Opinion ID: 1873729
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Contextual assessment

Text: ¶ 56 The statutory phrase on which our determination rests is: bridge on a highway maintainable by the town. Wisconsin Stat. § 81.38(1) provided in relevant part: When any town has voted to construct or repair any culvert or bridge on a highway maintainable by the town, and has provided for such portion of the cost of such construction or repair as is required by this section, the town board shall file a petition with the county board setting forth said facts and the location of the culvert or bridge; and the county board . . . shall thereupon appropriate such sum as will, with the money provided by the town, be sufficient to defray the expense of constructing or repairing such culvert or bridge. . . . The statutory phrase, on a highway maintainable by the town, modifies the word, bridge, in § 81.38(1). This prepositional phrase identifies a particular type of bridge by describing the location of the bridge. ¶ 57 Many similar phrases in other sections of the statutes identify other types of bridges, also through the use of a prepositional phrase that describes the location of the bridge in relation to which entity is responsible for maintaining the highway of which the bridge is, or will become, a part. For example, a bridge which is not on the state trunk highway system or on marked routes of the state trunk highway system designated as connecting highways are the phrases employed to define a local bridge in Wis. Stat. § 84.18(2)(d) (2005-06). A bridge not on the state trunk highway system is the phrase employed in Wis. Stat. § 84.10 (2005-06) to address the maintenance and operation of one specific type of bridge that is not located on state trunk highways. In addition, every highway bridge on a city, village, or town boundary shall be repaired and maintained by any adjoining municipality in which the bridge is located is the phrase used in Wis. Stat. § 82.23 (2005-06) to identify municipal line bridges. Further, a bridge on a highway in this state which crosses waterways, other topographical barriers, other highways or railroads is the identifying phrase in Wis. Stat. § 84.17(1)(b) (2005-06) that describes the type of bridge for which certain inspections are required by a particular entity. [12] None of the statutes condition the identification of the type of bridge described on whether the bridge was constructed before or after the highway that establishes the location of the bridge; yet, all of the statutes share similar syntax in that they employ a prepositional phrase to identify a type of bridge by its relationship to the highway of which it is, or will become, a part. ¶ 58 In Village of Bloomer v. Town of Bloomer, 128 Wis. 297, 107 N.W. 974 (1906), we discussed a type of bridge for which expenses were to be shared between a village and a town. There, the Village determined that it was necessary to repair and then build a new bridge on a town road that was bisected by a navigable creek as the road ran through the Village. Id. at 300-01, 107 N.W. 974. Accordingly, the bridge was of a type that was identified in ch. 284, Laws of 1899 that created a cost-sharing relationship between a village and a town for that type of bridge. Id. at 302, 107 N.W. 974. The Village presented a claim for $2,022.74 to the Town for the construction of the bridge, and the Town disallowed it. Id. at 301, 107 N.W. 974. ¶ 59 The Town did not argue that the bridge was not of the type described in the statute, but rather, it challenged the statute that apportioned payment for the bridge on constitutional grounds. Id. at 304, 107 N.W. 974. We concluded that requiring cost-sharing between municipalities was within the legislature's power, and we noted that [t]he law relating to county aid to towns for bridge purposes has been often approved. Id. at 305, 107 N.W. 974. We also noted that the legislative directive under challenge no more violates the constitutional provision referred to than the law providing for joint maintenance of bridges on town-line roads. Id. at 310, 107 N.W. 974. ¶ 60 Throughout Village of Bloomer, we reasoned by analogy to other types of bridges, all of which were identified by the locations of bridges in relationship to the highways on which they had been or would be constructed. That reasoning is directly applicable here where the plain meaning of the statutory words employed in Wis. Stat. § 81.38 identify the type of bridge that is subject to cost-sharing between a town and a county as one that is on a highway maintainable by the town. There is no dispute that West Beltline Highway frontage road and Ski Lane were highways maintainable by the Town when the Town petitioned the County to contribute to the cost of constructing the bridge.