Funny you should ask: Who ya gonna call OR What's going on with our ambulance service?

This past Saturday morning I got a call from a local restaurant owner who asked me pointedly, “What's going on with our ambulance service?” She then began to relate to me that one of her customers was in need of medical assistance and had laid on the floor “for nearly an hour” before an ambulance arrived. If you read this past week's Chetek Alert you may have caught the article Short of EMTs, Nov 7 medical 911 calls had longer response times (Section A, Page 5) which gives a more detailed account of the particular circumstances that led to the unique situation of an unconscious man waiting nearly 50 minutes before medical personnel arrived. What gives, you ask?

Read all about it (Chetek Alert)

Well, first let's be clear: The City of Chetek does not run the ambulance service. We do not run the fire department either. Both entities are run by commissions made up of representatives from the city and the surrounding townships which contract with the ambulance and the fire department for services. Chief Ryan Olson is not a city employee, either. The only departments that we truly own are the police department and the department of public works. Otherwise, we're a paying customer just like the other neighboring townships are.

Given the fact that our subsidy for ambulance services was north of $40K in 2020 and looks to be a little more than $46K in 2021, shouldn't we expect 24/7 emergency services? I had a conversation with Chief Olson this morning about the ambulance service in general and about November 7 in particular.

According to Olson, nation-wide volunteer departments like Chetek's are in the same boat scrambling to fill their shifts. There are just not as many EMTs out there as there once were. At the present time there are 23 individuals on his roster all of which are part-time. That is, driving the ambulance or riding shot-gun is not their full time gig. Many of these same individuals are already working in the health care field and are often picking up extra hours at their present place of employment. Only three of the twenty-three live within the city limits. The rest hail from around the county and, in one case, another state.

The log says it all

Due to the demographics of our current roster, the main challenge for Olson is filling evening or weekend shifts. As The Alert reported, on the weekend of the 7^th our own ambulance service was out of service (on account of lack of staff to work the weekend). At the time that the 911 call was placed for the patron at our local restaurant, there were already four ambulances in Chetek responding to calls between 9:30-10 a.m.: Marshfield Medical Center (Rice Lake), Mayo (Barron), Bloomer Community (Bloomer) and Rusk County (Bruce) (and therefore the 48-minute wait time before help arrived). It was, if you will, a “perfect storm.” All total there were 11 EMS calls made this past weekend where help had to come from elsewhere to assist those here with medical care.

Olson explained to me that by ordinance the Chetek Ambulance Service does not triage care. That means that if a 911 call comes in for a student with a broken arm at the school and shortly afterward a call comes in on account of a major accident out on Highway 53, they respond to the incident at school as it is literally 'first come, first serve.' Only dispatch can re-direct them otherwise.

And I haven't even mentioned how the reality of Covid-19 is placing even greater stress on an already undermanned force. In the last week alone there were 30 calls just for Meadowbrook alone. The ice, as it were, is getting pretty thin.

20% of the time
CAS is out of service

In my conversations with local commissioners they assure me that what happened last weekend won't happen again but given the reality of the current health emergency we are all living with I'm not sure they can promise that. In the meantime the city is exploring its options regarding contracting with another ambulance service. That's not meant to be a threat. But the fact that 65% of our population are senior citizens, generally the most medically frail in our community, we should do what we can to make sure that the very best service we can afford is available when someone picks up the phone and dials 911.

If you would like to speak with Chief Ryan Olson of the Chetek Ambulance Commission (CAC) you may do so by calling 715-764-5788.

If you would like to speak to the City's representative on the CAC, please call Alderman Mark Edwards at 715-914-9122.

As always you may call the Mayor to lodge your concern about this matter and any other matter by calling 715-925-6078.

Funny you should ask: "Is the City allowing Trick or Treating on Halloween this year?"

It is the most oft-asked question I get these days: is Halloween on for the City of Chetek? Given the growing concerns about the spike in county Covid cases of late and that, to quote one source I read, that we are at the “tipping point”, should the city take a stronger stance against the time honored tradition of kids going door to door dressed up in their favorite get-up on All Hallows Eve?

Officially, the city has no position on Halloween. We are leaving it
up to parents to decide what they think is best for their children: take them out or keep them home. Many of the kids will already be masked up anyway. Given the unique circumstances of this year, it might be prudent to have your kids add a mask to their costume. But you make the call. At the same time, we are leaving it up to citizens to decide whether or not to participate. Like Yoda once told Luke: “Do or do not”. In other words, if you are of the opinion that handing out candy might inadvertently contribute to the spread of the virus, then simply keep your porch light off (or, if you trust them to not be greedy, leave a bowl of candy out on your porch). On the other hand, if you're fine with it, join in the frivolity but perhaps wear a mask for good measure. (Of course, if you're sick, then you probably shouldn't be handing anything out. Leave that to someone else in your household.)

.

A month or so ago I got an angry voicemail from a local senior citizen who was “disgusted” at the amount of people in local eateries and shops not wearing a mask. Before they hung up – without leaving their name – they scolded me with “Mr. Mayor, you better do something about this!” I suspect they want me to issue a mayoral edict that threatens citizens with a hefty fine lest they don't don a mask. But this: one hour after Governor Evers issued the “Mask Mandate” back in August, Barron County District Attorney Brian Wright informed all county police agencies to not bother sending him any citations for those who had failed to wear a mask in a public place. What good is it, then, to issue a “mask ordinance” if there is no way to enforce it? The point, I gather, is to create peer pressure that leans on people's consciences to mask-up for the good of everyone. But I think it frequently has the opposite affect causing certain people to assert, in so many words, their right to politely decline. Admittedly, I have friends whom I love and respect on both sides of the issue. You probably do, too.

This is a long way, perhaps, from trick or treating but the principle I am invoking is the same: people are responsible for their own personal health. If they choose to send their kids out into the dark to collect candy on Halloween that is their business just like it is the business of residents who feel such a practice is unwise this year to politely not participate. All that we should expect from one another is the grace to disagree about this matter. After all, Halloween comes but once a year. And it looks like for a change it's going to be a beautiful night.

If you didn't catch it in this week's Chetek Alert,

• Trick or treating is being allowed from 4-7:30 pm on Saturday.
• Chetek United Methodist will be hosting Trunk-N-Treats from 4-6 on Halloween.
• The Chetek Lions are sponsoring free hot dogs, candy and chips (while supplies last) for trick-or-treaters at Main Street Park from 5-7 pm on Halloween.

Unfortunately, this year the annual Kids Halloween Costume party (sponsored by the Lions and the Chetek Chamber of Commerce) will not occur as the school is not allowing non-school events to be held on their premises. Also, this year Chetek Lutheran Church is also not hosting trunk-or-treat. Let's hope for better things next year!

Funny you should ask: Are the April 7th elections going to be held?

With the April elections just a little over two weeks away and given that it feels like every day some new governmental restriction has been put in place regarding public gatherings of one kind or another, one of the questions that keeps coming up is: are they on? That is, will they occur on the 7^th as planned or will they be postponed?

The safe answer is to tell you what we know today and that is the Wisconsin Elections Commission (WEC) has announced that the spring elections will occur as scheduled. The one exception is that there will be no voting allowed on premise at Meadowbrook (formerly Knapp Haven). This was mandated state-wide a few weeks ago about all nursing homes. Of course, the grand caveat in all of this is the real and present danger of COVID-19 that may cause elected executives such as Governor Evers to postpone the elections. But assuming that they will occur as scheduled here are some things you need to know about April 7^th.

If you plan to vote in person you will experience this:

1. You will be greeted at the door by one of our police officers. Only three voters may be in council chambers at one time. This officer will help ensure that.
2. You will be asked to don a set of non-latex gloves.
3. The election workers who will be working all must be under the age of 65 and all will be wearing masks.
4. Voting screens and digital pens will be disinfected regularly

If you're like me, voting at City Hall is usually no more than a 5-minute stop. But given the unusual circumstances we are all facing, give yourself more time that day than you normally would expect to take.

If you plan to vote by absentee ballot, remember this:

1. You must be registered to vote in order to cast an absentee ballot. If you are not yet registered call City Hall at 715-924-4838 and Carmen will walk you through this process.
2. The deadline to register by mail has already passed.
3. The deadline to register online to vote has been extended by federal court until Monday, March 30. You may request your absentee ballot online at https://myvote.wi.gov
4. Voters who need to register may also do so in person at City Hall until Friday, April 3 and on Election Day at the polling place. Again, call City Hall with any questions you may have.
5. Request your absentee ballot as soon as possible. The deadline is Thursday, April 2.

This graphic came from the Wisconsin Elections Commission website

These times can make even the most optimistic of us feel just a tad discombobulated. Every day some new federal or state guideline is announced. But life will go on and hopefully sooner than later things will go back to normal. But like the age-old tongue-in-cheek saying goes “Vote early, vote often.” Now you and I know there's no way there gonna let any of us cast our vote more than once but one of the great things of a local election is that your voice is really heard if you vote. Make sure you do come April 7th.

"Funny you should ask..." (recent questions that I have been asked)

Like everybody else I'm hoping for the best

As Mayor I get asked a lot of questions (the mayor is supposed to know things after all, right?) Some I can answer. Others I have to go looking for answers. And then there's the kind that really there are no good answers for. Here's a few I've been asked over the last month.

Question: “So, do you know what's going to happen to our Gordy's?”

Every month I sit down with the residents of Atrium and have coffee with them. We talk about the news around town and questions they'd like to have answers for. At January's “Coffee with the Mayor” session I was asked this one.

Honestly, at the moment, I didn't know what the person was referring to. Since I've seen the news like everyone else. For the second time in a year Gordy's is in receivership. Just how they're going to come up with $46 million dollars is anybody's guess. However, I did have an informal conversation with Scott, one of the managers of our local Gordy's and he had this to say on the matter: “I have no idea what will happen to Gordy's. They don't tell me anything. But I can assure you that after twenty years in the food service industry you will not lose your grocery store. Someone will buy it. Your location and all the summer tourists you get makes me confident that Chetek will have a grocery store. It may not be Gordy's but it will be here.”

That was reassuring to hear. I know that we can get our milk, eggs and bread at Kwik Trip. And there are items that we can pick-up at the Dollar Store but what a shame it would be to lose our grocery store. Same goes for Horton's Hardware. When you can you should buy local.

Have you seen these piles along the tracks?

Q: “Is there anything that can be done about the piles of old junk/scrap railroad ties in the right of way on the Wisconsin Northern Railroad line between Cameron-Chetek-New Auburn?” This question came to me via email from John, a resident of Chetek. Here's how his email reads:

Is there anything that can be done about the piles of old junk / scrap railroad ties on the right of way on the Wisconsin Northern Railroad line between Cameron - Chetek - New Auburn, WI? They are very unsightly and don't do a thing for tourists / travelers coming through our area using Highway SS. This is just plain unsightly and causes one to think that no one cares.

I have contacted Rep Romain Quinn about one year ago and he was told that the railroad's contractor was going to clean up the piles of ties last April 2018. Here we are almost the end of November 2018 with no results! Is there anything that the City of Chetek can do to convince Wisconsin Northern Railroad to get the ties picked up and contribute to the clean up of Chetek and the Highway SS corridor? 

When I first got this email I didn't know what John was speaking about so I drove out to the north end of town to take a look and then I saw exactly what he meant. Funny, I have driven past these piles of old ties lots of times and never really noticed them until John brought them to my attention.

Shortly after receiving this email I happened to run into someone who worked for Wisconsin Northern (WN) and he concurred with what John had mentioned – that this issue was supposed to have been addressed last summer. At the time of this conversation (early December), WN had furloughed a number of employees (my friend included) but he gave me the phone number of Jayme Bignell, head of operations.

Let's hope it happens this spring!

With one phone call I got a hold of Mr. Bignell and he assured me that this spring the old ties will be cleaned up and removed. Isn't that what he told Rep. Quinn last year? It is. So let's hope that answer is on the up and up. In the meantime is there anything the City can do about it? Not really except communicate to Mr. Bignell that we sure hope that the mess gets cleaned up when he says it will.

Q: “When is the old Jost Law building coming down?”

I was just asked this yesterday. The short answer is sometime this spring – I think. Why am I being so indefinite? Well, it's like this. The city purchased the building from the Josts at the end of 2016 with the intent to raze the structure to make room for a future parking lot for The Center. When the new sidewalks on Moore Street went in Joe Atwood instructed Apple Valley to put an approach in on the walk in front of the Jost building for just that eventuality.

At the end of 2018, however, the moth-balled Property Committee was begun afresh. While the Plan Commission has already given a thumb's up on demo of the property the Council wants the newly reformed Property Committee to discuss the matter first before we give the green light for demoltion. As we learned from the process of razing the old Chetek Cafe building, before the Jost building can be taken down the tenants have to be given ample time to relocate. Then a firm has to be hired to test for asbestos and, if found, abate it. Only then can the building come down.

Even though it's a stick building and smaller than the old cafe structure it's location between the Mosaic building and The Center will call for more precision-work as opposed to the use of the big claw. However it comes down the process is not cheap. And after its down, we're probably looking at a new west entrance to The Center. But that's a matter for both the Property Committee and the Plan Commission to address. So, “it's-hurry-up-and-wait” which I realize for the two gentlemen who are the City's tenants at Moore Street puts them in a difficult position. What if upon the recommendation of the Property Committee the Council decides to do nothing at this time? While that could happen I have yet to hear a better idea of how the property could be used. But that's only my opinion.

Q: “Do you still like your job?” and “Do you sleep at night?”

Ah, yes and yes. These were asked recently by two different individuals who seemed concerned for my welfare. Do I still enjoy serving as mayor? Absolutely! When I answered that way the first person laughed because they thought they detected sarcasm. But I assured them - and I'll assure all of you - I really do enjoy it. Since being elected in 2016 I have learned so much about how our community runs and the many people that make it run so well. Are there challenges facing Chetek? Yes! Are there differences about how those challenges should be met? Yes! But rather than take offense at those who either think the Council is doing a poor job or I am – or both – regardless of which side of the issue we may be we all care about the welfare of this community. And that's a good thing especially if we happen to be fired up about a certain issue.

As to the person who wondered if I slept at night I simply assured them that I slept fine. A mayor isn't a king. He doesn't wave his wand and things go away or happen. A mayor isn't a boss who can Trump-like declare “You're fired!” or “We're gonna win and win and win.” The mayor of Chetek fills a non-partisan position working with fellow community members to try and overcome challenges and address the needs of our town. He doesn't have a vote (unless, of course, the council is split on a matter which rarely happens) but he can speak his peace. So at the end of the day I hope to do the best I can and then put it away for the night. Should I decide to run again next year, the good folks of Chetek will either confirm that I'm doing an adequate job or they'll vote someone new in – which is how democracy works. Either way, I want to do well by the town I call home. And to that end I sincerely appreciate all of you who have given me an atta-boy from time to time. It sure helps keep the fun in it.

If you have a question for the mayor you can email me at pjsworld@chibardun.net, call me at 715-925-6078 or just stop and bend my ear a bit next time we cross paths.

Funny you should ask: what are the rules about fencing around pools?

“WHY ARE ALL THESE SWIMMING POOLS POPPING UP ALL OVER TOWN WITHOUT PROPER FENCING AROUND THEM??!"

- Peeved About Pools in Chetek

That's what I was recently asked by an irate resident who called to ask me why they had to put a fence around their pool while others seem to get away without having one around theirs? Well, as I do with all questions I'm asked I usually go right to the source to get the low down. That usually means one of the following people: City Clerk Carmen Newman, Public Works Director Dan Knapp, Police Chief Ron Ambrozaitis or City Inspector Joe Atwood. If they don't know the answer (and one of them probably does) then there's no help for it. It has to be a theological conundrum of some sort or another. So after I concluded that conversation I spoke with Joe Atwood who was only too happy to inform me everything I need to know about swimming pools.

Just in case you were wondering, no fence needed here

Namely – and most importantly – if it's two feet deep or less then it does not need a protective fence around it. That means your basic “kiddie pool” that you can buy at Wal-Mart for $15-30 is fine without fencing. (This caller reminded me that you could drown in a bathtub just as well as in a kiddie pool. They're right of course. Our ordinances, however, don't cover such a scenario). When I 

The guy knows his stuff

asked Joe about the alleged “pool plague” presently afflicting Chetek, he informed me that most of the pools he has seen around town meet the two feet deep or less standard.

However, if the pool is deeper than two feet, it's just entered a whole new category of pool. A few weeks ago, Deputy City Clerk and Treasurer Cassandra Larson posted a very helpful graphic at the City of Chetek Facebook page, the information which I'll re-post here. Citing Section 118-257(f) (1):

“All outdoor swimming pools having a depth capacity of two feet or more shall be completely enclosed by a fence prior to use of the swimming pool...Such fence shall be not less than four feet in height above the ground level immediately below. Such fence shall be of not less than 11.5 gauge chain link fencing or such other construction which will make access to the swimming pool area equally difficult.”

This family (not from Chetek) clearly knows the rules about fencing

When I asked Joe about the need for chain link fencing he said that he focuses on the phrase “...or such other construction which will make access to the swimming pool area equally difficult.” Personally, Joe disapproves of chain link fencing as its pretty easy for kids to climb over. The main thing is Joe has to see it and approve of the fencing before it goes up.

“Such fence or wall shall be constructed in such a design to resist climbing and as not to have voids, holes, or openings larger than four inches in one dimension. Any open space in the plane of the fence shall be equipped with a gate. Each gate shall have at least the minimum height required for the fence and shall be equipped with self-closing and self-latching devices placed at the top of the gate or at a place which is otherwise inaccessible to small children.”

My wife, Linda, has been wanting to put a pool up in our backyard for many summers running. It's that fence-requirement-thing that kills it for me. To buy any kind of fencing “in such a design to resist climbing” and one that has a gate in it prices me right out of that idea.

Last week, Joe actually had to stop at a residence that had a pool in their backyard and inform the owners that they, in fact, had to drain their pool by the next day as it was deep enough to require a fence around it which they didn't have. They were good sports about it and drained their pool as he requested but they're disappointed all the same. After all, if you spend several hundred dollars on a pool you hate to see your investment just laying on the ground.

Section 118-257(f)(3) does allow a temporary fix, however:

“Prior to the initial filling with water, each such outdoor swimming pool shall be enclosed by either fencing as required in this section, or a temporary construction fence. Such temporary fence shall be a snow fence, or a fence of similar design, at least four feet in height and securely anchored in place. The fence shall be constructed with its base flush to the ground and shall have supportive posts placed no more than eight feet apart. The fence shall remain in place until such time as a permanent fence is installed as provided in this section. The installation of a permanent fence shall take place no later than 60 days after the initial filling of the swimming pool.”

If you're prone to look for loop-holes, I guess here's one for you.

This will do for two months

You can put snow fencing around your pool so long as that within 60 days you have a more permanent fence erected around it. If you bought one this weekend, two months from now it'll probably be too cold to go swimming (and if you haven't cleaned it out since you filled it up the first time it will definitely be too gross to do so). But if I were you, I'd call Joe first before you invest any money in a pool or fencing materials. He's only too happy to talk you through what you need to know. You can reach him at 715-764-2948.

Like all municipal ordinances, these rules aren't personal. We're not picking on anyone. In this case, the heart of the matter is safety. Nobody wants to be that person who because they neglected to secure their pool a little child tragically drowned. So, do the right thing. If the lake is too green for your liking, then head to Barron's or Rice Lake's pool. Or, if you want your own pool just make sure you reference Section 118 of our Municipal Code and let Joe know what you're thinking.

Funny you should ask: what's the big deal about that new house being built by the airport?

Sec. 118-89. - Airport heights limitation zone.

Airport hazard means any structure or object of natural growth, which obstructs the air space required for the flight of aircraft in landing or taking off at an airport or is otherwise hazardous to such landing or taking off.

(c) Height limitation zones.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no structure shall be constructed, installed, altered, located or permitted to remain after such construction, installation, alteration or location to a height in excess of the height limit indicated on the map referred to in Subsection (b) of this section.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no trees shall be allowed to grow to a height in excess of the height limit indicated on the map referred to in Subsection (b) of this section.

(3) Except as otherwise provided in this section, no drones shall be operated at or above a height in excess of the height limit indicated on the map referred to in Subsection (b) of this section.

(d)Exceptions. 

The restrictions contained in Subsection (b) of this section shall not apply to objects which are less than 35 feet in height above ground level at the object site within one-half-mile of the airport boundary or to structures less than 50 feet in height above ground within the area beginning one-half mile from the airport boundary and extending to one mile from the airport boundary or to structures less than 100 feet in height above the ground within the area beginning one mile from the airport boundary and extending to three miles from the airport boundary.

An old Google map of our grass runway as it pictures only one house on Nielsen Lane

If you subscribe to the Chetek Alert you know that last month we had a bit of a dust-up during the City Council meeting over a new house being built on Nielsen Lane near the grassy runway. A small contingent of local pilots appointed commercial pilot Al Knowlton to speak on their behalf alerting the city what a safety hazard that house presents.

Here's the issue: a house rises near the end of the grass runway

“Since statistics show most fatal crashes occur during takeoff, the homes at the end of the runway could be deadly obstacles. They should not have been built in the first place. We don't build houses within 50 feet of a freeway for those reasons. Cars go fast.” (Al Knowlton as quoted in the Chetek Alert 5/16/18)

Greg Brodt, another local pilot who has similar safety concerns about the construction of this house, privately messaged me the following questions:

Did the city issue a building permit [for the dwelling] off the west end of the runaway?

If so, this could be very dangerous. Did the airport commission approve it or make any recommendations? Were there any concerns that the State had?

Let me answer those questions. First of all, Yes. The city did issue a building permit for this house.

Every house that is built within the city limits has to be okayed by Joe Atwood the City Inspector before it's built. This house is no different. The inferred concern about the height of the house does not apply. According to Section 118-89 anything under 35 feet tall within one-half mile of the airport is legit. I think the peak of the house being built is slightly under 25-feet tall. That's where our jurisdiction ends. If it's under 35 feet (and clearly it is) than we cannot tell someone not to build in that spot.

As to the question regarding the airport commission approving or not approving the construction of the house (which the city cannot refuse a permit to the owner anyway), technically speaking there is no airport commission any longer. Last year after several meetings in a row not able to meet for lack of quorum it was the recommendation to the council that we disband the commission which we voted unanimously to do. From that moment on the city council essentially became the airport commission and Public Works Director Dan Knapp airport manager. As to the concerns specific to this house none were raised before they dug the hole as the airport manager had none to make.

“I'd hate to see someone crash into it or them to complain about noise” (Greg Brodt). As would I. As would all of us. I certainly understand the pilots are motivated by concerns for public safety but again there is nothing the city can do to restrict this home owner from building their home on Nielsen Lane. I also agree with Greg about noise issues: If you build your house next to an airport than you forfeit your right to complain about the noise airplanes make. Agreed. There's plenty of people on South Street and Phillips Street who have come accustomed to the sound of planes coming in and taking off. The folks on Nielsen Lane are no different.

This is what nobody wants ever to see at Southworth Airport

In my brief tenure as mayor council meetings can get kinda sporty at times as people for and against an issue sound off before the council and at times at each other. Obviously it's because they care about the matter at hand. Our job as the council is to listen respectfully and make the best call we can based on the current ordinances that govern our daily lives. In this case, our airport manager informs us that while in the event of a catastrophic event a plane could crash into a house there is no code that limits the construction of this home. Let's hope we never have cause to regret that the city never purchased the navigation rights to these properties back in 2003 when this subdivision was created.

Funny you should ask: Why is Xcel pulling the plug on our holiday cheer?

I'm sure by now you've heard the news: Xcel Energy has informed us that this will be the last year for the Christmas wreath lights and the flags to be hung on the poles on Second and Dallas Streets. Citing safety issues and referencing the National Electric Safety Code, the “Bible” of the electrical utility industry that every state except California refers to, everything must come down – holiday lights, banners, hanging flower pots and even Old Glory on Second Street. (Carl Cooley did a very informative article about this matter that was published in the Wednesday, November 1 issue of the Chetek Alert see Xcel Energy to Prohibit Flags.)

She is a grand old flag

Understandably, there's been a reasonably loud hue and cry about this. After all, the lights are pretty much brand new having been bought and donated to the city by the Friends of Holiday Lights for Chetek citizen committee in 2015. And the flags? Well, they've been hanging on those poles on Second and Dallas Streets pretty much as long as anyone can remember. What will Liberty Fest look like if the parade route is decidedly absent of the Stars and Stripes?

"Strings of street lights..."

First of all, we have to remember this: we don't own the poles. Xcel Energy does. I don't know how many street lights and utility poles there are within the city limits but Xcel owns every last one of 'em. Except, of course, the four light poles out on the long bridge. We learned this the hard way when a summer ago one of them just keeled over, the bottom totally rusted out. Fortunately no one was hurt but when Public Works Director Dan Knapp called Xcel to let them know that one of their poles went down he was informed that in actuality while the State owned the bridge and the county maintained it, the poles belonged to us. At $10,000 a piece those are some light poles. But beyond that, the rest of the poles in town are theirs and so therefore we have to abide by their rules.

Does this affect, say, other municipalities like Barron and Rice Lake? Actually it doesn't because both these neighboring cities have their own utility company. Not us.

Here's a wreath that will have to be moved

But here's the good news. Right before Christmas, Dan and I met with Xcel Energy representative Larry Loverude to discuss this matter and were pleased to learn that (just like Carl reported in his November 1^st article) that we can keep our holiday lights after all. Xcel, in fact, allows decorations on street lights “but only if they don't have power distribution lines on them” (quoting Carl's article). In our case of the 25 lighted wreaths only four of them are currently posted on poles that are “hot”. Dan and the guys will have to relocate those four wreaths but next year things should pretty much look the same as they always do at Christmastime. That's a relief.

Some new arrangement will have to be worked out

And what about the flags? Well, that's another matter. Technically, the Chamber of Commerce is the one that finances and puts up the flags so they'll have to work things out with Xcel. Larry brought in a catalog of sorts featuring ground-mounted flags but that, of course, won't work downtown. There was some thought about various businesses purchasing mounts for the side of their building as well but again those are Chamber-issues that for the time being we'll leave to them.

It's just my opinion but looking forward, we ought to decorate those four poles we own out on the bridge and, say, deck out Main Street Park to the nines as well. Several people called Carmen when the news broke that Xcel was pulling the plug on our holiday lights and if you were one of those folks you may be hearing from me soon to get your input on keeping our city looking festive and bright.

Funny you should ask: What's the latest on the Central States matter?

I'm asked a lot of questions as mayor. Some I can answer because I know. Some I turn to ask Carmen about because she knows. And some I just don't know and I'll have to follow up on later. These "funny you should ask" posts are all about responding to some of the more common questions I'm asked.

A few weeks ago, my smiling face appeared on the front page of The Chetek Alert as Carl was running a follow-up article on the Central States Pension plan. He sent me an email and I responded with an email forgetting that I had not yet informed the guys about the latest development with our negotiations with Central States. It was unfair to them to read all about a matter that they have such a vested interest in at the same time everyone else was. For that, I'm sorry and going forward will try to do better at keeping them in the loop.

“So what's the latest on the Central States' matter?”

When I ran for mayor, I ran on no issue whatsoever. I was just willing to serve if the citizens were willing to have me. Never did I anticipate that during my first year in office I would be involved in a financial scramble for a lifeboat. Central States, the pension plan of our public works employees, is going under. By all accounts they are presently $28 billion insolvent (that's billion with a “b”). Some of it has to do with factors that are out of their control. In 1980, for every five guys coming to work, one guy was retiring. Nearly forty years later, that figure is exactly reversed: for every five guys retiring, only one is signing on. Add in the fact that in the 1970s the federal government deregulated the trucking industry (the primary members of the Teamsters Union) and that because of the passage by the Wisconsin legislature of Act 10 in 2011 that removes the necessity of joining a union in various industries, now it's a matter of simple math: there are just not enough members to pay all the promised benefits. By Central States' own estimate they will be out of money less than 10 years from now. The word on the street, however, is that they will be broke long before that.

The Titanic sinking we can blame on human error. Central States' sinking
more on human greed, as if they aimed right at the iceberg.

He even speaks English
and not lawyer-ese

At the end of June, we authorized Charlie Stevens of Michael Best out of Milwaukee, our lawyer who we have been consulting with, to draft a letter informing Central States that we were done sending money down the drain. By congressional rule that decision means that the city will have to pay our fair share of the liability before we row away from a proverbial sinking Titanic. At the present time, our estimate is that we would have to pay Central States somewhere in the vicinity of $2 million dollars. However, using an accepted industry formula, Charlie is confident that ultimately we will only have to pay somewhere between $700-950 thousand. I know, that's still a lot of money. However, since July 1 we have been taking the same amount of money that we had been sending to Central States for each of our guys and have contributed it instead to their private 457 plan (which is something akin to an IRA). At least, the guys can collect on that and we are no longer flushing good money down the toilet.

If one part of the boat is sinking how can
another not sink at all? 

We heard nothing from them in July but about a month ago in late August we received a lengthy response from them that amounted to a counter-offer. Essentially it said this: “Stay in. Pay us $650,000 as if you were brand new to the plan and if we go under we won't come after you for any more. We promise.” Of course, Carmen and I had a conference call with Charlie shortly afterwards to assure us we were reading the document correctly. He generally concurred with our understanding. It was his opinion that while the city could do that if a ship is sinking and no one is coming to the rescue, do you really want to hold firm and “not give up the ship.” Well, that would be dumb. So we instructed Charlie to respond to Central States accordingly by stating in plain English, “Ah, thanks but no thanks. We want out.”

Of course, the guys' union rep got a hold of them shortly after that decision went public in the Alert and informed them that if we went forward with that decision – to sever ties with Central States - they each could stand to lose between 35-40% of their pension benefits. I emailed Charlie to get his opinion on what their union guy was telling them and the next day he responded that while Central States can do whatever they want they would be punishing their own members for something they had no say in whatsoever. After all, they did not vote to decertify from the Teamsters. The city didn't ask their opinion whether or not it was a good idea to leave the plan. In other words, it's not their fault. They are not culpable whatsoever. A bomb has gone off and they are collateral damage. So why would the Teamsters want to punish their own people for a decision they had nothing to do with? Their union rep didn't show at last week's council meeting to offer any answers to that question. In any case, according to Charlie, the fund is in such bad shape now that they will ultimately cut benefits anyway, sooner or later.

Most of us get this; those who don't might work for Central States

We're not out of the woods yet with this matter but we're slowing finding our way. Charlie has been practicing pension law for 28 years. It's all he does and by his estimate the city will be free and clear (after ponying up and paying the lump sum exit fee) by Christmas. It's a pricey "gift", as Christmas gifts go, but at least we'll be safe from the undertow that is sure to follow the sinking of one of the largest pension plans in the country.

We have some great people who work for the city.
With the exception of Dan (far right), these are some of the local faces
who will be ultimately affected by Central States' failure

Funny you should ask: "Why do the trains have to lay on the horn in the middle of the night?"

"A critic is a gong at a railroad crossing clanging loudly and vainly as the train goes by." Christopher Marley

It's a common town peeve: it's the middle of the night and the train is creeping its way through town when all of a sudden you're awoken from your much needed deep REM sleep by the blast of a train horn. We accept that the driver has to blow his horn upon coming to an intersection but why does it seem that more often than not he's literally laying on the horn? And as long as we're talking about it, why is it that from time to time they leave an engine idling all night long? Can't they just turn the thing off and start it back up in the morning?

Well, funny you should ask. I was just asked these two questions (again) not too long ago so I thought I would try and get a hold of someone at Progressive Rail and see if I could get some answers. On my first phone call, I got a real person (whose name is Joe) and asked him if he could respond to these two common complaints.

Delivery to ABC Truss

Why do the drivers have to blow the horn in the middle of the night?

Federal regulations is the short answer to that question. According to 49 CFR Part 22 (otherwise known as the Train Horn Rule), “locomotive engineers must begin to sound train horns at least 15 seconds, and no more than 20 seconds, in advance of all public grade crossings” regardless of the time of day. As Joe explained to me, every engineer is required not only to sound his horn before arriving at the crossing but until his engine has passed entirely through the intersection. What's the reasoning behind this rule? Simple: to prevent accidents. “Just the other day a driver in plain day drove into the side of a train in Faribault, Minnesota. So, if that happens in the daytime just imagine the risk at night?” Apparently “distracted driving” is a probable cause of this accident but the number one safety issue that Progressive deals with, as you may have already guessed, is intoxicated drivers. Joe acknowledged most of the drivers who drive at night are the newer guys so perhaps they err on the side of caution by laying on the horn a little longer than perhaps federally mandated (not, as you might think, to antagonize the locals).

Why can't they just turn the engine off rather than allow it to idle all night long?

“We get asked this question all the time,” says Joe, “and frankly, it's a NIMBY question (i.e. “Not In My Back Yard”). In other words, for every person who believes that they are being inconvenienced by the sound (and feel) of an idling engine all night would they rather they move the thing in back of someone else's house to do the same? I know for a fact that the person who asked me this question wasn't asking that. They were just wondering why can't they just turn the thing off and, like a car or a truck, start it up in the morning? Well, a train engine is not like your family car and from what I gathered from Joe's explanation is that it's just cheaper to keep it running rather than uncouple it from the cars it's pulling and park it in a quiet place somewhere. “The majority of the time, the train will pass on through after picking up or dropping off its load,” Joe informed me. “But once again we're bound by federal regulations that state that for every 12 hours of work, railroad employees are entitled to 10 hours of rest.” He's referring to the Hours of Service Act that was amended in 1971 because of longstanding complaints that crews were not getting adequate rest which was a factor in many accidents. Since that time railroad crews are limited to 12 hour shifts that must be followed by “10 hours of undisturbed rest” in a 24 hour time period. So, on the occasion that an engine is left to idle all night it's more than likely because of that rule. They have to rest their guys and if it happens that they're in town when their shift expires, well I guess that's the luck of the draw.

So, the long and short of it is this is the cost of doing business. Regularly the trains pass through Chetek delivering lumber to ABC Truss or hauling telephone poles from McFarland Cascade outside of Cameron or carrying sand to one of the many wash plants south of town. All this means jobs for local people, who live in houses and pay property taxes, who buy their gas and their groceries and eat out from time to time at our local restaurants. I guess when you frame the question that way the sound of silence might not be a good sound after all.

Do you have a question about stuff going on in town or about an ordinance you think is unnecessary? Message me at my Facebook page (Jeff Martin, Mayor) or at chetekmayor@cityofchetek-wi.gov. I may not know the answer but I probably can find out.