Fond du Lac council votes to begin eminent‑domain process for longtime vacant downtown building

The Fond du Lac City Council voted 6–1 on Sept. 10, 2025, to adopt Resolution 9202, finding a downtown property blighted and authorizing the city to begin eminent‑domain proceedings. The action was presented by the city attorney as the initial step in a longer statutory process under state law.
City Attorney Miss Hoffman said the resolution is "the very first step in what will be quite a long process," and that the council was being asked only to determine whether the structure is sufficiently blighted to justify the next steps. Hoffman said the property has been unoccupied since February, suffered a fire about 10 years ago, and has had only limited temporary repairs.
The vote follows public comments urging both caution and action. Donna Richards, a resident, told council the item felt premature and said many residents “do not know the result of the Court of Appeals decision” and asked that the city provide more information before committing funds. Shar Trotter, another resident, suggested salvaging the building’s front kitchen for a shared community kitchen if parts of the structure are sound.
Council discussion addressed safety, historic status and prior attempts to work with the owner. Ms. Leering asked the council to delay the matter several weeks so the public could review records and suggested exploring grants or negotiations with the owner. Mr. Godfrey and Mr. Heisler, who moved and seconded the approval motion respectively, emphasized repeated efforts to negotiate with the out‑of‑state owner and safety concerns after years of deterioration.
The council did not vote on demolition, reuse or a purchase price. City Attorney Miss Hoffman explained that if the process proceeds, the city would obtain an appraisal, the owner would be compensated and the owner could contest valuation under the statutory process. The resolution cites the statutory standard for blight; the council’s finding permits the city to move to the next steps required by state statute.
The motion to table the resolution for six weeks failed for lack of a second. Mr. Heisler moved to approve Resolution 9202; Mr. Godfrey seconded. The motion carried with six council members voting in favor and Ms. Leering voting no. The council did not set a timeline for subsequent steps beyond initiating the statutory procedure.
Next steps described by city staff include standard appraisal and notice procedures and additional public hearings later in the process; any decision about demolition, rehabilitation or reuse would come to council at a future meeting.