What effect do retention ponds have?

That is a question that has been lingering for a while now. If you have read the news, you know that approximately 50% of Oshkosh had some type of water damage from the storm. Most of the central city had their sewer back up into the basement creating quite a mess. That mess was raw sewage, not storm water.

Now back to the question... what good would storm water retention do? How would that solve the sanitary sewer backup problem? My answer... it wouldn't. It looks good on paper but how would STORM WATER retention prevent SANITARY SEWER from backing up? They are NOT connected. They are 2 separate systems and retention would only help the storm water related flooding. You could build 20 retention ponds in the city and the crap would still float in basements.

Now if you want to actually solve THAT problem, we need to figure out the root cause of the issue. It is no secret that houses built 25-50 years ago set up the sump flow into sanitary sewer. That means that every time the sump needs to be pumped out, it pushes the water to the sanitary pipes. Those are the same as the sink, tub and toilet in your house. It also is the same as the basement floor drain and the washer drain which is the source of most of the flooding. Since that time, codes have changed to prevent such plumbing dilemmas but it did not ensure that houses built prior were corrected. Well, perhaps that would be a better way to spend $11 million. Find and fix all of the improperly routed sump pumps and actually relieve the pressure put on the sanitary system of the city.

On another related subject, we have Westhaven retention proposal. Here is an artist rendition of the retention area. If you note, it looks nice and pretty with all of the trees and blue clear water forming several ponds throughout the area. I have news for you... it will NOT look like that. In order for the retention area to be effective, it will be nearly or completely empty for around 340 days a year. Only in the spring when Sawyer Creek swells out of it's banks will the retention area see water. The rest of the time it would most likely be a low lying swampy area with cattails and weeds.

For those who still think it's a good idea... feel free to buy a house in that area as the people who currently live there will want to move. I live across Oakwood to the west and I have not met anyone who really favors this plan. It is far too expensive and will not serve the intended purpose of preventing floods east of 41. Nice thought but planners should hit that drawing board again.

I know I am not an engineer but I don't think you need an engineering degree to see that this plan is not adding up. As with most plans, it looked good at first and nobody is willing to admit that it may not work after all.

KM

Would Water Retention in Westhaven help?

There appears to be great debate over making Westhaven Golf Course a water retention area. There were even comments made by Mr. Patek after the first round of storms on June 7th/8th that some flooding could have been avoided if there was water retention there.

I don't believe for one minute that flooding could be avoided on as large of a scale as he would like us to believe. What purpose would a pond that far west serve? The golf course served as water retention as it was and basements still flooded all over. It sure wouldn't have done any good for areas south and east of the course. The flood waters would still have gotten there. It wouldn't have done any good for homes or businesses north of 9th Ave. either. The largest backup was created at the bridge over Sawyer Creek at 9th. It turned Oakwood Rd into a raging river and Homestead flooded when the water retention west of Pheasant Creek failed. It sure created a mess for many homes west of Oakwood. All the water retention would have done in this situation is take care of the water backing up at 9th and allowed it to go elsewhere besides basements on Ruschfield/Homestead/Wheatfield/Fairfax/etc.

So you need to ask yourself, is spending $11 million on a golf course/water retention project worth it to protect less than 100 basements? I sure don't.

BTW, I live in the subdivision that would benefit from such an expenditure. I still don't like the cost. I think that there are cheaper and more viable alternatives... even finding a location farther downstream would be better. I think Public Works needs to go back to the drawing board and take another look rather than bail out a retiring golf course owner.

KM

How influential is Special Interest?

That is one question that has long been going through my mind. The opinion of many that I know can tell you that there is a great deal of influence. There isn't much doubt that money drives politics. That will always be true. Just look at recent elections and you will see that the candidates that raise the most and spend the most get the votes on election day. I really don't think that the message matters. Just that people hear the name.

The only election that has even been close was last year when Tower and Esslinger faced off for Mayor. Neither spent a bunch of money and the election was very close (51% to 49% if my memory serves). In that same election, Jessica King came out of nowhere and won a seat on the council. She spent over $7000 to do it, but the outcome seems to be worth it. Now she is looking for a seat in our State Senate.

Another example of how the message doesn't seem to matter. Last year there were four candidates for Oshkosh Area BOE (Becker, Monte, Bowen and Thiel). There is not much of an argument on agendas with that group. Becker and Monte align while Bowen and Thiel have shared opinions for many years. But the outcome was far from "party lines". Becker and Bowen were elected with only a separation of 100 votes. Monte came in 3rd with Thiel following in 4th. What on earth were the voters thinking? I don't understand.

Oshkosh has long been run by those who have power with deep pockets. Whether or not they will step up to the microphone or pull strings from the shadows, both will have the same results. As long as there is private money to "assist" in projects, the city administration will have their hand out. The Sundial was just the latest. A perfect example of how our administrators are spineless. Fitzpatrick stated during the last council meeting when Esslinger tried to bring a resolution to block the re installation of the fountain that nothing needed to be done and that the Sundial would not be put back until more discussion could take place. We can see how far that went. It didn't even make it to the next meeting. By the way, the influence was not C.R. Meyer (thank you for the correction) nor the $5000 that they were paid to R/R the thing. It could have waited.

I will open the door for other examples of Special Interest control... Please don't get personal.

KM

Welcome Back to the Sundial

I found out this evening that our Acting City Manager will have the sundial replaced in Oprah House Square tomorrow (6/5). Just one week after we heard him at the Council meeting telling Council Members not to worry. That it wouldn't be put back until a decision can be made to an alternate location.

I guess the "powers that be" in the community have spoken and convinced the City Manager to put it back. What does that say about the leaders of our city? Even the Council can't prevent an eyesore from being the center piece of our downtown.

And for those that think that I am being too critical about this fountain, keep in mind that this fountain has not been maintained in quite some time. Half of the nozzles were not working and it does not fit in with the architecture of its surroundings.

So, I would hope that the "welcome back" is short lived...