Misc News Propaganda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

existing private sewer and water system on lots must be credited to the landowner when considering the amount of benefit from the improvement (new law) , that the presump- tion of validity could be easily overcome by the property owner by introducing any evidence on value [modification of paragraphs 1 and 2 above] that "as a practical matter this means many improvements may not be fully assessed but must be funded through some other means, such as general property taxes" [new direction by the court] . 2 . In Kraemer & Sons, Inc vs. Village of Burnsville, Minn. , 245 N.W.2d 445 (1976) , the Supreme Court stated that any general benefit from the improvement must be paid for out of general funds and it cannot be specially assessed against property (new law or at least modi=fication of prior case law) . 3. In Continental Sales & Equipment Co. vs. Town of Stuntz, Minn. , 257 N.W. 546 (1977) , the Supreme Court Find that although M.S. S429.01, et seq. , provided that an appellant must appeal within 20 (now 30] days of the adoption of the assessment roll, a property owner may sue at any time pursuant to M.S. 5278. 01, et seq., to invalidate existing special assessments. (This new law fortunately was later eliminated by the state legislature.] 4. In Southview Country Club vs. City of Inver Grove Heights, Minn. , 263 N.W.2d 385 (1978) the Supreme Court held for the first time: "where an assessment is levied on part of a land holding which is devoted as a totality to some specific use, the inquiry into whether the portion assessed has increased in value must take into account the function of that portion as a part of the whole." [New law which will have effect on assessments in golf courses, railroads, large tracts of land.] 5. In Buettner vs. City of St. Cloud, Minn. , N.W.2d !_, March 16, 1979, the Supreme Court ruled: a. "where the sole issue present is whether there has been an unconstitutional taking, the trial court cannot abrogate its duty to uphold constitutional safeguards and defer to judr.nent of the taxing authority. Decision must be oased upon independent consideration of all the' evi- dence . . . "