We had a very successful rally and meeting at the courthouse on Wednesday.
I want congratulate and thank all of you who attended and have supported this issue so far.
Keep up the letters and articles.
Volume 1 has some very good space devoted by readers to the Riverfront Jail. Stop by and leave a comment or two with them as well.
You have just begun. First we needed to reach the media and use them to make it known that saving our waterfront from this jail project is important to many many members of our community. We still need to let other community members, who agree with us, know ..... that now is the time....The issue is now in focus ..... and we need more people to speak up ...... or be satisfied with the heritage they will be leaving.
We also have successfully begun to establish our own communication and awareness network. We can not rely on the traditional media to notify and inform... let alone understand the issue ... or clearly report the message. We have begun to set up a strong email forwarding system. Please continue to make it grow and work for us.
If you have the skill and the time... you can help this communication system grow by forwarding pertinent emails and calls to action. Thank you.
Our next meeting is Monday at the 1st Congregational Church across from Randall Park. At 7PM... We welcome supporters who oppose the location of the Jail upon our Riverfront and we will use the time to review future plans, and update you on the issues. Bring 2 friends.
I wish we could say we have affected our County Board and our job is done.... but the county board is not our focus. The City Council are the defenders of our riverfront. The County just finally recognized the need for a jail and with disregard for our city efforts they just want to plop it down and move on with county business. The city council passed the Comprehensive Plan and we need to show them that there is support for them to stand up to the county and tell them the Jail does not belong on the riverfront.
Please try to attend Monday's meeting so we can outline our next steps. You are doing a great job. Bring 3 friends and it will be even better.
originated as an email by Ken
Sunday, February 24, 2008
Monday, February 18, 2008
County Board Meeting Wedndesday!
– Your Voice is needed –
The decorative Riverfront Downtown Jail Project is moving forward & your HELP is needed. This Wednesday evening there will be an OPEN House at the County Courthouse at 6PM to view the current plans and meet the County Board supervisors, as well as the architects and planners. Following the Open House, the County Board will be voting whether to allocate $25 million dollars towards advancing this project forward.
We are marching on the courthouse this Wednesday.
Meet us at 5:45pm, Wednesday February 20, at the corner of First and Grand Avenues (also called Peace Park, in the shadow of the proposed riverfront jail). We will walk together to the open house at the nearby Courthouse to make our collective voices strong: NO JAIL DOWNTOWN.
Even if you can't make it early, please attend the meeting and speak out! You are needed to help stop this project while we still can.
Even though agendas for the Wednesday County Board Meeting have not reached the board members as of Tuesday morning, the agenda when received will call for a vote on approving a $25 Million dollar bonding issue to continue the Jail project.
The City has not yet had an opportunity to approve or reject the re-zoning of the riverfront property that the county wants to use to build it’s 4 story jail. There is a planned Protest Petition being filed with the City Council when this re-zoning reaches the Council for discussion & vote.
The Citizens for Accountability in Jail Expansion feel that the county board should table it’s bonding effort until it is known if the city will change it’s comprehensive plan for downtown improvements on the riverfront and allow property proposed for the Jail to be re-zoned.
How can you help?
Meet in peace park (first and grand) this Wedndesday at 5:45pm.
Come later to the Wednesday meeting at the County Board.
Call your friends & neighbors about this & ask them to attend
Email this website to everyone you know who might want to see this project halted (click the envelope at the end of this message to email this page to your friends now!)
Put this announcement on your facebook or myspace page, add the rally to your calendar!
Call & email all of the county board supervisors
Call AND email all of the city council members
Call & email all of the Plan Commission Members
Call & email Mike Huggins the City Manager
Write a letter to the Leader Telegram opposing the re-zoning and urging the County & the City to gain its senses
We have several sample letters posted on this site. Feel free to cut and paste. The important thing is that you write or call with the simple message: No Jail Downtown!
Jail study group seeks public input
A public meeting meant to give input to a group studying Eau Claire County's justice system will begin at 9 a.m. Thursday in Room G034 of the courthouse, 721 Oxford Ave.
The National Institute of Corrections, which is part of the U.S. Department of Justice, has scheduled a community forum and plans to reveal research results.
Today and Wednesday, NIC officials plan to visit with local officials, including those who work in the jail.
The study is expected to provide advice on constructing the county's new jail; work is scheduled to begin in the fall.
above from the leader telegram
The information below came from Bruce Willett and Tom McCarty.
Date: February 18, 2008
From: Bruce Willett, County Board Chairman Tom McCarty, County Administrator
To: County Board Members City Council Members Mike Huggins, City Manager Mike Felton, Department of Corrections
Re: NIC Justice System Analysis; Community Meeting
The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) will be conducting a Local Justice System Assessment of Eau Claire County February 19-21, 2008. The assessment process will include interviews with key criminal justice policy makers and support groups associated with the jail, which will be conducted February 19-20th at the Eau Claire County courthouse, room 2532. On Thursday, February 21st the NIC consultants will be conducting a community meeting (9am-3pm) in room G034 of the courthouse to present their findings and hold an open forum discussion. You are invited to attend and participate in this discussion (a tentative agenda is enclosed). Also enclosed are four background items that have been forwarded by the NIC team for review prior to the interviews/forum. Copies of these materials will also be available in the Eau Claire County Administration office. Please contact the Administration office if you have questions regarding this project, and with your intent to attend (RSVP’s appreciated, but not required).
Phone: (715) 839-4835 Fax: (715) 839-6243 Email: admin@co.eau-claire.wi.us
Tentative Agenda
Community Meeting Eau Claire County Local Justice System Assessment Thursday, February 21, 2008 Eau Claire County Courthouse, Room G034 9am-3pm
1. Introduction of National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Consultants
2. Review of Proposed Agenda
3. Brief Overview of Services Provided by the NIC
4. Jail and Justice System Overview
a. Admissions and length of stay
b. Agency impacts on jail population
c. Managing jail (over)crowding
5. Jail Population and Bed Space
6. Seven Key Justice System Decision Points / Discussion
7. Justice System Trends in Eau Claire County
8. Comparison of ECC Justice System to Other Wisconsin Counties
9. Summary of Consultant Findings and Observations / Discussion
10. Major Choices and Challenges for Eau Claire County
11. Recommended Planning Process
12. Correctional Sanctions and Services Matrix
13. Consultant Recommendation
14. Action Planning / Discussion
15. Closing by Eau Claire County Officials
16. Adjourn
The National Institute of Corrections, which is part of the U.S. Department of Justice, has scheduled a community forum and plans to reveal research results.
Today and Wednesday, NIC officials plan to visit with local officials, including those who work in the jail.
The study is expected to provide advice on constructing the county's new jail; work is scheduled to begin in the fall.
above from the leader telegram
The information below came from Bruce Willett and Tom McCarty.
Date: February 18, 2008
From: Bruce Willett, County Board Chairman Tom McCarty, County Administrator
To: County Board Members City Council Members Mike Huggins, City Manager Mike Felton, Department of Corrections
Re: NIC Justice System Analysis; Community Meeting
The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) will be conducting a Local Justice System Assessment of Eau Claire County February 19-21, 2008. The assessment process will include interviews with key criminal justice policy makers and support groups associated with the jail, which will be conducted February 19-20th at the Eau Claire County courthouse, room 2532. On Thursday, February 21st the NIC consultants will be conducting a community meeting (9am-3pm) in room G034 of the courthouse to present their findings and hold an open forum discussion. You are invited to attend and participate in this discussion (a tentative agenda is enclosed). Also enclosed are four background items that have been forwarded by the NIC team for review prior to the interviews/forum. Copies of these materials will also be available in the Eau Claire County Administration office. Please contact the Administration office if you have questions regarding this project, and with your intent to attend (RSVP’s appreciated, but not required).
Phone: (715) 839-4835 Fax: (715) 839-6243 Email: admin@co.eau-claire.wi.us
Tentative Agenda
Community Meeting Eau Claire County Local Justice System Assessment Thursday, February 21, 2008 Eau Claire County Courthouse, Room G034 9am-3pm
1. Introduction of National Institute of Corrections (NIC) Consultants
2. Review of Proposed Agenda
3. Brief Overview of Services Provided by the NIC
4. Jail and Justice System Overview
a. Admissions and length of stay
b. Agency impacts on jail population
c. Managing jail (over)crowding
5. Jail Population and Bed Space
6. Seven Key Justice System Decision Points / Discussion
7. Justice System Trends in Eau Claire County
8. Comparison of ECC Justice System to Other Wisconsin Counties
9. Summary of Consultant Findings and Observations / Discussion
10. Major Choices and Challenges for Eau Claire County
11. Recommended Planning Process
12. Correctional Sanctions and Services Matrix
13. Consultant Recommendation
14. Action Planning / Discussion
15. Closing by Eau Claire County Officials
16. Adjourn
Sunday, February 17, 2008
make signs!
(an idea of what one person can do)
I made up a bunch of the no jail downtown signs on the tongue depressors and handed them out after the Obama Rally at 1st and Water. People were very supportive, I went through 200 in no time. It will help to inform about the blog. I left some at just local as well.
Joel
I made up a bunch of the no jail downtown signs on the tongue depressors and handed them out after the Obama Rally at 1st and Water. People were very supportive, I went through 200 in no time. It will help to inform about the blog. I left some at just local as well.
Joel
Leader Telegram article Feb 16
Do you take issue with this article, with the headline, or the opinions expressed?
Make comments at the Leader Telegram website, contact the reporter or write a letter to the editor.
Jail, courthouse referendum not likely to happen
By Andrew Dowd Leader-Telegram staff
Some citizens are asking for a halt or referendum on Eau Claire County's $59.1 million jail and courthouse remodeling project, but County Board members said that's not likely.
Board member Howard Ludwigson supported holding a referendum on the project and got the County Board to vote on his proposal during the June meeting where the budget project was approved.
"The County Board turned it down," he said. "It's not that the County Board didn't have that opportunity."
The Board voted 17-10 against the referendum on June 19. To overturn that, a board member who voted against the referendum would have to request it be reconsidered, or a referendum request would have to be attached to upcoming bond issues.
Even if that happened, Ludwigson said the board's membership hasn't changed enough to request a referendum, though he feels that's still the way to go.
Kathleen Clark and other board members argued that most people did not attend open meetings and information sessions held by the County Board and don't know as much about the project as County Board members. She added that county government is not subject to the same referendum requirements as public schools.
"There is nothing in the state statutes requiring us to have a referendum," she said.
A 1992 local government spending cap does limit how much counties can borrow, but that can be overridden by a three-quarters vote of the County Board. In the case of the jail and remodeling project, the $59.1 million cost put the project just under the limit of about $60 million that would have required a referendum.
Citizens can petition for an advisory referendum, but Ludwigson said it's doubtful enough signatures could be gathered in time.
To get on the April ballot, a referendum question would have to be approved by Tuesday, county Clerk Janet Loomis said.
A special election for a referendum could be held, Ludwigson said, but that would cost a few thousand dollars if not done on a regular election day.
Bond issue reaching board Wednesday
Construction of the new jail is slated to begin in fall, and the County Board will vote Wednesday on the first $25 million of borrowing. The county originally planned to borrow $10 million in 2008, but wanted to take advantage of current low interest rates.
Clark, a member of the Finance and Budget Committee, said the recommendation is to borrow $25 million this year, $25 million the next and $9.1 million in 2010.
Lower interest rates also are expected to lower the final cost of the jail to $92 million when interest is included, Clark said. Previous projections put the final price tag at $99.5 million.
Community members have lobbed allegations that the county is underestimating costs of the jail and will go above the $59.1 million approved construction costs.
In a letter to city and county politicians and the media, Eau Claire resident Paul Kaldjian wrote that the "cost of the jail has been disingenuously underestimated at $59.1 million."
However, county Project Manager Frank Draxler said that is the ceiling set by the County Board, and the project cannot go over that price, but some parts of the plan could be scaled back if they are too expensive.
"We're not to exceed 59.1, period," he said. "If things cost more, they'll have to be cut."
After years of studies and multiple votes, Draxler noted the County Board has approved building the jail between the courthouse and First Avenue.
At the June 19 meeting, by a vote of 16-11 the County Board approved a new jail and courthouse remodeling. Spending $59.1 million for construction passed 15-12. Board member Tami Schraufnagel switched her vote.
Since then, those decisions have been reinforced by other votes including approval of an architect, construction manager, buying property for the new jail and a higher tax rate in the 2008 county budget.
Make comments at the Leader Telegram website, contact the reporter or write a letter to the editor.
Jail, courthouse referendum not likely to happen
By Andrew Dowd Leader-Telegram staff
Some citizens are asking for a halt or referendum on Eau Claire County's $59.1 million jail and courthouse remodeling project, but County Board members said that's not likely.
Board member Howard Ludwigson supported holding a referendum on the project and got the County Board to vote on his proposal during the June meeting where the budget project was approved.
"The County Board turned it down," he said. "It's not that the County Board didn't have that opportunity."
The Board voted 17-10 against the referendum on June 19. To overturn that, a board member who voted against the referendum would have to request it be reconsidered, or a referendum request would have to be attached to upcoming bond issues.
Even if that happened, Ludwigson said the board's membership hasn't changed enough to request a referendum, though he feels that's still the way to go.
Kathleen Clark and other board members argued that most people did not attend open meetings and information sessions held by the County Board and don't know as much about the project as County Board members. She added that county government is not subject to the same referendum requirements as public schools.
"There is nothing in the state statutes requiring us to have a referendum," she said.
A 1992 local government spending cap does limit how much counties can borrow, but that can be overridden by a three-quarters vote of the County Board. In the case of the jail and remodeling project, the $59.1 million cost put the project just under the limit of about $60 million that would have required a referendum.
Citizens can petition for an advisory referendum, but Ludwigson said it's doubtful enough signatures could be gathered in time.
To get on the April ballot, a referendum question would have to be approved by Tuesday, county Clerk Janet Loomis said.
A special election for a referendum could be held, Ludwigson said, but that would cost a few thousand dollars if not done on a regular election day.
Bond issue reaching board Wednesday
Construction of the new jail is slated to begin in fall, and the County Board will vote Wednesday on the first $25 million of borrowing. The county originally planned to borrow $10 million in 2008, but wanted to take advantage of current low interest rates.
Clark, a member of the Finance and Budget Committee, said the recommendation is to borrow $25 million this year, $25 million the next and $9.1 million in 2010.
Lower interest rates also are expected to lower the final cost of the jail to $92 million when interest is included, Clark said. Previous projections put the final price tag at $99.5 million.
Community members have lobbed allegations that the county is underestimating costs of the jail and will go above the $59.1 million approved construction costs.
In a letter to city and county politicians and the media, Eau Claire resident Paul Kaldjian wrote that the "cost of the jail has been disingenuously underestimated at $59.1 million."
However, county Project Manager Frank Draxler said that is the ceiling set by the County Board, and the project cannot go over that price, but some parts of the plan could be scaled back if they are too expensive.
"We're not to exceed 59.1, period," he said. "If things cost more, they'll have to be cut."
After years of studies and multiple votes, Draxler noted the County Board has approved building the jail between the courthouse and First Avenue.
At the June 19 meeting, by a vote of 16-11 the County Board approved a new jail and courthouse remodeling. Spending $59.1 million for construction passed 15-12. Board member Tami Schraufnagel switched her vote.
Since then, those decisions have been reinforced by other votes including approval of an architect, construction manager, buying property for the new jail and a higher tax rate in the 2008 county budget.
facebook / myspace
Hey - don't forget to tell your friends through your facebook and myspace pages! Let's rally Eau Claire!
Saturday, February 16, 2008
action
As of now, one of the most important actions you can take is educating yourself and your neighbors as to the impact and scope of the jail project. Once you've formed an opinion, the next greatest thing you can do is share your opinion with our elected leaders. The County Board still has the authority (duty) to reconsider the matter. Their names and emails are listed on this site under "decisionmakers". The Eau Claire City Council also has a chance to weigh in on the matter when they are asked by the County to change the zoning for whichever properties they end up purchasing. So it would also be helpful for you to contact them. It is entirely appropriate to contact all of these folks, no matter where you live, as you do not need to be a constituent in their "district" per se in order to share your opinion. Your voice does count, this is not a "done deal" as some have said! And by all means, if you are motivated, join us at our next meeting! We'd love to have you!
Dear City Council members:
I spent time on the original "Citizens Advisory Council" to the County Jail project. Bob Von Haden was also a member of this group.
We met several times over a 6 or 7 month period for about two hours each meeting.
I seems to me that "Advisory" must mean listening to the "powers that be" advise us on what things are happening between each meeting! That is exactly what happened.
Our advise was asked only when it came time to "sell" this project to the public. How can we best talk the public into buying into this very expensive project??
Objections to the location of this new jail received not a listen!! It seemed to be a "done deal"!!
This is not the way a democracy should work.
I ask, at this late date, for the city council to vote for a County-wide referendum on this Jail project and not simply rubber stamp the approval of this Hundred Million plus dollar project!
Thank you for your attention!
Thanks much,
Keep on hammerin with H4H!
Peace,
Jerry
We met several times over a 6 or 7 month period for about two hours each meeting.
I seems to me that "Advisory" must mean listening to the "powers that be" advise us on what things are happening between each meeting! That is exactly what happened.
Our advise was asked only when it came time to "sell" this project to the public. How can we best talk the public into buying into this very expensive project??
Objections to the location of this new jail received not a listen!! It seemed to be a "done deal"!!
This is not the way a democracy should work.
I ask, at this late date, for the city council to vote for a County-wide referendum on this Jail project and not simply rubber stamp the approval of this Hundred Million plus dollar project!
Thank you for your attention!
Thanks much,
Keep on hammerin with H4H!
Peace,
Jerry
To: County Board Members:
I spent time on the original "Citizens Advisory Council" to the County Jail project. We met several times over a 6 or 7 month period for about two hours each meeting.
It seems to me that "Advisory" must mean listening to the "powers that be" advise us on what things were happening between each meeting! That is exactly what happened.
Our advise was asked only when it came time to "sell" this project to the public. How can we best talk the public into buying into this very expensive project?? We were asked.
Expanding the TIP program was suggested but not taken seriously as a way to affect the building of a new jail. Suggestions of other programs: Mental Health Court, Youth Drug Court, and others were also discussed by some folks. Again, none were taken seriously as having any possible effect on the size for a new jail!
Objections to the location of this new jail received not a listen!! It seemed to be a "done deal"!! We were told that the location was a "done deal" because the County Board had voted on it!
Costs were discussed at length and that committee decided that if such a project were to be done, it should be done completely, all at once. The cost would have been in the neighborhood of 120 million dollars. However the cost of doing all of the buildings piecemeal over a fifteen or twenty year period could not even be estimated other than a guess of at least twice the 120 million.
Apparently the County Board decided to go with only the jail portion so the cost could be held under 60 million dollars. Our committee discussed that option also. Members of the committee discussed and knew that the total cost for just this jail project would probably be about one hundred million dollars. The public has not been told about the one hundred million. Nor has the public been told about the huge extra costs predicted to hire many additional staff people to make this new jail work.
This is not the way a democracy should work. Advisory Committees should have input into the meetings they are asked to attend. The public should have input through a referendum when such large costs are involved which will directly their taxes.
I ask, at this late date, for the County Board to call for a County-wide referendum on this Jail project and not simply rubber stamp the approval of this Hundred Million plus dollar project!
Thank you for your attention!
Peace,
Kenneth G. (Jerry) Foote
It seems to me that "Advisory" must mean listening to the "powers that be" advise us on what things were happening between each meeting! That is exactly what happened.
Our advise was asked only when it came time to "sell" this project to the public. How can we best talk the public into buying into this very expensive project?? We were asked.
Expanding the TIP program was suggested but not taken seriously as a way to affect the building of a new jail. Suggestions of other programs: Mental Health Court, Youth Drug Court, and others were also discussed by some folks. Again, none were taken seriously as having any possible effect on the size for a new jail!
Objections to the location of this new jail received not a listen!! It seemed to be a "done deal"!! We were told that the location was a "done deal" because the County Board had voted on it!
Costs were discussed at length and that committee decided that if such a project were to be done, it should be done completely, all at once. The cost would have been in the neighborhood of 120 million dollars. However the cost of doing all of the buildings piecemeal over a fifteen or twenty year period could not even be estimated other than a guess of at least twice the 120 million.
Apparently the County Board decided to go with only the jail portion so the cost could be held under 60 million dollars. Our committee discussed that option also. Members of the committee discussed and knew that the total cost for just this jail project would probably be about one hundred million dollars. The public has not been told about the one hundred million. Nor has the public been told about the huge extra costs predicted to hire many additional staff people to make this new jail work.
This is not the way a democracy should work. Advisory Committees should have input into the meetings they are asked to attend. The public should have input through a referendum when such large costs are involved which will directly their taxes.
I ask, at this late date, for the County Board to call for a County-wide referendum on this Jail project and not simply rubber stamp the approval of this Hundred Million plus dollar project!
Thank you for your attention!
Peace,
Kenneth G. (Jerry) Foote
Open Letter to City Council President Adler
Dear Mr. Adler:
I am writing to you to bring to your attention a matter which will come before the City Council in the near future. The Eau Claire County Board has approved the funds for construction of a new jail (sometimes referred to as “courthouse expansion” or “courthouse renovation”). The footprint of the proposed building is a rectangular piece of land extending from the east side of the courthouse building, along Ann Street, to First Avenue. I am sure that you have heard that there is a growing objection from citizens of Eau Claire County regarding the proposed building. The matter which will come before you, in the City Council, is a re-zoning request from the Eau Claire County Board, asking for a zoning variation or change for the construction of this building. I am writing to you to urge you NOT to approve this request.
First, I point out to you that the proposed building is to be built on the flood plain of the Eau Claire River. Construction of such a large and heavy building requires that deep pilings be sunk for support and the ground level be elevated above the flood plain, just as was done for the Royal Credit Union, across the river. Such a raising of the grade will directly affect the entire area around the property. The County building is constructed on the bluff and has firm footings; the proposed extension will not be on firm ground. Despite any assurances from the group which is pushing this project, the approved funds will not cover the necessary preparatory work plus the pilings plus construction of the building. In fact, the approved funds do not cover the proposed building in a completed form. Your approval of the County board’s request will lead to a building fiasco which will have to be remedied, at great expense to the taxpayer. Current estimates, without the pilings (and without the change in ground level) exceed $100 million.
Second, the proposed building is not consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan. In that plan, approved in 2005, one of the overarching themes is “Neighborhood Protection and Improvement: Keep older neighborhoods attractive and vital through improved streets, parks and services, code enforcement, design standards and selective redevelopment.” Although the plan does not address this specific site and although the property directly to the east of the county building is currently a parking lot, the proposed project would expand the footprint of that site, place a large concrete block of a building on the site, affect the flood plain, and bring the building close to the riverfront. All of this affects the historical character of the neighborhood, both in the proposals to acquire property and the indications of future intent to remove houses and buildings which are adjacent to the proposed building.
In the Comprehensive Plan’s chapter on Land Use, some of the relevant objectives are:
“Objective 4 – Established Neighborhoods: Maintain or revive the traditional urban character of the older neighborhoods so that they remain attractive places to live.
Objective 7 –Waterfronts: Improve the visual quality and connections to the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers to support appropriate development and enhance the community’s quality of life.
Objective 10 – Parks: Build parks and interconnected greenways to enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods and commercial districts, reflect Eau Claire’s cultural heritage, and honor civic life.
The proposed project is not consistent with the plan. First, the proposed project will alter the character of the neighborhood. Second, it will mar the riverscape, which the city has recently improved with Phoenix Park. The Park “enhances the community’s quality of life.” The proposed project will be a blight on the riverscape. Third, the proposed building will encroach on both the riverfront and the riverfront parkway. Do we really want a jail building right on the border of a parkway?
In the chapter on natural resources are the following objectives:
“River and Stream Shoreline Protection: Work with the Department of Natural Resources to protect the banks and flood plain of the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers, as well as Sherman, Lowes and Otter Creeks by enforcing its current flood plain regulations, using natural stream edge protection techniques as described above and by acquiring additional land for public open space. (See also the Parks System Chapter and the Land Use Chapter.)
Greenway Design: Consider environmental issues in the design of linear public parks and other open space along streams or bicycle paths. Determine the basis of any greenway width by specific environmental standards, such as slope percentage, erodible slopes, soil conditions, wetlands, flood plain locations and areas of quality woodlands with their size, area, and species identified. Carefully align bicycle paths in a greenway so as to minimize disruption of the ecology of the site.
River Flood Plain Management: Continue to strictly enforce river and stream flood plain regulations, which are part of the Zoning Code. Land use plans and site development plans will be drawn to protect the streams and accomplish appropriate waterfront development.
It would require more space than I can use here to include relevant objectives from the chapter on Historical Preservation. However, a quick review of the various versions of the proposal will give the reader the very clear impression that historical preservation played no role whatsoever in the proposal for this jail expansion. In fact, the proponents often and in a very flippant fashion would refer to removing or tearing down historic homes and buildings; there was no regard for the neighborhood. The neighborhood was there before the county building. I believe that it has priority.
In the chapter on Downtown Development, there is reference to expanding the county facility; but that is directly followed by the phrase “with respect for the neighborhood.” The proposed building hardly does that. There has been a complete disregard for the neighborhood. I was part of the “Neighborhood Advisory Meetings.” We were told that the whole thing was a “done deal” and that there was “nothing we could do to change it.” I don’t think that that was a wise statement to be making to a group of voters, taxpayers, and neighbors.
I am sure that those pushing the project will find some way to dance around these objectives and make it appear as if the proposed building will comply with the Comprehensive Plan. However, I am hoping that the City Council and the Plan Commission can clearly see that the proposed building does NOT comply with the Comprehensive Plan and cannot be made to comply with it.
I have other objections to this project. Although those objections may not be relevant to the matter which is coming before you, I think that it is relevant to the taxpayers of the city of Eau Claire. The County Board approved $59.1 million for this project. Every estimate I have ever heard, including those from proponents, is that the building, when complete, will cost in excess of $100 million. It is crystal clear to anyone who cares to look at this that the County Board set the approval of funding at $59.1 million to avoid the requirement to take any funding issue of $60 million or more to the voters in a referendum. The citizens of Eau Claire Count are not aware that the County Board has already raised their property taxes by 15% this year and for each of the following 29 years. If the full cost of the project hits the taxpayer’s wallets, the increase will be as much as 30% for each year in the next thirty years. Many of these County residents are also residents of the city of Eau Claire. The City Council would not allow the Eau Claire School District to do such an end run around the voters. Why should the Eau Claire City Council collude with this plan? I want to see full disclosure to the voters. This will mean bringing ALL of the information to the public. If the voters decide to approve a bond issue in referendum and if that vote indicates voter acceptance of site of the proposed building, then I will stand away from the issue. The voters will have spoken, and it is their money (and mine).
Thank you for receiving and considering my input. I would be happy to respond to any questions or comments you may have.
Sincerely,
Nick Smiar
I am writing to you to bring to your attention a matter which will come before the City Council in the near future. The Eau Claire County Board has approved the funds for construction of a new jail (sometimes referred to as “courthouse expansion” or “courthouse renovation”). The footprint of the proposed building is a rectangular piece of land extending from the east side of the courthouse building, along Ann Street, to First Avenue. I am sure that you have heard that there is a growing objection from citizens of Eau Claire County regarding the proposed building. The matter which will come before you, in the City Council, is a re-zoning request from the Eau Claire County Board, asking for a zoning variation or change for the construction of this building. I am writing to you to urge you NOT to approve this request.
First, I point out to you that the proposed building is to be built on the flood plain of the Eau Claire River. Construction of such a large and heavy building requires that deep pilings be sunk for support and the ground level be elevated above the flood plain, just as was done for the Royal Credit Union, across the river. Such a raising of the grade will directly affect the entire area around the property. The County building is constructed on the bluff and has firm footings; the proposed extension will not be on firm ground. Despite any assurances from the group which is pushing this project, the approved funds will not cover the necessary preparatory work plus the pilings plus construction of the building. In fact, the approved funds do not cover the proposed building in a completed form. Your approval of the County board’s request will lead to a building fiasco which will have to be remedied, at great expense to the taxpayer. Current estimates, without the pilings (and without the change in ground level) exceed $100 million.
Second, the proposed building is not consistent with the city’s comprehensive plan. In that plan, approved in 2005, one of the overarching themes is “Neighborhood Protection and Improvement: Keep older neighborhoods attractive and vital through improved streets, parks and services, code enforcement, design standards and selective redevelopment.” Although the plan does not address this specific site and although the property directly to the east of the county building is currently a parking lot, the proposed project would expand the footprint of that site, place a large concrete block of a building on the site, affect the flood plain, and bring the building close to the riverfront. All of this affects the historical character of the neighborhood, both in the proposals to acquire property and the indications of future intent to remove houses and buildings which are adjacent to the proposed building.
In the Comprehensive Plan’s chapter on Land Use, some of the relevant objectives are:
“Objective 4 – Established Neighborhoods: Maintain or revive the traditional urban character of the older neighborhoods so that they remain attractive places to live.
Objective 7 –Waterfronts: Improve the visual quality and connections to the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers to support appropriate development and enhance the community’s quality of life.
Objective 10 – Parks: Build parks and interconnected greenways to enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods and commercial districts, reflect Eau Claire’s cultural heritage, and honor civic life.
The proposed project is not consistent with the plan. First, the proposed project will alter the character of the neighborhood. Second, it will mar the riverscape, which the city has recently improved with Phoenix Park. The Park “enhances the community’s quality of life.” The proposed project will be a blight on the riverscape. Third, the proposed building will encroach on both the riverfront and the riverfront parkway. Do we really want a jail building right on the border of a parkway?
In the chapter on natural resources are the following objectives:
“River and Stream Shoreline Protection: Work with the Department of Natural Resources to protect the banks and flood plain of the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers, as well as Sherman, Lowes and Otter Creeks by enforcing its current flood plain regulations, using natural stream edge protection techniques as described above and by acquiring additional land for public open space. (See also the Parks System Chapter and the Land Use Chapter.)
Greenway Design: Consider environmental issues in the design of linear public parks and other open space along streams or bicycle paths. Determine the basis of any greenway width by specific environmental standards, such as slope percentage, erodible slopes, soil conditions, wetlands, flood plain locations and areas of quality woodlands with their size, area, and species identified. Carefully align bicycle paths in a greenway so as to minimize disruption of the ecology of the site.
River Flood Plain Management: Continue to strictly enforce river and stream flood plain regulations, which are part of the Zoning Code. Land use plans and site development plans will be drawn to protect the streams and accomplish appropriate waterfront development.
It would require more space than I can use here to include relevant objectives from the chapter on Historical Preservation. However, a quick review of the various versions of the proposal will give the reader the very clear impression that historical preservation played no role whatsoever in the proposal for this jail expansion. In fact, the proponents often and in a very flippant fashion would refer to removing or tearing down historic homes and buildings; there was no regard for the neighborhood. The neighborhood was there before the county building. I believe that it has priority.
In the chapter on Downtown Development, there is reference to expanding the county facility; but that is directly followed by the phrase “with respect for the neighborhood.” The proposed building hardly does that. There has been a complete disregard for the neighborhood. I was part of the “Neighborhood Advisory Meetings.” We were told that the whole thing was a “done deal” and that there was “nothing we could do to change it.” I don’t think that that was a wise statement to be making to a group of voters, taxpayers, and neighbors.
I am sure that those pushing the project will find some way to dance around these objectives and make it appear as if the proposed building will comply with the Comprehensive Plan. However, I am hoping that the City Council and the Plan Commission can clearly see that the proposed building does NOT comply with the Comprehensive Plan and cannot be made to comply with it.
I have other objections to this project. Although those objections may not be relevant to the matter which is coming before you, I think that it is relevant to the taxpayers of the city of Eau Claire. The County Board approved $59.1 million for this project. Every estimate I have ever heard, including those from proponents, is that the building, when complete, will cost in excess of $100 million. It is crystal clear to anyone who cares to look at this that the County Board set the approval of funding at $59.1 million to avoid the requirement to take any funding issue of $60 million or more to the voters in a referendum. The citizens of Eau Claire Count are not aware that the County Board has already raised their property taxes by 15% this year and for each of the following 29 years. If the full cost of the project hits the taxpayer’s wallets, the increase will be as much as 30% for each year in the next thirty years. Many of these County residents are also residents of the city of Eau Claire. The City Council would not allow the Eau Claire School District to do such an end run around the voters. Why should the Eau Claire City Council collude with this plan? I want to see full disclosure to the voters. This will mean bringing ALL of the information to the public. If the voters decide to approve a bond issue in referendum and if that vote indicates voter acceptance of site of the proposed building, then I will stand away from the issue. The voters will have spoken, and it is their money (and mine).
Thank you for receiving and considering my input. I would be happy to respond to any questions or comments you may have.
Sincerely,
Nick Smiar
Friday, February 15, 2008
Eau Claire's Alcatraz
| The city of Eau Claire has promoted, financed and built a beautiful riverside bike trail that has been augmented by the purchase of a railroad bridge, a funeral parlor and extensive easements to ensure its success. The city also has implemented development at the confluence of our two great rivers in Phoenix Park and the North Barstow area at great expense and with increasingly positive vision. It appears that a concentration of attention on the city center and riverfront with development and improvement may pay dividends in the future. So how could Eau Claire County be allowed to expand a jail to the very verge of the pearl of the city? Do the inmates need a view of Phoenix Park and a revitalized downtown? Is the jail to be part of the centerpiece of the riverfront? I can't wait to sit on the lawn in Phoenix Park, listen to some jailhouse blues and view the razor wire across the sky-blue waters. San Francisco has Alcatraz and we'll have the Eau Claire County Jail. Rock on! WILLI CHENEY Eau Claire |
Opposed to Jail Expansion (open letter to County Board and City Council)
I'm strongly opposed to Eau Claire putting a jail on one of the nicest riverfront areas in the city. Having lived in other U.S cities with riverfront areas, I’ve seen the good that can come with proper planning and use of such destination areas. The thought of putting a jail in the proposed downtown area is absolutely ridiculous, and I hope you will oppose it. Future generations will look back at this decision as either a “what were they thinking??”, or will appreciate that the riverfront business/residential area has been preserved and expanded.
It also has become very personal to me in that it is directly affecting the future of Just Local Food. I’ve been a loyal customer since moving to Eau Claire, and have even begun working there (as a second job) because I believe so strongly in the local food movement.
I look forward to hearing your position on this matter, and what you will do to oppose it.
Respectfully,
Laura Sommer
It also has become very personal to me in that it is directly affecting the future of Just Local Food. I’ve been a loyal customer since moving to Eau Claire, and have even begun working there (as a second job) because I believe so strongly in the local food movement.
I look forward to hearing your position on this matter, and what you will do to oppose it.
Respectfully,
Laura Sommer
Thursday, February 14, 2008
the location is problematic
MUST we have a jail addition on this choice piece of almost-riverfront land? MUST we take THIS land off the tax roles? MUST we raze this neat-as-a-pin neighborhood to put up an impersonal government building--even razing one of the oldest buildings in our neighborhood, one seen in old photo's shot from the river?
Isn't there a piece of city-owned land you could swap with the County--one on the periphery with easier-Interstate access for visitors--that could be used for a new jail.
Admittedly, we need more jail space and interest rates now are optimal for getting the job done. The time is right; the location is problematic.
Penny France
Isn't there a piece of city-owned land you could swap with the County--one on the periphery with easier-Interstate access for visitors--that could be used for a new jail.
Admittedly, we need more jail space and interest rates now are optimal for getting the job done. The time is right; the location is problematic.
Penny France
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Who Knew?
On Tuesday night, February 5th, the Eau Claire County Board approved the purchase of 2 properties totaling $490,000 which they intend to move or demolish to clear a site for the construction of a nearly $60 million jail.
Who knew?
How many residents are even aware that the county board has approved the new $60 million jail?
How many residents know that the proposed site is between First and Second Avenue directly adjacent to the beautiful Chippewa River downtown?
How many people know how much this will raise their property taxes?
How will a waterfront jail fit with the Comprehensive Downtown Development Plan? Who knows the results of an environmental impact study? Was there one?
It seems to me that there are a lot of important questions that the people of this county need to be asking their elected officials before we can commit to such a large scale project that will impact the entire community for decades to come.
Who knew?
Eric Zeegers
Candidate for County Board
Letter to County Board
I am concerned about recent actions of the County Board and groups within county government regarding construction of a new jail. In a recent motion, the County Board approved what was proposed as a $59.1 million expenditure for a new county jail. My primary concern is that the entire process has been, ultimately, an end-run around voter review and approval via a referendum, which is the ordinary and legal way to secure approval of public projects over $60 million. Every effort has been made to “fly under the radar” of voter review and approval.
I was present at one of the first “community advisory meetings,” held at Lakeshore School. The presenters tried very hard to make their presentation seem to be informational only. However, when I asked whether the decision regarding not only what was to be built but also whether there would be such a project had already been made, after much hemming and hawing, I was told that the decision had, in fact, already been made. It was, in other words, a “done deal.” The whole process, from the beginning to the present time, has been deceptive.
Now, most recently, I understand that a test of the site has been done. Results indicate that land instability would require the use of pilings as supports for any structure on the plot of land along Ann Street. Although I am not an expert on construction, even I know that that will add substantially to the cost of construction. I have been told that the response of the group which is pushing the project forward is that they will simply make changes in the building specifications to stay within the $59.1 million. This means to me that this group has every intention of keeping this issue away from a referendum. Every person with whom I have spoken about this project, both proponents and opponents, have acknowledged that $59.1 million is not the full cost of the project, even the full cost of the funding which will have to come in a bond issue (or two bond issues). Most estimates range between $100 million and $150 million. Even the $59.1 million which you have approved will add 15% to my property tax each year for the next thirty years.
We have not had full disclosure to the voters, and the issue has not come before them in a referendum. We would not permit our school district to do this. We ought not to permit the county to do this. Let the group which is proposing the project make its case to the voters, in the same way that we require the school district to do this to secure approval of a bond issue. I am opposed even to building the new jail, and especially on that site. However, if the voters indicate their approval, then I will stand down from the issue. If the voters do not have the opportunity to approve or disapprove the proposal and the bond issue and when they discover that your action has led to a 15% to 30% increase in property taxes over the term of the bond(s), I believe that you will face the ire of the taxpayers. I realize that your approval of the $59.1 million was not for a bond issue; it was to come from the county’s budget. However, the effect on the property tax is the same.
If you were one of the persons who voted to approve this matter, I strongly encourage you to make a “motion to reconsider” the original motion (following Robert’s Rules of Order). Bring the issue back. Require full disclosure. Ask for an itemized estimate of the full cost of the project, to determine the actual size of the bond issue which will be necessary or the full impact on the county budget. I think that the strategy is to get the walls and roof on the ground and then to come back for funds for completion, a two-strike strategy. I am hopping mad about this because some persons are trying to pull the wool over the county residents’, taxpayers’ eyes. I do not like to see things decided in the smoky back room. Bring this issue out into the light of day. Let’s thrash it out in the public forum, with full disclosure.
Thank you for reading my concerns. I know that you will give them serious consideration. I fully expect this issue to be taken up by the County Board as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
Nick Smiar
Letter to Editor
Dear Editor:
How many taxpayers in Eau Claire County are aware that their property taxes have increased because of a major expense the county has taken on, without seeking the consent of the voters through a referendum? I am referring to the County Board’s decision to proceed with the construction of a new jail. The proposal is to build a new jail as an addition to the county building, extending along Ann Street, east of the present building, taking the properties on both sides of Ann Street out to First Avenue, and maybe more.. The reported estimated cost of the building is $59.1 million, although I do not know anyone who has seen the itemized estimate, and so we do not know if that estimate includes all costs for the entire project or just a “bare bones” estimate to put up the walls, floors, and roof, and then add on the rest of the cost when it is too late. A recent land survey indicates that pilings will have to be built to support the building, which will certainly increase the cost. A more realistic estimate may be as high as $100 million.
For any project which is more than $60 million, there must be a referendum in which the voters can approve or disapprove of the expenditure, which we often see when the school district wants to build a new school or make major renovations.
This project seems to be “flying under the radar” of voter review. We may, in fact, need a new jail, and it may have to be where it is proposed. However, I want to see voter review of such a major expenditure. Let the case be made in public through a referendum. Do not put this financial burden on the taxpayer without that referendum. I have heard that even the current estimated cost would increase our property tax by 15% for each year over the next thirty years. We would not allow the school board to do this; we certainly should not allow the County Board to do it. Let’s have full disclosure and voter review through a referendum.
Nick Smiar
Eau Claire – A Great Place to Spend Time
9 February 2008
Dear City of Eau Claire Council Member,
Please take a firm stand against the expansion of the county jail complex onto First Avenue along the Chippewa River. Why this project even remains a possibility is a mystery to me. This county imposition on our city is an insult to our community and runs counter to the very goals toward which much of the Eau Claire community has been working, including efforts of Downtown Eau Claire, Inc., UWEC Strategic Planning, Eau Claire Redevelopment Authority, Eau Claire’s Historic Preservation Foundation, Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Commission and others. For numerous social, economic and environmental reasons, the proposal must be quashed immediately.
The City is, and should be, proud of its recent accomplishments and efforts along the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers. These include Phoenix Park and the Farmer’s Market, the multiple bike/pedestrian bridges, the ongoing redevelopment of the tire factory, the Chippewa River State Trail connecting the Old Abe with the Red Cedar Trails, the possible purchase of riverfront property around Oxford Avenue, the North Barstow Redevelopment project, and so on. Having a three or four-story monstrosity placed at the center of all this positive improvement is incongruous and will be with us for decades.
To place a jail in such a prominent place, in the heart of our community, at a hub of state recreational trails, will make it a defining feature of our city and part of our identity. What are people to think of such an overwhelming structure on the landscape from across the river, from the Lake Street Bridge, while fishing or floating the Chippewa River, while biking down the State Trail? Forget UWEC as the most beautiful UW campus, Eau Claire will be known as that city with the new jail downtown. Great for La Crosse, rotten for us. And the possibilities for new city mottos and logos will be endless – “Eau Claire: Wisconsin’s most beautiful place to do time;” images of fishermen in black and white striped waders; signs along the Chippewa River warning canoeists not to pick up hitchhikers. You get the picture.
Compounding the disgrace of having a modern jail as the cornerstone of a revitalized downtown Eau Claire is having to pay for it. The cost of the jail has been disingenuously underestimated at $59.1 million. (Is it true that projects of $60 million or more require a supermajority to get county board approval but those less than that don’t?) No such project gets done without significant cost over runs. Other reasonable estimates of the project bring the cost of the jail closer to $100 million or more. If one includes the expenses related to hiring additional staff to operate the new jail over the next 15 years, the total bill begins to approach $200 million. City residents, who make up 67% of the county’s population, will have to pay for most of it. By some estimates, this comes to over $2500 per person. Why are we willing to do this when we cannot even raise a comparative pittance of that amount for our city’s schools and teachers? Shame on us! It does not take a creative policy genius to imagine what impact $200 million or $59.1 million or a fraction of that, spent in the county and city on education, community development, small business enterprises, opportunities for youth, social programs, riverfront enhancement, etc. would do for improving our city, maybe even reducing our need for an expanded jail.
On top of actual costs, the opportunity costs of placing the jail on the riverfront will further detract from the city’s coffers. Will county facilities pay taxes as residential or commercial properties do? Moreover, if it is true that the county intends to house prisoners from other jurisdictions to generate revenue, such income will go to the county. Should the City be so generous with taxpayer resources when we have our own serious financial needs?
This is not to say we may not need to work on our correctional facilities. I value and greatly appreciate the role of local law enforcement, and if there truly is a need for a new jail it should be done in a manner consistent with actual needs of community, law enforcement, prisoners and city-wide goals and planning. A downtown riverfront is not the place. Our riverfront is prime for redevelopment that meets the needs, desires, dreams for, and pride in, our community.
The alternatives for First Avenue are exciting. The city could find architectural possibilities from pictures of Eau Claire in local archives, small businesses could make the area a destination for walkers and bikers, and Eau Claire could be integrated across the Chippewa River. Instead of a jail on its tourism and promotional materials, the city could promote its extraordinary number of pedestrian and bike bridges. We have six such bridges in our small city, with at least one other in the plans. This integration between environment, residence and business would be the envy of other cities our size. We want people to come to Eau Claire because they want to, not because they have to.
Demonstrate your care for the City of Eau Claire, its people and environment, by putting an immediate stop to discussions that entertain a jail on our precious waterfront asset. It is a waste of resources, energy and time and seems to have already involved sneaky and behind the scenes shenanigans – no two explanations of what is going on are consistent. (For example, the map of the proposed jail and its parking lots as posted on the County’s website is different from the architects’ drawing provided for the February issue of The Progressive Outpost). Our community expects you to work productively with the County toward meeting all of our needs, but not to roll over for them. In the long run, Eau Claire County will thank you for it.
Thank you for your efforts on this issue specifically and for your work on the City Council more generally. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue, and would enjoy the opportunity to discuss them with you in person.
Respectfully,
Paul Kaldjian
East Side Hill
Dear City of Eau Claire Council Member,
Please take a firm stand against the expansion of the county jail complex onto First Avenue along the Chippewa River. Why this project even remains a possibility is a mystery to me. This county imposition on our city is an insult to our community and runs counter to the very goals toward which much of the Eau Claire community has been working, including efforts of Downtown Eau Claire, Inc., UWEC Strategic Planning, Eau Claire Redevelopment Authority, Eau Claire’s Historic Preservation Foundation, Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Commission and others. For numerous social, economic and environmental reasons, the proposal must be quashed immediately.
The City is, and should be, proud of its recent accomplishments and efforts along the Chippewa and Eau Claire Rivers. These include Phoenix Park and the Farmer’s Market, the multiple bike/pedestrian bridges, the ongoing redevelopment of the tire factory, the Chippewa River State Trail connecting the Old Abe with the Red Cedar Trails, the possible purchase of riverfront property around Oxford Avenue, the North Barstow Redevelopment project, and so on. Having a three or four-story monstrosity placed at the center of all this positive improvement is incongruous and will be with us for decades.
To place a jail in such a prominent place, in the heart of our community, at a hub of state recreational trails, will make it a defining feature of our city and part of our identity. What are people to think of such an overwhelming structure on the landscape from across the river, from the Lake Street Bridge, while fishing or floating the Chippewa River, while biking down the State Trail? Forget UWEC as the most beautiful UW campus, Eau Claire will be known as that city with the new jail downtown. Great for La Crosse, rotten for us. And the possibilities for new city mottos and logos will be endless – “Eau Claire: Wisconsin’s most beautiful place to do time;” images of fishermen in black and white striped waders; signs along the Chippewa River warning canoeists not to pick up hitchhikers. You get the picture.
Compounding the disgrace of having a modern jail as the cornerstone of a revitalized downtown Eau Claire is having to pay for it. The cost of the jail has been disingenuously underestimated at $59.1 million. (Is it true that projects of $60 million or more require a supermajority to get county board approval but those less than that don’t?) No such project gets done without significant cost over runs. Other reasonable estimates of the project bring the cost of the jail closer to $100 million or more. If one includes the expenses related to hiring additional staff to operate the new jail over the next 15 years, the total bill begins to approach $200 million. City residents, who make up 67% of the county’s population, will have to pay for most of it. By some estimates, this comes to over $2500 per person. Why are we willing to do this when we cannot even raise a comparative pittance of that amount for our city’s schools and teachers? Shame on us! It does not take a creative policy genius to imagine what impact $200 million or $59.1 million or a fraction of that, spent in the county and city on education, community development, small business enterprises, opportunities for youth, social programs, riverfront enhancement, etc. would do for improving our city, maybe even reducing our need for an expanded jail.
On top of actual costs, the opportunity costs of placing the jail on the riverfront will further detract from the city’s coffers. Will county facilities pay taxes as residential or commercial properties do? Moreover, if it is true that the county intends to house prisoners from other jurisdictions to generate revenue, such income will go to the county. Should the City be so generous with taxpayer resources when we have our own serious financial needs?
This is not to say we may not need to work on our correctional facilities. I value and greatly appreciate the role of local law enforcement, and if there truly is a need for a new jail it should be done in a manner consistent with actual needs of community, law enforcement, prisoners and city-wide goals and planning. A downtown riverfront is not the place. Our riverfront is prime for redevelopment that meets the needs, desires, dreams for, and pride in, our community.
The alternatives for First Avenue are exciting. The city could find architectural possibilities from pictures of Eau Claire in local archives, small businesses could make the area a destination for walkers and bikers, and Eau Claire could be integrated across the Chippewa River. Instead of a jail on its tourism and promotional materials, the city could promote its extraordinary number of pedestrian and bike bridges. We have six such bridges in our small city, with at least one other in the plans. This integration between environment, residence and business would be the envy of other cities our size. We want people to come to Eau Claire because they want to, not because they have to.
Demonstrate your care for the City of Eau Claire, its people and environment, by putting an immediate stop to discussions that entertain a jail on our precious waterfront asset. It is a waste of resources, energy and time and seems to have already involved sneaky and behind the scenes shenanigans – no two explanations of what is going on are consistent. (For example, the map of the proposed jail and its parking lots as posted on the County’s website is different from the architects’ drawing provided for the February issue of The Progressive Outpost). Our community expects you to work productively with the County toward meeting all of our needs, but not to roll over for them. In the long run, Eau Claire County will thank you for it.
Thank you for your efforts on this issue specifically and for your work on the City Council more generally. I look forward to hearing your thoughts on this issue, and would enjoy the opportunity to discuss them with you in person.
Respectfully,
Paul Kaldjian
East Side Hill
Leader Telegram article
An article covering the recent CAJE meeting is posted on the Leader Telegram website.
Updated: 2/12/2008
See it.
Updated: 2/12/2008
| Jail plan rankles residents |
| Group wants $60 million expansion proposal stopped |
| By Brad Bryan |
| Leader-Telegram staff |
See it.
TV-13 coverage
From their website:
| Expanding the Eau Claire County Courthouse and Jail |
Last Updated: 10:45 PM Feb 5, 2008
The Eau Claire County Board is moving ahead with plans to expand the courthouse and jail.
Monday night board members discussed buying a home at 113 Ann Street and one at 762 First Avenue. On a vote of 16 to 9 members authorized the county lawyer to complete and finalize the purchases so it can use that land for expansion.
Progressive Outpost article
County Jail Project Threatens Downtown Food Cooperative
By Jeremy Gragert, Eau Claire
The Progressive Outpost – February 2008 (Published January 29, 2008)
The $59.1 million Eau Claire County building renovation and jail project approved last year, which includes a massive new three-story jail being sited between the current county building and the Chippewa River, is very close to the Just Local Food cooperative grocery at 772 First Ave. For months, preliminary site plans have shown a parking lot replacing the building that Just Local Food currently leases, making the worker-owners of the cooperative more than a little nervous about the future of their store.
“We want to stay here. It’s a great spot for a grocery store,” said Aaron Ellringer, a worker-owner who has been exploring Just Local Food’s options if the building’s owner, Gerald Niblett, agrees to sell the building to the county. Currently, the county is in the process of having the property independently appraised so an offer can be made to Niblett, said Frank Draxler, the city-county purchasing director who has taken on the role of project manager for the expansion project.
About half of all properties east of the current county building, between Lake Street and Grand Avenue, are under threat of being acquired by the county for either the new jail or new parking lots. The exceptions include all the Grand Avenue businesses, the houses directly on Lake Street, and the Victorian home at 751 Second Ave. Ellringer of Just Local Food questions why the building that the store operates out of was not given similar protection by the Eau Claire County Board.
Some county board members are wondering the same. County board supervisor Maureen Slauson, whose district includes the county building area, said she doesn’t understand why all of the commercial buildings along First Avenue are under threat by a riverfront parking lot. “There are a number of people on the county board who do not want to see this gone,” Slauson said, adding that the buildings have historical and aesthetic value even if they did not house the only grocery store in the downtown.
It has been grumblings like that that may have caused the latest jail site plan (released as a draft on January 11) to leave almost all of the commercial buildings on First Avenue intact, with the exception of a portion of Eau Claire FabriCare, an operating dry cleaning and laundry business at 768 First Ave. The sudden appearance of the commercial buildings on the plans surprised Ellringer of Just Local Food, because he said that Draxler and the acquisition firm hired by the county to appraise the property, Timbers-Selissen Land Specialists, Inc., has always made it quite clear to him that the county intends the store to be a parking lot before the end of the year.
“In order for us to stay here we need to improve the infrastructure of the buildings,” Ellringer said. “Nobody is going to improve the infrastructure of the buildings if the county is threatening to buy them and rip them down.” Because of that threat Just Local Food has been working with the city for months on finding a new location in the downtown, rather than spending time and resources to buy or improve the building they are currently occupying.
But recently, Chuck Gable, of Eau Claire, has been in contact with Just Local Food about how he could help financially support improvements to the buildings so that the cooperative could stay. Gable has even been in contact with Niblett about purchasing the buildings before the county makes an offer on them, but Niblett is waiting for the county’s offer first. Gable says removing the buildings and the businesses along First Avenue would be a mistake. “These buildings were built in the 1800’s for food distribution,” Gable said. “Just Local Food is providing the same service as the people who built the buildings had.
It is unclear whether Niblett, the owner of the properties, will sell to the county following the appraisal that is expected to be complete by February. According to Draxler, if Niblett does not want to sell at the price offered to him, the county is obligated to pay for a second independent appraisal, and if a deal can’t be worked out after a third appraisal the acquisition goes in front of a judge. In the end the county has the power to condemn individual properties, but not without the approval of the county board.
Draxler said the county has not had trouble acquiring properties to date, with each property acquisition having to get the approval of the county board. Draxler said that the county board has the final say, for example, over whether the buildings along First Avenue are purchased by the county or not. Supervisor Slauson, quoted earlier, said she would vote against the county purchasing the buildings. For the time being, Draxler says, the county is planning to offer Niblett a price for the buildings and will try to negotiate a purchase sometime in early February.
“My priorities are working with the site plan and making sure we have adequate parking,” said Draxler. “If we don’t need those buildings (for parking), we aren’t going to take the buildings.” Draxler said there is no set number of parking spaces required at this time, but at a minimum, the county would prefer to replace the number of parking spaces lost when the new jail is built on top of current surface parking. “It’s mainly up to how much parking we need and the cost of acquisition,” Draxler said, about whether to acquire certain properties outside of the jail footprint.
Draxler admitted that the owners of Eau Claire FabriCare, the dry cleaning business next to Just Local Food, do not want to sell their building to the county either. “FabriCare is concerned with its client base,” said Draxler, a base that is primarily people who dress formally and work at or near the county courthouse. A move elsewhere, even if the county pays FabriCare to relocate, could shut down the business if the cliental can’t be maintained.
To answer concerns of community members, one project workgroup formed in December, called the Community Advisory Team, has representatives from the neighborhood and area businesses and is charged with providing input on the outward appearance of the jail building and the basics of the site plan. Representatives of the Milwaukee-based firm Venture Architects, which has the contract for architectural and engineering services for the project, attend the meetings. Venture presented the latest site plan on January 11 showing the Just Local Food building on the plan for the first time. When asked why the buildings were on the site plan, Draxler said: “It was just the way the architect drew it at the time.
According to County Clerk Janet Loomis, the Community Advisory Team has no real decision-making power, and therefore the meetings of the workgroup are not given public notice. Technically, members of the general public are allowed to attend but must contact the county for meeting times and locations. Draxler said discussion of specific businesses would not be allowed at future Community Advisory Team meetings, which are scheduled every three weeks for the months ahead. It would not be appropriate to publicly negotiate the future of the buildings, and the Advisory Team does not have that authority anyway, Draxler said. “I’m not going to allow discussion of Just Local Food at those meetings,” insisted Draxler.
The future of the buildings, and whether Just Local Food will have to relocate, is expected to be decided by the end of March. Ellringer said the grocery cooperative is looking at all of its options, and are hoping to be included in discussions with the county officials and Timbers-Selissen, the firm hired to handle acquisition for the county. Ellringer summed up the uncertainty: “It’s a rollercoaster, that’s for sure.
Upcoming Meetings:
held in Rm 2550 of the Eau Claire County Courthouse
Public Open Houses
Wednesday, February 20 – 6:00pm
Wednesday, April 2 – 6:00pm
Community Advisory Team
Friday, February 1 – 7:30am
Friday, February 22 – 7:30am
By Jeremy Gragert, Eau Claire
The Progressive Outpost – February 2008 (Published January 29, 2008)
The $59.1 million Eau Claire County building renovation and jail project approved last year, which includes a massive new three-story jail being sited between the current county building and the Chippewa River, is very close to the Just Local Food cooperative grocery at 772 First Ave. For months, preliminary site plans have shown a parking lot replacing the building that Just Local Food currently leases, making the worker-owners of the cooperative more than a little nervous about the future of their store.
“We want to stay here. It’s a great spot for a grocery store,” said Aaron Ellringer, a worker-owner who has been exploring Just Local Food’s options if the building’s owner, Gerald Niblett, agrees to sell the building to the county. Currently, the county is in the process of having the property independently appraised so an offer can be made to Niblett, said Frank Draxler, the city-county purchasing director who has taken on the role of project manager for the expansion project.
About half of all properties east of the current county building, between Lake Street and Grand Avenue, are under threat of being acquired by the county for either the new jail or new parking lots. The exceptions include all the Grand Avenue businesses, the houses directly on Lake Street, and the Victorian home at 751 Second Ave. Ellringer of Just Local Food questions why the building that the store operates out of was not given similar protection by the Eau Claire County Board.
Some county board members are wondering the same. County board supervisor Maureen Slauson, whose district includes the county building area, said she doesn’t understand why all of the commercial buildings along First Avenue are under threat by a riverfront parking lot. “There are a number of people on the county board who do not want to see this gone,” Slauson said, adding that the buildings have historical and aesthetic value even if they did not house the only grocery store in the downtown.
It has been grumblings like that that may have caused the latest jail site plan (released as a draft on January 11) to leave almost all of the commercial buildings on First Avenue intact, with the exception of a portion of Eau Claire FabriCare, an operating dry cleaning and laundry business at 768 First Ave. The sudden appearance of the commercial buildings on the plans surprised Ellringer of Just Local Food, because he said that Draxler and the acquisition firm hired by the county to appraise the property, Timbers-Selissen Land Specialists, Inc., has always made it quite clear to him that the county intends the store to be a parking lot before the end of the year.
“In order for us to stay here we need to improve the infrastructure of the buildings,” Ellringer said. “Nobody is going to improve the infrastructure of the buildings if the county is threatening to buy them and rip them down.” Because of that threat Just Local Food has been working with the city for months on finding a new location in the downtown, rather than spending time and resources to buy or improve the building they are currently occupying.
But recently, Chuck Gable, of Eau Claire, has been in contact with Just Local Food about how he could help financially support improvements to the buildings so that the cooperative could stay. Gable has even been in contact with Niblett about purchasing the buildings before the county makes an offer on them, but Niblett is waiting for the county’s offer first. Gable says removing the buildings and the businesses along First Avenue would be a mistake. “These buildings were built in the 1800’s for food distribution,” Gable said. “Just Local Food is providing the same service as the people who built the buildings had.
It is unclear whether Niblett, the owner of the properties, will sell to the county following the appraisal that is expected to be complete by February. According to Draxler, if Niblett does not want to sell at the price offered to him, the county is obligated to pay for a second independent appraisal, and if a deal can’t be worked out after a third appraisal the acquisition goes in front of a judge. In the end the county has the power to condemn individual properties, but not without the approval of the county board.
Draxler said the county has not had trouble acquiring properties to date, with each property acquisition having to get the approval of the county board. Draxler said that the county board has the final say, for example, over whether the buildings along First Avenue are purchased by the county or not. Supervisor Slauson, quoted earlier, said she would vote against the county purchasing the buildings. For the time being, Draxler says, the county is planning to offer Niblett a price for the buildings and will try to negotiate a purchase sometime in early February.
“My priorities are working with the site plan and making sure we have adequate parking,” said Draxler. “If we don’t need those buildings (for parking), we aren’t going to take the buildings.” Draxler said there is no set number of parking spaces required at this time, but at a minimum, the county would prefer to replace the number of parking spaces lost when the new jail is built on top of current surface parking. “It’s mainly up to how much parking we need and the cost of acquisition,” Draxler said, about whether to acquire certain properties outside of the jail footprint.
Draxler admitted that the owners of Eau Claire FabriCare, the dry cleaning business next to Just Local Food, do not want to sell their building to the county either. “FabriCare is concerned with its client base,” said Draxler, a base that is primarily people who dress formally and work at or near the county courthouse. A move elsewhere, even if the county pays FabriCare to relocate, could shut down the business if the cliental can’t be maintained.
To answer concerns of community members, one project workgroup formed in December, called the Community Advisory Team, has representatives from the neighborhood and area businesses and is charged with providing input on the outward appearance of the jail building and the basics of the site plan. Representatives of the Milwaukee-based firm Venture Architects, which has the contract for architectural and engineering services for the project, attend the meetings. Venture presented the latest site plan on January 11 showing the Just Local Food building on the plan for the first time. When asked why the buildings were on the site plan, Draxler said: “It was just the way the architect drew it at the time.
According to County Clerk Janet Loomis, the Community Advisory Team has no real decision-making power, and therefore the meetings of the workgroup are not given public notice. Technically, members of the general public are allowed to attend but must contact the county for meeting times and locations. Draxler said discussion of specific businesses would not be allowed at future Community Advisory Team meetings, which are scheduled every three weeks for the months ahead. It would not be appropriate to publicly negotiate the future of the buildings, and the Advisory Team does not have that authority anyway, Draxler said. “I’m not going to allow discussion of Just Local Food at those meetings,” insisted Draxler.
The future of the buildings, and whether Just Local Food will have to relocate, is expected to be decided by the end of March. Ellringer said the grocery cooperative is looking at all of its options, and are hoping to be included in discussions with the county officials and Timbers-Selissen, the firm hired to handle acquisition for the county. Ellringer summed up the uncertainty: “It’s a rollercoaster, that’s for sure.
Upcoming Meetings:
held in Rm 2550 of the Eau Claire County Courthouse
Public Open Houses
Wednesday, February 20 – 6:00pm
Wednesday, April 2 – 6:00pm
Community Advisory Team
Friday, February 1 – 7:30am
Friday, February 22 – 7:30am
SING SING SING
by Ken Fulgione
It seems to me that we are missing several important issues and just accepting the placement of the new county jail in downtown Eau Claire as a done deal. During the entire process there has been an outpour of location opposition from the public. They have politely been given their opportunity to speak and then ignored. Downtown Eau Claire is not the appropriate location to try to shoe-horn in this structure… but no matter what is said ~ the band plays on. Aside from the new discovered additional costs in the neighborhood of ½ to 1.5 million dollars for piers or some type of enhanced foundation needed to build the jail in the otherwise unstable ground, the county will also be spending unreported hundreds of thousands of dollars to put on a secondary skin and cosmetic façade towers to make the jail look like it is not a jail….. The large expanse of windows overlooking the riverfront & bike trail are all added cost and will not actually show in the cell blocks located in the building inside the façade.
These absurdities go well to compliment the fact that the city spent almost 2 years developing a comprehensive plan that allowed for protection of the homes on Lake St and the creation of a Court House Campus in that area ~ not a 4 story jail. The city has purchased land along the riverfront….. added bike & walking trails, and has spent enormous sums in developing the river front and Phoenix Park … all now to be overshadowed by the downtown county jail.
And this initial project can by no means considered complete. After the enormous fancy faced jail is squeezed into the site, the county’s parking problem will be increased. Even before counting the added staff that will be needed to man the 2 story jail (they are not in the budget by the way) there will only be a net increase of 15 parking spaces…. And with the jail planned to be able to go up to 4 stories high and a new court house planned to remove homes on Lake St … when do you think the parking ramp will be added to the tax rolls?
I feel like we need R2-D2 to say …. “Obie-One my City – you are our only hope”. The County board with its normal back to the public has ignored the public opposition & rejected the idea of allowing for a Referendum on spending the 59.1 million initially budgeted for this project. (That is close to $100,000,000 without cost overruns by the time it is outdated and paid for) The public’s last hope and only opportunity to speak out against this project, lies with the City. The land still needs to be re-zoned and the City’s new Comprehensive Plan will have to be changed in order to allow the building of this monstrosity to continue. The money spent to date can be easily re-couped by the County, and the City can say NO!!! … the jail does not belong downtown.
Several county residents have already started to form a group calling for Accountability in the Jail Expansion project and it is very likely that the City Council will be forced to overcome a Super-Majority vote in order to approve the necessary re-zoning. If the Plan Commission & City Council are affected by an enraged public and the re-zoning does not pass….. then the County will be forced to consider other alternatives that would be less detrimental to downtown Eau Claire.
So if you are outraged by location of a Downtown fancy skinned jail along the river or by the rejection of you having a voice by referendum in the expenditure of such a large sum of tax dollars > call the City Council. If you think the long term plans of a 4 story jail and a new court house and the removal of the Lake St homes is not in the best interest of our downtown development efforts > call your City Council. If you feel that the County Board should turn their chairs around and face the public and listen to their constituents then send them a message > call the City Council and tell them to reject the Re-zoning and not to change the City’s Comprehensive Plan…… And why you are on the phone or sending e-mails, let the County Board hear from you. You may have spoken before and been ignored …. but it ain’t over till Yogi Bear sings.
Next Meeting
Citizens for Accountability in Jail Expansion:
We have grown and plan to contact the next 1000 this week. Thank you …. to those who had time to come out on a frozen night to attend a meeting to discuss strategies to stop the Riverfront Jail Façade. We left the meeting with the promise to start contacting the media – the county board – the Plan Commission & the Eau Claire City Council with our concerns and comments as to why shoehorning in a jail along the riverfront is detrimental to the city of Eau Claire…. should not be done without a public referendum …. and is going to be un-necessarily wasteful of taxpayers money and on and on and on. Please join in the efforts.
The best thing about the Riverfront Façade Jail is that there are so many reasons why it should not occur that we will have unlimited things to write about. PLEASE DO MAKE SOME CONTACTS. The attached file will provide you with all of the email addresses for the County Board & the City Council members. Contact them all.
We also will be sending out letters to as many of the 1000 signatures in opposition as we can the next couple weeks…. And I would hope you all will talk to at least 2 more people and bring them along to our next meeting FEBRUARY 18 AT 7PM AT 1ST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH across from Randall Park.
If you can not make that meeting ~ we will also be gathering at the County Board Open House in the County Court House 2nd Floor at 6PM on FEBRUARY 20th to talk with the board members in attendance…. Bring along a sign & send them a note and let them know you are coming.
(this was an email sent by Ken Fulgione)
Upcoming County Meetings:
held in Rm 2550 of the Eau Claire County Courthouse
Public Open Houses
Wednesday, February 20 – 6:00pm
Wednesday, April 2 – 6:00pm
Community Advisory Team
Friday, February 22 – 7:30am
We have grown and plan to contact the next 1000 this week. Thank you …. to those who had time to come out on a frozen night to attend a meeting to discuss strategies to stop the Riverfront Jail Façade. We left the meeting with the promise to start contacting the media – the county board – the Plan Commission & the Eau Claire City Council with our concerns and comments as to why shoehorning in a jail along the riverfront is detrimental to the city of Eau Claire…. should not be done without a public referendum …. and is going to be un-necessarily wasteful of taxpayers money and on and on and on. Please join in the efforts.
The best thing about the Riverfront Façade Jail is that there are so many reasons why it should not occur that we will have unlimited things to write about. PLEASE DO MAKE SOME CONTACTS. The attached file will provide you with all of the email addresses for the County Board & the City Council members. Contact them all.
We also will be sending out letters to as many of the 1000 signatures in opposition as we can the next couple weeks…. And I would hope you all will talk to at least 2 more people and bring them along to our next meeting FEBRUARY 18 AT 7PM AT 1ST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH across from Randall Park.
If you can not make that meeting ~ we will also be gathering at the County Board Open House in the County Court House 2nd Floor at 6PM on FEBRUARY 20th to talk with the board members in attendance…. Bring along a sign & send them a note and let them know you are coming.
(this was an email sent by Ken Fulgione)
Upcoming County Meetings:
held in Rm 2550 of the Eau Claire County Courthouse
Public Open Houses
Wednesday, February 20 – 6:00pm
Wednesday, April 2 – 6:00pm
Community Advisory Team
Friday, February 22 – 7:30am
An Open Letter to the Eau Claire County Board and Eau Claire City Council
We are writing to let you know of our strong opposition to the current plan to expand the city jail. This plan is a bad idea for the following eight reasons:
1. It would impose a huge burden on Eau Claire taxpayers, a burden they neither want nor deserve. At a time when the whole country — and especially the struggling State of Wisconsin — are hovering on the brink of recession, it is hardly an opportune moment to embark on a project that we now realize would cost over $60 million dollars before it was done. Do the citizens realize that we would be paying for this ill-conceived venture for the next 30 years, and that it would raise property taxes by an average amount of between 15% and 20% per family? To make matters worse, most of the costs for design and construction of the new facilities are slated to go to businesses from outside of the Chippewa Valley. That money would not recirculate back into the local economy; it would be lost to us for good.
2. It represents a poor set of priorities to put the county’s educational needs at the bottom of the list in order to place correctional facilities at the top. Are you aware of the fact that over the past three decades the State of Wisconsin has reduced its spending for higher education by almost exactly the same amount that it has increased spending for its bloated prison system? This trend cannot go on indefinitely! If it continues, we will lose an entire generation of young people, their hopes and dreams nipped in the bud because they cannot individually afford the rising costs of higher education. (As educators, this is of particular concern to us.) The only solution, in our view, is for the state and local governments to resume their fair share of the costs for education. Yet the huge and costly jail construction plan will effectively turn its back on our students and youth.
3. We would do far better to create less expensive rehabilitation facilities for local lawbreakers. Most of these have been convicted of non-violent crimes in any case, and they can be dealt with more effectively by sentences involving a combination of house-arrest, drug or alcohol rehabilitation where necessary, and community service. The money freed up by emptying jail cells could be used to provide more easily accessible higher education for all. Would we not do better to rehabilitate our young people and send them to school than plan to increase their rate of incarceration?
4. The estimated costs for the new jail project keep creeping up incrementally. The latest news we’ve heard is that the soil all along the Randal Park riverbank area is insufficiently stable to support the weight of such a large edifice. As a result, there would need to be a soil stabilization procedure prior to construction, adding costs of somewhere between half-a-million and a million dollars to the original estimate! Some people may say this is “only” half a million dollars, but the taxpayers of Wisconsin will not be so blasé when they realize how their representatives have wasted their hard-earned dollars.
5. Some have argued that the rising number of crimes in Wisconsin requires the building of more and more prisons. Yet the fact remains that Eau Claire is one of the safest places in the country to live, with a relatively low crime rate. According to my information, the expansion plan calls for filling up the beds in the new jail facility with prisoners drawn from other parts of the state, since there won’t be nearly enough local criminals to incarcerate. So the intention is to ship them in from Milwaukee and Madison, principally. In this way, the presumed hope is over time to pay for prison cells that should never have been located here in the first place. This plan may be clever, to be sure but in adopting it the planners implicitly admit that they are expanding the jail to an extent far surpassing Eau Claire County’s needs.
6. Further, has the Eau Claire County Board considered that prisoners, too, have families and friends who need to visit them on a frequent basis, both for the prisoners’ morale and for their families’ sakes? It is simply inhumane to shift prisoners around over long distances from one part of the state to another, treating them like mere chattel with no human dignity. We hope that the Eau Claire City Council will have a more compassionate attitude when your turn comes to consider this matter.
7. Even if it could be shown that Eau Claire needs such a huge increase in its jail facilities — which we very much doubt — it still would not follow that the jail should be built in the Randall Park area. Randall Park is one of the oldest and finest neighborhoods ***in the city, yet many members of the County Board are evidently willing to destroy many of the loveliest homes there. Among those on the list slated for demolition are several houses of real historic significance, including that of the first mayor of Eau Claire. This neighborhood also features a growing artistic community. The entire area is situated by our prized Chippewa River waterfront. This is an area where the town’s children and adults alike now spend restful summer afternoons. They will scarcely be pleased to see the intrusion on their leisure space by the expensive behemoth that is now being planned.
Directly across from these treasures Eau Claire has just spent a great deal of energy and taxpayers’ dollars to improve the landscape with Phoenix Park and the new Open Air Marketplace. And now there are plans to spend far more money to destroy the opposite bank by demolishing the lovely old neighborhood in order to erect a large, impersonal jail that will stretch along the waterfront and sports paths? Instead of doing that, we would urge our representatives to fix their sights on the outskirts of the city away from any recreational sites, where the land is cheaper and the soil is more stable and where a reasonable distance can be maintained between the facility and local homes; a site where incidentally prisoners also could have some opportunity for outdoor exercise or involvement in some useful pursuit. We know that alternative sites have been suggested numerous times, yet for unknown reasons this option has never been seriously explored.
8. It may be said that those promoting a jail expansion have the best interests of Eau Claire in mind, that they are simply making some tough choices for the betterment of the community as a whole. In that case, however, one has to ask: why is there so much resistance to putting the matter before the voters in a referendum? If the jail-expansion advocates of the Eau Claire County Board genuinely believe that these construction plans reflect the best interests of the citizens, then you should have nothing to fear by submitting the matter for decision by plebiscite.
Some of the members of the County Board have already decided that they wish to go forward with this project. We would like to suggest that you reconsider this decision very seriously, pondering the fact that a very large contingent of your electorate do not stand behind you on this plan and are deeply opposed to the long-term taxes that it would impose. As word of the profligate waste as well as the planned destruction to their community spreads throughout city, people are mobilizing in order to prevent this from going forward.
If the Eau Claire County Board should choose to ignore their constituents’ pleas, then we must appeal to the City Council to please deal appropriately with these plans. Talk to your neighbors. Ask them if they want to pay a huge increase in taxes for the next 30 years for the privilege of having their waterfront destroyed.
And then please, let the will of the people decide!
Respectfully,
Edward and Emily Beach
Eau Claire, WI 54703
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
county board contacts
| | Click here for the official county board contact list, which doesn't include email addresses. You'll find those below: | ||||
| | |||||
| | County Board Contact List | | PHONE | ADDRESS | CITY |
| 1 | Gary G. Gibson | 715.877.2730 | E16934 Scenic Dr. | Fall Creek, WI 54742 | |
| 2 | Will Fantle | 715.839.7731 | 901 Platt St. | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 3 | Howard J. Ludwigson | 715.832.6759 | 5537 Bayview Drive | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 4 | Stella Pagonis | 715.835.5007 | 1019 Tenth St. | Altoona, WI 54720 | |
| 5 | Roger (Jody) Hahn | 715.286.5343 | 612 Buckman Street | Augusta, WI 54722 | |
| 6 | Richard Ziemann | | 715.877.2191 | 543 So. State St. | Fall Creek |
| 7 | Ronald B. Erickson | | 715.835.4186 | S9670 County Road F | Eau Claire, WI 54701 |
| 8 | 715.834.9418 | 3204 Blakeley Avenue | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | ||
| 9 | Gordon C.Steinhauer | | 715.834.6596 | W4945 Langdell Road | Eau Claire, WI 54701 |
| 10 | David Donovan | | 715.839-9547 | 1616 Birdlawn Road | Eau Claire, WI 54701 |
| 11 | Ray Henning | 715.832.4971 | 1603 Spooner Ave. | Altoona, WI 54720 | |
| 12 | Colleen A. Bates | 715.835.9813 | 405 Skyline Drive | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 13 | Kathleen M. Clark | 715.832.5078 | 2014 Linda Lane | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 14 | Jean D. Schlieve | 715.832.6911 | 2115 Sherman Creek Rd | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 15 | Maureen Slauson | 715.832.5338 | 322 W. Grand Ave.. | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 16 | Joel Mikelson | 715.839-0192 | 702 Water Street | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 17 | Gregg Moore | 715.832.7109 | 428 E. Tyler Ave. | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 18 | James A. Dunning | 715.839.0039 | 164 Wold Ct | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 19 | Donald Ellickson | 715.834.1558 | 922 E. Tyler Avenue | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 20 | Emily Smith Nguyen | 715.835.1106 | 3337 Briarcrest Drive | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 21 | Gerald (Jerry) Wilkie | 715.834.9524 | 3114 Coltman Lane | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 22 | Sue Miller | | 715.834.0750 | 209 Washington Street | Eau Claire, WI 54701 |
| | | | | | |
| 23 | Robin J. Leary | | 715.832.3741 | 2104 Providence Court | Eau Claire, WI 54703 |
| 24 | Mark J. Schmitt | 715.834.0174 | 2831 Wellington Drive East | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 25 | Dennis Jenson | 715.834-7699 | 2921 Mountaray Drive | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 26 | Tami Schraufnagel | 715.835-2604 | 529 Hobart Street | Eau Claire, WI 54703 | |
| 27 | Paul A. Lokken, Sr. | | 715.834.3762 | 1167 E. Madison Street | Eau Claire, WI 54703 |
| 28 | John B. DeRosier | 715.839.0327 | 1316 Altoona Avenue | Eau Claire, WI 54701 | |
| 29 | Patrick L. Lavelle | | 715.577.0900 | 1925 Laurel Avenue | Eau Claire, WI 54701 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
