Lake Tomahawk residents disagree with town board on placement of slow-no-wake buoys

On June 12, the Lake Tomahawk town board agreed to create an ordinance for placing slow-no-wake buoys in a bay on North Two Lakes.

Town chairman George DeMet asked town supervisors Stephanie Sowatzka and Lenore Lopez if they had any thoughts on what was being proposed, assuming both went to inspect the bay for themselves, which they indicated they had.

DeMet said he visited the area and indicated he understood why the board would get inquiries of concern “on more than occasion.”

“You got 10 homes, 13 piers, nine boatlifts, 15 powered watercraft, 25 plus non-powered watercraft,” he said. “It’s a small bay. I think that the proposal is … very valid and I personally would like to approve a line from the northwest side of lot LT-181-7 and take it across to lot LT-184-3.”

Lopez seconded a motion made by DeMet to do so, but resident Holly McKinney asked if she could comment before the vote was called. 

McKinney said she’s a resident of North Two Lakes and is opposed to any regulations dealing with no wake on any lakes. 

She asked the board if any safety issues had been brought to the town’s attention.

DeMet said he’s heard reports of boats traveling at too fast of speeds. 

McKinney indicated she meant issues involving law enforcement being called, issues resulting in damages to other boats or a person being injured. 

DeMet said he hadn’t heard any reports of that nature.

“No,” he said. “No, we haven’t had any reports and I guess that’s the point is to prevent anything from happening.”

McKinney said “there seems to be an appetite for the current residents” to want slow-no-wake buoys, however, she pointed out, that may not be the case for new or future residents.

She said she spoke with new neighbors, some of whom indicated to her plans of having a jet ski or ski boat. 

“Are we going to do this for all lakes in Lake Tomahawk, that any small bay where there’s less than several hundred feet of frontage that we’re going to make them no wake or?” she asked. 

DeMet said this particular bay is the only one the board’s been made aware of where buoys were requested, “so that’s the only one we’re acting on.”

McKinney said estimated there are roughly 15 people who oppose the slow-no-wake buoys being added. 

Safety is part of the board’s decision, DeMet said, and added he researched some of the other lakes in the area.

“You have on Two Sisters Lake, there’s actually four slow-no-wake bays … Clear Lake has a couple of areas that are slow-no-wake, and it’s not unprecedented,” he said. “So I think it’s a reasonable request. And, as I stated, your lot won’t be included in this.”

There was some discussion with regard to an original proposal of where the buoys were going to be placed, though DeMet said he wasn’t aware of any other proposal. 

Another resident of North Two Lakes said he thinks there’s no need for the buoys if the residents of the lake continue to act “as we always have.”

“I guess my ultimate concern is I can’t imagine why there’s any appetite to take the rights away from other boaters,” McKinney said. “And whether it’s this or any other lake or any other bay or whether you want to be a kayaker, if you want to be a water skier …”

DeMet stopped McKinney, saying the buoys won’t be taking anybody’s rights away. 

“You still have the right to use the bay, it’s just a consideration to keep it slow because it’s a very congested bay,” he said. “Like I said, there’s all these homes and there’s rafts and there’s piers and there’s a lot of usage, so it just makes a lot of sense to me anyhow.”

McKinney said she appreciated DeMet’s concerns, but said she “strongly” feels “the state has got this.”

“They have safety as their utmost concern when they’re thinking from a law enforcement perspective,” she said.

DeMet said the ordinance would simply be a “precaution.”

McKinney disputed that claim and DeMet said he was going to limit the discussion. 

“This is not a public hearing, this is a town board meeting for us to discuss these things,” he said.

Asked if there was an appeal process, DeMet said he wasn’t sure and hadn’t looked into that.

Discussion started to escalate until DeMet reiterated the board wasn’t taking anyone’s rights away and ended the discussion. He called for the vote and it passed unanimously. 

Eric McKinney asked about enforcement of the buoys after the board agreed on creating an ordinance. 

“Do you think it’s going to need enforcement?” DeMet asked. “Do you plan on breaking the ordinance?”

McKinney said his family waterskis. 

“Right, but as long as you’re not waterskiing in that area then there’s no problem is there?”

“Right, but other people?” McKinney asked. 

“Who’s going to do something that’s against the ordinance?” DeMet said. 

“There’s others using the lake,” McKinney said and the discussion ended. 

Lark Road and Garden Lodge CUP

The Lake Tomahawk town board also denied a conditional use permit (CUP) for Garden Lodge on Lark Road. 

There wasn’t much discussion amongst the board members, and after making the motion to deny “based on the initial recommendation” from the town’s plan commission, Lopez read a passage from the town’s comprehensive plan.

“This will involve working with Oneida County to update land use strategies, as well as maintaining and updating town ordinances and other land,” she said while reading. “Use implementation tools. Paramount in the plan is the careful placing of residential development with regard to the community’s natural features and natural resources. The plan recommends protecting the vast majority of the town’s natural features and resources to be protected for continued local and tourist enjoyment and to spur economic growth opportunities. Key implementation tools include development density, development site planning, lot sizes and volunteering land conservation programs.”

The town’s future vision, according to the comprehensive plan, includes limited development “land constraint, which is an opportunity to preserve these natural resources and prevent negative impacts of over-development or development not consistent with the town’s Northwoods character,” Lopez noted.

DeMet said he thinks the board should explore rezoning the area of land the Garden Lodge CUP is for. 

“There’s really not any good reason for that area to be zoned recreational,” he said. “If you look at the shoreline on either side, it’s all single family. So that’s something we can look into. Planning and zoning even said that they would work with us if we want to do that, so that’s something we can think about.”

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