How to Jumpstart a Dying City

***Those with weak constitutions when dealing with reality are advised not to continue reading***

Menasha is slowly slipping into a comatose state that is testing the will and drive of not only the residents, but local businesses.  Even though the search for a light at the end of the tunnel seems to be cloaked at the moment, all is not lost.  In fact, our great city has some opportunities to turn the blighted economic status into a vibrant city once again.  In order to accomplish this everyone must hold on tight and be willing to look at reality for a moment without diving off the deep end into a pool of negativity and accusations.

Menasha has much to offer, but there are items we do not have on our checklist that surrounding cities do.  In order to grow Menasha, we need to overcome the deficiencies by properly utilizing our strengths…we need to stop attempting to grow outward and start concentrating on growing inward.  Many may scoff in disbelief that such a concept would actually grow a city, some consider it more comical to suggest this can be accomplished without much of the taxpayers money.  The first step in rehab is to admit the faults and focus on them like lasers, which is one way to get many people to wiggle uncomfortably in their seats.  The taboo of mentioning reality must be eliminated if anyone is truly interested in curbing the decline that has overcome our city over the past decade.

Business loss - Unfortunately Menasha has seen an exodus of businesses over recent times with little interest in larger employers knocking on our door.  Some departing has been delivered by plant closings while other are closely related to the lack of a customer base draw to the city.

Less traffic – Traffic flow has subsided primarily in and around our downtown.  Less traffic flow equates to fewer customers which in turn leads to our downtown as a less desirable location compared to other communities.

Taxes – Government function is a necessity to any city, and Menasha is burdened with unique obligations that unfortunately lay at the feet of the taxpayers.  The more businesses our city attracts will result in faster relief of the heavy tax levy…if our departments can keep a firm grip on cost control and spending.

Lodging – Menasha is at a slight disadvantage to surrounding areas and that is partly due to the massive void of lodging.  Having overnight accommodations (hotels or campgrounds) is vital to many aspects of growth.  Lodging facilities supply a revolving-door-supply of fresh potential customers to a community. 

Conventions – The lack of convention facilities permanently places Menasha at a disadvantage to attract economic boosting gatherings. 

Location – Menasha is located between two larger communities that have direct access to Hwy 41 traffic flows.  Through shear placement of our city limits to higher traffic, we have resources that are currently underutilized…we need to unlock the potential we have.

Regulations – This may be the most important drawback Menasha has when attempting to breath life back into our city.  Over regulating and excessive fee structures are not only a deterrent for new business enticement, but also to established business advancement and growth.  Deregulation is essential to obtain the needed growth within our boarders.

The above list may appear to be some large hurdles to overcome, but the reality is by addressing one out of the seven (Regulations) would provide the foundation for the rest to turn over a new leaf.  By removing useless obstacles (and demanded hoop jumping) Menasha can trigger a chain reaction for growth…if only the senseless fear and craving for ultimate control can be overcome.  In order to visualize a chain reaction to growth the overall concept must be dissected one step at a time.

1)      Menasha needs to start turning coarse and make an investment in its own promotion...and that includes special events.  The council needs to form a commission whose sole directive is to promote the city and establish (and run) a couple of large special events during the calendar year.  With the commission being an extension of the city, all permit fees, park rental fees and all other associated fees would be negated, allowing the event to easily produce a profit which would supply the commission the needed revenue to actively promote Menasha.  These funds would need to be securely locked away from political fingers to avoid a raping of the account.  In 2004 Houston, MN (population under 1000) began to celebrate the birthday of an owl that resides in the city’s nature center.  A simple birthday party has turned into the largest owl festival in the world and people from England fly in for this weekend event that nets over $13,000 for the tiny community.  The most unique aspect of the concept is the start-up cost…a considerable sized event can be formed with as little as $500 and generate as much as $10,000 on its first year.

2)      Cutting or eliminating all fees associated with special events for a period of five years would spur interest in new, independent events to take a gander at Menasha.  With little to no overhead that allows an event to become established means newer festivals have the opportunity to firm up their customer base and allow substantial growth.  Certain requirements such as garbage detail and security would need to be accounted for by the event organizer…and held to.

3)      The special events help to establish a consistent, ever growing customer base.  Businesses do not want to locate to an area to assist in trying to attract customers…they are more apt to move into an area that currently can supply them with a customer base.  Drawing crowds into our city with events is one of the few options Menasha is already poised to handle without having a major shakedown of the taxpayer’s pocketbook.

4)      If done correctly, the consistent movement of “tourists” in and out of our city will be the muse that allures lodging facilities to consider erecting a building or two allowing the transient customer base close and easy access to overnight accommodations.  Combining the effort of special events with the promotion of Menasha’s natural and splendorous waterways would garner the eyes of many.  Menasha needs to constantly place itself two steps ahead of other communities instead of viewing the hindquarter of or neighbor’s activities and eventually attempting to mimic them.

5)      Traffic would increase with potential customers, businesses would locate to Menasha to take advantage of the larger “tourist” customer base and in turn would be generating more tax dollars, relieving Menasha’s already stressed families.  Eventually location would become irrelevant as Menasha grows into an epicenter of activity for the Fox Valley and hopefully Wisconsin.

Can the above be accomplished?  Yes, as long as the correct individuals are seated on the council and they are not afraid to start a project with a $500 start up cost.

Will there be critics?  Yes, people who have been programmed to believe that great success stories are only accomplished with massive taxpayer dollars will always ridicule concepts and ideas they cannot comprehend or makes them feel inferior.  Unfortunately Menasha cannot afford the time needed to reassure wavering egos.  This past council meeting has shown that the current direction is hitting home to many individuals in a negative way and there is apprehension to what lays around the corner.  We need a positive vision for the residents to look at without wondering when city hall will strike at the pocketbook again.  We can rebuild Menasha in a relatively short time compared to the epoch it took to disintegrate.     

Neenah/Menasha Sewerage Commission Building Project...Steam Plant 2?

With such an important issue at hand, a one hour workshop before a scheduled council meeting seems to bind the hands of discussion to a determined timetable when a subject such as the Neenah/Menasha Sewerage Commission Building Project is at the table.  Full disclosure and discussion are trumped by a stopwatch and many questions have been left to float in an abyss until a later date.  Mayor Merkes was able to quantify some of the issues that disturb many of the council members and I do not want to cart off with his very valid points and comments, the following are a few brief uncertainties and matters of concern, out of many, that I feel need to be included in the discussion.

A) Sonoco uses a service that is provided by the Neenah/Menasha Sewerage Commission and as with any other utility service any customer would expect the billing to include a set amount for expected repairs, upgrades and replacements.  It would be of concern if any customer that pays for a service to be approached by the provider requesting a sizable “donation” to the retrofitting of their facility because there was an absence of a pro-active mechanism to deal with a known and pending life expectancy of the equipment and machines used to provide the service.

B) As with all technology, when a device or production capabilities from the mid 1980’s is replaced or compared with modern technology from 2011 there should be an expected (and drastic) increase in productivity and a decrease in expenditures to operate the equipment resulting in a savings.  With a 2 ½ decade difference in equipment there is a reasonable assumption that the equipment to be installed will require less manpower to operate than the replaced antiquated equipment.  Areas yet to be discussed include how the new equipment will provide a positive efficiency in man hours to the overall operation of the system.  There needs to be concern, if after the upgrade, the same numbers of employees are required to work relatively the same amount of hours as the old system.  This revamping of the treatment plant should bring about great efficiency, requiring less man hours to operate allowing for a greater cost savings. 

C) Was there, or is there, a government regulation that prevented the NMSC from implementing a pro-active means of dealing with known factors such as complete equipment life expectancy?  If the NMSC was prevented from taking a pro-active posture by government regulations then a late response to an impending situation is a bit more understandable.  However, if no such obstacle stood in the way of developing a well thought out plan for such a large known depletion of mechanical life, then a scrutinizing eye must be focused on the reason for the lack of insight or planning.  On average, if the equivalent buying power of the U.S. dollar every year was used, and an equivalent of $4 today was added for every month on each NMSC utility bill starting in the mid 1980’s ($1.90 in 1987 = $4 in 2011) and placed in a separate trust account drawing 1% to 2% interest, the need for any loan for this project would not exist.  If this was an overlooked viable option in the past, is there a pro-active program being constructed for the subsequent 25 year equipment end-of-life replacement in 2037?

The committee’s soothing words about the project and its components has not quelled my overall apprehension with the course this issue has been taking.  I thank Mayor Merkes for the trepidation he displayed during the workshop and I fully share in the unease.  Our own steam plant is not the only regrettable mishap that has occurred in the Fox Valley when it comes to municipalities revamping a complete structure or service, a recent water treatment plant in a neighboring community went afoul costing those taxpayers more than they bargained for.  The Neenah/Menasha Sewerage Commission is basically asking the City of Menasha, and all other involved parties, to take out loans for their use, which the taxpayers will be ultimately liable for if the utility cannot make the loan payments.  There are no guarantees that the commission will keep wages and the number of employed personnel reasonable…there is no guarantee that operating expenditures will be kept at a minimum.  The only guarantees that seem to exist include change orders that will add extra expense to the final cost of the project, and when something goes amiss the taxpayers of the participating communities will be paying the bill. 

All municipalities were assured in the not too distant past that every component of the project was scoured over and all needed replacements were addressed.  Thirteen months later the municipalities are informed that new components are now targeted for upgrades even though one year earlier they were not singled out as needing replacement.  Tonight the City of Menasha was again assured that all troubled components have been identified and no others are in need of upgrades…I will stress the word AGAIN. 

It boils down to two options:

1)      Menasha uses the Clean Water Fund to obtain its share of the project cost at a 3% interest rate and allowing your utility bill to rise to an appropriate amount to cover the loan payments…but signs the Menasha taxpayer on the dotted line for ultimate responsibility for a direct loan.

2)      Menasha allows the Sewerage Commission to pursue its own financing for the project on the bond market at a 4.5%+ interest rate and allowing the utility bill rise even higher to cover the loan payments…but excludes the Menasha taxpayer from ultimate responsibility on a direct loan.

If ever there was a subject to contact your Alderman to voice your opinion it would be the Menasha Sewerage Commission Building Project. 

Field of Dreams

Due to the brief amount of time I have to write this I apologize ahead of time for any grammar errors and verbiage. The vacant plot of land across from the Post Office on Racine Street has attracted a flurry of enthusiastic opinions from all angles since Dr. Larson made another offer to purchase the land for $57,500 which is ½ of the asked listing price. His intent is to build a parking lot on ½ of the parcel while leaving the other green space.  He has stated that acquiring the lot would be a benefit by allowing him to retain the current business that is leasing the upper level of his building located next to the Racine Street Bridge.

There have been many arguments from various people stating the offer was too low (which I am in total agreement with) but there has also been an array of statements as to why Dr. Larson should not be allowed to purchase the property at all.  They range from accusations that Dr. Larson is being a shrewd business man molded in the image of Donald Trump to the area of interest being a gateway to our downtown and something more than a parking lot needs to be placed on that property.  My position is as long as the offer is substantially close if not equal to the asking price it should be accepted, resulting in tax revenue and reduction in city maintenance…as long as City Hall can come to an agreement of which of the three total square footage numbers given for the property is correct.  Menasha should not be playing the future’s market with land…we have a bad track record of success.  There are many arguments against the sale and I would like to address them one at a time.

1)      The city spent $282,000 to acquire the property and we need to get a good return.  With some of the comments referring to the city acting like a business on the issue of selling this parcel, the first reminder is no business would spend three times the actual value of any property to turn around and sell it knowing that the sale would only recoup one third of the investment.  Relying on long term incremental income such as taxes to account for the remainder is very unwise as the future holds no guarantees.  The taxpayers spent $282,000 to acquire this property and today it takes $1.19 to have the same purchase power as the 2004 dollar.  It will take $335,580 today to pay back the taxpayers for the $282,000 investment when comparing dollars to dollars.  With the current rate of inflation, next year if the parcel is not sold means an additional $9,060 (2.7% increase each year) will have to be added to the present $335,580 value to receive an equal dollar amount back for the investment the taxpayer made for the acquisition of the property. The steam plant, Lake Park Villas and a large chunk of our 11 TIFs are a testament as to how a long term, city anticipated incremental payment plans turn out…disastrous.  The cold reality remains that the taxpayers, once again, will never see a full repayment of the investment their tax dollars paid for. 

2)      A parking lot will not generate much tax revenue for the city.  It is true that a parking lot will not generate as much tax revenue as a commercial building, however, it will generate more revenue for the city than it does as a vacant plot of land sitting in the hands of the city and not taxed at all.  The unique aspect of the situation is the only devised plan that was ever conceived for the property in the past which was presented to this current council was outlined in Resolution R-39-04 dated December 20, 2004 where it states that the purposes for this land included a parking lot…and a diagram dated September 24, 2007 was given to the current council and it depicts a parking lot on ½ of the property and green space on the other half…same concept Dr. Larson wants utilize the land for.  There appears to be a back-slide on that original plan by the city and on November 19, 2007 Resolution R-19-07 was passed that required other options to be explored for the property and directed the Plan Commission and Redevelopment Authority to study all uses for the property…the results from those studies, if they occurred, have not been presented to the current council.  It appears as though the city is flying by the seat of its pants and does not have a goal or plan for this vacant property.

3)      A parking lot will not have an aesthetic look to it.  With the current requirements by the city when it pertains to parking lots this is not correct.  The city adopted regulations that require new parking lots to incorporate green space to make the appearance of the area more aesthetic.  This, at least in my opinion, is an invalid point.

4)      If Dr. Larson agreed to develop his current property more so the city would collect a higher tax amount from it then the parking lot would be acceptable.  Making a demand that someone needs to develop or increase the tax value of another owned property in order to purchase a separate piece of land in my opinion is counterproductive on enticing businesses to consider Menasha as a home and borders on extortion.  Imagine owning a home within Menasha and deciding to invest money and purchase a vacant piece of property for sale by the city, but you were only allowed to complete the transaction if you doubled the current square footage of your existing home so the city could be guaranteed to collect more tax revenue from you. 

5)      It is a gateway to our downtown and a prime location.  Business growth should be guided by what the free market can bare, not by an artificial determination governed by elected officials and municipal bureaucrats.  When you force a wrong key into the ignition switch of a vehicle you can only do damage.  If a future business wants to construct a building on the Racine Street lot between First Street and Broad Street it will have that desire whether there is a parking lot in the location or if it a vacant lot.  The market dictates where businesses want to be located and current structures are not a barrier just as the homes that were present on Broad Street were not a deterrent for the Headwaters condominium project.  Traffic flowing past that location has diminished overall 15% since 2000 traffic counts (DOT data) and has dropped over 13% alone since the acquisition of the property in 2004 compared to current traffic counts.  Our “Gateway” is less productive since acquisition which makes it a less desirable location compared to other areas of increased traffic flow such as Appleton Road which has seen a 47% increase in traffic and Hwy 114 heading east which has seen a 46% increase in traffic (DOT data).  Labeling an area a gateway should require the area it is a gateway to be well developed, however, there are many eye-sore structures within the downtown area that escape the attention of possible blighted areas.  A “Gateway” label is of no importance when the traffic value has continually diminished over the years.  As a comparison Sherwood has the same amount of traffic flowing through its downtown as Racine Street has on a daily basis. 

Accepting a low offer would be foolhardy, but that does not cede the city having superior knowledge over the market for the best use of the vacant lot, it has been proven time and time again that the city’s realty skills and insight are frightful at best.  If a fair market value offer is presented to the city for the purchase of the vacant property it should be accepted unless the intended use would do direct harm to the city, it should not be rejected due to a graduated long term monetary income deficiency the city feels they can increase if they sit and keep fingers and toes crossed in hopes someone at sometime may want to build a small commercial building in an area that has had decreasing traffic over the years. 

We have had some great businesses invest in our downtown area such as Vertigo 1894, The WeatherVane and Theresa’s Treasures…we have also lost some great businesses such as Gilbert, Banta and more recently R.R. Donnelley and Inspiring Interiors.  I also spoke with the new owner of Art Affair recently and was told that as of right now his two year business goal and plan is to relocate out of Menasha…we have other issues to attend to in our downtown, “gateways” and city that are more important than the vacant lot on Racine Street.  Acquiring or purchasing perceived blighted property is not a substitute for an intelligent and comprehensive plan to address the true issues that are plaguing our city, and such acts and aspirations of attainment will not nudge Menasha into prosperity.  

Taxpayer Money vs. Private Money Investments

There is a stark difference in the ideology of the current Menasha Common Council compared to the previous… and that is directly related to putting other people’s money at risk.

Half of the current council derives an income from the operation and owning of a business. They possess a unique perspective on the gains and fallouts from putting money in jeopardy in an attempt to reach a goal.  Not every investment turns out the way it was intended and there are large risks that have a great ability to harm the investor by the lose of massive amounts of assets.  This has also happened to Menasha through the steam plant, however, there is one very major difference…private investment vs. taxpayer investment.

It is acceptable for anyone in this country, who has the nerve, to try and obtain the American dream by placing their money at risk in an attempt to achieve a financial benefit from such.  These same people, however, would not take the pleasure as past councils have to force others into loosing money in a risky project or goal.  When a person places their own wealth on the table they accept, with full knowledge, the risks and odds involved to obtain the goal…many of these risks are not for the weak hearted and every person doesn’t possess the ability to handle the stress and volatile situations that come with the territory, nor should those people be forced to participate in the activity against their will.

The low drum lecturing from former and current politicians through willing advocates is disheartening and insincere.  The surrogate lectors demean the intentions and goals of newer council members in a veil attempt to divert the attention of residents away from elected officials who still hold office and who could not resist the temptation to reach their hands into the $42 million steam plant cookie jar.  As of today there has been a magical spin allowing culpable current and former officials to place a perspective on the situation that hides their very involvement where millions of taxpayer dollars have evaporated into thin air. Placing a cloud of doubt over newer council members as a form of compensation for past blunders that others have made is puerile and shameful.  It would be more advantageous for the City of Menasha if the owners of disgruntled commentary would emerge from the shadows and offer constructive avenues to guide Menasha out of the black hole debt and leave behind the David Copperfield imitation attempt of placing a shadow of doubt upon those that have done nothing more than step to the plate in an attempt to correct what predecessors have created. The same predecessors who took the irresponsibility upon themselves and created a financial mess with the taxpayer’s money.  An investment those officials would never have made if they had to use their own life savings to accomplish the same goal.

Dialogue is good, but using it to transfer ownership of extremely poor decision to those who do not own them is ruinous.

Respectful Dissent

It goes without saying that any person that chooses to brave the treacherous realm of government service has the certainty of drawing fire from others that have an opposing point of view.  This usually sparks debate, which in turn develops into a meaningful understanding of each other’s perspective.  Elected officials should expect dissenting arguments and listen closely for skews that may have escaped the building blocks for their own developed standpoint…but that does not give free rein to use the elected officials as punching bags by others that happen to have a differing outlook on an issue. 

Aldermen in Menasha do not place the one step forward and insert their name in the election hat to derive a hefty income from the city coffers, nor do they have an insatiable craving for power.  If the intentions are to acquire the preceding they are doing it for the wrong reasons and will experience culture shock on how inaccessible both of those aspirations are.  The people who choose to run for elected office are compelled by the inner need to assist a community in a higher capacity than most, and each person that runs and/or is blessed with an election win brings unique concepts and experiences to the table that they feel would aid their community and bring about a positive outcome.  If presented properly, the electors cast ballots with favor and the designated official proceeds to lay claim to the daunting task of city politics.

Dissent is needed and healthy in any democracy, but the ones that are throwing the sandbags cannot loose sight that even elected officials have wives, husbands and children that become collateral damage to a process that excuses reckless rock-throwing in order to achieve a desired result.  Any elected official, or those that strive to become one, that rely on stealth Kamikaze personal attacks to force a viewpoint or stance on any subject should raise a brow or two.

If damaging a family brings no concern to a person tossing mud against a wall to see what sticks, then fearful should be the eyes of the public when that person addresses them. Dissent is good and healthy…but accomplish it with a little respect and class.

Menasha Mayor Vetos Redistricting Plan

The Mayor of Menasha vetoed the Common Council’s redistricting plan today.  Within the official press release he addresses the reasons for his veto strike, but there is a problem…the press release is not being honest describing the situation of the redistricting.  I would like to address the items to let voters make an informed decision whether or not the Common Council made the correct choice for the citizens and taxpayers of Menasha.

2011 Current Representation

Wards: 21

Aldermanic Districts: 8

Percent difference in District populations: 48%

Highest populated District: District 8 with 3523

Lowest populated District: District 2 with 1815

County Supervisory lines crossed: 1

County lines crossed: 1

School lines crossed: 1

Current number of ballots needed: 11

2011 Commission Proposed Plan (Rejected)

Wards: 18

Aldermanic Districts: 8

Percent difference in District populations: 55%

Highest populated District: District 6 with 2443

Lowest populated District: District 8 with 1103

County Supervisory lines crossed: 0

County lines crossed: 1

School lines crossed: 1

Number of ballots needed: 10

2011 Council Plan (Passed)

Wards: 17

Aldermanic Districts: 8

Percent difference in District populations: 19%

Highest populated District: District 7 with 2374

Lowest populated District: District 3 with 1917

County Supervisory lines crossed: 2

County lines crossed: 0

School lines crossed: 1

Number of ballots needed: 11

The redistricting plan that was passed DOES NOT create any increase in ballot printing costs farther than what is currently in place.  There is no added expense to the tax payers.  The plan that was passed by the Common Council allows for the fairest representation for all taxpayers.  The press release from the Mayor’s office is accusatory by stating that the plan that was passed disenfranchises voters on the east side…this is very disingenuous when the plan that the Mayor is backing actually does disenfranchise voters, in fact 93.6% of Menasha’s voters would have received half the representation on the Common Council compared to the other 6.4% if the first proposed plan was passed.

The Mayor also avoids the fact that if substantial growth does occur on the east side before the next redistricting, by Wisconsin State Statute our municipality can adjust our Aldermanic District boundaries to even out the population representation…this can be completed every two years.  The Common Council did approve an agreement with a developer to build UP TO 200 homes near Lake Park Villas, what the press release forgot to mention was the builder is not obligated to build any amount of homes...in fact he does not have to build a single home and can sell off vacant lots if he so chooses, he just will not receive a cash bonus from the city if he does not build 200 homes. The time frame to build those homes is stretched over many years, the developer to this day has not signed the agreement to build any homes, and the city forgot to purchase and retain part of the land that the developer wanted in the first place. 

Now for the cost.  The Mayor stated that the extra ballot cost will total an extra $1,000 each election…this is absolutely false and beyond disingenuous.  Here are the actual facts:

1) There will not be any extra ballots printed than what there are currently printed today.  The cost will remain the same.

2) The plan crosses three lines, exactly the same as today.

3) The plan has one polling place with three ballots while all others have two, exactly the same as today

Ballot Costs of Last Three Years with Three Border Crossings

2011 - $1,451 for entire year for entire city

2010 - $1,095 for entire year for entire city

2009 - $422 for entire year for entire city

Ballot Costs of Last Three Years Before Moving County District Lines Causing An Extra Ballot - With Two Border Crossings

2007 - $578.15 for entire year for entire city

2006 - $824.51 for entire year for entire city

2005 - $437.80 for entire year for entire city

Average ballot costs after county redistricting in 2007 (2009 to 2011, Excluding Presidential Elections): $989 for each year for entire city

Average ballot costs before county redistricting in 2007 (2000 to 2007, Excluding Presidential Elections): $1030 for each year for entire city

Total Yearly Cost of Menasha Election Ballots

2011 - $1,451 ~ 11 separate ballots

2010 - $1,095 ~ 11 separate ballots

2009 - $422 ~ 11 separate ballots

2008 - $4,613 ~ 11 separate ballots (Presidential election Obama v. McCain)

2007 - $578.15 ~10 separate ballots

2006 - $824.51 ~10 separate ballots

2005 - $437.80 ~10 separate ballots

2004 - $2,541.86 ~10 separate ballots (Presidential election Bush v. Kerry)

2003 - $893.48 ~10 separate ballots

2002 - $1,954.12 ~10 separate ballots

2001 - $1,492.82 ~10 separate ballots

2000 - $1,332.52 (Presidential election Bush v. Gore)

1999 - $509.10

A large added ballot increase did not exist when Menasha had to add an extra ballot to our elections due to the County Supervisory Lines being re-drawn in 2007 causing Aldermanic District 7 to be cut in the middle.  Stating that the one ballot that would remain in place with the passed plan would cause a $1,000 increase in ballot cost is false and borders a complete lie.

It boils down to this…the Common Council drew a plan that keeps everyone’s vote and representation as equal as possible, and I for one am proud to defend against the diluting of anyone’s representation or vote!  The plan supported by the Mayor literally does dilute the representation and vote of 93.6% of Menasha residents giving 6.4% of the city’s population a 2-to-1 advantage on the Common Council.

I plant my feet firmly on the side of fair and equal representation for everyone, others would prefer to give a fraction of the population more clout and more power of representation on the Common Council.  It is up to you to decide in the up coming elections, is your vote meant to be equal as your neighbor’s, or is your neighbor allowed to be counted twice because of where they live?  It is your choice.

The Menasha Redistricting Debate

To start things off one must have a solid grip on the concept and reason for redistricting.

Redistricting is not intended to streamline the election process, nor is it intended to keep ballot costs down.  The sole intent and reason for the redistricting process is to establish election districts which provide representational equality for all potential voters…period, nothing more and nothing less.  It is almost an embarrassment that a simple procedure that is intended to provide you as a voter reassurance that your vote will count equally as your neighbor’s can, and often does, turn into a political circus. 

Voting equality is the base for our democracy.  There are laws that work in conjunction with our Constitution that protect your vote from becoming diluted down, this is achieved by not allowing a section of the population to obtain an unfair advantage over another in governmental representation. Elected officials are to represent people…not areas.

The original proposed redistricting plan that came from the established Redistricting Committee for Menasha diluted 93% of the population’s representation which flies in the face of a fair and equal democracy. The original plan, by default, advocated one portion of the population within the city deserves twice the amount of representation on the city council than all others.  This is a one-person-one-vote system, the redistricting map initially presented to the council gave District 8 voters a one-person-one-vote representation on the council while all other Districts had to have 2+ voters to equal the representation that one voter in District 8 would receive.  This is clearly not within statutes and frankly is quite disturbing that there were people, including elected officials,  advocating that the 6.4% of the population in proposed District 8 should receive 1/8 of the representation, while all other remaining districts contained 13.4% of the population each and would only receive the same 1/8 representation.  Think about that for a moment, 6.4% of the population would receive 12.5% of the representation while all others would equate to 13.4% receiving the same 12.5% representation. 

There are laws that govern redistricting and many written documents that clearly state what must be followed. 

-There is case law with the United States Supreme Court (Wesberry vs. Sanders) where the high court found in Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution a command that in the election of Members of the House of Representatives districts were to be made up of substantially equal numbers of persons…and they extended that ruling and requirement to all legislative bodies in the United States including municipal councils.

-Robert Marchant, Legislative Attorney for the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau in 2001 (He is currently the Chief Clerk for the Wisconsin Senate) clearly states within the pages of “The Basic Legal Requirements of Local Redistricting” dated April of 2001 that “City Aldermanic Districts must be as equal in population as practicable” and goes further to state that past case law established that “Article 1, Section 1 of the Wisconsin Constitution guarantees persons the right not to have their votes diluted by unequal distribution of local legislative seats.”

- Within the pages of the Wisconsin Counties Association’ “WCA 2011 County Redistricting Guide” it states “Aldermanic Districts have to be substantially equal in population” and defines substantial as “an over all deviation of 10%”

- You would have to ignore the US Supreme Court, the Wisconsin Constitution, the past Legislative Attorney for the Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau and the Wisconsin Counties Association in order to arrive at the conclusion that a difference in population at the magnitude of 55%, as was presented in the initial proposed map, was acceptable.  Even in light of solid fact that the city of Menasha could, without a doubt, adhere much closer to the statutes and requirements of redistricting. 

-         My proposed plan did not increase ballot cost.  The exact number of different ballots that are produced right now is equivalent to the amount of different ballots required for my new plan. As of today District 7 crosses county supervisory lines causing two ballots, District 8 crosses an actual county line causing an extra ballot and District 8 has two school districts causing an extra ballot…a total of 3 extra ballots.

-         My proposed plan has District 2 crossing a county supervisory line causing an extra ballot, District 6 crosses a supervisory line causing an extra ballot and District 8 still has the dual school districts causing an extra ballot…a total of 3 extra ballots.  There is no added cost to the tax payers and no added ballots.

-         Currently there is one polling place (Clovis School) that has three ballots to deal with during every other election year, the rest have two a piece.  My plan drops the Clovis ballot count to 1 ballot allowing District 5 voting to be moved to that school (which was part of the committees original plan by recommending the closing of Jefferson School as a polling location) leaving every polling place with two ballots except for the polling place for District 1 and 2 which would now have the 3 ballots instead…the exact ballot count as we currently have.

I must repeat…there is no added cost to the taxpayers above what we currently have for voting.

The Mayor threatened the use of his veto pen to this proposal and he listed three requirements to avoid a veto.

1)      No wards could cross County Supervisory lines…the proposed plan has no ward crossing county lines

2)      It could not create multiple ballots resulting in additional, unnecessary costs…the proposed plan contains the same amount of various ballots that exists in our elections today and keeps polling places with the same amount of ballot distribution as it exists today.

3)      It cannot create a Calumet County Aldermanic District larger than the average of the Winnebago Districts…unfortunately this requirement is statistically impossible to achieve.  Calumet County has 2204 Menasha residents and Winnebago County has 15,233…if you divided that number by 7 aldermanic districts you have 2,176 people per Winnebago district on average.

Cost is not the concern.  If it were, the mayor would have vetoed the recent purchase of a $24,000 parking lot by the previous council.  This purchase will cost another $20,000 for repairs and removes $1,400 of taxes each year from the levy which residents will have to make up.  There was no concern about spending costs over ten years of a $70,000 un-needed parking lot because there was no veto…cost cannot be the concern here.

My proposed plan has the District 8 population amount sitting right at the median of all the District populations, half of the Districts have a higher population and half the Districts have a lower population.  Alderman Benner’s population will be 239 people lower than if he had the proposed District 6 that was suggested in the map that was rejected by the council.  District 8 is also comprised of neighborhoods with covenants, which by nature reduce most of the common complaints and concerns related with older sections of the city.

This is a good plan, a feasible plan and a fair plan for the residents of Menasha.  Redistricting is to make your vote count just as equally as your neighbor.  That cannot happen when your neighbor’s vote counts twice as much as yours for the same representation on this governing body.  It is simple…one-person-one-vote…a very low population cannot have an equal representation on the city council as a population twice it’s size.  This is common sense and the law…and quite honestly should send shivers up people’s spines to know there are elected officials out there that have no problem with diluting your vote for the benefit of others.

I am extremely proud to have put in the 52 hours of research and phone calls it took to protect your vote, and I would have no qualms of doing it again.