DCTA Home The portal to town government in Dane County
 2014 
Meeting Calendar
 Jan. 15 Exec. Board
 Feb 19
(T of Verona)
Membership
 March 19
Exec. Board
 April 16
April 23
(T of Middleton)
Exec. Board  
 May 21
(T of Dunkirk)
Annual
 June 18 Exec. Board 
 July 16 Exec. Board 
 Aug 20
Aug 13
Exec. Board
 Sept 17
(T of Berry)

Membership
 Oct 15 Exec. Board 
 Nov 19
 (TBA)
Membership 
 Dec 17 Exec. Board 


Membership Meeting

Agenda September 17, 2014 DCTA Membership Meeting at the Berry Town Hall. 

 

One of the main items on the agenda is an update on DaneCom from Director, John Dejung and staff.  Gary Pelletier, a representative from General Communications, has also agreed to attend the meeting.  General Communications is the radio vendor that won the DaneCom contract for Harris Radio Corp, and also represents other radio brands (Motorola excluded).

 

The DCTA Executive Board and DaneCom Governing Board representatives Steve Anders (t. of Cottage Grove) and Doug Meier (t of. Vermont) have been working to understand town issues with the system and bring them to the attention of Dane County officials. 

 

We would like to facilitate an organized question and answer session for towns and their public safety organizations.  Most questions can be best answered if the presenters have them in advance.  If you have questions that you would like addressed at the meeting and have the opportunity to send them to me via email (lauberconsulting@gmail.com) I will get them to Mr. Dejung and Mr. Pelletier.

_____________________________________________
DANE COUNTY TO PROPOSE ORDINANCE RECREATING

FLOODPLAIN ORDINANCE July 9, 2014

The DCTA will carefully monitor proposals update the County’s floodplain ordinance, Ch. 17 of the Code. If the proposal does no more than follow the mandated elements of Wisconsin law, there is neither reason nor opportunity to object to the change. However, the DCTA and towns should oppose any attempt to use the update as a way to adopt provisions more restrictive than mandated.

BACKGROUND

Under 1973 legislation, the federal government adopted and enforces flood protection regulations applicable to all states. Those regulations make federal flood insurance available only if the state in which the property is located has adopted a floodplain management system, including mandatory zoning of all floodplains. Wisconsin has participated in the program for decades. Wisconsin adopted sec. 87.30, Wis. Stats., which mandates floodplain management. In unincorporated areas, counties adopt and enforce floodplain zoning. Town approval of the original and amended County ordinances is not required, sec. 59.692, Wis. Stats., NR 116, Wis. Adm. Code.

 http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/code/admin_code/nr/100/116.pdf

DCTA certainly supports floodplain zoning as it has been adopted in Wisconsin. Dane County has existing floodplain zoning which is found in Chapter 17 of the County Code of Ordinances. Under the federal program, floodplain zoning must prohibit construction of structures intended for human habitation in areas where there is a 1 percent probability of a flood in any given year. These areas are commonly known as “100 year floodplains.” The area included in the floodplain is determined by hydrology studies which consider rainfall, terrain, soils and historical flooding patterns. The floodplain studies result in preparation of Flood Insurance Rate
 Maps (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. The maps include areas within communities. Each map area is known as a “panel.” The map panels are updated periodically to reflect better data and changes in watersheds.

Every Wisconsin county, city and village is required to have a floodplain ordinance which complies with NR 116 standards. The ordinance also must adopt all of the FIRM panels that have been prepared for the jurisdiction, and additional flood prevention maps, such as the area below a dam which would be flooded if the dam failed.

Currently, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources is working with counties, cities and villages to update floodplain ordinances to comply with the DNR’s 2012 model ordinance. DNR recommends the model ordinance be adopted by communities to comply with the State’s requirements. The model ordinance is drafted so that the adopting community need only insert the community’s name in five places in order to comply.

Dane County staff originally planned to amend Chapter 17 of the County Code to address necessary updates. Recently OA 40 was introduced by Supervisor Patrick Miles to make updating amendments to Chapter 17. After OA 40 was introduced, County staff learned that the DNR preferred that the County repeal and recreate the entire chapter in a form consistent with the DNR model ordinance. Brian Standing, Dane County senior planner, informed DCTA that the County will be introducing an ordinance amendment which is currently in drafting. There is a public hearing scheduled for July 22. The proposed ordinance is not yet available. The DNR’s model ordinance is available for review now.

http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/floodplains/documents/ModelOrdwithFloodStorageJan2012FINAL.pdf

The model ordinance tracks the requirements of NR 116. I reviewed the model ordinance, which was issued by the current DNR leadership. I am satisfied that it does not exceed the mandate of NR 116 and federal law.

DCTA learned of the proposal to repeal and recreate Chapter 17 only after someone brought a legal notice in the Wisconsin State Journal to our attention. That notice is the legal notice of the July 22, 2014 public hearing. No notice of the proposal or need to adopt a complete rewrite of Chapter 17 was sent to the Towns, the DCTA or the Dane County Cities and Villages Association [county floodplain ordinances indirectly affect cities and villages]. The ordinance is not a Chapter 10 amendment, and is not subject to Town veto. We would have appreciated hearing about this more directly. We have no indication that the County’s actions were improperly motivated, however, and may have been an oversight.

We note that Supervisor Patrick Miles has consistently attempted to communicate with the DCTA and towns about proposals he has advanced.  Nonetheless, this issue is moving forward very quickly and with little time to evaluate.

For that reason, we will be watching for amendments.

This memo was written by Attorney Mark Hazelbaker. A version of the memo was reviewed by the DCTA Board. The Board will be taking formal action on this issue at its July 16, 2014 meeting.


____________________________________________________________________

May 2014
Open Letter From DCTA President Jerry Derr 
To Dane County Towns About Local Control 
and the Mineral Extraction Ordinance, OA 26

Dear Town Chairs, Supervisors and Citizens:

Towns and other local governments are being challenged by Dane County. The issue of the moment is mineral extraction. The real issue is broader – the County’s desire to dictate to towns and local governments. We must stand together to preserve local control.

You are aware that recently, Dane County Towns voted by a 21-13 margin to veto OA 26. The ordinance amendment was directed at mineral extraction sites that were planned for long-term reserve status under a 1968 County ordinance. In response, the County Executive and some county board members have proposed a revised ordinance which requires these sites to obtain a reclamation plan immediately. DCTA is sending out a separate analysis of the revised ordinance, which DCTA opposes. This letter addresses the more serious problem – the challenge to local control.

In a press release issued by County Executive Parisi, he asserted "Dane County residents deserve more say in what goes on in their neighborhoods, not less.” In fact, towns already have controlling say on mineral extraction sites. Towns can adopt ordinances regulating hours of operation, truck routes, requiring reclamation plans and other subjects which would be regulated by conditional use permits.

OA 26 will not give towns any power over mineral extraction sites which towns do not already have. What OA 26 will do is give the County zoning and land regulation committee the power to block the use of mineral extraction operations which have been identified for 46 years as potential sites. Our experience with the zoning committee has not been favorable in recent years. We have every reason to believe that the zoning committee will reject mineral extraction proposals even when the local town supports them. Indeed, the Committee just did exactly that in March with a proposed mineral extraction site strongly supported by the Town of Albion. Despite strong town support, the Committee rejected it because a professor from the State of Maryland, who never even saw the site, wrote a letter questioning it.

The County Executive says that he wants more local control, but the County’s actions say just the opposite, and loudly.

-          Dane County (before Joe Parisi took office) forced towns to pay for part of the cost of operating and maintaining the new County radio system. The County continues to collect these fees even though the radio system and dispatch system don’t work yet.

-           Dane County unilaterally discontinued its 30-year practice of providing automobile and liability insurance services for EMS districts. When the towns, cities and villages persuaded the Department of Revenue to allow the local units to claim the levy limit associated with that shift in services, the County filed an appeal which has involved all local units in administrative litigation over the issue. The County has indicated it may dump the responsibility of EMS worker compensation insurance on local units.

-          Rather than changing the structure of the zoning committee to give towns a real voice in zoning decisions, the County Board rejected real change when they reorganized for the 2014-16 term.

-          The County continues to dump county highways on cities and villages, refusing to spend money to repair or reconstruct the roads unless the cities and villages agree to accept all responsibility for these roads in the future.

-          The County continues to buy vacant land and development rights in towns, taking property off the tax rolls, and refuses to give the towns any voice in whether or not the lands should be purchased.

 The debate over OA 26 is more than just a difference of opinion. In comments to the Wisconsin State Journal, Executive Parisi stated: “The only people that align with the towns’ position are the people who profit from the mining operations.” You are being accused of being tools of the mineral extraction industry.

Dane County will not negotiate with the towns unless the Towns force the County to do so by vetoing ordinances developed without our involvement.

The DCTA does not support opening quarries in wetlands or environmental corridors. But we do believe it is irresponsible to adopt legislation that will increase the price of the raw materials which build our roads, houses and structures. If OA 26 is adopted, inevitably it will restrict the supply and increase the price of these materials.

Beyond that immediate concern, however, is a more serious one. If the towns do not stand together against the continuing efforts by the County to impose its will on local units of government, there will be no one to stop the County from continuing to do what it has done – take more power from us and shift more costs on us.

We must hold together. We are committed to working with the Towns to help those which feel the need to regulate mineral extraction adopt ordinances to do so. The County should not make that decision for us, whether on this issue or any other.

Sincerely,

 

Jerry Derr

DCTA President