HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2017 (28) Resolution No. 28 (2017)
�
, ��, UNTY RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO SENATE BILL 309 AND
ASSEMBLY BILL 399 REGARDING LOWER ST. CROIX
RIVERWAY ZONING REGULATIONS
1 WHEREAS, in 1968, the U.S. Congress enacted the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (16
2 U.S.C. § 1271) to preserve and protect selected rivers because of their scenic beauty, recreational,
3 geological, historic, culture, and other positive values; and
4
5 WHEREAS,in 1972,the U.S. Congress enacted the Lower St. Croix River Act(16 U.S.C.
6 § 1247(a)(9))in order to include the 52-mile section of the St. Croix River below Taylors Falls to
7 the confluence with the Mississippi River as part of the National Wild and Scenic River System;
8 and
9
10 WHEREAS, pursuant to the Lower St. Croix River Act enacted by the U.S. Congress,
11 Wisconsin Statute § 30.27 was enacted to provide for protections of the Lower St. Croix River and
12 directed the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to adopt guidelines and specific
13 standards for riverway zoning ordinances; and
14
15 WHEREAS, effective January 1, 1976, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
16 promulgated Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 118, standards for the Lower St. Croix National
17 Scenic Riverway; and
18
19 WHEREAS, effective January, 1976, St. Croix County amended its zoning Ordinance to
20 include the St. Croix River Valley District in order to comply with Wis. Stat. §30.27(3) and Wis.
21 Admin. Code NR 118.02(3)and has continued to update its zoning ordinance to reflect subsequent
22 changes by the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources in NR 118; and
23
24 WHEREAS, the regulations are currently contained in Chapter 17.36 of the St. Croix
25 County Code of Ordinances entitled"Lower St. Croix Riverway Overlay District"; and
26
27 WHEREAS, 2017 Senate Bill 309 and 2017 Assembly Bill 399 call for an amendment to
28 Wis. Stat. §30.27(3) and to create Wis. Stat. § 30.27(2)(d) relating to zoning ordinances in the
29 Lower St. Croix Riverway; and
30
31 WHEREAS, the proposed bills create Wis. Stat. § 30.27(2)(d), which removes the
32 authority of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and a county from enforcing a
33 guideline, standard, or ordinance against a property owner who wishes to have an event facility
34 and lodging establishment in buildings that were previously used as a recreational campground;
35 and
36
37 WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399 were introduced into the Legislature
38 without the knowledge or advisement by local officials in the towns or counties in whom the Lower
39 St. Croix Riverway lies and in whom may be affected by the amendment of Wis. Stat.§ 30.27(3)
40 and creation of Wis. Stat. § 30.27(2)(d); and
41
42 WHEREAS, the proposed legislation targets the site of the former church camp, Camp
43 Clearwater, in the Town of Somerset, which the landowner has developed into a wedding and
44 event center; and
45
46 WHEREAS, the issue related to the use of the property affected by this legislation was
47 addressed by St. Croix County in the case of St. Croix County vs. Family First Farms, LLC et al,
48 St. Croix County Case No. 15CX08; and
49
50 WHEREAS, this special interest legislation was introduced only after the court confirmed
51 that a wedding and event center is a prohibited use in the St. Croix Riverway Overlay District; and
52
53 WHEREAS, creation of Wis. Stat. § 30.27(2)(d)would allow for the commercial activity
54 of an event facility and lodging establishment to take place on a parcel of land that is currently not
55 zoned as commercial without any oversight or regulation of the parking areas, removal of trees,
56 times of activity, number of people on the property, etc.; and
57
58 WHEREAS, the State has previously taken away local control of nonmetallic mining,
59 livestock facility siting,wireless communication and shoreland regulation; and
60
61 WHEREAS, adoption of 2017 Senate Bill 309 and 2017 Assembly Bill 399 removes local
62 control from the county to regulate certain land use activities; and
63
64 WHEREAS, adoption of 2017 Senate Bill 309 and 2017 Assembly Bill 399 erodes the
65 purposes of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and the Lower St. Croix River Act; and
66
67 WHEREAS,the proposed legislation undermines the St. Croix Riverway Overlay District,
68 especially the wild and scenic protections, which combined with the state rules under NR 118,
69 provides numerous positive effects on water quality, fisheries, vegetation and wildlife; and
70
71 WHEREAS, the St. Croix Riverway Overlay District zoning regulations ensure continued
72 high property values and a high quality of life to property owners along the Riverway, as well as
73 positive impacts related to tourism; and
74
75 WHEREAS, the towns of Somerset and St. Joseph passed resolutions in opposition to
76 Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399.
77
78 THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors is
79 strongly opposed to adoption of 2017 Senate Bill 309 and 2017 Assembly Bill 399; and
80
81 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors is requesting
82 that the state leaders continue their commitment to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Program and the
83 aesthetic and consequent impacts related to property values, quality of life and tourism; and
84
85 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the St. Croix Board of Supervisors requests that the
86 Legislature reject this attempt at the State engaging in the rezoning of property; and
87
88 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors directs the
89 County Clerk to send a copy of this resolution to the Wisconsin Counties Association, State
90 Legislators, State of Wisconsin U.S. Legislators, and Governor Scott Walker.
91
Legal—Fiscal—Administrative Approvals:
Legal Note:
Fiscal Impact: Increased commercial activity on the St. Croix River may have a negative impact
on property values resulting in a decrease in assessed property values and
property taxes.
scat Cox, Corpora om OLxr�sel 7` 7/2(:17
Ao —rt P�1it�t, hnalicc ircctor 7r 21117
AV
Kt rick drain rrAratorr 7127/22017
07/26/17 Community Development Committee APPROVED AS AMENDED
......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..........
RESULT: APPROVED AS AMENDED [3 TO 1]
MOVER: Jill Ann Berke, Supervisor
SECONDER: Daniel Hansen, Vice Chair
AYES: Agnes Ring, Jill Ann Berke, Daniel Hansen
NAYS: Tom Coulter
EXCUSED: Dick Hesselink
Vote Confirmation.
Agijeg Ring, Super6sol" 7/28/2017
SL Croix County Board of Supervisors Action:
Roll Call -Vote Requirement— Majority of Supervisors Present
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
RESULT: ADOPTED [14 TO 2]
MOVER: Jill Ann Berke, Supervisor
SECONDER: Daniel Hansen, Supervisor
AYES: Ring, Sjoberg, Nelson, Berke, Ostness, Larson, Hansen, Peterson,Anderson,
Achterhof, Leibfried, Peavey, Ard, Mootheclan
NAYS: Tom Coulter, Bob Long
ABSTAIN: Ryan S. Sicard
ABSENT: Christopher Babbitt, Andy Brinkman
This Resolution was Adopted by the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors on August 1, 2017
Cindy Campbell, County Clerk
�UItWAq Z_
' §fafie of Wisronsin
2017 - 2018 LEGISLATURE LRB-1053/1
ZDW.klm&wlj
2017 ASSEMBLY BILL 399
June 19, 2017 - Introduced by Representatives JARCHOW, STAFsxoLT and
ZIMMERMAN, cosponsored by Senator HARSDORF. Referred to Committee on
Natural Resources and Sporting Heritage.
1 AN ACT to amend 30.27 (3); and to create 30.27 (2) (d) of the statutes; relating
2 to: zoning ordinances in the Lower St. Croix riverway.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill provides that neither the Department of Natural Resources nor a
county may enforce a guideline or standard for local zoning ordinances applicable to
the Lower St. Croix riverway, a general zoning standard, or a stipulation made
between a county and a property owner to prohibit the operation of an event facility
and lodging establishment in existing buildings on a property located in the riverway
that was historically used as a recreational campground.
Under current law, DNR is required to promulgate rules establishing
guidelines and standards for local zoning ordinances that apply to the banks, bluffs,
and bluff tops of the Lower St. Croix River, and counties and municipalities located
in the riverway are required to adopt zoning ordinances complying with the
guidelines and standards. Current law also prohibits a county or municipality from
modifying or providing a variance from the ordinances without DNR consent. The
bill eliminates this prohibition.
For further information see the state and local fiscal estimate, which will be
printed as an appendix to this bill.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
2017 - 2018 Legislature - 2 - LRB-1053/1
ZDW.klm&wlj
ASSEMBLY BILL 399 SECTION 1
1 SECTION 1. 30.27 (2) (d) of the statutes is created to read:
2 30.27 (2) (d) Notwithstanding par. (a) 1., neither the department nor a county
3 may enforce a guideline or standard under this section, any general zoning standard,
4 or a stipulation made between a county and a property owner to prohibit the
5 operation of an event facility and lodging establishment in buildings that existed
6 prior to the effective date of this paragraph .... [LRB inserts date], on a property
7 located wholly or partially within the Lower St. Croix riverway that was historically
8 used as a recreational campground.
9 SECTION 2. 30.27 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:
10 30.27 (3) IMPLEMENTATION. Counties, cities, villages and towns lying, in whole
11 or in part, within the areas affected by the guidelines adopted under sub. (2) are
12 empowered to and shall adopt zoning ordinances complying with the guidelines and
13 standards adopted under sub. (2) within 30 days after their effective date. If any
14 county, city, village,. or town does not adopt an ordinance within the time limit
15 prescribed, or if the department determines that an adopted ordinance does not
16 satisfy the requirements of the guidelines and standards, the department shall
17 immediately adopt such an ordinance. An ordinance adopted by the department
18 shall be of the same effect as if adopted by the county, city, village. or town, and the
19 local authorities shall administer and enforce the ordinance in the same manner as
20 if the county, city, village. or town had adopted it. No zev4ii4g ^r,air^r^^ so adopted
21 ,
22 ,
23 ,
24 ordinance more restrietive than that adopted by the department.
25 (END)
�UItWAq Z_
' §fafie of Wisronsin
2017 - 2018 LEGISLATURE LRB-3726/1
ZDW.klm&wlj
2017 SENATE BILL 309
June 15, 2017 - Introduced by Senator HARSDORF, cosponsored by Representatives
JARCHOW, STAFSHOLT and ZIMMERMAN. Referred to Committee on Economic
Development, Commerce and Local Government.
1 AN ACT to amend 30.27 (3); and to create 30.27 (2) (d) of the statutes; relating
2 to: zoning ordinances in the Lower St. Croix riverway.
Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau
This bill provides that neither the Department of Natural Resources nor a
county may enforce a guideline or standard for local zoning ordinances applicable to
the Lower St. Croix riverway, a general zoning standard, or a stipulation made
between a county and a property owner to prohibit the operation of an event facility
and lodging establishment in existing buildings on a property located in the riverway
that was historically used as a recreational campground.
Under current law, DNR is required to promulgate rules establishing
guidelines and standards for local zoning ordinances that apply to the banks, bluffs,
and bluff tops of the Lower St. Croix River, and counties and municipalities located
in the riverway are required to adopt zoning ordinances complying with the
guidelines and standards. Current law also prohibits a county or municipality from
modifying or providing a variance from the ordinances without DNR consent. The
bill eliminates this prohibition.
For further information see the state and local fiscal estimate, which will be
printed as an appendix to this bill.
The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do
enact as follows:
2017 - 2018 Legislature - 2 - LRB-3726/1
ZDW.klm&wlj
SENATE BILL 309 SECTION 1
1 SECTION 1. 30.27 (2) (d) of the statutes is created to read:
2 30.27 (2) (d) Notwithstanding par. (a) 1., neither the department nor a county
3 may enforce a guideline or standard under this section, any general zoning standard,
4 or a stipulation made between a county and a property owner to prohibit the
5 operation of an event facility and lodging establishment in buildings that existed
6 prior to the effective date of this paragraph .... [LRB inserts date], on a property
7 located wholly or partially within the Lower St. Croix riverway that was historically
8 used as a recreational campground.
9 SECTION 2. 30.27 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:
10 30.27 (3) IMPLEMENTATION. Counties, cities, villages and towns lying, in whole
11 or in part, within the areas affected by the guidelines adopted under sub. (2) are
12 empowered to and shall adopt zoning ordinances complying with the guidelines and
13 standards adopted under sub. (2) within 30 days after their effective date. If any
14 county, city, village,. or town does not adopt an ordinance within the time limit
15 prescribed, or if the department determines that an adopted ordinance does not
16 satisfy the requirements of the guidelines and standards, the department shall
17 immediately adopt such an ordinance. An ordinance adopted by the department
18 shall be of the same effect as if adopted by the county, city, village. or town, and the
19 local authorities shall administer and enforce the ordinance in the same manner as
20 if the county, city, village. or town had adopted it. No zev4ii4g ^r,air^r^^ so adopted
21 ,
22 ,
23 ,
24 ordinance more restrietive than that adopted by the department.
25 (END)
Town of Somerset
Resolution 2017-01
Opposition to Senate Bill 309 &Assembly Bill 399
WHEREAS, The State of Wisconsin requires all Towns to a adopt a Comprehensive Land Use Plan under
WSS 66.1001; and
WHEREAS, adoption of County zoning is a fiscally responsible decision for Towns as it places all costs related to
ordinance administration and enforcement on the county, and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 & Assembly Bill 399 both call for an amendment to WSS 30.27(3) and to create
WSS 30.27 (2)(d)relating to zoning ordinances in the Lower St. Croix Riverway; and
WHEREAS, Adoption of County zoning is consistent with the Town of Somerset's Comprehensive Land Use
Plan and the Town of Somerset has been under County Zoning since 1976; and
WHEREAS,the local government officials who live and reside in the counties and communities are best suited to
make determinations as to what zoning is best for their community; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 & Assembly Bill 399 both call for an amendment to WSS 30.27(3) and to create
WSS 30.27(2)(d)relating to zoning ordinances in the Lower St. Croix Riverway; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 & Assembly Bill 399 both prohibit a county and subsequently towns relying on
county zoning from implementing its own zoning code; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399 are the antithesis of the design our founding fathers who
drafted the laws of the state to benefit the state as a whole and who saw it crucial most authority should be at the local
level, and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 &Assembly Bill 399 will negatively impact the Town of Somerset's rural character
and impact the quality of life in the lower St. Croix Riverway by taking zoning control out of the local control; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bil1.399 were introduced into the Legislature without any knowledge
or advisement by local officials in the towns or counties in whom this property lies and in whom may be affected by the
amendment of WSS 30.27 (3) and creation of WSS 30.27(2)(d); and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, it is deemed advisable,useful,beneficial, and in the best interest of the people
and the beauty, protection and economic impacts of the Lower St. Croix Scenic Riverway that the Town Board of the
Town of Somerset strongly oppose Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Somerset is requesting the Legislature reject the
notion that the State begin engaging in rezoning of property and instead allow the County to enforce their own zoning
ordinances; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town�Board of the Town of Somerset is requesting it is imperative that the
state leaders continue their commitment to the W4d and Scenic Rivers Program and the aesthetic and consequent impacts
related to tourism; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Somerset is strongly opposed to a non-fiscal bill
being incorporated into the Budget Bill.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of Somerset directs the Clerk to send a
copy of this resolution to the Wisconsin Towns Association, our State Legislators and to Governor Scott
Walker.
Ed Schachtner, Town Chair, Town of Somerset
Shane Demulling, Town Supervisor, Town of Somerset
Lenny Germain, Town Supervisor,Town of Somerset
° Douglas Plourde,Town Supervisor,Town of Somerset
Larry Rauch,Town Supervisor,Town of Somerset
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution 2017-01 passed and adopted by the Town Board
of the Town of Somerset this 10t"day of July,2017 by a vote of 3 to P-
Attest: Jeri Koester, Clerk/Treasurer Town of Somerset.
Town of St.Joseph
Resolution 2017-11
Opposition to Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399
WHEREAS, The State of Wisconsin requires all Towns to a adopt a Comprehensive Land Use Plan under
WSS 66.1001;and
WHEREAS,adoption of County zoning is a fiscally responsible decision for Towns as it places all costs related to
ordinance administration and enforcement on the county;and
WHEREAS,Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399 both call for an amendment to WSS 30.27(3)and to create WSS
30.27(2)(d)relating to zoning ordinances in the Lower St.Croix Riverway;and
WHEREAS,Adoption of County zoning is consistent with the Town of St.Joseph's Comprehensive Land Use Plan
and the Town of St.Joseph has been under County Zoning for many years; and
WHEREAS,the local government officials who live and reside in the counties and communities are best suited to
make determinations as to what zoning is best for their community;and
WHEREAS,Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399 both call for an amendment to WSS 30.27(3)and to create WSS
30.27(2)(d)relating to zoning ordinances in the Lower St.Croix Riverway;and
WHEREAS,Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399 both prohibit a county and subsequently towns relying on county
zoning from implementing its own zoning code;and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399 will negatively impact the Town of St.Joseph's rural character
and impact the quality of life in the lower St. Croix Riverway by taking zoning control out of the local control;and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399 were introduced into the Legislature without any knowledge
or advisement by local officials in the towns or counties in whom this property lies and in whom may be affected by the
amendment of WSS 30.27(3)and creation of WSS 30.27(2)(d);and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, it is deemed advisable, useful, beneficial,and in the best interest of the people
and the beauty,protection and economic impacts of the Lower St.Croix Scenic Riverway that the Town Board of the Town
of St.Joseph strongly oppose Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,the Town Board of the Town of St.Joseph is requesting the Legislature reject the
notion that the State begin engaging in rezoning of property and instead allow the County to enforce their own zoning
ordinances;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the Town Board of the Town of St.Joseph is requesting that it is imperative that
the state leaders continue their commitment to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Program and the aesthetic and consequent impacts
related to tourism;and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,the Town Board of the Town of St.Joseph is strongly opposed to a non-fiscal bill
being incorporated into the Budget Bill.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,the Town Board of the Town of St. Joseph directs the Clerk to send a
copy of this resolution to the Wisconsin Towns Association,our State Legislators and to Governor Scott
Walker.
Thomas J. Spaniol,Town Chair,Town of St.Joseph
P
Steve Bohl, Supervisor#1,Town of St.Joseph
Mike Lon Supervisor#2
Long, p ,Town of St.Joseph
Laurie DeRosier, Supervisor#3,Town of St.Joseph
Joy Packard, Supervisor#4,Town of St.Joseph
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution 2017-11 passed and adopted by the Town Board
of the Town of St.Joseph this 141 day of July,2017 by a vote of _� to
�OgEPh! ST
co
:'GORPORgT• 9
.z
:Zi' �SOONSO.-p.
Julie A. Peterson
From: St. Croix River Association <info=scramail.com@mail121.sea3l.mcsv.net> on behalf of
St. Croix River Association <info@scramail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 4:12 PM
To: Julie A. Peterson
Subject: Act Now to Stop AB399
Call if cu Ac iioiro `,/,iie='.�v....tlr,,ii.�.._c mi iill....ii,ir:..... cuu.u,ir... ,ircu e it
�I�Illlllli�uuiu��
m
lV���i , ..�� , ��.,.
r i h
k
i
Wisconsin's AB,._99 targets the site of the former Baptist Camp in Somerset township,
just south of the Somerset Landing, across from Marine on St. Croix. The new
landowner has proposed that the site be developed as a wedding and event center.
1
® ® ® ® ass
Dear Friend of the River,
A Wisconsin State Legislative Committee will hear Bill AB399 on ,July
19th, at 10 AM, 417 North (GAR Hall), in Madison. This bill is intended
to exempt a property owner from current zoning laws. The bill will
undermine the St. Croix River Overlay District in St. Croix County, and
will affect scenic protections along the St. Croix National Scenic
Riverway.
This bill runs counter to everything that the Wild and Scenic River
federal designation represents, and violates Wisconsin's commitment to
protect this Riverway, for the good of ALL people, for all time. The St.
Croix River Association stands firmly against this bad bill, and we need
your help.
Please call or write your legislators and/or the committee members
listed below today. AB 399 will:
• Undermine the St. Croix River Overlay District, especially the wild
and scenic protections, which in conjunction with the state rules,
2
have had untold positive effects on water quality, fisheries, and
protects all the plants and animals that live here.
• Be contrary to the Wild and Scenic designation and the Acts
primary goal to protect and enhance the values that caused it to
be designated.
• Undermine local authorities' ability to protect the health, welfare,
and safety of their citizens, for whom zoning laws are designed to
protect.
Writing a law to give an individual land owner preferential treatment is
irresponsible. This bad bill will have adverse affects on neighboring
landowners, the millions of visitors to this National Park and the
businesses that thrive because of this Park, and the Park itself. Most
property owners along the Riverway consider the restrictions not only
fair and reasonable, but rely them to ensure continued high property
values and a high quality of life. We trust our elected officials to adhere
to Wisconsin's almost-50 year commitment to the Wild and Scenic
Rivers Act.
PLEASE CONTACT YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TODAY!
3
&& 41w�)
Deb Ryun
Executive Director
0 1 a 0 IfIl"',
rr
I Ihe St. ra li If"s)JI'ver Association way rks watershed wide to protect the St
C."'roix INaflonaIl Scenic lZiverway, and lis the 1::::'riends group for this
NaflanaIl 1::,lark
l3oard of I Yhrecturs
.............................................................................::....................................................................
....................................
Additional Resources
St (,"roix Naflona�l Scenic [Z'I'verw
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................gy
St. ( ruix ;:360
..........................................................................................................
Copyrk7ht @ ICI 17,St. Croix River Association, All ri�..7hts reserved.
You are rec&Ving ths err4because you inc.ficatecl ain iiinterest iiin rec&Ming iiirofonnrrialiioin from us.
Ouir inirmiling addiress iis::
St. Crdx IFF ver Assodaboin
F:1.0. 1Flox 655
St. Crdx F::afls,W 54024
y2 .................................................................................
ac.1c.1ress book
Waint to chainge Ihow you rec&ve these emafls?
You cain uR�.J.�
y
_2g.E
�.Lgfereinces or uinsubscdbe from ths hst
... ................................................... .........................................................................................................................................
5
1=
6
STATE OF WISCONSIN CIRCUIT COURT ST. CROIX COUNTY
ST. CROIX COUNTY,
Plaintiff,
vs. MEMORANDUM DECISION
AND ORDER
FAMILY FIRST FARMS, LLC, Case No. 15 CX 08A
FAMILY FIRST FARMS, LLC 15 CX 08B
JEREMY HANSEN, 15 CX 08C
JOSH HANSEN, 15 CX 08D
Defendants.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff St. Croix County commenced this action against Defendants Family First
Farms, LLC, Jeremy Hansen and Josh Hansen on November 12, 2015, The Complaint
alleges that Defendants are in violation of sec. 17.15 and 17.36 of the St. Croix County
Code of Ordinances.
In March 2013, Defendants purchased property located at 300 221St Avenue in
Somerset, Wisconsin, from Fourth Baptist Church on a land contract. On November 6,
2013, Defendants appeared before the Town of Somerset to present a business plan for
the property. The business plan, entitled "The Lodge on Croix," stated that the property
would be used as a"premier wedding destination" with an observation deck and patio
which had been installed on top of the hill directly behind the lodge. The previous use of
the property was by the Fourth Baptist Church for a recreational campground called
"Camp Clear-Waters."
According to St. Croix County, the deck and patio constructed by Defendants
violate the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances. Furthermore, that Defendants failed to
I
obtain a land use permit or a variance prior to building the deck and patio and did not
obtain the necessary approvals prior to building the structures. St. Croix County also
claims that Defendants have conducted activities on the property, including weddings,
wedding receptions, gala events and banquet activities that are not allowed uses and
violate county ordinances. Finally, that these activities are not pre-existing
nonconforming uses of the property.
St. Croix County claims that Defendants are in violation of sec. 17.15 and 17.36
of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances. The Complaint requests forfeitures of not
less than$100.00 nor more than $500,00 for each day the violations have existed since
August 29, 2013. The Complaint also seeks an order requiring Defendants to remove the
patio and observation deck; for an Order_requiring Defendants to cease operating a
wedding/reception business on the property; and for a permanent injunction prohibiting
Defendants from operating a wedding/reception business on the property.
Defendants denied liability in their answer and filed a motion for summary
judgment on March 23, 2016. Defendants conceded that they "would like to operate a
wedding business" on the property. However, they argue that such use would be
"consistent with prior use of the land." Defendants also assert that "[p]rior use of the
land predates enactment of the subject St. Croix County Zoning Code." As such,
Defendants claim that the existing uses are "grandfathered" in and that their intended use
of the property as a"premier wedding destination" is permissible pursuant to Wis. Stat. §
59.69(10)(am); St. Croix County Ordinance 17.05(3).
St. Croix County opposes the Defendants' summary judgment motion and asks
the Court to grant summary judgment in its favor pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 802.08(6).
2
SUMT14ARY JUDGMENT METHODOLOGY
Wis. Stat. § 802.08(2), sets out the standards governing motions for summary
judgment. Grams v. Boss, 97 Wis.2d 332, 338-9, 294 N.W.2d 473 (1980). Summary
judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Id.
When interpreting an ordinance, the rules of statutory construction apply.
Schroeder v. Dane County Board ofAdjustment, 228 Wis.2d 324, 333, 596 N.W.2d 472
The purpose of statutory construction is to discern legislative intent. Id The court
begins with the language of the ordinance and determines if it is plain on its face; if so,
the court applies the language to the facts without looking beyond the statute to ascertain
meaning. Id. The plain language of a statute should not be construed in a manner that
results in absurd or unreasonable consequences. State v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 101
Wis.2d 142, 153, 303 N.W.2d 834 (1981). On the other hand, if the language is
ambiguous, meaning there is more than one reasonable interpretation, the court looks at
"the scope, history, context, subject matter and object of the ordinance." Schroeder, 228
Wis.2d at 333, 596 N.W.2d 472. Determining whether an ordinance is ambiguous is a
question of law. Id.
DEFENDANTS' ARGUMENTS
In support of their motion for summary judgment, Defendants argue that: (1) Wis.
Stat. § 59.69(10)(am) prohibits application of the St. Croix County Zoning Code to pre-
existing uses; (2) that St. Croix County did not empower itself to prohibit a
nonconforming use; (3)that St. Croix County's failure to provide notice of a
nonconforming use is fatal; (4) that any ambiguity must be resolved against St. Croix
3
County; (5) that St. Croix County is estopped from enforcing violations of any ordinance
that includes definitions of a"bluffline" and a"slope preservation zone;" and (6)that the
deck faces an"adjoining watershed channel"no longer covered by the zoning code.
ST. CR®IX COUNTY ARGUMENTS
St. Croix County, in turn, argues that there is no continuous pre-existing
nonconforming use of the property and that Wis. Stat. § 59.69(10) is applicable in this
case. St. Croix County asks that the Defendants motion be denied and that the Court
grant summary judgment in its favor pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 802.08(6).
Based on the sworn statements contained in the affidavits of Laurie Diaby-
Gassama, Daniel Sitz, Kevin Grabau, Sarah Droher and Jeri Koester, St. Croix County
claims that it has "proven"that the use of the property as a wedding business and/or
wedding venue is not a pre-existing non-conforming use of the property.
In response to Defendant's arguments, St. Croix County claims that: (1) it has
empowered itself to govern nonconforming uses; (2) that it did not fail to provide notice
to the Defendants regarding the non-conforming use; (3)that the Defendants have
conducted activities on the property that are not an allowed, permitted or conditional use;
(4)that there is no ambiguity in the Zoning Code; (5) that the deck and patio required a
land use permit and/or variance prior to construction; and (6) that the definitions of
"bluffline" and"slope preservation zone" are not ambiguous.
ST. CRGIX COUNTY ZONE OF ORDINANCES
Wis. Stat. § 30,27(1), consistent with federal code provisions identified therein,
recognizes the Lower St. Croix River as part of the national wild and scenic rivers
system. Wis Stat. § 30.27(2) required the DNR to "adopt, by rule, guidelines and specific
4
standards for local zoning ordinances which apply to the banks, bluffs and bluff tops of
the Lower St. Croix River." Wis. Stat. § 30.27(3), in turn, required all affected
municipalities to adopt ordinances at least as restrictive as those adopted by the DNF..
St. Croix County subsequently adopted an ordinance essentially mirroring Wis.
Admin. Code § NR 118. Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.05(3) states that "All uses and
structures not listed as permitted or conditional uses shall be prohibited,
Section 17.36 of the St. Croix County Zone of Ordinances, entitled "Lower St.
Croix Riverway Overlay District" was adopted by the St. Croix County Board of
Supervisors. Section 17.36 F.l.a. lists the followed allowed uses and structures that are
allowed in the Riverway District without a permit:
1) Nonstructural conservancy and open space uses associated with maintaining
the value of certain lands for natural areas, scenic preservation, recreation,
wildlife management, water and soil conservation and other such purposes.
2) Nonstructural agricultural and forestry uses, including silviculture in
compliance with Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter NR 118.06(6).
3) Routine pruning of trees and shrubs to improve their health and vigor, provide
a filtered view of the Lower St. Croix River, herein after referred to as "the
river,"prevent property damage, and removing trees that pose an imminent
safety hazard to persons or structures.
4) Docks,piers, and wharves subject to Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) administrative rule standards and Army Corps of
Engineers permit requirements.
Section 17.36 F,2.a of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances lists the
following as permitted uses and structures which are allowed in the Lower St. Croix
Riverway Overlay District without a permit:
1) Single-family residence and accessory uses and structures.
2) Filling and grading less than 10,000 square feet outside of the slope
preservation zone and greater than 40 fee from the slope preservation zone.
3) Signs per § 17.36 H.2.
4) Structural erosion control measures constructed outside of slope preservation
zones.
5) Rock riprap and other shoreland protection measures per § 17.36 H.6.
5
6) Vegetation removal per § 17.36 H.8.
7) Public parks, areas devoted to natural resource management and
interpretation, waysides, rest areas, information areas, and scenic overlooks.
8) Governmental structures used as information centers or for resource
management to improve the fish and wildlife habitat, provided that they meet
all other provisions of this subchapter.
9) Accessory structures.
Section 17.36 F.3.a of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances lists the
following as conditional uses and structures:
1) Land divisions.
2) Wireless communication service and other transmission facilities.
3) Stairways and lifts.
4) Filling and grading less than 10,000 square feet in slope preservation zones
that do not directly face the river and do not drain directly to the river.
5) Filling and grading within 40 feet of a slope preservation zone.
6) Filling and grading 10,000 square feet or more outside of the slope
preservation zone.
7) Structural erosion control measures in slope preservation zones.
8) Public and private roads serving two or more properties or single-family
residences.
9) Bed and breakfast operations.
10)Private, non-profit, nature-oriented educational facilities.
11)Minor home occupations per § 17.155(5) of this ordinance.
Section 17.36 F.4.a of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances addresses
prohibited uses and states:
a. Within the Riverway District, all uses or structures not listed as allowed,
permitted, or conditional uses are prohibited.
ANALYSIS
Fourth Baptist Church utilized the property as Camp Clear-Waters, a recreational
educational campground. Its use of the property, which was purchased on December 6,
1962, commenced prior to the adoption of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances on
January 1, 1968. The use of the property as a recreational educational campground was a
nonconforming use of the property and was consistent with a "nature-oriented
6
educational, non-profit facility" as articulated in Wis. Admin. Code § NR 118.05 and
17.36 of the St. Croix County Code of Ordinances.
While Camp Clear-Waters' non-conforming use of the property was permitted by
the application of Wisconsin law, Defendants' proposed expansion of that use is not.
After a careful consideration of the arguments presented, the Court finds that, for
purposes of summary judgment, there was no continuous pre-existing nonconforming use
of the property. Defendants' proposed use of the facility as a"premier wedding
destination" is not a"nature-oriented educational, non-profit"use. Such use of the
property as a wedding business, wedding venue, or banquet facility is not a pre-existing
nonconforming use, and The Court adopts the arguments made by St. Croix County on
pages 8-13 of its brief as its own. See Trieschmann v. Trieschmann, 178 Wis.2d 538, 544,
504 N.W.2d 433 (Ct. App. 1993). For reasons cited in that brief and in this decision,the
motion for summary judgment is denied.
The Court also finds that St. Croix County's motion for summary judgment is
properly granted under Wis. Stat. § 802.08(6). Based on the sworn statements contained
in the affidavits of Laurie Diaby-Gassama, Daniel Sitz, Kevin Grabau, Sarah Droher and
Jeri Koester,the Court finds that St. Croix County has conclusively established that the
use of the property as a wedding business and/or wedding venue is not a pre-existing
non-conforming use of the property.
St. Croix County empowered itself to govern nonconforming uses and
Defendant's proposed use of the property is not"grandfathered" in. St. Croix County
complied with Wis. Stat. § 59.69(10) and the record plainly demonstrates that Defendants
have conducted activities on the property that are not an allowed, permitted or conditional
7
use. There is no ambiguity in the zoning code and the deck and patio required a land use
permit and/or variance prior to construction. The definitions of"bluffline" and "slope
preservation zone" are not ambiguous. Defendants were well aware of the requirements
of the zoning code but chose to disregard them. St. Croix County's motion for summary
judgment is granted.
DECISION
Based upon the foregoing, IT IS HE DY ORDER-ED that Defendants' motion
for summary judgment is denied. Ste Croix County's motion for summary judgment is
granted.
11 ®VRT.
r`
Dated this day of
August 2016. �7
Hon rable Sc tt R.Nee 1
St. roix Cou ty Circuit Court Judge
Bra ch III
8
Resolution 2017-01
A Resolution in Opposition to Senate Bill 309&Assembly Bill 399
St. Croix County Unit of WI Towns Association
St. Croix County,WI
WHEREAS, The State of Wisconsin requires all zoning, mapping and subdivision ordinances to be consistent
with a Comprehensive Land Use Plan under WSS 66.1001; and
WHEREAS, adoption of County zoning is a fiscally responsible decision for most Towns as it places all costs
related to ordinance administration and enforcement on the county; and
WHEREAS, the Towns of Forest, Hudson and Troy have not adopted county zoning and have adopted their own
local zoning, of which they are responsible for the administration, enforcement and associated costs; and
WHEREAS, adoption of County zoning is consistent with the Towns of Baldwin, Cylon, Eau Galle, Erin Prairie,
Glenwood, Hammond, Kinnickinnic, Pleasant Valley, Richmond, Rush River, St. Joseph, Somerset, Springfield, Stanton,
Star Prairie and Warren who have all adopted a Town Comprehensive Land Use Plan; and
WHEREAS,the local government officials who live and reside in the counties and communities are best suited to
make determinations as to what zoning is best for their community; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 & Assembly Bill 399 both call for an amendment to WSS 30.27(3) and to create
WSS 30.27(2)(d)relating to zoning ordinances in the Lower St. Croix Riverway; and
WHEREAS, a section of Senate Bill 309 & Assembly Bill 399 both prohibit a county and subsequently towns
relying on county zoning from implementing its own zoning code with special exemptions given to specific properties;
and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399 are the antithesis of the design our founding fathers who
drafted the laws of the state to benefit the state as a whole and who saw it crucial most authority should be at the local
level, and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 &Assembly Bill 399 will negatively impact the Town's rural character and impact
the quality of life in the lower St. Croix Riverway by taking zoning control out of the local control; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 399 were introduced into the Legislature without any knowledge
or advice by local or St. Croix County officials affected by the amendment of WSS 30.27 (3) and creation of WSS
30.27(2)(d); and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, it is deemed advisable,useful, beneficial, and in the best interest of the people
and the beauty, protection and economic impacts of the Lower St. Croix Scenic Riverway that the St. Croix County Unit
of the Wisconsin Towns Association strongly oppose Senate Bill 309 and Assembly Bill 390; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the St. Croix County Unit of the Wisconsin Towns Association is requesting the
Legislature reject the notion that the State begin engaging in rezoning of property or approving uses inconsistent with the
current zoning and inconsistent with the Town's Comprehensive Land Use Plan and instead allow the Towns or County to
enforce their own zoning ordinances; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,the St. Croix County Unit of the Wisconsin Towns Association is requesting it is
imperative that the state leaders continue their commitment to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Program and the aesthetic and
consequent impacts related to tourism; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the St. Croix County Unit of the Wisconsin Towns Association is strongly
opposed to a non-fiscal bill being incorporated into the Budget Bill.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the St. Croix County Unit of the Wisconsin Towns Association directs
a copy of this Resolution be sent to the St. Croix County Board, Wisconsin Towns Association, our State
Legislators and to Governor Scott Walker.
Paul Hueg, Chair of St. Croix Co.Unit of WI Towns Assoc.
I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution 2017-01 was duly adopted by the St. Croix County Unit of the WI
Towns Association at a legal meeting held on the 271 day of July, 2017 by a vote of � to 49
Attest: UL
i