A boundary agreement approved by both Gretna and Papillion earlier this year was under scrutiny last week, as the City of Papillion questioned a lack of action taken by the City of Gretna.
At its Dec. 3 meeting, the Papillion City Council unanimously authorized its city attorney to file a lawsuit against Gretna, claiming the city had failed to hold up its end of a boundary agreement reached between the two cities in April of this year.
Focused on a proposed interchange at Interstate 80 and 192nd Street, the agreement called for Gretna to make some revisions to its comprehensive plan, as well as de-annex a piece of land south of the interstate.
“The terms and deadlines were very clear,” said Trenton Albers, Papillion’s communications manager. “We take all of our boundary agreements very seriously and are very committed to those. We expect our partners to do the same.”
Gretna City Attorney Jeff Miller said the city is working to make revisions to the comprehensive plan, but wanted to do so while making changes to other areas of the plan, taking one big action rather than making small, separate changes.
He also said that while the piece of land south of the interstate is included in the city’s annexation ordinance, that piece of land is not in city limits, as the 2017 annexation agreement has been tied up in litigation between the city and Sarpy County for the past two years.
“We believe the litigation by the county prevents us from doing that, but Papillion has a different opinion,” Miller said.
Albers countered that there should have been no surprises for Gretna, who was already in litigation with Sarpy County before entering the boundary agreement with Papillion.
Officials from both cities said they plan to work toward a resolution before the threatened litigation becomes reality.
“We’re going to look at things with them and see if we can’t work something out moving forward,” Miller said.