10-03-2005 SPECIAL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Section 12.05 of the Mounds View Charter that provides that “[n]o real property of the City shall be disposed of except by ordinance.” However, section 471.64 authorizes the City to enter into a contract for the sale of property to the EDA without regard to the city charter. Although the City Council complied with the charter and adopted an ordinance authorizing the conveyance, Minn. Stat. § 471.64 provides authority for the Council to adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA. B. Minn. Stat. § 465.035. The second statute that supports the argument that the conveyance of property is not subject to charter requirements is Minn. Stat. § 465.035. That section provides: Any county, town, city or other public corporation may lease or convey its lands for a nominal consideration, without consideration or for such consideration as may be agreed upon to the state or to any governmental subdivision . . . for public use when authorized by its governing body. The Minnesota Supreme Court addressed this statute in County of Hennepin v. City of Hopkins, 58 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. 1953). In that case, Hennepin County conveyed property to the village of Hopkins for park and recreation purposes. After the deed had been recorded, the county brought an action to invalidate the conveyance based on the failure to comply with a statute requiring the adoption and publication of a resolution defining the terms of the sale, a bond, and other specific requirements. The court held, however, that Minn. Stat. § 465.035 trumped the requirements in the other statute and that the county was permitted to convey the property without complying with the other statute. See id. at 855. The City in this case has authorized conveyance of property to the EDA for a public purpose. Under the Court’s holding in County of Hennepin, Minn. Stat. § 465.035 would trump the City’s charter requirements. Thus, the City may adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA, despite the ordinance requirement in the charter. Under this same reasoning, a court could also find that, in a conveyance of property from one public entity to another, section 465.035 trumps the referendum provision in the city charter. III. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 Preempts the Charter Referendum Provision. The City may also be able to argue that the conveyance and redevelopment of property is governed by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462, and, therefore, Chapter 462 preempts the referendum provision in the charter. City charters provisions must be consistent with and are subject to state law. See State ex rel Town of Lowell v. City of Crookston, 252 Minn. 526, 91 N.W.2d 81, 83 (1958). The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that the procedures set forth in chapter 462 for adopting and implementing laws for land use planning preempt charter provisions reserving the right of referendum to voters to approve or disapprove land use ordinances. See Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N.W.2d 343 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). In Nordmarken, a private redeveloper submitted a plan to the City of Richfield that required both a rezoning