Trash the fee
As reported in the Oshkosh Northwestern, I will introduce a resolution at Tuesday's council meeting to eliminate the garbage and recycling fee language from the city ordinance. Since this is an ordinance change, it requires two readings prior to council action. The council is slated to vote on the resolution at our January 23rd meeting.
In a December conversation I had with City Manager Wollangk, he said he would not be recommending a fee for service anytime in the near future. Keeping the language in the ordinance would have required a discussion and vote every year, even if we wanted to set a zero dollar fee. I felt it unnecessary to have this conversation over and over again, especially after the clear signal Oshkosh voters sent in November. That is why I am proposing to eliminate the fee language from the ordinance. I encourage my fellow councilors to join me in supporting this resolution.
-Bryan
In a December conversation I had with City Manager Wollangk, he said he would not be recommending a fee for service anytime in the near future. Keeping the language in the ordinance would have required a discussion and vote every year, even if we wanted to set a zero dollar fee. I felt it unnecessary to have this conversation over and over again, especially after the clear signal Oshkosh voters sent in November. That is why I am proposing to eliminate the fee language from the ordinance. I encourage my fellow councilors to join me in supporting this resolution.
-Bryan
posted by Bryan L. Bain at
1/08/2007 09:37:00 AM
![[ BadgerLink logo ]](http://www.badgerlink.net/images/bl_logo1.gif){kind=logo}
11 Comments:
Great Job Bryan.....don't let them sneak the fee back in!
By
Anonymous, at January 08, 2007 2:30 PM
Didn't you vote in favor of the fee last year?
Is this damage control for election season?
By
Anonymous, at January 08, 2007 4:28 PM
Anonymous 4:28-
I'll answer your second question first. No, it's doing what is right.
Now for your first question. If you recall, I proposed two resolutions to eliminate the garbage fee during the 2005 council meeting where we voted on the 2006 budget. The first was defeated 1-6 (Esslinger, B. Tower, Castle, F. Tower, Scheuermann and Mattox voting against) and the second lost 3-4 (Esslinger, Castle, F. Tower and Mattox voting against).
Yes, I did vote for the $30 fee for Oct.-Dec. 2006, only because the City Manager would have had to make double the personnel cuts to meet the $600,000+ required in the levy to provide the service. It would have been irresponsible to vote no at that point in time, and I was contacted by several citizen opponents of the fee who agreed with me.
I think my record speaks clearly on where I've stood on this issue. As always, I encourage you or any others who have questions or concerns to contact me directly so that we can discuss them. Thank you.
-Bryan
By
Bryan L. Bain, at January 08, 2007 5:04 PM
Bryan said-
"only because the City Manager would have had to make double the personnel cuts to meet the $600,000+ required"
So what!
Now Dr. Heilmann says that the schools closing wont mean any lost jobs.
Hey..Heres a news flash. The City and School aren't in the business to create and maintain jobs. If jobs can be cut - DO IT!
ALot of us taxpayers have felt the sting of job cuts and by God the people that work for us in schools and city jobs shouldn't be insulted from that reality!
By
Anonymous, at January 10, 2007 9:02 AM
taxpayers have felt the sting of job cuts and by God, ETC;
SO your attitude is if you don't have a job no one should? Self Centered "ME" attitude is not good for anyone.
Brian has a excellent handle on what is right and what is wrong. He works for the good of the WHOLE community. He questions, communicates, and offers leadership and compromise when necessary. Brian does not need to pander to public opinion
to get elected. His record speaks for itself and our city needs more leaders like him.
By
Anonymous, at January 10, 2007 1:52 PM
The citys business is not to create and provide jobs for people. If we don't have enough work for staff, they need to be laid off. Not sheltered from reality.
The entitlement factor is one reason why we need an outside firm to look deeply into the inner workings ofour city. Many citizens have lost confidence in our city administrations ability to be unbiased and govern for the best interest of those that pay the taxes.
By
Anonymous, at January 10, 2007 4:29 PM
I too am all for taxpayer savings. The reason many of us are putting pressure on for this audit, is that most times, meaningful change does not occur unless you have an external pressure applied to top ranking administration and executives. Unless those that currently provide leadership and direction are faced with consequences, changes just don’t happen. A 3rd party report to the council will become public information and any oddities and excesses that would be uncovered would be known to all. At that point, city administration will be faced with consequences if they don’t implement the suggested changes.
That type of strategic organizational change generally requires outside credible pressure. The kind brought about by a 3rd party audit.
By
Anonymous, at January 11, 2007 3:32 PM
Why can't we get the City to enforce the ordinance code 17-36 B without private citizens placing themselves in Harm's Way if reporting? Even if done anonymously, the offender knows and retaliates often resorting to harrassment, abuse (elder in some cases). Eventually the violator is right back doing the same thing figuring no one will do anything - learned their lesson. Inspection knows these violations are going on. One excuse given on a repeat was "I don't have time to babysit these people"! I guess only those with the big bucks can get anywhere.
By
Anonymous, at January 20, 2007 12:01 PM
Anonymous 12:01 p.m.-
I read over the ordinance you refer to, however, without specifics, I'm not sure how I can help. (Please do not post specifics here, but rather email or call me.) It is unacceptable for a staff member not to do their job. If you have specifics you wish to share, I encourage you to contact me, another council member or the city manager. Thank you.
-Bryan
By
Bryan L. Bain, at January 20, 2007 9:54 PM
Anonymous 9:02 said:
"Now Dr. Heilmann says that the schools closing wont mean any lost jobs."
If you listened carefully, you would know, what that means is positions will be cut but, through retirements and people leaving for other jobs it is unlikely that those currently employed in the district who want to stay will still have a job. There will just be a lot fewer individuals hired because of the reduction in positions.
By
Questioning, at January 21, 2007 9:31 AM
You're right about it being unacceptable for City staff not to do their jobs but some don't. It's not right that decent people are required to be vigilantes to get anything done and put themselves in Harm's Way. Sorry I can't e-mail and reveal my identity. I appreciate your concern, as always. I'll ponder calling.
By
Anonymous, at January 21, 2007 4:56 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home