Both Sides of the Fence

Chistine, Zimmerman estimate of 50 years may not be correct

considering that their last renovation was estimated to last 20 years

and it’s only been 10 years so far.

Also, how come Brookfield’s firehouse is costing $7 million and ours

is estimated at $12 million.  Is it 80% bigger?

With looming employee benefit funding, Hart Park renovations,delayed infrastructure improvements, is this real the time to be asking for a Cadillac when a Buick would do.  Let’s ask the voters what they are willing to pay for.

Yes we need a fire station, but with scrutiny and fiscal constraint.

Susie Orman says "build what you can afford not what you want"  

Pardon, "the Waukesha Model" not "Brookfield"

Family Guy, your point about Zimmerman may argue for new construction, not renovation.

As to Brookfield, have they ever brought a project in for anywhere near the budget? I don't know the answers to your questions but they sound like good ones. Have you asked your alder or Nancy Welch? Or do you know the answers?

It seems to me that the fire station IS a delayed infrastructure improvement, and that there's been plenty of time for scrutiny.

As to what we are willing to pay for and what we can afford, well, those aren't always the same. I bet you and your wife have had some discussions about that. . .

Christine

Christine...

Good post.

This project needs to get under way and completed.

I'm beginning to sense a lack of transparency, or dare I suggest courage, on the part of the naysayers (I am being polite) - One of whom is a mayoral candidate.

Knock-off the posturing and put this before the voters.

Tom

Here's a stupid question.

Why can't we have a referendum during the spring mayoral election.

No special referendum would be needed (saving $$) and this could be the largest voter turnout in years (greatest input

From taxpayers).   A referendum would take the heat off the counsel and save Time & Money  (architectural design fees for a $12M firehouse may be worthless when the taxpayers want to spend less) .   A Spring Referendum would speed the process as well.  

Here is the referendum

City needs a firehouse what should they spend:

A. $12,000,000 for a nice one

B. $10,500,000 for a modest one

C. $0  Wait for a few more years until I can get into San Camillo

Works for me!

Why do we need a new fire station? Are we having more fires?

Crusty,

Any new fire truck the city gets in the future will be too big to fit in the old station and bigger doors cannot be put in for some reason.  The argument is about the cost and need of the amenities, as well as the location.

"Amenities" sounds so. . . crown moldings and other decorator heaven.

I think a bigger argument is about function, in the sense of having space for administrative functions, not just the ladders and slide poles. (Do they have poles still?)

Christine

House administation @ City Hall--It's within walking distance

of the firestation.  

Fire department Admin belongs at Station One.  It should be functional space.

If you're going to spend the money make sure you think long-term use.

They also need space for the spotted dogs that ride on the trucks...

www.wauwatosanow.com/.../index.aspx

Here are some amenities:

"Under the proposal to move the fire station north of its current site on Underwood Avenue, the fire chief's office would increase in size from 175 to 409 square feet; the sleeping rooms for firefighters would increase from 790 to 1,625 square feet; and the kitchen would increase from 480 to 1,311 square feet."

Alderman Donegan:  "I think the amount of space they are asking for is startling, more than doubling the size of administration and dorms without additional staff."

Donegan is my alderhuman and we are ideologically opposed on a number of issues, but he has been asking very good questions on this one.

I see this issue as akin to people buying a house....they often want alot more than they will actually need, government buildings are no different.

Christine, I hope you will take a look at my comments on Tom's blog.

To your specific question regarding whether or not a referendum is required; I would say that we recently changed the ordinance that limited the Council's discretion on capital spending so that this matter does not require a referendum. However, I believe every Alder holds that this, the largest capital expenditure in our history, should indeed be subject to referendum and on a binding basis and I have not heard any Alder suggest otherwise.

And if I may say to TOSAGUY, thanks for the support and I don't believe I have been "ideological" at all on Council but........ the Square Feet numbers you quote have been ......I guess, "retracted" is the best characterization I can give. The numbers you quote and that I complained about are indeed reported in detail in the 12/18 public presentation by Zimmerman. These, along with the other requirements, would total to some 37,000 SF. However, Zimmerman, after providing all this fine detail, told us to disregard and that the proposal and budget is for a total of some 32,000 SF and that Admin. and Dorm will be adjusted accordingly. So, as I read it, the current proposal wants 42% more space for Admin. and Dorm with no anticipated increases in staff. (Confused?? this kind of reporting to us is one reason that this has been so drawn out).

I'm definitely holding out for a 10% reduction in this space worth an estimated $480,000.

Thanks for your comments Alder Donegan.   I do agree that you have not injected ideology into the council.   The numbers I cited were from a TosaNow article, if they are changing the we should have follow up articles since not everyone spends their free time plodding through meeting minutes.   If I missed such an article...my bad.