Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Joel R. Hanson <br />July 19, 2006 <br />Page Six <br />Chapter 214, Laws 2006, §15, entitled "Right of First Refusal," requires that <br />when the condemning authority determines that the property acquired has not been used <br />and is no longer needed for a public use, the authority must offer to resell the property to <br />the original owner from whom it was acquired. The price must be at the lower of current <br />market value or the original price in the condemnation process, except when a different <br />value is required for property acquired with federal highway funds. The Commissioner <br />of Administration or Natural Resources must offer surplus property to the former owner <br />under this section, before the property can be offered to local governments or be offered <br />for public sale. It appears that this may apply to any surplus property, whether it was <br />acquired by eminent domain or not. If the former owner cannot be located, the attorney <br />for the condemning authority can file a certificate in the land records to evidence the <br />termination of the right of first refusal. This certificate is only prima facie evidence that <br />the right of first refusal has terminated. This provision applies to the disposition of <br />property that is acquired by an action commenced on or after May 20, 2006. <br />Chapter 214, Laws 2006, §8 increases the maximum on business establishment <br />costs from $10,000.00 to $50,000.00. Chapter 214, Laws 2006, §19 is a new provision <br />that requires an acquiring authority to initiate contested case proceedings before an <br />administrative law judge, if a person entitled to relocation benefits does not accept the <br />authority's offer. The decision of the administrative law judge is a final decision. The <br />acquiring authority must pay all costs of the proceeding, including charges billed by the <br />office of administrative hearings. <br />Chapter 214, Laws 2006, §10, entitled "Compensation for Removal of Legal <br />Nonconforming Use," may restrict local zoning authorities in their exercise of normal <br />zoning review. This section provides that an ordinance of a political subdivision that <br />requires removal of a legal nonconforming use as a prerequisite for the issuance of a <br />permit, license, or other approval for any use, structure, development or activity would <br />constitute a taking, which is prohibited without payment of just compensation. This <br />section does not apply if the approval that is requested is for construction of a building <br />that cannot be built without physically moving the nonconforming use. This section <br />applies to all actions occurring on of after May 20, 2006, if the action requires removal of <br />a nonconforming legal use. <br />Chapter 214, Laws 2006, §22 (a) provides that the new law is effective the day <br />following final enactment, which is May 20, 2006, and applies to all actions commenced <br />after that date. An "action" is a condemnation proceeding and "commence" means when <br />service of the Notice of Petition is made. There are a number of exceptions to the <br />effective date provision. If anyone has any specific questions in this regard, we will need <br />to review the facts relating to the specific project and review the applicable statutory <br />provision relating thereto. <br />-10- <br />