Laserfiche WebLink
1 1 <br /> • 306 Minn. 535 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER. 3d SERIES <br /> ed. The conditions udder which additional Gsrdebring.J..sled a dissenting opinion <br /> disbursements were to be made are clearly in which Anderson. J., joined. I <br /> stated in the construction <br /> loan agreement stringer. J.. Sled dissenting opirdon. ' <br /> and it cannot reasonably be interpreted to <br /> • <br /> create a mere option. Like the mortgagee in tions �,� <br /> Phelps. (the Bank watts obligationfor 1• Municipal charterproposed amendment is man- <br /> advance the furl of thet of featly then city council may <br /> gin, the. completionrof � theorefuse to plade proposal on ballot <br /> r'� property. That the Bank <br /> the conditions (receipt of Ken waivers) and <br /> Z. Officers and Public Employ/eel X18 <br /> relied on others(inspections by Bank person- <br /> nen does not change the priority of its re- Provision of State Constitution allowing <br /> corded mortgage. '. legislature to establish •quatifta <br /> tions"for lo- <br /> . cal government officers refers to dlementa of <br /> . Accordingly. the court of appeals decision performgnyee requiring particular �' of <br /> is affirmed. candidate such as physical agility or edu- <br /> cation level, but does not authorise legisla- <br /> ture to set'eligibility requirements-for pub.i4lc office which have nothing to do with abili- <br /> ty to perforin ditties of office such as age and <br /> rs dem► requirements. and which are gov- <br /> erned <br /> / by separate constitution /provision <br /> guaranteeing universal eligibilitt for public <br /> r <br /> dike. M.S.A. Const. Air 7.16: Art 12, <br /> MINNEAPOLIS 'PERM LIMN <br /> § S. <br /> COALITION. et *L. See publication Words and Phrases <br /> ' Plaintiffis. for other judicial constructions and def- <br /> initiots9- - <br /> •. tions �145c2� <br /> t 3. Municipal Corpora <br /> Merry KEEFE. et aL Defettdeoyta Proposed amendment to city charter <br /> �C 8137. limiting terms of elected City offi is <br /> would <br /> change e� <br /> I'j supreme Court df Mitmeaotar _ See in violation of constitutional guarantee of <br /> 4--1996=---_ ua ►eri+ sal eligiblhity for public office. which <br /> F Aug; ane such changes be Made by eon= <br /> , required <br /> stitutioiial amendment; term limits were not <br /> Bled action in federal court <br /> Association Blemerely "qualifications"Tor local government <br /> seeldng declaratory and iryuncte relief officers which could be established by legisla- <br /> eft'from , ceun�•s refusal to place proposed tion under authority of separate constit on- <br /> .,. term limits amendment to city charter on s.1 provision. M.S.A Const. Art?.it 6; Art <br /> ' election ballot. The United States District ie. I s. <br /> f,( Court for the District of Minnesota certified the Court on whether amendment would vio- Sys by <br /> • <br /> bate State Constitution. The Supreme Court, An amendment to the minneapolia city <br /> Keith CJ., held that proposed amendment charter limiting the terms of fecal elected <br /> to city charter limiting WIN of e]ected city officals would violate Article VII. Section 6 <br /> #" officials would change "eligibility require- of tete Minnesota Constitution. <br /> menta"for local office in violation of constitu- �-_ <br /> tional guarantee of universal eligNlity for <br /> public office. Christopher J. Dietaen, Peter J. Coyle. <br /> Certified question answered in affirms tarkin. Hoffman. Daly & Lindgren. Ltd.. <br /> Bloomington, for plaintiffs. <br /> five. <br /> s' <br />