Rosek is right; Council spending too much time on Fowler Lake Village, but his actions may be the cause

Couldn’t the time being spent on FLV be better used to revisit the master plan, including the downtown and waterfront?

In the wording of his resolution seeking to repeal the MOU between the city and Fowler Lake Village, LLC., alderman Matt Rosek states he is seeking the reversal because “in excess of two years have passed since the MOU and no development agreement has been approved.”

Ok, but so what? How is the city hurt from moving ahead carefully and deliberately? Isn’t everyone involved better served by giving the FLV partners time to consider and address issues expressed over the last couple of months by some members of the Council and the public? Given that some of the issues really are not related to the proposed condominium project–such as the relocation of the boar launch and the closing of the exit onto North Main Street from the current parking lot behind businesses on the north side of Wisconsin Avenue–Seymour and his partners should be commended by their desire and willingness to address issues.

Other aldermen have also stated that the Council has spent and continues to spend too much time on FLV. Implied is the suggestion that somehow this is the fault of the people behind FLV. That’s crazy. FLV does not control the Council agenda. It doesn’t control the public comment sessions, nor does it have the ability to engender any discussions with the Council on anything that relates to FLV. Perhaps those who feel too much time has been spent on FLV need to look inward. Maybe Rosek’s multiple attempts to derail the project are why the Council has not moved onto to other things. To then use those actions to justify repealing the MOU makes no sense.

Tuesday night’s Common Council meeting is a case in point. Rosek’s attempt to repeal the MOU will force a debate among the aldermen that will take time away from other Council business. There is no need to this. The project is dead in the water, perhaps forever, because FLV has withdrawn from a vote on the developers agreement. There will be no FLV with that agreement. Mayor Jim Daley told the Council on Nov. 4 that he doesn’t expect FLV to ask for that approval, if it decides to continue, for perhaps months. So why is the Council wasting time on an issue that isn’t even before it? Couldn’t this time be better spent following alderman Ken Herro’s request that the Council and city at large review the city’s master plan and its plans for the waterfront and downtown. That would be time well spent.

468 ad

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *