|
Two Bills Supported by WTA Need Urgent Help From Town Leaders
WTA Web Site
With less than two weeks left
on current Legislative schedule, WTA Executive Director Rick
Stadelman has asked town officials to help push two bills
supported by WTA.
SB 87 would establish
more rational annexation boundary standards and AB 551 would
give towns approval authority over county development plans.
Both bills have moved part way through the legislative process,
but have now hit snags. Help from town leaders across the
state is urgently needed to gain final passage.
SB 87 would require
that future annexations follow natural boundaries, the
centerlines of highways or surveyor's quarter-quarter lines. The
bill has been amended to specify that otherwise prohibited
annexations can proceed if they are part of a boundary agreement
and the annexing city or village agrees to make payments to the
affected town for five years. It passed the Senate on a voice
vote on January 28 and has been recommended for passage by the
Assembly Rural Affairs Committee (7-2). But the Wisconsin
Realtors Association and Wisconsin Builders Association are now
objecting to the bill, claiming it will cost their members
"millions." WTA responded that, far from increasing costs, more
rational municipal boundaries will encourage both better local
government cooperation and greater service efficiency.
Getting this bill scheduled
for prompt Assembly floor action is the top WTA legislative
priority. Contact your Assembly Representatives as soon as
possible. Ask them to urge the Speaker to promptly place SB 87
on the Assembly calendar. Also ask them to vote for passage.
AB 551 would promote
town/county cooperation on planning issues by giving town boards
the final approval authority before a county plan takes effect
in the town. As amended, town board action would be required
within 90 days. The bill passed the Assembly 78-21 on February 3
and has been recommended by a Senate committee. It is available
to be placed on the Senate calendar, but some County Zoning
Administrators and Code Officers have now raised objections to
the bill on the grounds that it would give towns "too
|
|
