Who is winning?

Lawyers seem to be the only winners so far in a squabble between International Falls and Koochiching County officials.
The most recent move by the city seeks the removal of an attorney representing Koochiching County in a court appeal of a decision by the Minnesota Department of Transportation Commissioner Tom Sorel involving Minnesota Highway 332.
City officials contend the attorney appointed by the Minnesota Counties Insurance Trust to represent the county has a conflict of interest because he represented the Koochiching Economic Development Authority earlier. MCIT is expected to appoint a new attorney to represent the county.
And tit-for-tat, the county board has sought removal of Joe Boyle from the case, citing his representation of the city, KEDA and International Falls-Koochiching County Airport Commission.
Wow. How did our elected officials get to this point? The recent action is especially disturbing given that the KEDA and the airport commission are joint organizations led by both county and city officials. It’s also troubling that the anger and frustration on both sides of this issue are spilling over and impacting other issues.
And who is paying for the city and county attorneys and the attorneys that will represent the MnDOT commissioner? City, county and state taxpayers. So far, taxpayers appear to be the losers in this case.
The issue appears to come down to the city’s demand that the county’s plan to realign the northern entrance to Highway 332 be redesigned to lead to a foreign trade zone east of International Falls. County officials say money designated by the state for the realignment would not apply to a new route. And, they noted, the new route wouldn’t likely be approved by the MnDOT as a state highway for several reasons.
To most people, this issue sparked when a Boise Inc. official petitioned the city for vacation of the portion of Highway 332 known as the Burner Road citing a need to improve safety on the road and efficiency at the paper mill. The city agreed to vacate the road only if the county agreed to change its route for the highway. As a result, the Burner Road has not been vacated.
City and county officials have been urged to set aside their differences and talk about how to resolve this issue.
But for now, we will all wait for the court’s decision.