-----
I neglected to earlier report the Sawyer County Wilderness Lakes Classification was passed by the Zoning Committee. The issues were well presented on both sides. Everyone wants to preserve clean water ... the devil is in the details of how?Politically Speaking....
What's Happening in Northwest Wisconsin
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Thursday, July 24, 2008
I found this interesting from the Village of Bruce. According to the Ladysmith News...
The Bruce Village Board on Monday night voted to discontinue contracting with the Rusk County Sheriff’s Department to provide additional police protection in the village beyond that provided through its ordinary county patrols effective Dec. 31.
Village voters opposed continuing the additional patrol, 145 to 93, in an April advisory referendum. There are about 400 registered voters.
The village presently has an agreement with the county through which the Rusk County Sheriff’s Department provides 24 hours of additional patrol weekly for village businesses and nearly 800 residents at a cost of $38,081.54 per year. The village has contracted for additional patrol since 1995, when trustees ended having a village police officer and patrol car and contracted with the county to cut costs of law enforcement.
The advisory referendum was not binding, thus the decision to continue to provide the 24 hours of weekly patrol in addition to normal county patrol still rested with trustees.
Trustee Mike Anderson made the motion to discontinue contracting for additional patrol. His motion was seconded by Trustee Lloyd Waite. Trustee Richard LaBelle voted in favor of the motion along with Anderson and Waite.
Trustees Jon Hamel and Mike Newman opposed the motion. Trustee Steve Quade was not present.
The village president did not vote.
“The people said they don’t want it. I don’t know why it has to go to committee,” said Trustee Anderson in discussion before he moved to discontinue contracting for added patrol. “Sixty-one percent of the voters said they don’t want this.”
“We’re paying too much for what we are getting,” said Trustee Waite.
Trustee LaBelle said he favored discontinuing added patrol because of the way the referendum came out.
“We should get extra patrol for no extra money. They are through here all the time anyway going to the county line,” commented Dave Jandrt from the audience.
The village clerk said it was not a roll call vote. Each member voting, however, made it clear which way he had voted. The village president generally does not vote except to break a tie, the clerk said.
I have no opinon whatsoever on this topice but ...
I just loved the quote, "We should get exra patrol for no exta money."
More for less.
The American Way!
The Bruce Village Board on Monday night voted to discontinue contracting with the Rusk County Sheriff’s Department to provide additional police protection in the village beyond that provided through its ordinary county patrols effective Dec. 31.
Village voters opposed continuing the additional patrol, 145 to 93, in an April advisory referendum. There are about 400 registered voters.
The village presently has an agreement with the county through which the Rusk County Sheriff’s Department provides 24 hours of additional patrol weekly for village businesses and nearly 800 residents at a cost of $38,081.54 per year. The village has contracted for additional patrol since 1995, when trustees ended having a village police officer and patrol car and contracted with the county to cut costs of law enforcement.
The advisory referendum was not binding, thus the decision to continue to provide the 24 hours of weekly patrol in addition to normal county patrol still rested with trustees.
Trustee Mike Anderson made the motion to discontinue contracting for additional patrol. His motion was seconded by Trustee Lloyd Waite. Trustee Richard LaBelle voted in favor of the motion along with Anderson and Waite.
Trustees Jon Hamel and Mike Newman opposed the motion. Trustee Steve Quade was not present.
The village president did not vote.
“The people said they don’t want it. I don’t know why it has to go to committee,” said Trustee Anderson in discussion before he moved to discontinue contracting for added patrol. “Sixty-one percent of the voters said they don’t want this.”
“We’re paying too much for what we are getting,” said Trustee Waite.
Trustee LaBelle said he favored discontinuing added patrol because of the way the referendum came out.
“We should get extra patrol for no extra money. They are through here all the time anyway going to the county line,” commented Dave Jandrt from the audience.
The village clerk said it was not a roll call vote. Each member voting, however, made it clear which way he had voted. The village president generally does not vote except to break a tie, the clerk said.
I have no opinon whatsoever on this topice but ...
I just loved the quote, "We should get exra patrol for no exta money."
More for less.
The American Way!
Monday, July 21, 2008
Three interesting bits of information...
First we have this release from Mike Spranger, Chairman of the Board of the Wisconsin Realtors® Association...
Column: Wisconsin Way Initiative collaborative project
We have a wonderful quality of life here in Wisconsin, but budget challenges at the state and local levels are making it difficult to maintain it. Public services, like great schools, parks, roads, fire and police protection, all need adequate funding. At the same time, an excessive tax burden -- particularly our high property taxes -- put pressure on affordable housing, businesses and job growth. The fact is, our quality of life is defined by adequate funding for public services and fair and affordable taxes to pay for them.
As we enter another campaign season, we will hear candidates discuss the need for striking the right balance between the twin necessities of good services and affordable taxes. However, this important discussion is often overshadowed by polarizing politics and oversimplified "solutions" intended to get votes rather than get results.
I don't believe we can rely on legislators alone to fix our problems. I believe we, the general public, need to enter this discussion directly and engage legislative candidates in a serious discussion about our future. We must ask the hard questions of candidates, offer our own ideas, and allow them to consider creative alternatives to how we raise and spend our tax dollars to ensure our quality of life in Wisconsin remains high forever.
A unique coalition consisting of the Wisconsin Realtors Association, Wisconsin Education Association Council, Wisconsin Transportation Association, Wisconsin Counties Association and Wood Communications, has formed the "Wisconsin Way" project in hopes of providing this direction. This coalition is holding public hearings across Wisconsin to get your input for solutions, and they plan on sharing what you say with lawmakers this election season and beyond.
The Wisconsin Way initiative has been gaining momentum over the last year as over 5,000 attendees have offered their input at nearly 20 public hearings. These initial hearings produced many concerns and ideas, which have been cataloged and reviewed by policy experts to produce some innovative ideas on improving Wisconsin's systems for providing public services, and how we pay for them.
The Wisconsin Way is continuing their public hearings over the next several weeks and we're looking for your input. On July 23rd, central Wisconsin residents will have an opportunity to join this unique discussion by attending a Wisconsin Way public hearing in Wausau. The forum will be held from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Stoney Creek Inn, 1100 Imperial Avenue, Rothschild.
As the head of the Wisconsin REALTORS Association, a founding partner of the Wisconsin Way project, I invite you to join this important conversation and attend the Wausau hearing on July 23. A small investment of personal time now may help us create a better future for your children and grandchildren. Come share your ideas, listen to others, and be a part of creating Wisconsin's future. Please join me in attending this event, and ask your neighbors to come too!
You can also learn more about the Wisconsin Way at www.wisconsinway.org.
----------
Douglas County voters can register their opinion on health care reform at the polls.
The Douglas County Board became the first northern Wisconsin county to adopt the advisory referendum question to place on the ballot for November.
It gives voters the opportunity to tell their legislators they want health care benefits at least as good as the one’s they buy with their tax dollars — those the state legislature and other Wisconsin officials receive.
The board voted in favor of putting the question to the voters: “Shall the next state legislature enact health care reform legislation by Dec. 31, 2009, that guarantees every Wisconsin resident affordable health care as good as what is provided to state legislators and state officials?”
A “yes” vote would advise the legislature that Wisconsinites want health care reform.
Supervisor Karen Livingston, who worked in the health care, admitted having reservations about the wording of the question because of the complexities of issues involved.
“I would like it to say it would provide ‘access’ to affordable health care for every resident,” Prettie said. “I pay $550 a month. I’ve talked to families paying $1,500, $1,600 a month. I don’t make that kind of money. When you talk every year increasing, increasing, increasing, you’re going to have to do something.”
She said there are some who can’t get insurance, such as single people who have no children, but earn slightly more than limits allow for programs like BadgerCare.
“How are we going to pay for it?” Supervisor John Robinson asked. “We’re in a budget crunch everywhere from the state to the county. How are we going to pay for it? Where is the money going to come from?”
The referendum is strictly advisory. It gives voters the opportunity to log their opinion with the state without directing legislators to come up with a plan.
“It lets the people at least voice their opinion,” Board Chairman Doug Finn said.
“I support this resolution,” said Supervisor Mark Liebaert. “For years the Farmer’s Union has been trying to get the state of Wisconsin to give access their health care policies … We have suggested they allow the farmers to buy the policy the state supplies to legislators and their employees. We can’t even get them to do that.”
He said the biggest problem is people trying to make a living on their own can’t get a quality insurance product for a reasonable cost.
“There are 130-some people elected in the house in the state down in Madison who make a pretty good wage, get a pretty good health care plan and retirement plan,” said Steve Carlson of Trego, who proposed the idea to the county’s executive committee in late June. “I don’t think it’s too much to put an advisory referendum question to the voters to put some pressure on the folks down in Madison to try to figure it out. … We pay an awful lot of money for the group of people we elect to sort these things out. And, I think the voters should have the opportunity to kind of give them a nudge to do that.”
Elsewhere on this page today you will find an opinion about the mysterious barrels dumped into Lake Superior decades ago. There has been a long time dispute regarding their contents. Honeywell has confirmed military armaments were among the disposed items. At issue is whether or not hazardous or radioactive waste also is present.
A few barrels were raised nearly 20 years ago and nothing dangerous was found. Minnesota regulators believe they have done their job and the matter should be dropped. We disagree.
The 1,500 barrels hidden beneath the surface represent waste that no common resident would be allowed to discard in such a cavalier manner. Pity the individual who foolishly allows their pickup truck or snowmobile to fall through Lake Superior’s ice. State and federal regulators would immediately be on the scene dictating expensive removal instructions and writing costly citations.
And that’s the way it should be. Everyone must take care to ensure Lake Superior’s water remain pristine.
So why don’t those rules apply to Honeywell, which manufactured the material, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which dumped it?
Clearly, there is an uneven and unfair enforcement of the law. Only one thing remains unclear: Whether the manufacturer and government are engaged in a coverup or just don’t want to fund a cleanup.
This represents one more example of why people have lost faith and interest in government: Individuals are held accountable for their actions, but public agencies are exempt from their own rules. This type of hypocrisy has torn the heart and soul from a great country.
A coalition of groups will march on Sunday to protest inaction on the barrel issue. Hopefully, they will stimulate public pressure to remove and examine all of the suspicious barrels.
Column: Wisconsin Way Initiative collaborative project
We have a wonderful quality of life here in Wisconsin, but budget challenges at the state and local levels are making it difficult to maintain it. Public services, like great schools, parks, roads, fire and police protection, all need adequate funding. At the same time, an excessive tax burden -- particularly our high property taxes -- put pressure on affordable housing, businesses and job growth. The fact is, our quality of life is defined by adequate funding for public services and fair and affordable taxes to pay for them.
As we enter another campaign season, we will hear candidates discuss the need for striking the right balance between the twin necessities of good services and affordable taxes. However, this important discussion is often overshadowed by polarizing politics and oversimplified "solutions" intended to get votes rather than get results.
I don't believe we can rely on legislators alone to fix our problems. I believe we, the general public, need to enter this discussion directly and engage legislative candidates in a serious discussion about our future. We must ask the hard questions of candidates, offer our own ideas, and allow them to consider creative alternatives to how we raise and spend our tax dollars to ensure our quality of life in Wisconsin remains high forever.
A unique coalition consisting of the Wisconsin Realtors Association, Wisconsin Education Association Council, Wisconsin Transportation Association, Wisconsin Counties Association and Wood Communications, has formed the "Wisconsin Way" project in hopes of providing this direction. This coalition is holding public hearings across Wisconsin to get your input for solutions, and they plan on sharing what you say with lawmakers this election season and beyond.
The Wisconsin Way initiative has been gaining momentum over the last year as over 5,000 attendees have offered their input at nearly 20 public hearings. These initial hearings produced many concerns and ideas, which have been cataloged and reviewed by policy experts to produce some innovative ideas on improving Wisconsin's systems for providing public services, and how we pay for them.
The Wisconsin Way is continuing their public hearings over the next several weeks and we're looking for your input. On July 23rd, central Wisconsin residents will have an opportunity to join this unique discussion by attending a Wisconsin Way public hearing in Wausau. The forum will be held from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Stoney Creek Inn, 1100 Imperial Avenue, Rothschild.
As the head of the Wisconsin REALTORS Association, a founding partner of the Wisconsin Way project, I invite you to join this important conversation and attend the Wausau hearing on July 23. A small investment of personal time now may help us create a better future for your children and grandchildren. Come share your ideas, listen to others, and be a part of creating Wisconsin's future. Please join me in attending this event, and ask your neighbors to come too!
You can also learn more about the Wisconsin Way at www.wisconsinway.org.
----------
This article on health care from the Superior Daily Telegram...
Voters’ get choice on health care
Shelley Nelson The Daily Telegram - 07/18/2008
Douglas County voters can register their opinion on health care reform at the polls.
The Douglas County Board became the first northern Wisconsin county to adopt the advisory referendum question to place on the ballot for November.
It gives voters the opportunity to tell their legislators they want health care benefits at least as good as the one’s they buy with their tax dollars — those the state legislature and other Wisconsin officials receive.
The board voted in favor of putting the question to the voters: “Shall the next state legislature enact health care reform legislation by Dec. 31, 2009, that guarantees every Wisconsin resident affordable health care as good as what is provided to state legislators and state officials?”
A “yes” vote would advise the legislature that Wisconsinites want health care reform.
Supervisor Karen Livingston, who worked in the health care, admitted having reservations about the wording of the question because of the complexities of issues involved.
“I would like it to say it would provide ‘access’ to affordable health care for every resident,” Prettie said. “I pay $550 a month. I’ve talked to families paying $1,500, $1,600 a month. I don’t make that kind of money. When you talk every year increasing, increasing, increasing, you’re going to have to do something.”
She said there are some who can’t get insurance, such as single people who have no children, but earn slightly more than limits allow for programs like BadgerCare.
“How are we going to pay for it?” Supervisor John Robinson asked. “We’re in a budget crunch everywhere from the state to the county. How are we going to pay for it? Where is the money going to come from?”
The referendum is strictly advisory. It gives voters the opportunity to log their opinion with the state without directing legislators to come up with a plan.
“It lets the people at least voice their opinion,” Board Chairman Doug Finn said.
“I support this resolution,” said Supervisor Mark Liebaert. “For years the Farmer’s Union has been trying to get the state of Wisconsin to give access their health care policies … We have suggested they allow the farmers to buy the policy the state supplies to legislators and their employees. We can’t even get them to do that.”
He said the biggest problem is people trying to make a living on their own can’t get a quality insurance product for a reasonable cost.
“There are 130-some people elected in the house in the state down in Madison who make a pretty good wage, get a pretty good health care plan and retirement plan,” said Steve Carlson of Trego, who proposed the idea to the county’s executive committee in late June. “I don’t think it’s too much to put an advisory referendum question to the voters to put some pressure on the folks down in Madison to try to figure it out. … We pay an awful lot of money for the group of people we elect to sort these things out. And, I think the voters should have the opportunity to kind of give them a nudge to do that.”
-----------
Then, also this from the Superior Daily Telegram...
EDITORIAL:
Barrel controversy demonstrates why people no longer trust government.
The Daily Telegram - 07/19/2008
Elsewhere on this page today you will find an opinion about the mysterious barrels dumped into Lake Superior decades ago. There has been a long time dispute regarding their contents. Honeywell has confirmed military armaments were among the disposed items. At issue is whether or not hazardous or radioactive waste also is present.
A few barrels were raised nearly 20 years ago and nothing dangerous was found. Minnesota regulators believe they have done their job and the matter should be dropped. We disagree.
The 1,500 barrels hidden beneath the surface represent waste that no common resident would be allowed to discard in such a cavalier manner. Pity the individual who foolishly allows their pickup truck or snowmobile to fall through Lake Superior’s ice. State and federal regulators would immediately be on the scene dictating expensive removal instructions and writing costly citations.
And that’s the way it should be. Everyone must take care to ensure Lake Superior’s water remain pristine.
So why don’t those rules apply to Honeywell, which manufactured the material, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which dumped it?
Clearly, there is an uneven and unfair enforcement of the law. Only one thing remains unclear: Whether the manufacturer and government are engaged in a coverup or just don’t want to fund a cleanup.
This represents one more example of why people have lost faith and interest in government: Individuals are held accountable for their actions, but public agencies are exempt from their own rules. This type of hypocrisy has torn the heart and soul from a great country.
A coalition of groups will march on Sunday to protest inaction on the barrel issue. Hopefully, they will stimulate public pressure to remove and examine all of the suspicious barrels.
Friday, July 11, 2008
Over the past few months in Barron County there has been a minor controversy smoldering over the County Board Agenda. As with any small fire, if it isn't extinguished immediately it will grow into a bigger fire. Thus, this editorial from the Rice Lake Chronotype.
Agenda issue getting in way
County board supervisors are the public's direct representatives in county government. So it seems reasonable to think that their concerns should be priorities for those who administer county government. But at times that doesn't appear to be the case in Barron County.
Of late there have been instances in which county supervisors have asked to have an issue placed on the agenda of the board's monthly meetings. Without a specific listing on the agenda, state law prohibits supervisors from discussing or acting on an issue. But county government leadership seems, at best, to be hesitant to deal directly with those requests. To outside observers this foot-dragging has the appearance of either obstructionism or ineptitude.
Supervisors are now questioning what it takes to get an issue on the agenda. The answers they've been getting haven't been reassuring. In fact, even those reportedly involved in that decision-making process have been seeking clarification about this most basic and critical part of county board governance.
It is literally incredible that County Board leadership can't give even County Board supervisors a straight answer on the agenda issue. And, if county supervisors are confused, what chance does the average citizen have of comprehending the procedures of county government? What confidence can they have that the county is going to be responsive to their needs?
It hasn't helped that two of the most recent requests have involved issues directly related to the job performance of administrator Duane Hebert. In one instance a supervisor has asked repeatedly for a closed meeting on Hebert's performance. In another, a supervisor asked when the board would consider a petition signed by 450 citizens calling for Hebert to be placed on administrative leave and elimination of the administrator's post. Hebert told that supervisor the issue may or may not appear on a future agenda.
The County Board's own rules seem to state clearly in Rule 2 that the board chair "shall decide all questions of order and the agenda" as the presiding officer for meetings of the board. The duties and responsibility of the county administrator states that the administrator, in consultation with the board chair, "shall prepare the agenda for meetings of the County Board of Supervisors." If there is some ambiguity or conflict in these two statements, county leadership should bring to the board a proposal to end this confusion.
The lack of action to date leaves citizens wondering just what is the "agenda" of county leadership.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Measures to ratify the deal in Congress will be introduced shortly, said David Naftzger, executive director of the Council of Great Lakes Governors.
More than 20 members have endorsed it, including Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, the presumptive presidential nominees. Obama, an Illinois Democrat, said he would be a co-sponsor.
"I am committed to working to fully implement this compact to protect America's truly Great Lakes," Obama said.
Carl Levin, D-Mich., and George Voinovich, R-Ohio, will be the primary Senate sponsors. In the House, support will be led by Rep. James Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat and chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Supporters hope the pact will be approved this fall and sent to President Bush, whose administration has voiced no opposition.
The agreement outlaws diversions of Great Lakes water from its natural drainage basin with rare exceptions, while requiring the states to regulate their own large-scale water uses and promote conservation.
Agenda issue getting in way
County board supervisors are the public's direct representatives in county government. So it seems reasonable to think that their concerns should be priorities for those who administer county government. But at times that doesn't appear to be the case in Barron County.
Of late there have been instances in which county supervisors have asked to have an issue placed on the agenda of the board's monthly meetings. Without a specific listing on the agenda, state law prohibits supervisors from discussing or acting on an issue. But county government leadership seems, at best, to be hesitant to deal directly with those requests. To outside observers this foot-dragging has the appearance of either obstructionism or ineptitude.
Supervisors are now questioning what it takes to get an issue on the agenda. The answers they've been getting haven't been reassuring. In fact, even those reportedly involved in that decision-making process have been seeking clarification about this most basic and critical part of county board governance.
It is literally incredible that County Board leadership can't give even County Board supervisors a straight answer on the agenda issue. And, if county supervisors are confused, what chance does the average citizen have of comprehending the procedures of county government? What confidence can they have that the county is going to be responsive to their needs?
It hasn't helped that two of the most recent requests have involved issues directly related to the job performance of administrator Duane Hebert. In one instance a supervisor has asked repeatedly for a closed meeting on Hebert's performance. In another, a supervisor asked when the board would consider a petition signed by 450 citizens calling for Hebert to be placed on administrative leave and elimination of the administrator's post. Hebert told that supervisor the issue may or may not appear on a future agenda.
The County Board's own rules seem to state clearly in Rule 2 that the board chair "shall decide all questions of order and the agenda" as the presiding officer for meetings of the board. The duties and responsibility of the county administrator states that the administrator, in consultation with the board chair, "shall prepare the agenda for meetings of the County Board of Supervisors." If there is some ambiguity or conflict in these two statements, county leadership should bring to the board a proposal to end this confusion.
The lack of action to date leaves citizens wondering just what is the "agenda" of county leadership.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
-----------------------------
The Rusk County Lake Classification Study and recommendations went to the County Board. The recommendation of enlarging the minimum shoreland lot size was defeated for a completely logical reason. The entire ordinance will need to be looked at after new NR 115 rules are completed. When exactly that will happen is totally unknown, but it is a foregone conclusion it will happen sometime in the near future. The following is the report from the Ladysmith News.
The board members ... were not in agreement during earlier action on proposals introduced after about a year and a half of meetings by the Rusk County Lake and Stream Classification Ad Hoc Committee, which was chaired by Bob Wiltrout.
It was approved by a 12 to 6 roll call with Tom Costello, Eldon Skogen, David Willingham, James Hofacker, James Platteter, Phil Schneider, Henry Golat, Roger Svoma, Wayne Stevens, Lucinda LaPorte Lyle Lieffering and Chairman Randy Tatur in favor. Voting no were John Stencil, Cliff Taylor, Gene DuSell, Tony Hauser, Sandra Roth and Phil Kaiser.
A motion by Phil Kaiser to amend the resolution so it would simply acknowledge completion and thank the committee instead of adopt the classification was defeated by a 12 to 6 vote prior to adoption of the original proposal.
Stencil said the classification was “based on not science but guess” and was just the start of a process toward more regulation and he could see no benefit.Tony Hauser said the whole purpose of classification of lakes was to “set the stage for future regulation and restrictions.”
Jason Gillis, a member of the ad hoc committee, made similar points and criticized the classifications themselves.
Cliff Taylor thanked the committee but said he could not support their classification plan. He said the population around lakes at Madison is 250 times that in Rusk County and said the ad hoc committee conclusions could be used by people developing Smart Growth in the county.
Board member Wayne Stevens said the classification was “something we can use in the future. There is no regulation in it. Any regulation would have to pass through the board.”
He said he agreed with Supervisor Tom Costello who described Phil Kaiser’s amendment as asking the board to tell the hard working committee members “Thank’s for turning it in. Here’s a cookie.” Costello also had referred to opponents’ comments at the meeting as a “little coup attempt at the 11th hour” after the ad hoc committee had worked more than a year.
Wiltrout addressed board members about the ad hoc committee work and Ken Parejko, a retired professor of biology from Sheldon who worked with the committee answered questions. “I think we had a robust system” to determine classification, he said, and maintained that the committee’s “science” which Stencil belittled was stronger than that similar groups in other counties. David Willingham said the county was “extremely fortunate to have someone with the background he (Parejko) had.”
At one point, Board Chairman Tatur cut short Stencil’s comments saying “We’re gonna move on John. You’ve got a minute and that’s it.”
A resolution from the ad hoc committee calling for the zoning committee to consider a minimum shoreline width of 150 feet for newly developed lots was amended to a recommendation, then defeated by a 10 to 7 vote. Wiltrout in comments to the board indicated that resolution had been forwarded because the committee had been asked to do so.
Sentiment seemed to be that such changes should not be talked about until new state law regarding resources is announced.
-------------------------------
The Great Lakes Compact has now been approved by the last of the eight Great Lakes States.
The pact still needs approval of Congress and the White House. The Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec have adopted a nearly identical document but cannot join the compact because U.S. states cannot make treaties with foreign governments.
Measures to ratify the deal in Congress will be introduced shortly, said David Naftzger, executive director of the Council of Great Lakes Governors.
More than 20 members have endorsed it, including Sens. Barack Obama and John McCain, the presumptive presidential nominees. Obama, an Illinois Democrat, said he would be a co-sponsor.
"I am committed to working to fully implement this compact to protect America's truly Great Lakes," Obama said.
Carl Levin, D-Mich., and George Voinovich, R-Ohio, will be the primary Senate sponsors. In the House, support will be led by Rep. James Oberstar, a Minnesota Democrat and chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Supporters hope the pact will be approved this fall and sent to President Bush, whose administration has voiced no opposition.
The agreement outlaws diversions of Great Lakes water from its natural drainage basin with rare exceptions, while requiring the states to regulate their own large-scale water uses and promote conservation.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
The Rusk County Comprehensive Planning Commitee will be meeting on Friday July 11 at 11:00 am at the Law Enforecement Center of the Rusk County Courthouse. Expected topics include:
Review Draft of Survey Questions
Review Public Participation Plan
Review Elements for: Land Information & Zoning
A new brochure explaining the Pier (Dock) Regulations in Wisconsin has been produced by the Wisconsin Realtors® Association. It is a web brochure only but can be printed out. The brochure can be found at this link location.
http://www.news.wra.org/story.asp?a=927
Review Draft of Survey Questions
Review Public Participation Plan
Review Elements for: Land Information & Zoning
A new brochure explaining the Pier (Dock) Regulations in Wisconsin has been produced by the Wisconsin Realtors® Association. It is a web brochure only but can be printed out. The brochure can be found at this link location.
http://www.news.wra.org/story.asp?a=927
Monday, July 7, 2008
After months of consideration, the Barron County Economic Development Committee has decided to list Industrial property located in the County with a Realtor®. This will allow the Industrial property in the county to be viewed world wide on the Realtors® Association of Northwestern Wisconsin MLS site. The Realtor® who will be the listing Broker is Jim Coil from Coil's Realty in Cumberland.
Just another reminder, the Sawyer County Zoning Committee will be holding a Public Hearing on Friday July 18 on the proposed Wilderness Lakes Development Classification as a portion of their Shoreland Ordinance. The Public Hearing is scheduled for 1:00 pm at the Courthouse.
Just another reminder, the Sawyer County Zoning Committee will be holding a Public Hearing on Friday July 18 on the proposed Wilderness Lakes Development Classification as a portion of their Shoreland Ordinance. The Public Hearing is scheduled for 1:00 pm at the Courthouse.
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
Washburn County has a new Campground Ordinance! Yes, after five years of meetings, and cancelled meetings, a new Campground Ordinance has been passed by the County Board. Whew! This new ordinance regulates the size of new and expanded campgrounds with special emphasis on the number of camping units allowed in the Shoreland District. Final passage was achieved by removing a controversial dock regulation which had been inserted at the last minute without the knowledge of the entire ad hoc committee which had worked on this issue.
Burnett County Zoning officials have been in discussion with local surveyors attempting to negotiate a new Subdivision Ordinance. The Surveyors, with Realtor® Association backup, have been objecting to the proposed new ordinance.
Burnett County Comprehensive Planning Committee has stopped spinning their wheels and is now starting down the road of real planning. Public Participation, and how to get it, is the first step.
Barron County Comprehensive Planning Committee hasn't started to spin their wheels. The Zoning Committee will soon be forwarding names of individuals to serve on the committee to the County Board for approval.
Burnett County Zoning officials have been in discussion with local surveyors attempting to negotiate a new Subdivision Ordinance. The Surveyors, with Realtor® Association backup, have been objecting to the proposed new ordinance.
Burnett County Comprehensive Planning Committee has stopped spinning their wheels and is now starting down the road of real planning. Public Participation, and how to get it, is the first step.
Barron County Comprehensive Planning Committee hasn't started to spin their wheels. The Zoning Committee will soon be forwarding names of individuals to serve on the committee to the County Board for approval.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)