CC PACKET 09221992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

application of that period to that entity constituted a taking without just compensation (also unlikely). (3) Can the City, after the end of the amortization period, remove the sign and put these costs into the property tax if it does not receive payment? The statutory authority I find for what the city proposes to do is contained in Minn. Stat. §§ 463.16-463.21 (1990). This section is entitled "Hazardous and Substandard Buildings," although in practice a building must be hazardous for the provision of this section to come into play. Under these provisions, a municipality may order an owner to remove or correct hazardous conditions in any building (defined in § 463.15, subd. 2 as "any structure" and thus covering signs). Minn. Stat. 463.16. If the owner does nothing, the municipality may abate the hazardous condition itself, in which case it may levy a special assessment against the real estate (pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 429.061-429.081) for payment in not more than 5 annual installments with 8% annual interest. Minn. Stat. 463.161. Under Minn. Stat. 429.061, subd. 2, the assessment and accruing interest constitute a lien against the property concurrent with general taxes. This statute will thus be of use, but only if the sign is in hazardous condition. In cases not covered by this statute, there is one other possible approach. Minn. Stat. § 514.67 authorizes first and prior liens equivalent to tax liens for "any inspection, examination or other governmental service of any nature now or hereafter authorized or required by law," effective from the date of the service, • provided that a proceeding to enforce the lien is begun within two years of the claim becoming due. If removing the sign in the event the owner*does not do so after the amortization period is an authorized governmental service (which it would seem to be — if amortization of such signs is permissible, there must be some way to enforce the scheme), it seems that the language of this provision is broad enough to create at the least a first lien when the city removes the sign itself.