Leading the Way on Priority Based Budgeting

In a recent update, the Center for Priority Based Budgeting noted that Washington County is the national leader, having repurposed 13% of our budget from priority 3 & 4 expenses to priority 1 & 2 expenses.  This is a greater percentage than any other governmental body who has implemented Priority Based Budgeting.

Priority 1 & 2 expenses are critical expenses such as our County Sheriff's drug enforcement until.  in contrast, priority 3 & 4 expenses are less important.  A good example of a priority 4 expense was the County Sheriff's booth at the County Fair, where deputies would talk to the public and let kids color pictures and engage with our Sheriff's deputy.

Instead of funding new priority 1 & 2 expenses by burdening the community with higher taxes, we are finding ways to reduce our priority 3 & 4 expenses.  to do this, we are looking at a variety of solutions for the expenses.  A great, recent example was our County Administrator's effort called "Forever Honoring Our Veterans" in which he led fundraising effort to create a permanent endowment fund to take over the care of veteran's gravesites in our County.  The service will continue to be provided, but instead of using taxpayer money every year for a priority 3 expense, we will now be using privately-donated money.

Below is the information we received, showing how Washington County compares to some of the other governments across our country who have engaged in priority-based budgeting.

Another Campaign Promise Kept (and exceeded)

Yesterday I kept another promise from my 2018 campaign.  

In March of 2018 I promised:

I promise that, as long as the History Center remains committed to working towards significantly decreasing their reliance on County Funding, I will be an ally in supporting them and their efforts.

Yesterday that promise was fulfilled beyond expectations.  The County Board finalized an agreement that will support the History Center in becoming a fully self-sustaining member of our community.  This will save the County millions of dollars over the next 25 years, while preserving our history as well as the public use of the old courthouse building.  I am thrilled to join 23 other County Board Supervisors in supporting this win-win solution.

While I was critical of the History Center in 2016, they are now bravely embarking on a new future, one which I am thrilled to support.  They are going to be implementing a variety of changes that the community will find exciting and engaging.  They will also preserve the old courthouse building for future generations and ensure it remains a public resource.  I cannot wait to see them finalize this transformation.

County Executive---Key statistics

I thought I would put together some key statistics related to the decision to switch to a County Executive form of government.



Counties who currently have County Executives (by population)
1. Milwaukee, 950,381
2. Dane. 530,519
3. Waukesha, 401,446
4. Brown, 260,616
5. Racine, 196,200
6. Outagamie, 184,541
7. Winnebago, 170,025
8. Kenosha, 168,700

10. <<Washington County>>, 135,970 (County Administrator)

14. Fond du Lac, 104,035
21. Manitowoc, 81,494
23. Portage, 71,038

• Source, 4/16/19 e-mail from Brad Stern, using 2019 population statistics

Southeastern Wisconsin Region

1. Milwaukee, 950,381 (County Executive), no growth from 2012-2017, -0.31%

3. Waukesha, 401,446 (County Executive), High growth from 2012-2017, 1.87%

5. Racine, 196,200 (County Executive), no growth from 2012-2017, -0.12%

8. Kenosha, 168,700 (County Executive), Moderate growth from 2012-2017, 0.74%

10. Washington County, 135,970 (County Administrator), High growth from 2012-2017, 1.62%

15. Walworth, 103,535 (County Administrator), Low growth from 2012-2017, 0.06%

18. Ozaukee, 88,667 (County Administrator), High growth from 2012-2017, 1.83%

• Source, 4/16/19 e-mail from Brad Stern, using 2019 population statistics
• Source for population growth ratings, 2018 Green Book published by Wisconsin Counties Association, pages 8 & 9.

We are also at the precipice of an extremely high growth period for our County.  Some are predicting that Washington County may soon see explosive growth, and become one of the fastest growing counties in the State of Wisconsin.  Structurally, a County Executive would have stronger authority and support to ensure that we adequately plan for that growth.

Important County Board Meeting and Public Hearing - County Executive

Next week Wednesday, May 22 at 6:00 p.m. at the County Fair Park, the County Board's Executive Committee will be holding a meeting related to implementing a County Executive.  There will be a presentation, followed by an opportunity for Public Comment.  I encourage anyone who is interested to attend this meeting.

I have generally heard positive commentary related to this topic.  Many of the neighbors I have talked to like the idea of electing the head of the Executive branch of our County's government, instead of having the County Board appoint that head.

I have heard a few comments that have expressed some pessimism about getting this accomplished, since the issue came up once before.  Right now we have a very reform-minded County Board.  I would point to a few examples:

• People doubted that we would ever have evening meetings, but we got that done.  
• People doubted that we would ever curb the wasteful practice of paying County Board members per diem pay based on the number of meetings they attend.  We made significant progress in reducing that practice to only $20 per meeting (Long-term I would like to eliminate per diem pay entire at some point).  
• People doubted that the County Board would ever be reduced in size, but that happened in 2015 (just before I first got elected) when the board was reduced from 30 to 26.  It also stands a good chance of being reduced again after the 2020 census.
• People doubted that we would ever have a park-system that could sustain itself without taxes, but we are making great progress towards getting that done.

Right now I am leaning towards voting for this when it comes before the full County Board, but I also want to continue hearing from my neighbors in District 3 and throughout the County.

I think that the final vote on this will be close, but I see a significant potential that this will pass, and that in April 2020 we will be electing a County Executive.

Should Washington County Elect A County Executive?

Just as a bit of background, in Wisconsin counties can chose between 3 approaches for their government structure:

• Administrative Coordinator.  This approach is usually taken by the smallest counties.  The County Board basically runs all of County Government, except for the courts, and the Administrative Coordinator helps the Board in running the County effectively.  The Administrative Coordinator is selected by the Board.  The Board is heavily involved in supervising staff.  Washington County had this form of county government until about 4-6 years ago, but had definitely outgrown it.
• County Administrator.  This approach is what Washington County now has.  The Administrator is hired by the Board, and reports to the Board Chairman, but he (or she) runs the operations of the County Government.  Close supervision of department heads is provided by the Administrator, rather than the County Board.
• County Executive.  This approach is most common for the largest counties in Wisconsin.  In this approach, the community elects a County Executive, similar to how the community elects a Sheriff, a County Clerk, a County Treasurer, a Clerk of Courts, etc...  The Board does not provide any supervision of department heads or County Operations, but instead remains strictly focused on the policy decisions.

In a recent editorial in the Washington County Daily News, the prospect of switching to a County Executive was raised.  At first, I had visions of Milwaukee County, and the frequent disfunction they display.

However the more I thought about it, the more I realized that we do need to very closely and carefully consider this idea.  This is not a decision to make lightly, nor is it a decision for us to avoid.  The County Board should invest time and effort to fully consider this issue.

One major reason is our growth.  We are one of the fastest growing counties in the state.  We are currently the 10th largest County, and the top eight counties (Milwaukee, Dane, Waukesha, Brown, Racine, Outagamie, Winnebago, and Kenosha) all have County Executives.  The other counties who have a County Executive include Fond Du Lac (16th), Manitowoc (21st), and Portage (23rd).  In our region, south-eastern Wisconsin, the only counties that don't have a County Executive are Ozaukee and Walworth, which rank 18th and 14th in total population.

I also like the accountability of having an elected person, chosen by the whole County.  Right now our County Administrator is potentially insulated from the will of the voters.  If he goes in a direction that the public doesn't like, the public can only hold him accountable through the County Board.  Having direct accountability seems like it is the way government should work.  One former Supervisor referred to me as a "Good Government Type" as if it is somehow a bad thing to want Government to be accountable;  I couldn't disagree more.  Government should be accountable to the voters.

Of course, one of the dumbest reasons to do something is because "that's what everyone else is doing."  Just because it works elsewhere doesn't mean that it is right for Washington County.  We shouldn't blindly follow what others are doing.  But that coin can be flipped to the opposite side, if all the other big counties have a County Executive, maybe there's a good reason and maybe we should take the time to find out.

I don't have a strong opinion on this yet, because this is such a big decision and so far we have very little information.  I do think we should look at this very closely, and gather a lot of information, so that we can make a fully informed decision.

As this evolution of County government is being considered, I want to ask the community in Washington County, and especially district 3, to reach out to me and share their thoughts on this issue.  Representative government works best when I hear from you.

Milwaukee's Trolley, the Good, the Bad, and the Rather Strange (my experience riding it)

Last weekend my girlfriend and I rode Milwaukee's trolley, so I could experience for myself the trolley.  I often find that firsthand experience serves me best.  I had heard that weekends were busier times for the trolley, so we chose to go on an early Saturday afternoon.

After driving past the homeless campground underneath the Marquette interchange, paying $3.50 to park downtown, and walking several blocks, we reached the trolley platform and my adventure began.

I ultimately started at one end of the line, at 4th and St. Paul.  From there, I rode the trolley to the end of the line and back.  As I describe my experience, I'll true to be honest about the good and bad that I observed, along with the rather strange.



The Good

• Ridership was much higher than I expected.  I did deliberately pick a busier day, and maybe a weekday would be much slower.  I also happened to pick St. Patrick's day weekend, which might have increased ridership.  I thought a busier day meant that there would be 10 riders instead of 3.  When we got on at 4th and St. Paul, there were about 12 people already on board (which was a surprise since there were only about 5 people waiting for the trolley).  When we reached the 3rd ward, another 15 or so people got on (most of whom got off at or before the end of the line).  When we reached the end of the line and prepared to come back, a ton of people got on, and the trolley car was full.  I counted about 35-40 people in all.  Around 20 of those people got off when we reached the third ward, with others getting off at various stops.  Of course, riding the trolley is free, and parking in the 3rd ward is not free.  Once people have to pay, ridership may fall off significantly, but at least for now free ridership seems to be strong.
• It ran on time.  It left 4th and St. Paul at exactly 12:20, right on schedule, and was back a few minutes before 1:00.  the trolley was ready to leave again at 1:00.  Two trolleys are running at the same time, in opposite directions, so a potential rider should never wait more than 20 minutes.  Assuming it always runs on time, that reliability increases the potential that it will get used.  A basic of any public transportation is that it has to run on time, by the schedule, and the trolley did that during my visit.
• I never felt unsafe.  We've all heard the horror stories of the New York City subway system in the 80s, where rampant crime made the use of public transportation a risky proposition.  I felt completely safe on the streetcar, as there were no riders who made me feel uncomfortable.  Of course, when the route only visits trendy neighborhoods, the criminal element won't garner much interest in the trolley.

The Bad

• There was a stop every two or three blocks.  One of the stops made no sense, on 1st and St. Paul, where there is literally nothing nearby.  I don't think the trolley ever went more than 4 blocks without stopping, and it stopped even if nobody was getting on or off.  As a result of all of the stops, it took twice as long as it would have taken me to just drive the route (minus the time spent looking for parking).
• It didn't go very fast.  If the number on the dashboard was the speed, it topped out at around 12-14 MPH.  The route is 2 miles long and takes 17 minutes (including stops) which works out to an average speed of 7 MPH.  It seemed like it was going a little faster than that, but certainly not at the speed of traffic, nor was it going as fast as the cars behind it would have preferred.  Part of me now wants to follow it in my car so I can get an honest measurement.
• Driving on the tracks was strange.  On my way out, I drove the trolley route, and while I can't explain it, it didn't feel right driving on a road with tracks in it.  I kept trying to make sure none of my tires were driving directly on the tracks as it seemed to make my cars handling less stable.  Maybe that's psychosomatic, but that was my experience driving part of the route.
• Bicycles and motorcycles.  The trolley tracks are not bicycle or motorcycle friendly.  For a few of the platforms, in order for them to extend out to the trolley, they went over the bike lane.  Bikes had to zig behind the trolley platforms (there was a gap between the platform and the pedestrian sidewalk).  As well, I saw a bicyclist do a well-practiced hop over the trolley tracks while riding down the road, when a platform forced him to ride between the tracks.  There have been stories about bikes and motorcycles getting their front tires stuck in the tracks and flipping over.
• Noise.  The trolley had a frequent and relatively constant high pitch whine that I found to be very annoying.
• Trendy Neighborhoods.  The tracks did not go through any poor neighborhoods, but instead visit all of the trendy neighborhoods on the east side.
• No left turns (except for the trolley).  There was a least one spot where the trolley tracks were in the left lane, which became a left turn lane.  Consequently, signs were posted that limited use of the left turn lane to only the trolley.  While driving this part of the route, I had to drive straight for a block, pull a u-turn, and then make a right turn to continue following the tracks.
• Short route.  The full length of the route is 2 miles (and it takes 17-20 minutes to traverse that distance).
• Limited Seating.  There were 14 seats at each end of the trolley, with a big empty space for standing in the middle.  It seemed odd that there wasn't more seating.  With 10-12 people staying on the trolley for more than a complete lap, and many taking 2 seats for themselves, this left only a few seats for other riders.  When we had 40 on the trolley, more than half of them were standing in the middle section.
  

The Rather Strange

• Riders who stay on the trolley.  Several of the people (maybe as many as 10-12, but at least 6) who were already seated on the trolley when I got on stayed on for the entire round trip, and didn't even get off after completing the entire circuit (plus whatever they had already ridden).  My girlfriend noticed this too.  Neither of us had planned to watch for this, so I don't have an exact count.  None of these individuals looked like homeless people, and many seemed to know each other.  Either they were really clean homeless people or the only explanations left are rather far-fetched.  Still, when realistic and plausible explanations have been exhausted, you have to start considering far-fetched explanations.  I won't speculate any further on what was going on here, but it is odd.  I will say that I personally would not ride more than 1 complete lap at a time unless someone else was paying me to do it, but that's just me.
• Bus Seats.  The seats were essentially the very same hard plastic seats that are used on the buses.  Of course, that leads to the big question, why not just have a bus run this route and save millions of dollars, especially if everything on the trolley is going to be just like a bus?  On the outside, it looks somewhat sleek and slightly futuristic, why do you want it to look just like a bus on the inside?
• Platforms in the center of the street.  This was genuinely weird.  At a few spots, the platform was in the center of the street, so potential riders would have to cross traffic to get to the platforms.  There was room on the side of the street, and this did take away a traffic lane.  This was also on one way streets, so there didn't seem to be a logical reason the have the platform in the center of the road.  It just didn't make sense to me.
• Riding backwards.  If you stay in the same seat for an entire lap, you'll spend half that time riding backwards, which came seem qeird and uncomfortable.  For us, we spent the first half of the trip facing backwards.

Final Conclusion

• How is this better than a bus?  While the trolley had good ridership, one burning question remains---What can the trolley do that a bus can't.  The trolley cost a ton of money, more than a thousand times the cost of a pair of busses.  It also had a ton of infrastructure that buses don't need, including raised platforms, overhead wires, tracks in the street, etc...  Since buses have a much cheaper price-tag on them, this is a critical question.  The only answers I have for that aren't very satisfying.  It looks sleaker than a bus, so if your primary concern and motivation when designing public transportation is aesthetics no matter what the price, then that's one advantage.  Otherwise, from a value added perspective, I couldn't give you any explanation of how this is better than a bus, or why a bus driving this exact route would be inferior.
• Doesn't help the city's poor.  The trolley seemed focused on getting trendy east-siders to the 3rd ward and back.  The busiest stops by far were the stop at the north end of the route, and the stop in the 3rd ward.  The city's poor don't live along the route, and it does absolutely no good for them.  They are the ones who depend on public transportation to get to work each day, and they are left without help from the trolley.  In fact, the trolley may take away public resources from their neighborhood.
• Possible Market Fulfillment.  It is possible that the trolley does fulfill a market desire/need (albeit in the most massively expensive way possible) for public transportation between the east side and the 3rd ward.  This doesn't mean that a bus couldn't serve that need every bit as well, for a small fraction of the cost and maybe at a faster speed than an average of 7 MPH, but it does mean that there is a market for some form of public transportation between these two points.

I still believe that in the long run, we will come to realize that the best name for the trolley will be the "Boondoggle Express."

Today's 5k Run---I came, I saw, I... Survived?

Me, after crossing the finish line

A few months ago, I decided to start work on getting myself into a bit better shape.  I used to run cross country in high school, and decided that running would be a key part of my effort.  Along with that, I signed up for a 5k run (an event that raises money for the Ronald McDonald House), and set a goal for myself: to be able to run the whole distance.

When I started training, I could only run a quarter-mile at a time.  Each time I went to the gym, I pushed myself to run a little bit more each day, (even if I only added a twentieth of a mile).  Over the first month I worked my way up to running 2 miles.

Then my legs started giving me some resistance, with a pulled muscle, and then some ankle issues.  This last week I didn't do any training at all, and was pessimistic about achieving my goal today.

This morning I joined 600 other people at the starting line.  Before the start, I lined up near the back, with the walkers and slower runners.  Once the race started, it took a minute and a half for me to even get to the starting line, as I slowly edged forward behind a throng other runners.

Ultimately, I did run the entire distance.  My time was slow, 34 minutes (when I subtract out the time it took to get to the starting line).  If they don't subtract out that time, then my official time is around 35:28.  I had a lot of moments of doubt, especially during the first two miles.  When I saw the finish line, I regained my old form for the last 1/4 mile.

The came the ride home, when my legs decided to start returning the punishment I had given them.  When I stopped at a convenience store halfway home, my calves were in open revolt and I could barely walk.  A little light stretching got them to loosen up a bit, but I am sure I'll be sore all weekend.  My body now has a lot more wear and tear on it than it did when I was 16.

I am signed up for another one in 2 months, and hopefully can improve on my time.  I don't know that I'll ever get back to my personal best, a 20:08 that I ran when I was 16 (which wasn't really all that fast).  My body has seen a lot of wear and tear since then, so I'd be happy just to get under 25 minutes again someday.

Update---They do deduct the time it takes to get to the starting line, and results are posted.  My official time is 33 minutes, 40 seconds, which works out to a pace of just under 11 minutes per mile.  I was also 15th in my age/gender group.