The important/juicy part . . . Check here for part 1.
PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION
Alder Solomon clarified his motion was to figure out the implications of any decision and then to look at possible solutions.
Alder Schumacher thought the Turner's was different than the low-income housing and that the motion did not ask for a new legal position. Schumacher points out that the narrow construction is legal, the broader construction is looking for solutions
City Attorney reiterates again that his legal opinion is the only thing the council can do and nothing will change.
Alder Schumacher points out he believes that all of the things Alder Kerr and Solomon want to do can be done with or without the delay. He's been involved in this issue and we are running a risk in our city if the property tax exemption is removed, but he doesn't want to put us in a legal predicament. He will continue to work on the issue, with the leadership of the Mayor's office, to come up with a package to resolve the issues. He doesn't support the substitute motion.
Alder Compton wants to keep the Turners in the motion. There are others Turner's organizations in the state that are exempt and she is looking for answers.
Confusions ensues - there is confusion about if this motion includes the low-income housing and Turner's. City Attorney tries to sort it out. They vote to keep the three items together and there are no objections. Alder Kerr didn't think they were ever separated and she made the motion.
Alder Compton continues to talk about the Turner's being exempt for 154 years.
Maniaci says she agrees with Clear. She says we should go forward with an exemption. Says we put orgs at risk or its denied if we do the extention. We do need more information, but the 60 day extention will just throw it all out the window. Doesn't know why hockey is exempt but gymnastics and soccer is not. Says she's against extension but supports the exemption - but wants to force it into the court. Then, they have to ask her what she was saying and clarify that she was speaking against the current motion.
Alder Skimore supports the extension based on talking with many folks.
Alder Palm - they say he's spoken three time - but this is another question on the floor. He thinks that the Turner's is open to anyone. He says if he understands the Alder from the 2nd that she wants to deny the extension and just give the exemption - and that might be too much for the council - but he's willing to go along and do a little civil disobedience and go against the city attorney.
Alder Solomon tries to clarify ramifications. Clarifies that the alder from the 2nd wants to ignore the city attorney and city assessor and just do their own thing by ignoring the law. Brian figures out that without the extention, we could really give ourselves more than 60 days.
Alder Bidar-Sielaff says that the extension makes a statement that we want alternatives in place before we make a decision. It's not a good idea to make a policy decision without options especially when the consequences are dire. It puts the fire under us to do something - or decide they make more time. She doesn't want to go ahead with a narrow decision without looking at the broader implications. She supports the motion.
Alder Clear - confused about how many times he has spoken - doesn't speak because it is the third time.
Alder Schumacher speaks - extension doesn't impact the organizations one way or the other. We're not the state legislature, has to follow the law, and we need to separate the policy decisions. Wants to live within the law instead of choosing civil disobedience. Should not violate state law.
Alder Clausius - regrets missing the brown bag. Asks city attorney if they have until December to make payments. City attorney clarifies that they have to pay in July. He doesn't like the extension. Wants to follow City Attorney advice. Thinks the Turner's need to be separated at some point, as it is a totally different legal issue.
Alder Maniaci - under the statutes we are out of time, extension doesn't do anything. We're doing an extension for us not the organizations. Thinks it does a disservice to the organizations and puts us on thin ice. She thinks even if they don't approve the motion they will get the information any ways.
Alder Bidar-Sielaff - says if both parties agree to the extension, who would not allow the agree? The State. This is all about risk management, but usually when two parties agree the court isn't going to not allow the agreement. What is the legal risk?
Attorney May says they have to pay the taxes regardless. Then he points to the statute. Is willing to enter into the agreement. We're in murkier waters. They will do their best to agree to it and stick to the agreement.
Alder Bidar-Sielaff points that the other side is taking the risk and they are willing to do that. But there is no additional legal risk to us?
Attorney May agrees, the legal risk is on the other parties. Even if we agree to it, who knows what the courts will do.
Alder Solomon - urges to vote for the extension. At least we'll be acting with full information and we will be able to move forward with full knowledge of the implications of our decision.
Alder Kerr - double check to make sure the other parties all agree to the 60 day extension. Attorney May says that the city attorney is directed to do that and will offer it to them.
Mayor - 10:25, another half hour to hour before us and will not do his state of the city address. It will be on line tomorrow morning and you can all read it.
You can do what is proposed and it will be referred, but he wants to give the council some ideas that should give them pause. He says we're not sure they are on solid legal footing. Only two reasons to refer one is that you hope the city attorney will come up with new ideas, but he is not going to come up with any other ideas and change his mind in the next 60 days. He thinks city attorney is good city attorney, just took and oath to follow the law, its "outrageous" that you would consider voting against the city attorney on this. If city attorney isn't going to change his mind, then you must be hoping for another way out. He says there is no way out - anything you come up with now in this environment because it will be construed as tax abatement. One way out of it, would be to offer money to a broader group of non-profits. He says if you enter into a fiscal obligation and the city starts paying, if the state legislature fixes this, we won't be able to stop proving that financial assistance. Furthermore, we don't have the money to do any of this, even if we could. Puts focus in wrong place. Shouldn't be with city attorney or assessor, they are just doing their job. If you refer we will be spending time locally instead of where the focus should be, which is with the legislature.
City Attorney restate the motion: 52, 53 & 54 referred to common council meeting in 60 days and for city attorney to grant 60 day extension and Community Development should come up with solutions.
Roll Call
AYE: Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Compton, Eagon, Kerr, King, Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Schmidt, Cnare
NO (i.e. Mayor's rubber stamps): Schumacher, Bruer, Clausius, Clear, Sanborn (ok, not a rubber stamp, he has principled reasons for doing it) and Maniaci.
Both Cnare and Maniaci passed the first time and did not vote. Alder Pham-Remmele left the council meeting (good gossip behind this one! see below)
RECESS
Then, the moved a 10 minute recess. Which was 15 minutes. Bruer takes the chair again . . . he's been in the chair almost the whole evening.
There were speakers on 53 and 54 who seem o have gone home. He asked if hey could still speak. City Attorney says that they have acted on the items and they can't speak. NO FREAKING WAY!! If people were there to speak, they should have been able to speak before they voted.
CITIZEN APPOINTMENTS/10 YEAR RULE
Alder Rhodes-Conway wanted to refer the citizen appointments back to the Mayor's office which would have no dealay. She explained that she was on the subcommittee that came up with the new ordinances affecting terms and term limited. The recommendations were adopted by CCOC and the Common Council. We voted to standardize terms to a length of three years - staggered so everyone was not up at the same time. We recommended a law to standardize the informal rule - we thought it should be a written policy and it should be clear. We recommended 12 years instead of 10 - so people didn't time-out in the middle of a term to which they were just appointed. Those recommendations were passed into ordinance. She communicated this to the Mayor and has not heard back from him on it. She wants to send it back to have the Mayor reconsider his recommendations in view of the law we passed.
Bert Zipperer spoke on the matter. 20 years ago first elected and been involved on city committees since then. Served on alot of committee because Mayor kept changing his committees. Thinks the limit should apply to everyone - alders included. Pointed out that there are frequently vacancies. Uses EOC as an example. 3 people have 10 years or more (if Megin reappointed), 3 people have 4 - 6 years and the rest, half have less. 4 have been there less than a year. Affirmative Action has 11 members, and 2 years have 10 years or more, he holds up chart pointing out that 5 people are new, that there are three vacancies. Thinks they need to get deeper and think about if you want people who say yes or are compliant, or do you want people who have experience and expertise.
Mayor Dave speaks. Did read email from Rhodes-Conway but didn't respond. Says informal 10 year rule that goes back to, no one knows, but he thinks it is Soglin that and he has followed it more than not. But it isn't always followed. Doesn't think it is a bad idea. Wants fresh blood, new ideas and doesn't want people to get a sense that they own these seats. People who are appointed answer to the people who are elected. But the mayor does get to appoint the majority of people who reflect his point of view and then diversity after that is good. Council has a 12 year ordinance, even that isn't hard and fast, can still do it with a 2/3 vote. It might be his fault for making the 10 year rule an issue. He's struggling to find a way to put this that doesn't sound arrogant or overbearing. But its a fact, the mayor can appoint anyone for anytime for any reason. There isn't a guarantee that people will get 10 or 12 years. So, the truth is, these folks would come off whether or not there was a 10 year rule. You will get the same appointments back.
Alder Bruer asks if the mayor intends to apply this rule consistently. He says as a general rule it is a good idea, but he thinks there are extraordinary reasons to keep people on.
Voice vote - no's have it.
ALDER APPOINTMENTS
There is a substitute. Passes on a voice vote. (Good back story here.)
The changes to committee appointments were that they added the Board of Estimates seats, the Mayor removed some appointments he didn't have the authority to make and Alder Thuy Pham-Remmele resigned from Commission on People with Disabilities and Alder Clear was appointed in her place. (See gossip below)
ITEM 35
Several people were going to be there to speak, but he just wanted to say that people appreciated respecting veterans and fixing the spelling of the gentleman's name.
They adjourned after 4.5 hours.
GOSSIP
Apparently, Alder Thuy Pham-Remmele was not happy with her committee appointments, which was why item 20 was pulled from the agenda. Apparently, she was going to make a big stink and then resign. Someone talked her out of it and instead, she just left the meeting.
Also, I just want to point out that when the Mayor has disagreements with the boys, he usually twists arms behind the scenes, cuts deals and tries to keep it out of the public eye. When Alder Rhodes-Conway disagreed with him, he ignores her email and addresses the council directly. Interesting.
Read more!
Showing posts with label Gender in City Hall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gender in City Hall. Show all posts
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
The TiVo'd Common Council Recap (Property Tax Exemption Again)
I was unable to be at the evening meeting due to the fact that I had to go to a funeral north of Milwaukee - but here's what I was able to attend and to see from Tivo.
NOON MEETING
The Common Council meeting started at noon today, with honoring resolutions. We honored "outgoing" Common Council President Tim Bruer, who gave a speech for about 10 minutes, despite the Mayor telling him to be brief because the chicken was being served at 1:15 or 1:30 and would be cold. He got only half a standing ovation from the Council - with at least a few purposely not standing, perhaps others not paying attention - that was unclear.
Next, we honored Mark Clear for serving as Pro Tem for the past year. He did manage to be brief and also got only a partial standing ovation, but more than Tim and again, those not standing were doing so on purpose.
The next honoring resolution was for me. The Mayor coughed/choked about twice while reading it. I made my little speech (which I will put on line tomorrow) and while the Mayor tried to quickly move on it didn't work, about 8 of my colleagues had something that they wanted to say about my service. Kristin at the Cap Times did a live blog of the noon meeting and you can see some/most of the comments there.
Next up Alder Webber - who was quite emotional. She did a nice speech and asked us not to say anything - but of course, we did. The Mayor pointed out that despite Robbie's request, some of us still wanted to make her cry.
Next up, Libby Monson, who filled in when Alder Brandon left office. More nice words said and heartfelt thanks to her for stepping in! She had served on the council 25 years ago and made note of some of the changes that she has seen.
Next up, Eli Judge. Charming as always. Thanked his parents for "not screwing me up too much". He urged us to remember the students and find new ways to reach out to them. Again, check out Kristin's comments from her live blog.
Finally, Alder Gruber, and his son Martin who stole the show.
With that, the "old" council adjourned sine die. The "new" council took their oath of office, filled out their paperwork and handed it in and went into the "committee of the whole". For that portion of the meeting, the Mayor does not chair the meeting, so they had the senior member of the council who wasn't running take the chair - that being Judy Compton. Not used to being in the chair, she made many rookie mistakes, offered many apologies and used her good old sourthern charm to entertain while the ballots were being counted.
VOTE FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND PRO TEM
The first vote was for Council President. Alder Clear nominated Alder Bruer. Alder Cnare nominated Larry Palm. The vote was by secret ballot and the results were Bruer 13, Palm 7. Not exactly a mandate for Alder Bruer to return for a fourth or fifth term as Council President and the second term in a row.
The second vote was for Pro Tem. Alder Schumacher nominated Alder Clear. Alder Cnare again nominated Alder Palm. The results this time were Clear 12, Palm 7, with one write-in.
With that, the council recessed the meeting around 2:00 so that they could go to lunch.
EVENING MEETING
I left town, but tivo'd the meeting and here's what I had time to watch. Everyone was there at the beginning of the meeting except for Thuy Pham-Remmele.
HONORING RESOLUTION
The first item of action was number 113 honoring Diedre Green from the Simpson St. Free Press. She spoke and seems like an impressive young woman.
The Mayor then made an announcement that the Curfew issue had widespread support to refer and that people could go home.
CONSENT AGENDA
Next up - the consent agenda. All items on the agenda
18 & 32 supermajority votes
56 - Alternate Parking Ordinance was placed on file
The items separated for discussion were
19 - citizen appointments
20 - alder appointments
35
51 - Curfew
52, 53 & 54 - Property Tax Items
plus all of the public hearing items.
One person took advantage of speaking early - they had their kids with them. They spoke on the Turners property tax exemption issue.
SIDEWALKS AND ASSESSMENTS
Next, there was minutes of testimony on the Camden sidewalk issue. Because of the late night/early morning hour, I fast forwarded through about 50 minutes of testimony - my apologies to those who took the time to come to city hall to discuss an issue important to them. There were no questions registrants or staff. A motion was made to approve the assessment, without any alders saying a word, it was unanimously approved.
Next, there was public testimony on Oak Street assessments. There was about 8 minutes of testimony plus a speaker on Marquette St. assessments. There was a brief discussion on items 11 - 15. Again, passed unanimously on a voice vote.
MERITER MASTER PLAN
Meriter Hospital Master plan was referred to May 5th Common Council meeting.
STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS
The Mayor next offered not to do the State of the City Address until after the public speakers were done.
CURFEW
The next item was curfew, it was referred, but there were several speakers stayed to speak.
People who went home were 5 in support, 3 in opposition. Tom McKenna of Orchard Ridge Neighborhood Association spoke and informed the council that the nieghborhood association voted unimously to support this. He said this would make it consistent with surrounding communities. Linda Hoskins spoke in opposition. She felt that it was unfair to ticket parents because they simply don't have the money to pay for the tickets - especially because they have to pay more for bus tickets. Bert Zipperer spoke in opposition. He pointed out that EOC unanimously strongly opposed it based on racial disparity in the criminal justice system. The motion was referred without comment.
PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION
Next up was items 52 to deny the claims. Several people spoke about the impacts of the not issuing the property tax exemption on low income housing. Attorney Radelet, representing several non-profit low-income housing providers pro bono, pointed out that at the last meeting the motion asked for a list of options to consider, with the benefits, risks and recommendations. He offered some options in his memo, but the city attorney did not address those options. He says that they would be consistent with the state law, court ruling and the ruling of the Department of Revenue. Dan O'Connell pointed out the irony that the City of Madison which says that they support affordable housing, took the actions to create this problem. He also urged the council to find other options. He also said that the other irony was that if the City pursues this, not only will the City not get the taxes, they will also get responsiblity for these properties as they go into foreclosure. Doug Strub, from Future Madison, came to point out that they have worked in troubled neighborhoods and the success of their projects was because of the partnership with the City. He mentioned his properties and explained that there would be deferred maintenance at Wexford Ridge, that they would no longer be able to support the neighborhood center in the Vera Court and the City would have to find another place to rent and pay for the neighborhood center, in Darbo, they will hand the properties back to the lenders, including the City who has $575,000 money in those properties. After some questions, Attorney May made a brief presentation to the Council.
Attorney May basically told the council that the role of the assessor is to look at the property, look at the law and make a determination about if a property is tax exempt. The role of the city attorney is to help the assessor interpret the law. The outcome doesn't matter, it just has to be consistent with the law. He explained the history of this issue. He said he disagrees with Attorney Radelet's analysis. He said that tonight is not the time to resolve this issue, this is simply about the claims - are the properties tax exempt or not? He also addressed extending the time for resolving this issue - he says nothing will change and he doesn't know if the city can make the decision to extend the timeline, but he hasn't researched the issue.
Alder Cnare asked what the legal implications of city assistance to these properties might be. Attorney May said that you can't "look like" you can create a tax exemption. He says no matter what we do, someone will argue what we are doing. Generally speaking, however, they city could support the low-income housing projects, but you have to be careful how you set that up. He mentioned that they could possibly subsized the tenants rent, but Bill Clingan might say there are some restrictions on how CDBG money might be spent. Cnare also asked where the money might come from - attorney May says you could change the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, CDA or CDBG funds. Cnare also asked how much it would cost - Attorney May said it was $1.2 million annually, but that some think that is low.
Alder Pham-Remmele asked how this issue got in front of the ocuncil and why staff doesn't just handle this and so it wouldn't come before the council. Attorney May responded that the Council follow the law, but the groups have a statuatory right to come before the council, and if they want to go to court, they have to bring that claim before the council. So, there is no way to avoid this.
Alder Palm asked Bill Clingan, our Community Development Director, what funds might be available. Bill Clingan says "income payments" are not allowed under CDBG funding, however HOME funds could be used. The City would have to change the plan it submits to HUD and the common council and CDBG would have to approve it. He also expressed concerns that legally the council might not be able to do it without offering it to all low-income people in the city of Madison. Also, he pointed out that if we gave direct tenant assistance, there wouldn't be funds for new projects. Larry asked about the additional tax dollars we might get as a result of this change. Bill Clingan had not looked at this.
Alder Rummel asked if the CDA could purchase the properties and have the non-profits run them. Mark Olinger said that the CDA is not in a position to do that unless the Council gave them the money to do it. She also asked how CDA pays for maintenance. Olinger explains they get money from HUD. Attorney May pointed out that CDA has a separate statute and these ruling don't apply to them.
Alder Solomon asked what the ramificaitons might be. Attorney May says that they should act according to law. He also points out that the City could get sued and that the assessor might face some action to compel them to comply with the law. Alder Solomon wanted to keep the exemptions in place and seek a clarification from the legislature. Solomon noted that there might be some vagueness and that the council could find different than the city attorney. The city attorney said he didn't think it was vague.
Compton asked how much of the 1.2M is actual city money. The Comptroller didn't know where the $1.2M came from, and that the city share is about 35% if that number is the total taxes. Judy asks about other grants that the city might be able to apply for. Attorney May says in the last 24 hours nothing has been identified beyond CDBG and HOME. Compton asked about what happens if the state changes the law. She also pointed out that the council had until April 29th or 30th to make the decision.
Cnare asked where the state legislature is on this issue. Mario Mendoza from the City Attorney's office explained the city's position is to support the language vetoed in last year's budget. He explained that the fix that has been discussed is not likely to pass, that the legislators are focused on budget and that they have expressed that we need a fix this year.
Clear asked relationship with other entities for which we collect taxes. Does the council make the decision for the County etc? The answer, was yes, but it took a long time to drag it out of the City Attorney. The city attorney could answer any questions about what standing the other entitites might have to come back on the city if we decide they are exempt.
Alder Chris Schmidt asked why a statute about the previous year tax exemption status doesn't apply here. The attorney said that language doesn't sya that once a group is found exempt, they aren't locked in forever.
Alder Schumacher asked why they initiatied the re-evaluation of these properties. Attorney May said that one of the attachments in his report gives the history and he says it was because of the Columbus Park case which brought Wis. Stat. 70.11 to the attention of the assessor and they started looking at the properties. They thought these properties didn't meet the maintenance restrictions and then we eneded up in court. The assessor said that it was also about the 10 year rule. Schumacher asked why were are doing this when other cities are not. Attorney May says it is just lag time due to other assessors finding out about the new ruling through training. Plus, they only assess property once a year and so if they miss a year, it will take them another year to comply. He's not sure if the other assessors follow the law as closely.
Schumacher asked a question of Future Madison. What was originally the reason for denial and what did it change to? Doug Strub said that the original denial was based on the 10 acre rule and that was the reason for the denial. As the litigation progressed, they ended up in front of the judge only on the rent use restriction issue. The court did not rule on the original reason for denial of the claim. Schumacher asked May why the shift in strategy. He said that they were surprised by the court. He also explained that they raised all issues where the claim could be denied, because that is what good city attorney's do.
Kerr moved a substitute - 60 day extention for item 52, 53 and 54. She explained that this had been referred to attorney and mayor's office to discuss options with Attorney Radelet and others. She felt like that did not happen to her satisfaction. She said she wants the council to understand the implications of this decision. She says there is no strategy to deal with this issue and that it is embarrassing. She wants to see city staff to take this on and outline the possible financial remedies, what the tax base implications are and what the effect is on the people who are impacted by this. She also said that the City has not made clear how educational institutions will be evaluated in regard to their tax-exempt status. She wants the city to be clear about what the rules are.
Alder Rhodes-Conway supports Kerr's amendment. Respects city attorney but this isn't just a matter of law, but also policy. This issue has been flying below our radar screen for 2 years or more and the Council is way behind on this issue. However, after the last meeting, the Council now knows how important this is and that it has widespread implications. This means people will not be able to pay their rent and many may become homeless as a result. It also may mean that housing providers that have been putting it together with duct tape and string for years will be put in an even more difficult position. There are several areas in her district that were not doing well and it changed because of the tax exempt entitites that are here. If the motion fails, she's going to vote her conscience. She said that the saying goes that "the road to hell is paved by good intentions" but tonight the road to hell is due to narrow interpreted legal decisions.
Alder Schumacher asked about the delay. Attorney may says the city may not have the authority to do this and that nothing is going to change legally. He said that effectively, the council is instructing the city attorney to not raise the issue as a bar to the parties filing a suit as a result of the agreement that the Council is telling them to enter into. Schumacher asked for options to buy time and stay withing legal obligations. Attorney May advised that they follow the rules in state statute and we should just go to court. He was not sure about alot of things and said lots of things were unclear. Yet he was sure he was right. Interesting. Schumacher pursued a question - the attorney repeated the same things over and over.
Alder Clear asked about cash flow - Greentree Glen has paid their first installment. Will they get that money back due to the extension. The Comptroller says this motion doesn't affect the money end of things.
Alder Skidmore says that this is frustrating. We need to address the policy issue - he supports the extention, but angry as a policy maker, so supports referral. Understands the legal ramifications but wants to explore this further. If no referral, he too will vote his conscience.
Alder Palm wants the City to petition the Department of Revenue to reconsider how they interpret their rules. And, regarding the Turners the city assessor should determine which portion would be taxable and which portion would not be.
Alder Solomon asked for the substitute to be reread. Referred back to common council in 60 days and city attorney directed to accept offer of extention of time and that they do their best to change the state law in regard to the deadlines. Alder Kerr said she just asked for an extention. Alder Solomon then made a friendly amendment that during the 60 days it be referred to Office of Community Development to explore the implications and come back with a slate of possible solutions. He says we dropped the ball on this, there are huge implications and we can't vote on this out of nowhere and dropping this on our service providers.
Alder Clear supports the intent of Kerr and Solomon, but the issues of these three properties and our policy decisions are getting mixed. He reiterates this is a state policy that they don't have the policy to change. He wants to pursue the additional options, but without precarious or murky legal position of the delay - which may have no actual affect.
Alder Kerr agrees we need to work with the state to change the law, but this narrow legal decision has broad policy implications and we need to look at them. The council has lost sight of the policy and we are not in the drivers seat. She wants the Council to be in the driver's seat and that is why they need the extention.
Alder Clear thinks that they can do what Alder Kerr described with or without the extention.
Alder Cnare - karmic wheel has turned. We were focused on IZ and creating committees and not dealing with this. Also urged people to call the governor and their legislators.
Schumacher seeks clarification on the motion on several items. Schumacher points out that all of the solutions that we are looking at are to focus on financial options to solve this problem. Was that the intent? Kerr says Turners is a separate issue.
STAY TUNED
Ok - you're going to have to stay tuned for the rest. I'll tell you now that it was a roll call vote, the council voted to extend the time, but there is more to report when I have time. Also, there was no state of the city address, there was some discussion of the 10 year rule on appointments and that was about it . . . I think. Will need to finish watching the last 45 minutes or so of the meeting. The rest of the meeting is here. Read more!
NOON MEETING
The Common Council meeting started at noon today, with honoring resolutions. We honored "outgoing" Common Council President Tim Bruer, who gave a speech for about 10 minutes, despite the Mayor telling him to be brief because the chicken was being served at 1:15 or 1:30 and would be cold. He got only half a standing ovation from the Council - with at least a few purposely not standing, perhaps others not paying attention - that was unclear.
Next, we honored Mark Clear for serving as Pro Tem for the past year. He did manage to be brief and also got only a partial standing ovation, but more than Tim and again, those not standing were doing so on purpose.
The next honoring resolution was for me. The Mayor coughed/choked about twice while reading it. I made my little speech (which I will put on line tomorrow) and while the Mayor tried to quickly move on it didn't work, about 8 of my colleagues had something that they wanted to say about my service. Kristin at the Cap Times did a live blog of the noon meeting and you can see some/most of the comments there.
Next up Alder Webber - who was quite emotional. She did a nice speech and asked us not to say anything - but of course, we did. The Mayor pointed out that despite Robbie's request, some of us still wanted to make her cry.
Next up, Libby Monson, who filled in when Alder Brandon left office. More nice words said and heartfelt thanks to her for stepping in! She had served on the council 25 years ago and made note of some of the changes that she has seen.
Next up, Eli Judge. Charming as always. Thanked his parents for "not screwing me up too much". He urged us to remember the students and find new ways to reach out to them. Again, check out Kristin's comments from her live blog.
Finally, Alder Gruber, and his son Martin who stole the show.
With that, the "old" council adjourned sine die. The "new" council took their oath of office, filled out their paperwork and handed it in and went into the "committee of the whole". For that portion of the meeting, the Mayor does not chair the meeting, so they had the senior member of the council who wasn't running take the chair - that being Judy Compton. Not used to being in the chair, she made many rookie mistakes, offered many apologies and used her good old sourthern charm to entertain while the ballots were being counted.
VOTE FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT AND PRO TEM
The first vote was for Council President. Alder Clear nominated Alder Bruer. Alder Cnare nominated Larry Palm. The vote was by secret ballot and the results were Bruer 13, Palm 7. Not exactly a mandate for Alder Bruer to return for a fourth or fifth term as Council President and the second term in a row.
The second vote was for Pro Tem. Alder Schumacher nominated Alder Clear. Alder Cnare again nominated Alder Palm. The results this time were Clear 12, Palm 7, with one write-in.
With that, the council recessed the meeting around 2:00 so that they could go to lunch.
EVENING MEETING
I left town, but tivo'd the meeting and here's what I had time to watch. Everyone was there at the beginning of the meeting except for Thuy Pham-Remmele.
HONORING RESOLUTION
The first item of action was number 113 honoring Diedre Green from the Simpson St. Free Press. She spoke and seems like an impressive young woman.
The Mayor then made an announcement that the Curfew issue had widespread support to refer and that people could go home.
CONSENT AGENDA
Next up - the consent agenda. All items on the agenda
18 & 32 supermajority votes
56 - Alternate Parking Ordinance was placed on file
The items separated for discussion were
19 - citizen appointments
20 - alder appointments
35
51 - Curfew
52, 53 & 54 - Property Tax Items
plus all of the public hearing items.
One person took advantage of speaking early - they had their kids with them. They spoke on the Turners property tax exemption issue.
SIDEWALKS AND ASSESSMENTS
Next, there was minutes of testimony on the Camden sidewalk issue. Because of the late night/early morning hour, I fast forwarded through about 50 minutes of testimony - my apologies to those who took the time to come to city hall to discuss an issue important to them. There were no questions registrants or staff. A motion was made to approve the assessment, without any alders saying a word, it was unanimously approved.
Next, there was public testimony on Oak Street assessments. There was about 8 minutes of testimony plus a speaker on Marquette St. assessments. There was a brief discussion on items 11 - 15. Again, passed unanimously on a voice vote.
MERITER MASTER PLAN
Meriter Hospital Master plan was referred to May 5th Common Council meeting.
STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS
The Mayor next offered not to do the State of the City Address until after the public speakers were done.
CURFEW
The next item was curfew, it was referred, but there were several speakers stayed to speak.
People who went home were 5 in support, 3 in opposition. Tom McKenna of Orchard Ridge Neighborhood Association spoke and informed the council that the nieghborhood association voted unimously to support this. He said this would make it consistent with surrounding communities. Linda Hoskins spoke in opposition. She felt that it was unfair to ticket parents because they simply don't have the money to pay for the tickets - especially because they have to pay more for bus tickets. Bert Zipperer spoke in opposition. He pointed out that EOC unanimously strongly opposed it based on racial disparity in the criminal justice system. The motion was referred without comment.
PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION
Next up was items 52 to deny the claims. Several people spoke about the impacts of the not issuing the property tax exemption on low income housing. Attorney Radelet, representing several non-profit low-income housing providers pro bono, pointed out that at the last meeting the motion asked for a list of options to consider, with the benefits, risks and recommendations. He offered some options in his memo, but the city attorney did not address those options. He says that they would be consistent with the state law, court ruling and the ruling of the Department of Revenue. Dan O'Connell pointed out the irony that the City of Madison which says that they support affordable housing, took the actions to create this problem. He also urged the council to find other options. He also said that the other irony was that if the City pursues this, not only will the City not get the taxes, they will also get responsiblity for these properties as they go into foreclosure. Doug Strub, from Future Madison, came to point out that they have worked in troubled neighborhoods and the success of their projects was because of the partnership with the City. He mentioned his properties and explained that there would be deferred maintenance at Wexford Ridge, that they would no longer be able to support the neighborhood center in the Vera Court and the City would have to find another place to rent and pay for the neighborhood center, in Darbo, they will hand the properties back to the lenders, including the City who has $575,000 money in those properties. After some questions, Attorney May made a brief presentation to the Council.
Attorney May basically told the council that the role of the assessor is to look at the property, look at the law and make a determination about if a property is tax exempt. The role of the city attorney is to help the assessor interpret the law. The outcome doesn't matter, it just has to be consistent with the law. He explained the history of this issue. He said he disagrees with Attorney Radelet's analysis. He said that tonight is not the time to resolve this issue, this is simply about the claims - are the properties tax exempt or not? He also addressed extending the time for resolving this issue - he says nothing will change and he doesn't know if the city can make the decision to extend the timeline, but he hasn't researched the issue.
Alder Cnare asked what the legal implications of city assistance to these properties might be. Attorney May said that you can't "look like" you can create a tax exemption. He says no matter what we do, someone will argue what we are doing. Generally speaking, however, they city could support the low-income housing projects, but you have to be careful how you set that up. He mentioned that they could possibly subsized the tenants rent, but Bill Clingan might say there are some restrictions on how CDBG money might be spent. Cnare also asked where the money might come from - attorney May says you could change the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, CDA or CDBG funds. Cnare also asked how much it would cost - Attorney May said it was $1.2 million annually, but that some think that is low.
Alder Pham-Remmele asked how this issue got in front of the ocuncil and why staff doesn't just handle this and so it wouldn't come before the council. Attorney May responded that the Council follow the law, but the groups have a statuatory right to come before the council, and if they want to go to court, they have to bring that claim before the council. So, there is no way to avoid this.
Alder Palm asked Bill Clingan, our Community Development Director, what funds might be available. Bill Clingan says "income payments" are not allowed under CDBG funding, however HOME funds could be used. The City would have to change the plan it submits to HUD and the common council and CDBG would have to approve it. He also expressed concerns that legally the council might not be able to do it without offering it to all low-income people in the city of Madison. Also, he pointed out that if we gave direct tenant assistance, there wouldn't be funds for new projects. Larry asked about the additional tax dollars we might get as a result of this change. Bill Clingan had not looked at this.
Alder Rummel asked if the CDA could purchase the properties and have the non-profits run them. Mark Olinger said that the CDA is not in a position to do that unless the Council gave them the money to do it. She also asked how CDA pays for maintenance. Olinger explains they get money from HUD. Attorney May pointed out that CDA has a separate statute and these ruling don't apply to them.
Alder Solomon asked what the ramificaitons might be. Attorney May says that they should act according to law. He also points out that the City could get sued and that the assessor might face some action to compel them to comply with the law. Alder Solomon wanted to keep the exemptions in place and seek a clarification from the legislature. Solomon noted that there might be some vagueness and that the council could find different than the city attorney. The city attorney said he didn't think it was vague.
Compton asked how much of the 1.2M is actual city money. The Comptroller didn't know where the $1.2M came from, and that the city share is about 35% if that number is the total taxes. Judy asks about other grants that the city might be able to apply for. Attorney May says in the last 24 hours nothing has been identified beyond CDBG and HOME. Compton asked about what happens if the state changes the law. She also pointed out that the council had until April 29th or 30th to make the decision.
Cnare asked where the state legislature is on this issue. Mario Mendoza from the City Attorney's office explained the city's position is to support the language vetoed in last year's budget. He explained that the fix that has been discussed is not likely to pass, that the legislators are focused on budget and that they have expressed that we need a fix this year.
Clear asked relationship with other entities for which we collect taxes. Does the council make the decision for the County etc? The answer, was yes, but it took a long time to drag it out of the City Attorney. The city attorney could answer any questions about what standing the other entitites might have to come back on the city if we decide they are exempt.
Alder Chris Schmidt asked why a statute about the previous year tax exemption status doesn't apply here. The attorney said that language doesn't sya that once a group is found exempt, they aren't locked in forever.
Alder Schumacher asked why they initiatied the re-evaluation of these properties. Attorney May said that one of the attachments in his report gives the history and he says it was because of the Columbus Park case which brought Wis. Stat. 70.11 to the attention of the assessor and they started looking at the properties. They thought these properties didn't meet the maintenance restrictions and then we eneded up in court. The assessor said that it was also about the 10 year rule. Schumacher asked why were are doing this when other cities are not. Attorney May says it is just lag time due to other assessors finding out about the new ruling through training. Plus, they only assess property once a year and so if they miss a year, it will take them another year to comply. He's not sure if the other assessors follow the law as closely.
Schumacher asked a question of Future Madison. What was originally the reason for denial and what did it change to? Doug Strub said that the original denial was based on the 10 acre rule and that was the reason for the denial. As the litigation progressed, they ended up in front of the judge only on the rent use restriction issue. The court did not rule on the original reason for denial of the claim. Schumacher asked May why the shift in strategy. He said that they were surprised by the court. He also explained that they raised all issues where the claim could be denied, because that is what good city attorney's do.
Kerr moved a substitute - 60 day extention for item 52, 53 and 54. She explained that this had been referred to attorney and mayor's office to discuss options with Attorney Radelet and others. She felt like that did not happen to her satisfaction. She said she wants the council to understand the implications of this decision. She says there is no strategy to deal with this issue and that it is embarrassing. She wants to see city staff to take this on and outline the possible financial remedies, what the tax base implications are and what the effect is on the people who are impacted by this. She also said that the City has not made clear how educational institutions will be evaluated in regard to their tax-exempt status. She wants the city to be clear about what the rules are.
Alder Rhodes-Conway supports Kerr's amendment. Respects city attorney but this isn't just a matter of law, but also policy. This issue has been flying below our radar screen for 2 years or more and the Council is way behind on this issue. However, after the last meeting, the Council now knows how important this is and that it has widespread implications. This means people will not be able to pay their rent and many may become homeless as a result. It also may mean that housing providers that have been putting it together with duct tape and string for years will be put in an even more difficult position. There are several areas in her district that were not doing well and it changed because of the tax exempt entitites that are here. If the motion fails, she's going to vote her conscience. She said that the saying goes that "the road to hell is paved by good intentions" but tonight the road to hell is due to narrow interpreted legal decisions.
Alder Schumacher asked about the delay. Attorney may says the city may not have the authority to do this and that nothing is going to change legally. He said that effectively, the council is instructing the city attorney to not raise the issue as a bar to the parties filing a suit as a result of the agreement that the Council is telling them to enter into. Schumacher asked for options to buy time and stay withing legal obligations. Attorney May advised that they follow the rules in state statute and we should just go to court. He was not sure about alot of things and said lots of things were unclear. Yet he was sure he was right. Interesting. Schumacher pursued a question - the attorney repeated the same things over and over.
Alder Clear asked about cash flow - Greentree Glen has paid their first installment. Will they get that money back due to the extension. The Comptroller says this motion doesn't affect the money end of things.
Alder Skidmore says that this is frustrating. We need to address the policy issue - he supports the extention, but angry as a policy maker, so supports referral. Understands the legal ramifications but wants to explore this further. If no referral, he too will vote his conscience.
Alder Palm wants the City to petition the Department of Revenue to reconsider how they interpret their rules. And, regarding the Turners the city assessor should determine which portion would be taxable and which portion would not be.
Alder Solomon asked for the substitute to be reread. Referred back to common council in 60 days and city attorney directed to accept offer of extention of time and that they do their best to change the state law in regard to the deadlines. Alder Kerr said she just asked for an extention. Alder Solomon then made a friendly amendment that during the 60 days it be referred to Office of Community Development to explore the implications and come back with a slate of possible solutions. He says we dropped the ball on this, there are huge implications and we can't vote on this out of nowhere and dropping this on our service providers.
Alder Clear supports the intent of Kerr and Solomon, but the issues of these three properties and our policy decisions are getting mixed. He reiterates this is a state policy that they don't have the policy to change. He wants to pursue the additional options, but without precarious or murky legal position of the delay - which may have no actual affect.
Alder Kerr agrees we need to work with the state to change the law, but this narrow legal decision has broad policy implications and we need to look at them. The council has lost sight of the policy and we are not in the drivers seat. She wants the Council to be in the driver's seat and that is why they need the extention.
Alder Clear thinks that they can do what Alder Kerr described with or without the extention.
Alder Cnare - karmic wheel has turned. We were focused on IZ and creating committees and not dealing with this. Also urged people to call the governor and their legislators.
Schumacher seeks clarification on the motion on several items. Schumacher points out that all of the solutions that we are looking at are to focus on financial options to solve this problem. Was that the intent? Kerr says Turners is a separate issue.
STAY TUNED
Ok - you're going to have to stay tuned for the rest. I'll tell you now that it was a roll call vote, the council voted to extend the time, but there is more to report when I have time. Also, there was no state of the city address, there was some discussion of the 10 year rule on appointments and that was about it . . . I think. Will need to finish watching the last 45 minutes or so of the meeting. The rest of the meeting is here. Read more!
Thursday, October 18, 2007
City Wages: Disturbing Trend
I guess when you ask for a study, you kind of want it to show what you thought it would. However, in this case, I think I wish I had been wrong.
Here's the average wages of men vs. women and non-minorities and minorities in the City of Madison.
2003
Men $65,403
Women $62,344
Non-minority $64,367
Minority $61,282
2004
Men $67,022
Women $62,315
Non-minority $65,231
Minority $60,849
2005
Men $67,806
Women $63,821
Non-minority $66,173
Minority $62,467
2006
Men $71,282
Women $67,104
Non-minority $69,378
Minority $67,159
Additionally, when you just look at the average and median wages of Agency Heads and how men and women compare, here's what you find:
2007 Average
Men - $110,836
Women - $95,073
2007 Median
Men - $120,267
Women - $96,541
When you combine the information about salaries with the fact that in 2003 there were
31% women in these positions and in 2006 there were 21% I find these trends more and more disturbing.
Read more!
Here's the average wages of men vs. women and non-minorities and minorities in the City of Madison.
2003
Men $65,403
Women $62,344
Non-minority $64,367
Minority $61,282
2004
Men $67,022
Women $62,315
Non-minority $65,231
Minority $60,849
2005
Men $67,806
Women $63,821
Non-minority $66,173
Minority $62,467
2006
Men $71,282
Women $67,104
Non-minority $69,378
Minority $67,159
Additionally, when you just look at the average and median wages of Agency Heads and how men and women compare, here's what you find:
2007 Average
Men - $110,836
Women - $95,073
2007 Median
Men - $120,267
Women - $96,541
When you combine the information about salaries with the fact that in 2003 there were
31% women in these positions and in 2006 there were 21% I find these trends more and more disturbing.
Read more!
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Gender & City Employment - The Controversy Continues
So, Vikki Kratz calls me and asks me what I think about the Mayor hiring another man. I say, you can't look at this on a case by case basis. I don't know who applied so I can't really comment. I also say that until the report comes out, I don't expect anything to change and that likely, our problem is in recruitment and maybe not in the actual hiring decision and that I look forward to the committees recommendations about how to get more women to apply for jobs.
So, Vikki writes a story, Jason Joyce starts a thread on thedailypage, I get attacked (again) and the thread goes to hell. And so it goes. However, it does give me an opportunity to update you on some information I have about how the City of Madison is doing in general.
The Department of Workforce Development groups jobs into job families and somehow, they can tell you the percentage of women and people in racial/ethnic groups are available in those jobs. We can then compare this to the number of women and people in certain racial/ethnic groups that are currently in those positions. Here's the areas in the City where women are being under-hired compared to their availability in the job market:
Job Family 1A - 1B (Senior Official & Executives; Unit Directors & Managers)
Available in the Job Market: 36.6%
Currently Hired: 28.89%
Women are 13 of 45 employees in these job families
Job Family 1C - 1F (Program Managers & Supervisors; Major Program, Project or Operations Administrators and Supervisors; Program, Project and/or Operations Administrators and Supervisors; Program, Project or Operations Supervisors)
Available in the Job Market: 49.9%
Currently Hired: 36.11%
Women are 39 of 108 employees in these job families
Job Family 2F - 2J (Police Captains; Police Lieutenants; Fire Captains; Fire Lieutenants)
Available in the Job Market: 21.9%
Currently Hired: 17.28
Women are 14 of 81 employees in these job families
Job Family 2K - 2M (Expert Consultants; Public Health Protection; Heath Care Services)
Available in the Job Market: 87.4%
Currently Hired: 80%
Women are 36 of 45 employees in these job families
Job Family 3A - 3E (Police Sergeants and Special Investigators; Firefighters/Paramedics; Fire Inspectors and Investigators; Advanced Specialized Regulatory and/or Code Enforcement; Specialized Regulatory and/or Code Enforcement; Inspectors)
Available in the Job Market: 32.6%
Currently Hired: 27.62%
Women are 50 of 81 employees in these job families
Job Family 3F - 3K (Engineering Program Specialists and Surveyors; Engineering/Planning Technicians; Architectural/Engineering and Related Aides; Property Assessment and Real Estate Aides; Biological and Chemical Science Technicians)
Available in the Job Market: 32.6%
Currently Hired: 19.67%
Women are 12 of 61 employees in these job families
Job Family 6A - 6K (Advanced Administrative and Program Support; Fiscal Processing; Resource Assignment; Administrative and Program Support; Advanced Administrative and Clerical Support; Administrative and Clerical Support; Clerical Support; Library Clerks; Library Page; Cashiers; Inventory Clerks)
Available in the Job Market: 84.3%
Currently Hired: 76.98%
Women are 408 of 530 employees in these job families
Job Family 7A - 7F (Crafts Group; Advanced Electrical Systems Installation, Maintenance and Repair; Facilities and Buildings Maintenance/Construction; Water Supply Operators, Skilled Mechanical Maintenance)
Available in the Job Market: 12.1%
Currently Hired: 1.35%
Women are 2 of 148 employees in these job families
Job Family 8A - 8B (Service and Maintenance Leadworkers, Coordinators and Crew Leaders; Specialized Grounds, Conservatory and Arborist Workers)
Available in the Job Market: 23.20%
Currently Hired: 12.96%
Women are 7 of 54 employees in these job families
Job Family 8D - 8P (General Public Works Maintenance and Equipment Operations; Advanced Public Works Maintenance and Equipment Operations; Advanced Equipment Operators; Refuse Collection, Street and Sewage Maintenance Operators; General Facility/Equipment Repair and Maintenance; General Maintenance/Mechanical Repair Work; Custodial and Facility Maintenance; Metro Transit Custodial and Service Workers; Hourly Public Facility Service Providers)
Available in the Job Market: 30.8%
Currently Hired: 22.28%
Women are 123 of 552 employees in these job families
So, for those who think that we don't take various factors into account, such as availability in the market place, you're wrong, we do. And even after taking those factors into account, we're still failing. Read more!
So, Vikki writes a story, Jason Joyce starts a thread on thedailypage, I get attacked (again) and the thread goes to hell. And so it goes. However, it does give me an opportunity to update you on some information I have about how the City of Madison is doing in general.
The Department of Workforce Development groups jobs into job families and somehow, they can tell you the percentage of women and people in racial/ethnic groups are available in those jobs. We can then compare this to the number of women and people in certain racial/ethnic groups that are currently in those positions. Here's the areas in the City where women are being under-hired compared to their availability in the job market:
Job Family 1A - 1B (Senior Official & Executives; Unit Directors & Managers)
Available in the Job Market: 36.6%
Currently Hired: 28.89%
Women are 13 of 45 employees in these job families
Job Family 1C - 1F (Program Managers & Supervisors; Major Program, Project or Operations Administrators and Supervisors; Program, Project and/or Operations Administrators and Supervisors; Program, Project or Operations Supervisors)
Available in the Job Market: 49.9%
Currently Hired: 36.11%
Women are 39 of 108 employees in these job families
Job Family 2F - 2J (Police Captains; Police Lieutenants; Fire Captains; Fire Lieutenants)
Available in the Job Market: 21.9%
Currently Hired: 17.28
Women are 14 of 81 employees in these job families
Job Family 2K - 2M (Expert Consultants; Public Health Protection; Heath Care Services)
Available in the Job Market: 87.4%
Currently Hired: 80%
Women are 36 of 45 employees in these job families
Job Family 3A - 3E (Police Sergeants and Special Investigators; Firefighters/Paramedics; Fire Inspectors and Investigators; Advanced Specialized Regulatory and/or Code Enforcement; Specialized Regulatory and/or Code Enforcement; Inspectors)
Available in the Job Market: 32.6%
Currently Hired: 27.62%
Women are 50 of 81 employees in these job families
Job Family 3F - 3K (Engineering Program Specialists and Surveyors; Engineering/Planning Technicians; Architectural/Engineering and Related Aides; Property Assessment and Real Estate Aides; Biological and Chemical Science Technicians)
Available in the Job Market: 32.6%
Currently Hired: 19.67%
Women are 12 of 61 employees in these job families
Job Family 6A - 6K (Advanced Administrative and Program Support; Fiscal Processing; Resource Assignment; Administrative and Program Support; Advanced Administrative and Clerical Support; Administrative and Clerical Support; Clerical Support; Library Clerks; Library Page; Cashiers; Inventory Clerks)
Available in the Job Market: 84.3%
Currently Hired: 76.98%
Women are 408 of 530 employees in these job families
Job Family 7A - 7F (Crafts Group; Advanced Electrical Systems Installation, Maintenance and Repair; Facilities and Buildings Maintenance/Construction; Water Supply Operators, Skilled Mechanical Maintenance)
Available in the Job Market: 12.1%
Currently Hired: 1.35%
Women are 2 of 148 employees in these job families
Job Family 8A - 8B (Service and Maintenance Leadworkers, Coordinators and Crew Leaders; Specialized Grounds, Conservatory and Arborist Workers)
Available in the Job Market: 23.20%
Currently Hired: 12.96%
Women are 7 of 54 employees in these job families
Job Family 8D - 8P (General Public Works Maintenance and Equipment Operations; Advanced Public Works Maintenance and Equipment Operations; Advanced Equipment Operators; Refuse Collection, Street and Sewage Maintenance Operators; General Facility/Equipment Repair and Maintenance; General Maintenance/Mechanical Repair Work; Custodial and Facility Maintenance; Metro Transit Custodial and Service Workers; Hourly Public Facility Service Providers)
Available in the Job Market: 30.8%
Currently Hired: 22.28%
Women are 123 of 552 employees in these job families
So, for those who think that we don't take various factors into account, such as availability in the market place, you're wrong, we do. And even after taking those factors into account, we're still failing. Read more!
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Gender (and Race and Disability): Preliminary information
The Affirmative Action subcommittee had their first meeting on the "gender resolutions". The two resolutions asked them to research and report (by Feb 2008) on recommendations to improve gender (and race and disability) balance in top management positions and on city committees, commissions and boards.
Preliminary information presented is as follows:
As I reported earlier, for top management positions, the salaries as of 5/17/07 are as follows:
All that, in less than an hour. Next meeting: August 14th before the Affirmative Action Committee meeting. Read more!
Preliminary information presented is as follows:
As I reported earlier, for top management positions, the salaries as of 5/17/07 are as follows:
- Average: $86,561.46
- Average for Women: $84,544.83
- Average for Men: 87,266.05
- Average for Racial/Ethnic Minorities: $95,314.70
- Average: $86,086.16
- Average for Women: $83,191.67
- Average for Men: 87,086.72
- Average for Racial/Ethnic Minorities: $91,596.44
- Women are under represented in 10 of the categories.
- Racial/Ethnic minorities are under represented in 7 of the categories.
- Women are the most under represented, they are only 40.2% of the appointments, while being 50.9% of the population.
- Asians are 5.8% of the population, but 1.7% of the appointments.
- People with disabilities are 10% of the population, but 6.8% of the appointments.
- Hispanics or Latinos are 4.1% of the population but only 2.5% of the appointments.
All that, in less than an hour. Next meeting: August 14th before the Affirmative Action Committee meeting. Read more!
Thursday, June 14, 2007
Gender Resolutions, Expanded and Supported.
The Affirmative Action Commission, not only liked my resolutions, they expanded the scope of the information that they thought would be helpful to the City Council. On Tuesday night, among other things going on in City Hall, the Affirmative Action Commission took a look at the two gender resolutions (1, 2) that I introduced as a result of various issues regarding gender in city hall. Mostly, committee appointments and women in top management positions and their salaries.
The Affirmative Action Commission seemed excited that I was bringing this up. One member commented that they receive alot of information, but don't get much of an opportunity to act on it and give recommendations for fixing various issues they see. However, they noted, that perhaps these ordinances were only addressing part of the problem. They were equally concerned about issues of race/ethnicity and disability. So, they added those two categories to the resolution. And then, to my surprise and delight, Ald. Joe Clausius signed on as a co-sponsor! (Yes, that Joe Clausius. Let me just say, since he got elected, I've gotten to know him and quite enjoy having coffee with him from time to time.)
These resolutions may have enough time to get back to the Common Council for Tuesday's agenda, however, I won't know until I see the agenda later today or tomorrow morning. Meanwhile, I'm glad to see that they took my concerns seriously and that we have support for looking into these issues. Stay tuned.
Read more!
The Affirmative Action Commission seemed excited that I was bringing this up. One member commented that they receive alot of information, but don't get much of an opportunity to act on it and give recommendations for fixing various issues they see. However, they noted, that perhaps these ordinances were only addressing part of the problem. They were equally concerned about issues of race/ethnicity and disability. So, they added those two categories to the resolution. And then, to my surprise and delight, Ald. Joe Clausius signed on as a co-sponsor! (Yes, that Joe Clausius. Let me just say, since he got elected, I've gotten to know him and quite enjoy having coffee with him from time to time.)
These resolutions may have enough time to get back to the Common Council for Tuesday's agenda, however, I won't know until I see the agenda later today or tomorrow morning. Meanwhile, I'm glad to see that they took my concerns seriously and that we have support for looking into these issues. Stay tuned.
Read more!
Sunday, June 3, 2007
Gender Watch: Still no change.
Men are still being appointed to City Committees 2 times for every 1 woman.
Of the appointments submitted on May 15th that we will be voting on this Tuesday, there were 12 women and 20 men. Or, 37.5% women and 62.5% men. Of the appointments submitted for Tuesday's meeting, to be approved on June 19th, there are 24 or 64.8% men and 13 or 35.2% women. (I didn't count the informational appointment information or the recommendations from chairs of committees.)
Not much has changed. I was kind of hoping that we might see some change once the issues was raised. Hopefully this resolution, and the recommendations we receive, will make a difference. Read more!
Of the appointments submitted on May 15th that we will be voting on this Tuesday, there were 12 women and 20 men. Or, 37.5% women and 62.5% men. Of the appointments submitted for Tuesday's meeting, to be approved on June 19th, there are 24 or 64.8% men and 13 or 35.2% women. (I didn't count the informational appointment information or the recommendations from chairs of committees.)
Not much has changed. I was kind of hoping that we might see some change once the issues was raised. Hopefully this resolution, and the recommendations we receive, will make a difference. Read more!
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Gender, Managers and Salaries
In my quest for knowledge about the role of gender in employment for the City of Madison, I have some more information. Out of 113 people in Compensation Group (Comp Group) 21, 18 and Metro 44, or in layman's speak, the top two tiers of management positions in Madison, 30 are women. That's 26.5%.
In Comp Group 21:
In Comp Group 21:
- There are 5 women (20.8%), 19 (79.2%) men.
- There are 2 women (12.5%) and 14 men (87.5%) who get paid over $100,000.
- Women's salaries in this Comp Group range from $70,624 to $119,941, while men's salaries in this Comp Group range from $89,116 to $131,000.
- There are 25 women (28%), 64 men (72%) .
- There are 11 women (32%) and 23 men (68%) who get paid over $85,000.
- There are 12 women working for the City over 20 years, they get paid $62, 738 - $105,535. There are 30 men working for the City of 20 years, they get paid$74,802 - $131,368.
- The average women's salary in these ranges are $84,544 compared to men at $87,266, which is a little better than in 2006 where women averaged $83,191 while men averaged $87,086, but worse than 2005 when it was women at $82,171 and men at $82,681.
Monday, April 23, 2007
More on the City of Madison and Gender
It's not just the City of Madison employees, based on current appointments posted on the web today:
Of the 805 appointments to the 88 Standing and Ad Hoc City Committees with members appointed:
FOLLOW UP
Apparently, the City no longer does the report that I cited in this morning's post.
Prior to Jim Hess being appointed to the Monona Terrace Director position - that post was also held by a woman. Read more!
Of the 805 appointments to the 88 Standing and Ad Hoc City Committees with members appointed:
- 499 or 62% of the appointments are men
- 306 or 38% of the appointments are women
- 82% (72) of the 88 committees have more men than women on them
- 26% (23) of the 88 committees have 75% or more of their membership being men
FOLLOW UP
Apparently, the City no longer does the report that I cited in this morning's post.
Prior to Jim Hess being appointed to the Monona Terrace Director position - that post was also held by a woman. Read more!
Gender in City Hall
I made a comment about gender in City Hall the other day. Of course, people immediately freaked out and said that I was accusing someone of being sexist. That was not what I was doing. However, it did get me thinking even more. Working in City Hall it seems as though I work with many men, and very few women. And those women I did work with seem to be disappearing. I looked at the City's organizational chart (new planning and development chart on page 51) and here is what I found.
Men in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Assessor - Mark Hanson
*City Attorney - Michael May (previously Eunice Gibson)
City Comptroller - Dean Brasser
*Human Services - Roger Goodwin (position previously held by a woman)
Information Service - Richard Grasmick
City Channel Station Manager - Brad Clark
Monona Terrace Director - James Hess
*Overture Center President - Tom Carto
*Police Chief - Noble Wray
*Public Health Director - Dr. Thomas Schlenker (previously Kate Vedder)
Public Works and Transportation & City Engineer- Larry Nelson
Fleet Service Superintendent - William Vanden Brook
Parks Superintendent - James Morgan
*Street Superintendent - Alan Schumacher
*Traffic Engineering and Parking Manager - David Dryer (previous Parking Manager position held by Robin Williams, position was eliminated)
*Metro Transit General Manager - Charles Camp (previously Cathrine Debo)
Water Utility Manger - David Denig Chakroff
Planning and Development Director - Mark Olinger
Planning Unit - Brad Murphy
*Housing Operations - Augustin Olvera (previously Deborah Garrett-Thomas)
*Inspection Unit (I forget the new name) - George Hank (formerly Linda Grubb)
Women in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Clerk - Maribeth Witzel-Behl
*Civil Rights Director - Lucia Nunez (formerly EOC - Anthony Brown/Ariel Ford and AA- Kirby Mack/Enis Ragland/Norm Davis)
Fire Chief - Debra Amesqua
Library - Barbara Dimick
Vacant Positions
City Treasurer
Economic and Community Development in the Planning and Development Department- This position will supervise some offices that previously appeared higher in the organizational chart and a few more women. Those offices include:
Community Development Block Grant Office - Hickory Hurie
Community Services Supervisor - Dorothy Conniff
*Office of Business Resources - Matthew Mikolajewski (previously Kathrine Naherny)
Senior Center Director - Christine Beatty
WOMEN AS % OF WORKFORCE
In the past few years, of the 14 positions that were hired (indicated by a *), 8 of them replaced women in higher positions in government. Even if you count the offices now under the new Economic and Development Department, there are only 6 women out of 28 positions (21%) where there formerly were 14 out of 30 positions (46%).
I didn't look a whole lot at the 2004 Affirmative Action Report - the last one I could find, but what it did tell me was that:
Additionally, I noticed when reading about the folks that get top salaries in the City of Madison, there was only two women mentioned. Top salaries were for:
Dean Brasser at $133,927
Larry Nelson at $133,463
Michael May at $125,040
Others of the 43 making over $100,000 that the article mentioned were:
Updates here.
Read more!
Men in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Assessor - Mark Hanson
*City Attorney - Michael May (previously Eunice Gibson)
City Comptroller - Dean Brasser
*Human Services - Roger Goodwin (position previously held by a woman)
Information Service - Richard Grasmick
City Channel Station Manager - Brad Clark
Monona Terrace Director - James Hess
*Overture Center President - Tom Carto
*Police Chief - Noble Wray
*Public Health Director - Dr. Thomas Schlenker (previously Kate Vedder)
Public Works and Transportation & City Engineer- Larry Nelson
Fleet Service Superintendent - William Vanden Brook
Parks Superintendent - James Morgan
*Street Superintendent - Alan Schumacher
*Traffic Engineering and Parking Manager - David Dryer (previous Parking Manager position held by Robin Williams, position was eliminated)
*Metro Transit General Manager - Charles Camp (previously Cathrine Debo)
Water Utility Manger - David Denig Chakroff
Planning and Development Director - Mark Olinger
Planning Unit - Brad Murphy
*Housing Operations - Augustin Olvera (previously Deborah Garrett-Thomas)
*Inspection Unit (I forget the new name) - George Hank (formerly Linda Grubb)
Women in Charge of Departments and Divisions
*City Clerk - Maribeth Witzel-Behl
*Civil Rights Director - Lucia Nunez (formerly EOC - Anthony Brown/Ariel Ford and AA- Kirby Mack/Enis Ragland/Norm Davis)
Fire Chief - Debra Amesqua
Library - Barbara Dimick
Vacant Positions
City Treasurer
Economic and Community Development in the Planning and Development Department- This position will supervise some offices that previously appeared higher in the organizational chart and a few more women. Those offices include:
Community Development Block Grant Office - Hickory Hurie
Community Services Supervisor - Dorothy Conniff
*Office of Business Resources - Matthew Mikolajewski (previously Kathrine Naherny)
Senior Center Director - Christine Beatty
WOMEN AS % OF WORKFORCE
In the past few years, of the 14 positions that were hired (indicated by a *), 8 of them replaced women in higher positions in government. Even if you count the offices now under the new Economic and Development Department, there are only 6 women out of 28 positions (21%) where there formerly were 14 out of 30 positions (46%).
I didn't look a whole lot at the 2004 Affirmative Action Report - the last one I could find, but what it did tell me was that:
In 2004, of the 2,661 permanent City employees . . . 898 (33.7 percent) were women.This compared to the County:
In 2004, of the 2,083 permanent Dane County employees . . . 1,079 (51.8 percent) were women.And State:
In June 2004, of the 40,475 permanent State classified employees . . . 20,703 (51.2 percent) were women.WOMEN AND SALARIES
Additionally, I noticed when reading about the folks that get top salaries in the City of Madison, there was only two women mentioned. Top salaries were for:
Dean Brasser at $133,927
Larry Nelson at $133,463
Michael May at $125,040
Others of the 43 making over $100,000 that the article mentioned were:
- Bus drivers - John Nelson, the 18th best-paid city employee at $113,610 and Roger Waggoner No. 32 at $103,786.
- Mayor Dave Cieslewicz was 23rd on the list at $111,544.
- Other top city salaries of note include outgoing Metro general manager Catherine Debo at $117,115; embattled city water utility manager David Denig-Chakroff at $116,440 and city planning and development director Mark Olinger at $115,015.
- Interim Overture Center director Michael Goldberg, who resigned after not getting the job permanently, was paid $102,999 last year.
Fire chief Debra Amesqua was paid $112,673 last year but that figure was topped by three of her assistant chiefs: Michael Dirienzo ($117,340), Paul Bloom ($114,959) and James Keiken ($114,451).Now, to be clear, am I accusing any one individual of being sexist? NO! Do I think it is an issue that we should start paying attention to? YES!
As opposed to
Police chief Noble Wray was the city's top-paid cop at $121,349 followed by assistant chiefs Randall Graber ($117,772) and Charles Cole ($114,384).
Updates here.
Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)