06-12-2017 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mike Gaffron From: Michael D. Wolf <Michael.Wolf@hennepin.us> Sent: Tuesday, May 16,2017 12:00 PM To: Mike Gaffron Cc: Jeremy Barnhart, Melanie Curtis; Anna Carlson; Adam Edwards Subject: RE: Proposed reclassification of properties in City of Orono Michael, Thank you for your quick reply. Per our subsequent phone conversation � have reviewed our files. It's hard to say why the conveyance requested in your City resolution #4027 from 1998 was never acted upon. I find no record of it in our files. it may be because it incorrectly referred to the parcels as "non -conservation" when in fact they were classified as it conservation", or the necessary funds were not received? Going forward, the way in which conservation vs non -conservation can be conveyed or sold to a governmental subdivision differs. For conservation land M.S. 282.01 Subd. 2 is our guide. It will allow us to convey (sell) to a government subdivision under 282.01 la. Paragraph (h) speaks to how this sale can occur: "(h) Conservation tax -forfeited land may be sold to a governmental subdivision of the state for less than its market value for either: (1) creation or preservation of wetlands; (2) drainage or storage of storm water under a storm water management plan; or (3) preservation, or restoration and preservation, of the land in its natural state, The deed must contain a restrictive covenant limiting the use of the land to one of these purposes for 30 years or until the property is reconveyed back to the state in trust. At any time, the governmental subdivision may reconvey the property to the state in trust for the taxing districts, The deed of reconveyance is subject to approval by the commissioner of revenue. No part of a purchase price determined under this paragraph shall be refunded upon a reconveyance, but the amount paid for a conveyance under this paragraph may be taken into account by the county board when setting the terms of a future sale of the same property to the same governmental subdivision under paragraph (b) or (d). If the lands are unplatted and located outside of an incorporated municipality and the commissioner of natural resources determines there is a mineral use potential, the sale is subject to the approval of the commissioner of natural resources." If this is the option the City wishes to pursue I would need a new City resolution requesting the purchase of the "Conservation" parcels, and a check in the amount of the cost estimate I can provide. Another option would be to have the parcels reclassified as non -conservation at which time the City could request a conveyance of the parcels for an authorized public use, just as your resolution #4027 indicated. In fact we could use the same resolution and would just need the $250.00 conveyance fee per lot made payable to the Department of Revenue. Reclassification to non -conservation would also allow the city to outright purchase them for market value without the 30 year restrictive covenant called for in a conservation parcel purchase. Please review and let me know which option the City would prefer to pursue or with any questions/concerns. I am happy to help out in any way I can to find a resolve to the current forfeited status of these parcels. TFL Mission - To return properties to the tax rolls orproduettve use while assuring dueprocess and equitable treatmentfor property owners, community residents, and stakeholders.