* Hearing in a remote location --- Minocqua
is many hours
away from all the population centers of Wisconsin,
making
attendance for most Wisconsin residents impossible.
Several hearings should have been held in multiple
cities, to
reach a true cross-section of the population.
* Hearing during work hours --- A weekday hearing
is
impossible for ordinary working people to attend.
This
favored all the realtors, builders, developers,
lawyers and
politicians who came as part of their paid jobs.
* Short, inadequate notice by the legislature ---
Only one
week’s notice was given, and most people in southern
Wisconsin found out only by word of mouth.
This was an
outrageous slight-of-hand by the JCRAR.
Most hearing
attendees had not had time to read an impartial
analysis of
what the rules actually required, they were forced
to rely on
partisan interpretations which were often inaccurate.
* No written comment period before vote --- The vote
was
immediate, before most Wisconsin residents were
even
aware of the issues. No time was granted for
a written
comment period before the JCRAR voted.
* Hearing located in anti-planning, anti-DNR area of
state
--- The JCRAR selected the audience they wanted
to hear, in
the most rabidly anti-zoning, anti-planning area
of
Wisconsin, which is not representative of the true
feelings of
most Wisconsin residents.
* Hundreds of people turned away --- The JCRAR chose
a
meeting room with a maximum capacity of 75-100 people.
When more than 400 people tried to attend, the local
government officials were forced to turn hundreds
of people
away, due to the safety hazard. The
100 who stayed tended
to be local residents who got there 45 minutes early
and
packed the room. People who had traveled
hours from other
parts of the state were turned away.
* Aggressive advertising by the realtors --- The
Wisconsin
Realtors Association placed dozens of prominent
ads in
newspapers all across northern Wisconsin, whipping
up
hysteria about the pier issues, including inaccurate
claims.
(If these issues were so vital, why didn’t the Realtors
Association and their lawyer Paul Kent raise these
concerns
in the months of negotiations leading up to the
emergency
rules? They’ve proven they can’t be trusted
as negotiators.
They are without honor. The same is
true of the Wisconsin
Builders Association.)
* Complicit news media --- The Lakeland Times printed
editorials and articles featuring inflammatory,
one-sided and
inaccurate propaganda from the Wisconsin Realtors
Association and anti-DNR property rights extremists.
There
was no attempt at balance. The media
deliberately
manipulated and frightened local shoreline property
owners
with non-issues, and used them to promote other
actions that
many reasonable shoreline property owners wouldn’t
support if they had accurate information and a chance
for
full and open debate. The Wisconsin
Lake Association,
whose members include more than 100,000 shoreline
property owners were ignored.
* Hysteria generated on a minor issue --- The simple-
minded focus on the pier issue (NR326) was used
as a
smokescreen, or red herring, to deflect attention
from the
more serious and far-reaching debate concerning
the other
rules upholding the Wisconsin Public Trust Doctrine.
The
first four hours of the hearing were completely
dominated by
pier discussion and debate, frequently based on
misinformation and inaccurate rumors.
For example, many
local shoreline residents attended and were upset
because
they mistakenly thought the rules prohibited benches,
flags
or ladders on their docks. This misconception
was
corrected only after three hours of hearing.
* Inaccurate claims by realtors and legislators ---
The
hearing was conducted by obviously partisan legislators,
and
dominated by lobbyists from the Realtors and other
development interests, perpetuating inaccurate
interpretations of the emergency rules even after
DNR staff
clearly responded to their concerns and corrected
the
inaccuracies. The legislators weren’t
listening to DNR’s
reasonable explanations.
* Major issue delayed and sidelined --- The most
essential
rule in the package, NR 1, wasn’t opened for comment
until
four hours after the hearing started, after most
news media
representatives and public attendees had gone.
* Legislators voting and leaving before testimony ended
---
The public hearing was fraudulent. Legislators
had
obviously made up their minds before the hearing
started.
Citizen comments were irrelevant. Republican
Senators
Robert Welch and Mary Lazich requested and received
a
suspension of the rules allowing them to cast their
votes and
leave long before the end of the hearing, and before
comments had started on NR 1. They both
voted against
NR 1 without bothering to hear citizen concerns.
It was
extremely rude and should not have been allowed.
* Grandstanding by politicians --- Representative
John Gard
was also rude, as he breezed into the hearing in
the middle of
the day, jumped to the head of the line of speakers,
gave an
extreme “property-rights-above-all” speech, then
breezed out
again. He didn’t have the decency or
courtesy to attend the
entire hearing and listen to serious citizen concerns.
His
long and inaccurate speech was out of order, exceeded
the
time limits, and took the place of citizens who
had waited
hours to testify. The arrogance was
astonishing.
* Property rights issue misused, Constitution violated
---
Much of the frenzy created by the Realtors was based
on the
phony claim that “private” property rights were
at risk. This
is not accurate. Under Wisconsin’s Constitution,
all lakes
and streams are PUBLIC property and belong to all
the
people. This means the majority of TRUE
property owners
live in the population centers of Wisconsin, not
in Minoqua
or the northwoods. Shoreline owners
have had the privilege
of extending their docks, rafts, boat hoists, riprap,
and other
private structures into our public waters, but there
must be
strict limits on this activity or the rest of us
will lose the
values we hold most dear on our waterways:
scenic beauty,
clean water, tranquility, healthy wildlife, and
abundant fish.
Wall-to-wall development will ruin these values.
If
shoreline developers want to amend the Wisconsin
Constitution and privatize Wisconsin’s lakes and
streams,
they should be forced to proceed openly in this
direction
rather than using back-door manipulation and Legislative
sleight-of-hand to grab public property under the
guise of
“private” property rights.
* Promises broken and bad-faith negotiations ---
When the
Legislature rushed the “Job Creation Act” to passage
in
January, the Act had been through numerous closed-door,
last-minute negotiations with the realtors, builders
and other
special interests. The process was chaotic,
corrupt and
undemocratic. Many of us struggled to keep
up with the
changes and many still weren’t sure what had happened
even
after the Act passed. Even so, it was
clear that the Act
would weaken at least 23 separate environmental
standards
for shorelines, and several air pollution regulations
as well.
Legislators flatly denied any weakening and insisted
that the
DNR would be instructed to write rules to clarify
their
intent. They promised that the resulting
rules would not
weaken Wisconsin standards. Now that the JCRAR
has
voted to suspend several key aspects of the emergency
rules,
we know these legislators cannot be trusted.
Their promises
mean nothing, and were used as false defense for
the Job
Creation Act.
* Inaccurate reporting of votes in support of rules
--- Some
news media claim that only 14 people registered
in favor of
the rules, while 400 registered against. In
fact, 45 people
registered in support of the rules, and at least
half of these
supporters represented thousands of members across
the
state. For example, Wisconsin Lakes
Association supported
the emergency rules and they represent more than
100,000
shoreline property owners in Wisconsin. In
addition,
Wisconsin Wildlife Federation represents at least
tens of
thousands of hunters and anglers who support the
emergency
rules. In contrast, the vast majority of the
400 who
registered in opposition to the rules were local
individual
shoreline property owners who represented no one
else, and
they came to the hearing primarily because of false
hype
over the pier rule. Many specifically
registered opposition
to the pier rule only. Most knew little about
the rest of the
rules, especially NR 1. The rest of the opposition
came
primarily from the realtors, developers, contractors
and
others who would benefit from privatizing our lakes
and
streams.
* Abuse of DNR --- The ultimate hypocrisy came from
the
legislators who took cheap shots at the DNR, claiming
that
the agency was making a power grab and creating
“thousands of new jobs of DNR bureaucrats.” These
legislators know full well that they’ve slashed
the DNR
budget and staff several times in recent years,
crippling
many of the agency’s functions. At the
same time, they’ve
tied up key DNR staff in months of difficult negotiations,
in
a huge rush to beat this year’s construction season.
These
legislators and their developer friends in the had
many
opportunities for input and clarification during
the
negotiations. Everyone knew there would
be glitches to
work out, but afterall these were only temporary,
stop-gap
rules with less than 100 days to go before they
expire. The
final rules will undergo a more deliberate and careful
process with full public hearings. It’s an
outrage that these
dishonest legislators abuse the DNR when the true
power
grab is by the legislators themselves.
The legislators
promote distrust of an agency THEY control, when
the
legislators are the ones unworthy of trust.
* “Job Creation Act” title is a lie --- This entire
legislative
push has been built on a lie. Any reasonable
person can see
that these shoreline rules have absolutely nothing
to do with
job creation or job retention. The rules
don’t stop
development; they simply direct the development
to occur in
the least destructive and least obtrusive manner.
Few, if
any, jobs are affected.