Brookfield Alderman Scott Berg offers his 12 cents.

Brookfield’s 5th district Alderman Scott Berg has a colorful history. Most notably, when he thinks someone has offended him, he goes berserk. (Which means I’ll need to watch my back for a few weeks after this post.) We’ve caught him taking aim at one of the readers here. This week he’s going after yet another blogger.

Now it’s not the first time he’s hit Kyle Prast in public. Of his more remembered unwindings: he once e-mailed her a picture of his diseased appendix. (Lucky me! I received a copy of that photo as did a number of the press.) Six months later he was apologizing to her for his inappropriate comments about home schooling. Again, both indiscretions were when he felt threatened – what he considered in his paranoia unjustifiable criticism of his efforts.

This week he’s been commenting on Kyle’s blog. Our sensible Ms. Prast suggests she’s not a fan of the city’s Greenway Corridor projects. Berg lets her know she was WRONG. Of course, he did it all in his special Bergy manner.

First he reiterates his support for the program. Then he snidely comments,

that all sidewalks, walkways, bicycle trails, etc. are used by burglars casing out their next target. This blog strongly implies child snatchers and drug dealers have overrun the parks which couldn’t happen if there were no parks.

I even recall one resident at a Park Commission public hearing stating (s)he didn’t want a pathway at 124th street because it would allow “those people” easy access to the city (the hearing was not recorded or I would provide a link to the comments). I presume (s)he meant non-Brookfield residents.

(I’ve mentioned before that Berg is insanely prejudiced. Here he allows that to come through in another “resident.”)

In a following comment he conveys that he’s sent Prast’s work to both the Chief of Police and the Director of Parks and Recreation. This is a typical Berg intimidation move. He makes his issue a BFD so you’ll back down quickly.

Then he adds:

By the way, if the entire $382,964 of expected 2009 cell tower revenue was switched to general tax relief, effectively ending construction of the Greenway Corridor, a house with an assessed value of $274,000 (typical value for that general area) would have its taxes lowered by 12 cents. Do you think that homeowner got at least 12 cents of value from the trailways?

My dear friend does not back down. She questions the 12 cents calculation and then makes a remarkable analogy in a follow-up comment, the real point that I hope you take home kind reader, that the free puppy isn’t really free. The paths initially paid with cell tower leasing will require maintenance, policing, and more from regular tax dollars.

She goes on to post another entry about ATVs on the path. (I like this lady a whole lot. She has many fine qualities. Her willingness to defend her values is one of them.) SHE CALLS THE DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION, AND FORESTRY ABOUT THE ISSUE. She also provides the police number she will call next time she sees something like that happening. Yes, she’s neutralizing Berg’s threat by making those contacts.

The 12 cents comment didn’t fit for me, either. Now Scott Berg says he has a B.S. in math and computer science. He used to have his diplomas on his Web site. Who am I to argue? (Yep, that’s obviously rhetorical.) I did my own work, then I put in on a spreadsheet, then I asked the spouse who has been known to crunch a number or two. Finally, I checked with someone at City Hall.

I am not the expert on tax rate calculations, however, I think your figure of approx. $16 is correct.

Another way I might look at it is to take the $382,964 and divide it by our total City assessed value of $6,532,118,790. That comes out to 5.9 cents per thousand of assessment. .059 x 274 =
$16.17

Berg is off by $16 or so, but hey! who’s counting?

I sure hope Alderman Scott Berg will admit his mistake and clarify the issue on Kyle Prast’s site. At this point I’ll be gracious and suggest it was just that, a mistake. Perhaps if he shared his math we’d all understand how he got to that number.

I’d sure hate to think the Chair of the City of Brookfield’s Finance Committee would really get it that wrong. That would be a little scary, indeed.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] at $11 – $13. It was later confirmed by someone at City Hall that the dollar amount was higher, $16.17 per home of my value, "…divide it by our total City assessed value of $6,532,118,790. That comes out to 5.9 cents [...]