Sprawled Out: The Search for Community in the American Suburb

WAR and OIL: Now the truth is bubbling up

Part THREE of today's OIL trifecta.

Oh, no, they told us, Iraq isn't a war about oil. That's cynical and simplistic, they said. It's about terror and al-Qaeda and toppling a dictator and spreading democracy and protecting ourselves from weapons of mass destruction. But one by one, these concocted rationales went up in smoke, fire and ashes. And now the bottom line turns out to be ... the bottom line. It is about oil.

Bill Moyers

If you've read Greg Palast's brilliant ARMED MADHOUSE (handy ordering box below), none of what Bill Moyers lays out in this video is a surprise to you. The good news is, the truth is bubbling up to the mainstream; Bill Moyers is generally the pathfinder for the Katie Courics of the media world. 

Greg Palast could find no voice in the American mainstream press; "journalism" is not widely spoken here. He had to get his support and funding from the BBC. And Palast got it right. I have yet to meet the movement conservative who can confront any of the issues raised by Palast in his book and Moyers in his commentary below. The most I can get is, "You just hate George Bush."

When they eventually prosecute Cheney and Bush, can we hope that the vanguard of the right wing echo chamber (Limbaugh, Hannity, et.al.) is brought up on charges as co-conspirators? 

Watch the little local wanna-bes (you know who you are) scurry when that happens. They would rather go to war than invest - - - and I mean invest heavily - - in transportation, infrastructure, and energy alternatives that would make such a war unnecessary. 

Spend about nine minutes with Bill Moyers and the hard truth. (Transcription)

 

"The dismal failure of Milwaukee’s civic leaders to bring the region’s public transit infrastructure up to 21st-century standards is more than just another run-of-the-mill breakdown in leadership."

University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Professor Marc. V. Levine gets it right in his op-ed from this Sunday's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.

Meanwhile, we have in County Executive Scott Walker a living example of willful obstinacy that is slowly and oh-so-surely killing Milwaukee and the surrounding region. This blind obstructionist is planning to proudly veto an advisory referendum on a (much-needed) 1-cent increase in the county sales tax! 

Read that again: Scott Walker is vetoing a vote in which the people decide - - in a nonbinding vote - -  whether it's worth a tax hike to fix the broken county.

He doesn't want to know how the citizens of his broken county feel about the current state of transit, parks, and other infrastructure?

Who does this sort of thing? A politician who is plotting a run for governor and who fears the likes of Mark Belling, that's who. Scott Walker is looking out for Scott Walker.

Once again, self-interest reigns, and Milwaukee's reputation as a non-starter that cowers under the clumsy brickbats of conservative radio talkers - - a cartoon-character breed that squeals in desperate search of attention and ratings and without regard to any larger truth - -  spreads across the nation as surely as this poorly formed, run-on sentence spreads across your screen.

It's time to ignore the talk-radio narcissists and pandering politicians and do what needs to be done. And if a County Executive fears an advisory vote by the people that may hinder his political future, his time is up.

Dim light at the end of the tunnel

The region needs higher wattage ideas for transit

By MARC V. LEVINE

The dismal failure of Milwaukee’s civic leaders to bring the region’s public transit infrastructure up to 21st-century standards is more than just another run-of-the-mill breakdown in leadership.

It is a public policy debacle that threatens the very economic viability of this city and region — and it comes at a time when we already are struggling with stagnant growth, spreading poverty and shockingly high rates of joblessness in the inner city.

Skyrocketing gas prices and awareness of climate change are reshaping the way Americans live, work and play. Mass transit ridership is surging in cities with rail transit systems, as commuters seek alternatives to $4.50-a-gallon gasoline. Suburban and exurban communities, whose growth was predicated on cars and cheap gas, are facing bursting housing bubbles and an uncertain future.

In this new era, the economic winners will be cities and regions that have invested in state-of-the-art mass transit. Unfortunately, few metropolitan areas are less prepared for these changes than Milwaukee.

Unlike in virtually all other large U.S. cities, leaders here have balked for two decades at building any form of regional rail transit.

By contrast, other cities, such as Baltimore, St. Louis and Minneapolis have built light rail systems since the 1990s (and ridership has soared by 15% this year in all three places). In 2004, Denver voters approved a $4.7 billion bond issue, underwritten by a sales tax, for a 119-mile expansion of their system, while Kansas City recently approved financing of a $1 billion, 27-mile light rail line.

Even in conservative, historically anti-tax “red states,” civic leaders and voters have understood the economic imperative of investing in rail transit. Salt Lake City recently raised the sales tax to expand regional rail. Phoenix is building a 20-mile, $1.3 billion light rail line. And in Texas, that bastion of big-government liberalism, Dallas is investing $4 billion to double the size of its regional light rail system to 90 miles.

In an era of expensive gas and pressures to reduce carbon footprints, it takes some magical thinking to believe that Milwaukee can remain economically competitive as one of the nation’s only large cities without such infrastructure.

The intransigence of Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker, bolstered by know-nothing talk radio hosts, columnists and bloggers, is obviously the biggest impediment to sensible transit policy.

Fortunately, Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett supports rail transit. Unfortunately, he has offered an inadequate plan: a streetcar Downtown Circulator that would run in a three-mile loop around downtown, which is too small and too slow to generate either of the two key economic benefits of rail transit — linking workers to employment hubs in the region or promoting development along rail corridors.

Barrett sees the Circulator as a “starter” investment toward a more elaborate rail system, touting its links to the vastly oversold KRM commuter rail proposal. But it’s likely that the mayor’s trolley to nowhere would draw meager ridership, thus providing more ammunition to the opponents of light rail, foreclosing future investments and leaving us with an underutilized white elephant ringing downtown.

Barrett, properly concerned about fiscal responsibility, notes that “advocates have failed to explain how to fund a more extensive system.”

Yes, public finances are tight everywhere. Yet leaders in places as varied as Denver, Baltimore, Dallas, Minneapolis and Charlotte have financed the construction or expansion of their systems in recent years. Moreover, even in fiscally strapped Milwaukee, we’ve found a way to spend billions in the past decade on a baseball stadium and a convention center, mega-projects that nearly all economists agree contribute precious little to regional economic growth.

Surely, then, given the existential importance of transit for metro Milwaukee, a financially sensible, $1 billion regional fixed-rail plan can be crafted:

• Using the $91.5 million in federal funds already allocated.

• Minimizing capital costs by extensively utilizing existing rail rights of way.

• Creatively deploying such tools as tax incremental financing.

• Selling station-area development rights.

• Receiving infrastructure support from the State of Wisconsin.

• And, yes, implementing a regional sales tax (with rebates to low-income residents) to fund transit improvements and operations.

If Sen. Barack Obama is elected president, more federal funding likely will be available for rail transit. Obama’s campaign platform calls for a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that could provide an infusion of funds to cities like Milwaukee to invest in transit (as well as in other infrastructure vital to economic development).

But the biggest problem is not fiscal but political.

Barrett and his allies should boldly confront the anti-rail demagogues, advocating a comprehensive fixed-rail plan for Milwaukee’s future that would link key hubs (downtown, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, the County Grounds and the airport) and stretch from the North Shore suburbs through the central city, perhaps to Brookfield.

The region’s corporate leaders, represented by the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce and the Greater Milwaukee Committee, supposedly support regional rail transit. If that’s true, they should make it the centerpiece of the Milwaukee 7 initiative, turning it into a more muscular regionalism that could underpin an economic revitalization of the city and region.

Rail is not a panacea for Milwaukee’s economic woes: It will not single-handedly solve the crisis of inner city joblessness, end poverty or create a culture of economic innovation here (although it will help in all of those areas).

But imagine a future of $8-a-gallon gas, in which Milwaukee is one of the few large cities in the United States without rail transit.

Businesses increasingly will locate in transit-friendly regions that offer the efficient and economical flow of people, goods and services. A Milwaukee without rail transit runs the risk of becoming economically obsolete, a city whose leaders failed to invest in its economic future.

Investing in rail is not like flipping a switch; the lead time is substantial. We already are way behind other cities, and our economic viability is slipping away.

The time for action is now.

Marc V. Levine is a professor of history, economic development and urban studies at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.

For whom the road tolls

ABOVE: New York Times photo

James Rowen notes that SEWRPC leader Philip Evenson is OK with the idea of toll roads in Wisconsin.

The latest issue of THE WILSON QUARTERLY magazine contains a discussion of LEASED TOLL ROADS - - something Wisconsin will undoubtedly be tempted to look at.

Indiana has a state budget of $13 billion; they leased their tool road for about $4 billion to "a private Australian-Spanish consortium." Evidently, a few months of interest on that payment exceeded the amount Indiana had made in 50 years of tolling that road (a New York Times story says Indiana earned $287 million in interest from the $3.8 billion the state received last year).

However, the lease runs until 2081; that could be trouble according to critics who fear Indiana sold too low. And privatized public utilities are prone to break (witness the California power debacle).

As the New York Times notes:

“Early on, there was excitement about the big checks that came in,” Jonathan R. Peters, a finance professor at the City University of New York and an expert on toll roads, said of the arrangements in Indiana and Chicago. “But now academics and departments of transportation are starting to see that you can give away too much.”

Governor Jon S. Corzine was looking to privatize New Jersey’s toll roads as well - - including the iconic New Jersey Turnpike! - - but irony struck him particularly hard. A serious auto crash that almost killed the Governor took the wind out of his sails for a while.

Watch this issue bubble up in the near future.

Franklin Plan Commission sandbagged

Signs that post-flood normalcy may be returning:

- On Tuesday I found time to go running (in the process discovering all kinds of brand new aches and pains that come from days of hauling wet pop culture debris from a flooded basement);

- Tonight I'm going to mow the lawn;

- And right now I'm going to bellyache about the decomposition of Franklin's Plan Commission.

Weeks ago, when it looked like Kevin Haley was being forced off the commission (he's since been reinstated for reasons still unclear), I'd put in an open records request for the volunteer sheets submitted by current members of that body. With Haley possibly off the commission, the point I wanted to make was that the remaining members had little in their backgrounds to engender confidence in their ability to safeguard the city's long-term goals and well-being against the ambitions of developers who look no further than their personal bottom line. As has been noted here before, commissioner Kevin Haley was the lone voice against some pretty blatant developer manipulations. No one else on the commission felt moved - - or indeed seemed qualified - - to support Haley's legitimate objections and informed observations.

Now comes news that the mayor has successfully placed former alderman Pete Kosovich on the Plan Commission. As reported by Greg Kowalski on his now-defunct FranklinNow.com blog (continued at his new blog, Metro Milwaukee Today), Kosovich squeaked in when the mayor broke a 3-3 common council tie. The tally, which I'm pasting from Greg Kowalski's blog (with my comments in parenthesis), was:

Olson: NO (Very interesting, and should have set the tone)

Solomon: YES

Wilhelm: NO (Expected)

Taylor: YES (I'll assume Taylor felt he needed to be magnanimous after defeating Kosovich)

Sohns: NO

Skowronski: YES

Mayor Taylor YES (tie-breaker)

With all due respect to the mayor and Mr. Kosovich: What th'...?!?!

Is the standard for serving on the Plan Commission of one of the fastest growing suburbs in Wisconsin really nothing more than a desire to serve and, as blogger Kevin Fischer explains in his blog entry supporting Kosovich's nomination, a presumed "knowledge of local ordinances, state rules and regulations, and ... experience in dealing with Franklin business and economic development issues"?

The answer more likely resides hidden in the cynical language of a comment Fischer left after his entry:

Appointment of friends, colleagues, etc has been going on in politics for all time. This is nothing new.*

Jim Doyle has appointed tons of people that have been confirmed by the state Senate when it was controlled by Republicans and now Democrats.

Taylor appointed Kosovich because he knows him, likes him, respects him, is familiar with him and thinks he will do a good job.

But you know what else? There are certain developers in town who likely thought they'd been rid of their only obstacle on the plan commission, Kevin Haley. When the mayor inexplicably reversed himself and brought Haley back on to the commission, a "gesture" had to be made.

Enter Pete Kosovich, plan commissioner.

Don't get me wrong; it appears to me that Mr. Kosovich is a nice enough gentleman and should be commended for his desire to serve, but, verily, I doubt that intricate land planning and development theories regularly weigh heavily upon his mind. Will we find on his bookshelves dog-eared, yellow-highlighted volumes like Zoned Out: Regulation, Markets, and Choices in Transportation and Metropolitan Land Use, A Better Place to Live: Reshaping the American Suburb, the harrowing Edge City: Life on the New Frontier, Community and the Politics of Place, The Geography of Nowhere, How Cities Work, Suburban Nation, the pro-sprawl Sprawl: A Compact History, the required-reading Crabgrass Frontier: The Suburbanization of the United States, Regulating Place: Standards and the Shaping of Urban America, Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design in the Twentieth Century, Land Use Planning and Development Regulation Law, and the noxious but still informative in a "know the enemy" sort of way, The Best-Laid Plans: How Government Planning Harms Your Quality of Life, Your Pocketbook, and Your Future?

(I must confess, I don't own the above books either: My dog-eared, yellow-highlighted volumes of these tomes washed away when my office was flooded last week.)

No, Mr. Kosovich will rely on his "knowledge of local ordinances, state rules and regulations, and ... experience in dealing with Franklin business and economic development issues."

Just the sort of bootstrap knowledge you need when a developer is trying to sneak in another self-enriching, city-draining strip-mall, huh?

Notwithstanding Mr. Kosovich's admirable desire to serve, this was a bad, old school pol move that will have potentially devastating consequences down the line unless something is done very soon to fix a sandbagged plan commission.

* [Note - I was a fly on the wall (harmless intern) during Tommy Thompson's reign in Madison. Those guys might not have invented cronyism, but they certainly perfected it. What a pit of incestuous vipers. It led to my first (and so far, last) legal deposition, as part of a sexual harassment claim against a Thompson good-old-boy appointee.]

Editorial: "The truest fact of American politics is that no candidate running this year is going to upset or even challenge the suburban sprawl industry. "

Bruce Fisher makes a contention that is hard for many to swallow:

Towns are the problem. Towns disrupt regional planning. Towns insist on going it alone. Towns poach development from cities and from each other. And towns demand that subsidies flow.

Yet, observing "planning strategy" here in Franklin, I see more competitiveness with neighboring municipalities than I see real planning. "If we don't offer this or that incentive or subsidy, Oak Creek will get 'em!" So, another TIF district is born.

Can you imagine the reaction to a proactive regional strategy by the Little Caesars who run suburban enclaves?

From Courant.com:

Ghost-Towns In A Sprawl-Land

By BRUCE FISHER

May 25, 2008

The truest fact of American politics is that no candidate running this year is going to upset or even challenge the suburban sprawl industry.

Sprawl is the endless increase in housing supply, the endless outward redistribution of population from cities and older suburbs, the endless federal subsidy for roads and the endless chatter about "good schools" that is just a code for "schools without poor, visible minorities" that dominates American political life.

Sprawl exists because of a bipartisan commitment to avoiding any talk about reining in the immense power of the real estate industry.

Americans tend to believe that sprawl is a natural consequence of free market forces when, in fact, sprawl is a consequence of decision-making by governments that are responsive to one single industry.

Alas, the people who would lead our national government are not addressing sprawl. That means that the long-avoided discussions America ought to have on race, on climate change, on imported energy, on highway construction and on agriculture will all continue to be lacking a certain element of reality.

Meanwhile, as the silence continues, sprawl continues to rule. And American cities will continue to die.

Folks in Hartford may be forgiven for believing that this is a Hartford phenomenon. The population within the city's boundaries fell from 136,392 in 1980 to 124,387 in 2003.

Did you know that it's San Francisco's problem, too? And Boston's? And Cleveland's?

In 2005, the Census Bureau measured domestic migration — people moving within the United States — from 1990 to 2000, and from 2000 to 2004. The report provides the number of people moving into and out of each state and the 25 largest metropolitan areas.

What that report showed is that thanks to immense national, state and local subsidies, population is being shifted out of cities and out of older suburbs and into sprawling suburbs.

The main incentive for sprawl: silence.

So far, Barack Obama is the only candidate who is speaking about urban America.

But he is speaking within the bounds of the 1960s paradigm about cities. His talk is all about the poverty of the deserted minorities of central cities, and not about the huge countervailing incentives that keep poor people marooned inside central cities.

The Brookings Institution's Center for Metropolitan Studies is trying to change the paradigm by getting thought-leaders across many disciplines to start thinking about cities again — not as enclaves, but as the indispensable centers of regional economies.

Governmentally, cities remain isolates. Former Albuquerque Mayor David Rusk suggests that the cities of the Northeast and Midwest are dying because they are trapped within "little boxes" that have no planning power over their suburbs, and so remain isolated.

That means that suburbs get to make their own planning and spending decisions as if they are independent, supreme, self-sustaining entities rather than components of regional economies.

Towns are the problem. Towns disrupt regional planning. Towns insist on going it alone. Towns poach development from cities and from each other. And towns demand that subsidies flow.

So in a marketplace where there is already a huge oversupply of housing, the availability of county, state and federal funds to build new roads and to maintain an already-overbuilt infrastructure leads to more and more subdivisions being built.

If our politics is going to be run by towns, is there any hope for cities or for metro regions?

There's despair about Washington, because Washington has been stuck in the 1960s mind-set — which is, to be brutal about it, that cities are for the very rich and the very poor, and that suburbs are for white folks, and that there's nothing to be done about it because the free market means that folks are going to live where they're going to live.

Governors are the logical players to disturb the political status quo.

Until they do, though, cities will continue to get special aid. Suburban real estate developers will continue to receive their subsidies for further sprawl through the town governments they already control.

Thus suburban town officials across the Northeast and Great Lakes states will continue to do what town officials do — which is to facilitate the sprawl that kills cities.

Because the inevitable alternative is something like this: If cities are to live, the power of town governments must die. That's a paradigm shift that would disrupt everything we think we know about race relations, transportation, imported oil, agriculture and democracy.

But wait — isn't that what we need?

Bruce Fisher heads a public policy institute in Buffalo, N.Y., where he served as deputy county executive from 2000 to 2007.

Copyright © 2008, The Hartford Courant

The Plan Commission shuffle

Thanks to a tip from Greg Kowalski, I note that the Common Council agenda for tomorrow night includes "Appointments: Kevin Haley - Plan Commission."

Haley was unceremoniously removed from the Plan Commission by Mayor Taylor in the middle of May. Evidently, the mayor has reconsidered. If so, kudos for a smart reversal of what for all intents and purposes looked like a case of commission-rigging.

Other potential good news on the same agenda: Don Dorsan, who had the right idea all along on what the quarry should have provided in terms of a useful bike and walking trail on 51st street, is appointed to the Parks Commission.

The mayor faces the ongoing consequences of questionable commission appointments

First, Franklin Mayor Tom Taylor removed Kevin Haley from the Plan Commission, rendering that body inert; developers rejoice. Now he appoints a hostile alderman to the Environmental Commission, prompting a resignation by someone who will definitely make his grievances public.

Ouch.

From FranklinNOW.com:

Environmental panel member resigns

By John Neville

Franklin Environmental Commission Acting Chairman Gregory Kowalski announced his resignation from the commission today in a letter to Mayor Thomas Taylor.

Kowalski, also a blogger on FranklinNOW.com, said the position of the panel has been weakened by the recent appointment of Alderman Lyle Sohns.

"Considering that there were better aldermanic choices for the representative spot, that Alderman Sohns already didn't seem interested in the position, and his representation on the commission in the past was noted by other commissioners as not helpful, I will take it as a sign by yourself that you do not want this commission to succeed in its current form," said Kowalski in his letter of resignation.

Full text of Kowalski's letter is here.

Boomgaard: Relax - "professionals" have the situation in hand

The May 22nd Franklin edition of the NOW community paper printed a letter to the editor from Casper Green. As I've noted here previously, Mr. Green is a familiar fixture at various city meetings, keeping tabs on issues and reporting back to the senior community. Deservedly so, he was inducted into the Milwaukee County Senior Hall of Fame this year; to call him an asset to the Franklin community is quite an understatement. If anyone has earned the right to publicly register an opinion, it's him.

Mr. Green is not, in other words, simply an otherwise-disengaged attention-craver lobbing spitballs from the peanut gallery.

The grain of salt ...

I recall a conversation I had with Mr. Green almost a year ago regarding Shoppes at Wyndham Village development, and I was left with the overwhelming impression that he nurtures almost unshakable faith in "the professionals" and almost anyone in city government. The mayor "assured him" that the Wyndham Target would be "best in the state"; that was good enough for Mr. Green. He said of Doug Wheaton, Franklin’s Director of Economic Development: “He’s sharp. He could have taken lots of other jobs; he’s a lawyer. You heard his remarks, how he recommended going ahead. And he has nothing to gain from saying that.” That sealed the deal for Mr. Green.

I was especially taken with his response when I brought up the poor Shoppes at Wyndham Village site plan - - a layout that is distinctly unfriendly to persons with limited mobility such as the elderly. Mr. Green took this as a personal attack on Mark Carstensen, the developer of the project and, Mr. Green noted, a generous contributer to programs for the elderly:

"People fight him with excuses, not reasons," he said.

“You said 'they' fight him. Not 'they' fight the development?" I pointed out. "You said 'they' are actually fighting Mark Carstensen the person.” Mr. Green clarified that he didn’t mean to make that implication.

But then, later in our conversation: “When someone is against Mark, we …”.

I interrupted to call attention what he'd said; “It appears that you feel that a criticism of the development or elements of the development is personal criticism against your friend Mark Carstensen.” Once again, he assured me that that was not the case. Yet I could not help feel that, in Mr. Green’s eyes, if you hinder the progress of Shoppes at Wyndham Village, you hinder his friend personally.

Mr. Green's "Boomgaard" letter again reflects a rock-steady faith in "the professionals." Apparently, membership on a civic committee and/or employment at a PR firm(!) bestows special powers of perception that we should defer to without question. To wit (with emphasis added by me):

The name Boomgaard is thought, by professionals, to be a name which would attract businesses from all over the world...

In this case, they have started rumors that are not true and have no foundation, according to those on the committee and the Zizzo Group.

The committee expects to eventually attract $2 billion worth of tax-paying businesses to the corridor with only $300,000 budgeted for advertising.

...[M]aybe instead of second-guessing professionals, we amateurs ought to pull in our horns and allow the name to be used.

Let me, with all due respect, remind Mr. Green of some other great (and expensive) ideas dreamed up by professionals:

New Coke
Edsel
Miller Clear Beer
Betamax
Titanic - UNSINKABLE!
The Tacoma Narrows Bridge
The Green Bay Packers game plan in Super Bowl XXXII

All designed and conceived by "professionals." Some "second-guessing" would have been welcome in retrospect, yes?

Here's Mr. Green's letter from the FranklinNOW Public Forum:

Boomgaard! After culling through hundreds of names, that is the name chosen by a steering committee of two Franklin residents and two Oak Creek residents for the South 27th Street corridor. The Zizzo Group, a professional advertising and public relations firm, was also involved.

Now the second-guessing has begun.

I've lived in Franklin for 24 years. I've accepted leadership responsibility in helping run organizations, so I can tell you that no matter what decision one makes, second-guessers show up. Seldom do these second-guessers take on a responsibility of any magnitude, but to hear them talk you'd think they've been around the world at least twice and seen everything and done everything.

I happen to know, very well, the two Franklin men - Ted Grintjes and Jim Rhiner - who are on the 27th Street Corridor committee. I do not know the two from Oak Creek; however, one can bet they are also of upstanding character.

And one would think all four people are concerned citizens who are giving of their time for the good of both cities. These people have given thousands of hours of their time. Yet, when their committee comes up with a name, someone has to complain.

The name Boomgaard is thought, by professionals, to be a name which would attract businesses from all over the world, but that doesn't matter to the second-guessers as they shower committee members with ridicule. How sad.

What bothers me most, personally, is the way second-guessers work. In this case, they have started rumors that are not true and have no foundation, according to those on the committee and the Zizzo Group.

Yes, the name Boomgaard is different, but certainly not offensive.

The committee expects to eventually attract $2 billion worth of tax-paying businesses to the corridor with only $300,000 budgeted for advertising. If the committee is successful, it would be a very small price to pay.

The name Boomgaard is strange to those of us who have lived here all our lives. Some of us have never gone outside the United States and maybe have not even ventured outside of Wisconsin. But if we intend to further 27th Street's long-term image and status, maybe instead of second-guessing professionals, we amateurs ought to pull in our horns and allow the name to be used.

Casper T. Green

Franklin

Deploy the bad puns: Franklin and Oak Creek reconsider Boomgaard

Now Boomgaard is talk radio fodder for Sykes and Belling - no surprise.

It's not just the NAME that's messed up. I'm certain lots more will be revealed about the faulty process in days ahead...

From FranklinNow.com:

Panel considers lowering the boom on Boomgaard

27th Street committee reviewing district's name

By JULIE BECKER
jbecker@cninow.com

Posted: May 14, 2008

At least one city official admits the cities of Oak Creek and Franklin might have made a mistake in selecting the name Boomgaard District for the South 27th Street corridor.

"The idea I have is, you should never do anything knee-jerk, because knee-jerk never gets you any place you really want to go," Oak Creek Mayor Richard Bolender told the 27th Street Steering Committee on May 13. "It just postpones failure, generally."

Bolender said he "never was nuts" about the name, but supported it to help move the project forward.

Reacting to public criticism, Bolender and Franklin Mayor Thomas Taylor referred the name back to the committee. The committee decided at its meeting to suspend the naming and logo development for the corridor while gathering more public input, particularly from the surrounding business community.

More input needed

"I just think we need to do our due diligence, think about it, think about the process," said Ted Grintjes, committee chairman. "I think that shouldn't come from us; that should come from the public."

Bolender suggested allowing Franklin and Oak Creek residents to participate in a naming process if the committee decides to scrap Boomgaard.

So far, the two communities have spent about $9,800 on naming and logo development work with the Zizzo Group Advertising and Public Relations - about 47 percent of what was budgeted for the task.

Zizzo Group, with help from the steering committee and city officials in each community, chose the name "boomgaard" - Dutch for "orchard" - to represent the economy of the area dating back to the early 19th century and to pay tribute to some of the early settlers.

However, the name has sparked backlash from community members who say any name that must be explained probably won't convey a good message to potential developers.

No need to rush

Grintjes was hesitant to provide a deadline for a decision on the name, but suggested the committee give itself at least 120 days.

"If it takes 60 or 90 or 120 days, what's the difference, as long as the entire project goes forward," Bolender said. "I don't think we should stop the project or tie the progress of the project to a name."

There are plenty of other issues for the committee to tackle, said Doug Seymour, Oak Creek's Community Development director. They include development of marketing materials and collaboration with the Wisconsin Department of Transportation on designs related to 27th Street and the Interstate 94 North-South corridor project.

 

Julie Becker can be reached at (262) 446-6606.

Next step

WHAT: 27th Street Steering Committee meeting

WHEN: noon Thursday, June 12

WHERE: Oak Creek City Hall, 8640 S. Howell Ave.

27th Street Corridor gains a name that no one will use

So, it's time for Oak Creek and Franklin to name the 27th Street corridor something more interesting than "the 27th Street corridor."

Given the colorful and varied history of the 27th Street corridor (touched upon in a FranklinNow story), I have to say I expected something much, much more evocative than.... THE BOOMGAARD DISTRICT.

That's "creativity by committee" for you. Blech. I can see the twee little logo already. When will we stop naming developments and subdivisions after the natural features that have been plowed under to construct them?

So much for effective branding.

UPDATE: If IKEA made those concrete blockades around the Green Zone in Baghdad, they would be called Boomgaards.

From FranklinNOW.com:

27th Street Corridor gains a name
By Julie Becker

As 27th Street continues to evolve in Oak Creek and Franklin, the two communities hope the joint development will become known as the "Boomgaard District."

Both the Oak Creek and Franklin common councils have endorsed the name, as its origin - boomgaard is Dutch for "orchard" - represents the area's agricultural economic history, according to a news release issued today by Zizzo Group Advertising and Public Relations.

Officials also selected the name based on its uniqueness, stating it brings to mind thoughts of progress, momentum and positive energy, and embodies an environmentally friendly vision for the six-mile corridor.

"The Boomgaard District name is as unique as the collaborative efforts between Franklin and Oak Creek," Oak Creek Mayor Richard Bolender said in the release. "The uniqueness of the name will set this development apart from others not only regionally, but nationally."

The name was selected after extensive research and discussion by the Zizzo Group and Joint South 27th Street Steering Committee, which unanimously recommended the councils adopt it.