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.

Comments could and should focus around how or why you would use the streetcar, what routes are best of the proposed routes, what service frequency you would like, hours of operation, how it should interact with existing transit systems (i.e. the 10, 15, 30 MCTS routes), vehicle types, and what future extensions should be.

It’s important you make a comment on the record in support of the streetcar. If you can’t make the meeting, you can leave a comment online.

As a refresher, here’s our latest article on the issue (with route #1 winning overwhelming in the poll.  You can also view two PowerPoints on the proposed streetcar line.  One from the office of Mayor Barrett and another from the Milwaukee Connector study group.

The Mayor walked through the three possible routes and numerous possible future extensions.  He broke down how successful systems in cities such as Seattle, Portland, and Tacoma have started with routes similar in length to the proposed for the Milwaukee Streetcar system (2 to 3 miles).

The public is invited to attend an open house to review and comment on the proposed routes on October 8th, 2009 from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m. at the Zeidler Municipal Building at 841 N. Broadway.

Keep in mind that this is a starter system, limited by the availability of funds.  The plan is that once something is in the ground, expansions will be a lot easier.  Mayor Barrett himself describes the plan as a “trojan horse” designed to be expanded.

Likewise, this system is outside of the purview of MCTS and their funding issues.  It is certainly a piece of a larger regional transit solution, but the lack of a transit authority with dedicated funding is not a reason to stop working to actually utilize 18-year-idle federal funds.  That said, we still believe a regional transit authority with dedicated funding is vital to developing a healthy, regional transit system.  Thankfully Jim Doyle has proposed a plan to address just that, and now it’s up to our state legislators to act.

We invite you to vote in the below poll for your favorite route (and leave a message in the comments why), here is some quick food for thought from us.  You’re also invited to buy a streetcar t-shirt, and wear it to the event on October 8th to show your support.

Alignment #1

• This route seems positioned for success because it connects likely riders (urban residents) with jobs.  The Third Ward and downtown are filled with “creative class” jobs, and downtown and the lower East Side are filled with “creative class” workers.  Likewise this streetcar would connect service industry workers with numerous restaurants, bars, and retail locations, saving money for the people who need it most.
• The jog up to Brady is more valuable than the jog further south in the Third Ward.  Adding access for thousands of residents by connecting to Brady is more desirable than getting to the front door of more jobs in the Third Ward.  It seems likely that if riders were dropped off by the iconic Milwaukee Public Market they would likely walk to the jobs located south of St. Paul in the Third Ward.
• Development potential along this route is good, although secondary to the potential for riders.  This is key in this author’s viewpoint for making the starter system successful.
• Connection to the Intermodal Station is essential for regional transit (Amtrak, KRM, Megabus, Greyhound, etc).
• The 4th Street jaunt at the west end of the route seems likely to be underutilized, with likely only convention attendees and a few hotel guests using the leg.  It might be better waiting until funds are available to make the 4th Street leg go further north.

Alignment #2

• The Water Street leg seems to pass less housing than Alignment #1 would.  On the flip side it would likely pass more jobs, and more bars.  It seems that a better balance would yield better ridership for the starter system.
• The potential Brady Street leg is intriguing, but likely a disappointment in terms of development.  The Water Street portion could see more accelerated development, because of the line’s construction (The North End’s development would likely be accelerated).  The Brady Street portion would draw riders, however, future growth may be difficult because of neighborhood politics including the East Village Neighborhood Conversation Overlay District that limit heights and thereby inhibits density beyond a certain level.  Additionally, Brady Street itself is a historic district, which could limit the possibility of new development as well.  Long-term development potential from the line on Brady Street is likely fairly limited (compared to other potential routes).
• Connection to the Intermodal Station is essential for regional transit (Amtrak, KRM, Megabus, Greyhound, etc).
• The 4th Street jaunt at the west end of the route seems likely to be underutilized, with likely only convention attendees and a few hotel guests using the leg.  It might be better waiting until funds are available to make the 4th Street leg go further north.
• The alignment is less connected with the Third Ward, a large center of jobs, and is even further disconnected with the growing number of apartments at the east and southern areas of the Third Ward.

Alignment #3

• The alignment misses a large portion of East Town, the most jobs-dense portion of the city.
• The alignment serves many major entertainment hubs (Bradley Center, US Cellular Arena, Milwaukee Theater, Turner Hall Ballroom, Midwest Airlines Convention Center), which are likely to generate high ridership, but only on a handful of days.
• The alignment misses the Third Ward completely, a large jobs center, and an increasingly dense population center.
• The potential Brady Street leg is intriguing, but likely a disappointment in terms of development.  The Water Street portion could see more accelerated development because of the line’s construction (The North End’s development would likely be accelerated).  The Brady Street portion would draw riders, however, future growth may be difficult because of neighborhood politics including the East Village Neighborhood Conversation Overlay District that limit heights and thereby inhibit density beyond a certain level.  Additionally, Brady Street itself is a historic district, which could limit the possibility of new development as well.  Long-term development potential from the line on Brady Street is likely fairly limited (compared to other potential routes).
• The leg from Ogden to Brady would be important to generate ridership on the route, but it’s hard to imagine many people riding it to work daily.
• The route has the greatest development potential of the three routes, with all of the Park East covered.  Unfortunately, that comes with the trade-off of likely the lowest ridership.
• If the goal is to build a starter system with the greatest number of riders possible, this is the worst option.

Urban Milwaukee has produced a limited number of Milwaukee Streetcar t-shirts, available for $15 a piece.

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?

It’s easy to see why Governor Jim Doyle is pushing for Talgo to locate in Janesville. While Talgo would bring only 80 jobs after a loss of thousands, the hard hit city would gain momentum from a likely to growth in industry.  Janesville is more desperate for the breath of economic life, and the addition of Talgo would have a greater immediate impact than it would in Milwaukee.  If you’re Governor of Wisconsin, it’s obvious why you would push for Janesville.

If you’re Antonio Perez, CEO of Talgo, it’s easy to see where you want to locate your company’s new assembly and maintenance facility.  Milwaukee provides both land and water access for shipping in parts and personnel.  Milwaukee also is actually on a passenger rail line, the Amtrak Hiawatha, where Talgo’s first Wisconsin order will go.  Should Wisconsin get it’s stimulus request for the development of a Madison to Milwaukee line, Talgo’s second Wisconsin order would also be utilized in the same city it’s assembled.  Janesville is not part of any passenger rail plans, neither short nor long-term.

Perhaps the biggest kicker is the potential cost-savings in possible partnership with Milwaukee-based Super Steel who manufacturers train cars for Metra and light-rail vehicles.  A Super Steel partnership in some form is exactly what the Milwaukee legislative contingent is pushing for.

Talgo it’s easy, come to Milwaukee.

The release indicates positions we have advocated for before, including the need for the bridge to better interact with the city at its northern terminus at Clybourn and Lincoln Memorial Drive.

One should not hold out hope that the city gets everything it asks for though.  As evidence of how little influence they city may have in the issue, Mayor Barrett and Common Council President Hines were mere attendees at the Marquette Interchange ribbon cutting.  They stood among the crowd, while Governor Doyle and Transportation Secretary Busalacchi unveiled their $800 million interchange.  There might not be better symbolism for highway building than that.  The city can yell all it wants, but will the state listen?

When

Bridge reconstruction is expected to be completed in 2013.  The timeframe for such a redevelopment is relatively fast.

Where

The entire structure is in need of serious maintenance in the form of a redecking.  Running from the eastern half of Interstate 794 downtown to the south end of the bridge where it touches down in Bay View.

Who Uses It

The bridge serves primarily Bay View, St. Francis, and other southside residents looking to enter downtown and nearby neighborhoods.  It likewise provides access for individuals downtown looking to get to the airport.

Who Builds It

The Wisconsin Department of Transportation will award and manage contracts for bridge reconstruction.  The City of Milwaukee is not the project manager by any means.

Cost

Simply rebuilding the bridge as is was estimated at $200 million, and some sort of rebuild is viewed as necessary for safety reasons.  A considerable amount of money is going to need to be spent, even just to maintain the status quo.

Bauman’s Proposed Principles

Alderman Bauman’s press release revealed a series of principles to be introduced to the full Common Council on July 7th.

• The bridge and its approaches must use the existing right-of-way and substantially the same footprint.
• The bridge’s approaches must remain elevated over all land uses currently beneath the approaches, including but not limited to the Port of Milwaukee, MMSD and the Maier festival park.
• Any moveable bridge spans must have sufficient clearance over the (average) water level to minimize bridge openings for non-commercial vessels.
• Bridge openings must be limited to non-peak traffic periods, except in emergencies.
• The bridge and its approaches must accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic.
• The bridge and its approaches must be limited to two travel lanes and one distress lane, bicycle lane and pedestrian sidewalk in each direction.
• The lake shore interchange must be eliminated and replaced by an at-grade intersection or roundabout in the approximate location of Clybourn Street and Lincoln Memorial Drive.
• All new or reconstructed structures must be designed with lighting and architectural elements developed in consultation with the City of Milwaukee.

Conclusion

It seems perfectly reasonable to assume that the completely elevated bridge could be rebuilt in a fashion much more respectful to the city, that doesn’t impair motorists’ ability to enter downtown.  Drivers looking to enter downtown might actually have a better experience being dropped to street-level faster (the street grid gives options) at the north end of the bridge.  Also, while much of the land over which the bridge crosses isn’t developable, the land at the north end of the bridge holds a lot of potential.  A bridge that better interacts with the city could pay dividends in the form of a healthier neighborhood and increased tax base.

Cost is something to consider, and dropping the bridge to an intersection at the north end would likely mean the loss of the Interstate designation and some amount of federal funding.  That isn’t a reason not to do a highway rebuild though, as the state has shown by spending $400 million rebuilding Highway 26 from Janesville to Watertown, which includes the addition of by-passes around towns smaller than the Bay View neighborhood.

The item of most interest to most Milwaukeeans, outside of income tax levels, is the proposed Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Transit Authority.  We have created a chart to track the changes that have been made to the proposal, and included a more in-depth explanations into each step below.

What will come out of the conference committee to merge the two budgets, we cannot guess.  In regards to stimulus funds, the amount of money for high-speed rail jumped up to $8 billion, from previous considerations of around $2 billion.  Conference committees are a bit unpredictable sometimes.  It looks like the KRM will get done, one way or another, and that a new sales tax is coming for Milwaukee County.

We’ll update you when we know more, but for now here is a look at how it got to the way it is.

RTA Board, Governor’s Budget Proposal

Governor Doyle stuck his neck out to include the recommendations of SEWISRTA in his original budget proposal.  Those recommendations, as a refresher, were up to a 0.5% sales tax to fund the KRM and transit services in Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee Counties and remove transit from the property tax.  Also included was the ability for municipalities to enact a .15% sales tax for public safety, which was included to gain the support of Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett.  When Doyle issued his recommendations, he removed Barrett’s 0.15% sales tax.

RTA Board Recommendations
Governor Doyle Budget Recommendation

Joint Finance Committee

The Joint Finance Committee of the Wisconsin State Legislature then took up the Governor’s proposed budget, and made their changes.  The Joint Finance Committee RTA changes were made in the middle of the night , with a number of Republicans (who hold the minority in both the Senate and Assembly) heading out to the bars while waiting for Democrats to finish caucasing behind closed doors.

When the meeting finally started, Senator Lena Taylor, Representatives Pedro Colon and Tamara Grigsby had helped turn the southeastern Wisconsin RTA in two RTAs.  One “regional” transit authority for Milwaukee County only, that was funded by a 1% sales tax, and was in charge of supporting transit, parks, EMS, and culture.  The amendment included no clear dividing lines between areas, so it wasn’t clear if Milwaukee County would have parks paved with gold or the best-staffed EMS department in the world.  Of that 1%, 15% would go directly to the City of Milwaukee, with no apparent restrictions on how it could be spent.  This was somewhat similar to the referendum that was narrowly approved by Milwaukee County voters on November 4th.

The second RTA created was the KRM authority, which would operate the Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee commuter rail line.  The motion was sponsored by Senator John Lehman, Senator Lena Taylor, Representiave Cory Mason, and Representative Pedro Colon.  Instead of using the RTA board recommended, and Governor proposed .5% sales tax to fund both buses and the commuter rail line, the rail line was to be funded by a $16 rental car tax (per transaction).  A pork stop for Pedro Colon was included to have the train’s first stop out of the Intermodal Station be at East National Avenue (originally called West in the motion that was distributed), a mere mile out of the station.  A stop would make sense in such a location for a light-rail or streetcar vehicle, but not a heavy rail train.  Additionally, the make-up of the board was extremely partisan in nature, with the Milwaukee and Kenosha County Board Chairs appointing their county’s representative as the County Executives in each respective county is a Republican.  Racine County would have had their member appointed by the County Executive.  Bonding authority for the KRM was also reduced to $50 million.  The motion was approved on a party line vote, 12 aye, 4 no.

Representative Robin Vos (R) from Racine County proposed a motion to require a referendum be held in each county to approve the KRM and to exclude western Racine County from the rental car tax.  It was defeated on a party line vote, 4 aye, 12 no.  Vos also moved to amend the KRM authority to have county members of the authority appointed by the county executives.  This was again defeated on a party line vote.

Motion 218 – Southeast RTA
Motion 223 – KRM Authority
Motion 226 – KRM Authority
Motion 228 – KRM Authority

Wisconsin State Assembly

On June 10th, 2009, the Wisconsin State Assembly approved their version of the budget.  They approved a version of transit services more similar to what the Governor and RTA board had recommended than the Joint Finance Committee’s approval.  In brief, the Assembly approved a few key changes to the Joint Finance Committee motions.

• Rename KRM authority SERTA (South Eastern Regional Transit Authority).  Designate it the only entity in Milwaukee, Racine, and Kenosha that can apply as an RTA to the FTA.
• Rename the Milwaukee Regional Transit Authority the Milwaukee Transit Authority (MTA).
• Authorize the Milwaukee County Board to assess a .65¢ sales tax for Milwaukee County. Mandate ½ ¢ has to go to the Milwaukee Transit Authority for transit.
• If the sales tax is adopted, existing funding for transit must be removed from property tax levy.
• Authorize the Milwaukee County Board to approve up to .15% (NOTE: Urban Milwaukee believes this should be cents, not percent, as that would be 9.75 cents as written) of the sales tax go to Milwaukee County municipalities prorated on a formula based on the number of police and fire employees within each municipality.
• Increase the approved car rental tax to $18. Designate that $1 per vehicle from this vehicle rental tax will go to the City of Racine for the Belle Urban System & $1 per vehicle go to the City of Kenosha for the Kenosha Transit Authority to support their local transit systems. Each city will then be required to generate new funds to match new car rental tax revenues. The $1 for the respective cities will not be released by SERTA until the City of Racine and the City of Kenosha have demonstrated an established funding source to produce the matching funds.
• Add a KRM stop in the City of Milwaukee at the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Bay Street. (NOTE: This is a long-discussed stop in Representative Jon Richards district)
• Include language specifying that municipalities in Racine and Kenosha Counties, outside of the cities of Racine & Kenosha, shall not have a KRM transit stop in those municipalities until they each provide for a sustainable mechanism to generate new funding to contribute to the Belle Urban System or the Kenosha Transit Authority.
• Restore the language from Governor Doyle’s budget proposal to provide $100 million in bonding
  authority.

The Assembly made adjustments to the KRM after key members met with members of Herb Kohl’s staff and communicated with FTA officials to learn what it would take to get federal approval for the project (federal funds are key to the development of the KRM).

Full Assembly KRM Amendment

Wisconsin State Senate

The Wisconsin State Senate approved a budget closer to that of the Joint Finance Committee than the Assembly on June 18th, 2009.  In brief, their key changes included the following.

• Delete the Milwaukee County Regional Transit Authority (RTA) proposed under the substitute amendment. Remove the reference to the Milwaukee County RTA as an eligible applicant under the southeast Wisconsin transit capital assistance program and, instead, make Milwaukee County an eligible applicant under that program.
• Grant Milwaukee County the ability to enact an additional 1% sales tax for transit, parks, culture, and emergency medical services, and require the property tax levy be reducing by $67 million (NOTE: this would be about half of what the sales tax brings in).
• Require Milwaukee County to distribute the other 15% of the new sales and use tax revenues to the municipalities in Milwaukee County. Require the municipalities to use these funds to support police, fire, and emergency medical services. Specify that the funds would be allocated among the municipalities in Milwaukee County on a per capita basis.
• Rename the KRM Authority, as proposed in the substitute amendment, the Southeastern Regional Transit Authority (SERTA). Modify the appointments to the SERTA board by specifying that the Kenosha County board chair, rather than the Kenosha County Executive, would appoint the Kenosha County member to the board. Specify that SERTA would be an eligible applicant for the southeastern Wisconsin transit capital assistance program that would be created under the substitute amendment. Require that the KRM commuter rail project include a stop in the City of Milwaukee at the intersection of Lincoln Avenue and Bay Street.

Full Senate Budget – Page 65 for RTA

Timeline

1991 – Milwaukee awarded $289 million for the construction of a dedicated-bus lane in the East-West Freeway corridor (Interstate 94 from Downtown to Waukesha).  When the plan was canceled, the federal government took back $48 million.

1998 – Jim Rowen at The Political Environment has the best summary…

Then Gov. Tommy Thompson prevailed on Rep. Tom Petri (R) to allow Thompson to direct the transit funds to other transportation projects, including freeways, because Thompson wanted the money for the Marquette Interchange reconstruction. Intervention by then-Rep. Tom Barrett (D), and Sen. Herb Kohl, (D), prevented that outcome – - and I don’t recall then State Rep. Scott Walker, (R), piping up and complaining that would mean less money for Milwaukee County buses someday.

1999 – A deal between County Executive Tom Ament, Mayor John Norquist, and Governor Tommy Thompson and approved by the federal government diverts $149.5 million to a series projects that include the construction of the new Marquette Interchange, the 6th Street Viaduct, and Canal Street.  The fund (which does not gain interest) is left with $91.5 million designed for capital costs of a downtown circulator starter system.  To access the remaining funds, approval is needed from the Milwaukee Mayor, the Milwaukee County Executive, the President of the MMAC, and the CEO of the Wisconsin Center District (WCD).

2006 – The Milwaukee Common Council approves an electric-guided bus plan, backed by the MMAC and WCD, intending to move it into preliminary engineering.  Mayor Tom Barrett vetos the $300 million proposal, the majority of the Common Council reverses their previous position and upholds the veto.  Plan killed.  Credit the Common Council for trying to do something on the issue, but the system was seriously flawed and I think that was realized at the end of the day.

2007-2008 – Tom Barrett and Scott Walker each pushed the issue of the $91.5 much more publicly.  Barrett unveiled a plan that included a downtown streetcar loop and two express bus lines, and talked of reconfiguring existing bus service to work with new, express service.  Walker unveiled an express bus plan scant on details, but complete with attacks on the Mayor’s plan.  It appeared he had the intention to simply cut all standard bus service in the areas to be served by express buses.  Both, being career politicians, cleverly avoided any mention of the money needed to operate such a system after building it.

September 9th, 2008 – Tom Barrett and Scott Walker debate the merits of their respective proposals at a forum at Marquette moderated by Mike Gousha.  Barrett offers to split the $91.5 million 50/50 in person to Walker (an idea he had been proposing for weeks if not months prior), Walker refuses.

March 2009 – Senator Herb Kohl and Representative David Obey include an earmark provision in the bill that became the Omnibus Appropriations Act of 2009 that divided the $91.5 million between the City of Milwaukee and Milwaukee County.  Milwaukee County received 40% ($36.6 million), with the City of Milwaukee receiving 60% ($54.9 million).  Barrett and Walker are each now free to pursue using their respective allocated funds to build a new mode of transit service in Milwaukee.

More details on the origin of the money, and past issues is available in an article on Milwaukee transit politics.

FAQ

Is the streetcar proposal part of the proposed Regional Transit Authority (RTA)?

No, but in the future it could become part of the RTA.  At this time no serious discussions have taken place between the City of Milwaukee and appointed-members of the RTA (outside of of course the Mayor’s appointee Sharon Robinson).  The RTA is currently being debated in the Wisconsin State Senate and State Assembly after being included in the Governor’s budget proposal.  It would allow the counties of Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee to enact a sales tax up to 0.5% to fund transit services (key aspect: it would not enact the sales tax as further action would be needed locally in each county).

Does that streetcar affect the current transit funding crisis?

No, the $91.5 million is not available for operating costs of MCTS.  Nor, despite what Scott Walker advocates, does the implementation of a streetcar compete for funding against the existing transit system.  The key to fixing the existing transit funding crisis is to obtain dedicated funding.  Currently property tax dollars from the general fund of Milwaukee County are used.  These are supplemented by dollars from the state.  When this is not enough (as it not been numerous years in a row) federal dollars designated for capital expenses (new buses) have been used for operating expenses.  This problem has been looming for years, and has been postponed with service cuts and fare hikes.

Does the streetcar stand a better chance of being built with the RTA in place?

Yes.  The RTA would provide a dedicated funding source for transit in Kenosha, Racine, and Milwaukee counties.  It could also serve as the operator of multiple services in place of MCTS and other existing services, this included the KRM commuter rail line and potentially the streetcar.  The streetcar proposal currently has the majority of the funding needed for construction (capital costs), but not for the operating budget.  The RTA is a logical fit for operation of the streetcar, especially since the proposed route would sync with the RTA-proposed KRM commuter rail line at the Milwaukee Intermodal Station.  The RTA is likewise a good choice for the operator of the region’s bus transit services as centralized branding, route planning, and uniform ticketing will lead to the attractive and cost-effective intermodal transit system.

Where would the streetcar run?

On steel rails embedded in the road in the same lane as traffic runs on.  The rails would not damage cars or cause a bumpy driving experience.  Unfortunately for road bikers, narrow tires may get stuck in the space between the rail and the road, but there isn’t a shortage of streets in downtown Milwaukee that bikers can utilize.  Portland, perhaps the most bike friendly city in America, has avoided this problem by dedicating space for bike lanes or having bike lanes intersect streetcar tracks perpendicularly.  The streetcar would also have signal priority, so it won’t get stuck at stop lights.  An example image from Portland is included below.

Would the streetcar eliminate street parking where it runs?

Rarely.  Depending on the configuration of the street and the location of the stops minimal parking would be lost.  Using the same space for stops as the existing buses do would save stalls (and make logical transferring points) will reduce the need to eliminate parking. Additionally, using streets that don’t have much street parking on them to start (such as Van Buren Street south of Juneau) will make the loss of parking minimal.  An example image of how a streetcar stop may function is included below, remember that the spot is already “unparkable” as it is a bus stop.

What’s the difference between a streetcar system and a light rail system?

There is a three-fold difference between streetcars and light rail.  The first is the intended users, streetcars work within a handful of densely populated neighborhoods circulating people (light rail connects location at least a couple miles apart (downtown to the airport, UWM, or Miller Park, with maybe one stop inbetween each).  The second difference is the type of track such a system would need, to go longer distances a light rail system a dedicated right-of-way is needed where no other vehicles can run.  Longer travel distances also yields itself to bigger and longer trains, bigger trains mean bigger stations.  Streetcars, as their name, indicates run in the street, with traffic and are much shorter (and smaller) than light rail vehicles.  The third difference is the cost.  Light rail costs more, at least $10 million more per mile, Tucson, AZ estimates light rail would cost $30 million more per mile than a streetcar (numbers will vary based on size of system, need for land acquisition, and road configuration).  At the end of the day it’s an apples-to-oranges comparison though as they serve different purposes.

More discussion on this issue can be found in a previous article on transit technologies.

Why not a bus instead of a streetcar?

Quality of the ride, and the chance of sparking investment.  Riding on steel rails provides a very smooth ride, on top of having curb bump-outs at stops so there isn’t weaving in and out of traffic, and signal priority to avoid waiting at stop lights.  Second, investing in the steel rails in the ground has a great chance of sparking development nearby as has been shown in numerous other cities where modern streetcar systems have been built.  It’s a show of confidence that a bus can’t deliver.  There is also an unfortunate reality that there is a stigma attached to standard bus service, and that people will ride the streetcar that would rarely, if ever, ride a standard bus.

No one would ride the streetcar

False.  The 78,000 or so people that work downtown along with the 15,000 that live downtown are likely riders.  That’s before entertainment is considered, to which the streetcar would enable people to avoid paying for parking next to the Bradley Center or other venues and park in other areas of downtown.  It would be a boost to downtown businesses, as it would encourage people to move about the area after parking.  Current MCTS riders would also have their ability to move about the downtown extended, which might allow some to take a bus downtown and the streetcar to their ultimate destination (or save someone currently taking a long walk).  Riders of the future KRM commuter rail line will be able to get off at the station and ride the streetcar to their ultimate destination.  The last and final obvious group of potential riders is tourists, who stay at all the various hotels around downtown or drive into downtown to the convention center and currently don’t go elsewhere in the city.

Why Only 3 Miles In Length?

Money, money and politics.  The federal money was donated to create a starter system.  At a cost between $18-$30 million per mile, three miles would keep the cost below $100 million and provide a starter system with obvious routes to UWM, the west, and the airport as potential future extensions.

Looking at various routes, also yields the reality that three miles is about as short as one can go before the system doesn’t connect anything.  It won’t be easy for the city to obtain the remaining money to build the system, but it won’t be impossible either.  To put it in perspective, the final cost of Miller Park is four times that of the streetcar proposal.  Still, it’s a lot to swallow politically, so as Barrett says “it’s the goldie locks plans, not too big, not too small, just right.”  If you disagree, run for Mayor or County Executive, just don’t be surprised when you get laughed out of the room.

Who is going to pay for the rest of the capital costs?

The portion the city received for the streetcar from the $91.5 million was $54.9 million, which is a significant amount, but not enough to cover the costs of Tom Barrett’s proposal.  That leaves options to fund the remainder.  The likely funding option is that the city bonds the money to build it, and it is paid back through the general property tax fund.

Another possiblity is that a benefactor or two could fund the system. Michael Cudahy has been an outspoken advocate of a streetcar system, flying Walker and Barrett around the country (and to Ireland) to look at different systems.  He had mentioned funding the capital costs for his own route, so there is an outside chance Barrett could convince him to fund some portion of the ultimate route.

Using the RTA’s potential bonding ability (as derived from its sales tax collections) is extremely unlikely, but is technically a possibility.

Theoretically one could also put together a series of tax-incremental financing districts to pay for the capital costs, but that would hamper the city’s ability to collect the increased property tax revenue that the line would generate through transit-oriented development.

Winning Route of the Urban Milwaukee Streetcar Contest

We held a contest seeking out the best possible three-mile streetcar route, and a clear winner emerged.  We’ve included that route below as the Mayor’s route isn’t final until there are rails in the ground.

View Transit Idea A in a larger map

While you’re free to vote for whatever you may wish, I encourage you to consider the following aspects as criteria for judging a plan.

1. Ability to serve 78,000 individuals working downtown, and the 15,000 or so that live in the area.

2. Ability to serve event attendees coming downtown and parking at various locations.

3. Ability to interact with existing systems (Amtrak, intercity bus, MCTS) and future ones (KRM, HSR).

4. Ability to encourage future development.

5. The line is close 3 miles (applications significantly greater than 3 miles were disqualified).

The Proposals

• The Mayor’s
• Downtown to Brady by Sam Dodge
• Line to UWM by Sam Dodge
• Ogden-Third Ward-MAM by Sam Dodge
• Viaduct Streetcar by Dan
• UWM to Ogden and Van Buren by Joe Klein
• Downtown to Walker’s Point by Marty
• North Side-Marquette-Cathedral Square by Dave Steele
• North Side-Brewery-Downtown by Dave Steele
• Entertainment Streetcar by Rob Vosters
• Transit Idea A by Streetcar Sam

The Ballot Box

The route is likely to change as the planning process continues, and we’ll track those changes on our map.

To learn more about what may soon be coming to Milwaukee check out the video below: (If you have trouble viewing this video you can also see it on streetfilms)

Maybe in a few years we could have events like TRAMix. Check out the video below: