Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Legal Issues <br /> <br />I. Is the conveyance of property a legislative act subject to referendum? <br /> <br />II. May the City authorize conveyance of the property under Minnesota Statutes <br />sections 471.64 and 465.035, without regard to city charter provisions? <br /> <br />III. Does Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 preempt the city charter referendum <br />provision? <br /> <br /> <br />Legal Discussion <br /> <br />The following are legal arguments that would support a finding by the City Council to deny <br />a petition for referendum on the sale of the property. <br /> <br />I. The Conveyance of Property is Not a Legislative Act Subject to <br />Referendum. <br /> <br />The power of referendum is limited to acts which are legislative in character. Hanson v. <br />City of Granite Falls, 529 N.W.2d 485, 487 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995)(citing Oakman v. City of <br />Eveleth, 203 N.W. 514 (1925). To determine whether an ordinance is legislative and <br />subject to a referendum, the courts have distinguished between legislative, administrative <br />and quasi-judicial acts of a city. Id. at 488. In the Oakman case, a taxpayer sought to <br />require the city to hold a referendum on an ordinance authorizing the settlement of a <br />lawsuit against the city. The court found that the ordinance did not enact a law, but was <br />instead the exercise of an administrative function: <br /> <br />We think the measure is one that calls for investigation and discretion, and, if <br />such matters are not to be met and handled as a part of the daily routine of <br />business of a municipality, but must be submitted to the people to make a law for <br />each controversy that may arise, we are drifting from the ideals of representative <br />government. In fact, the theory of initiative and referendum was directed at <br />supposed evils of legislation alone . . . To allow a referendum to be invoked in <br />order to delay executive conduct would destroy the efficiency necessary to the <br />successful administration of the business affairs of a city. <br /> <br />Oakman, 203 N.W. at 517 (emphasis added). The Oakman court also rejected the idea <br />that the matter of awarding a contract is a legislative act: <br /> <br />The orders of the city council as to which the referendum is sought in the case at <br />bar are clearly executive and not legislative in their nature. A direction to an <br />officer to sign a specified contract with a named person to do a defined thing for <br />a specified price is not a legislative act. . . It is not the laying down of a rule, a <br /> <br />with the provisions of this Charter to initiate and adopt ordinances and resolutions, to require <br />measures passed by the Council to be referred to the electorate for approval or disapproval, and to <br />recall elected public officials. These powers shall be called the initiative, the referendum, and the <br />recall, respectively.”