The Forum

As a curious historical fact, the reason our fundraising drive is called Drive to Distinction is because the committee used the fundraising writeup from Ball State University as a model. BSU also called their stadium fundraising drive the "Drive to Distinction." The name stuck after the committee read that document, though we did not officially decide to use this as the Shorewood name until Jan, 2005 after brainstorming any number of other names including some clearer reference to Greyhounds or other Shorewood terms.

Proponents of various local public spending initiatives often cite the need for Shorewood to remain competitive with other North Shore suburbs for new residents. This week, the US Census Bureau released its annual population estimates, which tell one piece of the story on how we are doing in this particular competition.

The numbers show Shorewood is indeed losing population, though not as quickly as the other North Shore suburbs. Whitefish Bay is losing population faster than we are in Shorewood, as are Brown Deer, Bayside, Fox Point, and Glendale. Since the year 2000, Shorewood has lost 3.7% of our population, compared to 4.4% lost for Whitefish Bay. Bayside saw the largest percentage decrease, at 5.9%.

As the population interested in living in inner ring suburbs dwindles, and households continue to shrink, we need to be sure we remain competitive with the nearby suburbs. But as the numbers show, we are not hurting as badly as our various neighbors to the North.

-----------------------
Percent Change from 2000-2006
Bayside Village -5.9%
Brown Deer Village -4.8%
Whitefish Bay Village -4.4%
Fox Point Village -4.4%
Glendale City -4.2%
Shorewood Village -3.7%
Source: US Census Bureau, JSOnline
----------------------

If you are interested, you can read how other communities are doing in this week's JSOnline article, "Franklin sees population boom, census data show." There are several tables and charts in the article showing who is gaining and losing in terms of population.

In case you missed it, the newly opened Oak Crest Tavern on Oakland Ave got a glowing review in the Shepherd Express this week. Here is the review:

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

Good for Shorewood: Fine dining in a tavern setting

The Shepherd Express, 6/27/07
by: Jeff Beutner

The Oakcrest Tavern is much more than the name implies. Yes, they call it a tavern, and when the place is empty, it certainly looks like one. But even though one side is devoted to a large bar with a top constructed of tropical hardwood boards, the accompanying flat-panel televisions and requisite beers only tell half the story.

The other side of the room serves as a carpeted dining area, with an inviting stone fireplace taking center stage. Outdoor tables shaded by Pilsner Urquell umbrellas are also available. When the place is busy—which is often—you will see that Shorewood residents tend to favor the restaurant side of Oakcrest Tavern

Oakcrest is located in the space once occupied by the seafood eatery Red Rock, though the interior has been completely redone. This is the first solo project for owner Rick Schmidt, whose diverse menu reflects his extensive experience in restaurant management and consulting.

As inviting as the interior is, the outdoor tables are the summertime place to be. Try a plate of onion rings ($4.95) for a starter. They are medium-sized, between a haystack cut and thick slabs of onion, dipped in a buttermilk batter before they are deep-fried. Normally I shun guacamole at restaurants without Mexican names, but Oakcrest's guacamole ($6.95) counters that logic. Though it is processed to a smooth puree, this distinctive guac still brings the tartness of tomatillos. The fresh and crisp flour tortilla chips add to the taste. Another good starter is the tenderloin tips ($9.95), two skewers of beef seared with rosemary, along with a horseradish and sour cream dipping sauce.

The menu complements the casual decor with entrée-sized salads and many sandwiches. Entrees are split between "Tavern Favorites," which are served all day, and a roster available only after 5 p.m. Options include mussels, grilled tuna, cognac chicken and even balsamic marinated tofu—not the typical fare of a British pub! Just try the shrimp risotto ($13.95) in a wide bowl, the short-grained Arborio rice bathed in a tomato cream sauce with a yellow hue nearly of saffron. Grated Parmesan cheese, pieces of asparagus and red and green bell peppers fill out the meal.

The hanger steak ($15.95) provides a reason in and of itself to visit the Oakcrest. When ordered medium-rare, the aging of the meat makes the center tender, almost silky in texture. The meat, grilled and sliced, is topped with chimichurri, a condiment of parsley, herbs and olive oil that is an everyday sight in Argentina. (The menu mistakenly attributes it to Spain.) This is a fine chimichurri in complete harmony with the flavor of the beef. A pile of salty fries and a cup of coleslaw accompany.

The Oakcrest navigates a fine line between tavern and restaurant. The setting is casual, yet the wood paneling implies elegance. The food at times aspires to fine dining, though the prices indicate otherwise. The restaurant, which offers the usual Friday fish fry, clearly targets the neighborhood crowd, but the risotto and hanger steak speak out to a larger audience. Regardless of which style you prefer, this is a fine new addition to Shorewood.
------------------------------

For those of you who could not attend, I will tell you the D2D listening session was very interesting and informative. Several readers contacted me after the meeting regarding the article written about the event. Their questions specifically related to one aspect of the D2D presentation at the meeting. The article on the event said the following.

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

Residents back D2D's request for funding

ShorewoodNOW, 6/25/07

"Sean Cummings, who spoke on behalf of D2D, said that upon completion of the facility, it would like attract new families to Shorewood.

Cummings said if four new families with two children moved into Shorewood each year and those children attended Shorewood schools, it would generate more than $11 million in revenue for the district."
----------------------

I contacted Mr. Cummings yesterday to seek clarification on the statistics behind this calculation. Here is his response.

-----------------------
From: Sean Cummings
Date: 6/26/07

Dear Steve,

Thank you for your interest in and support of D2D. I will drop a sign off at your home in the next few days.

It is my understanding that the average benefit to the school district of a student is $140,000. This assumes the child stays in the system the entire 13 years (K-12).

This is how the funding was calculated.

If D2D attracted (or retained) 4 incremental families (2 child avg.) per year for 10 years to Shorewood schools it would result in $11 million in increased funding:
per student value (K-12) = $140,000
4 families x 2 students = 8 students
8 students x $140,000 = $1,120,000 for each set of 8 kids in the system for 13 years
$1,120,000 over 10 yrs. = $11,200,000 assuming a new set of 8 kids entered into the system each year for 10 years and stayed the entire time

In summary, this assumes that 80 new kids (8 kids per year x 10 years) come into the system and stay the entire time. 80 x $140,000 = $11,200,000 over 10 years or 1,120,000 per year

Cut the assumption in half to just 2 families and D2D still delivers $5.6 million over 10 years or $560,000 per year

This numbers assumes a flat rate benefit per student, state formulas are very complex. I cannot begin to figure out all of these scenarios. This was intended to illustrate the directional power of increased (or declining) enrollment on school funding and the need to implement bold, visible changes to our schools to attract additional residents. If D2D prevents some families from leaving the system it is equally valuable. There are just two ways to keep our schools strong, one is to raise taxes and the other is to increase enrollment. As a tax payer and resident I like D2D because it provides a very visible investment in the community, utilizing primarily privately raised funds, that will appeal to prospective home buyers and renters.

Please let me know if you have any further questions.

Sean
------------------------------

1. In the D2D response, I saw no mention of the $600,000 that the VIllage of Shorewood was expected to put up. Somewhere, I saw a statement that village tax payers would pay about $200 for each $300,000 assesment. If D2D is a privitized approach to upgrading athlethic facilities, why should the local gov't subsidize the effort to the tone of $600,000? Why can't this be a loan to the School Board to be paid back to the Village at $60,000 a year from future private donations? Does the $11,000,000 for eight students in school come from State collected taxes. Will Shorewood residents, get hit by State taxes as well as School taxes and additional Village taxes. I thought CDA efforts were to reduce tax, why are the members now encouraging increase in taxes? Why should empty nesters and people without children and seniors who will no longer have children have to pay additional taxes to support new sports buildings? Why don't the families with the children make their contributions on a private basis? I believe that those people who are against subsidies of other sorts and are all for privatization should go all out to keep this a private project in order to prove that privatization can work. I don't believe sports to be necessary for eduaction, in fact it works against good education and diverts the attention of our young. I'm not giving my name because those who attack certain blogs won't give theirs."
- Anonymous, 6/27/07

From Steve: Some of these issues were covered in the actual presentation that day. I will try to post some of the actual materials from the D2D committee, which answers some of these questions.

2. A - What was the calculation behind $140,000 (is this net present value?), or w

In response to my post about Tim's comments on the Library, I received this comment. The comment is topical and timely, given tonight's events, so am highlighting it.

------------------------------
Go for it, Tim! This is still a vital topic for discussion. We should have learned from the failures in the library planning and execution--and those lessons should be reflected in the planning and execution of the athletic field renovation/beautification/dome project. Unfortunately, so far that doesn't seem to be the case.
- Anonymous, 6/22/07
-----------------------------

Links
1. Tim's Post
2. My Response

Tonight at 6:30 PM at SIS, there is a listening session concerning whether the Village Board should contribute to the renovation of the athletic facilities. I will bring you whatever information I obtain on either side, and will recap the evening in a later post.

For now, here are some electronic materials I obtained which are being distributed by those in favor of the Village Board's contributing the money to the fundraising effort.

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

Why Support D2D?

Vibrant communities don’t develop by accident. They take vision, commitment and investment. The Drive-To-Distinction (D2D) campaign is a bold initiative designed to make a major contribution to the quality of life of all Shorewood residents for decades to come.

Athletes and those families interested in athletics support this initiative. This is not a surprise to anyone. What is less obvious perhaps is why every Shorewood resident benefits (see summary list below) by implementing these plans. You should support D2D if you believe our schools are a significant, contributing factor to the health of our community. You should support this initiative if you are tired of the academic program cuts in our schools. You should support D2D if you believe in physical education or combating the rising problem of childhood obesity. You should support this project if you are a Shorewood resident with children at St. Roberts today, with plans to attend Marquette High or DSHA. You should support this project if you like the idea of a summertime farmer’s market or a Seniors Walking Club in the middle of winter. If you are a landlord, business owner, empty nester or senior citizen with no direct interest in the schools, recreational and social activities, you should support this project. Finally, if you are a property owner and taxpayer you should definitely support D2D.

The single largest reason that people choose to live in Shorewood is the quality of our schools. Families move to Shorewood, raise their kids and become the next generation of empty nesters, senior citizens and shoppers. We must continue to fill the pipeline with that next generation of Shorewood residents or the quality of Village life will diminish over time.

Like it or not, we are in competition with other school districts and communities for residents. Young families who are considering a move from other countries, US cities or Wisconsin communities often come to town and visit three, four or five communities prior to making a decision on where to rent or buy a property. They may make two or three visits to various school districts in a single day. We often get just one chance to make a good first impression. Shorewood High School is the gateway to our community and we don’t have great “curb appeal”. Our neoclassical buildings are impressive however a closer inspection reveals a facility that is tired and underwhelming. Facilities sell and we are sending a signal to prospective residents that we are not looking forward and investing in our future. Our competition: Whitefish Bay, Nicholet and Mequon, to name just a few, continue to invest in new facilities.

Shorewood must attract new families to our community at an accelerated rate if we are to reverse the tide of declining enrollment. We cannot continue to enjoy the benefit of a world-class school system without doing one of two things: increase property taxes or increase enrollment. Did you know that each additional student who enters and completes K-12 in the Shorewood system generates $140,000 in funding? We would inject an additional $11 million into the school system if D2D helped to attract or retain just 4 families (2 children avg.) per year over each of the next 10 years. Cut that assumption in half to just 2 families per year for 10 years and you generate more than $5 million to use in the classroom. In addition, an increase in the demand for housing would benefit property owners, area businesses and the Village tax base.

We must take bold, visible action if we are to attract more students into the school system, remove the pressure to cut programs or dramatically increase school revenue through referendum. Nobody would dare to suggest that D2D is a panacea for all of our fiscal challenges however we can reduce the magnitude of future funding requirements by implementing these plans. Certainly residents will always have the ability to reject a school referendum however seniors, empty nesters, business owners, landlords and Village representatives all understand that there is no free lunch. Surely all Village residents realize that a declining school system is not good for Shorewood? A decline in the reputation of our schools would ultimately lead to a fall in demand for rental units, reduced housing values, declining business success and tax revenue. We cannot save our way to prosperity. We must spend some money to make money. This project will deliver tremendous value, especially

In case you missed it, NOW has engaged a UWM Journalism graduate named Bradley Wooten as a “roving reporter,” with a blog called "North Shore Unscripted." His post from 6/16 irritated me, as a longtime Shorewood resident. Take a read:

------------------------------
Whitefish Bay offers serenity now
North Shore Unscripted, 6/16/07

You know what’s great about Whitefish Bay? There is a definite moment, a defining instant, when you arrive in the village. All of a sudden, beautiful homes and greenery appear and the boisterous city disappears. A feeling of calm and safety envelopes the arriver. It’s truly remarkable that such a haven exists so close to the city.
----------------------------

I bring this up only because at that "defining instant" when the “boisterous city disappears,” you have in fact arrived in Shorewood, not Whitefish Bay. Shorewood is the first suburb north of Milwaukee, has thousands of beautiful homes, and while we may not have an official Village Forester, we do have a bit of greenery here and there.

That is leaving aside the fact that there are plenty of beautiful homes and greenery in the city of Milwaukee, well before you arrive in either Shorewood or Whitefish Bay. Lower Lake Drive has a certain rustic charm, if you see what I’m saying, and some residents of the East Side of Milwaukee have been known to plant a garden or tree here and there.

I don't mean to be glib (ok, I do), but the dismissive, "Bay-centric" tone of his post irritated me enough that I had to bring it up.



Comments

1. "Absolutely!"
- Tim Fojtik, 6/20/07

2. "There are some real oasis that exist in the city itself --- like along Sherman Blvd with magnficent homes and mansions --- and just south of St Josephs off Roosevelt Road --- it would be hard to tell you are not in either Whitefish Bay or Shorewood --- Oh, except for the fact there are a whole lot of Black folk there !!!"
- Dave Tatarowicz, 6/20/07

3. "Looks like this guy is a WFB roving reporter, not all of the North Shore. He looks young too, so he gets a break for that. But, really - not a smart post."
- Anonymous, 6/21/07

4. "If his writing thus far illustrates the breadth and depth of his perspective after completing the journalism program, it doesn't really reflect that well on the school. Let's hope he at least grows in the job a little."
- Anonymous, 6/21/07

The new website for the Village of Shorewood is now up and running. You can view it here.

Comments

1. "It sure took a while, but it's very attractive and organized. Very well done!"
- Mark, 6/19/07

2. "Much better, and includes a lot of good information."
- Anonymous, 6/20/07

In case you missed it, Tim Fojtik has stepped on the Third Rail of Shorewood political discourse; he criticized the Library.

Speaking from experience, aspiring Shorewood politicians in the last 3 election cycles have done whatever possible to steer a wide berth around any issue relating to the library. Recalling the ugliness and divisions that were laid bare during the period of Shorewood's history when the Library was an issue, we candidates just left it alone during the elections, no matter what our positions may have been.

Nonetheless, wounds left over from the Library battles still prompted questions during the debates about whether particular candidates were for or against the Library building and the later audit.

We seem to finally be mostly moved on, at least from overt discussion of the issue during election cycles, which is definitely a healthy development for Shorewood. The two distinct camps that were in existance for the last 5 or so years were not healthy for a Village the size of ours. We still have other divisions to work on, but my hope is that this particular one will not re-emerge.

In case you missed Tim Fojtik's recent post, here is what he said:

--------------------------
 I know I wasn't here for the discussion, but...
Neighboring, 6/15/07

"That's important stuff. I wonder, though, what happened when the library was built? I really have no idea what the consensus is on that building, but there sure seem to be some glaring design flaws on the exterior. It's not the ugliest building I've ever seen, but there's some weird stuff going one with that thing. I hope everyone involved in the whole streetscaping and redevelopment of the commercial areas of the village have learned something from that building. I realize that many people will say that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," but there are reasonable considerations when talking about design. Thankfully, several of the major design flaws with the exterior of the library not only look goofy (the beauty thing), they also have some clear functional shortcomings as well."
------------------------

The note below is from Leeann Butschlick, the Assistant to Village Manager Chris Swartz.

-----------------------
Hi Steve,

Just thought you'd like to know that we have requested SBC/AT&T make the necessary browser adjustment to launch our new website. We did not receive any confirmation of a time so I can't give you any more than a "heads up" to watch for it.

I'm anxious to hear what you think. Thanks for your interest in the project.

Leeann Butschlick
Assistant to the Village Manager
---------------------

I spoke to Village Manager Chris Swartz today about progress on the Village of Shorewood website. He said that 2 weeks ago, the marketing firm, Meyer and Wallis sent their concept of what the website should look like to the Village of Shorewood.

The Village then sent it to GovOffice, the company who is constructing our new website. GovOffice is supposed to send the Village a draft version of the site tomorrow. This draft version will then be released in a limited fashion for beta testing. Several weeks after that, it should be live.

This is the timeline, as it was relayed to me today.

Comments

1. Thank you for the update. That is great news. Meyer & Wallis does good work.
- Anonymous Comment, 6/4/07.

In a recent news story about the possibility of a statewide smoking ban, Jim Doyle acknowledges the validity of the chief complaint cited by those opposing the ban. It hurts business.

I continue to believe the localized smoking ban was the wrong step for Shorewood to take, but I am encouraged to see that the state is finally stepping up to the plate. We need a level playing field-- preferably, a smoke free level playing field.

-----------------------------
Governor Doyle Wants Smoking Ban Passed Quickly
WKBT La Cross, 5/31/07
...

When smoking bans are proposed in a city, the main complaint from businesses is that they will lose customers to nearby towns. "There's no doubt that those taverns on a city line suffer significantly, the way were going about this right now I think they have a very legitimate complaint," says Governor Jim Doyle. Doyle was in La Crosse Thursday to tell business owners it's time a state wide ban is passed.
---------------------------

By my count, the various governmental bodies on our Village operate 5 different websites.

1. The Village of Shorewood: http://www.villageofshorewood.org  
2. The Shorewood School District: http://www.shorewoodschools.org  
3. The Business Improvement District: http://www.shorewoodwi.com  
4. The Shorewood Police Department: http://shwdpd.fp.execpc.com  
5. Marketing Shorewood Website: http://www.walkshorewood.com 

Am I forgetting any?

Comments

1. For the record, I love shorewood. LOVE shorewood. and that new walkshorewood webiste is very nice. So how about the designers who did that site make over the others? A style guide for Shorewood marketing would be a good start. Consistency is good when disseminating public information.
- Anonymous Comment, 6/2/07

From Steve: My hope is that this is the type of thing the marketing steering committee is considering. Any branding campaign needs to be consistent in the look and feel of its communications. If we have spent money to develop the branding materials that went in to the Walk Shorewood website, we should use these parameters when creating the other websites as well. Otherwise, the danger is that the Walk Shorewood brand becomes just one more of the many, many images and brands that we are currently putting out.

In my personal opinion, the Walk Shorewood website has some usability shortcomings, which I will get into in a later post. However, I do agree with the commenter that the look and feel of the Walk Shorewood website is a huge leap forward from where we are today with the other sites.

2. The Shorewood Library web site is at www.shorewoodlibrary.org.
Beth Carey, Director of Library Services, 6/4/07