Laserfiche WebLink
• MINUTES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 25, 1988 <br />been. He does. not feel there is any need to financially support <br />Minnetrista. He would like to see the City initiate another lawsuit using <br />separate counsel so it will emphasize the fact that there is multiple <br />concern. The basic issue is whether or not the Council thinks opposing the <br />condemnation proceeding is cost worthy. <br />Mayor Grabek thinks that the issue does need to be addressed. The <br />question is what method of action would be most economical. He is <br />uncertain whether the citizens of Orono would have enough interest to <br />warrant spending money on a legal battle. He does not feel that this issue <br />takes financial priority. Mayor Grabek would like to take some form of <br />action that lets the Courts know the City of Orono has an interest in this <br />without, proceeding in a full scale lawsuit. City Attorney Barrett stated <br />that there would be a conflict of interest if he were to provide the City <br />with a letter to that effect. He feels that the Resolution of Support is a <br />good vehicle to show the Court there is interest on behalf of the City. <br />The City could also as a second option, send a representative to sit in <br />Court and indicate that the City does not wish to intervene at this time, <br />but is concerned. The third option would be to join with other concerned <br />cities. and file an amicus curiae brief highlighting the main issues. A <br />fourth option would be to join in the existing lawsuit. <br />• Mayor Grabek asked for clarification of an amicus brief. Councilmember <br />Callahan explained that its effect is that the City would appear to support <br />one side or the other, without actually being a party to the lawsuit. It <br />provides the opportunity to formally argue the City's position to the <br />Court. Mayor Grabek opined that this would seem to be the best way to <br />insure that the City is apprised of developments in this matter. <br />Councilmember Callahan stated that he would like to see the City try to <br />involve other cities in drafting an amicus brief. Mayor Grabek agreed by <br />stating there should be a letter drafted from the Council and Mayor to the <br />affected communities suggesting such an action. City Administrator <br />Bernhardson pointed out that there was an upcoming meeting at Mayor Smith's <br />home that would provide the opportunity to discuss this proposal. <br />Councilmember Goetten believed that a formal letter should be sent. She <br />expressed her extreme concern over this issue and is happy to see that <br />action is being taken. <br />It was moved by Mayor Grabek, seconded by Councilmember Goetten, to <br />instruct the City to draft a letter from the Mayor and Councilmembers to <br />the appropriate adjacent cities suggesting an amicus brief strategy and <br />requesting a response thereto. Motion, Ayes =4, Nays =O, Motion passed. <br />WATER CONSERVATION REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES <br />RESOLUTION #2479 - ORDINANCE 53, SECOND SERIES <br />City Administrator Bernhardson stated that the Council had asked the <br />City to provide some language to put into effect an ordinance to regulate <br />water usage. City Attorney Barrett submitted an ordinance for adoption. <br />• Bernhardson would like to add language that would give the Administrator <br />the authority to determine conservation requirements involving the City <br />water system. He stated that there are situations in which an immediate <br />restriction may be mandatory. This amendment would have to be ratified, if <br />acceptable, at the next Council meeting. The City has drafted a Resolution <br />10 <br />