restoration of funding for Senior Activities/ Volunteer Opportunities to the following agencies:

Atwood Community Center 558

Neighborhood House 242

North/Eastside Senior Coalition 3,192

West Madison Senior Coalition 9,034

Retired and Senior Volunteer Program 6,745

WilMar Neighborhood Center 2,958

South Madison Coalition of the Elderly 352

United Asian Services of WI 414


THE FOLLOWING SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUESTS AND ARE LISTED IN PRIORITY ORDER:

1. Freedom, Inc.
Cambodian Wisdom Project 5,000

2. Bridge/ Lake Point/ Waunona Neighborhood Center
Senior Program 2,000

3. South Madison Coalition of the Elderly
Client Directed Case Management 8,500

4. United Asian Services of WI
Senior Services Expansion 1,350

SUPPLEMENTAL TOTAL FOR PROGRAM AREA III: $48,634 Read more!

BUDGET TIME!!!!!

Yup - it's city budget time . . . and it's gonna be a mess this year!!

Tomorrow night at the Downtown Public Library (201 W Mifflin St.) at 6:00 the Mayor will be having a public hearing on what his budget should look like. In order to assist people in determining what they should testify about, I have posted the department requests here. And soon, I will have the "supplemental" requests available as well.

Meantime, I think we are going to have a huge struggle over the definition of "basic services" and "economic development". In many ways, we are going to have a battle for the soul of our City. Are we going to be a City where we give police resources to arrest people and toss them in jail, or a City where we invest in our future through neighborhood centers and childcare programs to prevent the need for police resources. And how to we find the right balance?

And, are we going to be a City where when we talk about "economic development" we talk about biotechnology and high tech jobs at the University Research Park, or are we going to talk about having a bus system that can support people working 2nd and 3rd shift? And again, does it have to be one or the other and can we strike a balance?

Finally, I have to ask, are we going to continue to give millions of dollars in TIF to developers and not require that they build housing that more than the top 15% of the wealthiest people in Madison can live in? Are we going to get serious about affordable housing and put some money into some programs, or are we going to continue to talk about what is wrong with the programs that were developed because of the reluctance of the council to invest in affordable housing?

It's going to be an interesting budget. The time to get involved is now. I hope to see you at the public library tomorrow night. If you can't make it, you may want to try to attend one of the Mayor's "Build your own budget" sessions. I know there are many conflicts with the meetings that have been scheduled, but if you can make it, it's worth your time! Read more!

City Council: Over Budget

We got the following email from the Council Office Staff today . . . how embarrassing . . .

The 2006 Common Council budget contains $565 for cab delivery of aldermanic mail.

As of 7/24/06 we are have spent $750 on cab delivery from January - June 2006. $150 over our budget for delivery service.

We will no longer be able to provide cab delivery of aldermanic mail starting this Friday, July 28. Please let Debbie know if you plan on:

1. Picking up your mail in the office
2. Request that your mail be mailed via USPS

Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.

Yup, that issue, again.

Who are the spendthrifts on the council you might ask . . . Info we were recently given (tho already out of date) at the July CCOC meeting indicated that the following folks had spent as follows:

Sanborn $-
Konkel $-
Cnare $48.89
Verveer $-
Webber $8.25
Olson $-
Brandon $-
King $-
Skidmore $78.43
Golden $8.15
Gruber $-
Benford $-
Knox $-
Bruer $188.43
Palm $-
Compton $48.89
Rosas $98.39
Van Rooy $22.75
Radomski $-
Thomas $59.28

In their defense . . . we all get a "$600 Account" for expenses . . . but somehow, it hardly seems fair that if you spend the money first, you get to spend it where you'd like, but once the council as a whole goes over, you can't spend the money. In other words, if you cab only one thing, but do it in September, you'll be prevented from doing it since others have already spent the money. There's gotta be a better way to do this . . . Read more!