Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Amendment Camping Cabins topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter urges legal review before county reissues camping-cabin amendment with 30% cap; county to send Option F to towns for review
Summary
A resident told the Sawyer County Zoning Committee she is awaiting public-records responses before endorsing a proposed 30% park-model limitation in an upcoming zoning amendment (Option F). The committee said it will send Option F to towns for review and county legal counsel will examine whether state law allows a 30% cap.
A public commenter urged the Sawyer County Zoning Committee to obtain a legal opinion before forwarding an ordinance amendment that would add a 30% cap on park-models or camping cabins in campgrounds to town review.
Linda Zilmer, who identified herself as an Edgewater property owner, told the committee she is pursuing a public-records request to clarify whether a 30% limitation on park models and campgrounds was originally intended to be part of the zoning ordinance. Zilmer said she had found minutes from a Land, Water and Forest Resources Committee meeting in which a motion to remove a 30% limit apparently failed for lack of a second; she said her review of archived minutes left uncertainty and that she could not offer a definitive opinion until the records request is fulfilled.
“Until the public records request is fulfilled, I can’t offer an opinion either,” Zilmer said.
County zoning staff explained that the 30% threshold originated in an ad hoc committee’s recommendation in the mid-2000s and that at various stages the 30% language was included, dropped or reinserted into different drafts and the muni-code codification. Staff told the committee that towns have asked for the 30% threshold to be included in Option F and that the zoning committee had voted previously to send Option F to towns for their input. The zoning administrator told the committee that subsequent state statute changes may affect whether the county can legally adopt a 30% cap and that county legal counsel would review the question.
The committee’s staff told members that Option F had not yet been circulated to town boards and that it is scheduled to go out to towns for review in conjunction with June town-board hearings. County legal counsel Rebecca said she will prepare a legal analysis of whether the 30% limitation can lawfully be included before Option F is circulated.
Committee members acknowledged the need for legal clarity and for towns to review the draft amendment with a clear understanding of whether the numerical cap can stand under state law. No formal committee vote was taken on Option F at the meeting; staff listed the plan to circulate Option F for town review and to provide the legal analysis to committee members.
