Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance Oa005 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends changes to Dane County icebound-lakes ordinance to reflect modern off-highway vehicles
Summary
The Lakes and Watershed Commission voted to recommend approval of OA005, which would remove an 850-pound vehicle weight limit and vehicle flotation-device requirement, limit allowed equipment to off-highway recreational vehicles, and require wearable personal flotation devices. Staff said the changes clarify enforcement and align with current vehicle types.
The Lakes and Watershed Commission recommended approval of ordinance amendment OA005 to revise Chapter 71 of the Dane County Code governing icebound lakes. Staff watershed manager Kyle Minks told the commission the amendment would "remove the weight restrictions for motor vehicles" and instead limit allowed craft to state-registered off-highway recreational vehicles such as UTVs, ATVs, off-highway motorcycles and snowmobiles, while requiring operators to wear personal flotation devices.
Commissioners asked detailed questions about enforcement, liability for submerged vehicles and penalty amounts. Minks said owners remain responsible for removing submerged vehicles under state rules and that the county and sheriff's office coordinate removals: "He's on the hook for finding someone to come out and remove it from the lake," Minks said, describing the expectation that owners contract specialized removers. Phil Gabler raised concerns about PFD definitions in state code, noting some acceptable Type III devices include heavy winter jackets; staff replied the ordinance defers to state NR definitions and that it may be appropriate to seek sheriff's input on citation amounts.
After discussion, the chair called for a voice vote and declared the commission's recommendation passed. Staff will forward the commission's recommendation to the county board through the formal ordinance-amendment process. Next steps identified by members included asking the sheriff's office for feedback on penalty levels and clarifying PFD expectations in ordinance language.
