Nov 15, 2010 Lakeville City Council Meeting Public Comment

I made the following comments to the Lakeville City Council during the 3 minute public comment section of the agenda (Nov 15, 2010):

The City of Lakeville was approached by New Morning Windows in 1995 to jointly enter into an agreement to protect approximately two and a half acres of land.  Specific wording of the document included identification of this as a permanent conservation easement.  A number of items were identified as prohibited activities. Specifically:

·        constructing anything made by man. including but not limited to buildings, structures and walkways

·        cutting removing or altering trees or vegetation

·        excavation or filling

and

·        Activity detrimental to the preservation of the scenic beauty, vegetation, and wildlife

The City of Lakeville was granted the right to <quote>enter upon the property at any time to enforce compliance with the terms<end quote>

I did some research and found a definition within  the United States Treasury regulations¹ entitled  “Qualified conservation contributions” .  It says, “To be considered an eligible donee under this section, an organization must be a qualified organization, have a commitment to protect the conservation purposes of the donation, and have the resources to enforce the restrictions”

Let me just repeat that one phrase again “have a commitment to protect the conservation purposes of the donation” – in the case of this conservation easement, that would be the City of Lakeville who agreed to enter into this agreement.

In 2009, the Malt-O-Meal Company purchased the property containing the conservation easement

In 2010, Malt-O-Meal let it be known that they had no intention of honoring the permanent conservation easement which had been written to preserve the original nature of the land in perpetuity. 

The following is an excerpt from a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources publication²,

An easement is recorded on a property’s title and “runs with the land;” that is, it is legally binding on not only the present landowner but all future owners of the property. The organization or agency that holds the easement is responsible for regular monitoring (and, if necessary, legal action) to ensure that the terms of the easement are upheld.

I come in front of you today requesting that you consider the effect and impact of decisions you will be asked to make soon regarding rescinding an agreement the City of Lakeville entered into in 1995 and the city’s legal recorded intentions to act as the steward of the conservation intent in perpetuity.

This is not  simply a matter of a zoning change or approving a variance, this decision has more far reaching implications in that it would in effect send the message that the City of Lakeville cannot be relied upon to honor long term agreements and commitments to protect the environment.

The same DNR publication has a quote from Andrea M. Peterson who was the Mayor of Grand Marais, from 1992 to 1996 describing our shared responsibility to protect our resources for future generations and describes how,                under her leadership, the Grand Marais City Council voted unanimously to establish a perpetual conservation easement on sixty acres of city-owned land. 

My question for the Lakeville City Council and each of you personally is “what messages and decisions do you want to leave as your legacy?”