Oct. 10, 2008 — The La Crosse Common Council voted 10-5 yesterday to reverse a decision to charge a hotel developer for costs arising from the planned condemnation of a "nuisance" billboard.

Council members George Italiano, Jai Johnson, Jacie Gamroth, Dorothy Lenard, Doug Farmer, Audrey Kader, Lorraine Decker, Tom Sweeney, Marilyn Wigdahl and Dick Swantz voted in favor of the city paying the bill.

Council members Andrea Richmond, Jim Bloedorn, Richard Becker, Bruce Ranis and Bernie Maney voted in favor of the developer picking up the tab.

Council member Bill Harnden abstained, citing a conflict of interest.

Lost? The vote applies to the story below:

The La Crosse Common Council on Thursday recommitted itself to condemning a Copeland Avenue billboard considered an impediment to building an extended stay hotel.

The hotel’s future was in doubt in the wake of a council decision to charge the developer, NSD Hotel Associates, for any attorney’s fees resulting from the condemnation and subsequent lawsuits.

NSD attorney Phil Addis said his clients would drop its plans for the 92-room extended stay hotel just north of Three Rivers Plaza if the council didn’t reverse its decision.

“If the amendment stays in the contract, we’re not signing the contract,” Addis told the council. “If you adopt the amendment, we’re not building.”

Having the developer foot the bill would undermine the city’s position the condemnation was for a public purpose, not private.

“The amendment we adopted creates the impression for possibility of a private condemnation as opposed to a public condemnation, and a private condemnation would be a violation of state law,” council member Doug Farmer said.

Collins Outdoor Advertising, which owns the billboard, has called the declared public purpose — to provide marsh access — superficial, meant only to prop up the condemnation in court.

Collins representative Keith Carson also acknowledged his company helped draft the measure that states the developer would bear the condemnation expenses.

Collins has vowed to fight the condemnation in court.

“Do you honestly believe an amendment drafted by Collins Sign is designed to help you win your case?” Addis asked the council.

A number of council members and the developer also objected to the way the amendment was passed, summarily and without any input from the developer.

“It was done in the dead of night and it was bad public policy and it shouldn’t have been done,” Farmer said.