Bain-Blog: Information flow

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Information flow

Do you ever read something and say to yourself, "that is exactly what I was thinking?" Well, that is what happened when I read this morning's Oshkosh Northwestern editorial.

Even though The Waterfront resolution had nothing to do with the 100 N. Main issue, the City Manager should have told the council (and citizens) what he knew at the time of the council meeting. There is no excuse for not. Period. Especially when, in the past, the council has specifically asked for updates, even if not all of the information is known.

I had a phone conversation with Community Development Director Jackson Kinney yesterday about this very topic. I told him what I've said to others in the community over the past few days, including The Northwestern. The perception of city staff keeping or delaying information from being given to the council and public unnecessarily damages the credibility (and viability) of unrelated projects. It puts a black eye on city efforts. It also creates an unproductive "side show," which could severely impact progress.

The big question is, "now what?"

I was informed yesterday that Council Member McHugh intends to ask for a closed meeting to discuss the status of the City Manager's contract. He did not attend last night's meeting, so I was unable to confirm this with him.

The council must have some serious conversation. We are responsible for what happens at City Hall. We hire, fire and supervise the City Manager. The buck stops here.

Update: There is a story on The Northwestern's website related to the closed meeting scheduled for Tuesday night. I want to clarify my "call for the removal of City Manager Richard Wollangk" as referenced in the article. Do I believe there should be a change, yes, but I respect him and the process too much to simply call for his removal in the media. I am not out there beating my chest and calling for the City Manager to be terminated. Let me explain below.

I believe the process of the council having the conversation about his performance is warranted. I also believe the council must plan for the future if in fact we decide to make a change. It would be irresponsible for us to make decisions now without further discussions and proper planning.

I also want it to be known that, during a conversation with the City Manager in April, I told him that I liked him personally, but felt his leadership style was no longer what the city needed. I also told him that I wanted to see someone with more assertive and visionary leadership. I was honest with him and told him that I felt it was time for a change.

Fast forward to today.

I am unhappy with the City Manager's choice not to share the information about the 100 Block with us prior to Tuesday's meeting. This is not, however, the sole issue for my belief that change is needed.

Let me state for the record that I believe Richard has served the city well, both as a City Manager and Council Member. He is an honest, principled man, and I have no issues with him personally. In fact, I like him as a person. I do believe, however, that the council should move forward with our discussions and planning so we can consider what is in the best interest of the city of Oshkosh.

-Bryan

53 Comments:

Attaboy Bryan!!

Time for some changes.

By Anonymous, at July 18, 2007 5:56 PM
It was reported that Jackson Kinney did inform the Mayor of the 100 No. Main St. situation. Shouldn't Mayor have at least passed that on? This is not the first time Mr. Kinney has "hoodwinked". Perhaps the Council should be considering more than the City Manger's Contract. The word among Oshkonians is placing more questions about Mr. Kinney! Being close to retirement, it's often been known in bureaucracy and elsewhere to "sweeten the deal" or else; make it look like a good option and possible ultimatum. Councilman Bain you do seem to have a lot of trust in Mr. Kinney for some reason.

By Anonymous, at July 18, 2007 6:09 PM
The "buck stops" at Dick Wollangk. Jackson and everyother Dept head ultimately answers to the CIty Mgr. Too many odd things have happened lately. Less and less are having trust in our admininistration. I think Mr. Bain and Mr. McHugh are going to do what the people expect our elected officials to do. Investigate and make corrective action. I think this action needs to be much much more than a slap on the wrist.

By Anonymous, at July 18, 2007 9:18 PM
Thanks for taking the lead on this issue Brian. It is long overdue. In the end Dick's undoing will be his loyalty to his staff. Changes need to be made there also.

By Anonymous, at July 19, 2007 3:12 PM
Outstanding stance Bryan. Your position on Dick Wollangk is just another indicator of your overall leadership on the council. It simply can't be business as usual at 215 Church. Things need a major shake-up and you are the person to lead the council through that change. Be bold and action minded. Oshkosh is ready for a change at the top.

By Anonymous, at July 20, 2007 6:48 AM
Do you ever read something and say to yourself, "that is exactly what I was thinking?" Well, that is what happened when I read this morning's Oshkosh Northwestern editorial.
Yes, The Sunday morning editoral regarding the Convention Center.
The ONW really hit the nail on the head with this editorial! This is actually the ideal way to finance the renovation of the Center, generate business, tourism, and downtown Oshkosh ALL with the recently enacted 2% room tax. What an marvelous investment for the future and what a way to make our $$$ mushroom!

By Anonymous, at July 22, 2007 12:38 PM
Frank Tower is really proving to be a "Stand-up" guy...he really impresses me!

In today's edition of the Northwestern, Frank is quoted as saying he would support the additional room tax to be used for convention center improvements. He would not support extending/using the 4Imprint TIF.
AttaBoy Frank!!

This council is the best in years!

Frank, Tony, Bryan, Paul and Dennis. These guys all seem to be doing the right things.

By Anonymous, at July 24, 2007 10:11 AM
Way to go Bryan!

keep demanding that you get the information.... you are the elected official not the city manager .... you make the decisions not him!

By Anonymous, at July 26, 2007 8:56 AM
Any person with ten years of experience on any public job would certainly have stepped on important toes along the way. Some of those toes are attached to feet armed with a boot unfortunately, Mr Wollangk is their target.

I fear we will see a change just for the sake of change and for no other reason. When a councilor makes the statement for a local interview, "10 years, its time for a change".

Any man/woman serving the public will NOT please everyone all the time. We have councilors serving that don't believe is the form of government so they will make decisions favorable to their positions.
Yes, Oshkosh has its problems, like any other city, but should it all fall to the City Manager, or should the past and current councils take equal responsibility?

By Anonymous, at July 26, 2007 9:17 AM
Yes, past councils should take some of the blame. That is why we replace councilors like Scheuermann when they do not hold staff accountable and replace them with Tony or Jess who will.

By Anonymous, at July 26, 2007 9:47 AM
Funny how the only name mentioned in your post is Mrs. Scheuermann. The blame goes all the way back to when Richard was hired. Melanie Bloechl was on the council then. What expectations did that and subsequent councils have for him? What goals did they set for him? Or did they not set any? If you want past councils to accept blame, and they should shoulder some of the responsibility for his performance through the years, you can't name just one who you obviously have a problem with. Scheuermann didn't employ Richard by herself, you know.

By Anonymous, at July 27, 2007 8:59 AM
Any person with ten years of experience on any public job would certainly have stepped on important toes along the way. Some of those toes are attached to feet armed with a boot unfortunately, Mr Wollangk is their target.

I agree with that statement.

Further, I think the writing is on the wall especially when a councilor makes the statement "10 years, its time for a change".
To me that's a rush to judgment with no review.
I to think we will see a change just for the sake of change and for no other reason.

By Anonymous, at July 27, 2007 9:38 AM
This is going to be an interesting decision.

I believe Mr. Wollangk is unable to make any decision without some council members accusing him of not keeping them in the decision making process.
He has attempted to protect his career by doing exactly what the Council wants.

Unfortunately his job is now in jeopardy for doing what his bosses want him to do (not make any decisions without their approval).
Oshkosh is idle because of the lack of a clear leader. They won’t let him be a leader. Micromanagement at it best!
Since the Council has wanted our City Manager to perform his job this way, the councilors are to blame for the current state of Oshkosh.

I think Mr. Wollangk could do a very good job IF the Council would step back and had the courage to let the City Manager be a city manager.
The question is, do they have the courage or do they just want to whine and grandstand?

By Anonymous, at July 27, 2007 10:39 AM
Its a performance based world. Mr. Wollangk simple has not performed and has placed his job in jeopardy. We need a change at the top in Oshkosh. A house cleaning is in order.

By Anonymous, at July 28, 2007 12:58 PM
Are you ready to see the additional expenses from the "house cleaning" you are recommending??
We could be facing a whopping severance package for anyone terminated plus possible legal fees. Not to mention the fees to pay for a search to replace any staff. Oshkosh will NEVER go for a independent, expensive city manager...and I'm afraid the majority of the council certainly isn't looking for someone to lead the city. If Mr. Wollangk goes, the council will hire someone very weak who will kowtow to their every whim...

By Anonymous, at July 29, 2007 7:39 PM
I think you will have to be mindful
of the domino affect at City Hall.
If the council fires the city manager or tactly askes for his resignation,who else will follow?
How many vacanies will be created and at what cost to taxpayers?

City managers and city planners get paid "BIG BUCKS"... will the taxpayers support a council ready to spend that kind of money?

Consider what the city lose with an interim government?

By Anonymous, at July 30, 2007 8:56 AM
Cost to the taxpayer? With the current situation it appears things will never change. Poor performance track record is a clear indicator. I'd rather clean house, reorganize and build a team at 215 Church that will finally place Oshkosh as a leading city, rather than the sub-city class we now seem to be stuck in. If you talk with people from the north valley, Oshkosh is a laughing stock. I am proud of my City and I want it to succeed. With the current administration, I feel we are on nothing but a downward spiral. REORGANIZE...make the changes NOW!

By Anonymous, at July 30, 2007 12:03 PM
CHANGES under these circumstances are going to cost BIG BUCKS.
Even without CHANGES just the discussions are costing extra dollars for the attorney fees.
there has to be a better way.
That better way has to come from a part-time council that has been seated for about 4 months.
If they take the easy road out and decide on termination. Oshkosh will feel the impact of that decision for years. Years far beyond the time any of the present councilors will serve.

By Anonymous, at July 31, 2007 7:52 AM
Sorry Bryan you're being "left out" in decision making re. City Mgr. That should not be. City Government is a "mess" to say the least. Mr.W. is not the only one to be looking at. Inspection alone is something to be looked into with a fine tooth comb. This nitpicking must stop. Code violations are abundant and yet a "quota" few are tagged, sometimes over such trivial things it's unreal, while at the same time deplorable violations go "unnoticed". Personally I don't have any contact with them anymore as there's no trust. Another is the Police Dept. Even when in Neighborhood Watch where we're encouraged to call them, I've been met with rudeness, intimidation, well to the point it would take a lot for me to ever contact them again! In essence I want nothing to do with City Hall and would love to get out of this city once and for all. Such is not possible as a nice home surrounded by "junk holes" only can be sold to another slumlord at a huge loss. Hum, what happened to all the improvement plans? A little here and there but then again, nitpicking. Until slumlords, bad tenants and homeowners who simply don't care how their property looks or the effect on others is dealt, this City will continue to become a very undesirable place to live. Thank you the opportunity to address concerns and again I regret that you have been singled out. I would check the legality of that.

By Anonymous, at July 31, 2007 4:37 PM
Bryan,
Sorry to read about your situation. I support your position and agree we need significant change at City Hall. I would support the position to remove Mr. Wollangk from office. I also call into question Jackson Kinney and Warren Kraft. I think a major reorganization of City Hall administration would be a proper move at this time. Some selective pruning promotes new growth. I think there are a few old growth limbs at City Hall that need to be trimmed back so the new sprouts can develop.

Keep fighting for this Bryan. Doing whats right is never easy.

By Anonymous, at July 31, 2007 8:20 PM
12:58 “ . . .We need a change at the top in Oshkosh. A house cleaning is in order."

I can agree with this statement. The City Council is at the top, get rid of them and then let's talk some more.

By Anonymous, at July 31, 2007 10:25 PM
10:25 you're a funny guy. The voters put those people in office. I and many others feel this is the best slate of councilors we've had is many many years. I think you hold a minority position if you feel this group are underperformers.

By Anonymous, at August 01, 2007 6:46 AM
EXCELLENT article by Cheryl Hintz:

"No logical reason for Bain to be out of city manager discussions"

Go to:
http://www.eyeonoshkosh.blogspot.com/

By Anonymous, at August 01, 2007 8:40 PM
People PLEASE CHILL
Who are the lawyers here?
Who are the overzealous public or columists? Do we need a massive lawsuit down the road?
I think not. Let's error on the side of caution. I agree it would be a shame that in an overzealous rush to "throw the bums out" we wound up subjecting the city to a massive lawsuit by an employee terminated through a publicly documented process. From an attorneys advise Brian is doing the safe thing and making sure the city he serves is protected. He's
doing the right thing by protecting the taxpayers purse.

By Anonymous, at August 02, 2007 9:19 AM
To those who believe a lawsuit could be forthcoming, please tell us on what basis? The city manager's contract allows for his termination OR non-renewal. If they terminate him and do so according to the terms of the contract they have with him, he has no grounds for a lawsuit and would be laughed out of court if he tried. We needto stop cowering in our boots everytime the mere threat of litigation rears its ugly head.

By Anonymous, at August 02, 2007 10:42 AM
Please understand the only person the council can remove is the City Manager. The City Manager is the one responsible for dealing with the employment of people like Jackson Kinney, Warren Kraft and Tom Stephany. The council CANNOT remove these people from their jobs; only Wollangk can.

As far as what Bain said in the paper? Stupid move. I don't think it should preclude him from taking part in the discussions, but to come out and say what he said when the council was about to convene in closed session to evaluate the CM was just plain dumb.

By Anonymous, at August 02, 2007 3:16 PM
There was nothing dumb about it and it's no different than anything else anyone else on the council has said. Also contrary to the continued proliferation of misinformation on the Kent "Mouthpiece" Monte blog, Bain never used the word "fired" in speaking about the city manager. As a matter of fact he even clarified on Eye on Oshkosh that the paper had it wrong and that he was NOT calling for the city manager's removal. Watch the replay and see for yourself. Every one of these city councilors has their mind made up so none are impartial. Bain needs to participate in this discussion. Although there's probably plenty votes to get rid of Wollangk even without Bain so when all's said and done his non-participation will probably be a moot point.

By Anonymous, at August 03, 2007 6:56 AM
Commentary: Attorney's advice on Bain perplexing

By Stephen Hintz

The attorney advising the Common Council in its discussions about the status of the city manager has come up with a legal interpretation requiring Councilor Bryan Bain to remove himself from any discussions about termination because Bain previously had stated that Oshkosh needed a new city manager.

What is the basis of this interpretation? Clearly, it is not in state statute chapter 64, which establishes council-manager government.

First, the city council by state statute has the authority to hire and terminate the city manager. This means the entire city council.

Second, by state statute, the city manager can be dismissed for cause (defined as willful misconduct in office, misfeasance, or malfeasance) or without cause. The city manager thus is an at-will employee who serves at the pleasure of the council. The only obligation of the city council is to provide specific reasons in writing for the dismissal, 60 days notice, and an opportunity for the city manager to present his response in a public forum. The specific reasons do not have to rise to any level of seriousness or meet the cause standard as defined by court cases.

There are instances when the city council functions as a quasi-judicial body such as considering a recommendation to revoke a city license. It is understandable why a public comment on the case by a councilor might disqualify the councilor from hearing the case. However, in the instance of deliberating about the city manager, the council is not acting as a quasi-judicial body. It is the employer making a decision about an at-will employee.

The interpretation by the attorney seems to suggest that the discussions of the council essentially constitute a hearing for the city manager to evaluate evidence. State statutes mention nothing about a hearing, in either open or closed session, or an appeals process. The city manager does not get to argue his case in front of the council. He simply is entitled to know the reasons for dismissal and to have an opportunity to publicly respond.

I do not believe that there is any legal connection between prior comments by a council member and council deliberations. By barring a council member from participation, the interpretation is improperly restricting the legal authority of the council member.

Let us look at several situations. What if a slate of candidates campaigned on the dismissal of the city manager and they won. Does it make any sense that they would be disqualified from participating in a discussion about termination? What if the slate included all of the council members? Would this mean that the council could not discuss termination of the manager?

What if several councilors publicly indicated that they thought that termination was a bad idea. Shouldn't they also be barred from participating in council discussions on termination by the same logic that kept Bain from participating?

We need a better legal explanation than we have received.

Stephen Hintz is the former Mayor of Oshkosh and common council member. He is retired from the UW Oshkosh faculty where he as Director of the Masters of Public Affairs program, Chair of the Department of Public Affairs, and Associate dean of the College of Letters and Science. He is a partner in Public Administration Associates, LLC, a consulting firm specializing in local government recruitment and management studies and an acknowledged expert in local government, organizational theory, and intergovernmental relations.

By Anonymous, at August 03, 2007 7:46 AM
If the City Mgr. has any chance of "redemining" himself it would be to do a long overdue "housecleaning". In particular: Jackson Kinney, Warren Kraft, Head of Inspection and possibly protegees to name the worst. Don't know about Stephany but he does have some great staff. Will Mr. W. do this? Highly unlikely so I would think new blood is in order.

I think a "good look" at the Mayor too is in order! It's worrisome that we wait until 2009. He does seem to have his cronies but then so do at least 2 other Council members. All 3 seem to find Bryan as "in the way...".

By Anonymous, at August 05, 2007 10:44 AM
Frank, Bryan, Dennis, Paul, Tony all have great redeeming values.

The jury (no pun intended) is still out on Jess...and Burk is from the old entitlement (I'm special/superior) driven shadow government crowd.

5 of the seven are solid. 1 shows some potential if she can distance herself from Jon D. and the final council member (Burk) will be defeated if he runs again.

The basic current slate of councilmembers are as good as this city has seen in decades.

By Anonymous, at August 05, 2007 4:32 PM
Wowee 10:44, it's difficult to know what you're saying because your grammar is so poor and thoughts so disjointed. Maybe blogging isn't your thing.

What's the problem with the mayor? He's been voting right along with Esslinger on many things. Please cite your specific problems, or is it just that you wanted Esslinger and didn't get your wish??

By Anonymous, at August 06, 2007 11:19 AM
I agree we certainly seem to have the best group of council reps we've had in years. You kind of know where Paul, Dennis and Tony stand, and you kind of know where King and Burk stand. Bryan and Frank are the swing votes. It's actually fun watching this group operate on Tuesday evenings. Lots of good discussion, always a question as to exactly how the vote will turn out. Good job Oshkosh! You elected an outstanding group.

By Anonymous, at August 06, 2007 2:57 PM
Yes, I did make a spelling error. As for Paul I voted for him and am happy that's he was at least able to retain his Council seat. My concerns re. the Mayor are that it was Frank that brought up the issue of Bryan's suitability for being involved with decision making regarding the City Mgr. when others did not (refer to originl press reports). I also vividly recall Frank's "fence jumping" when last on the Council. However, one can change. I hope that explains my position, questions etc. In addition, these sites I think are best used for expressing our througts regarding the author and his involvements/concerns vs. personal insults. We are not all at the same intellectual level but that does not mean our thoughts are "disjointed"; some are not as young as others. Thank you.

By Anonymous, at August 07, 2007 9:49 AM
It was Esslinger who agreed Bain should leave. As those of you in favor of the sidewalk issue always so quickly bring up, it doesn't matter who bought it up, it only matters who was for it.

By Anonymous, at August 07, 2007 12:12 PM
As I understand that meeting was closed. How is anyone to actually know what occured? Were quoted statements made by those in attendance? If so, can they be reprinted here so we are all able to read what was said. If people keep making comments about "what was said" but have no documentation to back it up, I submit that is a big problem...again as this was a closed meeting.

I looke forward to reading the specific quotes, if they can be produced.

By Anonymous, at August 08, 2007 6:51 AM
The way I see this whole thing is this. Jessica and Burk are kindof like Republicans, more for business and industry than people.
Toni, Dennis and Paul are like Democrats, more for the person, not the industry or business.
Frank and Brian are the swing votes, on any specific item, they might go either way. I think this all makes for a great balance of power in our government. The power is not all one side or the other.

By Anonymous, at August 08, 2007 12:14 PM
This council is all about the special interest groups each with a "pet" agenda.
Why else do homeowner/taxpayer questions and issues get shoved to the background. Examples:

Residential block parties 10 pm cut off...Water Fest 11 pm or later activities. OKAY

Same holds true for the neighborhood in the area around the Sports Complex.
The events there go on 7 days a week. Some well past 10pm with a page system turned up so you can actually hear the announcements at city hall. No Code Enforcement

Sawdust Daze issues brought to light by attendees and the neighborhood.
Neighborhood residents are all wrong...
there are no problems...
we can't possible move it...
it's only 3 or 4 days out of the year so move or deal with it.

Look at the 2% additional room tax
to possibly generate over $200,000
a year. Instead of going to help taxpayers pay for renovation of the Convention Centre it will go to "pet projects" determined worthy by the OCVB. What project is more deserving the Convention Centre or the Sports Complex?

Flash "special dollars" in front of any of these councilors and they will jump through hoops to make it happen and the resident taxpayers be Dammed.

By Anonymous, at August 08, 2007 2:04 PM
If the current administration is changed, you are likely to end things like not reacting to:
"10pm with a page system turned up so you can actually hear the announcements at city hall. No Code Enforcement"

Wollangk and his key crew need to be dismissed.

By Anonymous, at August 09, 2007 12:08 PM
Neighbors have actually been told that the OPD has no authority to enforece noise ordinances or nauisance complaints on UWO grounds.
Wollangk and his key crew need to be dismissed; have absolutely nothing to do with this.

It is UWO calling themselves a "state entity" and therefore DO NOT recognize the city codes ordinances. UWo lives in our community with their own set of rules. They take our tax dollars and beg us to buy bricks for a stadium that had NO business
being built in a residential area.

By Anonymous, at August 09, 2007 2:03 PM
Stop being so melodramatic. It's hardly as bad as you make it seem and the stadium has been where it is for decades. It's not like it was just erected yesterday.

By Anonymous, at August 09, 2007 9:03 PM
I agree-
Bottom line....
Wollangk and his key crew need to be dismissed

By Anonymous, at August 09, 2007 9:15 PM
Melodramatic? hardly
In your neighborhood do your neighbors abide by city nuisance codes or noise ordinances?
In your neighborhood:

•would you let the children out to scream and holler or crank a jukebox at 6AM or after 10PM?

•would you be able to continue a block party beyond 10PM?

•would you be allowed operate a sissors hoist vehicle with a constant ‘beep beep beep’ sound for hours after 10PM?

•would you operate leaf blowers after 10pm?

Some Titan families were there before the stadium was built
Families moved into the area 15 or 20 years ago when it was used on Friday nights and Saturdays but Never in the late night hours and Never with a PA system cranked to be heard miles away from the events. Always mindful of the neighborhood and city ordinances!

Now with declining property values and the noise residents are starting to move out

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 6:54 AM
The only way to make any head-way is to change our leadership. Our city administration needs a good house-cleaning. Our City Manager and his key lead Department Heads to be replaced.

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 7:31 AM
to make any head-way is to change our leadership...
please help me understand...
How will changes in City Manager or other department heads make the OPD enforce the municipal code violations?

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 9:48 AM
If 1 block party is allowed to cotninue after 10 PM I suspect they all would be allowed to do so. And who is that hurting anyway, since the entire block would be there, presumably?

As for the other complaints, if it's that bad why are neighbors not at the city council meetings registering their complaints? And if the problems really are that bad, maybe those who are hosting games at the stadium could offer goodwill passes to the neighbors whose properties abut the stadium. That would at least be some kind of a neighborly gesture.

I doubt that many people are selling their homes due to noise. There may be other factors involved in their decision.

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 10:50 AM
One of our neighbors who represents our concerns has been TRYING to work with the Police Chief, city councilors McHugh,and Bain as well as the Mayor. They listen but except for the Chief no one is working toward a solution.
Event noise is generated nightly from August to November.
However, the noise from the Stadium does end with the completion of the event It continues until well after 11 plus pm when the clean-up starts. Clean-up that includes the noise of numerous leaf blowers and a hoist platform with a constant "beep beep beep" similar to a truck when it backs up.
If you listen to block party requests brought forward to the council they emphasize a cut off time of 10 pm. Please realize this is NOT a once a week party event it is EVERY afternoon and night 6 days a week!
At least 3 families have moved from the area and each sited the additional noise and additional traffic concerns as factors in their decisions.

Although a nice gesture, the OASD that is hosting some of the games at the stadium could offer goodwill passes to the neighbors... a better gesture would be to compromise with the neighborly suggestion to just turn down the volume and alter the times of the games/events to end no later than 10pm.

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 11:22 AM
Sure 9:48 glad to help you understand this.

To review, here is your posting:
to make any head-way is to change our leadership...
please help me understand...
How will changes in City Manager or other department heads make the OPD enforce the municipal code violations?

August 10, 2007 9:48 AM

If you look at the City table of organization, the Police Chief answers to the City Manager.

The City Manager has the ability, as the Police Chief's Supervisor to play a major role in setting the agenda.

If the areas such as excessive noise in certain areas of the city are brought to the Mangers attention, he can direct the Police Chief or Health Department (noise) to take action.

Just as in any organization, employees will do what is prioritzed by their superiors.

In the case of Oshkosh, you will see by the numerious postings on various blogs, as well as letters to the editor in the local paper, the citizens of Oshkosh do not feel we have an effective leadership team at 215 Church Avenue.

Ultimately, regarding City issues, the buck SHOULD stop at the City Managers Office. Right now many of us feel that doesn't happen. We seem to much like a ship with a broken rudder...just floating with the tide. We in Oshkosh deserve better!

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 2:36 PM
In response to anonymous 11:22 AM, here it is a Friday night and I took a drive by the stadium. Absolutely nothing going on. Naturally I assumed when you said there was activity "EVERY afternoon and night 6 days a week!" (your emphasis and punctuation), that would have included Friday nights of all things. Imagine my surprise to see the stadium dark and the neighborhood quiet as quiet can be. Are these complaints just a bit overstated?

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 9:58 PM
I agree it may be a bit overstated, but the fact remains the new "Oshkosh Sports Complex" will do nothing except get busier.

The other fact still remains we are not getting the bang for our buck from the City Manager or his Staff. They seem to be coasting and trying to fly under the radar until retirement.

Oshkosh deserves better. We lag far behind our neighbors to the North and South.

Lets clean house at City Hall and get a real LEADER as City Manager.

By Anonymous, at August 10, 2007 10:55 PM
sorry I neglected to add
once school starts...
Come on back next Friday and the Fridays' there-after and see how quiet it is. Feel welcome to check out the daily events calendar
on the UWO webpage. Here are the links to the information
http://www.uwosh.edu/ click on Athletics... scoll down to Oshkosh Sports Complex... click Facility Schedule... choose JJ Keller Field...pick any month from August to November. Let me also point out the last 2 Friday nights of August and the last Friday night in Septmeber.
Than tell me if its a bit over stated.

By Anonymous, at August 11, 2007 6:16 AM
another suggestion if you think coners are over-rated
Read the ONW chat with the Chancellor Wells
He realizes the concerns of the neigborhood are legit...

By Anonymous, at August 11, 2007 8:16 AM
Some Dept. heads are relying on vigilantee reporting re. code violaions etc. This puts the reporter in harm's way. Inspection needs to be out detecting violations personally and make it know they are their discovery. In my neighborhood people have simply ceased calling; it's not worth the risk. If we have police patrol I have not observed such. It's fairly much open field to violations of all kinds. Has anyone ever received the "we don't have the manpower" response from anyone in City Hall, Police etc.? Indeed, we do need change! The City Mgr., while not a bad person, has simply let the inmates take over the prison.

By Anonymous, at August 12, 2007 4:21 PM
but the fact remains the new "Oshkosh Sports Complex" will do nothing except get busier.

...so after 3 years of promises don't you think the university should fix the problems BEFORE they create more?

Don't you think they should be part of the solution instead of part of the problem?

By Anonymous, at August 13, 2007 8:51 AM

Bain-Blog

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Information flow

53 Comments:

About

About Me

Previous

Links