As I See It
Why delay on city administrator issue?
Do we really need nine more months to decide whether the city needs an administrator or not?
It’s been seven months since a committee was organized to investigate the issue. Since then, they have done the work but last week the council pushed the issue into 2026.
I realize that the wheels of government turn slowly sometimes but why shelve the idea until next year? The idea has been floated at city hall for two years already. I suspect that delaying a decision until then will only end up costing city taxpayers more in the long run.
How difficult is it to set up a few public forums or informational sessions in the next few months where residents can share their thoughts or suggest new ideas?
Postponing a decision until 2026 simply means having to re-educate people about the issue and cover the same ground yet again.
Get the issue out there, give the public the chance to speak out on the matter, then vote it up or down, or give residents the chance to decide in a referendum.
As I see it, I’m Kevin Millard
Bob N.
May 13, 2025 at 8:51 am
Because it takes awhile for the opposition to get organized, Kevin. The Council and it’s Administrator advocates can pop the question anytime it feels like it, with little warning. Plus the issue is uppermost in their minds.
The Public, on the other hand, pays little attention to many issues until it is repeatedly pointed out how the issue affects them. The Public holds no regular meetings; it only hears news in passing or someone they know brings it up.
Your advertising department could show you more about repetition and how it works over time.
The Administrator advocates know this and are in a big hurry to get this done before the opposition, and there are many, gets organized.
Roy
May 13, 2025 at 11:22 am
For the newest Council members and the Mayor anxious to vote this in..RIGHT NOW, shows how little wisdom there is in that room. Does the current young crop even wonder why the idea failed, overwhelmingly, not many years ago? What, besides them coming into the picture, has changed?
If ever there was an issue that needed the direct, referendum vote of the people it will affect, this is it.
walden
May 13, 2025 at 6:23 pm
WIZM, please provide the link to the city administrator job description outlining the duties and repsonsbilities of the position along with the budgeted pay grade and benefit package. Oh, there isn’t one? Then how can you be so naive to lobby for a position that hasn’t yet been defined?
Also, please proved an analysis of the expected efficiencies and cost savings (net of the administrators payroll cost) expected to be realized by taxpayers.
This is basic information anyone promoting this change in city government should be able to provide (without being asked).
Libertarian Guy
May 16, 2025 at 11:40 am
Why wait, Kevin? As news director, I would think you would have considered some questions and had your crack news team follow up to obtain answers to the following “why wait” considerations:
1. What do current council members and mayor know about the reason the public voted this down via a past referendum?
2. What has changed in recent years to cause this major change in local governance to be re-considered?
3. What has been determined in regard to the mayor’s position? Will to mayoral position change? What will it look like? Will it be eliminated (There is no mayor in Eau Claire where they have a city administrator only they call the position a city manager)?
4. Exactly what are the likely savings to taxpayers as touted by advocates or the are predicted savings and efficiencies just a false promise?
5. If the advocates on council and mayor want to save money by creating this costly position, why did every council member vote unanimously in favor of every spending project approved in the April council meeting without questioning any of it including wasteful spending on the greenway project?
6. What are each council member’s positions on putting the administrator position up for referendum? When will La Crosse citizens be able to make an informed decision and vote on the matter?
7. The salary and benefits for the position has been determined (as stated in he April meeting) to be $248,000.00 – $257,000.00. Will this salary be capped or will it increase every year?
8. There are additional costs not yet determined and without public knowing it for support staff, for office space, for the cost of creating or remodeling existing space to move offices, and to buy technology/computers. What are these added costs beyond the salary and benefits, how many support staff will be needed and at what salary?
Do your job Kevin by asking these questions so the council and mayor can inform the La Crosse residents. If they don’t provide the answers, you can have your news team inform the residents, or tell the public the council and mayor don’t know these answers, but are going to ram it through anyway because it feels good to them.
Libertarian Guy
May 16, 2025 at 12:40 pm
Follow up questions to consider. 1. Why has no one on the Council (current or past) ever considered saving boatload of money by paying down or, better yet, paying off debt to eliminate the cost and waste of paying interest on excessive borrowing? Debt service is a large piece of wasteful spending. 2. Do council members need a City Administrator to make them be fiscally responsible? 3. Will they hold and future member elected to the council hold the City Administrator accountable and fiscally responsible? 4. What actions will they take if savings are not realized as predicted? 5. Will the Administrator position sunset if not effective or will the person hired be kept to any kind of standards to make sure savings and efficiencies are found or will this person be another bureaucrat the voters cannot fire for not meeting expectations of the job? 6. What are the expectations of the job?
Libertarian Guy
May 16, 2025 at 2:22 pm
Dang errors….
Follow up questions to consider. 1. Why has no one on the Council (current or past) ever considered saving boatloads of money by paying down or paying off debt to eliminate the cost and waste of paying interest on excessive borrowing? Debt service is a large piece of wasteful spending. 2. Do council members need a City Administrator to make them be fiscally responsible? 3. Will current and future council members elected to the council hold the City Administrator accountable and fiscally responsible? 4. What actions will the council they take if savings and efficiencies are not realized as predicted? 5. Will the Administrator position sunset if not effective or will the person hired be kept to any kind of standards with consequences to make sure savings and efficiencies are found or will this person be just another bureaucrat the voters cannot fire for not meeting expectations of the job? 6. What are the expectations of the job?