2009_0720_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

See Section II Entering private property. inspection of the property may provide information that may help the council determine if the building is hazardous. While inspecting the property, it is helpful to take detailed notes and photographs of what was observed. Because there are constitutionallimitations on entering private property, the city should consider how it will lawfully enter the property to make the inspection. Before the council orders a hazardous condition to be repaired or removed, LMC info�ation memo, the council must first make a determination that the building is hazardous. nreenngs ofct�y coun�tts. This must be done during an open city council meeting. At the meeting, it is xosramkhant v. ctry ofsr. Paut, advisable that the city council consider all the relevant evidence it has, such 645 N.W.2d 479 (Minn. Ct. App. aooa). as any inspection notes or reports, photographs of the property, code M��. scac. § 46s.is violations, and any other information related to the property, including any information provided by the property owner or occupant. It is also advisable to keep in mind the statutory definition and consider how the evidence relates to this definition. Rostamkhani v. City ofSt. Paul, 'I'he deClSlOri t0 I'01JalI' OI' I'0T110V0 a IlaZal'C�OUS COriC�ltlOri, OI' t0 I'aZ0 a 645 N.W.2d 479, 484-85 (Minn. bU11C�lri TriUSt riOt b0 aI'b1tl'aI' OI' Ca T1C10US. 1� C�0C1SlOri 1S aI'b1tl'a OI' Ct. App. 2002); CUP Food.s, Inc. g� y p � V. ctty ofnrtnneapotts, 6ss capricious if it is unreasoned and does not consider the facts and N.w.ad ss�, sda circumstances of the situation. Said another way, the city's decision must be (Minn.App.2001); Tessmer v. ct�y ofsr. P�t, No. ao�-as49, reasoned and supported by substantial evidence. It is a good idea for the aoos wL sais9ss ��nn. ct. council to keep a detailed record of the discussion, the evidence considered, app. �e�. id, aoos� and the ultimate decision that was reached based on the evidence (unpublished opinion) LMCIT rlsl{ management considered. This record will help the city defend its decision if it is later information memo, Exercising CI1a110Y1g0C� ffi COUTt. Discretion: Keeping Record.s to Support Immunity. Although the law does not explicitly require the property owner to be see se�non 111 �ue pYO�ess. notified of the council consideration of the property, it is advisable to take steps to ensure the property owner's due process rights are respected. One way to do this may be to notify the property owner that the issue will be discussed and to allow the owner a chance to speak with the council and provide any evidence or information that he or she may have. Notice to tenants as well as lien-holders may also be advisable. Notice may also lead to self-remedy of the hazardous conditions. Minn. Stat. § 463.151 Minn. Stat. § 463.15, subd. 4 Minn. Stat. § 463.151; Minn. Stat. § 463.21; Minn. Stat. §§ C. Removal or repair by consent One method of dealing with a hazardous condition or building is to approach the property owner to ask him or her to voluntarily repair or remove the hazardous condition or to raze the hazardous building If the owner will not or cannot voluntarily repair or remove the hazardous condition, the city may obtain written consent of all owners of record, occupying tenants, and all lien-holders of record that allows the city to make the repair or remove the hazardous condition. The "owner," "owner of record," and "lien-holder of record" are persons that have a right or interest in the property and have recorded their interest with the county recorder or registrar of titles in the county where the property is located. If the city does the work, the costs that the city incurs in repairing or 16 LEaGUE oF MirrrrESOTa CiTiEs