Daley Farm of Lewiston v. County of Winona

Winona, Minnesota planning and zoning law lawyers represented the Plaintiff.

In 2018, appellants Daley Farm of Lewiston L.L.P., et al., applied for a variance from respondent Winona County. On February 21, 2019, County of Winona's Board of Adjustment (the board) denied the request. Daley Farm appealed the board's decision to the district court and moved for summary judgment, claiming that the board's denial was arbitrary and capricious as three of the five board members' bias demonstrated that the denial reflected the members' will rather than judgment. The district court determined that the board's decision was so tainted by bias that its denial was arbitrary and capricious. The district court granted Daley Farm's motion for summary judgment and voided the board's decision. The district court remanded the variance application for reconsideration by a newly constituted and unbiased board.[



* * *



ZONING LAW. VARIANCE APPLICATION REMAND. The case examines whether a district court's decision to remand a variance application to a county board of adjustment was appropriate after the initial denial was deemed arbitrary and capricious due to bias, considering if the record supported the decision absent bias.



ADMINISTRATIVE LAW. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION OF 60-DAY RULE. The judgment addresses whether the 60-day rule under Minnesota Statutes section 15.99 applies to a district court order remanding a variance application or if such remand orders are excluded from being defined as a "request” under the statute.



ZONING LAW. REVIEW OF VARIANCE DENIAL. The court analyzes if the denial of the variance by the county board of adjustment was reasonable and not arbitrary or capricious, particularly evaluating the board's conclusion that the variance was sought for economic reasons alone and confirming no bias influenced the decision.



Key Phrases Variance application denial. Arbitrary and capricious. Board of adjustment. Economic considerations. Remand order.