My reaction to this article is the following:
1. I appreciate Fred’s service and his best effort to do what he feels is right for the town. I don’t harbor any ill feelings toward Fred and consider him a friend, but it IS time for a change. I have very vocally disagreed with the direction the town is heading.
2. I hope that he realizes that his approach was wrong and that the people don’t support this move. I could be wrong, but he has been under fire and this must factor in the decision making process.
3. It’s too bad the one of the architects of this mess won’t be around in the next budget cycle to show the residents how this WILL cause an increase in taxes. I hope not, but fear it’s inevitable.
Lots of people have asked me to run for office in this cycle to help the town get back to normalcy. I’d love to continue to serve the community in a more visible role and I’m contemplating doing so, but I’m concerned about the need for even more money to fix this mess. We’ve spent well in excess of my initial estimate of $150,000. As I’ve stated before we’ve spent lots of cash and capital to get to where we are today.
On the issue of more money to solve this problem, I’ve looked at the town and fire department budgets for next year and have two major concerns:
1. The fire department budget overstates estimated revenues by about $35,000.
2. The town budget, in order to not raise taxes even this year, taps into reserve funds. There won’t be this opportunity next year; the current town board has us tapped dry. Our reserve funds should not be diminished further.
Then again, when I think about these things, I wonder who WILL work to fix these things? I fear the next town board will not be popular when reality sets in and the money has to come from somewhere to correct these past sins.
On another matter, reading the comments after this article, one set of comments struck me as a little troubling not only because of the mis-information repeated, but because of the tone. The comments by “snakecharmer” on 12/9, have the acidic tone that has become all too common in anonymous online postings. I have to admit, some of that tone does reach this blog too and it happens on both sides of the issues. Of course, in the comments I’m called out specifically, that’s OK, I have thick skin, but I do have a couple comments on the specific issues:
1. “Hey there fellow bloggers, Craig, Barikmo, Bird and Riley are town heroes. No other town in the history of Wisconsin ever got a cool half million dollars from a neighboring village for free and unconditionally.” FREE!?! Are you kidding me? This is OUR money! Think about this: It was estimated that the joint department had a value (equity) of about $2.4million. Roughly 85% of that should belong to US in the town, or about $2million of it. In the dissolution of the department we received about $1million in equipment and about $500,000 in cash from Big Bend. So we LOST $500,000 in equity! ($2m - $1m - $0.5m = $0.5m) We got screwed in this deal; it’s certainly NOT free money. To make this even worse, Big Bend lost equity too. This split has been a lose-lose.
2. “If Doble runs he has got a lot to explain --- how the consecutive numbered checks were written for the $13K soap scam…” I have to admit, I don’t know much about the details of this issue: Did I vote with the rest of the fire board to approve these payments? When was this? Did anyone on the fire board know about this issue at the time? I’m going to do a little research on this and make it the subject of a later blog post. If I was duped, then I’ll address it. I’m certainly not perfect and do make mistakes. But, what really bothers me about this comment is the accountability directed at those that were deceived and NOT those that perpetrated the deception. I have to ask who knew about this in the fire department? Why was the fire board deceived, if that is the case? The last I checked, the only member of the command staff that is no longer with the department is Phil Buchholtz. I would suspect that Phil did not act alone on any purchase. Phil was a consensus builder, the rest of the command staff was well involved in all aspects of the fire department operations, were they involved in this? Maybe “snakecharmer” should explain why Doble has a lot of explaining to do, when there are still people on the fire board today that were in place when this “soap issue” occurred. Do they have a lot to explain too? I suggest that if “snakecharmer” wants to take a cheap shot at Doble, then he/she should take the same shot at all of those that should bear some responsibility, but I suspect that would not serve this person’s purpose, therefore it will never happen.
3. “….even the old and confused darling of Big Bend and Vernon's Mr. NoooooO, Rodell Singert.” Really!?! Is this necessary? How does this add to the improvement of our town? Add to the dialogue? I have to say, sometimes Singert goes off on a tangent and speaks longer that he should on an issue, AND he and I don’t always agree, but this is unnecessary. Like Fred, Rodell is doing what he thinks is best for the town at all times. I appreciate his service too.
This post has gotten a lot longer that I intended, but I always feel it is necessary to keep the dialogue alive. Here is one final suggestion for everyone:
Stop making anonymous posts and keep your dialogue productive and insightful; this applies to this blog too! Put your name to your comments. Add to the debate and add your ideas. God knows we need all the help we can get to get our community through this. Ninety percent of the comments I see are back and forth tit-for-tat dribble attacking people and personalities on both sides, this is unnecessary and unproductive. Do we really need to attack those that we disagree with? Anyway, comment on this:
How would you move the community forward?
Sunday, December 12, 2010
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Mukwonago Chief Comments 11/25/2010
If you hit the link above (the blog title), you'll see an article from the Mukwonago Chief regarding the fire department. The article is OK, but the comments are infuriating to me. Below is my response.
Ironically, today is my brother Johnny’s birthday. He would have been 45 today. When he was 37 yrs old he died in a house fire because of slow/unconcerned response from his local fire department. The danger of a lack of a cohesive and responsive department is real. Our department has been gutted. I’m confident that with new leadership it’ll rebuild, but right now we’re in a shambles. Anyway, in response to the comments after the article, I had this to say:
In response to criticisms of me and others in the above comments, I must say that the commenter has completed ignored any points that I have made in the past. I have simply stated that I disagree with splitting the joint fire department because it will 1) harm our community by creating a divide when we should be finding ways to work together, and 2) it’s going to cost us a TON of money. These opinions are well documented on my blog: afterthewakeup.blogspot.com
I told you so….
1) If you can’t see the harm that has been caused by the rift in our community, then you are not paying attention. Since this is a matter of opinion and the town board and some others just doesn’t care, then I’ll leave this issue alone.
2) On the matter of money, this HAS cost us LOTS of money. The easiest way to see this is that in order to not raise our taxes, the town board has dipped into our cash reserves to the tune of about $190,000 which will result in cash reserves much less than is recommended for a community our size. If you want to get into more detailed analysis, look at this: It was estimated that the joint department had a value (equity) of about $2.4million. Roughly 85% of that should belong to us in the town, or about $2million of it. In the dissolution of the department we received about $1million in equipment and about $500,000 in cash from Big Bend. So we LOST $500,000 in equity! ($2m - $1m - $0.5m = $0.5m) This is simple math. Never mind the $70,000 +/- in legal and consulting fees we’ve spent.
Please don’t let the facts get in the way of your comments though. Continue to attack anyone that doesn’t agree with the board or who might bring up valid reasons why we shouldn’t be going down this road.
Oh, almost forgot, on the matter of the $150,000 the fire board has been “sitting on,” the commenter has once again not let the truth get in the way of the comments. Most of that $150,000 is money that is invested in interest bearing accounts and came from donations from citizens for specific purposes. You know, someone died and left $30,000 to the department for, say, a training tower. Should we just now grab this money to spend against their wishes? Legally we CAN; but rightfully we CANNOT. If someone in my family left money to the department for a specific purpose and it was grabbed by the town board to cover the cost of this fiasco, I would have a real problem with that.
But once again, let’s not let facts and what is right get in the way of what we want.
I’m really tired of this BS! We have about six or eight fools destroying our community.
Ironically, today is my brother Johnny’s birthday. He would have been 45 today. When he was 37 yrs old he died in a house fire because of slow/unconcerned response from his local fire department. The danger of a lack of a cohesive and responsive department is real. Our department has been gutted. I’m confident that with new leadership it’ll rebuild, but right now we’re in a shambles. Anyway, in response to the comments after the article, I had this to say:
In response to criticisms of me and others in the above comments, I must say that the commenter has completed ignored any points that I have made in the past. I have simply stated that I disagree with splitting the joint fire department because it will 1) harm our community by creating a divide when we should be finding ways to work together, and 2) it’s going to cost us a TON of money. These opinions are well documented on my blog: afterthewakeup.blogspot.com
I told you so….
1) If you can’t see the harm that has been caused by the rift in our community, then you are not paying attention. Since this is a matter of opinion and the town board and some others just doesn’t care, then I’ll leave this issue alone.
2) On the matter of money, this HAS cost us LOTS of money. The easiest way to see this is that in order to not raise our taxes, the town board has dipped into our cash reserves to the tune of about $190,000 which will result in cash reserves much less than is recommended for a community our size. If you want to get into more detailed analysis, look at this: It was estimated that the joint department had a value (equity) of about $2.4million. Roughly 85% of that should belong to us in the town, or about $2million of it. In the dissolution of the department we received about $1million in equipment and about $500,000 in cash from Big Bend. So we LOST $500,000 in equity! ($2m - $1m - $0.5m = $0.5m) This is simple math. Never mind the $70,000 +/- in legal and consulting fees we’ve spent.
Please don’t let the facts get in the way of your comments though. Continue to attack anyone that doesn’t agree with the board or who might bring up valid reasons why we shouldn’t be going down this road.
Oh, almost forgot, on the matter of the $150,000 the fire board has been “sitting on,” the commenter has once again not let the truth get in the way of the comments. Most of that $150,000 is money that is invested in interest bearing accounts and came from donations from citizens for specific purposes. You know, someone died and left $30,000 to the department for, say, a training tower. Should we just now grab this money to spend against their wishes? Legally we CAN; but rightfully we CANNOT. If someone in my family left money to the department for a specific purpose and it was grabbed by the town board to cover the cost of this fiasco, I would have a real problem with that.
But once again, let’s not let facts and what is right get in the way of what we want.
I’m really tired of this BS! We have about six or eight fools destroying our community.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
No Plan Yet - REALLY!!!
Are they listening? I think not. Come let them know how you how you feel:
November 4th at 6:30pm! This is the annual budget hearing.
So here we are in November of 2010 a mere seven weeks from the dissolution of the fire department as we have known it for years. Vernon has not even given us a clear picture or how they will assemble a fire department in these last few weeks. I even saw a flyer signed by Supervisors Craig and Bird that has the gall to claim that all is well. I must be one of the “misrepresenters” referred to in their flyer, because I don’t believe them since they have not shown anyone a plan for service. Having turn-out gear and pagers is not a plan.
In addition, they state they offered the Village FULL services for $97,500. This is true, but the Village can provide their own service for less and not have to deal with these jokers. Even last year, their cost was less than that. Their total cost in 2010 was about $88,000. Don’t take my word for it, make the call to the village clerk and find out for yourself.
That issue aside, the issue at hand is the Town budget which now includes the fire department budget. From my best examination there are the following issues with the budget:
1. The budget shows a shortfall of $187,000 being made up from the reserve funds. I see this as a problem, we have not have any good reason to tap into our reserve. Why now? Do we have some unanticipated costs this year? Hmmmm.
2. In the fire department budget, there is a line item estimated at $140,000 for public charges for rescue runs. This is down $10,000 from the 2010 budget line item of $150,000. In the three year period from 2006 to 2008, the Village of Big Bend consumed 17.17% of the recue runs. So, shouldn’t this revenue number be down by about 17%? I think so, it should be nearer to $125,000. That’s a difference of $140,000 - $125,000 or $15,000. In addition, with the loss of Big Bend, we also lose the ability to invoice from about a third of the State Highway charges. In 2010 these charges were estimated at $20,000, the current Town Board has included an estimate of $18,480 in the budget. It just seems too high to me. A quick check on the actual 2010 charges shows that the fire department will fall well short of the $150,000 estimated for 2010. So already, I guess there is a shortfall of about $25,000 in the budget for 2011 for the Vernon Fire Department.
Anyway, there is more, I suggest you come to the meeting and hear the details for yourself. Maybe stay after the meeting and quiz those that make brash statements. Have them give you the facts. To be honest with you I’m busy and I’m tired of fighting with these guys, I’m not entirely sure I’ll be there. I leave that night for deer hunting in Minnesota with my son.
Here’s a radical idea: Why don’t Tom Bird and Bill Craig make a flyer that outlines exactly what our fire department staff, equipment and training will look like next year? We have had lots of problems and from what I see they haven’t made much progress. Looks like our department leadership is the same as it was two years ago, but we’ve lost a lot of our trained staff. Give me an organization chart with names in positions and a list of equipment. Some outlines of how we’ll staff a structure fire and what equipment might be there. You know; a plan!
No, they’d rather spend their time saying that folks like me that question them are providing “misrepresentations and deceptions”. Ugh! Just give us the PLAN!
November 4th at 6:30pm! This is the annual budget hearing.
So here we are in November of 2010 a mere seven weeks from the dissolution of the fire department as we have known it for years. Vernon has not even given us a clear picture or how they will assemble a fire department in these last few weeks. I even saw a flyer signed by Supervisors Craig and Bird that has the gall to claim that all is well. I must be one of the “misrepresenters” referred to in their flyer, because I don’t believe them since they have not shown anyone a plan for service. Having turn-out gear and pagers is not a plan.
In addition, they state they offered the Village FULL services for $97,500. This is true, but the Village can provide their own service for less and not have to deal with these jokers. Even last year, their cost was less than that. Their total cost in 2010 was about $88,000. Don’t take my word for it, make the call to the village clerk and find out for yourself.
That issue aside, the issue at hand is the Town budget which now includes the fire department budget. From my best examination there are the following issues with the budget:
1. The budget shows a shortfall of $187,000 being made up from the reserve funds. I see this as a problem, we have not have any good reason to tap into our reserve. Why now? Do we have some unanticipated costs this year? Hmmmm.
2. In the fire department budget, there is a line item estimated at $140,000 for public charges for rescue runs. This is down $10,000 from the 2010 budget line item of $150,000. In the three year period from 2006 to 2008, the Village of Big Bend consumed 17.17% of the recue runs. So, shouldn’t this revenue number be down by about 17%? I think so, it should be nearer to $125,000. That’s a difference of $140,000 - $125,000 or $15,000. In addition, with the loss of Big Bend, we also lose the ability to invoice from about a third of the State Highway charges. In 2010 these charges were estimated at $20,000, the current Town Board has included an estimate of $18,480 in the budget. It just seems too high to me. A quick check on the actual 2010 charges shows that the fire department will fall well short of the $150,000 estimated for 2010. So already, I guess there is a shortfall of about $25,000 in the budget for 2011 for the Vernon Fire Department.
Anyway, there is more, I suggest you come to the meeting and hear the details for yourself. Maybe stay after the meeting and quiz those that make brash statements. Have them give you the facts. To be honest with you I’m busy and I’m tired of fighting with these guys, I’m not entirely sure I’ll be there. I leave that night for deer hunting in Minnesota with my son.
Here’s a radical idea: Why don’t Tom Bird and Bill Craig make a flyer that outlines exactly what our fire department staff, equipment and training will look like next year? We have had lots of problems and from what I see they haven’t made much progress. Looks like our department leadership is the same as it was two years ago, but we’ve lost a lot of our trained staff. Give me an organization chart with names in positions and a list of equipment. Some outlines of how we’ll staff a structure fire and what equipment might be there. You know; a plan!
No, they’d rather spend their time saying that folks like me that question them are providing “misrepresentations and deceptions”. Ugh! Just give us the PLAN!
Friday, September 17, 2010
Town Board Listening Session!!!! Finally!
MONDAY, 9/20 - 7PM!
All the Vernon Town Board is finally holding a listening session.
THIS MEETING IS CRITICAL!
PLEASE BE THERE!
All the Vernon Town Board is finally holding a listening session.
THIS MEETING IS CRITICAL!
PLEASE BE THERE!
Monday, September 13, 2010
Happenings in the Town
There are a couple comments to my last post requesting more information and how to find out more of what is going on.
Here is what happened last week, the Town and Village held a meeting to bid on the equipment in the fire department. Basically, they were to tell the Fire Board what gear and trucks they would like to buy. Those pieces with one buyer were awarded to the only bidder. Those items that had two bidders need to go to the next step in the process which is for each community to prepare a sealed bid.
The Town did not bid for most of the miscellaneous equipment (communications equipment, office equipment, AV equipment, department furnishings, etc.), so the Village ended up being awarded most of this equipment. The big stuff stuff still needs to be bid on (most engines, ambulances, etc.).
Word has it (unverified by me as of yet) that the Village acquired most of department small equipment for about $250,000. If the Town has to purchase this equipment new, it is estimated to cost approximately $800,000. (A good example of a piece of equipment that I know about is the new washer in fire station #3, it was purchased new two years ago for $3,500 if I remember correctly; the Village just bought it for $264!) I am working to verify all of this right now....more to come!
If you want to know more, the best way is to pay attention to the newspaper, go to the Town Board meetings (or as an alternative - watch it on TV, CH 25) and go to the Fire Board meetings. I'll do what I can to pass the information on to people that pay attention to this blog.
Here is what happened last week, the Town and Village held a meeting to bid on the equipment in the fire department. Basically, they were to tell the Fire Board what gear and trucks they would like to buy. Those pieces with one buyer were awarded to the only bidder. Those items that had two bidders need to go to the next step in the process which is for each community to prepare a sealed bid.
The Town did not bid for most of the miscellaneous equipment (communications equipment, office equipment, AV equipment, department furnishings, etc.), so the Village ended up being awarded most of this equipment. The big stuff stuff still needs to be bid on (most engines, ambulances, etc.).
Word has it (unverified by me as of yet) that the Village acquired most of department small equipment for about $250,000. If the Town has to purchase this equipment new, it is estimated to cost approximately $800,000. (A good example of a piece of equipment that I know about is the new washer in fire station #3, it was purchased new two years ago for $3,500 if I remember correctly; the Village just bought it for $264!) I am working to verify all of this right now....more to come!
If you want to know more, the best way is to pay attention to the newspaper, go to the Town Board meetings (or as an alternative - watch it on TV, CH 25) and go to the Fire Board meetings. I'll do what I can to pass the information on to people that pay attention to this blog.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Well, well, well....
I have to tell you that this is certainly suspect. I've been working very hard to keep my mouth shut and let them continue to work for the Town's benefit. But this really concerns me:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/100897579.html
What's to say they didn't have the consultant change the report to meet their needs? Where's the integrity in this process? I'm disturbed to say the least and expected more from our Board.
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/100897579.html
What's to say they didn't have the consultant change the report to meet their needs? Where's the integrity in this process? I'm disturbed to say the least and expected more from our Board.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Big Bend, Vernon Open Negotiations
I'm happy to post this link:
Big Bend, Vernon Open Negotiations
I have my fingers crossed that this development will stop the madness and at least get the ball rolling in the right direction. I've been a strong advocate of negotiating with the village from day one. It makes no sense for two communities, so closely tied, to duplicate efforts in fire and rescue services. Never mind the cost to actually create the separate services in the first place.
I commend the Vernon Town Board for taking this first step. I feel a weight has been lifted from my shoulders.
It’s now time to watch closely that our two governments work to strike a fair compromise that we can all live with. An agreement like this is very similar to a marriage; we need to continue to work and grow together. We will not agree all the time, or even most of the time, but we need to understand the benefits of our arrangement, we need to compromise, and we need to operate in good faith to keep the marriage strong.
It truly is the best thing for both communities.
Big Bend, Vernon Open Negotiations
I have my fingers crossed that this development will stop the madness and at least get the ball rolling in the right direction. I've been a strong advocate of negotiating with the village from day one. It makes no sense for two communities, so closely tied, to duplicate efforts in fire and rescue services. Never mind the cost to actually create the separate services in the first place.
I commend the Vernon Town Board for taking this first step. I feel a weight has been lifted from my shoulders.
It’s now time to watch closely that our two governments work to strike a fair compromise that we can all live with. An agreement like this is very similar to a marriage; we need to continue to work and grow together. We will not agree all the time, or even most of the time, but we need to understand the benefits of our arrangement, we need to compromise, and we need to operate in good faith to keep the marriage strong.
It truly is the best thing for both communities.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Are they listening?
I’ve been rather quiet the last few weeks; I know. Mostly this has been driven by my job. With spring comes my busy time of year, sorry. I have not been quiet because I feel any less passionate about the issues in our town.
So, why do I ask, “Are they listening?” Well, on April 13th, at the meeting of the electors (commonly referred to as the “Annual Town Meeting”), I made several motions for the town board to consider. These motions all passed with an overwhelming majority of the electors present voting in favor. In essence I asked the current town board to consider the following:
- Reconsider their action of 12/17, and continue the intermunicipal agreement with Big Bend that governs our Fire Department.
- Reconsider the five member plan commission and reseat the seven member commission with more citizen members.
- Consider attempting to protect the community from annexation by being more accommodating to businesses that want to locate here.
In my commentary on the fire department, I asked them to reconsider the action, but then use the consultant to assist in negotiating a better deal with Big Bend. The consultant could suggest a more favorable funding formula, add the costs of the fire stations into the equation, consider mutual aid issues, etc. All those things I’ve been saying all along. Adjust the agreement, but let’s not completely divorce ourselves from Big Bend. We stand to gain a lot by partnering with our neighbors. Share costs, develop in a mutually beneficial manner, etc.
On the plan commission matter, my point is that complete control by a few is never a good thing. Open discussion, community involvement, and outside opinions ARE good things. I think this is self explanatory.
Can we stop annexation? Not really. I’m realistic enough to understand that we’re not going to completely stop businesses from annexing away from the town, because Big Bend (and Mukwonago for that matter) has services that we in the town don’t offer or even want. Services like sewer and water, financing capability, assessment power, etc. But in the town we can offer lower taxes, a friendly business environment, high quality building standards, and a master plan that keeps business and homes separated (to a certain degree).
Anyway, I want to know if the town board will act. I want them to listen. I want them to at least have a discussion in public on the how-and-why it’s a good idea to go-it-along with a fire department. If they need more information to have this discussion, then why didn’t they have this information before making this decision?
What’s my plan? Well, if I was in the driver’s seat on this, I would have agreed to an identical budget with Big Bend and reluctantly kept the agreement in place. But, I would have put Big Bend on notice that Vernon is going to explore other options and review the agreement. I would have then spent 2010 figuring out the least expensive, most efficient, and best way to provide fire service to the community. We all agree that some things need to change. I would have reminded Big Bend that Vernon could withdraw from the agreement any time. We don’t have to wait a year to have our own department, we can do this anytime. We’re the 800 pound gorilla in the room and we have the control! We could have negotiated a better deal without the risk of losing our partner. I would have worked to avoid the current turmoil and negative reaction from the electorate. I would have kept the electors in the loop on this discussion and used their ideas to create a better agreement. In short I would have taken a more methodical approach.
So, come to the town hall this Thursday, May 6th, and find out if they’re listening. I really hope they are and I really hope we can have a little less talk and a lot more action!
So, why do I ask, “Are they listening?” Well, on April 13th, at the meeting of the electors (commonly referred to as the “Annual Town Meeting”), I made several motions for the town board to consider. These motions all passed with an overwhelming majority of the electors present voting in favor. In essence I asked the current town board to consider the following:
- Reconsider their action of 12/17, and continue the intermunicipal agreement with Big Bend that governs our Fire Department.
- Reconsider the five member plan commission and reseat the seven member commission with more citizen members.
- Consider attempting to protect the community from annexation by being more accommodating to businesses that want to locate here.
In my commentary on the fire department, I asked them to reconsider the action, but then use the consultant to assist in negotiating a better deal with Big Bend. The consultant could suggest a more favorable funding formula, add the costs of the fire stations into the equation, consider mutual aid issues, etc. All those things I’ve been saying all along. Adjust the agreement, but let’s not completely divorce ourselves from Big Bend. We stand to gain a lot by partnering with our neighbors. Share costs, develop in a mutually beneficial manner, etc.
On the plan commission matter, my point is that complete control by a few is never a good thing. Open discussion, community involvement, and outside opinions ARE good things. I think this is self explanatory.
Can we stop annexation? Not really. I’m realistic enough to understand that we’re not going to completely stop businesses from annexing away from the town, because Big Bend (and Mukwonago for that matter) has services that we in the town don’t offer or even want. Services like sewer and water, financing capability, assessment power, etc. But in the town we can offer lower taxes, a friendly business environment, high quality building standards, and a master plan that keeps business and homes separated (to a certain degree).
Anyway, I want to know if the town board will act. I want them to listen. I want them to at least have a discussion in public on the how-and-why it’s a good idea to go-it-along with a fire department. If they need more information to have this discussion, then why didn’t they have this information before making this decision?
What’s my plan? Well, if I was in the driver’s seat on this, I would have agreed to an identical budget with Big Bend and reluctantly kept the agreement in place. But, I would have put Big Bend on notice that Vernon is going to explore other options and review the agreement. I would have then spent 2010 figuring out the least expensive, most efficient, and best way to provide fire service to the community. We all agree that some things need to change. I would have reminded Big Bend that Vernon could withdraw from the agreement any time. We don’t have to wait a year to have our own department, we can do this anytime. We’re the 800 pound gorilla in the room and we have the control! We could have negotiated a better deal without the risk of losing our partner. I would have worked to avoid the current turmoil and negative reaction from the electorate. I would have kept the electors in the loop on this discussion and used their ideas to create a better agreement. In short I would have taken a more methodical approach.
So, come to the town hall this Thursday, May 6th, and find out if they’re listening. I really hope they are and I really hope we can have a little less talk and a lot more action!
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Thank You Vernon!
I cannot express how thankful I am to all Vernon residents that showed up at the polls and exercised that most basic right in our democracy; the right to vote!
I’ve mentioned before that I thought a referendum on the issue of splitting the fire department would have been a good idea. I have NEWS for ya’ll, yesterday’s vote WAS that referendum! I heard a resounding message intended for our town board: we need to do better!
I can’t say how impressed I am with the write-in vote for Diane Herried! Wow! She was only shy by seven votes; and that’s before a recount! I have my fingers crossed for her, but whichever way it goes, it is a major victory. The town board should now be paying attention!
I will post an update and more thoughts after the recount is complete on Friday. We still have lots of work to do. So, say a little prayer for a positive outcome in the recount and stay tuned!
I’ve mentioned before that I thought a referendum on the issue of splitting the fire department would have been a good idea. I have NEWS for ya’ll, yesterday’s vote WAS that referendum! I heard a resounding message intended for our town board: we need to do better!
I can’t say how impressed I am with the write-in vote for Diane Herried! Wow! She was only shy by seven votes; and that’s before a recount! I have my fingers crossed for her, but whichever way it goes, it is a major victory. The town board should now be paying attention!
I will post an update and more thoughts after the recount is complete on Friday. We still have lots of work to do. So, say a little prayer for a positive outcome in the recount and stay tuned!
Saturday, April 3, 2010
Recall? I don't think so...
NOT TRUE: Rumors have circulated that VRSG is planning to recall Fred Michalek, and only Fred, from the Town Board.
This must come from a statement made by me at the 3/31 VRSG public meeting when I said that I would not hesitate to initiate a recall if things don't change. I also said to the group that I've told Fred directly that if our Town Board continues to operate as "out of control" as they have, that I would be the first to sign that recall petition for Fred. He is our chairman and is in charge of the meetings after all.
So, why this post? Someone walked away from our VRSG meeting spreading the rumor that our next more was to recall Fred, and only Fred. I just want to clear up a couple things:
1. Fred Michalek is a good person and deserves our respect – no recall is needed at the moment. So we’ll continue to respectfully disagree with his position on splitting the fire department and his lack of control of how the board meetings are run. Most of us believe that Fred is an intelligent enough leader to get into the facts of splitting the fire department, contemplate the consultant’s report (when it comes out) and seek council from those that understand the complexities; then make a rational decision. We hold out hope that he changes his mind and supports a renegotiation of the joint fire agreement with Big Bend.
2. VRSG is only focused on the election at the moment – we have no plans for any recall. AND no, we did not put out the “Reilly Must Go” signs; not quite our style.
3. VRSG will continue to work after the election to supply information to residents so they can get the other side, and “the rest of the story.”
So there you have it! If you have questions about what I said, please call me: 414-708-9466.
Remember: Write-in Herried and vote Singert on Tuesday!
This must come from a statement made by me at the 3/31 VRSG public meeting when I said that I would not hesitate to initiate a recall if things don't change. I also said to the group that I've told Fred directly that if our Town Board continues to operate as "out of control" as they have, that I would be the first to sign that recall petition for Fred. He is our chairman and is in charge of the meetings after all.
So, why this post? Someone walked away from our VRSG meeting spreading the rumor that our next more was to recall Fred, and only Fred. I just want to clear up a couple things:
1. Fred Michalek is a good person and deserves our respect – no recall is needed at the moment. So we’ll continue to respectfully disagree with his position on splitting the fire department and his lack of control of how the board meetings are run. Most of us believe that Fred is an intelligent enough leader to get into the facts of splitting the fire department, contemplate the consultant’s report (when it comes out) and seek council from those that understand the complexities; then make a rational decision. We hold out hope that he changes his mind and supports a renegotiation of the joint fire agreement with Big Bend.
2. VRSG is only focused on the election at the moment – we have no plans for any recall. AND no, we did not put out the “Reilly Must Go” signs; not quite our style.
3. VRSG will continue to work after the election to supply information to residents so they can get the other side, and “the rest of the story.”
So there you have it! If you have questions about what I said, please call me: 414-708-9466.
Remember: Write-in Herried and vote Singert on Tuesday!
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
You have to ask yourself these questions….
EDITED 3/10/10 with less reactionary and more informative responses from me.
The Mukwonago Chief just published an article written by Amy Nixon entitled “Citizens group seeks to save joint Fire Dept.” (3/10/10 Ed. Note: Good article by the way Amy! Please don’t take to heart Mr. Reilly pointing at you and giving you a hard time at the meeting last night. [Thanks for calling him out of order Mr. Michalek.] I think your article was pretty fair and well balanced.)
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/87114212.html
In reading this article, you have to ask yourself some questions. I suggest you think about the following excerpts from the article then try to answer the questions that follow the excerpts. If you don’t know the answer, then please ask whoever said these things:
CHIEF: “At Thursday's [March 4] Town Board meeting, Supervisor Joe Reilly said he was against a referendum on the issue, citing the April 1997 annual meeting in which residents voted 44 to 14 to direct the board to "review all joint departments, joint projects, cost sharing arrangements, service contracts and other agreements between the town and village or city so annexing such territory is hereby authorized to modify, suspend or terminate the same."
QUESTION: If at the April meeting of the electors a motion passes to renegotiate the agreement with Big Bend and continue the joint fire department, will your honor this motion or are you going to pick and choose which motions of the people to follow? Is the 1997 motion more valid than a 2010 motion?
MY COMMENTARY: This is a little silly, but hey, I’ll make the motion and we’ll see what happens. According the Mr. Reilly the will of the people should prevail, we’ll see if he’s a man of his word.
CHIEF: “Supervisor Bill Craig said that it will actually cost the town more if it does nothing and cited the village's intent to put in sewer, which he said will lead to big-box stores which will force a joint department to purchase costly equipment such as ladder trucks. The town would be paying for the village's growth, he explained.”
QUESTION: How do we service the Waynez World building? Isn’t that a big box? When the village develops, doesn’t that trigger a shift in the funding formula so that they pay more and more as the village develops? Long term, won’t the town costs start to shift downward?
MY COMMENTARY: I have spoken to fire fighters close to this issue and they all admit that it would be hard to justify a ladder truck for this interchange. Plus this interchange has easy access from the surrounding communities that do have ladder trucks (New Berlin, Waukesha, Mukwonago and Muskego all have ladder trucks). I’ve been told by senior fire fighters that if there was a fire of the size necessary for a ladder truck, then the situation would be addressed through mutual aid.
Mutual aid is a formalized system in the county that in essence is an agreement between departments to provide assistance to adjacent departments when there is an emergency outside of the capability of one department to handle. Have you ever heard of a “five alarm” fire? We’ll that means that besides the original fire company, four additional [local or mutual aid] fire departments are alarmed to respond. This is a real situation that we deal with now; not speculation on some distant circumstance.
The truth is that we don’t need to buy any more fire trucks if we get the “big box” that Mr. Craig is referring to. BUT, IF we do, AND we’re partnered with the village, the village has the ability to force whoever is making the impact, PAY for the impact. This is called an “impact” fee. The Town of Vernon alone does not have this power; only villages and cities do. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a partner in our fire department that has the power to have developers pay for their impacts? I want people to pay their OWN way, the best way to do that under state law is to be a village/city or be partnered with village/city. Despite their higher taxes, there are some advantages to being a village. Why don’t we remain a town and keep our way of life, but partner with the village to get the benefits for our fire department? Makes sense to me.
CHIEF: “Instead of keeping the Fire Department as is, Reilly suggested the village could contract with the town.”
[RHETORICAL] QUESTION: Maybe Mr. Craig and Mr. Reilly should talk to each other because if the Village contracts with us, don’t we have to buy that truck? Sorry, I forgot, we don’t need a truck….see above. [This is a rather snotty comment by me, but I’ve decided to leave it in only for the humor of it. Much like my comment about razing the barn just south of town hall in an earlier post….]
CHIEF: "We're trying to do what's in the best interest of the town - the town - not the village," said Reilly. "Last night [at the VRSG meeting] we heard a lot of misstatements. We are not (being) deceiving … we wouldn't do anything to hurt this town."
QUESTION: What is the plan to provide fire service to the town and how much will it cost? Shouldn’t the town board have considered the costs and impacts of not partnering with the village before this decision was made? If the costs were considered, then where is the data to prove to me that this is going to be better for our community and not hurt our community? Can you give me a plan?
MY COMMENTARY: I have never suggested that the town board is WILLFULLY not working in the best interest of the town. I DID suggest that the town board demonstrates from their actions that they do not have enough information or understanding of the complexities of this issue to make a decision that will benefit the town in the long term. I feel this decision was made in haste, in the heat of a battle of wills with the village, and without consulting the people. This was a big decision. We the citizens should have been involved. It should not have been made at 12:15am without this being specifically on the agenda.
When I read the agenda for that meeting on 12/17, I did not go to the meeting for two reasons: first, I read in the Mukwonago Chief just two days earlier that Fred Michalek was reported to have felt comfortable that an agreement had been reached with the village over the budget; second, I did not see anything on the agenda that would indicate anything other than the town board would discuss this agreement (in closed session) and then maybe suggest some changes to the ordinance that governs our joint fire department and maybe some other budget negotiation matters before meeting with the village again. I breathed a sigh of relief after quietly following this issue for four months. Here is the article I refer to:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/79317052.html
This article actually says that Big Bend finally acquiesced and agreed to shift the $4,000 budget item to cover increased insurance costs instead of legal fees. Big Bend gave in and completely compromised. Read it for yourself. Yet, two days later the town board took action to not continue our agreement with the village.
CHIEF: “Craig stated that although the citizens committee insinuated that it is the Town Board who voted to split the department, it is not the town that dissolved the agreement.”
BACKGROUND (From the minutes of the meeting on 12/17):
QUESTION: Did the town board’s action (or maybe inaction) cause the joint fire department dissolution provision to come into play?
MY COMMENTARY: In all things said by a member of town board recently, stating that they did not take action to dissolve the fire department is the MOST disingenuous. Nearing the deadline of 12/15, the village was willing to agree to pretty much anything to avoid the provision in the ordinance that calls for the dissolution of the joint fire department (see above), including removing the $4,000 in attorney fees from the budget. The board spent about four hours in closed session contemplating their action (or inaction, I guess) to break away from the village. Is this really about a $4,000 budget item? I think I’ve proven not.
Ask your town board why they think putting $4,000 for attorney fees in the Fire Department Budget is a bad idea when they spent $110,939.70 in attorney fees in 2009? (Don’t blame this on Paff, he was only there for three of those months.)
Anyway, my fingers are getting really tired of writing these things over and over again. But this is my only platform. At town board meetings I only get 3 minutes to state my case in public comments; I try to remain calm and respectful. The town board can respond however, whenever they like, can take all the time they like, then they can play the tape of the meeting over and over again. I don’t have the power to get the message out like they do. They can pretty much say whatever they want with no consequences and then put it on TV and hammer the point home over and over again. It’s an uphill battle for me and others that see the benefits of partnering with the village.
Any of you out there that read this, please call me if you want more information. I’d be happy to sit down with you and lay out the details, provide facts and figures, and help you become informed. Please call me at 262-662-9745. I’d be happy to back up anything I’ve said AND I’m willing to admit when I’m wrong. Is the town board willing to do the same?
Oh and by the way, all of the quotes from the town board above were made under an agenda item from the March 4th Town Board Meeting that reads:
But who I am to say so, I used the some logos without permission.
The Mukwonago Chief just published an article written by Amy Nixon entitled “Citizens group seeks to save joint Fire Dept.” (3/10/10 Ed. Note: Good article by the way Amy! Please don’t take to heart Mr. Reilly pointing at you and giving you a hard time at the meeting last night. [Thanks for calling him out of order Mr. Michalek.] I think your article was pretty fair and well balanced.)
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/87114212.html
In reading this article, you have to ask yourself some questions. I suggest you think about the following excerpts from the article then try to answer the questions that follow the excerpts. If you don’t know the answer, then please ask whoever said these things:
CHIEF: “At Thursday's [March 4] Town Board meeting, Supervisor Joe Reilly said he was against a referendum on the issue, citing the April 1997 annual meeting in which residents voted 44 to 14 to direct the board to "review all joint departments, joint projects, cost sharing arrangements, service contracts and other agreements between the town and village or city so annexing such territory is hereby authorized to modify, suspend or terminate the same."
QUESTION: If at the April meeting of the electors a motion passes to renegotiate the agreement with Big Bend and continue the joint fire department, will your honor this motion or are you going to pick and choose which motions of the people to follow? Is the 1997 motion more valid than a 2010 motion?
MY COMMENTARY: This is a little silly, but hey, I’ll make the motion and we’ll see what happens. According the Mr. Reilly the will of the people should prevail, we’ll see if he’s a man of his word.
CHIEF: “Supervisor Bill Craig said that it will actually cost the town more if it does nothing and cited the village's intent to put in sewer, which he said will lead to big-box stores which will force a joint department to purchase costly equipment such as ladder trucks. The town would be paying for the village's growth, he explained.”
QUESTION: How do we service the Waynez World building? Isn’t that a big box? When the village develops, doesn’t that trigger a shift in the funding formula so that they pay more and more as the village develops? Long term, won’t the town costs start to shift downward?
MY COMMENTARY: I have spoken to fire fighters close to this issue and they all admit that it would be hard to justify a ladder truck for this interchange. Plus this interchange has easy access from the surrounding communities that do have ladder trucks (New Berlin, Waukesha, Mukwonago and Muskego all have ladder trucks). I’ve been told by senior fire fighters that if there was a fire of the size necessary for a ladder truck, then the situation would be addressed through mutual aid.
Mutual aid is a formalized system in the county that in essence is an agreement between departments to provide assistance to adjacent departments when there is an emergency outside of the capability of one department to handle. Have you ever heard of a “five alarm” fire? We’ll that means that besides the original fire company, four additional [local or mutual aid] fire departments are alarmed to respond. This is a real situation that we deal with now; not speculation on some distant circumstance.
The truth is that we don’t need to buy any more fire trucks if we get the “big box” that Mr. Craig is referring to. BUT, IF we do, AND we’re partnered with the village, the village has the ability to force whoever is making the impact, PAY for the impact. This is called an “impact” fee. The Town of Vernon alone does not have this power; only villages and cities do. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a partner in our fire department that has the power to have developers pay for their impacts? I want people to pay their OWN way, the best way to do that under state law is to be a village/city or be partnered with village/city. Despite their higher taxes, there are some advantages to being a village. Why don’t we remain a town and keep our way of life, but partner with the village to get the benefits for our fire department? Makes sense to me.
CHIEF: “Instead of keeping the Fire Department as is, Reilly suggested the village could contract with the town.”
[RHETORICAL] QUESTION: Maybe Mr. Craig and Mr. Reilly should talk to each other because if the Village contracts with us, don’t we have to buy that truck? Sorry, I forgot, we don’t need a truck….see above. [This is a rather snotty comment by me, but I’ve decided to leave it in only for the humor of it. Much like my comment about razing the barn just south of town hall in an earlier post….]
CHIEF: "We're trying to do what's in the best interest of the town - the town - not the village," said Reilly. "Last night [at the VRSG meeting] we heard a lot of misstatements. We are not (being) deceiving … we wouldn't do anything to hurt this town."
QUESTION: What is the plan to provide fire service to the town and how much will it cost? Shouldn’t the town board have considered the costs and impacts of not partnering with the village before this decision was made? If the costs were considered, then where is the data to prove to me that this is going to be better for our community and not hurt our community? Can you give me a plan?
MY COMMENTARY: I have never suggested that the town board is WILLFULLY not working in the best interest of the town. I DID suggest that the town board demonstrates from their actions that they do not have enough information or understanding of the complexities of this issue to make a decision that will benefit the town in the long term. I feel this decision was made in haste, in the heat of a battle of wills with the village, and without consulting the people. This was a big decision. We the citizens should have been involved. It should not have been made at 12:15am without this being specifically on the agenda.
When I read the agenda for that meeting on 12/17, I did not go to the meeting for two reasons: first, I read in the Mukwonago Chief just two days earlier that Fred Michalek was reported to have felt comfortable that an agreement had been reached with the village over the budget; second, I did not see anything on the agenda that would indicate anything other than the town board would discuss this agreement (in closed session) and then maybe suggest some changes to the ordinance that governs our joint fire department and maybe some other budget negotiation matters before meeting with the village again. I breathed a sigh of relief after quietly following this issue for four months. Here is the article I refer to:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/news/79317052.html
This article actually says that Big Bend finally acquiesced and agreed to shift the $4,000 budget item to cover increased insurance costs instead of legal fees. Big Bend gave in and completely compromised. Read it for yourself. Yet, two days later the town board took action to not continue our agreement with the village.
CHIEF: “Craig stated that although the citizens committee insinuated that it is the Town Board who voted to split the department, it is not the town that dissolved the agreement.”
BACKGROUND (From the minutes of the meeting on 12/17):
Chairperson Michalek stated reconvening in open session to consider taking actions on those matters in discussed in Closed session including but not limited to issues regarding the Intermunicipal Agreement, “would accept a motion to give notice to the Big Bend Village Board dissolving the Town of Vernon’s participating in the Big Bend – Vernon Fire Department per the provision of the “Inter-municipal Agreement for Creation of a Joint Fire Department and a Joint Fire Board and a Joint Fire commission between the Village of Big Bend and the Town of Vernon”.
MOTION Supervisor Reilly moved to give notice as stated by Chairperson Michalek, seconded by Supervisor Bird.
QUESTION: Did the town board’s action (or maybe inaction) cause the joint fire department dissolution provision to come into play?
MY COMMENTARY: In all things said by a member of town board recently, stating that they did not take action to dissolve the fire department is the MOST disingenuous. Nearing the deadline of 12/15, the village was willing to agree to pretty much anything to avoid the provision in the ordinance that calls for the dissolution of the joint fire department (see above), including removing the $4,000 in attorney fees from the budget. The board spent about four hours in closed session contemplating their action (or inaction, I guess) to break away from the village. Is this really about a $4,000 budget item? I think I’ve proven not.
Ask your town board why they think putting $4,000 for attorney fees in the Fire Department Budget is a bad idea when they spent $110,939.70 in attorney fees in 2009? (Don’t blame this on Paff, he was only there for three of those months.)
Anyway, my fingers are getting really tired of writing these things over and over again. But this is my only platform. At town board meetings I only get 3 minutes to state my case in public comments; I try to remain calm and respectful. The town board can respond however, whenever they like, can take all the time they like, then they can play the tape of the meeting over and over again. I don’t have the power to get the message out like they do. They can pretty much say whatever they want with no consequences and then put it on TV and hammer the point home over and over again. It’s an uphill battle for me and others that see the benefits of partnering with the village.
Any of you out there that read this, please call me if you want more information. I’d be happy to sit down with you and lay out the details, provide facts and figures, and help you become informed. Please call me at 262-662-9745. I’d be happy to back up anything I’ve said AND I’m willing to admit when I’m wrong. Is the town board willing to do the same?
Oh and by the way, all of the quotes from the town board above were made under an agenda item from the March 4th Town Board Meeting that reads:
9. ANNOUNCEMENTS. The following individuals will be given the opportunity to make announcements at the meeting in regards to activities they have undertaken since the last meeting on behalf of the Town, future activities and citizen contacts. It is not contemplated that these matters will be discussed or acted on but referrals to the appropriate committees and/or individuals will be made.This is a violation of the open meetings law. I’m not suggesting they should not respond, just put it on the agenda next time.
Town Board, Town Clerk, Town Treasurer, Department of Public Works Director and Building Inspector.
But who I am to say so, I used the some logos without permission.
Friday, March 5, 2010
We Just Lost Another One.....
Vince Siegle, American Fireworks, just petitioned to annex his property on Enterprise Drive into the Village of Big Bend. The Town of Vernon just lost another property….
As most of you know, I am a land development consultant. I have been working with Vince on his property in Vernon for about three years; this is no secret. I've been assisting him in developing plans to build a fireworks store where he normally has his fireworks tent along I-43 during the summer fireworks season. Since this annexation was a confidential matter between my client and I, I was not able to reveal this until now. I assisted Vince in the preparation of his annexation documents.
It saddens me to see another property in the town go over to the village! Here we go again…
Let’s be clear, I predicted this would happen last year the night the town board voted to change the town ordinance. The town board's policies have stopped a property owner from doing what they want to do. So, we’re going to get the impact anyway, just the property will be in the Village of Big Bend.
Sure, Vince could have built his store in the Town of Vernon, but when the ordinance changed, he couldn’t sell anything but (essentially) sparklers. AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS CHANGED BY THE CURRENT TOWN BOARD! If they would have left the ordinance alone, he would have built in the Town! He needs to be able to sell all LEGAL fireworks in order to pay for a store. One of the reasons I’ve been pushing the town board so hard and trying to hammer the point home on annexation, is because I knew this was going on.
A little history for you: Vince bought this property several years ago when the old ordinance was in effect. Our previous ordinance would have allowed Vince to sell the same fireworks as he sold in his tent in the past several years, but the new ordinance is now more restrictive than all of the surrounding communities. Vince was deep into the process of getting his building ready for construction when the town board changed last April. The change in the ordinance pulled the rug out from under him and his plans to build a store.
VINCE IS ANNEXING TO THE VILLAGE OF BIG BEND BECAUSE OF THE POLICIES OF THE TOWN OF VERNON!
Simple as that.
What a shame.
As most of you know, I am a land development consultant. I have been working with Vince on his property in Vernon for about three years; this is no secret. I've been assisting him in developing plans to build a fireworks store where he normally has his fireworks tent along I-43 during the summer fireworks season. Since this annexation was a confidential matter between my client and I, I was not able to reveal this until now. I assisted Vince in the preparation of his annexation documents.
It saddens me to see another property in the town go over to the village! Here we go again…
Let’s be clear, I predicted this would happen last year the night the town board voted to change the town ordinance. The town board's policies have stopped a property owner from doing what they want to do. So, we’re going to get the impact anyway, just the property will be in the Village of Big Bend.
Sure, Vince could have built his store in the Town of Vernon, but when the ordinance changed, he couldn’t sell anything but (essentially) sparklers. AN ORDINANCE THAT WAS CHANGED BY THE CURRENT TOWN BOARD! If they would have left the ordinance alone, he would have built in the Town! He needs to be able to sell all LEGAL fireworks in order to pay for a store. One of the reasons I’ve been pushing the town board so hard and trying to hammer the point home on annexation, is because I knew this was going on.
A little history for you: Vince bought this property several years ago when the old ordinance was in effect. Our previous ordinance would have allowed Vince to sell the same fireworks as he sold in his tent in the past several years, but the new ordinance is now more restrictive than all of the surrounding communities. Vince was deep into the process of getting his building ready for construction when the town board changed last April. The change in the ordinance pulled the rug out from under him and his plans to build a store.
VINCE IS ANNEXING TO THE VILLAGE OF BIG BEND BECAUSE OF THE POLICIES OF THE TOWN OF VERNON!
Simple as that.
What a shame.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Another Example....
For those of you that are now paying attention, here is another example of our town board’s mindset. In order to advertise for our citizens group to assemble, I created a flyer for Vernon Residents for Sensible Government (VRSG) using the town logo and the fire department logo. I pulled both of these logos from the internet and pasted these on the flyer.
Low and behold, not three days later, an item appears on the town board’s agenda that reads:
“Town of Vernon and Fire Department logos by unauthorized parties.”
I’m guessing VRSG is one of those “unauthorized parties”. Come on, we're a group of citizens. We can't use our own town and fire department logo? Maybe Big Bend will give us 17% of the permission we need to use the logo? How would that work anyway? Come to the meeting at 7pm tonight and find out what happens. If you cannot be there, please tune your TV to cable channel 25 at 7pm to watch it yourself from the comfort of your recliner. You can print a copy of the agenda here:
http://www.townofvernon.org/Uploads%20to%20Website/TB%20Agendas/2010/030410.pdf
If you cannot be at the meeting, but would still like to comment, please contact your town board members and let them know how you feel. They are always happy to hear from residents. Their contact information is here:
http://www.townofvernon.org/town_board.htm
Once again, THANKS for caring!
Low and behold, not three days later, an item appears on the town board’s agenda that reads:
“Town of Vernon and Fire Department logos by unauthorized parties.”
I’m guessing VRSG is one of those “unauthorized parties”. Come on, we're a group of citizens. We can't use our own town and fire department logo? Maybe Big Bend will give us 17% of the permission we need to use the logo? How would that work anyway? Come to the meeting at 7pm tonight and find out what happens. If you cannot be there, please tune your TV to cable channel 25 at 7pm to watch it yourself from the comfort of your recliner. You can print a copy of the agenda here:
http://www.townofvernon.org/Uploads%20to%20Website/TB%20Agendas/2010/030410.pdf
If you cannot be at the meeting, but would still like to comment, please contact your town board members and let them know how you feel. They are always happy to hear from residents. Their contact information is here:
http://www.townofvernon.org/town_board.htm
Once again, THANKS for caring!
VRSG Meeting Last Night
A Great Success!
To those of you who attended, THANKS!
VRSG held its first meeting last night at the Lion’s Club Community Center. I’m proud to say that we had quite a crowd; more than we expected at about 65 people. Next time we’ll find a larger venue. If you missed the meeting and would like a copy of the presentation, then please email VRSG with “Presentation” in the subject line. The email address is vrsg@wi.rr.com. You can also send any questions, comments or corrections to this address as well, or post a comment to this blog.
In attendance at the meeting were four members of the town board; all of them except Fred Michalek. I’m really sorry Fred chose not to be there, but I understand. I think all in attendance found it informative and insightful. This is a very complex issue and very difficult to understand the nuances of the path we’re on. Hopefully the town board is now listening. The town board has indicated that their policies are widely supported by the citizens of this community; we intend to prove that this is not true.
For those of you that are reading this and willing to put yourself out there like we have, please come to the town board meetings on the first and third Thursday of the month and voice your opinion.
Tonight is one of those meetings, please make the time to be there!
To those of you who attended, THANKS!
VRSG held its first meeting last night at the Lion’s Club Community Center. I’m proud to say that we had quite a crowd; more than we expected at about 65 people. Next time we’ll find a larger venue. If you missed the meeting and would like a copy of the presentation, then please email VRSG with “Presentation” in the subject line. The email address is vrsg@wi.rr.com. You can also send any questions, comments or corrections to this address as well, or post a comment to this blog.
In attendance at the meeting were four members of the town board; all of them except Fred Michalek. I’m really sorry Fred chose not to be there, but I understand. I think all in attendance found it informative and insightful. This is a very complex issue and very difficult to understand the nuances of the path we’re on. Hopefully the town board is now listening. The town board has indicated that their policies are widely supported by the citizens of this community; we intend to prove that this is not true.
For those of you that are reading this and willing to put yourself out there like we have, please come to the town board meetings on the first and third Thursday of the month and voice your opinion.
Tonight is one of those meetings, please make the time to be there!
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Vernon Residents for Sensible Government
I have to admit, I never thought I’d be involved with one of THOSE groups. You know the ones, they come to meetings at the town and disagree with anything other than the status quo? They are disagreeable, just be disagreeable?
We’ll, I’ve joined one of those groups. But, this group is different. We base our action on facts and reasonable opinions based on being informed and making resonable assumptions. We then get involved to try and shape policy and support candidates for our government that represent what we feel is best for our town. We don’t plan to go to board meetings and chant slogans, no secret handshakes, no inflammatory commentary or personal attacks; just calm sensible public discourse.
This new group is called “Vernon Residents for Sensible Government," or VRSG for short. Why did we form? Basically we don’t like the way our current Town Board is handling our relationship with Big Bend, among other things. Read my blogs below to find out more.... Like I’ve said before, we as a town can benefit greatly by sharing costs with our neighbors. Our board has decided unanimously to not share fire and rescue services with the Village of Big Bend. We’ve been doing this cost effectively for more than 40 years! In fact our current fire department has a cost per resident that among the lowest in the county.
Anyway, you can get more details by reading this blog and, possibly, by attending Town Board meetings. In addition, VRSG is planning on holding an informational meeting on March 3rd at 6:30 at the Big Bend Lion’s Club near the Village Hall. This is the time and place for you to get your questions answered and to get the information you need to make an informed decision. If you can’t make that meeting, a summary of the proceedings will be posted to this blog.
Oh, by the way, you don’t need to agree with us to attend the meeting. Please come to offer your opinion. We respect everyone’s opinion; we’re all in this together and some will disagree with us. That’s OK! We can still be friends and neighbors. Quite frankly, I would enjoy having those who disagree attend the meeting and provide information to support the Town Board. If you show up, you’ll be provided an opportunity to speak and not be treated with anything but respect. Sometimes we all need some alternative perspective.
We’ll, I’ve joined one of those groups. But, this group is different. We base our action on facts and reasonable opinions based on being informed and making resonable assumptions. We then get involved to try and shape policy and support candidates for our government that represent what we feel is best for our town. We don’t plan to go to board meetings and chant slogans, no secret handshakes, no inflammatory commentary or personal attacks; just calm sensible public discourse.
This new group is called “Vernon Residents for Sensible Government," or VRSG for short. Why did we form? Basically we don’t like the way our current Town Board is handling our relationship with Big Bend, among other things. Read my blogs below to find out more.... Like I’ve said before, we as a town can benefit greatly by sharing costs with our neighbors. Our board has decided unanimously to not share fire and rescue services with the Village of Big Bend. We’ve been doing this cost effectively for more than 40 years! In fact our current fire department has a cost per resident that among the lowest in the county.
Anyway, you can get more details by reading this blog and, possibly, by attending Town Board meetings. In addition, VRSG is planning on holding an informational meeting on March 3rd at 6:30 at the Big Bend Lion’s Club near the Village Hall. This is the time and place for you to get your questions answered and to get the information you need to make an informed decision. If you can’t make that meeting, a summary of the proceedings will be posted to this blog.
Oh, by the way, you don’t need to agree with us to attend the meeting. Please come to offer your opinion. We respect everyone’s opinion; we’re all in this together and some will disagree with us. That’s OK! We can still be friends and neighbors. Quite frankly, I would enjoy having those who disagree attend the meeting and provide information to support the Town Board. If you show up, you’ll be provided an opportunity to speak and not be treated with anything but respect. Sometimes we all need some alternative perspective.
After the Wakeup - Notification of New Posts
All - I just realized that new posts are not being notified to registered users; it doesn't work that way.... So to that end, I've added several of my contacts to the notification list. I would appreciate it if you would send new posts to those in your contact list that you think might be interested in what I have to say. The more people that become informed the better.
As always, folks who have questions about my posts should contact me at mikedoble@wi.rr.com or on my phone at 414-708-9466. If you don't care to be notified of posts from my blog, then please let me know at the above address and I'll remove you from the list.
As always, folks who have questions about my posts should contact me at mikedoble@wi.rr.com or on my phone at 414-708-9466. If you don't care to be notified of posts from my blog, then please let me know at the above address and I'll remove you from the list.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Attack Doble! He Disagrees!
So, Amy Nixon was not quite accurate with my comments in the Mukwonago Chief….that’s OK it happens. I said to the town board in public comments last week that I estimate it will cost $150,000 when all is said and done to split the fire department. I never said that money had already been spent….anyway. Not that big of a deal. The money might as well already have been spent, the town board just doesn't want to listen to anyone.
This IS is a big deal though….here we go again with Mr. Craig's personal attacks. Instead of speaking to the reporter and correcting the facts then providing insight and information (hopefully factual information), he says this (as reported by Amy):
"Mike (Doble) resigned from the Fire Board because I asked him pertinent questions … " said Craig. "They are trying to incite fear into taxpayers … when we as the Town Board don't have the numbers together yet. In the worst case scenario, we're not even talking $40,000 to $50,000 for the whole thing." – From Amy Nixon’s Mukwonago Chief Article 2/9/2010
What does my resignation from the fire board have to do with how much it’s going to cost to disband the fire department? This type of comment/statement is just indicative of how Mr. Craig’s mind works. If he doesn’t like what I have to say, then he’ll say something to discredit me. Well Mr. Craig, I made a HUGE mistake of resigning from the fire board and feel partially responsible for what’s happening here. I quit. I took myself out of the position that might have made the difference to prevent this mess. I deeply regret that decision. So, I will not quit again. Keep it coming.
Friends who happen to read this blog, please come to the town board meetings, or post comments (with your name preferably), or at least watch the meetings at the town so you can see what’s going on in our town! It’s time for change. Let Mr. Craig and the others on the board know that you demand answers.
(Oh, by the way, this is the first acknowledgement in public by any board member that this whole splitting of the department thing will cost us some money. ONLY $40,000 to $50,000!!! You sure can buy a lot of patience in dealing with the village for $40,000 or $50,000! What a shameful waste of our money…..Never mind that more likely than not it will cost way more than this….Never mind that we elected these guys to deal with problems....)
This IS is a big deal though….here we go again with Mr. Craig's personal attacks. Instead of speaking to the reporter and correcting the facts then providing insight and information (hopefully factual information), he says this (as reported by Amy):
"Mike (Doble) resigned from the Fire Board because I asked him pertinent questions … " said Craig. "They are trying to incite fear into taxpayers … when we as the Town Board don't have the numbers together yet. In the worst case scenario, we're not even talking $40,000 to $50,000 for the whole thing." – From Amy Nixon’s Mukwonago Chief Article 2/9/2010
What does my resignation from the fire board have to do with how much it’s going to cost to disband the fire department? This type of comment/statement is just indicative of how Mr. Craig’s mind works. If he doesn’t like what I have to say, then he’ll say something to discredit me. Well Mr. Craig, I made a HUGE mistake of resigning from the fire board and feel partially responsible for what’s happening here. I quit. I took myself out of the position that might have made the difference to prevent this mess. I deeply regret that decision. So, I will not quit again. Keep it coming.
Friends who happen to read this blog, please come to the town board meetings, or post comments (with your name preferably), or at least watch the meetings at the town so you can see what’s going on in our town! It’s time for change. Let Mr. Craig and the others on the board know that you demand answers.
(Oh, by the way, this is the first acknowledgement in public by any board member that this whole splitting of the department thing will cost us some money. ONLY $40,000 to $50,000!!! You sure can buy a lot of patience in dealing with the village for $40,000 or $50,000! What a shameful waste of our money…..Never mind that more likely than not it will cost way more than this….Never mind that we elected these guys to deal with problems....)
Town Supervisor Craig, Ashamed?
For those of you who don't know, the Village President Jamie Soneberg is a deputy Sheriff with the Waukesha County Sheriff’s office. From what I understand, Deputy Soneberg has an impeccable service record. Deputy Soneberg is assigned by the Sheriff to patrol areas that include the Town of Vernon.
Bill Craig at last Thursday’s meeting has asked that Jamie be reassigned. Here we go again….
Mr. Craig has a history of this. Everyone that disagrees with Mr. Craig and his view on how he governs comes into his crosshairs. First it was Marilyn Gauger, then president of the Big Bend-Vernon Fire Board. Mr. Craig said some things that implied that Mrs. Gauger had done wrong. If fact, she conducted herself with the utmost integrity. She continued to follow policies that had been in place for years in the conduct of the Fire Board’s business. As it turns out, these policies violated the letter of the law as written in the intermunicipal agreement between the town and village. Mrs. Gauger continued to conduct the Fire Board’s business following an unwritten policy explicitly condoned by the Town Attorney John Macy, and the past two Town Chairs. Yet she was taken to task by Mr. Craig and was not reappointed. (This relates to verbal approval from the Town Chair and Village President to seek legal counsel for private matters relating to Fire Board performance evaluation issues. The key word being PRIVATE matters. The subject of legal closed session meetings.)
And then there’s me….Mr. Craig pushed for me to not be reappointed to the Fire Board when my term was up. I was at the meeting in the third week of May 2009 when Mr. Craig urged the other board members to not reappoint me since “new blood” was needed even though significant progress was being made in applying stabilizing controls to the Fire Department budget and leadership. No, he didn’t want to overlook minor details of operation issues (i.e. verbal approval for legal fees) to see the big picture and the progress being made. In a follow-up meeting with Mr. Craig he continued to ask for minute details of the Fire Board’s dealings and ignore all progress made by the Fire Board in years of hard work. My integrity was questioned and I decided to resign knowing that continued personal attacks would most likely follow….
So, now we get to Jamie. Jamie is in Mr. Craig’s sights. This is despicable; Mr. Craig should be ashamed. The voters should be outraged. The voters in this community need to start paying attention. We do not need this in our community. Not one of us deserves this, not one of us has done anything other than serve this community with the best of intensions. What are Mr. Craig’s intensions? What’s he trying to accomplish? Is this really Town business?
So, Mr. Craig cites a conflict of interest? Is it a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig (a real estate agent) lists a property for sale in the Village of Big Bend? Is a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig is a member of the Town Board and Town Plan Commission when a land division is considered for approval by the Town? Is it a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig’s business is located in the Village and not the Town? These questions are as absurd as claiming that Jamie’s patrol duty as a Sheriff’s deputy is a conflict of interest. Where will this insanity end?
Bill Craig at last Thursday’s meeting has asked that Jamie be reassigned. Here we go again….
Mr. Craig has a history of this. Everyone that disagrees with Mr. Craig and his view on how he governs comes into his crosshairs. First it was Marilyn Gauger, then president of the Big Bend-Vernon Fire Board. Mr. Craig said some things that implied that Mrs. Gauger had done wrong. If fact, she conducted herself with the utmost integrity. She continued to follow policies that had been in place for years in the conduct of the Fire Board’s business. As it turns out, these policies violated the letter of the law as written in the intermunicipal agreement between the town and village. Mrs. Gauger continued to conduct the Fire Board’s business following an unwritten policy explicitly condoned by the Town Attorney John Macy, and the past two Town Chairs. Yet she was taken to task by Mr. Craig and was not reappointed. (This relates to verbal approval from the Town Chair and Village President to seek legal counsel for private matters relating to Fire Board performance evaluation issues. The key word being PRIVATE matters. The subject of legal closed session meetings.)
And then there’s me….Mr. Craig pushed for me to not be reappointed to the Fire Board when my term was up. I was at the meeting in the third week of May 2009 when Mr. Craig urged the other board members to not reappoint me since “new blood” was needed even though significant progress was being made in applying stabilizing controls to the Fire Department budget and leadership. No, he didn’t want to overlook minor details of operation issues (i.e. verbal approval for legal fees) to see the big picture and the progress being made. In a follow-up meeting with Mr. Craig he continued to ask for minute details of the Fire Board’s dealings and ignore all progress made by the Fire Board in years of hard work. My integrity was questioned and I decided to resign knowing that continued personal attacks would most likely follow….
So, now we get to Jamie. Jamie is in Mr. Craig’s sights. This is despicable; Mr. Craig should be ashamed. The voters should be outraged. The voters in this community need to start paying attention. We do not need this in our community. Not one of us deserves this, not one of us has done anything other than serve this community with the best of intensions. What are Mr. Craig’s intensions? What’s he trying to accomplish? Is this really Town business?
So, Mr. Craig cites a conflict of interest? Is it a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig (a real estate agent) lists a property for sale in the Village of Big Bend? Is a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig is a member of the Town Board and Town Plan Commission when a land division is considered for approval by the Town? Is it a conflict of interest when Mr. Craig’s business is located in the Village and not the Town? These questions are as absurd as claiming that Jamie’s patrol duty as a Sheriff’s deputy is a conflict of interest. Where will this insanity end?
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Posting Comments: Anonymous said...
Those of you that are not registered are able to post comments. No problem. You post these comments an "anonymous" user. IF you want to your comments to have a greater impact, please add your name to the comment at the end. Some of you do this; most don't.
It's much easier to show those that read this that those of you who are posting really do care and are not afraid to say so. I recommend using your name or becoming a registered user to have the greatest impact.
Another side benefit to being a registered user is that you will be notified automatically when a new post is made.
It's much easier to show those that read this that those of you who are posting really do care and are not afraid to say so. I recommend using your name or becoming a registered user to have the greatest impact.
Another side benefit to being a registered user is that you will be notified automatically when a new post is made.
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Everyone Supports the Town Board?
I’ve been told by the Town Chair that most in the Town agree with the Town Board’s position that the Town should have its own Fire Department. Sharing costs with the Village is not a good idea because of ALL the baggage. (Of course I’m paraphrasing the board’s position….)
Do you agree? Is this a good idea? Are people just telling the Town Board members what they want to hear?
Please sound off. A simple answer is OK: I don’t know enough to have an opinion, I don’t agree with them, I agree with them, etc.
They read this blog, let them know how you feel.
Do you agree? Is this a good idea? Are people just telling the Town Board members what they want to hear?
Please sound off. A simple answer is OK: I don’t know enough to have an opinion, I don’t agree with them, I agree with them, etc.
They read this blog, let them know how you feel.
Please Read the Paper and ACT!
Dear Loyal Readers,
Thanks for keeping up with my rants regarding the current actions of the Town Board. As you can tell from my writing I firmly believe that the path were on is one of failure. The decision to disband the long standing agreement with Big Bend for fire service is a disservice to us and our entire community. Plus, I believe that it will cost the Town of Vernon more than $150,000 to divorce ourselves from the Village of Big Bend and establish our own fire department. This new department will provide a lower level of service than we have now and will cost us more than we pay now year to year. Please let me know if you disagree.
There are so many issues the Town Board has not addressed; as a matter of fact they have not addressed any issues yet. They have retained a consultant to evaluate the situation and to assist in developing the new department. This consultant will cost $25,000. Cha-ching…. we’re nearly 20% to my $150,000 estimate. I could go on and on, but I’ll get to the point. This is all entirely unnecessary. We just need to work with our neighbors to resolve the issues. Trust me; there are issues, but nowhere near $150,000 worth. Please get informed and get involved. Even if your involvement is just a comment or two on this blog!
So in order to provide the information that our Town Board refuses to provide, I have teamed up with several other concerned citizens of the Town of Vernon to create a group called Vernon Residents for Sensible Government. The VRSG will be holding a series of meetings to provide information so you can make an informed decision on this matter and so you can speak intelligently about this issue with your elected officials. Hey, you may disagree with us. That’s OK! We can respect that, but please only draw your conclusion after availing yourself of the facts. We’re willing to provide them.
So, why read the paper? We have sent a letter to the Editor of all the papers that server our area to outline some questions that YOU should demand be answered BEFORE we proceed any further with this matter. I know for sure this letter will be in tomorrow’s issue of the Mukwonago Chief. After tomorrow look for it in the Mukwonago Chief Letters to the Editor:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/opinion/83357007.html
If this link does not work, go to the Mukwonago Chief Home Page and hit the “Opinion” menu option. The home page is:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/
The VRSG plans to hold a meeting in early March so you may come and ask questions and become informed. It’s obvious that we’re very opinionated about this matter, come and figure out why!
Stay tuned.
Thanks for keeping up with my rants regarding the current actions of the Town Board. As you can tell from my writing I firmly believe that the path were on is one of failure. The decision to disband the long standing agreement with Big Bend for fire service is a disservice to us and our entire community. Plus, I believe that it will cost the Town of Vernon more than $150,000 to divorce ourselves from the Village of Big Bend and establish our own fire department. This new department will provide a lower level of service than we have now and will cost us more than we pay now year to year. Please let me know if you disagree.
There are so many issues the Town Board has not addressed; as a matter of fact they have not addressed any issues yet. They have retained a consultant to evaluate the situation and to assist in developing the new department. This consultant will cost $25,000. Cha-ching…. we’re nearly 20% to my $150,000 estimate. I could go on and on, but I’ll get to the point. This is all entirely unnecessary. We just need to work with our neighbors to resolve the issues. Trust me; there are issues, but nowhere near $150,000 worth. Please get informed and get involved. Even if your involvement is just a comment or two on this blog!
So in order to provide the information that our Town Board refuses to provide, I have teamed up with several other concerned citizens of the Town of Vernon to create a group called Vernon Residents for Sensible Government. The VRSG will be holding a series of meetings to provide information so you can make an informed decision on this matter and so you can speak intelligently about this issue with your elected officials. Hey, you may disagree with us. That’s OK! We can respect that, but please only draw your conclusion after availing yourself of the facts. We’re willing to provide them.
So, why read the paper? We have sent a letter to the Editor of all the papers that server our area to outline some questions that YOU should demand be answered BEFORE we proceed any further with this matter. I know for sure this letter will be in tomorrow’s issue of the Mukwonago Chief. After tomorrow look for it in the Mukwonago Chief Letters to the Editor:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/opinion/83357007.html
If this link does not work, go to the Mukwonago Chief Home Page and hit the “Opinion” menu option. The home page is:
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/mukwonagochief/
The VRSG plans to hold a meeting in early March so you may come and ask questions and become informed. It’s obvious that we’re very opinionated about this matter, come and figure out why!
Stay tuned.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
The Village is TAKING Our Land!!! Yikes! Run for the hills!
Sorry for the delay in postings. I have so much to write about, but so little time….I’m going to try and make this a Sunday habit, so stay tuned. Here’s my latest installment regarding my opinion that the Town of Vernon Town Board has lost its mind:
So the Village is TAKING our property? What? Is this true? Our Town Board seems to think so; I’ve heard them say this, or imply this, more than once.
The fact is that the Village CANNOT initiate the taking, or annexation, of Town property. A property owner or MAJORITY of property owners in a continuous geographic area must initiate an annexation petition. In fact, it is ILLEGAL for any village or city to initiate an annexation or to provide incentives or contractual benefits to a property owner in exchange for requesting annexation of their property!
(Do you want to know more? Go to: http://www.doa.state.wi.us/section.asp?linkid=132&locid=9)
Even though this is true, our Town Board continues to spread the myth that somehow the Village is “taking” our land. Why do they spread this myth? Why do they keep making us believe the Village is the “bad guy”? Honestly, I don’t know. I can only speculate as to their motivations.
Here’s what I know to be true: the Town has made it attractive for property owners to take their land into the Village! What Mike? That’s blasphemous! OUR Town Board is causing these annexations!?! How can you say that!?! Well, it’s true….
Think about this, would property owners such as Deluca and Ball have ever annexed their properties to the Village if the Town had been more progressive in their support of the business that resides on these properties? If the Town had policies in place that encouraged and worked with businesses to expand and be successful, then they would have no motivation to move the property into the Village. So, in the case of the Deluca property we did not allow them to expand; the Village did. So, we have the IMPACTS (more trucks, more traffic, etc.) anyway, but the Town has lost the tax base. WE AS A TOWN AND OUR LEADERS CAUSED THIS!!! Not the Village. The Village just decided to be flexible and work with this business.
Most of the Town Board members involved in negotiating with Mr. Deluca did not have the forsight to see this. What a shame. Yet it’s the Village’s fault!
So, where does this leave us today? Our Town continues to more toward more and more isolation from the Village of Big Bend. We are no longer working together to solve problems as a community even though most reasonable people know and understand that we ARE a community. The Town knows best…we’re going it alone. We’re going to spend a TON of money in the next few months to realize that we can NEVER operate our Town without consideration of our neighbors. We’re going to lose the opportunity to work with the Village of Big Bend to create high quality, thoughtful development on the interstate interchange. We’re going to lose our opportunity to have ANY input or benefit from this development. Over what, a few line items in the budget and some poor decisions by some members of the Fire Board and Fire Department? Where I come from you work to solve problems, not create more by pretending we can do it better on our own. We all know that sharing costs will end up costing us all less in the long run.
(On a side note: keep in mind that this is the same group that has not yet figured out how to tear down the condemned barn near the Town Hall! And that's been over a year! Anyway, I digress....sorry.)
The Town Board has forgotten that the Village has the control no matter what. That’s the way the law of the State of Wisconsin is written. If we don’t find ways to work together, then isolated we will become and more of our tax base will leave the Town and we will lose more of our ability to negotiate with the Village on issues that will benefit the Town.
So remember, when it comes to annexation, it is the Town’s policies and business environment that cause annexation, not the Village. Come on Vernon! Wake up! Oh wait; this is AFTER the wake-up....wow I should have stayed asleep.
So the Village is TAKING our property? What? Is this true? Our Town Board seems to think so; I’ve heard them say this, or imply this, more than once.
The fact is that the Village CANNOT initiate the taking, or annexation, of Town property. A property owner or MAJORITY of property owners in a continuous geographic area must initiate an annexation petition. In fact, it is ILLEGAL for any village or city to initiate an annexation or to provide incentives or contractual benefits to a property owner in exchange for requesting annexation of their property!
(Do you want to know more? Go to: http://www.doa.state.wi.us/section.asp?linkid=132&locid=9)
Even though this is true, our Town Board continues to spread the myth that somehow the Village is “taking” our land. Why do they spread this myth? Why do they keep making us believe the Village is the “bad guy”? Honestly, I don’t know. I can only speculate as to their motivations.
Here’s what I know to be true: the Town has made it attractive for property owners to take their land into the Village! What Mike? That’s blasphemous! OUR Town Board is causing these annexations!?! How can you say that!?! Well, it’s true….
Think about this, would property owners such as Deluca and Ball have ever annexed their properties to the Village if the Town had been more progressive in their support of the business that resides on these properties? If the Town had policies in place that encouraged and worked with businesses to expand and be successful, then they would have no motivation to move the property into the Village. So, in the case of the Deluca property we did not allow them to expand; the Village did. So, we have the IMPACTS (more trucks, more traffic, etc.) anyway, but the Town has lost the tax base. WE AS A TOWN AND OUR LEADERS CAUSED THIS!!! Not the Village. The Village just decided to be flexible and work with this business.
Most of the Town Board members involved in negotiating with Mr. Deluca did not have the forsight to see this. What a shame. Yet it’s the Village’s fault!
So, where does this leave us today? Our Town continues to more toward more and more isolation from the Village of Big Bend. We are no longer working together to solve problems as a community even though most reasonable people know and understand that we ARE a community. The Town knows best…we’re going it alone. We’re going to spend a TON of money in the next few months to realize that we can NEVER operate our Town without consideration of our neighbors. We’re going to lose the opportunity to work with the Village of Big Bend to create high quality, thoughtful development on the interstate interchange. We’re going to lose our opportunity to have ANY input or benefit from this development. Over what, a few line items in the budget and some poor decisions by some members of the Fire Board and Fire Department? Where I come from you work to solve problems, not create more by pretending we can do it better on our own. We all know that sharing costs will end up costing us all less in the long run.
(On a side note: keep in mind that this is the same group that has not yet figured out how to tear down the condemned barn near the Town Hall! And that's been over a year! Anyway, I digress....sorry.)
The Town Board has forgotten that the Village has the control no matter what. That’s the way the law of the State of Wisconsin is written. If we don’t find ways to work together, then isolated we will become and more of our tax base will leave the Town and we will lose more of our ability to negotiate with the Village on issues that will benefit the Town.
So remember, when it comes to annexation, it is the Town’s policies and business environment that cause annexation, not the Village. Come on Vernon! Wake up! Oh wait; this is AFTER the wake-up....wow I should have stayed asleep.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Town Bears the Cost? Huh?
Village of Big Bend development of the I-94/Hwy 164 interchange has been cited by the Town of Vernon Board of Supervisors as a reason to dissolve the joint fire department. This was stated in the letter to residents dated 12/18/09.
I did a rough guesstimate for the potential increase in assessed value on this interchange based on what I know might occur when sewer is available. Conservatively this increase in commercial assessed value is $30 million. Potentially more, but let’s be conservative.
Based on the 2009 budget [considering tax derived monies], the Town contributed about $365,000 and the Village about $71,000 to the fire department operating fund. If everything else remained the same (i.e. residential value, population, etc.) as the interchange develops, this proportion would change to about $358,000 and $77,861 respectively. Hey we’re moving in the right direction.
I admit, it’s not a lot, but citing this as a reason to dissolve the joint fire department is absurd. The reality is the biggest cost for development on this interchange is not going to be fire and rescue services, it will be police services which are a Village issue. Keep in mind also that fire and rescue services are charged to the user; they don't necessarily impact the budget. Based on the equipment on hand and the proposed development plans I've seen, the fire department does not need to expand. What costs?
I did a rough guesstimate for the potential increase in assessed value on this interchange based on what I know might occur when sewer is available. Conservatively this increase in commercial assessed value is $30 million. Potentially more, but let’s be conservative.
Based on the 2009 budget [considering tax derived monies], the Town contributed about $365,000 and the Village about $71,000 to the fire department operating fund. If everything else remained the same (i.e. residential value, population, etc.) as the interchange develops, this proportion would change to about $358,000 and $77,861 respectively. Hey we’re moving in the right direction.
I admit, it’s not a lot, but citing this as a reason to dissolve the joint fire department is absurd. The reality is the biggest cost for development on this interchange is not going to be fire and rescue services, it will be police services which are a Village issue. Keep in mind also that fire and rescue services are charged to the user; they don't necessarily impact the budget. Based on the equipment on hand and the proposed development plans I've seen, the fire department does not need to expand. What costs?
BBVFD Breakup - Some More Background
The link included with this post is to the Mukwonago Chief article about the breakup of the Big Bend-Vernon Fire Department. It's a relatively good article. The only inaccuracy is in the characterization of the intermunicipal agreement.
The agreement states that if both communities cannot adopt an identical budget by December 15th each year, then the department will dissolve by December 31 the next year. Nothing to do with state law.
The Town of Vernon Board of Supervisors have used this provision in the agreement as an excuse to dissolve the department over what I feel is the appropriate budgeting of legal fees that THE BOARD AGREED WAS A GOOD IDEA! Including CHAIRMAN MICHALEK!!! I'm convinced it's a control issue, nothing more. A control issue that's going to cost us a lot of money.
Anyway, I'll stop yelling now. Why the overwhelming need to control? I've been told by the Board directly and seen in their actions that they must directly control all actions taken, spending, etc. in the Town. Their attitude is that they were elected, so they MUST make these decisions. I STRONGLY DISAGREE! Having some appointed members of committees, commissions and other governing bodies helps add a measure of insight that the politicians may not feel compelled to add due to politics. Too much control in the hands of a small group is not a good thing.
My suggestion is to ask one of the former plan commission members how they feel about NONE of the electorate being involved in the decision making process. Mr. Craig? Mr. Batholomew? Mr. Bauer?
Bottom line is this, as a citizen you need to demand that the board provide the answers to these questions about our "new" fire department: How much will it cost to establish? How much will it cost to run on a yearly basis? What level of service will we have? How about having paramedic service?
If it costs the same with a lower level of service (which I'm sure it will), then why are we doing this?
The agreement states that if both communities cannot adopt an identical budget by December 15th each year, then the department will dissolve by December 31 the next year. Nothing to do with state law.
The Town of Vernon Board of Supervisors have used this provision in the agreement as an excuse to dissolve the department over what I feel is the appropriate budgeting of legal fees that THE BOARD AGREED WAS A GOOD IDEA! Including CHAIRMAN MICHALEK!!! I'm convinced it's a control issue, nothing more. A control issue that's going to cost us a lot of money.
Anyway, I'll stop yelling now. Why the overwhelming need to control? I've been told by the Board directly and seen in their actions that they must directly control all actions taken, spending, etc. in the Town. Their attitude is that they were elected, so they MUST make these decisions. I STRONGLY DISAGREE! Having some appointed members of committees, commissions and other governing bodies helps add a measure of insight that the politicians may not feel compelled to add due to politics. Too much control in the hands of a small group is not a good thing.
My suggestion is to ask one of the former plan commission members how they feel about NONE of the electorate being involved in the decision making process. Mr. Craig? Mr. Batholomew? Mr. Bauer?
Bottom line is this, as a citizen you need to demand that the board provide the answers to these questions about our "new" fire department: How much will it cost to establish? How much will it cost to run on a yearly basis? What level of service will we have? How about having paramedic service?
If it costs the same with a lower level of service (which I'm sure it will), then why are we doing this?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
