2021-08-10 P & Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

RELEVANT LINKS: A. Authority In addition to the criminal penalty and abatement measures provided in state statutes, cities also have the general authority to handle nuisance Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. 23. issues though the adoption of local measures. For statutory cities, the city Handbook, The Home Rule council has specifically been provided the power to, by ordinance, define Charter City. nuisances and provide for their prevention or abatement. Most home rule Minn. Stat. § 410.33. charter cities have similar authority through a charter provision providing either a similar grant of power, or the general authority to provide for the community’s safety, health, and welfare. In the absence of any specific charter provision, charter cities may also exercise the powers of a statutory city. State v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing There are limits to this local authority. City actions will be invalidated if Co., 310 Minn. 535, 246 this authority is exercised in an arbitrary or unreasonable manner or if pre- N.W.2d 692 (Minn. 1976). Claesgens v. Animal Rescue empted by state or federal laws. League of Hennepin County, 173 Minn. 61, 216 N.W. 535 (1927). B. Nuisance ordinances A city may best be able to control public nuisances through the adoption of a nuisance ordinance (or collection of city ordinances) that defines and Handbook, Meetings, classifies nuisances, provides for their abatement, and establishes penalties Motions, Resolutions, and for noncompliance. Because city ordinances have the force and effect of Ordinances. law, their form and content are important, as well as the procedures for adoption. Minn. Stat. § 412.221, subd. An ordinance defining a particular activity as a public nuisance is 32. presumably a valid exercise of a city’s police powers. Not only have many St. Paul v. Gilfillan, 36 Minn. 298, 31 N.W. 49 cities adopted nuisance ordinances, but many rely on their local ordinances (Minn. 1886). Cf .City of St. more than state statutes. However, ordinances may only regulate public Paul v. Haugbro, 93 Minn. 59, 100 N.W. 470 (Minn. nuisances and may not declare something a public nuisance that would 1904). otherwise be considered a private nuisance, relatively harmless, or simply not a nuisance at all. Ordinance language is critical for city efforts to be effective. City Press v. City of Minneapolis, ordinances often mirror the provisions provided in state law, but often 553 N.W.2d 80 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). include specific acts or omissions to provide local officials direction in State v. Becker, 351 N.W.2d enforcing nuisance violations. A common problem is not properly defining 923 (Minn. 1984). terms or using terms too vague or broad to be enforceable. Conversely, an ordinance may be drafted in a way that is too limiting to encompass all intended violations. The ordinance should clearly provide the enforcement procedure and how it will be interpreted and applied. The primary purpose of nuisance regulations is usually to encourage compliance, not necessarily to punish offenders. League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 4/16/2020 Public Nuisances Page 14