Laserfiche WebLink
ew <br />righton <br />M <br />M <br />• <br />N December 30, 1982 <br />w <br />Q <br />p To: The New Brighton Park Board <br />z From: Maurice H. Anderso~ctor of Parks and_Recreation <br />_z <br />~ Re: Long Lake Park Development Options <br />z <br />0 <br />x <br />c? <br />~ The L.L.I.A, has announced its intentions of filing a law suit <br />m -:.o force the return of Long Lake Park to the city. As noted <br />w in its letter of December 14, 1982 to the New Brighton City <br />z Council they contend that the sa le of the land constitutes an <br />o illegal use of 1967 bond issue proceeds. The City Attvrriey <br />ao feels that they have a weak case, however....... ._ <br />w If they should prevail and reverse the sale, it should be <br />~ noted that the land on the south shore was not purchased~c~ith <br />those bond proceeds and. is not directly affected by the results <br />~ of the suit. The city has a number of options available, some <br />"' of them are: <br />J <br />y 1. Declare the land unnecessary for park purposes. and <br />sell it-for residential purposes, using the proceeds <br />to develop the remainder of the property. <br />H <br />w 2. Sell or give the land to Ramsey County for use as a <br />~ boat launch and/or fishing area. <br />a 3. Sell or give the lend to DAR for use as boat access <br />w and fishing area <br />o <br />p 4. Sell the land to Ramsey County and attempt. to persuade <br />~ Metro Council''that deve3.opment of-'the south shore of <br />,Q Long Lake9 Rush Lake land, Rice Creek lands and a munici- <br />~ pally developed Long Lake area. should still qualify for <br />w regional funds. <br />°C It maybe unnecessary to discuss any of these options at length, <br />~ however it'is worth noting that an adverse ruling on the land <br />Q sale does not necessarily mean that a high quality park can <br />Y be.d'eveloped at little or no cost``to New Brighton residents. <br />oc <br />Q <br />a - <br /> <br />