The idea to privatize Milwaukee's Mitchell International Airport refuses to be grounded. The airport actually makes money for the county and isn't in major disrepair or in need of an overhaul, yet some local officials continue to carry the torch for selling it off.

Tiring of such talk is state Sen. Tim Carpenter (D-Milwaukee), who is doing his best to shoot down the plans. After recent reports that privatization backers are still running amok, Carpenter points to Detroit's failed attempt at letting a small cadre of business interests run their airport. Detroit transferred control of two airports in 2002.

"Detroit's new agency now has 46 executives making more than $100,000 per year, and 53 executives who got perks of vehicles or vehicle allowances," notes Carpenter. That's "double the amount from when the Detroit airport was run publicly."

He goes on to say that before privatization, the travel budget for Detroit airport executives was less than $100,000, but last year the new authority spent over $850,000 on travel for executives.

Carpenter says a survey that got 2,100 responses from his district found only 6 percent in favor of a transfer of the airport to control by a non-elected agency.

"Any discussion of changing the structure or finances of Mitchell Airport will have to fly against many questions," he says.

Milwaukee County Board Chair Lee Holloway has flown into the debate as well, albeit in a less headstrong way than Carpenter.

"The proof will be in the details," says Holloway. "The airport uses no property tax dollars in its operation and all revenues generated from passengers and airlines are used to maintain and improve the airport. A private operator, however, would keep profits and could put additional cost burdens on both passengers and airlines. I am also concerned about a plan that does not provide safeguards for property tax payers in the event that privatization would fail."

Expanding Nuisances: Some Milwaukee aldermen like the city's relatively new nuisance property ordinance, where the property residents get assessed the cost of police calls if more than three calls to police emanate from the property in a short period of time. Ald. Bob Donovan wants to expand the scope of the rule to local businesses, as well. He also wants to cover more activities than the original ordinance.

Donovan's plan would define chronic nuisance activity to include violations of possession or use of firearms, underage alcohol activities and adults contributing, allowing or providing alcohol to underage persons. Why gunplay hasn't been included yet is anybody's guess, but we can see that the under-age alcohol ban would definitely affect some teen clubs and many an East Side house party.

Candid Camera Talk: On the heels of a highly publicized arrest credited to a mounted camera, Donovan also wants to require stores and places with liquor licenses to have cameras. It's an idea that's been floated before as a means of forcing taverns to get cameras, but it's never gotten far.

Donovan wants digital cameras in all the stores that would "provide a clear image of the entire premises as described in the Class "B" license as well as the public right-of-way abutting the premises and any off-street parking lot used expressly for patron parking. It also requires on-duty store employees of retail establishments, licensed alcohol beverage establishments and convenience stores to provide a copy of recorded digital security camera images to law enforcement officers immediately upon request," according to the city's Legislative Reference Bureau's analysis of the plan.

 Page 1 of 2 (view all on one page)

Next >>

4 comments about this article. Post a comment / write a review.

Recent Talkbacks ...

Posted by haaz on June 25, 2008 at 9:54 a.m. (report)

Has the County's management of the airports necessitated their privatization? We have not been shown anything on this. Note that I said airports I'm thinking of both Mitchell Int'l and Timmerman Field, both owned and operated by the County. Timmerman is still good for private pilots, as they don't have to pay to land there, as they do at Mitchell. Back to my first point, how has the management been so bad it should go to private hands? And if there is bad management, how would privatizing the airport and making its management's actions and behavior totally unaccountable improve anything?

Posted by jlohman on June 23, 2008 at 7:58 a.m. (report)

Follow the money. A "private" airport can give campaign cash, a "public" airport can't. Jack Lohman http://MoneyedPoliticians.net

Posted by local_yokel on June 21, 2008 at 1:50 p.m. (report)

Why would it matter how much executives get or spend? Because a private owner would probably cut services that are enjoyed by the public, skimp on quality, and in general just run a bare bones operation. Somethings need to be run in the interest of the public and not for the greed of a few. BYW, I noticed that Bear Stearns was mentioned in the Journal Sentinel as a possible interested party in privatizing Mitchell International. With the recent indictments, do we really want to trust Bear Stearns? The real problem, though, is that I do not trust Scott Walker to manage things. Look at how he has overseen the decline of the County transit system. Look at how he submits one phony budget after another. Would profits from a private airport really go where he says (now) that he wants to put them? Would there be any assurances for the public, any requirements? The other thing is the time-frame. How far into the future would we see any return on a privatization venture? I fear this is based mostly on ideology, not a sound costs and benefits analysis. (That said, I am not unreasonable: if the case can be made, I think we have to at lest consider it.)

Posted by summer_cash on June 20, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (report)

If Mitchell were to go private, why would it matter how much executives spend on travel expenses? That's the beauty of free enterprise. The question is how the county's bottom line will be effected if it were to go private. My guess is that a private company can manage the airport a lot more effectively than the county. (No offense to Scott Walker, though:)