Docs re Term Limits Amendment - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-2- City Clerk to do their duty. This lawsuit would be based on Minn. Stat. 410.11. Further, Dietzen claimed that under federal statute, 42 U.S. Code Sec. 1983, the city is exposed to paying the legal fees of the prevailing side. I asked him what constitutional right he would allege is violated and would then expose the city to paying these legal fees. Dietzen stated, "free speech, freedom of association, deprivation of due process." [Sue says there is a comparable state law which was amended last session and is quite onerous. We don't want to remind them but we need to have Thompson advise us on this.] I asked Dietzen if the City wouldn't then be entitled to seek a stay of execution pending the outcome of the Minn. Supreme Court ruling as is often done when Congress passes a law which is challenged as unconstitutional. He agreed that could happen. Dietzen concluded that the Council's opportunity to raise a constitutional issue on the term limits amendment was gone once it was decided that it should go on the ballot. Mr. Dietzen noted that the briefs before the Minn. Supreme Court on the term limits case are due at the end of December. He expected a ruling in 6 months. (There is only a certified question to the Minn. Supreme Court asking them to rule on the constitutionality of term limits under the Minn. Constitution; then the lawsuit in federal court will be concluded.) Dietzen mentioned that the U. S. Supreme Court also is going to be ruling on a federal term limits statute and that perhaps the Minn. Supreme Court would defer their own ruling until that ruling comes down before their term concludes in June. [Personally, I think the Minn. Supreme Court will rule on what the Minn. Constitution intends regarding local term limits without regard to the federal ruling. The federal ruling could later impact what our state constitution may or may not do but we still will need our own state court to decide what is meant by the Minn. constitution.] Sue Hankner chaired this meeting. Sue had to inform Mr. Dietzen that the term limit amendment was not presented to the City Council by petitioners in this city but came directly from the Charter Commission. Dietzen acknowledged he was not fully aware of the facts of our specific case. Sue commented to Dietzen that the Minn. Statute directs the clerk to file but does not direct a time frame. She asked Dietzen what the time frame was. Dietzen