Tuesday's Meeting

First, did anyone notice this puzzling editorial in the Tuesday Northwestern? The editorial questions the appropriateness of the City hiring a new Communication Coordinator while not funding a Victim/Witness Coordinator in the Police Department. Puzzling, because it's not clear why an editorial like this would appear AFTER the City Council had extensive deliberations and a vote on the budget. The editorial might have had some impact before the budget adoption.

For the record, I tried to amend the budget to eliminate the Purchasing Agent position via attrition and thus eliminate also the new Communication Coordinator position. I didn't call for using the funds from the Purchasing Agent position to fund the Victim/Witness Coordinator, but certainly would have been open to such a suggestion. Only McHugh and Esslinger supported my amendment. Perhaps some proactive editorializing could have swung another vote.

As for Tuesday's Council meeting, we had three issues worth a summary here:

*First, Mr. Bain proposed tabling approval of another season for the Farmer's Market (FM) until representatives of FM and Parks discuss with the Council the possibilities of possibly moving the event from the City Hall parking lot to the Leach Amphitheater. The tabling passed 5-2 (Frank Tower and Dennis McHugh voting no). FM vendors apparently want to stay in the parking lot, which benefits me personally (I live literally a minute away from City Hall), but I really think the event and city would flourish at the Leach or another location like Main St. (Appleton's College Ave. Farmer's Market is one of the most lively and fun in the state; I've never understood why we couldn't close down our Main St. for the same purpose and for the same excitement.).

If I had to predict, I'd say the FM will be staying in the City Hall parking lot for at least the next year and probably much longer, but kudos to Mr. Bain for keeping this important discussion going.

*Second, we raised the bus rates according to the recommendation of the Transit Advisory Board. The Board did recommend that 4 of the rates (for rides mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act and servicing low income people) not be raised at this time, and we took that advice. The Transportation Director wanted even those rates raised, claiming that the transit budget might end up another $42,000 short without it. I argued that the 2009 budget was based on a diesel fuel per gallon rate on $4.50, which is much higher than what the actually price will be in 2009. I cited a Department of Energy press release:

The average U.S. prices for regular-grade gasoline and diesel fuel, at $1.70 and $2.52 per gallon respectively on December 8, were both more than $2 per gallon below their highs in mid-July. With the assumption of a fragile economy throughout 2009, along with lower projected crude oil prices, annual average retail gasoline and diesel fuel prices in 2009 are projected to be $2.03 and $2.47 per gallon, respectively.

I also argued that if we find ourselves truly in need of $42,000, then maybe administration could rethink the Communication Coordinator position, which is being budgeted for $41,0000 - $53,000.

*Finally, we were asked to cover operational and maintenance costs (including electrical costs) for the Main St. LED lights donated to the city by Progress Oshkosh. From what I understood from the discussion, Progress Oshkosh had originally committed to cover these costs (which they argued could be as little as $300 per year), but have not been able to raise funds for that purpose even though they were able to raise over $50,000 for the project. By a 4-3 vote (both Towers, Bain, and King voting in the affirmative), the Council approved paying the operational costs. The 4 believed that in paying the costs, the project becomes a true "public private partnership," and will provide us with lights that improve the appearance and image of the city.

I did not speak on this issue, but thought that Esslinger and McHugh made stronger arguments against it. They said that the city would probably have to rent out a barge every time a light needs to be fixed. No one refuted that claim, and it was not clear how much additional that would cost. They also argued the City, a few years ago, shut off many street lights to save costs. How ironic that people who had their lights shut off would then have to support with taxes the powering up of another set of lights. McHugh also made the point that Progress Oshkosh had originally pledged to fund the entire project, and we should hold them to that.

I can see the arguments for both sides, and I applaud Progres Oshkosh's heroic efforts to help beautify the City. But I just couldn't understand why a group that has already raised $50,000 for a project could not find another $300. Heck, we could probably request the Farmer's Market to set up a special booth for bridge funding. Perhaps people could be given some free tomatoes or asparagus spears if they make a contribution to the bridge. I mean if we truly only need $300, it could probably be raised on one Saturday at the FM. Just a thought.