Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mounds View Residents FB Page Posts <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Posted February 15, 2022 <br />ATTENTION MV VOTERS: MV CITY COUNCIL has scheduled a SPECIAL VIRTUAL (Zoom) CITY COUNCIL MEETING for Friday, February 18 at 10am. It will be solely to discuss the PETITION, and Attorney's <br /> letter delivered to City Council, Staff & Attorney on Feb. 14. <br />From the agenda, it appears they will be deciding the issue that morning, one way or another. I for one hope they follow the law (statutes), and reverse their decision. We will see <br /> . . . <br />SO BE SURE TO CALL OR EMAIL YOUR MAYOR & COUNCIL MEMBERS BEFORE THE MEETING, to tell them your thoughts on this important city issue. Or join the meeting via Zoom on Friday morning, <br /> and comment during the Public Comment portion of the meeting. Hold them accountable - so they do the right thing. <br /> However this turns out on Friday, we can feel good. 🙂 <br /> <br />V. Amundsen Responses to Comments <br />Kim Hanson Ruedy - Kim, the county does not decide this. They offered the city their opinion. But the city apparently did not tell the county the type of petition it was. The County <br /> assumed it was an ELECTION petition, which it was not. I was given a contact person at the County Elections office, and immediately reached out to them after the city council mistakenly <br /> deemed the petition as deficient (2/4). I spoke to the office for an hour, after which they suggested the city resubmit. They said they had NOT evaluated it based on the Statutes under <br /> which it was submitted (MN 410.12), and that we should let the city attorney know that they should resubmit. They also stated that they are NOT the decider, and that responsibility <br /> rest with the City (specifically with the city clerk). The city, in addition, did not fulfill their statutory obligation of verifying signatures, and/or providing the sponsoring committee <br /> with the "particulars" (meaning specifics) of any and all insufficiencies. The city even refused, when asked, to let the committee know how many signatures were needed before the deadline <br /> expired. A very clear violation, as detailed in the Attorney's letter. So much more I could share. I encourage you to read the letter, it's long but very good. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Posted February 14, 2022 <br />FYI Mound View Residents: Petition update... a highly respected legal firm has advised the city council, staff and city attorney that the petition was indeed acceptable under MN law, <br /> and should not have been rejected because of form used. The firm delivered a 12 page letter to the city this afternoon, informing them of relevant MN law, and case precedent. The <br /> firm instructs the city to immediately reverse the February 4 insufficiency declaration, and accept the MV Citizen's petition as submitted. <br />As one of the sponsors of the petition, I was copied on the letter, and would be happy to email the letter to anyone wanting to read it. Just PM me your email and I'll send it to you. <br />The argument the city used for throwing the petition out (not proper form used) has already been litigated in many other cases and it was found that it is NOT sufficient grounds for <br /> determining insufficiency under MN state law, as the petitions DID meet statutory requirements (as did ours).