Public Purpose

Under the U.S. Constitution, Minnesota Constitution, and Minnesota state law, private property can be taken by the government only for a public use or public purpose. A great deal of debate has surrounded the meaning of public use and public purpose. Ultimately, the decision is left to the court.

The court gives great deference to an agency's determination that a taking serves a public purpose. Public purpose focuses on the nature of the project, not the particular land being taken. A court may overturn that determination if (a) the governmental authority failed to follow required statutory procedures in making the determination, (b) the project violates a statute, for example regulating the environment or otherwise prohibiting some aspect of the project itself, (c) the particular government authority lacks authority to conduct projects of this kind, (d) the project itself is beyond the power of government, or (e) the governmental authority seeks to take property from another governmental authority with a superior governmental purpose. A court may also overturn a project if the land being taken is not necessary for the public purpose. But the term necessary implies a higher standard than actually exists, for a court will not overturn a public necessity finding unless the governmental authority's determination is wholly without merit. In a recent case, for example, the Minnesota appellate courts refused to allow the University of Minnesota to take land to stockpile it for a future project that is not yet approved.

The recent revisions to Minnesota Statutes Chapter 117 attempt to raise the standard of deference given to agencies by the courts. The statute now provides a strict definition of "Public use" and "public purpose." The statute now also contains a strict set of procedural requirements for the use of eminent domain to remove blight or clean up environmental contamination. However, the revisions to the statute are so recent that their impact on the use of eminent domain is still unclear.