By: Derek Hawkins//May 26, 2020//
WI Court of Appeals – District III
Case Name: Oneida County v. Sunflower Prop II, LLC,
Case No.: 2018AP2366
Officials: Stark, P.J., Hruz and Seidl, JJ.
Focus: Ordinance Interpretation
Sunflower Prop II, LLC, appeals a judgment validating the enforceability of Oneida County’s pier ordinance and the County’s finding that Sunflower is in violation of that ordinance. Sunflower argues the ordinance is unenforceable because its pier complies with the requirements for a permit exemption under WIS. STAT. § 30.12(1g)(f), and a municipality lacks the authority to regulate the construction and location of piers that qualify for that exemption.
We agree with Sunflower that municipal regulations enacted pursuant to WIS. STAT. § 30.13(2) cannot be applied to a pier that qualifies for a permit exemption under WIS. STAT. § 30.12(1g)(f). Based on the appellate record, however, it is unclear whether Sunflower’s pier in fact qualifies for that exemption, specifically the requirement that a pier be “no more than 6 feet wide.” See § 30.12(1g)(f)1.a. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment and remand for further proceedings. If the circuit court determines that Sunflower’s pier satisfies the requirements of § 30.12(1g)(f), it is directed to dismiss the citation in accordance with our statutory analysis. If the court determines that Sunflower’s pier does not qualify under § 30.12(1g)(f), it may conduct further proceedings as are appropriate to resolve the case. The County has filed a cross-appeal regarding the proper interpretation of certain aspects of its ordinance, which we decline to resolve at this time given that our statutory analysis may be dispositive.
Recommended for Publication