Newbold board updates draft wake ordinance

The Newbold town board tweaked its draft “enhanced” wake ordinance during its Feb. 9 meeting.

About 25 people attended the meeting. Eight spoke in favor of the proposed ordinance during the public comment portion of the meeting, no one spoke against it.

While each person who made a comment was in favor of the ordinance, all of them opposed the ordinance’s inclusion of a two-year “sunset clause.”

Before the board discussed the draft ordinance, town chairman Dan Hess said he wanted to see debate among board members before any motions were made. 

“As you know, as town board members, when we enact a law, we have to make sure it’s done correctly,” he said. 

“A lot of times, fast government is not good government,” Hess added. “So we have to be very vigilant on what we’re doing. We’re creating a law, which is obviously very important to all the people in the room.”

Hess acknowledged the concern regarding the sunset clause.

He said he’s researched what it is and said “typically” sunset clauses are a good thing.

Town supervisor Mike McKenzie, who suggested including a sunset clause when the ordinance was first discussed at a meeting last month, said he doesn’t think it was being interpreted correctly.

The primary concern voiced with regard to the sunset clause was the opportunity for state law to take effect if the ordinance expired at the two-year mark, essentially making it impossible for any local regulation in the future.

McKenzie said he thinks the board already showed its support for the ordinance and noted how the board has worked with the lakes associations that requested it.

“By placing the sunset clause in there, it is gonna trigger an official board of review prior to that (two-year) expiration, to evaluate the effectiveness of that ordinance,” he said. “There’s still state legislation going on that we don’t know where that’s gonna end up. The ordinance might not have any effect if the state mandates that they have statewide regulations on enhanced wakes. So reviewing it after two years is not trying get rid of it in any way. You know, it’s reviewing where we’re at (in two years), whether it should be modified , whether it’s good the way it sits or that’s its intent.”

He also mentioned a contentious time when the board created an ordinance for all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) being used on town roads. 

A one-year sunset clause was placed on that ordinance, McKenzie said, to determine if any concerning issues developed as an effect of that ordinance or if it was “doing what it was intended” to do.

“And here’s what it came down to: it (was placed on) an agenda, we probably talked about it for five to 10 minutes, and there were no issues, there were no concerns,” he said. “The ordinance was working the way it was originally adopted. So we just voted to keep the ordinance. That’s it. The intent is review, not to get rid of it.”

Some said the sunset clause could potentially prevent any chance of the ordinance being grandfathered in, if or when state legislation is passed. 

McKenzie said he personally doesn’t see how the sunset clause would have any effect on an ordinance being grandfathered. 

“Whereas, the Town Board placed a sunset expiration stipulating that this ordinance will cease to be effective two years after the date of enactment unless further legislative action is taken to extend,” is the way the sunset clause was originally drafted.

Hess presented the board with different language for that part of the ordinance: “Whereas, the Town Board placed a sunset clause stipulating that this ordinance will be reviewed by a data analysis on complaints, violations, citations and public safety concerns two years after the date of enactment. Unless further legislative action is taken this ordinance will remain in effect as written.”

“I believe this ordinance, like any ordinance, like I said, we’re creating law, should be reviewed,” Hess said. “It’s a brand-new law, and if we just make it into a law and don’t require us to review it, it’s foolishness.”

The board unanimously approved the updated language regarding the sunset clause part of the draft ordinance. 

During its Jan. 11 meeting, the board agreed to send the initial draft ordinance on enhanced wake to the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for review .

The board also updated the language changes as suggested by the DNR.

Unsure of exactly what steps to take next, like whether the board needs to send the updated draft back to the DNR or not, the board decided to wait and not schedule a public hearing for the ordinance until a future meeting.

Trevor Greene may be reached via email at [email protected].