Muskego Lake Park Discussions A Necessary Part of Process

For the second session in a row, the subject of a closed session for the Muskego Common Council was a potential purchase of the property owned by Michael Dilworth along Janesville Road.

While the nature of the discussion makes some uncomfortable, as many who came to speak against the park expressed, the procedure has been the same as the purchase of the 100-plus acre parcel owned by Nancy Borst. Real estate transactions are one of many topics that fall under the state's statutes for closed sessions.

The irony of someone complaining that the public has not been allowed to comment, saying so during a public comment session of the council meeting is also an irony that has not been lost on me. I've lost count how many of these have focused on the lake development.

In addition, the inevitable comparison to the ill-fated "Bring Back the Lake," which was a disaster, is also incorrect. That initiative was never brought forward to council or any other city committee. It was presented as a nearly-complete concept during an informal public information session at Muskego High School. Many at that meeting reacted in loud and negative tones because it seemed, given the amount of detail, as though it was already a done deal.

Conversely, it would seem those same opponents are upset because the city hasn't provided detail. I'm not sure, then, if there is any information that would suffice.

, Craig Anderson said costs would be impossible to determine for the next few years regarding maintenance as he explained, "the city has been known to be frugal with its development of its parks." In other words, artists renderings presented several months ago were just that...concepts. What the city will design will be up to all of its residents, when and if an offer to purchase is to be made.

Alderman Kert Harenda also hinted at that same meeting that the council is also not sure of what the parcel would include yet. Two easement 'wings' proposed on the beach are likely under debate. Until that is figured out, a price can't even be decided.

Another misconception was that the idea before was widely hated and all of a sudden it's OK. What happened at the previous public information meeting for BBTL was a lot of yelling, which truthfully intimidated many of the park's supporters. It has always been OK in their minds, but the recent formation of Muskego Proud has given them more confidence to speak.

I would also say that it also has always been OK for our elected representatives to look into every proposal that could bring the city value, especially when done in conjunction with major redevelopment. In fact, it's their duty, and I thank them all for carefully looking into it.

As Phil Zieglar, president of InPro, which is a hugely successful company in the city with global ties, has explained, the attraction for businesses to a community is what it can offer its employees. Parks do add value, and businesses are watching what Muskego is doing. Rarely will they move to an area that is in a pattern of pulling back and stagnating.

Public hearings will be coming along with more details. When we asked about the process, Mayor Kathy Chiaverotti explained, "When and if an agreement is reached on a purchase price, there will be a resolution placed on a Council agenda.  There will be an overview of all the information at the beginning of that meeting plus the information will be made available on the City’s website prior to that meeting.  The public will have yet another opportunity to provide comment after the informative overview.  As soon as we have knowledge of all this information we will release it."

No one has said they want a park at any cost. Everyone agrees cost is a major factor, and determining what the 'right cost' will be is likely what's taking too long for some. I'm interested to see what comes of this...I don't know that passing on this will mean the end of Muskego, but it's too early to decide what 'should' happen just yet.