No Reality for Bloechl in City Debate
Contributed by: Anonymous
While I enjoy Melanie Bloechl’s spirit and personality from time-to-time, her letter to the editor in the March 23 Northwestern was misguided, untruthful, and ignorant to the real issues the city is facing and the dialogue that has already taken place among council candidates.
When people in politics have nothing to resort to, they often start throwing around labels like "tax and spenders". At last week’s council debate every candidate was asked whether he or she supported cutting city staff, raising taxes, or expanding the tax base to pay for city services. Expanding the tax base was the number one response although candidates including Cheryl Hentz acknowledged the willingness to raise taxes for worthwhile services. I never heard Mattox, Bain, or Schererman say "they’re comfortable spending your hard-earned money on proposed projects, even though they haven’t reviewed plans or asked if you can afford them." Translation: You do not understand what you are talking about Melanie and it is a little disappointing.
Why? Because the increases in government spending have little to do with downtown projects and everything to do with:
*the increased cost of health care for city employees
*the increased cost of fuel and utilities
*and declining state aid to the city
The only way to pay for all of the city services we need (from these uncontrollable costs mentioned to addressing streets and other infrastructure) without grossly increasing taxes is to grow the tax base. Projects like the public library expansion, Opera House Square, and the amphitheater have more than just social benefit, but rather a great economic benefit to individual taxpayers. It is not whether to invest in development of not, but rather how we invest.
Working with the county, the state, the region, etc. to best determine how to deliver services most efficiently will be a priority as all are under financial pressure.
A large number of city employees have their salary and benefits determined by the collective bargaining process. Ms. Blochel should know this. And actually, while health care costs are skyrocketing in the public and private sector, our City Manager has been effective comparatively at keeping costs down and getting city employees to pay co-pays.
As for the non-represented employees, there is a pretty clear classification system in place with 11 or so steps. The step increases are based upon the collective bargaining process with the represented employees. The city did a salary study a few years ago that determined where we were versus other cities. Sure, we can cut salaries and positions, but campaign populism has consequences, in this case quality. Are we better off as taxpayers with a quality, creative, efficient workforce, or with the cheapest we can find.
As for council members like Mr. Esslinger being "watchdogs", don’t go to Tan Lines and then say you went to Florida.
Here are some facts to review:
* Mr. Esslinger supported Melanie Blochel’s effort to examine a brand new $26 million City Hall. Thankfully Mark Harris, Shirley Maddox, and Bill Castle led the effort to save taxpayers $23 million when they purchased the county building for a new police facility.
* Esslinger was behind the city repaving Burnwood Drive near his High Oak residence near the airport. Because the repaving included property belonging to the Town of Nekimi, city of Oshkosh taxpayers had to pay over $200,000 to cover the loss of assessed property contribution. Way to go Watchdog!
* If the so-called "watchdogs" wanted to have an open bid process on the amplitheater bathrooms, why didn’t they support keeping the bathrooms included as part of the original project which would have been subject to open bidding. Mr. Castle, Ms. Maddox, and Mr. Harris did.
If Mr. Esslinger is opposed to any tax increase, he should explain what city services should be cut, and what employees need to be laid off. Of course, he has voted for tax increases in the past.
Respect for citizens would involve actually attending the city’s budget hearings, which Mr. Esslinger has not. (more than stopping by)
I thought the debate last week showed improved dialouge between all candidates. Unfortunately, Ms. Blochel missed that.
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
No Reality for Bloechl in City Debate
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23 2005 @ 01:01 PM MST
There was no open bidding on the original amphitheater project. The Leach family single-handedly picked CR Meyer to construct the bandshell. You know not of what you are talking about. So I really don't know what Castle, Maddox and Harris voted on that you think you saw.
No Reality for Bloechl in City Debate
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23 2005 @ 02:58 PM MST
Ah yes yet another person that has all the answers yet has no name. As I have stated on Oshblog Ms Scheuerman,mattox and Mr Bain's comments can be seen and heard at the League of Women Voters forum March 16th and Eye on Oshkosh. As to your comments on the city and her overall state of being. First you state the healthcare costs are out of control for the employees, then you state Mr Wollangk has done a good job control them, which is it? You state another issue is the decline in state aides to the city, yet Mr Esslinger was the only councilor that in writing asked Rep Gregg Underheim to appear and explain why he continues to support these damaging cut to our city. You talk of growing the taxbase as though that has never been thought of before, as though that has no issues associated with that growth. Obviously you have not thought about what comes with growth, the call for even more and extended city services. Fire, Police, street, lighting, sewer, water,personal. Growth must be well thought out, planned and coordinated with County, City, Schools, etc. so that resources where they can, can be combined and maximized. Growth for the sake of saying you want it provides nothing but sprawl and cost. The communities ability to pay, and their input as to how the city will develop is esstential, and has been over looked far too often. You talk of investment, it in my opinion is not a wise investment to trade $20.00 an hour jobs for $6.00 an hour jobs and call it progess. You need to consider the multipler effect and this type of investment/employee/employer benefit not to mention the rationale to your board of director (they would be the taxpayers paying the tab). You also bastardized a study that Mr Esslinger and I both support for a city hall/fire station/police station for the city. The cost projections at that time were approx 26 million dollars. Instead you support a piece meal approach for esstential city services, the ones for which the city is charged with providing to her taxpayers, of buying a mold infected building that has no heating or cooling on premise(because it was run from the courthouse), a builing thaqt the roof is flat and will cause future problems due to arcitual design flaws, whoes third floor has been renedered useless due to heavy bars as it was used as a jail, this is your idea of wise use of taxpayers money. You speak of quality and yet you damn the most visable of city buildings to be put back together with bubble gum and scotch tape. But by all means lets have progress in downtown? I fail to see or remotely understand your logic or lack there of in my opinion. Further you state that MR Esslinger wanted his street done which cost the taxpayers a great deal of money, the last ime I looked Mr Esslinger has been unable to singlehandedly get anything done so you may want to review the vote on that issue. You may also want to check and see if that project wasn't indeed suggest by the city staff, and that the cost will be recapture upon annexation. As to your comments about the original bid for the Ampitheather, my understanding, there was no original bid the project deal was cut between the Leach family, the community foundation and CR Meyer, but please if you have documents proving the opposite please do share them. As for Mr Esslinger stopping by at budget time, I have worked with Mr Esslinger and I know first hand how much time, effort and energy he gives to this city council and the people of Oshkosh, this is even too cheap a shot for the likes of you to take.
I have enjoyed this execrise and hope that you will in the future find the courage and strength to share your name and your views if you want to be taken as more than just a person that has contempt for Oshkosh and her questioning people.
Melanie Bloechl
While I enjoy Melanie Bloechl’s spirit and personality from time-to-time, her letter to the editor in the March 23 Northwestern was misguided, untruthful, and ignorant to the real issues the city is facing and the dialogue that has already taken place among council candidates.
When people in politics have nothing to resort to, they often start throwing around labels like "tax and spenders". At last week’s council debate every candidate was asked whether he or she supported cutting city staff, raising taxes, or expanding the tax base to pay for city services. Expanding the tax base was the number one response although candidates including Cheryl Hentz acknowledged the willingness to raise taxes for worthwhile services. I never heard Mattox, Bain, or Schererman say "they’re comfortable spending your hard-earned money on proposed projects, even though they haven’t reviewed plans or asked if you can afford them." Translation: You do not understand what you are talking about Melanie and it is a little disappointing.
Why? Because the increases in government spending have little to do with downtown projects and everything to do with:
*the increased cost of health care for city employees
*the increased cost of fuel and utilities
*and declining state aid to the city
The only way to pay for all of the city services we need (from these uncontrollable costs mentioned to addressing streets and other infrastructure) without grossly increasing taxes is to grow the tax base. Projects like the public library expansion, Opera House Square, and the amphitheater have more than just social benefit, but rather a great economic benefit to individual taxpayers. It is not whether to invest in development of not, but rather how we invest.
Working with the county, the state, the region, etc. to best determine how to deliver services most efficiently will be a priority as all are under financial pressure.
A large number of city employees have their salary and benefits determined by the collective bargaining process. Ms. Blochel should know this. And actually, while health care costs are skyrocketing in the public and private sector, our City Manager has been effective comparatively at keeping costs down and getting city employees to pay co-pays.
As for the non-represented employees, there is a pretty clear classification system in place with 11 or so steps. The step increases are based upon the collective bargaining process with the represented employees. The city did a salary study a few years ago that determined where we were versus other cities. Sure, we can cut salaries and positions, but campaign populism has consequences, in this case quality. Are we better off as taxpayers with a quality, creative, efficient workforce, or with the cheapest we can find.
As for council members like Mr. Esslinger being "watchdogs", don’t go to Tan Lines and then say you went to Florida.
Here are some facts to review:
* Mr. Esslinger supported Melanie Blochel’s effort to examine a brand new $26 million City Hall. Thankfully Mark Harris, Shirley Maddox, and Bill Castle led the effort to save taxpayers $23 million when they purchased the county building for a new police facility.
* Esslinger was behind the city repaving Burnwood Drive near his High Oak residence near the airport. Because the repaving included property belonging to the Town of Nekimi, city of Oshkosh taxpayers had to pay over $200,000 to cover the loss of assessed property contribution. Way to go Watchdog!
* If the so-called "watchdogs" wanted to have an open bid process on the amplitheater bathrooms, why didn’t they support keeping the bathrooms included as part of the original project which would have been subject to open bidding. Mr. Castle, Ms. Maddox, and Mr. Harris did.
If Mr. Esslinger is opposed to any tax increase, he should explain what city services should be cut, and what employees need to be laid off. Of course, he has voted for tax increases in the past.
Respect for citizens would involve actually attending the city’s budget hearings, which Mr. Esslinger has not. (more than stopping by)
I thought the debate last week showed improved dialouge between all candidates. Unfortunately, Ms. Blochel missed that.
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
No Reality for Bloechl in City Debate
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23 2005 @ 01:01 PM MST
There was no open bidding on the original amphitheater project. The Leach family single-handedly picked CR Meyer to construct the bandshell. You know not of what you are talking about. So I really don't know what Castle, Maddox and Harris voted on that you think you saw.
No Reality for Bloechl in City Debate
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 23 2005 @ 02:58 PM MST
Ah yes yet another person that has all the answers yet has no name. As I have stated on Oshblog Ms Scheuerman,mattox and Mr Bain's comments can be seen and heard at the League of Women Voters forum March 16th and Eye on Oshkosh. As to your comments on the city and her overall state of being. First you state the healthcare costs are out of control for the employees, then you state Mr Wollangk has done a good job control them, which is it? You state another issue is the decline in state aides to the city, yet Mr Esslinger was the only councilor that in writing asked Rep Gregg Underheim to appear and explain why he continues to support these damaging cut to our city. You talk of growing the taxbase as though that has never been thought of before, as though that has no issues associated with that growth. Obviously you have not thought about what comes with growth, the call for even more and extended city services. Fire, Police, street, lighting, sewer, water,personal. Growth must be well thought out, planned and coordinated with County, City, Schools, etc. so that resources where they can, can be combined and maximized. Growth for the sake of saying you want it provides nothing but sprawl and cost. The communities ability to pay, and their input as to how the city will develop is esstential, and has been over looked far too often. You talk of investment, it in my opinion is not a wise investment to trade $20.00 an hour jobs for $6.00 an hour jobs and call it progess. You need to consider the multipler effect and this type of investment/employee/employer benefit not to mention the rationale to your board of director (they would be the taxpayers paying the tab). You also bastardized a study that Mr Esslinger and I both support for a city hall/fire station/police station for the city. The cost projections at that time were approx 26 million dollars. Instead you support a piece meal approach for esstential city services, the ones for which the city is charged with providing to her taxpayers, of buying a mold infected building that has no heating or cooling on premise(because it was run from the courthouse), a builing thaqt the roof is flat and will cause future problems due to arcitual design flaws, whoes third floor has been renedered useless due to heavy bars as it was used as a jail, this is your idea of wise use of taxpayers money. You speak of quality and yet you damn the most visable of city buildings to be put back together with bubble gum and scotch tape. But by all means lets have progress in downtown? I fail to see or remotely understand your logic or lack there of in my opinion. Further you state that MR Esslinger wanted his street done which cost the taxpayers a great deal of money, the last ime I looked Mr Esslinger has been unable to singlehandedly get anything done so you may want to review the vote on that issue. You may also want to check and see if that project wasn't indeed suggest by the city staff, and that the cost will be recapture upon annexation. As to your comments about the original bid for the Ampitheather, my understanding, there was no original bid the project deal was cut between the Leach family, the community foundation and CR Meyer, but please if you have documents proving the opposite please do share them. As for Mr Esslinger stopping by at budget time, I have worked with Mr Esslinger and I know first hand how much time, effort and energy he gives to this city council and the people of Oshkosh, this is even too cheap a shot for the likes of you to take.
I have enjoyed this execrise and hope that you will in the future find the courage and strength to share your name and your views if you want to be taken as more than just a person that has contempt for Oshkosh and her questioning people.
Melanie Bloechl
posted by Cheryl Hentz at 12:42 PM
<< Home