I almost missed this, but thanks to a reader, here it is: A group of pro 4K residents will be making an appeal to the school board this Tuesday during the Citizen's Forum time--first on the agenda.

My reader had this to say about the pro 4K group:

...Seems as though they believe that the old 'wear em down one request at a time' philosophy will work on the board as well as it works on the taxpayers.

...I was reminded of Tom Gehl's comment about where the taxpayers went the last time the proposal came up, forcing him to face an [emotionally charged crowd]** alone.

My reader then suggested a counter "No Way 4K" cheering section at the meeting, to give the board a little moral support.

Last fall, I was there when they made that difficult decision in discontinuing Elmbrook's 4K program. They made that tough choice because there was no proof that 4K made a long term academic improvement.

True, 4K will add money to the school district's budget, but it will also add more tax burden to Elmbrook taxpayers. We cannot afford to add programs that do not deliver real results. 4K shows no long lasting academic improvement, therefore it is a luxury. Right now is the time to tighten our belt, not indulge in self serving programs.

We will already see higher property tax bills because that magical 2% growth (projected by the experts) the referendum tax calculations were based on has not materialized.

We did not even hit 1% growth this year, and that was a figure from June, when our market was stronger. From Fairly Conservative, Brookfield assessed growth less than 1%: (My emphasis)

The Board of Review met this morning and assessed property values in the City of Brookfield only grew 0.987% to $6,300,693,600.

This low number has enormous implications for taxpayers who will be taxed above that growth according to state caps. Low growth also affects the estimates used for the Elmbrook referendum as well as the failing TIF district in our community.

Come to the School Board meeting on Tuesday to show your support for the board's decision to discontinue 4K. (Maybe I could make the Citizen Forum and still catch most of the Creation Science speaker?) If you plan on speaking, make your comments short (2 minutes) and please be polite.

Superintendent Matt Gibson and some of the board are looking at ways to increase their budget through "revenue enhancers." 4K would do that, but at an added expense to the taxpayer. Let's not even let them think about flirting with 4K** again! 

 

*I could not verify Tom Gehl's original words. This conveys the same meaning. Tom was one among 4 who voted the measure down: Meg Wartman, Patrick Murphy, and Glen Allgaier.

**I don't want to make more of this flirtation than it was: just a mention. But often "mentions" are made to test the waters of acceptance or opposition.

Brookfield District 7 Info meeting, Wed., Sept. 24, 2-3pm or 6:30-7:30pm City Clerk Kris Schmidt will be in attendance to answer questions or concerns regarding recent news about the Van Hollen lawsuit against the state elections authority.

Please, comment content should relate to the subject of the post. Although I try to respond to many, do not interpret my lack of a response as agreement.

Links: 

 

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin,  Vicki Mckenna

 

 

The Commission OKs plans for Ruby Farms site.  What I find so frustrating with our Plan Commission is that they grant PDDs and project proposals so easily. Oh, they raise all sorts of questions and concerns, but then vote as if with one "Aye."

Tuesday's meeting was interesting. There were a lot of points the mayor, AVS Development (VK), and commissioners were careful to make. These are not direct quotes, just my impression of the statements.  Watch cable broadcast for exact words:

Mayor makes a point of asking Ajay of AVS something about the amount of runoff water after development vs. before development.

Ajay: Considering the storms this weekend, there will be questions about storm water. We are meeting and exceeding ordinances.

Mayor: You're going to reduce current runoff?

Ajay: Yes,  AVS will sell construction ready pads [to other developers]. We, [AVS] are not requesting public assistance for storm water [or parking structures.]

In other words, no TID district to AVS. More details about what Percheron Square will include. Plans include 1/2 million sq. ft. in office space and parking structure buildings along with 210 condos, retail, an 126 unit extended stay hotel, fitness center, 80 resident assisted living, and Ruby farmsted.(Since Mrs. Ruby still lives there, I don't think they had much of a choice.)

More talk about how much tax base Percheron would add to Brookfield--estimated at $250 million.

Mayor questions Ajay about the office space.

Mayor: Our plan called for 1 million square feet in office space and you are saying less? 

The neighborhood plan did not have all the retail in it that Percheron Square has (852,000 sq. ft?).

Ajay: Yes, our office space was based on [5] parking decks, with that we get 420,000. With no decks, surface parking will cause office space to go down about 1/2.

 Mayor: You're not asking for any TID money for decks?

I think Ajay had to clarify this. The other developer could ask for TID to keep the decks and thus keep all office space of 420,000 of the freestanding office space, not the retail/office mix along Bluemound. 

The subject of connectivity came up several times. Approval based on Patrick Blvd. connecting to Percheron Square does not seem to be a major issue. (Patrick Blvd. extension runs through the neighboring DNR designated wetlands.)

Jennifer Donze raised some good points.

Donze: One of the things I feel is important to plan is the connection to office parks to the west. If we wait for DNR approval after plan [approval] that keeps us from other alternatives. I would request the permit to the DNR prior to the public hearing. 

She also brought up the narrow feel of Percheron Square Drive, a north south internal connection road between the tall office buildings.

Donze: 29 feet back to back is too narrow.

Mayor: "Narrower roads serve as traffic calming."  We have school on the other side, a narrower road puts drivers on notice that this is not a cut through, but a definite purpose.

Is that the same mayor who did not care that the Calhoun south neighborhood is now constructing a roadway the size of some highways cutting through it? 

Mark Nelson brought up this point and even said that other plans were denied because there were not other road connections within.

Mark Nelson: The dominoes needed to fall no matter who developed it. The one domino that is essential is the Patrick Blvd. We've stopped entire subdivisions because of too many culdusacs. We're lessening our standards without knowing what we can do with Patrick Blvd. 

The other domino is the Ruby and Swanson Swap. It seems to me those dominoes aren't going to fall in place right now. If we approve this, when can Mark Nelson step forward and say, Let's reduce buildings and heights

More work needs to be done to get it right.  

I heartily agree.  

Original plans of having Ruby Lane extended into the project have been scrapped. We were told that Elmbrook is not interested in any kind of playfield swap.

Jennifer Donze wished the future Ruby Lane extension would stay on the map.

Donze: There could be some time in the future that the school is no longer there. Why not keep it on the map for future use the city could not foresee? Sometimes plans aren't realized for 50 years.

Ertl fielded that one.

Ertl: School district lands are owned and controlled by the district... Matt Gibson was keen on the idea that the entire project was planned without needing school land.    

 Later Gary Mahkorn assured all that Swanson was off the table.

Mahkorn: I support taking Ruby Lane as a good will gesture to the School District off the map. It is an honorable gesture. I have a hard time believing Swanson will ever move. [Reference to I was at that Town Hall meeting with all the people.]

Why does that make me not feel assured? 

Talk of the poor economic climate and how this project was coming in not asking for TID money. Remember though, it is AVS not asking for TID money. There still could be a request for TID help for the parking structures. (Parking structures cost $15-16,000 each vs. surface parking at $2,000.)

This project is over the current FAR zoning of 30%. Of course the Plan Commission is salivating at the proposed $250 million increase to our tax base, so we know they will approve the PDD. I always ask myself, of that $250 mil, how much will it cost taxpayers in increased city services? Adding that much retail, office, and residential is bound to increase demand on fire, police, schools, and infrastructure, and add to traffic congestion. Plus, Brookfield does not have unlimited water supplies and certainly our sewer capacity does not seem to have excess capacity either.

There finally was some real clarification about the storm water. The Mayor again asked something about the water flow. 

Mayor: The water flow, once they do their grading it will decrease the amount?

Jeff  Chase: The devil is in the details. I haven't reviewed their plan yet, I have no reason to doubt their presentation.

Someone mentioned a standard of 120 ft/second. They propose 98 feet/second. (Sorry, I don't know if it was Chase or the next speaker.)

Then some "Expert" from the project stepped up to the podium. I think he felt he had to clarify.

Expert: The PEAK runoff rate, that is down 20%, not the total.

Jennifer Donze pipes up to help the mayor (and me) understand.

 Donze: They are slowing it down.

Bottom line is, after all the questions and doubts expressed, Gary Mahkorn makes his usual pronouncement...

Mahkorn: We're being asked to approve a PDD general plan, we're not committing to anything right now. Mark and Jennifer's issues ...[all the detail isn't there, but it doesn't need to be there.] 

We all knew someday Ruby Farm would be developed. I am prepared to approve the request tonight. All the other tough questions will be answered down the road. 

And with that, they all voted, AYE. 

Why is it whenever I hear "We aren't committing to anything now" later on, it seems, nothing can be changed? 

Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for  Monday, July 15th's Plan Commission meeting.

Links:

Brookfield7, Fairly Conservative, Betterbrookfield, Mark Levin , Vicki Mckenna

I am very pleased that Dan Sutton and Ron Balzer will be returning to the council, but extremely sorry that Terry Halmstad will not be joining them. Thank you, Terry for making the effort to make a difference.

 
Renee' Lowerr will join Brookfield's Common Council though, and that is a good thing too. She won by 105 votes:  Lowerr, 797  Schellinger, 692. That one was closer than I thought.

I think Lisa Mellone will appreciate having an enthusiastic fellow alderman for our district. Congratulations Renee'.
 

Elmbrook's referendum passed by 634 votes: Yes, 7,557 to No, 6,923. I would have thought in our current economic climate that it would not have passed. Note to self, next time I move (I should really say, if I move, since I never pictured myself living anywhere else), make sure our household income is not below the median.

Chanel 4 is calling the State Supreme Court for Gableman, so that definitely lifts my spirits. It has been 40 years since an incumbent lost, so this is quite a remarkable win.

He stated in his acceptance speech, "I believe the proper role of a judge is to apply the law not make it." I like that! He offered thanks to God for keeping him through the campaign. I like that even better.  Gableman's victory shifts the court by 1 vote to the conservative side, so that makes me very happy.

Gleisner lost. His race was not a hill to die on. Gleisner was more of a social conservative, but Neubauer maybe be better for the business climate in Wisconsin.

One oddity, in the school board race, the candidates who dropped out of the race each received over 4,000 votes!

Do we interpret that as voters are not very well informed or chalk it up to a protest vote?

OK, I can go to bed now. Glad this is over and done. Zzz   

Links:

Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna

It is nearing the big day for the 2008 spring election on Tuesday, April 1st. True, it is April Fools Day, but this election is no joke. There is a lot riding on the ballot this day, for one thing, a $62.2 million dollar school referendum.

Add an important State Supreme Court race and half of Brookfield's Common Council too, throw in a Constitutional Amendment and a few other races and I hope it adds up to a good turnout.

I will start with the biggest ticket item first. My picks are in bold and marked with an X. I live in the 7th district, but I will also include my picks for other districts as well. As always, familiarize yourself with the candidates and issues and make an intelligent choice.

My policy is to only vote for those I support. Unless I am reasonably familiar with a candidate's stance, I do not vote for them. If a candidate is unopposed and I don't support them, I don't vote for them. I may vote for a write-in instead as a protest vote. (My comments are in parenthesis.)

HERE IS TUESDAY'S BALLOT  (Thanks Fairly Conservative for the tip on looking up your area's ballot.)

AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (A.K.A. Elmbrook's $62.2 Million dollar referendum )

_ YES

X NO!!!

 

QUESTION 1: Partial Veto (A.K.A. Frankenstein veto)

X YES

   NO
 

Non-Partisan Races: 

JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT 

X MIKE GABLEMAN (Endorsed by Cong.Sensenbrenner, Ryan, Wisconsin Right to Life, and more info)

   LOUIS BUTLER (Endorsed by Sen. Feingold, Kohl, AFT & WEAC, Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Center Advocates)

 

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE, DISTRICT 2

X WILLIAM GLEISNER (Endorsed by Paul Bucher, who's ads state Gleisner is pro-life, gun rights, and voter ID)

   LISA S. NEUBAUER (Gov. Doyle appointee, more liberal than Gleisner)

 

COUNTY BOARD SUPERVISOR

THOMAS SCHELLINGER (Tom will make it for this one without my vote, remember 2006?)  

Former alderman JIM HEINRICH is also on the ballot for another area.

 

ALDERMEN, City of Brookfield  My picks if I could vote in every district. My district 7.

DISTRICT 1

X DAN SUTTON*  (Hands down my favorite here. Dan has great instincts. I hope to see him as council pres.)

DICK BRUNNER (My impression: Voted with mayor's agenda for every development and against neighborhoods.)

 

DISTRICT 2

X TERRY HALMSTAD (Seems to be everything I would look for in a candidate, he would be an asset on the council.)

RICK OWEN (Seems he votes with mayor's agenda for every development and against neighborhoods--including ours. Will the real Rick Owen please stand up?)

 

DISTRICT 3

X RON BALZER* (Ron often votes independently of mayor's agenda.  I would vote for him if I lived in 3.)

JACK SHAW  

 

DISTRICT 4

STEVE PONTO (I can't remember a vote of his that wasn't the mayor's agenda. Drives a cute red VW convertible though.)

DISTRICT 5 

SCOTT BERG* (His votes sometimes surprise you--not always with the mayor's agenda--he also is surprising.)

 

DISTRICT 6 

X CHRISTOPHER BLACKBURN* (I am so glad he is running again and has no opponent. He is very pro resident.)

 

DISTRICT 7 

X RENEE' LOWERR (Very energetic, hard worker, and I think will be sensitive to neighborhoods regarding development since she had her own NIMBY experience.)

TOM SCHELLINGER*, AGAIN. (Nice enough guy, but a neighbor refers to him as Mr. Roll-a-dex, because when he called Tom about an issue, Tom got the neighbor a phone number to call to solve for himself. Position never known on an issue until vote.) 

*The star denotes the aldermen who voted with our neighborhood to preserve our little Kinsey Park woods from an unwanted, paved, bike road. We barely squeaked a victory and would not have won had Gary Mahkorn not been on vacation.

Oh, I almost forgot...

SCHOOL BOARD: all unopposed 

X TOM GEHL (Tom and I don't see eye to eye on everything, like the referendum, but he made the hard decision to vote NO to 4K because it did not show academic merit. He is very prompt and polite in his response time to email questions.) 

DAVID MARCELLO (David is also pro referendum and will probably get in unless enough people write in CINDY KILKENNY as I will do. Then maybe we can start maintaining our schools.)

GARY JONES (He will get in, but this is another chance to choose your ideal candidate with a write-in. Gary seemed nice enough at the forum, but again, he is pro referendum.) 

 

Correction: C G SCHMIDT Cost summary of Referendum

ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS AND AIR CONDITIONING!  

 

 

Tomorrow is MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

 

 

 

 

I have to admit that seeing the sea of yellow hands being held up by the hopeful citizens last night made me smile. It reminded me of an evening in the spring of 2003 when a group I was involved in earnestly held up little green trees during a common council meeting.

Our neighborhood was passionate about saving our Kinsey Park woods from an 8 foot wide asphalt bike road.  We worked hard as a neighborhood, petitioning, leafleting the neighborhood, speaking before the council and parks department meetings, lobbying the aldermen and meeting with the mayor.

All that work culminated in a council vote one night. During that meeting, whenever an alderman said something against our plan, the sea of trees were held high and waved. Fortunately for us, we prevailed with a 7-6 vote.

Seeing the yellow hands last night reminded me of my experience 4 years ago. I had to laugh to myself how holding up that little green tree changed my life so.

My Kinsey Park issue was what sparked my interest in local politics and life has not been the same since!

 

The Kinsey Park issue also marked a turning point in local politics. It was only the 2nd incident, in recent times, that the public swayed the political process.

Since that time there have been a few more times that the public made their voices heard loud and clear.

Our Common Council votes are no longer 12-2 in favor of the mayor's agenda. The School Board demonstrated last night that they are willing to make the tough decisions.

I hope that people will step forward to run for the council and board positions open this spring. It would be such a shame to go back to business as usual. 

 

                                                                        

 

Someone brought to my attention that Wauwatosa Schools puts their school board meetings on Google video.

What a great idea!

I don't have cable TV (I just can't justify the cost) and I don't think I am alone it that. So I have often wondered why Elmbrook doesn't put their meetings on their website so all residents can view for free. But this Google video option would suit me just as well. 

I searched on Google video for Elmbrook, just in case our school district already was uploading to the web. I did not find any regular board meetings, but I did stumble onto Elmbrook HG&D discussion from Sept. 11, 2007 in case that would interest you.

So, how about it Elmbrook? The board meeting could be uploaded to Google video just as easily as to the public access cable channel, couldn't it? And best of all, it is free!

While we are on the subject of free access to public meetings, how about Brookfield doing the same with their Common Council meetings?

I Googled Brookfield but only found video of the sermons from my church. (If the council meetings are already on the web, I apologize that I am not a better Googler.)

This type of free public access to meetings will become more popular as time goes on. I just wish it was now. 

 

NEW COMMENT POLICY: Your pertinent, constructive comments are welcome. Please be aware however, that there is no guarantee that I will post them in their entirety. Some may not be posted at all.  By submitting your comment to me, you are agreeing to these terms: that if I do post your comment, I may use a portion or all of your comment.

Although I was pleased with the results from last night, it is clear from some comments at yesterday's common council meeting that those who were pro referendum really do not get it why we were not.

Last night I attended Brookfield's Common Council meeting and spoke up for keeping our fire stations where they were. I also said we were grossly understaffed and would need more stations in the future. Their new plan will not allow for additional stations to be added to serve the southeast side. Interestingly, for all the rhetoric over safety at the high schools, not one parent nor Dr. Gibson showed up to plea for keeping East's 1 minute EMS/fire response time to the high school.

Later during the discussion, Alderman Reddin slammed me for speaking out for the safety of East High School students when, according to him, I had spent the last 2 months saying we should do nothing for the high schools. That is his opinion and he is entitled to it. (You may watch the meeting to hear his exact comments on the cable broadcast. Alderman Nelson made a similar comment.)

I have a thick skin, I know not everyone agrees with me. BUT they obviously have not understood my position on the high schools at all.

I fear the board and administration will not "get it" either. Those who wanted this referendum will chalk up the NO vote to mean we are all against education. I don't believe that is true at all. We are against wasteful spending and poor stewardship. There is a BIG difference between the two.

PLEASE CONTACT ME IF YOU ARE AGAINST WASTEFUL SPENDING AND POOR STEWARDSHIP TOO. WE MUST BE BETTER ORGANIZED FOR THE NEXT REFERENDUM.

WE ALSO NEED TO STAY INVOLVED WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD AND ATTEND THE BUDGET HEARING & ANNUAL MEETING ON JUNE 25TH 7PM, (location to be determined). LAST YEAR THEY APPROVED THE $2.5 MILLION DEFEASANCE, WE NEED TO ALL BE THERE!


WANT TO CONTACT ME ANONYMOUSLY? CLICK HERE

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield, Votenoapril3.com

Only 27 days before Millions of Dollars Tuesday

Yes, that is right. Matt Gibson, Superintendent of Elmbrook Schools, spoke before the Brookfield Common Council last night! He was allowed about 10 minutes of public comment time. (The school district only gives residents 2 minutes to speak to the board before cutting them off.) Matt used his 10 minutes to promote the $108.8 million dollar referendum. (I thought the district was neutral on the referendum?) He also handed out a tri-fold flier to all the aldermen and staff.

Keep in mind; speaking before the council, at the public comment time, is done not only to address the council and gallery audience, but it is also an opportunity to speak to the wider cable broadcast audience.

The mayor already indicated in a Nov. 3, 2006 article, Officials back school plans, that he did not think the extra $287 dollars a year was too much to ask. (It has gone up since then)

That article stated, “Asked whether the projected cost and tax impact were in an acceptable range, Speaker said the costs were necessary to maintain local property values and educational achievement. Speaker said, ‘$287 to me is not a bad investment. To me, we have to look at keeping the School District competitive.’ ”

To our mayor, that extra $287 may not seem like a hardship. He does make $123,263 a year in salary and benefits--it is only about .23% of Speaker's income (not including other household income). But what about retired residents whose incomes are only in the $20,000 range? They would probably tell you an extra 1% is too much to ask.

Dr. Gibson’s speaking before the council last night and Mayor Speaker’s support of the referendum seems just too cozy to me. We know in the past, during the Swanson Swap, there had been cooperation between school district and city.

What do you think about this cooperation?

One reader contacted me to say that legally, Dr. Gibson can advocate for the referendum on his own time as a citizen. I might ask, since he is a salaried employee, how do you define own time? Plus, not everything legal is necessarily right.

P.S. FYI: Dr. Gibson just received a raise, his new salary for the 2007-08 school year will be $142,230 (not sure if that is including benefits).

LINKS:Brookfield7 postings Betterbrookfield