2012-05-23 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

review of street assessment, declining to address evidentiary objections on ground that appellant failed to raise objections in motion for new trial). Therefore, we conclude that the city's failure to move for a new trial or amended findings based on the district court's evidentiary ruling allowing Shopek's testimony as foundation for Herman's appraisal precludes our review of this issue. II "A special assessment is a tax, intended to offset the cost of local improvements such as sewer, water and streets, which is selectively imposed upon the beneficiaries." Dosedel v. City of Ham Lake, 414 N.W.2d 751, 755 (Minn. App. 1987). A municipality may assess "[t]he cost of any improvement, or any part thereof . . . upon property benefited by the improvement, based upon the benefits received." Minn. Stat. § 429.051 (2010). "A municipality's power of assessment, however, is limited by three conditions: (1) the land must receive a special benefit from the improvement being constructed; (2) the assessment must be uniform upon the same class of property; and (3) the assessment may not exceed the special benefit." David E. McNally Dev. Corp. v. City of Winona, 686 N.W.2d 553, 558 (Minn. App. 2004) (citing Carlson -Lang Realty Co. v. City of Windom, 307 Minn. 368, 369, 240 N.W.2d 517, 519 (1976)). The district court's standard of review of a special assessment varies according to the challenge asserted. Buettner v. City of St. Cloud, 277 N.W.2d 199, 202 (Minn. 1979). If a property owner challenges matters within the city's legislative discretion, such as the proportionate distribution of the total costs of an improvement, the determination of the area benefitted by the project, or the regularity of the assessment process, the district 10 23