Laserfiche WebLink
From: John M. Baker [mailto:]Baker@greeneespel.com� <br />Sent: Monday, February 07, 2005 8:04 AM <br />To: Gronli, Daag <br />Cc: Cliffo�l M. Greene; William P. Hefiier <br />Subject: Friends cf Twin Lakes v. Roseville information <br />Doug: <br />Our attorneys have handled approximately six cases in the last ten years involving claims that <br />directly or indirectly involved ��PA (and, in at least one case, MERA). They include suits for <br />Roseville (involving a challenge to a negative declaration for the need for an EIS on Center <br />Pointe, which included a MERA claim), Ham Lake, Apple Valley, and Forest Lake. We have <br />also handled two suits involving the relationship between the automatic approval statute and <br />MEPA, for Bloomington and Mendota Heights. <br />Our MERA work has not included a MERA "trial." In the Center Pointe case, the plaintiff <br />ultimately dropped that claim after we had moved for summary judgment on it. <br />I see that the case also involves a general challenge to the City's zoning decision as arbitrary and <br />capricious. We have responded to over a dozen such claims in the last few years. <br />I hope this information is helpful. Please let me know if you have any further questions. <br />John M. Baker <br />Greene Espel P.L.L.P. <br />200 S. Sixth Street, Suite 1200 <br />Minneapolis, MN 55402 <br />(612)373-0830 <br />JBaker@gr-espeLcom <br />http://www.greeneespel.com <br />