5.2. SR 09-08-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Mr. Stephen Rohlf Page 2 August 13, 1997 pasture land, storage areas, caretaker residences, buffer zones, and other ancillary areas and uses supporting the company's research and development activities. The ANC has conducted agricultural-related research at its present location for four decades, and Cargill intends to continue and expand these operations. Cargill is very concerned by the fact that the Urban Service EAW indicates that over 300 acres of the ANC would be included in the expanded urban services area, and that certain utility facilities would be physically constructed on the Cargill property. No analysis is contained in the Urban Service EAW as to the impacts of these proposal on Cargill's operations. This lack of analysis is particularly troubling since it appears likely from the document that the proposed facilities may interfere directly with various ANC buildings and activities. Cargill has invested millions of dollars in its research center over the years. Since 1994 alone, the company has expended over $4 million to construct new, state-of-the-art laboratory facilities and a swine research complex. Cargill has emphasized to City officials its intention to remain permanently at its current location. Despite the company's repeated efforts to communicate with the City on matters of concern involving possible expansion of public services, Elk River in the Urban Service EAW again has elected to proceed without any attempt to involve Cargill in the process, or to even provide the most minimal type of notice. Procedural Issues Before turning to the specifics of the Urban Service EAW, we must note as an initial matter that Elk River, by failing to provide Cargill with a copy of the EAW when it was distributed for comment, has violated the rules of the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) regarding publication and distribution of environmental documents. See Minn. Rules pt. 4410.1500. Cargill has made repeated requests to the City that it provide the company with all pertinent documents involving the proposed extension of utilities and other major municipal projects into the so-called East Elk River urban service area. Accordingly, Cargill was entitled under Minn. Rules pt. 4410.1500(A)(12) to a copy of the Urban Service EAW at the time of its initial distribution and to notice of the comment period. The City failed to meet this requirement. Elk River's failure to provide timely notice has prejudiced Cargill severely. The company became aware of the Urban Service EAW only yesterday, the day before today's deadline for filing comments. Although Cargill is submitting