pf_03444 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Roselawn v. Roseville/3200-149 Page 1 of 1 Paschke, Thomas From: Beets, Neal Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 11 :29 AM To: 'George Hoff' Cc: Welsch, Dennis; Paschke, Thomas Subject: RE: Roselawn v. Roseville/3200-149 Yes, thank you, sounds good. And, yes, I think if a set of conditions could be agreed to by the neighbors then the council would grant the permit subject to those neighbor-approved conditions. Thank you, George. Good work. I doubt the neighbors will agree upon such conditions, but you never know and it is worth a try (that is, another try, since we tried that before but the neighbors were adamantly opposed then, and maybe the passage of time and the new procedural posture of the matter - in court, who knows how judge may rule, etc - may move neighbors to accept the crematory subject to some conditions). Thanks for keeping us so well informed. Neal -----Original Message----- From: George Hoff [mailto:ghoff@hbklaw.com] Sent: Monday, January 06, 20034:41 PM To: neal.beets@cLroseville.mn.us Cc: Mark Rossow (E-mail); justin Subject: Roselawn v. Rosevillej3200-149 Neal - I spoke with Tom Radio today concerning the status of the above matter and the court ordered mediation. At present the court has ordered that the matter be mediated by 2/21/03. As of yet we have not chosen a mediator. I think that part of the lack of progress on that front is the perception of both parties that mediation will be fruitless. Mr. Radio indicated that he has talked to the atty. for the intervening neighbors and asked what it would take to resolve the matter with them. Mr. Goodman, on behalf of neighbors, apparently had a list of conditions that they would want to have included in any permit, but would still like to see the facility located elsewhere. My sense is that if a set of conditions could be found that the neighbors would accept to allow the location of the facility, that it would likely be acceptable to the City. If that is in fact the case, with the neighbors now in the case (presumably after the 10th) and present at any mediation it may be worthwhile having a mediation before the judge decides the motion, while there is some uncertainty for all parties as to what the judge may do. The suggestion that Radio and I came up with was to have the argument on Friday as scheduled, have the Court consider the matter submitted (to start the 90 day clock running for the judge to decide), but advise the judge that we don't want an order issued until after we report back on the mediation session, which would agree to hold before 2/15. Please let me know, if this approach is acceptable. If I don't here from you, I will assume that the foregoing is acceptable to the City as an approach. George Hoff 01/0712003