Is a sanitary sewer ordinance “just and equitable” where it charges commercial properties a fee for metered use but charges dwellings a flat fee, and where it charges part-year dwellings on an assumption of year-round use? Golden Rule Estates Owners Ass’n v. City of Crosslake (Minn. App. A04-1752) (June 28, 2005) (unpublished). Part-year residents challenged a municipal sanitary sewer ordinance charging dwellings on the basis of full-year flow and basing commercial charges on metered usage but applying a flat residential charge. The Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s award of summary judgment to the City of Crosslake. It found that rate-setting is a legislative activity to which the court must defer. It further found that the residents failed to carry their burden to show that the charges were not “just and equitable” under Minnesota Statutes §444.075. An assumption of full-year flow was justified to ensure sufficient capacity in the event of full-year habitation and the fee approach was justified by the infeasibility of monitoring actual use on a dwelling basis.
|
||
 |
||