Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Shell Lake council takes no further action after court removes park deed restriction on three city lots
Summary
After a recent court ruling removed a deed restriction requiring three city-owned lots on County Highway B (West) to be used as a park, the Shell Lake City Council opted to take no further action; residents were split between urging park development and asking the city not to spend more money.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Shell Lake City Council decided on Dec. 8 to take no further action after a court recently removed a deed restriction that had required three city-owned lots along County Highway B (West) to be used as a city park. City Administrator/Clerk/Treasurer Andrew Eiche updated the public on the court ruling and told the council he believed the judge’s decision was correct because the governing body had not demonstrated the park requirement was "impossible" or "impracticable."
The agenda item was moved to the front of the meeting so the council and the public could discuss the implications. Eiche said the court ruling relieved the city of the deed restriction but did not require immediate council action, and the governing body briefly discussed options before deciding to take no further action at this time. There was no formal vote recorded to overturn a prior decision; the council’s determination was described in discussion and recorded as "no further action."
Public commenters expressed differing views. Resident Robin Mercier said she was "happy with what [she] heard tonight" and thanked the council; Jeri Bitney attended to observe the discussion. Resident Deb Nebel asked the city not to spend any more money on the matter, while Bill Taubman and Duke Welter urged the council to consider developing the three lots as a park. The council did not commit to a next step or schedule any follow-up action during the meeting.
The council’s decision leaves the legal status of the parcels changed by the court, but no new development or city-funded park work was authorized. The council also noted concerns about further expenditures on the issue and did not set a timeline for reconsideration.
