Progressive Thinking

Bruce has over 35 years of experience in helping people make real estate decisions.

BROOKFIELD, WI - Many of you have asked how the real estate market is doing and the market is ever changing.

The first half of this year was fabulous in almost all sectors. Homeowners were receiving multiple offers within hours of putting their homes on the market! This did not happen in all cases, but if the home was priced properly based on condition the result was positive. Overpricing a home is always a bad idea, especially when the market is strong because buyers wonder why a home is sitting on the market for longer than a month.

I expect the market to flourish next year, especially in spring. The best months to sell are late February to the end of May. That is when buyers will pay the highest prices for the year. If you are thinking of buying first, the off months are the best time to buy (November-February). There are less buyers competition and sellers price their homes during the off months realistically due to need type sales (death, divorce, job relocation, health reasons). They are motivated to sell quickly and price homes accordingly. If you buy in the off months, you can then capitalize on selling your home in spring and you will know where you are going to live.

I am often asked what are the best improvements to make to get the ‘best bang for the buck’. Paint, paint, paint! That is the cheapest and best way to get your home ready for market. But the key is to paint with colors that resonate with today’s young buyers. Examples are steel grey in living rooms and hallways, pale green in kitchens and tope in bedrooms. There are many other colors that work and you can always go online to check out what are the most popular colors for today’s savvy buyer.

Make sure all defects are corrected, especially roof, basement and furnace. It is critical that your electrical system is at least 100amp circuit breakers because insurance companies won’t insure a home in most cases with 60-amp service.

If the exterior needs paint, do it now! It is still warm enough. So often I get a call in winter or early spring to sell a home and the exterior trim and siding show poorly. There is nothing you can do about that when temperatures are below 60 degrees in most cases. So, think ahead.

If you have a parent that needs to sell in the coming year or two, start the downsizing process now! We work with professionals who can help. Just give us a call or email and we will send you the information to connect with the professionals we trust. Downsizing can be so easy if you let others help!

Don’t hesitate to call us with any questions you may have. We have over 35 years of experience in helping you make the best real estate decisions for your future!!

Enjoy Halloween and we hope to connect with you in the coming year!

Candidate for Governor Mike McCabe talks about getting everyone in Wisconsin access to high-quality and affordable medical insurance.

ALTOONA, WI - Applying that common sense rule, Wisconsin’s whole population should be made eligible to get health insurance through the BadgerCare program. BadgerCare should be there for all Badgers who want or need it. BadgerCare provides excellent insurance coverage and is affordable. It should be a public option that anyone in the state could choose in the insurance marketplace.

BadgerCare is Wisconsin’s version of Medicaid but existing state law has restrictive requirements including income limits that make only the poor, elderly and disabled eligible to enroll. Changing a single word in state law would allow BadgerCare to be listed as one of the options on the health insurance exchange that currently only includes private insurance plans.

State law now says “An individual is eligible to purchase coverage...if all of the following apply” and goes on to list the requirements. Changing the word “all” to “any” would open up BadgerCare to the general population. No one would be required to enroll, but anyone could if they choose to.

Analysis done by the health care advocacy group Citizen Action of Wisconsin estimates that BadgerCare’s cost is on average 23 percent lower than other policies in the health insurance market. It also covers 100 percent of medical expenses, unlike many plans with sky-high deductibles and co-payments that leave patients paying for much of their care out of pocket.

Getting everyone in Wisconsin access to high-quality and affordable medical insurance not only will make our state healthier but also will stimulate the economy. There are so many people out there with great ideas for a new business who’ve dreamed of starting their own company but can’t leave a job that provides insurance for their families. If they could access BadgerCare, many would go ahead and start that new business.

Wisconsin’s entire population also should be eligible to participate in the state’s retirement system. In keeping with its name, the Wisconsin Retirement System should offer retirement security to all of Wisconsin. Employees and employers in every sector of the economy should be able to buy into the WRS, not only the public sector.

Currently, about 600,000 people are eligible to participate in the Wisconsin Retirement System, or only about one-eighth of the adult population of the state. Wisconsin has one of the most financially sound retirement systems in the country. Making participation an option for everyone in Wisconsin would make it even stronger. More people invested in the system means even greater financial stability. It also means more people with a stake in sustaining the retirement fund and defending it against political attacks. Social Security has lasted for more than 80 years because every working American pays for it and everyone stands to benefit.

Employers in the private sector who want to provide a retirement benefit to employees should have the WRS as an option and so should those who are self-employed and want to set aside money for their own retirement. As with BadgerCare, no one should be required to participate, but everyone should be eligible to buy into the system.

The closer we can get to the point where everyone pays and everyone benefits from what government does, the better off we all will be.

****

Mike McCabe is a candidate for governor. He ran the independent watchdog group Wisconsin Democracy Campaign for 15 years and later started the grassroots citizen group Blue Jean Nation. His campaign’s website is GovernorBlueJeans.com.

Native Americans, originating from the Great Law of the Iroquois, have approached conservation decisions made today as ones that should benefit the people seven generations from now. Today, we seem to be rushing towards a new era, one where promises of the past are cast aside in the name of eliminating obstacles for business.

MADISON - Wisconsin has a rich heritage of conservation. From the Native American Tribes who inhabited this land for generations, to John Muir, Aldo Leopold, Warren Knowles and Gaylord Nelson – Wisconsin has been a national leader in protecting our land, water and air. The public trust doctrine, enshrined in our state constitution, guarantees that the waters of Wisconsin belong to the people of Wisconsin.

There was a time when this was a shared ethic amongst Democrats and Republicans. Our greatest environmental achievements have always been accomplished together, working toward the goal of making a better Wisconsin for our children and grandchildren. But today, I am disturbed by the erosion of that shared commitment. Governor Walker and Legislative Republicans seem to be rushing towards a new era, one where the bipartisan promises of the past are cast aside in the name of eliminating obstacles for business. Three examples from this legislative session alone demonstrate this regression.

In the early 2000s, water bottling giant Perrier had a plan to open a facility in the central sands of Wisconsin. There was great concern for the impact this might have on our groundwater resources. High capacity wells in that area have a direct impact on surface waters. As we can see today, they cause lake levels to decrease and rivers to run dry. The threat of Perrier brought together Republicans, Democrats and Democratic Governor Jim Doyle to pass what was supposed to be the first step in protecting groundwater quantity. 2003 Wisconsin Act 310 was passed nearly unanimously, 99-0 in the Assembly and 31-1 in the Senate and signed into law by Governor Doyle. In the years that followed, bi-partisan study groups continued to look at the issue to determine what those next steps forward might be to ensure everyone has reasonable access to the waters of the state.

The 2010 election resulted in the Republican control of both houses of the Legislature, the Governor’s office and an about face on the approach to environmental protection. Earlier this year, Republicans passed Wisconsin Act 10 on a partisan 62-35 vote in the Assembly and 19-13 vote in the Senate. The law allows for the repair, replacement and transfer of high capacity well permits without DNR approval. Because high capacity well permits are the only environmental permits without an expiration date, the provisions of this bill essentially grants permanent access to groundwater for those permit holders. This is in direct conflict with the Wisconsin state constitution which protects the waters of Wisconsin for the benefit of all users. It guarantees that the current problems with surface waters in the central sands will continue to get worse.

In the mid-1990s, the threat of a sulfide mine in Crandon, Wisconsin brought Democrats and Republicans together to pass the mining moratorium. This legislation, 1997 Wisconsin Act 171, was passed with overwhelming support, 91-6 in the Assembly and 29-3 in the Senate and signed by Republican Governor Tommy Thompson. Sometimes referred to as the “Prove it First” law, it simply requires that anyone wanting to operate an sulfide mine in the state of Wisconsin needs to demonstrate than another similar mine has been able to operate and close somewhere in the United States without polluting for at least 10 years. Because there has not yet been an example of a mine that can operate without causing pollution, Republicans now want to change the law.

Sen. Tom Tiffany (R-Hazelhurst) and Rep. Rob Hutton (R-Brookfield) have introduced Senate Bill 395 and Assembly Bill 499 which repeal the current Prove it First law. The bill appears to have widespread support on the Republican side. It passed the Senate Sporting Heritage, Mining and Forestry Committee on a partisan 3-2 vote and is rumored to be scheduled before the full Senate later this fall. It is widely opposed by Native American Tribes, conservationists, and government watchdog organizations. But that is virtually meaningless against strong Republican backers like Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce and Americans for Prosperity.

The most recent attack was unleashed at the end of September. A new bill is being circulated by Sen. Roger Roth (R-Appleton) and Rep. Jim Steineke (R-Kaukauna) that will end protection for isolated wetlands in Wisconsin. There are two kinds of wetlands and they are regulated differently. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, through the Clean Water Act, has jurisdiction over wetlands that are connected to navigable waters. Other wetlands, those that are geographically isolated, are protected by Wisconsin, thanks to a dedicated group of bi-partisan lawmakers.

In 2001, a U.S. Supreme Court decision, SWANCC vs. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, left all geographically isolated wetlands unprotected. In the wake of that decision, legislators in Wisconsin sprang into action. A concerted effort over a 5 month period led to Republican Governor Scott McCallum calling a Special Session to pass a bill which put in place state-level protection for isolated wetlands. 2001 Wisconsin Act 6 was passed unanimously by both houses of the Legislature. Since 2011, a number of proposals have chipped away at the 2001 law, but the latest, LRB 4115/1, proposes eliminating state protection for isolated wetlands.

What has happened to Wisconsin? Not that long ago, when faced with an environmental crisis, Democrats and Republicans worked hand-in-hand to come up with common sense solutions. I worked diligently with my colleagues on both the wetlands and groundwater laws during my tenure in the State Assembly and was proud to have voted for both. Now I see a new generation of Republican lawmakers, very different from the last, who fail to see the forest for the trees.

Native Americans, originating from the Great Law of the Iroquois, have approached conservation with the concept of the seventh generation. Decisions made today should be ones that benefit seven generations from now. While I know we have fallen short at times, the core of that philosophy has been at the heart of Wisconsin’s past environmental law. It’s what brought us together to ban sulfide mining, protect groundwater and isolated wetlands in an overwhelming, unified voice.

Today, there is not thought given to seven generations. Rather, the next generation will be saddled with the damage inflicted today. I hope that they are able to rise to the challenge and repair what has been broken.

Senate Bill 119 would legalize growing hemp and create an active industrial program and license growers, actions eagerly supported by Wisconsin farmers. The Bill has strong bi-partisan support and Sen. Vinehout hopes it will pass quickly.

MADISON - Farmers in diverse states like Hawaii, Kentucky, Maine and Minnesota are researching a new crop: industrial hemp. Many states are changing laws to allow growing of hemp.

Wisconsin is slow to get in the game. Hopefully, this is about to change.

Lawmakers on the Senate Agriculture, Small Business and Tourism Committee are considering a hemp legalization bill. If Senate Bill 119 becomes law, the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Protection (DATCP) would create an active industrial hemp program and license growers.

Hemp is not a new crop to Wisconsin. We once had flourishing fields of hemp. But, as the saying goes, you are sometimes known by your relatives. Even for a plant. Hemp suffered from an association with its cousin, marijuana. By the 1950s, farmers stopped growing hemp. Federal and state drug laws swept up hemp in an effort to eradicate marijuana.

According to a Congressional Research Service (CRS) publication, industrial hemp and marijuana are separate varieties or cultivars of the same species of plant cannabis sativa.

Generally, hemp is defined by having less than 0.3% of THC, an active ingredient in marijuana. However, the plant differs in other genetic aspects, in cultivation practices, and in its use.

Thirty counties around the world grow hemp as an agricultural commodity. Hemp can be used to create plastics, mixed with lime to create concrete, as a fiberglass alternative for use by aviation or automobiles or as a potential biodiesel fuel. The CRS reports more than 25,000 hemp products fall into nine markets: agriculture, textiles, recycling, automotive, furniture, food and beverages, paper, construction materials and personal care.

According to the CRS, growth in the sale of hemp products averaged over 15% annually between 2010 and 2015. The biggest demand for hemp related products are hemp-based body products, food or supplements. These products account for more than 60% of the value of U.S. sales.

Until recently, U.S. farmers were forbidden to grow hemp. This policy forced industries to import hemp raw materials or use finished hemp products for further processing. China now leads the world as a grower and supplier of hemp. United States processors also rely heavily on Canadian growers.

A provision in the 2014 federal Farm Bill allowed universities and state agriculture departments to begin supervising hemp in pilot programs. This caused a flurry of activity within state legislatures to create new hemp laws.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) as of July 2017, 33 states passed some legislation related to industrial hemp including all our Midwestern neighboring states except Iowa. Twenty-six states created laws that began research on hemp, or a grower pilot-program.

Many states passed laws encouraging the development of hemp for certain purposes. For example, Colorado is researching the use of hemp for animal feed. Kentucky funded research on the use of hemp for biofuels. North Carolina is studying hemp for soil conservation and reforestation. The CRS cites research showing hemp may be less environmentally degrading than some other crops. Hemp can play a role in crop rotation, breaking the cycle of disease and pests.

Wisconsin farmers are eager once again to get in on hemp production. The Wisconsin Farm Bureau and the Wisconsin Farmers Union are advocating for the passage of SB 119. Farmers from both organizations and local agriculture agents contacted me asking for quick passage of the SB 119.

Like many agricultural issues, hemp legislation this year has strong bipartisan support. Forty cosponsors of both parties signed up to help pass SB 119. This is a significant improvement from when I introduced the first Senate bill in 2016. Several earlier bills died in the Assembly.

This year, Senators Testin and Harsdorf took the bill I authored and added some important provisions. They gave the UW a role in supervising a seed certification program. The new bill allows any university or tribe to establish agricultural hemp plots. Additionally, it encourages our State Tribal Relations Committee to investigate hemp as an economic development tool for our tribes.

Hemp in Wisconsin is a crop whose time has come. Passage of SB 119 will begin the work of bringing back Wisconsin’s hemp industry. Let’s make 2017 the year of hemp.

Two bills moving through the Senate would create a non-elected council to review professional licenses and propose legislation that would de-license professions in Wisconsin. Many professionals around the state have voiced opposition.

MADISON - Imagine you are with your loved one who is in the hospital. Night comes. You prepare to leave, gently kissing your loved one “good night”.

As you walk down the corridor and into the hospital parking lot, you might wonder how your loved one will feel in the morning. Will things be better, worse or stay the same?

One thing you don’t worry about is the quality of care provided to your loved one because the nurses working the night shift are licensed by the state.

Nurses and other professionals follow “standards of care” that are spelled out in their education and clinical training. They follow licensing and board requirements set in state law. Patients are protected from incompetent nurses by a board that oversees the practice of nursing. This is true for dozens of other professionals in Wisconsin.

Recently, a Senate committee on which I serve passed two bills that set up a process to potentially de-license professionals. Senate Bill 288 establishes a partisan appointed council that reviews licensing, registration or other state approval for ALL occupation and professional licensing in Wisconsin. Senate Bill 296 creates a process for self-certification that allows a person to claim “state certification” even though they may have no training or experience in their chosen occupation.

Electricians, nurses, certified public accountants, plumbers, physical therapists, doctors, and other professionals will have their licensing and continuing education requirements reviewed by a non-elected, partisan council. The Council would have the power to write and introduce a bill making changes to the laws governing occupational licensing. These powers are generally reserved for lawmakers.

The process set up by these bills is eerily similar to a process laid out in an August 2017 publication of the ideologically conservative Mercatus Center:

Policymakers…would be wise to follow these steps:

1. Pass legislation that sets an ambitious goal for the elimination of licenses and the reduction of licensing burdens.
2. Establish an independent commission charged with examining the state’s licensing laws. …the commission should be charged with evaluating all licenses.
3. The commission should be charged with setting a comprehensive path for licensure elimination and reform. The authorizing legislation should commit elected officials to accepting the commission’s recommendations in their entirety or not at all.

…the institutional structure that we recommend borrows elements from other reforms that have succeeded in eliminating favoritism. In particular, it allows elected officials to cast conspicuous votes in the public interest while giving them some degree of “cover” from the special interests that will inevitably be harmed by the elimination of their regulatory privilege.

Let’s break down that last sentence.

The elected officials cast “votes in the public interest” – your elected representative is voting to de-license your plumber. “Giving them some degree of ‘cover’” – your elected official is now able to say, “I didn’t really want to de-license your plumber, but it was part of a larger bill and I couldn’t change the bill.”

“Special interests that will inevitably be harmed”—those “special interests” would be the plumbers’ union or the nurses’ association.

The public likely did not hear about the de-licensure plan because the daylong hearing by both the Senate and Assembly committees happened at exactly the same time as the public hearing on Foxconn. The Foxconn hearing dominated headlines, not the concerns of over 100 Wisconsinites who traveled to Madison to testify or register against the de-licensure bills. Those speaking in favor of the bills were, almost exclusively, conservative ideological groups.

When I asked what problem the bills were trying to solve, proponents said they wanted to eliminate “fence me out” legislation that left people unable to get into a desired profession. When I asked them to provide me a list of professions with licenses that create a “fence me out” problem, they did not give me a single example.

Over the years, the Legislature created licensure requirements in conjunction with professionals. If we have unnecessary licensing, committees of the Legislature should review details of a professional license and determine if change is necessary.

Setting up a process to de-license professionals by unelected appointees is an attempt by conservative ideological groups to remake Wisconsin in their own image. In fact, a republican colleague commented that these ideological groups have become a shadow legislature.

These bills need to be stopped.