Hiya, Neighbors! It seems that March wants very much to go out like a lion instead of a lamb today. Oof. Real spring — and summer — cannot come soon enough!
I’m glad you tuned in today for this week’s Full Council Meeting Week blog post. There are also a few other meetings scheduled and an important date — Spring Election Day — on this week’s schedule. Here’s your regular rundown:
Tuesday, 04/01/2025
Spring Election Day! The polls will be open from 7am to 8pm. Our District 13 polling place (in case you didn’t already know) is Celebration Ministry Center at 3100 E Evergreen Drive. Please see here for more information about what is on the ballot for this election. These spring state/local elections are some of the more important ones. I know you know about the federal fall elections’ importance. But these state/local ones are most closely linked to how your state and local tax dollars are managed and spent. Well… enough of me trying to convince you… just go vote!
Wednesday, 04/02/2025
Appleton Public Arts Committee – 8amIn a bit of a special meeting for this committee, there is only one item on the agenda — a revisiting of the Appleton Downtown, Inc (ADI) application for a “selfie sculpture” in Houdini Plaza. (Mentioned most recently here under the City Plan Commission notes.) This item was referred back to this committee from the last full council meeting as the committee chairman told some aldermen that she did not feel as though the item got enough attention and proper discussion the first time around.
And in an interesting twist of fate, there will likely be very little discussion on this item again as ADI is now asking to withdraw the application due to some public pushback on the “art” aspect of the piece and, more importantly, the anticipated cost of the piece. ADI found out after the initial potential approvals of this “sculpture,” that the cost to execute it was too high. Why that was not determined beforehand seems like poor planning to me. But regardless… this one will not happen this time around due to the withdrawal.
And speaking of special meetings and this proposed “sculpture”….
Parks and Recreation Committee – Special Meeting – 6:45pmThis same item will also be back to this committee! Since, during the first time around, there were three committees reviewing and looking to approve the ADI application for this “sculpture,” all three committees are again seeing it (City Plan Commission last week, the art committee and this one this week) and the withdrawal letter that accompanies it this time around. Painfully, the withdrawal letter will again be recognized and the whole thing will be over (unless and until ADI comes up with another option in the future).
Then…
City of Appleton Common Council – 7pm The mayor will get the ball rolling for this meeting with some board reappointments and an appointment of a new Fox Cities Transit commissioner. Then there will be a revisiting of a public hearing regarding the concrete paving/sidewalks/curb and gutter for a number of District 13 neighborhoods (see here for that listing). This hearing and the action item to approve and move forward with the projects were both delayed the last time the council met due to some previously missed public reporting of the project. If you have any questions on this, please let me know.
We move forward then with all of the other items that were discussed and approved (or denied) last week in committee meetings. Here’s what will likely be separated for further full council discussion:
- From the Municipal Services Committee: The committee approved the recommendation for a $200,000 consultancy for a strategic plan/wayfinding signage study for downtown Appleton. We were told during the committee meeting that this study would look at “all parking issues throughout Appleton.” But I have strong doubts that anything much more than dealing with the parking structures downtown will be on the list for the consulting firm (should this item be approved). Another couple of ditties on the “to do” list for the consultants are 1) evaluations of and recommendations for public EV charging stations and 2) marketing strategies and a wayfinding plan. What the heck?The city government should not be in the business of providing EV charging stations for public use. This is a private sector project that should be left to the private sector to manage. The city government isn’t running gas stations throughout the city. So… what makes us think that EV charging should be any different? I understand the needs/desires for EV charging stations. But the private sector should fill these needs, not the taxpayers of the City of Appleton.
And again I question the need for the city to conduct marketing and create/post wayfinding signage for the city’s parking structures. Consumers/users/drivers are sophisticated enough to figure out the downtown Appleton parking situation and find their ways — on the maps on most of our phones! — to various parking ramps throughout the downtown area. Appleton is not that large, after all. It’s not like Chicago or Minneapolis… where, by the way, you can look up “parking near me” on your phone and find places to suit your needs without those cities spending copious amounts of money on marketing their parking ramps and providing excess signage to direct folks to them. I realize that not everyone has a smartphone… but doesn’t darned near everyone?
This whole $200,000 consultancy spend is good money chasing bad, in my opinion. There was a parking study done for the city in 2015 and virtually none of the recommendations that came of that study were taken up by the city (likely due to the expense involved). So now who’s to say that the very same thing will not happen again? There are no guarantees that any recommendations that come from this study will be implementable or not cost-prohibitive to implement. Taxpayers have been subsidizing and continue to subsidize downtown parking and the city’s parking structures. Yet the consultants recommended this time around are not being asked whether it is wise for the city to continue to operate in this manner. What are your thoughts about spending this large amount of money — again! — on more consulting for downtown parking in the city?
- From the Finance Committee: As I mentioned in last week’s blog post, there are a few “special consideration” items on the agenda for approval. See below for the items against which I argue:
I was incorrect in my post last week when I mentioned that I believed that these items would fall under the policy where 80% of the total unused funds would be used for debt reduction for the city. That policy is only for general fund dollars and these “special considerations” are for the use of borrowed funds. In my opinion, that only makes the requested “special consideration” spending requested above even more egregious.
Why should this city government used borrowed funds — over $100,000 — to pay for a consultancy for the creation of a “sustainability and climate action plan” for the city?! Doesn’t the city already have a full-time employee whose job is climate action? This consultancy is a ridiculous ask. If this action plan is so needed, the funds should come from the general fund — not from borrowed funds — and be justified as a requirement for general funds spending. Would you, in your personal budget, borrow money to accomplish something like this? If not, then the city should not.
At the very least, I believe that an item such as this should come with far more committee discussion and a plan to use departmental funds (general funds) to accomplish the task. This item in particular is a hard NO for me. And the majority of the Finance Committee agreed and voted to deny this line item. So it is up for denial by the full council. We shall see how the rest of the council views this denial recommendation and whether they will affirm that.
Along the same lines, the “wayfinding signage” for City Hall — again using borrowed funds in a “special consideration” — is also up for denial by the full council. This one mystifies me as there seems to be no justification for the spending and no justification for the large amount asked for this purpose — over $20,000. There are numerous tenants (four or five in addition to the city) in the city hall building complex who are said to all be taking part in wayfinding signage throughout the complex. If that’s the case and the city’s portion is $20,000…. multiply that by four or five. What are these proposed wayfinding signs made of? Gold??
I cannot see the justification for either the high price tag or the real need for this signage. Most everyone who comes to city hall at least knows the address and there is already a huge sign on the side of the building. How much more signage — and signage spending — is necessary? What are your thoughts on this?
There are a number of other items from the Finance Committee and committees up for approval; but none are such that they should be argued against at this time. It seems as though consultancies and an apparently grossly over-priced signage package are what will have to be fought for the taxpayers this week.
If you have any questions or concerns about the above items or anything else of interest to you city-government-wise, please reach out to me and let me know! I’m happy to help in any way.
I do hope that the weather turns the corner and begins to cooperate with us “users” a bit more in the week to come. I also hope that you have a great start to your April 2025. I look forward to continuing to serve our district and you, my neighbors!
