Laserfiche WebLink
' C1) ar <br />tone e JUN 14 2006 <br />2. On September 21, 2004, a resolution supporting the <br />annexation petition of the Subject Property was passed by the City <br />Council of the City of Vadnais Heights .2 <br />3. The MBA set the petition on for hearing for May 3, 2005. Notice of <br />the hearing was published in the White Bear Press and Vadnais Heights Press. <br />The hearing was rescheduled due to a notice error for May 9, 2005. The hearing <br />opened on May 9, 2005 and was immediately continued to an indefinite date and <br />referred to the undersigned ALJ for hearing. <br />4. The ALJ set a prehearing conference for Friday June 10, 2005. <br />5. Prehearing conferences were conducted by the Administrative Law <br />Judge on June 10, 2005 and December 12, 2005. The hearing was set for <br />February 21, 2006. <br />6. On November 17, 2005, the City of Gem Lake filed a Motion to <br />Dismiss based upon a Ramsey County District Court decision that found that <br />Petitioner Bryan Hansen was not the sole owner of the Subject Property. The <br />decision by the district court found that Robert Hansen, brother of the Petitioner <br />had a half interest in the Subject Property. Minn. Stat. § 414.061, subd. 5 <br />requires the signatures of all owners to a petition for concurrent detachment and <br />annexation. <br />7. Robert Hansen joined in an Amended Petition and the Motion to <br />Dismiss was denied. <br />8. A Notice of Hearing in this matter was issued by the Office of <br />Administrative Hearings on January 5, 2006 and duly published. <br />9. On January 13, 2006, the City of Gem Lake moved this ALJ for an <br />Order of Dismissal for failure of the Petitioner to comply with the Prehearing <br />Order. On January 17, 2006, Petitioner Bryan Hansen filed a motion to withdraw <br />his Petition without prejudice. <br />10. The Motion to Withdraw without prejudice and the Motion to <br />Dismiss were denied and the matter set for Hearing on May 10, 11, and 12, <br />2006. The parties requested an extension of the statutory deadline for <br />completion of the decision in this matter. That request was granted for good <br />cause shown. <br />11. Notice of the reconvened hearing was issued and duly published. <br />12. On May 4, 2006 a Notice of Appearance was filed noting that Bryan <br />and Robert Hansen would be represented by counsel at the hearing. <br />2 Ex. 28. <br />3 <br />