Stoltzmann v. County of Ramsey

251 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 186, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1627
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedFebruary 18, 1977
Docket46488
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 251 N.W.2d 130 (Stoltzmann v. County of Ramsey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Stoltzmann v. County of Ramsey, 251 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 186, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1627 (Mich. 1977).

Opinion

MacLaughlin, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court refusing to change the assessment valuation of petitioner’s real property, and awarding judgment to the County of Eamsey for the unpaid portion of the original amount of the 1973 real estate taxes on petitioner’s property. The petitioner had claimed that the valuation of his property for the year 1973 should be reduced, with a resulting decrease in real estate taxes, because of a fire which substantially destroyed his homestead on April 29, 1973. Because we find no statutory authority for such midyear valuation reduction, we affirm the district court.

The parties submitted the case to the district court upon a stipulation as to the following facts. At all times material to this action, petitioner Allen H. Stoltzmann owned certain real property located at 625 North Winthrop in St. Paul, Eamsey County, Minnesota, on which a building was located and occupied as his homestead. On January 2, 1973, petitioner’s property was valued by the county assessor at $39,000, an amount agreed by the parties to have been reasonable and accurate.

On April 29, 1973, a fire substantially destroyed the homestead, in consequence of which the reasonable market value of the property was reduced to $5,000. Shortly thereafter, repair and reconstruction of the premises began and continued during the next 6 months. By October 30, 1973, upon completion of the rebuilding, the property was restored to its original value of $39,000, and petitioner was able to reoccupy the premises.

After the fire, petitioner asked the assessor to reduce the assessment of his property for 1973 to reflect its diminished value *188 from April 29 to October 30, 1973. The assessor refused to change the amount of the assessment made on January 2, 1973, notwithstanding the fire damage, because Minn. St. 1974, § 273.01, provides that “[a] 11 real property subject to taxation shall be listed and assessed every odd numbered year only with reference to its value on January 2 preceding the assessment * * *" 1

Petitioner subsequently paid a portion of the general taxes and special assessments levied for 1973 and payable in 1974, as required by Minn. St. § 278.03 in order to preserve his right of appeal, and filed a petition for review thereof with the district court.

The district court concluded that the assessor’s refusal to change the amount of the assessment of petitioner’s property made on January 2, 1973, was in compliance with existing law, notwithstanding the fire damage, and did not violate the provisions of Minn. St. cc. 272 and 273, Minn. Const, art. 10, § 1, 2 or U. S. Const. Amend. XIV. The district court found that Ramsey County was entitled to the amount of the 1973 real estate taxes as originally determined.

The petitioner contends that the assessor is required by the applicable statutes to reduce immediately the valuation of a parcel of real property if it is substantially destroyed subsequent to its January 2 valuation as provided in Minn. St. 1974, § 273.01.

Petitioner argues that the statutory authority to make such *189 a reduction in value may be found in Minn. St. 1974, § 273.01, which provides in part:

“All real property subject to taxation shall be listed and assessed every odd numbered year with reference to its value on January 2 preceding the assessment, and all real property becoming taxable any intervening year shall be listed and assessed with reference to its value on January 2 of that year. * * * The county assessor or any assessor in any city of the first class may * * * correct any errors in valuation of any parcels iof property, that may have been incurred in the assessment * * *. Not more than two percent of the total number of parcels in his jurisdiction may be corrected after the dates specified herein * * (Italics supplied.)

Because the assessor is given authority to “correct any errors,” petitioner claims that the assessor is required to change his valuation since the destruction of his homestead on April 29, 1973, obviously changed the value of petitioner’s property as of that date. However, this provision of the statute is provided to give the assessor limited authority to correct errors when he has made a bona fide mistake with respect to his valuation as of January 2. This is made clear through the use of the words “that may have been incurred in the assessment” and by the limited authority to correct no more than 2 percent of the total number of parcels in the assessor’s jurisdiction. If the legislature had intended this language to include authority to make corrections because of destruction or improvements, it would not have referred to “errors in valuation of any parcels of property, that may have been incurred in the assessment,” and could easily have expressed such authority precisely and clearly.

Petitioner also relies upon the language of Minn. St. 1974, § 273.17, subd. 1, 3 which provides:

*190 “In every even-numbered year, on January 2, the assessor shall also assess all real property that may have become subject to taxation since the last previous assessment, including all real property platted since the last real estate assessment in the odd-numbered year, and all buildings or other structures of any kind, whether completed or in process of construction, of over $100 in value, the value of which has not been previously added to or included in the valuation of the land on which they have been erected. * * *
“* * * /n case of the destruction by fire, flood, or otherwise of any building or structure, over $100 in value, which has been erected previous to the last valuation of the land on which it stood, or the value of which has been added to any former valuation, the assessor shall determine, as nearly as practicable, how much less such land would sell for at private sale in consequence of such destruction, and make return thereof to the auditor.” (Italics supplied.)

Petitioner argues that the provision referring to the destruction of a building requires the assessor to revalue the property on which the building stood as of the date of the destruction. The county contends that the assessor’s duty is to reassess such property only on the succeeding January 2, based upon its decreased market value on that date because of the damaged building.

Our interpretation of the statute supports the county’s position. The intent of Minn. St. 1974, § 273.17, subd. 1, was to add to the tax rolls on January 2 of every even-numbered year all real property which had become subject to taxation since the previous assessment on January 2 of every odd-numbered year. Included would be property previously exempt and increases in property *191 valuation caused by buildings which were newly constructed or improved since the last assessment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of Ramsey
584 N.W.2d 390 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1998)
County of Ramsey v. Lincoln Fort Road Housing Ltd. Partnership
494 N.W.2d 276 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1992)
Lifteau v. Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission
270 N.W.2d 749 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
251 N.W.2d 130, 312 Minn. 186, 1977 Minn. LEXIS 1627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stoltzmann-v-county-of-ramsey-minn-1977.