Politics & Government

County Government Reform About More Than Just Supervisor Pay

A forum Thursday night in South Milwaukee spelled out all of the changes under a proposed bill reforming Milwaukee County government.

A possible 2014 referendum on slashing salaries of Milwaukee County supervisors—essentially making them part-time positions—has gotten a lot of headlines in recent weeks.

But as those attending a forum Thursday in South Milwaukee heard, it's far from the only part of state Rep. Joe Sanfelippo's proposed legislation reforming county government.

Sanfelippo, himself a former county supervisor, explained the rationale behind his legislation to what appeared to be an evenly-split audience of roughly 200 at the South Milwaukee Performing Arts Center.

Find out what's happening in Greendalewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

County Supervisor Theo Lipscomb provided counter-arguments, with County Supervisor Pat Jursik, who has not yet taken an official position on the bill, moderating the discussion.

Besides supervisor pay, Sanfelippo's bill trims supervisors' terms from four years to two and establishes the role of the county board vs. county executive. Which, in many cases, means empowering the county executive and marginalizing the board's role in managing departments, acquiring and selling real estate, collective bargaining with employees and many other areas of county affairs.

Find out what's happening in Greendalewith free, real-time updates from Patch.

But Sanfelippo and Lipscomb differed in how much would actually change.

Sanfelippo often said provisions in the bill simply clarified or simplified the current system, which would make it easier for the government to function while still allowing the board to maintain oversight.

Real estate deals, for example, would be negotiated between the county executive's office and the buyer and then brought to the county board for approval. That allows a developer to just deal with the county executive and not all 18 supervisors, he said, but still gives the board the chance to vote on it.

"It's so cumbersome to navigate through the process that ... developers just throw up their hands," Sanfelippo said.

Lipscomb responded that "again, we see the world a little differently."

He said land deals deserve an open process, particularly at high-profile spots like the Downtown Transit Center, on which a high-rise overlooking the lakefront is planned, and the vacant Park East property near the Bradley Center.

Lipscomb also disputed the notion that developers are negotiating with all 18 supervisors, or that developers are burdened by county requirements. It was an example of what Lipscomb called an "overreach" and "kisses for (County Executive Chris) Abele" at various points in the forum.

"Developers I've talked to said, 'this isn't a problem,'" he said.

And while the bill addresses broad county government reform, the referendum component also got its share of discussion.

If an April 2014 referendum passed, supervisors would be paid no more than the per-capita income of Milwaukee County, which right now is about $24,000, or receive benefits. The county board could only increase supervisor salaries by the rate of inflation.

Sanfelippo believes the county government would function better the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s when the board was part time. Back then, the county had 11,000 employees, compared to the 4,400 it has now, Sanfelippo said.

He noted that 12 out of 19 municipalities overwhelmingly passed an advisory referendum last spring supporting a downsizing of the county board. That represented about 25 percent of residents. Now, he wants to give all residents a say on the issue.

"If, in the end, the citizens say, 'We're happy with the way things are. We want a full time board,' that's what we're going to have," he said.

Unsurprisingly, Lipscomb didn't see it that way.

"The referendum ... is a sham," he said.

Why? Because it only addresses compensation, and not the other aspects of the bill that would take effect regardless of what voters decide on the referendum, he said. The board would be left without the resources it needs to do its job, Lipscomb said.

"You seem to be unwilling to put most of these changes to voters," he said. "But you're putting the one thing you expect the voters to (approve)."

Jursik has put the presentation about the bill online. She encouraged residents to give their feedback about the proposal by emailing her at  patricia.jursik@milwcnty.com or calling (414) 278-4231.

"We enjoyed a thoughtful, respectful discussion about this elaborate legislation," Jursik said in a statement. "Before taking a formal position on this legislation, I want to hear from as many constituents as possible."


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here