I’m not sure if anyone even cares about these. 2 people registered on the capital budget. Rosemary Lee against removing the philosopher stones and trees at the top of state and Anne Reynolds registered against cutting the cooperative funding.
AMENDMENT ONE
Library / New Project – Eastside Libraries Feasibility Planning
Alders Clausius, DeMarb, ResnickDirect the Library Planner to undertake a comprehensive study of the need for library services on the far eastside. The study will address geographic locations and their proximity to eastside population centers. Attention will be given to ensuring the sites can be safely accessed by all residents, including children, using many modes of transportation, particularly in major traffic corridors such as Stoughton Road, E. Washington Avenue and the Beltline, which are barriers to pedestrians and bicyclists. Consideration will be given to challenged areas and acknowledge equity and diversity needs. Existing proposals for the Pinney relocation, the Hawthorne relocation and Northeast and Grandview Commons sites will be reviewed to ascertain if they reflect the needs underscored by the comprehensive study.
Adds $100,000
Adds $11,723 in debt service starting in 2016
Adds $.13 taxes on the average homeNo surprises here, I thought there was an internal planning process planned for the east side, perhaps that didn’t go well, but it looks like the alders remain unsatisfied with the process and are seeking something better. Not sure what Resnick’s interest is, looks like Palm is supporting the staff and whatever process they did as his name is not on this one.
Joe Clausius makes the motion to approve, he says he is making it out of frustration, they had the same amendment last year, this is his eighth year on the board and he has been advocating for a library for the 25,000 – 35,000 people who don’t have library services. He has pestered the alder on the library board unmercifully on it, he pestered the librarian and been to the library board numerous times and after 8 years this is where they are, there still is no planning for funding for a branch library. The language is different because it addresses equity, low income areas and issues for pedestrians. He says that Pinney and Grandview are on the same street and less than a mile apart and we should not be talking about building two $5 – 6M libraries within a mile of each other and have no services for 25,000 – 35,000 people. This shouldn’t be about a developer but about where the needs of the people are.
Mike Verveer asks the staff to come up, they introduce the new planner (started 3 weeks ago). Verveer asks if they are doing this study anyways and isn’t the planner position to work on this. Greg Mickells says yes, he has been here two years and they worked on criteria and last year they got $100,000 to hire a planner, it took us a while to vet what we needed in that position and go through the hiring process, they have someone now and they hit the ground running. Verveer asks if the amendment is adopted, what will the $100,000 do if we have an in house. Clausius says they don’t know at this time. He would like to get the legislative analyst on it. He says all they have done is hire someone and now we need to direct her about what to do on the east side. Verveer tries to figure out what he wants, how would the money be used. Staff says they can use the funds (everyone laughs), he says it would supplement the current budget, the current budget only covered the salary and not all of it, this would cover shortages on salary, subscriptions to GIS databases to do a more thorough analysis, materials for public engagement, publication of final report and a website. He says that the relocation of Pinney is not a consideration, that site has been vetted and approved, they are moving forward with the Royster Corners location.
Larry Palm has been on the library board for 16 years and they have been working on siting issues since he has been on the board. He says they have documents and they have worked city wide to site libraries and there are lots of needs and they can’t put a library on every corner. People will have to travel to the library to use the services. We don’t have the resources to have a library in every district, but they are trying to serve the most amount of people with the least amount of costs. That requires a practical look at geography and uses and they are working on their 10 year plan. They are aware that there are several east side libraries and that is why he put in an amendment to hire a planner and he is pushing back at anyone that says where they need a library because that is just not how it works. The Central Library took a lot of resources. He wants more for his library and those things take time. His name is not on the amendment. He knows they can use some of the money for the process, so it is well worth it, but rejects it as a notion that the library staff are not doing anything.
Denise DeMarb hopes they look not only at brick and mortar but also technology to get resources to people. The closer you go to the city limits, the less ability there is to get to the library. She asks if the wages were a capital line item, they say yes. She thinks the language is important, east side planning hasn’t gone forward, they don’t understand how the siting happens. She saw the maps, but doesn’t understand why they don’t take other things into consideration like transportation issues.
Clausius says that this is about Eastside libraries. There is a lack of libraries on the east side, especially on the far east side. You have an overall city plan, but this is to key in on the east side because there is a void there.
Palm moves to delete “far” in the first line. Remove the examples of transit corridors and delete Pinney relocation. He says he is trying to get back to the concept of the “east side”. He says that would be more in line with what the library will do.
Verveer says he looked at the 2014 language and the language in there is a summary of what Greg cited that the money would be used for. He is wondering if they can just use that language. He wants to identify what the money would be used for. Palm tables his amendment, its seconded and passes, Verveer substitute is made by Palm, with the deletion of the Pinney branch relation language. Palm reads the language for everyone.
Mayor Paul Soglin asks how the money would be spent. Palm says marketing, staffing, etc. Mayor says then he should then take the money out of he operating budget. Palm says yes if it passes.
Lisa Subeck says this is a reauthorization and adding dollars. She says when they did this last year that they would hire a planner paid for by the projects and not just a salary because that goes in the operating budget. She was happy not to hire consultants so she is bothered by it being in there in this format. Sounds like the mayor would put it in the operating budget and it doesn’t make sense to do a repeat of last year.
Mayor asks Dave Schmiedicke (Finance Dept Director) to explain how this is in the operating budget. He says there are two items in 2014, one is in the operating budget that is a planner that charges it costs to the capital budget, there was then a capital budget item of $100,000 for an east side libraries planning. The $100,000 is not reauthorized so he assumes they are spending those dollars and the position remains authorized and he assumes they will continue to charge against capital projects. This item would be similar to the 2014 project item, its another $100,000.
Subeck asks if the funds will be spent. Mickells says they are beginning to. Will it be done by 2014? Will you expend all the funds? No. Then how much money do you need? Mickells doesn’t have the numbers. Mayor says but we have enough money in the operating budget without it. Mickells says yes.
Clausius says that nothing has happened yet, he is just trying to get a study about where we need libraries. He wants to hold people’s feet to the fire, he’s been at this eight years.
Subeck suggests that the goal to hold the feet to the fire does not require a number, you can just add language.
DeMarb says that no one understood there was money in the operating budget that they hadn’t seen yet, but if its in the operating budget, she is fine with it not passing.
Shiva Bidar-Sielaff asks if the position is there, but no money, is that right? Or is there money in the operating budget. Schmiedicke says the permanent position was created in 2014, but it is funded by charging against all capital budget projects and one of those projects is the $100,000 for the east side. Bidar says that they have not spent 2014, and we need to reauthorize the money. Schmiedicke says they did not ask for reauthorizaiton. Bidar says she thinks her colleagues would like that money to be reauthorized.
Marsha Rummel says she thought that she heard the mayor say the money is in the operating budget and the delay was in the hiring and she doesn’t think we need to start over, we are moving and she understands that they want this done, but they are starting this project.
Clausius asks if it is reauthorized the money would it be in the capital or operating budget (SERIOUSLY? 8 years and alder and sits on the Board of Estimates???) Schmiedicke patiently replies that it is the capital budget.
The Palm amendment of the 2014 language fails with only one aye (DeMarb?).
Subeck removes the dollar amount and leaves the language. Verveer seconds. Verveer asks what the affect of that would be. He asks about reauthorizing the money. He asks the staff what money they would need. $200,000 in salary would be required for the 2 years of LTE. He says that GIS and outreach would be more.
Mayor asks if he can speak bluntly. They say yes, he says there was a need to do something profound in last year’s budget, they will use capital projects to fund operating positions and they did that last year to show what they could do instead of doing it the conventional way and attach it to the general borrowing. When it came time to fill the position, they spent more time than normal in recruitment and he’s glad they did. They got the desired result, an excellent candidate. Now they want to reassert the policy itm in the capital budget, be sympathetic to the alders and compound last years problem with this year’s action when we don’t need the money. His suggestion is find another way to make the statement but don’t monkey with the capital budget.
Subeck was trying to be empathetic, we have done studies that have not been done before, she has no problem failing this and the amendment, but to be blunt the reason they should fund it is because the library didn’t ask for it, they have the planner and they plan to work on this. If they didn’t have the money, that would have been part of the budget request, this will happen regardless of us adding $100,000.
Palm thinks what he is hearing is that they figured out how to pay for the person but we haven’t figured out what tools they will be using and how much the tools will cost. The only thing in this whole conversation that makes any sense to him is that they have hired someone without tools and maybe we want to find out how to pay for the tools, but we haven’t heard how much those things can be. He says that all capital projects get paid back through the operating budget, and he thinks they should figure it out and come back.
Mayor recommends to put his on the table and they might be able to come up with appropriate language in the mean time.
Chris Schmidt says they can set the priority through a resolution, he doesn’t feel comfortable dealing with it tonight, Clausius is ok withdrawing it. Process lecture by the mayor. Subeck motion withdrawn. Clausius amendment 1 withdrawn.
RESULT: AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN
AMENDMENT TWO
Fire / Project No. 10 – Employee Development & Station 14
Ald. DeMarbProvide General Obligation Debt funding of $500,000 in 2016 for design and $7,660,000 in 2017 for construction of a new Fire Station (No. 14). Move funding for the Training Center of $400,000 in 2015 for a site study and $2,350,000 in 2016 for construction of a new exercise building and multi-use technical training tower to 2019 and 2020, respectively.
$400,000
Save $46,892 in debt service starting 2016
Saves $.52 taxes on the average homeFunding for Fire Station in 2016 and 2017, adds funding in future years so there are no notes on what this will cost taxpayers so it looks like a savings but includes an increase, but also, it just postpones the fight until another year.
Funding for Training Center for fire postponed to 2019 and 2020.
Not sure what the two of these are in the same motion.
DeMarb makes motion, Schmidt seconds. She hopes this will go smoother. She asks the Chief and Economic Development to come up. She says she has a question not about the fire department but people. She met with the chief about not having a fire station in her district and she not only has the same amount of residents, but over 400 businesses so they are underrepresented and the east side has less ambulance service. She asks the chief to speak to call times. The chief gave them maps and charts that I can’t share with you cuz I didn’t show up and get them. He says station 5 on Cottage Grove Rd could get there in 7 minutes and the second truck could get there in 9 minutes and that is more than the 5 minutes they strive for. He explains the other maps that show what 5 minute response times are, one map he can’t figure out and skips and then the last page shows the number of calls they have in that area. They say 4 a day is when they locate a station in the neighborhood. He says they also have talked about equity of service to look at race equity and social justice to make sure the resources are located appropriately citywide. On a bright note, when they talked to the DCR folks they found that time is one of the best measures. DeMarb says that they don’t need the money in 2015, planning in 2016 and be operational in 2018. The chief says that he would delay the training center to get another fire station. She says that Stoughton Rd is an employment corridor, she says that when other neighborhoods empty out during they day, her’s doesn’t. This would be located near the beltline. This would serve 5 neighborhoods and lots of businesses.
Mayor says he has no problem moving it ahead and switching it, but what will the operating costs be? He says they talked about adding an ambulance which would be 9 people, $850,000. And then there may be over or under representation in the rest of the city and they will move services based on that for now. The population has grown enough that they will try to use the SAFR grant in the future.
DeMarb says she understands this is a lot of money, public safety is a huge part of the budget, 47% of the budget goes to public safety and she is pretty conservative fiscally and she didn’t take this lightly.
Palm asks about the Blooming Grove Fire Department. The chief says they have come to a tentative agreement but it has to pass their Town Board. Palm asks if they are included in the response times. He says no. Palm asks if they have shared response, chief says no. Palm asks why May numbers are so high? He says a lot of it is related to weather. Palm asks why you wouldn’t want to do the training center at the same time? Chief says he is also fiscally conservative and he doesn’t want to go to the well too much, but if you’re willing to give it us we’ll take it. He says that change in leadership has really changed at MATC and he thinks in the next 5 years their needs can be met.
Subeck asks about the fire station built in district 3, how much of the city won’t meet the 5 minute response times. Chief says this is about it. He says based on info from planning, this will meet future needs and the next area will be the west side near Epic. He says station 15 is on a map in that area.
David Ahrens asks about May data, chief says it is pulled off the CAD, there could be a glitch.
Ruth Roelich from Economic Development says that DeMarb asked them to look at how much of the labor force is in this area and Dan Konelly found that there was about 3700.
RESULT: AMENDMENT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY ON A VOICE VOTE
AMENDMENT THREE
Police / Project No. 10 – Midtown District Station
Alder Schmidt and Bidar-SielaffCurrently, MPD’s West District is, by population, the fifth largest city in Wisconsin, generates 1/4 of MPD’s workload, and covers approximately 1/3 of the City and of its streets. A site has been acquired for a new Midtown Station on Mineral Point Road (former Mt. Olive Church site). The creation of this new district will reduce the workload from not only the West but also the South and Central Districts. The South District is near capacity and will be over capacity when the Town of Madison becomes part of the City. The Central District has seen demands for its staff increase as the number of downtown events have increased. The new Midtown Station would cover roughly an area from Whitney Way to Park Street and University Avenue to (east to west) Regent Street, Monroe Street, and the Beltline. Given these boundaries, Midtown Station would handle coordination for Badger games rather than Central, reducing their workload. The target date for opening the station would be January 2017. An additional $6,895,000 in General Obligation Debt will be added to the 2016 Capital Improvement Plan to complete the project. It is anticipated that existing officers would be reassigned to the new station, and that approximately 6 new support staff would need to be hired.
$2,125,000
Adds $249,115 in debt service starting in 2016
Adds $2.77 per year to the average taxes on a home.Well, a few questions here, first, why wasn’t this already in the budget since they are moving forward with this? Second, why only two sponsors given all the impact it is supposed to have? And third, 6 new support staff, where is that money coming from? The operating budget part of this is sure to be much harder.
Chris Schmidt asks about the need for the station. Assistant Chief Randy Gaber hands out more maps, again I have no links for you. Gaber says that he is a product of community policing, he worked on decentralization and there is an issue of efficiency, but also how we connect with our community and figure out what is unique about various areas and this area is too big. If you belong to a neighborhood, you know if a car belongs there, same is true with policing. That is why the decentralize. Schmidt asks if this will help in some of the distressed neighborhoods? Chief Koval says that you will have more special initiatives and be able to work better in a smaller area. He says you are taking the largest district, 6 people from 11pm to 7am, 2 will be on a drunk driver (2 hours), 2 will be on a domestic violence case (1.5 – 2 hours if the jail is moving well) now if you have a mental health person, that will be the duration, or two officers on a sexual assault and they are in for the duration and you are not serving the 5th largest city in Wisconsin and your closest back up is at Camp Randall. Schmidt asks about timing, we bought the land, why now as opposed to delaying two or three years. Koval says that there is a need now, the city and complexity is growing and waiting will exacerbate the problems we are seeing now.
Palm says he doesn’t understand Midtown? Koval says they can rename it if they move it up. Palm says they are taking up much of central. Koval says this is only 2 sectors. This makes the access points of the citizens easier and it will deflect a lot of the burdens of special events. Fall football for instance.
DeMarb is confused about how they can add another district without hiring more officers. Koval says they will need an adjustment. They have some ambitious things coming with neighborhood initiatives, and they will be asking for more poeple.
Mayor says he would like them to get an update on the increase. Schmiedicke says according to the police budget request, in year 1, is will be $1.1M, $250,000 in vehicles and equipment, and some one time money and the ongoing costs would be $800,000.
Subeck asks when the 1st year would be. Schmiedicke says 2017.
Verveer asks if the support staff are civilians, or is it a captain, lieutenant, etc. Koval says they are looking at earmarking 2 lieutenant positions and coexisting with the transition, they would be moved to civilian positions (personnel and records). Verveer asks again if they are civilians. Terry says it is a Captain, a Sergeant for the CPT team, 2 officers for CPT, the PRT and the 2 lieutenants or civilians, whatever that turns out to be. Verveer asks when the positions would be civilianized? THey say in 2017. Verveer asks when the last time they redrew districts or setors was. Koval says he started in ’83 and a lot of the area that is by Glenway Golf Course, those were baker cars (west), blah, blah, blah, boils down to not much substantive. Verveer asks about staffing studies and why the sectors have not been withdrawn, densities have increased dramatically. Koval says that sectors can be small geographically and yet have a lot of population and make up a beat. Verveer asks if moving the boundary lines would help, Koval says you wouldn’t diminish response times or get the community they want. Verveer says that redrawing the lines could solve some of the problems. Koval says they try to have equity among the beats. Gaber says that when they decentralized areas of the city, they examined what they thought was best but now the district stations are where they are. Dividing the sectors may not make the differences you think.
Schmidt asks if there are grants they can apply for? Koval says they are aggressive on the COPS grants and they are petitioning for a deferment.
Bidar asks about the maps and wonders if community engagement could change things. Koval says that is a good restatement.
Mayor says when they see the operating budget you will see what a bind they are in. It works two ways, first the tax increase cuz of rising debt service, imagine what that would be like if they didn’t make significant cuts over the last three years, and second cuz of the levy limits. Add to that, even tho we could defer promised salary increases, we have to meet them the next two years. He has no clue in 3 years, between moving up the fire station, which has a lower operating cost than the training station and adding the police station how any of the social service and disparity demands will be met let alone balancing the existing service levels with these kind of decisions.
Bidar hopes they will support it, we do have demands to do with social services and equity and she thinks about that when she comes forward with aendments, she says it is hard to make these decisions without seeing the operating budget, and we get a second kick at the can when they have the full picture. She says that in talking with Koval and command staff, they need to balance the neighborhood needs and quality of life, so freeing some resources to allow better community policing is important to her. This is not pushing something for our districts, but pushing for better ability for police to be effective and proactive. She says the piece that does impact her is that she has 5 districts in her aldermanic district and none of them know what is going on in her district. She says that proactive police response is high in dictators of quality of life in the city. She thinks they need that in the high tax base district like hers. She thinks that this matches well with strategic planning.
Schmidt says this is about prioritization. We are faced with balancing a huge number of priorities and this impacts the operating budget and we will need to work that out as we go along. WE change our mind every year about major projects and we should set this on a more certain path.
RESULT: PASSES ON VOICE VOTE UNANIMOUSLY
AMENDMENT FOUR
Information Technology / New Project – Neighborhood Center Connectivity
Mayor Paul SoglinThe purpose of this project is to provide fiber-optic or high-speed point-to-point radio connections to community and cultural centers. The connections will allow the centers to gain access to higher speeds of broadband for community member use. Many families, in the areas where these centers are located, do not have access to high-speed broadband. This project would provide a facility, in several low income neighborhoods, where citizens could go to get access to high-speed Internet service
Adds $200,000
Adds $23,446 in debt service starting in 2016
Adds $.26 per year to the taxes on an average homeI hope they don’t charge to use the computer lab like they do at the Salvation Army in Darbo. Or limit it mostly to kids like they do at the Boys and Girls Clubs.
Mayor says that after the budget was submitted they discovered they couldn’t do what they planned to get service to the neighborhood centers so that is why they need more money.
Subeck says she thought that the whole city was wired to get high speed internet. Mayor asks Rich Beadles to explain what MUFN does. Beadles says there are pockets in the city that are underserved and unserved. The first part of the grant we got funded and we didn’t get the second grant. We do have fiber backbone in a large part of the city, from that backbone we can run lateral from those back bones. Subeck asks if this will be city owned, they say yes. Subeck asks if we can’t use Charter’s system, Mayor says no.
Palm says we can’t, but the neighborhood center’s private entities can. Palm asks where these centers are. Beadles says the Resiliance Center, Teresa Terrace, Norhtport, Packers, Urban League, Centro Hispano, Gasia House, Outreach, Allied Drive, Old Grist (?) Restaurant and Salvation Army on Darbo. The city owned centers will be wired by the end of the year. Palm asks why not Goodman? Beadles says that is included. Palm asks if all centers will be connected. Jim O’Keefe from Community Development says it is not city owned, but city funded centers will all have high speed by the end of the year and then these other community centers and neighborhood centers will be covered. Palm asks if they will be paying or the city is paying. They will pay us. Beadles says supranet and others will run the service, they will still need a provider. Mayor says we are providing the diamond lane.
DeMarb says there was money in last year’s budget, there was a committee around that, does that haven anything to do with that. Mayor says no, that was for neighborhoods.
Scott Resnick says this is a good idea and proposal, the one question he has, are we doing point to point or laying fiber? Beadles says all but one. Resnick says there is a map that shows where fiber is laid and if we have more budget to do fiber we should encourage it. Resnick asks if it is a priority of the centers to be equipped with modern devices – if you can’t run youtube on the equipment why do you need high speed internet? Jim O’Keefe says it varies but it is a goal to improve their technological capabilities.
Rummel asks about money that these groups applied to for money in the Digital Divide committee, how does this all relate? Resnick says this is an extension, even if we try to accomplish something in the homes, but we still need this at the centers and the people who use them. Mayor says it is critical for those who don’t have a computer at home. Mayor says they want to encourage participation. Rummel says she remembers Darbo getting something to put on their facility and extend it to households at East Pointe. Mayor says there are several issues, first who controls the ability to transmit info on cables, that is something left to municipalities, municipalities could license organizations, when we had the franchise control, we could have standards, they couldn’t cherry pick and not go to just the welthiest neighborhoods and they had to be the same quality. The state legislature then got involved and said any company could go into the marketplace and the competition was supposed to bring lower prices and higher quality services and after 8 years that hasn’t happened. More companies entered the market place, but not more quality and they didn’t go into low income and isolated neighborhoods. While all this was going on, a consortium was formed to send high speed networks through the community, the first goal was public buildings, schools, community facilities, libraries. When the legislature deregulated, they also limited what we could do with MUFN (the high speed group), this is to follow up and continue getting access to these community buildings. How do we get access to low income households is a different matter, different network, different regulations. Rummel asks about project 10 and this amendment. Mayor says that the digital divide is used to describe the problem of getting connectivity to low-income households or public buildings. This the service that Charter, AT&T provides. They charge for that service. In some communities providers like Comcast will provide a basic servce at $9.99 per month, to qualify you have to have a child in the house that qualifies for free and reduced lunch. In some communities they even subsidize that, they have tried to work with Charter to do that and they have refused and we have no leverage. Now there is a couple of ways to deal with the problem, some are in other amendments before you, but we have been working hard as a city to get the FCC to issue an order preempting the state legislation and return control to local municipalities, two members are conflicted, the chair is undecided and they are taking comments and they have been working to get in comments and if they are successful this fall, then we can do something in terms of access to low income households.
Palm is concerned about the language in the amendment, he understood Rich’s explanation, he supports it cuz it is the right thing to do, but the language is not specific enough and had more substance.
Mo Cheeks says alot of this is about the digital divide, he says the school is analyzing their data on their surveys and they will have info in the next few weeks, he wants to define what high speed internet means? He says almost none of us has high speed fiber coming to our homes. How many homes are we talking about. Beadles says 4 megabits per second is the minimum, he says they struggled to figure out how many people are underserved, because Charter and others won’t share that information. Cheeks says he feels ill-equiped to spend the money we have in our budget or decide if $250,000 is the right amount of money, we don’t know who needs it. It is worthwhile to get this to neighborhood centers, but we need it in the households. Mayor says national studies say 1/3 of all households do not have access. They work from that.
Resnick says that with low income households who choose between internet or food, or internet or housing, that number jumps to 60% who do not have internet access period. That includes mobile internet access.
Anita Weier asks about Vera Court and Kennedy Heights? O’Keefe says they will be connected by the end of 2014. This is for facilities that are over and above the city supported neighborhood centers.
Subeck asks about what most neighborhood center have now. O’Keefe says they don’t have direct access right now. Subeck says she has Uverse, they tell me I have high speed internet, Charter claims they can provide higher, so when you get Charter high speed, what do you have. Someone says it depends on the neighborhood. They are trying to figure out how this compares, is it cheaper, is it faster, how does it improve. Beadles says low end Uverse is 6 megabits per second. That is download, upload is 1 megabyte or half a megabyte. So uploading homework or a video you did for a class, it would be the same speed up or down. Subeck says it would be a significant increase. Beadles say yes.
DeMarb asks if there are on-going costs. Beadles says the city says that the centers will pay $30. DeMarb asks if this is better than just calling Charter, they said yes.
Bidar asks if the neighborhood centers want this? O’Keefe says that the extension to city neighborhood centers, they were eager to get it, they are impatient to get it.
Mayor says we are talking about 1,000s of young people using these resources and this is their only access to the internet. There are no guarantees in life, but with this service and a few hundred dollars of year, if they can’t afford it, they should be able to find the funds for the monthly bills. In terms of the equipment, it ought to motivate them, we can’t do it all, we can’t guarnatee outcomes, we have to take some risks if we are serious about doing something about the divide, this is one mechanism that is relatively cheap to get significant outcomes not just in terms of education, but also job opportunities.
Palm wants to be added as a co-sponsor. Lets just move on and get to the next item.
RESULT: PASSES UNANIMOUSLY ON A VOICE VOTE
AMDNEMENT FIVE
Information Technology / New Project – Feasibility Study for a Madison Co-op Internet Utility
Alders Resnick, Schmidt*, Clear, ClausiusFund this new project with General Obligation Debt of $100,000 in 2015 and $250,000 in 2016. Add the following narrative for the project: The purpose of this project is to study the feasibility of a Madison cooperative internet utility to provide wireless internet services to low income neighborhoods and families. The study must meet the objectives outlined within Wisconsin Statute §66.0422 to start a municipal internet utility, gather input from existing service providers on cooperative models of internet service, facilitate meetings among non-profit partners such as the University of Wisconsin-Madison and Madison Metropolitan School District, explore relevant businesses models, and index existing resources and infrastructure within the City of Madison to better serve the public beyond the Isthmus. The study should explore LTE and LTE- Advanced options and provide a scalable solution. In 2016, $100,000 of capital funding is allocated for operational software, licensing, back-end network systems, and authentication software. The remaining $150,000 is used for required infrastructure, installation fees, and radio base stations.
Adds $100,000
Adds $11,723 in dept service starting in 2016
Adds .13 per year to the taxes on the average homeAmendments 4 and 5 seem to be the one sign of an upcoming election.
Resnick says this is the other part that addresses how to get internet into the households. The residential access program was approved last year, this was to leverage the MUFN network to use it to the maximum potential. He says they should look at the map. Our police, fire and libraries (all but 4) are connected. They looked at the needs and wants, instead of looking at fiber to the home, what other networks are out there, not MadCity Broadband, what could they do now. They came up the solution of a LTE network, this is not as strong as fiber to the home, but its more affordable. If we wanted to provide service to Darbo would would need the network (software), a tower and a my-fi device, an internet router to get the connections. This is a feasibility study. This is the first step to get around the state law. Sun Prairie is doing this. It is like extending the library connection for a mile and a half. Sun Prairie spent $40K, this is $100K, even with the FCC discussions, but he is not helpful, they just voted against net neutrality. They are looking at the most egregious states, and some like Tennessee are worse. He encourages them to support this.
DeMarb asks Resnick if amendment 4 is redundant. Resnick says no, the network needs to be points on the fiber grid, if we are laying fiber it could be on a water tower or police station or a neighborhood center which are probably the best places. We spend a quarter million every year to expand and no one has questioned it for 5 years.
Subeck says we have LTE coverage all over the city, is there a reason we cannot use those towers. Resnick says that they are owned by private companies, police and fire use Verison or (missed it). Subeck asks about how soon this will become obsolete. They explain that they are trying to address that.
RESULT: PASSES ON VOICE VOTE
AMENDMENT SIX
Miscellaneous / New Project – Participatory Budgeting
Alder Cheeks, Rummel, Schmidt*Provide $100,000 of General Obligation Debt to support $50,000 for a contract with the Participatory Budgeting group,
$20,000 for outreach services (publications, door-to-door canvassing, social media and website costs), $10,000 for documentation and data collection, and $20,000 for Neighborhood Resource Team area assemblies. This project is anticipated as a first-year start-up budget to support a participatory budgeting effort that fosters citizen participation in local government by offering an opportunity to influence neighborhood programs and projects. Participatory budgeting is a method to improve transparency in government, increase accountability of elected officials and build civil society while empowering neighbors to determine neighborhood investments.$100,000
$11,723
.13This was one of the presentations at the Mayor’s Conference and this is a follow up to that. We’ve been talking to mayor’s about participatory budgeting for AT LEAST 10 years, so nice to see this moving forward.
Cheeks says at the Mayor’s Neighborhood Conference they brought in people to talk about leveraging the Neighborhood Resource Teams and giving them a budget amount to allow them to use participatory budgeting to determine how it is spent. It is a popular tactic that is spreading across the world in the last 10 years and it would be well served for the City of Madison to do it. He sent them a lengthy memo earlier this afternoon to answer more questions.
Mayor says he has some comments that he hopes shortens the questions. For the last several years we have been going through a process where neighborhood resource teams have been making recommendations and they have been funded, we did this in the 90s and we picked it up again. IN this budget there is close to 3/4 of a million dollars from that process by NRT citizens folks and staff, this would take that process further. He has one question, how does the system work if they decide for a capital improvement that will require operating funds given the levy limit. Cheeks says that is not resolved, that will be part of the process.
Rummel says they have been working on this, focusing on the NRT areas it would be a way to engage communities that are not involved in our budgeting process. They have seen this grow, 20 alders in New York are using it, its used in Chicago and other places. Most of this is capital improvements, they spent time crafting it to fit into the existing budget process, its a 2 year thing. If everything gets in the budget is still up to this, but it is a way to get more information for us.
Palm asks if they can contract with a specific group in the budget. Schmiedicke says it would be a sole source contract. Palm asks if it would be a sole source or RFP, but that is a policy choice of the council. Palm says in other communities they create pots of money for people to decide on. In Chicago the alders get pots of money to divvy it up. In New York they set a chunk of dollars and gave it to the groups, he is leary of it, but you are dividing people. Maybe the intent is different here, but he would like to see them include all residents and citizens instead of saying NRTs and specific pots of money.
Mark Clear asks if there is a way to get at the way Madison is known for being participatory in its government but we all know that the participation is not equitable, it is a relatively small group of people with a high level of participation and many many others who don’t participate. Is there a process to level the playing field in this process. Rummel says part of the 1st part is to engage communities and do that outreach. If the same old people show up, then this isn’t successful, we need new people to show up, who elect a delegation and they select projects. Then it will feed into our system instead of being a separate system. Clear asks how you keep it grounded in reality – the Ideascale and budget meetings because with those everything is a top priority and when people get involved they get frustrated and walk away. How do we ensure that we don’t create a bunch of good ideas we can’t fund. Cheeks says that is why we are taking a year to develop this. We want to build on the success of other communities where they have a higher participation on this than people who vote, and it includes those who cannot vote. That is part of the equity piece. How to address the grand visions isn’t worked out. Part of it will be done by the dollar amount.
DeMarb says this is about if there would be an RFP process in the this. Cheeks says that this is a group that is a consultant and the only folks that have a track record of being involved. He says another group is interested, they would not charge us, but they are not professionals. DeMarb says you keep saying “we”, who is “we”? There is no department aligned with this, who would be driving this work. Rummel says the equity task force and NRT staff. They have been involved. Mayor says with Finance. Rummel says that Schmiedicke came to the workshop. Demarb says that Schmiedicke has been involved in the equity workgroup and has been interested in this beyond the workshop.
Subeck is excited about his, she has been to many presentation with alders in Chicago and New York, it is impressive and they continue to be surprised by the results. You get very different results than from a group of people who come and speak downtown. You get equity.
Bidar says you may want to call out who is going to follow through, she is excited about it too.
Clausius says the Dane County Youth Commission does something like this, he supports it. If no RFP, would those people monitor how the money is spent? Where is the control between the citizen group and the pot of money. Rummel says we can write an RFP, she assumes that is how it will work, we will have a contract with them. Clausius says they are not by-passing the RFP process.
Palm moves to remove the specific organization. That passes.
RESULT: MOTION PASSES ON VOICE VOTE UNANIMOUSLY
AMENDMENT SEVEN
Eng. – Bicycle and Pedestrian / Project No. 1 – Bikeways & Misc. Improvements
Alder PalmAdd $200,000 in General Obligation Debt to purchase the property located at 217 N. First Street and to construct bike facilities on the south side of E. Johnson Street between First Street and Second Street.
$200,000
$23,466
.26Expanding and improving a bike path in his district
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT EIGHT
Eng. – Bicycle and Pedestrian / Project No. 1 – Bikeways & Misc. Improvements
Alder PalmAdd $325,000 in General Obligation Debt to construct a wide sidewalk or path along Packers Avenue through Demetral Park to better accommodate pedestrian and bike traffic. Currently there is no existing sidewalk/path there and this would improve safety.
$325,000
$38,100
.42Again, improvements in his district
Verveer asks why they didn’t use park impact fees. Staff explains that Engineering will be doing the work, they table this to determine it parks fees could be used.
TABLED
AMENDMENT NINE
Eng. – Bicycle and Pedestrian / Project No. 4 – Sidewalk Program
Mayor Soglin, Alder VerveerReduce the amount of Other Funding from Special Assessments from $1,500,000 to $1,000,000.
$500,000
I think this is just saying we are going to use less special assessments money for the project and since there will be less revenue there will be less spent. Maybe the project just ended up cheaper too?
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT TEN
Eng. – Bicycle and Pedestrian / New Project – State Street 700/800 Blocks TID No. 32 – State Street
Alds. Resnick, Verveer, ZellersReauthorize $500,000 of TID 32 Cash from the 2014 Capital Budget. The work in 2015 will include plantings and the installation of a public art piece titled “The Leaf”.
$500,000
This is a reauthorization, so it was in last year’s budget, but not spent. Many times these are just automatically included in the budget. This is likely more of an administrative fix.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT ELEVEN
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 4 – Railroad Crossings and Quiet Zones TID #37 Union Corners
Mayor Soglin, Ald. RummelQuiet Zone #4 – Extend to include the crossings at Corry Street and Waubesa Street. Each crossing is expected to require a signal upgrade to 12 inch flashers, new gates, constant warning time and power out indicators. Costs are estimated at
$250,000 per crossing for a total of $500,000. Construction will take place in 2017, using General Obligation Debt supported by TID#37.Quiet Zones, yeah, this has been an issue since 2000 when I was an alder representing the First St. area . . . good to see Marsha continuing to be tenancious on this one, following in Judy Olson’s footsteps.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT TWELVE
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 5 – Pavement Management Water Utility / Project No. 1 – Water Mains – Replace/Rehab/Improve TID #32 State Street
Ald. VerveerAdd Lake Street from University Avenue to Dayton Street to the resurfacing list. Pavement will be resurfaced, replacing spot curb and gutter and sidewalk as necessary. Pedestrian lighting will be installed. Other funding consists of $150,000 of TID #32 cash and $110,000 of special assessments.
General Obligation Debt $ 150,000
Other Funding: TID #32 cash 150,000
Other Funding: Special Assessments 110,000
Water Utility Other Funding: Revenue Bonds 150,000
Total: $ 560,000
Debt Service $17,585
.20Mike working his magic to get improvements in his district while raising taxes as little as possible, he is a master of TIF and that makes the rest of the council envious.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT THIRTEEN
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 11 – Atwood Avenue
Alds. Rummel, Schmidt*Increase budget and modify text description to:
Schenks Corners: Atwood Avenue and Winnebago Street intersection reconstruction including Atwood to First Street and special amenities.
Construction Year: 2016Total: $1,200,000
GO: $1,050,000
Assessments: $150,000Special amenities?
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT FOURTEEN
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 14 – Capitol Square Pavement Replacement TID #25 Wilson Street
TID #32 State Street
Ald. VerveerRevise the 2016 funding sources to: GO: $2,542,500
TID32: $423,750 TID25: $423,750
Total: $3,390,000
Project funding revised to recognize TIF funding sources.Again, Mike working his TIF magic. No wonder all the alders want TIF districts, I might be the only alder to never want one.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT FIFTEEN
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 34 – Monroe Street
Alds. Dailey, Schmidt*, ResnickAdvance Monroe Street construction timetable by one year. Preliminary funding of $885,000 is moved from 2016 to 2015, and construction funding of $9,120,000 ($8,850,000 General Obligation Debt and $270,000 special assessments) is moved from 2017 to 2016
$885,000
103,749
1.15Moving projects up usually doesn’t work as staff doesn’t usually get things done earlier than they can. Also, shouldn’t this all be worked out during the TIP discussion?
TABLED FOR ALDERS TO COME BACK IN THE ROOM
AMENDMENT SIXTEEN
Engineering – Major Streets / Project No. 35 – Old Middleton Roundabouts
Alds. Clear, Schmidt*, SkidmoreDelete the project from the CIP.
Anti-roundabout? Not funded til 2020 but being removed now.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT SEVENTEEN
Engineering – Major Streets / New Project – North Gammon Road
Alds. Clear, Schmidt*, SkidmoreYear: 2020
Funding: $50,000 G.O.This project will reconstruct and widen North Gammon Road from Tree Lane to City of Madison limits to a full urban arterial boulevard cross section with median, left turn lanes, sidewalk and bike lanes. Planning, surveying and beginning of design and public information meetings are proposed for year 2020. Construction year is not scheduled.
Again, seems like this should have been resolved during the TIP discussions. At least that was the excuse used against us when we tried to cut projects in the past. Maybe adding projects doesn’t get the same scrutiny.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
AMENDMENT EIGHTEEN
Parks Division / Project No. 8 – Playground/Accessibility Improvements Impact Fees – Vilas-Brittingham
Alds. Bidar-Sielaff, Schmidt*Parks Project No. 8, Playground/Accessibility Improvements, includes $175,000 in impact fee funding for two playground replacements at Stevens Street Park. This amendment adds $95,000 ($50,000 General Obligation Debt and $45,000 impact fee cash) for improvements to the seating area, basketball court, and retaining walls.
General Obligation Debt $ 50,000
Other Funding: SI 27 cash 45,000
Total: $ 95,000
Adds 5,862 per year staring in 2016
Adds $0.07 in taxes on the average home.Ah, the parks scramble to spend parks impact fees and get projects done in your neighborhood, Bidar-Sielaff is good at this one.
PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITHOUT DISCUSSION
ooops, got ahead of myself . . . . see next blog post . . . .
CONCLUSION
Items 19 – 34 will be blogged tomorrow, there is only about an hour of the meeting left, but I gotta go teach a seminar!
