04-27-94 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 27, 1994 3 the District Court. The appellate court very specifically said that procedures need to be followed. If they aren't, you loose your right to assert those errors. Mottaz: We never really got a chance to appeal the MB decision. Attorney Filla explained one of the things that Lake Elmo can do is petition the Board to initiate a proceeding if there are any parcels in one city that are completely surrounded by another. The problem with this Is discretionary with the Board. There may be arguments to the effect this area is not completely surrounded. By looking at the map, the northern boundary of the public right-of- way is the dividing line between Woodbury and Lake Elmo --not the centerline of 1-94 Freeway. It is important to establish this southern border. Council member Conlin asked what are the consequences of petitioning the Municipal Board other than being denied: Attorney Filla responded that Oakdale cannot make the same kind of petition because they cannot show that a good part of Lake Elmo is surrounded by Oakdale. Administrator Kueffner indicated that when she talked to Terry Merritt, Municipal Board, he indicated that if we petition the Board they would take a look at this issue. Attorney Filla pointed out we need to define our priorities as a council if we are going to continue these negotiations with Oakdale. They still have not signed a letter of undertaking. If this goes back to the legislature again, they will create another avenue to allow the MB to take a look a this. The legislature is not going to solve the problem. If that's what occurs next year, it would be nice to have some legislation that allows the Board to reexamine the whole issue (the West half of 33 and part of 32) as opposed to just a small part of it. Attorney Filla explained that pursuing something in front of the Municipal Board is one thing to do, but didn't think the city should abandon negotiations or stop thinking about what form of legislation should be introduced on our behalf next Spring. All of these things can be pursued at the same time in order to achieve a specific goal whichever the Council thinks that goal should be. Council member Johnston indicated if we are going to pursue a strategy, we have to go into it with the thought it could go either way. If we start petitioning the MB in this manner, does that give Oakdale a good reason to say you are not serious with these negotiations so we would not make any progress. Councilman Johnson stated the land in trade for a joint project would give us some sewer capacity to the east. From what I heard in the negotiations, there is no SAC capacity to give. Oakdale is of the opinion that they need every bit of sewer capacity that is available to them if they want to develop according to their current comp plan. So what is there to negotiate. Mayor John responded in the