01-3396 Donaldson v. Board of Commissioners of Rock-Koshkonong Lake District

Listen to this article

“Donaldson had an opportunity to challenge the initial inclusion of his property in the Lake District. Wisconsin Stat. § 33.26(7) is the exclusive means by which to challenge the county board’s decision to create a lake district. [citation]… Enabling landowners to challenge the county board’s determination that their property is benefited by inclusion in the district by petitioning the board of commissioners under Wis. Stat. § 33.33(3) would effectively negate the timeline in § 33.26(7), thereby nullifying the legislature’s intent to limit the time to challenge inclusion in the district.

“Our review finds nothing in the text of Subchapter IV suggesting that the word ‘benefited’ has one meaning at the time of the creation of a lake district and a different meaning after creation. Because ‘benefited’ has the same meaning in the detachment statute, Wis. Stat. § 33.33(3), that it has in the statute authorizing district creation, Wis. Stat. sec. 33.26(3), Donaldson’s petition for detachment was properly denied on the basis that he failed to show a change in circumstance.”

Accordingly, the decision of the circuit court is reversed and the cause is remanded for entry of an order affirming the decision of the Lake District Board.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist IV, Rock County, Welker, J., Lundsten, J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: William P. O’Connor, Madison; Mary Beth Peranteau, Madison

For Respondent: David C. Moore, Janesville