Agenda Packets - 1996/07/29 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i - . -,v 1a•:Je KtNNEDY & GRAVEN I P.4 I Chuck Whiting 4, July 23, 1996 Page 3 ordinances and for revising the City's Ordinance Code deletions. by listing additions and As I stated in my legal opinions to the City Council dated November 29, March 29, 1396 on different subjects, it has been concluded by of the Minnesota Attorney General that a city 1995 and numerous pr cedeopinies w�ch are in conflict with, the city's charter council may not adopt procedures without authority granted byY harte. or take actions or adopt ordinances November 5, 1948; O a to the city's charter. See, Op. At y• en., 844E-8, January 28 �. Gen., 63n. , -2, 3, August 11, 1950; Op. Atty. Gen. , 285a, October 22, 1957;Op.A Atty. , , B8- , March 25, 1955. 1958; Atty. Gen. , 218- Therefore, following the Attorney General opinions cited above, the language of Section 102.01 of the Mounds View City Code purporting general oereal eal general ordinances adopted prior to the recodification is invalid because itis in direct conflict with the procedures set forth in the City Charter under Section _ and Section 3.11 for repealing ordinances and listing deletions of ordinances as required. Thus, Ordinance 343, Section 50.02 of the Mounds View Code ado June 27, 1983 would remain in effect and would not be re geed on al repealer language of Section 102.01. Pealed by the general • A review of the files by staff showed there was no ordinance which Section 3.10, subd. 1 of the Charter re a• complied with specPaling Section 60.02 in that there is no reference to that s P ific section or subdivision and no indication that the requirements relating to automatic fire suppression systems were being omitted. The City Council had the clear intent of continuing the automatic fire suppression system requirements of Ordinance No. 343, Section 60.02 adopted June 27, 1983. This ordinance was included in the materials sent to the City's codification service as acknowledged in a November 25, 1992 letter from the codifiers. The City Council never adopted an ordinance specificall re City Councilado ted Or y Peng Section 60.02_ Finally, when the P dinance No. 426 on November 12, 1991, now codified at Section 1002.02 of the Municpal Code, the Council tent to continue the requirement of automatic fire suppression sys ems in clearressedits the City of Mounds View. Section 1002.02 states: (1) All required automatic fire-extinguishing systems shall be water sprinkler systems except: . . To include this provision and not continue the requirement suppression systems in Section 60.02 would make no sense nd isftherm automatic of the Council's intent to require automatic fire suppression systems. Furthermore, according to Rick Jerson, it has been the clear intent andractice of the City to apply the automatic fire suppression system requirements of Section 80.02 to new construction and buildings increased in.floor area. It appears that staff has • interpreted the City Council's adoption.of Ordinance No. 343, Section 60.02 to be the governing laws in Mounds View since there was never any City Council intent A=1.07773 1AJL'5-47