Thanks for posting, Lisa. I checked that article out, too, since I wasn't able to attend. I wonder why Cramer, Dobbs and Willing weren't there? Maybe they could still chime in on their opinions on here. I know Willing has expounded on his ideas on Wal-Mart, but I'd like to know what they all have to say about the new village hall, also. Hmmmm...

Hey there Lisa… I am SO SORRY that I was not able to show!!!

Unfortunately was unaware of the event, and was never contacted. A single email was sent but it was in my spam folder from a couple of weeks ago. I found it last night, after Kathy a burton texted me to see if I was coming! Nothing was sent by mail and I never received a phone call or I would've more than happily joined the forum. :( ( I would have arrived at almost 8pm.

but.... Please feel free to ask any questions here that were asked last night or that you would've liked to have been asked. :)

I am an open book and am more than willing to discuss anything on your mind!

Hey heather!

Regarding a new village hall, I'm open to discussing it, but right now, unless the cost/benefit is clearly in favor of replacement now, I would prefer to hold off until we see an increase in revenues. I get the sense from residents that a tax levy increase or large bond measure would not be popular right now, or sustainable in this fragile economy. The fire station needs repair or replacement as well.... These are potentially as much as our entire annual budget, and a tremendous burden at a time when our housing values have dipped by tens of millions of dollars.

I would ask the planning commission to discuss with our maintenance team and Mr Janiuk to explore just how pressing the repairs are, and focus on the fire department, by default, first. ThEn village hall.

For the record, I would prefer a new village hall be closer to the majority of the population.... If a new one were constructed in the future.

Ed, thank you for your comments on the village hall. :) Just wondering - why does the proximity of the hall to the majority of the population need to be a factor? I've had to go there twice in the past 10 years. (Used to go there to pay taxes, but now it's off to Johnson Bank.) An extra 5 minutes in the car to get there sure isn't an inconvenience. Since the village already owns that land, I certainly don't have any problem with them looking at expanding right where they are.

@Heather

Oh, it's just personal preference. :) I have had to go there at least once every month or two, but in general, I think the LUP rewrite I am seeking would help us determine where a true "village center" could be. That's where the village hall should be. But not for any reason other than aesthetic or convenience. The water utility, fire department and other amenities are closer to the east side of the village. Then again, if we develop the I-94 corridor, it would be wise to stay where it is... So again, just preference. If it would be cost prohibitive, then I'd never support a relocation. :) I'm a stickler on finances.

mau-For the sake of clarification, no one ever made the statement that they were filing a lawsuit with the village. The link below provides the means to validate that. The ONLY statement was relative to some community members seeking legal advice since both the village and Wal-Mart have legal representation. The ONLY statement relative to an attorney was the frustration of the residents asking clear, open record questions and receiving no answers. The assertion that a community group or person is filing a lawsuit is FALSE. Everyone should have the right in any situation to seek out legal advice to know their rights. That should not negate the ability for community leaders to answer questions. And I 100% agree with you. What a shame an open dialogue does not seem possible within this process.

http://wcca.wicourts.gov/simpleCaseSearch.xsl;jsessionid=3030716E10E19B1A77C6FFA8995333EA.render6

Lisa, I'm sorry if there's a misunderstanding, but I will repeat: I did not Receive a packet by mail. The only email I received was in my spam folder and was missed. I also received no phone call. So, apologies again for missing it. But I would have attended had I known about it. Also, I don't frequent these threads enough to see you speaking about it. I'm sorry. Meanwhile, I'm here and answering questions, while the oth candidates have no online presence at all. ;)

I have been informed on the building condition, actually, and I know there are many problems with the roof and plumbing. Bradley has his opinion, and I have mine. Disagreeing doesn't mean I'm misinformed, its just a different opinion... im not the only one with my position... and I might be convinced to vote for a replacement building, but I'm not jumping ahead on it quite yet. Btw, I'm voting for Bradley.

Regarding Caledonias sustainability, I agree we need growth, and, we may need higher taxes at some point, for the most essential services to stay top notch. However, my default position has been and always will be "let's see what we can do first..." And I think my position on developer relationships and possibly a bond measure is in line with what you're saying. We essentially agree. Except for the lights going out :)

The lights will stay on, there just may be fewer of them if we fail to give people a reason to stay in Caledonia.

Re: development, I posted this response earlier today to the article covering that topic last night:

http://caledonia.patch.com/articles/candidates-say-water-sewer-should-extend-to-i-94

'really? I've been posting this event on Facebook for months,' Not every one seems to think that reading every ones crap on Facebook is all that important. That's like being in highschool and passing a note across the room. I would expect a little more professionalism when it comes to setting up a forum for election candidates. Not some gossip rag such as Facebook. Give the guy a break. Just saying.

Wi,
It appears to me that you were at the forum last night, did you confront Couts and Wangard?

No, Daniel, I was not there.

Daniel-I presume the all caps WILL suggest he yelled at the board. Listen to the tape, which mind you was preceded by Mr. Tiderman asking a question followed by 15 seconds of silence from the board. Are suggesting that asking a question, which has been done several times by several members of the community since January, getting no response and stating you feel the need to seek legal advice in order to know your rights and protect your assets is a threat? Then tell me: if a Wal-Mart attorney invited to sit on a village workgroup should be considered "threatening"?. He did not yell. He did not state a lawsuit was filed. He did not say an attorney had been retained. For God's sake, he asked a question they refused to answer. Before even the idea of an attorney was mentioned. I can imagine many, many members of this community have sought legal advice relative to their rights as home owners and residents. The mention of attorney does not nullify their commitment to their constituents nor allow them the right to not provide what is public record information. And how does the board ascertain who is and who isn't part of this group? You want a vote but you will not answer a question? Actually, I believe it was 3 questions.

Katie, (I'm sorry dont want to ruin your anonymity) KOKO,
The video is very clear, Jim said "The next time these questions are asked it will be from legal counsel". Is it possible that they are following the law as it pertains to developments. As to your "how does the board ascertain who is or isnt part of this group?" If your referring to the workgroup, I'm pretty sure, those people were chosen by the PC and not the board. You say you want to protect your investment (home), so do the rest of us. How will you and your group react when developers stay clear of the Village and the boards only option is to raise our property taxes? Those services that you, I and 24k other residents enjoy, they come at a cost!

It is true that legal counsel gets very spendy. They are also at pretty much every board meeting, making the cost of those meetings hundreds of dollars more each time.

I would concede however that since they are already there, the No Walmart group won't be increasing costs. However, it is plausible that such groups could threaten to sue to stop projects. Hopefully it doesn't get to that point.

THEN I would have a problem with increased legal costs. We cannot afford that at this point. We need responsible development as soon as possible. Our image needs to change in the business community!

The group referred to the general public. Will they now answer no questions from anyone regarding the WM issue. The question asked on Monday was asked back in January and supposedly the answer would be provided via a list to the PC and public then. The inconsistencies are the cornerstone of the WM request. Do you find it out of line or threatening to ask for an answer? WM is not the tax salvation for Caledonia. Maybe the potential near the highway may offer a more substantial revenue generating base for the community.

I agree, KOKO. the other location had much larger potential for a tax base. Walmart will likely be a zero-sum development or close to it.

I welcome any development we can get, as long as it suits our community. But I don't know anyone personally who likes this location.... It'd be nice to rewind 2 years, eh? maybe the board would have found a way to make 31 happen.

KOKO,
Would you support the WM at the corner of 31 and 4 mile?

Daniel, I'm not sure what you're inferring.

I haven't spent much time on the Patch the last month because of work. Everything I said was accurate. I did not know the date and time of the forum. I wish I could have made it. What exactly are you refuting? I speak honestly, and call it like I see it. I am here, and open to discussion. If you have a question for me shoot away.

Btw, I do feel having an online presence makes a difference. My site gets as many hits in one afternoon as were at the forum, and the FB page gets at least 100 active views per day. I think it's essential to be a visible in every ay possible, and had I received a phone call, or the USPS packet they claim was sent, I would have gladly been there. Mixups happen. It's not a reason to not vote for the best candidate. :) and for seat one, that's me. I won't sit there just to hang with buddies, but to make a difference so my kid wants to stay here when he grows up.

Daniel, several of the board members are acquaintances of mine as well.

The impression I'm getting is that you don't like me as a candidate, and are trying to find things upon which to have a conflict, when we would likely agree on most things. I am not alone in saying the board hasn't accomplished enough. I'm not insulting anyone, or wrongfully accusing anyone. And I didn't say they hang out and do nothing.

But the LUP hasn't been revisited. Businesses don't view the board favorably. My impression is that people and businesses want fresh blood on the board, that's why I'm running, and my friend Richard Frazier as well. We want to be the second half team that brings in new energy and new ideas.

Ed
Am I safe to say in todays economy Business expansion is difficult? That being said Caledonia has been fortunate to have many of its larger employers expand in the Village. If business owners didnt see the board as favorable would these expansions have taken place? Would A&W be moving its operations from Raymond to Caledonia? I dont think so! I do agree with you that we need sewer and water out by I-94, If Racine's arrogant and narcissitic Mayor, would have sold water to Waukesha, we could have had it for pennies on the dollar. I have no issues with you as a canidate, other than the only presence you have is social media. I for one am not a Twitter, Facebook, Website voter. Call me old fashion, I like to hear potential representative speek it show a human characteristic.

I have a website: www.votewilling.com, a facebook page, I comment on important village matters here on Patch whenever possible, and I hit doors consistently whenever possible. I also come to as many meetings as possible, and I serve on the Caledonia Parks Commission as well. Unfortunately, not many in Caledonia know me yet, because i spent the last 5 years in my own little shell, raising my son and running my business. Hopefully I can overcome that relative anonymity and win the seat so I can make a difference and be part of the community I chose very deliberately.

If you'd like to meet me in person to talk about some issues, i welcome you to meet at Mocha lisa sometime, and we can chat! I work a ton, but I can be a little flexible for a conversaton and some coffee. ;)

What's even more disappointing is that our 7 yr old Land Use Plan still thinks that new location for Walmart is a "village center" and gives no value to 31 as a commercial corridor.

Meanwhile, the new utility contract we just signed opens the door for us to take pipes out to I-94. I think we have to find a way to finance it and make it happen. No more waiting! Ad... It would actually serve the interests of several groups, by moving the focus for development away from conservancy land and toward the freeway.

Win/win! :)

T.R.,
You obviously arent connected with the village. In the past year 3 businesses have expanded in Caledonia, 1 has relocatedto the Village and one more has commited to moving to Caledonia. Take five minutes and driv thru the Industrial Park you'll see what has been happening. To state that the current board hasnt done nothing is a outright lie. Please try to use facts when posting, it'll save you future embarassment.

Seems like you are angry about something TS...........all this ranting and raving is really fruitless, do you live in the area of the proposed WM?

Having worked extensively in real estate development and the real estate market in general for about a decade I can confirm that big-box stores on a store to store basis have at best a zero-sum benefit to the local community in terms of jobs and taxes and over all economic activity.

The only other factor missing from that analysis is the effect that big-box retailers have in attracting other light retail and commercial development. Whether it be Walmart or any other large retailer I would insist that our land-use plan encourage the use of mixed-use zoning to ensure that it is in the anchors' best interest to attract and maintain other assets. Not just any development is good development, you are correct.

However, if done properly, and with good real estate relationships, our village could woo a developer to bring in a combination of tenants or builders that truly do add a net-plus to our revenue, quality of life and reputation.

www.votewilling.com

Has anybody made an official request in writing for the information they are looking for under the open records law????? I assume that would be the first thing legal counsel would ask of their client(s).

This thread should be discussed here:
http://caledonia.patch.com/articles/walmart-opposition-forms-llc#video-13722449

It has been asked for many times.........

The site at 4 Mile and Highway 31 is looking better everyday!

I wonder if the majority of people would like to drive a shorter distance to save fuel costs. Hmm. Maybe that is why Walmart is on a building spree.

the 4 mile and hwy. 31 site suffers from most of the same deficiencies as the one at 4 mile and green bay road in terms of the traffic and road situation and the intended demographic pull. people would still be primarily coming from east on 4 mile road, or west on 4 mile road, or from the oak creek area, they would have to come down hwy 32 which is not set up for that kind of traffic or highway 38 also not set up. there are other issues on highway 31, such as the closeness of the root river and potential pollution issues which should not be discounted either. the costs of the big box development to the village tend to outweigh the income to the village, so with the added policing, and the road issues and congestion issues, it is not a "gain". regarding I-94 frontage road option, the demographics from oak creek could access it easily, as could also people west of the I, such as yorkville and raymond and union grove, etc., while caledonia residents could use Hwy. K for primary access, a much better route than 4 mile road for the heavy traffic..

San- Those people are already using those same roads to get to the Sturtevant Wal Mart from eastern Caledonia. I doubt that you will draw much from Oak Creek unless they use Hwy 32. Which is precisely why the Hwy 31 and 4 Mile rd location would fair much better. Hwy 31 is already slated to be widened from 4 Mile to Highway 32. The utilities have already been moved for the project. This is not a chemical factory where you are looking a environmental hazards as run-off and that is just a fear tactic being used. With proper storm sewers, it would be minimal at best. Like every project in Caledonia, the environmental impact would have to be studied prior to construction.

The proposed location, I would agree, is probably not the best location for some of the reasons you cite. Wal Mart will not build on the I-94 corridor because there are not enough rooftops.

I think Caledonia should outlaw any gas stations in the Village. Hell, ms would drive to Arizona just to get gas!!

it is after all not our responsibility to determine what is best for walmart. they are very good at doing that themselves, not always to the benefit of the communities they go into. it is our responsibility to protect the community we live in and preserve the qualities of life that we value here. Since most residents of Caledonia live here and work in other communities (successfully, as we have the LOWEST unemployment in the State), they already commute in various directions, so they already pass shopping in whatever direction they choose to go without making special trips. Other communities find that shopping at interstates works for both the community AND the big box retaillers because it provides ease of access for people in other communities nearby while reducing overall costs of infrastructure and still preserving the community core from being radically changed. As a conservative community that values our quality of life, I would suspect that we would want to exercise caution before making a radical change of this sort in the core of the village with the numerous foreseeable and unintended consequences that result. That is why a review of the studies of actual big box impact around the country is useful, as it is not generally a "win" for the communities who wind up hosting these businesses.

If the traffic on 4 Mile Road is already exceeding the design limits, does the Village have the responsibility to make improvements to the road? I also assume the money would come from a special assessment of the adjoining property owners.

The discussions here whether 4 mile and 31 was a legitimate location are somewhat trivial because every site for any development goes through these questions, and are usually resolved well before building.

The runoff issue isn't a concern in a location with enough space for retention ponds and storm sewers built for it. Hwy 31 is already going to be expanded, and 4 mile can be made to forbid semis or other commercial traffic. However, Walmart or not, 31 should not be excluded from the development corridor. Is where the bulk of our community lives. I believe if e village board rewrites the land use plan and designates responsible areas for development (I-94 and 31/32 and hwy K) then it will resolve many of the constant concerns and battles we face when we fear losing precious green space or environmental protections.

Our LUP is 7 years out of date. It must be rewritten so these conversations an happen more quickly and with more questions already answered. Right now, it leaves us only to react to each case, one by one.

"it does not appear that the CURRENT traffic on 4 mile is a problem" Yep, it's been closed for a year. But honestly, I get a big kick out of all these traffic experts. What are the actual daily auto counts? When is peek times? What is the projected traffic load? Until you know all these numbers, don't even claim to be a traffic expert. There are companies that do only that for a living. When you have the numbers, I'll listen. But then again, maybe you don't want people to really see that it is possible the road is underutilized now. And like I said before, if Caledonia Zoning and Planning committee is on top of things, all the added infrastructure work would have to be included in the site plan and paid for by the developer. Other communities do it all the time, and you would be surprised what they get the developers to pay for. But then again, you have be looking forward.

the model is the "hub and spoke" model used by the airlines. the HUB gets ALL the traffic and congestion. the SPOKES have light traffic. Milwaukee or Madison airport gets much less congestion than Chicago O'Hare. So the roads at the HUB of a big walmart tend to get all the pressure and congestion, as opposed to the outlying spokes. Caledonia right now is NOT such a hub, so we don't suffer from the problems attendant on being a HUB. If we become a HUB, we change the entire characteristics of the community and the impact on the roads, with many other secondary impacts (more crime, more noise, more pollution, more impact on wildlife, potential impact on the river, loss of local businesses and urban blight potentially, along with likely HIGHER taxes due to the negative contribution of big box and fast food to the local village tax base based on review all over the country of actual results).

the definition of class B highway sets forth the load it can carry. neither Green Bay Road nor 4 Mile was designed with a major 182,000 square foot walmart in mind. But it is not just these two roads that are involved, as the demographic pull of this walmart will create congestion for highway 32 and highway 31 and other roads as well as they come into the "hub" and collect in Caledonia. This in turn makes the commuting from the bedroom community and back much more an issue, adds more noise, pollution and congestion in many places. it is not so simple to say "make sure the developer pays" because many consequences are not known in advance by "citizen commissions or boards" and this does not solve the quality of life issues that get deteriorated. just dumping a major walmart into the wrong area does not solve anything, and clearly the existing infrastructure is not in place to handle it. regarding traffic counts, etc. these are things that we would want to see as part of a planning and review process and since no one PLANNED on having a walmart in this crazy location, no one did traffic counts with that in mind! Thus, we would expect that a serious review would take a look at many such issues, including but not limited to this one. Those who try to push development without this kind of planning try to minimize these things before the review can be done. what is their agenda I wonder???

good question. studies show that Walmart tends to harm small businesses in general and there is after a few years, a loss of local businesses; on the other hand, they tend to attract things like "fast food" and it is the combination of fast food and big box that runs up the costs to the villages and creates all the crime, congestion, etc. that the studies show tend to result. The next question then is do the residents of caledonia want to live in a congested, polluted, noisy, crime-ridden environment, or do they want to preserve the bedroom community that has been its main attraction. those are the very questions we are being asked to decide, and the consequences of our decisions will result in what this community is and becomes in the future. right now we have low crime, bedroom community with the lowest unemployment in the state, and the ability to shop nearby in communities that have chosen to do this kind of development that your question implies. the changes that come about with a walmart have been well documented and a little study by the community of the impacts would be worthwhile...we have the right to choose our path, but we don't have the right to avoid the consequences of our choices.

So after a few years only Walmart and fast food restaurants will be here and most of the residents will be living in Raymond.

That's a pretty bleak picture! I have a different vision of what can and should happen!

www.votewilling.com

Do you think that people from Oak Creek will be shopping here with a WM on S. 27th, along a commercial hub where they can get all their shopping done? Do you think people in S. Milwaukee will just drive by their own WM to come all the way here? For 1 store and maybe a fast food place? Do you think enough people from N Racine, who are not heading into Caledonia for other shopping, to drop off their kids at school and most likely not for their jobs, will be enough to sustain a store of that size? Could just maybe the "leakage" study that told WM Caledonia NEEDED a supercenter (when mind you, 18 mths earlier a smaller WM was quite sufficient for the area) be in essence a smoke screen for possibly closing the WM in Sturtevant? With the new store in Somers, South Racine can go there. This of course is speculation, but fits with a pattern...

Actually, Katie, yes, people from Oak Creek will avoid the heavy traffic and time of driving 15-20 minutes to s 27th and COLLEGE to drive 10-15 minutes to a Caledonia location.

Take a look at a googled map result of Walmart. We are directly in the middle of the gaping hole in their coverage of the area. So financially, yes it makes sense for them to move here. And, they have millions of dollars (and 30 years of success) riding on their studies being right about traffic and market patterns.

This isn't an argument supporting their construction there on Green Bay Rd, but your statement had many mistakes in analysis. Also, the random proposal that Walmart wants to close sturtevant just doesn't make sense... Their store is VERY busy. There seems to be a presumption here that the company doesn't care about making money and only building wasteful boxes.

Your other arguments have been logical and reasonable. But I cannot make sense of these latest ones... Walmart wants to make money. They will make money where they want to build. However, we all agree that location is obnoxious.

Right now, it appears that statutorially we have few options to block it, but perhaps the owner or Walmart will change their mind? Not holding my breath. But I still wish out loud that our LUP had been updated much sooner so that perhaps they would have found a better location.

more likely if we let this happen, we will wind up with the effects of the congestion and costs of widening and maintaining roads, more police costs, and having to upgrade the access roads for miles to accommodate letting them in there. Once they are there and the negative impacts occur, walmart KNOWS the community has no choice but to spend the money, upgrade the road system and allow the traffic, congestion etc. to dictate the future costs we have to bear. what that does to the quality of life of the village and the residents who live here for certain values and qualities is not their concern. It should be OURS. Heavy truck and "hub" traffic should be placed with a road infrastructure and appropriate surrounding uses that do not exist where they are proposing it.

Well I guess I forgot this one then:

5. No one will shop there because Walmart is a BAD corporate citizen.

Oops forgot this one too:

4. They know no community is DUMB enough to allow them to build their store.

And your facts on these are coming from where??????

Looking before we leap is always a good idea.

That goes for refusing to leap too. We need to so something, but I think the infrastructure needs to come first, along with a rewritten LUP. I don't think we'd be having is problem with Walmart now had the LUP been addressed 2, 3 years ago.

So, the current Caledonia Land Use Plan was done by the neighborhood work groups.
Were any of these people considered "Planning Professionals"?
Oh wait, wasn't the VC-METRA done by SEWRPC?
That would be the area everyone is concerned about now.

That was heavily slanted to the open space crowd. The area under discussion, if you read the document, was intended to be a village center with the center piece being the light rail train station. That has long passed and will not become reality. The board's decsion to readdress the area is prudent as the extensive study you speak of is no longer a reality.

Furthermore, SEWRPC doesn't even exist anymore either.

The LUP is faulty, and now we are paying the price. No, the current location was not intended for a big box store, but Walmart has an arguable position, saying they can meet the demands of mixed use easily, with a slight variance. Minus the train station, it's still within the parameters the short sighted LUP assembled.

Which is the problem. Few of us think Walmart should build there.... We may be stuck with it now, because of precious decisions or lack of one over the last decade or so. I hope to change that, with other fresh blood on the board.

www.votewilling.com

All these planning professionals, residents, work group members, planning commission, and village board (was Caledonia a village then?) looked at the completed LUP plan and not one person at the time, up to final approval, found that as written commercial development IS allowed west of the railroad tracks in the VC-METRA area.

The County 2035 Plan was approved AFTER the Village LUP.

One other note, most of those same work group members are working on the NEW plan.

SEWRPC is still around. I think you are thinking of the SE WI RTA.

http://www.sewrpc.org/SEWRPC.htm

The RTA hired SEWRPC to do the planning of KRM.

Where are all those "High Profit / Low Volume" stores lining up to build in Caledonia?
They must be stupid for not wanting to build here.

The only store looking to build here is one which is "not sustainable"?
They also must be stupid, right?

Yes, you are right. I didn't work out the letters. :) but I was referring to the SEWRTA.

As for other businesses lining up, there aren't many yet as you say, because there aren't developers lining up. And, I feel it's because of a combination of factors that are able to be resolved or mitigated on the Board level.

You are right, San....

Except we risk getting sued b Walmart. And I do feel they would threaten it if the Board doesn't approve slight variances for its success.

The best hope local homeowners have is trying to convince Walmart not to come. It doesn't look good right now, for stopping that location unless we can propose a better one.

And the infrastructure needs could be proposed by Walmart and partially or whole paid for.

I'm not saying that I support it. I'm simply stating the reality from the perspective of a developer, and what options they have to force it through. :-/

Ed-please explain how WM can sue us for not allowing what you describe as a "slight" variance? from residential designation to all commercial for a 20+ acre site is a slight change? We have 5 village centers in our LUP. 4of them were designated mixed use according to the 2035 Plan map. ONLY the VC-M was broken down into specific uses for specific areas within the center. There is space for office, government, mixed use, commercial and residential. Problem for WM is the land they want doesn't have the designation they need. Maybe it is fear that is propelling this. I think we have established that the LUP needs a fresh look, but certainly wasn't a priority until now. I am very skeptical of an comment that basically says "WM is in charge here so we throw up our hands as leaders". So it's up to the community? Ed-is this the sentiment upon which you would join the board if you are elected?

@Katie-

I think anyone would be hard-pressed to point out where I have said that our sentiment should be throwing your hands up in the air.

No, I've stated many times what my sentiment would be: to make fact-based judgements on a case by case basis. And I've also stated that I'm personally against that location, as are about 90% of the folks I've talked to door to door and at mtgs.

The details you're bringing up here a legitimate but from a municipal standpoint, a slight variance. Mixed use still gives them the flexible designation they need. What I meant by sue, is if the village suddenly refuses to work with the landowner to single out a single development, it could create a perception on their side of impropriety. I'm only speaking in legal terms, but it's a reality. I worked with a developer that was part of a consortium that nearly went to court over something similar, but dealing with smaller retail and residential. In that case, it never went to court, and my company actually refused to be part of the plaintiffs case, but it still opened my eyes. Once we've come this far and flirted with it, we could find ourselves in trouble. Hopefully not... Legally, theres little that can e done other than public pressure on the company itself. heather Anisyabi will concur with this, having seen Mt Pleasant go through something similar.

(Cont)

(Cont)

Again, I'm not trying to fight back on the Green Bay rd crowd, because I'm right there with you and feel this location is obnoxious. Perhaps I'm just being risky by pointing out the hard to swallow realities that I've seen faced before.... And I do so out of regret, not hope,

Btw.... Don't give up. ;)

If Walmart ends up asking caledonia for money to make needed improvements, I will fight it tooth and nail, whether I'm on the board or not. S Milwaukee gave millions in assistance to their WM project and I would not tolerate my village doing the same. If that occurs, your new LLC would have newfound and motivated purpose, and you'd find even more joining you. ;)

Ed-Your insight is appreciated. And you have echoed many times my feelings regarding why we are in the situation we are in now. No one bothered to prioritize recognizes issues with our LUP before. And no real, legitimate concerns/questions were brought up by our board or PC back at the October WM presentation. For me to ask the board why they did not speak up about concerns and to have one in particular say to me "I was waiting for someone else to bring it up" is infuriating. To have not a single other retail representative other than the WM attorney on this workgroup is infuriating. To have some of the previous members never receive an invitation letter is infuriating. To request information 3 mths ago and finally get it yesterday is infuriating. And to mention the pursuit of legal advice as a resident and then be accused of suing the village is infuriating.
An aside: Our Racine County Comprehensive plan provides a definition of mixed Use and other concepts relative to this type of designation on pg lX-11. There is a tremendous amount of information both in our village and county level LUP which reflects a designation and design concept that does not adhere to the WM proposal. But WM's sole goal is to "make it work". For them, not for the good of the community. And whatever the motivation, all appearances thus far have seemed to lend themselves to Wal-Mart's objectives and the concerns raised by the citizens have fallen on deaf ears.

Agreed, San, my only point is that the principles are only a guide. They aren't strict law. On a daily basis, villages and cities amend and make changes in areas to fit new uses. Legally, the LUP is not binding, but could have helped a better location be an option long before this debacle. The mixed use designation doesn't say "big box" but Walmart would develop mixed use to make it happen, adding in a few retail outlets to qualify. They find their way around these things. Bleh. I don't like it.

You're right that Elwood park turned it down... Perhaps we could too. If it was just a straight up "yay" or "nay" on that location, I would too, as long as I'm confident it wouldn't leave us in a bad position.

I've seen precedence before, but admittedly, on behalf of WM it's rare. Probably, though, because they usually get what they want, eventually. :-/

The group that was formed was not assembled to change the LUP. That would be a more formal process, this group is out together regarding the current location and recommendations for it. Out of 8 members, one is a rep for the property owner and Walmart.

That is quite common, even though it sounds salacious. As a party involved, any developer would usually have a representative as part of a workgroup. It keeps communication open, and efficient. Elaine Ekes backed up their participation, so perhaps a conversation with her would be be in order. The planning commission is what approved Tomczyk being on the group. So, planning commission, plus 8 new members makes that singular voice quite small, and only an advisory one.

Hopefully that ratio makes it a little easier to swallow. what it means is that if you want to put the brakes on this project, reach out to the planning commission members at every meeting.

Heather covered this event quite well here: http://caledonia.patch.com/articles/walmart-rep-picked-for-land-use-work-group

Typo *this group is PUT together