Article
FAQs: 60-day Rule for Zoning, Other Issues
To encourage local government units to consider in a timely manner written requests relating to zoning, septic systems and other specific issues, Minn. Stat. § 15.99 requires a county to approve or deny a request within 60 days. Failure to approve or deny within 60 days results in automatic approval.
This may sound simple enough, but several questions arise repeatedly regarding this 60-day rule. Here are answers to the most frequently asked.
No. The “request,” as defined in the statute, must be submitted to the county in writing.1
It refers to a written request that has a “connection, association, or logical relationship to the regulation of building development or the uses of property.”2 Courts have broadly applied this phrase, but common examples include variances, conditional/interim use permits and rezoning/reclassification requests. The rule, however, does not apply to building permits.3
Additionally, the Minnesota Supreme Court held a letter disputing notice of a zoning violation is not a “request” because it was not on an agency application form and did not clearly identify a request for governmental approval of an action.4
Yes. If the county has an application form, the applicant must use it. If the county does not have a form, then the request must clearly identify on the first page the specific governmental approval being sought.5
The 60-day period begins when the county receives a written request containing all information required by law or by county ordinance, including the applicable application fee.6
If the fee is paid a few days after the application is submitted, the clock starts when the fee is paid.
If the application is incomplete, the county must send written notice to the applicant explaining what information is missing within 15 business days of receipt of the request. The clock does not start until the county receives the missing information.7
When evaluating an application for completeness, the specific ordinance provisions and the application form itself should be reviewed. Counties should ensure that their ordinances and/or application forms list the information they want to require from applicants.
Calendar days. Business days are only considered when the county notifies an applicant it has received an incomplete application.8
The county can extend the 60-day deadline by up to another 60 days, but it must do so before the expiration of the initial 60-day deadline.
The county must provide written notice of the extension to the applicant, which must state the reasons for the extension and its anticipated length.9
An applicant can always waive the 60-day rule. The waiver should be in writing to ensure that it will be upheld if challenged.10
The clock does not begin for the county’s review until the state or federal agency approves the applicant’s request.11
If a state statute, federal law and/or court order requires a process(es) to occur before the county can act on the application and the time period(s) makes it impossible to act within 60 days, the clock does not begin until completion of the last required process.12
The Minnesota Supreme Court confirmed the automatic-approval penalty is not triggered by failure to provide written reasons for denial.13 Rather, the penalty only applies to the failure to make a timely decision.
A county that does not articulate written findings to support its decision, however, runs the risk of having its decision overturned on the basis of being arbitrary and capricious.
1 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 1(c).
2 500, LLC v. City of Minneapolis, 837 N.W.2d 287 (Minn. 2013).
3 Advantage Capital Mgmt, v. City of Northfield, 664 N.W.2d 421 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003).
4State v. Sanschagrin, 952 N.W.2d 620 (Minn. 2020).
5Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 1(c); State v. Sanschagrin, 952 N.W.2d 620 (Minn. 2020).
6 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subds. 1(c) , 2, and 3(a).
7 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3.
8 Compare Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 2 and subd. 3(a).
9 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f).
10 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(f).
11 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(e).
12 Minn. Stat. § 15.99, subd. 3(d).
13 Johnson v. Cook County, 786 N.W.2d 291 (Minn. 2010).
Topics
