Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/07/2012

Home

April 25, 2012 I Volume 6 j No. 8 Zoning Bulletin towns which have enacted ordinances regulating the same subject matter." The town had enacted a billboard ordinance pursuant to its authority granted under Wis. Stat. § 60.23(29). The County claimed that its authority to regulate billboards was not pre- empted by the Town's billboard ordinance. The County contended that counties had the authority to regulate billboards pursuant to Wis. Stat. §§ 59.69(4) and 59.70(22). It argued that since it had enacted its billboard ordinance pursuant to its general zoning authority under Wis. Stat. § 59.69(1) and (4), and not under § 59.70(22), the Town's billboard ordinance did not preempt the County's bill- board ordinance. Finding there were no material issues of fact in dispute, and deciding the matter on the law along, the circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of Adams. The circuit court concluded that when, as here, a town has enacted a billboard or- dinance under § 60.23(29), that ordinance preempts a county billboard ordinance enacted under the more general authority conferred in the county zoning statute, § 59.69. The circuit court granted declaratory relief in favor of Adams. The County appealed. DECISION: Reversed. The Court of Appeals of Wisconsin held that a county has authority under both Wis. Stat. §§ 59.69(1) and (4) and 59.70(22) to enact ordinances regulating billboards and other similar structures. The court further held that, where, as in this case, a town approves a county zoning ordinance that includes a billboard ordinance enacted pursuant to the procedures set out in Wis. Stat. § 59.69(5)(c), the town's billboard ordinance adopted under the town billboard statute does not preempt a county's general zoning authority to regulate billboards in that town. Consequently, the court concluded that, under the facts of this case, the Town's billboard ordinance did not preempt the County's billboard ordinance. In so holding, the court interpreted the statutes according to their plain mean- ing. The court interpreted the statute granting general zoning authority to coun- ties—§ 59.69(4)—as conferring zoning authority to counties to regulate "struc- tures" which include billboards. Thus, the court concluded that the County could, under its general zoning authority granted by § 59.69(4), regulate the con- struction and maintenance of billboards within its geographic limits. Although the statutory scheme for local regulation of billboardsdid contain preemption language, that language applied only to county billboard ordinances enacted under Wis. Stat. § 59.70(22), said the court. In contrast, the court found that neither Wis. Stat. § 59.69 (granting general zoning authority to counties, including over billboards) nor Wis. Stat. § 60.23(29) (granting towns zoning authority over billboards) contained preemption language. Thus, based on this statutory construction, the court concluded that "there is nothing that precludes a county, pursuant to its zoning authority, from regulating billboards in a town that has approved the county's pertinent zoning ordinance, even if the town has enacted its own billboard ordinance under the town billboard statute." The court concluded that, under the facts of this case —where the Town had approved the County's zoning ordinance, including the portion of the ordinance governing billboards and enacted under its general zoning authority pursuant to 6 © 2012 Thomson Reuters