Laserfiche WebLink
Williams Island <br />Synagogue, Inc. v. <br />City ofAventura, 358 <br />F.Supp.2d 1207 <br />(S.D.Fla. 2005); Guru <br />Nanak Sikh Society of <br />Yuba City v. County of <br />Sutter, 326 F.Supp.2d <br />1140 (E.D.Cal. 2003); <br />Cottonwood Christian <br />Center v. Cypress <br />Redevelopment <br />Agency, 218 <br />F.Supp.2d 1203 <br />(C.D.Cal. 2002); Civil <br />Liberties for Urban <br />Believers v. City of <br />Chicago,342 F.3d 752 <br />(C.A.7 (Ill.) 2003). <br />Village of Euclid, <br />Ohio v. Ambler Realty <br />Co., 272 U.S. 365, 47 <br />S. Ct. 114 (1926); <br />Kiges v. City of St. <br />Paul, 240 Minn. 522, <br />62 N.W.2d 363 <br />(Minn. 1953); State ex <br />rel. Berndt v. Iten, 259 <br />Minn. 77, 106 N.W.2d <br />366 (Minn. 1960). <br />State, by Rochester <br />Ass'n of <br />Neighborhoods v. City <br />of Rochester 268 <br />N.W.2d 885 (Minn <br />1978); Amcon Corp. <br />v. City of Eagan, 348 <br />N.W.2d 66 (Minn. <br />1984). <br />Since RLUIPA was adopted in 2000, numerous cases have been brought in <br />federal court concerning the law's application to various city zoning <br />requirements. However, federal courts in the 8 Circuit (which includes <br />Minnesota) have not ruled on many RLUIPA cases. If a city has concerns <br />about RLUIPA, the city should consult its attorney for specific guidance. <br />4. Federal and state constitutional concerns <br />Zoning regulations limit the ability of landowners to use their property in any <br />manner they wish. While both the state and federal constitutions provide <br />protections to landowners from government seizures of land (takings), the <br />courts have long upheld zoning regulations as a reasonable use of a <br />government's police power to protect the health, safety and welfare of the <br />public. However, there are still some federal and state constitutional <br />restraints on city zoning authority. <br />The adoption or amendment of a zoning ordinance is considered a legislative <br />decision of the city council. Courts normally give legislative decisions great <br />deference and weight, but the court will on occasion set aside or intervene in <br />city zoning decisions if two important constitutional restraints in the federal <br />and state constitution are violated. First, the courts may overrule a city <br />zoning decision, when it determines that a zoning ordinance is unsupported <br />by any rational basis related to promoting public health, safety, morals, or <br />general welfare. Usually, in these cases the court finds that the city's actions <br />were arbitrary and/or capricious. Second, when a zoning ordinance denies <br />the landowner practically all reasonable use of the land, resulting is a <br />"taking" of the land without just compensation; the court may order the city <br />to pay compensation to the affected landowner. <br />16 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA. CITIES <br />