359 Degrees

One of the quality of life issues the city manages is controlling the deer population.   With a plentiful food supply (your lawns), no natural predators (bobcats, anyone?) and plenty of natural cover (all that green space everyone wants more of), it's a perfect environment for a deer population explosion.  It's a common problem in many suburban areas.  There are several options to control the population as outlined on this page from the Wisconsin DNR, all with good and bad points.  The city started a control program in 2002.  It is summarized in the following chart.

There are some public safety issues as well.  Deer can carry Lyme Disease, chronic wasting disease, and be the cause of auto accidents.  This chart shows the deer/car collisions in the city.   A "reportable" accident is an occurrence that originates or terminates on a traffic way that involves at least one motor vehicle in transport, and results in any of the following:

• Injury or fatality of a person
• Total damage to one person's property to an apparent extent of $1,000 or more
• Damage to government-owned property to an apparent extent of $200 or more, except government owned vehicles, where the threshold is $1,000 or more

A "non-reportable" accident is an occurrence that does not meet the above criteria.  For example, a couple of years ago I was waiting behind a school bus for two deer to cross North Avenue by Wirth Park.  My car was rear ended by a car whose driver was busy tuning the radio.  It was not seen as deer related.  Of course there are also accidents that don't get reported at all and thus can't be classified as reportable or non-reportable. 

Year	Reportable	Non-Reportable	Total
2000	60	21	81
2001	67	13	80
2002	43	21	64
2003	70	1	71
2004	32	16	48
2005	39	18	57
2006	40	8	48
2007	38	14	52

MJS, June 17, 2008 Deer - Jogger Collision

In January, 2008 the program cost $25,763.  That works out to about $233/deer for sharpshooting (rifle) and about $400/deer for live trapping.  The article linked to above indicates this is a bargain.    The city is under tremendous pressure to reduce spending and taxes.  This is an excellent example of a new program (started in 2002) with a continuing cost (new deer are born every year, so the deer population reduction continues every year) that is not absolutely essential (in the way a fireman is deemed to be) but is politically popular. 

Should the deer control program be continued?  You tell me!

On June 9 the Plan Commission considered my referral on a historic building preservation ordinance.  It was about 10:15 pm and all but one resident had already left.  I was late to the Plan Commission meeting because I was meeting with some District 5 homeowners who had suffered flooding.  You can't really understand the challenges those residents face by just sitting in your family room with a laptop and a crate of Oreos!

There were many good questions from the commissioners about past commission meetings on preservation, what the goals should be, how to measure community support, etc.  In the end, the Commission unanimously decided to assign the 2035 Master Plan Task Force the job of discussing the topic at one of their first meetings with a report back to the commission.  The idea is to use the task force as a sounding board for public opinion to measure if Brookfield residents believe historic building preservation is worthwhile.  The staff will also try to locate a consultant to review and update the building inventory.  If both of those are positive, the hard part of figuring out how to pay for the study will be next. 

Why hire a consultant?  There's an important difference between being architecturally or historically significant and being just another old farm house.  Some definitions use 50 years as the start of an "historic" designation, then narrow it down with many other factors.  For example, there is a not-so-old house in Brookfield that is considered by some architects to be a treasure because it was bought from a Sears catalog!  I wish you could have heard the excitement of several of the commissioners.  Unfortunately, I understand that a malfunction with the video equipment meant none of the meeting was recorded.  I'm sure we'll hear all sorts of un-medicated paranoid conspiracy theories about that!

By the way, I will soon be mailing in my membership application to the Elmbrook Historical Society.  They are the volunteer group behind the Dousman House.  I'm sure someone will consider this a conflict of interest, but I want to show I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is.  Are you?

A few weeks ago I made a request for the city to study creating an ordinance protecting historic properties. I wrote about it in my blog entry Historic Building Preservation. It comes up for discussion at the Plan Commission meeting on Monday, June 9.  As with most things in city policy, the two biggest hurdles will be community support and money.

My recommendation is to start with a study determining how many historic buildings exist in the city and finding out what can be done to preserve them.  That will cost money that was not budgeted for this year.  Before the city can spend money now allocated for some other purpose or take it from a contingency fund (how do you think we paid for that extra road salt last January?), we'll need some feel for whether people will support the whole concept to begin with.  Here's how you can help:

1) Send an email to the city clerk's office (cityhall@ci.brookfield.wi.us) stating, "I endorse the city's study to identify historic local buildings which may lead to ordinances restricting the use and remodeling of those buildings in order to preserve them for future generations."  If you really want to make a point, you can state "I will support an increase in my property taxes or a voluntary user fee for the purpose of funding this preservation effort and am willing to make a private donation as well."

2) Speak at the public comment period of the Common Council meeting.  The next one is June 17 at 7:45 pm.  Your comment can be pretty much the same as in 1), but in person it can be more effective.

If this issue is of importance to you, this is the time to speak up.  I'll need a lot of help to make this go anywhere!

Click here for a copy of the official 1993 report listing local historic properties:  1993_HistoricInventory.pdf

The official staff report to Monday's Plan Commission reads:

"Report: 

1. At the May 6, 2008 Common Council meeting Alderman Scott Berg forwarded a legislative referral to the Plan Commission to consider an historic building preservation ordinance. 
2. Alderman Berg also issued a memo on May 1, 2008 outlining suggestions for how staff can research and create the ordinance.  Attached is his memo for your review. 
3. In the early 1990’s, an inventory of historic buildings was created by the Community Development Department.  Staff also provided an educational presentation to Plan Commission and Common Council on historical building preservation in the City and available grants and programs.  In addition, staff drafted an historical building preservation ordinance for consideration by Plan Commission and Common Council.  Ultimately, the ordinance was rejected because the City felt it was too draconian and onerous to property owners.  No other activity in regard to an ordinance has taken place since this time. 
4. The Mayor has identified that by statute, the 2035 Comprehensive Plan is to include a Historical Building Preservation section.  That could be a possible venue for this discussion. 
5. Staff’s direct response to Alderman Berg’s memo is as follows:

• Item 1:  Funding would be required to update the historic building inventory.  The last inventory was conducted in 1993 at a cost of $14,000.00.  An estimate of the cost today is not known because the inventory is complete and would need updating; however, the existing inventory is 15 years old.  Funding would need to be identified, possibly in the 2009 budget. 
• Item 2: Plan Commission and Common Council can direct staff to conduct a local, regional or national search for what other communities have done in this regard. 
• Item 3: Currently, VK Development is planning on preserving the Ruby Farm house and outbuildings west of Calhoun Road.  The Dousman-Dunkel-Behling house is preserved and the City has implemented a recommended preservation of the Village Railroad Depot in the Village Area Neighborhood Plan and completed an architectural assessment of the building. 
• Item 4: This could be addressed through the 2035 Comprehensive Plan process. 
• Item 5: The creation of any ordinances or implementation of tools would need to wait until staff was directed by Plan Commission and Common Council directed staff to undertake the previous items discussed in this report.

 Please note that items #2 and #5 are not currently within the scope of services for 2035 Comprehensive Plan update. 

6. Staff is requesting that Plan Commission review the referral and provide direction to staff, with particular guidance given to items 1, 2, 4 and 5 of Alderman Berg’s memo."