Excerpts from recent Wisconsin editorials

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Jan. 27

Scott Walker offers sound starting point on arena financing

Credit Gov. Scott Walker with coming up with a financing proposal to help build a new Milwaukee arena that offers a sound starting point for discussion. Credit him also with making it sound almost painless to state taxpayers. It's not; as with any proposal involving public money for such a facility, there will be trade-offs. But if Walker's revenue projections are right, the trade-offs appear reasonable, and a sound investment in downtown Milwaukee.

Walker announced Tuesday a proposal to use new growth in income tax revenue from Milwaukee Bucks players and visiting teams to cover debt payments on $220 million in state-issued bonds for the proposed arena. Walker called it a "common-sense, fiscally conservative approach," and said the plan, simply put, is a "Pay Their Way" proposal.

Not exactly: Although no existing base revenues collected from the Bucks or visiting teams would be used, the expected increase in taxes would have been added to those base revenues and gone to state coffers to help pay for things such as schools, roads and other public services.

That this proposal also came out about the same time as the announcement that the University of Wisconsin System will be facing $300 million in cuts suggests that Walker is choosing to fund a downtown arena at the expense of the university. Again, not exactly: The two are not directly linked; the university cuts were expected anyway and Walker is not using those cuts to directly fund the arena.

As the Journal Sentinel reported Tuesday, recent estimates indicate that the amount of income tax revenue from NBA athletes in 2015 would total $15 million. That number is expected to increase dramatically in the years to come, due in large part to the explosive growth in revenue the NBA is expected to receive from its TV network partners. That, in turn, will boost player salaries, giving the state more revenue.

It's that growth in income tax revenue due to future contracts and estimated pay increases that would be used to repay the bonds, which would only be issued after all other funding totaling $300 million is secure.

Walker says his proposal protects the state taxpayers and keeps an economic development tool and job-creating engine in Wisconsin. He's right to a point. A new entertainment complex could help generate additional economic activity and jobs in an area of Milwaukee that is in need of more such activity. But taxpayers, and their representatives in the Legislature, also should be wary of overstated claims of economic benefits; according to one professor of sports management, the new Yankee Stadium in New York, was a "complete wasted opportunity. One billion dollars was spent and it had no impact at all on the south Bronx." Any public investment must be made wisely.

The Bucks and the team's new owners are under a deadline to build a new arena to replace the outdated BMO Harris Bradley Center. If that doesn't happen, the Bucks will most likely leave, taking their jobs-generating revenue and all those salaries' income taxes with them. Walker said Tuesday the state would lose $10 million in annual revenue if that happened.

A new arena is expected to cost $400 million to $500 million. Private money has already put at least $250 million on the table, and the state bonding of $220 million would get the job done. But if costs go above that, the state needs to firmly establish in any agreement that those costs will be borne by the owners, not the taxpayers. Let's repeat that: Cost overruns are the responsibility of the private owners.

If Walker is right that the increase in the income tax from higher salaries can provide that funding, that does strike us as a sound investment. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos called the proposal a "good starting point for the discussion" in a news release. We agree, and we trust the Legislature will provide just that in the months ahead.

___

Leader-Telegram, Jan. 26

More bureaucracy won't improve schools

What in the name of Ronald Reagan is going on with the Republican-controlled Wisconsin Legislature?

A party that hails local control as a cornerstone of its philosophy suddenly is talking about creating a new bureaucracy to manage K-12 public education. Specifically, a proposed state Senate education reform bill would create two new state boards to oversee schools and sanction those whose students underperform on standardized tests, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

The Assembly, meanwhile, dropped its proposed new state board but instead would close poorly performing public schools and convert them to independent charter schools. How this would be an improvement isn't clear.

Gov. Scott Walker wisely is leery of creating another layer of bureaucracy beyond local school boards and the state Department of Public Instruction.

"To me, the most important sanction is giving parents objective, comparable information so they can make decisions about what's the best choice for their sons and daughters," Walker was quoted in the Jan. 15 Journal Sentinel. "I trust parents."

Walker is right. There is a segment of conservatives who have it in for public schools. There's also a segment in the private sector that would love to get its hands on the billions of taxpayer dollars now used to support public schools. Whether those folks would be in the long-term best interest of most students is far from clear.

The system we have now is less than perfect, but it is more accountable in the aftermath of Act 10, which gives local school administrators and school boards more freedom to reward the higher-performing educators and when necessary remove those who aren't cut out for the profession.

Open enrollment is another tool for parents and students who believe there may be a benefit in transferring to another school.

Taking it a step further and giving publicly-funded vouchers so more students can attend private schools should be a last resort to rescue serious students from schools where chronic truancy and discipline problems make it difficult if not impossible for teachers to move their class forward in their studies. It can't be said often enough: "Failing" schools are most often caused by "failing" neighborhoods and lack of parenting, problems that in turn show up in the classroom.

A long-running debate is how much weight to place on standardized test results. "Teaching to the test" hinders innovation, some educators say. But without some standardized measure of comprehension in key subjects as reading and math, how do we know if students are progressing with the skills they need to function when they graduate? Critical thinking is important, but more important is knowing how to balance a checkbook and being able to read and write fluently.

Test scores help ensure accountability, which, as Walker noted, is what parents and taxpayers have a right to expect. Schools not accountable or receptive to change will increasingly find themselves struggling as parents enroll their children elsewhere.

___

Wisconsin State Journal, Jan. 25

Politics and money hurt state's high court

The problem with the Wisconsin Supreme Court isn't the age of some members. Nor is it the process for picking a chief justice.

What ails the state's high court is broken public trust - something two Republican proposals won't fix.

The real solution is to appoint, rather than elect, high court justices in a way that insulates the selection from partisan politics.

Neither Republicans nor Democrats in Wisconsin appear ready to adopt that good-government reform. The two state parties would rather battle for partisan control of the high court in the same way they battle for the Legislature - with lots of money and pandering to special interests.

Until Wisconsin moves to an appointment system based on merit, the next best option is a single term of around 16 years. The State Bar has suggested such a change, which would continue judicial elections but protect justices from having to look over their shoulders before ruling on the law.

It's important to remember that judges and lawmakers are supposed to play very different roles in our democracy. Judges are supposed to be nonpartisan referees who settle disputes over the law without regard for public influence. It's in this way the rights of individuals are protected from the whims of the masses.

In sharp contrast, lawmakers are supposed to advocate for the views of the majority and fight for their constituents.

Wisconsin has confused these distinct roles, turning our best judges into the worst of politicians.

As the spring election for state Supreme Court between incumbent Justice Ann Walsh Bradley and challenger James Daley will show, nasty television ads will tarnish the reputations of both candidates, and the winner will be dogged by conflicts of interests, based on who paid big bucks to help the winner get elected.

It's a huge problem of trust and integrity. Even those justices who insist they are not influenced by all the money and campaigning will have the strong appearance of being beholden to special interests.

Amid this mess of judicial elections, the Republican-run Legislature just finalized a spring referendum asking voters to change the state constitution. Rather than assigning a chief justice based on seniority, as has been the practice for more than a century, the referendum seeks to let the justices pick a court leader.

The measure makes some sense by basing leadership on the respect of peers, rather than longevity.

But making such a change immediately - without allowing current Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson to serve out the reminder of her term - exposes the proposal's partisan motive.

Abrahamson is widely viewed as leaning left in many decisions, while the majority of the board appears or professes to favor the political right.

Abrahamson hasn't stopped the conservatives who control the state's highest court from upholding lots of Republican priorities, including Act 10, Gov. Scott Walker's strict limits on public sector unions.

But that's not good enough, apparently, for the Republicans who run the Legislature. The chief justice has the power to speed or slow decisions. So they wants to remove even that limited check.

Another GOP proposal would bar justices from serving on the court past the age of 75. Abrahamson is 81.

Rather than playing political games with the state's highest court, the Legislature should encourage more judicial independence.