It's happening: Referendum and the Spring 2024 election

 

When I ran for mayor
in 2016, the first 100
homes were given this flyer

When I ran for mayor the first time in 2016, I knocked on many doors asking for people's consideration as they voted in the upcoming election. More than a few remarked to me: “If I do vote for you, please don't raise my taxes!” At the time, I didn't have a clue how municipal government worked. Since then I've learned a thing or two but trying to sum it up in a few concise statements is challenging to say the least.

For example, a city council or village board can't just willy-nilly
“raise taxes” to satisfy their budget. Imagine if they could! Then every small town would have a municipal pool or whatever was the item residents or their elected leaders thought they needed for their community. On the contrary, the State of Wisconsin sets a levy limit for each community, based on a certain formula, that informs the council the maximum amount of levy they can collect on property taxes. If the financial obligations of the city exceed the revenues that are collected one of three things must happen: the city may borrow money (which creates other issues), the city may cut or diminish services it provides or ask the citizens for permission to exceed the levy limit that the State has set for us. Unlike the federal government which can (and does!) print money, every municipal government must live within its means, Chetek included.

We are at one of those moments. At January's common council meeting the council voted unanimously to go to referendum this April. We are asking the citizens of Chetek to exceed our levy limit by $350,000 annually in order to sustain the full-time police officer recently hired, add an additional full-time officer and add one additional public works employee. For how long will we need to exceed the levy? The legal term is “in perpetuity.” In other words, forever. If the referendum is successful it would cost approximately $180/year per $100K of property value, $120 of which would go to pay for the two police officers and $80 for public works.

Chief Ron (left) with new Chetek PO
Connor Haukom

Why do we feel we need to take this action at this time? Currently,
we want to remain a “24/7” community meaning that local police protection is available twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. In the past, our police department was made up of an assortment of full-time and part-time officers. Due to national trends in law enforcement it has become nigh unto impossible to find part-time police officers these days. There are just not as many recruits as there once were. And every part-timer naturally wants to secure full-time employment.

If you are one of the crew at Chetek Public Works you wear many hats. Picking up garbage, pushing snow, checking on lift stations, maintaining equipment, cleaning out sewers and the list goes on. What's more, the new waste water treatment plant that is presently under construction is a bit more complex operation than the one we presently have. If I understand what Public Works Director Dan Knapp is telling me, it's too soon to tell if we will need to allocate more man-power there but either way the need in his department is real.

In the weeks and months leading up to the vote on April 2 it is our plan to provide opportunities to educate the public on our present budgetary needs. This will involve information that will be released in the paper and on-line. What's more, we will be providing “listening sessions” with Chief of Police Ron Ambrozaitus, Public Works Director Dan Knapp and City Administrator Laura Stelzner in order to hear and receive questions about the needs of these departments as well as the particulars of the referendum.

At this stage, no question is dumb so feel free to ask away by emailing me at chetekmayor@cityofchetekwi.us or calling me at 715-925-6078. The council and I are cognizant that this is a weighty decision for our community to make and are sensitive to the financial realities involved.

Funny you should ask: How often should I shovel my walk?

 

This can be slippery stuff!

Sec. 90-403. - Responsibility of owner or occupant.

The owner or occupant of any lot or parcel shall remove or cause to be removed, within 24 hours of cessation of each continuous period of snowfall, all snow and ice which may have fallen or accumulated upon the sidewalk in front of such lot or parcel provided, when ice has so formed that it cannot be removed, the owner or occupant shall keep the same sprinkled with a material which will prevent the sidewalk from being dangerous to pedestrians. All snow and ice so removed shall be deposited on the property of such owner or occupant, or be hauled away by such owner or occupant, or their agent, and such removal shall at all times conform with the provisions of Section 90-405.

(Code 2005, § 6-2-7(a); Ord. No. 739A, § 1, 5-13-2014)

It seems like a dumb question, doesn't it? “As often as it needs it, right?” seems like the right answer. In reality it should be: “Within 24 hours of the last snow” as that is what our Code of Ordinances state.

This gets walked on every day

If you drive around town these days, however, it's clear that people have different opinions about the answer to this question. There are many stretches of sidewalk that are clean and clear allowing pedestrians to walk safely over them. At the same time there are equally as many that have been totally untouched since the last snowfall on New Year's Eve five days ago. “What's the big deal? I mean, it's not even an inch!”, you may think. But snow that gets walked on repeatedly while temperatures remain the way they have this week turns into ice. And ice is a public safety hazard.

I spoke with Building Inspector/Zoning Administrator Joe Atwood about this matter and he told me that generally speaking after a snowfall he gives people a couple of days to get 'er done. After that, however, they may be subject to a citation. Article X (“Snow and Ice Regulations”) clearly states that not only do all of us have to be on task to push the snow off our sidewalk within a 24-hour period (Sec 90-403 – see above) but failure to do so may result in the City doing it for us and sending us “a special tax” to accompany our tax statement (Sec 90-404). Furthermore, when we do push or move it we should think twice before we throw it in the street as that kinda of thing is definitely prohibited (Sec 90-405). (Note: Every snow season there are residents who push their snow with their ATV or snowblower into the thoroughfare thinking perhaps that one of the city plow guys will just sweep it up on their next pass. Most of the time our guys come through in the middle of the night and are long gone by the time we get around to moving our snow. Public Works Director Dan Knapp would simply say, “Don't be that guy.”)

Long before I was elected mayor, I have pushed snow as a side-gig and since October 31 I have had to do that for my customers (all of whom live within the city limits) five times. I used to have a customer who suggested to me that I could leave “small snowfalls” be and only shovel when we got “the big stuff”. We had to part ways on a matter of principle: the Code says we need to move snow every time it falls and accumulates, walked-on snow soon becomes ice and I'm the mayor. If the mayor doesn't move snow after each snowfall why should anyone else have to?

Now that's more like it

Did you hear that just the other day a customer slipped and fell in the parking area of a local business and broke their hip? I was told that unmoved snow that had become slippery was the culprit. The moral of this unfortunate tale to all of us is DON'T BE THAT GUY unnecessarily putting our neighbors and fellow townsfolk at risk. The heavier stuff is coming and will get here soon enough. Might as well put our back into it and get at it (if we haven't already done so).