The Forum

As I mentioned in my previous post about Wilson Drive, there are many reasons not to use stop signs to calm traffic. One reason I did not discuss in much detail is the increase in automobile emissions resulting from the placement of a stop sign.

This was the only government site I could find which quantified the emissions increases resulting from the placement of just one stop sign. These statistics should give us pause as we consider placing unnecessary stop signs. If anyone has access to EPA or other government statistics, please send them to me.

----------------------------

Why Don't They Put Up More Stop Signs?

Delaware County, OH Website

One of the stronger arguments against multi-way stop intersections is air pollution. Research indicates the following results per 1000 automobiles decelerating to a stop and then accelerating again:

From 25 MPH
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 13 lbs.
Hydrocarbon (HC) 1.0 lbs.
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 1.1 lbs.
Fuel Consumption 5.6 Gals.

From 35 MPH
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 24 lbs.
Hydrocarbon (HC) 1.7 lbs.
Nitrogen Oxide (NOx) 1.9 lbs.
Fuel Consumption 8.7 Gals.

When queues build up in an approach, and cars have to move up in the queue one car length at a time, emissions and fuel consumption increase with the queue length. One car joining a 10-vehicle long queue will emit and consume 10 times as much of the above listed quantities than it would if arriving directly at the STOP sign.
---------------------------

In case you want to view the results of the marketing initiative Shorewood has undertaken, the development version of the website is now available at this link:

http://www.walkshorewood.com/dev/

The recent article on narrowing Wilson Drive quoted Village President Guy Johnson saying, "Nothing is a traffic calmer like a stop sign." I did some digging online to see if stop signs were really an appropriate device for achieving this end. In the hour or so I looked, I found a very large number of resources on the use of traffic control devices for any number of different purposes. None of the websites I found spoke positively of using stop signs as traffic calmers. If anyone finds other sites which disagree with what I have posted below, please send them to me and I will add them.

A number of municipal and county governments apparently encounter this issue regularly from citizens concerned about a given road or intersection, and have put their official position online for reference. Here are some pertinent sections from their websites:

1. Madison, WI. "Stop signs are intended to assign the right of way at intersections. They do not control speeding. In fact, speed often increases as motorists try to make up for time lost at a stop sign."

2. Delaware County, OH. "Many people believe that forcing motorists to stop at each intersection will decrease overall speed on the road. However, studies show that stop signs only reduce speed immediately adjacent to the sign, and that most drivers accelerate between intersections to make up for time lost at the stop sign. Engineering studies indicate that the inappropriate installation of extra stop signs may cause additional problems, such as more rear-end collisions, a redistribution of traffic onto side streets, and drivers ignoring the appropriate stop signs."

3. San Antonio, TX. "Stop signs are a traffic control device intended for assigning the right of way, not controlling the speed.... These emissions increase when vehicles are accelerated and decelerated. It is important to minimize unnecessary stops since steady speeds increase fuel economy and reduce vehicle emissions. Unwarranted stop signs not only cause motorists delay by unnecessarily requiring them to stop, but also reduce the efficiency of our transportation system which results in increased air pollution."

4. Fargo, ND. "Unnecessary stop signs result in unacceptable levels of stop sign violations and lead to disrespect for all traffic signs. Stop sign compliance studies show that when all-way stop control was installed but not warranted, an average of 30% of the motorists approaching the intersection do not come to a complete stop. In general, if people see no reason for the stop sign, they disrespect the sign. Inappropriate signs become part of the landscape and their effectiveness is reduced."

5. Yakima, WA. "As with any traffic control device, overuse of stop signs will cause many drivers to ignore them, creating a more hazardous situation of non-compliance, especially on residential streets with low traffic volumes. Many drivers consider a stop sign to be a substantial inconvenience and will tend to speed up after they move through the intersection. Recent studies of stop signs used as speed control devices in the City of Pueblo, Colorado indicated that vehicle speeds were slower within 150 feet of a stop sign, but after that went back to the same speeds or higher. In addition, the resulting “stop and go traffic” from stop signs increases air pollution from vehicle emissions, wastes fuel and creates more traffic noise."



Comments

1. Factors that determine whether stop signs are warranted at a particular intersection include vehicular and pedestrian volumes, crash rates, sight distance, turning conflicts, speed (posted and actual), and many other traffic measurements. Installing stop signs at an intersection that does not meet the stop sign warrant requirements will have adverse effects on the overall safety of the intersection. A good articale addressing stop sign warrants can be found at this link: http://www.midwesternite.org/FallJournal/StopSignWarrants.htm
- Eyad Ghani, PE

AT&T is continuing to plow their way into the cable market, handing out large piles of cash to elected officials in advance of the upcoming vote on cable franchising. If the bill passes, one of these decorative boxes could soon be arriving on your front lawn, and there will be nothing the Village government can do to stop it.

The details of the franchise, and who pays what to whom are now being closely scrutinized by various media outlets. On the other hand, nobody seems to be paying much attention to the fact that the delivery of this service requires the placement of huge numbers of massive grey boxes in the Village right-of-way.

------------------------------

AT&T doles out $54,000 ahead of cable bill debate

Doyle, lawmakers say money won't affect stands on deregulation legislation
JSOnline, 4/22/07

Communications giant AT&T pushed a controversial bill to have state government license cable systems by showering more than $54,000 in campaign cash on dozens of lawmakers and Gov. Jim Doyle over the past 15 months.

Campaign-finance records show that AT&T's political action committee gave a total of $10,000 to four legislators and the Assembly Republican Campaign Committee in the past two months, when legislators negotiated details of the complex package with AT&T's 15 registered lobbyists.

AT&T is launching its own Internet-based television service, called U-Verse, to compete with cable systems.

It's unusual for one special-interest group to donate so much after November elections. The next partisan elections are 18 months away, and $1,000 went to the chief Senate sponsor of the bill, Sen. Jeff Plale (D-South Milwaukee) five weeks ago, even though Plale won't need the money until his re-election in 2010.

Three other senators each got $1,000 donations on Feb. 19 from AT&T's political action committee: Democrat Jon Erpenbach of Middleton, who also isn't up for re-election until 2010; and Roger Breske (D-Eland) and Alberta Darling (R-River Hills), both of whom are up for re-election next year. (READ FULL STORY)
----------------------------------

I received several letters from Village Officials following last week's exchange on the proposed narrowing of Wilson Drive (Original Post, Letter from a Reader). As I side note, I greatly appreciate it when any government official takes the time to speak directly to voters about issues of concern. Thank you to Dawn Anderson, Margaret Hickey, and Chris Swartz for taking the time to address this issue.

------------------------------------

Village Manager Chris Swartz

Steve; good concerns; but narrowing the streets will allow the same traffic volume as it is a wide two land road; we would just make it a narrower two lane road. The state has standards that we have to meet; narrowing the road maintains those standards. I have had many comments on this good and bad; so keep the dialogue up.

--------------------------------

Trustee Margaret Hickey

Hi Steve,
I think that the very brief coverage of this in the News may be leading to some misunderstandings. Although I have not seen drawings, it is my understanding that one reason to narrow Wilson is to ADD parking. There have been discussions of angle parking along Wilson which would alleviate some of the renters' concerns. Another objective is to slow down traffic on Wilson. Although cost is an issue on whether or not we can actually do the project, it is not my perception that cost is driving this change. Let's see how this develops as we will certainly have public meetings on it and plenty of chance to comment.

Margaret

---------------------------------

Trustee Dawn Anderson

Hi Steve - my first response is that I'm not sure that anyone said this was being done because Wilson is NOT a busy street. I too drive it every day to my office - and sometimes, if I want a more peaceful route, I do take Estabrook Parkway. (In probably more disrepair than Wilson, but more peaceful to drive)

I don't believe the narrowing will have a "congestive" effect - but it will definately slow down traffic - nothing wrong with that. I'm routinely passed - on the right - by faster moving traffic. This to me seems a hazard to bikers in that lane - and to anyone planning a right turn!. A couple of notes from research I've done:

"People tend to drive faster on wider roads and in wider lanes, and more slowly on narrower roads. Wide roads are more difficult for pedestrians and bicyclists to cross because traffic is faster and the distance to cross is greater..... recent research suggests that widening roads just triggers more traffic and congestion."

Of course cost is a consideration. We were turned down for the last grant request to the state to help repave the road because the cost of repaving a 56 ft wide stretch of concrete for nearly a mile was so huge. We have to look at maintenance costs for that road - not just now for the initial repaving, but in the long haul. Residents do not want to pay what it will cost the village to maintain it properly forever at the current width - and we have to maintain our roads.

Here's another consideration. The UW extension reports that streets account for 40-50% of the impervious cover in residential areas. Narrower streets and more green space will help reduce stormwater runoff, which we all know is a problem with the combined sewer system, not to mention that it's an environmentally good thing to do. The EPA recommends reducing road surfaces. They also note that several real estate studies concluded that low traffic volume, slow traffic speeds and minimal noise were preferred elements in home selections.

I have to disagree with your reader that this is a "campaign friendly" or "feel good" move by the village. And it was not proposed as a way to increase the park's square footage. Anyone who drives Wilson regularly knows it is a terrible mess - a mine field of pot holes and irresponsible drivers. This is a practical matter and it will help solve a number of issues. I'm in full support.

Thanks, Dawn Anderson
------------------------------

There is an encouraging piece of news regarding the possibility of a statewide smoking ban in today’s Journal Sentinel. I have not seen any projections about whether or not it will pass, but if I do, I will be sure to post them here.

As expected, the Tavern League of WI opposes the ban (Find out why).

------------------------------

Statewide smoking ban bill introduced

JSOnline, 4/18/07
By Stacy Forster

Madison - A bipartisan group of legislators has introduced legislation to ban smoking statewide in all workplaces, including restaurants and taverns.

Backers of the measure said it would create a level playing field for all businesses while protecting the health of workers in all industries.

Rep. Steve Wieckert (R-Appleton), the lead author in the Assembly, said a similar ban has worked well in Appleton and is the most practical approach to addressing the problem.

"It is simply unrealistic to have all of local Wisconsin governments pass their own versions of a smoking ban," Wieckert said at a press conference announcing the legislation.

A study of 1,500 bartenders in Madison and Appleton before and after smoking bans went into effect in those cities showed that upper respiratory symptoms were significantly lower among the bartenders after the bans were enacted. The results were released this week by the University of Wisconsin 's Comprehensive Cancer Center .

Sen. Fred Risser (D-Madison), co-sponsor in the Senate, said the bill would be unacceptable if taverns were exempted.

Gov. Jim Doyle also called for a statewide smoking ban in his state of the state speech in January.
-------------------------

Monday’s Journal Sentinel editorial observed with concern the dwindling participation in local elections, and the rising number of these elections that are uncontested (READ THE FULL EDITORIAL). They then went on to advocate “an effort like the one under way in Madison , where the business community, the media and the Democratic Party are working to get more people engaged in politics and government.”

To completely turn the tables on the editorial board, one of the main things we need in the Milwaukee area, in order to increase citizen participation in local elections, is an increase in media participation. The editorial reads, “Political parties, media and the business community of southeastern Wisconsin need to figure out a way to get more citizens engaged.” If the editorial board of the Journal Sentinel wants citizens to get engaged, they should begin by getting the media engaged.

By way of example, as I have said many times in the past, the amount and the depth of the press coverage given to Shorewood elections is woefully inadequate. Bloggers were the only “press” covering any of the debates this year. Although I do my best to cover what I can of Village politics, I have another full time job, and really do not have the time it would take to do it right.

The only NOW articles written about the elections were superficial pieces centered on candidates’ answers to a few softball questions. No paper went the extra mile to get voters involved by showing how the candidates were different on key issues. No reporter uncovered a big story by analyzed campaign finance statements. No media outlet created an issue tracker to show how the candidates differed on the 6 or 7 main issues. Surely reporters can find time to attend some of the debates, track the statements made by the candidates, analyze the issues in the election, pore over the voting records of incumbents, write about the differences between the candidates, and so forth. If editors do not make the effort to include this type of information in their publications, why should we take seriously their calls for us to participate in an event they do not deem worth covering?

How can the Journal Sentinel help convince voters that our local elections matter? By covering them as if they matter.

Comments

1. Hi Steve, The lack of participation in local elections is pathetic and the absence of good media coverage, except where there is serious contention or controversy (see the school referendum in Brookfield) does play a role. However, the way local elections are scheduled almost insures a lack of participation. If the local elections were combined with the national elections participation would be up (although our national participation is poor as well). I know that holding separate elections for local issues generally brings out those who are interested (and hopefully informed). My feeling is that local officials really don’t want a large turnout; it is easier to get issues passed. The situation was even worse in New York where school board would bring budgets and referendums to the voters three and four times until they “wore down” the electorate and got the issues passed (usually with a fraction of the votes cast in the first election). Hope to see you soon.
- Ed Duncklee, Shorewood Resident.
April 23, 2007

Much has been made of the fact that the police were called in to handle the recent fight caught on videotape at Shorewood High School. How do you think this matter should have been handled?

Who should have been responsible for dealing with the fight caught on videotape at SHS?

The Shorewood Police Shorewood High School Faculty/Staff Nobody, let the kids fight it out Undecided

View Result

Free Web Polls

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Village Board is considering a plan to rebuild Wilson Drive in 2009. As the proposal is currently outlined, the road would be narrowed from 56 feet wide to 38 feet wide once the reconstruction is completed (View ShorewoodNOW Story). Additionally, there has been discussion of adding stop signs to slow traffic. Just to be clear, I have no final opinion on whether narrowing the road is a good idea, though I am glad we are having the discussion before the plan is finalized.

I received the below letter from a homeowner in the Wilson Dr area who asked not be identified. The reader brings up some very good points about the downside of altering traffic flow in the area, and the effect this reconstruction would have on Estabrook Parkway, as well as smaller residential streets on the West side of Shorewood.

--------------------------------
Steve,

I’m not sure where people get the idea that Wilson isn’t a very busy street. As someone who drives it every day (our house is just about a block and a half off of it) I can tell you that it gets plenty of traffic. I think we are just so used to driving on overcrowded, underbuilt streets and highways that many people no longer recognize a right-sized road. Despite some folks’ perceptions, I can tell you that pulling in and out during rush hour can at times be a little challenging, particularly when you throw in the buses as well as the bicyclists and joggers heading over to Estabrook for some after-work recreation. It’s lively but not a hazard to life or limb—I love it!

I am a devotee of Estrabrook Park , but just don’t see how much benefit the park would get from an additional slim strip of green space at its outer edge. What I could easily see happening, though, is a greater number of cars seeking to avoid a narrowed, over-trafficked and slower-moving Wilson drive and instead heading north/south between Shorewood and Whitefish Bay through Estabrook Park, which would do nothing for the atmosphere in the park—want a little more exhaust with your workout?—or the animals who live in it. The narrowing of Wilson would likely also add to the traffic of other north/south streets in the western side of Shorewood.

Wilson is also home to a number of by all appearances decent apartment buildings. It’s more densely populated than much of Shorewood. Forcing the traffic from these buildings—which is not currently problematic—into a much narrower street would do just that much more to make Shorewood unattractive to prospective tenants, and to increase perceived tensions between homeowners and renters. I also can’t imagine that narrowing Wilson would do much good for the people who park there, who currently have the somewhat unusual experience of finding it easy to pull in and out without disrupting traffic or risking their bumpers. And I doubt it would be of much benefit to the VFW, whose patrons often make use of this street parking.

Because our elected representatives do not live on the western side of Shorewood, I suppose I should find it easy to understand why they might be very willing, even eager, to reduce our quality of life in the name of taking the oh-so-campaign-friendly ‘feel good’ step of increasing the park’s square footage (though not really adding to usable space) and claiming to save a few dollars (though once ALL of the costs of narrowing the street are truly measured, I doubt this would save any money at all). What I do find very difficult to comprehend is how you, given your ongoing advocacy for renters (which I wholeheartedly support), can even begin to consider supporting this idiotic boondoggle of a plan.

Thank you for the opportunity to respond.
-------------------------------

In last Friday's blog post, I noted that the Shorewood Village website has missed its target launch date of March 2007. Following that post, I received the letter shown below, with withering criticism for both the Village Manager, and the process of getting the website up and running. The letter was sent to be from a reader describing him/herself as an employee of the Village of Shorewood. While I cannot vouch for the author of this message, the details described do suggest that the writer is familiar with the inner workings of Village Hall.

-------------------------
Steve:

You have made some good points about Shorewood not having its new website up and running. Just to give you some inside information...

I am a village employee.

The truth is that as far back as the fall of 2005, the new website was in "preparation." It was expected to be launched sometime in early 2006 but the Village Manager's assistant who was working on the website (and without whom it seems he cannot do anything) was out for 12 weeks on family leave with a new baby. So the target date for the new website has been pushed back and back and back. From sometime in 2006 to February, then March of 2007. Now it is April and still no word on when the new website will be up
and running.

I think the Village Manager should be asked exactly how long he thinks it should take for a website to be operational. Please, we are not trying to pass a new ordinance or dig a tunnel to China, it's a damn website for crying out loud.

If the Village of Shorewood was a business, it would have long since locked its doors with a big "out of business" sign on it, the way it is currently managed.
-----------------------------------

Wilson Drive has always been curiously wide for the amount of cars that use it. Although I am no engineer or traffic expert, the current two lanes in both directions seems excessive for the relatively modest amount of traffic that the road supports. The latest proposal indicates that the road may be narrowed in the next round of reconstruction.

There are some questions we should consider before beginning. Is there any reason anyone has why the road should not be narrowed? What, if anything, should be done with the extra space gained on the Estabrook Park side of the street? Green space? Entrances to the Oak Lead Trail? Sidewalks?

The below update is from this week’s Village Manager’s Memo.

-------------------------------------

Wilson Drive reconstruction grant

Shorewood Village Manager’s Memo
April 5, 2007

Wilson Drive is currently in disrepair and in need of reconstruction. At a price tag between $2 and $3 million, the work will not be accomplished without a State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation grant. The Village applied for such a grant last year and was denied. This year we are submitting the grant with a concept to narrow the road, to reduce costs and expand the area along the Estabrook Parkway .
------------------------------

The article below by Dennis Shook appeared in this week's edition of the Shepherd Express.

--------------------------------------------

Is Competition the Best Thing for TV Consumers?

The Legislature will decide
Shepherd Express: April 04, 2007
By Dennis Shoook

Cable TV, as Wisconsin viewers have known it, could soon be dead and buried.

Currently, cable TV systems have contracts that give them monopolies in municipalities. But AT&T is trying to convince consumers they will save money through competition. The telephone giant wants to provide TV watchers another option with its own Internet-based TV system, called "U-verse."

The cable TV companies have responded by saying "It's not TV for us. It's TV for them."

But consumers may not have a choice, since the matter will be decided in the state Legislature. A bill that would allow for those new providers to offer alternative video service is being considered in Madison and could pass as early as May.

Will Competition Hurt Consumers?

There are arguments on both sides. On the one side, there is the argument that competition will lower monthly fees. On the other hand, one longtime cable TV expert says the possible death of cable TV franchises would actually hurt consumers in many ways.

Barry Orton, telecommunications professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, has closely tracked the cable TV industry in the state for nearly 30 years. Orton said the so-called Video Competition Act being considered would not only allow for AT&T to enter the market, but the rule changes would also allow cable companies to renege on all of their existing deals.

The bill would allow the state to become the one and only video franchiser, replacing all the municipalities that have agreed to cable TV franchises until this point. The state would collect all the franchise revenues from new video providers, such as AT&T, as well as the current cable TV companies. Orton said that change alone would mean a loss of revenue to municipalities, an end to some existing consumer protections set up by municipalities and even the demise of the local public, education and government (PEG) channels that have been successfully developed in places like Milwaukee, Kenosha and Oshkosh.

Perhaps the key problem with the bill, which is being fast-tracked through the state Legislature, is the lack of any kind of meaningful regulatory control on the new television service industry.

Orton said if the measure passes as currently written, some major changes will result:

• Regulating the video industry will be the responsibility of the state Department of Financial Institutions. But that department will have no power to regulate or fine providers such as AT&T or Time Warner for any problems customers might have with service. Unlike current cable franchise agreements, which specify the years of the term, the bill does not currently place any time limits on agreements between the state and video providers.

• The franchise fees currently paid to municipalities, and used in lieu of property taxes, will be eliminated. Orton calls that "a back-door tax increase" in any municipality that currently has cable. It will mean a loss of $350,000 to the City of Milwaukee, based on city estimates.

• As the sole franchiser, the state of Wisconsin would be the government entity that gathers the fees and makes the rules. So the state can decide how much it wants to share with local municipalities. The current projection is the state would share about 2% of all the revenues it collects. But there are no guarantees.

• Funding for PEG channels, such as the Milwaukee Access Telecommunications Authority (MATA), would not be required, as it is in many cable TV agreements. The bill would also require that each local access channel produce 10 hours of local, original programming each day in order to retain its channel allocation, an all but impossibly high standard. MATA Executive Director Vel Wiley said if the bill passes in its current state, Channels 14 and 96 would certainly die off very quickly. There would also likely be no coverage of governmental or school meetings on those channels, based on those rules, she said.

• The current cable TV promise of a repair within 72 hours will be null and void.

• The mandate of 30-day notices for changes in programming or rate increases will be eliminated, as will the 10-day notice for disconnections.

The argument for competition lowering the price hasn't worked that well in other states.

"After the first year of competition, prices only lowered for a little while," Orton said of experiences in other states. "But they will continue to increase after that."

Room for Improvement

State Sen. Jeff Plale (D-South Milwaukee), a co-author of the bill, vowed that many aspects of the b

Those who participate in Shorewood political life frequently bemoan the low turnout that characterizes spring elections. Apparently, we should count our blessings. In the recent election is Missouri described below, nobody voted. Not one person. The candidate did not even turn out to vote for himself.

--------------------------------

No votes cast in Show Me state election

AP, 4/6/07

Joe Selle didn't exactly get voted out of office this week, but he wasn't re-elected, either. Selle, who was running unopposed for City Council in Missouri City , Missouri , didn't get any votes at all. Not even one from himself. Selle says he simply forgot that Tuesday was election day, and apparently so did Ward Three's 34 other registered voters. The result was zero votes cast in Selle's race, but the city charter lets him keep the seat unless someone else is "successfully elected and qualified." Turnout was better in Ward Two, where two people voted.
-------------------------------

Last November, Village Manager Chris Swartz told me that the Village was in the process of redesigning the sadly out of date Shorewood Village website (See original posting and later correction).

The target date for the launch of the updated site was March, 2007. We are now a week into the month of April, and the old website is still up.

Where are we on this?

Superintendent Blane McCann issued the following statement regarding the recent fight at SHS caught on videotape and replayed over and over again in the local media. (Read JSOnline Coverage)

-----------------------------
Focus on: Recent Incidents at SHS
March 30, 2007

Shorewood High School has been in the news this week, and while many of you have undoubtedly seen the television and newspaper coverage, I would like to provide you with some factual information concerning the incident that has captured so much media attention. On March 21, two students were involved in a fight. Approximately 20 additional students watched the fight with four of them joining in as it progressed. One student videotaped the whole incident. None of the students involved required medical attention and the fight broke up when school personnel and police arrived simultaneously. I should add that there is no indication that this fight was race related. Following established policies, school personnel dealt swiftly with the students engaged in the fight and those who stood around watching rather than seeking adult help. In addition, the Shorewood Police Department issued disorderly conduct citations and confiscated the video.

Unfortunately, teenagers do not always make the best choices; we are extremely disappointed in our students' behavior that afternoon and consider it unacceptable. We do not tolerate such behavior at any of our schools.

I want to assure all parents and community members that such incidents are very rare at Shorewood High School and that all our schools are very safe and organized to maximize student learning. Please remember that a vast majority of our students exhibit responsible behavior. An assembly will be held for all SHS students on Friday, March 30, to review the incident and reinforce school policies and expectations.

I believe that each of our schools is working very hard to maintain a safe environment for staff and students. We know it is our job, as well as the job of parents, to help our students learn to make appropriate choices and take responsibility for their actions. Our classroom teachers and administrators effectively address these issues on a daily basis, but we know there is always room for improvement. Currently, two of our ongoing district inquiry groups are addressing issues of safety and developmental guidance. They are developing emergency response protocols for all of us to implement and are researching areas that will lead to updated educational programming for students in areas such as decision making, alcohol and drug use, bullying and harassment, conflict resolution, and other areas of student behavior that need addressing.

We will continue to work very hard to provide a safe learning environment for all of our children. As parents and neighbors please help us encourage our students to make good decisions.

Please contact me if you have further concerns or comments.

Blane McCann
Superintendent
---------------------------

Tomorrow, April 3, is election day. Participation is April elections has been very poor the last few years. Hopefully, this year will be an exception. A surprisingly bitter State Supreme Court fight may drive voter turnout a little higher than it has been these last few years.

Anyway, on to my one endorsement for this election cycle.

Chris Liegel for Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge, Branch 26

Liegel's background as an Assistant District Attorney is just what the doctor ordered, given the significant crime problems we are facing in Milwaukee at the moment. I also admit to having a soft spot for campaigns driven by the candidates own positive energy. His attendance at the Legion Post debate, his one to one campaigning, and the fact that he responded immediately to questions I sent speak loudly of the populist nature of his campaign. Chris Liegel brings a determination and resolve to his campaign which is hopefully an indication of how he will approach the job. (See his campaign website.)