Tonight the Common Council will vote on an ordinance that will "clarify" the functions of the Energy & Environment Advisory Board. The proposed "clarification," if enacted, could kill the Board. Below I will present the functions and duties, enacted in the 1980s, that currently define the Board's role, along with the proposed change.
Current Functions and Duties:
1. Advise the City Manager and/or Common Council on specific energy and environmental problems or concerns.
2. Review and advise the City Manager and/or Common Council on proposed or existing State and Federal laws and rules pertaining to energy conservation and their potential effect on the community.
3. Develop a comprehensive energy education plan, including emergency measures.
4. Advise the City Manager and Common Council on existing or proposed City ordinances which have energy and/or environmental implications. Serve as liaison on specific issues with Wisconsin Public Service, Advocap, Winnebago County, East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (ECWRPC), and other agencies as requested by the City Manager and/or Common Council.
5. Develop methods and procedures through which the City of Oshkosh can more efficiently utilize energy.
The "clarified" functions and duties that we are being asked to approve tonight say the following:
"Advise on specific energy and environmental issues as requested by the City Manager and/or Common Council."
This means, of course, that if the City Manager and/or Common Council do not make requests, the Board literally has nothing to do! In fact, if the Council tonight fails to adopt Consent Agenda item 08-295 at the same time passing the revision to the duties and functions, the Energy and Environment Board for all intents and purposes will be killed.
Take a look at City's Boards and Commissions in chapter 2 of the Municipal Codes and you will find not one example of a Board or Commission that can advise only on the request of the Common Council or City Manager.
Suppose we get into a situation--and this is a real possibility--where the majority of the Common Council and/or City Manager are hostile or indifferent to environmental issues? According to this "clarification," that Council and Manager would be able to prevent the E & E Board from doing anything.
Chapter 2, Article VI, section 2-36(I) gives the mayor and council the power to establish Commission subcommittees. If we want to establish a subcommittee to advise on the ICLEI milestones, fine. But why on earth would we limit the Commission's ability to advise on other issues that it sees fit?
If we need to revise the 198os duties and functions (and so far a compelling case has not been made that we need to) and reduce them to one line, I would argue that we should simply keep #1 from the 1980s functions and duties: "Advise the City Manager and/or Common Council on specific energy and environmental problems or concerns." At the very least, that language would allow the Committee to exist and do business even if there is no request from the Council and/or Manager to do so.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Tony,
Ironically, this board and its “charges” at present time will be discussed on next week’s edition of “Eye on Oshkosh.”
In the meantime, it’s my understanding from speaking to you about this agenda item that the city attorney seems to feel the functions and responsibilities of this board are outdated. I see nothing here that was relevant or important back in the 1980s that is not as or more important today, especially when dealing with some of the environmental issues we are.
I really don’t know why a change is necessary but it strikes me that this is perhaps someone’s idea of how to prevent the board from having too much authority or “power.” And yet, if that were the case, since the board is advisory in nature only, it really is powerless. So why take action that essentially makes it meaningless, as well?
Cheryl,
The city attorney's memo to Mark Rohloff says the following: "When the Board was rejuvenated in November of last year, the Board began operating under the 1983 language although portions of the language were clearly outdated. As the Board has begun to move forward, it became apparent that the anticipated role of the Board differed from the current ordinance language."
Like you, I can't see anything in the 1983 language that is "outdated."
At the very least, Oshkosh City Attorney Lynn Lorenson needs to give us some clear answers to these questions.
Post a Comment