The Vision Thing in Franklin: Aldermen know best? Part 1

On the agenda for Monday's Council of the Whole meeting and last night's Common Council meeting were two intriguing items placed there by Mayor Taylor:

1. Current Mission Statement of the City of Franklin.
2. Vision Statement for a long-term vision of the City of Franklin as prepared by MSA Professional Services, Inc., December 2004 (unadopted as of April, 2009).

I had a fairly long conversation with the mayor a few weeks back wherein I stressed the need to access just exactly what and who Franklin is, as well as what and who we would eventually like to become. He said he'd been thinking the same thing, and the agenda items above make that plain.

Here, by the way, is the current unadopted Franklin Vision Statement, crafted in 2004:

The City of Franklin's vision is to enhance the quality of life for present and future generations by providing economic growth through the highest quality of residential, recreational and business development in Southeastern Wisconsin.

Franklin's unadopted Mission Statement, also from 2004:

The City of Franklin's mission is to be a well-planned model community providing for a high quality of life for residents of all ages. The future of Franklin is founded on quality development that includes smaller and mixed-use commercial centers and corridors, that provides for new office parks that attract knowledge-workers and information industries to the community, while continuing to develop and maintain quality residential areas that provide a wide range of housing opportunities to support the needs of working professionals, seniors, and families. The residents of Franklin will have access to parks, open space, and a wide range of recreational programs and facilities that help to promote an active and healthy lifestyle. Franklin will be a community where modern conveniences, friendly people, and a small town atmosphere combine with low crime, a clean environment, and quality educational opportunities to make Franklin the primary destination to live and learn, work and play, and to do business.

If it sounds like language created by bureaucrats, that's because it was (to whom - other than a bureaucrat - would the notion of "office parks" seem inspirational?).

A look at the background documentation for the 2004 "Long Term Vision for the City of Franklin" report prepared by consultant MSA Professional Services (PDF here) reveals that the "visioning" done to come up with a portrait of Franklin and its potential was relegated to members of the Common Council and seven members of the city's senior staff.

Citizen input in the "Long Term Vision for the City of Franklin"?

Zero. Nada. Zilch.

So when you see "Valet Parking at City Hall and Library" as one of the answers to the question "What will Franklin be like fifty years from now," (page 13) you have an elected official to thank for that burst of hilarity.

So, what's wrong with letting aldermen decide what our city should aspire to? After all, they were/are elected by the citizens, right?

And let's not forget the propensity of the public to think no further than the edge of their driveway. Not too long ago, if you walked up to the average suburban homeowner - - me included - - and asked what he or she finds important in terms of their city, you'd likely hear about their property tax bill, desire for nearby shopping, good schools, and maybe something vague about "green space." 

(Why do I live on a disconnected cul-de-sac? Because ten years ago when I bought this, my first house, my priorities were: good school district; good physical structure; safe area; and a yard with room to play ball. That's it. I was blissfully unaware of any other factors.)

So we should leave it to our elected officials to hash this out, then, right?

Nothing could be more wrong - - as I'll discuss (along with some much better solutions) in Part 2 of this post.