Monday, April 26, 2010

Random Question Time

Back by unpopular demand, it's random question time. Ask any question as long as it relates to Monona or is interesting or both.

Please, no questions about Calvinism unless you are really predetermined.

hahahahahahahahahahahhahahaha.




 

24 comments:

  1. Several Questions-
    1. Heard about the Warner Park geese are the "rats" in our lagoon next? They need to be gone.
    2. I see things in our community and wonder? For instance, since all the branches and limbs are picked-up in a garbage truck it is my guess that is goes the landfile, correct?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Doug. I've noticed that the left turn signal from northbound Monona Drive onto Nichols Road isn't functioning - at least when I'm usually there between 4:30 and 5:00 pm. Is it because the left turn lane has shifted to the right with the construction? The one at Frostwoods and Monona Drive still works and the Monona Drive/Nichols intersection is just, if not more, busy.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Besides grilling your own from Ken's who makes the best burger in Monona?
    (Doug, you don't need to answer this since it could cost you an election.)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Best burger?? Hmmm. Red Robin's burgers always smell really good outside, but the taste doesn't match up (and the price makes me cringe). I don't have a strong favorite - I don't buy that many burgers. I like the Harmony's burgers, but that's not quite in Monona.

    I'm checking on the left turn signal question.

    1. Heard about the Warner Park geese are the "rats" in our lagoon next? They need to be gone.

    A: The geese at Warner Park were a hazard to aviation. Our geese just poop a lot. We have no plans to kill the geese in Winnequah. (Killing them seems futile anyway given how many geese there are.)

    http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_d27c7ec8-50a1-11df-af20-001cc4c03286.html

    2. I see things in our community and wonder? For instance, since all the branches and limbs are picked-up in a garbage truck it is my guess that is goes the landfile, correct?

    A: I am almost positive they don't go to a landfill. Green Valley has the contract for brush pickup and they use their trash compaction trucks to squish the brush. Or they use their trash squishing trucks to compact the brush.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Reading notes from various committees of our fair city and found the following"The Committee discussed possible changes to the water rates for Monona residents. A possible new model would be for Monona to adopt an “inclining block” water rate structure, in which the amount paid per unit of consumption increases when larger amounts of water are consumed. This structure would, it is hoped, reduce the amount of water used by the average household. The structure would only apply to residential
    properties, not commercial."

    What does this have to do with our city being sustainable? Well, I understand what it had to do with it, but why single out water? I know, I know the arguement about water...but gosh this committe is strange at times.

    Currently, we have the ability to monitor car usage with GPS-why don't we tax people who chose to drive to the pool, Ken's and etc. It pollutes, makes you fat (or fatter) and would save our roads. Impose a wheel tax!

    Why don't we have tax for citizens who 2 or 3 garbage cans instead of one? Impose a Garbage Can Tax!

    Some folks in this fair city-pay to have fancy companys fertilize their lawn-then they have to mow three or four times a week. This is not good for air quality-established fact-IMPOSE a Lawn MOWING TAX or STAMP Program.
    (This could also apply to snow blowers.)

    Finally, WHY would this change only apply to residential and not businesses? I mean who paid when the sewers were backed up on Monona drive with grease?

    ReplyDelete
  6. "possible new model would be for Monona to adopt an “inclining block” water rate structure, in which the amount paid per unit of consumption increases when larger amounts of water are consumed. This structure would, it is hoped, reduce the amount of water used by the average household.

    What does this have to do with our city being sustainable?"

    Conserving water is the cheapest source of 'new' water. Less wear and tear on equipment, less energy use, and so forth. How is *not* sustainable? It saves money and energy and water.

    Are there other things we could do to be more sustainable? Dang straight skippy. One thing at a time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If a residential water users can be more thoughtful about their water use-why not businesses?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Regarding the left-turn arrow for NB Monona Drive at Nichols, I received the following info from city engineer Rich Vela (he was going to verify with the project engineer, but what Rich says makes sense as an explanation):

    The shift in the traffic at the Nichols Road intersection is most likely the reason for the non-operation of the left turn signal on NB Monona Drive at Nichols Road. Because the signal sensors and actual signal heads were not altered at this intersection, the left turn phase is not activated with the current traffic flow.

    At the Frost Woods Road intersection, the signals are in a temporary installation situation and are better aligned with the traffic flow location.

    The left turn arrow is set up as an automatic phase in the signal progression at the Frost Woods Road intersection, which does not have a dedicated left turn pocket, while the left turn arrow at the Nichols road intersection is activated by demand based on vehicle presence in the left turn pocket.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "If a residential water users can be more thoughtful about their water use-why not businesses?"

    Businesses could certainly could consider ways to conserve, but applying a conservation water rate to businesses has not been done anywhere in Wisconsin to date. And it is simply in the nature of some businesses to use very large volumes of water. Some day conservation rates may well be applied more broadly, but right now the PSC has only authorized them for residential customers.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "And it is simply in the nature of some businesses to use very large volumes of water. "

    This is a rationalization just like it is a rationalization for me to see I like the old system. I worked in the rest. industry-so I know darn well restraunts and other business can be more thoughtful about how they use water.

    Further, you are going to increase water rates when you already have done that for the last two or is it three years? Your choice.

    Some of this sustainability stuff frustrates me because it seem more about leaping at the next shiny object rather then looking at it from a system perspective.

    For example, the light bulbs-the PTO and most of Monona talked my lovely bride into after about 14 months- she brings home an article from the times about those bulbs and how they are not the next thing since sliced bread...and lo and behold she had added a whole bunch of new lights because it was darker and needed to be lighter...at least I was permitted to take them out and I did not say I told you so.

    four bits

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sorry to be so ignorant, but who, or what, is Arminian? (You said we couldn't ask questions about Calvin, so I thought this was fair game)

    ReplyDelete
  12. "Further, you are going to increase water rates when you already have done that for the last two or is it three years? Your choice."

    No, under conservation rates most residential customers would stay at the current rate. And the total revenue taken in by the water utility would NOT change as a result of using conservation rates. The utility would take in the revenue needed to operate in a fiscally sound manner. (I'm checking on the frequency of rate increases.)

    This is similar to the way property assessments function. When the city reassesses property values the reassessment simply attempts to allocate property taxes more equitably by using timely data. But assessments do not directly control how much we all pay in taxes. The amount we spend determines what the taxes need to be to be fiscally responsible.

    "Some of this sustainability stuff frustrates me because it seem more about leaping at the next shiny object rather then looking at it from a system perspective."

    Please come to one of our meetings and offer your ideas about using a 'system perspective'. Or send me an email or do a letter to the editor or whatever. I'm very sincere in making that request.

    And the city *is* taking a systemic look at our NRG use thanks to a planning grant that the Sustainability Committee pushed for two years.

    *Considering* conservation rates is not the same thing as adopting them. Sometimes Monona seems afraid to even consider and evaluate new ideas, new ways of doing things in our city government. You, anon, sound like one of those.

    I'm not sold on conservation rates yet partly because we don't have the report from staff with the data on customer usage but also because water is still really cheap around here (and Monona's water rates are still very low even within this water rich state.) The point is I don't know if an inclining rate structure would make enough difference to cause customers to reduce their usage.

    You also sound like you are looking for an excuse to blow off even simple changes. The light bulb thing is a good example because those bulbs (I assume you mean the CFLs) have improved as they have gained more acceptance in the market. You could use twice as many bulbs as the old incandescent bulbs and still save a lot of NRG and cash.

    And changing to CFLs doesn't require *any* change in lifestyle. You reduce the amount of NRG you use by changing products, but you don't have to sit in the dark. It's a good thing you didn't say I told you so because you would have been wrong.

    http://www.productdose.com/article.php?article_id=1142


    (To anticipate the mercury argument, yes CFLs have mercury and you should be careful if one breaks, but the danger from CFL mercury exposure pales compared to your mercury exposure as a result of burning coal. Use less NRG and we need to burn less coal.)

    "I know darn well restaurants and other business can be more thoughtful about how they use water."

    Yeah, actually I was thinking of water-intensive industries (like bottling plants as an example).

    I'm sure some Victorians resisted the replacement of whale oil lamps with kerosene (which only happened with government subsidies BTW), but it was a good change.

    http://www.radford.edu/wkovarik/misc/blog/8.whaleoil.html

    You will also find this quip at that web page:

    Q: How many conservative economists does it take to change a light bulb?
    A: None. The darkness will cause the light bulb to change by itself.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "How many conservative economists does it take to change a light bulb?
    "
    First, thanks for your thoughtful response. I am willing to try new things-just do not like them shoved down my throat by people who have not thought their argument through.

    See I disagree with your joke about economist. An economist looks a human nature and then leverages it for the community good. A great example of this one is the 10cents deposit in MI. Lawyers (no offense) made laws that said if you litter we are going to hit you with a fine, nope now a bigger fine...no no a BIGGER FINE.

    An economist came up with a 10 cent redemption on cans.. As a result, my friends (when we were kids) and I spent a lot of time picking up cans in the spring...trying to make two bits.

    ReplyDelete
  14. On more thing-I think it does the "progressives"in this town little good to keep saying you are not willing to try new things: You must "Old Monona" or You must be a conservative.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "Q: Sorry to be so ignorant, but who, or what, is Arminian?"

    Wahoo! Somebody finally asked!

    Google "arminianism vs calvinism" and you'll be amazed at the amount of argument out there.

    Here's a handy guide: http://www.the-highway.com/compare.html

    My knowledge of Calvinism basically comes from my readings in English and US colonial history, esp. 16th and 17th centuries. So I'm no expert.

    The short answer is 'read the t-shirts'. Calvinists believe that everything that happens is predetermined (and thus no free will) and Arminians believe humans have free will. (And that explains my little wisecrack about no comments unless you are really pre-determined.)

    For Calvinists, God is all powerful and therefore God knows everything that is going to happen from the beginning of time to the end of time (OK, leave aside what comes before the Beginning and after The End; I don't believe this stuff, I'm just describing what they think). In other words, there are no surprises for a Calvinist God. No matter how good or evil you are the course of history is set, i.e. predetermined, and you ain't fooling Him.

    Calvinists believe that a small group of people are the Elect who will get into Heaven. For Calvinists, "God's choice of the sinner, not the sinner's choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation."

    And God chose the Elect all the way back at the beginning of Time. (He must have a really good index file because this was, of course, before Excel spreadsheets.)

    Arminians believe sort of the opposite. Humans have free will and get into Heaven based on their response to "His Call". However, God knew who was going to earn their way into Heaven way back at the beginning of Creation.

    "God's choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel."

    According to Wikipedia: "Arminianism is a school of theology based on the teachings of Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius...It is perhaps most prominent in the Methodist movement and found in various other evangelical circles today."

    Of course, this is all just stuff made up by humans to explain their existence, but positing the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful God, then the Calvinists have the more logical argument. Arminians just seem confused. "Yeah, God knows everything we are going to do before we do it, but we are still free to choose what to do." Like I said, they're confused.

    The Calvinists are wide open to ridicule because what practicing Calvinist would possibly exclude himself or herself from the Elect? So the Elect is an exclusive club, but ALL Calvinists are among the Elect. Back in colonial days Calvinists went to great measures to not only be Good but also to be seen to be Good in order to demonstrate their Elect status.

    Ouch…my brain hurts.

    ReplyDelete
  16. "Q: See I disagree with your joke about economists. An economist looks at human nature and then leverages it for the community good."

    Response: The point of the joke is that conservative "free market" economists expect the unseen hand to take care of everything, while in reality a lot of problems require a nudge or maybe a push from the gummint to make things happen.

    Your Michigan example actually proves this point. Both the punishment approach and the deposit law are examples of government intervention in the economy to acheive a goal the market place ignores. Michigan law requires recycling with the deposit law.

    The deposit law was NOT a creation of the free market. The "free market" combined with property rights tends to make environmental damage an 'external' cost that we all bear while the property owner takes home the profit. Environmental advances (almost?) always require government intervention (at least to get started).

    I sincerely do not think that we shoved resource conservation policies down anyone's throat (unless one views the adoption of any law or policy with which they disagree as down-the-throat-shoving).

    I think our Monona government is very open - at least I certainly work to ensure the parts that I am involved in are open. This blog, for example, is basically an ongoing experiment in promoting open government.

    We have plenty of process, but most of the time people don't engage unless it directly impacts them (and then the broader community interests may get trampled). So again, come to a meeting and offer your views.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Q: On more thing-I think it does the "progressives" in this town little good to keep saying you are not willing to try new things: You must be "Old Monona" or You must be a conservative."

    My response: I'm not entirely certain what you mean, but I think you are saying us progressives should quit saying that "Old Monona" and /or conservatives oppose change.

    Is that what you are saying?

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think you are saying us progressives should quit saying that "Old Monona" and /or conservatives oppose change.


    yes, thanks for asking. Those type of statements divide and sterotype.
    good debate-thanks for your patience.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Is the blog business down because of the all other blogs?
    HP

    ReplyDelete
  20. Actually, I hadn't looked at the numbers in awhile, but they are actually higher than ever. Maybe it's like motels; a cluster of motels attracts more visitors than a single motel. Or people just can't get enough Monona? The brilliant writing? The incredibly smart comments?

    ReplyDelete
  21. all of the above!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Does the fear expressed by residents of lower Winnequah(winnebago squaw)Road for the safety of children reflect any record of accidents or injuries to pedestrians? The cost to the city of policing and the variety of 'bump outs' to control traffic seems disproportionate without such validation.
    On Tonyawatha Trail there are two stop signs where there is little or no record of accidents etc. and only a slowing and lack of respect for the signs.
    Why are these residents able to use fear which seems unjustified? Do the areas along the lake wish to become gated 'communities' rather than part of the public?

    ReplyDelete
  23. "trying to make two bits."
    Two bits is actually a quarter, not 10 cents. This dates to the Spanish dollar (widely used in the colonies and the US until 1857) which was worth 8 Spanish "Reales". Some of the dollar coins were scored so that they could be broken into 8 pieces to make change, 2 bits of the coin equaled a quarter.
    A dime was colloquially known as a "short bit", one could pick up a 10c can to try and make a short bit.

    ReplyDelete