Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 11, 1992 3 <br />own understanding in that she arrived at with Mr. Thompson <br />as to what the comp plan is. <br />My feeling is that Mary knew full well that this was an <br />issue that had to be resolved in this City. I felt as that <br />letter from Mr. Thompson said, unless there are any other <br />conclusions or information from the City, that is the way <br />they were going to proceed. I could not see us not <br />commenting. <br />Councilman Hunt: I think we definitely differ in <br />interpretation. As I interpret it, Mary did not call Mr. <br />Thompson and say "this is my impression of what happened, <br />will you please send a letter to that effect." She called <br />and said "this is what we have, what is your opinion?" This <br />is the letter I received as to response to that. This is <br />what happened, what did you review, what is your opinion. <br />This is what Mr. Thompson responded to. Not that he and <br />Mary sat down and cooked up this deal, that Mary wanted him <br />to write this letter this way. I take offense that your <br />comments made it sound that way. If I were Mary, I would <br />take offense to it also. <br />Mayor Johnson: And that was one of the intentions. <br />Councilman Mottaz: I am sort of disappointed. If Mary is <br />making this the same issue. This letter that we sent does <br />not involve the MUSA extension. As a matter of fact this <br />letter was sent and Thompson received it after the Met staff <br />had made their decision and published their position on the <br />MUSA extension. That happened before this letter was even <br />sent in the mail. I was at the meeting at the Met Council <br />when this was discussed with the staff and Mike Black <br />presented the city's position. There could be no question <br />in any one's mind that the City was not unified in this <br />thing. Mike presented an excellent case. He brought out <br />some very very strong arguments and had nothing to do with <br />the comp plan at all. It was strictly the MUSA question. <br />Hunt: The fact is that after presenting that very strong <br />case w have potential for erosion because there is a doubt <br />as to which comp plan that application had to be reviewed <br />against. No matter what you say that application has to be <br />reviewed against our comp plan because it is an amendment to <br />our comp plan and how it fits in. All of that work is to <br />naught if it is a different comp plan which means we are <br />back to square one. Mary did not call me up and tell me <br />"this comp plan being linked to this MUSA extension and to <br />this letter." What I did was ask her some specific <br />questions because I knew she was there. What I asked was <br />What do you think? Do you think there is a possibility? <br />She said "I don't know." But I certainly would be pissed <br />off if I got something like this that told me I don't know <br />my own business. I could tell she was not pleased by the <br />