Wednesday, September 30, 2015

AIS update from Michelle Saduskas

From: Michele Sadauskas <>
Date: September 25, 2015 at 1:30:00 PM CDT
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: ais update 9-25-15
Good afternoon everyone-

Here are a few, brand new,  AIS monitoring reports I wanted to share with the group.  Please find reports for Sureshot, Thompson, Alva, Booth, and Killarney here: .

Additionally, I just received a season monitoring report from the WDNR.   I have attached that document.  A number of lakes had new findings of narrow-leaf cattail and aquatic forget-me-not, both invasive species.  Please find information on these two invasives on page 3 of the attached document.

Have a great weekend everyone!     

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

A New Message from AIS Coordinator Michele Saudauskas

This will be the first installment and I will post more later......

From: Michele Sadauskas <>
Date: September 1, 2015 at 2:08:07 PM CDT
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: FW: Shoreland Zoning and Local Control
Good afternoon everyone!

The below email (with 2 attachments) just came across my desk, and I thought it might be of interest to many Oneida County lake associations.  If you have questions and/or comments please direct those to:  John Richter,

Have a great day!

August 20, 2015

To:  Vilas County Lake Association Officers

From:  John Richter, President, Plum Lake Association

We have begun a last minute effort to join forces with like-minded lake associations to seek relief from the changes to shoreland zoning the state recently inserted in the budget.   These changes remove county control of some of the most critical zoning issues and put the State in control with “one size fits all” lesser standards that constitute a very real threat to our lakes.  
One of the most egregious changes is reduction of shoreline frontage requirements to the state minimum.  It will adversely affect Plum and many other lakes with 150, 200, and greater frontage requirements (some as great as 400’), reducing them to 100 front feet.  The reason for quick action on this issue is that, once the zoning departments get the final “directive” from DNR, they will have to begin handling re-platting requests from owners selling out and from developers.  What I have heard is that there will be a flood of requests once the directive is received and when these requests are approved, they are good forever.  If the rule is changed back by new legislation later, they will be still be effective - a legal nonconforming lot at 100 ft.  Re-platting, as I understand it, cannot be reversed.  We have parcels in that situation on Plum, thus our concern.  Many other lakes are in the same boat.  
The reason for greater minimum lake frontage standards is founded in science for the protection of our lakes to maintain water quality and property value.  It was not controversial and not a political issue.  I think we all felt the county had done a very good job setting the standards some 20 years ago.  
All of the rest of this new law can be revisited by new legislation and we have time to consider each issue.  For the shoreline frontage issue, it will be too late - the damage will be done and irreversible, so immediate action on this issue is required.
I have found almost universal agreement in my conversations with other lake association officers on this point; that letting the State set one size fits all standards and take zoning power away from the county makes no sense and is antithetical to the mantra of local control being best.  From a republican legislature, 520 was a big surprise.
We have been asked, by a former senate majority leader (a republican), “How many lake associations are with you?"  They are pursuing remedial legislation at this time on our behalf.  My mission was to contact as many as I could to see if they were generally in favor of returning zoning authority to the county.  To date, I have not found any that were not in favor.  We are in the process of preparing an outline of remedial legislation that will be available shortly.  
We expect to have a broad base of Bipartisan support for this bill.
 We have signed a letter of engagement with a law firm and engaged a public affairs consultant with broad experience in this area and will need to fund the retainer very soon.  We have begun our effort to get commitments of donations from associations and individuals to this effort.  Our efforts will result in return of shoreland zoning authority to each county, insuring local control and a return to our previous regulations that were not controversial or political and protected our lakes and our property values.
We are now tasked with collecting donations for the legal and lobbying retainers.  The escrow account has been set up and donations will be made to through our 501c3 tax-exempt entity.  I will get a letter out with instructions for mailing shortly.  
Overall, the goal is to return control of shoreland zoning to the County, where it belongs and to stop implementation of reduced lakefront minimum lot sizes until our new legislation is effective.  We are the last line of defense.  All of the others lines have been penetrated and we are now called on to step up and defend our lakes.  I know that none of us ever expected to be in this spot, but we are and we need to act now.  Good luck with your groups.  Keep me advised of your progress, as I will you.
I am hoping you will step up.  I need to know as soon as possible if I can add your association and members to our collective voice in opposition to the budget amendment and to join our effort to correct it. 
Plum Lake Association
A. John Richter, President