Laserfiche WebLink
RESOLUTION OF THE LAKE C Mr CITY COUNCIL TO S0_ICIT IhISOTA MUNICIPAL <br />F=L <br />BOARD ACTION TO DETACH SECTION Ty AND SECTION 33, TOWNSHIP 29 FROM THE <br />tUJNICIPAL AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF OAKDALE TO THAT OF THE CITY OF LAKE <br />ELMO. <br />Whereas, Mn. Stat. 414.061 (Subd. 4), "Concurrent Detachment and <br />Annexation of In__rplorated Lard - Board initiation", states that "The <br />board may initiate proceedings for the concurrent detachment and <br />annexation of portions of one municipality completely surrounded by <br />another municipality, on its own motions..." allows for Mn. Municipal <br />Board initiation of detachment proceedings; and <br />Whereas, it remains the City of Lake Elmo's contention that action by <br />the Municipal Board to grant concurrent detachment and annexation of <br />roughly 300 acres of lard in Sections 12 and _3 of the above described <br />township was not in accordance with statutory requirements: That ls, the <br />statutes appear clear that only "abutting" properties may be annexed to <br />another city. Not one of the properties petitioning to detach from Lake <br />Elmo and annex to Oakdale was, at the time the Municipal Board granted <br />detachment and annexation, "abutting" Oakdale; The State on behalf of <br />State streets and highway right-of-way, the County on behalf of County <br />Highway right-of-way, and, of course, all Lake Elmo streets and <br />right-of-way refused then and have not, to date, petitioned to detach <br />property from Lake Elmo, as required by statute. It is this property that <br />forms the barrier that continues to prevent abuttment of petitioning <br />properties with the City of Oak:dalo. Since our city was incorporated with <br />these bounding properties (streets_ and right-of-way) in 1969, we continue <br />to hold the position that there was not at the time of the Municipal <br />Board's decision in this matter nor is there now a single property that <br />was a part of this _action that was or is "-abutting" the City of Oakdale <br />and the area remains, to this day, surrounded by the original incorporated <br />bounding properties of Lake Elmo Qta w, County and City streets and/or <br />highway; right-of-way); and <br />Whereas, Mn. Stat. 414.+41, subd. 5 that define_ criteria to be used <br />by the Municipal Board in decisions of detachment and annexation: and <br />Whereas, the above referenced subdivision clearly states the following_ <br />as important criteria: <br />"c. Degree of contiguity of the boundaries_ between the included <br />municipalities", and <br />"f. Analysis of whether governmental services now available in <br />the included municipalities can be more effectively of more economically <br />provided by consolidation."; and <br />Whereas, numerous islands of Oakdale remain, after the boards action, <br />completely surrounded by property tinder City of Lake Elmo municipal <br />authority; .and <br />Whereas, numerous examples Of conflict have ari'en in the provision of <br />municipal aarvic s. particularly those Of fire and rescue operations that <br />cause this city a .great deal of concern; and <br />Whereas, the City of Lake Elm_ sincerely desires to avoid a costly <br />legal battle between government agencies (Lake Elmo vs. Mn. Municipal <br />Board) '.yet we believe we would prevail at (court on the issue Of "abutting'' <br />properties as THE criteria for concurrent detachment and annexation; <br />