Laserfiche WebLink
March 29, 2010 <br /> Page 2 <br /> in other parts of the Agreement, cer�ain connection charges for water service will be <br /> based on the connection charges in effect at fhe time of connection, A well-established <br /> rule of contract interpretation is that where one part of a contract provides for a <br /> connection fee updated to the time of connection, if the drafter of the contract intended <br /> other connection charges to be updated, that same language would appear throughout <br /> the contract. Therefore, it is my opinion that the 350 sewer connections referrec! to in <br /> Paragraph 4 of the Agreement should pay a connectian charge of $3,450.00 per unit <br /> regardless of the amount wFtich may stated in the current fee schedule of the City of <br /> Long Lake. This conclusion is supported by Paragraph 2 of the Agreement which <br /> provides that MnDOT paid the full cost of the sewer line and therefore Long Lake has <br /> no capital expenditure to recoup. In addition, Paragraph 4 of the Agreement requires <br /> Orono to pay the Metropolitan Council directly for the treatment of the effluent from the <br /> 350 units of capacity as they come online, <br /> Paragraph 5 of the Agreement notes that MnDOT also paid the full cost of constructing <br /> the water line to serve the fire station and that the water iine is available fo serve the <br /> Outlot A as shown on the attached plat of Wiifowfire Addition. There appears to be no <br /> possible argument that the water fine constructed on the easement crossing Outlot A is <br /> not intended to serve Outlot A. <br /> Paragraph 5 uses the same Eanguage as Paragraph 4 in establishing a $2,700.00 <br /> connection charge for residential properties to connect to the water system. !t would be <br /> consistent with the entire Agreement to conclude that "residen#ial properties" means a <br /> single-family dwelling unit or equivalent. As we have seen in the previous discussion, <br /> there is no support for the proposition that the $2,700.00 connection charge can be <br /> updated. This conclusion is suppo�ted by the fact that there is no capita{ expenditure for <br /> Long Lake to recoup through connection charges and by the fact that a user fee will be <br /> charged to Orano for the water usage, <br /> Paragraph 5 goes on to state that if L.ong Lake has sufficient water capacity, water <br /> service would be made available to certain generally identified neighborhaods other <br /> than Outlot A, V�Jill�wrire iHddition. These neighborhoods woufd be paying bath a <br /> connection charge and a user fee, both of which are consistent with the Long Lake fee <br /> schedule in effect at the time connection is made t� #he system. <br /> If you have further questions regarding this contract, please contact me. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> DOVE �RETLAND VAN VALKENBURG, PLLP <br /> Richard J. Schieffer <br /> RJS:rb <br />