Ok – I’m done . . . enjoy!
AMENDMENT ONE
Agency: Miscellaneous Appropriations / Direct Appropriation to Capital; General Fund Revenues; Capital Revolving Fund
Page(s): 10, 15, 23
Sponsor(s): Alds. Sanborn, Pham-Remmele, SchumacherDissolve the Capital Revolving Fund and eliminate Facade Improvement and Lighting Enhancement Grants. Transfer fund balance and loan repayments from the Capital Revolving Fund to General Fund Revenues – Miscellaneous Revenues. Add a corresponding amount of expenditure authority to the Direct Appropriation to Capital/Special Revenue line in Miscellaneous Appropriations.
No levy impact, puts money towards the capital budget to reduce borrowing by $1,008,731.
Sanborn has a substitute to exclude the lighting enhancement grant. Change the amount to $958,731. This is another repeat amendment, he doesn’t like facade improvement grants. Quips that he has a home office and needs new siding and maybe he’ll apply for the money. Small cap tif and this program are a pure give away to people. Also thinks that this amendment is a nice way to address our outstanding debt issues. Pays down debt and benefits operating budget for next 10 years.
Verveer says that appreciates that Percy is here and sits here for 2 nights and at Board of Estimates. Capital Revolving Fund is a positive program. It has helped countless projects, absolutely and clearly made a difference in the aesthetics in the community. Has had owners tell him that but for this very popular program they wouldn’t invest money to improve facades. He says it is so popular that budget authority was exceeded by applications. A few on hold for next budget year. Very popular. Appreciates Sanborn saving the new program on lighting.
Motion FAILS on a voice vote, with a few nos.
AMENDMENT TWO
Agency: General Fund Revenues
Page(s): 15
Sponsor(s): Alds. Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, SolomonIncrease Liquor/Miscellaneous General Fund Revenues in anticipation of several license fee increases.
Adds $25,000 in revenue to the budget.
Verveer asks them to keep amendment in mind with number 11. Number 2 is one of few positive revenue amendments in operating budget. Anticipates $25,000 for license fee increases. These are miscellaneous and alcohol licenses. He has talked about other amendments to raise finds, this is not duplicative Thanks clerk and Dan Bohrod for helping him with this amendment. Says specifics will be in the ordinance form later.
[This is the not-paying attention/bitter alert!]
Pham-Remmele says she is against the amendment. When only see liquor miscellaneous, it is a very simple way to describe it. If look carefully it is misleading. She serves on the Vending Oversight Committee and she notes this is the one and only commission she was assigned to serve on – and she was very surprised that Verveer has a puny amendment compared to amendment one. $25,000 is sticking the small business people, smallest vendors in the city, brief experience with this. She says if she is wrong [yes!], please correct her, she is so new in last 2.5 years [That excuse is getting sooooooo old.]. Says the fines have been raised fee recently. Vendors are selling food on the street at night in the cold. Warren Hanson is the coordinators, his job is checking and make sure no violations. Working much more with much less, had a part time assistant, Charlie, don’t know him, he quit part time job, he left Warren left without the assistance and they didn’t notice right away. He start;s early and goes late all by himself. Had to work with people who didn’t speak English and worked entire year without part time person. Money set aside to get the help and mayor took money and used it for something else. Sad situation of the economy, part time job with no benefits, left. Job was posted, 32 people applied . . .
Mayor wakes up and interrupts and asks how this is relevant?[It’s not!]
Pham-Remmele says Warren still not have help cuz of freezing hire. Personal experience is Warren working without help.
Mayor asks again how it relates to the amendment.
She says it increases the fees to the vendor, and they put in to hire assistant for Warren Hanson. Making promises we don’t carry and people now are being short changed and don’t know about it. Small amount of money, when need money stick it on the lowliest people in the city, vendors have to pay more and start with no help for Warren. They are talking best practices, but when putting money in to pay people doing the service, we are not honest. Ask you to please don’t approve this amendment. This is blatant trespass to her.
Verveer says that everything she said is correct, but nothing to do with amendment before us. That amendment was 19 at Board of Estimates in the operating budget and no one signaled to overturn that. .5fte is funded in Board of Estimates budget which is motion on the floor. Funded in part through increase in vending fees. This amendment in no way double counts, $25,000 in number 2 doesn’t double count and doesn’t count vending fees. Pham-Remmele is right they did have increased fees earlier this year to pay for the monitor and again to increase other vending fees not raised earlier. This has nothing to do with vending oversight or monitoring. These are items like peddler solicitor licenses. Door to door peddlers selling magazines, fire alarms, etc. Our fees are very low, 50% of what others charge and police do a background check, that is one category. Liquor license for change in licenses premise, agent, or corporatize control will now be $20. $5 for amusement devices in taverns. Will see specific list in an ordinance amendment. Nothing to do with vending oversight.
Motion PASSES on a voice vote, there are a few nos.
AMENDMENT THREE
Agency: Public, Educational and Governmental (PEG) Access Funding; Madison City Channel (MCC)
Page(s): 18, 72
Sponsors: Alds. Rhodes-Conway, Bidar-Sielaff, VerveerRestore $30,000 of funding to WYOU from PEG funds. This will reduce the amount of PEG funding available for Madison City Channel and increase its levy funding by an equal amount.
Adds $30,000 to the levy.
Rhodes-Conway moves adoption. Says she won’t repeat what was said at Board of Estimates, but wants to make two points. First, this is a question of basic fairness, heard the testimony, state legislature in its questionable wisdom made decision to discontinue PEG funding in 2011. Not fair for us to decide to discontinue the funding before then. Other thing is that this does not restore the entire cut. That cut was $70,000 this restores only $30,000. Compromise in her eyes.
Maniaci thanks everyone who contacted her, a lot of emails, and thanks WYOU who got data together. Supporting this amendment. Going forward need to look at WYOU as it relates to needs of the city. Unfair to pull the rug out from under them. Working hard to turn things around with Board of Directors and fundraising and wants to give them the opportunity to do this so not having to do this in years to come. Thanks constituents.
Bidar-Sielaff also thanks volunteers and staff who took all the time to come to Board of Estimates and early budget hearings by the Mayor and thank you for informing us on what you do. Night of opportunities, night of life support. Give them opportunity to do fundraising and do great work they are doing.
Compton is repeating what said at Board of Estimates. Appreciates hearts of people who have not been around for similar debates. WYOU is a wonderful organization and it is true that they make herculean efforts and we keep trying and keep patting on the head and they back slide. Never see actual making of that money. A free speech TV or radio station – WORT doesn’t ask for money becasue they want no governmental controls, for 10 or 11 years she wanted to close WYOU, then tried to support to push them out of the next and make them fly and we can’t get their wings flapping, we keep giving it back to them guys. This is a generous effort, only taking part of the money. They knew last year and so she says do not change the budget with this amendment. Give WYOU hope by giving them wings and allowing them to stand on heir own two feet. We have been here many times. Once there was an amendment that they didn’t get balance of money until earned certain amount of money. They got out and did it, they can do that, there are supporters in the community, if continue to funding they won’t stand on won two feet, next year will have to.
Sanborn says that echos those comments, keep it in mind when consider 11.
Cnare says that appreciates people who came out, but tried to find a way to legitimatize funding. Looked at materials. You are a very narrowly focused or marketed group for a reason. Very specific types of program and can’t find overall support for what you do. Struggle to connect it to a public benefit. She says they should be reaching out to populations, help develop people in a way that supports mission would maybe work. $30,000 as bump up against goals, doesn’t feel like best use of money. Hope find an audience and continue with mission but not responsibility of City of Madison to fund this operation.
AYE: Maniaci, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Kerr
NO: Palm, Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Schmidt, Schumacher, Bruer, Clausius, Clear, Cnare, Compton, Eagon, King
Motion FAILS 8 – 12.
AMENDMENT FOUR
Agency: Room Tax Fund – Sister Cities Program
Page(s): 19
Sponsors: Mayor Cieslewicz, Alds. Rhodes-Conway, BruerDecrease projected 2009 expenditures and increase 2010 expenditures for the Sister Cities Program by $4,100 to allow funds that will remain unspent at the end of this year to be spent on authorized Sister Cities Program activities in 2010.
No levy impact.
SRC moves adoption, explains it is a technical amendment. Committee that has to make recommendations has not come to decision on how to spend funds and this allows them to roll it over to next year.
Motion PASSES on a voice vote.
AMENDMENT FIVE
Agency: Clerk
Page(s): 68
Sponsors: Alds. Rummel, Rhodes-ConwayDelete funding for alcohol inspectors.
Cuts $10,000 in expenses.
Rummel says submitted it cuz under a hiring freeze. This seems like a new effort, why start a new program since so many things are being cut. Please support and move forward on discussion on how to do this better.
Kerr speaks against, thinks it is a great idea, as someone who is on third bar with ALERT team meetings and potential revocations. If have a problem bar we need all the resources we have to come to bear on the situation. Police come when called, not make regular inspections unless need to. Urge you to vote it down. When think about amount of time the council devotes to alcohol issues, hopes you will agree this is a good first step to get a better result.
Bruer says that surprised when police department all but ceased calls for service, disbanded annual inspections, this is part of early alert system, its cost effective, they often identify license holders before they become problematic. No different than fire or health or vendors. This is a no-brainer. 10K modest and cost benefit to preservation of neighborhood issues, quality of life and educational tools. They work with license holders on various concerns. Not a ticket revenue generator, but police did generate income. This is just picking up on a smaller scale. Please do not support.
Eagon echoes last two speakers. Reason he supports it is that it gives us a chance to be more strategic and have a smarter police presence. Having police spend on not so much on licenses, they can be more strategic and exercise smart policing and welcomes review in a year or two to see if changes.
Schumacher, hopes not support amendment, integration so alcohol policy coordinator and these positions and clerk is important to ordinate with the industry.
Bidar Sielaff against the amendment, but expect to see a larger discussion about the role and integrate that with this alcohol discussion. Need to be part of larger discussion.
Motion FAILS on a voice vote.
AMENDMENT SIX
Agency: Treasurer; Parks Division; Planning Division
Page(s): 70, 105, 137
Sponsors: Alds. Rhodes-Conway, Bidar-Sielaff, VerveerAdd funding to restore 0.5FTE Treasurer’s Office Administrative Clerk 1 to full-time status ($23,432). Add funding to restore 0.75 FTE Parks Events Scheduler and 0.75 FTE Parks Recreation Services Assistant positions to full-time status ($33,461). Add funding to the Planning Division to restore the 0.5 FTE Administrative Clerk 1 (MPO) to full-time status ($30,357).
This adds $87,250 to the budget.
Rhodes-Conway moves adoption. Says there is a theme to this evening. Most important items in this year’s budget is the jobs. We just had a very long discussion that was in part about jobs created by construction projects, hopes this is not as long. These are jobs right there in city hall. A few things apply to both this amendment and the next one. Should do everything we can to not lay people off just cuz of money. We have the work for them to do. Our city staff are doing their best but working hard and doing the work of more than one person in many cases. Not able to use comp time, police have a pay to time ratio issue because can’t take vacation time but take it in pay, this is an issue all across the city an the last thing we should do is get rid of staff. Also thinks about impact not just on the individual staff, but the coworkers and departments that they might bump into. Their coworkers have to take on the work they are not doing and if they bump into a another position is disrupts others. If laid off, they receive a list of possibilities for jobs they are eligible for. They have 48 hours to express interest and prove qualified. 48 hours to make a life changing decision, but they can only bump if they have seniority, might not have any relationship to what they are doing. People are going from scheduling to riding a tractor, graphic design to answer phones. Might not have anything to do with training or specialties or career. They have to take cut in pay as well, person they bump gets the same opportunity until somehow we end up with someone not losing their job. Someone will lose somewhere down the line. She would argue that many lose out along the way, all the coworkers, ourselves and citizens that these people serve. Specifically on this one, these positions are all positions where cutting a portion of their time from full time to part time. More work and paid less is not fair.
Maniaci agrees with Rhodes-Conway. We need to reinstate the positions. Hears consistently that they want to have strong commitment to services and no one wins with musical chairs. Knows someone at county who got switched around and it is causing havoc with his life an jobs. We should not balance the budget on backs of employees. Hopeful that city channel is not where we should spend our money, this is where we should spend it.
Bruer says nothing Rhodes-Conway said he doesn’t agree with but has a quick reality check, went through capital budget, now operating, came into this year facing serious layoffs and furloughs . . . I missed a bunch . . . Labor contracts coming forward, 3% increase (decrease?) for human services, 77% percent increase in numbers over last year at Energy Services (where he works), half of clients being laid off often in service industry and they are facing survival. Applauds firefighters for their labor contract, we are facing the same thing, so the history of this body is to do everything humanly possible to listen last night, but heard testimony from labor rep who he likes and respects, no one will get laid off it’s a matter of choice. If in private sector people are laid off, we are not making difficult choices, still do have a choice. Not sure where end up and not if where want to be, in a perfect world support this amendment. All we need is a half or 1% we are going into contingency or going into o general fund. Other labor organizations looking at this closely. Limit growth in tax burden. Best type of economic support we provide them is the tax burden . . . I missed some more, he’d randomly going from topic to topic . . . If choice between bumping rights and other amendments for homeless or facing basic survival, that is where he’d like to put the money. This is a reality check and matter of spending priorities. Do we put it in basic needs or continue to send message to people with contracts coming forward that we all have to struggle together.
Pham-Remmele has to speak against because very surprised, amazing to her, same people who ask to have everything and at the same time can’t let go of anything. They are like kids in the toy store, want this and this and this, ever run a budget for your own family? [Wow, how insulting. Does she think that the entire council is still living at home mooching off mom and dad?] She trusts the staff, she checked with the human resources director and was assured that this is the way to do it and not only that, the managers oppose this and Olinger, Briski, Olinger and Gawenda, they are the managers running the division, why change it. [Perhaps you want to take a look at their contracts and see what kind of raisers Wirtz and others got in this time of “tough budgets”] Wake up and smell the coffee, this doesn’t happened to a few people, for all 35 years taught school every summer you come back, teachers get sent around pink slips and can get assigned to 3 schools in one year. This isn’t harsh, we share the burden, when we spend the money if we take it from somewhere put if someplace else. Unless do magic trick, this is unrealistic, trust the judgment of staff and when share with them and they said they can do it, best way to handle budget at this time, not her place to come into place and tell them how to do it. Please don’ waste more time.[This is some council members favorite statement she makes . . . apparently her sentiment applies to everyone but hereself.
Schumacher asks Briski what is reason behind elimination of this position and what is the impact on the department.
Briski says they anticipate no impact, did a review of all positions in recreational services and customer services and they feel they have an over abundance of clerical staff that can do this work. [Seriously?] All staff have been talked to and agreed to it and spread the workload and put positions where they really need them which is in the field. Makes them more efficient and effective in the field. Take something where over abundance of staff. [I’m skeptical, I have no direct knowledge but I’ve seen how the city has employees “agree” to things.]
Schumacher asks him to describe impact on the employees in the positions, will they get other jobs?
Briski says yes, people in the positions will be offered positions that are currently vacant at current salary so maintain 100% employment and maximize their workload responsibility.
Schumacher says so no one unemployed?
Briski says they would have the ability to bump, but gave them opportunity to stay in organization and get 100% of their salary. [Does this sound funny to you, they are cutting jobs to save money but no employees are going to lose their jobs or take a pay cut. So, where is the savings?]
Schumacher asks Olinger same questions. Olinger punts to Murphy. Murphy says transportation planning section is where the position is and they staff the MPO planning board. The manager of the transportation planning system said that this was a reduction they could accommodate. Impact on employee best explained by Bard Wirtz. No positions the person could move into that person is qualified for within the department, unless they would be qualified to be the Preservation Planner which is doubtful.
Schumacher asks if there would be no loss of services? They think they can continue to have adequate services with half time supplemented with staff form other sections of planning divisions and office of the director.
Schumacher apologizes before he asks the question but asks if we are eliminating positions and no impact on services why were they there in the first place.
Murphy says that they can meet the needs if the cut is made, not that it doesn’t have an impact, they just think they can make it work.
Schumacher asks Wirtz what happens to the employee. Administrative clerk will get a list, will get 48 hours to select a position if qualified. 48 hours after qualified. She should be able to go to another admin clerk job without impact on salary. A few retirements at end of year. At end of year, we have retirements so more vacancies, in preparation they have ability to avoid layoffs. She will likely replace least senior admin clerk or go right into one of the vacancies. If employee seeks to stay, won’t have an impact of losing job and no one else will lose job too. . . . I missed a bunch watching mayor respond to this . . .
Schumacher asks about city treasurer’s office. Wirtz says that it is delayed to April so longer to find a vacancy.
Schumacher asks about impact on service in Treasure’s office – Gawanda says a number of factors that result in recommendation. Parking utility is moving to multi-space meters. Currently all the money is counted in the office, takes 1 fte, multi-space meters will allow electronic payments, so with that in mind they thought they could assume they could cut position to have half-time and still count the coin.
Schumacher says that employment is one of the most sacred bonds we have an sometimes turn into a transaction we can brush over with numbers. Responsibility to look at it and understands that management can look at it. Also, someone has to balance the budget and respond to it. May not actually believe it is in the best interest. Shouldn’t assume that they are voluntarily done. Thinks there is something that concerns him. He’ll raise it publicly, advocate for community services and mindful that there might be a connection on how to look at the budget. Uncomfortable eliminating positions when we can’t meet the needs. Grass isn’t mowed or offices short staffed. People have to be in the back office to support front services, if keep cutting city government we will be confronted with outsourcing and that is not always cheaper and has an impact on culture. Also have to increase taxes or cut services. These two amendments should highlight what we are going to have to confront. Concerned year after year of finding efficiencies we cutting service people expect. People might support slight increases in taxes if perceive they get the value.
Solomon says he doesn’t know what to do. Instinct is to vote for this, but has an email from managers saying the positions not needed – can’t fathom that. Left thinking the only reason we got the email and the answer is out of respect for budget and Board of Estimates process and would like to talk to those managers about the usage of staff if they really truly feel they are overstaffed. Can’t imagine that scenario. If polled city staff, who provide the services to our constituents if they feel overworked and don’t have enough bodies to do jobs they need to do, he thinks they would say yes. We depend on them, city staff in the front and back of the room. Answers filter up from our staff when we ask them questions. Don’t know what to do, can’t imagine, if polled staff 70 –80 % would say stressed and overworked. Maybe it is about job duties or restructure jobs to do priority work. At the same time, difficult budget, thinks that doing anything with staff which are critical part of what we do has to be the last thing we do. Don’t know what that is yet and cutting a couple staff won’t make a difference on labor agreements. Might have to make a tough decisions at the time, to do it in advance without knowing it will happen doesn’t make sense. Unfathomable, as a government manager, to think that they don’t need the staff.
King says that the unions are responsible for the bumping system and all of the nasty things that happen when it is invoked. Don’t think outsourcing is an option. Question for Murphy on MPO position. No RTA at the time they proposed the budget, not sure if the retirement was in play as well. Concerned with all that work involved, if maybe the answer might be a little bit different with those circumstances.
Murphy says don’t know what all the work will be for the RTA from the planning division, land use and transportation section, but will need some support; Says the retirement of Bob MacDonald will certainly complicate that. Admin clerical support services needed by the section will not change significantly due to RTA at this point, first of the year the RTA will be making appointments and getting organized, difficult to know what that will entail, since appointments not made yet.
Schmidt asked question. Reiterate concern since MPO voted to support RTA during interim period until get money to support it. Two requests in the budget, not cut community services and avoid layoffs and furloughs. But given what told tonight hard decision tonight. He’d consider dividing the question, but not making a motion.
Cnare says really turning the muck about how to vote on this subject. While tonight and last night the focus is the budget. What we do the rest of the year is running city and need to make sure right amount of people to do the work. Don’t feel guilty or bad if you vote for this. This is money in here that we don’t all lack. Thanks staff leaders who do more with less and share that with staff members, we all know how it feels. More responsibility at first but then gets tired and demands will only increase. Spoke about jobs not yet created at Edgewater, don’t give this up, they are good jobs and just cuz we take these jobs away, all it does is add to the pain of the community. Later amendment to deal with people who need. Urge you to support, will affect other decisions. Job is the best social services we can do. With hiring freeze and attrition this keep the jobs intact.
King separates MPO. Respects what Brad said, pressure to tow the party line, but also knows that the MPO has a lot of work and amount of service they have to provide to MPO and RTA pressure for info and research really dictates they hold that position for another year.
Schumacher would like to add .75 position in parks as well to the .5 in the MPO.
Bruer in chair, no objection to separation. Confusion – know one can figure out what motions are on the table and what isn’t. May explains that MPO separation has to be voted on first.
Clausisu also on MPO supports the position.
Still confusion.
Schmidt votes to restore that position, but not the others.
Mayor says there are 3300 workers lost job in last year, in December they will get a bill in the mail and good news is there is a letter from himn for them, and he gets to communicate to those households, but has to tell them bad news of bill. He says there are not slashes to services, unemployment is twice what it was, those working making less money. State took 3% cut, others no increase, fixed income got retirement benefits reduced. Trying to get services people want with not too heavy on the tax base. Feels strongly to keep it at 4%, no magic number, need to show restraint. Tax bill will be $200 more than last year – chances are. City not laying off, cutting salaries, 5 of 2700 employees being displaced. That’s the worst, if you lost a job or took hit on retirement or got salary cut you’re going to be unhappy. He says the council is not paying attention to what is going on out there. This amendment isn’t as onerous as other amendments. Some amendments coming he is concerned about. Some on community services and CDBG – he’s strongly opposed to those increases. Says they got big increases in past few years. Talks about Transit for Jobs, willing to find more resources, but can’t do it if you add back the positions. Can’t do it and keep 4%, if do this, then don’t approve back end and the next one. He says he can find money to get in under 4% if don’t approve these jobs.
Maniaci asks what increase to average home with executive budget and with total with all the amendment s before us. Where are we?
Executive budget has increase of 3.85% roughly $70 on average home. Board of Estimates added $240,000 making it a 3.9% change of $74 which is city portion of taxes on average home. Tonight so far added, nothing, $25,000 added to savings, so 3.98%.
Confusion and questions off mic about process.
Motion is to restore the MPO position. They attempt to vote by raising their hands instead of a roll call vote, but they can’t make that work. It looked like ti would have passed 12 – 8. Then they vote and the vote is 15 – 5.
AYE: Maniaci, Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Schmidt, Schumacher, Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Clausius, Cnare, Eagon, Kerr and King.
NO: Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Bruer, Clear, Compton
Then they have a voice vote on the main motion that PASSES.
AMENDMENT SEVEN
Agency: Madison City Channel
Page(s): 72
Sponsors: Alds. Rhodes-Conway, Bidar-Sielaff, VerveerRestore funding for 0.5 FTE Madison City Channel Assistant Programming Coordinator and remove funding in Hourly Employee Pay and in Work Study Wages that was added as a result of the layoff.
Adds $24,890 to the budget.
Same thing as last motion but reminds them of the testimony and the impact that this will have on real people’s lives and the services that our award winning city channel does. Incumbent is only reason award winning – small and silly but represents effort and pride they take in their work, the above and beyond they go to make the services award winning. Save this woman’s job and don’t cut services. Job won’t get done. We’re cutting line staff positions, if really so important to save staff money, why not management positions, that is where the money is. If we allow this person to be laid off, we will have a one to one staff to management and that is ridiculous. Unacceptable to time after time cut line staff whether line staff is filled. Look at where real money is – not fair – everyone does a good job. Not fair to do these cuts. Hope agree to keep this position. If laying people off and cut positions should look at our priorities.
Maniaci agrees. For those who voted against WYOU and you can invest in city channel here. [Hmm, I guess she still doesn’t get the difference between public access and government access.] Young woman demonstrated the great need we have for her and service that they provide. You get the emails from people watching. To hear she is only back up we have at time if management is not available it is pretty disconcerting. Not happy with previous amendment. Invest in our service to citizens and this position does a lot of good things to get info about city out to residents.
Compton asks if this employee losing her job, would she be eligible for reposition?
Wirtz says that she would be eligible for the process.
Compton says that she is proud of city channel, believe Brad and his staff pulled themselves up by bootstraps and made us proud. This position has done an outstanding job, will be supporting it.
Verveer asks staff to confirm if what happens is what the employee described. Clark says yes, filled by supervisor, she will do two jobs and have more work study. Her supervisor would have to do work and hourly folks would have to help keep up with work flow. Community Bulletin board is message board, a lot of info and each agency in the room has info that goes out, collects info, creates graphics and does computer program. That is what she does 90% of the time.
Verveer supports the amendment, difference is this is one of the tiniest departments, incumbent was overwhelmingly compelling and no comparable jobs for her to bump into with her current skill sets. She would end up in a clerk typist jobs. Main concern in the small staff, much of it is work study students and for the small amount of savings and impact on levy not make them more dependent on Cnare suggests work study.
Cnare asks Clark about design fee they charge, can they increase the fee? Charge to make itself supporting.
Clark says the demand would be impacted. The charges there were agencies and nonprofits that wanted to take up a lot of her time, they got charged if they took too much time to keep it realistic. Haven’t charged for her time, it was just a way to control her time. No revenue source.
Cnare suggests a small charge. Clark says it is a road block.
Mayor Dave says he has eliminated three jobs in management CDBG/OCS, AA/EOC and ? – he also says that he leaves openings in management when people leave and then they have staff do two jobs. That is how we get salary savings. Management team is same as he found it. No one wants to see anyone lose a job or go to a job that doesn’t match their skill set. No on is losing a job. Effect is bulletin board wont’ be timely and as sharp as it has been. Started with a $12M gap with this budget. Community bulletin board being timely isn’t what needs to be done. Is this really a priority?
Maniaci says that with positions in amendment 6 they were to restore to full time. This is an elimination.
Compton ask the Mayor if the salary is cut or transferred at same salary to another position. Mayor punts to Wirtz who says they won’t know til she picks.
Compton asks Mayor about how we are talking about presentation of Madison to the public, this young women got the awards that makes Madison look good. If important the face we put forward, why not important the City Channel not have a major presentation that is important.
Mayor Dave says they don’t think Madison is great because of bulletin board for city channel. Has no impact on what people think of Madison as a whole.
Compton says that when lost BTRB coordinator, at the time they didn’t have good staff, volunteer workers, reaching into the tiniest spot and taking away someone important. May seem trivial but only as good as lowest employee.
AYE: Maniaci, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Schmidt, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Clausius, Compton, Kerr, Schumacher.
NO: Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Skidmore, Bruer, Clear, Cnare, Eagon, King, Palm
(Schumacher and Palm passed to see how everyone else voted)
Motion PASSES 11 – 9. [Proving once again that their station the government station is important, but the community station is not. Nice.
AMENDMENT EIGHT
Agency: Parks Division
Page(s): 105
Sponsors: Alds. Rummel, Kerr, Verveer, Skidmore, Rhodes-ConwayAdd a budget highlight as follows: “The Parks Division will schedule and assign a staff person for inspection of terrace trees during road construction projects.”
No levy impact.
Rummel says they asked staff to follow up on work doing with trees and gives comfort to neighborhood. Working with staff to create an ordinance to create fine for damage to trees.
Clear asks Briski if this is appropriate to have parks staff assigned to this.
Briski says work group of engineering and parks, staff review on all construction projects and work with engineering staff. They do have spot inspection on the trees. They are talking about cross training for engineering inspectors to be more aware and more specifically the contract specs. They are working together and cross training. The effort of putting a staff person there, they have done it and will continue to do it.
Clear clarifies this is not an unfunded mandate? Partially underway?
Briski says they do have people working on it. Would plan to specifically rewrite seasonal job description and assign them to construction work.
Motion PASSES on a voice vote.
AMENDMENT NINE
Agency: Traffic Engineering
Page(s): 125
Sponsors: Alds. Verveer, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Bidar-SielaffProvide funding for the production and installation of nearside Bus Stop signage and remove language that was included in Adopted BOE Operating Budget Amendment No. 12 that directed Traffic Engineering to reprioritize and accommodate the production and installation of the bus stop signs within its existing expense budget.
No fiscal impact.
Verveer says that people at Board of Estimates are familiar with the issue, they did an unfunded mandate. Traffic engineering was given a $40,000 unfunded mandate, this is a pet peeve of his. This is an issue that effects almost all districts. This is what they call near side bus stops, instead of having signage where they board the sign is many feet away as is the parking restriction. Confusing for riders and parkers. Metro report said they should fix the signage, this program is a pilot and will not only follow through, but will go further and get at issue of improving identification for metro passengers. These signs are many feet away from intersection, not well marked, facing the street and small signage about the parking restriction. Doesn’t help visitors, a lot of parking citations and towing. Problem in many bus stops in his district and on isthmus. 800 of these stops. Original plan was to do half next year, but given work load, they could only do it on overtime, so dropped it to 200. Compromise further and only do 100. Verveer has a substitute. After some shuttle diplomacy between traffic engineering, David Dryer and Mayor they decided the Mayor will fill vacancies that are subject of the hiring freeze. So, asks traffic engineer, Dryer to comment. He asks if substitute to do 100 and mayor fills hiring freeze issues can you start the pilot in the 2nd if not 1st quarter of the year.
Dryer says yes, with the changes and with looking at modifications to materials and reducing number of signs, can accommodate this request.
Verveer says not just about him. Metro planning ad hoc committee recommended this as well.
Verveer has a substitute to change 200 to 100 signs and have no levy impact. He thanks staff, complaints for years and finally going to tackle this. Appreciates mayor helping out.
Rhodes-Conway thanks them and talks about the report. Accessibility of bus system was a priority, where and when and how to ride the bus is important for new riders. For those who do it daily, they figure it out, know what routes looking for and more or less when they show up. Incredibly confusing for new users. Can’t tell if bus stop or not or what routes come there.
Rummel, hears about it a lot. She says the board of Marquette Neighborhood seems to all live in front of bus stops. Hears about people coming to neighborhood getting tickets and towed, great idea and appreciates Verveers work.
Motion PASSES on a voice vote
AMENDMENT TEN
Agency: Community Development Division
Page(s): 160; Supplement p. 135
Sponsors: Alds. Schumacher, Rummel, Solomon, Rhodes-Conway, Skidmore, VerveerProvide additional funding for Community Resources programs that are dedicated for services that are directed toward children,teens,youth and their families. The Community Services Commission will make recommendations for funding allocations, to be approved by the Common Council.
Levy Impact $370,155
Schumacher moves the substitute they got by email several days ago.
Hmmm . . . I thought I had a copy of it, but I guess I don’t. It was changing the service from being focused on kids to letting the Community Services Committee determine where the funds would go and report back to the council.
Says that there was some discussion about the amendment. Original intent was to focus on youth and teenagers. It was not about seniors. He was responding to emerging needs in the community. Has worked for years with seniors, but children are the ones that can’t pick up the phone and say they need help. When address needs of youth it is preventative and an investment. We have been dealing with these issues in our communities. Also needs to say a few things, apologize to Bidar-Sielaff for their discussion. He says he agreed to having it opened up to everyone. Learning curve for him, especially Cnare and Solomon helped him understand. This might be a surprise given his previous votes in the last two years. He says he was a victim of own branding. He says this is one of the most balanced budgets. Not a statement about a flaw, it’s about a hole that is not so recognizable. Came form sense that with the economic downturn it is showing signs in the city. County state and federal cuts are happening while the federal governemnt is bailing out banks and corporations. Do we as a city spur on these or conditions or do we help? This is still a drop in the bucket. Hole in budget is statement to community that has this is needed. Can’t keep doing business as usual. He says Clingan is being more strategic to go after emerging needs – this might help. We cannot turn another blind eye to emerging needs. Motive is that as an alder he is maturing and seeing things he didn’t see year ago. Even if just a token amount, need to response out of the ordinary circumstances.
Maniaci has a real problem with the amendment. Feels like this is Schumacher playing Santa Claus. What is going on? This is a lot of money, everyone is hurting, agencies and city departments did not ask for this money. [I know that is what the Mayor said, but that is not entirely true. The Mayor said that. Here’s the letter from the non-profits. Anyone working with the non-profits understands that flat funding is a cut for non-profits. No raises for staff, and essentially cuts to make up for rising health care and other costs. This increase is vital to keeping the agencies going in a time when there is increasing needs and stress in our community.] They got everything they asked for, didn’t get cuts. What is role of city and where should we put our resources? Yes a lot of needs, but fundamental issues on face value and issues with how the amendment came about. Can’t justify it in this budget. Mayor spoke eloquently, a lot of people hurting, this is the debate between role of city and county. County is social services.
Cnare has a substitute to make the amount $100,000. She says this is the end of the line and is difficult. No one asked of this, but if you see someone on the street and they look hungry you don’t need to be told there is a need. Need to strike a balance. $100,000 will not go far, many valuable programs, but if this gets one child some education or a hot snack after school it is worth is. If one older adult doesn’t know what do to in their home, and they can help them find supportive care to stay in home, it is worth it. This is a small contribution to those who continue to bleed in our community.
Sanborn says that being on Board of Estimates he went back and looked. He says there is a hole in the budget cuz of this. He reads off a list of funding that the city has given out. I didn’t get all the details, but he talks about funding for Porchlight, YWCA, grants for housing providers, Catholic Multi Cultural Center, stimulus money for homelessness, the grant for Higher Ground, the attempt to help with Section 8 voucher mix up and another grant for the YWCA. And the fact that we are no longer going to share in the appreciation. You may respond those are not the services we have in mind, sill money helping low income people. $1.4M in stimulus money, that fell from the sky, to say it is so critical now, with 800,000 stimulus money doesn’t hold water.
Rummel says that she supports the amendment and signed on early with Schumacher. Felt he made a good case to think big. She wants to respond to Sanborn. She learned that CDBG is good at reinvesting and reusing money, it is in the budget, this isn’t that kind of money. This isn’t bricks and mortar, this is some of the other part of the shop that helps people directly. These are the nonprofits that help us, they are on the edge all the time, just thankful not to be cut, losing money all the time, insurance goes up. They are our partners in the community, its basic services like everything else we do.
Eagon asked Brasser for an update.
Brasser says with this it is 4.07%, without it would be 4.01%.
Solomon has three quick stories. He talks about going to the MAP program to judge a debate, he says if they if walked in the room and saw the 14 students in the class out on the street, he can tell you what 99% of public would think based on perception of their clothes, color of skin and stereotypes and what conclusions they would draw. He says there were two teams of 7 people debating health care. Making 2 minute arguments, calm but intelligent and well thought out and researched way, learning so many skill its hard to know where to start. Think about those 14 people. They are all high school dropouts and all had some kind of criminal history. Look where they are and where they are going. If drive around square tonight you will see 2 – 5 homeless people sleeping outside, despite all the money we put in. Drive by there, you will see them, if you remember 2 years ago, he wanted to reduce the number of police, not cuz against police, he thought we needed to invest our dollars differently. He made the argument about domestic abuse and asked the police chief what percentage of their call were related to domestic violence and he said 1/3 of them. Every time we put one more dollar into DAIS, that is 33 cents less we have to invest in domestic abuse call to the police and we can put the police on another priority. Don’t just think about money going out, ongoing need in community and ripple effects that preventative services have. Never, ever enough, not because unlimited resources, there is a need, prevention dollars, pays itself off 2, 3 5, 10 fold in long run.
Bidar-Sielaff says that Solomon and Cnare serve on Community Services Commission. For those who work in social service there are many issues in community – police and fire know and they count on this investment too. We spend 1.54% on community resources, Sanborn mentioned the number, $100,000 is going to make a huge difference. Difficult time for citizens out there and everyone trying to do best and they will be supportive of council to do a little more. These are difficult times, kids who don’t have safe place, people losing jobs, women who are domestic violence victims, rape crisis center clients and they all support this. Doesn’t come close to servicing the needs we have, a lot of partners out there in helping serve people. They are the leanest meanest machines in community – they do so much for so little. $100,000 you would not believe what they can do, you should see what they do with $1,000 – don’t dismiss this, you should see what we can do with $5. Would appreciate support for basic services.
Compton says all this sensitivity i really touching and concern is good but what Sanborn said is true. We look at a 8 x 11 piece of paper, think this is a minimal amount of money, it is and you would never stop. Bidar-Sielaff hit the nail on the head, never enough, recommendation to those who support this, consider not voting for this but finding the one need in the year to support with this money. Wait for special requests, these are documented and structured requests, with those requests, the one that merits her votes, she will make it. Let’s not do it now.[So, I have a question, can any old non-profit come in at any old point in the year and ask for money? How would one go about it? What would the rules be? What are the priorities? I bet every non-profit in town could put together a proposal for $100,000 for much needed services in the community. Does that sound like a good process? Don’t we have the two year funding process for a purpose? So we can compare and make priorities and fund the best programs? This sounds like a crazy idea.] Let’s use what Sanborn was talking about an look at the applications at the time. Need to identify the cause and the need and work toward it.
Clear says that there is a theme that here will never be enough money. It is true. So how do we decide the right amount. Every year the answer is just a little more. How is that the right amount as opposed to what is in the budget.[How about COLA for costs, plus health care cost increases plus wage increases, funding the living wage increases and adding for population growth. And, add in a mechanism for new programs where appropriate.] City used to not have community services, its the county’s responsibility. He says county started not funding as musch as we wanted and city started picking up the slack.[I don’t think that is true at all, the Tenant Resource Center was funded by the city long before the county. And the county doesn’t fund our neighborhood centers.] County cut 3% and we are picking up the slack adding to city burden. [That’s not true either, this doesn’t even cover the COLA agencies that the city funds now. There is no slack being picked up and this won’t address increasing needs in the community or the other costs I mentioned above. The ignorance is killing me]. He says that city residents also pay county taxes, why not a little more. That money comes from people who are also hurting, lost their jobs. [Ok, who the hell do they think is serving the people who can’t pay their rent because they lost their jobs? It’s these same non-profits that you are advocating get 2009 level funding.] Clear asks how much more $1M? $5M? $10M?
Solomon says $100M.
Bidar-Sielaff says that the amendment directs them to look at the needs and decide how to spend it. More discussion and in depth need to look at needs of community. We are not randomly giving $100,000, want it to go back to commission to have a recommendation – that is more appropriate there than with the 20 of us. Very surprised the council talks bout what going on in community, if you can’t deal with root causes and deal with the issues, we can throw as much police as you want at it but it won’t solve the issue. If not willing to spend $100,000 what will we do? She says this is why she sits here and not on county board, has faith in the city, don’t make those decisions and doesn’t want to on the bar. The colleagues have the values of people it the City of Madison.
Cnare says that county cut, we’re not making up the gap, we can’t and many not funded by the county, some of them do get some funds, but not across the board match. Not replacing money county left behind. [Thank goodness someone understands!]
[Warning, this is headache inducing. You might want to hide any sharp objects.]
Pham-Remmele is grouchy because she has been trying to talk and her microphone didn’t work. She is frustrated and say this is not the first time this has happened. She would like to see 10 and 11 combined, this is nothing new, but when we talk about never enough, it’s like a drop in the ocean, and you don’t have to start in Madison, think statewide and country and globally and this is nothing new, we have ?? service and the problem is still here. Talk about root cause, are we serious, are we just scratching the surface? Outsider, only serving 2.5 years, [again? when does she become an insider?] when at cdbg totally shocked at the amount of money handed out so freely, so easily and regularly and the same outfits navigate to get the money and surprised cuz it confirms what people say against us that Madison is a wonderful haven for the poor. In fact there are people working in social services that say they cannot speak up for fear of their jobs but they give free money non-stop. [Can I find out what agency this is and what they give the money for. All I run into is long waiting lists, crazy applications and lottery prcesses and demeaning lines people have to stand in to beg. This is the list I usually work from, and largely, there just isn’t enough anywhere.] She says the list Sanborn just read is nothing compared to real amount, its public information and available. She says she taught school [Really, I don’t think she’s ever mentioned that before . . . does that somehow make her special? Does it make her an expert in community services?] and saw and could get everything free if have a kid. [My brain hurts, I seriously want to see details on this.] If you come to Madison you do not have to work and people give you things. Not a tough person, easily moved, when moved here with mom and sister and son, they received donation from churches, but we have pride, we need crutches, we pick ourselves up and return the favor, pay it forward, why $300,000, why $100,000 compared to millions handing out is nothing. [Well, because the council decided not to fund individual agencies but to go along with the new process where they give money to the Community Services Commission to decide and come back with a report for the council to approve.] They hand it out free, they don’t earn it, don’t see how hard it is, they have a sense of entitlement that someone owes it to you, disservice to the people cuz when refugees jump out of home to the sea didn’t have bad habit, but kept at refugee camp and didn’t have to cook and just stand in line and get food for free and people throwing away stuff in front of her, we don’t take charity, we are we pimping on the poor. Doesn’t want to think about it this way, very difficult to continue on CDBG cuz she ask these questions. Enough is enough give people pride that they earn the things, we help, but not forever, the people who really need help are mainstream elderly people trying hard to stay in home. Make it look like not have people feeling sorry for them, they are the people you are taxing, so you can feel great to have things to hand out and feel good, saying it is there and hand it out and it feels great, don’t continue the pattern. This is something we need, small amount, $300,000, $100,000 $50,000, who are we, are we better than people? Stand on the same height, we can help, don’t carry them on your back forever.
Solomon says Pham-Remmele’s comments are offensive and disappointing. He challenges her to look at one of the constituents that applies for 20 jobs every day and tell him he is not doing everything he can, he is trying. Look at constituent who has mental health issues and on SSDI and can’t get a job, can barely write, what do we do with someone like that? She can’t cover rent, got evicted. He found her housing after evicted but is just a matter of time before she can’t pay again. Is this someone who wants a hand out, trying but doesn’t know where to start. Talks about going to DAIS (Domestic Abuse Intervention Serives) like he did 3 weeks ago and tell them it is their fault that they are abused and in an abusive relationship. Don’t even know where to start, but he will let it go. Never have enough for anything, if we said open budget season, police would want more police, parks need more parks, streets has too many potholes, never enough for everything, don’t pick on Community Services, this is a basic service, and an investment that pays off. Budget is high, but we should put money into prevention. Help get people into housing, get jobs and on their feet, decrease crime and homelessness and if goal is to do everything then investing in community services is way to do it.
Schumacher says that most people don’t hear us talk any more, not only is it late, but they have heard these arguments before. How do we wake ourselves up and get a different perspective? He has made arguments on opposite side in the past. We are experiencing one of most severe economic downturns. Business as usual out there, sometimes one or two people who get helped by a service of afterschool program, so of course we can’t solve everything, but the difference for that one person is important. Difficult times, but continue business as usual. Hopes Mayor and leaders will support it.
ROLL CALL
They vote twice. First to change the amount from 370,000 to 100,000 and then on the 100,000 amendment. Both were roll calls with the same votes. It was entirely unclear if people knew what they were voting on the first time, and Michael May had to explain basic Robert’s Rules to the body. In the end, this was the vote.
AYE: Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Schmidt, Schumacher, Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Cnare, Eagon, Kerr, King – and the next two passed the first time and waited to vote at the end, I’m unclear what game they are trying to play – Maniaci and Bruer
No: Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Clausius, Clear, Compton
Motion PASSES 15 – 5.
AMENDMENT ELEVEN
Agency: Community Development Block Grant
Page(s): 164
Sponsors: Alds. Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, SolomonProvide additional funding for programs that address homeless prevention. Funding will be subject to an RFP process. Specific contract allocations will be based on recommendations of the CDBG Commission and approval by the Common Council.(Note: The costs of the program and associated levy impact are offset in part by additional General Fund revenues derived from alcohol-related licensing fees. These revenues are included in Amendment No. 2.)
Adds $50,000 to the levy.
Verveer changes the motion form “homeless prevention” to “homelessness” and says this is not guilt money for peace park. [:)] He says he has a long history of offering amendments to deal with homelessness – a year ago Konkel and I had an amendment that passed 13 – 7 to fund homeless outreach workers. [Mike’s a good Catholic, of course he feels guilty, but I wasn’t necessarily talking about him.] Appreciates the list that Sanborn read off, one thing that is a common thread is that it is federal pass through money, allocating to providers it the community. Only non federal money was contingent reserve money for the Catholic Multi-Cultural Center. Yes there is ARRA funding, unprecedented times and money, appreciates the argument but holds no water. City provides very little levy support for homeless. Also most all city support goes to neighborhood centers and community gardens. Very little to homeless, that is why we offer these amendments. Funding we provide to Porchlight and Tellurian, almost all ESG and Federal money. We should put money where mouth is. Did encourage members of community to come back tonight cuz this is more appropriate to talk about root causes of homelessness. $50,000 is a drop in the bucket. Hardly nothing, knows they will try to amend it to a smaller level, as Solomon stated, you will be seeing those among us that are less fortunate if go by GEF building after the meeting and maybe outside the city county building by the front doors. Prolific problem given the economy, shelters overflowing, AODA is a particular need, already beat the county up, they are cutting 3% funding, they should be doing more, they don’t. AODA issues is a need, not enough treatment, county said they would use some money, homeless consortium thought maybe the amendment was too broad, but leave it up to CDBG committee, decide where appropriate use is. Tried to do his part to find revenue to raise license fees, does see a connection, trying to put money where mouth is. This is a horrific issue and please think of amendment 2 and the revenue he found.
Sanborn says that knows not city money, but federal government has stimulated the economy, spending money on homeless issues, this $50,000 not critical, doesn’t matter where money comes from, #1M more to address homelessness than thought they would.
Rummel says first thing she dealt with was car campers and homelessness. Homeless are sleeping on grates, in parks and cars, this is her district where you will see the homeless tonight. This is a depression, not getting better for the people who have the least.
Cnare offers amendment from $50,000 to $25,000.
May explains again how amendments work for those who apparently haven’t learned their Robert’s Rules yet . . . unless, Bruer asks if it is friendly. Verveer objects.
Roll call to change it from $50K to $25K.
AYE: Maniaci, Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Schumacher, Skidmore, Solomon, Bidar-Sielaff, Clear, Cnare, Compton, Kerr, King, and . . . Bruer, who passed earlier again.
NO: Pham-Remmele, Rummel, Sanborn, Verveer, Clausius, Eagon.
Motion passes 14 – 6.
Next they vote to put the money in the budget.
AYE: Maniaci, Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Schmidt, Schumacher, Skidmore, Solomon, Verveer, Bidar-Sielaff, Bruer, Cnare, Eagon, Kerr, King
NO: Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Clausius, Clear, Compton.
Motion PASSES 15 – 5.
SURPRISE AMENDMENT!
Adds two workers to the streets department. Introduced by Cnare. Adds $103,675.33 to the budget.
Several seconds.
Cnare says she is not interested in restoring large item collection, concern is that despite growth of city, kept same staffing level. She says she gets two popular complaints as an alder, one is speeding and the other is streets issues that are not taken care of yet (dead animals, leaves not picked up etc.). These are things government should provide for us, we can’t do on own. Two is reasonable solution.
Kerr asks what the workers would be used for.
They say that they will be used for unscheduled items that they might not realize we do. Obvious street repair, graffiti worse, leaf collecting, unscheduled things.
Maniaci says with this amendment we are at 4.15%. We are at 4.09% right now, or $77.20 on the average home.
Roll call
AYE: Maniachi, Palm, Rhodes-Conway, Rummel, Solomon, Verveer, Cnare, Kerr, Bidar-Sielaff.
NO: Pham-Remmele, Sanborn, Schmidt, Schumacher, Skidmore, Clausius, Clear, Compton, Eagon, King and Bruer (waited til the end again.)
Motion FAILS 9 – 11.
FINAL VOTE ON THE OPERATING BUDGET
It’s now 1:15 and they take a 5/15 minute break. I asked, and for some reason several alders I asked could not explain and was not immediately obviously, except for the boys club (Mayor, Clear, Bruer and Schumacher) gathered off camera having some conversation that apparently changed nothing.
They come back at 1:30, Clear moves adoption of the operating budget as amended.
No discussion by alders.
Mayor says he had four basic goals: library, Edgewater TIF, operating budget not tap the fund balance (aka the rainy day fund) and keeping the increase to 4%. He says he got 3 out of 4. Capital budget is excellent, historic document. Less happy about operating. Good didn’t tap fund balance, its the reason city has a AAA bond rating is the healthy fund balance. Would be tempting to take more out. First budget when not tapped it at all. [You have to be freaking kidding me, its raining and instead of using our rainy day fund, we decide to give no raises, potentially lay people off, not give basic increases to departments and non-profits and here, for the first time in 7 years, we didn’t take the typical $2M or so from the fund balance?! Seriously?] He says the didn’t slash services, a nip and a tuck here and there but maintaining the same services. Disappointing at about 4.1%. $400K – 500K is too much. Inability to make tough dsicisions is disappointing, will sign it, good budget, worked hard. [Just because people did not make the same decisions he did, doesn’t mean they didn’t make tough decisions.] He says this was a collegial budget, most collegial budget he has had, he says they sure do talk, sure like to ask questions, its a late night and almost without exception good discussion. Thanks for respect for process and thanks staff.
Operating budget passes on a voice vote with Sanborn and Pham-Remmele audibly voting note and the Mayor watching closely and taking note.
MOTION ON THE LEVY
Dean Brasser thanks his staff and says that the 2009 levy, after 15 hours talking about policy, they added $263,000?? to the capital budget which has a tax levy impact of $193,588,000??. On the operating budget they added $155,000 on they levy leaving $173,805,401. It will be $1936.22 on the average home. Increase of 4.09% and a mill rate of 7.8889.
I think Pham-Remmele was the only one to vote no.
DONE!
With that, it was about 1:30. I snagged a ride home, and as we drove down the street I was embarrassed to see Alder Maniaci literally running down the street to the Great Dane to get there before they closed. An alder who called me and asked me if I was there said it was “rude” to even try to get there and make the bartenders and waitstaff stay open – I agree. Embarrassing. Apparently, the wait staff and bartenders agreed it was rude (and borderline illegal as it was bartime), as they were DENIED! There, that’s the gossip for the evening.
