Bain-Blog

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Oshkosh Waterfront

In case you missed it in the Oshkosh Northwestern, there is now a website (similar to the Northwestern's online forum) for the proposed Waterfront project. Be sure to check it out and contribute your thoughts and ideas for developing our riverfront.

-Bryan

posted by Bryan L. Bain at 3/18/2007 05:27:00 PM

14 Comments:

  • Good to finally see some attempt to reign in the run-away cost of labor in the city. Approving a 1% increase for the City Manager is the first step. Even Bill Castle said that public sector wages were becoming out-of-line compared with the private sector. This momentum will hopefully become more established council wide and carry over with future union negotiations.

    Good job Council!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 28, 2007 7:07 AM  

  • This is the type of thing that is happening everywhere in the private sector. This is why those in the public sector need to know it's not "Business as usual" and understand we taxpayers can not continue increasing our property tax payments to allow them greater wage and benefit increases.


    ................................
    Circuit City to lay off 3,400, hire cheaper replacements


    Circuit City Stores said today it plans to cut costs by laying off about 3,400 store workers and hiring lower-paid employees to replace them, and by trimming about 130 corporate jobs.


    Circuit City, the nation’s No. 2 consumer electronics retailer behind Best Buy Co. Inc., the store workers being laid off were earning “well above the market-based salary range for their role.” They will be replaced with employees who will be paid at the current market range, the company said in a press release.

    The Richmond, Va.-based company also plans to outsource its information-technology infrastructure operations to IBM, a move that is expected to cut IT expenses by more than 16 percent. About 50 of Circuit City’s IT workers will move to jobs with IBM and remain on the Circuit City contract. The other 80 corporate positions will be cut.

    The changes follow the company’s announcement this winter of planned cost-cutting measures and management moves to improve sales and cut expenses.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 28, 2007 3:17 PM  

  • I beleive the council made grave error last night and time will tell. Some city contracts were settled at a minimum of 2.5%. To give the leader of this city 1% was a slap in the face. What specific goals set forth did he NOT meet?
    Mr Wollankg deserves better. He was made the scape-goat for politic gain. Compare the wages for the District Superintendent or a Bank Manager without half the work load.
    Check the wages of surrounding civic leaders.
    Our Councilors are an embaressment to the city of Oshkosh and NEW

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 28, 2007 5:17 PM  

  • I support the council regarding Wollangk.
    In my opinion, looking at the BENEFITS, the entire city staff (union and non-union) should have their wages FROZEN!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 28, 2007 6:14 PM  

  • The following are 2 of the 9 specific goals submitted to the City Manager from our Council. These 2 specific goals deal with department efficiency and cost reduction. Goal #2 asks department employees to be directly involved with ways to streamline their specific areas. Submit ways to do things more efficient and with less cost to the taxpayer. Goal #7 requires the City Manager to develop productivity standards for each department. Ways to insure each department is doing the work in the most efficient manner possible, in a measurable way.

    These are 2 good goals, and address citizens concerns about making our city departments more efficient, effective and run with less cost to the taxpayer.

    Goal #2 –
    Have each majpr department develop an “efficiency” team to meet periodically to identify and discuss ways for the department to become more efficient and effective in its delivery of services. Approaches to helping the City achieve a higher level of ecological sustainability should also be discussed. Please have a written summary of these efforts to date submitted to the Council each July.

    Goal #7 –
    Continue to create standards to gauge each department’s annual performance. Implement these standards in each City department such that all departments are completed by the end of the current City Manager contract (through 2008). Provide a memorandum detailing the implementation to the Council at the end of the current year, At least three additional departments should be completed by the end of 2007.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 29, 2007 8:59 AM  

  • Where were the comparables in assessing the City Manager. He is the lowest paid City Manager in the area.

    So the City Manager should complete ALL these goals..... for what?? a 1% wage increase?

    Totally Asinine Expectations!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 29, 2007 10:14 AM  

  • "Where were the comparables in assessing the City Manager. He is the lowest paid City Manager in the area."

    Typical Union mentality!

    He may be the lowest paid because his performance is also the lowest.

    You should EARN your pay, not just be ENTITLED due to your title or length of service.

    Good move Council!
    1% sends a clear message!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 29, 2007 11:00 AM  

  • Here’s some good reading for Mr. Wollangk.

    He needs to identify, in clear understandable and justifiable terms how he saves the city taxpayers at least $104,000.00 a year (his salary)

    We are “investing” in is skills and we need at least a 100 percent return on our money.
    (Which leads to the following paradigm shift: You need to stop thinking of yourself as a job seeker, and start thinking of yourself as an investment. One that pays returns of 100 percent, 200 percent or more.)

    …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

    Tom Sather column: Sell yourself to employers as good company investment

    What kind of reaction do you think you'd get if you knocked on an employer's door and asked, "Could you give me a job?"

    I'll tell you, the reaction would be underwhelming. If you knocked on 100 doors you might get three or four "yes" or "maybe" answers. That's the response rate in a typical job search.
    But what if you took a different approach?

    What if you knocked on an employer's door and asked, "Want to buy a dollar for 25 cents?" Here's the answer you'd get: "Tell me more!"

    Look at it as offering to sell employers money at a discount, rather than asking them for a job.
    Which leads to the following paradigm shift: You need to stop thinking of yourself as a job seeker, and start thinking of yourself as an investment. One that pays returns of 100 percent, 200 percent or more.

    How?

    Think back to your last job. Were you fired within 90 days? No? Good! That means you were either making more money or saving more money than your employer was paying you. Otherwise, you would have been terminated. (If you left on bad terms, of course, think back to a successful job.)

    In other words, when you did your job well, you produced a return on somebody's investment in you. Maybe it was 10 percent or 20 percent. Perhaps much more. How much? That's for you to figure out.

    Examine your work history and determine how much money you saved or earned on the job. Every job. Then, stick those numbers in your resume and cover letters. And mention them in every networking conversation and interview you have.

    You need to be very clear about how much of a return on investment employers will get by hiring you. When you do this, you will stand out from a crowded field of ordinary candidates. And you will get hired faster.

    Here are two ways to do it ...
    1. Write down all the money you've saved or earned for employers.
    Do NOT write: "Sold products and met quotas." Write: "Sold $516,750 in one year while exceeding all four quarterly quotas by an average of 21 percent."
    Do NOT write: "Produced substantial savings." Write: "Saved $45,890 in 45 days."
    If you get stuck, get on the phone and call somebody at the company and ask them to help you quantify the value of your achievements. The numbers are out there. It's your task to find them.
    However, if you simply can't quantify your work in dollars, then ...

    2. Write down everything you've done to increase efficiency or save time.
    Time is money to employers. Perhaps you wrote a training manual, or created a new shipping system on the loading dock. Everything is fair game here.
    The key is to figure out exactly how many hours you saved per week and assign them a dollar value. Then annualize that value to get the most impressive number possible.

    You can now write this in your resume: "Saved $27,040 annually by automating widget process."
    And guess what? When you fill your resume with results quantified in dollars, you turn yourself from just another job seeker, crying, "Give me a job!" into a walking, talking, blue-chip stock, who says: "Hire me at $50,000 and I can deliver a 300 percent return on your investment because I've routinely saved $200,000 annually at prior jobs."

    Which would you rather be?

    To sum up, your task today is to stop thinking of yourself as an ordinary job seeker and start thinking of yourself as an extraordinary investment.

    When you do — and you do the thinking for hiring managers by emphasizing specific results in your resumes, cover letters and employment- related conversations — good things will happen in your job search.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 29, 2007 11:21 AM  

  • Sounds like good reading for Mr. Esslinger, I think he is the one lacking a job.
    Mr Wollangk has a job and is very good at what he does. It is this city and our current council that lacking the skills to even know which direction the city should go. It was councilors that met with would-be developers behind closed doors...or signed confidentiality agreements. It was councilors that kept changing the goals...everyone knows you don't change the rules in the middle of the game.
    Taxpayers need to recognize desperate councilors making political moves to get re-elected.
    That is want we viewed Tuesday night. Two incumbents and one wanna-be-Mayor fighting for political survival at the expense of a hard-working City Manager who deserves the same increase in pay the council approved for other non-union employees.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 30, 2007 8:32 AM  

  • It appears to be the end of the easy ride for city unions. The line in the sand has been drawn. When listening to the LWV forum, both Tower and Esslinger made comments that the city employees were over compensated and something needs to be done. Tower even eluded to outsourcing. I say its a good thing. We taxpayers aren't getting our moneys worth. The benefit structure for city employees is totally out-of-line with todays ecomomy. Cuts in wages, benefits or staff itself is bound to happen. People in Oshkosh are fed up with this.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at March 30, 2007 9:04 AM  

  • The benefit structure for city employees may be totally out-of-line with todays ecomomy. Cuts in wages, benefits or staff itself are bound to happen. People in Oshkosh are fed up with this.
    BUT IF the people of Oshkosh elect more councilors from UWO this will NOT change. The wages and benefits of UWO staffers are equal to or better than any city employee. They are supported by public employee unions. Unions back unions! We can't allow the university to rule city politics.
    We can't elect any more candidates
    from the university or university backing.
    As the Northwestern clearly stated VOTERS BEWARE!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at April 01, 2007 10:01 AM  

  • Allow me to point out that a 1% raise for someone like our city manager is equal to 2% for someone that makes $50k/year. The 1% was NOT out of line. If anything, it was too much.

    It is definately time to step up to the plate and make the city manager earn his pay. If he wants a better paying job, let him look at other communities. His resume was not worthy of higher pay when he started the job and I don't feel that his goals have been fashioned in a manner deserving of higher increases.

    Just what DID he accomplish in 2006 besides the garbage fee and the sky is falling at budget time.

    He can't even control his department heads. That is proven time and again.

    So I will ask again, just WHY does he deserve more?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at April 01, 2007 9:53 PM  

  • 9:53 I totally agree with you. EVERYONE I speak with about this says the same thing. In my circle of friends the current administration does not have ANY supporters. Our council needs to get some balls and make these guys EARN what we pay them.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at April 02, 2007 9:20 AM  

  • Some candidates stated the need for more accountability at city hall from day one of their respected campaigns. It was an issue up front not added along the way. As we come down to the wire I agree LET"S RETURN ACCOUNTABILTY To CITY HALL!
    Let's start by electing Neilsen, Cornell, King to give us at least 3 new faces. F.Tower would finish the new look for 2007. Although not a new face to the council he would certainly be the better choice. We need more representation not less,so a vote for another UWO candidate hurts the city and the university.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at April 02, 2007 9:47 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home