7. EDSR 09-11-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

presence of abandoned buildings (as defned do Section 2) in one of these areas will not add to the condemnation authority; the individual abandoned buildings may be taken, but they will not juste arty other takings to carry out redevelopment in the area as whole. V. NEW PROCEDURES; EVIDENTIARY STANDARD. Section 6 of the bill creates new Section 117.0412, laying out new procedures applicable only to takings for redevelopment i.e., to mitigate a blighted area, remediate an environmentally contaminated area, reduce abandoned property, or remove a public nuisance. The procedures include: • Written notice to the owner of property to be taken, and published and posted notice, at least 30 but not more than 60 days before the date of a public hearing. • The proceedings of the hearing must be recorded and available for public review and comment at reasonable times and a reasonable place. • At the next regular meeting of the local government (defined as the elected governing body) that is at least 30 days after the public hearing, the local government must vote on the question whether to authorize the taking. • In the approving resolution, the local government or local government agency (i.e., the relevant HRA, EDA or similar entity) must by resolution (I) identify the public costs and benefits expected to result from the program or project for which the property interest is proposed to be acquired; and (2) address how the taking serves one or more identified public uses or public purposes and why the acquisition of the property is needed to accomplish those uses or purposes. Comment: Public hearings have been required under the HRA Acf since 2002, with 10 days published notice. The major significance of this change is the extended time periods for notice and delay between hearing and action. Further, the vote to authorize the taking must be by the city council even if the taking will be performed by a separate HRA, EDA or port authority. Section 8 of the bill imposes a new evidentiary standard, again applicable only to the four types of redevelopment takings. The condemning authority must show the district court "by preponderance of the evidence that the taking is necessary and for the designated public use: ' Comment: Prior versions of the bill would have imposed the even higher "clear and convincing" evidence standard. Nevertheless, the preponderance standard may lead to closer scrutiny by courts, and leaves open to question the extent to which the traditional standards of deference to local Endings remain viable in the context of takings for redevelopment. This standard could be especially III-7 Kennedy & Greven 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 470 Minneapolis, MN 55402