Grass roots effort to save lake from no wake proposal

[XR6Hurricane]

Looking for some input and ideas from people who have dealt with this sort of thing. My 300 acre hometown lake is divided into a main basin that is ~200 acres, and a bay that is ~100 acres. The bay is an important relief for overflow traffic from the main part of the lake, and serves as an "out" for watersports drivers when the counter-clockwise traffic pattern isn't timed right and you need to take a wider pass around the lake.

 

A proposal has been made to close the bay to high speed traffic and make it no wake only. Aside from the huge pain this creates for property owners who moor their boats in that part of the lake, the bigger problem is that it is a HUGE safety concern. This is a very congested lake and cramming the existing watersports, PWCs, and joy riding into roughly 2/3 of its former area will only make it worse and create a more dangerous traffic situation if a skier/tuber/wakeboarder falls.

 

So far it is being done on the sneak and almost nobody knows about this. I am trying to help get the word out and these are my plans/thoughts so far:

- Letter to the editor

- Posts on my Facebook feed (or create a new Facebook page specifically for it?)

- Print flyers explaining the poor logic and failed arithmetic of this proposal, and rubber band them to people's pier posts or slip them under the boat covers. Should be no problem doing that as people rubber band ads to my front door all the time. I'm thinking that if we idle around from pier to pier with my little fishing boat we can make good time and this will hit more of our target audience than going door-to-door. Also thinking of going around and handing the flyers to other boaters on the lake.

- Possibly park trucks / boats / complete rigs in town with signs on them alerting everyone of the meeting.

- Short video blog explaining the proposal in detail and its counter-arguments

 

Any other ideas? Thanks.

[boarditup]

Nothing beats a personal invitation with a look in the eye. Ask them for their support and attendance at whatever meeting there will be on the issue. Have your own gathering a half hour before the official meeting in the parking lot to get everyone on the same page.

[6balls]

Have to get those property owners involved if as you suspect it will not be popular with them.

[bogboy]

@HR6Hurricane, I think your ideas are good, including getting lake residents involved, with as many as possible politely and calmly stating the reasons at the city counsel meetings to keep the current policies unchanged. Good luck.

[mwetskier]

pretty much all states have some sort of *administrative procedures act* that defines the legal process for state agencies to create or modify regulations. assuming your in wisconsin you can start here in learning how to be involved and even fight a regulatory action that will adversely affect you - http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lc/adminrules/files/admin_rules_manual.pdf

[XR6Hurricane]

I am actually in the Socialist Republic Of Northern Illinois, but thanks...I have already suggested to a village board member that they may want to think twice before ramming through a village ordinance on a state-owned lake without their blessing.

[mwetskier]

even in illinois i recommend you learn the regulatory process. odds are very good who ever is pushing for the limitations does not know the legal procedures and if you do you will be way ahead of them and may be able to prevent them from making your life miserable. http://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2321&context=cklawreview

[Wish]

Who made the proposal and why? Knowing the person or persons responsible for the proposal or the initial complaint may also be beneficial. Our local city took it upon themselves to place a drain pipe in place of a drain ditch that led directly to our lake. There rational was no maintenance with the pipe. Not only was it inadequate for flow, it was without the ok o the water management district. They claimed ignorance but were forced to reestablish ditch. It's amazing what local governing bodies will do in the name of ignorance. So agree with above on familiarizing yourself with who may ultimately be responsible for a decision like that.

[XR6Hurricane]

I know the person very well, for almost 25 years. He is a former neighbor. The kind of guy who thinks that whatever suits him best at the time is what everyone should do. He has since gained some political clout. He and his cronies even voted themselves a two digit raise at the height of the recession. Despite all of this, I'd like to think that this hare-brained idea is truly a move at what he thinks is right for the lake, and just lacks reason and common sense. But knowing the guy I can't help but think there is an ulterior motive.

[bojans]

Which lake is this?

[Wish]

Find out who in the local political class would appose this or at least have enough common sense where they would start moving the ball in the correct direction. Get him/her/them on your side as rational thought will usually prevail. Even point out how this irrational move going through may affect their next election as most lake front owners can contribute more to a campaign.

[lpskier]

While it may be your only skiing option, it doesn't really sound like a good (i.e. safe) lake to be skiing in in the first place. I'll take gators, snakes and Canadians (and you know who you are) any time over skiing in or near boat traffic. Especially if everyone is driving Bayliners.

 

If it is your only skiing option, maybe you could propose that prior to some reasonable hour, the the entire lake exclusive of the bay is reserved for water skiing X says a week. If it was skiers only three mornings a week until 8:00 AM, (or seven or even six) and the bay was a no wake zone, net net you might be better off. When you are dealing with government, in my experience, you never "win," but sometimes the final compromise can work out for everyone.

[XR6Hurricane]

Actually it is not where I do most of my skiing - but we own property with rights to it and do a fair amount of boating there. Mostly I ski on the river now because the water conditions are better. My beef with this whole thing is what it does to the boating in general there, and the principle of the matter.

 

bojans- you have a private message.

[TylerR]

@XR6Hurricane‌ I'm a political consultant, if you have any specific questions about your elected officials I can do some digging for you if you will send me a pm

[MattP]

I wonder if the @The_Krista @skident or USAWS HQ would have some advice for you. They are our National advocates for water rights.

[klindy]

@MattP @XR6Hurricane‌ contact your regionals representative on the Waterways committee at USAWS. Even if there's little advice they usually track this kind of activity.

[fu_man]

@XR6Hurricane I am also in your general area and am curious. Which lake?

[XR6Hurricane]

Bumping this one to the top...see attachment. It is officially on the agenda for this coming Tuesday. Everyone and anyone in the general area who can help us exceed the fire code at the village hall is welcome to come (non-residents really aren't able to comment but we need BODIES there). If you are in the general area, this affects you. Restrictions on lakes in this area are growing like a cancer. Thanks.

 

[clskier]

I see the entire lake went "No Wake" today. I assume this is due to high water from Monday nights rain, or is it a result of last nights meeting?

 

http://wauconda-il.gov/

[mateja]

@XR6Hurricane what was the outcome of the meeting last night?

[XR6Hurricane]

@clskier Yes, we had some heavy rain but the no wake order has been lifted now. It was unrelated.

 

The proposal was opposed by 100% of the people in the crowd who spoke, and 100% of the board. Standing room only at the village hall.

 

Link to the Herald article:

http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20140514/news/140519243/