Posts Tagged ‘State of Wisconsin’

Super Mob Book review


chicago outfit chart.php


Reading a great book I found at the Racine Library called Supermob by Gus Russo who has written other Books/Stories on the Mob in Chicago.

In Supermob he write of the history of the Mob in Chicago and the move to LA from the early days to say the early 2000’s not done yet

I just love the history this book talks about the who’s who and the corruption wow the corruption!

One of the aspects of the Book is that sometimes the Justice system takes years but justice does come.

Now in  2014 we have more laws and regulations making it easy for the FBI the IRS and the press to find out what is going on!

As I see it the RICO case with our Mayor and others will help uncover many things going on in this City, County, and perhaps even State.  Laws like this did not exist in the time frame of this book.

Who knows what might be uncovered?

Be interesting to see what we find out in a open court, with this RICO Case, as we wait read this book!

A Call For Legislative Action And Public Comment

Another handout by a group unhappy with the BS in the City of Racine


A Call For Legislative Action And Public Comment
It is time for the Wisconsin State Legislature to end the abuse of Racine’s water utility revenues by introducing Legislation that will end the practice of allowing local Politicians to raise water rates, siphon off water utility revenues, or issue water utility revenue bonds for local government operations or other development activities that are unrelated to the operations of the water utility. Ensuring safe, clean and affordable drinking water for all is the only long term sustainable option that will not jeopardize, for Generations to come, the future of Racine’s supply of safe, clean and affordable water.
The City of Racine, in their Financing Options for Tax Incremental District 17, on page 22 states:
Utility Revenue Bonds: The City can issue revenue bonds to be repaid from revenues of the sewer and/or water systems, including revenues paid by the City that represent service of the system to the City. There is neither a statutory nor constitutional limitation on the amount of revenue bonds that can be issued, however, water rates are controlled by the Wisconsin Public Service Commission and the City must demonstrate to bond underwriters its ability to repay revenue debt with the assigned rates. To the extent the City utilizes utility revenues other than tax increments to repay a portion of the bonds; the City must reduce the total eligible Project Costs in an equal amount.
The absence of statutory or constitutional limitations on the amount of water and sewer utility revenue bonds that can be issued is an oversight by past Legislatures and an open invitation to abuses by local governing authorities. This looming crisis demands immediate attention from Wisconsin State Legislators who need to introduce Legislation that will place reasonable limitations on the issuance of utility revenue bonds along with the purposes for which they can be issued. Utilities operations are too vital to the health and well-being of the Communities that depend upon them to allow politicians to encumber them with debt for purposes unrelated to the operation of the utility.
In Wisconsin there are an increasing number of people who are experiencing fuel poverty due to rising costs, which is why the Wisconsin State Legislature must regulate utility revenue bonds and not allow them to be used for purposes other than utility operations. The City of Racine, in its 2014 Budget, page 242, lists the water utility operating expenses at $17,342,000 with revenues of $21,871,851. That is a profit of $4,529,851. The PSC must reject The City of Racine’s current request to raise water rates and while the State Legislature must end the practice of issuing utility revenue bonds for unrelated purposes.

We last saw our hero



Just strange what is going on in Racine with Water and I fear it will be getting worse.

Spent quite a bit of time looking for the maps of the Bulkhead Lines and I found a copy not where City Ordinance said at the City Clerk’s office (and to the best of my understanding not at the Register of Deeds office as called for by State Law.

As we see here:

30.11 Establishment of bulkhead lines.
(1) Who may establish. Any municipality may, subject to the approval of the department, by ordinance establish a bulkhead line and from time to time reestablish the same along any section of the shore of any navigable waters within its boundaries.
(2)Standards for establishing. Bulkhead lines shall be established in the public interest and shall conform as nearly as practicable to the existing shores, except that in the case of leases under sub. (5) and s. 24.39 (4) bulkhead lines may be approved farther from the existing shoreline if they are consistent with and a part of any lease executed by the board of commissioners of public lands.
(3)How established. Whenever any municipality proposes to establish a bulkhead line or to reestablish an existing bulkhead line, the municipality shall indicate both the existing shore and the proposed bulkhead line upon a map and shall file with the department for its approval 6 copies of the map and 6 copies of the ordinance establishing the bulkhead line. The map shall use a scale of not less than 100 feet to an inch or any other scale required by the department. The map and a metes and bounds description of the bulkhead line shall be prepared by a land surveyor registered in this state. The department may require the installation of permanent reference markers to the bulkhead line. Upon approval by the department, the municipality shall deliver the map, description and ordinance to the office of the register of deeds of the county in which the bulkhead line lies, to be recorded by the register of deeds.
(4)Riparian rights preserved. Establishment of a bulkhead line shall not abridge the riparian rights of riparian owners. Riparian owners may place solid structures or fill up to such line.
(5)Finding of public interest.
(a) Prior to the execution of any lease by the board of commissioners of public lands concerning rights to submerged lands or rights to fill in submerged lands held in trust for the public under s. 24.39, the department shall determine whether the proposed physical changes in the area as a result of the execution of the lease are consistent with the public interest. Thirty days before making its determination, the department shall notify, in writing, the clerk of the county and clerk of the city, village or town in which the changes are proposed and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers of the application for the lease. In making its finding the department shall give consideration to all reports submitted to it. The department shall not approve a lease applied for under s. 24.39 (4) (a) 2. if the department determines that the lease may threaten excessive destruction of wildlife habitat.
(b) When considering leases to allow certain initial improvements such as, but not restricted to, filling on submerged lands to create sites for further facilities, the department may determine whether such initial improvements are consistent with the public interest in the navigable waters involved even though the exact final use to which these improvements will be put is not known. The department, at the time it finds that a proposed lease would be consistent with the public interest in the navigable waters involved, may include in its findings such limitations upon the use of improvements as it considers necessary to confine their use to functions primarily related to water transportation or otherwise of public benefit. The board of commissioners of public lands shall include in the lease such limitations on final use as is determined by the department.
(c) Upon the complaint of any person to the department that current use made of rights leased under s. 24.39 (4) is inconsistent with both its original findings and the public interest, the department shall hold a public hearing thereon after the publication of a class 2 notice, under ch. 985. If the department finds that the present use conforms neither to its original finding nor to the present public interest, it shall submit its findings to the governor. The governor may cause the attorney general or the district attorney of the proper county to bring action in the name of the state in a court of competent jurisdiction to declare the lease terminated and to institute appropriate action for removal of structures or cessation of practices in violation of such lease.
(6)Shoreline not invalidated. A shoreline lawfully established before January 1, 1960, is a lawfully established bulkhead line.
A bulkhead line is not merely the natural shoreline, but one legislatively established by a municipality. It may differ from the existing shoreline and is also distinguishable from the low- and high-water marks previously judicially defined. State v. McFarren, 62 Wis. 2d 492, 215 N.W.2d 459 (1974).
The private right to fill lakebeds granted under this section does not preempt the zoning power of a county over shorelands under s. 59.971 [now 59.692]. State v. Land Concepts, Ltd. 177 Wis. 2d 24, 501 N.W.2d 817 (Ct. App. 1993).
When a bulkhead line has been established, a riparian owner must nonetheless obtain a permit or contract pursuant to s. 30.20 prior to removing material from the bed of a navigable water landward of the bulkhead line, but within the original ordinary high water mark. 63 Atty. Gen. 445.
A bulkhead line is not legally established until the filing requirements of sub. (3) are met. A bulkhead line established by a town on lands subsequently annexed to a municipality that has not established such line, remains in effect. 64 Atty. Gen. 112.

So why are they not there? Why were they not at the city clerk’s office?

Now I do have copies sent to me under an Open Records request that I thank the City for filling and I will see if I can post the maps that at first glance are so hard to find.

A few wonder why?

I will post the Maps here once I can do so and have them readable sorry.

Since I last wrote I have talked to say a Mr LN who has informed me on the further plans once the Mound St Buildings have been bought if I understand right and I may not can you say RICO?


Root River Goes to Sewage?



So I went to my first meeting of the Waterworks Commission yesterday. I did so because with the focus of Mayor John Dickert to sell water from Lake Michigan to Waukesha even though this would becuse of the Great Lakes Compact to replace Water from Lake Michigan with “Treated” sewage from Waukesha. This sewage as I understand it would come down the Root River yes Sewage in the Root River perhaps looking like this



Yum! Lets go boating or swimming now!


Last night meeting was interesting. Went fast the members had read the agenda (Unlike what goes on at say the City Cable Commission). Overall I was impressed whit how it was run.

Mayor Dickert was there as a member but did not run the meeting. The Mayor also did not make motions he may have seconded  some no issues with that.

I taped the Audio of the meeting and plan to tape the Audio of all the meeting of the Waterworks commission with what is being proposed by the City of Racine to sell water to Waukesha and get  “treated” sewage in return is so critical because  the Good old boys want this done andd as  I see it will do anything to make it so. Why?

Easy, all about the money.  Lets look at what the Water might bring in If I understand right Waukesha might need 5 MILLION gallons a day and  lets say we charge only .05 per 1000 gallons that’s $2500 per day  about 900,000 a year. I am sure that there will be fees and other charges Racine see over 1 million a year in income for the City of Racine easy if not more.

Think of the land that may have to be bought or rights leased to run pipes under/over. How many millions will that cost? What FOJ (Friend of John) might be used for that  sweat part of the deal?

Think about the engineering and the creation of the system. How much money will that be who might benefit  from that part of the contact? How much might that cost.

How many Millions will this selling of Water cost us? Who might see a lot of funds come into their hands?  Can we trust Mayor John Dicket to keep our Water clean? Please recall the Lead issues in some of the Homes in Racine’s NSP program.

Now I have been assured that the Sewage will be treated and all will be well then I recall this:   only 170 MILLION gallons of Raw Sewage dumped last year into Lake Michigan by the Green Mayor of Milwaukee in 2011. So what might we look at here if some act of God would dump sewage into the Root River?  1 Million Gallons? 2 Million?  What woult that do to the homes along the River? What might that do to North Beach?  Are you willing to take a chance?


In the posts to come lets look at the money

Funding the plan

So in a few weeks the Rootworks plan be passed and be the law of the land. The question now becomes how in Hell do we pay for any of this.
Mind you some of the plan is in the way of Cities cheep. A paint only Bike Trail costs very little and may in fact pay for itself in safety. Bikes in Bike lanes IMHO are safer then milling about.
An added foot bridge across the River would be not much BUT far more then a paint only Bike Path still as it comes to the plan not out of sight.

Infrastructure, such as fixing the intersection of Water and Marquette (and the buying of the buildings in that intersection would be done via a TIF (If I understand how TIF’s work) and that corner needs to be fixed as I see it. Sure they are ways that TIF’s can be misused and being someone that does not trust city Goverment leadership, so it be nice if say the City Council would keep tabs on the TIF if and when its formed, like that will happen. These are all side bars to the ideas of the RootWorks plan that IMHO gets the City of Racine Good Old Boys hard.
The main one being KRM, now I have been told by a few working in City planing jobs/Mass Transit types that plans are often created without knowing if they will EVER BE CARRIED OUT. Wow, shocking to me that some group/Goverment would spend tons of cash and to me the RootRiver cost lots of money for it not to be tried. IMHO every word in the plan is met to move the plan and all its parts forward. Therefore they talk about KRM to bring it about. Silly Rabbits KRM is dead The South Eastern Wisconsin Transit has been disbanded the funding mechanism removed. No way in God’s Earth is Govenor Scott Walker or Rep Robin Voss going to allow it to return. The recall that folks like the Tick Corry Mason and Mayor John Dickert bet on failed. KRM is not coming back in my lifetime 5 years. I do not think any chance of it coming back in my Grandkids Lifetime. Move the F on KRM folks.
The other big thing as I see it is Azarian Marina some obstacles are there like does the City buy it for tons of cash or use the fact that this land is behind on taxes to get it that way. Going back to the TIF idea some funds can be found via that the rest who know?
Thing is I think the City has no idea either.
In the Day of the big tick the old Governor Jim Doyle our Mayor in meeting with State Bodies planted Seeds he thought would bare fruit, sorry Mayor Dickert, Governor Walker cut the vines down so the tax payer can keep his own money.

Did the Root River Council spend all this money, do such a great Dog and Pony Show for nothing?
Sure as I see this RootWorks can help the Good old boys keep an illusion that they matter and they have a clue, that we need to believe. Should we? What would you think if the City of Racine say took down more lights to fund a new footbridge? Where will the money come to create a web page and maintain it? Questions questions

Grant Award to the Root River Council From the State of Wisconsin via

Recipients for this year’s grants were recommended by the Wisconsin Coastal Management Council, a Governor-appointed citizen and governmental advisory/The funds are part of Wisconsin’s federally-funded Coastal Management Program.

Project Name Root River Public Access Planning Project
Applicant Root River Council
Grant Amount $29,355
Category Land Use & Community Planning
Contact Monte Osterman (262) 308-2766
This project will result in design recommendations for completing
downtown Racine for decreasing stream-bank erosion and for strengthening
riverfront path and commercial, retail and recreational hubs.

My guess is that this group’s consultants Vandewalle out of Madison will see the Lion’s share, perhaps some will stay in the groups hands. I will be contacting the State for a copy of the grant be more details there.
Thinking it might be worth my time to start adding up the Grant totals of the Root River Council and as well the number of jobs this group has made for its membership.
Wonder why this did not make the paper? Might it help if we had a paper??!!
Mr. Mike Friis, of the State of Wisconsin was very helpful in answering some questions I had about the grant.