Prairie Dog Corner - Not the Cute Furry Prairie Dogs

The "Prairie Dog Corner" of 1865 had nothing to do with prairie dogs and everything to do with double-dealing railroad stock manipulators.

The owners of railroads operating in Wisconsin were struggling to stay in operation in the wake of the Panic of 1857. One railroad's misery was a stock manipulator's dream - or perhaps a nightmare. Rapid consolidation was underway that would leaveWisconsin with two  railroads - Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway and the Chicago & North Western - operating all  trackage in the state (excepting 86 miles operated by very small roads).

The Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway managed a major growth spurt when it swallowed whole the Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company. The Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company was an association of bondholders organized to acquire and operate the bankrupt Milwaukee & Mississippi Railroad.

In 1850, the Milwaukee & Mississippi RR had built and operated the first track in the state between Milwaukee and Elm Grove via Wauwatosa. See Wisconsin Railroad Timeline and The Railroads of Wisconsin, 1827-1937, Railway and Locomotive Historical Society (1937).

In brief, the Wall Street brokerage firm Henry Stimson & Company (with others) quietly bought up all common stock shares of Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company (i.e. they cornered the market). They then called in short sales. When the short selling brokers tried to buy shares to cover their position they found that shares were only available at stupendously inflated prices (the stock's share price rose from $64.50 to $230 in ten days). Short selling involves selling shares one does not own on the premise that the shares will be cheaper by the time one actually has to deliver the shares. In other words, you are betting the stock will go down - the more the better.

The 'corner' succeeded marvelously. Stimson & Company now owned a dominant position Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company. Life isn't always fair, but sometimes it is not only fair but also wildly hilarious. The Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company's charter denied any say in the company's management to common stock holders until a $2,556,000 mortgage was repaid. Stimson & Company found itself unable to control the company it owned lock-stock-and-barrel.

Stimson, et al., didn't get to be successful stock manipulators by giving up at the first roadblock. They devised a clever plan - in a duplicitous sort of way - to fleece the rubes after all. Stimson knew that the Wisconsin legislature had issued the charter under which the Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien Company operated and therefore could amend it. They seemingly blundered by openly seeking the introduction of an amendment to give votes to the common stockholders. The bill was quickly exposed and rejected. At the same time, however, another bill was insinuated onto the legislative docket that appeared to deal only with a corrupt petroleum company (Merk at page 229). I reality, the bill granted voting rights to Stimson's common stock. It passed in an end of session rush of legislative activity (some things never change).

My primary source is Frederick Merk's indispensable Economic History of Wisconsin During the Civil War Decade published by the State Historical Society in 1916. You can download Merk's book free at Google Books.

The following excerpt from a private research site concerning the history of the Milwaukee Road details how the deal worked:

In New York, the brokerage firm of Henry Stimson & Company began overt speculation in Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien stock. The brokerage had quietly purchased all available common stock of the railroad, and had loaned these shares to various persons and businesses, subject to a short call. In early November. 1865, the brokers suddenly called in all of the stock. The New York Stock Exchange was besieged by traders attempting to purchase shares to satisfy the short call. Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien stock skyrocketed, and the Stimson traders were able to sell their remaining shares at these high prices. The New York Times remarked that the corner was "the sharpest and beyond all precedent the most sudden corner known to the forty years' history of the New York Stock Exchange." Prairie du Chien being French for prairie dog, the corner was memorialized as the "Prairie Dog Corner." Tremendous profits flowed to the speculators.


It would happen often with the Milwaukee Road.

The New York speculators retained a majority of the common shares of the Milwaukee & Prairie du Chien stock, but they were surprised to learn that this was non-voting stock according to an unusual provision of the railroad's charter. An agent of the brokerage managed to slip a provision into a last minute legislative measure -- ostensibly designed to regulate petroleum companies in Wisconsin -- but which converted the non-voting common stock of the railroad to voting stock: the speculators now had control of the company, which they offered to the Milwaukee & St. Paul, which accepted, trading share for share.

Whatta They Got That We Ain't Got?

Maysville, Kentucky is getting daily Amtrak service. Madison, Wisconsin almost got 6 train per day.

But then Maysville is the county seat of Mason County, Kentucky, with a population of almost 9,000. And Maysville is slambang across the Ohio River from Aberdeen, Ohio. Ahoot, Maysville is the principal city of the Maysville Micropolitan Statistical Area, which includes all of Mason and Lewis counties!

Maysville even has a road connecting it to Lexington, despite the efforts of President Andrew Jackson who vetoed the road in 1827. Some scholars speculate he just didn't like Maysville.....

Madison, Wisconsin has over 200,000 residents, but no Amtrak service and no bridge over or tunnel under Lake Monona.

***

I once drove across the Simon Kenton Memorial Bridge at night during a heavy thunderstorm and lived to tell about it, which is more than can be said for Simon Kenton.

 
 
Sure, the bridge looks picturesque standing there in the sunshine.Ha! Don't be fooled. The dude was ugly.  

Land Grant Railroads in Wisconsin, Part II

Addendum: I inexplicably left out the indispensble Law and Locomotives: The Impact of the Railroad in Wisconsin Law in the Nineteenth Century by Robert S. Hunt.

I have also added a photo of Byron Kilbourn's final resting place.


[BEGIN ORIGINAL POST]



I recently posted Land Grant Railroads in Wisconsin, Part 1 that related some background & history of how the US used its vast public landholdings to provide indirect funding for some railroads. A couple of additional note before moving on. The land grant railroads were not as significant as I rather vaguely believed before doing this research. In Wisconsin, as of 1886 land-grant railroad lines constituted only about 20% of total track miles – 973.50 land-grant miles out of 4778 total miles. The total land grant mileage would not have increased in Wisconsin after that date.


The three routes funded by land grants for railroads all served the far northern reaches of the state, the Pinery. The southern part of the state, especially the southeast was already well-served by railroads and had far less need for the US grants. The northern interests strongly believed that the railroad would never reach its environs without the help of the US lands.

The following maps from Illinois suggest that the land grant for the Illinois Central line (from Cairo to Galena with a branch line from Centralia to Chicago) spurred the development of other feeder lines. And they are cool maps anyway.



From Railroads and the Making of America, http://railroads.unl.edu/views/item/landsales_IL?p=5




From Railroads and the Making of America, http://railroads.unl.edu/views/item/landsales_IL?p=5


I ended my prior with the ironic query: what could possibly go wrong?


And as some of you already know, the correct answer was "plenty". The land grants of 1856 led directly to the worst political scandal in the state history. The land grant scandal should be set against the background of how a previous private mode of funding Wisconsin railroads ended in a far greater disaster. 

The Farm Mortgage Debacle

The early 1850's were boom years for Wisconsin wheat farmers (yes, wheat). But the farmers wanted an easier way to get their crops to market than hauling them forty or fifty slow and laborious miles by cart. They wanted railroads to connect them to Chicago or Milwaukee. The railroads of the state were local affairs at the time. Neither the farmers nor the railroads had the capital to build the railroads. State aid was out because the state constitution forbid investment in works of internal improvement. Article VIII, Section 10 provided that "the state may never contract any debt for works of internal improvement, or be a party in carrying on such works." (This proviso has since been amended on several occasions.)

The farm mortgage scheme worked like this: The railroad swapped stock for mortgages on the farms. The farmer mortgaged the farm to pay for the stock. The stock was to yield 10% to the farmer, while the mortgage carried 8% interest. The 'extra' 2% owed to the farmer would be held back by the railroad to pay off the underlying principle. This was all swell, except it amounted to a bunch of poor farmers swapping paper with a bunch of undercapitalized railroads. In order to obtain actual money to build the railroads, the farm mortgages were sold by the railroads (often at a steep discount) to Eastern financial interests.

Local communities also issued local municipal bonds in support of the railroads.

The scheme worked well until the Panic of 1857 plunged the state's railroads into bankruptcy with the state's farmers immediately following (along with many others - see the "sidebar" below).

***

The Wisconsin Historical Society's Odd Wisconsin Archive contains this description of that depression.

The Panic of 1857 was felt especially hard in Wisconsin. LaCrosse, for example, had grown from a hamlet of six houses in 1851 to a town of 6,000 people in 1856 (a fact much touted by the mayor and other promoters). Homes, stores, sawmills, and businesses were sprouting enthusiastically when the Panic hit and employers and investors were unable to get their hands on cash. "Immediately all business operations were paralyzed," wrote a resident afterwards. "Much of the business had been done on credit which depended on outside parties for liquidation. Half a million dollars was owed to the lumbermen from parties down the river, principally. The lumbermen owed the farmers, merchants, banks, mechanics, and laborers, and could not pay."

***

The railroad farm mortgage debacle dominated Wisconsin politics for a decade as farmers and rural interests generally attempted to obtain state legislative relief from their debts. The legislature generally provided relief, but the state Supreme Court consistently overturned these laws.

An excellent source for the history of the railroad farm mortgages is Economic history of Wisconsin during the Civil War decade, by Frederick Merk. Available free on Google Books.



The Land Grant Scandal

The biggest scandal in the history of Wisconsin occurred surrounding the selection of the railroads to build the tracks authorized by the 1856 grants.


Thirteen senators and fifty-nine assemblymen, the Governor, and one Supreme Court Justice were implicated in a bribery scandal.

The excellent article by local attorney Joseph Ranney, Imperia in Imperiis: Law and Railroads in Wisconsin, 1847-1910 describes the scandal:

In 1856 Wisconsin received its first federal railroad land grant from Congress. The federal land grant system provided that when the state selected a railroad to develop a line along a route specified by Congress, that railroad would receive alternate sections of public land in a strip extending six miles along either side of the route. The land would be granted to the railroad in installments as the state certified that successive portions of the road were completed; in the meantime, the railroad could obtain financing on the strength of the grant.


A fierce struggle for the 1856 land grant took place between Byron Kilbourn's La Crosse & Milwaukee Railroad and several competing companies. The La Crosse & Milwaukee won, but shortly afterwards it came out that Kilbourn had engaged in wholesale bribery to win the grant. A special committee of the 1858 Legislature, chaired by Assemblyman James Knowlton of Janesville, discovered that Governor Coles Bashford had received $50,000 worth of La Crosse & Milwaukee stock; supreme court Justice Abram Smith had received $10,000 and other state officials and more than half the members of the 1857 Legislature had received lesser amounts of stock. The 1858 Legislature rescinded the La Crosse & Milwaukee grant and enacted stringent lobbying restrictions and reporting requirements for railroads, but the damage was done. Wisconsin's reputation was damaged throughout the United States, making it more difficult for state railroads to secure outside capital, and it was many years before the state was able to use the 1856 land grant effectively to finance its railroad system.

But as Ranney notes, "Despite the depression, the land grant scandal and the Legislature's failure to adequately control railroad chartering and financing, the demands of a growing economy and the sheer economic advantages of rail transport over rivers and plank roads kept Wisconsin's rail system growing."

You can visit Our Hero at the Forest Home Cemetery in Milwaukee.

Sources and suggested readings:

Many early volumes of the annual (later biennial) reports of the Railroad Commissioners of Wisconsin are available at Google Books, including the very first report of 1874 containing agreta deal of historical data. Tables with data on land grants, municipal railroad bonds, and farm mortgages start at page 401 of the PDF file. According to the report, 3795 farm mortgages were given in the amount of  $4,079,433.

Sanborn, John Bell. Congressional grants of land in aid of railways, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, (Economies, Political Science, and History Series, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 263-392.) August 1899.


Ranney, Joseph A. Imperia in Imperiis: Law and Railroads in Wisconsin, 1847-1910, Wisconsin Lawyer Magazine.

Haney, Lewis Henry, A Congressional History of Railways in the United States, 1850-1887, Bulletin of the University of Wisconsin, , (Economies, Political Science, and History Series, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1-336.) January 1910. Available free on Google Books.

Bernd, John Muth, The La Crosse and Milwaukee railroad land grant, 1856, Wisconsin Magazine Of History. Volume: 30 /Issue: 2 (1946-1947)

Greiner, Gordon Oswald., Wisconsin national railroad land grants, Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1935.

Economic history of Wisconsin during the Civil War decade, by Frederick Merk. Available free on Google Books.

Links can also be found through the UW's MadCat system.

Land Grant Railroads in Wisconsin, Part 1

Following is an edited version of a presentation I gave recently at the Wisconsin DOT Fall Rail Conference.

In the 19th century, the United States provided huge grants of public lands for a variety of activities, including canals, education (both elementary and college), homesteads, wagon roads, plank roads & Macadamized roads - and railroads.

Uncle Sam: Land Baron

At the end of the Revolutionary War, the British ceded lands to the United States, including the 260,000 square miles that became the Northwest Territory, which included the area that became the State of Wisconsin in 1848.

The US also acquired:


1803 – Louisiana Purchase 829,000 sq. miles

1818 – British Cession 46,000 sq. miles

1819 – Florida Cessions 59,000 sq. miles

1845 – Texas Annexation 390,000 sq. miles

1846 – Oregon Territory 286,000 sq. miles

1848 – Mexican Cession 525,000 sq. miles

1853 – Gadsden Purchase 30,000 sq. miles

The United States had added about 2,425,000 square miles to its territory and owned nearly all of it. Thus, by the time of the first railroad land grant in 1850, the US owned a vast amount of land.

1850 – Land grant for the Illinois Central began the railroad land grant era and set the model for future legislation.


The grant was hugely successful as detailed by the University of Nebraska at Lincoln's website Railroads and the Making of America (where you can find a rich collection of photos, land contracts, maps, animations, and analysis): 

The transformation of Illinois was nothing less than explosive in these years. The Illinois Central advertised intensely and attracted settlers from England, Canada, Vermont, Germany, and Ireland. Large numbers came from Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York, and New England. The town of West Urbana in Champaign County provided a useful example: it was a depot in 1854, then in two years it had 1,500 people and farm prices had increased 100 per cent. The county also grew between 1850 and 1860: improved acreage jumped from 23,000 to 170,000 acres, and the value of farm property skyrocketed from $478,000 to $5,178,800. Carbondale, another Illinois Central depot town, stood as a lonely, recently surveyed railroad stop in 1852, but in five years the place attracted over 1,200 residents. Cairo too increased its population in the 1850s, by a remarkable ten times.

Paul Gates suggested that 34,000 sales were made by the Illinois Central from 1854-1870 and these sales brought 100,000 new residents to the state (Paul Wallace Gates, The Illinois Central and Its Colonization Work, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1934, p. 250).

1856 – Congress approves land grants for railroad development in eight states, including Wisconsin.

1860’s – Congress approved land grants for 4 of 5 transcontinental routes.

Congress gave land grants to the states to aid the construction of rail lines for specific routes that included six square miles of land for each mile of track built (later grants increased to 10 sq. miles). Wisconsin used public land grants to build three main rail routes.

1880 US General Land Office map showing land grants for railroads, wagon roads, and canals. http://www.davidrumsey.com/

Congress also provided “indemnity lands”, which were replacement lands to compensate for any lands in the main grant that had already been sold and thus withdrawn from the public domain. “Indemnity lands” were the nearest vacant public lands outside of the main grant and not more than 15 miles from the right-of-way (later increased to 20 miles).


From Railroads and the Making of America, http://railroads.unl.edu/views/item/landsales_IL?p=5



1886 General Land Office map showing grants for railroads and wagon roads. http://www.davidrumsey.com/


  The land was provided in a checkerboard pattern of alternating township sections. Odd-numbered sections went to the railroad. Even-numbered sections were retained by the US for sale to private parties.

Map showing a Township section map. Shaded sections were granted to the railroad.

How much land? As of 1886, some 155,000,000 (155 million) acres were granted and 49,650,000 acres were patented to the various states for transfer to the railroads. In Wisconsin, some 2,874,000 acres was certified or patented – about 7% of all lands. For reference, Wisconsin covers 65,498 square miles or 41,918,720 acres.

How much trackage? As of 1886, some 17,724 miles of land-grant railroad tracks had been constructed in 26 states. In Wisconsin, land-grant railroad lines constituted about 20% of total track miles – 973.50 land-grant miles out of 4778 total miles.

How did it work? Congress specified the route and made a grant of public lands to a state. The state legislature then selected the railroad. This selection process was ripe for corruption, as we shall see.

The railroad then filed a map of definite location with the General Land Office of the Department of Interior. The route could be altered so long as the map filed encompassed the actual route as determined by the Department of the Interior. See, Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis Omaha Ry. Co. (Bayfield Branch), 6 Pub. Lands Dec. 209, 1887 WL 561 (D.O.I.)

As soon as the railroad filed its map of the route, the Department of Interior removed all of the land from the public domain, including the indemnity lands. The land grants withdrew 30-mile-wide swaths of public lands from the public domain (later 40-mile-wide. Settlers were then barred from buying lands on the odd-numbered sections located within the main grant and the indemnity lands.

This policy was a source of bitter friction between the railroads and homesteaders, especially when combined with DOI decisions allowing the railroad to alter its route. These corridors of land were removed from public sale while the railroad made its selection of indemnity lands.

How did the land grants help the railroad? As the railroad completed 20-mile sections, the state would certify the completion and the US would release the lands to the railroad. How did railroads use the land?

• Free land to build the railroad.

• Provided collateral for bonds (the railroads did not always wait until they had a patent).

• Revenue from selling most of the lands.

• Harvested timber and quarried rock for the railroad construction.

• Sold stumpage rights.

The Wisconsin Central Railroad Company (WCRC) received about 884,000 acres under the 1864 grant for a railroad running from the center of the state to Lake Superior. By 1890, the WCRC had sold 268,194 acres for $765,041 and had received $962,960 for stumpage.

Three main land-grant railroad routes were built in Wisconsin under grants of land passed by Congress in 1856 and 1864. The 1856 law provided for a northwest route and northeast route. The 1864 law provided for the central route.

The 1856 act passed by Congress described the routes :


“from Madison, or Columbus, by the way of Portage City to the St. Croix River or Lake between townships twenty-five and thirty-one and from thence to the west end of Lake Superior; and to Bayfield”;


“and also from Fond du Lac on Lake Winnebago, northerly to the State line…”.

1856 Land Grant Act, Statutes at Large, XI, 20 [Ch. 43, 11 Stat. 20 (June 3, 1856)]

Both routes were later altered by Congress. The Northwest Route was amended to require that run through both Madison and Columbus. The Northeast Route was also altered to run along Green Bay.

Map from unpublished master's thesis by Greiner, Gordon Oswald., Wisconsin national railroad land grants, Thesis (M.S.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1935.

The 1864 Land Grant Act renewed and extended the time to complete 1856 grants and authorized a third route running from the central portion of the state to Lake Superior.

“From Portage City, Berlin, Doty's Island or Fon [sic] du Lac, as said state may determine, in a northwestern direction to Bayfield, and thence to Superior, on Lake Superior.”

1864 Land Grant Act, Statutes at Large, XIII, 66. [Ch. 80, 13 Stat. 66 (May 5, 1864)]

What could possibly go wrong? To be continued.

More RTA?

I posted the following over on the Rag and then I thought, why am I giving away this good stuff?

I wanted to respond to one comment in your post and make a couple other observations: "I point out that Wood the is legal counsel for the State Office of the Commissioner of Railroads – so I would think it would make him a natural cheerleader for this project."


No, my agency is basically a quasi-judicial regulatory body. I have no rooting interest. Our primary focus is rail-highway crossing safety (highway being any type of public street, path, road, etc.). We don't run projects, like high-speed rail (HSR) or commuter rail or highway projects . Other agencies do that, like DOT, RTA, or municipalities. We get involved when those projects require changes to public rail-highway crossings.

I personally like the HSR project. It will tie us into the Chicago Hub Network of Midwest cities connected by HSR. It should not be viewed as a Madison to Milwaukee project - no, Madison is really not the center of the known Universe. I doubt I will take the train to Milwaukee very often, but would certainly take it to Chicago. On the other hand, I'm not sold on commuter rail. Will people ride a train to get from the far east side to the far west side in sufficient numbers to make it worthwhile? Maybe, maybe not. I sort of look at it like a new roadway going through the Isthmus - imagine how much that would cost even if it were feasible. But how many trips per day will this new road carry?


In any event, whether I think these passenger rail projects are a good idea or not really has nothing to do with my job of evaluating the safety impact.

The high-speed rail (HSR) project is an entirely separate project from the commuter trains. However, commuter trains would run on the same tracks as the inter-city HSR trains. So clearly, any future commuter train operation would significantly benefit from the money spent in the HSR project to upgrade the tracks, signals, stations, etc.

The RTA was, in fact, created partly to aid the County's funding application to the Federal Transit Administration for commuter rail funds. The FTA would not consider the application until there was a governing structure and a funding source. The "Falk letter" that has everyone's tights in a knot was basically in aid of that application.


BUT, the RTA is NOT only about trains.

I actually blogged this issue three years ago:

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2007/08/rta-update.html

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2007/08/more-on-rta-and-commuter-rail.html

Here is the estimated breakdown of expenditures at that time.


§ Bus service for Madison and surrounding communities – 25%

§ Town, Village, City and County road maintenance – 25%

§ Commuter rail – 33%

§ Rail/Bus Enhancements/County-wide Paratransit/Bike Transit – 16%


As it has now developed, the road maintenance part could not be funded by the sales tax under the law that created the RTA.

There's something about trains. A whiff of diesel makes a lot of people get goofy. We call them "foamers" or "FRNs". I never got that; to me it's just another way to move people.

Spotted in Superior

While in Superior recently for work I came across this sculpture of James J. Hill, whose "name became synonymous with railroad innovation and visionary business leadership in the last quarter of the nineteenth century"  according to The American Experience.

"Robber baron" or "constructive genius"?

This statue stood in front of the Superior Jr. High for many years and was recently relocated to a spot outside the BNSF offices in Superior.

Council Supports Transit Referenda

The Monona city council passed, by a 4-2 vote (Munson and Wood opposed), a resolution for the anti-train November referendum. The Mayor also indicated that he would have supported the proposal.

That referendum will read:

“Shall commuter rail from the City of Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by a half-cent (0.5%) increase in the sales tax?"

 
It was another occasion where I thought logic was on my side, but to no avail. Do we want to spend ALL of the RTA sales tax revenue on a commuter train? Who could vote 'Yes' on that question? I plan to either vote No or - more likely - just sit it out to boycott dumb questions.

Melanie Stebbins, one of the residents who supported the referendum, made the most astute observation of the evening: The driving force behind this anti-train referendum is that a lot of people just do not have any trust that they will get a fair chance to vote on any future RTA-proposed sales tax increase. She nailed it exactly. I don't share that mistrust, for the most part, of county government, but the mostly well-earned corrosive cynicism that pervades the average person's view of state and federal government has made its way down to county government.

The council also passed by a 6-0 vote the proposal I offered (co-sponsored by alder Munson) calling for the Regional Transit Authority Board to hold a regular meeting in Monona, urging the RTAto adopt a regional transit plan that includes, among other things, increased transit services for Monona residents; and urging the RTA Board and the Dane County Board to conduct a referendum on a regional transit plan, including the amount of any increase in sales tax, at a regularly scheduled election and to abide by the results of that referendum.

In non-transit matters, the council approved an ordinance making the Sustainability Committee a Standing Committee. The Council also extended Green Valley's refuse/recycling/brush contract by one year while the City Engineer prepares an RFP for the next long-term contract. The Public Works Committee will be working on that in the months ahead.

Transit Tops Monona Council Agenda - September 20, 2010

The Monona city council takes up three transit-related matters on Monday, September 20. The first two are related to the RTA. To counter the premature proposed referendum, alder Munson and I are offering a substitute resolution. Our proposal calls for a referendum to be held after a transit plan is adopted by the TA and that the plan includes improved transit services for Monona.

Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1719 Requiring a Referendum on the Levying of a Sales Tax to Fund Commuter Rail (Alderman Kugle, Alderman Wiswell, Alderman Veserat).

 

Consideration of Substitute Resolution 10-09-1725 Requiring a Referendum on the Levying of a Sales Tax to Fund the Dane County Regional Transit Authority (Alderman Wood, Alderman Munson).

The substitute :

• invites the Dane County Regional Transit Authority Board to hold a regular meeting of the Regional Transit Authority in Monona for the purpose of learning about Monona’s existing transit system and its future transit needs; and,
• urges the Dane County Regional Transit Authority Board to adopt a regional transit plan that includes, among other things, increased transit services for Monona residents; and,
• urges the Dane County Regional Transit Authority Board and the Dane County Board to conduct a referendum on a regional transit plan, including the amount of any increase in sales tax, at a regularly scheduled election and to abide by the results of that referendum.

 

The third seeks a broader view of the transit needs of Monona:

 

Consideration of Resolution 10-09-1724 Directing the Mass Transit Commission to Outline its Vision for Mass Transit in the City of Monona (Alderman Munson, Alderman Veserat).
 
Some other items of interest:
 
Proclamation Recognizing David Neperud for 30 Years of Service to the City of Monona.


Proclamation Declaring October as Energy Awareness Month.

Proclamation Declaring September 20, 2010 as “Bob Essock Day” in the City of Monona.
 
Consideration of Ordinance 8-10-616 Reconstituting the Sustainability Committee to that of a Standing Committee (Alderman Wood, Alderman Munson).

 

Consideration of Ordinance 9-10-618 Amending Title 10, Chapter 2 Regarding Bicycles (Police Chief).

 

(Proposed ordinance changes for bikes are here.) 

 

Here's the entire agenda.

Here's the entire packet.

Monona Transit Committee Rejects Referendum

The Monona Transit Commission, by a 4-0 vote, passed a recommendation to the Monona city council  against placing a proposed referendum on the November ballot. Alder Munson, members Nelson, Runk, and Stolper voted in favor of the motion. Chair Veserat did not vote (chair only votes in case of a tie).

Here is the proposed question:

“Shall commuter rail from the City of Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by a half-cent (0.5%) increase in the sales tax?"

The Committee had RTA Chair Dick Wagner in attendance. He informed the committee that the RTA is still working on a transit plan. The committee also heard from alders Kugle, Busse, Wiswell, and me. (Alder Busse is undecided and didn't tip his hand tonight.) County Supervisor Schmidt was also in attendance and spoke briefly.

Several Monona residents spoke in against the referendum. Three non-Monona speakers, Bill Howard, Bill Richardson, and Bob Schaefer, spoke in favor the referendum.

The item will be back before the council on September 20.

I get it. The conservative crowd thinks their anti-train tack is good politics. That's why they want it on as many ballots as possible in November. 

But, to my mind, it's bad public policy to ask voters to vote on something that has not been proposed and will not be proposed. The RTA will not propose a transit system that only includes a commuter train.

And the question is worded to maximize the 'no' vote. State law allows the RTA to raise the sales tax by up to 0.5%. So the question really asks "do you want to allocate all of the money only to commuter rail?"

Someone casting a no vote could:

* Support a sales tax increase between 0.1% and 0.5%; AND

* Support spending most of the sales tax increase on commuter rail, but not all of it; OR

* Support spending a little of it on commuter rail, but most of it on increased bus service; OR

* Support spending all of the money on buses and none on commuter trains; OR

* Oppose any sales tax increase period.

Who is left to vote yes? Only voters who want to raise the sales tax the maximum legal amount and spend 100% of it on commuter rains and none on bus service or any other transit option.

If, as its supporters claim, they just want to let voters express their voice about commuter rail, a better question would have been, "Shall commuter rail from the City of Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by any increase in the sales tax?"

But really, why not wait until a plan is proposed by the RTA and then we can all vote on a question that will actually man something?

Monona Transit Committee Meets September 8

The Monona Transit Committee meets next Wednesday, September 8 at 6 PM at City Hall

 
Here's the agenda.

Representatives from the RTA are expected to be on hand to talk and listen.

Date: Wed - 09/08/2010


Time: 6:00 PM


Location: Monona City Hall, 5211 Schluter Rd., Large Conference Room

Three Card Sunny

In this week's Herald Independent, our very own Sunny goes on about the RTA again. (Note that in these environs, Ms. S. is a big enough cheese to go by one name, like one of the those Brazilian futbal players.) I swear the anti-train people are as obsessed with trains as any foamer I ever met. To me, trains are just another way to move products and people.

Her column yesterday, left a number of questions in my mind. It reminded me of a game of three card monty wherein the goal of the purveyor is to distract (and then fleece) the sap who stops to watch.

Unless you take her suppositions, inferences, and arguments on faith (not advised), I guess her dear readers have to chase down each loose strand. Lucky for you, I'm taking a furlough today. [BEGIN ADDENDUM] I am adding this note to emphasize that Sunny is correct (pass the smelling salts for Sunny, please) on one point: If the RTA takes Metro's operations they will have to honor Metro's labor contracts per the state law (quoted below) that created the possibility of the RTA.   

Sunny doesn't like Madison Metro's overtime costs. She claims that Paul Soglin explained to her how the drivers cooperate with each other to get more overtime by manipulating the sick leave system. She claims the RTA will be stuck with Metro's labor contract if RTA takes over bus service within the region. She claims, as does alder Veserat, that the FLSA (Fair Labor Standards Act) is a federal law that prevents employers from negating labor contracts (collective bargaining agreements) even if they make a dramatic change in their "business plan".

[Actually, I've only ever heard Mike ask, "But what about the FLSA!". The first time I heard this exclamation, I thought maybe he meant the FMLN, which was rather concerning if it meant that Salvadoran rebels had seized control of Madison Metro. He says it sort of like it's a rhetorical question and the listener should know what he means. Some discomfort follows.]

But, the FLSA is a federal wage and hour law that sets the minimum wage, requires overtime pay for some workers, and the like. It doesn't have anything to do with collective bargaining agreements. That would be the NLRA (National Labor Relations Act). My recollection is that employers actually can void labor contracts in some circumstances, not that I advocate such a course.

But, now I'm still thinking maybe Mike really means the FMLA (Family And Medical Leave Act). Here's Wisconsin's version.

STATE LAW: When I inquired this morning, Sunny sent me the section from the statute that created the RTA. It explicitly states that the RTA "shall assume all of the employer's obligations under any contract between the employees and management of the system to the extent allowed by law". Sec. 66.1039 (6) (a).

Sheesh, if she'd said that in The View, I could have read a book or something....

But, but, but....this report to the Madison City Council provides some interesting data. Madison Metro has successfully reduced overtime per driver by about 50% since 1998. And at mid-year, total OT hours had dropped 20% from 2009 to 2010. Metro and Mayor Cieslewicz recognize the problems and are attempting to resolve them. Also, the collective bargaining agreement expired January 1, 2010 and negotiations for a new one are ongoing.

So, we finally arrive at the proposed referendum before the Monona council. The proposed referendum does not ask whether the voters think commuter rail is a good idea, as former alder Dale Suslick's letter to the editor states.

Put in those terms, the proposed referendum really asks whether commuter rail is the only idea. The RTA can raise the sales tax by a maximum of a half-cent. The referendum asks if we want to spend all of it on a commuter train.

Here's the actual proposed question:

“Shall commuter rail from the City of Middleton to the Town of Burke be funded by a half-cent (0.5%) increase in the sales tax?"

If you wanted to know whether voters want commuter rail, you could just ask them that exact question:
Do you want commuter rail?
Or you could ask, Should the RTA spend any money on commuter rail?
Or, Should the RTA spend part of the sales tax on trains and part on buses?
Or, Should the RTA spend part of the sales tax on trains and part on buses and part on park and ride lots and part on bike paths?

Of course, it is hard to decide what the right question is, let alone the right answer, before the RTA produces its transit plan.


So, another real question is why do the political leaders who are pushing this referendum want to have a referendum before it is ready for decision?

If we had such a half-baked question brought before the council on any run-of-the-mill, non-political item, it would be tossed back to committee for further development.

***

 

Final question: Sunny's a big cheese, but what kind of cheese?

Monona City Council Preview - August 30, 2010

The Monona City Council meets tomorrow (Monday, August 30) at 7:30 PM in the Media Room at the Library. The full agenda.

We will be getting three reports to start the information portion of the evening. Chris James of Dane County Parks Department will speak about the Capital Springs State Recreation Area (this includes the status the proposed bike trail connecting Lake Farm County Park with the Village of McFarland and associated railroad trestle widening).

Also on tap:

• Dane County Supervisor Robin Schmidt (RTA, Radio Interoperability, and Other County Issues)
• City Engineer Rich Vela and BT Squared Civil & Environmental Engineering: Belle Isle Planning/Engineering Update.

Also Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1718 Requiring a Referendum on the Levying of a Sales Tax to Fund Commuter Rail (Aldermen Kugle, Wiswell, Veserat). This referendum would ask us Monona voters if we want to use the entire half-cent sales tax increase for commuter rail. What a question! Heck, I don't think anyone would support using all of the sales tax increase just from commuter rail. I sure wouldn't (I might not support using any of it for that purpose).

As I've said before, this referendum is premature and a distraction. We ought to be focused on telling the RTA Board what Monona wants out of a planned regional transit system (like other communitiess are doing).

The Monona Transit meeting did not reach a conclusion and has scheduled another meeting for September 8 when RTA Board members and staff will attend.

I expect the council vote will be delayed until after that meeting (We can approve the referendum at our September 20 meeting and be in time for the November ballot).

See my prior posts on this topic.
http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2010/08/monona-transit-meeting-on-august-25.html

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2010/08/rtas-draft-principles-for-regional.html

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2010/08/lets-play-hypothetical-referendum.html

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2010/08/dane-county-rta-status.html

http://mononadoug.blogspot.com/2010/08/monona-city-council-preview-august-16.html


The council is also asked to approve at a first reading: Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1722 Approval of CDA Recommendations for “Renew Monona” Program Loans (CDA).


and Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1723 Award of Contract for Demolition at 608 Clear Spring Court (City Administrator). CORRECTION. This building is being razed because it is "dangerous, unsafe, unsanitary, and otherwise unfit for human habitation".  This is one of the properties the CDA acquired in the past year.

The council will have a first reading on changing the status of the Sustainability Committee [Consideration of Ordinance 8-10-616 Reconstituting the Sustainability Committee to that of a Standing Committee (Alderman Wood, Alderman Munson)].

Finally, the Mayor has knocked it out of the park with his nomination of James Pflasterer to the Monona Police and Fire Commission. He is the former General Counsel for the state's Labor and Industry Review Commission.

Monona Transit Meeting on August 25

The Monona Transit Committee is meeting this week.

Date: Wed - 08/25/2010



Time: 6:00 PM


Location: Monona City Hall, Small Conference Room, 5211 Schluter Rd.
 
I cannot attend the Transit meeting because I have the Sustainability Committee meeting at the same time. These are comments I have submitted for the Committee's consideration.

The proposed referendum is premature. The RTA Board has not proposed ANY transit plan yet. Once they decide upon a plan there will be a system-wide referendum on whether to raise the sales tax to pay for the plan that is actually proposed. We should wait until then to have a referendum.


The referendum is being pushed by the Dane County Towns Association. I have no quarrel with the Towns association; they are representing their communities’ interest as they see it. The interests of Monona are different from the towns on this issue. We are a suburb that is an immediate neighbor of Madison and within easy reach of bus service.

We should concentrate on telling the RTA what we WANT rather than what we what we don’t want. RTA has been going around the county meeting with communities to get input FROM the community as to their transit needs. In fact, they are meeting tonight (August 25) with Shorewood Hills for that very purpose. Monona has potentially more to gain from the RTA than any other community.

Our bus service is inadequate and prevents us from fully exploiting the advantage we have from our strategic location next to Madison. We are unlikely to be able to expand the service under the current levy constraints. The RTA gives us a realistic opportunity to expand transit services to and from Monona.

Other communities will benefit by having their bus transit costs removed the property tax levy. Our per capita expenditure for transit is relatively low compared to other communities. If we do not demand and obtain increased transit services, then Monona will get a smaller benefit than nearly any city.

I would tell the RTA that Monona wants more comprehensive bus service. Any RTA plan that does not include such expanded bus service for Monona is a non-starter. There may be other things that the city should ask for, but additional bus service for Monona is an absolute minimum.

The referendum only serves to distract us from the real task at hand: helping the RTA Board to shape a plan that will benefit Monona.


RTA Board Chairman Dick Wagner drafted the following 10 points as a starting point for creating a regional transit plan. A final version will eventually include detailed financial information.


1. Expand Transit to a truly regional service using existing providers and selected new providers where needed.

2. Provide financially secure base for existing transit service and remove present transit costs from property tax being paid by citizens of Madison, Middleton, Fitchburg, Shorewood Hills, Town of Madison, Monona, Sun Prairie, Stoughton and Dane County (within RTA for elderly and specialized services).

3. Elements of regional service in the future will include express bus service from many parts of the region for prime commute times and may include Sun Prairie, Fitchburg, Stoughton, Middleton, Verona, Cottage Grove, Waunakee and McFarland.



4. Elements of regional service will include park and ride lots to access express routes and park and ride lots to access other mid-region locations for transit to reduce core congestion trips yet riders can chain errands with their overall trip.



5. Elements of regional service will include improved elderly and specialized transit for the RTA area.



6. Elements of regional service may include new types of service to be determined by the RTA like Bus Rapid Transit and Commuter Rail as analysis of their feasibility continues.



7. Elements of regional service will include a comprehensive fare system permitting differential rates and easy transfers across providers.



8. Elements of regional service will include commitment to green technologies with expansion of bus service by hybrid vehicles and other green options as they are developed.



9. Elements of regional service may include as communities express interest in better intra-service connectivity like shared taxi service used by some communities (at present Stoughton and Sun Prairie) or local circulators combined with express service.



10. Elements of regional service will include participation in a multi-mode transit hub for the region to be developed to accommodate regular mainline bus connections, express bus connections, and possibly BRT buses and commuter rail with inter city bus and rail service.

RTA's Draft principles for regional transit plan

Found on madison.com

Draft principles for regional transit plan


RTA Board Chairman Dick Wagner drafted the following 10 points as a starting point for creating a regional transit plan. A final version will eventually include detailed financial information.

1. Expand Transit to a truly regional service using existing providers and selected new providers where needed.

2. Provide financially secure base for existing transit service and remove present transit costs from property tax being paid by citizens of Madison, Middleton, Fitchburg, Shorewood Hills, Town of Madison, Monona, Sun Prairie, Stoughton and Dane County (within RTA for elderly and specialized services).

3. Elements of regional service in the future will include express bus service from many parts of the region for prime commute times and may include Sun Prairie, Fitchburg, Stoughton, Middleton, Verona, Cottage Grove, Waunakee and McFarland.

4. Elements of regional service will include park and ride lots to access express routes and park and ride lots to access other mid-region locations for transit to reduce core congestion trips yet riders can chain errands with their overall trip.

5. Elements of regional service will include improved elderly and specialized transit for the RTA area.

6. Elements of regional service may include new types of service to be determined by the RTA like Bus Rapid Transit and Commuter Rail as analysis of their feasibility continues.

7. Elements of regional service will include a comprehensive fare system permitting differential rates and easy transfers across providers.

8. Elements of regional service will include commitment to green technologies with expansion of bus service by hybrid vehicles and other green options as they are developed.

9. Elements of regional service may include as communities express interest in better intra-service connectivity like shared taxi service used by some communities (at present Stoughton and Sun Prairie) or local circulators combined with express service.

10. Elements of regional service will include participation in a multi-mode transit hub for the region to be developed to accommodate regular mainline bus connections, express bus connections, and possibly BRT buses and commuter rail with inter city bus and rail service.

Let's Play Hypothetical Referendum Proposals

The Monona city council has been favored with a proposal to hold a referendum on a hypothetical commuter train proposal guaranteed to reveal meaningless results*. And it only costs about $900 so, heck, let's ask a bunch of questions!

What other hypothetical questions should we ask the voters?

For starters, how about:

"Should we have hypothetical advisory referendums?"

* Why meaningless? Because the RTA Board is not going to propose spending the entire allowable half-cent sales tax increase on a commuter-train-only service as the question assumes. If the RTA Board proposes commuter trains at all, it will be as part of a package in one form or another.

Dane County RTA Status

In light of the proposed advisory referendum on the Monona city council agenda, I did some poking around to find out what is going on with the RTA.  This task turned out to be a lot harder than I had imagined because there is very little information available, partly because not much has happened.

The Monona City council referred the matter to the Transit Committee with a vote by the council expected on September 20.

The RTA Board does not have any staff or its own website. The meetings are posted on the Dane County website. Let me repeat that: The RTA Board has NO staff. How does one go about starting a new regional transit agency with no staff? Of course, the state budget provided no funding and no one else has stepped up with any funding. Does this strike anyone else as nuts?

In terms of the RTA’s transit plan, the RTA Board has created a committee to put that together, but the committee is still in the information gathering stage and developing the principles/criteria to use in putting it together.

The Madison Area Transportation Planning Board (MPO) has created a staff advisory committee for a 5-year transit plan that the MPO prepares in close cooperation with Metro Transit staff. The scope of that effort was expanded to include development of transit service improvement scenarios for consideration by the RTA in developing the plan the RTA will take to the voters before the referendum is held. The focus of that effort thus far has been on bus service improvements.

It is also very possible that the rail plan, assuming it is part of the mix, will change given the implementation of intercity rail in the corridor.

Perhaps we should conduct other advisory referendums on matters over which the city has no control and which address hypothetical plans that don't exist. (Before anyone brings it up, yes, I supported the Iraq war refenedum back in in 2004 (?), but the supporters for that referendum had some 700 signatures). Would any of the three Monona alder sponsors support referenda on other hypothetical questions?

Or perhaps there are political motivations at work, such as in using these referenda to energize the Republican base and drive up voter turnout in November, which may be good political stratgey, but it's not a reason to hold a referendum. The RTA Board will hold a referendum in good time

Monona Council Approves Meriter TIF & Other Stuff

As previewed here, the Monona city council approved a Development Agreement with Meriter Hospital, Inc. (CDA), (scaled back) Design Plans for South Monona Drive Entryway Feature, and a Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of $9,910,000 Taxable General Obligation Promissory Notes (which reduced the interest rate from about 5.5% to 2.6%).


The Council also referred to the Transit Committee the proposed Resolution 10-08-1718 Requiring a Referendum on the Levying of a Sales Tax to Fund Commuter Rail (Aldermen Kugle, Wiswell, Veserat). The committee is supposed to get the RTA representation to attend their meeting and provide information. The matter will be brought back for a vote by the council on September 20.

Monona City Council Preview - August 16, 2010

Here are some excerpts from the Monona City Council agenda for this coming Monday, August 16 at 7:30 PM at the Library Media Room. In addition to Meriter development agreement and the entryway feature, three alders have proposed a referendum on the RTA. Well, actually, it's a referendum on on a non-existent RTA plan that would only include trains.

Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1718 Approving a Development Agreement with Meriter Hospital, Inc. (CDA).


Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1716 Approval of Design Plans for South Monona Drive Entryway Feature and Authorization to Proceed (Plan Commission).
http://www.mymonona.com/pages/calendar/export_file.php?t=1328

http://www.mymonona.com/pages/calendar/export_file.php?t=1329


Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1720 A Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of $9,910,000 Taxable General Obligation Promissory Notes

Consideration of Resolution 10-08-1718 Requiring a Referendum on the Levying of a Sales Tax to Fund Commuter Rail (Aldermen Kugle, Wiswell, Veserat). It is interesting to note that this matter has not been to Monona Transit Committee for its review and input. Aside from the fact that the RTA Board has not proposed a plan yet.

Cottage Grove Road Closed

According to my information, Cottage Grove Road will be closed to all traffic for most of this week at the railroad tracks located immediately west of Stoughton Road. The railroad plans to completely rebuild the crossing, which requires closure of the roadway. This work typically takes at least five days, but my understanding is the railroad plans to try and complete the project by Wednesday (July 14). (Don't know if the project started this morning or not.)

High-speed Passenger Details

Here's more information on high-speed passenger rail service from Madison to Milwaukee (and Beyond!). I emphasize the 'beyond' because this service will not just be about taking the train from Madison to Milwaukee, but probably more importantly connecting to passenger service to major Midwestern cities like Chicago (good-bye Northwest Tollway! - err, Jane Addams Memorial Tollway).

Another point to note: The Wisconsin effort is part of a long-standing larger Midwestern effort called the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative (MWRRI).

The following is an excerpt from the overview section of Wisconsin Department of Transportation's application for funding to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The overview is at:


[Begin excerpt]:Main features and characteristics of the Corridor Service

Wisconsin's corridor service plan (together with Illinois and Minnesota) is to implement 110 mph passenger rail service between Chicago-Milwaukee-Minneapolis/St. Paul and Chicago-Milwaukee-Green Bay. The implementation of this corridor service is planned in phases, which are consistent with the Midwest Regional Rail System (MWRRS) phases:

Phase 1 of corridor service plan: Milwaukee-Madison (Extension of Chicago-Milwaukee)
-Initially 7 round-trips between Chicago and Milwaukee with 6 continuing on to Madison in 2013 (Final design and construction applied for October 2, 2009 HISPR Track 2, project 5 on table).
-Increase to 10 round-trips between Chicago and Milwaukee with 6 continuing on to Madison upon completion of improvements between Chicago and Milwaukee. This includes three track 1a improvements (see project table).

The other improvements will be applied for in 2010 following completion of the Service Level NEPA. Phase 2 of corridor service plan: Milwaukee-Minneapolis/St. Paul
-10 round-trips between Chicago and Madison, with 6 round-trips extending to Minneapolis/St. Paul (via Madison route alignment depends on results of Service Level NEPA study. Funding for Service Level NEPA applied for August, 2009 HISPR Track 3 by Minnesota)

 Phase 3 of corridor service plan: Chicago-Milwaukee-Green Bay-Increase to 17 round-trips between Chicago and Milwaukee with 7 continuing on to Green Bay-Increase speed between Chicago and Milwaukee to 110 mph

Existing passenger service operating over the area of the corridor service plan as defined above includes Amtrak Hiawatha Service with 7 round-trips per day between Chicago and Milwaukee, and Amtrak Empire Builder with one round-trip per day between Chicago and Minneapolis/St. Paul. Madison and Green Bay currently have no rail service.
…

Implementation of the corridor service plan could potentially serve most of the Wisconsin's most populous and fastest-growing regions. Approximately 76% of Wisconsin's total population lives within 30 miles of proposed Midwest Regional Rail System stations.

Based on MWRRS, Wisconsin service characteristics include:
Travel Time:
- Chicago to Milwaukee: Existing = 1:29 / 2020 = 1:05
- Milwaukee to Madison: Existing = N/A / 2013: 1:14 (1:09-Express)
- Chicago to Minneapolis/St. Paul: Existing = 8:37 / 2020 = 5:37
- Chicago to Green Bay: Existing = N/A / 2020 = 2:58

The participating states of this corridor service plan, which include Wisconsin, Illinois, and Minnesota, have a long history of coordination and cooperation, which will continue with the implementation and operation of the corridor service.
The Midwest Regional Rail System (MWRRS) has been under development since 1995, when the states of Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Minnesota, Iowa, Nebraska and Missouri in partnership with the FRA and Amtrak, began to evaluate the potential for high speed rail in the Midwest."


[End of excerpt]

***

If this post doesn't do it for you, then you can find enough info for even the frothiest foamer at:

http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/projects/recovery/railroad.htm