Oneida County zoning denies new Bangstad CUP

The Oneida County planning and development committee last week denied Kirk Bangstad’s application for a conditional use permit (CUP) to operate a beer garden at his downtown Minocqua Brewing Company location.

There was no drama, few public comments, and no deliberation on the motion, as the committee unanimously denied the new application based on what committee chairman Scott Holewinski called Bangstad’s history of repeated violations. 

Most immediately, he cited Bangstad’s ongoing operation despite the fact that his previous CUP has been revoked. 

While Bangstad’s attorney, Fred Melms (no association with Melms, Hogan & Francois), spent much of his commentary asserting that Bangstad was almost in compliance with previous conditions of his now-revoked CUP, that did not impress Holewinski, who said the decision didn’t really boil down to the technical details.

“This isn’t about parking spaces or fencing or traffic markings,” Holewinski said. “That all can be handled in conditions on the CUP. This is about an applicant refusing to follow specific conditions in the past and violating every permit he had for the past three-plus years. In fact, he is currently in violation with no permit and he’s open right now.”

Holewinski observed that, just that morning, Bangstad had taken to social media to announce that he would be open following the meeting no matter what the committee decided.

“So it just shows that he doesn’t follow the rules,” he said. “He doesn’t. So us giving him that CUP, I would think we wouldn’t.”

Early in the meeting, zoning director Karl Jennrich ran through a timeline and history of Bangstad’s permits, citations, and alleged violations.

“We issued an administrative review permit (ARP) on March 8, 2022,” Jennrich said. “We believe in 2022, there were approximately 28 days that that ARP was in violation. In 2023 we believe that there are 59 days in violation prior to revocation of the administrative review permit on Aug. 2, 2023.”

Jennrich observed that on August 2, 2023, the ARP was revoked after a public hearing.

“A letter was sent Aug. 4, and we believe again there was 23 days after revocation that the business was out of compliance,” he said.

The applicant submitted a CUP application on Nov. 22, 2022, Jennrich recalled, and he said it was deemed complete on Feb. 24, 2023, though it was denied on April 19 of that year. A revised CUP was submitted on May 10, 2023, it was complete on May 15, and approved on Oct. 4.

“In 2023, again, we believe that there was approximately a total of 82 violations of that permit and/or the administrative review permit,” he said. “In 2024, we believe that they were out of compliance from May 24 to June 19, approximately 21 days. At that time, the committee suspended the conditional use permit on June 20, 2024, and after that there were 34 days of violation.”

On July 24, 2024, Jennrich said, the permit was revoked.

“From September 17 to October 23, 2024, there were 13 days of violations and then October 23, 2024, there was an appeal filed,” he said. “So in 2024, we believe there are approximately 69 days in violation.”

As for 2025, Jennrich said there was no conditional use permit for the property.

“They were open May 1, 2, 3 and 4, which I issued four citations,” he said. “They were open May 8, 9, 10, 11, which I issued four citations. They were open May 15, 16, 17, and 18, which I issued four citations, and then they have been open May 22 through today. We did have staff take pictures prior to the meeting. So in 2025, we believe there was total 32 days of violations. These are all approximate numbers.”

Kirk’s song

Bangstad was not in attendance at the meeting, but his attorneys were, including Melms, who said the latest meeting presented an opportunity for everyone to move beyond past contentions.

“The building is now virtually as it was supposed to be last summer,” Melms said. “There should not be any safety concerns with how Mr. Bangstad is running this business. Everything is certainly up to code. There are the correct parking spaces. The parking lot is now paved. He has at this point done it all.”

Melms said there were stormwater issues, but Bangstad had sought out an engineer to address those. There were other outstanding concerns — curbs were one — but Melms said it was time for everyone to work together.

“So I think this is just the time for hopefully everyone to just get along at some level, and that’s been a challenge here,” he said.

Melms said Bangstad had built an impressive business.

“He brings in tens of thousands of people from out of town to come and see him, basically,” he said. “His Facebook followers, online followers, they stay in the hotels here, they eat in the restaurants. He’s got I think a staff of around seven. He pays them very well, especially for up here. So just generally this business is a pretty good thing for the town of Minocqua and certainly Oneida County.”

Everyone can move on, Melms said, if everyone just leaves one another alone.

Melms said nothing better than Bangstad’s business would go into his current location if he was not allowed to operate.

“There should be no need for any really future interactions between zoning and Mr. Bangstad,” he said. “We can just move on and everyone do well.”

At one point, Holewinski asked Bangstad’s attorneys what substantial evidence they could give the committee that, if the CUP was issued, Bangstad would satisfy those conditions, given that “he has for the past three years violated every permit he has been issued after he agreed to the conditions and now he is knowingly in violation without any permit.”

The difference this year, Melms said, is that everything is complete or nearly complete.

“So it’s not a situation where you’re asking a small business owner to forgo a significant portion of their revenue for the entire summer so they can get a parking lot or asking some guy who spent his life building this business, spent boatloads of money, to lose significant amounts of money to wait to operate until he is in compliance,” he said. “I think at this point he is so close to compliance that that’s really the best substantial evidence anyone can provide, that they’re already in compliance.”

Bangstad was always amenable to meeting permit conditions, Melms said.

“It’s not that he’s not been willing in the past to put in the effort, it’s just that these matters always seem to come up during the tourist season when he’s open and it is kind of difficult to ask a small business to forego that much revenue and survive,” he said. 

Holewinski wanted to know how the county would know that everything was completed, given that Bangstad has previously not allowed an on-site inspection.

“Well, I certainly would encourage you to do an on-site visit if that’s something you’d like to do this year, and I don’t think Mr. Bangstad would have any objection to the committee making an on-site visit, either, as we move forward,” Melms said. 

Melms said Jennrich and Oneida County land use specialist Carla Blankenship could answer the question best.

“They are the ones who have been apparently going there every day to write him citations,” he said. “They’ve been there. They’ve seen it. As far as the parking lot, I think it was one of the few things that needed to be cleaned up here. We’ve provided pictures. So I think certainly the evidence from individuals unrelated to Mr. Bangstad is certainly there for the completion of his conditions.”

None of Melms’ pleas made a difference in the end. By meeting’s end, nothing had changed: Bangstad still did not have a CUP, and he was still open for business, in violation of the county ordinance.

Richard Moore is the author of “Dark State” and may be reached at richardd3d.substack.com.