My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 2005/02/07
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2005
>
Agenda Packets - 2005/02/07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:20 PM
Creation date
8/1/2018 1:15:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/7/2005
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/7/2005
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Exhibit C. <br /> <br />Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117 – SUMMARY <br /> <br />Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117 governs Eminent Domain Proceedings. The statute fulfills <br />several functions. First, it creates a procedure whereby there is judicial supervision of a <br />governmental finding of Public Purpose. Second, it creates a mechanism for official <br />identification of the land to be taken and notification of interested parties. Third, it creates a <br />mechanism for immediate acquisition and transfer of the property to the governmental <br />authority, called Quick Take. Fourth, it creates a multi-tiered mechanism to establish the <br />amount of just compensation to be paid to the landowner. <br /> <br />In Minnesota, virtually all takings must be performed under Chapter 117. There are a few <br />exceptions. Most notable are takings by watershed districts for Water Projects and by <br />Drainage Authorities for drainage ditches. When a governmental authority takes property <br />without compensation, the landowner may commence an inverse condemnation procedure <br />to force the authority to pay compensation, or may seek injunctive relief to stop the taking <br />unless eminent domain proceedings have first been commenced. <br /> <br />Pre-Eminent Domain Negotiation. Most governmental authorities prefer to negotiate an <br />acquisition. An agreement saves the authority attorneys fees, eliminates delays and makes <br />for happier constituents. Sometimes an authority will approach a landowner with a very <br />substantial and fair offer. Other times, the authority approaches the landowner with an offer <br />which is way too low and unfair. <br /> <br />Uniform Relocation Act. Minnesota follows the Uniform Relocation Act in condemnations. <br />This act confers various rights upon the landowner. <br /> <br />Pre-Taking Entry. In Minnesota, a governmental authority may enter upon the land to <br />survey the land or in some cases to confirm whether the land has environmental problems. If <br />there is a dispute regarding the right of entry, the governmental authority applies to the Court <br />for an order. <br /> <br />Commencement of Proceedings. An authority commences an eminent domain proceeding <br />by serving a Summons and Petition upon all of the property owners. The authority should <br />serve all persons with a property interest in the land. "Owner" under the Statute includes all <br />persons interested in such property as proprietors, tenants, life estate holders, <br />encumbrancers, or otherwise. The petition gives the owner 20 days notice of the initial court <br />appearance. At this initial court appearance, the Court makes a public purpose and <br />necessity determination and appoints three commissioners, private parties who make an <br />initial just compensation. <br /> <br />Public Purpose and Necessity. A court gives great deference to a governmental <br />authority's determination that a taking serves a public purpose. Public purpose focuses on <br />the nature of the project, not the particular land being taken. A court may overturn that <br />determination if (a) the governmental authority failed to follow required statutory procedures <br />in making the determination, (b) the project violates a statute, for example regulating the <br />environment or otherwise prohibiting some aspect of the project itself, (c) the particular <br />government authority lacks authority to conduct projects of this kind, (d) the project itself is
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.