• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

How can I stop the city from vacating a street.

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
What is the name of your state? MN

I live in a small town where I bought a piece of property (2.84 acres) There is a city street that runs parallel with my land for a distance of 700 ft. A neighbor bought a lot (50ft. x 142ft.) He cannot build on this piece because of new zoning laws. So he wants to have the city vacate the street in between us. Then each land owner would pick up 30ft. more of property.

I am not interested in having this closed, because I just recently had the land sub-divided into four parcels. By closing this street We would only be able to access two of the parcels from a county road that has a steep embankment. I don't feel it is in our best interest to limit the potential of these propertys.

The ones in favor of closing street, work for the city, and "are in tight" with the city council. I think we maybe in for a fight with this one. One other neighbor this would cause a problem for owns 12 lots (undeveloped) and he is not in favor of this either.

How do we stop this motion? They have a public hearing August 10th.
How should we prepare for it?
 


S

superbovine

Member
You said you live in a small town, and the city council is an elective body. I hope either you or your neighbor are in good standing with the community. Have your friends and their friends start sending letters and talking the city council about it. Is there a local paper in your town? Could you get a story the spun in your favor?
 
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
superbovine said:
You said you live in a small town, and the city council is an elective body.

**Yes and yes.


superbovine said:
I hope either you or your neighbor are in good standing with the community.

**Yes and yes.


superbovine said:
Have your friends and their friends start sending letters and talking the city council about it.

**We have talked to two councilmen and are planning to talk to the mayor this evening. We also contacted people that were interested in closing streets or alleys (in the past three years) that were denied and they plan on attending. They feel it is discriminating.


superbovine said:
Is there a local paper in your town? Could you get a story the spun in your favor?


**No, but there is one 18 miles away that does local stories. That is a good idea.

**I have another question, in my other post "We surveyed and there's a problem". I mentioned that my step-brother and I were recently on bad terms, (due to the fact our survey shows we own part of his front yard).

He is one of the four councilmen. We feel he probably won't vote in our favor, because he is still p*****. If he doesn't abstain from this vote, when is the proper time to tell the council, that we feel he should abstain (due to a conflict of interest)?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
D

dequeendistress

Senior Member
You need to voice any conflicts you feel prior to the voting process at the open city council meeting or challenge the vote after which if the person does not abstain, but the majority is what rules in a vote, therefore unless the one vote was the deciding vote it makes no difference.

I would also advise you that more than one council member meeting with anyone outside of an open (called) meeting is illegal, when city matters are being discussed.
 
H

HomeGuru

Senior Member
dequeendistress said:
I would also advise you that more than one council member meeting with anyone outside of an open (called) meeting is illegal, when city matters are being discussed.

**A: what? You mean 2 council members meeting with someone talking City business at Starbucks is illegal? Say it isn't so.
Click to expand...
 
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
**We hadn't attended the meeting and didn't know it was on the agenda. My stepbrother, (on at least 3 different occasions) was aware that we wanted to be informed if this issue came up. Well......he didn't. He also knew that we had sub-divided and this would affect us, yet never brought it up at the meeting.

**This is a small town, where everybody knows everybody. I suppose their are "closed meetings" happening daily. I only want to have the councilmen aware of the sub-dividing and the affect it has on us, since they hadn't been made aware of it initially. Ultimately the decision is theirs.

**I just want them to have all the facts, since the city worker, had been talking to at least two of them, on several occassions, on what he wanted to do.
 
N

nextwife

Senior Member
With all those lot sales at stake, it may be a good financial investment to see if the other opposing neighbor wishes to split the cost of having a RE attorney review the situation and see if they can attack the proposal on any legal grounds,. There is a substantial financial loss potentially being incurred if this change is made.
 
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
dequeendistress said:
I would also advise you that more than one council member meeting with anyone outside of an open (called) meeting is illegal, when city matters are being discussed.
Click to expand...

**We met with the councilmen individually at each of their homes. My interpretation of closed meeting is, if more then one of the members of the legislative body meet and discuss issues.
 
D

dequeendistress

Senior Member
You're incorrect as far as the definition of a closed meeting of a council or other public board:

A closed meeting is one that concerns personnel matters and the like. Usually individual personnel matters. An open meeting may be closed and then re opened, usually any item requiring action due to a closed meeting must be voted on in public after the meeting is re-opened.

What you are speaking of is personal conversations with one party on the board. That is all it amounts to is conversation, now if another board member or the mayor was there also, and matters of the city were discussed, this is where the illegal or in the least unethical meeting defintion would apply.

The closing of the street would most certainly be discussed in a called open meeting and you should have the right to present your case.

Just a side note, if I were you I would write to the editor of you paper and see if they allow citizens to place "from the people" articles...if so, then write your concerns and the paper will publish it. They may require that you give your name, but you can always request that it be withheld from print.
 
Last edited:
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
nextwife said:
With all those lot sales at stake, it may be a good financial investment to see if the other opposing neighbor wishes to split the cost of having a RE attorney review the situation and see if they can attack the proposal on any legal grounds,. There is a substantial financial loss potentially being incurred if this change is made.
Click to expand...
**That is a very good point. But I never heard of any type of laws that would support this type of case. (Doesn't mean there isn't one though)

**So what do you think Homeguru, does this case have some sort of legal grounds on the issue being a (potential) financial loss for us and the neighbor? Providing we would be able to show that it would affect our propertys adversely. Or would it be a waste of RE time?

**Basically, we would just prefer they not close the street at all. But if it goes through, then would some sort of action be taken then or could some sort of action be taken before to stop it?

**Thanks Nextwife.
 
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
dequeendistress said:
Your incorrect as far as the definition of a closed meeting of a council or other public board:

A closed meeting is one that concerns personnel matters and the like. Usually individual personnel matters. An open meeting may be closed and then re opened, usually any item requiring action due to a closed meeting must be voted on in public after the meeting is re-opened.

What you are speaking of is personal conversations with one party on the board. That is all it amounts to is conversation, now if another board member or the mayor was there also, and matters of the city were discussed, this is where the illegal or in the least unethical meeting defintion would apply.

**Thankyou for clarifying.

The closing of the street would most certainly be discussed in a called open meeting and you should have the right to present your case.


**Yes, and I'm certainly going to try.


Just a side note, if I were you I would write to the editor of you paper and see if they allow citizens to place "from the people" articles...if so, then write your concerns and the paper will publish it. They may require that you give your name, but you can always request that it be withheld from print.
Click to expand...

**We do have a couple of papers that have this type of column. I will take your advice on that. Thanks for the idea.
 
H

Happy Trails

Senior Member
Thank you all for your help.

Just got back from the open meeting. Wow! What a fight!

It was hard fighting town hall when there were people on the council with their own agenda. They had changed closing it all the way through to appease owner of block one; leaving the issue solely on us. But after a very heated debate, they couldn't get any one to make a motion. (Because the street commissioner knew he would not get a second) Yeah! We won!!

I even used the issue nextwife had brought up about it affecting value. I said my real estate agent and RE attorney thought it could adversely affect the value, by limiting the potential our undeveloped property has.

Thank you all! Now I have to go find the tums bottle. Can I sue the city for an ulcer?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top