AB849-ASA1,8,19 (b) The legislature recognizes that title to natural lake beds as existing at statehood, including those in the Great Lakes, generally is held by the state. State v. Bleck, 114 Wis. 2d 454 (1983); Illinois Steel Co. v. Bilot, 109 Wis. 418 (1901); State v. Trudeau, 139 Wis. 2d 91 (1987).

AB849-ASA1,8,25 (c) The legislature finds that the combination of the dynamic nature of Great Lakes waters and the evolution of commercial harbors, urban areas, and other lakeshore development has resulted in considerable changes in the lake bed shoreline compared to the original government survey. In many places, formerly submerged areas have become upland and have been used for public or private purposes for decades.

AB849-ASA1,9,3 (d) The legislature finds that the historical record to determine the location of the shoreline at the date of statehood, and the extent of natural or artificial changes to lake bed areas before and after statehood, is often incomplete and inconclusive.

AB849-ASA1,9,9 (e) The legislature declares that the uncertainty of title to and the uncertainty associated with permissible uses of some lakefront property are a substantial impediment to orderly redevelopment and transfer of valuable lakefront properties, and it is in the public interest to promote the use of upland areas in a way that provides certainty and facilitates economic development, increased tax base, and public access.

AB849-ASA1,9,19 (f) The legislature recognizes that courts have held that the location of the boundary of lake bed can change and that title to such areas can be adjusted under the common law doctrines of accretion and reliction through both natural processes and through the placement of artificial fill. De Simone v. Kramer, 77 Wis. 2d 188 (1977); Heise v. Village of Pewaukee, 92 Wis. 2d 333 (1979); W. H. Pugh Coal Co. v. State, 105 Wis. 2d 123 (1981); Doemel v. Jantz, 180 Wis. 225 (1923); Angelo v. Railroad Com., 194 Wis. 543 (1928); Jansky v. City of Two Rivers, 227 Wis. 228 (1938). The legislature finds that the system for establishing the shoreline of Great Lakes waters under s. 30.2039, as created by this act, is permissible under the law because this system is based upon the longstanding doctrine of accretion.

AB849-ASA1,9,24 (g) The legislature declares that the best available method to establish the shoreline between a Great Lakes lake bed and adjoining uplands for purposes of establishing ownership and allowable use of the adjoining uplands is the method established under s. 30.2039, as created by this act, and that this method is in the public interest, is consistent with the public trust doctrine, and promotes the most equitable method of determining the ownership and use rights applicable to lakefront property on the Great Lakes.

AB849-ASA1,10,14 (h) Should a reviewing court of competent jurisdiction disagree with the legislative finding in par. (g), the legislature finds that the system for establishing the shoreline of Great Lakes waters under s. 30.2039, as created by this act, is permissible under the law because case law allows the legislature to make certain limited transfers of lake bed to a private party if it is part of a larger process that is in the public interest. Milwaukee v. State, 193 Wis. 423 (1927). The legislature finds that any transfers of former lake bed to a private party under s. 30.2039, as created by this act, are nominal transfers and are part of a process ensuring that uses of waterfront property serve public interests. The department of natural resources is not required to prepare a report under s. 13.097 (2) with respect to the process by which the department may establish a shoreline under s. 30.2039, as created by this act.

AB849-ASA1,10,24 (i) Should a reviewing court of competent jurisdiction disagree with the legislative findings in par. (g) and (h), the legislature finds that the system for establishing the shoreline of Great Lakes waters under s. 30.2039, as created by this act, is permissible under the law because this system is separately supported by the longstanding doctrine of adverse possession. The property subject to s. 30.2039, as created by this act, has been upland for more than 40 years, which is consistent with the doctrine of adverse possession. Multiple cases have indicated that the allowance for adverse possession of formerly submerged lands is constitutional. Illinois Steel Co. v. Bilot, 109 Wis. 418 (1901); State v. Bednarski, 1 Wis. 2d 639 (1957); State v. Adelmeyer, 221 Wis. 246 (1936).

AB849-ASA1,11,6 (j) The legislature recognizes that in interpreting the public trust, the courts in Wisconsin have made a distinction between the ownership of the beds of navigable streams and natural lakes. For stream beds, the title is held by a fee title owner but this title is qualified by the rights of the public to use the water for navigation. Munninghoff v. Wis. Conservation Com., 255 Wis. 252 (1949); FAS, LLC v. Town of Bass Lake, 2007 WI 73.

AB849-ASA1,11,14 (k) The legislature recognizes that in Muench v. Public Service Com., 261 Wis. 492 (1952), the court held that the public trust extends only to land under the stream of a navigable water so long as the land constitutes part of the bed of the stream, and if the course of the stream is changed so that the land is no longer is part of the river bed, it ceases to be impressed with the public trust. The legislature recognizes that the state has allowed the relocation of navigable streams under s. 30.195 and, when such action is taken, any area that was formerly the bed of a stream is no longer subject to the public trust and may be used for any allowable private purpose.

AB849-ASA1,11,17 (L) The legislature recognizes that the historic record on the extent of natural or artificial changes to the original riverbank and river bed is often incomplete and inconclusive.

AB849-ASA1,12,2 (m) The legislature finds that where riverfront properties in incorporated areas have been filled for an extended time, any public rights in navigable waters that existed in the submerged area were extinguished when that area became upland and pursuant to s. 30.122, as affected by this act, and riverfront properties in incorporated areas are no longer subject to the public trust. It is now in the public interest to promote the use of upland areas in a way that provides certainty and flexibility for property owners, facilitates economic development and redevelopment, and increases the local tax base.

AB849-ASA1,12,3 (End)