HomeMy WebLinkAboutCounty Board of Supervisors - Minutes - 12/8/1981December oa., 1981
MEETING OF THE
BAYFIELD COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
December 6, 1981
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Walter Barningham.
The following members answered roll call: No. 1
Present - Erickson, Meierotto, Barningham, Sneed, Maki, McGillivray, Mattson, Rave, Soderstrom,
Johnson, Carter, Diamon, Anderson, Wickman, Ludzack, Renoos
Absent - Seidel, Sechen
Present - 16
Absent - 2
TOTAL 18
No. 2
A prayer and pldege of allegiance were led by Carl Anderson, board member.
No.3
Moved by Erickson and seconded by Wickman to dispense with the reading of the minutes
of the previous meeting and to approve of the minutes as written. Motion carried.
The following petition was read: No. 4
October 21, 1981
TO: James C. Strom
Bayfield County Clerk
Bayfield County Courthouse
Washburn, WI 54891
Dear Mr. Strom:
You are hereby petitioned to call a Special Meeting of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors
at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday evening, December 8, 1981, at the Courthouse, Washburn, Wisconsin, for the
following purposes:
1) `io adopt the 1982 budget and set the tax levy.
2) All other matters which may come before said Board of Supervisors.
Signed: Dale Maki, James Mattson, Carl Anderson, Robert Sechen, Harold Wickman, Karl Ludzack,
Art Meierotto, Edwin Erickson, Charles Diamon, Edwin Renoos, Swen Soderstrom,William Rave,
William Carter, Carolyn Sneed, Wallace Johnson, Walter Barningham
Moved by Meierotto and seconded by Carter to receive the petition and place it on
file. Motion carried.
NO.5
George Phillips, representing the DNR, addressed the board regarding a proposed trade
of land between the U.S. Forest . Service and a prsvate owner. The land in question is the
following: 28 acres in the NWNW, 13 acres in the NENW, 40 acres in the NENE, all in Sec. 29,
T43N, RSW.
Phillips informed the board that the DNR has a serious objection to the trade", --of lands.
His reason was because if the trade of lands goes through, it would cut off all public access to
Ghos+ Lake. Phillips encouraged the board to support the DNR's stand in this matter by objecting
to the proposed trade.
Renoos suggested that Phillips write up a resolution for the board to adopt.
Robert 9echen arrived at this time
December
1981
i _m
4 4 _..
No.6
Moved by Carter and seconded by Maki to_adjourn as a county board and reconvene as
a committee of the Whole to hold a public hearing on the 1982 county budget. Motion carried.
William Bussey, District Attorney, was first to speak to the board regarding three
items.
_ The first item was in reference to the County Child Support Agency which is attached
to the District Attorney's Office.. Bussey gave a brief explanation of what the child support
agency does and then presented his problem. The current child support agent. Donald MacDonald
will be retiring in 1982. Bussey explained that the child support budget will need an additional
$2,500 to cover the additional -expenses of retirement benefits and he also added there will be
a two week period during which time both MacDonald and his successor will.be,employed in order
to train the successor in the position;,the $2,500 will also corer this cost.. Bussey.also stated
that he expected this amount to be reimbursed from the state.
The second item he wished -to discuss was the District Attorney's budget. Bussey stated
-_that his budget was reduced by $500 and that he would need at least $300 of that placed back
into this budget. He stated that after salaries were taken out, he only ba6veed $4,000 to cover
other items including supplies, telephone and xerox.
The third item Bussey brought up was.the matter of the elimination,of the position of
court intaker worker which is presently filled by Joyce "Meyer. Bussey highly commended Meyer's
work stating that if this position was eliminated the,-JdVenile justice system would greatly
suffer.
Larry Seidel arrived at this time.
Clyde Sukanen, principal of the DuPont Elementary School, spoke to the board praising
Meyer's work with the school system.
Fred Schlichting, principal of the Washburn High School, agreed -with Sukanen stating
that the area school districts are concerned about the elimination of Meygr's position.
Walter LaJoie, Chairman Town of Barnes, next spoke on the law enforcement, budget,
stating the need for more officer's to cover the county.
Joseph Pemberton, Chairman Town of Iron River, also spoke to the board regarding the
large cut in the Sheriff's budget. Pemberton felt that law enforcement deserved top priority
in the budget.
Renoos stated that the Sheriff's budget was cut by more the $200,000 and he proposed
the question as to where theCouTfN- would get the money to reinstate the original proposed
figure..:..
Francis Patrick, Supervisor for the Tn.`of Iron River and representative from the
Iron River Lakes, Assoc., answered Renoos by stating that the $200,000 figure was for the
hiring of five additional personnel in the Sheriff's Department. Frances stated that even the
addition of one deputy would help the situation. He further added that the Tn. of Iron River's
Police Department cannot provide adequate protection for the area.
Dec. 6, 1981 i.
Bob Matteson, Tn. of Namakagon, also supported the views presented by the Towns of
Iron River and Barnes. Matteson questioned as to what exactly was out from the Sheriff's
budget.
Sheriff Fredericks answered that his budget contained no frills, only additional manpower
which he felt was badly needed.
Ed Pajala; representing the Bay Area Rural Transit System, next addressed the board
appealing to them to reconsider the system's budget request. Pajala stated that the system had
originally asked for a little over $9,000 but that amount had been out entirely out by the
Executive Committee.' Pajala further informed the board that Jack Shubat, manager of BART, has
worked the figure down to an amount of $8,745. Pajala also stated that he had talked to Lou
Stolle, Director for the Unit on Aging, and Stolle had informed him that he could possible stretch
from his transportation fund $2,000 to put toward the BART System. This would still leave in
excess of $6,000 to be picked up by the county.
Carter stated that the SocialciServices Committee endorsed the BART program because
they thought it could be used for transportation in the New Horizons Program.
Jack Shubat stated that New Horizons has agreed to u: e the system on a trial monthly;
basis. He further stated that there were still a few details to be settled with New Horizons on
this.
Don Chatfield, Department of Transportation, then spoke explaining to the board that
the $2,000 the BART Program wished to acquire from Lou Stolle's funds is part of the transportation
funds that Stolle receives from the state not from county funds.
Francis Patrick again spoke stating that there are two items that he wanted the board
to reconsider: 1) an increase in the Sheriff's budget and 2) the retention of the court intake
worker.
Sheriff Fredericks spoke again regarding the retention of the Court Intake Worker.
Fredericks stated that when he first started work with the county he saw the same juveniles in
trouble time after time. He went on to say that since Joy Meyer has taken over the position of
court intake worker, this reoccurance of the same juveniles always getting into trouble does not
happen., Fredericks further stated that the position of court intake did not work out when it was
attached to the Social Services Department.
Diamon stated that if the Social Services Department has the time to take on a full
time position without adding any additional staff then perhaps an elimination of personnel is
necessary in the Social Services Department and not the elimination of the court .intake worker
position.
McGillivary then spoke informing the board that the reason the court intake position
was established was so that it could be separate from the Social Services Departmentand be
totally independant.
McGillivray also commended Meyer's work stating that she sometimes handles three times
the caseloads as some of the social workers.
Dec. 'ff., 1981
&t0126-E, "{ Hu,Cip
U.5•'Foaesrs cR
Mike Fredericks, juvenile officer, addressed the board saying that the juvenile
system .is better now with the courtintake worker position than it has been in the past and
that the county .has a very capable person 7n the position of court .intake .worker. Fredericks
further stated that if the position is eliminated a lot will be destroyed.
Rick Thompson, alderman .from the City of Bayfield, next came before the committee
regarding.the BART program. Thompson stated that it would be premature to discontinue
BART when it was just getting off the ground.
System.
Don Engstrom and Joe Bresette also talked in support of the Bay Area Rural Transit
Moved by Johnson and seconded by Erickson.to adjourn as a committee and reconvene
as a county board. Motion carried.
The following,resolution was read:. No. 7
TO: The U.S. Forest Service
Chequamegon National Forest
157 N. 5th Ave.
Park Falls, WI 54552
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, That the Bayfield County Board does hereby go on record as being opposed
to the land exchange as described by your memo of November 23, 1981, and more particularly
described as: 28 acres in NWNW, 13 acres in NENW, 40 acres in NENE, all in T43N, RSW, Sec. 29,
of Bayfield County; such exchange resulting in loss of public access being objectionable and
not in the best interest of the public.
SIGNED: Edwin Renoos
Moved by.Rave and seconded by Mattson to adopt the..resolution..Motion carried.
The followingresolution was.read: No. 8 -
WHEREAS, The Executive Committee intends to maximize resources enabling the county
to provide an, effective and adequate program for residents of the,county,. and
WHEREAS, The Department of Social Services has funds and personnel available to
provide for the court intake worker and dispositional services, and
WHEREAS, There could be a savings of $19,406 as per the budget request, by the
elimination of this position, and being absorbed by the Department of Social Services, now
therefore be it
RESOLVED, By the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, in session this 8th day of
December, 1981, that the present position of court intake worker be abolished and that court
intake and dispositional services be placed within the Department of Social Services effective
January 1, 1982.
SIGNND: Johnson, Renoos, Meierotto;�Cariter, Seidel
Moved by Daimon and seconded by McGillivray to deny the request.
Johnson then stated that this position is costing the county alot of money and that
if it were tied into the Social Services Department funding could be acquired for the position.
Dec..B, 1981
OtFT- WLA-06
NDP'r1+A
W1 aWw 11
McGillivray then quoted 19.79:-Assembly Bill 1168 (4) which read in part: "State Aid -
State aid to any county for court services under this section shall be at the same net effective
'I rate that each county'is reimbursed for county administration under s.49.52, except as provided
in s.46.26. Counties having a population of less than 500,000 may use funds received uner ss.
46.26 and 49.52 (1)(d), including county or federal revenue sharing funds allocated to match funds
received under s. 49.52(1) (d) 2. c and 3.c, for the cost of providing court attached intake
services in amounts not to exceed 50/ of the cost of providing court attached intake services or
$305000 per county per calendar year, whichever is less."
Ed Dashner, Director Social Services, then commented saying thatihis bill had been
researched and that the funding for the program could be obtained if the program was supervised
by the -Department of Social Services.
Bussey contradicted Dashner stating that this bill must have been an amendment to the
bill he researched, because it did not make any mention at all to the fact that the position had
to be supervised--. by the Department of-Social.,.Services in order to be funded.
Anderson then stated that when Meyer's was hired for this position -it was placed apart
from the Department of Social Services because of the total dissatisfaction -with the way the
department handled the position.
Dashner was asked to comment on his position and he stated that when the Executive
Committee was having problems with the budget, he suggested -to them that the position of court
intake -be eliminated and placed under the Department of,Social Services where it had been
previously and where they may be able to receive funding for it.
Ludze.ck then questioned if the Social Services Department would ask for additional
funding if it abosrbed this position.
Dashner stated that this would not be the case.
Diamon stated that when the court intake work was handled by the Social Services
Department he was extremely dissatisfied with how the department handled the position.
The question was asked on the motion to deny Resolution No. 8
A roll call vote was taken with the following results: No. 8A
Ayes �, Erickson,-Mei'erotto, Barningham,'Maki,'McGillivray, Mattson, Carter, Diamon, Anderson
Wickman, Renoos
Nayes - Sneed, Seidel, Rave, Soderstrom, Johnson., Sechen, Ludzack
Ayes 11
Nayes 7
Absent - 0
TOTAL 18 Motion carried.
The following resolution was read: No. 9
WHEREAS, The Budget and Finance Committee has, in the process of formulating the 1982
propesed budget, eliminated all funds for conventions from each department, and
WHEREAS, It was deemed.in the best interest financially of the county to delete these
expenses for conventions, and
WHEREAS, There may be times when attendance would be necessary or beneficial to the
county, and
WHEREAS The Budget and Finance Committee recommends that no one shall receive
reimbursement for a convention without prier approval of the Executive Committee, now therefore
be it
RESOLVED, That there shall not be any reimbursement to any county employee for any
convention in 1982 prior to approval of the Executive Committee.
SIGNED. Johnson, Renoos, Meierotto, Carter, Seidel
Dec. 8, 1981
Moved by Seidel and seconded by Ludzack to adopt the resolution.
Carl Anderson questioned.if this covered district meetings.
Seidel stated that a district meeting was not considered a convention. Seidel
further added that committees: do receive`advance notice of meetings giving them enough time
to get approval from the Executive Committee to attend. He also stated that it' would be
possible to,receive blanket approval for a number of meetings at onetime.
The question was asked on the motion to adopt Resolution No. 9
Motion carried.
The following dog claim and letters were read: 10, 10a,. & 10b
Owner?s-Claim for Damages to Animals
STATE OF WISCONSIN
S.S.
COUNTY OF BAYFIELD )
I, George 0. Vernon, being first duly sworn on oath depose and say that I am the legal
owner of certain domestic animals located in the Town of Barksdale and County as aforesaid.
That on the 2nd day of May, 1981, Easter. Bar Fly,a purebred quarter horse met with death
(or injuries) resulting from and directly caused by a. dog or dogs the, owner unknown to me.
That upon or before the discovery of the death (or injury) of said animals I observed the
following: That the ih-orse was chased into a fence and was between the barbed wire and
hog wire and walked or ran about 500? tearing ,at her front shoulder., Dr. Palet had to put her
to death because the, injury was too bad to stitch.
That by reason of these facts I claim that the death (or injury) of said animals -is due to the
work of some dog or dogs. And I therefore assess the fair and reasonable market value of said
animals herein described as follows: I paid $3000 in.October 19.80.-The owners were asking
$4,500 but were moving"to Oklahoma; two days before they moved they said'I eould have the mare
for my offer . of $3 , 000 .
Have you paid the current dog tax on all dogs owned by ybu2 Yes
Signed by owner: George 0. Vernon
Affidavit of Investigating Committee
STATE OF WISCONSIN )
) ss.
COUNTY OF BAYFIELD )
We, The Town Board of the Town of Barksdale, being individually first duly sworn on
oath depose and,say that we, have investigated the claim...of.George 0. Vernon for damages as
aforesaid to ascertain and determine whether in -fact said damages were caused by some dog or
dogs. That we have diligently.investigated said claim and now find the facts to be as follows:
A sit was about two weeks after this occurred when -we were notified.,,we had to call others
who were there, namely County deputy Carl Frederick and gamewarden Donald Bjork. They said
it could have been dogs, but nothing was seen to definitely establish that it was caused by
dogs. No bite marks on horse by dogs. z
That by reason of the facts as aforesaid we further find, either (a) that said damage
was caused by some dogor dogs,, or (b) that said damage was not caused by some dog. or dogs.
And further find that the assessed value of said animals at last assessment was --
No assessment on horses.
SIGNED. Fred Janz, Gordon Gilbertson, Richard Galligan
10a
James C. Strom
Bayfield County Clerk
Re; Dog Damage Claim
On May 2, 1981, I was called by Mike Fredericks to assist him"on an investigation of a dead
horse. From my observation of the area and animal tracks and injury to the horse, it is my
opinion that dogs caused the horse to injure itself can a barbed wire fence.
Don Bjork
Warden
Dec. 8, 1981
10b
James Strom
Bayfield County Clerk
Re: Dog Damage Complaint
Dear Mr. Strom:
On May 2, 1981, Mr. Geor.ge.Vernon stopped at my residence and.advised that one of his horses was
seriously injured and had to be' -disposed of by a vet. Mr. Vernon thought the injuries were
caused by dogs and,,requested.an investigation.
Approximately one half hour later, Saturday afternoon, Don Bjork, a, DNR Warden, arrived at the
Vernon farm. Mr. Vernon took us to the area where the incident had occurred.
The horse had apparently attempted to jump a woven wire fence with one strand of barbed wire on
top. In jumping the fence the barbed,wire,,was caught between the horses two:front legs. The
horse then ran along the fence line, several hundred feet, pulling the barbed wire from the
posts as he ran. The wire caused severe lacerations to the lower chest area resulting in injuries
that could not be treated.
In checking the area, Don Bjork.and myself found dog tracks along the fence line and around the
area. There were no dog. -tracks -in -the -area. where -the horse was lying when we arrived. However,
any tracks would have been destroyed by others who had walked in the area.
The horse itself had no visible marks that indicated an animal"had attached it. It was obvious
that the horse's injuries were caused by the barbed wire. The question remains why the horse
attempted to jump the fence. Evidence of dog tracks indicated at least one, possibly more dogs
had been in the area. Hair from two dogs was. taken from a strand of fence which the dogs and
crawled under.
It is possible the horse was harassed by dogs to the point it attempted to jump the fence, however,
there was not enouglf evidence, in the area -for Dori Bjork'and myself to conclude, for certain, that
dogs were the cause.
There was no other evidence in the area to give any indication why the horse would attempt to
jump the fence.
I..have seen several dogs running in a park in this area, however, I do not know who the owners of
these dogs are. I have had no other complaints similiar to this.
With the evidence available, I cannot conclude that the horse was chased by dogs to the point
it attempted to jump the fence. I could not, however,.deny the fact the dogs may have caused
fatal injuries to the Vernon's horse.
Sincerely,
C.M. Frederick
Juvenile Officer
Bayfield County Sheriff's Dept.
Moved by Carter and seconded by Johnson to allow the claim.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results: No..10C
Ayes - Erickson, Meierotto, Barningham, Sneed, Maki, McGillivray, Seidel, Mattson,.Rave,
Johnson, Carter, Diamon, Anderson,.Ludzack
Nayes - Soderstrom, Sechen, Wickman, Renoos
Ayes 14
Nayes 4
Absent - 0
TOTAL 18
Motion carried.
The following claim was read: No. 11
Owner's Claim for Damages to Animals
State of Wisconsin )
ss.
County of Bayfield' )
I,"Iry Berlin, being first duly sworn on oath depose and say that I am the legal owner of
certain domestic animals located in the Town of Lincoln and County as aforesaid.
That on the 18th day of August, 1981, 6 cornish rock chick ns and one mammoth white
turkey met with death resulting from and directly caused by 'a dog or dogs owned by Town of
Lincoln.
That upon or before the discovery of the death of said animals I observed the following:
All bid dead, chewed and drug outside the chicken year. This being the same mode of operation
as observed in this dog before® Said dog has been observed harassing and killing livestock on
other farms and was seen running loose near our home on the day of the attacks which occurred
between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.
19
That by reason of these facts, I claim that the death of said animals herein
described as follows: $3 each -for the chickens; $6 for the turkey.
Have you paid the current dog tax on all dogs owned by you? Yes
Signed by owner:
STATE OF WISCONSIN
Janet Berlin
ss.
County of Bayfield
Affidavit of Investigating Committee
We, The Town Board of Town of Lincoln, being individually sworn on oath depose and
say that we have investigated the claim of Iry Berlin for damages as aforesaid, to ascertain
and determine whether in fact -said damages.were caused by some dog or. dogs. That we have
diligently investigated said claim and now find the facts to be as follows:
No investigation was made. We believe this person to be honest and will take his word for it.
That by reason of the facts aforesaid we further find, either (a) that said damage
was caused by some dog or dogs, or (b) that said damage was not caused by some dog or dogs.
And we further find that the assessed value of said animals at last assessment was
that their fair and reasonable market value is $24.00; $3.00 for.each chieken,
6.00 for turkey.
Signed: Tiny Brown; Harold Wickman; Joe Vaillancourt
Moved by Seidel and seconded by Johnson to allow the -claim.
A roll call vote was taken with -the following results: No. lla
Ayes - Erickson; Meierotto, Barningham, Sneed, Maki; McGillivray,�;Seidel, Mattson, Rave,
Soderstrom, Johnson, Sechen, Carter, Diamon, Anderson, Wickman, Ludzack, Renoos
Nayes - None
Ayes 18
Nayes . 0
Total 18 Motion carried.
The following resolution which was tabled by motion no. 15 at the November 10, 1981,
meeting was read: No. 12
WHEREAS, There are now outstanding and uncashed certain checks issued by Bayfield
County butween the dates of August 24th, 1979 and December 14th, 1979; all as more set forth
in the schedule attached hereto, and
WHEREAS, Said checks can be re -issued upon the proper application by the payee,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That all of the Bayfield County checks listed in
the schedule, attached hereto, be cancelled subject to re -issuance upon proper application.
SIGNED: Seidel, Johnson, Carter, Meierotto, Renoos.
Outstanding checks as carried from Security State BanY\�or year 1979
Stop payment will be ordered:
GENERAL FUND:
Issued to:
Dan Odeen
Cynthia Bonovia
Roseann Susan Bonoavia
Russell'Darwin
Eileen 4-H Club
Frankie Halverson
Troy Jaronitzky
Susanne R.'Johnson
Debbie Emetz
Leah Landry
Alan Pope
Dan Pope
Joanne Peterson
Shirley Rice '
Michelle Seidel
Theresa A. Sandor
Sioux River Valley 4-H
Diana I. Vajacek
Robert Pope
Bill Weber
Iry Berlin
Ruth M. Frederickson
Date
Check No.
Amount
Issued
2812 $
1.00
8-24-79
3005
1.00
9-5-79
3006
2.25
9-5-79
3049
4.00
9-5-79
3054
6.00
9-5-79
3113.
1.50
9-5-79
3137
28.00
9-5�79-
3153 _
15.00
9-5-79
3162
3.50
9-5-79
3189.
3.50
9-5-79
3253
1.75
9-5-79
3254
1.00
9-5-79
3259
.50
9-5-79
3276
3.7.6
9-5.-79
3287
2.25
9-5-79
3309
2.00
9-5-79
3320
4.00
9-5-79
3337
1.50
9-5-79
3440
.75
9-14-79
5194
24.90
11-19-79
5728
40.20
12-10-79
5796
8.88
12-14�79
December .8, 1.9.81
'[o •.
D46tta0_
IT"Z1
Dias �VUU�_
PAYROLL ACCOUNT:
Carl Anderson 10717 25.57 4-13-79
Arthur R. M`eierotto 12580 7.27 8-31-79
TOTAL 190.07
Moved by Johnson and seconded by Wickman to adopt the resolution. Motion carried.
The following resolution was read: No. 13
WHEREAS, In 1978, the State of Wisconsin, Department of Health and Social Services
developed a formula for the distribution of Social Services and Mental Hygiene aids to counties;
and,
WHEREAS; The formula was adopted by the Legislature in 1979; and,
WHEREAS, The allocation to counties was in.some instances limited to less funds
than the formula proposed; and
WHEREAS., The formula attempted.to measure- the community's need for services and
amounts of money allocated were meant to meet that need; and,
WHEREAS, Bayfield County, because of the limitations placed on the implemen ation,of
the formula, will .ose.$90,000.00 in Social Services funds and the same amount again in 1983, and
$60,000.00 in 51.42 Unified Services funds;and
WHEREAS, The Legislature, in ids most recent session -passed increased implementation of
the formula which would have provided these funds to the County; and
WHEREAS, The Governor vetoed an additional allocation to correct the problem in the
biennium budget bill (AB 66) this year,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors call upon
all legislators representing portions of Bayfield County to strongly support the full implementa-
tion of the Community Aids formula so that Bayfield County and other affected counties will receiv
their full share of state human service funds, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a copy of this Resolution be sent to State Senator Dan
Theno and Assemblywoman June Jaronitzky.
SIGNED: Johnson, Carter, Sneed, Mattson, Rave.
Moved by Carter and seconded by Rave to adopt the resolution. Motion carried.
The following resolution was read: No.14
WHEREAS, The Department of Social Services administers financial aid programs, food
stamps and emergency assistance programs, and
WHEREAS, In the course of such programs some recipients of such assistance become
legally obligated to reimburse the department for some or all of the assistance provided, such -
as in cases of overpayment or where the assistance is in the form of a loan, and
WHEREAS, Though the department's policy is to obtain such reimbursements on a voluntary
basis whenever practical, it is sometimes necessary to resort to legal action,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors in session
this 8th\day of December, 1981, that the.District Attorney be authorized to take any legal action
necessary to cover amounts -due the county in any such cases referred to him by the department.
PRESENTED BY: Johnson, Carter, Sneed, Mattson, Rave.
Moved by Rave and seconded by,Mattson to adopt the resolution.. Motion carried.
Dec. 851981
PAO
ffaJUA
00(w. Lmjo - -
s;qui,t1b6 a-
I,OH�U, {�rtywM
lvokN4
CARu Gv /l H .
The following resolution was read: No.lS
WHEREAS, Clarence Peterson, of the Bayfield.County Veterans' Service Commission, is
resigning from his position on the Commission, and
WHEREAS, His service to Bayfield County for 35 years has been distinguished by dedica-
tion to service to Bayfield County and to the people of Bayfield County, and
WHEREAS, The Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County is desireous of recording an
acknowledgment and recognition of this distinguished public service, now therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, in special session assembled
this 8th day. of December, 1981, go on record recognizing -the outstanding and meritorious service
of Clarence Peterson during his tenure in office and be it further
RESOLVED; That this resolution be.made a part of the permanent records of Bayfield
County and .that a - certified copy - thereof be presented Ito . Mr. Peterson.
SIGNED: Carter, Johnson, Sneed, Mattson, Meierotto, Renoos, Rave, Soderstrom, McGillivray,
Diamon, Wickman, Maki, Erickson, Ludzack, Sechen, Anderson, Barningham
Moved by Diamon and seconded by Wickman to adopt the resolution. Motionrearried.
The following resolution was read: No. 16
WHEREAS, The taxes on Government Lot 1, Sec. 21, Township 43N, Range 5W, Bayfield
County, Wisconsin, have not been paid, and
WHEREAS, A statement issued by former County Treasurer Nick Pristash on September 10,
1980, indicated that there were no taxes due on the property for 1975, and
WHEREAS, On the basis of this information, the property was sold to a new owner without
any 1975 taxes being paid, and
WHEREAS, The property has been sold several more times before it was discovered that
the 1975 taxes had not been paid and that the statement issued by the then County Treasurer
was erroneous, and
WHEREAS, The Executive Committee recommends to the County Board that the 1975 taxes
on Government Lot 1, of Section 21, Township 43N, Range 6W, be absorbed by the County, now;
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors meeting this 8th day of
December, 1981, agree that the unpaid taxes of 1975 levied against Government Lot 1, of
Section 21, Township 43N, Range 6W, be absorbed by the County.
SIGNED: Johnson, Meierotto-, Seidel, Renoos.,-Carter, Barningham
and
Moved by Soderstrom and seconded.by.Sneed to.adopt the resolution. Motion carried.
The following resolution was read: N0.17
WHEREAS, Mr. Cary Wiik-.has been employed by Bayfield County as an energy consultant,
WHEREAS, Mr. Wiik has been surveying the building looking for ways to conserve energy,
WHEREAS, Mr. Wiik did meet with the Executive Committee and outlined various methods f
energy conservation, and
WHEREAS, Monies have been placed in the budget for the purpose of energy conservation
pro j;ects and
WHEREAS,/, It is the opinion of the Executive Committee that these projects are
M Ps roP_
reasonable and will conserve energy and they recommend that these projects be undertaken, now
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Executive Committee be given authoriaation'to undertake these energy
conservation projects.
SIGNED: Johnson, Carter,'Seidel,'Renoos, Meierotto, Barningham
Moved'by Renoos and seconded by Meierotto to adopt the resolution. Motion carried.
The following .report was read : No. 18
TO: The County Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County;on the hearing of the petitions to
amend the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance.
The Zoning'Committee of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors, having held a public
hearing pursuant to Section 59.97(5), Wisconsin Statutes, notice thereof having been given as
provided.by law and being duly informed of the facts pertinent to the proposed changes, hereby
recommends that the petitions described as follows be approved.
All existing Zoning Districts in the Town of Namakagon are abolished and the Township
rezoned as follows:
SEE ORDINANCE NO. 19 FOR DESCRIPTIONS
Moved by Renoos and seconded by Seidel to receive the report and place it on file.
Renoos then explained the report to the board.
Bob Matteson, Town of Namakagon, addressed the board saying that when the town was
rezoned in 1971 it was done incorrectly and now they are correcting the errors made in 1971;
however, he was dissatisfied with a portion of the rezoning.
Soderstrom informed the board that the Zoning Committee went along with everything
that Matteson suggested except one item that the town board of Na_makagon requested by changed.
Soderstrom further stated that the town board was happy with the rezoning.
After a lengthy discussion, the following amendatory ordinance was read; No. 19
The Bayfield County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows:
That the Bayfield County Zoning Ordinance, adopted June 1, 1976, be and the same is
hereby amended so that as amended, all existing zoning districts in the Town of Namakagon are
abolished and the Township is rezoned as follows:
Township 43 North, Range 5 West, Bayfield County, Wisconsin
Section 1--------=---------------All F,-1
Section 2------------------------All F-1
,., Section 3------------------------All F-1`.
_t.
Section 4------------------------All F-1
Section 5------------------------All F-1
Section 6------------------------All F-1
Section 7 . . . . . . . . . .
(a) E2 of the NWµ excluding that parcel described as Vol. 2, C.S.M., P.290 =
R-2
(b) W2 of the NWµ excluding those parcels described in Vol'. 2 C.S.M., P. 176 =
R-2
(c) That part of the SWµ lying North of Namakagon Lake and West of Forest
Road 192 = R-2
(d) SEµ of the SEµ = R-R
(e) W z of the SEµ = R-R
(f) That part of the NEµ of the SWµ lying East of Forest Road 192 = R-%
(g) That part of -the SEµ of the SW-1-4 lying East of Forest Road 192 excluding
the Plat of Namakagon Subdivision and that parcel described in Vol. 337,
P. 418 = R.R.
251
December 8, 1981
(h) Those parcels described in Vol. 2, C.S.M., P. 290 = R-R
(i) That parcel described as that part of Block 5 as described in Vol. 298, P. 289 and Lots 7, 8,
and 9, Block 5, Namakagon Village = R.R.
(j) Those parcels described in Vol. 2, C.S.M., P. 176 = R-1 -
(k) That part of the NEµ of the SW-4 lying East of Namakagon Lake and West of Forest Road 192 =
R-1
(1) Plat of Namakagon Subdivision excluding that parcel described .as that part of Block 5 as
described in Vol. 298 and Lots 7, 8 and 9, Block 5, Namakagon Village = R-1
(m) Those parcels in the S2 of the SW4 described in Vol. 6, P. 93; Vol. 343, P. 260; Vol. 128,
P. 405; Vol. 98, P. 169; Vol. 210,. P. 530;.Vol. 218, P. 154 =.R-1
(n) NEµ = F-1
(o) NE 4 of the SE 4 = F-1
(p) That parcel described in Vol. 337, P. 418 = R-2 .
-Section.8-----------------------------------All 12-1
Section 9----------------------------------- All F-1
Section 10----------------------------------- All F=1
Section 11---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 12---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 13----------- ------------ ------ ----- All F-1
Section 14------ --------------------------- All F-1
Section 15---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 16---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 17---------------------------------- All F-1
Section, 18 . . . . . . . . . . . -
(a) E2 = F-1
(b) S2 of the SW4 except that parcel described in Vol. 241, P. 75 = F-1
(c) SEk of the NW4 = F-1
(d) NEk of the SA = F-1
(e) All that part of Government Lot 1 lying East of Forest Road 192 = R-2
(f) All that part of Government Lot 1 lying West of Forest Road 192 = R-1
(g) Government Lot 2 = R-1
(h) NW4 of the SW-4 except those parcels described in Vol. 348, P: 441 and Vol. 271, P.: 299
R-3
(i) Those parcels described in Vol. 271, P. 299 and Vol. 241, P. 75 = R.R.
(j) That parcel described in Vol. 348, P. 441 = R.-1
Section. l9---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 20---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 21--------------------------------- -ALI_ F-1 . . .
Section 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except East 25 rods of Lot 6
(b) East 25 rods of Government Lot 6 = R-1
Section 23---------------------------------- All P-1
Section 24---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(a) N2 of the N2 = F-1
(b) E2 of the E2 = F-1 -
(c) That part --of the- W - of. -the W2 lying West of White Bass Road = F-1
(d) That part of the W2 lying South of County Trunk M and East of White Bass Road = R-1
(e) SW-4 of the NE-4 and.the NW4 of the SW-4 = R-1
(f) SW4 of the SEµ =- R-2
Section 26---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 27 . . . . . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except the -North 25 rods of that part of'Government Lots 1 and'8 lying East of
Delta Lake
(b) The North 25 rods of that part of Government Lots 'l and 8 lying East of Delta Lake = R-1
Section 3'8--------------- --------------------- All F-1
Section 29----------------------------------All F-1 .;
Section -30---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 31---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 32------------------------------- --All F-1
Section 33 . . . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except Government Lot 2
(b) Government Lot 2 = R-1
Section 34
(a) All F-1 except that part of the NW4 lying North and West of Lake Five Road
(b) That part of the NWµ lying North and West of Lake Five Road = R-1
Section 35 . . . . . . . . . .
(a)
W2 of the W2
= F-1
(b)
E2 of the W2
= R-1
(c)
All that part
of the
E2 lying North of Buffalo Lake Road = R-1
(d)
All that part
of the
E2 lying South of Buffalo Lake Road = R-2
Dec. 8, 1981
Section 36 . ® . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except N 2 of the NE-1 . W 2 of the NW and SE-1-4of the SE-4
(b) SEµ of the SEµ = R-2
(c) N2 of the NEµ = R-2
(d) W 2 - of the _NWµ excluding that parcel described - as "the' W 2 of the NW 4 lying South of White Bass
Road less parcels described in Vol. 151, P. 471; V. 208, P. 595; Vol. 209, P__.628; Vol. 228,
P. 563; Vol. 231, Pl. 445; Vol. 209 P. 627; Vol. 215, P. 379 = R-R
Township 43.North, Range 6,West, Bayfield County Wisconsin
Section 1 All F-1
Section 2 . . . . . . . .
(a) All R-1 except that parcel described._in..Vol....155., P- 286_..and. Vol. 151,_ Pl. 148,
except that part of Government ,Lots ,5.. and 7..excluding- Gottland. Resort._Subdivision and except
Lot 1, Block 1 and Lots 1, 2,3, and 4,_ Block 5,.of--Gottland..Resort.Subdivision..
(b) That parcel described in Vol. 155,, P. 28.6. and_ Vol. - 51, .P... 148 R-"..
(c) Government Lots 5 and 7 except Gottland Resort. -Subdivision. _=..R-R,
(d) Lots 1,2,3 and 4 of Block 5, also, Lot .1,._.Block. l..of Gottland- Resort__Subdivision =. R-R
Section 3
(a) All R-1 except the island
(b) Island = F-1
Section 4
(a) SWµ = R-R
(b) S2of the NWµ = R-R
(c) W2 of the W2-- of the SEµ = R-R
(d) NEµ = R-1
(e) E2 of the SEµ = R-1
(f) E2, of, the W2 of the SEµ R-1.
(g) N2 of the NWµ = F-1
Section 5----------- All F-1
Section 6----------- All F-1
Section 7----------- All F-1
Section 8
(a)
All
F-1 except
the E2 of the NE-1-4
(b)
NEµ
of the NEµ
= R-R
(c)
SEµ
of the NE4
= R-1
Section 9 . . . . . . . . .
(a) N 2 of the NW 4 = R-R
(b) NWµ of the NEµ = R-R
(c) That parcel described in Vol. 238, P. 470 = R-R
(d) NEµ of the NE4 = R-1
(e) S2 of the N2 excluding that parcel described in Vol. 238, P. 470 = R-1
(f) That part of the SW-'4 lying East of the Town Road =. R-1 -
(g) NW-1-4 of the SE-4 = R-1
(h) That part of the N2 of the SWµ lying West of the Town Road
(i) SEµ of the SE-1-4 = R-2
(j) SW4 of the SW 4 = F-1
Section 10 . . . . . . . . .
(a) That part of the N2_excluding those parcels described in Vol. 173, P. 261.; Vol. 334, P. 393;
Vol. 294, P. 362; Vol. 344, P. 363 = R-1
(b) That part of --the S2 lying North and West of County Trunk D. Excluding those parcels described
in Vol. 338, P. 301 and excluding that part of Government Lots 8, 17 and 19 lying West of
County Trunk D and North and West of MummT.s_.Bay Road,.less..thos.e.parcels...described in Vol. 229,
P. 248; Vol. 176, P. 365; Vol. 172, P. 20,8;_Vol...338, . P. 227; .Vol.-- 20.0.,_.P...36.8 = R-1
(c) That part of the N2 of the SE-4 lying,South_and.East..of.County. Trunk- D__. excluding .that parcel
described as Vol. 344, P. 385 = R-2 ....
(d) The parcels described as follows will be.Z.oned.R-R:.Vol.-.173,. P....2.61;_.Vol. 334,. P. 383;
Vol. 344, P. 363; Vol® 294; P. 361; Vol. 338, P. 301; Vol. 344,-P. 385; That part -)of the Sz of
the SEµ lying East of County Trunk D; that part of Government Lots 8, 17 and 19 lying West of
County Trunk D and North and West of Mumm's Bay Road, less those parcels described in Vol. 229
P. 248; Vol..176, P. 365; Vol. 172, P. 208; Vol. 338, P. 227 and Vol. 200, P. 368
Section 11 . . . . . . . . .
(a)
N 2
= R-1
I
, .. .
(b)
N 2
of
the
N2 of
the
SEµ .
_. , R-1
(c)
S2
of
the
S 2 of
the
SWµ
= R-R
(d)
S 2
of
the
SEµ =
F-1
(e)
S2
of
the
N2 of
the
SE-1-4
= F-1
(f)
N2
of
the
S2 of
the
SWµ
= F-1
(g)
N2
of
the
SW 4 =
F-1
iz a
Dec_. 8, 1981
Section 12 . . . . . . . .
(a) - N 3/4 less S 2 of -the N 2 of the SE 4. = F-1
(b) That part of the S2 of the SW4 lying North of Garden Lake Road = R-2
(c) That part of the S2 of the SE4 lying North of Garden Lake Road excluding that parcel
described in Vo..221, P. 192 = R-1
(d) That part of Section 12 lying South of Garden Lake Road excluding those parcelsdescribed
in Vol. 221, P. 192; Vol. 324, P. 186 and Vol. 346, P. 418 = R-1
(e) S2 of the N2, of the SE4 = R-3
(f) Those parcels described in Vol.. 221,'P. 192; Vol. 324, P. 186; Vol. 346, P.. 418 = R-R
Section 13
(a) That part of the N2 excluding the island and excluding those lands described as Lots 17, 18,
2.85 299 30, and 31 of the Namakagon Lakeshore Subdivision = R-1
(b) That .part.of the S2 lying North of County Trunk ,M excluding those parcels described as
..Government Lot 6, Vol. 172, P. 277; Vol. 292, P. 240 and Government Lot 2 = R-1
(c) Those parcels described as Government Lot 6 and Government Lot 2 and those parcels described
in Vol. 172, P. 277 and Vol. 292, P. 240 = R-R
(d) Those lands described as Lots 17,18, 28, 29, 30 and 31 of the Namakagon Lakeshore Subdivision
R-R
(e) The island is F-1
(f) That part of the SE4 of the SE4 lying South of County Trunk M = R-3
(g) That part of the SW4 of the SEµ lying South of County Trunk M = F-1
Section 14 . . . .
(a) That part of the NW-4 excluding that parcel described as Government Lot 12 and 6 "'R-R
(b) That parcel described as Government Lot 1 = R-R
(c) The1. E? of the SE4 = R-R
(d) That part of the NE4 lying South and West of County Trunk D, South of Garden Lake Road and
300 feet.North and.East of the centerline of County Trunk D R-R
(e) The E2 of the SW4 excluding that parcel described as Government Lot 1 = R-1
(f) W2 of the SE4 = R-1
(g) That parcel described as Government Lot 12 and 6 = R-2 _
(h) That part of the NEµ lying North of Garden Lake Road and .300 feet -.North and East_ of the
centerline of County Trunk D = F-1
Section 15 . . . . . . ...
(a) N2 of the NE-1-4 = R-1
(b) That part of the S2 lying South of Lake Namakagon = R-1
(c) That parcel described in Vol. 147, P. 218; Vol. 202, P. 87; Vol. 251, P® 258 = R-1
(d) Government Lots 3 and 4 = R-R
(e) The S 2 of the NE-4 = R-2
(f) The N2 of the SE4 = R-2
(g) That part of the NE-1-4 of the SW4 lying North of Lake Namakagon = R-2......
(h) The SE4 of the NWµ excluding that parcel described in Vol. 147,.P. 218; Vol. 202, P. 87;
Vol. 251, P. 258 = R-2
(i) This island is W
Section 16
(a) SE4 = R-1
(b) N2 of the SW4 = R-1
(c), . The is-Idnd in the NE- = R-2
(d) S 2 " of the SW4
(e) NW-1-4 = F-1
Section 17 . . . . . . . .
(a) SW 4 of the NE4 = R-1
(b) NEµ of the SE4 excluding that parcel described in Vol. 209, P. 240— R-1
(c) W2 of the SE4 of the SE4 excluding that parcel described in Vol. 209:, P. 240 = R-1
(d) That part of the SW4 of the SE4 described in Vol. 317, P. 482 = R-1
(e) NW--4 = R-R
(f) SWµ of the SW-1-4 = R-R
(g) That parcel described as Vol. 209,.P. 240 = R-R
(h) E2 of the SE4 of the SE4 = R-2
(i) N2 of the NE-4 = F-1
(j) SE4 of the NEµ = F-1
(k) N2 of the SW4 = F-1
(1) SE-4 of the SW 4 = F-1
(m) NWµ of the SE4 = F-1
(n) SW4 of the SE4 = F-1 excluding those parcels described in Vol. 209,.P..240; and Vol. 317,
P. 482
Section 18---------------------------------- All F-1
Section 19--------------------- ---------- ---- All F-1
I Section 20 . . . . . . . . .
(a) All. F-1 except, the. SE4, of the. SEµ, NEµ. of the. SWµ and that part of the N2 of the NEµ lying
North of County Trunk M
(b) SEµ of the SE4 = R-2
(c) NEµ of the SW-1-4 = R-2
(d) That part of the E2 of the, .NE 4 of the NEµ lying North of County Trunk M = R-2
(e) That part of the N2 of the NE-1-4 lying North of County Trunk M, excluding the E2 of the NEµ
of the NE4. .R-1
December 8, 1981
Section 21 . . . . . . . . .
(a) That part of the N2 lying North of County Trunk M and Garmisch Road excluding the East 1,345
feet except that parcel described in Vol. 344, P. 8 and 9 = R-R,
(b) That parcel described in Vol.'344, P. 8 and 9 = R-R
(c) That part of the East 1,345 feet of the NE4,lying North of Garmisch Road excluding that
parcel described in=Vol. 344,. P. 8, and 9 = R-1
(d) That part of the NWµ lying South -of County Trunk -M = R=3 •
(e) That part of the SW4 of the NE-4 lying South of County Trunk M = R-3
(f) S2 = F-1
(g) That part of the E2 of the NEµ lying South of Garmisch Road = F-1
Section 22
(a) All F-1 Except that part of the "NE q'of'the NE%4 lying North of Garmisch Road
(b)'That part" of the NE -It of"the NE4-lying`'North of Garmisch Road and West -of the Town Road = R-1
(c) That part of the NE4 of the NE4 lying North of Garmisch Road and East of the Town Road = R-R
Section 23 . . . . .
(a) E2 of the NE4 = R-R
(b) S 2 = F-1
(c) That part of the S2 of the-NW4•lying South of Garmisch Road =-F-1
(d) That part of the SW 4' • of the • NE 4 lying South •of Garmisch Road = F=1
(e) That part of the SW4 of the NEµ lying North of Garmisch Road = R-3
(f) The N2 of the NW4 except that part lying North of Garmisch-Road and West of the Town Road = R-
(g) That part of the NWµ of the NW4 lying North of Garmisch Road and West of a Town Road = R-R/:
Section 24 . . . . . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except that part of Government Lots 1 and 2 lying North of County Trunk M
(b) That part of Government Lots-1 and '2 lying North of County Trunk M'= R-1
Section 25---------- All F-1
Section 26----------All F-1
Section 27---------- All -F-1
Section 28---------- All F-1
Section 29---------- All F-1
Section 30 . . . . . . . . .
(a) All F-1 except W 2 of the -NW4
(b) W2 of the NW4 = R-2 •..
Section 31---------- All F-1
Section 32---------- All F-1
Section 33---------- All F-1
Section 34-- All' F-1
Section 35---------- All F-1
Section 36---------- All F-1
These zoning changes were amended by the Bayfield County Zoning Committee -on November 19, 1981. . .
ABBREVIATIONS
R.-1
= Residential
- 1
F-1
= Forestry - 1 - R-R = Residential -Recreational
R-2
= Residential
- 2
F-2
= Forestry - 2
R-3
= Residential
- 3
A-1
= Agricultural - 1
R-4
=_Residentia_
4
A-2
= Agricultural - 2
W
= Conservancy
I
= Industrial
C.S.M. = Certified Survey Map
Vol.' = Volume
P.
= Page
N,
= North
S .-
South
E
= East
W
= West
NW
- Northwest
NE
= Northeast
SW
= Southwest
SE
= Southeast
Signed: Renoos,=Sneed; McGillivray, Barningham, Soderstrom; Maki
Dated: December 8, 1981
Moved by Ludzack and seconded by Johnson-to--table--the^matter until the next meeting for
further study.
Seidel questioned why the matter should be sent for further study when a public hearing
had already been held on the rezoning.
A roll"call vote was taken with the following results: No. 19a
Ayes - Barningham, Sneed, Mattson, Rave,.Johnson, Carter, Diamon, Ludzack
Nayes - Yrickson, Meierotto, Maki, McGillivaay, Seidel, Soderstrom, Sechen, Anderson, Wickman,
enoos
Ayes - 8
Nayes -10
TOTAL 18 Motion lost.
December .$, 1981
No.. 20
Moved by Soderstrom and seconded by Sneed to adopt the ordinance. Motion carried.
No. 21
.Clerk Strom then conveyed to.the board a request from Steve Anich to construct
a building on a parcel of land he recently purchased by land contract in a tax title land
s9.Ie. - The land.contract stipulat-es :that Anich may not build on the parcel until the contract
is paid off.
Moved by Anderson and seconded by Renoos that the request be- denied. Motion carried.
The clerk next w.ent.through the budget.item by item allowing the board to .make
changes in the budget where they felt they were needed.
No. 22
Moved by Renoos.-and seconded by Mattson to insert $300 back into the D.A.'s budget.
.Motion carried. �.
-No . 23
Moved by..MO.Gillivray..and.seconded by Soderstrom to.add $-25,000 to the Sheriff's
Department budget to allow -for the hiring .of an investigator.
A roll call .vote was taken with the following results: No.-23a
Ayes - Maki, McGillivray, Soderstrom,%,Carter, Diamon
Nayes - Erickson, Me.ierotto, Barningham, Sneed, Seidel, Mattson, Rave, Johnson, Sechen, Anderson,
Wickman, Ludzack, Renoos
Ayes 5
Nayes 13
TOTAL 18 Motion lost.
No. 24
Moved by Carter and seconded by Maki to add $2,500 to the Child Support Account.
Motion carried.
No. 25
Moved by Rave and seconded by Anderson to restore an amount of $6,.745 into the
public transportation account.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results: No. 25a-.
Ayes Erickson, Meierotto, Barningham, Sneed, --Maki, McGillivray, Seidel,.Mattson, Rave,
Soderstrom, Johnson, Sechen, Carter, Diamon, Anderson, Wickman, Ludzack
Nayes - Renoos
Ayes 17
Nayes . 1
TOTAL 18 Motion carried.
December '8, :1981
BAYFIELD .COUNTY PROPOSED BUDGET
FOR THE YEAR 1982
TO THE H0140RABLE MEMBERS OF THE
BAYFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
The Executive Committee of the Bayfield County Board of Supervisors submits this
-proposed county budget for the_.:year 1982 together with.a report of operations.
VALUATION
The Wisconsin.Depar-tment..of °Revenue,has.reeommended a total county valuation.for all
real and personal property of $425,431,250.00. The recommended value was approved by the
county board o-n September-29,_.1981,. and all 1981 county and state taxes .will be apportioned
accordingly. The equalized valuation of the county shows an increase over the 1980 valuation
of $29,883,690._00 or 7..5.6%. In 198.O the increase was 15.25/. -
COUNTY TAX LEVY & LEVY LIMITS
Section 70.62 of the Laws of 1975 created new levy limits on the county.
The 1980 county tax levy was.$88:9,.076.46 and with the allowable adjustments the 1981
levy cannot be more than approximately $1';403,173.00. The levy as proposed by the Executive
Committee is $1,029,743.78. No amounts have been included in any of the..department budgets for
salary increases for 1982. There is, however, an amount of $50,000.00 included in the contingent
fund which may take care of .salary .increases and other contingencies.
The committee has included in the 19.8.2 budget in..the revenue section an amount of
$177,135.00 Federal'Revenue Sharing -monies. Due to more realistic budgeting in the revenue
section for 1981, there is no surplus cash.,available to be appli:ed.to the budget in 1982.
The county levy limit for 1982_has been increased due to the,increases-in state
equalized valuations and increased population as well as by the lack of surplus cash that is not
available to decrease the 1981 levy. The proposed county tax levy this year iS $140,667.32
over the 1980 levy and is $373,430.00 below the approximate allowable tax levy. This year after
completion of the tentative budget by the Executive Committee using budget figures as approved by
various county board committees and department heads as well as other estimated expenditures,
the grand total expenditures amounted to $4,214,734.09 with revenues of $2,693,537.25. With no
surplus cash to apply, this would have left a tax levy of $1',521,196.18. The levy would have been
$1181,023.18 over the allowable approximate levy limit.
The committee,c.ou3-d not recommend a budget with a tax 1-evy over the tax levy limit
and even by adjusting the budget to bring it down to the levy limit,, would have represented a
tax levy increase of 41,:S%-ov.er the 19.80.levy._ The committee agreed that it was necessary to
make many drastic cuts to bring the..county tax levy down -to a more.aceeptable figure. Many
large cuts were made in the budget as first compiled, the largest being a reduction of $85,552.29
in the Highway budget and $220,764.08 in the Sheriff's budget and $23,428.00 in the Sheriff's
outlay budget. Recommended staff reductions for 1982 in personnel were made in the Court Intake
Worker department, as well as many other smaller adjustments;in other areas.
REVENUE SHARING FUNDS
The local tax effort (county levy) is an important factor used by the Federal and
State agencies in calculating the amount of Revenue Sharing Funds and State Shared Taxes. Be-
cause the county board has been very conservative in the early 70s, we are.now suffering from
decreased revenues from those two sources. Unfortunately, there is a time lag of several years
in the calculation of the aids and, consequently, any increase in the tax levy this year will not
have an immediate effect on revenues.
Dec. 82 1981
PAYMENTS IN-LIEU=`OF-TAXES
Bayfield County has received in 1981 $115,781.00 in,lieu of taxes on Federal Forest
Lands. The amount is more than the $109,172.00 received in 1980. The payments are based on
75� per acre on Federal Forest Lands less the amount received as payment for timber harvest on
said lands. Pursuant to County Board action 75% of the money is being distributed to the towns
in which the Federal Forest Lands are located.
BAYFIELD COUNTY JAIL
Construction is nearly completed for the new Bayfield County Jail. It is expected
that actual occupancy will be very soon after the first of the year.
NORTHERN LIGHTS MANOR REST HOME
The new county rest home has now been in use for approximately one year. There are
now 73 patients in the new rest home. There was at one time during the year a total of 76
patients in the rest home.
HIGHWAYS
The amount of.$188,000.00 in the Highway outlay only represents the amount included
in the county tax levy;, other highway ,expenditures are not reflected in this budget..
AUDIT
The 1980 Audit Report by John Maitland, C.P.A., has been again completed on
schedule --copies are available for inspection at the office of the county clerk or from
members of the county board. Mr. Maitland has made several recommendations on various
accounting items to the,committee. Many of.his recommendations have already been discussed
and the committee will very_ likely act_faVorably on the other recommendations he has made.
The assistance of Mr. Maitland and his staff continues to be a great asset to
Bayfield County as his services are available throughout the year to all the various county
departments.
The Executive Committee recommends approval of the following budget for 1982.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE: Wallace Johnson, Edwin Renoos, William Carter, Art Meierotto, Larry
Seidel,
rect.
No.
51111
51211
51211.1
51212.1
1221
1261
1410
1412
1423
1521
1540
1561
1610
1621
710
810
1981
GENERAL GOVERNMENT Appropriation
County Board $ 33,350.0.0
Circuit Court .,- 83,349.28
Court _intake Worker. 17,850.00
Probate Registrar` &. Register
in Probate
Family Court Commissioner
Coroner
County Clerk
Elections
Labor Negotiator
Assessment
County Treasurer
Special Accounting
District Attorney
Legal Counsel Cost Allocation
Plan
Register of Deeds
Courthouse
.00
3,870.00
6,200.00
66,700.00
3,750.00
5,500.00
15,825.00
31,149.64
9,900.00
38,719.60
3,500.00
47,604.28
505939.00
1.
. Authorized by
Proposed
Exec. Comm.
for 1982r
for 1982
$ 34,000.00 ,
_ $ .,32,000.00 $
9.7,670.12,;1
91,670.12
19,406.00
-.00
1,467.96
35920.00
65900.00
76,175.00
6,100.00
11,000.00
202065.00
43,129.16
9,900.00
43,610.15
1,467.96
3,920.00
6,000.00
76,000.00
5,000.00
10,000.00
20,065.00
42,179.16
9,900.00
43,110.15
3,600.00
3,600.00
53,869.24
535169.24
555615.00
54,615.00
REVISED
19,406.00
43,410.15
ember 8. 1981
Acct.
1981
Proposed
No.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT Appropriation
for 1982
51911
Tax Deed Expense $
9,150.00
$ 91987.04
51912
Repairs to Tax Deed Property
250.00
250.00
51931
Maps & Plats
151)300.00
250.00
51941
Property & Liability Insurance
8,000.00
20,000.00
51962
Workmen's Compensation
10,000.00
13,000.00
51963
Retirement Fund (Co.'s Share)
1405000.00
160,000.00
51964
Social Security (Co.'s Share)
60,000.00
75,000.00
51965
Health Insurance (Co.'s Share)
40,000.00
48,000.00
51966
Life Insurance (Co.'s Share)
1,500.00
1,800.00
51967
Employee Longevity Pay
8,000.00
91)000.00
TOTAL
710,406.80
823,714.67
PROTECTION OF PERSONS &
PROPERTY
52110
Sheriff
366,303.00
5891)775.34
52131
Criminal Investigation
500.00
`-400,.00
52141
Education & Community Relations
.400.00
300.00
52220
Civil Air Patrol
500.00
.00
52225
Wilderness Search .& Rescue -
.0.0.
5 00-00.
*52260
Red Cliff Law Enforcement
.00
2,390.00
52421
Fire Suppression
150.00
150.00
52611
Emergency Government
14,600.00
16,564.50
TOTAL
382,453.00
610,079.84
HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES
53110 General Health
53109 R.S.V.P.
53131 Home Nursing Program
53230 State General Hospital
53251 Home & Infirmary
53381 51:"42/437 Board
63,592.32
.00
29,362.00
99991.75*
.00
630,866.00
60,236.12
.00
319955.00
.00
.00
617,204.00
*53382 Emergency-Ener.gy Assistance 2,363.00 00..
/� 20,0.00
*53383 Emergency Energy Assist. Admn. 2:,-591.00✓
53611 Social Services 367.,531.00 366,395.00
*53611.02 Youth Aids 83_,584.00 76,091.00
53612 Co. Child: Support Agency. 20,870.64, 22,289.68
*53613
S.S.I. Burial
53621
Resident Indigent Relief
53622
Transient Poor Relief
*53623
Indo China Relief
*53624
Cuban -Haitian Relief
53680
Transportation to Elderly
53681
Nutrition Program for Elderly
53682
Supportive Home Care
53685
Home Delivered Meals
Service Program(State Senior
Center)
53691
Bayfield County Unit on Aging
4,000.00
105000.00
1,000.00
15,000.00
.00
12,276.00
94,010.00
20,510.00
4,473.00
10,100.00
1,500.00
3,000.00
105000.00
.00
10,000.00
1,000.00
15,400.00
85,098.00
28,500.00
4,885.00
52133.00
1,300.00
Authorized by
Exec. Comm.
for 1982
$ 9,287.04
.00
250.00
20,000600
13,000.00
148,000.00
75,000.00
485000.00
1,800.00
9,000.00
777,033.67
369,011.26
400.00
300.0.0
.00
.00
.-0 0
.00
14,864.50
384,575.76
57,536.12
.00
315355.00
.00
.00
613,204.00
202000.00
366,395.00
76,091.00
22,289..68
3,000.00
10,000.00
.00
10,000.00
1,000.00
15,400.00
85,098.00
28,500.00
4,885.00
5,133.00
1,300.00
REVISED
24,789.68
- Flow through account
- State Special Charges
r,
Authorized by
cet.
1981
Proposed
Exec. Comm.
No.
HEALTH & SOC. SERVICES
Appropriation
for 1982
for 1982
REVISED
*
53710
Aid to Families with Depenh
$
$
$
$
dent Children - I
52000.00
9,822.00
93,822.00
53711
Aid to Families with Depen-
dent Children
165000.00
14,000.00
1:4-,000.00
53712
Aid to Families with Foster
Children
49,704.00
47,232.00
47,232.00
32612
Veteran's Relief
.00
500.00
500.00
53821
Veteran's Service Officer
34,964.64
38,357.82
35,685.38
53841
Care of Veteran's Graves
300.00
22500.00
2,500.00
TOTAL
1,490,589.35
1,4701)898.62
1,460,926.18
1;463426.18
PUBLIC- WORKS
54550
Public Transportation
3,771.00
95383.00
.00
6,745.00
TOTAL
31J771.00
9,383.00
.00
6,745.00
EDUCATION & RECREATION
55111
County Library, & Bookmobile
13,308.00
14,193.00
14,193.00
55131
Historical Society
800.00
2,000.00-
500.00
55141
Fairs & Exhibits
331.1050.00
31,500.00
31,100.00
55181
Co. Contribution for Conventions 500.00
500.00
500.00
55321
Snowmobile Trails & Areas
22,605.00
22,850.00
22,850.00
55347
Washburn Rec.
.00
.00
.00
55348
DART Program
.00
.00
..00
TOTAL
705263.00
712043.00
69;143.00
CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
56111
County Forestry
43,
82,832.32
82,832.32
56121
County Forest State Aid
495820.00
162626.00
16,626.00
56350
County Extension -Agent
81,500.60
85,456.76
-85,456.76
56360
Conservation
43-,855.00
46,407.50
46,407.50
56411
-Regional Planning Commission
7-,275.00
7,987.00
7,987400
56431
Zoning
71,864.00
77,332.84
77,332.84
56432
Zoning Bd. of Adjustment
1,900.00
1,900.00....
1,600.00
6433
Payment to Municipalities on
Land
Withheld from Sale
15568.00
19968.00
113968.00
TOTAL
301,211.16
3201)510.42
3202210.42
INDEBTEDNESS
9111
Principal on Bonds
75:,000.00
115,000.00
115,000.00
Interest on Bonds (Hospital)
28,380.00
262070.00
26,070'.GO
I9211
9212
Interest on Bonds (Rest Home)
•107,992.50
105,272.50
1055272'.50
9213
Interest on Jail --Bond
79,627.50
782200.75
7813200.75
TOTAL
291,000.00
3242543.25
324,543.25
TOTAL MAINTENANCE
3,249,694.31
356302172.80
3,336,432.28
3,365,383.28
Flow
through account
December 8, 1981
Acct:
No.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
OUTLAY
61211
Circuit Court
61211.1
Court Intake Worker
61212.1
Register in Probate
61410
County Clerk
61540
County Treasurer
61710
Register of Deeds
61810
Courthouse
63821
Veteran's Service
TOTAL
PROTECTION OF PERSONS &
PRO PERTY
62110
Sheriff
TOTAL
HEALTH & SOC. SERVICES
OUTLAY
63110
County Nurse
63611
Soc. Services Admn.
63682
Supportive Home Care
TOTAL
PUBLIC.WORKS
64550
Public Transportation
TOTAL
EDUCATION & RECREATION
65321 Snowmobile Trails Constr.
65411 County .Parks
TOTAL -
CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
OUTLAY
66111
Forestry
66121
Forestry State Aid
66211
Rivers
*66211.01
Forest Regeneration ORA P
66350
County Extension,A gent
66360
Conservation
66431
Zoning
TOTAL
TOTAL OUTLAY
HIGHWAY
64211
Road Construction of C.T.H.S.
64213
Machinery
64241
Co. Aid Bridge Constr.
TOTAL
1981
Appropriation
950.00
.00
.00
500.00
.00
.00
7,500.00
.00
28,100.00
28,100.00
.00
.00
5,000.00
5,000.00
2,324.00
2,324.00
.00
1,600.00
1,600.00
55000.00
.00
7,588.00
85000.00
2,000.00
.00
400.00
22,988.00
68,962.00
57,935.65
21,250.00
14,817.50
104,003.15
Authorized by
Proposed Exec. -Comm.
for 1982 for 1982
50.00
50.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
500.00
500.00
.00
.00
130.00
130.00
22,000.00(?)
50,000.00
000
.00
22,580.00
50,680.00
106,728.00
106;728.00
500.00
2,000.00
.00
2,500.00
.00
.00.
1,600.00
1,600.00
89000.00
AI
7,588.00
8,313.00
2,000.00
1,600.00
.00
27,501.00
1612009.00
273,552.29
.00
.00
273,552.29
83,300.00
83;300.00
500.00
2,000:00
.00
2,500.00
.00
.00
.00
500.00
8,000.00
.00
7'588.00
85313.00
.00
.60
.00
23,901.00
160,881.00
1882000.00
.00
.00
188,000.00
REVISED
** Flow through account
December 85 1981
r�
�cct.
No. GENERAL REVENUES
41151 Forest Crop Tax,.from
1981
Appropriation
Authorized by
Proposed Exec. Comm
for 1982 for 1982
District
32800.00
3,000600
3,000.00
1161
Land Transfer Tax
52500.00
5,500.00
5,500.00
14 91
Interest on Taxes
605,000.00
755000.00
7513-000.00
2111
Federal Revenue.Sharing
166,494.00
1775135.00
1775135.00
2112
Federal Anti -Recession (Interest)
.00
.00
-.00
2211
Shared Taxes from State
1022023.0
2211.1
Supplemental Shared Tax
from State
7,218.00--
149,3634.00
1.491634.00
2261
State Aid - Manuf. ® &
Equipment
55395.0
2361
Fed. Aid- Nutrition Program
70,126.00
70.2126.00
70,126.00
2363
Fed. Aid - Supportive Home Care
24,510.00
23,672.00
23,672.00
2365
State Aid - Transportation (85.20?)j
.00
142000.00
14,000.00
2366
Home Delivered Meals
4,473.00
4,885.00
4,885.00
Service Program (State Senior
Center)
10,100.00
5,133.00
5,133.00
2542
National Forest Income
27,000.00
28,945.25
28,945.25
2614
State Aid - Family Court
Commissioner
.00
.00
.00
2624
Indian Law Enforcement
2,500.00
2,390.00
21,390.00
2625
State Aid - Emergency Gvt.
613500.00
7,500.00
7,432.25
2627
State Aid - Education & Comm.
Relations
400.00
.00
.00
2713
State Aid for E.P.S.D.T.
28,000.00
21,000.00
21,000.00
2714
Blood Pressure Donations
2,520.00
2,500.00
2,500.00
2716
WIC Reimbursement
660.00
1,200.00
1,200.00
2613
Court Intake
8,925.00
.00
.00
2761
State Aid for Soc. Serv. Admn.
349,796.00
4341805.00
434,805.00
2761.01
State Aid For Soc. Serv® Outlay
.00
2,000600
2.5000.00
2761.02
Youth Aids
83,3584.00
76,091.00
76,091.00
2762
State Aid for Child Welfare
.00
.00
.00
2762.01
A.F.D.C. - F.
49,3704.00
47,232.00
47,232:00
2762.02
A.F.D.`C. - I.
16,000.00
9,822.00
913822.00
2764
State Aid for Co. Child
Support Agency
255000.00
35,000.00
35,3000.00
2766
S'.,S.I.,Burials
4,000.00
3,000.00
3,000.00
2767
Indo China Relief
15,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
2768
Cuban Haitid n.Relief
.00
111000.00
12000.00
2781
State Aid - Veteran Service
Officer
35000.00
3,000.00
3,000.00
2832
State Aid - Fairs
44,200.00
4,200.00
4,200.00
2843
St. Aid - Snowmobile Trails. Constr.
.00
.00
.00
2845
St. Aid - Maintenance of Snowmobile
Trails,
22,505.00
22,850.00
22,850.D0
2871
State Aid - Forestry
492820.00
162626.00
16,626.00
2876
State Aid - Co. Conservation
5,691.00
5,647.50
5,647.50
2881
Emergency Assistance Energy
2,148.00
_
�20,000.00
Est. 20,000.00
2883
Emergency Assistance Energy Admn. 2,591.00
REVISED
37,500.00
* Flow through. account
.Dec. 8, 1981
Acct,
1981
No.
GENERAL -REVENUES
Appropriation
42885
Forest Regeneration O.R.A.P.
85000.00
43511
Zoning Fees and Permits
205000.00
42611
Co. Ordinance Forfeitures &
Defaults
17,000.00
43631
Penal.Fines for -County
18,000.00
44111
County Clerk's Fees
600.00
44131
Circuit Court Fees and Costs
9,400.00
44141
Register of Deeds Fees
23,200.00
44311
Home Nursing Service
19,700.00
44314
Equipment Rental - County Nurse
864.00
44315
Participants Contrib.-
Nutrition
33,000.00
44316
Supportive Home Care Donations
.00
TOTAL
1,319,047.00
COMMERCIAL REVENUES
42541
Federal Aid - Forest Patrol
17,000.00
42765
Unified Services Bd.
558,866.00
44151
Sale of Maps & Plats
2,000.00
44513
County Fair
11,725.00
44322
Home & Infirmary
.00
44551
County Parks
5,000.00
45621
St. Aid - Advertising
.00
48111
Interest on Investment
1005000.00
48112
Interest on Jail Bond
451.1000.00
48211
Office Space
3,420.00
48291
General Hospital Lease
1031.1380.00
48292
General Hospital Rest Home
Lease.- A
107,992.50
48292.01
General Hospital- Rest Home
Lease - B
20,952.50
48611
Sale of County Property
1,200.00
48631
Profit on Tax Deed Sales
180,000.00
48641
Sale of Wood (C.F.L.)
200,000.00
48651
Sale of Wood (Other Co. Lands)
8,000.00
TOTAL
15364,536.00
TOTAL REVENUE OTHER .THAN
PROPERTY TAX
Total Maintenance
Total Outlay -Other than Hwy.
Contingency
Highway Outlay
GRAND TOTAL EXPENDITURES_
Less: Receipts Other than
Property Tax
Less: Surplus Cash Applied
Proposed
for 1982
8,313.00
12,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
2,000.00
10,000.00
23,400.00
2.0,150.00
1,100.00
Authorized by
Exec.. Comm®
8,313.00
12,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
25000.00
10,000.00
25,300.00
20,150.00
1,100.O0
REVISED
361)500.00 36,500.00
.00 .00
1,436,356®75 1,43 8,389. 00 1,440,889.00
11,700.00(?)
11,700.00
5421.$204.00
542,204.00
4,000.00
4,000.00
11,725.00
11,725.0.0
.00
.00
5:,000:00
513000.00
.00
.00
135,000.00
135,000.00
.00 .00
3,420.00 315420.00
61,070.00 61,070.00
-150,272.50 150,272.50
291D789.00 29,789.00
.00 .00
501)000.00 60,3000.00
250,000.00 250,000.00
313000.00 31.1000.00
11.1257,180®50 15267,180,50
$ 2,683,583.00 $ 2,693,537.25 $2,705,569.50 $2,708,069.50
- SUMMARY
3,2492694.31 35630,172.80 35336,432.28 3,3651)383.28
68,962.00 161,1009.00 160,881.00
1505000.00 150,000®00 50,000.00
1045003.15 2732552.29 1885000.00
$35572,659.46 $4,214,734.09 $3-,735,313.28 $3,764,264.28
$2,683,583.00 $2,693,537.25 $2,703,569.50 $2,708,069.50
.00 .00 .00
COUNTY TAX LEVY
** Flow through account
$889,076.46 $1,521,196.84 $1,029,743.78 $1,056,194.78
December 8, 1981
The following resolution was read: no. 26
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, By.the Board of Supervisors of Bayfield County, Wisconsin,
assembled in annual session this 8th day of December, 1981, that there be and is hereby
levied against all the taxable property in Bayfield County the following item to wit:
State Tax for
Forest PurposeS-under Section 70.58(2)
$
85,086.25
For all other
items of the Budget the sum of
$
1,056,198.78
SIGNED: Johnson, Meierotto, Seidel, Renoos, Carter, Barningham
Moved by Renoos and seconded by Erickson to adopt the resolution.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results: No. 26a
Ayes - Erickson, Meierotto, Barningham, Sneed, Maki, McGillivray, Seidel, Mattson, Rave,
Soderstrom, Sechen, Carter, Diamon, Anderson, Wickman, Ludzack, Renoos
Nayes - Johnson
Ayes 17
Nayes 1
TOTAL 18 Motion carried.
No. 27
Moved by Erickson and seconded by Wickman to adjourn.
Motion carried.
Walter Barningham, Co. Bd. Chrm.
C. Strom, Bayfield County Cler
9