Dear Editor:
I am writing with a final plea to ask Rachel Development to re-consider developing the former Mississippi Dunes golf course. I have been involved with the hoped-for protection of this site since 2020. Over the last several years, I have attended nearly every City meeting where the Mississippi Dunes (aka Mississippi Landing) project proposal has been discussed. During the many hours that I have spent at these meetings and other public forums, I have listened to hundreds of people offer impassioned pleas to their elected officials, imploring them to protect this sacred place. And, at each of those same meetings, the Cottage Grove Planning Commission and City Council have voted unanimously in favor of developing it. The message from the public has been clear and consistent. This land should remain as public parkland and open space and the Mississippi Landing development should be located on an alternative site, outside of the National Park and without such tremendous biodiversity and cultural significance.
The City Council continues to perpetuate the idea that development is the only option, but we know differently. They have misrepresented the reason(s) as to why conservation buyers were (as yet) unsuccessful in acquiring the property. The simple truth is that these negotiations fell through because the property owner never engaged in good faith. On two separate occasions, he feigned interest in selling to a conservation buyer but chose instead to grant a purchase option first to Pulte Homes, then to Rachel Development. Conservation interests were never given a reasonable window of time to put together a deal.
Meanwhile, the City bent over backwards to accommodate both the landowner and the developer(s) at every turn along the winding road to their vote last week. Not only did they push through a change to their 2040 Comprehensive Plan (which originally identified this parcel as their highest priority for protection to provide public access to the River), they changed the zoning to allow for the much higher density that the development requires. They then had the audacity to suggest at the February Council meeting that they would be violating their Constitutional duties to vote against the development. The audience at the meeting was audibly disgusted. The City paved the way for this development and now they are patting themselves on the back for being law-abiding citizens. Please.
Our group, Friends of Grey Cloud, worked directly with Representative Rick Hansen to have the legislature allocate $6 million to acquire the land. We had (and have) a national land trust lined up to broker the deal and provide bridge funding until the state money was (is) made available. The property owner spoke to Representative Hansen at the same time and knew full well that we were working to get the money appropriated for the acquisition of Mississippi Dunes. The City has mistakenly claimed that this $6 million was to be used in part for the 50 acres that the SNA is acquiring as an addition to Grey Cloud Dunes. This is not accurate.
In addition to not allowing equal consideration to both development and conservation interests, the City has failed at nearly every level to do their due diligence with regard to the biological and cultural resources on the property.
• They failed to understand the difference between federal and state-listed species and assumed that a letter from the MnDNR (which contradicts itself) was enough to get them out of satisfying their responsibilities under the Federal Endangered Species Act.
• They failed to consult the Dakota people with regard to the likely significance of the property given its close proximity to Lower Grey Cloud Island, one of the first permanent Dakota settlements in the Region.
• They failed to require a new Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Rachel project when it clearly has a different scope than the Pulte project proposal.
• They pretend that the developer has gone above and beyond their obligations by protecting more open space than they are required to by law. This might sound impressive until you realize that the majority of the “protected” land is either under the Mississippi River, part of a designated wetland where no development would be permitted anyway, or an impermeable surface such as a parking lot.
• They ignored their local historic preservation committee when they spoke in favor of preserving the historic Cowan house, which was built pre-Minnesota Statehood. They even dismissed one of the committee members due to her opposition to the development project.
• They have ignored the fact that this property falls entirely within a National Park (the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area) and a protective zoning corridor, the Mississippi River Critical Corridor Area (MRCCA). They have ignored an appeal by the National Park Service to protect the viewsheds from the River, a violation of federal law.
• They have failed to acknowledge the threat of global climate change and the promise of requiring any new development to embrace sustainability and resilience. There will be no rainwater gardens, native plantings, solar panels or designated open space on the developed property. It will be wall-to-wall houses with manicured lawns, gas-powered lawn mowers, leaf-blowers, domestic animals and everything else that goes with a 377-home development. The Scientific and Natural Area to the east will be surrounded by development on all sides and will die a slow death by encroachment.
• They ignored a petition containing 1249 signatures and a separate letter with 100 signatures of local residents, stating their opposition to the development. By stating that only a quarter of the signatures were from Cottage Grove residents, the City fails again. The Mississippi River is a Regional and National treasure and does not belong to the City of Cottage Grove. And, by the way, the developer is from St. Michael, Minnesota.
Lisa Mueller
Co-founder, Friends of Grey Cloud
