Act 9: Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning Law

Lucia Ruggiero

Regional Planning Dr. Daniel Moscovici Spring 2012

Introduction The people of Wisconsin have long prided themselves on their independence and local cultures. It is not surprising that when the state began to see environmental issues regarding land use and sprawl, protection from big government was a top priority when discussing planning measurements. This paper aims to explain how Act 9: Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning Law attempted to respect local municipalities while protecting open space. Background Geography and Climate Wisconsin is located in the northern part of the Midwest in the United States and is bordered on the east by Lake Michigan and by the Mississippi River, Minnesota, and Iowa on the west. Michigans Upper Peninsula occupies its northern boundary, while Illinois is located to the south of the state. The state takes up approximately 56,000 square miles and has 72 counties (Wisconsin Historical Society). Geographically, it is divided into five provinces (see Figure 1): the Western Upland, Eastern Ridges and Lowlands, Central Plains, Northern Highland, and the Lake Superior Lowland (Lawrence). The state has a rolling terrain as a result of glaciation from over two million years ago. The glaciation also helped to form over 15,000 lakes and allowed for fertile soils in the region. Wisconsin has a continental climate, with hot summers and winters that commonly have temperatures as low as -20F (Moran). The average annual precipitation ranges from 28 to 34 inches, depending on location (Ibid).

Figure 1

Figure 1: Outlines the state of Wisconsin, its five geographic regions, and 72 counties (Lawrence).

History and Resource Use Until the seventeenth century, Wisconsin was primarily occupied Native Americans, including the Hopewell, Oneota, Sac, Ho-Chunk and Fox tribes. They started farming as early as 500 BC, and began mound building around 100 BC. The various tribes rose and fell over the millennium, until they were encountered by the Europeans in the mid 1600s (Wisconsin Historical Society). In 1634, Jean Nicolet, a Frenchman, became the first European to enter Lake Michigan and present day Wisconsin in search of a Northwest Passage. He wintered with the Ho-Chunk and established a trading post in the Green Bay region. Over the next several, the French continued to use Wisconsin to expand fur trade and the sale of beaver pellets became the chief force of the economy. Wisconsin then fell under British control after the French and Indian war, and was annexed by the US after the War of 1812. Throughout this time, the Europeans and Americans warred with the natives to greatly displace and decrease their populations (Wisconsin Historical Society). Once the Americans resolved their conflicts with the Native Americans, more people were able to settle in the Wisconsin territory. Lead mining provided the major prospect for settlement. By the 1840s, Wisconsin was providing for half of the USs lead demand. Meanwhile, population booms helped

the territory become an official state in 1846 and resulted in the expansion of Milwaukee and Madison, the states capital (Huffman p. 42). By 1850, much of the lead had been mined and extraction became more difficult. This, combined with the gold rush induced migration to California, marked the decline of lead mining in Wisconsin, however prospecting for copper and iron ore continued near Lake Superior (Wisconsin Historical Society). Wheat was the first cash crop in the state, and Wisconsin was considered Americas Bread Basket during the mid 1800s. However, the crop was hard on the soil and a pesto outbreak in the 1860s killed off much of the wheat. Fortunately, the land was suitable for dairy farming, which became the states most important agricultural entity. By 1899, 90% of farms produced dairy cows and the state was made famous for its cheese. Wisconsin was the number one dairy exporter from 1915 to the mid 1990s (Huffman p 42). Another industry that proved extremely valuable to the state was logging. When the homesteaders first arrived, northern and central Wisconsin were covered in dense, soft pine forests that were quickly utilized as a major profit generator. In addition to exporting the lumber, much of it was used to construct the homes and buildings needed for the growing population. From 1890 to 1910, lumber was the states most profitable industry (Wisconsin Historical Society). When the timber industry began to decline, many of the mills were converted and used in the paper industry, helping Wisconsin to produce more paper than any other state by 1953(Huffman p. 50). The success of the timber, mining, and dairy industries would not have been possible if it were not for the construction of the railroad in the 1850s. Initially, the states rivers were used to transport goods; however this was often slow and difficult. Building the railroad greatly helped to promote connectivity throughout Wisconsin and strengthened its economy (Wisconsin Historical Society). Early Environmental Regulation

The implications of Wisconsins industrial development are easy to see. Mining resulted in acid deposition and water quality issues while the overharvesting of timber increased erosion and destroyed beautiful landscapes and habitats. Additionally, paper mills added a great deal of chemical pollution to rivers and streams (Huffman p. 50). Unique to Wisconsin are its early attempts to protect the environment without allowing an overreach of government. Their insistence on protecting sovereignty and promoting cooperation would set a precedent for its Comprehensive Planning Law. One of Wisconsins first attempts at environmental regulation was by state forester E.M. Griffith. From 1904 to 1915, he attempted to create forest reserves in the over exploited north. Unfortunately, fierce opposition from the timber industry and Republican Party stopped his success (Huffman 51). However, Griffiths effort did three very important things for future planning efforts: it highlighted the need for management, set a precedent for state involvement, and showed the effect of working (or not working) with industry when trying to pass a law. After Griffiths conservation battle was lost, Wisconsin enacted the Rural Zoning Law of 1929. This gave county boards zoning authority for agricultural, forestry, and recreational areas, and was the first of its kind in the US (Huffman p. 51). In reality, this law had little effect on deforestation. It did not require that counties enact zoning laws, and it did not set requirements for the zoning that did take place (Shilling and Keyes p. 460). However, it gave counties that chose to the ability to plan without having local municipalities resent the state for enacting a top down approach. It also responded to the call for land conservation by giving counties the option to protect their land from exploitation. Similar laws were passing in 1955 and 1967, giving authority to five regional planning commissions and each county respectively (Ibid). Later, Wisconsin Governors Gaylord Nelson (the father of Earth Day) and Warren Knowles continued to avoid the top down approach to environmental regulation during their terms. Nelson

worked with local businesses to start the Outdoor Recreation Action Program that helped to protect the land in 1961 (Huffman p. 53). Knowles faced a more difficult challenge and had to make attempts to protect Wisconsins rivers from paper mills, which were releasing 12,000 gallons of untreated water for every ton of paper produced (Ibid). Aside from the health and environmental consequences of this, Knowles wanted to find an effective program in an effort to keep the federal government from taking charge of management. He worked with the Kimberly-Clark Corporation, one of the worlds biggest paper companies, to develop the Water Resources Act, promoting quality management and protection of state water (Huffman p. 56). In doing so, he passed the states first law that specifically mentioned ecology while showing a willingness to work with business. Sprawl Wisconsin had developed a fairly effective method for protecting local sovereignty, business, and the environment by the 1970s. However, sprawl presented a different kind of issue. A paper mill dumping contaminated water and a timber industry clear cutting a beautiful landscape can be pin pointed, while sprawl is a collective action. When one farmer chooses to sell his land, it is likely that few people will notice; however, when many farmers follow suite, it can have a major effect on the entire region. In addition, water and timber are public resources. The vast majority of land in Wisconsin is privately owned, making regulation more difficult (Ohm 1). By the 1990s, sprawl was a major concern. The US was losing about one million acres of farmland a year, and from 1950 to 1998, Wisconsin lost nearly 10 million acres (Diaz and Green p. 318). That equates to more than a 30% decrease in the states farmland in less than fifty years (Schilling and Keyes p. 460). This rural sprawl affects the land differently than urban and suburban sprawl. Although they both result in a loss of open space and the need to expand infrastructure, rural sprawl is spread out over a larger area. It also changes the environment in areas with less previous alteration than urban

sprawl (Radeloff et al. p. 803). This can be seen with the habitat fragmentation that has been one of the many factors that has slowed the return of wolf populations in Wisconsin (Radeloff et al. 807). Wisconsins population has steadily increased over the years (see Figure 2). Additionally, as shown if Figure 3, some of the greatest increases in population density from 1990-2000 occurred in the northern and central parts of the state (Wisconsin Maps and GIS Resources). This is significant because this area has traditionally been extremely rural (Ibid). As it cities and towns grew, the state and local municipalities used ad hoc measurements to facilitate the expansion (Schilling and Keyes p. 460). Although they had the authority to do so, only about half of Wisconsins cities, and less than 20% of its towns, had taken the initiative to produce some sort of planning commission. Adding to this was the fact that previous law allowed municipalities to submit partial plans, so many of the regulations were incomplete (Ohm). This resulted in uncertainty and inconsistency for developers and real estate agencies (Schilling and Keyes p. 458). With little regulation, builders either faced NIMBY sentiments from locals or reaped the benefits of municipalities racing to the bottom in an effort to attract business (Schilling and Keyes p. 463). By the mid 1990s, it was clear that Wisconsin needed a state wide planning initiative.
Figure 2

Figure 3

Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning Law Developing the Plan Although it was clear that Wisconsin needed a growth management plan, there was wide disagreement over what should be done. In 1994 Governor Tommy Thompson created the State Interagency Land Use Council and Wisconsin Strategic Growth Task Force to identify and assess the issues surrounding sprawl and growth management (Schilling and Keyes p. 461). He appointed former real estate broker Mark Bugher to chair the council. Bugher and his colleagues developed the red book, which articulated development goals and called for more citizen participation and state assistance in growth management (Ibid). As citizens became more aware of the potential growth management plan, people began to divide. Critics pointed out that smart growth was blamed for the rising costs of living in places like

Portland, Oregon and Boulder, Colorado (Friedrich P. 46). Republicans were also worried that it would be restrictive of land owners rights (Ibid). In an effort to ease concerns, the 1000 Friends of Wisconsin Group was formed to promote engagement and keep people informed (Schilling and Keyes p. 463). Also, Thompson highlighted the fact that his administration was working with environmentalists, realtors, builders, cities, towns, and professional planners to draft the plan (Friedrich p. 46). In spite of his efforts, Thompson still faced controversy, and chose to introduce the plan as part of his budget bill. Some thought this was a corrupt way of bypassing the policy making process, while others considered it legislative brilliance. Because politicians have their own agendas related to the budget, they are less likely to vote it down over one specific aspect. Without this measure, the Comprehensive Planning Law may not have passed (Schilling and Keyes p. 467). Key Aspects Although passing the law was controversial, its initial feedback was mostly positive. Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning Law, which took on the name Smart Growth Law, was hailed by the American Planning Association as a prime example for planning (Schilling and Keyes p. 475). Future Governor Jim Doyle described it as an excellent way for business and environmental leaders to come together and forge a consensus (Friedrich p. 47). The basic concept of the Smart Growth law was that it requires all local governments to develop a comprehensive plan by 2010 (Ohm p. 1). Each plan must contain nine elements: issues and opportunities; housing; transportation; utilities and community facilities; agricultural, natural, and cultural resources; economic development; intergovernmental cooperation; land use; and implementation (Ibid). In addition to the nine goals, the Comprehensive Plan outlines fourteen goals, as shown in Table 1. The law does not tell municipalities how to achieve its goal, but requires that they use practical measures to achieve them (Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources).

Table 1: Fourteen Comprehensive Planning Goals

Shilling and Keyes p. 474

Although the law does not define smart growth, it contains several of its characteristics. For example, all cities with populations greater than 12,500 must incorporate a Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) plan. These plans include mixed use, pedestrian friendly design, and affordable housing (Schilling and Keyes p. 456). To provide incentive for this, cities are awarded one aid credit for any new home built on less than a quarter acre or sold at less than 80% of the median market price

(Ibid). Another smart growth incentive for the plan is property tax relief to farmers in communities with exclusive agricultural zoning (Diaz and Green p. 319). The Smart Growth Law required that each communitys plan be developed by a seven member commission with citizen participation. Members of the commission are appointed by the mayor (Ohm p.1). The law also mandates that the plans be reevaluated every ten years and encouraged neighboring communities to work together. Once a community has a plan in place, it becomes eligible for state funding to help implement it (Schilling and Keyes p. 472). Unlike the growth management laws in places like California and Florida, Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning law is primarily incentive based (Ibid). Evaluation Positive aspects of the Smart Growth law include the fact that it reduces the costs of NIMBY and land use disputes in the long run because communities will already have a plan for siting them (Friedrich p. 46). It also gives municipality a large amount of flexibility to cities and towns to limit impairment by an overbearing state government. It has also been inexpensive for the state (Ibid). Although it has not been particularly expensive to Wisconsin, funding the law has been one of its most contentious aspects. The law only allots two million dollars a year towards its grant program (Friedrich p. 46). Grants are competitive and it is extremely common for municipalities to be completely denied funding, or only given a portion of what they request (Schilling and Keyes 476). Although this can be a positive thing because it pushes communities to be more innovative, it can be frustrating and cause resentment towards the program. This was especially true for Price County, which voted to dissolve its own planning commission after it was denied a $174,000 grant in 2002 (Schilling and Keyes p. 477). The plan was thought to be less contentious because it used a carrot and stick approach over direct mandates. Unfortunately, it has had difficulty actually providing incentives, making compliance less likely. As a result of this, the 2010 compliance deadline was extended by Act 372 (Senate Bill 601).

Another flaw in Wisconsins Smart Growth Law is that its efforts to respect local authorities left the law vague and confusing. The law required plans to be made for towns, cities, counties, and regions (Ohm p. 1). As a result, the law requires overlap. If a town has its own plan, a county still must include it in its growth strategy and it cannot contradict the towns original plan. The same applies to the relationship between a regional planning commission and a county (Diaz and Green p. 16). In addition, some towns do not enact a plan and consider themselves included in the county, while others consider themselves unplanned in the same situation (Ibid). This can result in a number of things including inconsistency, jurisdictional debate and overspending. Wisconsins smart growth law also experienced conflict over the issue of property rights. This was especially true in the North Central Region, where rural people found the largely city and suburban orientated plan unrelatable. They felt as if the government was trying to tell them what to build, and were concerned that their property would be devalued (Friedrich p. 77). Unfortunately, this was mostly a result of lack of information in the community, and can often be seen as poorly informed individuals spread accusations that the United Nations is trying to control their lives (Friedrich p. 47). A major problem with this is that the people who are most against the Smart Growth Law are in the rural areas that have the space that needs to be protected. Because they are in less populated areas, they are also in the locations that anti-growth management politicians try to exempt from the planning laws (Radeloff et al. p. 823). Implementation and Compliance According to the Wisconsin Department of Administration, and Figure 4, nearly every county was in compliance of the Wisconsin Comprehensive Planning Law by the 2010 deadline. However, compliance does not mean that effective planning is taking place.

Figure 4

Wisconsin Department of Administration 2011

Although the Smart Growth Law required certain types of ordinances be adopted by 2010, it did much less regarding their implementation. For example, once a city has approved a Traditional Neighborhood Design plan, it does not have to do the actual zoning or construction. Instead, it can simply wait for a developer to come in and build (Schilling and Keyes p. 481). Essentially, a communitys plan is effective as its participants want it to be. Because the seven members of each planning committee are appointed by the mayor, a town can produce a well thought out comprehensive smart growth plan, or it can opt for dumb growth (Friedrich p. 47). Shortsightedness can make less regulation more favorable. Selling land to developers can privatize management costs, bring in business, and help the local economy (Diaz and Green p 19). Unfortunately, the long term environmental and infrastructural costs are usually neglected when these types of decisions are made. In 2004 the University of Wisconsin at Seven Point took a survey of local plans.

Although all thirty of the towns studied had comprehensive plans that were technically in line with state requirements, the vast majority of them were either minimal or found loopholes to avoid regulation (Schilling and Keyes p 486). On the other hand, there are many municipalities that have taken strides to more effectively manage their land. More than half of Wisconsins counties have implemented exclusive agricultural zoning (Diaz and Green p. 319). In addition, the state has reported fewer brownfields and more protected watersheds. Also, it should be noted that the plan is still new, and more improvements may be made in the coming years. Moving Forward Wisconsins Comprehensive Planning Law provides municipalities with plenty of independence, but is lacking in support. Although it is not a direct mandate, it is largely unfunded and limits local municipalities ability to implement their plans. However, its willingness to work with businesses and citizens has proved exemplary, and most reasonable people can respect its deference to local sovereignty. If Wisconsin is capable of increasing its financial and logistical support to its communities, it is likely to see great improvement in the future.

Works Cited Diaz, Daniel, and Gary Green. "Fiscal Stress and Growth Management Effort in Wisconsin Cities, Villages, and Towns." State & Local Government Review 33.1 (2001): 7-22. Print. Diaz, Daniel, and Gary Paul Green. "Growth Management and Agriculture: An Examination of Local Efforts to Manage Growth and Preserve Farmland in Wisconsin Cities, Villages, and Towns*." Rural Sociology 66.3 (2001): 317-41. Print. Friedrich, Katherine. "Dumbing down Smart Growth | Earth Island Journal | Earth Island Institute." Earth Island Institute. Spring 2006. Web. 28 Apr. 2012. <http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/dumbing_down_smart_growth/>. Huffman, Thomas. "Protectors of the Land and Water: Environmentalism in Wisconsin, 1961-1968, Thomas R. Huffman. 1994. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI. 300 Pages. ISBN: 0-80782138-1(hc): 0-8078-4445-4(pb). $39.95(hc); $14.95(pb." Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 16.1-2 (1996): 77. Print. Lawrence, Walter. "Wisconsin: Geographical Provinces: Introduction." What's Happening in Wisconsin! Wisconsin Events at Wisconsin Online. University of Wisconsin. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. <http://www.wisconline.com/wisconsin/geoprovinces/index.html>. Moran, JM. "CLIMATE OF WISCONSIN." UW-Madison Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences. Wisconsin State and Climatology Office. Web. 25 Apr. 2012. <http://www.aos.wisc.edu/~sco/clim-history/state/stateclimate.html>. Ohm, Brian. "Wisconsins New Comprehensive Planning & Smart Growth Law (Summary)." Wisconsins New Comprehensive Planning & Smart Growth Law (Summary). University of WisconsinExtension. Web.

Ohm, Brian. "WI Smart Growth Legislation: Key Points." [ Land Information & Computer Graphics Facility, UW-Madison ]. Web. 27 Apr. 2012. <http://www.lic.wisc.edu/shapingdane/resources/planning/library/process/smart-growth.htm>. Radeloff, Volker, Roger Hammer, and Susan Stewart. "Rural and Suburban Sprawl in the U.S. Midwest from 1940 to 2000 and Its Relation to Forest Fragmentation." Mendeley Research Networks. Department of Forest Ecology and Management, University of WisconsinMadison. Web. 28 Apr. 2012. <http://www.mendeley.com/research/rural-and-suburban-sprawl-in-the-usmidwest-from-1940-to-2000-and-its-relation-to-forest-fragmentation/>. Schilling, J., and S. D. Keyes. "The Promise of Wisconsin's 1999 Comprehensive Planning Law: Land-Use Policy Reforms to Support Active Living." Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 33.3 (2008): 455-96. Print. Senate Bill 601. "2009 Wisconsin Act 372." 2009 Wisconsin Act 372. State of Wisconsin. Web. <http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2009/related/acts/372.pdf>. US Census Bureau. "Decennial Census of Population, 1840 to 2000." US Census Bureau Decennial Census of Population, 1840 to 2000. US Census. Web. <http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lrb/bb/03bb/103106.pdf>. Wisconsin Historical Society. "Turning Points." The Physical Geography of Wisconsin. Wisconsin Historical Society. Web. 20 Feb. 2012. <http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/tp001/?action=more_essay>. Wisconsin Maps and GIS Resources. "WisconsinMaps and Geographic Information Systems Resources." Wisconsin Maps, Satellite Imagery and Geographic Information Systems Resources. Wisconsin Maps and GIS. Web. 26 Apr. 2012. <http://www4.uwsp.edu/geo/wisconsin/wisconsin_maps.htm>.

Wisconsin Department of Administration. "Land Use Regulations and Comprehensive Planning Status Report." 2011 Land Use Regs and Planning Status Inventory Report. Wisconsin Department of Administration. Web. <http://www.doa.state.wi.us/category.asp?linkcatid=750