MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
shriners
Saturday, August 2, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 57.0° F  Fog/Mist
Collapse Photo Bar

Isthmus on Edgewater

Please limit discussion in this area to local and state politics.

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 07, 2011 9:16 am

Why should taxpayers' money be used for private development? isn't that Walker's agenda?
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19610
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby gargantua » Thu Apr 07, 2011 10:35 am

Henry Vilas wrote:Why should taxpayers' money be used for private development? isn't that Walker's agenda?


I hate this, because I will probably be agreeing with Huckleby on this narrow question. In some instances, if a private development has a demonstrable public benefit, I can see some taxpayer "assistance", participation", what have you, being appropriate. Also, in the case of TIF, theoretically the taxpayers are supposed to recover the tax money eventually.

As for the Walker part....that's a pretty loaded question. I think it overlaps Walker's agenda, which is to raise taxes and cut programs for the poor and middle class to take care of the rich. TIF ain't nearly that bad.
gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3988
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 07, 2011 4:55 pm

gargantua wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:Why should taxpayers' money be used for private development? isn't that Walker's agenda?


I hate this, because I will probably be agreeing with Huckleby on this narrow question. In some instances, if a private development has a demonstrable public benefit, I can see some taxpayer "assistance", participation", what have you, being appropriate.

That was Walker's justification for special corporate tax cuts given out in the first weeks of his administration. Theoretically, it was for job growth.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19610
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Phil » Sun Apr 10, 2011 12:05 pm

The wise Snoqueen wrote before the election
snoqueen wrote:And Edgewater is a factor in the upcoming ... aldermanic elections, it's certainly a factor for Bridget Maniaci, who was an extremely visible Edgewater proponent.


Maniaci won and Edgewater was further validated. That is what democracy looks like!
Phil
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 273
Joined: Thu May 06, 2004 9:46 am

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Apr 10, 2011 1:10 pm

Soglin beat Cieslewicz by a narrow margin. It's entirely possible that a faction intent on edgewater blood vengence swung the election against C.

As many have noted, the irony is that Soglin is likely every bit as enthusiastic about the Edgewater redevelopment as his hapless predecessor. But really Soglin's position is irrelevant, this is a feud - the point is vendetta!

For better and worse, this is what democracy looks like.

Ten years from now when people are used to the expanded Edgewater, people will chuckle that it was such a giant controversy (pun intended), just like how the decades-long battle over the FLW Convention Center now seems a little silly in hindsight.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Azog » Sun Apr 10, 2011 4:05 pm

Huckleby wrote:Soglin beat Cieslewicz by a narrow margin. It's entirely possible that a faction intent on edgewater blood vengence swung the election against C. As many have noted, the irony is that Soglin is likely every bit as enthusiastic about the Edgewater redevelopment as his hapless predecessor.


Screw mayor Dave and his trademark version of Madison - good riddance, the Edgewater thing is the very least of what he's done to this city. If the measure of a good mayor is pushing people around and spending a lot of money, I'd prefer a bad one. I hope he finds another town to live in where they like the generic little mouse trap that he wants to make their city into.
Azog
Senior Member
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 6:52 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby fennel » Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:43 pm

Huckleby wrote:Soglin beat Cieslewicz by a narrow margin. It's entirely possible that a faction intent on edgewater blood vengence swung the election against C.
I really doubt it. My west side neighborhood went for Soglin, and though I don't get the sense many folks cared much about the Edgewater as such, they clearly were bothered by The Dave's ham-fisted approach to the permit process. That and the fact that the whole process seemed fishy from the outset. It was always intended to be a coup, not a process.

It was as if the developers were, themselves, so juiced up on the "anti-business" propaganda line spewed by squawk radio that they couldn't possibly brook the idea of letting the established protocol play it's course.

They could have kept their approach low-key and saved themselves a lot of money. The developers were sold a bill of goods and dutifully passed the burden down the line.
fennel
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3125
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Inside the Green Zone, Madison

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Apr 10, 2011 9:30 pm

fennel wrote: they clearly were bothered by The Dave's ham-fisted approach to the permit process. That and the fact that the whole process seemed fishy from the outset. It was always intended to be a coup, not a process.
I see no basis for this attitude other than sour grapes. How does a mayor stage a "coup" when he has to garner a supermajority on the council to get his policy through!?
Fred Mohs erected endless legal obstacles at both the state and local level. The proponents found a way through the technical barriers and got the job done.

Dave was not "ham-fisted" in regard to the permit process. He went through all the hoops, and fought a gritty, tenatious battle for what he saw as right for the city. The opponents had many advantages.

It was an ugly political fight. The only thing C. did "wrong" was prevail in the end. There was no way that project was ever going to get done without some seriously bruised feelings.

I wish we could just agree to disagree about what is best for the city. This sore-loser " we waz robbed" stuff is offensive.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Stu Levitan » Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:20 pm

How on earth did Fred Mohs "erect endless legal obstacles" to the project, at either state or local level? Fred has never been on the Council; Fred didn't enact the Landmarks Ordinance. Matter of fact, when Mary Mohs was chair of Landmarks, she was criticized for being too easy on development. The only thing Fred has done is file a single lawsuit; don't think that qualifies as "endless legal obstacles." So what exactly do you mean?
Stu Levitan
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3212
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2003 8:40 pm
Location: Studio B of the historic Abernathy Building

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby fennel » Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:25 pm

Huckleby wrote:I see no basis for this attitude other than sour grapes. How does a mayor stage a "coup" when he has to garner a supermajority on the council to get his policy through!?
... The proponents found a way through the technical barriers and got the job done.
Right. But plenty of voters, as far as I can tell, thought otherwise. Perhaps they were naïve; perhaps they were born yesterday. But in any case, they just didn't go for the superMayor vs. uninformedMasses MO. These processes aren't supposed to be wars, but I think the developers never knew that, and The Dave never invited them into the democratic process.
fennel
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3125
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 4:24 pm
Location: Inside the Green Zone, Madison

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Bad Gradger » Sun Apr 10, 2011 10:58 pm

Stu Levitan wrote:How on earth did Fred Mohs "erect endless legal obstacles" to the project, at either state or local level? Fred has never been on the Council; Fred didn't enact the Landmarks Ordinance. Matter of fact, when Mary Mohs was chair of Landmarks, she was criticized for being too easy on development. The only thing Fred has done is file a single lawsuit; don't think that qualifies as "endless legal obstacles." So what exactly do you mean?

Huckleby's ongoing premise is that the Edgewater project enjoyed massive public support but there was an entrenched minority pulling out all the stops against it, and that minority would've prevailed had it not been for Dave's herculean efforts. Any criticism of how Dave handled it or Huckleby's version of events is automatically sour grapes.

And all of that is moot now anyway. The only relevant question is, what do we learn from Edgewater for the next big and controversial project?
Bad Gradger
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 800
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 11:00 pm

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:22 pm

Stu Levitan wrote:How on earth did Fred Mohs "erect endless legal obstacles" to the project, at either state or local level?

For instance, he spent a lot of time lodging complaints with the DNR, alleging various technical violations. (I've heard about some of this from a friend who works for Mr. Mohs, a lot of the maneuvering did not get in the papers.)
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:27 pm

fennel wrote: in any case, they just didn't go for the superMayor vs. uninformedMasses MO.

This is your characterization of the conflict. I doubt anybody shares this perspective who isn't pissed-off that edgewater went through.

fennel wrote: These processes aren't supposed to be wars, but I think the developers never knew that, and The Dave never invited them into the democratic process.
I have no idea what you are saying here. I saw developers present at, and responsive to, public hearing after public hearing after public hearing.

This process was an orgy on public debate and democracy.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Huckleby » Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:35 pm

Bad Gradger wrote: Huckleby's ongoing premise is that the Edgewater project enjoyed massive public support but there was an entrenched minority pulling out all the stops against it, and that minority would've prevailed had it not been for Dave's herculean efforts.
Well stated. This premise is supported by the facts. An illusion of an evenly divided community was due to the scale being tipped by that absurd "historic district."

Bad Gradger wrote: Any criticism of how Dave handled it or Huckleby's version of events is automatically sour grapes.
I haven't heard anything specific, just generalized whining. I can't picture any way that the process could have gone, with the same end result, that wouldn't have left opponents upset.
Huckleby
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 6234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2005 5:12 pm
Location: parents' basement

Re: Isthmus on Edgewater

Postby Henry Vilas » Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:17 pm

Soglin's capital budget will gut TIF funding to Edgewater project

Mayor Paul Soglin's proposed capital budget, scheduled to be released Tuesday, would gut the amount of tax incremental financing the city would provide to the controversial Edgewater Hotel redevelopment from a promised $16 million to around $4 million, according to two City Council members.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19610
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

PreviousNext

Return to Local Politics & Government

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar