Won't you be my neighbor?

Once it was impossible for a candidate from Milwaukee to get elected governor. Now, it seems that’s the only kind we want to elect. In a state encompassing 65,505 square miles, Gov. Scott Walker and Mayor Tom Barrett live bizarrely close to each other, exactly two miles and 59 feet apart. Barrett is at 5030 W. Washington Blvd., just a ways northeast of Walker, who lives at 520 N. 68th Street in Wauwatosa. Walker lives near the Valley Forge neighborhood, and some Republicans would have you believe he’s suffering as much abuse as George Washington once did. Barrett is in the Washington Heights neighborhood and hopes to scale the heights on June 5. The two town rivals are so close geographically you’d think they could just meet half-way at Hawthorn Glen and settle the election mano-a-mano.

Right Wing Recall Fan

It seems to have become an article of faith among conservatives that recalls have gone overboard and we need limits on their use. An interesting exception is the Citizens for Responsible Government, and its spokesperson Chris Kliesmet. Kliesmet is a fervent Walker supporter, but opposed to limiting the use of recalls in Wisconsin.

No one has worked on more recalls in this state. Kliesmet estimates CRG has helped groups launch at least two dozen recalls. Most were small municipal elections and had a conservative slant, often in opposition to government spending. CRG was formed to recall former Milwaukee County Executive F. Thomas Ament, whose resignation opened the door for the election of Scott Walker.

Kliesmet argues that frivolous recalls will not succeed. “If it’s for a bad reason — I don’t like the official’s dog — you’re not going to get the signatures.”

And Kliesmet is adamant that recalls are critical to a vibrant democracy. “Do you wait till the next election to fire a bad plumber?” he asks. “Politicians are not a protected class. They should not be given a four-year no-cut contract.”

Why the Journal Sentinel Endorsed Walker

Many around town were buzzing about the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s endorsement of Scott Walker. The editorial, after all, offered a laundry list of negatives about Walker’s performance, noting that “No governor in America is so polarizing” and “Walker brought on some of this animosity on himself,” while Act 10 was “an overreach of political power.” That sounds more or less like a Barrett stump speech.

Yet the JS had no choice but to endorse Walker because it has editorialized against recalls pursued because of disagreement over “a single policy.” It has yet to explain why the recall was a legitimate tool in the case of Tom Ament and the single policy change (the pension plan) he championed.

But in the future, to be consistent, it will have to oppose the recall when the next politician passes some outrageously self-serving but legal piece of legislation like the county pension plan. It seems a strange position indeed for a paper that prides itself on its watchdog stories to protect the public interest.

They Like Us, They Really Like Us!

Readers were quick to point out that the New York Times did get around to reviewing the Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra’s performance at Carnegie Hall. Critic James R. Oestreich’s review offered plenty of praise. He lauded music director Edo de Waart, who, “no surprise, showed full command here and in the more standard works” and the “responsive orchestra (which) shone everywhere, with warm strings, characterful woodwinds and strong brasses.” Characterful woodwinds are my favorite kind.

MSO musicians are still hopeful that New Yorker writer Alex Ross (for my money the best classical music critic in America) will review the concert.

The Journal Sentinel presumably didn’t think it was worth the cost to fly its freelance critic to review the concert, yet Shepherd Express critic Rick Walters and ThirdCoast Digest’s Tom Strini managed to get there. Word has it Walters had frequent flyer miles and Strini got help from a symphony patron. So it goes in a world where publications of all kinds are slashing their budgets for arts critics.

Waukesha Dry Gulches Itself

JS reporter Don Behm did a solid and pretty gutsy story on Waukesha’s bid for Lake Michigan water that predicts the city is unlikely to meet the legal deadline for its proposal. Waukesha is the first city completely outside the Great Lakes basis to ask the various states in the region for permission to divert Lake Michigan, but there is a legal time table for such proposals, and Waukesha looks like it may not make it.

The legal requirements are hard enough, but Waukesha hurt itself first by going the cheap route. Instead of proposing to build a pipeline to return water all the way back to the lake, which would have been more expensive, it chose the option of returning the water to Underwood Creek in Wauwatosa, where the water would then flow into the Menomonee River and eventually to the lake. But that raises sticky environmental issues that will delay the process.

Waukesha’s voters hurt the effort by electing Jeff Scrima as mayor, who ran on an anti-Milwaukee platform and has done everything to oppose and slow down the proposal to gain Lake Michigan water. It looks like Scrima and his supporters are going to get their way. But they may regret it.

Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele

Will Chris Abele run for mayor? Sources have told me the Milwaukee County Executive is considering running for mayor of Milwaukee should Tom Barrett get elected governor — and has even talked about trying to hold both positions at once. I reached Abele, who conceded discussing this with friends: “I tend to think out loud.” Abele said he spends a lot of time thinking about efficiencies and how to consolidate government functions, and that any merger of city and county functions is inevitably stymied by turf battles. Whereas if he held both executive positions, he jokes, “I’m unlikely to get into turf battles with myself.”

That’s funny, but perhaps not the best campaign slogan. I think the idea of Abele holding both positions would get quickly hooted down as an unseemly power grab, with radio squawkers Charlie Sykes and Mark Belling leading the chorus of critics. Abele, however, adds that “it’s nothing I’m actively pursuing.”

Nor could he. As Sykes has noted, correcting an early version of my column, if Barrett is elected governor, Common Council President Willie Hines would take over as acting mayor.

Double Dipping

Last week I wrote about State Sen. Van Wanggaard’s double dipping. It’s worth noting two other double dippers, in this case Democrats: New City Treasurer Spencer Coggs intends to continue collecting his state senator salary of about $50,000 through 2012 even as he earns $114,000 from the city. And new county supervisor Dave Cullen intends to continue collecting his state assembly salary through 2012. Both have suggested they might give the money back to charity, but as talk radio’s Jeff Wagner notes, these kind of promises are easily broken. Indeed, former county supervisors Joe Rice and Paul Cesarz both made pledges to give back much of their salaries, but the press soon forgot about it and neither ever disclosed how much they ever gave back.

Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra in New York

My, how times have changed. In the old days, a trip by the Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra would have generated a bunch of reviews from the New York press, bringing the MSO national attention. Nowadays, the concert doesn’t even get a review by the home town newspaper. That’s right, last Friday’s Carnegie Hall concert got no review from the New York Times or any other NYC publication, nor even from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. The only reviews were by Milwaukee’s ThirdCoast Digest (thanks to Tom Strini), and the daily paper in Birmingham, Alabama. Imagine the next time the orchestra tries to sell donors to sponsor such a trip: hey, this could get us a review from an Alabama critic.

In the Eyes

The eyes have it: gubernatorial rivals Scott Walker and Tom Barrett are in many ways polar opposites, particularly when you look at their eyes. Walker’s typically look sleepy, even when he’s delivering a fiery speech. Barrett looks wild-eyed; there’s a strange intensity to the cast of his eyes. It’s ironic: firebrand revolutionary Walker looks like he’s about to snooze while the typically bland Barrett’s eyes signal a crazed ferocity.

They Love Ron Johnson and Paul Ryan

In a Sunday New York Times story on the Tea Party challenge to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Wisconsin’s Senator Ron Johnson was cited as a key ally: McConnell “enlisted” Johnson, “a freshman elected with Tea Party backing, to lead efforts to coordinate the Republican messages and agenda in the Senate and the House with the party’s presidential nominee.” That seeming elevation of Johnson’s stature is ironic, since Johnson subtly distanced himself from the Tea Party during his successful campaign against Russ Feingold.

The same story noted that “Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, the House Budget Committee chairman, has become perhaps his party’s most important policy maker.” That’s good news for Ryan, but makes you wonder just how deep the GOP party’s bench goes when it comes to policy making.

Hooters and Flag Burning

The Journal Sentinel has been too high-minded to report the fact that Walker spokeswoman Ciara Mathews was once a Hooters girl, but the liberal Capital Times was happy to spread the story and link to a spicy image, earning the scorn of Fox Nation and Jeff Wagner.

Not to be outdone, conservatives have gone after state Democratic Party Communications Director Graeme Zielinski for burning a flag while in college. I’m sure members of both parties are relieved that no photos of a scantily dressed Zielinski were unearthed.

Where was Peter Bock?

Did anyone notice Peter Bock’s invisibility in the Democratic gubernatorial primary? Bock is a former state legislator who was highly regarded (a 1997 Milwaukee Magazine story by yours truly rated him as one of the ten best lawmakers)  and is married to Kathleen Falk,  but you never heard about him campaigning for her in the gubernatorial primary. Of course, Bock is also an old friend of Falk’s opponent Tom Barrett; Barrett and Bock often traveled to Madison together when both were legislators.

CEO Pay

Kudos to reporter Cary Spivak and the Journal Sentinel for their Sunday stories on corporate executive pay. As grossly high as company filings show CEO pay is today, Spivak has documented that the pay is even higher in some cases, as documented by the state net tax records. He found that in 2010, former Bucryrus International CEO Tim Sullivan and Rockwell Automation CEO Keith Nosbusch both earned a stratospheric $29.5 million while Harley Davidson CEO Keith Wandell brought home $20.4 million.

Spivak also took a look at shareholder votes on executive pay, showing that many companies are seeing a backlash from shareholders. And small wonder, when you have numerous CEOs getting huge raises while shareholders get the shaft: in 2011, Manitowoc Co. Inc. CEO Glen Tellock got a 77 percent raise while the value of the company’s stock declined 29 percent and MGIC Investment Corp. CEO Curt Culver saw his pay rise 28 percent while the company’s stock dropped 63 percent.

The newspaper typically includes the pay of its own CEO in these stories, but this story went further, spotlighting Journal Communications Inc. CEO Steven Smith, whose rose by 8.5 percent even as company earnings dropped by 35 percent and the stock price dropped 9 percent. That showed some guts by JS editor Marty Kaiser.

“If somebody other than me is elected on June 5th, it will have fundamentally changed elections in Wisconsin,” Walker predicted. “I think you’ll have a recall the year after. And a recall the year after. And a recall the year after. It will be recall ping-pong. It will go back and forth. I think that’s a horrendous outcome. Employers will be scared to death of that. You’d see a retraction of jobs as people move somewhere else.”

No, Walker didn’t predict a plague of locusts, but his message was clear: his defeat would forever darken the political landscape of Wisconsin.

Rep. Robin Vos (R-Rochester) has offered a medical analogy to define the utter terror of recalls:  “Recall elections are like a cancer,” he declared. The legislature must “apply chemotherapy immediately to try to stop the cancer from spreading.”

JS editorials have echoed Vos’ doctorly stance, diagnosing  “recall fever” and decrying the “poisonous atmosphere” it has caused. Another editorial echoed Walker’s prediction of recall ping-pong, suggesting there could be  “a wave of recalls following his.”

“Politicians, regardless of party, should not be recalled over one issue or one (or even several) votes,” the editorial maintained.

Funny. When the Milwaukee County pension scandal broke, it involved just one issue. Yet the Journal Sentinel ran an orgy of front page stories, hammering Milwaukee County Executive F. Thomas Ament and the Milwaukee County Board unrelentingly for months. A recall effort was launched against Ament (who resigned rather than get thrown out) and nine or ten supervisors (seven were successfully recalled). None of these politicians were accused of misconduct in office (which Vos and the Journal Sentinel believe should be the only possible reason to recall a politician from office). Yet the paper did everything it could to induce recall fever with its news coverage.  Apparently, it likes some recalls better than others.

The Journal Sentinel, and conservative bloggers like Christian Schneider, argue it has become too easy to recall public officials. On the contrary. “Historically, recall attempts at the state level have been unsuccessful,”the National Conference of State Legislatures has noted.

Its data shows that since 1913, when the first recall laws were passed, there have been just 33 recall attempts of state officials in the U.S. and 17 that were successful. That, by the way, includes last year’s wave of legislative recalls in Wisconsin. This election will add five more recall attempts for Wisconsin and the nation.

And it’s much tougher to do a recall in Wisconsin. Wisconsin requires anyone wanting to recall a governor to get enough signatures equal to 25 percent of those who voted in the last election. Idaho requires just 20 percent, Georgia and Oregon and Rhode Island 15 percent, California only 12 percent.

No state makes it easier than California, yet the recall of Gray Davis didn’t create a ping-pong effect. There has been no attempt to recall a governor since.

The bar in Wisconsin is so high that no one ever thought a governor could be recalled. I was among those who predicted the opponents of Walker could never get that many signatures. Wow, were we wrong.

Schneider has argued that back in the horse-and-buggy days, it was harder to organize a recall. If so, that would only be a reason to increase the number of signatures required. But is it really so easy to recall a governor today?  Then why wasn’t Gov. Jim Doyle recalled?

Schneider, after all, has argued that Wisconsin was actually more divided under Doyle, citing a poll showing 55 percent of voters disapproving of him compared to 47 percent who disapproved of Walker.

Yet opponents of Doyle tried to organize a recall and gave up; they couldn’t get anywhere near enough signatures to recall him. Schneider also says Wisconsin has “always housed deep divisions.” Yet no governor in history had ever been recalled until now. The JS editorial condemned another example of those dreaded single issue recalls: Opponents of state senators Dale Schultz (R-Richland Center) and Bob Jauch (D-Poplar) threatened to recall them from office because they opposed legislation to make it easier for mining companies to operate in Wisconsin. But neither recall materialized. Recalls aren’t easy.

Have there been excesses in the recall process? I think Democrats have wasted our time targeting some state senators they have no hopes of recalling. And Republicans have perverted the process by running fake Democrats in order to force a primary election in each case.

But excesses come with any kind of democratic process. That’s not a reason to eliminate recalls.

The irony of all this conservative opposition to recalls is that most recalls in Wisconsin have been organized by conservatives and championed by talk radio. Indeed, it was the demise of Ament which led directly to Walker’s election to county executive, and gave him the platform to run for governor. Walker was once a big fan of recalls. Now he decries their impact on Wisconsin.

Misconduct in office is something that’s typically policed by the legislature or legal system, whereas recalls arose out of the old Progressive tradition, with the goal of making public officials more answerable to the electorate. If you believe in recalls to throw out Democrats like Ament, how can you oppose them for Republicans like Walker?

Governor Walker’s move to implement pro-sprawl policies has been quick and wide spread.  Starting even before he took office, his opposition to the $800 million high-speed rail system cost the State of Wisconsin a service that would have benefited Milwaukee and Madison directly.  Quickly this was followed up with dramatic changes at the Department of Natural Resources .  It started with the appointment of Matt Maroney, the former Executive Director Metropolitan Builders Association of Greater Milwaukee, to the Deputy Secretary position, and was quickly followed up by the DNR announcing that it will be reducing air pollution, or rather the reporting of air pollution.

There’s more.  There was the passing of legislation that removed small wetlands from protection so that these wetlands could be developed, often enough into parking lots.   There is a proposed rule that would negatively impact  wind turbine siting, while opening the door for more sprawling development.  Every penny of funding for bike infrastructure was cut from the budget.  Another measure alters the tax impacts for pre-fab home construction, which will essentially have Wisconsin exporting sprawl to neighboring states.  Even the PACE program which would have protected our local food source, our farms, and slowed sprawl is to be eliminated.

The budget also dramatically speeds up freeway construction, while at the same time slashing local street funding and cutting transit. As predicted there will be a significant hit to transit systems statewide as there are deep funding cuts, the possibility of losing federal funds for some systems, a proposed dismantling of regional transit authorities, and the moving of transit funding out of the transportation fund into the general fund.  If this laundry list of agenda items shows anything, it is that there is a pro-sprawl agenda coming straight from the Governor’s office.

It’s unfortunate, because Wisconsin had been on track to be better prepared for our global future.  But it looks like as oil prices continue to rise, environmental impacts continue to pill up, and as the demands of the creative class go unanswered, Wisconsin will be unprepared and unwilling to move forward.

Milwaukee Intermodal Station Trainshed

Our belief that 2010 could have been the Year of the Park East, came up a bit short, and unfortunately it wasn’t the only project that was derailed in 2010.  The Rainier Properties II LLC’s office and movie theater proposal hasn’t budged.  The CommonBond project, an apartment proposal on RSC’s Park East land, failed to receive WHEDA tax credits so it stalled.  In fact nothing actually broke ground in the Park East, and most Park East proposals have gone quiet during this past year.

That said there were a couple of significant advances in the Park East.   First, The Moderne finally received financing, and although it has yet to officially break ground, site preparation started this past week. Secondly, The North End Phase II project received a funding agreement from WHEDA, though it is still working with the City of Milwaukee to complete the project’s financing.  Finally, MSOE proposed the building of a parking garage/athletic facility in the Park East which seems to be on the fast track.  So with an improving economy it looks possible that the Park East project will be able to get back on track in 2011.

Unfortunately, 2010 ended up being the year of high-speed rail, just not in Milwaukee.  Governor Walker ran a campaign that featured shutting down the high-speed rail upgrade and extension project as a key plank in his platform, and once elected he got his wish.  As a direct result the funds were reallocated from Wisconsin to a multitude of other states, costing Wisconsin, and Milwaukee in particular, jobs, tourism, and improved transportation options.  Legally required upgrades to the Milwaukee Intermodal Station are now delayed and possibly unfunded.  The funding for freight tracks that were to be upgraded to allow trains to travel at speeds higher than 10 MPH was also lost.  Finally, instead of 125 new central city jobs, Talgo will likely only keep 60 here in Milwaukee.

Clearly, 2010 wasn’t the year of the Park East, though certain projects did move forward, unfortunately for Milwaukee it turned out to be a year of anti-urban rhetoric that cost us much more than the pennies a year high-speed rail service would have cost Wisconsin.

Critics claim the goal is unrealistic and his jobs plan as lacking and juvenile. Walker counters this criticism with a little faith and some history. Wisconsin has bounced back before. In his victory speech he said that back in 1985, Wisconsin was facing “nearly identical circumstances,” losing nearly as many jobs then as now. Wisconsin was able to overcome the job losses with the election of Tommy Thompson, who governed over an increase of nearly 268,000 new jobs.

How accurate is this claim? And can we rely on Walker’s policies to get us there?

First, let’s look at the jobs data from 1980 through 2009. Wisconsin did indeed experience job losses in the early 1980s (about 71,000 jobs between 1980 and 1982). However, by 1985, Wisconsin recovered the lost jobs, surpassing the 1980 level. Similarly, Wisconsin’s unemployment rate increased from 7.3% in 1980 to 10.3% in 1982, but dropped to 7.2% in 1985.

In contrast, between 2007 and today, Wisconsin lost over 171,000 jobs and unemployment increased over 5% during the “Great Recession.”

Given the differences in the two recessions, Walker’s claim about “nearly identical circumstances” seems a little out of touch empirically. The economic tide began to turn in Wisconsin far before Tommy Thompson became governor. In fact, the bulk of Wisconsin’s economic recovery occurred during former Democratic Governor Tony Earl’s term.

So what about Walker’s goal of creating 250,000 jobs? Well, he’s right – Wisconsin did experience job expansion between 1986 and 1990. Over 267,700 new jobs were created during that period, and unemployment fell from 6.9% in 1986 to 4.3% in 1990.

What explains the increase in jobs? The Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance offers a clue in their September report. They suggest that a significant expansion in the workforce, especially among working women, fueled the state’s job growth during that period. However, while Wisconsin experienced steady job expansion during Thompson’s terms in office, Wisconsin’s job growth still lagged behind the national average. Moreover, Thompson nearly tripled the amount of state spending during the 1990s (which I’ll return to in a little bit).

In his victory speech, Walker pointed to policies such as reducing (governmental) regulation, less litigation, and repealing the state’s law on health savings account to get us to the 250,000 jobs mark. In other forums he’s flirted with the idea of repealing the state’s tax on corporations. Can these usher in a new era of Wisconsin job growth?

Now, I can’t speak for most economists, but it’s important for readers to know that job creation doesn’t necessarily follow tax cuts per force. In fact, I’m constantly flustered at how this claim continues to seduce voters. See here for an example of how county tax cuts haven’t impacted the county unemployment level.

Job creation models are based on fancy statistical regressions that show how change in one factor can lead to change in the other – keeping every other variable constant. Specifically, tax cuts can lead to job growth only without changes in any other factors, such as state spending levels. With significant cuts in state spending levels, tax cuts will wash, and job creation won’t follow. In many cases, governmental spending is more important that tax rates in creating jobs (see here for an example of how government spending on roads leads to decreases in the unemployment level).

Overall, Walker’s optimism is somewhat grounded in reality (rebounds can happen!), although some important specifics are off.

I just hope that hope policymakers remember the lessons about the conditional impact of tax cuts and state spending. Significant cuts in education, health care, municipal services, and infrastructure can negatively impact job creation in the state – even if major tax cuts occur. If Walker really wants to follow in Tommy Thompson’s footsteps, then he’ll use strategic tax cuts without slashing services.

Related Article:

• Working on job creation

Guest post by: John Kovari

John Kovari is a Ph.D. candidate in political science at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the 2008-2009 Norman N. Gill Fellow at the Public Policy Forum. Additionally, he has served as a legislative assistant to city of Milwaukee Alderman Michael Murphy.

While Cullen, Krusick, and Staskunas aren’t responsible for the fiscal woes of MCTS (nor is MCTS itself), their support of AB282 could have saved a system that is headed for significant service cuts in 2011. A vote for a property tax for sales tax swap that Milwaukee County voters approved in 2008 would have been appreciated.

To show our frustration (and utter lack of graphic design skills), we’ve created a desktop wallpaper for you to display on your computer.

MCTS, Falling Off A Cliff

Politics are at work, given the election season.  Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker blames the economy and is downplaying his decision to raise fares over the past several years, and transit advocates are saying that the drop is due to large fare increases and service cuts (fewer routes).

It’s a finger-pointing situation I really hate, so I decided to go straight to the data, presented for you here to make up your own mind.

First, here’s data associated with Walker’s argument: that the declining economy explains the downturn in ridership.

Stats geeks will want to know that the correlation is indeed significant and negative. But taking a closer look at the data makes me wonder if unemployment really drives less ridership. Take a closer look at the graph. There’s a pesky outlier on the bottom right hand side of the graph. That’s the 8.5% unemployment rate in 2009, and it’s most likely skewing the correlation.

Translation: while there might be a relationship, Walker’s overemphasizing the impact of the economy on bus ridership. More on this point later in the post…

Next, take a look at the relationship between fare prices and ridership. Here, we’re testing the assertion that fare increases and service cuts lead to drops in ridership.

As evident from the graph, the relationship between fares and ridership is significant and negative. That is, as fares go up, less people decide to ride.

While both the economy and fares have a statistically significant relationship with how many people decide to ride the bus (even in the regression models I ran), if I had to bet on either I’d bet on fares as the major factor in play here.

Why fares? It’s because when you look at the historical data, there’s a massive spike in ridership in 1979 and 1980 (see graph below).

Remember in 1979 the Iranian Revolution led to an energy crisis and recession – high gas prices, long lines at gas stations, cats and dogs living together, etc. If Walker’s argument is correct, then bus ridership in 1979-80 should have dropped precipitously. Instead, during hard times, people turned to public transportation.

Today, during hard times, people might be using transit more if County government reduced fares.

Of course, this doesn’t mean we should slash prices either. If we look again at the graph with fare prices (the middle graph), it shows that there is an ideal price at which to charge riders, around $0.75-$1 (the point at which ridership peaked). In theory, this price should maximize ridership, and bring in additional revenue to the transit system to cover costs.

Bottom line: Walker has evidence to back up his bad economy claim, but he shouldn’t be ignoring the fact that fare prices have a more important relationship with ridership totals. In other words, Walker’s budgeting decisions have led to less ridership.

Guest post by: John Kovari

John Kovari is a Ph.D. student in political science at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and the 2008-2009 Norman N. Gill Fellow at the Public Policy Forum.  Additionally, he has served as a legislative assistant to city of Milwaukee Alderman Michael Murphy.

It is possible that the race could come down to Barrett versus Walker, and because of this the potential impacts on Milwaukee are significant.  If this happens the Milwaukee area is guaranteed to have one top level position albeit the Mayor’s office, or County Executive become vacated.  Clearly, the impacts of either of Barrett or Walker winning have dramatically different outcomes for Milwaukee.

Politically, the policies are well known, it’s clear that Walker would attempt to hold taxes down at almost any cost, likely pushing again for passing TABOR, and as experienced by residents of Milwaukee County by cutting services or in some cases neglecting services.  Holding taxes down is a commendable goal, unless it negatively impacts vital Milwaukee area services such as mass transit, the Milwaukee Public School System, and parks.  Finally, Walker has consistently opposed any sort of fixed rail system, and as he has in the past work in opposition to the KRM project and Milwaukee’s downtown streetcar.

Obviously, Barrett would bring and different set of policies to Madison, a set that would be open to expanding mass transit and building fixed rail, but a set that would in all likelihood raise taxes to cover the increasing cost of services.  Recently, Mayor Barrett showed his support for fixed rail by successfully lobbying Washington to split the $91.5 million worth of federal funds which had been designated to Milwaukee for the purpose of improving mass transit back in the 90′s, so that the money can finally be spent on developing a Milwaukee streetcar system.  On the taxes front property taxes have grown under Mayor Barrett’s helm, though not terribly fast, and fees have certainly risen.  Prior to the market crash the budgets had generally been tight but raising fees, and cutting staff had been the Barrett’s method of slowing the rate of increase in property taxes.

Clearly, rising taxes, and the importance of mass transit are two vital issues that could dramatically impact the future of Milwaukee.  But at the local level it’s far more interesting to speculate at the potential cast of characters that could attempt to replace either Mayor Barrett or County Executive Walker.

For the Mayors Office if Barrett were to win the Gubernatorial race.

• Former Alderman Michael D’Amato.  Recently former Alderman D’Amato has rounded out his resume by becoming involved in education efforts, and the M7 economic development initiative.  At one time he had flirted with running for Milwaukee County Executive, but choose to pass, this might be a better opportunity for his return to politics.
• Alderman Robert Bauman.  Alderman Bauman regularly takes an active role in citywide issues, such as mass transit, as such he might consider entering the race.
• Common Council President Willie Hines.  Council President Hines has broad appeal, and is often considered as a possible candidate, this could be his shot.
• Alderman Donovan.  Alderman Donovan is always working to be in the news, putting out a press release, holding a press conference, or taking a shot at Mayor Barrett, so it certainly appears as though he’d be interested in the office.
• Rep Pedro Colon. (D)  Despite his failure to win the race for Milwaukee City Attorney against incumbent Grant Langley, he may still have aspirations for City Hall.
• U.S. Rep Gwen Moore (D).  It wouldn’t be the first time a U.S. Rep from Milwaukee ran for Mayor, and it might be seen as a stepping stone to even higher office.

For County Executive if Walker were to win the Gubernatorial race.

• Milwaukee County Parks Director Sue Black.  Parks Director Black has done an fantastic job running the Milwaukee County Park System in the face of budget cuts and staff reductions.  She has consider running in the past, but the prospect of running against your boss probably ended any serious consideration.  With Walker out of the way she may consider it again.
• Sheriff David Clarke (I).  Despite continually running as an Independent Democrat, he is still popular among conservatives, and has always appeared interested in a political office.
• Rep. Jon Richards (D).  He has considered running for County Executive in the past, and with Walker out of the way this door might finally be open.
• Rep. Jeff Stone (R). Stone has experience managing his own business, has reached across the aisle on issues like transit lending his support to the RTA. His name is almost always mentioned when it comes to County Executive in the post-Walker era.
• Supervisor John Weishan Jr.  Supervisor Weishan is often in the middle of big issue and debates, not always winning them, but in the fight regardless.
• Supervisor Chris Larson.  As a freshman Supervisor this may be a long shot, but an opening like this don’t come along all too often and Supervisor Larson might have to consider running.
• Joe Klein (I).  Klein is an extremely long and quite frankly a silly shot, but he’s likely to run as he has twice before.

Who did we miss?

In summary, in order to pay for the massive pension funding gap caused by the first scandal, and lately the market’s performance, the county needs a lot of money.  To get that money they’ve issued $400 million in bonds since the start of 2009.  With the proceeds from the issuance of those 6% bonds, they’ll invest in the market at a hope of earning an 8% return.  They’ll then use the excess 2% they hope to earn to pay for the pension liabilities.  That amount of profit as planned is $237 million.

Seems like a good plan, until you consider what happens if things go wrong.  Assuming the stock market performs only at the rate of interest on the bonds, the county will have undertaken a large risk for zero reward.  More catastrophic though, would be for the market to under-perform the interest rate on the bonds.  Milwaukee County will then find itself in a far worse financial situation, with likely no ability to short-term borrow their way out of it.  The county has to do something, but borrowing-and-investing appears to be quite aggressive.

When a plan like this comes around, it’s best to ask yourself the question “if it really is this easy wouldn’t everyone be doing it?” Instead of discussing closing libraries, privatizing the Water Works, and having fewer firefighters per crew, why doesn’t the City of Milwaukee get the free cash it so desperately needs for its $90 million budget hole with pension bonds and investments?  Why don’t we see this as common place for local governments?  Why am I not doing it?

The answer is because it’s extremely risky.

Of course something that looks great on paper, but has a lot of long-term risk is just what a politician can feed on.  County Executive Walker is more than happy to look at this as a fix as he runs for Governor and looks to leave Milwaukee County with its troubles behind.  The Milwaukee County Board seems posed to go along, perhaps because it avoids drastic cuts that will be difficult to stomach (and get re-elected on).

The costs from the pension scandal haven’t gone away, and in a year where budgets are bad for every level of government dependant on property taxes, things are real bad for the county. While calls have gone out to dissolve the Milwaukee County government and eliminate the County Executive position, they seem far-fetched.  It’s time though to start small and have serious discussions about off-loading aspects of Milwaukee County to other units of government, existing or new, privitazed or not.  Consolidating services with the City of Milwaukee may provide cost savings for both departments, especially in the areas of information technology.  Any proposal from privitazing the airport to creating a regional transit authority should be investigated thoroughly with the hopes of putting Milwaukee County in a better long-term fiscal position.

The move, which many see as a slam of Milwaukee by Doyle, arguably shouldn’t be completely viewed that way.  Doyle did propose a three-county sales tax of up to 0.5% for Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha Counties to establish an authority that would operate all of the transit in the area including the KRM.  Doyle’s reasoning for the veto was that the MTA didn’t have a regional approach.

Some have speculated that this was done as part of Doyle’s potential re-election bid.  That it was an attempt to position himself against Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker.  I don’t buy that, Doyle had proposed the sales tax in his budget previously, and he wouldn’t have allowed the KRM to continue to move forward because, Walker will surely run all over rural Wisconsin talking about “Doyle’s choo choo,” sales tax or no sales tax.  If Doyle was that desperate to position himself against Walker, he would have vetoed the KRM as well.  I can’t speak for Doyle, but I think this was a clear statement to southeastern Wisconsin to get its act in order and come up with a functional, regional solution.

So what’s next? Something has to happen as the 2010 MCTS funding crisis is quickly approaching.  The word on the street is that Doyle is pushing the legislature for a real regional sales tax for Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee Counties to be introduced as its own legislation.

Now is the time for the Milwaukee caucus to actually deliver for their constituents and get this done.  We’ve watched Lena Taylor and Pedro Colon settle on the Joint Finance Committee for a compromise that gave Racine and Kenosha a free ride as a way to protect Racine Senator John Lehman, but now is the time for real action, real solutions.  Because with the funding crisis looming, and Scott Walker probably willing to cut off his own arm to avoid raising taxes, it’s now or never time.

Unfortunately, what is the Milwaukee caucus doing right now?  Pouting.  Taylor, Colon, and Grigsby led the charge on the Joint Finance Committee to vote down a small spending allotment of $35,000 to further study the KRM.

Even worse, Milwaukee County Board Chair, Lee Holloway has given a series of statements which sound more like a whining teenager, than someone who is determined to leverage his friends in the legislature to go out and get a real funding solution for a real crisis.

Meanwhile, Holloway said he would work against the KRM line by appointing himself and an ally to the transit authority board.

“We are going to vote against the KRM, right down the line,” Holloway said.

“It’s just terrible,” Holloway said. “I’m very critical of (Doyle). I thought he was a friend of Milwaukee County.”

It’s time for our Milwaukee caucus to bring home a real dedicated funding solution for transit in southeastern Wisconsin.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has an excellent series of short articles on the case, the players, and the history that educate you with everything you need to get started.