One-Term Tony
That's what they're calling newly elected Council Member Tony Palmeri over on River Mill Road after his performance at Tuesday's Council meeting. At that session Tony made the case for pushing ahead with sidewalks in the River Mill subdivision on the grounds that it's a safety issue and a way to make the city more "walkable," while perhaps evening the score by sticking it to the "wealthy."
We'll roll some tape here in a a minute, but first let me offer this full disclosure. I am one of those "wealthy" homeowners on River Mill Road. I have lived there for almost 10 years, and I've always thought it a little odd that we didn't have sidewalks. If the Council decides to impose sidewalks on the neighborhood, I won't oppose it, although I will question the motives and priorities of those who insist upon moving this extremely low traffic street ahead of major roads elsewhere in the city.
Here's Tony's reasoning:
Here's what's wrong with Tony's reasoning:
1. It's true that there are some very large houses on River Mill Road, but the idea that we're all a bunch of fat cats is just plain wrong. More of us are employed by UW Oshkosh than by any other single employer, and there are more college professors in the neighborhood than any other occupational title. So unless Tony has gone over to the Republican side and decided that UW professors (including some who make less than he does) must by definition be "wealthy," he is wrong to refer to this issue as one that fits the haves vs. have-nots paradigm.
2. Sidewalks will not have any effect on the walkability of the neighborhood or of the city. On almost every day of the year, I walk (or bicycle) to work. My daughters walked (or bicycled) to their elementary and middle schools for years. People come from outside the neighborhood to walk on River Mill Road, which is laid out like the loop at the end of a lasso. They come because this low-density neighborhood is already highly walkable. There is hardly any traffic here, and the road is so wide that even when a car comes by there is plenty of room for all. And these River Mill walkers are not people who are on their way to the Wiouwash Trail. These are people who simply take a loop through the neighborhood.
3. This is not a smart growth issue, for the same reasons as explained in Point No. 2. Sidewalks on River Mill Road will not have an effect on how future development in or near the city will proceed. There isn't any developable land for several miles north of River Mill Road. The open land immediately adjacent to our neighborhood is already occupied--it's called a cemetery.
4. The fact that the Wiouwash Trail runs through the neighborhood is not particularly relevant. First of all it isn't necessary to access the trail from River Mill Road--lots of people cut through the cemetery to get there. Other people drive into the neighborhood and park their cars up and down River Mill Road to gain access to the trailhead. And so unless the Council is planning to demolish some houses to build a parking lot at the mouth of the trail, many trail users will still have to walk or ride their bicycles on at least a portion of River Mill Road to get to the trail. That's what they do now--and without incident. The largest group of people to travel the length of River Mill Road to get to the trail are track athletes from UW Oshkosh. They run in large packs, and I seriously doubt that they would use the sidewalk even if it were built.
Some more Tony Talk:
This snippet shows why Tony could be vulnerable in a future election. You have to wonder why he felt it was necessary to make a drive-by inspection of the neighborhood to justify his position. Oshkosh is a small town, and as I said many of the residents of River Mill Road are his university colleagues. If he wanted a feel for the neighborhood, he could have come by and/or talked to us.
But deciding that we need sidewalks after spending 30 or 40 seconds driving down our street doesn't suggest the depth of analysis or concern for citizens that I think a lot of us were expecting from Tony.
To be sure there are some real safety issues that the Council could address. One of the biggest problems is that more and more people walk their dogs on the trail without keeping them on a leash, violating both city and county ordinances. Dogs chase cyclists and joggers all the time--so much so that I more often ride my bike for recreational purposes on city streets, where it is safer. And if the Council really cares about making the city walkable, it would do a better job of making sure that sidewalks along city property (such as the Oshkosh Public Museum) are promptly shoveled and de-iced after a storm. (I won't go into the way city snow plows treat River Mill Road like a racetrack, spraying snow and slush ahead and around them as they speed through the neighborhood.)
When all is said and done, River Mill residents will go along with the sidewalks. But we will also be wondering why the Council decided this low-speed road through a low-density neighborhood needed to have sidewalks right away.
That's not really true. We already know that for all the posturing about safety and walkability and past Council votes, the real reason is political. The Palmeri-Esslinger-McHugh axis wants to flex some muscle. And for whatever reason, Mayor Tower and Council Member Bain are so far going along.
There's an easy solution here, but it remains to be seen whether it will be chosen.
The solution is to put River Mill Road on the list of streets to be upgraded with sidewalks, but fix the streets that really need it first. When our time comes, the residents of River Mill Road will pay for our sidewalks.
But if the Council insists upon "ordering in" the neighborhood for the current year, then a lot of us are going to be wondering about the motives and good sense of our Council members.
During the April elections, Council Members Palmeri and Bain picked up a good number of votes in Ward 2, and Mayor Tower easily bested Council Member Esslinger. Paul doesn't have anything to lose by pushing this proposal, but some others might.
We'll roll some tape here in a a minute, but first let me offer this full disclosure. I am one of those "wealthy" homeowners on River Mill Road. I have lived there for almost 10 years, and I've always thought it a little odd that we didn't have sidewalks. If the Council decides to impose sidewalks on the neighborhood, I won't oppose it, although I will question the motives and priorities of those who insist upon moving this extremely low traffic street ahead of major roads elsewhere in the city.
Here's Tony's reasoning:
Here's what's wrong with Tony's reasoning:
1. It's true that there are some very large houses on River Mill Road, but the idea that we're all a bunch of fat cats is just plain wrong. More of us are employed by UW Oshkosh than by any other single employer, and there are more college professors in the neighborhood than any other occupational title. So unless Tony has gone over to the Republican side and decided that UW professors (including some who make less than he does) must by definition be "wealthy," he is wrong to refer to this issue as one that fits the haves vs. have-nots paradigm.
2. Sidewalks will not have any effect on the walkability of the neighborhood or of the city. On almost every day of the year, I walk (or bicycle) to work. My daughters walked (or bicycled) to their elementary and middle schools for years. People come from outside the neighborhood to walk on River Mill Road, which is laid out like the loop at the end of a lasso. They come because this low-density neighborhood is already highly walkable. There is hardly any traffic here, and the road is so wide that even when a car comes by there is plenty of room for all. And these River Mill walkers are not people who are on their way to the Wiouwash Trail. These are people who simply take a loop through the neighborhood.
3. This is not a smart growth issue, for the same reasons as explained in Point No. 2. Sidewalks on River Mill Road will not have an effect on how future development in or near the city will proceed. There isn't any developable land for several miles north of River Mill Road. The open land immediately adjacent to our neighborhood is already occupied--it's called a cemetery.
4. The fact that the Wiouwash Trail runs through the neighborhood is not particularly relevant. First of all it isn't necessary to access the trail from River Mill Road--lots of people cut through the cemetery to get there. Other people drive into the neighborhood and park their cars up and down River Mill Road to gain access to the trailhead. And so unless the Council is planning to demolish some houses to build a parking lot at the mouth of the trail, many trail users will still have to walk or ride their bicycles on at least a portion of River Mill Road to get to the trail. That's what they do now--and without incident. The largest group of people to travel the length of River Mill Road to get to the trail are track athletes from UW Oshkosh. They run in large packs, and I seriously doubt that they would use the sidewalk even if it were built.
Some more Tony Talk:
This snippet shows why Tony could be vulnerable in a future election. You have to wonder why he felt it was necessary to make a drive-by inspection of the neighborhood to justify his position. Oshkosh is a small town, and as I said many of the residents of River Mill Road are his university colleagues. If he wanted a feel for the neighborhood, he could have come by and/or talked to us.
But deciding that we need sidewalks after spending 30 or 40 seconds driving down our street doesn't suggest the depth of analysis or concern for citizens that I think a lot of us were expecting from Tony.
To be sure there are some real safety issues that the Council could address. One of the biggest problems is that more and more people walk their dogs on the trail without keeping them on a leash, violating both city and county ordinances. Dogs chase cyclists and joggers all the time--so much so that I more often ride my bike for recreational purposes on city streets, where it is safer. And if the Council really cares about making the city walkable, it would do a better job of making sure that sidewalks along city property (such as the Oshkosh Public Museum) are promptly shoveled and de-iced after a storm. (I won't go into the way city snow plows treat River Mill Road like a racetrack, spraying snow and slush ahead and around them as they speed through the neighborhood.)
When all is said and done, River Mill residents will go along with the sidewalks. But we will also be wondering why the Council decided this low-speed road through a low-density neighborhood needed to have sidewalks right away.
That's not really true. We already know that for all the posturing about safety and walkability and past Council votes, the real reason is political. The Palmeri-Esslinger-McHugh axis wants to flex some muscle. And for whatever reason, Mayor Tower and Council Member Bain are so far going along.
There's an easy solution here, but it remains to be seen whether it will be chosen.
The solution is to put River Mill Road on the list of streets to be upgraded with sidewalks, but fix the streets that really need it first. When our time comes, the residents of River Mill Road will pay for our sidewalks.
But if the Council insists upon "ordering in" the neighborhood for the current year, then a lot of us are going to be wondering about the motives and good sense of our Council members.
During the April elections, Council Members Palmeri and Bain picked up a good number of votes in Ward 2, and Mayor Tower easily bested Council Member Esslinger. Paul doesn't have anything to lose by pushing this proposal, but some others might.
posted by Miles Maguire at 7:29 AM
35 Comments:
A beautifully presented, well thought out analysis. While I question what happened with the sidewalks here when the subdivision was created, and why. And while I believe there should be sidewalks citywide, your points were very well made and should be given due consideration, particularly at this time. Plenty of time later on for sidewalks. Take care of more pressing needs now. The sad fact is, while everyone deserves sidewalks, this was political motivation on Paul Esslinger's part. There is no other way around that, no matter how he spins it.
Miles,
as you pointed out this was a five to two vote - you appear to be singling out Palmeri while excusing Bain and Tower:
"The Palmeri-Esslinger-McHugh axis wants to flex some muscle. And for whatever reason, Mayor Tower and Council Member Bain are so far going along."
I think this is looking for a scape goat. There is no P-E-M Axis (of evil) but nice careful choice of words to describe it.
I agree with you that this should be a low priority. However having a young child who has been trained to stay out of the road, I think I'll look for the cemetary short cut you mentioned and stay off River Mill Road.
By the way - as an aside, I've always considered neighborhoods without sidewalks as "unwelcoming" to non-residents. However being that I generally dislike traffic, strangers, and groups of people I think I would love to live in a neighborhood with no sidewalks. Although even better would be a neighborhood with no roads and only sidewalks!
Boo, hoo! NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY!!
Ron
I singled out Tony for a couple of reasons. One, quite frankly, is that I expect more from him than from some other Council members.
In this particular case I don't think his arguments are based on facts, as I tried to show. And the notion that there is not a personal dimension to this is untrue. There is also an element of payback.
(Yeah, I know that former Mayor Jon Dell'Antonia stood in front of the Council and said sidewalks were not a big deal to him, but if you think for a minute that he would give Paul Esslinger the satisfaction of displaying any irritation about this, you would have to be truly naive.)
Under the circumstances I think it is abusive of the Council's power to "order in" the sidewalks this year. As I said in my original post, put us on the list but deal with higher-density, higher traffic areas first.
Insisting that the River Mill sidewalks be done right away is bad government, pure and simple. Tony should see that and run, not walk, in the other direction.
I also think there is and will be a P-E-M voting bloc, or at least a P-E bloc. It will be interesting to see.
Miles
Dear Anonymous
No, it's NIMBYRN. Not In My Back Yard Right Now.
M
Your BlaBlaBla, sounds like a spoiled rich kid who isn't going going to get there way.
In one breath you say you'll go along with the sidewalks giving the impression of "doing what is best for the community", then in another, you threaten to un-seat those that have dared to impose themselves on your little enclave community.
I say...Good Job Tony, Paul, Dennis, Bryan and Frank!!
Well it certainly appears those who disagree with you Miles didn't take the time to really read what you wrote. They also showed how little intelligence they're actually able to display on this issue. Instead all they can utter are comments one would expect to hear on the playground by the schoolyard bully. I'm sure Paul Esslinger feels really good about this but it's nothing more than bully tactics and finding saps to go along with him. If it truly was Mr. Esslinger et. al. being concerned about having a walkable, safe city, Esslinger and the others would have done their homework and brought something forward that included ALL the areas that don't have sidewalks, not just River Mill. By doing it this way it shows it's nothing but politics and the Nothwestern made the right call in so noting it as such.
Does anyone have an answer to why sidewalks were not placed in that part of the subdivision when they were placed by Fratello's? Seems odd they just happened to skip that street while placing sidwalks in the rest of the subdivision. I am sure Mr. Dell' Antonia could provide some insight to that question.
He probably could 12:08. About as much insight as Paul Esslinger could provide about why he targeted only River Mill and didn't insist that every block in the city without sidewalks would have them "ordered in."
If you don't want citywalks in the city owned street right-of-way, there are plenty of houses for sale in the town of Algoma. No ones forcing you to stay here. A city is made up of people. The sidewalk will be put on city owned land, not land owned by the homeowner. I and everyone else in this city has a right to walk our city property using well maintained sidewalks, walking in the road is dangerous.
So why is it so hard for Anonymous to read what I wrote? I'm NOT opposed to the sidewalks.
I am opposed to elected officials with misplaced priorities and an outsized sense of their importance.
"misplaced priorities"??
Priorities by definition are very individualistic. My priorities are certainly not the same as yours. Most likely the seven members on the council each have a different set of priorities…but they must use debate and persuasion skills to move their individual priorities forward.
I do not agree with your comment that moving this forward was an example of misplaced priorities…and furthermore, there were five other votes that would tend to side with my opinion.
This was the one last “neighborhood” area of the city that did not have sidewalks. This area also connects with the nature trail. Those two bullet points should be priority enough to green light this project.
When I wrote "priorities," I was referring mostly to the fact that the city already has a list of priority sidewalk projects, prioritized largely according to the traffic volumes of the streets where they will go.
I think there are real convenience and safety (and aesthetic) issues associated with those missing sidewalks, and that's why I think they should be completed first.
The city put together that priority list a few years back and has worked its way about half way through. I don't have a problem with River Mill being on that list--I just don't see the need to move it to the top of the list.
And that's why I have to be believe that there are political/personal motivations behind this plan to "order in" the River Mill sidewalks for this year. And again that's where I see misplaced priorities.
Council members should be working on programs that will do the most good for the community, not just casting votes to settle old scores.
Mr. Wollangk was quite clear in stating that several years ago many missing blocks of sidewalk were "ordered in" in the Westhaven area in which Mr. Wollangk lives.
I would suggest, that even 10-15 years ago, when those walks were ordered in, you could have found sidewalks in the south, east and north sides of Oshkosh that could have been replaced or repaired.
There is a precedence for “ordering in” complete city blocks that have been missed, even when other older walks need repair. River Mill is just a continuation of that model - and as our City Manager explained, perhaps the last complete neighborhood that was missed.
A worthy project.
One again, I'm not arguing that it's not a worthy project. I'm saying that there is no compelling reason to do it this year, no "clear and present danger."
As Mr. Esslinger is so fond of reminding us, in this world there are "wants" and there are "needs."
Is there an immediate need for sidewalks in a low-traffic, low-density neighborhood, or a want to get some revenge?
Miles, your "wants versus needs" comparison is yet another good example of how logic has been overlooked by some councilors in exchange for political revenge.
(isn't it funny how those words have come back to haunt Mr. Esslinger?)
Let's see: the council did not approve sidewalks in the Lark/Arthur street area but it does want to move forward with River Mill. If the council truly believes every neighborhood should have sidewalks, then let's put them everywhere. Equity has not been applied here and River Mill was a target because Jon D. lives there and Paul E. wanted to settle an old score.
Mr. Maguire,
Your comment "or a want to get some revenge?" leads me to believe you can't seem to get past a conspiracy theory here. So any rational discussion is useless.
The Westhaven ordered in sidewalks show precedence for “ordering in” complete city blocks that have been missed, even when there may be other worthy projects.
That area directly connects to a major walking and biking nature trail that we want our citizens to use.
Ordering in sidewalks in this area seems rational and should be enough to have our five council members continue to support the project.
I think Mr. Maguire has more than proven his point. However, perhaps before the sidewalks are "ordered in" someone needs to spend a week counting every person that "walks in that area" to prove that it is a "major walking area". I doubt such a count would prove that to be true. Those of you who can't see the "revenge politics" of this just don't want to.
I'm so disappointed in Tony. Aligning himself with Esslinger, I believe, will prove to be his downfall.
It was mentioned:
"However, perhaps before the sidewalks are "ordered in" someone needs to spend a week counting every person that "walks in that area" to prove that it is a "major walking area".
No one needs to spend their time doing that, this is the final section/neighborhood without sidewalks so the taxpayers that live in the River Mill subdividion deserve sidewalks just as much as anyone else. I'm sure they are pleased they will have a nice way to walk and meet and enjoy their neighborhood. These people shouldn't be treated like second class citizens, they have as much right as anyone else to have sidewalks!!
Anonymous said "this is the final section/neighborhood without sidewalks"
I don't believe that is true... another posted noted that " Let's see: the council did not approve sidewalks in the Lark/Arthur street area..."
Sidewalks west of Ninth Street are far more necessary. Where was Paul E.'s concern for them? Shame on him and his skewed logic, using River Mill neighbors as pawns in his political tug-of-war. The city is growing to the west, not in River Mill. Get your priorities in order P.E. before bringing forth such another lame proposal. Either do all the areas without sidewalks or do none at all.
Mr. McGuire, I have always thought you to be fair and well grounded in many of your arguments. But this time, I have to agree with the other comments that you have unfairly singled out Tony Palmeri. Tony brings so many good things to the City Council. Are you going to crucify him because you dislike his opinion on one issue? That seems like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Do you (and the neighbors calling for 1 term Tony) do that with your friends, or your church? It strikes me that you protest too much about this and, to me, that makes you look like you are having a temper tantrum. Yes, I read that you aren't opposed to sidewalks. But you are creating a conspiracy theory where there is none and that is unethical. Five of the Seven council members voted in favor of these sidewalks. Get over it. You should hold all the council members to the same high standards that you hold Tony.
Well, as I said before, I am singling Tony out because I expected more from him.
He's the one who has said the city needs to get away from "faith-based" decision-making, which implied to me that votes should not be cast until all the facts had been gathered. I don't believe that has been done here.
Tony has always held himself out to be a hard-working guy, and I believe that he is. But in this case, he said he could justify his decision based on a quick drive through the neighborhood.
And for him to pretend that there isn't a personal element to this dispute (Esslinger v. Dell'Antonia) just strains credibility.
The question is whether this is an aberration, or a sign of things to come.
There is another vote that has to be taken before the sidewalks are "ordered in."
I am hoping that the Council will follow my suggestion, by adding River Mill to the list for future construction but maintaining the current priority of working on streets with higher traffic volumes first.
1:59,
what 12:03 meant was, per Dick Wollangk, the River Mill area is the last totally neighborhood area in Oshkosh that doesn't have walks. There are other scattered patches, but none like a whole neighborhood. At least thats coming from the City Manager.
This recent Letter to the Editor at the ONW sums it up quite accurately.
"City council wastes time, energy on sidewalk issue
The Paul Esslinger class war myth takes center stage. Way to go council, you have really hit a home run this time. Oshkosh has 50 miles of streets in disgraceful shape so let's put down a new sidewalk in River Mill that will affect almost none of the population. The classical council working hours to address meaningless issues when the city has so many macro problems. Esslinger can beat his chest again in his never-ending pursuit of justice for the common man most of whom have jobs.
Arthur Martin Oshkosh"
Amen, Arthur.
I don’t know why there are so many people that are upset about letting these fine people in that nice area have sidewalks. I have a sidewalk outside my home and so do all my neighbors. We like to walk the block and visit in the nice summer evenings. These people deserve sidewalks as much as anyone else in Oshkosh. I think it’s just terrible that some people think just because these are newer homes that somehow they shouldn’t have the right to have sidewalks like all the rest of us. These fine folks shouldn’t be refused part of why people live in the city. If the people who don’t want River Mill to have walks live in the Towns, well then if you want walks just like all the rest of us, move to the city. There is no reason in the world that city government should deny these city residences the pride and usefulness of having a wonderful walkway to enjoy their neighborhood.
If you have read or listened to the comments you would know it's not so much about NOT haivng sidewalks as it is not having sidewalks before neighborhoods with greater priorities get sidewalks.
Hey Tony, Stick to your guns man. Sidewalks should be standard in a city. On that one I agree with Dick Wollangk. He said he and the rest of the city administration feels everybody in the city should have sidewalks...I do to.
Your buddy Miles sure is slammin you man. Now you know who your friends are I bet!
Glad to see you and the four others see it the same way on this one. Hang in dude, your right on target with this issue.
9:29 you said:
"it's not so much about NOT haivng sidewalks as it is not having sidewalks before neighborhoods with greater priorities get sidewalks."
You make a great point as to why now is right time for sidewalks in River Mill.
Our City Manager reported all the high priority sidewalk projects have been accomplished and that is why they are looking at this neighborhood now.
This is the last large continuous section of Oshkosh City neighborhood lacking sidewalks so it appears that this area is now the highest priority.
Great point!
For those of you who mentioned that Lark and associated streets did not get approved...
Better check your facts. Look at the agenda/minutes for 4/10 and you will see that it was APPROVED 6-0 (Scheuermann was absent) for the sidewalks and driveway approaches to be installed.
This is ABSOLUTELY fair for the residents on River Mill to get these sidewalks.
Way to go council. There is hope for this city yet!
Just because 2 people don't agree on a political issue doesn't mean they can't be friends. If someone believes that they have a pretty skewed concept about friendship.
As far as the sidewalks go, the whole point is there are other areas that don't have sidewalks either and Paul Esslinger did not bring anything up at the council meeting to order in those sidewalks. He only went after Jon Dell'Antonia's neighborhood. That's what makes this politically motivated. He's an angry man who comes off as always having an axe to grind and a need to settle old scores.
Miles, Tony, Melanie, the Monte's, Paul, the tony lemurs, etc -
What we have here my friends are two facts not conspiracies.
Jon Del'Antonia did conspire to keep sidewalks out of River Mill at the time of the Fratello's side walks,
AND Paul Esslinger did use political payback on the rest of the neighbors of River Mill.
Should River Mill have gotten side walks years ago when Fratello's were put in?
Absolutely.
Should they be retrofitted now when the city's tax dollars over overcommitted and desperately needed elsewhere?
Absolutely Not!
Does Tony Palmeri's hypocrisy of attacking the "well-paid" faculty who dominate the River Mill neighbor hood today pass the laugh test?
Not even close.
I bet there are many "well paid" faculty members who would love to trade salaries with Palmeri.
Is Paul Esslinger a small man with a large chip on his shoulder?
No doubt.
Does a fear of a swarm seem to have played a role in the other two votes of the council?
Read the other comments in the last six or so threads and answer that question for yourself.
Does anyone get the feeling there may be more to the lemur attack than meets the eye?
Just asking.
See what happens when I stop working for 5 minutes. I will now resume my quite work life.
Polly Briley
(note) cross posted on later thread
My God, people. You quarrel over something silly as sidewalks in one neighborhood, and read into this minor issue large machinations of 'power axis' and alliances.
Ever look at some of the roads in the neighborhoods? Talk about degraded. They are unkempt and embarassing.
Better roads mean higher home values.
The City Council should steer money toward road improvement, especially on the south side and on the east side of the tracks east of downtown.
PS: Tony Palmeri will stay on the council as long as he wants. He has considerable support out here and he was elected to represent those who have no voice.
Blog Owner approval?
Why is he afraid of the free market of ideas?
Post a Comment
<< Home