Lilac Lane Closed Again...

I had mentioned that the new bridge was open and looked great last week.  Soon after, Trustee Wolter e-mailed to advise that this was only temporary since there was some road re-construction happening very soon on Maple Road west of the bridge over Hwy 41. on Lilac Lane from the new bridge to Maple Road.

That time has arrived.  The "Road Closed" signs are out.

It was nice while it lasted, but this will be over before too long.

Germantown Fire Safety Fair...

The annual Fire Safety Fair was held at Station #2 in Germantown last Saturday.  Several very interesting demonstrations were conducted. 

A convincing demonstration of fire in a room without sprinklers versus in a room with sprinklers made me a believer that  water damage is far preferable to the total damage and potential injury or loss of life where sprinklers aren't present!  The in-home equipment is quite pleasing to the eye, as well. 

I had my first opportunity to see Officer Bosco work his magic seeking out marijuana that had been secreted in an old vehicle's door panel.  He is a marvel to watch as he works.  This four-legged officer really rounds out the department's offering at no added cost to the taxpayers of the community.  Bosco is fully supported by contributions/grants as discussed a few days ago.

There was equipment present from the Mequon and Thiensville departments in addition to the rolling stock from Germantown.  Interestingly enough, a "live" call was received late in the morning that took a couple of units with it.

People were enjoying lunchtime treats that included a delicious smelling recipe of 'Firehouse Chili'.  It may've only been me, but it didn't seem there was enough advertising about this event.  It didn't find its way onto the Village Hall signage along Mequon Road and I didn't recall seeing any print mention.

Attendance seemed quite good; lots of youngsters that seemed to be enjoying themselves while learning valuable lessons.

Do We Need Nude Dancing In Germantown?

I had lost track of this issue after Boro Buzzdum's 'Diamonds Pub & Grille' on Maple Road near Hwy 41 was closed and recast as 'The Starting Gate Sports Bar & Grill'.

The first suit claiming the then existing ordinance was unconstitutional was filed in U.S. District Court in Milwaukee dating back to February, 2006 was scheduled for mediation when Boro Buzzdum brought a second action claiming the Germantown amended ordinance is also unconstitutional.  I certainly hope that Germantown prevails.

Our community does not need a nude dancing venue.

This Blog promises to be too long...and I apologize up front.  BUT, this topic is critical, in my estimation, to the safety of our citizens and our property.  While we're getting everything on the table, you should know by now that "I am in the tank" for our Police Department; I make no bones about it and I am unapologetic for that!

~~~~~~~~~~

I have had several exchanges with Chief Pete Hoell about the budget of his department and about the requests that have been made of him to further reduce his budget by something north of $300,000 for 2009.  I have to tell you that he is anguished over this; he wants to remain a loyal servant of the community, he doesn't want to appear to be carping over the political situation, and he had some qualms about some of the information I'll make known in this Blog.  In the final analysis, he came down on the side of letting the citizens of the community know what is going to happen if his budget is cut any further than has been the case over the past several years. 

The budget numbers to date (as of yesterday) for the department were expected to approximate $4,501,000 for 2009 versus the $4,497,000 approved for 2008.  That is virtually a 0% increase even though fuel prices have soared and even though personnel costs are what they are.  The majority of the department budget is committed to wages and benefits since it is made up of people.

The actual discretionary operating budget, when the numbers represented above are stripped away is something on the order of $520,000.  From that, we remove the base costs such as insurance, heat, water and sewer and have some $300,000 remaining for discretionary costs.  As the chief pointed out, he has been reducing annual budget requests on a regular basis and is simply at the point where there is not much else, if anything, that can be cut.

The department is already relying on donations from the community as well as grants that are available to cover its needs.  The DARE program is funded by the school district.  Citizen's Police Academy (CPA) graduates are donating volunteer hours and are engaged in fund raising activities on behalf of the department.  The CPA program actually pays back more than its cost to the department over and above the PR value gained.  Officer Bosco's costs are funded by grants and donations.  Contributions a couple of years ago raised by CPA graduates were used to replace many of the side arms carried by officers, for example.  The motorcycle patrol is funded by contributions.  Officers are already working extra hours without overtime pay; they get compensatory time off if and when that doesn't stretch the force too much.  The department's gas costs went out of sight just as yours and mine did.

If you've toured the department's facilities, you will recall seeing a lot of "hand-me-down" equipment and furnishings.  I don't think I've seen a desk that is any newer than circa 1960.  Most of what I see has been donated by someone or other in the community.  "New" equipment, if there is to be any, is often found on the 'for sale' sites of other police departments as they replace old items with new items.  An old aquarium found its way to the evidence room for use as a finger print development tool.  The buildings are on a "bare bones" basis; this is not a department that has an excess of funding nor is it a department that wastes taxpayer dollars.  It scratches to make ends meet and continue to do its job.

Against that backdrop, permit me to get right to the point.  I don't see any other areas where costs can be reduced but the area of personnel.  That is going to impact you and me adversely. Period!  The hoped for 0% increase budget of about $4.5M would become $4.2M if the $300K is stripped out.

One of the areas that Chief Hoell had some misgivings about disclosing is the number of officers on patrol during each shift.  He discussed this with members of his command group and finally decided that, in the interest of full disclosure to the citizens, I could include this information:

We have a total of THREE officers on patrol each shift to cover the thirty-six square miles that comprise Germantown.

It is entirely possible that overlapping calls could mean that there is no one available to respond.  One heavy-duty call could easily make that happen.  The recent burglary of a Germantown construction site consumed all the patrol officers that were available.  Situations requiring all three officers and the shift commander are not that unusual.  During my ride-along, a pretty simple auto accident saw two officers and the shift commander on scene and also saw the vast majority of our fire department's on duty staff engaged along with vehicles of both departments.  This was essentially a fender-bender.  No one needed to be cut out of a vehicle; traffic control pretty much took care of itself since we were at a light-controlled intersection, etc. 

The $300,000 cut being requested of this department could, and probably would, since there isn't anything further left to chop, cause staff cutbacks that would result in two officers available for patrol duties on each shift.  That is an insufficient number considering the back-up required in many situations that are encountered.  Bar fights are difficult if not impossible to control with two officers.  Certain domestic abuse situations can easily require all three officers.  Bank robberies obviously could pull all three into that scene.  Our officers will be put in harm's way just as you and me will be adversely affected. 

I used the phrase "cutting muscle instead of fat", or something to that effect, in an earlier Blog.  I hope you now have a much better idea of what that meant.

What, you might ask, do I think we need at this point?

We need political leadership to go along with the excellent department leadership now in place.  We need people to stand up and let their political leaders know that they do not want a weak Germantown Police Department even if taxes have to go up a bit to support it at the 0% growth number.  We need to understand as a community that there comes a time when we have to pay for critical services. 

I had a shocking experience last evening courtesy of the Germantown Police Department.  I have been, along with several other citizens, participating in the current Citizen's Police Academy offered by the department as a means of informing more people about the department, its duties, its tools and so on.

One of the tools available to our officers is that 'gadget' called a Taser.  I'm not certain what the verb form of that word ought to be, but it will be "tazed" with a long "a" for my purposes this morning.

My classmates and I were "offered the opportunity" to experience being tazed.  We knew this was part of the Academy curriculum and we knew that it was optional.

That having been said, I couldn't very well admit that I'd prefer to avoid this experience, so I stepped up along with my peers.  We were exposed simultaneously having gotten onto mats side-by-side.  I was on one end and had the pleasure of a probe being attached to my lower leg.  (Officer Borden had previously told us we'd remember where the probe was attached after the experience.)  The person at the other end of this 'daisy chain' had the same honor.  Then, we all joined hands in what might have seemed like the start of a group sing-along.

Having grown up in a farming community in western Wisconsin, I can still remember my first experience of being 'suckered' into touching an electric fence.  I now have a memory that will replace that by several fold.  This time, it was Corporal Delmore and not an electric fence that I was about to remember along with the Taser.

If you've ever had the electric fence experience, I'd suggest that being tazed felt to me like about 25 times the experience.  I knew what was happening around me, but I was helpless to do anything other than let my leg jump a bit while being zapped.  Our jolt was about a second or two long...and it seemed much, much longer quite frankly.  The sound of the Taser adds to the experience as it crackles away while you're writhing...or trying to writhe.  I heard some of my classmates verbalizing their experiences while others seemed to have a more physical response.  We all survived as do virtually all the people who have been or will be 'given this opportunity' as the result of their actions.

It is amazing to me that the amperage involved is only .004 Amps.  But, the nervous system is apparently disrupted to the point that nearly everyone who is tazed is rendered unable to control their physical movement; their muscles are simply beyond control.

We were told of a few people who have been tazed for real and who were able to withstand the experience for upwards of thirty seconds or more.  I cannot imagine that, but I suspect that, if one were drugged up or drunk enough, he or she might be able to ignore the pain involved.  I hope never to encounter one of those folks who can withstand that jolt.

My advice to you if you should ever find yourself in the position of deciding to obey or disobey a police officer doing his or her duty is this:  Don't be a fool...you're going to lose in the end...and the trip won't be particularly pleasant if you make it that way.

Germantown Police Department Building Follow-Up...

Several readers requested a timeline concerning the Germantown Police Department building process.  Chief Hoell had done just such a timeline for the Trustees and was kind enough to provide that for this piece:

~~~~~~~~~~

1982:  Both the original Police Building (N112 W16877 Mequon Rd.) and Library - now PD Annex - were built.   The shell of the range was completed but funds have never been approved to date for completing the indoor range.

1994:  The Public Safety Committee discussed an expansion project for the Police Dept.  No action was taken. 

1995:  The Village retained the services of HNTB to conduct a Needs Assessment Study of all municipal facilities.  The study recommended building a new library and that upon completion the police department should expand its building by connecting both existing structures.  HNTB estimated the cost of the police department expansion at $750,000.

According to the Public Safety Committee notes, the police department building expansion, indoor range and communications center projects would be moved from 1995 to 1996. 

1998:  Garage addition proposal submitted.

1999:  A request was made to budget $725,000 for the building expansion to be completed in 2003.  The amount was reduced first to $450,000 and then $350,000 at the final budget meeting. 

2000:  Garage construction started with a $270,000 budget. 

2001:  Garage addition completed.   January 16, 2001 the Public Safety Committee tours new garage.

Fischer, Fischer Theis, Inc. hired for $4,400 to design the police expansion.

2002:  Fischer, Fischer Theis, Inc. worked with the $350,000 budget constraints, submitted and received final approval from the planning commission for the architectural design plans.  The Village Board split the amount of which $167,500 was allocated for 2003 to remodel the interior of the old library, and $167,500 was set aside to connect the two buildings in 2006.  The Village Board then decided at the final budget hearing to withdraw all funding since the limited money budgeted created a design that fell short of their expectations for the long-term use of the police department facilities. 

2003: The Village Board approved $750,000 in the Capital Budget to connect the police department in 2004.

2004:  Police staff, primarily support services, moves into the old library (PD Annex). 

2004 – 2005:  Public Safety gave direction to hire Plunkett Raysich for $9,200 to design a connection and remodel both buildings based on space needs to accommodate the PD until 2025.  The total project, to include connection of both buildings and a total remodel, came in at $3,200,000 for a 2006 construction date.

2005-2006:  Homeland Security grant received to install building security upgrades.  Items chosen from a security study of the buildings and the ability to reuse the items with the building project.  Items added:  fob key system, lobby security drawer, fencing, cameras/monitor, and windows. 

2006:  Village Board tabled the PD building project till 2007.

2007-2008:  Third conceptual design for PD connection and remodel of both buildings.  Zimmerman Architectural Studios was hired for approximately $12,000.   This project is ongoing.  Cost estimate for a remodel of both buildings and connection was at approximately $6,000,000.  Village Board sent the plan back to be reviewed with the possibility of doing this project in phases. 

Notes on a couple important issues, but not inclusive:  90% to 95% of all the police department furniture is original (26 years old) and/or secondhand donated items.  Most of the furniture was not designed for computer usage.  

The completion of the indoor range has been discussed for 26 years but never completed.

The radio is too small to accommodate the county radio project coming in the fall of 2009.  The current radio console is outdated and not equipped to handle the computers. 

The radio and communications equipment should be removed from the basement.

Air quality due to electronics needs to be improved. 

Men and Women’s lockers are over capacity.

The flooring is old, worn out and in poor shape.  Also in need of repair are some of the ceilings and walls. 

There is no central location to handle and store evidence.  The evidence processing and storage is handled between two floors and the storage should be removed from the basement. 

No room to function as an Emergency Operations Center.

Because staff has outgrown the buildings, interview rooms were taken over for office space.   The police department is in need of both hard and soft interview rooms equipped with both audio and visual recording devices to be able to record interviews per State Statute.  The rooms should also be equipped with emergency notification/alert call buttons.  

A secure training and conference room that can be utilized by outside organizations and other law enforcement personnel is needed.

The PD Annex is an old library; it’s still an old library which is occupied by PD personnel.  This building is in need of security updates.

Records are stored throughout the PD and Annex; there is no central records location.

There is a strong need to create a safe work environment for the PD employees and the public while in and around the PD building and Annex.  PD staff should be able to move around without the constant exposure to the outside by having to walk through the courtyard.  The entrance to the main PD building is hidden from the parking lot.   We need the front door to be seen by those in distress because they may not have the time or ability to read a directional sign or follow arrows.  

The overall buildings are aged and worn.  They were built with the security needs of the early 1980’s in mind.   The safety of the staff and public while at the police department are paramount, and creating a professional, efficient work environment is an important aspect of this project as well.  

~~~~~~~~~~

This provides the rest of the story over and above the request that the department find $330,000 of "unnecessary" expense to be cut so the village can balance its 2009 budget without a tax increase.

I believe that the board has been neglecting the department and that we will ultimately pay the price.  As is evident, the simple impact of inflation has caused the building connector proposals to escalate significantly over time. 

My apologies for such a lengthy Blog but all this information seemed quite germane to the story needing to be told.  

The Sunday Journal Sentinel contains a story by Tom Kertscher that discusses the school referenda with interviews of Bruce Warnimont, school board member, and others representing both sides of the debate over a new elementary school and the operating cap 'forgiveness' that would permit an additional $500,000 for operations of the new school.

Mr. Warnimont is quoted as pointing out the potential, based on presumed increases in full day kindergarten enrollment, for the increases in state aid to offset or exceed the cost of the referenda issues on the property tax bills in the district.  He is very knowledgeable on such things and I do not presume to espouse a position, either pro or con, in this Blog.

I will say that this is a most counterintuitive argument.  How does one approve a $22.5 MM bond issue and an additional $500M in annual operating costs and still see his or her property tax bill stay the same or decrease so far as the school district's portion of that bill?  The assumption is that some 230 full time kindergarten students would be enrolled (76 more than now) and that the additional state funding would offset the tax increases necessary to pay off the building and to operate the school.

Those in favor point to this as justification while those opposed point to this skeptically given that there can be no assurances that the supposition will prove valid.

I have difficulty in thinking that anyone would be disingenuous and therefore presume that each side is speaking what it considers to be the truth.  Perhaps I am terribly naive but I hope that isn't the case.

Given the lay of the land today so far as this project goes, I must say that I am happy to be an interested observer and not a direct participant on either side.  As I stated above, this is one tough counterintuitive argument to mount.  I do not know how I will vote but you can be sure I will vote.  I trust that the vast majority of our school district citizens will vote, as well.  We need to learn the true will of the people...and this election should point that out...unless the referenda pass by a handful or lose by a handful of votes.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept..."

That lead-in to the old Mission Impossible television show came to mind as I pondered today's Village Buzz topic possibilities.

I take some of our elected representatives to task now and then, and some of you readers do the same in your comments.  Maybe it is time for us to "put up or shut up" as the old saying goes (not really but it gets the point across).  If we have ideas as to how our governing entities could do things differently, lets put those on the table and see if any grow legs.

For example, we see privatized prisons popping up around the country.  That happened because the private sector found a use for capital that took a burden from the shoulders of the taxpayer.  I read of the latest Scott Walker budget proposals for Milwaukee County and thought that he has to be among the most creative politicians I've seen in some time (and, I hope he runs for Governor again).

What is there in our small world that could be done differently if we were to 'color outside the lines' for awhile?  At the risk of angering entrenched interests, I'll throw out a few thoughts along those lines (remember that there may be some current impediments but that most impediments are man-made and could be altered if we demanded that):

Why not look to the private sector to build a school building that we can lease?  The lessor could be obligated to handle all repairs, for example, over the term of the lease to assure that things that break get fixed on a timely basis instead of being delayed until they manifest as something worse.  I see many former hospitals that have been turned into apartment buildings, for example.  Just because a building is built to house students, doesn't have to mean that it would always be a school building.  As population ebbs and flows, this would give the taxpayer some welcomed flexibility.  Would this be workable?  We won't know unless we ask the questions.

What about a charter school or an Internet school option to take student-count pressure off the buildings now available?  Might that also reduce the personnel costs? 

Many communities have hired assessor organizations and building inspector organizations to do their specialized work instead of retaining this talent on their own payrolls.  Why not go through an extensive review of what we could do along those lines.  That might reduce costs.  It might eliminate our angst over rising benefit costs that have been negotiated and about which we can do nothing even as we watch the private sector deal with those same issues.  Current employees with those skills might welcome the opportunity to become entrepreneurs and build new companies that other communities could employ.

Would it be possible to contract for road repair and shift some of the uncertainties off onto a private sector entity?  Private business is accustomed to taking risk.  Government tends to have to avoid risk and that adds expense.  Road salting and snow plowing, for example, is a real problem given a hard winter and higher salt costs.  If a private firm were contracted, it would bear that risk.  I see many landscape firms that become snow plowers and salters in the winter.  Is that worth exploring?

Would it make sense to lease computer servers for the village's use and have those housed in a private data center that does that as its primary business?  The village wouldn't have need for the IT skills that it might today.  Leasing of such systems might prove more economical and is an expense for which we could plan.

In most of these examples, the private sector would probably be more efficient, less susceptible to the political winds that blow hot and then cold, more intent on running very tightly controlled operations, etc.  Where there is a true risk/reward relationship that is properly negotiated and vetted, I believe that the private sector is simply better at that than is a government body.  And, as the "sidewalk" issue shows, I feel certain that the private sector can get things done in shorter time periods in most cases.

"Your mission, should you decide to accept" is to come up with your own ideas that might be capable of altering the way we look at the world of Germantown government and the Germantown school system today.  I look forward to your comments...if you are brave enough/foolish enough to offer those.  Most of you, at least, have anonymity on your side.  I'm just hanging out there with my zipper down.

The "sidewalk" item in yesterday's Village Buzz referenced that I was seeking further information on the "as directed by elected officials" portion of the explanation from Daniel Naze, Village Engineer.

I really need to be sure that I want that for which I ask.  Trustee Dean Wolter sent me a six page e-mail that details the evolution of the sidewalk that now appears on the east side of Pilgrim Road south of Mequon Road.  I will gladly send that information to anyone who wishes to send me an e-mail requesting this information.

I want to provide a summary of this process for it really amazed me.

~~~~~~~~~~

July 11, 2007 Public Safety Committee Meeting:

A citizen presents a petition to the committee concerning sidewalks from Bel Aire to Mequon Road on the east side of the road.  The committee forwarded this request to the Public Works Committee for action.

August 7, 2007 Public Works and Highway Committee Meeting:

The Public Works Committee asked that the Public Safety Committee authorize a study for the intersection of Lyle Lane and Pilgrim Road and suggested that funding be placed in the budget for a sidewalk from Lyle Lane to Mequon Road.

Village Board Meeting September 17, 2007

This item was removed from the Consent Agenda and motion was made by Trustee Zabel with second by Trustee Vanderheiden to table until adoption of the 2008 budget and to have the project done in early spring. Motion lost.

Motion made by Trustee Langer with second by Trustee Sorce to approve installation of 166 lineal feet of asphalt pavement at a cost estimated to be $13,700.Motion was subsequently amended to permit use of asphalt or concrete with the cheaper of the two be used.

October 2, 2007 Public Works Committee Meeting

Request to contractors to bid on installation of an asphalt or concrete sidewalk from Lyle lane 166 feet to the south.  bids were received ranging from $13,000 to $25,625 for asphalt and from $6,950 to $8,300 for concrete.

Motion was made by Trustee Zabel with second by Trustee Steitz to accept $6,950 bid from Zenith Tech with funds to be disbursed from the Capitol Budget.

October 15, 2007 Village Board Meeting

Consent agenda item G for sidewalk was part of motion by Trustee Langer with second by Trustee Sorce for approval.  Motion passed.

October, 2007

Construction occurs.

December, 2007

Monies left from borrowing for roads in 2007 budget carried to 2008 budget (some $200,000+), additional $300,000 borrowed for road maintenance and construction for total of $500,000 with another $200,000 borrowed for sidewalk construction.

May 5, 2008 Special Meeting of Public Works Committee

River Lane project was approved

May 5, 2008 Village Board Meeting

Final Resolution - Issuance of General Obligation Promissory Notes:  Motion made by Trustee Langer with second by Trustee Vanderheiden to approve total of $1,480,000 at 3.70% interest.  (Trustee Wolter noted that this was for all approved 2008 budget items that required borrowing like equipment purchases, new buildings, DPW parking lot, roads and sidewalks.)

June 3, 2008 Public Works Committee Meeting

After considerable discussion, a motion was made by Trustee Langer with second by Trustee Wolter that a bid from Rennhack Construction be accepted not to exceed $52,402.10 for construction of the sidewalk from Lyle Lane north to Mequon Road.

August/September 2008

Construction commences on the sidewalk.

~~~~~~~~~~

As you can see, this passed through multiple committees and hands on its way from the original citizen's petition to completion over the course of some two years.  Not having been heavily involved in the governance of our community, I have to confess that I was astounded by the time involved in something that seems quite simple for a business person.

There will be two versions of the Village Buzz posted today given two relatively lengthy subjects each of which deserve a more detailed review.

~~~~~~~~~~

Germantown Police Department Budget...

I learned that our Police Department was being tasked by some members of the Village Board to reduce its 2009 budget request by some $330,000 as its share of the $900,000+ deficit solution.  I have followed the department closely enough to recognize that this request would very likely cut away muscle and not fat, and I asked Chief Hoell for information about what this level of reduction would bring in the way of policing in 2009 without sharing my position with him at that point.

Chief Hoell indicated that his proposed budget was already done on the basis that this was an austere year for the village and that he would have to make do without a lot of the things he'd like to see for the department and the citizens of Germantown.  He advised that he had been able to trim some operating costs but that other line items, such as fuel costs, were beyond his ability to control.  He said that, although there have been cost increases in other line items, the department had made do without similar budget increases.  If there were equipment breakdowns or if some large unforeseen event such as a major crime scene were to be confronted, there would be no surplus available with which to handle the occurrence.

He stated, simply, that "a $330,000 cut would cripple this department".  "We would become solely reactive at best and the safety of our officers would be at jeopardy."   He indicated that, if he took out insurance, bonds, heat and water expense line items, the $330,000 would be "pretty much our operating budget for 2009".

"If you take this money out of personnel, then as I stated above, we would become solely reactionary at best and no longer proactive.  We are already experiencing delays in our responses due to the volume of calls for service or simply cannot respond to a time sensitive incident.  The safety and security of our officers will be at stake and the safety of our community will slowly deteriorate."

He went on to discuss staffing studies:  "The Germantown Police Department is the least staffed municipal agency in Washington County per capita.  The same holds true for the metro area.  We continually update this study and attach it to our budget to keep our elected officials educated on where we stand for staffing.  The Depart. of Justice recommends approx. 2.2 officers per 1,000 people.  GPD has 1.58 officers per 1,000 people.  Granted the 2.2 is a bit high, however the national average is 2.0, the state average is 1.8".   (This is for communities having from 10,000 to 40,000 people). 

~~~~~~~~~

Now, I'll take the opportunity to "editorialize":

The thought that we would cut our police protection budget by such an amount simply to be "fair" to the rest of the departments in this village is something I simply am unable to grasp.  This would likely result in a reduction of one-third in the on-the-road shift staffing; and that staffing is already quite sparse for the community from my perspective.  "Across the board cuts" are too often simply the easy way out for people charged with developing budgets.  Each department head has, I hope, put forth their best effort.  I rely upon the Village Administrator to assure that there is no "fluff" left in any department's numbers.  I rely upon our elected representatives to handle the balance of any mandated budget reductions with the best interests of all citizens uppermost in mind.

I believe this proposed cut would be to carry the funding of the police department to a level that would cause our services to deteriorate too far.  If we lose the edge we have today in that area, we will pay a very severe price.  The "bad guys" don't respect budget issues.  They respect force.  I hope and trust that wiser minds will prevail when the Finance Committee and Village Board again convene.  It is time for some serious leadership on a serious issue.  There are "issues" and then there are "life and death" issues.

I can only imagine the reaction if a member of the Board were to be poorly served by the department in a time of need due to this budget process.  I'll wager that the recrimination wouldn't be pretty, and I'll bet some heads would roll.  But those likely wouldn't be "elected heads" rolling.

Sidewalk Construction Question...

I received a question from a reader concerning recent sidewalk construction that you may have observed.  He was asking about the new sidewalk on the east side of Pilgrim Road south of Mequon Road, and about the walking path along Division Road on the south end of the village.

His questions, specifically, were:

Are the owners receiving assessments to fund this?  Did they (the owners) get any input on this decision?  Does it make sense to install sidewalks when streets need work?

I asked Daniel Naze, Village Engineer, about these projects and he explained them as follows:

"The Division Road pathway is being installed and paid for by Harmony Homes, developer of the adjacent Meadow Creek Crossing Subdivision.  This is something that was in the original developer agreement and I have been after them to complete since I became Village Engineer during 2004."

"The Pilgrim Road sidewalk is being constructed as directed by elected officials.  There is one property that had signed a letter at the time of their site plan approval in 1997, indicating they would pay for sidewalk for their frontage when installed or directed by the Village.  That property is Pilgrim Plaza.  The remainder is paid for from budgeted funds."

I have sent an email to Dave Schornack, Village Administrator, seeking more information on the "as directed by elected officials" segment of the response.  He is away from his office until next week, so we can anticipate a response soon after his return. 

My thanks to Mr. Naze for his prompt response.

Walking Quorum...

There are rules concerning the number of trustees that may meet outside duly called meetings.  This is designed to preclude gatherings of a sufficient number of trustees so as to push or thwart various motions, and to assure open government for the citizens.

I have learned that a meeting of three trustees was observed at the Mequon Road McDonald's this morning.  The three would be sufficient to thwart actions of several committees if they were of a mind to engage in such activities.  In some instances, a meeting of two trustees could also present the same problem.  This is referred to as a"walking quorum" as I understand the jargon and is not permitted.

Since I didn't observe the people involved personally, I'll refrain from naming them.  My information comes, however, from a very reliable source.

This issue has been an on again-off again issue in Germantown and trustees have been warned of the nature of the rules governing their coming together.

Bridge Construction...

My eyes tell me that the two bridges now being rebuilt (Lilac Lane and Freistadt Road) that were scheduled for completion by the first week in October are ahead of schedule.

It appears that final clean-up is underway.  Concrete has been laid and new blacktop approaches seem to be in place.  I couldn't tell if markings had been applied but I would doubt that has occurred yet given the crush of equipment still scattered about both sites.

Last Night's Special Meeting...

The reason for and results of the Board's special meeting last evening remain a tightly-held secret.  In spite of my digging, I have been unable to gather anything more than hypotheses and that is not something I would speculate about in this forum.

That having been said, I will continue the quest.

Garbage Pick-Up Funding...

I discussed, in an earlier Village Buzz segment, the fact that some discussion has been had over the manner in which garbage pick-up costs have been and might be handled in the future.  I had a most pleasant and informative visit with a gentleman from Germantown who stays on top of much that occurs within the community.  Dick Kent has compiled a treatise that he has provided to the members of the General Government & Finance Committee.  He has been adamant that this presents information only and does not attempt to suggest the proper approach.  I have extracted from and interpreted that information for the following:

Municipal Code Section 11:08 (2) is a cryptically worded code section that does not clearly define which residents are to be excluded from municipal garbage collection services.  Some of the classic explanations made to residents questioning why they are excluded from collection have included:

• your homes are not free-standing single family residences
• the original developer of your development signed an agreement that no successor homeowners would ask for Village garbage pick-up
• your "street" was not built to accepted standards and cannot be accepted as an official street for collection purposes
• homeowners in an organized development have greater bargaining power and the ability to contract for garbage pick-up and are, therefore, reasonably excluded from municipal pick-up

In one instance, he points out that a Village Trustee who owns a home in Lake Park does not receive municipal garbage collection while he can observe from his window an identical home that does receive such municipal pick-up.

There have been problems over interpretation for some time.  A Washington County Judge opined as to the difficulty of his task when deciding issues brought to his attention with this Code involved.

Among the solutions available, whether or not desirable, would be moving to a fee-based system for all and removing the tax-based costs from the budget.  Mr. Kent describes this as amounting to about a 5% reduction in property taxes while recognizing that it would be most unlikely that an actual reduction would be seen given the tough decisions facing the Board.

He also mentioned that commercial and industrial concerns would benefit from such a change since they pay taxes that include such fees but do not receive municipal service.

The question is certainly one that needs be discussed in light of the budget issues we face.  Again, it is pleasant to be a Blogger and not a Trustee in such situations.

Election Follow-Up...

Chris Micka, Deputy Clerk for Germantown sent along some facts concerning the past Presidential elections so far as turn-out relating to an earlier posting about turn-out vis a vis the referenda issues.

The Presidential races in 1996 drew 77.5% of the registered voters, and 79.6% of registered voters in 2000.  2004 had some 91.1% of registered voters turn out.  Chris indicates that, while it is difficult to predict, she would not be surprised to see more than a 90% turn-out this year.  That could generate something in the 12,000 voter range.

I am very happy to see that our Germantown voters have the civic-mindedness to vote in large numbers given all the important decisions that will be made that day.

Garbage Strike...

The Local 200 Teamster members voted 214-0 against the Waste Management proposal last Friday and the same proposal was again voted on yesterday.  The second ballot showed 199 against and 24 for the proposal.

The union leaders say they're ready and willing to resume discussions.  The company says that it will scale back the proposal that had been on the table and that it will begin to solicit replacement workers.

The union says that the company cannot legally solicit replacements since it has lodged a complaint alleging unfair tactics against Waste Management with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).  I guess that will sort itself out as time passes.

So far, our service has not suffered since the first pick-up that was delayed by about 24 hours.  The question, from my perspective, is for how long can the imported workers be kept here to maintain service levels?  They came from elsewhere and they must be causing some problems by being here rather than where they've come from.  Sooner or later, it seems as though something will have to give on that side.

At the same time, how long will the union members be able to sit out?  Most of us are having difficulty given the higher prices being charged for seemingly everything.  That can't be easy if you're out on strike trying to get by on much less than you're accustomed to having available to spend.

Special Meetings...

The Germantown Village Board has two special meetings set.  A meeting has been called for 7:30PM tonight with a closed session shown for personnel matters to be discussed.

A special meeting has been called for 6:30PM Tuesday night with a closed session shown for discussion of a possible land sale in a business park.

Public Fire Protection Charges...

I received information from a Germantown resident who has asked that I not use the person's name.  I will certainly honor that request.  Both name and telephone number were provided.  This is not a trustee, by the way.

The Public Fire Protection charge is where the cost of infrastructure/water system capacity to enable fire fighting to occur is assessed to the citizenry.  It is also sometimes called a 'hydrant rental charge' according to my source.

This cost has been carried as part of the property tax in Germantown for many years.  It is part of the Fire Department budget.  The reason that it is on the property tax roles is so that people who are not on the municipal water system, and who, therefore, don't pay for the costs of that system are fairly charged for the fire protection they receive.

Germantown currently has a 2009 budget deficit of something in the range of $900,000.  Trustees are wrestling with how and where to find the means to cover this shortfall.  I am told that some discussion has been had that would see this hydrant rental charge removed from the fire department budget thus freeing up about $491,000 of expense to the General Fund and shifting it to the water utility alone.

This would make it easy to avoid a "tax increase" or cutbacks even while nearly another half-million dollars was made available to cover wants and needs. 

My source has indicated that there are some 5,825 water utility customers each of whom would see an average annual increase of $84 in their water bills.

This would also mean that those citizens not using the water utility for water but still being afforded fire protection would, in essence, not be paying a fair share of fire protection costs.  The fire department tankers are filled from hydrants in order that fires outside the water utility coverage area can still be fought.  The supply capacity must still be made available, etc.

Citizens must speak their mind on this subject but that is difficult since virtually no one is aware that this approach is being considered as a solution to part of the shortfall.

This would obviously not be a real solution.  Nothing would be cut from the budget to remove the shortfall.  We'd simply be playing a bit of a 'shell game' by transferring money from one pocket to another and adversely impacting the residents who live within the water utility's system reach.

I don't believe this is a good public policy approach.  The hydrant rental costs have been quite properly spread across all users and should continue to be managed in that manner in my opinion.

We have already been tapping surplus that has been accumulated in certain funds in order to have some money available for known future needs as well as emergency needs that might develop.  That 'robbing Peter to pay Paul' approach has already caused some future issues that are not yet fully understood.  Someday we'll be paying that bill and we'll be scratching to cover the needs.

Garbage Costs To Become Fees?

Another discussion topic is that of removing garbage pick-up costs from the village budget and making those costs into fees that would be assessed separately on the tax bill.

This is not necessarily a bad idea on the surface if everything is made known to the residents and if the change is done in a fair and equitable manner.

One such thought would be to move to a bi-weekly pick-up of recyclables such as was recently done in Menomonee Falls.  I understand that some trustees are exploring that idea and gathering knowledge so that they will be able to propose a reasonable package if anything does come forward.

New School Support Group Formed... 

Tom Kertscher has written on JSOnline that a new group has been formed in Germantown for purposes of supporting the school referenda.

The organizers appear to be Sara Sina and Merissa Osswald and their email address is abettergermantown@gmail.com if you'd like to make contact.  They reportedly will establish a website at www.abettergermantown.com but that has not yet been turned on to the public.

Larry Prodoehl, president of Germantown Citizens Action Coalition may again become active on the opposition side of the equation although that announcement has yet to be made.

The forum of the Village Buzz is certainly available for a debate on the issues should these two groups desire.  The more information that can be gotten into the hands of more voters, the better for us all regardless of the outcome of the election.

There has been speculation that the greater voter turn-out would auger favorably for the referenda proponents.  The last Presidential race in 2004 saw some 11,500 votes cast in Germantown.

Waste Management Draws Line In The Sand...

Waste Management has advised the Teamsters Local 200 leadership that it will amend the offer currently on the table if the union members have not been given complete information on the latest proposal and an opportunity to vote prior to 4:00PM this coming Sunday.  Among the changes would be a reduction in the amount being offered over the coming 5 years.

I don't know for how long Waste Management will be able to keep their replacement workers on the job, but it does seem that the leverage of the union may have eroded a bit since the Harley 105th Anniversary crowd has gone home and there seems relatively little complaint, at least in Germantown, about late garbage pick-ups.

Quiet Thursday...

I'll be unable to Blog tomorrow but will be back with you on Friday.  See...you can catch a break once in awhile ;>)

School District Referenda...

District residents will have the opportunity to make their wishes known with the news that two referenda items will appear on the local ballots.  The votes were unanimous with one member, Bruce Warnimont, absent from the special meeting.

The first item will see the question concerning approval of borrowing $22.5M to support the building of a new elementary school building for approximately $17.5M while using the balance for security and plant upgrades at the other existing school buildings.  The Journal Sentinel story this morning stated the cost to a homeowner with a $200,000 home would amount to about $74 per year.

The second item is the question concerning the district being authorized to borrow $500,000 for current operating expenses in excess of the current revenue cap.  That same homeowner would see this item add some $30 per year to the property tax bill.

Business Manager Ric Ericksen was quoted as saying that these costs would drop after existing debt is paid off in 2012.

Yesterday's Blog on this subject saw a healthy exchange of ideas and information amongst readers.  I hope we might see that exchange continue.

Knodl Konundrum...

I missed my guess on this item; I expected it to die down after a couple of days.  But, it seems this story has grown some fairly strong legs.

That has no doubt been caused by the original complaint filing by the Menomonee Falls resident, a letter from Jason LaSage to Dan Knodl that found its way into the Journal Sentinel story this morning...and some relatively questionable handling by Knodl himself.

Radio talk shows have continued to discuss this situation and reporters have obviously decided it has some continuing merit.

And, the longer this goes on, the more I begin to wonder if there isn't something more here than I originally felt to be the case.

The initial response from Knodl seemed plausible.  The subsequent statements that differ a bit from that original explanation raise some further questions...simply because the explanation has changed.  I hope the investigation by the Ozaukee County DA will be conducted promptly and that this can be put to rest so that it doesn't cloud the November election anymore than the facts, once exposed, justify.

Special School Board Meeting...

Tom Kertscher's article in the Journal Sentinel indicates that the school board will convene at 5:30PM today to consider referendum questions.

He reports that the school board has voted to end the full day kindergarten effort for the 2009-2010 school year because of the space limitations that necessitated a lottery approach.  Michael Schultz, Vice President of the board was quoted as saying that he didn't make this proposal to persuade voters to approve a building referendum but saw that a connection might be made by voters.  His attributed quote in this article was, "They are not unrelated".

I am not aware of who voted in favor or if there were votes in opposition but I hope commenters may flesh that out for us.

Without taking a position on the matters that we may be voting for or against (since I don't yet know my position having not seen the actual items) there is, I think, a very real potential for a public relations backlash coming as the result of the recent vote against.  This approach, as described by Kertscher, is a typical reaction as we've seen over and over again when a school board loses a referendum request.  I have said before that I think a follow-up question without any changes made will be met with voter angst without regard to the needs.

It appears that there may, in fact, be some changes to the question or questions.  First, apparently the $16.5MM request will be bumped to $22.5MM so that cost increases in the original plan and safety and technology upgrades to other buildings can be accommodated.

A second question is apparently going to be part of the debate at today's meeting (which I'll not be able to attend).  The school district apparently will seek approval of the second question that would permit the district to exceed mandated revenue limits by some $750,000 annually.  Whether or not there is a limit to the number of years or if this is intended to be open-ended is not clear.  If open-ended, I suspect the voters will nix this request.

Does this $750,000 represent the battle between district administration and the school board?  There has been quite a bit of 'back and forth' on a somewhat similar amount that seems to be a constant in spite of board direction.

Mid-Moraine Municipal Court...

Judge John Grundahl appears to once again find himself embroiled in some controversy.  If you recall, he was involved in an issue brought to the fore by various police chiefs in his jurisdiction over the length of time he required to process warrants with some of those having taken three to four months.  There was also a question about his holding juvenile convictions open for months.

In spite of that adverse publicity, Judge Grundahl was re-elected in the following election defeating Janet Heins.

The latest issue involves municipalities having approved a $50 fee for each time a warrant is issued with $25 going to the court (as is now the case) and the additional $25 going to the issuing municipality.  The person named in the warrant would be obligated to pay this fee.  Germantown is among the 14 municipalities that are perturbed by his refusal to collect the additional $25 fee.  Judge Grundahl has been quoted as saying, "My concern was and is that this is an attempt to expand the authority of the Municipal Court without statutory support."

Is this simply a continuation of the most recent brouhaha?  Is the judge simply being obstinate to demonstrate that he is the judge?  Attorneys for the communities involved indicate that this practice is in place in other areas of Wisconsin.

This will probably end up being taken to the Circuit Court for a ruling.  That seems a real waste of time for a court system that has not a lot of extra time available.  Maybe the Attorney General can clear this matter up quickly.

Is it simply happenstance that we find Judge Grundahl involved in yet another dispute with the communities that comprise this court's jurisdictional district or does he lay in wait for such an issue to surface so that he can be disruptive?

Guest Blog - Police Chief Pete Hoell...

I felt, that as Chief of Police, I should probably chime in on this PD building project blog; I owe it to my staff and our citizens.

Just as a little background, I have been part of the Germantown Police Administration for approximately 14 years now.  As Administrative Sergeant, Lieutenant and now as Chief, I have been involved in the budgetary process those 14 years in a variety of degrees.  Obviously the last 4 years it has been my sole responsibility to present a budget to address the PD needs.

Also as background, I had hoped that the road improvement issue would not be connected to the PD building project.  Everyday our citizens see the condition of the roads and what they feel is needed.  Most people do not use the PD everyday, most if ever.  I would venture to say there is a large portion of our population who has never been inside our two buildings.  So I do understand that there may be some who do not understand the "need" for a PD building project.  But, a budget is about money and taxes, so the fact that the two are equated was anticipated.

When I read Mr. Fletcher's comment on the PD building, that it would "nice", I think this statement is not an accurate term for what we are asking for.  Granted, it may just be a matter of semantics or splitting hairs, but this project is by no means something that would be "nice".

I was looking back on my last 4 years of budget requests to confirm my original thoughts on the word "nice".  The requests that the PD has made have all been "needs".  I have never asked for anything that would be "nice to have".  I see part of the role as Chief is to operate this department as efficiently and as effectively as possible.  It is my duty to this community to be fiscally responsible and to watch every penny and stretch every dollar.  Again, if I am belaboring this point of "nice", my apologies to Mr. Fletcher.

I put together a time line on the PD building project for the Public Safety Committee a couple of months ago at their request.  The time line was supported by minutes of previous Board and Public Safety meetings.  This building project started in 1995 with a village wide space needs study and discussion of the PD space needs.  The last 7 years we have been dealing with conceptual designs.  There are many issues as to why we are requesting a PD building project, too lengthy for this blog.  However, I would certainly entertain any questions to this blog or directly to my e-mail: phoell@germantownpolice.org

Our current Public Safety Committee recently has made some difficult decisions, which has given me direction.  Granted, I would have been pleased to see the conceptual design move forward that Zimmerman Design presented, but that is not the case.  So now we are at plan "B" and we'll develop a plan that will eventually meet our "needs".  I also do not want to speak on behalf of our Trustees, but most have expressed to me that they do understand our needs and do see the issues we are dealing with that do need attention.  Therefore most do understand and have educated themselves to the PD building issues.

Security and efficiency are my most important objectives with this project.  I owe it to my staff and to the citizens who visit and do business at the PD buildings not to give up and to continue to move forward to the point of where our needs are met.

I am also pleased and very thankful for the support of our citizens.  Policing a community takes a community; your involvement, trust and support is very much appreciated.

Flogging A Deceased Equine? 

The Village Board agenda for Monday, September 15th includes another discussion on the Waste Management agreement.   This is as the result of the Board's direction to staff during the special meeting of a week or so ago.

The special meeting resulted in a sound reaffirmation that the current Waste Management agreement should be left as is unless and until something changed dramatically enough to warrant more consideration.  During that meeting, it was indicated that calls had been received but no one had been tracking those calls.  The Village Administrator advised then that the responsible person would begin to gather specifics.

The anecdotal discussion points seemed to indicate that, while there may have been some disruption caused by the strike of Teamsters against Waste Management, any disruption seemed well within the 'five day' delay language of the current agreement.

President Kempinski has told me that his actions were intended to be proactive and that he and the Administrator had held conversations with Veolia, the other company that tendered a bid for Germantown's business when Waste Management was selected.  I questioned whether or not he hoped to bring some pressure to bear on Waste Management.  He said that while he was thinking of the citizens, he did hope to apply some pressure although he was not concerned with the outcome of the Teamsters' strike.

As we look forward to the next regular meeting, my question is: "What has changed since the last consideration?"

My experience before was a one day delay at the worst.  We are on  Friday pick-up schedule and my garbage was picked up at 6:05AM this morning (Friday).  That was followed by the recycle pick-up about 30 minutes later.  From my perspective, the "what has changed" question is answered by stating..."it's back to normal".

So far as I can determine, based on an email exchange with Dave Schornack, Village Administrator, there have been no more complaints to him, and two had been logged by the Public Works department.  As was my experience, Schornack indicates that his pick-ups occurred on the regular day this past week, as well.

I have heard other anecdotal complaints about people in condominiums experiencing delays.  Those I've looked into were apparently condominium association agreements for pick-up and not violations of the village agreement.

While President Kempinski has told me that he has no interest in the outcome of the Teamster strike against Waste Management, he also indicated that he did want to bring pressure on Waste Management to assure that Germantown citizens got what they and the village were paying for.

It strikes me that this is, whether intentional or unintentional, a "perfect storm" in that it accomplishes both the satisfaction of the agreement and application of more pressure to Waste Management as labor decides whether or not to put the latest offer to a vote by membership.  There is a very significant issue involved and