Spinfest, ALRC favoritism – past and present, Mayor goes all out for the Edgewater and Mayor changing rules on Absent Without Pay leave and “encouraging” employees in “certain circumstances” to take up to 15 days of paid leave, with possible impacts on their benefits . . .
SPINFEST
As the Mayor trumpets success from Freakfest, I can’t help laughing at the spin on a few of the items of interest. Here’s the WSJ coverage that caught my eye:
There were no major incidents reported in the event area, no significant injuries, and no property damage, the release said.
A celebrant was taken to a hospital, with apparent minor injuries, after a police horse spun into him, and knocked him down.
Police said there were several fights in other areas of the downtown, and one relatively minor stabbing: A man said he was cut in the arm and buttocks just after 1 a.m. while waiting in a line outside of Madison Avenue in the 600 block of University Avenue. He was transported to a local hospital with what were described as superficial wounds. No perpetrator was located.
In addition, a Madison police officer was punched while trying to break up a fight shortly before midnight in the area of Carroll and Gilman streets.
I wonder how these incidents would have been reported had things gone wrong? Or why this isn’t a big deal? Or this?
While they are claiming crime and arrests are down for Freakfest, I wonder what they are for the weekend in the downtown area, which are the numbers that I believe have been reported in the past. And how those numbers when honestly reported compare? Do they only count arrests and tickets inside the fences and ignore everything that happens outside the fences? How many sexual asaults were reported downtown? Was detox full as usual? Aren’t these the things we should be looking at to measure success? I sincerely hope that all these numbers are down and that things are better, but . . . I’d like to see some real numbers, not just the spin.
WHAT’S BUGGING THE MAYOR
Why is he trying so hard and acting so unreasonable with the Edgewater project? I try not to read his blog, it makes my head hurt since its just a press release mechanism for the Mayor. But I kept hearing about his blog on the Edgewater and how he had sort of jumped the shark and finally broke down and read it. Beyond the name-calling language he uses to dismiss opponents as merely “parochial concerns”, “die-hard opponents” and calling them unreasonable . . . I’m surprised he so poorly makes his case by mis-stating the issues by saying it is about Capitol view limits and then there is this:
It should not be this hard for someone who wants to create jobs, add to our tax base, increase public access to the lake and revive a tired iconic property to get his project done. It’s not that the opponents of this project didn’t have some legitimate concerns. But those concerns have been more than adequately addressed. What remains now is unreasonable opposition from a slim minority that vows to use every tool at their disposal, including the courts, to block this project. In this long debate, it’s time for reason to take hold.
Um, apparently, the concerns have not been addressed.
And furthermore, there hasn’t been a long debate. There’s a brand new project being proposed that most people haven’t seen any details about. In fact, plan commission gets to see it tonight for the first time and Urban Design will see it for the first time on Wednesday. Landmarks, Zoning Board of Appeals and the public won’t get their meetings til even later. Why is he so desperate to ram this down our throats before most people have even seen it? I have to agree with Diaz – who’s being unreasonable here? And why so desperate to be using George Bush type tactics?
IT’S WORSE THAN I THOUGHT
When Hawk talked about banking at Park Bank being the reason Tim Bruer made sure he got a more favorable approval on his alcohol license I wasn’t quite sure if it was because he ran into Bruer at the bank and they were able to talk often, or that Bruer told him that is who he should do business with. Turns out, its the worse of the two, the later. That’s an awful important distinction and a pretty big accusation to be made so publicly.
NO MORE FAVORITISM AT ALRC! WELL, EXCEPT FOR MARSH SHAPIRO’S PRIVILEGE
At the meeting of Oct 21, the chair David Hart starts out by formally stating the rules that apply to the public. You only have three minutes, after speaking to the committee please take your seat in the gallery and you may only respond to questions with permission of the chair.
Except . . . when your name is Marsh Shapiro, the non-voting member of the ALRC committee [sic] representing the Tavern League (If you haven’t done so yet, you have to re An [sic] Letter to the Badger Herald from the Tavern League). Then, the chair has different rules. As the item is taken up, Hart announces that as a committee member he would prefer Shapiro have the privilege to sit at his seat and “not be timed when you speak”. Hart notes that Shapiro is the agent and registrant and is applying to increase the capacity of the bar. When Shapiro speaks he says he is the owner, operator and license holder of said bar. That’s a pretty handy advantage to have. (You can see all this on the video here. Its in the first 10 minutes or so, its the first item discussed.)
Now, when he got that privilege, was it because he was owner of the Nitty Gritty, or the Tavern League representative? Seems the lines are blurred when he get the advantage, but not when students try to hold his business responsible for the position he takes. Interesting. And I guess its ok to hand over his plans when it is to his advantage.
15 FURLOUGH DAYS FOR CITY WORKERS?
Here’s a portion of a letter sent out to department and division heads last week.
Instead of cutting into our general fund balance or making drastic cuts in programs or services, I spread budget cuts over all agencies by increasing salary savings. I’m proposing two policies to help managers meet those higher levels of savings.
First, I will continue the hiring freeze throughout 2010. As you know, this does not mean that managers are prohibited from filling all vacancies, only that they must justify those positions they wish to fill. I know this has caused hardships in many offices, including my own. But thanks to the cooperation of managers and the hard work of staff who have been asked to take on additional duties, we have saved more than $1.5 million since the freeze was implemented in May. Continuing the freeze will go a long way toward getting us through 2010 without significant layoffs or cuts in services. In order to better track the position requests, effective immediately please use the standardized Request to Fill Vacancy form that can be found on Employeenet under “forms.”
Second, I will be encouraging city employees in certain circumstances to use up to 15 days of voluntary Absence Without Pay (AWOP) leave in 2010. Use of voluntary AWOP will only be allowed in situations where it will not increase overtime or affect important services to the public. Approval of AWOP requests will continue to be up to the sole discretion of the department head. This does not change any of the procedures of our current AWOP policy. It simply encourages the use of approved AWOP for calendar year 2010 only. Attached you will find two documents that describe the policy and the impact it may have on employee benefits. Please share these with your employees who may be interested in taking AWOP leave in 2010.
I wondered what those “certain circumstances” are? And who will be “encouraged” to take this leave? Where’s the budget line item that does this?
So, I read the document. Would you be surprised to find out that this changes the policy which says they can take 12 days of Leave Without Pay, not 15? I don’t know who wouldn’t want to do it when they get an accompanying 2 page memo telling them how their benefits will reduced as well.
More round up tomorrow . . . I woke up late today! 🙂
