  |
|
| Disappointment follows annexation ruling |
|
|
| Wednesday, 20 August 2008 | |
|
Alice Pickering Wyoming Reporter A decision has been reached in the protracted annexation case involving Chisago City, Stacy, Wyoming, and Wyoming Township. Administrative Law Judge Steve Mihalchick announced his ruling Friday that sends 1200 acres to Chisago City. In it Sections 35 and 36 of Wyoming Township are awarded to Chisago City. The balance of the township is annexed to the city of Wyoming. No other assets are awarded to Chisago City. Chisago City had petitioned for $500,000 of township assets. A separate annexation agreement was negotiated by the two Wyomings and Stacy on June 30. In it Sections 5 and 6 of Wyoming Township are to be annexed to Stacy. This agreement was also part of the order. Officials and residents have been waiting a long time for the ruling and most had opinions. Anderson speaks “We’re disappointed,” said Wyoming Mayor Sheldon Anderson. He said he does not believe the combined Wyomings should have lost any of the area. However, he is “looking to move forward,” particularly with city elections and a 2009 budget. The city and township had been working together before the hearings. About 18 months ago there were negotiations between Chisago City and the Wyomings, Anderson said. At that time, an offer was made to give Chisago City more valuable land, better suited to development, he said. He said an additional request by Chisago City then, for $500,000 from the township, ended the discussions. Anderson said they “had a better deal before the hearings,” but turned it down. The ruling was 15 days past the July 31 deadline, even after an extension beyond June 26. Asked about the possibility of appeal of the decision, Anderson said Wyoming will not do so. If Chisago City decides to pursue an appeal, it takes a risk, he said. Wyoming could appeal to the district court to have the ruling overturned. “Wyoming reserves the right to play the ‘Late Card’ with the possibility of Stacy and CC losing everything,” Anderson said. Anderson said he is “looking forward” to working with Chisago City. He has had talks with Don Taylor, Chisago City mayor, and believes that the two cities can cooperate on projects, including utilities along Highway 8. “We can bring vital, mutually beneficial improvements.” When contacted by the newspaper, Taylor would give few comments. He said he too, was disappointed in the final ruling. He “had not seen the decision in its entirety.” The Chisago City Council met Tuesday with Attorney Chris Hood. Taylor may have additional comments after that meeting. Elmore's views Roger Elmore, chairman of Wyoming Town Board, is also “disappointed in the decision.” The time it took the judge to reach a decision is also disappointing, he said. He said that at the beginning of the hearings that Judge Mihalchick said “no one will walk away happy.” Referring to Supervisors Ron Swenson and Mark Utecht, Elmore is sorry to lose some good people. Swenson lives in the area annexed to Chisago City. Utecht is the area now part of Stacy. Elmore said he is “truly hoping Taylor will set aside feelings and allow Wyoming to move forward.” Elmore added, “nobody is a big winner. We didn’t get what we wanted; they didn’t get what they wanted.” While there can be an appeal by any of the parties. Elmore is anxious not to spend more money on this issue. In a letter to Taylor and the Chisago City Council, Elmore said: “I am urging you to set aside hurt feelings and seemingly, crushed egos. I know, neither one of us is particularly pleased with the results. To appeal Judge Mihalchick’s decision will not only cost all three communities additional thousands of dollars, but perpetuate already strained relations. “I hope you would agree that the dollars spent to date, are dollars that should have been better used improving our communities’ roads, general infrastructure and even stabilizing taxes. On behalf of the new residents of Chisago City, Wyoming Township, Wyoming City and the entire Chisago County as a whole, I ask that you consider this matter resolved.” Elmore has also appealed to District 17 State Sen. Rick Olseen and District 17B Rep. Jeremy Kalin to intervene and urge no appeal on the part of Chisago City. “I’m urging Chisago to let it go; throwing additional thousands, and dragging this fight out for perhaps another year, will only hurt all communities involved in the long run. I’m asking that you write Taylor and council urging them to set aside differences in an effort to normalize relations for the benefit of not only all three communities, but for the county as well,” he wrote to the state lawmakers who represent Chisago County. Other views As a result of the decision Swenson must give up his seat on the Wyoming Township. According to Swenson, the one big positive is that the dragged-out process is now over. Swenson believes Wyoming is just as capable as Chisago City in providing services to the land which is now part of Chisago City. He said is “best to let it sit as is,” when asked about the possibility of an appeal. “Enough tax-payer money has been spent,” he said, adding that he does not want to see this go to an appeal. His hope is that everyone can be civil to each other. If he could choose, he would be in a township, because of its grass-roots form of government. He also hopes there is no more bickering and fighting between the groups involved. He said that the reasoning for Wyoming’s annexation petition is so Wyoming could become a little larger city. Whereas Chisago City can grow in other directions, Wyoming was, and is, limited in the directions it can grow. Utecht said he was “disappointed with the delay in the decision.” He believes the city (Wyoming) could have served Sections 35 and 36 better than Chisago City. His biggest wish is that all cities to “move forward and work for viable and vibrant community.” Asked about an appeal, Utecht said “an appeal at this time, from any party, would not be in the best interest” of anyone. “I will do my best to serve Stacy,” he said The ruling In reaching his decision, Mihalchick considered populations, the land and its features, existing development, roads, comprehensive plans, and zoning. Government services considered include all utilities, fire protection and ISO ratings, police protection, streets, administrative services, parks, and impact of any decision on delivery of these services. He addressed surface water management and considered the fiscal impact of annexation to all the parties. A large part of the information came from testimony during hearings March 24 to April 1. In the text of the decision, Mihalchick wrote, “There is not one obviously correct answer in this case. In many ways, Chisago City is better run and is certainly able to serve the contested area because it has been preparing to do so for years. But it is also clear that the Wyomings have been working to urbanize their community for at least three years and will also be able to serve it well. “To grant the proposed Chisago City annexation area to Chisago City would cause undue harm to the remaining new City of Wyoming by making it difficult for Wyoming to deliver municipal services. Considering the factors set forth in Minn. Stat. 414.031, on balance, Chisago City’s annexation petition should be denied.” Mihalchick viewed Sections 35 and 36 differently, noting a more remote location toward the edge of the township, further from Wyoming’s services. “More importantly, it is squarely within Chisago City’s plans for development of road, water, and sewer around Green Lake and into the core of the Chisago Lakes area,” he said. The judge said he believes these areas would be better served by Chisago City than Wyoming. While an appeal, from any of the municipalities is possible, “an appeal does not stay the effect of this Order.” Requests for amendments to the Findings of Fact, the Conclusions, and the Order itself may be requested, by August 22. The requests will not extend the 30-day appeal period. Social Bookmarking ...       |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|