Laserfiche WebLink
February 14, 2022 <br />Page 2 <br />the Citizens' Petition (Insufficiency Letter). City Clerk Ewald determined the Citizens' Petition to <br />be insufficient because it "is not in the proper form as required under Minnesota Rules, part <br />8205.1010." Fatally, however, this is not a sufficient ground for a determination of insufficiency <br />under state law, as the filing of a petition which meets the statutory requirements under which it <br />was brought automatically suspends the effective date of the ordinance pending the outcome of a <br />referendum vote, regardless of the form requirements of Minn. R. 8205. 10 10 and the verification <br />requirement of Minn. R. 8205.1050. See In re Referendum to Amend City of Grand Rapids, <br />Minnesota Mun. Elections Ordinance No. 04-08-11, No. A05-2350, 2006 WL 1985595, at *2 <br />(Minn. App. July 18, 2006) ("The petition contained more than the requisite number of signatures <br />and included a printed name and address for each signatory. Notwithstanding the form <br />requirements of Minn. R. 8205. 10 10 and the verification requirement of Minn. R. 8205.1050 <br />(2003), the filing of the petition suspended the effective date of the ordinance pending the outcome <br />of a referendum vote"); Bauman v. City of New Brighton, No. 62-CV-1 6-4804,2016 WL 4581497, <br />at *2 (Minn. 2nd Jud. Dist., August 25, 2016 Order) ("The suspension of the ordinance happens <br />automatically once a petition complying with Minn. Stat. § 205.07, subd. 3 is filed, regardless of <br />whether there are any concerns about the form of the petition"). <br />Further, despite her statements to the contrary in her February 4, 2022 Insufficiency Letter, <br />City Clerk Ewald neither (1) "presented these findings to the City Council at a Special City Council <br />meeting on February 4, 2022," nor (2) "determined that the petition is not in the proper form as <br />required under Minnesota Rules, part 8205.1010." Those statements are presumably in the letter <br />because City Clerk Ewald is aware that she is statutorily obligated to do both. See Minn. Stat. § <br />410.12, subd. 3 ("Within ten days after such petition is transmitted to the city council, the city clerk <br />shall determine whether each paper of the petition is properly attested and whether the petition is <br />signed by a sufficient number of voters.... Upon completing an examination of the petition, the <br />city clerk shall certify the result of the examination to the council" (emphasis added)). In fact, <br />City Attorney Scott Riggs (Riggs) is the one who presented the determination of insufficiency to <br />the City Council, and City Clerk Ewald did not even attend. Similarly, it was the Ramsey County <br />Elections Office (Elections Office) that found the form requirements of Minn. R. 8205.1010 were <br />not followed after City Clerk Ewald emailed it the Citizens' Petition the morning after it was <br />received, and the Elections Office emailed her back that same day asking her to promptly notify <br />Amundsens of the alleged basis for the insufficiency of the Citizens' Petition. City Clerk Ewald <br />did not, however, promptly notify Amundsens, as her first communication with Amundsens was <br />with the February 4, 2022 Insufficiency Letter. <br />City Clerk Ewald and City must now correct City Clerk Ewald's errors and certify the <br />Citizens' Petition as sufficient. <br />BACKGROUND <br />1. January 26, 2021. Chair Russell Warren (Warren) of City's Charter Commission <br />(Charter Commission) stated that he recently met with City Council and City Council requested <br />