Agenda Packets - 1995/05/01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

{ 04/20/95 09:02 CITY OF BLOOMINGTON ADMIN DEPT 4 933'?9310 NO.458 P004 • • Mr. Ornstein Page 3 generally render opinions regarding the constitutionality of state statutes. However, I hope that the following discussion will provide you some guidance on the taking clauses . Generally, the government may regulate land to a great extent, and only if the regulation goes beyond certain limits, will it be considered a compensable taking. Pennsylvania Co. v4 -Mahon, 260 U.S. 393, 413 (1922) . A land use regulation does not constitute a compensable taking under the Fifth Amendment to the united States Constitution) or under Minnesota Constitution, art. I, S 13,2 if it "substantially advance[s] legitimate state interests" and does not "den[y] an owner economically viable use of his land. " Nollan v.. California Coastal Comme'n, 483 U.S. 825, 107 S. Ct. 3141, 3146 (1987.) , citing AQins v. Tiburon, 447 U.S 255, 260, 100 5. Ct. 2130 (1980) ; Earrano Bros. v. ity of New Brighton, 425 N.W.2d 585, 590 (Minn. Ct. App. x988) . The question of whether a regulation constitutes a compensable taking involves a balancing of public and private interests and an inquiry into the facts of each case. Connolly_ vv Pension Benefit Guarantee oro., 475 U.S. 211, 224 , 106 S. Ct. 1018, 1026 ( 1986) ; Parranto Bros. , 425 N.W.2d at 590-91, citing AQins, 447 U.S. 260-61. Minnesota courts and federal courts generally have applied the following three factors in making such an inquiry: (1) the character of the governmental action; (2) the economic impact of the regulation; and (3) the extent to which the regulation has interfered with distinct investment-backed expectations . Penn Central Transportation Co. Y. New York City, 438 U.S. 104, 98 S. Ct. 2646, 2659 (1978) . 1/ The Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. " 2/ Minnesota Constitution art. I, S 13, provides that "private property shall not be taken, destroyed, or damaged for public use without just compensation therefore, first paid or secured. " . ./ A taking claim under the federal constitution would not be ripe for adjudication until available state remedies have been exhausted. Williamson planning Comm'j v. Harn' agl... ank, 473 U.S. 172 (1985) . Minnesota courts do, however, rely upon federal case law in analyzing taking claims pursuant to the Minnesota Constitution.