Tough Votes

Every public servant encounters “tough votes” from time to time. At the federal or state level, sometimes it involves an omnibus bill which includes “pork” that only benefits particular congressional districts, or simply “poison pill” amendments that make a vote extremely difficult because to vote for the larger bill, one has to also accept those amendments for which one also disagrees. At the local level, we are not immune from this problem. Every year on the Kenosha County Board, we must pass a large budget that includes spending for which some supervisors may not agree. However, every supervisor must weigh the total benefit of passing the budget versus the cost of not passing it. For some, this can be a tough vote. The point is that all public servants have to consider multiple factors above and beyond the substance of a resolution, such as its legality, jurisdictional issues, the process by which it was drafted, and, most importantly, whether the resolution is necessary. Does the resolution, in fact, solve an actual problem, or is it motivated by other factors, such as politics?

In the past ten years, John has had to make several tough votes. Below is an example of one and the rationale behind the decision:

John’s vote against the resolution encouraging Foxconn to set up operations in Kenosha County. John was one of only three supervisors who voted against the proposal.

The vast majority of supervisors were focused on the potential economic development to Kenosha County (which would have been considerable), but John was also concerned about the impact on the Kenosha taxpayer. All he heard from some people was that he should never vote against jobs. Though he agrees with this to a point, John didn’t think this deal should be rushed into, considering the billions of dollars of proposed subsidies that were being dangled as an inducement. Moreover, John was not comfortable with the track record set by Foxconn, not only in China, but in other attempts at setting up shop in the U.S. Lastly, the impact on our local environment, in terms of water diverted and used for a business of this size, was really problematic. As it was, Kenosha Mayor Antaramian ultimately closed the door on the deal and Racine was chosen as the site for Foxconn’s development. In short, even though John felt pressure to vote with the majority, he decided against it and was glad he did. Five years later, the state and, in particular, Racine County has sunk millions of dollars of development costs into the construction of Highway KR, and what do we have to show for it? A massively scaled down operation which has changed multiple times and has resulted in far fewer jobs than anticipated. In fact, Governor Evers has had to renegotiate the original contract with Foxconn in order to lessen the negative financial impact on Wisconsin taxpayers.

Bottom Line - The majority is not always in the right. If your decision is well researched and thought out, don’t be intimidated even if you are the only person standing alone.