Pier bill would bypass public process for private agenda

Released 12/15/05 Contact Tami Jackson (lakeinfo @ wisconsinlakes.org)

Less than two years ago the Wisconsin Legislature passed 2003 Act 118 which created a pier permitting process, exempted certain piers from permitting, and directed the DNR to write administrative rules (NR 326) to administer the statute.

A diverse group of stakeholders, with the help of public, spent eighteen months developing reasonable rules (delivered to the legislature December 9) that represent the best compromise possible. These rules balance property owner’s rights to access the water, to continue enjoying their piers, and to preserve the character and health of our lakes.

Now, before considering the rule, and less than two years after the legislature directed the DNR to write pier rules Representative Gunderson has introduced legislation (AB-850) that would allow certain private riparian property owners to place pre-existing and new piers that are clearly detrimental to other riparian property owners and the public interest in public waters.

With the rapid pace of this bill (introduced November 29, public hearing held December 2, passed out of Assembly December 15), many legislators will not have had time to read the submitted rules before voting to change them again. In addition, several amendments were added to AB-850 making it easier to install piers that are harmful to lakes and interfere with other riparian property owners’ rights, including:

Requiring DNR to issue permits for harmful piers even if they negatively impact an adjacent property owner, obstruct navigation, or damage fish and wildlife habitat.
Restricting the recourses for adjacent property owners who may be harmed by a proposed pier.
Allowing high density condominium and commercial development to double their number of boat slips. This is unfair to single family home owners whose lakes and property are adversely affected.
Creating standards, exemptions, and permitting requirements that are more confusing for property owners, the problem 2003 Act 118 was intended to solve.

We would hope the Senate would consider the proposed rules they directed the DNR create, and reject AB-850.