Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/01/2014

Home

Zoning Bulletin April 10, 2014 I Volume 81 Issue 7 to rent their property and that such a right to rent their property was guaranteed by the substantive component of the Due Process Clause of the Minnesota Constitution. Assuming, without deciding, that the right to rent is protected by the Due Process Clause of the Minnesota Constitution, the court found that, in any case, the Property Owners failed to meet their burden to show that the Ordinance violated their'substantive right to due process. Rather, the court found the Ordinance provided a reasonable means to a permissible objective. More specifically, the court found that the Ordinance: (1) served to promote a public purpose of controlling the number of occupied homes that are converted to rental properties and to avoid heavy concentrations of rental properties; (2) was not an unreasonable, arbitrary, or capricious interference with private interests, but rather was adopted after a long, deliberate information- gathering process; and (3) bore a rational re- lation to the public purpose sought to be served where the 30% cap had limited the location of converted rental properties. Finally, the court also rejected the Property Owners' contention that the 30% rule violated their "procedural due process right by unconstitutionally delegating legislative power to a property owner's neighbors." The Property Owners had asserted that the 30% rule unconstitutionally transformed city blocks "into mini - republics, delegating the power to ban additional licenses to the [license - holding] property owners on each block." The court dis- agreed, finding that, under the 30% rule, the owners of certified rental prop- erties did not determine which other lots could be certified; property owners could neither grant certification by consenting to it nor prevent certification by denying consent, found the court. See also: City of Morris v. Sax Investments, Inc., 749 N. W.2d 1 (Minn. 2008). See also: State v. Cox, 798N.W.2d 517 (Minn. 2011). See also: Contos v. Herbst, 278 N. W.2d 732 (Minn. 1979). Zoning News from Around the Nation ILLINOIS State Senator Pamela Althoff has introduced legislation aimed at "prevent[ing] disputes over zoning authority between school districts and municipalities." Althoff's bill reportedly states that a "a school district is subject to and its school board must comply with any valid local govern- ment zoning ordinance or resolution that applies where the pertinent part of the school district is located." Opponents of the bill are "concerned the time needed to send construction projects through city zoning processes could take too long and result in work failing to get done during the short summer construction season." The bill had already passed through the Education Committee and was expected to go to a vote in the full Senate. © 2014 Thomson Reuters 11