Agenda Packets - 2023/07/05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

Jump to thumbnail

RELEVANT LINKS: C. Ordinances Minn. Stat. § 412.191, Only the city council has the power to enact ordinances. Generally, subd. 4. A.G. Op. 4720 (July 31,1959). ordinances do not need voter approval. The statutes do not authorize a Minn. Stat. § 412.221, council to seek voter consent to a proposed ordinance or even to ask for an subd. 33. advisory opinion on its desirability. In home rule charter cities, the charter may provide for voter approval of or advisory elections on particular ordinances. Mangold Midwest Co. v. City councils can only deal with subjects that the Legislature has expressly Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347,143 N.W.2d authorized them to act on or that directly relate to a statutory grant of 813 (1966). authority. In some areas, statutory cities may enact ordinances on subjects City of Birchwood Village v. Simes, 576 N.W.2d 458 state law already regulates, if the ordinances are consistent with state law. (Minn. Ct. App.1998). But the city's regulation of an area, including those areas where authority Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N.W.2d 343 may be generally granted in the statutory city code, may be pre-empted if (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). state law has so extensively regulated a particular area of law that it has become solely a matter of state concern. In addition, councils must adhere to the following general requirements when enacting ordinances: Press v. City of . An ordinance must not be unconstitutionally vague. Ordinances must be Minneapolis, 553 N.W.2d 80 (Minn. Ct. App.1996). reasonably certain in their terms and set forth objective standards that State v. Becker, 351 provide adequate notice of what is required or prohibited. N.W.2d 923 (Minn. 1984). State v. Northwest Poultry & Egg Co., 203 Minn. 438, 281 N.W. 753 (1938). State v. Suess, 236 Minn. 174, 52 N.W.2d 409 (1952). State v. Hayes, CO-01-241 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. 6.2001) (unpublished decision). Holt v. City of Sauk Rapids, . Ordinances must be consistent with the constitution and laws of the 559 N.W.2d 444 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). Cascade Motor United States and Minnesota. (A city ordinance is presumed Hotel, Inc. v. City of constitutional so long as it is substantially related to health, safety, or Duluth, 348 N.W.2d 84 (Minn.1984). see City of the general welfare. It also must be reasonable; that is, it must be fair, Eveleth v. Town ofFayal, general, and impartial in operation.) C2-00-1882 (Minn. Ct. App. June 5, 2001) (unpublished decision). See cases cited above. • Ordinances must not limit or deny any common law or constitutional rights. State v. Hensel, No. Al5- . An ordinance must not be unconstitutionally overbroad. 005 (Minn. Sept. 13, 2017). • Ordinance provisions must not constitute an unreasonable restraint of trade. League of Minnesota Cities Handbook for Minnesota Cities 8/30/2022 Meetings, Motions, Resolutions, and Ordinances Chapter 7 1 Page 42