Previously on This Just In…

The update.

I don’t attend Franklin Common Council meetings. Normally I have other commitments. But even if I didn’t, spending valuable  time with my family is far more important than watching my ineffective city pols in action.

I DO listen to the tapes of the meetings and monitor the city of Franklin website for meeting updates, agendas, minutes, etc.

So I know what happens at these meetings. Honest to God if you were to attend one of them (there are two each month) you’d swear the entire populace of Franklin was vehemently opposed to Ballpark Commons. Speaker after speaker after speaker during the meeting’s comment period at the beginning of each meeting attacks the project and anyone who supports it.

Same crowd. Same folks. And normally the same arguments.

Now I can understand when a massive development enters an area there will be the usual outrages regarding noise, lights, additional traffic, etc.

But what happened at Tuesday’s Common Council meeting is beyond bizarre and the Twilight Zone. A resident insisted a correspondence from the Milwaukee River Advocates in opposition to Ballpark Commons be officially recorded (it has).

The note from the Milwaukee River Advocates to Franklin Common Council members was dated 06/19/18.

Readers, be prepared. You’re not going to believe this. We’re supposed to be in an uproar over the most exciting economic development project in the history of Franklin because of this notice from David Press, President of the Milwaukee River Advocates that reads in part:

We’re losing more wildlife habitat in cities and suburbs and thus, we’re losing wildlife.

Less sexy but more critical is the devastating loss of insects we’re seeing (up to 82% loss, according to one stud), including bees, butterflies, moths and others, which will create a topple-up effect on the birds, amphibians, and others who eat them, and in turn, the larger animals that eat them, and so on.

Our concern with the Ballpark Commons is that it will have these negative effects. To have such a large, populated, noisy, bright activity happening in areas that is adjacent to wildlife habitat is extremely detrimental.

Click G.1. and scroll down to Page 12 for the entire note from the Milwaukee River Advocates.

OMG.

Insects will die.

Incidentally the Milwaukee River is nowhere near the Ballpark Commons site. Yet this is what opponents will stoop to. They will say and do anything to smear this project.

Scoff if you will but this is what’s going on at City Hall, even while tens of hundreds support Ballpark Commons. Problem is those tens of hundreds are at home while the moonbats fill the room at City Hall.

If you care about the Ballpark Commons, organize. Assemble. Show up at City Hall for these meetings. Blow the others out of the water with your support. Speak out.

Guaranteed, they will scatter with tails between their legs.

If it means that much to you, don’t let the other side win in the debate of public opinion. You may think this is a done deal but a lot more needs to be done.  Someone take the bull by the horns and organize  showing up in full force to make a powerful statement against these weak NIMBYs.

I’ve blogged extensively about the ongoing debate about the so-called “Dark Store Loophole.” There will be attempts to kill this so-called loophole in the current legislative session in Madison. I’ve made it clear in my blogs I oppose such legislation.

That’s more than I can say for the proponents of the legislation (my mayor for one of dozens). At least I’ve been fair on this blog and have presented both sides unlike those (my mayor and dozens of others) who push for killing the so-called (I say so-called because I question the loophole nomenclature) loophole who have engaged in blatant one-sided propaganda.

At the risk of complicating this issue I go on by stating several groups representing cities, towns and counties have launched, AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE, a campaign to push lawmakers to close the state’s so-called “dark store loophole.”

The Wisconsin League of Municipalities, Wisconsin Counties Association and Wisconsin Towns Association have done so because they contend big box stores are employing strategies to avoid paying higher taxes under current law.

Large retailers argue their property tax assessments should include the values of similar vacant or “dark” stores. But local government advocates say that reasoning doesn’t make sense.

“That would be like me assessing your house as if it were foreclosed, abandoned and boarded up. These are active, growing, thriving businesses on busy street corners in downtown Wisconsin,” said Jerry Deschane, executive director with the Wisconsin League of Municipalities. “They’re being valued at what they’re actually worth, not what theoretically they would be worth if they were vacant.”

I’ve more than taken that nonsense to task in my blog. Just search for Dark Store to see it all.

OK.

Take it easy.

Breathe.

What follows is not another salvo in the loophole debate.

Everybody’s arguing and bitching and moaning about empty commercial space in this debate.

But what if that derelict commercial space could be turned into an overall community positive rather than a negative?

Granted, that would require thinking beyond one’s nose, along with eliminating the constant parade of posing for holy pictures of local elected officials, including my mayor Steve (Franklin is never ever wrong and don’t you forget it) Olson.

The positive aspect I mentioned has been done. It can and does happen when people work together on productive ideas.

Please read.

Is recycling popular in Wisconsin? Who knows?

That bastion of outstanding journalism, the Shepherd Express, without crediting sources reported that in Wisconsin, recycling supports 97,000 jobs and contributes to the $5.4 billion-dollar environmental industry, and 94% of households in the state support recycling and recycle regularly.

Then you have wisconsinenvironment.org that reports:

Recycling rates in major cities throughout Wisconsin reveal one of the more wasteful states in the nation. Based on the most recent available data, only Madison and Waukesha have managed to eclipse the national average of 34.7 percent (see table below).5Due to a lack of reporting in certain jurisdictions, the state’s overall recycling rate is unclear. However, given low rates in major cities, evidence from other states suggests that Wisconsin’s statewide rate is even lower than the national average.

I’m guessing that here in Franklin recycling is immensely popular. Popular in that it doesn’t bring giddy joy and enthusiasm, but that the practice is one that’s embraced, with residents willing to comply for what they perceive to be a greater good.

And yet recycling is increasingly being frowned upon, not by the folks that drag their carts to the end of their driveways, but by the elected officials in charge. Why? The cost.

The NY Times reports more cities have decided to get rid of recycling, again, because of the cost.

Finally, to the major issue at hand.

Is recycling a waste?

Sorry. It is.