Water Panel Weak On Specifics

The Politics of Water. Thursday, May 21.

A panel ensconced by the Public Policy Forum in a Wauwatosa hotel, was strong on the language of cooperation, happy about the International Water Compact, and true believers in the new “work together” mood of our nation.

From www.freefoto.com

Michael Murphy, Alderman from Milwaukee, spoke of the issues on which Milwaukee would like cooperation: affordable housing, transit, and economic development of distressed areas. What he might have added is some conceptual material - how all of these things work together in a healthy city. Unfortunately he did not bring to the table The Now Issue: why it is that Transit, today as they spoke, could be the most effective signal of cooperation from Waukesha (County and City). Nor did he suggest, and reasonably he could have, why Milwaukee officials are looking to a private, international water corporation for serious money after being rebuffed on many fronts in Madison over school funding, dedicated transit funding that brings federal dollars, and health care costs.

Larry Nelson, Mayor of the City of Waukesha, touted the many things Waukesha has done to distinguish itself from the politics of his County. He omitted Waukesha’s embarrassing history of running its water industry dry after World War II. “Waukesha Springs” used to mean the best water in the world. Now their underground aquifers are drying up. The city is under an order from the DNR to fix its radium problem by 2018. While Waukesha can buy water from Racine or Oak Creek, Nelson stated clearly it was in Waukesha’s interest to develop collaborations with Milwaukee, simply because between these two cities there are already many issues on the table. I get a “good neighbor” feeling about this man. Milwaukee needs to listen.

Matt Moroney, Metropolitan Builders Association, was high on the word cooperation. He even “scolded” his own industry (what were they thinking?) for all that farmland converted to sprawl, as if to say that is So Past. He stated “We cannot solve all issues at once” but we should focus on Water first. He stated that there is “plenty of water,” that the City of Waukesha is not anyone’s example of sprawl. Moroney was patently happy to have a chance to use and recycle that pro-environment buzz-word “infill” to describe recent revitalization in Waukesha - in strong support of the City of Waukesha’s application for water. His vested interest was palpable. I would have preferred to hear him announce a pro-bono, stimulus funded (perhaps) effort by Metropolitan Builders to sponsor Habitat for Humanity efforts to Waukesha County. SEWRPC tells me the jobs are in Waukesha but the unemployed are not.

“How difficult would it be to solve this problem?” a Godfrey & Kahn attorney from Brookfield asked me.

Jodi Habush Sinykin from the Midwest Environmental Advocates brought to the conversation a needed sense of applause for recent environmental progress. She nudged the audience to think about comprehensive planning rather than the “one at a time” approach of the Builders. Her most unfortunate statement was that there is “no urgency” right now, and that means we can make a comprehensive plan without pressure. Like Murphy, she was short on specifics around the transit crisis in Milwaukee County.

She might have mentioned the letter her organization co-signed last week, asking the Governor to devote more federal stimulus money to public transportation projects. Letter_to_Wisdot_on_transit_and_stimulus-5-12.pdf (Again, is there a fear to jar this $40 lunch audience?)

With respect, I thought the environmental position on regional cooperation might have been sharper if presented by Bruce Speight, WISPIRG Advocate. But I’m not sure his passion would suit the decorum of a Public Policy Forum.

To his credit, Murphy did mention the high concentration of poverty (30% of Milwaukee’s population earns below the $18,000 poverty level). He splashed cold water on our collective faces by reminding us that there is competition among the parties in the region. As long as Milwaukee has the largest burden of poverty in the state it will always be at a disadvantage: Farmland is often cheaper than urban infill. (He might have added how State policy encourages sprawl, but a point like that would be too testy for the spirit of cooperation that embraced this gathering.)

Sinykin pointed out the difficulty in returning water to Lake Michigan up and over the Sub-Continental Divide - a requirement of the Compact. There will be, she said, a 40% increase in the load on the “return” river (Root River or Underwood Creek). Who will monitor that? Who will pay for erosion? Will the new flood plains be adequate? She stated that during heavy rains there will be allowed some diversion of Lake Michigan water in the other direction (Fox River) but, she asked, how often? How much?

Nelson answered the “no urgency” position of Sinykin by pointing out that nine years is a short time to get all Waukesha’s ducks lined up. Waukesha’s application for water must be accepted by seven governors and two provinces of Canada; and that won’t happen before engineering and local politics deem the application acceptable.

Ken Yunker, Director of SEWRPC, in a long “question” to the panel, came down politely but firmly in favor of Murphy and Sinykin’s “comprehensive” position. His oft-heard point is that the planning really has to be implemented as a whole. Cherry-picking parts of a comprehensive plan is exactly the wrong way to approach these problems, he said.

Yes, Ken mentioned Milwaukee’s Transit and how it needs help in Madison, now. I wish he had pointed to the self-destructive politics of the majority. In my heart of hearts I believe transit is a truly Republican issue (about serving small business and getting workers to work).

In May 2008 the Public Policy Forum issued an excellent analysis of the Milwaukee Transit crisis Milwaukee County’s Transit Crisis: How did we get here and what do we do now?. Reading this should have been a pre-requisite for each panelist. And maybe their Housing study (“Give Me Shelter”) earlier this month.

I sat with bankers, whose self interest is probably not a depressed, politically conflicted regional economy.

Maybe, just maybe one Waukesha guest went back to the office that afternoon and called his or her state rep to find out about the implementation of the will of Milwaukee’s voters on November 4th: a Regional Transportation Authority for three Southeastern Wisconsin counties and ask, just by the by, why the heck is Waukesha not part of this, too?

a statement of opinion by Bill Sell at email