City Attorney Michael May sent this out to alders today:
On March 22, 2010, the Plan Commission approved a conditional use permit (CUP) for the Edgewater development. On April 2, 2010, the City received a timely appeal of that approval.
Pursuant to sec. 28.12(11)(i), MGO, the City Clerk “shall file such appeal with the Common Council. The Common Council shall fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal, and give public notice thereof as well as due notice to the parties in interest, and decide the same within a reasonable time.”
The ordinance requires a 2/3 vote of the Council to overturn the actions of the Plan Commission.
Therefore, the appeal has been placed in Legistar and will be on the Council’s agenda for April 20. The only role for the Council at that time is to “fix a reasonable time for the hearing of the appeal …” My understanding is that several other Edgewater items will be on that agenda, and will be referred to a future meeting. The appeal of the CUP should be set for hearing at the same time.
You should also be aware that our initial review of the appeal showed that it did not contain the necessary 20% or more of the property owners who received notice of the CUP application. In that case, the appeal is not valid, and there would be nothing for the Council to act on. However, there are some questions about the nature of the list used by those initiating the appeal and conversations they may have had with the City Clerk’s office. We are investigating exactly what happened, and whether this affects in any way our legal opinion that the appeal is insufficient. That investigation and our conclusion will not be finished until late next week, at the earliest. At that time, we will provide the Council with a more comprehensive memorandum on the appeal.
If you have any questions on this, please contact me, ACA Kitty Noonan, or Brad Murphy.
Michael P. May
City Attorney
Gee, what do you think he’ll find. Nothing to see here?
