Heins v. City of Cedar Rapids
| Decision Date | 25 June 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 2--56947,2--56947 |
| Citation | 231 N.W.2d 16 |
| Parties | John C. HEINS and Martha R. Heins, Appellees, v. CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS, Iowa, Appellant. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
David F. McGuire, Cedar Rapids City Atty., and Judith W. Redmond and David P. McManus, Cedar Rapids Asst. City Attys., for appellant.
F. James Bradley and Robert B. Ward, Cedar Rapids, for appellees.
Heard before MOORE, C.J., and RAWLINGS, LeGRAND, UHLENHOPP and REYNOLDSON, JJ.
In this appeal we construe §§ 391.48 and 441.21(1) of the 1973 Code insofar as they relate to 'actual value' of agricultural property.
Appellees John C. and Martha R. Heins own a farm which they have used at all pertinent times for agricultural purposes. The farm is within the limits of appellant City of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and abuts a hard-surfaced highway. Formerly the highway had two lanes, but the City widened it to four lanes and levied special assessments against abutting lands for the cost. In valuing appellees' farm in the special assessment proceedings, the City considered potential non-agricultural uses of the farm, which substantially increased the value of the land over its value as a farm only.
Appellees appealed to district court on three bases. We are not at this time concerned with the second and third bases. The first basis was that the City violated the following portions of §§ 391.48 and 441.21(1), Code 1973:
§ 391.48. When any city council levies any special assessment for any public improvement against any lot, such special assessment shall be in proportion to the special benefits conferred upon the property thereby and not in excess of such benefits. Such assessment shall not exceed twenty-five percent of the Actual value of the lot at the time of levy, and the last preceding assessment roll shall be taken as prima facie evidence of such value. (Italics added.)
§ 441.21(1) . . .. In assessing and determining the Actual value of agricultural property fifty percent consideration shall be given to each of the following factors:
a. The productivity and net earning capacity determined On the basis of the use for agricultural purposes capitalized at a rate representing a fair return on the investment, such rate to be established by the state board of tax review and applied uniformly among counties and among classes of property.
b. The fair and reasonable market value of such property as defined herein, but such market value Shall be based only on its current use and not on its potential value for other uses. . . .
'Actual value', 'taxable value', or 'assessed value' As used in other sections of the Code shall mean the valuations as determined by this section; however, Other provisions of the Code providing special methods or formulas for assessing or valuing specified property shall remain in effect, but this section shall be applicable to the extent consistent with such provisions. (Italics added.)
After the City filed its answer, appellees moved for an adjudication, as a point of law, that their property is to be valued in the special assessment proceedings exclusively for use as a farm. At the hearing on the motion, the parties stipulated that the property was at all relevant times used only for agricultural purposes. The trial court held that the City In the course of its order, the trial court also stated that appellees' farm received no special benefits from the fourlane highway.
We granted the City permission to take an interlocutory appeal.
I. Is the 'actual value' of farm land for special assessment purposes under § 391.48 to be determined in accordance with § 441.21? We think the answer turns upon the clear language of those sections. We do not resort to rules of construction when the terms of a statute are unambiguous. Kruck v. Needles, 259 Iowa 470, 144 N.W.2d 296.
Section 441.21 states (1) that in determining the values of agricultural property, only the current use and not potential uses shall be considered and (2) that 'actual value' as used in other sections of the Code means the value as ascertained by § 441.21 except in cases of 'other...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hartman v. Merged Area VI Community College
...of the Statute. A. This court resorts to rules of construction only when the terms of a statute are ambiguous. Heins v. City of Cedar Rapids, 231 N.W.2d 16, 18 (Iowa 1975). The intent of the legislature is the polestar. Iowa Nat'l Ind. Loan Co. v. Iowa State Dep't of Rev., 224 N.W.2d 437, 4......
-
Marcus v. Young
...1981). Rules of statutory construction are to be applied only when the explicit terms of a statute are ambiguous. Heins v. City of Cedar Rapids, 231 N.W.2d 16, 18 (Iowa 1975). Precise unambiguous language will be given its plain and rational meaning in light of the subject matter. Maguire v......
-
Le Mars Mut. Ins. Co. of Iowa v. Bonnecroy
...1976). Rules of statutory construction are to be resorted to only when the terms of the statute are ambiguous. Heins v. City of Cedar Rapids, 231 N.W.2d 16, 18 (Iowa 1975). Precise and unambiguous language is given its plain and rational meaning as used in conjunction with the subject consi......
-
City of Clive v. Iowa Concrete Block & Material Co.
...portion was added in 1980. 1980 Session, 68th G.A., ch. 1136, § 3. PDM, ICBM, and the court relied heavily on Heins v. City of Cedar Rapids, 231 N.W.2d 16 (Iowa 1975). In that case, we decided that section 441.21(1), with its special method for valuing agricultural land, should be read into......