City of Mountain Lake receives $890,000 DEED grant
Mountain Lake City Council members were informed at their Monday, May 19 meeting that the City’s application for the 2014 Small Cities Development Program Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) grant has been approved in the amount of $890,900. The funds will be used for digging the new well and water lines – as well as housing rehabilitation in the city.
The needed new well – well #7 – will be dug on the former Boldt’s Water Care property at the north intersection of Nickel Street and 10th Street North. To reach the current well house, located in the southwest corner of Mountain Lake City Cemetery, a new raw water line will cross 10th Street North, and follow 9th Street to the location. Following the completion of the new well and water line, the well in the Mountain Lake Fire Hall will be closed.
It is anticipated that the new well will be operational by this fall.
Appellate Court upholds Mountain Lake Trail decision
Mountain Lake City Attorney Maryellen Suhrhoff reported that the Appellate Court had affirmed the 2010 decision of former Fifth Judicial District Court Judge Bruce F. Gross on the Mountain Lake Trail. Rachel and Ken Yoder had appealed the decision before the State Court of Appeals in Marshall in Wednesday, April 9, asking if the district court erred in its interpretation of the easement.
The dispute between the Yoders and the City of Mountain Lake deals with the interpretation and scope of a Right-of-Way Easement between Raymond H. and Harriet B. Dick dates to July 22, 1996. At issue specifically is whether the City’s transformation of the original trodden “walk path or trail purposes” into an engineered, multipurpose, regional, recreational, paved trail violated the terms of the easement, resulting in a de facto taking of the Yoders’ property.
On August 27, 2010, the City brought the underlying action against the Yoders. The claims at issue in the appeal involved the parties’ competing judgment claims, seeking interpretation of the scope of the easement. In addition, in 2010, the City sought a declaratory judgment that the construction of the paved trail was within the scope of the easement. Meanwhile, the Yoders counterclaimed for a declaratory judgment that the City’s construction of a paved trail was outside the scope of the easement and ended in taking of the Yoders’ property, which entitled them to just and fair compensation from the City.
At that time, the district court of the Honorable Bruce F. Gross ordered each side to submit their own respective interpretations and scope of the easement. The City’s argument was that the easement did not contain any restrictive language that would prevent the paving of a trail, that the plain language in the easement gave the City the right to “construct” a trail and that it was reasonable that the trail would be transformed from a natural, grass path to a paved trail at some point in time. On the other side, the Yoders argued that the plain and ordinary meanings of the words “walk path or trail” in the easement meant that it was to consist of a natural, meandering path over and across the existing land that would be used by people walking by foot, and did not include any significant construction, culvert installation, leveling, grading, paving and removal of brush and trees. The Yoders additionally noted that the City never compensated the Dicks for the easement, and that because the Dicks never demanded compensation, they believed and intended the easement grant was limited and would not end in harm to their property’s value.
On October 1, 2010, the district court issued the order determining that the City’s construction of the paved trail was within the “unambiguous scope” of the easement, but that the City’ substantial alterations to the soil and vegetation cover, as well as the scenic values within the easement’s right-of-way during construction of the trail, were not within the scope of the easement. To that end, the district court found the City had acquired an “additional easement” over the Yoders’ property, for which they must be compensated, and also ordered that the Yoders were entitled to a jury trial on the issues of damages.
After directing the City to start condemnation proceedings in a separate action, and awarding to the Yoders’ attorneys’ fees and surveyor’s costs, the district court of the Honorable Judge Christina M. Wietzema entered final judgment on November 21, 2013.
Based on the appellate court decision, City Attorney Suhrhoff has requested that the attorney for the Yoders arrange mediation to settle all matters.
Bike Plan gets go-ahead
The city council gave the go-ahead to a Mountain Lake Foundation/Sweet Fields Bike Plan, as presented by Judy Harder, member of the Foundation. The proposed plan includes stenciling on city streets to guide bicyclists from the Mountain Lake Trail to downtown, as well as other points of interest around town. Bicycles will be available – at no charge to the public – at three locations. In addition, there will be a brochure provided showing the location of the trail and the points of interest found along the trail.
The Foundation has pledged $2,400 as start-up money to cover the cost of the bicycles, bike racks, paint and all maintenance on the bicycles.
Mountain Lake City Administrator/Clerk Wendy Meyer and Mountain Lake City Attorney Maryellen Suhrhoff, will prepare a contract for the individual responsible for bicycle maintenance.
In other business
* Approved the hiring of Levi Kass and Austin Watkins as summer help for the Electric Department, Joshua Grev as Street Department summer help and Janessa Peters as combined City Hall/Street Department summer help.
* Approved the conditional use permit for the Assembly of God Church of Mountain Lake as a place of worship in a residential district. Council Member David Savage (pastor of the church) abstained from the vote.
* Adopted a resolution allowing for a conditional use permit for the keeping of bees at 1416 Boxelder Street with the understanding that the recommended conditions are met. The application and findings of fact had been reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and that commission had recommended the permit as long as two conditions were met – location of signs and and approved owner’s request of three colonies. If the owner wishes to increase the number of colonies to the permissible number of eight, the owner would need to notify the city.
* Awarded the 2014 seal coat bid to Pearson Brothers of Hanover, Minnesota, for $4.85 per gallon for 3,900 gallons of oil.
* Reviewed the city’s audit with city auditor Kyle Meyers of Abdo, Eick and Meyers. The city and utility’s assets, fund balances, bonds and other indebtedness are satisfactory. The city and utility are in sound financial shape.
* Established a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Plan for the proposed modification of redevelopment project #1, relating to approval of business subsidy to Milk Specialties.
*Approved an agreement for additional services for a Conservation Improvement Plan (CIP) with Central Minnesota Municipal Power Agency (CMMPA).
