Attack on Local Control - Mineral Extraction Ordinance
In 2014, Dane County Town government’s local control was, again, under assault by the Dane County Board of Supervisors and the County Executive, using the issue of mineral extraction in the form of ordinance amendment (OA) 26.
Eventually, the Dane County Towns voted 21-13 to veto OA 26, which was directed at mineral extraction sites previously planned for long-term reserve status under a 1968 County ordinance. In response, the County Executive and some county board members proposed a revised ordinance, which required these sites to immediately obtain a reclamation plan. After having done its own analysis, the Dane County Towns Association (DCTA) also opposed this revised ordinance, whose main goal was to replace local control of mineral extraction sites with control by the county board.
At that time, County Executive Parisi asserted, “Dane County residents deserve more say in what goes on in their neighborhoods, not less.” In fact, towns already
had controlling say on mineral extraction sites. Then as now, towns can adopt ordinances regulating hours of operation, truck routes, require reclamation plans and address other subjects which would be regulated by conditional use permits.
OA 26 would not have given towns any new power over mineral extraction sites, which they didn’t already have. What OA 26 would have done was give the Dane County Zoning and Land Regulation committee (ZLR) the power to block the use of mineral extraction operations, which had been identified for 46 years as potential sites. The DCTA’s experience with the ZLR committee had been strained for years, as county board members from the City of Madison began dominating the committee. The Towns had every reason to believe that the ZLR committee would reject mineral extraction proposals even when the local town supports them. Indeed, the committee did exactly that, in March of 2014, with a proposed mineral extraction site strongly supported by the Town of Albion.
Despite strong town support, the ZLR rejected this proposed mineral extraction site because a professor from the state of Maryland, who never personally viewed the site, wrote a letter questioning it.
The County Executive, at the time, stated he wanted more local control; however, the county’s actions demonstrate the exact opposite. Rather than changing the structure of the zoning committee to give towns a real voice in zoning decisions, the County Board rejected real change under their, post-election, reorganization in April of 2014.
The debate over OA 26 was more than just a difference of opinion. In comments to the Wisconsin State Journal, Executive Parisi stated: “The only people that align with the towns’ position are the people who profit from the mining operations.” Mr. Parisi basically accused all elected Town officials of being tools of the mineral extraction industry.
Dane County never negotiates with the towns unless the towns force the County to do so by vetoing ordinances developed without our involvement, which is why the DCTA continues seeking legislative relief through the “OPT-OUT” bill, or AB 563 which is currently working its way through the legislature.”
Towns never supported opening quarries in wetlands or environmental corridors, but did believe it is irresponsible to adopt OA 26, which would have it would have inevitably and unnecessarily restricted the supply and increase the price of raw aggregate building materials necessary for build houses, our roads, and other forms of infrastructure.
In the end, OA 26 was just one of many attempts by the county board to infringe on the local control of Towns.
