$14.5 million borrowing plan included in Muskego budget

Muskego - The battle lines were uncharacteristically drawn last week on the Muskego Common Council, which narrowly passed a 2012 city budget and a $14.5 million capital borrowing plan.

Approvals came on the same 4-3 vote that held unchanged through votes on the budget, the borrowing, the capital budget and the six failed attempted amendments to them.

Among other things, the voting block of three - Kert Harenda, Daniel Soltysiak and Neil Borgman - didn't think controls would be strong enough on the $14.5 million capital borrowing package. They also didn't want the $2.5 million for the Pioneer Road reconstruction and beautification next year, and preferred a pay freeze for city workers instead of the 2 percent raises budgeted.

The three had brought up most of their concerns during the prior weeks of budget discussions, but the four aldermen who formed the majority - Noah Fiedler, Neome Schaumberg, Keith Werner and Tracy Snead - still weren't buying their viewpoints last week.

No property tax increase

The 2012 budget calls for no property tax increase. The 2012 operating budget will be $14 million, up 1.7 percent from this year's nearly $13.8 million budget. The levy will remain at $11,935,917 with the estimated tax rate dipping slightly to $4.41 per $1,000 of assessed value from $4.43 per $1,000.

The capital budget vote gave the go-ahead to the $2.5 million Pioneer Drive project, which needled some in the audience as well as on the council.

"Two million for six businesses sounds like the federal government to me, spending like crazy," said Michael Brandt of Larkspur Road.

So far, there are about a half-dozen businesses on the stretch of Pioneer to see the work done, but some officials argue that fixed up, the area could attract more.

But Soltysiak doubted the investment will be worth it, as business has not grown there in years.

But Mayor Kathy Chiaverotti said the price tag is deceptively big. About $1 million of the $2.5 million will be for bringing city water to residents who asked for it, she said. The city will get that back through assessments, she said.

And while it's true that $500,000 will go mainly to burying utilities and the rest to beautification, Chiaverotti noted after the meeting that it is an historic district and has been designated as a redevelopment district by the city Community Development Authority.

The Pioneer Drive discussion was tied up in a disagreement about changing the way the city borrows to pay for roads. That change involves the city borrowing $14.5 million mainly for the projects short-term, going ahead with the work and then borrowing long-term in the normal manner years later when the actual costs are known. That way the city doesn't borrow too much and have to pay interest on money it doesn't need, said Paul Thompson, the city's financial adviser. It also allows more flexibility in that money can be moved from project to project wherever it is needed, he said. That also helps avoid having to issue new bonds as projects come up, which saves about $25,000 in costs per issue, he said.

Transparency sought

But it is that very flexibility that bothers Borgman and others. Taxpayers deserve to know exactly were money is going, he said. This has the potential of being a grab-bag, he said.

"Whenever we do something, we go in and grab a chunk of money," he said. "We're supposed to be stewards of your money, not keepers of a slush fund."

More than 70 percent of the $14.5 million borrowing will be for the city's share of the Janesville Road widening and for streetscaping and for Durham Drive, which is nearly completed already.

But the $14.5 million in road spending and the possibility of spending $4 million more to buy property along Little Muskego Lake for a park was too much for some residents who counseled caution during tough economic times.

"Don't do it," Heidi Lindhorst said, especially with the $29.9-million school referendum that might be approved Nov. 8.

Others targeted the potential park purchase, even though the $4 million remains unfunded in the capital budget.

"I see no need to spend $4 million on a park that isn't big enough to develop as a quality piece of property," said Doreen Foyer of Island Drive.

"If he wants to donate it, great," Scott Dickmann of Muskego Drive said of the landowner.

Park feasibility undecided

Even though the $4 million for the parkland is in the budget, the Common Council would still have to decide if a park is feasible and find funding for it, possibly by borrowing or using landfill fee money, said Sharon Mueller, director of financial and administration.

Park opponents should not read too much into the potential park property purchase being in the budget, Chiaverotti said after the meeting. If the council had not approved a resolution of necessity for the land, which is only the first step toward purchase, the potential purchase would not have been on the list of capital items still to be funded.

Harenda tried to amend the budget to institute a pay freeze instead of raises and attracted support from Borgman, who said taxpayers are still recovering from the recession and they generally are not getting raises themselves.

But Chiaverotti said that while funding for up to 2 percent raises is in the budget, negotiations are just starting with employees on raises, so all the money might not be needed.

THE VOTE

The seven-member Muskego Common Council divided itself into two voting blocks over the 2012 budget last week:

ALDERMEN VOTING IN THE MAJORITY: Noah Feidler, Neome Schaumberg, Keith Werner and Tracy Snead

ALDERMEN VOTING IN THE MINORITY: Kert Harenda, Neil Borgman and Daniel Soltysiak

AT A GLANCE

2012 BUDGET: $14,031,076, up $234,270 or 1.7 percent

LEVY: $11,935,917, no increase from 2011

TAX RATE: $4.41 per $1,000 of assessed value, down from $4.43 per $1,000 in 2011