11/ “WHEN THE STATE LACKS AUTHORITY”: Haslund applied to the City of St. Mary’s Point for a variance in connection with Haslund’s efforts to build a new home on a bluff overlooking the lower St. Croix River. The City granted the variance.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) declined to certify the City’s action. The DNR upheld its decision through a contested hearing pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act.
In this case, the Court of Appeals upheld the DNR’s denial of a certification because the City had granted the permit within the 60-day window.
The Supreme Court majority reversed the DNR denial of certification and upheld Haslund’s permit to build the house, but it used a complicated statutory analysis to reach that conclusion.
In a concurring opinion, then-Justice Gildea was more direct. “I agree with the majority that Haslund should be permitted to develop his property in accordance with the variance he received from the City of St. Mary’s Point, but I reach this result for a different reason. Because the DNR lacks authority to certify, its refusal to certify is of no effect. I therefore would reverse the court of appeals.”
READ THE FULL CASE DECISION:
READ THE FULL CASE DECISION:
In
re Matter of Denial of Certification of Variance Granted to David Haslund by City
of St. Mary's Point.
April
29, 2010 2010-044
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/supct/1004/OPA080427-0429.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment