Washington Island Government Minutes and Agendas

TOWN OF WASHINGTON

TOWN BOARD MEMBERS, MSA, WBOA. AND AIRPORT ADJOINING LANDOWNERS
AUGUST 21, 2007 2:00P.M.
RUTLEDGE ROOM IN THE COMMUNITY CENTER

MINUTES

A. ROLL CALL: Chairman Tim Jessen called the meeting to order at 2:00 PM. Supervisors present were Ron Overdahl and Randy Sorensen. Also present were property owners: Ray and Barbara Hansen, Kate Kaniff, Rob and Marcia Carr and Daniel Nerenhausen along with Mike Hinz, Project Manger from MSA, and Gayle Stearn, Airport Development Engineer, Gordon Fleury, Real Estate Agent both from Wisconsin Bureau of Aeronautics.

B. DISCUSSION OF AIR EASEMENT RIGHTS WITH LANDOWNERS – Discussion lasted until approximately 2:55 PM. Mike Hinz began the discussion by providing an executive summary of the “Carr” and “99” runways. Following Mike Hinz, Gordon Fleury explained the real estate process when a government agency is interested in acquiring land. When a governmental agency acquires land, they have the inherent power of imminent domain and as a result they have to go through a certain process in order to acquire land or an interest in land. In our case most of this is navigation easements on land. Once there is a determination and the DOT has received surveys that delineate the area that we need to have these aviation easements over – will be placed on an “Exhibit A” map (a map an appraiser can work off of). The Bureau of Aeronautics hires an appraiser to go out and evaluate the easements and what impact is on the property. Once the appraisals are turned into Mr. Fleury’s office – the WBOR are then required by law to send these on to a review appraiser. Once the reviewer finalizes his review and finds the appraisals acceptable he/she returns the appraisals to the WBOR. From the appraisal and the review the WBOA establishes an offering price. At this time the landowners involved will be contacted. A face-to-face appointment will be set-up where the WBOA will present their offer to them. Once the WBOA meets with a property owner and sets an offer before them. There will also be a negotiator to go over the plan with the property owner and explain the idiosyncrasies of the plan. If a property owner does not like or agree with the appraisal submitted by the WBOA, he/she has the right to go out and obtain another appraisal and this appraisal will be paid for by the “acquiring agency” (In this case the Town Of Washington) provided the appraisal is received by the WBOA within sixty days if the initial offer. If this occurs the negotiator will again sit down with the individual property owners and discuss the merits of each appraisal and attempt to negotiate a settlement with the property owner. If at some point no deal can be reached then a jurisdictional offer will be made (final offer from the acquiring agency). At this time the property owner has 20 days to either accept or reject the offer. If the offer is accepted then WBOA will arrange for closing. If the offer is rejected, then the 20th day following the rejection, the Town of Washington has the right to “record an award of damages” and the property rights will then be Washington Islands. From the date of the “record of an award of damages” property owners have two years to appeal the amount of compensation you received for the navigation easements on your property.

The amount can be appealed in two ways. The first appeal process involves utilizing a condemnation commission. A commission made up of a group of local citizens. These citizens sit on a board and the acquiring agency (Town of Washington) and the property owners sit down and they present their arguments to condemnation commission. The commission then makes a determination of what just compensation should have been.

The second appeal process if the owner or the acquiring agency does not like the decision of the condemnation commission they can appeal to the circuit courts. They can choose to either appear before a judge or request a jury trial – the same arguments would be presented then the jury or the judge would make a determination on the amount of compensation. When this process is complete – then the it is basically final. Mr. Fleury gave each property owner a pamphlet explaining this process in more detail. This process may seem long, but it is to avail to the property owner every right not only the US Constitution provides them but also the State of Wisconsin for protecting property owners.

At this time Mr. Hinz and Mr. Fleury addressed questions from Rob Carr and Daniel Nerenhausen. Mr. Hinz reminded the folks present that as an airport owner, the Town of Washington is responsible for maintaining clear approaches to its airport. The cost of maintaining the trees will always be the Town’s responsibility. The Town would own the rights to cut those trees – and at any time could come back and say those trees are getting pretty close to the approach slope and either by private contractor or the Town Crew to come in and cut the trees down again. This gives the Town the right after they have purchased the easements to come back and clear the trees at a later date at not cost to the landowner. Remember, there is no cost to the landowner now or in the future for clearing is will always be the Town of Washington’s airport cost to clear the trees when necessary. The easements give the Town the right to keep the airport approach surface clean.

There will be Federal (FAA) money involved and also State of Wisconsin money involved. Wisconsin statutes state that an airport owner must maintain clear approaches to its airport both now and in the future. Part of Gayle Stern’s responsibilities includes visiting airports periodically and ensuring the approaches are clear.

Chairman Jessen inquired into who owned the lumber from trees that may need to be cut. Mr. Hinz responded it would be up to the property owner to keep the lumber or sell it. Also, the property owner could cut the trees themselves or they could decide they do not want any part of the process and request the BOA or the Town to take care of this. All of this would be decided during the negotiation process.

Mr. Hinz explained to Mr. Carr the reason the Town of Washington has to make a decision is due to the following:

In April 2007 the Town informed MSA that they did not want the “Carr” alignment. The property owners involved spoke with the Town Board and told them that they did not want the “Carr” alignment. Now the Town needs to find out from the public if the “99” alignment is the one they want and will be the alignment the Town will stick with based upon the impacts the BOA can present to the property owners as they know them. So after looking at an engineering standpoint and an airport standpoint how is runway “99” going to fit in. MSA and the BOA are providing the Town Board the best information available to assist them in choosing a runway plan. The Town Board is now charged to choose an appropriate runway plan and inform MSA and BOA to continue with the process. The Town Board’s decision does not preempt any rights of the property owners.

According to Mr. Hinz, the BOA’s anticipated schedule, if the Town does act at the September 2007 meeting on the “99” alignment then the state would ask MSA to come back and redo the surveys, the surveys would be given to Gordon Fleury and the negotiations would begin. If this process moves along smoothly, it is possible that construction could begin July of next year. MSA does not always wait until every property owner has “signed on the line” until they begin the engineering of the runway. The plan is to have the two process’s will move along simultaneously. Mr. Fleury (BOA) will begin negotiations based on the property surveys and MSA will go ahead and design the project so that when the time comes that the properties are secured the Town would then be able to go forward with bidding the project out. Jessen reminded the landowners that in order for the process to move forward the Town Board has to approve the runway so the easement negotiations and engineering can continue.

Robb Carr asked Mr. Hinz, what pressure if any would the Town feel from MSA and the BOA to continue with the project if one or more property owners did not want to go along with what is offered to them? Mr. Fleury explained to Mr. Carr, if the Town goes ahead and tells MSA “99” is the runway alignment they want and Mr. Fleury acts as agent for the town and acquires all of the property and easements necessary – if the Town relents and says we do not want to condemn because there were two property owners against this all the costs for the planning, the design, the engineering and initial real estate costs will be the burden of Washington Island. The federal and state governments will not contribute. The Town is asking for federal and state funds to improve the airport and with the feds and state agreeing to fund the project they (feds and state) require certain things from the sponsor’s of the airport. And one of the things they require the sponsors is if we (the State and Feds) undertake and start putting funds into this project then they presume the Town of Washington is going to go through with the project – if the Town decides at the last minute that they do not want to follow-through on the project the Federal and state Governments point out that the Town of Washington committed to start the project and now you are backing out at the last minute then the Town is responsible for the initial costs.

Chairman Jessen reminded Mr. Carr that the airport improvement project is not the Town Board’s idea. The electors of the Town of Washington voted in 2005 to have the work done.

C. ADJOURNMENT - Motion by Sorensen seconded by Overahl to adjourn at 2:55 PM Motion carried.