FREE WHITEWATER

Common Council Meeting for November 20, 2007, Part 2

This is Part 2 of my review of the latest Common Council meeting, on November 20th. Part 1 was posted previously.

On Tax Rates.

City Manager Brunner mentioned that tax rates in Whitewater have been declining year over year. That sounds impressive, but it’s not meaningful by itself. A reduction of tax rates in the city would be meaningful to spur growth among existing city residents only if (1) other fees and fines were stationary or falling too, and (2) the reductions benefited entrepreneurs or potential entrepreneurs in the city, and (3) no one could leave the city.

Our municipal economy is not an island. One key part of assessing the value of tax reduction is comparatively, one location to another. If taxes, fees, and other burdens decline more elsewhere, that relative advantage to another town means more than our absolute, but smaller, reduction. People will stay there, and others will flock there.

Our problem is more than absolute; it’s relative.

On Kim Hixson.

How many people are truly persuaded when Kim Hixson bloviates talks on an issue? Hixson doesn’t even speak to his fellow council members; he’s always mugging for the camera, with a louder-than normal, odd tone. Does he practice in front of a mirror? Hixson was the Council member who proposed that Whitewater purchase a super-duper leaf vacuum, at the cost of, I don’t know, about a gazillion dollars.

I’m here to help, Dr. Hixson. Instead of spending all that money on leaf vacuums, I can get you – yes, you — what you need to help the city. Over at the FREE WHITEWATER Department of Engineering for Better Everyday Living™, the design team’s built a device for leaf vacuuming. They estimate the cost per unit at only $76.94.

They have created a technical schematic. (If this should seem too complex, feel free to write me at adams@freewhitewater.com and a member of the staff will reply to guide through all the technicalities.)

Here’s the detailed schematic:

Amazing, isn’t it?

Hixson could play a role here, though – this device requires a human operator. The heavy duty Shop Vac attaches to an operator through the use of highly durable duct tape. Afterward, just plug in the extension cord, and vacuum away any loose foliage you find. Problem solved!

(This astonishing device even incorporates a Moisture-Alert feature. When the vacuum comes into contact with damp leaves or water, the operator immediately receives an unmistakable electric signal, alerting him to the presence of excessive moisture. Trials with monkey test-subjects confirm that the signal is, in fact, unmistakable. It’s just another fine innovation from FREE WHITEWATER.)

Dr. Hixson mentioned that some of his constituents would willingly have their taxes raised to give Jim Coan another police officer. Not everyone in the city shares that view. I am sure though, that if Hixson speaks for those who would pay more in taxes, he must be willing to volunteer his services without charge for leaf removal.

The rest of us would be grateful for each moment he spends outside, picking up leaves.

Congeniality out the Window!

I wrote before about the on-boarding session that the Common Council conducted earlier this year to improve congeniality. Here’s part of what I wrote, as harmony seemed to have improved:

The interesting question is whether this harmony will hold when the sessions are not fixed on budget presentations, department by department. If idle hands are the devil’s workshop, then an open agenda is a grandstander’s opportunity.

Well, it only takes one skunk to spoil a garden party. It’s funny about our politician-dentist: he’s his own worst enemy. Apparent anger and hostility overcomes him so easily that he undermines his own case and image, almost every time. He’s not alone in what he wants, but he is nearly alone in how he conveys it. The more exposure he gets, the worse he’ll do. I am convinced he could not run and win city-wide this way.

Socialists in the Dairyland.

Every time you don’t like a commercial development, does it make sense to ask the city’s taxpayers to purchase the property, to prevent the development from happening? No, because it shows that (1) you’re ignorant of economics, and (2) worse, your ignorance will wreck our economy. There’s considerable imbecility in an approach that favors municipal purchases of anything a cranky politician dislikes simply because he dislikes it. (Note to UWW students: Relax. The Thirteenth Amendment will keep you safe from an approach based on purchasing whatever a local politician dislikes.)

Comments are closed.