Practically Speaking

Today is February 29th, a leap year. My son mentioned a classmate of his told him he had a leap year birthday. Poor kid, in actual Feb. 29th birthdays, today is this young man's 5th birthday. It could have been worse though. Had he been born a century earlier, he would have had only 4 actual Feb. 29th birthdays. How would that be possible for a 20 year old? Ask Pope Gregory.

Back in Julius Caesars day--45 BC--the concept of adding a day to the 365 day calendar every 4 years was introduced. It was known that an actual year was almost 1/4 day longer than 365 day year. So to compensate, Caesar added the leap year day to his Julian Calendar. This worked for a while.

Pope Gregory, in the 16th century, recognized that Julius' correction was not enough. "Eventually Easter would fall on Christmas Day unless the system was refined. The 'Gregorian Calendar,' still in use today, fine-tunes the leap year calculation by stipulating that century years (e.g. years ending in "00"), which would normally qualify as leap years, are an exception to the general rule and will have only 365 days."* But this still needed a little more adjusting.

If a century year is evenly divisible by 400, then it will have the extra leap year day. It is an exception to the exception and that is why the classmate is "5" today instead of "4"!

The amount of error in our Gregorian calendar is about 27 seconds (1 day every 3,236 years). I think we are safe for a while! 

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

It has been one year since I posted my first piece, Déjà vu: It’s 'Smokes for Votes' all over again! , on Brookfieldnow.

So, what has changed in that year?

Brookfield just approved step one on a really dense development project, Fountain Brook Crossing.

Elmbrook school district is proposing another referendum, this one a mere $62.2 million. 

There were a few positive things that happened this past year though too. The costly 4K program was discontinued. 

Someone emailed me this week that they were enjoying some of my postings lately. I don't really know which ones they were referring to, but if you care to share your opinions, I would like to hear them. You may use the comments or email me directly.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

I have often said that if you wait long enough, there will be something that two opposing camps can agree on. Hillary Clinton and I do not see eye to eye on much, but when she gave her "Celestial Choir" speech the other day, we finally found our common ground!

Clinton raps Obama's 'celestial choir' campaign:

Hillary Clinton (or should I say Hillary Rodham Clinton?) today mocked Barack Obama's campaign style as one that portrays a divine-like picture of problem-solving to voters when the challenges America face are much more complex...

"None of the problems we face will be easily solved," she said before delivering a fanciful description of an Obama speech.

"Now I could stand up here and say, 'Let's just get everybody together. Let's get unified. The sky will open. The lights will come down. Celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect.' 

"Maybe I've just lived a little long, but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be. You are not going to wave a magic wand and have the special interest disappear," she said.

So I find myself agreeing with Sen. Clinton, "Maybe I've just lived a little long (well, not quite as long as Hillary), but I have no illusions about how hard this is going to be" either. I don't think we can afford her programs any more than we can afford his, however.

I also found myself agreeing with Mr. Schwei's assessment of the emphasis on athletics over academics in a Jan. 16th article:

Board member Steve Schwei questioned the construction of new gymnasiums and renovation of classrooms. The new space should be allocated to academics, not athletic areas, he said.

Ready or not, the $62.2 million dollar high school referendum is coming in just 1 month on April 1st. Spread the word.

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Do we really have to bend over backwards for everything? By now you have heard about the flap over the use of Barack Obama's middle name, Hussein, at a campaign rally. Seems we are not supposed to mention this because it might be interpreted as criticizing Sen. Obama. (This would be so much easier if Condoleeza Rice was our candidate. Then we could say something about Hillary and Barack!)

The VOA reported :

Conservative radio  talk show host Bill Cunningham repeatedly used Barack Obama's middle name as he criticized the news media for being soft on Obama compared to its treatment of President Bush and the Republicans.

"The media, at some point, is going to peel the bark off of Barack Hussein Obama," said Cunningham. "The media will quit taking sides in this thing and maybe start covering Barack Hussein Obama the same way they covered Bush." (By the way, Sen. Clinton is voicing much the same complaint about the media's Obama coverage.)

Obama's middle name comes from his father, who was from Kenya. The Obama campaign frequently points out that he was raised as a Christian to refute persistent rumors that he has a Muslim background.

McCain arrived at the rally after the comments were made and later apologized for the remarks made by Cunningham. 

"I have repeatedly stated my respect for Senator Obama and Senator Clinton, and that I will treat them with respect," he said. "I regret any comments that may be made about these two individuals who are honorable Americans." 

I don't happen to think the use of a middle name is controversial. It is his name, after all, and it is a rather ironic--a key component to humor. John Stewart must have thought so too or he would not have included Barack Hussein Obama's name in his Oscar jokes.

"You have to give Barack Obama credit, he's overcome a great deal. Not just he's an African-American. Barack Hussein Obama is his name. His middle name is the last name of Iraq's former tyrant. His last name rhymes with Osama. That's not easy to overcome..." 

John picked on the Republicans too,

"Oscar is 80 this year, which makes him now automatically the front runner for the Republican nomination." 

You can catch John Stewart's comedy bits here. (Watch from about 7:30 to 8:05.) 

When names are really bothersome or a burden, people often legally change them. I certainly can understand being sensitive about an unusual name. In fact, if I had a nickel for every time someone said to me, Oh, I thought you were going to be a man, I could afford Elmbrook's April 1st $62.2 million dollar high school referendum! .

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Assemblyman Leah Vukmir's office called today in response to an email I sent*. Her aid informed me that the Renewable fuel bill (Ethanol) was going to committee again this Wednesday, Feb. 27, at 10 am.

He also said that Leah Vukmir was in a hearing meeting on the Assembly version of the Virtual Schools bill AB870(?) It was to go to Executive Session (committee) Tuesday, Feb. 26, 10 am. The Assembly version of the Virtual Schools bill did not have the cap restriction as the Senate SB396 version did.

Fifth District Senator Jim Sullivan voted FOR capping the Virtual School program. The capping will eliminate about 3,000 children from this very popular program unless the Assembly comes up with a solution.

Contact the Assembly about the Ethanol bill and Virtual Schools. 

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe

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 

On another note, the Photo ID bill amendment, AJR17 is stalled in the Senate. Kevin Fisher of New Berlin was filling in for Mark Belling today. He relayed that unless Majority Leader Russ Decker brings it to the floor soon, it will be a dead issue--the 2007 legislative session ends March 13th. 

State Senator Mary Lazich of New Berlin wrote an informative piece on how this simple ID requirement will not adversely effect our election process as Governor Doyle and others suggest.

Kevin stated it is estimated that about 80% of Wisconsin residents would like to have a photo ID requirement for voting. Hey, I would be happy if they would ink our fingers too. Anything to discourage vote fraud.

If you would like to see Wisconsin adopt voter ID, please contact Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker and urge him (politely) to bring this bill to the floor now. As a Wisconsin voter, you have the right to request this vote, since he is blocking this important legislation. Let your Senator know how you feel about voter ID too.

Senator Russel Decker, Senate Majority Leader
Sen.Decker@legis.wisconsin.gov  608-266-2502
 

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

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

*(Don't you just love responsive government? Leah Vukmir always emails or calls me back. Even Rich Zipperer and Ted Kanavas email me, and they aren't my representatives! I am still waiting to hear from my State Senator Jim Sullivan on these and other  issues I have contacted him about over the past weeks. My last response from him was about the budget, dated November 2007.)

Familiarize yourself with this issue: Ethanol: The bad bill that just won't die! It's back

A MUST read: Ethanol bill poses conflicts, One sponsor has $20,000 interest in fuel producer, 

Clearing Land for Biofuels Makes Global Warming Worse, The Ethanol Fallacy

Ethanol bill heads to senate Thursday--Speak Up, Ethanol bill: Just what would be a conflict of interest?

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

If you want to give the Elmbrook School District your 2 cents on their online Strategic Planning Survey, the deadline is this  Wednesday, Feb. 27.

You are to select 1 to 5 of their pre-written responses for questions 1 - 4, but they also allow for you to select "Other" and then tell them what your other concern/priority is. The next 2 questions allow you to comment; the last 3 questions are just a yes or no.

If you did select "Other", want to share what your "Others" were as well as your comments for questions 5 & 6 via email? I can quote your comments on a future blog, but you can remain anonymous to other readers.

Ready or not, the referendum is coming in just a little over a month! 

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Fellow blogger Janet Wintersberger recently echoed my sentiments that the Plan Commission rarely seems to listen to resident comments regarding development.

She wrote, regarding the proposed Fountain Brook Crossing, "Twenty-nine (of the 30) attendees' comments were negative."  The proposal got the nod anyway.

Our opinions did not matter when it came to widening Calhoun Road south either. I think there were 51 negative comments out of 54 left at one of the Open Houses. No matter, Calhoun is being widened.

So it seems our opinion seldom counts with the city or plan commission. But there has been one exception. (Janet's posting triggered my memory.)

Remember last year when the Fresh Market went up?

Every day it seemed they added a new color or texture to its hodge-podge exterior.

Then the GOLD trim paint went on.

That color choice did not sit too well with some people.

The brighter gold was then painted over with a slightly more subdued color.

Why?

Because 12 people complained to the mayor.

Twelve people?

It must have been newsworthy because there was even an article about it.

"Mayor Jeff Speaker said Thursday that he received about a dozen complaints about the color..." 

Now, I really don't know how anyone could so vehemently object to the gold trim on the Fresh Market and not also strongly object to Flemmings, which is painted a color I can only politely call raw umber. (I have heard it referred to as many other things, none of which I can put into print.) 

Why would the mayor jump in response to just 12 people's complaints when at other times our concerns fall on deaf ears?

A family member summed it up well, "It must have been the right 12 people!"

Flemmings, part of the Moorland/Bluemound gateway the City wanted you to say "WOW" about.

I saw this semi today loaded with snow plows. Does this mean it has been such a rough winter that reinforcements were needed? I think we can safely say that the plowing crews are just as sick of this winter as we are!

The pot hole crew was also at work on Moorland today. Yesterday I saw them out on the left lanes of I-94 in Waukesha.

Enjoy the warm weekend. (More snow on Monday.)

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

I just got off the phone with the Department of Motor Vehicles and the smoke is still pouring out of my ears. I needed to call about an extension on an emissions test because the car in question is not drivable at present. Although I had just been to the actual emission test facility and stopped in the office to ask for the extension, the woman in the office said I needed to call. So, call I did.

I dialed the Milwaukee number. I listened through an extensive menu list. Finally at selection 5, I heard something that sounded like the department I needed. I punched in 5.

Now I had to listen through a whole host of other information about emissions. Finally after a few minutes the menu message stated to press 0 to speak to a PERSON. I pressed 0.

The message under 0 was this, that, and the other thing, and finally the recorded voice stated that the office was CLOSED!

Couldn't they have told me that 5 minutes and umpteen menus ago?

We have 2 vehicles with tags due in March. The cost to renew the plates of course is now $75.00 instead of the former $50.00 each. While at the emissions office I also picked up a Title Application form for a used car we just purchased. The cost on that form bears a hand written $69.50 instead of the printed in $45.00. Sarcasm here: Thank you Gov. Doyle for not raising our taxes. (That makes a total increase of $129.50 for our household of cars this year.)

I still have to call back tomorrow, but the thought came to me: Are people crazy that they think government run health care will be better and cheaper? 

I have needed to call my health insurance company. It is often not all that pleasant, but it is never as bad as calling the DMV! 

... 

OK, that was yesterday, now it is the next day. I called again. This time, after about 6 minutes, I did get a live body to speak to. The man told me I could not have an extension but that I would need to purchase a temporary license plate to get the car to the emissions test place after my tags expired! I told him the woman at the title window at the emissions place said if I called,  the extension would be granted. He insisted, no, he could not.  

Do you really want to deal with this kind of help when it comes to your health care?

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

This Wednesday, February 20th, there will be a Community Education Meeting to explain the new Family Care Program at the Waukesha County Expo Center 4H Forum Building, North Hall . (1000 Northview Road, Waukesha) You may choose to attend the 3 pm or 6 pm session. 

The meetings are sponsored by the Waukesha County Human Services and Health Department, Waukesha County Department of Senior Services, Care Wisconsin, and Community Care Inc. They will explain the new Family Care Program (formerly the Community Options Program) and they will have a Q & A opportunity too.

Basically, as I understand it, this program allows the elderly or those in need of assisted living to remain in their assisted living facility, even after their private funds run out. In other words, Medicaid would pay for assisted living.

In the past, Medicaid would only pay for the traditional nursing home after the patient used up their own private resources. But now, through this program, Medicaid will pick up the tab on assisted living facilities too.

In case you did not know, usually assisted living facilities are much less expensive than the traditional nursing home. Nursing homes run about $6,000+ a month while some assisted living apartments or homes cost closer to $3,000 per month. Thus this program saves the taxpayers some money. At those rates, it is easy to see how a senior could go through their hard earned savings very quickly.

The program is not automatic, you must plan for it. If anyone in your family is facing the prospect of assisted living or long term care, but has limited resources, this meeting could be beneficial. Check it out and visit the websites.

Websites: dhfs.wisconsin.gov/ltcare, familypartnershipltc.org,  

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Today is President's Day. Tomorrow is the Presidential spring primary. It's been an unusual campaign, to say the least.

When you consider the three major candidates in the running for president, think about how far we have come as a nation.  Back in 1789 when George Washington was inaugurated, African Americans and women did not have the right to vote much less run for public office. Not all white males had voting rights either; property ownership was required.

Think about how the major candidates don't fit the typical presidential candidate mold, yet each is winning primaries.

Very Liberal African American male: OK

Liberal middle-aged white woman: OK

Middle-of-the-road older white man: OK 

But what happened to the Conservative, young, white man who spoke Reaganese? He was REJECTED. Why? Because of his religion.

Many conservatives and Evangelicals like me were at first cautious about Romney, but as time went on, I realized Mitt stood for what I stood for: Freedom of religion. His Faith in America speech was outstanding in my estimation. It beautifully summed up the sentiments and intent of our Founding Fathers regarding the role of Faith in our nation.

Recall the early days of the First Continental Congress in Philadelphia, during the fall of 1774. With Boston occupied by British troops, there were rumors of imminent hostilities and fears of an impending war. In this time of peril, someone suggested that they pray. But there were objections. They were too divided in religious sentiments, what with Episcopalians and Quakers, Anabaptists and Congregationalists, Presbyterians and Catholics.

Then Sam Adams rose, and said he would hear a prayer from anyone of piety and good character, as long as they were a patriot. And so together they prayed, and together they fought, and together, by the grace of God, they founded this great nation.

In that spirit, let us give thanks to the divine author of liberty. And together, let us pray that this land may always be blessed with freedom's holy light.

God bless this great land, the United States of America.

Reagan conservatives were heartbroken when Romney delivered his concession speech. I found it rather curious, that this election seemingly indicates we have overcome racial, gender, and age bias. But when it came to religious discrimination, that was one hurdle we still could not jump as a nation.  

I do remember the controversy over Kennedy's Catholicism and where his allegiances would lie. Yet he managed to overcome those fears. When John Kerry ran in 2004, his Catholicism (allegiance) was not an issue. Perhaps in the future religious prejudice will no longer be an issue for Mitt Romney either?

Primary Election Picks: Sutton, Halmstad, and...Hillary?

Fountain Brook Crossing: Council votes on rezoning, Tuesday, Feb. 19 

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

 

 

Tomorrow is the primary for President and Brookfield Aldermen in Districts 1 and 2. I have no aldermanic primary in my district. But if I did live in the 1st or 2nd district...

I would be casting my vote for Dan Sutton. I have watched Dan Sutton during his first 4 year term and I like what I see. Dan showed he had good instincts with some of his comments during those early council meetings and even though he was a new alderman, he voted against the flow. As he matured in his role as alderman, his votes reflected his good instincts more and more. In recent years, Sutton went to bat for Brookfield taxpayers: 

JSOnline Nov. 2006 Aldermen Jerry Mellone and Dan Sutton argued that the budget had some areas where reserves were high enough and expenses low enough to cut tax collections, even for one year of relief.

If you attended that council meeting or saw it on cable broadcast, you witnessed Dan's leadership skills:

From Brookfield7, Dec. 2006 Rick Owen, in his usual condescending way, in essence put down Alderman Jerry Mellone for bringing up further budget cuts. Then a remarkable thing took place: Alderman Sutton eloquently put Rick in his place by reminding the council that Jerry Mellone had every right to bring up those cuts.

Is it any wonder that earlier in 2006, many of Sutton's fellow aldermen thought he would be a good leader too?:

Brookfield7, April 2006 Last real bit of business for the council was to elect a new Council President. Scott Berg had been promoting his name and Steve Ponto was too. The surprise candidate was Dan Sutton. The first ballot was Ponto 7, Sutton 5, and Berg 2--no majority. Second ballot was Ponto 8, Sutton 5 and Berg 1. Ponto wins. Ponto was the better choice than Berg, but am disappointed that Dan Sutton did not prevail. Although Dan frequently [not always] votes with the crowd, he has good instincts and raises valid questions during the discussion. I am hoping that with the new aldermen on the council that Dan will trust his good instincts more and vote accordingly.

It did not take long for Dan Sutton to trust his good instincts more and more. He deserves your vote. 

Now, if I lived in the 2nd district...

Terrence Halmstad would be getting my vote. Mr. Halmstad, according to Brookfieldnow's article and voter's guide, reflects my values.

Halmstad said the relocation of the fire station coupled with further development near the intersection could make traffic in the area "horrendous."

Halmstad also said he's been frustrated with the city's approach to development and redevelopment in the district and across Brookfield.

"We're not really looking at these (projects) really hard before they're passed," he said.

Rick Owen's quote in the guide, "I supported the 2020 Master Plan and continue to endorse it. One of its essential doctrines is the preservation of single family residential neighborhoods.", from my perspective, seems rather in conflict with Will the real Rick Owen please stand up?  Rick dismissed the 2020 Master Plan's specificity and Alderman Jerry Mellone's efforts to protect Mellone's single family neighborhood from an over enthusiastic Calhoun Road widening project.

Rick has always been very polite to me personally. But his civility does neighborhoods little good as his hand consistently reaches for the vote YES button on development issues. 

I don't know that there is much of a difference between Jennifer Donze and Rick Owen. They both serve on the Plan Commission. If the colossal Fountain Brook Crossing project is any indicator, they both voted "to recommend rezoning to allow construction of a four-story office building." The Journal article stated, "Commissioners said Monday that the concept is growing on them for its potential as a striking gateway as motorists enter the city from New Berlin. 'In a way, the height is an important part of that,' said Commissioner Jennifer Donze." 

Jennifer and Rick seem to think our taxes are low enough too. Terry Halmstad sees that there is "no longer a distinction between wants and needs; this has to change."

The choice is yours, District 1 and 2 residents. Please research this for yourself and make an informed decision.

As for my Hillary Clinton vote, no, I have not become a Democrat. But since McCain will get the Republican nomination with or without me (he is now my 1st choice for president), I am at least going to vote tomorrow for my 2nd choice for president. 

Why Hillary Clinton? Because she is more conservative than Barack Obama*. She is considered to be the 16th most liberal senator, while Barack is considered to be THE most liberal (1st). They both are making promises to fund all sorts of government programs with taxpayer money, but Barack even out-gives Hillary. I see him as much more charming and thus will be able to get his measures through Congress easier.

So that is it. Tomorrow I vote for my first ever Democrat for President, Hillary. 

*One of the reasons I view Barack as the most liberal...

 "Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition."

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Oh, I am getting so tired of all this watchdogging, calling, and emailing our officials, but the alternative is to let these bad bills pass. This one is not just about a huge amount of money; our national sovereignty is at stake.

For those of you who think Barack Obama does not have much of a record to run on, his Global Poverty Act bill ought to tell you a lot about this young senator.

Vicki McKenna cued her listeners into this unbelievable bill yesterday. (She really does have a nose for news!) She explained, The Global Poverty Act takes .7% of our G.D.P. and sends it to the UN to fight global poverty. She also reminded us that the UN is not a very efficient charity and only sends out about 5 cents from every dollar received--not to mention their bad track record on plans such as Oil for Food.

This estimated $845 billion dollars, the .7% of our G.D.P., is in addition to what we already send for foreign aid. This new bill would add up to $1,000,000,000,000 over 15 years. (That is trillion with a T) But the money is the least of our concerns.

Think we don't have to worry about this bill? It will never pass?

Think again.

It already passed the House! According to Glenn Beck, "it already has passed the House mainly because people didn't read it. "

Read the entire Glenn Beck posting. It's chock full of important things to consider before casting your vote for President like: UN Rights of the Child, Kyoto protocol, Convention on Biological Diversity, and spending $210 billion for, in essence, a new kind of WPA project.

This Senate bill 2433 sounds so outrageous, you might think it is an Urban Legend. Sadly, it is not.

Family Research Council posted this: (Direct link unavailable, emphasis added. No, I am not for Huckabee.)

"Less than a day after the President agreed to put more money in taxpayers' pockets, the U.S. Senate is attempting to take some of those dollars back. The Global Poverty Act, while seemingly charitable and big-hearted, sounds nicer than it really is... 

"...In addition to surrendering more dollars, the U.S. would also be required to surrender some of its own sovereignty over foreign aid by putting it under UN control. The bill would force the U.S. to sign onto the U.N.'s Millennium Declaration, which would commit us not only to "banning small arms and light weapons," but also to ratifying a series of objectionable treaties such as the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), the International Criminal Court Treaty, the Kyoto Protocol (global warming), the Convention on Biological Diversity, and so on. Considering the magnitude of the legislation, one would think that the Senate would proceed with caution. Not so!...

That posting concluded with: "Unreal. If that does not scare you, I don't know what will. Take action to stop this bill now." 

I couldn't agree more. 

Our own dear Senator Russ Feingold was a cosponsor too, but call or email his office anyway. 

This bill was steamrolled through the Senate committee without hearings. 

Contact our Senators: (IF you know people in other states, tell them to contact their Senators too.)

Kohl Contact page: http://kohl.senate.gov/gen_contact.html   Phone: (202) 224-5653, (414) 297-4451

Feingold  senator@feingold.senate.gov  Phone: (414) 276-7282, (202) 224-5323

Tell them to oppose S.2433, The Global Poverty Act of 2007

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                           February 13, 2008
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Rep. Steve Nass (608) 266-5715

ETHANOL MANDATE BILL STALLS IN PRO-ETHANOL COMMITTEE

     State Representative Steve Nass (R-Whitewater) reacted with cautious optimism that the 25% Ethanol Mandate Bill may finally be on life support.  Today, the Assembly Biofuels and Sustainable Energy Committee, a pro-ethanol committee, failed to take a vote on AB 682 after members raised concerns over details of the legislation.  One major sticking point was the punitive fines aimed at gas station retailers for failing to meet the bill’s requirements.

     “I am convinced that the overwhelming opposition from citizens and gas station owners played a role in stalling the mandate in a pro-ethanol committee.  The people can have an impact when they get riled up over bad government,” Nass said.

     Nass noted that committee members discussed meeting again in two weeks to consider the Ethanol Mandate Bill.  The legislative session ends on March 13, 2008.

     “While this is great news, it’s no time to declare victory.  The special interests in support of this mandate won’t give up and will re-double their effort to sneak this bill through in the last minutes of the session,” Nass said.

Rep. Nass just sent the above press release, but as he stated, this is no time to sit back. If you have not contacted Huebsch and Fitzgerald as well as your Representative, please do. As much as we hate to do it, your comments do make a difference!

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe

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

Familiarize yourself with this issue: Ethanol: The bad bill that just won't die! It's back

A MUST read: Ethanol bill poses conflicts, One sponsor has $20,000 interest in fuel producer, 

Clearing Land for Biofuels Makes Global Warming Worse, The Ethanol Fallacy

Ethanol bill heads to senate Thursday--Speak Up, Ethanol bill: Just what would be a conflict of interest?

The JSOnline article, Ethanol bill poses conflicts, also brought up AB 85, a bill introduced by Hahn and Sheridan that would , "provide a $1,000 tax credit to Wisconsinites who buy or lease a new flex-fuel vehicle."  Rep. Sheridan (D) "is president of United Auto Workers Local 95. General Motors Corp. pays his salary."

Yes, the bad ethanol mandate bill that just won't die is coming back to an Assembly near you.

I awoke today to Jay Webber talking about this at 7:10 a.m. He mentioned, for all of the promises by Mike Huebsch and Jeff Fitzgerald to not bring Assembly bill 682 to the Assembly floor, it is due to come out of committee and to the floor for possibly tomorrow. Seems they did send it to a committee though, the Assembly biofuel and sustainable fuels committee. Not exactly one it would die in!

Now through some legal maneuvering, the ethanol mandate bill can be brought directly to the Assembly floor. Huebsch and Fitzgerald can keep their promise to not bring it to the floor directly, but it will come to the floor just the same.

To make matters even worse, this Assembly version also has another Republican perceived conflict of interest. Jay Webber mentioned that it was introduced by Assemblyman Eugene Hahn, whose wife has $20,000 in shares of United Wisconsin Grain Producers LLC--a place ethanol refiners get their grain from. (I think that is what Jay said--check his podcast.) This just shows we really need to watch all of the politicians, regardless of party.

Assemblyman Stephen Nass, Vicki McKenna mentioned, is protesting this bill with a letter to Mike Huebsch and Jeff Fitzgerald. You might want to drop Nass a supportive email. 

PLEASE contact Huebsch and Fitzgerald. Tell them what you think about this bill sneaking back to the Assembly floor. Then contact our Representatives again. They really need to know what you think of this ethanol mandate bill.

Rep. Jeff Fitzgerald (Assembly Majority Leader), from Horicon. Counties: Columbia and Dodge
Rep. Michael Huebsch (Assembly Speaker), from West Salem. Counties: LaCrosse and Monroe

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

Familiarize yourself with this issue: A MUST read: Ethanol bill poses conflicts, One sponsor has $20,000 interest in fuel producer,  Clearing Land for Biofuels Makes Global Warming Worse, The Ethanol Fallacy

Ethanol bill heads to senate Thursday--Speak Up, Ethanol bill: Just what would be a conflict of interest?

The JSOnline article, Ethanol bill poses conflicts, also brought up AB 85, a bill introduced by Hahn and Sheridan that would , "provide a $1,000 tax credit to Wisconsinites who buy or lease a new flex-fuel vehicle."  Rep. Sheridan (D) "is president of United Auto Workers Local 95. General Motors Corp. pays his salary."

Remember the old TV game show, To Tell the Truth? The panel of celebrities was to guess which of the 3 contestants was the real person who had done some unusual or heroic act. One of the 3 was the real person, the other 2 would try to mislead the panel. At the end, the game host would say, Would the real So-in-so, please stand up. Then the real person would stand, sometimes surprising everyone.

Well, after reading Development tops list for candidates , I almost felt like saying, Would the Real Rick Owen, please stand up? Did anyone of you share my dismay over the paragraph from that article?

Owen said he "never likes to see roads widened" because of the impact it has on homeowners, but added that current traffic volumes along the northern section of Calhoun Road indicate that widening "needs to be looked at."

Since Rick was not at all supportive of Alderman Jerry Mellone's efforts to protect his district from the impact of widening Calhoun Rd. south to highway proportions (despite its lack of traffic) I thought his statement was surprising.

I had attended the Oct. 3, 2006 Common Council meeting where Alderman Jerry Mellone attempted to sway the Council to either follow the Master Plan or amend it properly, regarding the widening of Calhoun Road south. I felt following or amending the Master Plan was a very important point, and so I urged Brookfield residents to attend with this information.

At that meeting, Mellone pointed out that the 2020 Master Plan and Calhoun Neighborhood South Plan showed the maximum road widths to be 100 foot right of ways, maximum, not the 130 foot width the city proposed.

I remembered Alderman Rick Owen dismissing Jerry's referral at that meeting and so I watched my taped cable broadcast of that meeting again. The following is some of what Mellone and Owen said, transcribed to the best of my ability: (Emphasis added)

Jerry Mellone: My motion is: I want to stop the widening of Calhoun to 130' because it is in conflict with the 2020 Master Plan.

Rick Owen: ...whether or not this was a conflict with the Master Plan...I'll be brief...  ...The real issue is, does the Master Plan preclude a 130' right of way? That is what we are down to. I am not even interested in, ah,... I appreciate the legal expertise we brought to the table, and I also want to state quickly--for those who want to read or look at plenty of information out here--staff has had 3 public hearings... er, a 4th is coming...

(The publics' comments from those Calhoun hearings about widening were negative.)

Rick continues: A lot of questions have been asked. Jerry Mellone put out a lot of information... ...that is not the purpose of this (now) at this point, I will state this: What we often say at the Planning Commission is that the Master Plan is the view from the 30,000 foot level. It is not meant to be this extremely detail minded prescriptive plan that says nothing can happen if  X or Y. It is much broader in scale.

Although I want to make sure you understand transportation was not considered a small detail in the Master Plan, I think everybody has seen that chapter. I believe more pages are devoted to (transportation) than any other subject in the Master Plan because people wanted at least to get that information out and make sure we were clear as to what was going on.

So I think there is a tremendous amount of data there and I think we have to look at it piece by piece.. I'll be quick...1st, Looking at section noted: pp 40, fig. 27. That is a series of 5 figures that denote: 2020 Master Plan Typical Section. Typical Street Sections, that was the emphasis here. You have to read the explanation about the diagram as far as there is no plan from 30,000' level that would be that specific and nothing in detail precluding this would suggest the maximum road width would be 130' for any roadway in this city.

(Rick goes on in his brief comments. Now he brings up the key transportation plan, The Calhoun South Neighborhood Plan.)

Rick goes on: Calhoun is stated to have a divided 4 section maximum.  (Reading:) Where Calhoun approaches I-94 or Bluemound, additional lanes may be warranted or provided to permit left or right turning movement. (Rick concludes), We are not inconsistent with the Master Plan.

Jerry Mellone cites again the specifics of the 2020 Master Plan:

Jerry Mellone: Figure 21 shows a 90' right of way, pp 40,41, and 42 shows maximum 100' right of way at Greenfield (Jerry explains that is what we have now, we measured it)... ...Arterial B Calhoun: pp 41, maximum right of way, 75' Twiddle Lane. It is very clear the plan the 2020 task force wanted.

Those Figures and page references seemed pretty specific to me. If they are to be treated so generally, it makes me wonder why anyone would waste their time on a Master Plan or Neighborhood Plan Task Force.  If this very residential arterial was intended to be 130' right of way, I wonder why the city had to obtain so much residential frontage.

Rick Owen was elected before I followed Brookfield politics. If memory serves me correctly, I think he ran on a more responsible development platform--staying within current zoning. Remember, the 2004 election was just after the approval of VK's mega Capitol Heights project*--development was a hot issue in the 2nd district. Maybe some of you 2nd district residents can fill in the blanks here?

Alderman (and Plan Commission member) Rick Owen is being challenged by Plan Commission member Jennifer Donze and by Terry Halmstad. I happen to agree with Halmstad's comments that, "We're not really looking at these [development and redevelopment] (projects) really hard before they're passed."

Of course, on Tuesday, Feb. 19th, it will be up to 2nd district voters to decide, Who is the real Rick Owen?

Check the Brookfieldnow District 1 and 2 Voter's Guide for primary election candidates stances on important issues. 

*Capitol Heights is VK's overly dense condo project on Capitol Drive that former aldermen 1st district Richard Brunner and 7th district Tom Schellinger now say they regret voting for.

Blogs: Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

My Alderman, Lisa Mellone, is really great about keeping her District 7 constituents informed of upcoming issues. She sent this District 7 update last night. (I posted her entire update on Brookfield7.) The 3 development issues should be of interest to all Brookfield residents.

District 7 Residents of the City of Brookfield,

This coming Monday night, Feb. 11^th, the Plan Commission will be presented with a digital three dimensional model of the proposed Fountain Brook Crossing office building to be located on the NE corner of Greenfield and Moorland roads.  The meeting starts at 7 pm and this item is 2^nd on the agenda.  The meeting is open to the public but there is not an opportunity for residents to speak.  (see www.betterbrookfield.com for more info)

A proposal from Thomson Corp. for the final phase of the Brookfield Common’s development (Pick N Save and retail space on Greenfield Ave.) will also be on the Feb. 11^th Plan Commission agenda.  The proposal is for two additional buildings of which one will be retail and the other a bank.  This item is last on the agenda (discussion will most likely occur at 9:30 pm or later).

It was just announced today that VK Development will give an update on development plans for the former WTMJ and Ruby Farm properties near the SW corner of Calhoun and Bluemound roads.  They will present to the Swanson Site Review team at Swanson Elementary on Tuesday, Feb. 12^th at 7:30 AM.  This meeting is open to the public.

Note: One of the businesses mentioned for the Fountain Brook Crossing office building proposal was a bank. Here we see next door neighboring Brookfield Commons is hoping to gain approval for a bank as well.

VK Development, no doubt, is watching how Brookfield's Plan Commission treats the overly dense Fountain Brook Crossing proposal.

FOUNTAIN BROOK CROSSING: BIG BUILDING, BIG ZONING CHANGE, BIG PRECEDENT, BIG MISTAKE

FOUNTAIN BROOK CROSSING: 2 UNBELIEVABLY BIG BUILDINGS (Photo comparisons)

More on Brookfield Plan Commission Meeting

Blogs: Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Feeling a little low after this week's Super Tuesday results and Romney's campaign suspension?

Maybe what you need is a little shot in the arm tomorrow at the Americans for Prosperity, Defending the American Dream Summit, February 9, 2008, 9am to 5pm at the Country Springs Hotel. (Just off I-94 in Waukesha, 2810 Golf Rd.)

You can still register online. The cost of $29 for adults and $15 for students includes lunch.

Blogs: Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Like many of you, I listened to the Super Tuesday coverage for most of Super Tuesday night. I also had my computer on and clicked on the US map watching the vote totals/percentages as they came in state by state. Of course I was most interested in what would happen on the Republican side in California. Finally, I gave up when they called it for McCain.

There's been much speculation about how conservatives (like me) will vote in November or if we will vote at all. First of all, this is not over...yet. Wisconsin and the other states holding primaries in February just became more important--that is the good news. The bad news is now we must listen to all those campaign ads! 

I admit though, to vote or not to vote, is a tough question. I have voted in every primary, election and referendum since I was eligible to vote, and I will vote in November--just not sure for who. For some, however, much will depend on what happens at the Republican convention: who's the nominee, who's the running mate, and who is their opponent. I think it is far too early for people to state emphatically what they will do or not do in November.

One reason that keeps me from throwing my hands up into the air and saying, I quit, is the judicial nomination process for the Federal and Supreme Courts. This, in my opinion, is one of the most important functions of a president.

Five of our Supreme Court judges, I think, are over age 70. (Age range 71-88?) It has been mentioned that the potential for the next president to choose their replacements is very high.

The irony is that there is not much talk about 71 year old McCain's own personal potential for replacement during his next 4 years. (I wish him no ill will.) Instead, we are told we must vote for the oldest ever presidential nominee so we can ensure more conservative* judicial nominations for those 5 potential vacancies on the bench. (*More conservative than a Democrat President, that is.)

Another problem I have with the prospect of a McCain nomination is that he very seldom gets the majority of votes in the states he wins. Certainly Mike Huckabee's strong showing in the south was a surprise too. McCain did not even receive over 50% of the votes in his own state of Arizona.

Now many people think Huckabee is the spoiler for Romney, and I am inclined to agree. But if you look at the vote totals (click on any state and the percentages come up) in most cases, if you add Romney and Huckabee's totals-- representing the conservatives--they receive the majority of support.

Early on, there was some speculation if conservatives would go with a 3rd party candidate rather than vote for Romney. That seems to have subsided since groups like Focus on the Family and Bob Jones III of Bob Jones University (a very conservative Baptist college) are speaking favorably about Mitt Romney.

But the vote totals show that conservatives in the Republican party are not for McCain. He has not emerged as a real front runner in the sense of consistently gaining over 50% of the vote. It is almost as if he is the third party candidate within the party!

I really hate the idea of a third party. Ross Perot is the reason we got Bill Clinton. But with so many voters not standing with McCain, I just don't know.

Today GOPUSA Eagle email sent this out: 

The Strange GOP Nominating Victory

Assuming John McCain gets the GOP nomination, it will show how whimsical history can be. It would be the first time in living memory that a Republican presidential nomination went to a candidate who was not merely opposed by a majority of the party but was actively despised by about half its rank-and-file voters across the country--and by many, if not most, of its congressional officeholders. 

Slit a Vein or Vote for McCain?
by Chuck Muth

While the conservative knock against Mitt Romney is that he started out as a moderate and has since moved to the right, John McCain started out on the right but has since moved to the left. Which is worse?

I might add that Reagan started on the left and moved right. I always believed that how you end the race is much more important than how you start it.

Here are a few other Super Tuesday remarks that caught my attention:

From Hillary, "I see an America where prosperity is shared." (In the redistribution of wealth sense, not the American dream.) She then went on to list many other things she would take care of. I wondered, why work at all? She also thanked her mother. I truly can appreciate how special Hillary's campaign would be for her mom. She mentioned her mother was born before women had the right to vote and now her mother was watching her run for president.

From Obama, I noted that when he mentioned increasing alternative energy sources like solar, wind, and bio-diesel, I don't think he included ethanol.

Romney: I thought he gave a great speech and I liked his list of things we asked Washington to fix.

"You see... at a time like this...we recognize just how broken Washington is. We've looked to them to solve our problems, and they haven't.

"We asked them to solve Social Security. They haven't done that. We asked them to balance the budget. They haven't.

"We asked them as well to rein in excessive pork barrel spending. They haven't.

 "We asked them to end illegal immigration. And they haven't...

Time will tell what happens in November. I did smile today when I heard Congressman Paul Ryan's name suggested as a possible running mate for McCain. Granted, Paul is a long, long shot, but he would be someone who would make this conservative a little more at ease come election day.  

UPDATE: Evidentially, Romney is announcing today in a speech at CPAC that he is pulling out of the campaign. If this is true, the McCain campaign better pick the running mate of the century. 

Blogs: Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

My State Assemblyman Leah Vukmir sent me the following email today, which I