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?

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.

Feingold recently boldly stated his support for protecting the Great Lakes

“These shippers should know that we’ll do what it takes to protect the Great Lakes, and nothing should be completely taken off the table.” Read more.

If one questions the strengths of Feingold’s convictions they need only to look at his adamant opposition to bills like FISA and the Patriot Act where he was labeled a “maverick” for standing virtually alone in protecting the rights of all of us in Wisconsin and the rest of the country.