Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDec 5, 19825 December 1983 C~ty Council of Columbia Heights 590-40th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, Mn 55421 Ref: Hearing on Assessments - lnnsburck 3rd Additlon Council Members: My w~fe and I Jointly own our residential property at 1600 Innsburck Parkway. Our property abu~ts upon Anoka County RoCd t04 on both Johnson and Innsburck Parkway sides. County roads, In fact, surround the entire res~dental area of abutting lots as 49th Avenue to the South ls also a county road. We claim that no special assessment (due to street imp~ovements elsewhere on clty streets not abutting our property) should lawfully be made against our property. The reasons for our claim are as follows: 1.) Improvements to both 2ohnson and Innsb¥~ck Parkway abutting our lot and [pa~d for by Anoka County are not considered as "improvements". Op.Atty.Gen., 59a-.4, Nov 25, 1959~ 2.) M~nnesota Law provides that "t'~ ~' ~n~. bas~s for special assessments ~s that the property so assessed ls "specially benefited" by the Improvement". It states, ~dr[hermore, that special assessments be based upon the enhancement of property value due to the street improvement. Assessments against each property are to be proportionate to 'the individual benefit resulting from the improvement, as dlstin§ulshed fro~ general benefits to the whole community. 3.) No estimate of the special benefit our property has recelved has been made, No policy exists to ~5 the assessor's office. 4.) The action by the Councll directing a "1/3 street-rate" to be levied against property owners abutting the county road is arbitrary and is not followed by special assessment procedures uses elsewhere within the city. 5.) If our lot were s~milar'lly located elsewhere in the city (with respect to county reads, etc.) no special assessment for a street improvement on non-.abutting streets would be made. Yet Minnesota Law provides "taxes shall be uniform for' the same class of propertles~~ 6.) Court opinions have held that 'iF a special assessment exceeds the amounto~"speclal benefits", +,.hat excess is, 'in effect, a taking of private property for publlc use wltho~Jt lUSt com~ensatlor~ and would l~tn ~ , v~olate both the state constitution and the . amm(~ndment to the federal constitution. :v /P .... , 1600 Im-~sbruck Parkway 12~:l~L',nbia Heigl~t:s, MN 55421