Talk with Malt-O-Meal

I had a 30 minute phone conversation last night with Malt-O-Meal Vice President of Business Development Paul Holzhueter who is also the primary contact on all of the letters we have received.

I expressed my confusion about this action that Malt-O-Meal is taking with this conservation easement and that I really can't find any negative information published about the company.  This just seems so out of character for them.  His response back was that yes they are a good company and it is the City of Lakeville's decision.  When I pointed out that by buying the land, they took over the easement agreement and that it is Malt-O-Meal's actions also that are causing this by buying the 4.5 acres separately and turning their back on preserving this land, he said that this was a city matter and the city is saying that they can terminate the agreement or agree in writing to allow any of the prohibited activities.  While that might align with the actual text of the agreement - does that really align with the intent?  Unfortunately it appears that no one else can question this since we lack "standing"...

I also mentioned that it would be a multiple win if they bought the 25 acres owned by the school district but he said that it is not convenient since there would be a building in-between.  He also mentioned that Malt-O-Meal could expand their existing building to be as close as 30 feet to the homes that are further west - interesting comment - those neighbors had better watch out!

When I mentioned the 70 foot drainage easement and the 100 foot drainage easement flowing into the wetland, he said that the city was extremely concerned about drainage and that there is an existing drain pipe on the property within the drainage easement and that's why 100 feet are needed.  The city still maintains that they have no idea why this conservation easement was put in place. 

It was a very calm discussion and it became obvious to me as I was already sure that it is just the formality of a vote to make the rescission of the conservation easement a "done deal".  I don't have any leverage here to convince them of what is the right thing to do - but I guess that's my perspective - I just can't imagine signing an agreement that says protect the land forever in its natural state and then going back on it.  My personal values are that you are bound by it and not just until something that you think is better comes along.  I guess I am just very naive.  And more than that, extremely disappointed.