Interim City Manager

After a closed session meeting Tuesday morning, a decision was made to move forward with an interim city manager search, and five finalists were announced. At that time, Councilors Esslinger, McHugh and Palmeri and Mayor F. Tower decided to proceed with the search for an interim city manager, while Councilor King, Deputy Mayor B. Tower and I wanted to end the interim search and move forward with something different.

The concept the three of us argued for, albeit unsuccessfully, was for the council to hold community meetings between now and January 17th - the date a citizen-led petition drive is due - to discuss what the community wanted to see in and expect of its next leader (a discussion like this would benefit the city regardless of its form of government).

Yesterday, Mayor F. Tower announced he would call a special meeting of the council to discuss ending the interim search and moving forward with a plan similar to what Councilor King, Deputy Mayor B. Tower and I advocated for the day before. I was pleased to learn that the mayor had changed his mind, however, frustrated it came after finalists were named and the decision to move forward with the interim search process.

Fast forward to today's special meeting. The council decided, on a 4-2 vote, to end the interim search and proceed with a search for a permanent city manager with the following provisions: to not start the search until after January 17th, and if a citizen-led referendum is submitted by the 17th, to not start the search until after the April 2008 spring elections. I joined Councilor King, Deputy Mayor B. Tower and Mayor F. Tower to support the above plan, while Councilors Esslinger and McHugh voted against it. Councilor Palmeri was unable to attend due to a teaching commitment, however, provided remarks on his blog.

Again, I am frustrated with the fact that we even needed to have a special meeting. I do, however, give credit to the mayor for taking responsibility for his change of mind and recognizing the position his change has put the city, us as council members and the five finalists in.

Finally, I have noticed for next Tuesday's meeting a discussion to take place during "Council Member Statements" regarding the council holding future community meetings for citizens to express to us what they want to see in and expect of their next leader. It is important for us as a council to provide an opportunity for the community to begin discussions about our next leader, regardless if he or she is a city manager or directly-elected mayor.

-Bryan

Running of the Goats canceled

As reported by The Northwestern, the "Running of the Goats" (the pub crawl) has been canceled.

While I disagree with the event, and its organizers stating it is equivalent to others supported by the community (like Waterfest, Country USA, etc.), I commend them for reaching this decision. While it may have been difficult, it was the right thing to do.

-Bryan

Cable Competition Bill

Yesterday, the Joint Finance Committee voted 13-3 in favor of the so-called cable competition bill (AB207/SB107). Unfortunately, Wisconsin is on path to pass a bill that is more friendly to AT&T than us as consumers. It also threatens funding for PEG stations such as OCAT.

In response, I sent a letter to the members of the JFC asking the legislators why Wisconsin citizens and communities deserve less than our neighbors in Illinois? I also urged them and their colleagues to support a bill that protects Wisconsin public access television and the rights of Wisconsin consumers. Now, I urge you to do the same.

Contact Senator Roessler and Representatives Hintz and Owens and ask them to support OCAT and Wisconsin consumers by supporting an "Illinois version" of the bill in Wisconsin.

For more information, check out the Save Access Wisconsin Web site.

-Bryan

UPDATE: (Courtesy of the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign)

"For the nearly four months that the state budget stalemate dragged on, we saw the Legislature at its worst. We are seeing it again with the mad rush to pass AT&T's cable TV bill. When you'd think our elected officials would insist that AT&T give Wisconsin a cable deal at least as good as the company agreed to in Illinois, lawmakers here seem to have been rendered blind, deaf and dumb by AT&T's public relations and lobbying blitz."

"A front group for the company, TV4Us, has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on TV ads promoting AT&T's position. The company has spent more than $200,000 on lobbying at the Capitol so far this session, and has given current legislators and the governor more than $352,000 in campaign contributions including over $28,000 in the first half of the year while the bill was being prepared for introduction and sailed through the Assembly."

"Then just a few days ago, AT&T and its allies released a poll aimed at sealing the deal in the Senate. After you read the poll results, read a little about the polling firm, which prides itself on shaping public opinion rather than measuring it."

"AT&T's bill passed the Assembly on a 66-28 vote in early May and then was just approved by the Joint Finance Committee 13-3 on Wednesday. It has been scheduled for a vote in the full Senate next Thursday. So far, lawmakers haven't been willing to do what even some of the proposal's original backers have been doing . . . namely reading the bill's fine print and looking at AT&T's track record on keeping past promises. That's leading to second thoughts. To see what we mean, go here and here."