Advertisement
Collins Outdoor Advertising has every right to protect a property interest that was established almost eight years before the developers purchased the surrounding property on Dec. 6, 2006. The billboard in question was erected Jan. 11, 1999. Collins’ easement was recorded Dec. 2, 2005. These developers bought this site knowing full well about Collins’ property interest. Instead of acknowledging they made a risky investment, they are righteously demanding the city of La Crosse take somebody else’s property for their benefit.
Existence of the billboard does not “block” development of the hotel; rather it is the uncompromising position of the developers themselves. Collins Outdoor Advertising offered to compromise by raising the sign above the
level of the top floor of the hotel. The developers have flatly rejected that proposal for no stated reason. It is the developers, not Collins Outdoor Advertising, who have refused to negotiate in good faith.
It is not federal regulations that prevent the billboard from being moved to accommodate developers. The city of La Crosse had the opportunity to remove Copeland Avenue from restrictive regulations applicable to the Great River Road. The federal government recognizes that a commercial corridor over a half mile from the Mississippi River is not part of the scenic byway that the regulations contemplate. Had the city done so, the sign could be moved. Mayor Mark Johnsrud refused Collins Outdoor Advertising’s request to even present the proposal to the Common Council.
The city has painted itself into a corner and now seeks to blame Collins Outdoor Advertising for the problem the city created. The city and developers, and by extension the media, have approached this situation as if it were a simple equation; the proposed approximately $5 million hotel is more valuable than the Collins’ billboard. That is not a rationale contemplated by our Founding Fathers when they passed the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution to protect private property rights from unreasonable taking. Would this logic be applied any differently if Collins offered to build a $5 million hotel in place of Mayor Johnsrud’s or City Planner Larry Kirch’s home? Would they be bad people for refusing to negotiate the surrender of their property for the benefit of the city?
The Collins family has been hard-working tax-paying members of this community for 60 years. They are the fifth highest payer of personal property taxes in the city. Collins Outdoor Advertising has paid more in taxes to the city of La Crosse than this hotel will ever pay. They employ 28 people at living wages and pay them full benefits. When the city suggests this hotel will provide wonderful employment opportunities, ask yourselves “Will any of the housekeepers and desk clerks employed by a hotel be paid anything other than minimum wage without benefits?”
The Collins’ have been civic-minded members of this community. Just one example of Collins philanthropic contributions is the wonderful Children’s Museum in this city, which would not exist had Charles and Marjorie Collins not given the building where it is located. Collins Outdoor Advertising deserves far better treatment than it has been given by the city leaders and the media of this community.
This column was written on behalf of the Collins Outdoor Advertising Family.
