§
Subdivision 1.Not inconsistent.
The governing body of any town including any town with the powers of a statutory city pursuant to law may continue to exercise the authority to plan and zone as provided by law, but after the adoption of official controls for a county or portion thereof by the board of county commissioners no town shall enact or enforce official controls inconsistent with or less restrictive than the standards prescribed in the official controls adopted by the board. Nothing in this section shall limit any town's power to adopt official controls, including shoreland regulations which are more restrictive than provided in the controls adopted by the county. Upon the adoption or amendment of any official controls the governing body of the town shall record a certified copy thereof with the county recorder or registrar of titles. A certified copy of any official controls of any town which are in effect on August 1, 1974, shall also be filed by the governing body of the town with the county recorder or registrar of titles for record within one year from August 1, 1974.
§
Subd. 2.Like municipality.
The board of supervisors of any town which has adopted or desires to adopt zoning regulations and restrictions pursuant to law shall have the authority granted the governing body of any municipality as provided in section 394.32.
Notes of Decisions
Altenburg v. Bd. of Supervisors, 615 N.W.2d 874 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000).
· cites it 18× “Did the district court err by concluding that, under Minn.Stat. § 394.33 (1996), the township’s ordinance properly established official controls that were more restrictive than those of the county? II.”
Berggren v. Town of Duluth, 304 N.W.2d 24 (Minn. 1981).
· cites it 8× “That section provides in pertinent part as follows: The governing body of any town including any town with the powers of a statutory city pursuant to law may continue to exercise the authority to plan and zone as provided by law, but after *27 the adoption of official controls…”
Appeal of Kenney, 374 N.W.2d 271 (Minn. 1985).
· cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 394.33 (1984). Furthermore, Kenney would not qualify for a regular county permit for, since 1977, Stearns County has prohibited boathouses and additions or alterations to boathouses.”
West Circle Props. LLC v. Hall, 634 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 394.33 (2000). Therefore, Cascade’s authority to approve or disapprove WCP’s subdivision plat is limited by its statutory obligation not to enact or enforce controls inconsistent with or less restrictive than Olmsted’s.”
Bruce Twp. v. Kevin Schmitz, Nathan A. Baum (Minn. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 25× “Minn. Stat. § 394.33 , subd. 1 (2014). Another statute provides that a copy of the ordinance “must be furnished to the county law library.”
Brown v. Cannon Falls Twp., 723 N.W.2d 31 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “But under Minn.Stat. § 394.33 (2002), no township can “enforce official controls inconsistent with or less restrictive than the standards prescribed” by the county.”
Appeal of Kenney, 358 N.W.2d 120 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “The parties do not dispute appellant acted entirely in good faith in this matter.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.