Trending
FAIRMONT - Changes to the city of Fairmont’s special assessment policy faced scrutiny from the city council at its meeting on Monday.
The changes were to sections 1.4 and 5.2. Section 1.4, it now states the assessment policies are designed only to serve as a general guide for city council in allocating benefits to properties for defraying the cost of installing public improvements. The council also reserves the right to vary from these policies in unique or unusual circumstances, provided the city complies with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 regarding special benefit analysis.
To 5.2, regarding reconstruction, it now states assessments are to be based on a 36-foot-wide street regardless of the actual constructed width. Costs are to be on a front footage basis, with construction costs from the bid prices plus administrative costs.
The changes were made at the request of city attorneys and recommended for approval by city staff.
Councilor Britney Kawecki asked if this applies to the Lake Avenue project. Public Works Director Matt York said, if approved, this would apply to every project that begins after Oct. 1, 2026.
"All current projects, any project that’s already been approved, is going to receive the old standard of the 2024 assessment policy," he said.
Kawecki said she understands what they are doing with 1.4 as it relates to being a guide, but was concerned about it not having any requirements listed.
"Being this has come up, written findings for the variance, the reason why it’s unique before and after market value appraisal," she said. "Is this going to be something that’s going to be the same? Are we going to be applying this as the same treatment for similar parcels? Is that something that should be put into 1.4?"
City Attorney David Assaf said the operative language here is that when the city varies from its policy, it needs to do so in compliance with Chapter 429.
"Ultimately, treating similar parcels the same is part of that," he said. "This is intended to address unique one-off situations where maybe there’s some inequity in how things were calculated. I think the plan is not, obviously, to rely on this provision, but if there is a situation that comes up to have this sort of flexibility built into the policy. Terms like this aren’t uncommon in special assessment policies like this."
If there are no requirements and this is left as a guide, Kawecki said she had concerns about making sure there is a fair process.
"In not so many words, we are allowing favoritism to rule here?" She said. "I understand why we’re doing it. When we’re just leaving it so open, I guess when you don’t put it in words sometimes it does us good, and when we leave it so open, I worry that it opens us up to problems as well."
Assaf said he appreciates that concern, and any concern of favoritism or picking and choosing is intended to be addressed by the city's compliance with State Statutes in Chapter 429 in terms of how it treats properties as a certain class.
"If the council wants to remove this provision or would like staff to workshop something different, certainly that could be done here," Assaf said. "There has to be a unique circumstance that would then justify making that change, and changes have to be consistent with Chapter 429, which means the city can’t just arbitrarily apply that to various pieces of property if there are properties that are being treated differently."
While deferring to the city attorney, Kawecki wanted to make sure this has been fixed, and they won’t be coming back to this issue in a year or five years. The special assessment policy was last updated Nov. 18, 2024, a little less than two years ago.
She also voiced concerns about making this change being held against them, as it is being made mid-dispute, and could be seen as something that could have been a solution. Currently, the city is working on resolving an objection from the Lake Avenue assessments with the Senne Farm owned by DFP Limited Partnership.
Assaf said referring to any special assessment policy as a solution is a bit difficult, as people always have the right to appeal their assessment.
"The point of the policy is to establish that methodology for the city to determine an amount," he said. "That amount must comply with the special benefit test. That’s essentially the extent of the guidance the city gets and how to establish that amount. Having a policy in places like this is a benefit, but that doesn’t necessarily prevent potential challenges to that special benefit, as cities across the state often encounter, regardless of what their policy is."
Finally, Councilor Randy Lubenow asked if they were following the Minnesota Statute in their old policy, as he felt that's where the complaint came from. Assaf said ultimately, the measure is of the benefit against the property.
"The point of policies adopted by cities is to get, as best they can, close to some of those measures, so as to pass the sort of special benefit test," he said.
The special assessment policy changes were approved unanimously after a motion by Councilor Jay Maynard and seconded by Councilor James Kotewa.
In other news:
-- The reduction of days the liquor store is open from seven to six days, closing Sunday, was discussed. Kawecki raised concerns about being closed on a day the store can be busy due to football. Finance Director Paul Hoye said they will be down from four full-time employees to one for a couple of weeks in October before ending up at two. He said it is a combination of the fact that they cannot expect one person to work seven days a week, and the part-time employees do not know the opening and closing procedures.
-- As assessment rolls for the 2026 overlay projects have been completed, City Council approved a public hearing to be held for said assessments on Monday, Oct. 26, at 5:30 p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers.