By Anne Thom

Approximately 130 people came to the Lent Town Hall on Monday, Jan. 30, as talks continue between Lent Township and the city of Stacy over land ownership.

Much of what the large group heard had been said before, but many people still had questions. Lent residents are concerned that annexation has the potential to change their quality of life.

But nothing was resolved in the negotiations due partly to parties missing from the table and residentsí questions being left unanswered.

Absent were Stacy Mayor Michael Carlson, whose wife was ill and Councilmember John Walz, who was out of town on business.

Lent Township supervisor Monica Abress opened the meeting saying, ìWeíve had many proposals on the table and itís gone back and forth, back and forth.î

After giving a brief history of negotiations, Abress explained that the most recent proposal includes sections Stacy is seeking to annex - Section 32, and half of Sections 30 and 31 - and a notation that any landowner in Lent who chooses to be absorbed by Stacy may opt to do so.

A map at the front of the hall allowed residents to locate their properties in relationship to the above-mentioned sections. Once again it came up that both the city and township are interested in the same 40-acre parcel of land.

But the owner of that parcel has not, at this time, indicated any interest in selling or in petitioning to become part of Stacy.
ìThis land is not for sale,î said Abress, ìwhat weíre really arguing is what we want the future of this community to look like ... weíre arguing over the same parcel of land.î

Lentís plan for the parcel is industrial development as outlined in the townshipís comprehensive plan. The township is keeping in mind that Chisago County has barely any commercial industrial tax base.

Stacy has plans for retail development. The Lent board has stated they are not eager to see retail with its lower paying jobs. Stacy City Council member John Daher pointed out that retail provides jobs for part-time and high school students. Daher added behind the retail development the city would be looking for commercial and light industrial. What is the future then?

Lent resident Kerri Wuornos said, ìI thought in order for you to annex us it had to be to improve our quality of life and that isnít going to happen. If youíre interested in those parcels why donít you just annex those?

Supervisors speak up

Lent supervisors spoke first. Abress suggested bringing in a mediator, one who has knowledge of commercial growth and real estate law. She said, ìwhen and if the land becomes available, we could keep it in the township boundaries and develop it, but sewer and water development rights could be signed over to the city.î

A second proposal is to have both parties work with the Chisago County HRA/EDA. The plan is that the county would help purchase the land and then work with everyone toward commercial development. This proposal was taken to the county HRA/EDA on Jan. 31.
Councilman John Daher said the tri-party proposal had not been discussed by the Stacy council, but he said they were willing to discuss it.

Abress said the township wants mediation because it would force regularly scheduled meetings. ìWe are hopeful we can reach some kind of agreement,î she said.

Regarding the cityís proposal, Abress said, ìIt is our (townshipís) belief that the proposal is not in the best interest of Lent Township, whatever Stacy and Lent can agree to will not be put aside by an administrative law judge.î

Lent Township resident Dave Milles said ìWe have to deal with the reality that some kind of municipality is going to take place here.î
This was a point Stacy City Councilman Mel Aslakson had made at the Jan. 24 city council meeting. Daher said the city council had spoken to an attorney about mediation in order to understand what that process would involve. He said the council wanted to hear what the residentsí thoughts are. He acknowledged the city has hired a planner to look at the sections they are interested in but denied any papers had been filed regarding annexation at this time.

Who will have to pay?

There appears to be contention over the cityís recent partnership with the Chisago Lakes Joint Sewage Treatment Commission. The cost of hooking Stacy up was considerable and paid for with both a grant and bonds. Some Lent residents see the cityís bid for annexation as strictly a bid for increased access to water and sewer revenue to cover the cityís current debt.

Lent residents said they did not want to support payment of that debt, especially those who it appeared wouldnít be able to get city water and sewer services for quite some time, if ever.

Daher also declined to promise any access to water and sewer services immediately, but also explained that anyone agreeing to annexation without those services would not be charged for them. Lent residents then took the floor.

A word of caution

Resident John Rohon said to the council, ìBe careful what you wish for. Any hostile takeover without resident input may be political suicide in the long run.î

He was the first resident to say that if Lent was annexed the current council could be assured they would lose their seats to Lent residents, noting that the township has more residents than the city does. Rohon continued asking, ìwill my quality of life be enhanced if I am annexed?î He believed not.

Rohon brought up Grant Township in Washington County and many of the Lent residents wanted to know why they couldnít incorporate as they had.

Abress said because Chisago County is not part of the Metropolitan Council, as is Washington, the township doesnít have this option. There is also a catch 22 in that once a township files papers of incorporation, the state essentially changes its designation from rural to urban. Maintaining the rural feel of Lent was important for the residents who spoke out on Monday night.

What if you donít want development?

Township resident Michael Mayercheck asked what if the landowners do not want to see their land developed as commercial/industrial.

Abress said the landowners wouldnít have much of a choice. Township resident Carol Schmidt asked, ìWhat is the benefit to me as a homeowner to be annexed into Stacy? What is the benefit to me of staying in the township?î

Speaking for the city, Councilor Daher said right now he couldnít think of any. Water and sewer services would be a few years off, he said. The current public safety services are already in place and there would be no change, better or worse. The city however, would get the property tax benefit.

Abress responded for Lent saying there would be no change in their form of government and no change in taxes or tax structure. ìIt keeps your quality of life the way it is,î Abress said.

What about the livestock?

Lent resident Wendy Beimert asked, ìHow would it (annexation) affect building codes for outbuildings?î Milles spoke again, asking about keeping horses or chickens?

Lent resident Greg Hunder added he has neighbors who own horses and other livestock and was concerned that Stacy had not thought about this and could not address it. Then Hunder asked, ìWhat does annexation do to hunting?î

Daher responded, ìWe would cover it under our ordinances.î

Councilman Aslakson said some cities have hunting districts.

Daher answered, ìWe follow building code standards. Right now our ordinances donít accommodate rural areas.î

Referring to quality of life issues, Lent resident John Barney wanted to know once the County 17 bridge is in what is to stop Stacy from moving up to that area. He said, ìI can stand outside and see the northern lights at night. Right now we have a say.î

Daher admitted the last part was correct and also admitted expansion as far north as County 17 had come up in city discussions, but that extending services so far appeared to be cost prohibitive.

Quiet no more

Lent Supervisor Lyle Johnson, who had been quiet most of the evening finally said, ìhow many people have to tell you no?î He and Daher argued about taxes, revenue and that Stacy had not even brought the townshipís latest counter proposal up for discussion as they had been told would occur.

The discussion became even more heated when it was learned that Stacy had scheduled a special meeting to discuss the issues on Feb. 7.

Daher and Lynda Schmidt, who was sitting in for Stacy city clerk Sharon Payne, said that notices of the meeting have been posted as is protocol for public meetings.

Lent residents felt strongly they should have been notified more directly. There were calls for no secret meetings and that trust is an issue.

See story on Feb. 7 meeting next week, or check online www.ecmpostreview.com.