My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07-28-25 - Council Work Session Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2025
>
07-28-25 - Council Work Session Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/12/2025 3:25:31 PM
Creation date
8/12/2025 3:24:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
07/28/2025
Council Meeting Type
Work Session Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5. Water Appropriation Permit Contested Case Appeal <br />The Community Development Director reported that on August 30, 2017, the Ramsey <br />County District Court issued a judgement regarding the groundwater management of <br />White Bear Lake and the Prairie Du Chien -Jordan Aquifer. As a result, the City's <br />Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Water Appropriation Permit 1985- <br />6168 was amended to include the following requirements: <br />• PREPARE A PLAN TO CONVERT TO SURFACE WATER SOURCE <br />• ENACT AND ENFORCE A RESIDENTIAL IRRIGATION BAN WHEN WHITE BEAR LAKE <br />DROPS BELOW 923.5 <br />• PREPARE AN ENFORCEABLE PLAN TO LIMIT PER CAPITA WATER USE (75 GPD FOR <br />RESIDENTIAL AND 90 GPD TOTAL) <br />• REPORT ANNUALLY ON COLLABORATIVE EFFORTS WITH NE COMMUNITIES TO MEET <br />THE PER CAPITA REQUIREMENTS <br />The City, along with multiple other communities, appealed three of the four <br />amendments and a contested case hearing was held in 2023 before an Administrative <br />Law Judge (AU). The AU struck the irrigation ban requirement but left the other <br />amendments in place. Both the White Bear Lake Restoration Association and White Bear <br />Lake Homeowners Association appealed the decision. The six communities involved <br />appealed as well. <br />In July the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled on the appeals and reversed the decision <br />of the AU and remanded for further review. <br />The City Attorney recommended that the City ask the Supreme Court to review the <br />decision. Under the Rules any party to a Court of Appeals matter can ask the Supreme <br />Court to exercise its discretionary review power. The Supreme Court does not have to <br />do so. A request is in the form of a Petition for Review, which is a short document <br />highlighting the importance of the case. <br />The Community Development Director requested that the Council place "Authorize the <br />Filing of the Petition for Review" on the July 28, 2025 regular agenda. <br />Council Consensus <br />It was the consensus of the City Council to place "Authorize the Filing of the Petition for <br />Review" as part of the Consent Agenda, on the July 28, 2025 Regular Meeting agenda. <br />6. City Attorney Notice of Retirement <br />City Attorney Jay Squires provided notice to the City Council that he would be retiring in <br />October of this year. He stated that the City contract is with his firm. He stated that the <br />firm has 20 attorneys and that he has been working with the assigned attorneys to get <br />them up to speed, so they will not miss a step when they become the key contact, after <br />his retirement. <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.