Deferred Maintenance Threatens Future of Mitchell Park Domes
“I call on Chris Abele and regional leaders to join me in committing to do whatever it takes to keep our Mitchell Park Domes in Milwaukee for the next generation.”
The Domes. Photo by Dave Reid.
MILWAUKEE – February 8, 2016– Today State Senator Chris Larson (D–Milwaukee), a candidate for Milwaukee County Executive in the spring elections, released the following statement regarding the Mitchell Parks Domes closure:
“It’s a tragedy that the future of our Domes has been compromised by millions of dollars worth of deferred maintenance that has piled up under the last two County Executives and that there has yet to be a plan to keep the public informed on what will happen with the Domes future.
“Voters should find it disturbing that, instead of addressing the structural concerns surrounding the Domes, County Executive Abele instead secretly lobbied for legislation that put our parks and cultural institutions at risk by eliminating American style checks and balances.
“As County Executive, I will work with our neighbors to do what it takes to ensure our Domes are available for future generations. I have a long history of working to get dedicated funding for our parks and will continue to work toward that so we can plan long-term. Milwaukee County will once again have a long-term plan so that every family has access to a quality park.
“I call on Chris Abele and regional leaders to join me in committing to do whatever it takes to keep our Mitchell Park Domes in Milwaukee for the next generation.”
Chris Larson for County Executive
NOTE: This press release was submitted to Urban Milwaukee and was not written by an Urban Milwaukee writer. While it is believed to be reliable, Urban Milwaukee does not guarantee its accuracy or completeness.
Mentioned in This Press Release
Recent Press Releases by State Sen. Chris Larson
You’re blaming Abele for this? It’s the county board (who you’d be a rubber stamp for) who deferred the maintenance. They could have forced the issue at any point but they don’t care.
If Chris Larson had such a good record of park funding and pushing the deferred maintenance then where was he on this one?
I love the Domes, mainly because my kids love the Domes. This is sad. However, has anyone on the county board been consistently vocal about the need for maintenance to save them? This seems like one of those press releases hastily constructed to exploit some bad news (Bob Donovan is the master at this).
@Ryan and @AG
Your bewilderment comes from the fact you are assuming Chris Larson isn’t an opportunist moron, hence the disconnect.
Such a transparent attempt to twist an issue to his favor. When did Lardon ever have an issue with the deferred maintenance before the recent news articles about the domes. I get that there are many people who dislike Abele, but Larson as a viable alternative? What a hack.
Mr. Larson should call his former County Board member and now Chairman Lipscomb Jr to task for bad choices. His decision to fund the crumbling Milwaukee River Estabrook in his district that benefits a few of his constituents who insist on operating power boats on the small pond costs $6.1 million! Environmental Assessments and studies concludes the dam increases flooding and drainage, will fill with sediment. Only power boat enthusiasts and carp will love it. It benefits only a few and the rest of taxpayer residents are left with the crumbling gem that WE all benefit from. Remove the dam at a cost of $1.5 million. The difference isn’t pocket change.
Turth Be Told, it appears you have not really researched the Estabrook dam issue and are going solely on what organizations like the Riverkeepers are telling you. UrbanMilwaukee had a very good series about it, you should read it.
Anyway, the upfront costs for repair or removal of the dam is only 1.6 million either way. The domes, according to what they say are early estimates, is more like 65-70 million. Whole different ball game.
Side note, and something for UM to look into… what happened to the upgrades and remodel the domes were supposed to get back in early 2000’s?
Today’s JS said there was a proposal to spend $32 million repairing and upgrading the Domes 10 or so years ago. It never got off the ground.
AG. I’m familiar with Mr Homes 6 articles regarding the dam. I’m sure a comprehensive response will be forthcoming for critique and balance. Stay tuned.
You act as if the cost difference of $5.5 million for a better alternative is pocket change. Leadership and fiscal responsibility from the Board Chair is lacking.
If you’re familiar with it, you would know that the 5.5 million dollar difference is made up. Between remediation of lakebed, lost property taxes, and other costs the total for removal of the dam (according to his methodology) is over $15 million. Repairing the dam would be $6 million if you hire a full time worker to man it (why would you do that?) and you divert river cleanup funds from other parts of the river and attribute it to the dam (again, why would you do that?).
Hit post too early..
That full time worker and the budgeted cleanup would have to be in the budget for 20 years to get the $6 million figure. The up front costs is 1.6 million compared to 1.6 million PLUS millions for lakebed remediation if you remove the dam. Thus, it is cheaper in the short run AND long run to keep it.
Johnson Controls should WOW us all with their climate control expertise and either fund the projected $75 million overhaul, or as an alternative, fund a brand new 21st c. version.
That gesture could maybe shore up some of the feelings about their new off-shore status.