From the Washington County Insider. I’ve had some personal insight into Samaritan and it is in sore need of attention. One wonders when that shoe is going to drop.

What once appeared a priority in the county with a dedicated Task Force and study committee, now, as a Samaritan resident noted, did not even manage a reference during the county executive’s 2022 state of the county address.

 

So, what is the status of the Samaritan Home and what is the future?

 

[…]

• Part of the discussion during the July 2021 meeting was financing and awaiting funds from the U.S. Treasury. A section of the story read; Washington County is in line to receive approximately $26.2 million in federal COVID relief funding. Schoemann said it is possible the federal money the County will be receiving could pay for this. “That’s why I said we have to let Matt finish all his work. By the time he finishes we should have final guidance from the U.S. Treasury.  I don’t know that it would pay for all of it, but it may be able to pay for a good portion,” he said.

 

The “Matt” referred to in the story is Matt Furno. Calls have been placed to Furno but recently a policy was enacted by the county executive and Furno said he cannot now speak directly to the issue. “I am not allowed to speak,” he said, “We could use your help in this whole thing.”

 

An email was sent to have a sit-down interview with Furno but so far there’s been no response.

 

[…]

 

Inside the Samaritan Home residents talk about the limited staff and some have mentioned how staff are paid with gift cards as incentives should they choose to work 7 days a week or more. Residents have also mentioned feelings of worry and insecurity about their living situation. Another wondered if the National Guard would be brought in to help with staffing.

 

County Supervisor Jodi Schulteis is Chairperson of the Human Services Committee, which in part, is informed about the Samaritan Home and its status. On the county board since being appointed in 2020, Schulteis said she has not been inside the Samaritan Home.

 

Questioned about the future of the Samaritan Home she said, “We continue to meet on it and discuss it and we continue to take the Task Force recommendation seriously but there has been no decision one way or the other.”

Call me skeptical. From the Washington County Insider:

July 21, 2022 – Washington Co., WI – The Washington County Joint Safety Committee approved a proposed $3.6 million public safety referendum to increase the budget for the Washington County Sheriff’s Department.

If the referendum is approved the $3.6 million would continue in perpetuity meaning it would be a regular tax every year moving forward.

[…]

A couple of bullet points from the Wednesday, July 20, 2022, Public Safety Committee meeting. The full draft of the Washington County Anti-Crime Plan is also below.

• The referendum would cover an additional 30.5 full-time positions; there would be an increase in staffing with Sheriff’s Department patrol or mental health. There were several requests for additional data for specifics and supervisors were told that information is forthcoming.

• County Executive Josh Schoemann said, “The county board could fund it (the $3.6 million) if they so choose.”

• “Bottom line is, if the county board chose to fund all these positions on their own, they have the ability to do that. My concern is it’s such a big increase, relatively speaking, I think the people of Washington County should make that choice. If they don’t want to increase their tax rate, increase the levy, then we don’t,” said Schoemann.

• “There’s enough property tax levity and flexibility, because we have not been taking the full amount of levy for years. The three times in the last eight years that we’ve cut the levy, the state allows you to go back and take some of that, if you so choose,” Schoemann said.

• “There’s major crimes back to the 1990s and in the 80s. I think it’s just the frequency is happening much more, and I think this is at the top of people’s mind right now. And as I mentioned, the sheriff’s office crime in particular is the highest concern of the county board and the community,” said Schoemann.

• Sheriff Martin Schulteis said, “There is minimum staffing to properly serve Washington County. We haven’t kept up with the county itself.”

• Schulteis said some changes would include eliminating some administrative positions and “really focus on boots on the ground serving citizens of Washington County.”

• The Sheriff and county administration were not prepared with data on out-of-county bookings, crimes committed outside area. More data was promised at a later date, however the committee had to vote on the proposed referendum during its meeting July 20, 2022 as it was an action item on the agenda.

• In past government scenarios there is a study conducted or committee formed to discuss major issues, similar to how Washington County approached the issues surrounding the Samaritan Home. There was no study or committee formed to review the Washington County Anti-Crime Plan.  Schoemann said he met with Schulteis and they discussed the issue.  The meeting July 20, 2022 was the first time it was brought before county supervisors.

• The decision to put the referendum on the November 8, 2022, ballot must be made by the county board at its August 10, 2022, meeting as the deadline to place it on the ballot is August 15, 2022, according to Schoemann.

Thanks to inflation, tax collections are at all time highs while personal real income is dropping. Is it really necessary to permanently increase taxes now?

Here’s the thing… budgets are about priorities. If we start from the position that almost all governments are adequately, if not over, funded, then it takes an extraordinary situation to justify increasing funding even more. But here we are with the supposedly “conservative” Washington County Board casting unanimous votes to proceed with a referendum to raise taxes. Are you telling me that there isn’t any superfluous spending in the budget that couldn’t be reallocated to public safety? None? Are they taking advantage of the increasing crime and public worry about it to raise taxes?

I’ll remind the reader that the county implemented a “temporary” sales tax that has since become permanent. The bite of inflation makes that sales tax hurt even more – and pushes more money into county coffers. Local governments are awash in money. They do not have a funding problem.

Let’s hope the large board comes to its senses and does not put this on the ballot. If they do, let’s hope the voters have more sense than their supervisors and vote it down.

I know that I’ve been on this for 20 years, but this is the object lesson for never believing government when they sell a tax as a “temporary” measure for some “emergency.” Come to think of it, that lesson applies to any government program.

WEST BEND — The Washington County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved keeping the county’s 0.5% sales tax in place Wednesday night.

As a reminder, I wrote this is 2006:

In 1998, Washington County was in a bit of a pickle. Several large capital improvement projects, like an expansion of the University of Wisconsin Washington County, the courthouse addition, and new Highway Department facilities, were looming and there wasn’t going to be enough tax revenue to pay for them. In the face of a crisis, the County Board did what governments always do – they raised taxes.

 

In this case, the new tax came in the form of a half penny county sales tax. They also designated part of the sales tax to be used for debt service, but that didn’t kick in until three years ago. Since 1999, the sales tax has removed over $49,400,000 from the pockets of people who choose to spend money in Washington County. Since the new sales tax was primarily for one time expenses, the County Board put in a provision that says that the County Board can vote to stop collecting the tax in 2006 – this year. If no vote is taken to stop the tax, then the tax will continue indefinitely.

There is another thoughtful letter to the editor in the Washington County Insider opposing the expansion of Hwy W through private property.

Also, you cannot excuse a yes vote as just “progress.”  If you do, you are not governing for the “people.”  You are just blindly following your transportation plan without thinking.  The supposed “progress” is theoretical.

Maybe more people will travel to Hartford to work and do business but no one will ever know.  There are too many factors affecting those kinds of issues.  “Progress” in this case, is not a tangible thing.  You cannot promise any real benefit.  To the families, however, it is very real.  To them, “progress” is likely a shameful and embarrassing government infringement on private property rights and the future of their farms.  The 11.4 acres is measurable, the emotional toll can be seen.

There are two very thoughtful letters to the editor in the Washington County Daily News today about the potential extension of Highway W in Hartford. This is part of a larger discussion that has been happening in Washington County and throughout the country for many years – the push-pull between urban and rural interests as areas become more populated.

In this case, I don’t understand the drivers behind the extension. There seems to be a lot of cost and disruption for a very marginal benefit. I’m familiar with the roads in the area and there are, as the letters suggest, much less expensive ways to address safety concerns. So who keeps pushing for this? Why? Is there a road builder behind the scenes planning to land this contract? It keeps coming back to life, so there must be a vested interest behind it that keeps pushing.

Without a stronger argument than we have seen, this extension doesn’t make any sense.

While Borek’s husband fell into the eligible age group and co-morbidity category to receive the vaccine, he was not eligible to receive one from Samaritan.

 

These will be fun to read.

We’ll see how firm they are when the rubber hits the road, but it is good to see them on the right side of the Constitution.

WEST BEND — The Washington County Board of Supervisors on Wednesday unanimously approved 2020 Resolution 17 — Washington County Advocates the Constitutional Rights of its Citizens.

The resolution reaffirms the oath county supervisors took upon swearing in to uphold rights of Washington County residents under the U.S. Constitution.

According to the resolution, “We the People” affirms the U.S. government exists to serve the nation’s people and “We the People hold dear and sacred and challenge all those who would seek to infringe upon the rights of the people.”

[…]

“We want to make sure the oath you took on day one, that’s something you’re committed to despite what other government bodies try to do,” said Kelling. ”We are going to hold true to the Constitution. We are going to fight for it on every level at every opportunity. This is who we are. This is one of the most conservative counties in Wisconsin. Who would lead if not us?”

A few months ago, I would have yawned at something like this as just some showmanship and pandering. In our new normal, as they say, affirming our rights has become paramount. Let’s get this done!

Nobody wishes ill on our neighbors who work for government, but these kinds of things will become more necessary as the people’s ability to pay is severely retarded by Governor Evers.

April 28, 2020 – Washington Co., WI – Details are coming in slowly however it appears Washington County is looking to implement a Mandatory Furlough Program for some of its employees. The five days of furlough are tied to an upcoming fiscal impact from COVID-19 pandemic. Details regarding a projected $3 million to $5 million drop in revenue are below.

Other details according to the Public Affairs Coordinator Ethan Hollenberger:

Employees must pick five furlough days between May 7 and Dec 31. They can take one per calendar week. Paid holidays (Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, etc) are eligible as days to pick to be on furlough.  Employees will work with their supervisor to pick the days that best work for them.

Long term, I don’t think this will be enough, unfortunately, but it’s a step in a necessary direction.

On another note, this stuck out to me from another story about a local government dealing with lesser revenue:

Here is a guest post from former Washington County Sheriff, Dale Schmidt. Here is a copy County Administrator Current Contract

As the candidates for Washington County Executive, Mr. Gitter and Mr. Schoemann, campaign using information they want you to know, voters should always seek out their own information about the candidates.  As Schoemann has been employed by county government since 2014 it may be worth reviewing the positions he has held and his current employment contract.

When he was first hired, the position was known as County Manager.   That position was part of the County pay chart at that time and probably had the same benefits as other full time employees.

By June of 2014 though, the County Board changed the position to County Administrator, still on the pay plan.  Starting in June of 2015 the Executive Committee held closed session meetings under the heading “County Administrator Contract” every month, (for 7 months) which culminated in the Board approving an employment contract for Schoemann at its December 8^th meeting.

That contract was a public document made available as part of the Board’s packet of information. The contract was for two years, renewable in one year increments.  Schoemann negotiated and the Board approved wages of $126,555 in 2016, and $132,883 in 2017.  The total wages and benefits were $166,988 in 2016 and $174,223 in 2017.  (At that meeting, the Board also approved a 1% cost of living raise for all non-represented employees.  It’s unknown if 1% was then added onto Schoemann’s negotiated wages).  Schoemann also was to accrue Paid-Time-Off at the rate of a 9 year employee and the contract included performance evaluations and a retention/incentive clause.

In September of 2017, that contract was amended by the Executive Committee in a closed session meeting lasting 16 minutes.  The contract item was on the public agenda as closed session, but the proposed contract was not publicly available.  To the best of my knowledge, the contract has not been published publicly to this day.  It also was never approved by the whole County Board as the Administrator is now only required to answer to the Executive Committee.  The members who approved this contract were Supervisors Kriefall, Michalak McCune, Bulawa, Deiss, Bassill, and past Chairman Gundrum.  The contract has been released to the public through a formal record request.  It should be noted that since the County Board changed its form of government to Executive, this contract is done the day the new Executive term begins in April.

Significant bullet points of the current contract.  (Words in italics are copied from the contract):

-This is a five year contract covering years 2018 through 2022.

–Administrator’s gross salary shall be set as follows: For calendar year 2018: $138,198; For calendar year 2019: $143,726; For calendar year 2020: $149,475; For calendar year 2021: $153,960; For calendar year 2022: $158,578.

–Retention Incentive.  Administrator shall receive an incentive (“incentive”) accrual and payment in accordance with the following procedures and policies:  1. Accrual of Retention Incentive, Beginning in 2018 for each year Administrator is employed by County from January 1 to December 31 under this Agreement, he shall accrue a retention incentive payment, The incentive accrual amount shall be as set forth in Article IV,B.2.  2. Payment.  In January of 2018 Administrator shall receive a retention incentive payment in the amount of $10,000, On January 1 each year thereafter, Administrator shall receive a retention incentive payment in the amount accrued three (3) years prior which shall be five percent (5%) of the then gross salary budgeted and approved by the County Board.  Said payment shall be deemed income and subject to applicable withholdings in accordance with the County’s standard payroll practices, The retention incentive payment shall be made as directed by Administrator in one lump sum or in 26 installments.  (Schoemann received the $10,000 on January 1, 2018 and then on January 1, 2019 it appears he received 5% of his gross salary for 2016 which is $6327.75 and on January 1 of 2020, 5% of his salary for 2017 which is $6644.15.)

-Deferred Compensation.  Beginning January 1, 2018 and continuing for the term of this Agreement, County shall make a contribution to a deferred compensation account approved by Administrator.  The amount of the contribution for 2018 shall be $6,000’ The amount of the contribution shall increase by $3,000 per year every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement.  (Deferred Compensation is a program to invest money for retirement.  Washington County employees must use their own money to invest in this program.  This contract specifies taxpayer funds are invested for the Administrator).

– Performance Bonus. Administrator shall be eligible for a performance bonus in the amount of $10,000 each year upon a satisfactory annual performance evaluation as determined by the Executive Committee.   (The Executive Committee conducted a performance evaluation on the Administrator during an October 9, 2019 closed session meeting.  The minutes reflect that Schoemann was rated a 5.  I believe the County scale is 1 to 5.)

Other income.  Beginning January 1, 2018 and every year thereafter during the term of this Agreement, per Administrator’s direction, County shall make a payment in the amount of $5,000 to a health savings account established by Administrator.   (The County puts $728 per year in individual employee HSA’s, and the employee can add their own money).

– Administrator, as of January, 2018, accrues paid-time-off (“PTO”) hours consistent with fourteen (14) years of service in the PTO table for Full Time non-represented employees with administrative leave and for the duration of this agreement will earn years of service credit consistent with the PTO table.   (2018 was the Administrator’s 5^th year of county employment.  Also, unused PTO can be cashed out at time of separation).

Additionally there are two lengthy sections on Removal/Resignation/Separation and Severance.  Together, they indicate the ways Schoemann could be separated from the position and what the payout would be for each.  One specific method is Change in Form of Government.  It spells out that if the County, changes to a County Executive form of government, the Severance clause is followed.  That clause essentially states the County agrees to pay Administrator a one-time lump sum cash payment equal to six (6) months of his current annual salary, and, extend paid health insurance coverage to Administrator and existing beneficiaries for six (6) months following removal.

A few thoughts… it is a shame that this is coming out less than a week before the election, but it needs to be known. This is one of the consequences of the decimation of local journalism with the rise of the internet. There was a time when it would have been someone’s job to watch local government. When a new contract like this was signed, they would have gotten a copy and reported it if anything was newsworthy. Now we are mostly relying on local citizens and a couple of small media outlets to cover the dozen or so governments just in Washington County.

The contract itself is a pretty sweetheart deal. Guaranteed raises, performance bonuses, expenses, and a separation payout clause? Sign me up! While County Administrator is an important position, I struggle to understand why the taxpayers needed to extend such a lucrative contract to attract good talent to the position.

The most egregious part of the whole deal, however, is the process. It was secretive, non-competitive, and just as you would expect the “good ol’ boy” system to work. For example, if they were going to so dramatically increase the compensation package for the role, then why not post the job to see if we had the best candidate we could get for that money? Or, if the County Manager was threatening to leave without the contract, why not let him quit and see if the county could get an equal or better resource for the money? As it is, we took the same guy and gave him a pretty substantial contract for the same work. It flies in the face of the cries of “frugal” and “broke” we get from the County leadership.

If you look at the folks who negotiated and signed this contract, they are many of the same people who have been writing letters of recommendation for Shoemann in his bid to be an elected County Executive. One wonders if they just want to keep the bodies buried when we have an independent, elected County Executive.