Charter Update Memo to Council - June 2016

Home Browse Search

Mr. James Ericson February 10, 2016 Page 4 a quorum of the current Commission membership would be two, and would conceivably drop to a lower number if another member resigned. Such an outcome runs contrary to the above - discussed implicit legislative intent behind the statutory requirements for setting the number of members and the filling of vacancies. Thus, regardless of the number of commissioners currently on the Commission, a quorum for the Commission should never fall below six members. Cf. ,State ex rel. Peterson v. Hoppe, 194 Minn. 186, 260 N.W. 215 (1935) ("[w]here a charter or statute provides that the vote of a majority of the members elected to the council shall be necessary to pass a measure, the fact that there are vacancies in office due to death, resignation, or other cause, does not diminish the number of votes necessary to pass such measure.") The legislative history of this statute further supports this viewpoint. Prior to the 1971 statutory amendment, it was up to the judges of the district courts, and then the district courts themselves, who were required to set the rules for charter commissions.' The change to allow charter commissions to set their own rules did not provide any new authority that the judges or district courts did not have. Instead, it simply shifted that responsibility onto the commission rather than remaining on the judiciary. In other words, the common law rules stated in Hoppe are as applicable to the charter commission's rulemaking authority as they were to the judiciary. 3. What was the effect of the 1958 constitutional amendment and related statutory changes as they relate to these issues., Generally speaking, the constitutional amendment which was ratified in 1958 was seen as an authorization for the legislature to "revise and consolidate provisions relating to local government, home rule, and special laws."4 In large part, this amendment sought to streamline the creation, maintenance, and operation of charter commissions.' Therefore, the general consensus is that this amendment simply clarified and simplified existing law, rather than substantively changing it. Because the cited Attorney General opinions critically rely on legal analysis that would still be true under the current statutes, those opinions are still valid. 4. How is a negative change in the Consumer Price Index ("CPI") treated under the charter provision related to lev. comps? Based on the plain language of the charter provision, it seems clear that a negative CPI figure must be calculated using standard mathematical principles which could result in a levy cap below two percent. It is not uncommon for legislative enactments which rely on a function of CPI 3 See 1949 Minn. Law Ch. 210, sec. 1; 1971 Minn. Law Ch. 208, secs. 1-3. a See State Constitutional Amendments Considered, maintained by the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library, available at http:www.le�.state.mn.us/lrl/mnSov/constitutionalamendments#t (last visited, October 135 2015). 5 1957 Minn. Law Ch. 809. 469537v6 SJR MU210-4