PRINT ADS

Voters will send at least five new people to the La Crosse County Board when they go to the polls April 1, replacing incumbents who opted to step down, including George Hammes, who represents the 27th District.

Fourteen of 35 seats are contested this year, the most since 2002, when 15 contested races resulted in 11 new supervisors and a new chairman.

But six years into the Steve Doyle-era of county board leadership, it doesn’t appear the board is headed for a change in direction, even if all those who don’t like Doyle’s course are elected. Doyle himself is unopposed, giving him plenty of time to help other like-minded candidates.

In the Onalaska and Holmen area, there are two contested races. In the 27th District, Mark Huesmann and Marilyn Pedretti are on the ballot to replace Hammes. And in the 26th District, incumbent Vicki Burke faces a challenge from James Kinsman. They both have unsuccessfully challenged state Rep. Mike Huebsch, R-West Salem.

Questionnaires were sent to all 49 candidates, asking about their backgrounds and thoughts on 10 issues facing the county board. Thirty-one of the 49 returned the questionnaires.

Other area county board members on the ballot include Jim Berns (23rd), Brad Pfaff (29th), Charles Spiker (30th), Ann H. Fisher (31st), Patrick Schippers (32nd), Tom Rauk (34th) and Joe Bilskemper (35th).

Only Pfaff and Bilskemper returned surveys among the area’s unopposed candidates.

Here are the responses to the questionnaire from Vicki Burke, James Kinsman, Mark Huesmann and Marilyn Pedretti.

Why do you want to serve on the county board?

BURKE: As chair of Judiciary and Law and the Law Enforcement Construction Committee, I want to make sure the Law Enforcement Center is built to meet our criminal justice needs for at least the next 30 to 50 years. As a teacher, I helped young people realize their goals and dreams. Now I want to serve the people of La Crosse County by making this a safe, secure place to raise a family and an economically thriving community.

KINSMAN: I don't feel that Ms. Burke has fairly represented all the residents in the district. I feel that as a representative of county government that it is important to hear all voices on all matters before the county. Ms. Burke has proven time and time again that she bases her decisions on narrowly defined ideological principles. That's fine in partisan positions, but our county government is supposed to be free from the foul stench that has crippled Washington, D.C., and Madison. We are supposed to work with our neighbors to find compromises that take into account the rights of all people. And, finally, I feel that government should operate in the light of public scrutiny. Whether it's sweetheart contracts for our county administrator or the fluctuating cost of the new(est) law enforcement center, the public has a right to know the whole truth. Ms. Burke has been comfortable in her position these last 8 years, and now it's time to show her that she is not the "goddess" some claim she is.

HUESMANN: As a two-term member of the Holmen School Board, I have come to appreciate the need for effective, local government. As a small-business owner for the past 12 years, I have gained valuable and practical experience that will assist in terms of my role with the La Crosse County Board. I have been pragmatic and collaborative in my business, elective and civic endeavors, and I want to bring that approach to helping out the taxpayers of La Crosse County, as a whole.

PEDRETTI: I have always had an interest in politics and look at this as an opportunity to make a difference on a local level. Born and raised in Holmen, I have had great experiences living in various parts of the country but feel blessed to be back home. Because I care deeply about this community and believe in civic duty, I would work hard to provide the best possible services while holding down costs.

What are the two most pressing issues facing La Crosse County, and what do you think La Crosse County government should do about them?

BURKE: As traditional revenue sources continue to decrease, La Crosse County will need to look at creative and innovative ways to increase revenue. Collaboration with others will need to increase as the region works to grow economically.

A declining work force and increasingly aging population will also impact our county.

KINSMAN: The first issue that we must address is stopping the out-of-control spending on this county board. The second issue is ensuring that the different comprehensive plans are fair to all our neighbors. What I fear is that these plans become overly restrictive to land owners in the pursuit to preserve green space. There must be a balance in preserving both our environment and the rights of land owners. When elected that is what I will work towards.

HUESMANN: 1. As a current member of the Holmen Board of Education, I am keenly aware of the need to bring more industry to the area in an effort to reducing mounting property taxes on residential home owners. Unless we mount a concerted effort, now, in terms of bringing more industry to the area, particularly Holmen, residential taxes will continue to increase.

2. Government needs to work smarter and more efficiently. As growth continues, there will be a greater melding of the communities of La Crosse, Holmen, West Salem and Onalaska. The time has come for us to take a more collaborative approach to governing and determining how costs and services can be shared amongst the county and the various municipalities. I want to look at reducing duplicative costs and encourage this type of collaborative approach.

PEDRETTI: (1) Unfunded mandates: Working at the local level, I’ve seen the municipalities continually hit with mandates from the state/federal government. From what I’ve observed, the county sees the same pressure to produce results with no funding to back the new regulations.

(2) Sustainability: Having built my home off-grid using many sustainable practices, I can see many opportunities for the county to take the lead in the “green” movement (and save money in the process).

Do you support or oppose reducing the size of the county board by half?

BURKE: Support. Serious consideration must be given to reducing the board size.

KINSMAN: I support reducing the size to a level that ensures a person’s access to county government. I'm not sure that reducing the county board by half is the answer, but I will seek the opinion of my constituents once elected.

HUESMANN: Oppose.With certain exceptions, the county board operates effectively and efficiently. I have seen nothing demonstrative of the need to reduce the size of the board.

PEDRETTI: Oppose. Diversity is a good thing. While I think there could be some reduction, cutting the board in half seems to take away from diverse opinions, and I’m not sure it would save that much money. The more people, the more opinions, the more an issue would be “fleshed out” for all the pros and cons.

With the switch to a county administrator four years ago, how satisfied are you with the county board’s new role as a board of directors that makes policy decisions rather than operational decisions?

BURKE: Very satisfied. I feel that monthly reports from individual departments and the amount of time spent on budget preparation have made me much more knowledgeable about the workings of the county. I like the idea that we set the agenda and work on the long-term stability of the county rather than the day-to-day activities.

KINSMAN: Very unsatisfied. The feeling one gets when seeing this county board in operation is one of ineptitude. I feel the current supervisor for District 26 has abdicated her role in ensuring accountability in county government. I refer to the next question and answer.

HUESMANN: No opinion. Frankly, this is an issue that I would have to be on the board to truly assess. I think a board needs to be careful not to delegate too much of its leadership and decision-making roles to paid staff. The county administrator and board should, of necessity, work closely together but also be cognizant of each other’s position and limitations.

PEDRETTI: Satisfied. From what I’ve seen in other communities, this county runs a pretty efficient system. It seems to me that the board is elected to make decisions that affect the residents in the county, not make decisions about day-to-day activities or basic management of departments.

How satisfied are you with the county administrator’s new four-year contract?

BURKE: Satisfied. La Crosse County deserves the best administrator in the Midwest. That’s what we have with our current administrator. He is innovative, creative, a consensus builder and extremely knowledgeable. Department heads as well as rank and file workers are happy with him. He inspires and leads, getting the best out of all employees. One initiative at Hillview Care Center will save $700,000 a year for taxpayers. Our need for continuity in administration through these difficult economic times and his desire to remain in La Crosse County are a perfect match.

KINSMAN: Very unsatisfied.

1. Nearly $1 million dollars in compensation and benefits over the next four years.

2. Allowing him to set his own work schedule, with the permission of his good friend and county chair Steve Doyle.

3. Allowing him to use county and taxpayer resources to bring in a secondary means of income.

4. Allowing to work at his secondary means of income while on the taxpayers’ time.

5. Paying for his PhD when he decides to get it.

HUESMANN: Unsatisfied. Like many others, I was a bit shocked at the salary that was contained in the contract. Western Wisconsin has some of the lowest wages in the entire state. The salary being paid to the county administrator puts him in one of the top echelons of salaries earned in the county. That being said, I am also aware that this is the type of position that may command a hefty salary by virtue of the market demands. While I have no specific complaints about the county administrator’s performance, I would like to take a closer look at the salary issue.

PEDRETTI: Satisfied. While I’m still learning all the details of the county workings, I’ve heard nothing but good remarks concerning the administrator and his work.

How satisfied are you with the proposed “smart growth” comprehensive plan scheduled for county board approval in coming months?

BURKE: Satisfied. Working on the Comprehensive Steering Committee for 30 months has been a learning experience. The numerous public meetings gave great public input to this plan. It is a compromise. No one is completely happy, but it assures that we will have planned development rather than haphazard development.

KINSMAN: Very unsatisfied. The plan is well meaning, but it is not conducive to allowing the towns the ability to make amendments to their plans. It allows for too much political gamesmanship on the part of the county board when considering amendments to a town plan. Finally, the comprehensive plan restricts the power of the towns to decide what is best for them.

HUESMANN: No opinion. The concept behind “smart growth” is wise. Considering the extensive growth that La Crosse county, particularly Holmen and West Salem, have experienced, it is good to have a comprehensive plan to assure that this growth is moderated by guiding principles. This concept comes out of Madison, though, and I am concerned about the costs in terms of complying with it.

PEDRETTI: Satisfied. It’s obvious that a lot of work went into this document—tons of meetings, citizen input, committee effort and good consulting work over the past 30 months. I think the plan is a great first step for long-term planning for land use, taxes, services, etc.

Do you support or oppose having the county board hold a referendum before borrowing money for buildings or other capital projects?

BURKE: Oppose. It is our responsibility to educate the public on issues. Ultimately, however, we have been elected to make the difficult decisions. If those decisions are made with public input and in a thoughtful and deliberate manner we should not need to go to referendum.

KINSMAN: Oppose. One of the jobs of county supervisor is to be an advocate for the taxpayer. In order to perform well in those duties, a county supervisor must have an open means of communication with our community. When elected, the first priority I have is to establish the means necessary to ensure the residents of the 26th district have multiple avenues of communication with their supervisor. It will be through this means of communication that I will have the ability to listen to the will of my neighbors.

HUESMANN: Oppose. I presume that when the electorate sends someone to the board, they are doing so with a degree of trust that he or she will make wise decisions. Local government is an interesting mix of direct and representative democracy. However, the board has to have a certain degree of latitude in terms of spending money. Referendums are important, but should be used, sparingly. They should be held on a limited number of issues, only, lest the importance of the referendum, as a concept, gets watered down.

PEDRETTI: No opinion. I would have to do more research on this subject.

Do you support or oppose La Crosse County being the main developer of its vacant Lakeview Farm property in West Salem?

BURKE: Support. In the past few years La Crosse County has hired a planner and economic development specialist. These individuals, along with our La Crosse County Economic Development Fund and other local economic development groups, have worked to improve the tax base. As we look forward to a master plan for this area we will balance our economic development and residential needs.

KINSMAN: Strongly oppose. This county board has done everything in its power to strip these very rights from private landowners; it just shows the type of hypocrites we are dealing with on the county board. If we are to do anything with that land why not build the "county campus" on the land in West Salem and sell the property in downtown LaCrosse. This would free up commercial space in the downtown La Crosse area, while allowing the county sufficient space to build. In addition, building the "county campus" in West Salem could be cheaper as well.

HUESMANN: Strongly oppose. I don’t believe government should have involvement in what is a private venture project. If the county wants to sell the property to assist with the budget or long terms projects, I am fine with that. But we don’t need the county competing against private developers or others in a for- profit venture. That is a line I do not think government should cross.

PEDRETTI: No opinion. Again, I would need more information before making a decision.

Do you support or oppose La Crosse County’s criminal justice philosophy, which includes finding alternatives to jail for offenders who are not a danger to the community?

BURKE: Strongly support. Our philosophy believes community safety is the highest priority. It also recognizes society’s and the victim’s desire for justice. Our focus is on first assessing the risk to the community and the characteristics of the offender. We then try to deliver the most effective sanction or punishment for that offender with the hope of changing his/her attitude to avoid future offences.

KINSMAN: Support. I support the philosophy, but have concerns as to the application of said philosophy. If Justice Sanctions is working, why is there an overcrowding problem in the jail? Another question that needs to be raise is why does LaCrosse County arrest more people per 10,000 than any other county in Wisconsin? These are questions I plan to answer when elected.

HUESMANN: Strongly support. As a lawyer who has represented many criminal defendants over the past 13 years, I am keenly aware of the complex problems that some in our society face. There are times when someone wrongs society and needs to go to jail. Many other cases, however, are not that easy. The Justice Sanctions program has been successful in terms of reducing jail costs to the county while at the same time addressing the ills behind those crimes, such as drug and alcohol abuse. I support any program that keeps the community safe, reduces costs, and ultimately helps the offender. Justice Sanctions seems to do all three.

PEDRETTI: Support. It appears to be effective and provides cost-savings to the taxpayers.

Do you support or oppose spending more of the county’s budget reserves to reduce the property tax levy?

BURKE: Support. I support using the budget reserves conservatively, always maintaining the proper “rainy day” fund. These reserves should not be used for ongoing expenses, however. It is our financial security that has given La Crosse County a Aa2 bond rating.

KINSMAN: Strongly oppose. I feel that simply exercising a little fiscal restraint on the part of the county board is this problem’s best solution.

HUESMANN: No opinion. I will need to learn more about this issue. On the one hand, I could argue that wise planning and budgeting should not result in the county having a reserve fund. In other words, if the county will not use it, then give it back to the taxpayers. That being said, I am a business owner and understand the need to have reserve funds available because no one can predict the future. I will need to take a look at the hard numbers on this. But, I don’t believe that our current county board has been irresponsible with the taxpayer’s money.

PEDRETTI: No opinion. Again, I would need more information.

Do you support or oppose the state of Wisconsin’s use of a “property tax cap” which limits La Crosse County’s ability to raise property taxes by 2 percent, or the percentage of new construction growth, in 2009?

BURKE: Oppose. As I stated before, we have been elected to make the difficult decisions. Shared revenue from the state has declined or remained the same for the last 15 years. We have a fiscally conservative history in La Crosse County giving us the third lowest tax of all 72 Wisconsin counties. We have our own self-imposed debt rate limit.

KINSMAN: Strongly oppose. First, I have reservations when the state "caps" the county's ability to raise revenue for the constant stream of unfunded mandates coming from the state. Second, just like my concerns of the county dictating to the towns on what is best for them, those same concerns rise when the state dictates to the counties on revenue caps. The residents of the counties will ultimately decide at the ballot box when they feel their taxes are rising too much.

HUESMANN: Oppose. I understand the need to keep property taxes in check. But I believe we are more than capable of taking care of our own local matters. We don’t need to take our marching orders from Madison on every issue. Last year’s state budget fiasco demonstrates that Madison is guided by something other than the needs of the taxpayers. Local control of these matters is essential and I don’t think the politicians in the capital should mess with our efficient style of governing.

PEDRETTI: Oppose. There are too many unfunded mandates and unstable cost increases (fuel, health care, etc) to think a cap won’t do more harm than good.

Do you support or oppose the county’s plans for a $29.5 million jail expansion?

BURKE: Support. This was a unanimous decision of the La Crosse County Board after much debate and study. It will meet our criminal justice needs for the next 30-50 years. As a member of Judiciary and Law for eight years, I know we have done our homework showing the necessity for this expenditure.

KINSMAN: Oppose. First, $29.5 million is just "phase one". Next is the new county administration building, the parking garage, the re-routing of streets, and so on. This is better known as the County Campus Plan.

Second, the cost of the jail keeps going up. Some county board members, including Ms. Burke, feel that better air quality, more natural sun light, and roof top gardens are necessary for inmates to pay their debt to society. The county board is considering whether to have the new building LEEDS certified. That would lead to even more cost, and all for a piece of paper that says the jail expansion is "green".

Finally, I do not feel that the county board did its job. The county board heard this one plan and only this one plan. The current jail was designed to expand as our community grew, so why not add three floors to the existing building. Referring to an earlier question, why not solve all the problems at once and build on the county property in West Salem and do it right for less money.

HUESMANN: Support. Actually, what I support is looking at why, only 10 years after the jail was built, we are expanding again. Could these things not have been projected? After all, was it wise to build a new courthouse and jail in 1997 without considering that the women’s jail across the street was inadequate? I think this was poor planning. That being said, and despite the progress of the Justice Sanctions program, the need is there.

PEDRETTI: Strongly support. The plan was unanimously supported by the County Board and has received great input from staff, public hearings, professionals, etc. I like seeing all the proactive planning for renewable and sustainable features!

MEET THE CANDIDATES

Vicki Burke

AGE: not given

OCCUPATION: Retired educator: 32 years at Logan High School

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE: La Crosse County Board Supervisor District 26, 2000-present

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Mississippi River Regional Planning Commission treasurer, Brice Prairie Conservation Association, Lake Onalaska Protection and Rehabilitation District secretary, Logan High School Booster/Alumni Association life member, Holmen High School Booster Club, minister of the word at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Catholic Church and co-editor of the church quarterly,

Shamrock Club of La Crosse Area and La Crosse Bantry Friendship Association

Full candidate survey

James Kinsman

AGE: 36

OCCUPATION: Railroad engineer

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE: Democratic candidate for state representative, 2006

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Member of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) Division 13; past state legislative chairman for the BLET; active in youth sports in Holmen and Brice Prairie; delegate to the Western Wisconsin AFL-CIO

Full candidate survey

Mark A. Huesmann

AGE: 39

OCCUPATION: Attorney

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE: Holmen School Board, 2002-present

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Member of the U.S. Army Reserves since 1986 (currently serving as a major with a training unit at Fort McCoy), board member and past president of the Holmen Area Foundation, board member and past vice president of the La Crosse County Historical Society, member of the Wisconsin, Minnesota and La Crosse county bar associations

Full candidate survey

Marilyn J. Pedretti

AGE: 44

OCCUPATION: Town of Holland clerk; landscaper, Prairie Lawn & Garden

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE: Holland town clerk, an appointed position

COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT: Habitat for Humanity Restore (volunteer), Friends of the Holland Sand Prairie (secretary), AmeriCorps Advisory Board (member), Coulee Region Sierra Club (ex-comm. board), A Place of Grace Catholic Worker House (volunteer), YMCA Advisory Board (former member), FSPA Affiliate and Prayer Partner, Midwest Renewable Energy Association (member)

Full candidate survey

.