Jan. 29-2008--LARGE PUBLIC TURNOUT DESPITE WEATHER

Story Updated: February 6, 2008

Despite the blowing snow and below-zero temperature and wind-chill, the La Pointe Town Hall was nearly full, with members of the public concerned with the proposed property nuisance ordinance at Tuesday night's Public Workshop.  Nearly fifty people braved the weather-- despite travel warnings--to voice their opinions on the proposed Nuisance Property Ordinance.

Over the past few weeks, Town Board members have been receiving many comments and complaints about the proposed ordinance-- drafted and approved by the Town Plan Commission --during their ordinance review project. 

All members of the Town Board were in attendance as well as some of the members from the Town Plan Commission. Town Chair Greg Nelson said that he felt it was important to hold a workshop to gather public input, rather than to take the time to go through the process of holding a Public Hearing. 

Included in the workshop were discussions about two petitions that were submitted to the Town Plan Commission and then misplaced, the actual ordinance review project itself, and clarification of the process of same. 

Town Board Chair Greg Nelson stated that he had just received a copy of one of the misplaced petitions, which were submitted to the TPC several months earlier, and he apologized to everyone whose signatures were on the petition.  He also stated that if he had been aware of the petition's existence, he would have put it on the Town Board's agenda and addressed it.

According to Tom Nelson, the originator of one of the petitions, the two petitions were submitted to the TPC at their meeting on August 15th, 2007.  The other petition, which was from Gary Krubsack, has yet to be found. 

Greg Nelson said Jennifer Croonborg, Zoning Administrator and record custodian for the Town Plan Commission, brought these missing petitions to his attention when inquiries as to the whereabouts of the petitions started coming into her office.

Town Plan Commissioner Lois Carlson, acting recording secretary during the August 15th meeting recently discovered one of the petitions in her possession and stated that she takes “full responsibility” for the missing petitions.  Lois claimed that she was unaware that she had the petition as it was in a "pile of papers."   She also stated that the petition had not been properly submitted.  

Tom Nelson countered by bringing up the fact that there was no mention of these petitions in the TPC minutes, and that no audio recordings of the August 15^th meeting could be found either.  He also said that there is an appearance of impropriety with disappearing records and suggested that the petition be brought up at the next Town Board Meeting and discussion followed with Greg Nelson about the situation.

Greg Nelson continued to apologize and but said he didn't understand why there was a breakdown.  He said that some people assume that the Town Board should know everything that's happening at TPC meetings which he doesn't have time to do.   He said that Mike (Starck) was at that meeting and he considers him the liaison; the link between the Town Board and TPC.  More discussion followed about the procedure and public workshops.

Town Board Supervisor Jim Patterson stated that the missing petition “was a mistake that a person made and not somebody trying to put something under the rug.”  He also stated that the Junk/Nuisance Property ordinance hasn't yet been formally recommended to the Town Board.

More discussions followed concerning public meetings and public workshops before the actual ordinance itself was discussed.  According to a letter by Zoning Administrator Croonborg, the Town of La Pointe has ordinances already in place to cover anything that the nuisance property ordinance would cover.  This led to discussions about various state and county statutes and the work being down by the TPC related to the Smart Growth Plan, as well as ordinance revision and codification.

Gary Krubsack suggested a vote be taken from people in the room who are happy with the current law in effect, and over 2/3 people present  raised their hands.  Gary then suggested they hear comments from people who were in favor of the new ordinance.

However, before comments could begin, Warren Anderson was allowed to read something that he had wrote which outlined a brief history of the island and its history of the islanders saving everything and the necessity and economics of saving.  He also had a comment about noise and offensive odors in town, two things that bother him that he would like to see addressed.  A discussion about noises issues followed.

Suzie Flores then spoke in favor of the ordinance and questioned if there were already ordinances in place and Jen Croonborg replied, "yes."  She also commented on the unsightliness of the rear sides of some of the downtown businesses, saying she thinks that something does need to be done to keep that in check. Flores then stated that she thinks there are some people who don't "...fall in line to a community peacefulness. They do what they want, all else be damned."

Beth Fischlowitz spoke about an article from the “Ashland paper” about Ashland’s  legal process concerning ordinances, explaining that what La Pointe has on the books is complaint driven, and we don't have enforcement.  "If there is a complaint, every community needs some process..." 

She continued,  "At the risk, of alienating my fellow commissioner members, I have come to the conclusion that what we have on the books is probably what we need on the books and that if we need the words 'public nuisance' or 'property maintenance' in the book to satisfy some of the external requirements, why don't we do that? I don't have any issues with that.  I don't personally have any complaints.  I've been here 26 years and I never heard of one, so if there have been, they've been pretty well handled, I would guess. In my view, this is the perfect Shakespearean definition of ‘much ado about nothing.’  We have it on the books. It works for us. We're not looking  for an enforcement team. There are no people in uniforms with badges.  I think we could go with that.

Holly Tourdot spoke, stating that she has a real problem with the ordinance, saying whatever the state or county ordinances are, let those be the ordinances.

She continued by saying, "What shouldn't happen is personal vendettas played out in town hall using ordinances.  Ordinances like this create this possibility.    Personal opinions about aesthetics shouldn't be legislated." 

She went on to discuss the relationship of this ordinance to property values and raised questions higher rising property values in relation to our current junkyard and salvage ordinance and whether land being added to the (Madeline Island) Wilderness Preserve helped to prevent gentrification.  "Why be redundant when we already have ordinances to prevent these things in place?"

She also pointed out that there are different legal definitions for codification and revision.

Suzie Flores spoke again and asked whether all of these ordinances could not be organized and brought together.

Jen Croonborg responded with her perspective that town tax money already pays Ashland County to enforce  the "Human Health Ordinance" and questioned why the town would want to additionally pay someone else to enforce a town ordinance.  A discussion followed about which government entity enforces which ordinances.

Greg Nelson spoke about three instances where people came to him to complain.  Each time he pointed them to the (former) Zoning Committee or the TPC to make their complaint.  "That never happened.  I think they expected the Town Board to pick up the ball; that's not going to happen." 

Jessica Hatch, new TPC Recording Secretary, asked a question about ordinances being 'passed' by the TPC, and if they were sent to General Code or the Town Board.  Greg Nelson answered, "The Town Board".

Gary Krubsak asked about procedure and enforcement, and Greg Nelson responded, citing the various agencies in charge of different areas.

Gary then asked for clarification about the TPC’s involvement in the matter, and Greg Nelson responded that the TPC is the first entity that deals with ordinances. 

Gary suggested that the TPC post their procedures in the paper so that people know the legal process.  More discussion followed about procedures, the complaint process, and the involvement of the TPC.

Ken Peterson spoke about the proposed ordinance being more extensive than existing ordinances as to description and allowed square footage of debris, and asked why those definitions were added, since they go above and beyond what is now legislated.

Greg Nelson stated that he was still gathering information and more discussion followed concerning actual complaints.

Troy Nelson asked for clarification about differences between what has been on our books and what Ashland County has as ordinances.  He further asked whether it was a recommendation or a law that states we should have a junk-nuisance property ordinance. It was then revealed that it was only a recommendation, and discussion followed concerning civil complaints and  enforcement of the proposed ordinance. .Also discussed were clarification of civil action and the process about filing complaints, definition of abandoned cars, vehicles that have been sitting around on private property—fluid leakage and other related environmental concerns-- and the process for dealing with them.

Tom Nelson posed the question that if the only two complaints about problem properties were about (hazardous) holes in the ground, why didn't the proposed ordinance cover that problem?   He went on to discuss other problems he perceived with the ordinance, and also his grievance with the aesthetics of large homes and mansions on the island that sit empty most of the year which some supporters of 'sustainability' find offensive.  More discussion followed.

Greg Nelson replied that he has faith in the efforts of the committee and believes that they are working in the interest of the public good.

Members of the public motioned and seconded to adjourn.  More discussion followed about the ordinance, and what the next steps will be.  Jim Patterson said that he had a sense that the majority of people in the room believe that the ordinances already in place are enough.

Mike Starck went on to say that roughly 30 people, in the course of several meetings, determined that  things fall into 3 categories.  One is 'junked cars' and they found someone to take them off the island without being drained--or “as is”.  The second category was “appliances”.  Starck states that Ashland County has ordinances against keeping appliances, washers, dryers, refrigerators.  The third category is 'building materials' and the differentiation between good materials and scrap.  He also went on to say that if those three categories were accommodated, "...who would have a problem?"

He also said that if someone can't afford to take their old appliance to the MIRC (Madeline Island Recycling Center) they should come and talk to the Town Board, "we will find a way to subsidize it.  We are not looking to penalize someone who can't afford to pay for their product."  He went on to suggest that on some occasions that he bets that Ted might “look the other way”, although he wasn’t sure of that. 

He went on to say that the articles in the Gazette are good—that neighbors should try to work things out on their own; however, the ordinance is for when two people don't agree. They can take it to a higher authority, and this ordinance is an attempt to document where the higher authority is.

He also went on to say that what really bothered him was when people categorized everything in regards to the poor and wealthy.  He said the working relationship was "...a two way street." and "...didn't believe there was an issue with one class of people on the island picking on another class.  I don't see it."

Jan Smith stated that she didn't care who kept what where and that any of her concerns were safety issues and has information on how to make refrigerators and car trunks safe so children don't suffocate in them. 

A discussion then followed concerning how the proposed ordinance got onto the agenda.  Mike Starck commented that it was on the December 27th meetings' agenda, showing that the TPC had finished crafting an ordinance, after having two workshop s during the summer, with 30 some people present at each one.  On the 27^th, an agenda item was to discuss the TPC’s transfer of the proposed ordinance to the Town Board to be looked at it before it was sent on to general code to be put into a document.  It was not to be passed, just printed in a document so that the town wouldn’t waste money having something printed only to have it thrown out right away in the beginning. “So that the 27th meeting was for the Town Board to look at what had come on to the TPC saying ‘yeah, send it on to general code’, knowing that it had to come back and be re-approved and endorsed anyway."  He went on to say the item had been put on the agenda at the request of (Supervisor) Jim Patterson.

He continued, saying,  "...Suggested changes to the zoning ordinances and the process that is involved in making it happen and it usually takes 6 to eight months.  Since we’re going though a codification of the ordinance , why don't we stack up current requests or ideas that have been stacking up in this file,  on what changes have should be made to the zoning ordinance so we do all of this at one time and complete it in a lump sum rather than every two weeks going through  updating the process.  Maybe it was an invalid assumption, since we’re going to end up with a new document, let’s stock pile changes and try and get them  all through at once."

Holly Tourdot asked, “If we don't, as a town and citizens address individual changes we have to address the whole lump sum rolled into one. …If we reject any part if it we have to send it all back and start from scratch?”

Mike Starck replied that they "...don't have to send anything back to General Code."  "...They just type.", he added.

She then asked, "What if the town rejects the public nuisance ordinance specifically after the whole ordinance has been rewritten, codified, and revised?”

Mike Starck replied, "It would take five minutes and $5 to take it out...A line item veto."  He went on, "The process was, as we've all seen over the years, you need a zoning change for some reason, and it’s legitimate, and the process is very lengthy.  And it takes six months to do.  So we said, lets not make any zoning changes, the last 18 months there hasn't been one, lets just accumulate them and get them all done in a kind of a batch.  Maybe that was erroneous thinking.  Cause its' too big.  There are 27 more changes in this ordinance that haven't hit the fan yet."

Discussions followed about codification, complaints about nuisances, health and human service complaints.

Greg responded about the procedure, and said what upset him the most was that they (Town Board) don't get copies of TPC minutes until they are approved.  He admitted that there were problems with (TPC) agenda topics being too broad, but “generally speaking, people don't show up, and then they expect to just go get the minutes and be able to know exactly what the...-- we've been advised by towns association and other sources to limit discussion in minutes, because if you have to have a ...transcript, it would cost this town; you couldn't to do it!"  He went on to say, "I've seen minutes from many other boards and commissions.  They expect people to show up at the meetings and hear what is discussed."  He continued, "By rule, you don't have to allow any public comment at a Board meeting."  He said,  "I still don't understand how information disseminates from this place and how people could get to the point that they were, when the Town Board hadn't been privy to a lot of it."

Tom Nelson replied that he did go to a meeting and that he expected his petition to reach the Town Board.  Multiple simultaneous discussions ensued, and the motion was called to adjourn.