I attended the Spending Limit Committee meeting this evening. It was an interesting meeting. I think this committee has some very good people on it and I look forward to watching as they progress towards their goals. What is the goal you may ask. Well that is not completely defined yet. They are going to look at the spending limit ordinance and determine what changes need to be made. Right now the ordinance is about all building and public works projects. Does developer financed water and sewer projects need to be included in that? Will there be just one blanket limit or different limits for different types of projects? Will there be an automatic adjustment based on some index? There are many other questions that will still need to be answered, but not bad for a first meeting.

But how did we get to this point? Well thanks to Dave Mokros, we have the answer. Here is the audio. So in August of 2003 the City took preemptive measures and imposed an arbitrary spending limit. Well here is the definition of preemptive, designed or having the power to deter or prevent an anticipated situation or occurrence. Just what is it they were trying to deter? It was direct legislation. The council was afraid that a citizen group would gather enough signatures and force a spending limit ordinance that would require the City to go to referendum on projects. They did not want that to happen so they picked a large dollar amount and enacted an ordinance to prevent the citizens from having any real say in the matter.

Why was the council so worried in 2003 about the citizens making direct legislation? Perhaps it had something to do with the fact that they were planning on spending a lot of money and knew the citizens would not be happy about it. Maybe it was something else, but it is crystal clear that they did not trust the citizens of Pewaukee. The Council were afraid that their decisions would be questioned and they wanted a way to keep the citizens at bay. To me, it reeks of arrogance.

I have heard Mike Pazdernik say this before. A couple of things Mike. First, I know you don't agree with this, but the citizens MUST a say in how the government is run outside of the election cycle. This is a right, not a privilege, think first amendment here. Second, we are going into an election cycle, and constituents don't like the what has been voted for.