Where are the tough questions??

Contributed by: Anonymous
Remember when candidates in the last city council election were assuring us how they were going to ask the tough questions? Well, I don’t know about you but I’m still waiting for most of the candidates that got elected to start asking some questions.

At the last council meeting we saw the council debate for 30-45 minutes about a .50 cent ticket charge on attendees to the amphitheater. Council member Frank Tower had figures about the charge that would impress a CPA, yet when it came to the $52,000,000 Five Rivers project, only Paul Esslinger had questions. In fact, when Mayor Castle asked the council if there were any questions that they would like to ask, for a few seconds, no one said anything. And when Mayor Castle called for the vote, finally Paul Esslinger, bewildered I might add, spoke his peace, and asked some questions.

And Burke Tower took the cake on the amphitheater ticket charge when he said we need to get another year under our belt to determine what kind of ticket charge we should have, if any. Give me a break Burke; what is so hard to understand about a 50 cent charge on a ticket? Let me see if I have this right; you don’t understand and need more information about a 50 cent ticket charge, but you know everything about the Five Rivers project, and don’t have any questions about that??? By the way kudos to Brian Bain and Shirley Mattox for voting in favor of the tickets charge! How is it that we can analyze to death a 50 cent charge on an amphitheater ticket, which I might add tragically failed, but six council members don’t have any questions about a $52,000,000 project?!?!

I specifically remember council member Scheuremann in the last election debates saying how she was going to ask the tough questions. Really Ms. Scheuermann? I haven’t heard you ask one tough question in the seven months you’ve been on the council. As a matter of fact you copped out on the vote for the amphitheater, and you didn’t give a good explanation why? Can you please explain, in detail, how you would directly benefit from that vote; and don’t give me any crap about your employer has privacy restrictions?

Why is it that most politicians always say one thing and then once elected do another? But I must say, if the average person doesn’t get out and vote, special interest groups and special interest council members will continue to bleed us dry.

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 10:47 AM MDT
Hey dummy,Waterfest banks with US Bank, Sheuermann's employer. Waterfest is directly affected by the surcharge being placed on their ticket prices. Her vote on such an issue is a conflict of interest.Ever have anything positive to say? All you ever do is complain. Offer something compelling once, will you?Got it?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 10:52 AM MDT
Hey dummy.Scheuermann has to DIRECTLY benefit from the vote.Got it?!

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 10:53 AM MDT
Another thing, dummy.Scheuermann voted for the PMI contract which involves Waterfest and US Bank.Don't be so stupid, dummy.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 10:58 AM MDT
Wrong again, dummy.Waterfest banks with US Bank. Her vote either way could generate money or decrease money Waterfest makes. If Waterfest makes less money, US Bank makes less money. Conflict of interest.You are so stupid you don't even know what you don't know.Humor us all and tell us one thing you like about this city. One.Better yet. Move to Appleton. Got it?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:01 AM MDT
Why did she vote on the PMI project?Man are you dumb

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:04 AM MDT
Grow a set and ask her. You asked about her conflict of interest, and I told you what it was. I don't know about the PMI contract. She had legal advice from the city attorney, as she said at the meeting Tuesday night. Her phone number is in the book. Why don't you ask her, instead of using a public forum to simply try to make her look bad?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:07 AM MDT
You're just like her, a cop-out.You don't know why she voted on the PMI contract, so just throw up your hands and say "I don't know."Why don't you grow a couple and ask her why she votes for one issue, but not the other.And while you have her on the phone, ask her when she's going to ask some tough questions. Dummy.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:08 AM MDT
The other thing you're not getting in regards to the 5 Rivers Resort is that the city council had a TON of information given to it in closed meetings. Don't be so quick to judge that none of them had any questions. Many of their questions were probably answered in closed session prior to the meeting. Esslinger has the knack to appear to ask 'tough' questions when no one else does to make him look like he's the only one concerned about money the city spends. Just because the question isn't asked during the council meeting doesn't mean it hasn't been asked previously. Got it?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:11 AM MDT
Grow a couple and call the council members that voted in favor of the Five Rivers project and tell them that you don't understand it and you want them to explain it to you. You'll either have silence on the other end, or you'll hear "I really don't understand it either."God, you really are stupid!

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:17 AM MDT
I talked to them already, dummy. Remember when they asked us to call them to let them know how constituents feel about the issue? I did! And I think they do have a good understanding of thr issue. You're the one who obviously doesn't. You really are clueless about so many things. You don't like ideas, so you bad mouth them, and criticize people for things you know absolutely nothing about. Keep your head in the sand. You should probably be able to prove that the council members know nothing about the resort before you start making that claim. Appleton is calling. I hear McDonalds up there is hiring. Take your eighth grade education and head north, superstar.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:53 AM MDT
I'm the one who bad mouths?Go back and read your last few posts; superstar.At least I have an 8th grade education, you my friend I don't believe even went to school.Later dummy.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:22 AM MDT
Maybe questions should be asked during council meetings so that the public can actually hear the answers, especially when our money is being spent or our services are being put on a backburner. But to knock Esslinger for asking questions at the meetings or to suggest why he is asking them at the meetings rather than behind closed doors is unfair and uncalled for. Let's also not forget about the times in the past where certain council members have asked questions at meetings, not gotten answers, yet voted for something anyway. That's just plain poor leadership; in fact non-leadership would probably more closely describe it.I, also, don't understand why Mrs. Scheuermann could vote on one aspect of the project, but not another. If she can't vote on it, it certainly seems she ought to at least be able to explain why she can't.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 11:57 AM MDT
Cheryl,Your comments are right on point.But don't expect "got it" to "get it."I don't think he/she knows how to tie his/her shoes.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:07 PM MDT
Does PMI bank at US Bank? I do not think so. Waterfest does. You should be able to figure it out from there. The key here is direct monetary impact.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:09 PM MDT
When Mr. Esslinger votes present on an issue he states " they are a client of mine". Why is that good enough? Waterfest is a client of Mrs. Scheuermann. Enough said. Remember, monetary gain!

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:25 PM MDT
Waterfest is not a client of Ms. Scheuermann, they are a client of US Bank. She does not have a DIRECT monetary gain.When Paul says "they are a client of mine," he directly benefits because sales people are paid on commission, and he DIRECTLY benefits from that.Why can't you rocket scientists understand this?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:39 PM MDT
So I assume you have talked to MS and she told you she has no monetary gain? Wow, you make so many assumptions with little or NO knowledge.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:27 PM MDT
Esslinger explains what the reason is for his being unable to vote. Mrs. Scheuermann did not. If it was simply a matter of Waterfest banking there why not say it? We'd all understand, but to cite a conflict, then say something about the bank's privacy policy is kind of vague. After all, it apparently is not a huge secret where Waterfest banks, as some of you have so stated, so what's the big deal? Although I am surprised Mr. Dempsey would not have Waterfest bank at his own bank rather than somewhere else. Then there's still the unanswered question of why, if there's this conflict, one piece of the project can be voted on and another cannot. A little clarification would be nice and put things in better perspective, is all.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:31 PM MDT
You are all blowing this out of proportion.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:42 PM MDT
Paul states "they are a client of mine". Does he ever say what the specific reason why he does not vote? (Monetary gain?) He is usually very vague, as are the council members who work for the university. You are asking MS for specifics while not asking others for them.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:57 PM MDT
When a salesperson works on commission everyone understands that client=dollars in salesperson's pocket.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 12:59 PM MDT
Please, can we leave this alone? MS got info from the city attorney that her involvement when it came to this specific vote was enough to cause a conflict of interest. She abstained given that information. Unless any of you complaining about this (DOR, admin) can show your law degree, ENOUGH!

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:22 PM MDT
One doesn't need a law degree to question something. But for what it's worth, I have had several attorneys tell me that I know more about the law than many of their colleagues. Let's also not forget that our own city attorney has given advice in direct conflict with the DA's office and that of the state Attorney General. So a law degree has nothing to do with it. If MS needs to abstain, that's fine. Then the question of why there was no abstention on a contract overseeing the management of that same facility needs to be answered.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 03:29 PM MDT
Call her and ask her then, Cheryl. You want to know so badly. Call her and let us know what you find out.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 04:03 PM MDT
What valuable insight you've provided to the discussion with comments like this one. Goodness, how have we survived without you for so long? But maybe you can "get this" - if Meredith could not explain her reasons in a public setting, what makes you think she'll explain them in a private one?
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 04:05 PM MDT
Perhaps since you are so wise you'd like to try sincerely addressing some of the original points made by "dose of reality." Those being about asking tough questions.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:04 PM MDT
Oh, he gets a commission. I never heard him state that. Not all sales people work on commission. Do bankers ever get compensated for recruiting accounts?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:03 PM MDT
Let me try this again, and I’ll speak slowly so some of our challenged readers can understand.When you’re in sales, which Paul said he is, you work on commission. You make money on the amount of dollars your client spends with you.For example:If you have a client, say “Widgets are us,” and they spend $5,000 with you, and you make 10% commission, you DIRECTLY make $500.If you work for a company like US Bank, and you don’t service the account, you don’t DIRECTLY benefit.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:17 PM MDT
Well Dose, you are wrong on both counts. There are exceptions in both fields. But I guess you just make assumptions in both cases that fit your argument. Your stupidity is only surpassed by your arrogance.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:21 PM MDT
Please educate me with the exceptions.If you can't, please don't show any more of your stupidity.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 01:20 PM MDT
Are you really naive enought to think bankers do not get compenstaed for landing lucrative accounts? Have you never had a salesperson state to you, "I do not work on commission"? Hello, do you live under a rock, or do you just choose to be an argumentative ass?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DP on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 02:50 PM MDT
Also, please remember that there are MANY different laws regarding privacy within the banking and securities industry. I side with MS...she CAN'T be more specific. I applaud her professionalism for not exposing specifics. Also, direct and indirect monetary benefit are not always black and white. For example...making an affirmative vote for a client of the bank may put more assets in the bank for that client. If she has a bonus structure that is partially based on new assets coming into the bank, this could increase her bonus. Is that direct, or indirect?? I say you could argue both. She's personally on the hook for any ethics violations, so becuase she may take a conservative approach to a situation shouldn't be held against her.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 03:12 PM MDT
I don't think anyone is saying or even suggesting that she should have violated a conflict - ethical or otherwise. It just hasn't made sense that she has voted on one aspect of the Leach operation and not another.- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 03:33 PM MDT
Waterfest had not entered into a contract with PMI, the Leach, etc when the first votes regarding the leach, promotional company, etc were being decided on. Now that Waterfest is a client of both PMI (who runs the Leach) and US Bank, Scheuermann is obligated to abstain from voting as the conflict now exists.Plus, where else is she supposed to go to get the legal advice as to whether or not she should vote? The city attorney, duh! Whether or not you like him, his opinions, or whatnot, she went to the resource available to council members. Let it go already.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 03:40 PM MDT
You are certainly full of answers. Not necessarily the best answers in the world, but we thank you for trying to clarify. Too bad we couldn't get this kind of clarity at Tuesday night's meeting. But here's a question for you: How exactly do you know so much? If you got the information from M.S. then she still would have violated a privacy policy it seems. If you got the information from someone at city hall, it would appear they have a similar type problem. If you got the information because you work at the bank, then you have violated the privacy policy. That's how it seems on this end.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 04:45 PM MDT
What have I answered that shows I have inside info?Waterfest banks a US Bank. Not anything top secret. What else have I answered? A timing question. Waterfest had not contracted with anyone at the Leach when the vote was made. How do I know? Simple deduction, and a good memory. You see, it was after the PMI bit, and the talk of the $30,000 that Waterfest was going to contribute. Put it in the timeline, and it all makes sense. The last thing I remember contributing is that MS confided Tuesday night that she asked the city attorney if she had a conflict of interest. He provided his definition, she concluded she did. I have not talked to ANYONE about any of this. It just takes a little detective work. Now, Cheryl, prove me wrong. You say me answers aren't the best. Why not? They make sense, don't they? I love how you hate being wrong.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 08:21 PM MDT
"Got it" - The $30,000 figure you referenced is the dollar amount PMI is paying the city. And again, any facility charge would technically be paid by the people purchasing the tickets, unless of course, Waterfest is planning to purchase all tickets for all their events themselves. Good Lord, you can't even get the basics right on this. Given that, I don't think we should bother responding to the rest of your nonsense. It's nothing more than drivel. That much you've proven here today.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 08:40 PM MDT
Hey "got it" how do you know Waterfest banks at U.S. Bank? Also, as to your timeline, your memory is about as shaky as your deductive processes. Construction on the Leach was still going on and Waterfest was talking about using it. In fact, Mike Dempsey was a very active participant in the planning meetings for the Leach. Also, I well remember during the spring common council campaign David Leach talking with me and Paul Esslinger about Waterfest's intentions to use the facility. So while a contract may not have actually been signed with PMI (it wouldn't have necessarily been signed with Leach as you mentioned, so I think you're getting the different entities confused again), they certainly had given every indication of their intention to use the facility. Instead of relying solely on memory, assumptions and deductive processes, you might be better served and better be able to take part in the discussion if you had more hard facts rather than memory and suppositions. It's just a thought.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 06:13 AM MDT
Anyone else notice how in the beginning of this discussion "got it" said they didn't know about the PMI contract questions, but suddenly now they are as full of answers as they are of themselves?- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 08:19 AM MDT
Yes, maybe "got it" has a conflict also.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: OshRocks! on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 02:57 PM MDT
here here! I was going to type this in a response, but you said it well - there have been hours and hours of closed door meetings in which everyone had an opportunity to ask questions - no one else seems to have the need to grandstand.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 06:16 AM MDT
Again, as was previously mentioned, perhaps questions should be asked at the council meetings, even if they've been previously asked in a closed door meeting. That way the public who usually foots the bill but doesn't get to participate in the conversation can actually hear the answers. We might just feel a little more comfortable with the council votes. But knowledge is power and maybe they'd rather we didn't know.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: L Schaffer on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 04:37 PM MDT
Hey "oshrocks", how does the average taxpayer know if the tough questions were asked, the meetings were held behind closed doors, minutes of those meetings are never published in the paper, are we as taxpayers suppose to take the word of a politician, I THINK NOT. What gets me mad about the whole thing is our council members beat to death a surcharge for the amphitheatre and does nothing to help protect the taxpayer and then during council meetings in front of taxpayers do not ask questions about a project that costs over $50 million dollars, this is totality unexceptable.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 04:09 PM MDT
Hey "got it" - here's a reality check you might want to consider. The people who buy the tickets for events at the Leach are the ones who actually would be paying the user fee, not Waterfest. So technically, the money is not coming from Waterfest, but rather the users. And after all, they're the ones who should be paying for this facility.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 04:49 PM MDT
Come on Cheryl, do you really miss this that badly?If there is an additional fee tacked on, Waterfest might lose money because *gasp* the 50 cents or a buck might keep people away. If that is the case and Waterfest loses money, they don't invest as much with US Bank. As MS has WF as an account with US Bank, US Bank may lose money. So of MS votes for or against it, it could have a direct monetary impact on the business she works for.Got it? It ain't really that complicated.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: L Schaffer on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 06:14 PM MDT
Hey "got it" are you that brainwashed that you believe everything that the city council says and MS as long as she has been on the city council has not shown me yet that she can ask questions that are important. Stop with the bad comments and start listening, you might learn something.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 06:57 PM MDT
No, L Schaffer....I do my own homework. I ask my own questions. What is the big deal over a council member saying they have a conflict, and they were advised my the city attorney that they should abstain? That is all this is really about. Why are people like Esslinger, Cheryl Hentz and Dose of (Un)Reality so blind to this? Beyond that-- is it really that big a deal?If you watch the meetings, and read the minutes, it really isn't that hard to understand....

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 08:05 PM MDT
Apparently it IS that hard to understand - for you, "got it." If you have all these answers as to what the real conflict of interest is for Mrs. Scheuerman than they must be a matter of public knowledge somehow. In that case there shouldn't be a problem for those reasons to be cited, or so it would appear. Yet there was this big veil of secrecy at Tuesday's meeting and a privacy policy cited. I understand privacy policies and respect the decision not to vote if that is the case. But here again, you claim to know the real reasons and a few others claim to know. I think it is fair to ask how you know if no one else can. If you don't get that, then refer to my earlier posting and it might be a little more clearly spelled out for you so you can "get it." In addition to that, everyone is still missing the meat and potatoes of "dose's" original posting.
- Cheryl
FYI: I don't hate being wrong, "got it" and I''ll admit it when I am. (So see, you don't know as much as you want people to think you do) But you have not proven any of us wrong yet. Nor have you really addressed the main issues; all you've really done is throw things out there that are more than likely supposition on your part and attack others. If you're so sure of yourself and have nothing to hide, stand up and sign your real name. Can you "get that?"

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 08:15 PM MDT
I think you have missed it pretty badly, "got it." The legal reason to abstain is when you can directly benefit from something. If Waterfest loses money and doesn't invest as much, there is no benefit derived by anyone. But that explanation is really a stretch. I also believe that peolpe should abstain when there could be an appearance on a conflict. But you have suggested a timeline that doesn't entirely make sense either. Do you actually think that Waterfest - an organization that has been around for several years now - has just changed over to U.S. Bank in the last 6 months since M.S. has been on the council or since the vote on PMI occurred? I doubt it. And again, it would make more sense that Mike Dempsey would have Waterfest bank at his own bank, not U.S. Bank. It is interesting how "got it" seems to ignore those things s/he doesn't have an answer for. But we understand it is hard to stay on top of everything, especially when one is so busy reading all those meeting minutes and making all those phone calls to get information right from the horse's mouth.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 09:10 PM MDT
Please refer to DP's post above.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 10:01 PM MDT
Speaking for myself, I said earlier that I understand about conflicts, etc. But "got it" continues with a lot of things that simply don't make sense, are inaccurate or which ignore some of which has been asked. Then as a follow-up, "got it" makes nasty comments to others who take an opposing position. Finally, instead of addressing the "tough questions" comments, all "got it" has chosen to do is attack Paul Esslinger for asking tough questions in the council chambers and makes presumptuous comments about Paul's motive for doing so.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: got it on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 05:17 AM MDT
That's what makes this forum so interesting. Idiots on here like dose of reality can call names, make accusations that border on slander, etc, and as long as they are in line with admin, they are just fine. But when someone challenges something that goes against what Cheryl believes, all of a sudden they are attacking, misinformed, should sign their name, etc. Interesting how this forum works, isn't it?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 05:36 AM MDT
Slander? Please, do you even know what slander is, Mr/Ms. Attorney?Would you please point out where there have been slanderous comments?Face it, you and maybe one other misinformed individual are the ones sticking up for M.S. Everyone else seems to “get it.”Got it “Get it.”

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: admin on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 06:08 AM MDT
Hey "got it," you started with the name-calling and accusations in your very first response. You immediately called "dose of reality" a "dummy." Anyone reading this thread of responses can see that. You got what you deserved and now you're complaining about it. You've subequently said that "dose" says things bordering on slander. Again, you know not of what you speak. There was nothing slanderous said in "dose's" comments, but you should be aware that the threshhold for claiming and proving slander is much higher for an elected official than it is for a private citizen. Mind you, I'm not saying that makes it right to slander an elected official, but "dose" didn't say anything close to slanderous. Interesting how people like you make the same old tired argument, even though the obvious has been pointed out. And then when your arguments have been shot down and your positions have no more steam in them, you resort to complaining about the site and how I run it. And you base my reasoning on the fact that someone has disagreed with me. It's really quite humorous and certainly predictable. Tell you what, "got it," I'll be happy to delete your username. That way you'll be insulated from having to see the "name-calling" and "near slanderous" remarks you accuse others of doing. We have all merely defended ourselves against your misstatements of fact and name calling. You just can't take it or adequately defend your position. And again, you know my real identity and I know yours. If you're so sure that you're right, I encourage you to share your identity with everyone else. I think that will put things in a greater perspective for others. Others can certainly do the same. Until then, please let me know if you'd like your username deleted. I aim to please.
- Cheryl

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 09:54 AM MDT
I don't think this is about "sticking up" for MS. I think some of us understand the situation while other refuse to see the position MS is in. I believe it has been explained quite clearly. Again, I refer you to the post above by DP. If you still do not understand I would suggest you contact MS. Hopefully she can clear things up for you. This is about policy not personalities.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 10:01 AM MDT
Dose were you not there when MS asked tough questions to our parks director about the pier issue. Other than Paul, she has probably asked the most "tough questions" of any member of the council. Should she ask more, possibly. IWe can sit here and pick apart any member of this council. Yes, even your man Saint Paul. (Who I voted for) Dose, you seem like a very negative bitter person. Just once I would like to see you contribute something positive to this board. It is easy to sit back and take shots at people after the fact.

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 10:24 AM MDT
Please stop with this “just once say something positive” B.S.Yea, I get negative when our elected people are grossly derelict in their duties, and say things to get elected and then do something else when they get elected.But if you must, I’ll say some positive things:Oshkosh has very warm and caring people, we have a low crime rate, our parks system is good, (although Menominee Park is becoming a zoo, literally) we have good services including our fire and police protection, we have some wonderful businesses, (EAA, Oshkosh Truck, Beamis to name a few) we have many fine churches, we have a good sense of our history, and we generally are considerate of other peoples opinions. I could mention many more, but you asked for one, and I gave several.So for you and others who don’t seem to mind that we have people representing us that in my opinion are centered around special interest groups, I’m sure things are really great. But for me, someone who is concerned about taxes and special interest groups running the city, things can be somewhat negative at times, and I won’t apologize for it.I must admit, M.S. was impressive regarding the pier issue, but outside of that subject, she has contributed little. Please be a little more objective in your defense of M.S.By the way, should I refer to some religious label for M.S. seeing as you fall at her feet at every corner?

Where are the tough questions??
Authored by: DRR on Friday, October 28 2005 @ 10:14 PM MDT
This is the first time I have defended her. I told you I voted for Paul. I just call them as I see them. I totally disagree with MS on the fee issue. If you recall she verbally sided with the Twin Towers. I believe we need a fee on the Leach and we should also be using PMI or fee dollars to pay down the debt on the Leach. I do not blindly follow any candidate.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again

During this evening's Common Council meeting Frank Tower stated that, based on financial information councilors received in their packets, it did not seem that a facility charge at the Leach Amphitheater was necessary - at least not at this time.

When Councilor Shirley Mattox talked about how the fee is to help the city plan for the future of the facility and pay for maintaining/improving it in the future, Tower responded by posing a somewhat rhetorical question, asking if it was right that the patrons using the facility be responsible for paying for something they may not be using; things that may be there in the future.

Unbelievable! While Frank Tower is busy protecting the users of the Leach under that misguided premise, he has no problem whatsoever asking the citizens of this community - every property owner there is - to pay for something, whether we use it or not. Let’s remember, we taxpayers have paid more than $3 million for this facility, but apparently that does not matter to Frank Tower, who voted in favor last year to put this on our backs. Nor does it seem to matter to the other “nay” voters on this issue: William Castle and Burk Tower.

And regardless of the fact that Frank said a charge can always be put in place in the future, he seems to be more concerned about acquiescing to his buddies at the Chamber of Commerce (who have fought against this charge from the very beginning) than protecting the taxpayers he was elected to serve. His misplaced allegiance needs to be remembered at election time – no matter what elected position he may run for in the future.

VOTED FOR A FACILITY CHARGE:
Paul Esslinger
Shirley Mattox
Bryan Bain

VOTED AGAINST A FACILITY CHARGE (and the taxpayers):
William Castle
Frank Tower
Burk Tower
These three "no" votes are shameful.

(Meredith Scheuerman cited a conflict of interest and, therefore, abstained from the vote but said she opposed it at this time, anyway.)

- Cheryl

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: DP on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 07:14 PM MDT
I agree Cheryl...shameful for those council members to not vote for the surcharge. At a time when fees are about to be dumped on the taxpayer, it is disturbing that this would happen. Fees should be imposed on voluntary users.

Even more disturbing to me was Frank Tower's suggestion that surplus revenue be given to the Oshkosh Foundation. Why not use the surplus revenues to pay down the debt?? I argued against the Foundation being involved with taxpayers money...primarily because of the potential for "the slippery slope". Well, now it's not just fees going to the foundation, it's also any surplus revenues. What's next?? They are NOT the city's personal money manager. Poor Policy.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 07:47 PM MDT
I agree with you. Not to mention that if the Foundation really felt strongly about something, they could nix a request for money given them for a specific cause. They are in total control and the entity for whom dollars are donated is at their mercy. Not necessarily the best vehicle in the world for donations.

There should be a clause in any agreement an organization or community makes with them that says the Foundation will not deny, but rather honor all requests made for donated money to that specific entity.

- Cheryl

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: Jim B. on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 07:58 PM MDT
What inkling have you ever had that the twin towers and the castle have the best interest of the citizens in their thought process? This charge is a no-brainer! Have you ever bought tickets from Ticketmaster? Do you not buy tickets to see a favorite act because of an additional charge? Probably not.........so why would The Leach be any different? Regardless of your position on The Leach, this is another example of certain council members taking the common sense out of the common council.

Jim B.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 08:21 PM MDT
Absolutely true! Their decision completely defies logic. The "twin Towers" need to be toppled come spring '06. Rumor has it F. Tower will be seeking a higher elected office and not seeking Common Council re-election. If that proves true, his Common Council votes need to be considered - and remembered - in any other election.

- Cheryl

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: Jim B. on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 08:40 PM MDT
In my opinion Frank Tower has done absolutely nothing to to deserve or be thought of for higher office.

Jim B.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: Mike on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 08:53 PM MDT
It is a shame that the .50 cent surcharge didn't at least get passed. I feel it is wrong to always rely on donations or tax dollars to further this project when something so simple could have been done to finance further improvements and maintenance. This sure could have helped with the storage shed that is in the plans.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: L Schaffer on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 08:55 PM MDT
Frank Tower and many of the other council members from time to time need to be reminded just who pays the bills. What happened tonight at the council meeting just goes to prove that the city of Oshkosh needs to change the form of gov. from a manager type to a mayor type with veto powers and to finally get rid of the mismanagement that has been going on for so long.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 09:04 PM MDT
They certainly do need to be reminded of who pays the bills. But as long as people continue re-electing these political misfits, we will continue to pay the bills while their business buddies skate by free and easy.

- Cheryl

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: DP on Wednesday, October 26 2005 @ 11:59 AM MDT
Regarding your comment about a clause with the foundation. I don't believe that could be done as it may put their tax-exempt status at risk. There is quite a gray area regarding control and donor advised funds.

Councilman Frank Tower sticks it to the citizens again
Authored by: admin on Wednesday, October 26 2005 @ 12:17 PM MDT
Perhaps that may be the case. I was merely trying to think of ways that donations could be made to the Foundation but the entities for whom they are made could be assured that their future requests for money would always be granted rather than being left to the possible subjective whims of the Foundation's board - whose complexion can change at any time.

- Cheryl

1,000 greyhounds need your help!

[We have received the following press release, asking for your help, and are pleased to publish it here at the request of the sender.]

On November 6th, Geneva Lakes Greyhound Race Track in Lake Geneva, Wisconsin, will close their doors for good and 1,000 of their racing dogs will need homes.

Greyhounds Only, a not-for-profit rescue group (501-C-3) usually handles these adoptions, however, with their current resources and volunteers, they can only accommodate 20-25 of these ex-racing beauties.

Please get the word out to all your friends and media affiliates across the country that Greyhounds Only is in desperate need of other Greyhound Rescue groups to pitch in and help. Transport can be arranged; it's the housing, care, feeding and placement of these marvelous, gentle creatures that needs immediate attention and volunteers.

We cannot stand idly by and let these ex-racing dogs be cast aside because their owners no longer value them. They lived their whole lives being someone else's commodity; now it's their turn to live the rest of their lives in comfort being loved and pampered.

For more information:contact Kathy Urzedowski at www.greyhoundsonly.com
Cell: 847-309-3647
Home: 847-587-0621

Take a moment to look at www.greyhoundsonly.com. On the home page click on Enter. Look at those eyes on the next page. These animals deserve so much more than they have known thus far. Click on the link that says Geneva Lakes. Here you will find documents that you can print out and post at your places of employment or where you shop.

Thank you so very much!

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair

Contributed by: Jim B.
Have you seen the article this morning about a possible new Lowes coming in on Washburn? Sounds like they are negotiating to improve Washburn in order to seal the deal. The city would divert funds allocated for next year arterial street repair to fix Washburn. According to our Mayor, Washburn is in pretty bad shape! Has he driven down Grand? I understand this would increase the tax base, but how much longer will residents have to wait to get there decrepit streets fixed? And who is to say this won't happen again next year when Home Depot, etc. comes calling? Do we really need another store like this in that area? And what would stop Lowes from bailing down the road for a better location, i.e. Menards and Walmart?

Flame away,

Jim B.

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: doseofreality on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 08:49 AM MDT
Mr. B seems confused once again.

Here's the guy that thought that the amphitheater would bring in boat loads of people to Oshkosh and supported that project which cost the taxpayers millions of dollars, and now it seems he doesn't seem to think that a Lowe's would help the city, and that the taxpayers shouldn't help pay for a poorly designed, and substandard Washburn St.

Hey B, here's a clue, Lowe's is more beneficial than the amphitheater!

Is this guy for real???

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: admin on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 09:52 AM MDT
But dose, should we put off doing residential roads just because some business wants to come to town? Hopefully there will always be a business that wants to come to town, but we have to find a reasonable balance. It doesn't help our image when so many residential streets look like crap either. We have enough lousy streets in this city and need to start getting them fixed more quickly - in one way or another.

- Cheryl

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: Jim B. on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 10:16 AM MDT
Dose,

What does this issue have to do with the Leach Ampitheater? Please enlighten us as you have all the answers. Then you might actually add something to the discussion.

The real issue is a corporate entity forcing us to use funds earmarked for other street repair to repair the street they will have as an entrance. Why Cowtow to these demands? Will they really help Oshkosh that much? Please explain how? Obviously, we will get taxes from them, but how else? Jobs that most will likely be minimum wage with no benefits? Some jobs are better than none, but does this make it worth bending over backwards for them?

Washburn is planned for updating, but not in the timing we would be forced to do based on Lowes demands. This is no less than Corporate Welfare.

Jim B.

PS The Leach brought in close to 50,000 people this Summer. Granted most were for Waterfest, but I think there numbers were up as well(hopefully somebody can confirm this). I would hardly call that failure. Also, let's see how things go after the promoters have a full season to do there jobs. This past Summer was almost a wash based on there start date.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DP on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 11:49 AM MDT
The Council has already authorized the use of over $90million in bonding for "Capital Improvements". Why not use it here?? The road is going to be done in the fairly near future anyway...why not get a Lowe's in the process? At least a Lowe's would generate ten's of thousand's of dollars in tax revenues each year...unlike some of our "quality of life" projects.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 11:58 AM MDT
We can say no, like we have for years, and continue driving to Appleton for everything we need. At some point we need to step up to the plate and do what it takes to get some quality stores, restaurants, and industry in this city. I do not see them lining up to come here the last 20 years. Taking a hard line against big business has gotten us no where. Why the hate for corporations in this city? We need them more than they need us. Take a look at what we do not have. Fox River Mall? Home Depot? Kohls? Best Buy? Quad Graphics? The list of lost opportunities goes on! Will Lowe's be next? Five Rivers? We need to think long and hard about the message we will be sending to other prospective opportunities.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: Jim B. on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 12:19 PM MDT
DRR,

Very valid points of which I tend to agree. I am by no means anti-corporate. I just don't think it is prudent to take money away from projects already slated to appease Lowes. Can't this agreement get done with the understanding that the Washburn upgrades will take place? They are already scheduled. Mr. Pommerening stated in the article that he doesnt see how the City is going to get it done in the time frame anyway. Yes, the taxes would be good, but if we have to buy land for a right away, how long before we are coming out ahead? It is really a question of growth for growths sake vs. smart growth.

Jim B.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: doseofreality on Friday, October 21 2005 @ 02:39 PM MDT
B:

I thought you were going to ignore my posts?? Hmmm, seems you can't decide whether to ignore or not ignore. At least your consistant in your waffling here.

In regards to your questions.

1. What does this have to do with the amphitheater? I thought I was clear, but I guessed you missed the point, again. You're ok with spending millions of dollars of taxpayers' money for an amphitheater that few people will use, buy you're not ok with spending taxpayers money for a road EVERYONE will use, and is desperately needed.

2. You claim that a corporate entity is "forcing" us to use funds for the road. Again, you are incorrect. Lowe's, or anyone else for that matter, can't "force" us to do anything.

3. Why cow tow to these demands? Again, no "demand" is being leveled.

4. Will they really help Oshkosh that much, what other taxes, bending over backwards? WOW, if I need to explain this to you, you may be a lost soul. Please read DRR's analysis, it's quite good! Aren't you taking those civics classes at the city? Maybe you need to pay attention, or ask more questions.

5. Waterfest. If Waterfest is sooooooo successful, why are they balking at having a $1.00 fee placed on a ticket for maintenance of the joint? Ask yourself that B.

Wise up B, and please ignore my post.

Cheryl:

No, I don't think that we should put off residential roads just to do this project. The city staff should find a way to do both. You are correct, we do have a lot of lousy streets that need to be done. Hopefully we can get them all done.

Perhaps if we didn't do stupid projects like the amphitheater, we would have more money to get the things done that we need. But I guess you have to talk to Mr. B about that. He thinks the amphitheater is working out great.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: Jim B. on Saturday, October 22 2005 @ 07:10 AM MDT
I prefer pancakes over waffles, but thanks!

Jim B.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: poeschl on Saturday, October 22 2005 @ 08:48 AM MDT
I disagree that LOWES in more beneficial than the Amphitheater. Lowes
is just like Wal-Mart, a big box retailer. Matter of fact we still have an
empty Wal MArt box in Oshkosh. Lowes is bad for Oshkosh because it will
be pitted againt Menards, a wisconsin big box retailer with just as many
problems as Lowes but is regional.

What the city should say to Lowes is if you want to come to Oshkosh,
Take the old Walmart building or do not come at all. Lowes is bad for
business. Our city should not be catering to un sustainable development.

Hey what happen to the City Planners implementing Smart Growth
Principles into city planning? All they are planning is economic growth for
retailers not for the taxpayer.

Put LOWES IN the old Wal Mart or get out.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: popo on Saturday, October 22 2005 @ 04:46 PM MDT
We talk about how bad the box stores are for our area business and how they cost taxpayers so much because of their labor practices. But even though I don't agree with delaying other road projects to attract them to the area I feel this is a much better situation than the proposed five rivers project. Neither will bring in the jobs this area needs as they willl both offer service type jobs with no or little benefits. But at least Lowes will begin to contribute to the tax base now rather than in 20 years. No matter how anyone defends the TIF districts the facts are that TIF's do pay themselves off over the next 20 years but they pay nothing to relieve the tax problems we have today. Correct me if I'm wrong but they pay no county or school taxes either?

Maybe Mr. Pommerening should be ak to add some money to this since I see him gaining quite a bit of money in this development.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Monday, October 24 2005 @ 08:35 AM MDT
What has the river property been contributing to the tax base the past few years? Last I looked it is empty land. Five Rivers would spur other development and bring alot of tourist dollars to the community while they were paying off the TIF. Right now we have nothing.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: popo on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 09:55 AM MDT
There has been no tax contributions since the city took it off the tax rolls. Now lets even take more properties off to help attract more businesses with our free give aways. If you look into it I believe one of the factors for not building in Escanaba, MI was that area was not willing to donate to private businesses. Oshkosh has now established itself as a city willing to give the freebies to anyone who asks.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 10:25 AM MDT
You're right and it's a reputation I believe we've had for a some time. That has been my argument all along: that this city offers up TIF districts, free money and sweet deals as an automatic, before even finding out what the developers are willing to do. But city administration has now set a precedent and developers come in expecting things like this. We need to start learning from other communities how to get development without always relying on TIFs. The town of Grand Chute is a shining example (as well as other towns) of what can be done when you really put your mind to it. They cannot do TIFs, yet they manage to get lots of development. And if a community automatically has to offer a TIF in order to get development, I think it sends a message that says "we have nothing else to offer you, so here you go." Oshkosh has a lot to offer people and businesses. Let's stop relying solely on TIFs to move this community forward.

Finally, if we are going to create a TIF for something, we need to do it on a "pay as you go" system, which is exactly what I brought up when I ran for city council in this last election. I was the only one who even mentioned it. Now other people are talking about it. It's one way to help ensure that if a project fails, the city doesn't get completely burned in the process.

- Cheryl

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 10:52 AM MDT
Grand Chute has an advantage. The Fox River Mall. I have not seen businesses lining up to come to Oshkosh the past 20 years. Five Rivers could be the center piece. You need to have something to help attract more business without TIF's. Five Rivers could do for the downtown what the mall did for Grand Chute. Hopefully down the road businesses will be lining up to come here, but until they are we need to go the extra yard to attract them.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 01:22 PM MDT
I understand they have the mall, and that's exactly why I said we have to do a better job of marketing that which Oshkosh has to offer.

But still, that cannot be used as an excuse by anyone. After all, there are plenty of towns and villages across Wisconsin which do not have the Fox River Mall, and they are seeing plenty of development, too. It CAN be done if the effort is made and the proverbial TIF carrot is not dangled in front of developers as a standard operating procedure.

If our city leaders are saying we need to always give a TIF in order to get something, then could someone please tell us what will be done to get additional economic growth when we can no longer offer TIFs because we have reached our limit? Will the growth then stop until enough existing TIFs are closed out that we can begin offering them again? To use TIFs everytime a developer comes a'calling is to show a lack of ingenuity and salesmanship. 'Course like I said earlier, we have a reputation for offering TIFs at the drop of a hat, so perhaps we are now boxed into a corner because someone got lazy and didn't want to find a way to entice developers by any other means.

- Cheryl

P.S. Incidentally, the town of Grand Chute did a masterful job of marketing themselves to GET the Fox River Mall in the first place. They did it with no TIF money, and I was told by the local leaders there that they offered nothing to the developers to spur that development. So again, I submit to everyone reading this: It CAN be done without always offering up a TIF!!

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 02:00 PM MDT
We seem to have a hard time getting anyone to come here even when we offer the "carrot".

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 02:28 PM MDT
I don't entirely know about that. Five Rivers wants to come. And plenty of other developers have taken advantage of TIFs over the years or we wouldn't have so many. If we don't have much to show for it all those TIFs (other than apartments and condos and a somewhat revitalized downtown) maybe it's because we're not trying to attract the right stuff or revitalize in the right way.

- Cheryl

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 03:12 PM MDT
I believe great progress has been made in the downtown is a realtively short time. It took decades for it to die. Time will tell if this is the right way to go with this property. I know Green Bay has struggled to find someone to develop their riverfront. They all want incentives. I would think Green Bay has alot more to offer than Oshkosh. Do you know of any projects that Oshkosh has turned down for the riverfront properties? I would think if someone stepped up and wanted to use their own dollars we would have jumped on it. My guess is there were no such offers.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: admin on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 03:18 PM MDT
Relative to the riverfront itself, no, I cannot think of someone who wanted to put in their own dollars and not get a handout from the city. Again, I think TIFs are good tools when all else fails. But I don't think they should be the only tool we use and I don't think it should be an automatic.

I'm glad you're happy with the downtown. I patronize it frequently, but it just is not thriving to the point that other communities' downtown districts are. Something is missing from the Oshkosh equation, it seems. That is a shame.

- Cheryl

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: L Schaffer on Tuesday, October 25 2005 @ 09:10 PM MDT
You know what is missing and it will be missing until the city goverment starts to treat businesses with better respect. This city still has the reputation of being anti business and that is why Appleton and Fun du lac are growing faster than Oshkosh.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: OshRocks! on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 08:51 AM MDT
Oshkosh is growing much faster than Fond du Lac - Especially in the downtown area. I would not use the city of Fond du Lac when arguing your point.

Oshkosh is coming along - downtown revitalization is helping, adding venues to draw tourists and businesses are helping and will continue to draw attention to this city, and continued growth on the 41 corridor will help in this high visibility area.

We need it all, and we will benefit in the end.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: L Schaffer on Thursday, October 27 2005 @ 02:45 PM MDT
Continued growth on the 41 corridor will not help downtown Oshkosh, there is nothing downtown that draws the people down there, you need a big name store and more parking , but I don't see happening. Oh sure downtown will grow a little more and the city gov. will spend more tax dollars to help it along, but I see it coming to an end and it will die again.

Big Box vs. Residential Street Repair
Authored by: DRR on Wednesday, October 26 2005 @ 08:01 AM MDT
The downtown has a long way to go. But it is improving. This will not happen over night. Like I said, it took 20-30 years for it to die.

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest

Contributed by: shors
I have learned much from taking a stand regarding the proposed children's fishing pier which is proposed to be constructed in the middle of Miller's Bay. I'm starting to feel like Miller's Bay has been for sale...........purchased by the Otter Street Fishing Club. Doug Mosher, Club President, owner of Noffke Lumber is supplying the wood........the club is apparently using club monies to support members of the club. While at the meeting regarding the pier which was held at the Otter Street Fishing Club headquarters, there were boxes there that said Castle-Pierce. Has the Otter Street Fishing Club been using the services of Mayor Castle's printing company? Mayor Castle repeatedly states "I voted for the pier." Are there some conflicts of interests going on here?

Another thing: Why is C.R. Meyer getting so much work? They too changed the pier design for this project recently. Are there any club members who work for C.R. Meyer?

Esslinger thought he was trying to rise to the occason and get the Otter Club to compromise with the pier location--their compromised location was vindicative--located at the Pump House where Chuck Williams lives--the location makes no sense as it is even farther from facilities such as restrooms and parking. It too, is in the middle of Miller's Bay.

Now Esslinger has called up selected concerned residents and told them "the pier will happen." He appears to be in favor of the Otter Street Fishing Club. Turns out Mayor Castle does plan to run again and Esslinger will probably run---he's thinking ahead because the Otter Street Club has a track record of voting in local elections. Has the Club now purchased Esslinger?

Esslinger says the Otter Club has done nothing wrong. They went through the proper hoops. He must have a memory problem because the Stephany and the Council ingnored the entire Parks Plan which did not include changes to Miller's Bay. There was no citizen input..........seems to me that ignoring the Park Plan started this issue off on the wrong foot and it has now unraveled corruption and conflicts of interest.

Granted, this issue is pennies compared to the huge river front condo project. I wonder what that project will tell us about our city government? Notice how they want citizen input now?

Teri Shors

The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, October 09 2005 @ 08:56 PM MDT
Ms. Shors:

I have to say I’m very disappointed in your letter regarding the fishing pier/dock.

Your assertions and your possible slanderous statements I think are really out of character for a person of your stature.

You referenced that I called up some “selected” residents and told them that I said “the pier will happen.” Your correct, I did call up residents that were affected (I thought that is what I was supposed to do as an elected official) and I did say that the pier will happen; that is of course unless the DNR denies the application which doesn’t seem likely.

I ask you, did I make a huge mistake in trying to get a compromise in this situation? I had thought that a compromise could be struck and everybody could walk away from this with a little satisfaction. I’m sure the Otter Street Fishing Club isn’t happy with me, because as you know, I was the one that wanted the city staff to set up this meeting in the first place. I’m sure that the fishing club wasn’t exactly thrilled with that idea. And now you’re upset because you didn’t seem to get the pier completely eliminated. You stated that the Otter St. Fishing Club’s compromise location was vindictive; how so? Do you have any proof to substantiate that claim? You also claim that I’m “in favor” of the fishing clubs plan. Really? If I was in favor of the club, why would I go through the trouble of having a meeting with both sides to work out a compromise, and upset both sides in the end?

You also inferred that the Otter Street Fishing Club may now have “purchased” me. This is both disrespectful, and very close to being slanderous. As an elected official I try VERY hard to be open to all ideas, and I have abstained on occasions when I have had a conflict of interest, or even the appearance of a conflict. Your inference that I may have been “purchased” should be retracted at once.

You go on to say that Mayor Castle is in fact running again and that I will probably run again. Have you had a conversation with Mayor Castle where you can substantiate this claim? If so, please enlighten the readers of this website. Mayor Castle is about seven months into his term with about a year and a half to go before he is up for re-election; I’ve never seen a local elected official announce a year and a half before an election that they’re running again. As for me, I haven’t made up my mind if I’m running for election in April of ’06 let alone if I’ll run for mayor again.

In regards to my statement about the Otter Street Fishing Club not doing anything wrong in this situation. I stand by that statement because it’s a fact. Again, if you can come up with any facts that will dispute that, I’d be happy to see/hear them. And just because there was no mention of a pier/dock in the parks comprehensive plan does not mean one can’t be constructed. Please remember, comprehensive plans are derived by a set of people at a given time. As time goes on, comprehensive plans can and do get revised.

I would like to also say that you have criticized the Otter Street Fishing Club for not compromising. May I point out that they were willing to compromise; it is you who will not compromise.

In closing, I would just like to say that I would not have expected a professor that holds a Doctorate to write such a letter. It’s no wonder why it’s tough to get people to run for elected office with behavior like this.

Regretfully,

Paul Esslinger
Oshkosh Common Council

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: shors on Monday, October 10 2005 @ 03:00 AM MDT
All I did was put the questions out there. A scientist questions and
observes. I hope what I said is not true but something is fishy about
this whole situation. I've put this out there. Let the residents who read
this think about it. There is nothing wrong with questioning. Clearly I
have struck a nerve. Any time anyone makes a stand, they risk being
scrutinized.

Teri

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, October 10 2005 @ 07:38 AM MDT
Ms. Shors:

Yes, you did hit a nerve. When I get accused of being “purchased,” I get angry, for obvious reasons. And if your objective was to “hit a nerve” you succeeded; congratulations.

You said a scientist “questions and observes,” tell me, is it one of the objectives of scientists to throw out accusations, and lies and “observe” what happens?

You’re correct Ms. Shors, there is nothing wrong with questioning, but lying and accusing someone of being “purchased” without any proof is not only childish, but disrespectful and beneath you.

I will let the folks who read this website come to their own conclusions. But I would appreciate it if you deliver facts and not lies.

I ask you again to retract your statement that I’ve been “purchased.”

Paul Esslinger
Oshkosh Common Council

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: shors on Monday, October 10 2005 @ 04:27 PM MDT
I asked the question if you were purchased by the OSFC. I never
stated you were purchased. I think you are overreacting.

The title of this venue is Rants and Raves.

Chill.

Teri

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: doseofreality, October 10 2005 @ 04:58 PM MDT
I see Teri Shors goes to the same political school as Jef Hall. Don’t exactly come out and say Paul was purchased, come out and say something stupid like “has the club now purchased Esslinger.” Excuse me Mrs. Shors, but this is just dumb, if not downright slimy. Jef Hall did this stupid technique with the racist garbage.

I would expect a slime ball like Jef Hall to stoop to those levels, but as Paul stated, I wouldn’t expect a college professor with a doctorate to do something that childlike.

Why don’t you grow up? You lost the fight with the Otter Street Fishing Club, and quite frankly, you should be happy Paul was there to see if a compromise could be reached.

And “chill” is your response??? How old are you??

It’s no wonder some of the products that come out of college can barely tie their shoes; they probably have had you for a professor.

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: L Schaffer on Monday, October 10 2005 @ 09:28 PM MDT
What is the big deal about putting a fishing pier where the Otter Street Club wants to put it, it is in park that has little use, it is about time the people that live in that part of the city come to grips with it once in for all. It is a park and not their front yard. It is time to use all of the park. The main part of Menominee Park is getting to crowded because of the zoo expansion. I agree the process that was used needs to be better, the the anger towards one person is not exceptable, the anger should go towards our city officials like Tom S. and our city manager, they should know better.

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: OshRocks! on Tuesday, October 11 2005 @ 03:04 PM MDT
The main part of the Menominee Park is not getting too crowded because of the expansion of the zoo. That 'expansion' was completed about three years ago and took up an extra few acres (I believe it was around 4, but could be as much as 8) - on the back side of the park that was NEVER used.

Actually, back behind the zoo would be a PERFECT place for the fishing pier -

People writing contrary to Dr. Shors (and neighbors' opinions) about the fishing pier constantly say that those living along Menominee drive think that they have more rights to that part of the park than others. I disagree - as I am one of those neighbbors. But please look at it from their angle, in that, they paid a premium for a clear lake view at some time in the past. Additionally, their tax bills reflect that value - and because of that tax difference - I do believe that those people should be allowed to have a say in this whole discussion. Do not for one minute think that these people are taxed equally to non-waterfront property.

Additionally, it is not just about obstructed views - what about parking? What about restroom facilities? What about garbage (there are no garbage cans in the park now - are you aware of that?). What about the quality of the fish - no one is going to want to fish for carp. It's the whole package - not just a few people complaining about their obstructed views.

Please don't be so rash to judge Dr. Shors and others about what you THINK they have issue with in regards to the fishing pier.

Have a great day!

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: admin on Wednesday, October 12 2005 @ 01:45 PM MDT
Some points that I wish to make:

1. I agree there are probably better places for this fishing pier.

2. I believe that the DNR representative already has her mind made up and the activity of late is probably nothing more than exercises in futility. At the meeting last week, she almost seemed "bothered" by the whole thing.

3. I do not believe Paul Esslinger has been bought by anyone. While I disagree with his reasoning in not being willing to vote against accepting this pier in the location it was, his points are well taken. Besides, he could not bring this matter back before the council anyway, because he was not there when it was originally voted on.

4. While the Otter Street Fishing Club has done wonderful things for this community, its member and spokesperson Terry Wohler has displayed a complete lack of disrespect for those who are opposed to the pier or who even dare ask questions about it. This behavior is not very becoming for a spokesperson of a club that is in the public eye like theirs is, but it is certainly not something the city should tolerate from a parks board member. Mr. Wohler has acted and spoken in both capacities in this matter.

5. In that regard, I believe Mr. Wohler should have abstained from voting when the matter was before the parks board. His vote, while not illegal, certainly calls his ethics into question with respect to the fishing pier.

6. I also believe that Mayor Bill Castle should have abstained from voting on this matter on the council floor. Based on boxes present at the fishing club's meeting place, it appears Castle's printing company does work for the fishing club. It seems to me that when the line between votes and one's professional activities becomes blurred, it is best to err on the side of caution and not give the impression that you're giving preferential treatment to a group that helps pay your bills.

7. The people along Menominee Drive have a vested interest in this project - that interest is their property. We all know that waterfront property and/or property with a view costs more and comes at a premium. If that view changes, so might the property values for those people. But at the same time, thought the park does not belong just to those people, it is a public park and therefore, belongs to all of us. That is why there have been others, who don't live along Menominee Drive, who have spoken out on it.

8. There needs to be stop measures put in place so projects do not sail past the council like this one does and projects need to receive greater scrutiny. Far too often I do not see enough questions asked of parks director Tom Stephany or community development director Jackson Kinney. They may be the fulltime staff members, but that does not mean the council should just accept what they say and give it the green light "just because." When enough questions are not asked, this city has a history of finding itself in one kind of trouble or another. More questions and answers just might stop at least this kind of history from repeating itself.

- Cheryl Hentz

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: shors on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 06:03 PM MDT
All good points Cheryl.

Here's a thought......if City Council terms were 3 instead of 2 years,
maybe there would be more consistency in decision making? My logic
is that maybe if terms were longer in the case of the fishing pier,
someone would have questioned or looked at the Park Plan regarding
the vision for Menominee Park? (My guess is that it really should have
been Mr. Stephany to check the plan first before he suggested this
project but he didn't and the Council didn't question it. Maybe this was
due to inexperience?)

I have no idea if this is a good idea or would matter. It could be that
the same people run for Council and there is very little turnover.
Therefore most council members would remember the history of the
city, including prior decisions etc. I have not lived here long enough
to know the history of whose all been on the Council and for how long.

Teri

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: Jim B. on Wednesday, October 12 2005 @ 10:02 AM MDT
Why do we have to put a pier in "where Otter street wants to put it"? What gives them more clout than other taxpaying citizens?

Although I don't buy into the fact that Menominee Drive residents pay more taxes so should have a say, I agree with OshRock that the shoreline in front of the zoo is a good spot. You certainly see more people fishing there than Millers Bay.

Jim B.

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: shors on Wednesday, October 12 2005 @ 04:25 PM MDT
The arguments against putting the pier near the zoo or beach area is
because the area is not protected from the damage caused by ice
shoves. The only locations that seem to work for this would be places
behind Monkey Island or the OSFC suggest the NY avenue location.
The NY location isn't directly behind Monkey Island but they say that
ice shoves don't happen there.

Other locations for the pier not in Menominee Park have been
suggested but the OSFC is not interested in those sites. Their one
compromise was across from the pump house on Nevada Street which
is even farther from facilites.

Someone mentioned to me that the OSFC seemed receptive to a
location change until more residents came forth and this started to get
controversial. Some say it may be a power struggle. There are more
women than men that have been opposed to this location. Maybe that
is part of the struggle as well? Anyone who went to the meeting at
the OSFC headquarters could feel the sense of animosity towards
women vs.men but hey--nobody cares about that.

I am not sure if real estate tax information is open information
anywhere but I can tell you that I paid $2900 in 2004 for a modest
1200 sq.ft.home on Menominee Drive. It is more than my colleagues
with bigger homes in other locations in Oshkosh pay but I don't have
that many comparisons. Maybe Oshkrocks knows more?

All in all, the OSFC are in this position because of Terry Wohler and
Tom Stephany. The pieri has been their idea from day one. The Club
is trying to support them.

Teri

The Bottom Line
Authored by: shors on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 04:31 AM MDT
Mr. Dose of Reality:
The bottom line is that residents simply want to preserve the largest
open green space in Oshkosh. It's the hallmark of Oshkosh. Why
should this scenic beauty be altered in any way? Adding a large pier
will change this area in many ways, forever.

There are secondary problems with putting a pier in a location with no
lighting, restrooms etc.

Teri

The Bottom Line
Authored by: doseofreality on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 08:07 AM MDT
OK, good points, but what's up with the sexism charge?

It seems you are free and easy with throwing out accusations. First Paul is bought off by the Otter Street Fishing Club, and now the Otter Street Fishing Club is full of women haters. I think both accusations are frivolous, and you should apologize for both of them.

I don't agree with Paul all the time, and I'm not necessarily in favor of the pier, but let's stop with the goofy accusations.
[ Reply to This | Delete ]

The Bottom Line
Authored by: shors on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 08:47 AM MDT
Did you attend the meeting at the club headquarters?

The Bottom Line
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 09:02 AM MDT
No, but what relevance is that to anything?

The Bottom Line
Authored by: Jim B. on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 10:10 AM MDT
Dose,

Interesting how you busted my chops in another thread for not being at the meeting, but for you it is irrelevant?

Jim B.

The Bottom Line
Authored by: doseofreality on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 10:19 AM MDT
I didn't ask how the meeting went; you did.

You're busted!

And by the way Mr. B, you've busted people's chops for being anonymous, but your name isn't really Jim B. Hypocritical Mr. B???


The Bottom Line
Authored by: Jim B. on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 10:43 AM MDT
If you actually read those posts, I asked that people attach a name or moniker rather than post by anonymous. That way we can all track who is saying what. You can still remain anonymous.

So now when ever I see a Dose post I will simply ignore it as you seem more interested in flaming than adding to the discussion.

Jim B.

PS Can't get anything past you Dose!!!

The Bottom Line
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, October 13 2005 @ 10:46 AM MDT
B:

If you can't take the heat, remove yourself from the kitchen!

Fishing Pier Issue Unfolds Many Conflicts of Interest
Authored by: Kent Monte on Tuesday, October 11 2005 @ 12:06 PM MDT
I must concur with Paul. You, Ms. Shors, owe him an apology and a retraction of your statement. Mr. Esslinger was correct in calling it slanderous. This whole situation is unnecessary. The pier is a good idea for those who do not have, nor can afford a boat. I have a boat and do not need the pier, but there are alot of people here in town that will use it. I haven't followed the whole saga (mainly because I have a boat and wont use it) but you can rest assured that no laws have been broken to this point so any statement to the contrary is a lie.
The correct thing is to swallow your pride and retract your comments. They were not viewed as questions, but as being vindictive. If you don't like Paul or his collegues, then don't vote for them. Lets not throw mud, especially if it is unsubstantiated.

Kent Monte