The Rusk County Lake and Stream Classification Committee has met for the last time. On June 9 a Public Information meeting was held to present their findings to the citizens. After $50,000...and 18 months of numerous meetings it was determined that development on lakes may cause decreased water quality. Thus, this committee will be recommending that minimum width of future waterfront property lots be increased from 100' to 150'. All the information compiled by the committee can be found at the website WWW.FlambeauValley.Com/LS.

Neighborhood Watch programs aren't just for the big cities. They are for everyone. In Chetek a new neighborhood watch program is just getting off the ground. According to the Chetek Alert a program is being developed in Chetek's downtown area.

Representatives of the The City of Rice Lake, Barron County and the Town of Rice Lake did meet last week to discuss the Rice Lake Extra Territorial Subdivision Ordinance. Discussions will continue on possible changes.

The Burnett County Zoning Committee received an update on the status of discussions regarding changes to the Subdivision Ordinance. The County has backed off many proposed changes. This will be on the agenda again next month.

Sawyer County Record Editorial – 5/29/2008

Of many county committees, the Sawyer County Zoning Committee is perhaps the most controversial. I believe this is because the committee’s focus is on regulating land use, and most people tend not to take land ownership lightly.

No matter what corner of earth you occupy in Sawyer County, many will eventually have to come before the committee either to argue in favor of their own project, or oppose another. In short, zoning affects us all, and therefore it is important these meetings be public, open and adequately noticed.

As I watched one substantial development work its way through the system over the last few months, I often wondered whether sufficient public notice was, in fact, being given. A large development had set its eyes on a small lake, and on multiple occasions the developer either did not supply the correct materials or submitted them late to the committee. Yet each time, the committee proceeded to act on very important documents it had very little time to dissect.

During the Zoning Committee meeting held on May 16, Zoning Administrator Bill Christman stated that his office received the developer’s documents around 1 p.m. of the previous day. Suddenly, the very next morning under agenda item “New Business,” the committee was discussing the issue as the developer continued to push for his final plat approval. The only amended notice to reflect this additional agenda item was posted on the door at the meeting.

As a journalist and member of the public, I submit that the Zoning Committee should have tabled the item until proper public notice could have been given. And I am forced to question whether county zoning is serving the public interest by not properly noticing meetings.

According to Wisconsin statute 19.84(3) (Open Meetings Law), public notice must be given at least 24 hours in advance, unless “for good cause” such notice is “impossible or impractical.” If an item is added within 24 hours of the meeting, then notices must be posted no less than two hours in advance — certainly not just on the door of the meeting room. This statute is in place to provide the public with the most complete information, and in the case of zoning, agenda items are being added under the public’s radar, unless a member of the public comes to the meeting in person to read the posted agenda.

In fact, Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen believes that if a specific item, such as a development, is placed under “a general subject matter designation” — in this case, “New Business” — the committee “should refrain from engaging in any information gathering or discussion or from taking any action that would deprive the public of information.”

I have compared notices posted at the meeting to those published in the newspaper or printed from the zoning department’s Web site. Many times, the newspaper notice in my hand is different than what is posted. Yet I look around the room and see many people clutching folded newspapers and relying on that as an official agenda.

I feel that if any county committee, or the county board, discusses an item of business, it should be properly noticed giving the public ample time to decide whether to attend a meeting.

If a developer can slip in the required paperwork just under the wire and still make the next day’s agenda, is this an attempt to subvert public discourse? And is the zoning department playing into the hands of developers or others — who know how to work the system — who also might wish to keep the public as unaware as possible?

Lack of information is just as good as misinformation.

Comprehensive Planning Update:

Burnett County: A Planning Consultant was expected to be chosen to lead the Committee through the planning process.

Rusk County: The Smart Growth Committee at their last meeting discussed the Agriculture, Natural and Cultural Resource Element of the the Plan.

Sawyer County: A survey will soon be sent to residents asking their opinions on the future of Sawyer County. All are encouraged to complete and return the survey.