10-19-2009 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council ltinutes October ~ 9, X009 Page 5 Counci.ltnember Moon wished to clarify that the '~1rit of Mandamus moves cases along and is not a preliminary f nding against the cite. Mr. Beck stated this is correct and signing the writ of mandamus does not address the merits of the case. Councilrnember westgaard asked the landfill why they wouldn't be willing to continue their long-standing positive relationship with the cite to work out the conditions for a CUP and license at a later date if the zone change were re~Tersed. He stated tlae parties have agreed to disagree on the zone change issue which will resolve itself but questioned why each group can't work with each other, He asked for confirmation From tl~e landfill that they don't wish to continue the long-standing relationship. Mr, Perry reiterated this is Council's only chance to add conditions to the CUP and license and stated the landfill doesn't wish to continue its relationship with the city, Mayor I~linzing stated the correct zoning is not in place to approve the CUP and license to expand the existing landfill so Council would have to deny it based on the cit~r's regulatory process, She stated the city is still in the position to require within its regulatory process an application from the landfill for a CUP and license whether the zoning decision is overturned by the court, She commented it would be difficult to believe any court would make a decision on an amendment to the city's Comprehensive Plan and then include that the city would have to circum~rent its regulatory process for CUP and license approvals. Mt'. Perry stated this is tlae city's only opportunity to impose conditions. Councilmember Moon stated lie would like to find out more information on the Duluth case and he questioned why there would be any issues with approving conditions that could be contingent upon the court decision. Mr, Beck stated the city's attorney handling the landfill lawsuit is fully aware and in support of the recommendation before Council tonight, He stated this item could be continued if the Council wanted to review the Duluth case, He stated the landfill lawsuit is based on a "gotcha" situation because Mr, Pes.~iy's case argues they "got us" and we have to approve whatever they applied due to a Host Fee Agreement with the landfill in 2003. MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER GUMPHREY AND SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER ~ERWAS TD ADOPT RESOLUTION D9-5G DENYING THE APPLICATION OF ELR RIVER LANDFILL, INC. FDR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND LICENSE TO ALLOW E~PAN~ION OF THE ELT RIVER LANDFILL. Counci.linember Moon stated lie would prefer to continue this item until the city could review the Duluth case, MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MOTTN TO CONTINUE THIS ITENT TO NOVEMBER 2, 2Q09 SO COUNCIL CAN REVTEVII THE DULUTH CASE AND OTHER.APPLICABLE CASES RELATED TO THIS MATTER. MOTION FAILED DUE TO LACK OF A SECOND. ORIGINAL MOTION CARRIED 4-~., Councilmember Motin opposed due to his wish to continue this item for further review,