Msc Correspondence & Term Limit Docs

Home Browse Search

MPLS. TERN LIMITS COALITION v. KEEFE Minn. 311 1 [he it S3S N grad 306(Min& NILS} t- lected officials, the November & 1994 ballot. Article VII, forbid the adoption of charter provisions as ` 1 h establishes a4 6 of the Minnesota Constitution provides: to any subject appropriate to the orderly i th the cons Eligibility to hold o®ce- Every person conduct of municipal affairs.although they the plain Lan- who by the provisions of this article is may differ from those of existing general (; 3,the rnatiortty entitled to +►ore at any election and is 21 lags. p�°n of Buck a charter is - ( ;t d $rs years of age is eligible for any office legislation. f , Irish "4 - elective by the people in the district Id at 628, 91 N w2d at 88 (quoting Mian.;,- meats." Nall- wherein he has resided 30 days previous to Const, art nr, § 36) (citations omitted). itself. nor our the election. esxept as other+e providedMy of departure from the majority is i't' ► analysis. constitution and11 in Chia constitution,or the fust, ata failure to even consider tI►at Appel- presumption • !. ,' moons of thelaw of the United States. !lei•:` ' lams' proposed amendment does not ��•: ptesursption Minn.Const.art vfl. # 6(emphasis added). ,`£`` . an eligibility or qualification standard for aa- •`.: apply to a duly Following the "exception"clause to the reed scoring or holding elective office at all The ., Gttflliams ay. step.we are lead to Article XII. § 3 of the proposed charter amendprent provides in ` . k!'1'; • X99 N. .Ed 138. Minnesota Constitution: pertinent part: I ;.;1 • 11 Is have not even legislation affecting- anyother' of 1.oca1 Government; Notwithatattdfng provision► : :: substantial bus- The legislature may provide by faux for the law to the contrary.no pent'''.++ray}ale to ! :i 1 In in this kind of creation. orgard7atian. adtnird�stratian. con- be a candidate for election to a term that :: l:; 1 aeon. I would sotidation, division and dissolution of local would cause the person to serve more than t in the negative, government units and their functions. for eight consecutive years in the office of ' the change of boundaries thereof.for their Mayor eight eonsec+rtr►e y in ire , '. Ming). elective and appointive ofuers including office of City Canna. /;i // : ', dice Gardebring for of cations se office and for the trans- (emphasis added). 'I'ke plain language of the.,' fen of county seats. A county boundary �p� simply prohibits "ffi[h+61 to he a may not be changed or county seat trans- candidate for election * ' ' i a ) t tt t rating. hib►tioti t , ; ferrel until approved in each county af- that clearly leaves other avenues open for . ' ' 1° d . the fected by a majority of the voters voting on achieving the office—for example. through tlla the question. write-in vote or, in some circumstances, by T. pl�ellantst Minn.Const. art.XII. $ 3(emphasis added). appointment. If the proposed amendment ;.i a for placing the The legislature.then.has constitutional au- were it~ fad an eu.,.hiiit,v standard in viola- • �+ Imenttwequ on the No- 1 i''?' nseque:rtly. I thorny to establish am In qualifications eem agreement elective tion of Minn- Coast a Sill. 1 6. unless ;E bffiee. nigher.I in agreement with the encompassed by a constitutional exception,it ;; .:. last the sta d3tr� • maionly that if the 1egislat a has authority would prohibit the taking of office etion, . ! , as startdsrd • to impose qualifications for elective office. so That is not at all the proposal we have here. 5 1 4 legislative slabtoo-does_-the City cf--Minneapolis as ahome amort-- -- r is presumed In Stale ex set Torun of Next,sig the-fate of appellants' .• Lowellc e.charter dry- ?52 MInm. &26, to obtain a public vote on their proposal.the u Xart+ls 488 '�.,.z' KO: Guilliauta u tx City of C�nokatatt. r testy p to narrawty define"quail- '., ;. 91 N.SSt2d 81 (1968). We held Ration" for office under Minn. Const. art. • N 2d 1�' jt]he genu rule is that in matters of ' sly.it maynot beXII. § 8 as "az' element perfortnattte re �, e. ging partydam_ mut�pal concern. home rule cities have guarana a particular ability"of on the part of the 14.1.,1• in of _ all the legislative power po-�aessed by the candidate for office. Because the term limits ' 4 o t the cO legislature of the state.save as such poweron does not relate to "s particular t ou te' See N.W.2Ham . or impliedly withheld. The pro"i„ o concluder.it must be • ii'.:; 4u�2 N.R►2d is a tion otY p ability, so the maj rity 1't adoption of eny charter provision contrary an ell 'bility requirement. thus falling out- hr of v to the public policy of the state, as lis- side the parameters of Minn.Covet.art.XII. •t • .a p'irte Ffghte+s closed by general laws or its penal code,is unconstitutitmal" t i ;a fi .1929). conferred upon § 3. and "manifestly I also forbidden. The power majority's analysis therefore tuns on . .i, (for oto Constibi- cities to frame and adopt home rale char- the nartro+#entire tion it accords the terms ,` t for determining term is limited by the provision that"such , :' "eligible" and "qushfication. �;,({�i... • .eapolis, as a home charter shall always be in harmony with meaning of terms "eligible" �,r 'Aired to place cap. and subject to the constitution and laws of plainThe thes the ("rag le" ,Illi;.nits amendment on the state." But these limitations do not and "qualification" sugges .. .'. .lili