Election results send message to City Hall
| Publication: Waukesha Freeman (Conley); | Date: Feb 18, 2010; | Section: Opinion; | Page: 8A | ![]() |
Election results send message to City Hall
But is Scrima a good alternative to Nelson?
(James Wigderson is a blogger publishing at http://www.wigderson.com and a Waukesha resident. His column runs Thursdays in The Freeman.)
If nothing else, the columnists at The Freeman will have plenty to write about. I was asked point blank on my Web site a week ago if it was the incumbent Mayor Larry Nelson and Waukesha businessman Jeff Scrima in the general election, for whom would I vote? I answered, “There is something to be said for voting for the candidate who will supply me with the most copy for the next four years, and I’ll let it go at that for now.”
If there was a real winner on Tuesday, it was yours truly. Unfortunately, I also have to live here, so part of me will be watching the unfolding race with dismay right along with the rest of you.
The results of Tuesday’s election should send a message to city government.
Nelson making it through to the general election was not a surprise. He is the incumbent, after all, and the sole recipient of support from traditional Democratic sources, with the possible exception of the local environmentalists. But he finished second to a hitherto unknown businessman in his first try for public office.
Scrima found a populist cause with the water issue. City leaders should take note of how the public was willing to support (so far) Scrima when he came out against purchasing Milwaukee water because of possible strings on the deal. They will need to reassure residents that there will be no agreement with Milwaukee so long as Milwaukee insists on including policy issues in with the sale of Lake Michigan water.
Scrima’s campaign to this point has been interesting. Not so much in the innovation of his ideas, but the innate need to pander that launches them.
In reaction to the pay raise for the mayor passed by the common council, Scrima promised during the primary to reduce his salary to $35,500 if elected mayor, roughly half of what the salary will be when the new term begins. What Scrima has yet to explain is any sort of reasoning behind the amount, because there is no reason.
If the theory is that the mayor should only be part-time, an idea Scrima rejects, then the salary would be much lower. If the position is truly full-time, then the salary would have to be higher.
Scrima just picked a number almost at random and said $35,500 is what he would accept as a salary. Voters should find this base pandering insulting.
At a candidate forum at Carroll University, the subject of the safety of the students crossing the street came up again. The simple pander would be to promise more crossing guard assistance, maybe a traffic cop. Scrima went full-pander with suggesting that tunnels under the road be explored as an option. Or, if that’s too expensive, maybe we could close some roads.
My favorite pandering flourish of Scrima’s was at the same candidate forum. Attempting to appeal to the co-sponsoring environmental group as well as the students present, Scrima actually suggested Waukesha should plow the bike trails, “like Madison.” At least he didn’t say we should plow the streets like Madison, too.
Think recycling is complicated now with the new schedule? Scrima wants us all to sort our recyclables, because it’s the right thing to do for the environment. Just when you thought his “green” credentials received enough buffing, Scrima called for a “multimodal transportation system.”
We won’t have to worry about accepting Milwaukee’s ideas for our city along with their water if Scrima is elected mayor. He’ll just adopt them without buying their water.
As for Nelson, I’ve certainly listed his faults aplenty in this space, including last week. My suggestion to him would be to quickly swipe some of Darryl Enriquez’s positions to offer voters some real reforms for the next four years. Nelson is likely not to listen.
I had suggested last week that, if the voters were inclined to fire Nelson, that the best candidate in opposition was Enriquez. The voters in Tuesday’s primary rejected my advice, and now the choice is between Scrima and Nelson.
Waukesha will have between now and April 6 to decide if the cure is worse than the disease.

JAMES WIGDERSON



James, your columns seem rather negative.
A balanced approach may help you increase your fan base.
You are smart. Do you want to be labeled as a stereotypical blogger?
[Reply]
James Wigderson Reply:
February 18th, 2010 at 9:47 pm
Perhaps my next column should be about the thin-skinned Scrima supporters.
[Reply]
James isn’t the one running around Waukesha saying he can tap rocks with thy rod and thy staff and make water.
[Reply]
If not balanced, he is certainly accurate. Nelson is a known quantity at this point. Enriquez had a clear plan for what he would do if elected. Although he never held office, he has at least been around government enough to know how things work and what is realistic. Scrima, I’m guessing, had the largest ad buy of all the candidates. His web site is filled with vague platitudes about “a new day for Waukesha”, but offering very little specific about what he would do if elected, aside from taking a pay cut as Mayor while still, presumably, operating his business. He is the Hope and Change candidate. I hope he can prove me wrong.
[Reply]
One of your best columns. Pandering, that’s the word I was looking for. All kinds of costly ideas, no hope of seeing them in the real world. There’s only so many tunnels and smooth streets you can pay for with a $35,000 per year cut in pay. I was at the debate also and have to admit Larry sounded most mayoral, informed and connected. Jeff has plenty of ideas the younger voters would go for but impractical in this economy and at this time. I voted for Larry and will again in April. Nelson is a known commodity. With Scrima I’m afraid we wouldn’t know what we got until it’s too late.
[Reply]
Anon Reply:
February 22nd, 2010 at 6:14 am
Well, the real world idea on Main Street is now deliquent with property taxes. The other real world idea is still awaiting financing for a stadium. Which makes everyone wonder, is water from Milwaukee another real world idea?
You’re correct in stating, “Nelson is a known commodity”. The condition of our roads amplify his governance and vision.
[Reply]
The question nobody is asking is “What is government responsible for”?
Is it responsible for;
Taxpayer funded transit? – NO
Taxpayer funded loans to private businesses? – NO
Taxpayer funded cemetery? – NO
Building tunnels for private institutions? – NO
Having the best and newest equipment? – NO
Protective Service (Police/Fire/EMS)? – YES
Roads (Construction and safe operation of)? – YES
Water (and Sewer) – YES
Garbage Removal – YES
Government (on all levels) have become bloated. It needs to be trimmed
back, I am worried that if government keeps spending the way it is, my
children will not be able to afford to live in this city.
Take a look at my website. I have clearly outlined some of the obvious
waste in the 2010 Operating Budget. Its MILLIONS!
“If we American people ever allow monopoly banking to control the issue of currency, firstby inflation & then by deflation, these banks & bureaucracies that will grow up around them will deprive we, the people of all our property until our children will wake up homeless on the continent which God gave us for stewardship.” – Thomas Jefferson
[Reply]