Sunrise development, contrary to certain opinions has been a “done-deal,” I believe, since about day one. The train has long ago left the station.
I believe this because Guy Johnson, chairman of the Planning Commission who is also president of the Board, has of course been aware of this project from the beginning. He has obviously been promoting it under his leadership or it would not have got this far, on its own, if he were not strongly in favor of it.
President Johnson, you should let the rest of Shorewood in, on your enthusiasm, as you will be voting yes for this proposal at the end of the hearing on Monday, making sure that you have a consensus first of all, of course. Your name as well as the names of the others associated with promoting this project will be attached to this development for years to come as it is your responsibility.
Mr. Johnson, I think it would be appropriated if you were to tell the citizens of Shorewood why you think this is an outstanding project, especially in terms of its specific relationship to the river. Why does it need to be located at the edge of the river and what its locational importance is as to the general welfare of the Village of Shorewood?
How will it best serve this site, especially in terms of traffic and the manner in which the old people will maximize their location on this high traffic street, Capitol Drive.
I suppose you also feel that it's outstanding architecturally and that there is a need for this type of facility here to serve all the old folks living in Shorewood who have obviously been waiting for a place like this that they can call their own, even though there are many beautiful ones already on the Lake.
As you personally, as well as all the others, who are going to vote for the development are willing to have your name attached to this, and as it shall come under constant scrutiny, in the coming days, months and years, perhaps you can explain all these and other reasons for giving such strong leadership to this project or do you merely “think its a good idea,” not necessarily practical as you did at one point?
Trustee, Michael Maher, I know that you have strong interests in the environment and in the GREEN movement, that you would be looking forward to seeing your name personally attached to this project, especially as the project has taken “outstanding approaches” to the GREENING of this area on the river, don't you think?.
You voted "no" on granting money to recreation facilities recently because as you indicated that you felt that there were other priorities more important than school recreational facilities. I don't suppose it was facilities for old people which you were concerned with, that moves you to vote yes for this project or was your concern only with environmental issues?
You know that you are not going to make a motion to postpone this resolution nor vote against its passage, then how are you going to personally explain your position to those you represent? Of course, you're going to be held personally accountable as are all the other members of the Board are. Am I wrong, will you be voting “no?”
Trustee, Dawn Anderson, your name too, will be personally attached to this project. Do you want this pointed out as one of your great achievements. Could you please explain in some detail as to why this project is so urgent and of such great importance to Shorewood, especially as you too are already part of the consensus who is going to vote yes. If you are not already supporting the proposal, I apologize. But I believe you will be doing so on Monday.
Trustee, Margret Hickey, you of course would be considered to be among the most reasonable of our trustees. You too, are rushing to get your name associated with this project because of the worthiness of it.
Perhaps long before you vote “yes,” following the leadership of our president and the path of those that I've previously mentioned, or perhaps following your own path, that you would at least indicate the dramatic nature of this proposed development. Obviously, you too shall not be forgotten as to your affection for this proposal.
Trustee, Michael Phinney, as a member of the CDA you've obviously been involved in shaping this proposal so that you have developed a pride in it, that is by now unshakable and inseparable from your personality. But perhaps, before you vote yes, you can explain why this is such an important element of the master plan and so meaningful to the people of Shorewood.
Trustee, Ellen Eckman, you too are a member of the CDA and with your known thoroughness, you would obviously have covered every detail before you would give your approval. If you were to say, that beyond improving the tax base, that years from now, that this project had something we could point to with pride, what would be its most important aspect?
Would we have a good Sunrise setting, as we view the old people sitting out in the sunshine, watching the fast traffic, as they await their meeting with God (not in winter of course)? Is it the river and the soon-coming meeting with God combination that gives us the Sunrise effect?
Trustee, Jeff Hanewell, as an architect, you have, I'm sure already evaluated the architectural character and quality and spacial setting and locational suitability of this project; how would you explain its essence to the rest of the committee and to the citizens. We are depending on your professional judgement. What are the aesthetic points that urge you to vote for it? I'm sure you have other comments on the project as well.
I've been very much opposed to the project because, I feel its the wrong use in the wrong place and at the wrong time. Then it is all wrong in design, especially in relation to the river and is not essential to our community.
As I know that this project is a done deal, I wanted to remind each of you individually that your names shall be permanently associated with the future of this development in spite of the fact that you vote collectively. If it's a mistake, it will be standing there for years. If all seven of you are right, then of course, I'm wrong. On the other hand, if I'm right, then each of you, all seven will be responsible for the mistake individually as well as collectively.
But as an outside chance, we might use the economy as an excuse to hold off on this for awhile, until we can give it better consideration? How about postponement? Oh! No. Too urgent. There you have it. "Trains coming into the station.