Laserfiche WebLink
Hugo City Council Meeting Minutes for May 7, 2018 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br />Public Hearing on the Vacation of Drainage and Utility Easement Adelaide Landing Outlot A <br />Excelsior Group had requested a vacation of the drainage and utility easement located over Outlot <br />A, Adelaide Landing. Planner Rachel Juba explained that Outlot A would be used for the <br />development of Adelaide Landing 2nd Addition, and new drainage and utility easements would be <br />placed on the lots at the time the final plat was recorded. <br />Weidt opened the public hearing. After receiving no comments, Weidt closed the public hearing. <br />Haas made motion, Petryk seconded, to approve the notice to vacate the drainage and utility <br />easement located over Outlot A, Adelaide Landing. <br />All Ayes. Motion carried. <br />Update on White Bear Lake Lawsuit <br />City Administrator Bryan Bear gave background on the White Bear Lake Lawsuit, providing <br />details on the judge's ruling and appeals. As a result of the judge's order the, the DNR added <br />restrictions on the City's appropriations permits. One condition appeared on the first amended <br />permit, which was to provide contingency planning to convert to surface water. Three other <br />conditions appeared on subsequent amended permits. The City appealed all four conditions at <br />once; however the DNR did not accept the appeal on the first condition. The City then appealed <br />the denial of that appeal. DNR informed all cities that a hearing will happen in front of an <br />administrative law judge in the contested case hearing. Bear further explained there is bill being <br />considered during the current legislation session to make it illegal for the judge to enforce the <br />order. It has been put on a dual track in the House and Senate as standalone bills, and it is also <br />part of the Omnibus Bills. The bill in the House was heard the following day, and the Senate will <br />come later. It was Bear's opinion that the standalone bills would pass, which was good since <br />there was little guarantee the Omnibus Bill would. <br />Miron questioned whether the DNR would still move forward with their appeal option. City <br />Attorney Dave Snyder stated they would since the order contained other language of concern. <br />Klein questioned whether the City would have to comply with the conditions in the order while <br />waiting for the appeals. Bear replied they would be put on hold until the appeals are finished. <br />Haas talked about the lawsuit being based on a particular section of law dealing with the <br />environment and not the normal statutory rules under which the DNR assesses appropriation <br />permits. It was his thought that the DNR may have troubles with this because it would open them <br />up for other lawsuits. Snyder agreed and stated the DNR may have trouble with enforcing the <br />conditions. He further spoke about how the lawsuit sought and received the extension of the <br />doctrine that states the DNR is the trustee for water, foremost to preserve surface water for <br />drinking, and the extension of this doctrine to underground water is open to question as is <br />elevating the recreational factor of White Bear Lake over drinking water. <br />Petryk voiced frustration based on the fact that Hugo has been a leader in water conservation and <br />done many things in advance of this court situation it is not getting any credit for. <br />