Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCommunity Development 12-15-11NOTICE OF MEETING AND AGENDA ST. CROIX COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE December 15, 2011— 6:00 P.M. St Croix County Government Center — Community Room 1101 Carmichael Road Hudson, Wisconsin L CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL IILAPPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: November 3, 17 and 30, 2011 IV. BUSINESS ITEMS: 1. Refill position of Committee Secretary 2. Financial Report 3. Municipal Plats 4. County Parks Ordinance regarding gun regulation standards 5. Recycling Ordinance — public hearing comments 6. Farmland Preservation Plan — public hearing comments V. ANNOUNCEMENTS & CORRESPONDENCE VI. ADJOURN DATE OF NEXT MEETING: January 5, 2012 at 4:00 p.m., work session in Hudson REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY: Committee Chair and County Administrator DATE APPROVED: December 9, 2011 A quorum of the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors (County Board) may he present at this meeting. Therefore, this notice also serves as notice of'a meeting of'the County Boardfor the purpose of'ohtaining information relaxing to subjects listed above for use at future County Board Meetings. 12/9/2011 MINUTES COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE DECEMBER 15, 2011 CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hermsen called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. ROLL CALL - Members Present: Supervisors Steve Hermsen, Sharon Norton- Bauman, Bill Peavey, Buzz Marzolf, Lorin Sather and Robert Shearer. FSA Representative Ken Graf was absent. STAFF PRESENT: Pete Kling, Ellen Denzer, Brett Budrow, Jennifer Havens, Bob Heise, Ryan Sterry, Pat Thompson, Don Gillen and Monica Lucht GUESTS: Sharon Ellwein, Don Schumacher, Todd Rehnelt, Dan Linneman, David & Annette Olson, Larry Joachim, Larry Rauch, Doug Rivard, Stan Wekkin, Jon Stephenson, Scott Counter, Bill Gnatzig, Roger Humphrey, Marc Putman and George Klein. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: Motion by Sather 2nd by Shearer approving the minutes of November 3, 17 and 30, 2011. Motion carried. BUSINESS ITEMS Refill position of Committee Secretary: Motion by Norton - Bauman, 2nd by Shearer, nominating Marzolf as the committee secretary. Motion carried. Financial Report: County Administrator Thompson reviewed the financial report for the month of November for the Community Development department. Revenues stand at 93.5% of budget, and expenditures are at 83% of budget. Budgets are not showing any stress and there are three departments exceeding revenues. Municipal Plats: Denzer reviewed the municipal plat for Red Cedar Canyon Four Winds located in the City of Hudson, and recommends no objection. Motion by Sather, 2nd by Shearer for no objections to the plat. Motion carried. County Parks Ordinance regarding gun regulation standards: Chair Hermsen reminded the committee that the last discussion was of what was considered a building, and asked the committee if anyone had a change of view. Thompson indicated that Corporation Counsel Gillen was going to look at the legal definition of park shelter. Gillen stated that a picnic shelter is not considered a building and should not be called that because it's not restricted by walls. Marzolf is concerned that pavilions are where families gather, and to allow weapons seems inappropriate. Gillen agreed that it is /maybe inappropriate, but it is not considered a building and it's no different from walking in a park. Motion by Norton - Bauman, 2nd by Peavey to change the definition in `A. Building' by striking the words "and open picnic shelters ". The definition should read "A structure intended to be or capable of being occupied by a person or person, including but not limited to, registration stations, maintenance buildings, permanent restrooms, utility sheds ". Norton - Bauman stated her vote has changed in light of the definition presented by Gillen because the previous definition would not pass legal review. Discussion. Motion failed, Marzolf, Shearer and Sather opposed. Norton - Bauman stated that if challenged on the definition of a building, it needs to be in the ordinance. Gillen feels under the law of firearms in buildings, it comes down to the definition of a building, and is of the opinion that picnic shelters are not buildings — they don't have walls and are open. Norton - Bauman asked if Gillen is suggesting no definition at all. Gillen is not stating the County needs to have a definition for clarification, just not to include `open picnic shelter'. Motion by Shearer, 2nd by Norton - Bauman for reconsideration of the original motion. Motion carried. 1 Discussion. Peavey clarified that the committee is creating a definition, and not just changing it. A vote was taken on the original motion. Motion carried. Marzolf and Sather opposed. The committee than discussed section `M. Weapons' of the County Parks Ordinance. Motion by Sather, 2nd by Peavey to strike section `M. Weapons' from the ordinance. Discussion. Norton - Bauman explained it has to be deleted; there is no choice because the state doesn't have a definition. Motion carried. Chair Hermsen questioned if there should be a new section `M. Firearms' as staff has drafted. Motion by Norton - Bauman, 2nd by Marzolf to adopt the new definition for firearms as drafted by staff. Discussion. Peavey feels the wording is enforcing or repeating the resolution passed by the County Board banning firearms in County buildings. Sather questioned if section `M. Firearms' is considered a definition of a firearm. Gillen responded that the definition is just saying what you can't do with a fireman, and we absolutely need that provision in the ordinance. Motion clarified by Norton - Bauman, 2nd by Marzolf to state that the committee adopts definition `M. Firearms' which states that firearms are not allowed in County buildings, and make this definition part of the body of the ordinance. Motion failed, Shearer, Sather and Peavey opposed resulting in no section `M' at all. Farmland Preservation Plan — public hearing comments: Chair Hermsen clarified that this was not a public hearing and instead encouraged the public guests to write their Farmland Preservation Plan (FLP Plan) comments on comment cards. Kling explained the summary comments received from the November 30, 2011 public hearing, with ten in favor of the plan, four against and one neutral. Kling asked to focus on the changes made to the plan because of the comments made. Budrow gave explanation of all the changes made to the FLP Plan based on comments received from residents in the Towns of Somerset, Troy, Star Prairie, Erin Prairie, Baldwin and City of New Richmond. Denzer stated that for the committees consideration, staff has put together a resolution for County Board if the committee moves forward with this. Chair Hermsen asked if anyone has questions they should ask now. Chair Hermsen called for break at 6:53p.m to allow for public guests to write comments. The committee reconvened at 7:02 p.m. Chair Hermsen asked for the written comments and read each comment into record. Written comments were submitted by Scott Counter, Town Supervisor of Star Prairie, Don Schumacher, Town Chair of Rush River, Roger Humphrey, Marc Putnam and Annette Olson. Chair Hermsen than brought the discussion back to the committee. Denzer explained that the first thing to do is either to accept, or not to accept the map changes along with the tracked changes made by the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection ( DATCP), because these changes were directly from the public hearing. Motion by Marzolf, 2nd by Sather that the map changes and tracked changes from DATCP be accepted. Motion carried. Chair Hermsen asked the committee to discuss the FLP Plan as a whole based on the public comments received tonight. Sather questioned if there is a timeline. Kling answered that this plan is tied to a chapter in the Comprehensive Plan and feels a substantial amount of work, with quite a bit of information, has gone into presenting this to as many people as possible, and to wait would not benefit the plan. Budrow explained that legislation in Chapter 91 requires that counties of certain population and population growth, including St. Croix County, are in the first group required to revise their FLP Plan before it expires. The existing plan from 1980 will expire, and upon expiration county property owner's eligibility for income tax credits would be eliminated. Denzer explained the timeline and urged the committee to make a decision in a timely manner because of many steps still to do in a tight timeframe. Chair Hermsen questioned if all the Towns affected have been on board with revising the FLP Plan. Denzer answered that the Towns do not have to approve, but they were all sent copies and encouraged to share with their Town Board and Plan Commissions for any comments or questions. Kling also answered that he has been to several of their Town meetings. Chair Hermsen stated he understands the public fears and clarified that this locks government from touching property, secondly, determines eligibility in a non - favoritism manner, and also sets up for an opportunity. Marzolf asked if the committee could put a hold 2 on the resolution and incorporate new comments received in a revised FLP Plan. Denzer explained another public hearing would have to be held. Motion by Sather, 2nd by Marzolf to table the resolution for sixty days so staff can get written acknowledgments of opinions on the FLP Plan, from the municipalities involved. Gillen commented that it seems we've already gotten their response. Norton - Bauman remarked that the committee has worked on this for over two years, and it's getting too close to a committee changeover. It would be a terrible waste of staff and public time to postpone and feels a decision is in order. Peavey asked if Town Chairs present at this meeting would voice their opinion now. Doug Rivard, Star Prairie Town Chair, agreed the plan should move forward now. Don Schumacher, Rush River Town Chair, said he feels a delay is waste of time, either finish it now or forget it. Lawrence Rauch, Somerset Town Supervisor and Plan Commission Chair commented that he fails to see what the committee is trying to obtain from the Towns that they don't already know. Rivard commented that the eastern towns are all Agriculture and most likely are not present tonight because the FLP Plan is okay. Chair Hermsen asked the committee if they are in accordance with the motion to delay, and requested additional criteria in the motion that regardless of response by the towns the resolution would still go in front of the County Board at their March 2012 meeting. Marzolf withdrew his 2" Hearing no other 2" the motion failed. Motion by Norton - Bauman, 2nd by Marzolf that the resolution which has been presented, be forwarded, by this Committee, to the County Board for approval at their January 2012 meeting. Discussion. Peavey asked for clarification, referring to Section 3.5, if wording could be added without another public hearing since it was brought up at the November 30 public hearing. Denzer answered that it could. Motion carried, Sather and Hermsen opposed. Recycling Ordinance — public hearing comments: Denzer gave a summary of the comments heard at the public hearing held November 30, 2011. There were numerous comments on specific areas in the Recycling Ordinance. Denzer compared the comment sheet with the newly revised draft Recycling Ordinance and gave staff recommendations. She asked the committee for any questions on the changes and recommended material. Chair Hermsen asked if the public guest had any questions. George Klein, from the Village of North Hudson, questioned putrescible waste. Havens explained this material will naturally rot. Klein also wanted to encourage the public to negotiate some of these ordinance provisions with their waste hauler. Denzer explained NR544 Effective Recycling Programs code. Bill Gnatzig, from the Town if Kinnickinnic, questioned the use of lids on recycling containers. Havens explained that would pertain to trash containers and not recycling. Dianne Joachim, from the Town of New Richmond, feels the County is getting into the garbage business with rates and reporting and is concerned that additional reporting done by the haulers, would add to their costs. She asked how the County could regulate the rates with the service received, if there's been a cost analysis done with the local haulers. Havens explained that haulers are already providing reports to municipalities; the County would just require a copy of that report. Jon Stephenson, from Hudson, commented that that, in general, he is in support of the ordinance but has concerns over the enforcement in 21.4 Section C. Inspections. Denzer explained the provisions and permissions staff would have to seek, and how very limited the authority is. It does not allow for entrance into residential structures. Joachim questioned Corporation Counsel Gillen if the County is allowed to limit State Statute. Gillen answered that the County could do what the State Statute allows, but the County is actually more limiting. Norton - Bauman explained that the County Board specifically addressed the limit to go into anyone's house. When it comes to health issues, the health department, most likely, would get involved, which is completely separate from the recycling issue. Annette Olson, from Glenwood, asked for clarifications on outbuildings. Denzer answered that the open space and yard area, in her opinion, doesn't include outbuildings. Peavey clarified residential outbuildings, not agriculture outbuildings. Chair Hermsen read a written comment into the record submitted by Todd Rehnelt, Town Chair of Richmond, commending staff on a well written document and for the hard work from the committee and staff that went into this ordinance. Rehnelt is asking for support of the ordinance to make his job easier in dealing with infestation problems. Gnatzig spoke and gave his appreciation for the items addressed. He hopes in the process, Town Boards have a chance to 3 talk how this impacts them at the local level. He also included that with animal agricultural buildings, there has to be precaution with disease and infestation from outside traffic. Lawrence Rauch, from Town of Somerset, appreciated the changes with better language, making constituents happier. He questioned staff on state statute if this has become a federal issue now. Denzer explained St. Croix County is the responsible unit for twenty -six municipalities since 1994, and the State has repeatedly amended statutes and code. The County staff had to write a Compliance Assurance Plan, which included updating our Recycling Ordinance to come into compliance with state law. Chair Hermsen turned the discussion back to the committee. Sather stated he has not been for this ordinance from day one and feels the municipalities are responsible, and with a bit of tweaking, the old recycling ordinance could meet State requirements. Motion by Sather, 2nd by Shearer to scrap the new Chapter 21 Recycling Ordinance, and that the present Chapter 43 be tweaked and brought back to the committee. Discussion. Chair Hermsen asked staff what amount of work would go into just tweaking the old Chapter 43. Denzer answered the work would by the majority of what went into the new Chapter 21. Marzolf feels it is critical that we make the revised ordinance happen. Motion failed on a vote of 1 -5. Motion by Norton - Bauman that the Committee takes this revised draft Chapter 21 Recycling Ordinance and moves it forward to the County Board. Motion amended by Peavey, 2nd by Norton - Bauman to change 21.4 Section C. La. 5) to read "Any open space or yard area adjoining only residential structures. This does not include agriculture structures ". Motion carried. Motion amended by Chair Hermsen, 2nd by Sather to completely eliminate, 21.3 Section A.3. Rates and Services, from the ordinance. Discussion. Chair Hermsen feels that dealing with rates and services is a business between the resident and hauler, and the hauler and municipality, not the County, and should be worked out in contracts. Peavey asked if any of this section in the ordinance is required by state statute before we eliminate it. Denzer stated that by encouraging haulers to offer volume -based systems, which majority has, is an activity that promotes recycling, but removal of the section in the ordinance will not take us out of compliance. Norton - Bauman recalled from the past comments and discussion that citizens were more concerned about not being offered smaller containers and wanted provisions put in for smaller container options. Roll call vote: Norton - Bauman — no, Peavey — yes, Marzolf — no, Hermsen — yes, Sather — yes, Shearer — yes. Motion to amend carried. Roll call vote on the on the main motion, moving Chapter 21 Recycling Ordinance as amended to the County Board Norton - Bauman — yes, Peavey — yes, Marzolf — yes, Hermsen — yes, Sather — no, Shearer — yes. Motion carried. ADJOURN: Motion by Peavey, 2nd by Marzolf to adjourn the meeting at 9:19 p.m. DATE OF NEXT MEETING: January 5, 2012, at 4:00 p.m., work session in Hudson. Respectfully submitted: Monica Lucht, Recording Secretary Richard Marzolf, Secretary December 15, 2011 M