Village of Bay City, WI Prefers Theft of Land to a Negotiated Trade

The village of Bay City has voted to put in a walking trail along the Missippi River. There is just one small problem, however. The land belongs to Bay City resident David Meixner. Evidently, that's not a serious problem if you think that the village has the ability to take what it likes whenever it likes. Mr. Meixner doesn't agree, and neither would anyone who has worked and saved to build their life's dream on their own property.

According to an article in the Peirce County Herald:

The proposed nature trail would split Meixner’s land into three separate chunks, which he said “makes everything I’ve tried to put together worthless.”

Meixner began acquiring parcels of land there about 15 years ago, in hopes of creating a nature photography sanctuary. However, he said, people walking through his land on a trail would scare away the birds and animals he hopes to attract, therefore destroying his livelihood.

Meixner is proposing to give the village a 650-by-15-foot swath of his land along the back side of his property, along what is platted (although unused) as Eighth Street. The path would then meet up with Market Street, swing around a 130-by-60-foot parking area for the ball field (which Meixner is also proposing to give to the village), and head over the berm on a permanent easement (again, given by Meixner) to the unclaimed island.

“In an effort to try and resolve the issue, I would be willing to give you the land,” Meixner said of his proposal. “The designated parking area, I’ll give it to you. You can have it. If you get the island, I would give a permanent easement to cross the berm around the pond.”

In exchange, Meixner wants a 150-by-50-foot tract of woods and wetland, owned by the village on the northwestern side of his property.

“It’s about the same amount of land I’d give you for the parking lot,” Meixner said. “I would also ask the village to stop any and all claims against my property. It would save the village a ton of money.”

But why would anyone even consider negotiating a fair trade when they have the potential ability to simply take the land for themselves? If the good people of America and Wisconsin don't stand together to protect the property rights of others, then no one will stand with them when the government decides that they would like to have their land, too.

It is the duty and commission of government to protect the natural, God-given rights of the people of their community, among which are life, liberty and property. When governments fail to provide these basic functions, it is the right and the duty for the people to amend or abolish said governments. Hey, that sounds somewhat familiar...

We must stand together or we will all eventually stand alone against the bullies who think that might  makes right and that they can get what they want under threat of force. We have to show them that they are sadly mistaken.

Church owners say they’re being bullied by small-town government (Perry, WI)

Be careful about giving your local town board the power to control the land and it's uses within the community. No matter how "nice" and "friendly" your "neighbors" are who fill the seats of the local town board, they won't always be the ones who fill the seats and they won't always have the appetite of a bird when it comes to power and control. They will succomb to the whims of their own fancies and the fancies of those who think that it is moral and just to take stuff away from people who are not using it in the way that they think is best, just because they have some self-granted legal authority to do so.

Just ask the good caretakers at an historic 19th century church in Perry, Wisconsin. Their local town board has decided that it is in the best interests of the town and the church to destroy the historic landscape surrounding the church. And they're using the power of eminent doman as well as the church itself to raise the money that they need to do it.

St. Croix County Property Rights Case Goes to U.S. Supreme Court

A property rights dispute between St. Croix County, WI and the Murr family, who owns a small piece of property along the St. Croix River, will be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The Murr family own a small 1.25 acre on the banks of the St. Croix River, but the county has forbidden them from building on it, selling it, or doing anything at all with it. The Murrs then asked for just compensation since the county has essentially taken control of the property, but the county only offered 10% of what the Murrs believe that the property is worth.

You can read more about the case here:
Supreme Court will hear Wisconsin family’s property rights case

Agenda 21 = Sustainable Development = Smart Growth = Proposed Cady Zoning

The Cady Town Board has not yet been successful in implementing their "Smart Growth" plan known as Title 13 - ZONING. They did unanimously vote to adopt this Agenda 21 style ordinance in June of 2012 and then sent it to the county for approval, only to have it rejected by the county.

The primary reason that the Cady Liberty Caucus is against this zoning ordinance, written by Dane County attorney Allen Harvey, is because it's primary purpose is to transfer immense control of private property rights away from property owners. The power is then given to an un-elected zoning authority who will sit in judgement of all private party land uses as we, the land owners, go to them for permission and licenses to ask if we can do what we like with our own land.

There is a new documentary out that explains how this "sustainability" agenda has its roots in Communism and serves the UN's Agenda 21. The film is called "It's Easy Being Green When You Have No Choice: Sustainable Development and the End of History." This documentary is only one of many resources out there that clearly exposes the connections between UN's Agenda 21 and local zoning regulations being implemented across the country.

We need to educate ourselves regarding the methods being used to erode away at our natural rights if we are to have any hope in stopping them. Please, for the sake of yourselves and your children for generations to come, stand up and protect your natural rights to life, liberty, and property. Once these rights have been violated by government, which is actually supposed to be the protector of them, we may not ever be able to restore them without great struggle and sacrifice. The time to preserve and protect these rights is now, while we are still in control of them.

Surrendering "Freedom of Choice" for "Poll Worker Convenience"?

Although it's somewhat older news by now, most people are probably not aware that the rules have changed in Wisconsin regarding "write-in" votes.

According to this article on Isthmus, Wisconsin rules were changed in 2014 to save poll workers as much as 45 minutes on election nights, because they are no longer required to count all the votes. 

On April 2, the day after this year's spring election, Gov. Scott Walker quietly signed a bill lifting the requirement that all write-in votes must be counted.

Under the new law, only votes for registered write-in candidates, and write-in votes in races absent a certified candidate on the ballot, will be counted 

To be considered a registered write-in candidate, a special form must be submitted with the appropriate clerk's office prior to the election.

Not only does this new law prevent votes from being counted, but it also prevents votes for "registered" write-in candidates from being cast in the first place. 

According to a memo published by the Wisconsin G.A.B., 

Municipal clerks must provide their inspectors with a list of registered write-in candidates and the offices for which they are running.  This list is not to be posted or advertised in any way.  The list should be present at the polling place, in a folder, so that if a voter directly asks an inspector about write-in candidates, the inspector may refer to the list.  Inspectors may not volunteer write-in candidate information. (emphasis added)

So, how do you even know who you can write-in for an elected position? Well you'll have to ask an inspector at the polling place, assuming that you are even aware that a list of registered write-ins even exists in the first place.

We're told that this new rule is intended to prevent poll workers from having to count votes for Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck, but it also relieves them from counting votes for Joe Citizen who doesn't know that he must first "register" with the clerk prior to the election if there is to be any hope that he might be chosen to represent the people.

Under the new law, only votes for registered write-in candidates, and write-in votes in races absent a certified candidate on the ballot, will be counted.
To be considered a registered write-in candidate, a special form must be submitted with the appropriate clerk's office prior to the election.
- See more at: http://isthmus.com/news/news/write-in-election-rules-changed-under-new-wisconsin-law/#sthash.vlLpWCFT.dpuf

Under the new law, only votes for registered write-in candidates, and write-in votes in races absent a certified candidate on the ballot, will be counted.
To be considered a registered write-in candidate, a special form must be submitted with the appropriate clerk's office prior to the election.
- See more at: http://isthmus.com/news/news/write-in-election-rules-changed-under-new-wisconsin-law/#sthash.vlLpWCFT.dpuf

On April 2, the day after this year's spring election, Gov. Scott Walker quietly signed a bill lifting the requirement that all write-in votes must be counted.
Under the new law, only votes for registered write-in candidates, and write-in votes in races absent a certified candidate on the ballot, will be counted.
To be considered a registered write-in candidate, a special form must be submitted with the appropriate clerk's office prior to the election.
- See more at: http://isthmus.com/news/news/write-in-election-rules-changed-under-new-wisconsin-law/#sthash.vlLpWCFT.dpuf

Proposed Title 13 - February 2015

A draft of the updated Zoning Ordinance - Title 13, had been posted on the Town of Cady website. What do you think?

      *** UPDATE ***

For convenience sake, an improved version of TITLE 13 has been posted on this blog. The improved version puts all of the sections posted on the Town of Cady website together into one document. The smeared pages have been removed and the PDF file has been made searchable so that words of phrases are easier to find using a search tool.

This revised version is the verbatim equivalent of the one posted on the Town of Cady website and has been improved for your convenience by the Cady Liberty Caucus.

Farmland Preservation Plan vs. Property Rights

Last night, 09/19/13, St. Croix County held a public hearing on the St. Croix County Farmland Preservation Plan, adopted by the County Board of Supervisors back in January, 2012. This plan is presented as a program to preserve farmland in the county through the implementation of regulations and tax incentives.

According to the Community Development Director, Ellen Denzer, in March of 2013, this plan primarily affects towns that have adopted county zoning. This would include all towns in the county with the exception of Cady, Forest, and Hudson. Here is an email message from Ellen Denzer:

We sent out a letter to all towns that the county is working on new farmland preservation zoning districts as required by the county farmland preservation plan.  We offered to meet with any interested towns to give them an update on what we are doing and why and asking for their input.  Cady could skip the meeting if they want because they aren’t in county zoning or because they plan to have their own zoning but they can also meet with us to understand what is going on and have enough information to decide if a farmland preservation zoning district is needed in a town zoning ordinance.  If they want their residents to be eligible for the farmland preservation income tax credits they will want more information about options.

Conservation Easements and Farmland Preservation Tax Credits sound like nice incentives to entice land owners into doing what they usually want to do anyway, preserve their farmland. However, what these incentives do is surrender property rights to the government, who then are given a great deal of power to regulate how that farm land is used.

Here is a video from Kirsten Lombard from the Wisconsin 9/12 Project that does an excellent job of explaining the "carrot-and-stick" approach to these types of government programs.

Here are some FAQs on the St. Croix County Farmland Preservation Plan along with a countywide map.