Butler v City of Saint Paul (1) - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Butler v. City of Saint Paul, 936 N.W.2d 478 (2019) © 2022 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.4 argues that the district court erred in two respects. First, he argues that the district court improperly upheld the City's decision to rely on the SVRS to disqualify some signatures on his petition. Second, Butler argues that he at least raised an issue for trial as to the residency of a sufficient number of signatories and so granting summary judgment for the City was erroneous. We consider each issue in turn. A. [2]We turn first to Butler's argument that the district court erred in upholding the City's reliance on the SVRS to reject signatures contained in Butler's petition. Butler's petition involves a citizen-led effort to urge residents of Saint Paul to vote to amend the city charter. We have long promoted “the enfranchisement of qualified voters[.]” Bell v. Gannaway, 303 Minn. 346, 227 N.W.2d 797, 802 (1975) (upholding challenged absentee ballots). And we have been reluctant to exclude such petitions “on mere technicalities,” because they can be “the result of democracy working at the grassroots level.” *482 Bogen v. Sheedy, 304 Minn. 62, 229 N.W.2d 19, 24 (1975). But we also recognize that we must adhere to mandatory statutory requirements, such as a voter's “affidavit of residence and eligibility” to vote, to ensure that only those who are qualified to participate do so. Bell, 227 N.W.2d at 803 (concluding that absentee voters “must be held to a strict compliance” with all substantial requirements of absentee voter statutes). The statutory requirements at issue here are found in Minn. Stat. § 410.12 (2018). In this statute, the Legislature provided methods to amend home rule charters, including the process for amendments voters propose in voter-circulated petitions. Minn. Stat. § 410.12; Minneapolis Term Limits Coal. v. Keefe, 535 N.W.2d 306, 308 (Minn. 1995). Under section 410.12, “[o]nly registered voters are eligible to sign the petition.” Minn. Stat. § 410.12, subd. 1; see also Minn. Const. art. XII, § 5 (“Home rule charter amendments may be proposed ... by a petition of five percent of the voters of the local government unit as determined by law[.]”). In addition, the “petition must contain each petitioner's signature ... and must indicate after the signature the place of residence by street and number, or other description sufficient to identify the place.” Minn. Stat. § 410.12, subd. 2. Once the petition has been filed and transmitted to the city council, the city clerk has 10 days to determine “whether the petition is signed by a sufficient number of voters[,]” and to “certify the result[s] of th[at] examination to the council.” Id., subd. 3. The dispute in this case is over the way in which the City determines which voters are eligible to sign a petition submitted under section 410.12. The parties agree that the language of section 410.12 is unambiguous, but each side contends that the unambiguous language supports their respective interpretations. The parties’ disagreement centers on the requirement in subdivision 1 that only “registered voters” can sign a petition to propose an amendment to the city charter. Id., subd. 1. The City contends that the statute requires it to verify that a sufficient number of petition signers are, in fact, residents of Saint Paul. To do so, the City used the SVRS to verify that the petition signers were registered to vote in Saint Paul. If a signer listed a Saint Paul address on the petition but was registered to vote at an address outside of Saint Paul, the City rejected that signature. The City rejected 147 signatures for this reason, which Butler argues was an error.5 Butler asserts that the statute's language merely requires the City to verify that (1) the signer is a registered voter, and (2) the address the signer lists as the signer's residence on the petition is located within the city. He argues that the plain language of the statute requires that the City rely on the address listed on the *483 petition for the signer's place of residence. See id., subd. 2 (“A petition ... must indicate after the signature the place of residence by street and number, or other description sufficient to identify the place.”). The statute, Butler contends, does not mandate that the address listed on the petition conform to the signer's voter- registration record nor does it require additional proof of the signer's residence. Butler asserts that the City therefore erred in looking beyond the petition to voter-registration records to determine the voter's residency. Butler further argues that the City's review is limited to determining only whether the petition is signed by a sufficient number of registered voters. See id., subd. 1 (“Only registered voters are eligible to sign the petition.”). A “registered voter,” Butler argues, is defined by being a person listed in the SVRS, not by the residence that the person lists when registering to vote. See Minn. Stat. § 201.081, subd. 1(a) (“The statewide registration system is the official record of registered voters.”). Butler contends that any person listed in the SVRS is a registered voter and is thus eligible to sign the petition as long as the person also lists a Saint Paul residence address on the petition.