09-27-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• -. 3490 Lexington Avenue North League of Minnesota Cities St. Paul, NLN 55126-8044 Referendums on Term Limits 9/8/94 By: Kent Sulem, Codification Attorney It is basically unanimously accepted within the legal community that locally imposed term limits are per se unconstitutional in Minnesota (the issue of federal constitutionality does not need to be addressed at this time) . Article VII, Sect. 6 of cur State Constitution clearly sets out the requirements for holding office at the local level._ This provision states that any person who meets these requirements shall be eligible to hold public office. There is no provision for term limits and no provision granting cities the authority to adopt more restrictive qualifications. Article 12 , Sect. 3 appears to grant the legislature the right to impose term limits for city officials, but it does not authorize local units of government to adopt their own limits . Thus , the issue of term limits is preempted by the State Constitution and any attempt to impose term, limits would be unconstitutional and unenforceable. This interpretation is supported by the findings of the Attorney General in opinion 59-a-29 dated 4-14-81 . Despite the fact that such provisions are unconstitutional, it appears that the issue of referendums on term limits is going to be popular this election year. Several home rule charter cities have called recently asking what they can do when they receive a petition from a citizen' s group, or a proposal from their charter commission, demanding that the issue of a set term limit be submitted to the voters. In essence, cities have three options in responding to a petition or charter commission request for a referendum on the issue of term limits: Accept the petition or proposal and hold an election on the issue; seek an immediate declaratory judgement on the constitutionality of the matter; or deny the petition or commission proposal and argue the constitutionality issue at the mandamus hearing that would likely follow. I will attempt to summarize the pros and cons of each of these options in further detail . First, the city could accept the petition or proposal and place the issue on the ballot as provided for in chapter 410 of the State Statutes. If the election fails, the city is off the hook as the voters themselves will have rejected term limits . If, however, the election were to succeed, the city would be faced with having an unconstitutional provision in its charter. In this situation, the city would basically wait for a person with standing to challenge the provision and then concede its invalidity and have it removed by judicial order. The legal casts would be relatively low, and the city AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER (012)49O.6000 1.800.925-1122p[usyourcitycaie TDD(612)490-9038 Fax(G12)490.0012