ST PETER — A countertop manufacturer’s first shot at sidestepping state highway billboard rules came with help from a neighbor, who also happens to be the Nicollet County attorney.

That was after Le Sueur-based Cambria already had painted its name and logo on the landmark silo off Highway 169, which violated Minnesota Department of Transportation regulations against advertising along certain highways without a permit. But it was before Nicollet County became involved, citing its own rules against Cambria’s use of the silo, said County Attorney Michael Riley.

“I want to make clear my disconnect from the county in this,” Riley said Monday. “I have no involvement in this thing whatsoever as Nicollet County attorney.”

Before becoming a cylindrical billboard for Cambria, the silo was most recently painted to look like a can of 7-Up.

Prior to that, the silo between St. Peter and Le Sueur looked like a Coca-Cola can. When Cambria worked out a deal with land owner Lee Boyum to paint the silo black and add its name in large white letters, officials with MnDOT sent a letter saying the advertising had to be removed.

That’s when Riley, who has lived near the barn and silo since 1991, became involved. Thinking the silo could keep its new paint job if it was on the site of an actual Cambria business, Riley said he agreed to do what he could to help. He said the plan that followed was the “brainchild” of Marty Davis, co-owner and general manager of Cambria. The countertop business is owned by the Davis family, which also owns and operates Davisco Foods International and other dairy-related businesses.

“I felt that it was a fantastic renovation,” Riley said. “I and my wife like old barns, and we don’t want to see it collapse, so when we heard that the Department of Transportation didn’t like it, we asked if we could become a dealer for Cambria.”

Business deal

So Riley and his wife, Marie, worked out a deal to lease the silo from Boyum. Then Riley applied for and received a permit to operate a small Cambria distribution business out of his home. The words “available here by appointment” and a phone number were added to the bottom of the silo.

Then the Rileys filed a permit request with the Minnesota Department of Transportation. They wanted permission to use the silo as advertising for their business. At that point, MnDOT already had issued an order to have the Cambria advertisement removed because it violated state statutes. The deadline to remove the advertising, which gave Cambria two months to do the work, was approaching quickly.

On Sept. 25, 2009, MnDOT sent a notice to the Rileys. It said, since they were now leasing the property, that they had 30 days to remove the advertising. Marie Riley filed a request for a hearing to appeal the order three weeks later. The appeal was heard by Administrative Law Judge Kathleen Sheehy in St. Paul in February.

After reviewing the case, Sheehy said the state had statutory authority to have the landowner remove the sign. She recommended MnDOT’s order to remove the advertising be followed.

“We decided we weren’t going to appeal it any further,” Mike Riley said. “We were disappointed because it was a good opportunity to have a business at our place and restoration of barn and silo were very important.

“I gave up the lease and the business as a result of the judge’s decision.”

On April 21, Khanin Sahebjam, MnDOT deputy commissioner, issued an order adopting Sheehy’s ruling and saying the Cambria advertising must be removed. Sahebjam also ordered the MnDOT District 7 office to remove the sign.

Before the work started, however, another application was filed to use the silo for advertising. This time it was sent by Boyum, the actual land owner, and Cambria. District officials responded by sending a May 5 letter that set a June 1 deadline to remove the advertising, then followed up with a May 11 letter denying the request.

That led to the current District Court case that resulted in an injunction delaying the deadline and setting another court hearing in August.

Question of conflict

From the start, MnDOT raised a question about whether Riley’s involvement with the silo was a conflict of interest, said Rebecca Arndt, MnDOT District 7 public information coordinator.

Riley said there was no conflict because Nicollet County wasn’t involved in his situation. Once the county did become involved, he and his law firm, MacKenzie & Gustafson, turned the legal representation over to the Minnesota Insurance Trust.

“I appeared at the first court hearing and then withdrew because of my prior involvement supporting the silo earlier on,” Riley said. “I and my office have nothing to do with it anymore.”

When asked if his involvement could have helped Cambria get around the law, Riley said it was a legitimate business partnership. He and his wife were hoping to sell Cambria products but no longer think they can without the silo as an advertising tool.

Davis said Riley was simply attempting to help his business.

“We didn’t know when we put it up that we were doing anything wrong,” Davis said. “I went to Mike long after the silo was painted. Initially on a business level. Once we found out they had rules against this stuff, then we tried to structure it correctly.

“Mike was just trying to be helpful. We were trying to accommodate whatever the requirements were.”