The decision was publicly released this morning.

An EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) is ***so I have to make a correction here***. The decision to not do an EIS was "reversed and remanded for a new EIS determination".  So this means the city can obtain more information and make a new decision.

But still: We won! 

It has been a long journey to this point. Hours of research, meetings, interacting with supporters (and non-supporters) and so much more.  For anyone who would like to read the decision, you can find it here (it's number 24):

https://www.mncourts.gov/CourtOfAppeals/RecentOpinions.aspx?ext=

The city proved quite a few things, some we obviously don’t agree with (as “Don’t worry, we’ll fix it” isn’t good enough, but that’s opinion in the courts eyes).  But they failed to rely on substantial evidence to determine the project’s potential effects on wildlife and failed to consider the project’s cumulative effects on climate change.

Our lawyer and his team have done an outstanding job and we can't thank them enough for their help!  

Another recent update:
An outgoing councilman gave a speech at his last meeting.  This is a part of what he said to the council, “I’d really like you to, uh, on that driving course out there – keep pushing forward.  I know it’s a different economy now, I…..can only expect that, you know, that the judges will see it in the city’s favor, uh, cause that could be huge for Eagle Lake.  And if it takes some tax increment finance - financing to get that thing going again, just get it done.”   This speech can be seen/heard here at the 1:52:30 mark.  From the beginning it has been regularly stated that this is a "privately funded project". From upgrades to the sewer/water (to the site) and contracting the services of a zoning expert, it doesn't appear there wouldn’t be some costs to the town of Eagle Lake.  This is NOT to say the current city council approves of the suggesting of tax increment financing, but this project has reeked of personal (not community) interest very early on (which we know affected the decision to not do an EIS). That is not the way to add to a community. Should this project reach a final planning stage and goes up for approval, it should be crystal clear if "privately funded" is no longer the case and additional finances are included.

So this decision does not mean that the project won’t happen.  It means that the proper steps should be required to move forward, which is what we have been asking for. From here on is new territory so we'll see how things move forward.  

With all that said, resident input to the city council is still crucial.  Some of the city's points were upheld, but by studies we consider inadequate or inaccurate.  Additionally, while we can't prove they won't follow through with certain conditions ("Don't worry, we'll fix it"), they can't prove they will (or can) before the damage is already done.

Thank you so much to all of our supporters!  For signing, sharing, donating, etc.  The support has been greatly appreciated and we hope it’s encouraged others to speak up in your community.  Not every project is beneficial and not every ordinance is reasonable. 

Thank you again!!!