3. Letter on behalf of Meadowbrook FarmUammilleri
From:
John & Diane >
Sent:
Wednesday, January 29, 2020 6:43 AM
To:
k.cammilleri
Cc:
esherburne@eckberglammers.com
Subject:
Re: Meadowbrook Meeting
Dear Ken, Thank you for advising us on this matter
I will attend the council meeting along with Keith Lurie, another of the owners. We are not surprisingly very
opposed to any road vacation by the City. We have owned this property for over ten years having bought it
from the Gilbertson estate. Prior to that it was owned for decades by the Gilbertsons. During these many
decades, the road and drive has been in this location as shown by old air photos. This is our only access to our
131 plus acre property now in active farming. Our use of it has been continuous. We have been in a long
discussion with this neighbor regarding our right to the road access due to multiple legal theories: adverse
possession, common boundary by agreement and, for the road, most importantly, prescriptive easement. He has
erected new fencing substantially into the area of the road and along our south boundary traditionally farmed
limiting our use, all areas we have legal rights to under the above Minnesota long standing law. This has
brought the matter to point where a legal action on our part is required. Presently we have retained legal
counsel, completed a variety of title and survey work required for legal proceeding, and will shortly commence
a registration proceeding to resolve the matter.
We have also had a number of discussions with the neighbor and remain open to an amicable resolution, but
these are not active now. These will likely continue during the court proceeding. We feel any amicable
resolution should be consistent with the City;s longterm road plan for Meadowbrook. He has been jockeying
for arguments in the matter by these types of requests. In fact, prior to your tenure he approached the City for
vacation and the City discussed the matter and determined to take no action. This was during the time between
Neil and yourself. The City Attorney (Eric Sherburne) and I communicated this matter at that time and the City
took no action. By the way, I have seen no official or even informal communication regarding any type of
"vacation" request from our neighboring owner. Isn't there some kind of formal process for this, with affected
property owner notice?
In conclusion, it would make no sense for the City to take any action that might cause a loss of access to our
property, severely limiting its use and value. This is particularly so while it is in active litigation and when the
road is (and has been for decades) on the city's comprehensive long term transportation plan for extension and
connection as a North/South arterial.
Thank you for keeping us in the loop on this matter. We will be at the meeting next week.
John and Diane Herman
Cedar Bend on St. Croix
23355 Quentin Ave. N
Scandia, MN 55073