Oshkosh staff propose tiered code-enforcement priorities, changes to SeeClickFix and public reporting

Oshkosh City staff on Wednesday recommended a formal, tiered approach to code enforcement aimed at prioritizing life-safety issues and reducing staff time spent on lower-priority complaints submitted through SeeClickFix.

The recommendation, presented by Sarah (Community Development staff lead), would categorize complaints into three tiers: immediate life-safety hazards (tier 1), issues that could lead to damage or safety concerns if untreated (tier 2), and lower-priority quality-of-life or minor zoning matters (tier 3). Sarah told the council, "Code enforcement is a balance. It's not as simple as this is the code, you're breaking the code, you're in violation, therefore, we're taking you to court." She said the goal is to focus limited staff resources on higher-impact problems while improving communication and transparency.

Why it matters: Staff reported heavy use of SeeClickFix for resident complaints and argued the current reactive process consumes substantial time. From July 1, 2024, to July 1, 2025, staff said the city logged about 2,700 SeeClickFix reports (an average of roughly 230 per month) and an average of 12 days to close cases. The most common SeeClickFix categories cited were parking issues on street/sidewalk (more than 400 reports), tall weeds (about 380), property maintenance (about 348), junk/debris on private property (about 340) and garbage/recycling (about 194). Sarah noted SeeClickFix is only the intake tool; case management is handled in Evolve.

Discussion and staff recommendations: Staff and a consultant (Matrix) recommend prioritizing complaints so staff do not treat every case identically. Examples discussed for tier 1 included severe exterior maintenance creating immediate hazards, sump pumps discharging onto sidewalks in a way that creates ice hazards, and unsecured pools that could endanger children. Tier 2 examples included junk and debris, some zoning violations and working without a permit; staff suggested a typical response window of about a week for these. Tier 3 would include minor zoning matters, parking disputes, unregistered vehicles and visible garbage cans, and staff proposed educational, non‑inspection first responses for many tier 3 items.

Council reaction and operational concerns: Council members largely supported prioritization but raised operational and policy questions. One councilmember said the volume and cost of investigating each complaint—travel, photos and data entry—make prioritization essential. Another urged staff to retain discretion to elevate recurring or neighborhood-concentrated complaints even if they initially land in a lower tier. Several councilmembers expressed concern about the public-facing nature of Evolve and whether images and permit or complaint data should be publicly visible; Sarah acknowledged privacy and "Safe at Home"/judicial privacy considerations are being evaluated.

SeeClickFix, anonymity and tenant complaints: Staff asked whether the city should allow anonymous SeeClickFix reports. Some councilmembers supported removing anonymous reporting except for narrow tenant-landlord retaliation cases; others warned anonymous reporting can protect tenants who fear retaliation. Sarah said staff will explore a compromise (for example, an anonymity option limited to tenant complaints) and stressed the need for a separate intake process for sensitive landlord-tenant issues.

Technology and coordination: Councilmembers proposed operational fixes that do not require staff to visit and document every SeeClickFix item when not warranted. Suggestions included improving the SeeClickFix options available to residents, limiting dropdown options to reduce frivolous reports, and enabling community-development staff to mark items as "received" without creating a resource-intensive inspection for every report. Staff also raised the idea of a dedicated coordinator or a more centralized approach to code enforcement: roughly 32–35 staff across nine divisions currently touch enforcement work, which staff estimated equates to about six full-time equivalent positions when combined.

Next steps: Staff said they will refine the tier definitions, propose changes to SeeClickFix intake options and anonymity settings, review Evolve's public-facing settings for privacy concerns, and return with a more detailed policy and operational plan. Sarah said the public workshop was intended to be a visible first step: "I took it to council. We're making some changes," she told residents and council members.

Ending note: No formal vote or ordinance was taken at the workshop; the session was a policy and operational discussion. Staff asked for council direction on tier assignments, anonymity limits and whether to pursue a central coordination role for code enforcement, and will return with proposals for council to consider.