Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dmi Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Edwards trustees discuss using existing nuisance ordinances to press DMI properties for fixes
Summary
Trustees said they will start applying current village nuisance ordinances to several DMI-owned parcels and explore whether escalating fines and liens — drafted with legal counsel — could force compliance. No formal enforcement action was taken; further ordinance revision is planned.
Port Edwards trustees agreed April 29 to start documenting alleged ordinance violations at several commercial parcels owned by DMI and to pursue enforcement under existing public-nuisance rules while considering future ordinance changes.
The board chair reported recent outreach to village staff member Ben and said the plan is to "start tallying some violations for public nuisance" against the DMI properties to encourage corrective action. A trustee said DMI controls eight parcels and urged the board to consider higher fines that escalate monthly, place liens and run any changes through a village attorney because such a policy would likely invite litigation.
The board discussed legal constraints: a trustee cited Village Ordinance 10 (public nuisance) and village statute 25.04 for general penalty provisions and noted the village is bound by the code’s existing penalty schedule. Trustees agreed to begin enforcement under current ordinances and to consider revising Ordinance 10 or section 25.04 at a future meeting if harsher penalties are desired.
Board members raised practical questions about implementation, including what would happen if property is surrendered to the village or sold and how lien procedures should proceed. One trustee emphasized the need for clear guidelines so the village would not be “sideswiped” if property were transferred to the village or sold at a low price.
No motion to change ordinances was adopted at the meeting; members said they would start with available enforcement tools and return to any ordinance amendments later.
The board’s discussion did not record a formal enforcement action; trustees asked staff to continue outreach and to prepare any recommended ordinance language for future consideration.
