The Forum

I am nervous about the effect the smoking ban will have on our bars and restaurants. On the other hand, I do not necessarily believe it will be the end of the world for Shorewood. My sincere hope is that the State of WI will finally act before the Shorewood ban even takes effect. I will save detailed commentary on the ban itself for another time.

For now, I need to emphasize that almost none of the people who spoke out in favor of the smoking ban at last night's meeting were from Shorewood. They flocked from all corners in a veritable feeding frenzy of political opportunism, to wag their fingers, stomp their feet, and lecture us. They threatened us of doomsday scenarios if we passed anything but the harshest possible ban with no exemptions. We had the anti-smoking organizations from the North Shore, Southeast WI, the State of WI , Smoke Free Tajikistan, and the head of the Coalition of Tobacco Free Left-Handed Ukranian Harmonica Players. They came from Racine, from Cedarburg, from Mequon, from Oman, Siberia, and the Caribbean Island of St Kitts, all to tell us what would be best for us to do in our village.

I must clearly state how bothersome these Super-Nannies are, and urge them to respect the fact that this is our town and not their political petri dish. The well meaning lobbyists will bear none of the potential negative consequences of this ban. None of them will be appearing at the North Shore Legion Post in the weeks and months after the ban goes into effect to ensure this Shorewood stalwart stays in business. They came, did their drive-by lobbyist act, and have already moved on. We are now a case study, to be written about in press releases and used as ammunition in their next drive by.



Comments

1. I'm aghast!! How in the world could the Shorewood Village Board vote on a smoking ban without first seeking the valuable input of anti-smoking coalitions from Screen Writers' Guild, East Vietnam and the Village of Franklin? On the serious side, I truly feel that we are now in a petri dish. I'm also curious now to see what effects recent events of over-served high school students and now a 'suburban-trend-setting' smoking ban will have on our upcoming $225,000 media blitz.
- Jim Genthe, Shorewood Resident, 2/27/07

In a cliffhanger 4 to 3 vote, the Shorewood Village Board voted to ban smoking in all public places. Although I arrived late to the meeting, I believe the option they chose goes into effect July 1, 2009. No exemption for bars and restaurants was included in the ordinance that was adopted.

Something tells me this is about to get interesting.

Welcome to Trustee Candidate Dave Tatarowicz to the ShorewoodNOW blog roll!  I am pleased to have him join us.  I hope an online presence will become a major part of all Shorewood campaigns, similar to the lit drops and the candidate coffees.

For many voters, a candidate blog or website would be the best (and perhaps only) opportunity to interact with the candidates.  Only a small number of voters will be invited to a campaign coffee, and a total of maybe 100 people will attend the candidate forums.  Today, most voters are left to make up their minds based on campaign literature, or an endorsement from a trusted friend or neighbor.

If all of the candidates were online, every single voter would have the opportunity to get to know the candidates, ask questions, and truly make up their own minds.  No prepared speeches.  No time limits on questions or answers.  Just the voters, and the candidates writing back and forth. 

 

Following the combination of all polling locations into one for this Tuesday's Primary Election, I stumbled across the following Village Ordinance.

--------------------------------
Section 2-301 Polling Places
There are and shall be six polling places in the Village of Shorewood, to be designated by the Village Board. The polls shall be open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. for all elections.
---------------------------------

 

The below update is from the Shorewood School District's eNews.  On a personal note, I had 4 of the 6 teachers who will be retiring at the end of this year.  Thank you to all of you for your many years of service!

---------------------------------
Shorewood eNews 
Feb 2, 2007

At the February 13 School Board Meeting, the Board approved retirement requests from Dianne Messar, Gary Pruett and Marti Berg and thanked them for their many years of quality service to our students. Retirement requests for David Powell, Karen Radtke and Roxanne Hanney were approved in December
---------------------------

 

Let’s change the tone of things for a moment and discuss what is best about living in Shorewood. We all spend a good deal of time griping when things go wrong. Let’s spend some time celebrating what is right about our Village.

So the question for all of you is: What is the best thing about living in Shorewood? 

Click here to enter your response.

I will post your responses as they come in.

"1. Being able to walk to get a book at the library, to get a GOOD loaf of bread, to buy a book.... 2. Being close to Lake Michigan. 3. Having the Oak Leaf Trail nearby. A bike ride to Beans and Barley and all the way to the Art Museum is probably a lot easier than people realize!"
- Tim Fojtik, 2/26/07

"I am going to answer my own question.  SHS, SIS, Lake Bluff, and Atwater."
- Steve Koczela, 2/26/07

I received this comment about the general content of my blog.  (My responses in bold type.)

-------------------------------
Steve, I appreciate your thoughtful observations on Shorewood. I often don't agree with you, but I think it's clear that you care about the community. I just have a couple comments:

1. Could you please stop saying things like "If we do not want Shorewood to be seen as a high tax community, we should not spend $225,000 of tax money on a marketing program to convince people Shorewood is not a high tax community." You seem like an intelligent and thoughtful guy. Shorewood's taxes are high. That's no secret. Perhaps it's a problem, but the cute quotation above is the type of thing goofy radio personalities say. 

Response: These was indeed a cute quotation (not word for word) of a goofy radio personality (Jessica McBride).  These were not my own words.  However, I believe the content of the concern, if not the phrasing, is warranted.  This from a JSOnline Article, 2/14/06: "Michael Phinney, a Village Board trustee who supports the branding effort, said he's concerned about Shorewood's image as a high-tax, divisive community." 

2. You also say: "We have a shortage of parking on Oakland and Capitol" I'm just very perplexed by this claim. I am no parking expert, but I live less than a half block off of Capitol and I walk up Oakland several times a week. I see parking all along both of these streets. In addition, all of the main businesses along Oakland have their own parking lots. Rather than claim there is a shortage of parking, I would possibly go as far to say that there is an abundance of parking on Oakland. These are just my observations from frequenting these areas regularly, but perhaps I'm missing something.

Response: The parking problem in Shorewood is twofold.  First is the set of rules by which parkers in our public lots must abide.  They are restrictive to the point of driving away current and potential renters.  Second is the shortage, as documented by Walker Parking Consultants in their Feb, 2005 Study available on the Village of Shorewood website.

- Tim Fojtik, 2/20/07
------------------------------

A few loose ends from election day yesterday:
1. Parking.  Several people, including Trustee Candidate David Tatarowicz had questioned where people would park if all voting locations were combined.  When I went, I found adequate parking, including 6 or 7 spots reserved for 30 minute election parking.
2. Signage.  There was minimal signage at Lake Bluff indicating the change of venue.  The signage was limited to one piece of 8.5" x 11" taped to the inside of each door window, telling people to go to the Village Center.

3. Turnout.  I was the 712th voter at approximate 5:30 PM.  I have emailed the Village Clerk to find out the precise turnout figures.


Comments
1. RE: the parking situation on the February 20th voting day! I say we take a page from the Green Bay book and allow residents around the library voting site to open up their lawns to parking for a nominal fee as they do for Packer games at Lambeau!
- Jim Genthe, Shorewood Resident, 2/20/07

Several other school districts in the area are adding turf to their athletic facilities. The below excerpt is from an article from this morning's Journal Sentinel.

--------------------------------------

Cutbacks in class, upgrades on the field

Districts crunched; boosters fund new turf
JSOnline, 2/19/07

Just days before the Kettle Moraine School District's superintendent embarked this month on discussions preparing residents for $1.2 million in program cutbacks, a letter went out to some of those same residents. Signed by a group called the Kettle Moraine Field Project Committee, the letter sought $460,000 in funding the installation of artificial turf for the football field.

If successful, Kettle Moraine High School would be the latest school in the state to perform a pricey upgrade to its athletic facilities at a time when many school districts complain they have to reduce services or are holding referendums to raise tax dollars to keep existing programs.

.....

Already, Arrowhead and Brookfield Central high schools have replaced grass football fields with the synthetic stuff. Both were funded by donations from private groups, although the Elmbrook School District has pledged to match half of the $830,000 upgrade of Brookfield Central's stadium. Read full article
----------------------------------

Jeff raises some points in his letter that I need to address. Below are his original statements/questions followed by my responses.

-------------------------------

Jeff: I read your list of things you perceive as "negative" about Shorewood, I had to wonder: why do you live here? You appear to be an advocate for lower taxes, a more politically conservative demographic, and bigger lot sizes, which sounds a lot like life in, well, Brookfield. Perhaps you could expound on that in another posting.

Steve: You have misunderstood the point of what I was writing. The point of the post was to list things which we should not attempt to communicate in the marketing plan. This post was not, in any way, meant to be a list of things I was advocating for or against. I certainly was not calling for lower taxes, bigger lots, or more conservative residents.

I am not sure where you have placed me on your mental political spectrum, but if you think my views would be more appropriate for Brookfield, I have not explained myself properly. My consistent advocacy for senior citizen services, equal treatment of low income renters, protection of our Village property from AT&T, pesticide free village property, etc. should suggest to you that you are misreading my political beliefs.

Like you, I love Shorewood for what it is. I have lived here since I was 9, moving back intentionally after my time in college, grad school, and the Army. If I gave the impression that I feel like a fish out of water in Shorewood, then thank you for bringing it up, because that certainly was not my intent.

---------------------------------------

Jeff: The facts you stated in your column are true, but it's your opinions, not the facts themselves, that qualify them as "negative things." The bottom line is that it's all in how you look at it. What's "negative" to you might just be "positive" to other people.

Steve: True enough. The statements contained in the list are facts, but you are correct that my use of the word "negative" does indicate that I made a qualitative judgment about them. However, I would argue most people would agree that the facts I listed are negative, if all else were equal We would all love to get everything, and pay nothing. Of course, as you point out, all else is never equal. High taxes often lead to good schools, infrastructure, etc. I believe my listing of School, the Library, and so forth in the list of positives indicates my recognition of the tradeoffs present in Shorewood, many of which lead to positive outcomes. As an aside, I am a strong believer in quality public education, having reaped the benefits of Shorewood schools myself.

-----------------------------------------

Jeff: Yes, compared to other Wisconsin municipalities, we are a high tax community. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing if you're the sort of person (like me) who doesn't mind paying a higher percentage of his income to property taxes. In fact, I think it's a "positive thing." What I get in return for high taxes are great schools and a clean, green community that is safe to live in, among many other things.

Steve: True, but again I would say I fully recognized the tradeoffs by listing things in the positives list which are paid for with tax dollars. On the other hand, being a high tax community is not a positive thing, in and of itself. It is a positive thing because of the outcome it produces. So in our marketing program, let's focus on the positives gained by our high taxes, rather than suggesting we are not a high tax community.

-----------------------------------

Jeff: You say that Shorewood's liberalism is a "drawback" for some potential residents of more conservative viewpoints who wish to live near people of similar political beliefs. But you can also say the same thing about Brookfield's conservatism. People of similar values and beliefs tend to want to live near each other; this is how communities are formed. Steve, this isn't a drawback, it's human nature.

Steve: True, it is human nature to want to live near people of similar beliefs. I believe I stated clearly that this would only be a drawback for someone of a more conservative viewpoint. Once again, I simply believe we should focus on other things when marketing Shorewood, which was the point of the original post. This was added partly in response to several of the callers to the radio show, who said they would not move here based on our political leanings.

--------------------------------

The below letter is in response to my post "More on the Marketing Plan" from 2/18/07. By way of full disclosure, Jeff was an active supporter of mine for the 2005 and 2006 election cycles.

---------------------------
Steve, your column does a pretty good job of identifying some of the key issues facing Shorewood residents these days, but I have to take issue with some of the things you've listed about Shorewood that are "negative." The facts you stated in your column are true, but it's your opinions, not the facts themselves, that qualify them as "negative things." The bottom line is that it's all in how you look at it. What's "negative" to you might just be "positive" to other people. Here's what I mean:

1) Yes, compared to other Wisconsin municipalities, we are a high tax community. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing if you're the sort of person (like me) who doesn't mind paying a higher percentage of his income to property taxes. In fact, I think it's a "positive thing." What I get in return for high taxes are great schools and a clean, green community that is safe to live in, among many other things.
2) Yes, compared to other Wisconsin municipalities, we are a very liberal community. This is because people who choose to live in Shorewood are more liberal than those who choose to live in, say, Brookfield. This is one of the reasons WHY people live in Shorewood. For them, it's a "positive thing." You say that Shorewood's liberalism is a "drawback" for some potential residents of more conservative viewpoints who wish to live near people of similar political beliefs. But you can also say the same thing about Brookfield's conservatism. People of similar values and beliefs tend to want to live near each other; this is how communities are formed. Steve, this isn't a drawback, it's human nature.
3) I agree that Shorewood has small lot sizes. And you're absolutely right: anyone looking for significant land space should not look in Shorewood. However, small lot sizes are not an inherently "negative thing." Shorewood is a great option for people who don't need or want a 4,000 square foot McMansion on three acres of overly-fertilized and excessively landscaped grounds, for example. So for them, a small lot size is a "positive thing."

When I decided to make Milwaukee my home, I looked around at a number of communities before deciding where to live. I chose Shorewood precisely for its quality of life, and I knew that high tax rates were one of the things that made this possible. I also chose Shorewood specifically because of its progressive values and liberal political environment. And yes, I chose to own a house in Shorewood because the sizes of the lots and houses meet my needs.

I know a lot of other people who feel the same way I do. We could live anywhere in the Milwaukee area, but we choose to live in Shorewood because it is a reflection of who we are and what is important to us. So when I read your list of things you perceive as "negative" about Shorewood, I had to wonder: why do you live here? You appear to be an advocate for lower taxes, a more politically conservative demographic, and bigger lot sizes, which sounds a lot like life in, well, Brookfield. Perhaps you could expound on that in another posting. By the way, we agree on the parking problem. Thanks for bringing it up.
- Jeff Jara, Shorewood Resident, 2/19/07
-----------------------

Below are two excerpts from the minutes of the Dec 4, 2006 Village Board meeting. The excerpts specify the time period in which the Board should have acted on the two hottest topics of the day: the smoking ban, and the senior lounge. As you can see, both time periods are now expired, and we still have no action on either front.

---------------------------------
Dec 4, 2006: Presentation and Discussion of Village Center Space Needs Ad Hoc Committee Report
"President Johnson referred this matter to the Development and Long Range Planning Committee for further review and a recommendation in approximately two months."

Dec 4, 2006: Discussion on Process for Clean Indoor Air Act "Smoking Ban"
Tr. Hickey moved, seconded by Tr. Maher, to direct the Committee to continue to study the issue and refine the ordinance in such a way that the Trustees can take a vote as a Board within 60 days. Motion carried, 7-0.
--------------------------------

Now that both time periods are past, we have seen neither "a recommendation in approximately two months" on the senior lounge, or "a vote as a Board within 60 days" on the smoking ban. Both time frames were set by the Board itself, in the presence of a large number of constituents.

How does Shorewood stack up against the rest of the North Shore in terms of property taxes? A 2003 Study by the Institute for Wisconsin's Future compared a number of municipalities in terms of what percentage of household income goes to pay property taxes. Below is a chart showing the results.


Source: Institute for Wisconsin's Future

So what does this chart mean? It means that $0.10 out of every dollar earned by Shorewood residents goes to pay our property taxes. This is in comparison to $0.059 per dollar in Whitefish Bay and $0.0614 in Glendale.

I point this out as one more piece of evidence of the absurdity of any marketing plan which attempts to suggest that Shorewood is anything but a high tax community. Let's hope the marketing plan will focus on the positives about Shorewood, rather than taxes. Arguing the tax question is a losing battle for us.

I put up a poll several weeks ago about whether or not the Shorewood School District should build a dome over the athletic fields. Below are the results of our very unscientific poll.

28% Yes, build a dome
67% No, do not build a dome
5% Unsure

If you would like to vote in our poll, you may do so below.

Building a Dome

Should the renovation of the Shorewood athletic facilities include a dome over the football/soccer field?

Yes, build a dome No, do not build a dome Undecided

View Result

Free Polls

Although I did post Jessica McBride's comments last night, I need to make it clear that I am not in 100% agreement with her opinions. I agree with her that the notion of spending a huge amount of tax money to convince outsiders that we do not have high taxes is a lesson in irony.

On the other hand, I do support some form of marketing get the good word out about our Village. We need to send a positive message to bring people to Shorewood. We need to take positive action to reverse the population decline, bring children to our schools, fill our rental properties, and prevent the long list of homes for sale from growing even longer.

There are many positive things we could say about our Village without trying to deny the fact that we do, in fact, have high taxes. The following is a list of positive things we could communicate about Shorewood.

1. We have great schools.
2. The walkability of our shopping district is second to none.
3. We are a very family friendly community.
4. We are the most economically diverse community on the North Shore.
5. We have a nice blend of urban and suburban.
6. We have a very nice Library facility.
7. UWM students and professors keep our community interesting.

On the other hand, there are some negative things about Shorewood. Denying any of the facts below will not make the facts any less true, and will make us sound ridiculous and out of touch.

1. We are a high tax community. According to a 2003 study by the Institute for Wisconsin's Future, we pay the highest percentage of our income to property taxes of any community in Milwaukee County.
2. We do have a parking problem. We have a shortage of parking on Oakland and Capitol, do not allow overnight on street parking, and have by far the most expensive parking permits in the area.
3. We are a very liberal community. This is a drawback for some potential residents of more conservative viewpoints who wish to live near people of similar political beliefs. Shorewood voted for Jim Doyle over Mark Green by a margin of 73% to 26%.
4. We do have small lot sizes. Anyone looking for significant land space should not look in Shorewood.

If this media blitz is supposed to improve perceptions of our Village, well, we are off to a bad start. The first media outlet to pick up the story made us look absurd.



Comments

1. I agree with your excellent lists of pros and cons of living in Shorewood. My family moved to Shorewood as opposed to other communities because of the reasons you mentioned, plus the amazing neighborhood schools that offer an excellent education as well as diversity which we feel is an important part of public school education. Then again, we were moving to the Milwaukee area from New York City, so our perceptions about housing costs vs. the services you get for your money, the space, the walkability of the community, and the easy access to nature are quite different from those of someone who has lived in Wisconsin for years. Maybe one strategy is to try to attract telecommuters, who can work anywhere, and former Milwaukeeans who now have families to move here from the expensive big cities such as NYC, Boston, D.C., and San Francisco.
- Nancy Peske Darrow, 2/17/07

From Foyne Mahaffey's blog, "A Fine Line":

"I'm proposing a National Match.com especially for parents and educators. All teachers would be required to have their photos posted, along with in depth profiles detailing accomplishments, degrees, certifications, awards, recognitions, participation ribbons and scanned copies of childhood report cards. Along with this would be a 5 star rating feedback system so parents could get back at or reward past teachers. "

While you may not be able to pick your child's teachers, there are sites out there to rate them.

Here is one of them: RateMyTeachers.com

Well, having listened to the entire segment of Jessica McBride's show, I can tell you nothing positive was said about Shorewood or our marketing program.



Comments

1. I completely agree that the marketing campaign to be kicked off in Shorewood is a complete waste of money. I moved to Shorewood a year ago, and had much more hope for what Shorewood would become, and have to state that I am disappointed in what I have seen thus far. The matter at stake is simple, if you do not want to be viewed as a high tax community, find ways to lower taxes, don't increase spending on unnecessary "programs". The best way to lower taxes are bring in some more businesses to the community. There are so many vacant shops in Shorewood that could be replaced with a younger hipper image that would create more of a Towne center feel. People live in Shorewood because of the close proximity to Milwaukee, which means people are looking for more of a city feel. The demographics are changing daily, and could benefit from some change, not necessarily depending on revenue streams from the past. If there aren't any changes in the near future, the homeowners of Shorewood will have a rude awakening as property values will continue to decline, as people choose other affordable and developing communities to call home.
- Kristi, 2/16/07

2. Steve, Last year, I and I believe 13 other Shorewood residents, were gathered in a room on the lower level of the Village Center/Library to view and rate slogans with collages of pictures to be used in what I now see will be a $225,000 marketing program. We were paid $70 each for our time and efforts. At the time, I recall thinking the results we viewed were rather inadequate attempts that were in need of more revision. Now, having seen what the final cost of this project will be, I'm again confused. If we are attempting to convey to prospective residents what a wonderful place this is to live, why are we also conversely showing them that we feel the need to throw buckets of public money to 'outsiders' to show them that fact?
- A 53 Year Shorewood Resident, 2/16/07

So far, Jessica McBride has offered us this piece of advice:

If we do not want Shorewood to be seen as a high tax community, we should not spend $225,000 of tax money on a marketing program to convince people Shorewood is not a high tax community.

Conservative radio talk show host and blogger Jessica McBride is apparently not impressed with the proposal by the Village of Shorewood to spend $225,000 on a marketing program to change our image. Her comments from her blog "McBride Media Matters" are shown below. Her radio program has just begun on the radio...we'll see what she has to say about it.

-------------------------------------

Shorewood's PR blitz

THURSDAY, Feb. 15, 2007, 6:40 p.m.

HUH? Is Shorewood the Britney Spears of local suburbs?

Shorewood is having an identity crisis. Shorewood thinks it needs a new image. Maybe it can hire a stylist or something.

Journal Sentinel:

Shorewood - Does Shorewood need a new image?

Civic leaders apparently think so, and they're about launch a $225,000 media blitz in an effort to change the public's perception of this North Shore village.

Note to Shorewood: Since a lot of people think you have a fine image, except for all of those rabid anti-war and anti-Bush signs pasted all over Leftyville, you might consider that it won't exactly help to spend 225K of public money on..... pretty much nothing.
------------------------------

I have argued before that the negative climate for renters in Shorewood is bad for our future. The majority (52.4%) of residential units in Shorewood are rental units, according to the 2000 Census. The long term success of Shorewood is inextricably bound to the success of our rental community.

Let's take a look at where they all live. The map below shows the percentage of residential units in each area that are rental units, based on 2000 US Census Data.