A freshman’s time to shine; ERC ghost haunts Barrett

Pat on the back: After weeks and weeks of hearing that this was Mayor Barrett’s most difficult budget ever – and that fees and taxes had to be raised by a certain amount or fire fighters, police and libraries would be cut – the Common Council found a third and better option.

Thanks to frosh alderman Nik Kovac (who happens to have a math degree from Harvard), the Council came up with the idea of moving the bulk of the fee increases from the solid waste fee (homeowners only) to the wastewater/tree pruning fee (homeowners, non-profits and businesses). The City of Milwaukee will get more money by capturing businesses and non-profits (hey, they have trees too) with the fee increases, but homeowners will actually pay less than they would have under the Mayor’s proposed budget. Not only that, but aldermen managed to restore libraries, fire fighters and police – and expand the summer jobs program to boot.

The word around City Hall is that the Mayor’s Budget office is frustrated that they didn’t see the solution that Ald. Kovac and other Council members put forth. But no matter who came up with the idea, it puts Milwaukee in a much better position.

Sick Day Fiasco: Speaking of putting the city in a better position, a group called 9to5 collected thousands and thousands of signatures earlier this year to enable something called “direct legislation” for more paid sick days for workers in the city of Milwaukee. (Full time workers would be eligible for nine days per year, if it is ever implemented.) Insiders say business organizations (e.g. the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce) lobbied Mayor Barrett and Common Council President Hines pretty hard to come out against the ordinance, which went directly to a voter referendum without a chance for the Council to vote it down.

Only Barrett took the bait, issuing a strong statement against more paid sick days for workers. What’s really interesting is that the Mayor now has no plan for enforcing the ordinance. He pushed for it to be defeated – hoping and praying, it seems, that he wouldn’t have to deal with it – and the voters ignored him. Now, Mayor Barrett appears to be pinning his hopes to an MMAC lawsuit against the ordinance. Why won’t he just deal with the fact that the ordinance passed and must be enforced? It all goes back to the Equal Rights Commission (ERC), or lack thereof.

The ERC was established during the Norquist Administration to deal with discrimination complaints related to housing and employment. It was the City agency set up to hear those complaints and enforce legal action against discriminatory businesses, landlords, etc. But there was a big blow-up when Norquist took away the ERC’s legal powers, and members of the commission resigned or retired one by one. Pratt avoided the issue during his short tenure, but when Barrett was sworn in, everyone watched anxiously to see what he’d do with the ERC. Would he abolish it? Would he reconstitute it? Over his nearly five years in office Barrett has done exactly one thing with the ERC: nothing. And it has come back to bite him with the 9to5 ordinance.

According to the ordinance, the ERC is the body charged with enforcing the code. Over the years, aldermen like Mike D’Amato and President Hines have foreseen that this day might come. They both wrote letters to Barrett, urging him to do something – anything! – with the ERC. Instead, Barrett has been content to let the Commission exist with no members, essentially doing nothing, even though it is still on the books. In a letter this summer to the City Attorney, Hines asked if having an Equal Rights Commission with no members is legally problematic “or merely an embarrassment.” Ouch.

With no ERC to enforce paid sick leave, the duties will fall to the Department of Employee Relations, which does not have enough staff to deal with potential complaints against companies that are not properly administering sick time. Is it enough to have an ordinance pass if it can’t be enforced? 9to5 (and others) would surely give a resounding No.

Doyle v. Barrett: The early talk on a potential Obama win was that Barrett would be in line for a cushy cabinet position. Then reality set in and it became apparent that a) Obama did not know Barrett that well and b) Governor Doyle was much higher on Obama’s wish list – but still not a sure thing. Being a governor rather than a mayor gives Doyle a big edge. In addition, even though Barrett was one of the earliest Obama backers, Doyle was still one of the first Democratic governors to go for Obama. So the talk around Dems in Wisconsin switched from a possible Barrett appointment to a possible Doyle appointment. Makes sense, right? Wrong again. It seems to be widely known that Doyle does not want to leave Wisconsin. First, he appears to genuinely like being governor. Second, the word is that Lt. Gov. Lawton has not earned Doyle’s respect and he does not want to leave her in charge of the state. What a tangled web the Obama election has woven in Wisconsin. (A web of pure speculation, of course.)  VS