Candidate Conversation

We were very pleased to dedicate most of our monthly all-hands meeting on March 10th to discussions with both candidates for Milwaukee Common Council. The special election that will decide the next representative for Milwaukee’s 3rd aldermanic district is April 1st. Thanks to some diligent note-taking from our friends Kate and Caleb, here’s a synopsis of their remarks and answers to questions we posed.

Alex Brower

General comments:  
Advocate for public schools; MTEA-endorsed. Has organized his campaign around housing for people over profit and standing up to landlords, particularly absentee. Referred to the Vienna (Austria) housing model as an example.  Believes housing authority should allocate seats to tenants.  On housing initiatives, supports GrowMKE in the macro sense - supports all the pieces - affordability, density,  proximity to public transit.  Also supports getting rid of single family zoning.  Believes we need to honor the concerns of (for example) the Midtown Neighborhood Association regarding GrowMKE, but that doesn’t mean we halt the process - just slow it down to get feedback in.

Spoke at length about "Power to the People Campaign" in which we replace WE energies with a  co-op - Chapter 197 law allows purchase of the infrastructure from WE ability to operate it as a municipal service with the expectation that lack of shareholder pressure will hold the line on the frequent rate increases. Could even be a regional effort vs. just a city initiative. 

Wants to see participatory budgeting, in which a portion of the city’s budget would be up for direct voting.  

Expand the common council; believes per-capita representation is too low.  Referenced the town hall democracy system common in New England. Noted that some of the red states have better representation at the state level than the city of Milwaukee. Committed to monthly having town halls.

Q: Can you speak more to the physical how with addressing public power/utility takeover?

A: Specifically for the infrastructure is within the city limits. Part of the acquisition costs would be needed for severing connections. Utilizing state statutes. The Federal government is selling power at-cost to municipalities on the energy markets. We could have so many cost savings.

Q: Florida Power & Light had a problem with the economies of scale re: responding to disasters, specifically outages with hurricanes.

A: Overall, customers in municipal utilities have half as much downtime as investor-owned utilities. This can be large enough to keep economies of scale, especially including neighboring municipalities.

Q: Regarding government structure and participation. Are there places doing it well that you would like to emulate/model?

A: More town hall-style democracies like we see in New England. Some red states have better representation than Milwaukee (e.g. Wyoming has more per-capita representation than our city). Committed to having monthly town halls and talk about what is happening at city hall.

Q: Would you be open to using language that doesn’t sound as radical, potentially utilizing research from the Sightline Institute.

A: Always interested in bringing people in and including them, growing a grassroots movement. Intent of the rhetoric is to unite the 99% of Americans and demand that we have power and a seat at the table.

Q: Regarding housing initiatives: what are your thoughts on Growing MKE plan?

A: Macro-sense, we support every single piece of it. It is controversial. The roll-out has been very poor. Midtown Neighborhood comments should be heeded (slow down). Honor the concerns that every neighborhood organization has but do not halt the process.

Daniel Bauman

General comments:

Is in Urban Planning Masters program at UWM. Got involved in city government when former Mayor Barrett was nominated for ambassadorship. Interested in urban development. Lived in Brooklyn for 15 years during COVID and then moved home. Understands the value of commercial corridors and walkability.

Has worked in the mayor’s office on Vision Zero and Complete Streets.

Worked closely with Alderman Brostoff. Shared his idea and passion for the district and building up density. Working now with the Center for equity and justice practice - building a national center to undo segregation through city planning.

Acknowledges Growing MKE is a hot topic. Question is how do we get people to where they need to be to accepting a more modern built environment?

Student housing - people are concerned about student housing in the UWM area, but those people are dealing with nuisance properties.

Affordable housing and workforce housing: would like to see the city get more specific about what that means. It would be nice to get funding for nonprofit housing, cooperative housing. We have to look at development and make sure we’re not just creating market rate only. We have to try to check all the boxes. Where can we do those different things. Affordable housing. Notes that out of state corporate housing ownership is really creating a problem. If there are legal options to push against that, we should.

Permitting reform is a huge problem that needs attention

Q: If elected, how would you work with districts that are opposed to Growing Milwaukee for other reasons?

A: I’ve been talking with other alders about it. Chambers is supportive of Growing MKE. Zamarripa is also a co-sponsor. Most of the push back is coming from a particular district. What would you have done differently? It’s hard when people don’t feel like they were brought to the table.

Q: What works well pertaining to Growing MKE?

Pushing the window. We’ve done what we can to keep your house safe, can we look differently at infill development and stop opposing new development in the district? Can we work collaboratively to build the district?

Student housing is a major concern. Not typical concerns of “renters” but people already dealing with “nuisance properties”

Q: Where would you maintain single-family zoning?

A: It’s important in locations on the east side to maintain the character of the existing neighborhoods. Need to start shifting people to understanding there needs to be a change in how these homes are used. We’re not there yet to eliminate it but need people to understand it is an incremental approach. If our city is seeing a lot of growth we need to have this conversation. The case is not made in terms of population growth and pressure to go after these valuable homes. It’s hard to convince people that what they’re afraid of is not going to happen. Someone in office needs to build trust to have that conversation. Don’t want east side residents’ needs to limit the ability for other neighborhoods to accept change.

Q: Would you support 3-4 units on single-familly lots?

A: Yes. Something is going to be altered with single-family language and all in-favor of the reforms.

Q: What are you excited about?

A: You have to take the wins. I’d be excited to do something with Riverwest - more development without destroying the fabric of the neighborhood. And sometimes you help people….and that can help carry you through the parts of the day where you have to make a call where 50% of the constituents won’t approve.

Collaboration PDX