| JEFFERSON -- The City of Jefferson is being sued by a group of residents
seeking to delay the common council's vote on a petition to annex
two parcels of land on behalf of Wal-Mart. Legal representatives for Coalition for a Better Jefferson filed
a civil complaint Monday seeking a temporary injunction to prevent
the city from proceeding on a vote slated at its Jan. 3 meeting regarding
approval of the annexation. In addition, a writ of mandamus complaint was filed asking that
Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge John Ullsvik consider the legal
standing of the council's actions taken at its Nov. 15 meeting regarding
the coalition's proposed direct-legislation ordinance. Prior to submission of the annexation petition on Oct. 28, the Coalition
for a Better Jefferson, a political group formed as a referendum
committee, submitted a direct-legislation petition asking the Jefferson
Common Council to enact an ordinance that would set new requirements
for developments or annexations that exceed 15 acres. As proposed, the ordinance would require these larger-scale developers
or owners seeking annexation for their larger-scale properties to
have environmental and traffic impact statements, an infrastructure
analysis and a community impact statement. At its Nov. 15 meeting, the council agreed to not act on the direct
legislation and to take the legal position that the proposed could
not go forward because it is an ordinance that is administrative
and violates both existing state statutes and city ordinances. Prior to that council meeting, a hearing was held before Judge Ullsvik
regarding a temporary injunction sought by the coalition against
the city to allow the Jefferson Common Council to consider the pending
direct legislation before considering the annexation. Ullsvik concluded that the Coalition for a Better Jefferson, which
had requested the temporary injunction, had not shown irreparable
harm in its arguments in support of a temporary injunction. However,
the judge indicated that the case would remain open, retaining the
option for either party to return to court for a determination on
the legality of the direct legislation. Last week, the Jefferson Planning Commission unanimously passed
a recommendation that the common council approve the annexation. In addition to the petition, the commission also temporarily rezoned
the property as business highway, conforming with the terminology
in the city's 1998 master plan. The Jefferson Common Council is expected to vote on the annexation
of the two parcels, for the third time, when it meets Jan. 3, unless
otherwise directed by Judge Ullsvik. Coalition attorney Brent O. Denzin, of Midwest Environmental Advocates
in Madison, said the coalition is asking the court to step in and
require the council to do something that it is legally bound to do:
Vote the direct legislation up or down. The coalition filed the lawsuit in hopes that the court would find
that the council violated the law in rendering its decision on the
direct legislation and prevent the matter from proceeding to a referendum,
he said. "We're trying to get them to stop the annexation until they make
a decision on the direct legislation," Denzin said. "We believe the
council's actions on the Nov. 15 were illegal." "We're trying to
let the people decide before we take a step that is pretty irreversible," Denzin
said. However, he also indicated that it was not necessarily a point to
say no to Wal-Mart. The group is merely requesting the council to
look at some of the numbers before annexing large developments outside
of the city. Denzin suggested that the Jefferson Common Council had misinformed
the public about the proposed ordinance. "It clearly allows the council to pass off the cost of these to
developers, in that other communities do this all the time," he said. "It
doesn't need to take any money out of the taxpayers' pockets." (The
full story appears in the Dec. 20 Daily Union.) |
