Sounds crazy, but yes, Occupy saved lives. In more ways than one. It literally saved lives, by having people watching out for each other and calling the ambulance when needed. They wouldn’t have that if they were out in a park, sleeping in a bush. But, in other ways, I think the dignity, family, respect and love it provided, it also saved lives. It’s hard to explain if you haven’t seen people interact and talk with each other. I’m going to let Hap explain. I have two videos which really stand out from the press conference yesterday. There will be more tomorrow once I do more editing, but . . . for now, listen to Hap. He’s someone you have probably walked by many times, never knew his name, or even saw his face. I know I did. Even took a picture of him. This time please listen to what he has to say, we have a lot to learn from him.

The first video is him answering a question about having a new site. He explains in very basic terms, why it was so important. Love. Food. Shelter.

This one, is most important to understand the very real implications of not having a place like occupy. Like I said, life, or death.

What more can I say?

I remember people critiquing PPP WI polls in run up to 2010 election … Didn’t work out too well #wiunion #recallwalker

If you’re worried about a poll, talk to a neighbor or donate some money or time to help recall Governor Walker and elect Tom Barrett.

Here’s the poll by the way (5/11 – 5/13): New Daily Kos/PPP poll shows Wisconsin gubernatorial recall picture unchanged

Tom Barrett (D): 45 (45)
Scott Walker (R-inc): 50 (50)
Hari Trivedi (I): 2 (2)
Undecided: 3 (3)

As you can see, the results from our newest gubernatorial recall poll are identical to those we saw a month ago. Since that time, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett won the Democratic primary but does not appear to be seeing a bounce from that victory. A few things to note:

Occupy Residents Say Soglin Not Progressive:
Wrong on his Statements About Occupy

In the dismantling of Occupy, we had worked hard to comply with the City and police in order to make their jobs easier. In the Wisconsin State Journal article dated March 27, 2012, Lt. Dave McCaw of the Central Police District described the Occupiers as “well behaved” though there have been some minor disturbances. At the same time, by others, it was being described as a hazardous waste site and drug den.

Many things have been said about Occupy, some good, and some not so good. “I feel that some people have been misinformed or even misled. It is not my intention, or the intention of any of the 99%ers of Occupy to discredit anyone, but we would like to clear up all the false rumors and accusations made about Occupy.” said Dan Callahan, a former resident of the 802 E. Washington camp site. Here is a list of concerns:

1) It was said that there were six sexual assaults that had occurred on site at Occupy. According to Captain Gloede, there were no sexual assaults on the site. There were two incidents that were originally reported as sexual assaults, but after investigation, those reports were proven to be false. In fact, one person from the site was able to provide a license plate number to the police so that they could investigate.

2) It was said that needles were found on site. If these needles were used for illegal “death drugs”, then the needles should have been tested and arrests should have been made. No arrests for drugs were ever made at Occupy. There were several people at Occupy that were diabetic that may not have had a proper place to dispose of their needles. The mayor said that the Occupy site was a hazardous waste site and that city employees had various reports of needles on the site. Perhaps if they were concerned about the needles, the public health officials that inspected the site could have provided public health services to the residents there.

3) Police calls to the site didn’t increase until the Porchlight Day Shelter closed down. In December there were 10 calls, 12 in January, 11 in February, 29 in March and 43 in April. “We tried to head off the foreseeable problems ahead of time, but we were told by the City and the police that we couldn’t ban anyone and at the same time were told we couldn’t enforce a no open alcohol container policy.” said Terre, another former resident of the site. “We were set up to fail. We operated with one arm tied behind our back.” Unlike Porchlight, which rented the site for $1 from the City and was empowered by the city to make and enforce their own rules, Occupy residents did not have that same ability. According to Captain Gloede: “Obviously when you look at it comparatively, from an empty parking lot with zero calls to a space where originally a couple dozen and lately up to 60 or 80 people – when you have a congregation of people, it does generate, at times, conflict and issues. So yes, we have seen an increase in calls for service here, but proportional to the number of people staying here.”

4) Several people’s lives were saved by the Occupy Madison encampment. In addition to a community watching over each other, there were resources like cell phones to make timely emergency calls for help. People on the site had seizures, asthma attacks, heart problems, complications from diabetes and other medical emergencies. If they had not been on the site with a group of people, they may not have gotten medical services that they needed in time. “There are still people living in tents all over this city, they are just spread out all over in different places,” said Bruce Wallbaum, “However, now they don’t have the community and services that came with being in a larger group at an accessible site.”

5) Many people used the temporary structures on the site to get on their feet. Some got jobs, some found housing and some got SSI or SSDI while there. Some entered treatment facilities and many are on their way to getting their lives back.

6) Occupy gave working people a temporary place to live. There are people who were displaced from their normal jobs due to different reasons who were only able to get part-time work or work for minimum wage. They made too little to afford housing and didn’t qualify for housing programs because they didn’t need treatment or services.

7) Mayor Soglin stated in the Capital Times “We do not now have a coherent housing plan.” and then later that he’d entertain such a facility (Tent City) only if it were available to Madison Residents only. 96% of the people at Occupy Madison were Madison residents. We did have the occasional person travelling through on their way to or from other Occupies etc, staying for a night and then gone the next day. This wasn’t a bunch of people deciding to move to Madison from Chicago and other places to brave it out living in unheated tents through the winter, but rather Madison area people in need of shelter and services that Occupy supplied them that they couldn’t get elsewhere.

The Occupy encampment wasn’t perfect. In fact, it wasn’t ideal. “If we had the opportunity to do this over, we would do it differently, learning from our past experience,” said Jen Thompson. The real solutions, however, are adequate amounts of truly affordable housing, good paying jobs, medical services, alternative less traditional housing solutions, decriminalization of homelessness, homeless services for those who aren’t a good fit for Porchlight or the Salvation Army and much more. However, while we work towards permanent solutions, Occupy is one temporary solution that did work to provide shelter, food, empowerment, responsibilities and was like a family to many of the residents who didn’t have a family. Occupy was not a place to be feared; it was a place where people who would otherwise be alone were able to find community and a safe place to be. “And love.” said Harold, a former Occupy resident.

Dane County Board Achieves Gender Parity
50% of Dane County Board Committee Leaders are Women

The Dane County Board of Supervisors has selected new committee chairs. For the first time in Dane County history, half of the county board’s committee chairs are women. Dane County is only the second county board in Wisconsin to reach gender equality within leadership.

“We are incredibly proud to achieve gender parity within county board leadership, and we are honored to have been selected for leadership by our colleagues,” said Supervisors Sharon Corrigan, Melissa Sargent, Robin Schmidt, and Carousel Bayrd, in a joint statement. “It’s about time,” Supervisor Bayrd added.

In addition to committee chairs, the county board also selected a new second vice chair for the county board. All leadership positions are for two-year terms.

The following County Board supervisors were elected into committee and county board leadership positions:

Supervisor Sharon Corrigan of Middleton was elected to chair the Personnel and Finance committee. This committee oversees the county finances and annual budget process, as well as all hiring, contracts, and union negotiations.

Supervisor Melissa Sargent of Madison was elected to chair the Health and Human Needs (HHN) committee. HHN oversees the county’s largest department, the department of human services, and hundreds of social service programs serving youth, the elderly, people with disabilities, families, veterans, and more.

Supervisor Robin Schmidt of Monona was elected chair of the Public Works and Transportation committee, overseeing the bidding and contracting of all public works projects and highway projects, solid waste and recycling programs, and all county transportation polices.

Supervisor Carousel Bayrd of Madison was elected Second Vice Chair of the board to assume all duties of county board chair when Chair Scott McDonell and First Vice Chair John Hendrick are unavailable. Second Vice Chair also coordinates communications for the county board.

Supervisor Patrick Downing of the Town of Perry was elected chair of the Environment, Agriculture & Natural Resources (EANR) committee. EANR oversees county parkland, waterways, recreational and open areas, including the conservation of the county’s natural resources.

Supervisor Patrick Miles of McFarland was re-elected chair of Zoning and Land Regulation, overseeing the planning and development of rural Dane County and working with local town boards to approve land use changes for county property owners.

Supervisor Paul Rusk of Madison was re-elected chair the Public Protection and Judiciary committee, which oversees the criminal justice system and public safety programs including the 911 center, the sheriff’s department, the courthouse, and the jail.

Ok – here’s the highlights only.

GETTING STARTED
Roll Call – Solomon and Verveer were missing. Solomon excused and coming late.

Suspension of the rules – that passed.

HONORING RESOLUTIONS
Forensics Night! – They honored the forensics team at Memorial High School. One member did part of his presentation for the council.

Bill Knobloch retirement. He wasn’t there but the Mayor and several alders had some nice things to say about him. Mayor said he had a great commitment to his job and he represented an ethic that city managers have. All alders were added as sponsors.

EARLY PUBLIC COMMENT
None

CONSENT AGENDA
Items 2 – 9 are public hearings.
They are including the confirmation of the new Public Health Director Janel Heinrich.
The extra-majority item, 23 was included because there was no objections.
Items separated for discussion were 13 (union corners), 18 & 21 (800 E. Washington), 32 (E Johnson/Gorham Traffic Study) and 46 (not sure why it was separated)
73 and 74 have registrants to answer questions, there were none, so they included it on the agenda.
Clear says 102 for introduction – not in alder district 19, its now in 11.
Mayor asks Janelle to stand and says congratulations.

Everything else on the agenda passed or was acted on as noted on the agenda.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Items 2, 3, 4 and 6 had the public hearings opened, closed and they were passed unanimously on a voice vote.
5 was referred to the first meeting in July.
7 was passed with the additional condition that that they work with zoning and planning staff to revise the family definition for up to three unrelated people and if there are three unrelated people then 3 is the maximum occupancy.
8 was recessed and referred to the next council meeting.
9 had one speaker in support and it passed.

UNION CORNERS
Three supporters of Occupy showed up to talk about the need to address the homeless situation said they thought that there should be a tent city as a TEMPORARY solution until there can be a longer term permanent solution to meet the needs of people who are without homes. He quoted one person who said on the last day of Occupy, saying that they can’t afford to be inside, it is illegal for us to be outside, where are we supposed to be?

No one says anything about the testimony.

Shiva Bidar-Sielaff moves a substitute that includes the names of the committee members that were added. They didn’t bother to read them or let the public know what they were.

Satya Rhodes-Conway moves a small amendment, in the 1st be it further resolved clause, number 6, Emerson east president or designee should be co-chair instead. That motion passes.

Larry Palm wants to refer it back to the mayor’s office because he objected to the alders that were appointed. He first saw the appointments at the council meeting and this was his first chance to object.

Bridget Maniaci notes that there is a deadline in the resolution for June 15th, so she asks what the implications for referral are.

Mayor says if referred upon its return it would have to be amendmed to a later date.

Marsha Rummel suggests that instead of referral they just substitute Palm for Cnare if everyone agrees.

Bidar-Sielaff wants a referral with a date certain for its return, thinks that would be friendly. She suggests June 12th and they say that is friendly.

Mayor asks to place it on the table, so much going on would like to consult with city attorney.

800 BLOCK EAST WASHINGTON
This went on F-O-R-E-V-E-R!! I think I’ve lost my patience, and I know I tuned out at one point, but recorded it but I don’t think that there was much to share with you. Here’s a few highlights, to the best of my ability.

They have the public speak, they are asked to speak to both items at once, and they have 6 minutes instead of 3.

About a half a dozen people testified. One talked about how this impacted the whole city since it was a gateway to the capital. This person urged them to stick to the process and award this to ULI because they worked well with her neighborhood and do good projects. Additionally, this was needed for economic development and they don’t need delay and additional costs that result. Metcalfe’s were late and if they reopen the process they will be sending a message that if developers miss a deadline they can get it re0opened and no one will have faith in the city process. If there should have been more meetings, that is the alders fault.

The rest of the speakers were from the Tenney-Lapham Neighborhood. They are thrilled to see development finally happening on East Washington. They know ULI is capable of good projects, they are just underwhelmed with this one. They are concerned about the phasing of the project, they didn’t like the timeline to get the project down, they were concerned about the surface parking lot and while they embrace technology based employment, they don’t think that should be the main thing. One person said that they filed a complaint with the Attorney General for violations of the open meetings law during the process since he was removed from a meeting he tried to attend about these projects. There were 6 – 8 union members in their orange shirts there to glare at the council throughout the discussion, they were in support of Metcalfe’s.

There were lots of questions of the developers and staff. Height and density (why so low), TIF, parking etc. They made it clear there will be many other decisions that need to be made along the line. The main one being that they are selling the land and giving them 90 days to work things out and if that doesn’t work, they will go back out to bid. Particularly, they have to look at the amount of the TIF support needed.

There was much discussion about the parking. Apparently there is a deal that if ULI doesn’t finish the project and the land is sold back to the city for another developer, the new developer could get stuck building the parking and ULI would have rights to some parking spaces. Also, a proposed way to finance the parking is for the CDA to issue taxable bonds, rent the space to the city who would rent the space to ULI until the bonds are paid off and then ULI could purchase the parking ramp. This is similar to what they did on block 89. They plan to rent the parking spaces for $40, and there was discussion about if that was the right price to charge since it isn’t downtown and not on the periphery where it was free.

Maniaci was very concerned about ULI not finishing the project and ULI getting parking built by another developer and made a motion to address this requiring ULI to pay for half the costs of the parking ramp. This caused people to call the developer back up and they said that the parking was paid for by the increment from the TIF, the parking fees and then they paid the balance. Chris Schmidt thanks Maniaci for paying attention to the details. (Ironic, eh, given how they tried to shove the Edgewater through!) But he doesn’t support it. Cnare and Bruer said they thought the conversation was worth it. The mayor had to warn people (Bruer) to actually ask questions instead of speechifying during that point and had to remind them that they can speak twice on an item and for a maximum of 10 minutes. The Mayor also speaks at the end and tells the council that it is the staff job to negotiate these things and this has been through hundreds of hours of meetings and these things should have been brought up there. He also said that they are 90 days to work out the details and if they have details to be worked out, they should add it to the list, but not try to negotiate on the floor like with the Overture. He was going to say something else, but stopped – I’m dying to know what that was. Clear agreed with the mayor. Palm doesn’t support Maniaci’s motion and notes there is a lot of land to be developed and that they should stick with their process despite its flaws.

Maniaci is the only one to vote for her amendment.

On the main motion, Rummel says she had concerns and voted against at Plan but will vote for tonight. She has strong opinions and dreams for the site and had great expectations. Given how much people wanted height and density in the corridor, she was shocked to see three stories in one of the first projects when it could have been 12 stories. Many people liked Metcalfe’s and they wanted something that would be more of a catalyst for the neighborhood. She says that she wanted something that fit better with the artist and funky nature of the neighborhood. She also thinks that grocery store jobs are still jobs that are needed, we need a whole range of jobs.

Again, Maniaci is the only one to vote no.

Maniaci makes a confusing motion that needs much clarification but she wants to go back out to rfp for the last piece of property. Staff says that there is a glimmer of hope and that they are not prepared to drop the project yet despite reports that Rifkin has pulled out. So, they place it on file without prejudice to find out what happens and will bring it back later. That passes unanimously.

TWO-WAY JOHNSON AND GORHAM
There are about a half a dozen speakers and registrants again. The main issues was that people agreed to go ahead with the construction in 2012. They just wanted to make sure that the construction would not prohibit 2 way in the future and that it would be considered with the rest of the larger multi-modal transportation plan coming up. Neighbors noted that strong neighborhoods help with a strong economic development strategy and that it is short sighted of the business community to be concerned about getting cars to the downtown instead of the small businesses on Johnson and having a strong neighborhood that attracted people to Madison. They also noted that several other cities have found that two-way helps them economically and that other streets in Madison are two way and treasured (Willy, Monroe, Regent). There was criticism of the study that was done and concern that it was taken out of context and that the strategy needs to include surrounding neighborhoods. They also noted that we could have told them that the study results would be to keep things they way they are given how the study was done. Speed on the streets is a concern and they hope there will be traffic calming efforts made in the construction.

Maniaci moves a 2nd substitute that is on their desk. The language just says that this will be part of the larger study instead of excluded. Rummel clarifies that the concerns will be covered in the plan. Steve Cover says it will. The traspnartation master plan will look at every area of the city and the study just done will feed information into that plan.

Skidmore makes an amendment to not include this in the plan. He doesn’t want to spend any more money on it. The motion fails with two or three people voting for it.

The mayor then asks engineering staff how much this will cost. They talk about it costing $1M dollars. Maniaci says that study was more detailed. The 2nd substitute passes.

ITEM 46
Passes, don’t know why it was separated.

TABLED UNION CORNERS
Mayor says eferral is beofe them, there is some urgency, one developer has made an inquiry, that devleoper has a proposal that would include all of the elements that have been identified for the site. Problem is that devlepers client is looking at several sites, some outside of Madison and when they originally came to us wanted to make an offer to aquire, I said no and that htey need an RFP. He’d like to suggest that if no there is no objection, they could withdraw the motion to refer, he says that they have copies of the individual committee apointment applications, he would ask that council accept it now to fill last citizen appointment, and if can’t come to agreement on one alder, that one alder slot should be referred and the rest of the appointments should go through so they can get started. He says there are several east side alders that are interested.

Cnare amends the motion to refer to only include the referral of her seat on the committee. Clear moves to add the citizen member. That will be back on June 12th.

Mayor suggests that the alders that might fill the position should go to the meetings. Palm, Johnson and Clausius, in case they get appointed.

Motion passes.

INTRODUCTIONS FROM THE FLOOR
Cnare – Legistar item 26416 – letters of understanding for WPL and MG&E for water meter upgrades – referred to water utility and boe
Solomon – 26422 – vending site size and equipemnt restrictions to allow mobile grocery store – referred to vending oversight
Solomon – 26423 – signage on mobile grocery parked on private property – referred to Urban Design
Solomon – 26410 – zoning district a permitted use for mobile grocery stores – referred to plan commission
Resnick – 26401 – requiring yearly change of door lock pass codes – referred to Building Inspection and Fire, Public Safety Review Committee and the Housing Committee

ADJOURN AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Happy Birthday Verveer.

Time of death. 10pm

May 15, 2012 Common Council Meeting
UPDATED Proposed Consent Agenda Exclusions

Please note that exclusions on this listing may change at the meeting.

Items may be added or taken off the list when the consent agenda is presented.

AGENDA ITEMS #2 THROUGH #9 ARE PUBLIC HEARINGS
Confirmation Hearing
Note: BOARD OF HEALTH FOR MADISON AND DANE COUNTY recommended Approval to the BOARD OF ESTIMATES (5/10/12)
10. Legislative File No. 26227 – Confirming the appointment of Janel M. Heinrich to the position of Director of Public Health Madison-Dane County subject to the execution of an Employment Services Agreement with Dane County.

The following item is an extra-majority item to be included on the consent agenda with request for unanimous vote
23. Legislative File No. 26137 – Amending the 2012 Stormwater Utility Capital Budget to reallocate existing budget authority to provide funding for needed greenway projects to be completed in 2012. (Report of BOE – 15 votes required)

Items requested by alders to be placed on EXCLUSION LIST
13. Legislative File No. 26338 – Accepting the Land Banking RFP Process Report dated May 8, 2012, authorizing the drafting of a Request for Proposals to purchase and develop the Union Corners Properties located at 2507, 2504, and 2340 Winnebago Street, and creating an ad hoc Union Corners Committee to approve and release the Request for Proposals and review and select proposals submitted for recommendation to the Common Council in accordance with the process recommendation outlined in the Land Banking RFP Process Report. (Business by the President – Ald. Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, Council President – purpose of moving a SUBSTITUTE)

18. Legislative File No 25885 – Accepting a Selection Committee’s recommendation of the Urban Land Interests, LLC proposal for the purchase and redevelopment of City-owned properties in the 800 Block of East Washington Avenue and authorizing the execution of a Purchase and Sale Agreement with Urban Land Interests, LLC for the purchase and redevelopment of these properties. (Report of BOE – Ald. Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, Council President)

21. Legislative File No. 25966 – Rejecting a Selection Committee’s recommendation of the Urban Land Interests, LLC proposal and The Rifken Group, LTD proposal for the purchase and redevelopment of City-owned properties in the North and South 800 Blocks of East Washington Avenue, authorizing the creation of a Don Miller Land Banked Property Selection Committee and authorizing the execution of a Request For Proposal (“RFP”) for the purchase and redevelopment of these properties. (Report of BOE – Ald. Shiva Bidar-Sielaff, Council President)

46. Legislative File No. 26191 – Approving Addendum No. 1 for the project known as 1001 University Avenue PUD, Private Contract No. 2293. (8th AD) (Report of BPW – Ald. Paul Skidmore,

So, the story here is that Microsoft, which still dominates the desktop market, has come under fire for enacting policies on its ARM port of Windows 8 as anti-competitive. Mozilla says Microsoft won’t allow rival browsers on ARM Windows desktop

The consequence for WOA users is that they will only have access to Internet Explorer, Microsoft’s own Web browser, in the desktop mode. Mozilla General Counsel Harvey Anderson suggested in a statement that this policy decision by Microsoft “restricts user choice, reduces competition, and chills innovation.”

And it looks like someone is going to do something about it…Committee to look at Microsoft competition allegations

Senate Judiciary Committee staffers plan to take a look at allegations that Microsoft has made it difficult for competing Web browsers to run on a certain version of Windows, an aide to Antitrust subcommittee Chairman Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) told The Hill Thursday.

The Mozilla Foundation, which makes the Firefox browser, and Google have accused Microsoft of hindering their browsers’ ability to run on Windows devices with ARM processors, which are popular in mobile phones. They say that only Microsoft’s Explorer browser is able to run on the devices.

And for those who say that Microsoft is hardly dominant in the mobile space, please note the following:

More important to Mozilla, however, was that Microsoft had pledged in the past to play fair. Its 12 promises, articulated in 2006 as U.S. antitrust supervision was winding down, included one central to Mozilla’s argument.

“Going forward, Microsoft will ensure that all interfaces within Windows called by any other Microsoft product … will be disclosed for use by the developer community generally,” the 2006 document titled “Windows Principles” stated. “That means that anything that Microsoft products can do in terms of how they plug into Windows, competing products will be able to do as well.”

So good for Senator Kohl!

Obviously, not all stops have shelters, but maybe we should work towards that instead of replacement.

Here’s one message:

bus shelter survey

Metro to Use Grant Money to Upgrade Bus Shelters

In October 2011, Metro Transit announced it would receive $5 million dollars as part of a $920 million federal grant intended to put Americans back to work repairing, rebuilding and modernizing the nation’s transit infrastructure. Read more

Metro will use part of this grant money to upgrade its bus shelters. Please give us your comments on how to best use this grant money to accomplish this task.

• Print/Mail Survey (PDF)

The survey asks about what you value – heat, benches, signs, etc.

Here’s a different message. I haven’t had time to watch the meeting yet, but my understanding is that at his presentation TPB (Madison Area MPO) planner Mike Cechvala was clear that a major goal of an updated Transit Development Plan would be eliminating bus stops so that stops would be 1/4 mile apart. Here’s some info that was handed out at that meeting.

2. Bus Stop Spacing
Many of Madison’s strong transit corridors (Johnson/Gorham Street, Jenifer Street, University Avenue) have bus stops every block – eight or more per mile. This condition has not substantially changed since Mills Street, University Avenue, State Street, Jenifer Street, and Johnson Street were served by streetcars in the early twentieth century. While closely spaced bus stops are convenient for riders in these corridors, they result in delay for all riders using the service. The TDP will evaluate the bus stop spacing in central Madison.

Here’s the full handout with additional information. And some maps/data.

Seems like a mixed message to me. Also, seems like if people don’t want to be on a bus that stops often and makes it easy for other bus riders to access the stops, perhaps we should have express buses . . . just a thought! Seems simpler than removing bus stops that are well loved and used! Finally, I’m concerned that there might be stereotypes about only young people and students using these stops, which I don’t think is entirely true. In fact, I know it isn’t.

]]> http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/what-is-going-on-with-our-bus-shelters/15243/feed 0 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/what-do-you-think-of-madisons-community-policing/15238 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/what-do-you-think-of-madisons-community-policing/15238#comments Tue, 15 May 2012 12:24:15 +0000 Brenda Konkel http://www.forwardlookout.com/?p=15238 Having learned all about community policing as an undergraduate with a Criminal Justice degree – I have lots of opinions. Madison was always held up as the model police department – but when I got on the council and watched us erode our community policing efforts, it was horribly sad to me. Now, you all have the opportunity to let the police department know what you think about their “community policing”. You can probably guess what I’m thinking!

Message from Chief Noble Wray:

“Dear Community Partner,

On behalf of the Madison Police Department, I invite you to help assess our community policing efforts and improve our efforts to better serve the community.

The Department recently received a COPS Hiring grant from the U.S. Department of Justice and is now using the Community Policing Self-Assessment Tool (online survey) to assess how community partners view the Department and our trust-based, community policing efforts.

Community policing is a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problem–solving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime.

The Community Policing Self-Assessment Tool online survey is designed to assess three key areas in community policing: community partnerships, problem solving, and organizational transformation.

COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIPS
Collaborative partnerships between the law enforcement agency and the individuals and organizations they serve to develop solutions to problems and increase trust in police.

PROBLEM SOLVING
The process of engaging in the proactive and systematic examination of identified problems to develop effective responses.

ORGANIZATIONAL TRANSFORMATION
The alignment of organizational management, structure, personnel, and information systems to support community partnerships and proactive problem solving.

Your responses to this survey will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. There are no individual identifiers in the data that the Department will receive, and the Department will not be able to link an individual’s data to their email address. This is not a test and there are no right or wrong answers. Please answer each question honestly.

Survey URL: https://survey.icfsurveys.com/se.ashx?s=04BD76CC552D21AD
Passcode: WI01301-C1

(You will be prompted to enter the passcode when you click the above URL. Please copy and paste the above passcode to ensure accuracy).

Please complete the assessment by May 22, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Jim Powell, Grants Administrator at 261-9635 or jpowell@cityofmadison.com.

Thank you.

Noble Wray
Chief of Police
Madison Police Department”

Obviously, my recent attempts to “partner” with the police department went horribly awry. They sure don’t make it easy! On the other hand, Captain Gloede was a rock star with the Occupy folks. I was seriously impressed.

What really concerned me over the years is the Neighborhood Police Officer program where they have fewer and fewer and they change them so often that once they establish relationships and engage with the neighborhood, then they get yanked out of the neighborhood. And of course, when we tried to redirect funding to these efforts, the Chief basically told us to go to hell, its his department and he decides. Very unfortunate, and a very poor example of community poicing when he can’t even try to work with council members, sets a bad example.

Anyways, I don’t know if you consider yourself a “community partner” – I sure don’t feel like one, but I filled out the survey, but I”m not sure my concerns were even addressed in the survey.

]]> http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/what-do-you-think-of-madisons-community-policing/15238/feed 0 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/soglin-says-more-capital-budget-cuts-needed/15236 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/soglin-says-more-capital-budget-cuts-needed/15236#comments Tue, 15 May 2012 12:03:04 +0000 Brenda Konkel http://www.forwardlookout.com/?p=15236 Last year it was easier . . . since there was so much that Mayor Dave was putting in the budget that never got built . . . this year, more cuts . . . this ought to be interesting.

Half of the Capital Budget is engineering and streets and Planning and Community and Economic Development. The question is, at what point will people start to notice and care? Here’s his message to the departments:

May 14,2012
To: Depatiment and Division Heads
From: Mayor Paul R. Soglin
Subject: 2013 Capital Budget Target

Last year, as we began work on the 2012 Capital Budget, I expressed my deep concern at the level of city bonowing and its increasing impact on the operating budget. I challenged you to reduce your projected capital requests in order to help moderate this upward trend.

Within that target, we were able to include many important projects in the 2012 Capital Budget. For
2013, we must continue to be prudent in the level of our borrowing, while still maintaining our city infrastructure. I continue toevery concerned about our debt level. As the portion of our operating budget that goes to debt service grows, our ability to sustain city operations is increasingly hampered.

For that reason, we must once again limit new bonowing. Each agency’s target for developing its
2013 Capital Budget is 80% of the amount in the adopted 2012 Capital Improvement Plan for 2013. I realize that some agencies were more severely impacted in the 2012 budget than others and we will bear that in mind when their budgets are considered.

I appreciate all of your help with last year’s budget and your continued assistance in ensuring that the city works more efficiently. I look forward to working with you in the coming months in preparing a responsible capital budget which protects our investments in roads, buildings, parks, and more.

Finally, the Finance Department has prepared some informational sheets on debt levels anq trends. Please feel free to contact them if you need more information.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

When you look at the numbers, it is clear why he needs to do this . . . our debt is growing out of control . . . just look at that second column and the amount of debt we have and how it has grown.  Especially under Mayor Dave’s administration 2003 -

Budget Year	Net General Obligation Debt	Most  Recent Equalized Value	GO Debt as a% of Equalized Value	%Chg in Rate
1990	67,681,724	5,709,180,000	1.19%
1991	69,030,201	6,229,400,000	1.11%	-6.5%
1992	75,675,496	6,550,915,000	1.16%	4.2%
1993	86,826,470	6,964,184,800	1.25%	7.9%
1994	89,251,835	7,581,595,000	1.18%	-5.6%
1995	92,863,450	8,306,368,500	1.12%	-5.0%
1996	109,152,868	9,093,362,900	1.20%	7.4%
1997	114,051,571 ‘	9,671,053,800	1.18%	-1.8%
1998	118,847,799	10,332,251,000	1.15%	-2.5%
1999	121,707,563	10,939,193,300	1.11%	-3.3%
2000	121,956,000	11,446,834,500	1.07%	-4.2%
2001	126,831,000	‘  12,351,593,400	1.03%	-3.6%
2002	128,409,000	13,677,854,400	0.94%	-8.6%
2003	131,381,000	15,073,829,000	0.87%	-7.2%
2004	139,088,000	16,239,031,200	0.86%	-1.7%
2005	172,508,000	17’764,099,400	0.97%	13.4%
2006	186,546,000	19,412,430,500	0.96%	-1.0%
2007	194,108,000	21,219,003,600	0.91%	-4.8%
2008	210,349,000	22,309,064,800	0.94%	3.1%
2009	237,062,718	23,105,474,700	1.03%	8.8%
2010	267,513,208	23,131,428,500	‘ 1.16%	12.7%
2011	322,165,000	22,212,095,800	1.45%	25.4%
2012 est	369,084,173	21,965,221,700	1.68%	15.9%
2013 est	454,172,456	22,184,873,917	2.05%	21.8%

Worse yet, look at how much of the operating budget is spent paying back all this debt. (2nd and last two columns) so that we don’t have money for other services.

					2013 Est. Debt  Service	2012
					Share of	Adopted
Year	Debt  Service	%Change	Expenditures	%Change	ExEenditures	Budget
1992	11,638,319		108,883,900		10.69%	10.69%
1993	12,090,707	3.89%	113,057,982	3.83%	10.69%	10.69%
1994	13,161,860	8.86%	118,436,855	4.76%	11.11%	11.11%
1995	13,805,000	4.89%	122,919,229	3.78%	11.23%	11.23%
1996	16,725,000	21.15%	131,390,822	6.89%	12.73%	12 .73%
1997	17,051,616	1.95%	138,754,494	5.60%	12.29%	12.29%
1998	18,145,624	6.42%	143,567,683	3.47%	12.64%	12.64%
1999	18,224,200	0.43%	145,900,321	1.62%	12.49%	12.49%
2000	19,197,757	5.34%	151,833,834	4. 07%	12.64%	12.64%
2001	20,732,183	7.99%	161,020,255	6.05%	12.88%	12.88%
2002	19,559,391	-5.66%	166,320,847	3.29%	11.76%	11.76%
2003	18,346,342	-6.20%	171,089,821	2.87%	10.72%	10.72%
2004	20,473,325	11.59%	176,959,171	3. 43%	11.57%	11.57%
2005	20,953,207	2.34%	182,594,260	3.18%	11.48%	11.48%
2006	21,323,259	1.77%	188,018,737	2.97%	11.34%	11.34%
2007	20,513,055	-3.80%	203,134,775	8.04%	10.10%	10.10%
2008	21,607,727	5.34%	210,476,301	3.61%	10.27%	10.27%
2009	25,979,821	20.23%	222,885,837	5. 90%	11.66%	11.66%
2010	27,948,416	7.58%	225,864,316	1.34%	12.37%	12 .37%
2011	29,812,712	6.67%	233,227,107	3.26%	12.78%	12.64%
2012 Projected	26,592,349	-10.80%	240,240,461	3.01%	11.07%	11.34%
2013 Projected	41,072,825	54.45%	261,130,381	8.70%	15.73%	16.16%
2014 Projected	46,019,706	12.04%	265,008,578	1.49%	17.37%	17.23%
2015 Projected	50,247,955	9.19%	275,806,493	4.07%	18.22%	18.49%
2016 Projected	54,686,440	8.83%	287,011,734	4.06%	19.05%	19.51%
2017 Projected	59,628,216	9.04%	298,923,269	4.15%	19.95%	20.49%
2018 Projected	61,256,669	2.73%	307,730,574	2.95%	19.91%	20.42%
2019 Projected	66,218,301	8.10%	320,086,423	4.02%	20.69%

Could you imagine if Mayor Dave Cieslewicz had kept us going down this road. For this, and so many other reasons (except one really big one) I’m so glad we have Mayor Paul Soglin! I know we tried to cut back on projects when we were on the council, but the Mayor always made the arguments for why we needed the roads and other projects. But now look at the mess we have.

]]> http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/soglin-says-more-capital-budget-cuts-needed/15236/feed 0 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/homeless-men-to-get-90-days-in-shelter-this-year/15228 http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/homeless-men-to-get-90-days-in-shelter-this-year/15228#comments Mon, 14 May 2012 14:32:48 +0000 Brenda Konkel http://www.forwardlookout.com/?p=15228 The May extension to accommodate Occupy has resulted in all men getting an extra 30 days in shelter – this year only. Details below.

from: schooler
to: Brenda Konkel
Sue Wallinger
“Berlin, Barbara”
cc: Brad Hinkfuss
Daniel Barnes
Karla Jameson
Preston Patterson
Sharon Hutchins
Tawanda Adams
Todd Dennis
date: Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:08 AM
subject: 60 Day Limit for 2012

As you know, we decided in light of the events surrounding the Occupy Site, to allow anyone in for the month of May, regardless of the number of nights they had previously spent at the Drop-In Shelter. Apparently there was some confusion over whether nights spent during May would count toward the 90 limit. Although we thought we were very clear that we were only lifting the 60-day limit during May, given the potential confusion as to whether nights of shelter would count toward the 60 day limit for the month May, we have simply decided to increase the limit from 60 days to 90 days until October 31, 2012. The days spent in May will count, but everyone will have 90 days as opposed to 60.

We are only doing this because we had access the the additional facility from First United Methodist Church during May, and limited additional funding for staff for May. The overflow shelter at First United Methodist will need to be closed as of June 1. We believe that we can accommodate the increased numbers at the two overflow shelters but there may be some nights when we have very tight quarters. We will do the best we can to accommodate everyone entitled to entry, as always.

We must emphasize that this is a one-time very special policy change. We do not believe we could accommodate the increased numbers of guests should we increase the nights limit from 60 to 90 in additional years, without and increase in facilities and staff funding. So, a new 60-day limit period will begin November 1, 2012 (as has been the case for a decade).

All other rules for the Drop-In Shelter, other bans, and the policy prohibiting guests from entering if they are intoxicated will continue to be applied and enforced.

]]> http://www.forwardlookout.com/2012/05/homeless-men-to-get-90-days-in-shelter-this-year/15228/feed 0