At the Monday, April 22 meeting, the Rushford Council discussed at length a request from the Department of Natural Resources to sign off on survey results they conducted. The land, now held privately, is being sold to a land conservancy which will transfer the ownership and management of the land to the State of Minnesota/DNR. The land abuts the Rushford Municipal Airport.
“The DNR is getting a bunch of land from an estate and they did their survey which shows one fence post is off an inch, another fencepost might be off three-quarters of an inch. It’s miniscule,” explained City Clerk Kathy Zacher.
“That’s not acceptable,” said Councilor Jim O’Donnell.
“It’s crazy. They want us to sign off. We can’t do that,” continued Zacher. “The FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) and people that give us money want to know that we are not giving away even an inch of land that belongs to the airport.”
“You’re looking for a degree of wrongness or rightness?” asked O’Donnell.
“A degree of accuracy,” stated Benson.
Further discussion revealed that the property line pins are not in dispute and each location where a fencepost is off, of which many were noted, is mere inches. The fenceline has been in the deeply wooded area for more than 40 years. City Attorney Mike Flaherty, Flaherty/Hood, P.A., and City Airport Engineer Matt Wagner, Mead & Hunt, advised the city against signing the document. Instead, the only way to prove the accuracy of the city’s property is a survey. The cost is $8,981.
“So, who’s settling it?” asked Councilor Leigh Volkmann. “If the DNR did a survey and we do a survey and there’s a dispute, it’s not over. You can’t override the DNR.”
Zacher felt a city survey would supersede the DNR survey because the city survey is based on what the FAA and the state say. The city plans to survey the airport property in 2025 as part of its updated Airport Operations Plan. There’s no guarantee that if surveying is done now, the FAA will accept it as the official survey for the plan, and another may need to be ordered again in a year.
“The property line is still the property line,” stressed O’Donnell.
“We should not sign away a potential of land even if it is six inches here or there. We should not just do so because the DNR asks us, too,” added Zacher, referring to the attorney and engineer’s reasonings.
Without the city signing the document or surveying the property, the DNR claims the estate can’t convey the land through sale. “That’s on them, not us. As a taxpayer, I don’t see why I would pay if they can’t convey the land the way it is,” added Volkman. “If the DNR says it needs to be done, they can pick up the cost. Nobody’s disputed this in 40 years.”
The council agreed it wasn’t necessary to sign the document or survey the property.
In other news, the city is immediately ceasing the Public Access Channel and amending the franchise Public, Educational, and Government (PEG) agreement with MediaCom and Acentek.
“Long story short, the equipment is not staying in good working order. It’s a fairly expensive option to upgrade it,” noted Benson. In addition, the Rushford Peterson School District has told the city it does not want the equipment kept on-site due to tightening security measures for technological equipment and liability issues.
“With the advent of live streaming, the local access channel is not a thing that people use anymore,” added O’Donnell.
There may be options for parts of the equipment to find a second life, but it’s outdated and not functioning as designed. The city will recycle the equipment unless the parts have some value. The city has taken in $64,000 in the PEG Fund since its creation, but only a portion comes from PEG franchise fees.
The council also unanimously approved expending $1,400/year, once a month, for rodent control at the former Farmers Win site downtown. Measures would include interior and exterior, similar to what was used when the elevator was operational.
The council asked if a site walkthrough was done to see what was inside. While some had been inside when it was for sale, it’s been sitting empty since the company vacated the site in 2019-2020.
“There’s lots of stuff in there. If you’re thinking about cleaning that out… uff da… that’s a nasty job,” exclaimed O’Donnell.
“It’s not good,” added Councilor Andrew Linder.
There is old feed, which could be moldy, and there are currently no lights on site. There was a suggestion the city utilize Sentenced to Serve (STS) to clean out the site, but Zacher noted there are stringent rules for STS about safety.
Leave a Reply