Practically Speaking

UPDATE: Senate Bill 380 sponsor Senator Olsen removed his name from the bill and will abstain from voting for it due to a perceived conflict of interest. Vicki McKenna of WISN radio was kind enough to send me that tidbit. Senator Olsen, by the way, is a republican, which just goes to show we need to watch them all. She also sent this lint to an Ethanol piece Mark Belling wrote 2 years ago when this was heading to the senate. Very interesting.

Senate Bill 380, the Renewable Fuel bill a.k.a. Ethanol Mandate bill hit the Senate floor today. However, according to Mark Belling's radio program* this afternoon, the Senate Democrats chose not to call the vote today. They knew they were short 2 votes (they need 17 votes for passage). So rather than have the bill fail, they simply returned it to the Democrat controlled Administrative Committee. I would guess it will wait there until the pro-ethanol crowd feels they have enough votes for passage.

This is at least temporarily a bit of good news. The legislators in favor of mandating 25% ethanol use for the state of Wisconsin must get it to the floor for a vote before the legislature recesses in March. We currently pay a subsidy of 51 cents for every gallon sold. Can you imagine the financial impact if every gallon of gas in Wisconsin taps us for 51 cents? 

Vicki McKenna, on her radio show* today, reported that Jim Sullivan and Mike Huebtch were on the fence about ethanol. Jim Sullivan's office did send me an auto email reply that he got my email, but there were no specifics on his stance. I have not heard from Mike Huebsch yet.

FYI, Ted Kanavas contacted me, "SB 390 is similar to legislation I voted against in the past, but it goes even further by requiring that at least 25% of all gasoline sold in Wisconsin after 2025 contains either ethanol or another renewable fuel. I do not support this or any other ethanol mandate." 

Senator Minority Leader Scott Fitzgerald's office also contacted me. He states he is opposed to the bill and will vote against it.

If you have not contacted our state leaders and representatives, please do so even if they support your position. They need to hear from you. Sometimes as little as 15 calls or emails can be enough to influence their decisions. As much as you don't like to do it, it works. If you have family and friends who live in other communities, encourage them to call or email their representatives too.

Familiarize yourself with this issue: Its Back! Ethanol bill heads to senate Thursday--Speak Up,  The Ethanol Fallacy

Contact your representatives:
State Senator Jim Sullivan, Democrat, 5th District
Sen.Sullivan@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2512,  866-817-6061

State Senator Theodore Kanavas, Republican, 33rd District
Sen.Kanavas@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-9174, 800-863-8883

State Representative Leah Vukmir, Republican, 14th District
Rep.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-9180

Representative Rich Zipperer, Republican, 98th District
Rep.Zipperer@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-5120 

Governor Doyle
608-266-1212, 414-227-4344

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe
Sen. Scott Fitzgerald (Senate Minority Leader), from Juneau. Counties: Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Jefferson, and Waukesha

*I appreciate the heads up from readers when they hear pertinent topics discussed on talk radio.

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative, Vicki Mckenna 

UPDATE: The Ethanol bill is on the Senate floor right now. Reportedly, Senator Jim Sullivan is on the fence regarding this bill. Please let him know what you think. If passed, the bill goes to the Assembly. There Assembly Speaker, Mike Huebsch is said to also be on the fence.

I heard that Senate Bill 380, commonly referred to as the Ethanol Bill, made it out of State Senate committee with a 4-1 vote. State Senator Ted Kanavas cast the only NO vote on the measure. (Thank you, Ted.)

The bill now heads to the Senate possibly as early as this Thursday, January 31st.

"This bill generally subjects a refiner to a penalty if the percentage of renewable fuel sold by the refiner, beginning in 2009, is less than a percentage set in the bill. The percentage of renewable fuel sold is determined by dividing the total volume of wholesale sales of renewable fuel in a year by the refiner’s five year rolling average volume of wholesale sales of all motor vehicle fuel, other than diesel fuel, and multiplying by 100. The percentage begins at 10 percent and increases to 25 percent in 2025 and thereafter." (Emphasis added)

Like so many of these Going Green bills and measures, they sound good but are NOT environmentally friendly--nor are they practical or economically feasible. Ethanol is not an efficient fuel*. In fact, many scientists believe it takes more energy to produce ethanol than it provides.The miles per gallon with ethanol are not as high as without ethanol.

The only thing Green about this renewable fuel bill is when you follow the money to the ethanol manufacturers and corn growers.

If contacting your state representatives about ethanol mandates seems familiar, it is because we defeated this once before back in 2006(?)

Sometimes I feel like we are playing that old arcade game called Whack-a-Mole with these bad bills that keep returning. (Whack-a-Mole is a game where the player takes a mallet and tries to hit a plastic mole who pops out of various holes in the game play field.) But call or email we must; it is only weapon against oppressive legislation like this. 

Contact your representatives:
State Senator Jim Sullivan, Democrat, 5th District
Sen.Sullivan@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2512,  866-817-6061

State Senator Theodore Kanavas, Republican, 33rd District
Sen.Kanavas@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-9174, 800-863-8883

State Representative Leah Vukmir, Republican, 14th District
Rep.Vukmir@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-282-3614

Representative Rich Zipperer, Republican, 98th District
Rep.Zipperer@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-5120 

Governor Doyle
608-266-1212, 414-227-4344

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe
Sen. Scott Fitzgerald (Senate Minority Leader), from Juneau. Counties: Columbia, Dane, Dodge, Jefferson, and Waukesha

With gas prices rising, people naturally are looking toward purchasing more fuel efficient vehicles. The free marketplace is addressing fuel efficiency and experimental fuel vehicles. We don't need to mandate the use of such an expensive carbon footprint fuel like corn ethanol.

And let's not forget that taxpayers (us) subsidize the price of each gallon of ethanol blended gasoline. From the Competitive Enterprise Institute:

"Motorists pay 51 cents less in federal gasoline taxes for every gallon of ethanol purchased, and Wisconsin pays ethanol makers 20 cents for every gallon produced. If ethanol were such a great deal for consumers, it would not need market-distorting tax breaks and subsidies, much less a market-rigging mandate, to compete with conventional gasoline."

 Be sure to read The Ethanol Fallacy in February 2008's Popular Mechanics issue.

* "Among the various ethanol sources, sugarcane is by far the most efficient in both land and energy use. The ethanol yield of sugarcane per acre is roughly 650 gallons, whereas for corn in the United States it is 350 gallons, scarcely half as much. The net energy yield of 8 for sugarcane offers an overwhelming advantage over that of the 1.5 for corn."

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

You just cannot depend on common sense any more. Last year, I remember hearing that California was thinking of banning the incandescent light bulb and mandating more energy efficient fluorescent lamps. I was not too concerned; I just chalked that up to another nutty Californian idea.

But just before the end of 2007, President Bush signed onto the United States Congress' energy bill phasing out most incandescent light bulbs! (Sensenbrenner, by the way voted against this ridiculous piece of legislation, but 314 of his fellow representatives lacked the backbone to oppose it--too afraid of committing heresy against the new religion of global warming.)

What? How did that happen? Did you even know that incandescent ban was in the works? How many people still don't know that C.F. (compact fluorescent) mandate is coming down the pike?

Now I had made my own little attempt at "going green" during the summer of 2006. I installed a 4 lamp exposed bulb light fixture above my kitchen sink. (The proper term for a light bulb is a "lamp".) 

I'm not ashamed to say it, I am well over 50 years old and I need more light--the eye, as it ages, does not receive light as well as it once did. Since I seem to spend most of my time in the kitchen, I thought I would live it up and enjoy the equivalent of 240 watts of light for the energy cost of 60 watts by using the decorator type compact fluorescents (round globe style).

My foray into going green, however, has been an abysmal failure. I can barely get 4 months of use out of these decorative type compact fluorescent lamps that are to last 7 years! Instead of saving energy, I am wasting energy when you consider the 14 mile round trip trek to the store to exchange them. How is that helping the environment?

Speaking of the environment, what about disposal? These lamps contain mercury, a very toxic substance. Mandating these lamps makes about as much sense as mandating lead paint. All of that mercury will end up in the landfills and heaven help you if you break one of them.

I am going back to the decorative round incandescent bulbs lamps. It makes me sick that in a few years I will have no choice but to use the horrid compact fluorescents that don't last. I guess that is what happens When Politicians Make Engineering Choices.

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

P.S. The price tag for these lamps is about 3X the cost of the incandescent even with the rebate. And by the way, who do you think is paying for that rebate? Yup. It is us.

I do use the squiggly compact fluorescents in the basement, on porches, lamps on timers, and closets. There, the ugly style lamps work fine--hanging upside-down I might add. They do not work for automatic motion sensor applications though. 

Another P.S. My decorator globe style CF fluorescent lamp packaging pictures one in a ceiling fixture hanging upside down! That is not the problem. The voltage is not the problem--this is the only place I am having this problem (did not have this problem with incandescents either).  

You ask for the outrageous so that you can come back for the ghastly.

I did not say that, but I do agree. I happened to catch that statement on the radio this morning while tuning in for the weather report. Jay Webber briefly mentioned Elmbrook's new $62.2 million high school referendum. ($62.2 million is still much too high for me; there is still too much fat in this plan.)

Personally, if our community is going to invest that much money, then we should be aiming for a better solution: one high school campus, greatly reducing nonresident students, and doing a better job of maintaining facilities at all of our schools.

By the way, asking for pie in the sky is the usual way of referendums. They first propose what they know will be not accepted. After they are shot down a number of times and they wear down the public's resolve, eventually a referendum will pass. I think it took 4 referendums* before the public approved the 2 new elementary schools, which by the way are larger than what we needed. *Correction: It took 4 referendums in the early 1990s before the public approved the Wisconsin Hills conversion back to a middle school and for the Swanson addition and remodel in 1996. The next referendum for the 2 new elementary schools passed on the first try 4 years later.

Government uses this same tactic to condition the public into accepting all sorts of ideas. Last summer "Healthy Wisconsin" was suggested. What was that, $15 billion dollars of additional taxation for Wisconsin taxpayers mandating that everyone sign on? It did not stand much of a chance of passing (although I don't even count on that anymore), but it still served a purpose. Healthy Wisconsin was the "outrageous" so that we would not react too much to the "ghastly" expansion of Badger Care. I am sure we have not heard the last of Healthy Wisconsin. It will be back.
 

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

As a Brookfieldnow blogger, I am told I cannot edit anyone's comments. I must either present them as they are sent to me or choose not to post them if I feel they aren't appropriate. But last Thursday, my blog on Open Enrollment,  Please Elmbrook, fewer open enrollment students, not more was edited and put into the Brookfieldnow printed paper.

Now, I can certainly understand that print space is limited while web space is not. I also know I am never a woman of few words. But by editing that posting, the paper eliminated my acknowledgment of the board's efforts to lower the number of open enrollment students by almost 50%. Of course if you only read the print version you would not know that; the editing changed the intent of my posting.

The good news is that the board did vote last night to hold the open enrollment numbers to 46 students next year, and the Schwei/Sylla sibling clause exception was rejected on legal grounds.

There are board members who think Open Enrollment is a money maker and others who question its financial merits. Certainly this is an issue that needs looking into, especially in light of the coming high school referendum.

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

I just got back from church and lunch out, and now I am glad to be back home. My, it's cold out there! But when I think of past cold snaps I've experienced, today's weather pales in comparison.

Even though the heat is running often, I still feel cold in the house. This chill, however, is nothing compared to our first years of marriage. Prior to moving here, my husband and I owned a very tiny Polish Flat in the Riverwest area. It had no central heat! A space heater in the living room supplied all the heat we had. We were young and adventuresome (and poorer) then and decided not to heat the upstairs. (Remember, this was just after the Carter years--we were used to cutting back.) That meant we kept the stairway door to the bedroom closed. During a particularly cold -26F day in January 1982 our attic bedroom temperature dipped below the freezing point to 28 degrees! An electric blanket on a timer kept us from freezing once in bed. I think after that we lived it up and kept the door open at night.

We viewed our situation as more of a challenge than a hardship. Plus, believe it or not, we had it better than my parents did when they first got married. Being one of the many post WWII newlyweds needing a place to live, my parents lived in an unfinished, uninsulated upper flat. It did not even have electricity or running water! (My dad's parents lived next door and so they had access to the necessary room.) Their only heat was a kerosene space heater that doubled as a cooking stove. My mom said they put an extra long blanket on the bed, pulling it up and over the headboard at night to trap their body heat in their blanket tent. It was so cold in their house that the bucket of water they had for drinking etc. froze solid one night, and it was next to the space heater!!! But they lived to tell the tale. (No wonder mom did not bat an eye later on at the idea of a camping vacation--she was already experienced.)

The Packer playoff game today at Lambeau Field reminds us of that infamous 1967 Ice Bowl game 41 years ago. Today the temps will be higher than the Ice Bowl's brutal -18F. My high school girlfriend's dad attended the Ice Bowl. I think they relied on lots of "anti-freeze" to keep warm.

School starts tomorrow for WCTC. There was some complaining from a member of our household about walking to class from the parking lot to class in the cold. (You have to remember that this is his first winter school experience.) I got to relay one of those In my day stories to put it in perspective, but mine happens to be true.

When I was a sophomore at Stout State University up in Menomonie, Wisconsin, I had to walk about 1 1/2 miles from the dorm to class. One really cold morning at 7:15am, as I was walking to Physiology and Anatomy (not a class you would skip) I glanced up at the bank clock. The temperature stated -32! Thirty-two degrees below zero! Not the wind chill, the actual temperature. Oh, that was cold. At least the fashion trend in 1970 was the Maxi coat, a coat that went down to the ankles. It did help. The local Menomins seemed to be quite used to these types of temperatures. Much like the locals in Arizona who dismiss their 108 degree days, my schoolmates dismissed the sub-zero temps by saying Oh, but it's a DRY cold!

Well, its time to go on to something more productive. Enjoy the Packer game and stay warm! 

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

A friend sent me this link to some truly amazing dancing. I have never seen anything like it in all my days at Milwaukee Ballet.

Be sure your sound is on on your computer. The intro is in French, but that does not matter. If you click on the last box in the bottom right hand corner of the "youtube" screen, then it will show full screen.

It says in the Bible that man can do anything he puts his mind to. This would be a good example of that! Her extensions are unbelievable and her balances defy gravity. (Most dancers tremble in fear at just one short balance, not to mention doing it on someones head or hand!) Her partner deserves some credit too. She must really trust him.

Check out the video and you will see what I mean. 

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7

I hope you took the time to look at the architect's renderings of Fountain Brook Crossing. But keep in mind, it is nearly impossible to imagine just how BIG this set of proposed buildings is simply by looking at those drawings. They are presented using the roadway to give some sense of open space and perspective.

Even though I am a visual person, I too am having trouble envisioning what this will look like. The easiest way for me to convey the size and scope of this project to you is to compare it to what we already have.

Using the areal photo of the area and then superimposing the architectural drawing on top of the 2 acre site gives a better impression of how large the buildings really are. Remember, they are seeking an increase in floor area ratio from 30% to 140%. 

You can see the Outback Steakhouse (pink) and Country Inns and Suites (reddish) to the north of the proposed Fountain Brook Crossing. They comprise a large building complex set back from Moorland Road.

But when you look to the south, to our plot of land in question, you now can immediately see it is literally filled with buildings!

The lighter pink represents the 18 foot high, one story parking garage structure. This compresses the equivalent of 4 acres of parking--400 spaces--into a two story (one underground and one above ground) parking garage building of about 210 feet by 380 feet in size. That is HUGE. (Mayfair's North Ave parking deck has 622 spots.)

On top of that sits the 125 foot by 268 foot large, 4 story, 97 foot tall glass and steel office building. Even BIGGER.

Notice how little grass (green) remains--much of this is the city's property. Notice that those pointed areas extend into what little green there is. These triangles are pretty tall too. Judging by people on the renderings, I am guessing the fountain walls are about 6 feet high, the planting ones are the same as the parking wall, 18 feet tall.

The driveways to the parking building will need to be ramped since there is parking topside too. Notice that the artist did not draw a car right up to the edge of the parking structure. I would guess that was not by accident. They no doubt were trying to downplay the fact that there will be cars visible to the street at 18 feet in the air! 

I then tried to compare this office building to other structures in the area. Since this will be a medical building, I thought, Elmbrook Hospital. Too big, you think? Take a look.

From an areal view, in the same ratio of resolution, I cut out Elmbrook's main building and the large, one story building in the front. I wondered how this would compare to Fountain Brook (I am just going to call it FBC from now on). I found putting Elmbrook onto the FBC site would actually give more greenspace! Plus, Elmbrook from the front is really only 3 stories on top of the 1 story, not 4 stories as FBC is.

When you look at the actual hospital, ask yourself how you would like to see something that size and that close to the sidewalk as your "Gateway" image for entering Brookfield. Remember FBC nearly FILLS the 2 acre site.

What about comparing FBC to a large office building?

This one is in Bishop's Woods.

 
It has about 325 parking spaces and sits on about 7 acres. It only measures 75 feet by 260 feet though--about 40% smaller than our 125 by 268 foot behemoth (not to mention it is not built on top of a nearly 2 acre sized 1 story parking structure!) 

Notice how this BIG office building looks dwarfed when compared to the FBC building and parking structure.  

My next question is, how tall is that parking structure and how close is it to the road?

The developer told us that the triangular peaks or points come within 2 feet of the Greenfield side walk. Estimating that the walk is somewhere around 5 feet and the grassy strip on Greenfield is maybe 2 feet, that means those 6 foot tall fountain peaks and 18 foot tall planted peaks will be around 8 to 9 feet from the road edge.

I looked for structures we have that would represent this parking structure wall in height. I estimate City Hall's 1 story section to be around 17 - 18 feet tall. (A door is around 7-8 feet tall.) Most one story structures will be about this height. 

 

The retaining walls on Calhoun are not as tall as 18 feet, but they do convey the feeling of walls close to the roadway.

Note that the car against the wall in the photo is larger than the rendering of the car in the artists depiction of the wall. This means the wall in the rendering is taller than the Calhoun retaining wall.

Don't forget that there will be that 4 story building on top of the parking structure.

They say a picture is worth a thousand words. Hope these pictures were a help to you.

Please do contact City Hall with your thoughts on this project and attend the Public Hearing Tuesday night at 7:45pm at City Hall. Email comments to development@ci.brookfield.wi.us by Monday, Jan. 14.

Regretfully, I am unable to attend, but feel free to use any of these points if you agree. 

FYI: During all the discussion, regarding the widening of Calhoun Road, Engineering told us that a 6 to 8 foot grassy strip between the walk and roadway was necessary for piling snow during the plowing process. Here this developer is requesting tall stone structures be placed just 9 feet from the road edge! 

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7

Just to give you the heads up, there is a potentially HUGE zoning change and building project coming to Brookfield next week. There will be a Public Hearing on Fountain Brook Crossing at City Hall on Tuesday, Jan. 15 at 7:45pm (before the council meeting).

Fountain Brook Crossing is a HUGE office building proposal for the north east corner of Moorland Road and Greenfield Ave.

The developer is asking for a zoning change from a B3 with a floor area ratio of 30%, to a PDD with a whopping 140% building to floor ratio! This will make Capitol Heights look puny!

The land owner and developer, William Hoag, tried to downplay the size of his proposed building by comparing his building to other sites such as the Midway Motor Lodge. His building will be 268 feet long, Midway is 270 feet. Compare the sites and size though on the map (Fountain Brook Crossing would be that little vacant parcel to the right of the intersection at the bottom.)

I am trying to collect some photos or pictures to help you envision how overly large this project is, but in the meantime, do look at the developers information and the City's notice.

Keep in mind that the "retaining" wall or decorative fountain fence is actually a 17 foot tall enclosed parking structure that nearly fills the 2 acre site. This project is really a building on top of a building. Note the size of the people in comparison and the close proximity of the parking wall to the road.

You may send in your comments to the city by Monday, Jan. 14 if you are not able to come to the Public Hearing or if you do not wish to speak. Email to: development@ci.brookfield.wi.us  

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7

When I read the Community Watch posting, Board considers change in Open Enrollment* headline, I thought, at last they are starting to "get it".  (*Sorry, this is not a perm. link)

I thought the posting was going to state that the board would be reducing the number of non-resident students. I was half right, but the posting was not exactly what I expected.

Certain board members, Sylla and Schwei, are actually proposing that the number of non-resident students increase instead of decrease!  Elmbrook's current policy is to give preference to Open Enrollment students' siblings but not to guarantee siblings a place in Elmbrook schools if no open seats exist.

According to the posting, "Cheri Sylla said the lack of open seats hurts some nonresident families who have sent all of their children to Elmbrook high schools." 

I have to ask, what about the hurt to Elmbrook taxpayers? Remember, Elmbrook taxpayers must pay the difference between the state reimbursement of about $5,500*/Open Enrollment student and the real cost per student in the Elmbrook School District of about $13,000! That means for each Open Enrollment student, Elmbrook taxpayers must kick in around $7,500. (*The exact reimbursement figure of $5,435 for 2005 was supplied to me by Bob Borch last spring.) And let's not forget that one of the reasons we are looking at a high school referendum is because of "crowding".

Steve Schwei, always one eager to increase enrollments at any cost to Elmbrook taxpayers--even if that means building more schools, dismissed the effect of Cheri's request.  Not because there are not many siblings who would want to attend Elmbrook schools, but because "most siblings enter during elementary school". Most siblings are already IN OUR SYSTEM!

Thankfully, not all of our board is supporting this change. Board President Meg Wartman seemed wary of making a change that could increase the crowding at the high school level.

Tom Gehl did not support the sibling guaranteed enrollment. Patrick Murphy and Glen Allgaier wondered about the expense of making this change and the crowding issue. 

The exact number of proposed Open Enrollment students would be 46 for this year. The posting stated this was a "downward trend". According to some correspondence with Bob Borch from 2007, the figure from 2006 was 80 new students.

Keep in mind that 46 is not the total number of Open Enrollment nonresident students in Elmbrook, it is just the additional new students for the year. The total number of nonresident Open Enrollment students in 2007 was 430. (FYI we also had and additional 294 nonresident Chapter 220 students last year too.) 

The whole nonresident student issue is a very important one to the Elmbrook School District and the Elmbrook taxpayers. A total of around 720 non Elmbrook School District students is not to be dismissed lightly. These students crowd our schools and use our support services. Student population is one of the driving forces for our high school needs.

Contact the board and let them know how you feel about nonresident students in Elmbrook. They could vote on this Jan. 22.

Links: Betterbrookfield, Brookfield7

Recently, Brookfield's human resource committee voted 3-1 in favor of a 1% pay raise for aldermen. Gary Mahkorn, Bob Reddin, and Jim Garvens voted in favor; Mike Franz voted against.

Wouldn't it be great if we could pay our aldermen based on merit instead of a one pay fits all criteria?

For some aldermen, I have no objections to them getting a bit more compensation for their services. I live in the 7th district and since Lisa Mellone replaced Tom Schellinger in 2006, we finally have an active voice at City Hall and someone down here who will look into and act on a problem. Lisa devotes a lot of time and effort toward being an alderman. So in my opinion, since a workman is worthy of his hire, more money would be OK for someone like her.  A few other hard working aldermen come to mind: Jerry Mellone, Chris Blackburn, Dan Sutton, and Bill Carnell. There may be others--each district's constituents usually know who their "go to guy" is.

There are other aldermen however, who don't do much of anything, except come to the meetings and vote. Many don't even bother to read through their packets of information!  Wouldn't you love to see them get a pay cut?

Actually, I think the pay rate right now is about right for the time they are supposed to devote toward the job. Bob Reddin summed it up pretty well, " 'Most of us consider this a public contribution,' Reddin said. 'Let's face it, if I wanted a part-time job that pays $9,000 a year, I'd go down to Home Depot and have a lot fewer headaches.' "

Since Scott Berg and Steve Ponto are running unopposed, obviously the aldermen pay amount is not so lucrative that people are lining up to run 

Too bad merit pay for aldermen would only happen in a perfect world.

Did you read that Mayor Speaker wrote a check to fulfill his 2006 campaign promise regarding the return of his pay raise to the city? "'I kept my word,' he said." Unfortunately, he gave it to the wrong city!

The Journal/Sentinel reported that "Mayor Jeff Speaker returned his 2007 salary increase - and a little more - to city coffers Monday, making good on a re-election campaign promise."

But this statement is a bit misleading, because his returned pay raise did not go back into the city's "coffers" as he promised. Speaker instead designated that his pay raise go to the non-profit Sister Cities fund. (Want to see what Sister Cities does? Look at their Sept. 2007 meeting minutes.)

What is wrong with that?

His raise was not returned to the taxpayers of Brookfield as he promised. He in effect made a donation, with our taxpayer money, to a non profit cause of his choosing. (I understood the city was not to directly fund the Sister Cities project from our taxes.) 

Now his $1,750 check is hardly a make or break issue for our city, but I think it does reveal an attitude that taxpayer relief doesn't matter. I look at budgets as every little bit of savings helps. Besides, after 4 years the total starts to resemble real money. "...Speaker pledged if he won re-election to a second term he would not accept the pay raises and would return them to the city. That would mean returning a total of $14,223 through 2010."

Interestingly enough, the mayor returned more money than necessary. His check was for $1,750, but it only needed to be $1,401. I think if you make a promise that you are returning your raise to the city, it should go back into the city's general fund. So maybe Mayor Speaker could request that his $1,401 be given to our city and the remaining $349 go to his beloved Sister City project if he favors that cause so much? That would be a win/win arrangement.

By the way, the return of the mayor's pay raise was an issue during both campaigns. These quotes were taken from the transcript of the 2006 JSOnline forum:

Kilkenny: In your 2002 campaign literature you said, "The New Mayor Will Get A 28% Raise." On the reverse page, you say, "I will not accept the pay raise and will ask the aldermen to do the same." How did you follow through on this promise to reject the mayoral pay raise?

Speaker: When questioned by a reporter on that exact campaign literature, I stated that I would not take the raise for that year and pay back the City the amount for that year period. And I did donate it back to the City. As for what the aldermen did, I can only speak for myself.

In Speaker's first term, he returned his extra pay for his first year - $2,409. He kept the increases the next three years.

I recently heard about an elected official (out east, I think) who also returned his pay raises while in office to fulfill his campaign promises. But now that he was leaving office, he was requesting the raises back! Hopefully, that will not happen in Brookfield, and our taxpayer money being given to the wrong city will be resolved soon.

One week down, 51 more to go in 2008. Already I am thinking, where did the first week go? (I started the new year out a little under the weather, so that may account for feeling I missed out on something.)

The end of the past year and start of the new naturally lends itself to being a time of reassessment. Being one of those Christmas letter people helps me sum up our highs and lows of the year. 

I get a pretty good look at our finances when I make our one time, year end donations to various causes rather than monthly donations (it just seems simpler to do it once).  I also render to Caesar by bringing my property tax payment to City Hall prior to year's end.

Some people clear out their Christmas decorations immediately after Christmas--they can't stand the clutter. Me, I leave my tree up until at least the end of January. I figure it takes me so long to put the thing up (if you saw it, you would understand) that I at least like to bask in its glow a bit before taking it down. Plus the decorations help chase the winter blahs away.  

Organizing seems to be a common theme of the new year. You can see it in the big box store ads. All sorts of organizational bins and boxes are on sale to get your stuff in order. 

New Year's resolutions are popular, but by now, some are already broken. I much prefer setting goals--something to strive for. The acronym J.O.Y. helps me keep my priorities straight. It stands for Jesus, Others, You. 

Setting a goal for the J, for example, might mean spending more time reading the Bible and praying every day. But make it a reasonable goal--maybe one chapter a day and 15 minutes of praying. (Keeping a prayer list really helps me.)

O for others could include your family. Maybe this is the year you will make family time and family meals a priority? Others also includes neighbors, community, school, volunteering, politics, charities, etc.

Finally You!  Getting/keeping fit and healthy living goals are always popular here. Again, don't start with something unreasonable like walking 5 miles a day. How about walking 3 times a week for 1/2 hour? (That is my goal this year. I know my dog will be happy about it too.) Saying you will never eat sugar again won't work, but designating a small sweet treat to once a day is something that could work for a lifetime. You also means taking a little time to do what you enjoy--maybe your You goal is to learn something new or go visit a place you always wanted to see. It might be as simple as saying you will make time to meet with a good friend once a week.

Well, it is time for me to get on with my day--must go ORGANIZE something!

Hope you reach your goals for 2008.