Minutes - 2005/07/11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council July 11, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 33 which in this case is the City Council in this matter and cannot be handed off to the citizens, • whether it is by requested petition or otherwise. He stated that it is clear when reviewing the list of items that the sale of land is within that context. Council Member Stigney noted that there has been some discussion around the heading of the petition and whatever the heading is would go on to the ballot. He asked who would make this decision. City Attorney Riggs explained that this is one part of amulti-pronged process. He stated that the information given to Ms. Haake was a very specific provision, Minnesota Rules Section 8205.1010 that provides a list often to fifteen items that are required to be included in a petition that comes in under this type of circumstance and are based on the Minnesota Election laws. He stated that it is a little inconsistent with what the City's Charter says noting that the Charter says, in essence you put on the ordinance and say what it is and what it says in the rules is that the actual question is placed on the ballot. He stated that in an email from City Administrator Ulrich to Ms. Haake it was suggested that they do both because the question is whether they are going to adopt an ordinance and it would cover both issues and would be clearly compliant with the Minnesota Rules and the City Charter. He stated that the final decision would fall to the City Council. He stated that it sits with Staff to deterniine whether they have a valid petition or not and it would then be brought to Council for a final decision. Council Member Stigney stated that it might be desirable to proceed with a resolution. • .Mayor Marty stated that if they did this by resolution they would be circumventing the Charter to make an end run so that the citizens couldn't petition to go to a referendum. City Attorney Riggs agreed that they could look at it this way noting that the Council could also look at it in a way that would question whether they are looking at something that wouldn't go forward anyways. He stated that typically the Council does not issue an opinon until the petition comes in adding that there have been other circumstances of land sales like this where it has been deemed manifestly invalid far a ballot question, which is the opinion that goes out. Mayor Marty clarified that the Charter has no control over the EDA. City Attorney Riggs explained that the Charter does not have control over the EDA noting that the EDA is a separate public entity under Minnesota Statute Section 469.091 and once the EDA is created it becomes a separate corporate body. He explained that the Charter section language that Mr. McCarty mentioned earlier, Section 2.02 of the Charter speaks of only Advisory and Administrative Commissions. He stated that the EDA is a legal subdivision of the State of Minnesota, similar to the City Council. Council Member Thomas asked what the Council would have to do to get a ruling on the administrative versus legislative context. She asked if there is a question that asks if this ordinance is valid for referendum that they could put to the AG's office and get an opinion on it. •