In a match reminiscent of the Biblical tale of David versus Goliath, Field Township will pursue legal action to stop ISD 2142 from proceeding with construction of the new North Woods School. Construction of a road to and site preparation for the new school, located about four miles north of Cook, began in mid-April.

Town Board supervisors unanimously approved the move on Tuesday following more than an hour of public debate over the issue. Although Supervisor Jay Brunner was unable to attend Tuesday’s meeting, he sent a letter saying he supported the motion.

Interim ordinance

At issue is an interim ordinance adopted by the Field Town Board in February. The ordinance calls for a temporary moratorium on construction projects such as the school while a committee considers whether the township should take a larger role in planning and zoning. The committee’s recommendations are due 60 days before the moratorium ends in October.

ISD 2142’s attorney maintains that St. Louis County’s approval of a conditional use permit (CUP) and variance gives the district property rights. The town was aware of the district’s attempt to acquire those approvals, the letter states, but did not challenge the district before the appeals process had expired.

“The interim ordinance does not, and lawfully cannot, reach backwards to strip a property owner of legally established property rights,” wrote attorney Peder Larson in a letter to Field Township and its attorney Troy Gilchrist. Larson works for the Minneapolis law firm Larkin, Holman, Daly and Lindgren Ltd., which has been retained by the school district in the land use dispute.

But Field Town Chair Keith Aho said the township’s attorney contends there is legal precedent for the town’s actions and said the case hinges on the township’s authority to exert some control over property development in its borders. He says St. Louis County disregarded the township’s role in awarding a the CUP and a variance that allows the school project to exceed lot coverage restrictions and is inconsistent with uses defined for area, which is zoned Forest and Agricultural Management-2.

But Larson argues that the issues in dispute are county-established zoning areas not township decisions. Under state and federal constitutions, the town cannot take existing property rights without following established eminent domain procedures and would require the town to reimburse the district at significant cost.

“Even if you succeed, you are temporarily taking the district’s property for six months, eight months, however long if you are effective and you have to pay for that,” Larson said. “You don’t just get to say you are no longer going to build a school, you have to go through a process and you have to pay the reduced value in that property to do that. You have to buy these rights from the school. You’re going to be out of pocket to pay for this.”

Until a court has determined that the town has properly taken the district’s property rights, the town’s interim ordinance has no effect and the district can continue work on the project. “Even if the town were to enact zoning controls or a comprehensive plan that outright prohibited the uses established by the CUP and the variance, the district would nonetheless have a right to complete the project as a legal non-conforming use,” asserted Larson.

Aho said the town’s first step likely would be to seek a temporary restraining order to halt work on the project. If approved, the order would give the township time to ensure there are legal grounds sufficient to move forward and also provide an opportunity to negotiate an amicable solution with the school district.

Pros and cons

Audience members, which included six members of the ISD 2142 School Board and Superintendent Charles Rick, were given an opportunity to weigh in on the issue before supervisors acted.

Zelda Bruns, who represents the Orr attendance area and chairs the school board, asked the Town Board to rescind the moratorium and let construction move forward.

“We need to stop spending money on attorneys,” she told supervisors. “We need to be spending money that will benefit our students. Every dollar we spend on these issues is taking money away from the new building and the new state-of-the-art technology that will benefit our kids’ future.”

Bruns said she understood the desire to retain schools in communities, but it was no longer practical to do so. “We’ve already invested an enormous amount of money in the Olson Road site,” she continued. “I believe, at this point, to stop this would be so wrong, such a waste of taxpayer money.”

Others questioned the legal costs to the township. According to Treasurer Ellie Brunner, about $3,750 has been spent so far on legal costs and she invited anyone who wished to examine the township’s financial records.

Several pointed out motions at Field Township’s annual meeting opposed spending township dollars on the issue. A motion to lift the moratorium was also approved.

But Aho said those motions were advisory only and that a survey showed that nearly 70 of the township residents favored the moratorium . In addition, the survey showed that a majority preferred renovating existing schools instead of building a new school. Similar surveys taken by Leiding Township and Linden Grove also showed a majority supported renovating existing schools instead of building new.

But others noted that attempts to pass an excess operating levy to keep existing schools open had failed on three consecutive votes. “So now we’re on Plan B,” said Ryan Hartway, referring to the restructuring plan.

Mary Conger said she was proud to be a graduate of Cook, but that the existing school was no longer adequate.

“If you think that that school is doing the best it possibly can for our kids, you are wrong,” said Conger. “There aren’t doors on the bathroom stalls in that school. There are kids smashed into rooms. There are four grades being taught by one person. There are classes we can’t offer. “

Several deemed the new school a “white elephant,” saying the building wouldn’t be needed due to declining enrollment in the region. Others were unhappy with the location of the school.

Jacqueline Stewart, who lives near the new school site, said residents had never been consulted by the district on the site selection.

“I don’t want it there,” she said, saying the addition of street lights and more traffic at the site would be disruptive. “My neighbors don’t want it there.”

Others targeted their remarks at the threat to local government control.

Kathleen McQuilllan, speaking for Linden Grove, said the county’s actions in Field Township alarmed others.

“This whole experience caused the township board and its residents to be concerned about the future and townships’ rights to manage land use because of the precedent set by county Planning and Zoning Commission through this process.”

Vermilion Lake Township supervisors expressed similar concerns in a letter read aloud at Tuesday’s meeting. The letter criticized ISD 2142 for not abiding by the interim ordinance approved by the township.

“When we see the school board fail to respect the authority of other elected officials and legitimate efforts to enforce local control it causes us great concern,” the letter stated.

The letter continued: “As a body that is charged with the education of our young people, School District 2142’s violation of the Field Township ordinance is a poor lesson indeed. Does the school board really wish to demonstrate to our students that disregarding the law is an acceptable approach to dispute resolution?”

The district should abide by the law and seek a legal approach to solving its differences with Field Township, the letter concluded.