Walker Announces
Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker will announce his candidacy for another term as county executive at the newly opened campaign headquarters on Sunday, December 2, 2007 at 7pm. Supporters began gathering nomination paper signatures on Saturday.
Well, another promise broken by Walker. What else is old?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0148 hrs
I guess all those times Walker said he wasn’t going to run for another full term in 2008, he must’ve thought that the people of Wisconsin would’ve promoted him to a higher office by now.
Guess this is his Plan B.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on December 02, 2007 at 0224 hrs
And liberals are as clean as the wind driven snow and they keep all their promises.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0355 hrs
What was that no tax increase pledge of Doyle’s during his last campaign? Something about we must not; I will not raise taxes?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0759 hrs
Quit whining…...people like him and he won’t be defeated. Do you know why people like him? I hear the same thing from average people all the time, down to earth. If you ever take the time to listen to him speak he is very good. He gives it straight and you don’t feel like you need to take a shower afterwards. The people who don’t like him keep yelling “the parks, the parks we need to raise taxes for the parks”. How many times have these people ever brought up fringe benefits costs being 3x that of what is spent on parks? These are also the people who brought us the pension scandal which everyone tries to pin on the Exec. If he promised not run I missed that and if it’s true well sure he changed his mind. I am glad he did if that’s the case. For the libs you can’t compare that to Gov. Doyle. No one voted for Scott in the last election based on a promise not to run next time.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 0957 hrs
While I think it’s good that he’s running again, I am a bit surprised. He did say he wouldn’t run again, so I’m wondering why he’s changed his mind. Again, not that it’s a bad thing.
Posted by Shana on December 02, 2007 at 1123 hrs
Walker never made a campaign pledge or a promise stating that he wouldn’t run and he certainly didn’t say it when he ran four years ago when he was re-elected by a substantial margin. The statement people are claiming as such was a very brief answer to an interview question in the first election. Anyone have a press release where Walker pushed such an idea? How about a Walker produced campaign piece where he made such a pledge? On the other side of things… Walker did pledge to hold the line on taxes and he has for six straight budgets. Walker did pledge to give back part of his salary and has given hundreds of thousands of dollars back to County taxpayers. Walker did pledge to downsize the Board and he has. Anyone that looks at the facts objectively will certainly see that Walker does meet the promises he makes. You may not like them…but he keeps them.
I for one am glad that he is running. We simply can NOT afford Lena Taylor as County Executive. That would be a blank check for raising taxes and increased spending. If you want to see businesses, jobs and residents leaving at record levels…just elect that tax and spend liberal.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1159 hrs
It’s too bad Walker wasn’t able to oust Diamond Jim. I don’t remember when he said something about not running offhand, but it was a while ago, too.
Posted by Shana on December 02, 2007 at 1233 hrs
Maybe he’s running again so he can get some traction on transit issues. That’s one area he has generally failed. Be it promoting his own agenda (revamping county bus service to better serve the poor) or achieving a compromise with others on some way to spend that big wad of federal money the region has yet to agree on.
Posted by Mike on December 02, 2007 at 1505 hrs
Walker never made a campaign pledge or a promise stating that he wouldn’t run ...
Oh, like hell he didn’t. And to help make it easier, the exact wording of Walker’s campaign promise is here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1730 hrs
Capper and Recess Supervisor,
What a serious offense you’ve stumbled onto here. It’s down right illegal, wait it’s not in any way…..but he lied under oath about something he did in the past…no, that didn’t happen…...but he made a promise to get himself reelected and turned on a dime the first chance he got…no your link is 5 1/2 years old and is vague at best.
I other link is priceless…..Walker is inept???? and what would that make the county board? They must be the most responsible, ethical and hard working group getting paid by the tax payers…...or would that be the U.S. Congress.
Why doesn’t anyone talk about the fact that county bus drivers get health insurance for life when they talk about parks and core services?
Why don’t they talk about how Milwaukee county has some of the highest fringe benefits in the country spending 3x as much as what is spent on parks?
I only hear one person talking about this kind of stuff and we need him to run for reelection…......Thank you Scott Walker for doing a good job!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1809 hrs
OH…it was in the Journal Sentinal…why didn’t you say so. It MUST be true. He MUST have said it.
Except he didn’t! And just because Capper and Folkbum say it…that’s about as good as coming from the Journal Sentinel.
REGARDLESS…he NEEDS to run again and we NEED him in office. Lena Taylor would be disasterous.
I can understand why you would want to keep throwing up smokescreens for your candidate with this non-issue….and why you wouldn’t want to discuss her record and what she will do to this county.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1811 hrs
Calvin, I support Walker even though I don’t live in Milwaukee. I still remember him saying something about not running again. I believe it was around the time that he was trying to run for governor. Unfortunately, I don’t remember the exact time/circumstances/etc. However, getting yourself all worked up isn’t going to help your case any either.
Whether or not he said he would or would not run, I think it will be good for Milwaukee if he is able to get reelected. Perhaps it will give him a better chance of running for governor again when the time comes.
Posted by Shana on December 02, 2007 at 1956 hrs
Hello and Calvin,
A disaster for the county? What do you think is going on now? Or do you just close your eyes, put your fingers in your ears and tell yourselves that this is a good thing? Corrections going to hell, the parks gone to hell, the debt service getting larger and larger as Walker keeps playing a budgetary shell game…the list is almost endless. The only reason the transit system wasn’t cut more, or taxes raised more to pay for it was because of Lena Taylor.
Instead of feeding off of the pablum that Walker, Sykes, Fraley and the rest feed you, get out and look around. Talk to people. Look past your own self-interest for a moment, there is a whole world out there. And it’s full of people that aren’t buying the load of fertilizer Walker is trying to sell.
Walker has failed on almost every promise, and that’s only the ones that are realistic. The others are so much gobbledygook that I can’t believe anyone would take them seriously.
And if your so worried about your taxes going up $8 instead of $6, why don’t you ask Taylor yourself. Or is it easier to believe the in the snake oil that Walker’s peddling?
Let me make it easy for you. Here’s her website.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 1959 hrs
And as I said in my post, if Walker’s old promise doesn’t mean anything, why were the lot of you harping about something Doyle said years ago? Or is hypocrisy just the way you roll?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2000 hrs
capper, I don’t recall you being this worked up about Doyle’s broken promise. How are you not also a hypocrite, as you accuse others of being?
Posted by Owen on December 02, 2007 at 2016 hrs
Uh, Capper…I didn’t say anything about Doyle. You are the hypocrite.
And I don’t believe your tripe for a moment that the county is going to hell. I DO ask those around me and they concur. The “sky is falling lefties” like you don’t do the county any favors by saying it is.
I go to the parks often, I don’t see any problems with them. I’m tired of people of your ilk saying they are falling apart without anything to support it. You think if you keep saying it often enough people with buy your line. Sorry, it’s not going to work.
I know what I need to know about Lena Taylor. She is, unfortunately, my State Senator. The co-author of a budget that would have increased taxes by over $15 BILLION dollars. We can’t go back to how the county was run before Walker was elected. And that’s exactly what will happen if Jim Doyle’s hand picked candidate is elected.
And Shana I appreciate your comments, but I’m not going to let Capper and Folkbum distort the truth to fit their agenda. Once they can provide anything from Walker’s campaign that said he pledged not to run another term, then I will let it go.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2052 hrs
I use one of a few county parks every day and I am very happy with them. The sky is not falling…........and neither are taxes, or supervisor’s pay for a part-time job or some of the highest fringe benefits in the country…...again no comments about the fringe benefits like lifetime health care for bus drivers. What do you guys think of these benefits that cost three times as much as the parks? Anyone care to comment?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2138 hrs
Hello-
No one is responding to a straw man. The parks budget is low due to Walker’s cuts. And the deficit that Walker created to the pension fund alone is more than the parks budget by itself.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2158 hrs
Wow, a lot of touchy Walker supporters here.
I hate term limits - I think they’re stupid. So my comment is hardly ideological.
I just think it’s funny that Walker is doing the thing he said he wouldn’t do. For those of you trying to shift this to Doyle, or Clinton, or your basic lying straw-man Democrat, I would only laugh at the fact that you apparently expect no more of your candidates than you believe Democrats expect of theirs.
It’s funny that some of you have even suggested that it only counts when a politician says something on a lit piece or in a commercial. I guess what a politician says in interviews or to reporters doesn’t count. I guess that was Doyle’s mistake then? He just should’ve told the reporters he’d never raise taxes and left it out of his lit? Are some of you actually suggesting that would’ve made his decision to raise taxes acceptable?
I’m also right when I say that Walker’s running again because he hasn’t found anything better to do. When Walker ran for County Exec in ‘02, there wasn’t a person around that didn’t think it was just a way for him to angle for a better platform to continue his ascent. Now, it’s just a question of what he’s waiting for. Wisconsin clearly didn’t show much interest in him as a gubernatorial candidate. He doesn’t have enough outstate appeal to win a statewide election. County Exec 4 Lyfe? Maybe.
I don’t dislike Scott Walker. I hardly think he’s been exceptional as a leader, but he’s not been terrible either. But he said what he said, and that some of you are defending that is just proof that you will forgive the behavior you condemn others for provided it’s coming from a guy you like.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on December 02, 2007 at 2208 hrs
Calvin-
Are you going to do anything but through up talking points? The $15 billion tax would have saved people money on their private insurance. My family would have come out about $100 per month ahead than what we pay now. Saving $100 per month would be a good thing to most people. Plus, everyone would have coverage. Another good thing.
Meanwhile, business as usual. Like yearly budget shortfalls. Scapegoating for the problems creataed by his policies. A continuing pension scandal, that has had the investigation, which cost $400 per hour, stopped. Failure to have key players in his adminstration not sign the pension waivers. Creating positions for political buddies. Oh yeah, Walker’s really shook things up from the Ament days.
But you will believe what you will believe. I don’t expect the facts to get in your way.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2211 hrs
http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/taxesbystate2005/index.html
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2236 hrs
Lots of interesting discussion here.
First, to say, “yeah well the Democrats…” is pathetic. As if Democrats determine by their actions what is ethical and honest and what is not.
Everything that’s wrong with politics. Everything my side does is great. I’ll complain about something the other side is doing when my side would have done even worse. Everything my side does can be justified, everything their side does is influenced by Satan. And if my side does something wrong well it’s ok because the other side does it too.
Pathetic.
You hacks know you’re being hacks when you make these arguments, right? You know you’re basing the reality of your argument on whether the person or the proposal in question is on your side or the other, right?
Capper, you said,
No one is responding to a straw man. The parks budget is low due to Walker’s cuts. And the deficit that Walker created to the pension fund alone is more than the parks budget by itself.
I’m curious. Given that the state’s funding for its mandated services has been flat since the 1990s, and given that the cost to continue of those services continually goes up, and given that the cost to continue is largely made up of personnel costs, a large part of which are fringe benefits, and given that the major cost drivers of the County’s fringe benefits (free retiree health insurance and pension enhancements) were implemented before Walker was elected, and given those fringe benefits cannot be taken away once granted, and given that the unions and their supporters on the board have been unwilling to allow contracting out for much of anything, and given annual cost increases in fringe benefits have been more reasonable since Walker was elected, and given that the County is subject to levy limits under state law, and given the Board has generally raised the levy by around 3% annually over Walker’s objections…
What do you believe could be done differently were you given the opportunity to submit a budget instead of Walker? If you think one Department or another should get another $10 to $15 million in levy, or more…from where in the County Budget would that money come?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2237 hrs
ATV-
You’re absolutely correct that the State has been short changing the county for decades. Tommy did it, Scott did it, and Doyle is continuing to do it. The State’s excuse: The feds are not giving them the money.
Walker did nothing to work with the State to get more money for the county. In fact he took the contrary position of approving of the AssGOP budget which would have shorted Milwaukee even more, but did his budget proposal on the SenDem’s budget.
The free health care for life ended in 1995, so that cost will eventually attrition out. As far as savings in benefits for Walker, he postponed the contract with the unions for two years, and ended up signing one that was virtually the same as the one that the Union offered up originally. The cost of the delay was in the millions. And he gave a $250 signing bonus per worker for ratifying the contract.
He went to a new computer system for the administration of payroll and benefits, which, according to county reports, was supposed to go into effect six months ago. Now overdue and overbudget, it’s still not running. Just like the state.
The State, while Walker was in the legislator, privatized child welfare. It is running about $45-50 million per year than when it was County run. He did nothing to get that money back into the County. Instead, he keeps proposing to give more income away, with selling off things that would cut funding or privatizing things that usually end up being more expensive. The same thing the State is facing now.
I would do those things differently, for starters.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 02, 2007 at 2358 hrs
You think Walker has done a good job of trying to make the county more efficient, I don’t.
You think Walker has spent time in Madison and Washington trying to get the mandated services fully funded, I don’t.
He authored truth-in-sentencing, which has proven to be a fiscal disaster for the State of Wisconsin. He lacks long term vision and the capacity to understand the consequences of what he does. His “brilliance” is simplistic.
The Milwaukee County Executive could work with the villages and cities of Milwaukee County to reduce redundant services and create efficiencies that would lower taxes, but he does not.
He could make Milwaukee County government more transparent and provide the people’s audit by actually having meeting agendas, transcripts, and audio and video of meetings on the Milwaukee County website, he does not.
He could have department heads post budget proposals to the Milwaukee County website and allow blog style public comments, but he does not.
He could show his faith in our democratic-republic by agreeing, indeed demanding, public debate with his opponents, my bet, he will not.
Why the announcement on a Sunday night at the worst point in the news cycle, unless he fears engaging the opposition?
He never takes personal responsibility for the problems at Milwaukee County, it is always, something done by the prior administrations, lack of state and federal funding, or the unions.
For Scott Walker, the buck stops elsewhere.
Posted by Joe Klein on December 03, 2007 at 0037 hrs
Capper,
Your criticisms of Walker and the state are fair but they do not answer my question.
Even with the new collective bargaining agreement, fringe benefit costs are higher in 2008 than in 2007 and those were higher than in 2006. So passing the Union’s proposal two years ago while smart would not have solved the problem.
Free health insurance for retirees did not “end” in 1995, that was the last year it was offered to new employees. That means an employee who was 25 who started in 1994 will be receiving the benefit until sometime around 2034. Given the pension enhancements we are likely at the peak of employees who retire early and use the free insurance until they are Medicare eligible, and will be for another 5-10 years.
You can blame Walker for the state’s actions past and present (and I agree with you on the budget negotiations), but the fact is the state likely would have taken those actions regardless of Walker’s service in the legislature. Hell even in this last budget the Governor proposed to raise JCI costs to Counties by more than the increase in Youth Aids they would have received.
The problem at the state and federal levels goes far beyond Walker and is the fault of both parties.
So again, given these structural problems facing the County, how would you have rearranged County spending?
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 0750 hrs
Joe your criticisms are fair, however when you said,
“He could make Milwaukee County government more transparent and provide the people’s audit by actually having meeting agendas, transcripts, and audio and video of meetings on the Milwaukee County website, he does not.”
That responsibility lies with a different elected office at the County.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 0753 hrs
ATV-
I would suggest eliminating a lot of the deadwood. Meaning the created positions with some made-up title just to give someone a job. I would have pushed harder to have the board’s salaries, the exec’s salary and most of the upper management’s salaries not just frozen, but cut.
I think a lot of problems could have been avoided. The county, whether it is fully funded by the state and/or the feds or not, is required to provide a minimal amount of services. By trying to cut corners, skipping a payment here and there, and some poor decisions (the no bid contract for the demolition of the courthouse annex is among the biggest), it has put the county in a bigger and bigger bind.
Sort of, but not really, like, making just under the minimum payment on a credit card. The balance doesn’t go away, and it gets worse due tot he interest, penalties, fees, etc. (I know it’s not the best analogy, but I’m in a hurry).
The pension benefits and healthcare, if I’m not mistaken, comes out of the pension fund, not county budget. Ament benefitted from the 90’s economy and didn’t pay anything into it. After 9/11, the market dropped and payments became mandatory again. Instead of doing that, and instead of planning ahead for the 2004 exodus of county workers, Walker pretended it wouldn’ t happen and left the county to get the short end of the stick.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 0857 hrs
Walker is running cause everyone wants him to do so. He has an excellent record and is the only one in Milwaukee county that has some sort of realization that for Milwaukee county to go forward we have to set up a system that “creates wealth, not more welfare”.
Look at the diiferent philosophies in Waukesha county and Milwaukee county. That is the reason that total property values are going to pass Milwaukee county and that there are plenty of good jobs.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 0911 hrs
Hello, Calvin, et al., crack me up. The same ones who proclaim that Walker gives it to ‘em straight then are told that he didn’t give it to ‘em straight when he said he wouldn’t run again (didn’t he say so before the last time, too?). But that’s okay, because he still gives it to ‘em straight, except when he doesn’t.
The core of the matter, that he said he wouldn’t but he will, is not the big deal. He just ought not have said he wouldn’t run when he couldn’t predict where he would be today, as no one could.
More to the point is that he has not given it us straight on several matters, most significantly the crucial matter of the county budget. Year after year, he claims to bring it in at a low level knowing that it will have to go up but leaves that to the county board to do. That is not acting as a county executive.
If he would just give it to us straight on the budget and take the tough times that come from the task, another term of trying to keep track of actual budget costs to come would be okay. That, and whichever candidate at least promises to try to rein in the fastest-growing part of the budget year after year, the MATC portion, would have my vote.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 1223 hrs
I would suggest eliminating a lot of the deadwood. Meaning the created positions with some made-up title just to give someone a job.
Due to the flood of retirements there aren’t a lot of these positions floating around anymore. I forget the precise number from the budget workshops (and I’m sure you’ll hear Walker mention it), but the County staff has been trimmed significantly in the last 6 years.
I would have pushed harder to have the board’s salaries, the exec’s salary and most of the upper management’s salaries not just frozen, but cut.
There isn’t a lot of fat in the Board or the Executive’s salary. 19 sups at $50K and an exec at $120K is a drop in the bucket.
Upper management is dicey. You want qualified people, don’t you? Cut the existing management and they retire - exacerbating the pension and retiree health care problem. Not to mention you could lose a lot of institutional knowledge in one fell swoop - though that might be a benefit!
I think a lot of problems could have been avoided. The county, whether it is fully funded by the state and/or the feds or not, is required to provide a minimal amount of services. By trying to cut corners, skipping a payment here and there, and some poor decisions (the no bid contract for the demolition of the courthouse annex is among the biggest), it has put the county in a bigger and bigger bind.
I have not heard that the Annex contract was the problem, the problem was they found asbestos they didn’t know was there. Not to mention the unkept secret that the Board didn’t really want it taken down because of the covered parking.
The pension benefits and healthcare, if I’m not mistaken, comes out of the pension fund, not county budget. Ament benefitted from the 90’s economy and didn’t pay anything into it. After 9/11, the market dropped and payments became mandatory again. Instead of doing that, and instead of planning ahead for the 2004 exodus of county workers, Walker pretended it wouldn’ t happen and left the county to get the short end of the stick.
You are partially mistaken. The pension is paid for out of the pension fund. However, if the County’s actuary determines the fund is not fully funded - meaning it has enough assets to pay every dollar of current and future liabilities - the County has to put tax levy into it to shore it up. Right now the pension is funded at about 75% of its liabilities (compared to over 120% for the city - hence no levy contribution). The unfunded liability - worth about $500 million at present - required the County to kick in $50 million in 2008. I believe they put the full amount in, though just like a credit card with no minimum payment they can choose to not pay anything and add it to the tab.
Health insurance for retirees however - at a cost of approximately $60 million - comes straight out of the general fund budget. That’s $60 million that cannot be used for transit, parks, or the mentally disabled.
You have a decent understanding of the problem capper, much better than the anti-tax clowns who wouldn’t grasp good fiscal policy if we put them through a PhD program at the U of Chicago. But I’m afraid that you haven’t exactly come up with any priority decisions that would make a real dent in the County’s problem.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2045 hrs
Dohnal said,
Look at the diiferent philosophies in Waukesha county and Milwaukee county.
Even Vrakas raised the levy by just over a percent in an election year.
That is the reason that total property values are going to pass Milwaukee county and that there are plenty of good jobs.
The County’s property tax rate is hardly a major reason companies are locating to Waukesha County.
Also, while Waukesha County was on the way to matching Milwaukee County in terms of eq value, it has a long way to go and Milwaukee County lept farther ahead in recent years due to the Condo boom.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2049 hrs
The total values are almost equal. It is not just the tax rate but the animosity the liberals hold towards businesses, the stupid rhetoric, taxes, difficulty of doing business.
When you have a ditzy alderman like Mike Murphy who blocks a major development, like Wal-Mart, on the west side. Look at what has happend in Mukwonago and Delafield, two nowhere places till Wal-Mart came in. T
They kick out 500 or more jobs with benefits, something badly needed on the west side of Milwaukee.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2223 hrs
The total values are almost equal.
Define “almost equal”. Within 5%? 10%? A few million dollars?
Back up your statement, lest you lose credibility.
It is not just the tax rate but the animosity the liberals hold towards businesses, the stupid rhetoric, taxes, difficulty of doing business…
You bring up rhetoric and city issues. I am talking about County policies specifically. And when it comes to the counties themselves, even Vrakas raised the levy 1.1% for ‘07 and something like 1.5% for ‘08.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 03, 2007 at 2301 hrs
ATV-
Regarding the employees, there are many middle-upper management to upper management positions that are pulling in $70K-$100K per year, but they don’t even have job titles.
There is the stink about County Board Sup Cogg’s estranged husband who has been named repeatedly in sexual harassment complaints, but still works for he county in an unidentified position. Small change, but a start.
There have been a growing number of high paid contract specialists to set up and monitor all the privitization contracts. And as with the state, what the County gets is a lot less than what it pays for.
The annex was a no bid contract that was set at a price, after being tested numerous times. It was only after the ink was put to paper that the asbestos “suddenly” was found, jacking the price exponentially. This put a hold on all of the other maintenance projects, thereby jacking up their costs.
As for the pension, I think the number I heard was that the board committed $39M of the $50. But like a credit card, if the minimum isn’t paid, it will be the $11M plus interest plus whatever the next years total will be. In other words, it keeps getting worse the more it is neglected.
I can’t say anything about the health insurance funding without researching it further.
I also think that some more preventative measures could result in larger savings down the road. Unfortunately, it would also mean some higher upfront costs. By preventative measures, I mean things like the First Offenders Program and Wraparound for juvenile delinquents. It has prevented a lot of kids going to the expensive state kiddie prisons.
We have a mental health complex that is only partially being used. Staffing the empty wards could save tons of money that is being paid to state mental health and disabled adult centers.
A proactive approach towards mental health and AODA has also proven to be more effective and cheaper than incarceration, but Walker continues to want to cut these programs.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 0005 hrs
Capper,
Indeed you have some thoughts I need to investigate.
Good discussion. I think we agree on more that we disagree on, in the end.
What would really help is more robust fiscal oversight and communication. Compare Milwaukee County’s budget book to Waukesha County’s budget book (both available on their respective websites). Waukesha’s makes Milwaukee’s look like a high school civics project.
Best,
ATV
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2156 hrs
Dohnal said,
Nothing
I thought so. The information is available on the web with a 5-minute search.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 04, 2007 at 2157 hrs
Total Entries: 19655
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 08:28 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 77
Total anonymous users: 2
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/11/2012 08:50 pm
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).