I am very pleased that Dan Sutton and Ron Balzer will be returning to the council, but extremely sorry that Terry Halmstad will not be joining them. Thank you, Terry for making the effort to make a difference.

 
Renee' Lowerr will join Brookfield's Common Council though, and that is a good thing too. She won by 105 votes:  Lowerr, 797  Schellinger, 692. That one was closer than I thought.

I think Lisa Mellone will appreciate having an enthusiastic fellow alderman for our district. Congratulations Renee'.
 

Elmbrook's referendum passed by 634 votes: Yes, 7,557 to No, 6,923. I would have thought in our current economic climate that it would not have passed. Note to self, next time I move (I should really say, if I move, since I never pictured myself living anywhere else), make sure our household income is not below the median.

Chanel 4 is calling the State Supreme Court for Gableman, so that definitely lifts my spirits. It has been 40 years since an incumbent lost, so this is quite a remarkable win.

He stated in his acceptance speech, "I believe the proper role of a judge is to apply the law not make it." I like that! He offered thanks to God for keeping him through the campaign. I like that even better.  Gableman's victory shifts the court by 1 vote to the conservative side, so that makes me very happy.

Gleisner lost. His race was not a hill to die on. Gleisner was more of a social conservative, but Neubauer maybe be better for the business climate in Wisconsin.

One oddity, in the school board race, the candidates who dropped out of the race each received over 4,000 votes!

Do we interpret that as voters are not very well informed or chalk it up to a protest vote?

OK, I can go to bed now. Glad this is over and done. Zzz   

Links:

Or, "TYPICAL JUVENILE TACTICS BY THE PERENNIAL CANDIDATE"

It happens nearly every election, I should not be surprised. The Schellinger signs pop up overnight like an unwanted crop of mushrooms.

My husband alerted me about this early today. He voted at 7am. They were all over across from our polling place. He called Brookfield's City Hall and spoke to City Clerk Kris Schmidt.

She indicated it would be taken care of. I think a poll worker could go take the errant ones down.

I went to vote at about 11:30am. That is when I snapped the 1st photo.  5 on one corner!

My Alderman Lisa Mellone had sent this photo to me in an email with this comment:

" Attached is a typical sign violation by Tom Schellinger (multiple signs placed in yard) placed in the final hours. Ask the residents on Chester St.(across from the District 7 polling place) if they gave Tom permission to place those signs in their yards.  Not surprisingly, it was discovered from at least one who was home, that Tom did not ask for permission.  Typical juvenile tactics by the perennial candidate." (Emphasis added)

This is typical Tom Schellinger.  He pulled another stunt even more juvenile  2 years ago when he ran for 3 races at once!

Lisa Mellone sent me this update at 1:49pm from Dean Marquardt, "Tom [Beinert, code inspector] just returned from this area.  He removed signs on five parcels.  Four of the properties were Schellinger sites, he pulled eight signs on these
sites.  Two Schellinger signs were left on each property (one for alderman, one more generic). "

Poor Kris Schmidt has been inundated with these types of calls today and she has an election to run! Unless something is extremely important, I think we have to let it go. 

Everything associated with campaigns is becoming "anything goes." Even with the referendum. Last night Chanel 4 did a spot on Elmbrook's referendum at Central High School. Molly Steffan was interviewed. The whole piece was slanted to why we need to spend $62.2mil. (No mention of why the school was allowed to get to this state.)

I was interviewed too, but I got a knock on my door around supper time and had about 5min.to think. Does that seem equitable?

Renee' Lowerr is playing by the rules. She has worked very hard going door to door, speaking with area residents.

Tom Schellinger went door to door too, to some selected residents if they had a Lowerr sign in their yard, to ask why they supported Renee'. He went to other households, but did not bother to ask to post a sign.

Is it any wonder Lisa Mellone defeated him in 2006?

I hope the same happens this election. 

I had this email early this a.m.:  "Interesting note--did you notice the Schellinger signs, which have appeared around the neighborhood in the past week or so?  (Spouse) has talked to a lot of these folks, whose properties the signs are on; of the folks (spouse) was able to talk to, none of them gave permission for the signs to be placed on their properties; some did not  even know they were there. Seems like Mr. Schellinger will never learn. Or perhaps he has and knows he is not wanted in the 7th district. Go Renee!" (Emphasis added)

Tom Schellinger was a Brookfield Alderman. He knows the law; he knows better. His method takes less work though, and that sums up "Mr. Roll-a-dex" pretty well. (He will be my County Supervisor, heaven help me if I ever need anything!) 

ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS AND AIR CONDITIONING!

Brookfield Academy's $12.5 mil high school, we can too

Correction: C G SCHMIDT Cost summary of Referendum

Today is the BIG MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TUESDAY--no fooling  GO VOTE! 

Elmbrook School District Referendum Links:

Frequently Asked Questions  Not to be missed!

HSST Meeting Minutes 

Cost Breakdowns of Type of Work (cost per square footage)

Architect's Conceptual High School Floorplans--East and Central

Facility "Needs" comparison of failed 2007 and present 2008 referendums

Tax Calculator  

Former 2007 Referendum Facilities Facts Sheets (Still a good read)

It is nearing the big day for the 2008 spring election on Tuesday, April 1st. True, it is April Fools Day, but this election is no joke. There is a lot riding on the ballot this day, for one thing, a $62.2 million dollar school referendum.

Add an important State Supreme Court race and half of Brookfield's Common Council too, throw in a Constitutional Amendment and a few other races and I hope it adds up to a good turnout.

I will start with the biggest ticket item first. My picks are in bold and marked with an X. I live in the 7th district, but I will also include my picks for other districts as well. As always, familiarize yourself with the candidates and issues and make an intelligent choice.

My policy is to only vote for those I support. Unless I am reasonably familiar with a candidate's stance, I do not vote for them. If a candidate is unopposed and I don't support them, I don't vote for them. I may vote for a write-in instead as a protest vote. (My comments are in parenthesis.)

HERE IS TUESDAY'S BALLOT  (Thanks Fairly Conservative for the tip on looking up your area's ballot.)

AUTHORIZING GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (A.K.A. Elmbrook's $62.2 Million dollar referendum )

_ YES

X NO!!!

QUESTION 1: Partial Veto (A.K.A. Frankenstein veto)

X YES

   NO
 

Non-Partisan Races: 

JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT 

X MIKE GABLEMAN (Endorsed by Cong.Sensenbrenner, Ryan, Wisconsin Right to Life, and more info)

   LOUIS BUTLER (Endorsed by Sen. Feingold, Kohl, AFT & WEAC, Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender Center Advocates)

COURT OF APPEALS JUDGE, DISTRICT 2

X WILLIAM GLEISNER (Endorsed by Paul Bucher, who's ads state Gleisner is pro-life, gun rights, and voter ID)

   LISA S. NEUBAUER (Gov. Doyle appointee, more liberal than Gleisner)

 

COUNTY BOARD SUPERVISOR

THOMAS SCHELLINGER (Tom will make it for this one without my vote, remember 2006?)  

Former alderman JIM HEINRICH is also on the ballot for another area.

ALDERMEN, City of Brookfield  My picks if I could vote in every district. My district 7.

DISTRICT 1

X DAN SUTTON*  (Hands down my favorite here. Dan has great instincts. I hope to see him as council pres.)

DICK BRUNNER (My impression: Voted with mayor's agenda for every development and against neighborhoods.)

DISTRICT 2

X TERRY HALMSTAD (Seems to be everything I would look for in a candidate, he would be an asset on the council.)

RICK OWEN (Seems he votes with mayor's agenda for every development and against neighborhoods--including ours. Will the real Rick Owen please stand up?)

DISTRICT 3

X RON BALZER* (Ron often votes independently of mayor's agenda.  I would vote for him if I lived in 3.)

JACK SHAW  

DISTRICT 4

STEVE PONTO (I can't remember a vote of his that wasn't the mayor's agenda. Drives a cute red VW convertible though.)

DISTRICT 5 

SCOTT BERG* (His votes sometimes surprise you--not always with the mayor's agenda--he also is surprising.)

DISTRICT 6 

X CHRISTOPHER BLACKBURN* (I am so glad he is running again and has no opponent. He is very pro resident.)

DISTRICT 7 

X RENEE' LOWERR (Very energetic, hard worker, and I think will be sensitive to neighborhoods regarding development since she had her own NIMBY experience.)

TOM SCHELLINGER*, AGAIN. (Nice enough guy, but a neighbor refers to him as Mr. Roll-a-dex, because when he called Tom about an issue, Tom got the neighbor a phone number to call to solve for himself. Position never known on an issue until vote.) 

*The star denotes the aldermen who voted with our neighborhood to preserve our little Kinsey Park woods from an unwanted, paved, bike road. We barely squeaked a victory and would not have won had Gary Mahkorn not been on vacation.

Oh, I almost forgot...

SCHOOL BOARD: all unopposed 

X TOM GEHL (Tom and I don't see eye to eye on everything, like the referendum, but he made the hard decision to vote NO to 4K because it did not show academic merit. He is very prompt and polite in his response time to email questions.) 

DAVID MARCELLO (David is also pro referendum and will probably get in unless enough people write in CINDY KILKENNY as I will do. Then maybe we can start maintaining our schools.)

GARY JONES (He will get in, but this is another chance to choose your ideal candidate with a write-in. Gary seemed nice enough at the forum, but again, he is pro referendum.) 

Correction: C G SCHMIDT Cost summary of Referendum

ACADEMICS, NOT ATHLETICS AND AIR CONDITIONING!  

Tomorrow is MILLIONS OF DOLLARS Tuesday!

Links: Brookfield7, Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Tomorrow is the primary for President and Brookfield Aldermen in Districts 1 and 2. I have no aldermanic primary in my district. But if I did live in the 1st or 2nd district...

I would be casting my vote for Dan Sutton. I have watched Dan Sutton during his first 4 year term and I like what I see. Dan showed he had good instincts with some of his comments during those early council meetings and even though he was a new alderman, he voted against the flow. As he matured in his role as alderman, his votes reflected his good instincts more and more. In recent years, Sutton went to bat for Brookfield taxpayers: 

JSOnline Nov. 2006 Aldermen Jerry Mellone and Dan Sutton argued that the budget had some areas where reserves were high enough and expenses low enough to cut tax collections, even for one year of relief.

If you attended that council meeting or saw it on cable broadcast, you witnessed Dan's leadership skills:

From Brookfield7, Dec. 2006 Rick Owen, in his usual condescending way, in essence put down Alderman Jerry Mellone for bringing up further budget cuts. Then a remarkable thing took place: Alderman Sutton eloquently put Rick in his place by reminding the council that Jerry Mellone had every right to bring up those cuts.

Is it any wonder that earlier in 2006, many of Sutton's fellow aldermen thought he would be a good leader too?:

Brookfield7, April 2006 Last real bit of business for the council was to elect a new Council President. Scott Berg had been promoting his name and Steve Ponto was too. The surprise candidate was Dan Sutton. The first ballot was Ponto 7, Sutton 5, and Berg 2--no majority. Second ballot was Ponto 8, Sutton 5 and Berg 1. Ponto wins. Ponto was the better choice than Berg, but am disappointed that Dan Sutton did not prevail. Although Dan frequently [not always] votes with the crowd, he has good instincts and raises valid questions during the discussion. I am hoping that with the new aldermen on the council that Dan will trust his good instincts more and vote accordingly.

It did not take long for Dan Sutton to trust his good instincts more and more. He deserves your vote. 

Now, if I lived in the 2nd district...

Terrence Halmstad would be getting my vote. Mr. Halmstad, according to Brookfieldnow's article and voter's guide, reflects my values.

Halmstad said the relocation of the fire station coupled with further development near the intersection could make traffic in the area "horrendous."

Halmstad also said he's been frustrated with the city's approach to development and redevelopment in the district and across Brookfield.

"We're not really looking at these (projects) really hard before they're passed," he said.

Rick Owen's quote in the guide, "I supported the 2020 Master Plan and continue to endorse it. One of its essential doctrines is the preservation of single family residential neighborhoods.", from my perspective, seems rather in conflict with Will the real Rick Owen please stand up?  Rick dismissed the 2020 Master Plan's specificity and Alderman Jerry Mellone's efforts to protect Mellone's single family neighborhood from an over enthusiastic Calhoun Road widening project.

Rick has always been very polite to me personally. But his civility does neighborhoods little good as his hand consistently reaches for the vote YES button on development issues. 

I don't know that there is much of a difference between Jennifer Donze and Rick Owen. They both serve on the Plan Commission. If the colossal Fountain Brook Crossing project is any indicator, they both voted "to recommend rezoning to allow construction of a four-story office building." The Journal article stated, "Commissioners said Monday that the concept is growing on them for its potential as a striking gateway as motorists enter the city from New Berlin. 'In a way, the height is an important part of that,' said Commissioner Jennifer Donze." 

Jennifer and Rick seem to think our taxes are low enough too. Terry Halmstad sees that there is "no longer a distinction between wants and needs; this has to change."

The choice is yours, District 1 and 2 residents. Please research this for yourself and make an informed decision.

As for my Hillary Clinton vote, no, I have not become a Democrat. But since McCain will get the Republican nomination with or without me (he is now my 1st choice for president), I am at least going to vote tomorrow for my 2nd choice for president. 

Why Hillary Clinton? Because she is more conservative than Barack Obama*. She is considered to be the 16th most liberal senator, while Barack is considered to be THE most liberal (1st). They both are making promises to fund all sorts of government programs with taxpayer money, but Barack even out-gives Hillary. I see him as much more charming and thus will be able to get his measures through Congress easier.

So that is it. Tomorrow I vote for my first ever Democrat for President, Hillary. 

*One of the reasons I view Barack as the most liberal...

 "Who would oppose a bill that said you couldn't kill a baby who was born? Not Kennedy, Boxer or Hillary Rodham Clinton. Not even the hard-core National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL). Obama, however, is another story. The year after the Born Alive Infants Protection Act became federal law in 2002, identical language was considered in a committee of the Illinois Senate. It was defeated with the committee's chairman, Obama, leading the opposition."

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna 

Remember the old TV game show, To Tell the Truth? The panel of celebrities was to guess which of the 3 contestants was the real person who had done some unusual or heroic act. One of the 3 was the real person, the other 2 would try to mislead the panel. At the end, the game host would say, Would the real So-in-so, please stand up. Then the real person would stand, sometimes surprising everyone.

Well, after reading Development tops list for candidates , I almost felt like saying, Would the Real Rick Owen, please stand up? Did anyone of you share my dismay over the paragraph from that article?

Owen said he "never likes to see roads widened" because of the impact it has on homeowners, but added that current traffic volumes along the northern section of Calhoun Road indicate that widening "needs to be looked at."

Since Rick was not at all supportive of Alderman Jerry Mellone's efforts to protect his district from the impact of widening Calhoun Rd. south to highway proportions (despite its lack of traffic) I thought his statement was surprising.

I had attended the Oct. 3, 2006 Common Council meeting where Alderman Jerry Mellone attempted to sway the Council to either follow the Master Plan or amend it properly, regarding the widening of Calhoun Road south. I felt following or amending the Master Plan was a very important point, and so I urged Brookfield residents to attend with this information.

At that meeting, Mellone pointed out that the 2020 Master Plan and Calhoun Neighborhood South Plan showed the maximum road widths to be 100 foot right of ways, maximum, not the 130 foot width the city proposed.

I remembered Alderman Rick Owen dismissing Jerry's referral at that meeting and so I watched my taped cable broadcast of that meeting again. The following is some of what Mellone and Owen said, transcribed to the best of my ability: (Emphasis added)

Jerry Mellone: My motion is: I want to stop the widening of Calhoun to 130' because it is in conflict with the 2020 Master Plan.

Rick Owen: ...whether or not this was a conflict with the Master Plan...I'll be brief...  ...The real issue is, does the Master Plan preclude a 130' right of way? That is what we are down to. I am not even interested in, ah,... I appreciate the legal expertise we brought to the table, and I also want to state quickly--for those who want to read or look at plenty of information out here--staff has had 3 public hearings... er, a 4th is coming...

(The publics' comments from those Calhoun hearings about widening were negative.)

Rick continues: A lot of questions have been asked. Jerry Mellone put out a lot of information... ...that is not the purpose of this (now) at this point, I will state this: What we often say at the Planning Commission is that the Master Plan is the view from the 30,000 foot level. It is not meant to be this extremely detail minded prescriptive plan that says nothing can happen if  X or Y. It is much broader in scale.

Although I want to make sure you understand transportation was not considered a small detail in the Master Plan, I think everybody has seen that chapter. I believe more pages are devoted to (transportation) than any other subject in the Master Plan because people wanted at least to get that information out and make sure we were clear as to what was going on.

So I think there is a tremendous amount of data there and I think we have to look at it piece by piece.. I'll be quick...1st, Looking at section noted: pp 40, fig. 27. That is a series of 5 figures that denote: 2020 Master Plan Typical Section. Typical Street Sections, that was the emphasis here. You have to read the explanation about the diagram as far as there is no plan from 30,000' level that would be that specific and nothing in detail precluding this would suggest the maximum road width would be 130' for any roadway in this city.

(Rick goes on in his brief comments. Now he brings up the key transportation plan, The Calhoun South Neighborhood Plan.)

Rick goes on: Calhoun is stated to have a divided 4 section maximum.  (Reading:) Where Calhoun approaches I-94 or Bluemound, additional lanes may be warranted or provided to permit left or right turning movement. (Rick concludes), We are not inconsistent with the Master Plan.

Jerry Mellone cites again the specifics of the 2020 Master Plan:

Jerry Mellone: Figure 21 shows a 90' right of way, pp 40,41, and 42 shows maximum 100' right of way at Greenfield (Jerry explains that is what we have now, we measured it)... ...Arterial B Calhoun: pp 41, maximum right of way, 75' Twiddle Lane. It is very clear the plan the 2020 task force wanted.

Those Figures and page references seemed pretty specific to me. If they are to be treated so generally, it makes me wonder why anyone would waste their time on a Master Plan or Neighborhood Plan Task Force.  If this very residential arterial was intended to be 130' right of way, I wonder why the city had to obtain so much residential frontage.

Rick Owen was elected before I followed Brookfield politics. If memory serves me correctly, I think he ran on a more responsible development platform--staying within current zoning. Remember, the 2004 election was just after the approval of VK's mega Capitol Heights project*--development was a hot issue in the 2nd district. Maybe some of you 2nd district residents can fill in the blanks here?

Alderman (and Plan Commission member) Rick Owen is being challenged by Plan Commission member Jennifer Donze and by Terry Halmstad. I happen to agree with Halmstad's comments that, "We're not really looking at these [development and redevelopment] (projects) really hard before they're passed."

Of course, on Tuesday, Feb. 19th, it will be up to 2nd district voters to decide, Who is the real Rick Owen?

Check the Brookfieldnow District 1 and 2 Voter's Guide for primary election candidates stances on important issues. 

*Capitol Heights is VK's overly dense condo project on Capitol Drive that former aldermen 1st district Richard Brunner and 7th district Tom Schellinger now say they regret voting for.

Blogs: Brookfield7, Fairlyconservative

Links: Betterbrookfield,  Vicki Mckenna