It has become obvious to all of us that President Barack Obama made a mistake in deciding to go bi-partisan in the Congress and especially in the Senate.

This gives the minority rather equal power to that of majority party in ruling.

This is not a football game. There the better team wins. Here the team with more players, if we can continue with the analogy, loses. What's the logic?

I've never been in favor of our present party system and the manner in which things play out in congress after the election.

If the minority party is absolutely against a piece of legislation no matter what, as it is today, then first of all, it should have no say in the development of legislation it intends to defeat.

I don't see how the common person is going to gain from a health bill that does not assure him or her complete health care,

This effort should follow the idea, in the same manner that everyone in this country should be assured all the education required to attain the best status in a specific field of study.

If a person is only half-educated, what's the point? If we can't give health care to everyone, then let's leave it alone and let the system fall from its own ridiculous structure.  What service do the insurance companies provide?

The 60-40 vote needed to pass a law in the Senate is absolute political lunacy and should be declared as such, except that neither party has the collective fortitude to move to eliminate this crazy rule.

It would only make sense to me, if the 60-40 were to be applied only in approving a declaration of war. But I strongly believe that it should be removed altogether regardless of which party is in power.

Then let's have no bi-partisan politics, what's the point and secondly, let's get ride of the rule that the majority vote does not count. As I've indicated parties are making less and less sense so why bi-partisanism? Let's get rid of them too.

At the same time, let's take a look at the Electoral College, it hasn't anything to do with the will of the majority and it ain't no college.

Now, to try to assure my objectivity, I'm against the “health reform legislation.”  Should we let insurance corporations decide who gets education and how much education.  What social objective would this arrangement serve?

Why should corporations decide on who and how much care Americans should get?

I indicated months ago that I thought this approach was more of what might be considered to be a bail-out or to keep the insurance corporations afloat in luxury rather than in the interest of the people.

Dr. Howard Dean, seems to have offered the best suggestion when it comes to health care, merely extend Medicare to everyone.

I think it's either health care for everyone or leave it to insurance companies to destroy themselves. Stockholders in insurance, it's your gamble. Should we bail you out too. Then how about gamblers in Las Vegas.

Community building is essential to building commercial centers.

My interests in the way Shorewood develops revolve around the concept of “community building.”

Community involves the social interaction that takes place among the three generations and today, it might be among four generations.

That interaction can easily be observed taking place, especially in small towns. These are the places where the three or four generations are likely to be present, forming and functioning as the heart of the community and what make the community work.

Towns outside the United States are more likely to present this community function than the small towns in the U.S. do.

In a significant number of cases, all three or all four of the generations were born there and actively functioning as important members of that interaction.

What I've described here is perhaps almost completely absent in urban suburbs. Where some of younger segments of suburban population may have been born in the a place like Shorewood, and on the other hand few, if any of the parents or grandparents were born there.

It is not likely that the youngest of the population will remain there many years or even months after leaving for college. So that in suburbs, we cannot expect to find the “rooted” nature of community that we find in small towns. Parents may leave the community soon after their children do.

Therefore, the function of community building in suburbs presents a completely different task. Where community is already in existence, all that is necessary is to make sure that those elements are working well. Perhaps no intervention is needed at all.

The suburb most first of all identify those elements and then bring about the means for their interaction, fully acknowledging that few if any three-generation blood-lines exist.

The three-generation function is less likely to be within the family and needs to become the relationship of the overall community. Most people of the three generations at first being of different families without any previous interaction. So the structure rather than a natural one is one that is invented and artificially superimposed.

The concept of community building in the development of new towns pretty much over all of Europe and the experience gained there by planners can be applied in the development and redevelopment of suburbs in the U.S.

Community is accepted by most social scientists to be an indispensable essential element of human development and essential to the development of our humanity, otherwise, why should effort be expended in bringing it about or in making it work.

In a sense community is like education. It is important for our overall development. And like education, its importance must be constantly promoted.

Once we can tie in community with its economic importance to our community as we do with education, then it is easier to give attention to it. In small communities, community function is important in maintaining the economic importance of their community centers.

Absent the community function, the commercial center as the expression of that community is left without a particular personality and without the social elements that give it that function.

Therefore, in our invention we must invent all those elements of community and community center. The land values that evolve because of community and its function, then contribute to the physical nature of community building.

My interest in land values is therefore primarily a social interest, that of gaining value through community building. The additional economic returns will then help promote that interest as it does with education and then also contribute to the secondary cost of community building.

As I've indicated in my previous posting and I do not want it to go unnoticed, I congratulate all involved in our Community Development projects over the years and the obvious leaders who have guided the evolution of the processes and policies that have got us to this highly advanced stage.

After going back and reviewing the pressures on land values throughout the world and reading and re-reading theories and practices and suggested policies for handling this great resource, “community land” that is a resource that is “of the community,” I've wondered as to how “community land” can be used in carrying some of the significant costs of “community building,”

I've begun to develop that notion in my thinking and to direct it in creative ways that the concept of “community land” can be applied here in our community, here in Shorewood, where it would eventually become an example.

We can through our redevelopment projects and through a process of land leasing gain from the “productive long-term benefits”of the land that we are developing.

Starting with the knowledge that as a community, Shorewood's “buildable” space is confined to the land located within our community limits, we must accept the fact that one of the basic reasons for its increasing value is its limited supply.
 

Although there are other reasons as well, it is a special and precious community commodity.  We cannot dispose of it without careful thought as to how it is presently being used or going to be used and its importance as a future “community resource.”

I would now appeal to those of the community interested in the “productive long-term benefits” of “community land” and in “community building,” those already within the process of community redevelopment to give attention to “community land,” that is, all of our buildable space and as to the best ways for giving more force to our sustainable community.

It would seem that there is a stronger and a greater significance in Community Development than there is in merely making it easier to develop land for its short term benefits, merely for the tax revenue it presently produces. 

I've been involved in this traditional thinking even as a professional. And perhaps even though I've had some of these thoughts earlier, “community land” has now, only recently become a more clearly significant element of my thinking.

Therefore, I would like to recruit everyone in our community to come up with their own thoughts as to how we can preserve this precious asset.

I could create some ways and shall do so as time permits but the understanding of “community land” and “community building” should become a community venture. I would like to see the community react to any of my concepts in the future just as I would like to react to your ideas.

Redevelopment and land values.

In the redevelopment process, commercially zoned land is normally burdened with existing improvements.

But under present joint public-private ventures, especially on Oakland Avenue here in Shorewood, some developers are being relieved of both the existing building burden and that of the high cost of land through redevelopment subsidies.

These subsidies although seemingly giving support to the trends of high land costs, may also be justifiable when taking normal free market conditions of the present and of future into consideration.

Perhaps none of or most of these redevelopment projects would not have taken place except for the public-private partnership agreements developed under Shorewood's Community Development Authority.

The Village of Shorewood seems to have established a rather successful formula of redevelopment. projects Projects consisting of 2 levels of underground parking occupying the total lot area, with 1 floor of commercial at street level and 3 floors of dwelling units above, presently the type of development that appears to be attractive to developers.

Of course, increased development of any type will augment the tax base of the community no matter how insignificantly, at least for a time period. And in this sense the CDA is achieving the goal of improving the tax base.

We would expect that most developments taking place on Oakland Avenue would be there for another 50 years. The building or improvement values would at that time be determined either on the income produced or the replacement value of the improvements.

Land values would continue their journey upward subject somewhat to the varying values of construction on the land.

The Village Board, the Village Manager, the CDA and especially Pete Petrie the Director of the CDA are to be congratulated for the manner in which they have directed the evolution of this redevelopment process in Shorewood. There is no question as to how well and how business-like they've carried out this community task.

The process has provided the means for developers to operate in an area where the field is rather risky. The CDA has generally smoothed out some of that risk.

There is an area of land values and very long range objectives that come together at a point in some years in the future that might be worth giving some attention in our redevelopment processes.

Increasing land values are not as certain as the rising sun each day, but in human terms, fairly certain. The land under each of our developments, if it were to rise merely on an annual average of 2% for 50 years, would be double today's worth. However, all indications are that land values will be rising at higher rates.

Of course, there would be inflation values to be added to that. Perhaps inflation or its magnitude is not as certain as rising land values, but most economists think the trend to be fairly certain.

As the Village is the most important agent involved in putting these public-private deals together, it would seem that it too would share in some of these successes. It of course, will gain by the normal tax revenue that any development brings to the community but these projects, it would seem are of the community and for the community. 

If the Village were to retain the land or acquire it during the process of the deal, among other things it would be accomplishing two important things.

First of all, the developer gains little from the land except its location and its use. The Village by owning the land and by controlling its use would latter when it needs further redevelopment , and most urbanized area do, will be in the position of owning the land.
 

And secondly, the Village would then gain somewhat from its efforts of generating this venture as it would not from others.

It is clear that at first, when this proposal that I'm about to present is made, that it may draw sentiments of astonishment, but it must be presented. If the Village owns the land it will not only benefit in the long run, as it will not have to purchase it again, but instead it would lease the land,.

Private enterprise has thrived on land leases in Britain so why not here. There is little actual “community gain” from our involvement in the public-private ventures as we smooth out the way for development that would not also, on a private basis produce tax revenue.

The leasing revenues could be directly turned over to community building, perhaps some of it to the school district. Here we would have some “community gain,” some return for community building which would be lacking in projects only looking at the present and present accomplishments.

Again, I want to congratulate all involved in our redevelopment processes in Shorewood and hope that the notion of land leasing eventually becomes a natural element of that process.

Free and equal.

The government that we want is of course, preferably “of the people” as the notion was gifted us by Abraham Lincoln.

But after Lincoln, government unfortunately even government “by the people” was not attainable. And therefore, government is only realizable at best, “for the people.”

Does for the people then mean directed toward the interest of the people. Are the people, now the recipients of the gift of government that gifts its people?

We then have a transformation of government “of the people” to “government by the government,” for the people and in some countries where it becomes clearly the People's Government, where it usually exists as a severe form of dictatorship operating in its own interpretation of what is in the interest of the people.

What wonderful documents, giving expression to the desires and dreams of free people, the declaration of independence and the constitution. And those founding fathers and men like Lincoln adding to the human inspiration of human governance without government or with minimal authority over the people.

Humanity will over centuries struggle with these dreams of freedom and equality and with minimal authority over human life, in reality, we are deprived of these almost achievable dreams and shall always be until perhaps when humanity itself becomes part of that dream.

Today nations create governments where they become supervisors over steady and constant genocide, the killing of their own and that instead of serving to provide freedom and equality, government prefers to make and manage war and maintain conditions of poverty.

We the government and we the people leave many within our own nations to go without the means for existence, without shelter, water and food and the care that gives vitality to the human existence and human honor.

Here reality strikes a clear contrast with those grand dreams.

Our intolerance toward government is understood in reality let alone in relation to the freedom dreams of an evolving humanity.

If we were to gain this grand freedom, would there be any long lived joy except for the moment. Would we raise our children in absolute freedom, the freedom that they cry for?

Neither nature nor the governance that human beings require in order to survive is going to be all that we dream of. Here usually when we come to this point in these kind of thoughts, they are usually punctuated with the term “nothing is perfect.”

Perhaps nothing is perfect even to the realist aiming at perfection, but then we might say that not even our dreams are perfect.

The problem of rising commercial land costs. (An economic report).

High land values seem not to be a problem in Shorewood's residential areas when it comes to upgrading existing homes. In fact,  researched further it might be found that those very residential land values contribute to upward pressure to much of Shorewood's land designated for commercial development.

In addition, commercially zoned land is normally burdened with existing improvement. At the present time some developers are being relieved of both that burden and that of the high cost of land through redevelopment subsidies.

These subsidies seem to give support to high land costs that may not be justifiable under normal free market conditions in the future.

The most successful formula of development encouraged by redevelopment processes in communities like Shorewood is seen in projects consisting of 2 levels of underground parking occupying the total lot area, with 1 floor of commercial at street level and 3 to 5 floors of dwelling units above that.

Of course, increased development of any type will augment the tax base of the given community no matter how insignificantly, at least for a time period.

It seems, however, that upgrading of existing residential property in Shorewood over the past 10 years has improved the tax base much more significantly than improvement of commercial properties has.

This can be easily proved or disproved if the Village were to conduct its own study of the tax records and that of land values..

One of the reasons for encouraging commercial development it seems is to shift some of the rising tax cost to commercial land use, usually paid by property owners who own land but who do not live in the community. High land value produces a high revenue but on the other side tends to discourage higher profit-producing development.

Condos and upscale apartments are usually occupied by people without children and within communities where declining school enrollment is a problem, this type development is not easily justified from that standpoint, that is, that these residential occupancies will increase school enrollment.

Implications have been made that empty nesters in Shorewood would move into the condos and apartments and that families with children would replace the empty nesters in their vacated homes.

Whether or not these implications are on sound ground is yet to be proved. At the same time, whether or not these speculations shall become an eventuality does not detract from the theory that these artificial or marginal contributions subsidize the value of land adding to the trend of its upward cost.

If redevelopment is to be used as the means for attracting families with children to Shorewood, it seems that there's plenty of existing housing that with subsidies could be converted for occupancy by young families with children.

This might be a more direct approach that perhaps should receive more redevelopment attention.

Back to our present formula of combined commercial and dwelling unit development: at some point, the community will not be subsidizing this kind of development and might then expect that the free market will be overwhelmed by land preparation and land costs, operating against future free market development.

Then those communities like Shorewood might be left with commercial areas of declining property values. The cost of a second turn at redevelopment in what might be considered to be normal free market conditions, then may be rather difficult. These conditions may even draw down the values of the development that is presently being subsidized.

Examples of declining property values have been seen recently in Shorewood and in other communities before redevelopment was encouraged by community initiated subsidies. This is the sort of decline that may come with increasing land values.

Therefore, rising value of land is an important factor, as has been seen, and to be dealt with today when developing for profitable purposes.

It seems therefore. that consideration should be given to the effect that the free market may have on present and future rising land costs in relation to future development.

The rising value of land is a certainty. How to distribute its cost over a fixed improvement, over time, is another matter and would be the basis of an interesting economic study.

(An excerpt from an ongoing economic study: Shorewood: an economic study of a suburb).

(Any other economic theories on land values out there?)

Government by the people would require no need for politicians.  If the people could develop and carry out their own policies, it would mean that we would not have to have go-betweens, people of excessive pride and arrogance.

We would need no laws and no officials to tell us what to do. We the people, we would be the government.

But now we have politicians, people seeking our vote to represent us but who never again think about the citizenry except as to how to earn their vote.

They never have to think about representation, only as to how to earn the vote. They then do very little except to develop a hierarchy of officials among themselves to carry on. The job of the politicians is to officiate.

Democracy is an inspiring notion. Lincoln whom I admire, gave us “of the people.” A grand notion. What is the significance of “of”? If government is of the people in basic principle, then we don't need it to be “FOR the people?”

And if it's by the people and the people could have a “by the people” rule, we would be ruling ourselves.

Some democracies are more responsive than others. They require politicians with less pride and less hubris. These democracies are run by people more likely to believe in something, they are more apt to be of the people in their beliefs and with the common beliefs of their party.

They are not elected for their perceived views that appear to be those of the many. These democracies are likely to have several parties, each with closer held views among the members and they must often come together with one or more other parties to form a majority government. And again, here's the problem.

Then they must agree to support certain principles basic to their own beliefs. This arrangement may work at times. Usually during times of crises. When it does not, then another election. A majority is more difficult to achieve where government is excepted to function with the involvement of many parties.

So government “by the people” is still a difficult dream to attain regardless of the kind and where. An individual not within the government nor not likely to run for office will find it difficult to get his view represented.

Unless he represents a larger group, a sort of party that could make it difficult at election time, politicians only have deaf ears.

Politicially appinted bureaucrats are not of or by the people, responsible to no one. Although theoretically they can be removed by politicians, the best of them usually dig in roots so deeply,  that their removal sometimes is not without difficulty and not always possible.

We often refrain from criticizing the notion of government “by the people” because it is so ingrained in our idealism but for a realist with that idealism still within him, government by its very nature is not “by the people.”

Creative writing, art, recreation and the older adult in the public school system.

Perhaps the best way for School Districts such as ours here in Shorewood that need to increase their enrollment numbers is to include older adults of their communities in programs that would qualify them as enrolled students, making the district eligible for state aid.

Of course, this would require State involvement and a amendment to our present law. Our school district has already begun to provide some of these programs for older adults but we have not come to the stage, where we could attain state aid for adult enrollment.

Here again, tax-paying older adults could make further additional contributions not only by living here in Shorewood, as they continue to pay school taxes but do not send children to school but we could by a thoughtfully created program bring further state aid as older adults enroll in school.

Of course, this would have to be a state wide program and there are many ways, in the long run that adults can make contribution to students' education as well.  I'd like to begin focusing some of my time on bringing the state into creative retirement projects.   

Therefore, I'm calling on our state representative's office to begin thinking about this aspect of education in this state.   we need some discussion on how to help determine the feasibility of this proposal.

This is my first shot at this. Where do I go from here?  Let's see what develops in the coming days and let's see what kind of moves we have to take to move this idea along.

I'm just setting this out here and making it public and let's see what the reactions are. How about some reactions. 

“School Board members John Carlton and Nancy Bornstein said an Ad Hoc Enrollment Committee will be able to develop some meaningful data that might lead to polices and decisions that would help increase enrollment in the village schools.

“The committee, formed as a result of a Bi Board meeting in December, is already investigating whether those who bought condominiums in three of the newer developments in the village are residents who moved from a house to a condo or if they moved from another community.”

I've quoted these first two paragraphs from an article written by Mary Buckley in the February 25^th issue of North Shore Now for those who may not have read this article.

“Member Michael Mishlove said developments such as the Cornerstone, being built on Kensington Boulevard and Oakland Avenue don't bring families to Shorewood. The development will have retail spaces on the first floor and 25 luxury apartments on the upper floors. Mishlove said it was unlikely that families would live in these apartments and said more affordable housing is needed.

“Borenstein said the village wants to enlarge the tax base with new development to help keep taxes down. 'These are legitimate competing interests' Bornstein said. 'We see ourselves highly taxed on those lists but people don't see what they get for those taxes.' “

I want to congratulate the three members, John Carlton, Nancy Bornstein, Michael Mishlove and the School Board for taking this action and who have been sticking to their guns on this issue.

Let's deal with the facts and not with hopeful speculation.

The Village Board, has been making policy based on their belief that movement of empty nesters would be encouraged by the presences of more condominiums in Shorewood and that that movement would be to new condos being provided.

Then families with children would replace the empty nesters who would be moving out. These notions have been expressed to justify policies that are being followed in our community redevelopment efforts and are not based in fact.

I'd like to see more funds coming to our school system to help maintain excellence. This might require some work with the State so that modifications can be made to overcome some of the deficiencies with the existing funding policies in the face of present demographic trends.

Again congratulations to John Carlton, Nancy Bornstein, Michael Mishlove and the School Board for following through on your convictions on this issue.

Does freedom contain the meaning of equality. 

America has been an inspiration to peoples all over the world. It is a place of freedom and equality.

A place where the poor can have what the rich can have. It is a place where everyone can become rich.

Of course, there is no such place on earth. No place where everyone living there is rich and equally rich. Is there a place where everyone can become rich?

Perhaps in a place where the poor have nothing, to have something, is in itself, on the way to becoming rich. Then how rich is mere survival?

To live where one can eat on a regular basis and have access to water amounts to basic survival. Yet there are places on this earth where many cannot eat on a regular basis nor drink water the will not eventual destroy them.

These people cannot think beyond day to day survival, let alone riches. Food and water there becomes a form of richness.

But America is a rich country, where most people can eat on a regular basis and where there is plenty of drinking water. We can eat too much and become sick from that. We even sweeten our water and we can become sick from that.

Beyond water and food, is the need for a place to live, a house. Many living here do not have a house in which to live on a regular basis. Some even share a bed for a portion of the day. Some live without a house or bed.

Usually those who have houses and beds, food and water work and earn money to pay for these basic essentials. Often these people are seen as having a work ethic. Work ethic as applied means that people within a society know that they must work to earn money so that they can pay for the essentials of life.

This does not mean that with work comes freedom and equality.  With only a work ethic, one must work and work and therefore there is little time for freedom, time is only for work.

Even people who work sometimes get sick. There is no time for many of these people to get sick for they must work. If one works less, there is less food and a place to live becomes more problematic.

There is no insurance against getting sick.

Yet some who get sick get sick-pay as they recover and some get to see doctors. This is much better than living somewhere in the world where food and water are not readily available.

Some that get sick-pay usually have some education.   Education is like water, it is just to go to the fountain and get some education.  But getting education doesn't pay off right away, like getting food and water does.

America is a place of freedom and equality. Freedom comes easier than equality. Those people who seem to be equal get equal education as regularly as they get food and water and a place to stay. For these people the question is how much education and how much to pay for it.

Work ethic helps some, it is the fuel that drives workers toward attaining money and perhaps attaining education, more likely for their children and that moves many in the direction of getting rich.

Most of these people do not get rich.  They become the separating layer protecting the rich against the poor.  They are the middle class.

To some, becoming middle class is richness, it is freedom and perhaps even a form of equality.

America is an inspiration for many people throughout the world and for Americans themselves, this is still a place of freedom with inspiration toward equality.

But equality is not that easily attainable in concept nor in reality.  Perhaps the word equality has no real meaning, it only has spiritual significance, it's an human inspiration.  What does equality mean to people who need food and water?

Rising land values are inevitable throughout the world.

Land values remain highest in cities and surrounding areas of the cities of Europe and extending out into the suburban areas of the world as they do throughout the cities.

Europe is an example of where the confined nature of urban development encourages the support of public transportation. This in turn has a limiting effect on fringe growth beyond the easy reach of public transport.

Therefore, urban transportation development along with other containment policies tends to contain cities at higher densities than in the United States.

Local governments, even in small towns are inclined to limit growth at the fringes, further adding to the increasing cost of land in populated areas.

Increasing population throughout the world and the movement of population toward the cities contributes to pressure on land values and operates to increase population densities resulting in pressure that contributes further to rising land values.

The general conclusion here is that growing populations and movement to the cities guarantees higher and higher land values.

Large commercial operations must either by their form of operation justify these high business costs or move outward where permitted and to areas of relatively lower land costs, usually a distance from cities.

Many smaller shops that are able to remain in high cost land areas do so because of their limited size and usually must be in the business of providing expensive services or small expensive items.

Restaurants for example, could thrive in high density areas that provide large numbers of clients and who can afford expensive services.

However, as their operations are only at specified times, they may not be able to bear the high cost of land as others might for the full day and the full week. All is dependent on high volume and cost of services.

Recently an upscale Milwaukee restaurant firm informed Whitefish Board members that rents, reflecting land values were too high for them to afford to locate there.

______________________________

Attempts at compensating for high land costs.

The initial reduction in costs through one-time development subsidies, tends to run out with time so that artificial stimulation of certain types of business is not long-lived.

This eventually brings a decline in specific locations where the subsidizes were granted, operating against business that do not receive subsidies.

On the other hand, an appropriate congregation of business enterprises, appropriately related, can increase the business activity of specially designed districts that operate toward off-setting the increasing value of land for an extended time.

This can be done especially where the subsidizes are for the purpose of integrating these business--creating enclaves rather than for temporary cost off sets.

We must accept the long term pressures of increasing land values and also acknowledge that any interference with market forces must enable a flow compatible with the market long term.

The making of temporary moves that are aimed at thwarting market forces at a given time shall be short lived.

___________________________________

Energized business enclaves.

Small communities often are unaware of the need for an assemblage of small businesses collected in small groups and therefore they neglect the need to design enclaves of enterprises as small collective “business magnets.”

These enclaves in function act as agencies subsidizing each other collectively and helping form and contributing the energy of these magnetic enclaves.

The enclaves become like batteries that store generated surplus energy for distribution within the small districts helping to bring on and support additional business relationships within the enclaves.

Without these “battery driven” enclaves, businesses will eventually succumb to the high cost of land as they must suffer this expense alone without the means for creating additional energy and quietly face their slow and individual demise.

High cost commercial land requires collective energy creating capacities if businesses are to survive under these high cost conditions. Groupings, that function collectively, acting as magnets and that have usually come together casually are found in commercial areas of cities throughout the world.

___________________________________

Developing this energy nucleus.

Where communities are to reconstitute or initiate small commercial areas, it would be advisable in most cases to begin by designing these business attracting, energy generating enclaves as total units rather than encourage random spreading that leads to still birth or early deaths.

A socio-physical nucleus must be formed and the enclave itself should more often serve as the destination point rather than any of the individual shops located there.

________________________________________

Facts or illusion.

Shorewood's residential property, the most significant of Shorewood's land uses and the largest proportion of our tax base is increasing in magnitude as a function of the market, while it would seem then that commercial use, a much lesser element of the tax base would be decreasing as part of the total tax base modification, also as a function of the market..

According to land value trends in Shorewood, the square footage value of commercial land should be increasing in reverse ratio to the actual value of existing buildings on each of the sites.

This overall information is going to be somewhat difficult to attain because a good portion of these new commercial developments include residences. A careful and delicate approach to attaining these facts can however produce usable information.

As an aside, in addition to Village subsidies, it seems that little if any new construction would take place without requiring that a good portion of residential use be included as an integral element of the development.

The increased values of single family dwellings in Shorewood is an almost natural trend and further being accomplished by upgrading and size augmentation of homes, this with little or no intervention in free market operations.

On the other hand, condominiums and upscale apartments are the result of intervention in the free market, direct actions taken by our Village government.

This is not meant to be a criticism of any of our redevelopment activities but is being presented here to point to the need to test out these opinions as they need to be proved or disproved if we are to continue implementing our present community development policies.

These policies are the responsibilities of the Village Board and it would seem that the members would want their operations to be based on fact rather than on opinion or speculation.

If the commercial portion of our tax base is not increasing even though we are intervening in development of commercial properties for that purpose, and if we may not be attracting families with children to Shorewood which is another element of our intervention policies, and if no significant number of empty nesters living in Shorewood are selling their homes and moving into these condos and apartments, and if families with children are not moving into these empty nesters' vacated homes, then we should make ourselves aware of these facts.

It is to the degree that Shorewood residents are actually doing what we wish they should be doing that this information is presently being sought by a committee made up of members representing the School District and Village Board and being chaired by the Director of the Community Development Authority.

If this assumed movement of residents is not taking place and if our efforts to improve our tax base by proportionately expanding the commercial part of our tax base is also not happening, then we'll have to take another tack in terms of public policy.

It becomes necessary then to determine as to whether our efforts to intervene in the free market are moving us in the direction of accomplishing the goals we have established for ourselves.

It would seem that if we find that we are not attaining our goals in this manner, that then we should establish other methods for doing so.

What is an economic cushion?

An economist recently stated that more than half of those employed in the United States work for many governmental agencies, federal, state and local or for private firms associated with serving these agencies and for health and other social associated enterprises.

This is a difficult statistic to find, however, we might conclude that a significant percentage of workers in this country could be described as public workers. This is quite significant to economists seeking a strong combination of consumer elements that regularly contributes to the viability of our economy.

In addition, there are a large number of Americans who are retired with pensions, who are functioning as rather active consumers. Many are receiving Social Security benefits and others can avail themselves of Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

Others are receiving unemployment compensation payments and a significant number still receive pay checks within the private elements of the economy. After all, even a 20% unemployment figure means that about 80% of the employment pool are at work.

At the fall of the stock market in 1929, there was usually only one bread-winner in the family. Today when our economic crisis hit, most families had two significantly employed. Therefore, many families experience only one who might have lost his/her job.

None of these described situation existed in the thirties. We have today, a sort of built-in cushion which has enabled a good portion of the consumer aspect of our economy to remain somewhat stable but at a rather low energy level.

Therefore much of the media advertising is not calling for the type of consumer spending having to do with useless type products and services that people were we willing to consider before the bubble burst. Most of the recent K-Mart's ads point to food saving purchases.

Dentist, more that physicians might be experiencing some decline in demand for their services, but even these service are quite active as most of us are covered in one way or another by insurance for most of our health services but not so many covered for dental care.

Of course many have begun to lose their health care coverage as well, which will be reflected by decline in demand for these services.

This described collective economic cushion has eased our national economic fall, even without attempts to correct for the ups and downs of the economy that economist have talked about from time time.

Never-the-less, the economy is a difficult patient to care for. It tends to become obese during periods of prosperity and undernourished during periods of economic decline.

Then during these undernourished periods it seems that we are not able to afford the economic treatments nor is it easy to determine which of the long term treatments are most likely to improve our condition.

But in viewing all of these underpinnings within our economy we find that these are some of the reasons that explain some of our general economic stability. But of course, it will be difficult to maintain even this low economic activity over long periods of time without a strongly operating private economic sector. 

Although there are disagreements as to the kind of treatment, there is good economic reason to understand how to deal with these ups and downs.  But in actual fact this is difficult to do.   

Perhaps this is primarily because in periods of good times we usually cannot remember nor prefer not to remember the bad times that usually preceded nor do we want to consider the conditions that often follow. Besides who is to help in achieving economic stability when things are going well.

As for our immediate future, it is difficult to imagine the types of industries that will employ the many who find themselves without jobs today.

Yet the economy will not work too well until most of these find employment that will begin to bring relatively significant standards of living. But because of many inherited institutions, pump priming is more likely to work sooner and therefore be less painful today than in the thirties.

Here we have focused more on the disease than on the treatment. Next time let's consider as to whether there are any treatments and how do we attempt to find the one that is most likely to work. Economic treatments are usually expensive and require some pretty serious social and collective decision making.

A Calatrava to solve our traffic problems or an UWM architectural student project?

I've been reading about some concerns that residents have about the summer traffic changes and traffic coming through their neighborhood, this for purposes of reconstructing Capitol Drive this summer.

I strongly believe that easy access should be provided for students going to UWM, just as I believe that UWM should acquire the hospital property to its north as UWM is want to do. 

I don't believe that increasing the capacity and efficiency of the flow of traffic on Capitol Drive west of Oakland is at all the best solution for accessing UWM.  This kind of traffic going through Shorewood ignores the values of community and those of the Village of Shorewood.

The same principles for restricting traffic through built-up areas are being violated for some Shorewood residents, even though this situation shall be for only a few months this summer.

This reconstruction with its related problems has revived my concerns about a highway moving a high volume of traffic through the center of our “walkable community.”

Even crossing streets at the designated crosswalks on both Oakland and Capitol is not all that easy. I find it easier “J-walking” on Silver Spring where the shops are concentrated than I do on Oakland, south of Capitol in Shorewood.

Capitol Drive east to Oakland after this new construction will increase its capacity as a highway that will continue to cut through Shorewood's western half for decades to come.

Only highway-type businesses can succeed along its edges, further detracting from residential living and the community character of the Village of Shorewood.

The negative effect it will have on the central intersection at the heart of the village is yet to be experienced by its citizens.

There are other solutions to accessing UWM which would not be found in highway planning books for highway engineers nor that would be politically acceptable at the present time.

The solution to maintaining a community centrality at this point will have to be devised by the Village.

We will have to design an elevated central square over this intersection. Its design should then turn this negative feature into a positive aspect of the village, that of providing a physical and social center over this river of traffic. It will require a Calatrava-type mentality to produce that dramatic (solar) solution.

As university planner for UWM in 1963, I advised the president of the university that when it was feasible to acquire Columbia Hospital property, just as we had acquired nearby institutional properties, that we should not let that slip out of our hands. Now, I'm likely to see that event come to pass as well.   

However, I'm not going to live long enough nor are many presently living in Shorewood, to ever see an elevated square over the Capitol Drive and Oakland intersection.

The cost of that structure will need to be off-set by a higher density and high rise development of a type that will give even more meaning to a “walkable community.”  This would be a good project  for  UWM architectural students.

It would be fantastic, if someone could pay the Calatrava group for producing a design solution for our central square, that could in time be carried out.   Short of that, a student project. 

The public could at least see the design, as perhaps could I, a design conceivably  in contrast to or complementing to the one I have in my mind.

My Friday walk and the difficulties of crossing the street in our "walkable" community also got me to think about the districts in European cities that exclude automobile traffic, some only for certain hours of the day.

The purpose for this is to create areas where the pedestrian is king or queen, a place we people of rather densely occupied areas can remain on foot, as we say that people in Shorewood already are.

We can even find sculptured play areas for children in some of these designed street spaces.

These sidewalk areas in Europe are designed for socializing, with all sorts of sculptures, benches and flower arrangements and of course sidewalk cafe`s, book and art stalls.

Some cafe`s are glass enclosed for the winter. We even have some examples of these in Milwaukee.

Although I worked as a Town Planning Architect in London, England for a number of years creating some of these pedestrian-type and socializing areas, they are not as easily created in a country where practically everyone 16 years of age and older drives a car.

Usually our streets run through our commercial areas and people have difficulty crossing from one side of the street to the other.

Most people in suburbs enter their homes from the garage, so now a creative addition, the mud room. The front door as a place of entrance seems “an ancient residuum,” primarily to be used for greeting visitors and “trick-or-treaters.”

We tend to approach the place where we are going to shop either from a parking lot or from a parking structure. I often park on the street when I have the opportunity, then walk in from the sidewalk area.

There are three examples in Shorewood that would give us a good insight into the way we approach our shopping destinations. Let's look at Walgreen's Drug store, Pick-N-Save and Sendiks on Oakland Avenue.

Each has its own parking lot and the shoppers generally approach each establishment from the parking lot.

Both grocery stores face their entrances toward their parking lots. Walgreen's is at an angle and seems to give some attention to the street as well, the entrance is designed toward making it more attractive to walk-in shoppers.

From a casual observation, I've seen a significant number of pedestrians enter Walgreen's from the street. As I usually park on the street, I'm one of those who find it inviting to enter from the sidewalk side.

Perhaps it is the nature of the drug store, so that many people can walk to the drug store and do not have to carry out as large parcels as they do from the grocery store.

Never-the-less, Walgreen's entrance for whatever purpose was designed so as to face pedestrian traffic as well as traffic from the parking lot. Few businesses do this.

Given the car use in our country, it seems that we cannot go against the existing situation. However, we could design our entrances more like Walgreen's and develop a larger pedestrian gathering area, where during certain times of the year pedestrians could even sit there for a short time.

This kind of design would then more resemble some European designs where the intention is to serve those people who walk to these commercial centers, except that here we would place our pedestrian areas between the parking area and the shop.

As we are so much involved in the development of our commercial street here in Shorewood, perhaps we should give more attention to the entrance points of businesses and the way they are designed in order give a more social pedestrian character to these points, also giving them more of the walk-in type of trade that merchants claim to seek.

We should avoid developing uninteresting long blank walls of buildings facing the street without openings toward the street that make walking rather dull.

We should also avoid the openness of large parking areas that present uninteresting dull gaps filled with a sea of cars.

Walking by an open area with or without cars presents a disturbing loss of friendly enclosure that the interesting buildings provide us.

The open street with a steady flow of cars on the other side presents a constant feeling of nearby danger.

Certain set-backs in the buildings themselves, when done properly can lend to an attractive social setting.

Even parking lots can receive some design attention so as to make them interesting to people who walk by. We have some good design examples of these situations even in Shorewood.

Let's remember in our development processes how important design is to the manner in which our centers develop and function. Good design could upgrade our already good improvement efforts.

Our congratulations.   And our recognition of Shorewood's  involvement in Community Development.

Yesterday, I took advantage of the sunny day and did a good deal of walking on Oakland Avenue from Shorewood's north boundary to our southern edge.

Keeping in mind that I have kept a pretty close eye on what has been happening in terms of development on this street, I began to consciously conclude that hardly any of the upgrading development and new development that has occurred within the past ten years would have taken place without the assistance of the Village of Shorewood's community development efforts.

Of course, we must start with the upgrading of the appearance and texture of our walking area. A rather  good number of facade improvements have been achieved.  Several land acquisitions, aided by the implied power of eminent domain have also been made.   There are more plans for more intense development for the future.

If this would have occurred merely on a market basis, any visitor would be led to think that this is certainly a viable economic strip. But without the assistance of the Village, even this appearance of viability would not be there.

As a citizen of this community for a number of decades I therefore want to congratulate all those people who have been involved during this time in achieving these accomplishments and in improving the image of newness and in maintaining the image that we are keeping up with commercial progress.

The establishment of Tax Incremental Districts makes money available for assisting in making possible what the market could not do on its own.

What we've accomplished is proof that without our local government's concern, not much of this would have been possible.

Tax Incremental Financing was set up to inject capital into areas like this to maintain and give new viability to these districts. Again all of those involved and who have worked hard deserve our gratitude. Present economic conditions have slowed down plans and prevented doing even more.  But more will be done.

The main motivating force has been the perceived need to improve property values and therefore the local community  tax base. Obviously the total tax base has increased considerably over the past ten years, perhaps even more than that of the inflation factor for municipalities.

Therefore, everything that we've done has been well-worth the effort and I'm sure that  without this effort that the commercial portion of that tax base would not have faired as well as it has.

It would be interesting to see those comparisons. They would help verify what we observe on the surface. In any case, thanks to those behind the scenes who have accomplished so much.

But not unlike medical surgeries, the end results cannot be guaranteed. Even with all our efforts, we can never know how our patient will prosper in the open market of the future.

It is said that human beings are the most rational of God's creatures.

Of course, we don't hear much to dispute that statement.

I'd like to apply the idea of rationality to the notion of work ethic as brought up by two young people that I overheard talking about their future careers.

One said that he was going to study business so that he could work very hard for a short time right after he finishes his education, make a lot of money, invest it and then live a life of luxury.

The other said that she was going to medical school instead so that she could help people with their lives, especially those who had become sick and incapacitated and not fully able to work hard and make money so that they could make a living.

But of course, she would have to make a lot of money in order to pay for her education debts and all the time that she needed to become a doctor. She said to her friend, that by the time I am able to practice as doctor and start paying off my debt, you will have made your first million or two.

Both wanted to work hard. One for a shorter time so that he would later not have to work so hard if at all and the other wanted to work hard to become a doctor so she would continue to work, perhaps for the rest of her life or until close to the end.

Of course, here is a good example of what we call the work ethic as motivated by two different philosophical views of life.

Here is rationality and the work ethic in operation at a certain level within our society and as demonstrated in communities like Shorewood for example, where our education system is exemplary and one of the primary reasons for living here.

Both attitudes leading to a need for education that was obviously affordable and payable. Some become school teachers or nurses. They'll not make as much money as these two, but they are demonstrating that they have a work ethic as demonstrated by their chosen occupations.

There are many others in our society who could not think about themselves within any education system, let alone being able to afford a college education.

Unless these people are willing to do menial or back-breaking work we might think that they are without work ethic. I would like some of those most concerned with work ethic and a social and an economic system based on that ethic explain its rationality and perhaps the rationality of our social economic system.

What a devil of an economy!

So we're as mad as hell.  What are we going to do about it?  What can we, those of us who are so mad, going do about it, especially as we are not going to take it anymore?  How are we going to quit taking it?

The strange thing is that no matter how mad we've become it doesn't seem that anyone knows what to do about it.  We are in effect in a depression and mad as hell about it, but what can we do about it?

We are involved in two wars, rightfully or wrongly. Not only is there a lot of killing going on with or without the help of the devil but it's more costly than the devil and contributing to our enormous national debt.

The Republicans and the Democrats are just as guilty in creating this large debt over this past decade. Neither party has repented or has a solution.

The Social security and Medicare programs are going to hell. They must have been contracts with the devil. What are we going to do about it?

Our banks and insurance companies don't seem to be of much help. They are like vacuum cleaners, They know how to suck up money but don't know much about how to distribute it.   And what about the money changers on Wall Street?

Any intelligence in the Congress, shared by all of them as a congregation or by any individual hasn't produced a solution.   What are they doing?   Merely lining their pockets? How do we change that?

The Chinese have become worried about our future ability to pay them off, so they've sold some of our bonds and diminished their risk.

Depression brings on a great deal of unemployment. So that those unemployed besides their own personal and individual miseries can not buy as many consumer products.

Therefore, industry doesn't provide as many of these products and doesn't hire many, if any of the unemployed. Besides if we can buy anything that we need, we can buy it from China at any time. And you can get as mad as hell about that, but what are you going to do about it? “Make a contract with the devil?

Can the far right or the far left, or the so-called middle come up with a solution? Perhaps, if we close our eyes, we won't need a solution, it will go away by itself. So we can stop being mad and just wait. Does anyone think that is the solution?

I don't think that a contract with the devil will help. Look at what happened to Haiti. They contracted with the devil

Meanwhile and in the interim we can continue to live as though earth quakes, hurricanes and global warming cannot happen, so let's calm down. Let's not get so mad. Our madness only stimulates the devil's interest.

Here are some of the notions out there. Tax at any time is not good. Therefore, raising any kind of taxes especially during depression is not good.

Government spending of any kind is not good and to increase spending during depression especially is not good. Does this mean do nothing?

So if we are not going to spend nor tax, we must start by doing away with IRS. I bet even I could get elected to office if I ran on that.

If we were to look at the economy as though it were a machine, we would know that it is either breaking down or not running too well. What do we do? Find out why it's not running too well.

The main problem is that many people are not working. So how do we start putting people to work, Some suggest by doing nothing. Leave it alone and it will take care of itself. But what happens if the machine breaks down completely?

But if you don't believe that and you believe something must be done and we have to put people to work to start with, before we can do much else, then we should put people to work at long term national investments that will pay off in the long run.

That is, we must do as much as possible with our aging infrastructure and develop an infrastructure that will begin paying off as soon as possible and will continue to do so for the next 100 years.

We must direct funds to municipalities and to our states on the basis of developed and developing programs that will start upgrading our infrastructure as soon as possible.

These funds can be paid off in the long run. They are investments in the future. This type of program should begin improving that machine that doesn't seem to be working too well. Then there will be other programs to follow to further lubricate it.

It seems that there are really only two choices, do nothing or do something. Our congress must begin operating based on one of these choices. We aren't so sure that opposition candidates have made any of these choices either.

Is there any other way to go but to take these positive steps and at the same time improve our employment situation through a process of upgrading our infrastructure?

The State of the Union.

We are in an economic depression that not even the most rational of economists want to define as a depression, preferring a less depressive name, a recession, which also suggests that we might come out of it rather easily.

We don't know at this stage what is the real depth of this economic decline as the depth still remains to be determined. That is, we may be about to begin getting out of it or that we are at the edge of what is referred to as a second economic dip?  We don't like to ponder this situation. But here we are.

In our greed, we have allowed industry to move its base from our land to nations where populations at their paltry living standards produce the stuff that has become essential to our daily lives and that we can buy for less from them. 

Therefore, we have unemployment at a level not experienced since the great depression of the thirties. Can we restore an industrial system or a post-industrial system in today's world that will support the employment component required to maintain our capitalistic system?

If our employment structure was not buttressed by the socialist system that we have in place (over 50% employed by public institutions, hospitals, police, teachers etc and the minimal number required to keep even the largest of corporations running in place), we'd be undergoing one of the world's most economic disasters at the present moment.

We should include within this support system, Social Security, Medicare, Medicade and all of the other government and institutional supported systems that contribute to the present economic cushion effect  that also helps give some support to retail activilty .  And of course, some of these activities are expected in a few years hence to run out of gas. 

Another important element of the cushen effect is that in many families where two adults were working, one still remains employed. 

The banking system and Wall Street are as outmoded today as the horse-drawn carriage, both on the verge of extinction failing to fulfill their responsibilities to our nation and its economic functions.

The banking system supported by Wall Street and our government has manipulated the values of real estate so as to reduce and eliminate most of the life-time savings of the average person. So we have reduced the value of most of our assets.

We have the greatest national debt, most of it owed to foreign countries that may call elements of it at their own convenience. No one has the slightest idea as to how it's going to be paid.

We are at war in at least two countries, adding to our national debt and depleting the national energies required in coping with the economic situation in which we find ourselves.

This is what we must do.   We must develop industries that will first of all produce most of the things we need for ourselves and at such efficiency that we will be capable of developing surpluses of production that can be exported to other countries, so as to  produce revenue that can begin to off set our foreign debts. Let's read this paragraph again. It's important.

None of this will happen on its own. We need to make it happen. But with a government beholding to most privately operated institutions that got us in the mess, it doesn't seem that it's going to be easy.

I believe that there are two ways we can begin to accomplish this new and more a solidly based economy in the long run.  We must begin producing in this country what is needed to update and upscale our infrastructure. Meanwhile begin extricating ourselves from our engagement in our present wars as soon as possible.

These are our beginning points. Although we can continue to trade with the rest of the world, we should discourage home based firms from moving their operations to other countries; for exportation to us from those countries is the very cause of the debt to them. So why continue and encourage this activity?

We need like most modern countries to centralize our banking system. I'll not say more about that for the present time.

And we need to regulate the stock market so that it serves in the interest of our national economy and not the selfish interest of the greedy, remembering that the earliest concepts of capitalism did not necessarily include the need for a Wall Street. It's been artificially superimposed on our system and not necessary to it, especially in its present form.

If we are not determined to implement these changes and do them immediately, then we shall remain on this downward road to an unknown ending.

Although important, as it affects us individually, the subject of economics doesn't have a durable interest as a total subject. If many readers have got this far, I'm surprised.

Now that we've come this far, we have one more significant problem, millions of unemployed. And there lies the real base of an eventual revolution, not with the “Tea Party.”

A characteriization of the politics of “you betcha.”

You betcha as I understand it means, your right, that's certainly the way to go, or I agree with you., or wait and see.

None of this “hopey-changey stuff.”  The people are mad as hell and they ain't gonna to take it no more. They hope to bring change to Washington. (When did we hear that before?)  This means more of the hopey-changey stuff but this time from the right and not from the left and we're gonna do it, you betcha (not, yes we can), you betcha, that's stronger.

There it is, Palin and the Tea Party philosophy. Let's keep the emotions in politics, you betcha. Rationality has no place in the world and especially no place in politics.  I wonder what goes on in the baby mind of a child, while its mom tries to characterize her mom-ism by carrying that kid to political rallies and once seen holding it, hands it over to someone else. 

She may have to drop this from here performances.  It may not be good politics.  The picture intends to portray that that's some mom, some family gal, you betcha.  And if only the Tea Party could have a mom like that to protect them and make their case for them in Washington.  That would be their hope fulfilled. 

Then we'd do away with Social Security, Medicare, Medicade and all this veterans' subsidies and aids and socalistic stuff.. That's what's got this country in a hole.  And then in 2008, even President Bush was showering money on the banks and Wall Street.  That sort of thing doesn't belong in the Republican Party and needs to be stopped. 

If we could get rid of taxes and spending, then we would all have a great life here. This is down-to-earth reality, none of that hopey-changey stuff.  This is what the Tea partying is all about.  A good Commander and Chief (not a professor-type) would make it possible then to concentrate on the wars. 

I don't believe that the Tea Party is a splintering off of the far right wing of the Republican Party.  Although many conservatives may attach themselves to many of the things that the Tea Party people stand for, as do other segments of the party, but conservatives also maintain a strong adherence and loyalty to the Republican Party.

On the other hand, Sarah Palin seems to be more within the makeup and texture of those of the Tea Party, she as a former Vice Presidential candidate and talked-about Presidential candidate of the Republican Party cannot nor would it be wise to jump off.   She has instead asked the Tea Party to join her in the Republican Party.

The Tea Party cannot be considered then to be to the right of the most conservative elements of the Republican Party but fairly well distributed over all of its elements.  If Palin then could become the leader of the Tea partying gang, she'd have relatively good representative support throughout the party.

This would be a good move on her part to connect or reconnect members of the Tea Party with the Republican Party. It would give a good down-to-earth feeling and bring a great deal of emotion and pizazz into the Republican Party, making it more of the “You betcha” Party rather than the "gotcha" party or as Rush would have it, the Hell No Party. 

I'd like to find similarities at the far left of the Democratic Party and explore and see if there's anything as exciting going on there.