Bain-Blog

Wednesday, May 09, 2007

Home rehab bill

State Representative Gary Sherman yesterday re-introduced a bill from last session that would "allow localities to defer assessments of improvements to a person's home for up to three years," currently something municipalities cannot do. In his press release, Rep. Sherman states, "[AB 299] gives a municipality the authority . . . to use tax policy to encourage behavior that will improve the social and economic health of the community."

I do not know all of the fiscal impacts of the bill, however, at first read, it seems this would be an excellent accompaniment to the "Great Neighborhoods Program" outlined in the Comprehensive Plan, of which the first is the Near East Neighborhood program.

I'm interested in knowing your thoughts on the proposed bill, and if passed, do you think this is something the city of Oshkosh should look into? Are there additional creative ways you think the city should explore to promote these types of improvements?

-Bryan

posted by Bryan L. Bain at 5/09/2007 04:37:00 PM

79 Comments:

  • Bryan,
    Unrelated to this thread, but related to the River Mill walk issue.

    What is the distance of the public right-of-way from the existing curb into the currently grass areas of the property?

    Looking at the are, it all currently appears to be front lawn, but actually when you account for terrance and sidewalk area, I assume there is 10 feet or more from the curb into the property that is actually public land.

    If sidewalks were not built, people could walk or bike on the lawns in that public right-of-way area and potentially create trails in the lawn that the homeowners certainly would object to.

    So what is that distance?

    Thanks in advance and in my opinion, you and the 4 others made the correct choice regarding sidewalks in this area.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 22, 2007 9:13 AM  

  • I would say if people walked in that right-of-way area now it would be perceived (and probably righftully so) as spite, since for all these years there has not been such an occurrence. Are you intentionally trying to fan the flames or do you just have a natural proclivity toward annoying people?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 24, 2007 9:29 PM  

  • 9:29...Miles is the one who brought this to light with his "River Mill Miles" video.

    Those nasty trails carved into land shown on his video could well be the River Mill terraces!!

    People certainly could lawfully walk on the public right-of-way which currently appears to be River Mill front lawn.

    I would imagine there would be a HUGH outcry if those nasty trails started to appear in the River Mill area...so, I would suggest, rather than trails, some nice concrete walks would certainly be far more attractive. Wouldn't you??

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 25, 2007 11:57 AM  

  • We can see what you're suggesting and it's even less becoming than the ruts you keep referencing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 25, 2007 4:54 PM  

  • I think the people who live in that area would be really ticked off if people started to walk on their yards. Thats not the main reason they should have sidewalks but I think they would all want sidewalks more than those goofy ruts that were in that video I watched. That would really wreck those nice yards and make the whole area kindof dumpy. I think sidewalks there are a good option and I support doing that.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 25, 2007 9:12 PM  

  • You're just showing what a childlike mind you have. Baby, baby. People have never walked in the yards before and your comments to instigate such behavior is akin to bullying.

    Hey if you still think Esslinger is so right about this area, check out the photos Miles has taken of other more high traffic areas without sidewalks including 1 property owned by the city. How about those apples!! Where's the outcry for sidewalks there? Where's the special resolutions to order them in? This was muscle flexing and political retaliation at its finest guised as public safety.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 26, 2007 9:44 AM  

  • You misunderstand me. River Mill Miles created a video to attempt to forward his opinion. I only use HIS evidence as a method to stimulate the thought that without sidewalks, his beloved neighborhood could also potentially turn into a nasty old path ridden slum. It's something that RiverMills Miles must not have considered when he shot his video.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 26, 2007 1:08 PM  

  • The real message of his video, which you have chosen to disregard, is that there are other, extremely high traffic areas, without sidewalks. If the do-gooders on the council are truly concerned about public safey, they'd be focused on these areas rather than one street in a subdivision that should be done when originally planned and not fast-tracked because of an over-zealous, power hungry mayor wannabe.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 26, 2007 1:47 PM  

  • Regarding the original "Home rehab. bill", I live in the near east side but didn't get into mapped area which was odd due to it being blighted far more than others. I did rehab. work on my home in 2005 and 2006. In 2005 my assessment increased $2000.00 and 2006, $3000.00. Of course this increases my taxes and I'm already on a low fixed income with a road replacement bill due on top of this. No deferement there as well. Yes, I would strongly favor this bill and wonder if passed people in my situation would be grandfathered. Thank you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 26, 2007 2:53 PM  

  • 1:47 - You’re a funny guy.

    You want sidewalks...but just not right now.

    You want the poor underprivileged areas to get their walks before you do. How generous you are. Let the “little people” get sidewalks first because they are poor…and with high gas prices need to walk more than you upper-middleclass "gated community" wannabes do.

    HA!

    You guys really shovel the dung over there by the river don’t you. Your little enclave is next on the list!

    As long as you're shoveling...you better buy a snow shovel. When I walk by your house in the winter I want a clean clear ice-free sidewalk to get to the nature trail.

    It could be worse you know. All us poor sidewalk deprived people could come over and trample a trail on your front yard right in the public right-of-way. Then I’ll bet you’d change your tune and say “We’re ready for our sidewalks now. We don’t want those ugly ruts in our front yards”

    What a sanctimonious joke you people are.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 26, 2007 10:57 PM  

  • Copy and paste dude strikes again, lifting things directly from Miles site and pasting it here. What a sad, sad play for attention this itty bitty baby has to use.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 27, 2007 6:30 PM  

  • I went to the Memorial Day Procession today. What a wonderful parade. Such a great turn-out to see our school bands. I noticed many people parking and walking from the River Mill area. I certainly bet they would have appreciated sidewalks rather than dodging cars as they made their way to Algoma Blvd to watch. I don't think there is any good reason not to want sidewalks in RiverMill and Bryan, I hope you continue to support them. Thank you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 28, 2007 12:28 PM  

  • Oh puhleaze, you'll say anything to push for sidewalks in an area that was not to get them now, does not need them now and should not have them thrust upon them now.they should have been installed according to the schedule the city had set up. Paul Esslinger's insistence that they be fast tracked and the others who went along with this so-called rationale, is yet another example of bad politics in Oshkosh. If not politically motivated why did Paul "Political Payback" Esslinger speed up the "order in" process? No one has yet to answer that question because there is no reasonable answer.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 28, 2007 5:02 PM  

  • 5;02 If you listened to the council meeting, you would have heard our City Manager and Public Works Director say that the priorities were the sidewalks by city major artierials. Now that those are completed, the city manager said that River Mill would be a good priority as it was the only large neighborhood area left in Oshkosh which did not have side walks. Mr. Wolangk also said that putting walks in River Mill was supported and actually recommended by the City Staff. I hope River Mills gets walks soon. It will make getting to the nature trail much easier and more importantly much safer for those that use that wonderful resource.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 28, 2007 7:04 PM  

  • 7:04 PM, if you had read what I wrote instead of saying anything to justify this ridiculousness you would have understood that if this was such a priority the sidewalks would not have had to have been ordered in, as the city was already planning on doing them at some point in the future. Paul Esslinger wanted some kind of retribution and brought forward a resolution to hasten the process. That is the point and that is what's wrong with sidewalks being done at this time. There are other areas that have greater priority because of the amount of traffic and their proximity to areas where more people walk. That is also the point and exactly why these arguments for so-called "safety" lack all credibility. Finally the nature trail is already being accessed in a safe manner without sidewalks so your safety argument again fails to sway me. Hopefully now that some time has past and several more arguments made against the fast tracking of the sidewalks, some of our other council members will see just how silly the timing of this is and change their minds.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 11:29 AM  

  • 11:29…You keep trying to suggest an “Esslinger” conspiracy theory here.

    If you’re into the whole conspiracy theory mentality, you must also then believe there was a “DelAntonio” conspiracy to keep sidewalks out of River Mill when Arboretum Drive received walks.

    I’m really not into the whole conspiracy thing…but if you enjoy that stuff, you might look into watching “Loose Change” on the web. That’s a huge conspiracy thing I’m told.

    I just think like a common man. There is a trail head that leads into River Mill. People walk or bike that trail. There should be city sidewalks that allow people to walk or bike to the trail in a safe method.

    Here’s the link to that Loose Change video if you’re interested:
    http://www.loosechange911.com/

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 11:53 AM  

  • No one has been able to sufficiently answer why walks weren't installed on River Mills - not even the city manager. All we've been told is the process was stopped for awhile. There must have been a majority on the city council that went along with that. J.D. is only one person with one vote. I don't think that proves a conspiracy theory. I'm not even saying there is an Esslinger conspiracy theory. I do believe he wants retaliation; that's his style; and I do believe that being the politician he is he's been able to convince other council members that this is a safety issue, etc. If he expects the public to swallow this malarkey they need to look at all other areas where safety is a greater concern and no sidewalks exist, and they need to do the sidewalks in the order they were scheduled, not jump this one ahead because crybaby Esslinger wants it and slings a bunch of hash.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 3:07 PM  

  • 3:07...Your logic makes no sense.

    You say " J.D. is only one person with one vote."

    Well the whole issue was passed 5-2 and Esslinger is also only one person and has only one vote.

    Try again...Or take some time to watch that Loose Change thing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 3:29 PM  

  • Hey 3:29, try reading what's been written. It's obvious Esslinger's only got 1 vote. He's a good politician who knows how to spin like a top. DUH!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 4:23 PM  

  • Sorry 4:23, you still make no sense.

    Try looking at the Loose Change video, that should satisfy your conspiracy theory addiction.

    River Mill needs sidewalks for no other reason that it is a starting point for a well used nature trail.

    Five council members and the city manager and city staff support that priority.

    Get on-board with River Mill resident John DelAntonio who said if the council wanted walks in River Mill, he would support that decision.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 5:06 PM  

  • Continue to ignore that which has been written. Your ignorance of the facts proves you have no answers to even the most obvious of questions. Thank you for your good work.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 8:05 PM  

  • Fact - River Mill needs sidewalks

    Solution - Five council members voted to "order in" sidewalks for the River Mill subdivision.

    I support that action!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 9:36 PM  

  • That only proves Esslinger made a "compelling" yet twisted argument for sidewalks now in the name of safey. There was no huge public outcry for sidewalks in River Mill and they could have been installed when originally scheduled. That wasn't good enough for Public Safety Poster Boy Paul. He wanted politial payback and this was how he chose to go about getting it while letting other areas go unchecked and forcing people to walk in the street in very high traffic areas. What a great (read "typical") public servant he is.

    "Continue to ignore that which has been written. Your ignorance of the facts proves you have no answers to even the most obvious of questions. Thank you for your good work."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 29, 2007 10:16 PM  

  • 10:16
    You are obviously not thinking rationally.

    You are simply turning this into an “I hate Paul” issue. I think you belong to the conspiracy crowd. When you rant about your “I hate Paul” feelings, you make yourself irrelevant.

    There were FIVE council members who voted for placing sidewalks in the River Mill area. No one twisted arms here, each council member chose to vote the way they did based on their own conclusions.

    If you’d like to feed your conspiracy hunger further, rather than ranting about Paul, please take some time to view the “Loose Change” internet video.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 6:52 AM  

  • Whatever you want to tell yourself. It's not an "I hate Paul" issue, but rather "I hate Paul's politics and lying about his reasons for ordering in sidewalks now."

    You still have failed to answer the lingering questions asked on this and other sites. Such failure proves there is no good reason for Esslinger to have brought anything forward. He's lost credibility in the process. The only thing he's proven is he was able to manipulate the discussion enough to get 4 others to go along with his twisted thought process about safety. At the end of the day that's not such a great accomplishment; he still couldn't convince the voters to elect him mayor.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 7:18 AM  

  • I didn't read anything about someone hating Paul, 6:52. You might want to think that but the simple fact is sidewalks ahve been planned for a while now for River Mill Rd. There was no sound justification for moving them forward at a greater speed than planned. They should have been allowed to be installed at the pace with which the city had intended. And if THIS was the time the city had intended it would have required no intervention from Paul Esslinger.

    Fact is if we're really going to deal with safety issues, there's other areas where sidewalks are needed more. that is what we should be focusing on at this time not an areas where there has been no public outcry or demonstrated need for them right now.

    To approve them in River Mill now is bad public policy and Paul Esslinger is the ringleader.

    If you want to continue talking about Loose Change, be my guest. It's more important to focus on loose marbles and loose cannons on our city council.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 8:08 AM  

  • 8:08
    You said:
    "They should have been allowed to be installed at the pace with which the city had intended."

    We are right on track then.

    Mr. Wollangk indicated all other priorities have been attended to, so now is a good time to address River Mill and install walks that were previously missed.

    So we both agree now is the correct time.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 8:58 AM  

  • Then please tell us WHY it was necessary for Esslinger to bring something forward? You people all keep dodging the question. Dodgeball is for children (and politicians who have no good answers).

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 10:52 AM  

  • I’ve read a lot of the postings on some of these blogs and I’m amazed at how the wealthier people who are living in the River Mill area are putting up such a fuss about having sidewalks constructed in their subdivision.

    From what I’ve read, they say they want sidewalks, just not now. I really think that’s a smoke and mirrors statement and what they really have is a “not in my front yard” mentality.

    I just find it humorous that the people who seem to be able to easily afford sidewalks, put up far more fuss than other much less wealthy people in Oshkosh who would need to cut back in other areas in order to pay for them.

    Seems to me all city homes should have sidewalks, and with that trail going from River Mill I thinks it’s odd they’ve waited this long to get at installing them in that area.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 11:01 AM  

  • What rock have you been hiding under? People have always argued against sidewalks, whether it's the cost of installing them or the cost of repairing them. Answer the question: If now was the time, why Esslinger's resolution? The answer: Political payback and settling old scores.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 12:07 PM  

  • 12:07 said-
    "Esslinger's resolution? The answer: Political payback and settling old scores."

    It would appear that you’re another person who believes in the conspiracy theory. I find it comical that so many people posting seem to hate Paul as much as Americans hate Bush! It’s really an interesting phenomena.

    In any event, five council members voted to “order in” sidewalks for a good reason…they’re needed and River Mill has worked itself to the top of the priority list.

    The City Manager stated that he felt River Mill should have sidewalks, and he also stated that his staff also felt that now is the time to install them as all other priority areas on the City’s list have had walks installed.

    The “Esslinger haters” should stop posting on this blog and move to the Rosie blog where you can all cry together about how bad things are.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 12:24 PM  

  • Answer the question: If now was the time, why Esslinger's resolution? The answer: Political payback and settling old scores.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 12:26 PM  

  • No doubt your love and support for Paul Esslinger would have you believe this is about hating him instead of looking at the facts. In doing so PE looks like an innocent victim when in fact, as is so often the case with this man, Esslinger brings on his own problems. The sad reality is he does not have any good excuse for targeting River Mill at this time. If it was the next priority for the city, he would not have had put something on the books to get it done. It's one thing to have blind faith, it's another to be led around by the nose and to fall for his schtick hook, line, and sinker.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 1:13 PM  

  • 12:26 (The Hater) said:
    "Answer the question: If now was the time, why Esslinger's resolution? The answer: Political payback and settling old scores."

    OK, here are some logical answers to your question. I know they wont satisfy you, as you are clearly a conspiracy theorist...but I'll try anyhow.

    I assume now is the time as it is the summer construction season. Few if any sidewalks are built in winter.

    I would also guess that as Mr. W. said all the other priorities are completed, River Mill was a great focus now. So as a good leader, Paul provided direction to city staff, and has the manager and staff support for finishing off this missing, un-attended to section of walk.

    That should answer the "why now" question.

    As was mentioned, If you’d like to feed your conspiracy hunger further, rather than ranting about Paul, please take some time to view the “Loose Change” internet video. It might satisfy you and your friends odd obsession!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 1:33 PM  

  • We shouldn't deal in assumptions and guesses and if that's what Mr. Esslinger is doing he's not a very responsible councilman. But let's just say for the sake of argument you're right, that everything else was done and satff felt it was the "right time" for River Mill. They wouldn't need direction from Paul Esslinger or anywhere other than the city manager or director of public works. If Paul Esslinger was really a good leader he'd be more worried about addressing the real safety issues where sidewalks don't exist. These aren't conspiracy theories. They're logical questions that still don't have logical answers. I appreciate your effort though.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 2:06 PM  

  • Odd obsession? You seem to have the same obsession, 1:33, just more tainted than ours.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 2:07 PM  

  • 2:06...OK then. In your world the staff needs no direction from the council.

    OK...I just find that totally silly.

    You are a real pinhead.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 2:46 PM  

  • If sidewalks are already planned, nope they don't. But tell you what, let's use your "logic" okay? How many other times have we seen a council member bring something forward to "order in" sidewalks? Rarely, if ever. Yet they seem to get done don't they? (an excellent example to prove my point would be the sidewalks recently approved for Arthur Avenue. No one "ordered" them in, yet public works brought them forward on their own.) Seems to me the work gets done without Esslinger & Company. And again, if safety is the big concern, why not focus first on areas of greater safety and more importance to a greater number of people. And you call me a pinhead! You're like a child on a playground.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 3:17 PM  

  • 3:17 We'll need to agree to disagree.

    All I know is the council voted 5/2 in favor of putting in the River Mill sidewalks.

    I support that.

    As they say...it takes 4 votes!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 3:26 PM  

  • Yup and Paul Esslinger's a typical politician slinging the crap. Thanks for conceding our point that there is no logical explanation for what he did.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 3:33 PM  

  • 3:33 said "Esslinger's a typical politician slinging the crap"

    You really do belong to the conspiracy theory crowd don't you.

    Here's a few websites that I'm sure you'd appreciate!
    http://www.michaelmoore.com/
    http://www.loosechange911.com/
    http://www.rosie.com/blog/

    (I bet you didn't need these links...their is your Favorites file aren't they?!)

    ENJOY!!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 5:31 PM  

  • And you and Mr. Esslinger belong to the "can't answer simple questions with simple answers" crowd. The sites you offer are pretty boring, much like you. No wonder you know all about them. You've obviously visited them. As much as some might enjoy them though, nothing provides entertainment value and comedic relief like the explanations the Esslinger crowd has offered so ordering in sidewalks now.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 7:15 PM  

  • 7:15
    Esslinger,EsslingerEsslinger

    Obsessed with Mr. Esslinger it would appear.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 7:29 PM  

  • Answer the question! Oh that's right, there isn't an answer.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 30, 2007 10:17 PM  

  • The question was answered with the only answer that counts.

    5/2

    Sidewalks ordered in.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 8:01 AM  

  • The expression "don't count your chickens before they're hatched" might be good advice for you to follow, especially since they're technically not approved yet.

    The REAL safety issues some of us have been talking about may come into play, despite Paul Es-SLING-er's attempts to convince us he's concerned about safety. Yeah right!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 8:14 AM  

  • 8:14, As a Concerned Citizen, I would imagine you too want sidewalks. So just get used to the plan and maybe next year, if you keep up the pressure, other areas of the city that "River Mills Miles" has pointed out will get walks also!

    I would have a hard time believing that any of the 5 council members that voted affirmative would switch horses mid-stream...but then you do belong to the Conspiracy Theory Crowd so you'll believe most anything wont you?!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 9:15 AM  

  • Whatever you want to tell yourself. Despite your pal Esslinger's "order-in" resolution and council meeting rhetoric, I bet these sidewalks will not be installed for another couple of years. Hardly worth his paper pushing and chest-thumping but hopefully he feels better anyway.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 9:19 AM  

  • 9:19 Well then if you truly feel that families, children and bike-riders going to the nature trail don't deserve sidewalks to get to the trail in a safe manner...you're obviously not as much of a Concerned Citizen as you say you are.

    I however continue to believe our 5 councilmembers and the city manager and staff will do what's right and finish this area, which should have really been done years ago.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 9:55 AM  

  • Nice spin. Like Es-SLINGER-er you paint a picture that just isn't so but in doing so you're showing how dumb you really are.

    Sidewalks should provide safety to "the masses." You don't actually expect anyone to believe that more people walk on River Mill to get to the trail than do walk along Murdock, Harrison, etc. to get to and from a grocery store, do you? Likewise, you certainly aren't stupid enough to believe there is more traffic on River Mill than on Murdock, Harrison, etc. Or are you?

    I believe our council members will do the right thing and put sidewalks where they can help the most pedestrians and provide the greatest amount of safety to them. River Mill is not the priority you believe it to be. I doubt they'll be installed there this year.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 10:05 AM  

  • 10:05
    So then in your little "conspiracy theory" world, the city would conduct a pedestrian study on all questionable walks and determine which walk has the highest used (the masses). Our city crews would place those little rubber pressure hoses on questionable walks and depending how many people step on the hose will determine which walks get repaired.

    If you have a crumbled walk in your neighborhood, but don't have the foot traffic (the masses) to warrent replacement, you're out of luck.

    If you have no walks, how do you even judge foot traffic? No where to place the counting device.

    Now 10:05, see how silly that is.
    You're just being a funny guy now!

    River Mill needs the sidewalks, they've waited long enough. People use the trail and should be able to access the trail from a sidewalk.

    Can you imagine if the council now changed their minds and defeated the sidewalks after they already voted 5/2 to place them...and if someone would happen to get struck by a vehicle while walking in the road and got injured because sidewalks WEREN'T installed... WOW can you see the attorneys salivating to get at that injury lawsuit!

    Enough with your "Not in my front yard" mentality.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 10:52 AM  

  • Ah yes, your "logic," while far-reaching, is equally astounding. There are so many things wrong with it, where does one begin? I will not belabor points already made but let's address just a couple points...

    In the first place one does not need a pedestrian study to determine there are greater numbers of pedsetrians walking near Piggly Wiggly and Pick and Save than on River Mill Drive. It also doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the traffic is heavy and more dangerous because of speed, road type, etc.

    In the second place, you threaten the possibility of lawsuits shoudl someone get hurt. the same situation could apply in the areas already mentioned and the council is now well aware of the safety issues there as they were discussed at last night's Fifth Tuesday Forum. I might add that the possibility for an accident is greater in those other areas, again, by virtue of the numbers.

    Thank you for pointing out those potential problems. I'm sure the council will take them into consideration when making a final determination on when to do sidewalks on River Mill.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 11:24 AM  

  • 11:24
    You said-"I might add that the possibility for an accident is greater in those other areas, again, by virtue of the numbers."

    But the council didn't cast a preliminary approval vote in that case...they did in River Mill.

    Now stop being so silly... and enough with your "Not in my front yard" mentality.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 11:49 AM  

  • Yes, you're right, they did. Because Paul Esslinger's ego needed him to flex some muscle. No conspiracy theory; fact. There are sidewalks all over this city and they've rarely had to be "ordered in." Such wasn't necessary here either, save for Esslinger's need to feel important and powerful.

    Despite all of that, the arguments you made and points I countered with remain. Though the council approved an "order-in" resolution, it will remain to be seen when those sidewalks are installed. My bet is common sense will prevail and sidewalks won't go in for another year or 2 whilst other, more pressing areas, get done first.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:00 PM  

  • Concerned Citizen...time will tell. It takes 4 votes!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:19 PM  

  • While your other comprehension skills leave much to be desired, you at least understand the concept of votes being the name of the game. Remember, that goes for elected officials too.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:22 PM  

  • Well there is no question the $$$ in River Mill may sway some of the council members...But I think Tony, Dennis and Paul are firm yes'.

    I hope Bryan and/or Frank don't cave to the big-bucks rantings of those in the wannabe gated community known as River Mill and do whats right and finish the task by installing walks.

    We'll see if Bryan and Frank are either "stand-up guys" or just more "flip-floppers"

    Like I said, time will tell, it takes four votes.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:31 PM  

  • Now that they have the total picture and not just the slanted, homespun version of the resolution's sponsor, I think Bryan and Frank will demonstrate they have the flexibility to be able to process thoroughy presented data and make a decision accordingly. I predict they'll come down on the side of common sense and install sidewalks where the safety hazards are greatest. That is certainly not, at this time anyway, on River Mill.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:38 PM  

  • What does any of this have to do with home rehab???????

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 12:39 PM  

  • 12:38..You're right. Money talks and River Mills got TONS of money.

    So Frank and Bryan just might be motived to change their vote for Big Money.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 1:45 PM  

  • And you talk about others believing in conspiracy theories!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 2:12 PM  

  • Other areas have more money than River Mills. Paul Esslinger's neighborhood, for example. 'Course that doesn't mean they all work or have more disposable income than anyone else.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 2:18 PM  

  • Money talks...some people are motivated to listen.

    I don't think Tony, Dennis or Paul belong to that group, and I hope others aren't...but you know, if walks don't happen in the River Mill area this year, well 2008 is just around the corner. 2007- 2008 I guess it really doesn't matter. At least Paul got the project off the back burner and now it will happen. Even Frank and Bryan agree to that.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 3:24 PM  

  • He didn't need to get anything off the backburner. That's one of the points. The city had already planned to put sidewalks in. Now you say it doesn't matter if the walks are done now or later. That's what we've been saying all along. Glad you finally get it. So much for Paul's pencil pushing paperwork.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 3:35 PM  

  • Everyone agrees River Mills needs sidewalks. If the people who live there are pitchin a fit about it now, I wonder what excuses theyre gonna use next year if the sidewalks dont get done this year. Seems those people arent gonna be happy unless everybody forgets about that whole project. I bet Esslinger will write a note to himself if that thing doesnt pass this time around that next year its goona be a #1 prority.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 6:56 PM  

  • You're banking on the fact that Esslinger will be in office next year.

    Also, with sidewalks in most sections of the city and no order-in resolutions having been necessary to get them there, I would have to agree with an earlier poster that the public works department functions just fine without Esslinger or his notes.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 7:58 PM  

  • 7:58 soooo Your the liar now!?!

    You mentioned many times that its not that the people on River Mill don't want sidewalks, just not now.

    Now you hope Esslinger isn't around so River Mill may never have sidewalks.

    You now show your true colors.


    If that isn't the case, just admit that next year would be a fine compromise then.

    Balls in your court.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at May 31, 2007 8:49 PM  

  • You're as bad as Esslinger, spinning stories and twisting the truth.

    Just because Esslinger may not be in office next year does not mean we won't get sidewalks in River Mill at some point.

    They've already been planned and they'll eventually happen -- with or without him. Go back and read some of the posts I and others have made.

    We've always said, do the sidewalks but in the time frame originally planned, not sped up because of Esslinger. That may be next year, it may be a few years down the line.

    As for his being in office next year (a) there's no guarantee he will run (b) there's no guarantee that if he does people will elect him in.

    Read what's written and not what you'd like to believe was written. You'll look less like a child just learning to read.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 5:57 AM  

  • Bottom line you’re disingenuous. You are hoping this whole issue will fade away and you will never have sidewalks in the wannabe gated community known as River Mill.

    We’ll see how the votes play out. Can you say…”Ordered In”?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 6:56 AM  

  • Whatever you want to tell yourself. What's disingenuous are city councilors who profess to be concerned about safety wasting time over a street like River Mill while much busier, more dangerous streets with greater numbers of pedestrians have sections with no sidewalks.

    Can you say "What a bunch of b.s.?"

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 7:36 AM  

  • 7:36 As a Concerned Citizen, thats your opinion, which in the big picture doesn't amount to anything.

    It takes four council votes to make anything happen...and I don't think you were elected or ever could be.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 10:02 AM  

  • The facts speak for themselves, as do the illogical actions set in motion by Mr. Esslinger. That's the opinion of a lot of concerned citizens, including some of whom are elected.

    It doesn't matter what the vote count is. It matters more when sidewalks are installed and that they're done when they're supposed to be, not according to a timetable based on irrational poppycock or someone's personal agenda.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 10:44 AM  

  • Mr. Concerned Citizen...Your Esslinger hate mantra is clouding your thinking. You've turned into a full fledge "Kool-Aid" drinker. You are a true-blue conspiracy theory nutcase.

    Your continued Esslinger slamming is, as you so eloquently stated...irrational poppycock or someone's personal agenda. That someone is you Concerned Citizen.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 11:43 AM  

  • The facts and pictures of areas more in need of sidewalks and with greater safety hazards speak for themselves.

    As for any hatred toward Esslinger, perceive the criticism any way you wish. Fact is it's Esslinger's sidewalk initiative and the buck stops with him on this one. No one else can be faulted for his flawed thinking, misrepresented concern about safety, and unnecessary resolution.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 12:21 PM  

  • Concerned Citizen.

    I've figured it out!

    With you, it's not really about sidewalks at all...it's about PAUL ESSLINGER!

    If Paul would have suggested that sidewalks NEVER be placed in River Mill, you would be spewing banter that River Mill needs sidewalks NOW and Paul is out to disable people because he wants them to walk in River Mill streets.

    You are a funny man Concerned Citizen.

    I think Paul wanted City Hall to consider altering their hours to make it easier for working people to conduct business other than during the current 9-5. Start bashing that idea Concerned Citizen, a little change in "Hate Paul" topics may be good for you!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 12:38 PM  

  • BlahBlahBlah. A third grader can see who's hate-filled and who's not. That same third grader could also easily see who's being disingenuous and who isn't. Spin all you want. You only make our position look that much more credible and for that we thank you.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 2:39 PM  

  • Well Concerned Citizen, I congratulate you!!

    You got through a complete post without one slam against Paul.

    Taking baby steps...one step at a time, one day at a time.

    Keep up the good work and keep that phone number for "Haters Anonymous” handy in-case you start to feel any Esslinger anger!

    :)

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 3:04 PM  

  • Actually, a change in hours at city hall was suggested by Jess King during her campaign.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 3:18 PM  

  • Great...I think it's a very customer focused idea. If both Jess and Paul support it, it may get traction.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at June 01, 2007 3:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home